sº 3 * * : * * * * * * * * * * ~ 3 - - , , 2- : * * A : * * * = -2 a . g . . . ~ g sº- - --- c - - f - --- - - * ~ * * * * ----------- - º. 3 w 3. << 1 ºr i : * ~ * * - * * * * * * * * **** *-*-s ºr º- a 2 s, z º. º. 2 ... - * * : * ~ * : * : * > --> <-s: a sº -- ; * * * *-* * * * * ~ * * * * * * : : i º : º i : y : . . . . . . . . . º º * * : * * R. 3. : : i º 3. i | | i i * * * * * * , ; tº 3 i : # i : . . . . . . . . . . . - * *, * ºf 3. * * : : º 8. . . . . . . - . . . . . . . * * * *.*.*. . . . ; 2-& º . : & º S * * * * * : * * * * ; : . . . . . . . - - - --- * * * * * ; : * : - --- o - 5. º * , , --> Fºx sº sº. ---, *. * * ~ * : * * * * * * --- LIBRARY • . 1:... :->~~ – :: *. tiliſ -º-º-º: irl tº ſº, º LL : I ------ * ------ ºf illi Nºvº NIVERSITYºutlºs Hillllllllllllllllllllllllliſſilſ; º-ººººººººººººººººººººººººººººº. t = i * } [11: 1111-1. ºf of THE -ºš * ºùùJºJº Jº". º iſſiſſiſtſ TTTTTTTTTF # # i # É º: # ; The Gintrance of Clip lords (5iurth ſight. Psalm CXIX:30 Q § 9 &\ *=s ſ’ - Ssss §-Rála &z. Sø) i. Šºš Cº. gº . } - º: %% à º º ę , ſº º % º - ºsnoyºs （ ） ‘ĀNOTO NISIH NI INGITVSQ. NIGHI ºn- THE POPULAR AND CRITICAL BIBLE ENCYCLOPEDIA AND SCRIPTURAL DICTIONARY FULLY DEFINING AND EXPLAINING ALL RELIGIOUS TERMS INCLUDING Biographical, Geographical, Historical Archaeological and Doctrinal Themes Superbly Illustrated with Over 600 Maps and Engravings E DITED BY RT, REV. SAMUELFALLOWS, A. M., D. D., LL.D. ASSOCIATE EDITORS ANDREW C. ZENOS, A. M., D. D. HERBERT L. WILLETT, A. M., PH. D. (McCormick Theological Seminary) (University of Chicago) I/O/L //M/, / CHICAGO THE HOWARD-SEVERANCE COMPANY 1904 COPYRIGHT, 1901, BY J. MITCHELL, HOWARD COPYRIGHT, 1904, BY J. MITCHELL, HOW A R Ly THIS WORK IS SUPPLIED ONLY THROUGH AU’ſ HORIZED CANVASSERS. BOOKSE LILE RS CANNOT OB'l'A IN I’T. LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS. e- SIGNATURES. NAMES. J. H. A. Prof. J. H. Allen, A. M., D. D., late of Harvard University, Boston, U. S. A. B. W. A. Bishop B. W. Arnett, D. D., Wilberforce, Ohio, U. S. A. - I. M. A Rev. I. M. Atwood, A. M.; D. D., President of Theological Seminary, Canton, New York, U. S. A. W. F. B. W. F. Barclay, Esq., Louisville, Ky., U. S. A. J. H. B. Rev. John Henry Barrows, A. M., D. D., President of Oberlin University, Oberlin, - Ohio, U. S. A. D. B. Rev. D. Berger, A. M., D. D., Dayton, Ohio, U. S. A. J. F. B. Rev. Joseph F. Berry, A. M., D. D., Editor of Zhe Ežworth Aerald, Chicago, U. S. A. S. S. B. Major S. S. Brengle, New York City, U. S. A. C. E. C. Rt. Rev. Charles Edward Cheney, A. M., D. D., Senior Bishop of the Reformed Epis- copal Church, Chicago, U. S. A. E. E. C Rev. E. E. Chivers, A. M., D. D., Cincinnati, U. S. A. F. E. C Rev. Francis E. Clark, A. M., D. D., Founder and President of the United Society of - Christian Endeavor, U. S. A. E. T. C. Rev. E. T. Corvin, A. M., D. D., Greendale, New York, U. S. A. S. I. C. Rev. Samuel Ives Curtis, A. M., Ph.D., Professor of Old Testament Literature, Chicago Theological Seminary, Chicago, U. S. A. J. H. D. Rev. J. H. Dubbs, A. M., D. D., Professor of History, Franklin and Marshall College, Lancaster, Pa., U. S. A. G. D. Gotthard Deutsch, Ph. D., Professor of Jewish History, etc., Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, U. S. A. G. E. George Ebers, Ph. D., Professor of Egyptology, University of Leipsic, Germany. B. D. E. B. D. Erdmans, D. D., Lecturer on Aramaic and Assyrian, University of Leyden, Holland, A. F Arthur Fairbanks, A. M., Ph. D., Instructor in Comparative Religion, Yale University, U. S. A. J. W. F. Rev. J. W. Fifield, A. M., D. D., Chicago, U. S. A. R. V. F Rev. R. V. Foster, A. M., D. D., Professor of Biblical Exegesis, Cumberland University, Lebanon, Tenn., U. S. A. (Cumberland Presbyterian). M. G. Rev. Mason Gallagher, A. M., D. D., Brooklyn, New York. G. S. G. George S. Goodspeed, A. M., Ph. D., Associate Professor of Comparative Religion, Uni- versity of Chicago, U. S. A. (Baptist). G. M. G. Rev. George M. Grant, A. M., D. D., Principal of Queen's University, Kingston, Canada © (Presbyterian). J. M. G. Rev. James M. Gray, D. D., Author of “Synthetic Bible Study”; Biblical Instructor Gordon Missionary Training School, Boston; Moody Bible Institute, Chicago. F. J. H. Rev. Francis J. Hall, A. M., D. D., Instructor in Dogmatic Theology, Western Theological Seminary, Chicago (Prolestant Episcopal). J. T. H. J. T. Hamilton, A. M., D. D., Professor of Church History, Theological Seminary, Beth- lehem, Pa., U. S. A. (Moravian). W. E. H. Rev. William Edwards Huntington, A. M., Ph. D., Dean of College of Letters, Boston University, Boston, U. S. A. E. C. H. Ellery C. Huntington, A. M., late Professor of Greek Language and Literature, University of Nashville, U. S. A. J. F. H. Bishop John F. Hurst, D. D., LL.D., President American University, Washington, D. C. (Methodist Episcopal). A. S. I. Rabbi A. S. Isaacs, Editor of The Jewish Messenger, New York, U. S. A. 3 421663 4 LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS SIGNATURES. NAMES. º A. V. W. J. A. V. Williams Jackson, A. M., Ph. D., Professor Columbia University, New York City, . U. S. A. H. J. Rev. Herrick Johnson, D. D., President McCormick Theological Seminary, Chicago, U. S. A. T. C. J. T. C. Johnson, A. M., D. D., Professor of Ecclesiastical History, Hampden-Sidney Col. lege, Virginia, U. S. A. (Presbyterian Church South). A. T. J. Elder A. T. Jones, Battle Creek, Mich., U. S. A. (Seventh Day Adventist). J. A. L. Bishop James A. Latané, A. M., D. D., Presiding Bishop Reformed Episcopal Church, - Baltimore, Md., U. S. A. - C. J. L. Rev. Chas. J. Little, A. M., D. D., President Garrett Biblical Institute, Evanston, III, U. S. A. (Methodist Episcopal). C. L. Rev. Clinton Locke, D. D., Chicago, Ill. F. M. Rev. F. Mayer, Ph. D., Jackson, Mich., U. S. A. W. T. M. Rev. W. T. Meloy, A. M., D. D., Chicago, U. S. A. L. P. M. Rev. L. P. Mercer, A. M., D. D., Chicago, U. S. A. S. M. M. Bishop S. M. Merrill, D. D., Senior Bishop Methodist Episcopal Church, Chicago, U.S. A. W. M. Walter Miller, Ph. D., Professor of Philology, Leland Stanford Junior University, Cal., U. S. A. J. H. M J. H. Moore, Editor at the Brethren Publishing House, Mount Morris, Ill., U.S. A. (Dunker). J. M. Rev. James Mudge, A. M., D. D., Lecturer on Missions, Boston University, Boston, U.S. A. F. M. M. F. Max Müller, Ph. D., K. M., Professor of Philology, University of Oxford, England. G. C. N. Rev. Geo. C. Needham, D. D., Philadelphia, U. S. A. A. H. N. Rev. A. H. Newman, D. D., LL.D., Professor of Church History, McMaster University. Toronto, Canada. T. O'G Rt. Rev. Thomas O'Gorman, D. D., Bishop of South Dakota, U. S. A. (Roman Catholic Church). W. M. F. P. W. M. Flinders Petrie, D. C. L., Professor of Egyptology, University College, London, England. T. G. P. Theophilus G. Pinches, M. R. A. S., of the British Museum. H. R. Hormuzd Rassam, Esq., Assyrian Discoverer. E. A. R. Mrs. Elizabeth A. Reed, A. M., L. H. D., Member of the Philosophical Society of Great Britain; member of the International Society of Orientals. W. H. R. Rev. W. H. Roberts, D. D., L.L. D., Stated Clerk of the General Assembly of the Pres- byterian Church in the United States of America. A. F. J. R. Arthur F. J. Remy, A. M., Scholar in Comparative Philology, Columbia University, New York. H. W. R. H. W. Roth, A. M., D. D., Professor of Church History in the Theological Seminary of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, Chicago, U. S. A. F. K. S Frank K. Sanders, A. M. Ph. D., Professor of Biblical Literature, Yale University, U. S. A. - A. H. S. Archibald Henry Sayce, D. D., LL.D., late Deputy Professor of Philology, Oxford University, England. - D. J. S. Rev. D. J. Severinghaus, A. M., D. D., Chicago, U. S. A. G. W. S. Rev. G. W. Shinn, A. M., D. D., Newton, Mass., U. S. A. - S. P. S. Rev. S. P. Spreng, Editor of The Evange/ical. Messenger, Cleveland, U. S. A. D. S Rev. Daniel Steele, A. M. D. D., Professor Theological Seminary, Boston University, & Boston, U. S. A. (Methodist Episcopal). J. R. S. Rev. J. Ross Stevenson, A. M., D. D., Professor McCormick Theological Seminary, Chicago, U. S. A. J. J. S Rev. J. J. Summerbell, A. M., Editor of Herald of Gospel Liberty, Dayton, Ohio, U. S. A. Z. T. S. Rev. Z. T. Sweeny, A. M., D. D., Columbus, Indiana, U. S. A. A. C. T. Rev. A. C. Thomas, A. M., D. D., Professor of History, Haverford College, Pa., U. S. A. B. B. T Rev. B. B. Tyler, A. M., D. D., Denver, Colo., U. S. A. SIGNATURES. C. W. V. W. W. º W. A A. w W. H. & º s º . Full Name. Full Name. K. A. C. S. D. B. D. J. F. D. J. W. D. J. E. Full Name. G. H. A. v. E. F. W. G. H. A. C. H. LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS 5. NAM ES. Clyde W. Votaw, A. M., Ph. D., Instructor in New Testament Literature, University of Chicago, U. S. A. Rev. Williston Walker, A. M., Ph. D., Professor of Church History, Theological Sem- inary, Hartford, Conn., U. S. A. (Congregational). Rev. A. G. Wallace, A. M., D. D., Sewickley, Allegheny, Pa., U. S. A. Bishop Alexander Walters, A. M., D. D., Jersey City, New Jersey, U. S. A. (Zion African Methodist Episcopal Church). Rev. W. C. Whitford, A. M., D. D., President of Milton College, Milton, Wis., U. S. A. Samuel Willard, A. M., M. D., L.L. D., Chicago, U. S. A., formerly Professor of Language, Illinois State Normal University; late Professor of History, Chicago High School. Rev. Herbert L. Willett, A. M., Ph. D., Assistant Professor in Semitics, University of Chicago (The Disciples' Divinity House), U. S. A. Rev. Joseph D. Wilson, A. M., D. D., Victoria, British Columbia. Rev. William C. Winslow, A. M. Ph. D., D. D., L.L. D., Bostón, U. S. A. Andrew C. Zenos, A. M., D. D., Professor of Biblical Theology, McCormick Theological Seminary, Chicago, U. S. A. (Not E.-The following are contributors to other works whose articles appear in the original, or in a revised form, in this Encyclopaedia.) Rev. W. L. Alexander, M. A., Author of “The Connection and Harmony of the Old and New Testaments,” etc. Rev. G. Baur, Ph. D., of the University of Giessen, Germany. Rev. J. R. Beard, D. D., Member of the Historico-Theological Society of Leipsic, Ger- many. G. M. Bell, Author of “Universal Mechanism,” etc. Rev. C. H. F. Bialloblotzky, Ph. D., Göttingen, Author of “De Abrogatione Legis.” Rev. John Brown, A. M., D. D., Professor of Exegetical Theology to the United Seces- sion Church. Rev. J. Newton Brown, A. M., D. D., Boston, U. S. A. Rev. Charles Buck, D. D., Author of “Buck's Theological Dictionary,” etc. Rev. George Bush, A. M., D. D., Professor of Hebrew and Oriental Literature in the University of New York, U. S. A. & Rev. James D Butler, A. M., D. D., Abbot Resident, Theological Seminary, Andover, United States. - Augustin Calmet, Author of “Dictionnaire de la Bible," etc. Rev. Alexander Campbell. K. A. Credner, Doctor and Professor of Theology in the University of Giessen, Germany. Rev. S. Davidson, L.L. D., Professor of Biblical Literature and Oriental Languages in the Lancashire Independent College, England. Rev. Benjamin Davies, D. D. Rev. J. F. Denham, M.A., F. R. S., St. John's College, Cambridge, England. Rev. J. W. Doran, L.L. D., Association Secretary of the Church Missionary Society, England. - Rev. John Eadie, I.I., TX., Professor of Biblical Literature to thc United Secession Church. Rev. B. B. Edwards, A. M., D. D., Editor of Quarter/y Observer. G. H. A. von Ewald, Doctor and Professor of Theology in the University of Tübingen, Germany. Rev. F. W. Gotch, M. A., Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland. H. A. C. Havernick, Doctor and Professor of Theology in the University of Königsberg, Germany. E. W. Hengstenberg, Doctor and Professor of Theology in the University of Berlin, Germany. tº 6 SIGNATURES. Full Name J. Z. R. J. Full Name. E. A. L. L. : N, | W . A. N. . P. P. . P. | Full Name. J. F. R. J. E. R. C. H. S. J. P. S. H. S. Full Name, A. T. Full Name. Full Name. D. W. L. W. W. W., LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS NAMES. Rev. D. W. C. Huntington, A. M., D. D., LL. D., Chancellor Nebraska Wesleyan University, U. S. A. Rev. J. Jacobi, D. D., of the University of Berlin, Germany. Rev. R. Jamieson, M.A., D. D., Editor of “Paxton's Illustrations of Scripture.” Rev. J. K. Knowles, A. M., D. D., Newton, Mass., U. S. A. Rev. E. A. Lawrence, A. M., D. D., Haverhill, Mass., U. S. A. Rev. Robert Lee, D. D., Edinburgh, Scotland. ve Frederick R. Lees, Ph. D., F. S. S. A., Editor of Z'he 7%rzeż/4-Seeker, etc. E. Michelson, Ph. D., of the University of Heidelberg, Germany. Peter Mearns, Author of “Tirosh’’, etc. Rev. N. Morren, M.A., L.L. D., Author of “Biblical Theology" and Translator of “Rosen- müller's Biblical Geography.” F. W. Newman, D. D., late fellow of Balliol College, Oxford, England. John Nicholson, B. A., Oxford, Ph. D., Tübingen, Author of “An Account of the Estab- lishment of the Fatemite Dynasty,” Translator of “Ewald's Hebrew Grammar.” W. A. Nicholson, M. D. Rev. John Phillips Potter, M. A., D. D., Oriel College, Oxford, England. Rev. Baden Powell M. A., F. R. S., F. G. S., Savilian Professor of Geometry in the Uni- versity of Oxford. Rev. Edward Robinson, D. D., L.L. D., Late Professor in Union Theological Seminary; Author of “Biblical Researches in Palestine,” etc. J. F. Royle, M. D., F. R. S., F. L. S., F. G. S., Member of the Royal Asiatic Societies of Calcutta and London; Professor of Materia Medica and Therapeutics in King's College, London, England. J. E. Ryland, Translator of “Neander's Church History” and of “Semisch's Justin Martyr.” Lieut.-Colonel C. Hamilton Smith, K. H. and K. W., F. R. and L. S., President of the Devon and Cornwall Natural History Society, etc. Rev. J. Pye Smith, D. D., F. R. S., F. G. S. Rev. H. Stebbing, D. D., of St. John's College, Cambridge, Author of a “History of the Church,” etc. Rev. Thomas O. Summers, D. N. LL. D., Nashville, Tenn. Rev. A. Tholuck, Doctor and Professor of Theology in the University of Halle, Prussia. Bishop Richard Watson, D. D., L.L. D., England. Rev. Richard Watson, D. D., L.L. D., Author of “Watson's Institutes” and “Watson's Biblical and Theological Dictionary.” Rev. David Welsh, D. D., Professor of Divinity and Church History, New College, Edinburgh, Scotland. * Rev. Leonard Woods, D. D., Professor of Theology in Andover Theological Seminary, Andover, Mass., U. S. A. Rev. William Wright, M. A. and LL. D., of Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland; Translatuſ of “Seiler's Biblical Hiermeneutics.” INTRODUCTION. HE present age is pre-eminently one of research and inquiry. The comparative sciences, relating to every realm of knowledge, have brought to the earnest student material for thought and investigation never before accessible. - It has been more than half a century since the Biblical cyclopaedias by Kitto, Robinson and Watson were issued, and nearly as long. Since the scholarly works by Dr. William Smith appeared. All of these are now far out of date, and there is a growing demand for a help to Bible study in similar form, but containing the latest and best results of modern scholarship, arranged in the most convenient manner for ready reference, to take their place. The advancement in Biblical and physical learning in the last fifty years, and the clearer understanding of many things concerning the Jewish and contem- poraneous oriental nations as well, have made great changes in Biblical reference works essential to intelligent investigation. In the light of modern science the ablest minds of the day are re-examining the claims of the Bible to be the Word of God. Its unity and consequent integrity have been chal- lenged. New statements of Biblical truth are being made and new methods of interpretation employed. But it still maintains its supreme place as the Book of books. It has been cast into the furnace of criticism, heated seven times hotter than for any other book, and it has come forth without even the smell of fire upon its sacred leaves. The result of this testing process has been to reduce the study of the Bible to a science, which is pursued with a greater or less degree of intensity and application by people of intelligence generally. To commit portions of it to memory, to be catechised in its doctrines and to enter into its devotions are not adequate Bible study. These are elementary steps in securing scriptural knowledge, but they do not unfold all the truths which thoughtful people seek after. The liberation of the human mind from bondage to creeds has ushered in an era of independent thought. But while this age is one of reason, it should not be in the light of facts before us, any less one of devotion. Science is the handmaid of religion, as has been devoutly said, and where pure religion abounds, the highest degree of intelligence is attained. Men who are thoroughly loyal to the Bible as the unimpeachable word of God, have been foremost to strengthen the hand of the archaeologist and to furnish the means which enable him to bring from the long buried past the story of the nations and the individuals mentioned in its sacred records. . Their faith has taken a firmer hold upon its authen- ticity and inspiration through the surprising results which have been attained. From sunburnt bricks and monuments of stone, disentombed from mounds of ancient ruins, new witnesses have come forth bringing invaluable testimony to the accuracy of the Hebrew writers. Unfriendly critics had decided long ago that some of the cities mentioned in the Old Testament were purely mythical, but the spade of the explorer has revealed the foundations of the cities them- selves. It was held that the names of certain kings were merely allegorical or the interpolation of some ignorant scribe, but in several instances the documents and inscriptions of these kings have been * found, and even their bodies have been produced as incontrovertible evidence of the accuracy of the record of the sacred writings. More light is also continually breaking upon the Scriptures by TeaSOIn of the progress made in Biblical Literature and Hermeneutics through the superior critical scholarship of the day. The aim of the Editors of this Encyclopaedia is to furnish a work of ready reference for ministers, Sunday School workers and Bible students of every class, including the general public. It will be found to contain the best information accessible upon all the varied themes of Bible lore. It is especially rich in the results of the most recent discoveries in Bible lands. The pick and spade of the archaeologist have forced the ancient ruins to yield up treasures richer than the gold of Ophir. The decipherment of historic inscriptions in the palaces and upon the tombs of ancient monarchs have 7 8 INTRODUCTION added a constantly increasing accumulation of testimony to the truthfulness of the Biblical record. Claims of adverse criticism have been dispersed in the light of these discoveries as clouds of fog and mist before the shining of the ascending sun. The growing intelligence of the people demands familiarity, not only of the ministry but of all who teach the Bible, with current facts which will enable them to arm the minds and hearts of the young with weapons defensive and offensive against the stalking foes of Christianity, namely, doubt, agnosticism, and scholastic infidelity. Such facts have been collated and arranged in this work in the most convenient form for reference. As a critical and popular Encyclopaedia and Dictionary it will meet the needs both of men of learning and of those who have not received a classical training. To produce accuracy and fullness, more than one hundred and twenty writers have contributed articles to these volumes. Most of them are specialists in History, Geography, Philology, Ethnology, Theology, or Archaeology, and among them are several of the greatest scholars of Europe and America. Never before have the services of so remarkable a corps of contributors been secured for any popular Biblical reference work. These writers differ in their opinions and views, and are alone responsible for them. But the whole work has been prepared on such a basis that it may confidently be regarded as a safe and reverent guide to the meaning of the Holy Scriptures. On controverted points in criticism and theology, as well as on ecclesiastical subjects, the questions at issue have been presented calmly and thoughtfully by recognized leaders of the different schools under discussion. The book has thus been divested of sectarian features and appeals to the whole Christian Church. Every Cyclopaedia of value has been consulted in the preparation of this work; and to these due credit has been given in specific articles. Much that was pertinent in the scholarly work of Kitto has been reproduced, and the names of the distinguished men who contributed to it have been given. Inasmuch, however, as conditions have so materially changed since that work was written, it has been necessary to thoroughly revise the articles which have been utilized, eliminating those features that have been rendered invalid by reason of later discoveries and the advanced scholar- ship and Science of the present day, and adding the features which are necessary in order to render them entirely modern and conformable to the knowledge now extant. In the practical, devotional and figurative treatment of many of the subjects Brown's Dictionary of the Bible, which is unexcelled in these particulars, has been freely used. The plan of this Encyclopaedia embraces many features of great advantage over other similar works. Among these some of the most notable are the following: I. The Hebrew and Greek words at the heads of all articles are pronounced phonetically and their literal definition given, by which the reader is enabled to have a working knowledge of these languages, So far as such words are concerned, with little or no outside assistance. The English pronunciation of each Bible term is also indicated by diacritical marks in the body of the work; and in the Appendix all these words are grouped together alphabetically and pronounced by the phonetic method. . 2. In these busy times it is often necessary to read rapidly, and yet intelligently, and therefore, to aid the eye and fix the attention, subheads and other convenient modes of division are employed in this work which enable One to see at a glance the part which may be especially sought. 3. There are many helps to Bible Study which cannot advantageously be placed in the body of such a work as this, yet which are frequently needed in the study of the Scriptures. Such features have been embodied in a conveniently arranged Appendix, which will be found to contain much matter of value and interest designed to aid in the study of the Bible. These have been carefully prepared especially for this work, and we feel warranted in the belief that taken together with the body of the work they make this book unrivaled in its kind. It is confidently claimed that no other fo/ular Biblical encyclopaedia or dictionary approaches this in completeness, or presents such a great number of points of interest, convenience and usefulness. THE POPULAR AND CRITICAL BIBLE ENCYCLOPAEDIA. A, the first letter in almost all alphabets. In Hebrew it is called Alef/, N, which signifies or, from the shape of it in the old Phenician alphabet, where it somewhat resembles the head and horns of that animal. (Plutarch, Quast. Sympos. ix:2. Gesenii Thesaur. Heb. p. 1.) This Hebrew name has passed over along with the letter itself, into the Greek alpha. Both the Hebrews and Greeks employed the letters of their alphabets as nu- merals; and A, (A left/, or al/ha) therefore, de- noted one, the first. Hence our Lord says of him- self, that he is Alpha and Omega, i. e., the first and the last, the beginning and the ending, as he himself explains it (Rev. i :8, II; xxi.;6; xxii.13). This expression in the Old Testament was em- ployed to denote the eternity of God (Is. xliv :6). The Church very early adopted these two letters as a symbol of the eternal divinity of our Lord, and used it extensively on monuments of every description, sometimes alone, but more frequently in connection with the cross and the monogram of Christ, in its various forms, as follows: Ríº Riº Sfº A—The use of a or an before a word which began with vocal / varied at the date of the Au- thorized Version (A. D. 161 I). Thus we find a half in Exod. xxv :10, but an half in Dan. xii:7; a harp in I Chron. xxv :3, but an harp in I Sam. xvi.16; a hammer in Jer. xxiii:29, but an hammer in Judges iv:21 (See also Gen. xxvii.;II; 2 Kings i:8; 2. Kings xii:9, and Exod. xxviii:32). An is sometimes abbreviated to a and appears to have been closely related to on, “Fell a sleep”. (Acts vii:60), “fell on sleep” (Acts xiii:36). In Ex: xix:18, “Mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke,” means all Mount Sinai smoked. In 2 Chron. ii: 18, “To set the people a work,” means to set them to work. “A work” should be written with a hyphen (a-work), “Sets it a-work.”—Shakespeare. AARON (ā'ron, vulgarly pronounced ār'on), (Heb. Tºº, 3-har-one", perhaps mountaineer or enlightener). * The eldest son of the Levite Amram and Jochebed (Exod. vi.20; Num. , xxvi :59). He was the brother of Moses and Miriam, being three years older than the great lawgiver (Exod. vii:7), and was born B. C. about 1293, which was the year before Pharaoh's edict for destroying the Hebrew male infants, and three years before his brother Moses (Exod. vii:7). (1) Marriage. He married Elisheba (or Eliza- beth), the daughter of Amminadab (Exod. vi.23), of the tribe of Judah (Matt. i :4; Luke iii:32), by whom he had four sons, Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar. The eldest two were de- stroyed by fire from heaven; from the other two the race of the chief priests was continued in. Israel (I Chron. xxiv:2 seq.). (2) Divine Appointment. The Lord having appeared to Moses and directed him to de- liver the Israelites from their oppressive bondage. in Egypt, appointed Aaron to be his assistant and speaker, he being the more eloquent of the two. (Exod. iv: I4-16; vii: I). Moses, having been di- rected by God to return into Egypt, left Midian where he had been (B. C. 1698–1658), and with his family entered upon his journey. At Mount Horeb he met his brother Aaron, who had come thither by a Divine direction (Exod. iv:27); and after the usual salutations, and conference as to the purposes of the Almighty, the brothers prosecuted. their journey to Egypt (B. C. I658). Upon their arrival in Egypt, they called together the elders of Israel, and having announced to them the pleasure of the Almighty, to deliver the people from their bondage (Exod. iv:29-31), they presented them- selves before Pharaoh, and exhibited the creden- tials of their Divine mission by working several miracles in his presence. (3) Conduct of Pharaoh. Pharaoh, however, drove them away, and for the purpose of re- pressing the strong hopes of the Israelites of a restoration to liberty, he ordered their laborious. occupations to be greatly increased. Over- whelmed with despair, the Hebrews bitterly com— plained to Moses and Aaron, who encouraged. them to sustain their oppressions, and reiterated the determination of God to subdue the ob- stinacy of Pharaoh, and procure the deliverance: of his people (Exod. v). In all their subsequent intercourse with Pharaoh, during which several powerful remonstrances were made, and many astonishing miracles performed, Aaron appears. to have taken a very prominent part, and to have pleaded with much eloquence and, effect the cause: of the injured Hebrews (Exod. vi-xii). (4) Priest. Moses having ascended Mount Sinai, to receive the tables of the law, after the ratification of the covenant made with Israel, Aaron, his sons, and seventy elders, followed him partly up. They saw the symbol. of thc Divinc presence, without sustaining any injury (Exod. xxiv:I-II), and were favored with a sensible manifestation of the good pleasure of the Lord. It was at this time that Moses received a Divine command regarding the Hebrew ecclesiastical establishment and the invest— ing of Aaron and his four sons with the priestly office (B. C. 1209), the functions of which they were to discharge before Jehovah forever (Lev. viii:12). (See TABERNACLE: PRIEST.) Under this new institution the whole tribe to which he be- longed, that of Levi, was set apart as the sacer- dotal or learned caste. (See LEVITES.) (5) The Golden Calf. During the forty days. that Moses continued in the mount, the people be- AARON •came impatient, and tumultuously addressed Aaron : “Make us gods,” said they, “which shall go before us: for as to this Moses, the man that brought us tip out of the land of Egypt, we know not what is become of hin!” (Exod. xxxii: I seq.). Aaron desired them to bring their pendants, and the ear- rings of their wives and children, which, being brought, were melted down under his direction, and formed into a golden calf. This calf, or young bull, was doubtless that of the bull-god Apis, at Memphis, whose worship extended throughout Egypt. However, to fix the meaning of this image as a symbol of the true God, Aaron was careful to proclaim a feast to Jehovah for the ensuing day. On that day in front of this calf Aaron built an altar, and the people sacrificed, danced, and di- verted themselves around it, after the fashion of ...the Egyptian festivals of the calf-idol, exclaiming, “These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee aup out of the land of Egypt.” The Lord having informed Moses of the sin of the Israelites (Exod. xxxii:7), he immediately descended, carrying the tables of the law, which, as he approached the camp, he threw upon the ground and broke (Exod. xxxii:19), reproaching the people with their transgression, and Aaron with his weakness. (6) Repentance and Consecration. Aaron at first endeavored to excuse himself, but afterwards became penitent, humbled himself, and was par- doned. The tabernacle having been completed, and the offerings prepared, Aaron and his sons were consecrated with the holy oil, and invested with the sacred garments (Exod. xl ; Lev. viii). Scarcely, however, were the ceremonies connected with this solemn service completed, when his two eldest sons, Nadab and Abihu, were destroyed by fire from heaven, for presuming to burn incense in the tabernacle with strange fire (Lev. x: I-II). It is recorded to his great honor that, at the words spoken by Moses, he “held his peace” when this terrible incident occurred. (See ABIH.U.) The high priest applied himself assiduously to the duties of his exalted office, and during the period of nearly forty years that it was filled by him the incidents which bring him historically be- fore us are very few. Aaron would seem to have been liable to some fits of jealousy at the superior influence and authority of his brother; for he at least sanctioned the invidious conduct of his sister Miriam (see MIRIAM), who, after the wife of Moses had been brought to the camp by Jethro, became apprehensive for her own position, and cast reflections upon Moses, much calculated to damage his influence, on account of his marriage 10 with a foreigner—always an odious thing among the Hebrews. . For this Miriam was struck with temporary leprosy, which brought the high priest to a schsc of his sinful conduct, and hc sought and obtained forgiveness (Num. xii). (7) Conspiracy Against Moses and Aaron. Some twenty years after (B. C. r171), when the camp was in the wilderness of Paran, a formidable conspiracy was organized against the sacerdotal au- thority exercised by Aaron and his sons and the civil authority exercised by Moses. This conspir- acy was headed by chiefs of influence and station —Korah, of the tribe of Levi, and Dathan and Abiram, of the tribe of Reuben. (See KORAH.) But the Divine appointment was confirmed by the signal destruction of the conspirators; and the next day, when the people assembled tumultuously and murmured loudly at the destruction which had overtaken their leaders and friends, a fierce pestilence broke out among them, and they fell by thousands on the spot. When this was seen, Aaron, at the command of Moses, filled a censer with fire from the altar, and, rushing forward, “he AARON stood between the dead and the living' and the plague was stayed (Num. xvi). (8) Aaron’s Rod. This was, in fact, another attestation of the Divine appointment; and, for its further confirmation, the chiefs of the several tribes were required to lay up their staves over- night in the tabernacle, together with the rod of Aaron for the tribe of Levi ; and in the morning it was found that, while the other rods remained as they were, that of Aaron had budded, blos- Somed, and yielded the fruit of almonds. The rod was preserved in the tabernacle (Comp. Heb. ix:4) in evidence of the Divine appointment of the Aaronic family to the priesthood (Num. xvii: Io). (9) Death. Aaron was not allowed to enter the Promised Land, on account of the distrust which he, as well as his brother, manifested when the rock was stricken at Meribah (Num. xx:8–13). His death indeed occurred very soon after that event (B. C. I.170). For when the host arrived at Mount Hor, the Divine mandate came that Aaron, accompanied by his brother Moses and by his son Eleazar, should ascend to the top of that mountain in the view of all the people; and that he should there transfer his pontifical robes to Eleazar, and then die (Num. xx:23–29). He was One hundred and twenty-three years old when his career thus terminated (Num. xxxiii:32), and his Son and his brother buried him in a cavern of the mountain. (See HoR, MoUNT.) The Israel- ites mourned for him thirty days; and, on the first day of the month Ab, the Jews yet hold a fast in commemoration of his death. The Arabs still show the traditionary site of his grave (Num. xx:28; xxxiii:38; Deut. xxxii:50), re- ported to be in Petra. In Ps. cxxxiii:2, the name of Aaron occurs as the first anointed priest. (10) Descendants. His descendants, termed ‘Children of Aaron’ (Josh. xxi.;4, Io, 13, etc.), and, poetically, ‘House of Aaron’ (Ps. cxv :Io, I2), were the priesthood in general (his lineal descendants being the high-priests, who were con- fined to the firstborn in succession). (See AARONITES.) Even in the time of David these were a very numerous body (I Chron. xii:27). (11) Character. Judging from the acts of his life, we should suppose him to have been, like many eloquent men, a man of impulsive and comparatively unstable character, leaning almost wholly on his brother; incapable of that endurance of loneliness and temptation which is an element of real greatness; but at the same time earnest in his devotion to God and man, and therefore capable of sacrifice and of dis- cipline by trial” (Smith's Bib. Dict.). Figuratite. Aaron's priesthood was designed as “a shadow of heavenly things,’ to lead the Israelites to look forward ‘to better things to come,” when another priest should arise ‘after the order of Melchizedek’ (Heb. vi :20). (See MELCHIZEDEK.) ‘Aaron was a type of Christ, not in his personal, but in his official, character: (1) As high priest, offering sacrifice. (2) In entering into the holy place on the great day of atonement, and acting as intercessor, (3) In being anointed with the holy oil by effusion, which was prefigurative of the Holy Spirit with which our Lord was en- dowed, (4) In bearing the names of all the tribes of Israel upon his breast and shoulders, thus pre- senting them always before God, and representing them to him. (5) In being the medium of their in- quiring of God by Urim and Thummim, and of the communication of his will to them’ (M’C. and S., Cyc.). “With unequaled purity, patience, pity, AARONITES courage, and labor, Christ, amidst inconceivable injuries and temptations, faithfully executed his work. At the expense of his life he averted the burning plague of endless vengeance from his un- reasonable foes; and, having finished his work of obedience, he publicly and willingly, on Cal- vary, Surrendered himself unto death, bequeathing his robes of finished righteousness to his spiritual seed' (Brown's Bib. Dict.). AARONITES (a'ron-ites), (Heb. same as Aaron). Levites of the family of Aaron ; the priests who particularly served the sanctuary (Num. iv:5, sq.). To the number of 3,700 fighting men, with Jehoiada, the father of Benaiah, at their head, they joined David at Hebron (I Chron. xii:27). Later on in their history we find their chief was Zadok (I Chron.xxvii:17). (See AARON; PRIEST; LEVITES). AB (āb), (Heb. 28, awb, father). 1. Is found as the first member of several com- pound Hebrew proper names—such as Abner, fa- ther of light; Abiezer, father of help, etc. By a process which it is not difficult to conceive, the idea of a natural father became modified into that of author, cause, source (as when it is said, “has the rain a father?” Job xxxviii:28). So that, in course of time, the original meaning was so far modified that the word was sometimes applied to a woman, as in Abigail, father of ſoy (I Sam. xxv.: I4). 2. The Chaldee' name of that month, which is the fifth of the ecclesiastical and eleventh of the civil year of the Jews. It commenced with the new moon of our August (the reasons for this state- ment will be given in the article MONTHS), and always had thirty days. This month is pre-emi- nent in the Jewish calendar as the period of the most signal national calamities. The Ist is memo- rable for the death of Aaron (Num. xxxiii:38). The 9th is the date assigned to the following events: The declaration that no one then adult, except Joshua and Caleb, should enter into the Promised Land (Num. xiv:30); the destruction of the first Temple by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings, xxv :8, comp. Jer, lii: 12); (to these first two ‘the fast of the fifth month,’ in Zech. vii:5; xiii :19; Jer. i :3 is supposed to refer); the destruction of the second Temple by Titus; the devastation of the city Bettar, and the slaughter of Ben Cozibah (Bar Cocáb), and of several thousand Jews there; and the ploughing up of the foundations of the Temple by Turnus Rufus—the two last of which happened in the time of Hadrian. - The 9th of the month is observed by the Jews as a fast, in commemoration of the destruction of the first Temple; the 15th is the day appointed for the festival of the wood-offering, in which the wood for the burnt-offering was stored up in the court of the Temple; to which Nehemiah alludes in x:34, and xiii:3I. Lastly, the 18th is a fast in the memory of the western lamp going out in the Temple in the time of Ahaz (2 Chron. xxix :7, where the extinction of the lamps is mentioned as a part of Ahaz's attempts to suppress the Temple service). the western or evening lamp see CANDLESTICK. ABACUC (āb'a-kük), (Lat. Abacuc, the Greek text being no longer extant), one of the minor proph- ets, Habakkuk (2 Esdr. i :40). (See HABAKKUK.) ABADDON (a-bād'don),or Apollyon, (Heb.”28, aô-bad"yon, destruction), (Gr.' Affaë6(öv, aff-ad-do/izz', in Rev. ix:II, where it is rendered by the Greek 'AtroX\}ov, aff-o/-ſoo'ohn, destroyer). The former is the Hebrew name, and the latter the Greek name, ascribed (Rev. ix: II) to the angel of the abyss, or Tartarus, i. e., the angel of death. He is represented as the king and head of the Apocalyptic locusts under the fifth trumpet 11 For an inquiry into what is meant by ABATTACHIM (Rev. ix:II). In the Bible, the word Abaddon means destruction (Job xxxi : I.2) or the place of destruction, i. e., the subterranean world, Hades, the region of the dead (Job xxvi :6; xxviii:22; Prov. XV: II). There is a general connection with the destroyer—referred to in I Chron. xxi :15. It is in fact the second of the seven names which the Rabbins apply to that region; and they deduce it particularly from Ps. lxxxviii:II. ‘Shall thy lov- ing kindness be declared in the grave, or thy faithfulness in (abaddon) destruction ?’ (See HADES ; LOCUST.) ABADIAS (āb-a-di'as), (Gr. 'Affaëtas, ab-ah- dee'-as), Obadiah, son of Jehiel (I Esdr. viii:35). ABAGARUS (a-bäg'a-rūs). See ABGARUS. ABAGTHA (a-bäg'thá), (Heb. Sº, ab-ag- thaw', given by fortune). One of the seven chamberlarns of the Persian king Ahasuerus or Xerxes (Esth. i: Io), who were commanded by the king to bring Queen Vashti into the royal presence (Esth. i :Io), B. C. after 529. ABANA (āb'a-nā), or Amana, (Heb. "???, ab- a 70-7tazºy', or njºs, a/z-aw-maw', the former being the kethib or Hebrew text, and the latter the keri or marginal reading; Sept. Agavá the name of one of the rivers which are mentioned by Naaman (2 Kings v : I.2), “Abana and Pharpar,” as “rivers of Damascus.” Amana signifies ‘perennial,' and is probably the true name. At the present day it is scarcely pos- Sible to discover with certainty the stream to which this name was applied. A recent conjec- ture seeks the Abana in the small river Fidgi, which rises in a pleasant valley fifteen or twenty miles to the northwest of Damascus and falls into the Barrada, the main stream by which Damascus is irrigated. The most recent opinion is that it must refer to some prominent stream like the Barrada, or Barada, rather than to a small river like the Fidgi or Fijih. Pharpar may be identified with the Arvaj. Robinson and J. L. Porter con- cur in this view. Dr. Mansford (Scripture Gag- 2eſſeer, s. v.) remarks: ‘Naaman may be ex- cused for his national prejudice in favor of his own rivers, which, by their constant and bountiful Supply render the vicinity of Damascus one of the most beautiful in the world.’ ABARIM (āb'a-rim), (Heb. Evºy, ab-aw-reem', regions beyond). º A mountain or, rather, chain of mountains which form or belong to the mountainous district east of the Dead Sea and the lower Jordan. It presents many distinct masses and elevations, com- manding extensive views of the country west of the river (Num. xxi : II ; xxvii:I2; xxxiii:47, 48). From one of the highest of these, called Mount Nebo, Moses surveyed the Promised Land before he died. From the manner in which the names Abarim, Nebo and Pisgah are connected (Deut. xxxii:49, “Get thee up into this mountain Abarim, unto Mount Nebo ;’ and xxxiv:I, ‘Unto the mountain of Nebo, to the top of Pisgah') it would seem that Nebo was a mountain of the Abarim chain, and that Pisgah was the highest and most commanding peak of that mountain. The loftiest mountain of the neighborhood is Mount Attarous, about ten miles north of the Arnou, and travelers have been disposed to identify it with Mount Nebo. It is represented as barren, its summit being marked by a wild pistachio tree overshadow- ing a heap of stones. (See NEBO.) ABATTACHIM (a-bät'ta-kim), (Heb. cººrs, ab-at-tah-khccºm'). - This word occurs only in Numbers xi :5, where the murmuring Israelites say, ‘We remember the ABBA fish which we did eat freely in Egypt, the cucum- bers and the abattachim,” etc. The last word has always been rendered ‘MELONS.’ The probable correctness of this translation may be inferred from melons having been known to the nations of antiquity; and it may be proved to be so by com- paring the original term with the name of the melon in a cognate language such as the Arabic. (See MELONS.) ABBA (āb'bá), (Heb. 838, ab-bah"), (Gr.’AB36), is the Hebrew word BS, awó, father, under a form peculiar to the Chaldee idiom. The Aramaic dialects do not possess the definite article in the form in which it is found in Hebrew. They compensate for it by adding a syllable to the end of the simple noun, and thereby produce a dis- tinct form, called by grammarians the emphatic, or definitive, which is equivalent (but with much less strictness in its use, especially in Syriac) to a noun with the article in Hebrew. This emphatic form is also commonly used to express the vocative case of our language—the context alone determining when it is to be taken in that sense (just as the noun with the article is some- times similarly used in Hebrew). Hence this form is appropriately employed in all the passages in which it occurs in the New Testament (Mark xiv:36; Rom. viii:15; Gal. iv:6), in all of which it is an invocation. Why Abba is, in all these passages, immediately rendered by 6 trarip, in- stead of trótep may perhaps be in part accounted for on the supposition that, although the Hellenic (as well as the classical) Greek allows the use of the nominative with the article for the vocative, the writers of the New Testament preferred the former, because the article more adequately repre- sented the force of the emphatic form. Probably to guard against the appearance of too great a familiarity, the writers of the New Testament, instead of using the Greek word trätra, papa, retained the foreign form Abba to give greater emphasis and dignity. St. Paul says, “Ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father' (Rom. viii:15). In some of the Eastern churches, as the Syriac, Coptic and Ethio- pic, the title was given in an improper sense to their bishops. ſº ABDA (āb'dá), (Heb. Sº, ab-daw', servant, slave, worshiper of God). 1. Father of Adoniram, who was an officer of the tribute under Solomon (I Kings iv:6). 2. Son of Shammua (Neh. xi :17), called Oba- diah in I Chron. ix:I6 (B. C. after 444). ABDEEL (ab'de-el), (Heb. ***, ab-deh-aſe, servant of God), father of Shelemiah (Jer. xxxvi : 26), R C 606 ABDI (āb'di), (Heb. Tºº, ab-dee", my servant), the name of three great men. 1. A Levite or Merarite, who lived in the time of David, an ancestor of Ethan, the Singer (I Chron. vi.44). 2. The father of Kish, a Merarite, in the reign of Hezekiah (2 Chron. xxix:I2). One of the ‘sons’ of Elam, who divorced his foreign wife after the return from Babylon (Ezra x:26), B. C. 459. ABDIAS (āb-di'as), (Lat. Abdias). See ABADIAs. ABDIEL (āb'di-el), (Heb. *Sºy, ab-dee-a/a, servant of God). - Son of Gemi and father of Ahi, one of the prin- cipal Gadites resident in Gilead (I Chron. v.:15), B. C. between Io93 and 782. ABDON (āb'don), (Heb. Yºy, ab-dohn', a ser- vant; Sept. 'Agöðv). e 12 ABEL 1. A son of Hillel, of the tribe of Ephraim, and twelfth judge of Israel. He succeeded Elon, and judged Israel eight years (B. C. I233-1225). His administration appears to have been peaceful; for nothing is recorded of him but that he had forty Sons and thirty nephews, who rode on young asses —a mark of their consequence (Judg. xii: 13-15). Abdon died (B. C. I225). He is probably the Bedan referred to in I Sam. xii:II. 2. The firstborn of Jehiel of the tribe of Ben- jamin (perhaps by his wife Maachah) and resi- dent at Jerusalem (I Chron. viii:30; ix:36), B. C. IO93. . 3. The son of Michah, a contemporary of Josiah (2 Chron. xxxiv:20), B. C. 628. He is called Achbor in 2 Kings xxii:I2. 4. A son of Shashak and chief Benjamite of Jerusalem (I Chron. viii:23), B. C. 624. 5. An important city of the tribe of Asher, which was given to the Levites of Gershom's fam- ily (Josh. xxi :30; I Chron. vi :74). The same . place according to several MSS. is mentioned in Josh. xix :28, instead of Hebron. It is probably identical with the ruined site Ab'deh, a few miles northeast of Accho. ABEDNEGO (a-bêd-ne-go' or a-béd'ne-gö), (Heb. *T22, ab-ade'nego', servant of Nego, i.e., Nebo); the Chaldee name imposed by the king of Babylon's officer upon Azariah, one of the three companions of Daniel. With his two friends, Shadrach and Meshach, he was miraculously de- livered from the burning furnace, into which they were cast for refusing to worship the golden Statue which Nebuchadnezzar had caused to be set up in the plain of Dura (Dan. iii). - Some have supposed this Azariah to be Ezra, but without sufficient grounds, for Ezra was a priest of the tribe of Levi (Ezra vii:5), while this Azariah was of the royal blood and consequently of Judah (Dan. i :3, 6), B. C. about 606. - ABEL (albe), (Heb.º, Aeº-be, properly He- bel, a breath), the second son of Adam and Eve. (1) Personal History. Cain and Abel having been instructed by their father Adam in the duty of worship to their Creator, each offered the first fruits of his labors. Cain, as a husbandman, offered the fruits of the field; Abel, as a shepherd, offered fatlings of his flock. God was pleased to accept the offering of Abel, in preference to that of his brother (Heb. xi :4), in consequence of which Cain sank into melancholy, and, giving him- self up to envy, formed the design of killing Abel ; which he at length effected, having invited him to go into the field (Gen. iv:8, 9; I John iii:I2). It should be remarked that in our translation no 111uiliuli is Iliade Uſ Caill illviliug lis U1 Ullieſ inlu the field : ‘Cain talked with Abel, his brother; and it came to pass when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother and slew him.’ But in the Samaritan text the words are express; and in the Hebrew there is a kind of chasm, thus: ‘and Cain said unto Abel his brother,’—and it came to pass,” etc., without in- serting what he said to his brother. a (2) Jewish Tradition. The Jews had a tra- dition that Abel was murdered in the plain of Damascus; and accordingly his tomb is still shown on a high hill, near the village of Sinie or Seneiah, about twelve miles northwest of Damascus, on the road to Baalbek. The summit of the hill is still called Nebbi Abel; but circumstances lead to the probable supposition that this was the site, or in the vicinity of the site, of the ancient Abela or Abila. The legend, therefore, was most likely suggested by the ancient name of the place. ABEL (3) Two-Fold Interpretation. To the name Abel a two-fold interpretation has been given. Its primary signification is weakness or vanity, as the word Abel, from which it is derived, indicates. By another rendering it signifies grief or lamenta- tion, both meanings being justified by the Scrip- ture narrative. Cain (a possession) was so named to indicate both the joy of his mother and his right to the inheritance of the firstborn ; Abel re- ceived a name indicative of his weakness and pov- erty when compared with the supposed glory of his brother's destiny, and prophetically of the pain and sorrow which were to be inflicted on him and his parents. (4) Faith. Paul, speaking in commendation of Abel, says (Heb. xi :4): ‘By faith he offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain; by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts; and by it he being dead yet speaketh,” even after his death. Our Savior places Abel at the head of those Saints who had been persecuted for righteousness' sake, and distinguishes him by the title righteous (Matt. xxiii:35; comp. I John iii:I2). It is prob- able that there was some command of God in reference to the rite of sacrifice with which Abel complied, and which Cain disobeyed. Abel by his faith was justified, or accepted as righteous. Cain had no faith; his offering was not expressive of this principle. He proudly rejected the ordinance of sacrifice. (See SACRIFICE.) (5) Conjectures. Ancient writers abound in observations on the mystical character of Abel, and he is spoken of as the representative of the pastoral tribes, while Cain is regarded as the au- thor of the nomadic life and character. St. Chrysostom calls him the Lamb of Christ, since he suffered the most grievous injuries solely on account of his innocency (Ad Stagir. ii:5); and he directs particular attention to the mode in which Scripture speaks of his offerings, consisting of the best of his flock, and of the fat thereof, while it seeems to intimate that Cain presented the fruit which might be most easily procured (Hom. in Gen. xviii:5). St. Augustine, speaking of regen- eration, alludes to Abel as representing the new or spiritual man in contradistinction to the natural or corrupt man, and says, “Cain founded a city on earth, but Abel as a stranger and pilgrim looked forward to the city of the saints, which is in heaven’ (De Civitate Dei, xv :I). Abel, he says in another place, was the first fruits of the Church, and was sacrificed in testimony of the future Mediator. And in Ps. cxviii (Serm. xxx, sec. 9) he says: ‘this city’ (that is, ‘the city of God’) ‘has its beginning from Abel, as the wicked city from Cain.” Irènaeus says that God, in the case of Abel subjected the just to the unjust, that the righteousness of the former might be manifested by what he suffered (Contra Haeres. iii:23). ABEL (a 'bel), (Heb. bes, aw-baſe', a grassy place or meadow). Name of several villages in Israel, with addi- tions in the case of the more important, to dis- tinguish them from one another. From a com- parison of the Arabic and Syriac, it appears to mean fresh grass; and the places so named may be conceived to have been in peculiarly verdant situations. In I Sam. vi :18 it is used as an ap- pellative, and probably signifies a grassy plain, instead, as is usually supposed, of a great stone on which the Philistines set the ark. AIBEL-BETH-MAACHAH (ā'bel-bêth-mă'a- kah),(Heb.º"nº bes, aw-baſe'óayth-ma-a-Āazy', meadow of the house of oppression). A place in the north of Palestine, which seems 13 ABGAR to have been of considerable strength from its his- tory, and of importance from its being called ‘a mother in Israel’ (2 Sam. xx:19). The identity of the city under these different names will be Seen by a comparison of 2 Sam. xx:14, 15, 18; I Kings xv :20; 2 Chron. xvi;4. The addition of ‘Maacah' marks it as belonging to, or being near to, the region Maacah, which lay eastward of the Jordan under Mount Lebanon. This is the town in which Sheba posted himself when he rebelled against David. Eighty years afterwards it was taken and sacked by Benhadad, king of Syria; and 200 years Subsequently by Tiglath-pileser, who Sent away the inhabitants captives into Assyria (2 Kings xv :29). ABEL-CIIERAMIM (ā'bel-kér'a-mim), (Heb. sº ºs, aw-bale' Aer-ah-meema', place of the vineyards). A village of the Ammonites, about six miles from Philadelphia, or Rabbath Ammon, according to Eusebius, in whose time the place was still rich in vineyards (Judg. xi :33). AIBEL-MACHEA (ā'bel-mâ'kè-a). See ABEL- BETH-MAACHAH. ABEL-MAIM (a'bel-mâ’im), the same as ABEL- BETH-MAACHAH (I Kings xv :20; 2 Chron. xvi : 4), which see. ABELMEA (ā'bel-mé'a). See ABEL-MEHOLAH. AIBEL-MEHOLAH (ā'bel-me-ho'lah), (Heb. Hinº 28, aw-baſe'?/te/#/º-o-Zaw', meadow of danc- ing), a town supposed to have stood near the Jor- dan, and some miles (Eusebius says ten) to the south of Bethshan or Scythopolis (I Kings iv:12). It was probably situated not far from where the Wady el-Maleh emerges into the Aulon or valley of the Jordan. . It is remarkable in connection with Gideon's victory over the Midianites (Judg. vii:22), and as the birthplace of Elisha (I Kings xix:16). AIBEL-MIZFAIM (ā'bel-míz'ra-im), (Heb. Fºº 738, aw-baſe' mits-rah-yim", the mourning of the Egyptians). The name of a threshing floor, so-called on ac- count of the ‘great mourning’ made there for Jacob by the funeral party from Egypt (Gen. l: II). Jerome places it between Jericho and the Jordan, where Bethagla afterwards stood. (See ATAD.) ABEL-SHITTIM (ā'bel-shit' tim), (Heb. Dººr, 28, aw-baſe' sh?t-teem", place of acacias). A town in the plains of Moab, on the east of the Jordan, between which and Beth-Jesimoth was the last encampment of the Israelites on that side the river (Num. xxxiii:49). It is more fre- quently called Shittim merely (Num. xxv :I ; Josh. ii: I ; Mic. vi.5). Eusebius says it was in the neighborhood of Mount Peor; and in the time of Josephus it was known as Abila, and stood sixty stadia from the Jordan (Antiq. iv:8, I ; v : I, I). The place is noted for the severe punishment which was there inflicted upon the Israelites when they were seduced into the worship of Baal-Peor, through their evil intercourse with the Moabites and Midianites. (See BAAL.) ABEZ (ā'bez), (Heb. YES, eh'bets, to glean, con- spicuous, Josh. xix:2O). A town in the tribe of Issachar, supposedly near the border mentioned between Kishion and Remeth (Josh. xix :20). It is probably the village of Kunebig, called also Karm-en-Abig, lying three miles west-southwest from Iksal. - ABGAR or ABGARUS (ßb'gar or āb'gărus). A king of Edessa, and of the district Osrhoene, the seventeenth of the twenty kings who bore ABHORRING this name, and contemporary with Christ. The name does not occur in Scripture, but is cele- brated in ecclesiastical history, on account of the correspondence which is said to have passed be- tween him and Christ. The legend is, that Abgar wrote to the Savior, requesting him to come and heal him of the leprosy ; to which Christ replied, that he could not come to him, but would send One of his disciples. Accordingly he is said to have sent Thaddeus. Both letters are apocryphal, and may be found in Fabric. Codex Apoc. N. T., D. 317. - ABHORRING (āb-hôr'ring), (Heb. Tºº, day- raw-one", from an unused root meaning to re- pulse); an object of aversion; abhorring, con- º (IS. lxvi :24). Translated “contempt” (Dan. X11 .2 ) . ABI (ā'bi), (Heb. 28, ab-ee"). 1. An old form of father of, which forms the first part of several Hebrew proper names. The mother of King Hezekiah (2 Kings xviii:2), called also Abijah (2 Chron. xxix:I). Her father's name was Zachariah, perhaps the same who was taken by Isaiah (viii:2) for a wit– IlêSS. ABIA (a-bi'á), (Gr. 'Aguá, ah-bee-a/a"), a Graecized form of Abijah (Matt. i :7; Luke i :5). Also found in I Chron. iii: Io, instead of Abiah. (See ABIAH.) ABIAH (a-bi'ah), (Heb. "38, ab-ee-yaw", father, i. e., possessor or worshiper of Jehovah ; a di- vinely endowed man). Son of Becher, the son of Benjamin (I Chron. vii:8). 2. Wife of Hezron (I Chron. ii:24). 3. One of the sons of Samuel, who were in- trusted with the administration of justice, and whose misconduct afforded the ostensible ground on which the Israelites demanded that their gov- ernment should be changed into a monarchy (I Sam. viii:I-5; I Chron. vi :28), B. C. before IO50. 4. Abijah or Abijam, the son of Rehoboam (I Chron. iii: Io; Matt. i :7). 5. Mother of King Hezekiah. (See ABI.) 6. Descendant of Eleazar and chief of the eighth of the 24 courses of priests (Luke i :5). ABIALBON (a-b-al'bon), (Heb. Tºš, al- ee'al-bone", father of strength, valiant). One of David’s mighty men (2 Sam. xxiii:31), called in the parallel passage (I Chron. xi :32) by the equivalent name Abiel. (See ABIEL 2.) ABIASAPH (a-bi'a-săph), (Heb. Tºš, ab-ee- aw-sawf', father of gathering). The youngest of the three sons of Korah the Levite (Exod. vi :24), B. C. after 1740. He is not the Ebiasaph mentioned in I Chron. vi :23, 37; ix:19. (See SAMUEL.) ABIATHAR (a-bi'a-thar), (Heb. Tºš, eó-yaw- 14 thawr', father of abundance), the thirteenth high- priest of the Jews and fourth in descent from Eli. When Abiathar’s father, the high priest Abime- lech, was slain with the priests at Nob, for sus- pected partiality to the fugitive David, Abiathar escaped the massacre, and bearing with him the most essential part of the priestly raiment (See EPHOD), repaired to the son of Jesse, who was then in the cave of Adullam (I Sam. xxii:20-23; xxiii:6). - (1) High Priest. He was well received by David, and became the priest of the party during its exile and wanderings. As such he sought and received for David responses from God. When David became king of Judah he appointed Abi- ABIB athar high priest. Meanwhile Zadok had been appointed high priest by Saul, and continued to act as such while Abiathar was high priest in Judah. The appointment of Zadok was not only unexceptionable in itself, but was in accordance with the Divine sentence of deposition which had been passed, through Samuel, upon the house of Eli (I Sam. ii:30-36). When, therefore, David acquired the kingdom of Israel, he had no just ground on which Zadok could be removed, and Abiathar Set in his place; and the attempt to do SO would probably have been offensive to his new subjects, who had been accustomed to the ministration of Zadok, and whose good feeling he was anxious to cultivate. The king got over this difficulty by allowing both appointments to stand; and until the end of David’s reign Zadok and Abiathar were joint high priests. How the details of duty were settled, under this somewhat anomalous arrangement, we are not informed. (2) Deposed. As a high priest Abiathar must have been perfectly aware of the Divine intention that Solomon should be the successor of David; he was therefore the least excusable, in some respects, of all those who were parties in the attempt to frustrate that intention by raising Adonijah to the throne. So his conduct seems to have been viewed by Solomon, who, in deposing him from the high priesthood, and directing him to with- draw into private life, plainly told him that only his Sacerdotal character, and his former services to David, preserved him from capital punishment. This deposition of Abiathar completed the doom long before denounced upon the house of Eli, who was of the line of Ithamar, the younger son of Aaron. Zadok, who remained the high priest, was of the elder line of Eleazar. Solomon was probably not sorry to have occasion to remove the anomaly of two high priests of different lines, and to see the undivided pontificate in the senior house of Eleazar (I Kings i :7-19; ii:26-27). (3) Apparent Discrepancy. In Mark ii:26 a circumstance is described as occurring in the days of Abiathar, ‘the high priest,’ which appears, from I Sam. xxi : I, to have really occurred when his father Abimelech was the high priest. Numerous solutions of this difficulty have been offered. The most probable in itself is that which interprets the reference thus ‘in the days of Abiathar, who was afterwards the high priest' (Bishop Middleton, Greek Article, pp. 188-190). But this leaves open another difficulty which arises from the precisely opposite reference (2 Sam. viii:17; I Chron. xviii:I6; xxiv:3, 6, 3I) to ‘Abimelech, the son of Abiathar,’ as the person who was high priest along with Zadok, and who was deposed by Solomon ; whereas the history describes that personage as Abiathar, the son of Abimelech. The only ex- planation which seems to remove all these diffi- culties—although we cannot allege it to be alto- gether satisfactory—is, that both father and Son bore the two names of Abimelech and Abiathar, and might be, and were called by, either. But although it was not unusual for the Jews to have two names, it was not usual for both father and son to have the same two names. We there- fore incline to leave the passage in Mark ii:26 as explained above, and to conclude that the other discrepancies arose from an easy and obvious transposition of words by the copyists, which was afterwards perpetrated. In these places the Syriac and Arabic versions have ‘Abiathar, the son of Abimelech.” DDX ABIB (ā'bib), (Heb. Pº, aw-beeb', from PPS, to fructify; properly, an ear of grain), the month of corn or grain, (Lev. ii: I4, “green ears;” Lev. ABIDA xxiii:IO-I4, “ears;” therefore the month of newly- ripe grain; Exod. xiii:4; xxiii: I5; xxxiv: 18; Deut. xvi : I). The first month of the ecclesiastical year of the Hebrews; afterwards called Nisan. It answered to our March, or part of April. Abib, as above, signifies green ears of corn, or fresh fruits. It was so named because corn, particularly barley, was in ear at that time. It was an early custom to name times, such as months, from observation of nature; and the custom is still in use among many nations. So it was with Our Saxon ancestors; and the Germans to this day, along with the usual Latin names of the months, have also others of the above character, e. g., June is also called Brachmonath, or month for ploughing; July, Heumonath, or Hay-month; No- vember, Windmonath, or Wind-month, etc. (See MonTH ; JEWISH CALENDAR, in Appendix.) ABIDA (a-bi'da), (Heb. PT-8, ab-ee-daw', father of knowledge, i. e., knowing, I Chron. i:33; Gen. xxv :4), the fourth of the five sons of Midian, the son of Abraham, by Keturah (Gen. xxv :4; 1 Chron, i :33). Probably the head of a tribe in the Arabian peninsula (B. C. after 2000). ABIDAH (a-bi'dah or āb'í-dah), (Gen. xxv.4). Same as ABIDA. ABIDAN (a-bi'dan), (Heb. iTºº, ab-ee-dawn', father of judgment, i. e., judge), Son of Gideoni, prince of Benjamin (Num. i: II ; ii:22; x:24), B. C. I2Io. At the erection of the tabernacle he made his contribution on the ninth day (Num. vii:60-65). ABIDANI (Gen. xxv.4). Same as ABIDA. ABIDE (a-bide'). “Bonds and afflictions abide me.” (Acts xx :23.) Abide means as in Old Eng- lish to await. It also takes the meaning to endure, to hear. “May abide the fire” (Num. xxxi :23). “Who can abide it” (Joel ii:II). ABIEL (a-bi'el), (Heb. 28°28, ab-ee-a/e', father of strength, i. e., strong, or father is God). 1. The father of Kish, whose son Saul was the first king of Israel, and of Ner ( I Chron. viii:33; ix:39), whose son Abner was captain of the host to his cousin Saul (I Sam. ix: I ; xiv:51), B. C. I093. 2. Abiel, an Arbathite, one of the thirty most distinguished men of David's army (I Chron. xi : 32), B. C. about IOOO. He is called Abialbon (2 Sam. xxiii:31), a name which has precisely the same signification (father of strength) as the other. The form Abialbon, under which this man’s name now appears in the Heb. text of Samuel is due to textual corruption. Wellhausen (on 2 Sam. xxiii:3I) supposes the original form to have been Abibaal; but there seems no sufficient reason to doubt the form (Abiel) preserved in Chron. ; comp. Driver on 2 Sam. xxiii:31. (G. B. Gray, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) ABIEZER (ā-bi-é'zer),(Heb. TºS, ab-ee-eh'zer, father of help). e sº º 1. The second of three sons of Hammoloketh, sister of Gilead, grandson of Manasseh (Num. xxvi :30; I Chron. vii:18), B. C. II.70. He be- came the founder of the family to which Gideon belonged, and which bore his name as a patro- nymic—Abiezrites (Judg. vi :34; viii:2; Josh. xvii:2). (See OPHRAH.) Gideon himself has a very beautiful and delicate allusion to this patronymic in his answer to the fierce and proud .Ephraimites, who, after he had defeated the Midianites with 300 men, chiefly of the family of Abiezer, came to the pursuit, and captured the two Midianitish princes Zeba and Zalmunna. They sharply rebuked him for having engrossed all the glory of the transaction by not calling them into 15 © ABIHAIL action at the first. ... But he soothed their pride by- a remark which insinuated that their exploit, in capturing the princes, although late, surpassed his own in defeating their army:-‘What have I done now in comparison with you? Is not the (grape) gleaning’ of Ephraim better than the vin– tage of Abiezer?' (Judg. viii:1-3). A native of Anathoth, one of David's thirty chief warriors (2 Sam. xxiii:27; 1 Chron. xi :28). B. C. IOOO. ABIEZRITE (a-b-êz'rite), (Heb. "Tº ºs. ab-ee'haw-eg-ree', father of the Ezrite), an ances– tral designation of the descendants of Abiezer (Judg. viii:32; vi. 2, 24). ABIGAIL (abºga), (Heb. ººs, al-ee-gah-yil. father of joy, i. e., exultation), contracted Abigai in 2 Sam. xvii:25. 1. The wife of a prosperous sheepmaster, called Nabal, who dwelt in the district of Carmel, west of the Dead Sea (I Sam. xxv. 3; xxvii.3; B. C. IOOO)- She is known chiefly for her beauty and the promptitude and discretion of her conduct in tak— ing measures to avert the wrath of David which, as, she justly apprehended, had been violently excited by the insulting treatment which his messengers. had received from her husband. (See NABAL.) She hastily prepared a liberal Supply of provisions. of which David’s troops stood in much need, and went forth to meet him, attended by only one: servant. When they met, he was marching to ex- terminate Nabal and all that belonged to him ; and not only was his rage mollified by her prudent. remonstrances and delicate management, but he became sensible that the vengeance which he had purposed was not warranted by the circumstances. and was thankful that he had been prevented from shedding innocent blood. The beauty and pru- dence of Abigail made such an impression upon David on this occasion, that when, not ſong after, he heard of Nabal's death, he sent for her, and she became his wife (I Sam. xxv :14-42). She ac- companied him in all his future fortunes (I Sama- xxvii:3; xxx :5; 2 Sam. ii:2). (See DAVID.) By her it is usually stated that he had two sons, Chileab and Daniel; but it is more likely that the Chileab of 2 Sam. iii:3 is the same as the Danieł of I Chron. iii: I ; the son of Abigail being known by both these names. 2. The daughter of Nahash (Jesse?), sister of David, wife of Jether, or Ithra, an Ishmaelite, and mother of Amasa (I Chron. ii:16, 17; 2 Sam- xvii:25), B. C. IOO8. ABiHAIL (ab-i-ha'i), (Heb. ºG">S, al-ee- Ä/ha/ 'y?/, father of light or splendor). The wife of Rehoboam, king of Judah. She is called the daughter of Eliab, David’s elder- brother (2 Chron. xi :18), B. C. 972; but as Davidi began to reign more than eighty years before her marriage, and was 30 years old when he became king, we are doubtless to understand that she was only a descendant of Eliab. This name, as borne by a female, illustrates the remarks under AB- ºn--is. (ab-ee-Éha'y?/, father of might, i. e., mighty). This name, although the same as the preceding in the Authorized Version, is, in the original, different both in orthography and signifi- cation. It should be written Abichail. The name was borne by several persons: 2. Abichail, the son of Huri, one of the family chiefs of the tribe of Gad, who settled in Bashon (I Chron. v . I4), B. C. between Io93 and 782. 3. Abichail, the father of Zuriel, who was the º of the Levitical tribes of Merari (Num- 111 :35). 4. Abichail, the father of Queen Esther, and ABIHU 16 ABILA brother of Mordecai (Esth. ii:15), B. C. before of priests (1 Chron. xxiv:Io; Luke i:5), B. C. 538. 5. The wife of Abishur and mother of Ahban and Molid (I Chron. ii:29), B. C. considerably before I612. & ABIHU (a-bi'hu), (Heb. 8 TPS, ab-ee-hoo”, to whom he, i. e., God, is father). Abihu was the second of the sons born to Aaron, by Elisheba (Exod. vi :23; Num. iii:2; xxvi :60; I Chron. vi :3; xxiv: I) who, with his brothers Nadab, Eleazar, and Ithamar, was set apart and consecrated for the priesthood (Exod. xxviii:I). (1) Establishment of Ceremonial Worship. When, at the first establishment of the ceremonial worship, the victims offered on the great brazen altar were consumed by fire from heaven, it was directed that this fire should always be kept up; and that the daily incense should be burned in censers filled with it from the great altar. (2) Fatal Neglect. But one day, Nadab and Abihu presumed to neglect this regulation, and offered incense in censers filled with ‘strange’ or common fire. For this they were instantly struck dead by lightning, and were taken away and buried in their clothes without the camp (Lev. X: I-II ; comp. Num. iii:4; xxvi :61; I Chron. xxiv:2). (See AARON.) There can be no doubt that this severe example had the intended effect of enforcing becoming attention to the most min- ute observances of the ritual service. (3) Prohibition of Wine. As immediately after the record of this transaction, and in ap- parent reference to it, comes a prohibition of wine or strong drink to the priests, whose turn it might be to enter the tabernacle, it is not unfairly sur- mised that Nadab and Abihu were intoxicated when they committed this serious error in their ministrations. (See NADAB.) ABIHUD (a-bi'hud), (Heb. Tº" N, ab-ee-hood', father of renown). * 1. One of the two sons of Bela (I Chron. viii:3), perhaps the same called Ahihud (v :7), E. C. after 1856. (See JACOB.) 2. The great-great-grandson of Zerubbabel and father of Eliakim ; among the paternal ancestry of Jesus (Matt. i :13, called ‘Abiud'). the same with Juda, son of Joanna and father of Joseph in the maternal line (Luke iii:26), and perhaps with Obadiah, son of Arnan and father of Shecaniah in the O. T. (I Chron. iii:21), B. C. before 410. ABIJAH (a-bijah),(Heb. "3-S, ab-ee-yaw', whose father God is, 2 Chron. xiii:1). He is also called Abijam, I Kings xv. I; Neh. x:7; 'Agtas in I Chron. xxiv: Io; Neh. xii;4, 17; 'Anywóps in I Chron. vii:8; 24&za,4 in I Sam, viii:2; I Chron. vi.28; 4 Åfa in 1 Chron. iii:Io; Matt. i:7; Luke i:5. 1. A son of Becher, one of the sons of Benja- min (I Chron vii:8), B. C. post 1856. 2. The daughter of Machir and wife of Hezron ‘(I Chron. ii:21, 24), B. C. about 1612. 3. The second son of Samuel (I Sam. viii:2; I Chron. vi.28), B. C. about 1093. (See SAMUEL.) 4. Son of Jeroboam, the first king of Israel. He having been seized with a dangerous disease, his mother disguised herself, and visited the prophet Ahijah to know whether he might re- cover. Ahijah answered her that he would die, and be the only person in his family who would receive funeral honors, and be lamented by Israel (I Kings xiv:1-18), B. C. about 930. (See JERO- BOAM.) 5. A descendant of Eleazar, son of Aaron, and head of the eighth of the twenty-four companies Probably about IOI4. 6. Called Abijam (I Kings xiv:31; xv.:I), was the Son of Rehoboam, and second king of Judah (I Chron. iii: Io). He succeeded his father (B. C. before 918) and reigned three years only. In the first book of Kings he is dcscribed as walk- ing in all the sins of his father, and as waging war with Jeroboam, king of Israel. But in 2 Chron. xiii he is represented as professedly and boastfully zealous for the honor of God and for the Levitical priesthood. He is also there said to have obtained a decisive victory over Jeroboam. 7. The daughter of Zechariah, wife of Ahaz, and mother of Hezekiah, king of Judah (2 Chron. xxix:I); called Abi (2 Kings xviii:2). - One of the priests who probably affixed their signatures to the covenant made with Nehe- miah (Neh. x:7), B. C. 410. He probably re- turned with Zerubbabel from Babylon, although very old (Neh. xii:4), B. C. 536, and had a son named Zichri (Neh. xii:17). There is a difficulty connected with the ma- ternity of Abijah, 6. In I Kings xv.2, we read, ‘His mother's name was Maachah, the daughter of Abishalom;' but in 2 Chron. xiii:2, ‘His mother's name was Michaiah, the daughter of Uriel of Gibeah.” Maachah and Michaiah are variations of the same name; and Abishalom is in all likeli- hood Absalom, the son of David. The word ban, rendered ‘daughter,’ is applied in the Bible not only to a man's child, but to his niece, grand- daughter, or great-granddaughter. It is there- fore probable that Uriel of Gibeah married Tamar, the beautiful daughter of Absalom (2 Sam. xiv: 27), and by her had Maachah, who was thus the daughter of Uriel and granddaughter of Absalom. (See MAACHA.H.) ABIJAM (a-bi'jam), (Heb. P.28, ab-ee-yawm', father of the sea, i.e., seaman). Same as Abijah, 6. The reference in I Kings xiv:I is to another person. He is called Abijah (I Chron. iii:Io; 2 Chron. xiii:I-22). (See ABIJAH.) Lightfoot (Harm. O. T. in loc.) thinks that the writer, in Chronicles, not describing his reign as wicked, admits the sacred Jah in his name; but which the book of Kings, charging him with fol- lowing the evil ways of his father, changes into Jam. This may be fanciful; but such changes of name were not unusual (comp. Bethaven; Sychar). ABILA (āb'i-la), capital of the Abilene of Lysanias (Luke iii: 1) and distinguished from other places of the same name as the Abila of Lysanias ('A6t)\m toà Ava'avtov), and (by Josephus) as “the Abila of Lebanon.” It is unnecessary to reason upon the meaning of this Greek name, for it is ob- viously a form of the Hebrew A hel, which was applied to several places, and means a grassy spot. This has been supposed to be the same as Abel-beth-Maacah, but without foundation, for that was a city of Naphtali, which Abila was not. (1) Tradition. An old tradition fixes this as the place where Abel was slain by Cain, which is in unison with the belief that the region of Damascus was the land of Eden. But the same has been said of other places bearing the name of Abela or Abila, and appears to have originated in the belief (created by the Septuagint and the ver- sions which followed it) that the words are identical; but, in fact, the name of the Son of Adam is in Hebrew Hebel, and therefore differ- ent from the repeated local name of Abel. How- ever, under the belief that the place and district derived their name from Abel, a monument upon the top of a high hill, near the source of the ABILENE river Barrada, which rises among the eastern roots of Anti-Libanus, and waters Damascus, has long been pointed out as the tomb of Abel, and its length (thirty yards) has been alleged to cor- respond with his stature. (2) Location. This spot is on the road from Heliopolis (Baalbec) to Damascus, between which towns—thirty-two Roman miles from the former and eighteen from the latter—Abila is indeed placed in the Itinerary of Antoninus. (3) Inscription. About the same distance northwest of Damascus is Souk Wady Barrada, where an inscription was found by Mr. Banks, which, beyond doubt, identifies that place with the Abila of Lysanius. . (4) Medals. There are several medals of Abila extant, two of which are of some importance, as they serve to identify the site of the town. On the reverse of one of these is a large bunch of grapes, from which it is to be inferred that the place where it was struck abounded in vineyards. But the most remarkable and decisive medal ex- tant is one which bears a half-figure of the river, with the inscription, “Chrysoroas Claudiaion,” and on the reverse, a figure of Victory, and the inscription “Leucadion,” the Greek name of the city. We may also remark that Abila, adding the name of CLAUDIA to its other appellations, as it appears from this medal it did, affords a pre- sumption that it was of some importance, and perhaps of considerable magnitude also. ABILENE (āb'i-lène), (Gr. AgiXmvi, ab-ee-lay- nay', Luke iii: 1), the small district or territory which took its name from the chief town, Abila. Its situation is in some degree determined by that of the town; but its precise limits and extent re- main unknown. Northward it must have reached beyond the Upper Barrada, in order to include Abila; and it is probable that its southern border may have extended to Mount Hermon (Jebel es-Sheikh). It seems to have included the eastern declivities of Anti-Libanus, and the fine valleys between its base and the hills which front the eastern plains. This is a very beautiful and fertile region, well wooded and watered by numer- ous springs from Anti-Libanus. It also affords fine pastures; and in most respects contrasts with the stern and barren western slopes of Anti- Libanus. (1) Government. This territory had been governed as a tetrarchate by Lysanias, son of Ptolemy and grandson of Mennaeus (Joseph Antiq. xiv:13, 3), but he was put to death, B. C. 33, through the intrigues of Cleopatra, who then took possession of the province (Antiq. xiv:4, 1). (See LYsANIAs.) After her death it fell to Au- gustus, who rented it out to one Zenodorus; but as he did not keep it clear of robbers, it was taken from him, and given to Herod the Great (Antiq. xv.:Io, I ; Bell. Jud. i :20, 4). At his death, a part (the southern, doubtless) of the territory was added to Trachonitis and Ituraea to form a tetrarchy for his son Philip; but by far the larger portion, including the city of Abila, was then, or shortly afterwards, bestowed on another Lysanias, mentioned by Luke (iii:I), who is supposed to have been a descendant of the former Lysanias, but who is nowhere mentioned by Josephus. Indeed, nothing is said by him or any other profane writer of this part of Abilene until about ten years after the time referred to by Luke, when the emperor Caligula gave it to Agrippa I, as ‘the tetrarchy of Lysanias' (Joseph. Antiq. xviii:6, Io), to whom it was after- wards confirmed by Claudius. At his death, it was included in that part of his possessions which went to his son Agrippa II. - 17 ABIMELECH (2) Apparent Discrepancy. This explanation (which we owe to the acuteness and research of Winer), as to the division of Abilene between Lysanias and Philip, removes the apparent discrep- ancy between Luke, who calls Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene at the very time that, according to Josephus (a part of) Abilene was in the possession of Philip. - “The region of Abilene is also noticed in a Gr. text found in 1873 at Burkush on Hermon, showing that the district included the Antile- banon and Hermon, N. W. of Damascus. There is a cemetery at Abila of Rom. rock-cut tombs on the left of the stream, which here forms a cascade. They are adorned with bas-relief busts, and there are several tombstones with Gr. texts, giving the names of Lucius, Archelaus, Phedistus, Antonia and Philander. N. Of the river and E. of the town are foundations of a small Rom. temple” (R. A. Conder, Hastings' Bib. Dict.). t ABIMAEL (a-bim'a-el), (Heb. *Sºs, ab-ee- meazy-a/e', father is God, or father of Mael), one of . the sons of Joktan in Arabia (Gen. x:28; 1 Chron. i:22), B. C. after 24I4. (See ARABIA.) He was probably the father or founder of an Arabian tribe. ABIMELECH (a-bim'e-lek), (Heb. Tºs, al-ee- me!"ek, father of the king, or perhaps royal father). 1. Philistine King of Gerar. The name of the Philistine king of Gerar in the time of Abraham (Gen. xx:I, sqq. B. C. about 2200) but, from its recurrence, it was probably less a proper name than a titular distinction, like Pharaoh for the kings of Egypt, or Augustus for the emperors of Rome. Abraham removed into his territory after the destruction of Sodom, and fearing that the extreme beauty of Sarah might bring him into difficulties, he declared her to be his sister. The conduct of Abimelech in taking Sarah into his harem shows that even in those early times kings claimed the right of taking to themselves the unmarried females not only of their natural subjects, but of those who sojourned in their do- minions. Another contemporary instance of this custom occurs in Gen. xii:I5, and one of later date in Esth. ii:3. But Abimelech, obedient to a divine warning communicated to him in a dream, accompanied by the information that Abraham was a sacred person who had intercourse with God, restored her to her husband. As a mark of his respect he added valuable gifts, and offered the patriarch a settlement in any part of the coun- try; but he nevertheless did not forbear to rebuke, with mingled delicacy and sarcasm, the deception which had been practiced upon him (Gen. xx). The most curious point in this transaction seems to be that it appears to have been admitted, on all hands, that he had an undoubted right to ap- propriate to his harem whatever unmarried woman he pleased—all the evil in this case being that Sarah was already married, So early had some of the most odious principles of despotism taken root in the East. The interposition of Providence to deliver Sarah twice from royal harems will not seem superfluous when it is con- sidered how carefully women are there secluded, and how impossible it is to obtain access to them, or get them back again (Esth. iv:5). It is scarcely necessary to add that these practices still prevail in some Eastern countries, especially, in Persia. Nothing further is recorded of King Abimelech, except that a few years after he re- paired to the camp of Abraham, , who had re- moved southward beyond his borders, accompa- nied by Phichol, the chief captain of his host,’ to invite the patriarch to contract with him a ABIMELECH league of peace and friendship. Abraham con- sented, and this first league on record (see ALLI- ANCE) was confirmed by a mutual oath, made at a well which had been dug by Abraham, but which the herdsmen of Abimelech had forcibly seized without his knowledge. It was restored to the rightful owner, on which Abraham named it Beer- sheba (the Well of the Oath), and consecrated the spot to the worship of Jehovah (Gen. xxi.; 22–24). - . 2. -Another King of Gerar, in the time of Isaac, who is supposed to have been the son of the preceding (B. C. about 1985). Isaac Sought refuge in his territory during a famine, and hav- ing the same fear respecting his fair Mesopota- mian wife, Rebekah, as his father had enter- tained respecting Sarah, he reported her to be his sister. This brought upon him the rebuke of Abimelech, when he accidentally discovered the truth. The country appears to have become more cultivated and populous than at the time of Abra- ham's visit, nearly a century before, and the in- habitants were more jealous of the presence of such powerful pastoral chieftains. In those times, as now, wells of water were of so much im- portance for agricultural, as well as pastoral pur- poses, that they gave a proprietary right to the soil, not previously appropriated, in which they were dug. Abraham had dug wells during his sojourn in the country, and, to bar the claim which resulted from them, the Philistines had after- wards filled them up; but they were now cleared out by Isaac, who proceeded to cultivate the ground to which they gave him a right. (See WELL.) From this time Abimelech forbade his people to do any injury whatever to Isaac or to his wife. Isaac, increasing in riches and power, ex- cited the envy of the Philistines, and Abimelech said to him, “Go from us, for thou art much mightier than we.” Isaac, therefore, retired to the valley of Gerar, and afterwards to Beersheba, where Abimelech, with Ahuzzath, his favorite, and Phicol, his general, visited him. Isaac in- quired : “Wherefore come ye to me, seeing ye hate me, and have sent me away from you?” . To which Abimelech replied, that observing how much he was favored by God, he was desirous of cultivating his friendship, and had come to make a covenant with him. Isaac entertained them splendidly, and the next day concluded a treaty with Abimelech (Gen. xxvi :8-3I). J. King of Jhechem, son of Gideon by a concubine, assumed the government of Shechem after the death of his father, and procured him- self to be acknowledged king; first, by the in- habitants of Shechem, where his mother's family had an interest, and afterwards by a great part of Israel. (1) His Conspiracy. . At Gideon's house in Ophrah he killed his father's seventy sons, now orphans, on One stone (Judg. ix). (2) The Bramble King. The youngest, Jotham, only remaining, who, when the people of Shechem assembled to inaugurate Abimelech, appeared on Mount Gerizim, and reproved them by his celebrated fable of the trees (Judg. ix:7-2I). (See Joth AM.) . (3) Revolt of Shechem. After three years, discord arose among the Shechemites, who, reflecting on their injustice, and detesting the cruelty of Abimelech, revolted from him in his ab- sence, and laid an ambuscade in the mountains, designing to kill him on his return to Shechem. Of this, Abimelech received intelligence from Ze- bul, his governor of Shechem. The Shechemites invited Gaal to their assistance, with whom, at a 18 4 ABISHAG great entertainment, they uttered many impreca- tions against Abimelech, who, having assembled Some troops, marched all night towards Shechem (Judg. ix:22-29). (4) Destruction of Shechem. In the morn- ing, Gaal went out of Shechem and gave battle to Abimelech, but was defeated, and, as he was endeavoring to reënter the city, Zebul repulsed him. Abimelech afterwards defeated the Shechemites, destroyed the city and burnt their to Wer. (5) Death of Abimelech. At the attack of The- bez, a town about thirteen miles to the N. E., a woman from the top of the tower threw an upper millstone upon his head, and fractured his skull. (See MILL.) He immediately called his armor- bearer and desired him to slay him, “that men say not of me, A woman slew him” (Judg. ix:50-56). 4. A High priest in the time of David (I Chron. xviii:16), the same as Abimelech (2 Sam.viii:17), and probably the same as Abiathar. (See ABIATHAR.) ABINADAB (a-bin'a-dāb), (Heb. Sººs, ab-ee- maw-dawb', father of generosity). & There are several persons of this name, all of whom are also called Aminadab–the letters b and m being very frequently interchanged in Hebrew. One of the eight sons of Jesse, and one of the three who followed Saul to the war with the Philistines (I Sam. xvii:I3). 2. One of Saul’s sons, who was slain at the battle of Gilboa (I Sam. xxxi :2), B. C. Iooſ. 3. A Levite of Kirjath-jearim, in whose house, which was on a hill, the Ark of the Covenant was deposited after being brought back from the land of the Philistines. It was committed to the spe- cial charge of his son Eleazar, and remained there seventy years, until it was removed by David, B.C. before IO3O (I Sam. vii: 1, 2; 2 Sam, vi:3, 4; I Chron. xiii:7). (See ARK.) 4. The father of one of the twelve officers appointed by Solomon to provide alternately, month by month, food for the king and his house- hold (I Kings iv: II), B. C. after 960. ABINoAM (a-bin'6-ām), (Heb. Pº, ab-ee- no'am, father of pleasantness Or grace, 2. e., racious), the father of Barak, the judge (Judg. iv: #. 12; v: I, I2), B. C. after I 17O. ABIRAM (a-bi'ram), (Heb. Enºs, ab-ee-rawm', father of altitude, i.e., high or proud; Sept. Ageiptºv). 1. One of the family-chiefs of the tribe of Reu- ben, who, with Nathan and On of the same tribe, joined Korah (see KORAH), of the tribe of Levi, in a conspiracy against Aaron and Moses (see AARON), (Num. xvi;I-7; xxvi;9; Deut. xi:6; Ps. cvi:17), B.C. about 162O. 2. Eldest son of Hiel the Bethelite (I Kings xvi;34). (Sce HIEL; JERICIIO.) ABISEI (āb-i-sé'i). Same as Aishna mentioned in Esdr. i2. ABISHAG (āb'i-shāg), (Heb. SºN, ab-ee-shag', father of error). g A beautiful young woman of Shunam, in the tribe of Issachar, who was chosen by the servants of David to be introduced into the royal harem, for the special purpose of ministering to him, and cherishing him in his old age. She became his wife; but the marriage was never consummated. Some time after the death of David, Adonijah, his eldest son, persuaded Bathsheba, the mother of Solomon, to entreat the king that Abishag might be given to him in marriage (B.C. about IOI.3). But as rights and privileges peculiarly regal were associated with the control and possession of the harem of the deceased kings (2 Sam. xii:8), (see HAREM), Solomon detected in this application a ABISHAI fresh aspiration to the throne, which he visited with death (I Kings i:1-4; ii:13–25). (See ADONI- JAH.) - ABISHAI(a-bish'a-i),(Heb.”28, ab-ee-shah-ee", father of gifts), a nephew of David by his sister Zeruiah, and brother of Joab and Asahel. It is recorded that these three brothers devoted themselves zealously to the interests of their uncle during his wanderings. Though David had more reliance upon the talents of Joab, he ap- pears to have given more of his private confidence to Abishai, who seems to have attached himself in a peculiar manner to his person, as we ever find him near, and ready for council or action, on crit- 'ical occasions (2 Sam. ii:24; I Chron. xix:4). Abishai, indeed, was rather a man of action than of council; and although David must have been gratified by his devoted and uncompromising at- tachment, he had more generally occasion to check the impulses of his ardent temperament than to follow his advice (2 Sam, iii:30). (1) Accompanied David. Abishai was one of the two persons whom David asked to accompany him to the camp of Saul; and he alone accepted the perilous distinction (I Sam. xxvi :5-9), B. C. about 994. The desire he then expressed to Smite the sleeping king, identifies him as the man who afterwards burned to rush upon Shimei and slay him for his abuse of David (2 Sam. xvi;9; xix: 21). For when the king fled beyond the Jordan from Absalom, Abishai was again by his side; and he was entrusted with the command of one of the three divisions of the army which crushed that rebellion (2 Sam. xviii:2), B. C. 967. He was sent by David against Sheba (2 Sam. xx:6– Io), B. C. about IO49. - (2) Rescue of David. Afterwards, in a war with the Philistines, David was in imminent peril of his life from a giant named Ishbi-benob; but was rescued by Abishai, who slew the giant (2 Sam. xx:I5-17). He was also the chief of the three ‘mighties' (2 Sam. xxiii:19; I Chron. xi :20), who, probably in the same war, performed the chivalrous exploit of breaking through the host of the Philistines to procure David a draught of water from the well of his native Bethlehem (2 Sam. xx.ii:I4-17). Among the exploits of this hero it is mentioned that he withstood 300 men and slew them with his spear; but the occasion of this adventure, and the time and manner of his death are equally unknown. In 2 Sam. viii:13, the victory over the Edomites in the Valley of Salt is ascribed to David, but in I Chron. xviii: I2, to Abishai. It is hence probable that the vic- tory was actually gained by Abishai (I Kings xi : I6), but is ascribed to David as king and com- mander in chief (comp. 2 Sam. x:14). (See DAVID.) ABISHALOM (a-bish'a-löm), a fuller form of Ab- Salom (I Kings xi:16). See ABSALOM. ABISHUA (a-bish'ti-á), (Heb. 9º, ab-ee shoo'ah, father of safety). - 1. The son of Phinehas, and fourth high-priest of the Jews (I Chron. vi;4, 5, 50). The com- mencement and duration of his pontificate are un- certain, but the latter is inferred from circum- stances, confirmed by the Chronicon of Alexan- dria, to have included the period in which Ehud was judge, and probably the preceding period of Servitude to Eglon of Moab. Blair places him from B. C. I.352 to 1302—equivalent to Hales, B. C. I513 to I463. This high-priest is called Abiezer by Josephus (Antiq. v., 12, 5). (See PRIEST, ETC.) A son of Bela and grandson of Benjamin (I Chron. viii:4), perhaps the same as Jerimoth (I Chron. vii:7), B. C. after 1856. (See JACOB.) 19 ABLUTION ABISHUR (ab'i-shur), (Heb. *28, ab-ee- shoor', father of the wall, i. e., stronghold, or per- haps mason), the second named of the two sons of Shammai of the tribe of Judah (I Chron. ii:28, 29), B. C. after 1612. ABISUM (āb'i-sām). The son of Phinces and father of Boccas (I Esdr. viii:2). ABITAL (abºtá), (Heb. ***, al-ee-tal, father of the dew, i. e., fresh), the fifth wife of David (2 Sam. iii:4; I Chron. iii:3), B. C. 1052. ABITUB (ab'i-tūb), (Heb. Pº, ab-ee-toob', father of goodness, i. e., good). A Benjamite, first named of the two sons of Shaharaim (I Chron. iii:3), B. C. IO52. ABIUD (à-bi'ud), a Graecized form (Matt. i.13) of ABIHUD (which see). ABIYONAH (āb-i-yô'nah), (Heb. nyiºs, ab-ee- Jo'zza/h). - s This word occurs only once in the Bible (Eccles. xii:5): “When the almond tree shall flourish and the grasshopper shall be a burden, and desire shall fail; because man goeth to his long home.’ The word translated desire is abiyonah, which by others has been considered to signify the caper plant. The reasons assigned for the latter opinion are: that the Rabbins apply the term abionoth to the small fruit of trees and berries, as well as to §º ſ Sºº (W. ºfº #!/42) Nº §(? Caper Plant (Capparis Spinosa). that of the caper bush; that the caper bush is com- mon in Syria and Arabia; that its fruit was in early times eaten as a condiment, being stimula- ting in its nature, and therefore calculated to ex- cite desire. (See CAPER.) ABJECT (āb'jékt), (Heb. "??, may-keh', a smiter), one Smiting with the tongue, i. e., a railer, slan- derer. Noun (Lat. abjectus, cast aside). ‘The abjects gathered themselves together against me’ (Ps. xxxv :15; Comp. Jer. xviii:18). As a noun, abject was in common use in the seventeenth century, but is now obsolete. We still retain the adjective abject. ABLUTION (āb-lii'shun), the ceremonial wash- ing whereby, as a symbol of purification from un- ABNAIM cleanliness a person was considered—(1) to be cleansed from the taint of an inferior and less pure condition, and initiated into a higher and purer state (Lev. viii:6); (2) to be cleansed from the soil of common life, and fitted for special acts of religious service (Exod. xxx:17–21); (3) to be cleansed from defilements contracted by par- ticular acts or circumstances, and restored to the privileges of ordinary life (Lev. xii-xv); (4) as absolving or purifying himself, or declaring him- self absolved and purified, from the guilt of a particular act (Deut. xxi : I-9). We do not meet with any such ablutions in patriarchal times; but under the Mosaical dispensation they all occur. (1) Influence of Pharisees. After the rise of the sect of the Pharisees, the practice of ablu- tion was carried to such excess from the affecta- tion of excessive purity, that it is repeatedly brought under our notice in the New Testament through the severe animadversions of our Saviour on the consummate hypocrisy involved in this fas- tidious attention to the external types of moral purity, while the heart was left unclean. All the practices there described come under the head of purification from uncleanness, the acts involving which were made so numerous that persons of the stricter sect could scarcely move without contracting some involuntary pollution. For this reason they never entered their houses without ablution, from the strong probability that they had unknowingly contracted some defile- ment in the streets. They were especially care- ful never to eat without washing the hands (Mark vii:1–5), because they were peculiarly liable to be defiled. As unclean hands were held to commu- nicate uncleanness to all food (excepting fruit) which they touched, it was deemed that there was no security against eating unclean food but by always washing the hands ceremonially be- fore touching any meat. The Israelites, who, like other Orientals, fed with their fingers, washed their hands before meals, for the sake of cleanli- ness. (See WASHING...) (2) Distinct from Ceremonial Ablutions. But these customary washings were distinct from the ceremonial ablutions. It was the latter which the Pharisees judged to be so necessary. When, therefore, some of that sect remarked that our Lord's disciples ate ‘with unwashen hands' (Mark vii:2), it is not to be understood literally that they did not at all wash their hands, but that they did not plunge them ceremonially according to their own practice. In at least an equal degree the Pharisees multiplied the ceremonial pollu- tions which required the ablution of inanimate objects—‘cups and pots, brazen vessels and tables;’ the rules given in the law (Lev. vi :28; xi:32-36; xv :23) being extended to these multiplied con- taminations. Articles of earthenware which were of little value were to be broken, and those of metal and wood were to be scoured and rinsed with water. - ABNAIM (āb'na-im), (Heb. P.238, ab-may-yim"). This word is the dual of the Hebrew word, a stone, and in this form occurs only twice (Exod. i. 16, and Jer. xviii:3). (1) The Potter's Wheel. In the latter passage it undeniably means a potter's wheel, but what it denotes in the former, or how to reconcile with the use of the word in the latter text any interpre- tation can be assigned to it in the former, is a question which (see Rosenmueller in 49c.) has exercised the ingenuity and patience of critics and philologists. . - (2) Doubtful Meaning. . The meaning ap- pears to have been doubtful, even of old, 20 ABNER and the ancient versions are much at vari- ance. The LXX evades the difficulty by the general expression ‘when they are about to be delivered, and is followed by the Vul- gate, “et partus tempus advenerit;’ ‘and the time of parturition shall have come;' but our version is more definite, and has and see their upon the stools.” This goes upon the notion that the word denotes a particular kind of open stool or chair constructed for the purpose of delivering preg- nant women. The usages of the East do not, how- ever, acquaint us with any such utensil, the em- ployment of which, indeed, is not in accordance with the simple manners of ancient times. Others, therefore, suppose the word to denote stone or other bathing troughs, in which it was usual to lave new-born infants. This conjecture is so far probable that the midwife, if inclined to obey the royal mandate, could then destroy the child without check or observation. (See STOOL.) ABNER (āb'ner), (Heb. "328, ab-mare', father of light, i. e., enlightener, I Sam. xiv:50). Abner was the son of Ner, who was the brother of Kish, Saul's father (I Chron. ix:36). He was, therefore, Saul's full cousin, and was made by him the Commander-in-chief of his army (I Sam. xvii:55; XX:25; xxvi. 5; I Chron. xxvi;28), B. C. Io90. (1) Under Saul. He does not come much before us until after the death of Saul B. C. IOOO. Then the experience which he had acquired, and the character for ability and de- cision which he had established in Israel, enabled him to uphold the falling house of Saul for seven years, and he might probably have done so longer if it had suited his views. It was generally known that David had been divinely nominated to suc- ceed Saul on the throne; when, therefore, that monarch was slain in the battle of Gilboa, David was made king over his own tribe of Judah, and reigned in Hebron. In the other tribes an influ- ence adverse to Judah existed, and was controlled chiefly by the tribe of Ephraim. Abner, with great decision, availed himself of this state of feeling, and turned it to the advantage of the house to which he belonged, of which he was now the most important surviving member. (2) Under Ishbosheth. He did not, however, venture to propose himself as king, but took Ish- bosheth, a surviving son of Saul, whose known im- becility had excused his absence from the fatal fight in which his father and brothers perished, and made him king over the tribes, and ruled in his name (2 Sam. ii:8). This event appears to have occurred five years after Saul’s death (2 Sam. ii:Io). Ishbosheth reigned in Mahanaim, be- yond Jordan, and David in Hebron. A sort of desultory warfare arose between them, in which tle advantage appears to have been always on the side of David (2 Sam. ii: 1). The only one of the engagements of which we have a particular account is that which ensued when Joab, David's general, and Abner, met and fought at Gibeon (2 Sam, ii: 12 sq.). (3) Slays Asahel. Abner was beaten and fled for his life, but was pursued by Asahel, the brother of Joab, and Abishai, who was “swift of foot as a wild roe.' Abner, dread- ing a blood-feud with Joab, entreated Asahel, but in vain, to desist from the pursuit, and finding that his life was in danger, he at length ran his pursuer through the body (2 Sam. ii:8-32). This, according to the law of honor which still pre- vails in the East, put a strife of blood between Joab and Abner. (See BLOOD-REVENGE.) As time went on, Abner, probably rendered arrogant and presumptuous by the conviction that he was the ABNER only remaining prop of the house of Saul, took to his own harem a woman who had been a concubine- wife of Saul: (2 Sam. iii:7). This act, from the ideas connected with the harem of a deceased king, was not only a great impropriety, but was open to the suspicion of a political design, which Abner may very possibly have entertained. (4) Breaks with Ishbosheth. A mild re- buke from Ishbosheth, however, enraged him So much that he immediately declared his intention henceforth to abandon his cause and to devote himself to the interests of David. Accordingly, after explaining his views to the elders of the tribes which still adhered to the house of Saul, he repaired to Hebron with authority to make certain Overtures to David on their behalf (2 Sam. iii:12, sq.). (5) Joins David. He was received with great attention and respect; and David even thought it prudent to promise that he should still have the chief command of the armies, when the desired union. of the two kingdoms took place. Joab, David's general, happened to be absent at the time, but he returned to Hebron just as Abner had left it. He speedily understood what had passed, and his dread of the superior influence which such a man as Abner might establish with §:( I' - 3& --~- & tºº WWNºra, | Egyptian Girdles. David quickened his remembrance of the ven- geance which his brother's blood required. (6) Slain by Joab. Unknown to the king, but apparently in his name, he sent a message after Abner, to call him back, and as he returned, Joab met him at the gate, and, leading him aside, as if to Confer privately with him, suddenly thrust his sword into his body (B. C. Ioaô). The lamen- tations of David, the public mourning which he ordered, and the funeral honors which were paid to the remains of Abner (2 Sam. iv:12), the king himself following the bier as chief mourner, exonerated him in public opinion from having been privy to this assassination (2 Sam. iii:31-39; Comp. I Kings ii:32). As for Joab, his privi- lege as a blood-avenger must to a great extent have justified his treacherous act in the opinion of the people, and that, together with his influ- ence with the army, screened him from punish- ment (2 Sam. iii 6–39). 21 ABOMINATION (7) David’s Lament. David's short but em- phatic lament over Abner (2 Sam. iii.33) may be rendered, with stricter adherence to the form of the original, as follows: “Should Abner die as a villian dies?— Thy hands—not bound, Thy feet—not brought into fetters: As one falls before the sons of wickedness, fellest thou!' ABNET (āb'net), (Heb. *328, aw8-meg', a band- age). As this word can be traced to no root in the Hebrew language, and as it occurs in the narrative immediately after the departure from Egypt, it is reasonably supposed by Professor Leº to be Egyptian, in opposition, however, to Hot. tinger, who refers it to the Persic, and to Gesenius, who finds it in the Sanscrit. It means a band, a bandage. From the places in which it occurs, it appears to have been made of fine linen vari- ously wrought, and used to bind as a girdle about the body of persons in authority, especially the Jewish priests (Exod. xxix:9; xxviii:39; xxxix: 29; Lev. viii: 13; Is... xxii:21). These girdles may be considered as fairly represented by those which we observe on such persons in the Egyptian paint- 1ngS. * ABOMINATION (à-bóm--nā’shūn), (Heb. 2);, Zig-goo/, filth, Lev. vii:18; 7 Fºº, shift-AEoozs', un- clean, Deut. xxix:17, etc.; Ypº, s/he/i'kets, rejected, tº gº s g Lev. vii:21, etc.; nºn, to-ay-&aw', causing ab- horrence, Gen. xliii:32; Gr. 36é\vyua, bde/oog-ma/, Matt. xxiv: I5, etc.). - These words describe generally any object of de- testation or disgust (Lev. xviii:22; Deut. vii:25); and are applied to an impure or detestable action (Ezek. xxii:II ; xxx:26; Mal. ii:II, etc.); to anything causing a ceremonial pollution (Gen. xliii:32; xlvi :34; Deut. xiv:3); but more espe- cially to idols (Lev. xviii:22; xx:13; Deut. vii:26; I Kings xi :5, 7; 2 Kings xxiii:I3); and also to food offered to idols (Zecht. ix:7); and to filth of every kind (Nahum iii:6). (See also Deut. xxix: I7; I Kings xi :5, 7; 2 Kings xxiii: 13, 24; 2 Chron. xv.:8; Is. lxvi;3; Jer. iv.: I ; vii:30; xiii: 27; xvi; 18; xxxii:34; Ezek. v : II; vii:20; xi :18, 2I ; xx:7, 8, 30; xxxvii:23; Dan. ix:27; xi :31 ; xii; II; Hos. ix: Io; Nah. iii:6; Zech. ix:7). (1) Difficulty. There are two or three of the texts in which the word occurs, to which, on ac- count of their peculiar interest or difficulty, espe- cial attention has been drawn. The first is Gen. xliii:32: ‘The Egyptians might not eat bread with the Hebrews; for that is an abomination unto the Egyptians.’ This is best explained by the fact that the Egyptians considered themselves ceremonially defiled if they ate with any strangers. The pri- mary reason appears to have been that the cow was the most sacred animal among the Egyptians, and the eating of it was abhorrent to them; whereas it was both eaten and sacrificed by the Jews and most other nations, who on that ac- count were abominable in their eyes. It was for this, as we learn from Herodotus (ii:41), that no Egyptian man or woman would kiss a Greek on the mouth, or would use the cleaver of a Greek, or his spit, or his dish, or would taste the flesh of even clean beef (that is, of oxen) that had been cut with a Grecian carving-knife. It is true that Sir J. G. Wilkinson (Anc. Egyptians, iii:358) ascribes this to the repugnance of the fastidiously clean Egyptians to the comparatively foul habits of their Asiatic and other neighbors; but it seems scarcely fair to take the facts of the father of history, and ascribe to them any other than the ABOMINATION very satisfactory reason which he assigns. We collect then that it was as foreigners, not pointedly as Hebrews, that it was an abomination for the Egyptians to eat with the brethren of Joseph. The Jews themselves subsequently exemplified the same practice; for in later times they held it unlawful to eat or drink with foreigners in their houses, or even to enter their houses (John xviii: 28; Acts x:28; xi :3); for not only were the houses of Gentiles unclean, but they themselves rendered unclean those in whose houses they lodged. (2) Instructions of Joseph. The second pas- sage is Gen. xlvi;34. Joseph is telling his brethren how to conduct themselves when introduced to the king of Egypt, and he instructs them that when asked concerning their occupation they should answer: ‘Thy servants’ trade hath been about cattle from our youth even until now, both we and also our fathers.’ This last clause has emphasis, as showing that they were hereditary nomade pastors, and the reason is added: ‘That ye may dwell in the land of Goshen—for every shepherd is an abomination unto the Egyptians.” In the former instance they were “an abomina- tion’ as strangers, with whom the Egyptians could not eat; here they are a further abomination as nomade shepherds, whom it was certain that the Egyptians, for that reason, would locate in the border land of Goshen, and not in the heart of the country. That it was nomade shepherds, or Bedouins, and not simply shepherds, who were abominable to the Egyptians, is evinced by the fact that the Egyptians themselves paid great at- tention to the rearing of cattle. This is shown by their sculptures and paintings, as well as by the offer of this very king of Egypt to make such of Jacob's sons as were men of activity over- seers of his cattle’ (xlvii:6). For this aversion to nomade pastors two reasons are given, and it is not necessary that we should choose between them, for both of them were, it is most likely, concurrently true. One is that the inhabitants of Lower and Middle Egypt had previously been invaded by, and had remained for many years subject to, a tribe of nomade shepherds (see EGYPT), who had only of late been expelled, and a native dynasty restored—the grievous oppres- sion of the Egyptians by these pastoral invaders and the insult with which their religion had been treated. The other reason, not necessarily super- seding the former, but rather strengthening it, is that the Egyptians, as a settled and civilized people, detested the lawless and predatory habits of the wandering shepherd tribes, which then, as now, bounded the valley of the Nile, and occupied the Arabias. (3) Abomination of the Egyptians. The third marked use of this word again occurs in Egypt. The king tells the Israelites to offer to their god the sacrifices which they desired, without going to the desert for that purpose. To which Moses objects, that they should have to sacrifice to the Lord ‘the abomination of the Egyptians,' who would thereby be highly exasperated against them (Exod. viii:25, 26). A reference back to the first explanation shows that this, ‘abomination' was the cow, the only animal which all the Egyptians agreed in holding sacred; whereas, in the great sacrifice which the Hebrews proposed to hold, not only would heifers be offered, but the people would feast upon their flesh. - (4) The Abomination of Desolation. In Dan. ix:27, literally, “the abomination of the desolater,” which, without doubt, means the idol or idola- trous apparatus which the desolater of Jerusalem should establish in the holy place. This appears to have been a prediction of the pollution of the 22 ABRAHAM temple by Antiochus Epiphanes, who caused an idolatrous altar to be built on the altar of burnt offerings, whereon unclean things were offered to Jupiter Olympius, to whom the temple itself was dedicated. Josephus distinctly refers to this as the accomplishment of Daniel's prophecy, as does the author of the first book of Maccabees, in de- claring that “they set up the abomination of desola- tion upon the altar’—thkočopºmaav Tó Böexvypla răs épmudaeos étri Tô 6vataatſipuov (I Macc. i:59; vi;7; 2 Macc. vi.2-5; Joseph. Antig. xii:5, 4; xii;7, 6). (5) Terms Quoted by Jesus. The phrase is quoted by Jesus in the form of ‘the abomination of desolation’ (Matt. xxiv.: IS), and is applied by him to what was to take place at the advance of the Romans against Jerusalem. They who saw ‘the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place’ were enjoined to ‘flee to the moun- Roman Standards. tains.’ And this may with probability be re- ferred to the advance of the Roman army against the city with their image-crowned standards, to which idolatrous honors were paid, and which the Jews regarded as idols. (6) Later Appearance. Nor was this the last appearance of ‘the abomination of desolation in the holy place,’ for not only did Hadrian, with studied insult to the Jews, set up the fig11 re of a boar over the Bethlehem gate of the city (AElia Capitolina), which rose upon the site and ruins of Jerusalem (Euseb. Chron. 1. i., p. 45, ed. I658), but he erected a temple to Jupiter upon the site of the Jewish temple (Dion Cass., lxix: I2), and caused an image of himself to be set up in the part which answered to the most holy place (Nice- phorus Callist. iii:24). This was a consummation of all the abominations which the iniquities of the Jews brought upon their holy place. ABRAHAM (ā'bra-ham), (Heb. Pº, ab-raw- hawm', father of a multitude), the founder of the Hebrew nation. Up to Gen. xvii;4, 5, he is uni- formly called Abram (Heb. Fº, ab-rawn', high father or father of elevation), and this was his original name, but the extended form, which it always afterward bears, was given to it to make it ABRAHAM . significant of the promise of a numerous posterity which was at the same time made to him. The attempt has been made to deprive the story of Abraham of all historic value, and to repre- sent the patriarch either as a mythical personage or as the typical impersonation of the virtues of the religious Israel, but as yet no evidence has been found to connect the name of Abraham with that of a tribal deity, while the endeavor to find in his story a philosophical description of abstract quali- ties seems to presuppose a stage of literary devel- opment to which the materials of the Hexateuch can make no claim, and to desiderate a literary unity which those materials emphatically contra- dict (H. E. Ryle, Hastings' Bib. Dict.). 1. Early History. Abraham was a native of Chaldea, and descended, through Heber, in the ninth generation, from Shem, the son of Noah. His father was Terah, who had two other sons, • Nahor and Haran. Haran died prematurely ‘be- fore his father,’ leaving a son, Lot, and two daugh- ters, Milcah and Iscah. Lot attached himself to his uncle. Abraham; Milcah became the wife of her uncle Nahor; and Iscah, who was also called Sarai, became the wife of Abraham (Gen. xi :26- 29; Comp. Joseph. Antiq. i :6, 5). (See ISCAH.) In Gen. xiv:13 Abraham is called the Hebrew, and in Gen. xl:15 the term Hebrew is first used in its plural form. Abraham was born B. C. about 2333, in “Ur of the Chaldees’ (Gen. xi :28). There is no positive certainty about any date in Scripture until near the year B. C. 800. (1) Birth. The concise history in Genesis states nothing concerning the portion of his life prior to the age of about 70; and respecting a per- son living in times so remote, no authentic in- formation can be derived from any other source. (2) Traditions. There are, indeed, traditions, but they are too manifestly built up on the founda– tion of a few obscure intimations in Scripture to be entitled to any credit. Thus it is intimated in Josh. xxvi :2, that Terah and his family “served other gods’ beyond the Euphrates. Upon this has been founded the romance that Terah was not only a worshiper, but a maker of idols; that the youth- ful Abraham, discovering the futility of such gods, destroyed all those his father had made, and justified the act in various conversations and arguments with Terah, which we find repeated at length. . . . § Ur of the Chaldees. Again, ‘Ur of the Chaldees’ was the name of the place where Abraham was born, and from which he went forth to go, he knew not whither, at the call of God. Now Ur means fire; and we may therefore read that he came forth from the fire of the Chaldees. Upon this has been built the story that Abraham was, for his disbelief in the established idols, cast by king Nimrod into a burning furnace, from which he was by special miracle delivered. And to this the premature death of Haran has suggested the addition that he, by way of punishment for his disbelief of the truths for which Abraham suffered, was marvelously destroyed by the same fire from which his brother was still more marvelously preserved. Again, the fact that Chaldea was the region in which astronomy was reputed to have been first cultivated, suggested that Abraham brought astronomy westward, and that he even taught that science to the Egyptians (Joseph. Antiq. i :8). These are goodly specimens of tra- dition-building; and more of them may be found in the alleged history of Abraham by those who think them worth the trouble of the search. It is just to Josephus to state that most of these stories are rejected by him, although the tone of some of 23 ABRAHAM his remarks is in agreement with them. (Comp. Legends of the Patriarchs and Prophets, by S. Baring Gould.) 2. First Period—The Ca11 (1) Removal to Charran. Although Abra- ham is, by way of eminence, named first, it appears #oºſe, that he was the youngest of Terah's sons, and born by a second wife, when his father was one hundred and thirty years old. Terah was seventy years old when the eldest son was born (Gen. xi.; Comp. Hales, ii:107): and that eldest son appears to have been Haran, from the fact that his brothers married his daughters, and that his daughter Sarai was only ten years younger than his brother Abraham (Gen. xvii:17). Abraham was sixty years old when the family left their na- tive city of Ur, and went and abode in Charran. The reason for this movement does not appear in the Old Testament. Josephus alleges that Terah could not bear to remain in the place where Haran had died (Antiq. i :6, 5); while the apocryphal book of Judith, in conformity with the traditions still current among the Jews and Moslems, affirms that they were cast forth because they would no longer worship the gods of the land (Judith V:6-8). Dr. Davidson suggests that upon his de- feat as a leader of a horde worsted in some en- counter, he had emigrated at the head of his ad- herents in quest of better fortune (Ency. Brit., Abraham). Abraham was at the head of the first division of one people (the second division being led by Jacob), which migrated into Canaan, whose inhabitants themselves had come from the same center as Abraham, and who spoke a kin- dred tongue; in fact, a tongue which differed but slightly from that of Abraham. (The Early Religion of the Hebrews, Bibliotheca Sacra, Oct., 1898, Rev. Arthur E. Whatham.) The real cause of the movement is given in Acts vii:2-4: ‘The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham while he was (at Ur of the Chaldees) in Meso- potamia, before he dwelt in Charran, and said unto him, Depart from thy land, and from thy kindred, and come hither to a land (Yāv) which I will shew thee. It has been a mooted question among Biblical scholars whether Abraham was at this time a monotheist, i. e., one worshiping the only true God, or a hemotheist, i. e., a wor- shiper of the one God, but still recognizing other gods. However this may be, he became entirely monotheistic later on in life. Departing from the land of the Chaldees, he dwelt in Charran. This first call is not recorded, but only implied in Gen. xii; and it is distinguished by several pointed circumstances from the second, which alone is there mentioned. Accordingly Abraham departed, permanent abode. and his family, including his aged father, removed with him. They proceeded not at once to the land of Canaan, which indeed had not been yet indicated to Abraham as his destination; but they came to Charran, and tarried at that convenient station for fifteen current years (five years ac- cording to McClintock & Strong) until Terah died at the age of 205 years. (2) Leaves Charran. Being free from his filial duties, Abraham, now 75 years of age, received a second and more pointed call to pursue his destination: “Depart from thy land, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto the land which I will shew thee' (Gen. xii:I). The difference of the two calls is obvious; in the former the land is in- definite, being designed only for a temporary resi- dence; in the latter it is definite, intimating a A third condition was also an- ABRAHAM nexed to the latter call, that he should separate from his father's house, and leave his brother Nahor’s family behind him in Charran. This must have intimated to him that the Divine call was personal to himself, and required that he should be isolated not only from his nation, but from his family. He, however, took with him his nephew Lot, whom, having no children of his own, he appears to have regarded as his heir, and then went forth ‘not knowing whither he went’ (Heb. xi :8), but trusting implicitly to the Divine guid- ance. And it seems to have been the intention of Him by whom he had been called, to open gradually to him the high destinies which awaited him and his race, as we perceive that every suc- cessive communication with which he was fa- vored rendered more sure and definite to him the objects for which he had been called from the land of his birth. (See UR ; HARAN.) (3) Reaches Canaan. No particulars of the journey are given. Abraham arrived in the land of Canaan, which he found occupied by the Ca- naanites in a large number of small independent communities, which cultivated the districts around their several towns. The country was, however, but thinly peopled; and, as in the more recent times of its depopulation, it afforded ample pas- ture grounds for the wandering pastors. One of that class Abraham must have appeared in their eyes. In Mesopotamia the family had been pas- toral, but dwelling in towns and houses, and send- ing out the flocks and herds under the care of shepherds. But the migratory life to which Abraham had now been called compelled him to take to the tent-dwelling as well as the pastoral life, and the usages which his subsequent history indicates are therefore found to present a con- dition of manners and habits analogous to that which still exists among the nomade pastoral or Bedouin tribes of southwestern Asia. - The rich pastures in that part of the country tempted Abraham to form his first encampment in the vale of Moreh, which lies between the mountains of Ebal and Gerizim. Here the strong faith which had brought the childless man thus far from his home was rewarded by the grand promise: ‘I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee and make thy name great and thou shalt be a blessing; and I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee; and in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed’ (Gen. xii:2, 3). It was further promised that to his posterity should be given the rich heri- tage of that beautiful country into which he had come (v. 7). It will be seen that this important promise consisted of two parts, the one temporal, the other spiritual. The temporal was the prom- ise of posterity, that he should be blessed himself, and be the founder of a great nation; the spiritual, that he should be the chosen ancestor of the Re- deemer, who had been of old obscurely predicted (Gen. iii:15), and thereby become the means of blessing all the families of the earth. The im- plied condition on his part was, that he should publicly profess the worship of the true God in this more tolerant land; and accordingly ‘he built there an altar unto the Lord, who appeared unto him.” He soon after removed to the district be- tween Bethel and Ai, where he also built an altar to that Jehovah whom the world was then hastening to forget (Gen. xii:8). (4) In Egypt. His farther removal tended southward, until at length a famine in Pales- tine compelled him to withdraw into Egypt, where corn abounded. Here his apprehen- sion that the beauty of his wife Sarai might bring him into danger with the dusky Egyp- ABRAHAM tians overcame his faith and rectitude, and he gave out that she was his sister (Gen. xii: II-I3). As he had feared, the beauty of the fair Stranger excited the admiration of the Egyptians, and at length reached the ears of the king, who forthwith exercised his regal right of calling her to his harem, and to this Abraham, appearing as only her brother, was obliged to submit (Gen. xii:I5, 16). As, however, the king had no in- tention of acting harshly in the exercise of his privilege, he loaded Abraham with valuable gifts, Suited to his condition, being chiefly in slaves and cattle. These presents could not have been refused by him without an insult which, under all the cir- cumstances, the king did not deserve. A griev- ous disease inflicted on Pharaoh and his house- hold relieved Sarai from her danger, by revealing to the king that she was a married woman; on which he sent for Abraham, and, after rebuking him for his conduct, restored his wife to him and recommended him to withdraw from the country (Gen. xii: 17-2O). (5) Return to Canaan. He accordingly re- turned to the land of Canaan, much richer than when he left it ‘in cattle, in silver, and in gold' (Gen. xiii:I, 2). Lot also had much increased his possessions; and Soon after their return to their previous sta- tion near Bethel, the disputes between their re- Spective shepherds about water and pasturage Soon taught them that they had better separate (Gen. xii:7, 8). The recent promise of posterity to Abraham himself, although his wife had been accounted barren, probably tended also in some degree to weaken the tie by which the uncle and nephew had hitherto been united. The subject was broached by Abraham, who generously con- ceded to Lot the choice of pasture grounds. Lot chose the well-watered plain in which Sodom and Other towns were situated and removed thither (Gen. xiii:II, I2). (See LOT.) Thus was ac- complished the dissolution of a connection which had been formed before the promise of children was given, and the disruption of which appears to have been necessary for that complete isolation of the coming race which the Divine purpose re- quired. Immediately afterward the patriarch was cheered and encouraged by a more distinct and formal reiteration of the promises which had been previously made to him, of the occupation of the land in which he lived by a posterity numerous as the dust (Gen. xiii:I4-17). Not long after he removed to the pleasant valley of Mamre, in the neighborhood of Hebron (then called Arba), and pitched his tent under a terebinth tree (Gen. xiii:18). (6) Rescues Lot. It appears that fourteen years before this time the south and east of Palestine had been invaded by a king called Chedorlanmer, from beyond the Euphrates, who brought several of the small disunited states of those quarters un- der tribute (Gen. xiv:I-5). (See CHEDORLAOMER.) Among them were the five cities of the Plain of Sodom, to which Lot had withdrawn. This bur- den was borne impatiently by these states, and they at length withheld their tribute. This brought upon them a ravaging visitation from Chedorla- omer, and four other (perhaps tributary) kings who scoured the whole country east of the Jordan, and ended by defeating the kings of the plain, plundering their towns, and carrying the people away as slaves. Lot was among the sufferers (Gen. xiv:8–12). When this came to the ears of Abraham, he immediately armed such of his slaves as were fit for war, in number 318, and being joined by the friendly Amoritish chiefs, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre, pursued the retiring invad- ABRAHAM ers. They were overtaken near the springs of the Jordan ; and their camp being attacked on Oppo- site sides by night, they were thrown into dis- order, and fled (Gen. xiv:13, 14). Abraham and his men pursued them as far as the neighborhood of Damascus, and then returned with all the men and goods which had been taken away. Although Abraham had no doubt been chiefly induced to undertake this exploit by his regard for Lot, it involved so large a benefit, that, as the act of a SO- journer it must have tended greatly to enhance the character and power of the patriarch in the view of the inhabitants at large. In fact, we aft- erwards find him treated by them with high re- spect and consideration (Gen. xiv:I5-17). (7) Meets Melchizedek. When they had ar- rived as far as Salem on their return, the king of that place, Melchizedek, who was one of the few native princes, if not the only one, who re- tained the knowledge and the worship of ‘the Most High God,” whom Abraham served, came forth to meet them with refreshments, in acknowl- edgment for which, and in recognition of his character, Abraham presented him with a tenth of the spoils (Gen. xiv:18-20). (See MELCHIZE- DEK.) By strict right, founded on the war usages which still subsist in Arabia (Burckhardt’s Notes, p. 97), the recovered goods became the property of Abraham, and not of those to whom they orig- inally belonged. This was acknowledged by the king of Sodom, who met the victors in the val- ley near Salem. He said, ‘Give me the persons, and keep the goods to thyself’ (Gen. xiv:21). But with becoming pride, and with a disinterested- ness which in that country would now be most unusual in similar circumstances, he answered, ‘I have lifted up mine hand (i. e., I have sworn) unto Jehovah, the most high God, that I will not take from a thread even to a sandal-thong, and that I will not take anything that is thine, lest thou shouldest say, I have made Abram rich’ (Gen. xiv:22-24). -- J. Jºecond period—The Tromise of a Lineal Heir. (1) Vision of Abraham. Soon after his return to Mamre the faith of Abraham was rewarded and encouraged not only by a more distinct and detailed repetition of the promises formerly made to him, but by the confirmation of a solemn cove- nant contracted, as nearly as might be, ‘after the manner of men' (see Coven ANT) between him and God (Gen. xv.:I-II). It was now that he first understood that his promised posterity were to grow up into a nation under foreign bondage; and that, in four hundred years after (or, strictly, four hundred and five years, counting from the birth of Isaac to the Exode), they should come forth from that bondage as a nation to take pos- session of the land in which he sojourned (Gen. XV:I2-2I). (2) Birth of Ishmael. After ten years’ resi- dence in Canaan, Sarai, being then 75 years old, and having long been accounted barren, chose to put her own interpretation upon the promised blessing of a progeny to Abraham, and persuaded him to take her woman slave Hagar, an Egyptian, as a secondary or concubine wife, with the view that whatever child might proceed from this union should be accounted her own (see HAGAR), (Gen. xvi;4). The son who was born to Abraham by Hagar and who received the name of Ishmael (see ISHMAEL) was considered the heir of his father and of the promises (Gen. xvi). 25 ABRAHAM 4. Third Teriod–Establishment of the Cotenant (Gen. xxvii:21). - (1) Change of Name. Thirteen years after, when Abraham was 99 years old, he was favored with still more explicit declarations of the Di- vine purposes. He was reminded that the prom- ise to him was that he should be the father of many nations; and to indicate this intention his name was now changed (as before described) from Abram to Abraham (Gen. xvii: I-9). (2) Circumcision. The Divine Being then Solemnly renewed the covenant to be a God to him and to the race that should spring from him ; and in token of that covenant directed that he and his should receive in their flesh the sign of circumcision (Gen. xvii: IO-14). (See CIRCUM- CISION.) Abundant blessings were promised to Ishmael ; but it was then first announced, in distinct terms, that the heir of the special promises was not yet born, and that the barren Sarai, then 90 years old, should twelve months thence be his mother. Then also her name was changed from Sarai to Sarah (the princess); and to commemorate the laughter with which the prostrate patriarch re- ceived such strange tidings, it was directed that the name of Isaac (he laughed) should be given to the future child (Gen. xvii:15–22). The very same day, in obedience to the Divine ordinance, Abraham himself, his son Ishmael, and his house- born and purchased slaves were all circumcised (Gen. xvii:23-27). (3) Visit of Angels. Three months after this, as Abraham sat in his tent door during the heat of the day, he saw three travelers approach- ing, and hastened to meet them, and hospitably pressed upon them refreshment and rest. They assented, and under the shade of a terebinth tree partook of the abundant fare which the patriarch and his wife provided, while Abraham himself stood by in respectful attendance (Gen. xviii: I-8). From the manner in which one of the strangers spoke, Abraham soon gathered that his visitants were no other than the Lord himself and two at- tendant angels in human form. The promise of a son by Sarah was renewed; and when Sarah herself, who overheard this within the tent, laughed inwardly at the tidings, which, on ac- count of her great age, she at first disbelieved, she incurred the striking rebuke, ‘Is anything too hard for Jehovah P’ (Gen. xviii:9-I5). (4) Destruction of Sodom. The strangers then continued their journey, and Abraham walked some way with them. The two angels went for- ward in the direction of Sodom, while the Lord made known to him that, for their enormous in- iquities, Sodom and the other ‘cities of the plain' were about to be made signal monuments of his wrath and of his moral government (Gen. xviii: I6-22). Moved by compassion and by remem- brance of Lot, the patriarch ventured, reverently, but perseveringly, to intercede for the doomed Sodom ; and at length obtained a promise that, if but ten...righteous men were found therein, the whole city should be saved for their sake (Gen. xviii:23–33). Early the next morning Abraham arose to ascertain the result of this concession ; and when he looked towards Sodom, the smoke of its destruction (B. C. 2223) rising ‘like the smoke of a furnace,’ made known to him its ter- rible overthrow (Gen. xix:I-28). (See SoDOM.) (5) Sarah Taken by Abimelech. He proba- bly soon heard of Lot's escape; but the consterna- tion which this event inspired in the neighbor- ABRAHAM hood induced him, almost immediately after, to remove farther, off into the territories of Abime- lech, king of Gerar (Gen. xx:I). By a most extraordinary infatuation and lapse of faith, Abraham allowed himself to stoop to the same mean and foolish prevarication in denying his wife, which, twenty-three years before, had occasioned him so much trouble in Egypt (Gen. xx :2-Io). The result was also similar (see ABIMELECH), except that Abraham answered to the rebuke of the Philistine by stating the fears by which he had been actuated—adding, ‘And yet in- deed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife' (Gen. xx:II–18). This mends the matter very little, since in calling her his sister he designed to be understood as saying she was not his wife. As he elsewhere calls Lot his ‘brother,’ this statement that Sarah was his ‘sister' does not in- terfere with the probability that she was his niece. (6) Isaac Born. The same year Sarah gave birth to the long promised son (Gen. xxi :2). It is, however, supposed by some biblical critics that the preceding adventure with Abimelech is related out of its order, and took place at an earlier date. Their chief reason is that Sarah was now 90 years of age. But the very few years by which such a supposition might reduce this age seems scarcely worth the discussion. (See SARAH.) (7) The Banishment of Hagar and Ishmael. According to previous direction, the name of Isaac ... was given to him (see ISAAC), (Gen. xvii:I9; xxi :3). This greatly altered the position of Ishmael, who had hitherto appeared as , the heir both of the temporal and the spiritual heritage; whereas he had now to share the former, and could not but know that the latter was limited to Isaac. This appears to have created much ill-feeling both on his part and that of his mother towards the child; which was in some way manifested so pointedly, on occasion of the festivities which attended the weaning, that the wrath of Sarah was awakened, and she insisted that both Hagar and her son. should be sent away (Gen. xxi :8-II). This was a very hard matter to a loving father; and Abra- ham was so much pained that he would probably have refused compliance with Sarah's wish, had he not been told by the Lord that it was in ac- cordance with the Divine intentions respecting both Ishmael and Isaac. With his habitual un- compromising obedience, he then hastened them away early in the morning, with provision for the journey (Gen. xxi :12-14). Their adventures be- long to the article HAGAR. 5. 6/je Fourtſ, Period. (1) Abraham’s Great Trial. When Isaac was about 20 years old it pleased God to subject the faith of Abraham to a severer trial than it had yet sustained, or than has ever fallen to the lot of any other mortal man. He was commanded to go into the mountainous country of Moriah (probably where the temple afterwards, stood), and there offer up in sacrifice the son of his affection, and the heir of so many hopes and promises, which his death must nullify (Gen. xxii:I, 2). It is probable that human sacrifices already existed; and as, when they did exist, the offering of an only or beloved child was considered the most meritorious, it may have seemed reasonable to Abraham that he should not withhold from his own God the costly sacrifice which the heathen offered to their idols. The trial and peculiar difficulty lay in the singular position of Isaac, and in the unlikelihood that his loss could 26 ABRAHAM be supplied. But Abraham’s ‘faith shrunk not, assured that what God had promised he would certainly perform, and that he was able to re- store Isaac to him even from the dead’ (Heb. xi : 17-19), and he rendered a ready, however painful, obedience. Assisted by two of his servants, he prepared wood suitable for the purpose, and with- out delay set out upon his melancholy journey. On the third day he descried the appointed place, and informing his attendants that he and his son would go some distance farther to worship, and then return, he proceeded to the spot (Gen. xxii: 3-6). To the touching question of his son respect- ing the victim to be offered, the patriarch re- plied by expressing his faith that God himself would provide the sacrifice, and probably he availed himself of this opportunity of acquainting him with the Divine command (Gen. xxii:7, 8). At least, that the communication was made either then or just after is unquestionable; for no one can suppose that a young man of 20 could, against his will, have been bound with cords and laid out as a victim on the wood of the altar. Isaac would most certainly have been slain by his father's uplifted hand, had not the angel of Jehovah interposed at the critical mo- ment to arrest the fatal stroke. A ram which had become entangled in a thicket was seized and offered, and a name was given to the place— Jehovah-Jireh–‘the Lord will provide,’ commemo- rating the believing answer which Abraham had given to his son's inquiry respecting the victim (Gen. xxii:9-14). The promises before made to Abraham—of numerous descendants, superior in power to their enemies, and of the blessings which his spiritual progeny, and especially the Messiah, were to extend to all mankind—were again con- firmed in the most solemn manner, for Jehovah swore by himself (Comp. Heb. vi.13-17) that such should be the rewards of his uncompromising obedience. The father and son then rejoined their servants, and returned rejoicing to Beersheba (Gen. xxii: I5-19). y (2) Death of Sarah. Eight years after Sarah died at the age of one hundred and twenty-seven years, being then at or near Hebron (Gen. xxiii:I). This loss first taught Abraham the ne- cessity of acquiring possession of a family sepul- chre in the land of his sojourning. His choice fell on the cave of Machpelah (see MACHPELAH), (Gen. xxiii:9), and after a striking negotiation with the owner in the gate of Hebron, he pur- chased it and had it legally secured to him, with the field in which it stood and the trees that grew thereon. (See Thomson's Land and Book, ii, 381 seq.) This was the only possession, he ever had in the Land of Promise (Gen. xxiii:17-20). The next care of Abraham was to provide a suit- able wife for his son Isaac. (3) Marriage of Isaac. It has always been the practice among pastoral tribes to keep up the fam- ily ties by intermarriages of blood relations (Burckhardt, Notes, p. 154) and now Abraham had a further inducement in the desire to maintain the purity of the separated race from foreign and idolatrous connections. He therefore sent his aged and confidential steward, Eliezer, under the bond of a solemn oath, to discharge his mission faithfully, to renew the intercourse between his family and that of his brother Nabor, whom he had left behind in Charran. (See ELIEzER.) He prospered in his important mission (see IsAAC), and in due time returned, bringing with him Re- bekah, the daughter of Nabor's son Bethuel, who became the wife of Isaac, and was installed as ABRAHAM - 27 chief lady of the camp in the separate tent which Sarah had occupied (Gen. xxiv). Some time after Abraham himself took a wife named Keturah, by whom he had several children. (See KETURAH.) These, together with Ishmael, seem to have been portioned off by their father in his lifetime, and sent into the east and south- east, that there might be no danger of their inter- ference with Isaac, the divinely appointed heir. (4) Death. There was time for this, for Abra- ham lived to the age of I75 years, IOO of which he had spent in the land of Canaan. He died (B. C. 2158?), and was buried by his two eldest Sons in the family sepulchre which he had pur- chased of the Hittites (Gen. xxv :I-Io). 6. NetwTestament References. In , the New Testament Abraham is referred to in a variety of ways. The words of John the Baptist in Matt. iii:9; Luke iii:8, and of St. Paul, Rom, ix:7, rebuke the popular Jewish supposition that descent from Abraham carried with it any special claim upon Divine favor. Our Lord speaks of Abraham as one with whom all the partakers of Divine redemption shall be privileged to dwell (Matt. viii:II); and as of one who is both cogni- zant of things on earth and is also entrusted with the special charge over the souls of the blest (Luke xvi :22). Our Lord employs the imagery of current religious belief; Abraham is the typical representative of ‘the righteous' who have been redeemed; he is “the father of the faithful.” Hence he says (John viii:56), ‘Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day; and he saw it, and was glad.' He obtained a vision of the meaning of the promises, and rejoiced in the hope of their future fulfillment. Christ was the consummation of all the aspirations of Abraham the father of the race (Hastings' Bib. Dict.). Z. Character. Abraham's character merits the tribute paid it in all ages. Its strength is seen in the choice of Jehovah as his God when all around were idolators, and in his grand loyalty to Him amidst every tennptation. Neither disappointment, nor delay, nor the strain of the sternest demands, for a moment shook his faith. Knowing Him in whom he believed, he trusted Him with an immovable confidence. Nor was his bearing less worthy towards his fellow-men. Though the elder, he gives the choice to Lot when the two must part; willing, for peace and kindliness, to take contentedly what his nephew leaves. He is too magnanimous to claim the spoil which war had made his, after the defeat of the kings, but renders the great service freely, without reward. If Hagar and Ishmael live ill at ease with Sarah, they have no such feeling towards him; for they knew how unwilling he had been to send them away, and must have seen how the heart clung to them, which broke out in the fatherly prayer, “O that Ishmael might live before thee.” The pity even for the unworthy that marks his inter- cession for Sodom is a lesson for every age. IIis bearing to the three mysterious strangers under the oaks of Mamre is the ideal of patriarchal courtesy and hospitality. He runs to meet them, and, bowing low, begs them to let him entertain them, and himself hastens the meal. That he should have maintained relations so friendly with the races among whom he lived at Shechem, Bethel, and Hebron, speaks for his prudence, in- tegrity, and neighborly worth. No wonder that his descendants, regarding him at once in his relations to God and to his fellow-men, should speak to him as “incomparable in his genera- tion,” or that they have fabled of him that, in Jeremiah's day, when the temple had been de- ABRAHAM stroyed, Abraham's form was seen over the ruins, his hands uplifted, pleading with God for the sons of his people led off to captivity (Geike, Hours with the Bible, vol. I. 410, II). 3. Typical. 1. Abraham himself with his family may be regarded as a type of the Church of God in future ages. They indeed constituted God's ancient Church. . Not that many scattered patriarchal and family churches did not remain, such was that of Melchizedek; and such probably was that of Nahor, whom Abraham left behind in Mesopotamia. But a visible Church relation was established between Abraham's family and the Most High, signified by the visible and distin- guishing Sacrament of circumcision, and followed by new and enlarged revelations of truth. Two purposes were to be answered by this: the pre- servation of the true doctrine of salvation in the world, which is the great and solemn duty of every branch of the Church of God, and the manifestation of that truth to others. Both were done by Abraham. Wherever he sojourned, he built his altars to the true God, and publicly celebrated his worship; and, as we learn from St. Paul, he lived in tents in preference to set- tling in the land of Canaan, though it had been given to him for a possession, in order that he might thus proclaim his faith in the eternal in- heritance of which Canaan was a type; and in bearing this testimony his example was followed by Isaac and Jacob, the “heirs with him of the same promise,” who also thus “confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims,” and that “they looked” for a continuing and eternal city in heaven. So also now is the same doctrine of immortality committed to the Church of Christ; and by deadness to the world ought its members to declare the reality of their own faith in it. 2. The numerous natural posterity promised to Abraham was also a type of the spiritual seed, the true members of the Church of Christ, springing from the Messiah, of whom Isaac was the symbol. Thus St. Paul expressly distin- quishes between the fleshly and the spiritual seed of Abraham; to the latter of which, in their ultimate and highest sense, the promises of in- crease as the stars of heaven, and the sands of the seashore, are to be referred, as also the promise of the heavenly Canaan. 3. The intentional offering up of Isaac, with its result, was probably that transaction in which Abraham, more clearly than in any other, “saw the day of Christ, and was glad.” He received Isaac from the dead, says St. Paul, “in a figure.” This could be a figure of nothing but the resur- rection of our Lord; and if so, Isaac being laid upon the altar was a figure of his sacrificial death, scenically and most impressively repre- sented to Abraham. The place, the same ridge of hills on which our Lord was crucified; the person, an only son, to die for no offense of his own; the sacrificer, a father; the receiving back, as it were, from death to life; the name im- pressed upon the place, importing, “the Lord will provide,” in allusion to Abraham's own words to Isaac, “the Lord will provide a lamb for a burnt-offering;” all indicate a mystery which lay deep beneath this transaction, and which Abraham, as the reward of his obedience, was permitted to behold. “The day” of Christ's humiliation and exaltation was thus opened to him; and served to keep the great truth in mind that the true burnt-offering and sacrifice for sin was to be something higher than the immolation of lambs and bulls and goats; nay, something more than what was merely human. ABRAHAM, BOOK OF 4. The expulsion of Hagar was a type. It was an allegory in action by which St. Paul teaches us to understand that the son of the bondwoman represented those who are under the law and the child of the free woman those who are by faith supernaturally begotten into the family of God. The casting out of the bondwoman and her Son represents also the expulsion of the unbelieving Jews from the Church of God, which is composed of true believers of all nations, all of whom, whether Jews or Gentiles, were to become “fellow- heirs.” 9. Cotenant Relation. 1. Abraham is to be regarded as standing in a federa/ or covenant rela- tion, not only to his natural seed, but specially and eminently to all believers. “The gospel,” we are told by St. Paul, “was preached to Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.” “Abraham believed in God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness;” in other words, he was justified. A covenant of gratuitous justification through faith was made with him and his believing descendants; and the rite of circumcision, which was not confined to his posterity by Sarah, but appointed in every branch of his family, was the sign or sacrament of this covenant of grace, and so remained till it was displaced by the Sacra- ments appointed by Christ. Wherever that sign was, it declared the doctrine, and offered the grace, of this covenant—free justification ...by faith, and its glorious results—to all the tribes that proceeded from Abraham. This same grace is offered to us by the gospel, who become “Abraham's seed,” his spiritual children with whom the covenant is established, through the same faith, and are thus made “the heirs with him of the same promise.” 2. Abraham is also exhibited to us as the representative of true believers; and in this espe: cially, that the true nature of faith was exhibited in him. This great principle was marked in Abraham with the following characters: An en- tire, unhesitating belief in the word of God; an un: faltering trust in all his promises; a steady regard to his almighty power, leading him to overlook all apparent difficulties and impossibilities, in every case where God had explicitly promised; and habitual and cheerful and entire obedience. The apostle has described faith in Heb. xi.; I ; and that faith is seen living and acting in all its energy in Abraham, (Watson's Dict. ; Miemayer, Charakt., ii. 72 sq.; The Histories of Israel, by Ewald, Reuss and Kittel; Sayce, Patr. Pal.; Price, Mon. and O. T.; Tompkins, Times of Abraham, Whately, Prototypes). - ABRAHAM, BOOK OF (ā'bra-ham, b06k of). A work bearing this title is found in the list of Jewish apocryphal writings, preserved from a much earlier period, in an appendix to the Chron- ographia Compendiaria of Nicephorus (c. 800 A. D. ). ôºn probably quotes from it as to a con- quest between the angels of righteousness, and iniquity with regard to the salvation of Abra- ham (In Luc. Hom. 35). ABRAHAM'S BOSOM (ā'bra-ham's bööz'âm). There was no name which conveyed to the Jews the same associations as that of Abraham. As undoubtedly he was in the highest state of felic- ity of which departed spirits are capabie, ‘to be with Abraham' implied the enjoyment of the same felicity; and ‘to be in Abraham's bosom' meant to be in repose and happiness with him. The latter phrase is obviously derived from the custom of sitting or reclining at table which 28 ABROAD prevailed among the Jews in and before the time of Christ. (See ACCUBATION). By this ar- rangement, the head of one person was neces- sarily brought almost into the bosom of the one who sat above him, or at the top of the tri- clinium ; and the guests were SO arranged that the most favored were placed so as to bring them into that situation with respect to the host (Comp. John xiii:23; xxi :20). These Jewish images and modes of thought are amply illus- trated by Lightfoot, Schoettgen, and Wetstein, who illustrate Scripture from Rabbinical sources. It was quite usual to describe a just person as being with Abraham, or lying on Abraham's bosom ; and as such images were unobjectiona- ble, Jesus accommodated his speech to them, to render himself the more intelligible by familiar notions, when, in the beautiful parable of the rich man and Lazarus, he describes the condition of the latter after death under these conditions (Luke xvi :22, 23). (See HADES.) ABRAM (ā'bram), (Heb. FPS, ab-rawm', father of height, i. e., high father), the original name (Gen. xvii:5) of Abraham. ABRECH (ābrech), (Heb. TBS, ab-rake', bow the knee). This word occurs only in Gen. xli:43, where it is used in proclaiming the au- thority of Joseph. Something similar happened in the case of Mordecai ; but then several words were employed (Esth. vi. II). If the word be Hebrew, it would then mean, as in our version, “bow the knee '' We are indeed assured by Wilkinson (Anc. Egyptians, ii:24) that the word abrek is used to the present day by the Arabs, when requiring a camel to kneel and receive its load. But Luther and others suppose the word to be of Chaldee origin. It is, however, probably Egyptian, and Dr. Lee is inclined with De Rossi (Etym. Egypt. p. I) to repair to the Coptic, in which Aberek or Abrek means “bow the head.’ It is right to add, that Origen, a native of Egypt, and Jerome, both of whom knew the Semitic languages, concur in the opinion that Abrech means ‘a native Egyptian ;’ and when we con- sider how important it was that Joseph should cease to be regarded as a foreigner (See ABOMI- NATION), it has in this sense an importance and significance which no other interpretation con- veys. It amounts to a proclamation of naturaliza- tion, which, among such a people as the Egyp- tians, was essential to enable Joseph to work out the great plan he had undertaken. We believe, however, that it is not now possible to determine the significance of the word with certainty. As an Egyptianized Seinitic word, it was prob- ably carried down into Egypt during the centu- ries of Hyksos rule. This opinion receives sup- port, too, from the evidence of the Tel el-Amarna tablets that there had been for many centuries before Joseph’s day free international communi- cation between Egypt and Asia. (Ira M. Price, Hastings' Bib. Dict.). ABROAD (à-brad'). “And he had thirty sons and daughters whom he sent abroad” (Judges xii:9). (See also I Kings ii:22.) Abroad in early English literature denotes merely away from home, or out of doors, and not, as now more frequently, out of the country. To come abroad (Mark iv :22; Rom. xvi :19) denotes to become publicly known. It is equivalent to our common saying, to get abroad. ABSALOM ABSALOM (ab'sa-lom), (Heb. Pºs, ab-shaw- /o/2e', Eibºs, ab-ee-shaw-lome', father of peace, that is, peaceful). - - (1) Name and Family. The third son of David, and his only son by Maacah, the daughter of Talmai, king of Geshur (2 Sam. iii:3), born B. C. about IOOO. (2) Personal History. He was deemed the handsomest man in the kingdom; and was particularly noted for the profusion of his beauti- ful hair, which appears to have been regarded with great admiration; but of which we can know nothing with certainty, except that it was very fine and very ample. We are told that when its inconvenient weight compelled him to cut it off “every year' (as in the A. V.), it was found to weigh 200 shekels after the king's weight;" but as this has been interpreted as high as II2 ounces (Geddes) and as low as 7% ounces (A. Clarke), we may be content to understand that it means a quantity unusually large. (3) Avenges Tamar. David's other child by Maachah was a daughter named Tamar, who was also very beautiful. She became the object of lust- ful regard to her half-brother Amnon, David's eld- est son; and was violated by him in pursuance of a plot suggested by the artful Jonadab (2 Sam. xiii: I.20; B. C. about 1050). (See AMNON.) In all cases where polygamy is allowed, we find that the honor of a sister is in the guardianship of her full brother, more even than in that of her father, whose interest in her is considered less peculiar and intimate. We trace this notion even in the time of Jacob (Gen. xxxiv:6, 13, 25, sq.). So in this case the wrong of Tamar was taken up by Absalom, who kept her secluded in his own house, and said nothing for the pres- ent, but brooded silently over the wrong he had sustained and the vengeance which devolved upon him. It was not until two years had passed, and when this wound seemed to have been healed, that Absalom found opportunity for the bloody revenge he had meditated. He then held a great sheep-shearing feast at Baal-hazor, near Ephraim, to which he invited all the king's sons; and, to lull suspicion, he also solicited the presence of his father. As he expected, David declined for himself, but allowed Amnon and the other princes to attend. They feasted together; and, when they were warm with wine, Amnon was set upon and slain by the servants of Absalom, according to the previous directions of their master (Sam. xiii:23–29). Horror-struck at the deed, and not knowing but that they were included in the doom, the other princes took to their mules and fled to Jerusalem, filling the king with grief and horror by the tidings which they brought. As for Absalom, he has- tened to Geshur and remained there three years with his grandfather, king Talmai (2 Sam. xiii: 30–38). (See GESHUR.) (4) Return to Jerusalem. Now it happened that Absalom, with all his faults, was emi- nently dear to the heart of his father. His beauty, his spirit, his royal birth, may be supposed to have drawn to him those fond paternal feelings which he knew not how to appreciate. At all events, David mourned every day after the banished fratricide, whom a regard for public opinion and a just horror of his crime forbade him to recall. His secret wishes to have home his beloved though guilty son were, however, discerned by Joab, who em- ployed a clever woman of Tekoah to lay a Sup- 29 ABSALOM posed case before him for judgment; and she applied the anticipated decision so adroitly to the case of Absalom, that the king discovered the object and detected the interposition of Joab (2 Sam. xiv:I-20). Regarding this as in Some degree expressing the sanction of public opinion, David gladly commissioned Joab to ‘call home his banished.’ Absalom returned ; but David, still mindful of his duties as a king and father, controlled the impulse of his feelings, and de- clined to admit him to his presence. After two years, however, Absalom, impatient of his dis- grace, found means to compel the attention of Joab to his case; and through his means a com- plete reconciliation was effected, and the father once more indulged himself with the presence of his son (2 Sam. xiv:21-33), B. C. about 1036. (5) Preparations for Revolt. The position at this time occupied by Absalom was very peculiar, and the view of it enables us to discover how far the general Oriental laws of primogeniture were affected by the peculiar conditions of the Hebrew constitution. At the outset he was the third son of David, Amnon and Chileab being his elder brothers. But it was possible that he might even then, while they lived, consider himself entitled to the succession; and Oriental usage would not have discountenanced the pretension. He alone was of royal descent by the side of his mother; and royal or noble descent by the mother is even now of itself a sufficient ground of preference over an elder brother whose maternal descent is less distinguished. This circumstance, illustrated by Absalom's sub- Sequent conduct, may suggest that he early entertained a design upon the succession to the throne, and that the removel of Amnon was quite as much an act of policy as of revenge. The other elder brother, Chileab, appears to have died, as no mention is made of him after (2 Sam. iii:3), and if the claims of Absalom, or rather his grounds of pretension, were so important while Amnon and Chileab lived, his position must have been greatly strengthened when, on his return from exile, he found himself the eldest surviving Son, and, according to the ordinary laws of primogeniture, the heir apparent of the crown. Such being his position, and his father being old, it would seem difficult at the first view to assign a motive for the conspiracy against the crown and life of his indulgent father, in which we soon after find him engaged. It is then to be considered that the king had a dispensing power, and was at liberty, according to all Oriental usage, to pass by the eldest son and to nominate a younger to the succession. This could not have affected Absalom, as there is every reason to think that David, if left to himself, would have been glad to have seen the rule of succession take its ordinary course in favor of his best loved son. But then, again, under the peculiar theocratical institutions of the Hebrews, the Divine King reserved and exercised a power of dispensation, over which the human king, or viceroy, had no control. The house of David was established as a reigning dynasty; and although the law of primogeniture was allowed eventually to take in general its due course, the Divine King reserved the power of appointing any member of that house whom He might prefer. That power had been exercised in the family of David by the preference of Solomon, who was at this time a child, as the successor of his father. David had known many years before that his dynasty ABSALOM was to be established in a son not yet born (2 Sam. vii:I2); and when Solomon was born, he could not be ignorant, even if not spe- cially instructed, that he was the destined heir. This fact must have been known to many others as the child grew up, and probably, the mass of the nation was cognizant of it. In this we find a clear motive for the rebellion of Absalom—to secure the throne which he deemed to be his right by the laws of primogeniture, during the lifetime of his father; lest delay, while awaiting the natural term of his days, should so strengthen the cause of Solomon with his years as to place his succession beyond all contest. (6) Revolt. The fine person of Absalom, his superior birth, and his natural claim, predisposed the people to regard his pretensions with favor: and this predisposition was strengthened by the measures which he took to win their regard. In the first place he insinuated that he was the heir apparent, by the state and attendance with which he appeared in public; while that very state the more enhanced the show of condescending sym- pathy with which he accosted the suitors who repaired for justice or favor to the royal audi- ence, inquired into their various cases, and hinted at the fine things which might be expected if he were on the throne and had the power of accom- plishing his own large and generous purposes. By these influences ‘he stole the hearts of the men of Israel’ (2 Sam. xv.:I-6); and when at length, four years after his return from Geshur, he repaired to Hebron and there proclaimed himself king, the great body of the people declared for him. So strong ran the tide of opinion in his favor that David found it expedient to quit Jerusalem and retire to Mahanaim, beyond the Jordan (2 Sam. xv.:7–18). - (7) Entry Into Jerusalem. When Absalom heard of this, he proceeded to Jerusalem and took possession of the throne without opposition. Among those who had joined him was Ahitho- phel, who had been David’s counsellor, and whose profound Sagacity caused his counsels to be regarded like oracles in Israel (2 Sam. xv.:30-31). This defection alarmed David more than any other single circumstance in the affair, and he persuaded his friend Hushai to go and join Absa- lom, in the hope that he might be made instru- mental in turning the sagacious counsels of Ahithophel to foolishness (2 Sam. xv.:32-37). The first piece of advice which Ahithophel gave Absalom was that he should publicly take pos- session of that portion of his father’s harem which had been left behind in Jerusalem; thus fulfilling Nathan's prophecy (2 Sam. xii:Io-12). This was not only a mode by which the suc- cession to the throne might be confirmed (see ABISHAG: Comp. Herodotus, iii :68), but in the present case, as suggested by the wily counsellor, this villainous measure would dispose the people to throw themselves the more unreservedly into his cause, from the assurance that no possibility of reconcilement between him and his father re- mained. Hushai had not then arrived. Soon after he came, when a council of war was held, to con- sider the course of operations to be taken against David. Ahithophel counselled that the king should be pursued that very night, and smitten, while he was ‘weary and weak handed, and before he had time to recover strength' (2 Sam. xvii: 1, 2). Hushai, however, whose object was to gain time for David, speciously urged, from the known valor of the king, the possibility and fatal conse- 30 ABSALOM'S TOMB quences of a defeat, and advised that all Israel should be assembled against him in such force as it would be impossible for him to withstand (2 Sam. xvii:5-13). Fatally for Absalom, the counsel of Hushai was preferred to that of Ahithophel; and time was thus given to enable the king, by the help of his influential followers, to collect his resources, as well as to give the people time to reflect upon the undertaking in which so many of them had embarked (2 Sam. xvii:I4). - -- (8) Organization of Royal Forces. The king Soon raised a large force, which he prop- erly organized and separated into three divi- Sions, commanded severally by Joab, Abishai, and Ittai of Gath (2 Sam. xviii:2). The king himself intended to take the chief command; but the people refused to allow him to risk his valued life, and the command then devolved upon Joab. The battle took place in the borders of the forest of Ephraim; and the tactics of Joab, in drawing the enemy into the wood, and there hemming them in, so that they were destroyed with ease, eventually, under the providence of God, decided the action against Absalom (2 Sam. xviii:3-6). Twenty thousand of his troops were slain, and the rest fled to their homes. (9) Death. Absalom himself fled on a swift mule; but as he went, the boughs of a terebinth tree caught the long hair in which he gloried, and he was left suspended there. The charge which David had given to the troops to respect the life of Absalom prevented anyone from slay- ing him; but when Joab heard of it, he hastened to the Spot, and pierced him through with three darts. His body was then taken down and cast into a pit there in the forest, and a heap of stones was raised upon it (2 Sam. xviii:7-17), B. C. 967. David's fondness for Absalom was unextin- guished by all that had passed; and as he sat, awaiting tidings of the battle, at the gate of Mahanaim, he was probably more anxious to learn that Absalom lived, than that the battle was gained; and no sooner did he hear that Absalom was dead, than he retired to the cham- ber above the gate, to give vent to his paternal anguish (2 Sam. xviii:24-33). The victors, as they returned, slunk into the town like criminals, when they heard the bitter wailings of the king –'O my son Absalom my son, my son Absalom would God I had died for thee, O Absalom, my son, my son l’ The consequence of this weakness—not in his feeling, but in the inability to control it—might have been most dan- gerous, had not Joab gone up to him, and, after sharply rebuking him for thus discouraging those who had risked their lives in his cause, induced him to go down and cheer the returning warriors by his presence (2 Sam. xix:1-8). (Comp. Ps. lii. title.) Absalom is elsewhere mentioned only in 2 Sam. xx:6; I Kings ii:7, 28; xv.2, Io; 2 Chron. xi: Io, 21. From the last two of these passages he appears to have left only a daughter, º lost three sons; 2 Sam. xiv:27; comp. xviii:18), who was the grandmother of Abijah. (See ABIJAH.) Tamar is with much probability identified with Maacah of I Kings xv.2, the wife of Rehoboam. (Comp. 2 Sam. iii:2; 2 Chron. xi.20 sq.) The sons must have predeceased their father, or else a different tradition is followed in 2 Sam. xviii: 18, where we are told that Absalom had no son. * * ABSALOM'S TOMB (#b'sa-loms tomb). A remarkable monument bearing this name makes a ABSINTHIUM conspicuous figure in the Valley of Jehoshaphat, outside Jerusalem; and it has been noticed and described by almost all travelers. It is close by the lower bridge over the Kedron, and is a square isolated block hewn out from the rocky ledge 'So as to leave an area or niche around it. The body of this monument is about 24 feet Square, and is ornamented on each side with two col- . - = ~ : . * * * B - ... , tº: - º º , ººº-º-º. §§ º: * Sºs t * f * * * Absalom's Tomb. umns and two half columns of the Ionic order, with pilasters at the corners. The architrave exhibits triglyphs and Doric ornaments. The elevation is about 18 or 20 feet to the top of the architrave, and thus far it is wholly cut from the rock. The old travelers who refer to this tomb, as well as Calmet after them, are satisfied that they find the history of it in 2 Sam. xviii:18, which states that Absalom, having no son, built a monument to keep his name in remembrance, and that this monument was called ‘Absalom's Hand'—that is, inder, memorial, or monument. (See HAND.) With our later knowledge, a glance at this and the other monolithic tomb bearing the name of Zecharias is quite enough to show that they had no connection with the times of the persons whose names have been given to them. (See JERUSALEM.) ABSINTHIUM (āb-sin' thiſ-àm), (Gr. 'Aptv6tov, aftszn' thion, in New Testament, by which also the Sept. renders the corresponding Hebrew term in the A. V. wormwood). This proverbial- ly bitter plant is used in the Hebrew, as in most other languages, metaphorically, to de- note the moral bitterness of distress and trouble (Deut. xxix:18; Prov. v :4; Jer. ix:15; xxiii:15; Lam. iii:15, IO; Amos v :7; vi :12). Thence also the name given to the fatal star in Rev. viii: IO-II. Artemisia is the botanical name of the genus of plants in which the different species of worm- woods are found. The plants of this genus are easily recognized by the multitude of fine divisions into which the leaves are usually separated, and the numerous clusters of small, round, drooping, greenish-yellow or brownish flower-heads with which the branches are laden. It must be under- stood that our common wormwood (Artemisia absinthium) does not appear to exist in Palestine, and cannot therefore be that specially denoted by the Scriptural term. Indeed, it is more than 31 ABSTINENCE probable that the word is intended to apply to all the plants of this class that grew in Palestine, rather than to any one of them in particular. (See WoRM wood.) ABSTINENCE (āb'sti-nens), is a refraining from the use of certain articles of food usually eaten ; or from all food during a certain time for Some particular object. It is distinguished from Temperance, which is moderation in ordinary food; and from Fasting, which is abstinence from a religious motive. (1) Jewish. The first example which occurs in Scripture is that use of blood is forbidden to Noah (Gen. ix:4). (See BLOOD.) The next is that men- tioned in Gen. xxxii:32: ‘The children of Israel eat not of the sinew which shrank, which is upon the hollow of the thigh, unto this day, because he (the angel) touched the hollow of Jacob's thigh in the sinew that shrank.’ This practice of particular and commemorative absti- nence is here mentioned by anticipation long after the date of the fact referred to, as the phrase ‘unto this day' intimates. No actual instance of the practice occurs in the Scripture itself, but the usage has always been kept up ; and to the present day the Jews generally abstain from the whole hind-quarter on account of the trouble and expense of extracting the particular sinew. By the law, abstinence from blood was confirmed, and the use of the flesh of even lawful animals was forbidden, if the manner of their death rendered it impossible that they should be, or uncertain that they were, duly exsanguinated (Exod. xxii:31 ; Deut. xiv:21). A broad rule was also laid down by the law, defining whole classes of animals that might not be eaten (Lev. xi). (See ANIMAL; FooD.) Certain parts of lawful animals, as being sacred to the altar, were also interdicted. These were the large lobe of the liver, the kidneys and the fat upon them, as well as the tail of the ‘fat-tailed' sheep (Lev. iii:9-II). Everything consecrated to idols was also forbidden (Exod. xxxiv:I5). In conformity with these rules the Israelites abstained generally from food which was more or less in use among other people. Instances of abstinence from allowed food are not frequent, except in com- memorative or afflictive fasts. The forty days' abstinence of Moses, Elijah and Jesus are pecu- liar cases requiring to be separately considered. (See FASTING.) The priests were commanded to abstain from wine previous to their actual minis- trations (Lev. x:9), and the same abstinence was enjoined to the Nazarites during the whole period of their separation (Num. vi.5). A constant abstinence of this kind was, at a later period, voluntarily undertaken by the Rechabites (Jer. xxxv :I6, 18). (See RECHABITEs.) (2) Christian. Among the early Christian con- verts there were some who deemed themselves bound to adhere to the Mosaical limitations regarding food, and they accordingly abstained from flesh sacrificed to idols, as well as from animals which the law accounted unclean ; while others contemned this as a weakness, and exulted in the liberty wherewith Christ had made his followers free. This question was repeatedly referred to St. Paul, who laid down some admir- able rules on the subject, the purport of which was, that everyone was at liberty to act in this matter according to the dictates of his own con- science; but that the strong-minded had better abstain from the exercise of the freedom they of abstinence in which the .* ABUNDANCE 32 possessed, whenever it might prove an occasion of stumbling to a weak brother (Rom. xiv. I-3; I Cor. viii). In another place the same apostle reproves certain sectaries who should arise for- bidding marriage and enjoining abstinence from meats which God had created to be received with thanksgiving (I Tim. iv:3, 4). The council of the apostles at Jerusalem decided that no other abstinence regarding food should be imposed upon the converts than “from meats offered to idols, from blood, and from things strangled’ (Acts xv :29). St. Paul says (1 Cor. ix:25) that wrestlers, in order to obtain a corruptible crown, abstain from all things; or from everything which might weaken them. He requires Christians to abstain from all appearance of evil (I Thess. v .22); and, with much stronger reason, from everything really evil, and contrary to religion and piety. The Essenes, a sect among the Jews which is not mentioned by name in the Scriptures, led a more abstinent life than any recorded in the sacred books. As there is an account of them elsewhere (see Essenes), it is only necessary to mention here that they refused all pleasant food, eating nothing but coarse bread and drinking only water; and that some of them abstained from food altogether until after the sun had set. ABUNDANCE (à-bun'dans). The translation of a great many Heb. and Gr, terms. It denotes in general a great deal of anything (2 Chron. ix:9; Rom. v :17; 2 Cor. xii:7). Great plenty and wealth (Deut. xxviii:47). The abundance of the seas, imports plenty of fishes, and of profits arising from sea trade (Deut. xxxiii:I9). The meaning of the word in Mark xii:44 is superfluity as in the Revised Version, “They cast in of their superfluity' (Comp. Luke xxi :4). ABUSE (à-büz'). In general it means to use per- sons or things from wrong ends or motives, or in a sinful and dishonorable manner (Judg. xix 25). The New Testament Gr. word kataxpaouai, AEat-ah- Arah'oh-my, means to “use to the full,” regardless of consequences (1 Cor. vii:31), “Those that use the world as not abusing it' (Revised Version) means “using it to the full’ (I Cor. ix:18), ‘that I abusing not my power in the gospel' (Revised Version), “so as not to use the full my right in the gospel.” ABYSS (à-bís') (Gr." Agvaaos, a'biis-sos). The Greek word means literally “without bottom,’ but actually deep, profound. It is used in the Sept. for the Hebrew word, which we find applied either to the ocean (Gen. i :2; vii:II), or to the wnder world (Ps. lxxi :20; cvii:26). In the New Testament it is used as a noun to describe Hades, or the place of the dead generally (Rom. x:7); but more especially that part of Hades in which the souls of the wicked were supposed to be con- fined (Luke viii:31; Rev. ix:1, 2, II; xx:I, 3; Comp. 2 Pet. ii:4). (1) Bottomless Pit. In the Revelation the authorized version invariably renders it ‘bottom- less pit,’ elsewhere ‘deep.” Most of these uses of the word are explained by reference to some of the cosmological notions which the Hebrews entertained in common with other Eastern nations. It was believed that the abyss, or sea of fathomless waters, encompassed the whole earth. The earth floated on the abyss, of which it covered only a small part. According to the same notion, the earth was founded upon the waters, or, at least, had its foundations in the abyss beneath (Ps. xxiv:2; czXxvi;6). ABYSSINIA Under these waters, and at the bottom of the abyss, the wicked were represented as groaning, and undergoing the punishment of their sins. There were confined the Rephaim—those old giants who, while living, caused surrounding nations to tremble (Prov. ix:18; vii:27, see mar- gin). In those dark regions the sovereigns of Tyre, Babylon and Egypt are described by the prophets as undergoing the punishment of their cruelty and pride (Jer. xxv :14; Ezek. xxviii: Io, etc.). This was ‘the deep' into which the evil spirits in Luke viii:3I besought that they might not be cast, and which was evidently dreaded by them. (See CoSMOGONY; HADEs.) (2) Celtic Druids. The notion of such an abyss was by no means confined to the East. It was equally entertained by the Celtic Druids, who held that Annwn (the deep, the low port), the abyss from which the earth arose, was the abode of the evil principle (Gwarthawn), and the place of departed spirits, comprehending both the Elysium and the Tartarus of antiquity. With them also wandering spirits were called Plant annwn, ‘the children of the deep’ (Davis’ Celtic Researches, p. 175; Myth. and Rites of the B. Druids, p. 49). (See HELL.) Fountains and rivers, in the opinion of the Hebrews, are derived from the abyss or sea; issuing from , thence through in visible channels, and returning through others (Eccl. i :7). We notice a few special applications of the word “deep” or “abyss” in the Scriptures. Isaiah (xliv :27) refers to the method by which Cyrus took Babylon. Jeremiah (1:38 and li:36) refers to the same event (Comp. Is. xix:5), where reference is made to the exhaustion of the country by its enemies. In Rom. x:7 we have : “Who shall descend into the abyss” (Deut. xxx:13, “beyond the sea”) “to bring up Christ again from the dead P” The abyss metaphorically means calamities (Ps. xlii:7; lxxi :20). ABYSSINIA (āb-is-sin'ſ-a). “There is no part of Africa, Egypt being excepted, the history of which is connected with so many objects of inter- est as Abyssinia. A region of Alpine mountains, ever difficult of access by its nature and peculiar situation, concealing in its bosom the long-sought sources of the Nile, and the still more mysterious origin of its singular people, Abyssinia has alone preserved, in the heart of Africa, its peculiar lit- erature and its ancient Christian church. What is still more remarkable, it has preserved existing remains of a previously existing and widespread Judaism, and with a language approaching more than any living tongue to the Hebrew, a state of manners, and a peculiar character of its people, which represent in these latter days the habits and customs of the ancient Israelites in the times of Gideon and of Joshua. So striking is the resemblance between the modern Abyssinians and the Hebrews of old, that we can hardly look upon them but as branches of one nation ; and if we had not convincing evidence to the contrary, and knew not for certain that the Abrahamidae orig- inated in Chaldea, and to the northward and eastward of Palestine, we might frame a very probable hypothesis, which should bring them down as a band of wandering shepherds from the mountains of Habesh (Abyssinia), and identify them with the pastor kings, who, according to Manetho, multiplied their bands of the Pharaohs, and being, after some centuries, expelled thence by the will of the gods, sought refuge in Judea, and built the walls of Jerusalem. Such an ACCAD hypothesis would explain the existence of an almost Israelitish people, and the preservation of a language so nearly approaching to the Hebrew, in intertropical Africa. It is certainly untrue, and we find no other easy explanation of the facts which the history of Abyssinia presents, and par- ticularly the early extension of the Jewish religion and customs through that country’ (Prichard's Physical History of Man, pp. 279, 280). ACCAD (ak'kåd), (Heb. 728, ak-kad', a fortress), the name of one of the four cities in Babylonia mentioned in Genesis (Gen. x:Io) as belonging to the kingdom of Nimrod in the country of Nimrod's Hill. Shinar. It was the residence of the first his- torical ruler of all Babylonia, Sargon I, whose active reign dates from 3800 B. C., according to the statement of Nabonidus (555-538 B. C.) an inscription discovered in 1881 on the site of Sippar. With Accad are named Babel, Erech and Calneh. Erech and Babel are well known in later history, and their sites have not been lost. The ruins of Calneh have recently been discover- ed. (See CALNEH.) Accad is probably the city which is known in the early Babylonian inscriptions under the name of Agade, or Agadi, which is on the Euphrates, north of Babylon. Rawlinson places it at Aker-Kuf, Io miles west by north of Bagdad. Delitzsch conjectures that it may have been one of the two cities which bore the name of Sepharvaim, but McCurdy locates this double city in N. Syria (Sec. 349). The Wolfe expedition to Babylonia, in 1884-85 (cf. Report, pp. 24, 25), located it at Anbar, on the Euphrates, N. W. of the ruins of Babylon. It was probably the capital city of mat Akkadi. The people who first formed this kingdom were the ancient Sumerians, whose racial connections are not yet known. Some suppose them to have been the in- ventors of the cuneiform system of writing, and laid the basis upon which the whole system of culture of the ancient Babylonians rested. On the other hand, there is a growing school which maintains that the Semites, whom we know as possessing the cuneiform characters, were the inventors of these last and the developers of Semitic culture, and that the so-called ‘Sume- rians’ and ‘Accadians’ are but figments of an over-zealous scientific spirit. Among the mem- bers of this school are Profs. McCurdy and Ira M. Price, Hastings' Bib. Dict. : McCurdy, His. Proph. and the Mon. ; Price, The Mon., O. T. (See ASSYRIA AND BABYLONIA.) ACCARON (äk'ka-rön). See EKRoN. ACCEPT, ACCEPTABLE, ACCEPTATION (ak'sépt, ak-séptabl,ak-sép-tā'shun), (Heb. Tºº, raw- 33 ACCHO Zsaw', to take pleasure in; Gr. 6éxopal, dekh'omº-ahee to take with the hand, i.e., to receive with hospital- ity). ‘Peradventure, he will accept of me' (Gen. xxxii:20). To accept of meant to receive with favor and approval, or as acceptable. It is so used by Bacon, “God above * * * accepteth of both.” In general the terms denote (I) To receive favorably (Mal. i :IO-I3; (2) To take pleasure in (Jer. xiv:Io); (3) To esteem highly (Luke, iv:24). To be accepted of God, is to be received into his grace and favor (Acts x:35). The saints are accepted in the beloved: through union to Jesus Christ they are received into the Divine favor, and entitled to all the blessings of eternal life (Eph. i :6). The sinful accepting of persons, is the showing them partial respect in judgment or otherwise, on the ground of flattery or Some expected advantage (Prov. xviii:5; Job xxxii:2I ; Gal. ii:6). ACCEPTANCE (äk-sépt'ans). Accept and kin- dred words are used in Scripture to denote the relation of favor and approval in which one man may stand to other men, and especially to God. In Acts x:35 we learn that “in every nation he that feareth him and worketh righteousness is accepted of him.” In Christ Jesus only are we acceptable to God (Eph. i:6). ACCESS (äk-sés'), (Gr. Trpooraywyſ, fros-ag-ogue- ay', act of moving to), free admission; unhampered entrance. The way of our access to a gracious state, and to God, is through Christ, as our ran- Som and ground of acceptance; actually by the spirit, as applying to us the person and fullness of Christ; and by faith, as the means of receiving and improving Christ, as the Lord our righteous- ness and strength (Eph. ii: 18; iii:12; Rom. v :2). To obtain acceptance with God we must ask according to his will. St. John (1 John V :14, 15) says: “This is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask anything according to his will, he heareth us: and if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of him.” ACCHABIS (äk'ka-bis). See SPIDER. ACCHO (äk'ko), (Heb. 22, aft-Ao, Sept. "Akxw, AAE-Ahoh), a town and haven within the nominal ter- ritory of the tribe of Asher, which, however, never acquired possession of it (Judg. i:31). The Greek and Roman writers call it "Akm, Ace (Strab. xvi;877; Diod. Sic. xix:93; C. Nep. xiv:5); but it was eventually better known as PTOLEMAIs (Plin. Hist. Nat. v : 19), which name it received from the first Ptolemy, king of Egypt, by whom it was much improved. By this name it is mentioned in the Apocrypha (I Macc. x:56; xi :22, 24; xii:45, 48; 2 Macc. xiii:I4), in the New Testament (Acts xxi :7), and by Josephus (Antiq. xiii: 12, 2, seq.). It was also called Colonia Claudii Caesaris, in consequence of its receiving the privi- leges of a Roman city from the Emperor Claudius (Plin. v :17; xxxvi;65). But the names thus im- posed or altered by foreigners never took with the natives, and the place is still known in the country by the name of Akka. It continued to be called Ptolemais by the Greeks of the lower empire, as well as by Latin authors, while the Orientals adhered to the original designation. (1) Situation. This famous city and haven is situated in N. lat. 32 deg. 55 min., and E. long. 35 deg. 5 min., and occupies the northwestern point of a commodious bay, called the Bay of Acre, the opposite or southwestern point of which is formed by the promontory of Mount Carmel. ACCOMMODATION The city lies on the plain to which it gives its name. Its western side is washed by the waves of the Mediterranean, and on the south lies the bay, beyond which may be seen the town of Caipha, on the site of the ancient Calamos, and, rising high above both the shrubby heights of Carmel. The mountains belonging to the chain of Anti-Libanus are seen at the distance of about four leagues to the north, while to the east the view is bounded by the fruitful hills of the Lower Galilee. The bay, from the town of Acre to the promontory of Mount Carmel, is three leagues wide and two in depth. The port, on account of its shallowness, can only be entered by vessels of small burden; but there is excellent anchorage on the other side of the bay, before Caipha, which is, in fact, the roadstead of Acre. (2) History. In the course of time Ptol- emais was absorbed, with all the country, into the Roman empire; and the rest of its ancient history is obscure and of little note. It is only mentioned in the New Testament from St. Paul having spent a day there on his voyage to Caesarea (Acts xxi :7). It continued a place of importance, and was the seat of a bishopric in the first ages of the Christian Church. The see was filled sometimes by orthodox and sometimes by Arian bishops; and it has the equivocal dis- tinction of having been the birthplace of the Sabellian heresy. Accho, as we may now again call it, was an imperial garrison town when the Saracens invaded Syria, and was one of those that held out until Caesarea was taken by Amru in A. D. 638. (3) Medals. There are several medals of Accho or Ptolemais extant, both Greek and Latin. Most of the former have also the Pheni- cian name of the city, PX), AK or Accho. Of the Io,000 or 12,000 inhabitants, two-thirds are Moslems, the remainder being Greek and Catholic Christians, with a few Jews and Persians. It is the seat of a provincial governor, under whom are the districts of Haifa, Nazareth, Tiberias and Safed. The chief trade is the export of grain brought by camels from AZatarém. About 1,000 tons of oil from the olive groves of Galilee are also annually exported. ACCOMMODATION (äk-köm'mo-dā'shun) (exe- getical or special) is principally employed in the application of certain passages of the Old Testa- ment to events in the New, to which they had no actual historical or typical reference. In this sense it is also called illustration. Citations of this description are apparently very frequent throughout the whole New Testament, but espe- cially in the Epistle to the Hebrews. As the system of exegetical accommodation has in mod- ern times been the occasion of much angry con- troversy, it will be necessary to enter somewhat minutely into its character and history. It cannot be denied that many such passages, although apparently introduced as referring to, or predictive of, certain events recorded in the New Testament, seem to have, in their original connection, an exclusive reference to quite other objects. The difficulty of reconciling such seemi- ing misapplications, or deflections from their original design, has been felt in all ages, although it has been chiefly reserved to recent times to give a solution of the difficulty by the theory of accommodation. By this it is meant that the prophecy or citation from the Old Testament was not designed literally to apply to the event in question, but that the New Testament writer 3. 34 ACCOMMODATION merely adopted it for the sake of ornament, or in order to produce a strong impression, by show- ing a remarkable parallelism between two analo- gous events, which had in themselves no mutual relation. . Calmet, Doddridge, Rosenmüller, and John are among the commentators who look upon passages introduced by the formula “that it might be fulfilled,” as equally accommodations with those which are prefaced by the words ‘then was fulfilled ;” while those who deny the accommoda- tive theory altogether considered both as formulas of direct prophecies, at least in a secondary or typical sense. This, for instance, is the case espe- cially in regard to the two citations of this description which first present themselves in the New Testament, viz., Matt. ii:I5, and Matt. ii:17, the former of which is introduced by the first, and the latter by the second of these formulas. But inasmuch as the commentators above referred to cannot perceive how the citation from Hosea xi : I, “Out of Egypt have I called my son,’ although prefaced by the formula ‘that it might be fulfilled,’ and which literally relates to the calling of the children of Israel out of Egypt, can be prophetically diverted from its historical meaning, they look upon it as a simple accommo- dation, or applicable quotation, and consider the £va tr}\mpa,0ſ, as a Jewish formula of accom- modation. Mr. T. H. Horne, in his Introduction to the Critical Study of the Holy Scriptures, says: ‘The apostles, who were Jews by birth, and wrote and spoke in the Jewish idiom, frequently thus cite the Old Testament, intending no more by this mode of speaking than that the words of such an ancient writer might with equal pro- priety be adopted to characterize any similar occurrence which happened in their times. The formula “that it might be fulfilled,” does not therefore differ in signification from the phrase “then was fulfilled,” applied in the following cita- tion in Matt. ii:17, 18, from Jer. xxxi :15, 17, to the massacre of the infants at Bethlehem. They are a beautiful quotation, and not a prediction of what then happened, and are therefore applied to the massacre of the infants according not to their original and historical meaning, but accord- ing to Jewish phraseology.” Dr. Adam Clarke also, in his Commentary on Jeremiah (xxxi : 15-17), takes the same view :—“St. Matthew, who is ever fond of accommodation, applied these words to the massacre of the children of Bethle- hem; that is, they were suitable to that occasion, and therefore he applied them, but they are not a prediction of that event.” Among those who, in modern times, have most ably vindicated the system of the typical inter- pretation of prophecy, as opposed to the accom- modation theory, is Professor Tholuck, of Berlin, in the Dissertation affixed to his Commentary on Hebrews. He does not, indeed, deny all instances of accommodation, but refers a great number of passages which had been so interpreted (as Matt. ii:15-18; xxvii:9-35; John iii:14; xix:24, 36; Acts i.20; ii:27-31) to the class of typical prophecies. The following list of passages Mr. Horne subjoins as accommodated from the Old Testa- ment by the writers of the New. Many of them may be included, however, among the typical in- terpretations of prophecy: Gen. xv.:5. cited in Rom. iv:18. - Rom. iv:3. Gal. Gen. xv.:6. &@ 66 iii.6. and James • ii:23. ACCOMMODATION Gen. xviii:IO. cited in Rom. ix:9. Gen. xix:15, 26. 64 & 6 Luke xvii:28, 29, 32. Gen. xxi.12. & 6 6& Rom. ix:7. Gen. XXV:33. G& &G Heb. xii:I6. Gen. xxvii:28, etc. “ “ Heb. xi:2O. xii:17. Exod. ix:I6. Exod. xxxii:6. Exod. xxxiii:I9. Lev. xi.;45. Lev. xviii:5. Deut. vi.13. Deut. vi.16 Deut. viii:3. Deut. Deut. xxvii:26. xxv.4 Deut. xxxii:35. Deut. xxxii:36. Deut. xxxii:43. Josh. i.5. I Sam. xxi.;6. I Kings xix:14, 18. Psal. v.:9 and Cxl:3. Psal. x:7. Psal. xiv:1-3. and liii: I-3. Psal. xix:4. Psal. xxiv:I. Psal. xxxii: I, 2. Psal. xxxiv:12-16. Psal. xxxvi;I. Psal. xliv 22. Psal. li:4. Psal. lxix:9. Psal. lxix:22, 23. Psal. lxxviii:2. Psal. lxxxii:6. Psal. cxii:9. Psal. cxvi. IO. Psal. cxvii:I. Psal. cxviii:6. ; Prov. i. 16. Isa. lix:7, 8. Prov. iii:II, I2. Prov. iii:34. Prov. x:I2. Prov. xxv :21, 22. Prov. xxvi. II. Isa. i:9. Isa. vi.9, Io. Isa. viii:I2, I3. Isa. viii: 17, 18. Isa. x:22, 23. Isa. xxix:IO. f Isa. xxix:13. }sa. xxix:I4. Isa. xxix:16 and xlv.:9. Isa. xlv.23. Isa. xlix:8. Isa. lii:5 with Ezek. XXXVI .2O. Isa. lii:7 and Nahum 1 : I 5. Isa. lii: I I, I2. Isa. lii:I5. 66 &G & 4 66 & © & Cº Rom. ix:17. I Cor. x:7. Rom. ix:15. I Pet, i:16. Rom. x:5. iii: 12. Matt, iv:Io, Luke IV Joj, Matt. iv:7. Luke iv.:I2. Matt. iv:4. Luke iv:4. I Cor. ix:9. I Tim. v:18. Gal. iii:IO. Rom. xii:19. Heb. X:3O. Heb. x:30. Rom. xv.:IO. Heb. xiii:5. Matt. xii:3, 4. Mark ii:25, 26. Luke vi:3, 4. Rom. xi:3, 4. Rom. iii:13. Rom. iii:I4. iii:IO-12. x:18. x:26. iv.:7, 8. iii:IO-12. iii: 18. viii:36. iii,4. Rom. Rom. I Cor. Rom. I Pet. Rom. Rom. Rom. Rom. XV:3. Rom. xi:9, Io. Matt. xiii:35. John X:34. 2 Cor. ix:9. 2 Cor. iv:13. Rom. xv.:II. Heb. xiii:6. Rom. iii:15-17. Heb. xii;5, 6. James iv:6. I Pet. iv:8. Rom. xii:2O. 2 Pet. ii:22. Rom. ix:29. John xii:40. Matt. xiii:I4, 15. Luke viii: Io. Rom. xi:8. I Pet. iii:I4, 15. Heb. ii:13. Rom. ix:27, 28. Rom. xi:8. Matt. xv.:8, 9. Mark vii:6. I Cor. i. 19. Rom. ix:2O, 21. Rom. xiv:II. Phil. ii:IO. 2 Cor. vi.2. Rom. ii:24. Rom. x:I5. 2 Cor. vi. I7. Rom. xv.2 I. Gal. 35 ACCUBATION * . . Matt. xxi.13. Mark lsº ſ (and Jer. ! cited in x i: I 7. Luke & dº - \, tº xix:46. - Isa. lxi:I, 2. 4 & 6 ſ. Luke iv:18, 19. Isa. lxv. 1, 2. 6 & 6 ſ. Rom. x:20, 2I. Isa. lxvi;I, 2. 66 ( & Acts vii:49, 50. Jer. xxxi.15. 66 g { Matt. ii:17, 18. Jºjº and ; & 6 Jé 2 Cor. iii:3. Hab. ii:4. 64 & 8 Rom. i:17. Joel ii:32. & 66 Rom. x:13. Mal. i.2, 3. 4 & 30, Rom. ix:13. ACCOMPLISH (äk-köm-plish). (1) To perform; fulfill; fully execute (Jer. xliv,25). (2) To bring to pass what is desired, purposed, or prom- ised (Prov. xiii: 1-9). (3) To finish; so days are accomplished (Acts xxi.5). ACCORD (äk-kórd'), of its or his own accord; freely, without pains or constraint, or human agency (Lev. xxv. 5; 2 Cor. viii:17). With one accord, with universal harmony and agreement (Acts i: I4; ii:46; v:12). From the Gr. atróparos, ale-fo/e'ah-tos, we get our word “automatically.” ACCORDING (äk-kórd'ing). (1) Agreeably to (2 Tim. i.9). (2) Even as; in proportion to (Acts iv.:35). God rewards all men according to their works, that is, agreeably to the nature of their works (2 Cor. v. Io; Rev. xxii: 12); but deals not with his elect according to the merit of their works, whether good or bad (2 Tim. i. 9; Tit. iii.5). ACCOUNT (āk-kount'), in general to reckon; judge; value. Deut. ii:II. The Hebrews made account for the paschal lamb; every eater paid his share of the price. Exod. xii; I4. To put a thing to one's account, is to charge it on him as his debt, or reckon it to him as his good deed. Philem. I8; Phil. iv:17. To take account, is to search into and judge a matter. Matt. xviii:23. To give account, is to have our conduct tried, whether it be reasonable and lawful or not. Rom. xiv:12; Heb. xiii:17; I Pet. iv:5. God giveth not account of his matters: he does not ordinarily inform his creatures of the reasons and circumstances of his conduct. nor is he under obligation to do it. Job. xxxiii:I3. It is used for reckon or impute (Gal. iii:6). To seem or be reputed (Mark x :42; Luke xxii:24). ACCOUNTABILITY (äk-kount'ā-bīl'í-ty), the abstract term for the use of one's opportunities and talents which all must make to God. Matt. xii :36; Rom. xiv: Io; Heb. xiii:17, and I Pet. 1V : 5. - It is the obligation under which every man lives of giving an account of himself to God, in order to future retribution. Matt. xii:36; Rom. xiv: Io, I2; 2 Cor. v . Io; Heb. xiii:17; I Pet. iv :5. The wisdom of God in this constitution of things may be understood by a very little reflec- tion. There manifestly wants Some husbanding and equalizing power to make the faculties of man turn to the most account. Powers are slum- bering for want of a call, instruments rusting for want of an occupation, and energies of every. kind are lavished upon idle or evil doing that should be occupied in doing good. A full con- viction of accountability to God, firmly seated in the soul, would change the aspect of the world. ACCUBATION (äk'ku-bā'shun), the posture of reclining on couches at table, which prevailed among the Jews in and before the time of Christ. (1) Roman Custom. We see no reason to think that, as commonly alleged, they borrowed this ACCUBATION 36 custom from the Romans after Judea had been . subjugated by Pompey. But it is best known to us as a Roman custom, and as such must be described. The dinner-bed, or triclinium, stood in the middle of the dining-room, clear of the walls, and formed three sides of a square which enclosed the table. The open end of the square, with the central hollow, allowed the servants to attend and serve the table. In all the existing representations of the dinner-bed it is shown to have been higher than the enclosed table. Among the Romans the usual number of guests on each couch was three, making nine for the three couches, equal to the number of the Muses; but sometimes there were four to each couch. The Greeks went beyond this number (Cic. In Pis. 27). (2) Lord’s Supper. The Jews appear to have had no particular fancy in the matter, and we know that at our Lord’s last supper thirteen persons were present. As each guest leaned, during the greater part of the entertainment, on his left elbow, so as to leave the right arm at liberty, and as two or more lay on the same couch, the head of one man was near the breast of the man who lay behind him, and he was, therefore, said “to lie in the bosom’ of the other. This phrase was in use among the Jews (Luke xvi.22, 23; John i:18; xiii:23), and occurs in such a manner as to show that to lie next below, or ‘in the bosom’ of the master of the feast, was considered the most favored place; and is shown by the citations of Kypke and Wetstein (on John xiii:23) to have been usually assigned to near and dear connections. So it was ‘the disci- ple whom Jesus loved’ who “reclined upon his breast’ at the last supper. Lightfoot and others supposed that as, on that occasion, John lay next below Christ, so Peter, who was also highly fa- vored, lay next above him. This conclusion is founded chiefly on the fact of Peter beckoning to John that he should ask Jesus who was the traitor. But this seems rather to prove the con- trary—that Peter was not near enough to speak to Jesus himself. If he had been there, Christ must have lain near his bosom, and he would have been in the best position for whispering to his master, and in the worst for beckoning to John. The circumstance that Christ was able to reach the sop to Judas when he had dipped it seems to us rather to intimate that he was the one who filled that place. Any person who tries the posture may see that it is not easy to deliver anything but to the person next above or next below. And this is not in contradiction to, but in agreement with, the circumstances. The mor- sel of favor was likely to be given to one in a fa- vored place; and Judas, being so trusted and honored as to be the treasurer and almoner of the whole party, might, as much as any other of the apostles, be expected to fill that place. This also gives more point to the narrative, as it aggravates by contrast the turpitude and baseness of his conduct. (3) Dinner-bed. The frame of the dinner-bed was laid with mattresses variously stuffed, and, latterly, was furnished with rich coverings and hangings. Each person was usually provided with a cushion or bolster on which to support the upper part of his person in a somewhat raised position, as the left arm alone could not long without weariness sustain the weight. The lower part of the body being extended diagonally on the bed, with the feet outward, it is at once per- ACCURSEID ceived how easy it was for ‘the woman that was a sinner’ to come behind between the dinner-bed and the wall and anoint the feet of Jesus (Matt. xxvi :7; Mark xiv:3). Reclining on Couches at a Feast. (4) Improbable Derivation. It is utterly im- probable that the Jews derived this custom from the Romans, as is constantly alleged. They cer- tainly knew it as existing among the Persians long before it had been adopted by the Romans themselves (Esth. i:6; vii:8); and the presump- tion is that they adopted it while subject to that people. The Greeks also had the usage (from the Persians) before the Romans; and with the Greeks of Syria the Jews had very much inter- course. Besides, the Romans adopted the custom from the Carthaginians (Val. Max. xii: 1, 2; Liv. xxviii:28); and that they had it, implies that it previously existed in Phoenicia, in the neighborhood of the Jews. Thus, that in the time of Christ the custom had been lately adopted from the Romans, is the fast of various probabilities. It is also unlikely that in so short a time it should have becotile usual and everi (as the Tal- mud asserts) obligatory to eat the Passover in that posture of indulgent repose and in no other. ACCURSED (āk-kārst'). The Heb. word Pººl, Åheh'zem, and the Gr. divá6epa, an-ath'em-ah, which the A. V. often renders accursed, signify things set apart or devoted; and with Jews and Chris- tians marked the highest degree of excommuni- cation. They generally imported the cutting off one from the community of the faithful, the num- ber of the living, or the privileges of Society, and of a thing from existence and common use. The cities of king Arad, the seven nations of Canaan, the sacrifices of false gods, were accursed, or devoted to destruction. Num. xxi.;2, 3; Deut. vii:2, 26; Exod. xxii: 19. The Hebrews devoted to a curse such as did not assist in punishing the Benjamites. Judg. xxi:5. Jephthah devoted whatever should first meet him from his house. Judg. xi :30. Saul devoted such in his host as should taste any food before sunset while he pursued the Philistines. I Sam. xiv:24. About forty Jews devoted themselves under a curse, if they did eat or drink before they had killed Paul. Acts xxiii:12-13. Nothing devoted to the Lord, under the form of a curse, could be redeemed. Lev. xxvii:28, 29. The wealth of Jericho was accursed; the gold, silver, brass and iron were under the form of a curse, Set apart to the service of God, and the rest devoted to ruin. Josh. vi.16, 19; vii:1. The hanged malefactors were accursed of God, devoted to public punish- ment. Deut. xxi.;23. To promote the salvation ACCUSER of his Jewish brethren, Paul could have wished himself accursed from Christ; not cast into hell, and forever under the power of sin, and em- ployed in blaspheming God, but cast out of the church, and made himself , a temporary monu- ment of God’s wrath (Rom. ix:3). The difficulty is removed at once by adopting what seems the proper translation—“I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart, for I was wont to wish myself accursed from Christ.” His sorrow was for his kindred who determined to be ac- cursed from Christ, a state which Paul, who once was in it, could now appreciate. (See ANATH- EMA.) ... • ACCUSER (ak-kü'zer,) (Heb. Tº, law-shan', to lick, to use the tongue; in the New Testament, Katiyopos, AEaf-ay" gor-os, prosecutor; Avrtówkos, an-tiâ’i-dos. The original word, which bears this leading signification, means one who has a cause or matter of contention ; the accuser, opponent, or plaintiff in any suit (Judg. xii:2; Matt. V:25; Luke xii:58). (1) Hebrew Courts. We have little informa- tion respecting the manner in which causes were conducted in the Hebrew courts of jus- tice, except from the Rabbinical authorities, who, in matters of this description, may be supposed well informed as to the later customs of the nation. Even from these we learn little more than that great care was taken that, the accused being deemed innocent until convicted, he and the accuser should appear under equal circumstances before the court, that no preju- dicial impression might be created to the disad- vantage of the defendant, whose interests, we are told, were so anxiously guarded that any one was allowed to speak whatever he knew or had to say in his favor, which privilege was withheld from the accuser. (Lewis, Origines //ebraeae i:68.) The word is, however, to be understood in regard to the real plaintiff, not to the advo- cates, who only became known in the later period of the Jewish history. (See ADvoCATE.) (2) Biblical Use. The word is also applied in Scripture, in the general sense, to any adver- sary or enemy (Luke xviii:3; I Pet. v :8). In the latter passage there is an allusion to the old Jewish notion that Satan was the accuser or calumniator of men before God (Job i :6, sq.; Rev. xii:IO, sq.; Comp. Zech. iii: I). In this appli- cation the forensic sense was still retained, Satan 37 being represented as laying to man's charge a breach of the law, as in a court of justice, and demanding his punishment. (See SATAN.) ACELDAMA (a-kël'da-mă), (Gr "Akex8agó, ak- el-dam-ah", from the Syro-Chaldaic, field of blood), the field purchased with the money for which Judas betrayed Christ, and which was appro- priated as a place of burial for strangers (Matt. xxvii:8; Acts i: IO). It was previously ‘a pot- ter's field.’ (1) Possible Location. The field now shown as Acelaama lies on the slope of the hills be- yond the valley of Hinnom, south of Mount Zion. This is obviously the spot which Jerome points out (Onomast, s.v. ‘Acheldamach'), and which has since been mentioned by almost every One who has described Jerusalem. Sandys thus writes of it: ‘On the south side of this valley, neere where it meeteth with the valley of Jehosha- phat, mounted a good height on the side of the mountain, is Acelaama, or the field of blood, pur- chased with the restored reward of treason, for a buriall place for strangers.” ACHAN (2) Mother of Constantine. “In the midst whereof a large square roome was made by Helena, the mother of Constantine; the south side, walled with the naturall rocke; flat at the top, and equall with the vpper level; out of which ariseth cer- taine little cupoloes, open in the midst to let doune the dead bodies. Thorow these we might see the bottome, all couered with bones, and certaine Corses but newly let doune, it being now the Sepulchre of the Armenians. A greedy graue, and great enough to deuoure the dead of a whole nation. For they say (and I believe it), that the earth thereof within the space of eight and forty houres will consume the flesh that is laid thereon' (Re- lation of a Journey, p. 187). He then relates the common story, that the empress referred to caused two hundred and seventy ship-loads of this flesh-consuming mold to be taken to Rome, to form the soil of the Campo Sancto, to which the same virtue is ascribed. Richardson (Travels, p. 567) affirms that bodies were thrown in as late as 1818; but Dr. Robinson alleges that it has the appearance of having been for a much longer time abandoned. (3) Present Condition. ‘The field or plat is not now marked by any boundary to distin- guish it from the rest of the hillside; and the former charnel-house, now a ruin, is all that remains to point out the site. * * An open- ing at each end enabled us to look in ; but the bottom was empty and dry, excepting a few bones much decayed' (Biblical Researches, i :524). ACHAIA (ā-kā'yá), (Gr. AXata, ach-a/-ee'ah), a region of Greece, which in the restricted sense occu- pied the northwestern portion of the Peloponnesus, including Corinth and its isthmus (Strabo, viii, p. 438, sq.). By the poets it was often put for the whole of Greece, whence 'Axalot, the Greeks. Under the Romans, Greece was divided into two provinces, Macedonia and Achaia, the former of which included Macedonia proper, with Illyricum, Epi- rus, and Thessaly; and the latter, all that lay southward of the former (Cellar. i, pp. I 170, 1322). It is in this latter acceptation that the name of Achaia is always employed in the New Testament (Acts xviii: 12-16; xix:21; Rom. xv.26; I Cor. xvi. I 5; 2 Cor. i. I; ix:2; xi: IO; I Thess. i:7, 8). Achaia was at first a senatorial province, and, as such, was governed by proconsuls (Dion Cass. liii, p. 704). Tiberius changed the two into one imperial province under procurators (Tacit. Anna/, i.76); but Claudius restored them to the senate and to the proconsular form of govern- ment (Suet. Claud. 25). Hence the exact and minute propriety with which St. Luke, expresses himself in giving the title of proconsul to Gallio, who was appointed to the province in the time of Claudius (Acts xviii:I2). ACHAICUS (a-kā'i-küs), (Gr.' Axatkós, ach-a/-ee- Áos'), a native of Achaia and a follower of the apostle Paul. He, with Stephanus and Fortunatus, was the bearer of the 1st Epistle to the Corinthians, and was recommended by the apostle to their special respect (I Cor. xvi; 17). ACHAN (ā’kan), (Heb. |PP, aw-Kawn', trou- blesome, Josh. vii:I). In the parallel passage (I Chron. ii.7) the name is spelt "PP, aw-Hawr, and as it has there the meaning of troubling, it is thought by some that this is an intentional change after the fact, to give the name a significant reference to the circumstance which renders it notorious. While Joshua and his army were besieging Jericho it was put under that awful ban of which there are other instances in the early ACHAR Scripture history, whereby all the inhabitants (excepting Rahab and her family) were devoted to destruction, all the combustible goods to be consumed by fire, and all the metals to be conse- crated to God. (1) Vow of Devotement. This vow of devote- ment was rigidly observed by all the troops when Jericho was taken, save by one man, Achan, a Judahite, who could not resist the temptation of secreting an ingot of gold, a quan- 38 tity of silver, and a costly Babylonish garment, which he buried in his tent, deeming that his sin was hid (Josh. vii:20-22). But God made known this infraction, which, the vow having been made by the nation as one body, had in- volved the whole nation in his guilt. elites were defeated, with serious loss, in their first attack upon Ai; and as Joshua was well assured that this humiliation was designed as the punishment of a crime which had inculpated the whole people, he took immediate measures to discover the criminal. (2) Punishment of Achan. As in other cases, the matter was referred to the Lord by the lot, and the lot ultimately indicated the actual criminal. The conscience-stricken offender then confessed his crime to Joshua; and his confession being verified by the production of his ill-gotten treasure, the peo- ple, actuated by the strong impulse with which men tear up, root and branch, a polluted thing, hur- ried away not only Achan, but his tent, his goods, his spoil, his cattle, his children, to the valley (afterwards called) of Achor, north of Jericho, where they stoned him, and all that belonged to him; after which the whole was consumed with fire, and a cairn of stones raised over the ashes (Josh. vii:25). The severity of this act, as regards the family of Achan, has provoked some remark. Calmet says: “The sentence passed on the family of Achan may be justified by reflect- ing, (1) that probably he was assisted by them The Isra-. in this theft; for, if not, (2) he could never have secreted such articles in the earth under his tent, without being observed and detected by them, who ought to have opposed him, or imme- diately to have given notice of the transaction to the elders. As they did not do this, they became, by concealment, at least, partakers of his crime.” Kitto, however, disagrees with this position, and says: “Instead of vindicating it, as is generally done, by the allegation that the members of Achan's family were probably accessories to his crime after the fact, we prefer the supposition that they were included in the doom by one of unose sudden impulses of indiscriminate popular vengeance to which the Jewish people were ex- ceedingly prone, and which, in this case, it would not have been in the power of Joshua to control by any authority which he could under such cir- cumstances exercise. It is admitted that this is no more than a conjecture; but, as such, it is at least worth as much, and assumes considerably less than the conjectures which have been offered by others” (Josh. vii:26). ACHAR (ā'kār), (Heb. Tº, aw-Kawr', trouble), another form of the name Achan, given to him in I Chron. ii:7. (See ACHAN.) ACHAs HDARPENIM (ā'kāsh-dār-pâ'nim), (Heb. Fºrê, akh-ash-dar-fem-eem", A. V., ‘lieutenants,” or ‘rulers of provinces.' It occurs in Esth. iii:12; viii:9; ix:3; and with the Chal- dee termination an, in Dan. iii.2, 3, 27; vi.2, 3). The word is undoubtedly merely another form ACHIOR of writing the Persian word satrap, the origin of which has been much disputed, and does not claim to be here considered. These satraps are known in ancient history as the governors or viceroys of the provinces into which the Persian empire was divided. Strictly speaking, they had an extended civil jurisdiction over several smaller provinces, each of which had its own satrap or governor. Thus Zerubbabel and Nehemiah were ‘governors’ of Judea, under the Persian satraps of Syria (Ezra iv:3, 6; Neh. ii:9). The power and func- tions of the Persian satraps were not materially different from those of the modern Persian gov- ernors and Turkish pashas ; and, indeed, the idea of provincial government by means of viceroys, entrusted with almost regal powers in their sev- eral jurisdictions, and responsible only to the king, by whom they are appointed, has always been prevalent in the East. (See LIEUTENANTs.) ACHAZ (ā’kaz), (Matt. i.9), elsewhere AHAz (which see). ACHBAR (äk'bar). See MOUSE. ACHBOR (#k'bór), (Heb. Tºy, aß-bore’, mouse, gnawing). 1. The father of Baal-hanan, king of the Edom- ites (Gen. xxxvi;38, 39; I Chron. i.49). 2. An officer of Josiah (2 Kings xxii: 12, I4; Jer. xxvi;22; xxxvi;12; called Abdon in 2 Chron. xxxiv:2O), B. C. 624. ACHIM (ā’kim), (Hebrew form is Jachin, a con- traction of Jehoiachin, the Lord will establish), an ancestor of Christ (Matt. i. 14). ACHIOR (a'ki-Ör), general of the Ammonites, who joined Holofernes with auxiliary troops, in that general's expedition into Egypt. Bethulia having shut its gates against Holofernes, he called the princes of Moab and Ammon, and demanded of them, with great passion, who those people were that opposed his passage; presuming that the Moabites and Ammonites, being, neighbors to the Hebrews, could best inform him. (1) Advice to Holofernes. Achior answered, “My lord, these people are originally of Chaldea ; but because they would not worship the gods of the Chaldeans they were obliged to leave their coun- try.” He related, also, Jacob's descent into Egypt, the miracles of Moses, and the conquest of Canaan; observing that the people were visi- bly protected by God while they continued faith- ful to him; but that God never failed to take vengeance on their infidelity. “Now, therefore,” added he, “learn whether they have committed any fault against their God; if so, attack them, for he will deliver them up into your hands: if not, we shall not be able to resist them, be- cause God will undertake their defense, and cover us with confusion” (Judith v 2, 3, etc.). (2) Threat of the Invader. Holofernes, trans- ported with fury, answered him, “Since you have taken upon you to be a prophet, in telling us that the God of Israel would be the defender of his peo- ple, to show you there is no other god besides Nebuchodonosor, my master, when we have put all these people to the edge of the sword, we will destroy you likewise, and you shall understand that Nebuchodonosor is lord of all the earth.” Achior was then carried out near to the city, and left bound, that the inhabitants might take him into the city. This was done, and Achior declar- ing what had happened, the people of Bethulia fell with their faces to the ground, and with great cries begged God's assistance, beseeching him to vindicate the honor of his name, and to hum- ble the pride of their enemies. After this they ACHISH 39 consoled Achior, and Ozias, one of the leaders of the people, received him into his house, where he continued during the siege. r (3) Joined the Israelites. After the death of Holofernes and the discomfiture of his army, Achior abandoned the heathen superstitions, and was received into Israel by circumcision (Judith xiv:6, seq.) - ACHISH (a'kish), (Heb. ???, aw-keesh", signi- fication uncertain) (called Abimelech in the title of Ps. xxxiv), the Philistine king of Gath, with whom David twice sought refuge when he fled from Saul (I Sam. xxi.;IO-15; xxvii:1-3). The first time David was in imminent danger; for he was recognized and spoken of by the officers of the Court as one whose glory had been won at the cost of the Philistines. They said, “Is not this David the king of the land?” etc. - (1) Stratagem. This talk filled David with such alarm that he feigned himself mad when introduced to the notice of Achish, who, see- ing him ‘Scrabbling upon the doors of the gate, and letting his spittle fall down upon his beard,' rebuked his people sharply for bringing him to his presence, asking, ‘Have I need of mad- men, that ye have brought this fellow to play the madman in my presence P Shall this fel- low come into my house?” After this David lost no time in quitting the territories of Gath. Winer illustrates David's conduct by reference to the similar proceeding of some other great men, who feigned themselves mad in difficult circumstances—as Ulysses (Cic. Off. iii:26; Hy- gin, f:95, Schol. ad Lycophr. 818), the astron- Omer Meton (AElian, Hist. xiii:12), 1. Junius Brutus (Liv. i :56; Dion. Hal. iv:68), and the Arabian king Bacha (Schultens, Anth. Vet. Hamasa, p. 535). (2) Later Visit. About four years after, when the character and position of David became better known, and when he was at the head of not less than 600 resolute adherents, he again repaired with his troop to King Achish, who received him in a truly royal Spirit, and treated him with a generous confidence, of which David took rather more advantage than was creditable to him (I Sam. xxvii:2-7). (See DAVID.) ACHMETHA (#k/me-tha), (Heb. Nººs, aāh- me-zhaw', station or fortress, Ezra vi;2; "Ekpárava, 2 Macc. ix:3; Judith xi. 1; Tob. v.9; Joseph. Antiq. x:II, 7; xi;4, 6; also, in Greek authors Egbatana EY!3árava and Agâatana 'AY34tava), a city in Media. The derivation of the name is doubtful; but Major Rawlinson (Geogr. Journal, x:134) has left little question that the title was applied ex- clusively to cities having a fortress for the pro- tection of the royal treasures. (1) Jews' Petition. In Ezra we learn that in the reign of Darius Hystaspes the Jews petitioned that search might be made in the king's treasure- house at Babylon for the decree which Cyrus had made in favor of the Jews (Ezra v :17). Search was accordingly made in the record-office ("house of the rolls'), where the treasures were kept at Babylon (vi :I); but it appears not to have been found there, as it was eventually discovered at Achmetha, in the palace of the province of the Medes' (vi :2). (2) Septuagint. It is here worthy of remark that the LXX regarded “Achmetha,’ in which they could hardly avoid recognizing the familiar title of Ecbatana, as the generic name for a city, and, accordingly rendered it by rôAts ; and that Josephus, as well as all the Christian Greeks, ACHSHAPH while retaining the proper name of Ecbatana, yet agree, with the Greek Scriptures, in employing the word Baris, 84pus, to express the Hebrew Birtha (‘the palace'), which is used as the dis- tinctive epithet of the city. (3) Apocryphal Account. In Judith i :2, there is a brief account of Ecbatana, in which we are told that it was built by Arphaxad, king of the Medes, who made it his capital. (4) Identification. This Ecbatana has been usually identified with the present Hamadan. Major Rawlinson, however, while admitting that Hamadan occupies the site of the Median Ecba- tana, has a learned and most elaborate paper in the Geographical Journal (x :65-158; On the Site of the Atropatenian Ecbatana), in which he en- deavors to show that the present Takht-i-Sulei- man was the site of another, the Atropatenian Ecbatana; and that to it, rather than to the proper Median Ecbatana, the statement in Herod- otus and most of the other ancient accounts are to be understood to refer. Our only busi- ness is with the Achmetha of Ezra; and that does not require us to enter into this question. (5) Present Condition. Hamadan is still an important town, and the seat of one of the gov- ernments into which the Persian kingdom is di- vided. It is situated in north lat. 34 deg. 53 min., east long. 40 deg., at the extremity of a rich and fertile plain, on a gradual ascent, at the base of the Elwund Mountains, whose higher summits are covered with perpetual snow. Some remnants of ruined walls of great thickness and also of towers of sun-dried bricks present the only positive evi- dence of a more ancient city than the one on the Spot. Heaps of comparatively recent ruins, and a wall fallen to decay, attest that Hamadan has de- clined from even its modern importance. The population is said by Southgate to be about 30,- OOO. Many Jews reside here, claiming to be de- scended from those of the Captivity who re- mained in Media. They speak the broken Turk- ish of the country, and have two synagogues. They derive the name of the town from ‘Haman' and ‘Mede,’ and say that it was given to that foe of Mordecai by King Ahasuerus. In the midst of the city is a tomb which is in their charge, and which is said to be that of Mordecai and Esther. ACHOR (ā'kor), (Heb. nºy, aw-Éore', trouble; Sept.'Ax&p, a-Āore'), a valley between Jericho and Ai, which received this name (signifying troub/e) from the trouble brought upon the Israelites by the sin of Achan (Josh. vii:24). (See ACHAN.) ACHSA (äk'sä), a less correct mode (I Chron. ii:49) of anglicizing the name ACHSAH (which see). ACHSAH (äk'sah), (Heb. "???, ak-saw', an ank- let), the daughter of Caleb, whose hand her father offered in marriage to him who should lead the attack on the city of Debir and take it. The prize was won by his nephew Othniel; and as the bride was conducted with the usual ceremonies to her future home, she alighted from her ass and sued her father for an addition of springs of water to her dower in lands. It is probable that custom rendered it unusual, or at least ungracious, for a request tendered under such circumstances by a daughter to be , refused; and Caleb, in accordance with her wish, bestowed upon her ‘the upper and the nether springs' (Josh. xv.16-19; Judg. i:9-15). * ACHSHAPH (#k'sāf), (Heb. *S, a.k-shawſ”, fascination), a royal city of the Canaanites (Josh. ACHU 40 xi : I), has been supposed by many to be the same as Achzib, both being in the tribe of Asher. But a careful consideration of Josh. xix:25 and 29 will make it probable that the places were dif- ferent. There is more reason in the conjecture (Hamelsveld iii:237) that Achshaph was another name for Accho or Acre, seeing that Accho oth- erwise does not occur in the list of towns in the lot of Asher, although it is certain, from J º i:31, that Accho was in the portion of tha tribe. - ACHU (ā'ku), (Heb. *, azy'koo). This word occurs in Job viii:II, where it is said, ‘Can the rush grow up without mire? Can the flag grow without water P’ Here flag stands for achu; which would seem to indicate some specific plant, as gome, or rush, in the first clause of the sentence, may denote the papyrus. Achu occurs also twice in Gen. xli:2, 18, And, behold, there came up Out of the river seven well-favored kine and fat- fleshed, and they fed in a meadow:’ here it is rendered meadow, and must, therefore, have been considered by our translators as a general, and not a specific, term. From the context of the few passages in which achu occurs, it is evident that it indicates a plant or plants which grew in or in the neighborhood of water, and also that it or they were suitable as pasturage for cattle. ACHZIB (äk'zib), (Heb. Pºs, ak-zeeb', false- hood, deceit). There are two places of this name, not usually distinguished. 1. Achzib, in the tribe of Asher nominally, but almost always in the possession of the Phoeni- cians; being, indeed, one of the places from which the Israelites were unable to expel the former inhabitants (Judg. i :3I). In the Talmud it is called Chezib. The Greeks called it Ecclippa, from the Aramaean pronunciation, and it still Sur- vives under the name of Zib. It is upon the Mediterranean coast, about ten miles north of Acre. It stands on an ascent close by the seaside, and is described as a small place, with a few palm- trees rising above the dwellings (Pococke, ii:II5; Richter, p. 70; Maundrell, p. 7I; Irby and Mangles, p. I96; Buckingham, ch. iii). 2. Achzib (Sept. "Axë3, Ach-zeb'), in the tribe of Judah (Josh. xv :44; Mic. i : I4), of which there is no historical mention, but, from its place in the catalogue, it appears to have been in the mid- dle part of the western borderland of the tribe, towards the Philistines. This is very possibly the Chezib of Gen. xxxviii:5. . ACKNOWLEDGE (āk-nó1'ej), (Gr. Śrāyvoorus, ep-ig"no-sis, precise and correct knowledge). (I) To own or confess (Gen. xxxvii.1:20). (2) To observe; take notice of (Is. xxxiii: 13). (3) To esteem and respect (IS. lxi :9; I Cor. xvi :8). (4) To approve of (2 Cor. i : I3; Philem. 6). (5) To worship, profess and own as a God (Dan. xi :39). (6) To know experimentally of his holy will and of the blessings which he has bestowed and constantly bestows through Christ (Eph. i:17; Col. i. Io; 2 Pet. i :2); of Christ, i. e., the true knowledge of Christ’s nature, dignity, bene- fits (Eph. iv:13; 2 Pet. i :8; ii:2O). We acknowl- edge the Lord in all our ways, when in every matter we request and wait for his direction and assistance; when we observe what direction or en- couragement his Word and providence afford us, in our affairs temporal or spiritual (Prov. iii:6). ACQUAINT (äk-kwānt'). 1. To get a familiar knowledge and intimacy (Ps. cxxxix:3; Is, liii:3). ACROSTIC To acquaint one's self with God is by repeated en- deavors to get a spiritual knowledge of and in- timacy with him (Job xxii:21). 2. Acquaintance, persons to whom one is fa- miliarly and intimately known (Job xix:I3). A.C.R.A. (äk'ra), (Gr, "Akpa), a Greek word signify- ing a citadel, in which sense chakra, NJET, also occurs in the Syriac and Chaldaic. Hence the name of Acra was acquired by the eminence north of the Temple, on which a citadel was built by Antiochus Epiphanes to command the holy place. It thus became, in fact, the Acropolis of Jerusa- lem. Josephus describes this eminence as semi- circular, and reports that when Simon Macca- baeus had succeeded in expelling the Syrian gar- rison, he not only demolished the citadel, but caused the hill itself to be leveled, that no neigh- boring site might thenceforth be higher or so high as that on which the Temple stood. The people had suffered So much from the garrison that they willingly labored day and night, for three years, in this great work (Antiq. xiii:6, 6; Bell. Jud. v 4, 1). At a later period the palace of Helena, queen of Adiabene, stood on the site, which still retained the name of Acra, as did also, probably, the council-house and the reposi- tory of the archives. ACRABATTENE (äk'ra-bat-tê'né). 1. A district or toparchy of Judaea, extending between Shechem (now Nabulus) and Jericho, inclining east. It was about twelve miles in length. It is not mentioned in Scripture, but it Occurs in Josephus (Bell. Jud. ii: 12, 4; iii:3-5). It took its name from a town called Acrabi in the Onomasticon (s. v. 'Akpa (38e v) where it is described as a large village, nine Roman miles east of Neapolis, on the road to Jericho. In this quar- ter Dr. Robinson (Bib. Researches, iii:Io3) found a village still existing under the name of Akrabeh. 2. Another district in that portion of Judaea which lies towards the south end of the Dead Sea, occupied by the Edomites during the Cap- tivity, and afterwards known as Idumaea. It is mentioned in I Macc. v.:3; Joseph. Antiq, xii:8, I. It is assumed to have taken its name from the Maaleh Akrabbim or Steep of the Scorpions, men- tioned in Num. xxxiv:4, and Josh. xv. 3, as the Southern extremity of the tribe of Judah. (See AKRABBIM.) ACRE (āker), (Heb. Tºš, tseh'med, a yoke), the rendering of the Hebrew word which is used as a measure of land, i.e., so much as a yoke of oxen can plow in a day (I Sam. xiv: I4; IS. v : IO). ACRE (äk'är or ā'kār). See ACCHO. ACROSTIC (Gr. Čikpov, aß'ron, extremity, and orizos, stikh'os, verse), a composition, generally in verse, in which the first or the last letters of the lines in their stanzas, or of words, one in each line, spell a name or sentence. In Ps. cxix the lines or verses begin with the letters of the He- brew alphabet. Each strophe has eight lines, each beginning with the same letter, the first eight lines beginning with N, Aleph, the next with 2 Beth, and so on. Ps. xxv and xxxiv have one verse to each letter in its order. Other Psalms, as czi and czii, have verses each of which is di- vided into two parts, and these hemistichs follow the alphabetical arrangement. In ecclesiastical history the term acrostic is employed to describe a mode of performing the psalmody of the ancient Church. The precentor began a verse and the people joined him at the close. (Mc. and Str., Bib. Dict.) ACTS OF THE APOSTLES The acrostic was also commonly used for epi- taphs. But the most famous of all ancient acros- tics is the one used by ancient Christians as a secret symbol of the faith. This is the Greek word 'Ix60s, ichtus, fish, formed from the ini- tial letters of five titles of our Lord, “Jesus Christ, God's Son, Saviour.” Imaois. . . . . . . . . . . . ... I esous. Xptotôs . . . . . . . . . ....CH ristos. ©eós. . . . . . . . . . . . . ...TH eds. * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . U ios. 20thp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S Otér (Barnes, Peof. Biff. Dict.) º ACTS OF THE APOSTLES (Ācts of the A-pós'- tles). (1) Title and Order. This is the title of one of the canonical books of the New Testament, the fifth in order in the common arrangement, and the last of those properly of an historical char- acter. (2) Contents. Commencing with a reference to an account given in a former work of the sayings and doings of Jesus Christ before his ascension, its author proceeds to conduct us to an acquaintance with the circumstances attend- ing that event, the conduct of the disciples on their return from witnessing it, the outpouring ‘on them of the Holy Spirit according to Christ's promise to them before his crucifixion, and the amazing success which, as a consequence of this, attended the first announcement by them of the doctrine concerning Jesus as the promised Mes- siah and the Saviour of the World. After following the fates of the mother-church at Jerusalem up to the period when the violent persecution of its members by the rulers of the Jews had broken up their society and scattered them, with the exception of the apostles, through- out the whole of the surrounding region; and after introducing to the notice of the reader the case of a remarkable conversion of one of the most zealous persecutors of the church, who aft- erwards became one of its most devoted and suc- cessful advocates, the narrative takes a wider scope and opens to our view the gradual ex- pansion of the church by the free admission with- in its pale of persons directly converted from heathenism and who had not passed through the preliminary stage of Judaism (Acts i-viii). The first step towards this more liberal and cosmopolitan order of things having been effected by Peter, to whom the honor of laying the foun- dation of the Christian church, both within and without the confines of Judaism, seems, in ac- cordance with our Lord's declaration concerning him (Matt. xvi :18), to have been reserved, Paul, the recent convert and the destined apostle of the Gentiles, is brought forward as the main actor on the scene (Acts iz). On his course of missionary activity, his successes and his suf- ferings, the chief interest of the narrative is thenceforward concentrated, until, having fol- lowed him to Rome, whither he had been sent as a prisoner to abide his trial, on his own appeal, at the bar of the emperor himself, the book abruptly closes, leaving us to gather further in- formation concerning him and the fortunes of the church from other sources (Acts x-xxxiii). (3) Authorship. Respecting the authorship of this book there can be no ground for doubt or hesitation. It is unquestionably the production of the same writer by whom the third of the four Gospels was composed, as is evident from the introductory sentences of both (Comp. Luke i :I-4, with Acts i:1). That this writer was Luke there 41 ACTS OF THE APOSTLES is abundant evidence to show. With regard to the book now under notice, tradition is firm and constant in ascribing it to Luke (Irenaeus, Adv. Aſaer. lib. i. c. 31 ; iii:14; Clemens Alexandr. Strom. v. p. 588; Tertullian, Adv. Marcion. v. 2; De Jejun. c. Io; Origen, apud Euseb. Hist. Ec- cles. vi.23, etc. Eusebius himself ranks this book among the Öpoxoyotſueva, H. E. iii:25). From the book itself, also, it appears that the author accompanied Paul to Rome when he went to that city as a prisoner (xxviii). Now, we know from two epistles written by Paul at that time, that Luke was with him at Rome (Col. iv : I4; Phil. 24), which favors the supposition that he was the writer of the narrative of the apostle's journey to that city. (4) Dogmatical Objections. The only parties in primitive times by whom this book was re- jected were certain heretics, such as the Mar- cionites, the Severians and the Manicheans, whose objections were entirely of a dogmatical, not of a historical, nature; indeed, they can hardly be said to have questioned the authenticity of the book; they rather cast it aside because it did not favor their peculiar views. (5) Acknowledged Genuine. At the same time, whilst this book was acknowledged as genuine, where it was known, it does not appear to have been at first so extensively circulated as the other histor- ical books of the New Testament; for we find Chrysostom complaining that by many in his day it was not so much as known (Hom. i. in Act. Sub init.). Perhaps, however, there is some rhetor- ical exaggeration in this statement; or, it may be, as Kuinoel (Proleg. in Acta App. Comment, tom. iv. p. 5) suggests, that Chrysostom's complaint refers rather to a prevalent omission of the Acts from the number of books publicly read in the churches, which would, of course, lead to its being comparatively little known among the peo- ple attending those churches. (6) The Former and Latter Treatise. Many critics are inclined to regard the Gospel by Luke and the Acts of the Apostles as having formed originally only one work, consisting of two parts. For this opinion, however, there does not appear to be any satisfactory authority; and it is hardly accordant with Luke's own description of the re- lation of these two writings to each other; be- ing called by him, the one the former and the other the latter treatise ( Aéryos ), a term which would not be appropriate had he intended to des- ignate by it the first and second parts of the same treatise. It would be difficult, also, on this hy- pothesis to account for the two, invariably and from the earliest times, appearing with distinct titles. (7) An Eye Witness. Of the greater part of the events recorded in the Acts the writer him- self appears to have been witness. He is for the first time introduced into the narrative in ch. xvi;II, where he speaks of accompanying Paul to Philippi. He then disappears from the narra- tive until Paul’s return to Philippi, more than two years afterwards, when it is stated that they left that place in company (xx:6); from which it may be justly inferred that Luke spent the interval in that town. From this time to the close of the period embraced by his narrative he appears as the companion of the apostle. For the materials, therefore, of all he has recorded from ch. xvi; 11 to xxviii:31 he may be regarded as having drawn upon his own recollection or on that of the apostle. To the latter source, also, ACTS OF THE APOSTLES may be confidently traced all he has recorded concerning the earlier events of the apostle's ca- reer; and as respects the circumstances recorded in the first twelve chapters of the Acts, and which relate chiefly to the church at Jerusalem and the labors of the apostle Peter, we may read- ily suppose that they were so much matter of general notoriety among the Christians with whom Luke associated, that he needed no as- sistance from any other merely human source in recording them. 42 Some of the German critics have labored hard to show that he must have had recourse to writ- ten documents in order to compose those parts of his history which record what did not pass under his own observation, and they have gone the length of supposing the existence of a work in the language of Palestine, of which the Apocry- phal book Praareis Petron or Kerugma Petron, IIpáčeus IIérpov or Kºpu Yua IIérpov, Acts of Peter or Discourses of Peter, mentioned by Clement of Alexandria and Origen, was an interpolated edition (Heinrichs, Proleg. in Acta AAA., p. 21; Kuinoel, Pro/eg., p. 14). All this, however, is mere un- grounded supposition. There is not the shadow of evidence that any written documents were extant from which Luke could have drawn his materials, and with regard to the alleged impossibility of his learning from traditionary report the minute particulars he has recorded (which is what these critics chiefly in- sist on), it is to be remembered that, in common with all the sacred writers, he enjoyed the su- perintending and inspiring influence of the Divine Spirit, whose office it was to preserve him from all error and to guide him into all truth. (8) Design. An important inquiry respects the design of the evangelist in writing this book. A prevalent popular opinion on this head is, that Luke, having in his Gospel given a history of the life of Christ, intended to follow that up by giving in the Acts a narrative of the establishment and early progress of his religion in the world. That this, however, could not have been his design is obvious from the very partial and limited view which his narrative gives of the state of things in the church generally during the period through which it extends. As little can we regard this book as designed to record the official history of the apostles Peter and Paul, for we find many particulars concerning both these apostles men- tioned incidentally elsewhere, of which Luke takes no notice (Comp. 2 Cor. xi.; Gal. i :17; ii: 1 I ; I Pet. v : 13). Much more deserving of notice is the opinion of Haenlein, with which that of Michaelis substantially accords, that ‘the gen- eral design of the author of this book was, by means of his narratives, to set forth the co-opera- tion of God in the diffusion of Christianity, and along with that, to prove, by remarkable facts, the dignity of the apostles and the perfectly equal right of the Gentiles with the Jews to a participation in the blessings of that religion’ (Einleitung, th: iii. s. 156. Comp. Michaelis, Introduction, vol. iii, p. 330). Perhaps we should come still closer to the truth if we were to say that the design of Luke in writing the Acts was to supply, by select and suitable instances, an illustration of the power and working of that religion which Jesus had died to establish. In his gospel he had presented to his readers an exhibi- tion of Christianity as embodied in the person, character, and works of its great founder; and having followed him in his narration until he was taken up out of the sight of his disciples into ACTS OF THE APOSTLES heaven, this second work was written to show how his religion operated when committed to the hands of those by whom it was to be announced ‘to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem’ (Luke xxiv:47). In this point of view the recitals in this book present a theme that is practically interesting to Christians in all ages of the church and all places of the world. They exhibit to us what influences guided the actions of those who laid the foundations of the church, and to whose authority all its members must defer—what courses they adopted for the extension of the church—what ordinances they appointed to be observed by those Christians who, under their auspices, associated together for mutual edifica- tion—and what difficulties, privations, and trials were to be expected by those who should zealously exert themselves for the triumph of Christianity. We are thus taught not by dogmatical statement, but by instructive narrative, under what sanctions Christianity appears in our world, what blessings she offers to men, and by what means her influ- ence is most extensively to be promoted and the blessings she offers to be most widely and most fully enjoyed. (9) Time and Place. Respecting the time when this book was written it is impossible to speak with certainty. As the history is continued up to the close of the second year of Paul’s imprison- ment at Rome, it could not have been written before. A. D. 63. A number of New Testament critics contend that Luke's gospel not only pre- supposes sufficient time for the writing of many Other treatises (Luke i: I ), but also the destruc- tion of Jerusalem (Luke xxi :20), and hence could not have been composed before A. D. 70. This means for the Acts a date as late as A. D. 75 or 80. Still greater uncertainty hangs over the place where Luke composed it, but as he accompanied Paul to Rome, perhaps it was at that city and under the auspices of the apostle that it was pre- pared. (10) Style. The style of Luke in Acts is, like his style in his Gospel, much purer than that of most other books of the New Testament. The Hebraisms which occasionally occur are almost exclusively to be found in the speeches of others which he has reported. These speeches are in- deed, for the most part, to be regarded rather as Summaries than as full reports of what the Speaker uttered; but as these summaries are given in the speakers' own words, the appearance of Hebraisms in them is as easily accounted for as if the addresses had been reported in full. His mode of narrating events is clear, dignified, and lively; and, as Michaelis observes, he “has well supported the character of each person whom he has introduced as delivering a public harangue, and has very faithfully and happily preserved the manner of speaking which was peculiar to each of his orators' (Introduction, vol. iii, p. 332). (11) Chronology of Events. Lardner and others have very satisfactorily shown (Lardner's Credibility, Works, vol. i ; Biscoe, On the Acts; Paley's Æoraº Paulinae, Benson's A'istory of the First Planting of Christianity, vol. ii., etc.), the credibility of the events recorded by Luke is fully authenticated both by internal and external evidence, but a very great obscurity attaches to the chronology of these events. Of the many conflicting systems which have been published for the purpose of settling the questions that have arisen on this head, it is impossible within such limits as those to which this article is neces- sarily confined, to give any minute account. As ACTS, SPURIOUS little do we feel ourselves at liberty to attempt an original investigation of the subject, even did such promise to be productive of any very satis- factory result. The only course that appears open to us is to present, in a tabular form, the dates affixed to the leading events by those writ- ers whose authority is most deserving of con- sideration in such an inquiry. t # . . . . ; a #| | | | | | | #| || # # | 3 || 5 || 3 || 5 || 3 Ü | | | | | | H | 03 | T | > Paul's Conversion....... 35 | 34 || 35 |35,36. 33 || 30 31, 32 Paul's First Visit to Jeru- Salem. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 37 37 || 38 |35-36. 33 ||34, 35 Death of Herod Agrippa. 44 44 || 44 || 44 || 44 44 || 44 Paul’s Second Visit to Jerusalem . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 || 45 |44,45| 46 || 47 | [44]|45, 46 Paul's First Missionary Journey. . . . . . . . . . . . . . |50-51. 48 |47,48. 47 |47-49| 45 bef.45 The Council at Jerusa- lem. . . . . . . . . ; . . . . . . . . . . 52 || 51 | 50 || 49 50 | 47 |45, 46 The Second Missionary Journey. ... :: : . . . . . . . . . 52-54|51-54|51-53|49-52|50-53|47-50|46, 49 The Third Missionary Journey. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54-5854-58||54-58||52-56'53-57|50-54|49-52 Paul's Arrest . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 || 58 58 || 56 || 57 54 53 Accession of Festus. . . . . 60 | 6o 60 58 59 56 55 Paul's Arrival in Rome. . . 61 61 61 59 || 60 || 57 56 Close of Acts. . . . . . . . . . . . 63 || 63 63 || 61 || 62 || 59 58 Paul's Death . . . . . . . . . . . . 66,67| 68 || 67 |64–65) 65 64 58 Date of Acts. . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 | . . . . [63-75] .... c. 8o c. 8ol 81-96 ACTS, SPURIOUS (ficts, spü'ri-oiás), see Apoc- rypha. This term has been applied to several ancient writings pretended to have been composed by, or to supply historical facts respecting our Blessed Savior and his disciples, or other indi- viduals whose actions are recorded in the holy Scriptures. Of these spurious or pseudepigraphal writings several are still extant; others are only known to have existed by the accounts of them which are to be met with in ancient authors. (1) Spurious Acts of Christ. Several sayings attributed to our Lord, and alleged to be handed down by tradition, may be included under this head, as they are supposed by some learned men to have been derived from histories which are no longer in existence. As explanatory of our mean- ing it will suffice to refer to the beautiful senti- ment cited by St. Paul (Acts xx :35), It is more b/essed to give than to receive. Makápióv čart pa)\\ov Övöövat # Napºgóvely, to which the term apoc- ryphal has been sometimes applied, inasmuch as it is not contained in any of the written biog- raphies of our Lord. This term is so applied by M. Gaussen of Geneva, in his Theopneustia (English translation, Bagster, 1842). The learned Heinsius is of opinion that the passage is taken from some lost apocryphal book, such as that en- titled, in the Recognitions of Clement, ‘the Book of the Sayings of Christ, or the pretended Con- stitutions of the Apostles.” Others, however, con- ceive that the apostle, in Acts xx:35, does not refer to any one saying of our Saviour's in par- ticular, but that he deduced Christ’s sentiments on this head from several of his sayings and para- bles (see Matt. xix:21; xxv, and Luke xvi :9). But the probability is that St. Paul received this passage by tradition from the other apostles. (2) Spurious Acts of the Apostles. Of these several are extant, others are lost, or only frag- ments of them are come down to us. Of the following we know little more than that they once existed. They are here arranged chro- nologically: The Preaching of Peter, referred to by Origen, in his Commentary on St. John's Gospel, lib. xiv.; also referred to by Clemens Alexandrinus. The Acts of Peter, supposed by Dr. Cave to be cited by Serapion. The Acts of 43 ADAD-RIMMON Paul and Thecla, mentioned by Tertullian, Lib. de Baptismo, cap. xvii; this is, however, sup- posed by Some to be the same which is found in a Greek MS. in the Bodleian Library, and has been published by Dr. Grabe, in his Spicil, Pa- trum Secul. I. The Doctrine of Peter, cited by Origen, ‘Prooem.’ in Lib. de Princip. The Acts of Paul, ib. de Princip, I :2. The Preaching of Paul, referred to by St. Cyprian, Tract. de 11 on iterando Baptismo. The Preaching of Paul and Peter at Rome, cited by Lactantius, De vera Sap. iv :21. The Acts of Peter, thrice mentioned by Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. iii:3: as to that work, however, which is ascribed to him, called “The Acts” and the “Gospel according to Peter,” we know nothing of their being handed down as Cath- olic writings, since neither among the ancient nor the ecclesiastical writers of our own day has there been one that has appealed to testinony taken from them. The Acts of Paul, ib. The Revelation of Peter, ib. The Acts of Andrew and John, ib. cap. 25. Thus,’ he says, “we have it in our power to know * * * those books that are adduced by the heretics, under the name of the apostles, such, viz., as compose the gospels of Peter, Thomas, and Matthew * * * and such as contain the Acts of the Apostles by Andrew and John, and others of which no one of those writers in the ecclesiastical succession has con- descended to make any mention in his works, and, indeed, the character of the style itself is very different from that of the apostles, and the senti- ments and the purport of those things that are advanced in them, deviating as far as possible from sound orthodoxy, evidently proves they are the fictions of heretical men; whence they are to be ranked not only among the Spurious writings, but are to be rejected as altogether absurd and impious.’ The Acts of Peter, John, and Thomas, Athanasius, Synops. Sec. 76. The Writings of Bartholomew the Apostle, mentioned by the pseudo-Dionysius. The Acts, Preaching and Revelation of Peter, cited by Jerome, in his Catal. Script. Eccles. The Acts of the Apostles by Seleucus, ib. Epitl. ad Chrom, etc. The Acts of Paul and Thecla, ib. Catalog. Script. Eccles. The Acts of the Apostles, used by the Ebionites, cited by Epiphanius Adversus Hares, Sec. 16. The Acts of Ileucius, Lentius, or Lenticus, called the Acts of the Apostles, Augustin. Lib. de Fid. c. 38. The Acts of the Apostles, used by the Manichees. The Revelations of Thomas, Paul, Stephen, etc. Gelasius, de Lib. Apoc. apud Gratian. Distinct. I5 C. 3. (3) Acts of Pilate. To these may be added the genuine Acts of Pilate, appealed to by Tertullian and Justin Martyr, in their Apologies, as being then extant. Tertullian describes them as ‘the records which were transmitted from Jerusalem to Tiberius concerning Christ.’ He refers to the same for the proof of our Saviour's miracles. ADADAH (ād'a-dah), (Heb. "TPT2, ad-aw-daw', festival), a town in the south of Judah (Josh. XV:22); probably either the modern el-Foka or Adadah. ADAD-RIMMON (ā'dad-rim'mon), properly Hadad-Rimmon, (Heb. i*TTE, ad-ad-rim-mome', a garden of pomegranates), a city in the valley of Jezreel, where was fought the famous battle between King Josiah and Pharaoh-Necho (2 Kings xxiii: 29; Zech. xii; II). Adad-rimmon was afterwards called Maximianopolis, in honor of the emperor Maximian (Jerome, Comment. in Zach. xii). It was seventeen Roman miles from Caesarea, and ten miles from Jezreel (Itin. Hieros.) (See HA- DAD-RIMMON.) AIDAH H-y ADAH (ā'dah), (Heb. "Tº, comeliness). 1. One of the wives of Lamech (Gen. iv:19). 2. One of the wives of Esau, daughter of Elon the Hittite (Gen. xxxvi;4). She is called Judith in Gen. xxvi;34. ADAIAH (a-dā'i-ah), (Heb. Tºº, ad-aw-yaw", whom Jehovah adorns). 1. The maternal grandfather of King Josiah (2 Kings xxii:I). A Levite of the family of Gershom. Prob- ably the same as Iddo, the latter born B. C. 632 (I Chron. vi:2O, 21, 41). 3. A “son of Bani,” an Israelite who divorced his Gentile wife after the captivity (Ezra x:29). 4. Another descendant guilty of the same offense (Exra x:39). 5. One of the Benjamites resident in Jerusalem before the captivity (I Chron. viii:21), B. C. be- fore 586. 6. Father of Maaseiah, who was one of the “captains of hundreds” who supported Jehoiada (2 Chron. xxiii:I). 7. Son of Joiarib and father of Hazaiah, of the tribe of Judah (Neh. xi.;5), some of whose pos- terity dwelt at Jerusalem after the captivity (B. C. 445). azy-dazy", adornment, 44 ADAM is an appellative noun made into a proper one. It is further remarkable that, in all the other in- stances in the Second and third chapters of Gen- esis, which are nineteen, it is put with the article, the man, or the Adam. It is also to be observed that, though it occurs very frequently in the Old Testament, at1d though there is no grammatical difficulty in the way of its being declined by the dual and plural terminations and the pronominal suffixes (as its derivatives cº, dam, blood, is), yet it never undergoes those changes; it is used abundantly to denote man in the general and collective sense—mankind, the human race, but it is never found in the plural number. When the Sacred writers design to express men distributively they use either the compount term, sons of men (PTS 22, benei adam), or the plural of ºx enosh, or ºx āsh. . A priest, son of Jeroham, who, after the return from Babylon, was employed in the work of the sanctuary (I Chron. ix:12; Neh. xi.;12). ADALIA (ād'a-li'á), (Heb. sºns, ad-a/-yaw", of Persian origin), one of the ten sons of Haman, the enemy of the Jews. He was slain by the Jews under the royal edict at Shushan (Esth. ix:8), B. C. 447. ADAM (ād'am), (Heb. Fº, aw-dawm', red), T+ , the word by which the Bible designates the first human being. It is evident that, in the earliest use of lan- guage, the vocal Sound employed to designate the first perceived object of any kind would be an ap- pellative, and would be formed from something known or apprehended to be a characteristic prop- erty of that object. The word would, therefore, be at once the appellative and the proper name. But when other objects of the same kind were dis- covered, or subsequently came into existence, diffi- culty would be felt ; it would become necessary to guard against confusion, and the inventive faculty would be called upon to obtain a discriminative term for each and singular individual, while some equally appropriate term would be fixed upon for the whole kind. Different methods of effecting these two purposes might be resorted to, but the most natural would be to retain the original term in its simple state, for the first individual, and to make some modification of it by prefixing an- other sound, or by subjoining one, or by altering the vowel or vowels in the body of the word, in order to have a term for the kind, and for the separate individuals of the kind. This reasoning is exemplified in the first appli- cations of the word before us: (Gen. i :26), ‘Let us make man [Adam] in our image;’ (i:27), “And God created the man [the Adam] in his own image.’ The next instance (ii:7) expresses the source of derivation, a character or property, namely, the material of which the human body was formed : “And the Lord God [Jehovah Elo- him] formed the man [the Adam] dust from the ground [the adamah].” The meaning of the pri- mary word is, most probably, any kind of reddish tint, as a beautiful human complexion (Lam. iv :7); but its various derivatives are applied to different objects of a red or brown hue, or ap- proaching to such. The word Adam, therefore, 1. Unity of the Race. The question of the *zºy of the human race, or the descent of the race from a single pair, has given rise to much discussion. It is among the clearest deductions of reason, that men and all dependent beings have been cre. ated, that is, produced or brought into their first existence by an intelligent and adequately power ful being. . A question, however, arises, of great interest and importance, Did the Almighty Creator produce only one man and one woman, from whom all other human beings have descended ?– or did he create several parental pairs, from whom distinct stocks of men have been derived? The affirmative of the latter position has been main- tained by some, and, it must be confessed, not Without apparent reason. The manifest and great differences in complexion and figure, which dis- tinguish several races of mankind, are supposed to be such as entirely to forbid the conclusion that they have all descended from one father and one mother. The question is usually regarded as equivalent to this: whether there is only one Species of men, or there are several. But we can- not, in strict fairness, admit that the questions are identical. It is hypothetically conceivable that the Adorable God might give existence to any number of creatures, which should all possess the properties which characterize identity of spe- cies, even without such differences as constitute varieties, or with any degree of those differences. Among the later writers in opposition to the descent of mankind from a single pair is Pro- fessor Alexander, Winchell, in Preadamites, or a Demonstration of the Existence of Men Before Adam, Chicago, 1880. A multitude of able writ- ers may be found who have advocated the unity of the human races. Among them may be enu- merated Sir James Mackintosh, Sharon Turner, Chevalier Bunsen, Bishop Berkeley, John Locke, Lord Brougham, Linnaeus, Cuvier, Professor Buckland, Sir Charles Bell, Baron Humboldt. The arguments for this unity may be briefly summed up as follows: (1) Animals Widely Dispersed. The animals which render eminent services to man, and pe- culiarly depend upon his protection, are widely diffused—the horse, the dog, the hog, the domes- tic fowl. Now, of these the varieties in each species are numerous and different, to a degree so great that an observer ignorant of physiological history would scarcely believe them to be of the same species. But man is the most widely dif- fused of any animal. In the progress of ages and generations he has naturalized himself to every climate and to modes of life which would prove fatal to an individual man suddenly transferred from a remote point of the field. The alterations ADAM produced affect every part of the body, internal and external, without extinguishing the marks of the specific identity. (2) Comparison of Races. A further and strik- ing evidence is, that when persons of different varieties are conjugally united, the offspring, espe- cially in two or three generations, becomes more prolific and acquires a higher perfection in physical and mental qualities than was found in either of the parental races. From the deepest African black to the finest Caucasian white, the change runs through imperceptible gradations, and, if a middle hue be assumed, suppose some tint of brown, all the varieties of complexion may be explained upon the principle of divergence influ- enced by outward circumstances. The conclusion may be fairly drawn, in the words of the able translators and illustrators of Baron Cuvier's great work: “We are fully warranted in concluding, both from the comparison of man with inferior animals, so far as the inferiority will allow of such comparison, and, beyond that, by comparing him with himself, that the great family of man- kind loudly proclaim a descent, at some period or Other, from one common origin.” (3) Cradle of Man. Follow the clue of history and it will lead us to the Mosaic Cradle of Man. Were mankind now reduced to a single family only time would be wanting, even without civiliza- tion, to overspread the earth. (4) Comparative Philology. Comparative Phil- ology brings us to the same point. The striking analogies of language reveal man's essential unity. (5) Mental Unity. There is a deep, real mental unity of the universal soul embracing the same intellect, affections, instincts, conscience, sense of Superior Divine power and susceptibility of re- ligion; there is the same power in the cross of Christ for the European, the Esquimaux, and the Hottentot. (6) Comparatively Recent Origin. Geology demonstrates the comparatively recent origin of man and fails to reveal any arguments for a diver- sity of races. We may say, with Baron Humboldt, in his Coszzos. “Deeply rooted in the man’s inmost na- ture, as well as commanded by his highest ten- dencies, the full recognition of the bond of hu- manity of the community of the whole human race, with the sentiments and sympathies which Spring therefrom, becomes a leading principle in the history of man” (vol. I, p. 351). Thus, by an investigation totally independent of historical authority, we are brought to the conclusion of the inspired writings, that the Cre- ator ‘hath made of one blood all nations of men, for to dwell on all the face of the earth’ (Acts xvii:26). 2. 66e Criginal Capacities and Condition of Our First Parents have also been the subject of much discussion, but here again we shall find that the best conclusions of reason harmonize fully On this point with the succinct Scriptural account of the facts as they occurred. 45 (1) Created in Maturity. It is evident upon a little reflection, and the closest investigation con- firms the conclusion, that the first human pair must have been created in a state equivalent to that which all subsequent human beings have had to reach by slow degrees, in growth, experience, observation, imitation, and the instruction of others; that is, a state of prime maturity. They must have been endowed also with an infusion, concreation, or whatever we may call it, of knowl- edge and habits, both physical and intellectual, suitable to the place which man had to occupy ADAM in the system of creation, and adequate to his necessities in that place. Had it been otherwise, the new beings could not have preserved their animal existence, nor have held rational converse with each other, nor have paid to their Creator the homage of knowl- edge and love, adoration and obedience, and rea- son clearly tells us that the last was the noblest end of existence. The Bible coincides with this dictate of honest reason, expressing these facts in simple and art- less language, suited to the circumstances of the men to whom revelation was first granted. “And Jehovah God formed the man [Heb, the Adam], dust from the ground and blew into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living animal’ (Gen. ii:7). Here are two objects of at- tention, the organic mechanism of the human body, and the vitality with which it was endowed. (2) Mechanical Material. The mechanical ma- terial, formed (moulded, or arranged, as an ar- tificer models clay or wax) into the human and all other animal bodies, is called ‘dust from the ground.’ This would be a natural and easy ex- pression to men in the early ages, before chem- istry was known or minute philosophical distinc- tions were thought of, to convey, in a general form, the idea of earthy matter, the constituent substance of the ground on which we tread. To say that of this the human and every other animal body was formed, is a position which would be at once the most easily apprehensible to an uncultivated mind, and which yet is the most exactly true upon the highest philosophical grounds. We now know, from chemical analysis, that the animal body is composed, in the inscrut- able manner called organization, of carbon, hydro- gen, oxygen, nitrogen, lime, iron, sulphur, and phosphorus. Now, all these are mineral Sub- stances, which in their various combinations form a very large part of the solid ground. (3) Organic Life. The Hebrew expression, nephesh hkaya, living animal, sets, before us, the organic life of the animal frame, that mysterious something which man cannot create nor restore, which baffles the most acute philosophers to search out its nature, and which reason combines with Scripture to refer to one immediate agency of the Almighty—‘in him we live, and move, and have our being' (Acts xvii:28). But the Scripture account also declares that ‘God created man in his own image; in the image of God created he him; male and female, created he them’ (Gen. i :27; I Cor. xi :7). The image, the resemblance (such as a shadow bears to the object which casts it) of God, is an expression which breathes at once a primitive simplicity and the most recondite wisdom; for what term could the most cultivated and copious language bring forth more suitable to the purpose? It presents to us man as made in a resemblance to the author of his being, a true resemblance, but faint and shadowy ; , an outline, faithful according to a distant form of the intelligence, wisdom, power, rectitude, goodness, and dominion of the Adorable Supreme. (4) Dominion. To the inferior sentient beings with which he is connected man stands in the place of God. We have every reason to think that none of them are capable of con- ceiving a being higher than man. All, in their different ways, look up to him as their superior; the ferocious generally flee before him, afraid to encounter his power, and the gentle court his pro- tection and show their highest joy to consist in serving and pleasing him. Even in our degenerate ADAM 46 state it is manifest that if we treat the domesti- cated animals with wisdom and kindness, their attachment is most ardent and faithful. Thus had man the shadow of the Divine dominion and authority over the inferior cre- ation. him, in his being made able to convert the inani- mate objects and those possessing only the vege- table life, into the instruments and the materials for supplying his wants, and continually enlarging his sphere of command. (5) Knowledge and Wisdom. In such a state of things knowledge and wisdom are implied; the one quality, an acquaintance with those substances and their changeful actions which were necessary for a creature like man to understand, in order to his safety and comfort; the other, such sagacity as would direct him in selecting the best objects of desire and pursuit, and the right means for attaining them. (6) Moral Excellence. Above all, moral earcel- lence must have been comprised in this ‘image of God;’ and not only forming a part of it, but be- ing its crown of beauty and glory. The Christian inspiration, than which no more perfect disclosure of God is to take place on this side of eternity, casts its light upon this subject; for the apostle Paul, in urging the obligations of Christians to perfect holiness, evidently alludes to the endow- ments of the first man in two parallel and mu- tually illustrative epistles; ‘–the new man, re- newed in knowledge after the image of Him that created him ; the new man which, after [ katē, according to] God, is created in righteousness and true holiness' (Col. iii: Io; Eph. iv:24). (7) Activity and Enjoyment. In this perfec- tion of faculties, and with these high preroga- tives of moral existence, did human nature, in its first subject, rise up from the creating hand. The whole Scripture narrative implies that this state of existence was one of correspondent activity and enjoyment. It plainly represents the Deity himself, or his direct representative, as conde- scending to assume a human form and to employ human speech, in order to instruct and exercise the happy creatures whom (to borrow the just and beautiful language of the Apocryphal ‘Wis- dom’) “God created for incorruptibility, and made him an image of his own nature.” The noble and sublime idea that man thus had his Maker for his teacher and guide, precludes a thousand difficulties. It shows us the simple, direct, and effectual method by which the newly- formed creature would have communicated to him all the intellectual knowledge, and all the practical arts and manipulations, which were needful and beneficial for him. (8) Religious Knowledge. Religious knowl- edge and its appropriate habits also required an immediate transmission, and these are pre-emi- nently comprehended in the ‘image of God.” On the one hand, it is not to be supposed that the newly- created man and his female companion were in- spired with a very ample share of the doctrinal knowledge which was communicated to their pos- terity by the successive and accumulating reve- lations of more than four thousand years; and On the other, that they were left by God in gross ignorance regarding the existence and excellencies of the Being who had made them, their obligations to him, and the way in which they might con- tinue to receive the greatest blessings from him. . It is self-evident that, to have attained such a kind and degree of knowledge, by spontaneous effort, under even the favorable circumstances of a state of negative innocence, would have been a long and arduous work. But the sacred nar- The attribute of power was also given to ADAM rative leaves no room for doubt upon this head. In the primitive style it tells of God as speaking to them, commanding, instructing, assigning their work, pointing out their danger, and showing how to avoid it. All this, reduced to the dry sim- plicity of detail, is equivalent to saying that the Creator, infinitely kind and condescending, by the use of forms and modes adapted to their ca- pacity, fed their minds with truth, gave them a ready understanding of it and that delight in it which constituted holiness, taught them to hold intercourse with Himself by direct addresses in both praise and prayer, and gave some disclosures of a future state of blessedness when they should have fulfilled the conditions of their probation. (9) Practical Habits. An especial instance of this instruction and information concerning prac- tical habits is given to us in the narrative: “Out of the ground Jehovah God formed every beast of the field and every fowl of the air [Hebr. of the heavens] ; and brought them unto the man [Hebr. the Adam], to see what he would call them’ (Gen. ii:19). This, taken out of the style of condescend- ing anthropomorphism, amounts to such a state- ment as the following: The Creator had not only formed man with Organs of speech, but he taught him the use of them, by an immediate communi- cation of the practical faculty and its accompany- ing intelligence. He guided the man, as yet the Solitary one of his species, to this among the first applications of Speech, the designating of the ani- mals with which he was connected, by appellative words which would both be the help of his mem- ory and assist his mental operations, and thus would be introductory and facilitating to more enlarged applications of thought and language. We are further warranted, by the recognized fact of the anecdotal and fragmentary structure of the Scripture history, to regard this as the se- lected instance for exhibiting a whole kind or class of operations or processes; implying that, in the same or similar manner, the first man was led to understand something of the qualities and rela- tions of vegetables, earthy matters, the visible heavens, and the other external objects to which he had a relation. - . (10) Creation of Woman. The next important article in this primeval history is the creation of the human female. It has been maintained that the Creator formed Adam to be a sole creature, in some mode of androgynous constitution capa- ble of multiplying from his own organization without a conjugate partner. This notion was advanced by Jacob (or James) Boehmen, the Si- lesian ‘Theosophist,’ and one very similar to it has been recently promulgated by Baron Giraud (Philosophic Catholique de l’Histoire, Paris 1841), who supposes that the ‘deep sleep’ (Gen. ii:21) was a moral fainting (‘défaillance’), the first step in departing from God, the beginning of sin, and that Eve was its personified product by some sort of Divine concurrence or operation. To mention these vagaries is sufficient for their refutation. Their absurd and unscriptural charac- ter is stamped on their front. - The second of the narratives is more circum- stantial : “And Jehovah God said, it is not good the man's being alone: I will make for him a help suitable for him.” Then follows the passage con- cerning the review and the naming of the inferior animals; and it continues—but for Adam he found not a help suitable for him. And Jehovah God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man [the Adam], and he slept ; and he took out one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place; and Jehovah God built up the rib which he had taken from the man into a woman, and he brought ADAM her to the man, and the man said, this is now bone out of my bones, and flesh out of my flesh; this shall be called woman [ishah], for this was taken from out of man lish]’ (Gen. ii:18–23). This peculiar manner of the creation of the woman has, by some, been treated as merely a childish fable; by others, as an allegorical fiction intended to represent the close relation of the female sex to the male, and the tender claims which women have to sympathy and love. That such was the intention we do not doubt; but why should that intention be founded upon a mythic allegory Is it not taught much better, and im- pressed much more forcibly, by its standing not on a fiction, but on a fact? We have seen that, under the simple archaic phrase that man was made of the ‘dust of the ground,’ is fairly to be understood the truth, which is verified by the analysis of modern chemistry; and, in the case of the woman, it is the same combination of ma- terials, the same carbon, and hydrogen, and lime, and the rest; only that, in the first instance, those primordial substances are taken immediately, but in the second, mediately, having been brought into a state of organization. (11) Nakedness. The next particular into which the sacred history leads us, is one which we cannot approach without a painful sense of its dif- ficulty and delicacy. It stands thus in the author- ized version : “And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed’ (ii:25). The common interpretation is, that, in this respect, the two human beings, the first and only existing, ones, were precisely in the condition of the young- est infants, incapable of perceiving any incongruity in the total destitution of artificial clothing. But a little reflection will tell us, and the more care- fully that reflection is pursued the more it will appear just, that this supposition is inconsistent with what we have established on solid grounds, the supernatural transmission into the minds of our first parents and into their nervous and mus- cular faculties, of the knowledge and practical habits which their descendants have had to acquire by the long process of instruction and example. We have seen the necessity that there must have been communicated to them, by their Creator, no inconsiderable measure of natural knowledge and the methods of applying it, or their lives could not have been secured; and of moral and spiritual “knowledge, righteousness and true holiness,’ such a measure as would belong to the sinless state, and would enable them to render an intelligent and perfect worship to the Glorious Deity. It seems impossible for that state of mind and habits to exist without a correct sensibility to proprieties and decencies which infant children cannot understand or feel ; and the capacities and duties of their conjugal state are implied in the narrative. Further, it cannot be overlooked that, though we are entitled to ascribe to the lo- cality of Eden the most bland atmosphere and delightful soil, yet the action of the sun's rays upon the naked skin, the range of temperature through the day and the night, the alternations of dryness and moisture, the various labor among trees and bushes, and exposure to insects, would ºr some protective clothing quite indispen- S3 DIC. From these considerations we feel ourselves obliged to understand the word arom, in that which is its most usual signification in the Hebrew language, as importing not an absolute, but a partial or comparative nudity. It is one of a re- markable family of words which appear to have branched off in different ways from the same root, 47 ADAM originally ar or er, but assuming several early forms, and producing five or six divergent par- ticipials; but they all, and especially this arom, are employed to denote a stripping off of the up- per garment, or of some other usual article of dress, when all the habiliments were not laid aside; and this is a more frequent signification than that of entire destitution. If it be asked, Whence did Adam and Eve derive this clothing? we reply, that, as a part of the Divine instruction which we have established, they were taught to take off the inner bark of some trees, which would answer extremely well for this purpose. If an objection be drawn from Gen. iii:7, Io, II, we reply that, in consequence of the transgression, the clothing was disgracefully injured. - (12) Period of Innocence. Another inquiry presents itself. How long did the state of para- disiacal innocence and happiness continue P Some have regarded the period as very brief, not more even than a single day; but this manifestly falls short of the time which a reasonable probability requires. The first man was brought into exist- ence in the region called Eden. He was introduced into a particular part of it, the garden, replenished with the richest productions of the Creator’s bounty for the delight of the eye and the other senses. The most agreeable labor was required ‘to dress and to keep it,” implying some arts of culture, preservation from injury, training flow- ers and fruits, and knowing the various uses and enjoyments of the produce. He made observations upon the works of God, of which an investigation and designating of animals is expressly specified; nor can we suppose that there was no contempla- tion of the magnificent sky and the heavenly bodies; above all, the wondrous communion with the condescending Deity, and probably with cre- ated spirits of superior orders, by which the mind would be excited, its capacity enlarged, and its holy felicity continually increased. It is also to be remarked that the narrative (Gen. ii: 19, 20) conveys the implication that some time was al- lowed to elapse that Adam might discover and feel his want of a companion of his own species, ‘a help correspondent to him.’ These considerations impress us with a sense of probability, amounting to a conviction, that a period not very short was requisite for the ex- ercise of man's faculties, the disclosures of his happiness, and the service of adoration which he could pay to his Creator. But all these considera- tions are strengthened by the recollection that they attach to man’s solitary state, and that they all require new and enlarged application when the addition to conjugal life is brought into the ac- count. The conclusion appears irresistible that a duration of many days, or rather weeks or months, would be requisite for so many and important pur- O SéS. p Thus divinely honored and happy were the progenitors of mankind in the state of their cre- ation. (13) Disobedience. The next scene which the sacred history brings before us is a dark reverse. Another agent comes into the field and success- fully employs his arts for seducing Eve, and by her means Adam, from their original state of rec- titude, dignity and happiness. (14) Two Trees. Among the provisions of Divine wisdom and goodness were two vegetable productions of wondrous qualities and mysterious significancy—‘the tree of life in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good, and evil’ (Gen. ii:9). It would add to the precision of the terms, and perhaps aid our understanding ADAM of them if we were to adhere strictly to the He- brew by retaining the definite prefix; and then we have ‘the tree of the life’ and ‘the tree of the knowledge.’ Thus would be indicated the particular life of which the one was a symbol and instrument, and the fatal knowledge spring- ing from the abuse of the other. At the same time we do not maintain that these appellations were given to them at the beginning. We rather sup- pose that they were applied afterwards, suggested by the events and connection, and so became the historical names. (15) Tree of Life. We see no sufficient reason to understand, as some do, “the tree of the life,' collectively, as implying a species, and that there were many trees of that species. The figurative use of the expression in Rev. xxii:2, where a plurality is plainly intended, involves no evidence of such a design in this literal narrative. The phraseology of the text best agrees with the idea of a single tree, designed for a special purpose, and not intended to perpetuate its kind. Though in the state of innocence, Adam and Eve might be liable to some corporeal suffering from the change of the seasons and the weather, or acci- dental circumstances, in any case of which occur- ring, this tree had been endowed by the bountiful Creator with a medicinal and restorative property, probably in the way of instantaneous miracle. We think also that it was designed for a sacramental or symbolical purpose, a representation and pledge of ‘the life,” emphatically so called, heavenly im- mortality when the term of probation should be happily completed. Yet we by no means sup- pose that this ‘tree of life’ possessed any in- trinsic property of communicating immortality. In the latter view, it was a sign and seal of the Divine promise. But, with regard to the former intention, we see nothing to forbid the idea that it had most efficacious medicinal properties in its fruit, leaves and other parts. Such were called trees of life by the Hebrews (Prov. iii: 18; xi:30; xiii: 12; xv :4). (16) The Tree of Knowledge. The ‘tree of the knowledge of good and evil’ might be any tree whatever; it might be of any species even yet re- maining, though, if it were so, we could not de- termine its species, for the plain reason that no name, description, or information whatever is given that could possibly lead to the ascertain- ment. One cannot but lament the vulgar practice of painters representing it as an apple-tree, and thus giving occasion to profane and silly witticisms. Yet we cannot but think the more reasonable probability to be that it was a tree having poison- ous properties, stimulating and intoxicating, such as are found in some existing species, especially in hot climates. On this ground the p; to eat or even touch the tree was a beneficent pro- vision against the danger of pain and death. Should any cavil at the placing of so perilous a plant in the garden of delights, the abode of sinless creatures, we reply, that virulent poisons, mineral, vegetable and animal, though hurtful or fatal to those who use them improperly, perform important and beneficial parts in the general economy of nature. But the revealed object of this ‘tree of the knowledge of good and evil' was that which would require no particular properties beyond some degree of external beauty and fruit of an immediately pleasant taste. That object was to be a test of obedience. For such a purpose, it is evident that to select an indifferent act, to be the object prohibited, was necessary; as the obligation 48 ADAM to refrain should be only that which arises simply, so far as the subject of the law can know, from the sacred will of the Lawgiver. This does not, however, nullify what we have said upon the possibility, or even probability, that the tree in question had noxious qualities; for upon either the affirmative or the negative of the supposition, the subjects of this positive law, having upon all antecedent grounds the fullest conviction of the perfect rectitude and benevolence of their Cre- ator, would see in it the simple character of a test, a means of proof, whether they would or would not implicitly confide in him. For so do- ing they had every possible reason, and against any thought or mental feeling tending to the viola- tion of the precept, they were in possession of the most powerful motives. There was no diffi- culty in the observance. They were surrounded with a paradise of delights, and they had no rea- son to imagine that any good whatever would accrue to them from their seizing upon anything prohibited. If perplexity or doubt arose they had ready access to their Divine benefactor for ob- taining information and direction. But they al- lowed the thought of disobedience to form itself into a disposition, and then a purpose. (17) Man. Not Deceived. Thus was the seal broken, the integrity of the heart was gone, the sin was generated, and the outward act was the consummation of the dire process. Eve, less in- formed, less cautious, less endowed with strength of mind, became the more ready victim. “The woman, being deceived, was in the transgression;’ but ‘Adam was not deceived’ (I Tim. ii:14). He rushed knowingly and deliberately to ruin. The offense had grievous aggravations. It was the preference of a trifling gratification to the appro- bation of the Supreme Lord of the universe; it implied a denial of the wisdom, holiness, goodness, veracity and power of God; it was marked with extreme ingratitude, and it involved a contemptu- ous disregard of consequences, awfully impious as it referred to their immediate connection with the moral government of God, and cruelly selfish as it respected their posterity. (18) The Serpent. The instrumeiſt of the temptation was a serpent, whether any one of the existing kinds it is evidently impossible for us to know. Of that numerous order many species are of brilliant colors and playful in their atti- tudes, so that one may well conceive of such an object attracting and fascinating the first woman. Whether it spoke in an articulate voice, like the human, or expressed the sentiments attributed to it by a succession of remarkable and significant actions, may be a subject of reasonable question. The latter is possible, and it seems the preferable hypothesis, as, without a mirac111011s intervention the mouth and throat of no serpent could form a vocal utterance of words, and we cannot attribute to any wicked spirit the power of working mir- acles. This part of the narrative begins with the words ‘And the serpent was crafty above every animal of the field’ (Gen. iii: 1). It is to be observed that this is not said of the order of serpents, as if it were a general property of them, but of that particular serpent. Had the noun been intended generically, as is often the case, it would have required to be without the substantive verb; for such is the usual Hebrew method of expressing universal propositions: of this the Hebrew scholar †. see constant examples in the Book of Prov- erDS. Indeed, this ‘cunning craftiness, lying in wait to deceive' (Eph. iv:14), is the very character of ADAM that malignant creature of whose wily stratagems the reptile was a mere instrument. The existence of Spirits, superior to man, and of whom some have become depraved, and are laboring to spread wickedness and misery to the utmost of their power, has been found to be the belief of all na- tions, ancient and modern, of whom we possess information. It has also been the general doctrine of both Jews and Christians that one of those fallen spirits was the real agent in this first and successful temptation. Of this doctrine, the dec- larations of our Lord and his apostles contain strong confirmation. (See 2 Cor. ii:II; xi:3, I4; Rev. xii:9; xx:2; John viii:44). The summary of these passages presents almost a history of the Fall—the tempter, his manifold arts, his ser- pentine disguises, his falsehood, his restless ac- tivity, his bloodthirsty cruelty, and his early suc- cess in that career of deception and destruction. The younger. Rosenmüller says upon this pas- Sage, ‘That it was not a natural serpent that Se- duced Eve, but a wicked spirit which had as- sumed the form of a serpent, and although Moses does not expressly say so, yet it is probable that he designed to intimate as much, from the very fact of his introducing the serpent as a rational being, and speaking; also, that this opinion was universal among the nations of Central and Upper Asia, from the remotest antiquity, appears from this, that, in the system of Zoroaster, it is related that Ahriman, the chief of wicked spirits, seduced the first human beings to sin by putting on the form of a serpent’ (Schol. in Gen. iii: I ; and he refers to Kleuker’s German version of the Zen- davesta, and his own Ancient and Modern Orien- tal Country). (See Commentary by Adam Clarke regarding the serpent, whereby he endeavors to show that it was an animal of the monkey tribe.) (19) The Penalty. The condescending Deity, or his representative, who had held gracious and in- structive communion with the parents of mankind, assuming a human form and adapting all his pro- ceedings to their capacity, visibly stood before them; by a searching interrogatory drew from them the confession of their guilt, which yet they aggravated by evasions and insinuations against God himself, and pronounced on them and their seducer the sentence due. On the woman he in- flicted the pains of child-bearing, and a deeper and more humiliating dependence upon her hus- band. He doomed the man to hard and often fruitless toil, instead of easy and pleasant labor, On both, or rather on human nature universally, he pronounced the awful sentence of death. The denunciation of the serpent partakes more of a Symbolical character, and so seems to carry a strong implication of the nature and the wicked- ness of the concealed agent. The human suffer- ings threatened are all, excepting the last, which will require a separate consideration of a remedial and corrective kind. - Of a quite different character are the penal de- nunciations upon the serpent. If they be under- stood literally, and of course applied to the whole order of Ophidia (as, we believe, is the common interpretation), they will be found to be so fla- grantly at variance with the most demonstrated facts in their physiology and economy, as to lead to inferences unfavorable to belief in revelation. Let us examine the particulars:—‘Because thou hast done this, cursed art thou above all cattle, above every behemah.” But the serpent tribe can- not be classed with that of the behemoth. The word is of very frequent occurrence in the Old Testament, and though, in a few instances, it 49 seems to be put for brevity so as to be inclusive. ADAM of the flocks as well as the herds, and in poetical diction it sometimes stands metonymically for ani- mals generally (as Job xviii:3; Ps. lxxiii:22; Eccles. iii: 18, 19, 21); yet its proper and universal application is to the large animals (pachyderms and ruminants), such as the elephant, camel, deer, horse, ox, rhinoceros, hippopotamus, etc. (See BEHEMOTH.) As little will the declaration, ‘cursed—,’ agree with natural truth. It may, indeed, be supposed to be verified in the shuddering which persons gen- erally feel at the aspect of any one of the order of Serpents, but this takes place also in many other cases. It springs from fear of the formidable Weapons with which some species are armed, as few persons know beforehand which are venomous and which are harmless; and, after all, this is rather an advantage than a curse to the animal. It is an effectual defense without effort. Indeed, We may say that no tribe of animals is so secure from danger, or is so able to obtain its sustenance and all the enjoyments which its capacity and hab- its require, as the whole order of serpents. If, then, we decline to urge the objection from the word behemah, it is difficult to conceive that ser- pents have more causes of suffering than any other great division of animals, or even so much. Further, 'going upon the belly' is to none of them a punishment. With some differences of mode, their progression is produced by the push- ing of scales, shields, or rings against the ground, by muscular contractions and dilatations, by elas- tic Springings, by vertical undulations, or by hori- zontal wrigglings; but, in every variety, the entire organisation—skeleton, muscles, nerves, integu- ments—is adapted to the mode of progression be- longing to each species. That mode, in every variety of it, is sufficiently easy and rapid (often very rapid) for all the purposes of the animal's life and the amplitude of its enjoyments. To imagine this mode of motion to be, in any sense, a change from a prior attitude and habit of the erect kind, or being furnished with wings, indi- cates a perfect ignorance of the anatomy of ser- pents. Yet it has been said by learned and emi- nent theological interpreters that, before this crime was committed, the serpent probably did ‘not go upon his belly, but moved upon the hinder part of his body, with his head, breast and belly upright’ (Clarke's Bible, p. 1690). This notion may have obtained credence from the fact that some of the numerous serpent species, when excited, raises the neck pretty high; but the posture is to Strike, and they cannot maintain it in creeping except for a very short distance. Neither do they ‘eat dust.’ All serpents are carnivorous; their food, according to the size and power of the species, is taken from the tribes of insects, worms, frogs, and toads, and newts, birds, mice and other small quadrupeds, till the scale ascends to the pythons, and boas, which can mas- ter and Swallow very large animals. The excel- lent writer just cited, in his anxiety to do honor, as he deemed it, to the accuracy of Scripture allusions, has said of the serpent, ‘Now that he creeps with his very mouth upon the earth, he must necessarily take his food out of the dust, and SO lick in some of the dust with it.' But this is not the fact. Serpents habitually obtain their food among herbage or in water; they seize their prey with the mouth, often elevate the head, and are no more exposed to the necessity of swallow- ing adherent earth than are carniverous birds or quadrupeds. At the same time, it may be under- stood figuratively. ‘Eating the dust’ is but another term for groveling in the dust, and this is equiva. ADAM lent to being reduced to a condition of meanness and contempt. (See Micah vii: 17.) But these and other inconsistencies and diffi- culties (insuperable they do indeed appear to us) are swept away when we consider the fact before stated that the Hebrew hammachash haiah, literally rendered, is the serpent was, etc., and that it refers Specifically and personally to a rational and ac- countable being, the spirit of lying and cruelty, the devil, the Satan, the old serpent. That God, the infinitely holy, good, and wise, should have permitted any one or more celestial spirits to apos- tatize from purity, and to be the successful Se- ducers of mankind, is indeed an awful and over- whelming mystery. But it is not more so than the permitted existence of many among mankind, whose rare talents and extraordinary command of power and opportunity, combined with extreme depravity, have rendered them the plague and curse of the earth, and the whole merges into the awful and insolvable problem, Why has the All-perfect Deity permitted evil at all P. We are firmly assured that He will bring forth, at last, the most triumphant evidence that ‘He is righteous in all His ways, and holy in all His works.’ In the meantime our happiness lies in the implicit confidence which we cannot but feel to be due to the Being of Infinite Perfection. (20) The Deliverer. The remaining part of the denunciation upon the false and cruel Seducer sent a beam of light into the agonized hearts of our guilty first parents. ‘And enmity will I put between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; he will attack thee [on] the head, and thou wilt attack him [at] the heel.’ The verb here used twice occurs in only two other places of the O. T.: Job ix:17, ‘Who breaketh upon me with a tempestuous horror,’ and Ps. cxxxix:II, ‘And if I say, Surely darkness will burst upon me,’ i. e., as a sudden and impervious covering. The meaning is established by Gese- nius after Umbreit as the idea of a violent and eager assault. Christian interpreters generally re- gard this as the Protevangelium, the first gospel promise, and we think with good reason. It was a manifestation of mercy; it revealed a Deliverer, who ‘should be a human being, in a peculiar sense the offspring of the female, who should also, in some way not yet made known, counteract and remedy the injury inflicted, and who, though partially suffering from the malignant power, should, in the end, completely conquer it and cons vert its very success into its own punishment' (J. Pye Smith, Scripture Testimony to the Mes- siah, vol. i., p. 226). The awful threatening to man was, ‘In the day that thou eatest of it, thou wilt die the death.’ Beyom, literally in the day, was also used as a general adverb of time, denoting when, without a strict limitation to a natural day. The verbal repetition is a Hebrew idiom to represent not only the certainty of the action, but its intensity and efficacy; we therefore think that the phrase die the death would more exactly convey the Sense of the original than what some have proposed, dying thou shalt die. The infliction is Death in the most comprehensive sense, that which stands op- posed to Life, the life of not only animal enjoy- ment, but holy happiness, the life which com- ported with the image of God. . This was lost by the fall, and the sentence of physical death was pronounced, to be executed in due time. Divine mercy gave a long respite. The same mercy was displayed in still more tempering the terrors of justice. The garden of delights was not to be the abode of rebellious 50 ADAM creatures. But before they were turned out into a bleak and dreary wilderness God was pleased to direct them to make clothing, suitable to their new and degraded condition, of the skins of ani- mals (Gen. iii:21). That those animals had been offered in sacrifice is a conjecture supported by so much probable evidence that we may regard it as a well-established truth. Any attempt to force back the way, to gain anew the tree of life, and take violent or fraudulent possession, would have been equally impious and nugatery. The sacrifice (which all approximative argument obliges us to admit), united with the promise of a deliverer, and the provision of substantial clothing, con- tained much hope of pardon and grace. The terrible debarring by lightning flashes and their consequent thunder, and by visible supernatural agency (Gen. iii:22-24), from a return to the bowers of bliss, are expressed in the characteristic patriarchal style of anthropopathy, but the mean- ‘ing evidently is, that the fallen creature is unable by any efforts of his own to reinstate himself in the favor of God, and that whatever hope of restoration he may be allowed to cherish must spring solely from free benevolence. Thus, in laying the first stone of the temple which shall be an immortal habitation of the Divine glory, it was manifested that ‘Salvation is of the Lord,' and that ‘grace reigneth through righteousness unto eternal life’ (Rom. v :21). (21) After Life. From this time we have little recorded of the lives of Adam and Eve. Their three sons are mentioned with important circum- stances in connection with each of them. (See the articles CAIN, ABEL, and SETH.) Cain was prob- ably born in the year after the fall; Abel, possibly some years later; Seth, certainly one hundred and thirty years from the creation of his parents. After that, Adam lived eight hundred years, and had sons and daughters, doubtless by Eve, and then he died, nine hundred and thirty years old. In that prodigious period many events, and those of great importance, must have occurred ; but the wise providence of God has not seen fit to preserve to us any memorial of them, and scarcely any vestiges or hints are afforded of the occupa- tions and mode of life of men through the ante- diluvian period.—J. P. S. (See ANTEDILUVIANs.) (22) Adam in the New Testament. Adam is twice mentioned in the New Testament in a merely historical fashion—in Jude. v : I.4, where we read of ‘Enoch the seventh from Adam,’ and in Luke iii:38, where the genealogy of Jesus is traced up to him, and Adam himself is ‘the son of God.” The extension of the genealogy beyond David or Abra- ham is no doubt due to the universalist sympathy of the Pauline evangelist. There are two other passages in which reference is made to the Old Testament story of the first man, with a view to regulating certain questions about the rela- tions of men and women, especially in public wor- ship. The first is I Cor. xi :9ff.; the other is I Tim. ii:I3ff. The use made of Adam in these passages may strike a modern reader as not very con- clusive; it has the form rather than the power of what may have suggested it—the similar use of part of the Old Testament story by Jesus to es- tablish the true law of marriage (Matt. xix:4ff.; Comp. Gen. ii:24). (J. Denney, Hasting's Bib. Dict.) Figuratite. Adam is represented in Scrip- ture as a covenant-breaker; as a coverer of his transgressions; as a source of guilt and death to his posterity, and as a figure of the promised Mes- siah (Gen. iii, iv., v.; Hos. vi :7; Job xxxi :33; Rom. v . I2-19; I Cor. xv.:21, 22, 45–49). ADAM, CITY OF Jesus Christ is called the second Adam, because of his similitude to the first (Rom. v :14). (I) He is in a peculiar manner the Son of God, the express image of his person and brightness of his glory. (2) He is a new thing created in the earth, by the influence of the Holy Ghost overshadow- ing his mother. (3) He is the glorious fruit of the earth, the product of the chief counsels of God and the ornament and center of all his works. (4) He is the head and representative of his people in the new and better covenant; he is their common parent, who communicates to them his spiritual image and entitles them to all the ful, ness of God; he is their great prophet, priest and governor. (5) All things without reserve are subjected to him for their sake. Having by his blood regained the celestial paradise, he resides in it, and cultivates the whole garden of his church, and has authority to give men power to eat of the tree of life. (6) His church is one with him, more closely and intimately than Eve was with Adam. The whole body of believers were chosen in him, are united to him, live by him and are divinely espoused to him (I Cor. xv.:22, 45-49; Eph. v :25-35). - ADAM, CITY OF (ād'am, city of), a city at some distance east from the Jordan, to which, or beyond which, the overflow of the waters of that river extended when the course of the stream to the Dead Sea was stayed to afford the Israelites a passage across its channel. Our public version follows the keri, or marginal reading, of Josh. iii: 16, ‘very far from Adam.’ It appears from 1 Kings iv:I2; vii:46, that Zarethan was on the west side of the Jordan, in the tribe of Manasseh ; whereas certainly Adam was on the east side of that river, where the Israelites already were. The text must therefore signify that the overflow reached on the east side to Adam, and on the west to Zarethan ; and it admits of the construc- tion that the ‘heap of waters' was ‘beside' Zare- than and beyond Adam, instead of that Zarethan itself was ‘beside Adam.” The name of the city Adam (red) was probably derived from the color of the clay in the neighborhood. ADAM, BOOKS OF (ād'am, bū6ks Šv). The Talmud speaks of a Book of Adam, and such legendary lore furnished suitable pabulum for Mohammedanism. The Apostolic Constitutions (vi.16) mention an apocryphal 'Abdu. Epiphanius (AZaer. xxvi;8) tells of a Gnostic work, Revela- tions of Adam, and the Decretum Gelasii prohib- its Christians from reading the two works, Peni- tentia Ada and De filiabus Adaº. The Cypriote Syncellus (8th cent.) makes quotations from a Biós 'Aödu which closely resemble the Book of Jubilees. The Jewish Book of Adam is lost, but it probably furnished matter for still further elab- oration in several Christian works which survive. (J. T. Marshall, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) ADAMAH (ād'a-mah) (Heb. "?.S. ad-aw-maw', earth), a fortified city of Naphtali (Josh. xix:36), probably Dámieh, west of the Sea of Galilee. ADAMANT (ād'a-mant). See SHAMIR. ADAMI (ād'ami), (Heb. Yº, ad-aw-mee', earthy, Josh. xix:33), a place in Palestine, near the border of Naphtali. Rosenmüller, Keil and others join Adami with the following name Nekeb. Keil renders the two “Adami of the pass.” The site is probably at the present village, Ed-Dámieh on the plateau northeast of Tabor, where the basaltic soil is reddish. The site of Nekeb (Seiyādeh) is not far off. ADAR (ā'dar), (Heb. 778, ad-awr, Esth. iii:7, the Macedonian Ağarpos), is the sixth month of the 51 ADARCONIM civil and the twelfth of the ecclesiastical year of the Jews. The name was first introduced after the Captivity. The following are the chief days in it which are set apart for commemoration: (1) Death of Moses. The seventh is a fast for the death of Moses (Deut. xxxiv:5, 6). There is some difference, however, in the date assigned to his death by some ancient authorities. Josephus (Antiq. iv:8) states that he died on first of this month; which also agrees with Midrash Megillath Esther, cited by Reland (Antiq. Hebr. iv: Io): whereas the Talmudical tracts, Kiddushim and Sota, give the seventh as the day. It is at least certain that the latter was the day on which the fast was observed. (2) Hillel and Shammai. On the 9th there was a fast in memory of the contention or open rupture of the celebrated schools of Hillel and Shammai, which happened but a few years before the birth of Christ. The cause of the dispute is obscure (Wolf's Biblioth. Hebr. ii:826). (3) Fast of Esther. he 13th is the so-called ‘Fast of Esther.’ Iken observes (Antiq. Hebr. p. I50) that this was not an actual fast, but merely a commemoration of Esther’s fast of three days (Esth. iv:16), and a preparation for the ensu- ing festival. Nevertheless, as Esther appears, from the date of Haman’s edict, and from the course of the narrative, to have fasted in Nisan, Buxtorf adduces from the Rabbins the following account of the name of this fast, and of the foundation of its observance in Adar (Synag. Jud. p. 554): That the Jews assembled together on the 13th, in the time of Esther, and that, after the example of Moses, who fasted when the Israelites were about to engage in battle with the Amalekites, they devoted that day to fast- ing and prayer, in preparation for the perilous trial which awaited them on the morrow. In this sense this fast would stand in the most direct relation to the feast of Purim. The 13th was also, “by a common decree,’ appointed as a festi- val in memory of the death of Nicanor (2 Macc. xv :36). - (4) Feast of Purim. The I4th and 15th were devoted - to the feast of Purim (Esth. ix:21). In case the year was an intercalary one, when the month of Adar occurred twice, this feast was first moderately observed in the inter- calary Adar, and then celebrated with full, splen- dor in the ensuing Adar. The former of these two celebrations was then called the lesser, and the latter the great Purim. These designations do not apply, as Horne has erroneously stated (Introduction iii:177), to the two days of the festival in an ordinary year, but to its double celebration in an intercalary year.—J. N. (See NINE.) - ADARconIM (ādar-könim), (Heb. Fºliº ad-ar'ko-mim; Sept. 6pax u%, drack-mah’, and Xpwoods, kroo-soos'; Vulg. drachma and azrezes). (1) Daric. Gesenius and most others are of opinion that these words, which occur in I Chron. xxix:7; Ezra viii:27; ii:69; Neh. vii:70-72, de- note the Persian Daric, a gold coin, which must have been in circulation among the Jews during their subjection to the Persians. Probably before the time of Darius Hystaspes the Persians had no coinage of their own, and that the daricus coined by him was probably a medal (Herod. iv:166) of the finest gold. When the darics became current, especially after the mercenary troops were paid in them, their num- bers must have been greatly augmented; yet Strabo assures us (1, xv, p. 1068) that the coin was by no means abundant among the Persians, ADARGAZERIN and that gold was employed by them rather in decoration than as a circulating medium. This, however, is of little real consequence, for it pro- ceeds on the erroneous supposition that the coin derived its name from the first Darius, and could not have previously existed. In the later day of Strabo the coin may have become scarce, although once plentiful. Be this as it may, the daric is of interest, not only as the most ancient gold coin of which any specimens have been preserved to the present day, but as the earliest coined money which we can be sure was known to and used by the Jews. (2) Crowned Archer. The distinguishing mark of the coin was a crowned archer, who ap- pears with some slight variations on different specimens. His garb is the same which is seen in the sculptures at Persepolis, and the figure on the coin is called, in numismatics, Sagittarius. (3) Weight. The specimens weighed by Dr. Bernard were fifteen grains heavier than an Eng- lish guinea, and their intrinsic value may, there- fore, be reckoned at twenty-five shillings, about five dollars and a half (Eckhel, Doctrina Numo- rum Veterum; Bernard, De Mensuris et Ponderi- bus). (See MonEY.) ADARGAZERIN (ādar-gāz'erin),(Heb.] Tº ad-ar'gaw-ze-rin"). This is a Chaldee word which occurs in Dan. iii:2, 3, where the titles of the Babylonian officers are enumerated. tº It is not only difficult, but perhaps impos- sible, to determine the particular office which the word describes, and opinions and versions 52 ADDER (2) Brought to David. Lentiles were among the provisions brought to David when he fled from Absalom (2 Sam. xvii:28), and a field of lentiles was the Scene of an exploit of one of David's heroes (2 Sam. xxiii:II). (3) TJsed for Bread. From Ezek. iv :Q it would appear that lentiles were sometimes used as bread. This was, doubtless, in times of scar- city, or by the poor. Sonnini (Travels, p. 603, English translation) assures us that in south- ernmost Egypt, where corn is comparatively Scarce, lentiles mixed with a little barley form almost the only bread in use among the poorer classes. It is called bettan, is of a golden-yellow color, and is not bad, although rather heavy. In that country, indeed, probably even more than in Palestine, lentiles anciently, as now, formed a chief article of food among the laboring classes. This is repeatedly noticed by ancient authors, and So much attention was paid to the culture of this useful pulse that certain varieties became re. markable for their excellence. (4) Egyptian Lentiles. The lentiles of Pelu- sium, in the part of Egypt nearest to Palestine, were esteemed both in Egypt and foreign countries (Vir. Georg: i:228), and this is probably the val- tled Egyptian variety which is mentioned in the Mishna (tit. Kilvim xviii:8) as neither large nor Small. Large quantities of lentiles were exported , from Alexandria (Augustin. Comm. in Ps. Xlvi). have differed greatly. The Sept., which is fol- lowed by the Vulgate, has rºpavvot, Zoo'razz-moy. Our version has ‘treasurers,’ and although we do not know the reason on which they proceeded, we may find one in the fact that gaza (Yáša), which seems the principal element of the word, means a treasury, and was avowedly adopted by the Greeks from the Persians. Jacchiades, who identifies all these officers with those of the Turkish court and government, compares the present to the defterdars, who have the charge of the receipts and disbursements of the public treasury. The Adargazerin were probably offi- cers of state who presided over the ordeals by fire and other matters connected with the gov- ernment of Babylon. This last explanation is not, however, new, being the one rejected by Gesenius. (See TREASURER.) ADASA or ADARSA (ād'a-sa or a-dār'sa), (Gr. 'Aöaoré, a-das-sa/.'), called also by Josephus Adazer, Adaco and Acodaco, a city in the tribe of Ephraim, said to have been four miles from Beth-horon, and not far from Gophna (Joseph. Antzg. xii:17; Euseb. Onomast, on 'A3agá); was the scene of some important transactions in the history of the Maccabees (I Macc. vii:40, 45; Joseph. Antiq. xii:17; Bell. /ted, i, 1). º ADASHIM (ā-dāsh'im), (Heb. Fºx, ad-aw'- shim). “Lentiles” is the interpretation given by our own and most other versions, and there is no reason to question its accuracy. In Syria lentiles are still called in Arabic addas (Russel, N. H. of Aleppo. i :74). - (1) Red Pottage. Lentiles appear to have been chiefly used for making a kind of pottage. The red pottage for which Esau bartered his birthright was of lentiles (Gen. xxv :29-34). The term red was, as with us, extended to yellowish brown, which must have been the true color of the pottage, if derived from lentiles. The Greeks *nd Romans also called lentiles red. (See authori- ties in Celsius i : 105). Pliny, in mentioning two Egyptian varieties, inci- dentally lets us know that one of them was red, by remarking that they like a red soil, and by Speculating whether the pulse may not have thence derived the reddish color which it im- parted to the pottage made with it (Hist. Nat. xviii:I2). This illustrates Jacob's red pottage. Dr. Shaw (i:257) also states that these lentiles easily dissolve in boiling, and form a red or chocolate colored pottage, much esteemed in North Africa and Western Asia. Putting these facts to- gether, it is likely that the reddish lentile, which is now so common in Egypt (Descript, de l'Egypte xix:65), is the sort to which all these statements refer. (See PottAGE: LENTILEs.) ADBEEL (adºbe-el),(Heb.ºs.ad beh-aſe,dis. ciplined of God), one of the twelve sons of Ishmael and founder of an Arabian tribe (Gen. xxv.13, 16). ADDAN (ād'dan), (Heb.l.º., ad-dawn'), another form (Ezra ii:59) of the name (Neh. vii:61) Addon ADDAR (ād'dar), (Heb. T.;8, ad-dawr', thrash- ing floor or wide-open place), a son of Bela and grandson of Benjamin (I Chron. viii:3), elsewhere called Ard, in Gen. xlvi.21; Num. xxvi;40. ADDER (ād'der), the English name of a kind of serpent, is a dialectical variation of the same word in a variety of languages of the Gothic and Teutonic family. Another name, varying, in the Old European tongues, from ag, ach to hag, has more connection with the Semitic; and in the South of Europe, where the Latin and its deriva- tives prevail, both are represented by the word vipera (viper). The first radically indicates poison ; the second, pain, distress, strife; the third, parturition of offspring, not in the state of an egg, but of the perfect animal. Though not clearly distinguished, in common acceptation, from innoxious snakes, all strictly indicate ser. pents armed with poisonous fangs, and therefore all are truly viviparous. In the English version of the Bible the name ‘adder' occurs several times. (See SERPENT.) (1) Cobra. The most prominent species of the genus at present is the maja tripudians, cobra ADDER di capello, hooded or spectacled snake of India, venerated by the natives; even by the serpent- charmers styled the good serpent to this day, and yet so ferocious that it is one of the very few that will attack a man when surprised in its haunt, although it may be gorged with prey. This species is usually marked on the nape with two round spots, transversely connected in the .--Tº - - g *...* e à -#i § º e & “s º *S*** . . . 7 *:AV “ Egyptian Adder. form of a pair of spectacles; but among several varieties, one, perhaps distinct, is without the marks, and has a glossy golden hood, which may make it identical with the maja haje of Egypt, the undoubted Ihh-nuphi, oneph, or agatho, daemon of ancient Egypt, and accurately repre- Sented on the walls of its temples, in almost in- numerable instances, both in form and color. This serpent also inflates the skin on the neck, not in the expanded form of a hood, but rather into an intumefaction of the neck. As in the former, there is no marked difference of appearance be- tween the sexes, but the psilli, or charmers, by a particular pressure on the neck, have the power of rendering the inflation of the ani- mal, already noticed as a character of the genus, so intense, that the serpent becomes rigid, and can be held out horizontally as if it were a rod. (2) Soothsayers. This practice explains what the soothsayers of Pharaoh could perform when they were opposing Moses, and reveals one of the names by which the Hebrews knew the species; for although the text (Exod. iv:3) uses, for the rod of Aaron converted into a serpent, the word 53 nachash, and Subsequently (vii:I5) thannin, it is plain that, in the second passage, the word in- dicates ‘monster,’ as applied to the nachash just named—the first being an appellative, the second an epithet. That the rods of the magicians of Pharaoh were of the same external character is evident from no different denomination being given to them; therefore, we may infer that they used a real serpent as a rod—namely, the species now called haje—for their imposture, since they no doubt did what the present serpent-charmers perform with the same species, by means of the temporary asphyxiation, or suspension of vitality, before noticed, and producing restoration to ac- tive life by liberating or throwing down. we have the miraculous character of the prophet’s mission shown by his real rod becoming a ser- pent, and the magicians’ real serpents merely as- suming the form of rods, and when both were opposed in a state of animated existence, by the rod devouring the living animals, conquering the Thus ADDER great typical personification of the protecting di- vinity of Egypt. Nachash may, therefore, with Some confidence, be assumed to have been the Hebrew name, or at least one of the names, of the naja haje, el haje and haje nacher of the Arabs. (8) Sacred Serpent. Nachash was intensely the Serpent of serpents with the Hebrews, and when figured with the crowns or caps of Upper and Lower Egypt, was the crowned serpent and basilisk. It is evident that nach-ash led authors, and Pliny among the number, to affix the term aspis to the haje, which, however, he did not recognize as the sacred serpent of Egypt. The true asp is a small viper, notwithstanding the opinion of M. Geoffroy to the contrary. This species may be regarded as extending to India and Ceylon, and probably the maja tri- pudians is likewise an inhabitant of Arabia, if not of Egypt, although the assertion of the fact (common in authors) does not exclude a suppo- sition that they take the two species to be only OIle. (4) Flying Serpents. We are disposed to refer the ‘winged’ or ‘flying’ serpent to the naja tripudians, in one of its varieties, because —with its hood dilated into a kind of shining wings on each side of the neck, standing, in undu- lating motion, one-half or more erect, rigid, and fierce in attack, and deadly poisonous, yet still denominated ‘good spirit,’ and in Egypt ever fig- ured in combination with the winged globe—it well may have received the name of saraph, and may thus meet all the valid objections, and con- ciliate seemingly opposite comments (see Num. xxi :6, 8; Deut. viii: I5; Is. xiv:29; xxx:6, and Paxton's Illustrations). In Isaiah xiv:29 and xxx :6, the epithet meo- pheph, 'vibrating' (rendered ‘flying’ in A. V.), is another form for ‘winged, and occurs in passages unconnected with the events in Exodus. Both bear metaphorical interpretations. (5) Fiery Serpents. A further confirmation of the ‘fiery serpents,” or ‘serpents of the burning bite,’ being najas occurs in the name Ras om Haye (Cape of the Haje serpents), situated in the locality where geographers and commentators agree that the children of Israel were afflicted by these reptiles. Should it be objected that these are the haje, and not the spectacle snake, it may be answered that both Arabs and Hindoos confound the species.—C. H. S. (6) Puff Adder. (Heb. Bºy, a/6-shooë", from root to coil, an adder.) This is another name of a serpent found only in Ps. cxl :3: “They have sharpened their tongues like a serpent, adder's poison is under their lips.” St. Paul quotes the latter half of this verse from the LXX in Rom. iii:I3. The root of the name implies bend- ing back, recurving, but not coiling up, for all snakes have that faculty. The syllable ach, however, shows a connection with the former de- nominations, and both are perfectly reconcilable with a serpent very common at the Cape of Good Hope, not unfrequent in Western Africa, and probably extending over that whole continent, ex- cepting, perhaps, Morocco. It is the ‘puff adder’ of the Dutch colonists, about three feet in length and about six inches in circumference at the middle of the body; the head is larger than is usual in serpents; the eyes are large and very brilliant; the back beautifully marked in half- circles, and the colors black, bright yellow and dark brown, the belly yellow ; the appearance at all times, but chiefly when excited, extremely brilliant; the upper jaw greatly protruding, some- ADDI what like what occurs in the shark, places the mouth back towards the throat, and this structure is said to be connected with the practice of the animal when intending to bite, to swell its skin till it suddenly rises up, and strikes backwards as if it fell over. It is this faculty which appears to be indicated by the Hebrew name acksub, and therefore we believe it to refer to that species, or to one nearly allied to it. (See SERPENT.) ADDI (ād'di), (Heb. 72, a-dº"; Gr. 'A36t, ad-dee", ornament, Luke iii:28), son of Cosam and father of Melchi, the third above Salathiel in the gene- alogy of Christ. ADDON (ād'don), (Heb. TºS, ad-dome', power- ful), a place mentioned in Ezra ii:59, to which those Israelites returned who could not show their ped- igree (see Neh. vii:61). ADER (ā’der), (Heb. Tºº, eh-der', a flock), a Benjamite, son of Beriah, chief of the inhabitants of Aijalon. The name is more correctly Eder (1 Chron. viſi:15), B. C. before 588. ADIABENE (ā-di-à-bé'ne), (Gr.’Aötagmuff, ah-dee- a-bay-may'), the principal of the six provinces into which Assyria was divided. Pliny (AHist. Maſſ. v.:12) and Ammianus (xxiii:6, sec. 20) com- prehend the whole of Assyria under, this name, which, however, properly denoted only the prov- ince which was watered by the rivers Diab and Adiab, or the Great and Little Zab (Dhab), which flow into the Tigris below Nineveh (Mosul) from the northeast. This region is not mentioned in Scripture, but in Josephus, its queen Helena and her son Izates, who became converts to Judaism, are very often named (Joseph. Aztázg. xx:2, 4; Be/Z. /ted. ii:I 6, 19; v:4, 6, II). ADIDA (ād'i-dá), (Gr. 'A6.64, ah-dee-dah", Vulg. A daſhes), a fortified town in the tribe of Judah. In I Macc. xii:38, we read that Simon Maccabaeus set up “A dida in Sep/he/a” ('A6töð ív tº Xeq j\g), and made it strong with bolts and bars. Eusebius says that Sephela was the name given in his time to the open country about Eleutheropolis. And this Adida in Sephela is probably the same which is mentioned in the next chapter (I Macc. xiii:13) as ‘Adida over against the plain,’ where Simon Maccabaeus encamped to dispute the entrance into Judaea of Tryphon, who had treacherously seized on Jonathan at Ptolemais. In the parallel passage Josephus (Antiq. xiii:6, 4) adds that this Adida was upon a hill, before which lay the plains of Judaea. Lightfoot, however, contrives to multiply the single place mentioned in the Maccabees and Josephus into four or five different towns (see Chorog. Decad. Sec. 3). One of the places which Josephus calls Adida (Bell. Jud. iv:9, I) appears to have been near the Jordan, and was probably the Hadid of Ezra ii:33. (See HADID.) ADIEL (ā'diel), (Heb. 2Nºº, ad-ee-ale', orna- ment of God). º 1. One of the chiefs of the tribe of Simeon, who seem to have dispossessed the aborigines of Gedor (I Chron. iv:36). 2. A priest, son of Jahzerah and father of Maasiai. The latter assisted in reconstructing the temple after the captivity (I Chron. ix:12), B. C. 536. 3. The father of Azmaveth, which latter was treasurer under David (I Chron. xxvii:25). ADIN (ā'din), (Heb. Tºy , a zw-deen', effeminate). 1. The head of one of the Israelitish families, whose descendants returned with Zerubbabel to Jerusalem from Babylon (B. C. 536). The number according to Ezra ii:I5 is four ADMIRE, ADMIRATION hundred and fifty-four; in Neh. vii;20, as six hundred and fifty-five, the discrepancy being oc- casioned by an error in the hundreds and the in- cluding or excluding of himself (Mc. and Str. Cyc.), (see Ez. viii:6), B. C. 457. 2. One who sealed the covenant made by Ne- hemiah and the people after their return to Jeru- Salem (Neh. x:I6), B. C. about 445. - ADINA (ād'i-na), (Heb. *}^*, ad-ee-maw', slen- der, delicate), the son of Shiza, a Reubenite, cap- tain of thirty of his tribesmen—one of David's warriors (I Chron. xi:42); B. C. before IOOO. ADITHAIM (#d-i-thä'im), (Heb. Fºr T2, ad-ee- thah'yim, double prey), a city of Judah (Josh. xv:36), whose location is unknown. At a later time the name appears to have been changed to HADID (Chadid) and ADIDA. ADJURATION (ād-ju-ra'shun), (Heb. "??, aw- Jaw', in Hiph., to cause to swear, in I Kings viii:31; 2 Chron. vi.22; P2%, shaw-bah', to make swear; Gr. §§opkiša, ex-or-kid"zo, to exact an oath). 1. This is a solemn act or appeal, whereby one man, usually a person vested with natural or offi- cial authority, imposes upon another the obliga- tion of Speaking or acting as if under the solem– nity of an oath. We find the word shawbah used in this sense in Cant. ii:7; iii:5, etc. 2. In the New Testament the act of adjuration is performed with more marked effect, as when the high-priest thus calls upon Christ, “I adjure thee by the living God, tell us,” etc. (Matt. xxvi :63). The word used here is that by which the LXX render the Hebrew (see also Mark v :7; Acts xix : I3; I Thess. v :27). An oath, although thus im- posed upon one without his consent, was not only binding, but solemn in the highest degree, and when connected with a question, an answer was compulsory, which answer being as upon oath, any falsehood in it would be perjury. Thus our Saviour, who had previously disdained to reply to the charges brought against him, now felt him- self bound to answer the question put to him. The abstract moral right of any man to impose so serious an obligation upon another without his consent may very much be doubted—not, in- deed, as compelling a true answer, which a just man will give under all circumstances, but as extorting a truth which he might have just rea- sons for withholding. 3. In the Roman Catholic Church it means the use of the name of God, or of some holy thing, to induce one to do what is required of him. ADMAH (ād'mah), (Heb. Fº, ad-maw', red earth), one of the cities in the vale of Siddim (Gen. x:19), which had a king of its own (Gen. xiv:2), It was destroyed along with Sodom and Gomor- rah (Gen. xix:24; Deut. xxix:23; Hos. xi:8). ADMATHA (#d'ma-tha), (Heb. Nº, ad mazy- thazy", perhaps earthy, dark-colored), the third named of seven princes or courtiers of Ahasuerus (Esth. i:14); B.C. about 519. ADMINISTER (ād-mín'is-ter), (Gr. 6takovla, dee-a/-on-ee'ah, service), to manage and give out as stewards (2 Cor. viii:19). Administration, a public office, and the execution thereof (I Cor. xii:5). Specifically “to relieve,” “to minister” (2 Cor. ix:12). Here the meaning is “the min- istration of the gift.” ADMIRE, ADMIRATION (ād-mire', #d-mi-rā'- shun). These words occur in A.V. as the expression of simple wonder, without including ; 2 Thess, i:10, ‘When he shall come to be glorified ADMONI in his saints, and to be admired (RV ‘marveled at') in all them that believe’; Jude, ver. 16, ‘having men's persons in admiration' (Gr. 6avud to vres Tpágota. RV showing respect of persons'); Rev. xvii:6, ‘When I saw her, I wondered with great a'. (R.V. with a great wonder'). (Hastings' Bib. A)ict. xvii:6). - ADMONI (ād-mö'ni), (Heb. **TS, ad-mo'nee). This word means red-haired, and is so rendered in the ancient versions, although ours understands a ruddy complexion. It would thus appear that Esau (Gen. xxv :25) and David (I Sam. xvi; I2; xvii:42) were red-haired. Red hair is so uncom- mon in the East, that it forms a particular distinc- tion, as in the Scriptural instances; but it is by no means unknown, especially in mountainous coun- tries. The writer has observed it in Persia re- peatedly, accompanied with the usual fresh com- plexion. Such hair and complexion together seem to have been regarded as a beauty among the Jews. The personal characters of Esau and David appear to agree well with the temperament which red hair usually indicates. (See RUDDY). ADNA (ād'na), (Heb. *T2, ad-maw', pleasure). 1. An Israelite descended from the family of Pahath-moab, who divorced his Gentile wife after the Captivity (Ezra x:30). 2. A chief priest, son of Harim, who was con- ºporary with Joiakim (Neh. xii:15), B. C. about 536. ADNAH (ād'nah), (Heb.";"|P,ad-maw',pleasure). 1. One of the chief men of the tribe of Manas- Seh, who joined David at Ziklag (I Chron. xii:20), B. C. before IOOO. - 2. A warrior of the tribe of Judah and captain gºer Jehoshaphat (2 Chron. xvii:I4), B. C. about 3. e ADONAI (a-dò'ni), (Heb. "#"S, ad-o'mee; Sept. Kºptos, AEze'ree-os, lord, master), the old plural form of the noun YTN, adom, similar to that with the suffix of the first person; used as the plura/is excellem- £ia” by way of dignity, for the name of Jehovah. The similar form with the suffix is also used of men, as of Joseph's master (Gen. xxxix:2, 3, sq.); of Joseph himself (Gen. xlii:30, 33; so also Is. xix:4). The Jews, out of superstitious reverence for the name of Jehovah, always in reading pronounce A doma? where /ehozyah is written; and hence the letters of Vehovah are usually written with the points belonging to Adonai. (See JEHOVAH.) ADONIBEZEK (a-dd-ni-bê'zek), (Heb. Pº";"|N, a-do'nee-beh'zeň, lord of Bezek), king or lord of Bezek, a town which Eusebius (in Beščk) places 17 miles east of Neapolis or Shechem. The small extent of the kingdoms in and around Palestine. at the time of its invasion by the Hebrews is shown by the fact that this petty melek had sub- dued no less than seventy of them and the barbarity of the war usages in those early times is painfully shown by his cutting off all the thumbs and great toes of his prisoners, and allowing them no food but that which they gathered under his table. These conquests made Adonibezek “a triton among the minnows;’ and we find him at the head of the confederated Canaanites and Perizzites, against whom the tribes of Judah and Simeon marched after the death of Joshua. His army was routed and himself taken prisoner. The vic- tors failed not to express their indignation at the mode in which he had treated his captives, by dealing with him in the same manner (B. C. about II45). His conscience was then awakened to the enormity of his conduct, and in his own treat- 55 ADONIKAM ment he recognized a severe but just application of the lear talionis. That the act was so intended by the captors is very clear, and it is strange that this strong reprobation of his conduct by the Israelites should have been construed into an ex- ample of their own barbarous usages in war. Adonibezek was taken to Jerusalem, where he died (Judg. I :5-7). ADONIJAH (ād-o-ni'jah), (Heb. Tºš, ad-o-mee- yaw", Jehovah [is] my Lord). (1) Son of David. The fourth son of David by Haggith. He was born after his father became king, but when he reigned over Judah only (2 Sam. iii:4). According to the Oriental notion developed in the article Absalom, Adonijah might have considered his claim su- perior to that of his eldest brother Amnon, who was born while his father was in a private sta- tion, but not to that of Absalom, who was not only his elder brother, and born while his father was a king, but was of royal descent on the side of his mother. When, however, Amnon and Ab- salom were both dead, he became, by order of birth, the heir apparent to the throne. But this order had been set aside in favor of Solomon, who was born while his father was king of all Israel. Absalom perished in attempting to assert his claim of primogeniture, in opposition to this arrangement. Unawed by this example, Adonijah took the same means of showing that he was not disposed to relinquish the claim of primogeniture which now devolved upon him. (2) Proclaimed King. He assumed, the state of an heir apparent, who, from the advanced age of David, must soon be king. But it does not ap- pear to have been his wish to trouble his father as Absalom had done; for he waited till David ap- peared at the point of death, when he called around him a number of influential men, whom he had previously gained over, and caused himself to be proclaimed king. This was a formidable attempt to subvert the appointment made by the Divine king of Israel, for Adonijah was supported by such men as Joab, the general-in-chief, and Abiathar, the high-priest, both of whom had fol- lowed David in all his fortunes. The adhesion of such men, and the previous defection of the nation to Absalom, show the strength of the hereditary principle among the Israelites. In all likelihood, if Absalom had waited till David was on his death-bed, Joab and Abiathar would have given him their support, but his premature and unnatural attempt to dethrone his father dis- gusted these friends of David, who might not otherwise have been adverse to his claims. This danger was avoided by Adonijah, but his plot was, notwithstanding, defeated by the prompt measure taken by David, who directed Solomon to be at once proclaimed, and crowned, and ad- mitted to the real exercise of the sovereign power, (3) Pardoned. Adonijah then saw that all was lost, and fled to the altar, which he refused to leave without a promise of pardon from King Solomon. This he received, but was warned that any further attempt of the same kind would be fatal to him. (4) Death. Accordingly, when, some time after the death of David, Adonijah covertly en- deavored to reproduce his claim through a mar- riage with Abishag, the virgin widow of his father (see ABISHAG), his design was at once penetrated by the king, by whose order he was instantly put to death (1 Kings ii:23-25), B. C. 960. ADONIKAM (a-dón i-kām), (Heb. Fºls, ad-o- mee-AEawm', whom the Lord sets up, or lord of the ADONIRAM enemy, the Sons of Adonikam, numbering six hundred and sixty-six, who were among those who returned with Zerubbabel from Babylon (Neh. vii: 18; I Esdr. v :I4). In the last two pas- sages the number is put down at six hundred and sixty-seven. The rest of the family returned with Ezra (Ezra viii: 13; 1 Esdr. viii:39), B. C. 458. In Neh. x: I6 the name is given as Adonijah. ADONIRAM (ād-o-ni'ram), (Heb. P.]";TS, ad-o- nee-rawm', lord of height, i.e.,high lord, I Kings iv:6). 1. This name is exhibited in the contracted form of Adoram in 2 Sam. xx:24; 1 Kings xii:18, and of Hadoram in 2 Chron. x:18 (B. C. 930). 2. Adoniram, or Hadoram, son of Toi, king of Hamath, who was sent by his father to cons gratulate David on his victory over their common enemy, Hadarezer, king of Syria (I Chron. xviii: Io). This prince is called Joram in 2 Sam. viii:10. 3. A person of this name is mentioned as re- ceiver-general of the imposts in the reigns of David, Solomon and Rehoboam. Commentators have been much at a loss to determine whether the office was held by one person for so long a period, or by two or three persons of the same name. It appears very unlikely that even two persons of the same name should successively bear the same office, in an age when no example occurs of the father's name being given to his son. We find also that not more than forty-seven years elapse between the first and last mention of the Adon- iram who was over the tribute; and as this, al- though a long term of service, is not too long for one life, and as the person who held the office in the beginning of Rehoboam’s reign had served in it long enough to make himself odious to the people, it appears on the whole most probable that one and the same person is intended through- out. Only one incident is recorded in connection with this person. When the ten tribes seceded from the house of David and made Jeroboam king, Rehoboam sent Adoniram among them, for the purpose, we may presume, of collecting the usual imposts, which had become very heavy. Perhaps he had been rigid in his invidious office under Solomon; at all events, the collector of the im- posts which had occasioned the revolt was not the person whose presence was the most likely to Soothe the exasperated passions of the people. They rose upon him, and stoned him till he died. Rehoboam, who was not far off, took warning by his fate, and, mounting his chariot, returned with all speed to Jerusalem (I Kings xii:18). ADONIS (à-dû'nis). See TAMMUz. ADONIZEDEK(a-dò-ni-ze'dek),(Heb. Pº";78, ad-o'nee-zee' deb, Sept. 'Aboviflefék, ah-doh-mee-bee- zeń', confounding him with Adonibezek). The name denotes ord of justice, i.e., just lord, king of Zealeã. (1) Canaanitish King. He was the Canaan- itish king of Jerusalem when the Israelites in- vaded Palestine, and the similarity of the name to that of a more ancient king of (as is supposed) the same place, Melchi-zedek (king of justice, or king of Zedek), has suggested that Zedek was one of the ancient names of Jerusalem. Be that as it may, this Adonizedek was the first of the native princes that attempted to make head against the invaders. (2) Confederacy. After Jericho and Ai were taken, and the Gibeonites had succeeded in form- ing a treaty with the Israelites, Adonizedek was the first to rouse himself from the stupor which had fallen on the Canaanites (Josh. x:I-5), and he induced the other Amoritish kings of Hebron 56 ADOPTION —Jarmuth, Lachish and Eglon—to join him in a confederacy against the enemy. They did not, however, march directly against the invaders, but went and besieged the Gibeonites, to punish them for the discouraging example which their seces- sion from the common cause had afforded. Joshua no sooner heard of this than he marched all night from Gilgal to the relief of his allies, and falling unexpectedly upon the besiegers, soon put them to utter rout. (3) The Five Kings. The pursuit was long, and was signalized by Joshua's famous command to the sun and moon, as well as by a tremendous hailstorm, which greatly distressed the fugitive Amorites. (See Jos HUA.) The five kings took refuge in a cave, but were observed, and by Joshua's order the mouth of it was closed with large stones and a guard set over it until the pursuit was over. When the pursuers returned the cave was opened and the five kings brought out. The Hebrew chiefs then set their feet upon the necks of the prostrate monarchs—an ancient mark of triumph, of which the monuments of Persia and Egypt still afford illustrations. They were then slain, and their bodies hung on trees until the evening, when, as the law forbade a longer exposure of the dead (Deut. xxi.;23), they were taken down and cast into the cave, the mouth of which was filled up with large stones, which remained long after (Josh. x:I-27). The Severe treatment of these kings by Joshua has been censured and defended with equal disregard of the real circumstances, which are, that the war was avowedly one of extermination, no quar- ter being given or expected on either side, and that the war usages of the Jews were neither worse nor better than those of the people with whom they fought, who would most certainly have treated Joshua and the other Hebrew chiefs in the same manner had they fallen into their hands. ADOPTION (a-döp'shun), (Gr. vio9erta, hºwee-oth- es-ee'ah, the placing as a son). The Old Testament does not contain any word equivalent to this; but the act occurs in various forms. The New Testa ment has the word vio9erta often (Rom. viii:15, 23; ix:4; Gal. iv:5; Eph. i:5), but no example of the act occurs. The term itself is well defined, and the act described, in the literal signification of the Greek word. It is the placing as a son of one who is not so by birth. The practice of adoption had its origin in the desire for male offspring among those who have, in the ordinary course, been denied that blessing, or have been deprived of it by circumstances. This feeling is common to our nature, but its Operation is less marked in those countries where the equalizing influences of high civilization lessen the peculiar privileges of the paternal character, and where the security and the well-observed laws by which estates descend and property is trans- mitted withdraw one of the principal induce- ments to the practice. (1) Among the Hebrews. Almost all of the instances in the Bible occur in the patriarchal period. The law of Moses, by settling the rela- tions of families and the rules of descent, and by formally establishing the Levirate law, which in some sort secured a representative posterity even to a man who died without children, appears to have put some check upon this custom. (2) Greeks and Romans. The allusions in the New Testament are mostly to practices of adoption which then existed among the Greeks and Romans, and rather to the latter than to the former, for among the more highly civilized Isaac was born. ADOPTION Greeks adoption was less frequent than among the Romans. In the East the practice has always been common, especially among the Semitic races, in whom the love of offspring has at all times been strongly manifested. And here it may be ob- served that the additional and peculiar stimulus which the Hebrews derived from the hope of giv- ing birth to the Messiah was inoperative with respect to adoption, through which that privilege could not be realized. (3) Confined to Sons. It is scarcely neces- sary to say that adoption was confined to Sons. The whole Bible history affords no example of the adoption of a female, for the Jews certainly were not behind any Oriental nation in the feel- ing expressed in the Chinese proverb—"He is hap- piest in daughters who has only sons’ (Mem. Sur les Chinois, t, x:I49). The first instances of adoption which occur in Scripture are less the acts of men than of women, who, being themselves barren, give their female slaves to their husbands, with a view of adopt- ing the children they may bear. Thus Sarah gave her handmaid Hagar to Abraham, and the son who was born, Ishmael, appears to have been considered as her son as well as Abraham's, until In like manner Rachel, having no children, gave her handmaid Bilhah to her husband, who had by her Dan and Naphtali (Gen. xxx :5-9), on which his other wife, Leah, although she had sons of her own, yet fearing that she had left off bearing, claimed the right of giv- ing her handmaid Zilpah to Jacob, that she might thus increase their number, and by this means she had Gad and Asher (Gen. xxx:9-13). In this way the greatest possible approximation to a natural relation was produced. The child was the son of the husband, and, the mother being the property of the wife, the progeny must be her property also ; and the act of more particular appropriation seems to have been that, at the time of birth, the handmaid brought forth her child ‘upon the knees of the adoptive mother' (Gen. xxx :3). Strange as this custom may seem, it is in accordance with the notions of representation which we find very prevalent in analogous states of society. We do not see the use of explaining away customs we do not like, or which do not agree with our own notions, by alleging that by this ex- pression nothing more is meant than that the son was to be dandled and brought up upon the knees of the adoptive mother. In this case the vicarious bearing of the handmaid for the mistress was as complete as possible, and the sons were regarded as fully equal in right of heritage with those by the legitimate wife. This privilege could not, however, be conferred by the adoption of the wife, but by the natural relation of such sons to the husband. (4) Sarah’s Case. A curious fact is elicited by the peculiar circumstances in Sarah's case, which were almost the only circumstances that could have risen to try the question whether a mistress retained her power, as such, over a ſe- male slave whom she had thus vicariously em- ployed, and over the progeny of that slave, even though by her own husband. The answer is given rather startlingly, in the affirmative in the words of Sarah, who, when the birth of Isaac had wholly changed her feelings and position, and when she was exasperated by the offensive con- duct of Hagar and her son, addressed her husband thus: “Cast forth this bondzvoman and her son ; for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac' (Gen. xxi : IO). (5) Previous Instance. A previous instance of adoption in the history of Abraham, when as 67 ADOPTION yet he had no children, appears to be discoverable in his saying, ‘One born in my house is mine heir.’ This unquestionably denotes a house-born slave, as distinguished from one bought with money. Abraham had several such, and the one to whom he is supposed here to refer is his faith- ful and devoted steward Eliezer. This, there- fore, is a case in which a slave was adopted as a Son—a practice still very common in the East, A boy is often purchased young, adopted by his master, brought up in his faith, and educated as his son; or, if the owner has a daughter, he adopts him through a marriage with that daughter, and the family which springs from this union is counted as descended from him. But house-born slaves are usually preferred, as these have never had any home but their master's house, are con- sidered members of his family, and are generally the most faithful of his adherents. (6) Among the Romans. This practice of slave adoption was very common among the Romans, and, as such, is more than once referred to by St. Paul (Rom. viii:15; Gal. iv:5); the transition from the condition of a slave to that of a son, and the privilege of applying the tender name of ‘Father’ to the former ‘Master,’ affording a beautiful illustration of the change which takes place from the bondage of the law to the freedom and privileges of the Christian state. As in most cases the adopted son was to be considered dead to the family from which he Sprung, the separation of natural ties and con- nections was avoided by this preference of slaves, who were mostly foreigners or of foreign descent. (7) The Chinese. For the same reason the Chinese make their adoptions from children in the hospitals, who have been abandoned by their parents. (8) The Tartars. The Tartars are the only people we know who prefer to adopt their near relatives—nephews or cousins, or, failing them, , a Tartar of their own banner. (9) Biblical Example. The only Scriptural example of this kind is that in which Jacob adopted his own grandsons, Ephraim and Manas- seh, to be counted as his sons. Some have ques- tioned whether this was really an act of adoption, but it seems to us that there is no way in which an act of adoption could be more clearly expressed. Jacob says to Joseph, their father—“Thy two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, shall be mine; * * * as Reuben and Simeon (his two eldest sons), they shall be mine. But thy issue which thou begettest after them shall be thine’ (Gen. xlviii:6). (10) Result. The object of this remarkable adoption was, that whereas Joseph himself could only have one share of his father’s heritage along with his brothers, the adoption of his two sons enabled Jacob, through them, to bestow two por- tions upon his favorite son. One remarkable effect of this adoption was that the sons of Jacob, and the tribes which sprang from them, thus became thirteen instead of twelve; but the ulti- mate exclusion of Lcvi from a share of territory rectified this so far as regarded the distribution of lands in Canaan. (11) Moses. The adoption of Moses by Pha- raoh’s daughter (Exod. ii:I-IO) is an incident rather than a practice, but it recalls what has just been stated respecting the adoption of outcast children by the Chinese. A man who had only a daughter would natu- rally wish to build up a family, to be counted as his own, through her. We have seen that, under such circumstances, the daughter is often married to a freed slave, and the children counted as those of the woman’s father, or the husband ADORA himself is adopted as a son. An instance of the former kind occurs in I Chron. ii:34, sq. Sheshan, of the tribe of Judah, gives his daughter to Jarha, an Egyptian slave (whom, as the Targum pre- mises, he no doubt liberated on that occasion); the posterity of the marriage are not, however, reckoned to Jarha, the husband of the woman, but to her father, Sheshan, and as his descend- ants they take their heritage and station in Israel. The same chapter gives another instance (1 Chron. ii:21; Num. xxvii:I): (12) Machir. Machir (grandson of Joseph) gives his daughter in marriage to Hezron, of the tribe of Judah. She gave birth to Segub, who was the father of Jair. This Jair possessed twenty- three cities in the land of Gilead, which came to him in right of his grandmother, the daughter of Machir, and he acquired other towns in the same quarter, which made up his possessions to threescore towns or villages (I Chron. ii:21-24; Josh. xiii:30; I Kings iv:I3). Now this Jair, though of the tribe of Judah by his grandfather, is, in Num. xxxii:41, counted as of Manasseh, for the obvious reason which the comparison of these texts suggests, that, through his grand- mother, he inherited the property, and was the lineal representative of Machir, the son of Ma- masseh. (13) Genealogy. This case, is some im- portance from the ground which it offers for the opinion of those who account for the difference between the pedigree of Christ as given by Mat- thew, and that in Luke, by supposing that the former is the pedigree through Joseph, his sup- posed father, and the latter through his mother Mary. This opinion, which will be examined in another place (see GENEALOGY), supposes that Mary was the daughter of Heli, and that Joseph is called his son (Luke iii:23), because he was adopted by Heli when he married his daughter, who was an heiress, as is proved by the act of her going to Bethlehem to be registered when in the last stage of pregnancy. - (14) Theological. In John viii:36, ‘If the Son shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed,” is supposed by Grotius and other commentators to refer to a custom in some of the cities of Greece, and elsewhere, called áðexpo6eaſota, a-del-pho-the- s?'a, whereby the son and heir was per- mitted to adopt brothers and admit them to the same rights which he himself enjoyed. But it seems more likely that the reference was to the more familiar Roman custom, by which the son, after his father's death, often made free such as were born slaves in his house. In Gal. iv:5, 6, there is a very clear allusion to the privilege of adopted slaves to address their former master by the cndcaring title of Abba, or Father. Slaves were not allowed to use this word in addressing the master of the family to which they belonged, nor the corresponding title of Mama, mother, when speaking to the mistress of it. But this adoption believers have received; and the evidences of it consist in the indwelling of the Holy Ghost testifying that they are God's children, enabling them to say “Abba, Father,” and as children to keep their father’s command- ments, and abound in supplication (Rom. viii: 15- 17; Jer. iii: 19; John i: I2). ADORA (a-dò'ra) or ADOR. See ADORAIM. ADORAIM (id-o-ra'im),(Heb.Pºls, ad-o-rah'. yim, two mounds, or dwellings), a town in the south of Judah, enumerated along with Hebron and Mareshah, as one of the cities fortified by Reho- boam (2 Chron. xi:9). Under the name of Adora 58 rebuilt by Gabinius ADRAMMELECH it...is mentioned in the Apocrypha (1 Macc. xiii:20, and ... also often by Josephus, Antiq. viii:IO, I, xiii.6, 4, I5, 4; Bell. Jud. i :2, 6, 8, 4), who usually connects Adora with Maressa, as cities of the later Idumaea. It was captured by Hyrcanus at the samc time with Maressa, and o (Joseph. Antiq. xiii:9, 1; xiv:5, 3). This town does not occur in any writer after Josephus, until the recent researches of Dr. Robinson, who discovered it under the name of Dura, the first feeble letter having been dropped. It is situated five miles W. by S. from Hebron, and is a large village, seated on the eastern slope of a cultivated hill, with olive groves and fields of grain all around. There are no ruins (Robinson's Bib. Researches, iii:2-5). ADORAM (a-dò'ram), (Heb. F.TS, ad-o-razºyzzz'), an officer of the customs under David (2 Sam. xx: 24; I Kings xii:18), elsewhere called Adoniram. (See ADONIRAM; HADORAM.) ADORATION (ād-o-ra'shūn). This word is com- º of ad, “to,” and os, ords, “the mouth,” and iterally signifies to apply the hand to the mouth, that is, “to kiss the hand.” (1) Act of Worship. The act is described in Scripture as one of worship. Job says: ‘If I had beheld the sun when it shined, or the moon walking in brightness; and my heart had been secretly enticed, or my mouth had kissed my hand; this also were an iniquity to be punished by the judge' (Job xxxi :26, 27). And this very clearly intimates that kissing the hand was considered an overt act of worship in the East. - (2) Reverence for Royalty. The same act was used as a mark of respect in the presence of kings and persons high in office or station. Or rather, perhaps, the hand was not merely kissed and then withdrawn from the mouth, but held continuously before or upon the mouth, to which allusic in is made in such texts as Judg. xviii:19; Job xxi :5; xxix:9; x1 :4; Ps. xxxix:9; in which ‘laying the hand upon the mouth’ is used to de- scribe the highest degree of reverence and sub- mission; as such, this posture is exhibited on the monuments of Persia and of Egypt. In one of the sculptures at Persepolis a king is seated on 1. is throne, and before him a person standing in a bent posture, with his hand laid upon his mouth as he addresses the sovereign. Exactly the same attitude is observed in the sculptures at Thebes, where one person, among several (in various postures cf respect) who appear before the scribes to be registered, has his hand placed thus sub- missively upon his mouth. Prayer is most com- monly commenced with the act of adoration (Ps. civ :I-6; cii:25, 27; Jer. xxxii:IG-I9). ADORN (à-dórn'), (Gr. Koopéa, Aos-meh'o, to Or- nament), to deck; to make beautiful (I Tim. ii:9), followed by participle designating the act by which the honor is gained (Tit. ii. Io; I Pet. iii.5). Figuratite. (1) By a holy conversation we adorm the doctrine of God; thus practically show- ing to the world the purity, power, glory, and ex- cellence of his truths, laws, promises, threaten- ings (Tit. ii:Io). (2) The church is adorned when her ordinances are pure and efficacious; her of: ficers faithful and zealous; her members clothed with the imputed righteousness of Christ, and his sanctifying grace. (Is. lxi. Io; Rev. xxi.2.) ADRA (ā'dra). See ARAD. ADRAMMIELECH (a-drām"me-lék), (Heb. : zººms, ad-ram-meh'/eſſ, splendor of the king, 2. e., of Moloch). ADRAMYTTIUM (1) An Idol. I. He is mentioned, together with Anammelech, in 2 Kings xvii:31, as one of the idols whose worship the inhabitants of Sepharvaim established in Samaria, when they were trans- ferred thither by the king of Assyria, and whom they worshiped by the sacrifice of their children by fire. This constitutes the whole of our certain knowledge of this idol. As to the figure under which this idol was worshiped, the Babylonian Talmud (cited at length in Carpzov's Apparatus, p. 516) asserts that he was adored under that of a mule; whereas Kimchi says it was under that of a peacock; statements upon which little re- Jiance can be placed. There is greater unanimity in the opinion that the power adored under this name was one of the heavenly bodies, in general accordance with the astrological character of the Assyrian idolatry (Gesenius, Jesaia, iii:327 seq.). (2) Identified with Moloch. Selden (De Diis Syris i;6) and others have identified him with Moloch, chiefly on the ground that the sacrifice of children by fire, and the general signification of the name, are the same in both. According, then, to the great difference of opinion concerning Moloch, authorities of nearly equal weight may be adduced for the opinion that Adrammelech represents the planet Saturm, or the Sun; the kind of sacrifice being the chief argument in favor of the former; the etymology of the name being that in favor of the latter. (See MOLOCH.) (3) A son of Sennacherib, king of Assyria. The king was dwelling at Nineveh after his disas- trous expedition against Hezekiah. While wor- shiping in the house of Nisroch, his god, Sennach- erib was murdered by Adrammelech and his brother Shareza, B.C. 681. After the murder the two brothers fled into Armenia (2 Kings xix:36, 37; IS. xxxvii:38). ADRAMYTTIUM (ād'ra-myt’ti-tim), (Gr. 'Aépauðrtwov, ad-ram-oof"ti-on), a seaport town in the province of Mysia in Asia Minor, opposite the isle of Lesbos, and an Athenian colony (Strabo, xiii, p. 606; Herod. vii:42). It is mentioned in Scripture only (Acts xxvii:2) from the fact that the ship in which Paul embarked at Caesarea as a prisoner on his way to Italy belonged to Adra- myttium. It was rare to find a vessel going di- rect from Palestine to Italy. The usual course therefore was to embark in some ship bound to one of the ports of Asia Minor, and there go on board a vessel sailing for Italy. This was the course taken by the centurion who had charge of Paul. The ship of Adramyttium took them to Myra in Lycia, and here they embarked in an Alexandrian vessel bound for Italy. Some com- mentators (Hammond, Grotius, Witsius, etc.) strangely suppose that Adrantetum in Africa (Plin. v :3; Ptol. iv:3) was the port to which the ship belonged. It suffered greatly during the Mithridatic wars, and rather declined in importance; but even as late as the third century, under Caracalla, it still ranked sufficiently high to strike alliance coins with Ephesus (implying certain reciprocal rights in respect of religious festivals and games). Adramyttium is still called ‘Adramyt.’ It is built on a hill, contains about 1,000 houses, and is still a place of some commerce (Turner, Tour. iii:265). ADRIA (ā'dri-á), (Gr. 'A6ptas, ad-ree'as), an ancient city of Italy, on the Tartaro, in the state of Venice. It gave name to the Adriatic Sea, or the sea of Adria (Acts xxvii:27). It appears from the narrative of Paul's voyage just réferred to, that, although the name of Adria 59 ADRIAN belonged in a proper sense only to the sea within the Adriatic gulf, it was given in a looser manner to a larger extent, including the Sicilian and Ionian Sea. Thus also Ptolemy says (lib. iii, cap. 4), that Sicily was bounded east by the Adriatic, and (cap. 16) that Crete was washed on the west by the Adriatic sea; and Strabo says (lib. vii) that the Ionian gulf is a part of that which in his time was called the Adriatic sea. (See ADRIATIC SEA.) ADRIAN (ā'dri-an), the fifteenth emperor of Rome. This prince is not mentioned in the New Testament, but some interpreters are of opin- ion that he is alluded to in Rev. viii: Io, I I, where Barchochebas, the famous Jewish impostor, is thought to be foretold, but without sufficiently good grounds. The Jews having created several disturbances in the reign of Trajan, Adrian sent a colony to Jerusalem, for the purpose of keeping them in subjection, and also built within the walls of the city a temple to Jupiter. (1) Jewish Mutiny. Not enduring that a strange colony should occupy their city, and introduce a foreign religion, the Jews began to mutiny, about A. D. I.34, and Barchochebas, who about the same time made his appearance under the assumed character of the Messias, animated them in their rebellion against the Romans. The presence of Adrian, who was at this time in Syria or Egypt, restrained in some measure their proceedings, but after his return to Rome, they fortified several places, and prepared for a vigorous resistance. Their pro- ceedings, and the great increase in the numbers of the seditious, induced Adrian to send Tinnius Rufus into Judea. (2) Defeat. The Roman generals marched against them, and a dreadful slaughter en- sued. The Jews fought desperately, and Rufus having been defeated in several con- flicts, Adrian sent to his assistance Julius Severus, one of the greatest generals of his age. Severus besieged Bether, or Betheron, where the Jews had entrenched themselves, which he at length took, and put many to the sword. Others were sold as cattle, at the fairs of Mamre and Gaza; and the rest were sent into Egypt, being forbidden, under a severe penalty, to return to their own city. Jerome (in Zech. xi :7) applies to this calamity of the Jews the words of Zechariah : “I will feed the flock of slaughter.” And the Hebrew doctors ap- ply Jer. xxxi :15: “A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation and bitter weeping; Rachel weeping for her children,” etc. The Jews purchased with a sum of money the liberty, not of entering Jerusa- lem, but only of looking from a distance on it, and going to lament its fall and desolation. This may have been included in Christ's prophecy (Matt.xxiv). (3) Length of the War. The number of Ro- man soldiers and auxiliary troops that perished in the course of this war, which lasted, as Jerome and the Rabbins say, three years and a half (Hiero- nym. in T)an. ix; Basnage Hist. des Juifs, tom. ii, page 133), or, as others suppose, only two years, was very great. Dio remarks, that the emperor, in writing of the termination of the war to the senate, did not use the common form in the be- ginning of his letters, “If you and your children are in good health, I am glad of it; I and the army are in good condition;” in consequence of the great losses he had sustained. (Dio, lib. 69, page 794.) After this revolt, Adrian finished the building of Jerusalem, and changed its name to ELIA, which See. ADRIATIC SEA - \ ADRYATIC SEA (ā'drí-āt'ik sé), (Gr. 'A6ptas, ad-ree'as, Acts xxvii:27). This name is now con- fined to the gulf lying between Italy on one side, and the coasts of Dalmatia and Albania on the Other. But in St. Paul's time it extended to all that part of the Mediterranean between Crete and Sicily. Thus Ptolemy (iii:16) says that Sicily was bounded on the east by the Adriatic, and that Crete was bounded by the Adriatic on the west; and Strabo (ii, p. 185; vii, p. 488) says that the Ionian gulf was a part of what was in his time called the Adriatic Sea. This fact is of impor- tance, as relieving us from the necessity of finding the island of Melita on which Paul was ship- wrecked in the present Adriatic gulf; and con- sequently removing the chief difficulty in the way of the identification of that island with the pres- ent Malta. - ADRIEL (adri-e), (Heb. *TP, adºree-a/a, the flock of God), the person to whom Saul gave in marriage his daughter Merab, who had been originally promised to David (I Sam. xviii: 19). Five sons sprang from this union, who were taken to make up the number of Saul's descendants, whose lives, on the principle of blood-revenge, were required by the Gibeonites to avenge the cruelties which Saul had exercised towards their race. (See GIBEONITES.) In 2 Sam. xxi.;8, the name of Micha/ occurs as the mother of these sons of Adriel; but as it is known that Merab, and not Michal, was the wife of Adriel, and that Michal never had any children (2 Sam. vi:23), there only remains the alternative of supposing either that Michal's name has been substituted for Merab's by some ancient copyist, or that the word which properly means bare (which Michal bare unto Adriel), should be rendered brought up or educated (which Michal brought up for Adriel). ADULLAM (adū’īam), (Heb. Fºx, adoo. Zazeyzzz'), an old city (Gen. xxxviii: I, 12, 20) in the plain Country of the tribe of Judah (Josh. xv.:35), and One of the royal cities of the Canaanites (Josh. xii: I 5). - - (1) Fortified Town. It was one of the towns which Rehoboam fortified (2 Chron. xi :7; Micah i :15), and is mentioned after the captivity (Neh. xl:30; 2 Macc. xii:38). Eusebius and Jerome state that it existed in their time as a large village, ten miles to the east of Eleutherop- olis; but they follow the Sept. in confounding it with Eglon. However, it is certain that these were different places, and had distinct kings in the time of Joshua (xii:I2, I5). It is evident that Adullam was one of the cities of ‘the valley,” or plain between the hill country of Judah and the Sea; and from its place in the lists of names (especially 2 Chron. xi :7), it appears not to have been far from the Philistine city of Gath. (2) Cave of Adullam. This circumstance would suggest that the ‘cave of Adullam' (I Sam. xxii: I), to which David withdrew immediately from Gath, was near the city of that name. But there is no passage of Scripture which connects the city and the cave, and it is certainly not in a plain that one would look for a cave capable of affording a secure retreat to 400 men; nor has any such cave been found in that quarter. (3) Mountainous Region. It is therefore far from improbable that the cave of Adul- lam was in the mountainous wilderness in the west of Judah towards the Dead Sea, where such caves occur, and where the west- ern names (as Carmel) are sometimes repeated. This conjecture is favored by the fact that the usual haunts of David were in this quarter; 60 ADULTERY whence he moved into the land of Moab, which Was quite contiguous, whereas he must have crossed the whole breadth of the land, if the cave of Adullam had been near the city of that name. (4) Probable Location. Other TeaSO11S OCCur which would take too much room to state; but the result is, that there appears at length good grounds for the local tradition which fixes the cave on the borders of the Dead Sea, although there is no certainty with regard to the particular gave usually pointed out. The cave so designated is at a point to which David was far more likely to summon his parents, whom he intended to take from Bethlehem into Moab, than to any place in the western plains. It is about six miles south- West of Bethlehem, in the side of a deep ravine (Wady Khureitun) which passes below the Frank mountain (see HERODION) on the south. It is an immense natural cavern, the mouth of which can be approached only on foot along the side of the cliff. It seems probable that David, as a native of Bethlehem, must have been well acquainted with this... remarkable spot, and had probably often availed himself of its shelter when out with his father's flocks. It would therefore naturally occur to him as a place of refuge when he fled from Gath; and his purpose of forming a band of fol- lowers was much more likely to be realized here, in the neighborhood of his native place, than in the westward plain, where the city of Adullam lay. As supporting the opposite view, W. Muir, in Hastings' Bib. Dict, says: “The Cave of Adullam, famous through its association with the early his. tory of David, has usually been supposed to have had no connection with the city of that name, and has been located by tradition, as well as by many travelers, in the Wady Khareitun, about six miles Southeast of Bethlehem. The most recent au- thorities, however, are strongly of opinion that an entirely suitable site for it can be found in the vicinity of the city, and that there is no reason for separating the two. Half-way between Shoc- hoh and Keilah, and ten miles northwest of He- bron, some caves have been found, the position of which suits all we are told about David's strong- hold, and which are at once central and defensible. It may be regarded as practically settled that the Cave of Adullam was not far from where David had his encounter with Goliath.” ADULTERY (à-dûl'tar-y). (13 Defined. In the common acceptation of the word adultery denotes the sexual intercourse of a married woman with any other man than her husband, or of a married man with any other woman than his wife. (2) Jewish. But the crime is not understood 1n this extent among Eastern nations, nor was it So understood by the Jews. With them, adultery was the act whereby any married man was exposed to the risk of having a spurious offspring imposed upon him. An adulterer was, therefore, any man who had illicit intercourse with a married or be- trothed woman ; and an adulteress was a betrothed or married woman who had intercourse with any other man than her husband. (8) Fornication. An intercourse between a married man and an unmarried woman was not, as with us, deemed adultery, but forni- cation—a great sin, but not, like adultery, involving the contingency of polluting a descent, of turning aside an inheritance, or of imposing upon a man a charge which did not belong to him. Adultery was thus considered a great social wrong, against which society pro- ADULTERY tected itself by much severer penalties than at- tended an unchaste act not involving the same con- c1ngencies. (4) Polygamy. It will be seen that this Orien- tal limitation of adultery is intimately connected with the existence of polygamy. If adultery be de- fined as a breach of the marriage covenant, then, where the contract is between one man and one woman, as in Christian countries, the man as much as the woman infringes the covenant, or commits adultery, by every act of intercourse with any other woman; but where polygamy is allowed—where the husband may marry other wives, and take to him- self concubines and slaves, the marriage contract cannot and does not convey to the woman a legal title that the man should belong to her alone. If, therefore, a Jew associated with a woman who was not his wife, his concubine, or his slave, he was guilty of unchastity, but committed no offense which gave a wife reason to complain that her legal rights had been infringed. If, however, the woman with whom he associated was the wife of another, he was guilty of adultery—not by infring- ing his own marriage covenant, but by causing a breach of that which existed between that woman and her husband (Michaelis, Mosázsches Aecht. art. 259; Jahn's Archaologie, th: i. b. 2, Sec. 183). (5) Punishment. By thus excluding from the name and punishment of adultery the offense which did not involve the enormous wrong of im- posing upon a man a supposititious offspring, in a nation where the succession to landed property went entirely by birth, so that a father could not by his testament alienate it from anyone who was regarded as his son—the law was enabled, with less severity than if the inferior offense had been included, to punish the crime with death. It is still so punished wherever the practice of polygamy has similarly operated in limiting the crime—not, per- haps that the law expressly assigns that punish- ment, but it recognizes the right of the injured 61 party to inflict it, and, in fact, leaves it, in a great degree, in his hands. Now death was the pun- ishment of adultery before the time of Moses; and if he had assigned a less punishment, his law would have been inoperative, for private ven- geance, sanctioned by usage, would still have in- flicted death. But by adopting it into the law, those restrictions were imposed upon its operation which necessarily arise when the calm inquiry of public justice is substituted for the impulsive ac- tion of excited hands. Thus, death would be less frequently inflicted; and that this effect followed seems to be implied in the fact that the whole biblical history offers no example of capital pun- ishment for the crime. In the law which assigns the punishment of death to adultery (Lev. xx: IO), the mode in which that punishment should be inflicted is not specified, because it was known from custom. It was not, however, strangulation, as the Talmud- ists contend, but stoning, as we may learn from various passages of Scripture (e. g. Ezek. xvi :38- 40; John viii:5); and as, in fact, Moses himself testifies (Deut. xxii:22-24). If the adulteress was a slave, the guilty parties were both Scourged with a leathern whip, the number of blows not exceeding forty. In this instance the adulterer, in addition to the scourging, was subject to the fur- ther penalty of bringing a trespass offering (a ram) to the door of the tabernacle, to be offered in his behalf by the priest (Lev. xix:20-22). (6) Teaching of Christ. In Matt. v.:32, Christ seems to assume that the practice of divorce for adultery already existed. In later times, it cer- tainly did; and Jews who were averse to parting ADULTERY, TRIAL OF with their adulterous wives were compelled to put them away (Maimon. in Gerushin, c :2). In the passage just referred to, Our Lord does not appear to render divorce compulsory, even in case of adultery; he only permits it in that case alone, by forbidding it in every other. (7) Roman Law. It seems that the Roman law made the same important distinction with the Hebrew, between the infidelity of the husband and of the wife. “Adultery’ was defined by the civil- ians to be the violation of another man's bed so that the infidelity of the husband could not con- stitute the offense. The more ancient laws of Rome, which were very severe against the offense of the wife, were silent as to that of the husband. The offense was not capital until made so by Con- stantine, in imitation of the Jewish law; but un- der LeO and Marcian the penalty was abated to perpetual imprisonment, or cutting off the nose; and, under Justinian, the further mitigation was granted to the woman, that she was only to be scourged, to lose her dower, and to be shut up in a COnvent. The punishment of cutting off the nose brings to mind the passage in which the prophet Ezekiel (xxiii.25), after, in the name of the Lord, reprov- ing Israel and Judah for their adulteries (i. e., idolatries) with the Assyrians and Chaldeans, threatens the punishment—they shall take away thy nose and thy ears,’ which Jerome states was actually the punishment of adultery in those na- tions. One or both of these mutilations, most generally that of the nose, were also inflicted by other nations, as the Persians and Egyptians, and even the Romans; but we suspect that among the former, as with the latter, it was less a judicial punishment than a summary infliction by the ag- grieved party. r It would also seem that these mutilations were more usually inflicted on the male than the female adulterer. In Egypt, however, cutting off the nose was the female punishment, and the man was beaten terribly with rods (Diod. Sic. i :89, 90). The respect with which the conjugal union was treated in that country in the earliest times is manifested in the history of Abraham (Gen. xii:19). (See MARRIAGE.) Jºymbolical. Adultery, in the symbolical lan- guage of the Old Testament, means idolatry and apostasy from the worship of the true God (Jer. iii:8, 9; Ezek. xvi :32; xxiii:37; also Rev. ii:22). Hence an Adulteress meant an apostate church or city, particularly ‘the daughter of Jerusalem,” or the Jewish church and people (Is. i :21 ; Jer. iii:6, 8, 9; Ezek. xvi :22; xxiii:7). This figure resulted from the primary one, which describes the con- nection between God and his separated people as a marriage between him and them. By an application of the same figure, ‘An adulterous generation’ (Matt. xii:39; xvi :4; Mark viii:38) means a faithless and impious generation. ADULTERY, TRIAL OF (ā'dül’tér-y, tri'al öv). (1) Water of Jealousy. It would be unjust to the spirit of the Mosaical legislation to suppose that the trial of the suspected wife by the bitter water, . called the Water of Jealousy, was by it first pro- duced. It is to be regarded as an attempt to miti- gate the evils of, and to bring under legal control, an old custom which could not be entirely abro- gated. The original usage, which it was designed to mitigate, was probably of the kind which we still find in Western Africa; and a comparison of the two may suggest the real points of the evil which the law of Moses was designed to rectify, and the real advantages which it was calculated to secure. The matter deserves particular at- ADULTERY, TRIAL OF tention, inasmuch as it relates to the only ordeal in use among the Israelites, or sanctioned by their a W. (2) Trial by Red Water. The illustrative details of the Trial by Red Water, as it is called, vary among different nations, in minute particu- lars, which it would be tiresome to distinguish. The substantial facts may be embodied in one Statement : (3) Differences. The ordeal is, in some tribes, confined to the case of adultery, but in others it is used in all cases. Differences, rather than resemb- lances, must indicate the particular points in which the Mosaical law, while retaining the form, aban- doned the substance and obviated the evils of this institution. The differences are, in fact, all-im- portant. In Africa the drink is poisonous, and cal- culated to produce the effects which the oath im- precates; whereas, the ‘water of jealousy, how- ever unpleasant, was prepared in a prescribed manner, with ingredients known to all to be per- fectly innocuous. It could not therefore injure the innocent; and its action upon the guilty must have resulted from the consciousness of having com- mitted a horrible perjury, which crime, when the Oath was so solemnly confirmed by the draught, and attended by such awful imprecations, was be- lieved to be visitable with immediate death from heaven. It cannot be too strongly inculcated, that in the African examples the effect is not ascribed to the drink, but to a supernatural visitation upon a perjury which the confirmation of the ‘oath- drink' renders so awful. (4) Oath-Drink. This name of ‘oath-drink' is commonly applied to it on the Gold Coast. And it was, doubtless, to strengthen such an impression that this awful drink, so much dreaded in Africa, was with the Jews exclusively appropriated to the only ordeal trial among them. (5) Result. The result of these views and illus- trations will be, that the trial for suspected adul- tery by the bitter water amounted to this—that a woman suspected of adultery by her husband was allowed to repel the charge by a public oath of purgation, which oath was designedly made so solemn in itself, and was attended by such awful circumstances, that it was in the highest degree un- likely that it would be dared hy any woman not supported by the consciousness of innocence. And the fact that no instance of the actual application of the ordeal occurs in Scripture, affords some countenance to the assertion of the Jewish writers —that the trial was so much dreaded by the women, that those who were really guilty gener- cally avoided it by confession ; and that thus the trial itself early fell into disuse. And if, as we have supposed, this mode of trial was only toler- ated by Moses, the ultimate neglect of it must have been desired and intended by him. In later times, indeed, it was disputed in the Jewish schools, whether the husband was bound to prose- cute his wife to this extremity, or whether it was not lawful for him to connive at and pardon her act, if he were so inclined. There were some who held that he was bound by his duty to prosecute while others maintained that it was left to his pleasure (T. Hieros. tit. Sotah, fol. I6, 2). (6) Abrogated. From the same source we learn that this form of trial was finally abrogated about forty years before the destruction of Jeru- salem. The reason assigned is, that the men them- selves were at that time generally adulterous; and that God would not fulfil the imprecations of the ordeal oath upon the wife while the husband was guilty of the same crime (John viii:I-8). 62 ADVENTISTS (SEVENTH DAY) ADUMMIM (a-dûm'mim), (Heb. bºs, ad- oom-meem'), a place which is only twice named in Scripture. Once (Josh. xv.:7), where, from the context, it seems to indicate the border between Judah and Benjamin, and that it was an ascend- ing road between Gilgal (and also Jericho) and Jerusalem. The second notice (Josh. xviii:17) adds no further information, but repeats ‘the as- cent to Adummim.’ Most commentators take the name to mean the place of blood, and follow Jerome, who finds the place in the dangerous or mountainous part of the road between Jerusalem and Jericho, and supposes that it was so called from the frequent effusion of blood by the rob- bers, by whom it was much infested. These are curious interpretations of the original word, which merely denotes the redness of the soil or rock. It does not appear that any traveler mentions the geological aspect of the spot, and therefore this must be regarded only as a probable con- jecture. However, as a difficult pass in a deso- late rocky region, between important cities, the part of the road indicated by Jerome, and all after him, was as likely to be infested by robbers in earlier times as in those of Jerome and at the present day. Indeed, the character of the road was so notorious that Christ lays the scene of the parable of the good Samaritan (Luke x:30) upon it; and Jerome informs us that Adummim or Adommim was believed to be the place where the traveler (taken as a real person) ‘fell among thieves.’ He adds that a fort and garrison was maintained here for the safeguard of travelers. The travelers of the present century mention the spot and neighborhood nearly in the same terms as those of older date, and describe the ruins as those of ‘a convent and a khan' (Hardy, I93). They all represent the road as still infested by robbers, from whom some of them have not escaped without danger. The place thus indicated is about eight miles from Jerusalem and four from Jericho. ADVANTAGE (ād-vān'tāj). The word has no connection with the Lat. prep. ad, but comes from avant, before. It denotes superiority and not profit (Rom. iii: I ; 2 Cor. ii: I ; see also 2 Cor. vii:2; xii:17, 18). In Job xxxv :3; Jude v :16, it means profit. ADVENT, SECOND (ād'vént, sék'ūnd). See MILLENNIUM. ADVENTISTS (SEVENTH-DAY). Strictly speaking, the denomination of Seventh- Day Adventists originated in 1845. A large num- ber who at that time, or shortly afterward, be- came Seventh-Day Adventists were formerly Ad- ventists. They had been actively connected with the great Advent movement of 1840-44. The dis- appointment which they had suffered in the pass- ing of the time at which they had expected the Lord to come in 1844 was caused by the almost universallv accepted theory that the earth was the Sanctuary which was to be cleansed at the end of the prophetic periods of the Book of Daniel, which had been the basis of their calculations. When they had given to the subject a more care- ful study they found that the sanctuary which was to be cleansed at the end of the prophetic days was “the sanctuary and the true tabernacle” “in heaven,” “which the Lord pitched,” and of which the sanctuary built by Israel in the Wilder- ness was but a figure (Heb. viii:I ; ix:II, 23, 24; Rev. xi :19). (1) Ten Commandments. The study of this subject led them irresistibly to the contempla- ADVENTISTS (SEVENTH DAY) tion of the Ten Commandments, which, “written with the finger of God,” were deposited “in the ark of the testament” in both the figure and the true. In this study they were very strongly im- pressed with the conviction that the fourth com- mandment of the ten requires the observance of the seventh day, or Saturday, as the Sabbath; and not the first day, or Sunday, as was, and is, the teaching of the churches. In their proclamation of the soon coming of the Lord in 1840-44, the two messages of Revela- tion, xiv:6-8, “Fear God and give glory to Him, for the hour of His judgment is come,” and “Babylon is fallen,” had been the keynotes. And now, as they reviewed their positions and more carefully studied the Scriptures they saw that there is a third message following these two, and belonging inseparably with them, being indeed the essential complement of the former two. And in this third angel’s message they also read the remarkable words, “Here are they which keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.” Having, in the study of the sanctuary, their at- tention already directed to the commandments, and their minds so strongly convinced that they were not keeping the fourth commandment, this voice of the third angel, calling upon all to “keep the commandments of God,” as well as the faith of Jesus, was to them the irresistible voice of God. They could not hesitate; they at once planted themselves firmly upon the Word in the keeping of all the commandments of God and also the faith of Jesus. From that day forward their motto has ever been the word of the third angel of Revelation xiv:12, “Here are they which keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.” Upon this leading and experience, the positive and clearly defined object, the well-understood purpose of existence, of the Seventh-Day Advent- ists, has ever been to proclaim to every nation and kindred and tongue and people upon the earth, the threefold message of God, as written in Revelation xiv:6-I2. - The chief subject of this proclamation as there recorded is, in a word, “the everlasting gospel,” emphasized by the fact that “the hour of his judgment is come.” With this law of God, the Ten Commandments is unavoidably interwoven; because that law is the standard in the judg- ment. All who in that day are found justified by the Gospel—the faith of Jesus—their justifi- cation will be witnessed by the law; and all who in that day are not found justified by the Gospel will be irrevocably condemned by the law. Men are justified by the Gospel and judged by the law, (2) Everlasting Gospel. This everlasting Gospel which we preach is the whole Gospel for the whole man. It is a Gospel of the salvation of the whole man, “body, soul and spirit.” The body is as certainly a part of the man as is the soul or spirit. Jesus Christ died for the whole man. He redeems the body as well as the soul. This requires that the Christian shall care for his body as well as for his soul. Accordingly, in this Gospel, health of body is a Christian grace, and the recovery and the pres- ervation of health is a Christian virtue, as it is written, “I wish above all things that thou may- est prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth (3 John 2). Purity of body, as well as of spirit, is also an essential element of this Gospel, because it is written, “Having these promises, dearly beloved, iet 11s cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and of the spirit, perfecting holiness in the 63 ADVENTISTs (SEVENTH DAY) fear of God” (2 Cor. vii:I). Consequently, to- bacco in any form, or any kindred thing, can have no place. Perfect temperance is likewise an essential of this everlasting gospel; for when the great apos- tle was heard “concerning the faith in Christ,” he reasoned of “temperance” as well as of “righteous- ness” and of “judgment to come” (Acts xxiv:24, 25). Wherefore, neither stimulant nor narcotic of any sort can be used by the believer in this everlasting Gospel. Temperance is self-control. Perfect temperance is perfect self-control. The everlasting Gospel aims at nothing short of per- fection in all things in Christ Jesus. Therefore, in the total rejection of every kind of stimulant or narcotic, as to the body, and absolute sur- render to the Spirit of God, as to the soul, thus being cleansed from all filthiness of the flesh and of the Spirit, the believer goes on “perfecting holi- ness in the fear of God,” prospering and being in health even as his soul prospers; is sanctified wholly, body, soul and spirit, and so is preserved blameless unto the coming of the Lord (I Thess. v:23). So much in brief for the principles of the Seventh-Day Adventists. “How far have these principles been found realizable?” To a considerable extent, indeed; though not yet to the extent that our profession justly demands. (a) As for the realizing of our principles of temperance, purity and health, and righteousness and holiness, much progress has been made; as we believe every one will agree who understands that in a membership of above fifty thousand, gathered from many nationalities and every con- dition of life, even to the lowest enslaved, wrecked and abandoned victim of tobacco, strong drink, Opium or morphine, it is almost impossible to find one who uses tobacco, very few who use even tea or coffee, and absolutely none who use any- thing stronger than tea or coffee. (b) As for the realizing of the original and ultimate purpose of our existence as a separate denomination, that is, the proclaiming of the mes- sage of God to every nation, kindred, tongue, and people, considerable progress has been made in this also. We have organized conferences in twenty-eight states of the Union, with churches in all the other states and in the territories; also in New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, Switzer- land, Germany, Denmark, Norway, England, Que- bec, and Ontario; churches in Manitoba, Hawaiian Islands, India, Russia, Turkey, Holland, British Guiana, Brazil, Argentina, Chili, in the islands of Trinidad, Jamaica, Ruatan, Pitcairn, Tahiti, Norfolk Islands; and missions in Fiji, Cook Is. lands, Tonga, Society Islands, China, India, Mata- beleland, and Gold Coast. We have educational institutions—academies or colleges—in Massachu- setts, Ohio, Tennessee, Michigan, Nebraska, Texas, California, Washington, New South Wales, Cape Colony, Germany, and Denmark; and Schools in Hawaiian Islands, Japan, Switzerland, Sweden, and Brazil. We have health institutions in Michigan, Illinois, Nebraska, Colorado, Cali- fornia, Oregon, Mexico, Hawaiian Islands, Samoa, New South Wales, Victoria, Cape Colony, India, and Switzerland. We have publishing houses in New York, Michigan, California, Australia, Cape Colony, Germany, Norway, and England; and from these are issued publications in more than forty languages. “How far can these principles be hoped to be realized in the future?” As for the Christian life itself, the principles can be hoped to be realized ADVENTURE t even to the absolute perfecting of the individual membership in Christ Jesus (Eph. iv.:7, 14). The power of God manifested in the everlasting Gos- pel is able to save a man from sin, to keep him from sinning, to make him perfect in every good work to do the will of God, and to present him faultless in the presence of God with exceeding joy. This consummation we sincerely expect to see realized in thousands upon thousands of men upon the earth, who thereby shall be pre- pared to meet the Lord Jesus in peace when he comes in the clouds of heaven in all his glory. And as for the proclamation of the message— completely to the earth's bounds—since already our evangelical, educational, health, and publish- ing institutions are all established twice clear round the earth—both north and south of the equator, it will be easy enough for the princi- ples to spread from these to the earth’s bounds, when all who are connected with all the institu- tions shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost as at Pentecost, for which we are constantly praying and waiting. A. T. J. AIDVENTURE (ād-vén'tūr), now obsolete as a verb. “Which would not adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the ground' (Deut. xxviii:56). Vezzzzzze has taken its place in later usage. Yet I will adventure. SHAKESPEARE. ADVERSARY (ād'vér-sà-ry), in its general meaning, is an enemy; as “The Lord will take vengeance upon his adversaries” (Nah. i:2); spe- cifically, one who justly or unjustly sets himself in opposition to another, so Peninnah is called the adversary of Hannah (I Sam. i.6). It is sometimes derived from Heb. YS, Zsuzz", to bind; in I Sam. ii:Io, D", rib, to strive. In the New Testament the terms occur àvruketp.evos, Virévavrlos, one who opposes; and duriótkos, opponent in law. In Is. 1:8, the ex- pression tº 222, Baa/ mish/at, means “he who has a judicial cause or lawsuit against me;” just as in Roman law do?/22ntes Zitis is distinguished from the procurator; i. e., from the person who repre- sents him in court (Delitzsch. Com. ; Barnes, Bih. Dict.). This use of the word was common in the litera- ture of the seventeenth century. And do as adversaries do in law, Strike mightily, but eat and drink as friends. SHAKESPEARE. Emphatically (Heb. ) Satan, the devil, is the general enemy of mankind. “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil,” etc. (I Pet. v :8). (See ACCUSER; SATAN.) With the most obstinate and implacable malice he sets himself to defame and dishonor God; to reproach, accuse, and harass the saints; and to ruin the souls and bodies of men. ADVERTISE (ād'vér-tiz). In Num. xxiv:14, tº) T T , the word means to inform, to give notice. In Ruth iv:4, it means to disclose. ADVICE (ād-vis'), ADVISE (ād-viz'), AD- VISEMENT (ād-viz' ment). In Judg. xix:30, and 2 Chron. xxv.17, to take advice means to consult with oneself and give an opinion. Advise, in the sense of deliberating with one- Self, is found twice in 2 Sam. xxiv:I3, * * * now advise, and see what answer shall return to him that sent me.’ Advisement occurs in I Chron. xii: 19 (in an obsolete sense) for deliberation, “for the lords of the Philistines upon advisement sent him away.' ADVOCATE (ād'vo-kat), (Gr. IIapákAmros, far- ań'/ay-tos, paraclete), one who pleads the cause of another; also one who exhorts, defends, com- 64 AETHIOPIA forts, pray for another. It is an appellation: given to the Holy Spirit by Christ (John xiv:16; xv.26; xvi.7), and to Christ himself by an apostle (1 John ii: I ; see also Rom. viii:34; Heb. vii:25). (See PARACLETU.S.) s In the forensic sense, advocates or pleaders were not known to the Jews 11ntil they came under the dominion of the Romans, and were obliged to transact their law affairs after the Roman manner. Being then little conversant with the Roman laws, and with the forms of the jurists, it was ne- cessary for them, in pleading a cause before the Roman magistrates, to obtain the assistance of a Roman lawyer or advocate, who was well versed in the Greek and Latin languages. In all the Roman provinces such men were found, who de- voted their time and labor to the pleading of causes and the transacting of other legal business in the provincial courts. It also appears (Cic. fro. Caelio, c. 30) that many Roman youths who had devoted themselves to forensic business used to repair to the provinces with the consuls and praetors, in order, by managing the causes of the provincials, to fit themselves for more important ones at Rome. Such an advocate was Tertullus, whom the Jews employed to accuse Paul before Felix (Acts xxiv:1); for although Æhetor, Åfjtap, the term applied to him, signifies primarily an orator or speaker, yet it also denotes a pleader or advocate (Kuinoel, Comment, and Bloomfield, Recens. Synopt. ad. Act. xxiv:2). (See ACCUSER; SPIRIT, Holy.) ADYTUM (ād'y-tūm), that which is inaccessible or impenetrable; and hence considered as descrip- tive of the Holy of Holies in the temple of Jeru- salem, and of the innermost chambers, or pene- tralia, of other edifices accounted sacred, and of the secret places to which the priests only were admitted. It is used metaphorically by eccle- siastical writers, and employed to signify the heart and conscience of a man, and sometimes the deep, spiritual meaning of the Divine word. AEGYPT (à'jipt). See EGYPT. AELIA CAPITOLINA (É'li-acăp-i-to-li'na), Jeru- salem. - AENEAS (ae'ne-as), (Gr. Alvéas, ahee-meh'as), a paralytic of Lydda cured by Peter (Acts ix:33, 34). AENON (à'nön), (Gr. Alvøv, ahee'nohn, springs), the name of a place near Salem, where John baptized (John iii:23); the reason given, ‘because there was much water there,” would suggest that he baptized at the springs from which the place took its name. On the situation of AEmon nothing certain has been determined, although Eusebius places it eight Roman miles south of Scythopolis (Bethshan) and fifty-three northeast of Jeru- salem. Dr. Barclay locates it at Wady Farah, five miles north of Jerusalem. It is accessible by roads from all quarters, and is situated by one of the main roads from Jerusalem to Galilee, the road passing Jacob's Well (John iv: 6) which our Lord may have taken to meet, the Baptist in view of threatened misunderstandings and jealousies of his disciples. For a full descrip- tion, see Conder's Tent Work, ii, pp. 57, 58. º AEON (à'on), (Gr. altºv, age), a human lifetime; life itself (according to Homer, Herodotus, etc.); an unbroken age; perpetuity of time; eternity. With this signification the Hebrew and Rabbinic idea of the word rºy, o-lawm', concealed, Com- bines in the biblical and ecclesiastical writers. (See TIME; ETERNAL.) AERA (ā'ra). See CHRONOLOGY. AETHIOPIA (à-thſ. O'pi-á). See ETHIOPIA. AFFINITY AFFINITY (af-fini-ty), is relationship by mar- riage, as distinguished from consanguinity, which is relationship by blood. (1) Marriages Forbidden by Mosaic Law. Marriages between persons thus related, in various degrees, which previous usage, in different con- ditions of Society, had allowed, were forbidden by the law of Moses. These degrees are enumerated in Lev. xviii:7 sq. The examples before the law are those of Cain and Abel, who, as the necessity of the case required, married their own sisters. Abraham married Sarah, the daughter of his father by another wife; and Jacob married the two Sisters, Leah and Rachel. In the first instance, and even in the second, there was an obvious con- Sanguinity, and only the last offered a previous re- lationship of affinity merely. So also, in the pro- hibition of the law, a consanguinity can be traced in what are usually set down as degrees of affinity merely. (2) Degrees of Affinity. The degrees of real affinity interdicted are, that a man shall not (nor a woman in the corresponding relations) marry—I. his father’s widow (not his own mother); 2. the daughter of his father's wife by another husband; 3. the widow of his paternal uncle; 4. nor his brother’s widow if he has left children by her ; but, if not, he was bound to marry her to raise up children to his deceased brother. (See LEVIRATE MARRIAGE). (3) Other Restrictions. The other restrictions are connected with the condition of polygamy, and they prohibit a man from having—I. a mother and her daughter for wives at the same time; 2. or two sisters for wives at the same time. These pro- hibitions, although founded in Oriental notions, adapted to a particular condition of society, and connected with the peculiarities of the Levitical marriage law, have been imported wholesale into Our canon law. The fitness of this is doubted by many; but as, apart from any moral questions, the prohibited marriages are such as few would, in the present condition of European society, desire to contract, and such as would be deemed repug- nant to good taste and correct manners, there is little real matter of regret in this adoption of the Levitical law. (4) Objections. Indeed, the objections to this adoption have rested chiefly upon one point; and that happens to be a point in which the law itself happens to have been egregiously misunderstood. This is in the injunction which, under permitted polygamy, forbade a man to have two sisters at once; an injunction which has been construed, under the Christian law, which allows but one wife, to apply equally to the case of a man marrying the sister of a deceased wife. The law itself, however, is so plain that it is difficult to conceive how its true object—concerning which nearly all commentators are agreed—could have been thus interpreted. It is rendered in our version, “Neither shalt thou take a wife to her sister, to vex her, to uncover her nakedness, be- side the other in her lifetime.” Clear as this seems, it is still clearer if, with Gesenius and others, we take the Hebrew word, rendered to ver, to mean to rival, as in the Sept., Arabic, and Vulgate. The Targum of Jonathan, the Mishna, and the cele- brated Jewish commentators Jarchi and Ben Gerson, are satisfied that two sisters at once are intended; and there seems an obvious design to prevent the occurrence of such unseemly jealousies and contentions between sister-wives as embittered the life of Jacob—the father of the twelve tribes. (5) Recondite Sense. The more recondite sense has been extracted, with rather ungentle violence AFFLICTION to the principles of Hebrew construction, by making ‘vex her’ the antecedent of ‘in her life- time,’ instead of ‘take her sister to her, in her lifetime.” Under this view it is explained that the married sister should not be vexed’ in her life- time by the prospect that her sister might suc- ceed her. It may be safely said that such an idea would never have occurred in the East, where un- married sisters are far more rarely than in Europe brought into such acquaintance with the husband of the married sister as to give occasion for such ‘vexation’ or ‘rivalry' as this. Yet, this view of the matter, which is completely exploded among sound biblical critics, has received the sanction of several Christian Councils (Concil. Illiber. can. 61; Aurat. can. I7; Aurer, can. 30); and is per- haps not calculated to do much harm, except under peculiar circumstances, and except as it may prove a snare to some sincere but weak consciences. It may be remarked that in those codes of law which most resemble that of Moses on the general sub- ject, no prohibition of the marriage of two sisters in succession can be found. In I Kings iii:I, ‘Solomon made affinity with Pharaoh ;’ 2 Chron. xviii: I, Jehoshaphat * * * joined affinity with Ahab ;’ and Ezra ix:14 “Should we # * * join in affinity with the people of these abominations P’ affinity has the special sense . of relationship by marriage, being distinguished from consanguinity or relationship by blood (Hastings). . AFFIRMATIVES (af-férm'à-tivs). Among the Jews the formula of assent or affirmation was, thou hast said, or, thou hast fightly said. It is stated by Aryda and others that this is the pre- vailing mode in which a person expresses his as- sent, at this day, in Lebanon, especially when he does not wish to assert anything in express terms, This explains the answer of our Saviour to the high-priest Caiaphas (Matt. xxvi :64), when he was asked whether he was the Christ, the son of God, and replied a e i r a s (see also Matt. xxvi :25). Instances occur in the Talmud; thus, ‘A certain man was asked. “Is Rabbi dead?” He answered, “Ye have said;” on which they rent their clothes'—taking it for granted from this answer that it was so (T. Hieros. Kilaim xxxii:2). All readers even of translations are familiar with a frequent elegancy of the Scriptures, or rather of the Hebrew language, in using an affirmative and negative together, by which the sense is rendered more emphatic; sometimes the negative first, as Ps. cxviii:17, ‘I shall not die, but live,” etc.; sometimes the negative first, as Is. xxxviii:I, ‘Thou shalt die, and not live.’ In John i:20 there is a remarkable instance of emphasis produced by a negative being placed between two affirmatives. —‘And he confessed, and denied not, but con- fessed, I am not the Christ.’ * AFFLICTION (äf-fiſk'shūn), (generally Heb. * on-ee", depressed Gr. 9Xtypus, th/ºff'sis, pressure). Affliction denotes all manner of distress, oppres- sion, persecution, or anything that causes sorrow (Job v :6; Exod. iii:7; Mark iv :17). The afflic- tion of the afflicted (Ps. xxii:24), denotes the pe- culiar affliction which Christ endured in his agony under the wrath of God and the fear of death (Heb. v. :7). (See ABHOR.) As an instru- ment in the hands of God it varies in its character and results according to the character of the soul that suffers it. When laid on reprobates, it is proper punishment (Nah. i:9). When laid on the saints. it is fatherly chastisement, springing from God’s love to them ; it is merited by the death of Christ, secured by the new covenant, and works for their good (2 Cor. iv:I7; Ps. lxxxix: AFTER 30). In consequence of its being promised as a Covenant-mercy, God afflicts his people in faith- fulness, and they know it (Ps. cxix:75). They “fill up what is behind of the afflictions of Christ in their flesh, for his body's sake” (Col. i:24); that is, they are made like unto Christ in thc followship of his sufferings. AFRICA (äf'ric-a). This “quarter of the world” is not mentioned as such by any general name in Scripture, although some of its regions are in- dicated. It is thought by some, however, that Africa, or as much of it as was then known, is denoted by “the land of Ham' in several of the Psalms. But we are inclined to think that the context rather restricts this designation to Egypt. Whether Africa was really “the land of Ham,' that is, was peopled by the descendants of Ham, is quite another question. (See HAM; ARABIA.) AFTER (äft'êr). (1) Behind (Job xxx:5). (2) Later in time; at the end of (Acts xv.16). (3) Ac- cording to the direction and influence (Is. xi.;3; Rom. viii: I, 4, 13); Žnquire after, is to search for (Job x:6); to go after, to serve and worship (Deut. vi; I4); to waſ/º after, to follow an example, to imitate (Hos. xi:IO). After, according to the Spirit of (Col. ii:8). AFTERNOON (āftār-nóón), (Heb. Fºº Fº, me-zoáh'/ha-yom", the day's declining, Judg. xix:8), according to the Jewish reckoning the fifth of the six divisions of the day. (See TIME.) AGABA (äg'a-bä), a fortress near Jerusalem, which Galestus, its governor, restored to Aristo- bulus, son of Alexander Jannaeus (Joseph. Antig. Złó. xiii, Cap. 24). - AGABUS (äg'a-bus), (Gr. "Ayagos, ag'ab-os, per- haps, to love), the name of “a prophet,” supposed to have been one of the seventy disciples of Christ. He, with others, came from Judaea to Antioch, while Paul and Barnabas (A. D. 43) were there and announced an approaching famine, which actually occurred the following year. Some writers suppose that the famine was general, but most modern commentators unite in understanding that the large terms of the Original "OX"v thu oikovuévny, apply not to the whole world, nor even to the whole Roman empire, but, as in Luke ii: I, to Judea only. Statements re- specting four famines, which occurred in the reign of Claudius, are produced by the commen- tators who support this view ; and as all the countries put together would not make up a tenth part of even the Roman empire, they think it plain that the words must be understood to apply to that famine which, in the fourth year of Claudius, overspread Palestine. The poor Jews, in general, were then relieved by the Queen of Adiabene, who sent to purchase corn in Egypt for them (Joseph. Ahtiq. xx :2, Ö) ; alld ſul (11e elieſ Uſ the Chris. tians in that country contributions were raised by the brethren at Antioch, and conveyed to Jeru- salem by Paul and Barnabas (Acts xi :27-30). Many years after, this same Agabus met Paul at Caesarea, and warned him of the sufferings which awaited him if he prosecuted his journey to Jerusalem (Acts xxi : II-I4). AGAG (Heb. 228 ag-ag', flame), the name of two kings of the Amalekites, and perhaps a com- mon name of all their kings, like Pharaoh in Egypt (Comp. Num. xxiv:7; I Sam. xv.:8, 9, 20, 32), B. C. I I69. I. The first of these passages would imply that the king of the Amalekites was, then at least, a greater monarch, and his people a greater people, than is commonly imag- ined. (See AMALEKITES.) 2. The latter references 66 AGAPE are to that king of the Amalekites who was spared by Saul, contrary to the solemn vow of devote- ment to destruction, whereby the nation, as such, had of old precluded itself from giving any Quarter to that people (Exod. xvii: Io; Num. xiv: 45). Hence, when Samuel arrived in the camp of Saul, he ordcred Agag to be brought forth. He came ‘pleasantly,’ deeming secure the life which the king had spared. But the prophet ordered him to be cut in pieces; and the expres- Sion which he employed—‘As thy sword hath made women childless, so shall thy mother be childless among women’ (I Sam. xv.:32)—in- dicates that, apart from the obligations of the vow, Some such example of retributive justice was intended, as had been exercised in the case of Adonibezek; or, in other words, that Agag had made himself infamous by the same treatment of Some prisoners of distinction (probably Israelites) as he now received from Samuel. The unusual mode in which his death was inflicted strongly supports this conclusion. AGAGITE (ā'gag-ite), used as a Gentile name for Amalekite in Esth. iii:1, Io; viii:3, 5. AGAPE or AGAPAE(ag'a-pé), (Gr.áyáirm, dyátral, ag-a%ay), the Greek term for love, used by ecclesi- astical writers (most frequently in the plural) to signify the social feasts of friendship, love, or kindness, in use among the primitive Chris- tians. It is very probable that they were insti- tuted in memory of the last supper of Jesus Christ with his disciples, which supper was con- cluded before he instituted the eucharist. (1) Festival. These festivals were kept in the assembly, or church, towards evening, after prayers and worship, were over. Upon these occa- sions, the faithful ate together, with great sim- plicity and union, what each had brought; so that rich and poor were in no way distinguished. After a Supper, marked by much frugality and modesty, they partook of the sacramental signs of the Lord's body and blood, and gave each other the kiss of peace. (2) Before the Eucharist. The Agapae are placed before the eucharist (I Cor. xi :21), and if they did refer to our Lord's supper before he instituted the eucharist, this seems to be their natural order. But it is probable that, at least in Some places, or on some occasions, the holy eucharist preceded the Agapae; perhaps when per- secution rendered extreme caution necessary; for it seems very likely that Pliny speaks of these Agapae in his famous letter to Trajan : “After their service to Christ (quasi Deo) they departed, and returned to take a harmless repast in com- mon.' . (3) History. The history of the Agapae among the primitive Christians is so closely connected with the manners, customs, and opinions of times and places that to treat it satisfactorily would lead us too far ; we may, therefore, only offer a few remarks. There seems reason to conclude that the social intercourse of early believers might enable them to discover many excellencies in each other, which might contribute to justify and to promote the observations of heathen strangers, ‘See how these Christians love one another l’ - These Agapae were not only very powerful means, among the primitive Christians, of culti- vating mutual affection throughout their body, and of gaining the good will of those who ob- served their conduct; but, in all probability, they contributed to the promotion of the Christian AGAPE cause, by leading to conversions, and by support- ing the minds of young converts under the diffi- culties attending their situation. Tertullian (Apol. cap. 39) speaks of them thus: “Nothing low or unseemly is committed in them ; nor is it till after having prayed to God that they sit down to table. Food is taken in moderation, as wanted; and no more is drank than it becomes discreet persons to drink. Each takes such refreshment as is suitable, in connection with the recollection that he is to be engaged, in the course of the night, in adorations to God; and the conversation is conducted as becometh those who know that the Lord heareth them. After water has been brought for the hands, and fresh lights, everyone is invited to sing, and to glorify God, whether by passages from the sacred Scriptures, or of his own composition. This discovers whether proper moderation has been observed at the table. In short, the repast concludes as it began ; that is to say, with prayer.’ (4) Abuse. These institutions, however, even in the time of the apostles, appear to have degen- erated, and become abused. Paul (I Cor. xi :20, 2I) complains, that the rich despised the poor in these assemblies, and would not condescend to eat with him : “When ye come together,’ says he, ‘in one place—this coming together, merely, is not eating the Lord's supper; one taking before another his own supper; one being hungry, another over full. What have ye not houses to eat and to drink in P or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not?' In this discordant state of its members, a church could not but be unfit to celebrate the great com- memoration of Divine love. (Jude I2. ‘Spots in your feasts of charity—Agapae—feasting them- selves, etc.') It certainly seems to us extraordinary, that on any occasion, much more on Occasion of a Chris- tian institution recently attended to, and a solemn Christian ordinance about to be attended to, the Corinthians should, any of them, indulge to excess of any kind : but when we consider that public suppers and other meals were customary among the Greeks (to which they might assimi- late these Agapae), and besides, that the sacrifices at which these Corinthians had been accustomed to attend, were followed (and some accompanied) by merriment, we shall see less reason to wonder at their falling into intemperance of behavior so very different from the genius of the gospel. Certainly the eucharist itself is, as the name im- plies, a feast for joy; but for joy of a much more serious kind. However, we must, in justice, vindicate the Corinthians from that gross profana- tion of the eucharist itself, with which, from our translation, or rather from the common accepta- tion of the phrase “Lord’s supper,” they have been reproached. The Agapae were abolished by the Council of Laodicea, Can. 28, Synod of Trullo, Can. 74, and the Council of Carthage, Can. 42. (5) Other Devotional Entertainments. The Jews had certain devotional entertainments, in some degree related to the Agapae. On their great festival days, they made feasts for their family, for the priests, the poor, and Orphans; or they sent portions to them. These repasts were made in Jerusalem, before the Lord. There were also certain sacrifices and first-fruits appointed by the law, to be set apart for that purpose (Deut. xxvi :10-12; Neh. viii:Io, I2; Esth. ix:19). A similar custom obtained among the heathen ; at 67 AGE least, so far as to partake convivially of what had been offered in sacrifice; and perhaps, also, send- ing portions to such as were absent. The Essenes also had their repasts in common; and probably many other confraternities or sects. To this fel- lowship, the institution of the Sodales or brother- hoods, which had become popular since the days of Augustus, might greatly contribute. AGAR (ā'gar), a Greek form (Gal. iv:24, 25) of the name HAGAR (which see). AGATE (ag'ate), (Heb. Pº, sheb-oo', signifying unknown; Sept. 3x3rms; Vulg. achaſes), a precious or rather ornamental stone, which was one of those in the pectoral of the high-priest (Exod. xxviii:19; xxxix: I2). The word agate, indeed, occurs also in Is. liv :I2, and Ezek. xxvii: 16, in our translation; but in the original the word in these texts is altogether different, being Kad- kod. It seems not to have been questioned that some stone of the agate kind is intended. This stone is popularly known in England under the name of Scotch pebble. There are few countries in which agates of some quality or other are not produced. The finest are those of India; they are plentiful, and sometimes fine, in Italy, Spain, and Germany; but those found in this country are seldom good. Agate is one of the numerous modifications of form under which silica presents itself, almost in a state of purity, forming 98 per cent. Of the entire mineral. The siliceous particles are not so arranged as to produce the transparency of rock crystal, but a semi-pellucid, sometimes almost opaque substance, with a resinous or waxy frac- ture; and the various shades of color arise from minute quantities of iron. The same stone some- times contains parts of different degrees of trans- lucency, and of various shades of color; and the endless combinations of these produce the beau- tiful and singular internal forms, from which, together with the high polish they are capable of receiving, agates acquire their value as precious stones. The Scripture text shows the early use of this stone for engraving ; and sev- eral antique agates, engraved with exquisite beauty, are still preserved in the cabinets of the curious. . AGE (āj), in the A.V. is the word used to repre- sent several Hebrew and Greek words: Generation, (Heb. him, dore, the circle of the years of human life, Job. viii:8; Is. xxxviii:12); old age (Heb. lº, gazey-Åame', aged, Gen. xlviii:IO); /*fetime (Heb. -: º, Aſheh'/ed, that which is fleeting, Job xi:17; PS. xxxix: 5 ; grayheadedness (Heb. *, sabe, I Kings xiv:4); day (Heb. Diº, yome, so-called from the diurnal heat, Gen. xviii:11; xxiv:I; Josh. xxiii:I, 2; Zech. viii.4); maturity, a particular period of life (Gr. #Xukta, hay-/:A-ee'ah, Heb. xi.; II). In general (1) The time, of life when a woman is fit for conceiving of children (Heb. xi.; II). , (2) The time when men's natural powers and faculties are at their perfection, or near it (John Xi:21, 23; Heb. v.:14). (3) Long continuance of life (Job v:26; Zech. viii.4). (4) A. period of time, past, present, or future (Eph. iii:5; ii:7). (5). The peo- ple living in such periods (Col. i.26). (See AEON; TIME; LONGEVITY.) AGEE (äg'ee), (Heb. 838, aw-gay", fugitive), a Hararite, father of Shammah, which latter WaS OIn e of David's mighty men (2 Sam. xxiii:II). AGE, OLD (āj, old). The strong desire of a pro- tracted life, and the marked respect with which AGMON aged persons were treated among the Jews, are very often indicated in the Scriptures. The most striking instance which Job can give of the re- spect in which he was once held, is that even old men stood up as he passed them in the streets (Job xxix:8), the force of which is illustrated by the injunction in the law, ‘Before the hoary head thou shalt stand up, and shalt reverence the aged’ (Lev. xix:32). Similar injunctions are re- peated in the Apocrypha, so as to show the deportment expected from young men towards their seniors in company. Thus, in describing a feast, the author of Ecclesiasticus (xxxii:3, 7) says, “Speak thou that art the elder, for it be- cometh thee. Speak, young man, if there be need of thee, and yet scarcely, when thou art twice asked.” The attainment of old age is constantly prom- ised or described as a blessing (Gen. xv.:I5; Job v:26), and communities are represented as highly 68 favored in which old people abound (IS. lxv :20; Zech. viii:4, 9), while premature death is de- nounced as the greatest of calamities to indi- viduals, and to the families to which they belong (I Sam. ii:32); the aged are constantly supposed to excel in understanding and judgment (Job xii:20; xv.:Io; xxxii:9; I Kings xii:6, 8), and the mercilessness of the Chaldeans is expressed by their having ‘no compassion' upon the ‘old man, or him who stooped for age’ (2 Chron. xxxvi :17). The strong desire to attain old age was neces- sarily in some degree connected with or resembled the respect paid to aged persons; for people would scarcely desire to be old, were the aged neglected or regarded with mere sufferance. AGMON (Heb. ???8, ag-mon'), occurs in Job x1:21; xli:2; Is. ix:14; xix:15; lviii:5; in the first of which passages it is translated in our Author- ized Version by flag, in the second by hook, in the next two by rush, and in the last by bulrush. As no plant is known under this name in the Hebrew or cognate languages, its nature has been sought for by tracing the word to its root, and by judging of its nature from the context. Thus agom is said to mean a lake or pool of water, also a reed; and in Arabic is translated reed-bed, cane-bed. Agom is also considered to be de- rived from the same root as goma, the papyrus. Some have even concluded that both names indicate the same thing, and have translated them by juncus, or rush.-J. F. R. (See PAPY RUS.) AGONE (a-gón'). My master left me because three days agone I fell sick (I Sam. XXX:I3). Agone, past and gone, old form of the past participle of the verb to go; then as an adverb, past, for which ago is now used. It was long agone prophesied in the Psalm. Udal, Erasmus's Paraphrase. For long agone I have forgot to court. Shakespeare (Swinton’s Bib. Hand Bk.). AGONY (äg'ö-ny), (Gr. 'Ayovia, agoni'a), a word generally denoting contest, and especially the con- test by wrestling, etc., in the public games; whence it is applied, metaphorically, to a severe struggle or conflict with pain and suffering. (1) Struggle with Present Evil. Agony is the actual struggle with present evil, and is thus distinguished from anguish, which arises from the reflection on evil that is past. In the New Testament the word is only used by Luke (xxii:44), and is employed by him with terrible significance to describe the fearful struggle which AGORA our Lord sustained in the garden of Gethsemane. The circumstances of this mysterious transaction are recorded in Matt. xxvi :36–46; Mark xiv: 32- 42; Luke xxii:39–48; Heb. v.:7, 8. None of these passages, taken separately, contains a full history of our Saviour's agony. Each of the three Evan- gelists has omitted Some particulars which the others have recorded, and all are very brief. The passage in Hebrews is only an incidental no- tice. The three Evangelists appear to have had the same design, namely, to convey to their read- ers an idea of the intensity of the Lord's distress; but they compass it in different ways. Luke alone notices the agony, the bloody sweat, and the appearance of an angel from heaven strength- ening him. Matthew and Mark alone record the change which appeared in his countenance and manner, the complaint which he uttered of the overpowering Sorrows of his soul, and the repeti- tion of the same prayer. All agree that he prayed for the removal of what he called ‘this cup,” and are careful to note that he qualified this earnest petition by a preference of his Father’s will to his own. (2) Let This Cup Pass. With regard to the cause of his overwhelming distress, Jesus himself points it out in the prayer, “If it be possible, let this cup pass from me;’ the cup which his Father had appointed for him ; and the question is, what does he mean by “this cup.’ Doddridge and others think that he means the instant agony, the trouble that he then actually endured. But this is satisfactorily answered by Dr. Mayer, who shows by reference to John xviii:II that the cup respecting which he prayed was one that was then before him, which he had not yet taken up to drink, and which he desired, if possible, that the Father should remove. It could, therefore, be no other than the scene of suffering upon which he was about to enter. It was the death which the Father had appointed for him—the death of the cross—with all the attending circum- stances which aggravated its horror; that scene of woe which began with his arrest in the garden, and was consummated by his death on Calvary. Jesus had long been familiar with this prospect, and had looked to it as the appointed termina- tion of his ministry (Matt. xvi :21 ; xvii:9-12; xx:17, 19, 28; Mark x:32-34; John x : 18; xii:32, 33). But when he looked forward to this destina- tion, as the hour approached, a chill of horror sometimes came over him, and found expression in external signs of distress (John xii:27; Comp. Luke xii:49, 50). (3) More Than the Cross. It is manifest, therefore, that something more than the cross was now before him, and that he was now placed in a new and hitherto untried situation. Dr. Mayer says: ‘I have no hesitation in believing that he was here put upon the trial of his obedi- ence. It was the purpose of God to subject the obedience of Jesus to a severe ordeal, in order that, like gold tried in the furnace, it might be an act of more perfect and illustrious virtue, and for this end he permitted him to be assailed by the fiercest temptation to disobey his will and to refuse the appointed cup. In pursuance of this purpose the mind of Jesus was left to pass under a dark cloud, his views lost their clearness, the Father’s will was shrouded in obscurity, the cross appeared in tenfold horror, and nature was left to indulge her feelings, and to put forth her reluctance.” (See BLOODY SWEAT.) AGORA (äg'o-ra), (Gr. 'Ayopa, ag-oh-rah"), a word of frequent occurrence in the New Testa- ment; it denotes generally any place of public AGORAIOS resort in towns and cities where the people came together, and hence more specially it signifies: (I) A public place, a broad street, etc., as in Matt. xi:I6; xx:3; xxiii:7; Mark vi :56; xii:38; Luke vii:32; xi :43; xx:46. (2) A forum or market- place, where goods were exposed for sale, and assemblies or public trials held, as in Acts xvi :19; xvii:17. In Mark vii:4 it is doubtful whether dyopæ denotes the market itself or is put for that which is brought from the market; but the known customs of the Jews suggest a preference of the former signification. AGORAIOS (a-gór-i'os), (Gr. 'A'yopatos, ag-oh-ray'- os), a Greek word signifying the things belonging to or persons frequenting, the Agora. In Acts xix: 38, it is applied to the days on which public trials were held in the forum, and in ch. xvii:5, it de- notes idlers, or persons lounging about in the markets and other places of public resort. There is a peculiar force in this application of the word, when we recollect that the market-places or ba- zaars of the East were, and are at this day, the constant resort of unoccupied people, the idle and the newsmongers. AGRAMMATOS (a-gräm'ma-tos), (Gr.” Aypáupa- tos, ah-gramz' meah-tos), a Greek word meaning un- learned, illiterate. In Acts iv:13, the Jewish lit- erati apply the term to Peter and John, in the same sense in which they asked, with regard to our Lord himself, ‘How knoweth this man letters, having never learned P’ (John vii:15). In neither case did they mean to say that they had been altogether without the benefits of the com- mon education, which consisted in reading and writing, and in an acquaintance with the sacred books; but that they were not learned men, had not sat at the feet of any of the great doctors of the law, and had not been instructed in the mys- teries and refinements of their peculiar learning and literature. AGRAPHA(agrafia). SeeUNwRITTENSAVINGs. AGRARIAN LAW (a-grä-ri-an law). To this or some such heading belongs the consideration of the peculiar laws by which the distribution and tenure of land were regulated among the Hebrew people, while the modes and forms in which the land was cultivated belong to AGRICULTURE. (1) Pastoral People. The Hebrews were for the most part a pastoral people until they were settled in Palestine, and their pastoral hab- its were mainly instrumental in keeping them dis- tinct and separate from the Egyptians, who were agriculturists and had a strong dislike to a shep- herd life (Gen. xlvi :34). But when they became an independent and sovereign nation, the same result of separation from other nations was to be aided by inducing them to devote their chief attention to the culture of the soil. - It was, doubtless, in subservience to this object, and to facilitate the change, that the Israelites were put in possession of a country already in a state of high cultivation (Deut. vi. II). And it was in order to retain them in this condition, to give them a vital interest in it, and to make it a Source of happiness to them, that a very peculiar agrarian law was given to them. (2) Basis of Agrarian Law. An equal dis- tribution of the soil (Num. xxvi :53, 54) was the basis of the agrarian law. y it provision was made for the support of 600,000 yeomanry, with (according to different calculations) from sixteen to twenty-five acres of land each. This land they held independent of all temporal su- periors, by direct tenure from Jehovah their sov- ereign, by whose power they were to acquire the 69 AGRARIAN LAW territory, and under whose protection they were to enjoy and retain it. (3) Guarded by Other Provisions. But this law was guarded by other provisions equally wise and salutary. The accumulation of debt was pre- vented, first, by prohibiting every Hebrew from accepting of interest (Lev. xxv :35, 36) from any of his fellow-citizens; next, by establishing a regular release of debts every seventh year, and, finally, by ordering that no lands could be alien- ated forever, but must, on each year of Jubilee, or every seventh Sabbatic year, revert to the fam- ilies which originally possessed them. Thus, with- out absolutely depriving individuals of all tem- porary dominion over their landed property, it re- established, every fiftieth year, that original and equal distribution of it, which was the foundation of the national polity; and as the period of such reversion was fixed and regular, all parties had due notice of the terms on which they negotiated, so that there was no ground for public commotion or private complaint. (4) Country Property. This law, by which landed property was released in the year of Jubi- lee from all previous obligations, did not extend to houses in towns, which, if not redeemed within one year after being sold, were alienated forever (Lev. xxv :29, 30). This must have given to prop- erty in the country a decided preference over prop- erty in cities, and must have greatly contributed to the essential object of all those regulations, by affording an inducement to every Hebrew to re- side on and cultivate his land. Further, the origi- nal distribution of the land was to the several tribes according to their families, so that each tribe was, so to speak, settled in the same country, and each family in the same township or sub- division. Nor was the estate of any family in one tribe permitted to pass into another, even by the marriage of an heiress (Num. xxvii); so that not only was the original balance of property preserved, but the closest and dearest connections of affinity attached to each other the inhabitants of every vicinage. For this land a kind of quit-rent was payable to the sovereign proprietor, in the form of a tenth or tithe of the produce, which was assigned to the priesthood. (See TITHES.) (5) Military Service. The condition of mili- tary service was also attached to the land, as it appears that every freeholder (Deut. xx:5) was obliged to attend at the general muster of the national army, and to serve in it, at his own ex- pense (often more than repaid by the plunder), as long as the occasion required. In this direc- tion, therefore, the agrarian law operated in se- curing a body of 600,000 men, inured to labor and industry, always assumed to be ready, as they were bound, to come forward at their country’s call. This great body of national yeomanry, every one of whom had an important stake in the national independence, was officered by its own hereditary chieſs, heads of tribes and families (Comp. Exod. xviii and Num. xxxi.; I4); and must have presented an insuperable obstacle to treacherous ambition and political intrigue, and to every attempt to overthrow the Hebrew com- monwealth and establish despotic power. (6), Security of State. Nor were these in- stitutions less wisely adapted to secure the state against foreign violence, and at the same time pre- vent offensive wars and remote conquests. For while this vast body of hardy yeomanry were always ready to defend their country, when as- sailed by foreign foes, yet, being constantly em- ployed in agriculture, attached to domestic life, AGRICULTURE and enjoying at home the society of the numerous relatives who peopled their neighborhood, war must have been in a high degree averse to their tastes and habits. Religion also took part in pre- venting them from being captivated by the splen- dor of military glory. - (7) Return from Battle. On returning from battle, even if victorious, in order to bring them back to more peaceful feelings after the rage of war, the law required them to consider themselves as polluted by the slaughter, and unworthy of appearing in the camp of Jehovah until they had employed an entire day in the rites of purifica- tion (Num. xix:I3-I6; xxxi :19). AGRICULTURE (ag'ri-culture). The antiquity of agriculture is intimated in the brief history of Cain and Abel (Gen. iv:2, 3). (1) Before the Deluge. But of the actual state of agriculture before the deluge we know nothing. Whatever knowledge was possessed by the old world was doubtless transmitted to the new by Noah and his sons, and that this knowl- edge was considerable is implied in the fact that one of the operations of Noah, when he began to be a husbandman,’ was to plant a vineyard and to make wine with the fruit (Gen. ix:20). There are few agricultural notices belonging to the patriarchal period, but they suffice to show that the land of Canaan was in a state of cultiva- tion, and that the inhabitants possessed what were at a later date the principal products of the soil in the same country. (2) Land Under Cultivation. In giving to the Israelites possession of a country already un- der cultivation, it was the Divine intention that they should keep up that cultivation, and become themselves an agricultural people, and in doing this they doubtless adopted the practices of ag- riculture which they found already established in the country. (3) The Seasons. As the condition of the sea- sons lies at the root of all agricultural operations, it should be noticed that the variations of sun- shine and rain, which with us extend throughout the year, are in Palestine confined chiefly to the latter part of autumn and the winter. During all the rest of the year the sky is almost uninterrupt- edly cloudless, and rain very rarely falls. The autumnal rains usually commence at the latter end of October or the beginning of November, not suddenly, but by degrees, which gives oppor- tunity to the husbandman to sow his wheat and barley. The rains continue during November and December, but afterwards they occur at longer intervals, and rain is rare after March, and almost never occurs as late as May. The cold of winter is not severe, and as the ground is never frozen, the labors of the husbandman are not en- tirely interrupted. Snow falls in different parts of the country, but never lies long on the ground. In the plains and valleys the heat of summer is oppressive, but not in the more elevated tracts. In such high grounds the nights are cool, often with heavy dew. The total absence of rain in summer soon destroys the verdure of the fields, and gives to the general landscape, even in the high country, an aspect of drought and barren- ness. No green thing remains but the foliage of the scattered fruit trees, and occasional vine- yards and fields of millet. In autumn the whole land becomes dry and parched, the cisterns are nearly empty, and all nature, animate and inani- mate, looks forward with longing for the return of the rainy season. In the hill country the time of harvest is later than in the plains of the Jordan and of the seacoast. The barley harvest is about 70 AGRICULTURE a fortnight earlier than that of wheat. In the plain of the Jordan the wheat harvest is carly in May; in the plains of the coast and of Esdraelon it is towards the latter end of that month, and in the hills not until June. The general vintage is in September, but the first grapes ripen in July, and from that time the towns are well supplied with this fruit. (4) The Soil. The geological characters of the soil in Palestine have never been satisfactorily stated, but the different epithets of description which travelers employ enable us to know that it differs considerably, both in its appearance and character, in different parts of the land, but wher- ever soil of any kind exists, even to a very slight depth, it is found to be highly fertile. As parts of Palestine are hilly, and as hills have seldom much depth of soil, the mode of cultivating them in terraces was anciently, and is now, much em- ployed. A series of low stone walls, one above another, across the face of the hill, arrest the soil brought down by the rains, and afford a series of levels for the operations of the husbandman. This mode of cultivation is usual in Lebanon, and is not unfrequent in Palestine, where the remains of terraces across the hills, in various parts of the country, attest the extent to which it was anciently carried. (5) Irrigation. In such a climate as that of Palestine, water is the great fertilizing agent. The rains of autumn and winter, and the dews of spring, suffice for the ordinary objects of agricul- ture, but the ancient inhabitants were able, in some parts, to avert even the aridity which the summer droughts occasioned, and to keep up a garden-like verdure, by means of aqueducts com- municating with the brooks and rivers (Ps. i:3; lxv :Io; Prov. xxi :I ; Is. xxx :25; xxxii:2; 20 ; Hos. xiii:15). Hence springs, fountains and rivu- lets were as much esteemed by husbandmen as by shepherds (Josh. xv.:19; Judg. i: I5). The soil was also cleared of stones, and carefully culti- vated, and its fertility was increased by the ashes to which the dry stubble and herbage were occa- sionally reduced by being burned over the surface of the ground (Prov. xxiv:31 ; Is. vii:23; xxxii: 13). Dung, and, in the neighborhood of Jerusa- lem, the blood of animals, were also used to en- rich the soil (2 Kings ir :37; Ps. lxxxiii:Io; Is. xxv :Io; Jer. iv:22; Luke xiv:34, 35). That the soil might not be exhausted, it was ordered that every seventh year should be a sab- bath of rest to the land; there was then to be no sowing or reaping, no pruning of vines or olives, no vintage or gathering of fruits, and whatever grew of itself was to be left to the poor, the stranger and the beasts of the field (Lev. xxv :I-7; Deut. xv :I-Io). But such an observance req11ired more faith than the Israelites were prepared to exercise. It was for a long time utterly neglected (Lev. xxvi;34, 35; 2 Chron. xxxvi;21), but after the captivity it was more observed. By this re- markable institution the Hebrews were also trained to habits of economy and foresight, and invited to exercise a large degree of trust in the bounti- ful providence of their Divine King (6) Fields. Under the term lºº, dagazt, which we translate 'grain’ and ‘corn,' the Hebrews Com- prehended almost every object of field culture. Syria, including Palestine, was regarded by the ancients as one of the first countries for corn (Pliny, Hist. Nat. xviii:7). Wheat was abun: dant and excellent, and there is still one bearded sort, the ear of which is three times as heavy, and contains twice as many grains, as our common English wheat (Irby and Mangles, p. 472). Bar- AGRICULTURE ley was also much cultivated, not only for bread, but because it was the only kind of corn which was given to beasts, for oats and rye do not grow in warm climates. Hay was not in use, and therefore the barley was mixed with chopped straw to form the food of cattle (Gen. xxiv:25, 32; Judg. xix:19, etc.). Other kinds of field culture were millet, Spelt, various species of beans and peas, pepperwort, cummin, cucumbers, melons, flax and, perhaps, cotton. Many other articles might be mentioned as being now cultivated in Palestine; but, as their names do not occur in Scripture, it is difficult to know whether they were grown there in ancient times, or not. Anciently, as now, in Palestine and the East the arable lands were not divided into fields by hedges, as in this country. The ripening products therefore presented an expanse of culture un- broken, although perhaps variegated, in a large view, by the difference of the products grown. The boundaries of lands were therefore marked by Stones as landmarks, which, even in patriarchal times, it was deemed a heinous wrong to remove (Job xxiv:2), and the law pronounced a curse upon those, who, without authority, removed them (Deut. xix:I4; xxvii:17). The walls and hedges which are occasionally mentioned in Scripture be- longed to Orchards, gardens and vineyards. Agricultural Operations. Of late years much light has been thrown upon the agricultural operations and implements of ancient times, by the discovery of various repre- sentations on the sculptured monuments and painted tombs of Egypt. As these agree sur- prisingly with the notices in the Bible, and in- deed differ little from what we find employed in Syria and Egypt, it is very safe to receive them as guides on the present subject. (1) Plowing. This has always been a light and superficial operation in the East. At first, the ground was opened with pointed Sticks; then a kind of hoe was employed; , and this, in Plowing with Oxen. many parts of the world, is still used as a substi- tute for the plow. But the plow was known in Egypt and Syria before the Hebrews became cultivators (Job i :14). In the East, however, it has always been a light and inartificial imple- ment. At first, it was a little more than a stout branch of a tree, from which projected another limb, shortened and pointed. This, being turned into the ground, made the furrow ; while at the farther end of the larger branch was fastened a transverse yoke, to which the oxen were har- nessed. Afterwards a handle to guide the plow was added. Thus the plow consisted of: I, the pole; 2, the point or share; 3, the handle; 4, the yoke. The Syrian plow is, and doubtless was, light enough for a man to carry in his hand (Russell's Nat. Hist, of Aleppo, i :73). We, an- nex a figure of the ancient Egyptian plow, which had the most resemblance to the one now used, and the comparison between them will probably suggest a fair idea of the plow which was in use among the Hebrews. The following cut (from 71 seed (Russell’s N. H. of Aleppo, i :73, etc.). AGRICULTURE Sir Charles Fellowes’ work on Asia Minor) shows the parts of a still lighter plow used in Asia Minor and Syria, with but a single handle, and with dif- ferent shares according to the work it has to eXCC11te. c. Share. Ox-goad (below) 6. Yokes. e. Points. a. Pole or Beam. a. Handle. The plow was drawn by oxen, which were Sometimes urged by a scourge (Is. x:26; Nahum iii:2); but oftener by a long staff, furnished at One end with a flat piece of metal for clearing the plow, and at the other with a spike for goad- ing the oxen. The Ox-goad might easily be used as a Spear (Judg. iii:3I ; I Sam. xiii:21). Some- times men followed the plow with hoes to break the clods (Is. xxviii:24); but in later times a kind of harrow was employed, which appears to have been then, as now, merely a thick block of wood, pressed down by a weight, or by a man sitting on it, and drawn over the plowed field. (2) Sowing. The ground, having been plowed as soon as the autumnal rains had mollified the soil, was fit, by the end of October, to receive the seed; and the sowing of wheat continued, in different situations, through No- vember into December. Barley was not generally Sown till January and February. The seed ap- pears to have been sown and harrowed at the same time; although sometimes it was plowed in by a cross furrow. . (3) Plowing in the Seed. The Egyptian paintings illustrate the Scriptures by showing that in those soils which needed no previous preparation by the hoe (for breaking the clods) the sower followed the plow, holding in the left hand a basket of seed, which he scat- tered with the right hand, while another person filled a fresh basket. We also see that the mode of sowing was what we call ‘broad-cast,’ in which the seed is thrown loosely over the field (Matt. xiii:3-8). In Egypt, when the levels were low, and the water had continued long upon the land, they often dispensed with the plow altogether; and probably, like the present inhabitants, broke up the ground with hoes, or simply dragged the moist mud with bushes after the seed had been thrown upon the surface. To this cultivation without plowing Moses probably alludes (Deut. xi : Io), when he tells the Hebrews that the 1and to which they were going was not like the land of Egypt, where they ‘sowed their seed and watered it with their foot as a garden of herbs.’ It seems, however, that even in Syria, in sandy soils, they sow without plowing, and then plow down tº: t does not appear that any instrument resembling our harrow was known ; the word rendered to harrow, in Job xxxix:Io, means literally to break the clods, and is so rendered in Is. xxviii :24: Hos. x:II: and for this purpose the means used have been already indicated. The passage in Job, however, is important. It shows that this break- ing of the clods was not always by the hand, but that some kind of instrument was drawn by an AGRICULTURE animal over the plowed field, most probably the rough log which is still in use. (4) Harvest. It has been already men- tioned that the time of the wheat harvest in Palestine varies, in different situations, from early in May to late in June; and that the barley harvest is about a fortnight earlier than that of wheat. Among the Israelites, as with all other people, the harvest was a season of joy, and as such is more than once alluded to in Scripture (Ps. cxxvi :5; IS. ix:3). (5) Reaping. Different modes of reaping are indicated in Scripture, and illustrated by the Egyptian monuments. In the most ancient times, the corn was plucked up by the roots, which con- tinued to be the practice with particular kinds of grain after the sickle was known. In Egypt, at this day, barley and dourra are pulled up by the roots. The choice between these modes of opera- tion was probably determined, in Palestine, by the consideration pointed out by Russell (N. H. of Aleppo, i :74), who states that “wheat, as well as barley in general, does not grow half as high as in Britain ; and is, therefore, like other grain, not reaped with the sickle, but plucked up by the roots with the hand. In other parts of the coun- try, where the corn grows ranker, the sickle is used.’ When the sickle was used, the wheat was either cropped off under the ear or cut close to the ground. In the former case, the straw was afterwards plucked up for use; in the latter, the stubble was left and burnt on the ground for manure. As the Egyptians needed not such ma- nure, and were economical of straw, they gen- erally followed the former method ; while the Israelites, whose lands derived benefit from the burnt stubble, used the latter; although the prac- tice of cutting off the ears was also known to them (Job xxiv:24). Cropping the ears short, the 72 Thrashing Corn with Oxen. AGRICULTURE Egyptians did not generally bind them into sheaves, but removed them in baskets. Some- times, however, they bound them into double sheaves; and such as they plucked up were bound into single long sheaves. The Israelites appear generally to have made up their corn into sheaves (Gen. xxxvii:7; Lev. xxiii: IO-15; Ruth ii:7, I5; Job xxiv: Io; Jer. ix:22; Mich. iv: I2), which were collected into a heap, or removed in a cart (Amos ii:I3) to the thrashing-floor. The carts were probably similar to those which are still em- ployed for the same purpose. (6) Sickles. With regard to sickles, there appear to have been two kinds, indicated by the different names chermesh and meggol, and as the former occurs only in the Pentateuch (Deut. xvi : 9; xxiii:25), and the latter only in the Prophets (Jer. ii:I6; Joel iii:I3), it would seem that the one was the earlier and the other the later in- strument. One was very much like our common reaping-hook, while the other had more resem- blance in its shape to a scythe, and in the Egyptian examples appears to have been toothed. This last is probably the same as the Hebrew meggol, which is indeed rendered by scythe in the margin of Jer. 1:16. The reapers were the owners and their children men-servants and women-servants, and day-laborers (Ruth ii:4, 6, 2I, 23 ; John iv :36; James v :4). Refreshments were provided for them, especially drink, of which the gleaners were allowed to partake (Ruth i:9). So in the Egyptian harvest-scenes, we perceive a provision of water in skins, hung against trees, or in jars upon stands, with the reapers drinking, and glean- ers applying to share the draught. Among the Israelites, gleaning was one of the stated pro- visions for the poor: and for their benefit the corners of the field were left unreaped, and the reapers might not return for a forgotten sheaf. == AGRICULTURE The gleaners, however, were to obtain in the first place the express permission of the proprietor or his steward (Lev. xix:9, Io; Deut. xxiv:19; Ruth ii:2, 7). (7) Thrashing. The ancient mode of thrash- ing, as described in Scripture and figured on the Egyptian monuments, is still preserved in Pales- time. Formerly the sheaves were conveyed from the field to the thrashing-floor in carts; but now they are borne, generally, on the backs of camels and asses. The thrashing-floor is a level plot of ground, of a circular shape, generally about fifty feet in diameter, prepared for use by beating down the earth till a hard floor is formed (Gen. 1:Io; Judg. vi.37; 2 Sam. xxiv:16, 24). Some- times several of these floors are contiguous to each other. The sheaves are spread out upon them ; and the grain is trodden out by oxen, cows, and young cattle, arranged five abreast, and driven in a circle, or rather in all directions, over the floor. This was the common mode in the Bible times; and Moses forbade that the oxen thus employed should be muzzled to prevent them from tasting the corn (Deut. xxv :4; I Cor. ix:9). Flails, or sticks, were only used in thrash- ing small quantities, or for the lighter kinds of grain (Ruth ii:17; Is. xxviii:27). There were, however, some kinds of thrashing-machines, which are still used in Palestine and Egypt. One of them, represented in the annexed figure, is very much used in Palestine. It is composed of Thrashing Instrument with Sharp Teeth. two thick planks, fastened together side by side, and bent upwards in front. Sharp fragments of stone are fixed into holes bored into the bottom. This machine is drawn over the corn by oxen— a man or boy sometimes sitting on it to increase the weight. It not only separates the grain, but cuts the straw and makes it fit for fodder (2 Kings xiii:7). This is most probably the Charutz, Yi'irī, or ‘corn-drag,' which is men- tioned in Scripture (Is. xxviii:27; xli :15; Amos i:3, rendered ‘thrashing instrument’), and would seem to have been sometimes furnished with iron points instead of stones. The Bible also notices a machine called a Moreg, Yº (2 Sam. xxiv:22; I Chron. xxi:23; Is. xli :15), which is un- questionably the same which bears in Arabic the name of Noreg. This machine is not now often seen in Palestine, but is more used in some parts of Syria, and is common in Tºgypt. It is a sort of frame of wood, in which are inserted three wooden rollers, armed with iron teeth, etc. It bears a sort of seat or chair, in which the driver sits to give the benefit Of his weight. It is generally drawn over the corn by two Oxen, and separates the grain, and breaks up the straw even more effectually than the drag. In all these processes, the corn is occa- Sionally turned by a fork, and, when sufficiently thrashed, is thrown up by the same fork against the wind to separate the grain, which is then gathered up and winnowed. (8) Winnowing. This was generally accom- plished by repeating the process of tossing up the 73 AHAB grain against the wind with a fork (Jer. iv:11, I2), by which the broken straw and chaff were dispersed while the grain fell to the ground. The grain afterward passed through a sieve to sep- arate the bits of earth and other impurities. After this, it underwent a still further purification, by being tossed up with wooden scoops or short- handed shovels. AGRIELAIA (a'gri-É-li'a), (Gr. 'A'yptexafa, a-gri- ee-lai'ah, New Testament áypuéNuos). The wild olive tree is mentioned by St. Paul in Rom. xi :17, 24. Here different opinions have been entertained, not only with respect to the plant, but also with re- spect to the explanation of the metaphor. One great difficulty has arisen from the same name having been applied to different plants. From the account of Dioscorides it is clear that the Ethiopic was distinguished from the wild, and this from the cultivated olive, and as the plant was well known both to the Greeks and Romans, there was no danger of mistaking it for any other plant except itself in a wild state; that is, the true 'A'YpleMata, Oleaster, or O/ea euro/asa, in a wild state. That this is the very plant alluded to by the apostle seems to be proved from its having been the practice of the ancients to graft the wild upon the cultivated Olive tree. The apostle, therefore, in comparing the Ro- mans to the wild olive tree grafted on a cultivated stock, made use of language which was most in- telligible, and referred to a practice with which they must have been perfectly familiar.—J. F. R. (See OLIVE.) AGRIPPA (a-grip'pâ), (Gr. 'A'Yplºrtras, agr-rip'- Abas, perhaps wild horse tamer). Although of the two Herods, father and son, who also bore the name of Agrippa, the latter is best known by his Roman name, it seems proper to include him with the other members of the Herodian dynasty, under the name which he bore among his own people. (See HERODIAN FAMILY.) AGUE (ā'gü). See PLAGUE. AGUR (ā'gur), (Heb. Tºš, aw-goor', gathered), the author of the sayings contained in Prov. xxx, which the inscription describes as composed of the precepts delivered by ‘Agur, the son of Jakeh,’ to his friends ‘Ithiel and Ucal.” Beyond this everything that has been stated of him, and of the time in which he lived, is pure conjecture. Some writers have regarded the names as an appellative, but differ as to its signification. ABI (ah), (Heb. TS, ach, brother), or rather Ach, is frequently found, according to the adequate representation of the guttural which is followed in our version, as the first syllable of compound Hebrew proper names. The observations already offered in the article AB may be referred to for some illustration of the metaphorical use of the term brother in such combinations, as well as for the law of their construction, whenever the two members are nouns of which one is dependent as a genitive on the other.—J. N. AHAB (ā'hāb), (Heb. 2878, akh-awb', father's brother), son of Omri, and the sixth king of Israel, who reigned twenty-One years, from B. C. 918 to 897. Ahab was, upon the whole, the weakest of all the Israelitish monarchs, and although there are occasional traits of character which show that he was not without good feelings and dispositions. the history of his reign proves that weakness of character in a king may sometimes be as injurious in its effects as wickedness. Many of the evils of his reign may be ascribed to the close connec- tion which he formed with the Phoenicians. AHAB (1) Phoenician Influence. There had long been a beneficial commercial intercourse between that people and the Jews, and the relations arising thence were very close in the times of David and Solomon. After the separation of the kingdoms the connection appears to have been continued by the nearer kingdom of Israel, but to have been nearly, if not quite, abandoned by that of Judah. w (2) Jezebel. The wife of Ahab was Jezebel, the daughter of Ethbaal, or Ithobaal, king of Tyre. She was a woman of a decided and energetic character, and, as such, soon established that influence over her husband which such women al- ways acquire over weak, and not infrequently also Over strong, men. Ahab, being entirely under the control of Jeze- bel, sanctioned the introduction, and eventually established the worship of the Phoenician idols, and especially of the sun-god Baal. (3) Idolatry. Hitherto the golden calves in Dan and Bethel had been the only objects of idol- atrous worship in Israel, and they were intended as Symbols of Jehovah. But all reserve and limi- tation were now abandoned. The king built a temple at Samaria, and erected an image, and con- secrated a grove to Baal. A multitude of priests and prophets of Baal were maintained. Idolatry became the predominant religion; and Jehovah, with the golden calves as symbolical representa- tions of him, was viewed with no more reverence than Baal and his image. So strong was the tide of corruption, that it appeared as if the knowledge of the true God was soon to be forever lost among the Israelites. (4) Elijah. But a man suited to this emer- gency was raised up in the person of Elijah the prophet, who boldly opposed himself to the regal authority, and succeeded in retaining many of his countrymen in the worship of the true God. The greater the power which supported idolatry, the more striking were the prophecies and miracles which directed the attention of the Israelites to Jehovah, and brought disgrace on the idols, and confusion on their worshipers. (5) Death of Naboth. Hard by his palace in Jezreel, a citizen named Naboth had a vineyard, and Ahab being desirous of obtaining it as a kitchen-garden, demanded that Naboth should sell him his vineyard, or exchange it for a better. Na- both absolutely refused to violate the Divine law, in an unnecessary alienation of the inheritance of his fathers. Stung with this refusal, Ahab went home greatly displeased, threw himself on his bed, and would eat nothing. Informed of the cause of his disorder, Jezebel, to comfort him, assured him that she would quickly put him in possession of Naboth’s vineyard. By issuing forth orders to thc elders of the city, and suborning false witnesses against Naboth, she got him murdered as guilty of blasphemy and treason. Informed of his death, Ahab went and took possession of his vineyard. In his return home to Samaria, Elijah met him, and divinely assured him that for his murder of Naboth and seizing of his vineyard, dogs should lick his blood on the spot where they licked the blood of Naboth, or perhaps because they licked it; that Jezebel his wife should be eaten by dogs by the wall of Jezreel; and the rest of his family have their carcasses devoured by the dogs in the city, or wild beasts and fowls without it. Terrified with this prediction, Ahab rent his clothes, put on sackcloth and mourned for his conduct. To re- ward his repentance, God deferred the full execu- tion of the stroke until after his death, in the reign of Jehoram his son (1 Kings xxi). At length the 74 AHASUERUS judgment of God on Ahab and his house was pronounced by Elijah, who announced that, during the reign of his son, his whole race should be exterminated. (6) Death of Ahab. Ahab died of the wounds which he received in a battle with the Syrians, ac- cording to a prediction of Micaiah, which the king disbelieved, but yet endeavored to avert by dis- guising himself in the action (I Kings xvi :29: xxii:40). - “That Ahab's rule was firm though despotic, and maintained the military traditions inaugurated by Omri, is indicated by the Moabite Stone, which informs us (lines 7, 8) that Omri and his son ruled over the land of Mehdeba (conquered by the former) for 40 years. It was not till the concluding part of Ahab's reign, when he was occupied, with his Syrian wars, that Moab rose in insurrection” (Hastings' Bib. Dict.). AIHAB and ZEDIERIAH. The names of two false prophets who deceived the Israelites at Babylon. For this they were threatened by Jere- miah, who foretold that they should be put to death by the king of Babylon in the presence of those whom they had beguiled, and that in fol- lowing times it should become a common male- diction to say, ‘The Lord make thee like Zedekiah and Ahab, whom the king of Babylon roasted in the fire' (Jer. xxix:21, 22). t AHALIM (āh'a-lim), (Heb. Fº, a-ſhaw-ſeem'), and AHALOTH (āh-a-1öth'), (Heb. Fº, a-hazy- /oth'), usually translated Aloes, occur in several pas- Sages of the Old Testament, as in Psalm xlv. :8, “All thy garments smell of myrrh, and ahaloth, and cassia ;’ Prov. vii:17, ‘I have perfumed my bed with myrrh, with cinnamon and ahalim ;’. Can- ticles, iv: I4, “Spikenard and saffron, calamus and cinnamon, with all trees of frankincense, myrrh and ahaloth, with all the chief spices.” . From the articles which are associated with ahaloth and ahalim (both names indicating the same thing), it is evident that it was some odoriferous sub- stance, probably well known in ancient times. Why these words have been translated ‘aloes,’ not only in the English, but in most of the older versions, it may not be easy to ascertain ; but there is little doubt that the odoriferous ahaloth of the above passages ought not to be confounded with the bitter and nauseous aloes famed only as a medicine. (See ALOES.) AHARAH (a-hăr'ah), (Heb. "Yº, a £h-ražh'. after the brother), a son of Benjamin (I Chron. viii:I), elsewhere called Ehi (Gen. xlvi.21), Ahiram (Num. xxvi;38), and Aher (1 Chron. vii:12). AHARHEL (a-hăr'hel), (Heb. 2.TN, aft-a, - A/ha/e', behind the breastwork), a son of Harum, a descendant of Judah (1 Chron. iv:8). AHASAI (a-hăs'a-i), (Heb. "ITS, akh-zah'ee, a contracted form of Ahaziah, whom Jehovah holds), a grandson of Immer, and a priest (Neh. xii.13) called Jahzerah, the grandson of Immer (I Chron. ix:12). (See JAHZERAH.) AHASBAI (a-hâs"ba-i), (Heb. "Pºrtº, afth-as- bah'ee, I have taken refuge in Jehovah), a Maacha- thite, father of Eliphelet, one of David's mighty men (2 Sam. xxiii:34). He is apparently called Ur in I Chron. xi:35. (See UR.) AHASUERUs (a-hāz-u-erus), (Heb. ºrs, akh-ash-way-rosh'), or Achashverosh, is the name, or rather the title, of four Median and Persian monarchs mentioned in the Bible. AHAVA . (1) Father of Darius. The first Ahasuerus is incidentally mentioned in Dan. ix:1, as the father. Qf Darius the Mede. It is generally agreed that the person here referred to is the Astyages of profane history (see the article DARIUs). (2) Successor of Cyrus. The second Ahas- uerus occurs in Ezra iv:6, where it is said that in the beginning of his reign the enemies of the Jews wrote an accusation against them, the re- sult of which is not mentioned. The Persian king here meant seems to be the immediate succes- sor of Cyrus, the frantic tyrant Cambyses, who came to the throne B. C. 529, and died after a reign Of Seven years and five months. (3) Ahasuerus of the Book of Esther. The third Ahasuerus is the Persian king of the book of Esther. The chief facts recorded of him there, and the dates of their occurrence, which are important in the subsequent inquiry, are these : In the third year of his reign he made a Sumptuous banquet for all his nobility, and pro- longed the feast for 180 days. Being on one Occasion merry with wine, he ordered his queen Vashti to be brought out, to show the people her beauty. On her refusal to violate the decorum of her sex, he not only indignantly divorced her, but published an edict concerning her disobedience, in Order to insure to every husband in his domin- . ions the rule in his own house. In the seventh year of his reign he married Esther, a Jewess, who, however, concealed her parentage. In the twelfth year of his reign, his minister, Haman, who had received some slights from Mordecai the Jew, offered him Io,000 talents of silver for the privilege of ordering a massacre of the Jews in all parts of the empire on an ap- pointed day. The king refused this immense sum, but acceded to his request; and couriers were dispatched to the most distant provinces to en- join the execution of this decree. Before it was accomplished, however, Mordecai and Esther ob- tained such an influence over him that he so far annulled his recent enactment as to dispatch other couriers to empower the Jews to defend them- selves man fully against their enemies on that day; the result of which was that they slew 800 of his native subjects in Shushan, and 75,000 of them in the provinces. (4) Late Research. Almost every Medo- Persian king, from Cyaxares I. down to Artaxer- xes III (Ochus), has in his turn found some champion to assert his title to be the Ahasuerus of Esther, but the question has at last been au- thentically settled by the decipherment of the cuneiform inscriptions. In a personal letter on this subject, Prof. A. H. Sayce says: “Ahasuerus and Xerxes are the same name, and there is only one Xerxes to whom the account in the book of Esther can refer. That is the famous Xerxes I. Thanks to the decipher- ment of cuneiform inscriptions, we now know that the Persian kings did not have two names, so that the old attempt to identify Xerxes of Esther with Darius or Artaxerxes can never be renewed.” J. A. Selbie, Hastings' Bib. Dict., says the Ahas- uerus of Dan. ix, the father of Darius the Mede, is a personage whose identity is as difficult to estab- lish as the existence of “Darius the Mede’ is prob- lematical. - (5) The Fourth Ahasuerus. Still another Ahasuerus is mentioned in Tobit. xiv:I5 in con- nection with the destruction of Nineveh. This in- dicates that Cyaxares was the man to whom al- lusion is made by Herodotus (Herod. I :IO6). ABIAVA (ahā’và), (Heb. Sº, i-haw-aw', water, Ezra viii:21, 31), the river by which the Jewish AHAZ exiles assembled their second caravan under Ezra. when returning to Jerusalem. It would seem from ch. viii:15, that it was named from a town of the same name: ‘I assembled them at the river that flows toward Ahava.’ In that case, it could not have been of much importance in itself; and possibly it was no other than one of the numerous canals with which Babylonia then abounded. This is probably the true reason that biblical geog- raphers have failed to identify it. Ewald conjectured that the river Ahava or Peleg-Ahava was the same as the Pallacopas, a stream to the South of Babylon. Rawlinson iden- tifies it with the Is (see Herod. i :179), a river flowing by a town of the same name, now called Hit, which is about eight days’ journey from Babylon (Hastings' Bib. T)ict.). AHAZ (a'hāz),(Heb.º, aw-Ahawg', possessor). 1. Son of Jotham, and twelfth king of Judah. He reigned sixteen years, from B. C. 735-719. About the tenth year of his age he espoused Abi- jah, the daughter of Zechariah, by whom, about a year after, he had his son Hezekiah. At twenty years of age Ahaz came to the crown. (1) Idolatry. In imitation of the kings of Israel, he abandoned himself to the most abomin- able idolatries. One of his sons he sacrificed to the idol Moloch; and, perhaps, caused the rest to pass through the fire for lustration. He did not merely connive at the people offering sacrifices in high places, as sundry of his predecessors had done; but himself ordered sacrifices and incense to be of fered in high places, hills, groves, and under green treeS. (2) Wars. Toward the end of his father's reign, the Syrians under Rezin, and the Israelites under Pekah, had begun to harass Judah. Observing Ahaz to be a weak prince, they agreed to dethrone him, and make a son of Tabeel, their deputy, king in his stead. Their armies invaded his kingdom all at once. He and his people were seized with the utmost consternation. The prophet Isaiah assured him that none of their projects should prosper; and that since the Messiah was not yet come, there was no reason to fear the de- parture of the sceptre from Judah (Is. vii). This stroke was diverted; but Ahaz proceeding from evil to worse, the two kings made a fresh attack upon him. Rezin marched to Elath, a noted Sea- port on the Red Sea, and peopled it with Sy- rians. Pekah attacked Ahaz' army and killed I2O,- OOO of them in one day, besides Maaseiah his son, and carried off 200,000 prisoners, men, women and children. Moved with the remonstrance of Oded the prophet, the princes of Israel, Azariah, Bere- chiah, Jehizkiah, and Amasa, persuaded the troops to dismiss their prisoners; and they accordingly clothed and fed them, and brought them back comfortably to Judah. Meanwhile the Edomites from the south ravaged the country, and carried off a number of the people for slaves. The Philis- times from the west invaded the low country, ad- jacent to their territories, and the South ; and took Bethshemesh, Ajalon. Gederoth, Shocho, Timnath, and Gimzo, and peopled them with a colony of their nation. (3) Becomes a Vassal. In his distress, Ahaz grew more and more wicked; he sought not to the Lord; but, stripping the temple and city of all the gold he could find, he sent it as a present to Tiglath-pileser, king of Assyria: he surrendered himself his vassal, and begged his as- sistance against his enemies. Accordingly Tiglath- pileser attacked and defeated the Syrians that dis- tressed him in the East; but, by imposing on his AHAZ kingdom a tribute, he rather hurt than helped him. Ahaz went to Damascus to congratulate the AS- syrian monarch on his victory over Syria, and, observing there an idolatrous altar which greatly suited his taste, he sent off a plan of it to Urijah the high priest, ordering him to form one similar, and to have it finished before he returned to Jerusalem. Ahaz ordered it to be placed in the room of the brazen altar erected by Solomon, and to offer all the sacrifices thereon. To gratify the king of Assyria who, it seems, returned him his visit, he turned about the royal entrance to the court of the temple; he took away the covert of the Sabbath, where, it seems, the priests stood to read the law, or the royal family to hear it; he dis- graced the brazen lavers and sea by removing their pedestals, and setting them on the earth, or upon a pavement of Stone. (4) Idols of Syria. Proceeding in his wicked- ness, he sacrificed to the idols of Syria, which, he imagined, had been the authors of his calamities, in order to render them more favorable; he brake in pieces the sacred vessels; he shut in every cor- ner of the temple, and erected altars in every cor- ner of Jerusalem and city of Judah, for burning incense. (5) Death. He died in the 16th year of his reign, and was buried in Jerusalem; but had not the honor of interment in the royal tombs (2 Kings xv :37; xvi; 2 Chron. xxviii; Is. vii). It is contended by some that there are differences between the ac- couht of Ahaz in the Book of Kings and the al- leged later account in Chronicles. “The Syrians carry away a large number of captives, and Pekah slays 120,000 in one day and carries away 200,000 captives, who, however, are sent back at the advice of a prophet. The invasions have no political mo– tive assigned, they are a punishment for the king's sin, while the figures are altogether incredible. Tiglath-pileser is called in, not to crush the coali. tion, but to help him against the Philistines and Edomites. He did not help him, howeyer, but apparently came against him, and was bought off with tribute. The religious apostasy of Ahaz comes out in much darker colors, and the account is really in conflict with the older. He burns his children, and not his son merely, in the fire; closes the temple and destroys its vessels, though we know that he took great interest in its services; and worships the gods of Damascus because of the success of the Syrians in war, though when Ahaz visited Damascus their power had been ut- terly broken. Of all this the older history says nothing” (A. S. Peake, Hastings' Bib. Dict.). But although there are differences there may not of necessity be contradictions. (6) Character. It would appear as though Ahaz was the most corrupt monarch that had hitherto appeared in Judah. He respected neither Jehovah, the law, nor the prophets; he broke through all the restraints which law and custom had imposed upon the He- brew kings, and had regard only to his own de- praved inclinations. He introduced the religion of the Syrians into Jerusalem, erected altars to the Syrian gods, altered the temple in many re- spects after the Syrian model, and at length ven; tured to shut it up altogether. Such a man could not exercise that faith in Jehovah, as the political head of the nation, which ought to animate the courage of a Hebrew king. 2. A great-grandson of Jonathan, Son of King Saul. He was one of the four sons of Micah, and father of Jehoadah or Jarah (I Chron, viii:35, 36; ix:42). 76 AHER AHAZIAH (ā-ha-zi'ah), (Heb. Tºtº, akh-a2- yaw", whom Jehovah sustains). 1. Son and successor of Ahab, and eighth king of Israe. (I Kings xxii:40, 51). He reigned two years (B. C. 853-852). It seems that Jezebel ex- ercised over her son the same influence which had guided her husband; and Ahaziah pursued the evil courses of his father. (1) Revolt. The most signal public event of his reign was the revolt of the Moabites, who took the opportunity of the defeat and death of Ahab to discontinue the tribute which they had paid to the Israelites. Ahaziah be- came a party in the attempt of Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, to revive the maritime traffic by the Red Sea; in consequence of which the enterprise was blasted, and came to nothing (2 Chron. XX:35, 37). (2) Consults Weather Oracle. Soon after, Ahaziah, having been much injured by a fall from the roof-gallery of his palace, had the infatuation to send to consult the oracle of Baal- zebub, the god of Ekron, respecting his recovery (2 Kings i:2). But the messengers were met and sent back by Elijah, who announced to the king that he should rise no more from the bed on which he lay (2 Kings i:4). He was succeeded by his brother Jehoram (2 Kings i:17; 2 Chron. xx:35). 2. Otherwise Jehoahaz (2 Chron. xxi :17; xxv :23), son of Jehoram by Athaliah, daughter of Ahab and Jezebel, and sixth king of Judah (2 Kings viii:24-27). (1) Short Reign. He reigned but one year ... (B. C. 843), and . that in , suffering himself in all things to be guided by the wicked counsels of his idolatrous mother, Atha- liah. He cultivated the connections which had un- happily grown up between the two dynasties, and which had now been cemented by marriage. Hence he joined his uncle Jehoram of Israel in an expedition against Hazael, king of Damascene- Syria, for the recovery of Ramoth-Gilead; and afterward paid him a visit while he lay wounded in his summer palace of Jezreel. (2) Death. The two kings rode out in their several chariots to meet Jehu ; and when Jehoram was shot through the heart, Ahaziah attempted to escape, but was pursued, and being mortally wounded, had only strength to reach Megiddo, where he died. His body was conveyed by his ser- vants in a chariot to Jerusalem for interment (2 Kings is :22-28). In 2 Chron. xxii:7-9, the cir- cumstances are somewhat differently stated; but the variation is not substantial, and requires no particular notice. It appears from that passage, 11Uwever, that Jehu was right in considering Ahaziah as included in his commission to root out the house of Ahab. He was Ahab's descend- ant (grandson by the mother's side) both in blood and character; and his presence in Jezreel at the time of Jehu's operations is considered as an ar- rangement of Providence for accomplishing his doom. - AHBAN (āh'ban), (Heb. lºns, aÅh-bazºn', broth- er of the wise, z. e., discreet, amazable); the first named of the two sons of Abishur by Abihail, of the descendants of Judah (I Chron. ii:29), B. C. about 1471. AHER (ā'her), (Heb. "ns, a/#/i-air', after), a descendant of Benjamin (I Chron. vii; I2), the same person as Aharah (I Chron. viii:I), or Ahiram. (See AHIRAM.) AHI AHI (ā'hi), (Heb. "ns, akh-ee', brotherly), the name cf two men. 1. The first named of the four sons of Shamer, one of the chieftains of the tribe of Asher (1 Chron. vii:34), B. C. about 1600. 2. A Son of Abdiel and one of the chieftains of the tribe of Gad, resident in Bashan (1 Chron. v:I6), B. C. about 782. AHIAH (a-hi'ah), (Heb. Tºš, akh-ee-yaw", fra- Žer Jehova, i.e., friend of God, I Sam. xiv:3, 18), Son of Ahitub, and high priest in the reign of Saul, and brother and predecessor of the Abim- elech whom Saul slew for assisting David. See- ing that Abimelech, a son of Ahitub, was also high priest in the same reign (I Sam. xxii:12), Some have thought that both names belong to the same person; but this seems less likely than the explanation which has just been given. There are several others of this name, but none of im- portance (I Kings iv:3; 1 Chron. viii:7; 1 Kings xi:29, 30; 2 Chron. ix:29; I Kings xiv:2; I Kings xv :27, 33; 1 Chron. viii:7; 1 Chron. xxvi :20). Ahiah is also called AHIJAH (which see). AHIAM (a-hi'am), (Heb. bsºrs, akh-ee-awm', perhaps for Achiab, father's brother), a son of Sharar, the Hararite, and one of David's thirty he- roic warriors (2 Sam. xxiii:33; I Chron. xi:35), B. C. IOOO. In I Chron. xi:35, his father is called Sacar. AHIAN (a-hi'an), (Heb. Tºs, akh-yawn', broth- erly), a member of the tribe of Manasseh (I Chron. vii:19), B. C. after 1856. AHIEZER (ā'hi-á'zer), (Heb. Yººns, akh-ee-eh'- zer, brother of help, i.e., helpful). 1. Son of Ammishaddai, and chief of the tribe of Dan, who came out of Egypt at the head of 72,000 men of his tribe (Num. i:12; ii:25). His offering was the same as that of his fellow-chiefs (Num. vii:66, 67; x:25). 2. Ahiezer is also found in 1 Chron. xii:3. He was a Danite chief who joined David when lying at Ziklag for fear of Saul. AHIHUD (a-hi'hud), (Heb. Tin"ns, akh-ee- hood', brother of renown). 1. A prince of the tribe of Asher, who, with the other chiefs of tribes, acted with Joshua and Eleazer in dividing the Promised Land (Num. xxxiv:27), B. C. II.72. 2. (Heb. "nºns. aßh-ee-Åhood", brother of a rid- dle, i. e., mysterious), a Benjamite of the family of Ehud (I Chron. viii:7). AHIJAH (a-hi'jah), (Heb. Tºº, akh-ee-yaw", brother of Jehovah). 1. Ahijah (same name as Ahiah), a prophet residing in Shiloh in the times of Solomon and Jeroboam. He appears to have put on record some of the transactions of the former reign (2 Chron. ix:29). It devolved on him to announce and sanction the separation of the ten tribes from the house of David, as well as the foundation (I Kings xi:29-39), B. C. I I60, and, after many years, the subversion of the dynasty of Jeroboam (I Kings xiv:2-18). (See JEROBOAM.) 2. The last named of the five sons of Jerahmeel (I Chron. ii.25), B. C. about 16OO. 3. A son of Ahitub and high priest in the reign of Saul (I Sam. xiv:3, 18), probably same as Abimelech (which see). 4. One of Solomon's princes (1 Kings iv:3). 5. Father of Baasha, King of Israel (I Kings XV:27, 33), B. C. 953. tº 6. One of David's mighty men (I Chron. xi:36), B.C. loso. 77 AHIMAN 7. A Levite in David's reign (1 Chron.xxvi;20), B. C. IoI5. 8. One of the chief Israelites who joined in the Covenant with Nehemiah (Neh. x:26), B. C. 445. AHIKAM (a-hi'kam), (Heb. Pºº, afth-ee- £awme', brother of rising, i. e., high; according to Gesenius, brother of the enemy), one of the four persons of , distinction whom Josiah sent to con- sult, Huldah, the prophetess (2 Kings xxii:12-14). Ahikam and his family are honorably distinguished for their protection of the prophet Jeremiah (Jer. xxvi;24; xxxix: I4). AHILUD (a hi'lud), (Heb. Tºrs, aāh-ee-lood, brother of one born or brother of the Lydian). 1. Father of Jehoshaphat, the chronicler or re- Corder of the kingdom during the reigns of David and Solomon (2 Sam. viii:16; xx:24; 1 Kings iv:3; I Chron. xviii:15). 2. Father of Baana, one of Solomon's purveyors (I Kings iv: I2), B. C. before IOOO. AHIMAAZ (a-him'a-āz), (Heb. 72'2"TS, akh-ee- Żmah-atz', brother of anger, i.e., irascible), son and successor of Zadok, who was joint high priest in the reign of David, and sole high priest in that of Solomon. His history chiefly belongs to the time of David, to whom he rendered an important service during the revolt of Absalom. David hav- ing refused to allow the ark of God to be taken from Jerusalem when he fled thence, the high priests, Zadok and Abiathar, necessarily remained in attendance upon it; but their sons, Ahimaaz and Jonathan, concealed themselves outside the city, to be in readiness to bear off to David any important information respecting the movements and designs of Absalom which they might receive from within. Accordingly, Hushai having com- municated to the priests the result of the council of war, in which his own advice was preferred to that of Ahithophel ( see ABSALoM), they instantly sent a girl (probably to avoid suspicion) to direct Ahimaaz and Jonathan to speed away with the in- telligence. The transaction, however, was wit- nessed and betrayed by a lad, and the messengers were so hotly pursued that they took refuge in a dry well, over which the woman of the house placed a covering, and spread thereon parched corn. She told the pursuers that the messengers had passed on in haste; and when all was safe, she released them, on which they made their way to David (2 Sam. xv.:27-36; xvii:17-2O). As may be inferred from his being chosen for this service, Ahimaaz was swift of foot. Of this we have a no- table example soon after, when, on the defeat and death of Absalom, he prevailed on Joab to allow him to carry the tidings to David. Another mes- senger, Cushi, had previously been dispatched, but Ahimaaz outstripped him, and first came in with the news. He was known afar off by the manner of his running, and the king said, ‘He is a good man, and cometh with good tidings;’’ and this favorable character is justified by the delicacy with which he waived that part of his intelligence concerning the death of Absalom, which he knew would greatly distress so fond a father as David (2 Sam. xviii:19-29). AHIMAN (a-hi'man), (Heb. Tºº, akh-ee-man', brother of a gift, i. e., liberal). 1. One of the three famous Anakim giants dwelling at Hebron, seen by the spies and Caleb (Num. xiii:22), B. C. about 1600. They were afterward exterminated by Joshua (Josh. xi :21), sºmeº slain by the tribe of Judah (Judg. 1 : IO). *-& AHIMELECH 2. One of the Levitical Temple gate-keepers after the exile (I Chron. ix:17), B. C. about I 59C. º AHIMELECH (a-him'e-lèk), (Heb. Tººns, akh-ee-meh'lek, brother of the king, i. e., the king's friend. 1. Ahimelech, son of Ahitub, and brother of Ahiah, who was most probably his predecessor in the high priesthood. (See AHIAH.) When I)avid fled from Saul, he went to Nob, a city of the priests in Benjamin, where the tabernacle then was ; and by representing himself as on pressing business from the king, he obtained from Ahime- lech, who had no other, Some of the sacred bread which had been removed from the presence-table. He was also furnished with the sword which he had himself taken from Goliah, and which had been laid up as a trophy in the tabernacle (1 Sam. xxi : I-9). These circumstances were witnessed by Doeg, an Edomite in the service of Saul, and were SG reported by him to the jealous king as to ap- pear acts of connivance at, and support to, Da- vid's imagined disloyal designs. Saul immediately sent for Ahimelech and the other priests then at Nob, and laid this treasonable offence to their charge; but they declared their ignorance of any hostile designs on the part of David toward Saul or his kingdom. This, however, availed them not; for the king commanded his guard to slay them. Their refusal to fall upon persons invested with SO sacred a character might have brought even Saul to reason; but he repeated the order to Doeg himself, and was too readily obeyed by that malignant person, who, with the men under his or- ders, not only slew the priests then present, eighty- six in number, but marched to Nob, and put to the Sword every living creature it contained. The only priest that escaped was Abiathar, Ahimelech's son, who fled to David, and afterward became high priest (I Sam. xxii:9-20). (See ABIATHAR.) 2. A Hittite, one of David’s warriors, whom David, invited to accompany him at night into the camp of Saul in the wilderness of Ziph; but Abishai seems alone to have gone with him (I Sam. xxv :7), B. C. about IOOO. AHINADAB (a-hin'a-dāb), (Heb. Pººls, akh- ee-zzazy-dazeb', liberal brother), one of the twelve officers who, in as many districts into which the country was divided, raised supplies of provisions in monthly rotation for the royal household. Ahimadab's district was the southern half of the region beyond the Jordan (1 Kings iv:14). AHINOAM (a-hin'o-ām), (Heb. PP2"T8, ee-zzo'aziz, brother of grace). 1. A woman of Jezreel, one of the wives of David, and mother of Amnon. She was taken captive by the Amalekites when they plun- dered Ziklag, but was recovered by David (I Sam. xxv :43; xxvii:3; xxx:5; 2 Sam. ii:2; iii:2). After Saul’s death Ahinoam and Abigail went up to Hebron with David, and there Ahinoam gave birth to David’s firstborn, Amnon (I Sam. xxv : 43; xxvii:3; xxx:5; 2 Sam. ii:2; iii:2; I Chron. iii: I ). 2. Daughter of Ahimaaz and wife of Saul (1 Sam. xiv:50). - AHIO (a-hi'o), (Heb. Tris', akh-yo’, brotherly), onc of the sons of Abinadab, who, with his brother Uzzah, drove the new cart on which the ark was placed when David first attempted to remove it to Jerusalem. Ahio went before to guide the oxen, while Uzzah walked by the cart (2 Sam. vi.3, 4). (See UzzAH.) a/#/.- 78 AHITHOPHEL AHIRA (a-hi'ra), (Heb. VTris, aāh-ee-rah', brother of evil, i. e., unlucky), chief of the tribe of Naphtali when the Israelites quitted Egypt (Num. i:15; Num. ii:29). AHIRAM (a-hi'ram), (Heb. PTTN, akh-ee- zaziſm', brother of the height, or high), a son of Bela and grandson of Benjamin (Num. xxvi;38), per- haps the same with Aharah (1 Chron. viii. 1), with Aher (I Chron. vii:12), and with Ehi (Gen. xlvi :21). AHIRAMITE (a-hi'ram-ite), (Heb." Tºš, akh- ee-razºl-mee'), a descendant of Ahiram (Num. xxvi;38). AHISAMACH (a-his'a-mak), (Heb. Tººls, ažh-ee-saw-mawā', brother of help, i.e., aiding), the father of Aholiab, the Danite, one of the famous workmen upon, the tabernacle. (Ex. xxxi:6; xxxv :34; xxxviii:23), B. C. before 1657. AHISHAHAR (a-hish'a-hār),(Heb. Tºš, akh- ee-shaáh'ar, brother of the dawn, i. e., early). a warrior, Son of Bilhan, the grandson of Benja- min (I Chron. vii:Io), B. C. before 1658. AHISHAR (a-hi'shar), (Heb. Tººls, akh-ee- shawr', brother of song, or of the upright), the rul. jºr over Solomon's household (I Kings 1V :O J . AHITHOPHEL (a-hyth'o-phel), (Heb. ºphºns, a£h-ee-tho'ſel, brother of foolishness, i.e., foolish), Sept. 'Axitópex, achztofthel, the very singular name of a man who, in the time of David, was renowned throughout all Israel for his worldly wisdom. (1) Political Sagacity. He is, in fact, the only, man mentioned in the Scriptures as having acquired a reputation for political sagacity among the Jews; and they regarded his counsels as oracles (2 Sam. xvi :23). He was of the council of David; but was at Giloh, his native place, at the time of the revolt of Absalom, by whom he was summoned to Jerusalem. (2) Defection. And it shows the strength of Absalom's cause in Israel that a man so capable of foreseeing results, and estimating the probabili- ties of success, took his side in so daring an at- tempt (2 Sam. xv : I.2). The news of his defection appears to have occasioned David more alarm than any other single incident in the rebellion. He earnestly prayed God to turn the sage counsel of Ahithophel “to foolishness' (probably alluding to his name), and being immediately after joined by his old friend Hushai, he induced him to go over to Absalom with the express view that he might be instrumental in defeating the counsels of this dangerous person (XV:31-34). Psalm lv: I2-14 is supposed to contain a further ex- pression of David's feelings at this treachery of one whom he had so completely trusted, and whom he calls ‘My companion, my guide, and my familiar friend.’ The detestable advice which Ahithophel gave Absalom to appropriate his fath- er’s harem, committed him absolutely to the cause of the young prince, since after that he could hope for no reconcilement with David (2 Sam. xvi :20- 23). His proposal as to the conduct of the war undoubtedly indicated the best course that could have been taken under the circumstances; and so it seemed to the council, until Hushai interposed with his plausible advice, the object of which was to gain time to enable David to collect his re- sources. (See ABSALOM.) (3) Suicide. When Ahithophel saw that his counsel was rejected for that of Hushai, the far- AHITOB seeing man gave up the cause of Absalom for lost; and he forthwith saddled his ass, returned to his home at Giloh, deliberately settled his affairs, and then hanged himself, and was buried in the sepulchre of his fathers (B. C. IO23), (2 Sam. xvii). This is the only case of suicide which the Old Testament records, unless the last acts of Samson and Saul may be regarded as such. AHITOB (a-hi'tob). See AHITUB 3. AHITUB (a-hi’tub), (Heb. Pººls, aāh-ee-food', brother of goodness, or benignity, i. e., benign). 1. Son of Phinehas, and grandson of the high- priest Eli. His father Phinehas having been slain when the ark of God was taken by the Philistines, he succeeded his grandfather Eli (B. C. II.4I) and was himself succeeded by his son Ahiab (I Sam. xiv:3), B. C. Io93. 2. Ahitub was also the name of the father of Zadok, who was made high-priest after the death of Abimelech (2 Sam. viii:17; 1 Chron. vi:8). There is not the slightest ground for the notion that this Ahitub was ever high-priest him- self—indeed, it is historically impossible. 3. Another Ahitub, son or descendant of Amar- iah and father of another Zadok (I Chron, vi : II, I2; Ezra vii:2). AIHLAB (āh'lāb), (Heb. Sºns, a/#/.-Jazvó', fat- ness, 2. e., fertile), a city of Asher, identified by Robinson as eſ-/ish, in Upper Galilee, near Safed (Judg. i:3I). AHLAI(ahia),(Heb.ºrs, aāh-lah'ee, Oh that wishful, ornamental), the name of a woman and also of a man. 1. Daughter of Sheshan, whom he married to his Egyptian slave, Jarha (I Chron. ii:31, 35). 2. The father of Zabad, one of David's body- guard (I Chron. xi:4I), B. C. before IO46. AHOAH (a-ha'ah), (Heb. Fºls, aāh-o'akh, broth- erly), son of Bela, son of Benjamin (I Chron. viii:4). He is called Ahiah (verse 7). Perhaps he is the Iri of I Chron. vii:7. (B. C. before 1856.) AHOHITE (a-ho'hite),(Heb.ºrs, aāh-o-Ahee'), a descendant of Ahoah. The name was applied to Dodo or Dodai, who was one of Solomon's cap- tains (I Chron. xxvii:4). AIHOLAH (a-hö'lah) and AHOLIBAH (a-hö1'- i-bah), (Heb. nºns a-ho/-aw', her own tent, and Psºns, o/ho/iáð'), two fictitious or symbolical names adopted by Ezekiel (xxiii:4) to denote the two king- doms of Samaria (Israel) and Judah. There is a sig- nificent force in these names which must be noted. Aholah, TN, is usually rendered “a tent,” but more properly femtorium suum (habet illa), she has her ozyń ſent or temple,' signifying that she has a tent or tabernacle of her own or of human invention. Aho- libah, TX2NTN, means, “my tent, i. e., temple, is 272 her,' that is to say—I, Jehovah, have given her a temple and religious service. They are both symbolically described as lewd women, adulteresses, prostituting themselves to the Egyptians and the Assyrians, in imitating their abominations and idolatries; wherefore Jehovah abandoned them to those very people for whom they showed such inordinate and impure affection. They were carried into captivity, and reduced to the severest servitude. But the crime of Aholi- bah was greater than that of Aholah, for she pos- sessed more distinguished privileges, and refused to be instructed by the awful example of her sister's ruin. The allegory is an epitome of the history of the Jewish church. 79 al AHOLIAB (a-ho'li-āb), (Heb. Pºzº, 6-hop-e- awó', tent of his father), of the tribe of Dan, a skillful artificer appointed along with Bezaleel to Construct the tabernacle (Exod. xxxv.34). AHOLIBAMAHG’ho-lib'a-mah),(Hebº, 6-hoſ-e-bazºl-maw', tent of the height), probably the second of the three wives of Esau (Gen. xxxvi;2, 25), B. C. about 1964. In the earlier nar- rative she is called Judith (Gen. xxvi;34). We must regard the concluding list of the genealogical table as a list of the names of places and not of persons (Gen. xxxvi;40-43). AHUMAI (a-hū'ma-i), (Heb. Tºtº, akh-oo- Żma/ 'ee, brother of water), one of the two sons of Jahath, a Zorathite, a descendant of Judah (1 Chron. iv:2). AHUZAM (a-hū’zam), (Heb. Flº, afth-oog- 2awm', their possession), son of Ashur, a de- Scendant of Judah, father or founder of Tekoa (I Chron. iv:6). AHUZZATH (a-hüz'zath), (Heb. Flº, afth-oog- gath", a possession), the ‘friend' of Abimelech II, king of Gerar, who attended him on his visit to Isaac (Gen. xxvi;26). In him occurs the first instance of that unofficial but important personage in ancient . Oriental courts, , called ‘the king's friend,' or favorite. Several interpreters, follow- ing the Chaldee and Jerome, take A huggath to be an appellative, denoting a come/any of friends, who attended Abimelech. AI (ā'i), (Heb. 2, ah'ee), Gen. xii:8; xiii:3; Josh. vii:2-5; viii:I-29; x:I, 2 ; xii:9; Ezra ii:28; Neh. vii:32; Jer. xlix:3), a city of the Canaanites, which lay east of Bethel. It existed in the time of Abra- ham, who pitched his tent between it and Bethel (Gen. xii:8; xiii:3); but it is chiefly noted for its capture and destruction by Joshua (vii:2-5; viii: I-29). This, as a military transaction, is noticed elsewhere (see AMBUSCADE). At a later period Ai was rebuilt, and is mentioned by Isaiah (x :28), and also after the captivity. The site was known, and some scanty ruins still existed in the time of Eusebius and Jerome, but Dr. Robinson was unable to discover any certain traces of either. He remarks (Bib. Researches, ii:313), however, that its situation with regard to Bethel may be well determined by the facts recorded in Scripture. That Ai lay to the east of Bethel is distinctly stated; and the two cities were not so far distant from each other but that the men of Bethel mingled in the pursuit of the Israelites when they feigned to flee before the king of Ai, and thus both cities were left defenseless (Josh. viii:17); yet they were not so near but that Joshua could place an ambush on the west (or southwest) of Ai, without its being observed by the men of Bethel while he himself remained behind in a valley, to the north of Ai (Josh. viii:4, II-I3). A little to the south of a village called Deir Diwan, and one hour's journey from Bethel, the site of an ancient place is indicated by reservoirs hewn in the rock, excavated tombs, and founda- tions of hewn stone. This, Dr. Robinson inclines to think, may mark the site of Ai, as it agrees with all the intimation as to its position. It is a hill of stones, Lee-el-Hajjar, a quarter of an hour from Beitin (Bethel) and less than four hours from Ain-es-Sultān, by way of Jericho. Near it, on the north, is the deep Wady-el- Mutyah, and towards the southwest other smaller wadys, in which the ambuscade of the Israelites might easily have been concealed. AIAH AIAH (a-i'ah), (Heb. nºs, a/*-yazy", a cry, often hawk). 1. Father of Rizpah, who was Saul’s concubine. David delivered her children to the Gideonites, to be hanged before the Lord (2 Sam. xxi.;8-II). 2. Son of Zibeon, son of Seir, the Horite (B. C. about 1500). AIATH (a-i'ath), (Heb. º, ah-yawth", Is. x:28), another form of the city Ai. (See AI.) AIJA (a-ija), (Heb. **, ah-yaw", Neh. xi.31), probably like Aiath, another variation of the name Ai (Neh. xi :3I). AIJALON (äij'a-lön), another form of the city AJALON (which See). AIJELETH SHAHAR(äij'a-lèth shä'har),(Heb. Tºn nºs, ahyeh-leth, hind; hash-shakhar, dawn (Ps. xxii, title), ‘Hind of the dawn, i. e., the rising sun, found only once in the Bible as the introductory verse or title of Ps. xxii. It was used to describe to the musician the melody to which the psalm was to be played (see MUSIC). AIL (ā’il), (Heb. ºs, a'yū), deer, generically, ac- cording to Dr. Shaw. (See FALLow DEER.) AIN (ā'in), (Heb. 2, ah'yin, a fountain, liter- ally, an eye). 1. One of the landmarks of the eastern bound- ary of Palestine (Num. xxxiv: II). It is probably Ain-el' Agy, the main source of the Orontes. 2. A city first assigned to the tribe of Judah (Josh. xv :32); and afterward to Simeon (Josh. xix:7; 1 Chron. iv:32). It was one of the Levi- tical cities (Josh. xxi : I6). Ashan takes the place of Ain in I Chron. vi. 59. It is situated in the northeast of Canaan between Riblah and the Sea of Gennesareth. AIR (āir), (Gr. &#p, ah-ayr'), the atmosphere as opposed to the ether (al6%p, ay-zhayer'), or higher and purer region of the sky (Acts xxii:23; I Thess. iv:17; Rev. ix:2; xvi :17). (See WINDs.) The air or atmosphere surrounding the earth is often denoted by the word heaven; so the birds of the heaven—for the birds of the air. God rained fire and brimstone on Sodom from heaven, that is, from the air (Gen. xix :24). “Let fire come down from heaven,” that is, from the air (2 Kings i: Io). Moses menaces Israel with the effects of God’s wrath, by destruction with a pesti- lential air (Deut. xxviii:22), or perhaps with a scorching wind, producing mortal diseases; or with a blast which ruins the corn (I Kings viii: 37). (See WINDs.) Figuratitye. To “beat the air '' and to “speak in the air” (I Cor. ix:26; xiv:9) are modes of expression used 1n most languages, signifying —to speak or act without judgment, or under- standing; or to no purpose; to fatigue ourselves in vain. “The powers of the air” (Eph. ii:2) probably mean devils, who exercise their powers principally in the air; exciting winds, Storms, and tempests, or other malign influences (see Job i :7), and to which, perhaps, the apostle may allude; if it be not rather an accommodation to the Jew- ish belief which was current in his days, that the air was the abode of evil spirits. (See ANGEL.) AIRUS (a-i'rus), (comp. Jairus of the New Tes- tament), one of the servants of the Temple whose sons are said to have returned from the Captivity (I Esdr. v :31), probably a corruption of Gahar of the genuine text, Ezra ii:47. AJAH (ā'jah), same as AIAH (Gen. xxxvi;24). 80 AKRABBIM nºx AJALAH (ā'ja-lah), (Heb. "?.S, ah-yazy-law', hind), in Gen. xlix:21; 2 Sam. xxii:34; Job xxxix: I ; Ps. xviii: 13; Prov. v :19; Cant. ii:7; Jer. xiv:5; Habak. iii:19. (See HART.) AJALON (ºja-lon), (Heb. Tºs, ahyaw-lone), placc of dcer, or Oaks. 1. Town and valley in the tribe of Dan (Josh. xix:42), which was given to the Levites (Josh. xxi :24; I Chron. vi.69). It was not far from Bethshemesh (2 Chron. xxviii:18), and was one of the places which Rehoboam fortified (2 Chron. xi : Io), and among the strongholds which the Philistines took from Ahaz (2 Chron. xxviii:18). But the town, or rather the valley to which the town gave name, derives its chief renown from the circumstance that when Joshua, in pursuit of the five kings, arrived at Some point near Upper Beth-horon, looking back upon Gibeon and down upon the noble valley be- fore him, he uttered the celebrated command : ‘Sun, stand thou still on Gibeon, and thou moon, in the valley of Ajalon’ (Josh. x:12). From the indications of Jerome, who places Ajalon two Roman miles from Nicopolis, on the way to Je- rusalem, joined to the preservation of the ancient name in the form of Yalo, Dr. Robinson (Bibl. Researches, iii:63) appears to have identified the valley and the site of the town. From a house- top in Beit Ur (Beth-horon) he looked down upon a broad and beautiful valley, which lay at his feet, towards Ramleh. This valley runs out west by north through a tract of hills, and then bends off southwest through the great west- ern plain. It is called Merj Ibu 'Omeir. Upon the side of the long hill which skirts the valley on the south, a small village was perceived, called Yālo, which cannot well be any other than the ancient Ajalon; and there can be little question that the broad wady to the north of it is the valley of the same name. 2. A city of the tribe of Zebulun (Judg. xii: I2). It has been identified as the modern Jalun. AKAN (ā'kān), (Heb. Tº, aw-Kawn', twisted), son of Ezer, son of Seir, the Horite of Idumaea (Gen. xxxvi :27). He is elsewhere called Jakan (I Chron. i :42). AKKUB (#k'kub),(Heb. PP2, ań-Żoob', insidious, a contracted form of Jacob). 1. Son of Elioenai, of the family of David (I Chron. iii:24). 2. A porter in Solomon's Temple (1 Chron.ix:17). 3. A family of hereditary porters in the Temple (Ezra ii:42; Neh. vii:45). 4. The chief of a family of the Nethinim who came up to Jerusalem after the exile (Ezra ii:45). A priest employed by Ezra to make the people understand the law (Neh. viii:7). AKRABBIM (a-kráb'bim), (Heb. Fº, aft- rab-been", Scorpion, Josh. xv.:3; xxxiv:4), an as- cent, hill, or chain of hills, which, from the name, would appear to have been much infested by scorp- ions and serpents, as some districts in that quarter certainly were (Deut. viii:15; Comp. Volney, ii: 256). It was one of the points which are only mentioned in describing the frontier line of the Tromised Land southward (Judg. i:36). Shaw conjectures that Akrabbim may probably be the same with the mountains of Akabah, by which he understands the easternmost range of the pºëAava èpm, ‘black mountains’ of Ptolemy, extending from Paran to Judaea. This range has lately become well known as the mountains of Edom, being those which bound AKROTHINION the great valley of Arabah on the east (Travels, ii: I2O). More specifically, he seems to refer Ak- rabbim to the southernmost portion of this range, near the fortress of Akabah, and the extremity of the eastern gulf of the Red Sea; where, as he ob- serves, ‘from the badness of the roads, and many rocky passes that are to be surmounted, the Mohammedan pilgrims lose a number of camels, and are no less fatigued than the Israelites were formerly in getting over them.’ - Burckhardt (Syria, p. 509) reaches nearly the same conclusion, except that he rather refers ‘the ascent of Akrabbim,” to the acclivity of the zvestern mountains from the plain of Akabah. This ascent is very steep, and has probably given to the place its name of Akabah, which means a cliff, or steep declivity.’ The probability of this identification depends upon the question, whether the southeastern frontier of Judah would be laid down so far to the south in the time of Moses and Joshua. If so, the identification is fair enough ; but if not, it is of no weight or value in itself. The apparent analogy of names can be little else than accidental, when the signification in the two languages is altogether different. AKROTHINION (äk'ro-thin'i-on), (Gr. 'Akpo- 6tvtov, ak-roſh-thin'ee-on). This Greek word, which occurs in Heb. vii:4, means the best of the spoils. The Greeks, after a battle, were accustomed to collect the spoils into a heap, from which an offering was first made to the gods; this was the &kpobivlov (Xenoph., Cyrop. vii:5, 35; Herodot. viii: 121, 122; Pind. Nem. 7, 58). In the first cited case, Cyrus, after the taking of Babylon, first calls the magi, and commands them to choose the dkpottvia of certain portions of the ground for sacred pur- DOSes. ALABASTER (äl'a-bäs' ter), (Gr. d’A&8aarpov), a genus of fossils having the color of the human 11ail, nearly allied to marbles, and, according to Pliny, found in the neighborhood of Thebes, in Egypt, and about Damascus in Syria. This ma- terial being very generally used to fabricate ves- sels for holding unguents, and perfumed liquids, many vessels were called alabaster, though made *- uſill tº £º Effs **@ Alabaster Vessels. 4; of a different substance, as gold, silver, glass, etc. In Matt. xxvi;6, 7 ; Mark xiv:3; Luke vii: 37, we read that, Jesus being at table in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper, a woman (Mary, sister of Lazarus, John xii:3) poured an alabaster box of precious ointment on his head. Mark says “she brake the box,” signifying, probably, that the seal upon the box, or upon the neck of the vase or bottle, which kept the perfume from 81 ALEXANDER evaporating, had never been removed, but was, on this occasion, first opened. ALAMETH (a-lā'meth), (properly Alemeth), son of Becher, grandson of Benjamin (I Chron. vii:8). ALAMMIELECH (a-lām"me-lèch), (Heb. iºs, a/-/am-z/te/, /ek, oak of [the] king, or king's oak), a town in Asher, marked at the present time by the Wady-el-Melek, six miles inland from Hhaiffa. ALAMOTH(al'a-moth),(Heb.nºala-moths, virgins), either a musical instrument or a melody (Ps. xlvi, title; I Chron. xv.:20). ALCIMUS or JACIMUS (äl'ci-müs), (Gr. 'AAkt- uós, al-Áee-mos', and 'Idkelpos, ee-a'Áy-/20s, Joseph. Antig. xii:9, 3, Graecized forms of Eliakim and Joachim—names often interchanged in Hebrew), a , usurping high-priest of the Jews in the time of Judas Maccabaeus. (See MAccABEEs; PRIEST, HEBREw PRIESTHOOD.) ALEMA (äl'e-ma), a cit dan (I Macc. v.:26). ALEMETH (äl'e-mêth or a-lè'meth), (Heb.nº, aw-leh'?meth, covering, otherwise adolescence), the name of two persons and also of a place. 1. A son of Jehoadah, or Jarah, a Benjamite descended from Jonathan, the son of Saul (I Chron. viii:36; ix:42). 2. The last named of the nine sons of Becher, the son of Benjamin (I Chron. vii:8), B. C. after I856. (Same as ALAM ETH.) 3. A city of refuge, in the tribe of Benjamin (I Chron. vi.60), called Almon in Josh. xxi.; 18. ALEXANDER (āl-egz-án'der), (Gr. 'AXéavôpos, A-Zer'am-dros, helper of men). 1. Alexander the Great, son of Philip and Olympias, king of Macedon, ruler of the greatest empire of antiquity. (1) In Prophecy. He was denoted in the prophecies of Daniel, by a leopard with four wings, signifying his great strength, and the un- usual rapidity of his conquests, Chap. vii:6; also as a one-horned he-goat, running over the earth So Swiftly as not to touch it; attacking a ram with two horns, overthrowing him, and trampling him under foot, without any being able to rescue him, Chap. viii:4-7. The he-goat pre- figured Alexander; the ram, Darius Codomannus, the last of the Persian kings. In the statue be- held by Nebuchadnezzar, in a dream, Chap. ii; 39, the belly of brass was the emblem of Alex- ander, and the legs of iron designated his suc- cessors. He was appointed by God to destroy the Persian empire, and to substitute the Grecian monarchy. y in Gilead beyond Jor. Tetradrachm of Alexander the Great. (2) Victories. He reduced Tyre and Gaza and treated the conquered cities with exceptionally cruel severity. He next set out for Jerusalem, in- tending to punish the High-Priest Jaddus for refusing to submit to him. The Lord, in a dream, commanded Jaddus to Open the gates to the conqueror, and, dressed in ALEXANT).ER his pontifical ornaments, attended by the priests, in their formalities, at the head of his people, to receive Alexander in triumph. Jaddus obeyed; and Alexander, seeing from a distance this com- pany advancing, was struck with admiration, and approaching the high-priest, he saluted him first, then adored God, whose name was engraven on a thin plate of gold worn by the high-priest on his forehead. The people, in the meanwhile, sur- rounded Alexander, with great acclamations. (b) His Vision. The kings of Syria, who ac- companied him, and the great officers about Alex- ander, could not comprehend the meaning of his conduct. Parmenio alone ventured to ask, Why he, to whom all people prostrated themselves, had prostrated himself before the high-priest of the Jews? Alexander replied that he paid this re- spect to God and not to the high-priest, “for,” added he, “while I was yet in Macedonia I saw the God of the Jews, who appeared to me in the same form and dress as this high-priest, he en- couraged me to march my army with expedition into Asia, promising, under his guidance, to render me master of the Persian empire. For this rea- Son, as soon as I perceived this habit, I recollected the vision, and understood that my undertaking was favored by God, and that, under his protec- tion, I might expect very soon to obtain the Per- sian empire, and happily to accomplish all my designs.” (4) Offered Sacrifice. Having said this, Alex- ander accompanied Jaddus into the city, and offered sacrifices in the temple, punctually con- forming to the directions of the priests, and leav- ing to the high-priest the honors and functions annexed to his dignity. Jaddus showing him the prophecies of Daniel, in which it was said that a Grecian prince should destroy the Persian em. pire, the king was confirmed in his opinion, that God had chosen him to execute that great work. (5) Favors to the Jews. At his departure he bade the Jews ask what they would of him, but the high-priest desired only the liberty of living under his government, according to their own laws, with an exemption from tribute every sev- enth year, because in that year the Jews neither tilled their grounds, nor reaped their products. Alexander readily granted this request, and as they besought him to grant the same favor to the Jews beyond the Euphrates, in Babylonia and Media, he promised that privilege as soon as he had conquered those provinces. This done, he left Jerusalem and visited other cities, being everywhere received with great testimonies of friendship and submission. The Samaritans who dwelt at Sichem, observing how kindly Alexan- der had treated the Jews, resolved to say that they also were, by religion, Jews, for it was their practice, when they saw the affairs of the Jews prosper to boast that they were descended from Manasseh and Ephraim, but when they thought it their interest to say the contrary, they would not fail to affirm, and even to swear, that they had no relation to the Jews. They came, there- fore, with many demonstrations of joy, to meet Alexander, entreated him to visit their temple and city, and petitioned him for an exemption from taxes every seventh year, because they also neither tilled nor reaped that year. Alexander replied that he had granted this exemption only to Jews, but at his return he would inquire into the matter and do them justice. (Joseph. Antiq. xi :8.) (6) Death. The great founder of Alexandria died in his thirty-second year (B. C. 323). The empire which he then left to be quarreled for by his generals comprised the whole dominions of Persia, with the homage and obedience of Greece 82 ALEXANDRIA superadded. But on the final settlement which took place after the battle of Ipsus (B. C. 301), Seleucus, the Greek representative of Persian må. jesty, reigned over a less extended district than the last Darius. Not only were Egypt and Cyprus severed from the eastern empire, but Palestine and Coelesyria also fell to their ruler, placing Jeru- Salem for nearly a century beneath an Egyp- tian monarch. On this subject, see further notice under ANTIOCHUs. The word Alexander, as before stated, means the helper or rescuer of men, denoting military prowess. It is Homer's ordinary name for Paris, Son of Priam, and was borne by two kings of Macedon before the great Alexander. 2. Alexander, surnamed Balas, from his mother Bala, a personage who figures in the his- tory of the Maccabees and in Josephus (I Macc. x). He was the husband of Cleopatra, and claimed the throne of Syria. 3. Son of Simon, the Cyrenian, and brother of Rufus, men well known among the early Chris- tians. He was compelled to bear the cross for our Lord (Mark xv :21). 4. One of the kindred of Annas and evidently holding some high office (Acts iv:6). 5. A Jew, or perhaps a Christian convert from Judaism, whom the mob at Ephesus, excited by Demetrius, refused to hear (Acts xix:33). 6. An Ephesian Christian, reprobated by St. Paul (1 Tim. i :20). Z. A coppersmith, probably of Ephesus, who did much mischief to St. Paul (2 Tim. iv:I4). He may have been the same person as the pervert mentioned above in I Tim. i :20. ALEXANDRIA (äl'egz-ān-dri'a), (Gr. 'AXe:áv6. peta, al-esc-and"ree-ah), the chief maritime city, and long the metropolis of lower Egypt (Comp. Acts vi : IQ: xviii:24; xxvii:6; xxviii:II). As this city owed its foundation to Alexander the Great, the Old Testament canon had closed before it existed; nor is it often mentioned in the Apocrypha, or in the New Testament. But it was in many ways most importantly connected with the later history of the Jews—as well from the relations which subsisted between them and the Ptolemies, who reigned in that city, as from the vast numbers of Jews who were settled there, with whom a constant intercourse was maintained by the Jews of Palestine. It is perhaps safe to say that, from the foundation of Alexandria to the destruction of Jerusalem, and even after, the former was of all foreign places that to which the attention of the Jews was most directed. And this appears to have been true even at the time when Antioch first, and afterwards Rome, became the seat of the power to which the nation was subject. (1) Situation. Alexandria is situated on the Mediterranean, twelve 111iles west of Ilie Callopic mouth of the Nile, in 31 deg. I3 min. N. lat, and 25 deg. 53 min. E. long. It owes its origin to the com- prehensive policy of Alexander, who perceived that the usual channels of commerce might be advanta- geously altered, and that a city occupying this site could not fail to become the common empo- rium for the traffic of the eastern and western worlds, by means of the river Nile and the two adjacent seas, the Red Sea and the Mediterranean, and the high prosperity which, as such, Alexan- dria very rapidly attained, proved the soundness of his judgment, and exceeded any expectations which even he could have entertained. For a long period Alexandria was the greatest of known cities, for Nineveh and Babylon had fallen, and Rome had not yet risen to pre-eminence, and even when Rome became the mistress of the world, and ALEXANDRIA Alexandria only the metropolis of a province, the latter was second only to the former in wealth, ex- tent and importance, and was honored with the magnificent titles of the second metropolis of the world, the city of cities, the queen of the East, a second Rome (Diod. Sic. xvii; Strab. xvii; Ammian. Marcell. xxii; Hegesipp. iv:27; Joseph. Bell. Jud. iv:II, 5). (2) Seat of Commerce and Science. Alex- andria became not only the seat of commerce, but of learning and the liberal sciences. This dis- tinction it owed to Ptolemy Soter, himself a man of education, who founded an academy, or Society of learned men, who devoted themselves to the study of philosophy, literature and science. For their use he made a collection of choice books, which, by degrees, increased under his successors until it became the finest library in the world and numbered 700,000 volumes (Strab. xvii, p. 791 ; Euseb. Chron.). (3) Burning of the Library. It sustained repeated losses, by fire and otherwise, but these losses were as repeatedly repaired, and it con- tinued to be of great fame and use in those parts, until it was at length burnt by the Saracens when they made themselves masters of Alexandria in A. D. 642. Undoubtedly the Jews at Alexandria shared in the benefit of these institutions, as the Christians did afterwards, for the city was not only a seat of heathen, but of Jewish, and subse- quently of Christian learning. The Jews never had a more profoundly learned man than Philo, nor the Christians men more erudite than Origen and Clement; and if we may judge from these celebrated natives of Alexandria, who were re- markably intimate with the heathen philosophy and literature—the learning acquired in the Jew- ish and Christian schools of that city must have been of that broad and comprehensive character which its large and liberal institutions were fitted to produce. (4) The Septuagint. It will be remembered that the celebrated translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek (see SEPTUAGINT) was made, under every encouragement from Ptolemy Philadelphus, principally for the use of the Jews in Alexandria, who knew only the Greek language, but partly, no doubt, that the great library might possess a version of a book so remarkable, and, in some points, so closely connected with the an- cient history of Egypt. The work of Josephus against Apion affords ample evidence of the at- tention which the Jewish Scriptures excited. (5) Three Classes. The inhabitants of Alex- andria were divided into three classes: (1) The Macedonians, the original founders of the city; (2) the mercenaries who had served under Alex- ander; (3) the native Egyptians. Through the favor of Alexander and Ptolemy Soter, the Jews were admitted into the first of these classes, and this privilege was so important that it had great effect in drawing them to the new city (Heca- taeus, in Joseph. Contra Apion, 1, ii). (6) Christian Church Founded by St. Mark. St. Mark is said to have first preached the gospel in Egypt and founded the Christian Church in Alexandria. The Christians were very numerous in this city in the second century. ./11exandria and NetwTestament. A masterpiece, whether in literature, art or life, by its very inspiration urges us to study its se- cret. Work on the New Testament has been tire- less and abundant along two lines—one in set- ting forth the power, beauty and worth of the truth itself; the other in making clear the con- ditions which were antecedent to its deliverance, 83 of the Egyptian capital. ALEXANDRIA the environment in which it was proclaimed and the results which its deliverance brought about. Along this latter line there is one very im- portant question : “What did Alexandria do in the preparation of the New Testament message?” To any one who knows anything of the thought and life of the first Christian centuries, there can be no question about the wide reaching influence Her schools were the pride of scholarship, and her methods the charm of both teacher and pupil. In order to prepare the way for an estimate of the influence exerted upon the preparation of the New Testament, it is necessary to linger for a moment at three points in this city—in the Jewish quarter, at the Museum and in the market place. These are critical points for the study of Alexandria’s peculiar place and purpose, in the earlier part of the third century B. C., the golden age of Hellenism. The mission of Alexandrian Judaism was pe- culiar. From the first it bore a conspicuous part in the history of the city. Alexander had given the Jews equal rights and privileges with other citizens at its foundation. They had their own alabarch or governor, who, in conjunction with the Sanhedrin, exercised control over them. At one time a wall about the Jewish quarter marked the hostility which they experienced from the Greeks and native Egyptians, because of political jealousy and religious hatred, but within it the Jews prospered financially and intellectually. Within that inner wall Plato was studied as well as Moses, and Greek was the common language. In this northwestern part of the old city began that amalgamation which was to be serviceable for so long in the history of thought. Here were started the questions which brought the law into comparison with philosophy, and which opened the way for the interpretation of one into the terms of the other. It was from here doubtless that the call came for the Greek version of the books of Moses. That busy, thriv- ing section was linked in a strange way with the fortunes of the gospels and epistles. Our use of the word museum does not lead us to think of a university, but as the muses and their priest were associated with the schools it is nothing less than , the great center of learning that here opens before us. Here was a theater for lectures and great public assemblies, and also the famous library open to all who would use it, thus bringing to the very door of the Jews the wisdom and culture of the heathen world. It was a place of marked intellectual activity, and that, too, with a fascination which comes from untrammeled speculation and comparative study. The third point of interest for us is the market- place, where wares from every part of the world were exhibited. - Greeks, Egyptians, Romans and merchants from the provinces of Asia Minor were busy in trade, and the variegated scene on the shore was matched by the harbor itself, where ships from many ports lay at anchor, - One fact invests this scene with supreme inter- est for us. There is everywhere one medium of communication—the Greek. Cosmopolitan as the life was, it found its unification in this. There was one language in palace, court, School, theater and shop. {e - The Jews, the culture of heathendom, and the language which was the common vehicle of though, these were the factors toward the result into which we wish to make inquiry. In looking into the New Testament for marks of their influ- ence our attention must be directed to two things: the language and the thought. ALEXANDRIA The Language of the New Testament. It does not take a student long to discover that in reading the Greek of the New Testament he has not before him the diction of the prose clas- sics with which he had become familiar. Not only, generally speaking, is there greater sim- plicity of structure, but there are peculiarities of idiom and forms of expression which at once demand attention. The whole atmosphere is changed. There were Greek colonists in Egypt before Alexander came to it, but it was his arrival and his policy that put Greek into the foremost place and made it the language of intercourse. But it was not the pure Greek of the classics that Alexander brought to Egypt. A living language can never be insensible to its environment, and Macedonians, Egyptians, Jews and Romans, meet- ing in the market place, were not there to indulge in fine phrases. They were there to be under- stood, and they took hold of the plainest Greek they could find, and also turned some of their own words and idioms into Greek forms. Add the resultant modifications to that which already existed in the predominating type of Greek of the court and official life, viz., the Macedonian, 84 and you have the kind of Greek which was char- acteristic of Alexandria, and perhaps also in some degree of other cities under the sway of Alex- ander's policy. If we have rightly conceived of the position and importance of this city, it is not difficult to see how it became a new center for the dif- fusion of this speech. But important as this modi- fied speech is, for it appears in the New Testa- ment, it is not the chief point of interest in the inquiry into the development of language here. The Jews of the city were as important a factor in its commercial life as they have been ever since, where they have had an equal chance, and commerce brought them into close contact with the Greek. It was, therefore, with this later Greek that they had to do, and they gradually took it up as their own speech, coloring it, of course, largely with Hebrew idiom. It is this peculiar kind of Hebraistic Greek that appears in the Septuagint and in a less degree in the New Testament. - Surrounded as they were by Greek life and cus- toms, and compelled to use the common medium of intercourse, it is not strange that the Jews forgot their own tongue, and the most plausible reason for the Greek version itself was this very need of the sacred books in a tongue that they could understand. - In two particulars, the Septuagint, the prepara- tion of which ranged over perhaps a period of a hundred years, is supposed to have influenced the vuualjula y Úſ the New Testament. These two particulars are the range of vocabulary, and its significance. It would be natural to suppose that the Greek version which came into immediate and widespread use in the dispersion would have had the effect of stereotyping the speech of the Jews. That it was thus widely used, the quotations from it in the New Testament seem to show, as do also the allusions to it and reminiscences of it found all through the epistles. - If we leave out proper names and their de- rivatives there are 4,829 words in the New Testa- ment vocabulary; of these, 3,850 are found in Greek previous to Aristotle (322 B. C.), that is, in the period of classic Greek. That leaves about 95o post-Aristotelian words in the New Testa- ment; of these, 314 are found in the Septuagint. As about one-half of this latter number occurs in the writings of the “common dialect we have ALEXANDRIA about 150 which are peculiar to the Septuagint and the New Testament.” About thirty per cent of the total number of Biblical words in the New Testament occur in the Septuagint. These figures must change the usual conception of the relation of the Septuagint to the New Testa- ment as far as range of vocabulary is concerned. Much might be said in relation to the influence of the Hebrew idiom upon the Greek, and it is beyond question that this was, in a measure, stereotyped by the Septuagint. There is a much greater advance in vocabulary than in diction in the New Testament, though the Greek of the Acts, of James and of the Epistle to the Hebrews at- tains a high level of pure expression. To be sure the writers of the New Testament were themselves Jews, and the influence of their mother tongue, the Aramaic, is evident, but be- yond, and in addition to this, they carry over the familiar idioms of the Hebraistic Greek of the Old Testament. Turning from the range of the vocabulary to the significance of it, we are no longer in the region where mere numbers can tell the whole story. Words must be weighed rather than counted. The contact of Hebrew and heathen thought compelled the transfer of the conceptions of the Old Testament into a medium which, flex- ible as it was, and finished as it had been, was yet a stranger to all those conceptions. Two fac- tors were adapting the medium to its more ef- fective use for Christ's own truth: the actual work of the translators of the Septuagint and that discussion of the relation of the Old Testa- ment conceptions to philosophical dogmas which gave a broader, richer meaning to some of the Greek words afterwards to go into the New Tes- tament. These words had all their own meanings in classic Greek, but no dictionary of simple classic speech could define them. Take such a word as Trveipia, Žnyoo'77ta/. Professor Jowett tells us that “to have given a Greek in the times of Socrates a notion of what was meant by Holy Spirit would have been like giving the blind a conception of colors, or the deaf of musical sounds.” That very word starts in the Old Testament with a conception entirely foreign to Greek thought. This latter connects it always with its physi- ological aspect: wind, breath. As the expression of a psychological conception it is unknown in classic Greek. Of course the New Testament has deepened and more sharply defined the word, but the beginnings of the process are in the Old Testament. The word was carried over to a new sphere by the Septuagint. The deeply interest- ing study of these changes is brought out in Cremer’s great work, which deserves faithful usage by all New Test a ment st11(ienfº The center of philosophical discussion in Alex- andria was the Museum. Here through all the years of the city’s glory was carried on that de- velopment, refinement and adjustment of thought which demanded a developed medium of expres- sion. All philosophy in Alexandria had a deeply theological interest, so much so that it has been denied that philosophy pure and simple could be heard there. Out of it all came the power to express in more significant forms the highest truths of which we are capable. It prepared the way for the “Logos,” indeed, made that word familiar all about the Mediterranean. It is to be noted that all that was serviceable for the New Testament was the vehicle of thought, not the thought itself. John’s Logos differs from the Logos of Philo, but that John took a term familiar in Alexandria and Ephesus is beyond ALEXANDRIANS doubt. Professor Jowett’s reflection upon the language of Philo will confirm what is meant : “As we read his works the truth flashes upon us that the language of the New Testament is not isolated from the language of the world in gen- eral ; the spirit rather than the letter is new, the whole, not the parts, the life more than the form. No study brings one more clearly face to face with the divine in this message from heaven to us than just this. Such, in brief, is the part Alexandria had to take in helping toward the formation of the Greek of the New Testament. By reason of it she stands upon that line which begins in the days of Athens’ glory and runs on through five hun- dred years of varied Greek life. Even as con- cerns the language in which the New Testament was written, had Christ come sooner than he actually did, the “medium” for his truth would not have been ready. The form in which we now have the New Testament belongs also to the “full- ness of time.” Alexandria had a definite mission in regard to that form. (See SEPTUAGINT). (See Alexandria and the New Testament, by J. S. Riggs, The American Journal of Theology. ALEXANDRIANS (äl'egz-ān'dri-ans), (Acts vi. 9), Jews of Alexandria settled at Jerusalem, where they had a synagogue. ALGUM or ALMUG (äl'gum or āl'mug), (Heb. cºs, al-groom-meem"), a kind of wood which Hiram brought from Ophir (I Kings x:II; 2 Chron. ii:8; ix: Io, II,). The rabbins generally render it coral; others, ebony or pine. It certainly is not coral, for this is not proper to make musical instruments, nor to be used in rails, or a stair- case, to which uses the Scripture tells us the wood was put. The pine tree is too common in Judea and the neighboring country to search for it as far as Ophir. The wood thyinum (by which the word is rendered in the Vulgate) is that of the citron tree, known to the ancients, and much esteemed for its odor and beauty. It came from Mauritania (Plin. xiii:16). Almug occurs in 1 Kings xv :II, I2. Calmet is of opinion that by almug, or algum, or simply gum, taking al for an article, is to be understood oily and gummy wood, particularly of the tree which produces gum Arabic. It is said gum Ammoniac proceeds from a tree resembling that which bears myrrh, and gum Arabic comes from the black acacia, which he takes to be the same as the Shittim wood, frequently mentioned . by Moses. & ALIAH (a-li'ah), (Heb. my, al-ee-yazv', perhaps evil), a less correct form of the name of Alvah (Gen. xxxvi;4o; I Chron. i. 51). He was the son of Shobal, a duke of Edom, descended from Esau. ALIAN or ALVAN (a-li'an or āl’van), (Heb. i.22, al-yazwn', tall), a son of Shobal, a descendant + : – ; of Levi (Gen. xxxvi;23; 1 Chron. i.40), B. C. about I927. ALLEGORY (al'le-go-ry), (Gr. 'AAA'm yopéw, aſ- Aay-gor-e/.'o), occurs only once in Scripture (Gal. iv: 24), where the apostle, referring to the story of Ha- gar and Ishmael, Sarah and Isaac, says, “Which things are to be allegorized” (Gr. drivá čaruv &\\myopoćueva); a figurative form of teaching, in which from certain facts, real or imaginary, in- struction is conveyed through some other applica- tion of the facts themselves. For examples of ‘pure and mixed allegory, see Ps. lxxx; Luke XV: I I-32; John xv.:I-8. “The allegory of Melchizedek, based not on the historical personage so much as on the nature of 85 - ALLIANCES the two passing allusions to him, combined with the significance of the great silence elsewhere in the Old Testament as to his birth and descent, as well as of the two names, Melchizedek and Salem, all these together being made the founda- tion of a logical construction of the person and work of Christ as an embodiment of the precon- ceived idea, can hardly be considered without regard to Philo's treatment of Melchizedek as an allegory of his apparently impersonal Logos. And yet, with the expression in the IIoth Psalm be- fore us, ‘Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek,’ we must allow Dr. Westcott a certain margin of justification when he maintains that the treatment of Melchizedek is typical rather than allegorical, though he appears to be too Sweeping when he affirms, ‘There is no allegory in this epistle.’” J. Massie, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) (See MELCHIZEDEK.) ALLELUIA (äl'le-lâ'yā). See HALLELUJAH. ALLIANCES (al-li'ān-sez). From a dread lest the example of foreign nations should draw the Israelites into the worship of idols, they were made a peculiar and separate people, and inter- course and alliance with such nations were strongly interdicted (Lev. xviii:3, 4; xx:22, 23). (1) Mosaic Interdiction. The tendency to idolatry was in those times so strong that the safety of the Israelites lay in the most complete isolation that could be realized, and it was to assist this object that a country more than usu- ally separated from others by its natural boun- daries was assigned to them. It was shut in by the sea on the west, by deserts on the south and east, and by mountains and forests on the north. Among a people so situated we should not expect to hear much of alliances with other nations. (2) Solomon and Hiram. By far the most remarkable alliance in the political history of the Hebrews is that between Solomon and Hiram, king of Tyre. It is in a great degree connected with considerations which belong to another head. (See CoMMERCE.) (3) Time of David. But it may primarily be referred to a partial change of feeling which origi- nated in the time of David, and which continued to operate among his descendants. During his wanderings he was brought into contact with several of the neighboring princes, from some of whom he received sympathy and support, which, after he ascended the throne, he gratefully re- membered (2 Sam. x:2). There was probably more of this friendly inter- course than the Scripture has had occasion to re- cord. Such timely aid, combined with the respect which his subsequently victorious career drew from foreign nations, must have gone far to modify in him and those about him that aversion to strang- ers which the Hebrews generally had been led to entertain. He married the daughter of a heathen king, and had by her his favorite son (2 Sam. iii:3); the king of Moab protected his family (I Sam. xxii:3, 4); the king of Ammon showed kindness to him (2 Sam. x:2); the king of Gath showered favors upon him (I Sam. xxvii; xxviii; I, 2) ; the king of Hamath sent his own son to congratulate him on his victories (2 Sam. viii:15). In short, the rare power which David possessed of attaching to himself the good opinion and favor of other men, extended even to the neigh- boring nations, and it would have been difficult for a person of his disposition to repel the ad- vances of kindness and consideration which they made. w Among those who made such advances was ALLIANCES 86 Hiram, king of Tyre; for it eventually transpires that ‘Hiram was ever a lover of David’ (I Kings v:2), and it is probable that other intercourse had preceded that relating to the palace which Hiram’s artificers built for David (2 Sam. v :II), The king of Tyre was not disposed to neglect the cultivation of the friendly intercourse with the Hebrew nation which had thus been opened. He Sent an embassy to condole with Solomon on the death of his father, and to congratulate him on his accession (I Kings v :I). (4) League with Hiram. The plans of the young king rendered the friendship of Hiram a matter of importance, and accordingly ‘a league’ was formed (I Kings v : I.2) between them, and that this league had a reference not merely to the Special matter then in view, but was a general league of amity, is evinced by the fact that more than 250 years after a prophet denounces the Lord's vengeance upon Tyre, because she ‘remem- bered not the brotherly covenant’ (Amos i :9), Under this league large bodies of Jews and Phoe- nicians were associated, first in preparing the materials for the temple (I Kings v :6-18), and afterwards in navigating the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean (I Kings, ix:26-28), and this in- creasing intercourse with the heathen appears to have considerably weakened the sentiment of sep- aration, which, in the case of the Hebrews, it was of the utmost importance to maintain. (5) Results. The disastrous consequences of even the seemingly least objectionable alliances may be seen in the long train of evils, both to the kingdom of Israel and of Judah, which en- sued from the marriage of Ahab with Jezebel, the king of Tyre's daughter. (See AHAB; JEZEBEL.) These consequences had been manifested even in the time of Solomon, for he formed matrimonial alliances with most of the neighboring kingdoms, and to the influence of his idolatrous wives are ascribed the abominations which darkened the latter days of the wise king (I Kings xi :1-8). (6) The Voice of the Prophets. The prophets, who were alive to these consequences, often raised their voices against such dangerous connections (I Kings xx:38; 2 Chron. xvi :7; xix:2; xxv :7, etc.; Is. vii: 17); but it was found a difficult matter to induce even the best kings to place such absolute faith in Jehovah, the head of their state, as to neglect altogether those human resources and alliances by which other nations strengthened themselves against their enemies. (7) Blood Covenant. From the time of the patriarchs a covenant of alliance was sealed by the blood of some victim. A heifer, a goat, a ram, a turtle dove and a young pigeon were immolated in confirmation of the co- venant between the Lord and Abraham (Gen. xv :9). The animal or animals sacrificed were cut in two (except birds, ver. IO), to typify the doom of perjurers. This usage often recurs in the prophets, and there are allusions to it in the New Testament (Jer. xxxiv:18; Dan. xiii:55; Matt. xxiv:51 ; Luke xii:46). The perpetuity of covenants of alliance thus contracted is expressed by calling them “covenants of salt’ (Num. xviii: I9; 2 Chron. xiii:5), salt being the symbol of incorruption. - (8) Scrupulous Adherence. The case of the Gibeonites affords an exemplary instance, scarcely equaled in the annals of any nation, of Scrupulous adherence to such engagements. The Israelites had been absolutely cheated into the alliance, but, having been confirmed by oaths, it was deemed to be inviolable (Josh. ix:19). Long afterwards, the treaty having been violated by Saul, the whole nation was punished for the ALMON crime by a horrible famine in the time of David (2 Sam. xxi.;I, sqq). The prophet Ezekiel (xvii: I3-16), pours terrible denunciations upon king Zedekiah for acting contrary to his sworn cove: nant with the king of Babylon. In this respect the Jews were certainly most favorably distin- guished among the ancient nations, and, from nu- merous intimations in Josephus, it appears that their character for fidelity to their engagements was so generally recognized after the captivity as often to procure for them highly favorable consideration from the rulers of Western Asia and of Egypt. ALLON (allon), (Heb. *, aſ Zone, oak, vulg, Quercus, Auth. Vers., Oak). 1. The Hebrew word, thus pointed, as it occurs in Gen. xxxv 8; Josh. xix:32; Is. ii: 13; vi-I3; xliv, I4; Hos. iv:13; Amos ii:9; Zech. xi.;2, was understood by the ancient translators, and has been supposed by most interpreters, to denote the oak, and there is no reason to disturb this conclusion. In our version other words are also rendered by oak,’ particularly A/a/, which more probably denotes the terebinth-tree. The oak is, in fact, less fre- quently mentioned in the original than in the A. V., where it occurs so often as to suggest that the oak is as conspicuous and as Common in Pal- estine as in this country. But in Syria oaks are by no means common, except in hilly regions, where the elevation gives the effect of a more northern climate, and even in such circumstances it does not attain the grandeur in which it often appears in our latitudes. The ‘Oaks of Bashan’ are in Scripture mentioned with peculiar distinction (Is. ii:3; Ezek. xxvii:6; Zech. xi:2), as if in the hills beyond the Jordan the oaks had been more abun- dant and of larger growth than elsewhere. This is the case even at the present day. In the hilly regions of Bashan and Gilead, Burckhardt repeat- edly mentions forests of thick Oaks, thicker than any forests he had seen elsewhere in Syria. (See OAK.) 2. A town on the border of Naphtali, between Keleph and Zaanannim (Josh. xix:33), but perhaps only some remarkable tree as a landmark. 3. The son of Jedaiah and father of Shiphi (I Chron. iv:37). ALLON-BACHUTH (äl'lon-bäk'uth), (Heb. nº; nºs, a/-lone' baw-Åooth", oak of weeping), the oak boncath which Deborah, Rachel's nurse, was buried (Gen. xxxv.8). ALLOW (äl-lou"). “Truly ye bear witness that ye allow the deeds of your fathers’ (Luke xi:48). Allow has here the sense of approving or praising, that ye approve the deeds of your fathers. In modern English it means merely to permit. However, allow has the meaning of praise in if S original roof (Lafin allaudare. and that from “laus,” praise. Compare our laud.) The less he is worthy, the more art thou there- fore allowed of God, and the more art thou com- mended of Christ (Homilies against Contention). —Swinton’s Bib. Hand Bk. ... • ALMODAD (al-mö'dad), (Heb. Tºº, al-mo- dawd", meaning unknown, perhaps agitator), son of Joktan, of the family of Shem (Gen. x:26; I Chron. i:2O). ... " - ALMON (äl'mon), (Heb. Tºº,al-mone', hidden), one of the three cities which belonged to the priests in the tribe of Benjamin (Josh. xxi:18): It is supposed to be the same as the Alemeth of I Chron. vi :60. Jarchi and Kimchi identify it with Baharim, which name the Targum (2 Sam. iii:16) renders by Almeth—both words signify ‘youth.” The site is unknown. ALMON–DIBLATHAIM ALMON-DIBLATHAIM (äl'mon-drb'la-tha'im), (Heb. jºy nºnpº, al-mome' dib-lazy-thazv'yem- azv), the fifty-first station of the Israelites on their way from Mount Hor to the plains of Moab, round by Mount Seir (Num. xxxiii:46). Proba- bly identified , with Beth-diblathaim, a Moabite city mentioned by Jeremiah (xlviii:22). ALMOND (ä'münd), (Heb. Tºº, shazw-kade', wakeful, probably from its early blossoming) (Gen. xliii:II; Num. xvii:8; Eccles. xii:5; Jer. i:II). This tree is a native of Syria and Palestine, and is highly ornamental from the beauty of its º § $ºS tº W. º 2. º.º. ) ºf ºbſº t **, * * w_* * alº. Sº §º º Š. º 22 t - ſº Zº & :S asº S.S. ; ;-s sAE: :--º* %:ºº -ºi sººlººg -;ºC -ºt ºtº:§ S sº s § º Terebinth. blossoms. The form of the almond would lead to its selection for ornamental carved work (Exod. xxv :33, 34; xxxvii:19), independently of its forming an esteemed esculent, as well as probably yielding a useful oil. In Eccles. xii:5, it is said, ‘The almond tree shall flourish, and the fruit of the caper droop, because man goeth to his long home.’ This evidently refers to the profuse flowering and white appearance of the almond tree when in full bloom, and before its leaves appear. It is hence adduced as illustrative of the hoary hairs of age, in the same way as the drooping of the fruit of the caper seems to refer to the hanging down of the head. Dr. Kitto mentions the almond among the first trees that flower in January. ‘There are two species of Amygdalus in Palestine; the common almond tree, and the peach tree, and both are this month in blossom in every part of Palestine, on both sides of the Jordan. It was doubtless from this winter blossoming of the almond tree, not less than from the snowy whiteness of the blossoms, that the hoary head of the aged man is, by a beautiful metaphor, said in Scripture to flourish like the almond tree' (Physic. Hist. of Palestine). 87 Post, Hastings' Bib. Dict., says: “The usual interpretation of Eccles. xii, ‘the almond tree shall flourish,” is that the old man’s hair shall turn white like the almond tree. To this Gesenius objects, that the blossom of the al- mond is pink, not white. He prefers to translate ALMS the word for flourish by spurn or reject, making the old man reject the almond because he has no teeth to eat it. But this objection has no force. The pink color of the almond blossom is very light, usually mainly at the base of the petals, and fades as they open, and the general effect of the tree as seen at a distance is snowy- white. We may therefore retain the beautiful imagery, which brings to mind the silver hair of the aged, and draw from the snowy blossom the promise of the coming fruit.” Figuratite. In Jer. i. 11, 12, the Hebrew words for almond are Shamkade' and Show - Kad", and signify the ‘waker,’ in allusion to its being the first tree to wake to life in the winter. The word also contains the signification of ‘watching' and ‘hastening.” The almond was the emblem of the divine forwardness in bringing God's promises to pass. A similar instance in the name of another rosaceous plant is the apricot, which was named from £raecocza (early) on account of its blossoms appearing early in the spring, and its fruit ripening earlier than its congener the peach (Pliny, xv :II). ALMS (āmz), (Gr. ÖAenuoqºvn, el-eh-ay-mos-oo'- nay). The English word is an abridged form of the Greek, brought down in several successive cor- ruptions, still to be found in the Anglo-Saxon and early English dialects: thus the Saxon trans- lation of the original term is (Matt. vi;4) almes- san; Luther's, almosen; Wycliffe's, almesse; Cran- mer's, almose; Tyndale's, alrmes. The Greek word is derived from ēNeos, pity or mercy; and hence comes to denote our manifestations of pity, namely, benefactions to the needy—'an almes-deede,’ as it is translated in the Rheims version of the New Testament. The primary meaning of ‘alms' does not, as is the case in its Greek original, appear on the face of the word, and the derivative signification only re- mains in the English term ; so that a word which properly signified merciful feelings and merciful actions towards the indigent has, in process of time, been restricted to one particular kind of charitable deeds, denoting now scarcely anything more than giving money to beggars. This de- parture from the etymological meaning of the original word should be carefully borne in mind by those who undertake to expound such pas- sages of Scripture as bear on the subject. (1) Mosaic Law. The regulations of the Mosaic law respecting property, and its benign spirit towards the poor, went far to prevent the existence of penury as a permanent condition in society, and, consequently, by precluding beggary, to render the need of almsgiving unnecessary. However, the duty of almsgiving, especially in kind, is strictly enjoined in the law (Lev. xix: 9, Io; xxiii:22; Deut. xv.:II ; xxiv:19; xxvi :2-13; Ruth ii:2). Every third year also tithes were to be shared (Deut. xiv:28, 29). The following passages indicate the theological estimate of almsgiving (Job xxxi :17; Esth. ix:22; T's. cxii: 9; Acts is :36, in the case of Dorcas; Acts x:2, Cornelius; to which may be added apocrypha Tobit iv: Io, I I; xiv: Io, I I; and Ecclus. iii:30; xl:24). - • & General Spirit of Christianity. The general spirit of Christianity, in regard to suc- coring the needy, is nowhere better seen than in 1 John iii:17: ‘Whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him P' With the faithful and conscien- tious observance of the “royal law' of love, par- ticular manifestations of mercy to the poor seem ALMUG TREES to be left by Christianity to be determined by time, place, and circumstances; and it cannot be supposed that a religion, one of whose princi- ples is ‘that, if any would not work, neither should he eat’ (2 Thess. iii:IO), can give any Sanction to indiscriminate almsgiving, or intend to encourage the crowd of wandering, idle beg- gars with which some parts of the world are still infested. The emphatic language employed by the Lord Jesus Christ and others (Luke iii: II; vi :30; xi :4I ; xii:33; Matt. vi. I ; Acts ix:36; x:2, 4; Gal. ii:IO), is designed to enforce the general duty of a merciful and practical re- gard to the distresses of the indigent; while the absence of ostentation, and even Secrecy, which the Saviour enjoined in connection with alms- giving, was intended to correct actual abuses, and bring the practice into harmony with the spirit of the Gospel. In the remarkable reflections of Jesus on the widow’s mite (Mark xii:42) is found a principle of great value, to the effect that the magnitude of men's offerings to God is to be measured by the disposition of mind whence they proceed; a principle which cuts up by the very roots the idea that merit attaches itself to alms- giving as such, and increases in proportion to the number and costliness of our alms-deeds. (3) Early Effects. One of the earliest ef- fects of the working of Christianity in the hearts of its professors was the care which it led them to take of the poor and indigent in the ‘house- hold of faith.” Neglected and despised by the world, cut off from its sympathies, and denied any succor it might have given, the members of the early churches were careful not only to make provision in each case for its own poor, but to contribute to the necessities of other though dis- tant communities (Acts xi :29; xxiv:17; 2 Cor. ix:12). This commendable practice seems to have had its Christian origin in the deeply inter- esting fact (which appears from John xiii:29) that the Saviour and his attendants were wont, notwithstanding their own comparative poverty, to contribute out of their small resources Some- thing for the relief of the needy. “In Christendom during many centuries the duty of almsgiving (primary, no doubt, from a desire of obeying the commands of Christ) re- ceived great, and sometimes exaggerated, atten- tion. The danger now is rather that, through fear of the ill-effects of indiscriminate almsgiving (as referred to above) the disposition to give and the habit of doing so should be discouraged. A practice, however, enjoined as this one is, must permanently hold a high place in the Chris- tian rule of life. It is the function of modern economic and social knowledge only to make its exercises more wise and beneficial.” (V. H. Stanton, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) ALMUG TREES (#1'mug très). See ALGUM. ALNATHAN (äl-nā'thān), one of the principal chiefs at the return from Babylon (I Esdr. viii:44). ALOES, LIGN ALOES (al'öz, lin'āl'öz or lig-nāl'öz), (Heb. P^2. S. ā-hazy-ſeem'; Gr. 3Xoff, al-3-ay'). This is doubtless the Zigmum aloes of the ancients, the products of Aquilaria Agallocha (Roxburg) and other trees of the same genus, growing in India, China and Arabia. It was a tree of very great value. From , its blossom comes fruit, like a large pea, white and red. The juice of the leaves is drawn by cutting them with a knife, which afterwards is received in bottles (Num. xxiv:6; PS. xlv.:8). It is worth more than its weight in gold; and is esteemed a sovereign cordial against fainting fits, and other nervous disorders. From this 88 ALPHAEUS account the reader will perceive the rarity and value of this perfume, implied in the notice taken of it by the spouse in the Canticles (iv :I4) and the boast of the prostitute (Prov. vii:17). The sandal-wood approaches to many of its prop- erties; and is applied to similar uses, as a per- fume at sacrifices, etc. The aloes of Syria, Rhodes, and Candia, called Aspalathus, is a shrub full of thorns; the wood of which is used by perfumers, after they have taken off the bark, to give consistency to their perfumes. It must not, therefore, be confounded with the bitter and nauseous aloes famed only as a medicine. In the English name Aloe, for the plant now under consideration, and for the officinal Aloes, we have an instance of two very different plants, of widely diverse properties, bearing the same name. It is then quite possible that the tree of Numbers might be totally different from the aromatic substance of the other passages. In Eng. the labiate genus Melissa is called balm. Impatiens is called balsam... Populus balsamifera, L., var. candicans, is called balm of Gilead, a very different plant from the balm of Gilead of Scripture, and the word balm is applied to many diverse substances. There is nothing, however, to prevent the supposition that the tree of Num- bers is that which produced the substance of the other passages. It is true that the tree is one of tropical Arabia, India, or China. But Balaam’s prophecy was uttered in full view of the tropical valley of the Jordan, where the climate would have made it quite possible to cultivate these trees. There is nothing to forbid the idea flat this and other trees not now known in Palestine were cultivated in the then wealthy and populous Jordan Valley. At least twenty-five distinctly tropical wild plants are indigenous in this valley. (G. E. Post, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) ALPHA and OMEGA (äl"fá and Ö'mê'gā or ö'mé- gá), (Gr. ÖAqa, alºfah, Ögeya, o' meg-ah), the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet, correspond- ing to the Hebrew N, Aleph. Both the Hebrews and the Greeks employed the letters of their alphabets as numerals, and A (Alpha or Aleph) therefore denoted one or the first. Hence Our Lord says of himself, that he is (tò A) A/#/ha and (rö Q) Omega, i.e., the first and the last, the begin- ning and the ending, as he himself explains it (Rev. i.8, II; xxi.;6; xxii:I3). ALPHABET (äl'fa-bêt). The origin of alpha- betical writing belongs to a period long ante- cedent to the date of any historical testimonies, or ancient monuments, which have come down to us. The earliest and surest data, however, on which any sound speculation on this subject can be based, are found in the genuine palaeo- graphical monuments of the Phoenicians; in the manifest derivation of all other Syro-Arabian and almost all European characters from that type, and in the testimony which history bears to the use and transmission of alphabetical writ- ing. (See WRITING.) ALPHAEUS (al-phé'us), (Gr. 'AApatos, a/-/a/.'- yos, successor). 1. Father of James the Less (Matt. x:3; Acts i: 13; Luke vi :15), and husband of . Mary, the sister of our Lord's mother (John xix :25); for which reason James is called ‘the Lord's brother' (See BROTHER). By comparing John xix:25, with Luke xxiv:Io, and Matt. x:3, it appears that Alphaeus is the same person as Cleophas; Alphaeus being his Greek, and Cleophas his He- brew or Syriac name, according to the custom of the provinces or of the time, , when men had often two names, by one of which they were ALPHEUS known to their friends and countrymen, and by the other to the Romans or strangers. Possibly, however, the double name in Greek arises, in this instance, from a diversity in pronouncing the n in his Aramaean name, a diversity which is common also in the Septuagint. (See Kuinoel 2m /oan. xix:25.) (See NAMEs.) 2. The father of the evangelist Levi or Matthew (Mark ii:14). ALPHEUS. See ALDHAEUS. ALTANEUS (fil-ta-né'us), another name of Mat- tenai, son of Hashum, who had married a foreign wife (Ezra x:33). ALTAR (al'tér), (Heb. Tºº, mig-bay'akh, place of sacrifice, but used also for the altar of incense). (1) Noah’s Altar. The first altar we read of in the Bible was that erected by Noah on leaving the ark. According to a Rabbinical legend, it was partly formed from the remains of one built by Adam on his expulsion from Paradise, and #} º #ſºft tº º º fºllºiſiliº ji: ſ -- [. # wº- |||||}| | | sºlºſſº Nº. º i. =| - == *[-Illill i. º º {\ "li º Nº-E, § Nºs. ------- Nº-II* H=-l --~~~~ | ------ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * :::::::------------> <-Sºrrºr-r: 89 S || || || |||||||||| SºSºº T. Hºpi; *::::::H N ==Nii - Nº. - - - - - ------.... " " ALTAR ticular instances, such as those of Gideon (Judg. vi:26) and David (2 Sam. xxiv: 18). It is said of Solomon that “he loved the Lord, walking in the statutes of David his father, only he sacrificed and burnt incense on the high places' (I Kings iii:3). Altars were sometimes built on the roofs of houses; in 2 Kings xxiii: 12 we read of the altars that were on the top of the upper chamber of Ahaz. In the tabernacle, and afterwards in the temple, two altars were erected, one for sacrifices, the other for incense; the table for the shew- bread is also sometimes called an altar. (4) The Altar of Burnt offering (Heb. Tº Hººp, mig-bakh' Jazy-o-law', Exod. xxx:28; brazen altar, Tºrº, neº, 7/772-ba/#/.' Jazz-7te/º/*-S/he/A", Exod. xxxix:39; table of the Lord, Mal. i:7, I2). (a) Altar of Burnt Offering, belonging to the tabernacle, was a hollow square, five cubits in length and breadth, and three cubits in height. It was made of Shittim-wood (see SHITTIM), and lº % C º § | º --- fiš. ºrſiºnſ fif HIE INHIIII Illillſ||||IIIllſº S-º-º: º º §% §§ º º &% & §§§ { NS&|| § ºft | | º º ſº :# Öſº &- º § | º : |W/ſ Willº" ---...-----. . º {=#Esº 6.'; Ǻ i > #EESº Ex-sº: WITT ES$# ** * * *-* s = < e = *** * * * * * * S.-->>>= * * * * * * * ~ * * - ~~~~~~~~ afterwards used by Cain and Abel on the iden- tical spot where Abraham prepared to offer up Isaac (Zohar, In Gen. fol. 51, 3, 4; Targum, Jona- than, Gen. viii:2O). (2) Patriarchal. Mention is made of altars erected by Abraham (Gen. xii:7; xiii:4; xxii:9); by Isaac (xxvi :25); by Jacob (xxxiii:20; xxxv : I, 3); by Moses (Exod. xvii:15). (3) Hebrew. After the giving of the law, the Israelites were commanded to make an altar of earth. They were also permitted to employ stones, but no iron tool was to be applied to them. This has been generally understood as an interdiction of Sculpture, in order to guard against a viola- tion of the second commandment. Altars were frequently built on high places, the word being used not only for the elevated spots, but for the Sacrificial structures upon them. Thus Solomon built an high place for Chemosh (I Kings xi :7), and Josiah brake down and burnt the high place, º Stamped it small to powder” (2 Kings xxiii: I5). This practice, however, was forbidden by the Mosaic law (Deut. xii: 13; xvi;5), except in par- -- **--- - - - - - - - - -- * * **-- * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * :-º-º-º::::::::: ~~~~ ***. overlaid with plates of brass. In the middle there was a ledge or projection, on which the priest stood while officiating; immediately below this, a brass grating was let down into the altar to sup- port the fire, with four rings attached, through which poles were passed, when the altar was re- moved. In Exod. xxvii:3, the following utensils are mentioned as belonging to the altar, all of which were to be made of brass: (I) siroth, pans or dishes to receive the ashes that fell through the grating ; (2) yaim, shovels (forcipes, Vulg.) for cleaning the altar; (3) migrakoth (basons, Auth. Vers.; pud Nat, Sept.; Zafera sacrifica, Gesenius), vessels for receiving the blood and Sprinkling it on the altar; (4) miglagoth (‘flesh-hooks,’ Auth. Vers.; Kpedypal, Sept.; fasciſſtaða, Vulg.), large forks to turn the pieces of flesh or to take them off the fire (see I Sam. ii: 13); (5) machthoth (‘firepans,’ Auth. Vers. ; Tô rupeſov, Sept.); the same word is elsewhere translated censers (Num. xvi. 17) : but in Exod. xxv :38, ‘snuff-dishes.’ (b) Solomon’s Temple. The altar of burnt- offering in Solomon's temple was of much larger ALTAR dimensions, “twenty cubits in length and breadth, and ten in height' (2 Chron. iv:I), and was made entirely of brass. It is said of Asa that he re- newed—that is, either repaired (in which sense the word is evidently used in 2 Chron. xxiv:4) or reconsecrated the altar of the Lord that was be- fore the porch of the Lord (2 Chron. xv :8). This altar was removed by king Ahaz (2 Kings xvi : I4); it was “cleansed' by Hezekiah, and in the latter part of Manasseh’s reign was rebuilt. (c) In the Second Temple. Of the altar of burnt offering in the second temple the canonical Scriptures give us no information excepting that it was erected before the foundations of the tem- &ºvº (ºš }} 2/ º Nº | Wilſº º º WW. mºlºſ grºirº | |P Hº º T.I., ºr ºf T. F- Eºs -*=s** * - *** ---, • * * *-*** • ---...-----... "... • ** ser.&se ---. ***********----------- - - -- * * * * * 5. --> Sº- - - - - SSSS-SSSSS -º-º-º-º: * * * ~ * * * > . sº-º-º: *** ~~~~sºsº Another Form of Altar of Burnt Offering. ple were laid (Ezra iii:3, 6) on the same place where it had formerly been built. From the Apocrypha, however, we may infer that it was made, not of brass, but of unhewn stone. (d) In Herod’s Temple. The altar of burnt offering erected by Herod is thus described by Josephus: ‘Before this temple stood the altar, fifteen cubits high, and equal both in length and breadth, each of which dimensions was fifty cubits. The figure it was built in was a square, and it had corners like horns, and the passage up to it was by an insensible acclivity from the south. It was formed without any iron tool, nor did any iron tool so much as touch it at any time.” The dimensions of this altar, however, are differently stated in the Mishna. an inclined plane, 32 cubits long and 16 cubits broad, made likewise of unhewn stones. A pipe was connected with the southwest horn, through which the blood of the victims was discharged by a subterraneous passage into the brook Ked- ron. Under the altar was a cavity to receive the drink offerings, which was covered with a mar- ble slab, and cleansed from time to time. On the north side of the altar several iron rings were fixed to fasten the victims. Lastly, a red line was drawn round the middle of the altar to dis- tinguish between the blood that was to be sprin- lºlod above and below it º (5) Altar of Incense (Heb. hºp Tºp 2 rº, mig-bakh' miſſ-far' ket-o'reth, altar of offering of incense, Exod. xxx:I; called also the goldeſt altar, Pº TPº, mig-bakh' hag-zaw-hawó', Exod. xxxix: 38; Num. iv:II). It was placed between the table of shew-bread and the golden candlestick, in the most holy place. (a) Altar of Shittim-wood. This altar was made of Shittim-wood, overlaid with gold plates, one cubit in length and breadth and two cubits in height. It had horns (Lev. iv.:7) of the same materials, and round the flat surface was a bor- der of gold, underneath which were the rings to receive ‘the staves made of Shittim-wood, overlaid with gold to bear it withal’ (Exod. xxx:I-5). On the south side was 90 ALTARS, FORMS OF (b) Cedar. The altar in Solomon's temple was similar, but made of cedar (I Kings vi.20; vii: 48; I Chron. xxviii:18), overlaid with gold. The altar in the second temple was taken away by Antiochus Epiphanes (I Macc. i :23), and re- stored by Judas Maccabaeus (I Macc. iv:49). On the arch of Titus there appears no altar of in- cense; it is not mentioned in Heb. ix, nor by Joseph. Antiq. xiv:4, 4. ALTARS, FORMS OF (al'térz, förms &v or üv). In the preceding article the reader is fur- nished with all the positive information which we possess respecting the altars as mentioned in Scripture; but as, with regard to material objects So frequently named as altars, we feel a desire to have distinct images in the mind, some further remarks respecting the forms which they probably bore may not be unacceptable. (1) Unhewn Stone. The direction to the Israel- ites, at the time of their leaving Egypt, to con- struct their altars of unhewn stones or of earth, is doubtless to be understood as an injunction to fol- low the usage of their patriarchal ancestors; and not to adopt the customs, full of idolatrous as- Sociations, which they had seen in Egypt, or might see in the land of Canaan. As they were also strictly enjoined to destroy the altars of the Canaanites, it is more than probable that the direction was leveled against such usages as those into which that people had fallen. The conclusion deducible from this, that the patriarchal altars were of unhewn stones or of earth, is confirmed by the circumstances under which they were erected, and by the fact that they are always de- scribed as being “built.” The provision that they might be made of earth applies doubtless to situ- ations in which stones could not be easily ob- tained. as in the open plains and wildernesses. Familiar analogies lead to the inference that the largest stones that could be found in the neigh- borhood would be employed to form the altar, but where no large stones could be had, that heaps of smaller ones might be made to serve. (2) Cromlechs. As these altars were erected in the open air, and were very carefully preserved, there is at least a strong probability that some of those ancient monuments of unhewn stone, usually called Druidical remains, which are found in all parts of the world, were derived from the altars of primitive times. These are various in their Aº-º- Rºsa - *- 2. – ) zººs N --" Sl);2 \! \\ --~x. A.W 2* |-ºs- ~~~~~ §: § <-2 *-.5-y- ºr Cromlechs. forms, and their peculiar uses have been very much disputed. It is admitted, however, that some of them must have been altars, but the difficulty is to determine whether these altars are to be sought in the Cromlechs. º - The arguments preponderate in favor of the opinion that the Cromlechs are the representatives of the primitive altars, and that the Kistvaens (stones 㺠in a chest-like form) are analogous to the arks of the Jewish ritual and of some of the pagan religions. (See ARK OF COVENANT.) ALTARS, FORMS OF Cromlechs, as is well known, are somewhat in the form of a table, one large stone being sup- ported, in a horizontal or slightly inclined posi- tion, upon three or more, but usually three stones, set upright. That they were used as altars is almost instinctively suggested to every one that views them, and this conclusion is strengthened when, as is often the case, we observe a small cir- cular hole through which probably the rope was run by which the victims, when slaughtered, were bound to the altar, as they were to the angular projections or ‘horns' of the Jewish altar (Ps. cxviii:27). (3) Cairn Altars. It was natural that where a sufficiency of large stones could not be found, heaps of smaller ones should be employed, and that, when practicable, a large flat stone would be placed on the top, to give a proper level for the fire of the sacrifice. Such are the cairn altars, of which many still remain; but as they are sometimes found in places where stones of large size might have been obtained, it seems that in later times such altars had a special ap- propriation, and Toland (Hist. B. Druids, IoI) shows that the sacred fires were burned on them, and sacrifices offered to Bel, Baal, or the Sun. Cairn Altar. The injunction that there should be no ascent by steps to the altar appears to have been im- perfectly understood. There are no accounts or figures of altars so elevated in their fabric as to require such steps for the officiating priests; but when altars are found on rocks or hills, the as- cent to them is sometimes facilitated by steps cut in the rock. This, therefore, may have been an indirect way of preventing that erection of altars in high places which the Scriptures so often reprobate. - (4) Horns of the Altar. It is usually supposed, however, that the effect of this prohibition was that the tabernacle altar, like , most ancient altars, was so low as to need no ascent, or else that some other kind of ascent was provided. The former is probably right, for the altar was but three cubits high, and was designed to be portable. There is one error in these and other figures of the Jewish altars composed from the descriptions; namely, with re- gard to the ‘horns,’ which were placed at the cor- ners, called ‘the horns of the altar' (Exod. xxvii:2; xxix:12; I Kings ii:28), and to which the victims were tied at the time of sacrifice. The word horn was applied by the Jews as an epithet descriptive of any point projecting in any direction after the manner of a horn (not neces- sarily like a horn in shape); and there is no rea- son to doubt that the horns of the successive altars of burnt offerings resembled those corners projecting upwards which are seen in many an- cient altars. These are shown in the view de- picting the probable form of the Jewish altar of burnt offerings. (5) Solomon’s Altar. By the time of Solomon it appears to have been understood that the inter- diction of steps of ascent did not imply that the altar was to be low, but rather that it was to be 91 ALTARS, FORMS OF high, and that only a particular mode of ascent was forbidden. The altar of the temple was not less than ten cubits high, and some means of as- cent must have been provided. The usual repre- sentations of Solomon's altar are formed chiefly from the descriptions of that in Herod's temple given by Josephus and the Rabbins, and although this last was almost one-third higher and larger than the other, it was doubtless upon the same model. The altar of the first temple had been Seen, and could be described, by many of those who were present when that of the second temple was erected, and the latter was known to those by whom Herod’s altar was built. Very different figures, however, have been formed from these descriptions, and that which we here introduce is perhaps the best and most probable of them. (6) The Altar of Incense, being very simple in its parts and uses, has been represented with so little difference, except in some ornamental details, that one of the figures designed from the descrip- tions may suffice. It is not our object to describe the altars of other nations; but, to supply materials for com- parison and illustration, a group of the altars of the principal nations of Oriental and classical an- tiquity is here introduced. One obvious remark Occurs, namely, that all the Oriental altars are Square or oblong, whereas those of Greece and Rome are more usually round, and that, upon the whole, the Hebrew altars were in accordance with the general Oriental type. In all of them various Altars. 1-2. Egyptian. 3. Assyrian 4. Babylonian. 5. Assyrian, from Khorsabad. we observe bases with corresponding projections at the top, and in Some we find the true model of the horns, or prominent and pointed angles. (See Asylum ; CENSER; INCENSE ; SACRIFICE.) (7) Altar at Athens. St. Paul, in his ad- mired address before the judges of the Are- opagus at Athens, declares that he perceived that the Athenians were in all things too superstitious. The Greek word Aetatóatpovertépous occurs here only, and is of ambiguous signification, being capable of a good, bad, or indifferent sense. Most mod- ern, and some ancient, expositors hold that it is here to be taken in a good sense (very religious), as it was not the object of the apostle to give needless offense. This explanation also agrees best with the context, and with the circumstances of the case. A man may be ‘very religious,’ though his religion itself may be false. The Apostle states that, as he was passing by and beholding their devotions, he found an altar, inscribed ‘To the Unknown God,” and adds, with unexpected force, ‘Him whom ye worship without knowing, I set forth unto you’ (Acts xvii:22, 23). AL–TASCHITH The questions suggested by the mention of an altar at Athens, thus inscribed ‘to the unknown God,' have engaged much attention, and differ- ent opinions have been, and probably will continue to be, entertained on the subject. The principal difficulty arises from this, that the Greek writers, especially such as illustrate the Athenian antiquities, make mention of many altars dedicated to the unknown gods, but not of any one dedicated to the unknown god. We must be content to rest in the conclusion of Professor Robinson : “So much at least is cer- tain, that altars to an unknown god or gods ex- isted at Athens. But the attempt to ascertain definitely whom the Athenians worshiped under this appellation must ever remain fruitless for want of sufficient data. The inscription afforded to Paul a happy occasion of proclaiming the Gos- pel, and those who embraced it found indeed that the being whom they had thus “ignorantly worshiped” was the one only living and true God.” AL-TASCHITH (äl-täskfth), (Heb. Fº, al-tash-khayth", destroy, or corrupt not), title to the following Psalms: 1vii; lviii; lix; 1xxv. It seems to indicate that the tune to which it is sung is a vintage song. (See Is. lxv :8.) ALUSH (a lush),(Heb. *Saw-loosh', perhaps desolation, one of the places at which the Hebrews rested on their way to Mount Sinai (Num. xxxiii: I3, I4. It was between Dophkah and Rep- hidim. The Jewish Chronology (Seder Olam Rabba, c. 5, p. 27) makes it twelve miles from the former and eight from the latter station. The Targum of Jonathan calls it “a strong fort;’ and it is alleged (upon an interpretation of Exod. xvi : 30) that in Alush the Sabbath was instituted, and the first Sabbath kept. ALVAH (äl’vah), (Heb. nºv, a/-zyazy", perhaps evil), a duke of Edom, descended from Esau (Gen. xxxvi;23; I Chron. i:51), B. C. between 1905 and 1/4U. e ALVAN (älvan), (Heb.]]?”, al-vazwn', tall, sub- lime), son of Shobal, a descendant of Seir (Gen. xxxvi;23; I Chron. i.40), B. C. between 1927 and I76O. AMAD (ä'mād), (Heb. Tºº,am-awd", people of duration), a town on the border of Asher, near Al- ammelech (Josh. xix:26); probably identified with Shefa Omar or Shefa Aznar, a large market town on a ridge east of Haifa (Robinson, later Re- searches, iii:IO3). 3. AMIADATHA or AIVLADATHUS (a-măd'a- thä or a-măd'a-this), (Esdr. xvi; Io, 17; Esdr. xii:6; AZ oczyżha) te AMAL (a'mal), (Heb. Fºy, azv-mazzy", toil), an Asherite, the last named of the four sons of Helem (1 Chron. vii:35), B. C. between 1658 and 1600. AMALEK (äm'a-lèk), (Heb. pº, am-azv-laže', dweller in a valley, son of Eliphaz and Timna his concubine, and grandson of Esau. He succeeded Gatam in the government of Edom, south of Judah (Gen. xxxvi; I2, 16; I Chron. i :36). He was the chieftain of an Idumaean tribe (B. C. about 1740). This tribe was probably not the same as the Amalekites so often mentioned in Scriptures, for Moses speaks of the Amalekites long before this Amalek was born (Gen. xiv:7). (See AMALEKITES.) 92 AMALEKITES AMALEKITES (äm'a-lek-Ites), (Heb. mostly P2'22, am-aw-lake', Amälek; more rarely Pº, (Z772– azv-lay-kee', the Amalekite), the name of a nation in- habiting the country to the south of Palestine between Idumaea and Egypt, and to the east of the Dead Sea and Mount Seir. ‘The Amalekites dwell in the land of the south’ (Num. xiii:29). ‘Saul smote the Amalekites from Havilah until thou comest to Shur, that is over against Egypt' (I Sam. xv.:7). ‘David went up and invaded the Geshurites, and Gezrites, and the Amalekites, for those nations were of old the inhabitants of the land as thou goest to Shur, even unto the land of Egypt’ (I Sam. xxvii:8). In I Chron. iv :42, it is said that the sons of Simeon went to Mount Seir and smote the rest of the Amale- kites that were escaped. According to Josephus the Amalekites inhabited Gobolitis and Petra, and were the most warlike of the nations in those parts, and elsewhere he speaks of them as ‘reach- ing from Pelusium of Egypt to the Red Sea.” We find, also, that they had a settlement in that part of Palestine which was allotted to the tribe of Ephraim. The first mention of the Amalekites in the Bible is Gen. xiv.7; ‘Chedorlaomer and his confederates returned and came to En-Mishpat, which is Kadesh, and smote all the Amorites that dwelt in Hazezon-tamar’. (1) First Assailants of the Israelites. The Amalekites were the first assailants of the Israel- ites after their passage through the Red Sea (Exod. xvii:8-13). It has been thought improb- able that in so short a period the descendants of Esau’s grandson could have been sufficiently nu- merous and powerful to attack the host of Israel, but within nearly the same period the tribe of Ephraim had increased so that it could muster 40,500 men able to bear arms, and Manasseh 32,- 200; and admitting in the case of the Israelites an extraordinary rate of increase (Exod. i :12, 20), still, if we consider the prostrating influence of slavery on the national character, and the absence of warlike habits, it is easy to conceive that a comparatively small band of marauders would be a very form1dable toe to an undisciplined mul- titude, circumstanced as the Israelites were, in a locality so adapted to irregular warfare. It ap- pears, too, that the attack was made on the most defenseless portion of the host. “Remember (said Moses) what Amalek did unto thee by the way when ye were come forth out of Egypt; how he met thee by the way and smote the hind most of thee, even all that were feeble behind thee, when thou wast faint and weary' (Deut. xxv : 17, 18). In the Pentateuch the Amalekites are frequently mentioned in connection with the Canaanites (Num. xiv:25, 43, 45), and, in the book of Judges, with the Moabites and Ammonites (Judg. iii: 13); with the Midianites (Judg. vi :3; vii: 12: ‘The Midianites, and the Amalekites, and all the chil- dren of the East lay along in the valley like grass- hoppers for multitude, and their camels were with- out number, as the sand by the seaside for multi- tude’); with the Kenites (I Sam. xv :6). (2) Retribution. By divine command, as a retribution for their hostility to the Israelites on leaving Egypt (I Sam. xv.2), Saul invaded their country with an army of 210,000 men, and ‘utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword;' but he preserved their king Agag alive, and the best of the cattle, and by this act of dis- obedience forfeited the regal authority over Israel. Josephus states the number of Saul’s army to be 400,000 men of Israel and 30,000 of Judah. He also represents Saul as besieging and taking the cities of the Amalekites, ‘some by warlike ma- AMAM chines, Some by mines dug underground, and by building walls on the outside; some by famine and thirst, and some by other methods' (Antiq. vi :7, Sec. 2). (3) Attacked by David. About twenty years later they were attacked by David during his resi- dence among the Philistines (I Sam. xxvii:8). It is said that he smote the land and left neither man nor woman alive;’ this language must be taken with some limitation, for shortly after the Amalekites were sufficiently recovered from their defeat to make reprisals, and burnt Ziklag with fire (I Sam: xxx). David, on his return from the camp of Achish, surprised them while cele- brating their success, ‘eating, and drinking, and dancing,' and ‘smote them from twilight even unto the evening of the next day, and there escaped not a man of them, save 400 young men which rode upon camels, and fled’ (I Sam. xxx: I7). At a later period we find that David dedi- cated to the Lord the silver and gold of Amalek and other conquered nations (2 Sam. viii:Io-I2). The last notice of the Amalekites as a nation is in I Chron. iv:43, from which we learn that in the days of Hezekiah, king of Judah, 500 men of the sons of Simeon went to Mount Seir, and Smote the rest of the Amalekites that were es- caped.’ In the book of Esther, Haman is called the Agagite, and was probably a descendant of the royal line (Num. xxiv:7; I Sam. xv.:8). Jo- sephus says that he was by birth an Amalekite (Antiq. xi :6, Sec. 5). (4) Three Tribes. The editor of Calmet sup- poses that there were no less than three dis- tinct tribes of Amalekites: I. Amalek the an- cient, referred to in Gen. xiv.; 2. A tribe in the region east of Egypt, between Egypt and Ca- naan (Exod. xvii:8; I Sam. xv, etc.); 3. Amalek, the descendants of Eliphaz. No such distinc- tion, however, appears to be made in the biblical narrative; the national character is everywhere the same, and the different localities in which we find the Amalekites may be easily explained by their habits, which evidently were such as belong to a warlike nomade people. (5) Territory. The territory proper of the Amalekites was bounded by Philistia, Egypt, Idumaea and the desert of Sinai. This is evident from the scriptural notices of their location south of Palestine (Num. xiii:29), in the re- gion traversed by the Israelites (Exod. xvii:8), and their connection with the Ammonites (Judg. iii: 13), the Midianites (Judg. vi. 3; vii:12), the Kenites (I Sam. xv :6), as well as their near proximity to the Philistines (I Sam. xxvii:8), and the town of Shur or Pelusium (I Sam. xv :7). - “Outside of the Old Testament we have no re- liable accounts of the Amalekites. In the works of the Arabian historians very extensive and de- tailed reports are given of the progress and achievements of the Amalekites, but these, as Nöldeke has convincingly shown, are credible only in so far as they are based on the statements of the historical books of our own canonical Scrip- tures.” (J. Macpherson, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) AMAM (ā'mam), (Heb. Fº, am-awm', gather- ing place), a city near Shema and Moladah in the southern part of the tribe of Judah (Josh. xv.26), perhaps situated in the tract afterwards assigned to Simeon (Josh. xix: I-9). AMAN (ā’man). The Graecized form of the name of Haman (Tob. xiv:2; Esdr. x:7; xii:6; xiii: 3, 12; xiv:17; xvi; Io, 17). • ? 93 AMASA AMANA (āma-nā or a-mă'ná), (Heb. Tºps, am- azey-maze', fixed, i.e., a covenant.) 1. A mountain mentioned in Cant. iv:8. Some have supposed it to be Mount Amanus in Cilicia, to which the dominion of Solomon is alleged to have extended northward. But the context, with other circumstances, leaves little doubt that this Mount Amana was rather the southern part or summit of Anti-Libanus, and was so called per- haps from containing the sources of the river Amana or Abana (2 Kings v :12). (See ABANA.) 2. A river of Damascus. (See ABANA.) AMARANTHINE (äm'a-rán'thin), (Gr. &papá- vTuvos, aſſe-ar-azz' fee-nos, unfading), the original of A. V. "that fadeth not away” (I Pet. v.:4; Comp. i, 4, Gr, dućpavros), and “meaning composed of ama- zam!/..” It is so called because the amaranth is a flower which does not wither when cut off. It is a symbol of immortality. AMARIAH (äm'a-ri'ah), (Heb. nymps, am-ar- yazy", word of Jehovah). tº - 1. A person mentioned in I Chron. vi.7, 52, in the list of descendants of Aaron by his eldest son Eleazer. He was the son of Meraioth and the father of Ahitub, who was (not the grandson and successor of Eli of the same name, but) the father of that Zadok in whose person Saul restored the high-priesthood to the line of Eleazer. The years during which the younger line of Itha- mar enjoyed the pontificate in the persons of Eli, Ahitub, and Abimelech (who was slain by King Saul at Nob) doubtless more than cover the time Of Amariah and his son Ahitub ; and it is there- fore sufficiently certain that they never were high-priests in fact, although their names are given to carry on the direct line of succession to Zadok. (B. C. I IOO.) 2. A high-priest at a later period, the son of Azariah, and also father of a second Ahitub (I Chron. vi. II ; Ezra vii:3) or rather perhaps of Urijah (2 Kings xvi : Io), B. C. about IoI5. In like manner, in the same list, there are three high- priests bearing the name of Azariah. 3. A descendant of Kohath, son of Levi (1 Chron. xxiii:19; xxiv:23), B. C. about IOI5. 4. Chief priest in the time of Jehoshaphat (2 Chron. xix :II), B. C. between 912 and 895. 5. A Levite appointed by Hezekiah to distribute the temple dues among the priestly cities (2 Chron. xxxi :15), B. C. about 726. 6. Great-grandfather of the prophet Zephaniah (Zeph. i : I ), B. C. about 630. 7. A son of Bani who married a foreign wife in the time of Ezra (Ezra. x:42), B. C. 465. 8. A descendant of Pharez, the son of Judah (Neh. xi :4), probably the same as Imri (in I Chron. ix:4), B. C. about 465. 9. A priest who with Nehemiah sealed the covenant (Neh. x:3; xii:2, 13), B. C. about 43O. AMARIAS (ām-a-ri'as), the Graecized form of AIIlariah (1 Esdr. viii:2; 2 Esdr. i. 2; Ezra vii:3). AMASA (äm'a-să), (Heb. Nº am-aw-saw', burden, or burden bearer.) e 1. Son of Jether or Ithra and Abigail, David's sister. Absalom, during his rebellion against David, placed his cousin, Amasa, at the head of his troops (2 Sam. xvii:25; I Chron. ii:17; I Kings ii:5, 32), but he was defeated by Joab. After the extinction of Absalom's party, David, from dislike to Joab, who had killed Absalom, offered Amasa his pardon and the command of the army, in room of Joab, whose insolence ren- dered him insupportable (2 Sam. xix:I3). On AMASAI the revolt of Sheba, son of Bichri, David ordered Amasa to assemble all Judah against Sheba ; but Amasa delaying, David directed Abishai to pur- Sue Sheba, with what soldiers he then had about his person. Joab, with his people, accompanied him ; and when they had reached the great stone in Gibeon, Amasa joined them with his forces. Joab's jealousy being excited, he formed the dastardly and cruel purpose of assassinating his rival—“Then said Joab to Amasa, Art thou in health, my brother P and took him by the beard with the right hand to kiss him ;” but at the same time smote him with the sword (2 Sam. xx:4-14), B. C. Io22. (See ABNER; ABSALOM ; JoAB.) 2. A chief of Ephraim, who, with others, vehe- mently resisted the retention as prisoners of the persons whom Pekah, king of Israel, had taken captive in a successful campaign against Ahaz, king of Judah (2 Chron. xxviii:I2), B. C. about 74I. e - AMAS AI (a-măs'a-i), (Heb. Sº, a/2-azzy-sa/h'ee, burden bearer). 1. A Kohathite, father of Mahath, and ancestor of Samuel (I Chron, vi :25, 35; 2 Chron. xxix:I2), B. C. between I4IO and IO45. 2. The principal captain of men from the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, who joined David at Ziklag (I Chron. xii:18), B. C. about IOGI. 3. A priest who aided in bringing up the ark to the house of Obed-Edom (I Chron. xv :24), B. C. about IO43. 4. Another Kohathite, father of a different Ma- hath, in the reign of Hezekiah (2 Chron. xxix: I2). Perhaps the name of a family. AMASHAI (a-māsh'a-i). Probably one form of Amasai, the son of Azareel, a valiant priest in the time of Nehemiah (Neh. xi:13), perhaps the same as Maasiai (I Chron. ix:I2), B. C. about 445. AMASIAH (ām-a-si'ah), (Heb. Tºº, am-as- yazy", Jah has strength), son of Zichri and chief captain of the army of Jehoshaphat (2 Chron. xvii: I6), B. C. about 440. AMASIS (äm'a-sis). Supposed to be the Pha- raoh whose house in Tahpanhes is mentioned in Jer. xliii:9, and who reigned B. C. 569-525. AMATH (ā'math). See HAMATH. AMATHEIS (am-a-the'is). The Athlai of the genuine text (Ezra X:28). AMBASSADOR (am-bās'sa-dòr), (Heb. 73, fseer, one who goes on an errand; yº, Aoots, inter- preter; ſº, mal-awk', messenger), a messenger sent by a king or state to carry important tidings, or transact affairs of great moment with another prince or state. An ambassador is always the public representative of the monarch or state from whom he receives his commission. In the Old Testament loots is used in 2 Chron. xxxii:3I ; malawk in 2 Chron. xxxv :21 ; Is. xxx:4; xxxiii: 7; Ezek. xvii: 15. The earliest examples of am- bassadors employed occur in the cases of Edom, Moab and the Amorites (Num. xx:I4; xxi :21 ; Judg. xi :17-19); afterward in that of the fraudu- lent Gibeonites (Josh. ix:4, etc.), and in the in- stances of civil strife narrated in Judg. xi : I.2, and xx :12. Eliakim, Shebna, and Joah, the servants of King Hezekiah, are called ambassadors of peace. In their master's name they earnestly solicited a peace from the Assyrian monarch Sennacherib ; but were made to weep bitterly with the disap- pointment and refusal (2 Kings xviii: I4-37; Is. xxxiii:7). They returned to Hezekiah in bitter grief, with their clothes rent (see 2 Kings xiv:8; I Kings xx:2, 6). 94 AMEN Figuratite. The word occurs once in the New Testament (2 Cor. v :20, Gr. Tpeogetºw, pres- byoo'o, to be a senior), being employed by Paul to designate the nature and dignity of the office of a minister of the Gospel. They are representa- tives of Christ, because in the name of Jesus Christ the King of kings they declare his will to men, and transact the important business of their reconciliation with God (Eph. vi.20). AMBER (äm'ber). See CHASMIL. AMIBIDEXTER (äm'bi-déx'ter). One who can use the left hand as well as the right, or more literally, one whose hands are both right hands. It was long supposed that both hands are naturally equal, and that the preference of the right hand, and comparative incapacity of the left, are the result of education and habit. But it is now known that the difference is really physical, and that the ambidextrous condition of the hands is not a natural development. The capacity of equal action with both hands was highly prized in ancient times, especially in war. Among the Hebrews this quality seems to have been most common in the tribe of Benjamin, as all the persons noticed as being endued with it were of that tribe. By comparing Judg. iii:15; xx:I6 with I Chron. xii:2, we may gather that the persons mentioned in the two former texts as ‘left-handed,’ were really ambidexters. In the latter text we learn that the Benjamites who joined David at Ziklag were ‘mighty men, helpers of the war. They were armed with bows, and could use both the right hand and the left in hurl- ing (slinging) and shooting arrows out of a bow.’ There were thirty of them; and as they appear to have been all of one family, it might almost seem as if the greater commonness of this power among the Benjamites arose from its being a hereditary peculiarity of certain families in that tribe. It may also partly have been the result of cultiva- tion; for, although the left hand is not naturally an equally strong and ready instrument as the right hand, it may doubtless be often rendered such by early and suitable training. AMBUSCADE and AMBUSH (am’blis-kāde, âm'bush), (Heb. 278, aw-rab', to lie in wait), in mili- tary phraseology, are terms used promiscuously, though it is understood that the first more properly applies to the act, and the second to the locality, of a stratagem which consists mainly in the conceal- ment of an army, or of a detachment, where the enemy, if he ventures, in ignorance of the measure, within the sphere of its action, is suddenly taken at a disadvantage, and liable to be totally defeated. The principles which must guide the contrivers of an ambuscade have been nearly the same in all ages; embracing concealment from the observa- tion of an enemy so as to create no suspicion; a position of advantage in case of being attacked by superior forces, and having the means of retreat- ing, as well as of issuing forth to attack, without impediment, when the proper moment is arrived. The example of Joshua at the capture of Ai shows the art to have been practiced among the Jews on the best possible principles (Josh. viii:21). In the attempt to surprise Shechem (Judg. ix:30, sqq.) the operation, so far as it was a military maneuver, was unskilfully laid, although ultimately successful in consequence of the party spirit within, and the intelligence which Abime- lech maintained in the fortress.-C. H. S. AMEN (ā’mên or ā'mén), (Heb. lº, azy-mane'; New Testament, ”Apafiv, azv-mane'). This word is strictly an adjective, signifying ‘firm,’ and, meta- AMETHYST phorically, ‘faithful.” Thus in Rev. iii:14, our Lord is called ‘the amen, the faithful and true witness.’ In Is. lxv.16, the Heb. has ‘the God of amen,” which our version renders ‘the God of truth, i. e., of fidelity. In its adverbial sense amen means certainly, truly, surely. It is used in the be- ginning of a sentence by way of emphasis—rarely in the Old Testament (Jer. xxviii:6), but often by our Savior in the New, where it is commonly translated ‘verily.” In John's gospel alone it is often used by him in this way double, i. e., “verily, verily.” In the end of a sentence it often occurs singly or repeated, especially at the end of hymns or prayers, as ‘amen and amen’ (Ps. xli : 13; lxxii: I9; lxxxix:53). The proper signification of it in this position is to confirm the words which have preceded, and invoke the fulfilment of them : ‘SO be it,' fat; Sept. Yévouro. Hence in oaths, after the priest has repeated the words of the covenant or imprecation, all those who pronounce the amen bind themselves by the oath (Num. v :22; Deut. xxvii:15, 17; Neh. v :13; viii:6; I Chron. xvi;36; comp. Ps. cwi:48). AMETHYST (ame-this), (Heb. Rºſs, ałł. law' maw), a precious stone, mentioned in Scrip- ture as the ninth in the breastplate of the high- priest (Exod. xxviii:19; xxxix:I2), and the twelfth in the foundations of the New Jerusalem (Rev. xxi :20). The concurrence of various cir- cumstances leaves little doubt that the stone an- ciently known as the amethyst is really denoted by the Hebrew word, and as the stone so called by the ancients was certainly that which still con- tinues to bear the same name, their identity may be considered as established. (1) Color. The transparent gems to which this name is applied are of a color which seems composed of a strong blue and deep red, and ac- cording as either of these prevails, exhibit differ- ent tinges of purple, sometimes approaching to violet and sometimes declining even to a rose color. From these differences of color the an- cients distinguished five species of the amethyst ; modern collections afford at least as many va- rieties, but they are all comprehended under two species—the Oriental Amethyst and the Occi- dental Amethyst. These names, however, are given to stones of essentially different natures, which were, no doubt, anciently confounded in the SalT162 1112.1111621°. - (2) The Oriental Amethyst. The Oriental amethyst is very scarce, and of great hardness, luster and beauty. It is in fact a rare variety of the adamantine spar, or corundum. Next to the diamond, it is the hardest substance known. (3) The Occidental Amethyst. Amethysts were much used by the ancients for rings and cameos, and the reason given by Pliny—because they were easily cut—sculpturis faciles’ (Hist. Nat. xxxvii:9), shows that the Occidental spe- cies is to be understood. The ancients believed that the amethyst possessed the power of dis- pelling drunkenness in those who wore or touched it, and hence its Greek name, ab a privativo et pebºw, eórius sum' (Martini, Excurs., p. 158). In like manner the Rabbins derive its Jewish name from its supposed power of procuring dreams to the wearer. - AMI (ā'mē), (Heb. "38, aw-mee'), one of the servants of Solomon (Ezra ii:57). AMINADAB. Same as AMMINADAB. AMITTAI (a-mit’tái), (Heb. "???, am-it-tah'ee, true), a native of Gath-hepher and the father of the prophet Jonah (2 Kings xiv:25; Jonah i : I). 95 AMIR AMMAH (äm'mah), (Heb. tº, am-maw', a cubit), one of the places reached by Joab and his * while in pursuit of Abner (2 Sam. ii: 24). AMMI (am'mi)), (Heb. Tº, am-mee', my peo- ple), a symbolic name applied to Israel. (see margin of A. V.). It is in contrast with Lo- ammi (see Hosea ii:I). AMMIEL Gim'mi-e), (Heb. ***, am-mee-ale, people of God). ; The father of Machir (2 Sam. ix:4, 5; xvii: 27). 2. The son of Gemalli, one of the twelve spies sent by Moses to explore the land of Canaan (Num. xiii:I2). 3. The sixth son of Obed-edom and one of the doorkeepers of the temple (I Chron. xxvi :5). 4. The father of Bathsheba, wife of Uriah (I Chron. iii:5). AMMIHUD (am-mi'hud), (Heb. Tº, am- mee-hood", people of glory). 1. The father of Pedahel, who was a prince of the tribe of Naphtali (Num. xxxiv:28). An Ephraimite whose son was appointed as chief of the tribe (Num. i :Io; ii:28; vii:48–53; x:22; I Chron. vii:26). 3. The father of a Simeonite chief (Num. xxxiv:20). 4. The father of Talmai, king of Geshur (2 Sam. xiii:37). AMMINADAB (am-min'a-dāb), (Heb. Prº, am-mee-maw-dawb', people of liberality). 1. Son of Ram, or Aram, and father of Nashon (or Naasson, Matt. i :4; Luke iii:32), who was prince of the tribe of Judah at the first number- ing of Israel in the second year of the Exodus (Num. i :7; ii:3), B. C. before I2 Io. He was the fourth in descent from Judah, the sixth in ascent from David (Ruth iv:19, 20; I Chron. ii:Io), and one of the ancestors of Jesus Christ (Matt. i :4). Little is recorded concerning him ; but the mar- riage of his daughter to Aaron (Exod. vi :23) is marked as the earliest instance of alliance be- tween the royal line of David and the priestly line of Aaron. The name Nadab given to Aaron's eldest son was probably in honor of his grand- father, Ammi-nadab. 2. (Cant. vi.12.) The chariots of this Ammina- dab are mentioned as proverbial for their swift- ness. Of himself we know nothing more than what is here glanced at, from which he appears to have been, like Jehu, one of the most cele- brated charioteers of his day. In many MSS. the Hebrew term is divided into two words 2"TX *}X), Amz madāb, in which case, instead of the name of a person, it means ‘of my willing,” or ‘loyal people.’ This division has been followed in the Syriac by the Jews in their Spanish version, and by many modern translators; but, taken in this way, it is difficult to assign any satisfactory meaning to the passage. In the LXX and the A. V. the same Hebrew word (Cant. vii: 1) is rendered “O prince's daughter l’” AMMINADIB (am-min'a-dīb), (Heb. PT, "º, am-mee’naw-deeb', another form of Amminadab), a man whose chariots were proverbial for their swiftness (Cant. vi. I2). AMIR (à-mêr'), (Heb. Tº, aw-meer', 'upper- most bough’). The word occurs only in Is. xvii: 6, 9, A. V. It has been usual to derive it from an Arabic word which means a general, or emir, and hence, in the present text, the higher Or upper branches of a tree. Gesenius admits AMMAN that this interpretation is unsatisfactory, and Lee, who regards it as very fanciful, endeavors (Lex. fin voce) to establish that it denotes the caul or sheath in which the fruit of the date palm is enveloped. According to this view he translates the verse thus: “Two or three berries in the head (or upper part) of the caul (or pod, properly sheath), four Or five in its fissures.’ This would make the scriptural allusion refer to the fact that the fruit of the date palm is, during its growth, contained in a sheath, which rends as the fruit ripens, and at first partially, and afterwards more fully, exposes its precious contents. (See TAMAR.) AMMAN (äm’man). See RABBAH. AMMON (äm’mon). See NO-AMON. AMMONITEs (ām"mon-ites), (Heb. Yº, am- monites; "Fºº, am-mo-ne', the sons of Ammon, the Ammonitai), the descendants of the younger son of Lot (Gen. xix:38). The Ammonites originally occupied a tract of country east of the Amorites, and separated from the Moabites by the river Arnon. It was previously in the possession of a gigantic race called Zamzummin (Deut. ii:2O), “but the Lord destroyed them before the Ammonites, and they succeeded them and dwelt in their stead.’ The Israelites, on reaching the borders of the Prom- ised Land, were commanded not to molest the children of Ammon for the sake of their progen- it or Lot. But, though thus preserved from the annoyance which the passage of such an im- mense host through their country might have occasioned, they showed them no hospitality or kindness; they were therefore prohibited from ‘entering the congregation of the Lord’ (i. e. from being admitted into the civil community of the Israelites) ‘to the tenth generation for ever' (Deut. xxiii:3). This is evidently intended to be a perpetual prohibition, and was so understood by Nehemiah (Neh. xiii:1). (1) Active Hostility. The first mention of their active hostility against Israel occurs in Judges iii: 13: ‘The king of Moab gathered unto him the children of Ammon and Amalek, and went and smote Israel.” About 140 years later we are informed that the children of Israel for- sook Jehovah and served the gods of various na- tions, including those of the children of Ammon, and the anger of Jehovah was kindled against them, and he sold them into the hands of the Philistines and of the children of Ammon. The Ammonites crossed over the Jordan and fought with Judah, Benjamin and Ephraim, so that “Israel was sore distressed.’ (2) Jephthah. In answer to Jephthah's mes- sengers (Judg. xi : I.2), the king of Ammon charged the Islaeliles with having tal:en away that part of his territories which lay between the rivers Arnon and Jabok, which, in Joshua xiii:25, is called ‘half the land of the children of Am- rrion,’ but was in the possession of the Amorites when the Israelites invaded it, and this fact was urged by Jephthah, in order to prove that the charge was ill-founded. Jephthah ‘smote them from Aroer to Minnith, even twenty cities, with a very great slaughter' (Judg. xi :33; Joseph. Antiq. v :7). (See JEPHTHAH.) (3) Saul and David. The Ammonites were again signally defeated by Saul (I Sam. xi : II), B. C. Io95, and, according to Josephus, their king Nahash was slain (Antig. vi.5). (See SAUL.) His successor, who bore the same name, was a friend of David, and died some years after his accession to the throne. In consequence of the 96 AMNON gross insult offered to David's ambassadors by his son Hanun (2 Sam. x :4; Joseph. Antiq. vii:6), a war ensued, in which the Ammonites were defeated, and their allies, the Syrians, were so daunted ‘that they feared to help the children of Ammon any more' (2 Sam. x:19). Contin- uing the war, in the following year David took their metropolis, Rabbah, and great abundance of spoil, which is probably mentioned by antici- pation in 2 Sam. viii: I2 (2 Sam. x:14; xii:26-31; Joseph. Antiq. vii:7). (See DAVID.) (4) Jehoshaphat. In the reign of Jehosha- phat (B. C. 896) the Ammonites joined with the Moabites and other tribes belonging to Mount Seir to invade Judah ; but, by the divine inter- vention, were led to destroy one another. Jehoshaphat and his people were three days in gathering the Spoil (2 Chron. xx:25). In 2 Chron. xx: I, it is said, ‘It came to pass after this also, that the children of Moab and the children of Ammon, and with them (other) besides the Ammonites, came against Jehosha- phat to battle.” (See JEHosłłAPHAT.) The Ammonites ‘gave gifts’ to Uzziah (2 Chron. xxvi :8), and paid a tribute to his son Jotham for three successive years, consisting of 100 talents of silver, 1,000 measures of wheat, and as many of barley. (5) Captivity of the Israelites. When the two and a half tribes were carried away captive, the Ammonites took possession of the towns belong- ing to the tribe of Gad (Jer. xlix:1). “Bands of the children of Ammon’ and of other nations came up with Nebuchadnezzar against Jerusalem (B. C. 607), and joined in exulting over its fall (Ezek. xxv :3, 6). Yet they allowed some of the fugitive Jews to take refuge among them, and even to intermarry (Jer. x1:II; Neh. xiii: 13). On the return of the Jews from Babylon the Ammonites manifested their ancient hostility by deriding and opposing the rebuilding of Jerusa- lem (Neh. iv:3, 7, 8). Both Ezra and Nehemiah expressed vehement indignation against those Jews who had intermarried with the heathen, and thus transgressed the divine command (Deut. vii:3; Ezra x ; Neh. xiii:25). Judas Maccabaeus (B. C. 164) fought many battles with the Am- monites, and took Jazer with the towns belong- ing to it. Justin Martyr affirms that in his time the Ammonites were numerous. Origen speaks of their country under the general denomination of Arabia. Josephus says that the Moabites and Ammonites were inhabitants of Coele-Syria (Antiq. i :II, sec. 5). (6) National Idol. The national idol was Molech or Milcom, whose worship was intro- duced among the Israelites by the Ammonitish wives of Solomon (I Kings xi :5, 8) ; and the high places built by that sovereign for this ‘abomi- nation were 1101 desli Uyeul till the rcign of Josiah (2 Kings xxiii: 13), B. C. 61O. Besides Nahash and Hanun, an Ammonitish king, Baalis, is mentioned by Jeremiah (x1:14). Sixteen manuscripts read Baalim ; and Josephus, Baalim, BaćXelp. (Antiq. x:9, sec. 3). (7) Denunciations of the Prophets. In the writings of the prophets terrible denunciations are uttered against the Ammonites on account of their rancorous hostility to the people of Israel; and the destruction of their metropolis, Rabbah, is distinctly foretold (Zeph. ii:8; Jer. xlix:I-6; Ezek, xxv : I-5, Io; Amos i :13-15). (See RAB- BAH.) * * AMNON (#m'non), (Heb. Tº, am-nohn', faith- ful). 1. The eldest son of David, by Ahinoam of AMOK 97 Jezreel. He was born at Hebron, about B. C. 1056. He is only known for his atrocious con- duct towards his half sister Tamar, which her full brother. Absalom avenged two years after, by causing him to be assassinated while a guest at his table (2 Sam. xiii), B. C. Io92. 2. Son of Shimon (1 Chron. iv:20). AMOK (ā'mok), (Heb. piny, aw-moke", deep, the father of Eber (Neh. xii:7-2O). - AMOMUM (am-5'müm), (Lat. from Gr. &uouov, amºnoh-mon). This word is found only in Rev. xviii: 13. It denoted an odoriferous plant, or seed, used in preparing precious ointment. It differed from the modern amonum of the druggists, but the exact species is not known. AMON (ā'mon), (Heb. Yºs. azy-mome', builder, Jer. xlvi.25). w 1. The name of an Egyptian god, in whom the classical writers unanimously recognize their own Zeus and Jupiter. The primitive seat of his worship appears to have been at Meroë, from which it descended to Thebes, and thence, accord- ing to Herodotus (ii:54), was transmitted to the Oasis of Siwah and to Dodona; in all which places there were celebrated oracles of this god. His chief temple and oracle in Egypt, however, *- The god Amon. were at Thebes, a city peculiarly consecrated to him, and which is probably meant by the No and No Amon of the prophets. He is generally represented on Egyptian monuments by the seated figure of a man with a ram's head, or by that of an entire ram, and of a blue color. In honor of him the inhabitants of the Thebaid ab- stained from the flesh of sheep, and they an- nually sacrificed a ram to him and dressed his image in the hide. A religious reason for that ceremony is assigned by Herodotus (ii:42); but Diodorus (iii:72) ascribes his wearing horns to a more trivial cause. There appears to be no account of the manner in which his oracular re- Sponses were given ; but as a sculpture at Karfiak, which Creuzer has copied from the Description d’Egypte, represents his portable tabernacle mounted on a boat and borne on the shoulders of forty priests, it may be conjectured, from the resemblance between several features of that rep- resentation and the description of the oracle of Jupiter Ammon in Diodorus (xvii:50), that his responses were communicated by some indication †g the solemn transportation of his taber- Ila C16. AMORITES There is no reason to doubt that the name of this god really occurs in the passage 'Behold, I will visit Amon of No,' in Jer. xlvi;25. The C9mtext and all internal grounds are in favor 9f this view. . The Septuagint has rendered it by 'Aºtºv, as it has also called No, in Ezek. xxx:14, Atóatroxts, Dee-os'?oh-Zis (city of Zeus). The Peshito likewise takes it as a proper name, as Amon does not exist in Syriac in the signification which it bears as a pure Hebrew word. The Targum of Jonathan and the Vulgate, however, have ren- dered the passage the multitude of Alexandria.” The reason of their taking Amon to mean multitude' may perhaps be found in the fact that, in Ezek. xxx:13-16, we read Hamon, which does bear that sense. Nevertheless, modern scholars are more disposed to emend the latter reading by the former, and to find Amon, the Egyptian god, in both places. * The son of Manasseh, and fifteenth king of Judah, who began to reign B. C. 644, and reigned two years. He restored idolatry, and again set up the images which Manasseh had cast down. He was assassinated in a court conspiracy; but the people put the regicides to death, and raised to the throne his son Josiah, then but eight years old (2 Kings xxi :18-26; 2 Chron. xxxiii:21-25). 8. Governor of the city of Samaria, in the time of Ahab (I Kings xxii:26; 2 Chron. viii.25), B. C. 900. 4. A descendant of the servants of Solomon (called Azmi in Ezra ii:57); the head of one of the families that returned from Babylon. (B. C. 536.) 5. A son of Manasses, in Christ's ancestry (Matt. i. Io), AMoRITEs (am'o-rites), (Heb. "Yº, Zaw-em- o-ree', dweller on the summits), the descendants of One of the sons of Canaan; Auth. Vers. the Emorite. The Amorites were the most powerful and distinguished of the Canaanitish nations. We find them first noticed in Gen. xiv:7–"the Amor- ites that dwelt in Hazezon-tamar,’ the cutting of the Žalm tree, afterwards called Engedi, fountain of the kid, a city in the wilderness of Judaea not far from the Dead Sea. In the prom- ise to Abraham (Gen. xv.16,21), the Amorites are specified as one of the nations whose country would be given to his posterity. But at that time three confederates of the patriarch belonged to this tribe; Mamre, Aner, and Eshcol (Gen. xiv: I3, 24). When the Israelites were about to en- ter the promised land, the Amorites occupied a tract on both sides of the Jordan. That part of their territories which lay to the east of the Jordan was allotted to the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half the tribe of Manasseh. (1) Sihon and Og. They were under two kings—Sihon, king of Heshbon (frequently called king of the Amorites), and Og, king of Bashan, who dwelt at Ashtaroth [and] in [at] Edrei’ (Deut. i.4, compared with Josh. xii:4; xiii :12). Before hostilities commenced messengers were Sent to Sihon, requesting permission to pass through his land; but Sihon refused, and came to Jahaz and fought with Israel; and Israel Smote him with the edge of the sword, and pos- sessed his land from Arnon (Modjeb) unto Jabbok (Zerka) (Num. xxi :24). Og also gave battle to the Israelites at Edrei, and was totally defeated (Num. xxi :33, 35 ; Deut. iii:I, 8). After the capture of Ai, five kings of the Amor- ites, whose dominions lay within the allotment of the tribe of Judah, leagued together to wreak vengeance on the Gibeonites for having made a separate peace with the invaders. AMOS (2) Joshua. Joshua, on being apprised of their design, marched to Gibeon and defeated them with great slaughter (Josh. x:Io). Another confederacy was shortly after formed on a still larger scale (Josh. xi :4). Josephus says that they consisted of 300,000 armed foot soldiers, I0,000 cavalry, and 20,000 chariots (Antiq. v :I). Joshua came suddenly upon them by the waters of Merom (the lake Samachonites of Josephus, Antiq. v :6, Sec. I, and the modern Bahrat-al- Hule), and Israel smote them until they left none remaining (Josh. xi :8). (See JoSHUA.) Still, after their severe defeats, the Amorites, by means of their war-chariots and cavalry, con- fined the Danites to the hills, and would not suffer them to settle in the plains: they even succeeded in retaining possession of some of the mountainous parts. It is mentioned as an extraordinary circum- stance that in the days of Samuel there was peace between Israel and the Amorites (I Sam. vii:14). In Solomon’s reign a tribute of bond- service was levied on the remnant of the Amor- ites and other Canaanitish nations (I Kings ix :21 ; 2 Chron. viii:8). (3) Stature. From the language of . Amos (ii:9) it has been inferred that the Amorites in general were men of extraordinary stature, but perhaps the allusion is to an individual, Og, king of Bashan, who is described by Moses as being the last of the remnant of the giants.’ His bedstead was of iron, “nine cubits in length and four cubits in breadth' (Deut. iii:II). Though the Gibeonites in Josh. ix:7, are called Hivites, yet in 2 Sam. xxi :2, they are said to be “of the remnant of the Amorites,’ probably be- cause they were descended from a common stock. After the conquest of Canaan nothing is heard in the Bible of the Amorites, except the mention of their name as the early inhabitants of the country. AMOS (ā'mos), (Heb. tºy. azv-moce', carried, or a burden). 1. One of the twelve minor prophets, a con- temporary of Isaiah and Hosea, and not to be confounded with Amoz (which see). Gesenius con- jectures that the name may be of Egyptian ori- gin, and the same as Amasis or Amosis, which means son of the moon. (1) Nativity. He was a native of Tekoah (2 Sam. xiv:2; 2 Chron. xx:20), about six miles south of . Bethlehem, inhabited chiefly by shepherds, to which class he belonged, being also a dresser of sycamore trees. Though some critics have supposed that he was a native of the kingdom of Israel, and took refuge in Telcoah when persecuted by Amaziah ; yet a com- parison of the passages Amos i :I ; vii:14, with Amaziah's language vii: 12, leads us to believe that he was born and brought up in that place. “Bethel was the principal scene of his preach- ing, perhaps the only one. When he had de- livered several addresses there, Amaziah, the chief priest of the royal sanctuary, sent a mes- sage to the king, who does not seem to have been present, accusing the preacher of treason, and at the same time ordered the latter to quit the realm. Evidently there was some reason to fear that the oppressed poor might be stirred up to revolt against their lords and masters. The threats of coming judgment would disturb many hearers. The denunciation of cruelty and in- justice would awake many echoes. Yet the priest's language evinces all the contempt which a highly-placed official feels towards an interfer- 98 AMOS, PROPHECY OF ing nobody, a fellow who, as he thinks, gains a precarious livelihood by prophesying. Jeroboam does not seem to have paid much heed. In the Bab. Talm. Pesachim, fol. 87b, it is said: “How is it proved that Jeroboam did not receive the accusation brought against Amos ? The king answered (in reply to Amaziah), 'God for: bid that that righteous man should have said this ; and if he hath said it, what can I do to him P The Shechinah hath said it to him.’ The con- versation is fictitious; but Amos doubtless with- drew unmolested, after disclaiming any official and permanent standing as a prophet, predicting Amaziah's utter destruction because of his im- pious hindrance of the divine word (Amos vii: I4-17, and completing the delivery of his own message to Israel (Amos viii., ix). On reaching home he doubtless put into writing the substance of his speeches, and the roll thus written is the earliest book of prophecy that has come down to us.” (J. Taylor, Hastings' Bib. Dict.). The period during which he filled the prophetic office was of short duration, unless we suppose that he uttered other predictions which are not recorded. & (2) Time of His Prophecy. It is stated expressly that he prophesied in the days of Uz- ziah, king of Judah, and the days of Jeroboam, the son of Joash, king of Israel, two years be- fore the earthquake (Amos i :1). As Jeroboam died in the fifteenth year of Uzziah's reign, this earthquake, to which there is an allusion in Zechariah (xiv:5), could not have happened later than the seventeenth year of Uzziah. Josephus indeed (Antiq. ix:Io), and some other Jewish writers, represent the earthquake as a mark of the divine displeasure against Uzziah (in addition to his leprosy) for usurping the priest's office. This, however, would not agree with the sacred narrative, which informs us that Jotham, his son, acted as regent during the remainder of his reign, was twenty-five years old when he became his successor, and consequently was not born till the twenty-seventh year of his father's reign. As Uzziah and Jeroboam were contemporaries for about fourteen years, from B. C. 798 to 784, the latter of these dates will mark the period when Amos prophesied. Others have placed the beginning of his ministry at about 760 B. C., and still others at 734. (8) Closing Life. “It is quite likely that he reached Tekoa in peace, resumed his shepherd life, and eventually was gathered to his fathers. Jerome and Eusebius affirm that his sepulchre was still shown at Tekoa in their days. When Maundrell was in the neighborhood in 1737 he was told that the tomb was in the village on the mountain. The Roman, Church places Amos amongst the martyrs, and commemorates him on the 31st of March, the Greek Church on the 15th of June. Amongst the Jews his freedom of speech gave offense even after his death, for the Koh. Rab. blames Amos, Jeremiah, and Ecclesiastes for their fault-finding, and states that this is the reason why the superscriptions to their books run, ‘The words of Amos,” etc., and not ‘The words of God.’” (Hastings). 2. Son of Nahum, and father of Mattathiac, in the genealogy of the Saviour (Luke iii.25), B, C. about 40O. AMOS, PROPHECY OF (ā'mos, préfe-sy 8v). When Amos received his commission, the king- dom of Israel, which had been “cut short' by Hazael (2 Kings x:32) towards the close of Jehu's reign, was restored to its ancient limits and splendor by Jeroboam the Second (2 Kings AMOS, PROPHECY OF xiv:25). But the restoration of national pros- perity was followed by the prevalence of luxury, licentiousness, and oppression, to an extent that again provoked the divine displeasure, and Amos was called from the sheep-folds to be the har- binger of the coming judgments. Not that his commission was limited entirely to Israel. The thunder-storm rolls over all the surrounding kingdoms, touches Judah in its progress, and at length settles upon Israel. Chap. i ; ii:I-5, form a solemn prelude to the main subject; nation after nation is summoned to judgment, in each instance with the striking idiomatical expression (similar to that in Proverbs xxx:15, 18, 2I). ‘For three transgressions—and for four—I will not turn away the punishment thereof.” Israel is then addressed in the same style, and in chap. iii (after a brief rebuke of the twelve tribes collectively) its degenerate state is strikingly AMOSIS ii: I ; iv:II; v :26; to agricultural or pastoral em- ployments and occurrences, i:3; ii: 13; iii.5, I2; iv 2, 9; v :19; vii: I ; ix:9, 13, I5; and to national institutions and customs, ii:8; iii: I5; iv:4; V :21 ; vi:4-6, Io; viii:5, Io, I4. Some peculiar expressions occur; such ‘cleanness of teeth,’ a parallelism to ‘want bread, vi :6. ‘God of Hosts’ is found only Amos and the Psalms. ‘The high places of Isaac, vii:9; ‘the house of Isaac, vii: 16. ‘He that createth the wind,” iv:13. (2) The Canonicity of the Book. The canonicity of the book of Amos is amply sup- ported both by Jewish and Christian authorities. Philo, Josephus, and the Talmud include it among the minor prophets. It is also in the cata- logues of Melito, Jerome, and the sixtieth canon of the Council of Laodicea. Justin Martyr, in his Dialogue with Trypho (Sec. 22), quotes a 3.S of 1I] Amphipolis. portrayed, and the denunciations of divine jus- tice are intermingled, like repeated thunderclaps, to the end of chap. vi. The seventh and eighth chapters contain various symbolical visions, with a brief historical episode (vii : Io-17). In the ninth chapter the majesty of Jehovah and the terrors of his justice are set forth with a sub- limity of diction which rivals and partly copies that of the royal Psalmist (Comp. verses 2, 3, with Ps. ciz., and ver. 6 with Ps. civ.). Towards the close the scene brightens, and from the eleventh verse to the end the promises of the divine mercy and returning favor to the chosen race are ex- hibited in imagery of great beauty taken from rural life. (1) Various Allusions. The allusions in the writings of this prophet are numerous and varied ; they refer to natural objects, as in iii:4, 8; iv.:7, 9; v:8; vi. I2; ix:3; to historical events, i :9, II, I3; considerable part of the fifth and sixth chapters, which he introduces by saying, “Hear how he speaks concerning these by Amos, one of the twelve.’ There are two quotations from it in the New Testament: the first (v :25, 26) by the proto- martyr Stephen (Acts vii:42), the second (ix:II) by the apostle James (Acts xv :I6). AMOSIS (a-mö'sis), an Egyptian monarch, the founder of the eighteenth dynasty, who ascended the throne B. C. 1585. The period of his accession, and the change which then took place in the reigning family, strongly confirm the opinion of his being the ‘new king who knew not Joseph’ (Exod. i :8); and if it be considered that he was from the distant province of Thebes, it is reasonable to expect that the Hebrews would be strangers to him, and that he would be likely to look upon them with distrust and contempt. AMOZ AMOZ (a'möz), (Heb. Yºs, aw-mohta', strong), the father of the prophet Isaiah and brother of Amaziah, king of Judah (2 Kings xix:2, 20; xx:I; 2 Chron. xxvi;22; xxxii:20, 32; Is. i. I; ii: 1; xiii:I; Xx:2; xxxvii:2). By several of the early Christian writers, Amos, the prophet, is confounded with Amoz, the father of Isaiah. Thus Clement of Alexandria (Strom. i:21, sec. 118), Tpopmrečova i öé éir' attoi, 'Apºds kal "Haatas ô viðs at Tow, A 77102 and his son, Isaza/, froż/hesy, etc. This mistake arose from their ignorance of Hebrew and from the name 'Auds being applied to both in the Septuagint. AMPHIPOLIS (ām-f{p'o-lis), (Gr. 'Auq ſtroXts, azz-ſºº'o/-7s), a city of Greece, through which Paul and Silas passed on their way from Philippi to Thessalonica (Acts xvii:I). It was situated on the left bank of the river Strymon, which flowed around the city, and thus Occasioned its name. Its situation upon the banks of a navigable river, a short distance from the sea, with the vicinity of the woods of Kerkine, and the gold mines of Mount Pangaeus, rendered Amphipolis a place of much importance, and an object of contest between the Thracians, Athenians, Lace- daemonians, and Macedonians, to whom it suc- cessively belonged. The Via Egnatia passed through it. It was called in the Middle Ages Popolia (Tafel, Thessal. p. 498f.), and is now represented by a village called Neochori, in Turk- ish Jenikoei (See plan in Leake, N. G. ii: 191). Zoilus, the carping critic of Homer, was a native, and wrote a history of it in three books (Suidas). AMPLIAS (am'pli-ás), (Gr. 'Aurºtas, am-//ee'- as), a Christian at Rome, and mentioned by Paul as One whom he greatly loved (Rom. xvi;8), A. D. 60. AMRAM (äm'rām), (Heb. Pº2, am-rawm', high people). 1. Son of Kohath. He married his father's sis- ter Jochebed, by whom he had Aaron, Miriam, and Moses (Exod. vi. 18; Num. iii: IQ; I Chron. vi. 2, 3, 18). He died in Egypt at the age of one hundred and thirty-seven years (Exod. vi.18, 20, B. C. between I 540 and 1628). 2. A son of Dishon and descendant of Seir (I Chron. i.41). 3. One of the sons of Bani who had married a foreign wife in the time of Ezra (Ezra x:34), B. C. 456. AMRAPHEL(am'ra-fé), (Heb.ºs, am raw. Je/", derivation uncertain, perhaps keeper of the gods), king of Shinar, one of the four kings who invaded Palestine in the time of Abraham (Gen. xiv:I, 2, sg.). - “Schrader, who suggested that the name was a corruption for ‘Amraphi’ (‘Fºs), was the first to identify this king with Khammurabi, the sixth king in the first dynasty of Babylon. The cuneiform inscriptions inform us that Kham- murabi was king of Babylon and N. Baby- lonia; that he rebelled against the supremacy of Elam ; that he overthrew his rival Eri-aku, king of Larsa; and, after conquering Sumer and Accad, was the first to make a united kingdom of Babylonia. He reigned fifty-five years. Winckler gives the date of his reign at 2264-22Io; Sayce (Patr. Pal.) gives 232O as the date of his uniting Babylonia. But the chronology is un- certain” (H. E. Ryle, Hastings' Bib. Dict.). AMULET (äm'u-let), probably from an Arabic word meaning a pendant (Is. iii:2O). - From the earliest ages the Orientals have be- lieved in the influences of the stars, in spells, witchcraft, and the malign power of the evil eye; 100 AMULET and to protect themselves against the maladies and other evils which such influences were Sup- posed to occasion, almost all the ancient nations wore amulets (Plin. Hist. Nat. xxx:15). These amulets consisted chiefly of tickets inscribed with sacred sentences (Shaw, i :365; Lane's Mod. Egypt. ii:365), and of certain stones (Comp. Plin. Hist. Nat. xxxvii:12, 34) or pieces of metal (Richardson, Dissertation; D’Arvieux, iii:208; Chardin, I :243, sqq.; iii:205 sqq.; Niebuhr i:65; ii:162). The previous existence of these customs is im- plied in the attempt of Moses to turn them to. becoming uses, by directing that certain passages extracted from the law should be employed (Exod. xiii:9, 16; Deut. vi :8; xi :18). By this religious appropriation the then all- pervading tendency to idolatry was in this mat- ter obviated, although in later times, when the tendency to idolatry had passed away, such writ- ten scrolls degenerated into instruments of Super- stition. The Fºº (leh-kaw-sheem", of Is. iii.20, Sept. treptăéâta, Žer-ee-deks' ee-a, an armlet for the right arm Vulg. inaures; Auth. Vers. earrings), it is now allowed, denote amulets, although they served also the purpose of ornament. They were proba- bly precious stones, or small plates of gold or silver, with sentences of the law or magic formulae inscribed on them, and worn in the ears, or suspended by a chain round the neck. ‘Earrings' is not perhaps a bad translation. It Amulets (Egyptian Amulets and Earrings). is certain that earrings were sometimes used in this way as instruments of superstition, and that at a very early period, as in Gen. xxxv :4, where Jacob takes away the earrings of his people along with their false gods (Hosea ii: 13; Ezek. xxiii:40, 42). Earrings, with Strange figures and characters, are still used as charms in the East (Chardin, in Harmer iii:3I4). Augustine Speaks strongly against earrings that were worn as amu- lets in his time (Epist. 75, ad Pos.). Schroeder, however, deduces from the Arabic that these amulets were in the form of serpents, and similar probably to those golden amulets of the same form which the women of the pagan Arabs wore suspended between their breasts, the use of which was interdicted by Mohammed. AMZI That these lechashim were charms inscribed on silver and gold was the opinion of Aben Ezra. The Arabic has bores of amulets, manifestly con- cluding that they were similar to those orna- mental little cases for written charms which are still used by Arab women. Amulets of this kind are called hſiegab, and are especially adapted to protect and preserve those written charms on which the Moslems, as did the Jews, chiefly rely. The writing is covered with waxed cloth, and inclosed in a case of thin embossed gold or silver, which is attached to a silk string, or a chain, and generally hung on the right side, above the girdle, the string or chain being passed over the left shoulder. In the specimen here figured there are three of these himegabs attached to one string. The square one in the middle is almost an inch thick, and contains a folded paper; the others contain scrolls. The later Jews regarded also as amulets the phylacteries, or sentences of the law which Moses had commanded them to wear on their foreheads and wrists; although this command of Moses is probably to be understood no more literally than the command to impress them upon their hearts. (Deut. vi :6, 8). AMZI (äm'zi), (Heb. "sps, a/-äsee', strong). 1. Son of Bani (I Chron. vi:46). 2. Son of Zechariah and ancestor of Adaiah (Neh. ii.22). ANAB (ā'nāb), (Heb. PPP, an-awb', grape town), one of the cities in the mountains of Judah, from which Joshua expelled the Anakim (Josh. xi.2 I; XV:13, I4). ANAH (ā'nah), (Heb. "#2, an-aw', answering). 1. Son of Zibeon, the Hivite, and father of Esau’s wife Aholibamah (Gen. xxxvi :20, 24), B. C. 1760. While feeding asses in the desert he discovered ‘warm springs' (aguaº caida), as the original yemim is rendered by Jerome, who states that the word had still this significa- tion in the Punic language. Gesenius and most modern critics think this interpretation correct, supported as it is by the fact that warm springs are still found in the region east of the Dead Sea at Callirrhoë. Our version of ‘mules’ is now gen- erally abandoned, but is supported by the Arabic and Veneto-Greek versions. The revised version reads, “A ma/, found the hot springs.” 2. A son of Seir, the Horite, and one of the heads of a tribe (Gen. xxxvi;29; I Chron. i. 38). ANAHARATH (ān'a-hā'rath), (Heb. Frº, an- azv-kha-razvth', gorge), city of Issachar (Josh. xix: 19), probably in the northern part of that territory. Meskara/, and also en-AWaurah, just east of #. Hermon, have been suggested as the site of Ana- harath. ANAIAH (än'a-i'ah), (Heb. Tº, an-aw-yaw", Jah has answered). 1. One of the persons (probably priests), who stood at the right hand of Ezra while he read the law to the people (Neh. viii:4). 2. One of the chiefs of the people who joined Nehemiah in a sacred covenant (Neh. x:22), B. C. 445. ANAR (ā-nāk), (Heb. Pº' aw-mazvk', long- necked, i. e., a giant), the son of Arba. He was the progenitor of a race of giants called Anakim. ANAKIM (än'a-km), (Heb, PTRF2, ah-mawk- Kim', giants), or Benei-Anak (Tº F32) and Benei Anakim (bº":3), a wandering nation of southern Canaan. 101 ANAN IAS It was composed of three tribes, descended from and named after the three sons of Anak (Josh. xi :21)—Ahiman, Sesai, and Talmai. When the Israelites invaded Canaan, the Anakim were in possession of Hebron, Debir, Anak, and other towns in the country of the south. Their for- midable stature and appearance alarmed the He- brew spies; but they were eventually overcome and expelled by Caleb when the remnant of the race took refuge among the Philistines (Num. xiii:22, 28, 32, 33; Deut. ix:2; Josh. xi :21, 22; xiv: I2; Judg. i:20). This favors the opinion of those who conclude that the Anakim were a tribe of Cushite wanderers from Babel, and of the same race as the Philistines, the Phoenicians, the Philitim, and the Egyptian shepherd kings. ANAMIM (an'a-mm), (Heb. Fºx, an-aw- meem", rockmen), second son of Mizraim (Gen. x:13), who made certain settlements about which little is known (I Chron. i: II). Knobel claims that these sons of Mizraim in- habited the Delta of Egypt. “Ebers identifies them with the Aamu or Naamu (Anamaima) i. e. cowherds, who are included among the tribes ruled by the Pharaohs, fifteenth or fourteenth centuries B. C. They occupy the second place in the procession (after the Rutu or Lutu), and are represented as reddish men of Sem. type, as is shown by the head of the man who rep- resents them in the grave of Seti I. They im- migrated into Egypt before the Hyksos from Asia. Their capital was on the Bucolic arm of the Nile, and, in addition to being cattle rearers, they were importers of Asiatic products to Egypt.” (J. Milton, Hastings' Bib. Dict.). ANAMMIELECH (a-nām"me-lék), (Heb. Tº ant-am'ſ/teh-leå, the king's rock, 2 Kings xvii:31), is mentioned, together with Adrammelech, as a god in honor of whom the people of Sepharvaim, who colonized Samaria, burned their children in sacrifice to their idols. No satisfactory etymology of the name has been discovered. ANAN (ā'nan), (Heb. i*, aw-mawn', cloud). 1. A chief Israelite, who sealed the sacred covenant on the return from Babylon (Neh. x:26), B. C. between 445 and 4 IO. - 2. Hanan (I Esdr. v.:IO). ANANI (a-nā’ni), (Heb. "???, an-aw-nee', pro- tected), son of Elioenai, of the family of David (I Chron. iii:24). ANANIAH (ān'a-ni'ah), (Heb. Fº, an-an- Ayazy", protected by Jehovah). 1. Grandfather of Azariah, a returned exile (Neh. iii:23), B. C. before 446. 2. A place in the tribe of Benjamin, between Nob and Hazor (Neh. xi :32). ANANIAS (än'a-ni'as), (Gr. 'Avavtas, aza-azz-ee'- as, of Gr. Amazziah, protected by Jehovah). 1. High-Priest. Ananias, son of Nebedaeus, was made high-priest in the time of the procurator Tiberius Alexander (about A. D. 47), by Herod, king of Chalcis, who for this purpose removed Joseph, son of Camydus, from the high priest- hood (Joseph. Antiq. xx:5, 2). He held the office also under the procurator Cumanus, who succeeded Tiberius Alexander. Being implicated in the quarrels of the Jews and Samaritans, An- anias was, at the instance of the latter (who, be- ing dissatisfied with the conduct of Cumanus, appealed to Ummidius Quadratus, president of Syria), sent in bonds to Rome, to answer for his conduct before Claudius Caesar. The em- peror decided in favor of the accused party. An- anias appears to have returned with credit, and ANAN IAS to have remained in his priesthood until Agrippa gave his office to Ismael, the son of Tabi (Antiq. xx :8, 8), who succeeded a short time before the departure of the procurator Felix, and occupied the station also under his successor Festus. An- anias, after retiring from his high-priesthood, 'increased in glory every day' (Antiq. xx: 1, 2), and obtained favor with the citizens and with Albinus, the Roman procurator, by a lavish use of the great wealth he had hoarded. The prosperity of Ananias met with a dark and painful termination. The assassins (sicariz) who played so fearful a part in the Jewish war, set fire to his house in the commencement of it, and compelled him to seek refuge by conceal- ment, but being discovered in an aqueduct he was Captured and slain (A71/77. xx:9, 2; Be//, /zed. ii: 17, 9). It Was this Ananias before whom Paul was brought, in the procuratorship of Felix (Acts xxiii:2, 3). The noble declaration of the apostle, ‘I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day,” so displeased him that he com- manded the attendant to smite him on the face. Indignant at so unprovoked an insult, the apostle replied, ‘God shall smite thee, thou whited wall,' a threat which the previous details serve to prove wants not evidence of having taken effect. Paul, however, immediately restrained his anger, and allowed that he owed respect to the office which Ananias bore. After this hearing Paul was sent to Caesarea, whither Ananias repaired in order to lay a formal charge against him before Felix, who postponed the matter, detaining the apostle mean- while, and placing him under the supervision of a Roman centurion (Acts xxiv). 2. Husband of Sapphira. A Christian belong- ing to the infant church at Jerusalem, who, con- spiring with his wife Sapphira to deceive and defraud the brethren, was overtaken by sudden death, and immediately buried. The Christian community at Jerusalem appear to have entered into a solemn agreement that each and all should devote their property to the great work of further- ing the gospel and giving succor to the needy. Accordingly they proceeded to sell their posses- sions and brought the proceeds into the common stock of the church (Acts iv:32, 37). The apos- tles then had the general disposal, if they had not also the immediate distribution, of the com- mon funds. The contributions, therefore, were º for the sacred purposes of religion (Acts V : I-II). As all the members of the Jerusalem church had thus agreed to hold their property in com- mon, for the furtherance of the holy work in which they were engaged, if any one of them withheld a part, and offered the remainder as the whole, he committed two offenses—he de- frauded the church and was guilty of falsehood; and as his act related not to secular but to re- ligious affairs, and had an injurious bearing, both as an example and as a positive transgression against the Gospel, while it was yet struggling into existence, Ananias lied not unto man, but unto God, and was guilty of a sin of the deepest dye. Had Ananias chosen to keep his property for his own worldly purposes, he was at liberty, as Peter intimates, so to do, but he had in fact alienated it to pious purposes, and it was there- fore no longer his own. Yet he wished to deal with it in part as if it were so, showing at the same time that he was conscious of his misdeed, by presenting the residue to the common treasury as if it had been his entire property. He wished to satisfy his selfish cravings, and at the same time to enjoy the reputation of being purely dis- 102 ANAPHA --- interested, like the rest of the church. He at- tempted to serve God and Mammon. The origi- nal évoo plorato, ent-osºfts'ah-ſo, is much more ex- pressive of the nature of his misdeed than our common version, kept back’ (part of the price). The Vulgate renders, it ‘fraudavit,” and both Wycliffe and the Rheims Version employ a cor- responding term, ‘defraudid,” “defrauded.” In the only other text of the New Testament where the word is found (Tit. ii:IO), it is translated “purloin- ing.' It is, indeed, properly applied to the con- duct of persons who appropriate to their own pur- poses money destined for public uses. It is the more important to place the crime of Ananias and his wife in its true light because un- just reflections have been cast upon the apostle Peter (Wolfenb. Fragm. Zweck Jesu, p. 256) for his conduct in the case. Whatever that conduct may have been, the misdeed was of no trivial kind, either in itself or in its possible conse- quences. If, then, Peter reproves it with warmth, he does no more than nature and duty alike re- quired; nor does there appear in his language on the Occasion any undue or uncalled for severity. With strange inconsistency on the part of those who deny miracles altogether, unbelievers have accused Peter of cruelly Smiting Ananias and his wife with instant death. The sacred narrative, however, ascribes to Peter nothing more than a Spirited exposure of their aggravated offense. Their death, the reader is left to infer, was by the hand of God; nor is any ground afforded in the narrative (Acts v : I-II) for holding that Peter was in any way employed as an immediate in- strument of the miracle. On the other hand, J. A. Selbie (Hastings' Bib. Dict.) says: “As to its cause, whatever this may have been from a secondary point of view, there can be no doubt that in Acts it is traced to the deliberate will and intention of St. Peter. (Note especially v. 9, and compare the parallel case of St. Paul and Ely- mas in Acts xiii:II.) 3. A Christian of Damascus (Acts ix: IO-17; xxii: I2), held in high repute, to whom the Lord appeared in a vision, and bade him proceed to ‘the street which is called Straight, and inquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul of Tarsus, for, behold, he prayeth.’ Ananias had difficulty in giving credence to the message, re- membering how much evil Paul had done to the saints at Jerusalem, and knowing that he had come to Damascus with authority to lay waste the church of Christ there. Receiving, however, an assurance that the persecutor had been converted and called to the work of preaching the Gospel to the Gentiles, Ananias went to Paul, and, put- ting his hands on him, bade him receive his sight, when immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales, and, recovering the sight which he had lost when the Lord appeared to him on his way to Damascus, Paul, the new convert, arose, and was baptized, and preached Jesus Christ. Tradition represents Ananias as the first that published the Gospel in Damascus, Over which place he was subsequently made bishop, but having roused, by his zeal, the hatred of the Jews, he was seized by them, scourged and finally stoned to death in his own church. There is a very fine church where he was interred, and the Turks, who have made a mosque of it, preserve a great respect for his monument. ANAPHA (an'a-fa), (Heb. "???, an-aw-ſhaw', Vulg. caradryon and caradrium, Eng. Vers. heron, Lev. xi:19, and Deut. xiv:18), an unclean bird, but the particular bird denoted by the ANATHEMA Hebrew word has been much disputed. The kite, woodcock, curlew, peacock, parrot, crane, lapwing and several others have been suggested. Since the word occurs but twice, and in both instances is isolated, no aid can be derived from a com- parison of passages. - Recourse has consequently been had to etymol- Ogy. The root anaph signifies to breathe, to Snort, especially from anger, and thence, fig- uratively, to be angry. Parkhurst observes that ‘as the heron is remarkable for its angry dispo- sition, especially when hurt or wounded, this bird seems to be most probably intended.” But this equally applies to a great number of different Species of birds. Bochart supposes it may mean the mountain falcon, called divoraſa by Homer (Odys. i :320), because of the similarity of the Greek word to the Hebrew. But if it meant any kind of eagle or hawk, it would probably have been reckoned with one or other of those species mentioned in the preceding verses. On the whole, the preponderance of evidence derived from an unbroken chain of well ascer- tained facts seems in favor of the conclusion that the Hebrew word anapha designates the numerous species of the plover (may not this be the genus of birds alluded to as the fowls of the mountain, Ps. 1:II; Is. xviii:6?) Various spe- cies of the genus are known in Syria and Pales- tine as the C. pluvialis (golden plover), C. a dºcue/ſetts (stone-curlew), and C. spinosus (lap- wing). (Kitto's Physical Hist. of Palestine, p. IO6.) And, in connection with some of the pre- ceding remarks, it is important to observe that in these species a yellow color is more or less marked. (See HERON.) ANATHEMA (à-nāth'é-mâ), (Gr. &vá9ega, an- ath'em-a), literally, anything laid up or sus- pended, and hence anything laid up in a temple, set apart as Sacred. (1) Setting Apart. In this general sense the form employed is &vá6mua, an-ath'ay-ma, a word of not unfrequent occurrence in Greek classic au- thors, and found once in the New Testament (Luke xxi:5). The form divá6eap, as well as its meaning, appears to be peculiar to the Hellenistic dialect. The distinction has probably arisen from the special use made of the word by the Greek Jews. In the Septuagint, àváðega, a thing set apart or accursed, is the ordinary rendering of the Hebrew word Prº, kheh’rem, to consecrate (al- though in some instances it varies between the two forms, as in Lev. xxvii:28, 29), and in order to ascertain its meaning it will be necessary to in- quire into the signification of this word. We find that the Kheh-rem was a person or thing consecrated or devoted irrevocably to God, and that it differed from anything merely vowed or sanctified to the Lord in this respect, that the latter could be redeemed (Lev. xxvii:I-27), whilst the former was irreclaimable (Lev. xxvii:21, 28; Num. xviii:I4; Ezek. xliv :29); hence, in reference to living creatures, the devoted thing, whether man or beast, must be put to death (Lev. xxvii: 29). The prominent idea, therefore, which the word conveyed was that of a person or thing devoted to destruction, or accursed. Thus the cities of the Canaanites were anathematized (Num. xxi :2, 3), and after their complete destruc- tion the name of the place was called Hormah (`i; Sept. 3 vä6epa). Thus, again, the city of Jericho was made an anathema to the Lord (Josh: vi :17), that is, every living thing in it (except Rahab and her family) was devoted to death; that which could be destroyed by fire was burnt, and all that could not be thus consumed 103 ANATHEMA (as gold and silver) was forever alienated from man and devoted to the use of the sanctuary (Josh. vi.24). The prominence thus given to the idea of a thing accursed led naturally to the use of the word in cases where there was no reference whatever to consecration to the service of God, as in Deut. vii:26; xiii:17, where an idol is called cherem, or dvd.6epa (a thing accursed), and the Israelites are warned against idolatry lest they should be anathema like it. In these instances the term denotes the object of the curse, but it is Sometimes used to designate the curse itself (e. g. Deut. xx:17, Sept. ; Comp. Acts xxiii:I4), and it is in this latter sense that the English word is generally employed. (2) Among the Later Jews. In this sense, also, the Jews of later times use the Hebrew term, though with a somewhat different meaning as to the curse intended. The Kheh-rem of the Rab- bins signifies excommunication or exclusion from the Jewish church. The more recent Rabbinical writers reckon three kinds or degrees of excom- munication, all of which are occasionally desig- nated by the generic term Kheh-rem (Elias Levita, in Sepher Tisbi). The first of these is merely a temporary separation or suspension from ecclesiastical privileges, involving, however, vari- Ous civil inconveniences, particularly seclusion from society to the distance of four cubits. The person thus excommunicated was not debarred entering the temple, but instead of going in on the right hand, as was customary, he was obliged to enter on the left, the usual way of departure; if he died whilst in this condition there was no mourning for him, but a stone was thrown on his coffin to indicate that he was separated from the people and had deserved stoning. Buxtorf (Lear. Chald., Talm. et Rabbin., col. I3O4) enu- merates twenty-four causes of this kind of ex- communication; it lasted thirty days and was pronounced without a curse. If the individual did not repent at the expiration of the term (which, however, according to Buxtorf, was extended in such cases to sixty or ninety days), the second kind of excommunication was resorted to. This was called simply and more properly Kheh-rem. It could only be pronounced by an assembly of at least ten persons, and was always accompanied with curses. The formula employed is given at length by Buxtorf (Lear. col. 828). A person thus excommunicated was cut off from all religious and social privileges; it was unlawful either to eat or drink with him (Compare I Cor. v: II). The curse could be dissolved, however, by three common persons, or by one person of dignity. If the excommunicated person still con- tinued impenitent, a yet more severe sentence was, according to the later Rabbins, pronounced against him. It is described as a complete excision from the church and the giving up of the individual to the judgment of God and to final perdition. There is, however, reason to believe that these three grades are of recent origin. The Tal- mudists frequently use the terms by which the first and last are designated interchangeably, and some Rabbinical writers (whom Lightfoot has followed in his A/ora Hebr. et Talm., ad I Cor. v:5) consider the last to be a lower grade than the second; yet it is probable that the classifica- tion rests on the fact that the sentence was more or less severe according to the circumstances of the case, and though we cannot expect to find the three grades distinctly marked in the writings of the New Testament, we may not improbably consider the phrase &TogvváYayov troteiu ſo exc/ure from the assemblies (John xvi;2; Comp. ix: ANATHEMA 22, xii:42) as referring to a lighter cen- sure than is intended by one or more of the three terms used in Luke vi :22, where perhaps different grades are intimated. The phrase, to give over to the adversary (I Cor. v :5; I Tim. i:20), has been by many commentators under- stood to refer to the most severe kind of excom- munication. Even admitting the allusion, how- ever, there is a very important difference between the Jewish censure and the formula employed by the Apostle. In the Jewish sense it would signify the delivering over of the transgressor to final perdition, whilst the Apostle expressly limits his sentence to the ‘destruction of the flesh' (i. e., the depraved nature), and resorts to it in order ‘that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.’ But whatever diversity of opinion there may be as to the degrees of excommunication, it is on all hands admitted that the term Kheh-rem, with which we are more particularly concerned as the equivalent of the Greek anathema, a setting apart, properly denotes, in its Rabbinical use, an excom- munication accompanied with the most severe curses and denunciations of evil. (3) In the New Testament. We are there- fore prepared to find that the anathema of the New Testament always implies execration, but it yet remains to be ascertained whether it is ever . used to designate a judicial act of excommuni- cation. That there is frequently no such refer- ence is very clear; in some instances the individ- ual denounces the anathema on himself, unless certain conditions are fulfilled. The noun and its corresponding verb are thus used in Acts xxiii :12, 14, 21, and the verb occurs with a sim- ilar meaning in Matt. xxvi :74; Mark xiv.:71. The phrase ‘to call Jesus anathema' (I Cor. xii:3) refers not to a judicial sentence pro- nounced by the Jewish authorities, but to the act of any private individual who execrated him and pronounced him accursed. That this was a com- mon practice among the Jews appears from the Rabbinical writings. The term, as it is used in reference to any who should preach another gos- pel, ‘Let him be anathema' (Gal. i :8, 9), has the same meaning as, “let him be accounted exe- crable and accursed.” In none of these instances do we find any reason to think that the word was employed to designate specifically and technically excommunication either from the Jewish or the Christian church. There remain only two pas- sages in which the word occurs in the New Testa- ment, both presenting considerable difficulty to the translator. With regard to the first of these (Rom. ix:3) Grotius and others understand the phrase to be amathema, (or accursed) from Christ, to signify earcommunication from the Christian church, while most of the fathers, together with Tholuck, Rückert and a great number of mod- ern interpreters, explain the term as referring to the Jewish practice of excommunication. On the other hand, Deyling, Olshausen, De Wette and many more adopt the more general meaning of accursed. The great difficulty is to ascertain the extent of the evil which Paul expresses his willingness to undergo; Chrysostom, Calvin and many others understand it to include final separa- tion, not indeed from the love, but from the pres- ence of Christ; others limit it to a violent death, and others, again, explain it as meaning the same kind of curse as that under which the Jews then were, from which they might be delivered by re- pentance and the reception of the Gospel (Dey- lingii Observatt, Sacrae P. II. p. 495, and sqq.). It would occupy too much space to refer to other interpretations of the passage, or to pursue the in- 104 ANCIENT OF DAYS vestigation of it further. There seems, however, little reason to suppose that a judicial act of the Christian Church is intended, and we may re- mark that much of the difficulty which commen- tators have felt seems to have arisen from their not keeping in mind that the Apostle does not speak of his wish as a possible thing, and their consequently pursuing to all its results what should be regarded simply as an expression of the most intense desire. The phrase, let him be amathema maran-atha seems, in the view of some, to be intended sim- ply as an expression of detestation. Others hold that it is a Syriac exclamation, signifying, Let him be accursed, the Lord is at hand, a reminder that at the coming of the Lord rewards and punishments would be meted out (I Cor. xvi :22). ANATHEMATA (à-nāth-é-mā'ta), (from Gr. &vatt0mut, an-at-2th'ay-mee, to lay up). Ornaments which were set apart for the dec- oration of churches. In Luke xxi :5 the word is applied to the ornaments which were used in the temple. In a stricter sense the word is used to denote memorials of great favors which men had received from God. Very early a custom, still existing, sprang up of anyone receiving a signal cure presenting to the church what was called his ectypoma, or figure of the member cured, in gold or silver. ANATHOTH (ān'ā-thèth), (Heb. ninji, an-aw- thoth', answers, i.e., to prayer). & 1. One of the towns belonging to the priests in the tribe of Benjamin, and as such a city of refuge (Josh. xxi :18; Jer. i : I). It occurs also in 2 Sam. xxiii:27; Ezra ii:23; Neh. vii:27, but is chiefly memorable as the birthplace and usual residence of the prophet Jeremiah (Jer. i :I ; xi :21-23; xxix: 27), whose name it seems to have borne in the time of Jerome, ‘Anathoth, gua hodie aft/eſ/atter Jeremiae' (Onomasz. s. v. Anathoth). The same writer (Comment, in Jer, i :I) places Anathoth three Roman miles north of Jerusalem, which corresponds with the twenty stadia assigned by Josephus (Antiq. x:7, 3). Professor Robin- son appears to have discovered this place in the present village of Anata, at the distance of an hour and a quarter from Jerusalem. It is seated on a broad ridge of hills, and commands an ex- tensive view of the eastern slope of the moun- tainous tract of Benjamin, including also the valley of the Jordan, and the northern part of the Dead Sea. It seems to have been once a walled town and a place of strength. It is now a small and very poor village. From the vicinity a favor- ite kind of building stone is carried to Jerusalem. Troops of donkeys are met with employed in this service, a hewn stone being slung on each side; the larger stones are transported on cam- els (Robinson, Researches, ii:109; Raumer's Pal- astina, p. 169). 2. Eighth of the nine sons of Becher, a son of Benjamin (1 Chron. vii:8), B. C. between 1856 and I650. 3. One of the chief Israelites that sealed the covenant with Nehemiah (Neh. x:19) B. C. about 445. g ANATHoTHITE (an-à-théth'ite), (Heb."º, Aazy-an-mah-thoſh'ee), is the uniform designation in R. V. of an inhabitant of Anathoth. A. V. offers such variants as Anethite, Anethothite, Antothite. ANCHOR (#n'kér). See SHIP. ANCIENT OF DAYS (ān'shent &v dāz), (Chald. ** Pºy, az-feeA' yoz-meen', advanced in days), an expression applied to Jehovah in a vision of Daniel (vii:9; 13, 22). ANCIENTS ANCIENTS (ān'shents), (Heb. Rī, gaw-Éame', old). This word has the meaning of aged (Gen. xviii: 12, 13; xix:3I ; xxiv:I, etc.). It has also the meaning of elders, i. e., chief men, magistrates (IS. iii:I4; xxiv:23; Jer. xix: I ; Ezek. vii:26; viii: II, I2, etc.). ANDREW (än'drü) (Gr. 'Avôpéas, an-dreſ,'as, manly), one of the twelve apostles. His name is of Greek origin, but was in use among the Jews, as appears from a passage quoted from the !ºlem Talmud by Lightfoot (Harmony, Luke V : IO ). T^ersonal History. He was a native of the º of Bethsaida in Galilee, and brother of Simon eter. (1) Receives Christ. He was at first a dis- ciple of John the Baptist, and was led to receive Jesus as the Messiah in consequence of John's expressly pointing him out as ‘the Lamb of God’ (John i:36, 40). His first care, after he had Satisfied himself as to the validity of the claims of Jesus, was to bring to him his brother Simon. Neither of them, however, became at that time Stated attendants on our Lord, for we find that they were still pursuing their occupation of fish- ermen on the sea of Galilee when Jesus, after John's imprisonment, called them to follow him (Mark i ; I4, 17). (2) As an Apostle. Very little is related of Andrew by any of the evangelists. The principal incidents in which his name occurs during the life of Christ are the feeding of the five thousand (John vi :9); his introducing to our Lord certain Greeks who desired to see him (John xii:22); and his asking, along with his brother Simon and the two sons of Zebedee, for a further explana- tion of what our Lord had said in reference to the destruction of the temple (Mark xiii:3). Of his subsequent history and labors we have no authentic record. (3) Tradition. Tradition assigns Scythia (Euseb. iii:I, 7I), Greece (Theodoret, i : 1425), and Thrace (Hippolytus, ii:30) as the scenes of his ministry; he is said to have suffered cruci- fixion at Patrae in Achaia, on a cross of the form called Crux decussata (X), and commonly known as ‘St. Andrew’s cross' (Winer’s Bibl. A'eaſwärterbuch, sub voce). The modern Greeks make him founder of the church of Byzantium. An apocryphal book, bearing the title of ‘The Acts of Andrew,’ is mentioned by Eusebius, Epiphanius and others. It is now completely lost, and seems never to have been received except by some heret- ical sects, as the Encratites, Origenians, etc. This book, as well as a ‘Gospel of St. Andrew,’ was declared apocryphal by the decree of Pope Gelasius (Jones, On the Canon, vol. i., p. 179 and w). (See ACTs, SPURIOUS ; GoSPELS, SPURI- OljS. ANDRONICUS (än'dro-ni'kus or ān-drön'i-kus), (Gr. 'Avôpovikos, an-dron-ee'Áos, man of victory). 1. The regent governor of Antioch in the ab- sence of Antiochus, Epiphanes, who, at the insti- gation of Menelaus, put to death the deposed high priest Onias, for which deed he was himself ig- nominiously slain on the return of Antiochus (2 Macc. iv), B. C. 169. 2. A Jewish Christián of Rome, the kinsman and fellow-prisoner of Paul (Rom. xvi :7). ANEM (ā'nem), (Heb. P3?, aw-mame', two foun- tains), a city of Issachar, given to the Levites, I Chron. vi;73. In the parallel passage, Josh. xix:21, it is called En-gammim, i.e., fountain of the gardens. This place, which is well watered— whence perhaps its name, “two springs'—is the Anea of the fourth century A. D. (Onomasticon, 105 ANGEL s. 27. Aniel and Bethana), which had good baths, lying fifteen Roman miles from Caesarea. Eusebius, however, identifies this site with Aner. ANER (ā'ner), (Heb. Tº, aw-mare', a youth, an exile). 1. Aner, Eshcol and Mamre, three Canaanites who joined their forces with those of Abraham in pursuit of the kings Chedorlaomer, Amraphel, and their allies, who had pillaged Sodom, and carried off Lot, Abraham's nephew, Gen. xiv:24. They did not imitate the disinterestedness of the patri- arch, however, but retained their share of the spoil. As Mamre is an old name for Hebron (Gen. xxiii:2), and Eshcol is the name of a valley not far from Hebron (Num, xiii:23), it is natural to suppose that Aner also was the name of a locality which gave its name to a clan. Dillmann (in loc.) compares Meir, which is the name of a range of hills in the vicinity. … 2. A city of Manasseh, given to the Levites of Kohath's family (I Chron. Vi :70). ANETHON (a 'né-thon), (Gr. Čiumöov, an 'ay-Zhon, dill), occurs in Matt, xxiii:23, where it is rendered amise, ‘Woe unto you—for ye pay tithe of mint and antise and cummin.' By the Greek and Roman writers it was em- ployed to designate a plant used both medicinally and as an article of diet. The Arabian translat- ors of the Greek medical authors give as its synonym shabit, the name applied in eastern countries to an umbelliferous plant with flattened fruit commonly called ‘seed,” which is surrounded with a dilated margin. In Europe the word has always been used to denote a similar plant, which is familiarly known by the name of Dill. Hence there is no doubt that in the above passage, instead of ‘anise,’ anathon should have been translated ‘dill;’ and it is said to be rendered by a synonymous word in every version except our OW11. - The common dill, or anethum graveolens, is an annual plant, growing wild among the corn in Spain and Portugal, and on the coast of Italy, in Egypt, and about Astracan. It resembles fennel, but is smaller, has, more, glaucous leaves, and a less pleasant smell. The fruit or seeds, which are finely divided, have a warm and aromatic taste, owing to the presence of a pale yellow vola- tile oil, which itself has a hot taste and a peculiar penetrating odor. ANGEL (ān-jël), (Gr. "AyyeXos, ang'e/-os, used in the Sept. and New Testament for the Heb. singular, º, ma/-awā'), a word signifying messengers, both in Hebrew and Greek, and therefore used to de- note whatever God employs to execute his pur- poses, or to manifest his presence or his power. In some passages it occurs in the sense of an ordinary messenger (Job i. I4; I Sam. xi.;3; Luke vii:4; ix:52); in others it is applied to prophets (Is. Ixiii:19; Hag. i. 13; Mal. iii); to priests (Eccl. v:5: Mal. ii.7); to ministers of the New Testament (Rev. i2O). It is also applied to impersonal agents; as to the pillar of cloud (Exod. xiv:19; xiii:21; xxxii:34); to the pestilence (2 Sam. xxiv:16, 17; 2 Kings xix:30); to the winds (who maketh the winds his angels, Ps. civ.4); so, likewise, plagues generally are called “evil angels' (Ps. lxxviii.49), and Paul calls his thorn in the flesh an ‘angel of Satan' (2 Cor. xii:7; Gal. iv:13, I4). (1) Spiritual Beings. But this name is more eminently and distinctively applied to certain spiritual beings or , heavenly intelligences, em: ployed by God as the ministers of His will and usually distinguished as angels of God or angels of Jehovah. In this case the name has respect ANGEL to their official capacity as ‘messengers,’ and not to their nature or condition. The term ‘spirit,' on the other hand (in Greek, pneuma, in Hebrew mach), has reference to the nature of angels, and characterizes them as incorporeal and invis- ible essences. But neither the Hebrew mach nor the Greek pneuma, nor even the Latin spiritus, corresponds exactly to the English spirit, which is opposed to matter, and designates what is immaterial; whereas the other terms are not Opposed to matter, but to body, and signify not what is immaterial, but what is incorporeal. The modern idea of spirit was unknown to the an- cients. They conceived spirits to be incorporeal and invisible, but not immaterial, and supposed their essence to be a pure air or a subtile fire. The proper meaning of true upa, pneuma (from T vé w, I blow, I breathe) is air in motion, wind, breath. (2) Spiritual Bodies. The Hebrew mach is of the same import; as is also the Latin spiritus, from spiro, I blow, I breathe. When, therefore, the ancient Jews called angels spirits, they did not mean to deny that they were endued with bodies. When they affirmed that angels were incorporeal, they used the term in the sense in which it was understood by the ancients—that is, as free from the impurities of gross matter, The distinction between ‘a natural body' and ‘a spiritual body’ is indicated by St. Paul (I Cor. xv :44), and we may, with sufficient safety, as- sume that angels are spiritual bodies, rather than pure spirits in the modern acceptation of the word. It is disputed whether the term Elohim is ever applied to angels, but the inquiry belongs to an- other place. (See GOD.). It may suffice here, per- haps, to observe that both in Ps. viii:5 and xcvii:7 the word is rendered by angels in the Sept. and other ancient versions; and both these texts are so cited in Heb. i :6; ii:7, that they are called Beni-Elohim, Sons of God. (3) Spiritual Intelligences. In the Scrip- tures we have frequent notices of spiritual intel- ligence, existing in another state of being, and constituting a celestial family, or hierarchy, over which Jehovah presides. The Bible does not, however, treat of this matter professedly and as a doctrine of religion, but merely adverts to it incidentally as a fact, without furnishing any details to gratify curiosity. It speaks of no obli- gations to these spirits, and indicates no duties to be performed towards them. A belief in the existence of such beings is not, therefore, an es- sential article of religion, any more than a belief that there are other worlds besides our own ; but such a belief serves to enlarge our ideas of the works of God, and to illustrate the greatness of his power and wisdom (Mayer, Am. Bib. Repos. xii:360). The practice of the Jews, of referring to the agency of angels every manifestation of the greatness and power of God, has led some to contend that angels have no real existence, but are mere personifications of unknown powers of nature; and we are reminded that, in like man- ner, among the Gentiles, whatever was wonderful, or strange, or unaccountable, was referred by them to the agency of some one of their gods. Among the numerous passages in which angels are mentioned, there are, however, a few which cannot, without improper force, be reconciled with this hypothesis (Gen. xvi :7-I2; Judg. xiii: 1-21 ; Matt. xxviii:2-4), and if Matt. xx:30 stood alone in its testimony, it ought to settle the ques- tion. Christ there says that ‘in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God.” The force of this 106 ANGEL passage cannot be eluded by the hypothesis (see ACCOMMODATION) that Christ mingled with his instructions the erroneous notions of those to whom they were addressed, seeing that he spoke to Sadducees, who did not believe in the exist- ence of angels (Acts xxiii:8). So likewise, the passage in which the high dignity of Christ is established, by arguing that he is superior to the angels (Heb. i :4, sqq.), would be without force or meaning if angels had no real existence. (4) Numerous. That these superior beings are very numero11s is evident from the following expressions: Dan. vii: Io, ‘thousands of thou- Sands,’ and ‘ten thousand times ten thousand.’ Ps. lxviii:17; Matt. xxvi :53, ‘more than twelve legions of angels.” (Comp. Gen. xxviii:12; xxxii: I, 2; PS. ciii:20, 21 ; czlviii:2). Luke ii:13, ‘multi- tude of the heavenly host.’ Heb. xii:22, 23, ‘myr- iads of angels.’ It is probable, from the nature of the case, that among so great a multitude there may be different grades and classes, and even na- tures—ascending from man towards God, and forming a chain of being to fill up the vast space between the Creator and man—the lowest of his intellectual creatures. This may be inferred from the analogies which pervade the chain of being On the earth whereon we live, which is as much the Divine creation as the world of spirits. (5) Biblical Allusions. Accordingly the Scripture describes angels as existing in a society composed of members of unequal dignity, power and excellence, and as having chiefs and ruſers. It is admitted that this idea is not clearly ex- pressed in the books composed before the Baby- lonish captivity; but it is developed in the books written during the exile and afterwards, especially in the writings of Daniel and Zechariah. In Zech. i :II an angel of the highest order, one who stands before God, appears in contrast with angels of an inferior class, whom he employs as his mes- sengers and agents (Comp. iii:7). In Dan. x : 13, the appellation, “one of the chief princes,” and in xii: 1, “the great prince,” are given to Michael. The Grecian Jews rendered this appellation by the term āpxdyyekos, ark-ang'e/-os, archange/, which occurs in the New Testament (Jude 9; I Thess. iv :I6), where we are taught that Christ will appear to judge the world €v pová ápxayyé\ov, foll-may' ark- ang-ed"oo, with the voice of an archangel. This word denotes, as the very analogy of the language teaches, a chief of the angels, one superior to the other angels, like the term chief priest. The opin- ion, therefore, that there were various orders of angels was not peculiar to the Jews, but was held by Christians in the time of the apostles, and is mentioned by the apostles themselves. The dis– tinct divisions of the angels, according to their rank in the heavenly hierarchy, which we find in the writings of the later Jews, were cither almost or wholly unknown in the apostolical period. (6) In Human Form. In the Scriptures an- gels appear with bodies, and in the human form, and no intimation is anywhere given that these bodies are not real, or that they are only as- sumed for the time and then laid aside. It was manifest indeed to the ancients that the matter of these bodies was not like that of their own, inasmuch as angels could make themselves vis- ible and vanish again from their sight. But this ex- perience would suggest no doubt of the reality of their bodies; it would only intimate that they were not composed of gross matter. After his resurrection Jesus often appeared to his disci- ples and vanished again before them : yet they never doubted that they saw the same body which had been crucified, although they must have per- ANGEL ceived that it had undergone an important change. The fact that angels always appeared in the hu- man form does not, indeed, prove that they really have this form, but that the ancient Jews believed so. That which is not pure spirit must have some form or other, and angels may have the human form, but other forms are possible. We some- times find angels, in their terrene manifestations, eating and drinking (Gen. xviii:8; xix:3), but in Judg. xiii:15, 16, the angel who appeared to Manoah declined, in a very pointed manner, to accept his hospitality. The manner in which the Jews obviated the apparent discrepancy, and the sense in which they understood such passages, ap- pears from the apocryphal book of Tobit (xii:19), where the angel is made to say, ‘It seems to you, indeed, as though I did eat and drink with you, but I use invisible food, which no man can see.' Milton, who was deeply read in the ‘angelical' literature, derides these questions: “So down they sat And to their viands fell; nor seemingly The angel, nor in mist (the common gloss Of theologians), but with keen dispatch Of real hunger, and concoctive heat To transubstantiate; what redounds Transpires through spirits with ease.’ —Par. Lost, v :433-439. The same , angel had previously satisfied the curiosity of Adam on the subject, by stating that ‘Whatever was created, needs To be sustained and fed.’ If this dictum were capable of proof, except from the analogy of known natures, it would set- tle the question. But if angels do not need it, if their spiritual bodies are inherently incapable of waste or death, it seems not likely that they gra- tuitously perform an act designed, in all its known relations, to promote growth, to repair waste and to sustain existence. The passage already referred to in Matt. xxii: 30, teaches by implication that there is no dis- tinction of sex among the angels The Scripture never makes mention of female angels. The Gen- tiles had their male and female divinities, who were the parents of other gods. But in the Scrip- tures the angels are all males, and they appear to be so represented not to mark any distinction of Sex, but because the masculine is the more honorable gender. Angels are never described with marks of age, but sometimes with those of youth (Mark xvi :5). The constant absence of the features of age indicates the continual vigor and freshness of immortality. The angels never die (Luke xx :36). But no being besides God himself has essential immortality (1 Tim. vi.16); every other being therefore is mortal in itself and can be immortal only by the will of God. Angels, consequently, are not eternal, but had a beginning. (7) Attributes. The preceding considerations apply chiefly to the earistence and nature of an- gels. Some of their attributes may be collected from other passages of Scripture. That they are of Superhuman intelligence is implied in Mark xiii:32: ‘But of that day and hour knoweth no man, not even the angels in heaven.” That their power is great may be gathered from such ex- pressions as “mighty angels' (2 Thess. i :7); ‘an- gels powerful in strength' (Ps. ciii:20); ‘angels who are greater (than man) in power and might.” The moral perfection of angels is shown by such phrases as ‘holy angels’ (Luke ix:26); ‘the elect 107 ANGELIC SALUTATION angels' (2 Tim. v :21). Their felicity is beyond question in itself, but is evinced by the passage (Luke xx:36) in which the blessed in the future world are said to be ‘like unto the angels and Sons of God.” (8) Ministry. The ministry of angels, or that they are employed by God as the instruments of His will, is very clearly taught in the Scrip- tures. The very name, as already explained, shows that God employs their agency in the dis- pensations of His Providence. And it is further evident, from certain actions which are ascribed wholly to them (Matt. xiii:41, 49; xxiv:31 ; Luke xvi;22), and from the Scriptural narratives of other events, in the accomplishment of which they acted a visible part (Luke i :11, 26; ii:9, sq.; Acts V: 19, 20; x:3, 19; xii:7; xxvii:23), that their agency is employed principally in the guid- ance of the destinies of man. In those cases also in which the agency is concealed from our view, we may admit the probability of its existence, be- cause we are told that God sends them forth ‘to minister to those who shall be heirs of salvation’ (Heb. i :14; also Ps. xxxiv:8, 91; Matt. xviii:Io). But the angels, when employed for our welfare, do not act independently, but as the instruments of God, and by His command (Ps. ciii:20; civ : 4: Heb. i:13, I4); not unto them, therefore, are Our confidence and adoration due, but only unto Him (Rev. xix:Io; xxii:9) whom the angels themselves reverently worship. (9) Guardianship. It was a favorite opinion of the Christian fathers that every individual is under the care of a particular angel, who is as- signed to him as a guardian. The Jews (except- ing the Sadducees) entertained this belief, as do the Moslems. The heathen held it in a modified form—the Greeks having their tutelary daºzon and the Romans their genius. There is, however, nothing to support this notion in the Bible, The passages (Ps. xxxiv:7; Matt. xviii: Io) usually referred to in support of it have assuredly no such meaning. The former, divested of its poetical shape, simply denotes that God employs the min- istry of angels to deliver his people from afflic- tion and danger, and the celebrated passage in Matthew cannot well mean anything more than that the infant children of believers, or, if prefer- able, the least among the disciples of Christ, whom the ministers of the church might be disposed to neglect from their apparent insignificance, are in such estimation elsewhere that the angels do not think it below their dignity to minister to them. (See SATAN.) (Literature: Storr & Flatt's Lehr- buch der Ch. Dogmatik, Sec. xlviii.; Dr. L. Mayer, Scriptural Idea of Angels, in Am. Bib. Repository, xii:356-388; Moses Stuart's Sketches of Angelol- ogy in Robinson's Bibliotheca Sacra, No. 1 ; Mer- heim, Hist. Angelor. Spec.; Schulthens, Engel- welt; etc.) ANGELIC HYMN (in-jël'ík him), the hymn Gloria in exce/sis, so called because the former part of it is composed of the words of the angels when announcing the birth of Jesus (Luke ii:14). In several Oriental liturgies it is used in the earlier part of the service. Before the time of Edward VI it was sung before the collect, epistle and gospel, but was afterward transferred to the closing part of the office, as a Song of thanks- giving after communion. ANGELIC SALUTATION (ān-jël'ík sil'ī-tā'- shūn), the greeting given to the Virgin Mary by the angel when he announced to her that she was to become the mother of Jesus (Luke i:28). (See AVE MARIA.) ANGELS OF THE SEVEN CHURCHES 108 ANGELS OF THE SEVEN CHURCHES (ān'jëls &v the sév'n chârch'ez). If these angels are men, they cannot be less than bishops ruling their several churches. In favor of this we have : (1) Mal. ii:7; iii: I, where the words may be used of men; (2) of the one who was not an officer of thc Synagogue, but one of the congregation called up for the occasion to pronounce the prayer; (3) the settled charac- ter of episcopacy in Asia in the time of Ignatius. Against it are: (1) śyye)\os never used of men in New Testament, except Luke ix:52; Jas. ii:25, of ordinary messengers; (2) the figurative char- acter of the Apoc. generally, and of this part in particular. There are seven angels for seven churches, and from the Saviour walking in a figurative tabernacle each of them receives a letter in figurative form and full of figurative promises and threats (Hastings' Bib. Dict.). ANGER (ān'gér), (usually Heb. º, af; Gr. 6pyń, or-gay'), a strong emotion which is sinful or other- wise according to its object and motive. When ascribed to holy beings it is used figura- tively to denote high displeasure at Sin. Anger, then, is either holy and approvable, or sinful and blamable. Thus, anger, wrath, and fury are ascribed to God; but when ascribed to him they denote no tumultuous passion; but merely his holy aversion to sin, and his just displeasure with sinners, both of which are evidenced in his terrible threatenings or righteous judgments (Ps. vi. I ; vii:II ; Gen. vi :7; Exod. iv:14). Jesus was angry with the hypocritical Pharisees, and with Peter, when he would have dissuaded him from bearing the cross, (Matt. xvi :23). Jacob was justly angry with Laban (Gen. xxxi :36). Moses was angry with the sons of Aaron (Lev. x:I6), and justly chided the officers who, contrary to the commandment, had spared the Midianitish women (Num. xxxi : I4). And so, in every case where sin is the object of anger, it is reasonably and justly dis- played; for a man may be angry and yet not sin (Eph. iv:26). But sinful and unholy anger abounds among men, far more than holy resent- ment against sin. Anger is then a work of the flesh (Gal. v :20); is a fruit of pride (Prov. xiii: Io), and uniformly leads to disgraceful conduct; it prompted Cain to murder; it urged on Simeon and Levi to cruelty and bloodshed; it provoked Saul to seek, and that maliciously, David's de- struction; and it never rose so high, never dis- played itself so awfully, as when it provoked the Jews to crucify Jesus the Son of God. ANGLE (än'g'l) (Heb. Tºm, Åhać-AEaw', Is. xix:8; Hab. i. 15), mediaeval English for “hook” (Job xli:1). It is connected with the idea of piercing. ANGLING (ān'gling). The word (Heb. "Pº, Æ/ha/º-kaw', angle or hook) which the Auth. Vers. renders “angle,’ in Is. xix:8; Hab. i:15, is the same that is rendered “hook' in Job xli:I, 12. In fact, “angling' is described as “fishing with a hook.’ The Scripture contains several allusions to this mode of taking fish. The first of these occurs as early as the time of Job: ‘Canst thou draw out leviathan with an hook; or his tongue (palate, which is usually pierced by the hook) with a cord (line), which thou lettest down 2 Canst thou put a hook into his nose, or bore his jaw through with a thorn ?” (Job xli : 1, 2). This last phrase obviously refers to the thorns which were some- times used as hooks, and which are long after mentioned as the thorns of fishing (Amos iv:2), in the Auth. Vers. ‘fish-hooks.’ Of the various passages relating to this subject, the most remarkable is that which records, as an ANISE important part of the 'burden of Egypt,’ that ‘the fishers also shall mourn; and all they that cast angle (the hook) into the brooks shall lament, and they that spread nets upon the waters shall languish’ (IS. xix:8). In this poetical description of a part of the calamities which were to befall Egypt we are furnished with an account of the various modes of fishing practiced in that country, which is in exact conformity with the scenes de- picted in the old tombs of Egypt. Angling ap- pears to have been regarded chiefly as an amuse- ment, in which the Egyptians of all ranks found much enjoyment. They constructed within their ground spacious sluices or ponds for fish (Is. xix : IO), like the vivaria of the Romans, where they fed them for the table, where they amused them- Selves by angling, and by the dexterous use of the bident. ANIAM (ā'ni-ām), (Heb. Fº, an-ee-awm', sighing of the people), a son of Shemidah the Manassite (I Chron. vii:19). ANIM (ā'nim), (Heb. Fº, aw-meem', foun- tains), a city among the mountains northwest of Judah (Josh. xv.:5O). - ANIMAL (än'í-mal), an organized living body, endowed with sensation. In the Hebrew there are several terms rendered “creature,” “living thing,” “cattle,” etc. “The animals are in Lev. xi divided into four classes: (I) Larger terrestrial animals (v. 2); (2) aquatic animals (vv. 9, IO); (3) birds (v. I3); (4) Smaller animals (vv. 20, 29, 41, sq.); and these classes were again distinguished into clean, i. e., eatable, and into unclean, whose flesh was not to be eaten (Comp. Lev. xi.; and Deut. xiv:I-20). The larger terrestrial animals were, moreover, in the Old Testament separated into cattle, i. e., tame domestic animals, and into beasts of the field or wild beasts (Keil. Bzó. Arch., Mc. and Str. Æð. Cyc.). * * ANISE (än'ís), (Gr. &vnóov, am'ay-thon), which occurs in Matt. xxiii:23, was commonly employed > & º &- *2 Å sº. * t b - º/ºx | < * ~\Z's & gº Sº § | º, v-b Anise. [Amethum graveolens ) ANKLET tº. by the Greek and Roman writers to designate a plant used both medicinally and as an article of diet. In Europe the word has always been used to denote a similar plant, which is familiarly known by the name of Dill, and there is no doubt that in the above passage it should have been so rendered. The common dill is an annual plant, growing wild among the corn in Spain and Portugal; and On the coast of Italy, in Egypt, and about Astra- can. It resembles femmel, but is smaller, has more glaucous leaves, and a less pleasant smell; the fruit or seeds, which are finely divided by capillary Segments, are elliptical, broader, flatter, and sur- rounded with a membraneous disk. They have a warm and aromatic taste, owing to the presence of a pale yellow volatile oil, which itself has a hot taste and a peculiar penetrating odor. - The error in translation here pointed out is not of very great consequence, as both the anise and the dill are umbelliferous plants, which are found cultivated in the south of Europe. The Seeds of both are employed as condiments and carminatives, and have been so from very early times; but the amethon is more especially a genus of Eastern cultivation, since either the dill or another species is reared in all the countries from Syria to India. Jewish authorities state that the seed, the leaves, and the stem of dill were ‘subject to tithe,” which indicates that the herb was eaten, as is indeed the case with the Eastern species in the present day. ANKLET (āfi'klêt), (Heb. tº, e/."Åes). This word does not occur in Scripture, but the Ornament which it denotes is clearly indicated by the tinkling (or jingling) ornaments about the feet,' mentioned in the curious description of fe- male attire which we find in Is. iii. The sculp- tures show that they were worn by men as well as women (Wilkinson's Anc. Egyptians, iii:375). Their present use among the women of Arabia and Egypt sufficiently illustrates the Scriptural allusion. The Koran (xxiv:31) forbids women ‘to make a noise with their feet,” which, says Mr. Lane (Mod. Egyptians, i:221), ‘alludes to the practice of knocking together the anklets, which the Arab women in the time of the prophet used to wear, and which are still worn by many women in Egypt.” Elsewhere (ii:364) the same writer States, ‘Anklets of solid gold and silver were once frequently worn by some ladies, but are more un- common than they formerly were. They are of course very heavy, and, knocking together as the woman walks, make a ringing noise.’ He thinks that in the text referred to (Is. iii:I6) the prophet al- ludes to this kind of anklet, but admits that the description may apply to another kind, of which he thus speaks further on (ii:368) : “Anklets of solid silver are worn by the wives of some of the richer peasants, and of the sheykhs of villages. Small ones of iron are worn by many children. It was also a common custom among the Arabs for girls or young women to wear a string of bells on their feet. I have seen many little girls in Cairo with small round bells attached to their anklets. Perhaps it is to the sound of ornaments of this kind, rather than of the more common anklet, that Isaiah alludes' (see also Chardin, tom. i :133, 148, 194). These belled anklets occur also in India among the several sorts which the dancing-girls employ. It is right to add that the anklets which the present writer has himself seen in use among the Arab women in the country of the Tigris and Euphrates are not usually solid, but hollow, so that, in striking against each other, they emit a much more sharp and sonorous sound than Solid ones. 109 ANNUNCIATION ANNA (än'ná), (Gr.” Avva, an’nah). 1. Wife of Tobit, whose history is contained in the apocryphal book named after him (Tob. i:9, etc.). 2. An aged widow, daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Asher. She had married early, but after seven years her husband died, and during her long widowhood she daily attended the morn- ing and evening services of the Temple. Anna was eighty-four years old when the infant Jesus was brought to the Temple by his mother, and entering as Simeon pronounced his thanksgiving, she also broke forth in praise (Luke ii:36, 37). ANNAS (än’nas), a contracted form of Ananias. 1. A high-priest of the Jews (Luke iii:2; John xviii: 13, 24; Acts iv:6). He is men- tioned in , Luke , as being high-priest along with Caiaphas, his son-in-law. He is called by Josephus, Ananus the son of Seth. In the passages of the New Testament above cited, there- fore, it is apparent that Caiaphas was the only actual and proper high-priest; but Annas, being his father-in-law, and having been formerly him- self high-priest, and being also perhaps his sub- stitute, Sagan, had great influence and authority, and could with great propriety be still termed high-priest along with Caiaphas (John ii:49). The interview of Jesus with Annas is described (John xviii:19-23). It could have only one issue. Jesus was sent as a condemned prisoner for a more formal trial before Caiaphas and the San- hedrin, as described by the Synoptists, but merely implied by St. John. The Sanhedrin at this time met in the headquarters of the Annas faction, so that it may have been when passing through the court from the apartments of Annas to the council chamber that ‘the Lord turned, and looked upon ºr (Luke xxii:61). (Westcott on John xviii: 25). 2. A corruption of Harim (I Esdr. ix:32; Comp. Ezra. x:3I). ANNIS (ān'nis), (A. V. Ananias, R. V. Annias), the eponym of a family that returned with Zerub- babel (1 Esdr. v:16). Omitted in parallel passages of Ezra and Neh. ANNUNCIATION (ān-niān'shi-ā'shūn). . This word, like many others, has obtained a particular signification in theological writings. As a general term, it expresses the communica- tion of important intelligence by chosen messengers of Heaven; but it became, at an early period of Christianity, restricted to the announcement of the blessed Virgin’s miraculous conception. The first formal mention that we meet with of its being commemorated among the festivals of the church, is in the decrees of the Council of Trullo, con- vened at the close of the seventh century. By one of the acts of this assembly it is ordered to be ob- served, though occurring in the solemn season of Lent, like the Sabbath and the Lord's day. Ser- mons attributed to St. Athanasius and other fathers have been referred to as proving the Ob- servance of the day long before the seventh cen- tury; but the best critics consider these discourses as spurious. The effect of the solemn announcement upon the mind of the blessed Mary was doubtless deep and permanent. It is conjectured by some that her hastening to Elizabeth was the consequence of an eager desire to prove at once the reality of the angelic visitation. The pious writers who have hazarded this opinion seem to have forgotten that such a notion represents the Virgin as more wanting in faith than Zacharias himself, and ANNUS that it can scarcely be made to agree with the beautiful and devout sentiment, ‘Behold the hand- maid of the Lord : Be it unto me according to thy word '' The annunciation of the birth of John the Baptist illustrates and confirms much of that re- specting Him of whom he was the forerunner. ANNUS (in'nis) (A. V. Anus), a Levite (1 Esdr. ix:48; Neh. viii:7). (See BANI.) º ANOINTED (à-noint'ed), (Heb. Tºº, maw- shee'akh, anointed), a consecrated P. as king (I Sam. xxiv:6); by way of signal prečminence, Jesus the Messiah. - ANOINTING (à-nointing), (Heb. usually nº. mazv-shakh'; Gr. Xpto, Áhree'o, to rub). The practice of anointing with perfumed oils or Ointments appears to have been very common among the Hebrews as it was among the ancient Egyptians. The practice, as to its essential mean- ing, still remains in the East, but perfumed waters are now far more commonly employed than oils or Ointments. In the Scriptures three kinds of anointing are distinguishable:—I. For consecration and inau- guration ; 2. For guests and strangers; 3. For health and cleanliness. Of these in order. (1) Consecration and Inauguration. The act of anointing appears to have been viewed as emblematical of a particular Sanctification; of a designation to the service of God; or to a holy and sacred use. Hence the anointing of the high-priests (Exod. xxix:29; Lev. iv:3), and even of the sacred vessels of the tabernacle (Exod. xxx:26, etc.); and hence also, probably, the anointing of the king, who, as ‘the Lord's anointed,’ and, under the Hebrew constitution, the viceroy of Jehovah, was undoubtedly invested with a sacred character. The first instance of anointing which the Scrip- tures record is that of Aaron, when he was sol- emnly set apart to the high-priesthood. Being first invested with the rich robes of his high office, the sacred oil was poured in much pro- fusion upon his head. It is from this that the high-priest, as well as the king, is called ‘the Anointed’ (Lev. iv:3; v :I6; vi :I5, 20; Ps. cxxxiii:2). In fact, anointing being the princi- pal ceremony of regal inauguration among the Jews, as crowning is with us, ‘anointed,’ as ap- plied to a king, has much the same significance as ‘crowned.’ It does not, however, appear that this anointing was repeated at every succession, the anointing of the founder of the dynasty be- ing considered efficient for its purpose as long as the regular line of descent was undisturbed ; hence we find no instance of unction as a sign of investiture in the royal authority, except in the case of Saul, the first king of the Jews, and of David, the first of his line; and, subsequently, in those of Solomon and Joash, who both as- cended the throne under circumstances in which there was danger that their right might be forci- bly disputed (I Sam. xix:24; 2 Sam. ii:4; v :I-3; I Chron. xi :I, 2 ; 2 Kings xi : I.2-20; 2 xxiii:I-21). Those who were inducted into the royal office in the kingdom of Israel appear to have been inaugurated with some peculiar cere- monies (2 Kings is :I3). But it is not clear that they were anointed at all ; and the omission (if real) is ascribed by the Jewish writers to the want of the holy anointing oil which could alone be used on such occasions, and which was in the keeping of the priests of the Temple in Jerusalem. The private anointing which was 110 Chron. .ANOINTING performed by the prophets (2 Kings ix:3; Comp. I Sam. x:I) was not understood to convey any abstract right to the crown; but was merely a Symbolical intimation that the person thus anointed should eventually ascend the throne. As the custom of inaugural anointing first oc- curs among the Israelites immediately after they left Egypt, and no example of the same kind is met with previously, it is fair to conclude that the practice and the notions connected with it were acquired in that country. With the Egyp- tians, as with the Jews, the investiture to any Sacred office, as that of king or priest, was con- firmed by this external sign; and as the Jewish lawgiver mentions the ceremony of pouring oil upon the head of the high-priest after he had put on his entire dress, with the mitre and crown, the Egyptians represent the anointing of their priests and kings after they were attired in their full robes, with the cap and crown upon their heads. (2) For Guests and Strangers. The anoint- ing of our Saviour's feet by “the woman who was a sinner’ (Luke vii:38) led to the remark that the host himself had neglected to anoint his head (v :46); whence we learn that this was a mark of attention which those who gave enter- tainments paid to their guests. As this is the only direct mention of the custom, the Jews are supposed by some to have borrowed it from the Romans at a late period, and Wetstein and others have brought a large quantity of Latin erudition to bear on the subject. But the careful reader of the Old Testament knows that the custom was an old one, to which there are various in- direct allusions. The circumstances connected with feasts and entertainments are indeed rarely intimated ; nor would the present direct reference to this custom have transpired but for the re- marks which the act of a woman in anointing the feet of Jesus called forth. Such passages, however, as Ps. xxiii:5; Prov. xxi :7; xxvii:9; Wisd. ii:7, as well as others in which the enjoy- ments of oil and wine are coupled together, may be regarded as containing a similar allusion. It is, therefore, safer to refer the origin of this custom among the Hebrews to their nearer and more ancient neighbors the Egyptians, than to the Romans or the Greeks, who themselves had probably derived it from the same people. Among the Egyptians the antiquity of the custom is evinced by their monuments, which offer in this respect analogies more exact than classical an- tiquity, or modern usage, can produce. With them the custom of anointing was not confined to the appointment of kings and priests to the sacred offices they held. It was the ordinary token of welcome to guests in every party at the house of a friend; and in Egypt, no less than in Judæa, the metaphorical expression “anointed with the oil of gladness” was fully understood, and applied to the ordinary occurrences of life. (3) Health and Cleanliness. It is probable, however, that the Egyptians, as well as the Greeks and Jews, anointed themselves at home, before going abroad, although they expected the observance of this etiquette on the part of their entertainer. That the Jews thus anointed them- selves, not only when paying a visit, but on ordinary occasions, is shown by many passages, especially those which describe the omission of it as a sign of mourning (Deut. xxviii:40; Ruth iii:3; 2 Sam. xiv:2; Dan. x:3; Amos vi :6; Mic. vi :15; Esth. ii:12; Ps. civ :15; Is. lxi :3; Eccles. ix:8; Cant. i :3; iv: Io; also Judith x :3; Sus. I7; Ecclus. xxxix:26; Wisd. ii:7). One of these © ANOINTING passages (PS. civ : I5, ‘oil that maketh the face to shine’) shows very clearly that not only the hair but the skin was anointed. In our northern climates this usage may not strike us as a pleas- ant one, but as the peculiar usages of most nations are found, on strict examination, to be in accordance with the peculiarities of their climate and condition, we may be assured that this Oriental predilection for external unction must have arisen from a belief that it con- tributed materially to health and cleanliness. Oil, by closing up the pores of the skin, is supposed to prevent that too copious transpira- tion which enfeebles the frame; perhaps, too, these Arabians think a glistening skin a beauty. When the intense heat comes in, they always anoint their bodies with oil. (4) Anointing the Sick. The Orientals are indeed strongly persuaded of the sanative prop- erties of oil; and it was under this impression that the Jews anointed the sick, and applied oil to wounds (Ps. cix : 18; Is. i :6; Mark vi :13; xxvi :18; Luke x:34; James v :I4). Anointing was used in Sundry disorders, as well as to pro- mote the general health of the body. It was hence, as a salutary and approved medicament, that the seventy disciples were directed to ‘anoint the sick’ (Mark vi : I.3); and hence also the sick man is directed by St. James to send for the elders of the church, who were ‘to pray for him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord.” The Talmudical citation of Lightfoot on Matt. vi:I6, shows that the later Jews connected charms and superstitious mutterings with such anoint- ings, and he is therefore probably right in un- derstanding this text to mean—‘It is customary for the unbelieving Jews to use anointing of the sick joined with a magical and enchanting mut- tering ; but how infinitely better is it to join the pious prayers of the elders of the church to the anointing of the sick.’ (5) Anointing the Dead The practice of anointing the bodies of the dead is intimated in Mark xiv: I, and Luke xxiii:56. This ceremony was performed after the body was washed, and was designed to check the progress of corruption (Num. v :22; Jer. viii:22). Figuratite. The anointing or pouring of sacred oil on the heads of persons set apart to these offices implied the gift of those qualifica- tions from God which could alone fit them for their work; and it was typical of the communi- cation of the gift of the Holy Ghost to Christ, as the prophet, priest, and king of his church. Hence persons set apart to these offices were termed the Lord's anointed; and especially so, because Jesus, of whom they were lively types, was the Lord’s anointed, or his Christ. This anointing of Jesus, by which he became Christ, or the anointed one, implied his call and separation to the office of Mediator, and the communication of those gifts of the Spirit beyond measure, which qualified him to be the prophet, priest, and king of his people, as well as the recipient of those ineffable communications of love which the Spirit of God, in his office as the Comforter, im- parts to him (I Sam. ii:35; Ps. lxxxiv:9; Dan. ix:24). The anointing of Messiah was predicted (Ps. xlv. :7). He was anointed with the oil of gladness above his fellows; that is, he was called to high offices, and more abundantly filled with the Holy Spirit than any of his people; “for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him” (John iii:34). The unction with which God anointed his Son, and with which he yet anoints all his chosen people, and of which the anointing oil is 111 ANT typical, is the influence of the Holy Spirit. The grace of the Spirit shed abroad in them is that unction from the Holy One, by which they know all things (I John ii:20, 27). By this grace they are separated to his service (Rom. i :1); endowed with all graces and comforts, and blessed with all spiritual activity and prosperity in the service of God (2 Cor. i :21; Ps. xxiii:5; xcii:Io). (Brown, Bib. Dict.) ANSWER (#n'sér), (Heb. Tº, aw-maw', to testify; Gr. dirokplvopat, aff-ok-ree' mom-ahee, to re- Spond), has in Scripture several meanings. I. To reply to a question, or call (John xix:9). 2. To make a defense, or apology before a judge (2 Tim. iv:16). 3. To respond when speaking by turns (Deut. xxvii:15). 4. To begin to Speak (Dan. ii:26). 5. To witness for (Gen. xxx:33). To obey a call (Is. lxv : I.2). 7. To grant what is prayed for (Ps. xxvii:7). 8. To account for (Job ix:3; x1:2). 9. To render a suitable punishment (Ezek. xiv:7). IO. To suit, correspond to, to be analogous (Prov. xxvii:19; Gal. iv:23). ANSWERABLE (än'sér-à-b’1), correspondent to ; meet for (Exod. xxxviii: 18; Matt. iii: 8). The answer of peace, from a city at- tacked in war (Deut. xx:II), implied a desire to come to terms of peace. The answer of peace from God (Gen. xii:I6), implies a gracious hearing to our prayers. The answer of a good conscience toward God, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, implies the testimony of a con- science delivered from guilt and fear, through faith in the blood of the risen Saviour. A fool is to be answered according to his folly, and yet not according to it (Prov. xxvi;4, 5); that is, his folly ought to be exposed ; but not in a spirit and manner chargeable with the folly which we rebuke in him. ANT (änt), (Heb. Tºpi, 7tem-aw-law', creeping, fifth order of insects; Æyzzzezzoffera, Linn.; occurs Prov. vi:6; xxx:25). Ants have only latterly be- come the subjects of accurate observation. (1) The investigations of Latreille, Gould, Geer, Huber, Kirby, Spence, Moggridge, Bates, Belt and Sir John Lubbock, have dissipated many erroneous notions respecting them, and revealing much interesting information concerning their domestic polity, language, migrations, affections, passions, virtues, wars, diversions, etc. The fol- lowing facts are selected as relevant to Scriptural illustration: Ants dwell together in societies; and although they have no 'guide, overseer, or ruler, yet they have all one soul, and are animated by one object—their own welfare, and the wel- fare of each other. Each individual strenuously pursues his own peculiar duties; and regards (except in the case of females), and is regarded by, every other member of the republic with equal respect and affection. They devote the utmost attention to their young. The egg is cleaned and licked, and gradually expands under this treatment, till the worm is hatched, which is then tended and fed with the most affectionate care. They continue their assiduity to the pupa, or chrysalis, which is the third transformation. They heap up the pupae, which greatly resemble so many grains of wheat, or rather rice, by hun- dreds in their spacious lodges, watch them in an attitude of defense, carry them out to enjoy the radiance of the sun, and remove them to different situations in the nest, according to the required degree of temperature; open the pupa, and at the precise moment of the transformation, disen- thral the new-born insect of its habiliments. ANT (2) The most prevalent and inexcusable error, however, respecting ants, has been the belief that they hoard up grains of corn, chiefly wheat, for their supply during winter, having first bitten out the germ to prevent it from growing in their nests. The learned Bochart has collected an im- mense array of the most eminent authors and naturalists of antiquity (Jewish, Greek, Roman, and Arabian), who all gravely propound this assertion. Even Solomon himself, whose re- nowned attainments in natural history included the knowledge of insects (I Kings iv:33), has been inconsiderately supposed to have Sanctioned the same opinion in the two passages in his writ- ings which refer to the ant. The mistake has no doubt arisen from the great similarity, both in shape, size, and color, before mentioned, of the pupa or chrysalis of the ant to a grain of corn, and from the ants being observed to carry them about, and to open the cuticle to let out the in- closed insect. Leeuwenhoeck was the first who distinguished, with precision, the precise forms which the ant assumes in the several stages of its development, from the egg to the larva, from the larva to the pupa, and thence to the perfect insect. Swammerdam renewed the inquiry, and discovered the encasement of all parts of the future ant, and showed that it appeared in such different forms only from the nature of its en- velopes, each of which, at its proper period, is cast off. It is now also ascertained beyond a doubt that no European ants, hitherto properly examined, feed on corn or wheat or any other kind of grain. Bonnet found that however long they had been kept without food, they would not touch wheat. Nor do they attack the roots or stems of wheat, nor any other vegetable mat- ter. Nor has any species of ant been yet found with food of any kind laid up in its nest. The truth is that ants are chiefly carnivorous, preying indiscriminately on all the soft parts of other insects, and especially the viscera; also upon worms, whether dead or alive, and small birds or animals. (3) It is highly probable that the exotic ants subsist by similar means. The account given us of the termites, or ants, inhabiting the hottest cli- mates, clearly shows that they are carnivorous. Bosman, in his description of Guinea, says that they will devour a sheep in one night, and that a fowl is amusement to them only for an hour. In these situations living animals often become their victims. Man himself, as related by Pre- vost in his Histoire General des Voyages, is even subject to the attacks of ants (Encyclopedia Britannica, 9th Ed. Art. ‘Ant'). (4) With regard to Solomon's words respecting the ant, Kirby and Spence are of opinion ‘that if they are properly considered it will be found that the interpretation which seems to favor the an- cient error respecting ants has been fathered upon them rather than fairly deduced from them. He does not affirm that the ant, which he proposes to the sluggard as an example, laid up in her magazine stores of grain against winter, but that, with considerable prudence and foresight, she makes use of proper seasons to collect a sup- ply of provisions sufficient for her purposes. There is not a word in them implying that she stores up grain or other provisions, nor has the modern study of the insect ever discovered any such habit. She prepares her bread and gathers her food (namely, such food as is suited to her) in summer and harvest (that is, when it is most plentiful), and thus shows her wisdom and prudence by using the advantages offered to her.’ A brief examination of the passages (Prov. vi.;6; 112 ANTEDILUVIANS xxx:25) with reference to their context will serve to confirm these observations. In the pre- ceding verses, Solomon has cautioned his readers against incurring dangerous responsibilities on behalf of another. Should this have inadvert- ently been done, he advises the surety to give no sleep to his eyes, nor slumber to his eyelids, till he has delivered himself from his rash engage- ment. He then adds, “Go to the ant, thou slug- gard, consider her ways, and be wise: which having no guide, Overseer, or ruler, provideth her meat in the summer, and gathereth her food in the harvest.’ The sense is thus ably given by Dr. Hammond : “As in the matter just men- tioned the least delay is pernicious, so in all things else sluggishness, or negligence of those things which concern us most nearly, should ever be avoided; and if we need any instructor on this head, we may go to one of the least and meanest of creatures.’ The moral, then, intended in Solomon's allusion to the ant, is simply to avail one’s self of the favorable time without delay. The description which follows, of the sluggard sleeping, evidently during the day, the proper season of activity, and of the conse- quences of his vice, agrees with this interpreta- tion. The other passage (xxx:25), probably by a different writer, also considers the ant simply as the symbol of diligence. (5) On the other hand the well-known entomolo- gist, the Rev. F. W. Hope, in a paper “On Some Doubts Respecting the Economy of Ants” (Mass. Entom. Soc., ii:2II), is of the opinion that there are species of exotic ants which store up food for winter consumption. And so it is asserted that there are certain facts in regard to the ants of the Holy Land which settle this controversy in favor of the rigid accu- racy of the author of the Proverbs. They are: (I) The ants of these countries lay up vast stores of grain in their nests. (2) To facilitate this act of providence they place their nests as near as possible to the places where grain is thrashed or stored. (3) They certainly eat this grain during the winter season. (4) They encourage certain insects which secrete sweet juices to consort with them, and collect and store their eggs with their Own, that they may have them at hand for future §. yºn they shall have hatched. (Barnes Bib. (VC. J. ANTEDILUVIANS (än'té-di-lii'ví-ans), the name given collectively to the people who lived before the Deluge. The interval from the Creation to that event is not less, even according to the Hebrew text, than 1657 years, being not more than 691 years shorter than that between the Deluge and the birth of Christ, and only 167 years less than from the birth of Christ to the present time, and equal to about two-sevenths of the whole period from the Crea- tion. By the Samaritan and Septuagint texts (as adjusted by Hales) a much greater duration is assigned to the antediluvian period—namely, 2256 years, which nearly equals the Hebrew inter- val from the Deluge to the birth of Christ, and much exceeds the interval from the birth of Christ to the present time. (See CHRONOLOGY.) All our authentic information prior to the won- derful discoveries during the past few years made in Babylonia and Egypt, respecting this long and interesting period was contained in 49 verses of Genesis (iv :16 to vi :8), more than half of which are occupied with a list of names and ages, in- valuable for chronology, but conveying no par- ticulars regarding the primeval state of man. In a most remarkable manner the testimony of the Old Testament and that of the monuments agree, ANTEDILUVIANS . It is very evident from these accounts that so- ciety did not begin afresh after the Deluge; but that, through Noah and his sons, the new families . of men were in a condition to inherit, and did inherit, such Sciences and arts as existed before the Flood. This enables us to understand how settled and civilized communities were established, and large and magnificent works undertaken, within a few centuries after the Deluge. After that event, Nimrod, although a hunter (Gen. x:9), was not a savage, and did not belong to hunting tribes of men. (1) Savagism and Degeneracy. In fact, sav- agism is not discoverable before the Confusion of Tongues, and was in all likelihood a degeneracy from a state of cultivation eventually produced in particular communities by that great social con- vulsion. At least that a degree of cultivation was the primitive condition of man, from which sav- agism in particular quarters was a degeneracy, and that he has not, as too generally has been supposed, worked himself up from an original Savage state to his present position, has been pow- erfully argued by Dr. Philip Lindsley (A.m. Bib. Repos. iv:277–298; vi :I-27), and is strongly cor- roborated by the conclusions of modern ethno- graphical research ; from which we learn that, while it is easy for men to degenerate into sav- ages, no example has been found of Savages rising into civilization but by an impulse from without, administered by a more civilized people; and that, even with such impulse, the zyżs 27teriza of estab- lished habits is with difficulty overcome. The aboriginal traditions of all civilized nations de- scribe them as receiving their civilization from without—generally through the instrumentality of foreign colonists; and history affords no example of a case parallel to that which must have occurred if the primitive races of men, being originally sav- age, had civilized themselves. The scriptural account clearly shows (see ADAM) that the father of men was something more than ‘the noble savage,’ or rather the grown- up infant, which some have represented him. He was an instructed man ;-and the immediate de- scendants of a man so instructed could not be an ignorant or uncultivated people. It is not neces- sary indeed to suppose that they possessed at first more cultivation than they required ; and for a good while they did not stand in need of that which results from, or is connected with, the set- tlement of men in organized communities. They probably had this before the Deluge, and at first were possessed of whatever knowledge or civiliza- tion their agricultural and pastoral pursuits re- quired. Such were their pursuits from the first; for it is remarkable that of the strictly Savage or hunting condition of life there is not the slightest trace before the Deluge. Astronomy, architecture, writing, music, IIIailufactures, poetry, metallurgy, mineralogy, zoölogy, and kindred sciences and arts were all known, some of them to quite a degree, to these antediluvians. (2) Patriarchal Government. It is impossi- ble to speak with any decision respecting the form or forms of government which prevailed before the Deluge. The slight intimations to be found on the subject seem to favor the notion that the particular governments were patriarchal, sub- ject to a general theocratical control—God him- self manifestly interfering to uphold the good and check the wicked. The right of property was recognized, for Abel and Jabal possessed flocks, and Cain built a city. As ordinances of religion sacrifices certainly existed (Gen. iv:4), and Some think that the Sabbath was observed; while some interpret the words, “Then men began to call upon 113 ANTELOPE # the name of the Lord’ (Gen. iv:26), to signify that public worship then began to be practiced. From Noah's familiarity with the distinction of clean and unclean beasts (Gen. vii:2), it would Seem that the Levitical rules on this subject were by no means new when laid down in the code of Moses. (3) Marriage. Marriage, and all the relations Springing from it, existed from the beginning (Gen. ii:23-25); and although polygamy was known among the antediluvians (Gen. iv:19), it was most probably unlawful; for it must have been obvious that, if more than one wife had been necessary for a man, the Lord would not have confined the first man to one woman. The marriage of the sons of Seth with the daughters of Cain appears to have been prohibited, since the consequence of it was that universal depravity in the family of Seth so forcibly expressed in this short passage, ‘A // flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth’ (Gen. vi. 12). This sin, described Orientally as an intermarriage of ‘the Sons of God' with ‘the daughters of men’ (Gen. vi:2), appears to have been in its results one of the grand causes of the Deluge; for if the family of Seth had remained pure and obedient to God, he would doubtless have spared the world for their sake, as he would have spared Sodom and Gomorrah had ten righteous men been found there, and as he would have spared his own people, the Jews, had they not corrupted them- selves by intermarriages with the heathen. Light is thrown upon the above statement made by Kitto, in Fresh Light from the Ancient Monuments, by Prof. Sayce, pp. 26, 27. He says: “Like cherub, Adam also was a Babylonian word. It has the general sense of ‘man,’ and is used in this sense both in Hebrew and in Assy- rian. But, as in Hebrew it has come to be the proper name of the first man, so, too, in the old Babylonian legends, the ‘Adamites’ were ‘the white race' of Semitic descent, who stood in marked contrast to ‘the black heads' or Accadians of primitive Babylonia. Originally, however, it was this dark race itself that claimed to have been ‘the men' whom the god Merodach created ; and it was not until after the Semitic conquest of Chaldea that the children of Adamu or Adam were supposed to denote the white Semitic pop- ulation. Hence it is that the dark race contin- ued to the last to be called the Adamatu or ‘red- skins,” which a popular etymology connected with Adamu ‘man.’ Sir H. Rawlinson has suggested a parallel between the dark and white races of Babylonia and the ‘sons of God’ and ‘dapighters of men' of Genesis. Adam, we are told, was ‘the son of God’ (Luke iii:38). But nothing similar to what we read in the sixth chapter of Genesis has as yet been met with among the cuneiform records, and though these speak of giant heroes, like Ner and Etanna, who lived be- fore the Flood, we know nothing as yet as to their parentage.” ANTELOPE (an'té-lôp), (Heb. Yºº, yoch'mur). Although this word does not occur in our version of the Scriptures, yet there can be no doubt that in the Hebrew text several ruminants to which it is applicable are indicated under different denominations. In scientific nomenclature, the term antelope, at first applied to a single species, has gradually become generical, and is now the designation of a tribe, or even of a family of genera, con- taining a great many species. According to pres: ent usage, it embraces some species that are of considerable size, so as to be invariably regarded ANTELOPE by the natives as having some affinity to cattle, and others delicate and rather small, that may be compared with young deer, to which, in truth, they bear a general resemblance. The antelopes, considered as a family, may be distinguished from all others by their uniting the light and graceful forms of deer with the perma- *-*. :...I Nubian Oryx. nent horns of goats, excepting that in general their horns are round, annulated, and marked with striae, slender, and variously inflected, according to the subdivision or group they belong to. They have usually large, soft, and beautiful eyes, tear- pits beneath them, and round tails. They are often provided with hair tufts or brushes to pro- tect the knees from injury. Antelopes are elegantly formed, active, restless, timid, shy, and astonishingly swift, running with vast bounds, and springing or leaping with sur- prising elasticity; they frequently stop for a mo- ment in the midst of their course to gaze at their pursuers, and then resume their flight. There are no less than 29 species of antelopes in all. Among the first of the subordinate groups sº- 'º º Sºº º & tº: . . º. - Bºrº's º - § §§§ §§ §§ § §§ º § § W §§ § § Nº wº º V wn ſº l Bºš º fºllº f - º ºnvº - ſº *** § ºfºº |ſº §§ º ºzº * † tº º ſº : N * º & § …nº Dishon or Pygarg. is the subgenus oryx, consisting of five or six species, whereof we have to notice the following: The Leucory r, as the name implies, is white, ‘Raving a black mark down the nose, black cheeks and jowl, the legs from the elbow and heel 114 ANTELOPE to the pastern joints black, and the lower half of the thighs usually, and often the lower flank, bright rufous; hence the epithet hommar (rubere, to redden). Wild O4 (Deut. xiv:5; Is. li:20), (Oryx tao, the Nubian Oryx, Ham. Smith), is either a species or a distinct variety of leucoryx. Orya addaw may have been known to the Hebrews by the name of dishon. It is three feet seven inches at the shoulder, has the same Structure as the others, but is somewhat higher at the croup ; it has a coarse beard under the gullet, a black scalp and forehead, divided from the eyes and nose by a white bar on each side, passing along the brows and down the face to the cheek, and connected with one another between the eyes. The general color of the fur is white, with the head, neck and shoulders more or less liver-color gray; but what distinguishes it most from the others are the horns, which in structure and length assimilate with those of the other spe- cies, but in shape assumile the spiral flexures of the Indian antelope. The animal is figured on Egyptian monuments, and may be the pygarg or dishon, uniting the characters of a white rump N \ *M) 7 || ºf Sºº- Dorcas. with strepsicerotine horns, and even those which Dr. Shaw ascribes to his ‘lid mee.’ We have now to notice the second group of antilopidae, classified under the subgenus gazella, whereof at least one species, but more probably four or five, still inhabit the uplands and deserts of Egypt, Arabia, and the eastern and southern borders of Palestine. They are named in the Greek dorcas, and in the Hebrew sebi, both Leſ IIIs beitſg applicable to the whole group ; and the Hebrew name is by distant nations now used for allied species which are unknown in Arabia and Syria. The biblical species clearly included in the section gazella are Antilope dorcas, Linn., Ariel or A. Arabica, Licht. ; more remotely, A. kevella, A. corinna, auctor. ; and for Eastern Arabia, A. cora, Ham. Smith ; while A. subgut- turosa, Guldenst, may be claimed for the north- eastern countries, where the species exists both in Asia Minor and Armenia, and therefore on the borders of Syria. One or other of these, according to geographical localities, occurs in the Authorized Version under the name of roe, in Deut. xii:I5, 22; xiv:5; xv :22; 1 Kings iv:23; I Chron. xii:8; 2 Sam. ii: 18; Prov, vi :5; Is. xiii:14; or dorcas, Eccles. xxvii:20. ANTHEDON The Jachmur, yoch-mur. (I Kings iv:23) is not, as in our Authorized Version, “the fallow- deer,' but the Orya leucoryx of the moderns, the true Oryx of the ancients, and of Niebuhr, who quotes R. Jona, and points out the Chaldaic jachmura, and Persian kutzkohi (probably a mistake for maskandos), and describes it as a great goat. The eastern Arabs still use the name jazmur. .C. H. S. Jachmur. ANTHEDON (an-the'don), a city of Palestine, lying on the Mediterranean, about twenty furlongs south of Gaza. Herod the Great called it Agrip- pias, in honor of Agrippa (Calmet). ANTHROPOMORPHISM (än'thrö-pô-mór'- fiz'm), (Gr. Šv6poros, anth'ro-fos, man; and uoppij, Žitor-ſay", form); a term in theology used to denote that figure whereby words derived from human objects are employed to express something which relates to the Deity. As a finite being can have no intuitive knowledge of an infinite, so no language of rational creatures can fully express the nature of God and render it comprehensible. All further knowledge of God must be com- municated by words used to express ourselves intelligibly concerning human and other terrestrial objects. Such words and phrases have their foun- dation in a resemblance which, according to our conceptions, exists between the Deity and man- kind. This resemblance, when essential, is such as regards the pure perfections of our minds, that is, such as are unaccompanied with any imperfec- tion, as reason, liberty, power, life, wisdom, and goodness. Those expressions afford an analogical knowledge, from whence arise analogical phrases, which are absolutely necessary whenever we speak of God, and would acquire or communicate some knowledge of his perfections. Such analogical expressions must, however, be understood properly, although they give no im- mediate and intuitive, but only a symbolical knowl- edge of the Deity. In this sense it is that in Gen. ii:I6; iii:9; vi :I3; xii:I ; xv ; xvii; xviii.; Exod. iii:4, 5—speech is immediately ascribed to the Deity while addressing Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses. The Deity is also in this sense said to speak mediately to man, viz. by his messengers. But although the speech here ascribed to the Deity is to be understood in a different manner from the language of men, it is not to be understood in such instances figuratively, or in the anthropomorphitic sense, but really and properly. “Either,’ says St. Augustine, ‘immutable truth speaks to man in- 115 ANTHROPOMORPHISM effably of itself to the minds of rational creatures, or Speaks by a mutable creature, either by spirit- ual images to our minds, or by corporeal voices to the bodily senses.’ But God speaks not properly, but anthropopathically, when his decrees and their execution are described in human methods, or in the form of dialogues and conversations, as in the phrase (Gen. i. 3) ‘Let there be light, and there was light.’ ‘This,’ says Maimonides, ‘is to be understood of the will, not the speech;’ and, in like manner, St. Augustine, “This was performed by the intellectual and eternal, not by the audible and temporal word’ (City of God, ch. vii.). Anthropomorphitic phrases, generally consid- ered, are such as ascribe to the Deity mixed per- fections and human imperfections. (1) Human Actions. A rational being, who receives impressions through the senses, can form conceptions of the Deity only by a consideration of his own powers and properties. Anthropomor- phitic modes of thought are therefore unavoidable in the religion of mankind; and although they can furnish no other than corporeal or sensible repre- sentations of the Deity, they are nevertheless true and just when we guard against transferring to God qualities pertaining to the human senses. It is, for instance, a proper expression to assert that God knows all things; it is improper, that is, tropical or anthropomorphitic, to say that He sees all things. Anthropomorphism is thus a species of accommodation, inasmuch as by these representa- tions the Deity as it were lowers himself to the comprehension of men. And it is altogether con- Sonant to his wisdom and benevolence in com- municating divine revelations to address mankind in language adapted to their inferior capacities. Therefore it is that this figure is called by the Fathers Divine Economy (Theodoret, Dialog. 2) and Condescension (Gregory of Nazianzus, Orat. I ). ‘Divine affections,’ says Tertullian, “are ascribed to the Deity by means of figures borrowed from the human form, not as if he were endued with corporeal qualities: when eyes are ascribed to him, , it is denoted that he sees (viz. knows) all things; when ears, that he hears all things; the speech denotes the will ; nostrils, the perception of prayer; hands, creation; arms, power; feet, immensity; for he has no mem- bers, and performs no office for which they are required, but executes all things by the sole act of his will. How can he require eyes, who is light itself? or feet, who is omnipresent? How can he require hands, who is the silent creator of all things? or a tongue, to whom to think is to command. Those members are necessary to men, but not to God, inasmuch as the counsel of men would be inefficacious unless his thoughts put his members in motion —but not to God, whose opera- tions follow his will without effort.’ (2) Human Affections. In the same manner human affections, as grief, repentance, anger, re- venge, jealousy, etc., are ascribed to the Deity. These affections are not, properly speaking, in the mind of God, who is infinitely happy and immut- able, but are ascribed to him anthropopathically by way of similitude. For instance, when God for- gives the penitent what he had denounced against the wicked who continue in sin, he is said to act as men do in similar cases. Thus St. Augus- time observes, “By repentance is signified a change of events. For as a man when he repents be- wails the crime which he had committed, so, when God alters anything unexpectedly, that is, beyond man's expectation, he, figuratively, is said to have repented of the punishment when man repents of ANTHROPOPATHISM the sin” (Ps. cx). Thus, also, when ignorance is ascribed to the Deity (Gen. iv:9), the same Father remarks, ‘He inquires, not as if really ignorant, but as a judge interrogates a prisoner;' and Luther, in reference to the passage (Ps. ii:4) where laughter is ascribed to the Deity, thus ob- serves, ‘Not that God laughed as men do, but to point out the absurdity of men's undertaking im- possibilities; meaning, that the matter was as ridiculous as it would be for a fool with a long stick to attempt to thrust the sun out of the firma- ment, and to rejoice as if he had performed his task to admiration' (Works, ii. Ep. ps. 37). (3) Anthropomorphitic Phrases. Anthro- pomorphitic phrases are found throughout the whole Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. In the infancy of mankind conceptions derived from the human senses were universal, and the Deity is constantly spoken of in anthropomorphitic phrases. We find these ideas more pure after the times of Moses, who forbade the making of any representation of the Deity (see DECALOGUE). The conceptions of men became still less sensuous in the times of the Prophets, who propounded still clearer notions of the sublime perfections of the Deity. But even under the Christian dispen- sation anthropomorphitic modes of expression were unavoidable; for although Christianity im- parts purer and more spiritual sentiments than the former revelations, the inspired teachers could not express themselves without the aid of images derived from human objects, if they would make their communications in regard to divine things intelligible to their hearers, who were habituated to the anthropomorphitic expressions of the Old Testament. Such a mode of teaching was there- fore indispensable in itself, and tended to promote the instruction and enlightenment of mankind; ‘the attention was more easily kept up among the sensuous hearers and readers of the sayings and writings of Jesus and his apostles; the truths, fig- uratively presented, made a deeper impression on the mind; it introduced variety into the discourse; the affections were moved, and religious instruc- tion the more readily communicated' (see Seiler's Biblical Hermeneutics, part i, sec. 2, Sec. 54-62, London, 1835, and Glass's Philologia º ANTHROPOPATHISMI (§n'th rººf 'à-thiz’m), (Gr. &vôpwrotra 6eta, with human feelings), the attributing of human emotions, such as anger, grief, joy, etc., to God. Traces of this are found in Scripture (Gen. vi;6; viii:21; xi:5, 6, and many other passages). If we understand such expres: sions as imperfect approximating expressions of eternal truth, then they become the means of a better knowledge of God. (See ANTHROPOMOR- PHISM.) ANTICHRIST (än'ti-krist), (Gr. divrlypiatos, an- fee' Ahris-fos, against Christ; some, instead of Christ), a word used only by the apostle John (Epistles I and 2). (1) Meaning. The meaning attached to this word has been greatly modified by the controver- sies of various churches and sects. In Scripture, however, and the early Christian writers, it has an application sufficiently distinct from partial in- terpretations. Antichrist, according to St. John, is the ruling spirit of error, the enemy of the truth of the Gospel as it is displayed in the divinity and holiness of Christ (I John ii: 18, 22; iv:3; 2 John 7). This is the primary meaning of the term, and we are led at once to consider it as the proper title of Satan. (2) Many Antichrists. But the same apostle speaks of the existence of many antichrists; 116 ANTILEGOMENA whence we learn that it is applicable to any being who opposes Christ in the high places of spiritual wickedness. St. Paul speaks of ‘the man of sin’ as not yet revealed (I Tim. iv:I), and it is sup- posed by most interpreters that Antichrist is to be understood as the object alluded to by the apostle; but if we attend strictly to his words, the anti- christ of whom he spoke must have been then, and at the time when he was writing, “opposing and exalting himself above all that is called God,' al- though awaiting some distant season for the Open display of his power and wickedness. ..St. Paul's picture (2 Thess. ii:3, 4) seemed, so like Nero that many of the ancients thought that prince was antichrist. (3) Views of Early Writers. Justin Martyr, in his Dialogue with Trypho, describes him as ex- ercising his wrath against Christians with espe- cial fury in the period immediately preceding the Second Advent. Cyril of Jerusalem represents him as reigning three years and six months pre- paratory to the entire destruction of his dominion at the second coming of Christ. The same father says that he will deceive both Jews and Gentiles; the former by representing himself as the Mes- siah; the latter, by his magical arts and incanta- tions. St. Chrysostom observes, on the passage in the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, that antichrist will not lead men to idolatry, but will rather abolish the worship of false gods, as well as that of the true God, commanding the world to worship himself alone as the only Deity. These views of the early writers, as well as the expressions of Scripture, have been perverted by many men of warm imaginations to the worst purposes of controversy. The effects of general corruption have often been charged upon offices and individuals; and the appellation of anti- christ as readily applied to them as if it had actually been coupled in Scripture with their names and titles. ANTILEGOMENA (än'ti-lè-göm'ên-a), (Gr. &vrixeyópeva, an -tee-leg-ozz'em - a, Contradicted or disputed), an epithet applied by the early Christian writers to denote those books of the New Testament which, although known to all the ecclesiastical writers, and sometimes publicly read in the churches, were not for a considerable time admitted to be genuine, or received into the canon of Scripture. These books are so denom- inated in contradistinction to the Homologou- mena, or universally acknowledged writings. The following is a catalogue of the Antilegomena: The Second Epistle of St. Peler, the Epistle of St. James; the Epistle of St. Jude; the Second and Third Epistles of St. John; the Apocalypse, or Revelation of St. John; the Epistle to the Hebrews. The earliest notice which we have of this distinction is that contained in the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius, the learned bishop of Caesarea, who flourished A. D. 270–340. He seems to have formed a triple, or, as it ap- pears to some, a quadruple division of the books of the New Testament, terming them—I, the homologoumena (received) ; 2, the antilegomena (controverted); 3, the notha (spurious); and, 4, those which he calls the utterly spurious, as being not only spurious in the same sense as the former, but also absurd or impious. Among the spurious he reckons the Acts of Paul, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Revelation of Peter, the Epistle of Barnabas, and the Instructions of the Apostles. He speaks doubtfully as to the class to which the Apocalypse belongs, for he himself includes it among the spurious; he then observes that some ANTI-LIBANUS reject it, while others reckon it among the ac- knowledged writings (homologoumena). Among the Spurious writings he also enumerates the Gospel according to the Hebrews. He adds, at the same time, that all these may be classed among the antilegomena. His account is consequently confused, not to say contradictory. Among the utterly spurious he reckons such books as the heretics brought forward under pretense of their being genuine productions of the apostles, such as the so-called Gospels of Peter, Thomas, and Matthias, and the Acts of Andrew, John, and the other apostles. These he distinguishes from the antilegomena, as being works which not one of the ancient ecclesiastical writers thought worthy of being cited. Their style he considers so remote from that of the apostles, and their contents so much at variance with the genuine doctrines of Scripture, as to show them to have been the inventions of heretics, and not worthy of a place even among the spurious writings. jº gº % sº º º | % § | § } % | º t § § §§ * Ž sº º º |; - %323.2 - : % º # i | º º % º% %2% 117 ANTIOCH of four townships or quarters, each surrounded by a separate wall, and all four by a common wall. The first was built by Seleucus Nicator, who peo- pled it with inhabitants from Antigonia; the sec- ond by the settlers belonging to the first quarter; the third by Seleucus Callinicus; and the fourth by Antiochus Epiphanes (Strabo, xvi;2; iii:354). It was the metropolis of Syria (Antiochiam, Syria caput. Tac. Hist. ii:79), the residence of the Sy- rian kings (the Seleucidae) (IMacc. iii:37; vii:2), and afterwards became the capital of the Roman provinces in Asia. It ranked third, after Rome and Alexandria, among the cities of the empire (Joseph., ZXe AEe//, /zed. iii:2, sec. 4), and was little inferior in size and splendor to the latter, or to Seleucia (Strabo, xvi;2; vol. iii, p. 355, ed. Tauch.). In the immediate neighborhood in a luxuriant grove was the suburb Daphne, with its cel- ebrated sanctuary of Apollo (2 Macc. iv:33); whence the city was sometimes called “Antioch Antioch. (See the articles on the several epistles and the KEVELATION.) W. W. ANTI-LIBANUS (an't-lib'a-nās). See LEB- ANON. ANTIOCH (an'ti-Ök), (Gr. 'Avrióxeia, an-tee-okh', 2-a). Two places of this name are mentioned in the New Testament. - (1) In Syria. A city on the banks of the Orontes, 300 miles north of Jerusalem, and about 30 from the Mediterranean. It was situated in the province of Seleucis, called Tetrapolis (Terpd- ToMs), from Containing the four cities, Anti- och, Seleucia, Apamea, and Laodicea; of which the first was named after Antiochus, the father of the founder; the second after himself; the third after his wife Apamea, and the fourth in honor of his mother. The appellation Tetrapolis was given also to Antioch, because it consisted by Daphne.” A multitude of Jews resided in it. Selcucus Nicator granted them the rights of citi- zenship, and placed them on a perfect equality with the other inhabitants (Joseph. Antiq. xii:3, sec. 1). These privileges were continued to them by Ves- pasian and Titus—an instance (Josephus remarks) of the equity and generosity of the Romans, who, in opposition to the wishes of the Alexandrians and Antiocheans, protected the Jews, notwith- Standing the provocations they had received from them in their wars. They were also allowed to have an Archon or Ethnarch of their own (Joseph. De Bell. Jud. vii:3). Antioch is called libera by Pliny (Hist. Nat., v. 18), having obtained from Pompey the privilege of being governed by its own laws. This fact is commemorated on a coin bearing the inscription, ANTIOXEQN MHTPOIIOA. ATTONOMOT, Antiocheon Metropo/. Autonomou, a Coin of the independent metropolis of Antioch. ANTIOCH The Christian faith was introduced at an early period into Antioch, and with great success (Acts xi: IQ, 21, 24). The name “Christians' was here first applied to its professors (Acts xi:26), and the city became the see of the four chief bishops, who were called Patriarchs. Antioch soon be- came a central point for the diffusion of Chris- tianity among the Gentiles, and maintained for several centuries a high rank in the Christian world. A controversy which arose between cer- tain Jewish believers from Jerusalem and the Gen- tile Converts at Antioch respecting the permanent Obligation of the rite of circumcision was the Occasion of the first apostolic council or conven- tion (Acts xv). Antioch was the scene of the early labors of the apostle Paul, and the place whence he set forth on his first missionary labors (Acts xi:26; xiii:2). Ignatius was the second & Q, *: exº, l]  * Jé § | ; §: sº §§ l Jº" § §º its sº § N §: ^S S$2. ºš º s Si $$. º .W \\ § \ ºš mº :* |||ſtall. ; *::: iſſiº all! W. W. W. Wºº. \\\\\\ º Rºlliſ i |||| H|||||| 4. | º ... W.T.T.Y. iſ M H L \\lifj 5 * v. W. “ t Mºſ \\ § *º t .M j $ t sº : , ſ: |||||| ==ºgº i. eit * rººmſ. t § 4. !!! Lºgº -—a ſº | * * º | | * * ** t ($º M it ill |||ſ. § - Sº...º. § 1 - * . # ...] }% §§§º $$@º- * | Wººllll, º *:: §§ S. - WS |l. ... tº P §§ $º. : º §§ # #sº JºJº £4% ſ/ Nº sº º). Sºº-ºº::= Gº Tºº-ºº::::::::::::::: 4'ſ/ t ºri #sº-º-º- J.-- * lilſ ->~~ = -- ~~ -: ** e-e-…sº º, *% † =: ... →--" ~4; "...i * --~~~ ..~~ --- *º. -- 23343*f; 2%. ... & T 2.2 Gate of St. Paul, Antioch. bishop or overseer of the church, for about forty years, till his martyrdom in A. D. Ioz. In the third century three councils (the last in A. D. 269) were held at Antioch relative to Paul of Samosata, who was bishop there about A. D. 260 (Neander's Allgemeine Geschichte, etc. i :3, p. IoI3; Gieseler's Lehrbuch, i :242; Moshemii Com- 77azzzarzz, p. 702). In the course of the fourth century a new theological school was formed at Antioch, which aimed at a middle course in Bibli- cal Hermeneutics, between a rigorously literal and an allegorical method of interpretation. Two of its most distinguished teachers were the presbyters Dorotheus and Lucian, the latter of whom suf- fered martyrdom in the Dioclesian persecution, A. D. 312 (Neander's Allgemeine Geschwehte, i :3, p. 1237; Gieseler's Lehrbuch, i :272; Lardner's Credibility, pt. ii. ch. 55, 58). Libanius (born A. D. 314), the rhetorician, the friend and pane- gyrist of the emperor Julian, was a native of Antioch (Lardner's Testimonies of Ancient Heathens, ch. 449; Gibbon's Decline and Fall, etc., ch. 24). It had likewise the less equivocal honor of being the birthplace of his illustrious pupil, John Chrysostom (born A, D. 347; died A. D. 407). (Lardner's Credibility, pt. ii, ch. II8; Nean- der’s Allgemeine Geschichte, ii:3, pp. 1440–56.) At the present time there are three prelates in Syria who claim the title of patriarchs of An- tioch, namely: (1) the patriarch of the Greek church; (2) of the Syrian Monophysites; (3) of the Maronites (Murdoch's Mosheim, edited by Soames, p. 304-II). 118 ANTIOCHUS Few cities have undergone and survived greater vicissitudes and disasters than Antioch. In A. D. 260 Sapor, the Persian king, surprised and pillaged it, and multitudes of the inhabitants were slain or sold as slaves. It has been frequently brought to the verge of utter ruin by earthquakes (A. D. 340, 394, 396, 458, 526, 528), by that of A. D. 526 no less than 250,000 persons were destroyed, the population being Swelled by an influx of strangers to the festival of the Ascension. The emperor Justinian gave forty-five centenaries of gold (£180,000) $900,000.00, to restore the city. Scarcely had it resumed its ancient splendor (A. D. 540) when it was again taken and delivered to the flames by Chosroes. In A. D. 658 it was captured by the Saracens. Its safety was ran- somed with 300,000 pieces of gold, but the throne of the successors of Alexander was degraded un- der the yoke of the caliphs to the secondary rank of a provincial town. In A. D. 975 it was retaken by Nicephorus Phocas. In A. D. IoSo the son of the governor Philaretus betrayed it into the hands of Soliman. Seventeen years after the Duke of Normandy entered it at the head of 300,- Ooo Crusaders; but as the citadel still held out, the victors were in their turn besieged by a fresh host under Kerboga and twenty-eight emirs, which at last gave way to their desperate valor (Gibbon, chap. 58). In A.D. 1268 Antioch was occupied and ruined by Boadochar or Bibars, sultan of Egypt and Syria; this first seat of the Christian name being dispeopled by the slaughter of 17,000 persons, and the captivity of Ioo,000. About the middle of the fifteenth century the three patriarchs of Alex- andria, Antioch, and Jerusalem convoked a synod, and renounced all connection with the Latin church. Antioch at present belongs to the Pashalic of Haleb (Aleppo), and bears the name of Antakia (Pococke, ii:277 sq.; Niebuhr, iii:15 sq.). The inhabitants are said to have amounted to twenty thousand before the earthquake of 1822, which destroyed four or five thousand. On the south- west side of the town is a precipitous mountain ridge, on which a considerable portion of the old Roman wall of Antioch is still standing, from 30 to 50 feet high and I5 feet in thickness. (2) Antioch in Pisidia. Antioch in (or near) Pisidia ('Avrtóxeta rās IIuguótas), a city belonging to the province of Pisidia in Asia Minor, but situated within the limits of Phrygia. When Paul and Barnabas visited this city (Acts xiii:14), they found a Jewish synagogue and a considerable number of proselytes, and met with great success among the Gentiles (xiii:48), but, through the violent opposition of the Jews, were obliged to leave the º: which they did in strict accordance with their Lord's injunction (xiii:51, Compared with Matt. x:14; Luke ix:5). Till within a comparatively recent period An- tioch was supposed to have been situated where the town of Ak-Sheker now stands; but the re- searches of the Rev. F. Arundell, British chaplain at Smyrna in 1833, confirmed by the still later in- vestigations of Mr. Hamilton, secretary of the Geographical Society, have determined its site to be adjoining the town of Yalowatch, and conse- quently that Ak-Sheker is the ancient, Philomelion described by Strabo (xii:8; vol. iii, p. 72, ed. Tauch.). J. E. R. ANTIOCHUS (an-ti'o-küs). Of the many kings who bore this name, Anti- ochus, called Epiphanes, has the chief claim on our attention in a Biblical Cyclopaedia, since in the Books of Maccabees and in the prophecies of Daniel his person is so prominent. Nevertheless, ANTIOCHUS it will be our business to set forth, not that which readers of the Bible can gather for themselves, but such preliminary and collateral information as will tend to throw light on the position of the Jews towards the Syrian monarchy. The name Antiochus may be interpreted he who withstands, or lasts out; and denotes mili- tary prowess, as do many other of the Greek Ila II] eS. (1) Antiochus I. The first Seleucus, father of Antiochus I, built a prodigious number of cities with Greek institutions, not, like Alex- ander, from military or commercial policy, but to gratify Ostentation, or his love for Greece. This love, indeed, led him to fix his capi- tal, not at Babylon, where Alexander would have placed it, but in the north of Syria (see ANTIOCH), and in extreme old age his life fell a sacrifice to *: romantic passion for revisiting his native Mace- O1112. Scarcely, indeed, had the second of the line, Antiochus I, begun to reign (B. C. 280) when four Sovereigns in Asia Minor established their com- plete independence, the kings of Pontus, Bithy- nia, Cappadocia and Pergamus. Then the Gauls, that had ravaged Greece, Macedon and Thrace, invaded Asia Minor, killed him, and established themselves in Galatia. (2) Antiochus II (Theos). In the next reign, that of Antiochus II, Theos, the revolt of the Parthians under Arsaces (B. C. 250) was fol. lowed speedily by that of the distant province of Bactriana. For thirty years together the Par- thians continued to grow at the expense of the Syrian monarchy. This king was followed by Seleucus II, Callinicus, 247-226 B. C., who was beset by rebellion and wars with Egypt and Par- thia. The next, Seleucus III, Ceraunus, a youth, was murdered in 223, and his brother, the great Antiochus III, followed. (3) Antiochus III (the Great). Through the great revolution of Asia the Hebrews of Pales- tine were now placed nearly on the frontier of two mighty monarchies, and it would seem that the rival powers bid against one another for their good will—so great were the benefits showered upon them by the second Ptolemy. Even when a war broke out for the possession of Coele-Syria, under Antiochus the Great and the fourth Ptol- emy (B. C. 218, 217), though the people of Judaea, as part of the battlefield and contested possession, were exposed to severe suffering, it was not the worse for their ultimate prospects, for Antiochus, when left master of southern Syria (B. C. 198), took Occasion to heap on the Jews and Jerusalem new honors and exemptions (Joseph. Antiq. xii: 3, 3). In short, in days in which no nation of those parts could hope for political independence, there was none which seemed so likely as the Hebrew 11aliull LU eujuy all 11011orable social and religious liberty. The great Antiochus passed a life of war (B. C. 223-187). In his youth he had to contend against his revolted satrap of Media and afterwards against his kinsman Achaeus, in Asia Minor. We have already noticed his strug- gles in Coele-Syria against the Ptolemies. Be- sides this, he was seven years engaged in suc- cessful campaigns against the Parthians and the king of Bactriana, and, finally, met unexpected and staggering reverses in war with the Romans, So that his last days were inglorious and his re- Sources thoroughly broken. The Syrian empire, as left by Antiochus the Great to his son, was weaker than that which the first Seleucus founded. Respecting the reign of this son, Seleucus IV (Philopator), B. C. 187-176, we know little, ex- cept that he left his kingdom tributary to the 119 ANTIOCHUS Romans (Livy, xiii:6). In Dan. xi :20 he is named a raiser of taxes, which shows what was the chief direction of policy in his reign. (4) Antiochus IV (Epiphanes). Seleucus IV having been assassinated by one of his courtiers, his brother Antiochus Epiphanes hastened to oc- cupy the vacant throne, although the natural heir, Demetrius, son of Seleucus, was alive, but a hostage at Rome. In Dan. xi :21, it is indicated that he gained the kingdom by flatteries; and there can be no doubt that a most lavish bribery was his chief instrument. According to the description in Livy (xli:20), the magnificence of his largesses had almost the appearance of insanity. Antiochus, apprehending that the Jews would never be con- stant in obedience to him, unless he obliged them to change their religion, and to embrace that of the Greeks, issued an edict, enjoining them to conform to the laws of other nations, and forbid- ding their usual sacrifices in the temple, their fes- tiyals and their sabbath. The statue of Jupiter Olympus was placed on the altar of the temple. Many corrupt Jews complied with these orders, but others opposed them. Mattathias and his Sons retired to the mountains, and Old Fleazar and the Seven brethren, Maccabees, suffered death with great courage at Antioch (2. Macc. vii). After, the death of Mattathias, Judas Maccabaeus put himself at the head of those Jews who con- tinued faithful, and opposed with success the generals who were sent against him. Finding his treasures exhausted, Antiochus went into Per- sia to levy tributes. When he arrived at Ec- batana he received news of the defeat of Nicanor and Timotheus, and that Judas Maccabaeus had retaken the temple of Jerusalem and restored the worship of the Lord. On receiving this intelli- gence, transported with indignation, he com- manded the driver of his chariot to urge the horses forward, threatening to make Jerusalem a grave for the Jews. He fell from his chariot, ºver and died, overwhelmed with pain and grief. The change of policy from conciliation to cruel persecution, which makes the reign of Epi- phanes an era in the relation of the Jews to the Syrian monarchy, has perhaps had great perma- nent moral results. It is not impossible that per- Severance in the conciliating plan might have Sapped the energy of Jewish national faith; while it is certain that persecution kindled their zeal and cemented their unity. Jerusalem, by its suf- ferings, became only the more sacred in the eyes of its absent citizens, who vied in replacing the Mºh which the sacrilegious Epiphanes had rav- 1S [] e C1. (5) Antiochus V (Eupator) and Antiochus VI. Besides Antiochus Epiphanes, the book of Maccabees mentions his son, called Antiochus Eupator, and annther young Antiochus. Son of Alexander Balas, the usurper, both of whom were murdered at a tender age. (6) Antiochus VII. In the two last chapters of the book another Antiochus appears, called by the Greeks Sidetes, from the town of Sida, in Pamphylia. This is the last king of that house whose reputation and power were not unworthy of the great name of Seleucus. In the year B. C. I34 he besieged Jerusalem, and having taken it next year, after a severe siege, he pulled down the walls and reduced the nation once more to subjection, after only ten years' independence. His moderation and regard for their religious feelings are contrasted by Josephus with the im- piety of Epiphanes. An outline of the deeds of the kings of Syria in war and peace, down to Antiochus Epiphanes, is ANTIPAS presented in the IIth chapter of Daniel, in which Epiphanes and his father are the two principal figures. Nothing but ignorance or a heated imagi- nation can account for some modern expositors referring that chapter to the events of the eight- eenth century after Christ. (7) Table of Kings. The most compact and unbroken account of the kings of this dynasty is to be found in Appian's book (De Rebus Syriacis), at the end. The dates of the following table are taken from Clinton's Fasti Hellenici, vol. iii, Appendix, chap. iii: Seleucus Nicator, B. C. 312–280. Antiochus Soter, his son, 280–261. Antiochus Theos, his son, 26I-247. Seleucus Callinicus, his son, 247-226. (Alexander, or) Seleucus Ceraunus, his son, 226-223. Antiochus the Great, his brother, 223-187. Seleucus Philopator, his son, 187-176. Antiochus Epiphanes, his brother, 176-164. Anºghus Eupator, his son (a minor), I64- IO2. Demetrius Soter, son of Seleucus Philopator, I62-150. Alexander Balas, a usurper, who pretends to be son of Antiochus Epiphanes, and is acknowledged by the Romans, I52-I46. 12. Antiochus Theos, or Alexander (a minor), son of the preceding. He is murdered by the usurper Trypho, who contests the king- dom till I40. 13. Demetrius Nicator, son of Demetrius Soter, reigns 146-141, when he was captured by the Parthians. 14. Antiochus Sidetes, his brother, I4 I-128. ANTIPAS (än'ti-pâs), (Gr. 'Avrtras, an-tee'?as). 1. A faithful witness or martyr mentioned in Rev. ii: 13 (A. D. before IOO). He is said to have been one of our Savior's first disciples and a bishop of Pergamos, and to have been put to death in a tumult there by the priests of Æscula- pius, who had a celebrated temple in that city. Tradition relates that he was burned in a brazen bull under Domitian. 2. Antipas, or Herod Antipas, was the son of Herod the Great by Malthace, a Samaritan. He inherited of his father's dominions Galilee and Perea, as tetrarch. He was the Herod who exe- cuted John the Baptist. (See HERODIAN FAMILY.) ANTIPATER (an-tip'a-ter). FAMILY. ANTIPATRIS (an-tip'a-tris), (Gr. 'Avrittarpts, am-fift-at-reece'), a city built by Herod the Great on the site of a former place called Caphar-saba (Joseph. Antig. xiii. I5, 1). Caphar-saba was I2O stadia from Joppa; and be- tween the two places Alexander Balas drew a trench, with a wall and wooden towers, as a de- fense against the approach of Antiochus (Antiq. xiii:15, I ; De Bell. Jud. i :4, 7). Antipatris also lay between Caesarea and Lydda, its distance from the former place being twenty-six Roman miles (Itin. Hieros. p. 600). These circumstances indi- cate that Antipatris was in the midst of a plain, and not at Arsuf, where the Crusaders supposed they had found it (Reland, Palaest. pp. 569, 570). On the road from Ramlah to Nazareth, north of Ras-el Ain, Prokesch (Reise ins Heilige Land. Wien, 1831) came to a place called Kaffr Saba; and the position which Brighaus assigns to this town in his map is almost in exact agreement with the position assigned to Antipatris in the Itin. Hieros. Perceiving this, Professor Raumer (Pal- &st. pp. I44, 462) happily conjectured that this Kaffr Saba was no other than the reproduced I O. I I & 120 See HERODIAN ANVIL name of Caphar-saba, which, as in many other instances, has again supplanted the foreign arbi- trary and later name of Antipatris. This con- jecture has been supported by Professor Robin- son, who gives Kefr Sába as the name of the vil- lage in question (Researches, iii:46-48). Wilson and Conder place it at Kala'at Ras el'Ain, ruins between Lydda and Caesarea, thirty miles south- east of the latter and eleven miles northeast of Joppa. The old Roman road from Jerusalem runs to this place, and thence to Caesarea. “One of the finest springs in the country is near.” It did not seem probable to Wilson and Conder that any large town like Antipatris had been at Kefr Saba. St. Paul was brought from Jerusalem to Anti- patris by night, on his route to Caesarea (Acts xxiii:3I). ANTONIA (an-tū’ni-á), (fema. of Antonius), a fortress in Jerusalem on the north side of the area of the temple, often mentioned by Josephus in his account of the later wars of the Jews. It was originally built by the Maccabees, under the name of Baris, and was afterwards rebuilt with great strength and splendor by the first Herod. In a more particular description, Josephus states (De Bell. Jud. v .5, 8) that the fortress stood upon a rock or hill fifty cubits high, at the northwest co, nei oſ Llie Leiriple area, above which its wall rose to the height of 40 cubits. Within it had the extent and appearance of a palace, being divided into apartments of every kind, with gal- 1eries and baths, and broad halls or barracks for Soldiers; so that, as having everything necessary within itself, it seemed a city, while in magnifi- cence it resembled a palace. At each of the four corners was a tower. Three of these were fifty cubits high, but the fourth, at thc southeast cor- ner, was seventy cubits high, and overlooked the whole temple with its courts. The fortress com- municated with the northern and western porti- coes of the temple area, and had flights of stairs descending into both, by which the garrison could at any time enter the courts of the temple and pre- vent tumults. On the north it was separated from the hill Bezetha by a deep trench, lest it should be approachable from that quarter, and the depth of the trench added much to the apparent eleva- tion of the towers (De Bell. Jud. v :4, 2). This fortress is called parembola, soldiers’ bar- racks, in the New Testament (Acts xxi :34, 37). The Romans generally kept a garrison in it, and from hence it was that the tribune ran with his soldiers to rescue Paul out of the hands of the Jews, who had seized him in the temple and de- signed to kill him (Acts xxi :3I, 32). Professor Robinson (Researches, i :422), con- ceives that the deep and otherwise inexplicable ex- cavation called ‘llie puul Uſ Belliestla' was part of the trench below the north wall of this fortress; in which case, as he remarks, its extent must have been much more considerable than has usually been supposed. ANTOTHIJAH (in'to-thijah), (Heb. Tº an-ſho-thee-yaw', answers of Jah), a Benjamite, One of the sons of Shashak (I Chron. viii:24), B.C. before 536. ANUB (a'nib), (Heb. Bºy, azy-mood', bound to- gether, confederate), son of Coz and descendant of Judah, through Ashur, the father of Tekoa (I Chron. iv:8), B.C. after 1618. ANVIL (Ån'vń), (Heb. P22, pah'am, beaten), the iron block on which the Smith lays his metal to be forged. APE It varies in shape according as the metal varies in which the Smith works. It generally has a beak or horn at one end for forging hollow or gººd work, and stands on a wooden block (Is. X11 :7). The description of the metal worker in Is. xli : 6. 7, is one that might have been taken from the Arab workshop of the present day. As the Orien- tal artisan has only a few simple tools at his command, his work lacks the precision and uni- formity attained in the West by elaborate ma- chinery. Hence vivacious comment during the process of manufacture, and a feeling of triumph at times when the article turns out according to sample. The act of welding on the anvil, to which the prophet alludes, is especially a moment of noisy enthusiasm and mutual encouragement be- tween the Smith and his fellow-workman on the other side of the anvil. They then call out to each other to strike more rapidly and vigorously, before the metal cools, crying ‘shidd / shidd tº the Arabic equivalent of Isaiah’s ‘hagak l’ ‘be of good courage l’ Then the term applied to the soldering —‘tob!' Arabic “tayyib l’ that is, ‘good l’—is at once a call to cease from further hammering and a declaration that the work is satisfactory. (G. M. Mackie, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) APE (ap), (Heb. Flip, Åo//, whence the Latin- ized name Ce/5/.2/s). - In the Hebrew and Semitic cognate tongues, and in the classical languages, these names, under various modifications, designate the Simiadae, in- cluding, no doubt, species of Cercopithecus, Mac- acus and Cynocephalus, or Guenons, apes and baboons; that is, all the animals of the quadru- manous order known to the Hebrews, Arabs, Egyptians and the classical writers. Accordingly, we find Pliny and Solinus speaking of Ethiopian Cephi exhibited at Rome, and in the upper part of the celebrated Praenestine mosaic representing the inundation of the Nile, figures of Simiadae occur in the region which indicates Nubia ; among others, one in a tree with the name Ke-i-pen be- side it, which may be taken for a Cercopithecus Khinen, s", º ſº & ſº º gº §§ Nº. s m\ is . § |; º S Kºs ; ;ºv. # tº P& : "º" sº sº º - * º †. º *m. iſºlº . i: º i. º "km º c. § sº, tº s , ºf Monkey from the Praenestine Mosaic. of the Guenon group. But in the triumphal proces- Sion Uſ Tliulliilies III al Tlleles, 11atius ſi Ulu (lie interior of Africa, probably from Nubia, bear curi- osities and tribute, among which the Camelopard- alis or Giraffe and six quadrumana may be ob- served. The smallest and most effaced animals may be apes, but the others, and in particular the three figured and colored from careful drawings, in Plate xxi of Rosellini’s work, are undoubtedly Macaci or Cynocephali, that is, species of the genus baboon, or baboon-like apes. Naturalists and commentators, not deterred by the intermin- able list of errors which the practice has occa- Sioned, are often unnecessarily anxious to assign the names of animals noticed in Scripture and in the ancient classics to species characterized by the moderns, although the original designations are to be taken in a familiar sense, and often ex- tend even beyond a generical meaning. 121. APHEK Among the articles of merchandise imported by Solomon's fleet was the Kophe (I Kings x:22; 2 Chron. ix:21). The Greek writers mention a sort of ape, native of Ethiopia and around the Red Sea, called Kephos, or Keipos, or Kebos, which comes near to the Hebrew Kuph, or Koph. It was about the size of a roebuck. The Egyptians of Babylon, in Egypt, adored a kind of ape, which Strabo calls Keipos, and they are still worshiped in many places of India. The only species of ape of the baboon form known in Arabia is the Mocko. Comparing the characters of this species, we find it by configuration, colors and manners pe- culiarly adapted to the purposes of idolatry in its grossest and most debasing aspect. The He- brew people, already familiar with a similar wor- ship in Egypt, may have copied the native tribes in the wilderness, and thus drawn upon them- selves the remonstrance in Lev. xvii:7, where the allusion to these animals is very descriptive, as is that in Is. xiii:2I ; and again, xxxiv: I4, where the image is perfect, when we picture to our- selves the ‘hairy ones' lurking about the river in the juniper and licorice jungle. It is not un- likely that the baboon idol may have had goat's horns, since we find the same attribute on rams' heads in Egypt; on lions' heads on coins of Tarsus, and on horses’ and elephants' heads on medals of Syrian kings. APELLES (a-pêI'léz), (Gr. 'AtreWXàs, aft-e/-/ace'), a Christian at Rome, whom Paul salutes in his Epistle to the Church there (Rom. xvi;IO), and calls ‘approved in Christ,’ an approved Christiazz. Origen doubts whether he may not have been the same person with Apollos ; but this is far from likely. (See APOLLOS.) According to the old church traditions Apelles was one of the seventy disciples and bishop either of Smyrna or Herac- leia (Epiph. Cont. A/ares, p. 20; Fabrici Lear. Evangelii, pp. II.5, II6, etc.). The name itself is notable from Horace’s ‘Credat Judaeus Apella, non ego' (Sat. i :5), by which he less probably means a circumcised Jew in general, as many think, than a particular Jew of that name well-known at Rome. APHARSACHITES (a-phar'sak-ites or a-phār- sath-kites), (Heb. 29.28, afar-seA-ah'ee, Ezra v.6; vi:6), or APHARSATHCHITES (Heb. 2: ET28, aft-ar-sath-Aa/.'ee), the name of the nation to which belonged one portion of the Colonists whom the Assyrian king planted in Samaria (Ezra iv: 9; v.6). Schulthess (A'arad., p. 362) identifies the Apharsachites with the Persian, or rather Median Paratacene of the Greek geographers (Strabo xi : 522; xv :732; Plin. xvi : 29). This conclusion is strengthened by the fact that the A is Uſtell plustliutic in Strabo, as in X w.764, where the names Mardi and Amardi are inter- changed. APHARSITEs (a-phar'sites), (Heb. "PſFS, aſ: azy-re-sa/4'ee), a tribe removed (B. C. 464-424) to Samaria by the king of Assyria (Ezra iv:9). APHEK (a'fék), (Heb. Pº, aſ aſſe'). The name signifies strength, hence a citadel or fortified town. There were at least four places so called. 1. A city in the tribe of Asher (Josh. xii; 18; xiii:4; xix:30), called A//hi/8 in Judg. i:33, where we also learn that the tribe was unable to gain possession of it. This must be the same place with the "Aqaka, which Eusebius (Constant. iii:55) and Sozomen (pp. 2, 5) place in Lebanon, on the river Adonis, where there was a famous temple of APHEKAH Venus. A village called Afka is still found in Lebanon, situated at the bottom of a valley, and may possibly mark the site of this Aphek. 2. A city near which Benhadad was routed by the Israelites (I Kings xx:26, seq.), to which the Aphaca of Eusebius corresponds, situated to the east of the sea of Galilee, and mentioned by Seetzen and Burckhardt, under the name of Feik. 3. A city in the tribe of Issachar, near to Jezreel, where the Philistines twice encamped be- fore battles with the Israelites (I Sam. iv: I ; xxix:I ; Comp. xxviii:4). Either this or the Aphek first above mentioned is probably the royal city of the Canaanites spoken of in Josli. xii: 18. 4. A city, most probably the place called at present Fik, six miles east of the Sea of Galilee (2 Kings xiii: 17). APHEKAH (a-fé'ka), (Heb. Tº, afay-Åaw', fortress), a town in the mountains of Judah near Beth-tappaah, site unknown (Josh. xv.:53). APHEREMA (a-fér'e-mâ), (Gr. 'Affaipega, aft/- 2"reh-mah, part taken away), one of the three toparchies added to Judaea by the kings of Syria (1 Macc. xi:34). This is perhaps the Ephraem or Ephraim mentioned in John Xi:54. APHIAH (a-phi'ah),(Heb.º.,aſ-ee'akh, blown upon, i. e., refreshed), the father of Bechorath, a Benjamite and a forefather of Saul (I Sam. ix:I). APHIK (a'phik), (Heb. pºts, aft/.2/8, strong), a city of Asher, in the north of Canaan, from which the Asherites were unable to drive out the Canaan- ites (Judg. i. 31); perhaps the same as Aphek (Josh. xiii:4; xix:30). APHRAH (äph'rah). See OPHRAH. APHSES (aph'séz), (Heb. Yº, pits-tsates', the dispersed), head of the eighteenth sacerdotal fam- ily, of the twenty-four which David chose for tem- ple service (I Chron. xxiv:15). APOCALYPSE (a-pêk'à-lips). TION. APOCRYPHA (à-pôk’rī-fá), (Gr. &tókpupa, ap- oÅ'roo-fa, hidden, secreted, mysterious), a term in theology applied in various senses to denote cer- tain books claiming a sacred character. The word occurs in Mark iv:22, Matt. x:26, Luke xii:2: ‘There is nothing hid, which shall not be manifested, neither was anything kept secret (aff-o/#' roo-ſon), but that it should come abroad;’ also Luke viii: 17 and Col. ii:3: “In whom are hid (árókpupot) all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.’ It is first found, as denoting a certain class of books, in Clemens Alexandrinus, Stromata, I 3, c. 4, from the unrecognized books of a certain one. (1) Early Definition. In the early ages of the Uhristian church this term was frequently used to denote books of an uncertain or anony- mous author, or of one who had written under an assumed name. Its application, however, in this sense is far from being distinct, as, strictly speaking, it would include canonical books whose authors were unknown or uncertain, or even pseudepigraphal. ‘Let us omit,” says St. Augus- tine, ‘those fabulous books of Scripture which are called apocryphal, because their secret origin was unknown to the fathers.’ ‘This is plain, that many examples have been adduced by the apostles and evangelists, and inserted in the New Testa- ment, which we do not read in the canonical Scriptures which we possess, but which are found in the A/ocry/ha’ (Origen, Praef. in Cantic.). So also Jerome, referring to the words (Eph. v :14), “Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise from the See REVELA- 122 APOCRYPHA dead,' observes that ‘the apostle cited this from hidden (reconditis) prophets, and such as seem to be apocryphal, as he has done in several other instances.' Epiphanius thought that this term was applied to Such books as were not placed in the Ark of the Covenant, but put away in some other place. (See Suicer's Thesaurus for the true reading of the passage in this father). Under the term apocryphal have been included books of a religious character which were in circulation among private Christians, but were not allowed to be read in the public assemblies, such as 3 and 4 Esdras, and 3 and 4 Maccabees. 2) Spurious Gospels Invented by Heretics. In regard to the New Testament, the term has been usually applied to books invented by heretics to favor their views, or by Catholics under fictitious signatures. Of this description were many spurious or apocryphal gospels (which See). It is probably in reference to such that Basil, Cyril of Jerusalem and Jerome gave cau- tions against the reading of apocryphal books; al- though it is possible, from the context, that the last-named father alludes to the books which were also called Ecclesiastical, and afterwards Deutero-canonical. In the Bibliothèque Sacré, by the Rev. Domin- ican Fathers Richard and Giroud (Paris, 1822), the term is defined to signify: (1) Anonymous or pseudepigraphal books; (2) those which are not publicly read, although they may be read with edification in private; (3) those which do not pass for authentic and of divine authority, al- though they pass for being composed by a sacred author or an apostle, as the Epistle of Barnabas, and (4) dangerous books, composed by ancient heretics to favor their opinions. They also apply the name ‘to books which, after having been con- tested, are put into the canon by consent of the churches, as Tobit, etc.’ And Jahn applies it in its most strict sense, and that which it has borne since the fourth century, to books which, from their inscription, or the author's name, or the subject, might easily be taken for inspired books, but are not so in reality. It has also been applied, by Jerome, to certain books not found in the He- brew canon, but yet publicly read from time im- memorial in the Christian church for edification, although not considered of authority in contro- versies of faith. These were also termed Ecclesi- astical books, and consisted of the books of Tobit, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, the first two books of Maccabees, the last seven chapters (ac- cording to Cardinal Hugo's division) of the book of Esther, and those (so-called) parts of the book of Daniel which are not found in Hebrew, viz., the Song of the Children, the Speech of Azariah, the History of Susannah, and the Fable (as Jer- ome calls if) of Rel and the Dragon. These have been denominated, for distinction’s sake, the deutero-canonical books, inasmuch as they were not in the original or Hebrew canon. In this sense they are called by some the Antilegomena of the Old Testament. ‘The uncanonical books,’ says Athanasius, or the author of the Synopsis, “are divided into antilegomena and apocrypha.’ (See DEUTERO-CANONICAL.) (3) As Distinct from Ecclesiastical. Of Spurious and Apocryphal Books, as distinct from Antilegomena or Ecclesiastical.—Among this class are doubtless to be considered the third and fourth books of Esdras, and it is no doubt in reference to these that, in his letter to Vigilantius, Atha- nasius speaks of a work of Esdras which he says that he had never even read. Of the same character are also the Book of Enoch, the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, APOCRYPHA the Assumption of Moses, etc., which, as well as 3 and 4 Esdras, being by many considered as the fictions of Christians of the second and third cen- turies, it is doubtful whether they ought to be classed in the Apocrypha of the Old or of the New Testament. Origen, however, believed the New Testament to have contained citations from books of this kind written before the times of the apostles, and in reference to such observes, in his preface to the Canticles, ‘This, however, is manifest, that many passages are cited either by the apostles or the evangelists, and inserted in the New Testament, which we do not read in those Scriptures of the Jews which we call canon- ical, but which are nevertheless found in apoc- ryphal books, or are taken from them. But this will give no authority to apocryphal writings, for the bounds which our fathers have fixed are not to be removed; and possibly the apostles and evangelists, full of the Holy Ghost, might know what should be taken out of those Scriptures and what not. But we, who have not such a measure of the Spirit, cannot, without great danger, pre- Sume to act in that manner.” Then, in his Letter to Apianus, he observes that there were many things kept from the knowledge of the public, but which were preserved in the hidden or apocryphal books, to which he refers the passage (Heb. xi : 37), “They were sawn asunder.’ (4) Apocryphal Books of the New Testa- ment. The apocryphal books of the New Testa- ment are not destitute of interest. Although the Spurious Acts extant have no longer any defend- ers of their genuineness, they are not without their value to the Biblical student, and have been applied with success to illustrate the style and language of the genuine books, to which they bear a close analogy. The American translator of Mosheim’s Ecclesiastical History terms them ‘harmless and ingenious fictions, intended either to gratify the fancy or to silence the enemies of Christianity.’ The mass of Christians who have neither time nor other means of satisfying them- selves must confide, in questions of this kind, either in the judgment of the learned, or the testi- mony at least, if not the authority, of the Church; and it ought to be a matter of much thankfulness to the private Christian that the researches of the most learned and diligent inquirers have con- spired, in respect to the chief books of Scripture, in adding the weight of their evidence to the testimony of the Church Universal. (5) Apocryphal Books of the Old Testa- ment. The following are the principal apocryphal (or spurious) books of the Old Testament which have descended to our times. The greater number of them can scarcely be considered as properly belonging to the Apocrypha of the Old Testament, as they have been most probably written , since the Christian era, and not before the second cen- tury: I. I Esdras. II. 2 Esdras. III. Tobit. IV. Judith. V. The rest of the chapters of the Book of Esther (i. e., x:4; xvi;24). VI. The Wisdom of Solomon. VII. The Wisdom of Jesus the son of Sirach, or VIII Ecclesiasticus. Baruch. (Cli. vi. =The Epistle of Jeremy). IX. The Song of the Three Holy Children. (7. e., The Prayer of Azarias and the Song of the Three.) X. The History of Susannah. BOOKS. 123 APOLLOS XI. The History of the Destruction of Bel and the Dragon. (ix, x, and xi are the additions to the Book of Daniel.) XII. The Prayer of Manasses. XIII. I. Maccabees. XIV, 2 Maccabees. (Comp. works by Dr. Tischendorf, Dr. Lau- rence of Oxford, and Lardner.) (See ACTS; GOS- PELS; EPISTLEs.) APOLLONIA (äp'ol-lö'ni-a), (Gr. 'AtroAAwyta, aft- o/-/o-ſtee'ah), a city of Macedonia, in the province of Mygdonia (Plin. iv:17), situated between Am- phipolis and Thessalonica, about twenty-eight miles from the former and thirty-three from the latter (/timer. Anton.). St. Paul passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia on his way to Thessa- lonica (Acts xvii:I). APOLLONIUS (äp'ol-16'ni-iis). 1. A general whom Antiochus Epiphanes sent into Judaea, and who took Jerusalem, but who was eventually defeated and slain by Judas Maccabaeus (I Macc. iii:Io, II), B. C. 166. He is called Mis- arches in the Greek (2 Macc. v :24). 2. A governor of Coele-Syria, and general of Demetrius Nicanor, who was defeated by Jona- than on behalf of Alexander Balas (I Macc. x: 69-76) B. C. 148. 3. Son of Genneus, was one of those governors whom Lysias had left in Judaea, after the treaty formed between the Jews and the young king Antiochus Eupator, and who endeavored to com- pel the Jews to break it (2 Macc. xii:2). APOLLOS (a-pôl'los), (Gr. 'AtroXX&s, a/ oſ-/oce', belonging to Apollo), a Jew of Alexandria, is de- scribed as a ſearned, or, as some understand it, an eſoquent man, well versed in the Scriptures and the Jewish religion (Acts xviii:24; xix: I). About A. D. 56 he came to Ephesus, where, in the Synagogues, he spoke about the baptism of John (verse 25), by which we are probably to understand that he knew and taught the doctrine of a Messiah, whose coming John had announced, but knew not that Jesus was the Christ. His fervor, however, attracted the notice of Aquila and Priscilla, whom Paul had left at Ephesus, and they instructed him in this higher doctrine, which he thenceforth taught openly, with great zeal and power (verse 26). Having heard from his new friends, who were much attached to Paul, of that apostle's proceed- ings in Achaia, and especially at Corinth, he re- solved to go thither, and was encouraged in this design by the brethren at Ephesus, who furnished him with letters of introduction. On his arrival there he was very useful in watering the seed which Paul had sown and was instrumental in gaining many new converto from Judaism. There was, perhaps, no apostle or apostolical man who so much resembled Paul in attainments and character as Apollos. His immediate disciples became so much attached to him, as well nigh to have produced a schism in the church, some saying, “I am of Paul;’ others, ‘I am of Apollos ;’ others, ‘I am of Cephas’ (I Cor. i :12; iii:4–7, 22). There must, probably, have been some difference in their mode of teaching to occasion this, and from the First Epistle to the Corinthians it would appear that Apollos was not prepared to go so far as Paul in abandoning the figments of Juda- ism, and insisted less on the, to the Jews, ob noxious position that the Gospel was open to the Gentiles. There was nothing, however, to pre- vent these two eminent men from being perfectly united in the bonds of Christian affection and APOSTLE brotherhood. When Apollos heard that Paul was again at Ephesus he went thither to see him, and as he was there when the First Epistle to the Corinthians was written (A. D. about 59), there can be no doubt that the apostle received from him his information concerning the divisions in that church which he so forcibly reproves. It strongly illustrates the character of Apollos and Paul that the former, doubtless in disgust at those divisions with which his name had been associ- ated, declined to return to Corinth ; while the lat- ter, with generous confidence, urged him to do so (I Cor. xvi; I2). Paul again mentions Apollos kindly in Tit. iii: 13, and recommends him and Zenas, the lawyer, to the attention of Titus, know- ing that they designed to visit Crete, where Titus then was. Apollos was so dissatisfied with the division which had happened on his account at Corinth that he retired into Crete with Zenas, but this interruption of Christian harmony hav- ing been appeased by the letter of Paul to the Corinthians, Apollos returned to that city, and afterwards, according to the best authority, be- came bishop there. The Greeks make him bishop of Duras; but, in their Menaea, they describe him as second bishop of Colophon, in Asia. Ferrarius says he was bishop of Iconium, in Phrygia; others say he was bishop of Caesarea. - APOSTLE (à-pôs's'l), (Gr. 'AtrógroXos, aff-os' tol- os, one sent). (1) In General. It occurs only once in the Septuagint (I Kings xiv:6), and there, as uni- formly in the New Testament, it signifies a per- son sent by another, a messenger (Heb. iii: I, 2). (2) Hebrew. It has been asserted that the Jews were accustomed to term the collector of the half-shekel, which every Israelite paid annu- ally to the Temple, an apostle; and we have better authority for asserting that they used the word to denote one who carried about encyclical letters from their rulers. It is even yet a custom among the Jews to call those who carry about circular letters from their rulers by the name of apostles.’ To this use of the term Paul has been supposed to refer (Gal. i : I) when he asserts that he was “an apostle, not of men, neither by men'—an apos- tle, not like those known among the Jews by that name, who derived their authority and received their mission from the chief priests or principal men of their nation. The import of the word is strongly brought out in John xiii: 16, where it occurs along with its correlate, “The servant is not greater than his Lord, neither he who is sent greater than he who sent him.’ (3) Christian. The term is generally employed in the New Testament as the descriptive appella- tion of a comparatively small class of men, to whom Jesus Christ entrusted the organization of his church and the dissemination of his religion among mankind At an early period of his min- istry he ordained twelve of his disciples that they should be with him. These he named apos- tles. Some time afterwards he gave to them power against unclean spirits to cast them out, and to heal all manner of disease; and he sent them to preach the kingdom of God (Mark iii:I4; Matt. x:1-5; Mark vi :7; Luke vi :13; ix:I). To them he gave the keys of the kingdom of God, and con- stituted them princes over the Spiritual Israel, that “people whom God was to take from among the Gentiles, for his name' (Matt. xvi :19; xviii: 18; xix:28; Luke xxii:28-30). Previously, to his death he promised to them the Holy Spirit, to fit them to be the founders and governors of the Christian church (Luke xxiv:49; John xiv:I 6, 17, 26, 28; xv :26, 27; xvi :7-15). After his resur- rection he solemnly confirmed their call, saying: 124 APOSTLE As the Father hath sent me, so I send you, and gave them a commission to preach the gospel to every creature (John xx:21-23; Matt. xxviii: 18- 20). After His ascension (Acts ii), on the day of Pentecost, he communicated to them those Supernatural gifts which were necessary to the performance of the high functions he had com- missioned them, to exercise; and in the exercise of these gifts they, in the Gospel history and in their epistles, with the Apocalypse, gave a com- plete view of the will of their Master in reference to that new order of things of which he was the author. . There was among the apostles no external dis- tinction of rank; indeed, the whole teaching of Jesus was directed to do away with all such dis- tinction, had it been otherwise possible for it to exist (Matt. xx:24, 27, sq., xxiii: I I, I2; Mark ix: 5; x:44). Nevertheless, there appears to have een a difference of character and standing among them in respect to influence and activity, so far as this, that Peter, and James, and John act a more prominent part than any of the others, both during the lifetime of Christ and also after his death, when they became especially pillars in the church at Jerusalem (Gal. ii:9). The names of the twelve apostles are: I. Peter. 8. Matthew (Levi). 2. Andrew. 9. Simon. 3. John. Io. Jude (Lebbeus, 4. Philip. Thaddeus). 5. James Major. II. James Minor. 6. Bartholomew. I2. Judas Iscariot. 7. Thomas. The last betrayed his Master; and, having hanged himself, Matthias was chosen in his place (Acts i: I5-26). They were, for the most part at least, Gali- leans, and from the lower class of Society. The greater part of them were fishermen, who prose- cuted their employment on the shores of the lake of Tiberias. Matthew was a publican or tax- gatherer employed by the Romans; an occupation regarded by the Jews in general with the utmost contempt and abhorrence. They were unlearned and ignorant men' (Acts iv:13), and Paul justly regards it as a proof of the wisdom and power of God that he had chosen, through the preaching of unlearned men, to overthrow the whole edifice of human wisdom, and lead the world to the light of truth (I Cor. i :19, 27, seq.). They authoritatively taught the doctrine and the law of their Lord; they organized churches and required them to keep the traditions, the doc- trines and ordinances delivered to them (Acts ii; 1 Cor. ii:16; ii:7, Io, 13; 2 Cor. v:20; I Cor. xi.2). Saul of Tarsus, afterwards termed Paul, was also miraculously added to the number of these permanent rulers of the Christian Society (Acts ix; xx:4; xxvi :15-18; I Tim. i :12; ii:7; 2 Tim. i : II). (4) Apostolic Office. The characteristic fea- tures of this highest office in the Christian church were: (1) That they should have seen the Lord, and been eye and ear witnesses of what they testified to the world (John xv :27). This is laid down as an essential requisite in the choice of one to succeed Judas (Acts i:21, 22). Paul is no exception here, for, speaking of those who saw Christ after his resurrection, he adds, and last of all he was seen of me’ (I Cor. XV:8). And this he elsewhere mentions as one of his apostolic qualifications: ‘Am I not an apostle? have I not seen the Lord?' (I Cor. ix:I). So that his see- ing that Just One and hearing the word of his mouth was necessary to his being ‘a witness of what he thus saw and heard’ (Acts xxii; I4, APOSTLE 125 I5). (2) They must have been immediately called and chosen to that office by Christ himself. This was the case with every one of them (Luke vi; 13; Gal. i.I), Matthias not excepted; for, as he had been a chosen disciple of Christ before, so the Lord, by determining the lot, de- clared his choice, and immediately called him to the office of an apostle (Acts i:24-26). (3) In- fallible inspiration was also essentially necessary to that office (John xvi :13; 1 Cor. ii:Io; Gal. i:II, I2). They had not only to explain the true sense and , spirit of the Old Testament (Luke xxiv:27; Acts xxvi :22, 23; xxviii:23), which were hid from the Jewish doctors, but also to give forth the New Testament revelation to the world, which was to be the unalterable standard of faith and practice in all succeeding genera tions (1 Pet. i :25; I John iv:6). It was therefore absolutely necessary that they should be secured against all error and mistake by the unerring dic- tates of the spirit of truth. Accordingly Christ promised and actually bestowed on them the Spirit to teach them all things, to ‘bring all things to their remembrance whatsoever he had said to them' (John xiv:26), to 'guide them into all truth,’ and ‘to show them things to come' (John xvi. I3). Their word, therefore, must be received, ‘not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God’ (I Thess. ii: 13), and as that whereby we are to distinguish “the spirit of truth from the spirit of error’ (I John iv:6). (4) An- other apostolic qualification was the power of working miracles (Mark xvi :20; Acts ij :43), such as Speaking with divers tongues, curing the lame, healing the sick, raising the dead, dis- cerning of spirits, conferring these gifts upon Others, etc. (I Cor. xii:8-II). These were the cre- dentials of their divine mission. ‘Truly,’ says Paul, ‘the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs and wonders and mighty deeds' (2 Cor. xii: I.2). Miracles were necessary to confirm their doctrine at its first publication, and to gain credit to it in the world as a revela- tion from God, and by these ‘God bare them wit- ness’ (Heb. ii:4). (5) To these characteristics may be added the universality of their mission. Their charge was not confined to any particular visible church, like that of ordinary pastors, but, being the oracles of God to men, they had the care of all the churches (2 Cor. xi :28). They had a power to settle their faith and order as a model to future ages, to determine all controversies (Acts xvi;4), and to exercise the rod of discipline upon all offenders, whether pastors or flock (I Cor. v :3–6; 2 Cor. x:8; xiii:Io). (5) No Successors. It must be obvious, from this scriptural account of the apostolical office, that the Apostles had, in the strict sense of the term, no cuccessors Their q11alifications were super- natural, and their work, once performed, remains in the infallible record of the New Testament, for the advantage of the Church and the world in all future ages. They are the only authoritative teachers of Christian doctrine and law. All offi- cial men in Christian churches can legitimately claim no higher place than expounders of the doctrines and administrators of the laws found in their writings. Few things have been more in- jurious to the cause of Christianity than the as- Sumption on the part of ordinary office-bearers in the Church of the peculiar prerogatives of ‘the holy apostles of our Lord Jesus.’ It is true in- deed that the word is used in this loose sense by the Fathers. Thus we find in Archippus, Phile- mon, Apphia, the seventy disciples (Luke x : 1-17), termed apostles; and even Mary Magdalene is said to be an apostle to the Apostles, No satis- APOSTLE factory evidence, however, can be brought for- Ward of the term being thus used in the New Testament. Andronicus and Junia (Rom. xvi :7) are indeed said to be of note among the Apostles; but these words by no means necessarily imply that these persons were apostles; they may, and probably do, signify merely that they were per- Sons well known and much esteemed by the Apos- tles. The fellow-workers of the Apostles are by Chrysostom denominated fellow-apostles. The argument founded on I Cor. iv:9, com- pared with verse 6, to prove that Apollos is termed an apostle, cannot bear a close examination. The only instance in which it seems probable that the word, as expressive of an office in the Christian church, is applied to an individual whose call to that office is not made the subject of special nar- ration, is to be found in Acts xiv:4, 14, where Barnabas, as well as Paul, is termed an apostle. At the same time, it is by no means absolutely certain that the term apostles, or messengers, does not in this place refer rather to the mission of Paul and Barnabas by the prophets and teachers at Antioch, under the impulse of the Holy Ghost (Acts xiii:I-4), than to that direct call to the Christian apostleship which we know Paul re- ceived, and which, if Barnabas had received, we can Scarcely persuade ourselves that no trace of so important an event should have been found in the Sacred history, but a passing hint, which admits, to Say the least, of being plausibly accounted for in another way. We know that on the occasion referred to, ‘the prophets and teachers, when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on Barnabas and Saul, sent them away;’ so that, in the sense in which we will immediately find the words occurring, they were apostles of the proph- ets and teachers. (6) I)ivinely Commissioned. The word ‘apostle' occurs once in the New Testament (Heb. iii: 1) as a descriptive designation of Jesus Christ: ‘The apostle of our profession,’ i. e., the apostle whom we profess or acknowledge. The Jews were in the habit of applying the correspond- ing Hebrew term to the person who presided over the synagogue, and directed all its officers and af- fairs. The Church is represented as ‘the house or family of God,' over which he had placed, during the Jewish economy, Moses, as the super- intendent, over which he has placed, under the Christian economy, Christ Jesus. The import of the term apostle, is—divinely-commissioned super- intendent; and of the whole phrase, ‘the apostle of our profession, the divinely-commissioned super- intendent, whom we Christians acknowledge, in contradistinction to the divinely-appointed super- intendent Moses, whom the Jews acknowledged. (7) Massengers nf the Churches. In 2 Cor. viii:23, we meet with the phrase, the messen- gers of the churches. These ‘apostles or messen- gers of the churches' were those who were chosen of the churches to travel with the Apostle with the gift of the churches of Macedonia to the im- poverished and persecuted saints of Judaea (2 Cor. viii: 1-4, 19). Theophylact explains the phrase thus: Those sent and chosen by the churches. With much the same meaning and reference Epaphroditus (Phil. ii.25) is termed diróa toxos—a messenger of the Philippian Church—having been employed by them to carry pecuniary assistance to the Apostles (Phil. iv:14-18). The Canons and Constitutions, called apostoli- cal, are generally admitted to be forgeries, proba- bly of the fifth century. APOSTLES’ CREED In the early ecclesiastical writers we find the term ho ap-os' toh-los, the Apostle, used as the designation of a portion of the canonical books, consisting chiefly of the Pauline Epistles. ‘The Psalter’ and ‘the Apostle' are often mentioned together. APOSTLES’ CREED (à-pôs's'ls kréd). The creed thus named is not to be ascribed to the Apostles themselves. It has been a growth or evolution of the doc- trine (or commission) given by Christ to the Apostles (Matt. xxviii:19). From this simple acknowledgment of the three- fold name have sprung all the more elaborated creeds of the Christian churches. The Apostles' Creed has never been regarded and treated as Scripture, but has been subjected at various times to changes or modifications. One of the first expansions of the creed after the manner of the Apostles is to be found in a Greek writer, Epiphanius, who, in the seventy- second book of his “Treatise on Heresies,” quotes the Confession of Faith, presented by Marcellus, Bishop of Ancyra in Galatia, to Julius, Bishop of Rome, in which one small change is made, and afterward is thus quoted in one of our own Church hymns, i. e., “and sitteth at the right hand of God.” The definite authority of the Apostles' Creed has been supposed to be St. Augustine, but this is in obscurity. However, no authority places its origin farther back than the fifth century. Its growth extended over four hundred years, from the first conception of a creed, when Jesus spoke to Peter at Caesarea Philippi, saying, “But whom say ye that I am P And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the son of the living God” (Matt. xvi :16). These forms and ex- pressions of belief were set forth again and again by Peter and Paul. On the day of Pentecost (Acts ii:22, 36) Peter was filled with the Holy Ghost and spoke of Christ's supernatural life, of the crucifixion, the resurrection, ascension, and that Christ had re- ceived of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, and the remission of sins. Paul, as he preached at Antioch in Pisidia (Acts xiii:27-38) gives the same doctrine in substance, but adds that the people desired that Pilate should crucify Jesus, though he was without fault. And in the book of Acts (iii:I2-22 and iv:Io-I2) Peter speaks on all the points before touched upon. And later Peter, before Cornelius (Acts x:36-43), says, “God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost . ... and he . . . was ordained of God to be the judge of the quick and the dead.” The simplicity and vivid appeal of the Apostles' Creed to the uneducated mind, and to children, impresses all, and probably it was its short, terse sentences, so full of faith, of tragedy, of light upon the here and the hereafter, that attracted the men of great minds and diverse beliefs, as Calvin, Wesley, Luther, St. Augustine, and hosts of others. It is conceded by all authorities to be the concen- trated essence of scriptural belief. How simple and concrete are all its expressions ! The divine life of Christ is emphasized and faith centered in him through the promise of remission of sins and the assurance of the resurrection—the sure foun- dation of the hope of immortality. The creed is not a definite statement in regard to the difference between the corruptible mortal body and the in- corruptible body which shall finally clothe the soul. It does express absolute belief in the life everlasting and the personal or individual identity hereafter, And we understand at once the divin- 126 APOSTOLICAL COUNCIL ity and the humility of Christ in the words, as we say them reverently, “Conceived of the Holy Ghost and born of the Virgin Mary.” The great purpose of the creed is thus to make prominent the supernatural character of the Christian re- ligion. A full and satisfactory account of the creed will be found in Lord King's History of the Apostles' Creed, with Critical Observations on Its Several Articles; What is the Apostles' Creed 2 by Prof. W. E. C. Wright, Bib. Sacra, Apr., 1900, p. 377, Sq. APOSTOLATE (à-pôs'tū-lāte), in a general sense, is used for mission; but it more properly denotes the dignity or office of an apostle of Christ. It is also used in ancient writers for the office of a bishop. But as the title apostolicus has been ap- propriated to the pope, so that of apostolate be- came at length restrained to the sole dignity of the popedom. APOSTOLIC A.G.E (ap-ös-tól'ik aj), that period of Church history which covers the time between the day of Pentecost and the death of John, the last apostle. The apostolic age is commonly divided into three periods: I. From the Pentecost until the Second appearance of Paul (about A. D. 4I). 2. Until the death of Paul (about 67). 3. The Johannean period (about IOO). APOSTOLIC, APOSTOLICAL (äp-ös-tól'ík, āp-ös-tól'íkal), belonging or relating to or traceable to the apostles, as apostolical age, apostolical doc- trine, apostolical character, constitutions, tradi- tions, etc. Apostolic, in the primitive church, was an ap- pellation given to all such churches as were founded by the apostles; and even to the bishops of those churches, as being the reputed successors Of the apostles. These were confined to four, viz., Rome, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem. In after times, the other churches assumed the same quality, on account, principally, of the conformity of their doctrine with that of the churches which were apostolical by foundation, and because all bishops held themselves successors of the apos- tles, or acted in their diocese with the authority of apostles. The first time the term apostolical is attributed to bishops, as such, is in a letter of Clovis to the council of Orleans, held in 5 II, though that king does not there expressly denominate them apos- tolical, but (apostolica sede dignissimi) highly worthy of the apostolical see. In 581, Guntram calls the bishops met at the council of Macon, apostolical pontiffs, apostolici pontifices. In progress of time, the bishop of Rome grow- ing in power above the rest, and the three patri- archates of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem falling into the hands of the Saracens, the title apostolical was restrained to the pope and his church alone; though some of the popes, and St. Gregory the Great, not contented to hold the title by this tenure, began at length to insist that it belonged to them by another and peculiar right, as being the successors of St. Peter. The council of Rheims, in Ioag, declared that the pope was the sole apostolical primate of the universal church. And hence a great number of apostol- icals; apostolical see, apostolical nuncio, apostol- ical notary, apostolical brief, apostolical chamber, apostolical vicar, etc. APOSTOLICAL COUNCIL (äp-ös - tol'í - kal koun'sil), the assembly of the apostles and elders held in Jerusalem (A. D. 50), an account of which is given in Acts xv. APOSTOLICAL CONSTITUTIONS 127 APOSTOLICAL CONSTITUTIONS (äp-ös-tó1'- i-kal kön'stí-tū’shūns), a collection of regulations attributed to the apostles, and supposed to have been collected by St. Clement, whose name they likewise bear. It is the general opinion, however, that they are spurious, and that St. Clement had no hand in them. They appeared first in the fourth cen- tury, but have been much changed and corrupted since. There are so many things in them different from and even contrary to the genius and design of the New Testament writers, that no wise man would believe, without the most convincing and irresistible proof, that both could come from the same hand. APOSTOLIC FATHERS (äp'ös-tól’ik fa'thérz), an appellation usually given to the writers of the first century who employed their pens in the cause of Christianity. Of these writers, Cotelerius, and, after him, Le Clerc, have published a collection in two volumes, accompanied both with their own annotations and the remarks of other learned men. See, also, the Genuine Epistles of the Apos- tolic Fathers, by Abp. Wake. APPAIM (äp'pa-lm), (Heb. Fºº, aft-ſa/yim, the nostrils), son of Nadab (B. C. I.4OO), and de- scended from Jerahmeel, the founder of an im- portant family of the tribe of Judah (I Chron. ii:30, 3I). APPAREL (āp-pár'él), (generally Heb. "33, behg'ed, dress, or some form of Chald. tºº, /eb- oosh', clothing). See DRESS. e APPARENTLY (#p-pár'ent-ly). “With him will I Speak mouth to mouth even apparently and not in dark speeches” (Num. xii:8). The word ap- parently means manifestly, openly, clearly, and not according to modern usage, seemingly. APPEAL (äp-pêl'). The right of appeal to supe- rior tribunals has generally been considered an essential concomitant of inferior judicatories. When, from the paucity of the population or any other cause, the subjects of litigation are few, justice is usually administered by the first author- ity in the State, from whose award no appeal can lie. But when the multiplication of causes pre- cludes the continuance of this practice, and one or more inferior courts take cognizance of the less important matters, the right of appeal to the superior tribunal is allowed, with increasing re- strictions, as, in the course of time, subjects of litigation multiply, and as the people become weaned from the notion that the administration of justice is the proper function of the chief civil magistrate. (1) In Patriarchal Times. In the patriarchal times, as among the Bedouins, the patriarch or head of the tribes, that is to say, the Sheikh, ad- ministered justicº ; and, as there was no superior power, there could be no appeal from his de- cisions. The only case of procedure against a criminal which occurs during the patriarchal period is that in which Judah commanded the Supposed adulterous Tamar to be brought forth and burnt (Gen. xxxviii:24). But here the woman was his daughter-in-law and the power which Judah exercised was that which a man possessed over the females of his own immediate family. If the case had been between man and man, Judah could have given no decision, and the matter would, without doubt, have been re- ferred to Jacob. (2) In the Desert. In the desert Moses at first judged all causes himself; and when, finding his time and strength unequal to this duty, he, at the suggestion of Jethro, established a series of APPEARING judicatories in a numerically ascending scale (Exod. xviii: 13-26), he arranged that cases of difficulty should be referred from the inferior to the superior tribunals, and in the last instance to himself. Although not distinctly stated, it ap- pears from various circumstances that the clients had a right of appeal, similar to that which the courts had of reference. When the prospective distribution into towns, of the population which had hitherto remained in one compact body, made other arrangements necessary, it was directed that there should be a similar reference of difficult cases to the metropolitan court or chief magis- trate for the time being (Deut. xvi :18; xvii:8-12). That there was a concurrent right of appeal ap- pears from the use Absalom made of the delay of justice which arose from the great number of cases that came before the king, his father (2 Sam. xv.:2-4). (3) Time of the Judges. The appeal lay in the time of the Judges to the judge (Judg. iv:5), and under the monarchy to the king, who appears to have deputed certain persons to inquire into the facts of the case, and record his decision thereon (2 Sam. xv.:3). Jehoshaphat delegated his judicial authority to a court permanently established for the purpose (2 Chron. xix :8). These courts were re-established by Ezra (Ezra vii:25). After the institution of the Sanhedrim the final appeal lay to them. (4) In the New Testament. The most re- markable case of appeal in the New Testament belongs to another class. It is the celebrated ap- peal of St. Paul from the tribunal of the Roman procurator Festus to that of the emperor; in con- sequence of which he was sent as a prisoner to Rome (Acts xxv : Io, II, 25). Such an appeal having been once lodged, the governor had noth- ing more to do with the case; he could not even dismiss it, although he might be satisfied that the matter was frivolous, and not worth forwarding to Rome. Accordingly, when Paul was again heard by Festus and king Agrippa (merely to obtain materials for a report to the emperor), it was admitted that the apostle might have been liberated if he had not appealed to Caesar (Acts xxvi :32). Paul might therefore seem to have taken a false step in the matter, did we not con- sider the important consequences which resulted from his visit to Rome. It may easily be seen that a right of appeal which, like this, involved a long and expensive journey, was by no means frequently resorted to. In lodging his appeal Paul exercised one of the high privileges of Roman citizenship which be- longed to him by birth (Acts xxii:28). The right of appeal connected with that privilege originated in the Valerian, Porcian, and Sem- pronian laws, hy which it was enacted that if any magistrate should order flagellation or death to be inflicted upon a Roman citizen, the accused person might appeal to the judgment of the people, and that meanwhile he should suffer nothing at the hands of the magistrate until the people had judged his cause. But what was originally the prerogative of the people had in Paul's time be- come that of the emperor, and appeal therefore was made to him. Hence Pliny (Ep. x:97) men- tions that he had sent to Rome some Christians, who were Roman citizens, and had appealed unto Caesar. This privilege could not be disallowed by any magistrate to any person whom the law en- titled to it. APPEARING (#p-pêr'íng), of our Lord (1 Tim. vi; I4; 2 Tim. i: Io; iv: I, 8, etc.). See MILLEN- NIUM, APPHIA APPHIA (äf'fi-á), (Gr. 'Atripta, ap-fee'a), the name of a woman (Philemon ii), addressed jointly with Archippus and Philemon and proba- bly the wife of the latter (A. D. 64), with whom, according to tradition, she suffered martyrdom. APPII-FORUM (äp'pí-i-fo'rum), (Gr.'Atrirtov pó- pov, aft-Øee'oo /o/, 'ron), a market town in Italy, 43 miles from Rome (Itiner. Anton., p. 107), on the great road (via Appia) from Rome to Brundu- sium, constructed by Appius Claudius. 128 The remains of an ancient town, supposed to be Appii-Forum, are still preserved at a place called Casarillo di Santa Maria, on the border of the Pontine marshes. Its vicinity to the marshes accounts for the badness of the water, as men- tioned by Horace (Sat. i :5, 7). When St. Paul was taken to Italy, Some of the Christians of Rome, being apprised of his approach, journeyed to meet him as far as Appii-Forum and the Three Taverns (Acts xxviii: I5). The Three Taverns were eight or ten miles nearer to Rome than Appii-Forum. The probability is that some of the Christians remained at the Three Taverns, where it was known the advancing party would rest, while some others went on as far as Appii- Forum to meet Paul on the road. It must be understood that Tres Tabernae was, in fact, the name of a town ; for in the time of Constantine, Felix, bishop of Tres Tabernae, was one of the nineteen bishops who were appointed to decide the controversy between Donatus and Caecilianus. APPLE, APPLE-TREE (#p'p'l tre). See TAP- PUACH. (Cant. ii:3-5; vii:8; viii:5; Joel i :12). Spoken of in the Scriptures as excellent “among the trees of the wood,” of pleasant shadow, with Sweet, beautiful and fragrant fruit. The Hebrew word, by its meaning, is thought to emphasize the latter property. The apple proper is rare in Syria, and its fruit is inferior. Writers have urged the citron, Orange, quince, and apricot as the trees meant. The fruit of the latter two alone is specially aro- matic, and of these the quince is not sweet in taSte. The apricot is Holy Land, and of it Tristram says: “Many times have we pitched our tents in its shade and spread our carpets secure from the rays of the sun.” “There can scarcely be a more deliciously-per- fumed fruit than the apricot; and what fruit can better fit the epithet of Solomon, “apples of gold in pictures of silver,’ than this golden fruit as its branches bend under the weight in their setting of bright, yet pale, foliage?” The expression of Solomon just referred to (Prov. xxv II) is also APPLES OF SODOM It has furnished many moralists with allusions, and also our poet Milton, in whose infernal re- gions— A grove sprung up—laden with fair fruit— greedily they plucked The fruitage, fair to sight, like that which grew Near that bituminous lake, where Sodom flamed. This, more delusive, not the touch, but taste Deceived. They, fondly thinking to allay Their appetite with gust, instead of fruit Chewed bitter ashes, which the offended taste With spattering noise rejected:— Tacitus and Josephus both refer to it. M. Seetzen, a renowned traveler of the last century, writes as follows regarding the subject: “The information which I have been able to collect on the apples of Sodom (Solanum Sod- omeum) is very contradictory, and insufficient; I believe, however, that I can give a very natural everywhere abundant in the supposed to compare fruit in silver baskets, or salvers curiously wrought like basket-work, and perhaps representing animals or landscapes, to seasonable advice wisely and courteously admin- istered (Schaff, Bzó. Dicz.). APPLE OF THE EYE (āp'p'ſ ov the i), (Heb. Tºš, ee-shome', little man, or pupil of the eye, Prov. vii:2; Zech. ii:8). Apple here represents an entirely different word from the word of the preceding topic, meaning the front and most sensitive part of the organ of vision. The same figure is used (Deut. xxxii:Io; Ps. xvii:8) to denote the most complete protec- tion and security. And in Lam. ii:18, the phrase “apple of thine eye” is figuratively used for tears. APPLES OF SODOM (ap'p'lz čv séd'om), is a phrase associated with the Dead Sea, as the name of a fruit said to have all the appearance of the most inviting apple while it was filled with nause- ous and bitter dust only. explanation of the phenomenon, and that the fol- lowing remark will lead to it. While I was at Karrak, at the house of a Greek curate of the town, I saw a sort of cotton, resembling silk, which he used as a tinder for his match-lock, as it could not be employed in making cloth. He told me that it grew in the plains of el-Gór, to the east of the Dead Sea, on a tree like a fig tree, called AOéschaer. The cotton is contained in a fruit resembling the pomegranate; and by making incisions at the root of the tree, a sort of milk is procured, which is recommended to bar- ren women, and is called Lébbin Aoéschaer. It has struck me that these fruits, being, as they are, without pulp, and which are unknown throughout the rest of Palestine, might be the famous apples of Sodom. I suppose, likewise, that the tree which produces it, is a sort of fromager (Bombyx, Linn.), which can only flourish under the ex- cessive heat of the Dead Sea, and in no other district of Palestine.” This curious subject is further explained, in a note added by M. Seetzen’s editor, who considers the tree to be a species of Asclepias, probably the Asclepias Gigantea. The remark of M. Seetzen is corroborated by a traveler, who passed a long time in situations where this plant is very abun- dant. The same idea occurred to him when he first saw it in 1792, though he did not then know that it existed near the lake Asphaltites. The umbella, somewhat like a bladder, containing from half a pint to a pint, is of the same color with the leaves, a bright green, and may be mistaken for an inviting fruit, without much stretch of im– agination. That, as well as the other parts, when green, being cut or pressed, yields a milky juice, of a very acrid taste; but in winter, when dry, it contains a yellowish dust, in appearance re- sembling certain fungi common in South Britain, but of pungent quality, and said to be particularly injurious to the eyes. The whole so nearly cor- responds with the description given by Solinus (Polyhistor), Josephus, and others, of the Poma Sodomae, allowance being made for their extrava- gant exaggerations, as to leave little doubt on the subject. Seetzen’s account is partly confirmed by the la- mented Burckhardt. He says: “The tree Asheyr is very common in the Ghor. It bears a fruit of a reddish yellow color, about three inches in diam- eter, which contains a white substance, resembling the finest silk. The Arabs collect the silk, and twist it into matches for their fire-locks, prefer- ring it to the common match because it ignites more readily. More than twenty camel loads might be produced annually.” p. 392, AQUILA Chateaubriand describes it as thorny, with small taper leaves, and its fruit is exactly like the small Egyptian lemon in size and color. Before the fruit is ripe it is filled with a corrosive and saline juice; when dried, it yields a blackish seed, which may be compared to ashes, and which in taste resembles bitter pepper. Mr. King found the same shrub and fruit near Jericho, and seems also inclined to regard it as the apple of Sodom. (Miss. Herald for 1824, p. 99; Mod. Traveler, i. p. 206.) Most probably, however, the whole story in Tacitus and Josephus is a fable, which sprung up in connection with the singular and marvelous character of this region and its history. The whole account of the Dead Sea in Tacitus is of a similar kind. Even to the present day a like fable is current among the Arabs who dwell in the vicinity. Burckhardt says: “They speak of the Spurious pomegranate tree, producing a fruit pre- cisely like that of the pomegranate, but which, on being opened, is found to contain nothing but a dusty powder. This, they pretend, is the Sodom apple tree; other persons, however, deny its ex- istence,” p. 392. Robinson refers to the Osher as being in ac- cord in its appearance with the ancient story (Bib. Researches ii:236, sq.; Comp. Wilson, Bible Lands i:8, sq.; Kitto, Phys. His of Palestine, p. ccxc, sq.). AQUILA (äk'wi-lá), (Gr. 'AköAas, aā-oo'/as, an eagle), a Jew with whom Paul became acquainted On his first visit to Corinth, a native of Pontus and by Occupation a tent-maker. He and his wife Priscilla had been obliged to leave Rome in consequence of an edict issued by the Emperor Claudius, by which all Jews were banished from Rome–Judaeos, impulsore Chresto, asszałęe tumu/Zuantes Acoma ex/u/it (Sueton. Claud. c. 25; Neander's History of the Planting of the Christian Church, vol. i. p. 231; Lardner's Testimonies of Heathen Authors, ch. viii.). This decree was made not by the senate, but the em- peror, and lasted only during his life, if even So long. Whether Aquila and Priscilla were at that time converts to the Christian faith cannot be positively determined; Luke's expression, Tpoo?\6ev at Tots he came to them (Acts xviii:2), as Kuinoel observes, rather implies that Paul sought their society on grounds of friendship, than for the purpose of persuading them to em- brace Christianity. On the other hand, if we Suppose that they were already Christians, Paul's joining himself to them is highly probable; while, if they were still adherents to Judaism, they would have been less disposed than even unconverted Gentiles to form an intimacy with the Apostle. At all events, they had embraced Christianity before Patil left Corinth : for we are informed that they accompanied him to Ephesus, and meeting there with Apollos, who ‘knew only the baptism of John,' they ‘instructed him in the way of God more perfectly’ (Acts xviii:25, 26). From that time they appear to have been zealous promoters of the Christian cause. Paul styles them his “helpers in Christ Jesus,’ and intimates that they had ex- posed themselves to imminent danger on his ac- count (Rom. xvi;3, 4), though of the time and place of this transaction we have no information. When Paul wrote his epistle to the Romans they were at Rome; but some years after they returned to Ephesus, for Paul sends salutations to them in his Second Epistle to Timothy (2 Tim. iv:19; Lardner’s Credibility, part ii. ch. II). Their oc- cupation as tent-makers probably rendered it ne- cessary for them to keep a number of workmen 129 ARABAH constantly resident in their family, and to these (to such of them at least as had embraced the Christian faith) may refer the remarkable expres- Sion, ‘the Church that is in their house,” Tijº kar’ otkov attáv čkk\ma tav. The Greeks call Aquila bishop and apostle, and honor him on July 12. The festival of Aquila and Priscilla is placed in the Roman Calendar, where he is denoted Bishop of Heraclea, on July 8, (Calmet). º AR (ār), (Heb. Tº, awr, a city),the capital city of the Moabites (Num. xxi :28; Deut. ii:9, 18, 29), near the river Arnon (Num. xxi :13-15). It appears to have been burnt by King Sihon (Num. xxi:28), and Isaiah, in describing the future calamities of the Moabites, says, “In the night Ar of Moab is laid waste and brought to silence’ (IS. xv.:I). In his comment on this passage, Jerome states that in his youth there was a great earthquake, by which Ar was destroyed in the night time. This he evidently regards as a fulfilment of the prediction. The Greek name be- came Areopolis. The city was also called Ariel of Moab, Rabbah or Rabbath, and, to distinguish it from Rabbath of Ammon, Rabbath-Moab, Ptol- emy calls it Rabmathon; Steph. Byzantinus, Ra- bathmoma; and Abulfeda (Tab. Syr., p. 90), Rabbath, and also Mab. The site still bears the name of Rabbah. Is. xvi :7, II calls it “the city with walls of burnt brick;” in Hebrew Kirha- rescheth, or Kirjathhares. The spot has been visited and described by Seetzen, Burckhardt, Legh, Macmichael, and Irby and Mangles. It is about 17 miles east of the Dead Sea, IO miles south of the Arnon (Modjeb), and about the same distance north of Kerek. The ruins of Rabbah are situated on a low hill, which commands the whole plain. They present nothing of interest except two old Roman temples and Some tanks. Irby and Mangles (Letters, p. 457) remark, with surprise, that the whole circuit of the town does not seem to have exceeded a mile; but it is obvious from the descriptions that the city whose ruins they saw was a comparatively modern town, less important and extensive than the ancient metropolis of Moab. ARA (ā'rá), (Heb. 8. §, ar-aw', lion), one of the sons of Jether (I Chron. vii:38), B. C. before IOI7. - AIRAB (ā'rab), (Heb. Prs, ar-awó', ambush, a Court), a city in the mountains of Judah near Hebron (Josh. xv.;48-52). g ARABAH (är'a-bah), (Heb. "P.P., ar-aw-baw', the plain), a Hebrew word signifying in general a desert Žazz or steppe. In the Authorized Version it is translated ‘the plain,’ but in the original 1t appears to be supplied with the article on purpose, as the proper name (ha Arabah, the Arabah) of the great plain or valley in its whole extent, which is partly occu- pied by the Jordan and its lakes, and is prolonged from the Dead Sea to the Elanitic Gulf. (1) Descriptive. Arabah is now applied only to that portion of the valley which stretches from the chalk-cliffs below the Dead Sea southward to the Gulf of Akabah—Elanitic Gulf. It is about Ioo miles long and from 4 to 16 miles wide. The limestone walls on the west of the valley are from 1,500 to 1,800 feet in height; the mountain wall on the east side of the valley rises from 2,000 to 2,300 in height, and in Mount Hor to 5,000 feet, and is chiefly composed of granitic and basaltic rock. The surface of the valley is covered with ARABIA loose gravel, blocks of porphyry, and is furrowed with torrents, with scarcely a trace of vegetation. It is oppressively hot, is swept with burning winds, the Sirocco blowing at some seasons without inter- mission, a region dreary and desolate. The theory that the Jordan once ran through this valley into the Red Sea is now held to be untenable. Arabah in Josh. xviii: 18 has also been mistaken for the name of a city, and confounded with Beth-arabah of Josh. xv.:61; xviii:22; but in xviii: 18 the word has the article before it in the Hebrew, and hence refers to the plain, as elsewhere. (2) Historical. The Wady el Arabah appears to have been twice traversed by the Israelites; first on their way from Horeb to Kadesh Barnea, and afterwards when obliged to retrace their steps owing to the refusal of the king of Edom to allow them to pass through his land (Num. xx :21 ; Deut. ii:8). No passage for the host by which to circumvent Mount Seir was practicable till they reached the stony gorge of the Wady el Ithem, which enters the Arabah four miles north of Akabah. Travers- ing this rough and glistering ravine under the rays of an almost vertical sun, it is not surprising that, as we read, the soul of the people was much discouraged because of the way' (Num. xxi :4). In later times the Arabah became a caravan route from Arabia to Palestine and Syria. The fort and harbor of Akabah (Ezion- geber) now constitute an outpost for the Egyptian government, beyond which its authority does not extend ; the Arabah, as well as the Arabian desert, being held by independent Arab chiefs. (See ARABIA ; JORDAN, RIVER OF). ARABIA (a-rā'bi-á), (Heb. P.P., ar-awb', wilder- ness), an extensive region occupying the south- western extremity of Asia, between 12° 45' and 34%.” N. lat. and 32%% and 60° E. long. from Greenwich ; having on the W. the Isthmus of Suez and the Red Sea (called from it the Arabian Gulf), which separate it from Africa; on the S the Indian Ocean, and on the E. the Persian (Bulf and the Euphrates. - 1. TXescription and TXesignation. The bound- ary to the north has never been well defined, for in that direction it spreads out into interminable deserts, which meet those of Palestine and Syria on the west, and those of Irak-Arabi (i. e., Baby- lonia) and Mesopotamia on the east; and hence some geographers include that entire wilderness in Arabia. The form of the peninsula is that of a trapezoid, whose superficial area is estimated at four times the extent of France. With the history of no country save that of Palestine are there connected so many hallowed and impressive associations as with that of Arabia. Here lived and suffered the holy patriarch Job; here Moses, when ‘a stranger and a shepherd,’ saw the burning, unconsuming bush ; here Elijah found shelter from the rage of persecution; here was the scene of all the marvelous displays of divine power and mercy that followed the deliver- ance of Israel from the Egyptian yoke, and ac- companied their journeyings to the Promised Land; and here Jehovah manifested himself in visible glory to his people. From the influence of these associations, combined with its proximity to Palestine, and the close affinity in blood, man- ners, and customs between the northern portion of its inhabitants and the Jews, Arabia is a region of peculiar interest to the student of the Bible; and it is chiefly in its relation to subjects of Bible study that we are now to consider it. The sacred historian of the children of Israel will never be thoroughly understood so long as we are not 130 ARABIA minutely acquainted with everything relating to the Arab Bedouins and the countries in which they move and pasture. (1) Early and Vague Names. In early times the Hebrews included a part of what we call Arabia among the countries they vaguely desig- nated as Kedem, the East, the inhabitants being numbered among the Beni-Kedem, Sons of the East. But there is no evidence to show (as is asserted by Winer, Rosenmüller, and other Bible- geographers) that these phrases are ever applied to the whole of the country known to us as Arabia. They appear to have been commonly used in speaking of those parts which lay due east of Palestine, or on the northeast and southeast; though occasionally they do seem to point to tracts which lay indeed to the south and southwest of that country, but to the east and southeast of Egypt. Hence Joseph Mede (who is followed by Bellermann, Handbuch d. Bib. Literat. th: iii. p. 220) is of opinion that the phraseology took its rise at the period when the Israelites were in Egypt, and was retained by them as a mode of speech after they were settled in Canaan. That conjecture would, doubtless, considerably extend the meaning of the term ; yet even then it could scarcely embrace the extreme south of Arabia, a queen of which (on the supposition of Yemen being identical with Sheba) is, in the New Testa- ment, styled not ‘a queen of the East, but a queen of the South. Accordingly, we find that whenever the expression Kedem has obviously a reference to Arabia, it invariably points to its northern divi- sion only. Thus in Gen. xxv :6, Abraham is said to have sent away the sons of Hagar and Keturah to the Eretz-Kedem—Kedemah, i. e., the East country eastward; and none of them, so far as we know, were located in peninsular Arabia; for the story which represents Ishmael as settling at Mecca is an unsupported native tradition. The patriarch Job is described (Job i :3) as ‘the great- est of all the men of the east,’ and though opin- ions differ as to the precise locality of the land of Uz, all are agreed that it was in some part of Arabia, but certainly not in Arabia Felix. In the Book of Judges (vi :3; vii:I2; viii: IO) among the allies of the Midianites and Amalekites (tribes of the north) are mentioned the ‘Beni- Redem," which Josephus translated by "Apašas, the Arabs. In Is. xi.; I4, the parallelism requires that by ‘sons of the east' we understand the No- mades of Desert Arabia, as corresponding to the Philistines ‘on the west;’ and with these are coil- joined the Edomites, Moabites, and Ammonites, who were all northern Arabians. The command was given (Jer. xlix:28) to the Babylonians ‘to smite the Beni-Kedem, who are there classed with the Kedarenes, descendants of Ishmael (comp. 1 Kings iv:30). In more modern times a name of similar import was applied to the Arabs gen- erally; they were called Saracens (Sharakiyun, i. e., Orientals) from the word shark, ‘the east,’ whence also is derived the term sirocco, the east wind. It is to be remarked here that though in Scrip- ture Kedem most commonly denotes Northern Arabia, it is also used of countries farther east, e.g. of the native country of Abraham (IS. xli:2; comp. Gen. xxix:1), of Balaam (Num. xxiii:7), and even of Cyrus (Is. xlvi. II); and, therefore, though the Magi who came to Jerusalem (Matt, ii: 1) were from the east, it does not thence follow that they were natives of Arabia. (2) Ancient Name. We find the name Arab first beginning to occur about the time of Solo- mon. It designated a portion of the country, an ARABIA inhabitant being called Arabi, an Arabian (Is.xiii: 2O), or in later Hebrew, Arbi (Neh. ii:19), the plural of which was Arbim (2 Chron. xxi.; I6), or Arbiim (Arabians) (2 Chron. xvii:II). In some places these names seem to be given to the NO- madic tribes generally (Is. xiii:20; Jer. iii:2) and their country (Is. xxi :13). The kings of Arabia from whom Solomon (2 Chron. ix:14) and Jehoshaphat (2 Chron. xvii:II) received gifts were, probably, Bedouin chiefs; though in the place parallel to the former text (I Kings x:15), instead of Arab we find Ereb, rendered in Jer. xxv :20, 24, ‘mingled people,’ but which Gesenius, fol- lowing the Chaldee, understands to mean ‘foreign allies.’ In all the passages where the word Arab occurs it designates only a small portion of the territory known to us as Arabia. Thus, in the account given by Ezekiel (xxvii:21) of the Ara- bian tribes that traded with Tyre, mention is Specially made of Arab (comp. Jer. xxv.24). In 2 Chron. xxi : 16; xxii: I ; xxvi :7; Neh. iv.:7, we find the Arabians classed with the Philistines, the Ethiopians (i. e., the Asiatic Cushites, of whom they are said to have been neighbors), the Mehu- nims, the Ammonites, and Ashdodites. At what period this name Arab was extended to the whole region it is impossible to ascertain. From it the Greeks formed the word 'Apašta, which occurs twice in the New Testament; in Gal. i :17, in ref- erence, probably, to the tract adjacent to Damas- cene Syria, and in Gal. iv:25, in reference to the } \\ \ * *- 2-‘.g := * * == = *- >:=" & Ararat. whither the sons of Sennacherib, king of Assyria, fled after they had murdered their father. The apocryphal book of Tobit (i:2I) says it was to the mountains of Ararath. This points to a territory which did not form part of the im- mediate Juuliului, Uſ Assyria, and yet tilight flot be far off from it. The description is quite ap- plicable to Armenia, and the tradition of that country bears that Sennacherib's sons were kindly received by king Paroyr, who allotted them portions of land bordering on Assyria. (2) Kingdom of Ararat. The other Scrip- ture text (Jer, li:27) mentions Ararat, along with Minni and Ashkenaz, as kingdoms sum- moned to arm themselves against Babylon. In the parallel place in Is. xiii:2-4, the invaders of Babylonia are described as ‘issuing from the mountains;’ and if by Minni we understand the Minyas in Armenia, mentioned by Nicholas of Damascus (Josephus, Antiq. i :3, 6), and by Ashkenag some country on the Eurine Sea, which may have had its original name, Aaremos, from Ashkenaz, a son of Gomer, the progenitor of the in memory of which the whole province was called Aray-iarat, the ruin of Arai. (3) Babylonian Tablets. In the Story of the Deluge, as given in the Accadian account found on the Babylonian Tablets, Sisuthros built the ship in which he was saved. It was in the land of Nizir in which the vessel of Sisuthros rested. This country was situated among the mountains of Pir Mam, to the northeast of Babylonia. Rowandiz, the highest peak in this part of Asia, rises a little to the north of the Pir Mam, and it seems probable, therefore, that it represents ‘the mountain of Nizir.’ The whole country had been included by the Accadians in the vast territory of Guti, or Gutium, which roughly corresponds with the modern Kurdistan. It is accordingly worth notice that a widespread Fastern tradition makes Gebel Gudi, or Mount Gudi, the mountain on which the ark rested, and that in early Jewish legend this mountain is called Lubar or Baris, the boundary between Armenia and Kurdistan, in the land of the Minni. Ararat, or Urardhu, as it is written in the cunei- ARARAT 140 form inscriptions, denoted Armenia, and more particularly the district about Lake Van ; so that ‘the mountains of Ararat,’ of which Genesis speaks, might easily have been the Kurdish ranges of Southern Armenia. It was not until a very late period that the name of Ararat was first applied and then confined to the lofty Inoun- tains in the north. (Sayce, Fresh Light from Ancient Monuments, pp. 33, 34. See also The Monuments and the Old Testament, by Ira Maurice Price, pp. 89. Sq.). But though it may be concluded with tolerable certainty that the land of Ararat is to be identi- fied with a portion of Armenia, we possess no historical data for fixing on any one mountain in that country as the resting place of the ark. The ancients attached a peculiar sacredness to the tops of high mountains, and hence the be- lief was early propagated that the ark must have rested on some such lofty eminence. (4) Early Tradition. The earliest tradition fixed on one of the chain of mountains which separate Armenia on the south from Mesopo- tamia, and which, as they also inclose Kurdistan, the land of the Kurds, obtained the name of the Kardu, or Carduchian range, corrupted into Gordiaean and Cordyaean. This opinion prevailed among the Chaldaeans, if we rely on the testi- mony of Berosus as quoted by Josephus (Antiq. i:3, 6): ‘It is said there is still some part of this ship in Armenia, at the mountain of the Cordy- aeans, and that people carry off pieces of the bitumen, which they use as amulets.” The same is reported by Abydenus (in Euseb. Praeff. Fºyang. ix :4), who says they employed the wood of the vessel against diseases. Hence we are prepared to find the tradition adopted by the Chaldee para- phrasts, as well as by the Syriac translators and commentators, and all the Syrian churches. (5) Known to Europeans. The mountain thus known to Europeans as Ararat consists of two immense conical elevations, one peak con- siderably lower than the other, towering in massive and majestic grandeur from the valley Smith and of the Aras, the ancient Araxes. Dwight give its position N. 57° W. of Nakh- chevan, and S. 25° W. of Erivan (Researches in Armenia, p. 267); and remark, in describing it before the recent earthquake, that in no part of the world had they seen any mountain whose imposing appearance could plead half so power- fully as this a claim to the honor of having once been the stepping-stone between the old world *and the new. Nothing can be more beautiful than its shape, more awful than its height. All the surrounding mountains sink into insignificance when com- pared to if If is perfect in all its parts; no hard rugged feature, no unnatural prominences, everything is in harmony, and all combines to render it one of the sublimest objects in nature. (6) Attempted Ascents. Several attempts had been made to reach the top of Ararat, but few persons had got beyond the limit of per- petual snow. The French traveler, Tournefort, in the year 17oo, long persevered in the face of many difficulties, but was foiled in the end. Be- tween thirty and forty years ago the Pasha of Bayazeed undertook the ascent with no better success. The honor was reserved to a German, Dr. Parrot, in the employment of Russia. summit of the Great Ararat is in 39° 42° north lat. and 61° 55' east long. from Ferro. Its per- pendicular height is 16,254 Paris feet above the level of the sea, and 13,350 above the plain of the Araxes. The Little Ararat is 12,284 Paris feet The ARAUNAH above the Sea and 9,561 above the plain of the Araxes. The Summit of Mount Ararat is a slightly convex, almost circular platform, about 200 Paris feet in diameter, composed of eternal ice, unbroken by a rock or stone. The ascent of the mountain by Dr. Parrot, and afterwards by a Mr. Antonomoff, is stoutly denied by the natives, and especially by the in- mates of the neighboring convent of Echmiadzin, who have a firm persuasion that in order to preserve the ark no one is permitted to approach it. This is based on the tradition that a monk, who once made the attempt, was, when asleep from exhaustion, unconsciously carried down to the point whence he had started ; but at last, as the reward of his fruitless exertions, an angel was sent to him with a piece of the ark, which is preserved as the most valuable relic in the cathedral of Echmiadzin. (7) Earthquake Effects. Since the memora- ble ascent of Dr. Parrot, Ararat has been the scene of a fearful calamity. An earthquake, which in a few moments changed the entire as- pect of the country, commenced on the 20th of June (O. s.), 1840, and continued, at intervals, until the Ist of September. Traces of fissures and landslips have been left on the surface of the earth, which the eye of the scientific observer will recognize after many ages. The destruction of houses and other property in a wide tract of country around was very great; fortunately, the earthquake having happened during the day, the loss of lives did not exceed fifty. The scene of greatest devastation was in the narrow valley of Akorhi, where the masses of rock, ice, and snow, detached from the summit of Ararat and its lateral points, were thrown at one single bound from a height of 6,000 feet to the bottom of the valley, where they lay scattered over an extent of several miles. (See Major “Voskoboinikof’s Report, in the Athenaeum for 1841, p. 157.) (8) Cuneiform Characters. “The cuneiform characters of Assyria were introduced into the kingdom of Ararat in the ninth century B. C. The syllabary was greatly simplified, each char- acter having only a single phonetic value at- tached to it, and the greater number of charac- ters expressing closed syllables being rejected. The vowels were usually denoted by separate characters, and a good many ideographs were borrowed. It is to the use of these ideographs that the decipherment of the Vannic inscriptions is mainly due. The inscriptions are carved on rocks, altar-stones, columns, and the like, and are in a language which shows little resemblance to any other with which we are acquainted, though it may be distantly related to modern Georgian.” (Hastings' Bib. Dict.). ARAUNAH (a-rau'nah), (Heb. "#"TS, ar-az- mazeſ'), or ORNAN (Heb. l: º, or-mawn', a strong one, or a hero), was a Jebusite who lived at Jeru- salem and owned a thrashing place or floor, where the temple was afterward built (2 Sam. xxiv:16). David bought it of him because the destroying angel sent to desolate the nation, in consequence of David's sin of numbering the people, stayed his hand at the command of God just as he had reached the floor. Araunah refused at first to receive anything for it, but offered it to him, together with oxen for sacrifices, and the timber of the threshing instruments for fuel. David re- fused to receive them as a gift, as he would not offer to the Lord that which had cost him noth- ing. . He therefore bought the oxen for fifty shekels of silver (2 Sam. xxiv:24), and the te ARBA 141 whole place for six hundred 'shekels of gold (I Chron. xxi.25), and offered his sacrifices, which were accepted and the plague stayed. 2 Sam. xxiv:23 may be better translated: “The whole, O king, does Araunah give unto the King.” But taking the Authorized Version translation as it stands, it favors the view of some that the expression “Araunah the king” implies that he was one of the kings of the Jebusites. ARBA (är'bá), (Heb. vºs, ar-bah", four). See HEBRON. e ARBATHITE (ar'bath-ite),(Heb.º,ar-baw- th?, belonging to Arabah), a native of Arba. ARBATTIS (ar-bät’tis), a city of Galilee, taken and destroyed by Simon Maccabaeus (I Macc. v.:23). ARBELA (ar-bê'lā), a town of Zebulun (Hos. x:14). See BETH-ARBEI. ARBITE (är"bite), (Heb.º, ar-bi"), a native of Arabia. Paarai, the Arbite, was one of David's guards (2 Sam. xxiii:35). , ARCH (ärch), (Heb. P2 8, ay-lawm'). Arches with vaulted chambers and domed temples figure so conspicuously in modern Orien- tal architecture that, if the arch did not exist among the ancient Jews, their towns and houses could not possibly have offered even a faint re- Semblance to those which now exist; and this being the case, a great part of the analogical illus- trations of Scripture which modern travelers and Biblical illustrators have obtained from this Source must needs fall to the ground. It is therefore of importance to ascertain whether the arch did or did not exist in these remote times to which most of the history of at least the Old Testament belongs. Nothing against its exist- ence is to be inferred from the fact that no word signifying an arch can be found in the Hebrew Scriptures. The word so rendered in Ezek. x1:16, 22, 26, 29, has not that meaning. The architectural notices in the Bible are neces- Sarily few and general ; and we have at this day histories and other books, larger than the sacred volume, in which no such word as ‘arch’ occurs. There is certainly no absolute proof that the Israelites employed arches in their buildings; but if it can be shown that arches existed in Egypt at a very early period, we may safely infer that so useful an invention could not have been unknown in Palestine or unemployed in their buildings. Palestine was indeed better wooded than Egypt; but still that there was a deficiency of wood suitable for building and for roofs is shown by the fact that large importations of timber from the forests of Lebanon were necessary (2 Sam. vii:2, 7; I Kings v :6; I Chron. xxii:4; 2 Chron. ii:3; Ezra iii:7; Cant. i :17), and that this im- ported timber, although of no very high quality, was held in great estimation. ARCHAEOLOGY, THE NEW (är'ké-öl'ö-jy). Archaeology itself is so new a word that it may seem strange to speak of the “new archaeology” as we do of the “new astronomy.” But the contrast is intended in comparison with the old antiquarianism, and with the view of archaeology which has been taken from that. We have here exactly the old conflict which is seen in almost every other branch of learning— the intrusion of comparative methods of classifi- cation, and of the use of minute evidence, upon the older system of emotional and literary treat- 1.nent. The old antiquarian first loved his collections, and then read about them, and valued them as they illustrated his favorite authors; where the ARCHAEOLOGY, THE NEW written record failed he was lost in chartless seas of imagination. But now, in the newer system of research, everything is a document to the archaeologist. He may love his collections emo- tionally, just as much as his fathers did, but he values them for the sake of their meaning, and not only for their beauty. When once the idea of a meaning is attached to Specimens—the idea that they spell facts, as plainly as may be done by means of words—an entirely new standard of value is set up. Formerly things were collected entirely for their own sake; in which case their origins, their connections, and their dates are merely matters of curiosity. Now we collect things for the sake Of the facts which they tell, and their value al- most entirely rests on the precise knowledge of where they were found, with what other things they were accompanied, and of what date they are. The old collectors valued objects for their beauty or their rarity; we now value them as much as they did, and besides that, also for their meaning and for the tale they tell—we would not love them half so much, loved we not history fnore. Now, this new interest considerably changes the new system of collections, and completely alters the mode of collecting. In place of merely getting possession of antiquities, unlabeled, or with such labels as “found in a barrow in Ireland,” or “from Thebes,” and putting them together to make a collection, we now require to know exactly the locality, the circumstances of finding, the series of objects which were found together, and all indications of the age, and to have all this vouched for on sufficient authority. (1) Preserved by History. Instead of dig- ging merely to get things, we now dig to get history. We need not only to record everything found, but also to reason on all we see, to draw our inferences on the spot, to work slowly, so as to be in time to observe critical questions as we go on ; in short, to reconstruct on paper the series of past events of which we see the product in the ground that we are excavating. All this requires qualities different from a Bel- zoni, a Drovetti, or their later followers. The ex- cavator must be brother to the geologist in the mode of inference, brother to the naturalist in his closeness of observation, brother to the physicist in his knowledge of matter, and he must work with the spirit of a detective who rejoices in every indication of the thoughts of men, and whose delight is to unravel the mean- ing of the traces of past actions and doings. The first aim must be to preserve as perfect a record as may be; even if it shall not be all of it intelligible LU Lllu Ubsu ver. Tor unlike dealing with any natural science, history cannot be re- peated; and when any deposit is once disturbed, it is a page of history either, destroyed or re- corded. "What is not recorded is destroyed. And the responsibility of the excavator is there- fore far heavier than that of the student of na- ture. The latter's mistakes can always be cor- rected by his successors, but the archaeologist, is often compelled to destroy all the evidence which he does not record. Even down to the present time, excavators are doing, every year, more harm than good; some few are recording with reasona- ble completeness, but on the whole more histori- cal facts are yearly destroyed than are recorded. More is lost than is preserved by them, and more harm—unseen and unheeded—is being done than the good which is put on record. ARCHAEOLOGY, THE NEW 142 We need far more conscience, and a far higher respect for our responsibilities. We curse the invaders who turned to the basest utility the priceless manuscripts of antiquity, while other such manuscripts are frequently being destroyed by sheer carelessness. We execrate the barbarian who knocked the head oſſ a statue, while we stand by and see the whole history of a statue, or a building, thrown away by not noting all that is found in connection with it. We scorn the ignorance of a Savage who fancies that treasure is hidden in a monument, while our museum fillers are hunting for what has a market value, and ignoring whatever is not showy to vulgar eyes. Though it is the essence of the new archae- ology to reason on everything that can be ob- served, however small or trivial, do not therefore think that small or trivial things are its object. By no means—they are only materials and not results. - The astronomer observes small and trivial things—hundredths of a second of angle, thou- sandths of an inch in the spectrum; and those are the materials for stupendous reasoning on the vast depths of space. The archaeologist ob- serves minute differences on a coin, a fragment of pottery, or the color of a scrap of glaze, and may from that safely deduce a lost page of dis- tant history. * To turn now to what is being done well. Of the excellent works of record and com- parison that are so liberally issued to the world by the Smithsonian Institution, it is need- less for me to say anything, as they cannot but be regarded as comprising models of research in the New World. In England, the high-water mark, so far, has been shown in the volumes of results made public by General Pitt-Rivers. The splendid record of every object, however minute; the precision of the diagram sections of excava- tion, showing in the great dykes thé exact na- ture of the ground, and the very place of every object found, so that any person can draw his own conclusions by simple inspection; the meth- ods of registration, descending even to every sin- gle chip of pottery, and so enabling statistical results to be safely laid down, bearing on the races and periods; the preservation of the skele- tons, and drawings of their exact positions; the measurements of all the skulls and skeletons; the abundant modeling of monuments and discov- eries so that they can be referred to in future times, in all these respects this work is a pat- tern which should be carefully studied and imi- tated so far as means may allow. (2) Barnabei. In Italy, some fine work has been done by Professor Barnabei in the hill cemeteries, which have furnished the museum of the Villa Papagiulio at Rome. Here every tomb has been planned in a general plan with hill shading, and also drawn in detail, showing the place of each object. The work will be pub- lished by the Lincei, and in the museum the contents of each tomb of importance are pre- served complete and kept together. At Bologna there is a notable series of burials transported entire into the museum—every bone —every tool—every vase—lying still embedded in the earth as originally laid to rest. Such are inspiring examples of the true method of work. (3) Bliss. In Palestine the excavations of Mr. Bliss for the fund have been carried on with full care for details. The mound of Lach- ish has been cut away over a third of the area, and removed layer by layer, town under town, ARCHAEOLOGY, THE NEW until ten or eleven towns have been successively examined, planned, and the objects registered at their various levels. Probably no such long series of dwellings on one site—sixty feet in height of ruins in all—has ever been so regularly explored, and so com- pletely recorded. Poor as the ruins of Palestine are, this is the only possible means of reaching their history; and the loss of facts and objects has been reduced to a minimum in this careful WOTR. (4) Eleven Years in Egypt. Now, I have been asked to say somewhat on my own results of the past eleven years in Egypt. Each year I have had to make a choice of evils; the ground before me was far more than I could work single- handed; and either I must have left the greater part of it unexamined, to be ransacked and ruined by natives as soon as I retired, or I must—as I have done—let much go by without full record, and reserve my attention to step in and preserve or note whatever was of unusual importance. At least by the system of paying the workmen for their finds, I have the satisfaction of know- ing that I have secured all that they discovered, and that nothing has wandered away through their hands. - (5) Historical Results. We will now sum- marize the principal results in chronological or- der. Of the earliest historical age, before 4000 B. C., there are the entire skeletons from Medium, the contracted posture of which is so different from that of the ordinary Egyptians, and which may belong to an aboriginal race. The temple of Seneferu, the oldest dated building, was found at Medium, quite perfect, beneath forty feet of rub- bish; and the sole guide to this discovery was the inference from the position of the ruins of other pyramid temples. At the same place the beautiful and skillful means of Setting out a building with sloping sides on an uneven founda- tion was fully revealed, and shows the correct system of working followed in the earliest times. The accurate copying of the hieroglyphs in the same cemetery has thrown light on the origin of the signs and opened a whole chapter of the lost prehistoric age of Egyptian civilization. At Gizeh the only work allowed to me was sur- veying, and not excavation for discoveries. But an accurate survey of the pyramids has given us a firm basis for judging of the grand skill and ability of the immediate successors of the Medtim builders at the beginning of the fourth dynasty. Nothing but the finest instruments, and months of work, are sufficient to reach the limits of their accuracy and their care. The fragments of the sculptor's waste left lying on the hillside have revealed the modes of cutting the hard stones and proved the use of jeweled saws and drills; the barracks of the masons have shown approximately the number of skilled hands permanently engaged. The measurements of the monuments have proved with what care they regulated their standard of measure. (6) XIIth Dynasty. Descending to the XIIth dynasty, about 2500 B. C., an entire town, known as Kahun, has been exhausted, over two thousand chambers being completely cleaned out, the floor- ing searched for hidden objects, , the houses planned and laid down in a survey. And we have as perfect a knowledge of every detail of a large town of over four thousand years ago, exactly as laid out by the architect, as if it were a set of mod- ern offices on a draughtsman's plan. The house- hold objects have revealed much of the life, the large series of papyri much extend our knowl- ARCHAEOLOGY, THE NEW edge of the language and writing of that age. We understand for the first time—from the wooden sickle set with flint saws—what was the purpose of the untold number of polished flint saws found in the Old World and in the New. We find that flint and copper were used side by side, and that bronze was not yet employed. The pyramid of Usertesen II, built by the work- men who inhabited this town, was opened, and the royal altar was found in it. The sites of the two temples of the pyramids were turned over, and the chips showed the names both of the king who built the temples and of Ramessu II, who destroyed them. The oldest foundation deposit of model tools, etc., was found Sunk in the rock bed of the temple. The pyramid of Hawara of the same dynasty was opened after months of mining, and by searching over the chips of stone lying deep in the water, the king's name was found—Amenemhat III. (7) XVIIIth Dynasty. Descending to the XVIIIth dynasty, about 1500 B. C., another town was cleared—Medinet Gurob–and the products of that age were collected. Here many clear evi- dences proved that the “Mykenaean” or Aegean” remains belong to this age. At both of these towns hundreds of signs have been found Scratched on the pottery. These are not known in any kind of Egyptian writing, though many of them may be traced to an Egyptian origin, and these signs were used in combination to express words. In short, they appear to be the materials of the alphabet in course of gradual formation, growth and Selection, and as every sign of the earliest Phoenician alphabet is almost exactly to be found among these, we can hardly refuse to See here the first stage of the Western scripts. Such signs are common in those towns which show strong traces of foreign occupation, but only about a fiftieth of the proportion are found in a thoroughly Egyptian town of the same age. This again suggests that they were used by the foreign people, who were ignorant of the compli- cations of the hieroglyphic system. * Of the end of the eighteenth dynasty the town built by Khuenaten about 1400 B.C., now known as Tell el Amarna, was excavated, principally over the palace, the rubbish heaps and the great temple. It had been most utterly destroyed anciently and only chips were to be found, yet these comprised highly valuable results. Over a thousand pieces of Greek vases of the “Aegean” or “Mykenaean” styles were found, mingled with dozens of the ob- jects of Khuenaten, proving the age of that Greek culture; the house from which came the celebrated cuneiform tablets was cleared, and parts of the dictionaries of the scribes were recovered; two great painted pavements of the palace have re- vealed an unexpected style of naturalism; por- tions of the gorgeoi1s inlaying of colored glazec and hard stones show the magnificence of the dec- Orations. The sites of the glass factories have yielded every stage of the glass making, from crude materials to finished vases; the glaze fac- tories have yielded thousands of molds, and in- numerable fragments of sculpture have proved the brilliancy and novel style of the naturalistic School of art peculiar to that reign. (8) XXVIth Dynasty. Of the twenty-sixth dynasty, about 600 B. C., a tomb was opened at Hawara, which contained the most complete and magnificent set of amulets yet known, and these are now preserved exactly in their original order. We now come to the age of the Greek settle- ments. The two great camps of the Greek mer- cenaries, one on each flank of the Delta, were dis- covered at Daphnae and Naukratis. At Daphnae 143 ARCHAEOLOGY, THE NEW the Tahpanhes of Jeremiah (Jer. ii:16; xliii:7-9; xlivi I; xlvi.14), (see TAHPANHES), to which the Jewish princesses fled, the fort is still called “The Palace of the Jew’s Daughter,” and the pavement before the entrance named by Jeremiah was iden- tified. Beneath the corners of the fort the foun- lºn deposits of Psammetichus were discov- €1 eCi. The chambers of the fort yielded a great variety of Greek vases of especial value, as it is his- torically certain that they belong to between the years 665 and 565 B. C., and the camp yielded a large quantity of arms, etc. At Naukratis the rubbish trench of the temple of Apollo was found, filled with portions of Greek vases, bearing the earliest series of Ionic inscrip- tions known, and probably the very earliest ex- amples. The celebrated temple of Aphrodite con- tained large quantities of painted Greek vases, many of the special wares of Naukratis. The Pan-hellenion and the other temples of the Dios- kouroi and Hera were also identified. And here were first found the foundation deposits, now so much valued for historical purposes. (9) Ptolemaic Times. Coming to Ptolemaic times the ignoble looking mummy coverings of the cemetery of Gurob have provided the oldest liter- ary papyri known, the fragments of Plato, Euri- pides and Homer, the series of wills of Greek soldiers, and the many letters and accounts which explain the condition of the Fayum and the organ- ization of the administration. (10) Roman Age. Of the Roman age many more papyri have been found, including the large series of burnt documents at Tanis; two of these now published are unique—the school book of hieroglyphs and the geographical lists. These papyri were completely carbonized, but yet per- fectly legible, and easily preserved by careful treatment. At Hawara the portrait paintings done in colored wax on panels, and attached to the mummies, have thrown much light on the style and methods of the Greek artists, and are aston- ishingly good considering the base period of the second and third centuries A. D. to which they belong. In all the periods the most abundant objects are pottery and beads, hence they are the most ready keys for the archaeologist to use in deciding historical questions. Special care has been taken in laying down clear results about these decisive materials. And though nothing was known about them ten years ago, yet now it is easy to name at once the date of a single chip of pottery or a sin- gle small bead. . (11) Conclusion. These results which I have thus briefly summarized will be seen to depend al- most entirely on the use of small evidences and lit- tle objectſ, such as would be quite neglected by the older system of work. If any justification of the scientific system of the new archaeology were needed, such a series of results obtained in eleven years by a single worker at a small cost would be enough. But principles which are obvious to those who will to understand them need no support from their results. To the scientific principles of the new archaeology we may look for harvests, which shall exceed all our past gatherings when these methods are thoroughly carried out, by all who take the responsibility of attacking the past, and of making or marring a chapter of history. W. M. F. P. (12) Tablet Concerning Israel. Since this article was written “A Tablet Concerning Israel” has been found by Professor Petrie, which is the largest yet discovered, being ten feet and three ARCHANGEL 144 inches high and five feet and four inches wide. It is of black syenite, highly polished, and covered with a scene of offering, and an inscription of thirty-one lines of hieroglyphics. This inscrip- tion had been for the most part erased by Akhen- aten, and then re-engraved by Seti I. Afterward it was stolen by Meretip Lali and engraved on thc back with a long inscription. - This inscription recorded mainly the deliverance of Egypt from the Libyans, and the flight of their king by night alone and on foot, leaving all his women behind without either food or drink. Towards the close he recited the various places taken in his Syrian war, and among these, ap- parently, in Northern Palestine, he spoiled “the people of Israel.” The rendering of this name is most distinct and has been accepted by Dr. Na- ville, Dr. Spiegelberg and Professor Maspero. Here we have the statement of the Egyptian king that he fought the people of Israel, appar- ently in Palestine, about 1200 B. C. This enor- mous tablet is one of the most important monu- ments yet found, on account of its great size, the length of the inscription, its completeness, and the unique importance of it to Biblical history. ARCHANGEL (ärk'ān-jël), (Gr. 3px4-yyeXos, chief angel, I Thess. iv:16; Jude 9.) See ANGEL. ARCHELAUS (ar'ke-lā'us), (Gr. 'Apxé\aos, peo- ple's chief), son of Herod the Great, and his suc- cessor in Idumaea, Judaea, and Samaria (Matt. ii.22). (See HERODIAN FAMILY.) AIR CHERY (ärch'er-y). See ARMS, ARMOR. ARCHEVITE (är'ke-vite), (Heb. Sº, ar- Æez-f", meaning uncertain; Chald. "º, ar-Āey- a/,'ee), perhaps the inhabitants of Erechi, who had a colony in Samaria (Ezra iv:9). ARCHI (är'ki), (Heb. with the art., "P Sº, ha- ar-Aee'), a city of Manasseh, near Bethel (Josh. xvi.2). Perhaps settled by a colony from Babylon, and named after Erech, in Babylonia. Conder identifies it with the village of 'A in 'A rek, which is in the required position. ARCHIPPUS (ar-kip'pus), (Gr. "Apxurtros, ar'- Á/.2%-fos, Chief groom). . A Christian minister, whom St. Paul calls his fellow-soldier, in Philem. ii, and whom he exhorts to renewed activity in Col. iv: 17. Archippus had exercised the office of Evangelista sometimes at Ephesus, sometimes elsewhere. He finally resided at Colosse, and there discharged the office of pre- siding presbyter or bishop when St. Paul wrote to the Colossian church. The exhortation given to him in this epistle has, without sufficient grounds, been construed into a rebuke for past negligence ARCHISYNAGOGUS (ar'kſs-cyn-a-go'gus), (Gr. dpx to ovváywyos, az-AE/.2s-tº-ma/ 'goh-gos, chief of the Synagogue), called also ruler of the synagogue (Luke viii:4I), and simply dipxau (Matt. ix:18). In large synagogues there appears to have been a college or council of elders (Tpeogörepot, Luke vii:3), to whom the care of the synagogue and the discipline of the congregation were com- mitted, and to all of whom this title was ap- plied (Mark v :22; Acts xiii:15; xviii:8, compared with verse I7). Their duties were to preside in the public services, to direct the reading of the Scriptures and the addresses to the congregation (Vitringa, De Synagoga Vetere, lib. 3, part i. c. 7; Comp. Acts xiii:I5), to superintend the dis- tribution of alms and to punish transgressors either by scourging (Comp. Matt. x:17; xxiii:34; Acts xxii: 19) or by excommunication. In a more ing to Grotius (Annotationes in Matt. ARCHITECTURE restricted sense the title is sometimes applied to the president of this council, whose office, *:::::::: 1x : Iö ; Luke xiii:I4) and many other writers, was differ- ent from and superior to that of the elders in gen- eral. Vitringa maintains that there was no such distinction of office. ARCHITE (är'kite), (Heb. with the art., "Pººl, /*a-ar-kee', the long), the usual designation of David's friend Hushai (2 Sam. xv.:32; xvi; 16; xvii: 5, 14), B. C. about IO50. ARCHITECTURE (ār-ki-téct'ure), (Gr. 3pxt- rékrwy, ar-Āhee-teå' tone, Lat. architectura). It was formerly common to claim for the He- brews the invention of scientific architecture, and to allege that classical antiquity was indebted to the Temple of Solomon for the principles and many of the details of the art. A statement so strange, and even preposterous, would scarcely seem to demand attention at the present day; but as it is still occasionally reproduced, and as some respectable old authorities can be cited in its favor, it cannot be passed altogether in silence. (See TEMPLE.) It may here suffice to remark that temples previously existed in Egypt, Babylon, Syria and Phoenicia, from which the classical an- cients were far more likely to borrow the ideas which they embodied in new and beautiful com- binations of their own. But there are few no- tions, however untenable, which have not some apparent foundation in fact. So in the present case, it is shown, first, that a resemblance of plan and detail can be traced between certain heathen temples and the Temple at Jerusalem, and, sec- ondly, it is alleged that this could not be owing to imitation in the latter, because the tabernacle, of which the Temple was a sort of imitation, was a divine suggestion, being framed according to a pattern shown to Moses on the Mount (Exod. xxv :40). This is the sole ground on which the claim made for the Hebrew architecture can be rested. But ‘a pattern' is not necessarily or prob- ably a new thing ; in the usual sense it is almost always a new combination or adaptation of exist- ing materials. And it may be shown, not only from historical probability, but from actual ex- amples (see ARK) that nothing more than this is here to be understood—nothing more than that Moses was instructed how best to apply the ma- terials of existing sacred architecture (more espe- cially that of Egypt) to the object in view. The pattern was necessary to make him understand how this application was to be made, and to ren- der it clear to him what parts of existing struc- tures should be rejected or retained. Indeed, this is proved by the Scripture itself; for David, in his charge to Solomon concerning the Temple, says: “All this the T ord made me understand in writing by his hand upon me, even all the works of this pattern (I Chron. xviii:19). Now, whatever be the meaning of this, it must mean nearly the same thing as in the parallel passage respecting the tabernacle. Yet it is on all hands admitted that the Temple of which this is said was an application and extension of ideas already exist- ing in the tabernacle. The text, therefore, must not be taken in the sense of complete Origination. There has never been any people for whom a peculiar style of architecture could with less prob- ability be claimed than for the Israelites. On leav- ing Egypt they could only be acquainted with Egyptian art. On entering Canaan they neces- sarily occupied the buildings of which they had dispossessed the previous inhabitants, and the suc- ceeding generations would naturally erect such buildings as the country previously contained. ARCHITRICLINUS 145 The architecture of Palestine, and as such, even- tually that of the Jews, had doubtless its own characteristics, by which it was suited to the cli- mate and condition of the country, and in the course of time many improvements would no doubt arise from the causes which usually operate in producing change in any practical art. From the want of historical data and from the total ab- sence of architectural remains, the degree in which these causes operated in imparting a peculiar character to the Jewish architecture cannot now be determined, for the oldest ruins in the country do not ascend beyond the period of the Roman domination. It does, however, seem probable that among the Hebrews architecture was always kept within the limits of a mechanical craft, and never rose to the rank of a fine art. Their usual dwelling-houses differed little from those of other eastern nations, and we nowhere find anything indicative of exterior embellishment. Splendid edifices, such as the palace of David and the Tem- ple of Solomon, were completed by the assistance of Phoenician artists (2 Sam. v :II; I Kings v :6, 18; 1 Chron. xiv:I). After the Babylonish exile the assistance of such foreigners was likewise resorted to for the restoration of the Temple (Ezra iii:7). From the time of the Maccabaean dynasty, the Greek taste began to gain ground, especially under the Herodian princes, who seem to have been possessed with a sort of mania for building, as was shown in the structure and em- bellishment of many towns, baths, colonnades, theaters and castles (Joseph. Antiq. xv :8, I ; xv : 19, 4; xv :Io, 3; De Bell. Jud. i :4, I). The Phoe- necian style, which seems to have had some affin- ity with the Egyptian, was not, however, super- seded by the Grecian, and even as late as the Mishna (Bava Bathra, iii:6), we read of Tyrian windows, Tyrian porches, etc. (See HOUSE.) With regard to the instruments used by build- ers—besides the more common, such as the ax, saw, etc., we find incidental mention of the compass and plumb-line (Amos vii:7). ARCHITRICLINUS (ar'ki-tri-cli'nus), (Gr. 'Apxurplk\ivos, ar-Āhi-trik'-lee-nos, master of the tri- clinium, or dinner-bed), very properly rendered in John ii:8, 9, ‘master of the feast,' equivalent to the Roman Magister Conviviz. The Greeks also denoted the same social officer by the title of Symposiarch, that is, Master of the Symposium. He was not the giver of the feast, but one of the guests specially chosen to direct the entertainment, and promote harmony and good fellowship among the company. In the apoc- ryphal Ecclesiasticus (xxxv :1, 2) the duties of this officer among the Jews are indicated. He is there, however, called director. (See ACCUBA- TION.) ARCTURUs (ark-tu'rus), (Heb. ??, awsh, or vºy, ah'yish), the Latin form of the Gr. dpkroipos, signifies, properly, the Bear's tail, and denotes a star in the tail of the Great Bear, or constellation Ursa Major. Job is supposed to speak of Arcturus, or the Bear, under the name of Ash (OV), chap. ix:9; xxxviii:32. ARD (ärd), (Heb. TS, ard, perhaps fugitive), son of Bela and grandson of Benjamin (Gen. xlvi.21; Num. xxvi;40), B.C. about 1660. In I Chron. viii:3 he is called Addar. ARDITES (ard-ites), (Heb. with the art, "Tº ha-ar-dee", the , Ardite, belonging to Ard), the descendants of Ard (Num. xxvi;40; Gen. xlvi.21). AREOPAGUS ARDON (är'don), (Heb. mºs, ar-dohn', descend- ant), Son of Caleb, the son of Hezron, by his wife Azubah (I Chron. ii:18), B.C. about 1560. ARELI (a-ré'li), (Heb. 28.8, ar-ay-lee', heroic), a son of Gad (Gen. xlvi.16; Num. xxvi.17), B.C. 17OO. His descendants, the Arelites, are men- tioned in Num. xxvi; 17. - AREOPAGUS (fir'e-àp'a-gūs), an Anglicized form of the original words (6"Apelos TáYos), signify- ing the AZZZZ of Ares, or Mars. The Council was also termed the Council on Mars A/7/Z, sometimes the Užer Council, from the elevated position where it was held; and sometimes simply, but emphatically, the Councz/, but it retained, till a late period, the original designation of Mars Hill, being called by the Latins Scopulus Martis, Curia Martis (Juvenal, Sat. ix:IoI), and still more liter- ally Areum Judicium (Tacit. Annal. ii:55). The place and the Council are topics of interest to the biblical student, chiefly from their being the scene of the interesting narrative and sublime discourse found in Acts xvii, where it appears that the apostle Paul, feeling himself moved, by the evidences of idolatry with which the city of Athens was crowded, to preach Jesus and the res- urrection, both in the Jewish synagogues and in the market-place, was set upon by certain Epi- curean and Stoic philosophers, and led to the Areopagus, in order that they might learn from him the meaning and design of his new doctrine. The Areopagites took cognizance of murders, impieties and immoralities; they punished vices of all kinds—idleness included; they rewarded or assisted the virtuous; they were peculiarly atten- tive to blasphemies against the gods, and to the performance of the sacred mysteries. It was, therefore, with the greatest propriety, that Paul was questioned before this tribunal. Whether or not the Apostle was criminally arraigned, as a set- ter forth of strange gods, before the tribunal, which held its sittings on the hill, may be con- sidered as undetermined, though the balance of evidence seems to incline to the affirmative. Whichever view on this point is adopted, the dig- nified, temperate, and high-minded bearing of Paul under the peculiar circumstances in which he was placed are worthy of high admiration, and will appear the more striking the more the asso- ciations are known and weighed which covered and surrounded the spot where he stood. Nor does his eloquent discourse appear to have been without good effect; for though some mocked, and Some procrastinated, yet others believed, among whom was a member of the Council, ‘Dionysius, the Areopagite,’ who has been represented as the first bishop of Athens, and is said to have written books on the ‘Celestial Hierarchy;' but their au- tlieuliuily is uuesliulled. The Court. The court of Areopagus was one of the oldest and most honored, not only in Athens, but in the whole of Greece, and, indeed, in the ancient world. Through a long succession of centuries it preserved its existence amid changes corresponding with those which the state underwent, till at least the age of the Caesars (Tacitus, Ann. ii:55). The ancients are full of eulogies on its value, equity, and beneficial in- fluence; in consequence of which qualities it was held in so much respect that even foreign states sought its verdict in difficult cases. Like every- thing human, however, it was liable to decline, and, after Greece had submitted to the yoke of Rome, retained probably little of its ancient char- acter beyond a certain dignity, which was itself cold and barren. 10 AREOPOLIS The origin of the court ascends back into the darkest mythical period. From the first its con- stitution was essentially aristocratic; a character which to some extent it retained even after the democratic reforms which Solon introduced into the Athenian constitution. By his appointment the nine archons became for the remainder of their lives Areopagites, provided they had well discharged the duties of their archonship, were blameless in their personal conduct, and had un- dergone a satisfactory examination. Its power and jurisdiction were still further abridged by Pericles, through his instrument Ephialtes. Fol- lowing the political tendencies of the state, the Areopagus became in process of time less and less aristocratical, and parted piecemeal with most of its important functions. First its political power was taken away, then its jurisdiction in cases of murder, and even its moral influence gradually departed. During the sway of the Thirty Tyrants its power, or rather its political existence, was de- stroyed. On their overthrow it recovered some consideration, and the oversight of the execution of the laws was restored to it by an express de- cree. Isocrates endeavored by his Areopagite speech to revive its ancient influence. The pre- cise time when it ceased to exist cannot be deter- mined; but evidence is not wanting to show that in later periods its members ceased to be uniform- ly characterized by blameless morals. It is not easy to give a correct summary of its several functions, as the classic writers are not agreed in their statements, and the jurisdiction of the court varied, as has been seen, with times and circumstances. They have, however, been divided into six general classes: (1) Its judicial function; (2) its political ; (3) its police function; (4) its religious; (5) its educational; and (6) its finan- cial. Notices on the subject may be found in the works of Tittman, Heffter, Hudtwalcker, Wachs- muth, Pauly, and Winer. AREOPOLIS (är'e-öp'o-lis). See AR; AROER. ARETAS (är'e-tās) (Gr. 'Apéras, ar-et'as), the common name of several Arabian kings. 1. The first of whom we have any notice was a contemporary of the Jewish high-priest Jason and of Antiochus Epiphanes about B.C. 17O (2 Macc. v:8). - 2. Josephus (Antig. xiii:13, 3) mentions an Are- tas, king of the Arabians (called Obedas, xiii: 13, 5), contemporary with Alexander Jannaeus (died B.C. 79) and his sons. After defeating Antiochus Dion- ysus, he reigned over Coele-Syria, being called to the government by those that he/d Damascus. He took part with Hyrcanus in his contest for the sovereignty with his brother Aristobulus, and laid siege to Jerusalem, but, on the approach of the Roman gencral Scaurus, he retreated to Phil- adelphia (De Bell. Jud. i :6, 3). Hyrcanus and Aretas were pursued and defeated by Aristobulus at a place called Papyron, and lost above 6,000 1116.11. Three or four years after, Scaurus, to whom Pompey had committed the government of Coele-Syria, invaded Petraea, but finding it diffi- cult to obtain provisions for his army, he con- sented to withdraw on the offer of 300 talents from Aretas (Joseph. Antiq. xiv: 5, I). Haver- 146 three years after his conversion. ARGOB camp has given an engraving of a denarius in- tended to commemorate this event, on which Are- tas appears in a supplicating posture, and taking hold of a camel's bridle with his left hand, and with his right hand presenting a branch of the frankincense-tree. (See Illustration.) 3. Aretas, whose name was originally AEneas, succeeded Obodas ("Ogóðas). He was the father- in-law of Herod Antipas. The latter made pro- posals of marriage to the wife of his half-brother Herod-Philip, Herodias, the daughterof Aristobulus, their brother, and the sister of Agrippa the Great. In consequence of this, the daughter of Aretas returned to her father, and a war, which had been fomented by previous disputes about the lim- its of their respective countries, ensued between Aretas and Herod. The army of the latter was totally destroyed; and on his sending an account of his disaster to Rome, the emperor immediately ordered Vitellius to bring Aretas prisoner alive, or, if dead, to send his head (Joseph. Antiq. xviii: 5, I). But while Vitellius was on his march to Petra, news arrived of the death of Tiberius, upon which, after administering the oath of allegiance to his troops, he dismissed them to winter-quarters and returned to Rome. It must have been at this juncture that Aretas took possession of Damas- cus, and placed a governor in it with a garrison. For a knowledge of this fact we are indebted to the apostle Paul. ‘In Damas- cus the governor under Aretas the king kept the city of the Damascenes with a garrison, desirous to apprehend me; and through a window in a basket was I let down by the wall, and escaped his hands' (2 Cor. xi :32, compared with Acts is :24). We are thus furnished with a chronological mark in the Apostle's history. From Gal. i :18, it appears that Paul went up to Jerusalem from Damascus - The emperor Tiberius died in A. D. 37; and as the affairs of Arabia were settled in the second year of Cali- gula, Damascus was then most probably reoccu- pied by the Romans. If, then, Paul’s flight took place in A. D. 39, his conversion must have oc- curred in A. D. 36 (Neander’s History of the Planting of the Christian Church, i : Io'7, English trans. ; Lardner's Credibility, etc. Supplement, chap. xi.; Works, ed. 1835, verse 497). ARGAZ (är'gaz), (Heb. '# 8, ar-gawa', that which is laid down), the receptacle called, in the Authorized Version, a ‘coffer' (I Sam. vi:8, II, I 5), which the Philistines placed beside the ark when they sent it home, and in which they deposited the golden mice and emerods that formed their trespass-offering. ARGOB (ār-göb), (Heb. Bºns, ar-gobe'). 1. A district in Bashan, east of the Lake of Gennesareth, which was given to the half-tribe of Manasseh (Deut. iii:4, I3; I Kings iv:13; 2 Kings XV:25). (1) Description. It is named only four times in the Bible. It is about 30 miles long by 20 miles wide, chiefly a field of basalt (black rock), ele- vated about 30 feet above the surrounding plain, and bordered by a rocky rampart of broken cliffs. It once contained 60 strong and fortified cities, the ruins of many of them being still to be seen. It is now called the Lejah. (2) History. Jair took 60 of its cities (Deut. iii:4, 5, 14). Absalom fled thither (2 Sam. xiii:38). Solomon placed an officer over its 60 great cities with brazen walls (I Kings iv: I3). Porter describes this region as “literally crowded with towns and large villages; and though a vast / ARIDAI majority of thern are deserted, they are not ruined. I have more than once entered a de- serted city in the evening, taken possession of a comfortable house, and spent the night in peace. Many of the houses in the ancient cities of Bashan are perfect as if only finished yesterday. The walls are sound, the roofs unbroken, and even the window-shutters in their places. These ancient cities of Bashan probably contain the very oldest specimens of domestic architecture in the world.” (See Giant Cities of Baishan.) But these ruins are now ascertained to belong to the Roman period, and after the Christian era. The American Palestine Exploration Society has ex- plored that East Jordan region and taken photo- graphs of ruins of theaters, palaces, and temples (Schaff, Bib. Dicl.). 2. The capital of the region of Argob. Eusebius says that Argob was fifteen miles west from Gerasa. It is probably the same as Ragab, or Ragabah, mentioned in the Mishna, in Menachoth (viii:3), and in Josephus (Azzºzy. lib. xiii, cap. 23). . The Samaritan translation, instead of Argob, gen- erally puts Rigobah. ARIDAI (a-rid'a-i), (Heb. "TS, ar-ee-dah!ee, meaning uncertain, perhaps strong), ninth son of Haman, hanged with his father (Esther ix:9). ARIDATHA (a-rid'a-tha or ār'i-dā'thá), (Heb. Nºë, ar-ee-daw-thaw', strong), the sixth son of Haman, slain by the Jews (Esth. ix:8) B. C. about 5IO. ARIEH (a-ri'eh or ā'ri-eh), (Heb. nºs, ar-yay', the lion), an accomplice of Pekah in his conspiracy against Pekahiah, or one of the princes of Peka- hiah, who was put to death with him (2 Kings xv. 25), B. C. 761. 147 * -- ARIEL (āri-el or a-ri'el), (Heb. 78°78, ar-ee-ale', lion of God). 1. A word meaning ‘lion of God,” and cor- rectly enough rendered by ‘lion-like,' in 2 Sam. xxiii.20; I Chron. xi.; 22. It was applied as an epithet of distinction to bold and warlike persons, as among the Arabians, who surnamed Ali ‘The Lion of God.” 2. The same word is used as a local proper name in Is. xxix:I, 2, applied to Jerusalem—"as victorious under God,' and in Ezek. xliii:15, 16, to the altar of burnt offerings. The Arabic means fire-hearth, which, with the Heb. EZ, God, supplies a more satisfactory signification. It is thus ap- plied, in the first place, to the altar, and then to Jerusalem as containing the altar. AIRIMATHAEA or ARIMATHEA (ār-i-ma- thé'á), (Gr. 'Apupiabata, ar-ee-math-a/-ee'ah, a height), the birthplace of the wealthy Joseph, in whose sepulcher our Lord was laid (Matt. xxvii: 57, Juliuſ xxix:38). Luke (xxiii:51) calls it “a city of the Jews;’ which may be explained by I Macc. xi :34, where King Demetrius thus writes—"We have ratified unto the III [the Jews] the borders of Judaea, with the three governments of Aphereum, Lydda, and Ramathaim, that are added unto Judaea from the country of Samaria.' Eusebius (Onomast. s. v.) and Jerome (Epit. Paula.) regard the Arimathea of Joseph as the same place as the Ramathaim of Samuel, and place it near Lydda or Diospolis. Hence it has by some been identified with the ex- isting Ramleh, because of the similarity of the name to that of Ramah, of which Ramathaim is the dual; and because it is near Lydda or Dios- polis, Professor Robinson, however, disputes this conclusion on the following grounds: (1) That ARIOCH Abulfeda alleges Ramleh to have been built after the time of Mohammed, or about A. D. 716, by Suleiman Abd-al Malik. (2) That Ramah and Ram- leh have not the same signification. (3) That Ram- leh is in a plain, while Ramah implies a town on a hill. To this it may be answered that Abulfeda's Statement may mean no more than that Suleiman rebuilt the town, which had previously been in ruins, just as Rehoboam and others are said to have built many towns which had existed long be- fore their time; and that the Moslems seldom built towns but on old sites and out of old ma- terials; so that there is not a town in all Palestine which is with certainty known to have been founded by them. In such cases they retained the old names, or others resembling them in sound, if not in signification, which may account for the difference between Ramah and Ramleh. Neither can we assume that a place called Ramah could not be in a plain, unless we are ready to prove that Hebrew proper names were always signifi- cant and appropriate. This they probably were not. They were so in early times, when towns were few ; but not eventually, when towns were numerous, and took their names arbitrarily from one another without regard to local circumstances. Further, if Arimathea, by being identified with Ramah, was necessarily in the mountains, it could not have been ‘near Lydda,” from which the moun- tains are seven miles distant. This matter, how- ever, belongs more properly to another place. (See RAMAH; RAMATHAIM-ZoPHIM.) It is alluded to here merely to show that Dr. Robinson’s objections have not entirely destroyed the grounds for following the usual course of describing Ramleh as representing the ancient Arimathea. Ramleh is in N. lat. 31 deg. 59 min. and E. long. 35 deg. 28 min., 8 miles S. E. from Joppa, and 24 miles N. W. by W. from Jerusalem. It lies in the fine undulating plain of Sharon, upon the eastern side of a broad low swell rising from a fertile though sandy plain. Like Gaza and Jaffa, this town is surrounded by olive groves and gardens of vegetables and deli- cious fruits. ARIOCH (a’ri-ök), (Heb. TS, ar-yoke', lion-like or venerable). 1. Arioch, king of Ellasar, according to the fourteenth chapter of Genesis, was one of the four confederate kings who, under the lead of Chedor- laomer, king of Elam, invaded Palestine in the time of Abraham. The entire interest of the name centers in George Smith's identification of Arioch with a king who had previously been known from the in- scriptions, as Rim-Sin, king of Larsa. George Smith found evidence finaf the monn-god Sin hore the name of Agu or Aku in the Mongolian or . Akkadian language. Translated from the Semi- tic into the Akkadian, the name Rim-Sin would be Eri-Agu or Eri-Aku. These proper names in earlier times do not often appear spelled out in full, a single ideograph having the meaning servant to be read either Rim, or Eri, or Arad, or Agu ; just as we read the same algebraic sign either minus or less, the one word being Latin and the other English. But in one case at least we find the name Eri-Agu spelled out in full, so that we know that this pronunciation was used as well as Rim-Sin. Now Eri-Agu or Eri-Aku is as near an approximation to Arioch as the language will allow. As for the Ellasar of which Arioch of Genesis was king, that instantly suggests the Larsa over ARIOCH which Eri-Aku ruled. We do not even need to suppose transposition of the r and s, for we have the spelling Larsa in the old monuments. Before the discovery that there was an Eri-Aku, king of Larsa, there was no other easy identification of the name Ellasar except Kalah-Shergot, the early capital of Assyria, on the Tigris, the old name of which was Alu-Asser or the “City of Assur,” which might be transformed into Ellasare. But the confederacy antedates, so far as we 1 3’ T *.* - ºssilijºlº alsº Q Jºšº º ſ Cº 32-º- § ſº ſ tiſſ t & ºf: }}<ſº ºffº =fºr i %ffſå fºſſºfil |-ſº º &lſº &NINTitº |-- ſ: §§ tº nant with the Mercy Seat. ing; mercy-seat ) was of the same length and breadth, and made of the purest gold. Over it, at the two extremities, were two cherubim, with their faces turned towards each other and in- clined a little towards the lid (otherwise called the mercy-seat). Their wings, which were spread out over the top of the ark, formed the throne of God, the King of Israel, while the ark itself was his footstool (Exod. xxv :Io-22; Deut. x:3; xxxvii:I-9). , (2) History. This ark was the most sacred object among the Israelites. It was deposited in the innermost and holiest part of the tabernacle and temple, called ‘the holy of holies,' where it stood so that one end of each of the poles by which it was carried (which were drawn out so far as to allow the ark to be placed against the back wall) touched the veil which separated the two apartments of the tabernacle (I Kings viii:8). In the ark were deposited the tables of the law (Exod. xxv :I6). A quantity of manna was laid up beside the ark in a vase of gold (Exod. xvi :32, 36; I Kings viii:9); as were also the rod of Aaron (Num. xvii:9), and a copy of the book of the law (Deut. xxxi :26). Nothing is more apparent throughout the his- torical Scriptures than the extreme sanctity which attached to the ark, as the material symbol of the Divine presence. During the marches of the Israelites it was covered with a purple pall. and borne by the priests, with great reverence and care, in advance of the host (Num. iv:5, 6; x:33). It was before the ark, thus in advance, that the waters of the Jordan separated; and it remained in the bed of the river, with the at- tendant priests, until the whole host had passed Over, and no sooner was it also brought up than the waters resumed their course (Josh. iii; iv:7, IO, II, 17, 18). The ark was similarly conspicu- ous in the grand procession round Jericho (Josh. vi :4, 6, 8, II, 12). It is not wonderful, there- fore, that the neighboring nations, who had no notion of spiritual worship, looked upon it as the God of the Israelites (1 Sam. iv:6, 7), a de- lusion which may have been strengthened by the ARK OF THE COVENANT figures of the cherubim on it. After the settle- ment of the Jews in Palestine the ark remained in the tabernacle at Shiloh, until, in the time of Eli, it was carried along with the army in the war against the Philistines, under the supersti- tious notion that it would secure the victory to the Hebrews. They were, however, not only beaten, but the ark itself was taken by the Philis- tines (I Sam. iv:3-II; vi.2, 3), whose triumph was, however, very short-lived, as they were so oppressed by the hand of God that, after seven months, they were glad to send it back again (1 Sam. V:7, 8, 9, Io, II). After that it remained apart from the tabernacle, at Kirjath-jearim (vii: I, 2), where it continued until the time of David, who purposed to remove it to Jerusalem; but the old prescribed mode of removing it from place to place was so much neglected as to cause the death of Uzzah, in consequence of which it was left in the house of Obed-edom (2 Sam. vi. I-II); but after three months David took courage and Succeeded in effecting its safe removal, in grand procession, to Mount Zion (ver. I2-19). When the Temple of Solomon was completed, the ark was deposited in the sanctuary (I Kings viii: 6-9). The passage in 2 Chron. xxxv :3, in which Josiah directs the Levites to restore the ark to the holy place, is understood by some to imply that it had either been removed by Amon, who put an idol in its place, which is assumed to have been the ‘trespass' of which he is said to have been guilty (2 Chron. xxxiii:23), or that the priests themselves had withdrawn it during idolatrous times and preserved it in some secret place, or had removed it from one place to an- Other. But it seems more likely that it had been taken from the holy of holies during the purifi- cation and repairs of the Temple by this same Josiah, and that he, in this passage, merely directs it to be again set in its place. What became of the ark when the Temple was plundered and destroyed by the Babylonians is not known, and all conjecture is useless. The Jews believe that it was concealed from the spoilers, and account it among the hidden things which the Messiah is to reveal. It is certain, however, from the consent of all the Jewish writers, that the old ark was not contained in the second temple, and there is no evidence that any new one was made. Indeed the absence of the ark is one of the important par- ticulars in which this temple was held to be in- ferior to that of Solomon. The most holy place is therefore generally considered to have been empty in the second temple (as Josephus states, De Bell, Jud. v . I4), or at most (as the Rabbins allege) to have contained only a stone to mark the place which the ark should have occupied. (3) Design and Form. We now come to consider the design and form of f he ark, on which it appears to us that clear and unex- pected light has been thrown by the discov- eries which have of late years been made in Egypt, and which have unfolded to us the rites and mysteries of the old Egyptians. One of the most important ceremonies was the “pro- cession of shrines,” which is mentioned in the Rosetta stone, and frequently occurs on the walls of the temples. The shrines were of two kinds, the one a sort of canopy, the other an ark or sacred boat, which may be termed the great shrine. This was carried with grand pomp by the priests, a certain number being selected for that duty, who supported it on their shoulders by means of long staves, passing through metal rings at the side of the sledge on which it stood, and brought it into the temple, where it was deposited upon a stand or table, in order that the prescribed ARK OF THE COVENANT ceremonies might be discharged before it. The stand was also carried in procession by another set of priests, following the shrine, by means of similar staves; a method usually adopted for carrying large statues and sacred emblems, too heavy or too important to be borne by one per- son. The same is stated to have been the custom of the Jews in some of their religious processions (Comp. I Chron. xv.2, I5; 2 Sam. xv.24, and Josh. iii:I2), as in carrying the ark to its place, into the oracle of the house, to the most holy | I 5*}UK'ſs== - ==AiyêS㺠2 Cº-ºº: ºCW *S º N | } place, when the Temple was built by Solomon (1 Kings viii:6). Some of the arks or boats con- tained the emblems of life and stability, which, when the veil was drawn aside, were partially seen; and others presented the sacred beetle to the sun, , overshadowed by the wings, of two figures of the goddess Thenei, or Truth, which call to mind the cherubim of the Jews (Anc. Egyptians, by J. G. Wilkinson). - (4) Points of Egyptian Resemblance. The following points of resemblance will strike the Biblical student, and will attract his close atten- tion to the subject. . In the above description three objects are distinguished: (1) The ‘stand. 153 ARM (2) The boat or ‘ark.’ (3) The ‘canopy.’ This last is not, as the extract would suggest, an alter- , native for the second; but is most generally seen with and in the boat. This is shown in the first cut, which exhibits all the parts together, and at reSt. The points of resemblance to the Jewish ark are many and conspicuous, as in the ‘Stand,’ which, in some of its forms, and leaving out the figures represented on the sides, bears so close a resemblance to the written description of the He- brew ark that it may safely be taken as an authen- tic illustration of its form. Then the cherubim of the Hebrew ark find manifest representatives in the figures facing each other, with wings spread inwards and meeting each other, which we find within a canopy or shrine which sometimes rests immediately upon this ‘stand, but more generally in the boat, which itself rests thereon. We direct º attention also to the hovering wings above, which are very conspicuous in all Egyptian representa- tions. (See CHERUBIM.) Other analogies occur in the persons who bear the shrine—the priests; and in the mode of carrying it, by means of poles inserted in rings; and it is observable that, as in the Hebrew ark, these poles were not with- drawn, but remained in their place when the shrine was at rest in the temple. Such are the principal resemblances. That the Israelites during the latter part of their sojourn in Egypt followed the rites and re- ligion of the country, and were (at least many of them) gross idolaters, is distinctly affirmed in Scripture (Josh. xxiv: I4; Ezek. xxiii:3, 8, 19), and is shown by their ready lapse into the wor- ship of the ‘golden calf,’ and by the striking fact that they actually carried about with them one of these Egyptian shrines or tabernacles in the wilderness (Amos v :26). From their conduct and the whole tone of their sentiments and char- acter it appears that this stiff-necked and rebel- lious people were incapable (as a nation) of ad- hering to that simple form of worship and service which is most pleasing to God. ARM (ärm), (Heb. usually wn. 2er-o'ah). This word is frequently used in Scripture in a metaphorical sense to denote power. Hence, to “break the arm’ is to diminish or destroy the power (Ps. x:15; Ezek. xxx:21; Jer. xlviii:25). It is also employed to denote the infinite power of God (Ps. lxxxix : 13; xlviii:2; Is. liii: I ; John xii:38). In a few places the metaphor is, with great force, extended to the action of the arm, as—"I will redeem you with a stretched-out arm’ (Exod. vi.5); that is, with a power fully exerted. The figure is here taken from the attitude of ancient warriors baring and outstretching the arm for fighi. Thus, in Is. lii: Io, Jehovah hath made bare his holy arm in the sight of all the nations.” Bishop Lowth has shown, from the Sept. and Other versions, that in Is. ix:20, ‘they shall eat ARMAGEDDON every one the flesh of his own arm,' should be ‘the flesh of his neighbor;' similar to Jer. xix:9, meaning that they should harass and destroy one another. - ARMAGEDDON (är'ma-géd'don), (Gr. 'Appa- 'yeb6tºw, ar-mag-ed-do/ºn', hill of Megiddo), prop- erly, the mountain of Megiddo, a city on the west of the river Jordan, rebuilt by Solomon (I Kings ix:15). Both Ahaziah and Josias died there. In the mystical language of prophecy, the word mountain represents the Church, and the events which took place at Megiddo are supposed to have had a typical reference to the sorrows and triumphs of the people of God under the gospel. “In that day,’ says Zechariah, xii; II, ‘shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem, as the mourn– ing of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon,’ referring to the death of Josias. But the same spot witnessed, at an earlier period, the greatest triumph of Israel (Judg. v : I.Q.) “He gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon,’ is the language of the Apoc- alypse; and the word has been translated by some as ‘the mountain of destruction,’ by others as ‘the mountain of the gospel;’ many ingenious specula- tions having been employed on the passage in which it occurs, but with little satisfaction to the more sober readers of Divine revelation. ARMENIA (ar-mê'ni-á), (the Greek form of Ararat), a country of Western Asia; is not men- tioned in Scripture under that name, but is sup- posed to be alluded to in the three following Hebrew designations, which seem to refer either to the country as a whole, or to particular districts. 1. Names. (1) Ararat, the land upon (or over) the mountains of which the ark rested at the Deluge (Gen. viii:4); whither the sons of Sen- nacherib fled after murdering their father (2 Kings xix :37; Is. xxxvii:38), and one of the ‘kingdoms’ summoned, along with Minni and Ash- kenaz, to arm against Babylon (Jer. li:27). That there was a province of Ararad in ancient Ar- menia, we have the testimony of the native his- torian, Moses of Chorene. It lay in the center of the kingdom, was divided into twenty circles, and, being the principal province, was commonly the residence of the kings or governors. For other particulars respecting it, and the celebrated moun- tain which in modern times bears its name, see ARARAT. (2) Minni is mentioned in Jer, li:27, along with Ararat and Ashkenaz, as a kingdom called to arm itself against Babylon. The name is by some taken for a contraction of ‘Armenia,' and the Chald. in the text in Jeremiah has Hurmini. In Ps. xlv. :8, where it is said ‘out of the ivory palaces whereby they made thee glad,’ the Hebrew word rendered ‘whereby’ is mimmi, and hence some take it for the proper name, and would translate 'pal- aces of Armenia,' but the interpretation is forced and incongruous. * (3) Thogarmah, in some MSS. Thorgamah, and found with great variety of orthography in the Septuagint and Josephus. In the ethnographic table in the tenth chapter of Genesis (ver. 3; Comp. I Chron. i :6) Thogarmah is introduced as the youngest son of Gomer (son of Japheth), who is supposed to have given name to the Cimmerians on the north coast of the Euxine Sea, his other sons being Ashkenaz and Riphat, both progenitors of northern tribes, among whom also it is natural to seek for the posterity of Thogarmah. The pro- phet Ezekiel (xxxviii:6), also classes along with Gomer ‘the house of Thogarmah and the sides of the north’ (in the Eng. Vers. ‘of the north quarters’), where, as also at Ezek. xxvii:14, it is 154 ARMENIA placed beside Meshech and Tubal, probably the tribes of the Moschi and Tibareni in the Caucasus. According to Moses of Chorene (Whiston's edi- tion, i :8, p. 24), and also King Wachtang's His- tory of Georgia (in Klaproth's Travels in the Caucasus, vol. ii, p. 64), the Armenians, Georgians, Lesghians, Mingrelians, and Caucasians are all descended from one common progenitor, called Thargamos, a son of Awanan, son of Japheth, son of Noah (Comp. Eusebius, Chron. ii :12). After the dispersion at Babel he settled near Ararat, but his posterity spread abroad between the Caspian and Euxine seas. (Togarmah in A. V.) 2. TSoundaries. The boundaries of Armenia may be described generally as the southern range of the Caucasus on the north, and a branch of the Taurus on the south ; but in all directions, and especially to the east and west, the limits have been very fluctuating. It forms an elevated table- land, whence rise mountains which, with the ex- ception of the gigantic Ararat, are of moderate height, the plateau gradually sinking towards the plains of Irān on the east and those of Asia Minor on the west. 3. Climate. The climate is generally cold, but salubrious. The country abounds in roman- tic forest and mountain scenery, and rich pasture land, especially in the districts which border upon Persia. Ancient writers notice the wealth of Ar- menia in metals and precious stones. The great rivers Euphrates and Tigris both take their rise in this region, as also the Araxes and the Kur or Cyrus. 4. Greater and Lesser. Armenia is com- monly divided into Greater and Lesser, the line of separation being the Euphrates; but the former constitutes by far the larger portion, and indeed the other is often regarded as pertaining rather to Asia Minor. There was anciently a kingdom of Armenia, with its metropolis Artaxata ; it was sometimes an independent state, but most com- monly tributary to some more powerful neighbor. Indeed, at no period was the whole of this region ever comprised under one government, but As- syria, Media, Syria and Cappadocia shared the dominion or allegiance of some portion of it, just as it is now divided among the Persians, Russians, Turks and Kurds, for there is no doubt that that part of Kurdistan which includes the elevated basins of the lakes of Van and Oormiah anciently belonged to Armenia. Schulz discovered in 1827, near the former lake, the ruins of a very ancient town, which he sup- posed to be that which is called by Armenian historians Shamiramakert (i. e., the town of Se- miramis), because believed to have been built by the famous Assyrian queen. The ruins are cov- ered with inscriptions in the arrow-headed char- acter; in one of them Saint Martin thought he deciphered the words Khshéarsha son of Daré- ioush (Xerxes son of Darius). 5. Later Times. In later times Armenia was the border-country where the Romans and Par- thians fruitlessly strove for the mastery, and since then it has been the frequent battle-field of the neighboring states. Toward the end of the last war between Russia and Turkey, large bodies of native Armenians emigrated into the Russian dominions, so that their number in what is termed Turkish Armenia is now considerably reduced. By the treaty of Turkomanshee (21st Feb. 1828). Persia ceded to Russia the Khanats of Erivan and Nakh- shivan. The boundary line, drawn from the Turkish dominions, passes over the Little Ararat; the line of separation between Persian and Turk- ish Armenia also begins at Ararat, so that this ARMENIAN VERSION famous mountain is now the central boundary- stone of these three empires. Christianity was first established in Armenia in the fourth century; the Armenian church has a close affinity to the Greek church in its forms and polity. N. M. Religious persecution and war have driven great numbers of Armenians from their native land into Asia Minor and Europe. The present number of Armenians is estimated to be from 2,500,000 to 3,OOO,OOO, of whom about 1,000,000 live in Armenia. Its chief modern towns are Erzeroum, Erivan and Van. (See ASSYRIA.) ARMENIAN VERSION (ār-mă'ni-an vär'shūn). The Armenian version of the Bible was under- taken in the year 4 IO by Miesrob, with the aid of his pupils, Joannes Ecclensis and Josephus Palnen- sis. It appears that the patriarch Isaac first at- tempted, in consequence of the Persians having destroyed all the copies of the Greek version, to make a translation from the Peshito; that Miesrob became his coadjutor in this work; and that they actually completed their translation from the Syriac. ARMHOLE (ärm-hol), (Heb. 2 #8, ats - tseel', Jer. xxxviii:12; Ezek. xiii:18, to select, refuse, separate meanings from the primitive root *š. aw-tsa/"; hence the joint of the hand or knuckle), armpit. ARMLET (ärm’lét). Although this word has the same meaning as bracelet, yet the latter is practically so exclusively used to denote the ornament of the wrist that it seems proper to distinguish by armlet the similar ornament which is worn on the upper arm. There is also this difference between them, that in the East bracelets are generally worn by women and armlets only by men. The armlet, however, is in use among men only as one of the insignia of sovereign power. There are three different words which the Authorized Version renders by bracelet. These are (I) Etgadah, which occurs in Num. xxxi :50 ; 2 Sam, i : Io, and which, being used with reference to men only, we take to be the armlet. (2) Taamid, which is found in Gen. xxiv: 22; Num. xxxi :50 ; Ezek. xvi :II. Where these two words occur together (as in Num. xxxi :50) the first is rendered by ‘chain’ and the second by ‘bracelet.’ (3) Shiryah, which occurs only in Is. iii:I9. The first we take to mean armlets worn by men, the second, bracelets worn by women and sometimes by men, and the third, a peculiar bracelet of chainwork worn only by women. It is observable that the first two occur in Num. xxxi :50, which we suppose to mean that the men offered their own armlets and the bracelets of their wives. In the only other passage in which the first word occurs it denotes the royal Ul Ila- ment which the Amalekite took from the arm of the dead Saul, and brought with the other re- galia to David. There is little question that this was such a distinguishing band of jeweled metal as we still find worn as a mark of royalty from the Tigris to the Ganges. The Egyptian kings are represented with armlets, which were also worn by the Egyptian women. These, however, are not jeweled, but of plain or enameled metal, as was in all likelihood the case among the Hebrews. In modern times the most celebrated armlets are those which form part of the regalia of the Per- sian kings, and which formerly belonged to the Mogul emperors of India. These ornaments are of dazzling splendor, and the jewels in them are of such large size and immense value that the pair are reckoned to be worth a million of our 155 ARMS, ARMOR money. The principal stone of the left armlet is famous in the East by the name of the Dević -e- nur, or Sea of light. It weighs 186 carats, and is considered the diamond of finest luster in the world. The principal jewel of the left armlet, although of somewhat inferior size (146 carats) and value, is renowned as the Tig-e-mah, ‘Crown of the moon.’ The imperial armlets, generally Set with jewels, may also be observed in most of the portraits of the Indian emperors. (See BRACELET.) ARMON (är'mon), (Heb. jºy, az-Zuzozwal', A. V. ‘chestnut-tree'), a tree which is named thrice in the Scriptures. * It occurs among the ‘speckled rods’ which Jacob placed in the watering troughs before the sheep (Gen. xxx:37); its grandeur is indicated in Ezek. xxxi.;8, as well as in Ecclus. xxiv:19. It is noted for its magnificence, shooting its high boughs aloft. This description agrees well with the plane tree (Platanus Orientalis), which is adopted by all the ancient translators, to which the balance of critical opinion inclines, and which actually grows in Palestine. This word has been translated beech, weapſe, and chestnut, but scarcely anyone now doubts that it means the plane tree. ARMONI (ar-mo'ni), (Heb. *::::s, az-7720-7tee', of a fortress), son of Saul by Rizpah (2 Sam. xxi. 8), B. C. about IoI8. ARMOR-BEARER (är mér - bár' er), (Heb. *: Nº, maw-saw” ke/-ee', bearer of weapon). An officer selected from the bravest of the favorites of kings and generals to bear their armor and stand by them in times of danger (Judg. ix:5; I Sam. xiv:6; xvi :21 ; xxiii:4). ARMS, ARMOR (ärms, ar’měr). 1. Offensite Arms. The instruments at first employed in the chase, but converted to the de- struction of their fellow-men, or to oppose ag- gression, were naturally the most simple. (1) Battle-axe and Mace. Among these were the club and the throwing-bat. The first con- Sisted originally of a heavy piece of wood, vari- ously shaped, made to strike with, and, ac- cording to its forms, denominated a mace, a bar. It is an instrument of great power when use among the Hebrews, for, in the time of the kings, wood had already been superseded by metal, and the shevet bargel, rod of iron (Ps. ii:9), is supposed to mean a mace, or gavelock, or crow- bar. It is an instrument of great power when used by a strong arm. It is probable maphietz (Prov. xxv :18; Ps. lvii:4; czx :3, 4) is a maul, a martel, or a war hammer. It is likely metal was only in general use at a later period, and that a heavy crooked billet continued long to serve Lulli as a missile and a 3 word. The throwsticle, made of thorn wood, is the same instrument which we see figured on Egyptian monuments. By the native Arabs it is still called lissan. (2) Sword. These instruments, supplied with a sharp edge, would naturally constitute a battle- axe and a kind of sword, and such in the rudest ages we find them, made with flints set into a groove or with sharks' teeth firmly secured to the staff with twisted sinews. Next came the dirk or poniard, which, in the Hebrew word cherev, may possibly retain some allusion to the original instrument made of the antelope's horn, merely sharpened, which is still used in every part of the East where the material can be procured. From existing figures, the dirk appears to have been early made of metal in Egypt and worn in the belt. From several texts ARMS, ARMOR 156 (I Sam. xvii:39; 2 Sam. xx:8, and I Kings xx: II) it is evident that the real Sword was slung in a belt, and that girding' and ‘loosing the Sword' were synonymous terms for commencing and end- ing a war. The blades were, it seems, always short (one is mentioned of a cubit's length), and -- ===- º º 22° º & ſº ||||N-J27 & Persian Sword. the dirk-sword, at least, was always double-edged. The sheath was ornamented and polished. But while metal was scarce, there were also swords which might be called quarter pikes, being com- posed of a very short wooden handle, surmounted by a spearhead. (3) Spear, Javelin and Dart. The spear, ramach, was another offensive weapon common to all the nations of antiquity, and was of various size, weight and length. Probably the shepherd Hebrews, like nations similarly situated in north- ern Africa, anciently made use of the horn of an Oryx, or a leucoryx, about three feet long, straight- ened in water and sheathed upon a thorn-wood staff. When sharpened, this instrument would penetrate the hide of a bull, and, according to Strabo, even of an elephant; it was light, very difficult to break, resisted the blow of a battle-axe, and the animals which furnished it were abundant in Arabia and in the desert east of Palestine. At a later period the head was of brass, and after- wards of iron. kind were often used in Egypt by the heavy in- fantry, and, from various circumstances, it may be inferred that among the Hebrews and their immediate neighbors, commanders in particular were distinguished by heavy spears. Among these were generally ranked the 1110sl valiant in fight and the largest in stature, such as Goliath, ‘whose spear was like a weaver’s beam’ (I Sam. xvii:7; 2 Sam. xxi :16), and whose spear's head weighed six hundred shekels of iron, which by some is asserted to be equal to twenty-five pounds' weight. The spear had a point of metal at the butt-end to fix it in the ground, perhaps with the same massy globe above it, which is still in use, intended to counterbalance the point. It was with this ferrel that Abner slew Asahel (2 Sam. ii: 22, 23). The javelins, named chaneth and kedon, may have had distinct forms; from the context, where chaneth first occurs, it appears to have been a Species of dart carried by light troops (I Sam. xiii.22), while the kedon, which was heavier, was most likely a kind of pilum. In most nations of antiquity the infantry, not bearing a spear, Very ponderous weapons of this ARMS, ARMOR carried two darts, those lightly armed using both for long casts, and the heavy armed only one for that purpose; the second, more ponderous than the other, being reserved for throwing when close to the enemy, or for handling in the man- ner of a spear. This explanation may throw light on the fact of the chanell, being named in con- nection with the tsenna, or larger buckler (I Chron. xii:34), and may reconcile what is said of the kedon (Job xxxix:23; xli :29; and Josh. viii:Io). While on the subject of the javelin it may be remarked that, by the act of casting one at David (I Sam. xix:9, Io), Saul virtually ab- solved him from his allegiance, for by the cus- toms of ancient Asia, preserved in the usages of the Teutonic and other nations, the Sachsen recht, the custom of the East Franks, etc., to throw a dart at a freedman, who escaped from it by flight, was the demonstrative token of manumission given by his lord or master; he was thereby sent out of hand, manumissus, well expressed in the I, 2, 3, 4. Bows. 5, 6. Quivers. 7, 8. Arrows. old English phrase, ‘scot-free.” But for this act of Saul, David might have been viewed as a rebel. (4) Bow and Arrow. But the chief offensive weapon in Egypt, and, from the nature of the country, it may be inferred in Palestine also, was the war-bow, keshtoth, and kesheth, the arrows Egyptian Slingers and Sling. being denominated hkitzem, hkitz. The bow be- came in the course of time very strong and tall, was made of brass, of wood backed with horn, or of horn entirely, and even of ivory. The horned bows of the cavalry, shaped like those of the Chinese, occur on monuments of antiquity. ARMS, ARMOR (5) The Sling. The last missile instrument to be mentioned is the sling, kala (Job xli :28), an improvement upon the simple act of throwing stones. It was the favorite weapon of the Benjam- ites, a small tribe, not making a great mass in an order of battle, but well composed for light troops. They could also boast of using the sling equally well with the left hand as with the right. The sling was made of plaited thongs, somewhat broad in the middle, to lodge the stone or leaden missile, and was twirled two or three times round before the stone was allowed to take flight. Stones could not be cast above 400 feet, but leaden bullets could be thrown as far as 600 feet. The force as well as precision of aim which might be attained in the use of this instrument was remarkably shown in the case of David, and several nations of antiquity boasted of great skill in the practice of the sling. 2. TXefensitye Arms. The most ancient defen- sive piece was the shield, buckler, roundel or target, composed of a great variety of materials, very different in form and size, and therefore in all nations bearing a variety of names. * - as 1. *** 2 //, ...?. ** * a.º.º. * . 24: - º 22.3 * -> ** ºzºº :^ **_ * se 2.3." Ze 23 ° & .* **, - e * * 's jº & º * Aº º 222 Á a I. The Tsenna, or Great Shield. , 2. Common Egyptian Shield. 3. Target. 4, 5. Ancient Shields of Unknown Tribes. 6. Roundel. 2 A. (1) Shield. The Hebrews used the word tsenna, for a great shield, defense, protection (Gen. xv :I ; Ps. xlvii:9; Prov. xxx:5), which is commonly found in connection with spear, and was the shelter of heavily-armed infantry; magin, a buckler, or smaller shield, which, from a similar juxtaposition with sword, bow and arrows, ap- pears to have been the defense of the other armed infantry and of chiefs, and so hairah, parma, a 1 Uuildel, whiuli 111ay lia vu ljuui appropriated to archers and slingers, and there were shelatim and shelti, synonymous with magin, only different in ornament. In the more advanced areas of civili- zation shields were made of light wood not liable to split, covered with bull hide or two or more thicknesses and bordered with metal; the lighter kinds were made of wicker-work or osier, sim- ilarly, but less solidly covered, or of double ox- hide cut into a round form. There were others of a single hide, extremely thick from having been boiled; their surface presented an appear- ance of many folds, like round waves up and down, which might yield, but could rarely be penetrated. - We may infer that at first the Hebrews bor- rowed the forms in use in Egypt, and that their common shields were a kind of parallelogram, 157 ARMS, ARMOR broadest and arched at the top and cut Square beneath, bordered with metal, the surface being covered with rawhide with the hair on. The lighter shields may have been soaked in oil and dried in the shade to make them hard; no doubt, hippopotamus, rhinoceros and elephant skin shields were brought from Ethiopia and purchased in the Phoenician markets, but small, round hand- bucklers of whaleskin, still used by Arabian Swordsmen, came from the Erythraean Sea. Dur- ing the Assyrian and Persian supremacy the He- brews may have used the square, oblong and round shields of these nations, and may have sub- sequently copied those of Greece and Rome. The princes of Israel had shields of precious metals; all were managed by a wooden or leathern handle, and often slung by a thong over the neck. With the larger kinds a testudo could be formed by pressing the ranks close together, and while the outside men kept their shields before and on the flanks, those within raised theirs above the head and thus produced a kind of surface, sometimes, as close and fitted together as a pantile roof, and capable of resisting the pressure even of a body of men marching upon it. The tsenna was best fitted for men without any other armor, when combating in Open countries or carrying on sieges. Shields were hung upon the battlements of walls, and, as still occurs, chiefly above gates of cities by the watch and ward. In time of peace they were covered to preserve them from the sun, and in war uncov- ered; this sign was poetically used to denote com- ing hostilities, as in Is. xxii:6, etc. (2) Helmet. The helmet was next in consid- eration, and in the earliest ages was made of osier, or rushes, in the form of a beehive, or of a skull cap. The skins of the heads of animals— of lions, bears, wild boars, bulls and horses— were likewise adopted, and were adorned with rows of teeth, manes and bristles. Wood, linen cloth in many folds, and a kind of felt, were also in early use, and helmets of these materials may be observed worn by the nations of Asia at war with the conqueror kings of Egypt, even before the departure of Israel. At that time also these kings had helmets of metal, or rounded or pointed forms, adorned with a figure of the serpent Kneph. I. Of Rushes. 8. Assyrian. 2. Egyptian. 9. Greek. 3. 4. Western Asia. Io. Ionian. 5. Carian (?). II. Parthian, 6. 7. Egyptian. 12. I5. Other Asiatic tribes. The nations of Asia, however, used the woolen or braided caps, still retained, and now called kaouk and fez, around which the turban is usu- ally wound. These were almost invariably sup- plied with long lappets to cover the ears and the back of the head, and princes usually wore a ARMS, ARMOR radiated crown on the summit. This was the form of the Syrian, and probably of the Assyrian helmets, excepting that the last mentioned were of brass, though they still retained the low cylin- drical shape. The koba, some helmet of this kind, was worn by the trained infantry, who were spearmen among the Hebrews, but archers and slingers had round skullcaps of skins, gelts or quilted stuffs, such as are still in use among the Arabs. The form of Greek and Roman helmets, both of leather and of brass, is well known; they were most likely adopted also by the Hebrews and Egyptians during their subjection to those nations. (3) Body Armor. The most ancient Persian idols are clad in shagged skins, such as the AEgis of Jupiter and Minerva may have been, the type being taken from a Cyrenaean or African legend. In Egypt cuirasses were manufactured of leather, of brass and of a succession of iron hoops, chiefly covering the abdomen and the shoulders, but a more ancient national form was a kind of thorax tippet, shere yon, or square, with an opening in it for the head, the four points covering the breast, back and both upper arms. This kind in particular was affected by the royal band of relatives who surrounded the Pharaoh. ; E|| º Hill|| ºft|† S =|HS i §§§ {}} §i) º # WN § º N º § § N N V WNNNSNSNSS W §§§ §§§ NNN\\\\NRKNºNºw fºliº (ſº 1. Egyptian Tigulated. § N *...*** N A 2. Sleeve of Ring-mail, Ionian. By their use of metal for defensive armor, the Carians appear to have created astonishment among the Egyptians, and therefore may be pre- sumed to have been the first nation so protected in western Asia; nevertheless, in the tombs of the kings near Thebes, a tigulated hauberk is represented, composed of small three-colored pieces of metal—one golden, the others reddish and green. This kind of armor may be meant by the word techera, the 'closest interpretation of which appeals tu Le devussutio, tigulatio, a til- ing. The expression in 2 Chron. xviii:33, may be that Ahab was struck in one of the grooves or slits in the squares of his techera, or between two of them, where they do not overlap, or per- haps, with more probability, between the metal hoops of the trunk of the shereyon, where the thorax overlaps the abdomen. The term kas- kasim, ‘scales,’ in the case of Goliath's armor, denotes the squamous kind, most likely that in which the pieces were sewed upon a cloth and not hinged to each other, as in the techera. It was the defensive armor of northern and eastern nations, the Persian Cataphracti, Parthians and Sarmatians. But of true annular or ringed mail we doubt if there is any positive evidence, ex- cepting where rings were sewn separately upon cloth, anterior to the sculpture at Takt-i-Boostan, 158 ARMS, ARMOR or the close of the Parthian era. The existence of mail is often incorrectly inferred from our translators using the word wherever flexible ar- mor is to be mentioned. The techera could not well be worn without an undergarment of some density to resist the friction of metal, and this Parthian Horseman Clad in Coat of Mail. may have been a kind of sagum, the shereyon of the Hebrews, under another form—the dress Saul put upon David before he assumed the breastplate and girdle. (4) Cuirass. The Cuirass and Corslet, strictly speaking, were of prepared leather (corium), but often also composed of quilted cloths; the former in ancient times generally denoted a suit with leathern appendages at the bottom and at the shoulder, as used by the Romans; the latter, one in which the barrel did not come down below the hips, and usually destitute of leathern vittae, which was nationally Greek. In later ages it always designates a breast and back piece of steel. It is, however, requisite to observe that, in estimating the meaning of Hebrew names for armor of all º-rº- fiſſiliº Ü ſ Tº 5. Roman. Barbarian. 1, 2. Early Greek. 4. 3. Greek. 6. y kinds, they are liable to the same laxity of use which all other languages have manifested; for ARMY, THE SALVATION in military matters, more perhaps than in any other, a name once adopted remains the same, though the object may be changed by successive modifications, till there remains but little resem- blance to that to which the designation was orig- inally applied. The girdle, or, more properly, the baldric or belt (cingula or balteus), was used by the Hebrews under the name of izor; it was of leather, studded with metal plates or bullae; when the armor was slight, broad, and capable of being girt upon the hips; otherwise it supported the sword scarf-wise from the shoulder. (5) Greaves. Greaves were likewise known, even so early as the time of David, for Goliath wore them. They consisted of a pair of shin- covers of brass or strong leather, bound by thongs round the calves and above the ankles. They reached only to the knees, excepting among the Greeks, whose greaves, elastic behind, caught nearly the whole leg, and were raised in front above the knees. The Hebrew word soin, in Isaiah ix:5, is supposed to mean a half-greave, though the passage is altogether obscure. Perhaps the war-boot may be explained by the war-shoe of Egypt with a metal point. C. H. S. Figuratite. (I) Armor, when ascribed to God, denotes his all-sufficiency to conquer and de- stroy the enemies of his people. (2) David em- ploys a bold and truly believing prayer, when he prays God “to lay hold of shield and buckler, and draw out the spear” (Ps. xxxv.2). (3) The saint, being called to be a warrior under the Captain of . Salvation, is provided with a panoply, or complete armor, both for defence and attack. (4) This spiritual armor consists of the following pieces: The “shield of faith;” that is, confidence in God as reconciled in the Son of his love, or the grace of faith implanted in us by the Spirit. By this we resist the fiery darts of Satan. The “helmet” is the hope of Salvation ; the “breast-plate” is the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and im- planted in us; the “girdle” is that of truth re- vealed to us and dwelling in us; the “shoes” are the preparation of the gospel of peace; our “sword” is that of the Spirit, or the word of God; and the whole is fastened on and wielded in the exercise of all prayer (Eph. vi :13-20). With these weapons we are to fight against sin, Satan and the world, and to defend ourselves from their many and dangerous attacks (Eph. vi. II-20). (5) In Scripture this armor receives various names. Be- cause, provided and given by God, it is called “the armor of God.” God the Son purchased it for us; God the Holy Ghost applies it, or bestows it on us. Its nature is Divine and spiritual; its suc- cess is of God; and by it we fight his battles and are made more than conquerors (Eph. vi. II). (6) Because given for the cause of righteousness, it is called “the armor of righteousness on the right hand and on the left;" it is purchased with the finished righteousness of Christ, and can in no case be successful unless righteously employed for the end intended by God (2 Cor. vi :7). (7) And inasmuch as it is openly wielded for the con- demnation of the works of darkness, it is called “the armor of light;" it proceeds from the Father of light; it is possessed, and used by the children of light; it is shining, glorious and honorable. By wielding, it skillfully we manifest our spiritual light and knowledge, and fight our way to ever- lasting light (Rom. xiii :12). ARMY, THE SALVATION (ärmy, sal-va'- shūn). In 1865 a man with a heart full of the love and passion of the man Christ Jesus stood on Mile- 159 ARMY, THE SALVATION End Waste, Whitechapel, London, and began a work among the poor and unchurched masses of the great metropolis that has since grown into the vast movement known as the Salvation Army. This Army is a body of converted men and women, recruited almost exclusively from the non-churchgoing classes, thoroughly organized under a military form of government, and con- stituting a world-wide evangelistic agency to preach the Christ-old gospel and to bring all men to affectionately submit themselves to the claims of God as set forth in the Bible, and especially in the person, work and teachings of Our Lord Jesus Christ. It holds the great cardinal doctrines of evan- gelical Christianity: As believing in the Trinity; in the fall and the universality of sin “through the disobedience of one”; in the atonement for sin, both original and personal, through the vi- carious sufferings of the Son of God, the benefits of which are for all men, conditioned solely upon repentance and “faith which works by love”; in the love and ever-present agency of the Holy Spirit seen in the conversion of sinners and the sanctification of believers; and in the everlasting blessedness of the righteous and the eternal pun- ishment of those who die impenitent, in the world to come. It accepts the Bible as the inspired and authoritative word of God, and believes in taking the gospel to those who will not attend the ordi- nary places of worship; to this end it shapes its methods and nomenclature to compel the atten tion of those whom it seeks to reach. Its mili- tary titles, uniforms, bands, etc., are the fruitage of this principle of adaptation. It also believes in the ministry of woman, and has placed every office in its ranks within her reach. It requires of its members total abstinence, industry, separa- tion from the fashions and follies of the world, benevolence, and self-sacrifice for the salvation of all men, and urges its people to purity of life in thought, word and act. The founder and general of this movement, the Rev. William Booth, was born in Nottingham, England, April Ioth, 1829, and was converted among the Wesleyans at the age of fifteen. At an early age he entered the ministry and at once took rank as one of the most successful pastors and evangelists in his denomination, which rank he held until he severed his relation with the church in order to devote his energies to the sal- vation of the poor in London. This work, known at first as the Christian Mis- sion, spread rapidly throughout England, and soon burst forth in other countries. In 1872 in Cleveland, and in 1879 in Philadelphia, work was begun by converts who had emigrated to America, but not until 1880 was the work formally opened in the United States hy Commissioner George Railton and seven women officers duly commis- sioned by the General. Since then the Army's advance in America has been phenomenal, in spite of external difficulties arising from ignor- ance, misrepresentation and prejudice, and inter- nal troubles occasioned by the secession in 1884 of Major Moore, who succeeded Commissioner Railton in the chief command, and later, in 1896, by the retirement of Commander and Mrs. Bal- lington Booth. These defections in this most democratic age and country have tested to the utmost the Army's paternal or military principles of government, usually assumed to be its most vulnerable point. But, instead of weakening, this testing has rather strengthened the conviction in the minds of its people that these principles are from above, are ARMY, THE SALVATION in harmony with the principles of the Divine gov- ernment, as revealed in the Bible, and in the constitution of the human mind, and are best adapted to secure large and permanent results in dealing with the unchurched and undisciplined Iſla SSCS. - Commissioner Frank Smith succeeded Major Moore, while Commander and Mrs. Ballington Booth were succeeded by Commander and Mrs. Booth-Tucker, under whose leadership very re- markable advances are being made in all depart- ments of the work, but especially in the develop- ment of the army's social operations. The evangelistic and social operations are un- der the oversight of more than three thousand commanding officers, in the United States alpne, who give their whole time to the work and re- ceive a small salary sufficient for simple living expense, though no salary is guaranteed. Private soldiers receive no remuneration for any service they may give. The Army publishes in America two War Crys weekly in English, one in Swedish, one in German, and one in Chinese. It also publishes The Young Soldier, for children, and Harbor Lights, a monthly magazine. The combined cir- culation of these papers, which is principally among the vicious, non-churchgoing and more illiterate classes, is about six million copies per annum. A large number of books, pamphlets and tracts are also issued by its publishing houses. “The World for God” is the Army’s motto, and such is the faith of its workers in the power of the gospel, and such has been their success with their kaleidoscopic methods, bottomed on change- less Scriptural and philosophic principles, that they look forward with confidence to the day when all men shall accept Jesus Christ as Saviour and Lord and be filled with love one to another. They are in no sense antagonistic to any denom- ination of Christian workers, but, on the con- trary, are glad to co-operate with all lovers of God and man who believe in present salvation from sin through faith in the blood of Christ and who are seeking the rescue of the lost and the advancement of the Redeemer’s Kingdom. (1) Principal Doctrines. The following are i. principal doctrines of the Army. We be- 16ve : I. That the Scriptures were given by inspira- tion of God, and that they contain the Divine rule of faith and practice. 2. There is only one God, who is the Creator, Preserver and Governor of all things, and that He is the only proper object of religious worship. 3. That there are three persons in the Godhead —the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. 4. That in the person of Jesus Christ the Di- vine and human natures are united, so that He is truly and properly God, and truly and properly II].3.11. 5. That our first parents were created in a state of innocency, but that by their disobedience they lost their purity and happiness; and that, in consequence of their fall, all men have become sinners, totally depraved, and as such are justly exposed to the wrath of God. 6. That Jesus Christ has, by His sufferings and death, made an atonement for the whole world, so that whosoever will may be saved. 7. That repentance toward God, faith in our Lord Jesus Christ and conversion by the Holy Spirit are necessary to salvation. 8. That we are saved by grace, through faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, and that he that believeth hath the witness in himself. 9. That the Scriptures teach that not only does 160 ARMY. THE SALVATION continuance in the favor of God depend upon con- tinued faith in and obedience to Christ, but that it is possible for those who have been truly con- verted to fall away and be eternally lost. IO. That it is the privilege of all believers to be “wholly, Sanctified,” and that “their whole spirit and Soul and body” may “be preserved blamcless unto the coming of Our Lord Jesus Christ.” That is to say, we believe that after conversion there remain in the heart of the believer inclinations to evil, or roots of bitterness, which, unless over- powered by Divine Grace, produce actual sin; but that these evil tendencies can be entirely taken away by the Spirit of God, and the whole heart, thus cleansed from anything contrary to the will of God, or entirely sanctified, will produce the fruit of the Spirit only. And we believe that per- Sons thus entirely sanctified may, by the power of God, be kept unblamable and unreprovable be- fore Hinn. II. In the immortality of the soul; in the resur- rection of the body; in the general judgment at the end of the world; in the eternal happiness of the righteous, and in the everlasting punishment of the wicked.—General Booth in Orders and A'egaa/azzoza's for Aºze/a/. Officers, pp. 151, 152. - (2) Articles of War. In joining the Army a soldier is asked to sign what are known as the Articles of War, which set forth the principal doc- trines that every soldier is supposed to believe, the main principles on which he is expected to act, and a brief description of the service he will have to render. ARTICLES OF WAR. Having received with all my heart the salva- tion offered to me by the tender mercy of Jehovah, I do here and now publicly acknowledge God to be my Father and King, Jesus Christ to be my Saviour, and the Holy Spirit to be my Guide, Comforfer and Strength; and that I will, by His help, love, serve, worship and obey this glorious God through all time and through all eternity. Believing solemnly that the Salvation Army has been raised up by God, and is sustained and di- rected by Him, I do here declare my full deter- mination, by God’s help, to be a true soldier of the Army till I die. I am thoroughly convinced of the truth of the army's teachings. Therefore, I do here, and now, and forever, renounce the world with all its sinful pleasures, companionships, treasures and objects and de- clare my full determination boldly to show myself a soldier of Jesus Christ in all places and com- panies, no matter what I may have to suffer, do, or lose, by so doing. I do here and now declare that I will abstain from the use of all intoxicating liquors, and also from the habitual use of opium, lattdaniſm, mor- phia and all other baneful drugs, except when in illness such drugs shall be ordered for me by a doctor. I do here and now declare that I will abstain from the use of all low or profane language; from the taking of the name of God in vain, and from all impurity, or from taking part in any unclean conversation, or the reading of any obscene book or paper at any time, in any company, or in any place. I do here declare that I will not allow myself in any falsehood, deceit, misrepresentation or dis- honesty; neither will I practice any fraudulent conduct, either in my business, my home, or in any other relation in which I may stand to my fellow-men, but that I will deal truthfully, fairly, honorably and kindly with all those who may employ me or whom I may myself employ. ARNAN I do here declare that I will never treat any woman, child or other person whose life, com- fort or happiness may be placed within my power, in an oppressive, cruel or cowardly manner, but that I will protect such from evil and danger so far as I can, and promote, to the utmost of my ability, their present welfare and eternal salva- tl On. I do here declare that I will spend all the time, strength, money and influence I can in supporting and carrying on this war, and that I will endeavor to lead my family, friends, neighbors and all others whom I can influence, to do the same, be- lieving that the sure and only way to remedy all the evils in the world is by bringing men to sub- mit themselves to the government of the Lord Jesus Christ. I do here declare that I will always obey the lawful orders of my officers, and that I will carry out to the utmost of my power all the orders and regulations of the Army, and, further, that I will be an example of faithfulness to its prin- ciples, advance to the utmost of my ability its operations, and never allow, where I can pre- vent it, any injury to its interests or hindrance to its success. And I do here and now call upon all present to witness that I enter into this undertaking and sign these articles of war of my own free will, feeling that the love of Christ who died to save me requires from me this devotion of my life to His service for the salvation of the whole world, and therefore wish now to be enrolled as a soldier of the Salvation Army.—General Booth in Orders and Regulations for Soldiers, pp. 4 I, 42. * * * * S. S. B. ARNAN (är'nan), Heb. l; 8, ar-mawn', strong, nimble), whose sons are mentioned by the received Hebrew text in the genealogy of Zerubbabel (I Chron. iii:21), B. C. after 536. ARNON (är'non), (Heb. lºš, ar-nohn', a mur- mur), a river forming the southern boundary of trans-Jordanic Palestine, and separating it from the land of Moab (Num. xxi:13, 26; Deut. ii:24; iii:8, 16; Josh xii:1; Is. xvi;2; Jer. xlviii, 20). Burckhardt was the first to give a satisfactory account of this river, under the name of Wady Modjeb, which it now bears. It rises in the moun- tains of Gilead, near Katrane, whence it pursues a circuitous course of about eighty miles to the Dead Sea. It flows in a rocky bed, so deep and precipitous as to appear inaccessible; yet along this, winding among huge fragments of rock, lies the most frequented road, and, not being far from Dibon, probably that taken by the Israelites. The stream is almost dried up in summer, but huge masses of rock, torn from the banks and deposited high above the 'usual channel, evince its fullness and impetuosity in the rainy season. The river is mentioned on the Moabite stone. AROD (ā'röd), (Heb. Tº, ar-ode', a wild ass), a son of Gad (Num. xxvi.17), called Arodi in Gen. xlvi.16 (B. C. 1856). ARODI (är'o-di or a-rö'di). See AROD. ARODITES (a' rod-ites), (Heb. "Tºº, haw-ar- o-di'), descendants of Arod (Num. xxvi; 17). AROER (är'o-er or a-ro'er), (Heb. 2", ar-oh- ayr', nudity). 1. A town on the north side of the river Arnon, and therefore on the southern border of the terri- tory conquered from the Amorites, which was as- signed to the tribes of Reuben and Gad (Deut. ii:36; Josh. xii:2; xiii:9). The Amorites had previously dispossessed the 161 ARROW Ammonites of this territory; and although, in the texts cited, the town seems to be given to Reu- ben, it is mentioned as a Moabitish city by Jere- miah (xlviii:19). Burckhardt found the ruins of this town under the name of Araayr, on the edge . of a precipice overlooking the river (Travels in Syria, 372). Aroer is always named in conjunction with ‘the city that is in the midst of the river;' whence Dr. Mansford (Script. Gag.) conjectures that, like Rabbath Ammon [which see], it consisted of two parts, or distinct cities; the one on the bank of the river and the other in the valley beneath, sur- rounded, either naturally or artificially, by the waters of the river. 2. One of the towns built, or probably rebuilt, by the tribe of Gad (Num. xxxii:34). It is said in Josh. xiii:25 to be ‘before Rabbah' [of Am- mon]; but, as Raumer well remarks (Pa/aestūta, p. 249), this could not possibly have been in the topographical sense of the words (in which be- fore means east of), seeing that Aroer, as a town on the eastern border of Gad, must have been west of Rabbah. . But to a person in Palestine proper, or coming from the Jordan, Aroer would be be- fore Rabbah in the ordinary sense; and it appears to have been thus understood by Burckhardt. §. A city in the tribe of Judah (I Sam. xxx: 285 ). 4. A city in the south of Judah, to which David sent presents after recovering the spoil of Ziklag (I Sam. xxx:26, 28). Dr. Robinson thinks this may have been the town in a valley twenty miles from Hebron. Here there are many pits for water, which are called Ararah, and which gave name to the valley. In the valley and on the western hill are evident traces of an ancient village or town, consisting only of foundations of unhewn stones, now much scattered, but yet sufficiently distinct to mark them as foundations. Small fragments of pottery are also everywhere visible. The identity of name satisfies the traveler that he has here found the Aroer of Judah. AIROERITE (Heb. `, ar-o-ay-ree', of Aroer). Hothan, the Aroerite, was father of two of David's captains (1 Chron. Xi:44). ARPHAD or ARPAD (är'phād or ār'pād), (Heb. ?"N, ar-fawd", spread out). - A Syrian city near Damascus, having its own king, and in Scripture always associated with Hamath, the Epiphania of the Greeks (2 Kings xviii:34; xix:13; Is. x:9; xxxvi :19; xxxvii: 13); at one time it was apparently dependent on Da- mascus (Jer. xlix:23). Near the site of this for- gotten city Mr. W. St. Chad Roscawen recently purchased a large and beautiful axe-head of green stone. From others that had been found at Ephe- sus and elsewhere, it is clear that these axes be- longed to the Hittites and that Arphad was once a Hittite city like Hamath. ARPHAxAD (ar-phâx'ad), (Heb. Tºš, ar- Żaž-shad", border or fortress of the Chaldeans.) 1. The son of Shem, and father of Salah ; born one year after the Deluge, and died at the age of 438 years (Gen. xi :12, etc), B. C. 2075. 2. King of Media, mentioned in Judith i :I, B. C. 592. ARRow (är'rö), (Heb. Yº, Ahers). Figuratite. (I) This word is frequently used as the symbol of calamity or disease inflicted by God (Job vi:4; xxxiv:6; Ps. xxxviii:2; Deut. (är'o-er-ite or a-rö'erite), 11. ARROWS xxxii:23; Comp. Ezek. v :16; Zech. ix:14). The metaphor thus applied derived its propriety and force from the popular belief that all diseases were immediate and special inflictions from Heaven. (2) Lightnings are, by a very fine figure, described as the arrows of God (Ps. xviii: 14; cxliv :6; Habak. iii:II. Comp. Wisd. v :21 ; 2 Sam. xxii: I5). (3) ‘Arrow’ is occasionally used to denote some sudden or inevitable danger, as in Ps. xci: 5:—‘The arrow that flieth by day.’ It is also fig- urative of anything injurious, as a deceitful tongue (Ps. cxxix:4; Jer. ix:8); a bitter word (Ps. lxiv: 3); a false testimony (Prov. xxv :18). (4) As sym- bolical of oral wrong, the figure may perhaps have been derived from the darting “arrowy tongue’ of serpents. (5) The arrow, however, is not always symbolical of evil. In Ps. cxxvii:4, 5, well-conditioned children are compared to “arrows in the hands of a mighty man;" i. e., instruments of power and action. (6) The arrow is also used in a good sense to denote the efficient and irresistible energy of the word of God in the hands of the Messiah (Ps. xlv.:6; IS. xliv 2). (See ARMS, ARMOR.) AIRROWS (ār-röz). See ARMs, ARMOR. ARROWS, DIVINATION BY (ār-róz, div'í- nā'shūn by). See DIVINATION. ARTAXERXES (ar' tag-zèrk'séz), (Hebrew Nºvrºs, ar-fakh-shash-taw'; Gr. "Aptašépêms, ar-tax-er'zace, probably, “the great warrior or king'). It is most frequently written artachast and is the title under which more than one Persian king is mentioned in the Old Testament. The Hebrew form is a slight corruption of the letters which De Sacy has deciphered in the inscriptions of Nakshi Rustam, and which he vocalizes Ar- tahshetr (Antiq. d. l. Perse, p. Ioo). Gesenius pronounces them Artachshatr; and, by assuming the easy change of r into s, and the transposition of the s, makes Artachshast very closely represent its prototype. The word is a compound, the first element of which, arta—found in several Persian names—is generally admitted to mean great; the latter part De Sacy conceived to be the Zend Khshe thro, King, to which Gesenius and Pott assent. Thus the sense of great warrior, which Herodotus (vi :98) assigned to the Greek form Artaxerxes accords with that which ety- mology discovers in the original Persian title. Pott, according to his etymology of Xerxes, takes Artaxerxes, to be more than equivalent to Artachshatr—to be ‘magnus regum rea' (Etym. Forsch. i. p. 1xvii). (1) The First Artachshasht is mentioned in Ezra iv:7-24, as the Persian king who, at the in- stigation of the adversaries of the Jews, obstructed the rebuilding of the Temple, from his time to that of Darius, king of Persia. This king is the immediate predecessor of Darius Hystaspis, and can be no other than the Magian impostor, Smer- dis, who seized on the throne (B. C. 521), and was murdered after a usurpation of less than eight months (Herod. iii:61-78). Profane his- torians, indeed, have not mentioned him under the title of Artaxerxes; but neither do Herodotus and Justin (the latter of whom calls him Oropasta, i. 9) agree in his name, so that this fact is not, of itself, enough to invalidate any deductions which are in other respects sound. (2) The Second Artachshast, in the seventh year of whose reign (B. C. 457) Ezra led a second colony of the Jewish exiles back to Jerusalem (Ezra vii:I, sq.), the opinions are divided between Xerxes and his son Artaxerxes Longimanus. The 162 ARTEMIS arguments brought forward by the advocates for Xerxes, among whom are J. D. Michaelis, Jahn, and De Wette, are briefly as follows: That, as the preceding portion of the book of Ezra relates to Darius Hystaspis, it is most natural to expect that the next following section should refer to his successor, Xerxes, but Ezra does not give a continuous history, and it is now demonstrable from the monuments that Xerxes I. is the Ahas- uerus of Esther (see AHASUERUS). It is hard to Suppose that he would have been called both Ahasuerus and Artaxerxes in addition to his regular name. The authority of Josephus in this respect is very slender, since he makes Xerxes reign 35 years; whereas, we know from other accounts that he was assassinated in the twenty-first year of his reign. This Artaxerxes is said to have re- ceived the name of Longimanus from the unusual length of his arms, which were so much out of due proportion that when standing erect, he could touch his knees. In the twentieth year of his reign, he consider- ately allowed Nehemiah to go to Jerusalem for the furtherance of purely national objects, invested him with the government of his own people, and allowed him to remain there for twelve years (Neh. ii:I, sq.; v. I4). It is almost unanimously agreed that the king here intended is Artaxerxes Longimanus, who reigned from the year 464 to 425 B. C. The date of Nehemiah’s departure, is, therefore, the year 444 B. C. Some few have indeed maintained (and it seems principally for the purpose of reconciling Neh. xiii:28, with Josephus, Antiq. xi. 8) that the king here referred to is Artaxerxes Mnemon, who reigned from the year B. C. 404 to 359. But Ezra and Nehemiah were contemporaries (Neh. viii:9), and it is diffi- cult to believe that no events of Jewish history were recorded between the reigns of Darius Hys- taspis (Ezra vi.) and Artaxerxes Mnemon. Be- sides this would separate Eliashib, the high-priest (Neh. iii:I), and his grandfather, Jeshua (Neh. xii:Io) by an interval of 139 years, which is hardly possible. ARTEMAS (är"te-mas), (Gr.’Aprepañs, ar-fem-as'). This name (which is a contraction for Artemi- dorus) occurs only once (Tit. iii:12), as that of an esteemed disciple whom St. Paul designed to send into Crete to supply the place of Titus, whom he invited to visit him at Nicopolis. When the Epistle was written, the Apostle seems not to have decided whether he sould send Artemas or Tychicus for this purpose. ARTEMIS (ār-té'mis), (Gr. "Aprepas, ar'fem-is, artemis, Acts xix:24). The Diana of the Romans is a goddess known under various modifications, and with almost in- compatible attributes. As the tutelary divinity of Ancient Coin Showing Image of Artemis. Ephesus, in which character alone she concerns us here, she was undoubtedly a representative of the same power presiding over conception and ARUBOTH birth which was adored in Palestine under the name of Ashtoreth. She is therefore related to all the cognate deities of that Asiatic Juno-Venus, and partakes, at least, of their connection with the moon. Creuzer has combined a number of testi- monies in order to show how her worship was introduced into Ephesus from the coasts of the Black Sea; and endeavors to point out the Several Medo-Persian, Egyptian, Libyan, Scy- thian and Cretan, elements of which she is com- pounded (Symbolik, ii. 115, sq.). The later image with the full development of attributes is, as Creuzer says, a Pantheon of Asi- atic and Egyptian deities. Even in it, however, we see how little influence Greek art had in modi- fying its antique rudeness. It is still more like a mummy than a Greek statute. Some of the most significant attributes in this figure are—The tur- reted head, like that of Cybele; the nimbus behind it representing the moon; the zodiacal signs of the bull, the twins, and the crab on her bosom ; below them, two garlands, one of flowers and the other of acorns; the numerous breasts; the lions, stags, and cows in various parts; the bees and flowers on the sides; and others described in Millin's Galerie Mythol. i. 26. Her priests were called Megabyzi, and were eunuchs. Artemis. The Arabic version of the Acts renders Arte- mis, in the chapter cited, by Ag Zuharat, which is the Arabic name for the planet Venus. ARUBOTH or ARABOTH (är'u-bóth or ār'a- böth), (Heb. nºs, ar-oob-both'), a country belong- ing to Judah (I Kings iv:IO), the situation of which is not known. It was probably a name for the rich corn-grow- ing country of the Shefelah. ARUMAH (a-ru'mah), otherwise Rumah, (Heb. º, ar-oo-maw', height), a city near Shechem (Judges ix:41), where Abimelech, the son of Gideon, dwelt. 163 ASA ARVAD (ār'vād), (Heb. Ts, ar-vad", place of fugitives, I Macc. xv.23), or, as it might be spelt, Arua d, whence the present name Ruad, a small island and city on the coast of Syria, called by the Greeks Aradus, by which name it is mentioned in I Macc. xv.23. It is a small rocky island, opposite the mouth of the river Eleutherus, to the north of Tripolis, about one mile in circumference and two miles from the shore. Strabo (xvi. p. 753) describes it as a rock rising in the midst of the waves (a rock washed all round), and modern travelers state that it is steep on every side. Strabo also describes the houses as exceedingly lofty, and they were doubtless so built, on account of the scantiness of the site; hence, for its size, it was exceedingly populous (Pomp. Mela, l. ii. c. 7). Those of the Arvidites whom the island could not accommodate found room in the town and dis- trict of Antaradus, on the opposite coast, which also belonged to them. Arvad is not the same as Arpad or Arphad. ARVADITES (ar'vad-ites), (Heb. FTTS, ar- vad-eezz', Gen. x:18; I Chron. i:16), the inhabitants of the island Aradus (see ARVAD), and doubtless also of the neighboring coast. The Arvadites were descended from Arvad, one of the sons of Canaan (Gen. x:18). Strabo (xvi, p. 731) describes the Arvadites as a colony from Sidon. They were noted mariners (Ezek. xxvii:8, II; Strabo, xvi, p. 754), and formed a distinct state, with a king of their own (Arrian, Exped. Alex. ii, p. 90); yet they appear to have been in some dependence upon Tyre, for the prophet represents them as furnish- ing their contingent of mariners to that city (Ezek. xxvii:8, II). The Arvadites took their full share in the maritime traffic for which the Phoenician nation was celebrated, particularly after Tyre and Sidon had fallen under the dominion of the Graeco- Syrian kings. They early entered into alliance with the Romans, and Aradus is named among the states to which the consul Lucius formerly made known the league which had been contracted with Simon Maccabaeus (I Macc. xv.:23). ARZA (är'zá), (Heb. ssºs, ar-àsaw', earthiness), governor of Tirzah, in whose house Zimri killed Elah, king of Israel (I Kings xvi;9, Io). ASA (ä'sá), (Heb. sps, aw-saw', healing or phy- sician), son of Abijah, grandson of Rehoboam, and third king of Judah. He began to reign two years before the death of Jeroboam, in Israel, and he reigned forty-One years, from B. C. 915-875. As Asa was very young at his accession, the affairs of the government were administered by his mother, or, according to some (Comp. I Kings xvi; I, IO), his randmother Maachah, who is understood to have een a granddaughter of Absalom (see MAA- CHAH). She gave much encouragement to idola- try. (1) Religious Conduct. The young king, on as- suming the reins of government, zealously rooted out the idolatrous practices which had grown up during his minority and under the preceding reigns; and only the altars in the ‘high places' were suffered to remain (I Kings XV: I I-13; 2 Chron. xiv:2-5). (2) Wars. He neglected no human means of putting his kingdom in the best possible military condition, for which ample opportunity was offered by the peace which he enjoyed in the first ten years of his reign. And his resources were so well organized, and the population had so increased, that he was eventually in a condition to count on the military services of 580,000 men (2 Chron. xiv:6- ASADIAS 8). In the eleventh year of his reign, relying upon the Divine aid, Asa attacked and defeated the numerous hosts of the Cushite king Zerah, who had penetrated through Arabia Petraea into the vale of Zephathah with an immense host. As the trium- phant Judahites were returning, laden with spoil, to Jerusalem, they were met by the prophet Aza- riah, who declared this splendid victory to be a consequence of Asa's confidence in Jehovah, and exhorted him to perseverance. (3) Reforms. Thus encouraged, the king ex- erted himself to extirpate the remains of idolatry, and caused the people to renew their covenant with Jehovah (2 Chron. xv.: I-15). It was this clear knowledge of his dependent political position, as the vicegerent of Jehovah, which won for Asa the highest praise that could be given to a Jewish king—that he walked in the steps of his ancestor David (I Kings xv. II). (4) Alliance with Ben-hadad. toward the latter end of his reign the king failed to maintain the character he had thus acquired. When Baasha, king of Israel, had renewed the war between the two kingdoms, and had taken Ramah, which he was proceeding to fortify as a frontier barrier, Asa, the Conqueror of Zerah, was so far wanting to his kingdom and his God as to employ the wealth of the Temple and of the royal treas- ures to induce the king of Syria (Damascus) to make a diversion in his favor by invading the do- minions of Baasha. By this means he recovered Ramah, indeed; but his treasures were squandered, and he incurred the rebuke of the prophet Hanani, whom he cast into prison, being, as it seems, both alarmed and enraged at the effect his address was calculated to produce upon the people. Other per- sons (who had probably manifested their disappro- bation) also suffered from his anger (I Kings xv. 16- 22; 2 Chron. xvi; I-IO). In the last three years of his life, Asa was afflicted with a grievous “disease in his feet;' and it is mentioned to his reproach that he placed too much confidence in his physi- ClallS. (5) Death. At his death, however, it appeared that his popularity had not been substantially im- paired; for he was honored with a funeral of unus- ual cost and magnificence (I Chron. xvi; I I-I4). He was succeeded by his son Jehoshaphat. ASADIAS (äs-a-di'as), (Baruch i. I). See HAS- ADIAH. ASAEL (a'sā-el or ās'à-el). See JAHzEEL. ASAHEL (ä'sä-hél or ās'a-hél), (Heb. 58 mº, as-aw-a/e', God's creature). tº 1. Son of David's sister Zeruiah, and brother of Joab and Abishai. He was noted for his swiftness of foot; and after the battle at Gibeon, he pursued and overtook Abner, who, with great reluctance, in order to preserve his own life, slew him with a back thrust of his spear (B. C. Io95), (see ABNER), (2 Sam. ii: 18-23; iii. 27, 30; xxiii: 24; I Chron. xi.; 26; xxvii: 7). 2. One of the Levites (B.C. 909), in the reign of Jehoshaphat, who instructed the people in the law (2 Chron. xvii: 8). 3. A priest, father of Jonathan, in the time of Ezra (Ezra x: I 5). He is called Azael in Esdr. ix: I4 (B.C. before 459). - 4. A Levite in the time of Hezekiah (B. C. 727), who had charge of the tithes (2 Chron. xxxi.; 13. ASAHIAH (äs'a-hi'ah), (Heb."º, ah-saw-yaw, Jah is doer or Jehovah made), one of the persons sent by king. Josiah to consult Huldah, the proph- etess, concerning the book of the law, found in the temple (2 Kings xxii; I4). Also called Asaiah (2 Chron. xxxiv: 2O). 164 Nevertheless, . ASQENSION ASAIAH (a-să'yā or ās'a-i'ah), (Heb. as in Asahza/, Jehovah made). 1. A prince of the Simeonites who drove out the Hamite shepherds (B.C. 712), from Gedor (1 Chron. iv: 36). 2. A Levite of the reign of David (1 Chron. vi; 30). With 120 of his brethren he brought the º: to the city of David (B. C. Io93), (1 Chron. xv.: , II). 3. A son of “the Shilonite,” dwelling at Jeru- salem (I Chron. ix: 5). In Neh. xi: 5 he is called Maaseiah (B. C. 536). 4. (See ASAHIAH). ASAPH (a'saph),(Heb.º,aw-sawſ,assembler). A Levite, Son of Barachias (I Chron. vi. 39; xv. 17), eminent as a musician, and appointed by David to preside over the sacred choral services which he organized. The ‘sons of Asaph’ are afterwards mentioned as choristers of the temple (I Chron. xxv. 1, 2; 2 Chron. xx: I4; xxix: I 3; Ezra ii:41; iii: IO; Neh. vi. 44; xi. 22); and this office appears to have been made hereditary in his family (I Chron. xxv. 1, 2). Asaph was celebrated in after times as a prophet and poet (2 Chron. xxix:30; Neh. xii; 4), and the titles of twelve of the Psalms (lxxiii to lxxxiii), bear his name. (See PSALMS). There were two other persons named Asaph: one who occupied the distinguished post of ma2.Éir (nº) or ‘re- corder’ to king Hezekiah (2 Kings xviii: 18, 37; Is. xxxvi; 3, 22); another who was keeper of the royal forests under Artaxerxes (Neh. ii:8). ASAREEL (a-să'rā-el or a-săr'a-el), (Heb. *sº 8, as-ar-a/e', right of God or bound by Jehovah), a son of Jehaleleel of the tribe of Judah (I Chron. iv.: 16; B. C. after 1618). AsARELAH (as'a-relah), (Heb. Tºº,as-ar. a/e'-aw, Jah is joined), one of the sons of Asaph, set apart by David to prophesy with harps (I Chron. xxv.2); called Jesharelah in verse I4. ASCALON (äs'-ka-lón). See ASHKELON. ASCENSION (äs-sén'shūn). The event spoken of under this title is among those which Christians of every age have contemplated with most profound satisfaction. It was in his ascension that Christ ex- hibited the perfect triumph of humanity over every antagonist, whether in itself, or in the circum- stances under which it may be supposed to exist. The contemplation of this, the entrance of the Redeemer into glory, inspired the prophets of Old with the noblest views of his kingdom. “Thou hast ascended on high; thou hast led Captivity captive; thou hast received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that the Lord God might dwell among them' (Ps. lxviii: 18); and “Lift up your heads, O ye gates; and be ye lifted up, ye everlast- ing doors, and the King of glory shall come in’(Ps. xxiv.: /). Our Saviour, having repeatedly conversed with his apostles after his resurrection, and afford- ed them many infallible proofs of its reality, led them from Jerusalem to Bethany, and was raised up to heaven in their sight; there to continue till he shall descend at the last day to judge the quick and the dead. (1) Evidences. The evidences of this fact were numerous. The disciples saw him ascend (Acts i:9, Io). Two angels testified that he did ascend (Acts i: i 1). Stephen, Paul and John saw him in his as- cended state (Acts vii. 55, 56; ix; Rev. i). The ascension was demonstrated by the descent of the Holy Ghost (John xvi;7-14; Acts ii: 33); and the terrible overthrow and dispersion of the Jewish nation is still a standing proof of it (John viii. 21; Matt. xxvi. 64). - (2) Time. The time of Christ's ascension was forty days after his resurrection. He continued so ASENATH many days upon earth that he illight give repeated proofs of his resurrection (Acts i:3); instruct his apostles in everything of importance respecting their Office and ministry (Acts i; 3); and might open to them the Scriptures concerning himself, and renew their commission to preach the Gospel (Acts i. 5, 6; Mark xvi; 15). (3) Manner. As to the manner of his ascension, it was from Mount Olivet to heaven, not in appear- ance only, but in reality, and that visibly and local- ly. It was a real motion of his human nature; Sud- den, Swift, glorious and in a triumphant manner. He was parted from his disciples while he was solemnly blessing them; and multitudes of angels attended him with shouts of praise (Ps. lxviii: 17; xlvii. 5, 6). (4) Effects. The effects or ends of his ascen- sion were: I. To fulfill the types and prophecies concerning it. 2. To “appear” as a priest “in the presence of God for us.” . 3. To take upon him more openly the exercise of his kingly office. 4. imſ F->: 7-2 | #2 3 Ž ##### % tº: - ==E= - - - ==E------> -e=: =====º: !}}}|..}} PſAS - %; E :E: Wºffº #4% % - ºft E: Ž % º Žºržº tºº. - º % Ż% º 165 ſº # § º %” % ASHDOD ASTIAN (ä'shan), (Heb. jº, azey-shazeyn', smoke), a city of Judah (Josh. xv.: 42), but afterwards ap- parently yielding to Simeon (Josh. xix: 7; I Chron. iv. 32). Eusebius says that, in his time, Beth- Ashan was sixteen miles from Jerusalem, west. In I Sam. XXX: 30 it is called Chor-ashan, i. e., ſternace of smoke. In I Chron. vi. 59, it is given as a priest's city. - * ASHBEA (āsh'be-à), (Heb. Pºs, ash-bay'ah, adjuration), a proper name, but whether of 2. place or person is not certain (I Chron. iv.21), B.C. about 14OO. ASHBEL (āsh'bel), (Heb. º, ash-baſe', man of Baal), a son of Benjamin (Gen. xlvi.21; Num. xxvi;38; I Chron. viii:1), B.C. about 1856. ASHBELITES (āsh'bel-ites), (Heb. with the art, " *", haw-ash-ba-ſee', belonging to Ashbel), descendants of Ashbel (B.C. 1700), son of Benja- min (Num. xxvi;38). §§ $ º §§ºš “” ------S sº §§ºš *S$ Nwº. Sº N §§ ºf 2 %ss Sº §. £ %.§ } | £3% 㺠º ". . * * E sº - § º ſº º $º "º ºri. §§ ºf º *'º. §§ º: º- § § sº tº be tº sº º, º.º. *"... . º | § -" - º . . . º. w \ \. * 2: Nºssº º % º ſ : º º º º #}} § º º: * : ºr ºf ſº % *** 2% º 2. º ſº £º º Ashdod. To receive gifts for men, both ordinary and extra- ordinary (Ps. lxviii:18). 5. To open the way to heaven for his people (Heb. x:19, 20). 6. To assure the saints of their ascension to heaven after their resurrection from the dead (John xiv: 1, 2.) ASENATII (As'e-uśll U1 a-se'11alli), (IIub. nºns, aw-se-math', dedicated to Neit), daughter of Poti- pherah, priest of On, whom the king of Egypt be- stowed in marriage upon Joseph, with a view prob- ably of strengthening his position in Egypt by this high connection. (See JOSEPH.) Attention is here required only to the 7zazze, which in common with other words of foreign origin, has attracted consid- erable notice. No better etymology of Asenath has been proposed than that by Jablonski, who (Panth. Egypt i: 56, and Ożuscul. ii. 208) regards the forms Asenath and Asemeſh as representative of a Coptic compound Assheneit, she who is of AVeith. (See Gen. xli:45, 50; xlvi.2O.) ASER (a 'ser), Greek form of ASHER (which see) (Luke ii:36; Rev. vii:6). ASH (āsh). See OREN. ASHDOD (āsh'dód), (Heb. TºS, ash-dode', rav- ager), the Azotus of the Greeks and Romans, and so called in I Macc. iv:15; Acts viii:40 (see also Plin. Aſist. A/a/. v.:14; Ptolem. v.:16); a city on the summit of a grassy hill, near the Mediterranean Coast, nearly midway between Ca2a and Joppa, being 18 geog. miles N. by E. from the former, and 21 S. from the latter. Ashdod was a city of the Philistines, and the chief town of one of their five states (Josh. xiii:3; 1 Sam. vi.17). It was the seat of the worship of Dagon (I. Sam. V: I-5; I Macc. xi.;4), before whose shrine in this city it was that the captured ark was deposited and tri- umphed over the idol (I Sam. v.: I-9). Ashdod was assigned to Judah; but many centuries passed before it and the other Philistine towns were sub- dued (see PHILISTINES); and it appears never to have been permanently in possession of the Judah- ites, although it was dismantled by Uzziah, who built towns in the territory of Ashdod (1 Chron. xxvi;6). It is mentioned to the reproach of the Jews after their return from captivity that they married wives of Ashdod, the result of which was w ASHDODITES that the children of these marriages spoke a mon- grel dialect, compounded of Hebrew and , the speech of Ashdod (Neh. xiii:23, 24). These facts indicate the ancient importance of Ashdod. It was indeed a place of great strength; and being on the usual military route between Syria and Egypt, the possession of it became an object of importance in the wars between Egypt and the great northern powers. Hence it was secured by the Assyrians before invading Egypt (Is. xx:I, sq.); and at a later date it was taken by Psammetichus, after a siege of twenty-nine years, the longest on record (Herodot. ii: 157). The destruction of Ash- dod was foretold by the prophets (Jer. xxv.20; Is. xx:I; Amos i.8; iii:9; Zeph. ii:4; Zach. ix:6); and was accomplished by the Maccabees (I Macc. v:68; x:77-84; xi:4). It is enumerated among the towns which Pompey joined to the province of Syria (Joseph. Antzg. xiv:4, 4; De Beſ/.../ud. i. 7, 7), and among the cities ruined in the wars, which Gabinius ordered to be rebuilt (Antig. xiv:5, 3). It was included in Herod's dominion, and was one of the three towns bequeathed by him to his sister Salome (De Be//, /ted. vii:8, 1). The evangelist Philip was found at Ashdod after he had baptized the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts viii:40). Azotus early became the seat of a bishopric; and we find a bishop of this city present at the councils of Nice, Chalcedon, A. D. 359, Seleucia, and Jerusalem, A. D. 536 (Reland Palastina, p. 609). ASEIDODITES (fish'dód-ites), (Neh. iv:7), inhab- itants of Ashdod (q.v.); less correctly rendered Ashdothites (Josh. xiii:3). (See ASHDOTHITES). ASHDOTHITES (#sh'dóth-ites), (Heb. "Tºº, ash-do-dee"), a less correct mode (Josh. xiii:3) of anglicizing the name ASHDODITES (which see). ASHDOTH PISGAH (āsh'doth-piz'gah), (Heb. Fºr mºs, ash-doth' ha-Żis-gazv', springs of Pis- gah), the water Courses, spurs and ravines of Mount Pisgah (Deut. iii:17; iv:49; Josh. xii:3; xiii:2O). ASHER (āsh'er), (Heb. Tºš, aw-share', happi- ness). 1. One of the sons of Jacob by Zilpah, the hand- maid of Leah (Gen. xxx:13; XXXV:26; xlix:20), and founder of one of the twelve tribes (Num. xxvi; 44-47). Asher had four sons and one daughter (Gen. xlix:20; Deut. xxxiii:24; I Chron. vii.30). (1) Tribe of Asher. . On quitting Egypt the number of adult males in the tribe of Asher was 41,500, which made it the ninth of the tribes (excluding Levi) in numbers—Ephraim, Manasseh and Benjamin only being below it. But before entering Canaan an increase of II,900—an in- crease exceeded only by Manasseh-raised the number to 53,4OO, and made it the fifth of the tribes in population (Comp. Num. i:40, 41; xxvi;47). (2) Inheritance. The inheritance of this tribe lay in a very fruitful country, on the seacoast, with Lebanon north, Carmel and the tribe of Issa- char south, and Zebulun and Naphtali east. It is usually stated that the whole of the Phoenician territories, including Sidon, were assigned to this tribe. But there are various considerations which militate against this conclusion (Num. xxvi;24; Josh. xix:24; Judg. i:31), and tend to show that the assigned frontier-line was drawn out to the sea south of Sidon. The strongest text for the inclu- sion of Sidon (Tyre was not then founded) is that in which it is mentioned to the reproach of the Asherites that they did not drive out the Sidoni- ans (Judg. i:31). (3) Among the Canaanites. The Asherites were for a long time unable to gain possession of the territories actually assigned them, and ‘dwelt among the Canaanites, the inhabitants of the land' 166 ASHKELON (Judg. i:32); and, “as it is not usual to say of a larger number that it dwells among the smaller, the inference is that they expelled but compara- tively few of the Canaanites, leaving them, in fact, a majority of the population' (Bush, note on Judg. i:32). 2. The name of the tribe descended from Asher, and also of that part of Canaan in which they dwelt (Num. i: I3; ii:27: xxvi; 44, 47; xxxiv:27; Josh. xix: 24, 31, 34; xxi.; 6, 30; Judg. i. 31; v: 17; vi:35; vii:23; 1 Kings iv: I6; I Chron. vi. 62, 74; Ezek. xlviii. 2, 3, 34). 3. A place that formed one boundary of the tribe of Manasseh on the south (Josh. xvii: 7). ASHERAH (a-shë'rah). See AsHTORETH. ASHERITES (āsh'er-ites), descendants of Ash- er (Judg. i. 32). (See ASHER). ASHES (fish'éz), (Heb. 28, ay'ſer; Gr. orodós, spod-os'; also lºº, deh'shem, literally, fatness). The ashes of the altar of burnt offering on the days of the great festivals were suffered to accu- mulate, and then taken away the next day by a priest chosen by lot to this work. There was a sort of lye made of the ashes of the heifer sacri- ficed on the great day of expiation, which was used for ceremonial purification (Num. xix: 17,18). (See SACRIFICE.) Figuratite. 1. Ashes in the symbolical lan- guage of Scripture, denote human frailty (Gen. xviii. 27), deep humiliation (Esth. iv: I; Jonah iii:6; Matt. xi. 21; Luke X: 13; Job xlii: 6; Dan. ix:3). 2. To sit ºn ashes was a token of grief and mourn- ing (Job ii: 8; Lam. iii: 16; Ezek. xxvii: 30), as was also strewing them upon the head (2 Sam. xiii: Io; Is... xli:3). (See MOURNING.) - 3. Feeding on ashes, in Ps. cii:9, appears to ex- press grief, as of one with whose food the ashes with which he is covered mingle. But in Is. xliv,2O “feeding on ashes' which afford no nourishment, is judged to denote ineffectual means, labor to no purpose. (Compare HOS. xii: 1.) e ASHIMA (ä'shi-mă or a-shi'má), (Heb. shºws. as/*-ī-maw', perhaps, heaven, 2 Kings xvii: 30), is Only once mentioned in the Old Testament as the God of the people of Hamath. The Babylonian Talmud, in the treatise ‘Sanhedrin' (cited in Carp- zov's 4//aratus, p. 516), and the majority of Jew- ish writers, assert that Ashima was worshiped un- der the form of a goat without woo/, the Talmud of Jerusalem says, under that of a Zamzâ. Elias Levita, a learned Rabbi of the sixteenth century, assigns the word the sense of affe, in which he was, in all probability, deceived by the resemblance in Sound to the latin simia. Jurieu and Calmet have Fº other fanciful conjectures. The opinion, owever, that this idol had the form of a goat, ap- pears to be the one best supported by arguments as well as by authorities. It is worthy of mention that the name of this idol furnished Aben Ezra with an opportunity of displaying the inveterate hatred of . the Jews against the Samaritans. In his preface to the book of Esther, he asserts that the Samari- tan text of Gen. i. I, begins with the words “In the beginning Ashima created.' It need hardly be said there is no trace of this reading either in the Samaritan text or version. ASHKELON or ASKELON (āsh'ke-lón or as'ke-lon), (Heb. lºº, ash-Ae/-one', weighing; Gr. 'AokáXav). (1) Description. One of the five cities of the Philistines, on the extreme edge of the shore of the Mediterranean Sea, ten miles north of Gaza. Thither Samson went when he slew thirty men ASHKENAZ and took their spoil (Judg. xiv:19); it was assigned to the tribe of Judah (Judg. i:18); it is mentioned in the denunciations of the prophets (Jer. xxv.20; xlvii:5, 7; Amos i:8; Zeph. ii;4, 7; Zech. ix:5). The town forms a semicircle—in a hollow, declining toward the sea, surrounded on every side by arti- ficial mounds. (2) History. Ashkelon was the seat of worship of the Philistine goddess Astarte or Ashtoreth (which see), whose temple was plundered by the Scythians, B. C. 625; was the birthplace of Herod the Great; was taken by the Franks, A. D. Io99; partially destroyed by the Moslems; rebuilt by Richard Coeur de Lion; destroyed again in A. D. I27O. Ruins of walls, columns, marble pillars, and in- scriptions on stone abound there now, though many of the good building stones have been dug up and used in Jaffa and Gaza. Sycamores, vines, olives and fruit trees are found, there, and also thirty-seven wells of sweet water. Near the ruins of the old city is Jūrah, a village of about 300 pop- ulation. At Askelon there are visible at low water two shallows of crescent shape, which are perhaps remains of ancient moles, and at the bottom of the rocky basin, in which the mediaeval city was confined, explorers think they can trace the lines of a little dock. Thomson, Zand and Book, says: No site in this country has so deeply impressed my mind with sadness. O man, savage, ferocious, brutal, what desolations thou has wrought in the earth! They have stretched out upon Askelon the line of confusion and the stones of emptiness. Thorns have come up in her palaces, and brambles in the fortresses thereof, and it is a habitation of dragons and a court for Owls (Is. xxxv :I I-13). Askelon will surely be rebuilt at some future day of prosperity for this unhappy land. The position is altogether too advantageous to allow it to sink into total neglect. The inhabitants call the place El Jore, but they are also acquainted with the name Askelon, and in some degree with her an- cient story, which closely resembles that of her neighbors, Ashdod and Gaza, and is to be found in the same books, sacred and profane (Vol. II, pp. 329, 330). ſº ASHKENAZ (āsh'ke-nāz), (Heb. 'Pºs, ash- Æen-a2', meaning unknown, Gen. x:3); and Ash- chenaz (Jer. li:27), the proper name of a son of Gomer, the son of Japheth, and of a tribe of his descendants. In Jeremiah it is placed with Ararat and Minni, provinces of Armenia; whence it is probable that Ashkenaz was a province of Arme- nia; or at least that it lay not far from it, near the Caucasus, or toward the Black Sea. The com- mentators have been all bound to something like this conclusion by the passage in Jeremiah, and nothing more satisfactory is now attainable. The various fanciful attempts to trace the name may be seen in Winer (Bib. Rea/wórf., s. v. “Askenas'). The modern Jews fancy the 11a111e Jellules Llle Germans. Exact site is unknown. ASHNAH (āsh'nah), (Heb. Tº, ash-maw', fortification, or bright). 1. A city of Judah (Josh. xv.:33), northwest of Jerusalem. 2. Another Ashnah is mentioned (Josh. xv.:43), ºwest from Jerusalem. Neither has been iden- tified. ASHPENAZ (āsh'pe-nāz), (Heb. pen-ag', perhaps horse-nose), chief of the eunuchs of king Nebuchadnezzar, to whose care Daniel and his companions were consigned, and who changed their names (Dan. i. 3, 7), B. C. about 604. The request of Daniel that he might not be com- pelled to eat the provisions sent from the king's ^º Pºs, ash- 167 ASHTAR OTH table filled Ashpenaz with fear. But God had brought Daniel into favor with Ashpenaz, and he granted his request, which kindness the prophet gratefully records (Dan. i.16). ASHRIEL (āsh'ri-el), (Heb.ºps, ash-rz-ale', God is joined), son of Gilead, and great-grandson of Manasseh (1 Chron. vii:14; Num, xxvi;31; Josh. xvii:2). It is more properly spelled Asriel. ASHTAROTH (fish'ta-roth), (Heb. nº, ash- taw-roth', a wife, and Ashtaroth-Carnaim, sºn, nº), a town of Bashan (Deut. i.4; Josh. ix:IO) which was included in the territory of the half- tribe of Manasseh (Josh. xiii:31), and was as- signed to the Levites (I Chron. vi.71; Judg. ii.13; I Sam. vii:3; xii:Io; xxxi:IO; I Kings xi:5, 33; xxiii:13). It is placed by Eusebius 6 miles from Edrei, the other principal town of Bashan, and 25 miles from Bostra. The town existed in the time of Abraham (Gen. xiv:5); and as its name of Ash- taroth appears to be derived from the worship of the moon under that name (see ASHTORETH), there is little need to look further than the cres- cent of that luminary and its symbolical image for an explanation of the addition Carnaim, or rather Karnaim, ‘horned.” In 2 Macc. xii:26, mention is made of the temple of Atergatis (Ashtaroth) in Carnion, which is described as a strongly fortified town of difficult access, but which was taken by Judas Maccabaeus, who slew 25,000 of the people therein (2 Macc. xii:21, 26). Ashtaroth-Carnaim is now usually identified with Mezareib, the situation of which corresponds accurately enough with the distances given by Eusebius. Here is the first castle on the great pilgrim road from Damascus to Mecca. It was built about 340 years ago by the Sultan Selim, and is a square structure, about Ioo feet on each side, with square towers at the angles and in the center of each face, the walls being 40 feet high. The interior is an open yard with ranges of warehouses against the castle wall to contain stores of provisions for the pilgrims. There are no dwellings beyond the castle, and within it only a few mud huts upon the flat roofs of the warehouses, occupied by the peasants who cultivate the neighboring grounds. Close to this building on the north and east side are a great number of springs, whose waters at a short dis- tance collect into a lake or pond about a mile and a half in circumference. In the midst of this lake is an island, and at an elevated spot at the ex- tremity of a promontory advancing into the lake, stands a sort of chapel, around which are many ruins of ancient buildings. There are no other ruins. (Burckhardt, p. 242; Buckingham's Arab Tribes, p. 162.) Porter thinks it possibly identical with Kenath and modern Kumazeſat. Others, with greater probability, suggest Tel/-Ashtārā, 20 miles east of the Sea of Galilee, “The antiquity of Ash- taroth (if the name be read and identified cor- rectly) is attested independently by Egyptian and Assyrian inscriptions: an Asſertu, occurs in, the list of places in Southern Syria’ conquered by Tahutmes 11ſ, of the 18th dynasty, in his twenty- second year (Tomkins, TSB.A. ix, 262, and in RP2 v. 45, No. 28; W. Max Müller, Asien ze. Eur, mach altag. Denkm., p. 162; cf. Wiedemann, Ag, Gesch. 348 f., 371); and an Ashtarti is mentioned in the correspondence, from Palestine, with Amenó- phis IV (15th cent. B. C.) as having been in the possession of the Egyptians, and being seized by rebels (Bezold and Budge, The Tel el-Amarna Tablets in the Brit. Mus., Nos. 43, 64; Sayce, Patriarchal Age, 1895, E. 133, 153). The writers named identify these places with 'Ashtaroth-Kar- naim; but they may equally well have been the ASHTERATHITE later capital of Og, 'Ashtaroth (supposing this to have been distinct).” (S. R. Driver, Hastings' Biö. AJict.) - ASHTERATHITE (fish' te - rath -ite), (Heb. Yº, ash-fer-aw-thee'), a designation of Uzziah (I Chron. xi. 44), probably as being a citizen of Ash- taroth. - ASHTORETH (āsh'to-réth or ash-to'reth), (Heb. nºny, ash-fow-reth, I Kings xi:5). (1) The Goddess of the Zidonians. This is the name of Astarte, goddess of the Zidonians (I Kings xi. 5, 33), and also of the Philistines (I Sam. xxxi:10), whose worship was introduced among the Israel- ites during the period of the judges (Judg. ii: 13; I Sam. vii. 4), and was celebrated by Solomon him- self (I Kings xi.; 5), and was finally put down by Josiah (2 Kings xxiii: 13). She is frequently men- tioned in Connection with Baal, as the correspond- ing female divinity (Judg. ii: 13); and from the ad- dition of the words “and all the host of heaven," in 2 Kings xxiii: 4 (although Ashérah occurs there, and not Ashtoreth, which will be accounted for below), it is probable that she represented one of the celestial bodies. (2) Queen of Heaven. There is also reason to believe that she is meant by the “queen of heaven,” in Jer, vil:18; xlivii.7, whose worship is there said to have been solemnized by burning incense, pouring libations, and offering cakes. Further, by com- paring the two passages, 2 Kings xxiii. 4 and Jer. vii:2, which last speaks of the ‘sun and moon and all the host of heaven, whom they served,' we may conclude that the moon was worshiped under the names of queen of heaven and of Ashtoreth, pro- vided the connection between these titles is established. This constitutes nearly the sum of all the indications in the Old Test concerning Ashtoreth. (3) Rites. The rites of her worship, if we may assume their resembling those which profane au- thors describe as paid to the Cognate goddesses, agree with the few indications in the Old Test., in part complete the brief notices there into an accordant picture. The cakes mentioned in Jer. vii: 18, which are called in Hebrew Kazyzyanºm, were also known to the Greeks by the name Cha- bómes, and were by them made in the shape of a sickle, in reference to the new moon. Among animals, the dove, the crab, and, in later times, the lion, were sacred to her; and among fruits, the pomegranate. No blood was shed on her altar; but male animals, and chiefly kids, were sacrificed to her (Tacit. Hist. ii:3). Hence some suppose that the reason why. Judah promised the harlot a kid was that she might sacrifice it to Ashtoreth (see Tuch’s note to Gen. xxxviii:17). The most prominent part of her worship, however, consisted of those libidinous orgies which Augustine, who was an eye witness of their horrors in Carthage, describes with such indignation (De Civit. Dei, ii: 3). Her priests were eunuchs in women's attire (the peculiar name of whom is Kadesh?”z", male devotees, sacri, I Kings xiv:24), and women Dedeshoth’, female devotees, sacrae, i. e. meretrices or prostitutes (Hos. iv:I4), which term Ought to be distinguished from ordinary harlots, Zonah, who, like the Bayaderes of India, prostituted themselves to enrich the temple of this goddess. The prohibition in Deut. xxiii: 18 appears to allude to the dedication of such funds to such a purpose. (See PROSTITUTION, SACRED.) (4) Places. As for the places consecrated to her worship, although the numerous passages in which the Authorized Version has erroneously rendered Asherah by grove are to be deducted (as 168 ASHTO RETH is explained below), there are yet several occa- sions on which gardens and shady trees are men- tioned as peculiar seats of (probably, her) lasciv- ious rites (IS: i:29; lvii: 5; lxvi; 17; lxv:3; 1 Kings xiv:23; Hos. iv: 13, I4; Jer. ii:20; iii: 13). She also had celebrated temples (I Sam. xxxi: Io). “Lucian (De dea. Syria, Sec. 4) visited a great tem- ple of Aphrodite in Byblus (Gebal), in which the rites of Adonis (who corresponded to Tammuz), were performed; here such women as would not shave their hair in commemoration of his burial were obliged to sell themselves to a stranger, the money received being expended on a sacrifice to Aphrodite (Comp, the Babylonian custom referred to above). At Aphaka in the Lebanon there was a temple of Aphrodite, the rites practiced at which were of such a character that they were suppressed by Constantine (Euseb. Vit. Const. iii: 55).” (R. S. Driver, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) Ashtoreth. With regard to Asherah (Judg. vi. 25; Ex. xxxiv: 13; Deut. vii. 5): Selden was the first who endeavored to show that this word—which in the LXX and Vulgate is generally rendered grove, in which our Authorized Version has followed them—must in some places, for the sake of the sense, be taken to mean a zwooden Z/nage of Ash- toreth (De Diºs Syrzis, ii:2). Not long after Spen- cer made the same assertion (De Leg. Æebraeor L. ii: 16). , Vitringa then followed out the same argu- ment, in his note to Is. xvii. 8. Gesenius, at length, has treated the whole question so elabo- rately in his Thesaurus as to leave little to be de- sired, and has evinced that Asherah is a name, and also denotes an image of this goddess. Some of the arguments which support this par- tial, or, in Gesenius's case, total rejection of the signification grove for Asherah are briefly as fol- lows: It is argued that Asherah almost always occurs with words which denote idols and statues of idols, that the verbs which are employed to express the making an Asherah are incompatible with the idea of a grove, as they are such as to build, to shape, to erect (except in one passage, where, however, Gesenius still maintains that the verb there used means to erect); that the words used to denote the destruction of an Asherah are those of breaking to É. subverting, that the image of Asherah is placed in the Temple (2 Kings xxi.;7; and that Asherah is coupled with Baal in precisely the same way as. Ashtoreth is (Comp. Judg. ii: 13; x:6; I Kings xviii: 19; 2 Kings xxiii: 4); ASHUR and Pºlº (Judg. iii:7 and ii: 13) where the plural form of both words is explained as of itself denoting images of this goddess. Besides, Selden objects that the signification grove is even incon- gruous in 2 Kings Xvii: IO, where we read of ‘set- ting up groves under every green tree.' Moreover, the LXX has rendered by Asherah Astarte, in 2 Chron. xv. 16, and the Vulgate has done the same in Judg. iii:7, and, conversely, has rendered Ashtaroth by groves, in I Sam. vii:3. On the strength of these arguments most modern scholars assume that Asherah is a name for Ash- toreth, and that it denotes more especially the relation of that goddess to the //ame? Venus, as the lesser star' of good fortune. It appears, namely, to be an indisputable fact that both Baal and Ash- toreth, although their primary relation was to the sun and moon, came in process of time to be Con- nected, in the religious conceptions of the Syro- Arabians, with the planets Jupiter and Venus, as the two stars of good fortune (see the article BAAL). Although the mode of transition from the one to the other is obscure, yet many kindred circumstances illustrate it. For instance, the connection between Artemis and Selene; that between Juno and the planet Venus, mentioned in Creuzer ii:566; the fact that, in the Zendavesta, Anāhīd is the name of the genius of the same planet; and that astro (which word is only an Ara- maic form of the same sitara/, which, as was remarked above, furnishes the best derivation for Ashtoreth) is also the name of the same planet in the religious books of the Tsalians (Norberg's Onomast. Cod. AVasaraz, p. 20). It is in reference to this connection, too, that a star is so often found among the emblems with which Ashtoreth is rep- resented on ancient coins. Lastly, whereas the word Asherah cannot, in the sense of grove, be legitimately deduced from the primitive or sec- ondary signification of any Syro-Arabian root as a name of the goddess of good fortune, it admits of a derivation as natural in a philological point of view as it is appropriate in signification. Asherah is the feminine of an adjective signifying fortun- afe, haft/y. J. N. ASHUR (āsh'ur), (Heb. mºs, as/*-shoor', suc- cessful, or else, freezzan, or hero). He is mentioned (I Chron. ii:24; iv:6) as the father of Tekoa, which likely means that he was the founder of that vil- lage (B. C. about 1568). ASHURITES (ash'ur-ites), (Heb. "Tºº, ash-oo- 7tee', belonging to Ashur). The name occurs only in 2 Sam. ii:9; Ezek. xxvii:6. Perhaps it is better to read here Beth-Asher, which would mean the peo- ple of the region of the plain Esdraelon. ASHVATH (āsh'váth), (Heb. nº, ash-vavth', perhaps bright), the last mentioned of the three sºus Uſ Japlılel, great-grandson of Asher (1 Chron. vii:33). ASIA (a'shi-á). The ancients had no divisions of the world into parts or quarters; and hence the word Asia, in the extended modern sense, does not occur in Scripture. It does not indeed occur at all, in any sense, in the Hebrew Scriptures, but is found in the books of the Maccabees and in the New Testament. It there applies, in the largest sense, to that peninsular portion of Asia which, since the fifth century, has been known by the name of Asia Minor; and, in a narrower sense, to a certain portion thereof which was known as Asia Proper. Thus it is now generally agreed, - (I) that ‘Asia' denotes the whole of Asia Minor, in the texts Acts xix:26, 27; xx:4, 16, 18; xxvii:2, etc.; but, (2) that only Asia Proper, the Roman or 169 ASIARCHAE Proconsular Asia, is denoted in Acts ii:9; vi;9; xix:Io, 22; 2 Tim. i:15; Rev. ix.4, II. (1) Asia Minor. Asia Minor comprehended Bithynia, Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Cicilia, Pamphylia, Pisidia, Lycaonia, Phrygia, Mysia, Troas (all of which are mentioned in the New Testament), Lydia, Ionia, AEolis (which are some- i. included under Lydia), Caria, Doris, and yC1a. - (2) Asia Proper. Asia Proper, or Pro- consular Asia, comprehended the provinces of Phrygia, Mysia, Caria, and Lydia (Cicero, Pro Flacc. 27; Eff. Fam. ii:15). But it is evident that St. Luke uses the term Asia in a sense still more restricted; for in one place he counts, Phrygia (Acts ii:9, IO), and in another Mysia (xvi;6, 7), as provinces distinct from Asia. Hence it is probable that in many, if not all, of the second set of refer- ences the word Asia denotes only Ionia, or the entire western coast, of which Ephesus was the capital, and in which the seven churches were situated. This is called Asia also by Strabo. About A. D. 285, Asia was greatly reduced in size, Caria, Phrygia, Lydia, and Mysia (Hellespontus) being separated from it; and the name Asia was then restricted to the coast cities and the lower valleys of the Maeander, Cayster, Hermus, and Caicus. “Asia was one of the most wealthy and populous and intellectually active of the Roman provinces; hence the natural sequence of the work done by Paul and Barnabas on their first journey was to preach in the great cities of Asia; and this was evidently St. Paul's intention on his second journey, until he found himself prevented from speaking the word in Asia (Acts xvi;6). The evan- gelization of Asia was reserved for the third jour- ney, when, during St. Paul's residence of two years and three months in Ephesus, ‘the entire population of Asia heard the word’ (Acts, xix: IO); partly on account of the frequency with which the provincials came to Ephesus for trade, religion, law, or festivals; partly through missions of St. Paul's coadjutors to the leading cities of the prov- ince.” (W. M. Ramsay, Hasting's Biö. Dicſ.) ASIARCHAE (ä'shi-árk'ee), (Gr. 'Aguápxat, as-ee- ar'Ahaz, chiefs of Asia, Acts xix:31; Vulg. Asza” principes, Tertull. Zºrasides sacerdoſales, A. V. “certain of the chief of Asia'). These asiarchae, who derived their appellation from the name of the province over which they presided (as Syri- arch, 2 Macc. xii:2, Lyciarch, Cariarch, etc.), were in Proconsular Asia the chief presidents of the religious rites, whose office it was to exhibit solemn games in the theatre every year, in honor of the gods and of the Roman emperor. This they did at their own expense (like the Roman aediles), whence none but the most opulent persons could bear the office, although only of one year's contin- uance. The appointment was much as follows: at the beginning of ovory yoar (d. a. about the autumnal equinox) each of the cities of Asia held a public assembly, in order to nominate One of their citizens as asiarch. A person was then sent to the general council of the province, at some one of the principal cities, as Ephesus, Smyrna, Sardis, etc., to announce the name of the individual who had been selected. Of the persons thus nominated by the cities the council designated ten. As the asiarchs are repeatedly mentioned in the plural, some suppose that the whole ten presided as a col- lege over the sacred rites (Comp. Strabo, xiv. p. 649). But in Eusebius (A/ist. Æcc/es. iv: I 5) Poly- carp is said to have suffered martyrdom when ‘Philip was asiarch and Statius Quadratus pro- consul of Asia;' from which and other circum- stances it is deemed more probable that, as in the case of the Irenarch, the names of the ten nomi- ASIEL nated by the general council were submitted to the proconsul, who chose one of the number to be asiarch. -- ASIEL (ä'si-el), (Heb. ***, as-ee-ale', God is doer, or created by God), a Simeonite, (B.C. 8oo), whose descendant was Jehu (I Chron. iv:35). ASKELON (as'ke-lón), (Heb. i*E*, ash-ke. dom', migration), a city of the Philistines, and the seat of one of their five states (Judg. xiv:19; I Sam. vi.17; 2 Sam. i2O). (1) Location. It was situated on the Mediter- ranean Coast, between Gaza and Ashdod, twelve eog. miles north of the former, and ten S. by W. rom the latter, and thirty-seven W. S. W. from Jerusalem. It was the only one of the five great Phil- istine towns that was a maritime port, and stood out close to the shore. Askelon was assigned to the tribe of Judah (Josh. xiii: 13; Comp. Judg.i: 18); but it was never for any length of time in posses- sion of the Israelites. The part of the country in which it stood abounded in aromatic plants, onions, and vines (Plin. xix:32; Strabo. xvi, p. 759; Dioscor. i: 124; Colum. xii: IO; Alex. Trall. viii. 3). It was well fortified (Joseph. De Be//, /ud. iii. 21; Comp. Mela i II), and early became the seat of worshi of Decerto (Diod. Sic. ii. 4). exander it shared the lot of Phoenicia and Judaea, being tributary sometimes to Egypt, and at others times to Syria (I Macc. x: 86; xi.;60; xii:33; Joseph. Azttig. xii; 4, 5). - (2) Birthplace of Herod. The magnificent Herod was born at Askelon, and although the city did not belong to his dominion, he adorned it with fountains, baths, and Colonnades (/)e Ae//, /teal. i. 12, II); and after his death, Salome, his sister, resided in a palace at Askelon, which Caesar bestowed up- on her (Antzg. xvii: I I, 5). It suffered much in the Jewish war with the Romans (De Bell. Jud. ii: 18, 5; iii. 2, I-3); for its inhabitants were noted for their dislike of the Jews, of whom they slew 2,500 who dwelt there (ii: 18, 5; iii. 2, 1). (3) In the Middle Ages. After this Askelon again revived, and in the middle ages was noted not only as a stronghold, but as a wealthy and important town (Will. Tyr. xvii: 21). As a sea- port merely it never could have enjoyed much advantage, the Coast being sandy and difficult of access. The town bears a prominent part in the history of the Crusades. After being several times dismantled and re-fortified in the times of Saladin and Richard, its fortifications were at length to- tally destroyed by the Sultan Bibars A. D. 1270, and the port filled up with stones, for fear of future attempts on the part of the Crusaders (Wilkin. Gesch. der Kreuz. vii: 586). The place still bears thc name of Askulan. The prophecies concerning Askelon are found in Zech. ix: 9; Jer. xxv. 20; xlvii: 5 and 18; Zeph. ii. 4, 7, ix. 5. (Suu ASIIKELON.) ASMODEUS (āz'mo-dé'us), (Gr. 'Aguočaſos, as - moh-dai'us, Tob. iii. 8), a demon or evil spirit, mentioned in the Apocryphal book of Tobit as having beset Sarah, the daughter of Raguel, and killed the seven husbands whom she had mar- ried before Tobit (Tob. iii:8; vi. 14; viii. 2, 3). The Rabbins have a number of absurd traditions re. specting Asmodeus, which may be seen in the original edition of Calmet, and in Lightfoot (A/or. Aebr. ad Luc. xi. 15). They call him, as well as Beelzebub, “the prince of devils,’ whence the two names have been supposed to refer to the same demon. But this title they also gave to ‘the angel of death,’ as the destroyer of all mankind. hence some derive the name Asmodeus from the Hebrew shamzad, to exterminate, which identifies it with Ashmodai and also ABADDON (see the word), the 170 After the time of Al- ASPALATHUS same as Apollyon, the angel of death. This is likely, and thus the story in Tobit means no more than that the seven husbands died successively on their marriage with Sarah. ASMONEANS (āz'mo-nē'anz). BEES. ASNAPPER (as-nāp'per), (Heb. 22:8, as-map- Aar'), the name of the king, or possiby Assyrian satrap, who sent the Cuthean colonies into Pales- tine (Ezra iv:IO). Taking him for king of Assyria, he is generally identified with Esarhaddon, although some believe the name to denote Shalma- neser. The title given him in the Auth. Vers., ‘most noble', belonged to the satraps. In R. V. his name is Osnappar. ASP (äsp), (Heb. Pºpº, Shef-ee-fone'), a kind of serpent, whose poison is of such rapid operation that it kills almost the instant it penetrates, with- out a possibility of remedy. . It is said to be very small. The most remarkable mention of it in Scripture is in Ps. lviii. 4 where the adder or asſº is said to “stop its ears, that it may not hear the voice of the charmer.” This is supposed by Forskal to be the co/uber Baetaen, whose bite causes instant death. See MACCA- The true asp of the ancients seems to be entire- ly unknown. It is frequently mentioned by an- cient writers; but in such a careless and indefinite manner that it is impossible to ascertain the spe- cies with precision. Critics are still undecided with respect to the species by which Cleopatra Fº her death; and, indeed, whether she was itten or stung at all. In the English Version the word is uniformly used for the Heb. Zezhen, the coluber Baetaen of Forskal. In Rom. iii: 13, 14, the Greek word asſis occurs, and it is also used by the Seventy in Ps. cxl: 4, where it is for the Heb. ako/mö, adder. (See Deut. xxxii:33; Job xx: I4; IG. xi.; 8.) ASPALATHUS (äs-pâl'à-this), (Gr. dairáXa60s, as-ſa/ah-thus), a word which occurs only in Ec- clus. xxiv: I5) of the Apocrypha, where the sub- stance which it indicates is enumerated with other spices and perfumes to which wisdom is compared. hough this drug is not mentioned in the canon- ical Scriptures, it is probable that it may have been one of the substances comprehended under the general name of spices. It was no doubt one of the substances employed by the ancients as a perfume and incense, as it is described by Dios- corides (i. c. 19), as well as enumerated by Theo- phrastus (ix c. 7), and by both among aromatic substances. It forms one of the ingredients of the cyphi, or compound incense made use of by the Egyptian priests as related both by Plutarch and Dioscorides. The substance which was called as: ASPATHA palathus has not been very clearly ascertained, though several plants have been indicated as yielding it. AsPATHA (as'pa-tha), (Heb. Nº, as £aw- thazy'), the third of the sons of Haman slain by the Jews of Babylonia (Esth. ix:7), B. C. 5 IO. ASPHALTUM (äs-fäl'tūm), (Heb. Tº, Ahay- mawr', boiling up, to be red, also slime, and pitch). Luther, like the modern Rabbins, erroneously trans- lates the Hebrew by ‘clay.' The Hebrew and Arabic names probably refer to the reddish color of some of the specimens (Dioscorides i: 99). The Greek name, whence the Latin Asphaltum is doubtless derived from the Lake Asphaltites (Dead Sea), wllelice it was abundantly obtained. Usually, how- cv.cr., asphaltum, or compact bitumen, is of a shin ing black color; it is solid and brittle, with a Con- choidal fracture, altogether not unlike common pitch. To judge from Gen. xiv: Io, mines of as- phaltum must have existed formerly on the spot where subsequently the Dead Sea, or Lake As- phaltites, was formed, such as Mariti (Travels, iv:27) discovered on the western shore of that sea. The Palestine earth-pitch, however, seems to have had the preference over all the other sorts (Plin. xxviii: 23; Discor. i, p. IOO). It was used among the ancients partly for Covering boats, paying the bottoms of vessels (Comp. Niebuhr ii, p. 336; Gen. vi.14; Exod. ii: 3; Joseph. De Be//, /ted. iv:8, 4; Buckingham, Mesopot, p. 346), and partly as a substitute for mor- tar in buildings; and it is thought that the bricks of which the walls of Babylon were built (Gen.xi:3; Strabo. xvi, p. 743; Herod i, 179; Plin. xxxv. 51; Ammian. Marcell. xxiii:6; Virtruv. viii: 3; Comp. Joseph. Anzig. i.4, 3) had been cemented with hot bitumen, which imparted to them great solidity. ASS (às), (Heb. -ºn. Åham-ore', the male ass; iºnº, aw-ſhone', she ass; Gr. 8vos, on ‘os, donkey; Ütro; Wytov, hoof-od-200g'ee-on, under the yoke), Equus Asinus of Linnaeus; by some formed into a subgenus containing that group of the Equidae which are not striped like Zebras, and have forms and characters distinguishable from true horses, such as a peculiar shape of body and limbs, long ears, an upright mane, a tail only tufted at the end, a streak along the spine, often crossed with an- other on the shoulders, a braying voice, etc. Besides the ordinary term Chamor, the Hebrews likewise used Athon, Afon, A fun, Ozrim, Para, Orad, Oredia. By these words, no doubt, though not with the strict precision of science, different species and distinct races of the group, as well as qualities of sex and age, were indicated; but the contexts in general afford only slight assistance in discriminating them; and reliance on cognate lan- guages is often unavailing, since we find that sim- ilar words frequently point to secondary and not to identical acceptations. (1) Chamor we take to be the name of the com- mon working ass of Western Asia; an animal of small stature, frequently represented on Egyptian monuments with panniers on the back, usually of a reddish color (the Arabic Hamar and Chamara denoting red), and the same as the Turkish Hy- mar. It appears to be a domesticated race of the wild ass of Arabia, Mesopotamia, and Southern Persia, where it is denominated Gour; in Scripture it is distinguished by the name of Orud (Job xxxix: 5), and in the Chaldee of Daniel, Orodia (v.21); both terms being most likely derived from the braying voice of the animal. In its natural state it never seeks woody, but up- land pasture, mountainous and rocky retreats; and it is habituated to stand on the brink of precipices 171 ASS (a practice not entirely obliterated in our own do- mestic races), whence, with protruded ears, it sur- veys the scene below, blowing, and at length bray- ; in extreme excitement. This habit is beauti- fully depicted by Jeremiah, when speaking of the Para (xvii. 6), and Orud (xlviii:6), where, instead Oror, heath, we should read Orºzd, wild ass, for there is no heath, erica, in Asia. Ożr, Ozrim, in the Chaldee //7, Auth. Vers. young ass, Colt; but this rendering does not appear on all occasions to be correct, the word being sometimes used where the Oirim or Ourim carry Ioads and till the ground, which seems to afford evidence of, at least, full growth (Is. xxx:6, 24). (See Ex. xiii: 13; xxiii:4; 2 Kings vi.20; Num. xxii:20; Prov. xxvi; 3; Is. i. 3; Zech. ix: 9; Matt. xxi: 5; Luke xiii: I 5; xiv: 5; John xii: 14.) By the law of Moses the ass was declared unclean, and therefore was not used as food, excepting, as it would appear, in cases of extreme famine. This inference, however, is drawn from a case where the term ‘ass's head' may be explained to mean not literally the head of an ass, but a certain measure or weight so called, as in I Sam. xvi;2O, where it is said that Jesse sent to Saul “an ass of bread;’ for, in our version, “laden with’ is an addition to the text. Although therefore the famine in Samaria may possibly have compelled the people to eat asses, and a head may have been very dear, still the expression may denote the measure or weight which bore the same name. The prohibition, however, had more probably an economical than a religious purpose: hunting was thus discouraged, and no horses being used, it was of importance to augment the number and improve the qualities of the ass. As this animal was most serviceable to man, its name was held in respect rather than contempt. The slander, therefore, current among the Romans and directed against the Jews, that they adored the head of an ass in secret, may not have originated in direct malice or misinterpretation, but have arisen out of some Gnostic fancies, in which the Alexandrian Jews, who had nearly forsaken the Scriptures in search of the magical delusions of the Cabala, and new semi-Christians in that city, so deeply indulged during the first centuries of OUlr €I a. - (2) Para, rendered likewise ‘wild ass,’ is a derivative of the same root which in Hebrew has produced Paras, horse, and Parasim, horsemen, Persians and Parthians. Though evidently a gen- erical term, the Scripture uses it in a specific Syrian Wild Ass. sense, and seems to intend by it the horse-ass, or wild mule which the Greeks denominated Hemi- onos, and the moderns Djiggetai; though we think there still remains some commixture in the descriptions of the species and those of the Kou- lan, or wild ass of Northern Asia. ASSEMBLIES, MASTERS OF ASSEMBLIES, MASTERS OF (Heb. nipps *y-, bah-al-ay' as-uſ-ſºoth'). This phrase, found in Eccles. xii;II, is supposed to mean the master spirits or associates of the gatherings in the East, where sages and philosophers uttered their weighty sayings. The preacher endeavored so to speak the truth that it should impress the listener with its weight and authority. The aim was to take hold of men's consciences, and fasten instruc- tion, as nails bind together boards through which they are driven, or to prompt them to duty as goads urge on the dull Ox (Acts i:37). ASSEMBLY (äs-sém'bly), the term used in the A. V. for several Hebrew words, frequently trans- lated “Congregation.” We note three Hebrew words: (1) "...#2, ats-aw-raw', a Coming together, especially for a festal occasion (Lev. xxiii:36; Num. xxix:35; Deut. xvi;8). (2) spº, mzzā-razºy', Something called a public meeting (Is. i:13; iv:5). (3) Hits, as-24A-Zaw', a collection of wise and learned men (Eccles. xii:II). In the Greek, (I) “general assembly,” travāyvpts, is a festal gathering of all the people (Heb. xii:23), commonly held to be the same as the Church. (2) 'Ekk\mata is a term in use among the Greeks from the time of Thucydides for an assemblage of the people for the purpose of deliberating (Acts x:39). Figurative. God has promised (Zeph. iii:18) to gather the sorrowful for the assembly again; that is, to restore the happy meetings of his people when converted to Christ. And to sorrow for the solemn assemblies is to be grieved for the want of these public ordinances of God, observed in a reg- ular manner (Zeph. iii:18). The “general assembly of the firstborn,” is the harmonious meeting of both Jews and Gentiles in one Christian church, and of all the redeemed in the heavenly state (Heb. xii:23). * ASSHUR (ash'ur), (Heb. Tºº, ash-shoor', a step or level plain). 1. The second named of the sons of Shem (Gen. x:22; I Chron. i. 17), B.C. before 2300. His descendants occupied Assyria (which see). Called “Asshur” in Gen. x: II; Num. xxiv:22-24; I Chron. i:17; Ezek. xxvii:23; xxxii:22; Hos. xiv:3. “Assur” in Ezra iv:2; Ps. lxxxiii:8; “Assyrian” or “Assyri- ans” in Is. xiv:25; , xix:23; xxx:31; xxxi:8; liii:4; Lam. V:6; Ezek. xvi;28; xxiii:9, 12, 23; Hos. v.:13; xi:5; xii: I ; Mic. v.:5, 6. 2. The builder of Nineveh, probably one of the descendants of Ham (Gen. x:II) or Assyria itself. 3. Asshur or Assur was originally the name of a city on the banks of the Tigris, the ruins of which are now known as Kalah Sherghat. The name was of Accadian derivation, and signified “water bank.’ The city long continued to be the capital of the district which was called after it Assyria, but was eventually supplanted by Ninua or Nineveh. Nineveh lay opposite the present town of Mosul, and it is from the remains of its chief palace, now buried under the mounds of Kouyunjik, that most of the Assyrian inscriptions in the British Museum have been brought (Sayce, Fresh Light on the Monuments, p. 4I). ASSHURIM (as-shu'rim), (Gen. xxv-3). ASHURITES. ASSIDAEANS (äs'si-dé'anz), (Heb. FTPE, Aha- see-deſm', I Macc. vii: 13, the pious, or righteous); a name derived from the root chasid, a word used to denote a very good or a very bad action, but more frequently the former. As a description of a particular body of men it does not occur in the See 172 ASSURANCE canonical Scriptures, nor in Josephus; but in the First Book of Maccabees, as above, it is applied to the body of zealous and devoted men who rose at the signal for armed resistance given by Matta- thias, the father of the Maccabees, and who, under him and his successors, upheld with the sword the great doctrine of the unity of God, and stemmed the advancing tide of Grecian manners and idol- atries. The analogous Hebrew term Chasidim occurs in various passages of Scripture appella- tively for good and pious men (Ps. cxlv.:Io; Cxlix:1; Is. lvii:I: Mic. vii:2), but is never applied to any sect Or body of men. Upon the whole, in the entire absence of Collateral information, it seems the safest course to conclude that the Assidaeans were a body of eminently zealous men, devoted to the Law, who joined Mattathias very early, and remained the constant adherents of him and his son Judas—not, like the mass of their supporters, rising Occasionally and then relapsing into the ordi- nary pursuits of life. It is possible that, as Jen- nings conjectures (Antiq., p. 298), the name asid. azos, or ‘saints,’ came to be applied to them by their enemies as a term of reproach, like ‘Puri- tans' formerly and “saints' very often in the present day. ASSIR (äs'sir), (Heb. *::s as-Seer', prisoner). 1. Son of Korah (Ex. vi.24; Chron. vi.22; B.C. about 162O). 2. Son of Ebiasaph, and a forefather of Samuel (I Chron. vi.23, 37), B.C. about 1740. 3. Son of Jeconiah (I Chron. iii:17), or perhaps “Jeconiah the captive.” (B.C. about 588). ASSOS (äs'sös), (Gr. "Aao'os, as 'sos), a town of Lesser Mysia, or of Adramyttium, opposite the island of Lesbos, or Mitylene. Paul came hither On foot from Troas, to meet with his friends, in Order to take shipping for Mitylene (Acts xx:13, 4). “The harbor of Assos, formed by an artificial mole, was situated at the foot of the hill on which the city stood; and beside it now cluster the houses of the modern village Behram. This harbor gave the city considerable importance in the coasting trade of ancient times (Acts xx:13), as is attested by its coinage, which begins early in the fifth cent. (when the city was released from the Persian dom- ination), and continues as late as A. D. 235. The importance of Assos under the Pergamenian kings is shown by its re-foundation with the name Apol- lonia, a favorite Pergamenian name (Pliny, WAZ v:123).” (W. M. Ramsay, Hastings' Biff. Dict.) It is now a miserable village, called Beiram, built high upon the rocks on the side towards the land (Richter, p. 465, Sø). ASSUR (as'sur), (Ezra iv:2; Ps. lxxxiii:8). ASSYRIA. - ASSTTRANCE (à-shur'ans). The sense in which this term is used theologically is that of a firm persuasion of Our being in a state of salvation. The doctrine itself has been matter of dispute among divines, and when considered as implying not only that we are now accepted of God through Christ, but that we shall be finally saved, or when it is so taken as to deny a state of salvation to those who are not so assured as to be free from all doubt, it is in many views questionable. 1. Assurance of fina/ sa/wa/zozz must stand or fall with the doctrine of personal unconditional election, and is chiefly held by divines of the Cal- vinistic school; and that nothing is an evidence of a state of present salvation but so entire a per- Suasion as amounts to assurance in the strongest sense, might be denied upon the ground that degrees of grace, of real saving grace, are un- doubtedly mentioned in Scripture. See ASSURANCE 2. Assurance, however, is spoken of in the New Testament and stands prominent as one of the leading doctrines of religious experience. We have “full assurance of understanding,” that is, a perfect knowledge and entire persuasion of the truth of the doctrine of Christ. The “assurance of faith,” in Heb. ix:22, is an entire trust in the sacrifice and priestly office of Christ. The “as- Surance of hope,” mentioned in Heb. vi. I I, relates to the heavenly inheritance, and must necessarily imply a full persuasion that we are “the children of God,” and therefore “heirs of his glory;” and from this passage it must certainly be concluded that such an assurance is what every Christian Ought to aim at, and that it is attainable. This, however, does not exclude occasional doubt and weakness of faith from the earlier stages of his experience. 3. A comforting and abiding persuasion of pres- ent acceptance by God, through Christ, we may 173 ASSURANCE sin is, in the present life, forgiven as otten as it is thus repented of, and as often as we exercise the required and specific acts of trust in the merits of Qur Saviour; but that this forgiveness of our sins is not in any way made known unto us: so that we are left, as to our feelings, in precisely the same state as if sin were not forgiven till after death, namely, in grief and trouble of mind, re- lieved only by hope;—or, 3. The scriptural view is, that when sin is forgiven by the mercy of God through Christ, we are, by some means, assured of it, and peace and satisfaction of mind take the place of anxiety and fear. .4. The first of the above conclusions is suffi- ciently disproved by the authority of Scripture, which exhibits justification as a blessing attainable in this life, and represents it as actually experi- enced by true believers. “Therefore being justi- fied by faith ” (Rom. v.:1). “There is mozy no condemnation to them who are in Christ Jesus” - º º *º The Acropolis at Assos, therefore affirm, must in various degrees follow true faith. In support of this view, the following remarks may be jº. If it is the doctrine of the inspired records that ula 11 is loy 11ature prolic to cvil, and that in prac tire he violates that law under which as a creature he is placed, and is thereby exposed to punish- ment; if also it is there stated that an act of grace and pardon is promised on the conditions of re- pentance toward God, and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ; if that repentance implies consideration of our ways, a sense of the displeasure of Almighty God, contrition of heart, and consequently trouble and grief of mind, mixed, however, with a hope inspired by the promise of forgiveness, and which leads to earnest supplication for the actual pardon of sin so promised, it will follow from these prem- ises—either: I. That forgiveness is not to be expected till after the termination of our course of probation, that is, in another life; and that, there- fore, this trouble and apprehension of mind can only be assuaged by the hope we may have of a favorable final decision on Our case;—or, 2. That (Rom. viii:1). The quotations might be multi- plied, but these are decisive. The notion that though an act of forgiveness may take place, we are unable to ascertain a fact so important to us, is also irroconcilable with many Scriptures in which the writers of the New Testament speak of an experience, not confined personally to them- sº lves, or to those Christians who were endowed with spiritual gifts, but common to all Christians. “Being justified by faith, we have peace with God” (Rom. v.1). “We joy in God, by whom we have received the reconcz/iation” (Rom. v. II). “Being reconciled unto God by the death of his Son” (Rom. v.: Io). “We have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear, but the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father” (Rom. viii:15). To these may be added innumerable passages which express the comfort, the confidence, and the joy of Christians; their “friendship” with God; their “access” to him; their entire union and de- lightful intercourse with him; and their absolute confidence in the success of their prayers. All such passages are perfectly consistent with deep ASSYRIA humility and self-diffidence; but they are irrec- oncilable with a state of hostility between the par- ties, and with an unascertained and Only hoped- for restoration of friendship and favor. Even in Old Testament times it was realized, as shown in the beautiful description of Isaiah (xxxii:17), where for A. V. ‘quietness and assurance’ R. V. reads ‘quietness and conſidence,' the original word de- noting ‘to hang upon something,' hence figura- tively ‘to trust.’ 5. An assurance, therefore, that the sins which are felt to “be a burden intolerable” are forgiven, and that the ground of that apprehension of future unishment which causes the penitent to “bewail #. manifold sins,” is taken away by restoration to the favor of the offended God, must be allowed, or nothing would be more incongruous and impos- sible than the comfort, the peace, the rejoicin of spirit, which in the Scriptures are attributed to believers. 6. Few Christians of evangelical views have, therefore, denied the possibility of our becoming assured of the favor of God in a sufficient degree to give substantial comfort to the mind. Their differences have rather respected the means by which the contrite become assured of that change in their relation to Almighty God, whom they have offended, which in Scripture is expressed by the term justification. The question has been (where the notion of an assurance of eternal Salva- tion has not been under discussion), by what means the assurance of the Divine favor is conveyed to the mind. Some have concluded that we obtain it by inference, others by the direct testimony of the Holy Spirit to the mind. . (See HOLY GHOST.) (Watson's Theol. Dict.; Hastings' Bib. Dict.) ASSYRIA (as'syr'i-á). We must here distin- guish between the country of Assyria and the AS- syrian empire. (Heb. TºS, ash-shoor', or nºs, ash- shoor'), the name of a country, the people being also described by the same term, only that in the latter sense it is masculine, in the former, femi- nine. In the Septuagint it is commonly rendered by Assour, or Assurious, and in the ulgate by Assur and Assyria, and seldom or never by As- suria, or Assyria. 1. Name. The biblical derivation of the name seems to be from Asshur, son of Shem (Gen. x:22; 1 Chron. i. 17). * tº tº The recovery of the monuments of ancient Nin- eveh, once the capital of Assyria (Gen. x:II), and the translation of their inscriptions, have thrown new and confirmatory light on scriptural state- ments and made th history of Assyria and its people of intense interest to Bible students. Assyria, or the land of Assur, took its name from the city of Assur, ‘water boundary,’ which was the capital of a once small district on the west bank of the Tigris river between the greater and lesser Zab. This name, as well as Sar, the god who represented the firmamen , became somewhat changed by the Semitic Assyrians and the two names took the form of the word that meant gracious; so that Assur became the divine personification of the power and, constitution of Assyria, and at the same time he was also the 'gracious' divinity, and the primeval firmament of heaven. 2. General Physical Features. . The Coun- try within these limits is of a varied character. On the north and east the high mountain chains of Armenia and Kurdistán are succeeded by low ranges of limestone hills of a somewhat arid aspect, which detach themselves from the principal ridges, running parallel to them, and occasionally enclos- ing between their northern or northeastern flank 174 ASSYRIA and the main mountain line rich plains and fertile valleys. To these ridges there succeeds at first an undulating zone of country, well watered and fairly productive, which finally sinks down with some suddenness upon the great Mesopotamian plain, the modern district of EZ-Jezireh. This vast flat, which extends in length for 250 miles, from the latitude of Mardān (37 deg. 20 min.) to that of Tekrit (34 deg.33 min.), and which is, in places, of nearly equal width, is interrupted only by a single limestone range—a narrow ridge, rising abruptly out of the plain; which, splitting off from Zagros in lat. 33 deg. 30 min. may be traced under the names of Sarazzłr, AZazzzzzzz, and Szaffar, from Jwan in Luristan nearly to Rakkah on the Eu- phrates. From all parts of the plain, the Sinjar is a beautiful object. Its limestone rocks, wooded here and there with dwarf oak, are of a rich gold- en color; and the numberless ravines which fur- row its sides form ribs of deep purple shadow” (Layard, Nineveh and Babylon, p. 265). Above and below this barrier, stretching southward and westward further than the eye can reach, and ex- tending northward and eastward 70 or 80 miles to the hill-country before mentioned, is an immense level tract, now for the most part a wilderness, scantily watered on the right bank of the Tigris, but abundantly supplied on the left, which bears marks of having been in early times throughout well cultivated and thickly peopled. This plain is not alluvial, and most parts of it are even con- siderably raised above the level of the rivers. It is covered in springtime with the richest vegetation, presenting to the eye a carpet of flowers, varying in hue from day to day; but as the summer advances it is parched up, and gradually changes to an arid and yellow waste, except along the courses of the rivers. All over this vast flat, on both sides of the Tigris, rise “grass-covered heaps, marking the site of ancient habitations” (Layard, p. 245; Smith, Biö. AXict.) 3. Climate. The proximity of hills and moun- tains materially affected the climate, which was in general cooler than that of Babylonia. . It is, how- ever, impossible to secure any definite information sufficiently comprehensive for a general view of the climate, The ancient inhabitants, who wrote so much concerning their lives, kept no records of temperature, and in modern times the passing traveler has only noted the temperature at irregu- lar intervals. From the records it appears that the average maximum temperature indoors in Bagdad during June and July is IO7 deg. Fahren- heit, while it sometimes goes up as high as I2O deg. or 122 deg. This average (IO7 deg.) seems now also to be reached in Assyria, at least along the river Tigris, in the neighborhood of the modern town of Mosul. There is little doubt, however, that this is higher than the regular temperature in ancient times, for the failure of the extensive sys- tem of irrigation, the encroachment of the desert sands, and the denudation of forests have all Con- spired to change the climate. (Barnes' Bib. Dict.) 4. Fauna. The fauna was formerly far more varied than it is to-day, as the pictures on the monuments and the statements in the inscriptions prove beyond the possibility of doubt. In addi- tion to hares, roes, stags, and mountain goats, lions and wild oxen (rí/2te, Heb. re'ém) were found in great numbers—the former in the tall reed plantations on the banks of the Tigris, the latter in the mountain districts, the happy hunt- ing-grounds of the Assyrians. Magnificent horses—the famous Assyrian chargers, which were probably of the Medo-Elamite type—and cattle, goats, and sheep pastured on the slopes; ASSYRIA 175 while wild asses and camels are known only in latter times, through the Assyrian incursions into the Syro-Arabian desert. The culture of bees was also actively carried on. Of domestic ani- mals, the dog may be mentioned; of wild beasts, the panther, the wolf, the bear, and some others. 5. Flora. The mountains were covered with oak, plane, and wild pine trees; while on the plain proper, besides abundance of nuts, fig and olive trees flourished, together with the vine plant. These last were originally unknown to the East-Semitic districts, and were first im- ported by the Assyrian kings from Syria. Ag- riculture was confined mainly to the cultivation of wheat, barley, hemp, and millet. (F. Hom- mel, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) 6. Chief Cities. The chief cities of As- syria in the time of its greatness appear to have been the following: Nineveh, which is marked by the mounds opposite Mosul (Nebbi-Yunus and Koyunjik); Calah or Halah, now Nimrud, Asshur, now Kileh Sherghat; Sargina or Dur- Sargina, now Khorsabad, Arbela, still Arbil; Opis, at the junction of the Diyaleh with the Tigris; and Sittace, a little further down the latter river, if this place should not rather be reckoned to Babylonia. 7. History. Assur was at first but a de- pendency of the then old monarchy of Babylon. In the sixteenth or seventeenth century B. C. it had gained sufficient power to free itself from Babylon, but what the exact boundaries were, it is hard to tell, as they were constantly varying with the strength of the military power. At times they reached from the Tigris to the plateau of Mesopotamia, and from Babylonia to the Kurdish mountains, embracing a territory about equal to Italy in extent. At an early period of time the capital of As- syria was moved to a group of cities composed of Nineveh, Calah, and Dur-Sargina, the sites of the modern Kouyunjik, Nimrud and Khorsa- bad. It was in the sixteenth or seventeenth century B. C. that Bel-kapkapi, the governor of the country of Assur, invested himself with the title of king. From this time little is known of the Assyrians, from their own records, until about 1320 B. C., when Rimmonnirari I recounts, in an inscription, his wars with the Babylonians, the Kurds, Shuites, and Aramaeans. (1) Tiglath-pileser. For two centuries his descendants occupied the throne in orderly suc- cession until the reign of Tiglath-pileser I, whose conquests of the Hittites and capture of Babylon in 1130 B. C. made him virtually the founder of the Assyrian empire. With his death the Assyrian power languished for a time, and the kingdom of David and Solomon arose during the interim in the west. (2) Assur-natsir-pal. In the reign of Assur natsir-pal (883-58 B. C.) Assyria once more be- came a formidable power, Babylon, Phoenicia and the Hittite king of Carchemish poured their rich offerings of tribute into the Assyrian treas- ury. Splendid palaces arose at Calah, where a library was created, and it became the favorite city of the #. (3) Shalmaneser II. Under his son, Shal- maneser II, Assyria reached the height of her imperial power. The annals of this king in- scribed upon three monuments are now in the British Museum. One of these is a monolith from Kurkh, and a full length figure of Shal- maneser is sculptured upon it while the surface of the stone is covered with the inscription. Another is a small obelisk of polished black - ASSYRIA stone, the upper part of which is shaped like three ascending steps. The third consists of the bronze framework of two colossal doors or gates more than twenty feet square. They are covered with relief work representing the va- Monolith of Shaimaneser II. rious campaigns of the king, and there are short texts whiuli explain the figures. (Sco Aggy RIAN AND RA ºvi nºw a N DiscoverIFs) Shalmaneser's first campaign was against the tribes of Kurdistan. He then fell upon the Arme- nian king of Van and Manna or Minni (Jer. li:27). He reduced the Hittites and their allies and regained Pethor which again gave the Assy- rians the command of the ford over the Eu- phrates. In B. C. 854 Shalmaneser came into conflict with the kingdom of Hamath, and the common danger roused Benhadad II of Damascus, who, with Ahab of Israel, and others, formed a con- federacy to resist the Assyrian advance. But the confederacy was shattered at Karkar or Aroer, although Shalmaneser had suffered too severely to be able to follow up his victory. For a time, therefore, Syria remained unmolested and ASSYRIA the Assyrian king turned his attention to Baby- lonia, which he reduced to a state of vassalage. In B. C. 84I Shalmaneser was again in the West. Hazael had succeeded Ben-hadad upon the throne of Damascus, and against him the tide of Assyrian power was turned. He suffered a crushing defeat on the heights of Shenir (see Deut. iii:9), and his camp fell into the hands of the Assyrians. Damascus was besieged and the ambassadors of Jehu brought tributes and offers of submission. Shalmaneser made expedi- tions to Phoenicia, Kapadokia and Armenia for the purpose of exacting tribute, but the king was growing feeble and disaffections arose at home, and when he died about B. C. 823, the vigor of his kingdom was failing. (4) Other Princes. He was succeeded by a few princes of his own line, but their reigns were short. One revolt followed another, and at last even the army declared itself against the king about B. C. 750, and he and his dynasty fell together. (5) Pul, or Tiglath-Pileser II. Soon after- wards a military adventurer by the name of Pul seized the vacant throne and assumed the name of Tiglath-Pileser II. With him began the sec- Ond Assyrian Empire, which differed essentially from the first, which was at best a loosely con- nected military Organization. Campaigns had been made into distant countries for the sake of plunder, but almost as soon as the Assyrian armies returned, the conquered kingdoms threw off the the yoke of the invader. Tiglath-Pileser II, however, consolidated and organized his work, and for thc first time in history carried Out on a large scale the principle of centraliza- tion and bureaucracy. His chief object was to divert the commerce of Western Asia into Assyrian hands, and to this end every effort was made to unite Babylonia with Assyria, to overthrow the Hittites, and to render Syria and the Phoenician cities tributary. The northern part of Babylonia was annexed to Assyria, the Kurdish tribes were severely punished, and a campaign was made against the confederacy of northern nations, which was led by Sarduris of Van. The confederacy was ut- terly defeated, 72,950 prisoners falling into the hands of the Assyrians, and the way opened into Syria. In B. C. 742, he conquered Arpad (now Tel Erfad) after a siege of two years, and this victory was followed by the submission of Northern Syria. Hamath was taken by storm, although it was in alliance with Uzziah of Judah, and the kings of Syria now hastened to do homage and offer tribute to the Assyrian con- queror. Menahem, king of Israel, against whom the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul, king of Assyria (I Chron. v :26), paid a tribute of a thousand talents of silver ‘that his hand,’ i. e., “his favor, might be with him to confirm the kingdom in his hand” (2 Kings xv :19, 20). Three years after this Ararat or Armenia was again invaded and the country devastated for a space of four hundred and fifty miles. Ahaz, king of Judah, was hard pressed by the combined forces of Pekah, king of Israel, and Rezin, king of Damascene-Syria, in their attempt to overthrow the Davidic dynasty. He therefore purchased Tiglath-Pileser’s assistance with a large sum, taken out of his own and the Temple treasury. The Assyrian king accordingly invaded the territories of both the confederated kings, and annexed a portion of them to his own dominions, carrying captive a number of their subjects (2 Kings xv. 29; xvi :5-Io; I Chron. v .26; 2 Chron. xxviii:16; Is. vii:I-II; Comp. Amos i :5; ix:7). 176 ASSYRIA Damascus, too, was conquered, and Ahaz was at the feast of celebration in honor of the vic- tory. It was here he saw the altar, of which he º a pattern to Urijah, the priest (2 Kings xvi; IO ). (6) Shalmaneser IV. Tiglath-Pileser was suc- ceeded by Shalmaneser IV (Hos. x:4), B. C. 724. His reign of five years was marked by an unsuc- cessful attempt against Tyre, and the beginning of a war against the kingdom of Israel, but his death put an end to the projects (B. C. 722). (7) Sargon. Sargon, a usurper, took the throne. (See SARGON.) Two years after his accession he laid siege to Samaria, took it after an investment of three years (B. C. about 720), and then reduced the country of the ten tribes to a province of his empire, car- rying into captivity the king and his people, and Settling Cuthaeans from Babylonia in their room (2 Kings xvii:3–6; xviii:9:II). Babylon had revolted again and now accepted the leadership of Merodach-Baladan, the hered- itary chieftain of Beth-Yagina in the marshes on the coast of the Persian Gulf. The southern por- tion of Sargon's dominions was threatened by Elam ; the Kurdish tribes on the east renewed their depredations; the Hittite kingdom remained unsubdued; the Syrian conquests could be re- tained only with difficulty, and a new enemy ap- peared in the shape of Egypt. Sargon's first act was to drive the Elamites back, but he was recalled to the west by the re- volt of Hamath, whose king had secured the co- operation of Arpad, Damascus, Samaria and other cities. But the revolt was of short duration. Hamath was burned and the king flayed alive. Sargon next marched along the sea coast to the cities of the Philistines. Then the Egyptian army was routed at Raphia, and its ally Khanun of Gaza taken captive. In B. C. 717 the rich Hittite city of Carchem- ish was stormed and sacked, and then placed under an Assyrian satrap, who thus held in his hands the key of the caravan trade between Eastern and Western Asia. But the Hittites found avengers in the allied populations of the north, in Meshech and Tubal, in Ararat and Minni. The contest lasted for six years, but Sargon finally conquered, and B. C. 71 I he was free to turn his attention to the west, where matters were in a serious condition. Merodach-Baladan, knowing that his own turn would come as soon as Sargon had firmly estab- lished his power in Northern Syria, had dispatched ambassadors to the Mediterranean states, urg- ing them to combine against the common foe. In Is. xxxix we read of their arrival in Jeru- salem, and, although Isaiah had faithfully warned Hezekiah, he listelled to the persuasions of the Babylonian envoys, and encouraged by the prom- ise of Egyptian support, besides that of Phoenicia, Moab, Edom and the Philistines, he determined to defy the Assyrian king. Hezekiah showed these strangers all the resources of his country and all the treasures of his house. He was severely rebuked by the prophet for his vainglory in so doing, and the terrible sequel proved that the words of Isaiah were faithful and true. Before the confederacy could act Sargon fell upon Palestine. Phoenicia and Judah were sub- jugated, and Jerusalem captured. Ashdod (Is. xx:I) was burned, and Egypt made no effort to render aid, though an ally by treaty. We are now enabled by the light of Assyrian records to state that the description of Isaiah (chap. x) of the onward march of the host against Jerusalem is not romance; the sufferings ASSYRIA of the beleaguered Jews (Is. xxii) are not imagin- ary, and the prophecy foretelling the fall of the devoted city (Is. x; xxii:I-I4) was not an unfulfilled threat. We know, too, that ten years before the cam- paign of Sennacherib, Sargon had swept through the land of Judah, and it is to his armies that Isaiah alluded as being at Nob, a half-hour to the north of Jerusalem. Sargon was murdered by his own soldiers in his new, city, Dur-Sargon (B. C., 707). (8) Sennacherib. In the reign of Sargon's Successor, Sennacherib, or Sancherib, we find Hezekiah, king of Judah, allying himself with Egypt (2 Kings xviii:7, 2I). This brought against him. Sennacherib with a mighty host, , which, without difficulty, subdued the fenced cities of Judah, and compelled him to purchase peace by the payment of a large tribute. But ‘the treacher- ous dealer dealt very treacherously' (Is. xxxiii:I), and, notwithstanding the agreement, proceeded to invest Jerusalem. In answer, however, to the prayers of the ‘good king' of Judah, the Assyrian Assyrian King in His Chariot. was diverted from his purpose, partly by the ru- mor (Is. xxxvii:6) of the approach of Tirhakah, king of Ethiopia, and partly by the sudden and miraculous destruction of a great part of his army (2 Kings xviii:I3-37; xix ; Is. xxxvi and xxxvii). He himself returned to Nineveh, where, in course of time, when worshiping in the temple of his god he was slain by his sons Adrammelech and Sharezer. (9) Esarhaddon. don was proclaimed king. Is. xxxvii:38). Under his rule the Second Empire reached the zenith of its power. king who ever attempted to conciliate the peo- ples who had been conquered. In the first year of his reign he rebuilt Babylon and made it the Sec- ond capital of the empire, his court residing alter- nately there and at Nineveh. It was while Esarhaddon was holding his win- ter court at Babylon that Manasseh of Judah * brought to him as prisoner (2 Chron. xxxiii: II ) . His principal achievement was the conquest of Egypt, which began about B. C. 675, and was completed four years later, when Memphis was (See 2 Kings xix:37; 177 About B. C. 681 Esarhad- He was the only Assyrian ASSYRIA taken and the Egyptian king was compelled to fly, first to Thebes and then to Ethiopia. Egypt was divided into twenty satrapies, which were governed partly by Assyrians and partly by native princes. On his return to Assyria Esar- haddon associated Assur-bani-pal, the eldest of his four Sons, with him in government, and died two years later. (10) Assur-bani-pal. Assur-bani-pal is prob- ably the 'great and noble' Asnapper of Ezra iv: Io. He was luxurious, ambitious and cruel, but was a munificent patron of literature. His first occupation was the crushing of a revolt in Egypt. Tirkakah was again driven out of the country, and Thebes, called “No of the god Amun” in the Scriptures, was plundered and destroyed. It is to this destruction of the old capital of the Pharaohs that Nahum refers in his prophecy (iii:8). Tyre was besieged and forced to surren- der, Cilicia paid homage to the Assyrian king, and Gog, or Gyges, of Lydia, sent him tribute. The Assyrian Empire had now reached its wid- est limits. Elam had fallen, and its capital had been razed to the ground. The three last Elam- ite kings were bound to the yoke of Assur-bani- pal’s chariot, and forced to drag their conqueror through the streets of Nineveh. The Kedarites were chastised, as well as other nomad tribes of North- ern Arabia, the land of Minni was overrun and the Armenians of Van begged for an alliance with the AS- Syrian king. - But the seeds of disruption were being fast sown by a luxurious king. At the very time that the empire reached its greatest limits in the sub- jugation of Elam a rebellion broke out in Babylon (B. C. 652). Egypt, Arabia, Palestine and Lydia made common cause, and nothing was left of the Assyrian Empire after the struggle but the old capital of ASSur. &. J1 rt. Assyrian art was for the most part borrowed from Babylonia, even the palaces and temples being constructed of brick and raised on mounds, although stone was plentiful and inun- dations which Babylon suffered were not feared. The walls of the houses, however, were adorned with sculptured slabs of alabaster, in place of the vermilion paintings of Babylon (Ezek. xxiii: I4). The walls of Dur-Sargon were over a mile Square. They were forty-six feet thick, flanked with eight towers, and their corners pointed to the four car- dinal points. Columns, which had been a Baby- lonian invention, were plentifully used, some- times in exaggerated forms, resting on the backs of dogs, lions or winged bulls. e Assyrian Sculpture was mostly in relief. Its first efforts, which began about the time of Assur- natsir-pal, are characterized by boldness and lack of perspective. Later, about the time of the Second Empire, the foreground is filled with plant and other forms, drawn with great exactitude. This made the relief work of this period exceed- ingly rich. º º º In the reign of Assur-bani-pal the carving is again distinguished by boldness, but it is finished and accurate. The human form, however, never received justice at the hands of the Assyrians. 9. Literature. Assyrians learned the art of writing from the Babylonians, who in turn learned it from the Accadians, the inventors of the hiero- glyphics, out of which the cuneiform characters of the Assyrians afterwards grew. 12 ASSYRIA The literature, as well as the writing of the Assyrians, came from the Accadians. Old docu- ments were re-edited or translated. The writing material was at first papyrus leaves, but clay was plentiful and received easily the impress of the cuneiform characters by means of a metal wedge- shaped stylus. This mode of writing did away with curves, circles and continuous lines; pic- tures became symbols instead of exact representa- tions, and in a few centuries a character would change beyond recognition in its transformation from a hieroglyphic to a cuneiform representa- tion. Nevertheless Assyrian literature was an exotic. The Babylonians, on the other hand, were by na- ture a literary people, while the Assyrian gloried in records of ferocity. He was the lion of Nahum, sº delighted to tear its prey (Nah. I :8; ii:6, , I2). - Notwithstanding these changes that were going on, and the poor means for writing and reading, it would seem that there was a large proportion <3:::::::::::::::::::º ---------~~~~ º º: - §: § - --- - º º § -- º º º- #º m - wº -- º |- - -- º §§§ ºntº --- § º º: 178 ASSYRIA lower classes are indicated. It is evident, how- ever, that among the higher classes chairs, ta- bles and couches were used, and wines were the usual beverage at their feast. Among the most highly prized of these was that of Khilbum, or º which is mentioned by Ezekiel (xxvii: IS). There was also a palm wine, made from dates, and beer, milk, cream, butter or ghee were much used. The tables were ornamented with flowers. and musicians amused the banqueters. Next to hunting men, the great delight of the Assyrian kings was the hunt of wild animals. Tiglath-Pileser I had hunted elephants in the land of the Hittites, as the Egyptian Pharaohs had done before him. The reem, or wild bull, after- wards became their favorite game. It was not un- til the reign of Assur-bani-pal that lion hunting ceased to be a dangerous sport. With Esarhad- don, however, the old race of warrior kings had come to an end, and lions were afterward cap- tured and kept in cages, until they were turned --~~~~ º Rºº- - sº wº- º-º:-- - % a :ſº- §§ º Bas-relief Showing Assur-bani-pal and His Queen. of the people who could read and write. Like Babylon, Assyria had her libraries, which were well stocked with books in papyrus and clay. One of these was at Nineveh, from which most of the Assyrian literature that we possess has come. There was another at Calah, and another at Assur. Many of these books were lexicog- raphal, explaining the old Accadian and Aramaic forms. Aramaic was the language of diplomacy (2 Kings xviii:26), as well as of travel, and was used side by side with the Syrian. This explains why the Jews of the post-Babylonish cap- tivity gave up their language in favor, not of the Assyrian, but of the Aramaic tongue. All subjects of knowledge or science of the times were treated of in these libraries. Dis- patches of generals, bills of sale, astrology, omens, religion, songs, poetry and astronomy are alſ found in these ancient books. Their works on astronomy show that records of eclipses had been kept for great periods. Time was measured by a water clock, as well as by the dial. The dial placed at Jerusalem by Ahaz (2 Kings xxii) was no doubt the result of contact with the Assyri- ans. Even medical science was in quite an advanced state. Diseases were classified and modes of treat- ment prescribed, although much of superstition was mingled with the prescriptions. (See As- sy RIAN and BABYLoNIAN LIBRARIES.) 10. Manners and Customs. It is only inci- dentally that the manners and customs of the out for the royal hunt, and as they then had to be whipped into activity the royal hunters were comparatively safe. The Assyrians were not an agricultural people, but the kings had their parks and the wealthier classes their gardens. Summer houses were some- times built in the midst of them, and as early as the time of Sennacherib we meet with a ‘hang- ing garden’ grown on the roof of a building (Assyria. Its Princes, Priests and People. A. H. Sayce, M. A., 1895). ASSYRIAN AND BABYLONIAN DIS- COVERIES. This article contains a short account of the discoveries that have been made in the buried cities of Nineveh and Babylon since the middle of this century. It must be very fascinating to all Biblical stu- dents to find that the names of all the Assyrian and Babylonian kings mentioned in the Bible, like Tiglath-Pileser, Shalmaneser, Sargon, Sennach- erib, Esarhaddon, Nebuchadnezzar, Merodach- Baladan and Belshazzar have been identified from the discoveries made in the ruins of Nineveh and Babylon. It is also interesting to note that those buried cities of ancient civilization had re- mained in oblivion for more than twenty-five centuries until the spade of the zealous explorers, Mr. (now Sir Henry) Layard and M. Botta, brought them to light nearly fifty years ago. ASSYRIA 179 (1) Nineveh. I was fortunate enough when, I was quite a youth to meet Sir Henry Layard in 1845 at Mosul, which is situated on the bank of the river Tigris, opposite the site of ancient Nineveh. As he wanted some one to assist him, he invited me to stay with him and give him the necessary help in his intended explorations. I was with him more than four years during his explorations in Assyria and Babylonia, and to this opportunity I owe my success in archaeolog- ical researches as well as other public services under the British Crown. - In 1844, while Sir Henry Layard was passing through Assyria, he noticed both at the mounds of Koyunjik, the principal seat of the kings of As- syria, and Nimroud, the Calah of the Bible (men- tioned in the tenth chapter of Genesis), some indi- cations of ancient remains which led him to ob- tain a firman from the Sultan to enable him to excavate there. He commenced operations in the last mentioned mound, and after a few days’ work he was rewarded by the discovery of the palace of Assur-Nazir-pal, the father of Shalmaneser II, who was the first of the Assyrian kings who came in contact with the Israelites. The sculptures of Assur-Nazir-pal’s palace, which now adorn one of the Assyrian galleries at the British Museum, were in better preservation than those of Khorsa- bad or any other edifice discovered in Assyria thereafter, but with the exception of the hunting and war scenes most of the bas-reliefs in the dif- ferent chambers consisted largely of representa- tions of kings, eagle-headed figures, eunuchs and sacred trees. A few of these were sent to the British Museum, and the remainder were acquired for different museums in Europe and America. As late as 1878 I carried to Constantinople sculp- tures from the same locality as a present from the trustees of the British Museum to the Sultan, and his majesty gave them to the Imperial Museum at the Turkish capital. Besides the palace of Assur-Nazir-pal, Sir Henry Layard discovered a temple built by that monarch and the remains of the edifices erected by Tiglath-Pileser, Esarhaddon and Saracus, his grandson, who was the last of the Assyrian kings. (2) Palace of Sennacherib. Afterwards Sir Henry Layard commenced work at Koyunjik (city of Nineveh) and was rewarded by the discovery of the grand palace of Sennacherib ; but, unfor- tunately, the magnificent sculptures which adorned it were found in a dilapidated state, as they had been greatly damaged by fire, and though a great number of the bas-reliefs were sent to the British Museum, the greater part fell into pieces as soon as they were uncovered. The most interesting and valuable inscriptions found by Sir Honry Layard in his explorations, which related to Biblical history, were the ac- counts given on a black marble obelisk and hu- man-headed bulls, of the invasion of the Holy Land by Shalmaneser and Sennacherib. The former was discovered at Nimroud, and on it is recorded that Jehu, the son of Omri or Nimshi, paid a tribute to Shalmaneser II of “silver, gold, a golden cup, golden vases, golden vessels, lead, a staff for the hand of the king, and scepters.” The latter was found in the palace of Sennacherib at Koyunjik, on which was inscribed the expedition of that monarch against Lachish, as it is recorded in the 18th chapter of 2 Kings and 36th chapter of Isaiah, wherefrom Rab-Shakeh was sent with a threatening message to Hezekiah, king of Judah. (3) Palace of Assur-bani-pal. After Sir Henry Layard's second successful expedition to Assyria he declined to go out again, and I was ASSYRIA therefore commissioned by the trustees of the British Museum to proceed to Mesopotamia to continue the researches in Nineveh, which were then conducted on a small scale under the gen- eral control of Major (late Sir Henry) Rawlin- son, the then British consul-general at Bagdad. I had come to England to complete my studies at Oxford, but as I took a great interest in Assyrian ºrches I willingly accepted the proffered task. - My exploration extended to Koyunjik, Nimroud and Kalaa-Shirgat (the ancient Asshur), but my great Success was achieved in the former site. There I discovered in the northern part of the mound the edifice of Assur-bani-pal. The sculp- tures of this palace have been considered by com- petent authorities to be of a higher order of art than those of other Assyrian buildings. The royal lion hunt, especially, has been the admiration of every one. The animals are portrayed in every variety of posture and are sculptured with sur- prising vigor. In the lion hunt saloon, I discov- ered the library of Assur-bani-pal, and among the records were found the legends of the creation and the deluge. To prove that there may be still invaluable treasures buried underground, both in Assyria and Babylonia, I will mention two important discover- ies I made in the former country some years ago, which will show how necessary it is to examine thoroughly every ancient site without being dis- couraged by disappointment and failures. (4) Colossal Gates. A few years ago, while an Arab was digging a grave in a mound, called Balawat, about fifteen miles to the east of Koy- unjik, and nine miles to the northeast of Nim- roud, he came upon a bronze band, covered with embossed illustrations and inscriptions, which he broke into a number of pieces and sold to differ- ent individuals. Fortunately one of those who purchased three or four portions of the rare an- tique sent me two pieces of it, and so, when I went out to Assyria for the trustees of the British Museum, in 1877, the first thing I did was to find out where that relic was obtained, and as I felt certain that the band discovered by the Arab dig- ger was a part of a large trophy, I determined to find the remainder. On arriving there I found to my great regret that the mound in which that object was buried had been used as a cemetery from time imme- morial by the Mohammedans, and there was not a vacant space even of two feet where a grave had not been dug to the depth of five or six feet. For nearly 2,500 years that monument of As- Syrian grandeur was unknown to explorers, and no one happened to hit upon it, though it was buried only about five feet below the surface of the ground. If was both difficult and dangerous to dig there for antiquities, on account of the prejudice of the natives, but nothing daunted, I managed by the help of my Arab friends to try a spot on which there was no grave visible, and in a few hours' time I was rewarded by the dis- covery of that part of the trophy which was only five feet deep. There were, however, two good reasons why that mound was left untouched by European explorers before I commenced work in it; the first was its insignificance, quite unlike Koyunjik, Khorsabad or Nimroud ; and, sec- ondly, the existence of the graves on it would naturally debar an archaeologist from attempting to dig in it from fear of coming into collision with the fanatical Arabs. These bronzes, which are now exhibited at the British Museum, appear to have covered a two- leaf cedar gate, about twenty feet Square by four ASSYRIA 180 inches thick, and as the wood had rotted away I could only find out its thickness from the bend of the nails that were found fixed to it. The scrolls, or bands, of bronzes which I found lying flat on the soil in their original position did not cover the whole wooden frame, but between each of the scrolls there must have been some orna- mented cedar work or some other rare material of which the monument was stripped when the Assyrian monarchy began to decay. The illus- trations on this relic, which are of bas-reliefs in repose work, are minute in detail and artistic in style. They represent the battle scenes, marching order and religious ceremonies of the Assyrians. Each plate is divided into two sections and sur- rounded by a large number of rosettes, which answered the purpose of ornamentation, and also encircled the top of the nails that fastened the metal to the wood. - -- Pā’āº - -- º - ~~~~ 3. L-ſº :::::::::::: - --l * * * º -ºººººººº- ºrrºr- --- wº - º - 2. An Assyrian Book. (From the original in the British Museum). (5) Cylinder. The second valuable discovery I made at Koyunjik was a perfect ten-sided terra- cotta cylinder, with 1,300 lines of fine inscriptions ASSYRIA detailing the conquests of Assur-bani-pal. It was by a mere chance that this unique historical rec- ord was discovered, because, generally speaking, Sir Henry Layard and I did not think it necessary to waste our time and money in digging thick, solid brick walls to no purpose. But I was asked by the overseer superintending the work in the palace of Assur-bani-pal if he should remove a small remnant of brick wall, which was left in digging out two chambers, or leave it to be cov- ered with rubbish which came out of the excava- tions. On seeing that its removal would not en- tail much expense I ordered it to be pulled down, and I was glad to find that the little labor and expense had gained us that most valuable record of Assyrian history. It was found built inside the solid brick wall. There were four sites of the royal residences discovered on the left side of the Tigris, in what was considered Assyria proper, and which were, I believe, in the time of the preaching of the Prophet Jonah within the metropolis of Nineveh. These are Koyunjik, Nebbi-younis, Nimroud and Khorsabad, as London takes in now the city, Westminster and Kensington. There are other ruins within what I consider to be the radius of that “great city,” such as Yarimja, Balawat, Karamlais, Bahsheeks and Shareef-Khan. Tak- ing the oblong dimensions of these different ruins, together with Koyunjik and Nebbi-younis on the western limit, Nimroud on its southern border, and Khorsabad on its northern boundary, we find the size of the old city to be about sixty miles in circumference, or three days’ journey, as it is mentioned in the book of Jonah, because twenty miles is reckoned in that country, according to pedestrian traveling, about a day's journey. That part of Nineveh is called Nebbi,younis, where the Prophet Jonah is alleged to have been buried, and which is still called officially “Nîn- weh,” or Nineveh. The remains of the palace of Esarhaddon was discovered by a native of the gººse while digging a foundation for a house in 1852. (6) Babylon and Birs Nimroud. As I had a great desire to conduct archaeological research in Babylonia, I went down to Bagdad in 1879 for that purpose, after leaving a competent agent to carry on the necessary work at Koyunjik in search of inscriptions. I commenced excavating at once in Babylon and Birs Nimroud, the ancient Borsippa and the supposed site of the tower of Babel, where the famous temple of Belus stood. In both ruins I found important Babylonian rec- ords, and in the latter spot I discovered the pal- ace of Nebuchadnezzar, where Nabonadius took refuge after the defeat of his army by Cyrus. I found it very difficult to explore systemat- ically in Babylon proper, because from time im- memorial the spade of the digger has been at work there either in search of bricks for building pur- poses, or for treasure. The area on which the palaces of the kings of Babylon were erected is now divided into four different quarters by the natives, namely, Jimjima, Quarich, Omran and Imjaileeba, in all of which I carried on extensive explorations, but I was only able to find a small remnant of the great palace in the limit of the latter site. In all the four localities my workmen found inscribed terra cotta and clay tablets, but the most valuable of these were discovered in Jim- jima, amongst which we found the contract clay document with some silver ornaments. The present visible ruins of Babylon consist of a mound called by the Arabs “Babel." In the mound of “Babel” I followed the excava- tions of the Arabs, who were digging for bricks ASSYRIA and stone, and uncovered four carefully built wells of granite placed parallel and within a few feet of each other in the northern center of the mound. The stones of which they were built were scientifically joined together, and it is most vexing to think that the Arabs are allowed to demolish them for the purpose of burning lime. Each well was built of circular blocks of granite, which must have been brought thither from a great distance higher up the Euphrates, as there is no stone quarry to be seen in Babylonia. Each stone, which measured about three feet in depth, had been bored and made to fit the one below it so perfectly and without cement that the whole structure looked as if the well had been hewn in one solid rock. These wells were connected with % º § tº ºft Ruins of the Tower of Babel. an aqueduct supplied with water from the Eu- phrates, and when I had two of them cleared out in the year 1879 the water was seen to ooze out through the debris in the watercourse during the rising of the river. (7) Hanging Gardens. These wells prove that “Babel” was the site of the famous hanging gar- dens of Babylon, mentioned by Diodorus Siculus, as the mound stands higher than any other site there. Unfortunately I could not find any of the terraces mentioned by historians, because the work of destruction has been going on for centuries in those parts, and the only reliable an- cient remains that can be identified now are the gxisting wells, which must have been at least one hundred and forty feet deep. The destruction of Babylon was so complete that one wonders whether the accounts given of § 22; % 2227 gº 181 #. % Zºº f t %| º ſ' " ASSYRIA its greatness and magnificence by different Greek writers and others were not exaggerated, espe- cially as regards the dimensions of its walls, which are said to have been sixty miles square. Herodo- tus mentions that the wall of the city was three hundred and fifty feet in height, eighty-seven in thickness, and six chariots could move abreast upon it. Not a trace can now be seen of it. The prophetic denunciation of Jeremiah has been won- derfully fulfilled, for he said that “the Babylon shall be utterly broken and her high gates shall be burned with fire.” 8) Tower of Babel. The ruins of the tower termed by historians and travelers Borsippa, tem- ple of Belus, Birs Nimroud, and tower of Babel, stand, up to the present day, as a memorable #|| % %| f lº, monument of past splendor. It towers high above any other existing Babylonian ruin. As the coun- try around it is perfectly flat, the top of the re- maining brick masonry can be seen far and wide for a distance of about twenty-five miles. I was very much struck with what seemed to me Super- natural destruction from the masses of vitrified brick scattered around the tower. Different trav- elers attributed the cause of vitrification to either lightning or extreme power of artificial heat, but I found on examining the different blocks that neither the work of man nor the effect of lightning could have caused such vitrification. The huge boulders are not large lumps of vitrified bricks, like those found in brick-kilns, but actual masonry which had been torn down from the top to the bottom. I consulted two scientific gentlemen in England, who understand the effect of lightning ASSYRIA upon such massive structures, and I was told that electric fluid could not have caused such whole- Sale vitrification. (9) Palace of Nebuchadnezzar. At Birs Nimroud I was fortunate enough to discover, after three days’ trail, the palace of Nebuchad- nezzar. It contained about eighty chambers and halls, but nothing was found in them excepting in four rooms, where there were some remains of Babylonian antiquities, which proved that Nebuchadnezzar was the builder. In the first hall discovered we found broken pillars, capitals and fragments of enameled bricks, with cedar beams which must have belonged to its embellishment. At the grand entrance of the palace we found a solid or brass object ornamented, and inscribed on the side of it, recording its dedication by Nebu- chadnezzar to his god for his restoration to health. I found it at the threshold of the entrance to the temple of Belus. I was quite convinced from its position that it was not made originally for that purpose and it must have been brought there from its original position. The shape of it seemed to me to point to quite a different use, and that is, that it belonged to a “two-leaved gate,” which is mentioned in the 45th chapter of Isaiah. Herod- otus also mentions (book I, chap. 181) that the gates of Babylon were made of solid brass. (10) Other Mounds. About a quarter of a mile to the northeast of Birs Nimroud there is a much larger mound, called Ibraheem-al-Khaleel, i. e., “Abraham the Friend” (of God), as the natives of the country believe in a tradition that Nimroud, “the mighty hunter,” had tried there to throw Abraham into the fiery furnace. I also explored another large mound, called Habl-Ibraheem, that is to say, “the rope of Abra- ham,” from the shape of the great canal which runs to it from the Euphrates, a distance of about thirty-five miles. That ruin is supposed to be the site of ancient Cuthah. The most important discovery I made during my explorations in Babylonia was at a mound called “Aboo-Habba” about sixty miles to the north of Babylon and fifteen to the southwest of Bagdad. From the records I found there it has been proved that the place was the site of the ancient Sippara, the Sepharvain of the Bible. During my first expedition to Babylonia I took a trip to Shat-al-Hai, the channel which runs from the Tigris, at Koot-al-Amara, to the Euphrates, as I had heard of a mound called Tel-loh, about one hundred and fifty miles to the southeast of Baby- lon, which was said to contain ancient statues. I found on arriving there that Tel-loh was not included in the terms of my firman. However, I was able to dig there three days, and discovered a ruined temple, from which I sent some inscrip- tions to the British Museum, which proves that the ruin dates as far back as 2,000 B. C. There are still, I am sure, invaluable historical records buried in different parts of Assyria and Babylonia, which will be lost to the world forever if men in authority do not use their energy and influence in checking the wicked traffic in antiques and save what remains of buried treasures for the benefit of science and Biblical knowledº ASSYRIAN AND BABYLONIAN LIBRARIES. It is only the older ones among us who are able to realize the profound change which the Oriental discoveries of the last half century have effected in our conceptions of the past history of civilized man. It is not so very long ago since 182 ASSYRIA culture in the modern sense of the word was re- garded as taking its origin in the age which saw the rise of the literature of classical Greece. The Oriental civilizations of an earlier date were hardly recognized as civilizations at all— they were rather incarnations of brute force which was concentrated in the hands of a few. A knowledge of the art of writing was grudg- ingly granted to the Egyptian and the Assyrian, but the possession of a literature was denied them, and still more a literary culture of an ex- tended character. The possession of a literature had indeed to be allowed to the Hebrews, but it was looked upon as a unique and extraordinary fact, which it was necessary to minimize as much as possible. Today all is changed, the East is yielding up its dead, and we are beginning to learn that the ancient Oriental world was, after all, not so very unlike our own. We know now that Egypt and Babylonia and Assyria possessed a culture and civilization of a high order, before the first Greek writer com- mitted his thoughts to papyrus or parchment, or even before any people in Europe had risen above the level of barbarism. - We can never return to the complacent belief that Europe was the cradle of civilization, and that culture is the monopoly of the nations of the West. Such a belief was the last echoes of those mediaeval doctrines which placed the earth in the center of the universe, and made man the sole object for which it had been created. Astronomy and geology have not been more fatal to these doctrines than Oriental archaeology has been to the equally unfounded and equally vainglorious theory that culture and civilization have been confined to Greece and Rome, and above all to ourselves of the modern world. (1) The Art of Writing. The art of writing is in the East immensely old, and it was an art which in Egypt and Babylonia was not restricted to a special class. On the contrary, a knowledge of reading and writing was widely spread, and when we bear in mind the complicated nature of the system of writing employed in Egypt and Babylonia, and the enormous number of separate characters used in them, it is evident that educa- tion was far advanced. In Egypt the rocks are covered with scribbles by ordinary passengers up and down the Nile, by the captains and sailors of boats, by merchants and traders, and even by quarrymen and labor- €1’S. The cuneiform tablets found at Tel-el-Amarna prove that in the century before the Exodus, not only was the Babylonian language, and the Baby- lonian script, studied and known throughout Western Asia, but that correspondence, sometimes upon the most trivial subjects, was constantly being carried on from one extremity of the civil- ized East to the other. The epoch of Moses was as much a literary age in Egypt and Western Asia as the epoch of the Renaissance was in Europe. (2) Libraries. A literary age implies the exist- ence of libraries, and libraries, indeed, there were. In Babylonia the institution of public libraries went back to a remote period, and we know of private libraries in Egypt at a period almost equally remote. One of the most famous of the Babylonian libraries had been established by Sargon of Ac- cad, the founder of the first Semitic empire, who flourished as early as 3800 B.C. (See SARGON.) It was for the library of Sargon that the standard works on astronomy, astrology, and terrestrial omens had been compiled, which re- ASSYRIA mained a sort of text-book to the astrologers and diviners of Babylon and Assyria down to the very last. The astronomical treatises show that the phe- nomena of the heavens had been long observed and noted; eclipses of the moon, and within certain limits of the sun also, could be calculated and foretold. The annual path of the sun through the sky had been mapped out among twelve constella- tions—the twelve signs of the Zodiac which are still familiar to the almanac-makers. The library of Sargon was but one out of many Babylonian public libraries, and a large part of the latest and largest of them—the library of Nineveh-is now in the British Museum. Its last and most generous benefactor was Assur-bani-pal, the Sardanapalus of the Greeks, 183 ASSYRIA predecessors, it became necessary to translate the literary products of the older Chaldea into Semitic Babylonian. For many centuries, Baby- lonia possessed a bilingual population and the educated classes were required to know, not only inflectional Semitic, but also agglutinative Sumerian. (3) Two Languages. As late as the reign of Khammurabi, with whom the history of united Babylonia begins, in the twenty-fourth century B. C., the public inscriptions of the king were written in the two leading languages of the coun- try, and there are numerous legal documents of the same age, the language of which is still Sumerian. The two languages necessarily bor- rowed words and idioms, one from the other, so that a knowledge of Sumerian was as important to the student of Semitic Babylonian as a knowl- Fragment Now in the British Museum Showing Primitive Hieroglyphics and Cuneiform Characters Side by Side. who seems to have had a passion for literature. The cities of Babylonia were ransacked for books which related to the favorite studies of the As- syrian king, and a considerable body of scribes was kept busily at work in copying and so re- editing the older literature of the country. Assur- bani-pal is never weary of telling us that the literary treasures which he collected were for the benefit of the people—that the ancient books of Babylonia had been collected and re-edited “for the inspection of the reader.” The con- tents of a Babylonian or Assyrian library were sufficiently varied. All the branches of the knowledge of the day were represented in it. History and chronology, grammar and lexicogra- phy, religion and the sciences, as they were then lºod and pursued, all alike found a place there. The earliest philologists, so far as we know, were the scribes of Chaldea and Nineveh. The original language of literary Babylonia had been agglutinative, and differed in toto from the Sem- itic language of the later rulers of the country, therefore, when the latter adopted the culture, the script, and the literary productions of their edge of Latin is to a student of English. The cuneiform syllabary itself could not be properly learned without some knowledge of the ancient language of Chaldea. It had been a Sumerian invention, but it was an invention which, like all others of the same kind, had been of slow growth; when the Semites became dominant in Babylonia, it was still grow- ing, and it was finally completed under Semitic supervision. The interlacing of Sumerian and Semitic elements which was the consequence of this double growth has been the cause of hasty and unfounded theories in regard to the Sumerian language. But it had much to do with making the old Babylonians a nation of philologists, for as soon as they began to learn, as it were, their alphabet, they were brought face to face with two languages utterly unlike one another, and a study of the ancient literature of their country brought the fact still further before them; hence origi- nated the grammar and vocabularies, the reading hooks, and interlinear or parallel translations which formed so large a portion of the contents of a Babylonian or Assyrian library. A consid- erable part of the sacred literature of Chaldea ASSYRIA was written in Sumerian—so also was a great deal of the legal literature, and in order to under- stand it, comparative grammars and lexicons were necessary. It is not astonishing that when Once the fact of the diversity of languages had been impressed upon the mind of the cultivated Babylonian, a philological interest should have been awakened in him. Babylonia was sur- rounded by populations of diversified speech, and Some of these populations established themselves in Babylonia itself. Not long after the line of Khammurabi, for instance, the country was con- quered and governed for several centuries by Kassites from the mountains of Elam, who spoke an agglutinative language, and the name of Khammurabi himself shows that although his native language was Semitic, it was not Semitic Babylonian. Explanatory lists of the words and names of these foreign populations were drawn up by the Babylonian scribes, and a table has been dis- covered which contains a list of common Kassite terms with their Babylonian equivalents. (4) Philology of the Babylonians. The Babylonians were consequently as regards phil- ology, and the recognition of the fact that other languages besides their own were worthy of study, far in advance of either Greeks or Rom- ans; what would we not give, for example, for a list of Etruscan words with their Latin render- ings, like the list of Kassite words of which I have just spoken P Doubtless the philology of the Babylonians was still immature, and their ideas of etymology exceedingly imperfect, but so also was the philology of the European scholars Only a hundred years ago. We can easily match the shortcomings of the Babylonian lexicogra- phers by the similar shortcomings of the English lexicographers of the last century. Sumerian words were confounded with antiquated Semitic Baby- lonian words, or words belonging to the languages by which Chaldea was surrounded, and Semitic words were provided with Sumerian etymologies, just as Anglo-Saxon words were provided with Greek or Latin etymologies by our dictionary makers. The Semitic Sabbatu, “a Sabbath,” is a curious example of this. A Babylonian scribe derives it from the Sumerian sa, “heart,” and bat, “to end,” and accordingly explains it as “a day of rest for the heart.” However, the per- verseness of the derivation is not greater than that of some modern Assyriologists, who have traced Sumerian words to Semitic roots. - People do not begin to compile grammars and dictionaries, or to speculate on the origin of words, until books and libraries abound, and a literary education is widespread. The daily ne- cessities of life may originate works on law or astronomy; the vanity of princes may lead to the compilation of annals, and the composition of history, while religious and poetical literature belong to the earliest days of national culture, but the philologist is a late product of civiliza- tion and bears incontrovertible evidence of a long and familiar acquaintance with the art of writing. It is just this fact which makes the philological works of the Babylonian scribes of such especial value. A considerable amount of the criticism which has been passed upon the Old Testament records has been based on the assumption that the civilized nations of the ancient East were as illiterate as the nations of northern Europe dur- ing the middle ages. But the revelations which have been made to us by the buried libraries of Babylonia and Assyria, and the discovery of the 184 ASSYRIA cuneiform tablets of Tel-el-Amarna—testifying as they do, to an active literary correspondence throughout western Asia, in the fifteenth century B. C.—have finally and decisively proved that such an assumption is false. The art of writing was generally known and practiced in the ancient East, and the natives of western Asia and Egypt were quite as fond of indulging in it as we moderns are to-day. So far as literary facilities were concerned, there was no reason why the contemporaries of Abra- ham or Moses should not have recorded on clay and papyrus the events which were passing be- fore them. If in future we are to question the historical accuracy of the narratives which have been handed down to us, it must be upon other fºnds than à want of literary knowledge and Sk111. (5) The Historic Sense. Of course it does not follow that because a people is literary and fond of reading and writing, it should therefore be possessed of what has been called a historical sense. The Egyptians, for instance, were singu- larly deficient in this respect; the inscriptions which cover the walls of their temples and tombs Seldom record a single historical fact. We find interminable lists of bombastic titles, wearisome invocations to the gods, and long accounts of the piety of the king or the dead man, but we look al- most in vain for references to historical events. Even the papyri of Egyptian history contain his- torical romances rather than history in the true sense of the word. The Babylonians again, though their contempt for history was not so marked as that of the Egyptians, preferred to cover their clay tablets with religious texts rather than with the annals of their country. The inscriptions of their kings tell us of the building of temples, and of offerings made to the gods, but of very little more. Their neglect of history was doubtless due in Some measure to the fact that the Babylonian monarchy was a species of theocracy. The king was the high priest and vicegerent of Bel, the supreme deity of Babylon; he derived his power from the god, and it was only as the adopted son of Bel that he possessed a valid title to the throne. (See BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA, RELIGION OF). It was far otherwise in Assyria. There we find a people eminently practical and matter of fact, who valued history and historical accuracy. The great ruins which Assyria has bequeathed to us are those of palaces, and not of temples like those of Babylonia. And the walls of the palaces were adorned with accounts of the cam- paigns and victories of their royal builders. The dates which are attached to each portion of the record, and the care with which the names of petty princes and towns were written down, give us a high idea of the historical precision at which the Assyrians aimed. The Assyrian monuments are alone sufficient to show that the historical sense was not altogether unknown to the ancient peoples of the east, and when we remember how closely related the Assyrians were to the He- brews in both race and language the fact be- comes important to the Biblical student. But whatever may be the conclusions which we draw from the facts already acquired by archaeological science, we must not forget that these facts are but a tithe of those we may hereafter hope to obtain. - . (6) Future Discoveries. We are still at the beginning of discoveries; those that have been already made are only an earnest of others that shall follow. No libraries, either of Babylonia ASSYRIANS 185 or of Assyria, have as yet been thoroughly ex- plored—at most but two-thirds of the library of Nineveh has been brought to the British Museum, and the library of the ancient Babylonian city of Nipur, which American enterprise has brought to light, has not yet yielded up the whole of its treaSureS. It will take time to examine, to edit, and trans- late all cuneiform literature which is at present in Europe and America. How much more time will be needed before the last of the old clay documents of Babylonia and Assyria has been rescued from the soil and we know exactly what has been saved for us out of the libraries of the past 2 A. H. S. Assyria Ns (as-syrians), (Heb. same as ass- hur), the inhabitants of Assyria. In Hebrew the name is the same as that of the country (Is. x:5, 24; xiv:25; xxxi.;8; Lam. v.:6; Ezek. xvi;28; Jud. xii: 13). ASTAROTH (äs' ta-röth), or ASTORETH or ASTARTE (Deut. i:4). See AshTAROTH. ASTATH (äs'täth), (Gr. 'Agrá0, as-fath'), prob- ably the Azgad of the true text (Ezra viii:12). ASTRONOMY (as-trón'o-my), (Gr. Garfip, as- Zare', star, and vôuos, mom?'os, law), that science which treats of the laws of the stars, or heavenly bodies, considered in reference to their magni- tude, movements and respective influence one upon another. Astronomy may be divided into empirical and scientific, the first being founded on the apparent phenomena and movements of the heavenly bodies, the second upon their real phenomena and move- ments. The knowledge of the ancients was lim- ited to the first; or if they possessed any truths connected with the second they were nothing more than bold or fortunate guesses, which were not followed out to their legitimate consequences, nor formed into a systematic whole. (1) Cradle of Astronomy. The cradle of as- tronomy is to be found in Asia. The few and imperfect notices which have come down to these times give a concurrent testimony in favor of this statement, and therewith agrees the fact that the climate, the mode of life and the occupations of the Oriental nations that were first civilized prompted them to watch and observe the starry heavens. . The Chaldaeans are accounted to have excelled in astronomical knowledge. Pliny, in his celebrated enumeration (Hist. Nat. vii:57) of the inventors of the arts, sciences and conveniences of life, ascribes the discovery of astronomy to Phoenician mariners: ‘Siderum Ob- Servationem in navigando Phoenices,’ and in the same chapter he speaks of astronomical observa- tions found on burnt bricks (coctilibus laterculis) aluulug the Babylonians, which ascend to ahnve 2200 years B, C, Alexander sent to Aristotle from Babylon a series of astronomical observa- tions, extending through 1900 years. The as- tronomical knowledge of the Chinese and In- dians goes up to a still earlier period (Plin. Hist. Nat, vi :17-21). From the remote East astronomy traveled in a westerly direction. The Egyptians at a very early period had some acquaintance with it. To them is to be ascribed a pretty near de- termination of the length of the year, as con- sisting of 365 days 6 hours (Herodotus ii:4). The Egyptians were the teachers of the Greeks. Some portion of the knowledge which prevailed on the subject would no doubt penetrate to and become the inheritance of the Hebrews, who do not, however, appear to have possessed any views of astronomy which raised their knowledge to the rank of a science, or made it approach to a ASTRONOMY more correct theory of the mechanism of the heavens than that which was generally held. Nor, if the Bible is taken as the witness, do the an: cient . Israelites appear to have had extensive knowledge in the matter. They possessed such an acquaintance with it as tillers of the ground and herdsmen might be expected to form while pursuing their business, having, as was natural, their minds directed to those regions of the heavens which night after night brought before their eyes; accordingly, the peculiar Oriental names of the constellations are derived from cir- cumstances connected with a nomade people. A peculiarity of the greatest importance belongs to the knowledge which the Israelites display of the heavens, namely, that it is thoroughly imbued with a religious character, nor is it possible to find in any other writings, even at this day, so much pure and elevated piety, in connection with observations on the starry firmament, as may be gathered even in single books of the Bible (Amos v:8; Ps. xix). (2) Days of the Patriarchs. As early as the day of the patriarchs the minds of pious men were attracted and enraptured by the splendor of the skies (Gen. xxxvii:9); and imagery borrowed from the starry world soon fixed itself firmly in human speech. The sun and moon were distin- guished from other heavenly bodies, in conse- quence of their magnitude and their brilliancy, as being the lights of heaven and earth (Gen. i :16); and from the course of the moon time was divided into parts, or months, of which the oldest form of the year, the lunar, was made up. Every new moon was greeted with religious festivities. While, however, the sun in his power, the moon walking in brightness, and all the stars of light conspired to excite devotion, their influence on the hearts of the ancient Israelites, who were happily instructed in a knowledge of the true God, the one Jehovah, the sole Creator of the world, stopped short of that idolatrous feeling, and was free from those idolatrous practices to which, among nations of less religious knowledge—and especially among their own neighbors, the Babylonians, for in- stance—it is unhappily known to have led. As early as the time of the composition of per- haps the oldest book in the Bible, namely, that of Job, the constellations were distinguished one from another, and designated by peculiar and ap- propriate names (Job ix:9; xxxviii:31). In the Bible are found, (I) Heyel', the morning star, the planet Venus (Is. xiv:12; Rev. ii:28). (2) Kimah' (Job ix:9; xxxviii:35; Amos v :8), the Pleiades. (3) Kesul", Orion, a large and brilliant constella- tion, which stands in a line with the Pleiades. The Orientals seem to have conceived of Orion as a huge giant who had warred against God, and as bound in chains to the firmament of heaven (Job xxxviii:31), and it has been conjectured that this notion is the ſuuuulation of the history of Nimrod (Gesen. Comment, gu Isaiah, i :457). (4) Ash (Job ix:9), the Great Bear, which has still the same name among the Arabians (Niebuhr, b. II.3). In the common version No. 4 is ren- dered ‘Arcturus,” No. 3 ‘Orion,’ and No. 2 ‘Pleiades.’ See Job xxxviii:32, where the sons of Arcturus are the three stars in the tail of the Bear, which stand in a curved line to the left. (5) Nachash' (Job xxvi :13, ‘the crooked ser- pent’), Draco, between the Great and the Little Bear ; a constellation which spreads itself in windings across the heavens. (6) Atóa koupol, di-os'koo-roi, the sons of Zeus, that is, the twins of Leda (Acts xxviii:II), Gemini, or the Twins, on the belt of the Zodiac, which is mentioned in 2 Kings xxiii:5, under the general name of ASUPPIM, HOUSE OF ‘the planets,’ Maggaloth", a word which sig- nifies dwellings, stations in which the sun tarries in his apparent course through the heavens (Comp. Gen. xxxvii:9). The entire body of the Stars was called ‘the host of heaven’, tsaba ha- shamayem' (Is. x1:26; Jer. xxxiii:22). No trace is found in the Old Testament of a division of the heavenly bodies into planets, fixed stars and comets; but in Jude 13, the phrase wan- dering stars is employed figuratively. (3) After the Exile. After the Babylonish ex- ile the Jews were compelled, even for the sake of their calendar, to attend at least to the course of the moon, which became an object of study, and delineations were made of the shapes that she assumes (Mischna rosch hassh. ii:8.) We find among the Babylonians Jupiter (Belus, Heb. Gad, Is. lxv : II), Venus (Heb. Meni, Is. lxv : II, where the first is rendered in the common version ‘that troop,' the second ‘that number'). 186 Both these were considered good principles. Mer- cury, honored as the secretary of heaven, is also found in Is. xlvi. I, ‘Nebo stoopeth;’ Saturn, (Heb. Kizun, Amos v :26); Mars, (Nergal, 2 Kings xviii:30). The last two were worshiped as principles of evil. Astrology concerned itself also with the determination of lucky and unlucky days; so in Job iii:3, ‘Let the day perish wherein I was born ;’ and Gal. iv: Io, ‘Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.’ The Chal- daeans, who studied the stars at a very early period, were much given to astrology, and were cele- brated for their skill in that pretended science (IS. xlvii:I3). In Daniel ii :27; v :II, astrologers, calculators of nativities, are named. ASUPPIM, HOUSE OF (a-sip'pim), (Heb. FPPS), Aaw-as-up"/eem, gatherings). This word occurs in I Chron. xxvi :15, but considerable diversity of opinion exists as to its import. , Dr. Geddes renders it, “the store-rooms,” and understands it of the upper galleries of the temple, where the stores were probably kept. Others understand by it the treasury of the tem- ple. The meaning of the word is collections, i. e. stores; and house of Asuppim is, therefore, a storehouse connected with the temple, probably on the southern part (I Chron. xxvi :15, 17). In Neh. xii:25 the word is incorrectly rendered “thresholds.” * ASYLUM (à-si'lúm), (Heb. tºº, mik-Jawz), a place of safety, where even a criminal might be free from violence from the avenger at least for a time. (1) Mosaic. The altar of burnt sacrifices, and the temple at Jerusalem, were sanctuaries. Hither Joab retired (I Kings ii:28, 29, 3I), but Solomon, Observing that he would not quit the altar, ordered him to be killed there. Moses commands (Exod. xxi : I4) that any who had committed murder and fled for protection to the altar should be dragged from thence. Sanctuaries were not for the advantage of wicked men, but in favor of the innocent, when attacked unjustly. When crimi- nals retired to the sanctuary of a temple they were either starved or forced thence by fires kindled around them.—Calmet. (See CITIES OF REFUGE.) (2) Pagan. It has been supposed that Her- cules' grandsons were the institutors of these places of refuge, in Greece, if not in Europe; for, apprehending the resentment of those whom Her- cules had ill-treated, they appointed an asylum or temple of mercy at Athens. Cadmus erected an- other at Thebes, and Romulus another at Rome, on Mount Palatine. That of Daphne, near An- tuS ATARGATIS tioch, was very famous (2 Macc. iv:34). Theseus built an asylum at Athens in favor of slaves, and of the poor who should fly thither from the op. pression of the rich. There was one in the isle Qf Calauria. The temples of Apollo at Delphi, of Juno at Samos, of Esculapius at Delos, of Bac- chus at Ephesus, and many others in Greece, had the privileges of being asyla, Romulus gave this right to a wood adjoining the temple of Vejovis (Virgil, AEneid, viii:342). Ovid speaks of a wood near Ostium that enjoyed the same privilege (Fast. i. 1). Austin observes (de Civit, lib. i, cap. 34) that the whole city of Rome was an asylum to all strangers. The number of these privileged places was so much increased in Greece under the emperor Tiberius, that he was obliged to recall their licenses and to suppress them. (Sueton, in Tiberio. Tacit. Annal. lib. iii, cap. 6). º his decree was little observed after his Cleath. (8) Christian. In the Christian Church the right of asylum was retained, and extended from the altar to all ecclesiastical buildings. By act of Theodosius II (A. D. 431), not only the church was to be considered sacred, but also the atrium, the garden, bath and cells. Many abuses crept in, until the custom has become practically ex- tinct. ASYNCRITUS (a-syn'kri-tūs), (Gr. 'Agºykpºros, aş-0071 g’Aree-tos, incomparable), the name of a Christian at Rome to whom St. Paul sent a broth- erly salutation (Rom. xvi; I4), A. D. 55. ATAD (ā'tåd), (Heb. Tº, aw-tawa", a thorn). 1. The person on whose thrashing-floor the sons of Jacob and the Egyptians who accompanied them performed their final act of solemn mourning for Jacob (Gen. 1:11), on which account the place was afterwards called Abel-Mizraim, ‘the mourn- ing of the Egyptians’ (B. C. 1689). 2. See THORN. ATARAH (ät'a-rah), (He azy-razy", Crown, Ornament), a wife of Jerahmeel, and mother of Onam (1 Chron. ii:26), B.C. before 1658. ATARGATIS (a-tär"ga-tís), (Gr. 'Arepyārms, af. er-gaſ"ace, or 'Arapydris, at-ar-gat" is), is the name of a Syrian goddess, whose temple ("Atepyarefov) is mentioned in 2 Macc. xii:26. That temple appears, by comparing 1 Macc. V :43, to have been situated at Ashtaroth-Karnaim. Her worship also flourished at Mabúg (i. e., Bam- byce or Hierapolis, which was, according to Raw- linson, the Carchemish of the Hittites. It is now Jerablus. The recent discoveries in the history of the Hittites seem to show that the sacred martial dances of the priestesses of Atargatis, clad in armor, gave rise to the Greek legend of the Ama- ZOI] S. There is little doubt that Atargatis, or Aterga- tis, is the same divinity as Derketo. Besides in- ternal evidences of identity, Strabo incidentally cites Ctesias to that effect (xvi, p. 1132), and Pliny uses the terms ‘Prodigiosa, Atergatis, Grae- cis autem. Derceto dicta.” We read that Derketo was worshiped in Phoenicia and at Ascalon under the form of a woman with a fish's tail, or with a woman’s face only and the entire body of a fish; that fishes were sacred to her, and that the inhab- itants abstained from eating them in honor of her. These facts are found in Lucian (De Dea Syria, xiv), and, together with a mythological account of their origin, in Diodorus (ii:4). Further, by combining the passage in Diodorus with Herodo- (i: IOS), we may legitimately conclude that the Derketo of the former is the Venus Urania b. H-Noy až- T I – :) ATAR OTH of the latter. Atergatis is thus a name under which they worshiped some modification of the same power which was adored under that of Ash- toreth. That the 'Atepyateſov of 2 Macc. xii:26 was at Ashtaroth-Karnaim shows also an imme- diate connection with Ashtoreth. Whether, like the latter, she bore any particular relation to the moon, or to the planet Venus, is not evident. Macrobius makes Adargatis to be the earth (which as a symbol is analogous to the moon), and says that her image was distinguished from that of the sun by rays ‘sursum versum inclimatis, monstrando radiorum vi superne missorum enasci guaºcumque terra Zºrogenerat' (Saturma/, i.23). Creuzer maintains that those representations of this goddess which contain parts of a fish are the most ancient; and endeavors to reconcile Stra- bo's statement that the Syrian goddess of Hier- apolis was Atargatis with Lucian’s express notice that the former was represented under the form of an entire woman, by distinguishing between the forms of different periods (Symbolik, ii:68). This fish-form shows that Atargatis bears some relation, perhaps that of a female counterpart, to DAGON (which see). ATAROTH (ät'a-röth), (Heb.nº, at-aw-roth', crowns). Several places of this name occur in the Scriptures. 1. Ataroth-beth Joab, in the tribe of Judah (I Chron. ii:54). 2. A taroth, On the bor- ders of Ephraim (Josh. xvi;2, 7), which some iden- tify with and others distinguish from, the Ataroth- Addar of the same tribe mentioned in Josh. xvi;5 xviii: 13. 3. A taroźh, in the tribe of Gad, beyond the Jordan (Num. xxxii:3, 34). 4. A taroźh-Shof- Aam in the same tribe (Num. xxxii:35), which some identify with the preceding; but it appears more likely that the addition was used to distinguish the one from the other. Eusebius and Jerome (Onozz- asticon, s. v. A taroth, 'Atapú6) mention two places in the tribe of Benjamin called Ataroth, but they do not occur in Scripture. The site of one of these appears to have been discovered by Professor Robinson (Bib. Researches, ii:314) under the name of Atara. Another place of the same name (Atara) he found about six miles N. by W. of Bethel, which appears to represent the Ataroth of Ephraim (Josh. xvi;2, 7). It is now a large village on the summit of a high hill (Robinson iii:8). ATBACH (ät"back), (Heb. "Bºº, awz'back), or the similar word, ATHEASH (Heb. *Bº, awah- ôash'). • This is not a real word, but a fictitious cab- alistic term, denoting by its very letters the mode of changing one word into another by a peculiar commutation of letters. Thus, as the technical term Athbash shows, N and ºn, and D and º, are Interchangeable, and so on throughout the whole strics. By writing the Hebrew alphabet, twice in two parallel lines, but the second time in an in- verse order, the two letters which form every pair will come to stand in a perpendicular line. ATER (ā'ter), (Heb. Tºš, aw-fare', shut up or dumb). 1. The children of Ater were among the gatekeepers of the sºlº who returned with Zer- ubbabel (Ezra ii:42; Neh. vii:45), B. C. 536. 2. The children of Ater of Hezekiah, who re- turned from Babylon with Zerubbabel (Ezra ii.16; Neh. vii:21). g 3. One among the heads of the people who signed the covenant with Nehemiah (Neh. x:17), B. C. 445. 187 ATHALIAH ATHACH (ä'thik),(Heb.º., ath-awk', lodging, inn). One of the places in the tribe of Judah fre- quented by David and his men at the time he dwelt at Ziklag (I Sam. xxx:30). As the word does not occur elsewhere it may be a corruption for Ether, in the low country of Judah. - ATHAIAH (a-tha'yā or āth'a-i'ah), (Heb. Tº ath-aw-yaw', . Jah is helper), a descendant of Pharez, son of Judah. After the return from Baby- lon he dwelt at Jerusalem (Neh. xi.;4, B. C. 536); called Uthai in I Chron ix:4. ATHALIAH (äth'a-li'ah), (Heb. Tºº, ath-a/- yazy", afflicted by Jehovah, or Jah is strong). 1. A daughter of Ahab, king of Israel, doubt- less by his idolatrous wife Jezebel. She is also called the daughter of Omri (2 Chron. xxii:2), who was the father of Ahab; but by a comparison of texts it would appear that she is so called only as being his granddaughter. (1) Marriage. Athaliah became the wife of Jehoram, the son of Jehoshaphat, king of Judah. This marriage may fairly be considered the act of the parents, and it is one of the few stains upon the character of the good Jehoshaphat that he was So ready, if not anxious, to connect himself with the idolatrous house of Ahab. Had he not mar- . ried the heir of his crown to Athaliah, many evils and much bloodshed might mave been spared to the royal family and to the kingdom. When Jehoram came to the crown he, as might be expected, ‘walked in the ways of the house of Ahab,” which the sacred writer obviously at- tributes to this marriage, by adding, ‘for he had the daughter of Ahab to wife’ (2 Chron. xxi :6). This king died B. C. 885, and was succeeded by his youngest son, Ahaziah, who reigned but one year, and whose death arose from his being, by blood and by circumstances, involved in the doom of Ahab's house. (See AHAZIAH.) Before this Athaliah had acquired much influence in public affairs, and had. used that influence for evil, and when the tidings of her son's untimely death reached Jerusalem, she resolved to seat herself upon the throne of David, at whatever cost. (2) Causes Murder. To this end she caused all the male branches of the royal family to be massacred (2 Kings xi : I), and by thus shedding the blood of her own grandchildren, she unde- signedly became the instrument of giving comple- tion to the doom on her father’s house, which Jehu had partially accomplished (B. C. 884). One infant son of Ahaziah, however, was saved by his aunt Jehosheba, wife of the high-priest Jehoiada, and was concealed within the walls of the temple, and there brought up so secretly that his crictonce was 11nsuspected by Athaliah. - (3) Death. But in the seventh year (B. C. 878) of her bloodstained and evil reign the sounds of unwonted commotion and exulting shouts within the temple courts drew her thither, where she beheld the young Joash standing as a crowned king by the pillar of inauguration, and acknowl- edged as sovereign by the acclamations of the assembled multitude. Her cries of ‘Treason '' failed to excite any movement in her favor, and Jehoiada, the high-priest, who had organized this bold and successful attempt, without allowing time for pause, ordered the Levitical guards to remove her from the sacred precincts to instant death (2 Kings xi; 2 Chron. xxi.;6; xxii: IO-12; xxiii). 2. A Benjamite, son of Jeroham, who dwelt at Jerusalem (I. Chron. viii:26), B. C. about 536. ATHANASIAN CREED 3. One of the Bene-Elam, whose son Jeshaiah returned with Ezra in the second Caravan from Babylon (Ezra viii:7), B.C. before 459. ATHANASIAN CBEED (äth'ä-nā'zhan kréd). (1) Author of the Creed. The orthodox fol- lowers of St. Athanasius, the great and able an- tagonist of Arius, were termed Athanasians. The Athanasian creed, though generally admitted not to be drawn up by this father (but probably, as Dr. Waterland says, by Hilary, bishop of Arles, in the fifth century), is universally allowed to contain a fair expression of his sentiments. This creed says: “The catholic faith is this : that we worship one god in trinity, and trinity in unity: neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance. For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one ; the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost;” namely, “uncreate, incomprehensible, eternal,” etc. “The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; neither made nor created, but be- gotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.” (2) Key. The true key to the Athanasian creed lies in the knowledge of the errors to which it was opposed. The Sabellians considered the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as one in person;– this was “confounding the persons:” the Arians considered them as differing in essence—three beings;–this was “dividing the substance:” and against these two hypotheses was the creed origi- nally framed. And since every sect was willing to adopt the language of Scripture, it was thought necessary to adopt scholastic terms, in order to fix the sense of Scripture language. (3) Essential Features. The eternal genera- tion of the Son of God forms an essential part of this creed, as well as of the Nicene: it is on this principle that the Son is called “God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made;”—which certainly does not apply to the human nature of Christ, which was “made of a woman—made under the law.” Most cer- tain it is that many of the Christian fathers maintain this mysterious doctrine of eternal gen- eration ; and it has had able defenders, down to Dr. J. Owen, Dr. Waterland, Dr. Edward Will- iams, and Andrew Fuller. On the other hand, Trinitarians equally zealous have considered the opinion as both inconsistent in itself, and de- rogatory to the Son of God—“as implying deri- vation and inferiority”—though certainly 110t so intended by the Athanasians. Dr. Watts, and other advocates for the pre-existence of Christ’s human soul, have considered the production of this first of creatures as the highest sense in which our Saviour is in Scripture called “the Son of God.”—Doddridge's Works (Parsons' edit.) vol. v., p. 182. (4) Faults. The chief fault in the creed it- self is its overstepping the modesty of Scripture, and attempting to define, with accuracy, where the sacred writers seem designedly to have left the subject under the veil of mystery. The Su- preme Being is, in all respects, so infinitely above the conception of men, and perhaps of angels, that it becomes us to conduct all speculations relative to the Deity with reverence, and even awe; to veil our faith under the wings of devo- 188 ATHEISM tion, as the seraphim cover their faces while they worship. But the most exceptional part of this creed lies in what are commonly called “the damnatory clauses”—“Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith; which faith, except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this”— proceeding to the statements of the doctrine of the trinity above given. Now, it is most certain that we cannot use too much caution on this subject. The Scripture indeed speaks of faith in Christ as necessary to salvation, but refers rather, perhaps, to the vital principle itself, than to any form of confession ; and it seems above all things improper to mingle anathemas with our devo- tions. This has led many of the English clergy and bishops to wish they were “well rid” of this creed altogether, which is certainly a prevailing sentiment; and were the question now put, on admitting this formulary into the church service, there are, perhaps but few comparatively that would vote for it. However orthodox it may be, it does not appear to be written in a Christian Spirit. ATHARIM (äth'a-rím), (Heb. FTS, ath-aw- zeem’, regions), a place in southern Palestine, near which the Israelites passed on their way thither (Num. xxi.1), the Hebrew of which is incorrectly rendered in the English version “the way of the spies.” Properly, by the way of Atharim. ATHEISM (ä'thé-iz'm), (Gr. 36eos, ath"eh-os, without God), the denial of the existence of God. (1) General Use of the Term. The Greeks termed a man à6eos, af/hezst, when he denied the existence of the gods recognized by the state. The Pagans called Christians atheists because they would not acknowledge the heathen gods and worship them. In the theological contro- versies of the early Church the opposite parties quite frequently called each other atheists. Athcists have been also known by the 11a111e infidels; but the word infidel is now commonly used to distinguish a more numerous party, and is become almost synonymous with deist. He who disbelieves the existence of a God, as an infinite, intelligent, and a moral agent, is a direct or speculative atheist; he who confesses a Deity and providence in words, but denies them in his life and actions, is a practical atheist. That atheism existed in some sense before the flood, may be suspected from what we read in Scrip- ture, as well as from heathen tradition ; and it is not very unreasonable to suppose that the deluge was partly intended to evince to the world a heavenly power, as Lord of the universe, and superior to the visible system of nature. This was at least a happy consequence of that fatal catastrophe; for, as is observed by Dean Sherlock, “The universal deluge, and the con- fusion of languages, had so abundantly convinced mankind of a divine power and providence, that there was no such creature as an atheist, till their idolatries had tempted men rather to own no God than such as the heathens worshiped.” (2) Atheism in Greece. Atheistical principles were long nourished and cherished in Greece, and especially among the atomical, peripatetic, and sceptical philosophers; and hence some have as- cribed the origin of atheism to the philosophy of Greece. This is true, if they mean that species of refined atheism which contrives any impious scheme of principles to account for the origin of the world, without a Divine Being. ATHENIANS (3) Martyrs: and Professors. Absurd and irrational as atheism is, it has had its votaries and martyrs. In the seventeenth century, Spi- noza, a pantheist, was its noted defender. Lucilio Vanini, a native of Naples, also publicly taught atheism in France; and, being convicted of it at Toulouse, was condemned and executed in I619. It has been questioned however, whether any man ever seriously adopted such a principle. The pretensions to it have been generally founded on pride or affectation. The open avowal of atheism by several of the leading members of the French convention seems to have been an extraordinary moral phenomenon. This, however, as we have Seen, was too vague and uncomfortable a princi- ple to last long. (4) Speculative Atheism. Archbishop Til- lotson justly observes that speculative atheism is unreasonable upon five accounts : I. Because it gives no tolerable account of the existence of the world. 2. It does not give any reasonable ac- count of the universal consent of mankind in this apprehension that there is a God. 3. It requires more evidence for things than they are capable of giving. 4. The atheist pretends to know that º no man can know. 5. Atheism contradicts 1tSelf. Under the first of these he thus argues: “I ap- peal to any man of reason whether anything can be more unreasonable than obstinately to impute an effect to chance, which carries in the very face of it all the arguments and characters of a wise de- sign and contrivance. Was ever any considerable work, in which there was required a great variety of parts, and a regular and orderly disposition of those parts, done by chance? Will chance fit means to ends, and that in ten thousand in- stances, and not fail in any one P. How often might a man, after he had jumbled a set of let- ters in a bag, fling them out upon the ground, be- fore they would fall into an exact poem ; yea, or so much as to make a good discourse in prose? And may not a little book be as easily made by chance as the great volume of the world? How long might a man be in sprinkling colors upon can- vas with a careless hand before they would happen to make the exact picture of a man P And is a man easier made by chance than his picture ? How long might twenty thousand blind men, who should be sent out from several remote parts of England, wander up and down before they would all meet upon Salisbury plain, and fall into rank and file in the exact order of an army P And yet, this is much more easy to be imagined than how the innumerable blind parts of matter should rendezvous themselves into a world.” ATHENIANS (a-the'ni-anz), (Gr. 'A6mvaſos, ath- ay-nai"os, belonging to Athens), natives of Athens (Acts xvii:21, 22). (See A1 HEN3.) ATHENS (äth'enz), (Gr. 'A6?val, ath-ay"mahee). This celebrated city, as the birthplace of Plato, and through him so widely influential on Juda- ism and Christianity, deserves something else than a geographical notice here. We shall briefly al- lude to the stages of her history and remark on some of the causes of her pre-eminent greatness in arms, arts and intellectual subtlety. (1) Early History. The earlier and more ob- scure period of the Grecian province named At- tica reaches down nearly to the final establish- ment of democracy in it. Yet we know enough to see that the foundations of her greatness were then already laid. Even the unfertile soil and dry atmosphere of Attica, in connection with the slender appetite of the people, have been thought as favorable to their mental development as the 189 ATHENS fertility of the neighboring Boeotia was injurious to its voracious inhabitants. The barrenness of the soil, moreover, prevented invaders from covet- ing it, so that through a course of ages the popu- lation remained unchanged, and a moral union grew up between the several districts. To a king named Theseus is ascribed the credit of uniting all the country towns of Attica into a single state, the capital of which was Athens. This is the first political event that we can trust as historical, although its date and circumstances are by no means free from obscurity. (2) Population. The population of this prov- ince was variously called Pelasgian, Achaian and Ionian, and probably corresponds most nearly to what was afterwards called Æolian (Prichard, Phys. Hist. of Man. iii:494). The first name carries the mind back to an extremely primitive period. When the Dorians, another tribe of Greeks of very different temperament, invaded and Occupied the southern peninsula, great num- bers of its Achaian inhabitants took refuge in Attica. Shortly after, the Dorians were repulsed in an inroad against Athens, an event which has transmitted to legendary renown the name of King Codrus; and thenceforward Athens was looked upon as the bulwark of the Ionian tribes against the barbarous Dorians. Overloaded with population, Attica now poured forth colonies into Asia; some of which, as Mi- letus, soon rose to great eminence, and sent out numerous colonies themselves; so that Athens was reverenced as a mother of nations, by powerful children scattered along the western and northern coasts of Anatolia. (3) Tradition. Dim tradition shows us isolated priesthoods and elective kings in the earliest times of Attica; these however gradually gave way to an aristocracy, which in a series of years established themselves as a hereditary ruling caste. But a country “ever unravaged’ (and such was their boast) could not fail to increase in wealth and numbers; and after two or three centuries, while the highest commoners pressed on the nobles, the lowest became overwhelmed with debt. (4) Laws of Solon. The disorders caused by the strife of the former were vainly sought to be stayed by the institutions of Draco; the sufferings of the latter were ended, and the sources of violence dried up, by the enactments of Solon. Henceforth the Athenians revered the laws of Solon (Nomoi) as the groundwork of their whole civil polity, yet they retained by the side of them f/he ordinances of Draco (6eogot) in many mat- ters pertaining to religion. The date of Solon’s reforms was probably B. C. 594. The usurpation of Pisistratus and his sons made a partial breach in the constitution ; but upon their expulsion a more serious change was effected by Cleisthenes, head of the noble house Uſ the Alcmaeonidae (B. C. 508), almost in the same year in which Tarquin was expelled from Rome. An entirely new organization of the Attic tribes was framed, which destroyed whatcver remained of the power of the nobles as an order, and estab- lished among the freemen a democracy in fact, as well as in form. Out of this proceeded all the good and all the evil with which the name of Athens is associated, and though greatness which shot up so suddenly could not be permanent, there can be no difficulty in deciding that the good greatly preponderated. . (5) Hostilities with Persia. Very soon after this commenced hostilities with Persia, and the self-denying, romantic, successful bravery of Athens, with the generous affability and great talents of her statesmen, Soon raised her to the ATHENS 190 head of the whole Ionian confederacy. As long as Persia was to be feared, Athens was loved; but after tasting the Sweets of power her sway degenerated into a despotism, and created at length, in the war called the Peloponnesian, a coalition of all Dorian and Æolian Greece against her (B. C. 431). In spite of a fatal pestilence and the revolt of her Ionian subjects, the naval skill of Athenian Seamen and the enterprise of Athenian commanders proved more than a match for the hostile confederacy, and when Athens at last fell (B. C. 404), she fell by the effects of internal sedition more truly than by Spartan lances or Persian gold, or even by her own rash and Overgrasping ambition. The demoralizing effects of this war on all Greece were infinitely the worst result of it, and they were transmitted to succeeding generations. It was substantially a civil war in every province, and, as all the inhab- itants of Attica were every summer forced to take ATHENS of Alexandria. Its great effort was to unite the contemplative mysticism of Eastern sages with the accurate Science of Greece; to combine, in Short, the two qualities—intellectual and moral, argumentative and Spiritual—into a single har- monious whole; and whatever opinion may be formed of the success which attended the experi- ment, it is not wonderful that so magnificent an aim attracted the desires and riveted the atten- tion of thoughtful and contemplative minds for ages afterwards. (7) Sculpture and Painting. In the imitative arts of Sculpture and painting, as well as in archi- tecture, it need hardly be said that Athens car- ried off the palm in Greece; yet, in all these, the Asiatic colonies vied with her. Miletus took the start of her in literary composition, and, under slight conceivable changes, might have become the Athens of the world. But all details on these subjects would be here out of place. §3. §º p Rº \º º º [] §: ºn | º: §::= E --- Fue , §§§ºg Š". §ºś Fº §ºssº º Pºº-ºº: *śss - wº - - -—." -: [. º' ...º º º! tº 'Wºº . . . . . .tºs (ſº º hº - - . ...sºsºvºrº)||lſº ºf ºf sRN — . } (\ §§ Nº. #3% **i. 2 º'NL Fº:-- * º §§ WN Yºgºſº }\; º º: §§§333 §e °, tº I- - % - Sº...?' yº º ñºSº, º º \ § N.Flſº §§ º º sº === ---—? #|#######ſº º ºffº.º.º.º.º.º. §§º T : ---> #Mºlſº º . . . .” - sº." Ø º *" G \\\\", º §§§ g D º: *º ( ºf Nº. Nº º \ à T---— ſº º'º. ". §: ſºlº & wº º rºl º ñº }%:..º.º.º.º. ſº W --—— | | §º ſº. " ºr . . . . Rºº, his † º ; , , ,º sºft . sº ſ †º. \º ºr. - * * ºilº |||ſ ! - - - -— " § º º º º # = "'Yº gº 8 ºr f *, * º º, º fºr "º . º º'º. *W* lºgº ... .º.'"; §º. º t ſº º: §." sº - -aº:- º *ś: { ºff. ºf §: §º jº § º #º: §§: # ſºſ." # ºº:: º: ſ } º º × §§ º: 44%. § Sº º §§ § §§§ jº: * *"...º. #sºft s: --- ~~~~ •–=s. ºº:: "...º.º. #º Sº \\ º W º § º- ... I º gº º ºs - -- : * * º - ſº ...] º W §§º W º ... 3. ‘. . . . .” -- ºr *** tº º *ś\º yº ºsº --- º 'º º º | Cººrººº- * ºś # Ú § # C º: Mars Hill. refuge in the few fortresses they possessed, or in Athens itself, the simple countrymen became transſorined into a hungry and profligate town rabble. (6) Intellectual Culture. From the earliest times the Ionians loved the lyre and the song, and the hymns of poets formed the staple of Athenian education. The consfift1tion of Snlon admitted and demanded in the people a great knowledge of law, with a large share in its daily adminis- tration. Thus the acuteness of the lawyer was grafted on the imagination of the poet. These are the two intellectual elements out of which Athenian wisdom was developed, but it was stimulated and enriched by extended political ac- tion and political experience. History and phil- osophy, as the words are understood in modern Europe, had their birth in Athens about the time of the Peloponnesian war. Then first, also, the oratory of the bar and of the popular assem- bly was systematically cultivated, and the ele- ments of mathematical science were admitted into the education of an accomplished man. This was the period of the youth of Plato, whose philosophy was destined to leave so deep an impress on the Jewish and Christian schools done, and, at the game time, more coal suly. (8) Loss of Civil Liberty. That Athens, after the Peloponnesian war, never recovered the polit- ical place which she previously held, can excite no Surprise—that she rose so high towards it was truly wonderful. Sparta and Thebes, which suc- cessively aspired to the “leadership' of Greece, abused their power as flagrantly as Athens †: It: never-ending cabals, the treaties made and vio- lated, the coalitions and breaches, the alliances and wars, recurring every few years, destroyed all mutual confidence and all possibility of again uniting Greece in any permanent form of inde- pendence, and, in consequence, the whole coun- try was soon swallowed up in the kingdom of Macedonia. With the loss of civil liberty, Athens lost her genius, her manly mind, and whatever remained of her virtue; she long continued to produce talents, which were too often made tools of iniquity, panders to power, and petty artificers of false philosophy. (9) Christianity. A Christian church existed in Athens soon after the apostolic times, but as the city had no political importance the church never assumed any eminent position. St. Paul visited the city on his journey from ATHLAI Macedonia, and remained there for some time cts xvii:I4-34; I Thess. iii:I). During his stay he delivered his great address before the Areo- pagus (Acts xvii:22–31). (See AREOPAGUS.) ATHLAI (äth'lāi), (Heb. Sº, ath-lah'ee), one of the sons of Bebai, who, at Ezra's wish, put away his foreign wife (Ezra x:28), B.C. 459. ATONEMENT (à-tón’ment), (Heb. TP2, AEazy- far', to cover, cancel; Gr. kara)\\ayi, kat-a/-/ag- ay', exchange, reconciliation). As a verb, the Hebrew literally signifies to cover; and, as a noun, a covering. Generally, wherever the word occurs, something that has given serious offense, and produced a permanent State of variance between the parties, is sup- posed, and then, in relation to the party offended, it signifies to pacify, to appease, or to render him propitious, as Gen. xxxii:20; Ezek. xvi :63. When applied to sin, it signifies to cover, or to expiate it; to atone, or make satisfaction for it (Ps. xxxii: I ; Lev. xvi :30). When the term respects the sinner himself, it implies his being covered or protected from punishment, and is rendered a ransom or atonement for him (Exod. xxi :30; 2 Chron. xxx:I2, I5). This seems to be the plain, unforced meaning of the Hebrew word kawfar. Other words Convey the same truth. (a) i\do kopiat, /.2/asſéozzaz, translated (Heb. ii:17) “to make recon- ciliation.” Also Rom. iii:25; I John ii:2; iv:Io, where the kindred noun is rendered “propitia- tion.” (5) Aörpov, Zutron, translated “ransom,” “redemption” (Matt. xx:23; Mark x:30; Luke ii:38; Heb. ix:12). Three prominent views have been entertained of the atonement. (1) View of Anselm. This is connected with the above view of the idea of the atonement as a Satisfaction to Divine justice. His name is pre- eminently identified with it (A. D., IIoo). (2) View of Abelard. Foremost among his Opponents of Anselm was Abelard (A. D. II.4I). He declared the atonement to be due wholly to the love of God, and taught that there could be nothing in the Divine essence that required satis- faction for sin. The death of Christ upon the cross was solely an exhibition of Divine love. Men were to be won to Christ by this supreme act of voluntary self-sacrifice for the welfare of men. Thus Abelard stands as the father of what is known as the moral influence theory. In cases where the party offending is unable to render adequate atonement in his own person, and where the punishment could not be endured by him without ruining him—as is the case in all capital offenses—if the suffering of another be accepted in his stead, the atonement thus made by a substitute is technically termed a vicarious ałowoºmawt. Thiſ is a cage that rarely happens in human governments. Yet this is the case in rela- tion to the atonement made by Christ. “He was wounded for our transgressions; he was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and by his stripes we are healed” (Is. lviii:5). In the New Testament there are also forms of expression in which the idea of substitution, or that Christ stands as our substitute in the econ- omy of Divine grace, appear with marked em- phasis (Rom. v :6-8; I Cor. xv :3; 2 Cor. v :21; Gal. iii:13; Tit. ii:14; I Pet. ii:24; iii:18). (3) View of Grotius. This celebrated author wrote in defense of the vicarious sufferings of Christ against Socinus (A. D. 1617). He main- tained that the atonement was grounded not in the nature of God but in the nature of the Divine ( 191 ATONEMENT government. In his view it was a satisfaction to the demands of moral government and not to Divine justice. His view is known as the rectoral or governmental theory. (4) Modern Views. Between these three views the church of to-day is divided. But to the great truth that a real propitiation has been made by fºLord Jesus Christ every evangelical teacher 1Ol ClS. (5) Atonement and Redemption. In the strictly evangelical view atonement must not be confounded with redemption. Between these two terms there are plain differences, and no one without a perception of these differences can treat this great subject with lucidness or accuracy. They differ in object and design, and, of course, are of a different nature, so that things may be truly affirmed of one which cannot be truly affirmed of the other. (a) First, they differ in object, Atonement is offered to God as its object; redemption is pur- chased or procured for men as its object. Atone- ment is a sacrifice offered; redemption is a bene- fit conferred. Secondly, they differ in design. The design of the atonement is to render God pro- pitious, as the Sovereign Ruler; the design of re- demption, to make man everlastingly blessed. Hence, thirdly, they differ in nature. Atonement being made to God, and made by a sacrifice of inestimable value, is in its own nature infinite; nor is it possible for us to conceive how its in- trinsic worth and glory, or its efficacy and adapta- tion to its end, could be increased. Its sufficiency is infinite, for who can overrate “the precious blood of Christ,” or take exact account of His “unsearchable riches?” Its end was “that God might be just, and the justifier of him that be- lieveth in Jesus.” This end was infinitely desir- able, for it involves an infinite good, glory to God in the highest, on earth peace, and good-will to men. But this end the atonement has accom- plished. God is just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus. Its efficacy, therefore, is com- plete. It could not be more so. By one offering of himself, says the apostle, he hath perfected for- ever them that are sanctified (Heb. x:14). Christ ts the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth (Rom. x:Io). Who shall lay anything to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth £ It is Christ that died; yea, rather that is risen again; who is also at the right hand of God, and who maketh intercession for us (Rom. viii:33, 34). Is not that atonement then in its nature infinite which is sufficient to satisfy God, the infinite Law- giver and Judge, in the remission of sin to every- one who cordially confides in it, and which so effectually repairs the injury done by sin as to justify Him in the sight of the whole universe for go doing? Can wo tall of limits to the value of such a sacrifice? Can we assign bounds to the efficacy of such an expiation ? Can we apply terms of measurement to the nature of such an atonement for sin P Is not the covering ample enough to protect a universe from the punish- ment of sin, were they all in need of its pro- tection, and to resort to it for shelter P (b) Redemption, on the contrary, is in its very nature definite. It has an inseparable rela- tion to men, as its object, and therefore in its very nature is limited to the number for whom its price is paid, in whose behalf it is accepted, and on whom the blessing is actually bestowed. Redemption is not expiation for sin, but the de- liverance of men from sin, by means of such an expiation. Hence Christ is said by his own blood to have obtained eternal redemption for us (Heb. ATONEMENT 192 ix:12). Hence, the word redemption is used for pardon, which is our actual deliverance from pun- ishment (Ephes. i :7; Col. i: I4); for sanctification, which is our actual deliverance from the dominion of sin (I Pet. i :18; Is. lix:20), and for the resur- rection, which is the actual deliverance of our body from the grave at the last day (Rom. viii:23; Ephes. i :14; iv:30). Hence it is clear that in Scripture usage atonement and redemption differ in their nature, and that the one is the cause and the other the effect. Atonement is the ground of redemption (Is. liii:4-9). Redemption is the re- sult of the atonement (Is. liii:Io-I2). The atone- ment. takes effect by changing the relations of God toward the guilty (Rom. iii:21). Redemption takes effect by changing the relations of the guilty towards God (Rev. xiv:4). The former was com- pletely finished on the cross (Dan. ix:24; John xix:30). The latter is now in daily progressive operation, and will not be finished till the final consummation of all things (Ephes. iv:30). (6) Extent of Atonement. As to the question whether the atonement be general, or limited, “that controversy,” as Mr. Malcom observes, “has ever seemed rather the result of misunderstanding between the parties, or of each party looking too exclusively to those aspects of the doctrine which seemed best to comport with their system of the- ology. In some respects the atonement is gen- eral; in others limited; in respect of sufficiency it is infinite; in respect to its application in the final salvation of men it is limited; but in no re- spect is it indefinite.” (7) Summary. J. O. F. Murray, in Hastings' #. Dict., sums up the question briefly as fol- OWS . “The effect of the atonement is therefore to remove altogether the obstacle introduced by sin, to undo the work of the devil (I John iii:8), and to open anew the way by which sinful men can return into communion with their Father in heaven (Heb. x:20). The blood of Christ, under- stood in the full measure of its spiritual reality, reveals the true law of man's being, and brings home to him the extent of his degradation. By its revelation of the love of God triumphant over sin, it wins men back from their spiritual aliena- tion, making them ready to return to their alle- giance, and willing to give up their sin. It cleanses their consciences from the stain of sin, and sets them free from the curse of the law, by the assurance that a perfect satisfaction has been offered to the righteous claims of the Divine jus- tice, and by enabling them to make their own the perfect confession of their sins that has al- ready been offered in their name. It is the well- spring of a new power of moral self-determination by which they may be enabled, in spite of the tyrannous domination of past habits acquired and inherited (I Pet. i :18), and in the midst of an atmosphere of temptation, to live henceforward in obedience to God’s will, submitting in patience and in hope to all the suffering that He may require from them, whether by way of discipline or of service. It thus robs even death itself of its sting. “It is true that we can but dimly see why such a sacrifice as the death of Christ should have been necessary, and guess in the light of partial human analogies at the secret of its power. But it is enough for our present guidance to know that the sacrifice itself has been offered, and that there have been men in every age who, from their own experience, have borne witness that it is effectual.” - (8) Ecclesiastical. In ecclesiastical writers, and in the canons of councils, Katallagay is em- ATONEMENT, DAY OF ployed to signify the reconciliation of offenders to the church after a due course of penitence. Of this there are said to have been two kinds; the One consisting merely in the remission of punish- ment; the other, in the restoration of the penitent to all the rights and privileges of communion. ATONEMENT, DAY OF (à-tön-ment), (Heb. Fºº Fº, yome hak-kip-poor-eem', day of pardon, Lev. xxiii:27; xxv.9). In the Talmud this day is called great fasting, or merely the day; a circum- stance which has suggested to some commentators the notion that by hemeran (Heb. vii:27) the apostle intended this atonement day. (1) Time. Though perhaps originally meant as a temporary day of expiation for the sin of the golden calf (as some would infer from Exod. xxxiii), yet it was permanently instituted by Moses as a day of atonement for sins in general; and this day—the Ioth of Tishri (our Septem- ber or October)—is indeed the only fast ordained by Moses, though the later Jews, in commemora- tion of some disastrous events, especially those which occurred at and after the destruction of the two temples, instituted a few more fast days, which they observed with scarcely less rigor and strictness than the one ordained by Moses for the purpose of general absolution (Lev. xvi : I-34; Num. xxix:7-II). This great fast, like all others among the Jews, commenced at sunset of the pre- vious day and lasted twenty-four hours—that is, from sunset to sunset, or, as the Rabbins will have it, until three stars were visible in the horizon. (2) Ceremonies. The ceremonies observed on this occasion are minutely described in Lev. xvi, and were of a very laborious character, especially for the high-priest, who had to prepare himself during the previous seven days in nearly solitary confinement for the peculiar services that awaited him, and abstain during that period from all that could render him unclean or disturb his devotions. The most remarkable ceremony of the day was the entrance of the high-priest into the sanctuary, a thing not allowed on any other day, and to which Paul alludes (Heb. ix:7). According to the Talmud and Maimonides, the entrance of the high-priest into the sanctuary took place four different times. The first time he was provided with the golden censer and the vessel filled with incense, when, after having entered, he placed the former between the two poles of the taber- nacle and put the incense upon the coals. This done, he went out (according to the Talmud. ibid., backwards, so as not to turn his back on the sanctuary). At his second entrance he took with him the blood of the bullock which he had offered in expiation for his own sins and those of the other priests, placed himself hetween the poles of the tabernacle, dipped his finger in the blood and sprinkled it seven times below and once above the mercy-seat. This done, he left the basin with the blood behind, and withdrew again. The third time he entered with the blood of the ram which he had offered for the sins of the nation, with which he sprinkled towards the veil of the taber- nacle eight times, and having mixed it with the blood of the bullock, he sprinkled again towards the horns of the altar of incense seven times, and once above it towards the east, after which he poured out the whole on the floor of the altar of burnt offering, having again left the Sanctuary and taken with him the basins of blood. The fourth time he entered merely to fetch back the censer and vessel of incense, and having returned he washed his hands and performed the other ceremonies of the day. ATR OTH That the high-priest entered more than once into the sanctuary during this solemnity is cer- tainly clear from the various rites which he had to perform there, as described in Lev. xvi :12, I4, I5. Nor does the assertion of the Talmud con- tradict Heb. ix:7, where the apostle tells us that the high-priest had entered only once on that day, Since the expression which he uses may refer to the one day in the year when such a service alone took place. (3) Other Duties of the High-Priest. The other duties of the high-priest on that day con- Sisted in frequent washings, changing his clothes, lighting the lamps, burning incense, etc., which operations commenced soon after midnight of the Ioth of the seventh month (Tishri). The cere- monies of worship peculiar to this day alone (be- sides those which were common to it with all Other days) were: (1) That the high-priest, in his pontifical dress, confessed his own sins and those of his family, for the expiation of which he offered a bullock, on which he laid them; (2) that two goats were set aside, one of which was by lot sacrificed to Jehovah, while the other (Azazel), which was determined by lot to be set at liberty, was sent to the desert burdened with the sins of the people (Lev. xvi). According to the Talmud, both goats were to be alike in color, stature and age at the time of their being set aside for the purposes of that day. On this day also the high-priest gave his bless- ing to the whole nation, and the remainder of the day was spent in prayers and other works of penance. - º ATROTH (ät'röth), (Heb. Fº, at-aw-roth', crowns), a city of Gad (Num. xxxii:35), named with Aroer and Jaazer. It should probably be taken with the name following it, Shopham, to distinguish it from Ataroth in the same locality. It was in a fertile grazing district. ATTAI (ät’tái), (Heb. Tº, at-tah'ee, opportune). 1. Grandson of Sheshan (B. C. 1658) through his daughter Ahlai, whom he gave as a wife to Jarha, his Egyptian slave (I Chron. ii:35,36). 2. The sixth of David's mighty men (1 Chron. xii:II), B. C. about IO68. - 3. Son of King Rehoboam and Maachah, daughter of Absalom (2 Chron. xi:20), B. C. about 972. ATTALEIA (ät'ta-li-á), (Gr. 'ArráNeta, at-ta/?- ah), a maritime city of Pamphylia, in Asia Minor, near the mouth of the river Catarrhactes. It de- rived its name from its founder, Attalus Philadel- phus, king of Pergamos (Strabo, xiv, p. 667). It was visited by Paul and Barnabas, A. D. 45 (Acts xiv:25). It still exists under the name of Adalia, and extensive and important ruins attest the former Consequence of the city (Leake's Asia A/27tor, p Ig3). ATTITUDES (#t’tí-tūds). The allusions in Scripture to attitudes and pos- tures expressive of adoration, supplication and re- spect are very numerous. From these we learn enough to perceive that the usages of the He- brews in this respect were very nearly, if not altogether, the same as those which are still prac- ticed in the East, and which the paintings and sculptures of Egypt show to have been of old employed in that country. These sources supply ample materials for illustration, which it may be well to arrange under those heads into which such acts naturally divide themselves. (1) Adoration and Homage. The Moslems in their prayers throw themselves successively, and according to an established routine, into the nine 193 ATTITUDES various postures which they deem the most ap- propriate to the several parts of the service. We have no doubt that the Hebrews employed on one Occasion or another nearly all the various pos- tures which the Moslems exhibit on one occasion. This is the chief difference. In public and com- mon worship the Hebrews prayed standing (I Kings viii:54; Ezra iv:5; Dan. vi. Io; 2 Chron. vi : 13); but in their separate and private acts of worship they assumed the position which, accord- ing to their modes of doing homage or showing respect, seemed to them the most suitable to their present feelings or objects. It would appear, how- ever, that some form of kneeling was most usual in private devotions. - (2) Standing in public prayer is still the prac- tice of the Jews. This posture was adopted from the Synagogue by the primitive Christians, and is still maintained by the Oriental churches. This appears, from their monuments, to have been the custom also, among the ancient Persians and Egyptians, although the latter certainly sometimes kneeled before their gods. While in this attitude of worship the hands were sometimes stretched forth towards heaven in sup- plication or invocation (I Kings viii:22; 2 Chron. vi : I2, 29; IS. xv). This was not perhaps so much the conventional posture in the Moslem series as the more natural posture of standing adoration with outspread hands, which we observe on the Egyptian monuments. The uplifting of one hand (the right) only in taking an oath was SO com- mon, that to say, ‘I have lifted up my hands,’ was equivalent to ‘I have sworn' (Gen. xiv:22; Comp. xli:44; Deut. xxxii:40). This posture was also common among other ancient nations, and we find examples of it in the sculptures of Persia and Rome. (3) Kneeling is very often described as a pos- ture of worship (I Kings viii:54; Ezra ix:5; Dan. vi : Io; 2 Chron. vi. I3; Comp. I Kings xix : 18; Luke xxii:4I ; Acts vii:60). This is still an Oriental custom, and three forms of it occur in the Moslem devotions. It was also in use, al- though not very frequent, among the ancient Egyptians, who likewise, as well as the Hebrews (Exod. xxxiv:18; 2 Chron. xxix:29; IS. i :15), sometimes prostrated themselves upon the ground. The usual mode of prostration among the He- brews by which they expressed the most intense humiliation, was by bringing not only the body but the head to the ground. The ordinary mode of prostration at the present time, and probably anciently, is that shown in one of the postures of Moslem worship, in which the body is not thrown flat upon the ground, but rests upon the knees, arms and head. In order to express de- votion, sorrow, compunction or humiliation, the Israelites threw dust upon their heads (Josh. vii: 6, JUly ii. 12, Laul. ii. 1U, Ezek. xxiv:/; Rev. xviii :19), as was done also by the ancient Egyptians, and is still done by the modern Orientals. Under similar circumstances it was usual to smite the breast (Luke xviii: I3). This was also a practice among the Egyptians (Herod. ii: 85), and the monuments at Thebes exhibit persons engaged in this act while they kneel upon One knee. In 1 Chron. xvii:16, we are told that ‘David the king came and sat before the Lord,' and in that posture gave utterance to eloquent prayer, or rather thanksgiving, which the sequel of the chap- ter contains. Those unacquainted with Eastern manners are surprised at this. But there is a 13 ATTITUDES mode of sitting in the East which is highly re- spectful and even reverential. It is that which occurs in the Moslem form of worship. The person first kneels and then sits back upon his heels. Attention is also paid to the position of the hands, which they cross, fold or hide in the opposite sleeves. The variety of this formal sit- ting which the following figure represents is highly respectful. The prophet Elijah must have been in this or some other similar posture when he in- clined himself so much forward in prayer that his head almost touched his knees (I Kings xviii: 42). (4) Supplication, when addressed externally to man, cannot possibly be exhibited in any other form than those which are used in supplication to God. Uplifted hands, kneeling, prostration, are common to both. On the Egyptian monuments, suppliant captives, of different nations, are repre- sented as kneeling or standing with outspread hands. This also occurs in the sculptures of an- cient Persia (Persepolis). The first of the Egyp- tian figures is of peculiar interest, as representing an inhabitant of Lebanon. Prostration or falling at the feet of a person, is often mentioned in Scrip- ture as an act of supplication or of reverence, or of both (I Sam. xxv :24; 2 Kings iv:37; Esth. viii:3; Matt. xviii:29; xxviii:9; Mark v :22; Luke viii:41 ; John xi :32; Acts x:25). In the instance last referred to, where Cornelius threw himself at the feet of Peter, it may be asked why the apostle forbade an act which was not unusual among his own people, alleging as the reason—‘I myself also am a man.’ The answer is, that among the Romans prostration was exclusively an act of adoration, rendered only to the gods, and therefore it had in him a significance which it would not have had in an Oriental (Kuinoel, ad Act. x:26). This custom is still very general among the Orientals; but, as an act of reverence merely, it is seldom shown except to kings; as expressive of alarm or supplication, it is more frequent. Sometimes in this posture, or with the knees * Fºr: w § N N § N N § § G: == bent as before indicated, the Qrientals bring their forehead to the ground, and before resuming an 194 AUGUSTUS erect position either kiss the earth, or the feet, or border of the garment of the king or prince be- fore whom they are allowed to appear. There are allusions in Scripture to the act of kissing the feet, or the hem of the garment (Matt. ix:20; Luke vii:38, 45). Kissing the hand of another as a mark of affectionate respect, we do not remem- ber as distinctly mentioned in Scripture. Kissing one's own hand is mentioned as early as the time of Job (xxxi :27) as an act of homage to the heavenly bodies. It appears from I Sam. x:I ; I Kings xix : 18; PS. ii:I2, that there was a peculiar kiss of homage, the character of which is not indicated. It was probably that kiss upon the forehead expressive of high respect which was formerly, if not now, in use, among the Bedouins (Antar, ii: I IQ). (5) Bowing. In the Scriptures there are dif- ferent words descriptive of various postures of respectful bowing, as gadad, to incline or bow down the head; kara, to bend down the body very low; barak, to bend the knee, also to bless. These terms indicate a conformity with the ex- isting usages of the East, in which the modes of bowing are equally diversified, and, in all likeli- (I) Touching the These are : lips and the forehead with the right hand, with or without an inclination of the head or of the body, and with or without previously touching the hood, the same. ground; (2) placing the right hand upon the breast, with or without an inclination of the head or of the body; (3) bending the body very low, with folded arms; (4) bending the body and rest- ing the hands on the knees—this is one of the postures of prayer and is indicative of the high- est respect in the presence of kings and princes. In the Egyptian paintings we see persons drop their arms towards the ground while bowing to a superior, or standing respectfully with the right hand resting on the left shoulder. It is observable that, as before noticed, the word barak means to bless and to bend the knee, which suggests the idea that it was usual for a person to receive a blessing in a kneeling posture. We know also that the person who gave the blessing laid his hands upon the head of the person blessed (Gen. xlviii:14). This is exactly the case at the present day in the East, and a picture of the exist- ing custom would furnish a perfect illustration of the patriarchal form of blessing. This may be perceived from the annexed engraving. 2° W.4. AUGUSTUS (äu-gūs' tus), (Gr. Aüryovoſtos, aw'- goos-tos, venerable), the title assumed by Octavius, AUGUSTUS’ BAND who, after his adoption by Julius Caesar, took the name of Octavianus (i.e., Ex-Octavius), according to the Roman fashion, and was the first peacefully acknowledged emperor of Rome. He was emperor at the birth and during half the lifetime of Our Lord; but his name has no con- nection with Scriptural events, and occurs only Once (Luke ii:I) in the New Testament. He was one of the second so-called triumvirate, with Mark Antony and Lepidus. After the removal of the latter he fought a battle with Antony at Actium (B. C. 31), defeating him. The senate saluted him as emperor, and in B. C. 27 conferred on him the title of “Augustus.” He comes into the New Testament in connection with Herod, whom he had reinstated in his kingdom and greatly honored, although Herod had espoused the cause of Antony. At Herod's death Augustus divided his kingdom in accordance with his will, and even educated two of his sons, since their re- lations had been very intimate. He reigned forty- One years, and was succeeded by Tiberius Caesar (Luke iii:I). The successors of the first Augustus took the Same name or title, but it is seldom applied to them by the Latin writers. In the eastern part of the empire the Greek see-bas-tos' (which is equivalent) seems to have been more common, and hence is used of Nero (Acts xxv :21). In later times (after Diocletian) the title of Augustus was given to one of the two heirs-apparent of the empire, and Caesar to their younger colleagues and heirs-apparent. AUGUSTUS BAND (äu-gūs’tus' band), the title of the body to which the centurion who took Paul to Rome belonged (Acts xxvii:I). AUL (aul). See Awl. - AUNT (änt), (Heb. Tº", do-daw', loving), a father's sister (Exod. vi.20); also an uncle's wife (Lev. xviii: I4; xx:2O). AURANITIS (au-ran i'tis). See HAURAN. AUTHORIZED VERSION (a"thèr-izd vér'- shūn), (A. V.). See BIBLE. AVA (ā’vá), (Heb. sy, av-vazy", ruin, 2 Kings xvii:24; also Ivah, my, Zv-vazy'; Sept. 'Agâ, a-ba', 2 Kings xviii:34; xix: 13; Is. xxxvii: 13), the capi- tal of a small monarchical state conquered by the Assyrians, and from which King Shalmaneser sent colonies into Samaria. Some take it for the river, or rather the town which gave name to the river Ahava of Ezra V111 .2 I. “As Ivváh is placed by the side of Hena (2 Kings xviii:34; xix : 13), Avva can hardly be any other than the country of Hebeh, situated on the Euphrates between Anah and the Chabur” (Keil, Com. on Kings). AVE MARIA (ä'vå mä-ré'ā), Hail Mary. 1. The words of the angel Gabriel to the Virgin Mary, when announcing the incarnation (Luke i : 28), as rendered by the Vulgate. 2. The familiar prayer, or form of devotion, in the Roman Catholic Church, called also the “An- gelical Salutation.” (I) The Salutation of Gabriel, Ave (Maria) gratia plena, Dominus tecum; benedicta tu in mulieribus; (2) the words of Elizabeth to Mary, et benedictus fructus ventris tui; (3) an addition made by the Church, Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, ora pro nobis peccatoribus nunc et in hora mortis 710słrae. The whole Ave Maria, as it now stands, is ordered in the breviary of Pius V (1568) to be used daily before each canonical hour and after compline; i. e., the last of the seven canoni- It consists of three parts: 195 AWL cal hours (Cath. Dict.; Barnes, Bib. Dict., Doc- trine of the Rom. Cath. Ch.). AVEN (ā’ven). (Heb. ?, aw'vem; Sept. Ov, ohm, nothingness), a plain, ‘the plain of the Sun,' of Damascene Syria (Amos i:5). 1. It is usually supposed to be the same as the plain of Baalbec, or valley of Baal, where there was a magnificent temple dedicated to the Sun. Being between Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon, it is supposed by Rosenmüller and others to be the same plain or valley that is mentioned as ‘the valley of Lebanon' in Josh. xi :17. Some, how- ever, influenced by the Septuagint, would rather seek Aven in the plain of Un, four leagues from Damascus towards the desert. 2. In Hos. (x :8) “the high places of Aven,” should be probably Beth-aven. Compare Hos. iv: I5. The plain of Aven or ‘the valley of Aven’ is probably the Plain of Coele-Syria, so called from the idolatrous worship of the Sun in the great temple of Baalbek. 3. On or Heliopolis of Egypt (Ezek. xxx:17). AvRNGER of BLOOD (āvén'jér Šv blüd), (Heb. 783, go-ale', avenger), a term applied to the nearest relative of a murdered man (2 Sam. xiv:7, II; Josh. xx:3, 5, 9; Ps. viii:2). It became abused in practice (Deut. xix:I; Num. xxxv.9; Exod. xxi.13). See BLOOD-REVENGE. AVIM (ā’vim), (Heb. Fº, av-veem', villagers), called also Avites and Hivites, a people de- scended from Canaan (Gen. x:17), who originally occupied the southernmost portion of that terri- tory in Palestine along the Mediterranean Coast which the Caphtorim or Philistines afterwards possessed (Deut. ii:23). As the territory of the Avim is mentioned in Josh. xiii:3, in addition to the five Philistine states, it would appear that it was not included in theirs, and that the expulsion of the Avim was by a Philistine invasion prior to that by which the five principalities were founded. The territory began at Gaza and extended southward to ‘the river of Egypt (Deut. ii:23), forming what was the sole Philistine kingdom of Gerar in the time of Abra- ham, when we did not hear of any other Philistine states. There were then Avim, or Hivites, at Shechem (Gen. xxxiv:2), and we afterwards find them also at Gibeon (Josh. ix:7), and beyond the Jordan, at the foot of Mount Hermon (Josh. xi : 3); but we have no means of knowing whether these were original settlements of the Avim, or were formed out of the fragments of the nation which the Philistines expelled from southern Palestine. The original country of the Avim is called Hazerim in Deut. ii:23. (See GERAR ; PHILISTINEs.) AVITES (a'vites), (Heb. "P, av-wee'), the name of two tribes of people. (See AVIM.) AVITH (ā'vith), (Heb. nº, av-weeth", hut, vil- lage), a city of Hadad ben-Bedad, one of the kings of Edom before there were kings of Israel (Gen. xxxvi;35; I Chron. i:46). - AWL (awl), (Heb. Pº, mar-tsay'ah, from verb signifying “to bore”). It denotes an awl or other instrument for boring a small hole, occurs in Exod. xxi:6; Deut. xv :17. Considering that the Israelites had at that time recently withdrawn from their long sojourn in Egypt, there can be no doubt that the instruments were the same as those of that country, the forms of which, from actual specimens in the British AX OR AXE Museum, are shown in the annexed cut. They are such as were used by the Sandal-makers and other workers in leather. AX or AXE (äx), in most modern editions of A. V. spelt ar, although the edition of 161 I had are throughout. - Several instruments of this description are so discriminated in Scripture as to show that the Hebrews had them of different forms and for various uses, which occurs in Deut. xix. 1. Gar-zen’ (Heb. Jºã, to cut, Deut. xix:5; xx:19; I Kings vi;7; Is... x:15). From these pas- sages it appears that this kind was employed in felling trees, and in hewing large timbers for building. The conjecture of Gesenius that in I Kings vi.7 it denotes the axe of a stonemason, is by no means conclusive. The first text sup- poses a case of the head slipping from the helve in felling a tree. This would suggest that it was shaped like Fig. 3, which is just the same instru- ment as Our common hatchet, and appears to have been applied by the ancient Egyptians to the same general use as with us. The reader will observe the contrivance in all the others (wanting in this) of fastening the head to the haft by thongs. 2. Mah-aſs-azºyd" (Heb. Tºº, a hewing in- strument), rendered “tongs” in Is. xliv : I2; and “axe,” Jer. x:3. From these passages it appears to have been a lighter implement than the former, or a kind of adze, used for fashioning or carving wood into shape; it was, probably, therefore, like Figs. 4 to 7, which the Egyptians employed for this purpose. Some texts of Scripture represent them as being employed in carving images—the use to which the prophets refer. The differences of form and size, as indicated in the figures, ap- pear to have been determined with reference to . or heavy work; Fig. 3 is a finer carving tool, 196 AXHEAD 3. A ar-dome' (Heb. Eººp), this is the com- In OneSt name for. an ax or hatchet. It is this of which we read in Judg. ix:48; Ps. lxxiv:5; 1 Assyrian Ax. Sam. xiii:20, 2I ; Jer. xlvi :22. It appears to have been more exclusively employed than the garzen for felling trees, and had therefore probably a heavier head. In one of the Egyptian sculptures the inhabitants of Lebanon are represented as felling pine trees with axes like Fig. I. As the One used by the Egyptians for the same purpose was also of this shape, there is little doubt that it was also in use among the Hebrews. Egyptian Ax, 4. The word mar-tsay'-ah, rendered ‘axe’ in 2 Kings, vi :5, is literally “iron;' but as an axe is Certainly intended, the passage is valuable as showing that the axeheads among the Hebrews were of iron. Those which have been found in Egypt are of bronze, which was very anciently and generally used for the purpose. But this does not prove that they had none of iron ; it seems rather to suggest that those of iron have been consumed by the corrosion of three thousand years, while those of bronze have been preserved. All our figures are from actual specimens now in the British Museum. * * 5. Mag-gay-raw' (Heb. nº), “iron cutting tools” (2 Sam. xii:31). Meg-ay-razy' (Heb. nº) is also used in the same passage, also I Chron: xx:3, and means a saw. 6. Kheh'reh (Heb. P.J.), “sword,” is used of other cutting instruments; once rendered “ax” (Ezek. xxvi :9); probably a pickax, as it is said that “with his axes he shall break down thy towers.” 7. Kash-sheel' (Heb. ???) occurs only in Ps. 1xxiv:6, and appears Lo have beetl a later WU1 (l denoting a large ax. Ax in Greek is débum, a v-ee"may (Matt. iii: Io; Luke iii:9). Figuratite. The Assyrians and Chaldeans are likened to an ar. By them God cut down, de- stroyed, and scattered the nations around (Is. x:15; Jer. 1:21). The air was laid to the root of the tree with the Jews. In Christ's time the destructive judgments of God were ready to be executed on their church and state, if they did not speedily receive Christ, repent of their sins, and bring forth good works (Matt. iii: Io). AXHEAD (äks'héd), (Heb. 7.2, bar-ge/,2 Kings vi:5), is literally “iron;” but as an ax is evidently intended, the passage shows that the axheads among the Hebrews were of iron. usually rendered | AXLETREE . 197 Those found in Egypt are of bronze, such as was anciently used for such instruments. They used iron axes also, which have become corroded by time. AXLETREE (äks"1-tré') occurs only in I Kings vii:32, 33, as translation of 7,9ad, hand, the whole phrase being the hands of the wheels. AZAL (ā’zal), (Heb. ºss, azy-Zsa/e', noble), a place, evidently in the neighborhood of Jerusalem, and probably east of the Mount of Olives (Zech. Xiv :5). AZALIAH (az-a-li'ah), (Heb. *s, as al. yaw'hoo, Jah is noble, or whom Jehovah has spared), the father of Shaphan the scribe in the reign of Josiah (2 Kings xxii:3; 2 Chron. xxxiv:8), B. C. before 625. AZANIAH (āz-a-ni'ah), (Heb. nºis, a2-azz-yazv', Jah is hearer, A. V. ‘ospray), an unclean bird, but there is a difference of opinion as to the particular species intended. The etymology of the Hebrew word would seem to point to some bird remarkably power- ful fierce, or impudent. Bochart supposes the black eagle to be meant, but reasons upon the mere conjecture that by the word pºexavai'etos is intended &\tat'etos (Hierog. tom. iii. p. 188, etc.). The following statement places the matter in a clear light: Aristotle, about B. C. 300, de- scribes the haleeatos as ‘a species of eagle dwell- ing near seas and lakes; and remarks, it some- times happens to it that having seized its prey, and not being able to carry it, it is drowned in the deep.” (Hist. Animal, ix. c. 32). (See EAGLE.) AZARAEL (a-zár'a-el or a-zā'ra-el), (Neh. xii:36). See AZAREEL. AZAREEL (a-zār'e-el or a-zā're-el), (Heb. ºsmy, a2-ar-a/e', God has helped). 1. One of the Benjamite warriors, who came (B. C. IO58) to David at Ziklag (I Chron. xii:6). 2. Head of the musicians of the temple (I Chron. xxv. 18), called Uzziel in verse 4, (B. C. IOI 5.) * 3. Ruler of the tribe of Dan (B. C. IoI 5), under David and Solomon (I Chron. xxvii:22). 4. An Israelite (B. C. 456), who renounced his Gentile wife (Ezra x:41). 5. The last of the chiefs (B. C. 445) of the One hundred and twenty-eight mighty men of the priests who served at the temple (Neh. xi: I3). AZARIAH (āz-a-ri'ah), (Heb. nºny, a2-ar-yazzy', whom Jehovah aids, answering to the German name Gołłże/f), a very common name among the Hebrews, a 110 lieuue bul IIe by a UUInside able number of persons mentioned in Scripture 1. A son or descendant of Zadok, the high- priest, in the time of David, and one of Solomon's princes (I Kings iv:2), B. C. 960. He is prob- ably the same with No. 5 below. 2. Son of Nathan and a captain of Solomon's guards (I Kings iv:5), B. C. about Iooo. 3. Frequently called Uzziah, tenth king of Judah, who began to reign at sixteen years of age, and reigned fifty-two years at Jerusalem (2 Rings xv :27; 2 Chron. xxvi :18, 19; 2 Kings xiv:21; I Chron. iii :12), B. C. about 809. 4. Son of Ethan (B. C. 1660), of the sons of Zerah. Perhaps Zerahiah is the better reading (I Chron. ii:8). 5. A high-priest, son of Ahimaaz and grand- Son of Zadok (I Chron. Vi:9), whom he seems AZAZIAH to have immediately succeeded (I Kings iv:2). He is probably the same with No. I. 6. The son of Johanan (B. C. 781), a high- priest (I Chron. vi. Io), whom some suppose the Same as Zechariah, son of Jehoiada, who was killed B. C. 840 (2 Chron. xxiv:20-22). 7. Son of Jehu (B. C. 1330), descended from Jarha, the slave of Sheshan (I Chron. ii:38, 39). Probably he is one of the captains mentioned in 2 Chron. xxiii: I, and called the son of Obed. 8. An Azariah inserted between Hilkiah and Seraiah, in Josiah’s reign. There seems scarcely room for him here, and it is possible the name was inserted to correspond with Ezra (vii:I). He was killed by Nebuchadnezzar (I Chron. vi : I3), B. C. 64I-610. 9. Son of Zephaniah and forefather of Samuel, the prophet (I Chron. vi :36). Apparently he is the same as Uzziah of verse 24. (B. C. I IOO). 10. A person (B. C. 941) to whom the high- priest Jehoiada made known the secret of the ex- istence of the young prince Joash, and who sº in placing him on the throne (2 Chron. XV : I ) . 11 and 12. The name of two sons of Jehosha- phat (B. C. 890), king of Judah. (2 Chron. xxi :2). - 13. In 2 Chron. (xxii:6), a clerical error for Ahaziah (B. C. 885). 14. Son of Jeroham, and one of the captains of Judah (2 Chron. xxiii:r), B. C. 878. 15. The high-priest (B. C. 765) who opposed Uzziah, king of Judah, in offering incense to the Lord (2 Chron. xxvi :17). 16. Son of Johanan, a captain of Ephraim (2 Chron. xxviii :12). He returned the captives and spoil taken in the invasion of Judah by Pekah (B. C. 726). 17. Father of Joel, in the reign of Hezekiah (2 Chron. xxix: I2), B. C. 726. 18. Son of Jehalelel (B. C. 726), and a con- temporary of the son of the former (2 Chron. xxix:I2). 19. A high-priest (B. C. 726) in the time of Hezekiah (2 Chron. xxxi :Io), who coöperated zealously with the king in the purification of the temple. 2O. Son of Maaseiah (B. C. 445). He repaired a portion of the wall of Jerusalem in the time of Nehemiah (Neh. iii:23, 24). tº 21. One of the leaders who went up with Zerubbabel from Babylon (Neh. vii:7). In Ezra ii:2 he is called Seraiah (B. C. 590). 22. A Levite (B. C. 445), who instructed the people in the law under Ezra (Neh. viii:7). 23. One of the priests (B. C. 445), who sol- emnized the covenant with Nehemiah (Neh. x: 2). Probably he was the one who helped in the dedication n.f the city wall (Neh. xii; 33). 24. (See JEZANIAH.) Jer. xliii:2. 25. The Chaldean name of Abednego, one of Daniel’s three friends who were cast into the fiery furnace (Dan. i :7; iii:9), B. C. 560. AZAZ (ā'zāz), (Heb. º, aw-zawz', strong), a Reubenite father of Bela (I Chron. V:8), B. C. 17OO. * AzAzEL (a zazel), (Heb. **), the Hebrew term which is translated in the A. V. (Lev. xvi;8, IO, 26) “scapegoat.” AZAZIAH (āz'a-zi'ah), (Heb. ºil”, ag-a2-yaw'- Åoo, strengthened by Jehovah). 1. A Levite (B. C. Ioao), appointed in the reign of David to play the harp in the service connected with bringing the Ark from the house of Obed-edom (I Chron, XV:2I). AZBUK 2. The father of Hosea (B. C. Ioao), and prince of the tribe of Ephraim, when David enumerated the people (I Chron. xxvii:20). . A Levite, who, in the reign of Hezekiah (B. C. 726), had charge of the tithes and dedi- cated things in the Temple under Cononiah and Shimei (2 Chron. xxxi :13). AZBUR (āz'buk), (Heb. pºp, a2-book', strong devastation or pardon), an ancestor, perhaps father of Nehemiah (B. C. 445), the prince of a part of Beth Zur (Neh. iii:16). AZEKAH (a-zé'kah), (Heb. "El 2, ag-ay-kaw', tilled or breach), a town of Judah in the neighbor- hood of Adullam and Shaaraim (Josh. xv.:35, 36; 2 Chron. xi:7; Neh. xi:30). It was near “to the northern one,” i. e. Shochoh (I Sam. xvii: I). To this place Joshua pursued the Canaanites (Josh. x:Io, II). The city was still standing at the time of the invasion of the kings of Babylon (Jer. xxxiv:7), and is mentioned as one of the places reoccupied by the Jews when they returned from captivity (Neh. xi:30). AZEL (a'zel), (Heb. *ē, aw-sale', noble), a descendant of Saul (I Chron. viii:37, 38; ix:43, 44). AZEM (ā'zem), (Heb. Fºº, eh'ſsem, a bone or fortress), a city in the south of Judah (Josh. xv.29), apportioned to Simeon later (xix:3). (See EZEM). AZGAD (āz'gåd), (Heb. Tº, az-gawd’, strong in fortune or worship, supplication). The children of Asgad to the number of 1,222 returned B. C. 536 with Zerubabbel (Ezra ii:12). The number is 2,322 in Neh. (vii:17). In the second caravan IIo accompanied Ezra (Ezra viii: 12). These joined in the covenant with Nehemiah (Neh. x:15). AZIEL (a'zi-el), (Heb. **, az-ee-ale', God is might), a Levite (I Chron. xv.2O). The name is shortened from Jaaziel (I Chron. xv.18), B. C. IO42. AZIZA (a-zi'zá), (Heb. slºts, a2-ee-gaw', strong); he belonged to the family of Zattu and married a foreign wife after the return from Babylon (Ezra x:27), B. C. 457. AZMAVETH (āz'ma-véth or āz-mā'věth), (Heb. º, az-maw'veth, strong as death). 1. A native of Bahurim (2 Sam. xxiii:31; I Chron. xi :33), probably a Benjamite, and one of David’s mighty men (B. C. IOSO). A descendant of Mephibosheth or Merib- baal (I Chron. viii:36; ix:42). * A Benjamite, father of Pelet and Jeziel, two skilled archers and slingers. The name has been identified with (I) by some ; others refer the word to the name of a place (I Chron. xii:3), B. C. IoSo. 4. Master of the royal treasures under David (1 Chron. xxvii:25), B. C. IoI5. 5. A town probably in Benjamin. Forty-two of the inhabitants returned with Zerubbabel (Ezra ii:24). It is mentioned in Nehemiah (xii:29), and several Benjamites of the kindred of Saul bore its name (I Chron. viii:36; ix:42; xii:3). Now called Higmeh. e AzMon or JESHIMON (āz'mon), (Heb. Tºº, afs-mome', bonelike or fortress), a city in the wilder- ness of Maon, south of Judah, belonging to the tribe of Simeon (Num. xxxiv:4; Josh. xv.:4) near the Wady-el-arish. Exact site unknown. 198 AZZUR AZNOTH-TABOR (az'noth-ta'bor), (Heb. ** n: 8, a2-nøth'íaw-bore", tops of Tabor), a town in the W. of Naphtali, between the Jordan and Huk- kok (Josh. xix:34): AZOR (a'zôr), (Gr. "Afdºp, ad-gore', helper), son of Eliakim, in the line of Our Lord (Matt. i. 13, I4), B. C. 4OO. AZOTUS (a-zö'tus), (Gr." Afwros, ad"go-tos, fort- ress, castle). See ASHDoD. AZRIEL (āz'ri-el), Heb. 28 Tº, ag-ree-ale', help of God). 1. Head of the house of the half tribe of Man- asseh beyond Jordan (I Chron. v.:24), B. C. I.400. 2. Ancestor of Jerimoth (B. C. IOI 5), a Naph- talite, and head of the tribe at the time of the cen- sus of David (I Chron. xxvii:19). 3. Father of Seraiah, an officer of Jehoiakim (Jer. xxxvi.26), B. C. 606. . AZRIKAM (āz'ri-kām), (Heb. PETP, ag-ree- Áawme', help against the enemy, Or, help has risen). 1. Son of Neraiah of the royal line of Judah (B. C. 460), and descendant of Zerubbabel (I Chron. iii:23). - - 2. Oldest son of Azel (B. C. 860), a descendant of Saul (I Chron. viii:38; ix:44). 3. A Levite, ancestor of Shemaiah (I Chron. ix:14; Neh. xi:I5), B. C. 470. 4. Governor of the palace of Ahaz (B. C. 741), who was slain in the invasion under Pekah, king of Israel (2 Chron. xxviii:7). AZUBAH (a-zú'bah), (Heb. "Fºx, ag-oo-haw', ruins, forsaken). 1. Wife of Caleb, son of Hezron (I Chron. ii:18, I9), B. C. I590. º g tº 2. Mother of King Jehoshaphat (I Kings xxii: 42; 2 Chron. XX:31), B. C. 914. AZUR (a'zur), (Heb. Tºº, az-zoor', a less correct form of Azzur, helper). See AZZUR. AZZAH (āz'zah), (Heb. º, ag-zaw', a mode of spelling the Hebrew name which is elsewhere rendered Gaza. The difference arises from the uncertain power of the first letter V, which, in proper names, some use as the consonant G, while others regard only the vowel sound connected with it, which in this case is A. (See ALPHABET.) The name occurs in this form in Deut. ii:23; Jer. xxv.20; which last clearly shows that Gaza is intended. AZZAN (āz'zan), (Heb. lº, az-zawn', perhaps a thorn), the father of Paltiel, a prince of the tribe of Issachar (B. C. 1540), who represented his tribe at the division of the promised land (Nurl1. xxxiv:26). AZZUR (āz'zur), (Heb. º, a2-2007", helper). 1. One of those who signed the covenant (B. C. 445) with Nehemiah (Neh. x:17). It is probably a family name and in Hebrew is the same as Azur. 2. Father of Hananiah of Gibeon (B.C. 596), who was a prophet in the time of Zedekiah (Jer. xxviii:I). 3. Father of º (B. C. 593). The latter was one of the leaders of the people whom the rophet, in a vision, saw devising false schemes or Jerusalem (Ezek. xi.1). BAAL BAAL (bā'al), (Heb. byn, bah'a/, lord, possess- or), is a generic term for god in many of the Syro- Arabian languages. As the idolatrous nations of that race had several gods, this word, by means of Some accessory distinction, became applicable as a name to many different deities. There is no evidence, however, that the Israelites ever called Jehovah by the 7ta/ze of Baal; for the passage in Hos. ii:I6, which has been cited as such, only con- tains the word baa/ as the sterner, less affection- ate representative of husband. (1) Ho Baal, with the defi- nite article, Judg. ii: 13; Sept. Gr. 6 Báa)\, the masculine Baa/, but also h Báa)\, the fezzeźnime Baal, Jer. xix:5; xxxii:35; Rom. xi.;4, is appropriated to the chief male divinity of the Phoenicians, the princi- pal seat of whose wor- ship was at Tyre. The idolatrous Israel ites adopted the worship of this god (almost always in conjunction with that S of Ashtoreth) in the §º period of the Judges | \, (Judg. ii: 13); they con- tinued it in the reigns of Ahaz and Manasseh, kings of Judah (2 Chron., xxviii:2; 2 Kings xxi:3); and among the kings of Israel, especially in the reign of Ahab, who, partly through the influence of his wife, the daughter of the Sidonian king Ethbaal, appears to have made a systematic at- tempt to suppress the worship of God altogether, and to substitute that of É.ii. its stead (I Kings xvi;31); and in that of Hoshea (2 Kings xvii:16), although Jehu and Jehoiada once severally des- troyed the temples and priesthood of the idol (2 Kings, x:18, sq.; xi. 18). We read of altars, images and temples erected to Baal (I Kings xvi;32; 2 Kings iii:2). The altars were generally on heights, as the summits of hills or the roofs of houses (Jer. xix:5; xxxii:29). His priesthood was a very numerous body (I Kings xviii:19), and was divided into the two classes of prophets and of priests (unless the term ‘servants,’ which comes between those words, may denote a third order—a kind of Levites (2 Kings x:19). As to the rites by which he was worshiped, there is 111ust ſluguciit mention of incenge being offorod to him (2 Kings xxiii:5), but also of bullocks being sacrificed (I Kings xviii:26), and even of children, as to Moloch (Jer. xix:5). According to the de- scription in I Kings xviii, the priests, during the sacrifice, danced (or, in the sarcastic expression of the original, /i/e/ed) about the altar, and, when their prayers were not answered, cut themselves with knives until the blood flowed, like the priests of Bellona (Lucan. Pharsal. i. 565; Tertull. A/o/o- get. ix; Lactant. Ozzy. Instit. i:21). We also read of homage paid to him by bowing the knee, and by kissing his image (I Kings xix:18; Comp. Cicero, In Merrezm iv:43), and that his worshipers used to swear by his name (Jer. xii:16). g As to the power of nature which was adored un- der the form of the Tyrian Baal, many of the pas- sages above cited show evidently that it was one 199 BAAL B of the heavenly bodies; or, if we admit that re- semblance between the Babylonian and Persian religions which Münter assumes, not one of the heavenly bodies really, but the astra/spirit resid- ing in One of them; and the same line of induction as that which is pursued in the case of Ashtoreth, his female Counterpart, leads to the conclusion that it was the szem. In a certain sense every argument which goes to show that Ashtoreth was the moon is also, on account of the close conjunction between her and Baal, as valid a reason for Baal being the sun; for the two gods are such exact correlates that the discovery of the true meaning of the one would lead, by the force of analogy, to that of the other. Nevertheless, as has been already observed in the article ASHTORETH, it must be admitted that the as- trological view did subsequently prevail, and that the planets Jupiter and Venus became mysterious- ly connected with some modification of the same powers which were primarily worshiped under the Cosmogonical ideas of Bel and Mylitta, sun and moon. This relation between Baal and the planet Jupiter is noticed in the article Gad. For the re- lation between Baal and Moloch, and that between Baal and Melkarth, the Tyrian Hercules, see Mo- LECH and HERAKLES. - (2) Baal Berith, covenant-lord (Judg. ix:4), is the name of a god worshiped by the people of Shechem (Judg. viii:33; ix:4, 46), who, on account of the signification of the name, has been compared to the Zezes Aſozºłeeds, guardian of oaths, Zet's 'Opkios of the Greeks and the Latin Deus Fidius. (3) Baal Peor, or sometimes only Peor, respec- tively represented in the Sept. by Bee///*egor, and Phogor, appears to have been properly the idol of the Moabites (Num. xxv.1-9; Deut. iv:3; Josh. xxii: 17; Ps. cwi:28; Hos. ix:Io); but also of the Midi- anites (Num. xxxi:15, 16). It is the common opinion that this god was wor- shiped by obscene rites; and, from the time of Jerome downwards, it has been usual to compare him to Priapus. Selden and J. Owen (De Diis Syrzis, i:5; 7%eologozémezza, v.4) seem to be the only persons who have disputed whether any of the passages in which this god is named really warrant such a conclusion. The utmost that these passages express is the fact that the Israelites re- ceived this idolatry from the women of Moab, and were led away to eat of their sacrifices (cf. Ps. cvi:28); but it is very possible for the sex to have been the means of seducing them into the adop- tion of their worship, without the idola fry itself being of an obscene kind. (4) Baalzebub, Fly-lora, occurs in 2 Kings i:2-16, as the god of the Philistines at Ekron, whose oracle Ahaziah sent to consult. There is much diversity of opinion as to the signification of this name, accoording as authors consider the title to be one of honor, as used by his worshipers, or one of contempt. The analogy of classical idolatry would lead us to conclude that all these Baals are only the same god under various modifications of attributes and emblems; but the scanty notices to which we owe all our knowledge of Syro-Arabian idolatry do not furnish data for any decided opinion on this sub- ject. The name was so obnoxious to the Jews in later times that bàshełh, shame, was frequently substituted for it (see ISH-BOSHETH). Thus we get BAAL Ishbosheth, Mephibosheth for Ishbaal, Meribbaal. (Hastings' Bib. Dict.) , BAAL (bā'al), (Heb. ?PP, bah'al, master, pos- sessor). 1. A Reubenite, descendant of Beerah (B. C. 1300), who was carried off by the Assyrian Tiglath- Pileser (I Chron. v.:5). 2. Grandfather of Saul (1 Chron. viii:30; ix:36), B. C. II.8O. 3. (Heb. as above). This word is often found as the first element of Compound names of places. In this case, Gesenius thinks that it seldom, if ever, has any reference to the god of that name; but that it denotes the place which Žossesses, which is the abode of the thing signified by the latter half of the compound—as if it was a syno- nym of bef/h (2 Kings i:8; Gen. xxviii:19). The best support of this opinion is the fact that baa/ and beſ/h are used interchangeably of the same place; as Baalshalisha and Baaltamar are called by Eusebius Bethshalisha and Bethtamar. BAALAH (bā'al-āh), (Heb. Tºº, bah-a/-aw', mistress). 1. Another name for Kirjath-jearim (Josh. xv.9, IO), and for Baale of Judah (2 Sam. vi. 2), and for Kirjath-Baal in Judah (Josh. xv.:60; xviii:14). (See KIRJATH-JEARIM; BAALE JUDAH; KIRJATH BAAL). 2. A place in Judah (Josh. xv.29), the same as Balah (xix; 3), and Bilhah (I Chron. iv:29); now AJezr-eſ-Bela/h, near Gaza. 3. A mountain (Josh. xv. II). Either the same as No. 1, or possibly a mountain in the northwest- ern part of Judah. BAALATH (bā'al-āth), (Heb. ôah-a/- azyżh'), a town in the tribe of Dan (Josh. xix:44), apparently the same that was afterwards rebuilt by Solomon (I Kings ix:18). Many have conject- ured this Baalath to be the same as Baalbek; but in that case it must have lain in northernmost Dan, whereas the possession of it is ascribed to that tribe when its territory was wholly in the south of Judah, and many years before the migra- tion (recorded in Judg. xviii) which gave Dan a northern territory. Correspondingly, Josephus places the Baalath of Solomon (which he calls Aa/eth) in the southern part of Palestine, near to Gazara (Antig. viii:2), within the territory which would have belonged to Dan, had it acquired pos- session of the lands originally assigned to it. The Talmud affirms that Baalath lay so near the line of separation between Dan and Judah that the fields only were in the former tribe, the buildings being in the latter. BAALATH-BEER (bā'al-āth-be'er), (Heb. Tº Fº, bah-a/-ath' beh-ayr', holy well, Baal of the well), probably thc Samc as thc Baal of I Chron. iv.:33—a city of Simeon; called also Ramath-Ne- eb, or Southern Ramath (Josh. xix:8; Comp. I am. XXX:27). DAALBER or BAALBEC (bā'al-bck). (1) Baalbek, in the Syrian language, signifies the city of Baal, or of the sun; and, as the Syrians never borrowed names from the Greeks, or trans- lated Greek names, it is certain that when the Greeks came into Syria they found the place bear- ing this name or some other signifying ‘city of the sun,” since they termed it Heliopolis, which is doubtless a translation of the native designation. If this should not seem satisfactory, we may conclude that Baa/ was so common an element in the composition of proper names, that it is not sufficiently distinctive to bear the stress of such an interpretation; and may rather take it to signify nºv: r—:–, 200 BAALBER OR BAALBEC (as Gesenius says it always does in geographical Combinations) the place where a thing is found. According to this view Baal-gad would mean the A/ace of Gad. Now Gad was an idol (Is. lxv.11), Supposed to have been the god or goddess § fortune (Vulg. Fortuna), and identified by the !º Commentators with the planet /u/iter (see AD). - Its origin appears to be lost in the most remote antiquity, and the historical notices of it are very Scanty. (2) Situation. Baalbek, is pleasantly situated On the lowest declivity of Anti-Libanus, at the Opening of a small valley into the plain El-Bekaa. Through this valley runs a small stream, divided into numberless rills for irrigation. The place is in N. lat. 34 deg. I min. 30 sec., and E. long. 36 deg. II min. distant Io9 geog. miles from Palmyra, and 38% from Tripoli. In the absence of more posi- tive information we can only conjecture that its situation On the high-road of commerce between Tyre, Palmyra, and the farther East, must have Contributed largely to the wealth and magnificence which it manifestly attained. (3) Heliopolis. It is mentioned under the name of Heliopolis by Josephus (Antzg. xiv:3, 4), and also by Pliny (AE/ist. Maſſ. v.:22). Two Roman inscriptions of the time of Antoninus Pius give sanction to the statement of John of Antioch, who alleges that this emperor built a great temple to Jupiter at Heliopolis, which was one of the won- ders of the world (AE/ist. Chron. lib. xi). From the reverses of Roman coins we learn that Heliopolis was constituted a colony by Julius Caesar; that it was the seat of a Roman garrison in the time of Augustus; and obtained the /us ſta/7czemz from Severus. Some of the coins of later date contain curious, representations of the temple. After the age of Constantine the splendid tem- les of Baalbek were probably consigned to neg- ect and decay, unless indeed, as some appearances indicate, they were then consecrated to Christian worship. From the accounts of Oriental writers Baalbek seems to have continued a place of importance down to the time of the Moslem inva- sion of Syria. They describe it as one of the most splendid of Syrian cities, enriched with stately palaces, adorned with monuments of ancient times, and abounding with trees, fountains, and whatever contributes to luxurious enjoyment. On the advance of the Moslems, it was reported to the emperor Heraclius as protected by a citadel of great strength, and well able to sustain a siege. (4) Investments. After the capture of Damas- cus it was regularly invested by the Moslems, and —containing an overflowing population, amply supplied with provisions and military stores—it made a courageous defence, but at length capitu- lated. Its importance at that period is attested by the ransom exacted by the conquerors, consisting of 2,000 ounces of gold, 4,000 ounces of silver, 2,000 silk vests, and 1,000 swords, together with the arms of the garrison. In the year 1400 it was pillaged by Timour Beg, in his Pºá. to Damascus, after he had taken Aleppo. Afterwards it fell into the hands of the Metaweli—a barbarous predatory tribe, who were nearly exterminated when Djezzar Pasha permanently subjected the whole district to Turkish supremacy. . (5) Ruins. The ruins of Heliopolis lie on an eastern branch of the mountain, and are called, by way of eminence, the Castle. The most prominent objects visible from the plain are a lofty portico of six columns, part of the great temple, and the walls and columns of another smaller temple a little below, surrounded by green trees. There is also a singular and unique circular temple, if it BAALBER OR BAALBEC may be so called, of which we give a figure. These, with a Curious column on the highest point within the walls (which may possibly have been a Clepsydra, or water-dial), form the only erect por- tions of the ruins. These ruins have been so often and so minutely described by scores of travelers, as well as in many works of general reference, that, since their identification as a Scriptural site is uncertain, a few additional observations only may suffice. The ruins at Baalbek in the mass are apparently of three successive eras: first, the gigantic hewn stones, in the face of the plat- ºff"Ti㺠º º::::::::: º | | ºf º º% fiſ? | {=|º # /#&#: - Hººj žđ mãì. |% % ſº Ruins of Heliopolis. form or basement on which the temple stands, and which appear to be remains of older buildings, perhaps of the more ancient temple which occu- pied the site. Among these are at least twenty standing upon a basement of rough stones, which would be called enormous anywhere but here. These celebrated blocks, which in fact form the great wonder of the place, vary from 30 to 40 feet in length; but there are three, forming an upper course 20 feet from the ground, which together measure 190 feet, being severally of the enormous dimensions of 63 and 64 feet in length, by 12 in breadth and thickness (Addison's Damascus and Pa/myra, ii:55). They are,’ says Richter (lWa//- fahrten, p. 281), ‘the largest stones I have ever seen, and might of themselves have easily given rise to the popular opinion that Baalbek was built by angels at the command of Solomon. The whole wall, indeed, is composed of immense stones, and its resemblance to the remains of the Temple of Solomon, which are still shown in the . ſoulidations Uſ ille IIIUsuue DS-Gakkala U11 Mount Moriah, cannot fail to be observed.’ This was also pointed out by Dr. Richardson. In the Ileighbor- ing quarries, from which they were cut, One stone, hewn out but not carried away, is of much larger dimensions than any of those which have been mentioned. To the second and third eras belong the Roman temples, which, being of and about the time of Antoninus Pius, present some of the finest specimens of Corinthian architecture in existence, and possess a wonderful grandeur and majesty from their lofty and imposing situation (Addison ii:57). - º The present Baalbek is a small village to the east of the ruins, in a sad state of wretchedness and decay. It is little more than a heap of rub- bish, the houses being built of mud and sun-dried bricks. (See BAAL-GAD; ON.) 201 ! BAAL–HANAN BAAL-BERITH (ba'al-ba'rith), Heb. nº ºn, ðah'al ber-eeth", Baal of the covenant), worshiped by the people of Shechem after the death of Gid- eon (Judg. viii.33; ix:4) as god of the covenant, i. e., protector and guardian of engagements. Called simply “the god Berith.” (Judg. ix:46). BAALE (bā'al-É). See BAALI. BAALE JUDAH (bā'al-e ju'dah), (Heb. Tº *zyn, ôah-a/-ay' yeh-hoo-daw', lords of Judah), a city of Judah (2 Sam. vi.2). Probably the same as Baalah, I. It was the old name of Kirjath-jearim. (See BAALAH; KIRJATH-JEARIM). te BAAL-GAD (bā'al-gåd), (Heb. "#722, bah-a/- gazvd", lord of fortune), a city “in the valley of Lebanon, under Mount Hermon’ (Josh. xi:17; xii:7). We are also informed that among those parts of Palestine which were unsubdued by the Hebrews at the death of Joshua, was “all Lebanon towards the sun-rising, from Baal-gad, under Mount Hermon, unto the entering into Hamath' (Josh. xiii:5). This position of Baal-gad is not un- favorable to the conclusion which some have reached, that it is no other than the place which, from a temple that stood there consecrated to the sun, was called by the Greeks //e/zo/o/7s, i. e., city of the sun; and which the natives called and still call Baalbek, a word apparently of the same meaning. The honor of being identified with Baal- bek has also been claimed for the Baalath which Solomon built or fortified; but this claim has al- ready been disposed of (see BAALATH); and no weight is to be attached to the local traditions which claim Solomon as the founder of Baalbek, seeing that it is the practice of the natives to as- cribe to that great king every grand ancient work of unknown date which the country contains. It is also to be observed that those who contend for Baalath, admit its possible identity with Baal-gad, and hence there are no conflicting claims to adjust. Even those who suppose the Baal-hamon of the Canticles (viii: I I) to be Baalbek conceive that to be a later name for Baal-gad; and hence the only question that remains is, whether Baal-gad be not the more ancient name of the place afterwards known as Heliopolis and Baalbek. The most prob- able site is at A in /edezdeh, “the strong spring,” in this direction, near the road to Damascus. (R. C. Conder, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) BAAL-GUR (bā'al-gur), same as Gur-Baal. We read in 2 Chron. xxvi;7, that ‘the Lord assisted Uzziah against the Philistines, and against the Arabians that dwelt in Gur-Baal.' The Septuagint renders this and the Azrabians that dweſt above Petra. It was doubtless some town of Arabia Petraea. (See GUR-BAAL). . . . BAAL-HAMON (bā'al-hā'mon), (Heb. Tº 722, Öah'a/-/haw-mome', Baal of multitude), a place where Solomon is said to have had a vineyard (Cant. viii:11). Rosenmüller conceives that if this Baal- Hamon was the name of a place that actually ex- isted, it may be reasonably supposed identical with Baal-Gad, or Heliopolis; for Hamon may have been a corruption of Amon, the Hebrew way of pro- nouncing the Ammon of the Egyptians (see Nah. iii:8), whom the Greeks identified with Jupiter (Bib. Geog. ii, p. 253). There was a place called Hamon, in the tribe of Asher (Josh. xix:28), which Ewald thinks was the same as Baal-Hamon. The book of Judith (viii:3) places a Balamon (Baxapºv) or Belamon (BeNapºv) in central Palestine, which suggests another alternative. * - BAAL-HANAN (bā'al-hă'nan), (Heb. 7 º'2, bah'al-khaw-mawn', lord of grace), BAAL–HAZOR 1. An early king of Edom (B. C. I 500), son of Achbor, successor of Saul (Gen. xxxvi:38, 39; I Chron. i.49, 50). 2. A Gederite (B. C. IOI 5) royal overseer of the olive and sycamore trees in the low plains, under David (I Chron. xxvii:28). iºn ºn BAAL-HAZOR (bā'al-hă'zor), (Heb. Tº 222, Bah'a/-ähaw-tsore', Baal's village), the place where Absalom kept his flocks and held his sheep-shear- ing feast (2 Sam. xiii:23). The Targum makes it ‘the plain of Hazor.' It is said to have been ‘be- side Ephraim,' not in the tribe of that name, but near the city called Ephraim which was in the tribe of Judah, and is mentioned in 2 Chron. xiii:19; John xi:54. This Ephraim is placed by Eusebius eight miles from Jerusalem on the road to Jericho; and is supposed by Reland to have been between Bethel and Jericho. º BAAL-HERMON (bā'al-her'mon), Heb. Tº 222, bah'al-Aher-mome', lord of Hermon). The Sep- tuagint makes two names of this in I Chron. v.:23, Baa/ Ermone, and in Judg. iii:3, where the origin- al has “Mount Baal-Hermon,’ it has Mount A/er- mon. It seems to have been a place in or near Mount Hermon, and not far from Baal-gad, if it was not, as some suppose, the same place. BAALI (bā'al-i), (Heb. "?”, bah-a/-ee", my master). “Thou shalt call me Ishi; and shalt call me no more Baali” (Hos. ii:16). BAALIM (bā'al-im). See BAAL. BAALIS (ba'a-lis), (Heb. Pº2, bah-al-ece', in exultation), a king of the Ammonites, who sent Ishmael to kill Gedaliah, who governed the rem- nant of the Jews not carried captive to Babylon (Jer. xl:I4). Syx2 > BAAL-MEON (bā’al-mê'on), (Heb. * *22, ôah'a/ meſh-one', lord of dwelling, Num. xxxii:38; I Chron. v.:8; otherwise Beth-Meon, Jer. xlviii:23, and Beth-Baal-Meon, Josh. xiii: 17), a town in the tribe of Reuben beyond the Jordan, but which was in the possession of the Moabites in the time of Ezekiel (xxv:9). At the distance of two miles southeast of Heshbon, Burckhardt found the ruins of a place called Myoun, or (as Dr. Robinson corrects it) Máz'zt, which is doubtless the same, although Eusebius makes the distance greater. It is named on the Moabite Stone (1:9), as built by - Mesha. BAAL-PERAZIM (bā'al-pér'a-zim or bâ'al-pe- rā'zim), (Heb. E-sºº ºve, ôah'a/-fer-azey-tseem', lord of breaches). This name, meaning ‘places of breaches,' which David imposed upon a place in or near the valley of Rephaim, where he defeated the Philistines (2 Sam.v:20; Comp. I Chron. xiv:II; Is... xxviii:21), is important as being the only one with the prefix Baal of which we know the circum- stances under which it was imposed. BAAL-SHALISHA (bā'al-shāl'i-shá), (Heb. nº byā, ãah'a/-shaw-ſee-shaw', lord of Shalisha, 2 Kings iv:42), a place in the district of Shalisha (I Sam. ix:4). Eusebius and Jerome describe it as a city fifteen Roman miles north from Diospolis, near Mount Ephraim. The village A efr Thälth preserves the name of Shalisha. º BAAL-TAMAR (bā'al-ta'mar), (Heb. Tº 292, bah'al-taw-mawr', lord of the palm, a place near Gibeah, in the tribe of Benjamin, where the other tribes fought, with the Benjamites (Judg. xx:33). Eusebius calls it Bethamar, thus affording an in- stance of that interchange of Beth and Baal which is also exemplified in the preceding article and in 202 BAASHA Baal-MeOn. It was connected with the palm of Deborah (Judg. iv:5), which was between Bethel and Ramah, a position which might suit the notice of Baal-tamar, whence Gibeah was at- tacked. - BAALZEBUB (ba'al-zé'bub). BUB. BAAL-ZEPHON (bā'al-zé'phon), (Heb. Tº ya, ba/,' al-āsef-ohn', Baal of winter, or north), a town belonging to Egypt, on the border of the Red Sea (Exod. xiv:2; Num. xxxiii:7). Nothing is definitely known of the situation of Baal-zephon; and whatever conjectures may be formed respect- ing it must be connected with a consideration of See BEELZE- the route taken by the Israelites in leaving Egypt, for it was “over against Baal-Zephon' that they were encamped before they passed the Red Sea. It has been placed on the north shore of Egypt by Brugsch, who identifies it with Mt. Casius; about the middle of the present Isthmus, on some hill like Shekh Ennedek (Naville); at Jebel Atakah, Or a spot on the east side of the modern canal nearly opposite fort Ajrud. The conjectures of Ebers (Durch Gosen gum Sinai, p. 570) that Phoe- nician sailors propitiated the god of the north wind when starting southwards on a voyage down the Gulf of Suez is a plausible one (A. T. Chap- man, Hasting's Bib. Dict.) - BAANA (bā'a-nā), (Heb. ***, bah-an-aw', son of affliction, patient). 1. Son of Ahilud, officer of Solomon (1 Kings iv.: I2), B. C. IOI 5. 2. Father of Zadok, who helped to repair the wall of Jerusalem (B.C. 470) after the captivity (Neh. iii:4). BAANAH (bā'a-nah), (Heb. as in Baana, of which this is another form). 1. A son of Rimmon, the Beerothite. He, with his brother Rechab, slew Ishbosheth while he lay in his bed, and took the head to David in Hebron. For this David caused them to be put to death, their hands and feet to be cut off, and their muti- lated bodies to be hung up over the pool at Hebron (2 Sam: iv:2-12), B.C. about 992. * 2. A Netophathite (B.C. 1075), one of David's mighty men (2 Sam. xxiii:29; I Chron. xi:30). 3. Son of Hushai (B.C. IoI2), an officer of Solo- mon (I Kings iv:16). 4. Qne of those who returned (B.C. 536), with Zerubbabel from captivity (Ezra ii:2; Neh. vii.7). BAARA (bā'a-rá), (Heb. 8-22, bah-ar-aw', brut- ish, or a wood, daughter of the fresh), one of the wives of Shaharaim, of the tribe of Benjamin (I, Chron. viii:8). . In the next verse, by some mis- take, she is called Hodesh. ay-yaw', work of Jehovah), a Gershonite Levite, forefather of Asaph the singer (I Chron. vi;40), B.C. about 13 Io. BAASHA (bā'a-shā), (Heb. Nº, bah-shaw', offensiveness, valor), son of Ahijah, of the tribe of Issachar, third king of Israel, and founder of a dynasty, was probably of common birth (1 Kings xvi;2), but rose to the throne by his slaughter of Nadab, king of Israel, and all his family while the king was besieging Gibbethon, a city of the Philis- tines (I Kings xv.27). By this cruel act he unde- signedly fulfilled the prophecy respecting Jero- boam’s posterity (I Kings xiv:10). He followed in the wicked ways of Jeroboam, and was visited with the most fearful judgments of God. The warning he received of the consequences of his Conduct (I Kings xvi;I-5) did not induce him to BABEL, TOWER OF forsake his evil courses. He attempted to fortify Ramah, but was compelled to desist by the attack of Ben-hadad at Asa's prompting (I Kings xv.16- 21; 2 Chron. xvi; I-6). He reigned twenty-four years, B. C. 91 I-888. His reign was filled with war and treachery. For his sins and idolatries the prophet Jehu declared to him the determination of God to exterminate his family, which was accom- plished in the days of his son Elah, by Zimri (I Kings xvi;3-13). BABEL, TOWER OF (bā'bel, toti'ār 6v), (Heb. 2. &azv-bed", gate of God). After the flood, we are told in Genesis (chap. xi) that men journeyed from the East until they came to the plain of Shinar, where they built the tower of Babel, in the vain hope of ascending into heaven. God, how- ever, confounded their language and scattered them over the face of the earth. (1) Confusion of Tongues. The references in this narrative to Shinar and Babel, or Babylon, in- dicate that here again we may expect to find a Babylonian account of the Confusion of Tongues, just as we have found a Babylonian account of the Deluge. As we have seen, the Accadians re- garded themselves as having come from the ‘mountain of the east' where the ark had rested, while Shinar is the Hebrew form of the native name Sumir—or Sungir, as it was pronounced in the allied dialect of Accad—the southern half of pre- Semitic Babylonia. Now Mr. George Smith dis- covered some broken fragments of a cuneiform text which evidently related to the building of the Tower of Babel. It tells us how certain men had ‘turned against the father of all the gods,” and how the thoughts of their leader's heart “were evil.” At Babylon they essayed to build “a mound' or hill-like tower, but the winds blew down their work, and Anu ‘confounded great and small on the mound,’ as well as their ‘speech,” and ‘made strange their counsel.” The very word that is used in the sense of ‘confounding' in the narrative of Genesis is used also in the Assyrian text. The Biblical writer, by a play upon words, not uncom- mon in the Old Testament, compares it with the name of Babel, though etymologically the latter word has nothing to do with it. Babel is the As- syrian Babili, ‘Gate of God,' and is merely a Semitic translation of the old Accadian (or rather Sumirian) name of the town, Ca-dimíra, where Ca is ‘gate’ and dimíra ‘God.' Chaldean tradition assigned the construction of the tower and the consequent confusion of languages to the time of the autumnal equinox; and it is possible that the hero-king Etanna (Titan in Greek writers), who is stated to have built a city in defiance of the will of heaven, was the wicked chief under whom the tower was raised (Sayce, “Fresh Light from the 24 ºf Mazzatºgayaſs"). - (2) Tradition. Plato also reports a tradition that, in the golden age, men and animals made use of one common language, but too ambitiously aspiring to immortality, were, as a punishment, confounded in their speech by Jupiter. In the details of the story of the war of the Titans against the gods may also be traced some traditionary resemblance to the narrative of the Bible. ‘The Sibyl,” says Josephus (A7ttig. i.4), ‘also makes mention of this town, and of the confusion of lan- guage, when she says thus: “When all men were of one language, some of them built a high tower as if they would thereby ascend up to heaven, but the gods sent storms of wind and overthrew the tower, and gave everyone his peculiar language, and for this reason it was that the city was called Babylon.”’ 203 BABEL, TOWER OF (3) Sacred Narrative. The sacred narrative (Gen. xi:4) assigns as the reason which prompted men to the undertaking, simply a desire to possess a building so large and high as might be a mark and rallying point in the vast plains where they had settled, in order to prevent their being scat- tered abroad, and thus the ties of kindred be rudely sundered, individuals be involved in peril, and their numbers be prematurely thinned at a time when population was weak and insufficient. Such an attempt agrees with the circumstances in which the sons of Noah were placed, and is in itself of a commendable nature. But that some ambitious and unworthy motives were blended with these feelings is clearly implied in the sacred record, which, however, is evidently conceived and set forth in a dramatic manner (ver. 6, 7) and may wear around an historical substance somewhat of a poetical dress. (4) Identification. After the lapse of so many centuries, and the occurrence in ‘the land of Shinar' of so many revolutions, it is not to be expected that the identification of the Tower of Babel with any actual ruin should be easy, or lead to any very certain result. (See article on “Baby/onzazz Cities,” by Hormuzd Rassam, Esq., Jour. of Trans. of the Victoria Inst., vol. xvii, April 16, 188?, ?. 227 sq.) From the Holy Scriptures it appears that when Nebuchadnezzar conquered Jerusalem and leveled most of the city with the ground, “he brought away the treasures of the temple, and the treas- ures of the king's house, and put them all into the temple of Bel at Babylon.” The brazen and other vessels which Solomon had caused to be made for the service of Jehovah are said to have been broken up by order of the Babylonian monarch, and formed into the famous gates of brass which so long adorned the superb entrances into the great area of the temple of Belus. (5) Its Purpose. The purposes to which this splendid edifice was appropriated may have been partly gathered from the preceding statements. These purposes varied in some degree with the changes in opinions and manners which successive ages brought. The signal disappointment inflicted on its original founders shows that even in its origin there was connected with it something sig- nally displeasing to God. It seems, indeed, al- ways to have existed in derogation of the Divine glory. Consecrated at the first, as it probably was, to the immoderate ambition of the monothe- istic children of the Deluge, it passed to the Sabaean religion and thus falling one degree from purity of worship, became a temple of the sun and the rest of the host of heaven, till, in the natural prog- ress of corruption, it sank into gross idolatry; and, as the passage from Herodotus shows, was polluted by the vices which generally accompanied the observances of heathen superstition. In one pur- pose it undoubtedly proved of service to mankind. The Babylonians were given to the study of as- tronomy. This ennobling pursuit was one of the peculiar functions of the learned men, denomi- nated by Herodotus, Chaldaeans, the priests of Belus; and the temple was crowned by an astro- nomical observatory, from the elevation of which the starry heavens could be most advantageously studied over plains so open and wide, and in an ºphere so clear and bright, as those of Baby- OIlla. To Nimrod the first foundation of the tower is ascribed: Semiramis enlarged and beautified it, but it appears that the temple of Bel, in its most renowned state, was not completed till the time of Nebuchadnezzar, who, after the accomplishment of his many conquests, consecrated this superb edifice to the idolatrous object to whom he ascribed BABEL, TOWER OF his victories. That the observatory on the tower was erected in remote times, there is good reason to believe. Prideaux mentions the circumstance that when Alexander made himself master of Bab- ylon, Calisthenes, the philosopher, who attended him thither, found astronomical observations as- cending upwards 1900 years. { (6) Appearance. The appearance of the tower is deeply impressive, rising suddenly as it does out of a wide desert plain, with its rent, frag- mentary and fire-blasted pile, masses of vitrified matter lying around, and the whole hill itself on which it stands caked and hardened out of the materials with which the temple had been built. Hormuzd Rassam says: “The vitrified portion of the tower of Belus has ever been a great mystery to me, and although I have been trying for the last three years to find out, through scientific gen- tlemen in this country, the cause of the vitrifica- tion, I have as yet found no one who could explain the mystery satisfactorily. Every traveler who visited the place could not help noticing the al- most supernatural sight, but not one of them could come to any tangible conclusion as to the cause. Benjamin, of Tudela, goes so far as to assert that the ‘heavenly fire which struck the tower split it to its very foundation;' and my late friend Mr. Loftus, gives the opinion of a “talented compan- ion,’ who originated the idea, when they examined the Birs Nimroud in company, that in order to render their edifices more durable, the Babylo- nians submitted them, when erected, to the heat of a furnace. The former authority does not tell us whether his assertion was based upon his own con- jecture, or that he quoted a tradition which existed then in the country when he visited the town about seven hundred years ago. As for the opinion of the latter, it cannot hold water, because it is against common sense that a huge tower like that º Birs Nimroud could be subjected to artificial heat after it was built. The tower must have been originally at least two hundred feet high; and to build a furnace to envelop it would be just like trying to cover a solid mass equal in size to the whole dome of St. Paul's Cathedral with one huge furnace, and subjecting it to artificial heat for the purpose of vitrifying it. Indeed, there is no visi- ble sign of vitrification on any part of the remain- ing edifice, but the huge vitrified bowlders are scattered about the tower, and look as if they do not belong to the place at all. Some of these must be between ten and fifteen feet square; and the vitrification is so complete throughout that, when I tried to have a large piece broken to bring to the British Museum, I failed to do so until I obtained the services of a competent mason, who managed to break me two pieces, after having blunted half-a-dozen of his iron tools.” (Jozer. of Trazzsacázons of the Victoria /?tsz., z/o/, ºrzyſz, Azºr. 16, 1883, Žº. 235, 236.) N” A very considerable space round , the tower, forming a vast court or area, is covered with ruins, affording abundant vestiges of former buildings; exhibiting uneven heaps of various sizes, covered with masses of broken brick, tiles and vitrified fragments—all bespeaking some signal Overthrow in former days. The towerlike ruin on the summit is a solid mass 28 feet broad, constructed of the most beautiful brick masonry. It is rent from the top nearly halfway to the bottom. It is perforated in ranges of square openings. At its base lie sev- eral immense unshapen masses of fine brick work— some changed to a state of the hardest vitrifica- tion, affording evidence of the action of fire, which seems to have been the lightning of heaven. The base of the tower, at present, measures 2,082 feet in circumference, Hardly half of its former 204 BABYLON altitude remains. From its summit, the view in the distance presents to the south an arid desert plain; to the west the same trackless waste; to- wards the northeast marks of buried ruins are visible to a vast distance. (7) Bricks. The bricks which compose the tower are mostly stamped with several lines of inscription, in the Cuneiform or Babylonian char- acter. Some extend to four or even seven lines, but the dimensions of all are the same. The bricks of Babylon are of two kinds, sun-dried and fire-burnt. The former are larger and of a coarser make than the latter; their solidity is equal to that of the hardest stone. They are composed of clay mixed with chopped straw or broken reeds, in Order to increase their compactness. This is the sort of brick which the children of Israel made while in Egyptian bondage. The unburnt bricks Commonly form the interior or mass of a building. This is the case with the great tower, while it was faced with the more beautiful fabric made in the furnace or kiln. BABYLON (báb'y-lon), (Gr. BašvXów, bab-ul-/ohn'; (Heb. 532, &á-be/, Babcl, mcaning confusion of tongues (Gen. xi. I-9). - I. 1. Name. The biblical account ascribes its foundation to the descendants of Cush and fol- lowers of Nimrod (Gen. xi:2-9) who came from the east and settled in the plain of Shinar. This state- ment distinguishes the people who founded the city from the Semitic race who afterward pos- sessed it. All that we have been able to learn of the city and its history points strongly to the same view. The Babylonians called the city Báb-i/;, gate of god, and Báb-ilāni, gate of the gods. In the Sumerian inscriptions (see BABYLONIA) it is called Ka-dān-gira, gate of god; Zºn-fir, seat of life; Shuanzza, and E-AE2. In Daniel iv: 30 the place is appropriately termed ‘Babylon the Great;’ and by Josephus (Antig. viii.6) the Great Baby- Zon. It was the metropolis of the province of Bab- ylon and of the Babylonio-Chaldaean empire. 2. Jituation and Appearance. The city was located on the Euphrates (Jer. xiii:4, 5, 7; xlvi;2, 6), the great stream, which corresponds to the name given in Gen. xv. 18, etc. Two walls surrounded it. The outer one was said to have been built by Belus and repaired by Nebuchad- nezzar. Babylon was laid out in the form of a square. The length of the wall surrounding it is variously given by historians. Ctesias makes it 360 furlongs in circumference; Quintus Curtius, 368; Strabo, 385; and Herodotus, 480. It was between 60 and 70 feet high (Sir Henry Rawlinson) and wide enough at the top for a four-horse chariot to turn around. These defenses were remarkable in strength for the times, and one of the greatest evils foretold by Jeremiah was their destruction (Jer, li:58). The cuneiform inscriptions do not sustain the account given by the classical writers of the height of the walls and the extent of the city. 3. Nebuchadnezzar. In the India House, London, is the large inscription of Nebuchadnez- zar which is the chief authority regarding the structures of Babylon. From this we learn that Nebuchadnezzar filled the city with temples and public buildings. Among the ruins are countless numbers of bricks bearing the name of this king, which supports the statements of the inscription and of the Book of Daniel that Nebuchadnezzar was a builder-king. From the fallen towers of Babylon have arisen not only all the present cities in its vicinity, but others which, like itself, have long since gone down into the dust. Since the days of Alexander four Capitals, at least have BABYLON 205 been built out of its remains—Seleucia by the Greeks, Ctesiphon by the Parthians, Al Maidan by the Persians, and Kufa by the Caliphs; with towns, villages, and caravansaries without number. The ..". fragments and materials were trans- ported along the rivers and the canals. The river ran through the city from north to south; and on each side was a quay of the same thickness as the Brick Bearing the Name of Nebuchadnezzar. walls of the city, and Ioo stadia in length. In these quays were gates of brass, and from each of them steps descending into the river. A bridge was thrown across the river, of great beauty and admirable contrivance, a furlong in length and 30 feet in breadth. As the Euphrates overflows dur- ing the summer months, through the melting of the snows on the mountains of Armenia, two canals were cut to turn the course of the waters into the Tigris, and vast artificial embankments were raised on each side of the river, 4. Palace of Nebuchadnezzar. The palace built by Nebuchadnezzar was prodigious in size and superb in embellishments. Its outer wall embraced six miles; within that circumference were two other embattled walls, besides a great tower. Three brazen Fº led into the grand area, and every gate of consequence throughout the city was of brass. In accordance with this fact are the terms which Isaiah (xlv. 1, 2) employs when, in the name of Jehovah, he promises Cyrus that the city should fall before him, ‘I will open before him the two-leaved gates; I will break in ieces the gates of brass'—a prophecy which was ulfilled to the letter when Cyrus made himself master of the place in the dead of the night. Having first by means of its canals turned the river into the great dry lake west of Babylon, and then marched through the emptied channel, he made his way to the outer walls of the fortified alace on its banks; when finding the brazen gates incautiously left open by the royal guards while engaged in carousals, he entered with all his train; ‘the Lord of Hosts was his leader,’ and Babylon, as an empire, was no more. The palace was splendidly decorated with stat- ues of men and animals, with vessels of gold and silver, and furnished with luxuries of all kinds brought thither from conquests in Egypt, Pales- tine, and Tyre. Its greatest boast were the hanging gardens, which acquired even from Grecian writers the appellation of one of the won- ders of the world. They are attributed to the gallantry of Nebuchadnezzar, who constructed them in compliance with a wish of his queen, Amytis, to possess elevated groves such as she had enjoyed on the hills around her native Ecbatana. Babylon was all flat; and to accomplish so BABYLON extravagant a desire an artificial mountain was reared, 4oo feet on each side, while terraces one above another rose to a height that overtopped the walls of the city, that is, above 300 feet in elevation. The ascent from terrace to terrace was made by corresponding flights of steps, while the terraces themselves were reared to their various stages on . of regular piers, which, forming a kind of vaulting, rose in succession one over the other to the required height of each terrace, the whole being bound together by a wall of 22 feet in thick- ness. The level of each terrace or garden was then formed in the following manner: the top of the piers was first laid over with flat stones, 16 feet in length and 4 feet in width; on these stones were spread beds of matting, then a thick layer of bitu- men; after which came two courses of bricks, which were covered with sheets of solid lead. The earth was heaped on this platform; and in order to admit the roots of large trees, prodigious hollow piers were built and filled with mold. From the Euphrates, which flowed close to the foundation, water was drawn up by machinery. The whole, says Q. Curtius (v.5), had, to those who saw it from a distance, the appearance of woods overhanging mountains. Such was the completion of Nebuchadnezzar's work when he found himself at rest in his house, and flourished in his palace. The king spoke and said, ‘Is not this great Babylon that I have built for the house of the kingdom by the might of my power, and the honor of my majesty'? (Dan. iv. 30), a picture which is amply justified by the descriptions of heathen writers. Nowhere could the king have taken so comprehensive a view of the city he had so mag- nificently constructed and adorned as when walk- ing on the highest terrace of the gardens of his palace. The remains of this palace are found in the vast mound or hill called by the natives Kasr. It is of irregular form, 800 yards in length and 600 yards in breadth. 5. Impure Worship. In Babylon were per- formed the rites of the lunar deity, who was worshiped by the Persians and the Chaldaeans under the names of Mylitta and Abytta, or Araites and Aranus. According to Maimonides, this Babylonish deity had numerous bands of young women devoted to her service; and here is seen a priestess introducing a virgin to her temple to receive the benediction of the priests. These dedicated females, Herodotus says, sat once in their lives in the shrine of Venus, their heads bound with garlands and their bodies with cords. Thus exposed, when strangers threw gold into their laps, they were obliged to retire with them into the temple, where their charms were subjected to its impure rites. The money was then laid on the altar to be consecrated to the goddess. These outrages seem to be referred to by Moses in the law, when he says, “Thou shalt not bring the hire of a harlot into the house of the Lord thy God.” 6. Corrupt Morals. Babylon, as the center of a great kingdom, was the seat of boundless luxury, and its inhabitants were notorious for their addic- tion to self-indulgence and effeminacy. Q. Curtius (v:1) asserts that, “nothing could be more corrupt than its morals, nothing more fitted to excite and allure to immoderate pleasures. The rites of hos- pitality were polluted by the grossest and most shameless lusts. Money dissolved every tie, whether of kindred, respect, or esteem. The Babylonians were very gº given to wine, and the enjoyments which accompany inebriety. Women were present at their convivialities, first with some degree of propriety, but, growing worse and worse by degrees, they ended by throwing off BABYLON at once their modesty and their clothing. On the ground of their awful wickedness the Babylonians were threatened with condign punishment, through the mouths of the prophets; and the tyranny with which the rulers of the city exercised their sway was not without a decided effect in bringing on them the terrific consequences of the Divine vengeance. Nor in the whole range of literature is there anything to be found approach- ing to the sublimity, force, and terror with which Isaiah and others speak on this painful subject (Is. xiv:11; xlvii:1; Jer, li:39; Dan. v.:1). 7. History. Babylonian history, so far as we can go back, begins about 38oo B.C. with Sargon I, king of Agade. (1) Sargon. This date is fixed by their own inscriptions, and since they were a nation of astronomers and observers of eclipses, sun-spots, and the phases of the moon, we can rely quite accurately on their dates. Nabonidus, who was king of Babylon about 554 B.C., was an archaeol- ogist and enthusiastic student of antiquity. He sought and found the foundation stone of the tem- le of the Sun-god. The literal translation of the inscription containing the announcement of his dis. covery is as follows. “That temple I excavated, its ancient foundation stone I sought, fifteen square cubits. I dug down (for) the foundation stone of Naram-Sim, the son of Sargon, which for three thousand two hundred years no king, my predeces- sor, had found.” This date added to 554 B.C., the date of King Nabonidas, takes us back to about 38oo B.C. The inscription of this very King Sar- on was found at Sepharvaim by Hormuzd assam. The writing was on a º perforated hard stone of a mottled, pinkish-gray color and in the form of the very earliest known, and reads: “I, Sargon, the king, king of Agade, to the Sun- god (Samas) in Sippara have dedicated.” There must of course have been kings before Naram-Sim and his father Sargon, and centuries which cannot be computed must , have passed before , the Babylonians had reached the high state of culture and civilization necessary to enable them to pro- duce such an object as that described above; for the stone is most beautifully drilled and polished and the characters are carefully and remarkably well executed’ (E. A. Wallis Budge, M.A., Baby- Zonian Life and Aſistory, A. Zo, London, 1891). (2) Earlier Date. But, while the general con- sensus of opinion among Assyriologists has been that accurate Babylonian chronology fairly begins with Sargon I, king of Agade, 3890 B.C., the dis- coveries of the American expedition at Nippur or Niffer (see CALNEH) give us a much earlier date. Prof. H. V. Hilprecht found the fragments of pre- Sargonic times in which are narrated the achieve- ments of En-shag-shur-ana in defending Kengi, the ancient name for Babylonia, from the enmity of the city of Kish. The capital of this early kingdom was probably the city of Erech (Gen. x:10). (See ERECH). The period of his reign was robably 5000 B.C. He was followed by other ings, among them Ur-Shulpaddu and Lugalzay- gisi, the latter being the Alexander of his time (B.C. about 4500). (See Hilprecht, The Babylo- nian Expedition of the University of Pennsylvania. /*ary 17.) (3) Ur-Bagas. Of Nimrod, the grandson of Ham and the great-grandson of Noah (Gen. x:6, Io), in whose time, according to Scripture, the kingdom was established, no trace has been found in the Babylonian records. The most important kings after Naram-Sim were Ur-Bagas, wh9 built many temples, and Dungi. The next line of kings came from Karrak, and they were followed by sev- eral viceroys. Later Simti-Silhah, an Elamite 206 BABYLON from Larsa, was ruler, and was succeeded by his son Kudur-Mabug, and his grandson Rim-Agu. (4) Hammurabi. These last two were de- feated in about 21oo B. C. by Hammurabi, who was possibly a Kassite, and he became master of Babylon. Under him the kingdom prospered in all departments. It must have been at this period that Abraham made his departure from Ur of the Chaldees (see ABRAHAM). Hammurabi was fol- lowed by a long list of kings who have left no de- tails of their reigns. A tablet has been found containing the names of about a hundred kings, but it is difficult to arrange their chronological order. Those ruling after the commonly accepted date of the flood are given, and the names are all Semitic in form. Stone Object Containing an Inscription of Nebuchadnezzal I, Recording a Grant of Privileges to Ritti-Marduk, King of Bit-Karziyabku. (5) A Kassite Dynasty. About 17oo B. C. a Kassite dynasty was established at Babylon. In 1450 B. C. a king called Kara-Indas made a treaty with the Assyrian king regarding the boundaries of their empires, as did also the next king, Burna- BABYLON 207 Burgas. This ruler was called king of Gan- dunigas, which some have identified with the Gar- den of Eden. About 1330 B. C. the Assyrian em- pire began to assert itself and a little later con- quered Babylon, under Tukulti Ninipi. The next Babylonian king was apparently Belzakir-iskun, in whose reign the Elamites made several fierce attacks upon Babylonia. (6) Nebuchadnezzar I. that Nebuchadnezzar I. came to the Babylonian throne and made three wars against the Assyrians. In the last conflict he was defeated, and Tiglath- Pileser I. of Assyria completed the conquest of Babylon, marching against Nebuchadnezzar's suc- cessor, Marduk-Iladin-ahi. About this time the Jewish nation was rising in the west, but none of the surrounding nations were strong enough to oppose her, after David’s defeat of Hadar-ezer, King of Zobah. Babylon at this time and until about 730 B. C. was in a perpetual conflict with Assyria, which gradually weakened her power until the Assyrians were absolute masters. (7) Merodach-Baladan. But Merodach-Bala- dan, or Marduk-pal-iddina now began to reign and Solicited aid from Hezekiah to oppose Sargon II. of Assyria. Hezekiah, however, did not support the Babylonian monarch, who was defeated to- gether with Elamite allies. In 705 B. C. Sennac- herib came to the Assyrian throne, who, it will be remembered, beseiged Hezekiah in Jerusalem and captured many of the cities of Judah, sending away 200, I50 prisoners into captivity. Under this king and his son, Esar-haddon, B. C. 680, Assyria became complete master of Babylon. (8) Nabopolassar. About 609 B. C., Nabu-pol- usur (Nabopolassar) then king of Babylon made a league with Egypt and Media. After various conflicts they laid seige to Nineveh, captured it and completely sacked it. This was the end of the Assyrian dominion and Babylon again began to assert herself. - It was about this time that Josiah, king of Judah, made his courageous march against Egypt (2 Kings xxiii:29, 30). (9) Nebuchadnezzar the Great. In the fourth year of Jehoiakim (Jer. xlvi :2), Nabopolassar of Babylon sent his son Nebuchadnezzar against Egypt; but news of his father’s death brought him back to Babylon to receive the crown. He set at work the captive Jews, Syrians, and Egyptians to build huge walls and palaces, and to make Babylon the greatest city in the world. Judaea and Phoenicia now threw off his yoke. But he marched at once against Tyre and Jerusalem (2 Chron. xxxvi :6; 2 Kings xxiv:I-6). Jehoiakim, king of Judah, re- belled (2 Kings xxiv:I), but Nebuchadnezzar con- quered and bound him and established Jeconiah in his place (2 Chron. xxxvi :6), whom he shortly carried Uſſ LU Dalylulu, luaving Zedekiah as king (2 Kings xxiv:II-17). After thirteen years' siege Tyre probably yielded to the iron-willed Nebu- chadnezzar, as its downfall was prophesied by Jer. (xxvii:3–6; and Ezek. xxvi). Before this event took place, however, Jerusalem rebelled, relying on Egypt for help (Jer. xxxvii:5-II ; Ezek. xvii:15–20). Nebuchadnezzar again be- seiged Jerusalem (Jer. xxxvii:5), drove off the advancing Egyptians, and after two years took the city (Jer, lii :12). Zedekiah was captured, and after being deprived of his eyes, was carried to Babylon (Ezek. xii:13). Jerusalem was sacked, the temple destroyed and the greater part of the people deported (Jer, lii :12-30; 2 Kings xxv :8– I2 ſt was this Nebuchadnezzar who threw the three Hebrew children, or youths, into the fiery It was at this time BABYLON furnace (Dan. iii:13–25), and who was so kind to the prophet Jeremiah. After having cast the three Hebrew children into the fiery furnace he had a dream in which he saw a vision that greatly troubled him. He called his astrologers and wise men, and asked them for an interpretation, which they were unable to give. Afterward Daniel was Summoned into his presence, and was asked to declare the meaning and interpretation of the dream, which he did, showing the king that his dwelling should be with the beasts of the field, and that he should eat grass and be wet with the dew of heaven for seven years till he should know ‘that the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever He will.’ This occurred one year after it was prophesied by Daniel. After this he extolled and honored God (Dan. iv). He died after a reign of 43 years. Under Nebuchadnezzar Babylon reached the Summit of her greatness and splendor. She was now the capital of the civilized world, and into her lap flowed, either through conquest or com- merce, the wealth of almost all known lands. Justly, therefore, might the prophets call her the great (Dan. iv:30), the praise of the zwhole earth (Jer, li:41), the beauty of the Cha/dees' exceſ/ency (IS. xiii:19), the lady of Æingdoms (Is. xlvii:5), but also the tender and delicate, and given to ZZeasteres (Is. xlvii:1, 8). Indeed, these last epithets are gentle, in comparison with the real state of the case; for, in consequence of the Opulence and luxury of the inhabitants, the cor- ruptness and licentiousness of manners and morals were carried to a frightful extreme. (See AVezy Light on the Biö. and Æo/y Land, Basil T. A. Evetts.) * (10) Nabonidus. Amil-Marduk (Evil-Mero- dach of the Bible), followed his father, and about 556 B. C. Nabonidus came to the throne. He was the last king of the Babylonian empire. His son Belshazzar was master of the army; and he has become confused by writers with his father Nabonidus, because it was natural for foreigners to think that, as master of the army, he was king. (11) Capture of Babylon. In the seventeenth year of Nabonidus (B. C. 539), Cyrus captured Babylon. The account in Daniel v has not yet been found mentioned on any of the records that have been recovered, but the accounts of Greek historians harmonize here with that of the Bible, that Cyrus entered Babylon on a night when the whole city, relying on the strength of the walls, had given themselves up to the riot and debauch- ery of a grand public festival. Herodotus states that Cyrus had previously caused the Pallacopas, a canal which ran west of the city, and carried off the superfluous water of the Euphrated into the lake of Nitocris, to he cleared out, in order to turn the river into it; which, by this means, was rendered so shallow, that his soldiers were able to penetrate along its hed into the city. But the cylinder record of Nabonidus, the van- quished king, (Nab.-Cyr. Chron. Col. i :12-24) does not mention such an incident. He states that “on the fourteenth day Sippar was taken without fighting. Nabonidus fled.” The Cylinder of Cyrus states that without clash or battle he (Merodach) made him (Cyrus) enter Babylon. “In view of this direct testimony of two con. temporaneous documents,” says Dr. Ira Maurice Price (7%e Montez/tenz's and the O/a/ Zasza/zezzz, p. 229) “we are forced to the conclusion that the story of Herodotus, that Cyrus diverted the waters BABYLON Terra-cotta Cylinder Containing the History of the Capture of Babylon by Cyrus the Great, King of Persia. of the Euphrates from its channel and marched in under the unguarded gates of the river, cannot be true. It may refer to the later capture of Babylon by Darius in 516 B. C.” On the other hand, Mr. E. A. Wallis Budge (Babylonian Life and History, p. 88) maintains that while there is no mention of draining the river by Cyrus in the inscriptions, there is no reason why Cyrus should not have had recourse to this means as well as to fighting. (12) Decline. After its capture, Babylon de- clined; for Cyrus made Susa the capital of his kingdom; and Babylon thus ceased to be the chief city of an independent state. Under the rule of the Persians, Babylon fared moderately well. Cyrus earned the title of “My Shepherd” (Is. Xliv:28; xlv.:1), “Daniel, pros- pered” (Dan. vi.28), the Jews were allowed to go up to Jerusalem, and the prophesies of Jeremiah were fulfilled (Jer. xxv :12; xxix:Io; xxxiii:7- 14). In 530 B. C. Cyrus was succeeded by Cam- byses. (13) Darius Hystaspis. An insurrection under Darius Hystaspis, the object of which was 208 BABYLON to gain emancipation from Persian bondage, led that prince to punish the Babylonians by throw- ing down the walls and gates which had been left by Cyrus, and by expelling them from their homes. Xerxes plundered and destroyed the temple of Belus, which Alexander the Great would probably, but for his death, have restored. Under Seleucus Nicator the city began to sink speedily, after that monarch built Seleucia on the Tigris, and made it his place of abode. In the time of Strabo and Diodorus Siculus the place lay in ruins. Jerome, in the fourth century of the Christian era, learnt that the site of Babylon had been converted into a park or hunting-ground for the recreation of the Persian monarchs, and that, in order to preserve the game, the walls had been from time to time repaired. Figurative. In the prophetic writings of the Apocalypse (xiv:8; xvi;19; xvii:5; xviii: 2) Babylon stands for Rome, symbolizing Heathenism:-"Babylon is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.’ This reference appears to have been derived from the practice of the Jews, who were accustomed to designate Rome, which they hated, by the opprobious and not inappropriate name of Babylon. This is also the sense given to Babylon in I Pet v :13 by the fathers and many commen- tators; but others refer it to Babylon in Asia, since it is quite possible that Peter labored for a while in that city, where there was at that time a large Jewish colony. Another interpre- tation identifies Babylon with Jerusalem, i. e., with the Jerusalem which was false to its heavenly King. But in this view “Babylon is not the Jerusalem only of the Jews. She is the great Church of God throughout the world when that Church becomes faithless to her true Lord and King” (Dr. William Milligan, Com., Rev., ch. xvii; Barnes, Bib. Dict.). II. Another Babylon lay in Egypt, south of Heliopolis, on the east bank of the Nile (Strabo, xvii:807). The Babylonians who had emigrated during the civil commotions between the two empires founded it (Diod. Sic, i :56; Josephus, Ant. ii:15, 1) BABYLON-GERMAN EXPLORA- TIONS IN. The recent work of German explorers on the site of ancient Babylon is producing rich results. The expedition began work in the spring of 1899 under the able leadership of Dr. Koldewey. Two important points concerning ancient Babylon were already known; one of them is the location of the palace of Nebuchadnezzar, which is now called El Kasr, and the other was the great business center of the city which was connected with the Euphrates by a canal, enab: ling the merchants of Babylon to readily avail themselves of her extensive commerce by sea. (1) El Kasr. At El Kasr, the site of the palace, the German explorers began their work by breaking through the massive circular wall which Ktesias says was eighty feet wide, and upon the top of whose great bulwark six chariots could be driven abreast. - Herodotus claimed that this wall was eighty- four feet wide and three hundred and thirty-six feet high. He also claimed that small one-story houses were built on the top of the wall on either side, and there was even then space enough between the houses to permit four chariots to drive abreast. BABYLON Herodotus has fared badly at the hands of modern critics, but in this instance the explorers found that this work of antiquity was even larger than he claimed. The outer, or retaining wall was twenty-three and a half feet thick and was made of baked bricks laid with asphalt. In- side of this there was a filling of sand and gravel which extended sixty-nine feet, and then the Outer retaining wall, which was forty-four feet thick. The whole structure, therefore, was one hundred and thirty-six and a half feet wide. They also verified the statement of Diodorus to the effect that many of the bricks of the wall and its citadels were beautifully colored. Dr. Koldewey was the first who succeeded in reconstructing any goodly portion of the many enameled fragments found here, and he has re- stored two of the lions which formed a frieze on both sides of the road. One of them is white with a yellow mane, and the other is yellow with a dark mane having a greenish appearance. (2) City of Babylon. Behind this famous wall lay the buried ruins of Babylon, the city of Nebuchadnezzar, and also the city of Assur- bani-pal, the Assyrian king, for, as the tide of conquest swept backward and forward, the kings of Nineveh were often the kings of Babylon, while in some instances the situation was re- versed. Esar-haddon, the father of Assur-bani-pal, held his winter court at Babylon, and the dominion of the city and surrounding country was a part of his legacy to his son. This was the city which was “the lady of kingdoms,” and the fame of her hanging gardens will ever live in the annals of history. The excavators have already crossed the park Surrounding the palace, and are now attacking the edifice in which Cyrus is supposed to have signed the edict authorizing the return of the Jews to their own land. It is hoped that important documents may be found, for many a vault of hidden archives must be buried here. The favorite temple of Neb- uchadnezzar has been uncovered, and here is a monument which is described as “the middle be 2 >). Iſº I º: Portion of Cylinder of Baked Clay with Cuneiform Inscrip- tion. i y point of Babylon,” and here also are the accounts of the workmen’s wages, here is a psalm, and there a terra-cotta figure. A canal has been found which crosses the 209 BABYLON Euphrates, and this is identified as the east canal mentioned in inscriptions which had been pre- viously found. It is thirty-nine feet wide. (3) Latest Report. Under date of Feb. Io, I900, Dr. Koldewey gives the latest information which we have so far obtained from his expedi- tion. He says: “I have not found in any of the excavations, any old buildings or traces of them. There are some remains of the time of Nebuch- adnezzar, such as the great Hittite stele, but wherever we dig, and we are now ten feet below the level of the Euphrates, we find seals of the time of Nebuchadnezzar, but nothing of more ancient date. The lowest that can yet be assigned is the lower part of the temple of Ishtar, which goes back to Sardanapalus (or Assur-bani-pal), and even around the cylinder of Sardanapalus, were the tablets of Nebuchadnezzar. It is prob- able that the old buildings will be found when we reach the southern part of the mound. Figures from Engraved Cylinders Showing Babylonian Cos- tu IneS. It seems daily more certain that the entire Kasr was a new suburb built by Nebuchadnezzar and his father, and that the long line of rulers who Worshiping Heavenly Bodies. From a Cylinder of White Agate. preceded them lived in some other part of the city. It seems that Amran, as the Arabs, call another mound here, is the most likely spot, for this alone of all the mounds is high enough to hold the W4. BABYLONIA ruins which we have a right to expect. On the surface is a layer of graves of late date, but of what is beneath it we know nothing at all. This hill is to be the next point of attack, and we shall work with even a larger force than hitherto. In the course of the excavations yarious frag- ments of cylinders have been found, as well as statuettes of different Babylonian deities. After searching the palace of Nebuchadnezzar, beyond #Hiſ - ſ ####| || Q | º *H º * Cylinder with Cuneiform Characters and Figures Worshiping the Lunar Deity. the East Canal, the rest of the mounds will be ex- cavated” (Rogers, His. of Bab. and Assyr.). BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA, RE- LIGION OF. (1) Sources—Origin of the Pantheon. Be- fore the discovery and the deciphering of the cuneiform inscriptions, our knowledge of the re- ligion of the people that lived in ancient times on the borders of the Euphrates and Tigris was lim- ited to the information given by Greek authors. Since 1835 a great number of documents have been found in the ruin-mounds of the now almost de- Serted country that bear testimony to the power and civilization of its ancient inhabitants. Parts of temples and palaces were laid bare, inscriptions were found and deciphered by the ingenuity of English and French scholars, and an almost un- known world was revealed. The excavations of the latest years, conducted by the French consul, de Sarzea, and by the University of Pennsylvania, added materials of the highest value to the large collections of monuments preserved in London, Paris, and Berlin. One of the most remarkable finds was the dis- covery of the remains of Sardanapalus' (668–626 B. C.) library in the mound of Kojundshik (Nineveh), that provided us with numerous texts, copied by order of the king (see NINEVEH). These copies form the chief source for our knowl- edge of Babylonian religious life, and contain prayers, incantations, forecasts, lists of gods, lists of temples, etc. But as they do not mention the date of the originals they were taken from, and as there is only a small number of well- preserved texts (owing to the fragility of the tablets, made of baked clay), our knowledge of the religion, though increasing every year, is still very imperfect, especially as to its development. In the oldest times a number of small king- doms existed in North and South Babylonia (Ur, Uruk, Eridu, Larsa, Lagash, Nippur, Agade), the population being formed by tribes of different descent and race. Among these the Sumerians possessed a high civilization. Before 3800 B. C. Semitic tribes took possession of a part of the country (kingdom of Sargon of Agade, 3800 B. C.), and after 2250 B. C. Babel became the pre- dominating town (conquests of King Kham- murabi). One branch of the Semites, the Assy- rians, settled in MESOPOTAMIA (which see); their might increased, and several times the Baby- lonian empire was overpowered by Assyrian kings. After the fall of Nineveh, the capital of the As- 210 BABYLONIA syrians, there was a short time of glory for Baby- lon (Nabopolassar, Nebukadrezar), until it was gººd by the Persians under Cyrus (538 (2) History. The history of the religion runs to a certain degree parallel to the political his- tory. The Sumerians were the inventors of the cuneiform Script, became the teachers of the Semites, who in that period did not know how to write, and their language was for centuries used in religious texts. Their influence on the religion of the Semites has been important, but is not to be overrated, as the religious ideas of both were doubtless very similar. Each town possessed a ºr " Heads of Statues from Teioh. Small pantheon, and was always governed by the Lord and Lady of the town. Where the popula- tion of a town was homogeneous, the gods were also of uniform nature; in the case of diverse Origin among the inhabitants, there was a differ- ence also between the characters of the gods; for men make their gods according to their own peculiar qualities. - As the Semites of Babylon became predomi- nant in the country, the gods of their capital town took the leading place, but in many instances the lords of other places were brought into relation with them by the schools of priests. The gods were almost always believed to live in matrimony, and so it was easy to make genealogies, which, owing to the differences between the schools of priests, were not always in harmony. Local deities of the same character were often regarded as different manifestations of one god, and thus it happens that we have an enormous number of names for some twenty gods, representing distinct tVDeS. - *ś, Gods, Local Cults. The Babylonian-As- syrian gods belong to the class of nature-gods. In many instances the heavenly bodies are be- lieved to be their incorporations, but we must remember that gods and stars were not identi- fied; it was only by means of them that the gods showed themselves. In other cases we find animals as an attribute of gods, because the pecu- liar power of a god was especially proper to a cer- tain animal, but the animal itself was not es- teemed as a god. The first place of the Pantheon is taken by Ana or Anu, God of Heaven. In the inscriptions of Gudea, priest of Lagash, he and his companions, Bel, and Ea, are already mentioned at the head of the list of gods, but at the same time we know him as the local god of Urick, where he, his wife, Amatu and his daughter Nana, or Ishtar are worshiped in the temple E-anna, house of heaven. Bel (the lord= Bač/), Lord of the Earth- mountain, takes the second place, and is the local god of Nippur. In ancient times his temple at Nippur was famous, but afterwards most of the glory of the ruler of mankind was transferred to Maruduk, the local god of Babylon. BABYLONIA Ea is the God of the Waters that surround the Earth-mountain, and also of the waters beneath the earth. The place of his local cult was Eridu, where he was worshiped as Lord of Wisdom. In the depth of the sea is his home. He speaks to mankind in dreams; he knows the secret ex- orcisms against evil spirits; as Lord of the Waters he bestows fertility; as Lord of Wisdom he is the patron of artists and workmen. These three gods, with their wives, Anat, Belit and Damkina, are consequently the rulers of the universe (heaven, earth, and the deep waters around and beneath the earth). Of little lower rank are the three gods, Sin, Shamash and Ishtar. Sin, the Lord of the Moon (the local god of Ur in Babylonia and of Harran in Mesopotamia), is often called the father of 211 BABYLONIA ality; and in historical times, when the matriar- chate had been long forgotten, she was worshiped as the Lady of Fertility, especially in Uruk. On the other hand, she reminds us of the Amazons, when as the Lady of the Battle (as she is often called in the historical inscriptions) she rides on a leopard, bearing bow and arrows." The god Ramman, Lord of Wind, Thunder and Lightning, Rain and Storm, was imported in early times from the Syrian countries. His character is the same as that of the Israelitic Jahwe (Jehovah), the bull being his animal, while he bears powerful horns on his head. The local god of Babylon was Maruduk. Un- der the famous king Khammurabi (2250 B. C.) his town become the capital of the country, and so Maruduk's glory rose. As son of Ea he is º: º . -: :* --- Priest Introducing Votaries to Shamash, the Sun God, in His Shrine. Shamash (the Sun). As some peasants still do, the Babylonians believed in the influence of the moonlight on the growth of plants, and so he is venerated as Lord of Fertility; owing to the mysterious transformations of his shape he is believed to be a mighty sorcerer, who creates himself, and, according to this, possesses sacred wisdom (Lord of Decrees). Shamash, Lord of the Sun, was the local god of Larsa and Sippar. In the morning the doors of heaven are opened, and from between two mountains he drives in his carriage, guided by Bunene, the charioteer. He is the great judge, the counselor of the gods, and as Lord of the Sunlight he is a friendly power that frightens the wicked. Ishtar, the Lady of Heaven, is identified with the star Venus. She is unmarried, and her posi- tion among the gods represents the position of women in the times of the matriarchate, when the mother was the head of her family, without re- garding the various fathers of her children as husbands. Thus, her cult was of great sensu- the mighty sorcerer, who knows all his father knows. He is the creator, the god of light, the conqueror of the great dragon of darkness, Tia- mat. The fate of mankind is settled by him in the chamber of destiny, and his name is Pel beli, Lord of Lords. Even the Assyrian kings wor- shiped him in Babylon. He was the national Babylonian god, as Ashur was the national god of Assyria. Ashur is the only god that is particularly As- syrian. Perhaps he was originally the Lord of the town Ashur, but his origin is not sufficiently clear. In Assyria he is the Lord of Lords, the father of the gods, whose banner is at the head of the troops, for the wars of the kings are his wars; it is the glory of his name that frightens the enemy, and to him a part of the booty is dedicated. With this one exception, the Assyrian pan- theon is wholly the same as that of Babylonia. Besides the gods already mentioned, there are worshiped in both countries Ninib, the warrior, a sun-god, whose wife Gula “vivifies death;” |BABYLONIA 212 Nergal (local god of Kutu), a god of war, a terrible lion, symbolizing the burning summer sun, also the lord of the deceased, the king of Hades; Nabu (Nebo), the great god of Borsippa, the patron of the scholars, to whom mankind is indebted for the art of writing, the gracious lord, the messenger and son of Maruduk ; Gibil, Lord of Fire, and Nusku, the messenger of the gods. Those are the “ilani rabuti,” the great gods; but there is a large number of gods of less promi- nent position: The seven spirits of heaven (the Igigi), and the seven spirits of earth (Anunnaki); Dugu (Tammu.g), the god of the sun in spring- time, whose place is at the door of heaven; Nam- tor, the god of pestilence; and all the other gods whose names are preserved to us. (4) Temples—Priests—Offerings—Feasts. A town of any importance possessed a number of temples, and among these one giggurat or “tower- temple.” The giggurat consists of several ter- races, made of bricks, on the top of which a small chapel was erected, open in front, with an altar before it. The chapel contained the image of the god; sometimes the walls of the terraces were made of enameled bricks in different colors (black, white, purple, blue, red, silver and gold). The top was reached by steps or by a sloping way. On the lower floors were rooms dedicated to various other gods. So in Esagila, the famous tower-temple of Babylon, were smaller temples for Maruduk’s wife, Nabu, Ea, Anu and Bel. x -º-º-º" The temples contained §"-2%. ...] imitations of the sup- & ſt posed real dwellings of the gods (house of the great mountain of earth, house of the fundament of heaven and earth, house of heaven, etc.). The great ocean that surrounds the world was represented in a temple of Lagash by a basin; the “chamber of destiny” was imitated in Esagila. Of course, the oldest temples were of a mod- est construction, but the kings were always en- gaged in repairing and embellishing the houses of their gods; and in the times of Nebukadrezar the Great, the chief- temple of Babylon was a complex of temples, surrounded by a huge wall, with large court- yards and a great gig- gurat of seven stories. The priests were persons of great influence, not only by their position in the temples, but also by their knowledge. People wanted them for the God Ea. writing of contracts, for medicaments, exor- cisms, and forecasts. In many instances we find women as priests, even royal princesses. Their revenues consisted in parts of the Offerings and in the profits from the possessions of the temple. The kings endowed the temples with fields, slaves, necessaries of the service (oil, incense, meal, and animals), and in many instances priests lent sil- ver or corn; especially in the older times they are usually the bankers. All sorts of perfect animals could be offered to the gods; the kings offer at Special occasions, and often a temple receives from them the neces- BABYLONIA saries for a daily offering. The gods were sup- posed to eat and drink the essences of the things offered to them, and therefore at least twice daily they were supplied with a meal. Every under- sºs re-si. i*.* - *i; }; Hü. ####| || "... is i.” 11. Sº \l'till 'ſid, S -. | | * is . . . . º d ºw- 'iº - | ºf t t º ! |W |||ſ, º º * ºssº. 3." %23;S$ºk. Fº ºğ - ſ * N - i. W M. " § # § º º / §ll'ſ º | ſ ; sº ſº º º, , ſº ||f||º', ; ; iſºl §º #18. d §§ * ſº #. § | #"º. \ j} |...}|† #| || ||jº. #|| 5.ºllº ſºlº § #| # i. º § º \ : º d # . N § § % Kºś sº º tº $º § #Nº. ºś º: º H. " º º- -- -- “lſº º ---------> taking, a campaign, hunting party, building of a house, etc., was opened by an offering, and, when finished, thank-offerings were given. Human sac- rifices were not usual, though not unknown, but of the offering of children there is not any ex- ample or trace. In the cult of Ishtar the sacred prostitution was of importance. The priests in- troduced the offerer to the god, leading him by the hand, and after introducing him, the gifts were poured out or burned on the altar. Every day was dedicated to some particular god, at least in later times, as is stated in long lists (hemerologies). The seventh, fourteenth, twenty-first, twenty-eighth, and also the nine- teenth of a month were “Sabbaths,” days of rest for the king, but not for the whole people. Our knowledge of the feasts is still very lim- ited. Best known is the feast “Zagmuku,” the feast of the New-year, which began in the Spring. In Babylon it was celebrated with great splendor. Conformably to human custom, the gods went to visit Maruduk, Lord of Lords, in his “chamber of destiny.” From the near Borsippa Nabu came on his holy ship, and Maruduk himself went to receive him. The gods of other places were also brought to Babylon, and whilst they were bowing to him Maruduk determined the events of the coming year. Another feast was celebrated in honor of Dugu or Tammug, the young Sun-god, that was killed and had gone to Hades. The women planted lit- tle gardens, which soon were burned by the heat of the summer gun, as a Symbol of the death of the god of fertility, and they recited mourning- SOngS. , Every god had his annual feast, but about the particulars of them we still know very little. (5) Mythology. The Assyrians and Baby- lonians believed the earth to be a huge mountain, surrounded by the sea. The heaven was a cupola supported by the wall of the horizon. At the east and west sides were doors for the Sun, that rises from the “chamber of destiny” in the east wall, and that sets in the “midst of heaven” in the west wall. This world was created by Maruduk. Before the creation of heaven and earth there existed Tiamat, the great dragon, living in the ocean. Then the gods were born and war arose between Tiamat and the gods, among whom Maruduk, son of Ea, was the great warrior. Armed with seven winds, thunder and lightning, he went to meet Tiamat, BABYLONIA and as a terrible wind blew her up, so that she was unable to shut the mouth, Maruduk then threw his net over her and cut her into two parts. One part was extended by him as heaven, the other part became the earth. Then the poles were fixed, the bodies of heaven placed, and mankind was created. This myth dates from the times of Maruduk's (Babylon's) supremacy. Another myth is “Ishtar's descent into Hades.” After the death of Degu (Tammuz), the god of the sun, in spring-time, Ishtar, his beloved, mourned for him. She decided to go into Hades, the world of death, that lies deep below the earth, in order to take the “water of life” with which she may revive her lover. She passes through the seven gates of Hades, and at every gate the guard takes a part of her dress, until finally she arrives naked. During the absence of Ishtar all vegetation and generation ceases on earth. The queen of Hades strikes Ishtar with diseases. Now Ea creates a helper, which is sent to her assist- ance. The queen of Hades is overpowered, the Source of the water of life is opened, and Ishtar, after being cured, returns, and every year Dugu revives in the spring. Historical elements are found in the great epos of Gilgamesh, the Babylonian Hercules, whose deeds are glorified in twelve Songs. In very old times the town of Uruk was besieged by an enemy and saved by Gilgamesh, who became king. As he was growing mightier every day, the goddess Aruru created Eabani in order to resist him, but by means of a woman dedicated to Ishtar, they became friends. They made a campaign against the Elamitic king Chumbaba. After conquering his city they returned to Uruk, where a great feast was arranged. Now the goddess Ishtar asked Gilgamesh to be her consort, but he refused and reproached her with the fickleness of her love. Full of wrath, she made complaint to her father Anu, who created a great bull, that, however, was killed by Eabani. After a new war against Nippur, Eabani died, while Gilgamesh suffered from lep- rosy. In order to be cured he went to see his deceased forefather, Tsit Napishtim, living on the isle of the blessed, at the mouth of the rivers. A long and difficult travel it was. Finally he came to the seashore, where he found the ferryman. They rowed forty-five days and reached the isle. Here Tsit Napishtim told him the story of his deluge, his escape, and glorification on the isle of the blessed; then he cured him at the fountain of life and gave him a plant that would protect him from illness. Gilgamesh returned to Uruk, but on the way home the plant was stolen by a serpent. In Uruk he complained of not finding Eabani on the isle of the blessed, but the god Nergal called the ghost of Eabani, which told him of the mystery of the land of the dead, where he was living. Every individual was protected by a particular god and goddess. He needed this protection, es- pecially against the evil spirits, an almost in- numerable army of demons, that brought illness and diseases to men. At the head of these demons were placed the terrible seven Anunnaki, that fought against Sin, and that were only defeated after a heavy struggle with the mightiest of the gods. They lived in the wall of the horizon, like wild horses. The demon “south-wind” was the first, a terrible pan- ther the third, the others were also animals and winds; they were not masculine and not feminine, without wife and children. They went around in the streets to cause trouble ; they entered the houses, even through the smallest opening ; they 213 BABYLONIA crept into a man's body to make him ill; they hid themselves among the cattle when driven home ; they caused hatred and jealousy, and did all the evil they could. Against them man makes a fortress of his house. He daily invokes the help of the great gods, and defends his house by their images. At the top of the roof, in the fireplace, in the door, and even at a certain distance from the door the figures are placed as sentinels. In the morning and evening he offers to them nourishment and Sweet drink, and asks them to keep off all that might be wrong. In case of illness, they are placed near the bed, two at the head and two at the foot. Man is exposed to the influence of the demons when the gods are insulted. Either the protecting gods are indifferent and do not defend the man, or the gods themselves send the evil spirits as punishments for the sins. The wrath of a god may be provoked by ritual neglects, but also by moral mistakes. When the offerings are not given or vows remain unfulfilled, the gods are insulted, but they are also insulted by sins against morality and laws. Changing of the boundary-stones, making use of false weights, stealing or commanding to steal, causing quarrels, speaking right, but doing wrong, killing the neigh- bor, teaching improper things, bribing in lawsuit, transgressing the limits of righteousness, eating or drinking out of unclean objects, etc., are pun- ished, and may be the cause of a curse. It is remarkable that, except the precepts of worship- ing One god and the forbidding of idol-cult, all the ten commandments have their equivalents in Babylonian religious precepts. The condition of woman in Babylonia compared unfavorably with that in Egypt. Not only do the gods send misfortune, but man also is able to do so. Some persons have the “evil eye,” others know how to conjure the spirits. Though sorcery is forbidden by the gods, a num- ber of witches bring misery by their practices. They make images of a person, and by cursing their figures, by hiding them, by burying them, by throwing them into the water, by burning them or crushing them in the street, they are sure of damaging the man himself, sooner or later. In cases of illness and adversity the gods should be satisfied and the spirits expelled. This could be done by reciting long exorcisms and by symbolical acts. Maruduk is the great god, whose assistance purifies the sick. The symbol- ical acts consist in the burning of onions, meal, clothes, fruit; the conjuror asks that the sickness may be buried at the same time. The body of the sick man is wrapped in sacred cords, which are tied with a mysterious tie; the conjuror unties Ille 111agical kilol and supplicates lllau the gud may untie the band of sickness. All uncommon events were believed to have significance. In the first place, dreams, unusual births, color of the hair, the moth in clothes, the scratching of dogs, and a thousand things more were deemed significant as to the future. Fur- thermore, the constellations, the eclipses of sun and moon, the rising of the planets were anx- iously watched, for no doubt was entertained about the influence of these on the crops, the re- sult of wars, etc. This belief in forecasts became the occasion of astronomical researches. Stars and gods were brought into relation by the priests. Each star represented a distinct number, and by means of those they made calculations about fu- ture events. So, religious life in Babylonia and Assyria was not easy. In all circumstances the BABYLONIA gods ought to be consulted. The king of Baby- lonia was not really invested with his dignity, un- less he “seized the hands of Maruduk” at the first Zakmuku-feast of his reign. He therefore went to Esagila and led the image of Maruduk by the hand on his holy procession. No campaign was undertaken without 4& consent of the gods; no ſº house nor temple was 2-Sº 2 sº º e - EºNº. built or repaired without sºs numerous offerings; in § § ºs the observatories on the top of the tower-temples the priests prepared re- ports that were sent to the king. Sins were confessed in penitential hymns of deep religious feeling. Of course, the religious ideas of the scholars and priests gradually became | - more developed than ºś popular . Opinions, and §§; º Some priests really came ...Tº r º very near monotheism. # ſ ! } # ! ... In the eighth century B. # z #|| % C. one of the Assyrian governors tried to make Nabu the god exclusively worshiped, but ended in failure, as the people could not appreciate his feelings. In another case a number of gods are re- º garded as manifestations stlt. Wit of the one Maruduk ; God Nebo. and the lists of gods prove that systems of identification of gods were taught in the schools of the priests. But all this was mere scholarship, and not living religion. The gods were conceived as human beings, animals, or animals with human faces. Only a part of their being was thought to be united with their images. In the mythological literature much is spoken of them that seems to us disre- spectful. The gods became anxious on account of the waters of the deluge; like frightened dogs they go to the heaven of Anu, like flies they come to the offering of the Babylonian Noah ; and Gilgamesh addresses Ishtar very disrespect- fully. The Babylonians believe in a life after death, but not in what we call the resurrection and im- mortality of the soul. The deceased was buried and placed in a tomb, where he was provided with fruits, wine, oil, etc. His shade is sup- posed to rest here for a time and then is trans- ported to Hades, the kingdom of Nergal and of Allatu, queen of death. In other cases the corpse was burned and the remains placed in a jar of clay. Hades is surrounded by seven walls, and by a river. The shades live there in darkness and misery, and no evidence is forthcoming as to any difference between the destinies of good and bad. B. D. E. (See Relig. of Bab. and Assyria, by Morris In- strom Jr.; The Monuments and the Old Testa- ment, Ira M. Price; New Light on Bib. and Holy Land, Evetts.) BABYLONIA (bâb'y-lö'ni-á). 1. Name. The name is derived from its chief city, Babylon, termed also Chaldaea, from those who, at a later period, inhabited it. A province of Middle Asia, bordered on the north by Mesopo- 214 BABYLONIA tamia, on the east by the Tigris, on the south by the Persian Gulf, and on the west by the Arabian Desert. On the north it begins at the point where the Euphrates and Tigris approach each other and extends to their common outlet in the Per- sian Gulf, pretty nearly comprising the country now designated Irak Arabi. The two words, Babylonia and Chaldaea, were, however, some- times used in another signification: Babylonia, as containing in an extended sense Assyria also and Mesopotamia, nearly all the countries which Assyria in its widest meaning embraced; while Chaldaea indicated, in a narrower signification, the southwestern part of Babylonia, between the Euphrates and Babylon (Strabo xvi; Ptol.). In Hebrew, Babylonia bore the name of Shinar, or ‘the land of Shinar,’ while ‘Babylon' (Ps. cxxxvii: I) and ‘the land of the Chaldaeans’ (Jer. xxiv:5; Ezek. xii: 13) seem to signify the empire of Babylon. Babylon, or the Assyrian Babilum, does not mean confusion. The error arose through a pun made upon the name by the Semites. The Hebrew has a word, balal, which means ‘to confuse,’ and they derived Babylon from this because the con- fusion of tongues here took place. 2. Climate. The great valley has a climate which appears little fitted to produce men of energy and force, for the temperature over its entire surface is very high in the summer season. In the far south, along the Persian Gulf, and in the near-by regions the atmosphere is moist, and the heat is of the same character as that of Hin- dustan or Ceylon. Records do not exist to show the range of the thermometer, but the passing traveler states the simple fact that the tempera- ture is higher than at Bagdad. In Bagdad the average maximum daily temperature indoors dur- ing June and July is set down as Io'7° Fahrenheit, and it often goes up to I2O" or I22°. At present this high temperature is also reached in the north as far up at least as Mosul. It is now also ren- dered much more oppressive by hot winds, which arise suddenly and, filled with impalpable sand, drive about in eddying circles or sweep in vast clouds over a wide extent of country. This dust becomes at times so thick as to completely shut off near objects from the vision, as though by a fog. The gleaming particles of sand shine beneath the sweltering sun, the sand enters nostrils or mouth and seems to choke the very lungs. Death itself sometimes alone terminates the suffering experienced in these terrible visitations. It is, however, altogether probable that in the period of the ancient history neither the heat nor the sand was such a menace, for at that period the vast net- work of canals helped to create moisture. (Rogers, His of Bab. and Assyr., vol. I, pp. 277, 278.) 3. T’ſ, ysical Features. The country in ans cient times was very prolific, especially in corn and palms. Timber trees it did not produce. Many parts had springs of naphtha. As rain is infrequent, even in the winter months, the country owes its fruitfulness to the annual overflow of the Euphrates and the Tigris, whose waters are con- veyed over the land by means of canals. Quintus Curtius (i:5) declares that the country between the Euphrates and the Tigris was covered with so rich a soil that the cattle were driven from their pastures lest they should be destroyed by satiety and fatness. The alluvial plains of Babylonia, Chaldaea and Susiana, including all the river, lake and newer marine deposits at the head of the Persian Gulf, occupy an extent of about 32,400 Square geo- graphic miles. BABYLONIA 215 4. Ribers. The rivers are the Euphrates and its tributaries, the Tigris (see TIGRIs) and its tributaries, the Kerah, the Karun and its tributaries, the Jerahi and the Idiyan, constitut- ing, altogether, a vast hydrographical basin of I89,200 geographic square miles, containing, within itself, a central deposit of 32,400 miles of alluvium, almost entirely brought down by the waters of the various rivers, and which have been accumulating from periods long antecedent to all historical records. All these rivers pre- sent the peculiarity of flowing, for a great part of their course, through supra-cretaceous forma- tions of a very friable nature, easily disintegrated by the action of the elements, and still more so by that of running waters when swollen by floods and carrying down pebbles. Near Bushiyah, about ten miles beyond the southeast quarter of an- cient Babylon, on a level plain, are found a num- ber of sand-hills, which are constantly shifting their place and number, and yet always occupy the same general locality. They appear to owe their existence to the presence of springs, which moisten the sand and cause its accumulation, at the same time allowing the prevalent winds to alter the form and number of the hills, while their bases have a fixed point of attraction. They are objects of superstition to the Arabs, who often look upon them as the sepulchral pall of brethren who have fallen in battle. The efflo- rescences of nitrate of potassium and of chloride or hydro-chlorate of sodium are common on these plains; the one is most probably derived from the decomposition of vegetable matters, and con- sequently characteristic of alluvium of river or marshy origin; the other is indicative of deposi- tions from seas or bays. The modern accumu- lations of soil in Babylonia from annual inunda- tions is still very great. Several canals, such as the Isa, the Nahr Zimberani-Yah, the Muhawil, etc., Convey water at certain seasons of the year from One river and part of the country to an- other. In general, the alluvium that is brought down by canals and rivulets and deposited at their mouths is a fine clay. The great extent of the plain of Babylonia is everywhere altered by arti- ficial works; mounds rise upon the otherwise uni- form level, walls and mud ramparts and dikes intersect each other, elevated masses and friable Soil of pottery are succeeded by low plains inun- dated during great part of the year, and the antique beds of canals are visible in every direc- t1On. 5. The Euphrates. The Euphrates is still a majestic stream, but wanders through a dreary Solitude. Its banks are hoary with reeds, and the gray osier willows are yet there on which the captives of Israel hung up their harps, and, while Jerusalem was not, refused to be comforted. At that time 1ts now broken hills were palaces; its long undulating mounds, streets; its vast soli- tude was filled with the busy subjects of the proud mistress of the East. Now, “wasted with misery,’ her habitations are not to be found, and, for her- self, ‘the worm is spread over her.’ Strabo makes the Euphrates a stadium (646 feet) in breadth at Babylon; according to Ren- nel it is about 491 English feet; D'Anville re- duces it to 330; Rich, on the other hand, raises it to 450 feet; its breadth, however, varies in its passage through the ruins. Rich ascertained its depth to be two and one-half fathoms, and that the current runs gently at the medium rate of about two knots an hour. The Euphrates is far less rapid than the Tigris, and rises at an earlier period. When at its height—from the latter end of April to the latter end of June—it overflows BABYLONIA the surrounding country, fills, without the aid of human labor, the canals dug for its reception, and facilitates agriculture in a surprising degree. The ruins of Babylon are then so inundated as to render many parts of them inaccessible. The Water of the Euphrates is esteemed more salu- brious than that of the Tigris. The course of the river through the site of Babylon is from north to South. Bricks and other fragments of buildings are frequently found in it by fishermen who ply On its waters. (See EUPHRATEs.) 6. Fertility and Riches. During the three great empires of the East no tract of the whole appears to have been so reputed for fertility and riches as the district of Babylonia, which arose in the main from the proper management of the mighty river which flowed through it. Herodotus mentions that, when reduced to the rank of a province, it yielded a revenue to the kings of Per- sia which comprised half their income. And the terms in which the Scriptures describe its nat- ural as well as its acquired supremacy when it was the imperial city evidence the same facts. They call it ‘Babylon, the glory of kingdoms; the beauty of the Chaldee excellency; the lady of kingdoms, given to pleasure; that dwelleth care- lessly, and sayeth in her heart, I am, and there is none else beside me.’ But now, in the expres– sive and inimitable language of the same holy book may it be said, ‘She sits as a widow on the ground. There is no more a throne for thee, daughter of the Chaldaeans !’ As for the abundance of the country, it has vanished as clean away as if ‘the besom of desolation' had swept it from north to south; the whole land, from the outskirts of Bagdad to the farthest reach of Sight, lying a melancholy waste. The Babylonians were famous for the manufacture of cloth and carpets; they also excelled in making perfumes, in carving in wood and in working in precious Stones. They were a commercial as well as a manufacturing people, and carried on a very ex- tensive trade alike by land and by sea. Babylon was indeed a commercial depot between the East- ern and the Western worlds (Ezek. xvii:4; Is. xliii:I4). Z. Flora. It is commonly believed that wheat and barley are indigenous to the plains of the Euphrates, and that thence, after a period of cul- tivation, they spread westward over Syria and Egypt and on to Europe. If this be true, the land might well be expected to yield a good harvest of native cereals. But the productivity of the land did not stop with the great cereals. The inhabitants had a wide range of vegetables for food, among which are pumpkins, kidney beans, Onions, vetches, egg plants, cucumbers, “gombo,” lentils, chick-peas and beans. Above the vegetables and cereals of the land rose its trees, of which the variety was great, both of those that yielded fruit and of those that added merely to the beauty of the land; among these were the apple, fig, apricot, pistachio, vine, almond, walnut, cypress, tamarisk, plane tree and acacia. But valuable and beautiful though they all were, none was equal in utility, in Song, or in story to the palm. From the most ancient of days down to the present all the Orient has rung with the praises of the palm. In Babylon it found a suit- able place for its development. It was cultivated with extreme care. Even in early times the proc- ess of reproduction had been discovered, and was facilitated by shaking the flowers of the male palm over those of the female. From the prod- ucts of this tree the peasantry were able almost BABY LONIA to support life. The fruit was eaten both fresh and dry, forming in the latter case almost a sweet- meat (Rogers, His. of Bab. and Assyr., vol. I, pp. 282, 283). 8. Fauna. The lion (másze, labòu) was a very common tenant of the reed beds between Arabia and Babylonia, and not only the panther (mimru), the jackal (akhº, barðaru), the fox (se/ibu), and the wild boar (shakhū, dabú), but especially the wild ox (reh-ame, Heb. PST), frequently figure in the literature and the pictorial representations (e. g., on the oldest cylinder seals). Many spe- cies of gazelles, antelopes and wild goats were found along the frontiers of the country. The horse (Heb. s?sz?) was unknown to the earliest settlers. The Sumerians called it ‘ass of the East’ or ‘the mountain' (anshu kurra), just as by circumlocution they called the lion lig-magh, ‘big dog.' The strictly domestic animals were the cow (a/#14), the sheep (sézzzz, Za/aru, and other words), the goat (2nzu), the ass (iméru, an incorrectly written form of himzérie, Sumerian anshu), and the dog (AEa/bu). The elephant (żārat) of Meso- potamia, the camel (gammalu) and the wild ass (Özer??ſele) Babylonians. Such a word as gammalu shows by its very form (if it were a genuine Babylonian word it would be written gamlu) that it has been borrowed from Arabia (F. Hommel, Hastings’ Bib. Dict.). The rivers swarmed with fish. In their slow- flowing waters the barbel and carp grew to large size and were most highly esteemed. But the eel, murena, silurus and gurnard were also used for food and found in abundance. By the waters and amid the great reeds which almost seemed to wall in the rivers were birds in extraordinary variety, among them pelicans, cranes, storks, herons, gulls, ducks, swans and geese. On land were found the ostrich, the bus- tard, partridge, thrush, blackbird, Ortolan, turtle- dove and pigeon, together with birds of prey like eagles and hawks. At the present time a few snakes are found, of which only three varieties are known to be poisonous, but none of these are so dangerous as many found in adjoining lands. Flocks pasture in meadows of coarse grasses; the Arabs’ dusky encampments are met with here and there; but, except on the banks of the Eu- phrates, there are few remains of the date groves, the vinevards and the gardens which adorned the same land in the days of Artaxerxes, and still less of the population and labor which must have made a garden of such soil in the time of Nebuch- adnezzar. The vegetation of these tracts is characterized by the usual saline plants, the river banks being fringed by shrubberies of tamarisk and acacia, and Occasional groves of a poplar which has been mistaken for a willow : . The weep- ing willow (Salix Babylonica) is not met with in Babylonia. The solitary tree, ‘of a species alto- gether strange to this country’ (Heeren, Asiatic Nations, vol. ii, p. 158), which Rich calls lignum- vitae, and which has been supposed to be a last remnant or offspring of the sloping or hanging gardens that appeared to Quintus Curtius like a forest, is in reality a tamarisk. 9. J'tones, Minerals, bricks. Stone and min- erals were almost unknown in the alluvial soil. The absence of these was, however, atoned for by the excellent building material that lay to hand in the clay, while the best possible mortar was obtained from the asphalt contained in the numer- ous naphtha wells. All the buildings in ancient Babylonia were accordingly constructed of brick. When sandstone, or still harder kinds of stone, of Arabia, were also known to the 216 BABYLONIA Such as basalt or diorite, were used (e. g., for statues), they were brought by ship—even in the earliest times—from the territories along the fron- tier (Mesopotamia, Elam, Arabia). The same is true of alabaster, marble, gold, silver, copper, tin, iron and lead (Hastings' Bib. Dict.) In the excellence of materials used, and in the perfection of form, texture and solidity, and in the great size of their bricks, the Babylonians have probably never been excelled. The same material was used for the manufacture of books or tablets. These were made even more care- fully, and were almost indestructible. For rec- ords the ancient world knew nothing their su- perior and perhaps nothing equal. The papyrus of ancient Egypt was so fragile and so easily destroyed by either fire or water that it bears no comparison with the brick, which resisted both almost equally well. The clay tablet has pre- served through the centuries a vast literature, much of it uninjured, while untold portions of the literature of the more cultured Egyptians have hopelessly perished (Rogers, Hist. of Bab. and Assyr., p. 287). 10. Mounds. No monuments in Babylonia and Chaldaea appear to be more decisive of the antiquity and Assyrian origin of sites than the lofty artificial mound of which the present de- generate hordes of the tent and the spear narrate So many fabulous tales, but which almost every- where present themselves where there are also Other strong grounds of presumption of an As- Syrian or Chaldaeo-Babylonian origin. Thus, at Irkah, at Wasit, at Teredon, at the Birs Nimrud, the Mujahlibah, El Heimar, etc., these colossal piles are found domineering over the dreary waste, to the uniformity of which they offer a Striking contrast, being visible at great distances, and, although thrown by the mirage into strange and contorted shapes, yet they always appear, when seen upon the verge of the horizon, as if possessing colossal dimensions, and produce an effect in point of grandeur which cannot easily be Surpassed. Long before the period when man began to erect these feeble semblances of moun- tains, a various level of alluvium had been estab- lished in the spaces between the rivers, by which in one part the waters of the Euphrates find a higher level than the Tigris, into which they flow at the high season, while at another place the Tigris sends its waters to the Euphrates and re- stores the flood by which it had been previously enriched from the ‘Great River.’ 11. Ethnology and Language. From the account which is found in Gen. x:8, Nimrod, the son of Cush, appears to have founded the king- dom of Babylon, and to have been its first sov- ereign. In the earliest period the chief race was the Sumerians. This was the people who founded a number of the chief cities, invented the cunei- form system of writing, and, in general, may be said to have laid the foundations of culture and civilization in the land. A few inscriptions writ- ten in their language have come down to us. Be- sides these, we find as early as B. C. 5000 or 6000 distinct traces of a Sêmitic population, which came from the Northwest (Mesopotamia) and took possession of the civilized settlements founded by the Sumerians. The branch of Semites who first conquered and ruled in Baby- lonia received accession from other Semitic peo- ples out of Arabia during the early periods. To the Sumerian and Semitic stocks were added, as time went on, yet other peoples from Elam, Me- dia and elsewhere, until the people of Babylonia were so completely mixed as to defy all analysis BABYLONIA into separate races. It is strange that on the other hand the people of Assyria should suffer compara- tively little from mixture, and should be able to pride themselves upon pure Semitic blood. “The Semitic Babylonians have the closest re- lationship with the other Semites (Hebrews, Arabs and Aramaeans), and yet, in opposition to these, they form a special group, as the grammar and lexicon clearly prove. If the Syro-Arabian Semites may be properly designated west Semites, the ancient Egyptian speech, on the other hand, belongs to the east Semitic, or the Bab.-Assyrian branch of Semitic languages. The Egyptians must in the remotest antiquity have emigrated from Mesopotamia to Africa. Apart from con- siderations of grammar and the great number of Sumerian loan-words contained in their language (which is otherwise Semitic), this is proved by extensive coincidences between the Egyptian and Babylonian systems of writing, their religion and other branches of culture” (F. Hommel, Hastings' Bib. Dict.). 12. Kings. In Gen. xiv. Amraphel is cursorily mentioned as king of Shinar. In the reign of Hezekiah (B. C. 719-690)—2 Kings xx : I.2—‘Bero- dach-baladan, the son of Baladan,’ was ‘king of Babylon,' and ‘sent letters and a present unto Hezekiah, for he had heard that Hezekiah had been sick.’ About a hundred years later Jeremiah and Habakkuk speak of the in- vasion of the Babylonians under the name of the Chaldaeans, and now Nebuchadneggar appears in the historical books (2 Kings xxiv:I sq.; Jer. xxxvi :9, 27) as head of the all-subduing empire of Babylon. Evž/-/aerodach (2 Kings xxv.27; Jer. lii:31), Son of the preceding, is also mentioned . as “king of Babylon;' and with Be/shazzar (Dan. v: I, 30), the Nabonidus of Berosus, the line of the Chaldaean kings was closed; he perished in the Conquest of Babylon by the Medo-Persians (Dan. V:31), ‘and Darius, the Median, took the kingdom.’ 13. Chaldaeans. The domination of the Chal- daeans in Babylon has given historians some trouble to explain. The Chaldaeans appear to have originally been a nomadic tribe in the moun- tains of Armenia, numbers of whom are thought to have settled in Babylon as subjects, where, having been civilized and grown powerful, they seized the supreme power and founded a Chal- daeo-Babylonian empire. Herodotus has noticed the Chaldaeans as a tribe of priests (i:28); Diodorus (i:28) as a separate caste under Belus, an Egyptian priest, while the book of Daniel refers to them as astrologers, ma- gicians and soothsayers, but there can be little doubt, as laid down by Gesenius on Isaiah xxiii: I3, that it was the name of a distinct nation ; if not, as IIeeren (Maºal of 1471&. Hist. 28) has maintained, the name of the Northern nomades in general. In connection with Babylonia the Chaldaeans are to be regarded as a conquering nation as well as a learned people; they, intro- duced a correct method of reckoning time, and began their reign with Nabonassar (B. C. 747). The brilliant period of the Chaldaeo-Babylonian empire extended to B. C. 538, when the great city, in accordance with the prophecy of Daniel, was sacked and destroyed. - - Babylonia, during this period, was ‘the land of the Chaldaeans,’ the same as that into which the children of Judah were carried away captive (Jer. xxiv:5), which contained Babylon (Jer. 1: I ; Ezek. xii: 13), was the seat of the king of Babylon (Jer. xxv : I.2), and contained the house of the god of Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. i :1, 2). 217 3. BABYLONIA The profane historians lend their testimony to the same effect. There is another scriptural refer- ence to this proud period in the history of the Chaldees, when learned men filled the Streets and the temples of Nineveh and Babel : ‘Behold the land of the Chaldaeans; this people was not, till the Assyrian founded it for them that dwell in the wilderness; they set up the towers thereof, they raised up the palaces thereof, and he brought it to ruin’ (Is. xxiii: 13). 14. History. (See BABYLON, AZistory, AS- SYRIA; CHALDEA; MEDIA.) 15. Writing, Literature and Art. The Babylonian wedge-shaped characters, which formed the syllables of the words in the Baby- lonian tongue, were originally pictures. (1) Clay Tablets. When clay tablets were in- troduced as writing material, and the stylus was used to form the characters, these pictures became much modified in form, and finally pure Syllables, which had little resemblance to the original picture. The Babylonians were essentially calculators, and astronomy, mixed with astrology, Occupied a large space in their libraries. This doubtless is what Isaiah refers to in xlvii: 13. They kept an ac- curate account of the eclipses, equinoxes and other similar occurrences. Their year consisted of 12 months of 30 days each, and an intercalary month every six years. Every seventh day was a rest day, on which it was forbidden to do certain things. Each day was lucky or unlucky, and on these days certain things were forbidden. The largest astrological work of the Babylonians was made by Sargon, 3800 B. C. It was called the ‘Illumination of Bel,’ and consisted of Seventy tablets. Their observations were made from towers, in quite a modern manner. They ob- served the spots in the sun and knew of comets. Geology and geography were represented among their sciences, as well as natural history. With the exception of the physical sciences, the greater part of our learning was known to the Babylon- ians. Much space was given to magic, and to judge by the quantity of this sort of literature, the Babylonians must have lived in constant terror of spirits and demons. As the Babylonian was a trader and a money-lender, there are almost innumerable tablets relating to Sales, loans, mar- riage dowries, slaves, and all sorts of commercial transactions that can be imagined. (2) Izdubar Legends. A small and interest- ing class of literature is the so-called Izdubar Legends. The ‘Deluge tablet' is one of these, which gives an account of the flood. While much of their literature and of their inscriptions is now only fragmentary, it has served, through a new channel, to tell us of Babylon and Nineveh, of the land of Abraham, and to give us a new worsion of the flood, Tf has given 11s a mnre ex- tended knowledge of Sennacherib, Tiglath-Pileser, Sargon, and Esar-haddon, and enlightened us on the language, learning and superstition of the fel- low citizens of Abraham, and of a branch of the Semitic race akin to the Jewish nation, from which sprang the Christ. It carries us back through long centuries to a time when man was learning his first lessons and slowly growing up toward civilization. (3) Manual Training. The Babylonian youth learned to read and write, which was no easy task. Many excelled in wood engraving and upon precious stones, and their work is a marvel even to-day. They were good builders, and their pal- aces were decorated with all kinds of beautiful Stones, bronze statues, vases, jars of alabaster, and ivories, embellished with gold. What they could BABYLONIA not produce for themselves they imported from Egypt and Phoenicia. (See Babylonian Life and History, by E. A. Wallis Budge, M. A., 1891; His of Bab. and Assyr., Robt. Wm. Rogers; New Light on the Bib. and Holy Land, Evetts.) 16. TRabylonian Creation J'tory. We have as yet only fragments of the Babylon- ian story of the Creation. Two of these have been known for some time, but there is a late discovery of a third fragment, by Mr. T. G. Pinches, differ- ing somewhat from the others, and adding Some particulars, making it necessary to combine them 3]. Il C.W. The last one of the three discovered is, like one of the others, a part of an incantation—an introduction to a formula, to be repeated at the dedication of the great temple of Borsippa, to invoke the protection of Merodach and other beneficent gods, and to drive away the malevolent deities. There is, however, one story of the creation often translated since it was first published by Mr. Smith, which appears to have been written purely for literary and mythological purposes. It is on seven tablets, and is therefore called the seven-tablet story. It is also called the Assyrian story, because the fragments were recovered from the library of King Assur-bani-pal (668 B. C.) of Assyria. We find that it begins when nothing existed but the primeval Ocean, the great abyss, under the name of Tiamat. But this abyss is soon per- sonified under the form of the mother of all dis- order and chaotic productions. At this time there were no gods, no heavens and no earth. Then, continues the Assyrian story, the primeval divine pairs were produced, Lakhma and Lak- hama, and Ansar and Kisar, or the upper and lower heavens. These primeval deities had long existed, like Uranos and Gaia in Greek mythology, before the production of the three great gods— Anu, Bel and Ea—who correspond to the great Greek triad, Jupiter, Pluto and Neptune. This much is told by the fragment which remains of the first chapter. The second chapter is entirely lost, except a few words, but the third chapter opens a Story. - It is an account of the contest between these later gods and Tiamat, the chaotic abyss, the serpent, for the possession of the world. This is developed in very dramatic form. Merodach, the son of Ea, was the champion of the gods, was besought by them, and armed by them, to accept the task. The result was the overthrow and slaughter of Tiamat, and the subjection of her followers. (This dragon mother of the chaotic brood is represcntcd on a bas-relicf in the British Museum as having claws, horns, tail and wings.) From her skin Merodach made the upper firma- ment, and fastened above it the upper waters, and built above the heavens the home of the great gods. This story occupies the second, third and fourth chapters. In the fifth tablet the constellations of the stars are created, the poles, the planets and the moon. In the portion thus far recovered nothing is said of the sun, except in a broken line. The sixth tablet is entirely lost, but there is a small fragment of the seventh tablet, which men- tions the creation of cattle and beasts of the field and creeping things. The Cuthean tablet is brief, being only part of an incantation. Here, not Merodach, but Ner- gal, the sun god of Cutha, is the creator. The first part is lost. Here we have a picture of the 218 Ong. BACA crude creation of the primal gods, the progeny of Tiamat, monsters of the abyss, animals with bird bodies, or men with raven faces, with their seven kings, against whom the younger gods at first fought unsuccessfully, but the story is incom- plete, and nothing is added to what was learned from the fuller account. The new tablet discovered by Mr. Pinches, while it is an incantation and too brief, is peculiar in that it is in two languages, the old Sumero- Akkadian and the Semitic Babylonian. This indi- cates that Some portion of the legend is much older than the time of Assur-bani-pal, who lived in the seventh century B. C. It begins, like the Assyrian account, with the beginning, before the abode of the gods had been made. It proceeds to enumerate the ancient cities and their temples, Neffer, Erech and Eridu not yet built, nor “the whole of the lands, the sea also.” Then there was a stream in the sea, and in that day Eridu and Babylon were built with their temples. The gods were made and the spirits of the earth. The next important passage must be given en- tire : “Merodach bound together a foundation before the waters, he made dust, and poured it out with the flood. The gods were to be caused to sit in a seat of joy of heart. He made mankind. Aruhu (Ishtar) made the seed of mankind with him. He made the beasts of the field and the living creatures of the desert. He made the Tigris and Euphrates, and set them in their place. Well proclaimed he their name. Grass, the marsh plant, the reed and the forest he made. He made the verdure of the plain, the lands, the marsh, the thicket also ; oxen, the young of the steer, the cow and her calf, the sheep of the fold; meadows and forests also. The goat and gazelle he set therein. Lord Merodach on the seashore raised a bank.” r The text here becomes fragmentary, but it continues with the account of the building of Neffer and Erech and their temples (The Baby- lonian Creation Story, by William Hayes Ward, D. D., Hom. Rev.). BABYLONIANS (bâb'y-lö'ni-anz). The inhab- itants of Babylon. They were among the colonists planted in Sa- maria by the Assyrians (Ezra iv:9). See BABY- LON ; BABYLONIA. BABYLONISH CAPTIVITY käp-tív'í-ty). See CAPTIVITY. BABYLONISH GARMENT (bâb'y-lo'nish går"ment), (Heb. Flº, ad-deh'reth shin-awr', cloak of Shinar or Babylon). The garment which Achan stole at the destruc- tion of Jericho (Josh. vii:21) is described by Josephus as “a royal mantle all woven with gold.” But no accurate description is possible. Babylon was famous for the products of the loom. “Josephus (Ant. v : I, Io) gives rein to his imagi- nation, and describes it as “a royal garment woven entirely of gold,” or ‘all woven with gold.” There is no doubt that a dress of this description would be ‘goodly' in the extreme. The probability is that it was a garment of embroidered stuff, such as Babylon was famed for (cf. Pliny, viii:74, and Martial, Ep. viii:28); and the statement in the Bereshith Rabba (sec. 85, fol. 75, 2) that it was a robe of purple (an opinion which R. Chanina bar R. Isaac also shared; cf. Kimchi on Josh. vii:21) is just as likely to be correct as any other.” (T. G. Pinches, Hastings' Bib. Dict.). BACA (bā’ka), (Heb. NPB, baw-Åaw', weeping), occurs the first in Ps. lxxxiv:6, ‘Who passing (bâb'y-lö'nish BACA, THE VALLEY OF 219 through the valley of Baca make it a well; the rain also filleth the pools;’ the second in 2 Sam. v:23, 24, and in I Chron. xiv:14, 15, “And let it be, when thou hearest the sound of a going in the tops * iſe mulberry trees, that thou shalt bestir thy- SC II. Neither the mulberry nor the pear-tree, con- sidered to be the baca of the Scriptures, satis- fies translators and commentators, because they do not possess any characteristics particularly suitable to the above passages. With regard to the mulberry, Rosenmüller justly observes that this interpretation is countenanced neither by the ancient translators nor hy fine occurrence of any similar term in the cognate languages. We should expect, however, some notice in Scripture of a tree which must have been common, and always esteemed for its fruit. Rosenmüller prefers pear- trees in the preceding passages, as being the old- est rendering of the words. But the correctness of this translation is not confirmed by any of the cognate dialects; nor is the pear-tree more appropriate than the mulberry. i The tree alluded to in Scripture, whatever it is, must be common in Palestine, must grow in the neighborhood of water, have its leaves easily moved, and have a name in, some of the cognate languages similar to the Hebrew Baca. The only one with which we are acquainted answering to these conditions is that called bak by the Arabs, or, rather, shajrat-al-bak—that is, the fly or gnat tree. As it seems to us sufficiently clear that the bak- tree is a kind of poplar, and as the Arabic ‘bak’ is very similar to the Hebrew ‘Baca, so it is prob- able that one of the kinds of poplar may be in- tended in the above passages of Scripture. And it must be noted that the poplar is as appropriate as any tree can be for the elucidation of the passages in which baca occurs. For the poplar is well known to delight in moist situations, and Bishop Horne, in his Comm. on Psalm lzxxiv, has in- ferred that in the valley of Baca the Israelites, on their way to Jerusalem, were refreshed by plenty of water. It is not less appropriate in the passages in 2 Samuel and I Chronicles, as no tree is more remarkable than the poplar for the ease with which its leaves are rustled by the slightest movement of the air; an effect which might be caused in a still night even by the movement of a body of men on the ground, when attacked in flank or when unprepared. That poplars are com- mon in Palestine may be proved from Kitto’s Palestine, p. II4: ‘Of poplars we only know, with certainty, that the black poplar, the aspen, and the Lombardy poplar grow in Palestine. The aspen, whose long leaf-stalks cause the leaves to tremble with every breath of wind, unites with the Willowſ and the nak fo overshadow the water- courses of the Lower Lebanon, and with the oleander and the acacia to adorn the ravines of southern Palestine; we do not know that the Lombardy poplar has been noticed but by Lord Lindsay, who describes it as growing with the walnut-tree and weeping-willow under the deep torrents of the Upper Lebanon.” BACA, THE WALLEY OF (bā’ka), (Ps. lxxxiv: 6), or Valley of Weeping. Some, with our translators, regard this as the name of a place, and by such it has been usually sought in the Bekaa (el-Bekaa), a valley or plain in which Baalbek is situated. But this spot is far from possessing the dreariness and drought on which the point of the Psalmist's allusion de- pends. It does not appear necessary to under- stand that there is any reference to an actual forces. BADGER valley so called. The Psalmist, in exile, or at least at a distance from Jerusalem, is speaking of the privileges and happiness of those who are permitted to make the usual pilgrimages to that city, in order to worship Jehovah in the Temple: ‘They knew the ways that lead thither, yea, though they must pass through rough and dreary paths, even a vale of tears; yet such are their hope and joy of heart that all this is to them as a well-watered country, a land crowned with blessings of the early rain.' Dr. Robinson (Add. to Calmet) concludes that something like this is the sense of the passage. Few versions regard the word as a proper name. The Sept. has eis Tiju Kot)\d.6a roß KXavôuóvos, 271ſo ſhe wa//ey of the place of weeping; the Vulgate, in valle lacry- marum, in the vale of tears or weeping. BACCHIDES (båk'ki-déz), (Gr. Bakxtöms, baſſ- Áhee'dace, son of Bacchin), the general of the Syrian king Demetrius, and governor beyond Zhe river, i.e., the Euphrates (I Macc. vii:8). The king sent him with an army against Judea, to establish the notorious Alcimus by force in the dignity of high-priest, 16I B. C. He left with Alcimus a body of troops, that he might main- tain himself against Judas Maccabaeus. But, as Judas continued to make progress, Bacchides re- turned the next year with a chosen army, van- quished and slew Judas at Laisa (I Macc. ix:18), held Jonathan afterwards at bay, and fortified Jerusalem (ix :49, 50); but after the death of Alcimus, in the next year, he again withdrew his In the following year (I58 B. C.), how- ever, he returned to Judea, on the invitation of some of the discontented Jews; but concluded a peace with Jonathan on reasonable terms, and left m to govern the Jewish state (I Macc. ix:70, SéQ. J. BACHRITE (båk'rite), (Heb. *TP2, baſſ-ree', be- longing to Becher), the family name of the des- cendants of Becher, son of Ephraim (Num. xxvi;35). BACKBITE (båk'bit), (Heb. **, raw-gaſ, to use the feet, as a talebearer), to speak evil of one in his absence. The Hebrew word for it properly signifies to go to and fro in order to gather and spread cal- wmºny (Prov. xxv :23). A “backbiter” is a hater of God and is excluded from fellowship with him (Rom. i :30; Ps. xv. 3.; see 2 Cor. xii:20). BACKSLIDE (bäk'slid), (Heb. Sºo, soog, to go back), is gradually, voluntarily and insensibly to turn from the knowledge, faith, love, profession and practice of the truth of God, which we once solemnly avowed or attained to (Jer. iii:6-14; Hos. iv:16. Comp. Jer. ii:19; Prov. xiv:I4). Backslidings are healed when they are freely forgiven, and the sinner is recovered from them to a course of holiness (Hos. xiv:4). A “back- slider in heart ’’ is one who with secret good will allows himself in a deliberate course of revolting from God (Prov. xiv:14). To be “bent to back- sliding” is to be strongly set on revolting from God, and disposed to take all opportunities of do- ing it (Hos. xi :7; Comp. Acts xxi :21 ; 2 Thess. ii:3; 1 Tim. iv: I). BAD (bād). See Byssus. BADGER (bāj'êr), (Heb. ºº, takh'ash). This is unquestionably a wrong interpretation of the word tachas/h, since the badger is not found in Southern Asia, and has not as yet been noticed out of Europe. The word occurs in the plural form in Exod. xxv :5; xxvi; I4; xxxv :7, 23; xxxvi :19; xxxix: BADGERS’ SKINS 34;. Num. iv:6, 8, IO, II, I2, I4, 25; and Ezek. xvi; Io; and in connection with oroth, skins, is used to denote the covering of the tabernacle. Negro- land and Central and Eastern Africa contain a number of ruminating animals of the great ante- lope family; they are known to the natives under various names, such as pacasse, cmpacasse, tha- casse, facasse, and tachaitze, all more or less varieties of the word tachash; they are of con- siderable size; often of Slaty and purple-gray colors, and might be termed stag-goats and ox- goats. Of these one or more occur in the hunting scenes on Egyptian monuments, and therefore we may conclude that the skins were accessible in abundance, and may have been dressed with the hair on for coverings of baggage, and for boots, such as we see worn by the human figures in the same processions. Thus we have the greater num- ber of the conditions of the question sufficiently realized to enable us to draw the inference that tachash refers to a ruminant of the Aigocerine or Damaline groups, most likely of an iron-gray or slaty-colored species. BADGERS’ SKINS (bāj'êrs' skins), (Heb. º. faāh'ash, badger; hiv, ore, skin; Ex. xxv.5; Ezek. xvi. IO). The true badger is rare, if known, in Arabia. It is believed that the skins meant were those of such marine animals as the dolphin, dugong, and seal. Dr. Robinson writes: “The superior” (of the convent of Mount Sinai) “procured for me a pair of the sandals usually worn by the Bedouin of the peninsula, made of the thick skin of a fish which is caught in the Red Sea. * * * The skin is clumsy and coarse, and might answer very well for the external covering of the tabernacle which was constructed at Sinai, but would seem hardly a fitting material for the ornamental san- dals belonging to the costly attire of high-born dames in Palestine described by the prophet Ezekiel.” Tristram adds: “As the tachash (badger) probably included also the seal, the sandals of the Jewish women may have been of that material, and so also may have been the cov- ering of the tabernacle.” BAG (båg), the translation of several Hebrew and Greek terms. - 1. Khaw-reet' (Heb. vºn. pocket), men- tioned in 2 Kings v :23 as the “bags” in which Naaman placed the talents for Gehazi. Gesenius thinks that they were called pockets from their long, conelike shape. In Is. iii:22 the word is rendered “crisping pins,” but denotes the reticules carried by Hebrew ladies. - 2. Tse?--ore' (Heb. --s). properly a “bundle.” (Gen. xlii:35; I Sam. xxv :29), appears to have been used in carrying money on a long journey (Prov. vii:20; Hag. i:6). - 3. Keece (Heb. P 2), a bag for carrying weights (Deut. xxv : 13; Prov. xvi :II; Mic. vi. II), and also used as a purse (Prov. i :14; Is. xlvi :6). 4. Kel-ee" (Heb. *2), rendered “bag” in I Sam. xvii:40, 49, is a word of general meaning. It is the “sack” in which Jacob's sons carried grain (Gen. xlii:25), but in I Sam. ix.:7; xxi :5, it denotes a bag or wallet for carrying food (A. V. “vessel”). The “shepherd's bag” (I Sam. xvii: 40) carried by David was probably (see Zech. xi : I5, 16) used to hold the lambs which were unable to walk, and also materials for healing such as were sick and binding up those that were hurt (Comp. Ezek. xxxiv:4, I6). 220 pursuers (2 BAKEMEATS 5. In the New Testament two Greek words are employed ; , (a) YMoogókouou g/oce-sok'om-on, the “bag” which Judas carried, probably a small box or chest (John xii:6; xiii:29); (b) the 8a)\ávrtov (baſ-an'tee-on) or wal/et (Luke x:4; xxii:35, 36, purse; xii:33, bag). All of these were used as receptacles for money. (Mc. and Str. Cyc.) BAGOAS (bā-gö'as), (Gr. Bay&as, bah-goh'as), the eunuch or chamberlain who had charge of the tent of Holofernes and introduced Judith (Judith xii: I I, I3, I5; xiii:I, 3; xiv:14). BAHARUMITE (ba-hă'rum-ite), (Heb. *T2, baáh-ar-oo-mee'), a native of Bahurim, one of David's heroes, Azmaveth by name (1 Chron. Xi:33). BAHURIM (ba-hu'rim), (Heb. FTP, bakh-oo- ſeem', young men), a place not far from Jerusalem beyond the Mount of Olives, on the road to the Jordan, where Shimei cursed and threw stones at David (2 Sam. xvi;5, 6; I Kings ii:8; Joseph. Antiq. vii:9, 7). (See BARHUMIT.E.) Here, too, Jonathan and Ahimaaz eluded their Sam. xvii:18), and Phaltiel bade farewell to his wife, as he was returning to King David (2 Sam. iii:16). It was a town of Benjamin, probably built by the young men who escaped the destruction of their tribe, and was thought to have been also named Almon (Josh. xxi :18), but the requirements of Bahurim will not at all suit Almon, according to some writers. But J. F. Stenning, Hastings' Bib. Dict., says: “The Targum preserves a tradition which identi- fies Bahurim with Almon (Josh. xxi :18), the mod- ern Almit, about four miles northeast of Jeru- salem and one mile beyond Anathoth (Anāta), near the southern boundary of Benjamin. This view, which is accepted by most moderns, agrees with the local details supplied by the narrative of David's flight.” He further says Barhumite (2 Sam. xxiii:3I) is clearly a mistake for Baharu- mite, a native of Bahurim, which is more correctly given by the Chronicler (I Chron. xi:33). (See BAHARUMIT.E.) - BAJITH (bā'jith), (Heb. F2, bah'yith, house), probably a city in Moab, where there may have been a celebrated idol temple; by others it is rendered Zez//e house (Is. xv.2). BAKBAKKAR (hak-bäkkar), (Heb. TPPE2, bak. baſſ-AEar", searcher), one of the Levites inhabiting the villages of the Netophathites, after the return from Babylon (I Chron. ix:I 5), B.C. about 536. BAKBUK (båk'buk), (Heb. Pº2, baſſ-book', a . bottle), the head of one of the families of the Nethinim that returned from Babylon with Zerub- babel (Ezra ii:51; Neh. vii:53), B.C. about 536. BAKBUKIAH (båk-bu-ki'ah), (Heb. TET2, bak- book-yazy', emptying, i. e., wasting of Jehovah). 1. A Levite, “second among his brethren,” who dwelt at Jerusalem on the return from Babylon (Neh. xi:17; xii:9). 2. Apparently another Levite (B.C. 445), a porter (Neh. xii:25). e BAKEMEATs (bak'mets), (Heb. Tº Tº *P82, mah-ak-awl" mah-as-eh' azy-fazv', food the work of the baker), baked provisions (Gen. xl:17). The margin renders literally meat of Pharaoh, the work of a baker or cook. In Shakespeare the form baked meats occurs with a similar signification: The funeral baked meats - Did coldly furnish forth the marriage tables. —Swinton, Bib. Word Bk. y BALAAM 221 BALAAM (bā'laam or ba'la-am), (Heb. Eyº, bil-azvm', foreigner). - The name is supposed by some to mean lord of the people; but by others, destruction of the peo- ple—an allusion to his supposed supernatural pow- ers. Balaam is called the Son of Bosor, which Gesenius attributes to an early corruption of the text, but Dr. Lightfoot considers it to be a Chal- daism, and infers from the apostle's use of it that he was then resident at Babylon. (Works, vol. vii, p. 80; Sermon on the Way to Balaam.) In the other passage of the New Testament (Rev. ii: 14, 15) the sect of the Nicolaitans is described as following the doctrine or teaching of Balaam; and it appears not improbable that this name is employed symbolically, as NukóAaos, Nicolaus, is equivalent in meaning to Balaam. (1) First Mention. The first mention of this remarkable person is in Numbers xxii:5, where we are informed that Balak ‘sent messengers unto Balaam, the son of Beor, to Pethor, which is by the river of the land of the children of his people.’ Twelve Hebrew MSS. examined by Dr. Kenni- cott, two of De Rossi's, the Samaritan text, with the Syriac and Vulgate versions, instead of ‘chil- dren of his people,’ read ‘children of Ammon." This is approved by Houbigant and Kennicott, but is inconsistent with Deut. xxiii:4, which in- forms us that Pethor was in Mesopotamia; for the Ammonites, as Rosenmüller observes, never extended so far as the Euphrates, which must be the river alluded to. If the received reading be correct, it intimates that Pethor was situated in Balaam’s native country, and that he was not a mere sojourner in Mesopotamia, as the Jewish patriarchs were in Canaan. In Joshua xiii:22, Balaam is termed ‘the Soothsayer,’ a word which, with its cognates, is used almost without excep- tion in an unfavorable sense. Balak’s language, ‘I wot he whom thou blessest is blessed’ (Num. xxii:6), Origen considers as only designed to flatter Balaam and render him compliant with his wishes. Of the numerous paradoxes which we find in ‘this strange mixture of a man,’ as Bishop Newton terms him, not the least striking is that with the practice of an art expressly forbidden to the Israelites (‘there shall not be found among you one that useth divination, Deut. xviii:Io), for all that do these things are an abomination to the Lord (verse I2), he united the knowledge and worship of Jehovah, and was in the habit of re- ceiving intimations of his will : ‘I will bring you word again as the Lord (Jehovah) shall speak unto me' (Num. xxii:8). The inquiry naturally arises, by what means did he become acquainted with the true religion ? Dr. Hengstenberg sug- gests that he was led to renounce idolatry by the reports that reached him of the miracles attellidiug the Exodus; and that having experienced the de- ceptive nature of the Soothsaying art he hoped, by becoming a worshiper of the God of the Hebrews, to acq11ire fresh power over nature and a clearer insight into futurity. Yet the sacred narrative gives us no reason to suppose that he had any previous knowledge of the Israelites. In Num. xxii:II he merely repeats Balak’s message, “Be- hold there is a people come out of Egypt,' etc., without intimating that he had heard of the mira- cles wrought on their behalf. The allusion in Nam. xxiii:22 might be prompted by the Divine affintus which he then felt. (2) Some Knowledge of Truth. And had he been actuated, in the first instance, by motives of personal aggrandizement, it seems hardly probable that he would have been favored with those Di- BALAAM vine communications with which his language in Num. xxii:8 implies a familiarity. Since, in the case of Simon Magus, the offer to purchase the gift of God with money’ (Acts viii:2O) called forth an immediate and awful rebuke from the apostles, would not Balaam’s attempt to obtain a similar gift with a direct view to personal emolu- ment and fame have met with a similar repulse? Dr. H. Supposes, indeed, that there was a mixture of a higher order of sentiments, a sense of the wants of his moral nature, which led him to seek Jehovah, and laid a foundation for intercourse with him. In the absence of more copious and precise information, may we not reasonably con- jecture that Jacob's residence for twenty years in Mesopotamia contributed to maintain some just ideas of religion, though mingled with much su- perstition ? To this source and the existing re- mains of Patriarchal religion Balaam was proba- bly indebted for that truth which he unhappily “held in unrighteousness’ (Rom. i :18). (3) Vision or Reality. On the narrative con- tained in Num. xxii:22-35 a difference of opinion has long existed, even among those who fully ad- mit its authenticity. The advocates for a literal interpretation urge that in a historical work and a narrative bearing the same character it would be unnatural to regard any of the occurrences as taking place in vision, unless expressly so stated; that it would be difficult to determine where the vision begins and where it ends; that Jehovah's ‘opening the mouth of the ass’ (Num. xxii:28). must have been an external act; and, finally, that Peter's language is decidedly in favor of the literal Sen Se. ‘The dumb ass, speaking with a man's voice, re- proved the madness of the prophet” (2 Peter ii: I6). Those who conceive that the speaking of the ass and the appearance of the Angel occurred in vision to Balaam (among whom are Maimonides, Leibnitz and Hengstenberg) insist upon the fact that dreams and visions were the ordinary meth- Ods by which God made himself known to the prophets (Num. xii:6); they remark that Balaam, in the introduction to his third and fourth proph- ecies (xxiv:3, 4, 15), speaks of himself as ‘the man who had his eyes shut,’ and who, on falling down in prophetic ecstasy, had his eyes opened; that he expressed no surprise on hearing the lass speak; and that neither his servants nor the Moab- itish princes who accompanied him appear to have been cognizant of any supernatural appearance. Dr. Jortin supposes that the Angel of the Lord suffered himself to be seen by the beast, but not by the Prophet; that the beast was terrified and Balaam smote her, and then fell into a trance, and in that state conversed first with the beast and then with the Angel. The Angel presented these objects to his imagination as strongly as if they had beef, before his eyes, so that this was still a miraculous or preternatural operation. In dream- ing, many singular incongruities occur without exciting our astonishment; it is therefore not wonderful if the prophet conversed with his beast in vision, without being startled at such a phe- nomenon (See Jortin’s ‘Dissertation on Balaam,” pp. 190-194). . (4) Prophecies. The limits of this article will not allow of an examination of Balaam’s mag- nificent prophecies, which, as Herder remarks (Geist der Ebraischen Poesie, ii:221), ‘are dis- tinguished for dignity, compression, vividness and fulness of imagery; there is scarcely anything equal to them in the later Prophets, and’ (he adds, what few readers, probably, of Deut. xxxii. xxxiii, will be disposed to admit) ‘nothing in the dis- courses of Moses.’ When Balak had pointed out BALAC the camp of the Israelites Balaam desired seven altars to be built, and a bullock and a ram to be offered on each altar (Num. xxiii ad fin.). Balak stood by the burnt offering, while Balaam with- drew to his enchantments. God bade him return and utter an oracular blessing on Israel, and not a curse. This he did a second and a third time, to the extreme mortification of Balak, who dis- missed him in great anger, Balaam declaring that he could not “go beyond the commandment of the Lord, to do either good or bad of his own mind.” He subsequently foretold what Israel should, in future times, do to the nations round about, and, after having advised Balak to engage Israel in idolatry and whoredom, that they might offend God and be forsaken by him, quitted his terri- tories for his own land (Num. xxiv: I4; Mic. vi :5; 2 Pet. ii:15; Jude II ; Rev. ii:14). This bad coun- sel was pursued; the young women of Moab in- veigled the Hebrews to the feasts of Baal-Peor; persuaded them to idolatry and seduced them to impurity. God commanded Moses to avenge this insidious procedure, and he declared war against the Midianites, of whom he slew many, and killed five of their princes (Num. xxv : 17, 18). Among those who fell on this occasion was Balaam (xxxi :2, 7, 8). BALAC (bā'lak), (Rev. ii:14), another form of anglicizing Balak. See BALAK. BALABAN (bala-dan), (Heb. Tºº, baſſad. azwn', having power). See MERODACH-BALADAN. BALAH (bā'lah), (Heb. "??, baw-law', with- ered, old). A city of Simeon (Josh. xix:3). (See BAALAH). * BALAK (ba'lak), (Heb. Prº, baw-lawé', empty), son, of Zippor, and king of the Moabites (Num. xxii:2, 4), who was so terrified at the approach of the victorious army of the Israelites, who in their passage through the desert had encamped near the confines of his territory, that he applied to Balaam, who was then reputed to possess great influence with the higher spirits, to curse them. The result of this application is related under another head. (See BALAAM.) From Judg. xi : 25, it is clear that Balak was so certain of the ful- filment of Balaam’s blessing, ‘blessed is he that blesseth thee, and cursed is he that curseth thee' (Num. xxiv:9), that he never afterwards made the least military attempt to oppose the Israelites (Comp. Mic. vi. 5; Rev. ii:IA), BALAMO (bål'a-mo), (Gr. BeNapºv, he/-ah-mohn, Judith viii:3, Apocrypha). See BAAL-HAMON. BALANCES (bål'ans-ez), (Heb. Eºsº, mo-zeh- zza/?'yee/72, i. e., two scales). That these were known to the early Hebrews and in common use, is evident from the frequent reference to them in the Old Testament (Lev. xix:36; Job vi:2; xxxi :6; Hos. xii:7, etc.). In the early periods of the world gold and silver were paid by weight, so that persons employed in traffic of any kind carried with them a pair of scales or balances and different weights (gener- ally stones of different sizes) in a pouch or bag. Dishonest men would carry two sorts of weights, the lighter to sell with and the other to buy with. This explains the allusions (Mic. vi :II ; Hos. xii:7). In pictures on monuments is represented a balance in which the scales are simply a pair of weights. There are two bags of money which are to be equalized, one of which is a standard. The scribe stands by to register the result. The prob- ability is that the Hebrews used the common bal- ances of Egypt. (See WEIGHTS AND MEASUREs.) 222 DALSAM TREE Figuratite. (I) Men are weighed in the balances, when they are tried by the law, word or judgments of God, and their goodness or bad- ness clearly discovered (Dan. v.:27; Job xxxi :6; Ps. lxii:9). (2) The balances in the hand of him that sat on the black horse, appearing under the third seal, may denote the strict equity of Divine Providence; the famed equity of Severus and other persecutors then living, and such scar- city of provisions, temporal and spiritual, as obliged men to eat bread as by weight (Rev. vi :5; see also Lev. xxvi :26; Ezek. iv:16, 17). (3) The balancings of the clouds, is the manner in which they are poised and supported in the air and formed for their proper purpose (Job xxxvii:16). (4) To weigh with an unjust balance is abomination to the Lord (Prov. xi : I). BALDNESS (bald'nés), (Heb. from TE, AEaw- zay'akh, bald, i. e., on the top or back of the head; º, ghiº-bay'akh, bald on the forehead). Baldness may be artificial or natural. Artificial baldness, caused by cutting or shaving off the hair of the head, a custom among all the ancient and Eastern nations, in token of mourning for the death of a near relative (Jer. xvi;6; Amos. viii: Io; Micah i :16). Moses forbade it to the Israelites (Deut. xiv:I), probably for the very reason of its being a heathen custom, for a leading object of his policy was to remove the Jews as far as possible from the ways and customs of the surrounding nations. Natural baldness, though Moses did not consider it as a symptom of leprosy, and declared the man afflicted with it to be clean and Sound (Lev. xiii:40, sq.), yet was always treated among the Israelites with contempt (ibid.), and a bald man was not unfrequently exposed to the ridicule of the mob (2 Kings ii:23; Is. iii:24; Comp. Suet. Caes. 45; Domiţ. 18); perhaps from the suspicion of being under some leprous taint, as the Hebrew word Áaurazakh originally implied an 14/cer, or an ulcered person. The public prejudice thus entertained against a baldheaded man was per- haps the main reason why he was declared unfit for the priestly office (Lev. xxi.20; Mishn. tit. Bechoroth, vii:2). BALL (bal), (Heb. ºn, dure, Is. xxii:18; ren- dered “round about,” xxix:3, and is employed as a ring or circle; and “burn” in Ezek. xxiv:5. In the last reference it probably means “heap,” as in the margin). The ball was used anciently in many sports, and was similarly constructed to those now in use. BALM (bâm), (Heb. *T*, *ser-ee', or •ºs. #sor-ee", to crack), a medicinal gum. (See BALSAM TREE). BALSAM TREE (bal'sam tré), or BALSAM. The won 1 Buſsw//wz, 111ay ComC from Bart'ſ 3%tºº, lord of oil; or the most precious of perfumed oils. The word is not in the Hebrew of the Song of Solomon, but we find the vineyards of Engedi (i:14), which are believed to have been gardens of the balsam tree. In Ezek. xxvii: 17 we find the word pannag; which the Vulgate translates Bal- samum, and which is so understood by the Chal- dee and other interpreters. The usual Hebrew word is Tzeri, the opobalsam, which was found particularly in Gilead. The balsam tree, though not a native of Judea, was cultivated in great perfection in the gardens near Jericho, on the banks of Jordan. JO- sephus, speaking of the vale of Jerich9, says: “Now here is the most fruitful Country of Judaea, which bears a vast number of palm trees, besides the balsam tree, whose sprouts they cut with sharp BALSAM TREE stones, and at the incisions they gather the juice, which drops down like tears” (De Bell. Jud. lib. I, chap. 7, Sec. 6). The balsam produced by these Balsam. trees was of such consequence as to be noticed by all the writers who treated of Judaea, and it was so dear that it sold for double its weight in silver. (1) Balm of Gilead. This balsam is mentioned in the Scriptures under the name of balm of Gilead (Jer. viii:22; xlvi :II ; li:8). Since the con- quest of Palestine by the Romans the baſsam tree has entirely disappeared; not one is now to be found. The balessan, balsam, or balm, is an ever- green shrub, or tree, which grows to about four- teen feet high, spontaneously and without culture, in its native country Azab, and all along the coast to Babelmandel. The trunk is about eight or ten inches in diameter, the wood light and open, gummy, and outwardly of a reddish color, inca- pable of receiving a polish, and covered with a smooth bark, like that of a young cherry tree. It flattens at top, like trees that are exposed to snow blasts, or sea air, which gives it a stunted appear- ance. It is remarkable for a penury of leaves; the flowers are like those of the acacia, small and white, only that three hang upon those filaments or stalks where the acacia has but one. Two of these flowers fall off and leave a single fruit; the branches that bear these are the shoots of the present year; they are of a reddish color and rougher than the old wood. After the blossoms follow yellow, fine-scented seed, enclosed in a reddish-black pulpy nut, very sweet and contain- ing a yellowish liquor like honey. They are bitter and a littlu tart upon the tonguc, of the Game shape and size of the fruit of the turpentine tree, thick in the middle and pointed at the ends. (2) Valuable Product. There were three lcinds of balsam extracted from this tree. The first was called opobalsamum and was most highly es- teemed. It was that which flowed spontaneously, or by means of an incision from the trunk or branches of the tree in summer time. The Sec- ond was carpobalsamum, made by pressing the fruit when in maturity. The third, and least es- teemed of all, was hylobalsamum, made by a de- coction of the buds and small young twigs. The great value set upon this drug in the East is traced to the earliest ages. The Ishmaelites or Arabian carriers or merchants, trafficking with the Arabian commodities into Egypt, brought 223 BAND with them balm as a part of their cargo (Gen. xxxvii:25; xliii:II). . According to Strabo, it is evident that balm was transplanted into Judaea from Saba, flour- ished and became an article of commerce in Gilead. “A company of Ishmaelites came from Gilead with their camels bearing spices, and balm, and myrrh, going to carry down to Egypt” (Gen. xxxvii:25). BAMAH(bā'mah), (Heb.º, baw-maw', height), a high place where idols were worshiped. The word appears in its Hebrew form only in Ezek. xx:29, while in the first part of the verse it is translated “high place.” It is obviously a con- temptuous derivation that the prophet means to suggest; but the precise point of it cannot be clearly ascertained. The word is resolved into its syllables, and these appear to be identified re- spectively with two words meaning ‘come’ and ‘what’; thus: “What (Mah) is the Ba-mah where- unto ye come (Ba) P’ (J. Skinner, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) BAMIAN (bā'mi-an) is a town half as large as Balkh, situated on a hill. Before this hill runs a river, the stream of which flows into Gurjestan. Bamian has not any gar- dens or orchards, and it is the only town in this district situated on a hill. The cold part of Kho- rasan is about Bamian. This town is affirmed to have been the residence of Shem.—Calmet. BAMOTH (bā'moth), (Heb. nº, baw-moth', heights), the forty-seventh station of the Israel- ites, perhaps the same as Bamoth-baal (Num. xxi. I9, 20), in the Country of the Moabites. (See BA- MOTH-BAAL.) e BAMOTH-BAAL (bā'moth-bā'āl), Heb. 222 hiº, baw-mâáh' bah'a/, heights of Baal), a place E. of Jordan, and lying upon the River Arnon (Josh. xiii:17). In the R. V. at Num. xxi.;28, called “the high places of Arnon.” “Bamoth-baal falls into place as the ridge S. of the stream of Wädy Jideid, now called the “Crucified One,” which pre- sents a group of more than one hundred rude stone monuments” (Harper, The Bible and Mod. ADºs., p. 122, quoted in Barnes' Bºö. ZX2cá.). BAND (bánd), the translation of several He- brew and Greek words, especially of ortreipa, spi'- ra/, a cohort. 6. A chain or cord (Luke viii:29; Acts xvi; 2 © 2. A company of men, warriors, cattle, lo- custs; so called because chained together in so- ciety, or the resemblance thereof (2 Kings xxiv:2; Acts x:I; Gen. xxxii: Io; Prov. xxx:27). - 3. A band of Roman soldiers consisted of about I,000 (Acts xxi:31, and xxvii: I). Figuratite. (I) The arguments, proofs and influences of Divine love are called bands of a man; because in a way suited to Our rational na- ture, they draw, and engage us to follow and obey the Lord (Hos. xi :4). (2) Governments and laws are bands that restrain from sin and draw to duty (Ps. ii:3; Jer. v :5; Zech. xi :7-I4). (3) Faith and love are called bands; they unite and fasten the saints to Christ and His people (Col. ii:19; Eph. iv:16). (4) Slavery, distress, fear, perplexity, are called bands; they restrain men's liberty and render them uneasy (Lev. xxvi :13; Fzek. xxxiv:27; Is. xxviii:22, and lii:2). (5) To have no bands in death is to die without great pain and without fear and terror of future mis- ery (Ps. lxxiii:4). (6) Sinful lusts and cus- toms are bands; they weaken our inward strength, BANI obstruct our holy obedience and powerfully draw and constrain us to work wickedness; nor is it easy to get rid of them (Is. lviii:6; Eccles. vii:26). (7) The band of iron and brass, securing the root of Nebuchadnezzar's visionary tree, was the fixed purpose and almighty providence of God, secur- ing his kingdom to him after his madness (Dan. iv :15, 23). * BANI (bā’ni), (Heb. "33, baw-nee', built). 1. A Gadite, one of David’s mighty men (2 Sam. xxiii:36), B. C. about IOOO. . 2. A descendant of Pharez and father of Imri, one of whose descendants returned from Babylon (I Chron. ix:4), B. C. long before 536. 3. A Levite, son of Shamer and father of Amzi, a descendant of Merari (I Chron. vi;46), B. C. before I300. 4. A head of a family or of descendants, to the number of six hundred and forty-two, who returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel (Ezra ii:Io). He is elsewhere (Neh. vii:15) called Binnui. Perhaps the same mentioned in Neh. X . I4. 5. A Levite, whose son, Rehum, repaired a por- tion of the wall of Jerusalem (Neh. iii:17). Ap- parently the same Bani was among those who were conspicuous in all the reforms on the return from Babylon (Neh. viii:7; ix:4. 5; x:13). He liad another son named Uzzi, who was appointed overseer of the Levites at Jerusalem; his own father's name was Hashabiah (Neh. xi :22). 6. Another Bani is mentioned in Ezra x:29, 34, 38. (Mc. & Str. Cyc.) BANISH (bán'ish). See BANISHMENT. BANISHMENT (bån'ísh-ment), (Heb. Tºº?. mad-doo'akh, means or cause of banishment, Lam. ii: 14; Chald. mºnº, shar-shazy', extirpating, root- ing out, Ezra vii:26). This form of punishment did not exist among the Hebrews as among the Romans. (See PUNISHMENTs.) BANNER (bán'nér). See ENSIGN. BANQUET (bān'kwét), (Heb. Tºº?, mish-zeh", drinking, a shouting for joy). The entertainments spoken of in Scripture, on however large a scale, and of however sumptuous a character, were all provided at the expense of One individual; the Épavos of the Greeks, a meal at zwhich every guest present contributed his proportion, being apparently unknown to the Jews, or at least practised only by the humbler classes, as Some suppose that an instance of it occurs in the feast given to our Lord, shortly before his Passion, by his friends in Bethany (Matt. xxvi :2; Mark xiv.: I ; Comp. with John xii:2). (1) Time. Festive meetings of this kind were held only towards the close of the day, as it was not till business was over that the Jews freely in- dulged in the pleasures of the table, and although in the days of Christ these meals were, after the Roman fashion, called suppers, they corresponded exactly to the dinners of modern times, the hour fixed for them varying from five to six o'clock P. M., or sometimes later. (2) Occasions. On occasions of ceremony the company were invited a considerable time pre- vious to the celebration of the feast, and on the day and at the hour appointed, an express by one or more servants, according to the number and distance of the expected guests, was dispatched to announce that the preparations were completed and that their presence was looked for imme- diately (Matt. xxii:8; Luke xiv:17). (Grotius, in loc.; also Morier's Journey, p. 73). This cus- tom obtains in the East at the present day, and the 224 BANQUET second invitation, which is always verbal, is de- livered by the messenger in his master's name, and frequently in the very language of Scripture: ‘Behold I have prepared my dinner; my oxen and fatlings are killed, and all things are ready' (Mátt. xxii:4). (3) Etiquette. At the small entrance door a servant was stationed to receive the tablets or cards of those who were expected, and as curiosity usually collected a crowd of troublesome spec- tators, anxious to press forward into the scene of gaiety, the gate was opened only so far as was necessary for the admission of a single person at a time, who, on presenting his invitation ticket, was conducted through a long and narrow passage into the receiving-room, and then, after the whole company were assembled, the master of the house shut the door with his own hands—a signal to the servant to allow himself to be prevailed on neither by noise nor by importunities, however loud and long continued, to admit the bystanders. To this custom there is a manifest reference in Luke xiii:24 and Matt. xxv : Io. One of the first marks of courtesy shown to the guests after saluting the host was the re- freshment of water and fragrant oil or perfumes, and hence we find our Lord complaining of Simon's omission of these customary civilities (Luke vii:44; see also Mark vii:4). (See ANOINTING...) But a far higher, though necessar- ily less frequent attention paid to their friends by the great, was the custom of furnishing each of the company with a magnificent habit of a light and showy color, and richly embroidered, to be worn during the festivity (Eccles. ix:8; Rev. iii:4, 5). To persist in appearing in one's own habili- ments implied a contempt both for the master of the house and his entertainment, which could not fail to provoke resentment—and our Lord therefore spoke in accordance with a well-known custom of his country when, in the parable of the marriage of the king’s son, he describes the stern displeasure of the king on discovering one of the guests without a wedding garment, and his in- stant command to thrust him out (Matt. xxii:II, I3). (4) Master of the Feast. At private ban- quets the master of the house, of course, presided and did the honors of the occasion; but in large and mixed companies it was anciently customary to elect a governor of the feast (John ii:9; see also Ecclus. xxxii:I), who should not merely per- form the office of chairman, dipxttpik\lvos, master of the feast, in preserving order and decorum, but take upon himself the general management of the festivities. º The guests were scrupulously arranged accord- ing to their respective ranks. This was done either by the host or governor, who, in the case of a family, placed them according to seniority (Gen. xliii:33), and in the case of others, assigned the most honorable a place near his own person; or it was done by the party themselves, on their successive arrivals, and after surveying the com- pany, taking up the position which it appeared fittest for each according to their respective claims to occupy. It might be expected that among the Orientals, by whom the laws of etiquette in these matters are strictly observed, many absurd and 1udicrous contests for precedence must take place, from the arrogance of some and the determined perseverance of others to wedge, themselves into the seat they deem themselves entitled to. Morier, who is well acquainted with the manners of the Persians, informs us that it is easy to observe by the countenances of those present when any BANQUET one has taken a higher place than he ought. Dr. Clarke states that at a wedding feast he attended in the house of a rich merchant at St. Jean d'Acre, two persons who had seated themselves at the top were noticed by the master of ceremonies and obliged to move lower down. (See also Joseph. Antiq. xv.2). The knowledge of these peculiar- ities serves to illustrate several passages of Scrip- ture (Prov. xxv :6, 7; Matt. xxiii:6, and espe- cially Luke xiv:7, where we find Jesus making the unseemly ambition of the Pharisees the sub- ject of severe and merited animadversion). (5) Reclining. According to Lightfoot (Ever- cit. on John xiii:23), the tables of the Jews were either wholly uncovered, or two-thirds were spread with a cloth, while the remaining third was left bare for the dishes and vegetables. In the days of our Lord the prevailing form was the triclinium, the mode of reclining at which is de- scribed elsewhere. (See ACCUBATION: EATING). This effeminate practice was not introduced until near the close of the Old Testament history, for amongst all its writers prior to the age of Amos Ayashab, to sit, is the word invariably used to de- scribe the posture at table (I Sam. xvi, margin, and Ps. cxxviii:3, implying that the ancient Israel- ites sat round a low table, cross-legged, like the Orientals of the present day), whereas āvak)\tvw, to recline is the word employed in the Gospel. And whenever the word ‘sit’ occurs in the New Testament, it ought to be translated ‘lie,” accord- ing to the universal practice of that age. (6) Method of Eating. The convenience of spoons, knives and forks being unknown in the East, or, where known, being a modern innova- tion, the hand is the only instrument used in con- veying food to the mouth, and the common prac- tice, their food being chiefly prepared in a liquid form, is to dip their thin, wafer-like bread in the dish, and, folding it between their thumb and two fingers, enclose a portion of the contents. It is not uncommon to see several hands plunged into one dish at the same time. But where the party is numerous the two persons near, or oppo- site are commonly joined in one dish ; and accord- ingly, at the last Passover, Judas, being close to his master, was pointed out as the traitor by being designated as the person ‘dipping his hand with Jesus in the dish.’ The apostle John, whose ad- vantageous situation enabled him to hear the minutest parts of the conversation, has recorded the fact of our Lord, in reply to the question, ‘Who is it?' answering it by “giving a sop to Judas when he had dipped’ (John xiii: 26). In earlier ages a double or a more liberal por- tion, or a choice piece of cookery, was the form in which a landlord showed his respect for the indi- vidual he delighted to honor (Gen. xliii:34; I Sam. i :4; ix:23; Prov. xxxi :15; see Voller’s Grec. Antiq. ii:387; Forbes’ Orient. Mem. iii:187). In the courge of the critertainment GorvantG are frequently employed in sprinkling the head and person of the guest with odoriferous perfumes, which (probably to counteract the effects of too copious perspiration) they use in great profusion, and the fragrance of which, though generally too strong for Europeans, is deemed an agreeable re- freshment (see Ps. xlv. :8; xxiii:5; cxxxiii:2). (7) Diversion. The guests were entertained with exhibitions of music, singers and dancers, riddles, jesting and merriment (Is. xxviii:1; Wisd. ii:7; 2 Sam. xix:35; Is. v :12; xxv :6; Judg. xiv:I2). (8) Cookery. According to the favorite cook- ery of the Orientals, their animal food is for the most part cut into small pieces, stewed, or pre- pared in a liquid state, such as seems to have been 225 BAPTISM the ‘broth’ presented by Gideon to the angel (Judg. vi :19). The made-up dishes are 'savory meat,' being highly seasoned, and bring to remem- brance the marrow and fatness which were es- teemed as the most choice morsels in ancient times. As to drink, when particular attention was intended to be shown to a guest, his cup was filled with wine till it ran over (Ps. xxiii:5), and it is said that the ancient Persians began their feasts with wine, whence it was called ‘a banquet of wine' (Esther v :6). The hands, for occasionally both were required, besmeared with grease during the process of eat- ing, were anciently cleaned by rubbing them with the soft part of the bread, the crumbs of which, being allowed to fall, became the portion of dogs (Matt. xv :27; Luke xvi :21). But the most common way now at the conclusion of a feast is for a servant to go round to each guest with water to wash, a service which is performed by the menial pouring a stream over their hands, which is received into a strainer at the bottom of the basin. This humble office Elisha performed to his master (2 Kings iii: II). Our Lord recommended his wealthy hearers to practice giving entertainments rather than spend their fortunes, as they did, on luxurious living (Luke xiv: I2); and as such invitations to the poor are of necessity given by public proclamation, and female messengers are employed to publish them (Hasselquist saw ten or twelve thus peram- bulating a town in Egypt), it is probably to the same venerable practice that Solomon alludes in Prov. ix:3. (9) Seventeenth Century Signification. In the seventeenth century and earlier, banquet fre- quently signified, not the general feast, but the wine that came after ; not eating and drinking, but drinking only. ‘Bring in the banquet quickly; wine enough Cleopatra's health to drink.’ Shaks. Ant, and Cleop. I. ii. II. ‘We’ll dine in the great room, but let the music And banquet be prepared here.” \ Massinger, Unnat. Comb. iii. I. Figurati tº e. To those who believe in the symbolical character of Solomon's Song there is a figurative meaning to banquet. Christ’s word, covenant, church, and intimate fellowship with Him, are called the banqueting-house, or house of wine; thereby the saints are refreshed, satisfied, strengthened, exhilarated, encouraged and com- º against all their fears and griefs (Cant. 11 : 4). BAPTISM (bāp'tíz'm), the application of water as a rite of cleansing, purification, or initiation; a Christian sacrament. Tlic word “baptism” is the English form of the Greek 3attuorućs, ba/-äs-mos'. The verb from which this noun is derived—8att tºp, Öa/- tid'20—is held by some scholars to mean “to dip, immerse.” But this meaning is held by others to be not the most exact or common, but rather a meaning that is secondary or derived. By the latter it is claimed that all that the term necessarily im- plies is that the element employed in baptism is in close contact with the person or object baptized. The importance of this branch of the discussion has often been greatly overestimated as settling the proper mode of the rite. A conviction of the holiness of God excites in man the notion that he cannot possibly come into any amicable relation with Him before he is cleansed of sin, which separates him from God. 15 - BAPTISM 226 This sentiment found a very widely extended sym- bolic expression in the lustrations which formed an essential part of the ceremonial creeds of the ancient nations. In the Septuagint the simple verb BáTrew is frequent in the sense of ‘dip’ (Exod. xii:22; Hlev. iv:6, 17; ix:9; xiv:6, 16, 51), or ‘immerse' (Job ix:31). The intensive 8attl{ew occurs four times: twice literally, of Naaman dipping in the Jordan (2 Kings v. 14), and of Judith bathing (Judith xii:7); Once metaphorically, h divoula ue Batttgel (Is. xxi.4), and once of ceremonial washing after pollution, Battušáuevos diró vekpot (Sirach xxxi.; xxxiv:25). The usual verb for ceremonial washing is Noved 6at (Lev. xiv.8, 9; xv.5-IO, 13, 16-22; xvi;4, 24- 28), the middle voice being used because the un- clean person performed this cleansing for himself. The active is used of Moses washing Aaron and his sons before they exercised their ministry (Ex- Od. xxix:4; xl:12; Lev. viii:6), and of the Lord washing Jerusalem (Ezek. xvi;4). But 8am-rt{ety is never used in the Septuagint of any initiatory rite. (A. Plummer, Hastings' Biö. Zict.) In the language of the prophets, cleansing with water is used as an emblem of the purification of the heart, which in the Messianic age is to glorify the soul in her innermost recesses, and embrace the whole of the theocratic nation (Ezek. xxxvi : 25, sq.; Zech. xiii:I). Such declarations gave rise to or nourished the expectation that the advent of the Messiah would manifest itself by a pre- paratory lustration, by which Elijah or some other great prophet would pave the way for him. This supposition lies evidently at the bottom of the questions which the Jews put to John the Bap- tist (John i:25; Comp. Matt. and Luke iii:7), whether he was the Messiah, or Elijah, or some other prophet. Thus we can completely clear up the historical derivation of the rite, as used by John and Christ, from the general and natural symbol of baptism, from the Jewish custom in particular, and from the expectation of a Mes- sianic consecration. Danz, Ziegler and others have, nevertheless, supposed it to be derived from the Jewish ceremonial of baptizing proselytes; and Wetstein has traced that rite up to a date earlier than Christianity. But this opinion is not at all tenable: for, as an act which strictly gives validity to the admission of a proselyte, and is no mere accompaniment to his admission, baptism certainly is not alluded to in the New Testament; while as to the passages quoted in proof from the classical (profane) writers of that period they are all open to the most fundamental objections. Nor is the utter silence of Josephus and Philo on the subject, notwithstanding their various opportuni- ties of touching on it, a less weighty argument against this view. It is true that mention is made in the Talmud of that regulation as already ex- isting in the first century A. D.; but such state- ments belong only to the traditions of the Gemara and require careful investigation before they can serve as proper authority. 1. Jetwish Rite. This Jewish rite was prob- ably originally only a purifying ceremony; and it was raised to the character of an initiating and indispensable rite co-ordinate with that of sacri- fice and circumcision, only after the destruction of the Temple, when sacrifices had ceased, and the circumcision of proselytes had, by reason and pub- lic edicts, become more and more impracticable. 2. Taptism of John. It was the principal ob- ject of John the Baptist to combat the prevailing opinion that the performance of external, cere- monies was sufficient to secure participation in the kingdom of God and his promises; he required -º-º: *-4. We 13APTISM repentance, therefore (84ttugua ueravotas), baptism of repentance, as a preparation for the approach- ing kingdom of the Messiah. That he may pos- sibly have baptized heathens also seems to follow from his censuring the Pharisees for confiding in their descent from Abraham, while they had no share in his spirit; yet it should not be overlooked that this remark was drawn from him by the course of the argument (Matt. iii:8, 9; Luke iii:7, 8). We must, on the whole, assume that John con- sidered the existing Judaism as a stepping-stone by which the Gentiles were to arrive at the king- dom of God in its Messianic form. The general point of view from which John contemplated the Messiah and his kingdom was that of the Old Testament, though closely bor- dering on Christianity. He regards, it is true, an alteration in the mind and spirit as an indis- pensable condition for partaking in the kingdom Of the Messiah ; still he looked for its establish- ment by means of conflict and external force, with which the Messiah was to be endowed, and he ex- pected in him a judge and avenger, who was to set up outward and visible distinctions. It is, therefore, by no means a matter of indifference whether baptism be administered in the name of that Christ who floated before the mind of John, or of the suffering and glorified One, such as the apostles knew him, and whether it was considered a preparation for a political or a consecration into a Spiritual theocracy. John was so far from this latter view, so far from contemplating a purely spiritual development of the kingdom of God, that he even began subsequently to entertain doubts concerning Christ (Matt. xi :2). Tertul- lian distinguishes the essential characteristics of the two baptisms in their spirit and nature. To that of John he ascribes the negative character of repentance, and to the Christian the positive impartation of new life (JDe Bapt. x:II); a dis- tinction which arises out of the relation of law and gospel, and is given in the words of the Bap- tist himself—that he baptizes with water and unto repentance, while the greater One who was to come after him would baptize with the Holy Ghost (Matt. iii:II ; Luke iii:16; John i:26). John’s baptism had not the character of an im- mediate, but merely of a preparatory consecra- tion for the glorified theocracy (John i:3I). The apostles, therefore, found it necessary to re-baptize the disciples of John, who had still adhered to the notions of their master on that head (Acts xix). To this apostolic judgment Tertullian ap- peals, and in his opinion coincided the most emi- nent teachers of the ancient church, both of the East and the West. J. Baptism of Jesus by John. (Matt. iii: 13, sq.; Mark i :9, sq.; Luke iii:21, sq.; comp. John i:19, sq.; the latter passage refers to a time after the baptism, and describes, ver, 32, the inci- dental facts attending it). The baptism of Jesus, as the first act of his public career, is one of the most important events recorded in evangelical his– tory; great difficulty is also involved in reconciling the various accounts given by the evangelists of that transaction, and the several points connected with it. To question the fact itself, not even the negative criticism of Dr. Strauss has dared. This is, however, all that has been conceded by that criticism, viz.: the mere and bare fact ‘that Christ was baptized by John,' while all the circumstances of the event are placed in the region of mythology or fiction. (1) Critical Questions. Critical inquiry Sug- gests the following questions: BAPTISM I. In what relation did Jesus stand to John before the baptism 2 2. What object did Jesus intend to obtain by that baptism P 3. In what sense are we to take the miracu- lous incidents attending that act? With regard to the first point, we might be apt to infer, from Luke and Matthew, that there had been an acquaintance between Christ and John even prior to the baptism; and that hence John declines (Matt. iii:I4) to baptize Jesus, arguing that he needed to be baptized by him. This, how- ever, seems to be at variance with John i:31, 33. Lücke (Comment. i. p. 4I6, sq., 3d edit.) takes the words “I knew him not in their strict and ex- clusive sense. John, he says, could not have spoken in this manner if he had at all known Jesus; and had he known him, he could not, as a prophet, have failed to discover, even at an earlier period, the but too-evident “glory' of the Messiah. In fact, the narrative of the first three Gospels presupposes the same, since, as the herald of the Messiah, he could give that refusal (Matt. iii: I4) to the Messiah alone. (2) Object of Christ. With regard to the sec- ond point at issue, as to the object of Christ in wndergoing baptism, we find, in the first instance, that he ranked this action among those of his Messianic calling. This object is still more de- fined by John the Baptist (John i:3I), which Lücke interprets in the following words: ‘Only by entering into that community, which was to be introductory to the Messianic, by attaching himself to the Baptist like any other man, was it possible for Christ to reveal himself to the Baptist and through him to others.” Christ, with his never-failing reliance on God, never for a moment could doubt of his own mission, or of the right period when his character was to be made mani- fest by God (Paulus, Exeget. Handbuch, i.; Hase, Leben Jesu, sec. 54); but John needed to receive that assurance in order to be the herald of the Messiah who was actually come. For all others whom John baptized, either before or after Christ, this act was a mere preparatory consecration to the kingdom of the Messiah; while for Jesus it was a direct and immediate consecration, by means of which he manifested the commencement of his career as the founder of the new theocracy, which began at the very moment of his baptism, the initiatory character of which constituted its gen- eral principle and tendency. (3) Miraculous Incidents. With respect to the miraculous incidents which accompanied the baptism of Jesus, if we take for our starting point the narration of the three Gospels, that the Holy Spirit really and visibly descended in the form of a dove, and proclaimed Jesus, in an audible voice, to be the Son of God, there can be no difficulty in bringing it to harmonize with the statement in the Gospel of John. This literal sense of the text has, indeed, for a long time been the pre- vailing interpretation, though many doubts re- specting it had very early forced themselves on the minds of sober inquirers, traces of which are to be found in Origen (Contr. Cels. i :48), and which Strauss (p. 376) has more elaborately re- newed. To the natural explanations belong that of Paulus (Eweg. Handb.) that the dove was a real one, which had by chance flown near the spot at that moment; that of Meyer, that it was the figure of a meteor which was just then visible in the sky, and that of Kuinoel (ad Matt. iii), who considers the dove as a figure for lightning, and the voice for that of thunder, which the eye- witnesses, in their ecstatic feelings, considered as a divine voice, such as the Jews called a Bath-kol 227 BAPTISM (Meyer). Such interpretations are not only irre- concilable with the evangelical text, but even pre- suppose a violation of the common order of na- ture, in favor of adherence to which these inter- pretations are advanced. A more close investigation of the subject, how- ever induces us to take as a starting-point the ac- count of the apostle St. John. It is John the Bap- tist himself who speaks. He was an eye-witness, nay, to judge from Matthew and John, the only one present with Jesus, and is consequently the only source—with or without Christ—of infor- mation. Indeed, if there were more people pres– ent, as we are almost inclined to infer from Luke, they cannot have perceived the miracles attending the baptism of Jesus, or John and Christ would no doubt have appealed to their testimony in veri- fication of them. In thus taking the statement in St. John for the authentic basis of the whole history, a few slight hints in it may afford us the means of solving the difficulties attending the literal conception of the text. John the Baptist knows nothing of an ex- ternal and audible voice, and when he assures us (i:33) that he had in the Spirit received the prom- ise that the Messiah would be made manifest by the Spirit descending upon him and remaining— be it upon or in him—there; this very remaining assuredly precludes any material appearance in the shape of a bird. The internal probability of the text, therefore, speaks in favor of a spiritual vision in the mind of the Baptist; this view is still more strengthened by the fact that Luke supposes there were many more present, who, notwithstanding, perceived nothing at all of the miraculous inci- dents. The reason that the Spirit in the vision assumed the figure of a dove we would rather seek in the peculiar flight and movement of that bird than in its form and shape. This interpretation, moreover, has the advantage of exhibiting the philosophic connection of the incidents, since the Baptist appears more conspicu- ously as the immediate end of the Divine dispen- sation. Christ had thus the intention of being in- troduced by him into the Messianic sphere of operation, while the Baptist recognizes this to be his own peculiar calling; the signs by which he was to know the Messiah had been intimated to him, and now that they had come to pass the prophecy and his mission were fulfilled. None of the evangelists give any authority for the com- mon tradition that the descent of the Spirit upon Christ was sensibly witnessed by the multitude. 4. Christian Haptism. Jesus, having under- gone baptism as the founder of the new kingdom, ordained it as a legal act by which individuals were to obtain the rights of citizens therein. Though He caused many to be baptized by His disciples (John iv:1, 2), yet all were not baptized who were converted to Him; neither was it even necessary after they had obtained participation in Him by his personal choice and forgiving of sin. But when He could no longer personally and im- mediately choose and receive members of His kingdom, when at the same time all had been accomplished which the founder thought neces- sary for its completion, He gave power to the Spir– itual community to receive, in His stead, mem- bers by baptism (Matt. xxviii:19; Mark xvi; I6 (1) Regeneration and Baptism. Baptism es- sentially denotes the regeneration of him who re- ceives it, his participation both in the divine life of Christ and the promises rested on it, as well as his reception as a member of the Christian community. BAPTISM 228 Each of these momentous points implies all the rest, and the germ of all is contained in the words of Christ (Matt. xxviii:19; Comp. Neander, History of the Planting, etc., ii) : The details are variously digested by the apostles ac- cording to their peculiar modes of thinking. John dwells—in like manner as he does on the holy communion—almost exclusively on the internal nature of baptism, the immediate mystical union of the Spirit with Christ; baptism is with him equivalent to ‘being born again” (John iii:5, 7). Paul gives more explicitly and completely the other points also. He understands by it not only the union of the individual with the Head, by the giving one's self up to the Redeemer and the receiving of His life (Gal. iii:27), but also the union with the other members (ib. 28; I Cor. xii: I3; Ephes. iv:5; v :26). He expresses a spiritual purport by saying that it intimates on the part of those who have received it their being joined with Christ in his death and raised with him in his resurrection. As regards the relation between the external and the internal, the normal condition of baptism required that the ceremony should be combined with regeneration in him who received it, while he who administered it should have a perfect knowledge of the state of the baptized, and should aim at strengthening and promoting the new life in him. There is no doubt that when Christ himself gave the assurance that He had received some one into His community, whether with or without baptism, such a declaration of His choice was met by the individual with a disposition al- ready prepared to begin the new life. But the church is not in a state of perfection, and being deficient both in knowledge and will, she cannot fix the moment of regeneration in order to com- bine with it the act of baptism. She nevertheless places both in a necessary mutual relation, and considers baptism only then complete when re- generation takes place; the church therefore either delays baptism until after regeneration, or admin- isters it beforehand, confiding in the assurance that the agency of the church will also produce in him regeneration, provided always that the indi- vidual has the will for it. In the apostolic times the church was in a less . mixed state; a comparatively large number, per- haps an actual majority, of the whole body of the baptized might at that time have passed for con- verts, as the inward and outward conditions of baptism were then not so far removed from each other as they afterwards became. The necessity of examining the comparative merits of both con- ditions separately grew with the growing imper- fection of the community. The apostles did not yet feel it; they considered both only in the light of their necessary union with each other as Paul, for instance, says (Tif iii. 5; Comp Mark, xvi. 16) of the external symbol, what belongs only to the union of both. To ascribe the promises to baptism without that inward union would be mak- ing it an opus operatum and its efficacy a magic power, but, on the other hand, since the insti- tution of Christ comprises also the external signs, it cannot be complete without them, and he who would abolish these external signs would de- prive the church of an essential tie of fellowship. The Catholic church rather favors the former doc- trine, and a few mystical sects, the Quakers, etc., the latter. (2) Recipients of Baptism. The command to baptize was coupled with that of preaching the gospel to all nations (Matt. xxviii:19). To be admitted to baptism in the apostolic age there needed no further development of Christian BAPTISM knowledge than a professed belief that Jesus was the promised Messiah. On this principle the apos- tles acted (Acts ii:37; viii: 12, 37, 38; xvi :15, 33). To be baptized in the name of the Messiah meant to receive baptism in the belief that the power and dignity contained in the idea of a Messiah was realized in Jesus. ' The profession of faith (I Pet. iii:21) probably was such as to convey this idea, and next also the formula of baptism in the name of Christ, or, according to Matt, xxviii:19, of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, when the whole body was immersed in water. Christ did not intend by these words to institute a fixed formilla of baptism, but merely meant to indicate thereby the substance of the essential re- lations of baptism, since in his lifetime people could not yet be baptized in the name of the Holy Ghost. As the church, however, knew of no better compendiary text for the article of faith, she declared herself early for that formula, which was already in general use at the time of Justin Martyr. - The early practice in regard to baptism corre- sponds with the general character of the gospel that it should embrace the world and be freely offered to all men. 5. Tº aptism for the T)ead. Paul (I Cor. xv :29) uses this phrase. Few passages have un- dergone more numerous and arbitrary emenda- tions than this text. We shall examine, first : (1) A Particular Application of Baptism. Those interpretations which take it to be some particular application of baptism. From the wording of the sentence the most simple impression certainly is that Paul Speaks of a baptism which a living man receives in the place of a dead one. This interpretation is particularly adopted by those expounders with whom gram- matical construction is of paramount importance, and the first thing to be considered. Many expounders have written in support of this opinion. But all we can infer from their statements is that baptism by substitution had taken place among the Marcionites, and perhaps also among the Corinthians and other smaller sects towards the end of the fourth century, a period when the confused views of the church as to the relations of the external to the spiritual might easily have favored that erroneous custom ; but that it existed between that period and the time when Paul wrote the above passage is wholly unsubstantiated. The idea, then, that such a superstitious custom existed in the Corinthian community is devoid of all historical evidence. In the words of Paul we discover no opinion of his own concerning the justice or injustice of the rite; it is merely brought in as an argumentum ea concesso (argu- ment from concession) in favor of the object which he pursues through the whole chapter (Comp. I Cor. ii:5). However much may be ob- jected against this interpretation, it is by far more reasonable than the explanations given by other critics. The Corinthian community was certainly of a mixed character, consisting of individuals of various views, ways of thinking, and different stages of education; so that there might still have existed a small number among them capable of such absurdities. We are not sufficiently ac- quainted with all the particulars of the case to maintain the contrary, while the simple gram- matical sense of the passage is decidedly in favor of the proposed interpretation. (2) Baptism. Over Graves. (I) Origen, Luther, Chemnitz, and Joh. Gernard interpret the words as relating to baptism Over the graves of the mem. BAPTISM bers of the community, a favorite rendezvous of the early Christians. Luther says that, in order to strengthen their faith in the resurrection, the Christians baptized over the tombs of the dead. But the custom alluded to dates from a much later period. - (2) Epiphanius mentions also a view, according to which uékpot is not to be translated by dead, but 2/zoº/a//y 2// persons, whose baptism was ex- pedited by Sprinkling water upon them on their death-bed, instead of immersing them in the usual way; the rite is known under the name of bap- Žismus câmzczęs, Zectua/7s, But few of the modern theologians advocate this view. (3) The interpretations which suppose that the church speaks of general church baptism. To these belongs the oldest opinion we know of, given in Tertullian, who renders the Greek word for in the sense of on account of, and the dead by dead bodies, they themselves, the baptized, as dead persons. r 6. Immersion Not Essential To. Taptism. The vast majority of the Christian church does not hold that immersion is the only valid baptism. The Greek word Batttºw it is conceded is some- times used both by sacred and profane writers to denote immersion. But the best lexicographers agree that this is not the only meaning of the word. Battós, the verbal adjective of 8&irro, is the word from which 8attiğa, is derived. It means ſo zºef Zhorough/y, and not necessarily to immerse. Among the lexicographers, ancient and modern, who give a wider meaning than immerse to the word may be mentioned Stephanus, Scapula, Passor, Suidas, Hedericus, Conlon, Parkhurst, Ainsworth, Schleusner, Wahl, and Robinson. The great majority of the commentators teach that the mode of baptism is not a thing essential. The Rev. Richard Watson sums up very forcibly the arguments against immersion as the sole mode of baptism. He says: “As the word 8atrriſw is used to express the various ablutions among the Jews, such as sprinkling, pouring, etc. (Heb. ix: Io), for the custom of washing before meals, and the washing of household furniture, pots, etc., it is evident from hence that it does not express the manner of doing a thing, whether by immersion or effusion, but only the thing done; that is, washing, or the application of water in some form or other. It nowhere signifies to diff, but in denoting a mode of, and in order to, washing or cleansing; and the mode or use is . Only the ceremonial part of a positive institute; just as in the Lord's Supper, the time of day, the number and posture of the com- municants, the quantity and quality of bread and wine, are circumstances not accounted essential by any part of Christians. If in baptism there is an expressive emblem of the descending influence of the Spirit, pouring must be the mode of adminis- tration; for that is the scriptural term most com- monly and properly used for the communication of Divine influences (Matt. iii: I I; Mark i. 8, IO; Luke iii: 16-22; John i: 33; Acts i. 5; ii: 38, 39; viii: 12, 17; xi. 15, 16). The term sprint/#/ºng, also, is made use of in reference to the act of purification (Isa. lii: I 5; Ezek. xxxvi; 25; Heb. ix: I 3, 14); and therefore cannot be inapplicable to baptismal purification. But it is observed that John baptized ‘in Jordan.’ To this it is replied, To infer always a plunging of the whole body in water from this particle would in many instances be false and absurd. The same Greek preposition, êv, is used when it is said they should be ‘baptized with fire;’ but few will assert that they should be plunged into it. The apostle, speaking of Christ, says, he came not, €v, ‘by water only,' but, €v, ‘by water and blood.' There the same word, év, is translated by, 229 BAPTISM and with justice and propriety, for we know no good sense in which we could say he came in Water. It has been remarked that év is more than a hundred times in the New Testament rendered a/, and in a hundred and fifty others it is trans- lated with. . If it be rendered so here, John bap- tized at Jordan, or with the water of Jordan, there is no proof that he plunged his disciples in it.” SAMUEL FALLOWS. Z. Infant Baptism. The great majority of those who call themselves Christians, throughout the world, have been baptized in infancy, so that there is a general denial by Christendom that im- meſsion is essential to the sacrament of baptism. (1) Early Custom. The word baptigo is not always applied “to acts involving the process of immersion.” Reputable authorities in church his- tory agree that infant baptism was practiced as early as the second century. Origen (185-253 A. D.) Speaks of it as the general practice of the church and as having been taught by the apos- tles, “for this cause it was that the church re- ceived a tradition from the apostles to give bap- tism even to infants.” Tertullian put an exaggerated value upon the rite of baptism and advised that it should be post- poned till later life, holding that “baptism was accompanied with the remission of past sins, and that sins committed after baptism were peculiarly da11gerous.” His polemic indicates that in his time (160-240 A. D.) infant baptism was com- 111 O11. Justin Martyr, in his Apology (138 A. D.) speaks of ‘many persons of both sexes, who had been made disciples to Christ from their infancy.” And in Trypho he says: “We are circumcised by baptism, with Christ's circumcision.” A rational view of the relation of young chil- dren to the Saviour, who said: “Suffer little chil- dren to come unto me and forbid them not,” (Mark x : I4), seems to imply that as the old dis- pensation used the designating rite of circumcision to indicate that the Jewish infant was recognized by the national church as belonging to its con- stituency, so the new dispensation has a formal ceremony by which the church claims little chil- dren as its own. If any choose to quote the in- junction of Christ, “Believe and be baptized,” as carrying an implication against the right to baptize such as are not yet capable of personal belief, it is sufficient to reply that this command is most certainly for adults, but that it has no ex- clusive meaning as against infants. Moreover, there are impressive and mandatory words from the Saviour which imply that young children are recognized by Him as belonging to a very lofty and exemplary sense to the Kingdom of God: “Except ye (adults) be converted and become as little children ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. xv.111:3). (2) Reasons. Infant baptism, therefore, as a Christian rite, rests upon the following concep- tion S : It is a sign given by the church that it recog nizes children as belonging to God. They are claimed and taken into its consecrating arms, to be brought within its sphere of nurture and in- struction. (a) The baptismal vows taken by parents at the font, in the solemn office of this sacrament, are a reinforcement of parental obligation to bring up ...their children as if they were God’s, and should never be allowed to believe that they were nat- urally aliens from the household of faith. (b) As much may be said of a baptized infant as of an adult baptized, for in each case this Sacrament witnesses, as far as an outward cere- BAPTISM 230 monial may do so, that this person is now Christ's and virtually a member of His kingdom. If the Child dies, baptized or unbaptized, he is saved, so all rational, modern theologies agree. If he lives and is rightly guided and taught, the saved life, the life of a Christian, is the normal and ra- tional (but not inevitable) result of the antece- dent influences. If a baptized infant may grow up into recreancy and stray into irreligion, so may the adult, after baptism, voluntarily accepted, “be- come a castaway” and deny the faith. (c) All this may be consistently believed with- out making any assumptions that carry the ex- treme views of “baptismal regeneration.” The wide and gracious purpose of the Redeemer is sufficient to cover the salvation of unsinning in- fants, whether or not a few drops of consecrated water have touched their brows. But it is expedi- ent and helpful, and tends to sweeten and sanc- tify the family order, if, without any claim of re- generating grace for the water itself, the little children of the household are “christened” for a fellowship in the great family of God, named for the Redeemer in heaven and on earth. H (3) Further Defense. Von P. Lobstein, in Zezzschrift fºr Theologie und Kirche, 1896, de- fends infant baptism on the broad ground of Di- vine revelation and Christian nurture. He finds infant baptism supported (I) as an expression of the undeserved, anticipating love of God. This love has no more comprehensible and touching form than in the baptism of babes and sucklings. (2) It is an expression of the glorious liberty (or independence, “Unabhaengigkeit") of the love of God. Man has no more claim to the unde- served mercy of God than the veriest babe. (3) It is an expression of the unchangeable faithful- ness of the love of God. Baptism stands for the ever-present, ever-uninterrupted grace of God. (See Review of Lobstein, by Prof. H. M. Scott, Chicago Theolog. Sem., in the Am. Jour. of Theol., Jan., 1897, p. 253, sq.). 8. Belietyers’ baptism. (1) Reasons For. Those who hold to be- lievers' baptism maintain that all authority for Christian baptism comes from the commission Christ gave to his disciples just before his ascen- sion. That commission, they maintain, plainly limits baptism to such as can be taught and be- lieve ; that there is no case in the practice of the Apostolic church which contradicts the above lim- itation, and that infant baptism is not found in the Bible, nor any other book, until near the close of the second century. They hold that it was the logical sequence of two errors which had then crept into the church, viz.: (a) That infants are totally depraved ; (b) that baptism per se is re- generative; therefore, infants should be baptized to remove their depravity. As both these errors are now in general dis- avowed by Christendom, there is no necessity for infant baptism, and hence there should be none. They further maintain that all attempts to infer infant baptism from infant circumcision, under the Mosaic covenant, are fanciful, and as plainly teach infant communion as infant baptism ; that baptism is an act of faith, and only such as can express faith thereby should be baptized ; that it is the answer of a good conscience, and cannot be ad- ministered to one who has no conscience what- eVer. They affirm that the church is builded upon the spiritual foundation of “the Apostles and Proph- ets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner- stone.” The members thus builded are “living BAPTISM stones,” and are builded together for a “spiritual house,” in which “spiritual sacrifices” are offered, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. This excludes mere flesh and blood. They deny that a person can become a proxy for another, and hold that such things as god- fathers and godmothers are inventions of an apos- tate church. (2) . Mode. The act of baptism they believe to be immersion. They maintain that all scholars admit immersion to be the plain English equivalent of “baptizo;” that “sprinkle” and “pour” are not equivalents as the lexicons all testify; that there are three words in the Greek language, equiva- lents, respectively, of the English, “pour,” “sprin- kle” and “immerse,” and when speaking of bap- tism as a literal Christian rite the Bible invariably uses the equivalent of “immerse” to the exclu- sion of the other two ; that the Greek church using the Greek language, and in many respects nearer the Apostolic church than the Roman Catholic, has always been an immersing church; that there is no mention of affusion for baptism in the Bible nor any other book for the first two Centuries; that it was introduced in the case of sickness or weakness, and was not regarded as regular; that after its introduction it met with long-continued opposition, and only in recent cen- turies has the Roman Catholic church accorded it an equal place with 1mmersion; that the cir- cumstances surrounding the practice of baptism in the New Testament point unmistakably to im- mersion as the universal practice; that the figura- tive references to it by the New Testament writers can all be understood on the supposition that they meant immersion and cannot be understood on any other supposition; that there is no place where baptism is spoken of in the New Testament that we may not substitute immersion without destroy- ing the Sense; that in a large majority of the cases where the word “baptism”, is mentioned, to sub- stitute “pour” or “sprinkle ’ would make the passage ridiculous and without meaning; that the great historians, such as Mosheim, Neander, Wall, Eidersheimer, Weiss, Ewald, Geikie, DePressense, Schaff, Conybeare, . Howson, Stanley and many Others unite in testifying that immersion was the primitive practice; that the great reformers, such as Martin Luther, John Calvin and John Wesley, admit that immersion was the original practice. They maintain also that the meaning of bap- tism is to be found in a visible representation of the death, burial and resurrection of our Lord— that this visible representation is found in im- mersion, but is not found in either sprinkling or pouring. Z. T. S. Figuratite. 1. There is a twofold meta- phorical baptism: (a) The baptism of the Holy Ghost, and of fire, which denotes not only the miraculous collation of the influences of the blessed Spirit, whereby the New Testament church was solemnly consecrated to the service of God; but chiefly his gracious influences, which, like fire, purify, soften and inflame our heart with love to Jesus and wash away our sin and enable us to join ourselves to him and his people (Matt. iii: II ; I Cor xii:13). (b) The sufferings of Christ and his people are called baptism; they are means of purging away iniquity, and thereby Christ and his people solemnly dedicate themselves to the service of God, and avouch him to be their only Lord (Matt. xx:22; Luke xii:50). 2. There appears a strong resemblance be- tween the baptism of Israel into Moses and the baptism of the church of God into Christ. Bap- tism in the name of Christ confessedly sets be- fore us completely the doctrine of Christ, and BAPTISMAL REGENERATION 231 by it we are introduced into the church of Christ. In like manner the pillar of cloud and passage through the sea exhibited a grand display of the whole doctrine of Moses, and by this bap- tism the whole church of Israel was initiated. As faith is inseparable from baptism in the name of Christ, so by faith Israel passed through the Red Sea, which the Egyptians essaying to do were drowned. The same truths set before us in bap- tism were set before Israel when they passed through the Red Sea. They were all baptized, young and old, male and female, infants and adults. The youngest child among them partook of the beneficial effects of the cloud and the glorious salvation through the sea; the parents, in bringing them along with them, trusted them into the bed of the Red Sea, believing what the Lord had said to them by Moses, hoping for the same salvation for them that they expected for themselves. And guilty sinners who look for deliverance in Christ bring their children un- der the cloud in the ordinance of baptism, know- ing that the same Almighty power which carries them through every danger and death can also carry their children. (See I Cor. x: I, 2.) 3. St. Peter makes the saving of a few persons through water at the flood a figure of the Chris- tian rite (I Pet. iii:20, 2I), where the water which purged the earth of its wicked inhabitants by floating the Ark saved its inmates. Luther al- most inverts this when he remarks that ‘baptism is a greater deluge than that described by Moses, since more are baptized than were drowned by the Deluge.” 4. But patristic writers find baptism typified in a variety of things, some of which are remote enough, e. g., not only in the passage of the Jor- dan (Josh. iii:17), and the cleansing of Naaman (2 Kings v : I4), but in the river of Paradise, the well revealed to Hagar, the water from the rock, the water poured upon Elijah's offering, etc. Ter- tullian asserts that the primeval water ‘brought forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life’ (Gen. i :20), in order that there should be no difficulty in believing that baptismal waters can give life (De Bapt. iii). In a like spirit prophecies respecting Christian baptism were found with great freedom, not only in Zechariah's fountain * * * “for sin and for uncleanness’ (Zech. xiii: I), in Isaiah's promise that sins red as Scarlet shall be white as snow (Is. i :18), and in Ezekiel's “I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean. * A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you' Ezek. xxxvi :25, 26), but even in the hart panting after the water brooks (Ps. xlii:I), and in the waters breaking out in the desert (IS. xxxv :6). (A. Plummer, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) RAPTISMAL REGENERATION (bāp-tíz'mal re-jën'êr-ā-shūn). See REGENERATION, BAPTISMAL. BAPTISM OF BIOOD (bāp’tíz'm Öv blüd). Tertullian gave this name to martyrdom be- fore baptism, and to the death of martyrs in general. By him and other fathers after him, it was thought to have a peculiar efficacy to purify from sins, from which mistaken notion it was urgently recommended to believers. Gregory of Nazianzen speaks of a baptism of martyrdom and blood with which Christ himself was bap- tized. This baptism goes beyond the others in proportion as it is free from sin. (See Matt, x: 39; Luke xii:50.) But the blood of Christ alone cleanseth us from all sin (I John i:7; Rev i :5, vii: 14). BAPTISM OF FIRE (bāp'tíz'm Öv fir). The words of John the Baptist (Matt. iii: II). “He that cometh after me shall baptize you with BAPTISM OF THE HOLY GHOST the Holy Ghost and with fire,” have given occa- Sion to various interpretations. Some of the fathers (e. g. John Damascenus) hold it to mean the everlasting fire of hell. Others of the fathers (as Chrysostom, Hom. II, in Matt.) declare that by fire in this passage the Baptist means the Holy Spirit, who as fire, should destroy the pollutions of sin in the regeneration conferred by holy baptism. Others again, as Hilary and Ambrose, as well as Origen, believe it to mean a purifying fire through which the faithful shall pass before enter- ing paradise, thus giving rise to the Roman Catho- lic doctrine of purgatory. Others think that it means the fire of tribulations and sorrows; others the abundance of graces; others, the fire of peni- tence and self-mortification, etc. The Hermenians and Seleucians understood the passage literally and maintained that material fire was necessary in the administration of baptism. The word fire is frequently used in Scripture to represcht both purifying and destroying agencies, and expositors differ as to whether to apply it to the sanctifying power of the Holy Spirit, or to the destruction of the wicked. Scripture also affirms in Is. i :25; iv:3, 4; Ezek. xx:38; Mal. iii:2, 17, 18, that the true Israel will be separated even by severe measures, both from the ungodly and from their own remaining sins. (See IS. i :25; iv:3, 4; Ezek. xx:38; Mal. iii:2, 17, 18.) Valentinus re- baptized those who had received baptism Out of his sect, and drew them through the fire, and it is said by Clemens Alexandrinus that Heraclion applied a red-hot iron to the ears of the baptized, as if to º on them some mark (Mc. and Str. (VC. J. Meyer (Com., in loc.) says that all explanations “which take fire as not referring to the punish- ments of Gehenna are refuted by John's own de- cisive explanation in Matt. iii: 12.” BAPTISM OF JESUS. See BAPTISM, 3. BAPTISM OF THE HOLY GHOST, that overwhelming abundance of the gifts and graces of the Holy Spirit which our Saviour, after his as- cension, poured forth upon his disciples. The basis of this beautiful metaphor is found in the literal signification of baptism, which is to cover one completely with any kind of element, particularly water. So the apostles and primitive believers are said to have been not only in a de- gree subjected to the influence of the Holy Spirit, but filled with it, immersed in it, as in a new ele- ment of existence, life, perception, feeling and action. A measure of the same Divine influence they had received before, but this was a far more copious and ample communication of it, to qualify them for their public labors, as well as to elevate their personal character and to promote their spir- itual enjoyment. Nor does this rich donation of spiritual blessings appear to have heen restricted to miraculous gifts on the one hand, or to the primitive believers on the other. For it is repre- sented: (1) As the prerogative of Christ's per- sonal dignity (Matt. iii:II; Mark i :8; Luke iii:16; John i:15-17, 32, 33). (2) As the grand distinc- tion of his glorious reign (John vii:37–39; xvi :7. (3) As the special promise of the new covenant (Luke xxiv:49; Acts i:4-8; ii:I-4, 16–21, 33, 38. 39; Heb. viii:6-12). (4) As the privilege and seal of every believer (Ephes. i :13, 14; iv:30; V:18; Gal. iv:6; v :16, 25. (5) As the proper object of expectation and prayer (Is. xxxii: 15-17; xliv :3-5; Luke xi:5–13; Phil. i :19). (6) As comprehending gifts and graces, varied in kind and degree to supply the necessities of the church, according to the will and wisdom of the Spirit himself (I Cor. xii: 1-13, 31; xiv:1; Ephes. V:9; iv:30; Rom, viii; 9, 13, 14; xiv:17; XY H3), BAPTIST BAPTIST (bāp'tist), one that baptizeth. John the son of Zacharias is so called, because he first administered baptism as an ordinance of God (Matt. iii:1). BAPTISTS (bāp'tists). (1) Antecedents and Principles. Protests against infant baptism as without Scriptural war- rant and as perversive of the nature and pur- pose of an ordinance of Christ were common but by... no means universal among mediaeval evan- gelical parties. Petrobrusians and Henricians (II94-48), Arnold of Brescia probably (1139-55), and many Waldenses and Bohemian Brethren (thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth centuries) CPposed infant baptism and insisted upon believ- ers' baptism. Insistence on regenerate member- ship, on the imitation of Christ in his humility and self-denial, and on the practical carrying out cf the teachings of the sermon on the mount; the rejection of oaths, magistracy, warfare, capital punishment, as contrary to the spirit of the gos- pel; and maintenance of freedom of the will and faith working by love, almost invariably accom- panied rejection of infant baptism in the mediaeval t11ne. These principles became far more aggressive and influential in connection with the Protestant Revo- lution of the sixteenth century. From 1521 on- ward in Germany and from 1524 onward in Switz- erland, radical reformers revolted from the par- tial and compromising measures of such politico- ecclesiastical reformers, as Luther and Zwingli, and insisted on unconditional return to apostolic Christianity. Chief stress was laid upon believers' baptism as alone fulfilling the purposes of the ordinance and as requisite for regenerate mem- bership. Ideas of social reform accompanied this radical religious propaganda. In a few years the movement had spread throughout southern, east- ern, Western and central Europe, and many thou- sands had been won to its support. Protestants and Catholics vied with each other in remorse- less efforts at extermination. The Moravian Ana- baptists adopted a communistic mode of organiza- tion and their membership at one time is said to have reached seventy thousand. In the Nether- lands the party reorganized by Menno Simons about . I536, was for some years the chief repre- sentative of evangelical Christianity. Many Ana- baptists were driven by relentless persecution to take refuge in millennarian expectations and were precipitated into the vortex of fanaticism (Mün- ster Kingdom). While immersion was recognized by Protestants and Anabaptists alike as the apos- tolic form of baptism, little stress was laid upon it by either party. A few cases of immersion almong Anabaptists are recorded, but sprinkling or pouring seems to have been the prevailing practice. Liberty of conscience was earnestly ad- vocated by leading Anabaptists, at a time when thearly all Protestants and Catholics regarded it as entirely inadmissible. Anabaptists from the continent appeared in Eng- land in small groups from time to time from I534 onward. They were cruelly persecuted and had little opportunity to form permanent churches of to exert any considerable influence on the na- tive population. It is possible that in some cases they came into relations with surviving Lollard communities and influenced these to reject in- fant baptism. That some English accepted their views in the times of Edward VI and Elizabeth we have reason to believe. It is probable that the large Dutch population found in the west of England in Elizabeth's reign contained many Anabaptists, and, in the opinion of leading Con- gregational scholars and others, exerted a de- 232 BAPTISTS cisive influence on Robert Brown, the father of English Congregationalism. In 1606 a Separatist congregation that had been formed at Gainsborough, England, under the lead- ership of John Smyth, a Cambridge graduate, were driven by the persecuting measures of James I to Amsterdam, where a church of English dissenters had for years Sojourned. Smyth and his follow- ers (among whom were Thomas Helwys and John Morton), became convinced that the Sep- aratist congregations were inconsistent in with- drawing from the fellowship of the Church of England as an apostate church, and yet accepting as valid the baptism and the ordination received in that body, and in insisting on regenerate mem- bership, and yet baptizing unconscious infants. Accordingly, they repudiated their baptism, ordi- nation and ordinances, introduced a new believer's baptism (or what they considered such, for it is probable that immersion was not employed at this time) and reorganized on what they considered a New Testament basis (1609). From the Menno- nites and Remonstrants they imbibed Arminian forms of doctrine. Smyth and a majority of the church soon be- came dissatisfied with their introduction of a new baptism and sought admission into the Men- nonite fellowship. Helwys, Morton and others adhered to the principle on which they had acted and returned to England in 16II to propagate their views there. These also cultivated the fel- lowship of the Mennonites and like the latter be- came strongly Socinian in their views. About I626 there were five small congregations in dif- ferent parts of England. From 1614 to 1620 they published several able pleas for liberty of con- Science. It is probable that they had increased to SOme extent by I640. It is not certain that any member of this party (afterwards to be known as General Baptists) practiced immersion up to I640. In 1616 Henry Jacob, who had been pastor of an exiled congregation of English dissenters at Middleburg, Zeeland, returned to London and Organized a church at Southwark. Out of this church, through successive withdrawals and re- divisions, there arose, from 1633 to 1644, seven an- tipedobaptist congregations that were afterwards known as Particular (Calvinistic) Baptist churches. Part of these became convinced (about I640) that baptism “ought to be by dipping the body into the water.” They were also disinclined to introduce the apostolic form independently. So far as they knew, “none” had “then so prac- ticed in England to professed believers.” Being informed of an immersionist body in Holland, they sent over one of their brethren to receive the ordinance. He returned baptized, and large numbers were 1mmersed early 1n 1641 or 1642. These Baptists published a confession of faith in 1644, which embodies the views of the great mass of modern Baptists. The principles of Baptists may be summarized as follows: Supreme authority of Scripture (this excludes from doctrine and practice whatever is without Scriptural warrant); regenerate member- ship; democratic government, with recognition of the headship of Christ and the universal priest- hood of believers; believers' baptism (immersion alone being regarded as true baptism); absolute liberty of conscience; separation of church and State. (2) Historical Outline. The first in America to advocate Baptist principles, so far as we are informed, was Roger Williams. Born about 1600, educated at Cambridge (B. A. 1627), he became an ardent non-conformist and at great personal BAPTISTS sacrifice emigrated to New England to escape the persecuting measures of Archbishop Laud. He was immediately invited to supply the pulpit of the Boston church, but he declined because it was “an unseparated church,” and he “durst not officiate to” it. He incurred the ill will of the Massachusetts authorities at this time by de- nying the right of the magistrate to punish any Sort of “breach of the first table,” such as idol- atry, Sabbath-breaking, blasphemy, etc. During his pastorate at Plymouth he spent much time among the Indians, mastering their language and seeking to promote their moral and spiritual wel- fare. As pastor of the Salem church (1634-35) he became involved in local controversies and in controversies with the Massachusetts authorities, Apart from his opposition to the Massachusetts churches as “unseparated” he objected to the char- ter, which involved recognition of the right of kings “to take and give away the lands of other people;” denounced the administration of oaths to the unregenerate as involving blasphemy, and the freemen’s oath of allegiance in general as involv- ing usurpation of Divine prerogatives on the part of the government, and at last disfellowshiped the other churches for refusing to discipline their representatives in the court for unrighteous con- duct and his own church for refusing to join him in this action. As advocating opinions dangerous to the Čommon welfare he was banished in 1635. He made his way amid winter's hardships and per- ils to Narragansett Bay, where he was joined by a number of Massachusetts sympathizers and founded a colony on the basis of soul-liberty, which, with the coöperation of John Clarke and others, was developed into Rhode Island. His de- fense of the principle of liberty of conscience in “The Bloody Tenet of Persecution” and “The Bloody Tenet Yet More Bloody,” was the most elaborate and complete that had ever been made and was epoch-making. This principle was de- fended with equal ability by John Clarke in his “Ill News from New England.” By 1639 Williams had become convinced that infant baptism was unwarranted by Scripture and a perversion of a Christian ordinance, and with eleven others introduced believers' baptism, and formed at Providence the first American Baptist church. Coddington, who was on Rhode Island at the time, accused Williams as at one time insisting on immersion and as Williams remained with the Baptists only a short time, it is natural to apply his remark to the time of the introduction of believers' baptism. This church, after Williams’ withdrawal, continued for years in an exceedingly weak state. The General Baptist type of teaching, with insistence on the laying on of hands as an ordinance of Christ, came to prevail by I652, and tho opponents of this view withdrew to form a new congregation. The second American Baptist church was that formed at Newport, about 1641, under the lead- ership of John Clarke. Clarke arrived at Bos- ton in November, 1637, when persecuting meas- ures were being inaugurated against Mrs. Anne Hutchinson and her followers on account of their antinomian teachings. How far he sympathized with Mrs. Hutchinson's views at this time we have no means of knowing. But he cast his lot with the persecuted party and led them in seeking a new home in unsettled territory. Through the kindly offices of Roger Williams they secured from the natives a title to Aquidneck Island. Here they founded a government in which the headship of Christ was recognized and which was purely democratic in form. This colony united with Williams’ Providence colony in pro- 233 baptism of infants. BAPTISTS curing a charter in which civil and religious lib- erty was fully provided for. Clarke deserves quite as much credit as Williams for this feature of Rhode Island polity, and his services in England on behalf of the colony were quite as distin- guished. For some time Clarke, who was physi- cian and theologian as well as statesman, minis- tered to the entire community in religious things. About 1641, or earlier, Clarke and a number of his fellow-colonists became “professed Anabap- tists,” and began to hold their meetings apart. In what form and under what circumstances they introduced believers' baptism we are not in- formed, but about 1644 Mark Lucar, who was among the English separatists that were im- mersed in I64I (1642) became a member of the Newport church. If immersion was not prac- ticed from the beginning, it was no doubt intro- duced on Lucar's arrival. The Newport church was full of missionary zeal. Members of this body sought to form a Baptist church at See- konk, Massachusetts, in 1649, but were thwarted by the authorities. In 1651 Clarke and two of his brethren suffered severe treatment at the hands of the Massachusetts authorities for Conducting religious services at Lynn. Clarke narrates these sufferings and denounces Massachusetts intoler- ance in “Ill News from New England” (I652). As already indicated, the Massachusetts govern- ment pursued a policy of extermination toward Baptists and no permanent organization of Bap- tist life was allowed until late in the century. Henry Dunster, the first president of Harvard College (1640-55), was obliged, under circum- stances of great hardship, to relinquish his posi- tion because of his persistence in opposing the In 1663 John Myles, a Welsh Baptist pastor, emigrated to Massachusetts with his church, secured a grant of land near the Rhode Island frontier, and established a settlement and church, which they named Swansea. Here they enjoyed a considerable measure of freedom. The First Baptist Church of Boston was organized in 1665, and for years suffered grievously at the hands of the authorities. In 1682 a small band of Baptists, several of whom had been members of the Boston church, formed an organization at Kittery, Maine. Driven from Maine soon after- ward they settled in South Carolina, and formed the Charleston church about 1684. In the Quaker colonies—New Jersey and Pennsylvania—Baptists appeared about 1682, and by 1707 at least six churches had been organized. They were largely Welsh, but included a considerable number from New England. The Philadelphia Association was formed in 1707, and became a chief means of extending and conserving Baptist influence. As late as 1729 there were in New England only three Calvinistic Paptist churches, while there were two Sabbatarian and thirteen, General Baptist churches. The latter had for some time held annual association meetings. The Charleston church had also come under Arminian influence, and had been almost wrecked by internal strife. It is not probable that the entire Baptist member- ship in America much exceeded 500 at the begin- ning of the Great Awakening (1733). With few exceptions the Baptists of 1740 were not aggressive or enterprising. They held aloof from the Great Awakening, led by Edwards, Whitefield, the Tennents, etc., refusing in some cases to open their churches for evangelistic Serv- ices. And yet no denomination, profited more largely by the revival. . The Philadelphia Associa; tion from 1750 onward exerted a stimulating and molding influence on the feeble Baptist churches in Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina, BAPTISTS 234 and secured the organization of many new churches and the formation of associations for #: conservation and advancement of Baptist life. In New England many Separate or “New Light” Congregational churches were formed by reason of the opposition of ministers and churches to the revival, and many of these “New Light” churches came to feel that their demand for re- generate membership logically involved the aban- donment of infant baptism and accepted the Bap- tist position. In some cases whole congregations, with their pastors, became Baptists. In other cases churches were divided. The older Baptist churches gave little encouragement to the “New Light” Baptists, and for a long time would have no fellowship with them. But a new vital force had come to the Baptist cause, and in a few years the evangelistic Baptists were greatly in the ma- jority in New England and throughout the South. The excessive enthusiasm of the Separate Bap- tists was everywhere tempered by the conserva- tive missionary influence that emanated from the Philadelphia Association. Highly educated men went forth in every direction from the Philadel- phia body. Hezekiah Smith as evangelist, finan- cial agent for the college, pastor and army chap- lain, disseminated the Philadelphia influence throughout New England and elsewhere. The in- fluence of this body, exerted persistently and through many channels, broke down the middle wall of partition between Baptists of the old and new types, and at last secured everywhere associa- tional organization and conservative but aggres- sive denominational life. In Virginia Separate Baptists led in the glorious struggle for civil and religious liberty (1775-99), and secured the coöperation of the Regulars. The two parties united in 1785. The Virginia Bap- tists were largely instrumental in securing relig- ious liberty for all, and at last in compassing the disestablishment of the Episcopal church and the confiscation of its glebe lands, etc. To them also was due in part the ample provision for liberty of conscience in the United States Constitution. In New England, Separate Baptists, like Backus, coöperated with Baptists of the Philadelphia type, like Manning, Smith, Davis and Stillman, in an equally heroic but less successful struggle for absolute religious liberty and equality. The serv- ices of American Baptists in the cause of civil and religious liberty are acknowledged by scholars of other denominations. By 1812 American Baptists numbered about 172,- 972, of whom 32,272 were in New England, 26, 155 in the Middle States and the rest in the South. Rhode Island College (Brown University) was still the only Baptist institution of higher learn- ing. Most of the numerical increase had been secured through the labors of illiterate evangelists, and the Baptist population in the South and West, apart from a few churches in Virginia, the Charleston Association, some churches in the neighborhood of Savannah, and the Georgia Asso- ciation, was strongly prejudiced against an edu- cated ministry and against missionary work of any kind conducted by boards and supported by contributions from the churches. * Since the beginning of the century Baptists in Boston and vicinity, New York, Philadelphia, Charleston and a few other places had taken a practical interest in the missionary work of Carey and his associates in India. The conversion to Baptist views of Adoniram Judson and Luther Rice, who had gone to India to open up a mission for the American Board of Commissioners for BAPTISTS Foreign Missions, in 1812, thrust upon the de- nomination the obligation to enter upon organized, independent work in the foreign field. Ilocal mission societies were formed in many of the more intelligent communities, largely through the efforts of Rice, who had returned for the pur- pose of providing a basis of support for a Baptist mission, and in 1814 representatives of such socie- ties met in Philadelphia and formed the Triennial Convention. This meeting brought together the leading Baptist ministers from all parts of the country. Within a few years there grew up in connection with this national organization for foreign missions, home-mission, publication and educational societies. The more intelligent portions of the denomina- tion were greatly stimulated by the foreign mis- sion movement. State conventions were formed in nearly all the states (1821 onward) for the promotion of missionary and evangelical work. Denominational colleges and theological Semi- naries sprang up with wonderful rapidity. Baptist newspapers arose and multiplied. Sunday School work was carried forward with vigor. The intro- duction of so many innovations alarmed the ignorant and unprogressive elements of the de- nomination, and a large proportion of the Baptists of the South and Southwest zealously antagonized the missionary movement, with all its accessories. Yet the party of progress triumphed. (3) Relation to Other Christian Denomina- tions. At the beginning of their modern history as a denomination, Baptists stood practically alone in their advocacy of uncompromising adherence to Scripture precept and example in respect to doctrines and ordinances; in insisting upon abso- lute liberty of conscience and denying the right of the civil power to interfere in matters of re- ligious belief or worship; and in contending for churches made up exclusively of those baptized on a personal profession of saving faith. It is highly gratifying to Baptists that some of the principles that were originally distinctive have become the common possession of evangelical Christendom. Most evangelical denominations now profess to make the Scriptures the norm of faith and prac- tice, yet, on grounds that seem to Baptists in- adequate, they refuse to follow the leadings of the best evangelical scholarship of the age as re- gards the subjects and mode of apostolic bap- tism. Baptists have always been divided on the set of doctrines that distinguish Arminianism from Calvinism. Every shade of view on these ques- tions could, no doubt, be found at present in Baptist churches; but the great majority of Bap- tists hold to what may be called moderate Cal- vinism. |Baptists have been among the staunchest de- fenders of congregational church government; but they have latterly made the fullest use of co- operative methods in missionary work, etc. AS- sociations, state conventions, missionary Societies, etc., are important features of Baptist polity. The attitude of Baptists towards Christian union is often misconceived and adversely judged by their brethren of other denominations. The fact is that they most earnestly desire to enter into the closest allowable fellowship with all true Chris- tians, and would make any amount of personal sacrifice to this end ; but they consider that loyalty to Christ makes it incumbent upon them to pro- test against erroneous doctrine and practice to the extent of refusing to enter into church fel- lowship with those that, in their opinion, are walking disorderly. They maintain that efforts for Christian union, to be permanently efficacious, BAPTISTS must be along the line of a better understanding of the Word of God and more complete loyalty thereto, rather than along the line of compromise. They are ready at any time, through accredited representatives, to confer with representatives of other evangelical denominations as to tile mean- ing of Scripture in relation to doctrine and prac- tice, and they profess to be willing to abandon at once any position that is made to appear out of harmony with apostolic precept and example. That the leading scholars of nearly all denomi- nations, including Angelican, Lutheran, and Re- formed, are so nearly in agreement regarding the main features of apostolic church order, such as the nature of church organization, the character and functions of church officers, the number and nature of the ordinances; and that the consensus of scholarship is so nearly in accord with the Baptist position, encourages Baptists to believe that the development of Christian doctrine and practice will be in the direction of greater uniformity, and that the church of the future will more and more closely approximate the Baptist position. Meanwhile, Baptists themselves are being in- fluenced by the non-Baptist Christian life and thought of the time, and are coming to appreciate more and more all that is true and Christ-like in the teachings and lives of other types of Chris- tians, to magnify the elements of agreement and to minify the elements of disagreement. They are ready to coöperate with their brethren of other denominations in all forms of philanthropy, and to a considerable extent in evangelistic and other forms of Christian work. (4) Bar to Organic Union. It may be said, in closing, that the insuperable bar to anything like organic union, or even federation, with most Other evangelical bodies of Christians is the prac- tice by the latter of infant baptism, regarded by Baptists as not only without Scriptural warrant, but as a perversion of a Christian ordinance, and the refusal of the latter to conform to the mode of baptism that the scholarship of the time declares to be apostolic. Baptists do not consider these points mere matters of ritual, but rather they regard believers’ baptism as an important ordi- nance of Christ and a valuable means of securing regenerate church membership, which also seems to them to be a fundamental requirement of the gospel. That members of different denominations should thoroughly understand each other's posi- tion and history is indispensable to correct judg- ment and intelligent charity. (5) Divisions. The Regular Baptists of the United States are divided into three great sections —the Northern, the Southern and the Colored. These divisions affect only the home and foreign mission work of the denomination. The South- ern Baptists organized separately 1m 1845 on ac- count of the anti-slavery agitation. They have their missionary and Sunday-school organizations. The Northern Baptists unite in the work of the American Baptist Missionary Union and the American Baptist Home Mission Society. The American Baptist Publication Society seeks to serve all parts of the denomination. The Baptist Young People’s Union takes in North and South alike. So does the American Baptist Education Society. The denomination has six great theo- logical schools (Newton, Rochester, Hamilton, Crozer, Chicago and Louisville), colleges and uni- versities too numerous to name, including Brown University, the University of Chicago, Vassar College, Colgate, Rochester, Colby, Wake Forest, Denison, Franklin, Richmond, Furman, Mercer, Howard, Georgetown, Kalamazoo, Bethel, Des 235 BAPTIST YOUNG PEOPLE'S UNION Moines, Central, Southwestern, Baylor and Wil- liam Jewell. It has periodicals multitudinous. It has produced a literature, religious and general, that in quantity and quality compares favorably with that of the other, leading denominº H. N. IBAPTIST YOUNG PEOPLE'S UNION OF AMERICA. (1) Organization and Aim. The Baptist Young People's Union of America was organized at a large and representative convention held in the Second Baptist Church, Chicago, Ill., July 7–8, 1891. In common with other bodies of Chris- tians, our Baptist churches had felt the quicken- ing influence of what had come to be known as the Young People's Movement. It was felt that the forces of Our Baptist young people should be unified and directed toward the attainment of the common interests and ends of our denomina- tional life. Out of the discussions which ensued, the Baptist Young People's Union of America was born, its object being clearly defined in the following article from its constitution : “The object of this organization shall be the unification of Baptist young people; their in- creased spirituality; their stimulation in Christian service; their edification in Scripture knowledge; their instruction in Baptist doctrine and history; and their enlistment in all missionary activity through existing denominational organizations.” While it is thus distinctively denominational, as its name implies, yet within these lines it is broadly inclusive. It seeks to effect a fraternal union of all Baptist young people's Societies in America. It does not insist upon uniformity of name or constitution. It undertakes no legisla- tive function over local societies. It simply seeks to bring all these societies into helpful fellowship and active coöperation, and to relate them prop- erly to our great denominational societies. (2) Educational Work. The feature of this new movement which from the outset differen- tiated it most clearly from the Young People's Movement in general was the educational feature. There was a strong conviction that the enthusiasm which had been quickened needed to be supple- mented and guided by instruction in Christian truth. It was felt, moreover, that our young people should be trained to an intelligent and self-respecting denominational loyalty, and to ac- tive enlistment in the support of the missionary activities of our body. This, in turn, involved indoctrination in distinctive principles and in- formation concerning missionary Operations. The educational plans of the Union have taken form in what are popularly known as the Chris- tian Culture Courses. These courses are three in number, each extending through four vears, The Bible Readers’ Course provides for the read- ing of the entire Scriptures, the first year being devoted to the historical, the second to the pro- phetical, the third to the epistolary and the fourth to the poetical, books. The Daily Readings are accompanied by introductions to the several books and by brief analytical notes. The Sacred Litera- ture Course aims to give a broader survey. Les- sons in this course are prepared by eminent Bibli– cal scholars, which treat in successive years : “Preparations for the Messiah;” “The Life and Times of Christ;” “The Dawn of Christianity;” and “The Development of History and Doctrine.” These lessons extend through twenty-five weeks each year. The Conquest Missionary Course is designed to present a progressive view of Bap- tist Missions, under several heads: “Convictions and Beginnings;” “Organizations and Methods;” EAPTIST YOUNG PEOPLE'S UNION “Fields and Operations;” and “Leaders and Tri- umphs.” The study period of these courses extends through twenty-five weeks, beginning October Ist and ending April Ist, and is supplemented by an examination in May. The number of ex- amination papers received in 1900 was I5, 162. To those who regard the Young People's Move- ment as expending itself in the excitement of great conventions these figures are submitted as indicating a substantial residuum. The bene- ficial effects of such courses of study admit of no question. They cannot fail to result in a more intelligent type of Christian character, and in a larger effectiveness for Christian service. Similar courses of study, though simpler in form, are provided for the Junior department. The material for these courses is published for the Senior department in The Baptist Union, and for the Junior department in The /unior Aa/fisſ Union. An advanced Christian Culture Course has been inaugurated, and two volumes, The Monuments and the Old Testament, by Prof. Ira M. Price, Ph. D., and Two Thousand Years of Missions Before Carey, by Lemuel Call Barnes, D. D., have been published. (3) Its Field. The field which the organiza- tion attempts to cover is a large one—the United States and Canada. A network of state and provincial organizations, including a host of local societies, covers this broad territory. The Bap- tist Young People's Union of the South, while maintaining a separate set of officers, is in closest affiliation with the International body, and indeed forms an integral part of it. The history of the organization has abundantly justified its being, and vindicated the wisdom and foresight of its founders. Its existence and work are perfectly compatible with catholicity of spirit. It does not interfere with the larger fellowship, while it em- phasizes the primary obligation of loyalty to one's own. In July of each year, the Union holds its own International Conventions, which are the most largely attended gatherings of the Baptist denomination in the world. (4) Its Organ. At the beginning of the move- ment, it was necessary to publish a paper which should be accepted as the official organ of the movement This was needed, (I) to set forth the principles and methods of the organization, and thus secure co-operation; (2) to chronicle the growth and development of the movement, and to furnish a medium for the interchange of ideas and working plans; and (3) to publish the educational material included in the Christian Culture Courses. Prior to the genesis of the Baptist Young People's Union of America, there had been published a few issues of the paper en- titled The Loyalist, which advocated the estab- lishment of a separate denominational society, and prepared for the formation of the Union. The first issue of The Loyalist bears date October 16, 1890. On December 13, 1890, the title was changed to Young People at Work, and was pub- lished under the auspices of the American Bap- tist Publication Society. This name was retained until September 12, 1891, when it was changed to The Young People’s Union. There was a growing conviction on the part of the Officers of the Union that in order to carry on their work with efficiency they should have immediate control of the paper, and that it should be published from headquarters. It was therefore purchased from the American Baptist Publication Society at a cost of $13,800, and since November 21, 1891, has been published 236 BARACHIAS weekly by the B. Y. P. U. A. On January 6, 1894, the name was changed to the title which it bears at present, The Baptist Union. Through all the history of the movement, the paper has been at once the impelling and guiding force and the means of financial Support. It is indispensable to all who would fully avail themselves of the educational work of the Union; and is equally necessary to all who would keep informed as to the aims and methods and progress of the work. It seeks to keep our young people in close and Sympathetic relation with all the interests and work of our denomination. It promotes fellow- ship. It quickens the sense of common life. It gives the “elbow-touch of comradeship.” Apart from the Courses, it offers large returns in the form of stories, aids to Christian living, descrip- tive sketches, editorials, thoughts for the quiet hour, and methods of work. It is a case of good measure pressed down, and shaken together and running over. As the organ of the Baptist Young People's Union of America, it is charged with a heavy burden. It is expected not only to pay its way, but also to provide for all the varied and exten- sive work of the Union. This work is expensive as well as extensive. The paper is not a private enterprise; it is the property of the Baptist Young People's Union of America. No personal profit would accrue to any individual connected with the paper, or with the management of the gen- eral work, from any increase of revenue, and all profits would go into the general work for its extension and betterment. It is proving itself to be a powerful agent in all denominational enter- prises. E. E. C. BAR (bār), (Heb. TB, bar), a Hebrew word meaning soft, but used only poetically in that lan- guage (Ps. ii: 12; Prov. xxxi:2). In Syriac, how- ever, Bar answered to the more common Hebrew word for son, i. e., beat; and hence in later times, in the New Testament, it takes the same place in the formation of proper names which Ben had for- merly occupied in the Old Testament, as Bar- Jona, Bar-Jesus, etc. (See BEN.) BARABBAS (bār-áb'bas), (probably Heb. N=8 "B, bar ab-baw', son of Abba, a common name in the Talmud), a person who had forfeited his life for sedition and murder (Mark xv.:7; Luke xxiii: 25). - As a rebel, he was subject to the punishment laid down by the Roman law for such political offenses; while, as a murderer, he could not escape death even by the civil code of the Jews. But the latter were so bent on the death of Jesus, that, of the two, they preferred pardoning this double criminal (Matt. xxvii:16-26; Mark xv :7- I5; Luke xxiii:18–25; John xviii:40). Origen says that in many copies Barabbas was also called Jesus. The Armenian Version has the same reading: “Whom will ye that I shall deliver unto you, Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus that is called Christ?” Griesbach, in his Comment, considers this as an interpolation ; while Fritzsche has adopted it in his text. We can certainly conceive that a name afterwards so sacred may have been thrown out of the text by some bigoted trans- criber. BARACHEL (bár'a-kel), (Heb. 7SP-2, baw- 7-a/-a/e', whom God has blessed), father of Elihu (Job xxxii;2, 6), B. C. I550. BARACHIAS (bár'a-ki'as), (Gr. Bapax tas, bar- a/#/h-ee'as), father of the Zechariah (Zacharias) mentioned in Matt. xxiii:35. (See ZECHARIAH.) BARAH 237 BARAH (bā'rah). See BETH-BARAH. BARAK (bā'rak), (Heb Flº, baw-rawk", light- ning flash), son of Abinoam of Kedesh-Naphtali, a Galilean city of refuge in the tribe of Naphtali (Judg. iv:6; Comp. Josh. xix:37; xxi:32). Hence he belonged to the district which had suffered most at the hands of the Canaanites: perhaps he had been actually their prisoner. When Jabin, king of Canaan, had for twenty years grievously oppressed the Israelites, the prophetess Deborah sent for Barak, the Son of Abinoam, a man of Issachar, who lived in Kadesh-Naphtali, and, from God, directed him to levy an army of Io,000 men of Naphtali and Zebulun, the tribes which had been principally enslaved, and march them to Mount Tabor, where the Lord would deliver Sisera, and the mighty host of Jabin, into his hand. He refused to attempt this unless she would go along with him ; she consented; but told him that his cowardice should be punished by the Lord's giving the chief honor of the vic- tory, the death of the general, into the hand of a woman. They had scarcely levied their troops, and marched from Kedesh to Tabor, when Sisera was at their heels, with a prodigious army. It seems scarcely one of Barak's Io,000 had either sword or spear; but the Canaanites were struck with a panic, when they saw the Hebrews come down from the hill to attack them; the slaughter was so universal that few escaped (B. C. II2O). Barak and Deborah composed a song to com- memorate their victory, and to praise God on account of it; and to celebrate the Hebrew princes, and Jael the wife of Heber, the Kenite, for their instrumentality therein; and to con- demn the tribes of Asher, Dan, and Reuben for their inactivity (Judg. iv and v). Barak appears in the list of the faithful worthies of the Old Testament (Heb. xi:32). BARBARIAN (bār-bā'ri-an), (Gr. Bápgapos, bar'- Aar-os, foreign, strange, rude). This term is used in the New Testament, as in classical writers, to denote other nations of the earth in distinction from the Greeks, without any idea of barbarism in the modern sense of the term. “I am debtor both to the Greeks and Barbarians'—"EX\mat Te kal 6apgåpots (Rom. i. 14); “To the Grekes and to them which are no Grekes’— Tyndale, 1534, and Geneva, 1557; ‘To the Grekes and to the Ungrekes'—Cranmer, I539. In Coloss. iii:II, ‘Greek nor Jew—Barbarian, Scythian’— Barbaros seems to refer to those nations of the Roman empire who did not speak Greek, and Skuthace, Scythian to nations not under the Ro- man dominion (Dr. Robinson). In I Cor. xiv: II, the term is applied to a difference of language: ‘If I kilow not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian (‘as of an- other language,’ Geneva Vers.), and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian (‘as of another language,’Genezia Vers.) unto me.” Thus Ovid, ‘Barbarus hic ego sum, quia non intelligor ulli,” Trist. v :Io, 37. In Acts xxviii, the inhabitants of Malta are called barbaroz, because they were originally a Carthaginian colony, and chiefly spoke of Punic language. In the Septuagint, barbaros, is used by the Hebrew loãz, “A people of strange language' (Ps. cxiv:I). Strabo (xiv:2) suggests that the word Bar- bar-os was originally an imitative sound, de- signed to express a harsh dissonant language, or sometimes the indistinct articulation of the Greek by foreigners. BARKOS BARBER (bârbër), (Heb. Pº, ga/-/awb') occurs but once in the Scriptures (Ezek. v.:I). Shaving the head is a very common custom in Eastern countries. In India many of the re- ligious sects are distinguished by the manner in which the head is shaved. Some leave a tuft of hair on the crown of the head, others a tuft above each ear. In Syria, old men frequently have the whole head shaved and allow the beard to grow. Young men shave the cheeks and the chin, and cut the hair of the head short. The upper lip is never shaved except in S. India, where it is done as a sign of mourning. Absence of the mustache is looked upon, in Syria, as a sign of the want of virility. The barber plies his trade in any convenient place—by the roadside, or in the courtyard of a khan. (V. Carslaw, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) BAREFOOT (bár'foot), (Heb. ºº, yaw-Khaſe', unshod, Jer. ii.25). To go barefoot was an indica- tion of great distress (Is. xx:2-4; 2 Sam. xv. 3O). In any great calamity or sorrow it was the Custom to strip oneself of ornaments and even of shoes. Persons were also accustomed to remove their shoes when coming to places accounted holy (Exod. iii:5). (See DRESS.) BARHUMITE (bar-hu'mite), (Heb. *T2, bar- Áhoo-mee', belonging to young men), a transposed form of the Gentile name Baharumite, one of David's worthies (2 Sam. xxiii:31), B. C. IoS8. (See BAHURIM.) - BARIAH (ba-ri'ah), (Heb. TB, baw-ree'akh, fugitive), son of Shemaiah, descendant of the royal family of Judah (I Chron. iii.22), B. C. about 4 IO. - BAR-JESUS (bär'jë'zus), (Gr. 8apumaois, bar-ee- ay-sooce', son of Joshua). - - A man described in Acts xiii:6 as ‘magian, prophet of lies, Jew,’ whom Paul and Barnabas, traveling in Cyprus, found in the train of the proconsul Sergius Paulus, as one of the amici or comites who always accompanied a Roman gov- ernor. In Josh. Antiq. xx; vii: 2 we find a similar case: Simon, “a Jew, by birth a Cypriot, and pretending to be a magian’ (observe the striking, though not exact, similarity of the triplet), was one of the ‘friends’ of Felix, the procurator of Judaea, and was used by him to seduce Drusilla from her husband, Azizus, king of Emesa. Such men, probably Babylonian Jews, ‘skilled in the lore and uncanny arts and strange powers of the Median priests' (Comp. Matt. ii:7-I6), not sim- ply sorcerers and fortune tellers, but “men of science,’ as they would now be called (being then beyond their age in acquaintance with the powers and processes of nature), and not mere isolated self-constituted pretenders, but representatives of an Oriental system and religion—appear to have been numerous at that period, and to have ex- erted considerable influence on the Roman world. It was with a system, therefore, rather than with a man, that the representatives of the system (‘the way') of Christ, also struggling for influence in the Roman empire, came here into conflict. (J. Massie, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) (See ELYMAS.) BAR-JONA (bār'jö-ná), (Gr. Bap-wvās, bar'ee-oh- 7tas', son of Jonas), the patronymic appellation of the Apostle Peter (Matt. xvi; 17; comp. John i:42). (See BAR and PETER.) BARKENIMI (bār-ké'nim). See THORNs. BARKos (bár'kos), (Heb. PPT2, bar-Aose', ainter), the head of one of the families of Neth- inim (Ezra ii:35; Neh. vii:55), B. C. 536. BARLEY BARLEY (bârly), (Heb. Tºº, sen-o-raw'. Twº, Seh-ore', Gr. Kptóvos, Åree' thee-nos, long hair). (1) Where Cultivated. This grain is men. tioned in Scripture as cultivated and used in Egypt (Exod. ix:3I), and in Palestine (Lev. xxvii:16; Deut. viii:8; 2 Chron. ii: Io; Ruth ii:17; 2 Sam. xiv:30; Is. xxviii:25; Jer. xli :8; Joel i:II). Barley was given to cattle, especially horses (I Kings iv:28), and was indeed the only corn grain given to them, as Oats and rye were un- known to the Hebrews, and are not now grown in Palestine, although Volney affirms (ii:II7) that small quantities are raised in some parts of Syria as food for horses. Hence barley is men- tioned in the Mishnah (Pesach. fol. 3) as the food of horses and asses. This is still the chief use of barley in Western Asia. Bread made of barley was, however, used by the poorer classes (Judg. vii: 13; 2 Kings iv:42; John vi.9, 13; Comp. Ezek. iv :9). In Palestine barley was for the most part sown at the time of the autumnal rains—October, November, and again in early spring, or rather as soon as the depth of winter had passed. This later sowing has not hitherto been much noticed by writers on this part of Biblical illustration, but is confirmed by various travelers who observed the sowing of barley at this time of the year. (2) When Ready. The barley of the first crop was ready by the time of the Passover, in the month of Abib, March–April (Ruth i :22; 2 Sam. xxi :9; Judith viii:2); and if not ripe at the ex- piration of a (Hebrew) year from the last cele- bration, the year was intercalated to preserve that connection between the feast and the barley har- vest which the law required (Exod. xxiii:15, 16; Deut. xvi :16). Accordingly, travelers concur in showing that the barley harvest in Palestine is in March and April—advancing into May in the northern and mountainous parts of the land, but April is the month in which the barley-harvest is chiefly gathered in, although it begins earlier in some parts and later in others. At Jerusalem, Niebuhr found barley ripe at the end of March, when the later (autumnal) crop had only been lately sown. (3) Mode of Culture. The passage in Is. xxxii:2O has been supposed by many to refer to rice, as a mode of culture by submersion of the land after sowing, similar to that of rice, is indi- cated. The celebrated passage, ‘Cast thy bread upon the waters,” etc. (Eccles. xi : I), has been by some supposed to refer also to such a mode of cul- ture. In Exod. ix:31 we are told that the plague of hail, some time before the Passover, destroyed the barley, which was then in the green ear, but not the wheat or the rye, which were only in the blade. This is minutely corroborated by the fact that the barley sown after the inundation is reaped, some after ninety days, some in the fourth month (Wilkinson's Thebes, p. 395), and that it there ripens a month earlier than the wheat (Sonnini, p. 395). BARN (bârn). 1. A zw-sazy//z' (Heb. EPS, Prov. iii:Io; rendered “storehouse” in Deut. xxviii:8), a place for the storing of grain. 2. Meg-oo-raw' (Heb. Tºº, Hag. ii:19) and mam-meg-oo-raw' (Heb. "Tºº, Joel i. 17), a granary. 3. Go"rem (Heb. 23, Job xxxix:12; “barn floor.” in 2 Kings vi;27) signifies rather a thrashing-floor, as elsewhere translated. 4. The passage in Luke xii:18 indicates gran- aries above ground. 238 BARNABAS Figuratite. (I) The blessing or filling one's barns, or his enlarging them, imports great plenty and prosperity (Deut. xxviii:8; Luke xii:18). (2) Breaking them down imports great scarcity and want (Joel i:17). BARNABAS,(bär'na-bas), (Syro-Chald. Tº T2, bar-meb-bah", Gr. Bapwóðas, bar-nab'as). (1) Name and Family. His name was origi- nally 'Iagºs, ee-oh-sace', Joses, or 'Iwo jºb, ee-oh-safe', Joseph (Acts iv:36); but he received from the Apostles the surname of Barnabas, which signifies the Son of Prophecy. Luke interprets it Son of Exhortation, R. V. ; but in A. V., of Consolation. It can hardly be doubted that this name was given to Joses to denote his eminence as a Chris- tian teacher. In Acts xiii: I his name is placed first in the list of prophets and teachers belonging to the church at Antioch. Chrysostom, however, understands the surname in the same way as the A. V., Son of Consolation, and supposes that it was given to Barnabas on account of his mild and gentle disposition: ‘This Barnabas was a mild and gentle person. His name means Son of Con- solation, hence he became a friend of Paul ; and that he was very kind and easy of access is proved by the instance before us, and by the case of John (Mark)' (In Acts Apost. Hom. xxi). He is de- scribed by Luke as ‘a good man, full of the Holy Ghost and of faith’ (Acts xi :24). He was a na- tive of Cyprus, but the son of Jewish parents of the tribe of Levi. From Acts iv:36, 37 it appears that he was possessed of land, but whether in Judaea or Cyprus is Ilot stated. He generously disposed of the whole for the benefit of the Chris- tian community, and ‘laid the money at the apos- tles’ feet.” As this transaction occurred soon after the day of Pentecost, he must have been an early convert to the Christian faith. (2) Associated with Paul. When Paul made his first appearance in Jerusalem after his con- version, Barnabas introduced him to the apostles and attested his sincerity (Acts ir :27). Though the conversion of Cornelius and his household, with its attendant circumstances, had given the Jewish Christians clearer views of the compre- hensive character of the new dispensation, yet the accession of a large number of Gentiles to the church at Antioch was an event so extraordi- nary that the apostles and brethren at Jerusalem resolved on deputing one of their number to in- vestigate it. (3) First Missionary Journey. Their choice was fixed on Barnabas. After witnessing the flourishing condition of the church, and adding fresh converts by his personal exertions, he visited Tarsus to obtain the assistance of Saul, who re- turned with him to Antioch, where they labored for a whole year (Acts xi :23-26). In anticipation of the famine predicted by Agabus, the Antiochian Christians made a contribution for their poorer brethren at Jerusalem, and sent it by the hands of Barnabas and Saul (Acts xi :28-30), who speed- ily returned, bringing with them John Mark, a nephew of the former. By Divine direction (Acts xiii:2) they were separated to the office of mis- sionaries, and as such visited Cyprus and some of the principal cities in Asia Minor (Acts xiii:14). Soon after their return to Antioch the peace of the church was disturbed by certain zealots from Judaea, who insisted on the observance of the rite of circumcision by the Gentile converts. To settle the controversy Paul and Barnabas were deputed to consult the apostles and elders at Jerusalem (Acts xv :I, 2); they returned to communicate the result of their conference (verse 22), accom- panied by Judas Barsabas and Silas, or Silvanus. PARNABAS (4) Second Missionary Journey. On prepar- ing for a second missionary tour, a dispute arose between them on account of John Mark, which ended in their taking different routes; Paul and Silas went through Syria and Cilicia, while Bar- nabas and his nephew revisited his native island (Acts xv :36-4I). At this point Barnabas disappears from Luke's narrative, which to its close is occupied solely with the labors and sufferings of Paul. From the Epistles of the latter a few hints (the only authen- tic sources of information) may be gleaned rela- tive to his early friend and associate. From I Cor. ix:5, 6, it would appear that Barnabas was unmarried and supported himself, like Paul, by Some manual occupation. In Gal. ii: I we have an account of the reception given to Paul and Barnabas by the apostles at Jerusalem, probably On the occasion mentioned in Acts xv. In the Same chapter (verse I3) we are informed that Barnabas so far yielded to the Judaizing zealots, at Antioch, as to separate himself for a time from communion with the Gentile converts. The date Of this occurrence has been placed by some critics SOOn ,after the apostolic convention at Jerusalem (about A. D. 52); by others, on the return of Paul from his second missionary journey (A. D. 55). It has been inferred from 2 Cor. viii: 18, 19, that Barnabas was not only reconciled to Paul after their separation (Acts xv :39), but also be- came again his coadjutor; that he was the ‘brother whose praise was in the gospel through all the churches.’ - In Colos. iv: Io and Philemon, verse 24, Paul mentions Mark as his fellow-laborer, and at a still later period (2 Tim. iv:II) he refers with Strong approbation to his services, and requests Timothy to bring him to Rome, but of Barnabas (his relationship to Mark excepted) nothing is said. The most probable inference is that he was already dead, and that Mark had subsequently as- sociated himself with Paul. (5) Personal Appearance. From the incident narrated in Acts xiv:8-12 Chrysostom infers that the personal appearance of Barnabas was dignified and commanding. When the inhabitants of Lys- tra, on the cure of the impotent man, imagined that the gods were come down to them in the like- ness of men, they called Barnabas, Zeus (their tutelar deity), and Paul, Hermes, because he was chief speaker. - (6) Death. The year when Barnabas died can- not be determined with certainty. If his nephew joined Paul after that event, it must have taken place not later than A. D. 63 or 64. ‘Chrysostom," it has been asserted, ‘speaks of Barnabas as alive in A. D. 63.’ The exact statement is this: In his Eleventh Homily on the Epistle to the Colossians he remarks, on chap. iv: Io, “touching whom ye re- vviv Ud UU111111a11uuluuts, iſ lie Lulue unlu you U- ceive him'—to ws trapó, Bapwéga €vroXàs éXaftov–Zer- hafts they received commands from Barnabas. (7) Traditions. There is a vague tradition that Barnabas was the first bishop of the church at Milan, but it is so ill supported as scarcely to deserve notice. It is enough to say that the cele- brated Ambrose (born A. D. 340, died 397) makes no allusion to Barnabas when speaking of the bishops who preceded himself. “It is interesting, however, to notice that the authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews is at- tributed to Barnabas by Tertullian (see HEBREws, EPISTLE TO), while there is still extant an Epistle of Barnabas, which, according to external evi- dence, is the work of this Barnabas, but on inter- nal grounds this conclusion is now generally dis- 239 BARNABAS, EPISTLE OF puted. (See the arguments briefly stated in Hefele, Patrum Apostolicorum Opera, p. ix ff., and more fully in the same writer's Das Send- Schreiben des Apostels Barnabas aufs neue unter- Such?, ?ióersetzi temd erklärt, Tüb. 1840. Comp. also Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers.)”—G. Mil- ligan, Hastings' Bib. Dict. (See BARNABAS, GOS- PEL OF..) +, BARNABAS, EPISTLE OF (bär'na-bas e- pis”] &v). (1) Title and History. The title of this an- cient composition is found in the Stichometries (or catalogues of the sacred books) of the ninth century; but from that period to the seventeenth century the work itself remained entirely un- known. Jacob Sirmond, a Jesuit, in copying the transcript of a Greek manuscript of Polycarp's Epistle to the Philippians, which belonged to Turrianus (a member of the same order), dis- covered another piece appended to it, which proved to be the Epistle (so called) of Barnabas. It was also found in two manuscripts of Poly- carp, at Rome, which Cressolius collated. Sir- mond sent a copy to the Benedictine, Hugo Menard, who had not long before found an an- cient Latin translation of the Epistle of Barnabas in the Abbey of Corbey. About the same time Andreas Schottus (also a Jesuit) obtained a manuscript containing the Epistles of Polycarp and Barnabas ; this was transcribed by Claudius Salmasius, and given, with a copy of the Corbey version, to Isaac Vossius. Vossius shortly after paid a visit to Archbishop Usher, who was then preparing for publication an ancient Latin ver- sion of the shorter Ignatian Epistles. It was agreed between them to annex to this work the Epistles of Barnabas. But it had hardly been sent to press when the great fire at Oxford oc- curred (I644), in which the manuscript was de- stroyed, with all the archbishop's notes, and only a few pages saved which were in the corrector's hands. These were afterwards inserted by Bishop Fell, in the Preface to his edition of Bar- nabas, Oxford, 1685. (2) Editions. The first edition of Barnabas appeared at Paris, in 1645; it had been prepared by Menard, but, in consequence of his death, was edited by Luke d'Acherry. In the following year a new and much improved edition was published by Vossius, for which he collated three manu- Scripts; it was appended to his editio princeps of the Ignatian Epistles. In 1672 Cotelerius pub- lished his magnificent edition of the Apostolic Fathers. Besides the Greek text, and Corbey's version of Barnabas, it contained a new transla- tion and valuable notes by the editor. The re- print, in 1724, contained additional notes by Davis and Le Clerc. In 1685 two edifions anpeared : Bishon Fell’s, already noticed, and one by Stephen le Moyne, at Leyden, in the first volume of his Wanza Sacra, with copious notes. It is also contained in Rus- sel’s edition of the Apostolic Fathers, London, I746, and in the first volume of Galland’s Bibli- otheca vetcrum Patrum, Ven., 1765. A con- venient edition is that by Dr. C. J. Hefele, in his Patrum Apostolicorum Opera, Tübingen, 1839 and 1842. Four German translations have ap- peared, by Arnold (1696), Glüsing (Hamb. 1723), Grynceus (1772), and Möst (1774); it was trans- lated into English by Archbishop Wake (The genuine Epistles of the Apostolic Fathers, etc., Lond. I693 and I7Io); and a French translation by Le Gras is inserted in Desprez's Bible, Paris, 1717. On comparing the Corbey version with the Greek text, it appears that the latter wants four BARNABAS, EPISTLE OF chapters and a half at the beginning, and the former four chapters at the end; thus each sup- plies the deficiencies of the other. It is remarka- ble that all the Greek manuscripts hitherto found are similarly defective, which plainly shows that they are all derived from the same source, and form only one family of manuscripts. The Epistle of Barnabas con- sists of twenty-one chapters. The first part (i :17) treats of the abrogation of the Mosaic dispensation, and of the types and prophecies re- lating to Christ; the last four chapters are com- posed entirely of practical directions and exhor- tations. The names and residence of the persons to whom it is addresed are not mentioned, on which account, probably, it was called by Origen a Catholic Epistle (Origen, Contr. Cels. 11b, i. p. 49). But if by this title he meant an epistle addressed to the general body of Christians, the propriety of its application is doubtful, for we meet with several expressions which imply a per- Sonal knowledge of the parties. It has been dis- puted whether the persons addressed were Jewish or Gentile Christians. Dr. Hefele strenuously contends that they were of the former class. His Chief argument appears to be that it would be unnecessary to insist so earnestly on the abolition of the Mosaic economy in writing to Gentile con- verts. But the Epistle of Paul to the Galatians is a proof to what danger Gentile Christians were exposed in the first ages from the attempts of Judaizing teachers; so that, in the absence of 1more exact information, the supposition that the persons addressed were of this class is at least not inconsistent with the train of thought in the Epistle. But more than this: throughout the Epistle we find a distinction maintained between the writer and his friends on the one hand, and the Jews on the other. Thus in chap. iii, “God speaketh to them (the Jews) concerning these things, “Ye shall not fast as ye do this day,” etc.; but to us he saith, “Is not this the fast that I have chosen P” etc.; and at the end of the same chapter, “He hath shown these things to all of us that we should not run as proselytes to the Jew- ish law’—‘ante ostendit omnibus nobis ut non incurramus tanquam proselyti ad illorum legem.’ This would be singular language to address to persons who were Jews by birth, but perfectly Suited to Gentile converts. In chap. xiii he says, ‘Let us inquire whether the covenant be with us or with them (the Jews), and concludes with quoting the promise to Abraham (with a slight verbal difference), ‘Behold I have made thee a father of the nations which without circumcision believe in the Lord,' a passage which is totally 1rrelevant to Jewish Christians. For other simi- lar passages, see Jones On the Canon, part ili, chaſ), 3.Q. . (4) Controversy. Whether this epistle was written by Barnabas, the companion of St. Paul, has been a subject of controversy almost ever since its publication in the seventeenth century. Its first editors, Usher and Menard, took the negative, and Vossius the affirmative side of the question. Of modern critics, Hug, Ullman, Nean- der, Winer and Hefele agree with the former, and Rosenmüller, Gieseler, Bleek, Heuke and Ror- dam with the latter. The external evidence for its genuineness, it may be allowed, is considerable; but besides some conflicting testimonies, criteria furnished by the epistle itself lead to the opposite conclusion. We shall present a view of both as S11ccinctly as possible. (a) Clement. The first writer who alludes to this epistle is Clement of Alexandria. (I) He quotes a sentence from the tenth chapter, and 240 BARNABAS, EPISTLE OF adds: ‘These things saith Barnabas' (Strom. ii:15, Sec. 67, vol. ii, p. 165 ed. Klotz. Lips. 1831). (2) A sentence from chap. xxi, of which he says: ‘Bar- nabas truly Speaks mystically’ (Strom. ii:18, sec. 84, vol ii, p. 174). (3) Again, quoting chap x : ‘Barnabas says' (Strom. v :8, Sec. 52, vol. iii, p. 38)). (4) After quoting two passages from chap. i and ii, he calls the author the Apostle Barnabas (Strom. ii:6, sec. 31, vol. ii, p. 142). (5) He cites a passage from chap. iv, with the words ‘the Apostle Barnabas says' (Strom. ii:7, sec. 35, vol. ii: 144). (6) He prefaces a passage from chap. xvi with : ‘I need not say more, when I adduce as a witness the apostolic Barnabas, who was one of the Seventy, and a fellow-laborer with Paul’ (Strom. ii:2O, sec. I 16, vol. ii, p. 192). (7) He makes two quotations from chap. vi, which he in- troduces with these words: “But Barnabas also, who proclaimed the word with the apostle, in his ministry among the Gentiles' (Strom. verse IO, Sec. 64, vol. iii, p. 46). The name of Barnabas occurs in another passage (Strom. vi;8, Sec. 64, vol. iii: I36), but probably by a lapse of memory, instead of Clemens Romanus, from whose first Epistle to the Corinthians a sentence is there quoted. There is also an evident allusion to the Epistle of Barnabas in A'adag. ii: Io, sec. 83, vol. i. p. 245, and in some other passages, though the author’s name is not mentioned. (b) Origen. Origen quotes this epistle twice: (I) The sentence in chap. v respecting the apos- tles, which he says ‘is written in the Catholic Epistle of Barnabas' (Contr. Cels. i :49). (2) A passage from chap. xviii: ‘To the same purpose Barnabas speaks in his epistle, when he says that “there are two ways, one of light, the other of darkness,”’ etc. (De Princip. iii:2). On these testimonies it has been remarked, that both these Alexandrian fathers have quoted works unquestionably spurious without expressing a doubt of their genuineness; thus Clement refers to the Revelation of Peter, and Origen to the Shepherd of Hermas, which he believed to be in- spired ('quae scriptura valde mihi utilis videtur, et, ut puto, divinitus inspirata,’ In Ep. ad Rom. Comment, lib. x); and though Clement speaks of the apostolic Barnabas, he evidently does not treat this Epistle with the same deference as the canonical writings, but freely points out its mis- takes. Tertullian calls all the seventy disciples apostles, and in this inferior and secondary sense, as Dr. Lardner observes, Clement terms Barnabas an apostle. (c) Eusebius. Eusebius, in the noted passage of his Ecclesiastical History (iii:25), quoted at length (in the original) by De Wette, and translated by Lardner, Credibility, part i : chap. 72, says, “The Epistle reputed to be written by Rarnahas is to he ranked among the pool's which are spurious;’ and elsewhere, “He (Clement of Alexandria) makes use of testimonies out of those Scriptures that are contradicted, that called the Wisdom of Solomon, and of Jesus the Son of Sirach, and the Epistle to the Hebrews, and that of Barnabas and of Clement, and Jude (Hist. Eccles. vi.13). He also observes of Clement. ‘In his book called Hypotyposes, he gives short explications of all the canonical Scriptures, not neglecting even the controverted books, I mean that of Jude and the other Catholic Epistles, the Epistle of Barnabas, and that called the Reve- lation of Peter.” (d) Jerome. Jerome in his work on il- lustrious men, or Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers, thus speaks of Barnabas: “Barnabas of Cyprus, called also Joseph, a Levite, was or— dained, with Paul, an apostle of the Gentiles; he BARNABAS, EPISTLE OF wrote an Epistle for the edification of the church, which is read among the Apocryphal Scriptures' (Catal. Vir. illust. cap. vi.); and in his Com- mentary on Ezekiel xlii:19, “Many parts of the Scriptures, and especially the Epistle of Barna- bas, which is reckoned among the Apocryphal Scriptures,' etc. In another place he quotes, as the words of Ignatius, the passage relative to the apostles, which is cited by Origen from the Epistle of Barnabas (Lardner's Credibility, pt. ii, chap. I I4). It is evident, as Valesius (with whom Lardner and Hefele agree) has remarked, that Eusebius uses the term motha, not in the strict sense of spurious, but as synonymous with those that are disputed, controverted, and applies it to writings which were received by some, but rejected by Others. The term apocryphal also, used. by Jerome, was applied both by Jews and Christians to works which (though the authors were known) were not considered canonical. The use of these terms, therefore, in reference to the Epistle before us, cannot be deemed as absolutely decisive against its genuineness. (5) Barnabas Not the Author. The follow- ing considerations, however, omitting some of less weight which have been urged by different writers, will, it is believed, go far to prove that Barnabas was not the author of this Epistle: (a) Though the exact date of the death of Bar- nabas cannot be ascertained, yet from the particu- lars already Stated respecting his nephew, it is highly probable that that event took place before the martyrdom of Paul (A. D. 64). But a passage in the Epistle (chap. xvi) speaks of the temple at Jerusalem as already destroyed; it was conse- quently written after the year 7o. (b) Several passages have been adduced to show that the writer (as well as the persons addressed) belonged to the Gentile section of the church ; but waiving this point, the whole tone of the Epistle is different from what the knowledge we possess of the character of Barnabas would lead us to expect, if it proceeded from his pen. From the hints given in the Acts he appears to have been a man of strong attachments, keenly alive to the ties of kindred and fatherland; we find that on both his missionary tours his native island and the Jewish synagogues claimed his first at- tention. But throughout the Epistle there is a total absence of sympathetic regard for the Jewish nation ; all is cold and distant, if not contemptu- ous. It remains yet that I speak to you (the I6th chapter begins) concerning the temple; how those miserable men, being deceived, have put their trust in the house.” How unlike the friend and fellow-laborer of him who had ‘great heavi- ness and continual sorrow in his heart for his brethren, his kindred according to the flesh' (Rom. ix;2). (c) Barnabas was not only a Jew by birth, but a Levite; from this circumstance, combined with what is recorded in the Acts, of the active part he took in the settlement of the points at issue between the Jewish and the Gentile converts, we might reasonably expect to find, in a composition bearing his name, an accurate acquaintance with the Mosaic ritual—a clear conception of the nature of the Old Economy and its relation to the New Dispensation, and a freedom from that addiction to allegorical interpretation which marked the Christians of the Alexandrian School in the second and succeeding centuries. But the following speci- mens will suffice to show that exactly the contrary may be affirmed of the writer of this Epistle; that he makes unauthorized additions to various parts of the Jewish Cultus; that his views of the Old 241 BARNABAS, EPISTLE OF Economy are confused and erroneous; and that he adopts a mode of interpretation countenanced by none of the inspired writers, and at utter variance with every principle of Sound criticism, being to the last degree puerile and absurd. The inference is unavoidable that Barnabas, ‘the Son of Prophecy,” “the Man full of the Holy Spirit and of faith,’ was not the author of this Epistle. (I) He mentions in two passages the fact re- corded in Exod. xxxii: 19, of Moses breaking the two tables of stone, and infers that Jehovah's covenant was thereby annulled. The falsity of this Statement need not be pointed out to the Biblical student. He says, “They (the Jews) have forever lost that which Moses received. For thus saith the Scripture: And Moses received the Covenant from the Lord, even two tables of stone, etc. But, having turned themselves to idols, they lost it; as the Lord said unto Moses, Go down quickly, etc. And Moses cast the two tables out of his hands, and their covenant was broken, that the love of Jesus might be sealed in your hearts unto the hope of his faith’ (chap. iv). The sec- Ond passage, in chap. xiv, is very similar, and need not be quoted. (2) On the rite of circumcision (Acts xv :1, 2) we find in this Epistle equal incorrectness. The writer denies that circumcision was a sign of the covenant. ‘You will say the Jews were circum- cised for a sign, and so are all the Syrians and Arabians, and all the idolatrous priests.” Herodo- tus (ii:37), indeed, asserts that the Syrians in Palestine received the practice of circumcision from the Egyptians; but Josephus, both in his Antiquities and Treatise against Apion, remarks that he must have alluded to the Jews, because they were the only nation in Palestine who were circumcised (Antiq. viii:Io, sec. 3; Contr. Apion. i:22). ‘How,’ says Hug, ‘could Barnabas, who traveled with Paul through the southern prov- inces of Asia Minor, make such an assertion re- specting the heathen priests?” (3) Referring to the goat (chap. vii.), either that mentioned in Num. xix or Lev. xvi, he says, “All the priests, and they only, shall eat the un- washed entrails with vinegar.” Of this direction, in itself highly improbable, not a trace can be found in the Bible, or even in the Talmud. (4) In the same chapter, he says of the scape- goat that all the congregation were commanded to Spit upon it, and put scarlet wool about its head; and that the person appointed to convey the goat into the wilderness took away the scarlet wool and put it on a thorn-bush, whose young sprouts, when we find them in the field, we are wont to eat; so the fruit of that thorn only is . On all these particulars the Scriptures are S1}ent. (5) In chap. viii. our author's fancy (as Mr. Jones remarks) seems to grow more fruitful and luxuriant. In referring to the red heifer (Nulli. xix.), he says that men in whom sins are come to perfection (év ois àuapriat réAetat) were to bring the heifer and kill it; that three youths were to take up the ashes and put them in vessels; then to tie a piece of scarlet wool and hyssop upon a stick, and so sprinkle every one of the people. ‘This heifer is Jesus Christ; the wicked men that were to offer it are those sinners who brought him to death ; the young men signify those to whom the Lord gave authority to preach his Gos- pel, being at the beginning twelve, because there were twelve tribes of Israel.” But why (he asks) were there three young men appointed to sprinkle? To denote Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And why was wool put upon a stick? Because the king- dom of Jesus was founded upon the cross, etc. BARNABAS, GOSPEL OF (6) He interprets the distinction of clean and unclean animals in a spiritual sense. ‘Is it not ( Apa of k—see Dr. Hefele's valuable note, p. 85) the command of God that they should not eat these things?—(Yes.) But Moses spoke in spirit (év rvečuatu). He named the swine, in order to say, Thou shalt not join those men who are like swine, who, while they live in pleasure, forget their Lord,' etc. He adds—“Neither shalt thou eat of the hyena; that is, thou shalt not be an adulterer.' If these were the views entertained by Barnabas, how must he have been astonished at the want of spiritual discernment in the Apostle Peter, when he heard from his own lips the ac- count of the symbolic vision at Joppa, and his reply to the command: “Arise, Peter, slay and eat. But I said, Not SO, Lord, for nothing com- mon or unclean hath at any time entered into my mouth’ (Acts xi :8) P (7) In ch. ix he attempts to show that Abraham, in circumcising his servants, had an especial refer- ence to Christ and his crucifixion;–‘Learn, my children, that Abraham, who first circumcised in spirit, having a regard to the Son (in Jeszeme, Lat. Vers.), circumcised, applying the mystic sense of the three letters (Aagāv Tptów Ypappadºraju 6órypiata— den gehezzzzem Sznn drezer Buchstaðen enzwendend, Hefele). For the Scripture says that Abraham circumcised 318 men of his house. What then was the deeper insight (Yvágus) imparted to him? Mark first the 18, and next the 3OO. The numeral letters of 18 are I (Iota) and H (Eta), I = Io, H = 8; here you have Jesus 'IHo'oùv; and because the cross in the T (Tau) must express the grace (of our redemption), he names 3OO; therefore he signi- fied Jesus by two letters, and the cross by one. It will be observed that the writer hastily as- sumes (from Gen. xiv: I4) that Abraham circum- cised only 318 persons, that being the number of ‘the servants born in his own house,” whom he armed against the four kings; but he circumcised his household nearly twenty years later, includ- ing not only those born in his house (with the addition of Ishmael), but “all that were bought with money’ (Gen. xvii:23). The writer evi- dently was unacquainted with the Hebrew Scrip- tures, by his committing the blunder of suppos- ing that Abraham was familiar with the Greek alphabet some centuries before it existed. (6) Integrity. Our limits will not allow us to enter into the question of the integrity of the epistle in its present form, but this and several other topics are discussed very fully and with great ability in Dr. Hefele's Treatise, to which, and the other works mentioned below, the reader is referred. A New and Full Method of Settling the Canon- ical Authority of the New Testament, by the Rev. Jeremiah Jones, Oxford, 1827, vol. ii, part iii. chap. 37-43: Das Sendschreiben des Apostels Bar- 7tabas amaſs AWezee tentersuch?, zibersetzz, und er/. /ºrf, von Dr. Carl Joseph Hefele, Tübingen, 184c: Patrum Apostolicorum Opera, edidit C. J. Hefele, Tubingae, 1839; Lardner's Credibility of the Gos- pel History, part ii. chap. i. ; Neander, Allgemeine Geschichte der Christlichen Religion und Kirche, i. 653, IIoo, or, History of the Christian Religion and Church, translated by the Rev. J. H. Rose, 1841, vol. ii, pp. 329-331 ; Lives of the Most Emi- ment Fathers of the Church, by William Cave, D. D., Oxford, 1840, vol. i., pp. 90-105. (See BAR- NABAS.) J. E. R. BARNABAS, GOSPEL OF (bär'na-bas, gös'- pel Šv). A spurious gospel, attributed to Barnabas, exists in Arabic, and has been translated into Italian, Spanish and English. It was probably 242 IBARTHOLOMEW forged by some heretical Christians, and has since been interpolated by the Mohammedans, in order to support the pretensions of their prophet. Dr. White has given copious extracts from it in his Bampton Lectures, I784: Sermon viii. p. 358, and Notes, pp. 4I-69 (see also Sale's Koran, Prelim. Dissert. Sec. 4). It is placed among the Apocryphal books in the Stichometry pre- fixed by Cotelerius to his edition of the Apostoli- cal Constitutions (Lardner's Credibility, part ii. chap. I47). It was condemned by Pope Gelasius I. (Tillemont, Mémoires, etc., i. p. 1055). BARREL (bár'rél), (Heb. 72, Aad, jar, pitcher), probably an earthen vessel used for the keeping of flour (I Kings xvii: 12, 14, 16; xviii;33). In other places the word is rendered pitcher. BARREN, BARRENNESS (bár’ren, bár' ren- nés), (Heb. Tº, aw-Éawr', when spoken of per- Sons). Barrenness is, in the East, the hardest lot that can befall a woman, and was considered among the Israelites as the heaviest punishment with which the Lord could visit a female (Gen. xvi;2; XXX:I-23; I Sam. i :6, 29; Is. xlvii:9; xlix :21 ; Luke i :25; Niebuhr, p. 76; Volney, ii:359). In the Talmud (Yeramoth, vi :6) a man was bound, after ten years childless conjugal life, to marry another woman (with or without repudiation of the first), and even a third one, if the second proved also barren. Nor is it improbable that Moses himself contributed to strengthen the opin- ion of disgrace by the promise of the Lord of ex- emption from barrenness as a blessing (Exod. xxiii:26; Deut. vii: I4). Instances of childless wives are found in Gen. xi:30; xxv :21; xxix:31; Judg. xiii:2, 3; Luke i:7, 36. Some cases of un- lawful marriages, and more especially with a brother's wife, were visited with the punishment of barrenness (Lev. xx:20, 2I). Michaelis, how- ever (Mosázsches Recht. v. 290), takes the term in a figurative sense, implying that the children born in such an illicit marriage should not be ascribed to the real father, but to the former brother, thus depriving the second husband of the share of patrimonial inheritance which would otherwise have fallen to his lot if the first brother had died childless. & This general notion of the disgrace of barren- ness in a woman may early have given rise in the patriarchal age to the custom among barren wives of introducing to their husbands their maid-servi ants, and of regarding the children born in that concubinage as their own, by which they thought to cover their own disgrace of barrenness (Gen. xvi;2; xxx :3). (See CHILDREN.) The reproach attached to barrenness, especially among the Hebrews, was doubtless due to the constant expectation of the Messiah, and the hope cherished by every woman that she might be the mother of the promised Seed. BARSABAS (bär'sa-bas), (Gr. Bapaapās, bar- sab-as', son of Sabas), a surname: 1. Of Joseph, a disciple who was nominated along with Matthias to succeed Judas Iscariot in the apostleship (Acts i:23). (See JOSEPH BARSA- EAS. 㺠Of Judas, who, with Silas, was sent to Antioch in company of Paul and Barnabas (Acts xv.22). (See JUDAS BARSABAS.) BARTHOLOMEW (bar-thèl'o-mew), (Greek Bapó0Xopaios, bar-thoſ-om-ah'90s, Son of Tolmai). (1) Name and Family. Bartholomew was one of the twelve apostles, and is generally Sup- posed to have been the same individual who in John's gospel is called Nathaniel. The reason BARTIMAEUS of this opinion is that in the first three gospels Philip and Bartholomew are constantly named to- gether, while Nathaniel is nowhere mentioned; on the contrary, in the fourth gospel the names of Philip and Nathaniel are similarly combined, but nothing is said of Bartholomew. Nathaniel therefore must be considered as his real name, while Bartholomew merely expresses his filial re- lation. (2) Personal History. He was a native of Cana in Galilee (John xxi :2). He was intro- duced by Philip to Jesus, who, on seeing him approach, at Once pronounced that eulogy on his character which has made his name almost synonymous with sincerity: ‘Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom there is no guile !” (John i:47). He was one of the disciples to whom our Lord appeared after his resurrection, at the Sea of Tiberias (John xxi :2); he was also a witness of the Ascension, and returned with the other apos- tles to Jerusalem (Acts i:4, I2, I3). (3) Traditions. Of his subsequent history we have little more than vague traditions. Accord- ing to Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. v : IO), when Pan- taenus went on a mission to the Indians (towards the close of the second century), he found among them the Gospel of Matthew, written in Hebrew, which had been left there by the apostle Bar- tholomew. Jerome (De Vir. ///usſr. c. 36) gives a similar account, and adds that Pantaenus brought the copy of Matthew’s Gospel back to Alexandria with him. But the title of Indians is applied by ancient writers to so many different nations that it is difficult to determine the scene of Bartholo- mew's labors. Mosheim (with whom Neander agrees) is of opinion that it was a part of Arabia Felix, inhabited by Jews, to whom alone a He- brew gospel could be of any service. Socrates (Hist. Eccles. i :19) says that it was the India bordering on Ethiopia, and Sophronius reports that Bartholomew preached the Gospel of Christ “ to the so-called fortunate Indians.” This apos- tle is said to have suffered crucifixion at Albanop- olis in Armenia, or, according to Nicephorus, at Urbanopolis in Cilicia. A spurious gospel which bears his name is in the Catalogue of apocryphal books condemned by Pope Gelasius. (See NA- THANAE.L.) BARTIMAEUS (bār-ti-me'us), (Gr. 8apttuatos, bar-tim'ah-yos, son of Timaeus), the blind beggar of Jericho whom Christ restored to sight (Mark x:46; Matt. xx:29-34; Luke xviii:35-43). BARUCH (bā' ruk), (Heb. T., baw-roo;', blessed). 1. The faithful friend and amanuensis of the prophet Jeremiah (Jer. xxxii:12-16; xliii;3, 6; li:61); was of a noble family of the tribe of Judah, and generally considered to be the brother of the prophet Seraiah, both beltig represeilled as SU11s of Neriah; and to Baruch the prophet Jeremiah dictated all his oracles (B.C. about 604). During the siege of Jerusalem, Baruch was selected as the depositary of the deed of purchase which Jeremiah had made of the territory of IIananneel, to which decd he had been a witness. In the fourth year of the reign of Jehoiachim, king of Judah (B. C. 605), Baruch was directed to write all the prophecies delivered by Jeremiah up to that period, and to read them to the people, which he did from a window in the Temple upon two solemn occasions. He afterwards read them before the counselors of the king at a private interview, when Baruch being asked to give an account of the manner in which the prophecy had been composed, gave an exact description of the mode in which he had taken it down from the 243 BARUCH, BOOK OF prophet's dictation. Upon this they ordered him to leave the roll, advising that he and Jeremiah should conceal themselves. They then informed the king of what had taken place, upon which he had the roll read to him, but, after hearing a part of it, he cut it with a penknife, and, notwithstand- ing the remonstrances of his counselors, threw it into the fire of his winter parlor, where he was sitting. He then ordered Jeremiah and Baruch to be seized, but they could not be found. The Jews to this day commemorate the burning of this roll by an annual fast. Another roll was now written by Baruch from the prophet's dictation, containing all that was in the former, with some additions, the most remark- able of which is the prophecy respecting the ruin of Jehoiachim and his house, as the punishment of his impious act. This roll is the prophecy of Jeremiah which we now possess. Baruch, being himself terrified at the threats contained in the prophetic roll, received the comforting assurance that he would himself be delivered from the calamities which should befall Judah and Jeru- salem. In the fourth year of Zedekiah (B. C. 595), Baruch is supposed by some to have accom- panied Seraiah to Babylon, when the latter at- tended Zedekiah with the prophecies contained in Jeremiah, chaps. 1. and li., which he was com- manded by Jeremiah to read on the banks of the Euphrates, and then to cast the prophetic roll into the river, with a stone attached to it, to signify the everlasting ruin of Babylon (Jer. li: 61). At least . Baruch, in the book which bears his name (see BARUCH, Book OF), is said to have read these prophecies at Babylon in the hearing of king Jehoiachim and the captive Jews, in the fifth year of the taking of Jerusalem by the Chaldaeans (see next article), which must have been the same taking of it in which Je- hoiachim was made prisoner. There is no ac- count in Scripture of Baruch's return. The Rab- bins, however, allege that he died in Babylon, in the twelfth year of the exile. Josephus asserts that he was well skilled in the Hebrew language, and that, after the taking of Jerusalem, Nebuzar- adan treated Baruch with consideration, from re- spect to Jeremiah, whose misfortunes he had shared, and whom he had accompanied to prison and exile (Antiq. x:II). 2. The son of Zabbai. He repaired (B. C. 445) that part of the walls of Jerusalem between the northeast angle of Zion and the house of Eli- ashib the high-priest (Neh. iii:20), and united in Nehemiah's covenant (x :6). 3. Son of Col-hozeh, a descendant of Perez, a son of Judah. His son Maaseiah dwelt in Jeru- salem after the captivity (Neh. xi :5). BARUCH, BOOK OF (Apocrypha), (bā'ruk, böök Šv), follows next after the book of Jeremiah in the Septuagint Version. (1) It is the only one of the deutero-canonical books named in the catalogue of the celebrated fifty-ninth canon of the Council of Laodicea. If Baruch, the scribe of Jeremiah, be the author of this book, he must have removed from Egypt to Babylon immediately after the death of Jeremiah, inasmuch as the author of the book lived in Babylon in the fifth year after that event, unless we suppose, with Eichhorn, Arnold and others that the reference (Baruch i :I) is the fifth year from the captivity of Jehoiachim. Jahn (Introductio in Epitomen redacta, sec. 217, etc.) considers this latter opinion at variance with Baruch i : I, where the destruction of Jeru- salem is spoken of as having already taken place. De Wette (Lehrbuch der Einleitung in das 4. BARUCH, BOOK OF zend AW. T.) ingeniously conjectures that ēret (year) is a mistake or correction of some tran- scriber for pumvi (month); and there is no question that the present reading, which mentions the year, and the day of the month, without nam- ing the month itself, is quite unaccountable. (2) If Baruch, the friend of Jeremiah, was the author of the present work, it must be a transla- tion from the Hebrew or Chaldee, and it is by no means impossible that this is the case, as the work abounds in Hebraisms. These Hebraisms, how- ever, in the opinion of Jahn (Introduction), Inight have originated with a Jew writing Greek, although he leans to the opinion that, from the use of the word manna, and the frequent He- braisms, this work not only does not belong to the Greek age of the Jews, but was actually writ- ten in Hebrew. This is also the opinion of Cal- met (Preface to Baruch), Huet (Demonstratio Evangelica), and others; while Grotius, Eich- horn and most of the German writers favor the idea of a Greek original. They conceive that the writer was some unknown person in the reign of Ptolemy Lagos, who, wishing to confirm in the true religion the Jews then residing in Egypt, attributed his own ideas to Baruch the scribe. There appears, however, no reason, on this latter hypothesis, why the author should speak of the return from Babylon. Grotius conceives that the book abounds not only in Jewish, but even in Christian interpolations. (See Eichhorn's Ein- leitung in die Apokryfen Schriften.) (3) Although Cyril of Jerusalem speaks of the book of Baruch as canonical, it is not expressly named in any of the ancient catalogues of the canon of Scripture, except, as already observed, that of the Council of Laodicea, and the re- markable circumstance of this being the only deuterocanonical book named in the canon of that council has given rise to various conjectures. Dean Prideaux, indeed, conceives that the words of the canon, Jeremiah, with Baruch, the Lamen- tations and the Epistle,’ were intended to express no more than Jeremiah's Prophecies and Lamenta- tions; that by the Epistle is meant only the epistle in the 29th chapter of Jeremiah, and that Baruch's name is added only because of the part he bore in collecting them together, and adding the last chapter (Connearion, vol. i. p. 50). But on ex- amining the Alexandrian manuscript in the Brit- ish Museum, it will be seen that the arrangement of these books exactly tallies with the words of the canon. Immediately after Jeremiah follows Baruch, with its title and subscription ; then the Lamentations, with title and subscription, and, last of all, the Epistle, with the title, ‘The Epistle of Jeremiah,” and the following subscription, ‘Jeremiah, Lamentations and the Epistle.’ (4) Whiston (Authentic Records, vol. i., p. I, etc.) strongly contends for the canonicity of this book, founding his opinion on Origen's mode of citing it, with the formula ‘It is written,’ as well as his testimony, recorded by Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. vi.25), that The Epistle (Baruch vi) was owned by the Jews, in addition to the fact that it is stated in the Apostolical Constitutions that the book of Baruch, together with the Lamenta- tions, was publicly read in the Synagogues on the tenth day of the month Gorpioeus. (5) Among the fathers the book of Baruch is cited generally as part of the book of Jeremiah— by Irenaeus, Cyprian, Clement of Alexandria, Eusebius, Ambrose, Augustine, Chrysostom, Basil, Epiphanius and others. Augustine, having cited under the name of Jeremiah the passage in our Bibles, Baruch iii:35-37, observes: “Some ascribe this saying not to Jeremiah, but to Baruch, his 244 DARUCH, BOOK OF amanuensis, but it is now known under the name of Jeremiah (City of God, chap. xxxiii). The book of Baruch is also cited as part of Jeremiah in the Roman office for the Saturday in Whitsun week. This mode of citing it most probably ac- counts for the fact of its name being omitted in the ancient catalogues, including those of Hippo and Carthage. It was at length cited as a sep- arate book by the Council of Florence, and after- wards, not without a struggle (see Father Paul's history), by the Council of Trent. It is at the same time observed by Calmet that its ‘canonicity had been denied not only by the Protestants, but by several Catholics,” among whom he instances Driedo, Lyranus and Diony- sius of Carthage. He considers that Jerome treats the book with harshness when (Preface to Jeremiah) that father observes: ‘I have not thought it worth while to translate the book of Baruch, which is generally joined in the Sep- tuagint version to Jeremiah, and which is not found among the Hebrews, nor the pseudepi- graphal epistle of Jeremiah.” This is the epistle forming the sixth chapter of Baruch, the genuine- ness of which is questioned by several who ac- knowledge that of the former part of the book. Most modern writers of the Roman church, among whom are Du Pin (Canon of Scripture), Calmet (Commentary), and Allber (Hermeneutica Gen- eralis), reckon this a genuine epistle of Jere- miah's. Jahn, however, after St. Jerome, main- tains its spurious and pseudepigraphal charac- ter. This he conceives sufficiently attested by the difference of style, and its freedom from He- braisms. He considers it to be an imitation of the epistle of Jeremiah (chap. xxix). This epistle, however, is confessedly more ancient than the second book of Maccabees, for it is there referred to (Macc. ii:2; Comp, with Baruch vi :4) as an ancient document. The position of this letter varies in manuscripts; it sometimes precedes and sometimes follows Lamentations. (7) The subject of the book is (I) an exhorta- tion to wisdom and a due observance of the law; (2) it then introduces Jerusalem as a widow, comforting her children with the hope of a return ; (3) an answer follows in confirmation of this hope. A prologue is prefixed, stating that Baruch had read his book to Jeremiah and the people in Babylon by the river Sud (Euphrates), by which the people were brought to repentance, and sent the book with a letter and presents to Jerusalem. W. W. (8) The Epistle of Jeremiah, which, according to the authority of some Greek MSS., stands in the English version as the 6th chapter of Baruch, is the work of a later period. It consists of a rhetorical declamation against idols (Comp. Jer. x ; xxix), in the form of a letter addressed by Jeremiah “to them which were to be led captive to Babylon.” The letter is divided into clauses by the repetition of a common burden ; they are 110 gods; fear them not (vv :16, 23, 29, 66); how can a man think or say that they are gods? (vv :40, 44, 56, 64). The condition of the text is closely analogous to that of Baruch, and the letter found the same partial reception in the church. The author shows an intimate acquaintance with idola- trous worship, and this circumstance, combined with the purity of the Hellenistic dialect, points to Egypt as the country in which the epistle was written. There is no positive evidence to fix its date, for the supposed reference in 2 Macc. ii:2 is more than uncertain, but it may be assigned with probability to the first century B. C. (9) A Syriac first epistle of Baruch “to the nine and a half tribes” (Comp, 2 Esdr, xiii:40, Vers. BARZILLAI 245 Arab.) is found in the London and Paris Poly- glots. This is made up of commonplaces of warn- ing, encouragement and exhortation. Fritzsche (Einl., Sec. 8) [with whom Davidson agrees (Introd. to the O. T., iii:424)} considers it to be the production of a Syrian monk. It is not found in any other language. Whiston (4 Collection of Authentic Records, etc., London, 1727, i :I ff., 25 ff.) endeavored to maintain the canonicity of this epistle as well as that of the Book of Baruch (Brooke Foss Westcott, Smith's Bib. Dict.) (10) The epistle called the Apocalypse of Baruch was discovered by Ceriani. This book has survived only in the Syrian version, of which Ceriani had the good fortune to discover a sixth century MSS. in the Milan Library. Of this MSS. he published a Latin translation in 1866 (Mon. Sacr. I. ii:73-98), which Fritzsche repro- duced with some changes in 1871 (Libri Apoc- ryphi V. T. pp. 654-699). The Syriac text ap- peared in 1871 (Mon. Sacr. v. ii:II3-180), and a photo-lithographical facsimile of the MS. in 1883. A fragment of this book has long been known to the world, viz., chs. lxxviii-lxxxvii, which constitute Baruch's Epistle to the nine and a half tribes that had been carried away captive. This letter is to be found in the London and Paris Polyglots in Syriac, with a Latin rendering; in Syriac alone in Lagarde's Libri V. T. Apocryphi Syriace, 1861. The Latin translation is also found in Fabricius' Cod. Pseudepig. V. T., and the English in Whiston's Authentic Records (R. H. Charles, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) - BARZILLAI (birºla- or lai), (Heb. * bar-zz/-/a/.'ee, strong, iron). 1. A wealthy old Gileadite of Rogelim, who dis- tinguished himself by his loyalty when David fled beyond the Jordan from his son Absalom." He sent in a liberal supply of provisions, beds and other conveniences for the use of the king's fol- lowers (2 Sam. xvii:27; xix :32). After the re. bellion had been suppressed, Barzillai, on account of age, and probably also from natural and proper pride, declined David's offer to be a resident of the court, but proposed his son Chimham should go instead (2 Sam. xix:31-40). David, in his final charge to Solomon, enjoined it upon him to show kindness to Barzillai's family, and even to make them members of the royal household (I Kings ii:7). 2. The Meholathite, father-in-law of Michal, Saul’s daughter (2 Sam. xxi :8), B. C. IO2.I. 3. The husband of a daughter of Barzillai the Gileadite, whose descendants returned from Babylon, but in vain sought admittance to the priesthood (Ezra ii:61; Neh. vii:63, 64), B. C. 530. BASHAN (ba'shan), (Heb. ???, baw-shawn', light soil, soft earth, fruitful). (1) Meaning. The word probably denotes the peculiar fertility of the soil; in the ancient versions, instead of using it as a proper name, a word meaning fruitful or fat is adopted. Thus in Ps. xxii :12 for Bashan, we find in Septuagint pee’-oh-mes (fat). (2) Territory. The sacred writers include in Bashan that part of the country eastward of the Jordan which was given to half the tribe of Manasseh, situated to the north of Gilead. Bo- chart incorrectly places it between the rivers Jabbok and Arnon; and speaks of it as the allot- ment of the tribes of Reuben and Gad (Num. xxxii:33). BASHAN (3) History. The first notice of this country is in Gen. xiv:5. Cherdorlaomer and his con- federates ‘smote the Rephaims in Ashtaroth Kar- naim.' Now Og, king of Bashan, dwelt in Ash- taroth, and ‘was of the remnant of the Rephaim' (“giants, Auth. Vers.), Joshua xii:4. When the Israelites invaded the Promised Land, Argob. a province of Bashan, contained 'sixty fenced cities, with walls and gates and brazen bars, besides unwalled towns a great many' (Deut. iii;4, 5; I Kings iv:13). These were all taken by the Israelites, and Og and his people utterly de- stroyed. Golan, one of the cities of refuge, was situated in this country (Deut. iv:43; Josh. xx:8; xxi :27; Joseph. Antiq. iv:7, Sec. 4). Solomon appointed twelve officers to furnish the monthly supplies for the royal household, and allotted the region of Argob to the son of Geber (I Kings iv:13). Towards the close of Jehu's reign, Hazael invaded the land of Israel, and smote the whole eastern territory, “even Gilead and Bashan’ (2 Kings x:33; Joseph. Antiq. ix:8, sec. 1); but after his death the cities he had taken were ... recovered by Jehoash (Joash) (2 Kings xiii:25), who defeated the Syrians in three battles, as Elisha had predicted (2 Kings xiii: 19; Joseph. Antiq. ix:8, sec. 7). After the captivity the name Batanaea was applied to only a part of the ancient Bashan; the rest being called Trachonitis, Auranitis, and Gaulanitis (see Lightfoot's Chorographical Notes upon the places mentioned in St. Luke: Works, vol. x, p. 282). All these provinces were granted by Au- gustus to Herod the Great, and on his death Batanaea formed a part of Philip's tetrarchy (JO- seph. De Bell Jud. ii:6, sec. 3; Antiq; xviii:4, sec. 6). At his decease, A. D. 34, it was an- nexed, by Tiberius, to the province of Syria; but in A. D. 37 it was given by Caligula to Herod Agrippa, the son of Aristobulus, with the title of king (Acts xii: I ; Joseph. Antiq. xviii:6, sec. Io). From the time of Agrippa's death, in A. D. 44, to A. D. 53, the government again reverted to the Romans, but it was then restored by Claudius to Agrippa II (Acts xxv : I.3). (4) Scripture Allusions. The richness of the pasture land of Bashan, and the consequent Su- periority of its breed of cattle, are frequently alluded to in the Scriptures. We read in Deut. xxxii:14, of ‘rams of the breed (Heb. sons) of Bashan.” (Ezek. xxxix:18) ‘Rams, lambs, bulls, goats, all of them fatlings of Bashan.’ The Oaks of Bashan are mentioned in connection with the cedars of Lebanon (Is. ii: 13; Zech. xi :2). In Ezekiel's description of the wealth and magnifi- cence of Tyre it is said, ‘Of the oaks of Bashan have they made their oars’ (xxvii:6). The an- cient commentators on Amos iv: I, ‘the kine of Bashan,’ Jerome, Theodoret, and Cyril, speak in the strongest terms of the exuberant fertility of Bashan (Bochart, Hierozoicon, pars i, col. 306), and modern travelers corroborate their assertions (see Burckhardt's Travels in Syria and the Holy Land, pp. 286-288; Buckingham's Travels in Palestine, Through the Countries of Bashan and Gilead. London, 1822, vol. ii, pp. II2-II7. J. E. R. (5) Tablet Allusions. “In the Tel el-Amarna tablets the land of Bashan is called Ziri-Basana, ‘the field of Bashan,' and the same name is found in an Egyptian text discovered at Abydos, which tells us that the prime minister of the first year of Meneptah's reign was a native of Zar- Basana,’ ” (Sayce, Higher Crit. and Mon., p. 25I). BASHAN–HAVOTH-JAIR BASHAN-HAVOTH-JAIR (bā'shan-hā'voth- jā'ir), (Heb. TP. FT lº baw-shawn' Ahaz,-vothe' yazy-eer', the Bashan of the villages of Jair), a name given to Argob after its conquest (B. C. 1451) by Jair (Deut. iii:14). (See HAVOTH-JAIR.) BASHEMATH (bāsh'e-măth), (Heb. nº bos- maſh', fragrance; elsewhere, I Kings iv:15, more correctly, “Basmath”). 1. Daughter of Ishmael (Gen. xxxvi;3, 4, 13), from whose son, Reuel, four tribes of the Edom- ites were descended (B. C. 1796). She is called Mahalath (Gen. xxviii:9). - 2. A daughter of Solomon and wife of one of his officers (I Kings iv: I5). (See BASMATH.) BASIN (bā's'n), the rendering in the A.V. Ot several words in the original; also spelled “ba- son.” 1. Ag-gawn' (Heb. }S) literally, founded out; a vessel for washing, a Zaver, Zarge bowl, or clº (Exod. xxiv:6). 2. Saf (Heb. 2), dishes or bowls for holding the blood of victims (Exod. xii:22; Jer. lii: IQ); the oil for the sacred candlestick (I Kings vii:5O); basins for domestic purposes (2 Sam. xvii:28); also a drinking cup (Zech. xii:2). 3. Mig-zawā' (Heb. Pº), a bowl from which anything was sprinkled. The sacrificial bow/s in the Tabernacle were of “brass,” bronze Or Copper (Exod. xxvii:3), and those in the Temple, of gold (2 Chron. iv:8). w - 4. Kefore (Heb. Tº), a covered dish, goblet, or tankard, such as the gold and silver vessels of the sanctuary (I Chron. xxviii: 17; Ezra i. IO; viii:27. 5. AVºž-fare' (Gr. vitrip), a large vessel, such as the basin from which our Lord washed the dis- ciples' feet (John xiii.5). (See BOWL; CUP.) BASKET (bås'két). There are several words in the Scriptures by which different kinds of baskets appear to be indicated. 1. Dood (Heb. Th", a pot), which occurs in 2 Kings x:7, where the heads of Ahab's sons are sent from Samaria to Jezreel in baskets; Jer. xxiv:2, as containing figs; and Ps. lxxxi :6 (rendered pots), also as containing figs; where, therefore, deliverance from the baskets means deliverance from the bondage of carrying bur- dens in baskets. In fact, very heavy burdens were thus carried in Egypt, as corn in very large baskets from the field to the threshing-floor, and from the threshing-floor to the granaries. They were carried between two men by a pole resting on their shoulders; which agrees with the previous clause of the cited text, “I removed his shoulder from the burden.’ This labor and form of the basket are often shown in the Egyptian sculptures. 2. Teh'neh (Heb. 83%), which occurs in connection with agricultural objects, ‘the basket and the store’ (Deut. xxvi :2-4; xxviii:5-17), and would therefore appear to have been somewhat similar to the above; and, in fact, the Egyptian sculptures show different baskets applied to this 11S62. w 3. Ke/-ooh' (Heb. P.”?). From the etymol- ogy, this appears to have been an interwoven basket, made of leaves or rushes. In Lev. v :27, however, it is used for a bird cage, which must have been of open work, and probably not un- like our own wicker bird cages. The name is also applied to fruit baskets (Amos viii:I, 2), 246 BASKET Egyptian examples of which are presented in Figs. 2 and 4 (which contain pomegranates) of the annexed cut. 1 Ancient Egyptian. 4. Sa/-s?/-/off." (Heb. nºt, sa/si//oth), oc- curs only in Jer. vi.9, where it obviously denotes baskets in which grapes were deposited as they were gathered. The form of the basket used for this purpose is often shown on the Egyptian monuments, and is similar to that represented in fig. 4, cut 2. 5. In all the other places where the word bas- ket occurs, we are doubtless to understand a basket made of rushes, similar both in form and material to those used by carpenters for carrying their tools. This is still the common kind of basket throughout Western Asia; and its use in ancient Egypt is shown by an actual specimen which was found in a tomb at Thebes, and which is now in the British Museum. It was, in fact, a carpenter's basket, and contained his tools (fig. I). The specimens of Egyptian baskets in the British Museum, represented in our cut, convey a favorable idea of the basket-work of ancient with colors (figs. 3, 5, cut I ; also the modern times. Some of these are worked ornamentally examples, figs. 2, 7, cut 2). And besides these the monuments exhibit a large variety of hand- baskets, of different shapes, and so extensively employed as to show the numerous applications of basket-work in the remote times to which these representations extend. They are mostly maanufactured, the stronger and larger sorts of the fibres, and the finer of the leaves of the palm tree, and not infrequently of rushes, still more seldom of reeds. ºš * @º 2-#Zº £º º asºſ. § 2:3 sº-ºº: Jº Eººrs, º ޺ .N §§ £gºś ğ#: Yºğä º ſº §§ º >:º º & *P º º º &P2: §§ lºs ſ &/27/32 G-3 gº º ğ. 2% 2.£º (ſ & §:#º §3) & CŞ sº & Yº Ǻ wº 6. Modern Oriental. 6. In the New Testament baskefs are described under the three following terms: kóplvos (Áof' ee- mos), a trupts (spoo-rece', hamper), orapyávm (sar-gan'- ay). The last occurs only in 2 Cor. xi:33, in describing St. Paul's escape from Damascus. BASMATH With regard to the two former words, it may be remarked that the first is exclusively used in the description of the miracle of feeding the five thousand (Matt. xiv:20; xvi :9; Mark vi;43; Luke ix:17; John vi :13), and the second, in that of the four thousand (Matt. xv. 37; Mark viii: 8); the distinction is most definitely brought out in Mark viii:19, 20. The spuris is also mentioned as the means of St. Paul’s escape (Acts is :25). The difference between these two kinds of baskets is not very apparent. Their construction appears to have been the same. (Smith, Bib. Dict.). BASMATH (bås'math), (Heb. nº, bas-math', fragrance), a daughter of Solomon, who became • the wife of Ahimaaz, one of the king's purveyors (I Kings iv:15), B. C. about IOOO. (See BASHE- MATH.) BASTARD (båstård). By this word the Auth. Vers, renders the Hebrew Tºº?, mam-2are', pol- luted, which occurs only in Deut. xxiii:2 and Zech. ix:6. But Michaelis, Mos. Recht, ii, sec. 139, reads the word, with a different punctuation, so as to make it a Compound of two words, mamzzer, meaning stain, defect of a stranger, implying the stain that would be cast upon the nation by grant- ing to such a stranger the citizen-right. (1) Offspring of Prostitutes. Some under- stand by it the offspring of prostitutes, but they forget that prostitutes were expressly forbidden to be tolerated by the law of Moses (Lev. xix: 29: Deut. xxiii:17). The most probable con- jecture is that which applies the term to the offspring of heathen prostitutes in the neighbor- hood of Palestine; since no provision was made by Moses against their toleration (Potter, Ar- chaoſ. i. 354), and who were a sort of priestesses to the Syrian goddess Astarte (Comp. Num. xxv :I, sq.; Gesenius, Comment on Isaiah, ii. 339; 247 Hos. iv:14; I Kings xiv:24; xv : I2; xxii:46, 47; 2 Kings xxiii:7; Herodot, i. IQ9). (2) Among the Jews. That there existed such bastard offspring among the Jews is proved by the history of Jephthah (Judg. xi : I-7), who on this account was expelled, and deprived of his patrimony. - (3) In General. In general bastard is one born out of wedlock. Thus bastards, or mothers' children, in the family of God, are those who, in respect of external profession, have the church for their mother, but were never savingly adopted and begotten of God (Heb. xii:8). BAT (ba), (Heb. º. at aliaſe', night bird), occurs in Lev. xi:I9. (1) Designation. In Hebrew the word im- plies flying in the dark; which, taken in con- nection with the sentence “moreover, the othelaph and every creeping thing that flieth is unclean unto you; they shall not be eaten,’ is so clear, that there cannot be a mistake respecting the order of animals meant; though to modern zo- ology neither the species, the genus, nor even the family is thereby manifested; the injunction merely prohibits eating bats, and may likewise include some tribes of insects. At first sight, animals so diminutive, lean, and repugnant to the senses, must appear scarcely to have required the legislator's attention, but the fact evidently shows that there were at the time men or tribes who ate animals classed with bats, a practice still in vogue in the great Australasian islands, where the frugivorous Pteropi of the harpy or goblin family, by seamen denominated flying- dogs, and erroneously vampires, are caught and BATHE, BATHING eaten ; but where the insectivorous true bats, Such as the genera common in Europe, are re- jected. Some of the species of harpies are of the bulk of a rat, with from three to four feet of expanse between the tips of the wings; they have a fierce dog-like head, and are nearly all marked with a space of rufous hair from the ºad Over the neck and along part of the a CEC. (2) Habits. They reside in the most dense foliage of large trees, whence they fly out at night and do considerable damage to the planta- tions of fruit trees. It was to one or more species of this section of Cheiroptera that we think the Mosaic prohibition was chiefly di- rected; and it is likewise to them that may be referred the foundation of the ancient legends concerning harpies, which, however much they may be distorted, have a basis of truth. Indeed, when we consider their voice, the faculty they have of feeding with their thumbs, their formida- ble teeth, their habit of flying in the day during dark weather, and their willingness, though they are frugivorous, to devour not only insects, but also the blood and flesh of small animals, we may admit that originally they were more daring in the presence of man; that their true characters are but moderately amplified by poetical fancy; and that the Mosaic injunction, was strikingly appropriate. In the texts of Scripture, where allusion is made to caverns and dark places, true Vesper- tilionidae, or insect-eating bats, similar to the European, are clearly designated. BATANAEA (bât'a-nae'a). See BASHAN. BATH (båth), (Heb. F2, bath), a measure for liquids, of equal capacity with the ephah for corn, about eight gallons. It is supposed that there was a common and sacred bath ; the latter containing a third more than the former, because in I Kings vii:26, Solo- mon's brazen sea is said to contain 3,000 baths, and in 2 Chron. iv:5, 2,000; but without sup- posing this distinction, the vessel might ordi- narily hold 2,000, and at a stretch, when filled to the brim, 3,000; or its foot might contain the third thousand. It has also been ingeniously conjectured, that as the Babylonish cubit was less than the Jewish, their liquid measures were less also. The book of the Chronicles was writ- ten subsequent to the captivity, and so 2,000 old Jewish “baths” might be equal to 3,000 Chaldean. (See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.) BATHE, BATHING (båth, bäth'ing), (Heb. Yº, raw-Khats'). (1) In contradistinction to the washing of par- ticular parts of the body, hands, feet, etc., bath- ing is used in thic article of the Washing of the whole body, and that either by the application of water, by pouring or otherwise, to the body, or by the immersion of the body in water, which alone is bathing in the strict sense of the term. The Hebrew of the Old Testament does not distinguish between the processes, both of which are expressed by rawk hats, to wash the body, as opposed to the washing of clothes. The new- born infant among the Hebrews was bathed in water before being dressed (Ezek. xvi;4). (Hast- ings' Bib. Dict.) (2) The Israelites, from early times, were ac- customed not only to wash the hands and feet before eating, but also to bathe the body when about to visit a superior (Ruth iii:3), after mourning, which always implied defilement (2 Sam. xii:20), but especially before any re- BATH –GALLIM ligious service (Gen. xxxv.2; Exod. xix: Io; Josh. iii:5; I Sam. xvi;5), that they might ap- pear clean before God. The high priest at his inauguration (Lev. xiii:6), and on the day of atonement before each act of propitiation (Lev. xvi;4, 24), was also to bathe. To cleanse the body snow water was used, or lye put into the water (Job ix:30), also bran, according to Mishna. Bathing in running water was specially favored (Lev. xv : I.3), or in rivers (2 Kings v :Io; Exod. ii:5). Baths were placed in the courts of private houses (2 Sam. xi :2; Susannah I5; Mc. and Str. ; Barnes, Bib. Cyc.). (3) The “pools,” such as that of Siloam, and Hezekiah's (Neh. iii: 15, 16; 2 Kings xx :20; Is. xxii:II ; John ix:7), often sheltered by por- ticoes (John v:2), are the first indications we have of public bathing accommodation. Ever since the time of Jason (Prideaux, ii. I68) the Greek usages of the bath probably prevailed, and an allusion in Josephus (the baths of the soldiers, B. J. i. 17, sec. 7) seems to imply the use of the bath (hence, no doubt, a public one, as in Rome) by legionary soldiers. We read also of a castle luxuriously provided with a volume of water in its court, and of a Herodian palace with spacious pools adjoining, in which the guests continued swimming, etc., in very hot weather from noon till dark (Joseph. Antiq. xii:4, sec. II ; xv :3, sec. 3). The hot baths of Tiberias, or more strictly of Emmaus (Euseb. Onomast. Albáſz, query Aiud.6? Bonfrerius) near it, and of Cal- lirhoe, near the eastern shore of the Dead Sea, were much resorted to. (Reland, i :46; Joseph. Antiq, xviii:2; xvii:6, sec. 5, B. J. i :33, Sec. 5; Amm. Marcell. xiv:8; Stanley, 373, 295.) The parallel customs of ancient Egypt, Greece, and Rome, are too well known to need special al- lusion. (Smith, Bib. Dict.) Figuratite. 1. By a bold and striking figure, “the sword of the Almighty bathed in heaven,” Isaiah represents the vengeance of God on the mighty ones of earth (Is. xxxiv:6). 2. Heaven in Scripture is often emblematical of exalted political power (Is. xiv:12; Matt. xxiv:29; Rev. vi :13; viii:I2). BATH-GALLIMI (båth-gällim), (Is. x:30). GALLIM. BATH. Kol (bathſkol), (Heb. ?P nº, bath'Aoi, daughter of the voice). Under this name the Talmud, the later Tar- gums, and the Rabbinical writers, make frequent mention of a kind of oracular voice, constituting the fourth grade of revelation, which, although it was an instrument of Divine communication throughout the early history of the Israelites, was the most prominent, because the sole, pro- phetic manifestation which existed during (and even after) the period of the second Temple. The Midrashim and the Gemara, cited in Re- land's Antiq. Sacr. pt. ii., chap. ix, Severally affirm that the Bath Kol is the voice which spoke to Abraham, Moses, David, Nebuchadnezzar, and others; and the Targums of Jonathan and of Jerusalem make the Bath Kol appear in Gen. xxxviii:26; Num. xxi.;6, and in other places. The Jewish authorities are not agreed as to what the Bath Kol was, nor as to the precise reason of its designation. It is disputed whether the persons hearing the Bath Kol heard the very voice from heaven, or only a daughter of it—an echo of it; whether as thunder is often mentioned as a sign of the Divine presence, and as the word zoice appears to be used for thunder in Exod. ix: 23; Jer. x:I3; Ps. xxix:3, the Bath Kol may not See 248 BATTLE signify an articulate voice proceeding out of the thunder; or whether, according to the explana- tion of Maimonides, ‘the Bath Kol is when a man has such a strong imagination that he be- lieves he hears a voice from without himself.' As to the meaning of the name itself, passages are cited in Buxtorf's Lea. Talm. s. v. R. and in Reland's Antiq. Sacr. 1. c., which show that the daughter of the voice Sometimes means the echo of a Sound, and sometimes merely a pri- mary sound itself. It is certain that the Peshito has sometimes rendered the simple Greek phonay, by “daughter Of the voice,’ as in Acts xii:22; 1 Tim. vi :20; Heb. iii:15. º BATH-RABBIM (båth'rābbim), (Heb. F2T2. Öath-rab'67772, daughter of many), the name of one of the gates of the ancient city of Heshbon, near which were two pools to which Solomon compares the eyes of his “beloved” (Cant. vii:4). BATH-SHEBA (båth'she'bā or bàth'she-bá), (Heb. 92?"F2, bath sheh'bah, daughter of the Oath); also, Bath-shua, daughter of Eliam, grand- daughter of Ahitophel, and wife of Uriah. She was seduced and became pregnant by King David during the absence of her husband, who was then engaged at the siege of Rabbah (2 Sam. xi :4, 5; Ps. li:2). The child thus born in adultery became ill and died (2 Sam. xii: I5-18). After the lapse of the period of mourn- ing for her husband, who was slain by the con- trivance of David (xi : I5), she was legally mar- ried to the king (xi:27), and bore him Solomon (xii:24; I Kings i: II; ii: 13). In I Chron. iii: 5 she is called Bath-shua instead of Bath-sheba ; and her father, Ammiel, instead of Eliam (Comp. Matt. i :6). The other children of Bath-sheba are named in 2 Sam. v . I4; I Chron. iii:5. She is afterwards noticed only in consequence of her good-natured intercession for Adonijah ; which in- cidentally displays the respect with which she was treated by king Solomon, her son (I Kings ii: 19). (See DAVID ; ADONIJAH.) - The Rabbins describe Bath-Sheba as a woman of vast information and a highly cultivated mind, to whose education Solomon owed much of his wisdom and reputation, and even a great part of the practical philosophy embodied in his Pro- verbs (see Prov. iv:3; xxxi). - BATH-SHUA (båth-shu'a), (Heb. *T2, bath- shuh'ah, daughter of prosperity). This name is translated “daughter of Shua” in Gen. xxxviii: 12 and in I Chron. ii:3; but in I Chron. 111:5, it is used as the name of the mother of Solomon, and she is called the daughter of Ammiel (elsewhere E/ia777). In Gen. xxxviii:2, 12, Bath-shua is really the name of Judah's wife (B. C. Io95), while Bath-sheba's original husband was a Hittite. BATH-ZACHARIAS (båth-zák'a-ri'as), a place near Bethsura celebrated for a battle fought be- tween Antiochus Eupator and Judas Maccabaeus (I Macc. vi.30). Epiphanius says the prophet Habakkuk was born in the territories of Bath- Zacharias. * BATTLE (båt’t'1), (Heb. Tºº?, mi/A/aw-maw", fighting). Mode of Warfare. Though the Hebrews in their mode of conducting warlike Operations varied somewhat in the course of ages, and are elsewhere shown to have been swayed by the practice of greater and more military nations, still, from the period when the institution of BATTLE royalty gave rise to an organized system, it was a maxim to spare the soldiers all unnecessary fatigue before an engagement, and to supply them liberally with food. (I) Their arms were enjoined to be in the best order, and when drawn up for battle they formed a line of solid squares of a hundred men, each square being ten deep, and with sufficient interval between to allow of facility in movements, and the slingers to pass through. (2) The archers may have occupied the two flanks, or formed in the rear, according to the intentions of the commander on the occa- Sion ; but the slingers were always stationed in the rear until they were ordered forward to im- pede an hostile approach, or to commence the engagement, somewhat in the manner of modern Skirmishers. (3) Meantime, while the trumpets waited to Sound the last signal, the king, or his representative, appeared in his sacred dress (the hadré kodesh, rendered in our version ‘the beau- ties of holiness'), except when he wished to remain unknown, as at Megiddo (2 Chron. xxxv :22); and proceeded to make the final dis- positions in the middle of his chosen braves, at- tended by priests, who, by their exhortations, animated the ranks within hearing. (4) It was now, we may suppose, when the enemy was at hand, that the slingers would be ordered to pass between the intervals of the line of solid squares, open their order and with shouts, let fly their Stone or leaden missiles, until by the gradual ap- proach of the opposing fronts they would be hemmed in, and be recalled to the rear, or to cover a flank. Then would come the signal to charge, and the great shout of battle; the heavy infantry, receiving the order to attack, would, under cover of their shields and leveled spears, press direct upon the front of the enemy; the rear ranks might then, if so armed, cast their second darts, and the archers from the rear shoot high, so as to pitch the arrows over their own main line of spearmen into the dense masses beyond them. (5) If the enemy broke through the intervals, we may imagine that a line of charioteers in reserve, breaking from their posi- tion, might in part charge among the disordered ranks of the foe, drive them back, and facilitate the restoration of the oppressed masses, or . wheeling round a flank, fall upon the enemy, or be encountered by a similar maneuver, and perhaps repulsed. The king, meanwhile, sur- rounded by his princes, posted close to the rear of his line of battle, and in the middle of the showered missiles, would watch the enemy and remedy every disorder. (6) In this position it was that several of the sovereigns of Judah were slain (2 Chron. xviii:33, and xxxv :23), and that such an enormous waste of human life took place; for the shock of two hostile lines of masses, at least ten in depth, advancing under the confidence of breastplate and shield, when once engaged hand to hand, had difficulties of no ordinary nature to retreat; because the hinder- most ranks, not feeling personally the first slaughter, would not, and the foremost could not, fall back; neither could the commanders disen- gage the line without a certainty of being de- feated. (7) The fate of the day was therefore no longer within the control of the chief, and nothing but obstinate valor was left to decide the victory. (8) Under such circumstances, defeat led to irretrievable confusion ; and where either party possessed superiority in cavalry and char- iots of war, it would be materially increased ; but where the infantry alone had principally to pursue a broken enemy, that force, laden with shields, and preserving order, could overtake *. 249 BDELLIUM very few who chose to abandon their defensive armor, unless they were hemmed in by the lo- cality. (9) Sometimes a part of the army was posted in ambush, but this maneuver was most commonly practiced against the garrisons of cities (Josh. viii :12; Judg. xx:38). In the case of Abraham (Gen. xiv:16), when he led a small body of his own people suddenly collected, and fell upon the guard of the captives, released them, and recovered the booty, it was a surprise, not an ambush; nor is it necessary that he should have fallen in with the main army of the enemy. (IO) At a later period, there is no doubt that the Hebrew armies, in imitation of the Romans, formed into more than one line of masses; but there is ample evidence that they always pos- sessed more stubborn valor than discipline. (See WAR.) BATTLE-AXE (bât’t'l-āks'), (Jer, li:20). See AXE. tº & BATTLE-Bow (bått'l-ba'), (Heb. Tº Fº. Æe's/eth miſ-Éhaw-maw'), the military bow, made of steel (Job xx:24), and so stiff that it could only be bent when the foot was placed on it. Hence, to tread the bow, means to bend it (Zech. ix: IO; X:4). BATTLEMENT (bât’t'1-ment), (Heb. Tºº, mah- až-eh', ledge), a breastwork, of wall or lattice, sur- rounding the flat roofs of Eastern houses, required as a protection against accidents (Deut. xxii:8). “Battlements” is the rendering (Jer. v.:IO) for º, net-ee-shaw, tendril, the parapet of a city wall. (See HOUSE.) BAVAI (báv'a-i), (Heb. *2, Öazy-va/h'ee, wishes), son of Henadad and ruler of the half of Keilah (B. C. 445). He repaired a portion of the wall of Zion, after the return from Babylon (Neh. iii:18). BAY (Heb. lº, ſaw-shome', tongue). 1. The cove of the Dead Sea, at the mouth of the Jordan (Josh. xv.:5; xviii: 19). 2. The color, according to A. V., of one of the spans of horses in the vision of Zechariah (vi.3, 7). It is the rendering of Yº, aw-mo/hts', strong. Keil and Delitzsch translate “speckled powerful horses” (Com., in loc.), (Barnes' Biö. A)?cá.). BAY TREE (bā' tre'), (Ps. xxxvii:35). “It may be questioned whether any particular tree is intended by the Psalmist; but, if so, it must have been an evergreen, and may possibly be the sweet bay (Laurus mobilis), which is a native of Palestine. It is not very common, but may be found in most of the wooded dells of northern and western Palestine.”—Tristrim. The leaves of the bay are much like those of the American mountain-laurel, but are fragrant when crushed, and , often come to our market packed with figs (Schaff, Bib. Dict). (See EzRACH.) BAZLITH (bāz'lith), (Heb. Fº, baſs-Zeeth" asking or nakedness), the head of a family whose children returned with the Nethinim under Zerub- babel (Neh. vii:54), B. C. 536. BAZLUTH (bāzīuth), (Heb. nº, baſs ſooth), another form of Bazlith (Ezr. ii:52). (See BAz- LITH). BDELLIUM (dé1'yūm), (Gen. ii: 12). * After much discussion, it is still impossible to say whether baellium is a mineral, an animal pro- duction (pearl), or a vegetable exudation. It is probably the latter. There is a gum produced in BEACON the East Indies which has the same name and is thought by many to be the same substance. It re- sembles myrrh in color, and is of a bitter taste (Num. xi:7). (See BEDOLACH.) BEACON (bé'k'n), (Heb. Inn, to'ren), a tree strip- ped of its branches and used like a flagstaff (Is. xxx:17, marg., “tree bereft of branches”), hence, a signal, pole, mast (Is. XXX:17; v:26; xi:12; xviii:3; lxii:Io). (See ENSIGN.) º BEALIAH (bé'a-lilah), (Heb. Tºº, beh-a/-yaw", whose Lord is Jehovah). The word contains the names of both Baal and Jah, a Benjamite who went over to David (B. C. IO54), at Ziklag (I Chron. xii:5). BEALOTH (bea-loth), (Heb. nº, beh-aw. Zóżh', probably citizens). An unknown town in the south of Judah (Josh. xv.24). - 2. Some think Aloth of I Kings iv:I6 is Bealoth. BEAM (bëm). 1. Ehreg (Heb. *, a web), a weaver's beam (Judg. xvi; I4). 2. Gabe (Heb. Pº, cutting), a board (1 Kings vi;9). s 3. Mazey-ſtore' (Heb. º, yoke), a weaver's frame, or beam (I Sam. xvii:7; 2 Sam. xxi.; IQ; I Chron. xi:23; xx:5). 4. Offe (Heb. >}), a term of architecture, a threshold step (I Kings vii:6; Ezek. xli:25, A. V. “planks”). 5. Keh-rooth-of/.' (Heb. mnº, hewed), beams (I Kings vi;36; vii:2, 12). 6. Tsayaw (Heb. ***, a rib, joists of a build- ing (I Kings vii 3; “board ” in vi;I 5, 16; “plank” in vi. I5). e 7. Åo-razy' (Heb. Tºp), a crosspiece, cross beam, or rafter (2 Kings vi;2, 5; 2 Chron. iii:7; Cant. I: I7). - 8. Kaw-ſece' (Heb. Pº), a crossbeam, sf/inter, girder (Hab ii:II). 9. Kazy-raw' (Heb. nºn , to fit beams, hence to frame (Neh. iii:3, 6; Ps. civ.3). 10. Dož-os' (Gr. 60kós), a beam, a rafter, a stick of wood for building purposes (Matt. vii:3, sq.; Luke vi:41, 42). In the passages referred to refer- ence is made to a common proverb among the Jews, respecting those who with greater sins re- proved the lesser faults of others, as also in the parallel proverb: “Strain (out) a gnat and swallow a camel ” (Matt. xxiii:24). (See MOTE.) BEANS (bens), (Ezek. Iv:9). The Eastern plant ordinarily thus known (Vicia faba) is quite unlike the garden or field bean of the United States. It is of the same family, but is an erect annual with a stout stem, is one of the commonest field crops of Europe and the Orient, and bears in its pods large, coarse seeds, which are fed to animals and much eaten by the poorer classes. Kidney-beans are now some- times cultivated in Palestine. (See POL.) 13EAR (bâr) (Heb. DF, or Diº, dobe, in Arabic dub, in Persian doć), is noticed in I Sam. xvii:34, 36, 37; 2 Sam. xvii:8; 2 Kings ii:24; Prov. xvii:12; xxviii: I 5; Is. xi:7; Lam. iii: IO; Hos. xiii:8; Amos v: IQ, etc. Although the moderns have denied the existence of bears in Syria and Africa, there cannot be a doubt of the fact, and of a species of the genus 250 BEARD Ursus being meant in the Hebrew texts above noted. David defended his flock from the at- tacks of a bear (I Sam. xvii:34, 35, 36), and bears destroyed the children who mocked the prophet (2 Kings ii:24). The genus Ursus is Syrian Bear. the largest of all the plantigrade carnassials, and with the faculty of subsisting on fruit or honey unites a greater or less propensity, according to the species, to slaughter and animal food. To a sullen and ferocious disposition it joins im- mense strength, little vulnerability, considerable sagacity and the power of clitubing trees. The brown bear, Ursus arctos, is the most sanguinary of the species of the Old Continent, and Ursus Syriacus, or the bear of Palestine, is one very nearly allied to it, differing only in its stature be- ing proportionably lower and longer, the head and tail more prolonged, and the color a dull buff or light bay, often clouded, like the Pyrenaean vari- ety, with darker brown. On the back there is a ridge of long semi-erect hairs running from the neck to the tail. It is yet found in the elevated woody parts of Lebanon. - BEARD (běrd), (Heb. Bl, 2azy-Åazyzz', the beard, as indicating age). . The ancient nations in general agreed with the modern inhabitants of the East in attaching a great value to the possession of a beard. The total absence of it, or a sparse and stinted Sprinkling of hair upon the chin, is thought by the Orien- tals to be as great a deformity to the features as the want of a nose would appear to us; while, on the contrary, a long and bushy beard, flowing down in luxuriant profusion to the breast, is con- sidered not only a most graceful ornament to the person, but as contributing in no small degree to respectability and dignity of character. (1) Badge of Honor. So much, indeed, is the posseggion of this venerable badge assuuiated will notions of honor and importance that it is almost constantly introduced, in the way either of al- lusion or appeal, into the language of familiar and daily life. When a man’s veracity is doubted, ‘Look at this beard,” he will say, ‘the very sight of it may satisfy you as to the truth and probity of its owner.” When censuring a bad or dishon- est action, ‘Shame on your beard' is the ordi- nary style of rebuke. When friends express their mutual good wishes, ‘May God preserve your beard' is the strongest and most ardent form of benediction. When requesting a favor from any one, the most earnest terms of sup- plication are to beg “by his beard, or the life of his beard,’ that he will grant it; and no higher idea of the value of a thing can be given than by saying, ‘It is worth more than one's beard.’ In short, this hairy appendage of the chin is BEARD most highly prized as the attribute of manly dig- nity, and hence the energy of Ezekiel’s language when, describing the severity of the Divine judg- ments upon the Jews, he intimates that, although that people had been as dear to God and as fondly cherished by him as the beard was by them, the razor, i. e., the agents of his angry providence, in righteous retribution for their long-continued sins, would destroy their existence as a nation (Ezek. v:I-5). With this knowledge of the extraordi- nary respect and value which have in all ages been attached to the beard in the East, we are pre- pared to expect that a corresponding care would be taken to preserve and improve its appearance, and, accordingly, to dress and anoint it with oil and perfume was, with the better classes at least, an indispensable part of their daily toilet (Ps. cxxxiii:2). From the history of Mephibosheth it seems probable that the grandees in ancient Palestine “trimmed their beards' with the same fastidious care and by the same elaborate process, while the allowing these to remain in a foul and disheveled state, or to cut them off, was one among the many features of sordid negligence in their per- sonal appearance by which they gave outward indications of deep and overwhelming Sorrow (2 Sam. xix:24; Ezra ix:3; Is. xv.2; Jer. xli:5; Comp. Herodot. ii:36; Suet. Ca/igzela, chap. v). No one was permitted to touch the beard ex- cept in the way of respectful and affectionate salutation, which was done by gently taking hold of its extremity with the right hand and kissing it. But this was allowed only to most intimate friends, such as wives or children. The act itself being an expression of kind and cordial familiar- ity, its performance by Joab shows in a flagrant light the base and unprincipled conduct of that ruthless veteran, when he took Amasa by the beard with his right hand to kiss him (rather it), and then, having assumed this attitude under the mask of the most friendly feelings, Smote his ºpºsing victim under the fifth rib (2 Sam. XX :9). - (2) Deprivation of, a Mark of Servility. To be deprived of a beard was, and still is, in Some places of the East, the badge of servility—a mark of infamy, that degraded a person from the ranks of men to those of slaves and women (Niebuhr, Arabia, ch. vii; Volney, ii, p. 118), while to shave it off voluntarily, even for a time, as the former writer mentions he knew was done by Some in mere wantonness or a drunken fit, frequently sub- jects the offender to so great odium as to exclude him from society. Nay, so great is the disgrace entailed by the appearance of a smooth and naked chin that D’Arvieux describes the case of an individual who, having sustained a dangerous wound in his jaw, preferred hazarding his life rather than allow the surgeon to remove his beard. We can easily conceive how deep and intolerable was the affront which the young and ill-advised king of the Ammonites put upon the ambassadors of David, when, among other acts of insolence, he shaved off one-half of their beards, and sent them home in that grotesque condition, exposed to the derision of their countrymen (2 Sam. x). (3) Among Egyptians. The ancient Egyp- tians, although they shaved their beards, had the singular custom of tying a false beard upon the chin. This was probably by way of compromise between their love of cleanliness and their desire to preserve some trace of the distinguishing sign of manhood. It was made of plaited hair, and had a peculiar form according to the rank of the person by whom they were worn. Private in- 251 Egyptians. BEARI) dividuals had a small beard, scarcely two inches long; that of a king was of considerable length and Square at the bottom, and the figures of gods º j9 * º §§ º^\\ - § \ } [. \\ % ) g %)|| gº º - §)} º Wºº º W 2:3 *... W w ſº 2^{ § §§ %ſ § § | - Sº ) Various Styles of Beards. were distinguished by its turning up at the end (Wilkinson, Anc. Egyptians, iii:362). . From the above facts it is clear that the Israel- ites maintained their beard and the ideas con- nected with it, during their abode among the This is not unimportant as one of the indications which evince that, whatever they learned of good or evil in that country, they pre- Served the appearance and habits of a separate people. The Egyptians, as we have seen, shaved their beards off entirely, so the injunction in Lev. xix:27, against shaving ‘the corners of the beard' must have been leveled against the practices of some other bearded nation. The prohibition is usually understood to apply against rounding the corners of the beard where it joins the hair, and the reason is supposed to have been to counteract a superstition of certain Arabian tribes, who, by shaving off or rounding away the beard where it joined the liai, Uſ Iliu livad, devoted the imselves to a certain deity who held among them the place which Bacchus did among the Greeks (Herodot. iii:8; Comp. Jer. ix:26; xxv :23; xlix:32). The consequence seems to have been altogether to prevent the Jews from shaving off the edges of their beards. The effect of this prohibition in establishing a distinction of the Jews from other nations cannot be understood unless we contem- plate the extravagant diversity in which the beard was and is treated by the nations of the East. Figuratite. As beards were thus esteemed by the Jews, God, by likening his people to the hairs of Ezekiel’s head or beard, hints, that nowever dear they were to Him, He would destroy them in different forms (Ezek. v). When God threat- ens to shave the hair of His people's head and feet, and consume the beard, it imports his easy BEASTS cutting off in vast numbers their principal men and commons, and exposing them to the utmost ignominy for the purging of them from their sinful leprosy (IS. vii:20). BEASTS (běsts). The term is sometimes used by the translators for Heb. "???, be-hay-maw, dumb; at others for Tº, beh-ere', live. In general this word in the Bible, when used in contradistinction to man (PS. xxxvi :6), de- notes a brute creature generally; when in con- tradistinction to creeping things (Lev. xi :2-7; xxvii:26), it has reference to four-footed ani- mals; and when to wild mammalia, as in Gen. i:25, it means domesticated cattle. Tziyim (Is. xiii:2I) denotes wild beasts of the upland wilderness. Ochim, rendered ‘doleful creatures’ and ‘marsh animals,' may, we think with more propriety, be considered as ‘poisonous and offensive reptiles.’ Seirim, shaggy ones, is a general term for apes —not satyrs, a Pagan poetical creation unfit for Scriptural language; it includes Saadim as a spe- cies, and Tannim, monsters of the deep and of the wilderness—boas, Serpents, crocodiles, dolphins, and sharks. (1) Zoology of Scripture. The zoölogy of Scripture may, in a general sense, be said to embrace the whole range of animated nature; but after the first brief notice of the creation of animals recorded in Genesis, it is limited more particularly to the animals found in Egypt, Arabia, Palestine, Syria, and the countries east- ward, in Some cases, to beyond the Euphrates. It comprehends mammalia, birds, reptiles, fishes, and invertebrate animals; but in a work like the Bible, written for a far different purpose, we might naturally expect that only a small part of these would be found described, and that generical indications would more frequently oc- cur than specific characteristics. As the intention of Scripture, in its allusions to animate or in- animate objects, was not scientific description, but the illustration of arguments and precepts by images drawn from objects familiar to those to whom it was addressed, it is not to be ex- pected that zoölogy or botany should be treated systematically, or in terms such as modern science has adopted; yet, where we can now fully ascertain the true meaning of the text, the imagery drawn from natural history is always forcible, correct, and effective, even where it treats the subject under the conditions of the contemporary popular belief; for, had the in- spired writers entered into explanations on mat- ters of science not then commonly understood, the poetical force of the imagery, and conse- quently its intended effect, must necessarily have been greatly diminished ; and, where system is appropriate, we find a classified general distribu- tion of the creation, simple indeed, but sufficiently applicable to all the purposes for which it was introduced. It resembles other parts of the philosophy of the earliest nations, in which the physical distribution of matter, excepting so far as man is concerned, proceeds by triads. Botany is treated under the heads of grass, shrubs, and trees: in animated nature, beginning with the lowest organized in the watery elements, we have first Sheretz, ‘the moving creature that hath life, animalcula, crustacea, insecta, etc.; second, Tan- minim, fishes and amphibia, including the huge tenants of the waters, whether they also frequent the land or not, crocodiles, python serpents, and perhaps even those which are now considered as of a more ancient zoölogy than the present sys- 252 BEASTS tem, the great Saurians of geology; and third, it appears, birds, 'Oph, “flying creatures’ (Gen. i:20); and still advancing (cetaceans, pinnati- peds, whales and Seals being excluded), we have quadrupeds, forming three other divisions or orders: First, cattle, Behemah, embracing the ruminant herbivora, generally gregarious and ca- pable of domesticity; second, wild beasts, Chayah, carnivora, including all beasts of prey; and third, reptiles, Remes, minor quadrupeds, Such as creep by means of many feet, or glide along the surface of the Soil, Serpents, annclides, etc.; finally, we have man, Adam, standing alone in intellectual supremacy. (2) Mosaic Classification. The classification of Moses, as it may be drawn from Deuteronomy, appears to be confined to Vertebrata alone, or animals having a spine and ribs, although the fourth class might include others. Taking man as One, it forms five classes—Ist, Man ; 2d, Beasts; 3d, Birds; 4th, Reptiles; 5th, Fishes. It is the same as that in Leviticus xi, where beasts are further distinguished into those with Solid hoofs, and those with cloven feet. R11t the passage specially refers to animals that might be lawfully eaten because they were clean, and to Others prohibited because they were declared un- clean, although some of them, according to the common belief of the time, might ruminate; for it may be repeated that the Scriptures were not intended to embrace anatomical disquisitions aiming at the advancement of human science, but to convey moral and religious truth, without disturbing the received opinions of the time on questions having little or no relation to their main object. In like manner, fishes and birds are divided into clean and unclean; and, taken al- together, the classification now described forms an excellent series of distinctions, which, even at the present day, and in countries far distant from the scene where it was ordained, still re- mains applicable, with few exceptions; and from its intrinsic propriety will remain in force, not- withstanding our present knowledge of the man- ners and opinions of the East and of Egypt has rendered many of the earlier comments upon it in a great measure useless. Figuratite. 1. Ministers are called beasts (Rev. iv:v : vi), but the word ought in all these passages to be rendered living creatures, as in Ezek. i. - 2. Saints compare themselves to beasts because of their sinful vileness, ignorance, stupidity, un- ruliness, carnality (Prov. xxx :2; Ps. lxxiii:22). 3. Men in general are called beasts for their earthliness, ignorance, unteachableness, conten- tion, hurtfulness to one another (Eccl. iii: 18). 4. The most 11seful and mild animals, as oxen, cows, calves, sheep, lambs, doves, are emblems of the saints; whilst lions, bears, wolves, serpents, are made emblems of the outrageously wicked (Isa. xi :6, 7, 8). 5. The most powerful animals, as eagles, lions, bullocks, he-goats, rams, leviathan, etc., are made emblems of kings and others, who are powerful and wealthy. The subjects of the kings of Assyria, Chaldea and Egypt are parabolically represented as beasts lodged under the shadow of their protection, as animals under a tree (Ezek. xxxi :6; Dan. iv: I4). - 6. Wicked men are called beasts for their un- reasonableness, earthly mindedness, neglect of eternal things, and rage against God and his peo- ple (I Cor. xv.:32; 2 Pet. ii: 12). 7. Beasts of the earth sometimes denote raven- ous beasts (Gen. xv :3). BEATITUDE 8. The Chaldean, Persian, Grecian, Roman and anti-Christian empires are likened to beasts, be- cause by methods cruel and unjust they have been erected and maintained (Dan. vii:II; viii:4; Rev. xii, xiii, xvii, xviii). - 9. The scarlet-colored beast that carries the Antichrist is the bloody empire of Rome, parted among persecuting princes (Rev. xvii:3). 10. The beasts that devour Antichrist's slaugh- tered troops are not only those literally so called, but the Protestants who seize on their spoils (Rev. xix:17, 23). 11. The Hebrews' passage through the Red Sea and wilderness is likened to a beast going down into or along a valley; it was easy and Safe under the protecting influence of God (Is. lxiii:14). (Brown, Bzó. Dzcz.) BEATITUDE (bé-āt'í-tūd). The word ‘beatitude does not occur in the Eng- lish Bible. In Biblical Theology it signifies either (I) the joys of heaven, or (2) one of the declara- tions of blessedness made by Christ as attached to certain virtues, or conditions, or persons. The name is commonly given to the first clauses of our Savior's Sermon on the Mount (Matt. v:3-11). They are as follows: I. Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 2. Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted. 3. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. 4. Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled. 5. Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy. 6. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. 7. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God. 8. Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. The eight beatitudes may be regarded as an analysis of perfect spiritual wellbeing ; and no- where in non-Christian literature shall we find so sublime a summary of the best elements in the felicity attainable by man. They correct all low and carnal views of human happiness. “They do not describe eight different classes of people, but eight different elements of excellence, which may all be combined in one and the same man. Some of them, indeed, are almost certain to be so combined, e. g. being poor in spirit with meekness, and endurance of persecution with mn11rning And perhaps if is not 11nfr11e to say with Ambrose that the four given by St. Luke virtually include the whole eight; but to make each of the four correspond to one of the four cardinal virtues is to force the meaning of one or *-m-º: the other.” (A. Plummer, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) BEBAI (běb'a-i or be'bāi), (Heb. "32, bay-bah'ee, fatherly). 1. The head of one of the families that re- turned from Babylon (B.C. 536) with Zerubbabel (Ezra ii:II; Neh. vii.16). Later twenty-eight more returned (B. C. 459) with Ezra (Ezra viii:II). Of this family four had taken foreign wives (Ezra x:28). They were among those who sealed the covenant (B. C. 4IO) with Nehemiah (Neh. v:15). 2. Father of Zechariah, leader of the twenty- eight men mentioned in 1. (Ezra viii:II). 253 13|ED . 3. One of the chiefs of the people, who entered into Covenant with Nehemiah (Neh. x:15). BECHER (bé'ker), (Heb. Tº, beh-ker, firstborn, youth, according to Simonis, young Camel). 1. Second son of Benjamin (Gen. xlvi.21; I Chron. vii:6); but wanting in I Chron. viii:I, as the text stands (B. C. 1700). He was one of the de- scendants of Rachel who came down to Egypt with Jacob and settled there. Among his descend- ants were Saul and Sheba; the last headed a for- midable rebellion against David (2 Sam. xx). 2, Son of Ephraim (Num. xxvi;35), same as 1. It is likely that either Becher or his descendant and head of the house married an Ephraimitish heiress (I Chron. vii:20, 21), and for this reason was reckoned in that tribe as Jair (I Chron. ii.22), B. C. after 1874. BECHORATH (be-ko"rath), (Heb. Tº beſ-o- rath', firstborn), a son of Aphiah, or Abiah (B. C. 1225); grandson of Becher (I Sam. ix:I). He was an ancestor of Saul. BED (běd). The manner of sleeping in warm Eastern cli- mates is necessarily very different from that which is followed in our colder regions. The present usages appear to be the same as those of the ancient Jews, and sufficiently explain the passages of Scripture which bear on the subject. (1) Bedding. Beds of feathers are altogether unknown, and the Orientals generally lie exceed- ingly hard. Poor people who have no certain home, or when on a journey, or employed at a ~ SS * «.” ~~~ > -º-º: ** * * - *- distance from their dwellings, sleep on mats, or wrapped in their outer garment, which, from its importance in this respect, was forbidden to be retained in pledge over night (D’Arvieux, iii:257; Gen. ix:21, 23; Exod. xxii:27; Deut. xxiv:13). Under peculiar circumstances a stone covered with some folded cloth or piece of dress is often used for a pillow (Gen. xxviii:T I). The more wealthy classes sleep on mattresses stuffed with wool or cotton, which are often no other than a quilt thickly padded, and are used either singly or one or more placed upon each other. A similar quilt of finer materials forms the coverlet in winter, T}ED and in summer a thin blanket suffices, but some- times the convenient outer garment is used for the latter purpose, and was so among the Jews, as we learn from I Sam. xix:13. The difference of use here is, that the poor wrap themselves up in it, and it forms their whole bed, whereas the rich employ it as a covering only. A pillow is placed upor; the mattress, and Over both, in good houses, is laid a sheet. The bolsters are more valuable than the mattresses, both in respect of their cover- ings and material; they are usually stuffed with cotton or other soft substance; but instead of these, skins of goats or sheep appear to have been formerly used by the poorer classes and in the hardier ages. These skins were probably sewed up in the natural shape, like water-skins, and stuffed with chaff or wool (I Sam. xix:13). It has been doubted whether the couches of the Jews for repose and for the use of the sick, called mit-taw' (Heb. "??), a bed as extended (Gen. xlvii: 3I; I Sam. xix:13; 2 Sam. iv:7; 2 Kings i:4); mish- Æawb’ (Heb. Płºń), (Exod. xxi.;18; 2 Sam. xiii:5; Cant. iii:1), or eh'res (Heb. º, (Job vii:13; Cant. i. I6), properly ‘bedstead,' (Comp. Deut. iii:II), were actually bedsteads of different sorts, or simply the standing and fixed divans such as those on which the Western Asiatics commonly make their beds at night. It has been usually thought that the choice must lie between these alternatives, because it has not been understood that in the East there is, in fact, a variety of arrangement in this matter, but we feel satisfied that the different Hebrew words answer to and describe similarly different arrangements, although we may be unable now to assign to the several words their distinctive ap- plications to still subsisting things. (2) Divan. The divan, or dais, is a slightly elevated platform at the upper end and often along the sides of the room. On this are laid the mat- tresses on which the Western Asiatics sit cross- legged in the daytime, with large cushions against the wall to support the back. At night the light bedding is usually laid out upon this divan, and thus beds for many persons are easily formed. The bedding is removed in the morning, and de- posited in recesses in the room, made for the This is a sort of general sleeping-room. purpose. for the males of the family and for guests, none but the master having access to the inner parts of the house, where alone there are proper and distinct bed-chambers. In these the bedding is either laid on the carpeted floor, or placed on a low frame or bedstead. (3) Bedstead. The most common bedstead in Egypt and Arabia is of this shape, framed rudely of palm sticks. It was used in ancient Egypt, and is figured in the mural paintings. In Palestine, Syria and Persia, where the palm tree is not com- mon and where timber is more plentiful, a bed- frame of similar shape is made of boards. This kind of bedstead is also used upon the house-tops during the season in which people sleep there. It is more than likely that Og’s bedstead was of this description (Deut. iii:II). In the times in which he lived the palm tree was more common in Palestine than at present, and the bedsteads in ordinary use were probably formed of palm sticks. They would, therefore, be incapable of Sustaining 254 BEDAN any undue weight without being disjointed and bent awry, and this would dictate the necessity of making that destined to sustain the vast bulk of Og, rather of rods of iron than of the mid- ribs of the palm-fronds. These bedsteads are also of a length seldom more than a few inches beyond the average human stature (commonly 6 feet 3 inches), and hence the propriety with which the length of Og's bedstead is stated, to convey an idea of his stature. It is not necessary to suppose that the bed- steads were all of this sort. There are traces of a kind of portable couch (I Sam. xix:15), which appears to have served as a sofa for sitting on in the daytime (I Sam. xxviii:23; Ezek. xxiii:41; Amos vi;4), and there is now the less reason to doubt that the ancient Hebrews enjoyed this convenience, as we find such couches in use among the neighboring nations, and figured on their 111011t1111entS. ſº º |\ | Nºis × - | i | | Couch-bed with Head Rest. A bed with a tester is mentioned in Judith xvi : 23, which, in connection with other indications, and the frequent mention of rich tapestries hung upon and about a bed for luxuriousness and or- nament, proves that such beds as are still used by royal and distinguished personages were not unknown under the Hebrew monarchy (Comp. Esth. i :6; Prov. vii:I6 seq.; Ezek. xxiii:41). (4) Customs. It is evident that the ancient Jews, like the modern inhabitants of their land, seldom or never changed their dress on going to bed. Most people only divest themselves of their outer garment, and loosen the ligatures of the waist, excepting during the hottest part of the summer, when they sleep almost entirely unclad. BEDAD (bé'dād), (Heb. 732, bed-ad', separation), the father of one of the kings of Edom (Gen. xxxvi;35; I Chron. i:46), B.C. I 500. BEDAN (bé'dan), (Heb. Tº, bed-awn'). In I Sam xii:II, we read that the Lord sent as deliverers of Israel Jerubbaal, Bedan, Jephthah, Samuel. Three of these we know to have been judges Uſ Islatl, but we nowhere find Dcclan among the number. The Targum understands, it of Samson, and so Jerome and the generality of interpreters, but this interpretation goes on the supposition that bedawn should be rendered in Dan, i. e., one in Dan, or of the tribe of Dan, as Samson was. In this sense, as Kimchi Ob- serves, it would have the same force as Ben-Dan, a son of Dan, a Danite. Such an intermixture of proper names and appellatives, however, is very doubtful, and it is to be noted that Bedan is men- tioned before Jephthah, whereas Samson was after him. The Septuagint, Syriac and Arabic have Barak, which many think the preferable reading (Comp. Heb. xi :32). A man of the name of Bedan occurs, however, among the posterity of Manasseh (I Chron. vii:17), and Junius, fol- lowed by some others, thinks that the judge Jair BEDCHAMBER is meant, and that he is here called Bedan to dis- tinguish him from the more ancient Jair, the Son of Manasseh. The order in which the judges are here named is not at variance with this view (Num. xxxii:41; Judg. x:3, 4); but surely, if Jair had been really intended, he might have been called by that name without any danger of his being, in this text (where he is called a deliverer of Israel, and placed among the judges), con- founded with the more ancient Jair. BEDCHAMBER (béd'cham'bër), (Heb. Fºl Tſ, Ahad-ar' ham-mee-toth', room of beds, 2 Kings xi.2; 2 Chron. xxii:11; PPºp TT, Ahad-ar' mish- Æawb', sleeping room, Exod. viii:3; 2 Sam. iv:7; 2 Kings vi.12). The “bedchamber” in the temple where Joash was hidden was probably a store chamber for keeping beds (2 Kings xi:2; 2 Chron. xxii:11). The position of the bedchamber in the most remote and secret parts of the palace seems marked in the passages Exod. viii:3; 2 Kings vi; I2 (Mc. and Str. Biö. Cyc.). BEDEIAH (be-dé'yá), (Heb. nº. bay-de-yazy", servant of Jehovah), one of the family of Bani who had married a strange wife (Ezra X:35), B.C. 458. BEDOLACH (béd'o-lāk), (Heb. 7272, be-do- Zach'). • This word occurs but twice in the Scriptures— in Gen. ii:I2, as a product of the land of Havilah, and Num. xi :7, where the manna is likened to it. It has been much disputed among critics, both ancient and modern. In the Septuagint it is con- sidered as a precious stone, and translated (Gen. ii: 12) by divěpaš, a dark red stone, carbuncle, and (Num. xi:7) by Kpiſota)\\os, crysła/, while Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion and the Vulgate render it baſe//ium, a transparent aromatic gum from a tree growing in Arabia. Of this opinion also is JO- sephus, Antig. iii:I, 6, where he describes the manna as szzzzz/ar to the aromatic baſe//iu//z (Num. xi:7). The Jewish Rabbins, however, followed by a iost of their Arabian translators, and to whom Bochart (Hiero2, iii, p. 593, sq.) and Gesenius (7%esaur. i. 181), accede, translate bedo/ach by Żear/, and consider Æavilah as the part of Arabia near Catipha and Bahrein on the Persian Gulf, where the pearls are found. BEE (bé), (Heb. Tººl, deb-o-raw", orderly, occurs in Deut. i:44; Judg. xiv:8; Ps. cxviii:12; Is. vii:18). This insect was unclean by the law (Lev. xi:23). It belongs to the family affidae, order Aymenoffera, species afts mellifica, commonly called the honey-bee, because this species has often yielded honey to man. The bee is one of the most generally diffused creatures on the globe, being found in every region. Its instincts, its industry and the valuable product of its labors have obtained for it universal attention from the remotest times. No nation upon earth has had so many historians as this insect. The naturalist, agriculturist and politician have been led by a regard to science or interest to study its habits. . - In proceeding to notice the principal passages of Scripture in which the bee is mentioned, we first pause at Deut. i :44, where Moses alludes to the irresistible vengeance with which bees pursue their enemies: ‘The Amorites came out against you and chased you as bees do, and destroyed you in Seir unto Hormah.” The powerlessness of man under the united attacks of these insects is well attested. Even in this country the stings 255 BEELZEBUB of two exasperated hives have been known to kill a horse in a few minutes. * The reference to the bee contained in Judg. xiv:8 has attracted the notice of most readers. It is related in the 5th and 6th verses that Sam- son, aided by supernatural strength, rent a young lion, that warred against him, as he would have rent a kid, and that “after a time,’ as he returned to take his wife, he turned aside to see the carcass of the lion, “and, behold, there was a Swarm of bees and honey in the carcass of the lion.’ It has been hastily concluded that this narrative favors the mistaken notion of the ancients, that bees might be engendered in the dead bodies of animals. The Syriac version translates ‘the bony carcass.’ The learned Bochart remarks that the Hebrew phrase, “after a time,’ sometimes signifies a whole year. The circumstance that ‘honey' was found in the carcass, as well as bees, shows that sufficient time had elapsed since their possession of it for all the flesh to be removed. Nor is such an abode for bees—probably in the skull or thorax —more unsuitable than a hollow in a rock, or in a tree, or in the ground, in which we know they often reside. The phrase in Ps. cxviii: 12, “They compassed me about like bees,’ will be readily understood by those who know the manner in which bees attack the object of their fury. The only remaining passage has been strangely misunderstood (IS. vii:18): “The Lord shall hiss for the fly that is in the uttermost parts of . the river of Egypt, and for the bee that is in the land of Assyria.’ Here the fly and the bee are no doubt the personifications of those inveterate enemies of Israel, the Egyptians and Assyrians, whom the Lord threatened to excite against his disobedient people. But the hissing for them has been interpreted, even by modern writers of eminence, as involving ‘an allusion to the prac- tice of calling out the bees from their hives, by a hissing or whistling sound, to their labor in the fields, and summoning them to return when the heavens begin to lower, or the shadows of evening to fall” (Dr. Harris’ Natural History of the Bible, London, 1825). No one has offered any proof of the existence of such a custom, and the idea will itself seem sufficiently strange to all who are acquainted with the habits of bees. The true reference is, no doubt, to the custom of the people of the East, and even of many parts of Europe, of calling the attention of any one in the street, etc., by a significant hiss, or rather hist, as Bishop Lowth translates the word both here and in Is. v :26, but which is generally done in this country by a short significant hem 1 or other exclamation. (For figurative allusions and moral lessons see Ezek. iii:3; Ps. xix : Io; Prov. xvi :24.) BEEF (běf). See FOOD. \ , , , , BEELIADA (bě'e-li'a-dá), (Heb. *****, beh-e/. yazey-dazzy', the lord knows, or known by Baal), one of David's sons, born in Jerusalem (I Chron. xiv:7). In 2 Samuel the name is Eliada, AE taking the place of Bee (B. C. IOA5). BEELZEBUB (be-él'ze-büb), (Gr. Beex{sgow), beh- e/-geb-oo/'), a heathen deity, believed to be the prince of evil spirits (Matt. x:25; xii:24, 27; Mark iii.22; Luke xi:15, sq.). The name properly should be Beelzebul in all the N. T. passages. There is no doubt that the reading Beelzebul is the one which has the support of almost every critical authority; and the Beelzebub of the Peshito (if indeed it is not a corruption, as Michaelis thinks), and of the Vulgate, and of some modern versions, has probably been accommodated to the name of the Philistine god Baalaebub. 1315 ER By some Beelzebul is thought to mean $2. bye, the dung-god, an expression intended to designate with loathing the prince of all moral impurity. It is supposed, at the same time, that the name Beelzebub, the Philistine god of flies, was changed to Beelzeóze/ (“god of dung”), and º II] a jocular way as a name of the devil. Others pre- fer to derive the word from $º bye, ba/#' al-ze-boo", the Zord of the dweſ/ing in which evil spirits dwell. BEER. (bé'er), (Heb. -82. ôe-ayr', a well), a lo- cal proper name, denoting, whether by itself or in composition, the presence of a well of water. There were two places so called. 1. A place in the land of Moab, which was one of the encampments of the Israelites (Num. xxi :16), beyond the Arnon, and so called because of the “well” dug by the princes and nobles of the people. This is probably the Beer-Elim (“well of heroes”) of Is. xv :8. 2. A town in the tribe of Judah. It is men- tioned only once in Scripture (Judg. ix:21) as the place to which Jotham fled. It is supposed to be the modern Bireh, a large village situated on the ridge, running from east to west, which bounds the northern prospect, as beheld from Jerusalem and its vicinity, and may be seen from a great distance north and south. It is now a large vil- lage, with a population of 700 Moslems. The houses are low, and many of them half under- ground. Many large stones and various substruc- tions evince the antiquity of the site; and there are remains of a fine old church of the time of the Crusades. BEERA (be-é'rā or be'er-á), (Heb. sis, ôe-ay- razy", a well, or else expounder), son of Zophah, of the tribe of Asher (1 Chron. vii:37), B. C. 1570. BEERAH (be-é'rah), (Heb. "Sº, be-ay-raw', a well, or expounder), prince of the Reubenites, car- ried away (B. C. 7440) by Tiglath-pileser (I Chron. v:6). BEER-ELIM (be'er-slim), (Heb. Fºs SP, be. ayr' ay-Zeezzz', well of heroes, Isaiah xv.:8), the zwell of the Žºržnces, probably the same with that men- tioned in Num. xxi. I6, 18. BEERI (be-é'ri), (Heb. "Tºº, be-ay-ree', of a fountain, illustrious). tº 1. Father of Judith, wife of Esau (Gen. xxvi;34), B. C. 1963. Judith is the same as Aholibamah (Gen. xxxvi;2) in all probability. This would make Beeri and Anak the same person. º 2. Father of the prophet Hosea (Hos. i:1), B. C. 8OO. BEER-LAHAI-ROI (be'er-la-hăi'roi), Heb. "&" -n}. TSF, he-ayr' Zakh-ah'ee ro-ee', the well of him that liveth and seeth me, or the well of the vision of life), a well between Kadesh and Shur, where the angel of God appeared to Hagar (Gen. xvi; I4). Here Isaac dwelt before and after the death of his father (Gen. xxiv:62; xxv. II). BEEROTH (be-é'roth), (Heb. "SP, be-ay-roth, wells). 1. The plural of Beer, and by many taken for the same place. Dr. Robinson thinks that if they were different the Bireh mentioned in the preced- ing article represents Beeroth rather than Beer. Beeroth is mentioned as a city of the Gibeonites (Josh. ix:17). It was one of the four cities of the Hivites and was reckoned in the tribe of Benja- min (Josh. xviii.25; 2 Sam. iv.2; Ezra ii.25). Euse- bius distinguishes it from Beer, and assigns it a 256 IBEERSHEBA position coincident, with that now occupied by Bireh, i. e., seven miles (in fact, rather more) north of Jerusalem. 2. The wells of the tribe of Bene-jaakan, a halting-place in the desert for the Israelites (Deut. x:6). The name is Bene-jaakan in Num. xxxiii:32. BEEROTHITE (be-à'roth-ite), (Heb. "YN2, be- ay-roth-ee", belonging to Beeroth). See BEEROTH. BEERSHEBA (bé'er-shë'bá), (Heb. 22% TNº, be- ayr-shek'bah, well of the oath), a place in the Southernmost part of Canaan, celebrated for the Sojourn of the patriarchs. It took its name from the well which was dug there by Abraham, and the oath which confirmed his treaty, with Abimelech (Gen. xxi:31). It Seems to have been a favorite station of that patriarch, and here he planted one of those 'groves' which formed the temples of those re- mote times (Gen. xxi :33). A town of some consequence afterwards arose on the spot, and retained the same name. It was first assigned to the tribe of Judah (Josh. xv.:28), and afterwards transferred to Simeon (Josh. xix:2), but was still popularly ascribed to Judah (2 Sam. xxiv: 7). As it was the southernmost city of the land, its name is of frequent occurrence, being pro- verbially used in describing the extent of the country, in the phrase ‘from Dan (in the north) to Beersheba' (in the south), and reversely, ‘from Beersheba unto Dan' (Judg. xx:i; 2 Sam. xvii: II ; I Chron. xxi:2; 2 Chron. xxx:5). When the land was divided into two kingdoms, the extent of that of Judah was in like manner de- Scribed by the phrase ‘from Beersheba to Mount Ephraim' (2 Chron. xix:4). It was at Beer- Sheba that Samuel established his sons as judges for the Southernmost districts (1 Sam. viii:2); it was from thence that Elijah wandered out into the Southern desert (I Kings xix:3); here was one of the chief seats of idolatrous worship in the time of Uzziah (Amos v :5; viii:14); and to this place, among others, the Jews returned after the Captivity (Neh. xi :27, 30). This is the last time its name occurs in the Old Testament. In the New Testament it is not once mentioned, and Seems to have been forgotten till the fourteenth century. In later years the site was visited by Dr. Rob- inson. Here, on the borders of Palestine, he found the Wady es-Leba, a wide watercourse or bed of a torrent, running W.S.W., upon whose northern side, close upon the bank, are two deep wells, still called Bir-es-Leba, the ancient Beer- sheba. These wells are fifty-five rods apart. They are circular, and stoned up very neatly with masonry, apparently very ancient. The largest of them is 12% feet in diameter, and 44% feet deep to the strface of the water, sixteen of which, at the bottom, are excavated in the solid rock. The other well is five feet in diameter by twelve feet deep. The water in both is pure and sweet, and in great abundance. Both wells are sur- rounded with drinking troughs of stone for camels and flocks, such as were doubtless used of old by the flocks which were fed on the ad- jacent hills. No ruins were at first visible; but, on examination, foundations of former dwellings were traced, dispersed loosely over the low hills, to the north of the wells, and in the hollows between. They seem to have been built chiefly of round stones, although some of the stones are squared and some hewn, suggesting the idea of a small straggling city. The site of the wells is nearly midway between the southern end of the Dead Sea and the Mediterranean at Raphaea, \ BEESHTERAH 257 or twenty-seven miles southeast from Gaza, and about the same distance south by west from Hebron. e BEESHTERAH (be-èsh'te-rah), (Heb. "Yº, beh-es/*-ter-azy", with Ashtoreth), a city, belonging to the half-tribe of Manasseh, beyond Jordan, which was given to the Levites (Josh. xxi.27). In the parallel list (I Chron. vi;71) Ashtaroth is given; and Beeshterah is only a contracted form of Beth- Ashtaroth, the “temple of Ashtoreth.” BEETLE (bé't'l). Lev. xi:21, 22. Beetles have not “legs above their feet to leap withal upon the earth,” neither are they ever eaten by man. From the connection the word probably indicates an insect of the Locust family (which see). The Egyptians worshiped the beetle (scarabaeus) as a symbol of fertility and immortality. (See CHAR JOL). BEEVES (běvz), (Heb. Tº, bazy' Kazvr'; in Ara- hiº, º ºſºtrº), cattle, liu ls, appliualle LU all Ruº minantia, the camels alone excepted; but more par- firm larly to the Bovidae and the genera of the larger antelopes. Ox or beeve, aluph, the most important of all clean beasts (Ps. viii:7; cxliv:14; Jer. xi:19). Bull, Shor, Chaldee, talez, Arabic, al-Zater, Latin, tale- rus, Celtic, for. Young bull, Žhar, Belgic, veir (Job xxi. Io; I Sam. vi;7, Io; Ps. lxix:31). Heifer, Ahara/h. Calf, ege/; Arabic, Zag/, but theo, al- though the hunched Ox Occurs on Egyptian monu- ments, we take to refer to an oryx, as well as Bećer-e/-wash, unless it be the Antilope defassa of Wilkinson, a species not yet scientifically de- scribed. Ye shall offer at your own will a male without blemish, of the beezes, of the sheep, etc. (Lev. xxii: 19). Beeves is the genuine plural of beef, and means the living animals. We find the same term in the form beefs in Shakespeare: “As flesh of mut- ton, Öeefs or goats.” - BEFORE (bé-for'). In the Scripture this word is used both as a preposition and an adverb. It applies both to place and time, and intimates preference. 1. Place. In view, free to one's choice (Gen. xx : I5). As in a posture of humiliation (Rev. iii:9). In sight or presence of (Gen. xliii:14). In advance of (Josh. viii:Io). 2. Time. Previously; sooner than (Is. xliii: 13; John x:8). 3. Preference. i:I5, 27). 4. In one solitary passage, owing to the posi- tion of Canaan, relative to Syria, it signifies “on the east,” as behind implies the west (Is. ix:I2). To be “before” God is to enjoy his favor, and the smiles of his providence (Ps. xxxi :22). DIG (Lég), the Llanslation Uſ IIeb. *T2, buw- Åash', beseech (Ps. xxxvii:25); Sº, shaw-a/ (Ps. cix: Io; Prov. xx:4); Gr. Štrautéal, eff-a/hee-teh'o, to ask for (Luke xvi;3); trpoa attéo, fros-ahee-teh'o (Mark x:46; Luke xviii:35; John ix:8). BEGGAR (bég'gér), Heb. mºs, eff-yone', desti- tute, I Sam. ii:8; Gr. Trøxós, pto-khos', Luke xvi; 20, 22; Gal. iv:9; elsewhere poor). A beggar who regularly solicited alms publicly or promiscuously was unknown to the Mosaic legislation. (See ALMS.) BEHEADING (bé-héd'Ing), (Heb. Tº, ar-aph", to cause to drop, break down). See PUNISHMENTs. BEHEMOTH (be-hé'môth), (Heb. nº, be-hay- zºohf.h", Job xl: I 5; in Coptic, according to Jablon- Rather than (2 Sam. vi.21; John BEHEMOTH ski, Pehemont), is regarded as the plural of behe- znah, but commentators are by no means agreed . as to its true meaning. A number of learned men, with Bochart and Calmet at their head, understand the word in the singular number as a specific name, denoting -ºš ā- Behemoth. the hippopotamus, seeking by somewhat forced interpretations of the beautiful poetical allusions in Job x1 : 15–24, to prove the exactness of the description when compared with the species. In some respects, however, it is more applicable to the elephant, while in others it is equally so to both animals. Hence the term behemoth, taken intensively (for in some places it is admitted to designate cattle in general), may be assumed to be a poetical personification of the great Pachy- dermata, or even Herbivora, wherein the idea of hippopotamus is predominant. This view ac- counts for the ascription to it of characters not truly applicable to one species; for instance, the tail is likened to a cedar, which is only admissi- ble in the case of the elephant; again, ‘the moun- tains bring him forth food;’ ‘he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan,’ a river which elephant: alone could reach ; his nose pierceth through snares,’ certainly more indicative of that animal’s proboscis with its extraordinary delicacy of scent and touch, ever cautiously applied, than of the obtuse perceptions of the river horse. Finally, the elephant is far more dangerous as an enemy than the hippopotamus, which numerous pic- torial sculptures on the monuments of Egypt represent as fearlessly speared by a single hunter standing on his float of log and reeds. Yet al- though the clephant is Scarcely luss ſuild uſ walel, the description referring to manners, such as lyr ing under the shade of willows, among reeds, in fens, etc., is more directly characteristic of the hippopotamus. The book of Job appears, from many internal indications, to have been written in Asia, and is full of knowledge, although that knowledge is not expressed according to the pre- cise technicalities of modern science; it offers pictures in magnificent outline, without conde- scending to minute and labored details. Con- sidered in this light, the expression in Ps. 1: Io, ‘For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle (behemoth) upon a thousand hills,’ ac- quires a grandeur and force far surpassing those furnished by the mere idea of cattle of various kinds. If, then, we take this plural noun in the sense here briefly indicated, we may, in like man- 17 BEKAH ner, consider the leviathan, its counterpart, a similarly generalized term, with the idea of crocodile most prominent; and as this name in- dicates a twisting animal, and, as appears from various texts, evidently includes the great pythons, cetacea, and sharks of the surrounding seas and deserts, it convoys a more sublimc con- ception than if limited to the crocodile, an animal familiar to every Egyptian, and well known even in Palestine. BEKAH (bé'kah), (Heb. PP3, 3eh-Åah, cleft), half a shekel. See WEIGHTS AND MEASURFs. BEL (bél), (Heb. $2. baſe, contracted from º, Öe-e/", the Aramaic form of ºrs, 6a-a/'), is the name under which the national god of the Babylonians is cursorily mentioned in Is. xlvi. 1; Jer. 1:2; li:44. The Only passages in the Apocrypha which contain any, further notice of this deity are Bar. vi :40, and the apocryphal addition to the book of Daniel, in the Septuagint, xiv:1, sq., where we read of meat and drink being daily offered to him, according to a usage occurring in classical idolatry. A particular account of the pyramidal temple of Bel, at Babylon, is given by Herodotus, i :181- 183. It is there also stated that the sacrifices of this god consisted of adult cattle, probata, of their young, when sucking (which last class were the only victims offered up on the golden altar), and of incense. The question whether the sun or the planet Jupiter was the power of nature adored under the name of Bel is discussed under the article BAAL (which see). From an Engraving on a Babylonian Cylinder, Representing the Sun God and One of His Priests. BEL and DRAGON (bél and drág'àn). See DANIEL, APOCRYPHAL ADDITIONS TO. BELA (bela), (Heb. ???, behah, swallowed, or destruction). 1. (See ZOAR; Gen. xiv:2, 8). 2. Son of Beor, who reigned over Edorn (B. C. 1618), in the city Dinhabah, eight generations before Saul (Gen. xxxvi;32, 33; I Chron. i.43). 3. Son of Azaz, a Reubenite (I Chron. V:8). 4. Eldest son of Benjamin (Gen. xlvi.21; Num. xxvi;38; 1 Chron. vii:6; viii: 1), and head of the family of Belaites, of whom Ehud is the most remarkable (B.C. 17OO). BELAH (bé-lā), a less correct mode of Angliciz- ing (Gen. xlvi.21) the name Bela, the son of Ben- jamin. (See BELA 4). BELAITE (belaite), (Heb. ºº, with the art, Aa-ba/-ee", Num. xxvi;38). BELIAL (bºia), (Heb. ***, he eyahal, worthlessness, wickedness; Gr. BeNta)\, beſ-ee'al). This should not be regarded as a proper name. It is generally associated with the words “man,” 258 BELL y “son,” “daughter” or “children.” Hence “son” or “man” of Belial simply means “a worthless person.” In the New Testament the form of the word is Beliar (not Belial, as given in the com- mon version). (See Analytical Concordance, Alex. Young.) A man or son of Belial, therefore, is a wicked, worthless man; one resolved to endure no sub- jection; a rebel; a disobedient, uncontrollable fel- low. The inhabitants of Gibeah, who abused the Levite's wife, have the name “men of Belial” given to them (Judg. xix:22). Hophni and Phineas, the high priest Eli's sons, are likewise called “sons of Belial,” because of their crimes and their unbecoming conduct in the temple of the Lord. In later writings, Belial is put for the power or lord of evil, i. e., for Satan. Paul says (2 Cor. vi :15) : “What concord hath Christ with Belial P” Whence it is inferred that in his time the Jews, by Belial, understood Satan, as the patron and epitome of licentiousness. BELIEF (bé-lèſ'), (Heb. Tº, aw-man', to be firm; Gr. trāoris, Zºis' tis, trust), the mental assent to a statement, proposition, or existing condition of things. - Belief, trust and faith have a religious applica- tion. Belief is simply an act of the understand- ing; trust and faith are active moving principles of the mind. Belief does not extend beyond an assent of the mind to any given proposition; trust and faith impel to action. Belief is to trust and faith as cause to effect; there may be belief without either trust or faith; but there can be no trust or faith without belief; we believe that there is a God, who is the creator and preserver of all his creatures; we therefore trust in him for his protection of ourselves; we believe that Jesus Christ died for the sins of men; we have there- fore faith in his redeeming grace to save us from our sins. Belief is common to all religions; trust is peculiar to the believers in Divine revelation; faith is employed by distinction for the Christian faith. Belief is purely speculative, and trust and faith are operative; the former operates on the mind: the latter on the outward conduct. Trust in God serves to dispel all anxious concern about the future. Theorists substitute belief for faith; enthusiasts mistake passion for faith. True faith must be grounded on a right belief, and accompa- nied with a right practice (Crabb, Synonyms). BELIEVERS (bé-lèv'ěrz), (Gr. Two rot, fºis-toy', Lat. ſide/es). A term applied to converts (Acts v : 14; 1 Tim. iv :12); in the early church baptized laymen, in distinction from the clergy on the one hand, and catechumens, who were preparing for baptism. They had special privileges, titles and honors, de- nied the catechumen, being called “the illumi- nated,” “the initiated,” “the perfect,” “the favor- ites of heaven.” They only were allowed to par- take of the Lord's Supper, join in all the prayers of the church, and listen to all discourses deliv- ered in the church, the catechumens having been previously dismissed. BELL (bél), (Heb. liº, fah-amº-one', something struck, Exod. xxviii:33, 34; xxxix:25, 26; nºsº, meſs-iſ-law', tinkling, Zech. xiv:2O). 1. The first bells known in history are those small golden bells which were attached to the lower part of the blue robe (the robe of the ephod) which formed part of the dress of the high priest in his sacerdotal ministrations (Exod. xxviii:33, 34; Comp. Ecclus. xlv. :II). They were there placed alternately with the pomegranate- shaped knobs, one of these being between every BELLOWS two of the bells. The number of these bells is not mentioned in Scripture, but tradition states that there were sixty-six (Clem. Alex. Stromata, p. 563). We need not seek any other reason for this rather singular use of bells than that which is assigned : ‘His sound shall be heard when he goeth into the holy place before the Lord, and when he cometh out, that he die not’ (Exod. xxviii:35), by which we may understand that the sound of the bells manifested that he was prop- erly arrayed in the robes of ceremony which he was required to wear when he entered the pres- ence-chamber of the Great King; and that as no minister can enter the presence of an earthly potentate abruptly and unannounced, so he (whom no human being could introduce) was to have his entrance harbingered by the sound of the bells he wore. This sound, heard outside, also notified to the people the time in which he was engaged in his sacred ministrations, and during which they remained in prayer (Luke i:9, Io). 2. “Bells of the Horses’ are mentioned in Zech. xiv:2O, which were probably such as were attached to the bridles or foreheads, or to belts around the necks of horses trained for war, that they might thereby be accustomed to noise and tumult, and not by their alarm expose the riders to danger in actual warfare. Hence a person who had not been tried or trained up to anything was by the Greeks called ākwóðvøros, “one not used to the noise of a bell,” by a metaphor taken from horses. The mules employed in the funeral pomp of Alexander had at each jaw a golden bell. We incline to think, however, that the use of horse- bells with which the Jews were most familiar, and which the prophet had in view, was that which at present exists in the East, and in other countries where carriage by pack-horses and mules is common. The laden animals, being with- out riders, have bells hung from their necks, that they may be kept together in traversing by night the open plains and deserts by paths and roads unconfined by fences or boundaries; that they may be cheered by the sound of the bells, and that if any horse strays, its place may be known by the sound of its bell, while the general sound from the caravan enables the traveler, who has strayed or lingered, to find and regain his party, even in the night. That the same motto, ‘Holiness to the Lord,’ which was upon the mitre of the high priest, should, in the happy days foretold by the prophet, be inscribed even upon the bells of the horses, manifestly signifies that all things, from the high- est to the lowest, should in those days be sanctified to God. It is remarkable that there is no appearance of bells of any kind in the Egyptian monuments. BELLOWS (béI'lús), (Heb. Tºº, maž-ſoo'akh, blower). This word occurs only in Jer. vi.29, and is there employed with reference to the casting of metal. As fires in the East are always of wood or charcoal, a sufficient heat for ordinary pur- poses is soon raised by the help of fans, and the use of bellows is confined to the workers in metal. Such was the case anciently, and in the mural paintings of Egypt we observe no bellows but such as are used for the forge or furnace. They occur as early as the time of Moses, being represented in a tomb at Thebes which bears the name of Thothmes III. They consisted of a leathern bag, secured and fitted into a frame, from which a long pipe extended for carrying the wind to the fire. They were worked by the feet, the operator standing upon them with One under 259 BELSHAZZAR each foot and pressing them alternately, while he pulled up each exhausted skin with a string he held in his hand. In one instance it is observed from the painting that when the man left the bellows they were raised as if filled with air, and this would imply a knowledge of the valve. BELLY (béI'ly), (Heb. usually tº, beh'ien, hol- low; Gr. Koºla, Aoy-lee'ah, also Heb. Pº, may- eem'; Gr. Yaarijp, gas-fare', especially the bowels). Among the Hebrews and most ancient nations the belly was regarded as the seat of the carnal affections, as being, according to their notions, that which first partakes of sensual pleasures (Phil. iii:9; Rom. xvi :19). Figuratite. 1. The heart or soul, which is deep, hidden, and hard to be searched (Prov. xviii:8; xx:30 and xxvi;22). 2. Men's beſ/ies fºre/are deceit, when their hearts devise how to speak or act it (Job xv.: 5). 3 3. Embittering of the belly signifies all the train of evils which may come upon a man (Jer. iv :19; ix:I5; Comp. Num. xviii:27). 4. The bragen belly and thighs of Nebuchad- nezzar's visionary image signified the firmly erected and bulky empire of the brass-armed Greeks, under Alexander, quickly filled with dis- order, and after several contentions formed into the two powerful kingdoms of Egypt on the south and Syria on the north (Dan. ii:32 and xi). The inhabitants of Crete are called slow bellies, for their gluttony, drunkenness, sloth and idleness (Tit. i :12). Jonah calls the belly of the whale the belly of hell, because of his great darkness, perplexity and disquiet of mind therein (John ii:2). N BELMA or BELMION (běl'ma, bé1'mon), a place near the valley of Esdraelon (Judith vii:3). BELMAIM (bél'ma-im), the waters of Bel, or Belus (Judith vii:3). BELMEN (bé1'mén), (Gr. 8éNuev, Judith iv:4), the same, probably, as Beel-maim; and, perhaps, Abel-main (Abel-mehira, Syriac), of Naphtali (2 Chron. xvi;4). So that Belmen, Belma, Belmaîm, and Abel-mehola may be the same place (Judith vii:3). f BELOMANCY (bél'ö-mân-sy). See DIVINA- TION. - - * BELSHAzzAR (bå-shazzar), (Heb. **** baſe-shags-tsar'), is the name given in the book of Daniel to the last king of the Chaldees, under whom Babylon was taken by the Medes and Per- Sla Il S. Herodotus calls this king, and also his father, Labynetus, which is undoubtedly a corruption of Nabonidus, the name by which he was known to Berosus, in Joseph. Contr. Apion. i:20. Yet in Joseph. (Antiq. x. II, 2) it is stated that Baltasar was called Naboandel by the Babylonians. His father, Nabonidus, had entrusted the care of the army to Belshazzar, and the Bible informs us that he was slain on the night of the capture of Babylon. It makes no mention of Nabonidus, Now, it is evident that the father, Nabonidus, and the son, Belshazzar, became confused in the minds of the writers of the histories. It was natural that foreigners should consider Belshazzar to be king, because he was the master of the army. Winer conjectures that in the name Belshazzar the element shaggar means ‘the principle of fire.’ Nothing has been really known of this king until recent discoveries, except from the book of Daniel, the authenticity and credibility of which will be treated under the article DANIEL. That BELSHAZZAR AND THE MONUMENTS 260 BELSHAZZAR AND THE MONUMENTS which is told of Nabonidus by the Babylonian in- Scriptions does not agree with the Scriptural ac- COL111t. According to these annals, there was a revolt among the troops of Nabonidus, and he fled, hence Sippara was easily taken. From which it will be seen that the conquest of Babylon was brought about by other things than mere force of arms. Berosus says that, losing a pitched battle against Cyrus in the Open plain, Nabonidus was shut up in the city Borsippa on the Euphrates, below Babylon, and soon forced to surrender his person. Cyrus received him kindly, sent him into Caramania, and settled him on an estate, where he ended his life peaceably. No hypothesis will reconcile this account with the other, since it is certain that Nabonidus is the last king in the One narrative, as Belshazzar in the other. There can be little doubt that the two personages were confounded because Belshazzar commanded the army. (See BELSHAZZAR AND THE MONU- MENTS.) BELSHAZZAR AND THE MONUMENTS. It is interesting to see how through the dis- covery of one ancient record after another, a name which seemed at first but a shadow, slowly become clothed with flesh and made real. In the case of Belshazzar, whom the Book of Daniel describes as the last king of Babylonia, this process has been going on since 1854, when Raw- linson first announced the discovery of Belshaz- zar's name on a Babylonian monument; and very late discoveries serve to make his person- ality more real to us. The “critics” claimed for a long time that the name was purely mythical, and the story of his death impossible. The situation was made still more difficult by the fact that all Greek his– torians agreed with Berosus that the last king of Babylon was Nabonidus, and that he was not in Babylon at the time of its capture by Cyrus, but in Borsippa a few miles away—that he was captured by the Persian king, was kindly treated and was made a satrap of Caramania. Rawlinson's important discovery was an his- torical inscription of Nabonidus, in which the following passage occurs: “And as to Belshazzar, the exalted son, the offspring of my body, do thou (the moon god Sin) place the adoration of thy great deity in his heart; may he not give way to sin; may he be satisfied by life’s abun- dance.” Thus it was fully demonstrated that Belshaz- zar was an historical and not a fictitious char- acter, and that the writer of the Book of Daniel had access to trustworthy sources of informa- livil whiuli were ulıklıUw II Lu Ilie G1 cek lis- torians. The further conclusion seemed to be that the son had a certain right in the kingdom and was probably associated with his father in government as Nebuchadnezzar had been as- sociated with his father, Nabopolasser. This being true, the promise made to Daniel that he should be “the third ruler in the kingdom” would be fully explained by the fact that Belshazzar was the second ruler. - The next discovery was that of two historical texts of Cyrus, which were found in 1880, but not correctly translated and fully published until Some time afterward. In these two inscriptions Cyrus mentions several times the son of Nabo- nidus, and though he does not mention his name, he tells us that when he invaded the country and attacked Babylon, the king's son was at first in the field with the army in 649 B. C.; also that this son held a period of mourning at Sippara on the occasion of his grandmother's death. The war continued some ten years, and in the last year Nabonidus took the field and fought a disastrous battle with Cyrus, while we may sup- pose that the king's Son was at the capital. On the capture of the town, the crown prince lost his life, although Babylon was taken “without fighting,” while Nabonidus was taken prisoner. These inscriptions of Cyrus are of great value for historical purposes, and they show that Nabonidus had a son who was not only crown prince, but was entrusted with important duties such as would belong to the second in command, but they do not mention the name of the son; we find, however, from the inscription of Nabonidus himself, that the son's name was Belshazzar. Additional facts concerning him are found in the contract tablets where his name frequently occurs, and hundreds and thousands of these tablets have recently been acquired by the British Museum and other institutions. In- deed, the Metropolitan Museum of New York has several hundred of them, many of which were brought to this country by myself; they are now being copied and published by Mr. Moldenke. Many more are in Philadelphia, having becn re- covered by the excavations which were conducted by the University of Pennsylvania, under the di- rection of Dr. John P. Peters, and are now being copied and published by Professor Hilprecht. One of these documents in the British Museum, which has been translated by Professor Sayce, records the sale through his steward of Bel- shazzar’s wool crop : “Twenty manehs of silver ($900) is the price of wool, the property of Bel- shazzar, the son of the king, which, by the hands of Nebo-tsabit, the steward of the house of Bcl- shazzar, the son of the king, and the secretaries of the son of the king, has been handed over to Nadin-Merodach, the son of Basa, the son of Nur-Sin, in the month of Adar. The silver, namely, twenty manehs, he shall give The house of a certain Persian, and all the prop- erty of Nadin-Merodach in town and country shall be the security of Belshazzar, the son of the king, until Belshazzar shall receive in full the money. The debtor shall pay the whole sum of money as well as the interest upon it.” The names of six witnesses are appended, be- sides that of the priest who drew up the docu- ment, and it is dated on the 20th day of Adar, in the eleventh year of Nabonidus. Another document is Belshazzar's own cons tract to carry his sacrifice to the temple of the great sun god at Sippar. This offering con- sisted of three oxen and twenty-four sheep, for the conveyance of which in a boat upstream, Belshazzar paid abuul Ulle lullal Uſ silver, with about three bushels of dates for the food of the boatman. These apparently unimportant transactions give a sense of personality to one whose very ex- istence was denied, and they show that the writer of the Book of Daniel had trustworthy knowledge of the history of Babylon. He knew that Belshazzar was the last ruler of Babylon and that he perished in the destruction of the city, and he did not confound Belshazzar with his father, Nabonidus. Whatever we learn from the inscriptions is consistent with the Biblical account and explains it. We may even conjecture that as Cyrus c p- tured Babylon on the sixteenth of the mol th Tammuz, a month sacred to the husband of the Babylonian Venus, it may have been the mid- month feast of Tammuz (See TAMMUz) and BELTESHAZZAR Ishtar, which was being celebrated by Belshaz- zar, and at which he profaned the holy vessels of the Jewish Temple. William Hayes Ward, D. D., Hom. Rev., Jan., Iö94. BBLTESHAZZAR (bél' te-shāz' zar), (Heb. ºssº, bale-tesh-aſs-tsar', Bel's prince or the lord's leader), the name given to Daniel at the Court of Nebuchadnezzar in Babylon (Dan. i:7, etc.). (See DANIEL.) e BELUS, TEMPLE OF (bé'lus, tém'ple Šv). SEE BABEL. BEN (běn), (Heb. lº, Öem, son), is often found as the first element of proper names; in which case the word which follows it is always to be consid- ered dependent on it, in the relation of our geni- tlve. The word which follows Ben may either be of itself a proper name, or be an appellative or abstract, the principle of the connection being essentially the same in both cases. As for the first class, as the Syro-Arabian nations are all particularly addicted to genealogy, and as they possess no surnames, nor family names in our Sense, they have no means of attaching a definite designation to a person, except by adding some accessory specification to his distinctive, or, as we would term it, Christian, name. This ex- plains why so many persons both in the Old and New Testament are distinguished by the addi- tion of the names of their father. The same usage is especially frequent among the Arabs, but they have improved its definiteness by adding the name of the person’s child, in case he has one. In doing this they always observe this arrange- ment—the name of the child, the person’s own name and the name of his father. Thus the designation of the patriarch Isaac would, in Arabic, run thus: Father of Jacob, Isaac, son of Abraham (Abū Ja'qūb Ishāq ben Ibrahim.) As for the latter class, there is an easy transi- tion from this strict use of son to its employ- ment in a figurative sense, to denote a peculiar dependence of derivation. The principle of such a connection not only explains such proper names as Ben Chesed (son of mercy), but applies to many striking metaphors in other classes of words, as sons of the bow, a son of seventeen years (the usual mode of denoting age), a hill, the son of oil (Is. v.2), and many others, in which our transla- tion effaces the Oriental type of the expression. All proper names which begin with Ben belong to one or the other of these classes. Ben Aminadab, Ben Gaber, and Ben Chesed (I Kings iv: Io, II) illustrate all the possibilities of combination no- ticed above. In these names Ben would, per- haps, be better not translated, as it is in our ºver- sion, although the Vulgate has preserved it, as the Septuagint also appears to have once done in verse 8, to judge by the reading there. These remarks apply also in part to Bar, the Aramaic synonym of Ben, as in the name Bar- Abbas. (See BAR.) * J. N. BENAIAH (be-nā'aih, já), (Heb. Fº, ben-aw- yaw", built by Jehovah). 1. Son of Jehoida and commander of David's guard (the Cherefhites and Pelethites; 2 Sam. viii: 18; 1 Kings i :38; 1 Chron. xviii:17; 2 Sam. xx:23). His exploits were celebrated in Israel. He overcame two Moabitish champions ("lions of God’), slew an Egyptian giant with his own spear and went down into an exhausted cistern and destroyed a lion which had fallen into it when covered with snow (2 Sam. xxiii:21; I xi.22-25; xxvii:6), Benaiah (doubtless with the 261 Chron. BENE–KEDEM guard he commanded) adhered to Solomon when Joab and others attempted to set up Adonijah, and when that attempt failed, he, as belonged to his office, was sent to put Joab to death, after which he was appointed commander-in-chief in his place (I Kings i:36; ii:29), B. C. IO42. Some persons named Benaiah returned from the exile with Ezra (x :25, 30, 35, 43). 2. The Pirathonite, an Ephraimite, one of David's mighty men (2 Sam. xxiii:30; I Chron. xi:3I), and captain of the eleventh course (I Chron. xxvii: I4), B. C. Ioa2. 3. A Levite musician in the time of David (I Chron. xv.:18, 20; xvi :5), B. C. IOA2. 4. A priest appointed to blow the trumpet be- fore the ark, when brought to Jerusalem in the time of David (I Chron. xv.:24; xvi;6), B. C. IO42. 5. A Levite (B. C. 896) of the sons of Asaph (2 Chron. xx:I4). A Levite, who was overseer (B. C. 725) of the offerings in the time of Hezekiah (2 Chron. xxxi : I.3). - . A prince (B. C. 713) of the family of Simeon (I Chron. iv:36). 8. Father of Pelatiah (Ezek. xi :I, 13), B. C. 57I. 9. Four of the people who took “strange wives” (B. C. 458) in the time of Ezra (Ezra x : 25, 30, 35 and 43). * * * BEN-AMMI (bén'âm'mi), (Heb. Yº-Yº, beſt- a/z-mee', son of my kindred), a son of Lot by his daughter (Gen. xix:38) and the father of the Am- monites. * BENE-BERAK (bén'e-bê'rak), (Heb. Pºº":- ben-ay'ber'ak, sons of Berak, or lightning, Josh. xix:45), a city in the tribe of Dan; probably where the “sons of Berak” were established. The Vul- gate makes two cities of it, Bane and Barak. It is near Jehud (e/- Pehudºye/h), now the village of Zön Jörå%, east of Jaffa. BENEDICTION (bén'e-dik'shūn). In Num. vi. 24-26, the form of the priestly benediction is given. The Lord bless thee and keep thee: the Lord make his face shine upon thee and be gracious unto thee; the Lord lift up his countenance upon thee and give thee peace. This blessing was pronounced with uplifted hands (Lev. ix:22). The people responded by saying, Amen (Comp. 2 Chron. xxx:27; also see 2 Sam. vi. 18; I Kings viii:55). - The Saviour is spoken of as blessing little chil- dren (Mark x:16; Luke xxiv:50), besides the blessing on the occasion of the institution of the Eucharist (Matt. xxvi :26). The apostolic benediction is the great Christian benediction (2 Cor. xiii:14): The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen. BENE-JAAKAN (běn'e-jā'a-kān),(Heb. Tº ben-ay'ſah-ak-awn', the sons of Jaakan, Num. xxxiii:31, and in Deut. x:6 Beeroth-bene-Jaakan is the wells of the sons of Jaakan). The name doubtless came from Jakan (I Chron. i.42). * * BENE-KEDEM (bén'e-ké'dem), (Heb. Fº ben-ay"Keh-dem', children of the east), a name given to people living east of Palestine (Gen. xxix:I: Jºb i:3; Judg. vi;3,33; vii: 12; viii. Io; I Kings iv:30; Is. xi. 14; Jer. xlix:28; Ezek. xxv.4, Io). From a consid- eration of these passages it seems that the peoples of the Arabian deserts are indicated, and chiefly the tribes of Ishmael and Keturah (Geseniuš), BENHADAD BENHADAD. (bén'hā'dad), (Heb. "Tºº, ben- Æad-ad", son of Hadad), the name of three kings of Damascene-Syria. As to the latter part of this name, Hadad, there is little doubt that it is the name of the Syrian god, Adad. 1. The king of Syria, who was subsidized by Asa, king of Judah, to invade Israel and thereby compel Baasha (who had invaded Judah) to re- turn to defend his own kingdom (I Kings xv :18– 29; 2 Chron. xvi :2-4), B. C. 907. (See AsA.) This Ben-hadad has, with some reason, been sup- posed to be Hadad the Edomite who rebelled against Solomon (I Kings xi :21). 3. King of Syria, son of the preceding. His earlier history is much involved in that of Ahab, with whom he was constantly at war. (See AHAB.) He owed the signal defeat in which that war terminated to the vain notion which as- similated Jehovah to the local deities worshiped by the nations of Syria, deeming Him “a God of the hills,’ but impotent to defend his votaries in ‘the plains’ (I Kings xx: I-30). Instead of pur- Suing his victory Ahab concluded a peace with the defeated Benhadad (B. C. 901-900), which was observed for about twelve years, when the Syrian king declared war against Jehoram, the Son of Ahab, and invaded Israel; but all his plans and operations were frustrated, being made known to Jehoram by the prophet Elisha (2 Kings vi :8, ad fin.), B. C. 893. After some years, however, he renewed the war, and besieged Jehoram in his capital, Samaria, until the inhabitants were re- duced to the last extremities and most revolting resources by famine. The siege was then unex- pectedly raised, according to a prediction of Elisha, through a panic infused into the besieg- ers, who, concluding that a noise which they seemed to hear portended the advance upon them of a foreign host procured by Jehoram, thought only of saving themselves by flight. The next year Benhadad, learning that Elisha, through whom so many of his designs had been brought to nought, had arrived at Damascus, sent an offi- cer of distinction named Hazael with presents to consult him as to his recovery from an illness under which he then suffered. The prophet an- swered that his disease was not mortal, but that he would nevertheless die. This was accom- plished a few days after by this very Hazael, who smothered the sick monarch in his bed and mounted the throne in his stead, B. C. 894 (2 Kings viii:7-I5). (See ELISHA ; HAzAEL ; JE- HORAM.) 3. King of Syria, son of the Hazael just men- tioned (B. C. 835). He was thrice defeated by Jehoash, king of Israel, who recovered from him all the territories beyond the Jordan which Ha- zael had rent from the dominion of Israel (2 Kings xiii:3, 24, 25). BEN-HAIL (bania'il), (Heb. *TP, hen-Ahah'. yi/, son of strength), a prince sent by Jehoshaphat to the cities of his dominions (B. C. 910) to instruct the people (2 Chron. xvii.7). BENHANAN (běn'hā'nan), (Heb. l;"|3, Öem- Ä/hazy-mazeyn', of one gracious), the third named of the sons of Shimon in the royal line of Judah (I Chron. iv:20), B. C. I612. * * * BENINU (běn'i-ni or be-ni'nu), (Heb. º, ben- ee-moo', our son), a Levite who sealed the Covenant with Nehemiah (Neh. x:13), B. C. 445. * BENJAMIN (bén'ja-min), (Heb. Tºº, bin- yaw-me/te'). 1. The youngest son of Jacob by Rachel (Gen. xxxv :18), B. I640. His mother died im- 262 BENJAMIN, TRIBE OF mediately after he was born, and with her last , breath named him ben oni, ‘Son of my pain,’ which the father changed into Benjamin, a word of nearly the same sound, but portend. ing comfort and consolation, ‘Son of my right hand,’ probably alluding to the support and protection he promised himself from this, his last child, in his old age. This supposition is strength- ened when we reflect on the reluctance with which he consented to part with him in very try- ing circumstances, yielding only to the pressure jºine and the most urgent necessity (Gen. X I 11 ). In Gen. lvi.21, sq., the immediate descendants of Benjamin are given to the number of ten, whereas in Num. xxvi :38-40 only seven are enumerated, and some even under different names. This difference may probably be owing to the circumsfance that some of the direct descendants of Benjamin had died either at an early period Or at least childless. 2. Sofl of Bilhan (B. C. IoI6) and head of a family of warriors (1 Chron. vii:Io). 3. An Israelite, son of Harim, in the time of ; (B. C. 458), who married a foreign wife (Ezra X:32). 4. ...Gate of Benjamin (Jer. xx:2; xxxvii: 13; xxxviii:7; Zech. xiv:IO.) (See JERUSALEM.) BENJAMIN, TRIBE OF. The tribe of Ben- jamin, though the least numerous of Israel, became nevertheless a considerable race in process of time. In the desert it counted 35,400 warriors, all above twenty years of age (Num. i :36; ii:22), and, at the entrance of Israel into Canaan, even as many as 45,600. (1) Portion and Position. The portion al- lotted to this tribe was in proportion to its small number, and was encompassed by the districts of Ephraim, Dan and Judah, in central Palestine. In Josh. xviii:II-20, the northern and southern boundaries are minutely described; from verses 12 to I6 is sketched the northern boundary line, and from 16 to 20 the Southern. Within the boundaries described in these eight verses lay a district rather small, but highly cultivated and naturally fertile (Joseph. Antiq. v : I, 22; Reland, p. 637), containing thirty-six towns (with the villages appertaining to them), which are named in Josh. xviii:21–28, and the principal of which were Jericho, Bethagla, Bethel, Gibeon, Ramah and Jebus or Jerusalem. This latter place subse- quently became the capital of the whole Jewish empire, but was, after the division of the land, still in possession of the Jebusites. The Benja- mites had indeed been charged to dispossess them and Occupy that important town, but (Judg. i:21) the Benjamites are reproached with having neg- lected to drive them from thence, that is, from Ilie upper, well fortified part of the place Zion, since the lower and less fortified part had already been taken by Judah (Judg. i :8), who in this matter had almost a common interest with Ben- jamin. Zion was finally taken from the Jebusites by David (2 Sam. v :6, sq.) "(2) Civil War. In the time of the judges, the tribe of Benjamin became involved in a civil war with the other eleven tribes, for having re- fused to give up to justice the miscreants of Gibeah who had publicly violated and caused the death of a concubine of a man of Ephraim, who had passed with her through Gibeah. This war terminated in the almost utter extinction of the tribe, leaving no hope for its regeneration from the circumstance that not only had nearly all the women of that tribe been previously slain by their foes, but the eleven other tribes had en- BENJAMITE gaged themselves by a solemn oath not to marry their daughters to any man belonging to Benja- min. When the thirst of revenge, however, had abated, they found means to evade the letter of the Oatlı, and to revive the tribe again by an alli- ance with them (Judg. xix :20, 2I). (3) Numbers. This revival was so rapid that in the time of David it already numbered 59,434 able warriors (I Chron. vii:6–12); in that of Asa, 280,000 (2 Chron. xiv:8); and in that of Jehoshaphat, 200,000 (2 Chron. xvii:17). (4) Subsequent History. This tribe had also the honor of giving the first king to the Jews, Saul being a Benjamite (I Sam. ix:1, 2). After the death of Saul, the Benjamites, as might have been expected, declared themselves for his son Ishbosheth (2 Sam. ii:8, sq.); until, after the assassination of that prince, David became king of all Israel. David having at last expelled the Jebusites from Zion, and made it his own resi- dence, the close alliance that seems previously to have existed between the tribes of Benjamin and Judah (Judg. i :8) was cemented by the circum- stance that, while Jerusalem actually belonged to the district of Benjamin, that of Judah was im- mediately contiguous to it. Thus it happened that, at the division of the kingdom after the death of Solomon, Benjamin espoused the cause of Judah, and formed, together with it, a kingdom by themselves. Indeed, the two tribes stood al- ways in such a close connection as often to be included under the single term Judah (I Kings xi :13; xii:20). After the exile, also, these two tribes constituted the flower of the new Jewish colony in Palestine (Comp. Ezra ix: I ; x:9). (5) Difficulties. There are some grave diffi- culties in the account of the outrage at Gibeah and the almost entire destruction of Benjamin, in consequence of its support of the perpetrators (Judg. xix-xxi) previously referred to. These difficulties are chiefly to be found in the account of the war with Benjamin (Judg. xxi). Israel is spoken of as a ‘congregation,’ and represented as acting together as one man, unlike everything else we know of the period. The size of the army raised (400,000) is quite incredible, and the inci- dents of the campaign no less so. Benjamin, with 26,700, destroys in two days 40,000 Israelites, but does not lose a single man. On the third day the whole tribe of Benjamin is destroyed, with the ex- ception of 600 men. The date given for this is vague; it is said to have been in the days of Phinehas, the grandson of Aaron. A satisfactory solution has so far not been presented by the critics (Hastings' Bib. Dict.). BENJAMIITE (bén'ja-mite), the designation of the descendants of Benjamin (I Sam. ix:21; xxii:7; I Kings ii:8; Judg. iii:15; xix:16; 2 Sam. xx:1). BENO (bé'no), (Heb. 22, beh-mo', his son), a Merarite Levite (1 Chron. xxiv:26, 27), B. C. Ior 4, We should perhaps render, ‘of Jaaziah his son, even the sons of Merari by Jaaziah his son' (Oxf. Aeë. Zer. s. v., Hastings' Bib. Dict.) BENONI (běn-Ö'ni), (Heb. "?"NT3, ben-o-mee', son of my sorrow). See BENJAMIN. e BENZOHETH (běn'zö'heth), (Heb. hººl:, Ben- 20-Éhayth", son of Zoheth, or else corpulent, strong), a name appearing among the descendants of Ju- dah, in a passage that appears to be a fragment, where the name of a son of Zoheth, just mentioned, º: originally followed (I Chron. iv:20), B. C. Iö56. -> BEON (bě'on), (Heb. lº, beh-ohn', lord or house of On), otherwise Bean, a city of Reuben, beyond 263 BERED Jordan (Num. xxxii:3). It is more properly called Beth-baal-meon (Josh. xiii:17), more briefly Baal- meon (Num. xxxii:38), and Beth-meon (Jer. xlviii:23). - BEOR (bé'or), (Heb. TV3, beh-ore', a torch). 1. Father of Bela (B. C. 1618), an early king of Edom (Gen. xxxvi;32; I Chron. i:43). 2. Father of Balaam (Num. xxii:5; xxiv:3, 15; xxxi:8; Josh. xiii:22; xxiv:9; Mic. vi. 5), B. C. 1618. He is called Bosor in the N. T. (2 Pet. ii:15). 'BERA (bé'rá), (Heb. PTE, beh'rah, gift), a king of Sodom in the time of Abraham, who was tribu- tary to Chedorlaomer, king of Elam, and with four other kings rebelled against him (Gen. xiv:2, I7, 2I). BERACHAH (bér'a-kah), (Heb. "?"}, ber-aw- AEazy', a blessing). One of the thirty Benjamite warriors who came to David at Ziklag (I Chron. xii:3), B. C. IO54. 2. A valley where Jehoshaphat assembled the eople to bless Jehovah for the overthrow of the oabites, Ammonites and Mehunim (2 Chron. xx:26). The name Berezāzºſ still survives in the name of some ruins between Bethlehem and He- bron, which agrees with the locality of the battle (2 Chron. xx; Rob. iii:275; Ritter, /ordan, 635). BERACHIAH (bér'a-ki'ah), (Heb. Tºº, beh- re/8-yaw' hoo, Jah is blessing), a Gershonite Levite and father of Asaph the singer (I Chron. vi.39), B. C. IO43. (See BERECHIAH 6). BERAIAH (bér'a-i'ah), (Heb. Tºº, ber-aw- yaw', Jah is maker), one of the chiefs of Benjamin and son of Shimhi (I Chron. viii:21), B. C. I.340. BEREA (be-ré'á), (Gr. 8épota, Öer'oy-ah, Acts xvii:IO, 13; xx:4), a city of Macedonia on the river Astraeus, not far from Pella, towards the south- west, and near Mount Bermius. It was afterward called Irenopolis, and is now known by the name of Boor. Paul and Silas withdrew to this place from Thessalonica, and the Jewish residents are described as more ingentious and of a better disposition (not “more noble,’ as in the Authorized Version) “than those of Thes- salonica’ in that they diligently searched the Scrip- tures to ascertain the truth of the doctrines taught by the Apostles. It is now called Verria or Kata- Verria, with a population of about 6,000, though sometimes incorrectly given 20,000. BERECHIAH (bér'e-ki'ah), (Heb. Tº, beh- re/8-yaw'/hoo, blessed by Jehovah). 1. Son of Zerubbabel, of the royal family of Judah (I Chron. iii:2O), B. C. 520. 2. See BERACHIAH. 3. Father of Zechariah, the prophet (Zech. i:1, 7), B, C, 500. 4. A chief man of Ephraim (B. C. 750) in the time of Ahaz (2 Chron. xxviii:12). 5. A doorkeeper for the ark (I Chron. xv.:23). 6. A Levite descendant of Elkanah (I Chron. ix:16), B. C. 445. 7. Father of Meshullam (B. C. 520); the latter assisted in rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem (Neh. iii:4,30; vi.18). BERED (bé'réd), (Heb. Tº, baw'zed, hail). 1. A city in Judah, near Kadesh (Gen. xvi; I4). The Chaldee calls it Agara, the Syriac, Gedar, the Arabic, Vader, it was the same, perhaps, as Arad, or Arada (Num. xxxiv:4), in the south of Judah (Calmet). Grove suggests /º/-K/ºu/asah, 12 miles south of Beer-sheba; Conder proposes Bereza. BERENICE 2. Son or descendant of Ephraim (I Chron. vii:20). Perhaps the name is the same as Becher (Num. xxvi;35), B. C. 1856. IBERENICE (bér'e-nece), (Gr. Bepwikm, ber-nee'- Æay), eldest daughter of Herod Agrippa I, and sister of the younger Agrippa (Acts xxv. 13, 23; xxvi.30). She was married to her uncle Herod, king of Chalcis, and after his death, in order to avoid the merited suspicion of incest with her brother Agrippa, she became the wife of Polemon, king of Cilicia. This connection being soon dissolved, she returned to her brother, and afterwards be- came the mistress of Vespasian and Titus (Jo- seph. Antiq. xix:5, I ; xx:7, 2, 3; Tacit. Hist. ii:8I ; Suet. Tit. 7). BERI (bé'ri), (Heb. 2, bay-ree', fountain, well), a man of Asher, son of Zophah (I Chron. vii:36), B. C. Ion 6. BERIAH (be-ri'ah), (Heb. "???, ber-ee'aw, in evil, or a son of evil). 1. Son of Asher (Gen. xlvi. I7; Num. xxvi;44, 45), and founder of the family of Beriites (Num. xxvi; 44), B. C. 1856. 2. Son of Ephraim (B. C. 1670), who named his son thus on account of the misfortune that had come upon the family (I Chron, vii:30, 31). For explanation of the name, a gift, see Gesenius 7%as. S. v. 3. A Benjamite (B. C. I.4OO), who, with his brother Shema, º the inhabitants of Gath and populated Ajalon (I Chron. viii:13, 16). 4. A Levite (B. C. IOI 5) mentioned in I Chron. xxiii:IO, II. BERIITE (be-ri'ite). See BERIAH. BERITES (bé'rites), (Heb. sy •ºn. /ha/-äez--ee-ee", people of the wells), a, people visited by Joab along with Abel and Bethºnaachah in the north of Palestine (2 Sam. xx:14). Ewald renders the Hebrew, Z/he yozzzzg meeze (Gesch. iii:249, 7toſe). Thomson, Zand and Boo/* (i:425) conjectures that it may specially designate the Beroth of upper Galilee where Josephus says (Ant. v:1, 18) the Canaanitish kings encamped against Joshua (Comp. Josh. xi:5), and which he identifies with Bzzia, a short distance north of Safed. BERITH (bé'rith), (Heb. Flº, Žer-eeth", cove- nant, Judg. ix:46). See BAAL-BERITH. BERNICE (ber-ni'se). See BERENICE. BERODACH - BALADAN (be-rö'dak-bāl'a- dān), (Heb. mis-, Tºsº, ber-o-da/º ba/-ad-awn', 2 Kings xx:12). See MERODACH-BALADAN. BERCEA (bě-roe'ā). See BEREA. BEROSH (be'rosh), (Heb. *F, ber-osh'), occurs in several passages of Scripture, as in 2 Sam. vi. 5; I Kings v :8; vi.15 and 36; ix: II; 2 Chron. ii:8; iii:5; Ps. civ.17; Is. xiv:8; xxxvii:24; xli:IQ; lv. I3; lx: I 3; Ezek. xxvii:5; xxxi:8; Hos. xiv:8; Nah. ii:3; Zech. xi:2); and Beroth, which is said to be only the Aramaean pronunciation of the same word, in Cant. i:17, ‘the bearers of our house are cedar, and the rafters of fir' (Beroth). So in most of the other passages Eres and Berosh, translated Cedar and Fir in the Author- ized Version, are mentioned together, as I Kings v. 8, “And Hiram sent to Solomon, saying, I will do all thy desire concerning timber of cedar and concerning timber of fir;’ Is. xiv:8, ‘Yes, the fir-trees rejoice at thee and the cedars of Lebanon.” (See CEDAR ; FIR.) BEROTHAH (be-roºthah), (Heb. Tºº, bay-ro- thaw', cypress), one of the boundary towns of 264 BETAH Israel, between Hethalon and Emesa or Ham- ath and Damascus (Ezek. xlvii:16). It is probably the same as Berothai, and from the mention of it here it would seem not to be a maritime place; therefore not Beirºz, according to Robinson (see Rosenm. Bib. Geog. I, ii, p. 292). However, Harper (Bible and Mod. Dis., p. 245), identifies Berothai with Beirãt. Keil (Com. in loc.) says: “Hamath is not the city of Hamath on the Orontes, . . . but the kingdom of Hamath, the southern boundary of which formed the northern boundary of Canaan, though it cannot be given with exact- ness.” * BEROTHAI (bér'o-thai). (2 Sam. viii:8), a city conquered by David; supposed by some to be Berytus, or Beirãt, in Phoenicia. But it is proba- bly the same as the preceding Berothah (Calmet). (See BEROTHAH.) BEROTHITE (bé'roth-ite), epithet of Joab's ar- mor bearer (I Chron. xi:39). Perhaps the same as 2 Sam. xxiii:27. See BEEROTH. BERYL (bér-il), (Ex. xxviii:20). By the Hebrew word “tarshish” modern yel- low topaz is supposed to be meant. This desig- nation seems to indicate the place from which it was brought. Beryl, in the New Testament, Rev. xxi :20, is probably a different stone, and very likely the mineral now so called, which is found in Palestine, but was less abundant and more precious in ancient times than in modern. It is usually of a light green color and considerably opaque. (See SHOHAM.) BESAI (bé'sāi), (Heb. "22, bes-ah'ee, conqueror), “Children” of Besai returned among the Nethi- nim, under Ezra (B. C. 536), from Babylon (Ezra ii:49; Neh. vii:52). * BESHA (běsh'a), (Heb. Tºº, bah'sha), occurs in the singular form in Job xxxi:40, ‘Let thistles grow instead of wheat, and cock/e (besha) instead of barley;’ and in the plural form in Is. v.2, “He (Jehovah) planted it with the choicest vine, and also made a wine-press therein; and he looked that it should bring forth grapes, and it brought forth wild gražes' (beushim). (See COCKLE.) So also in verse 4 of the same chapter. It is probable that the same plant is referred to in these two passages; but difficulties have here, as elsewhere, been experienced in ascertaining the precise plant intended. All, however, are agreed that some useless, if not noxious, herb must be understood in both cases. BESODEIAH (bés'o-deſiah, -yā), (Heb. Tºº, bes-o-deh-yazy", intimate of Jehovah), father of Me- shullam and one of those who helped repair the walls of Jerusalem (Neh. iii:6), B. C. 446. BESOM (bé'zúm), (Heb. Nº?, maſſ-at-ay', a broom or sweeper), a metaphor of destruction, a desolating broom, a besome of destruction (Is. xiv:23). ** . . . . s. BESOR (bé'sór), (Heb. Tºº, bes-ore', cold), a brook mentioned in I Sam. xxx:9. Sanutus de- rives its course from the interior Carmel, near Hebron, and states that it enters the Mediter- ranean Sea near Gaza (Liber Secretorum, p. 252). BESTEAD (be-stèd'), (Ang. Sax. stede, a place, stead, as in homestead). It is found only in Is. viii:21. It means placed, situated, especially in difficulty. Amer. R. V. has ‘sore distressed,’ Cheyne “hard-prest.’ BETAH (bé'tah), (Heb. "??, beh'iakh, confi- dence), a city of Syria-Zobah; taken by David from Hadadezer (2 Sam. viii:8). In the parallel BETEN 265 assage (I Chron. xviii:8) it is called Tibhath or ibchath, which, Ewald pronounces correct (Gesch. ii: 195). Site unknown. BETEN (bé'ten), (Heb. ??, beh'ien, belly or womb), a city of the tribe of Asher (Josh. xix:25). Eusebius says it was eight Roman miles east of Acre and was called Bebeten or Bethbeten. The place intended appears to be the present village El B'aneh, which would be suitabſe for the posi- tion of Beten. The site however is doubtful. BETH (běth), (Heb. F2, bahºyith, house), is often found as the first element of proper names of places in the Bible. It is only necessary to observe that, in all such compounds, as Bethel, etc., the latter part of the word must be considered, according to our Oc- cidental languages, to depend on the former in the relation of the genitive; so that Bethel can only mean ‘house of God.” The notion of house is, of course, capable of a wide application, and is used to mean temple, habitation, place, accord- ing to the sense of the word with which it is combined. -- BETHABARA (běth'âb'a-rá), (Gr. 376agapé, bay-Zhab-ar-a/.'), or Bethbarah. This name means place of the ford, z. e., of or over the Jordan; and is mentioned in John i:28, as the place where John baptized. Some have identified it with Beth-barah, an ancient ford of the river (Judg. vii:24). The best manuscripts and recent editions, however, have Bethany, the reading BnBagapó, Bethabara, appears to have arisen from the conjecture of Ori- gen, who in his day found no such place on the Jordan as Bethany, but knew a town called Beth- abara, where John was said to have baptized, and therefore took the unwarrantable liberty of chang- ing the reading. (See BETH-BARAH). BETH-ANATH (béth'ā'nath), (Heb. ºn 3, bayth-an-awth", house of response), a city of Naph- tali (Josh. xix:38; Judg. i:33). BETHANOTH (béth'ā'noth), (Heb. hºrn"?, &ayth'an-oth, house of echo), a town named with others in the mountainous region of Judah (Josh. xv.:59). It has been identified with the pres- ent village Beit-Anzem. - BBTBIANY (béth'a-ny), (Gr. Bm9avia, bay-than- ee'ah, place of dates). The place near the Jordan where John bap- tized, the exact situation of which is unknown. Some copies here read Bethabara (which see). 2. Bethany, a town or village about fifteen fur- longs east-southeast from Jerusalem, on the east- ern slope of the Mount of Olives (John Xi:18), so called, probably, from the number of palm trees that grew around. It was the residence of Lazarus and his sisters, Mary and Martha, and Jesus often went out from Jerusalem to lodge there (Matt. xxi : 1/; xxvi.ö, Mauk Ki. 1, 11, 12, xiv:3; Luke xix:29; xxiv:50; John xi : I, 18; xii:1). The place still subsists in a shallow wady on the eastern slope of the Mount of Olives. Dr. Robinson reached Bethany in three-quarters of an hour from the Damascus gate of Jerusalem, which gives a distance corresponding to the fif- teen furlongs (stadia) of the evangelist. It is a poor village of about twenty families. The only marks of antiquity are some hewn stones from more ancient buildings, found in the walls of some of the houses. The monks, indeed, show the house of Mary and Martha, and Simon the leper, and also the sepulchre of Lazarus, all of which are constantly mentioned in the nar- ratives of pilgrims and travelers. The sepulchre is a deep vault, like a cellar, excavated in the limestone rock in the middle of the village, to BETH_HARAH which there is a descent by twenty-six steps. Dr. Robinson (ii: IcI) alleges that there is not the slightest probability of its ever having been the tomb of Lazarus. The form is not that of the ancient sepulchres, nor does its situation ac- cord with the narrative of the New Testament, which implies that the tomb was not in the town (John xi :31, 38). The present Arab name of the village is el-Azirezeh, from el-Azir, the Arabic form of Lazarus. BETHARABAH (běth'ār'-àbāh), (Heb. Tº F2, bayth haw-ar-aw-baw', house of the desert), a town on the north end of the Dead Sea, and one of six cities belonging to Judah, on the north bor- der of the tribe (Josh. xv.;6, 61). It was afterward included in the list of the towns of Benjamin (Josh. xviii.22). It is called Arabah in Josh. xviii: 18. In the last cited passage the district only is men- tioned. The place has not been discovered. BETH-ARAM (béth-ā'ram), (Heb. P. F., bayſh hazw-razº/7/2", mountain house, or town of the height), a town of Gad, opposite Jericho, and three miles east of Jordan (Josh. xiii:27). Perhaps same as Beth-haran (Num. xxxii:36). , Merrill locates it at er-Razza, on the Shittim plain. ... Named Jul- ias, or Livias, by Herod, after the wife of Augus- tus. It is the present er Ramzeh. BETH-ARBEL (bºtharbe), (Heb. 83.8 nº, bayth ar-baſe', house of courts), a place men- tioned only in Hos. x:I4; and as it seems to be there implied that it was an impregnable fortress, the probability is strengthened of its being the same as the Arbela of Josephus. This was a vil- lage in Galilee, near which were certain fortified caverns. They are first mentioned in connection with the march of Bacchides into Judaea, at which time they were occupied by many fugitives, and the Syrian general encamped there long sº to subdue them (Antiq. xii:II, I ; I Macc. 1X .2). - BETH-AVEN (béth'ā’ven), (Heb.l.º. n°2, bayth azy'z'em, house of , nothingness, i. e., idolatry), a nickname for the town of Bethel, applied to it after it became the seat of the worship of the golden calves (see BETHEL). There was, how- ever, a town of this name not far from Bethel eastward (Josh. vii:2; I Sam. xiii:5), the ex- istence of which, perhaps, occasioned the transfer of the name to Bethel. The Talmudists confound it with Bethel. There was also a desert of the same name (Josh. xviii:I2). BETH-AZMAVETH (běth'āz'ma-véth), (Heb. Fºº Fº, bayth az-maw'veth, house of Azma- veth), a town of Benjamin. Forty-two of its in- habitants returned with Zerubbabel from Baby- lon (Neh. vii:28; “Azmaveth,” Neh. xii:29; Ezra ii.24). BETH-BAAL-MEON (běth’bà’al-mê'on), (Heb. jº by: F2, bayth bah'a/me-own', house of Baal- meon), one of the places assigned to Reuben in the plains east of Jordan (Josh. xiii:17), known formerly as Baal-meon (Num. xxxii:38), or Beon (xxxii:3), to which Beth was probably added. It is identified with the present ruins of Myun, or Ma'in, nine miles southwest of Heshbon. BETH-BARAH (béth-bā'rah), (Heb. Tº Fº, bayſh baw-razy", house of crossing), a chief ford of Jordan. Possibly the place of Jacob's crossing (Gen. xxxii:22), and near the scene of Gideon's victory (Judg. vi;24), and where Jephthah slew the Ephraimites (Judg. xii:4). It was probably the same as BETHABARA (which See), | BETH-BASI BETH-BASI (béth'bā'si), (Gr. Bató Baat, bay- ith-bay-see'), a city of Judah, which the two Mac- Cabees, Simon and Jonathan, fortified (I Macc. ix:62-64). f BETH-BIREI (béth'bir'e-i), (Heb. "Nº mº, bayth bir-ee', house of a creative one), a city of Judea (I Chron. iv:31), in the extreme south. It appears to have had the name Beth-debaoth and Lebaoth (Josh. xix:6; xv.:32); probably Báreh. BETH-CAR (béth'kār), (Heb. "P F3, bayth Áar', house of lambs), a city of Dan (I Sam. vii: I I), west of Mizpeh. Conder locates it at 'Ain Kå- 727/2. BETH-DAGON (béth'dā'gon), (Heb. Tº Thº, bayth-daw-gohn', house of Dagon, temple of Da- gon). 1. A city of Asher (Josh. xix:27; compare I Sam. v.:2-5). 2. A city of Judah (Josh. xv.:41), so called, prob- ably, because here was a temple of Dagon, be- fore the Israelites took it. BETH - DIBLATHAIM (běth'dib'la-tha'im), (Heb. tº nº, Öayth dió-Zazey-thah'ſzm, house of Diblathaim), a city of Moab (Jer, xlviii.22), prob- ably the place called Almon Diblathaim (Num. xxxiii:46). BETH-EDEN (beth'é'den), (Heb. Tº F2, bayth e/*'den, house of pleasantness), the seat of a na- tive king threatened with destruction (Amos i.5). BETHEKED (béth'é'ked), (Heb. Tº Th"?, bayth- ee'Éed, house of the binding of sheep, 2 Kings x:12, I4), which some Construe in a general sense —a shearing house, or, the house of shepherds ôānding sheep; but the LXX take it for a place be- tween Jezreel and Samaria. BETHEL (beth'é), (Heb. *"mº, baythale, house of God). 1. Originally Luz, an ancient town which Eusebius places twelve Roman miles north of Jerusalem, on the right hand of the road to Shechem. Jacob rested here one night on his way to Padan-Aram, and commemorated the vision with which he was favored by erecting and pouring oil upon the stone which had served him for a pillow, and giving to the place the name of Bethel (place or house of God), which eventually superseded the more ancient designa- tion of Luz (Gen. xxviii:II-19). Under that name it is mentioned proleptically with reference to the earlier time of Abraham (Gen. xii:8; xiii:3). - It has been supposed that, like many other sanctuaries, such as Jerusalem, Jericho, Shechem, Hebron, etc., Bethel was originally a Canaanite holy place, and that after it had passed into the hands of the Israelites it was adopted into Israel- ite traditions, and assigned a patriarchal conse- cration. On the other hand, there is no clear evidence that Bethel was a Canaanite sanctuary; all that the Old Testament knows about its earlier history is that its ancient name was Luz; so we are justified in concluding that its sanctity was of purely Israelitc origin. At the same time, it possessed a sanctity independent of the dedication which Jacob is said to have given it. It was a haunt of angels, a place where a ladder was always fixed between earth and heaven; and when Jacob passed the night there he saw it. It was not so much that Jehovah found Jacob, as that Jacob was unconsciously guided to find 266 BETHEMEK Jehovah there. (G. A. Cooke, Hastings' Bib. Alict.) After his prosperous return, Bethel became a favorite Station with Jacob ; here he built an altar, buried Deborah, received the name of Israel (for the Second time), and promises of blessing ; and here also he accomplished the vow which he had made on his going forth (Gen. xxxv I-15; Comp. xxxii:28, and xxviii:20-22). It seems not to have been a town in those early times; but at the conquest of the land, Bethel is mentioned as the royal city of the Canaanites (Josh. xii:16). It became a boundary town of Benjamin towards Ephraim (Josh. xviii:22), and was actually conquered by the latter tribe from the Canaanites (Judg. i:22-26). At this place, already consecrated in the time of the patriarchs, the ark of the covenant was, apparently for a long while, deposited (see ARK), and probably the tabernacle also (Judg. xx:26; Comp. I Sam. x:3). It was also one of the places at which Samuel held in rotation his court of justice (I Sam. vii:16). After the separation of the kingdoms Bethel was included in that of Israel, which seems to show, that although originally in the formal distribution assigned to Benjamin, it had been actually possessed by Ephraim in right of conquest from the Canaanites—which might have been held by that somewhat un- scrupulous tribe to determine the right of pos- session to a place of importance close on their Own frontier. Jeroboam made it the southern seat (Dan being the northern) of the worship of the golden calves; and it seems to have been the chief seat of that worship (I Kings xii:28-33; xiii: I). This appropriation, however, completely desecrated Bethel in the estimation of the ortho- dox Jews; and the prophets name it with ab- horrence and contempt—even applying to it the name of Bethaven (house of idols) instead of Bethel (house of God) (Amos i :5; Hos. iv.: IS ; v:8; x :5, 8). The town was taken from Jero- boam by Abijah, king of Judah (2 Chron. xiii: I9); but it again reverted to Israel (2 Kings x:28). After the Israelites were carried away captive by the Assyrians, all traces of this il- legal worship were extirpated by Josiah, king of Judah, who thus fulfilled a prophecy made to Jeroboam 350 years before (2 Kings xiii:I, 2 ; xxiii:I5-18). The place was still in existence after the Captivity, and was in the possession of the Benjamites (Ezra ii:28; Neh. vii:32). In the time of the Maccabees Bethel was fortified by Bacchides for the king of Syria. It is not named in the New Testament; but it still ex- isted, and was taken by Vespasian. (Robinson, Biblioth. Sac., 1843, p. 456 ff. town in the south of Judah (I Sam. xxx :27). Perhaps the same city is designated (Josh. xii:16). The place appears to have borne the names Chesil, Bethul and Bethnel (Comp. Josh. xv.:30; xix:4; I Chron. iv:29, 30; V :29, 30). BETHELITE (běth'él-ite), a designation of Hiel (I Kings xvi;34); a native of Bethel in Ben- jamin. BETHEL, MOUNT OF (běth'el, mount 6v), the southern range of mountains belonging to Bethel (Josh. xvi; 1, 2). Bethel is here distinguished from Luz, because the reference is not to the town of Bethel, but to the mountains, from which the boundary extended to Luz. BETHEMEK (běth-ā'mek), (Heb. Fºº Fº, bayth haw-ay"mek, house of the valley), a city of the tribe of Asher near its southeast border (Josh. xix:27), not identified. BETHER BETHER (bé'ther), (Heb. Tº, beh'/her, depth, separation), the Mountains of Bether are only mentioned in Cant. ii:17; viii:14; and no place called Bether occurs elsewhere. The word means, properly, dissection. The ſnountains of Bether may therefore be mountains of disjunction, of separation, etc., that is, moun- tains cut up, divided by ravines, etc. In the Authorized Version the same words that are ren- dered ‘mountains of Bether' in Cant. ii:17, are rendered mountains of spices' (viii:14). “Bethe, is celebrated for the resistance of the Jews to Hadrian under Bar-Cochba in A. D. I35 (See authorities quoted by Robinson, Bib. Res., vol. iii, and the account in Neubauer's Géog. Talm. s.v.). The site was recognized by Canon Williams at Bittir, southwest of Jerusa- lem—a village on a cliff in a strong position, with a ruin near it called “Ruin of the Jews,’ from a tradition of a great Jewish massacre at this place.” (C. R. Conder, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) BETHESIDA (be-théz'dá), (Gr. Bm9eröä, bay-thes- dah", house or place of mercy), a fool at the Sheep- gate of Jerusalem, built round with porches for the accommodation of the sick who sought benefit from the healing virtues of the water, and upon One of whom Christ performed the healing miracle recorded by St. John (v.2-9). That which is now, and has long been pointed Out as the Pool of Bethesda, is a dry basin or reservoir outside the northern wall of the in- closure around the Temple Mount, of which wall its Southern side may be said to form a part. The east end of it is close to the present gate of St. Stephen. The pool measures 360 feet in length, 130 feet in breadth, and 75 feet in depth to the bottom, besides the rubbish which has ac- cumulated in it for ages. Although it has been dry for about two centuries, it was once evi- dently used as a reservoir, for the sides internally have been cased over with small stones, and these again covered with plaster; but the workman- ship of these additions is coarse, and bears no Special marks of antiquity. The west end is built up like the rest, except at the Southwest corner, where two lofty arched vaults extended west- ward, side by side, under the houses that now cover this part. (Barclay, City of the Great King, p. 516 ff.; King, The Temple Hill.) Dr. Robinson was able to trace the continua- tion of the work in this direction tinder one of these vaults for Ioo feet, and it seemed to ex- tend much farther. This gives the whole a length of I60 feet, equal to one-half of the whole extent of the sacred inclosure under which it lies; and how much more is unknown. It would seem as if the deep reservoir formerly extended farther westward in this part; and that these vaults were built up, ii.1 and over it, in order to support the structures above. Dr. Robinson con- siders it probable that this excavation was an- ciently carried quite through the ridge of Bezetha, along the northern side of Antonia fo its north- west corner, thus forming the deep trench which se/barazed the fortress from the adjacent hill (Bib. Researches, i. 433, 434). The mere appear- ance of the place, and its position immediately under the wall of the sacred inclosure, strongly support this conjecture, so that we are still left to seek the Pool of Bethesda, if indeed any trace of it now remains. Dr. Robinson himself, without having any definite conviction on the subject, asks whether the Pool of Bethesda may not in fact be the ‘Fountain of the Virgin.' The question was suggested to his mind by the ex- ceedingly abrupt and irregular plan of that foun- 267 BETH-HORON tain. He remarks: “We are told that an angel went down at a certain season into the pool and troubled the water;' and then whosoever first stepped in was made whole (John v:2-7). There seems to have been no special medicinal virtue in the water itself, and only he who first stepped in after the troubling was healed. Does not this troubling of the water look like the irregular plan of this fountain P And as the Sheep-gate seems to have been situated not far from the Temple (Neh. iii: I, 32), and the wall of the ancient Tem- ple probably ran along this valley; may not that gate have been somewhere in this part, and the Fountain of the Virgin correspond to Bethesda, the same as the ‘King's Pool’ of Nehemiah, and the ‘Solomon's Pool’ of Josephus? (Bib. Re- searches, i. 508). For an account of the Foun- tain to which these inquiries relate, we must re- fer to the article on the Fountain, with which that of the Virgin is closely connected (R. A. Conder, agrees with Dr. Robinson, Hastings' Bib. Dict. See Barclay, City of the Great King, p. 516, ff.; King, The Temple Hill). (See SILOAM, Pool of.) BETH-EZEL (béth-ezel), (Heb. *Sinº-bayth. hazy-ay'tse!, house of firm root), a place mentioned (Mic, i: II). It was, according to Ephrem Syrus, not far from Samaria. Perhaps identical with Azal or Ezel (Zech. xiv:5). Exact site unknown. BETH-GADER (béth'gā’der), (Heb. Tº mº, bayāh-gaw-dare', house of the well), a city of Judah (I Chron. ii:51). Perhaps the same as Geder (Josh. xii:13). (See GEDER.) BETH.GAMUL (beth'ga'mul), (Heb. *; nº bayth gazv-//zoo/", camel house), a city of the Moab- ites, in Reuben (Jer. xlviii:23). It is now the ruin Um/z el-/emál, towards the east of the plateau, south of Medeba—a site where a Nabathaean inscription was found by Warren, which may date about the second century A. D. º BETH-GILGAL (beth-gū'gāl) (Heb. ºn nº bayth-hag-ghi/-gaw/", house of Gilgal, Neh. xii:29). Same as Gilgal, near Bethel. BETH-HACCEREM (běth'hāk'ge-rém), (Heb. Pº Tº bayth-ha/-äeh'rem, place of the vine- yard), a city of Benjamin, situated on an eminence between Jerusalem and Tekoa (Neh. iii:14; Jer. vi:I), about three and a half miles southeast of Bethlehem. BETH-HAGGAN (běth'hāg'gan), (Heb. ºn nº bayth-hag-gawn', house of the garden), a place by way of which King Ahaziah fled (2 Kings ix:27, A. V., “garden house”). BETH-HANAN (béth'hān'an). See ELON-BETH- HANAN, : * wº BETH-HARAN (béth'hā'ran), (Heb. j. Tº bayth - haw - razy?!", high or strong place, Num. xxxii:36; Josh. xiii:27), a city of Gad beyond the Jordan, afterwards called I.ivias, or Julias. It is opposite Jericho on the southeast. Probably the same as Beth-Aram. BETH-HOGLA and HOGLAH (běth'hög"lá), (Heb. Tº F3 bayth-Ahog-law', place of mag- pies), a town of Benjamin, on the confines of Judah (Josh. xv.:6; xviii:19, 21 ). The name and site are identified with 'Ain Hajlah, four miles southeast of Jericho. BETH-HoRoN (beth'ha'ron), (Heb. Tº Fº, bayſh-kho-rome', house of caverns or holes). Two places of this name are distinguished in Scripture BETH-JESHIMOTH as the Upper and Nether Beth-horon (Josh. xvi; 3, 5; xviii:I3; I Chron. vii:24). The Nether Beth-horon lay in the northwest corner of Benjamin ; and between the two places was a pass called both the ascent and descent of Beth-horon, leading from the region of Gibeon (el-Jib) down to the western plain (Josh. xviii: 13, 14; x:IO, II; I Macc. iii: 16, 24). Down this pass the five kings of the Amorites were driven by Joshua (Josh. x: LI). The upper and lower towns were both fortified by Solomon (I Kings is :17; 2 Chron. viii:5). Dr. Robinson gathers that in ancient times, as at the present day, the great road of communica- tion and of heavy transport between Jerusalem and the seacoast was by the pass of Beth-horon (Bib. Researches, iii :61). From the time of Jerome the place appears to have been unnoticed till 18OI, when Dr. E. D. Clarke recognized it in the present Beit-Ur (Travels, vol. i., pt. ii, p. 628), after which it appears to have remained unvisited till 1838, when the Rev. J. Paxton, and, a few days after, Dr. Robinson, arrived at the place. The Lower Beit- Ur is upon the top of a low ridge, which is separ- ated by a wady, or narrow valley, from the foot of the mountain upon which the Upper Beit-Ur stands. Both are now inhabited villages. The lower is very small, but foundations of large stones indicate an ancient site—doubtless that of the Nether Beth-horon. The Upper Beit-Ur is likewise small, but also exhibits traces of ancient walls and foundations. In the steep ascent to it the rock is in some parts cut away and the path formed into steps, indicating an ancient road. On the first offset or step of the ascent are founda- tions of huge stones, the remains, perhaps, of a castle, that once guarded the pass. BETH-JESHIMOTH (béth'jësh’i-möth or -jes'i- móth), (Heb. Fºº F#, bayth haſh-yesh-ee-math', place of desolations), a city of Reuben, between the mountains of Abarim and the Jordan (Num. xxxiii:49), about ten miles southeast of Jericho (Josh. xii:3; xiii:2O), afterwards possessed by the Moabites (Ezek. xxv :9). BETH-LE-APHRAH (běth'le-äph'rah), (Heb. Tº F3 bayth-le-aſ-raw', house of dust; so in R. V., Mic. i. Io; “house of Apharah” in the A. V.). Probably identical with the modern Beit-Offa, six miles southeast of Ashdod (Robinson's Researches, ii:369 note; Van de Velde, map). J. A. Selbie, Hastings' Biö. Dicé., says the site is quite unknown. * BETH-LEBAOTH (beth'leba-6th), (Heb.nº nº. bayſh-Meb-aw-6th', house of lionesses), a city of Simeon (Josh. xix:6), called Lebaoth (chap. xv.:32). Not idcIntificó. BETHLEHEM (béth"le-hem or búth’le-hem), (Heb. Fºº F2, bayth-leh"Ahem, house or place of bread, i. e. Bread-town, or house of flesh, Sept. B76Xeéu, Beth/e/ezzz). 1. A city of Judah (Judg. xvii:7), six miles southward from Jerusalem, on the road to Hebron. It was generally called Bethlehem-Judah to distinguish it from another Bethlehem in Zebu- lun (Josh. xix:15; Judg. xii: IO). It is also called Ephratah (the fruitful), and its inhabitants Ephratites (Gen. xlviii:7; Mic. v.2). Bethlehem is chiefly celebrated as the birthplace of David and of Christ and as the scene of the Book of Ruth. It was fortified by Rehoboam (2 Chron. xi:6); but it does not appear to have been a place of much importance, for Micah, extolling the 268 BETHLEHEM-JUDAH moral pre-eminence of Bethlehem, says: , ‘Thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah,” etc. (Mic. v.2). Mat- thew quotes this as—and thou, Bethlehem of Judah, art not the least of the cities of Judah,” etc. (Matt. ii:6) which has the appearance of a discrepancy. But it is answered that a city may be little without being the least, or that the evan- gelist may have quoted from memory, and hence the slight difference in expression, while the sense remains the same. There never has been any dispute or doubt about the site of Bethlehem, which has always been an inhabited place, and, from its sacred as- sociations, has been visited by an unbroken series of pilgrims and travelers. It is now a large vil- lage, beautifully situated on the brow of a high hill, which commands an extensive view of the surrounding mountainous country, and rises in parterres of vineyards, almond-groves and fig plantations, watered by gentle rivulets that mur- mur through the terraces; and is diversified by towers and wine-presses. It is a straggling vil- lage, with one broad and principal street. The houses have not domed roofs like those of Jeru- salem and Rumla ; they are built for the most part of clay and bricks, and every house is pro- vided with an apiary, the beehives of which are constructed of a series of earthen pots, ranged on the house-tops. Travelers differ as to the site of the well by the gate of Bethlehem, from which David longed so much to drink. But certain it is, that by the gate of the city there is a well with a covered piazza. The Latins, Greeks and, Armenians have each a convent there, and there still exists a fine church supposed to have been built by Helena, A. D. 326. The monks pretend to show to visitors the stable where Christ was born, and the manger where he was laid. The spot where Christ's birth took place is marked by a silver star. Like the show of Holy places at Calvary, the whole appears to be miserable profanation, and wretched deceit. The stable is a grotto or cave cut out of a rock, a cave into which one must descend. And there is no evidence that such stables were ever in use in the East. The fields where the angels appeared to the shepherds are pointed out to the east of the town, about half a mile distant (Matt. ii: I ; Luke ii:2-I2). The city was sacred to Christians from the earliest times, and the first care of the Crusaders was to secure the safety of its Christian popula- tion in A. D. Io99, before Jerusalem was taken. It was subsequently made a bishopric. One of the most remarkable Christian texts is that on the font in the Basilica, which is said, with true modesty, to have been presented by ‘those whose names are known to the Lord.’ The glass frescoes are of high interest, and were presented by Michael Comnenos in the twelfth century, A. D. The crests of knights who visited the church in the Middle Ages are drawn upon the shafts of the Basilica pillars. (C. R. Conder, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) 2. A town in the portion of Zebulun named in Josh. xix:15; Judg. xii: Io. It has been iden- tified with Beit Lahm, six miles west of Nazareth. by Dr. Robinson. BETHLEHEMIITE (běth"le-hem-ite), an inhabi- tant of Bethlehem. Among the Bethlehemites were Jesse (I Sam. xvi;I, 18; xvii:58), Elhanan (2 Sam. xxi.;19) and Elhanan, Son of Dodo (2 Sam. xxi. IQ). BETHLEHEMI-JUDAH (béth’le-hem-jū'dah), See BETHLEHEM I, BETH MAACHAH BETHMAACHAH (béth'mā'a-kah), (Heb. tº mº, bayth mah-ak-aw', house of the maa- chah), a place named (2 Sam. xx:14) in connection with Abel. Perhaps it is identical with Maachah, or Aram-Maachah, a small Syrian kingdom in the north of Palestine. BETH-MARCABOTH (běth 'már' kā-böth), (Heb.nº, nº, bayth-ham-mar-Āaw-both', place of chariots), a city of Simeon (Josh. xix:5; I Chron. iv:31) in the extreme south of Judah. Perhaps it was one of the stopping-places used in the chariot trade between Egypt and Jerusalem (I Kings x:19, 29; 2 Chron. viii:6; i:17); exact site is unknown. “ * BETHMEON (béth'maſon), (Heb. Tº F2, bayth me-own, place of habitation, Jer. xlviii:23). See BETH-BAAL-MEON, for which Bethmeon is a Con- tracted form. 269 BETHSAIDA BETH-PHELET (béth'phé'let), (Neh. xi:26). See BETH-PALET. º * BETHRAPHA (béth'rā'phâ), (Heb. ** T2, bayth raw-ſaw', house of Rapha, or of the giant), the name of the son of Eshton (B.C. 618), in the genealogy of Judah (1 Chron, iv:12). The name has not been identified as belonging to any place. BETH-REHOB (béth'ré'hob). See REHOB. BETHSAIDA (běth'sā'i-dá), (Gr. Bm0raičá, bayth sa/kee-dah", fishing-town), a town (tróNus, John i:44; Mark viii.22) in Galilee (John xii:21), on the west- ern side of the sea of Tiberias, towards the middle, and not far from Capernaum (Mark vi;45; viii.22). BETHMERHAK (bath'mar'hāk), (Heb. Tº Nº. nº. bayſh ham-mer-Ahaá', house of removal), the proper name probably of a locality, or only a house, beside the brook Kedron, between Jerusa- lem and the Mount of Olives (2 Sam. xv.17). The A. V. renders it “a place that was far off;” the mar- .* gin, “the Far House.” BETHMILLO (béth' mil'lo), bayth 2/27//ozy, wall house). (Heb. sº nº, 1. A fortress near Shechem (Judg. ix:2O). Prob- ably the same as the citadel of Judg.ix:46-49. 2. A castle of Jerusalem where King Jehoash was slain (2 Kings xii:2O). BETH-NIMRAH (béth'nim'rāh),(Heb.º. nº, bay//, 7zzzzz'rah, house of sweet water), a town in the tribe of Gad (Num. xxxii:3, 36; Josh. xiii:27), which Eusebius (who calls it Bethnabris, B70waſ pts) places five Roman miles north of Livias. This leaves no doubt of it being the same ruined city called Nimrin, south of Szalt, which Burckhardt mentions (Syria, p. 355) as situated near the point where the Wady Shoeb joins the Jordan, now called Tell-er-Rameh. Dr. Robinson understood that there was here a fountain corresponding to ‘the waters of Nimra' (Is. xv.:6; Jer. xlviii:34). BETH-PALET (beth'palet), (Heb. * * &ay//, /e/."Zez, house of flight), a city in the most southern part of Judah (Josh. xv.27; Neh. xi:26), also Beth-Phelet. Exact site unknown. BETH-PAZZEZ (béth'páz'zez), (Heb. Yºº h". bayſh paſs-tsafes, house of dispersion), a city of Issachar (Josh. xix:2I). * BETH-PEOR (béth'pë'or), (Heb. Tº F#, bayth Že-ore', house of Peor), a city of Moab, given to Reuben, and famous for the worship of BAAL- PEOR (Deut. Hi:29; iv.40, AAxiv.0; Josh. xiii:20). It was situated on the east of Jordan, opposite (áirévavri) Jericho, and six miles above Livias or Beth-haran (Euseb. Omomiasticon). It was in the possession of the tribe of Reuben (Josh. xiii:20). In the Pentateuch the name occurs in a formula by which one of the last halting-places of the children of Israel is designated—“the ravine over against Beth-peor” (Deut. iii:29; iv:46). In this ravine Moses was probably buried (Deut. xxxiv:6). BETHPHAGE (běth'pha-jë), (Gr. Bm9qayºff, baythºfag-ay", house of unripe figs; Comp. Cant. ii:13), a small village, which Our Lord, Coming from Jericho, appears to have entered before reaching Bethany (Matt. xxi. I; Luke xix:29); it probably, therefore, lay near the latter place, a little below it to the east. No trace of it now exists. Supposed Site of Bethsaida. It was the native place of Peter, Andrew, and Philip, and the frequent residence of Jesus. This gives some notion of the neighborhood in which it lay; but the precise site is utterly unknown, and the very name has long eluded the search of travelers. The last historical notice of it is by Jerome, but he affords no more information than may be derived from the intimations in the New Testament. It is true that Pococke (ii;p. 99) finds Bethsaida at Irbid; Seetzen at Khan Minyeh (Zach’s Monath. Corresp. xviii: 348); Nau at Mejdel (Voyage, p. 578; Quaresmius, tom. ii. 866), apparently between Khan Minyeh and Mej- del ; and others at Tabighah—all different points on the western shore of the lake. But Dr. Robin- son expresses his deliberate persuasion that these identifications can have no better foundation than the impression of the moment. (Robinson's Re- searches, iii, 3O4; King, Temple Hill). Christ fed the 5,000 ‘near to a city called Bethsaida’ (Luke ix:Io); but it is evident from the parallel passages (Matt. xiv:13; Mark vi :32- 45), that this event took place not in Galilee, but on the eastern side of the lake. This was held to be U11u Uſ Llic greatest difficultied in Sacred gengra- phy (Cellar. Notit. Orb. ii. 536), till the ingenious Reland afforded materials for a satisfactory solu- tion of it, by distinguishing two Bethsaidas; one on the western, and the other on the northeastern border of the lake (Palaestima, p. 653). The former was undoubtedly ‘the city of Andrew and Peter;' and, although Reland did not himself think that the other Bethsaida is mentioned in the New Testament, it has been shown by later writers that it is in perfect agreement with the sacred text to conclude that it was the Bethsaida near which Christ fed the five thousand, and also, probably, where the blind man was restored to sight. This, and not the western Bethsaida (as our English writers persist in stating), was the Bethsaida of Gaulonitis, afterwards called Julias, which Pliny (Hist. Nat. xv.) places on the eastern BETH-SHAN side of the lake and of the Jordan, and which Josephus describes as situated in lower Gaulo- nitis, just above the entrance of the Jordan into the lake (De Bell. Jud. ii. 9, 1 ; iii. Io, 7). It was originally only a village, called Bethsaida, but was rebuilt and enlarged by Philip the Tetrarch not long after the birth of Christ, and received the name of Julias in honor of Julia, the daughter of Augustus (Luke iii: I ; Joseph. Antiq. xviii: 2, 1). Philip seems to have made it his Occa- sional residence, and here he died and was buried in a costly tomb (Antiq. xviii:4, 6 Thomson is opposed to the idea of two Beth- saidas. He thinks it highly probable that the whole city on both banks of the river was ordi- narily attached to Galilee. He believes that there was but one Bethsaida at the head of the lake and that it was at the mouth of the Jordan (The Land and the Book, vol. ii, pp. 31, 32). BETH-SHAN (béth'shan), (Heb. ? F2, bayth Shawn', house of rest, or Rest Town; Sept. Beth- sam), a city belonging to the half-tribe of Manas: seh, west of the Jordan, and situated in a valley of that river, where it is bounded westward by a low chain of the Gilboa mountains. It is on the road from Jerusalem to Damascus and is about two miles from the Jordan, eighteen from the southern end of Lake Gennesareth and twenty-three from Nazareth. It also bore the name of Scythopolis, perhaps because Scythians had settled there in the time of Josiah (B. C. 631), in their passage through Palestine towards Egypt (Herod. i :205; Comp. Pliny, Hist. Nat. v. 16, 20; Georg. Syncellus, p. 214). As Succoth lay somewhere in the vicinity, east of the Jordan, some would derive Scythopolis from Succothop- olis (Reland, p. 992, sq.; Gesenius in Burckhardt, p. Ioš3, German edit.). It is also not improbably supposed to be the same as Beth-Sitta (Judg. vii: 22). Although Beth-shan was assigned to Manasseh (Josh. xvii:II), it was not conquered by that tribe (Judg. i:17). The body of Saul was fastened to the wall of Bethshan by the Philistines (I Sam. xxxi :10); Alexander Jannaeus had an interview here with Cleopatra (Joseph. Antiq. xiii: 13, 3); Pompey marched through it on his way from Damascus to Jerusalem (xiv:3, 4), and in the Jewish war 13,000 Jews were slain by the Scytho- politans (De Bell. Jud. ii:18, 3). In the Middle Ages the place had become desolate, although it still went by the name of Metropolis Palaestina tertia (Will. Tyr. pp. 749, IO34; Vitriacus, p. II 19). We find bishops of Scythopolis at the councils of Chalcedon, Jerusalem (A. D. 536), and others. During the Crusades it was an arch- bishopric, which was afterwards transferred to Nazareth (Raumer's Palaestina, pp. 147-149, Van de Velde). Written also Bethshcan. BETHSHEAN (běth'she'an), (Heb. ? nº bayſh shawn', house of security), (see Josh. xvii: I I, 16; Judg. i:27; and elsewhere). See BETH-SHAN. BETH-SHEMESH (béth'sha'mesh), (Heb. ??? nº, bayſh sheh'/zes/, house of the sun, i. e., Sun Town). 1. A sacerdotal city (Josh. xxi :16; I Sam. vi. I5; I Chron. Vi :59) in the tribe of Judah, on the (southeast) border of Dan (Josh. xv.: Io), and the land of the Philistines (I Sam. vi :12), prob- ably in a lowland plain, and placed by Eusebius ten Roman miles from Eleutheropolis, in the di- rection of the road to Nicopolis. It belonged at an early date to the Philistines, and they had again obtained possession of it in the time of Ahaz (I Kings iv:9; 2 Chron. xxviii:18). It was to this 270 Jerusalem (Neh. iii:I6). BETH-ZUR place that the ark was taken by the milch kine from the land of the Philistines, and it was here that, according to the present text, fifty thousand and threescore and ten men' were miraculously slain for irreverently exploring the sacred shrine (I Sam. vi. Ig). The Ir-Shemesh of Joshua (xix: 4I) is supposed to be the same as this Beth- Shemesh. 2. There was another Beth-Shemesh in Naph- tali (Judg. i:33). 3. Another in Issachar (Josh. xix:22). 4. And the Egyptian Beth-Shemesh is named in Jer. xliii: 13; although usually called On. BETHSHEMITE (běth 'she' mite), properly “Bethshimshite,” an inhabitant of Bethshemesh (I Sam. vi. I4, 18), B. C. I I40. BETH-SHITTAH (béth'shit' tah), (Heb. Tº F2, bayth shit-taw, house of the acacia, Judg.vii:22). BETHSURA (běth-sli'rā). See BETH-zur. BETH-TAPPUAH (běth'tap'pü-ah), (Heb. Tº F3, bayth taſ-ſoo'akh, house of apples), a city of Judah (Josh. xv.:53), which Eusebius says is the last city of Palestine, on the way to Egypt, four- teen miles from Raphia. It has been identified with Teffu/, five miles west of Hebron (Rob. ii:71). BETHUEL (bethu'el), (Heb.º. beth-oo-aſe, dweller in God or abode of God). 1. Son of Abraham's brother Nahor, and father of Laban and of Rebecca, whom Isaac married (Gen. xxii:22, 23). His name only occurs incident- ally (Gen. xxiv:15, 24, 47, 50) in the account of the transactions which led to that marriage, in which Laban takes the leading part (B. C. 2023). In Gen. xxv.20 and xxviii:5 he is called “Bethuel the Syrian.” (Blunt, Coincidences, I, sec. iv.) 2. A city of Simeon (I Chron. iv:30). , David sent thither a part of the recaptured spoil of Zik- lag (I Sam. xxx:27). It is probably the Chesil of Josh. xv.:30. Not identified. It may be the little village of Beit Aſila, 6% miles northwest of Hebron. BETHUL (bā'thul), (Heb. *3, beth-oo!", con- traction for Bethuel), the form under which the name appears (Josh. xix:4). It is probably the Bethel of Josh. xii:I6. BETHüLIA (beth'u-li'a), (Heb. ºn, betº-ul- yah), a place mentioned only in the Apocryphal book of Judith (iv.:5; vii: 1,3), and which appears to have lain near the plain of Esdraelon on the south, not far from Dothaim, and to have guarded one of the passes towards Jerusalem. Modern eccle- siastical tradition identifies Bethulia with Safed, near the lake of Gennesareth. The site of Bethulia is still undetermined. - BETH-ZUR (béth'zūr), (Heb. Tº F#, bayth #soor', house of rocks), a town in the tribe of Judah (Josh. xv.:58), twenty Roman miles from Jerusalem, on the road to Hebron (Onomast. s. v. “Beth-zur’), and consequently two miles from the latter city. It was fortified by Rehoboam (2 Chron. xi :7). The inhabitants assisted in building the walls of Lysias was defeated in the neighborhood by Judas Maccabaeus, who fortified the place as a stronghold against Idu- maea (I Macc. iv:29, 61 ; 2 Macc. xi :5; Comp. I Macc. vi :7, 26). It was besieged and taken by Antiochus Eupator (I Macc. vi. 31, 50), and for- tified by Bacchides (ix:52), whose garrison de- fended themselves against Jonathan Maccabaeus (x : 14); but it was taken and fortified by his brother Simon (xi:65, 66; xiv:7, 33). Josephus calls Beth-zur the strongest fortress in Judaea BETONIM (Antiq. xiii:5, 6). It has been identified under the name Beit-stir (Wolcott and Robinson, i :216, mote iii:277). This is another illustration of the wonderful preservation of Bible names (Wilson, Land of the Bible, i, 386). o BETONIMI (bét'o-nîm), (Heb. Pºtº, bef-o-meem', pistachio nuts), a city of Gad, towards the north of this tribe, bordering on Manasseh (Josh. xiii:26). The Hebrew word differently pointed occurs (Gen. xliii:II), “nuts,” A. V. BETROTHING (bé-tröth'íng). See MARRIAGE. BETULIA (be-tū'li-a), anointed stones. See STONES. BEULAH (beulah or be u’lah), (Heb. º. Öeh-oo-law', married), a name given to the Jewish church, importing its marriage with God, as their husband and sovereign Lord (Is. lxii:4). BEZAI (bé'zāi), (Heb. "32, bay-tsah'ee, victory, or conqueror). The descendants of Bezai to the nnmber of 323 who returned from Babylon B. C. 536 under Zerubbabel (Ezra ii:17; Neh. vii:23). The name also occurs among those who sealed the covenant with Nehemiah (Neh. x:18). BEZALEEL (bezāle-el), (Heb. *ś, bets at. a/e', in the shadow, i. e., protection, of God). 1. A famous artificer, son of Uri (Exod. xxxi: I-6; xxxv.30), to whom Jehovah entrusted the con- struction of the ark in the wilderness. He had charge chiefly of the metal works, wood and stone and a general supervision of the construction (Exod. xxxviii:22; xxvii). 2. A son of Pahath-moab (B.C. 458) and one of those with foreign wives (Ezra x:30). BEZEK (bé'zek), (Heb. Pº, beh'zek, lightning or brightness). 1. A city over which Adoni-bezek was king (Judg. i:4, Sg). {e 2. The place where Saul mustered his army to march to the relief of Jabesh-Gilead (I Sam. xi:8). It has been held that Bezek was not a city but a tract of country, for which there seems to be good grounds. At any rate it was not far from Jerusa- lem. But Conder identifies the site with the ruin Ibzik, thirteen miles northeast of Shechem. BEZ.E.R. (bé'zer), (Heb. T}3, beh'ſser, ore, gold or silver; Sept. Bogóp). - 1. A city beyond the Jordan, in the tribe of Reuben, and one of the six cities of refuge (Deut. iv:43; Josh. xx:8; xxi:36; I Chron. vi.78). The site is unknown. - 2. (Heb. as above), son of Zophah, a head of the house of Asher (I Chron. vii:37). BEZETH (bé-zeth), (Gr. Bm;é0, bay-2eth'), a place at which Bacchides encamped after leaving Jeru- salem (I Macc. vii; 19.). By Josephus (Ant. xii: Io, sec. 2) ille 11a111u is given as “the villago Beth- zetho,” or Berzetho, the northern suburb of Jeru- salem. (See JERUSALEM). BEZETHA (be-zé'tha). See BEZETH; JERUSA- LE. M. BIBLE (bib'1), (Gr. 813Xta, bāb-Zee'ah, Zibelli, the small books), a name supposed to have been first applied in the fifth century to denote the collect- ive volume of the sacred writings. 1. Name. The word occurs in the Prologue to Ecclesiasticus, ‘the Law, the Prophets and the rest of the books,’ and 2 Tim. iv:I3, ‘and the books.” Before the adoption of this name the more usual terms in the Christian Church by which the sacred books were denominated were the Scripture or writing, the Scriptures, the sa- cred writings and the sacred letters. These names 271 BIBLE are thus frequently applied to the sacred books of the Old Testament by Josephus and Philo, as well as by the writers of the New Testament (2 Pet. i:20; Matt. xxii:29; Rom. i :2; 2 Tim. iii:I5). 2. Tibisions. The Bible is divided into the Old and New Testaments. The name Old Testament is applied to the books of Moses by St. Paul (2 Cor. iii:14), inasmuch as the former covenant comprised the whole scheme of the Mosaic revelation, and the history of this is contained in them. This phrase, ‘book of the covenant,’ taken probably from Exod. xxiv:7; I Macc. i :57, was transferred in the course of time by a metonymy to signify the writings themselves. The word diathaykay, which we now translate testament, signifies either a testament or a cove- nant, but the translators of the old Latin version have by a Grecism always rendered it, even when it was used as a translation of the Hebrew Berith (covenant), by the word Testamentum. The names given to the Old Testament were the Scrip- tures (Matt. xxi :42), Scripture (2 Pet. i :20), the Holy Scriptures (Rom. i :2), the sacred letters (2 Tim. iii: I5), the holy books (Sanhed. xci:2), • the law (John xii:34), the law, the prophets and the psalms (Luke xxiv:44), the law and the prophets (Matt. v :17), the law, the prophets and the Other books (Prol. Ecclus.), the books of the old covenant (Neh. viii:8), the book of the cove- nant (I Macc. i :57; 2 Kings xxiii:2). The other books (not in the canon) were called apocryphal, ecclesiastical and deutero-canonical The term New Testament has been in common use since the third century, and is employed by Eusebius in the same sense in which it is now commonly applied (Hist. Eccles. iii:23). Tertul- lian employs the same phrase, and also that of ‘the Divine Instrument’ in the same signification. (See SCRIPTURE, HoLY.) W. W. 3. Jixty = six Books. Although properly considered as a unit, the Bible is a collection of sixty-six books which were originally written in three languages—the Hebrew, Chaldee, and Greek, these being the most extensively used of all the tongues of antiquity. These works were prepared in various locali- ties, in different ages, and by men who varied as much in mental attainment as in worldly posi- tion. They treat of the beginnings of earth and of primitive man; they recite the history of in- dividuals and of nations; they furnish an ex- tensive code of laws, civil, physical and moral; they include a wonderful collection of psalms or hymns; they contain letters written for the com- . fort and instruction of believers; they treat of God's dealings with men ; they portray His sub- lime patience and wisdom, and the physical em- bodiment of Divine love in the person of the Christ; they inculcate the whole duty of man toward his fellow clealul es and luis God; they describe his responsibilities and privileges, with the penalties and rewards which follow different lines of conduct. So complete a volume is its own witness that it came from the same mind which planned the earth with its wonderful resources, and adap- tation to the needs of humanity. The Bible fur- nishes moral and spiritual food, while the earth gives home and sustenance to the children of men. They both respond quickly to the inquiry of the uncultured mind, and they both contain problems which the greatest minds of earth have failed to solve. The Bible has lived through centuries of criticism while other monuments of letters have gone into oblivion. The literary treasures of Greece and Rome have followed those of earlier IBIBLE times into the halls of forgetfulness, but the circulation of this wonderful book is greater to- day than ever before. Thousands of volumes have been written in the effort to destroy its use- fulness, but it still guides the living and com- forts the dying, and thus it will continue to do until faith is swallowed up in victory. 4. A uthority of the TBible. Man is ever amenable to a higher power. From the first moment of his existence until the last vestige of his body has mingled with the dust, he is governed by physical law ; and every act of disobedience involves penalty; in like manner also he is amenable to the moral code, and here, too, sin is followed by sorrow. (1) Foundation of Jurisprudence. All law and order, all society, must rest upon authority; and that which opposes it is not reason, but egotism combined with that ignorance which has a tendency to deny whatever it fails to compre- hend. Human systems are outgrown, human au- thority is superseded, old laws are repealed, and new obligations are imposed. Creeds and theo- ries may be improved, but the eternal principles of truth and righteousness are unchanged. After thousands of years of struggle along the lines of reform, the world has failed to find any system of ethics which can compare with that which was taught in the Sermon on the Mount—it has failed to find any source of comfort like that which God's promises bring to the aching heart. All equable codes of jurisprudence are founded upon Biblical teaching, for as Blackstone well says: “An enactment is not a law when it con- flicts with the law of God.” (2) Its Claims. This book claims to contain precepts and commands which constitute the moral authority for humanity, and this claim comes not only from prophets and aposties, but also from the lips of Him “who spake as never man Spake.” There is no doubtful authority contained in the words: “Thus saith the Lord.” There is no hesitation in the command: “Search the Scrip- tures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life.” It is said of the Divine Master that “he taught as one having authority,” and his statement, “I say unto you,” carries with it an emphasis which is irresistible. It is true that the prophets, the apostles and the Christ not only assert and com- mand, they also argue and entreat, showing a constant purpose to use all means for the win- ning of men to the ways of righteousness, but by so doing they no more compromise their Di- vine mission than by their frequent appeals to hope and love. The Biblical claim to authority is reinforced by qualities which compel its recognition. In all Ilie Valiuus DUOks there is a single dominating line of thought binding the many parts into a perfect whole. The Christ is the great central figure of both prophecy and history, and the bringing of mankind to him is the one increas- ing purpose which runs through the ages—the one purpose which is manifest from the object lessons which were given in the wilderness to the crowning of the bride, the Lamb's wife, antidst the glories of Apocalyptic vision. Another guarantee of its claim is the purity of its teaching. Wickedness is condemned and holiness exalted, sin and sorrow are depicted, but into the very darkness is thrown the light of the Sun of Righteousness as a cleansing and re- deeming power. (3) Divine Element. The harmony of pur- pose, and the forceful teaching of uprightness, can 272 teachings. BIBLE be accounted for only by the presence cf the Divine element, and this is the basis of infallible authority. Whenever we meet the Divine, we come to the tribunal from whence there is no appeal. When God Speaks man can only obey. The truth of a statement depends upon its own nature, but its authority depends upon its origin. That which comes from God therefore is, and forever will be, absolute, supreme and final in its authority. 5. Têooks of the Old Testament and Their Jources. The Hebrew Scriptures are called the Old Testament because they pertain to the old cove- Inant. - (1) The Old Covenant. The Greek word Džatheke signifies both testament and covenant, but the term old covenant, as used by Paul in 2 Cor. iii.; I4, R. V., alludes not only to the books, but also to those early institutions described in the Pentateuch and spoken of in the writings of the prophets, and which, in process of time, were by a metonymy transferred to the books them- selves. In like manner, also, the writings per- taining to the new covenant came to be called the New Testament. These books have formed a center of ‘criticism and discussion for more than two thousand years, and in the course of the ages, the interest seems to increase rather than diminish, our Own genera- tion being more active in this investigation than any which has preceded it. (2) History. One reason why the Old Testa- ment is so absorbing an object of literary study, is because it has a history back of it. It ap- pealed to men in such a way that it was trans- lated into Greek nearly three hundred years be- fore Christ. In Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic, it was widely circulated, so that in all parts of the known world it bore its part in the great work of preparation for the introduction of Chris- tianity. The men of the Great Synagogue and the Tannite scribes did their work upon it. Christ and his disciples made it the basis of their It became the Bible of the Church as well as the synagogue, and to this Christ alluded when he said: “Search the Scriptures, for in thern ye think ye have eternal life; and they are they which testify of me” (John V:39). In the later centuries it has been translated into hundreds of languages, and has attracted the attention of those who study literary master- pieces. Hence, it has a wonderful interest aside from its religious value. But over and above these claims it is surely a marvelous storage bat- tery of spiritual power, and constituted the au- thority to which Christ and the apostles con- stantly appealed. We cannot wonder, therefore, that the scholars of the world have in the aggre- gate devoted thousands of years of skilled , lit- erary work to the solution of the problems which it presents. (3) Early Form. The first five books are still in the form with which the translator of Ecclesiasticus was familiar—still in the form in which Philo, and Josephus after him, knew them. These early workers knew them as a whole and not in the sources from whence some have Sup- posed them to be derived. . These books have been endorsed and preserved by three distinct and antagonistic classes of people, the Jews, the Samaritans and the Christians. It was these books, as distinguished from their sources, which molded Jewish thought during the Greek and Roman periods. It was the form in which we now have them and not in the form of Sundry BIBLE earlier documents, that Jesus and his disciples used them. (4) Authorship. In the preparation of the Pentateuch, Moses may have used the records of the early patriarchs; he may have embodied genealogies which had been carefully preserved— nay, the books themselves may have been partly written by an amanuensis, but if they were pre- pared by his authority or under his dictation, they were really his productions, and as such they were recognized by both his contemporaries and his St!CCCSSOTS. It is from “the books of Moses” and “the law of Moses” that constant quotations are made by later Biblical writers, twenty-seven of the succeeding books having many such references. It is also as the writings of Moses that these works are frequently quoted and endorsed by the Christ. He makes no reference to the possible sources from whence they may have been to a greater or less extent derived, and during all the ages of the Christian era these books, as a whole, have been establishing their claim upon mankind. Whether some restoration of the sources from which certain parts of them may have been drawn, can ever establish a similar claim, is a matter for future ages to decide. (5) Polychrome Bible. Another instance of Biblical study in the same direction is found in the treatment of the Book of Isaiah. In the “Polychrome Bible” Dr. Cheyne has analyzed the book into hundreds of fragments, which he re- gards as the product of Several successive cen- turies, and which he has arranged in an order entirely different from that to which we have been accustomed. In times past the book of Isaiah has been regarded as having many dis- tinctly marked discourses, each of them being a literary unit, but in Dr. Cheyne's work Scarcely one of these units remain, many of them hav- ing been taken apart and assigned to authors belonging to different centuries. But the book of Isaiah to which we are accustomed is that which is quoted by the author of Ecclesiasticus, the book which the translators of the Septuagint knew about three hundred years before Christ, and the one with which Josephus and other early writers were familiar. It is the one which Jesus of Nazareth used, and from which he read in the synagogue. It is the book containing prophe- cies of the Christ, of which he himself said: “This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears” (Luke iv:21). It is the book from which the first preachers of Christianity proved to their Jewish converts that Jesus was the Messiah of whom the prophets spake, and it is one which in all the later ages has commanded the attention of lovers of good literature because of its sub- lime prophecies, and Ilie Cloquent poetry of its diction. It is this book which has appealed to the human mind for thousands of years as being well worth studying, not in beautiful fragments but as one grand whole. It is worth while to attempt to find any possi- ble sources for the sake of the light which such an investigation might throw upon the work; but it would be intellectual suicide to substitute the study of the sources, for the study of the book. But very few, even of the men who support the new tradition, regard the results thus far reached as being final; the most of them will agree that the source-restorations of the newer school which they now accept are still open to much revision. And this is another reason for a study of the Old Testament as distinguished from its possi- ble sources. 273 BIBLE (6) Sources. The completed Old Testament Contains more than merely the extracts which the final authors have made from their sources. It gives us their judgment, either expressed or implied, in regard to the relations between the Sources and their proper interpretation. From the point of view of inspiration, we must hold that whatever Divine authority these books may have, comes largely through the men from whose hands the completed works came. Some Writers have claimed that inspiration belongs ex- clusively to the original documents, but a single illustration will expose the fallacy of that idea. In the fourth chapter of the Book of Ezra we find a copy of the letter written by Bishlam, Ta- beel and others to the Persian king—a letter in which the Jews who were building the temple were slandered. The letter is one of the original sources of the Book of Ezra, but it is here copied simply on account of its falsity, and to show that it is contrary to the mind of God. To assume, then, that other sources contain all the inspira- tion which has been given, is entirely contrary to the evidence in the case. The “holy men who spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” were as often the secondary, as the primary authors of the books. From a literary point of view Old Testament writers have sometimes been accused of being “uncritical,” but, they have at all events con- Structed books which have attracted more at- tention than any other literary product, and that, too, for a period covering more than twenty-two centuries. It may be well to inquire how many men, who call themselves “critical,” can construct even one book which will command attention from scholars for more than two thousand years? These early authors have done work which is still so thoroughly alive that this fact alone is conclusive proof of its value. They certainly had fountains of information which we have not.— they had the whole of certain works of which we have only the parts which they considered worthy of use. We, therefore, owe it to our- Selves to study these books as a whole. (See Old Testament Books Versus Their Sources, by Willis J. Beecher : Biff/iotheca Sacra. April, 1899, pp. 209, sq.) (See SCRIPTURE, Holy.) 6. Human Element in the Bible. * The later versions of the Bible have been con- ceded to be superior to the earlier, because of the better scholarship of its translators. (1) Translations. We feel this human ele- ment in the translation work, and our Bible may well be called a Divine-human book. All trans- lators have for themselves done the very best work, they could—all that honest, prayerful ap- plication could do in so difficult and responsi- hle an undertaking. And the Bible is better for this painstaking human element. No later traus- lation has been made from the original docu- ments than those from the hands of the Biblical writers themselves. They have been made first from copies, then from copies of copics, and so on, the originals having been lost. Scholars find that though there are thousands of minute variations in the hundreds of manu- Scripts which they have collated, there are no changes that affect the Divine doctrine of re- ligion. (2) Human Agencies. Nevertheless the copy- ing of the Bible is a human element. There is a blending of the human element, also touching the text as it came from the hands of the original writers, a blending of life, between the source of Divine revelation and the intelligent and responsi- 18 BIBLE ble human beings who penned the revelations com- ing through them. In these revelations we look to the man who was used to record them, not the pen that wrote, nor the fingers that held the pen, not the tongues of the men that spoke, but the Soul force—the whole man—as a free person- ality inspired in this superhuman work, the man chosen by God to communicate the Divine unto the human. Oehler in his Old Testament Theology, pp. 479, 480, says: “Whatever the prophet learned, experienced or observed, all that he feared or hoped, all concern- ing which he needed counsel or information, nay, even the external events which concerned him personally, all offered so many points of con- nection by which the Divine Word might reach him, and that word clothed itself in forms which had a relation to the idiosyncrasy and experience of the prophet, and was reported by him accord- ing to his individual rhetorical or literary powers.” (3) Personal Peculiarities. Prophets, apos- tles and evangelists all possessed individual pe- culiarities, stronger, perhaps, because of the greater personality of men thus gifted. We discover in them different degrees of edu- Cation, varying, degrees of learning, strong char- acteristics that lead them to the frequent use of phrases, particularly their own favorite expres- sions. Habits of thought are theirs, such as are readily noted, as in St. Luke's, in which educa- tion and Special gifts seemed the analysis or diag- nosing diseases and proclaimed him a physician. Commentators do not fail to note that the Book of Chronicles denote the art of priestly expres- Sion, and the fact that Amos was a herdsman and a gatherer of sycamore fruit is told by his Own peculiar speech. Thus we see that inspira- tion did not remove the human element from the men thus chosen for their responsible work. In- spiration did not give to them a precise identity of expression or memory, as seen in the record- ing of events and discourses in the time of our Lord, as at times one writer omits what another mentions, and in some places each writer has his own particular version. (See Matt. viii:25; Mark iv 38; Luke viii:24). Thus we see inspiration did not give them an equal degree of knowledge. St. Augustine says, referring to the different ex- pressions attributed to the disciples as they waken Jesus in the storm (see Matt. viii:23-25; Luke viii:22-24) : “The sense of the disciples waking the Lord and seeking to be saved is one and the same ; nor is it worth while to inquire which of these three was said to Christ. For, whether they said any one of these three, or other words which no one of the evangelists has mentioned, but of similar import as to the truth of the sense, what matters it?” (Quoted in Alford's Gr. Test). Each wrote according to his degree of inspira- tion, as he was impressed with different aspects of the same truths. (4) The Prophets. It is true that in some instances the prophets have been most earnest stu- dents and have also been devout believers that in answer to prayer their inspirations would be increased. In Dan. ix:2 it is said: “I, Daniel, understood by books,” and elsewhere it is writ- ten that the prophets as a class “inquired and searched diligently” to find out the manner and time of the Messiah's coming (I Peter i: Io). It was in direct answer to prayer that the inter- pretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream was made known to Daniel (Dan. ii:18, 19). Oehler, in his Old Test. Theol., p. 479, says: “In far the greater number of cases we must evi- dently conceive of the state in which the prophet receives a revelation, as merely one of profound 274 BIBLE Self-introversion and collectedness of mind in a state of perfect wakefulness. This prophetic state is most nearly related to communion with God in prayer. (5) Local and Historical Allusions. All the different books of the Bible have local and his- torical touches. Scholars can easily define to which epoch they refer. The “Orientalisms,” the “Hebraisms in Greek,” plainly point to the origi- nation of certain books. The author of Old Faiths in New Light, p. 42, says “the literature of Greece is not more thor- oughly Grecian, the literature of the age of Eliza- beth is not more genuinely English, than the Old Testament is thoroughly and genuinely the litera- ture of the peculiar people, bearing upon it the unmistakable stamp of the Semitic genius. The unhistorical interpretation of Scripture is as child- ish as an unastronomical view of the sky.” Eminent scholars claim that St. Paul's epistles have the peculiarity of dictated letters, and it is plainly to be noted that the later epistles of St. Paul have an increased spiritual view, but from earlier to later writings he was human and all the more genuinely Paul. (6) Message Bearers. The New Testament writers quote at will from the Old Testament; sometimes from the Septuagint, sometimes from the Hebrew. They change the manner of word- ing, but the original meaning is never lost. The inspired writers only claim to be the message bearers, thus revealing to men the Divine pres- ence in them of the Holy Spirit. St. Paul ac- knowledged his human dependence when he met the elders of the Ephesian church at Miletus, on his way to Judaea, as he said afflictions and bonds awaited him, but what particular trouble was to befall him at Jerusalem he did not know (Acts Xx:22, 23). All the more inspired was he for the moments of forgetfulness he had spoken of in I Cor. i. 16. It brings the Bible infinitely nearer to us, as we are convinced of the connecting link—the human element—in the Divine human book (The Human Element in the Bible, Rey D. W. C. Hunt- ington, Chron. Thought, June, 1892). (See SCRIP- TURE, HOLY ; INSPIRATION.) Z. The TBible and Jºcientific Research. The scientific man by no means ignores the Bible. He recognizes it as a factor not to be overlooked. No one can deny that the facts re- corded in its pages have been a stimulus to re- search during many past centuries. (1) Historical and Literary Grounds. Not only have the books of the New Testament been placed upon strictly historic and literary grounds, so their contents may be no longer regarded as mythical, but also the facts recorded in the Old Testament are taking their places among the ma- terials which the historian of antiquity must di- gest and reckon with. Egypt and the East are rapidly yielding up their secrets, archaeology and linguistic lore are add- ing their convincing proofs, and all seems con- firmatory of the genuineness and antiquity of the Bible narrative. (2) Science and Faith. The scientific man no longer regards his own conclusions as final ; he asks the question whether evolution is a final law P The question of questions is, whence comes the stream of life and the tendency to evolve or de- velop P Is it from above or from below P It is manifest to everyone who thinks at all that God must be reached in some other way than by the telescope or the microscope. The tendency of study and research seems hopeful and an assur- BIBLE ance is felt that scientific men have not dropped their belief in Christ, in the Bible and in God. The Scientific man is increasingly conscious of the limitations of his powers and functions. Spe- cialization is the order of the day. Physical science is itself only a specialized branch of universal science. Men no longer hunt for the philosopher's stone, for the secret of the renewal of youth, or for a method of attaining perpetual motion. The investigator of nature has ceased to look for power, and is content with process. He does not peer into a gland with his microscope in the hope of finding ego there. In- tent on the secret of the origin of life, he has given up the idea that the living proceeds from the non-living without the intervention of pre- ceding life. (3) Illustrations. The story of the flood is to him a matter of serious study. The student of comparative philology is prepared to detect in the simple story of Babel some strange intervention, which may account for the remarkable divergence of human language. The crossing of the Red Sea is now regarded as a fact, not fiction. The ancient Biblical law of heredity has emerged as a scientific discovery. Parthenogenesis is a familiar topic to the nat- uralist, and perhaps supplies an illustration of one of the most mysterious facts of Christianity, whilst another mystery—that which concerns the Triune God—may at least be symbolized by the presence of several sense centers in one organ- ism in what are usually regarded as among the most primitive kinds of animated life. One is inclined to ask: Is evolution a law P. Is it final P Or is it an ad interim speculation, help- ful and suggestive, and calculated to lead up to something which may have more of finality about it? There is a tendency in Bible readers to disre- gard the processes of nature on the ground that the Scriptures claim all nature as under direct Divine administration; and there is a counter tendency of science to economize the Divine action to the uttermost, to push it back into the region of the prehistoric and mythical, whence it fades from view altogether. A careless student might imagine that by the discovery of the law called conservation of energy there was neither room nor need left for God in the universe. But those who first announced this law did not drift to an athe- istic conclusion. The more one speculates on these things the more one sees that conservation of energy simply means conservation of physical energy, and only applies to one side of existence, the same being the case with the earlier discov- ery of the correlation of the physical forces and its offspring, the continuity of physical force. The substitute for creative action is automatic action. But automatic action, which in its true sense is as old as the Greek Testament, by no means dispenses with a preceding intelligence and force. All machinery, even the machinery of the uni- verse, is the product of intelligence and of power. (4) Results. We are thus led to a more full apprehension from a strictly scientific point of view of the mental and spiritual side of human nature. We come to believe that every human being is on the border of two worlds; he belongs to both, and both belong to him. He is the true meeting- place between them. Another desideratum is a free and full historical inquiry into the original nature and position of man. Whilst the tendency of geology is to reduce the time needed for man’s first appearance to a comparatively modern period, the archaeologist 275 BIBLE is pushing up the age of literature and civiliza- tion until it is almost within sight of the era of primeval man. It would be strange if, after all, the earliest evidences of the existence of man should point to a time when the traces of his mental powers were particularly conspicuous. And yet such a conclusion is within the bounds of possibility. It is, to say the least, conceivable that the spe- cial force which caused the first real man to be— whether that force worked through slow grada- tions or in the twinkling of an eye—may have prepared him for his unique position as a master upon earth by making him inventive and adaptive, long-lived and strong, to a degree which we can- not now easily comprehend. The materials in the hand of the anthropologist are not as yet sufficient for the solution of this problem, but it is an intensely interesting one, and must be kept steadily to the front in the present century. Nor is it to be forgotten that we are in the midst of a geographical discussion as to the posi- tion of Paradise; whilst the last word has not been said on the original language of man, and on the dissemination of primitive written characters in their simplest forms, east and west. The exploration of ancient cities is being rap- idly reduced to a science, thanks in a large degree to the unwearied enthusiasm and patient skill of Prof. Flinders Petrie, Prof. Sayce, Prof. Hil- precht and others. They have shown that what geological strata are to the pre-human period, eighty layers of pottery are to the historical hu- man eye, and to read their message rightly is as much a branch of science in its true, wide sense as is the interpretation of the fossil remains be- neath our feet. (5) A Living Book. As the scientific student sees a great deal more in nature than the casual observer, so does the student of archaeology find increasingly that the Bible is a living book. Its vivid historical and local coloring makes it what Il O gher collection of sacred books even professes to be. There are also phenomena in the Bible, such as its way of putting things, its selection of topics and its systematic tracing of everything back to the First Cause, which are replete with inter- est and philosophy. Its statements concerning natural phenomena need to be interpreted with extreme accuracy, both on their positive and negative side, whilst the series of marvels it records are to be read along- side of its theology and its central teaching, and not as a collection of isolated curiosities or fa- bles. They are signs, and the thing signified by them takes us to the very heart of the Creator. (See De Quincey’s Essays on Miracles.) If na- ; must be studied as a whole, so must the 1 D162. It is a collection of books by writers who un- wittingly contributed to a scheme the key to which is to be found in one historical Personage. To discuss the books without reference to the Per- sonage is like anatomizing a body without ref- erence to its head. We can hardly expect the scientific man in the ordinary sense of the term: to study the Bible scientifically unless the theolo- gian does so. (6) The First Cause. The greatest desideratum of all is that theism should be approached with steady steps from two sides, the Biblical and the sci- entific. Every thoughtful person must understand that the instruments of science cannot discover God. Evidences of his handiwork appear in nature, but he has better means of Hºli. himself to man, BIBLE The forces and processes of the material uni- verse, do not affect His nature or touch His be- ing. Space and time, which are very warp and woof of our existence, are not to Him what they are to us. It is to human nature—its most spirit- ual part—that we must turn if we desire to catch even a whisper of His real nature. “Show me thyself,” said a bishop of Antioch more than Seventeen centuries ago, “show me thyself, and I will show thee God.” Here, then, is a call to the man of science. If the existence of a planet can be inferred from the movements of other bodies, may not the existence of the Great Spirit be gathered from certain perturba- tions of the human spirit? At times we stand abashed and silenced as we realize that there are vast regions of existence of which we know next to nothing. I do not speak of the stellar but of the spiritual heavens. The Bible possesses a uniform system of psychology, of morals, and of metaphysics. Its writers are convinced that we live on the borders of two worlds whose laws are analogous—that the material world is a nursery for the spiritual. We should have a more careful inductive survey of the special phenomena of the universe as detected in human nature and revealed in cer- tain phases of human consciousness, and espe- cially in the will. May not scientific men look into this spiritual world P Do they not recog- nize psychology as science? May they not in- vestigate on scientific principles its immaterial side, where three empires meet—the psychologi- cal, the ethical, and the spiritual P Both parties now recognize the impassable gulf in nature be- tween body and soul, and both agree that these two are marvelously blended into one in human life. (See Scientific Research and Biblical Study, by the Rev. Canon R. B. Girdlestone, M. A.; Jour. of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute, vol. xxix, p. 25, sq.). 8. The TSible and Modern Jcholarship. Modern scholarship is active in every field of letters, and text-books of only five years ago are already considered antiquated. Whole systems of thought succeed each other with wonderful rapidity. The researches of later science are demon- strating the unity of the physical universe in its widest extent, and also , the identity of the laws which govern it; and the unity of the Di- vine method in the realm that we know is strong presumption of the same method in the region which lies beyond our knowledge. The Bible is not exempt from the universal spirit of investi- gation; the book is still under fire to even a greater extent than during the centuries that are gone, but it comes out triumphant from every fair 1nquiry, however searching it may be. The Old Testament as we have it since before the time of Christ, and the New Testament since the first century after Christ, have remained practically unchanged. Here we have the work of men, whatever may have been their names, who, if they are to be judged by their produc- tions, have a right to be called inspired. So much at least is beyond the reach of successful contradiction, but we must recognize also that these books have a history, and in order to understand the Christian Church, we must go back to the New Testament, and there we shall find that these writings partake largely of the thought of the Old Testament, and that they are in a sense the product of that book. Here we are met with the school called Higher Criticism, and the distinguishing features for which it contends are the emphasis of the 276 BIBLE doctrine of development, and the changing of the central point of ancient history from Moses to the prophets. The activity of the prophets, however, presupposes the Mosaic system, not only as an historical movement but as a legal foundation for the commonwealth of Israel. The Bible contains a record of the continuous revelation of God and His dealings with man- kind. It gives an illustration of the processes by which God is lifting man upward, and also the method by which the Father has adapted Himself to the partial comprehension of His children in bringing His revelation down within the limits of their understanding. (1) Archaeology. The age preceding that of the prophets is full of interest, and the research of the nineteenth century has brought it to a great extent within the range of our vision. The Spade of the explorer and the enthusiasm of Scholars who have devoted their lives to the deciphering of cuneiform texts, have given us an inside view of social life, not only in ancient Egypt, but also in the early days of the old As- Syrian kings. It is not many years since it was claimed that the Assyrian rulers who are spoken of in the Old Testament were purely mythical. But the names have been found graven upon corner stones or they have been deciphered on pages of clay which have been recovered from buried libraries, and lo! we have nearly a com- plete list of Assyria's monarchs already verified. The question has often been asked whether the story of the Deluge is true. But a wider knowledge of history, and a further search into the pages of clay have taught us that every peo- ple have their tradition of a great flood, show- ing that the survivors of that event handed down the story from one generation to another. The Assyrian account was found in the library of Asur-bani-pal, after the accumulation of cen- turies had been removed, but it was so covered with myth and fable that it might have passed for legend if it had been unsupported by other records. Early tradition also gives to a greater or less extent the story of Creation and the disobedience of man, but it is only in the Bible that we find the simple history of these things. This book tells us of “the beginning,” so far as a knowledge of this beginning pertains to the welfare of man, and so far as it is consistent with a progressive revelation. The great facts which have been recorded in Hebrew and Christian history have been sus- tained by close investigation. These records have been shown to contain truth and not fiction. (2) Practical Application. But truth is of little value unless it is practically applied, and hence the teachings of the Scriptures could never have won and held their place in human thought unless they had been to a greater or less extent embodied in the lives of those who believed them. Whatever may have been the names of these men there must have been such a character as Moses; there must have been an Abraham and a David, as also there were such men as the prophets. The late Professor Dillman of Berlin testified as follows: “The books of Moses admit of no explanation except on the supposition of a pre- paratory pure type of religion, such as according to Genesis belonged to those fathers; and such a higher form of religion of necessity presup- posed personal agents or , standard bearers.” (History of the Hebrews, vol. i., p. 240.) g These standard bearers were like sentinels along the line of humanity, from the beginning of human history down to the followers of the BIBLE 277 Nazarene, and the witnesses both before and after the Christ are the embodiment of a Divine revelation, which discloses an unchanging pur- pose from the foundation of the world to win men to truth and righteousness. In the Old Testament we find God making appeals to beings who are capable of moral and intellectual response. In it, as in that later reve- lation of Himself, Jesus of Nazareth, we find the mingling of the Divine with the human ele- ment—in this, as in the Christ, we have the self- witnessing revelation of which the crowning evidence is the response of the human heart. Men believe in Christ because through him God speaks directly to them—because His life and His mission fill a place in the great hungry heart of humanity which no other could ever fill. In like manner they recognize God’s voice in the teachings of the Book; they recognize His hand in the leadership of the world’s moral forces and they surrender themselves to the loving in- fluence of the Father. Thus, the books of the Old Testament lead up to the full revelation of the Christ. They are Messianic in a large sense of that term, and those who have come to know the Master gladly obey His injunction to “Search the Scriptures . . . for these are they which testify of me.” (See The Bible in the Conditions Created by Modern Scholarship, by Henry A. Stimson, Bib. Sacr., April, 1900, p. 366 sq.) 9. The TBible Not Outgrown. The general law controlling the productions of the human intellect is to the effect that they must Soon be outgrown and superseded by something else. The uninspired literature of antiquity has all been lost except the clay pages which are found beneath the foundation stones of buried cities. The most of the classical works of Greece and Rome have been saved from complete obliv- ion only by the allusions of later writers. Pliny wrote twenty books of history, but not one of them can be obtained to-day. There were one hundred and thirty comedies written by Plautus; only twenty are left. The most of Menander's writings are lost. Euripides wrote a hundred dramas, and they are all gone but nineteen, AEschylus produced a hundred dramas and only seven are left. Varro wrote the biographies of seven hundred Romans, but not a fragment of this great undertaking remains. Thirty books of Tacitus are lost. Don Cassius wrote eighty books; º twenty remain, and Berosus' history is all OSt. - The books of the Bible, however, have survived the wars of the ages and the storms of criticism. Marcion, who was expelled from the church for his wickedness, incidentally gives a catalogue of the books of the Bible, and that list, which was given in the second century, and that, too, by the hand of an enemy, is the same which we have to- day. Not only literary works, but scientific pro- ductions also are seen to be temporary. Indeed whole accepted Systems of science are rapidly supplanted by new theories. No system originating in the human intellect can Secure the full approval of succeeding ages, and this rule applies especially to human religions. The religion of Buddha was an improvement upon that of the Brahmans, but the present con- dition of China shows that the theories of Buddha and Confucius have long since passed beyond their usefulness. The inability of China to make any moral progress is shown by the ruthless massacres which even to-day are stain- ing the pages of her history. Such is her cruelty BIBLE and such her barbarism that the presence of all the great powers of the world is required within her borders. Mohammedanism at least flung the banner of theism into the face of idol-worshipers, but it rejected the only Teacher who ever came into this world for the salvation of men, and it has long since ceased to have any influence for good; it has been outgrown and is rejected by the intel- ligent portion of humanity. It is still fostered in Turkey and the whole land shows the results. Her industries are discouraged, the property, lib- erty and life of her citizens are in constant danger. The red hands of massacre seem to be restrained only by fear of the civilized nations. The history of Islamism, like that of Brah- manism, Buddhism and Confucianism, is that of rise, progress and decline. Their vitality is ex- hausted. Their votaries can make no further progress while under their influence, and if they would improve they must renounce the institu- tions of their fathers. (1) Progressive. Biblical teaching, however, instead of holding the seeds of decay, has been progressive. Beginning with the object lessons of ceremonial law, every sacrifice pointed toward the “Lamb who was slain from the foundation of the world.” Every prophet pointed to him, and when he came into the world and the predictions of the prophets were verified by history, he used “the law and the prophets” as the basis of his teachings. The principles which he advocated and urged upon the sons of men can never know decay. The religion of the Bible has confronted the old civilizations and outlived them all. It has met with the magicians of Egypt and the astrologers of Babylon; it has withstood the paganism of Rome and of northern Europe; it has come out triumphantly after the attacks of French, English and American infidelity. Occultism cannot feaze it; “science, falsely So- called,” cannot drown it. The book upon which it is founded lives to-day in three hundred lan- guages, coming to four-fifths of the human race in their own tongue. Three hundred million copies of it are in existence, and still the many- tongued press is busy in responding to the con- stant demand. It is itself calculated to awaken thought; it frankly challenges a full investigation of its claims. With nothing to fear and nothing to hide, it exhorts its own adherents to examine the foundations of their faith and to be able to give to every man a reason for their hope. Its great doctrines are of such a character that when the mind apprehends them the mental faculties are stimulated and provoked to inquiry. (2) Opposition. The book has always met with opposition because it opposes the selfish in- stiricts Uſ liullauily. Il duounces vice in all itg forms; it is a foe to crime and oppression—nay, it even denies to its adherents a liſe of ease and pleasure. It demands the denying of self for the good of others and commands its followers to “deal justly and love mercy” at whatever cost or sacrifice. It attacks the sins of governments as well as those of individuals and declares that “the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish—yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted.” (3) Meets the Human Need. The book has not been superseded. The stern denunciations of sin which were delivered at the foot of the quak- ing Mount are still in force. The Psalms of David are still the comfort of wounded hearts, and they still voice the triumphant peans of vic- tory. BIBLE The teachings of the Christ will never be outgrown. Untold millions of aching hearts have been comforted by his words. In trial and tribu- lation, in sickness and in Sorrow, in prison and torture, the loyal heart still turns to him, and never turns in vain. If the nineteenth century has been more re- markable for intellectual activity than any other that the world has ever seen, the nineteenth century has also done more than any other to spread a knowledge of the Bible in all parts of the world. Every human system has arisen because it was in harmony with the tendencies of the age, but the religion of the Bible has come into being in opposition to the natural tendencies of every age. It has carried the symbol of the cross into the places of darkness and cruelty and it shall bear the banners of victory when “there shall be no more death, neither sorrow nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain, for the former things are passed away.” (See the Divine Origin of the A’e/egion of the Bible, by the Hon. James Monroe, #. D., Bibliotheca Sacra, April and Oc- tober, 1896.) 10. Various Versions and Translations. Although the revelation of God's truth was first given to the race in Hebrew and Greek, it was designed to be extended to people of every tongue and nation. This truth was very early felt and acted upon by devout men. Even in the Old Testament times, as appears from Nehe- miah viii:8, the sacred Hebrew books were ex- plained in Chaldee for the benefit of the Jews, who had lost the knowledge of their native tongue during their captivity in Babylon. The Greek version, called the Septuagint, was made before the Christian era. (See SEPTUAGINT.) A trans- BIBLE $ *: tures to the common people. In the great British collections, the libraries of Oxford, of Cambridge, and of the British Museum, many vestiges of this tendency may be found in curious fragments of Anglo-Saxon and Anglo-Norman versions—rude and imperfect attempts to get portions of the Bible into the vernacular. The oldest of these, attributed to Caedmon, a monk, is the Bible his- tory paraphrased in the alliterative verse of Anglo- Saxon poetry. The Venerable Bede, who always . wrote in Latin, is yet associated with a version of St. John's Gospel in his native tongue. A Psalter is extant, said to be by a Saxon bishop of the lation was made directly from the Hebrew into . the Syriac. This version, called the Peshito, prob- ably dates from the second century. At a very early period a Latin version was made from the Septuagint, and the Latin Vulgate of Jerome was made A. D. 385-405. This version was declared by the Council of Trent in 1563 to be of equal authority with the original Scriptures. The Ger- man Bible now in use, the translation of Martin Luther, was first published in 1522, but before his time fourteen editions of the entire Bible had been printed and circulated in Germany. A French version made by Le Fèvre was published at Antwerp in 1530. Other French versions have been made by Olivetan (a cousin of Calvin, who improved the translation), by Martin Ostervald, and by De Sacy. Dutch version was ordered by the Synod of Dort, in 1619, which has been regarded as “the most accurate of all present modern versions.” (1) Early English Translations. The sluiy of the English Bible is one of the most remarkable in all the history of the Book of books since the manuscripts left the hands of the inspired writ- erS. In a book entitled “Our English Bible and its Ancestors,” the Rev. Mr. Walden says: “The experience of the Bible in its endeavors to reach the people has its best and most heroic history in the case of the Anglo-Saxon mind and of the English tongue. The spirit of Anglican in- dependence of the Roman rule has in this its most striking illustration, and the annals of the Refor, mation in England are bound up and identical with the annals of the English Bible. There would seem to have been a remarkable tendency in the early English Church, before Roman in- terference set in so strongly, to bring the Scrip- seventh century. A few chapters of Exodus and the Psalms were translated by King Alfred, who is recorded to have said that he desired ‘all the free-born youth of his kingdom should be able to read the English Scriptures.’ There are three versions of the Gospels and Some frag- ments of the Old Testament referred to the ninth and tenth centuries. Three or four more of the Gospels are assigned to the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Then, in the thirteenth century, a translation into Norman French of the whole Bible by an unknown hand, and various frag- mentary versions of the Psalms and other por- tions of the Bible, seem to have appeared here and there; all in uncouth, grotesque, and unintelli- gible lettering to the modern eye, but hungrily read by the educated among the people of those passing centuries.” But the knowledge, of letters at that time belonged only to the clerical and educated classes. The common people had no share in the word of God in their vernacular. When Wycliffe began his great work of translat- ing the Scriptures, he declared that he found nothing extant to help him. The facts in the following account of succeeding translations have been derived largely from Dr. Schaff's Dictionary of the Bible.” (2) John Wycliffe’s Translation. John Wy- cliffe lived in the fourteenth century, in the dawn of English literature. He was contempo- rary with Chaucer the poet and Mandeville. The great seats of learning, Oxford and Cambridge, in his day became, in a measure, worthy the name universities. Oxford is said to have had thirty thousand students in the beginning of the four- teenth century. But printing was not yet dis- covered, and all books had to be multiplied by the slow process of writing them out by hand. The work of translation occupied Wycliffe many The Rev. Dr. Krauth, in “Anglo-American Bible Revision,” writes of him : “Called to the work of reformation in faith and life, he saw, with the divine instincts of his mission, that noth- ing but the true rule of faith and life could re- move the evil and restore the good, and that the 1 estulation would be pertualletil Otily itſ Llle degree to which every estate of the church should be enabled, by possession of the rule, to apply and guard its teachings. He appealed to the Word, and to sustain his appeal translated the Word. He appealed to the people, and put into their hands the book divinely given to shape their con- victions. The translation of the Scriptures as a whole into English first came from his hands or under his supervision. It was finished in the last quarter of the fourteenth century. It was made from the Vulgate. Even had Wycliffe been a Greek and Hebrew scholar, it is doubtful whether he could have secured texts of the sacred originals from which to translate.” His version appeared in 1380, and was eagerly read. The Archbishop of Canterbury threatened the “greater excommunication 11pon any one who should read years. BIBLE 279 Wycliffe's version or any other, publicly or pri- vately.” Nearly half a century after his death the bones of Wycliffe were dug up and burned, by Order of the Pope, and his ashes thrown into the Avon: “The Avon to the Severn runs, The Severn to the sea, And Wycliffe's dust shall spread abroad, Wide as the waters be.” (3) William Tyndale’s Translation. The method of printing from movable type was dis- covered in the fifteenth century, and rendered effi- cient service in disseminating the translations of Scripture subsequently made. William Tyndale was born in 1484, and was burnt at the stake as a martyr to religious liberty, October 5, 1536. He determined “to cause the boy who driveth the plow to know more of the Scriptures” than had been known by those who pretended to be learned divines. Luther was his contemporary, and it is said that the two great translators met at Witten- berg. Tyndale's translation appeared at Worms in 1525, and was circulated in England in 1526. (4) Miles Coverdale (1488-1569) is the next name upon the list. His translation of the entire Bible appeared October 4, 1535, prefaced by a fulsome dedication to the king, Henry VIII. In order to render the volume more attractive, it was illustrated with several wood cuts. It was avowedly not made from the original tongues, but from three Latin and two German translations. The Old Testament was based chiefly on the Swiss-German (Zurich) Bible, and the New Testament on Tyndale, although with many varia- tions. This translation had but little influence upon the so-called Authorized Version. (5) The “Thomas Matthew” Bible was a compilation, although not a mechanical one, un- der this assumed name, made by John Rodgers (1505–55), Tyndale's friend—who is famous as the first Marian martyr, burnt at Smithfield, February 4, 1555—from the above-mentioned translations of Tyndale and Coverdale. It was published in London, 1537, but probably printed by Jacob van Meteren in Antwerp. The pub- lishers, Messrs. Grafton & Whitechurch, in some way interested Archbishop Cranmer in this edi- tion who, through Crumwell, Earl of Essex, pro- cured a royal license for it, and this Bible became the first authorized version. (6) Richard Tavener (1505-75) issued a re- vised edition of the Matthew Bible in 1539, but it never was widely used. Its sale may have been fººd by the publication of the so-called Great 1 DJ e. (7) The “Great Bible,” sometimes called Whitechurch's, after the name of one of the print- ers, or oftener “Cranmer's Bible,” from the mis- taken idea that lie was llie Culitor of it, was pub- lished in London, I539. Its name came from its size; its pages are fully fifteen inches in length and over nine in breadth. Its text is Matthew’s, re- vised by Coverdale. It was the first edition which printed in a different type the words not found in the original. It also derives interest from the fact that the Scripture sentences in the English Prayer- book in the Communion Service, in the Homilies, and the entire Psalter are taken from it. In 1540 appeared the Cranmer Bible, so-called from the archbishop's prologue, but in fact only a new revised edition of the Great Bible of the previous year. (8) The Geneva Version (1560) was made by the refugees from the Marian persecution, princi- pally by William Whittingham (1524–89), whose wife was Calvin's sister. But the Genevan Bible BIBLE must not be confounded with the New Testament which appeared there in June, 1557, the fruit of the editorial labors of Whittingham. The Gene- van Bible was begun the January following. The New Testament had for the first time the division of verses (following the Greek of Stephens, I551), with the numbers prefixed. It had also characteristic marginal notes, and marked by italics the words supplied. “. . . It became at Once the people's book in England and Scotland, and it held its place not only during the time of the Bishops' Bible, but even against the present Authorized Version for at least thirty years. It was the first Bible ever printed in Scotland (1576– 79), and it was the cherished volume in all Cove- manting and Puritan households.” (Eadie, The English Bible, vol. ii, p. 15.) (9) The Bishops' Bible. In the early part of Queen Elizabeth's reign the Great Bible was allowed to be read in the churches as the author- ized version, but the Genevan edition was a for- midable rival, greatly excelling it in popularity, and besides in accuracy. Thus it came about that a revision was demanded, and this Archbishop Parker (I504-75) was anxious to make. He be- gan it about 1563-64, having distributed the work to fifteen scholars, eight of whom were bishops, and therefore the Bible was called “The Bishops' Bible,” and the book was published in 1568. It was a revision of the Great Bible, which in turn was based on “Matthew’s” rescension of Tyndale. An effort was made to secure for the Bishops' Bible the royal sanction, but ineffectually. Con- vocation, however, passed a decree in 1571, “that every archbishop and bishop should have at his house a copy of the Holy Bible of the largest volume as lately printed in London, and that it should be placed in the hall or large dining-room, that it might be useful to their servants or to strangers.” The order applied to each cathedral, and, “so far as could be conveniently done, to all the churches.” The Bishops' Bible supplanted the Great Bible, but could not the Genevan, be- cause that was widespread among the people. The most important fact in its history is that it was made the basis for the recension which re- sulted in the King James Version, which has been before the people as the authorized version for two and a half centuries. (10) The King James Version. This version has so long held undisputed sway that most of its common readers can scarce think of any other as the true Bible. And all those who read edi- tions issued from the presses of Great Britain are familiar with the dedication : TO THE MOST HIGH AND MIGHTY PRINCE JAMES, By the Grace of God, KINU, UF GREAT BRITAIN, TRANCE, AND IRELAND, DEFENDER OF THE FAITH, ETC., The Translators of the Bible wish Grace, Mercy, and Peace, through JESUS CHRIST our Lord. - This piece of ful some adulation has very hap- pily disappeared from most of the Bibles issued from the American press. A recent article in the “North American Re- view” sketched the beginnings of this important In OVernent : “The authorized English version, so-called— although it was never properly authorized either by king, or parliament, or convocation, but simply by usage—had its birth in the Hampton Court BIBLE Conference, held in January, 1604. In that noble palace, built nearly a hundred years before by Cardinal Wolsey, on the banks of the Thames, and presented to Henry VIII, there assembled in the presence of King James, and at his invitation, Archbishop Whitgift of Canterbury, Bishop Ban- croft of London, Seven other bishops, and eight deans, on the part of the conservative conformists, and four leaders of the progressive Puritan party, with the learned Dr. John Reynolds of Oxford, to confer about the burning questions which agitated the then undivided Church of England. The king acted both as moderator and judge, and lost no chance to display his learning and wit during the debate. He rudely rejected every pe- tition of the Puritans, using as his final argument: ‘I will make them conform themselves, or else I will harry them out of the land, or else do worse.’ By doing worse, he meant, just hang them, that is all.’ This was his short method with dissenters. - “In one point, however, he yielded to the ob- noxious Puritans, notwithstanding the protests of the bishops. This was the revision of the Bishops' Bible, which had, from Queen Elizabeth's time, been used in all the churches of England, while the Geneva Bible of 1560 was the favorite version of the common people in their families. “Dr. Reynolds, the real mover of the enterprise, is described by Anthony Wood as a prodigious scholar, who ‘had turned over all writers, pro- fane, ecclesiastical, and divine, all the councils, fathers, and histories of the Church.’ He was commissioned as one of the translators of the com- pany which had in charge the prophetical books of the Old Testament; but he died in May, 1607, four years before the publication of the work. “The king was not slow in making prepara- tions. In July of the same year he commissioned fifty-four dignitaries and scholars, who had been selected by some unknown but, no doubt, compe- tent authority, to carry out the revision, and di- rected Bancroft, who in the meantime had be- come archbishop of Canterbury, to make provis- ion for the compensation of the translators by church preferment. He divided them into six classes, who were to meet at Westminster (Lon- don), Cambridge, and Oxford, two classes in each place.” Although the number of translators appointed was 54, only 47 were actually engaged in the work. - The following are the rules which were com- posed to govern them in their labors: “(I) The Ordinary Bible read in the Church, commonly called ‘The Bishops' Bible,” to be fol- lowed, and as little altered as the truth of the original will permit. “(2) The names of the prophets and the holy writers, with the other names of the text, to be retained as nigh as may be, accordingly as they were vulgarly used. “(3) The old ecclesiastical words to be kept ; viz.: the word church not to be translated congre- gation, etc. “(4) When a word hath divers significations, that to be kept which hath been most commonly used by the most ancient fathers, being agreeable to the propriety of the place and the analogy of the faith. “(5) The division of the chapters to be altered either not at all or as little as may be, if neces- sity so require. “(6) No marginal notes at all to be affixed, but only for the explanation of the Hebrew or Greek words which cannot, without some circumlocution, so briefly and fitly be preserved in the text. 280 BIBLE “(7) Such quotations of places to be originally set down as shall serve for the fit reference of one Scripture to another. “(8) Every particular man of each company to take the same chapter or chapters; and having translated or amended them severally by himself where he thinketh good, all to meet together, con- fer what they have done, and agree for their parts what shall stand. . “(9) As any one company hath despatched any One book in this manner, they shall send to the rest to be considered of seriously and judiciously; for His Majesty is very careful in this point. “(IO) If any company, upon the review of the book so sent, doubt or differ upon any place, to send them word thereof, note the place, and withal Send the reasons; to which if they consent not, the difference to be compounded at the general meeting, which is to be of the chief persons of each company at the end of the work. “ (II) When any place of special obscurity is doubted of, letters to be directed by authority to Send to any learned man in the land for his judg- ment of such a place. “(I2) Letters to be sent from every bishop to the rest of his clergy, admonishing them of this translation in hand, and to move and charge as many as being skillful in the tongues, and having taken pains in that kind, to send his particular ob- servations to the company either at Westminster. Cambridge, or Oxford. “(I3) The directors in each company to be the deans of Westminster and Chester for that place, and the king's professors of Hebrew and Greek in either university. “(I4) These translations to be used when they agree better with the text than the Bishops' Bible: Tyndale's, Matthew's (Rogers'), Cover- dale's, Whitchurch's (Cranmer's), Geneva. “(15) Besides the said directors before men- tioned, three or four of the most ancient and grave divines in either of the universities, not employed in translating, to be assigned by the vice-chancellor, upon conference with the rest of the heads, to be overseers of the translations, as well Hebrew as Greek, for the better observation of the fourth rule above specified.” How closely these rules were followed it is impossible to say. A passing remark of Selden furnishes nearly all that can now be known of what may be termed the private history of our English Bible: “The translation in King James' time took an excellent way. That part of the Bible was given to him who was most excellent in such a tongue, and then they met together, and one read the translation, the rest holding in their hands some Bible, either of the learned tongues, or French, Spanish, Italian, etc. If they found any fault, they spoke ; if not, he read on.”—Table 1 alk. When the revision was completed, three copies of the whole Bible were sent (to London) —one from Cambridge, a second from Oxford, and a third from Westminster—where they were committed to six persons, two from each company, who reviewed the whole. This final revision lasted nine months. The work was at last given up to the printer, Robert Barker; the proofs were read by Dr. Thomas Bilson, bishop of Winchester, and Dr. Myles Smith (appointed bishop of Glou- cester in 1612). The first edition of the new revision bore the date of 1611. The printing of the Bishops' Bible was soon stopped, but the Genevan Bible con- tinued to be used until about the middle of the seventeenth century, when King James’ version gained general acceptance, and has so continued to be the Bible of the more than a hundred mil- BIBLE ‘lions of English-speaking people. The beauty of its style has drawn praises from men of most diverse tastes. Mr. Huxley says: “It is writ- ten in the noblest and purest English, and abounds in exquisite beauties of mere literary form.” Dr. F. William Faber says: “It lives on the ear like a music that can never be forgotten, like the sound of church-bells, which the convert hard- ly knows how he can forego. Its felicities often seem to be almost things rather than mere words. It is part of the national mind and the anchor of national seriousness. The memory of the dead passes into it. The potent traditions of child- hood are stereotyped in its verses. The power of all the griefs and trials of a man is hidden beneath its words. It is the representative of his best moments; and all that there has been about him of soft, and gentle, and pure, and penitent, and good speaks to him for ever out of his English Bible.” Rev. Dr. Krauth, one of the Revisers, writes: “The Bible of 16II encountered prejudices and overcame them : it had rivals great in just claims and strong in possession, and it displaced them; it moved slowly that it might move surely; the Church of England lost many of her children, but they all took their mother’s Bible with them, and, taking that, they were not wholly lost to her. It more and more melted indifference into cordial admiration, secured the enthusiastic approval of the cautious scholar, and won the artless love of the people. It has kindled into fervent praise men who were cold on every other theme. It glorified the tongue of the worshiper in glorifying God, and by the inspiration indwelling in it, and the inspiration it has imparted, has created English literature.” Rev. Mr. Walden beautifully says: “The Eng- lish Bible, in its present form two hundred and sixty years old in this year of grace, given to the public when Shakespeare, and Bacon, and Ra- leigh, and Ben Jonson, and Drayton, and Beau- mont, and Fletcher were living to read and ad- mire, the richest formation of that great and plas- tic era of our language, the ‘bright consummate flower' of saintly labor and scholarly genius, the wonder of literature, coming down with the works of Shakespeare, and, like them, preserving to us the wealth and force of the Saxon tongue—our mother English in its simplicity and perfect beauty—the picturesque structure of an age now long gone by, already gray with antiquity, in whose familiar forms of speech the voices of our fore- fathers and kindred linger, and the inspiration of the Almighty seems to speak as with the majesty of an original utterance,—the English Bible has impressed itself with an almost overpowering au- thority upon the Christian heart of to-day, and is looked upon, in many cases, as if it were the actival production of the ancient scribe, and its pages are read and pondered over as 11 they con- tained the ultimate and 11nalterable expression of Divine truth.” It is hard to realize, without stopping to reflect, how long the King James' Version has been domi- nant. Its revisers were at their work when Jamestown, which claims the honor of being the oldest English settlement in America, was founded. The completed work was published in full nearly ten years before the Pilgrims landed on Plymouth Rock, in Massachusetts. Nearly the whole of American history has been written while the English Bible has remained unchanged. Shakespeare, Milton, Bacon, Bunyan, Newton, have added imperishable treasures to English literature. Two centuries and a half of scholar- ship have been concentrated upon every phase of 281 BIBLE the divine Word. The time for a revised version of the Scriptures, therefore, came in the fullness of time. (11) The Revised Version. In the preface to the Revised Version the translators say: The revision of the Authorized Version was undertaken in consequence of a resolution passed by both houses of the Convocation of the Province of Canterbury, as has been fully explained in the Preface to the Revised Version of the New Testament, which was first published in May, 1881. When the two companies were appointed for carrying out this work, the following general principles, among others, were laid down by the revision committee of convocation for their guid- 3.11Ce . (I) To introduce as few alterations as possible into the text of the Authorized Version con- sistently with faithfulness.” (2) To limit, as far as possible, the expression of such alterations to the language of the Author- ized and earlier English versions.” ‘(4) That the text to be adopted be that for which the evidence is decidedly preponderating; and that when the text so adopted differs from that from which the Authorized Version was made, the alteration be indicated in the margin.” (7) To revise the headings of chapters and pages, paragraphs, italics, and punctuation.’ In order to show the manner in which the Old Testament company have endeavored to carry out their instructions, it will be convenient to treat the subjects mentioned in the foregoing rules in a somewhat different order. It will be observed that in Rule 4 the word “Text' is used in a different sense from that in Rule I, and in the case of the Old Testament de- notes the Hebrew or Aramaic original of the sev- eral books. In this respect the task of the re- visers has been much simpler than that which the New Testament company had before them. The Received, or, as it is commonly called, the Massoretic Text of the Old Testament Scriptures has come down to us in manuscripts which are Of no very great antiquity, and which all be- long to the same family or recension. That other recensions were at one time in existence is prob- able from the variations in the Ancient Versions, the oldest of which, namely the Greek or Septua- gint, was made, at least in part, some two cen- turies before the Christian era. But as the state of knowledge on the subject is not at present such as to justify any attempt at an entire reconstruc- tion of the text on the authority of the Versions, the revisers have thought it most prudent to adopt the Massoretic Text as the basis of their work, and to depart from it, as the Authorized Translators had done, only in exceptional cases. With regard to the variations in the Massoretic Text itself, the revisers have endeavored to trans- late what appeal el Lu thic m to be the bogt reading in the text, and where the alternative reading seemed sufficiently probable or important they have placed it in the margin. In some few in- stances of extreme difficulty a reading has been adopted on the authority of the Ancient Versions, and the departure from the Massoretic Text re- corded in the margin. In other cases, where the versions appeared to supply a very probable though not so necessary a correction of the text, the text has been left and the variation indi- cated in the margin only. In endeavoring to carry out as fully as possible the spirit of Rules I and 2, the revisers have borne in mind that it was their duty not to make a new translation, but to revise one already ex- isting, which for more than two centuries and a BIBLICAL THEOLOGY half had held the position of an English classic. They have therefore departed from it only in cases where they disagreed with the translators of I6II as to the meaning or construction of a word or sentence; or where it was necessary for the sake of uniformity to render such parallel pas- Sages as were identical in Hebrew by the same English words, so that an English reader might know at Once by comparison that a difference in the translation corresponded to a difference in the original; or where the language of the Author- ized Version was liable to be misunderstood by reason of its being archaic or obscure; or finally, where the rendering of an earlier English version seemed preferable, or where by an apparently slight change it was possible to bring out more fully the meaning of a passage of which the trans- lation was already substantially accurate. The New Testament revision was completed in 1880, just 500 years after the first English trans- lation of the whole Bible by Wycliffe. By 1887 the whole Bible was revised. About one hun- dred of the ablest scholars of all denominations on both continents assisted in the laborious work of translation. BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 1. Introductory. Biblical Theology is based on the assumption that, as far as their outward form is concerned, the religious conceptions found in the Christian Scriptures are subject to the laws that govern the formation and growth of ideas in other spheres. It consists in the study, arrangement, and presentation of the religious ideas of the Bible in their chronological and genetic relations with one another and with their historical setting. (1) Basal Assumptions. This definition puts Biblical Theology in connection, on the one side, with the science of religion, which has for its material all the religions of the world, and on the other with a circle of so-called theological sciences centered in and growing out of the canonical books of the Bible. As far as its affilia- tion with the science of religion in general is concerned, Biblical Theology is prepared to rec- ognize that its subject matter has elements com- mon to all the religions of the world. It is pre- pared, further, to concede that the preliminary stages of that growth of thought which it deals with run parallel with the stages of growth passed through by other religions. Still further, that these parallels also prepare the way for the final stage of that development which it aims to examine. But it claims a unique character and an authoritativeness for the religion of which it traces the growth and examines the exact sig- nificance. It does not consider it a part of its own function to validate this claim ; it presup- poses that it has buuu p1 Uvel valid outside of its own sphere. It rejects as unscientific the pre- sumption that the religion of the Bible is “one of the great religions of the world, nothing less, but also nothing more.” (Kuenen’s Religion of Israel, vol. i., p. 5.) (2) With What Classified. As far as its re- lation to other theological sciences, based like itself, on the canonical Scriptures is concerned, it is to be classified with those of them that deal with history. It is a history of revealed thought in the process of revelation. It is allied to exege- sis, as far as sound exegesis precedes and con- ditions it. It is allied to history of doctrine in as far as this traces the growth of a systematiza- tion of revealed truth after its original formation. It is allied to systematic theology in that this department correlates the facts of Biblical the- 28 2 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY ology with philosophical postulates and scientific conclusions. Biblical theology is contented with the narrower but more essential task of ascertain- ing the exact circumstances under which, and the forms in which, revealed thought emerges and flows within the period of its first appearance. (3) A Modern Science. Biblical Theology is a modern Science. It had its origin in a series of efforts to lead theological discussion into the use of Scripture texts in their proper historical Sense. Under the stress of controversy the words of Scripture had come to be used without due regard to their true perspective and setting. A passage in Genesis was often made to serve the Same end as one in the gospel of St. John. Vari- Ous protests were made during the middle of the eighteenth century against this sort of usage, and Out of these protests issued, in 1789, Gabler's Essay on the true distinction between Biblical and Dogmatic Theology. The true reason for the existence of Biblical Theology was given in this essay, as well as the principle that should govern it. The programme outlined by Gabler was taken up and carried out with varying de- grees of fidelity to the original idea by a line of Successors; and during the century that has elapsed since the publication of this essay, Bib- lical Theology has won its way into recognition as a legitimate and exceedingly valuable, even in- dispensable, theological science. - According to the natural divisions of the ca- nonical Scriptures, Biblical Theology is generally treated under two heads: Old Testament The- ology and New Testament Theology. 2. Old 6 estament Theology. A final and thoroughly satisfactory historical exposition of the religious ideas of the Old Testament pre- supposes a final theory of the order in which the books of the Old Testament were produced. Such a theory Biblical Theology cannot construct in its own right; it must receive it from Biblical criticism. But so long as there is neither abso- lute nor even proximate uniformity on this point in the field of Biblical criticism, the only course left for Biblical Theology is to mass the content of the Old Testament, and give it as a whole, without endeavoring to trace any development within it. In the Old Testament dispensation two types of thought are discernible, which may be designated as the Mosaic and the Prophetic. (1) Mosaic System. The Mosaic type or system is characterized by the emphasis it lays (a) on a political and social system of organiza- tion as a foundation for the true religious life; (b) on the moral code, and (c) on the ritual of worship. Of these the political system may be set aside here as the remotest from the purposes of theology, although in the Mosaic law it was most 1ntimately related to the religious life of the nation. (a) The moral aspect of the Mosaic system was embodied in the so-called Book of the Covenant (Exod. chaps. xx-xxiv), whose nucleus is the Decalogue. The construction of the Decalogue shows that the ethical life was intended to be rooted in and blended with the religious. Of the ten commandments, the first three refer purely and simply to man’s relation to God; the fourth regulates the life of man, partly with reference to his duty to God and partly for its own, sake, and the remainder refer to earthly and human re- lations; but they all derive their sanction from, and are calculated to promote, spiritual life. (b) The ritual system of the Mosaic law is in- tended to express certain underlying religious ideas. The most important of these are the unity BIBLICAL THEOLOGY of God, his spirituality, his omnipotence and om- nipresence, and his special love for Israel, his covenant people. The aim of the ritual is the Sanctification of the worshiper as a member of the covenant people. In order to secure absolute holi- ness, the worshiper was required to offer sacrifice to Jehovah, designed to represent, secure or pre- serve his normal relation to him. The primitive form of Sacrifice round which the Mosaic ritual grew up was the burnt-offering, consisting of a bullock, a lamb or a pair of pigeons, according to the means of the worshiper. It signified complete consecration and adoration. The victim was brought to the door of the place of worship; the worshiper laid his hands on its head; it was slain, and the bones being broken it was completely burned. The next in importance of the sacrifices was the peace-offering, consisting of an animal taken either from the herd or from the flock, without blemish, male or female. It was intended to express or secure reconciliation with Jehovah. To this end an elaborate ceremony was provided for its performance. The sin-offering, consisting of a young bullock or a male or female kid, was designed to expiate sins committed in ignorance by individuals or by the people. The trespass-offering, consisting of a ram, was designed to expiate offenses against the rights of men. As an adjunct to animal sacrifices, the ºneal-offering was appointed, consisting of un- baked flour, baked loaves or roasted or parched ears of grain. (c) For the offering of sacrifice the Mosaic ritual provided one special place, because its cor- ner-stone was the unity of God and the unity of God’s people. It provided, further, a special body of men organized into a hierarchy. A high priest was appointed to be the head of the hierarchy and perform the highest sacred functions. A priest- hood and a ministry of lower rank, the Levitical, were assigned duties according to their order. Further, the Mosaic ritual provided a cycle of fes- tivities and Sabbaths, designed by their regular recurrence to fix the worshiper in habits of devo- tion, and impress, as deeply as such ordinances can, the necessity of holiness. And in addition, the series of distinctions of clean and unclean in the matter of habit, food, and conditions of bodily health are calculated to keep constantly. alive the rigid demand of God for perfect obedience to his law and conformity to his revealed character. The need of putting away sin was, further, particularly significant in the supreme acts of expiation which took place on the Day of Atonement. (2) Prophetic Type. (a) Prophecy, as a fea- ture of the religious life of Israel, is as old as the people itself. It is clearly understood to be the communication of the will nf God fo his neople through accredited men, to whom he vouchsafes revelations by His Spirit. A prophet has a dis- tinct and irresistible call; he is under the guidance of Jehovah and filled with His Spirit. Two stages are discernible in the history of prophecy, the first preceding the eighth century B. C., and the Second extending from the opening of the eighth Century to the end of the Old Testament period. These are distinguished from one another by clear characteristics. approach to the vaticinations of the heathen ; mat- ters of private nature are referred to the prophet. In the latter, prophecy assumes a loftier tone; it is concerned only with the affairs of the kingdom of God. In the earlier, the prophets do not dis- dain to use physical force in carrying out their de- signs. In the second, moral suasion alone is used. $) *d In the earlier stage, there is an 83 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY In the earlier, the prophet is called a seer, rhoeh; in the later, he is a prophet, nabhi. The transi. tion is noted in I Sam. ix:9, and indicates a pas- Sage in the mode of revelation from the vision or dream to the subconscious or intuitive process. (b) The prophets always assume the being, unity, and spirituality of God, declaring all idols “not—gods.” At first the relation of Jehovah to other peoples than Israel is not prominently in their minds, but it is defined gradually as one of dominion and absolute authority. The prophets also emphasize the eternity of Jehovah, and ascribe to him unlimited power and knowledge, but the attribute of God which above all others impresses them is his holiness. This is conceived of as his uniqueness, and made sometimes synony- mous with his real divinity, his purity of essence. It issues in his relations with creatures, in the subordinate attributes of justice, truth, or faith- fulness. The last of these is revealed especially in his fulfillment of all promises and persistence to Covenants. The goodness or mercy of Jehovah is also emphasized in the prayers and psalms of the period. As related to the world, God is the creator; he directs, controls, and overrules all the affairs of nature, the peoples of the earth; and the actions of individual men and even the trivial and incidental matters of life, such as the casting of a lot, are determined by him. . Jehovah has revealed himself to his people (a) in symbols, which, without representing him, sug- gest his attributes and indicate his presence. Such are the cherubim, described by Ezekiel, and the seraphim of Isaiah’s inaugural vision. (b) Through his messengers or angels, who announce his pres- ence, declare his will, and do his bidding. (c) In theophanies. He has come among men in the form of the creature, without thereby permitting them to think that his true form has been seen. And (d) his spirit or power is manifested in won- ders or works of special providence. (c) Man, in the thought of prophets, is a being capable of knowing, loving, and obeying Jehovah, a being with whom God enters into Covenant. The place of the individual in the scheme of the prophets is that of a member of the Cov- enant people of God; his mere membership secures for him the blessings of the covenant. He is not by nature in the normal relation with Jehovah, because he sins, incurs guilt, and is thus liable to punishment. Sin consists in alienation from Jehovah, it is a rupture of relations, and places man in the position of an enemy. All men are guilty of sin. Out of the human race Jehovah has chosen Israel to be a holy people ; yet even Israel is prone to sin, has turned away from God, and must be purged by punishment. From the punishment due to the whole race and to Israel, God will exempt a portion of the chosen people, which the prophets call the Remnant. He will preserve this Remnant and use 1t as a nucleus Uſ a new people. (d) The Remnant is to be organized and ruled by the royal line of David. One special, individ- ual king, the Messiah, shall lead it to the accom. plishment of its glorious work. This is the ser- vant of Jehovah, the head and representative of the true Israel. He is to arise out of a lowly en- vironment, to be born at Bethlehem, to live as a peaceful and unostentatious prince, and to share with his people in their distress, yet bring them out of it by his vicarious sufferings. (e) After the accomplishment of the work of the Messiah should come the great day of Jeho- wah, in which the enemies of God and of his peo- ple should be judged and punished according to their merits. . BIBLICAL THEOLOGY (3) A Third Type of thought is sometimes dis- tinguished in the Old Testament and designated the Wisdom Theology. This type is characterized by breadth and intellectuality. It has the appear- ance of being addressed to all people and times. The prevalence in it of the intellectual element, culminating, as it does, in the personification of the reason under the 11ame of Wisdom (the Hokhmah) has fixed the latter word as its proper designation. 3. NetwTestament. Theology. The theology of the New Testament is based on that of the Old. The Messianic hope of the old prophets is the connecting link between these two great portions of the Bible. The New Testament opens with the realization of this hope in the person of Jesus, and continues and closes with the transformation of the whole religious thought of the Old Testa- ment by the assumption of Jesus Christ into it as its central principle and molding force. Thus arises a complete Christian system. The first stage in the evolution is the preaching of the kingdom of God by Jesus; the second, the uni- versalization of the Messianic idea by the apostle Paul; and the third, the spiritualization of it by ohn. J (1) The Teaching of Jesus. (a) The king- dom of God as preached by Jesus was an order of things in which men should recognize their true relations to God, and enter into alliance with Jesus Christ by faith, constituting a new Spiritual social organization. This organization is properly called the king- dom of God, because God is recognized in it as supreme; but though it is constantly called a kingdom, God is with equal consistency called the Father of those who enter into it, and his paternal care is portrayed, and especially manifested in his constant watchfulness over them and his love for them. (b) The place of Jesus himself in the kingdom is that of the Revealer of the Father. He is the Messiah foreshadowed in the Old Testament. But the Messianic idea is altered, broadened, and uni- versalized in the new dispensation. It includes, besides the conception, brought over from its his- tory, of the headship of the Messiah over his peo- ple, also that of the redemptive function. (c) In performing the function of Redeemer, Jesus teaches that he must die in obedience to law, giving his life “a ransom for many for the ºn of sins” (Matt. xvi :21-23; xx:28; Mark X :45). - Sin is a serious, even fatal, alienation from God. Jesus says nothing about it that could in any way soften or lessen the hatred due to it from the healthy soul. On the contrary, by his inter- pretation of the old law, and by his strenuous efforts to rescue men from sin, he deepens the sense of ahhorrence arouged by it. Tile sinful are the “lost.” They are in a most miserable and perilous situation. Yet, even though guilty and lost, the sinner is capable of salvation. In this view Jesus differed diametrically from the Pharisees, who looked upon sinful men as in a hopeless condition. He recognized a certain dignity in human nature, be- cause of its relation to God both by creation and by the possibilities involved in it, if it should be redeemed. Man is an immortal being, because he is capable of sustaining a relation of love to God, such as that sustained by Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Man’s immortality is associated with the resurrection of the body. But though this fact is distinctly involved in the teaching of Jesus, there is nowhere an effort to explain the difficulties 284 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY connected with it. To secure his birthright as an immortal being, and one possessed of capabilities of redemption from sin, man must enter into the kingdom of God by repentance and faith. Once a member he must live a life of humility, love, earnestness, and purity. He must secure a right- eousness characterized by inwardness or depth and comprehensiveness or extent. The law of the kingdom is to be not more lax than the ethical laws already known, but more free, and at the same time more pervasive and effective. (e) The kingdom of God thus constituted, with Jesus at its head, acknowledging the fatherhood of God as its source of life and the brotherhood of man as its law, is to have a course of natural development in the world; and the consummation of it is to be a judgment day, in which all men shall be judged according to their character. The process of growth outlined for the kingdom is analogous to all organic growth, and is portrayed in parables drawn from vegetable life. The judgment is to be ushered in by Jesus himself in a second appearance on earth, and it is to issue in the separation of the righteous from the un- righteous. The righteous shall enter into life; they shall inherit the kingdom ; they shall shine as the sun; they shall rule over cities; they shall sit on thrones and share the joy of their Lord. The wicked shall be cast into outer darkness, or into fire, or into prison; it had been better for them had they not been born. (2) Teaching of St. Paul. Of all those who accepted Jesus as the Christ in the Apostolic gen- eration, none was more influential in molding the thought of the Church than the apostle Paul. His ancestry and early life, his education, the manner of his conversion, and his first experiences as a missionary conspired to impress him with certain aspects of the new faith which he embodied in his preaching and letters, alluding to the sum total of his teaching as “his gospel.” (a) The kernel of this system of thought was carried over by Paul from the pre-Christian stage of his life. It consisted in the view that true religion is a mode of righteousness or judi- cial standing before God, which, however, must work within its possessor a holy character, and must never be disconnected from this subjective side of it. This righteousness, although ideal and primi- tive in man, was lost by the first transgression on the part of Adam. Sin thus entered into the world and prevailed in the human race, so that both Jews and Gentiles as descendants of the same common ancestor are under the power of sin. They can expect nothing but the natural conse- quences of this evil principle; that is to say, dis- tress and alienation from God, and finally death. The Old Testament bro11ght sin to light through the Mosaic law, which was meant to be, not a means of salvation or righteousness, but a means of preparing the way for it. The Old Testament did, however, provide a way of righteousness through the promise given to Abraham. The promise was before the law, and called forth faith, and faith was accepted as a ground of jus- tification. Thus righteousness was imputed to Abraham and others on the ground of faith. But the promise which saved the believer in the Old Testament was realized in the new dispensa- tion in Jesus Christ and his work. Christ thus occupies the central place in Paul’s system of thought, and constitutes an object of affectionate devotion and allegiance. (b) Of Christ, Paul teaches that he was son of David, the son of a woman, therefore a true man, and yet the Son of God. He existed before his BIBLICAL THEOLOGY 285 birth as man with God, sharing in the work of the creation of the world and entitled to equality with the Father. In the incarnation he took on himself human nature, suffered and died, and rose again from the dead, and thus sealed and com- pleted his work. (c) The most significant part of the work of Christ is his death. This death was vicarious and sacrificial, and its efficacy consists in perfect and satisfactory obedience to the Father in behalf of men and the consequent removal of sin. Since Christ died, then, those who believe are united to him, constituting a new humanity, of which he is the Head. As the first Adam was the head of the sinful race, Christ thus becomes the second Adam, the head of the redeemed race. (d) God the Father stands in this scheme of thought as the Sovereign and Efficient Cause of all its parts. It is his free grace that has fore- seen and foreordained the minutest particulars of the plan in such a way that all creature merit is excluded by it. The redeemed has no occasion of boasting, nor ground for claim in himself, but only occasion for gratitude to him, whose love has provided this way of righteousness. God has an absolute right to deal with his creatures as it may appear best to him, but the impossible supposi- tion that God can or will choose to act in any other way than rightly toward his creatures does not enter into Paul's thought. Accordingly, God calls whom he has chosen out of his free grace to be made partakers in the new humanity of which Christ is the head. He further justifies these, pardoning their sins, and sends his spirit into their hearts to work out a new life of holi- ness in them. (e) The new life is begun by the Holy Spirit, and continued into complete Sanctification, the same Spirit enlightening, leading, moving, and actuating him in whom it has been begun through- out his whole course. The new life, though wrought out in individ- uals, is given them as sharers in the redeemed humanity of which Christ is the head; hence it has its social aspects. This is recognized in the organized Church, with its principles of polity and discipline and its ordinances of worship, es- pecially the two sacraments instituted by Christ, Baptism and the Lord's Supper. As the starting point of religion and principal question in the Pauline system was the securing of righteousness or normal standing before God, so in the Johannine system it is the restoration of union or fellowship between man and God. (3) Teaching of St. John. (a) The actual relation between man and God is that of aliena- tion. This appears in the natural condition of the world. The world conceived of as the gun total of the Gocial activity of the human race is in darkness, and prefers to remain in darkness, even though thc light may shine in it. It hates God. It is to be judged and condemned unless it accepts God’s offer of mercy. Viewed as a spirit of force constituted by human activity, it is an enemy to be overcome. It is subject to Satan and pervaded by the thought of Satan. This condition of the world is sin. It is a con- dition of lawlessness; the law of God is disre- garded in it. The root of sin lies in disbelief of God incited by the devil, and its consequences have the displeasure of God, the slavery of the higher to the lower nature of man, and death. But the world is not allowed to remain and perish in this state of sin. God has loved it, and is aiming to restore it to fellowship with himself. In his own essence God is a Spirit. As to his BICHRI character, he is light and love; light symbolizing his purity and holiness, and love issuing for the welfare and fellowship of spiritual beings whom he has created in his own image. (b) God’s love, like that of the parent to the child, is original and not responsive. It leads him from eternity to give some members of the human race to the Son, so that their restoration to fel- lowship may be assured. He has, moreover, pre- pared the way, step by step, by a progressive revelation of his will and purpose, culminating in the manifestation of his son in the world. Old Testament prophecy and John the Baptist are agents in this preparation. But the greatest sign of the love of God is the incarnation of his son, the eternal Logos. That the Logos was divine, and acted as the executive of God in the creation, does not admit of denial in the thought of John ; but that he was made real flesh and blood may be doubted, and therefore John takes pains to denounce such doubt as fatal error. (c) The death of the incarnate Logos is the sacrifice of the “Lamb that taketh away the sin of the world.” It was a voluntary endurance of sufferings for others, and had an elevating and healing power, such as might be represented by the brazen serpent in the wilderness. It was, moreover, a propitiatory death, and redemption from sin is based upon it. The restored fellow- ship follows forgiveness of sin. It is constituted by faith. The Paraclete takes the words of Christ and teaches them to the believer, guiding, bearing witness, reminding and comforting believers, and rebuking and convicting the unbelieving world. (d) The results of the new fellowships are cbedience to God’s commandments, victory over the world and the devil, and eternal life; the con- stitution of a new brotherhood among men, in which the brethren love one another and struggle with sin, overcoming it step by step. (e) The enmity of the world to God does not cease with the manifestation of his Incarnate Son, but is rather intensified and stimulated. A fierce struggle must be expected between the world power and the organized followers of Jesus, which, however, is destined to end in the com- plete overthrow of the world and the triumph of the Church. When this end is achieved Christ will come in glory and reign in a renewed and purified world. (4) Epistle to the Hebrews. The epistle to the Hebrews has often been taken as Pauline, giv- ing in general the same system as is found in the writings of Paul. Without controverting these positions, it is necessary to say that it presents religion as a covenant, and Christianity as the new and real covenant of which the Old Testa- ment ritual system was the type and prophecy. Christ 1s the mediator of this new covenant as 1ts high priest and only victim. Hence he stands as: the central figure in the system of the apostle. Both in respect to his priesthood and his sacri- fice he is contrasted with his Old Testament types as the reality and finality. By faith in him men are led into perfection. The most important duty incumbent upon the believer is a consistent ad- herence to his profession of faith through the sorest distress and trial ; thus, he will triumph and enter into the fellowship of his predecessors in faith who obtained a good report under the Old Testament dispensation. A. C. Z. BICHRI (bik'ri), (Heb. *T22, biß-ree', youth- ful), a Benjamite, whose son Sheba incited a re- bellion against David after the death of Absalom (2 Sam. xx: I, Sq.), B, C, about 967. . BID KAR BIDEAR (bid'kar), (Heb. "Pºº bid-Aar', son of stabbing, i. e., a stabber), a º under Jehu and once his fellow officer (2 Ki Completed the sentence against Ahab's son, Je- horam, by casting the body into the field of Na- both after Jehu had pierced it with an arrow (B.C. 882). (See J.E.H.U.) BIEER (běr). See BURIAL AND SEPULCHERS. BIGTHA (big' tha), (Heb. sº, big-thaw', given by fortune), One of the seven chamberlains in the harem of Ahasuerus or Xerxes (Esth. i:10), B. C. 483. BIGTHAN and BIGTHANA (big'than and big'tha-nā), (Heb. ºº, big-zhawn', perhaps for- tune given), a eunuch in the court of King Ahas- uerus, whose Conspiracy against that monarch was frustrated through the disclosures of Mordecai (Esth. ii:21; vi.2) B. C. 479. BIGVAI (big'va-i), (Heb. Tºº, big-vah'ee, hap- py, or of the people). * 1. Children of Bigvai to the number of 2,056 or 2,067, according to Nehemiah, returned to Jerusa- lem (B. C. 450) with Zerubbabel (Ezra ii:14; Neh. vii:19). At a later date seventy-two returned with Ezra (Ezra viii:I4). 2. One of those who signed the covenant with Nehemiah (Neh. x:16), and was apparently a chief in the expedition under Zerubbabel (Ezra ii:2; Neh. vii:7), B. C. 4Io. BIKATH-AVEN (bik'ath-ā’ven). See Aven (1). BILDAD (biidad), (Heb. Tº, ºdaa, the Shuhite), one of the friends of Job, and the second of his opponents in the disputation (Job. ii:11; viii:I; xviii:I; xxv :I). The Shuah, of which the Septuagint makes Bildad the prince or patriarch (Bildad the prince of the Shuhites), was probably the district as- signed to Shuah, the sixth son of Abraham by Keturah, and called by his name. This was doubt- less in Arabia Petraea, if Shuah settled in the same quarter as his brothers, of which there can be little doubt, and to this region we are to refer the town and district to which he gave his name and in which Bildad was doubtless a person of consequence, if not the chief. (See SHUAH.) BILEAM (bne-Am). (Heb. Fºº, bizawm', place of Conquest), a city of Manasseh, on the east of the Jordan; given to the Levites of Kohath's family (I Chron. vi.70). Elsewhere called /ø/eam (Josh. xvii;II; Judg. i:27; 2 Kings ix:27). Probably the modern Bel'ame. BILGAH (brigah), (Heb. º. ººgaw, burst. ing forth, i. e., firstborn). 1. A priest who returned from the captivity with Zerubbabel (Neh. xii;5, 18). Perhaps the same as Bilgai, who signed the covenant with Ne- hemiah (Neh. x:8), B. C. 536. 2. A priest who had charge of the fifteenth course in the temple service, in the time of David (I Chron. xxiv:I4), B. C. IO43. BILGAI (biga-) (Heb.º, biºgahee, burst. ing forth, Neh. x:8). Probably same as Bil- gah (I). - BILHAH (bm'hah), (Heb. Tºº, biºhaw, per- haps bashfulness). 1. The handmaid whom the childless Rachel bestowed upon her husband Jacob, that through her she might have children (B. C. 1917). Bilhah became the mother of Dan and Naphtali (Gen. xxx:I-8; xxxv.25; xlvi.25; I Chron. vii:13). As to i. connection with Reuben see Gen. xxxv.22; X11x:4. - 286 ings ix:25). He BIRDS 2. A Simeonite town (I Chron. iv:29). It is also called Baalah and Balah. BILHAN (biºhan), (Heb. 73, biºhawn', ten. der). 1. A Horite chief of Mount Seir, in Edom (Gen. xxxvi;27; I Chron. i.42), B. C. about 1963. 2. A Benjamite, son of Jediael (I Chron. vii: Io). From his connection with Ehud (I Chron. vii: Io; viii:3, 6) he was probably a Belaite (B. C. before 1658). - BILL (bil), (Heb. Tºº, Say'ſer, writing), a term meaning anything that is written, e.g., a “bill of divorcement” (Deut. xxiv:1, 3; Is. 1:1; Jer. iii:8; Matt. xix:7, Gr. 848Xiov, bib-lee'om). BILSHAN (bishan), (Heb. iś, ź.shawn', searcher), one who accompanied Zerubbabel from Babylon (Ezra ii:2; Neh. vii:7), B. C. 536. BIMHAL (Bim'hai), (Heb.º, him hawſ, cir- cumcised), a son of Japhlet, descendant of Asher (I Chron. vii:33), B. C. 1658. BIND (bind), (Heb. Tº R, AEaw-shar'). In the command, “Thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand,” etc. (Deut. vi;8), the “words are figur- ative, and denote an undeviating observance of the divine commands; and their literal fulfillment could only be a praiseworthy custom or well- pleasing to God when resorted to as the means of keeping the commands of God constantly beforc the eye” (K. and D., Coyz. in loc.). (Barnes, Bib. Cyc.) BINDING and LOOSING (bind'ing and 150s'- ing), to 82nd and Zoose are found in the address of our Lord to Peter (Matt. xvi;19). “The words are the literal translation of the Heb. "CŞ, aw- sar', to bind, in the sense of prohibiting; and Tºº, hit-teer', to loose, in the sense of permit- ting.” tº sº tº BINEA (bín'e-á), (Heb. N: and Tº, &zn-ah' and bin-aw', a gushing forth, fountain, or a wan- derer), a Benjamite, son of Moza and father of Rapha, of the descendants of King Saul (1 Chron. . viii:37; ix:43), B. C. about 850. BINNUI (bín-nu'i or bin'nu-i), (Heb. "33, bin- moo'ee, a building, familyship). 1. A Levite in the time of Ezra; father of Noa- diah (Ezra viii:33), B. C. 536. - 2. A son of Pahath-moab, who had taken a for- eign wife (Ezra x:30), B. C. 458. 3. Son of Bani, who also had taken a foreign wife (Ezra x:38), B. C. 458. 4. Neh. vii:15. This has been changed from Bani in the lists of Ezra. 5. A Levite, son of Henadad, who helped to repair the walls of Jerusalem under Nehemiah (Neh. iii:24; x:9, and perhaps the same as the One mentioned xii:8), B.C. 446. BIRD-CAGES (běrd-kāj'ez), are named in Jer. v:27, Rev. xviii:2, and are perhaps implied in Job xli:5, where ‘playing with a bird' is mentioned. This just suffices to show that the ancient Israel- ites kept birds in cages; but we have no further information on the subject. BIRD-CATCHING (běrd kāch'íng). See Fowl- ING. * BIRDS (běrdz), may be defined oviparous ver- tebrated animals, organized for flight. The Com- mon name "Ps, tsià-for", is used of small birds generally, and of the sparrow in particular; Fiv, ofe, translated ‘fowl' (Gen. i.21), properly means flyer; tº, ait, a bird of prey; AETOX, aetos, an BIRDS, NESTs eagle; in Gen. xv. II, Job xxviii:7, and Is. xviii.6, rendered ‘fowls'; in Jer. xii:9, ‘bird'; and in Is. xlvi. II, and Ezek. xxxix:4, ‘ravenous birds.' Fºº, barburim, denotes fatted gallinacea; it oc- curs only in I Kings iv:23, and is there translated ‘fowls,' though it may be questioned whether do- mestic fowls are mentioned in any part of the He- brew Bible (see COCK). Gesenius applies the word to geese. * In the Mosaic law birds were distinguished as clean and unclean, the first being allowed for the table, because they fed on grain, seeds and vegetables, and the second forbidden, because they subsisted on flesh and carrion. The birds most anciently used in sacrifice were, it seems, turtle-doves and pigeons. BIRDS, NESTS (běrdz nésts). The law in Deut. xxii:6, 7, directs that if one falls in with a bird's nest with eggs or young he shall allow the dam to escape and not take her as well as the nest. The reason Maimonides (More Nevochim) gives for this is: ‘The eggs On which the dam is sitting, or the young ones which have need of her, are not, in general, per- mitted to be eaten, and when the dam is allowed to escape she is not distressed by seeing her young ones carried off. It thus frequently happens that all are untouched, because that which might be taken may not be lawfully eaten.’ BIRSHA (běr'shā), (Heb. Pº, beer-shah', thick, strong), king of Gomorrah when Chedor- ºer invaded that country (Gen. xiv:2), B. C. 2OöO. BIRTH (běrth). In Eastern countries child-birth is usually at- tended with much less pain and difficulty than in Our northern regions. Such consideration may probably account for the fact that the Hebrew women, after they had long been under the in- fluence of the Egyptian climate, passed through the child-birth pangs with much more facility than the women of Egypt, whose habits of life were more luxurious and indolent (Exod. i :19). There were, however, already recognized Hebrew midwives, while the Israelites were in Egypt, and their office appears to have originated in the habit of calling in some matron of experience in such matters to assist in cases of difficulty. BIRTHDAYs (birthdāz), (Heb. nº sº, yozzee-hoo/-/e/e-deth', Gen. xl:20; Gr. Tà yewégua, Matt. xiv:6). - The observance of birthdays may be traced to a very ancient date, and the birthday of the first- born son seems in particular to have been cele- brated with a degree of festivity proportioned to the joy which the event of his actual birth occa- sioned (Job. i :4, 13, 18). The birthdays of the Egyptian kings were celebrated with great pomp as early as the time of Joseph (Gen. xl:20). These days were in Egypt looked upon as holy; no business was done upon them, and all parties indulged in festivities suitable to the occasion. Every Egyptian attached much importance to the day, and even to the hour of his birth, and it is probable that, as in Persia (Herodot. i : I.33; Xenoph. Cyrop. i :3, 9), each individual kept his birthday with great rejoicings, welcoming his friends with all the amusements of society, and a more than usual profusion of delicacies of the table (Wilkinson, v, p. 290). In the Bible there is no instance of birthday celebration among the Jews themselves. The example of Herod the tetrarch (Matt. xiv:6), the celebration of whose birthday cost John the Baptist his life, can scarcely be regarded as such, the family to which he be- 287 3. BIRTHRIGHT longed being notorious for its adoption of heathen customs. In fact, the later Jews at least regarded birthday celebrations as parts of idolatrous wor- ship (Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. ad Matt. xiv:6), and this probably on account of the idolatrous rites with which they were observed in honor of those who were regarded as the patron gods of the day on which the party was born. BIRTHRIGHT (barth'rit'), (Heb. Tº, bef- o-raw', belonging to the first-born). This term de- notes the rights or privileges belonging to the first-born among the Hebrews. The particular advantages which these conferred were the fol- lowing: (1) Right to the Priesthood. The first-born became the priest in virtue of his priority of descent, provided no blemish or defect attached to him. Reuben was the first-born of the twelve patriarchs, and therefore the honor of the priest- hood belonged to his tribe. God, however, trans- ferred it from the tribe of Reuben to that of Levi (Num. iii:I2, I3; viii:18). Hence the first-born of the other tribes were redeemed from serving God as priests, by a sum not exceeding five shekels. Being presented before the Lord in the temple, they were redeemed immediately after the thir- tieth day from their birth (Num. xviii:15, 16; Luke ii:22). It is to be observed that only the first-born who were fit for the priesthood (i. e. such as had no defect, spot, or blemish) were thus presented to the priest. (2) Double Portion. The first-born received a double portion of his father's property. There is some difficulty in determining precisely what is meant by a double portion. Some suppose that half the inheritance was received by the elder brother, and that the other half was equally di- vided among the remaining brethren. This is not probable. The Rabbins believe that the elder brother received twice as much as any of the rest, and there is no reason to doubt the cor- rectness of this opinion. When the first-born died before his father’s property was divided, and left children, the right of the father descended to the children, and not to the brother next of age. (3) Official Authority. He succeeded to the official authority possessed by his father. If the latter was a king, the former was regarded as his legitimate successor, unless some unusual event or arrangement interfered. After the law was given through Moses, the right of primogeniture could not be transferred from the first-born to a younger child at the fa- ther's option. In the patriarchal age, however, it was in the power of the parent thus to convey it from the eldest to another child (Deut. xxi : I5-17; Gen. xxv :31, 32). It is not difficult to perceive the reason why the first-born enjoyed greater privileges than the rest of the children. The peculiar honor attach- ing to them is easily accounted for. They are to be viewed as having reference to the Redeemer, the first-born of the Virgin. Hence in the epistle to the Romans, viii:29, it is written concerning the Son, “that he might be the first-born among many brethren;' and in Coloss. i :18, ‘who is the beginning, the first-born from the dead; that in all things he might have the pre-eminence' (see also Heb. i :4, 5, 6). As the first-born had a double portion, so the Lord Jesus, as Mediator, has an inheritance superior to his brethren ; he is exalted to the right hand of the Majesty on high, where he reigns until all his enemies shall be sub- dued. The universe is his rightful dominion in his mediatorial character. Again, he alone is a BIRZAVITH true priest; he fulfilled all the functions of the sacerdotal office, and the Levites, to whom, un- der the law, the priesthood was transferred from all the first-born of Israel, derived the efficacy of their ministrations from their connection with the great high priest (Jahn's Biblical Archaeo/- ogy, sec. 165). (See FIRSTBORN.) S. D. BIRZAVITH (bir'za-víth), (Heb. nº. beer- zoáh", holes, or olive wells), a name given in the genealogies of Asher (I Chron. vii:31) as the son of Malchiel and great-grandson of Asher. It was probably the name of a place. BISHLAM (bish’lam), (Heb. tºº, bish-lawm', in peace), one of the king of Persia's officers on this side the Euphrates, who wrote to King Arta- xerxes, desiring him to forbid the Jews to rebuild the temple (Ezra iv:7), B. C. 522. BISHOP (bish'tip). (1) Superintendents. The Apostles originally appointed men to superintend the spiritual, and occasionally even the secular, wants of the churches (Acts xiv:23;xi;30; see also 2 Tim. ii:2), who were ordinarily called trpeggūrepot, Żres-bu'ter-oz, elders, from their age, sometimes étria kotrot, eh-Ézs'Áo-Zoz, overseers (bishops), from their office. They are also said to preside (I Thess. v.:I2; I Tim. v.:17), never to rule, which has far too despotic a sound. In the Epistle to the Hebrews (xiii:7, 17, 24) they are named Zeading men (Comp. Acts xv.22), and, figuratively, Touéves, she/herds (Ephes. iv:II). But that they did not always teach is clear from I Tim. v . I7; and the name elders proves that originally age, experience, and character were their most necessary qualifications. They were to be married men with families (I Tim. iii:4), and with converted children (Tit. i :6). In the beginning there had been no time to train teach- ers, and teaching was regarded far more in the light of a gift than an office; yet St. Paul places ‘ability to teach' among episcopal qualifications (1 Tim. iii:2; Titus i :9; the latter of which passages should be translated, ‘that he may be able both to exhort men by sound teaching, and also to refute opposers). That teachers had obtained in St. Paul’s day a fixed official position, is manifest from Gal. vi.6, and I Cor. ix:14, where he claims for them a right to worldly maintenance; in fact, that the shepherds ordered to “feed the flock,” and be its ‘overseers’), (I Pet. v:2), were to feed them with knowledge and in- struction, will never be disputed, except to sup- port a hypothesis. The leaders also, in Heb. xiii:7, are described as ‘speaking unto you the word of God.” Ecclesiastical history joins in proving that the two offices of teaching and superintending were, with few exceptions, com- bined in the same persons, as indeed, the nature of things dictated. (2) No Difference Between Elders and Bishops. That during St. Paul’s lifetime no difference between elders and bishops yet ex- isted in the consciousness of the church, is mani- fest from the entire absence of distinctive names (Acts xx :17-28; I Pet. v :1, 2). The mention of bishops and deacons in Phil. i :1, and I Tim. iii, without any notice of elders, proves that at that time no difference of order subsisted between bishops and elders. (3) Ordination. A formal ceremony, it is generally believed, was employed in appointing elders, although it does not appear that as yet any fixed name was appropriated to the idea of ordination. (The word ordained is inexcusably interpolated in the English version of Acts i:22. In Tit. i :5 the Greek word means set, or set up; 288 BISHOP and in Acts xiv:23 it means having elected, prop- erly by a show of hands; though, abusively, the term came to mean simply, having chosen or nominated (Acts x :4I); yet in 2 Cor. viii:19, it seems to have its genuine democratic sense.) In I Cor. xvi; IS, we find the house of Stephanas to have volunteercol the task of ‘ministering to the saints;’ and that this was a ministry of ‘the word,' is evident from the Apostle's urging the church “to submit themselves to such.” It would appear then that a formal investiture into the office was not as yet regarded essential. Be this as it may, no one doubts that an ordination by laying on of hands soon became general or uni- versal. Hands were first laid on not to bestow an office, but to solicit a spiritual gift (I Tim. iv :I4; 2 Tim. i:6; Acts xiii:3; xiv:26; xv :40). To the same effect Acts viii:17; xix:6;—passages which explain Heb. vi :2. On the other hand, the absolute silence of the Scriptures, even if it were not confirmed, as it is, by positive testimony, would prove that no idea of consecration, as distinct from ordination, at that time existed at all ; and, consequently, although individual elders may have really discharged functions which would afterwards have been called episcopal, it was not by virtue of a second ordination, nor, therefore, of episcopal rank. (4) Apostles Bishops. The Apostles them- selves, it is held by some, were the real bishops of that day, and it is quite evident that they per- formed many episcopal functions. It may well be true, that the only reason why no bishops (in the modern sense) were then wanting was, be- cause the Apostles were living; but it cannot be inferred that in any strict sense prelates are co- ordinate in rank with the Apostles, and can claim to exercise their powers. The later ‘bishop' did not come forward as a successor to the Apostles, but was developed out of the presbyter; much less can it be proved, or alleged with plausibility, that the Apostles took any measures for Securing substitutes for themselves (in the higher char- acter of Apostles) after their decease. It has been with many a favorite notion that Timothy and Titus exhibit the episcopal type even during the life of Paul; but this is an obvious misconcep- tion. They were attached to the person of the Apostle, and not to any one church. In the last Epistle written by him (2 Tim. iv:9), he calls Timothy suddenly to Rome, in words which prove that the latter was not, at least as yet, bishop, either of Ephesus or of any other church. That Timothy was an evangelist is distinctly stated (2 Tim. iv:5), and that he had received spiritual gifts (i:6, etc.); there is then no difficulty in accounting for the authority vested in him (I Tim. v:1, 19, 22), without imagining him to have been a bishop ; which is in fact disproved even by the same Epistle (i:3). That Titus, more- over, had no local attachment to Crete is plain from Titus iii:13, to say nothing of the earlier Epistle, 2 Cor. passim. Nor is it true that the episcopal power developed itself out of wandering evangelists any more than out of the Apostles. On the other hand it would seem that the bishop began to elevate himself above the pres- byter while the Apostle John was yet alive, and in churches to which he is believed to have pecu- liarly devoted himself. (5) Angel. The meaning of the title angel, in the opening chapters of the Apocalypse, has been mystically explained by some ; but its true meaning is clear from the nomenclature of the Jewish synagogues. In them, we are told, the minister who ordinarily led the prayers of the BISHOP congregation, besides acting as their chief func- tionary in matters of business, was a functionary whose title was expressed by the Greek áyyeXos. This term has the ordinary sense of opus minis- terium, making it almost certain that the ‘angels of the churches' are nothing but a harsh Hebraism for ‘ministers of the churches.” We therefore here see a single officer, in these rather large Christian communities, elevated into a peculiar prominence, which has been justly regarded as episcopal. Nor does it signify that the author- ship of the Apocalypse is disputed, since its ex- treme antiquity is beyond a doubt; we find, there- fore, the germ of episcopacy here planted, as it were, under the eyes of an Apostle (Neander). Nevertheless, it was still but a germ. It is vain to ask, whether these angels received a sec- Ond Ordination and had been promoted from the rank of presbyters. That this has been the case is possible, but there is no proof of it; and while Some will regard the question as deeply interest- ing, others will think it unimportant. A second Question is, whether the angels were overseers of the congregation only, or of the presbyters too; . and whether the church was formed of many local unions, such as we call parishes), or of one. Per- haps both questions unduly imply that a set of fixed rules was already in existence. No one who reads Paul’s own account of the rebuke he ut- tered against Peter (Gal. ii) need doubt that in those days a zealous elder would assume au- thority over other elders, officially his equals, when he thought they were dishonoring the Gospel; and, a fortiori, he would act thus towards an official inferior, even if this had not previously been de- fined or understood as his duty. So again, the Christians of Ephesus or Miletus were probably too numerous ordinarily to meet in a single as- sembly, especially before they had large buildings erected for the purpose; and convenience must have led at a very early period to subordinate assemblies (such as would now be called ‘chapels of ease' to the mother church); yet we have no ground for supposing that any sharp division of the Church into organic portions had yet commenced. . (6) General Agreement. Episcopalians, Pres- byterians, and Congregationalists agree in one point, viz. that (because of its utility and general convenience) it is lawful for Christians to take a step for which they have no clear precedent in the Scripture, that of breaking up, a church, when it becomes of unwieldy magnitude, into fixed divisions, whether parishes or congregations. The question then arises, whether the organic union is to be still retained at all. To this (I) Congregationalists reply in the negative, saying that the congregations in different parts of a great city no more need to be in organic union, than those of two different cities; (2) Presbyte- rians would keep up the union by means of a synod of the elders; (3) Episcopalians desire to unite the separate churches by retaining them under the supervision of a single head—the bishop. It seems impossible to refer to the practice of the Apostles as deciding in favor of any one of these methods; for the case had not yet arisen which could have led to the discussion. not yet become so large as to make subdivision positively necessary; and, as a fact, it did not take place. To organize distant churches into a fixed and formal connection by synods of their bishops, was, of course, quite a later process; but such unions are by no means rejected, even by Congregationalists, as long as they are used for deliberation and advice, not as assemblies for ruling and commanding. The spirit of Episco- 289 The city churches had BISHOP pacy depends far less on the episcopal form itself, than on the size and wealth of dioceses, and on the union of bishops into synods, whose decisions are to be authoritative on the whole church ; io Say nothing of territorial establishment and the Support of the civil government. If, under any ecclesiastical form, either oppression or disorder should arise, it cannot be defended; but no form is a Security against such evils. Our experience 1r1ay in these later times possibly show us which of these systems is on the whole preferable; but the discussion must belong to ecclesiastical his- tory, and would be quite out of place here. W. N. (7) Opinion of Harnack. Harnack thinks that while bishops and deacons had the care of public worship and the poor, elders rather formed a court attached to the church, and as such were occupied with government and discipline. The apparent identity of the offices would then be no more than an identity of persons. The weightiest members of the church would naturally hold both offices, and give the tone to both. This theory explains points like the difference of names and the marked Separation between the two classes. It may con- tain more than a germ of the truth; but it cannot be accepted without important reservations. (a) It is not likely that duties were quite so definitely separated. If the elders began with discipline and general oversight, they would be likely soon to take up more spiritual duties, as the Seven did. Those who had gifts to minister the word and teaching, would rather he honored than hindered; so that many of them might easily be doing pas- toral work (especially if they were bishops also) before the end of the apostolic age. In any case (b) bishops and elders are identical in the Pas- toral Epistles, so that the distinction must by that time have been nearly lost. This, however, de- pends on their date. Harnack (Chronologie, 1897, p. 484) still places the relevant passages in the middle of the second century. (H. M. Gwatkin, Hastings' Bib. Dict.). (See EPISCOPACY.) (8) Specific Duties and Support. Prof. E. H. Plumptre says: ... “Their duty was to feed the flock, teaching publicly (Tif. i. 9), opposing errors, admonishing privately (I Thess. v. 12). The work of visiting the sick appears in Jam. v.:14, as assigned to the elders of the church. There, in- deed, it is connected with the practice of anointing as a means of healing, but this office of Christian sympathy would not, we may believe, be confined to the exercise of the extraordinary xaptopata lagdºrwV, and it is probably to this, and to acts of a like kind, that we are to refer the passage in Acts xx:35, and the “helps' mentioned in I Cor. xii:28. Among these acts of charity that of receiv- ing Strangers Occupied a conspicuous place (1 Tim. iii:2; Tit. i:8). The bishop elder's house was to be the house of the Christian who arrived in a strange City and found himself without a friend. Of the part taken by them in the liturgical meetings of the church we have no distinct evidence. Reason- ing from the language of I Cor. x, xii, and from the practices of the post-apostolic age, we may believe that they would preside at such meetings, that it would belong to them to bless and to give thanks when the church met to break bread. The mode in which these officers of the church were supported or remunerated varied probably in different cities. At Miletus St. Paul exhorts the elders of the church to follow his example and work for their own live- lihood (Acts xx:34). In I Cor. ix:14, and Gal. vi;6, he asserts the right of the ministers of the church to be supported by it. In 1 Tim. v.:17, he gives a special application of the principle in the assign- T}ISHO PRIC 290 ment of a double allowance to those who have been conspicuous for their activity.” Smith, Bāb. Dicſ. BISHOPRIC (bish'tip-rik), (Gr. 3rtakorff, eff-is- Æo/-ay", Oversight), the ministerial charge in the Church (Acts i.20; I Tim. iii:I). In later times it is used to designate (I) the office and function of a bishop, and (2) the district over which he has jurisdiction. BIT (bit), (Heb. Xº, //leh'ſ heg) (Ps. xxxii:9), (Gr. XaXtvös, AE/ha/-ee-nos', James iii:3), elsewhere rendered BRIDLE (which see). BITHIAH (bi-thi'ah), (Heb. Tºº, bith-yaw", daughter of Jah, worshiper), daughter of Pha- raoh, and wife of Mered, a descendant of Judah (I Chron. iv:18). She was probably a captive, but not a concubine. Her name indicates that she was a worshiper of Jehovah (B. C. 1658). BITHRON (bith'ron), (Heb. TP, bith-rome', (the) broken or divided place, 2 Sam. ii:29). This name has the same meaning as Bether. It probably denotes a region of hills and valleys, and not any definite place. BITTER HERBS BITTER, BITTERNESS (bit/ter, bit’tär-nēs). Bitterness (Ex. i. 14; Jer. ix:15) is symbolical of affliction, misery and servitude. It was for this reason that, in the celebration of the Passover, the servitude of the Israelites in Egypt was typically represented by bitter herbs. 1. On the day of bitterness in Amos viii: Io, Comp. Tibullus, ii:4, II— “Nunc et amara dies, et noctis amarior umbra est.’ In Habak. i :6 the Chaldeans are called ‘that bitter and swift nation,’ which Schultens illus- trated by remarking that the root Merer in Arabic (answering to the Hebrew word for bitter) is usually applied to strength and courage. 2. The gall of bitterness (Acts viii:23) de- scribes a state of extreme wickedness, highly offensive to God, and hurtful to others. 3. A root of bitterness (Heb. xii:15; Comp. Deut. xxix:18) expresses a wicked or scandalous person or any doctrine contrary to truth, or any dangerous sin leading to apostasy. BITTER HERBs (bitter Grb2), (Heb. Fº, mer-o-rim', literally bitters). There has been much difference of opinion respecting the kind of herbs - - #ºſ- =s & - - N - Sº. § . * > * #! SAŞ N, - - §§§. .ſ. E: E {\: Ş." is Ef 3. - ... ºr ** * *&zºğ t - l, f - # :* ſº Ž # = yº | s: :- i. Iſſ lſº QI. lº *: iſs *i; ! Nº. ſ ,-] i ! I 1. º 2: X 23: lº iº §§ - ... }' | l ! ! | AZZ -- ~~ **** *\tº - - - VV,\º. - l - --- sº §§ É É// | | ſº | | §§§ N - intº 3ºº ºë========#E** = < * 54, - M ~" łºś xº~: ºf jºšº -: :#. nº §º sis § - º - “w. S$º sº - hiſ ºl | i | ºS º º | Hºſſ". sº r; Tº sºlº Rºſº - g - t ſº * iſſimi; §§ ºś d : º * * * - - § iWº: Sºği "...ºllinºiſ; # § §§ §§ - M : • - - jºyſ § i ſ!! - 1.Illfinº #. # t ºš M. ſº WIFº º lulitº º - ſ * lºſſºſºſº § # (Iſiſ; § - º .* * ºf: *::firrºr:#- ! ºf | - # #g|Eſt. ill; |lſº - | = r | JDITN'ſ ſ ſ ſºll - º, Z. tºº l | | t |. ‘ſ. |||| titl|ti"!! Iti litt: iſi i | - | % !| | | * º, •Üº II: ſºilſ: : ſº - |ſ % - " ; º - - - - -> | | 4 * * \ |||||||||| | #||7... ºlº * * * * * * * * * * is || | M N. Ye NSN à | | | | lſº ||||||Willáſſiſſilſillºſſ * * * *:--—º tº IWW lºt will ºil. 1. - i. WN N * N Will!! :Hilº !!!! It st” -*** M.:-}}'t!!!...º.º. a - - R & NNX * - | f | - | ºl # | |h, !!!'s - : ºil - - l - N | : |||||| f n #|||||}|| |%ft º!!!. |||}. - ;| ! §§ | .* º Yºº-ºº: Iºlº'ſ | : |ºil | Illiſ] º tº º! Tºri ſ' §ºl\ºlºgy: lºſºlſ|| | ºr l Hiſtºl Y s – r # ; j |'; i.; * *Fºº, • ?:It t º ºlº # #|#####|| § #lºſiº |ºſſ; lift||| | I - -- == | * †. | | - ºt.” º: y \{{|| ||||| t * º-T_gº†† lº - *s Nº #=====#=&E ! | wº== #, {ll # -- -- # 2 - *Ss: ºSS =#. == - | £ºss º §§ = --- ############º: 2::=- - - ~£ass===s===ºses--F= .." -,-- * - --~~~~ Crates of Nicaea, the Capital of Bithynia. BITHYNIA (bi-thyn'i-á), (Gr. Buôvvta, bºthynia), a province of Asia Minor, on the Euxine Sea and the Propontis; bounded on the west by Mysia, on the south and east by Phrygia and Galatia, and C. the east by Paphlagonia. The Bithynians were a rude and uncivilized peo- ple, Thracians who had colonized this part of Asia, and occupied no towns, but lived in villages (kwuotroNeſs, Strabo, p. 566). That Christian con- gregations were formed at an early period in Bithynia, is evident from the Apostle Peter hav- ing addressed the first of his Epistles to them (I Pet. i : I). The Apostle Paul was at one time inclined to go into Bithynia with his assistants Silas and Timothy, “but the Spirit suffered him not' (Acts xvi :7). denoted by this word. On this subject the reader may consult Carpzov, A//araf. p. 404, Sg. It however seems very doubtful whether any particular herbs were intended by so general a term as bitters; it is far more probable that it denotes whatever bitter herbs, obtainable in the place where the Passover was eaten (Ex. xii:8; Num. ix: II), might be fitly used with meat. This seems to be established by the fact that the first directions respecting the Passover were given in Egypt, where also the first Passover was cele- brated; and as the esculent vegetables of Egypt are very different from those of Palestine, it is obvious that the bitter herbs used in the first celebration could scarcely have been the same as those which were afterwards employed for the BITTERN same purpose in Canaan. According to the Mishna (Pesachim, ii:6), and the commentators thereon, there were five sorts of bitter herbs, any one or all of which might be used on this occasion. There is great difficulty in identifying these plants. (Bochart, Æierog. i. 691). BITTERN (bit’térn). See KIPPOD. BITUMEN (bi-tu'mén). See AsPHALTUM. BIZJOTHJAH (biz-jöth'jah), (Heb. Tºº, big- yo-the-yaw", place of Jah's olives), a town in the South of Judah (Josh. xv.28). The place has not been identified. BIZTHA (biz'thā), Heb. Nº, big-thaw'), one of the seven chamberlains of the harem of Xerxes (Ahasuerus) who were ordered to bring Vashti forth for exhibition (Esth. i: IO), B. C. about 521. BLACK (blåk). Although the Orientals do not wear black in mourning, they, as did the ancient Jews, regard the Color as a symbol of affliction, disaster and privation. In fact, the custom of wearing black in mourn- ing is a sort of visible expression of what is in the East a figure of speech. In Scripture blackness is used as symbolical of afflictions occasioned by drought and famine (Job xxx:30; Jer. xiv:2; Lam. iv:8; v :Io). Whether this be founded on any notion that the hue of the complexion was deepened by privation, has not been ascertained; but it has been remarked by Chardin and others, that in the periodical mourning of the Persians for Hossein many of those who take part in the ceremonies appear with their bodies blackened, in order to express the extremity of thirst and heat which Hossein suffered, and which, as is alleged, was so great that he turned black, and the tongue swelled till it protruded from his mouth. In Mal. iii:14 we read, ‘What profit is it that we keep his ordinances, and that we have walked in blackness (Authorized Version ‘mournfully”) before the Lord of Hosts;’ meaning that they had fasted in sackcloth and ashes. Black occurs as a symbol of fear in Joel ii:6—‘All faces shall gather blackness,” or darken with apprehension and distress. This use of the word may be paral- leled from Virgil, A. m. ix. 719, A trumque time- orem; and Georg. iv.468, - ‘Caligantem migra formidine lucum.’ The same expression which Joel uses is employed by Nahum (ii:Io) to denote the extremity of sin and sorrow. - BLAINS (blåns). The Hebrew word º-S, ab-ah-boo-yoth', which, in the only places where it occurs, is in our version rendered blains, strictly means eruptions. The Septuagint renders it by pºvktlöes, phlook- fee' dez, inflamed ulcers, which is also a general term for puctulos or vesicles (See DTSFASFs.) BLASPHEMY (blås'fé-my), (Gr. 8Xao pmuta, blas- ſay-me'ah), signifies the speaking evil of God; Heb. Tº Pº PP3, to curse the name of the Lord). 1. Meaning. (1) The Greek word blasphemia is generic, denoting verbal abuse proceeding from an evil disposition. It is equivalent to defamation, or slander, involving an attempt to lessen the char- acter of others, with the intention of doing them injury. All kinds of abusive language, whether called imprecation, calumny, or reviling, come under the term. (2) The English word blasphemy is more re- stricted in its signification. It refers to God only. In like manner when blasphemia is directed against the Supreme Being, or when Jehovah is 291 BLASPHEMY the object of it, it is specific. In these circum- stances it corresponds to the English blasphemy. The Greek blasphemia is employed in reference to the defamation of men or angels equally with the Deity; but it is proper to use the term blas- phemy only when God is spoken against. Thus the Greek and English words are not coextensive in 1mport. (3) Our English translators have not adhered to the right use of the term. They employ it with the same latitude as the Greek; but it is generally easy to perceive, from the connection and subject of a passage, whether blasphemy, properly so called, be meant, or only defamation. It would certainly have been better to have em- ployed detraction or calumny rather than blas- phemy where man is the object; reserving the latter for that peculiarly awful slander which is directed against the ever-blessed God. º (4) Blasphemy signifies a false, irreverent, in- jurious use of God’s names, attributes, words, and works. . Whenever men intentionally and directly attack the perfections of Jehovah, and thus lessen the reverence which others entertain for him, they are blasphemers. If the abusive language pro- ceed from ignorance or if it be dishonoring to the majesty of Heaven only in the consequences deduced from , it by others, blasphemy has no existence. It is wilful calumny directed against the name or providence of God that alone consti- tutes the crime denoted by the term. (5) Examples of the general acceptation of blas- phemia in the New Testament are common, where the objects of it are men, angels, or the devil, as in Acts xiii:45; xviii:6; Jude 9. The re- stricted sense is found in such passages as Luke V :2I ; John x:36. 2. T’unishment. By the Mosaic law ö/as- phemy was punished with death (Lev. xxiv:Io- I6); and the laws of some countries still visit it with the same punishment. Fines, imprison- ment, and various corporal inflictions are annexed to the crime by the laws of Great Britain. It is matter, however, of sincere satisfaction, that there are very few instances in which these enactments require to be enforced. J. Blasphemy Against the Holy Ghost. (1) Much has been written respecting the blas- phemy against the Holy Ghost, usually, but improperly, denominated the unpardonable sin against the Holy Ghost. Some refer it to con- tinued opposition to the Gospel, i. e., obstinate impenitence or final unbelief. In this view it is unpardonable, not because the blood of Christ is unable to cleanse from such a sin, nor because there is anything in its own nature which separates it from all other sins and places it beyond for- giveness, but because, as long as man continues to disbelieve, he vol.11nfarily shuts himself out from the forgiving mercy of God. By not re- ceiving the Gospel, he refuses pardon. In the same manner, every sin might be styled the un- pardonable, as long as an individual continues to indulge in it. (2) But we object to this opinion, because it generalizes the nature of the sin in question. On the contrary, the Scripture account narrows it to a particular sin of a special kind, discountenancing the idea that it is of frequent occurrence and marked by no circumstances of unwonted aggra- vation. Besides, all the notices which we have refer it not so much to a state of mind, as to the outward manifestation of a singularly malignant disposition by the utterance of the lips. The occasion on which Christ introduced his mention of it (Matt. xii:31, cte: ; Mark iii:28, PLASTING etc.), the subsequent context, and, above all, the words of Mark iii:30 (‘because they said, He hath an unclean spirit"), indicate, with tolerable plainness, that the sin in question consisted in at- tributing the miracles wrought by Christ, or his apostles in His name, to the agency of Satan. It was by the power of the Holy Ghost, given to the Redeemer without measure, that he cast out devils; and whoever maligned the Saviour, by affirming that an unclean spirit actuated and enabled him to expel other spirits, maligned the Holy Ghost. (4) There is no connection between the descrip- tion given in the Epistle to the Hebrews, vi :4-6, and this unpardonable blasphemy. The passages in the Gospels which speak of the latter are not parallel with that in the Epistle to the Hebrews; there is a marked difference between the states of mind and their manifestations as described in both. The sins ought not to be identical ; they are altogether dissimilar. (5) It is difficult to discover the ‘sin unto death,’ noticed by the apostle John (John v:I6), al- though it has been generally thought to coincide with the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit; but the language of John does not afford data for pronouncing them one and the same. The first three gospels alone describe the blasphemy which shall not be forgiven; from it the “sin unto death’ stands apart. S. D BLASTING (blåst'íng), (Heb. "???, shed-ay- ſazy", singeing). This and Heb. TP. , yay-raw- Æone', to be yellowish, mildew, refer to two diseases which attack the grain; the former to the withering or burning of the ears, caused by the East wind (Gen. xli:6, 23, 27), the other to the effect produced by a hot wind or sirocco, by which the green ears are turned yellow, so that they bear no grains (K. and D., Como., Barnes' Bzö. ZX2cr.). Thomson says, “it rushes down every gorge, bending and breaking the trees, and tugging at each individual leaf. lips blister, and the moisture of the body evapo- rateS . ... you become languid, nervous, irri- table, and despairing' (/Land and Book ii:262). (See MILDEW). BLASTUS (blås’tus), (Gr. 8Xáorros, blas' tos, shoot, Sprout), a man who was cubicle/arzzes to king Herod. Agrippa, or who had the charge of his bed- Chamber (Acts xii:2O), A. D. 44. Such persons had usually great influence with their masters, and hence the importance attached to Blastus’s favoring the peace with Tyre and Sidon. BLEMISH (blém'ísh), (Heb. Dº, moom, Gr. pºpuos, 7/20'2720s). - There were various kinds of blemishes, i. e., im- perfections or deformities, which excluded men from the priesthood, and animals from being of- fered in sacrifice. These blemishes are described in Lev. xxi : 17-23; xxii: 19–25; Deut. xv.:21. We learn from the Mishna (Zebachim, xii: I ; Beco- 'roth, vii: 1), that temporary blemishes excluded a trian from the priesthood only as long as those biemishes continued. The rule concerning animals was extended to imperfections of the inward parts; thus, if an animal, free from outward blem- ish, was found, after being slain, internally defec- tive, it was not offered in sacrifice. Offending professors are spots and “blemishes;” are a reproach, dishonor, and plague to the church, and company that entertain them (2 Pet. ii: 13; Jude 12). 292 ... the eyes inflame, the BLESSING BLESS (blés), (Heb. nºs, aw-shar', to declare happy; T3, baw-rak', to declare blessed). Bless, in general, signifies to wish or do well to, or speak well of. When God is said to “bless,” it signifies, (I) To bestow plenty of temporal good things upon One, and make his outward affairs prosperous and successful, Gen. xxx:27. (2) To bestow both tem- poral and Spiritual good things, Gen. xii:2. (3) To justify one, and make him happy in the full enjoy- ment of God, Rev. xiv: I.2. (4) To set apart things to a holy use, and render them answerable to that end (Gen. ii:3). (5) To give creatures a power of propagating their species, Gen. i :22. (6) To endow one with heroic courage, miracu- lous strength and other gifts and graces necessary to his calling (Judg. xiii:24). When Christ is said to bless, it signifies, (I) to give thanks to God, and pray for his blessing on nourishment, (Matt. xiv:19). (2) To recommend persons by prayer to the favor of God (Mark x : 16). (3) In a way of thanksgiving ...) T ", to set apart the elements of his holy supper a sacred use (Matt, xxvi;26). (4) To save men rom the guilt and power of their sin, and bring them to God, as their portion and friend (Acts iii:26). When men are said to bless, it denotes (I) To extol and praise God for his infinite excellencies, (Ps. civ : I). (2) To give him thanks for his mer- cies and benefits (Ps. xvi :7; ciii:1, 2). (3) Sol- emnly to desire and foretell happiness to one (Gen. xlix; Deut. xxxiii). (4) Solemnly to pray for and declare God’s readiness to do good to others (Num. vi :23, 24; 2 Sam. , i :18). (5) Thankfully to value our great happiness in having God for our Saviour, portion and Lord (Is. lxv :I6; Jer. iv :2). (6) To salute persons, wishing them peace and prosperity (Gen. xlvii:7; Ps. cxxix:8). (7) To pray for, and speak well of others (Luke vi :28). (8) Fondly to imagine ourselves wise, happy, and in friendship with God, because of outward prosperity (Ps. xlix : 18), or flatter our- selves that God will not punish our sin (Deut. xxix: (9). (Brown, Bib. Dict.) BLESSING (blés'íng). Generally, blessing may mean any advantage conferred or wished for specially. The terms “blessing ' and ‘to bless’ occur very often in the Scriptures and in applications too Obvious to require explanation or comment. The patriarchal blessings of sons form the exception, these being, in fact, prophecies rather than blessings, or blessings only in so far as they for the most part involved the invocation and the promise of good things to come upon the parties concerned. The most remarkable instances are those of Isaac ‘blessing Jacob and Esau' (Gen. xxvii); of Jacob “blessing' his twelve sons (Gen. xlix); and of Moses ‘blessing’ the twelve tribes (Deut. xxxiii). On the first of these transactions Pro- fessor George Bush remarks: ‘It cannot be doubted that from such a father as Isaac a com- mon blessing was to be expected on all his chil- dren; but in this family there was a peculiar blessing pertaining to the first-born—a solemn, extraordinary, prophetical benediction, entailing the covenant blessing of Abraham, with all the promises, temporal and spiritual, belonging to it, and by which his posterity were to be dis- tinguished as God’s peculiar people.’ Favors, advantages, conferred by God, and bringing pleasure or happiness in their train (Gen. xxxix:5; Deut. xxviii:8: Prov. x:22, etc.). 3. The invocation of God’s favor upon a per- Son (Gen. xxvii:12). BLESSING, THE CUP OF 4. A present, a token of good will (Gen. xxxiii: II; Josh. xv.19; 2 Kings w;15).--Davis' Bib. Dict. BLESSING, THE CUP OF (blés'íng, küp Öv), a name applied to the wine in the Lord's Supper (I Cor. x:I6), probably because the same name was given to the cup of wine in the supper of the Passover (which see). BLESSING, VALLEY OF (blés'ing, väl'li Öv), (Heb. "Piº Pº, ay-meå Öer-aw-Éaw'), a translation of the name Valley of Berachah (bene- diction), which was borne by the valley in which Jehoshaphat celebrated the miraculous overthrow of the Moabites and Ammonites. It was from this circumstance it derived its name; and from the indications in the text, it must have been in the tribe of Judah, near the Dead Sea and En- gedi, and in the neighborhood of Tekoa (2 Chron. xx :23-26). BLINDING (blind'íng). See PUNISHMENTS. BLINDNESS (blind'nés), (Heb. Tºº, iv-vaw- zºozle"). (1) The frequent occurrence of blindness in the East has always excited the astonishment of travelers. Volney says that, out of a hundred persons in Cairo, he has met twenty quite blind, ten wanting one eye, and twenty others having their eyes red, purulent, or blemished (Travels in Egypt, i 224). This is principally owing to the Egyptian ophthalmia, which is endemic in that country and on the coast of Syria. Small- pox is another great cause of blindness in the East (Volney, Z. c.). (2) In the New Testament, blind mendicants are frequently mentioned (Matt. ix:27; xii:22; xx: 30; xxi. 14; John v:3). The blindness of Bar- jesus (Acts xiii:1 I) was miraculously produced, and of its nature we know nothing. Examples of blindness from old age occur in Gen. xxvii:I; I Kings xiv:4; I Sam. iv:15. The Syrian army that came to apprehend Elisha was suddenly smitten with blindness in a miraculous manner (2 Kings vi :18); and so also was St. Paul (Acts ix :9). The Mosaic law has not neglected to inculcate humane feelings towards the blind (Lev. xix: I4; Deut. xxvii:18). Blindness is sometimes threatened in the Old Testament as a punishment for disobedience (Deut. xxviii:28; Lev. xxvi :16; Zeph. i:17). * e & A. e - w e (3) Under the law, every man of Aaron's family who was “blind or lame” was peremptorily ex- cluded from the priesthood, and no blind or lame animals were to be sacrificed (Lev. xxi :18; Mal. i:13, 14). The Mosaic law inculcated the exercise of humanity towards the blind (Lev. xix:I4; Deut. xxvii:18). Figuratite. (I) The Scriptures denote those as blind who are ignorant, without any proper de- gree Uſ I aliullal kiluwludge, whether in heathen darkness or not (Matt. xv.: IS; Rom. ii: 19); (2) Without spiritual knowledge (Rev. iii:17); (3) Judges are blind, when ignorance, bribes, or partial favor hinders them to discern what is just and equal in a cause (Exod. xxiii:8; (4) Teachers are blind, when ignorance, honor, or interest, hinders their discernment of divine truth, imminent, dan- ger, and seasonable duty (Is. lix: IQ and xlii:19; Matt. xxiii:16; (5) People are blind, when weak- ness, self-conceit, hatred of brethren, or the like hinder them from discerning divine things (I John ii:II). BLOOD (blåd), (Heb. Fº, dawn, Gr. alua, Aah'- ee-/pa/h). There are two respects in which the ordinances of the Old and New Testaments con- cerning blood deserve notice here—the prohibi- 293 BLOOD tion of its use as an article of food, and the ap- pointment and significance of its use in the ritual of sacrifice; both of which appear to rest On a Common ground. - (1) As Food. In Gen. ix:4, where the use of animal food is allowed, it is first absolutely for- bidden to eat ‘flesh with its soul, its blood;’ which expression, were it otherwise obscure, is explained by the mode in which the same terms are em- ployed in Deut. xii:23. In the Mosaic law the prohibition is repeated with frequency and em- phasis; although it is generally introduced in con- nection with sacrifices, as in Lev. iii:7; vii:26 (in both which places blood is coupled in the pro- hibition with the fat of the victims); xvii:IO-I4; xix:26; Deut. xii:16-23; xv :23. In cases where the prohibition is introduced in connection with the lawful and unlawful articles of diet, the reason which is generally assigned in the text is, that ‘the blood is the soul,” and it is ordered that it be poured on the ground like water. But where it is introduced in reference to the portions of the victims which were to be offered to the Lord, then the text, in addition to the former reason, insists that ‘the blood expiates for the soul' (Lev. xvii: II, I2). This strict injunction not only applied to the Israelites, but even to the strangers residing among them. The penalty as- signed to its transgression was the being ‘cut off from the people;’ by which the punishment of death appears to be intended (cf. Heb. x:28), although it is difficult to ascertain whether it was inflicted by the sword or by stoning. It is observed by Michaelis (Mos. Recht. iv:45) that the blood of fishes does not appear to be inter- dicted. The words in Lev. vii:26 only expressly mention that of birds and cattle. This accords, however, with the reasons assigned for the pro- hibition of blood, so far as fishes could not be offered to the Lord ; although they formed a significant offering in heathen religions. To this is to be added that the Apostles and elders, as- sembled in council at Jerusalem, when desirous of settling the extent to which the ceremonial ob- servances were binding upon the converts to Christianity, renewed the injunction to abstain from blood, and coupled it with things offered to idols (Acts xv :29). In direct opposition to this emphatic prohibition of blood in the Mosaic law, the customs of un- civilized heathen sanctioned the cutting of slices from the living animals, and the eating of the flesh while quivering with life and dripping with blood. Even Saul’s army committed this bar- barity, as we read in I Sam. xiv:32; and the prophet also lays it to the charge of the Jews in Ezek. xxxiii:25. This practice, according to Bruce's testimony, exists at present among the Abyssinians. Moreover, pagan religions, and that of the Thoenicians among the rect, appointed the eating and drinking of blood, mixed with wine, as a rite of idolatrous worship, and espe- cially in the ceremonial of swearing. ... To this the passage in Ps. xvi;4 appears to allude (cf. J. D. Michaelis, Critisch. Colleg. p. 108, where several testimonials on this subject are Collected). (2) Ritual Significance. The appointment and significance of the use of blood in the ritual of sacrifice belongs indeed to this head : but their further notice will be more appropriately presented in the article SACRIFICE (which see). J. N. Figuratite. To be “in one's own blood,” signifies an unclean and destitute natural state: or a base and perishing, condition (Ezek., xvi;6). To “drink blood,” is to be satisfied with slaughter (Ezek. xxxix:18; Is. xlix:26; Num. xxiii:24). *. BLOOD AND WATER To have “blood given one to drink,” is to be slaughtered as a retribution for delighting in blood (Rev. xvi :6; Ezek. xvi :38). To “wash or dip one's feet in the blood of others; or have the tongue of dogs dipped in it,” denotes the terrible vengeance that shall fall on the enemies of Christ and his people (Ps. lviii:Io; lxviii:23). A “man of blood,” or “bloody man,” denotes one cruel and guilty of, or given to murder, (2 Sam. xvi :7). Frequently the Hebrew has bloods in the plural, to signify repeated or very horrid mur- der (Gen. iv: Io; 2 Sam, iii:28; xvi;7; 2 Kings ix:26; IS. i. I5; xxvi :21 ; xxxiii:15; Ezek. xvi : 9; xviii: I3; Hos. iv:2). “I will take away his blood out of his mouth, and his abomination from between his teeth,” i. e., the Philistines shall henceforth want power and inclination to mur- der and ravage in their wonted manner; nor shall continue in their idolatries; but be fearfully punished on account thereof (Zech. ix:7). (See AVENGER OF BLOOD ; BLOOD-REVENGE.) BLOOD AND WATER (blåd and waſtër), (John xix:34), are said to have issued from Our Lord's side when the soldier pierced him on the cross. The only natural explanation that can be offered of the fact is to suppose that some effusion had taken place in the cavity of the chest, and that the spear penetrated below the level of the fluid. Supposing this to have happened, and the wound to have been inflicted shortly after death, then, in addition to the water, blood would also have trickled down, or, at any rate, have made its ap- pearance at the mouth of the wound, even though none of the large vessels had been wounded It is not necessary to suppose that the pericardium was pierced; for, if effusion had taken place there, it might also have taken place in the cavi- ties of the pleura ; and, during health, neither the pericardium nor the pleura contains fluid, but are merely lubricated with moisture on their in- ternal or opposing surfaces, so as to allow of free motion to the heart and lungs. It must not be supposed that the fact of blood coming from the wound at all militates against the idea that our Lord was dead at the moment he was pierced. This argument is, indeed, made use of by Strauss (l. c.); but it can be refuted by the most ordinary experience. It is well known that, even many days after death, blood will trickle from deep incisions, especially where any of the large veins have been wounded. The pop- ular opinion that blood will not flow from a corpse, must be taken in a relative, and not ab- solute sense. It certainly will not flow as it does from a living body; and, when the wound is small and superficial, sometimes not a drop will be seen. The three other evangelists do not mention the circumstance. (Sec Physical Cause of the Death of Christ, by Wm. Stroms, M. D., London, 1847, pp. 309-420.) W. A. N. BLOOD, ISSUE OF (blåd, ish'ti čv), (Gr. al- poppoéa, Aa/-ee-zzzoz-ro/*-eh'o, to run with blood, Matt. ix:2O). The disease here alluded to is haemorrhagia; but we are not obliged to suppose that it con- tinued unceasingly for twelve years. It is a uni- versal custom, in speaking of the duration of a chronic disease, to include the intervals of com- parative health that may occur during its course; so that when a disease is merely stated to have lasted a certain time, we have still to learn whether it was of a strictly continuous type, or whether it intermitted. In the present case, as this point is left undecided, we are quite at liberty to suppose that the disease did intermit; and 294 BLOODY SWEAT can therefore understand why it did not prove fatal even in twelve years. Bartholinus (De Morb. Bibl. p. 61) quotes a case in which haemorrhage is said to have oc- curred for upwards of two years without cessa- tion; but the details necessary to render such an extraordinary case credible are not given. (See DISEASEs.) BLOOD-REVENGE (blåd'—ré-vénj"), or revenge for bloodshed, was regarded among the Jews, as among all the ancient and Asiatic nations, not only as a right, but even as a duty, which devolved upon the nearest relative of the murdered person, who on this account was called *sº, go-a/e', the reclaimer of blood, or One who demands the resti- tution of blood, similar to the Latin sanguinem ze/efere. (1) The Mosaical law (Num. xxxv :31) ex- pressly forbids the acceptance of a ransom for the forfeited life of the murderer, although it might be saved by his seeking an asylum at the altar of the Tabernacle, in case the homicide was acci- dentally committed (Exod. xxi :13; I Kings i :50; ii:28). When, however, in process of time, after Judaism had been fully developed, no other sanc- tuary was tolerated but that of the Temple at Jerusalem, the chances of escape of such an homi- cide from the hands of the avenger, ere he reached the gates of the Temple, became less in proportion to the distance of the spot where the murder was committed from Jerusalem. Six czężes of refuge were in consequence appointed for the momentary Safety of the murderer, in various parts of the kingdom, the roads to which were kept in good order to facilitate his escape (Deut. xix:3). Thither the avenger durst not follow him, and there he lived in safety until a proper examination had taken place before the authori- ties of the place (Josh. xx:6, 9), in order to as- certain whether the murder was a wilful act or not. In the former case he was instantly deliv- ered up to the Goel, against whom not even the altar could protect him (Exod. xxi.; I4; I Kings ii:29); in the latter case, though" he was not actually delivered into the hands of the Goel, he was, notwithstanding, not allowed to quit the precincts of the town, but was obliged to remain there all his lifetime, or until the death of the high-priest (Num. xxxv :6; Deut. xix:3; Josh. xx:I-6), if he would not run the risk of falling into the hands of the avenger, and be slain by him with impunity (Num. xxxv :26; Deut. xix:6). That such a voluntary exile was considered more in the light of a punishment for manslaughter than a provision for the safe retreat of the homi- cide against the revengeful designs of the pur- suer, is evident from Num. xxxv :32, where it is expressly forbidden to release liiini ſroin his confinement on any condition whatever. (2) That such institutions are altogether at va- riance with the spirit of Christianity may be judged from the fact that revenge, so far from being counted a right or duty, was condemned by Christ and his apostles as a vice and passion to be shunned (Acts vii:60 ; Matt. v :44; Luke vi :28; Rom. xii; I4, sq. Comp. Rom. xiii., where the power of executing revenge is vested in the authorities alone). BLOODY SWEAT (blåd'y swät'). According to Luke xxii:44, Our Lord's sweat was ‘as great drops of blood falling to the ground.’ Michaelis takes the passage to mean nothing more than that the drops were as large as falling drops of blood. (1) The evangelist does not say that it became BLUE blood, and the comparison may be used as an illustration of the terrible agony through which Our Lord was passing. An examination of twelve different translations besides the Greek text, fails to find any state- ment to the effect that the sweat became blood, or that blood issued from the pores. In relation to this subject, Dr. Olshausen says: “Although, on the authority of medical statements we can believe that in the highest state of mental agony a blood exudation may take place, still we must acknowledge that in these words of Luke, only a comparison of the sweat with drops of blood is directly expressed. In relation to real drops of blood, the words ‘as if' would be altogether out of place.” Butler, “Bible Work,” ). 5 I 4. Wakefield’s version reads as follows: “And be- ing in an agony of distress, he continued praying with unusual earnestness, and his sweat was run- ning down like great drops of blood to the ground.” McKnight renders the verse thus: “And being in an agony of grief, he prayed the more fervently, and his sweat fell like clotted blood to the ground.” Rotherham translates as follows: “And com- ing to be in an agony, more intensely was he pray- ing, and his perspiration became as if great drops of blood (were) descending to the ground.” Several ancient manuscripts besides the Vatican and the Alexandrian omit verses 43–44. (2) W. W. Keen, M.D., LL.D., in able papers, contributed to The Baptist Teacher, October, 1890; The Baptist Qr. Rev., April, 1892, and the Bib. Sacra., July, 1897, discusses the subject very thoroughly. After citing a large number of cases where the phenomena connected with exuda- tion of blood occurred from strong emotion, he contends that human emotion from any cause can be but slight when compared with that of him “upon whom was laid the iniquity of us all,” and who presumably from adolescence till his death, and certainly during the three years of his active ministry, felt this burden most intensely. If bloody sweating occurs, as is certainly the case, as a result of the nervous phenomena of hysteria, how much more probable would it be from the intense nervous strain of Gethsemane. More- over, though “foxes had holes and the birds of the air had nests, the Son of man had not where to lay his head,” he was undoubtedly often sub- ject to physical hardships, spent the night on mountains in prayer, was exposed to mob violence, and finally, combining both the acme of emotion and the acme of physical suffering, passed through the awful night in Gethsemane and the physical and mental agonies of the crucifixion. Under such circumstances, with such intensified emotion be- youd tile limit Uſ liulian eliduſ auue, and will suul physical suffering as culminated on the cross, it cannot be a wonder either that his sweat became bloody, or that his heart, even at so early an age as thirty-three, should rupture. BLUE (blu). See COLORs. BOANERGES (b5'a-nēr'jāz), (Gr. Boavepvés, bo. an-erg-es', explained as “sons of thunder,” Mark iii:17), a surname given by Christ to James and John, probably on account of their fervid, impetu- Qus spirit (Comp. Luke ix:54, and see Olshausen thereon). BOAR (bör), (Heb. Yº, Áha2-eer'), (Gr. xoipos, Áhoy'ros). Occurs in Lev. xi:7; Deut. xiv:8; Ps. lxxx:13; Prov. xi.22; Is. lxv.4; lxvi;3, 17. The Hebrew, Egyptian, Arabian, Phoenician and other neighboring nations abstained from hog's 295 BOCHERU flesh, and consequently, excepting in Egypt, and (at a later period) beyond the Sea of Galilee, no domesticated swine were reared. In Egypt, where Swineherds were treated as the lowest of men, even to a denial of admission into the temples, and where to have been touched by a swine defiled the the person nearly as much as it did a Hebrew, it is difficult to conjecture for what purpose these animals were kept so abundantly, as it appears by the monumental pictures they were ; for the mere service of treading down seed in the de- posited mud of the Nile when the inundation sub- sided, the only purpose alleged, cannot be admitted as a sufficient explanation of the fact. Although in Palestine, Syria, and Phoenicia hogs were rarely domesticated, wild boars are often mentioned in the Scriptures, and they were frequent in the time of the Crusades. The wild boar of the East, though commonly smaller than the old breeds of domestic swine, grows occasionally to a very large size. It is passive while unmolested, but vindictive and fierce when roused. The ears of the species are small, and rather rounded, the snout broad, the tusks very prominent, the tail tortuous, and the color dark ashy, the ridge of the back bearing a profusion of long bristles. It is doubtful whether this species is the same as that of Europe, for the farrow are not striped; most likely it is identical with the wild hog of India. BOARD (börd). Four Hebrew words are thus translated: 1. In Exod. xxvii:8; Ezek. xxvii:5 and else- where, the word is mº, /oo'akh, a tablet. 2. In Exod. xxvi;IS, SQ., ”E, Åeh'resh, to split off like a board. - 3. In 1 Kings vi.15, "...ſº, sed-ay-raw", a row, or set up in order. t 4. In I Kings vi.15, yºs, Žsay-/azy", is rendered a riff, or a beamz. BOAT (böt). The following words in the orig- inal are translated boat : 1. Ab-aw-raw' (Heb. Tºº), a crossing place, so ferry boat (2 Sam. xix:18). 2. P/oy-ar'ee-on (Gr. TXováptov), a little shift, a fishing Smack (John vi;22, 23). 3. SAEaſ'ay (Gr. o.ká pm), dug out, a boat acting as tender to a larger vessel (Acts xxvii:16, 30, 32). BOAZ (bö'az), (Heb. "PP, bo'ag, perhaps alac- rity). - 1. A wealthy Bethlehemite and near kinsman of the first husband of Ruth, whom he eventually espoused under the obligations of the Levirate law, which he willingly incurred (B. C. 1360). The conduct of Boaz—his fine spirit, just feeling, piety, and amenity of manners—appears to great advantage ill ille DUUk Uſ Rutlı, and ſul 1113 an in teresting portraiture of the condition and deport- ment of what was in his time the upper class of Israelites. By his marriage with Ruth he became the father of Obed, from whom came Jesse, the father of David. He was thus one of the direct ancestors of Christ, and as such his name occurs in Matt. i :5, but it is difficult to assign his date. (See RUTH; GENEALOGY.) Late Jewish tradition, without any probability, identifies him with the judge, Ibzan. 2. The name given to one of the two brazen pillars which Solomon erected in the court of the temple (I Kings vii:15, 21; 2 Chron. iii:17; Jer. lii:21). (See JACHIN, 2.) BOCHERU (bók'e-ru), (Heb. *::. bo-Åer-oo!, firstborn, youth), One of the six sons of Azel, a de. BOCHIM scendant of King Saul (1 Chron. viii:38), B. C. about IO37. º BOCHIM (bo'kim), (Heb. FP, bo-ſeem', weep- ings), the name given to a place (probably near Shiloh, where the tabernacle then was) where an ‘angel of the Lord ' reproved the assembled Israelites for their disobedience in making leagues with the inhabitants of the land, and for their remissness in taking possession of their heritage. This caused the bitter weeping among the people for which the place took its name (Judg. ii: 1). BODY (böd'y), the rendering of several Hebrew words and the Gr. o. ºpa, so"/la/. - It generally refers to the animal frame as dis- tinguished from the man himself. It differs from sara (ordpå), which has reference rather to the material or substance of the body. It is spoken of in the Scriptures as the temporary abode of the Spirit (2 Cor. v :I ; 2 Pet. i :13, I4). Figuratite. (I) Our whole man, and Christ's whole manhood, are called a body, because the body is most obvious, and visible (Rom. vi :12; Heb. x:5). The last is called the body of his flesh, to represent it in its state of humility, and to distinguish it from his mystical body, the church (Col. i :22). (2) Christ's body may sometimes denote himself, as fulfilling all righteousness for us (Rom. vii:4; Heb. x:Io). (3) The church is called Christ's body: it consists of many members, or persons, united to him, and to one another by faith, love, and the ministry of the word and sacraments; and by him every true member is quickened, strengthened, and supported (Eph. iv :I6; Col. ii :19; I Cor. xii: 12, 13). (4) Our in- ward corruption is called a body of sin and death. It consists of numerous lusts closely connected ; is of a base nature; and disposes men to seek after, and delight in carnal things. It is altogether sin- ful, the cause of sinful actions; and a chief in- gredient of spiritual death (Rom. vi :6 and vii:24). (5) The body of types is what is prefigured by them (Col. ii:17). (6) The apostle speaks of a natural body in opposition to a spiritual body (I Cor. xv.:44). The body which is buried is natural (Wuxuków), inasmuch as the power of the sensuous and perishable life (Wuxià) was its vital principle. The resurrection body will be spiritua/ (trwevuaruków) inasmuch as the spirit will be its life principle. It will therefore be a spiritualiged body fitted to the new spiritual conditions of heaven. BODY OF HEAVEN (böd'y 6v hèv"n), (Heb. Fºx', eh'ſsem, Exod. xxiv:IO), from root signifying strong, the bone; hence, the body, the very thing or substance. - It is here used for “the heaven itself, the very heaven,” in its clearness, in its unclouded blue appearance, with the unnumbered stars sparkling brightly thcrein (Exod. xxiv:10). BOHAN (bö'hān), (Heb. lº, bo'ham, a thumb), a Reubenite in whose honor a stone was erected which afterwards served as a boundary- mark on the frontier between Judah and Benja- min (Josh. xv:6; xviii:17). It does not appear from the text whether this stone was a sepulchral monument, or set up to commemorate some great exploit performed by this jºin in the conquest of Canaan (B. C. I7I4). º BoIL (boil), (Heb. Tºº, shekh-eem', burning, in- flammation). (1) A hard, painful tumor, an inflamed ulcer, which on suppuration discharges pus mixed with blood: a substance called the core is then re- 296 BONNET vealed, which is purulent, thick and tenacious, and can be drawn out in the form of a cylinder, more pus following. In the Scriptures the boil, shechin, seems to be used for three diseases: (1) An in- flamed ulcer (Exod. ix:IO, II; Lev. xiii: 18); (2) a carbuncle or the bubo of the plague (2 Kings xx:7; ... Is. XXxviii:21); (3) the black leprosy (Job ii:7). In Deut. xxviii:27, 35, the word is translated boſch. (2) Ordinary boils are common, in the warmer parts of the East, during the rainy season. They are unsightly, but are not dangerous. One type of boil, however, the carbuncle, arising from poi- soned blood and eating away the flesh like an ulcer, may terminate the life. This was probably Hezekiah’s disease. The application of a poultice of figs would do it good, but the rapid cure was due to God. (Davis, Bib. Dict.). (See DIS- EASES.) $ - BOLLED (bold), (Heb. bº, gið-ale', the calyx of flowers), that which is “swollen,” “podded” for seed (Exod. ix:31). * BOLSTER (böl'stér), (Heb. Tºº?, mer-ah-ash- aw', at the head, I Sam. xix:13, 16; xxvi;7, II, 16), elsewhere rendered PILLow (which see). BOLT (bölt). See LOCK. BOND (bönd), the rendering of several words in the original. Among them are Heb. Tºš, es- awr', Tºš, is-awr'. It denotes (I) A band or chain (Acts xxviii: 2O); (2) an obligation, or vow (Num. xxx:12); (3) oppression; captivity; affliction outward, or inward (Ps. cxvi :16; Phil. i :7); (4) the just laws of God or men, which restrain our sinful liberty, and unite us into a body in church or state (Jer. v :5). BONDAGE (bönd'āj), (Heb. *T22, ab-dooth'). See SLAVERY. BONE (bön). (1) The hard parts of animal bodies which support their frame (Job x:II). (2) A dead body (I Kings xiii:31; 2 Kings xiii:21). (3) The whole man (Ps. xxxviio). Figuratite. (I) A troubled soul is likened to broken, burned, pierced, shaken, or rotten bones; its distress is very painful, lasting, and difficult of cure (Ps. li:8; Lam. i : 13; Ps. xlii: Io; Jer. xxiii:9; Hab. iii:16); (2) to be bone of one's bone, and flesh of his flesh; or a member of his flesh and bones, is to have the same nature, and the nearest relation and affection (2 Sam. v : I ; Gen. ii:23; Eph. v :30; (3) to pluck the flesh off one’s bones, or to break and chop them, is most cruelly to oppress and murder (Mic. iii:2, 3); (4) iniquities are in and on men's bones, when their hady is polliſted hy them, and lie inder the guilt or fearful punishment of them (Job xx: II; Ezek, xxxii:27). - BONNET (bón'nét), (Heb. Fº, mig-bazy-oth', turbans, hilt-shaped; "Nº, £eh-ayr', tires, orna- ments). Among the Jews, bonnets and miters were the same. They were made of a piece of linen, sixteen yards long, which covered their priests’ heads, in form of a helmet; that of the common priests being roundish, and that of the high-priest pointed at the top (Lev. viii:I3). Josephus (Antiq. vol. iii. chap. 7, sec. 2) describes the bonnet of the common priests as made of a great many rounds of linen, sewed into the form of a crown, and the whole covered with a fold of plain linen, to hide the seams; and the high-priest’s as having BOOK 297 another above this; of a violet color, which was encompassed with a triple crown of gold, with three rows of the flower which the Greeks call x0avos or probably blue-bottle (Antig. vol. iii. chap. 8) interrupted in the forepart with the golden plate, inscribed Holiness to the Lord. These bonnets and miters of the priests repre- sented the pure and excellent royalty of our blessed High-Priest, Christ (Exod. xxviii:4). BOOK (book), (Heb. Tºº, sayſer, book, writing; Gr. 8(3)\os, bib' /os), a written register of events or declaration of doctrines and laws (Gen. vii; Esth. vi: I). . (1) The Books of Moses are called the book of the law; and a copy of Deuteronomy, if not the [*. º | , ºr, sº iſºtºrs, tº .--- Yº: ºr ~ : LRTR-3. Fºl-lºſſ * * *. -xx, W : -- º º- § 3. Book of the Law (Closed). whole of them, was laid up in some repository of the ark (Deut. xxxi :26). Anciently, men used to write upon tables of stone, lead, copper, wood, wax, bark, or leaves of trees. The ancient Egyptians wrote on linen, as appears from inscriptions on some bandages of their mummies; and so, it is likely, did the Hebrews. About B. C. 3679 they began to write on the inner films or skins of their paper reeds. Hesiod's works were written on tables of lead; the Roman laws on twelve tables of brass; Solon's on wood; and those of God on stone, probably marble. In very ancient times, the Persians and Ionians wrote on skins. ...When Attalus, king of Pergamos, formed his library, about B. C. 230, he either invented or improved BOOK parchment. This, when written on, was either Sewed together in long rolls, and written only on One side, in the manner of the copy of the law now used in the Jewish synagogues; or it was formed in the manner of our books. When the book was written on one of these rolls, it was wound on a stick, and turned off or on at the read- er's pleasure;—hence the term Volume. Some Indian books are extant, written on leaves of the Malabar palm tree. Books now, and for about five or six centuries backward, have been generally written on linen paper. The Jews had their copies Book of the Law (Opened). of the Scriptures carefully transcribed on rolls of parchment, and hence we read of a roll, or the roll of a book; or of the heavens rolled together as a scroll. It was probably a roll of the prophet Isaiah, which was put into our Lord's hands in the synagogue at Nazareth ; and on such a roll Baruch wrote, at Jeremiah's dictation, the proph- ecy which the king of Judah burned (Jer. xxxvi; Luke iv:17). (2) The Book of the Lord is either the Script- ures (Is. xxxiv:16) or his purpose, wherein every- thing is regulated and fixed (Ps. cxxxix:I6; Rev. v:4; x:2) or his providential care and support of men's natural life (Exod. xxxii:32; Ps. lxix:28) or his omniscient observation, and fixed remem- brance of things (Ps. lvi :8; Mal. iii:16). (3) “Book of the Wars of the Lord” (Num. xx1:14) is thought by some to be all dutieill docu- ment existing at the time of the writing of the Pentateuch, and quoted or alluded to by Moses. Another view is that it “is a collection of Odes of the time of Moses himself, in celebration of the glorious acts of the Lord and of the Israelites” (K. and D., Com.). “Was this book a record of war songs sung over camp fires, just as the Bedouins do to-day P It seems most likely” (Har- per, Bible and Modern Discoveries, p. 122). (4) The Book of Life. In Phil. iv:3 Paul speaks of Clement and other of his fellow-labor- ers, ‘whose names are written in the book of life.’ On this Heinrichs (Annotat, in Ep. Philipp.) Ob- serves that as the future life is represented under the image of a troXtrevua (citizenshift, community, political society) just before (iii:20), it is in BOOKS, SACRED, OF THE EAST 298 agreement with this to suppose (as usual) a cata- logue of the citizens' names, both natural and adopted (Luke x:20; Rev. xx:I5; xxi :27), and from which the unworthy are erased (Rev. iii:5). Thus the names of the good are often represented as registered in heaven (Rev. iii.5). But this by no means implies a certainty of Salvation (nor, as Doddridge remarks, does it appear that Paul in this passage had any particular revelation), but only that at that time the persons were on the list, from which (as in Rev. iii:5) the names of un- worthy members might be erased. This explana- tion is sufficient and satisfactory for the other im, portant passage in Rev. iii:5, where the glorified Christ promises to ‘him that overcometh,’ that he will not blot his name out of the book of life. (5) A Sealed Book (Is. xxix:II; Rev. v : 1-3) is a book whose contents are secret, and have for a very long time been so, and are not to be pub- lished till the seal is removed. (6) A Book or Roll. Written Within and Without, i. e., on the back side (Rev. v : I ), may be a book containing a long series of events; it not being the custom of the ancients to write on the back side of the roll, unless when the inside would not contain the whole of the writing (Comp. Horace, Ep. i. 20, 3). (7) To Eat a Book signifies to consider it care- fully and digest it well in the mind (Jer. xv.:I6; Rev. x:9). A similar metaphor is used by Christ in John vi., where he repeatedly proposes himself as ‘the Bread of Life’ to be eaten by his people. (8) Man’s Conscience is like to a book ; it records whatever he has done (Dan. vii:Io). (9) Christ's Opening the Sealed Book im- ports the predeclaration and exact fulfilment of the purposes of God relative to the New Testa- ment church (Rev. v. 9; viii:I). (See ROLL; WRITING...) º BOOKS, SACRED, OF THE EAST. In relation to the comparison between the rela- tive merit of the various “Sacred Books of the East.” Sir Monier Monier-Williams, Professor of Sanskrit, Oxford Univ., Eng., says: “(I) When I began investigating Hinduism and Buddhism, some well-meaning friends expressed their surprise that I should waste my time by grubbing in the dirty gutters of heathendom. After a little examination I found many gems there, and I began to be a believer in what is called ‘the evolution and growth of religious thought.’ ‘These imperfect systems,' I said to myself, ‘are clearly steps in the development of man's religious instincts and aspirations. Nay, it is probable that they were all intended to lead up to one true religion, and that Christianity is, after all, merely the climax, the complement, the fulfillment of them all.’ - “Now, there is unquestionably a delightful fas- cination about such a theory, and, what is more, there are elements of truth in it. But I am glad of an opportunity of stating publicly that I am per- suaded I was misled by its attractiveness, and that its main idea is quite erroneous. The charm and the danger of it, I think, lie in its apparent liber- ality, its breadth of view, and toleration. “(2) Now, to express sympathy with this kind of liberality is sure to win applause among a cer- tain class in these days of toleration and religious free trade. We must not forget, either, that our Bible tells us that God has not left Himself with- out witness, and that in every nation he that feareth God and worketh righteousness is ac- cepted of Him. “Yet I contend that this flabby, jelly-fish kind of tolerance is utterly incompatible with the nerve, BOOKS, SACRED, OF THE EAST fiber and backbone that ought to characterize a manly Christian. A Christian's character ought to be exactly what the Bible intends it to be. Take that Sacred Book of ours. Handle rever- ently the whole volume; search it through and through, and mark well the spirit that pervades it. You will find no limpness, no flabbiness about its utterances. Vigor and manhood breathe in every page. It is downright and straightforward, bold, fearless, rigid and uncompromising. “It tells us plainly to be either hot or cold. If God be God, serve Him. If Baal be God, serve Him. We cannot serve both. Only one name is given among men whereby we may be saved. “(3) These non-Christian Bibles are develop- ments in the wrong direction. They all begin with Some ashes of true light and end in utter dark- ness. Pile them, if you will, on the left side of your study table, but place your own Holy Bible On the right side—all by itself, all alone, and with a wide gap between. “(4) And now I crave permission to give at least two good reasons for venturing to contra- vene in SO plainspoken a manner the favorite philosophy of the day. Listen to me, ye youth- ful students of the so-called Sacred Books of the East; Search them through and through, and tell me, do they affirm of Vyasa, of Zoroaster, of Con- fucius, of Buddha, of Mohammed, what our Bible affirms of the founder of Christianity?—that He, a sinless man, was made Sin? Not merely that He is the eradicator of sin, but that He, the sinless Son of Man, was himself made sin. “Vyasa and the other founders of Hinduism enjoined severe penances, endless lustral wash- ings, incessant purifications, painful pilgrimages, arduous ritual, and sacrificial observations, all with one idea of getting rid of sin. All their books say so. But do they say that the very men who exhausted every invention for the eradication of sin were themselves sinless men made sin & “(5) As a layman I do not presume to inter- pret the apparently contradictory proposition put forth in our Bible that a sinless man was made sin. All that I now contend for is that it stands alone—that it is wholly unparalleled; that it is not to be matched by the shade of a shadow of a similar declaration in any other book claiming to be the exponent of any other religion in the world. Once again, ye youthful students of the so- called Sacred Books of the East; search them through and through, and see if they affirm of any one what our Bible affirms of the Founder of Christianity,+that He, a dead and buried man, was made life?—not merely that He is the giver of life, but that He is life? “‘I am the life.” “When Christ, who is our life, shall appear.’ ‘He that hath the Son hath life.” T.ef me remind yout, too, that ‘the blood is the life,’ and that our Sacred Book adds this matchless, this unparalleled, this astounding assertion : ‘Ex- cept ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.’ - (6) “Again I say I am not presuming to in- terpret so marvelous, so stupendous a statement. All I contend for is that it is absolutely unique, and I defy you to produce the shade of a shadow of a similar declaration in any other sacred book in the world. And bear in mind that these two matchless, these two unparalleled declarations, are closely, intimately connected with the great cen- tral facts and doctrines of our religion—the in- carnation, the crucifixion, the resurrection and the ascension of the Christ. Vyasa, Zoroaster, Confucius, Buddha, and Mohammed are all dead and buried; their flesh is dissolved; their bodies are extinct, Even their followers admit this, BOOTH “Christianity alone commemorates the passing into the heavens of its Divine Founder, not merely. in the spirit, but ‘in the body,’ to be the eternal Source of life and holiness to his people. “(7) The two unparalleled declarations quoted by me from our Holy Bible make a gulf between it and the so-called Sacred Books of the East which sever the one from the other utterly, hope- lessly, and forever. Not a mere rift, which may be easily closed up, and across which the Christian and the non-Christian may shake hands and in- terchange similar ideas in regard to essential truths, but a veritable gulf, which cannot be bridged over by any science of religious thought —yes, a bridgeless chasm which no theory of evo- lution can ever span. “(8) Go forth, then, ye missionaries, in your Master's name; go forth into all the world, and after studying all its false religions and philoso- phies, fearlessly proclaim to suffering humanity the plain, the unchangeable, the eternal facts of the gospel. “Dare to be downright with all the uncom- promising courage of your own Bible, while with it your watchwords are love, joy, peace and recon- ciliation. Be fair, be charitable, be Christlike, but let there be no mistake. Let it be made abso- lutely clear that Christianity cannot, must not, be watered down to suit the palate of either Hindu, Parsee, Confucianist, Buddhist, or MO- hammedan, and that whosoever wishes to pass from the false religion to the true can never hope to do so by the rickety planks of compromise, or by the help of faltering hands held out by half- hearted Christians. “He must leap the gulf in faith, and the living Christ will spread his everlasting arms beneath and land him safely on the eternal rock.” (Trans. I’ic. Inst. vol. 20. p. 302.) BOOTH (booth), (Heb. Hºt, Soo/*-AEazy', tabernacle or pavilion), a hut made of branches of trees, and thus distinguished from a tent properly so called. - - Such were the booths in which Jacob sojourned for a while on his return to the borders of Canaan, whence the place obtained the name of Succoth (Gen xxxiii:17; and such were the temporary green sheds in which the Israelites were directed to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles (Lev. xxiii:42, 43). As this observance was to com- memorate the abode of the Israelites in the wil- derness, it has been rather unwisely concluded by some that they there lived in such booths. But it is evident from the narrative, that, during their wanderings, they dwelt in tents; and, indeed, where, in that treeless region, could they have found branches with which to construct their booths? Such structures are only available in well-wooded regions; and 1t is obvious that the direction to celebrate the feast in booths, rather than in tents, was given because, when the Israel- ites became a settled people in Palestine, and ceased to have a general use of tents, it was easier for them to erect a temporary shed of green branches than to provide a tent for the occasion. BOOTY (boo' ty). See SPOIL. BOOZ (bö'oz), (Gr. Boöğ, boog, Matt. i. 5; Luke iii:32). See BOAz. BORDER (bór'dër). 1. Generally some form of the Heb. bº, gheb- oo/", a boundary line. 2. Mis-gheh’reth (Heb. ºº, inclosing, Exod. xxv.25, 27; xxxvii: 12, I4), the margins or panels placed round about the table of the shew bread 299 BOSOM where the upper portion of the legs were fastened, also of a similar margin round the pedestals of the temple lavers (I Kings vii:28-36; 2 Kings xvi; 17). 3. A aw-mazeſ’ (Heb. º, edge), the hem or fringe of a garment (Num. xv.:38). º 4. Tore (Heb. Yº, a string), a row or string of pearls or golden beads for the headdress (Cant. i:II). º BORITH (bö'rith), (Heb. FTP, bo-rith'), occurs in two passages of Scripture, first in Jer. ii.22, and then in Malachi iii:2. From neither of these passages does it dis- tinctly appear whether the substance referred to by the name of borith was obtained from the min- eral or from the vegetable kingdom. But it is evident that it was possessed of cleansing proper- tleS. BORN AGAIN (börn á-gēn) or BORN OF GOD. See REGENERATION. BORROWING (bör'rö-ing). On the general subject, as a matter of law or precept, see LOAN. In Exod. xii:35 we are told that the Israelites, when on the point of their departure from Egypt, ‘borrowed of the Egyptians jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment;’ and it is added that ‘the Lord gave the people favor in the sight of the Egyptians, so that they lent unto them such things as they required. And they spoiled the Egyptians.’ This was in pursuance of a Divine command which had been given to them through Moses (Exod. iii:22; xi :2). This has suggested a diffi- culty, seeing that the Israelites had certainly no intention of returning to Egypt, or to restore the valuables which they thus obtained from their Egyptian neighbors.’ It is admitted that the gen- eral acceptation of the word rendered borrow brº, shaal) is to asſé or beg. Surely the Israelites had the moral right to “ask or beg” of the Egyptians a portion of their valuables after more than four hundred years of unrequited labor, but Sir J. W. Dawson has called attention to the fact that the Israelites were obliged to leave their own property in lieu of what they received from the Egyptians, as there was very little which they could take with them on such a long and weary march. - Lesser translates Exodus xii:35-36, as follows: “And the children of Israel had done according to the word of Moses; and they had asked of the Egyptians, vessels of silver, and vessels of gold, and garments. And the Lord had given the peo- ple favor in the eyes of the Egyptians, so that they gave unto them what they required.” The Septua- gint also renders the word “ask.” In all these passages the word which is rendered “borrow” is bsº, shaw'al—ask. (See Exodus iii:22, also xi 2 and xii. 35 ) Tf if had meant horrow in our sense the word should have been "º, lavah, as in Prov. xxii:7; Is. xxiv:2; Ps. xxxvii:21, etc. It would appear that after so many plagues had fallen upon the country, the Egyptians would have been glad to give the Israelites almost any- thing in order to get them away, and relieve them of the continual judgments which were being sent on their account. BOSCATH (bös'kath), (2 Kings xxii.1). BOZKATH. BOSOM (bööz'um), (Heb. Pººl, Ahaße, to inclose). . It is usual with the western Asiatics to carry va- rious sorts of things in the bosom of their dress, which forms a somewhat spacious depository, be- ing wide above the girdle, which confines it so See BOSOR tightly around the waist as to prevent anything from slipping through. (See BREAST.) Figuratite. (I) To have one in our bosom im- plies kindness, secrecy, intimacy (Gen. xvi :5; 2 Sam. xii:8). (2) Christ is in the bosom of the Father; that is, possesses the closest intimacy with, and most perfect knowledge of, the Father (John i:18). (3) Our Saviour is said to carry his lambs in his bosom, which touchingly represents his ten- der care and watchfulness over them. (4) Abra- ham’s bosom is heaven, where the saints not only have the closest and kindest intimacy with that great patriarch, but with God in Christ, as a child in his father's bosom (Luke xvi :22). (5) As it seems the ancient used to carry money and what was very precious in their bosom, a gift in the bosom denotes one secretly given, and heartily ac- cepted (Prov. xxi :14). (6) And wicked men are rewarded into their bosom, when their sins are heavily and sensibly punished (Ps. lxxix:12). BOSOR (bö'sor), (Gr. Bogºp, bos-or'). 1. The Aramaic form of Beor, father of Balaam (2 Pet. ii:15). (See BEOR.) 2. A town of Gilead, Gilead being doubtless used in a comprehensive sense (I Macc. v :26, 36); perhaps Bezer, in the territory once belonging to Reuben (Josh. xx:8). BOSORA (bös'o-rá). A town of Gilead (I Macc. v.:26-28), either BOS- tra in Hauran, or Bozrah in Edom. BOSS (bös), (Heb. 23, gab, the back or convex portion), the outstanding parts of a shield, and thus the thickest and strongest (Job xv :26). The word is sometimes rendered “back” (Ps. cxxix:3; Ezek. x:12), “bodies,” i. e., ramparts (Job xiii: I2), “nave,” i.e., rim of a wheel (I Kings vii:33). BOSSES (bös'és), the thickest and strongest parts; the prominent points of a buckler. (See ARMS, ARMOR.) BOTCH (böch), (Heb. Nº, shekh-een', inflam- mation). The rendering in Deut. xxviii:27, 35, in A. V. of the Hebrew word elsewhere translated boil. BOTNIMI (böt'nim), (Heb. Eº, Öawt-nime'), Occurs only in Gen. xliii: I 1. Here the word rendered nuts is botnim. Among the various translations of this term Celsius enumerates walnuts, hazel-nuts, pine-nuts, peaches, dates, the fruit of the terebinth-tree, and even al- monds; but there is little doubt that pistachio-nuts is the true rendering. (See NUTS.) BOTTLE (böt’t'l), (Heb. Fºº, Khay' meth, Gen. xxi:14; Hos. vii:5; TN3, anode, Judg. iv:19; Josh. ix: 4, I 3; º, me/."bel, I Sam. i:24; x:3; 2 Sam. xvi. 1; *N, obe, Job xxxii:19; Gr. dorkós, Matt. ix:17; Mark ii:22; Luke V:37). (1) Natural objects, it is obvious, would be the earliest things employed for holding and preserv- ing liquids; and of natural objects those would be preferred which either presented themselves nearly or quite ready for use, or, such as could speedily be wrought into the requisite shape. The skins of animals afford in themselves more conveniences for the purpose than any other natural product. Accordingly, in the fourth book of the Iliad (1:247) the attendants are represented as bearing wine for use in a goatsáin bottle, "Aakó &v alyetº. In Herodotus also (ii:121) a passage occurs by which it appears that it was customary among the an- cient Egyptians to use bottles made of skins, and from the language employed by him it may be in- ferred that a bottle was formed by sewing up the 300 BOTTLE skin and leaving the projection of the leg and foot to serve as a cock; hence it was termed Troöedºv, neck of a wineskin. This aperture was closed with a plug or a string. In Soune instances every part was sewed up except the neck; the neck of the animal thus became the neck of the bottle. This alleged use of skin-bottles by the Fgyptians is confirmed by the monuments. (2) The Greeks and Romans also were accus- tomed to use bottles made of skins, chiefly for wine. Some interesting examples of those in use among the Romans are represented at Hercula- neum and Pompeii. Bottles of Skins. (3) Skin bottles doubtless existed among the Hebrews even in patriarchial times; but the first clear notice of them does not occur till Joshua ix :4, where it is said that the Gibeonites, wishing to impose upon Joshua as if they had come from a long distance, took ‘old sacks upon their asses, and wine bottles old and rent and bound up.” So in the 13th verse of the same chapter: ‘These bottles of wine which we filled were new, and behold, they be rent; and these our garments and our shoes are become old by reason of the very long journey.” Age, then, had the effect of wear- ing and tearing the bottles in question, which must consequently have been made of skin. To the same effect is the passage in Job xxxii: 19, “My belly is as wine which hath no vent; it is ready to burst, like new bottles.’ (4) Our Saviour's language (Matt. ix:17; Luke v:37, 38; Mark ii:22) is thus clearly explained, ‘Men do not put new wine into old bottles, else the bottles break and the wine runneth out and the bottles perish ;’ ‘New wine must be put in new bottles and both are preserved.’ To the conception of an English reader who knows of no bottles but such as are made of clay or glass, Ilie idea of bottles breaking through age presents an insuperable difficulty, but skins may become ‘old, rent and bound up;’ they also prove, in time, hard and inelastic, and would in such a condition be very unfit to hold new wine, probably in a state of active fermentation. Even new skins might be unable to resist the internal pressure caused by fermentation. (5) As the drinking of wine is illegal among the Moslems, who are now in possession of West- ern Asia, little is seen of the ancient use of skin bottles for wine, unless among the Christians of Georgia, Armenia and Lebanon, where they are still thus employed. In Georgia the wine is stowed in large ox-skins, and is moved or kept at hand for use in smaller skins of goats or kids. But skins are still most extensively used through- out Western Asia for water. BOTTLE (6) It is an error to represent bottles as being made exclusively of dressed or undressed skins among the ancient Hebrews (Jones, Biblical Cy- c/o/aºdža, in voc.). Among the Egyptians orna- mental vases were of hard stone, alabaster, glass, Water Carriers with Bottles. ivory, bone, porcelain, bronze, silver or gold, and also, for the use of the people generally, of glazed pottery or common earthenware. As early as Thothmes III, assumed to be the Pharaoh of the Exodus (B. C. I490), vases are known to have existed of a shape so elegant and of workmanship SO Superior, as to show that the art was not, even then, in its infancy. Many of the bronze vases found at Thebes and in other parts of Egypt are of a quality which cannot fail to excite admiration, and which proves the skill possessed by the Egyptians in the art of working and compounding metals. Their shapes are most various—some neat, some plain, some grotesque; some in form, not unlike our cream- jugs, others are devoid of taste as the wine bot- QTTLINº. Ş.§yuurrºuggº - - C NS 2. º w- 2. 5, 7. Porcelain. 4. Earthenware. 8. Gold, with Plates and Bands. Io. Alabaster, with Lid. I, 2. Gold 6. Hard Stone. 9. Stone. 3. Cut Glass. tles of our cellars or the flower pots of our con- Servatories. They had also bottles, small vases and pots used for holding ointment or for other purposes connected with the toilet, which were made of alabaster, glass, porcelain and hard stone. Many specimens of these are in the British Mu- Sel1111. (7) The perishable nature of skin bottles led, at an early period, to the employment of instruments of a more durable kind, and it is to be presumed that the children of Israel would, during their sojourn in Fgypt, learn, among other arts prac- ticed by their masters, that of working in pottery- 301 BOUGH ware. Thus, as early as the days of the Judges (iv :19; v :25), bottles or vases composed of some earthy material, and apparently of a Superior make, were in use, for, what in the fourth chap- ter is termed ‘a bottle, is in the fifth designated ‘a lordly dish.’ Isaiah (xxx: I4) expressly men- tions ‘the bottle of the potters' as the reading in the margin gives it, being a literal translation from the Hebrew, while the terms which the pro- phet employs show that he could not have in- tended anything made of skin—he shall break it as the breaking of the potter's vessel that is broken in pieces, so that there shall not be found in the bursting of it a sherd to take fire from the hearth, or to take water out of the pit.’ In the I9th chapter, verse I, Jeremiah is commanded: “Go and get a potter’s earthen bottle;’ and (verse Io) “break the bottle;’ ‘Even so, saith the Lord Assyrian Glass Bottles (from the British Museum Collection). of Hosts (verse II), will I break this people and this city as one breaketh a potter’s vessel, that cannot be made whole again.” (See also Jer. xiii:12-14.) - Figuratite. (I) Metaphorically the word bottle is used, especially in poetry, for the clouds considered as pouring out and pouring down water (Job xxxviii:37), ‘Who can stay the bot- tles of heaven? (2) “Put thou my tears in a bottle’—that is, ‘treasure them up'—‘have a re- gard to them as something precious' (Ps. lvi :8). (3) David was like a bottle in the smoke, when he was wasted with grief and trouble, and ren- dered almost useless (Ps. cxix:83). (4) The inhabitants of Jerusalem were like bottles, when God poured into them the wine of his wrath and burst and ruined them (Jer. xiii:I2). BOTTOM (böt’túm), (Heb. Fºsº, mets-ool-lazy', Zech, i.8), to be dark, shadowing. The primitive root 72%, tsaw-la/, means to fall or settle; hence the idea of a valley. The bottom, where Zechariah in his vision saw the myrtle trees, might denote the low and flat country of Babylon, or the distressed condition of the Jews there, during Ur aſleſ Lleil Captivity: and the afflicted lot of the saints in general (Zech. i :8). BOTTOMLESS PIT (böt’tüm-lès pit), (Rev. ix:1, 2, II; xi:7; xvii:8; xx: I, 3). See ABYSS. BOUGH (bou), (Heb. Tºš, aw-meer', a branch, Is. xvii:6). Figuratite. (1) Christ is called the Branch, and the Branch of Righteousness. In His human nature He sprang forth of the root of Jesse; His human nature has no personality of its own, but consists as an engrafted branch in His Divine person; He flourishes and protects His people with His shadow ; He brings forth the highest honor to God and greatest happiness to men; He is infinitely righteous in IIimself and BOUNDARIES in His acts; and is made of God to us righteous- ness (Jer. xxiii:5 and xxxiii: I5; Zech. iii:8 and vi :12; Is. iv:2; xi :I and liii:2). (2) When He is compared to a tree His boughs indicate His ordinances and His protecting and supporting power and grace (Ezek. xvii:23). (3) The saints are likened to branches; they are united to and derive their nourishing influence from Jesus, as their root; they refresh and protect the world with their shadow, and bring forth fruits of holi- ness (John XV :5). (4) In respect of spreading and beautiful appearance and influence the Jew- ish church and nation were like boughs extending to the sea, but they and their cities were cut down and destroyed by the Assyrians (Ps. lxxx: Io, II; Is. xxx:17, and xxvii: Io, II). (5) Kings and great men are likened to branches; they make a flourishing appearance, and have their favorites and subjects dwelling under their boughs, or laws; and depending on their protec- tion and support (Ezek. xvii:3 and xxxi:3; Dan. xi :7 and iv: I.2). (6) Cities desolate of inhab- itants and trade are likened to forsaken boughs, uppermost branches, turned dead, or burned branches (Is. xvii:9 and xxvii:Io). (7) Joseph was a fruitful bough, or flourishing son, for his numerous and honorable offspring (Gen. xlix: 22). (8) Children, or offspring, are called branches; being sprung from their ancestors they are an honor, help and pleasure to them (Job viii:16). (9) Sennacherib's bough was lopped zwith terror, when the Lord, by a terrible stroke, cut off his captains and numerous army as the leaves of a tree (Is. x:33). (IO) Prosperity is likened to branches; it is glorious, useful and protecting (Dan. iv:14). (II) To put the branch to the nose is to smell branches carried in honor of idols; or to smell the censer of sacred incense; or by sin to furnish fuel for the devouring wrath of God (Ezek. viii:17). BOUNDARIES (bound'à-ríz). See LANDMARKS. Bou NTIFULNESS (boun'ti-ful-nēs). Several words in the original are so translated: Heb. Pºp, tobe, good, Prov. xxii.9); Pº, sho'ah, rich, Is. xxxii:5; łº, gazey-ma/", Ps. xiii:6; Gr. et)\oyla, yoo-log-ee'ah, good speech or blessing, 2 Cor. ix:5, 6. In general it denotes liberality in the bestowment of gifts, favors, kindness (I Kings x:15; Is. xxxii:5; Ps. cxvi :7). Egyptian Bows with Quivers. Bow (bo), (Heb. nºt, Æeh'sheth, bow). The bow is frequently mentioned symbolically in Scripture. In Ps, vii: 12, it implies victory, signifying judgments laid up in store against of- 302 BOX-TREE fenders. It is sometimes used to denote lying and falsehood (Ps. lxiv:4; cxx:4; Jer. ix:3), probably from the many circumstances which tend to render a bow inoperative, especially in unskillful hands. Hence also ‘a deceitful bow' (Ps. lxxviii:57; Hos. vii:I6); with which com- pare Virgil's “Perfidus ensis frangitur" (The treacherous sword is broken). The bow also signifies any kind of arms. The bow and spear are the most frequently mentioned because the ancients used these most (Ps. xliv : 6; xlvi :9; Zech. x:4; Josh. xxiv:12). In Habak. iii:9 “thy bow was made bare’ means that it was drawn out of its case. The Orientals used to carry their bows in a case hung on their girdles. In 2 Sam. i :18 the Authorized Version has ‘Also he (David) bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow.’ ‘Here,’ says Pro- fessor Robinson (Addit. to Calmet), ‘the words “the use of" are not in the Hebrew, and convey a sense entirely false to the English reader. It should be “teach them the bow,” i. e., f/he song of the bow, from the mention of this weapon in verse 22. (See ARMS, ARMOR.) BOWELS (bou'éls), (Heb. Sº, me-yzm"), are often put by the Hebrew writers for the internal parts generally, the inner man, and so also for Aeart, as we use that term. (1) Hence the bowels are made the seat of tenderness, mercy and compassion ; and thus the Scriptural expressions of the bowels being moved, bowels of mercy, straitened in the bowels, etc. (2) By a similar association of ideas the bowels are also sometimes made the seat of wisdom and understanding (Job xxxviii:36; Ps. li:6; Is. xvi; II). (3) Paul longed after the Philippians in the bowels of Christ; that is, in the most ar- dent love and tenderest pity, wrought by Christ's Spirit, and similar, though not equal, to Jesus’ love to men (Phil. i :8). (4) “Trouble, pain,” and boiling of bowels import terrible distress and grief (Job xxx:27; Jer. iv:19; Lam. i :20). (5) The curse coming into one’s bowels like water, im- plies the execution of its fearful effects on the soul and the whole man (Ps. cix. 18). BOWING (bou'íng). See ATTITUDEs. BOWL (böl), (Heb. nº. ga/-/a/.', cruse). (See DISH.) Bow MAN (bou'man), (Heb. nº, Keh'sheth, bow, and nºn, zaw-maw', shoot, Jer. iv:29). (See ARMS, ARMOR.) BowsHot (bå 'shôt), (Heb. nº., Aeſh'sheth. bow, and "Nº, taw-khaw', to stretch, Gen. xxi.16). “In the distance as archers,” i e , as far as archcrg are wont to place their targets. BOX (böks), (Heb. 72, fak), so rendered 2 Kings ix:1, 3 properly denotes a “flask;” I Sam. x:1. Box would be better rendered “vial.” BOX-TREE (böks-tré), (Is. xli:19). A small evergreen tree, either the same with or closely resembling the shrubby box of our gardens. One species (Buarus longifolia) is found on Lebanon, and may once have been com- mon in Palestine. It is believed that the Phoe- nicians imported the wood of other species from Chittim, and used it with ivory for inlaid work. The perfect proportions of this tree, its perennial beauty of foliage, and its utility illustrate the prosperity and grace which God will bestow on Zion (Is. lx :13). (See TEASHUR.) EOY Box (boi), (Heb. Tº yeazed, a young lad or child, Joel iii:3; Zech. viii:5; 22, mah'ar, Gen. xxv.27), a term used of those who are from the age of infancy to adolescence. BOZEZ (bö'zez), (Heb. Ysº, ôo-fsafez', height, Shining), the name of one of the sharp rocks in the passage by which Jonathan entered the Philis- tines' garrison (I Sam. xiv:4, 5). BOZKATH (böz'kath), (Heb. Fº, bawts-cath', height), a city of Judah in the lowlands (Josh. ãºv In 2 Kings xxii:I it is spelled Boscath in the A. V. BOZRAH (böz'rah), (Heb. m $2, bazyts-razy"). 1. An ancient city, known also to the Greeks and Romans by the name of Bostra. In most of the passages of the Old Testament where it is mentioned, it appears as a chief city of the Edomites (Is. xxxiv:6; lxiii:I ; Amos i :12; Jer. xlix:I3, 22). Since Bozrah lay not in the origi- nal territory of the Edomites, i. e., southeast of Judah, but north of the territory of the Ammon- ites, in Auranitis, or Hauran, we must suppose that the Edomites had become masters of it by conquest, and that it was afterwards taken from them by the Moabites, who for a time retained it in their possession. Bozrah lay southward from Edrei, one of the capitals of Bashan, and, according to Eusebius, twenty-four Roman miles distant from it. The Romans reckoned Bozrah as belonging to Arabia Deserta (Amm. Marcell, xiv:27). Alexander Severus made it the seat of a Roman colony. In the acts of the Nicene, Ephesian and Chalcedonian councils mention is made of bishops of Bozrah, and at a later period it became an important seat of the Nestorians (Asseman, Biblioth. Orient. tom. iii. pt. 2, pp. 595, 730). Abulfeda makes it the capital of the Hauran, in which, according to Burckhardt, it is still one of the most important towns. The same writer gives a very ample descrip- tion of the various ruins, the extent and im- portance of which are alone sufficient to evince the ancient consequence of the place. They are of various kinds, Greek, Roman and Saracenic, with traces of the native works in the private dwellings. These monuments of ancient grandeur serve but to heighten the impression which is created by the present desolation and decay. ‘Bozrah,” says Lord Lindsay, ‘is now for the most part a heap of ruins, a most dreary spectacle; here and there the direction of a street or alley is discernible, but that is all. The modern inhabitants—a mere handful—are almost lost in the maze of ruins. Olive trees grew here within a few years, they told us—all extinct now, like the vines for which the Bostra of the Romans was famous. And such, in the nineteenth century, and under Mos- lem rule, is the condition of a city which even in the seventh century, at the time of its capture by the Saracens, was called by Caled “the market- place of Syria, Irak and the Hedjaz.” “I have sworn by myself, saith the Lord of Hosts, that Bozrah shall become a desolation and reproach, a waste and a curse, and all the cities thereof shall be perpetual wastes!” (Jer. xlix: I3). ...And it is so’ (Kitto). W. Ewing, Hastings' Bib. Dict., says: E/-Bäseireſ, seven miles southwest of Tuft/eh, the ancient Tophel (Deut. i : I), on the main road, north from Petra, suits the geograph- ical conditions, but the ruins are insignificant. Another possible identification is Kuster Bashazzº, These towers lie about fifteen miles Southeast of Dibon (Dhibán), and more probably represent 303 IBRANCH Bezer ‘in the wilderness,’ the city of refuge (Deut. iv:43), and the Bezer of the Moabite Stone. (See, however, BEZER.) 2. In Jer. xlviii:24 Bozrah is named among the cities of Moab, but it does not hence follow, as Raumer and others contend, that we should regard them as different cities, for, in conse- quence of the continual wars, incursions and conquests which were common among the Small kingdoms of that region, the possession of par- ticular cities often passed into different hands, Thus Selah, i. e., Petra, the capital of the Edomites, taken from them by Amaziah, king of Judah (2 Kings xiv:7), is also mentioned by Isaiah (xvi :I) among the Moabitish cities. How- ever Porter identifies it with Busrah, which lies in the open plain about sixty miles south of Damascus. The vincyards are destroyed. BRACELET (brås'lét), (Heb. Tºš, ets-aw- dazzy'). (1) This name, in strict propriety, is as appli- cable to circlets worn on the upper part of the arm as to those worn on the wrist, but as it has been found convenient to distinguish the former as Armlets, the term bracelet must be restricted to the latter. These are, and always have been, much in use among Eastern females. Many of them are of the same shapes and patterns as the armlets, and are often of such considerable weight and bulk as to appear more like manacles than Ornaments. Many are often worn one above an- Other on the same arm, so as to occupy the greater ğ. of the space between the wrist and the elDOW. (2) The materials vary according to the con- dition of the wearer, but it seems to be the rule that bracelets of the meanest materials are better than none. Among the higher classes they are of mother-of-pearl, of fine flexible gold, and of silver, the last being the most common. The poorer women use plated steel, horn, brass, cop- per, beads and other materials of a cheap descrip- t1On. (3) Some notion of the size and value of the bracelets used both now and in ancient times may be formed from the fact that those which were presented by Eliezer to Rebecca weighed ten shekels (Gen. xxiv:22). The bracelets are some- times flat, but more frequently round or semi- circular, except at the point where they open to admit the hand, where they are flattened. They are frequently hollow, giving the show of bulk (which is much desired) without the inconve- nience. Bracelets of gold twisted rope-wise are those now most used in Western Asia, but we cannot determine to what extent this fashion may have existed in ancient times. BRAMBLE (bräm'b'l). See THORN. DINANOII (brānch), (Heb. Tºš, a woor', gum mit; T2, bad, branch). t (1) As trees, in Scripture, denote great men and princes, so branches, boughs, sprouts or plants denote their offspring. In conformity with this way of speaking, Christ, in respect of his human nature, is styled a rod from the stem of Jesse, and a branch out of his roots (Is. xi :1), that is, a prince arising from the family of David. (3) This symbol was also in use among the ancient poets (Sophocles, Electra, iv:18; Homer, Iliad, ii:47, 170, 2II, 252, 349; Pindar, Olymp., ii:6, etc.). “And so even in our English tongue (remarks Wemyss), the word imp, which is origi- nally Saxon, and denotes a plant, is used to the Same purpose, especially by Fox, the martyrolo- BRASS gist, who calls King Edward VI an imp of great hope, and by Thomas Cromwell, Earl of Essex, in his dying speech, who has the same expression concerning the same prince. (3) A branch is the symbol of kings descended from royal ancestors, as branches from the root (Ezek. xvii:3, Io; Dan, xi :7). As only a vigor- ous tree can send forth vigorous branches, a branch is used as a general symbol of prosperity (Job viii:16). Jehoiachim is called the highest branch of the cedar, as being a king. (Ezek. xvii:3). (4) From these explanations it is easy to see how a branch becomes the symbol of the Messiah, when referring to the prosperity of his kingdom (IS. xi :I ; iv:2; Jer. xxiii:5; Zech. iii:8; vi.12, and elsewhere). (5) Branch is also used as the symbol of idola- trous worship (Ezek. viii:17), probably in allu- Sion to the general custom of carrying branches as a sign of honor. An abor,wnable branch (Is. xiv:19) means a withered branch or a useless sucker shooting from the root. A better rendering would be “an offensive branch;” 1. e., a useless one. BRASS (brås), (Heb. nºn, nežh-o'sheth, Gr, XaXkós, AE/ha/-äos'). This word occurs in the Authorized Version. But brass is a factitious metal, not known to the early Hebrews, and wherever it occurs, copper is to be understood. That copper is meant is shown by the text: “Out of whose hills thou mayest dig brass' (Deut. viii:9), it being of course impossible to dig a factitious metal, whether brass or bronze, out of mines. That compound of copper and zinc (68 of copper to 34 parts of zinc), which forms our brass does not appear to have been known to the ancients, but we have every evidence that they knew and used bronze arms, implements of that metal hav- ing been found in great abundance among ancient tombs and ruins. This, instead of pure copper, is probably sometimes, in the later Scriptures, meant by the word mechash. (See CoPPER.) Figuratite. (I) Brass (to retain the word) is in Scripture the symbol of insensibility, base- ness and presumption or obstinacy in sin (Is. xlviii:4; Jer. vi :28; Ezek. xxii:18). (2) Brass is also a symbol of strength (Ps. cwii:16; Is. xlviii:4; Mic, iv:13). (3) So in Jer. i :18 and xv : 20, brazen walls signify a strong and lasting ad- versary or opponent. (4) The description of the Macedonian empire as a kingdom of brass (Dan. ii:39) will be better understood when we recollect that the arms of ancient times were mostly of bronze; hence the figure forcibly indicates the warlike character of that kingdom. (5) The mountains of brass, in Zech. vi :I, are understood by Vitringa to denote those firm and immutable decrees by which God governs the world, and it is difficult to affix any other meaning to the phrase (Comp. Ps. xxxvi :6). (6) The Grecian kingdom of Alexander the Great, according to the usual interpretation (see DANIEL) was a kingdom of brass, less splendid than the rich Medo-Persian monarchy, which preceded it, but more warlike (Dan. ii:34). (7) Sinners are likened to brass, iron, tin and lead, and said to have a brow of brass, to denote their unworthiness, baseness, hardness of heart and impudence in sin (Is. xlviii: 4; Jer, vi :28; Ezek. xxii:18). BRAYING IN A MORTAR (brā’īng in a mór’tër), (Prov. xxvii:22). See PUNISHMENTs. BRAZEN SEA (brā-z'n sé). A great laver of brass placed in the priest's court of Solomon's temple (1 Kings vii:23-26; 2 Chron. iv:2-6). It rested on twelve bullocks of brass. At the 304 BREAD destruction of the temple it was destroyed by the Chaldaeans (2 Kings xxv.13; Jer. lii:17). (See LAVER). - BRAZEN SERPENT (brā’z'n sér'pent). See SERPENT. BREAD (bred), (Heb. Fº, leſſh'em. The word “bread” was of far more extensive meaning among the Hebrews than with us. There are passages in which it appears to be applied to all kinds of victuals (Luke xi :3); but it more generally denotes all kinds of baked and pastry articles of food. It is also used, however, in the more limited sense of bread made from wheat or barley, for rye is little cultivated in the East. Barley being used chiefly by the poor, and for feeding horses (see BARLEY), bread, in the more limited sense, chiefly denotes the various º of cake-like bread prepared from wheaten Old T. Corn, or wheat, is ground daily in the East (see MILL). After the wheaten flour is taken from the hand-mill it is made into a dough or paste in a small wooden trough. It is next leavened, after which it is made into thin cakes or flaps, round or oval, and then baked. (1) The Kneading. The kneading troughs, in which the dough is prepared, have no resem- blance to ours in size or shape. It is done in WºwWSSSWSNYS §y NSWSS N WNNX Egyptians Kneading Dough with Their Hands. small wooden bowls; and that those of the an- cient Hebrews were of the same description as those now in use appears from their being able to carry them, together with the dough, wrapped up in their cloaks, upon their shoulders, without difficulty. The Bedouin Arabs, indeed, use for this purpose a leather, which can be drawn up into a bag by a running cord along the border, and in which they prepare and often carry their dough. This might equally, and in some respects better, answer the described conditions; but, be- ing especially adapted to the use of a nomade and tent-dwelling people, it is more likely that the esº *2: Ns. Egyptians Kneading Dough with Their Feet. Israelites, who were not such at the time of the Exode, then used the wooden bowls for their ‘kneading-troughs’ (Exod. viii:3; xii:34; Deut. xxviii:5, 7). BREAD It is clear, from the history of the departure from Egypt, that the flour had first been made into a dough by water only, in which state it had been kept Some little time before it was leavened : for when the Israelites were unexpectedly (as to the moment) compelled in all haste to withdraw, it was found that, although the dough had been prepared in the kneading-trough, it was still un- leavened (Exod. xii:34; Comp. Hos. vii:4); and it was in commemoration of this circumstance that they and their descendants in all ages were enjoined to eat only unleavened bread at the feast of the Passover. (2) Public Ovens. The dough thus prepared is not always baked at home. In towns there are public Ovens and bakers by trade; and although the general rule in large and respectable families is to bake the bread at home, much bread is bought of the bakers by unsettled individuals and poor persons; and many small households send their dough to be baked at the public oven, the baker receiving for his trouble a portion of the baked bread, which he adds to his day's stock of bread for sale. Such public ovens and bakers by trade must have existed anciently in Pales- tine and in the East generally, as is evident from Hos. vii:4 and Jer. xxxvii:21. (3) Another Mode of Baking. Another mode of baking bread is much used, especially in the villages. A pit is sunk in the middle of the floor Of the principal room, about four or five feet deep by three in diameter, well lined with compost or cement. When sufficiently heated by a fire kindled at the bottom the bread is made by the thin pancake-like flaps of dough being, by a pe- culiar knack of hand in the women, stuck against the oven, to which they adhere for a few moments till they are sufficiently dressed. As this oven requires considerable fuel, it is seldom used ex- cept in those parts where that article is some- what abundant and where the winter cold is severe enough to render the warmth of the oven desirable, not only for baking bread, but for warming the apartment. (4) Baking with Pebbles. Another sort of oven, or rather mode of baking, is much in use among the pastoral tribes. A shallow hole, about six inches deep by three or four feet in diameter, is made in the ground; this is filled up with dry brushwood, upon which, when kindled, pebbles are thrown to concentrate and retain the heat. Meanwhile the dough is prepared, and when the oven is sufficiently heated the ashes and pebbles are removed and the spot well cleaned out. The dough is then deposited in the hollow, and is left there over night. The cakes thus baked are about two fingers thick, and are very palatable. There can be little doubt that this kind of oven and mode of baking bread were common among the Jews. (5) Baking Pans. There is a baking utensil called in Arabic tajen, which is the same word (tay-gan' oo) frying-pan by which the Septuagint renders the Hebrew machabath, in Lev. ii:5. This leaves little doubt that the ancient Hebrews had this tajen. It is a sort of pan of earthenware 5 BREAD in a manner which, although apparently very dif- ferent, is but a modification of the principle of the tajen, and is used chiefly in the houses of the peasantry. There is a cavity in the fire-hearth, in which, when required for baking, a fire is kindled and burnt down to hot embers. A plate of iron, or sometimes copper, is placed over the hole, and On this the bread is baked. (6) Baking in Ashes. Another mode of bak- ing is in use chiefly among the pastoral tribes, and by travelers in the open country, but is not unknown in the villages. A smooth, clear spot is chosen in the loose ground, a sandy soil—SO common in the Eastern deserts and harder lands —being preferred. On this a fire is kindled, and, when the ground is sufficiently heated, the embers and ashes are raked aside, and the dough is laid on the heated spot, and then covered over with the glowing embers and ashes which had just been removed. The bread is several times turned, and in less than half an hour is sufficiently baked. Bread thus baked is called in Scripture 'uggah (Gen. xviii:6; I Kings xvii: 13; Ezek. iv: I2), and the indication (I Kings xix:6) is very clear, 'ug- gath retaafim (coal-cakes), i. e., cakes baked un- der the coals. According to Busbequius (Itin. p. 36), the name of Hugath, which he interprets ash-cakes, or ash-bread, was in his time still ap- plied in Bulgaria to cakes prepared in this fashion, and as soon as a stranger arrived in the villages the women baked such bread in all haste in order to sell it to him. This is the kind of bread Sarah, on the arrival of three strangers, was required to bake “quickly,' such ash-bread—though not for sale, but for the hospitable entertainment of the unknown travelers. The bread thus prepared is good and palatable, although the Outer rind, or crust, is apt to smell and taste of the smoke and or iron (usually the latter), flat or slightly con- vex, which is put over a slow fire, and on which the thin flaps of dough are laid and baked with considerable expedition, although only one cake can be baked in this way at a time. This is not a household mode of preparing bread, but is one of the simple and primitive processes employed by the wandering and semi-wandering tribes, shepherds, husbandmen and others, who have oc- casion to prepare a small quantity of daily bread in an easy, off-hand manner. Bread is also baked ashes. The necessity of turning these cakes gives a satisfactory explanation of Hos. vii:8, where Ephraim is compared to a cake not turned, i. e., only baked on one side, while the other is raw and adhesive. (7) Different Kinds of Bread. The second chapter of Leviticus gives a sort of list of the different kinds of bread and cakes in use among the ancient Israelites. This is done incidentally for the purpose of distinguishing the kinds which were and which were not suitable for offerings. Of such as were fit for offerings we find : I. Bread baked in ovems (Lev. ii:4), but this is limited to two sorts, which appear to be (I) the bread baked inside the vessels of stone, metal or earthenware, as already mentioned; (2) the bread prepared by dropping with the hollow of the hand a thin layer of the almost liquid dough upon the outside of the same oven, and which, being baked dry the moment it touches the heated surface, forms a thin, wafer-like bread or bis- cuit A cake of the former was offered as the first of the dough (Lev. v111:26), and is ultil- tioned in 2 Sam. vi.19, with the addition of (*) “bread’—perforated bread. 2. Bread baked in a pan—(1) that which, as before described, is baked in, or rather on, the tajen. This also as an offering was to be unleav- ened and mixed with oil. (2) This, according to Lev. ii:6, could be broken into pieces and oil poured over it, forming a distinct kind of bread and offering. º 3. Bread baked upon the hearth—that is to say, baked upon the hearthstone, or plate cover- ing the firepit, which has already been mentioned. This also was to be mixed with oil (Lev. ii:7). As these various kinds of baked breads were allowed as offerings, there is no question that they were the best modes of preparing bread BREAD OF THE PRESENCE known to the Hebrews in the time of Moses, and as all the ingredients were such as Palestine abundantly produced, they were such offerings as even the poorest might without much difficulty procure. (8) Other Modes of Preparation. Besides these there are two other, modes of preparing bread indicated in the Scriptures, which cannot with equal certainty be identified by reference to modern usages. (I) One of these is the mikuddim Of I Kings xiv:3, translated ‘cracknels' in the Authorized Version, an almost obsolete word de- noting a kind of crisp cake. It is indeed not im- probable that they may have been a sort of bis- cuit or small and hard baked cakes. The exist- ence of such biscuits is further implied in Josh. ix:5, I2, where the Gibeonites describe their bread as having become as hard as biscuit (not ‘moldy,’ as in the Authorized Version), by reason of the length of their journey. (2) The other was a kind of fancy bread, the making of which ap- pears to have been a rare accomplishment, since Tamar was required to prepare it for Amnon in his pretended illness (2 Sam. xiii:6). As the name only indicates that it was some favorite kind of cake, of which there may have been dif- ferent sorts, no conjecture with reference to it can be offered. See Hezel, Real-Learicon, art. ‘A’zºod,' Burckhardt, Notes on the Bedouins; and the various travelers in Palestine, etc., particu- larly Shaw, Niebuhr, Monconys, Russell, Lane (Modern Egyptians), Perkins, Olin, etc. Figuratite. (I) Bread of heaven is the manna showered down from heaven on the He- brews in the wilderness for their food (Ps. cw : 40). (2) Bread of adversity and tears is such af- fliction and sorrow as overwhelm the spirit and render men careless of food (Is. xxx :20; Ps. lxxx:5). (3) Bread of sorrow is sustenance pro- cured and enjoyed, with much labor and grief (Ps. cxxvii:2). (4) Bread of affliction and water of affliction denote coarse and scanty provision, such as jailers in the East cast to their prisoners, whom they are expected to treat with great cruelty (Deut. xvi :3; 1 Kings xxii:27). (5) Bread of the governor, the salary appointed for his suste- nance (Neh. v :I4). (6) Bread of men, common food (Ezek. xxiv:17), (7) Bread of mourners, coarse food, such as people used in time of mourn- ing (Hos. ix:4). (8) Bread of wickedness, of de- ceit, of violence, of idleness, is that which is ac- quired by sin, by fraud, robbery, oppression, or is got in a way of sloth ; or it is wickedness, deceit, violence and sloth delighted in by our soul (Prov. iv :17; xx:17; xxxi :27). (9) Bread pleasant when eaten in secret means illicit and other un- lawful pleasures (Prov. ix:17). (Io) Bread, or bread and water often denote all necessary out- ward things, and they are a staff and stay, are necessary for the support of mortals (Is. iii:1; xxxiii:17; Matt, vi :II). BREAD OF THE PRESENCE (bréd év the préz'ens). See SHEW BREAD. BREAST (brést), (Heb. Tº, shad, the female nipple; 73, dad, breast). The females in the East are more anxiously desirous than those of northern climates of a full and swelling breast; in fact, they study embon- point of appearance to a degree uncommon among ourselves; and what in the temperate regions of Europe might be called an elegant slenderness of shape, they consider as a meagre appearance of starvation. They indulge these notions to ex- cess. It is necessary to premise this before we can enter thoroughly into the spirit of the lan- 306 BREAST PLATE guage in Cant. viii:8-IO, which Mr. Taylor ren- ders as follows: Our sister is little, and she hath no breasts; being as yet too 3)014% g; 1771?mature ; What shall we do for our sister, in ºlay when she shall be spoken Or I BRIDE. If She be a wall, we will build on her [ranges] turrets of silver; If She be a doorway, we will frame around her panels of cedar. BRIDEGROOM. I am a wall and my breasts like Kiosks, Thereby I appeared in his eyes as One who offered peace [repose; enjoyment j. BRIDE. This instance of self-approbation is peculiarly in character for a female native of Egypt, in which country, Juvenal sneeringly says, it is noth- ing uncommon to see the breast of the nurse, or mother, larger than the infant she suckles. The same conformation of a long and pendent breast is marked in a group of women musicians found by Denon painted in the tombs on the mountain to the west of Thebes, on which he observes that the same is the shape of the bosom of the pres- ent race of Egyptian females. The ideas couched in these verses appear to be these : “Our sister is quite young,” says the bride; “but,” says the bridegroom, “she is upright as a wall; and if her breasts do not project beyond her person, as kiosks project beyond a wall, we will ornament her dress (head-dress P) in the most magnificent manner with turret-shaped diadems of silver.” This gives occasion to the reflection of the bride, understood to be speaking to herself aside: “As my sister is compared to a wall, I also in my person am upright as a wall; but I have this fur- ther advantage, that my bosom is ample and full, as a kiosk projecting beyond a wall; and, though kiosks offer repose and indulgence, yet my bosom offers to my spouse infinitely more effectual en- joyment than they do.” “This, it may be con- jectured,” says Calmet, “is the simple idea of the passage; the difference being that turrets are built on the top of a wall; kiosks project from the front of it. The name kiosk is not restricted to this construction, but includes most of what are commonly called summer houses or pavilions.” (See BOSOM). Figuratite. (I) In Ezek. xxiii:3:8, breasts, or teats of virginity, pressed and bruised, implies that even in the early ages of Israel’s existence the people were given to idolatry. . The same figures are employed by the prophets in depicting the continued and obstinate idolatries both of Judah and Israel (Ezek. xxiii.; Hos. ii:2), and in the thirty-fourth verse of this latter chapter the plucking off the breast seems to denote the des- perate anguish which the people would feeſ in parting with their beloved sin (Hos. ii:2) (2) To smite or taber on the breasts imports.great affliction and grief (Nah. ii:7; Luke xxiii:48). (3) The Persian empire, according to the usual interpretation (see DANIEL), is compared to a breast and arms of silver to denote the prudence, humanity and valor wherewith it was founded and the wealth thereof (Dan. ii:32). ** BREASTPLATE (brést plat), (Heb. ?", Aho'- shem, covering on the breast), a piece of defensive armor. (See ARMS, ARMOR.) BREAST PLATE OF THE HIGH PRIEST 307 EREASTPLATE OF THE HIGH PRIEST (brést-plat Öv the hi prést), a splendid orna- ment covering the breast of the high priest. It was composed of richly embroidered cloth, in which were set, in four rows, twelve precious stones, on each of which was engraven the name of one of the twelve tribes of Israel (Exod. xxviii: 15-29; xxxix:8-21). (See PRIEST, HEBREW PRIESTHOOD, 3). / <> © * 2 S A3 \ *2 ſ JUDAH IssachAR ZEBULON T \, X & X, ‘70’vy woºl VX493 Sardonyx Topaz Emerald. §: arº º ºſº REUBEN SIMEON GAD V5.9% w/ y Cazºw mold Scºphire Jus?»ez- ź º: Ephral MANASSEH BENJAMIN ‘y A.F42/E TV V ºf V\} \ Iſotºrc gate znet/ys 3% DAN ASHER NAp'THAL v y . r - -w gº & Arabian Camel. (3) Two Arabian Species. Of the Arabian species two very distinct races are noticed—those of stronger frame but slower pace used to carry burdens, varying from 500 to 700 weight, and trav- eling little more than twenty-four miles per day, 328 CAMEL and those of lighter form, bred for the saddle with single riders, whereof the fleetest serve to convey intelligence, etc., and travel at the rate of 200 miles in twenty-four hours. They are designated by several appellations, such as Deloul, the best coming from Oman, or from the Bisha- reens in Upper Egypt; also Hadjeens, Ashaary, Maherry, Reches, Badees at Herat, Rawakel and Racambel in India, all names more or less imply- ing swiftness, the same as Öpopºds, Swift. J. Uses. All camels, from their very birth, are taught to bend their limbs and lie down to receive a load or a rider. They are often placed circularly in a recumbent posture, and together with their loads form a sufficient rampart of de- fense against robbers on horseback. The milk of she-camels is still considered a very nutritive cool- ing drink, and when turned it becomes intoxicat- ing. Their dung supplies fuel in the desert, and in Sandy regions where wood is scarce; and occa- sionally it is a kind of resource for horses when other food is wanting in the wilderness. Their flesh, particularly the hunch, is in request among the Arabs, but was forbidden to the Hebrews, more perhaps from motives of economy and to keep the people from again becoming wanderers than from any real uncleanness. Camels were early a source of riches to the patriarchs, and from that period became an in- creasing object of rural importance to the several tribes of Israel, who inhabited the grazing and border districts, but still they never equaled the numbers possessed by the Arabs of the desert. In what manner the Hebrews derived the valuable remunerations obtainable from them does not directly appear, but it may be surmised that by means of their camels they were in possession of the whole trade that passed by land from Asia Minor and Syria to the Red Sea and Egypt, and from the Red Sea and Arabia toward the north, and to the Phoenician Seaports. It is likely the word achashteranim (Esth. viii: Io), rendered ‘young dromedaries' (though Bo- chart regards it as meaning mules), implies the swift postage or conveyance of others, the whole verse showing that all the means of dispatch were set in motion at the disposal of government. Figuratite. 1. The Jews are compared to “a swift dromedary traversing her ways.” Like the dromedary hurried on by the impetuous call of nature, and while it lasts scorning all control, so the Jews scorned to be controlled in their pursuit of idols. “Multitudes of camels and dromedaries of Midian, Ephah, Shebah, and flocks of Kedar and Nebaioth’ (IS. lx :6-8), most evidently refers to the future restoration of Israel, “when they shall bring the Jews for an offering unto the Lord, Uul Uſ all 11alious, upoil 1101 ses, at1d itſ charity S, and in litters, and upol. 111ules, and upon swift beasts, to his holy mountain Jerusalem” (Is. lxvi :20). 2. With regard to the passage in Matt. xix:24, “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle,' etc., and that in Matt. xxiii:24, ‘Ye strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel,’ it may be sufficient to observe that both are proverbial expressions, similarly applied in the kindred lan- guages of Asia. Some, claiming a knowledge of the East from birth or long residence, have said that this latter comparison had its origin in the custom of stripping a camel—belated until the great gate of a city was closed for the night, so that it could no longer enter in the usual way— of its load, and pulling or pushing it through the small gate which is made in the panel of the larger one, They have alleged that the force of CAMEL'S HAIR 329 the comparison is to be sought in the fact that a 1ich man must be stripped of his wealth to enable him to Squeeze through the narrow gate of heaven, as the camel is stripped of his load that he may be forced through the panel gate of the city. Some have even gone so far as to say that this small gate is known in the East by the name of the ‘needle's eye.” In reply, we would say—(1) That this small gate is known by the name khau- khah, but no one of the many whom we have asked ever heard the name, needle's eye applied to it. We believe this to be a fabrication. (2) No camel could be forced through the khaukhah. It is a gate from three to four feet in height, and from eighteen inches to two feet in breadth, and its bottom is from one to two feet above the ground, and by no possibility could a camel he got through it. (3) Could we suppose a khau- khah so exceptionally large that a camel could be forced through it, the hyperbole would be quite lost. (G. E. Post, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) CAMEL'S HAIR (käm'êls här), (Gr. rpt):es, tree/º/,'es, kapº)\ov, AEazz-ay'Zoo). John the Baptist wore a garment made, of camel's hair (Matt. iii:4; Mark i :6), and some have supposed that Elijah “was clad in a dress of the same stuff” (Calmet's Dict. Frag. No. cc.cxx, ; Rosenmüller, Schol. ad Is. xx:2), the Hebrew expression “lord of hair” (2 Kings i :8) having reference not to his beard or head, but to his garment (Comp. Zech. xiii:4; I Kings xix: I3, 19) (see SACKCLOTH). Chardin (in Harmer's Observ. ii. 487) says the people in the East make vestments of camel's hair, which they pull off the animal at the time it is changing its coat. AElian (Nat. Hist. xvii. 34) speaks of the excellent smooth quality of the hair of camels, which the wealthy near the Caspian Sea used to wear; but the garment of camel's hair which the Baptist wore was in all probability merely the prepared skin of the animal. Figuratite. In Zechariah xiii:4 a rough gar- ment—that is, a garment of hairy manufacture— is characteristic of a prophet. (Smith's Bib. Dict.) It was his harmonious vesture when he delivered his message of protest and preparation, and such simplicity of personal life is still the consistent accompaniment of any voice crying against Social luxury and ecclesiastical pride. It was the garb of John’s great predecessor and type, Elijah (2 Kings i:8). (Hastings' Bib. Dict.) se CAMON (kā’mön), (Heb. Tºp, AEazy-mome', stand- ing place, fastness), the place where Jair, the judge, was buried (Judg. x:5). According to Josephus it was a city of Gilead. Eusebius and Jerome identify it with Cyamon, in the plain of Esdraelon. CAMP (lrämp). See ENCAMIPMENTC, CAMPHIRE (käm'fir). See KOPHER. CANA (kā'ná), (Gr. Kavā, Āamah"), a town in Galilee, not far from Capernaum, where Christ performed his first miracle by turning water into wine (John iv:46). This Cana is not named in the Old Testament, but is mentioned by Josephus as a village of Galilee (Vita, sec. 16, 64; De Bell. Jud. i. 17, 5). The site has long been identified with the present Kefr Kenna, a small place about four miles north- east from Nazareth, on one of the roads to Tibe- rias. It is a neat village, pleasantly situated on the descent of a hill looking to the southwest, and surrounded by plantations of olive and other fruit trees. There is a large spring in the neigh- borhood, enclosed by a wall, which, if this be the CANAANITES Cana of the New Testament, is doubtless that from which water was drawn at the time of our Lord's visit. It is also observable that water- pots of compact limestone are still used in this neighborhood, and some old ones are, as might be expected, shown as those which once contained the miraculous wine. Here are also the remains of a Greek church, and of a house said to be that of Nathanael, who was a native of Cana (John ii:I-II). The view which we give is that of the traditional Cana. (See cut, in APPENDIX.) There is a ruined place called Kāna el-Jelil. about eight miles N. W. E. from Nazareth, which Dr. Robinson is inclined to regard as the more probable site of Cana. The Palestine explorers who call the place Khurbet Kana revert to the traditional view. CANAAN (kā'nan or kā'nā-an), (Heb. 1223, Æem- a/*'an, flat or low). 1. Son of Ham and grandson of Noah. The transgression of his father Ham (Gen. ix: 22–27), to which some suppose Canaan to have been in some way a party, gave occasion to Noah to pronounce that doom on the descendants of Canaan which was, perhaps, at that moment made known to him by one of those extemporane- Ous inspirations with which the patriarchial fathers appear in other instances to have been favored (see BLESSING). There is no just ground for the conclusion that the descendants of Ca- naan were cursed as an immediate consequence of the transgression of Ham. Canaan was the progenitor of the Phoenicians, and the people living west of the Jordan previous to the conquest by Israel (Gen. x: IS ; I Chron. i : I.3). 2. The land of Canaan. The ancient name of that portion of Palestine which lay to the west of the Jordan (Gen. xiii:12; Num. xxxiii:51; Deut. xi. 30; Judg. xxi.;12), the part beyond the Jordan east- ward being distinguished by the general name of Gilead (Comp. Judg. xxi.;12). The denomination Canaan included Philistia and Phoenicia (Comp. Is. xxiii:II and Gesenius thereon ; Ezek. xvi :29; Zeph. ii:5). The name occurs on Phoenician coins, and was not even unknown to the Carthaginians (Gesen. Gesch. d. Heb. Sprach. p. 16). (See PALESTINE.) CANAANITE (kā'nan-ite). The designation of the Apostle Simon, other- wise known as “Simon Zelotes” (Matt. x :4; Mark iii:18). The name comes from a Chaldee or Syriac word, Kanean, or possibly Kanemieh, by which the Jewish sect of “Zelotes” was designa- ted (Matt. x :4; Mark iii:18). The Greek equiv- alent is Zm)\otºs, Ze/otes, a 2&alous fo//ower, which is preserved in St. Luke vi;I 5; Acts i: I 3. (See CANAANITES.) w CANAANITES (kā'nan-ites or kā'nāān-ites), (IIcb. ºº, Kent º are ce'), the descendants of Canaan, the son of Ham and grandson of Noah, inhabitants of the land of Canaan and adjoining districts. A general account of the different nations in- cluded in the term is given in the present article, and a more detailed account of each will be found under their respective names. (1) The Promised Land. The Israelites were delivered from Egypt by Moses, in order that they might take possession of the land which God had promised to their fathers. This country was then inhabited by the descendants of Canaan, who were divided into six or seven distinct nations, viz., the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Periz- zites, Hivites, and Jebusites (Exod. iii: 17, where the Girgashites are not mentioned; Deut, vii:I, CANAANITES etc.). All these tribes are included in the most general acceptation of the term Canaanites; but the word, in its more restricted sense, as applied to one tribe, designated those who dwelt by the sea, and by the coasts of Jordan' (Num. xiii:29). Besides these ‘seven nations,’ there were several tribes of the Canaanites who lived beyond the borders of the Promised Land, northward. These were the Arkites, Sinites, Arvadites, Zemarites, and Hamathites (Gen. x : 17, 18), with whom, of course, the Israelites had no concern. There were also other tribes of Canaanitish origin (or possibly other names given to some of those already men- tioned), who were dispossessed by the Israelites. The chief of these were the Amalekites, the Anak- ites, and the Rephaim or “giants,’ as they are fre- quently called in our translation. These nations, and especially the six or seven so frequently men- tioned by name, the Israelites were commanded to dispossess and utterly to destroy (Exod. xxiii:23; Num. xxxiii: 40; Deut. xx: I6, 17). The destruc- tion, however, was not to be accomplished at O11Ce. (2) Conquest. The destructive war com- menced with an attack on the Israelites by Arad, king of the Canaanites, which issued in the de- struction of several cities in the extreme south of Palestine, to which the name of Hormah was given (Num. xxi : I-3). The Israelites, however, did not follow up this victory, which was simply the consequence of an unprovoked assault on them; but turning back, and compassing the land of Edom, they attempted to pass through the coun- try on the other side of the Jordan, inhabited by a tribe of the Amorites. Their passage being re- fused, and an attack made on them by Sihon, king of the Amorites, they not only forced their way through his land, but destroyed its inhabitants, and proceeding onwards towards the adjoining kingdom of Bashan, they in like manner destroyed the inhabitants of that district, and slew Og, their king, who was the last of the Rephaim, or giants (Deut. iii: II). The tract of which they thus be- came possessed was subsequently allotted to the tribes of Reuben and Gad, and the half tribe of Manasseh. (3) Under Joshua. After the death of Moses the Israelites crossed the Jordan, and, un- der the conduct of Joshua, took possession of the greater part of the Promised Land, and destroyed its inhabitants. Several cities, however, still held out, particularly Jebus, afterwards Jerusalem, which was not taken till the time of David (2 Sam. v :6), and Sidon, which seems never to have yielded to the tribe of Asher, to whom it was al- lotted (Judg. i :3I). Scattered portions also of the Canaanitish nations escaped, and were frequently strong enough to harass, though not to dispossess, the Israelites. The inhabitants of Gibeon, a tribe of the Hivites, made peace by stratagem, and thus escaped the destruction of their fellow-country- Ił1611. Individuals from amongst the Canaanites seem, in later times, to have united themselves, in some way, to the Israelites, and not only to have lived in peace, but to have been capable of holding places of honor and power; thus Uriah, one of §. captains, was a Hittite (I Chron. xi :41). In the time of Solomon, when the kingdom had attained its highest glory and greatest power, all the remnants of these nations were made tributary, and * was exacted from them (I Kings 1X :2O ). The Girgashites seem to have been either wholly destroyed or absorbed in other tribes. We find no mention of them subsequent to the book of Joshua, and the opinion that the Gergesenes, or Gadarenes, 330 CANAANITES in the time of Our Lord, were their descendants, has very little evidence to support it (Rosenmül- ler, joi. in Gen. x:I6; Reland, A'alaestina, i.27, p. I3ö). The Anakites were completely destroyed by Joshua, except in three cities, Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod (Josh. xi :21–23); and the powerful na- tion of the Amalekites, many times defeated and continually harassing the Israelites, were at last totally destroyed by the tribe of Simeon (I Chron. iv :43). Even after the return of the Jews from the Babylonish captivity, there were survivors of five of the Canaanitish nations, with whom alli- ances had been made by the Jews, contrary to the commands which had been given them. Some of the Canaanites, according to ancient tradi- tion, left the land of Canaan on the approach of Joshua, and emigrated to the coast of Africa. Pro- copius (De Bello Vandalico, ii: IO) relates that there were in Numidia, at Tigisis (Tingis), two columns on which were inscribed, in Phcenician characters, ‘We are those who fled from the face of Joshua, the robber, the son of Naue. (Bochart, Peleg, i :24; Michaelis, Laws of Moses, art. 31, vol. I, p. 176, Smith's Transl. ; Winer's Real- wórferózech, arts. ‘Canaaniter' and ‘Joshua.”) (4) Objections to the Inspired Record. The manner in which the Israelites became possessed of the Promised Land has been so frequently brought as an objection to the inspired character of the Old Testament, and indeed is so far re- moved from the ordinary providential government of God, that it will be proper, in closing this ac- count, to notice the difficulty which has been felt, and to advert to some of the hypotheses by which it is sought to be removed. Many have asserted, in order to alleviate the difficulty, that an allot- ment of the world was made by Noah to his three sons, and that by this allotment the Land of Promise fell to the share of Shem—that the de- scendants of Ham were therefore usurpers and interlopers, and that on this ground the Israelites, as the descendants of Shem, had the right to dis- possess them. This explanation is as old as Epiphanius, who thus answered the objection of the Manichaeans. Others justify the war on the ground that the Canaanites were the first aggress- ors—a justification which applies only to the ter- ritory on the other side of the Jordan. Michaelis asserts that the Israelites had a right to the land of Canaan, as the common pasture land of their herdsmen, in consequence of the undisturbed pos- session and appropriation of it from the time of Abraham till the departure of Jacob into Egypt— that this claim had never been relinquished, and was well known to the Canaanites, and that there- fore the Israelites only took possession of that which belonged to them. The same hypothesis is maintained by Jahn (Hebrew Commonwealth, ch. ii. Sec. x. Stowe's Transl.). In the Fragments ap- pended to Taylor's edition of Calmet's, Dictionary (vol. iv, pp. 95, 96), another ground of justification is sought in the supposed identity of race of the Egyptian dynasty under which the Israelites were oppressed, with the tribes that overran Canaan— so that the destruction of the latter was merely an act of retributive justice for the injuries which their compatriots in Egypt had inflicted on the Israelites. To all these and similar attempts to justify, on the ground of legal right, the forcible occupation of the land by the Israelites, and the extermination (at least to a great extent) of the existing occupants, it is to be objected, that no such reason as any of these is hinted at in the sacred record. The right to carry on a war of ex- termination is there rested simply on the divine command to do so. That the Israelites were in- CANAANITES struments in God's hand is a lesson not only con- tinually impressed on their minds by the teaching of Moses, but enforced by their defeat whenever they relied on their own strength. That there may have been grounds of justification, on the plea of human or legal right, ought not indeed to be denied, but it is quite clear, from the numerous attempts to find what these grounds were, that they are not stated in the Old Testament; and to seek for them as though they were necessary to the justification of the Israelites, seems to be an abandonment of the high ground on which alone their justification can be safely rested. In a word, the justification of the Israelites is to be sought in this alone, that they were clearly commissioned by God to accomplish this work of judgment, thus, at once, giving public testimony to, and receiving an awful impression of, His power and authority, so as in some measure to check the outrageous idolatry into which almost the whole world had sunk. (See CRUELTIES.) (5) The Mixed Tribes of Canaan. Hor- muzd Rassam, the eminent archaeologist, in a communication to the Victoria Institute of Great Britain gives a valuable account of the original people of Canaan which is condensed as follows: The mixed tribes of Canaan, among whom Abraham wandered, and whose cities the spies from the desert found to be “walled up to heaven;” who had idols and idol-altars, which Israel destroyed, are represented in the Old Testa- ment as belonging to another race, not Semitic, but akin to some of the inhabitants of Chaldea and Phoenicia. The materials for this study are very authen- tic, and though fragmentary, they are contempo- rary, and, rightly understood, they are conclusive. They consist: first, in the names of towns in Palestine and Syria; second, in the names of Syrian chiefs with whom the Egyptians came in contact; third, in the names of Syrian chiefs en- countered by the Assyrians; fourth, in the hiero- glyphic texts of Syria and Asia Minor; fifth, in the non-Semitic element in Phoenicia ; sixth, in the engraved signets and amulets of Phoenicia and Asia Minor, as compared with those of Chaldea. All these materials yield important results, but only when they are treated by a comparative method, and on the basis of the supposition which is clearly pointed out in Genesis, that there was in Palestine from the earliest period a non- Semitic as well as a Semitic population,--that is to say, a population speaking a language, pos- sessing a physiognomy, a religion, and customs quite distinct from those of the group of nations called Semitic, by which we understand the He- brews, the Arabs, and the Assyrians. The northern part of the list of towns con- quered by Thothmes III in Syria contains many ruames which are not Semitic, and apparently not Aryan. No one, as far as Mr. Rassam knows, has made any serious effort to translate them. |Professor Sayce believed that Georgian might furnish the key, hut though he has studied Georg- ian as have Mr. Hyde Clark, Mr. Bertin, and others, the Georgian vocabularies have not been found to throw any light upon the subject. Mr. Rassam also inspected these vocabularies with the same result. Georgian is a modern lan- guage, which, according to Brosset, who has written the best grammar on the subject, is a mixed language. The Hittites, as represented on the monuments at Karnak have, however, long been recognized by Dr. Birch, Mr. H. G. Tomkins and Mr. Ras- sam as being of the Mongolian type. 331 CANDACE Summary. Mr. Rassam thus sums up the re- Sults he has attained: (1) That the monumental nomenclature of the Hittite country and of the Hittite chiefs is Tartar; (2) That the sounds of the Hittite language on the Syrian monuments are Tartar; (3) That the only known bilingual gives a Tartar-Ugrig language; (4) That the old languages of Caria and Lydia are Tartar- Ugrig. Comparing the results obtained from the monu- ments with the Old Testament, we know the fol- lowing facts: (1) The Hittites lived in walled towns; (2) They had carved representations of the gods; (3) They adored Tammuz, and Ash- toreth, and Set; (4) They could write on stone and on metal ; (5) They had chariots and horses; (6) They married out of their own tribe; (7) They entered into an alliance with Egypt; (8) They were of Turanian race, and probably, there- fore, not circumcised, as that is not a common Turanian custom; (9) They had riches of gold, silver and bronze. From the Old Testament, on the other hand, we learn that: (1) The Canaanites lived in cities “walled up to heaven;” (2) They made such likenesses of idols, which Israel was to destroy, and no such sculptures have been found between Dan and Beersheba, though they occur in Phoeni- cia and northern Syria; (3) The Canaanites adored Tammuz and Ashtoreth ; (4) Letters are mentioned in David's time, and writing in the time of Moses, but nothing, about the Canaanite litera- ture, except that some think Kirjath Sepher means “Book town” (Josh. xv.: I5, 16; Judg. i : II, 12), (5) The Canaanites had horses, and chariots of iron. (Note that the Canaanite chariots are said by Thothmes III to have been plated with silver, as were Roman chariots). (6) Esau married Hittite wives; David and Solomon did the same; so did Rameses II. (7) Egypt was the enemy of Israel, and Israel was the enemy of the Canaanites; (8) The Canaanites were the sons of Ham, and they were uncircumcised; (9) Great riches are mentioned as found by the Hebrews when they attacked the Canaanites. (Transactions of the Victoria Institute). (See HITTITEs.) CANAANITESS (kā'nān-i-têss), a woman of Canaan (I Chron. ii:3). CANDACE (kån'da-cé), (Gr. Kavčákm, Åan-dak'- ay), more correctly Kandaké, was the name of the queen of the Ethiopians, whose high treasurer was converted to Christianity under the preaching of Philip the Evangelist (Acts viii:27). (1) Her Country. The country over which she ruled was not, as some writers allege, what is known to us as Abyssinia; it was that region in Upper Nubia which was called by the Greeks Meroë and is supposed to correspond to the pres- ent province of Atbara, lying º 13° and 18° north latitude. From the circumstance of its being nearly enclosed by the Atbara (Astaboras or Tacazze) on the right, and the Bahr el Abiad, or White River, and the Nile on the left, it was some- times designated the ‘Island’ of Meroë ; but the ancient kingdom appears to have extended at one period to the north of the island as far as Mount Berkal. The city of Meroë stood near the present Assour, about twenty miles north of Shendy; and the extensive and magnificent ruins found not only there, but along the upper valley of the Nile, attest the art and civilization of the ancient Ethiopians. Meroë, from being long the center of commercial intercourse between Africa and the south of Asia, became one of the richest countries upon earth; the “merchandise’ and wealth of Ethiopia (Is. CANDLE xlv.:14) was the theme of the poets both of Pales- tine and Greece; and since much of that affluence would find its way into the royal coffers, the cir- cumstance gives emphasis to the phrase—“all the treasure” of Queen Candace. (2) The Title. It is further interesting to know, from the testimonies of various profane au- thors, that for some time both before and after the Christian era, Ethiopia Proper was under the rule of female sovereigns, who all bore the appellation of ‘Candace,’ which was not so much a proper name as a distinctive title, common to every suc- cessive queen, like ‘Pharaoh’ and ‘Ptolemy' to the kings, of Egypt, and “Caesar’ to the emperors of Rome. Thus Pliny (Hist. Nat. vi.29) says that the centurions whom Nero sent to explore the Country reported ‘regnare in Meroë feminam Can- dacen, quod momen multis jam annis ad reginas transit,” (that a woman named Candace reigned in A/eroë, which name had descended to queens for many years). Strabo also (p. 820, ed. Casaub.) speaks of a warrior-queen of Ethiopia called Can- dace, in the reign of Augustus, the same whom Dion Cassius (liv :5) describes as queen of the Ethiopians living in Upper Egypt. Eusebius, who flourished in the fourth century, says that in his day the queen of Ethiopia continued to be called Candace. º (3) Monumental Evidence. A curious con- firmation of the fact of female sovereignty having prevailed in Ethiopia has been remarked on the existing monuments of the country. Thus, on the largest sepulchral pyramid near Assour, the ancient Meroë, a female warrior, with the royal ensigns on her head, drags forward a number of captives as offerings to the gods; on another com- partment she is in a warlike habit, about to de- stroy the same group. Heeren, after describing the monuments at Naga, or Naka, southeast of Shendy, says, “It is evident that these representa- tions possess many peculiarities, and that they are not pure Egyptian. The most remarkable differ- ence appears in the persons offering. The queens appear with the kings; and not merely as present- ing offerings, but as heroines and conquerors. Nothing of this kind has yet been discovered on the Egyptian reliefs, either in Egypt or Nubia. It may therefore with certainty be concluded, that they are subjects peculiar to Ethiopia. Among the Ethiopians, says Strabo (p. II.7.7), the women also are armed. Herodotus (ii:IOO) mentions a Nito- cris among the ancient queens of Ethiopia. Upon the relief [on the monument at Kalabshé] repre- senting the conquest of Ethiopia by Sesostris, there is a queen, with her sons, who appears be- fore him as a captive’ (Heeren, On the Nations of Africa, vol. ii, p. 399). (4) Lacasa. De Dieu asserts, on the authority of ecclesiastical tradition, that the proper name of the queen mentioned in the Acts was Lacasa, and that of her chamberlain Judich. It is not unlikely that some form of Judaism was at this period pro- fessed to a certain extent in Ethiopia, as well as in the neighboring country of Abyssinia. Irenaeus (iii:12) and Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. ii:I) ascribe to Candace's minister her own conversion to Chris- tianity, and the promulgation of the Gospel throughout her kingdom; and with this agrees the Abyssinian tradition, that he was likewise the apostle of Tigré, that part of Abyssinia which lay nearest to Meroë ; it is added that he afterwards preached the Gospel in Arabia Felix, and also in the island of Ceylon, where he suffered martyr- dom. CANDLE (kån'd'I), (Heb. "3, mare; Gr. Xºxvos, ſookh'nos, a light). The word is used in the Scrip- 332 CANDLESTICK tures to represent a lamp or a light, but its use is generally symbolical. Figuratite. (I) God's searching Jerusalem with candles imports his perfect knowledge of their conduct; his punishing their secret sins; and his searching their consciences by convictions, and awakening providences (Zeph. i:12). (2) God's favor and blessing are termed his candle; as they direct, honor, and comfort us (Job xxix:3). (3) The rational understanding and conscience are termed a candle; they search, observe, judge, in- form, and direct us (Prov. xx:27). (4) Outward prosperity is called a candle; it is pleasant and agreeable; it manifests us to the world; renders us conspicuous; and enables us to act more abun- dantly for the honor of God, and welfare of men (Job xviii:6, and xxi:17; Ps. xviii:28). (5) Gifts and graces, and teaching offices, bestowed by God on persons, are termed a candle; they ought to be discovered and used for the direction and comfort of others (Matt. v :15; Luke viii:16, and xi:33). (6) Instituted ordinances, and earthly comforts, are called a candle; they are directive and comforting; but are short-lived, and quite un- necessary in the noon-tide of perfect glory (Rev. xxii:5). CANDLESTICK (kån'd'1-stik), (Heb. Tºº, Žeen-o-razy", place of lights). (1) Name. The candelabrum which Moses was commanded to make for the tabernacle, after the model shown him in the Mount, is chiefly known to us by the passages in Exod. xxv :31-40; xxxvii:17-24; on which some additional light is thrown by the Jewish writers, and by the repre- Sentation of the spoils of the Temple on the arch of Titus. & (2) Material. The material of which it was made was fine gold, of which an entire talent was expended on the candelabrum itself and its ap- pendages. The mode in which the metal was to be worked is described by a term which appears to mean wrought with the hammer, as opposed to cast by fusion. (3) Construction. The structure of the can- delabrum, as far as it is defined in the passages referred to, consisted of a base; of a shaft rising out of it; of six arms, which came out by three from two opposite sides of the shaft; of seven Jamps, which were supported on the summits of the central shaft and the six arms, and of three different kinds of ornaments belonging to the shaft and arms. These ornaments are called by names which mean cups, globes and blossoms. The cups receive, in verse 33, the epithet almond-shaped (it being uncertain whether the resemblance was to the fruit or to the flowers). Three such cups are allotted to every arm, but four to the shaft— two-and-twenty in all. Of the four on the shaft, three are ordered to be placed severally under the spots where the three pairs of arms set out from the shaft. The place of the fourth is not assigned, but we may conceive it to have been either between the base and the cup below the lowest tier of arms, or, as Bāhr prefers, to have have been near the summit of the shaft. As for the name of the second ornament, the word only occurs in two places in the Old Testa- ment, in which it appears to mean the capital of a column, but the Jewish writers generally con- cur in considering it to mean apples in this place. Josephus, as he enumerates four kinds of orna- ments, and therefore two of his terms must be considered identical, may be supposed to have understood globes or pomegranates (Antiq. iii:6), Bähr, however, is in favor of apples (Symbolik, i:4I4), CANDLESTICK The name of the third ornament means blos- som, bud, but it is so general a term that it may apply to any flower. The Septuagint, Josephus and Maimonides, understand it of the lily, and Bähr prefers the flower of the almond. It now remains to consider the manner in which these three ornaments were attached to the can- delabrum. The obscurity of verse 33, which orders that there shall be “three almond-shaped cups on one arm, globe and blossom, and three almond- shaped cups on the other arm, globe and blossom ; so on all the arms which come out of the shaft,' has led some to suppose that there was only one globe and blossom to every three cups. However, the fact that, according to verse 34, the shaft (which, as being the principal part of the whole, is here called the candelabrum itself), which had only four cups, is ordered to have globes and blosscnns, is a sufficient proof to the contrary. (4) Holy Place. It is to be observed, that the original text does not define the height and breadth of any part of the candelabrum, which was placed in the Holy Place, on the south side (i. e., to the left of a person entering the taber- nacle), opposite the table of shew-bread (Exod. xxvi :35). Its lamps, which were supplied with pure olive oil only, were lighted every evening and extinguished (as it seems) every morning (Exod. xxvii:21; xxx :7, 8; Lev. xxiv:3; 1 Sam. iii:3; 2 Chron. xiii:II). Although the tabernacle had no windows, there is no good ground for be- lieving that the lamps burnt by day in it, what- ever may have been the usage of the Second tem- ple. It has also been much disputed whether the candelabrum stood lengthwise or diagonally as re- gards the tabernacle, but no conclusive argument can be adduced for either view. As the lamp on the central shaft was by the Jewish writers called the western, or evening lamp, some maintain that the former name could not be applicable, unless the candelabrum stood across the tabernacle, as then only would the central lamp point to the west. Others again adhere to the later significa- tion, and build on a tradition that the central lamp alone burnt from evening to evening, the other six being extinguished by day (Reland, Antiq. i :5, 8). (5) First Temple. Tm the first temple, instead of this single candelabrum, there were ten can- delabra of pure gold (I Kings vii:49; 2 Chron. iv :7), one-half of which stood on the north and the other on the south side of the Holy Place. These were carried away to Babylon (Jer, lii:19). (6) Second Temple. In the temple of Zerub- babel there appears to have been only one can- delabrum again (1 Macc. i :21 ; iv:49, 50). It is probable that it also had only seven lamps. (7) Herodian Temple. At least, that was the case in the candelabrum of the Herodian temple, according to the description of Josephus (De Bell. Jud. vii:5). This candelabrum is the one which, after the destruction of Jerusalem, was carried with other spoils to Rome; then, A. D. 455, be- came a part of the plunder which Genscric trans- ported to Africa; was again, about A. D. 533, recaptured from the Vandals by Belisarius, and carried to Constantinople, and was thence sent off to Jerusalem, and from that time has disap- peared altogether. It is to this candelabrum that the representation on the arch of Titus, at Rome, was intended to apply. Figuratite. The custom, practiced from time immemorial in the East, of allowing a house lamp to burn night and day, is the source of the fre- quent figure by which the continually burn- ing lamp pictures the continued prosperity both of the individual and of his family (PS. xviii: 333 CANON 28, 29), ‘thou wilt light my candle' (I Kings xi :36). Conversely, “to put out the candle of the wicked’ (Prov. xxiv:20; Job xviii:6) is to make his home desolate and bring destruction on himself. This familiar metaphor is employed in the Apocalypse to describe the fate with which the Church of Ephesus was threatened: ‘I will remove thy candlestick out of his place' (Rev. ii:5). (R. S. Kennedy, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) The “seven golden candlesticks” in John's vision, denoted the seven churches of Asia (Rev. i :20). As Seven denotes fulness, Jesus, walking in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks, implies his watchful presence in the church universal. CANE (kān), or calamus (Cant. iv:14; Ezek. xxvii:19);or sweet calamus (Ex. xxx:23); or sweet cane (IS. xliii:24; Jer. vi.20); all probably names for the same plant. It seems to have been an aromatic reed brought “from a far country.” Lemon-grass (Andropo- gon) is “a plant of remarkable fragrance and a native of Central India, where it is used to mix with ointments, on account of the delicacy of its odor.” Calamus may have been a species of this. (See KANEH.) CANEER,-WORMI Nah. iii:15, 16). This was one of the army of destroying insects by which the land of Judaea was laid waste. It is thought that the original word means rather the locust in its larva or caterpillar state, when it is even more destructive than after it acquires wings and is about to fly away. Of this Nahum's words are very expressive—it “spoileth and fleeth away.” (See TELEK.) CANNEH (kån'neh), (Heb. "32, Žam-než', set up, distinguished, Ezek. xxvii:23). Probably a con- tracted form of the earlier Calneh (Gen. x:IO). (See CALNEH.) CANON (kān'ān). The Greek word Kavču, Éam- ohn', denotes, primarily, a straight rod, and from this flow numerous derivative uses of it, in all of which the idea of straightness, as opposed to obſ?- 7ttity, is apparent. (1) Meaning of Term. Among the rest it is employed to denote a rule or standard, by a refer- ence to which the rectitude of opinions or actions may be determined. In this latter acceptation it is used in the New Testament (comp. Gal. vi. I6; Phil. iii:16). In the same sense it is frequently used by the Greek fathers (Suicer, Thes. Eccles. in voce) ; and as the great standard to which they sought to appeal in all matters of faith and duty was the revealed will of God contained in the scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, they came insensibly to apply this term to the collective body of those writings, and to speak of them as tlie Caliull 01 Rule. In the came acceptafinn we shall use the term in this article. (2) Authoritative. The Canon then may be defined to be “The Authoritative Standard of Re- ligion and Morals, composed , of those writings which have been given for this purpose by God to men.” A definition frequently given of the Canon is that it is “The Catalogue of the Sacred Books,’ while Semler (Von Freier Untersuchun- gen des Canons), Doederlein (Institutio Theol. Christ, tom. i. p. 83) and others, define it as ‘The List of the Books publicly read in the meetings of the early Christians.’ The former of these definitions, however, leaves out of sight the true meaning of the term Canon; and the latter is doubly erroneous, as it not only omits the main characteristic of the Canon, its Divine authority, but substitutes for this a characteristic which is (kån'kér-wärm), (Joel i.4; CANON 334 CANON No. I.-CHRISTIAN CATALOGUES OF THE BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. The list extends only to such books as are disputed. Of the signs, * indicates that the book is expressly reckoned as ? that it is mentioned with doubt. A blank marks the silence Aoly Scrapture: f that it is placed expressly in a second rank: of the author as to the book in question. à | 3 | < # É # | 3 || 3 || 3 | # * | 3 || 3 || 3 || 3: I. ConcIL1AR CATALOGUES: [Laodicene]. . . . . . . . . . . A. D. 363 | + >k >}: Carthaginian... . . . . . . . . . . 397 (?) >}: >k Sk Apostolic Canons - * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2k f II. PRIVATE CATALOGUES: a) Greek writers. Melito... . . . . . . A. D. c. 160 [180] Origen. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... c. 183-253 | # 2 >k Athanasius ... . . . . . . . . . . .296-373 | + 2k f f f Cyril of Jerus.... . . . . . . .315-386 + >k >}: Synopsis S. Script . . . . . . . . . . . . . f t t [Nicephori] Stichometria . . . . >k f f f Gregory of Naz ... . . . . . . 300-391 Amphilochius . . . . . . . . . . . . c. 380 p Epiphanius . . . . . . . . . . . c. 303-403 * f f Leontius. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. 590 Joannes Damasc. . . . . . . . . f 750 :: f f Nicephorus Callist...... c. 1330 p 2 Cod. Gr. Saec. X. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . f f f (b) Catz'zt writers. Hilarius Pictav. . . . A. D. f. c. 370 | * P :#: Hieronymus * s a tº º te tº º is tº tº 329–420 || 3: >}: f f Rufinus. . . . . . . . . . . . c. 380 [t 410] >|< f + Augustinus . . . . . . . . . . . . . .355-430 >k :k >}: [Damasus] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . >k × :*: >k :k [Innocentius] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . >k × 2k Cassiodorus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + 570 >k >k >}: Isidorus Hispal..... t 696 [636] | * >k :k >}: Sacram. Gallic. “a rete a mºtos 1000' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2}: [Cod. Clarom Saec. VII.......... :k sº 2% à o, Q) Q} *C. co, O C) e cq + | > 25 GNP º; & }--> y- Conc. Laod. Cam. lix. >}: * | Conc. Carthag. iii, Cax. xxxix (Aliixlvii). ** * | Can. Apost. lxxvi (Alii. lxxxv). AA. Euseb. H. E. iv: 26. f AA. Euseb. H. E. vi. 25. f Ež. Fest. i. 767, ed. Ben. Catech. iv: 35. t Credner, Zur Gesch. des Kan. p. 127 ff. f i | Credner, a. a. O. p. 117 ff. Carzzz. xii; 31, ed. Par. 1840. Amphiloch. ed. Combef. p. 132. De Mensuris, p. 162, ed. Petav. De Sectis, Act. ii (Gallandi, xii: 625 f.). JDe Fºale orthod. iv.; 17. 2 Hody, p. 648. t # Montfaucon, Bibl. Coislin. p. 193 f. 7 Pro/ ºr Pº 15. f f "rol. Galeat. ix: p. 547 ff., ed. Migne. f f Expos. Symb. p. 37 f. re * | De Doctºr. Christ. ii: 8. >{< ::: Credner, a. a. O. p. 188. >}: * Ep. ad Ersuſ. (Gallandi, viii; 561 f.). : * | De Izzst. Dzzy. Litt. xiv. : * | De Orig. vi. 1. :}: * | Hody, p. 654. >{< * | Ed. Tisch. p. 468 ff.] CANON historically false, as the Canon was not at any time synonymous with the list of books read in public in the early churches. (3) Individual Books. According to this defi- nition, in order to establish the Canon of Scrip- ture, it is necessary to show that all the books of which it is composed are of Divine authority; that they are entire and incorrupt; that, having them, it is complete without any addition from any other source, and that it comprises the whole of those books for which Divine authority can be proved. It is obvious that, if any of these four particulars be not true, Scripture cannot be the sole and supreme standard of religious truth and duty. If any of the books of which it is composed be not of Divine authority, then part of it we are not bound to submit to, and, consequently, as a whole, it is not the standard of truth and morals. If its separate parts be not in the state in which they left the hands of their authors, but have been mutilated, interpolated, or altered, then it can form no safe standard, for, in appealing to it, one can- not be sure that the appeal is not made to what is spurious, and what, consequently, may be erroneous. If it require or admit of supplement- ary revelations from God, whether preserved by tradition or communicated from time to time to the Church, it obviously would be a mere contra- diction in terms to call it complete, as a standard of the Divine will. And if any other books were extant, having an equal claim, with the books of which it is composed, to be regarded as of Divine authority, it would be absurd to call it the sole standard of truth, for in this case the one class of books would be quite as deserving of our rever- ence as the other. (4) Evidence. Respecting the evidence by which the Canon is thus to be established, there exists considerable difference of opinion amongst Christians. Some contend, with the Catholics, that the authoritative decision of the Church is alone competent to determine the Canon; others appeal to the concurrent testimony of the Jewish and early Christian writers, and others rest their strongest reliance on the internal evidence fur- nished by the books of Scripture themselves. We cannot say that we are satisfied with any of these sources of evidence exclusively. As Michaelis remarks, the first is one to which no consistent Protestant can appeal, for the matter to be deter- mined is of such a kind that, unless we grant the Church to be infallible, it is quite possible that she may at any given period of her existence de- termine erroneously, and one sees not why the question may not be as successfully investigated by a private individual as by the Church. (5) Church of England. The books specified as canonical in the Sixth Article of the Church of England, and the First of the Confession of the Church of Scotland, are received as such by the majority of Protestants. To these the Church of Rome adds, as part of the Old Testament, ten other books, or parts of books, which Protestants reject as Apocryphal (see APOCRYPHA). For the evidence in support of the genuineness and Divine authority of those books universally regarded by Christians as canonical, taken individually, we would refer here to the articles in this work under the titles of these books respectively. The re- mainder of the present article shall be devoted to a sketch of the formation and history of the Canon, first of the Old Testament and then of the eV. (6) Formation of Old Testament Canon. By this is meant the collection into one whole of all those books whose Divine authority was recog- nized by the Jews and which now form the Old 335 f CANON Testament, as that is received by the Protestant churches. The question is, At what time and by whom was this done?’ In answer to this, a very steadfast tradition of the Jews ascribes the completion of the Old Testa- ment Canon to Ezra, and certain other persons who, after the rebuilding of the Temple, formed with him, and under his auspices, what has been called the Great Synagogue. Without pretending to be able to give full demonstration of the ac- curacy of this traditionary opinion, it seems to us one which may by evidence, both direct and cir- cumstantial, be rendered so extremely probable that to call it in question would be to exhibit a degree of scepticism such as, in all other questions of a similar kind, would be thought highly unrea- sonable and absurd (I) In the first place, there is the testimony of the tradition itself. It occurs in one of the oldest books of the Talmud, the Pirke Aboth, and is repeated, with greater minute- ness, in the Babylonian Gemarah (Tr. Baba Bathra, fol. I3, 2). See the passages in Buxtorf's Tiberias, lib. i. c. IO). The substance of it is that, after Moses and the elders, the sacred books were watched over by the prophets, and that the Canon was completed by Ezra, Nehemiah, and the men of the Great Synagogue. An effort has been made to discredit this tradi- tion by adducing the circumstance that Simon the Just, who lived long after Ezra, is said, in the Pirke Aboth, to have been one of the members of the Great Synagogue; but to this much weight cannot be allowed, partly because Simon is, in the passage referred to, said to have been one of the remnants of the Great Synagogue, which indi- cates his having outlived it, and principally be- cause the same body of tradition which states this opinion makes him the successor of Ezra, so that either the whole is a mistake or the Simon re- ferred to must have been a different person from the Simon who is commonly known by the title of Just' (Cf. Othonis. Lear. Rabbin. Philol. p. 604, Gen. I675; Håvernick's Einleitung in das A. T. Th. i. Abt. I, S. 43); or we may adopt the opinion of Hartmann (Die Enge Verbindung des Alt. Test. mit d. Neuen, s. I27), that the college of men learned in the law, which gathered round Ezra and Nehemiah, and which properly was the syna- gogue, continued to receive accessions for many years after their death, by means of which it existed till the time of the Maccabees, without our being required to suppose that what is affirmed concerning its doings in the time of Ezra is meant to refer to it during the entire period of its exist- ence. Suspicions have also been cast upon this tradition from the multitude of extravagant won- ders narrated by the Jews respecting the Great Synagogue. But such are found in almost every traditionary record attaching to persons or bodies which possess a nationally heroic character. (II) The part of this tradition which ascribes the for- mation of the Canon, before the Exile, to Moses and the prophets, is sufficiently supported by the testimony of Scripture itself. When Moses had finished the writing of the Law ‘he delivered it to the priests, the sons of Levi, and unto the elders of Israel’ (Deut. xxxi :9); and the book was then taken and put in the side of the ark, in the most holy place (ver. 26). Towards the close of the book of Joshua it is said that “he wrote these words in the book of the law of God,” which Le Clerc, with considerable probability, explains as meaning that he agglutinated the membrane on which his words were written to the volume of Moses which had been deposited in the side of the ark (Comment. in loc.). At a later period we find that Samuel, when he had told the people §e No. II.-QUOTATIONS OF THE APOCRYPHA AS SCRIPTURE. , Baruch. Ecclesiasticus. Wisdom. Tobit. Judith. Additions to Esther. Additions to Daniel. HILARIUS PICTAV. AMBROSIU.S. HIERONYMUS. [Strome. v : 14.] *non parc. p. 958 Adv. Haer. v : 35, 1. Paed, i : 10; ii: 3. Izz Ps. xlix : 3. Scorp. 8. Test. ii: 6. Izz Ps. lxviii: 19. De Trzoz. iv. 142. In Ps. cxviii: 18, 2. De Czzy, xviii: 34. Strom. iii: 5, etc. Comm. in Joan. xxxii: 14. § * 1, 2 Macc. I. Greek writers. CLEMENS ROM. PolycARP. BARNABAS. IRENAEUs. CLEM, ALEX. ORIGENEs. HIPPOLY TUs. METHODIUS. ATHANASIUS. EU SEBIUS. CY RIL. HIEROS. GREGoR. Naz. BASIL, EPIPHANIUS, CHRYsostom. II. Latin writers. TERTULLIAN. CYPRIAN. LUcIFER. OPTATUS. AUGUSTINUS. De Princ. ii : 1, 5. [De Antichr. 29.] Ep. 59 (55), 4. Sel. 2n Ps. cxxv. Sel, in Jer. xxxi. Adz. d. Noet. 5. Cozzy. viii: 3. c. Aržan. 1, p. 416. Demz. Ezº. vi. 19. Cat. xi : 15. Adv. Eurt. iv: 16. Haez". lvii: 2, etc. Conzy, i : 3, etc. c. Ariart. i., p. 183. [Cat. xxiii: 17.] Aſaer. xxiv.: 6, etc. De Laz. ii: 4. Testim, ii: 1; De Mortal. p. 9. In Ps. lxvi. 9, etc. De bono mortis, 8. [Dial c. Pelag.i:33] De Sch, Don, iii:3. In Ps. lxvii: 8, etc. [Ep. ad Cor. 27.] [Ep. c. 6.] [Adv. Haer. iv: 38, 3.] Strom. iv: 16; vi. 11, 14, 15, etc. c. Cels. iii: 72; w; 29; Aom. saepe. In Cant. Prol. Conz. i : 3, etc. c. Arian. ii, p. 513 Praep. Ev. i. 9. Cat. ix: 2, Adv. Eunom, v : 2. Haer. xxvi (Gnost.) 15. etC. In Ps. ciz: 7. [De Praes. Haer. 7.] Testim. ii: 14; De Mor- tal. p. 23. In Ps. cxviii: 2, 8. De Sø. S. iii: 18, 135, etC. [Džal. c. Pelag. i : 33.] Pro Athan.i, p. 860, ed. Migne. De Sch. Don, ii: 25, In Ps. lvii: 1. [Ep. ad Phil. 10.] [Adv. Haer. i : 30, 11. Strom.ii:23; vi. 12. Ež. ad Afric. p. 13 De Orat. p. 11. [In Dam, p. 697, ed. Migne.] c. Arian, i, p. 133. De Orat Dome. 32. In Ps. cxxix: 7. Eið. de Tobia, 1. Pro Athan, i, p. 871. [Ep. ad Cor. 55.] Strozzz. ii: 7. [Hom. ix. in Jud. 1.] Sel, in Jer. p. 23. [Conv. xi : 2.] Izz Ps. cxxv : 6. De non parc. p. 955. EA. ad Afric. AXE Orat. 14. Adv. Haer. iv: 5, 2; 26, 3. - Proph. Ecſ. 1. Ep. 2d Afric. etc. Comm. in Dam. p. 639 ff., ed. Migne. [Conv. xi.; 2.] c. Arian. iii, p. 580. Cat. ii: 16, etc. Orat. xxxvi : 3. Aſoon. xii. in Prozº. 13. Ancor. pp. 23, 24. Adz. Hermog. 44. De Orat. Dom. 8. In Ps. lii: 19, etc. De SA. S. iii: 6, 39. Pro. Athan. ii, p. 894 ff. Serm, cccxliii. 1. The quotations in brackets are doubtful either as to the reference or as to the character assigned to the book quoted. : § : CANON 337 the manner (the jus publicum) of the kingdom, wrote it in the book and laid it up before the Lord (I Sam. x:25). Hilkiah, at a still later date, is said to ‘have found the book of the Law in the House of the Lord’ (2 Kings xxii:8). Isaiah, in calling attention to his own prophecies, says: “Seek ye out of the book of the Lord and read; no one of these shall fail’ (xxxiv:16); a passage on which Gesenius says (Comment. i. 921), ‘The poet seems to have before his mind the placing of his Oracle in a collection of oracles and sacred writings, whereby future generations might judge of the truth of his predictions.’ And Daniel in- forms us that he ‘understood, by the books, the number of the years of the captivity’ (ix:2), an expression which seems to describe the sacred Canon So far as it then was complete. From these notices we may gather that such books as were sanctioned by the authority of Moses and the prophets (whose business it was, as the watchmen of Zion, to guard the people against either, the reception of any writing that was spurious or the loss of any that was genuine) were acknowledged by the Jews, before the Exile, as of Divine authority; that in all probability an authentic copy was in every case laid up in the Sanctuary, and placed under the care of the priests (Joseph. Antiq. v : 1, 17), from which copies were taken and circulated among the people (2 Chron. xvii:9); and that collections of these were made by pious persons for their own use, such as Daniel probably had in Babylon, and such as Jeremiah seems to have had, from the frequent quotations in his prophecies from the older books. (III) It is natural to suppose that, on the return of the people from their exile, they would desire an authoritative collection of their sacred books. We know that, on that occasion, they were filled with an anxious desire to know the will of God, for neglect of which, on the part of their fathers, they had so severely suffered; and that, to meet this desire, Ezra and certain of the priests and Levites read and expounded the word of the Lord to the people (Neh. viii:I-8; ix:1-3). As their fathers also had been misled by false prophets, it is natural to suppose that they would earnestly crave some assurance as to the writers whose words they might with safety follow. The Tem- ple also was now bereft of its sacred treasures (Joseph. De Bell. Jud. vi :6; Tract. Rabbin, Joma. ed. Sheringham, p. 102, sq.). During the Exile, and the troublous times preceding it, several prophets had committed their oracles to writing, and these required to be added to the Canon; and the majority of the people having lost acquaint- ance with the Hebrew, a translation of their sacred books had become necessary. All this conspired to render it imperative that some competent au- thority should, at the time of the second temple, fortſ, and ſix 111u code of Gacred triţth (TV) The time of Ezra and Nehemiah was the latest at which this could be done. As the duty to be per- formed was not merely that of determining the genuineness of certain books, but of pointing out those which had been divinely ordained as a rule of faith and morals to the Church, it was one which none but a prophet could discharge. Now, in the days of Nehemiah and Ezra, there were several prophets living, among whom we know the names of Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi; , but with that age expired the line of prophets which God had appointed ‘to comfort Jacob and deliver them by assured hope” (Ecclus. xlix: Io). On this point the evidence of Josephus, the Apocryphal books and Jewish tradition, is harmonious (comp. Joseph. Cont. Apion. i.8; 1 Macc. iv:46:.. ix:27; xiv:41; Hieronym. ad. Jes. xlix:21; Vitringa, * CANON Obs. Sac. lib. vi. cap. 6, 7; Håvernick, Einleit, i;I-27; Hengstenberg, Beiträge zur Fin/egg. āns 4. T. i. s. 245). As the men of the Great Syna- gogue were thus the last of the prophets, if the Canon was not fixed by them, the time was passed when it could be fixed at all. (V) That it was fixed at that time appears from the fact that all subsequent references to the sacred writings presuppose the existence of the complete Canon; as well as from the fact that of no one among the apocryphal books is it so much as hinted, either by the author or by any other Jewish writer, that it was worthy of a place among the sacred books, though of some of them the pretensions are in other, respects sufficiently high (e. g. Ecclus. xxxiii: 16-18; 1:28). Josephus, indeed, distinctly affirms (Cont. Ap, loc. cit.) that, during the long period that had elapsed between the time of the close of the Canon and his day no one had dared either to add to, or to take from, or to alter any- thing in, the sacred books. This plainly shows that in the time of Artaxerxes, to which Josephus refers, and which was the age of Ezra and Nehemiah, the collection of the sacred books was completed by an authority which thenceforward ceased to exist. (7) Division of Canon. Division of the Canon into three parts—the Law, the Prophets and the Writings.--This division is very ancient; it ap- pears in the prologue to Ecclesiasticus, in the New Testament, in Philo, in Josephus and in the Talmud. Respecting the principle on which the division has been made, there is a considerable difference of opinion. The law was so named frony its containing the national laws and regula- tions; the other two are regarded by some as named from the character of the writings they contain ; by others, from the office and station of their authors, and by others, from a sort of accidental combination, for which no reason can now be assigned. Of these, the second is the orily one that will bear the test of examination. Two very material points in its favor are: (I) That in the days of the Theocracy there was a class of persons who bore the name of Prophets professionally, i. e., they were persons not who were occasionally favored with Divine revela- tions, but who, renouncing all other occupations, gave themselves up to the duties of the prophetic office, and (II) that of all the books in the second division the reputed authors belong to this class; while of those in the third division, none of the atuthors, with two exceptions, belong to this class. The exceptions are Daniel and Lamentations. Of these the first is only apparent, for, though Daniel uttered prophecies, he was not by profession a prophet. The latter presents a greater difficulty, the best way of getting over which, perhaps, is, with Hävernick, to admit it to be an exception, and suppose it made intentionally, for the pur- pose of classing this bouk. Uſ. Clegies with the Psalms and other lyric poetry of the Jews (Ein- lett, sec. I I, s. 65). Adopting this theory, the title of the second division is accounted for. As for that of the third, the most probable account of it is that at first it was fuller—viz., ‘the other writings,’ as distinguished from the law and the prophets, and that in process of time it was ab- breviated into ‘the writings.’ This part is com- monly cited under the title Hagiographa. (8) Subsequent History of Old Testament Canon. The canon, as established in the time of Ezra, has remained unaltered to the present day. Some, indeed, have supposed that, because the Greek version of the Old Testament contains some books not in the Hebrew, there must have been a double canon, a Palestinian and an Egyp- No. III.—REFERENCES TO THE ANTILEGOMENA UP TO THE BEGINNING OF THE THIRD CENTURY. Epistle to the e- Epistle of Shepherd of Epistle of Apocalypse Hebrews. Jude. James. 2, 3 John. 2 Peter. Apocalypse. Barnabas. Hermas. Clement. of É CLEMENs Rom. . . | || Eff. 36, etc. Cf. | AAE. 10 38, etc. (|| Eff. 11.) Hieron. De zyżr. ill. 15. C -- > PolicARP . . . . . . . . . . (Il Ep. 3.) Z. O Z. JUSTIN MARTYR. . . . (I Apol. i :12, 63.) * Deal. 81. IRENAEUs...........! (Euseb. H. E. v.: (Adv. Hºer. iv:16, + Adv. Harr. i : * Adv. Haer. v : 35, |* Adv. Haer. [Adv. Harr. iii: 26.) 2.) 16, 3. (2 John) 2. Cf. Euseb. iv : 20, 2. Cf. 3, 3.] A. E. v : 8. Euseb. H. E. v . 8. CLEMENs ALEx ....|* Strom. vi. 8, § 62, * Strøm. iii; 2, § 11. (Cf. Euseb. H. E. Cf. Strom. ii: |[Cf. Euseb. * Ped, ii: 10, § 108; * Strom ii: 6, * Strem. i : 29, 1* Strome, iv: 17, Cf. Euseb. Cf. Euseb. H. Cf. Euseb. H. E. vi : 14, ) 15, is 66 H. E. vi. 14.] Strom, vi : 13, § 31, etc. Cf. § 181, § 107, etc. . E. vi. 13. E. vi. 14.) vi : 13. wº Euseb. H. E. Cf. Euseb. vi : 13. A. E. vi. 13. Cº TERTULLIAN........| ? De Audicit. 20 | De haë. metal. 3. * Adv. Marc. iii: 14 f De pudicit. § (Barnabas). 10, 20 De Orat, 12. ORIGEN ... ....... |* Ap. Euseb. H. E. * Comme, in Małł. ? Comm. ºn Joann. [Hom, in Jos. [*Hom, in Jos. 4 Ap. Euseb. H. E. *c. Cels. i. 63. , * De Arinc. ii: | * Sel. in Ezek. vi : 25, etc. T. x. § 17, 2 Id. xix: 6. * Sed, in vii: 1]. vii: 1; in Lezy. vi :25; Comm. 1. Comtm. ºn viii. T. xvii: 3. Ps. xxx. iv : 4 J Cf. in Joann. i : 14. Rom. xvi; 14. Sel, ºn Ps. iii. Dionysius ALEx....|* Ap. Euseb. H. E. | Comm... in Luc. ? Ap. ... Euseb. Cf. Euseb. H. E. vi : 41. xxii: 46. FI. E. vii; 25. vii; 10, 2 H. E. vii; 24. CYPRIAN............! (f #) each. mart. De op. et eleem. 14. 1. O P HIPPOLYTUs . . . . . . . (f Phot. 121.) * De Anzich?". 36. Ž Z METHODIUs........| || De Resurr. 5, p. * De Resurr. 9, p. 269 (ed. Migne); 315; Conv. viii: Cozzzy. v : 7. 4, p. 143. EUSEBI Us. . . . . . . . . . * Ecl. Proph. i : 20, ? H. E. iii:25. 7 H. E. iii. 25. 2 H. E. iii.; 25. 2 A. E. iii.; 25. 2 H. E. iii: 39. f H. E. iii:25. | f H. E. iii:25. [H. E. wi: 13. f H. E. iii:25. etc. Cf. 2 H. E. iii: 3. g Cf. iii: 25.] —ºr The sign || marks a verbal coincidence : * a direct quotation: ? an expression of doubt: () an uncertain reference: f a clear rejection: [ ] that the evidence is suspicious, or inconclusive as to the authority assigned to the book. CANON tian (Semler, Apparat ad liberaliorem V. T. inter- pret...secs. 9, Io; Corrodi, Beleuchtung der Gesch. des Jüdisc/.. u. Christlich. Kanons, s. 155-184; Augusti, Einleit. ins. A. T. s. 79); but this notion has been completely disproved by Eichhorn (Ein- leit, bol. i. S. 23), Hâvernick (Einl. i. sec. I6) and others. All extant evidence is against it. The Son of Sirach, and Philo, both Alexandrian Jews, make no allusion to it, and Josephus, who evi- dently used the Greek version, expressly declares against it in a passage above referred to (Sec. 6). The earlier notices of the canon simply desig- nate it by the threefold division already consid- ered. The Son of Sirach mentions ‘the Law, the Prophets and the other books of the fathers,’ and again, ‘the Law, the Prophecies and the rest of the books,’ expressions which clearly indicate that in his day the canon was fixed. (9) New Testament References. In the New Testament our Lord frequently refers to the Old Testament, under the title of ‘The Scriptures’ or of ‘The Law’ (Matt. xxi :42; xxii:29; John X:35, etc., etc.), and in one place he speaks of ‘the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms’ (Luke xxiv:44); by the third of these titles intending, doubtless, to designate the Hagiographa, either after the Jewish custom of denoting a collection of books by the title of that with which it com- menced, or, as Hāvernick suggests, using the term psal-moi, psalms, as a general designation of these books, because of the larger compara- tive amount of lyric poetry contained in them (Einl. : S. I.4); Paul applies to the Old Testament the appellation ‘The Holy Writings” (Rom. I :2), ‘The Sacred Letters’ (2 Tim. iii:15), and ‘The Old Covenant’ (2 Cor. iii:14). Both our Lord and his apostles ascribe Divine authority to the ancient canon (Matt. xv :3; John x:34-36; 2 Tim. iii:16; 2 Peter i: IQ-2I, etc.), and in the course of the New Testament, quotations are made from all the books of the Old, except Ruth, Ezra, Nehe- miah, Esther, Canticles, Lamentations and Eze- kiel, the omission of which may be accounted for on the simple principle that the writers had no oc- casion to quote from them. Philo attests the existence in his time of the sacred writings. He describes them as comprising laws, oracles uttered by the prophets, hymns and the other books by which knowledge and godliness may be increased and perfected (De Vita Contemplat. in Opp., tom. ii, p. 275, ed. Mangey), and quotations from or references to the most of the books are scattered through his writings. The evidence of Josephus is very important, for, besides general references to the sacred books, he gives a formal account of the canon, as it was acknowledged in his day, ascribing five books, containing laws and an ac- count of the origin of man, to Moses, thirteen to the prophets, and four, containing songs of praise to God and ethical precepts for men, to different writers, and affirming that ulie ſailli Uſ the Jews in these books is such that they would for them suffer all tortures and death itself (Cont. Apion. i :7, 8; Eichhorn, Einleit. i., sec. 50 ; Jahn, Introductio, p. 50). Melito, bishop of Sardis in the second century of the Christian era, gives, as the result of careful inquiry, the same books in the Old Testament Canon as we have now, with the exception of Nehemiah, Esther and Lamentations, the first two of which, however, he probably in- cluded in Ezra, and the last in Jeremiah (Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iv:26; Eichhorn, Einl. i., sec. 52). The catalogues of Origen (Euseb. Hist. Eccles. vi 2, 5), of Jerome (Prol. Galeat. in Opp. iii), and of others of the fathers, give substantially the same list (Eichhorn, l. c.; Augusti, Einl., Sec. 54; Cosin, Scholastical Hist, of the Canon, ch. 339 CANON iii, vi; Henderson, On Inspiration, 449). In the Talmudic Tract entitled Baba Bathro, a catalogue of the books of the sacred canon is given, which exactly corresponds with that now received by Christians (Buxtorf, Tiberias, c. 11). Hence it appears that all the evidence we have shows that the canon, once fixed, has remained unaltered. (10) Formation of New Testament Canon. The history of the formation of the New Testa- ment Canon is involved in much greater obscurity than that of the Old. An ecclesiastical tradition ascribes to the Apostle John the work of collect- ing and Sanctioning the writings which were worthy of a place in the Canon, but this tradition is too late for any weight to be allowed to it. A much more probable opinion, and one in which nearly all the modern writers who are favorable to the claims of the Canon are agreed, is that each of the original churches, especially those of larger size and greater ability, collected for itself a complete set of those writings which could be proved by competent testimony, to be the production of inspired men, and to have been communicated by them to any of the churches as part of the written Word of God, so that in this way a great many complete collections of the New Testament Scriptures came to be extant, the accordance of which with each other, as to the books admitted, furnishes evidence of the cor- rectness of the Canon as we now have it. This Opinion, which in itself is highly probable, is rendered still more so when we consider the scru- pulous care which the early churches took to dis- criminate Spurious compositions from such as were authentic—the existence, among some, of doubts regarding certain of the New Testament books, indicating that each church claimed the right of satisfying itself in this matter—their high veneration for the genuine apostolic writ- ings—the practice of the fathers of arguing the canonicity of any book, from its reception by the churches, as a sufficient proof of this—and the reason assigned by Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. iii:25). for dividing the books of the New Testa- ment into Öpoxonyotſaevot, Z/ºose agreed 24/ozz, and divri)\eyópevou, those disputed, viz., that the for- mer class was composed of those which the universal tradition of the churches authenti- cated, while the latter contained such as had been received by the majority, but not by all (Storch, Comment. Hist. Crit. de Libb. N. Tes- tamenti Canone, etc., p. II2, ff.; Olshausen’s Echtheit der IV. Evang., S. 439). In this way we may readily believe that, without the intervention of any authoritative decision, either from an in- dividual or a council, but by the natural process of each body of Christians seeking to procure for themselves and to convey to their brethren authentic copies of writings in which all were deeply interested, the Canon of the New Testa- 11tuit was fºrmed. (11) History of New Testament Canon. The first certain notice which we have of the ex- istence of any of the New Testament writings, in a collected form, occurs in 2 Pet. iii:16, where the writer speaks of the epistles of Paul in such a way as to lead us to infer that at that time the whole or the greater part of these were collected together, were known amongst the churches gen- erally (for Peter is not addressing any particular church), and were regarded as on a par with ‘the other Scriptures,’ by which latter expression Peter plainly means the sacred writings both of the Old Testament and the New Testament, as far as then extant. That John must have had before him copies of the other evangelists is probable from the supplementary character of his own CANON 340 CANON No. IV.--THE CHIEF CATALOGUES OF THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. Only “disputed ” books are noticed, or such as were in some degree recognized as authoritative. The symbols are used as before. Q) º $—t Q1) Q) .5 § | 5 | = | * Q) & ;I. ..º ‘5 d ;I. § ſº ‘s O § S a à | 3 || 3 || 3 | # Q) g ~ !—t v=4 Q) Q} Q1) *4 º: * ty. C) Q1) cº º: ~ º: cc; ºf | 3 || 3 || > || 3 || 3 || 3 || 3 || 3 || 3 à, 3 ă co Q- ſºlº Q. c ſº Q4 ſº - | *, cº CNº. }: 2: :: x: × C. stºr. Carthage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . × :* × 2. iſ: 2: L. C. supr. Apostolic (Concil. Quinisext.). . . * zk * × × × L. c. supr. I. ORIENTAL CATALOGUES: (a) Syria. The Peshito Version. . . . . . . • * * * •k * Junilius. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :: P 2 P P P L. C. supr. Joann. Damasc. . . . . . . . . e e º e s e º s sk × × wk zk :: L. c. supr. Ebed Jesu. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :: × L. C. suffr. (b) Palestine. Eusebius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : 2 P 2 7 2 f f f H. E. iii : 25. Cyril of Jerus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . × 2% × × * L. C. suftr. Epiphanius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . × * × * × 2K Adzy. Haer. lxxxi : 5. (c) Alexandria. Origen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * 2 P 2 7 × Ap. Euseb. H. E. vi. 25. Athanasius ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ::: :k :*: sº × × f L. C. supr. (d) Asia Minor. Gregor. Naz. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2}: 2k × Sk × L. c. supr. Amphilochius. . … × ? 2 2 2 p L. c. supr. (e) Constantinople. Chrysostom . . . . . . . . . . . :k :k Synop. S. Script, tom. vl, p. 318 A. Leontius. . . . . . . . . . . . . . º e º e s p is tº a :* :: × :: :* :: L. C. supr. Nicephorus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :* :*: :k + *: p 7 f f ? | L. c. supr. II. OccIDENTAL CATALOGUES: (a) Africa. Cod. Clarom............ . . . . . . . . ] ( ) :k ::: *: Sk :k sk 2k * | Tischdf. Cod. Clarom. p. 468 f. Augustine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ::: 2: x: × * sk L. C. supr. (b) Italy. Caze. Mºrač . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . tº e zº ( ) :* f * | Hist, N. T. Canon, p. 558 ff. Philastrius. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2\t × × × Aſar. 88 (All. 60). Jerome ... . . . . . . . . . . . s' - - - - - - - - * ::: × 2: :}; 2: Ad Paul. Ep. 53, § 8 (i, p. 548, - ed. Migne). Rufinus ... . . . . . gº º e º ſº gº tº :: :: × sº :* :* + L. c. stºr. Innocent. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x: *: × × × * f L. c. stºr. [Gelasius] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :: :k :}; :k 2: *: f L. C. supr. Cassiodorus (Vet. Trans). . . . . . × × × De Inst. dizy. Litt. 14. (c) Spain. Isidore of Seville . . . . . . . . tº e º e º & × :k × :: :* :: De Ord. Libr. Script. in it. * * :* 2]: * :: f t Hody, p. 649. Cod. Baroc. 206. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CANON gospel. In the anonymous Epistle to Diognetus, which is, on good grounds, supposed to be one of the earliest of the uninspired Christian writ- ings, the writer speaks of the Law, the Prophets, the Gospels, and the Apostles (sec. xi. ed. Hefele), Ignatius speaks of ‘betaking himself to the gospel as the flesh of Jesus, and to the apostles as the Presbytery of the church,” and adds, ‘the pro- pliets also we love,' thus showing that it is to the Scriptures he was referring (Ep. ad Philadel- phenos, sec. v., ed. Hefele). Theophilus of An- tioch speaks frequently of the New Testament writings under the appellation of the sacred writ- ings, or the Divine Word, and in one place men- tions the Law, the Prophets and the Gospels, as alike divinely inspired (Ad. Autol. iii:II). Clem- ent of Alexandria frequently refers to the books of the New Testament, and distinguishes them into ‘the Gospels and Apostolic Discourses' (Quis Dives Salvus? prope fin. ; Stromat. saepissime). Tertullian distinctly intimates the existence of the New Testament Canon in a complete form in his day, by calling it “Evangelicum. /nstrumentum' (Adv. Marc iv:2), by describing the whole Bible as “ſoftem instrzemzemżu/z zetriusque Testa- ment?' (Adv. Prax. chap. 20), and by distinguish- ing between the ‘Scriptura Vetus' and the ‘No- vum Testamentum' (ibid. c. 13). Irenaeus re- peatedly calls the writings of the New Testa- ment, ‘the Holy Scriptures,’ ‘the Oracles of God' (Adv. Aſar. ii:27; i:8, etc.), and in one place he puts the Evangelical and Apostolic writings on a par with the Law and the Prophets (ibid. i:3, sec. 6). From these allusions we may justly infer that before the middle of the third century the New Testament Scriptures were generally known by the Christians in a collected form, and reverenced as the word of God. That the books they received were the same as those now pos- sessed by us, is evident from the quotations from them furnished by the early fathers, and which have been so carefully collected by the learned and laborious Lardner, in his Credibility of the Gospel History. The same thing appears from the researches of Origen and Eusebius. Besides these sources of information we have no fewer than ten ancient catalogues of the New Testa- ment books still extant. Of these, sir accord exactly with our present Canon, while of the rest three omit only the Apocalypse, and one omits, with this, the Epistle to the Hebrews (Lardner's Works, vol. iv. and v, 8vo; Horne's Introduction, vol. i., p. 70, 8th edition). (12) Internal Evidence. With the external evidence thus furnished in favor of the sacred Canon, the internal accords. In the Old Testa- ment all is in keeping with the assumption that its books were written by Jews, sustaining the character, surrounded by the circumstances, and living at the time ascribed to their authors; or if any apparent discrepancies have been found in any of them, they are of such a kind as fur- ther inquiry has served to explain and reconcile. The literary peculiarities of the New Testament, its language, its idioms, its style, its allusions, all are accordant with the hypothesis that its authors were exactly what they profess to have been—Jews converted to Christianity, and living at the commencement of the Christian era. both Testaments the theological and ethical sys- tems are substantially in harmony, whilst all that they contain tends to one grand result—the mani- festation of the power and perfection of Deity, and the restoration of man to the image, service and love of his Creator. The conclusion from the whole facts of the case can be none other than that the Bible is entitled to that implicit and un- 341 CANTICLES divided reverence which it demands, as the only divinely appointed Canon of religious truth and uty. The criticism of the present century upon the authenticity of the separate books of the Old and New Testaments belongs to the special articles on these books. Literature. Besides the immortal work of Lardner and the different introductions to the critico-historical study of Scripture, the follow- ing works may with advantage be consulted on the Subject of the Canon:— Cosin's Scholastical His- tory of the Canon, 4to. London, 1657, 1672. West- cott, The Bible in the Church, London, 1864; and History of the Canon of the N. T., London, 1866; Hilgenfeld, Der Kanon und die Kritik des N. T., Halle, 1863; How the English Bible Has Come Down to Us, Thompson, Chas. Scribner's Sons, IQOO. CANTICLES (kån'ti-k'lz), or Solomon’s Song sº-ºn -º "...? 'a-ana, 3. f (Heb. FT%). Tº, shir' hash-irim; Sept. &gua doué- tww; Vulg. Canticume Canticorum, all signifying the Song of Songs), is generally believed to have been so denominated in the inscription, to denote the superior beauty and excellence of this poem. It is one of the five megilloth, or volumes, placed immediately after the Pentateuch in the present manuscript of the Jewish Scriptures in the following order, viz.: Canticles, Ruth, Lamenta- tions, Ecclesiastes and Esther, although this order is sometimes violated (see SCRIPTURE, Holy). It also constitutes the fourth of the Cetubim, or writings (hagiographa), which in the Jewish enumeration comprehend the Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Canticles, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel and Ezra, which last includes the book of Nehemiah. These books are supposed to have been so called in contradistinction to the Law, which was delivered orally, and to the pro- phetical books, which were dictated in a peculiar manner. The Cetubim the Jews regard as the inspired writings of men who had no prophetic mission (see HAGIOGRAPHA). 1. Canonicity. In favor of the canonical au- thority of this book (which has been questioned in ancient and modern times) we may observe that it is found in all the copies of the Hebrew Bible which have descended to our times, as well as in the version of the Seventy, which was finished some time in the second century before the Chris- tian era. It is also found in all the ancient cata- logues which have come down to us from the early Christian church. The most ancient which we possess, that of Melito, bishop of Sardis (A. D. I70), preserved by Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. iv, chap. 26), professes to give an account of the books of the Old Toctament, according to the order in which they were written, from accurate informa- tion obtained in the East. The names of these books, he acquaints us, are as follows: “Of Moses, five books, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Jesus Naue, Judges, Ruth ; four books of Kings; two of Paralipomena; Psalms of David; Proverbs of Solomon ; Ecclesiastes; Song of Songs; Job; of Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah ; of the twelve Prophets, one book; Daniel, Ezekiel, Esdras.’ The book of Canticles is invariably con- tained in all subsequent catalogues. It has con- sequently all the external marks of canonicity possessed by any other book of the Old Testa- ment not expressly cited in the New. Those who have questioned its right to a place in the sacred volume have proceeded more in dogmatical than on historico-critical grounds. It has been, indeed, attempted to be shown that the Song of Solomon CANTICLES was not included by Josephus in his account of the books of canonical Scripture, on the following grounds: Josephus divides these books into the ‘five books of Moses; thirteen books containing the history of their own times, written by the Prophets who succeeded him, to the time of Artaxerxes, son of Xerxes, King of Persia; and the remaining four consisting of hymns to God and admonitions for the conduct of men's lives. It is generally supposed that these four books are Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Canticles, and that the thirteen other books, included under the term Prophets, are Joshua, Judges and Ruth, Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah, Esther, Isaiah, Jeremiah and Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, the twelve minor Prophets, and the book of Job. But it has been maintained that this last book more appropriately belongs to the four which contain hymns and admonitions for human conduct than to the Prophets who wrote the history of their own times after Moses, and consequently that there is no place left for Canti- cles. Those who adopt this view are compelled to separate the book of Ezra from that of Nehe- miah in order to make up the number of thirteen prophets; but whatever appearance of truth there may be in this reasoning, which is that advanced by Mr. William Whiston, in his supplement to his Essay Towards Restoring the Teart of the Old Tes- tament, it is overbalanced by the fact already stated, that this book formed part of the Jewish canonical Scriptures and of the Septuagint ver- sion. It is true that other books are found in the copies of this latter version, which were either originally written in Greek, as the Book of Wis- dom and others, or are translated from the He- brew or Chaldee, as Ecclesiasticus, and the first book of Maccabees; but it is confessed that these never formed part of the first or Jewish canon. The Book of Canticles was also translated into Greek, from the original, by Symmachus the Jew, and by Aquila, in the second century. The Canticles was one of the books translated by Jerome from the Greek, or rather, corrected from the older Latin version, and published by that father; but this work is now lost. We still possess in the present Latin Vulgate Jerome's translation of this book from the original Hebrew. 2. Jubject. The subject of this book is con- fessedly Love. But it has been a matter of much controversy, especially in modern times, what kind of love is here celebrated. It is equally a matter of dispute among Divines whether the interpretation of the poem is limited to its obvious and primary meaning, or whether it does not also include a latent mystical and allegorical sense. We shall speak of these subjects in order. And, first, as to the literal and primary meaning, the earliest information which we have is contained in the preface of Origen to his commentary on this book. This eminent scholar holds it to be an epithalamium, or marriage song in the form of a drama. This idea has been, in modern times, improved by Lowth, Bossuet, Michaelis and other commentators. ‘The Song of Songs,’ says Bishop Lowth, ‘for so it is entitled, either on account of the excellence of the subject or of the composition, is an epithalamium, or nuptial dialogue, or rather, if we may be allowed to give it a title more agree- able to the genius of the Hebrews, a Song of Loves. Such is the title of Psalm xlv. It is ex- pressive of the utmost fervor as well as delicacy of passion; it is instinct with all the spirit and sweetness of affection. The principal characters are Solomon himself and his bride, who are rep- resented speaking both in dialogue and in solilo- quy, when accidentally separated. Virgins, also, 342 CANTICLES the companions of the bride, are introduced, who seem to be constantly on the stage, and bear a part of the dialogue. Mention is also made of young men, friends of the bridegroom, but they are mute persons. This is exactly conformable to the manners of the Hebrews, who had always a number of companions to the bridegroom, thirty of whom were present in honor of Samson at his nuptial feast (Judg. xiv:I3). In the New Testa- ment, according to the Hebrew idiom, they are called children, or sons of the bridechamber, and friends of the bridegroom. There, too, we find mention of ten virgins who went forth to meet the bridegroom and conduct him home; which circumstance indicates that this poem is founded on the nuptial rites of the Hebrews, and is ex- pressive of the forms or ceremonial of their mar- riage. In this opinion, indeed, the harmony of commentators is not less remarkable than their disagreement concerning the general economy and conduct of the work, and the order and ar- rangement of the several parts. The present Ob- ject of inquiry, however, is only whether any plot or fable be contained or represented in this poem; and upon this point the most probable opinion is that of the celebrated Bossuet, a critic whose profound learning will ever be acknowl- edged and a scholar whose exquisite taste will ever be admired.’ Bossuet's idea of this poem was that it is a regular drama, or pastoral eclogue, consisting of seven acts, each act filling a day, concluding with the Sabbath, inasmuch as the bridegroom on this day does not, as usual, go forth to his rural em- ployments, but proceeds from the marriage cham- ber into public with his bride. The following are Bossuet's divisions of the plots: First day Chap. i-ii:6. Second day ii:7-17. Third day . iii-v.I. Fourth day v:2-vi-9. Fifth day vi:Io-vii:II. Sixth day . vii: 12-viii:3. Sabbath. viii:4-14. Lowth so far differs from Bossuet as to deny the existence of a regular drama, inasmuch as there is no termination to the plot. Michaelis, in his notes to his German translation of Lowth's Prelections, endeavors to overturn the views of Bossuet and Lowth and to show that this poem can have no relation to the celebration of a mar- riage, inasmuch as the bridegroom is compelled in his nuptial week to quit his spouse and friends for whole days in order to attend to his cattle in the pastures; and while he altogether repudiates the idea, which some have had the rashness to maintain. that the subject of the pnem, in its literal signification, is a clandestine amour, inas- much as the transaction is described as legal and public, and the consent of parents plainly inti- mated, he equally rejects the views of those who conceive that these songs relate to the state of parties betrothed before marriage. His opinion is that this poem had no reference to a future mar- riage, but that the chaste loves of conjugal and domestic life are described. This state, he con- ceives, in the East, admits of more of the per- plexities, jealousies, plots and artifices of love than it does with us; the scene is more varied, and there is consequently greater Scope for in- vention. But the idea that the conjugal state, or the loves of married persons, are here referred to, has been strongly opposed by some of the ablest modern writers, including Eichhorn (Einleitung), Rosen- müller (Scholia in Cant. Pref. p. 261), Jahn (Ein- CANTICLES 343 leitung and Introduct. in Compendium redacta), who maintain that the chaste mutual loves of two young persons antecedent to marriage are here celebrated. The last-named writer having ob- served that neither in monogamy nor in polygamy is the passion of love so ardent as is here repre- sented, proceeds to maintain that no other object remains but ‘the chaste and reciprocal affection of the Sexes previously to marriage. Some of the language,’ he adds, “may be thought indecorous in persons in such circumstances, but this is not the case, unless it be taken in the worst sense. It admits of a meaning perfectly chaste, which in the mouths of chaste lovers, such as the parties are uniformly represented, is the only one that can be true.’ He conceives that there is no necessity to Suppose any actual historical foundation for the poem. &. Character of the Poem. Here it may be necessary to state that the learned are divided on the point whether the Canticles consist of one continued and connected poem, or of a number of detached songs or amorets. The first person who maintained the latter opinion was Father Simon, who was on this account unjustly accused of denying the canonicity of the book. This opin- ion has been subsequently defended by Eichhorn (Einleitung), Jahn, Pareau (Institutio Interpretis ^. T. p. iii, Sec. iv, c. xi, sec. 3; Biblical Cabinet, vol. ii, p. 129), and many others. A very general opinion is that it is an idyl, or rather, a number of idyls, all forming a collective whole. Such is the opinion held, among others, by Sir William Jones and Dr. J. Mason Good, in his beautiful translation of the Song of Songs. Dr. Adam Clarke, however, will not allow that the book of Canticles comes under the denomination of a pastoral, an idyl, an ode or an epithalamium. He conceives it to be a composition sui generis, par- taking more of the nature of a mask than any- thing else, an entertainment for the guests who attended a marriage ceremony. He admits no mystical sense. Jahn, in the work above alluded to, states his opinion that the work comprehends several amatory poems. Ewald considers the poem to consist of a drama in four parts. The heroine of the poem, accord- ing to this writer, is a country maiden, a native of Engedi, who, while rambling in the plains, fell in with the chariots of Solomon, and was carried by him into his palace. (Ewald's Das Hohe Lied Salomo's, Gotting. 1826). Among those who have maintained the opinion that the Song of Songs is an allegory founded on facts, were Isidore Clarius and Francis Vatablus. Lightfoot also considers the poem to refer to a daughter of Pharaoh, an Ethiopian and a Gentile. Others, as we have observed, among whom are tlie leai lied Lullieſ aus Cal pzov (Introductio ad Libros Canonicos V. T.) and Gerhard (Postill. Salomonis, in Cant., procm, cap. x), maintain that the book is a simple allegory, having no historical base whatever, but describing the love which sub- sists between Christ and the church under figures borrowed from the ardor of human passion. These writers maintain that there exists no double sense whatever, but that its primary is its only Sense, and that this primary sense is entirely of a spiritual character. As, however, the Scriptures give no intimation that this book contains a mystical or allegorical sense, recourse has been had to the analogy of Some of the Messianic Psalms, whose applica- tion to Spiritual objects is recognized in the New Testament. Especially a great resemblance has been observed between the character of the Can- CANTICLES ticles and the 45th Psalm. Aben Ezra, the cele- brated Jewish commentator of the twelfth century, considered that the Canticles represented the his- tory of the Jews from Abraham to the Messiah. Others have conceived the bride to be Wisdom, with whom Solomon was acquainted from his childhood and with whose beauty he was capti- vated (Leo Hebraeus, Dialog. iii, De Amore). This latter is the view followed by Rosenmüller in his Scholia. The modern writers of the Roman church have, in general, followed Origen and Jerome in their allegorical interpretations. The Rev. T. Scott observes, in his Commentary, that “no other poem of the kind could be so explained as to describe the state of the heart at different times, and to excite admiring, adoring, grateful love to God our Savior as this does.’ We must not omit the opinion of the learned Keiser, who conceives it to be a historico-alle- gorical song, celebrating the restoration of the Mosaic worship by Zerubbabel, Ezra and Nehe- miah (Das Hohelied, Erlangen, 1825). Prof. Hengstenberg of Berlin, in his essay upon the Song of Songs, in the Evangelische Kirchengei- tung for 1827, maintains that the allegorical in- terpretation of the book compels us to assume the relation of Jehovah to the Jewish people as the subject of the representation. Luther, in his Commentary on Canticles, main- tained the allegorical interpretation, conceiving Jehovah to be the bridegroom, the bride the Jew- ish nation and the poem itself a figurative de- Scription of Solomon’s civil government. The opinions of those who have acknowledged no other than the literal interpretation of the Canticles has had a considerable influence in the question of the canonicity of the book. Nor is it at all surprising that those who were in the habit of attaching a spiritual meaning to it should find it difficult to believe that a book treating of hu- man love should have a place in the inspired vol- 111116. But by many who defend the allegorical inter- pretation, it is acknowledged that, even in its literal sense, it has a just claim to be considered a canonical book. Dr. J. Mason Good, for in- stance, who, although he acknowledges that we have no sufficient data to build a decisive opin- ion, still believes it an allegory (observing that ‘this allegoric mode of describing the sacred union subsisting between mankind at large, or an in- dividual and pious soul and the great Creator, is common to almost all Eastern poetry,’ in proof of which he refers to the chaste and virtuous Sadi or the more impassioned Hafiz), and maintains that ‘to those who disbelieve the existence of such an allegory, they still afford a happy example of the pleagurog of holy and virt11nits love; they incill- cate, beyond the power of didactic poetry, the tenderness which the husband should manifest for his wife, the deference, modesty and fidelity with which his affection should be returned, and, considered even in this sense alone, they are fully entitled to the honor of constituting a part of the sacred Scriptures’ (Song of Songs, or Sacred Idyls, by J. Mason Good, M. D.). Writers of exquisite taste, like Bossuet, Lowth, Eichhorn and Dr. Mason Good, share the opinion of Calmet when he says: ‘Even regarding it as a mere human composition, it has all the beauties of which a piece of this nature is ca- pable. The bride and bridegroom express their sentiments in figurative and enigmatic periods, and by comparisons and similitudes derived from rural scenery. If the comparisons are sometimes CANTICLES too strong, we must allow something to the genius of the Orientals and the vivacity of love.’ The style is tender, ſively, animated and delicate' (Preface to Canticles). It was chiefly the subject of the poem that in- fluenced Dr. J. Pye Smith in rejecting the Canti- cles from the Ca11011, although he also maintained with Whiston that Josephus did not include it in his catalogue (Scripture Testimony, i :55, 3d edit., 1837; also Congregational Magazine for 1837, 1838). 4. Author and Age. These have been also much disputed. The inscription ascribes it to Solomon, and this is confirmed by the universal voice of antiquity, although some of the Jews have attributed it to Hezekiah. 5. Translation and Interpretation by C. Taylor. The translation and interpretation of the Book of Canticles, as found in Calmet, by Mr. C. Taylor, may be given as a typical presentation of the literal and dramatic nature of the work. (1) Introduction. The first principle to be considered in analyzing this poem is the arrange- ment of its parts, for it evidently appears to be not one continued or uniform ode, but a composi- tion of several odes into one connected series. In addition to the termination of the poem, there are three places where the author has decidedly marked the close of a subject. These are the lively adjurations addressed by the bride to the daughters of Jerusalem. close by the same words, uttered by the same pcrSon (the bride), who, when she is the last speaker, concludes in the same manner with very slight variations. They occur at the end of the first day, the end of the second day and the end of the fifth day, but at the end of the poem this conclusion is not maintained. If, then, these pas- sages be admitted as divisions of the poem origi- nally intended to be marked as closes, we have only to ascertain two other divisions in order to render the parts of the poem pretty nearly commensurate to each other in length, and com- plete in the subject which each includes. By at- tending to the sentiments and expressions we shall find little difficulty in perceiving such a change of person and occurrence that the ending of the third day must be where we have placed it, because the following words, relating to a dream of the Over-night, imply that they are spoken in a morning ; and they are so totally dis- tinct from the foregoing sentiments, as to demon- strate a total change of scene and of subject. The same may be said of the close of the fourth day. There is such a determinate change of style, sub- ject and person speaking, in the succeeding verses, that every feeling of propricty forbids our uniting them. These principles, then, divide the poem into six divisions, each of which we have con- sidered as one day. It has been usual with com- mentators to regard these six days as succeeding the day of marriage; a mistake, as we suppose, which has misled them into many mazes of error. On the contrary, they are here considered as pre- ceding the day of marriage, and, we think, the poet has distinctly marked the sixth day as being itself the day of that union, which accounts for its termination with the morning eclogue, and the omission of the evening visit of the bridegroom to the bride, as then the Sabbath, to which no allusion appears in any preceding day, would be beginning, in whose solemnities the Jewish bride- groom would be attentively engaged. Other inter- preters have supposed these eclogues to be so ab- solutely distinct as to have no connection with 344 These three periods CANTICLES each other, and not to form a regular series—a supposition that considerably impairs their beauty as a whole, and the effect of each of them singly, while it leaves undecided the reason for their association, or for their appearance and preserva- tion in one book. (2) Time. That the time of the year is spring has always been supposed, and, indeed, it is so clearly marked as to need no support from rea- Sonings. The mention of several particulars in the poem demonstrates it. Mr. Harmer has iden- tified the month to be April, and, in Judea, we may say of April, as in England has been said of May, that “April is the mother of love.” (3) Division. We have supposed it right to divide each day into two parts (morning and evening), because there appears to be such appro- priations of persons and sentiments as detach each eclogue from its companion. It should be remembered that the noon of the day is .too hot in Judea to permit exertion of body or mind, and that no person of the least degree of respectability is abroad at that time of the day. The Turks have a proverb importing that “only Franks and dogs walk about at noon.” And in Europe itself, as in Spain and Portugal, while the natives at noon sleep the siesta, “the streets,” say they, “are guarded by Englishmen and dogs.” Since, then, noon is the time for repose in the East (see 2 Sam. iv:5), we are not to expect that an eastern poet should depart from the manners of his coun- try by representing this part of the day, as a fit time for visiting, or conversation, or enjoyment. Neither can we suppose that night is a fit time for visiting or conversation, among recent acquaint- ances especially. Whatever our own unhappy man- ners may ordain, in respect of encroaching on the proper repose of night, the East knows nothing of such revels, nor of those assignations which, under favor of night, furnish too much occasion for repentance on the morrow. Such considera- tions restrict these eclogues to two parts of the day, morning and evening. The morning, among the Oriental nations, is very early; the cool of the day, daybreak, before the heat comes on ; and the evening is also the cool of the day, after the heat is over. The mornings of this poem are mostly occupied by conversations of the bride with her female visitors, or with her attendants, in her own apartments. But on the morning of the sec- ond day the bride, observing her beloved engaging in a hunting party, is agreeably surprised by a visit from him, and sees him from the upper story of her apartments and through the crossbars of her windows. He solicits a view of her counte- nance, but the poem seems to insinuate his further waiting for that till the next morning, when she, being intent on considering his palanquin, suffers herself to be surpriscol; and the bridegroom coin- pliments her beauty, which, for the first time, he has an opportunity—not properly of considering— but merely of glancing at. The evening is the reg- ular time when the bride expects to be visited by her spouse; accordingly, he visits her, on the first evening; but on the second evening she describes her anxiety, occasioned by his failure in this ex- pected attention, for which she had waited even into night, when it was too late to suppose he would come, and she must needs relinquish all thoughts of seeing him. On the other evenings he punctually pays his attendance, and though the import of the conversation between them is usually to the same effect, yet the variety of phraseology and metaphor employed by both parties gives, a characteristic richness, elegance and interest to this poem, in which, if it be equaled, it is by very few ; but certainly it is not surpassed by any. CANTICLES (4) Persons. It is natural to inquire, in the next place, who are the interlocutors in this poem. That it consists of conversation is an opinion derived from the earliest times; from the Jewish synagogue no less than from the Christian church : but opinions have varied as to the persons engaged in this conversation. There evidently are two principals—first, the lady herself, whom we dis- tinguish as the bride, meaning a person betrothed to her spouse, but not yet married to him. She evidently comes from a distant country, and that country south of Judea, and more exposed to the heat of the sun. She is accompanied by her mother, or by a representative of her mother, and by proper female attendants, whom we shall de- nominate bridesmaids; the second principal in the poem is the bridegroom, who is described in terms which can agree only with a prince ; and this prince is accompanied, on his part, by a number of companions, with whom he can be free and who in return can be hearty. In addition to these, as the bride is but recently arrived from a distant land, it is very natural that some of the ladies of her present residence (the Royal Harem) should visit her, no less to congratulate and to compli- ment her than to engage a share in her good graces and to commence that friendship which may hereafter prove valuable and pleasant to both parties. The Queen Mother of the bridegroom perhaps heads this group. Received opinion, founded on a pretty general tradition, has called the prince Solomon, king of Israel, and tradition almost, or altogether equally general, has called the princess, his Egyptian spouse, daughter of Pharaoh. As we acquiesce in this opinion we pass it with this slight mention only. (5) Place. The place is the city of David. This will follow, in some degree, from the men- tion already made of the parties, but further proof may be found in the history of this connection (I Kings iii: I.) Solomon made affinity with Pharaoh. king of Egypt, and took Pharaoh’s daughter and brought her into the City of David, until he had made an end of building his own house. Solomon made also a house for Pharaoh's daughter (I Kings vii:8); “Pharaoh’s daughter came up out of the City of David to the house which Solomon had built for her” (I Kings ix:24). From these passages it is clear that Solomon lodged his bride in the city of David directly as he received her; consequently at the time described in this poem. Tracing the ancient boundaries of the city (or palace) of David, we find it connects on one side with the city of Jerusalem; on the other side it is surrounded by the open country, the hills, etc, in the neighborhood. Its internal distribution, we are not to imagine, was wholly.like that of a city; that is, a Scries of Gtroots throughout, leading from end to end; but comprising the palace of David, its courts and appurtenances, the gardens and pleasure grounds belonging to that place, in various and irregular forms. If there were a few continued lines of houses in it, they might be adjacent to the city of Jerusalem, and further, where the wall of the present city passes, we shall suppose a pile of buildings, the palace of David, having one front toward Jerusalem and another toward the gardens, into which the rest of the ground was formed. These gardens, thus occupying full half the area of the city of David, must be supposed to be amply furnished with the most admired plants, shrubs, trees, evergreens, etc., with water in basins, streams and fountains; with a smooth-mowed sward of the most vivid green, that is, grass, and with a variety of flowers in pots, vases, etc.; in short, with whatever of decoration 345 CANTICLES art and expense could procure, and the whole so disposed as to be seen to the greatest advantage from the windows, balconies, galleries, pavilions and internal walks of the palace. Nor is this all, for unless we observe how fitly the risings and hills of Mount Sion were adapted to communicate pleasure, by views of them (that is, being looked towards) and by the situations they afforded for prospects (that is, being looked from); also, what is implied in these risings, the hollows, dells, etc., their counterparts, which yielded at once both coolness and shadow, we shall lose the satisfaction arising from several of the allusions in the poem ; these hillocks, then, the reader will bear in mind. We must add the supposition of various gates around this enclosure, some communicating with the town, others with the country, all of them more or less guarded by proper officers and at- tendants. We must also include in our ideas of the palace that King Solomon himself resided in a part of it; and his, bride, her mother and attendants, lodged in another part of it. These parts of the same palace may easily be under- stood as possessing a ready communication with each other; some of them were surrounded by corridors; others were open pavilions or colon- nades, according to the nature and composition of a royal residence in the East, and adapted to the various purposes of the apartments. Add guards, former residents, proper officers, servants, etc. Thus we have stated our notions of the time, the place, the persons, of this conversation poem. We desire the reader to transport himself and his conceptions into the palace of the highly favored king of Israel; to make one among those honored with a station in the train of Solomon, when his betrothed spouse, newly arrived from Egypt, with her mother, surrounded by all the pomp which the superb Pharaoh himself could depute to aggran- dize his daughter in the eyes of beholders. Egypt was at this time in its glory as to riches and power, and Solomon was rising into the greatest repute for magnificence and into a proverbial fame for wisdom. Thus introduced, let us attend the conversations of these illustrious lovers, but let us remember that they are expressed and trans- mitted in the energetic, the impassioned, the figurative language of poetry, of eastern poetry; comprised in metaphors, easy, familiar, and even constant, in the place and country where we hear them; that a great part of the gallantry attending a courtship conversation is (by usage) included in them, and that the promptitude of the repartee to such allusions, metaphors, similes, compari- sons, etc., is accepted as no small test of the sprightly wit, felicity of fancy, readiness of reply and mental dexterity, of the persons between whom they pass. (6) Arrangement. TIME. At, and after, the BRIDE's recent arrival from Egypt. The MARRIAGE WEEK ; six days previous to the completion of the marriage; the sixth day being the day of marriage. Each day divided into two ec- logues, MoRNING and EVENING, except the sirth, which is MoRNING only. Time of the year—SPRING. A PALACE OF SOLOMON in Judea, 7(7th its harem, gardens, ct c., that is, the CITY OF DAVID, ad- jacent to Jerusalem. PLACE. TIME. PLACE. PERSONS. BRIDE. LADIES. BRIDE. LADIES. BRIDE. LADIES. BRIDE. LADIES. BRIDE. LADIES. BRIDE. LADIES. FIRST DAY. TIME. PLACE. CANTICLES FIRST DAY. ECLOGUE I. MORNING. The Bride's parlor and apart- ments in the harem. BRIDE. LADIES of the harem, or QUEEN MOTHER, visiting the , Bride, to compliment and to accompany her. May he salute me with affection- ate salutations ! (I). Or, May he think me worthy to receive his addresses—his coin- pliments of kindness. Yes, most certainly;--Expect, as- suredly, his kindest addresses. So much are thy (2) love-favors excellences above wine. By the exquisite odor of thy per- fumes (Like perfume widely diffused is thy renown for beauty.) The virgins’ affections are con- ciliated to thee. Pray lead the way—[(3) pre- cede me; go before me.] © O, no,-We follow in thy train [close after thee.] The king hath introduced me into his palace [(4) HAREM, chamber.] We shall be happy and rejoice in thee: We shall commemorate thy love- favors more than wine; Most consummately shall love thee: Or, With perfect integrity shall we love thee. I am swarthy But attractive—[engaging]. . Swarthy, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, As the tents of Kedar ! attractive—as the tent- curtains of Solomon | Do not too accurately scrutinize my swarthiness, For indeed the sun hath darted his direct rays upon me. The sons of my mother treated me contemptuously; (5) They appointed me (6) inspect- ress of the (7) fruiteries [or- chards] ; But my fruitery—my own—I have not inspected. Tell me, O thou beloved of my (8) heart |...} where thou feedest thy flock. Where thou makest it to repose at 110On : For why should I be like a rover [a straggler in confusion] Beside the flocks of thy compan- ions? If indeed thou shouldest not know of thyself, O most (9) elegant of women' Trace thou thy way along the tracks of the flock; Or feed thou thy kids beside the shepherd's tents. We ECLOGUE II. EVENING. Bride’s Parlor. 346 CANTICLES PERSONS BRIDE and her ATTENDANTs. BRIDEGROOM and his ATTENDANTs. LADIES of the Harem. To a chief (rider) in the cavalry of Pharaoh. (IO) IIave I compared thee, my CO11SOrt. Thy cheeks are so elegantly dec- orated with bands of pearls; Thy neck is so resplendent with collets of gems. LADIES ; or {. will make for thee golden BRIDEGROOM. BRIDEGROOM’s bands, COMPANIONS. With spotted edges of silver. BRIDE, (aside) While the king is surrounded by his (II) circle. My spikenard diffuses delightful fragrance. A scent-bag of balsam is my love. to me, In my bosom he shall constantly reSt : A cluster of Al-Henna (I2) is my beloved to me, [Of Al-Henna] from the planta- tions of EN-GEDI. Behold, thou art elegant in thy taste, my consort | Behold thou art elegant Thine eyes are Doves | Behold, thou art (13) magnifi- cent, my associate friend ; How delightful, how exquisitely green [or flowery] is our (14) carpet covering ! The beams of thy palaces are ce- dars Their ornamental inlayings are firs! (15) brutim, or brushim. q. Cypress 2) I am a rose of the mere field : A lily of the mere valley. As the lily among thorns, So is my consort among the maidens. As the citron-tree among the wild underwood, So is my associate friend among the youths. BRIDEGROOM having retired. BRIDE sola; or (16) speaking to the LADIES. When I delight in his (17) deep shadow, and sit down beneath BRIDEGROOM. BRIDE. BRIDEGROOM. BRIDE. BRIDE. ºt, And his fruit is delicious to my taste ;- When he introduces me into his house of wine, And “Affection” is his banner bright-blazing above me; When he cheers me with refresh- ing cordials, And revives me with fragrant (18) citrons; (I am so wounded to fainting by affection 1) When his left arm is under my head, And his right arm embraces me ; I adjure you, O daughters of Je- rusalem, By the startling antelopes, by the timid deer of the field, CANTICLES If ye disturb, if ye discompose this complete affection, . . Till [affection] herself desire it! SECOND DAY. ECLOGUE I. TIME. PLACE. PERSONS. BRIDE. BRIDEGROOM, speaking to BRIDE. To his Com- panto 11s. MORNING, early. Bride’s chamber. BRIDE at her (I) window hears the [hunt- ing horn, etc. *] music of her beloved, very early in the morning. BRIDE, her ATTENDANTS. BRIDEGROOM, below. BRIDEGROOM’s CoMPANIONS, in at- tendance, within hearing. The (2) music [sounds] of my beloved Behold, he himself approaches | Lightly traversing the hills, Fleetly bounding over the rising grounds, My beloved is swift like an ante- lope, or a fawn Behold his stopping [ (3) seated, placed, in his (4) carriage; Looking through the apertures; (5) [windows, Gleaming between the blinds; (6) [lattices; ] My beloved addresses me, and SayS, “Rise, my consort, my charmer, and come away; - For lo! the winter is over, the rains are passed, are gone, The flowers appear in meads, The singing-time [of the night- ingale] is come, And the voice of the turtle re- echoes in our grounds: The fig-tree forwards into sweetness its swelling fruit, And the vines advance into fra- grance their just setting grapes. Arise, my consort, my charmer, and come away ! My dove (7) hid in the clefts of the rocks, Concealed in the fissures of the cliffs, Show me thy (8) swelling neck [turgid crop,) Let me hear call; (9) For sweet is thy call, A: thy swelling neck is beauti- 11 the thy [cooing] “Catch the jackals, the little jackals which damage our fruiteries Ere their productions come to maturity. [Or, While they have tender fruits.]” BRIDEGROOM being withdrawn. BRIDE. My beloved is mine, and I am his 1 (Io) Feeding among lilies' When the day breezes, when the lengthening shadows glimmer, Then return, then, my beloved, show thyself like the antelope, Or the young hart, on the moun- tains of Bether (II) [crags.] 347 SECOND DAY. TIME. PLACE. PERSONS. BRIDE. CANTICLES ECLOGUE II. Very late in the EVENING. Bride's apartment. BRIDE, sola [or with the LADIES of the Harem.] Reclined on my sofa till dusky night I look around, I seek him—the beloved of my heart: [Or, I have sought all the long evening till dusk, or, till night, (I2) | . - I seek him—but I find him not. What if I rise now, and take a turn [a round] in the city, (13) In the streets, in the squares; Seeking him—the beloved of my heart? I may seek him, but not find him. What if the watchmen, going their rounds through all the city, find me? “Have ye seen him—the beloved of my heart?” I should ask of them:—I might ask in vain. But, what if, passing ever So little a way beyond them, I find him—the beloved of my heart?— I would clasp him, I would not let him go ; Until I had brought him to the house of my mother, To the apartment of my parent herself. Then would I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem, By the startling antelopes, by the timid deer of the field, If ye disturb, if ye discompose this complete affection, Till, [Affection] herself desire 1t I THIRD DAY. ECLOGUE I. TIME. PLACE. PERSONS. BRIDE. (above) LADIES, or ATTENDANTs. BRIDE. MORNING. Bride's chamber window; look- ing towards the cottntry. BRIDE, and her ATTENDANTs of the Harem; looking through the window. (I) What is that, coming up from the common fields, Like a vast (2) column of Smoke P Fuming with balsams and trank- incense, Surpassing all powders of the perfumer. That is the (3) palanquin ap- propriate to SOLOMON himself Sixty stout men surround it; The stoutest heroes of Israel; Every one of them grasping a sword; every one of them ex- pert at arms; Ready on his thigh the sword of the commander, [A chief, (4) fearless] from fear in the night. Superior to fear at all times. A nuptial palanquin hath king SOLOMON made for himself? * LADIES, or ATTENDANTs. BRIDE. CANTICLES O yes! He hath made (5) of Lebanon-wood [cedar] its pil- lars - Of silver its top covering Of gold its lower carriage; With purple [aregamen] its part [floor] is spread, A present from the daughters of Jerusalem. Go forth, O daughters of Zion, and behold king SoLoMon Wearing the (6) head-circlet with which his mother en- circled him In the day of his espousals, In the day of the gladness of his heart. BRIDEGROOM (7) having seen the face, or person, of his BRIDE, for the first time, from a distance —incidentally at her window—by means of this visit, takes advantage of this opportunity to praise her beauty. BRIDEGROOM. (below). Behold, thou art elegant, my consort, behold, thou art ele- gant Thine eyes are doves peering be- tween thy (8) locks: Thy hair is like a flock of goats, (9) Long-haired glistering goats [descending] at mount GIL- EAD ; Thy teeth like a shorn flock (Io) of sheep, Coming up on (II) mount CAS- SIU.S. All of them twins to each other 348 BRIDE. BRIDEGROOM. And not one has lost its fellow twin. Li; a braid of scarlet are thy 1pS ; And the organ of thy voice ſmouth] is loveliness. Blushing (12) like the inner part of a piece of pomegran- ate Is thy cheek [temple] beneath thy locks; White (13) like the tower of David is thy neck, (14) Built on a commanding eminence; A thousand shields are sus- pended around it, as trophies of conquest, All of them arms of dignity of valiant heroes. Thy (15) two nipples are like two twin fawns of the ante- lope, Nibbling lily flowers. When the day breezes, when the lengthening shadows glimmer, I will visit the mountains of balsam, The hill of frankincense. THIRD DAY. ECLOGUE II. TIME. PLACE. PERSON.S. BRIDEGROOM. EvENING. Bride's parlor; in which her LADIES, etc., are in waiting. BRIDEGROOM, accompanied by ATTENDANTs, visiting his BRIDE. Thou art my entire elegance, my consort, BRIDE. BRIDEGROOM. To his CoMPANIONs. CANTICLES Not a blemish is in thee. Be of my party (16) to Leba- non, my Spouse, Accompany me CO111C : See the prospect from the head of Amanah, From the head of Shenir, and of Hermon, From Lions' Haunts, from Pan- ther Mountains. Thou hast (17) carried off cap- tive my heart, my sister, spouse (19), [partner]. Thou hast carried off captive my heart [literally, Thou hast dishearted me]. By one (18) sally of thine eyes, By one link [of the chainette] of thy neck. How handsome are thy love- favors, my sister, my spouse ! (19) [betrothed] How exquisite are thy love- favors | How much beyond wine ! And the fragrance of thine es- sences !— Beyond all aromatics Sweetness—as liquid [palm] honey drops, such drop thy lips, [speech] O spouse: [Bee] honey and milk are under thy tongue: And the scent of thy garments is the sweet scent of cedar. A garden locked up is my sister, Spouse, A spring strictly locked up, a fountain closely scaled. Thy plants are shoots of Para- dise : [Or, Around thee shoot plants of Paradise. (20)] Pomegranates, with delicious fruits; The fragrant henna, with the nards, (21) The nard, and the crocus, And sweet-scented reed, and cinnamon ; With every tree of incense; The balsam and the aloe : (22) With every prime aromatic. Thou fountain of gardens ! thou source of living waters' Thou source of streams—even of Lebanon Streams North wind, awake 1 (but [23] sink, thou southern gale), Blow on my garden, waft around its fragrances, - Then let my beloved come into his garden to Lebanon, And taste the fruits which he praises as his delicacies I am (24) come into my garden, my sister, spouse, [betrothed, trothplight.] I gather my balsam with my aromatics, I eat my liquid honey with my firm honey, I drink my wine with my milk. Eat, my companions: drink, drink deeply, My associate friends ! TIME. PLACE. PERSONS. BRIDE, relating a dreaſºn to her visitors. LADIES. BRIDE, describes his CO4% fema'ſ ce. CANTICLES FourTH DAY. ECLOGUE I. MORNING. Bride's chamber. BRIDE and her ATTENDANTS: LADIES of the Harem. I was sleeping, (I) but my [heart] imagination WaS awake : When methought I heard The (2) voice [sound] of my beloved, knocking, and say- 111g : “Open to me ! consort | My dove my perfect [or im- maculate beauly 1] For my head is excessively filled with dew, My locks with the drops of the night.” But I answered: “I have put off my vest; How can I put it on ? I have washed my feet; How can I soil them P” My beloved put his hand to open the door by the lock, (3) (—My heart in its (4) cham- ber palpitated on account of him I rose to open to my beloved, (—My hand dropped balsam, and my fingers self-flowing balsam, On the handles of the lock;) I did open to my beloved;— But my beloved was turned away—was gone— (—My Soul [person, affection] sprung forwards to meet his address.) I sought him, but could not find my sister | my 1m ; I called him, but he answered Inhe not. The watchmen going their rounds in the city discovered me, They struck me, they wounded me ; They snatched my deep veil it- self from off me, Those surly keepers of the walls | I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem, If ye should find my beloved,— What should ye tell him — —That I am wounded to faint- ing by Affection. Wherein is thy beloved superior to other beloveds, Most elegant of women, Wherein is thy beloved superior to other beloveds, That thou dost thus adjure us? My beloved is white and ruddy; The (5) bright-blazing standard of ten thousand 1 His head is wrought gold—of the purest quality' His locks are pendent curls— black as the raven' His eyes like (6) doves at a white-foaming water-fall; 349 CANTICLES Or, dipping themselves in a [garden canal—BASIN] stream- let of milk, And [turning themselves, roll- ing] sporting in the fullness [depth J of the pool. His temples are shrubberies of Odoriferous plants, Clumps of aromatic trees: His lips are lilies dropping self- flowing balsam ; Describes his His wrists [bands, bracelets] dress. are circlets of gold, Full set with topazes; His waist [girdle] is bright ivory, Over which the Sapphire plays; His legs [drawers, etc.] are col- umns of marble, Rising from bases of purest gold [his shoes] : His figure is noble as the cedars of Lebanon ; Majestic as the cedars of Para- dise, His address is sweetness | [The very concentration of Sweetness || His whole person is loveliness! [The very concentration of love- liness!] Such is my beloved, such is my consort, O daughters of Jerusalem LADIES. Whither may thy beloved be gOne, Most elegant of women? What course may thy beloved have taken, That we might bring him to re- join thee? BRIDE. My beloved is gone down to his garden, To his shrubberies of odorifer- ous plants; To feed in his gardens, And to gather lilies. I am my beloved's, and my be- loved is mine: Feeding among lilies 1 FourTH DAY. ECLOGUE II. TIME. EVENING. PLACE. Bride's parlor; in which are the LADIES in waiting, etc. PERSONS. BRIDEGROOM, with his ATTEND- ANTs, visiting his BRIDE. BRIDEGROOM. Thou art wholly (8) decorated, my love, like Tirzah; dorned as Jerusalem; Dazzling as flaming-bannered ranks. Wheel about (9) thine eyes [glances] from off my station, For, indeed, they overpower me ! “Thy (Io) hair is as a flock of Third Day. goats that appear from Eclogue I. Gilead : Common trans- Thy teeth are as a flock of sheep lation. which go up from the wash- ing; Whereof every one beareth twins, and there is not one barren among them. As a piece of pomegranate are thy temples within thy locks.” Fortified cities. A repetition of BRIDEGROOM’s COMPANIONS. LADIES of Harem, or BRIDE's AT- TENDA NTS. BRIDEG. CoM. CANTICLES Sixty are those queens, and eighty those concubines, And damsels beyond number; But my dove is the very one alone; To me she is my perfect one ! The very one is she to her mother; The faultless favorite of her parent: The damsels saw her; And the queens admired her, And the concubines extolled her, saying, º “Who is this, advancing [in brightness] like day-break, Beauteous as the moon, clearly radiant as the sun, Dazzling as the streamer-flames of heaven?” [q, a ComET Pl To the garden of filberts I had gone down, To inspect the of the brook side; Whether the grape were setting; Whether the pomegranate flow- ered ; Unawares to my mind, my per- son [II, Affection) beglided itself back again, More swiftly than the chariots of my people at a (I2) charge [pouring out.] BRIDE rises to go away. Face about, (13) face about, SELOMEH P Face about, face about ! That we may (14) reconnoitre thee— What would you reconnoitre in SELOMEH P Or, How would you reconnoitre Selo meh £ Like [as we do] retrenchments (15) around camps! fruits FIFTH DAY. ECLOGUE I. TIME. PLACE. PERSONS. MoRNING. Bride’s toilette: Bride dressing, or recently dressed. BRIDE, and her ATTENDANTS; LADIES of the Harem. LADIES of the Harem; admir- ing the Bride's [Egyptian P] dress. How handsomely decorated are thy (1) feet in sandals, O daughter of [LIBERALITY] (2) princes ! [pouring out.] [i. e., Q liberal rewarder of in- genuity and merit.] The (3) selvedges [returns] of thy drawers are like (5) open-work, [PINKED, The performance of excellent hands ! Thy (6) girdle-clasp is a round goblet, (7) Rich in mingled wine; Thy [bodice] body-VEST is a sheaf of whèat, Bound about with lilies: Thy two (8) nipples are two twin fawns of the antelope, Feeding among lilies. Thy neck is like an ivory tower: e e e s e º e s e o e s e s • * * * * * 350 TIME. PLACE. PERSONS. BRIDEGROOM. BRIDE. BRIDEGROOM. BRIDE. CANTICLES Thine eyes [dark with stibium; are like the fish-pools in Heshbon, (9) By the gate of Beth-rabbim: Thy nose is like the tower of Lebanon, (Io) Which looketh Damascus: Thy head-dress upon thee re- sembles (II) Carmel ; And the tresses of thy hair are like (I2) Aregamen The king is (13) entangled in toward these IIleanderings! . (14) [foldings; plaitings; intrica- cies.] FIFTH DAY. ECLOGUE II. Even ING. Bride’s parlor; with LADIES, etc., in Zwaiting. BRIDEGROOM visiting his BRIDE. How beautiful, and how rap- turous, O love, art thou in de- lights Thy very (15) stature equals the palm ; And thy breasts clusters: I said, I would climb this palm, And would clasp its branches: Now shall thy bosorn be odo- riferous as clusters of grapes, And the sweetness of thy breath like the fragrance of citrons. Yes, thy [palate] (16) address resembles exquisite wine, [cordial.] (17) Going as a love-favor to associate friends, to consum- mate integrities of love [or, to friends whose stanch friendship has been often ex- perienced.] It might make the very lips of the sleeping [of age] to dis- CO111 Se, I am my beloved's, ... . . . (18) And toward me are his desires, [or, And my dependence is up- on him.] Come, my beloved, let us go out into the fields, Let us abide in the villages, We will rise early to inspect the vineyards, Whether the vine he setting its fruit, Whether the smaller grape pro- trude itself, Whether the flower, Whether the (19) dudaim [man- drakes] diffuse their frag- resemble its pomegranates T211 Ce. There will I make thee com- plete love-presents; For our lofts (20) contain all new delicacies [fruits,) But especially preserved delica- cies, Stored up, my beloved, for thee. O wert thou my brother, Sucking my mother's breasts, CANTICLES Should I find thee in the public Street, I would kiss thee; Yes, and then would they [by- standers] not contemn me: I would take thee, I would bring thee To the house of my mother Thou shouldest conduct me (21); i. e., show me the way thither. I would give thee to drink scented wine, Wine I myself had flavored with the sweetness of my pomegranate. Then, were his left arm under my head, And his right arm embracing me, I would charge you, daughters of Jerusalem, (22) By the startling antelopes, by the timid deer of the field, Wherefore disturb, wherefore discompose this complete Af- fection, Till, [Affection] herself desire 1t : BRIDEGROOM. BRIDE. SIXTH DAY. ECLOGUE I. MORNING: after the marriage ceremony had recently taken place. Front of the palace. BRIDE, her ATTENDANTS : BRIDE- GROOM, his ATTENDANTS: all in procession before and after the Royal Palanquin, in which the Royal Pair are seated. Who is this coming up from the common fields, In full (I) sociability with her beloved P Under the citron-tree (2) I urged , thee I Overcame thy bashfulness.] There thy mother (3) delivered thee over to me. There thy parent solemnly deliv- ered thee Over to me. Wear me as a seal on thy heart [in thy bosom], (4) As a seal-ring on thine arm. For strong as death is Affection; Its passion unappeasable as the grave : Its shafts are shafts of fire, Thy flame of Deity itself! [ve- having ºf as lightning Mighty waters cannot quench this complete Affection; Deluges cannot overwhelm it: If a chief (man) give all the wealth of his house— In affection, it would be de- spised as despicable in him. Our [cousin, relation] sister is little, And (5) her bosom is imma- t11re : What shall we do for oſtr sister, In the day when her concerns shall be treated of P If she be a wall, We will build on her turrets of silver: TIME. PLACE. PERSONS. ATTENDANTS at the House. BRIDEGROOM. BRIDE. BRIDEGROOM. BRIDE. BRIDEGROOM. 351 CANTICLES If she be a door-way, We will frame around her soffits of cedar. - I am a wall—and my breasts are like kiosks (6); Thence I appeared in his eyes as one in whom he might find peace (7), [Absolute Repose; or Prosperity of all kinds.] Solomon himself now has a fruitery at (8) Baal-Ham- alln That fruitery is commited to (9) inspectors; The chief (Io) tenant shall bring as rent for its fruits, A thousand silverlings. My fruitery, my own, my own inspection, * Will yield a thousand to thee, Solomon: But (II) two hundred are due to the inspectors of its fruits. O thou [Dove) who residest in gardens, º Thy companions listening await thy [cooing] voice, Let me especially hear it! Fly to me swiftly, my beloved, And show thyself to be like the antelope or the young hart, On the mountains of aromatics | BRIDE. (aside) To Bridegroom. BRIDEGROOM. BRIDE. (7) Illustrations of the Proposed Version. We are now prepared to review the characters of the principal speakers in this interesting poem. The bride has been a ranger of parks, plantations, etc., is fond of gardens and rural enjoyment, and has a property of her own, of the same nature ; yet is a person of complete elegance of taste and of manners; magnificent in her personal ornaments and liberal in her disposition. She has been edu- cated by her mother with the tenderest affection, and is her only daughter; though her mother has several sons. The bridegroom is noble in his per- son, magnificent in his equipage, palace and pleas- ures; active, military, of pleasing address and compliment, and one on whom his exalted rank and station sit remarkably easy. The bride's mother does not speak in any part of the poem; it is only by what is said of her that we find she accompanied her daughter: whether this person- age be her natural mother, or any confidential friend, deputed to that office, might engage con- jecture. The bride's companions speak but little; we think only once, at the close of the fourth day, if then. The bridegroom’s companions speak also only on the same occasion. The ladies of the harem, or visitors to the bride, are the first per- sons to compliment and to cheer her; and we think they seem to accompany in her train throughout the poem. It is likely that these visitors praise her in the first day, describe the palanquin in the third day, converse with the bride in the fourth day, and admire her dress in the fifth day. These parts have hitherto been attributed to the bride's Egyp- tian attendants; but we rather stippose the infor- mation they give, and the sentiments they com- municate, imply persons well acquainted with the bridegroom and his court—that is, Jewish attend- ants, maids of honor to the bride—or, may these passages be spoken by the queen mother of the bridegroom? (See QUEEN MoTHER.) Some other persons also speak once at the opening of the sixth day; their remark indicates that they stand near, or at the palace; for want of more precise CANTICLES knowledge of them they are called “Attendants at the house;” say, the chief officers of the palace. But is this spoken by the ladies of the Harem or by the queen mother P FIRST DAY. (I) May He Salute Me with Affec- tionate Salutations ! Though the import of the word neshek undoubtedly is to kiss, yet, in sev- eral passages of Scripture, it implies no more than mere salutation or addressing—a compliment paid on view of a person or object. So those who are said, in our translation, to have “kissed the image of Baal,” did not kiss that image, strictly speaking, but kissed toward it; that is to say, they kissed their hands, and referred that ac- tion to the image; or kissed at a distance from it— addressed it respectfully by the salaam of the East. (See ADORATION ; KISS.) This expression of the bride, then, implies simply an apprehension of fear (united with a wish to the contrary), that when the bridegroom sees her he may think slightly of her person, her qualities, or attractions, and may refrain from paying his addresses to her. In reply, the ladies commend her beauty, and cheer her modest solicitude by praising her attrac- tions and her elegances. They do not indeed praise her person, because, according to the cus- toms and decencies of the country, the bridegroom cannot yet see that ; they only praise her general appearance, and what must first strike a beholder —what are most noticeable at the earliest interview —at a first approach—that is, her polite manners and deportment; also her perfumes, to the dif- fusion of which they compare her renown for beauty. The importance of perfumes in the East is very great; the lovers of the Arabian poets never omit to notice this attraction of their mis- treSSeS. “When the two nymphs arose they diffused fra- grance around them, As the zephyr scatters perfume from the Indian flower. Do not the perfumes of Khozami breathe P Is it the fragrance of Hazer from Mecca, or the odor diffusing from Azza? She resembled the moon, and she waved like the branches of Myrobalan. She diffused perfume like the ambergris, and looked beautiful like the fawn.” Agreeably to this we find in Scripture the re- mark that “Ointment and perfume rejoice the heart” (Prov. xxvii:9), and Isaiah, describing a female desirous of pleasing her paramour, repre- sents her as “increasing her perfumes” (chap. lvii:9). (See also Esth. ii :12; Ps. xlv.:8; Prov. vii:17.) The reader will observe the distance to which these perfumes are understood to extend their fragrance; and, relatively, that to which the bride's beauty was famous. (2) Love-Favors. It is usual to render this word (dudi) loves—but, by considering (I) that the ladies say they shall commemorate the (dudi.) loves of the bride; (2) that (dudi) loves are said to be poured out as from a bottle, or to be sent as presents to persons of integrities (plural); (3) that the spouse invites the bride into the country, where he would give her his (dudi.) loves, it ap- pears that love-presents of some kind are the articles meant by the word. Suppose, for in- stance, the bride presented the ladies with curi- ously-worked handkerchiefs (as is customary in the East), the ladies might look on them, at a distance of time afterwards, with a pleasing rec- ollection of the person by whom they were given; 352 CANTICLES as is customary among Ourselves. Such tokens are not valued for their intrinsic worth, but for the sake of the giver; and were it not trivial, we might quote a Common inscription on this subject as coincident with the spirit of this pas- sage, “When this you see, remember me.” What other than a present of love can be poured out from a bottle—delicious wine, that might rouse the drowsy to discourse? Or why does the Spouse invite his Bride into the country, but in order to present her with its best productions; some of which, he tells her, were stored up, and ex- pressly reserved for her reception ? Such is the meaning of this word, in this place : favors be- stowed as the effect of love—to remunerate love; or designed to conciliate love, to excite regard toward the presenter of the gift. We have used the word favors, since that word implies, occa- sionally, personal decorations; as at marriages, ribands, etc., given by the bride to the attend- ants, or others, are termed bride-favors, or sim- ply favors. (3) The bride proceeds to invite her visitors (as we suppose) into the interior of her apartments; and, from good manners, desires them to precede her; which they, with equal good manners, de- cline. The word meshek signifies to advance toward a place; as (Judg. iv:6), “Go and draw toward mount Tabor, and take with thee ten thousand men;” that is, go first to mount Tabor, and be followed by thine army—head thine army —precede it. (Job xxi:33), “He goeth to the grave, where he (meshek) precedes a great many men ; and so draws them toward him; as he himself has been preceded by many who have died before him.” (Job xxviii: 18,) “The price, (meshek), the precedence of wisdom—its attrac- tion—is preferable to rubies.” Jer. xxxi.;3, “I have loved thee with an everlasting love; there- fore with loving kindness have I preceded thee;” as we say, been beforehand with thee, “drawn thee toward me.” Such appears to be the import of the word, which, thereforé, is in this place rendered—lead the way, that is, precede me. (4) The king’s chamber. This word, though usually rendered chamber, can only mean, in gen- eral, his apartments, his residence. (Deut. xxxii: 25, Marg. ; Prov. xxiv:4; Jer. xxxv :2.) We have among ourselves an instance of a simi- lar application of the word chamber. In Richard III. Shakespeare makes Buckingham say to the young king, “Welcome, sweet prince, to London, to your chamber;” the reason is, London, from being the usual residence of the king, was called camera regis, “the king's chamber.” It might justly be rendered “rooms;” so we have the rooms at Bath, at Margate, etc., or chambers in a palace —as the ever-memorable Star chamber, the Jeru- salem chamber, the painted chamber, etc., that is, apartments. But here it evidently means the Harem, or women's apartment, the secluded cham- ber into which the bride invites the ladies; and where the latter part of this eclogue passes, be- ing transferred, as we suppose, from the parlor below to the Harem above; or from the parlor exterior, to the Harem interior. (5) Treated me contemptuously, literally “smorted at me;” which, perhaps, might be ren- dered by our English phrase, “turned up their noses at me;” but how would that read in a poem P To spurn does not correctly express the idea, as that action rather refers to a motion of the foot; whereas, this term expresses a move- ment of a feature, or of the entire countenance. (6) Inspectress of the fruiteries. This, we im- agine, is somewhat analogous to our office of ranger of a royal park; an office of some dignity, CANTICLES 353 And of more emolument; it is bestowed on indi- viduals of noble families among ourselves; and is sometimes held by females of the most ex- alted rank; as the princess Sophia of Gloucester, who was ranger of a part of Bagshot park; the princess of Wales, who was ranger of Greenwich park, etc., and the office is consistent even with royal dignity. This lady, then, was appointed ranger—governess, directress of these plantations; which appears to have been perfectly agreeable to her natural taste and disposition, although she alludes, with great modesty, to her exposure to the Sun's rays, in a more southern climate, by means of this office, as an apology for a com- plexion which might be thought by Jerusalem females to be somewhat tanned. (7) Fruiteries. The word signifies not restrict- ively vineyards, but places producing various kinds of plants; for we find the al-henna came from “the fruiteries of En-gedi,” the plantations, not merely vineyards, of “the fountain of Gadi,” Or the “springs of Gadi,” chap. i :14. See No. 12, below. (8) Belozyed of my heart, strictly, beloved by my person, but as this is rather an uncouth phrase in English, the reader will excuse the substitution of one more familiar. The word is very improperly rendered soul, by our translators, throughout the Old Testament, though the usage of their time, as appears from the best writers, pleads strongly in their excuse.—“That soul shall die”—“that soul shall be cut off,” read person; for in many places the actions and functions, or qualities, of the body, are attributed to it; some- times those of a living body, sometimes those of a dead body; where we cannot suppose it means a dead soul. It may be considered as a general word, expressing a person’s self; and Sir William Jones was obliged to use this term self, on more than one occasion, in translating a cognate word from the Arabic; as, for instance—the threw his self into the water,” where it would be extremely erroneous to say, “his soul,” in our common ac- ceptation of that term. (9) Elegant. We observed, in considering the Ship of Tyre, that the word ipi might refer less to beauty of person than has been thought. We Suppose our word handsome may answer to it, in a general sense; and we say, not only a hand- Some person, but a handsome dress, handsome behavior, speech, etc. We have preferred the term elegant as implying all these ideas, and as being more usually connected with person and manners; for we rather say, a lady of elegazzf manners, than of handsome manners. (IO) This passage is examined in the article on MARRIAGE PROCESSIONS. The principles of that explanation seem to be just. Otherwise the com- parison might be, “To my own mare, which is the prime among the high bred horses I have received from Pharaoh.” (II) Circle. This is precisely according to the usages of the East; the royal personage sits on his seat, and his friends stand round him, on each side, forming a segment of a circle. The friends of the bridegroom are, we suppose, his companions; but on this first visit he might, per- haps, be accompanied by other attendants, for the greater dignity and brilliancy of the interview. Nevertheless, thirty companions might form a sufficient circle; and one can hardly suppose the king of Israel had fewer than Samson (at that time a private person) (Judg. xiv:Io and Ps. cxxviii:3). - (12) Al-Henna. (See KOPHER). “The planta- tions, or fruiteries, of En-gedi.” These were not far from Jericho; they did not so much contain CANTICLES vines as aromatic shrubs, including, perhaps, the famous balsam of Judea. It may be thought from Ezek. xlvii: Io that En-gedi was a watery situation; perhaps not far from the river, besides being itself a fountain. This agrees with Dr. Shaw's account of al-henna; he says, it requires much water; as well as the palm, for which tree Jericho was famous, and from which it derived an appellation. (I3) Elegant; magnificent. We think the bride- groom here compliments his bride on the gem- eral elegance of her appearance (???); for, as she is veiled all over, he cannot see the features of her countenance; he catches, however, a glimpse of her eyes through her veil, and those he praises, as being doves,’ for which we refer to a following remark. (See VEIL.) She re- turns the compliment, by praising his elegance (222); but as this elegance refers to his palace, it seems here to be properly rendered magnifi- cence, which, indeed, as we have observed, is its meaning elsewhere. She notices this magnifi- cence, as displayed in the cedar, and other costly woods, which adorned those apartments of the palace into which she had been conducted ; not forgetting that ever-acceptable ornament in the East, the green grass-plat before the door, which, besides being green, was also in this palace adorned with the most stately and brilliant flowers, compared to which, says the bride, I am not worthy of mention; I am not a palace-flower, not a fragrant rose, carefully cultivated in a costly vase; or a noble lily, planted in a rich and favorable soil; I am a rose of the field, a lily from the side of the, humble water-course, the simple—the shaded valley. To this, her self- degradation, the bridegroom returns an affec- tionate dissent; and here concludes their first in- terview, whose chief characteristics may be gath- ered from observing that it is (I) short, (2) distant, (3) general, (4) that not the slightest approach to any freedom between the parties is discoverable in it; which perfectly agrees with our ideas on the import of the opening line of this eclogue. (14) Green; Flowery. It has been remarked that the word here used has both these significa- tions; and if, as we suppose, it refers to the green grass before the pavilion, and to the flowers and flowering shrubs, in pots and vases, standing close by the pavilion, it is applicable to both ideas. On this subject there is an appropriate passage in Tavernier: “I never left the court of Persia, but some of the lords, especially four of the white eunuchs, begged of me to bring some flowers out of France, for they have every one a garden be- fore their chamber door; and happy is he that can present the king with a posy of flowers in a crystal flower pot.” (15) Palacc. We linow algo that banquote, etc., are held in gardens adjoining the resi- dences of persons of opulence in the East; and when Ahasuerus, rising from table, went into the palace-garden (Esth. vii:7), he had not far to go, but might quit the banquet chamber and re- turn to it in an instant, for evidently the garden was adjacent. The idea of flowery verdure also applies to the rendering of oresh—carpet, or cov- ering; not bed. (See BED.) That a bed for sleep- ing on should be green is no great proof of mag- nificence; but an extensive bed of flowers, as it were, in full view of a parlor opening into it, would at once delight the senses of sight and smell, and would deserve mention when elegances were the subjects of discourse. (16) Garden. After the bridegroom is with- drawn the bride expresses herself to the ladies 23 CANTICLES 354 with less reserve. Her conversation no longer refers to the palace, but to her beloved; she re- Sumes the recently suggested simile of the citron tree, which, being a garden plant, naturally leads her thoughts to a kiosk in a garden, where, when they should be in private together, they might partake of refreshments; and while they should be sitting on the duan (see BED) he might rest his arm on the cushion which supported her head, while his right arm was free to offer her refreshments, citrons, etc., or to embrace her. She concludes by saying that, in such a pleasing seclusion, she would not choose their mutual af- fection should be interrupted, and alludes to the very startling antelopes and deer as the most timid creatures she could select, and those most likely to be frightened at intrusion on their re- treatS. 3. ( 17) Deep Shadow. As the orange tree does not grow to any height or extent in Britain, an- swerable to this idea of a deep shadow, we must take the opinion of those who have seen it in, or near, perfection; a single witness may be suffi- cient, if the Orange trees of Judea may be esti- mated by those of Spain. No doubt but the bride's comparison implies a noble tree, a grand tree of its kind. The following are from Mr. Swin- burne's Travels in Spain: “The day was sultry, and I could with pleasure have lolled it out in the prior's garden, under the shade of a noble lemon tree, refreshed by the soft perfumes ascending on every side, from the neighboring orchards. * * * Being very hot and hungry, we made the best of our way home, through large plantations of orange trees, which here grow to the size of moderate timber trees; the fruit is much more pleasing to the eye, if less so to the palate, than the oranges of Portugal, as the rich blood color is admirably contrasted with the bright tint of the leaves.” (Pp. 250, 260.) (18) Citron. That the fruit here meant is not “apples,” but citrons, is now so generally ad- mitted that we need not stay to prove it; never- theless, it is proper to mention it, that this ren- dering may not seem to be adopted without au- thority. Almost every writer has proofs on this subject. (See APPLE TREE.) THE SECOND DAY. (I) Bride at Her Window hears the hunting-horn. This we think probable from what follows; the directions of the bride- groom to his companions to catch the jackals partly prove it; perhaps, however, the poet hints, that though, when he set out, the prince designed to be of their party, yet, after conversation with his beloved, he is tempted to send them alone on that expedition. It is very 11atural that this passing by the bride's windows should occur, if Solomon dwelt below, and was going out at a gate above, in the palace; or even if his chase were restricted to the area within the walls it might easily lead him to pass the upper wing of the pal- ace and the windows of the harem. (2) Music. This is considered in the article on MARRIAGE PROCESSIONS. Are not these hills, these rising grounds, within the park of the pal- ace? If so, then perhaps the bridegroom, in a following day, invites his bride to no very distant or very dangerous “lions’ haunts,” or “panther mountains”—but to hillocks, etc., in his park, known by these appellations. We say perhaps, because, though such names are given to parts of a royal palace in the East, yet the mention of Lebanon seems to infer a more distant ex- Cl11 S1On. (3) Seated in his (4) carriage. (See the plate of vehicle, p. 362.) Also for (5) the windows, and for (6) the blinds, or lattices. CANTICLES (7) My Dove hid in ihe clefts of the rocks. To understand this simile, consider the bridegroom as being in the garden, below the windows of the chamber, within which openings the bride is seen by him; now, windows in the East are not only narrow, but they have cross-bars, like those of our sashes, in them; the interposition of these prevents a full view of the lady's person, so that she resembles a dove, peeping, as it were, over, or from within, the clefts in a rock; and only partly visible; that is, retiring, her head and neck, or crop, “which,” says the bridegroom, “though I can but just discern, I perceive is lovely.” Ob- serve, too, that she is closely veiled; the retiring, timid dove, therefore, is the comparison. The bridegroom continues the simile of the dove, praises (8) her turgid crop and her pleasant voice; this, in a dove, can only be the (9) coo- ing, or call, of that bird, which, under this simile, he desires to hear directed toward himself. (Io) My beloved is mine, and I am his. Does this mean: “I am all obedience to his requests? Our enjoyments now are mutual, and it shall be my happiness to accomplish his desires P’ What is the import of the phrase “feeding among lilies P” Who feeds?—who is fed 2–why among lilies 2 (II) Bether. This might be rendered “the craggy mountains;” and if it were certain that the iber or rock-goat, or the chamois, was that particular species of gazelle which we have ren- dered “antelope,” it might be very proper to pre- serve that translation; but as Egypt is not a mountainous country, but a valley, could the bride know anything of the rock-goat? On the other hand, were the mountains of Bether famous for swift goats?—and how should the bride know that particular P - (I2) Till night I seek him; meaning I have waited for my beloved all the evening, and now, though it be too late to expect his company, still I seek him; my disappointment is great; but how to remedy it? Shall I go into the city ? for I am sure he is not at home. I am sure if he were in the palace he would visit me. The whole of this speech is supposed to be in the optative mood; we have rather used the subjunctive English mood as more likely to convey its true import. (I3) City. We would suggest that the bride does not mean the City of Jerusalem, but the streets, the broad places, the handsome courts, squares, etc., of the City of David, her present royal residence. Under this idea, should she ven- ture on an evening promenade, she would be near her apartments and never beyond the walls of her palace; but even this she declines, not choos- ing to expose herself to incidental meetings with the guards or watchmen. To suppose that she has any inclination to ramble in Jerusalem at large is to forget that she is a foreigner, and very recently arrived. How could she know her way about that city ? e (1) What is that—? In THE THIRD DAY. * the original, “Who is that”—? ...But this has been If the orig- regarded as an error of transcribers. inal word were what, then the palanquin is the subject of this inquiry, and to this the answer is given. If the original word were who, then the answer implies that the royal Owner was seated in this vehicle. But there appears no subsequent reference to him. We have rather thought that the general turn of the question leads to the word zchał, the reader will take his choice, as either word implies the same import and will justify the Sa Iſle 3.11SW62T. (2) Vast column of smoke. This strong ex- pression (plural) is by no means too strong for CANTICLES the poet's design; the word is used in Joel ii:30 to denote the Smoke of a volcano or other abun- dant discharge of Smoke, rising high in the air like a cloud. The immense quantity of perfumes burning around the approaching visitor is alluded to with very great address under this prodigious comparison. The burning of perfumes in the East, in the preceding part of processions, is both very ancient and very general. Deities (images) were probably the first honored with this cere- mony, and afterward their supposed vice-gerent, human divinities. The English people have a relic of the same custom still existing among them in the flowers, strewed or borne in public processions, at coronations, etc., and before great officers of state, as the lord chancellor, the speaker of the House of Commons; and in some corpor- ations the mace, as an ensign of office, has the same origin, though now reduced to a gilded or- 11ament only. (3) Palanquin. 362.) (4) Fearless. We rather think this epithet de- scribes the commander of these guards, “the man,” that is, the head man, or chief (see No. Io of the SIXTH DAY), as a brave fellow ; of tried courage, void of fear in the very darkest night, or rather at all times. The composition of the Hebrew word (with 2) favors this thought, and we think had not the bed, the sleeping bed, unluckily pre- ceded it, this word would not have been deviated by translators from its proper import, to which we have endeavored to restore it. (5) This passage would startle the reader if he had not been prepared for it by what we have already said. This arrangement of the words is unusual in Hebrew, yet in poetry is very natural ; it merely refers the subject described to the fol- lowing words describing it, instead of the fore- going words, to which it has hitherto been usual to refer it. We shall see by the plates the pro- prieties which accompany, as natural inferences, this manner of regulating the passage. (See the plate of vehicle, p. 362.) (6) Head-Circlet. This might be rendered ban- deau; but then we could not have preserved the play of words, for to have said, “the bandeau with which his mother banded, or bandaged, his head,” would have been intolerable; the expression in our language becomes ludicrous; we have, there- fore, preferred circlet, with which his mother en- circled him. What this circlet was, we may see on another occasion more fully; but the plate of the lºsſom's dress will assist us in part. (See p. 364.) (7) Bridegroom, having seen his bride for the first time. This we infer, because this is his first description of her, or the first compliment he pays to her person; he praised, in the first day, her general deportment; on the second day he orily cutlipaſed lieſ 11uuk to that of a dove, that being all he had yet seen; but now the poet seems to say that he takes advantage of her contempla- tion of the royal palanquin to inspect her coun- tenance, which also she has suffered to be seen, partially at least (see Nos. 7 and 8 of the SFCOND DAY). Observe, he only praises so much of her person as we may suppose he could discern, while she was standing behind the window; that is to say, her face, her hair (seen in front), her neck, and her bosom ; having caught a glimpse of these he praises them, but his bride has modestly stolen away, and returns no answer. She hears him, no doubt, with internal pleasure; but the com- plete sight of her being a favor not yet to be granted, she withholds her approbation from the incident which had been too much his friend. (See the plate of vehicle, p. 5 CANTICLES Observe the art of the poet, who introduces an incident whereby he favors the Lover with a gratification to which he was not, strictly speak- ing, entitled, yet contrives to save the delicacy of his bride entirely harmless and irreproachable. He gives to the bride the choice of what time— how long—she would continue at the window, yet from the accident of her going to the window without her veil, if the introduction of his palan- quin, were a plot in the bridegroom, we perceive, by his subsequent discourse, that his plot had suc- ceeded; and this without the smallest imputation on the delicacy of the person who was the object of his contrivance. (8) Between thy locks. The word rendered locks seems to imply that portion of-those curls of-the hair which plays around the forehead; whereas, the word rendered tresses seems to de- note those braids which fall down the back of the wearer (see the plate of the Bride's Dress below.) Agreeably to this supposition, we do not recollect that the king has praised her tresses, because he had not seen them, having only seen his Lady in front; but he praises her locks two or three times, they being such parts of her hair as, in behold- ing her person in front, naturally met his inspec- t1On. (9, IO) There is an Opposition in this passage which requires elucidation. Thy hair, or braids of hair, falling on thy shoulders, are like the long hairs of the Angora species of goat, whose staple is of great length, and very silky (some of them have been made into muffs for our ladies), which hang down, but bend and wave in hanging. Op- posed to this is a flock of sheep, closely shorn, trimmed of their wool; no superfluity, but uni- form and perfect neatness. The goats are de- scending at Mount Gilead, where, we suppose, the way was winding and tortuous, making the flock appear the longer and more numerous to a person standing at the foot of the mount; the sheep are coming up on Mount Cassius; suppose Such a road, as apparently or really compresses them into one company (especially if seen by a person standing on the top of the mount), or which only admits two at a time to pass along it. Mount Gilead was at the extremity of Judea, north ; Mount Cassius was at the extremity of Judea, south. The contrast is that of long hair lengthened by convolutions of descent, opposed to the utmost smoothness contracted into the narrowest space. (II) As to the rendering of “Mount Cassius,” instead of “the washing:” (I) It rises from reading the original as two words instead of one, which, in fact, does not deserve the name of an alteration ; (2) as Mount Gilead is a place the parallelism requires a place for this verse, which (3) the oppositions we have above re- marked fully justify. This correction restores the poetry of the passage, and is perfectly agree- able to the usages of Hebrew poetry in general, and of this song in particular. (I2, I3) Blushing white. These verses, we ap- prehend, maintain an onnosition of a nature simi- lar to that illustrated in the foregoing remarks— blushing like a pomegranate; white as a marble tower. We presume that the inference of blush- ing is not to the flower of the pomegranate, but to the inner part of its rind when the fruit is cut open, which certainly is sufficiently blushing. The comparison of the female complexion to the rind, or skin, of ruddy fruits is common in all nations. Comparisons derived from the blushes of the peach are used not only in good company but by good writers. (14) The tower of David, built on a command- CANTICLES ing eminence. Probably this tower was part of the palace of David, or it might be a guard-house, which stood alone on Some hillock of his royal residence. The allusion, we presume, is to the lady's neck rising from her shoulders and bosom, majestically slender, graceful and delicate as the clearest marble, of which material, probably, this lower of David was constructed. On the neck of this lady was hung, by way of ornament, a row or collet of gems, some of which were pol- ished, prominent and Oval in shape; these the speaker assimilates to the shields which were hung round the tower of David, as military embellish- ments. We would ask, however, whether these shields, thus hung on the outside of this tower, were not trophies taken from the vanquished ; if so, antiquity explains this custom at once, and the royal lover may be understood as saying, “My father David hung many shields of those warriors who may have subdued many shields of the mighty, as trophies of his prowess, around the tower which he built as an armory; trophies no less splendid, and of conquests no less numerous Over princes vanquished by your beauty, adorn your neck” (see I Macc. iv:57). This is not all, as the word for shields seems to imply a shield borne before a warrior, as before Goliath, when subdued by David (I Sam. xvii:7). (15) Thy two nipples. Here we cannot, we ap- prehend, adopt any other rendering, for the simile seems to allude to two young red antelopes, who, feeding among lilies, and being much shorter than the flowers, are wholly obscured by them, except the tips of their noses, which they put up to reach the flowers, growing on their majestic stems. As these red tips are seen among the white lilies, so are the nipples just discernible through the trans- parent gauze, or muslin, which covers the lady's bosom. Otherwise, the breast itself is compared to lilies, on account of its whiteness, above which peeps up the red nose of the beautiful gazelle. (16) Lebanon. This may be understood as if he had said, “Your Egypt is a low, a level coun- try, but we have here most delightful and exten- sive prospects. What a vast country we see from Mount Lebanon ſ” etc. And this may very pos- sibly be the true sense of the invitation; but we submit, whether these appellations were not names of places within the precincts of the royal park. Such occur in the East, and to such, we suspect, is the allusion of this passage. (17) Carried captive my heart, robbed me of my heart and carried it off, as a prisoner of war, into slavery; so we say among ourselves, such a one has “lost his heart,” “his heart is captivated,” which is the idea here. (18) By one sally of thine eyes—that is, of which I just get a glimpse, behind or between thy veil; or, of which the sparkles, shooting through thy voil, reach me, and that with iſ lesistille eſ- fect, even to my heart’s captivity, as above. The comparison of glances of the eyes to darts, or other weapons, is common in the poets. (19) Spouse. The first time we meet with this word, calah, it implies bride; but, we think it is capable of being referred to either sex, like our word spouse. The bridegroom adds, my sister (see ABRAHAM), but the bride, in her answer, though she adopts the word spouse, yet omits the term brother; we suppose, because that was understood to convey a freedom not yet becoming her modesty to assume; she goes so far, but no farther. The reader will perceive several words attached, in elucidation of this appellation, to the places where it occurs. (20) Around thee shoot plants—literally, “thy shoots are plants,” etc. By means of this supple- 356 CANTICLES ment, we presume, the ideas of the poet are, for the first time, rendered clear, correct and con- nected. The importance of water, fountains, springs, etc., in the East is well known; but the peculiar importance of this article to a garden, and that garden appropriated to aromatic plants, must be very striking to an Oriental reader. By way of meeting Some ideas that have been sug- gested, we shall add, that the bride is a fountain, etc., securely locked up from the bridegroom, at present; that is, he is not yet privileged to have complete access to her. What the advantages of water to a garden of aromatics might be we may guess from the nature of the plants. The follow- ing extract from Swinburne may contribute to assist our conjectures: “A large party of Sprightly damsels and young men that were walk- ing here were much indebted to us for making the water-works play by means of a small bribe to the keeper. Nothing can be more delicious than these sprinklings on a hot day; all the flowers seemed to acquire new vigor; the odors exhaled from the orange, citron and lemon trees grew more poignant, more balsamic, and the company ten times more alive than they were ; it was a true April shower. We sauntered near two hours in the groves, till we were quite in ecstasy with sweets. It is a most heavenly residence in spring, and I should think the summer heats might be tempered and rendered supportable enough by the profusion of water that they enjoy at Seville.” (Travels in Spain, p. 252.) The following de- scription of his mistress, by an Arabian lover, in Richardson's Arab. Gram. (p. I51), bears much similitude to several allusions in the poem be- fore us: * Her mouth was like the Solomon's seal, And her cheeks like anemones, And her lips like two carnations, And her teeth like pearls set in coral, And her forehead like the new moon; And her lips were sweeter than honey, And colder than the pure water. How very different from our own is that cli- mate wherein the coldness of pure water is a sub- ject of admiration l—a comparison to the lips of the fair (21) The mard. As this plant occurs in the close of the former verse, should it again occur here? Can the words be differently connected P or is a word unfortunately dropped P or what fra- grant shrub should be substituted for the nard f but observe that in one passage the word nard is singular, in the other it is plural. (See NERD.) (22) We are so accustomed to consider the aloe as a bitter, because of the medical drug of that name (an inspissated juice), that we are hardly p1 epared to receive this allusion to the delicious scent of the flowers of this plant; but that it justly possesses and maintains a place among the most fragrant aromatics, we are well assured : “This morning, like many of the foregoing ones, was delicious; the sun rose gloriously out of the sea, and the air all around was perfumed with the effluvia of the aloe, as its rays sucked up the dew from the leaves.” (Swinburne's Travels in Spain. Letters xii.) (23) Sink, thou southern gale. On this avertive sense of the word BA, see the article SHILOH. Had this sentiment been uttered in England we should have reversed the injunction; but in Judea the heat of the south wind would have suffocated the fragrancy of the garden, to which the north wind would have been every way favorable. To desire the north wind to blow at the same time CANTICLES when the south wind blows is surely perverted philosophy. (24) I am come into my garden; that is, I al- ready enjoy the pleasure of your company and conversation; these are as grateful to my mind as delicious food could be to my palate; I could not drink wine and milk with greater satisfac- tion; I am enjoying it. And you, my friends, partake the relish of those pleasures which you hear from the lips of my beloved, and of those elegances which you behold in her deportment and address.” THE FourTH DAY. (I) The bride says ex- plicitly that these occurrences happened in a dream, “I slept”—which at once removes all ideas of indelicacy, as to the bridegroom's attempt to visit her, her going to the door, standing there, calling him, being found by the watchmen, beaten, wounded, etc. Moreover, she seems to have Sup- posed herself to be previously married, by men- tioning her radid, or deep veil, which in reality, we presume, she had not yet worn, as the mar- riage had not actually taken place; and, though betrothed, she probably did not wear it till the wedding. That the word heart in this passage means imagination, dreaming imagination, fancy, appears from Eccles. ii:23: “The days of labori- ous man are sorrows; his doing vexations, yea, even in the night time his heart does not rest;” he is still dreaming of, still engaged about the subject of his daily labors. This sense of the word heart is not uncommon in the Proverbs. (2) The voice, that is, sound, of my beloved, knocking. For the same reasons for which we have rendered voice, music, in the SECOND DAY (2), we have rendered voice, sound, in this place; since the sound of a rapping against a door is not properly a voice, and since the word bears a more general sense than voice, restrictively. (3) Lock. On the nature of the locks used in the East, Mr. Harmer has said something, and we mean to say more elsewhere, with a plate and explanation. - (4) Chamber of my heart. (See the article SHIP.) e - (5) Standard of ten thousand—chief, say many —standard, say others—he for whom the stand- ard is borne, say some, observing that the word has a passive import (the standard was a fiery beacon); he who carries this beacon—no, that is too laborious—he for whom, in whose honor, to light whom, this standard is carried; he who shines, glitters, dazzles, by the light of it; and lastly comes the present elucidator—what for- bids that this royal bridegroom should himself be the standard that leads, that precedes, that is followed by—imitated by—ten thousand 2 So Shakespeare describes Hotspur: His honor stuck upon him, as the sun In the gray vault of heaven, and by his light Did all the chivalry of England move To do brave acts; he was indeed the glass Wherein the noble youth did dress themselves. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * So that, in speech, in gait, In diet, in affections of delight, In military rules, humors of blood, He was the mark and glass, copy and book, That fashioned others — And him —O won- drous him O, miracle of men (6) His eyes are like doves. Nothing can more strikingly evince the necessity for acquaintance with the East, as well in its natural history as in other matters, than this passage, and the other passages in which eyes are compared to doves; 357 CANTICLES º our translators say “to the eyes of doves,” which, as it may be understood to imply meekness, ten- derness, etc., has usually passed without correc- tion; but the facts are (I) that our translators have added the word eyes; and (2) that they took black for white. They had in their minds the white pigeon, or at least the light-colored turtle dove; whereas the most common pigeon, or dove, in the East is the deep blue, or blue- gray pigeon, whose brilliant plumage vibrates around his neck every sparkling hue, every daz- zling flash of color; and to this pigeon the com- parison of the author refers. The deep blue pig- eon, standing amid the foam of a water-fall, would be a blue center, surrounded by a white space on each side of him, analogous to the iris of the eye, surrounded by the white of the eye. But as the foam of this water-fall is not brilliant enough to Satisfy the poet, he has placed this deep blue pigeon in a pond of milk, or in a garden basin of milk, where, he says, he turns himself round, to parallel the dipping of the former verse; he wantons, sports, frisks; SO Sportive, rolling and glittering is the eye, the iris of my beloved. The milk, then, denotes the white of the eye, and the pigeon surrounded by it the iris; that is, “the iris of his eye is like a deep blue pigeon, standing in the center of a pool of milk.” The comparison is certainly extremely poetical and picturesque. Those who can make sense of our translation are extremely favored in point of ingenuity. This idea had not escaped the poets of Hindostan, for we have in the Gitagovinda the following passage: “The glances of her eyes played like a pair of water-birds of a gure plumage, that sport near a full-blown lotus on a pool in the season of dew.” The pools of Heshbon afford a different comparison to the eyes of the bride; dark, deep, and serene are her eyes; so are those pools, dark, deep and serene—but were they also surrounded by a border of dark-colored marble, analogous to the border of stibium drawn along the eyelids of the spouse, and rendering them apparently larger, fuller, deeper ? As this comparison is used where ornaments of dress are the particular subjects of consideration, we think it not impossible to be correct; and certainly it is by no means contra- dictory to the ideas contained in the simile re- cently illustrated. (See No. 9 in the FIFTH DAY.) For particulars of the dress, see the plates of dresses and their explanations, infra. (7) Decorated as Tirgah, etc. The whole of this eclogue, we apprehend, is composed of military allusions and phrases; consequently, the cities, with the mention of which it opens, were those most famous for handsome fortifications. “Thou art (Ipi) decorated as Tirzah (Naweh); adorned as Jerusalem (Aimeh); ornamented in a splendid, sparkling, radiant manner, as bannered ranks, or corps of soldiers, are ornamented, which is flou far from the compliment formerly paid her as resembling an officer of cavalry, riding with dig- nity among the horse of Pharaoh ; nor is it unlike the reference of the prince himself to a (fiery) standard, in the preceding eclogue. See what is said on the banner of the heavens in a following verse; these banners, we must recollect, were iºns fire-pots, usually carried on the top of a Staff. (8) Wheel about thine eyes. Literally, do that return, or, at least, turn round; but this phrase is not in our language either military or poetical ; we have, therefore, adopted a word of command whose import is of the same nature and whose lºcation has been sufficiently familiar to us of ate. (9) My station. Literally, my region, the ground CANTICLES I occupy with my troops, my post, in a military sense; which station you attack, and by your at- tack force me to give ground, to retire; you drive me off, overpower me, advance into my terri- tories, and, in spite of my resistance, add them by victory and conquest to your own. These are clearly military ideas, and, therefore, we suppose, are expressed in military terms. (Io) Here follow four lines, or verses, repeated from the second eclogue of the second day. They have every appearance of being misplaced ; a mere duplicate of the former passage. It would seem rather unlikely that, in So short a poem, such a duplication should be inserted intentionally. Whether these lines replace others which should be here, or merely are a repetition, the reader will judge for himself by the connection, or want of connection, of the passage. Daggling as the streamers? (a CoMET P). The reader will probably be startled at this idea, as we also should have been had we not accidentally met with the following Arabic verses in Richard- SOI] . When I describe your beauty, my thoughts are perplexed, Whether to compare it To the sun, to the moon, or to the wandering star (a COMET). Now this idea completes the climax of the pas- sage, which was greatly wanted, so that the com- parisons stand (I) daybreak, a small glimmering light; (2) the moon (full moon 2) ; (3) the sun clearly shining; (4) the comet, which, seen by night, is dazzling; as it were, the fiery banner, or streamer of the hosts of heaven ; such a phe- nomenon has ever been among the most terrific objects to the eyes of the simple Arab, on whose deep blue sky it glows in tremendous perfection. Is this word plural by emphasis F-meaning, the chief of streamers; THE STREAMER, par earcel- bence. The comparison of a lady to the full moon is frequently adopted in Arabia : She appeared like the full moon in a night of joy, Delicate in limbs, and elegant of stature. We cannot refrain from observing how happily this comet illustrates the simile, in Jude 13: “Wandering stars, to whom is reserved the black- ness of darkness for ever.” As the apostle uses the word planetai, it has been usual to suppose he alludes to neighboring orbs, the planets, whose motions appear very irregular; sometimes direct, Sometimes stationary, sometimes retrograde; but, if we refer his expression to comets, then we see at once how they may be said to remain in per- petual darkness, after their brilliancy is extinct, which idea is not applicable to the planets. We may add that the Chaldeans held comets to be a species of planets (Senec. Quest. Nat.); that the Pythagoreans included comets among planets which appears after very long intervals, (Arist. Meteor, lib. i.), and that the Egyptians calculated their periods and predicted their return. (II) Affection, heart. The bride had told us be- fore, in No. 1, that while she slept, her affection, heart, imagination, was awake; the heart, among the Hebrews, was the seat of the affections; but here the bridegroom says, while he was really awake, and therefore fully master of his senses and of his actions, his affection overcame his intentions, and brought him back, unawares to himself, unconsciously, or molens volens, as we say will he nil he, toward the object of his regard. This, then, is a stronger idea than the former, 358 CANTICLES and is heightened by his notice of the swiftness with which he was brought back, equal to that of the rapid chariots of his people, flying to en- gage the enemy; literally, chariots of my people pouring out; (I2) now, this pouring out hardly means a review, but if it does it must point, espe- cially, to the most rapid movement of that ex- ercise; that is, the charge; if it mean poured out in battle it amounts to the same; a charge on the enemy, executed with great velocity; but some say, “chariots of the princes of my people.” ( See AMMINADAB.) Who are “the people” of monarchs 2 The phrase is used by Pharaoh, in Gen. xli :40, and by Solomon here. (I3) Face about. Literally, turn round; but as this is no military phrase, as already observed, the expression adopted seems to be more coin- cident with the general tenor of this eclogue. (I4) Reconnoitering. This phrase, which, lit- erally, is that we may fasten our eyes on thee, we have ventured to render reconnoiter thee, for it appears that they would “fasten their eyes” On her as they did on entrenchments around camps, which can be nothing but what modern military language would term reconnoitering. (I5) What, or how, would you fasten your eyes on Selomeh? As we do on the ditches, fosses, or entrenchments of the camps. In this sense the root is used, in 2 Sam. xx: I5; I Kings xxi.;23; IS. xxvi; I ; Lam. ii: I. On the whole, then, it appears that these are military terms; and it must be owned that they prodigiously augment the variety of the poem and give a highly spirited air to this eclogue in particular; they account, too, for the lively interference of the bridegroom's companions, and, by the rapid repartee they occa- Sion, they close it very differently from all the Others, and with the greatest animation and vivacity. FIFTH DAY. (I) Feet in sandals. plate on page 363.) (2) Daughter of Liberality, or of Princes. Here the same word occurs as we observed signified FourTH DAY, No. 12) pouring out; it is usually rendered princes, from the opportunity enjoyed by persons of high rank of pouring out their lib- erality on proper occasions, and perhaps such is its import in this place. Daughter, in the looser sense of the word, not descendant, but patroness of pouring out, of liberality, who has spared no expense on this occasion to adorn thyself with the most costly apparel; q. d. “Daughter of liberal- ity, how magnificent how elegant how attractive is thy dress the whole together is beautiful; the (See, the parts separately are rich and ornamental | We shall consider and commend them in their Order.” As the bride stands 11p the ladies hegin with describing her sandals; and they not only praise her sandals, but her feet in them. The reader will perceive, by inspecting the prints, that this is extremely accurate, as sandals do not hide the feet, but permit their every beauty to be seen ; and although our ladies, being accustomed to wear shoes, may think more of a handsome shoe than of a handsome foot, the taste in the East is different. We know that the Roman emperor Claudius decorated his toes with gems, no less than his fingers; and was so proud of his hand- some foot that, whereas other sovereigns used to give their hands to be kissed by their subjects, on certain occasions, he gave his foot for that purpose, which some historians have attributed to pride of station ; others to pride of person, as if his handsome foot would otherwise have been overlooked and deprived of its due admiration. Observe, these ladies begin at the bride's sandals, CANTICLES her feet, and their descriptions ascend; the bride- groom always begins with her locks, her hair, etc., and his descriptions descend, but not so low as the feet. (3) The selvedges of thy drawers. This word (chemuk) is derived from the same root as that in the SECOND DAY rendered “my beloved was turned away,” it signifies, therefore, to turn, to return, to turn back; now, what can more cor- rectly describe the selvedge of a piece of cloth, etc., which is made by the return of the threads back again to where they came from, that is, across the cloth 2 Thus threads, by perpetually turning and returning, compose the edge of the cloth, which we conceive to be the very article described by the use of the word in this place; but if it be the edge of the garment the thought is the same, since that is the natural situation for an ornamental pattern of open work. (4) Drawers. This word can never mean thighs, as thighs have no selvedges; it must mean draw- ers, or the dress of the thighs. (See the plate on page 362). (5) Open-work ; pinked. Which of these words should be adopted depends on what materials these drawers were made of ; if they were of muslin, then the open-work is wrought with a needle, as muslin will not bear pinking; but if they were of silk, then they might be adorned with flowers, etc., cut into them by means of a sharp iron, struck upon the silk, and cutting out those parts which formed the pattern. And this, we apprehend, is the correct meaning of the word; it signifies to prick full of holes—to wound —to pierce—to make an opening—to run through, as with a sword: all which ideas agree perfectly with our rendering, pinking, which consists in piercing silk full of holes, with a steel instru- ment, forcibly struck through its subject. This determines for silk drawers; however, open-work pinkings do not disagree in phraseology. (6) Girdle-clasp. (See the plate on page 362). (7) Rich in mingled wines. The original is, not poor; an expression doubtless adopted by the poet for the sake of his verse; the difference between rendering “rich,” and “not poor,” needs no apology. The idea is that this clasp was set with rubies; and Sir William Jones tells us it is very common among the Arabian poets to com- pare rubies to wine; hence he begins one of his translations from the Arabic: “Boy, bid yon liquid ruby flow”—meaning that he should pour out wine from the vessel which contained it. (8) Nipples. (See No. 15, THIRD DAY, where this allusion has already occurred.) (9) Eyes like the pools of Heshbon (see No. 6 in FourTH DAY); that is, darkened by a streak of Stibium drawn all around them, as those pnols are encompassed by a border of black marble. Probably, too, the form of these pools was oval rather than circular. (IO) Thy nose like the tower of Lebanon. If the former line had not alluded to a place, whereby this line should require allusion to a place also, we should have inclined to risk a version derived from the roots of these words; which would stand thus: Thy nose like a tower of whiteness itself, Which overlooks the levels (thy cheeks, etc.). We are persuaded that this gives the true con- ception of the passage, even if referred to a structure called the tower of Lebanon, for Da- mascus is situated on a level plain; or this tower might stand so as to overlook some of those level 359 CANTICLES plains which are interspersed in the mountains of Lebanon. Such, however, is the general idea; an erect tower, but of whatever other qualities is not determined. It might be desirable to render the foregoing verse also according to its roots, but the mention of the gate of Bathrabbim for- bids; and if Heshbon be of necessity retained, then, for the sake of the parallelism, we think we must retain also Lebanon and Damascus; of course the comparisons are entirely local. (See No. II, THIRD DAY.) (II) Carmel. (13) A regamen. We confess our embarrassment on the subject of these words. (I3) Entangled. This word (assur) is used to signify the entangling power of love. Mr. Harmer interprets Eccles. vii:26: “I find more bitter than death the woman whose hands are (assurim) bands;” the general sense of the word is con- finement, restraint, bondage, so that our word entangled seems to express the idea sufficiently. The idea that the king's heart was entangled in the numerous and beautiful braids of hair which adorned the head of his spouse seems plaus- ible enough, from the customs of Oriental females, and the general scope of the passage; but a par- ticular and applicable authority is furnished in an ode of the Pend-Nameh (pp. 287, 288), translated from the Persian by Baron Silvestre de Sacy. Ode of Jami on the Tresses of His Mistress: “O thou, who hast entangled my heart in the net of thy ringlets the name alone of thy curling hair is become a snare for hearts. Yes, all hearts are enchained (as in the links of a chain) in the ringlets (links) of thy hair; each of thy curls is a snare and chain. O thou, whose curls hold me in captivity, it is an honor for thy slave to be fet- tered by the chains of thy ringlets. What other veil could so well become the fresh roses of thy complexion, as that of thy black curls (fragrant) like musk? Birds fly the net; but, most wonder- full my never quiet soul delights in the chains of thy tresses | Thy curls inhabit a region higher than that of the moon. Ah! how high is the region of thy tresses It is from the deep night of thy curls that the daybreak of felicity rises at every instant for Jami, thy slave l’’ The reader will probably think this rhapsody sufficiently exalted; it is, however, a not im- modest specimen of the poetical exuberance of fancy and figurative language in which the Orien- tals envelop their ideas when inspired by the power of verse and frenzied by the fascinations of beauty. (I4) Meanderings. This word (rehethim) sig- nifies to run down, with a tremendous motion, or winding way, as of a stream, or rill of water: so Jacob's rods were placed in the rills, rivulets, gut- ters, in the watering troughs (Gen. xxx:38, 39); so the datighters of Reuel filled the troughs, watering places, for the sheep to drink from (Exod. ii:16); not raised wooden troughs, such as our horses drink out of, but rills running among the stones, etc. This we have expressed by the word meanderings; derived from the numerous bendings of the River Meander, and now natural- ized in our language, in reference to streams and winding rivulets, etc. The trough into which Rebekah emptied the contents of her pitcher (Gen. xxiv:20) is described by a different word, and might be properly a trough. (T5) Thy stature equals the palm. (See the plate of the Bride's Dress, infra.) (16) Thy address. Literally, thy palate; but this must refer to speech of some kind; the bride had formerly toºd her spouse that “his lips dropped honey;” and now he says, “her palate dropped wine—prime wine;” we have the lips and the CANTICLES palate noticed together, to the same purpose, in Prov. v :3: The lips of a strange woman drop liquid honey, And ºr palate drops what is smoother than Oll. It is evident the writer means her flattering words, her seductive discourses. The rendering “thy address” seems to coincide with the cheering and pervading effects of wine. (17) Going to be presented, as a special token of affectionate regard, to persons whose consum- mate integrity has been experienced; literally, going for love-favors to uprights (persons). Now in such a case, a person would naturally select the very best wine in his power; he would not send the tart, or the vapid, but the most cordial, the most valuable he could procure. We suspect that the bridegroom compliments himself, under the character of a friend whose integrity could not be doubted. (For the sense of consummate or com- plete, as that of the word Jashur, or Jeshurun, see the article JESHURUN.) - (18) Should this chasm be filled up with • e º e º 'º - e o 'º e º 'º e and he is mine? (19) Dudaim. (See MANDRAKE.) (20) Our lofts; that is, the upper part of our gates or openings. As it is evident they were places to contain stores of fruit from the last year's gathering, the word lofts is as proper as any to convey that idea. It might be added that presents of ſruit, especially apples, by youths to their beloveds, are well known among the Greek poets; indeed, the practice almost became a cus- tom, and originated a proverb, “He loves her with apples”—as we say “with cakes and comfits.” (21) Thou shouldst conduct me. The reader’s attention has already been drawn to this passage; without departing from the usual translation of the words we have merely referred them to the proper speaker. Should this chasm be filled up with By the startling antelope, by the timid deer of the field? It is inserted by the LXX, and the passage is im- perfect without the usual termination. SIXTH DAY. (I) Sociability. This seems to be pretty nearly the import of the original term, which occurs only in this place. Since, as we conceive, the parties sat in the palanquin opposite to each other, the bride could hardly be said to be leaning on her beloved, nor joining herself to her beloved, as some have proposed to render it; nevertheless, that a kind of free intercourse after 111a11 iage is 111eatil here, which would not have been so proper before marriage, admits of no doubt; and we think the chit-chat of sociability may answer the meaning of the word. The fol- lowing conversation is probably a continuation of, or at least is of the nature of, that intended by the term sociability. (2) I urged thee; that is to say, I would not let thee indulge thy bashfulness, but brought thee forward to the marriage ceremony, and over- came thy maiden dilatoriness, “That would be woo'd, and not unsought be won.” (3) Thy mother delivered thee. The word sig- nifies to deliver over, as a pledge is delivered over, to the person who receives it, or to be brought forward, or brought out for that purpose. The reader may discover, under the uncouth idiom of our translators, this very idea: “There thy mother 360 CANTICLES brought thee forth;” that is, as a pledge is brought forth to be delivered to a person who stands out of the house to receive it (see Deut. xxiv:Io, II). That this is sufficiently unhappily expressed, we suppose no judicious reader will hesitate to admit. But what shall we say to the Romish rendering of this passage: “There thy mother was corrupted; there she was deflowered that bare thee!”—and then—such mysteries 1 in reference to Eve, the general mother, etc. - (4) As a signet on thy arms. (See SEALs.) (5) Our sister, or cousin, or friend, etc. The word sister is not always used—strictly—in the Hebrew in reference to consanguinity. The youth of this party is denoted by the phrase—her breast is not grown to its proper mature size. In Egypt this part of the person was extremely remarkable; Juvenal describes the breasts of an Egyptian woman as being larger than the child she suckled. (6) Kiosks are pavilions, or little closets pro- jecting from a wall for the purpose of overlooking the surrounding country, like our summer houses, etc. In the East they are also the indispensable places of repose, and of that voluptuous, tranquil gratification to which the inhabitants are urged by the heats of the climate. (7) As one who offered peace; literally, as one finding peace ; but perhaps the sentiment is : “I appeared to him as inviting as the most delightful kiosk; a kiosk in which he might be so delighted that he would go no farther in search of enjoy- ment.” That peace often means prosperity is well known ; indeed, all good is, in the Hebrew lan- guage, as 1t were, combined and concentrated in the term peace. (8) Baal-Ham-aun. We take this to be alto- gether an Egyptian term ; Ham Aun is “progenitor Ham ; Baal is “lord”—“The lord Ham our pro- genitor.” This agrees perfectly with Egyptian principles. In fact, no other nation so long main- tained, or had so just authority to maintain, its relation to .PTam, who was commemorated in this country during many ages. This name of a place, decidedly Egyptian, confirms the general notion that the bride was daughter to Pharaoli. (9) Inspectors. This is the office which had been held by the bride when in her own country; but here it is expressed in the plural, implying, probably, an inferiority from that of the princess, though to the same purposes, etc. (Io) The tenant; literally, the man; that is, as we understand it, the chief man, the first tenant, the occupier; the same here as we have taken “the man” for the commander, in No. 4, THIRD DAY, that is, the chief, or head man, as we speak; not each man distributively, but the man emphat- ically; for if there were many tenants, did each bring a thousand silverlings, so as fo make, say, ten thousand P then why not state the larger num- ber 2 or did all which the tenants brought make up one thousand 2 then why not use the plural form men & Moreover, since two hundred, which is one-fifth of a thousand, was due to the inspec- tors, it reminds us that this is the very propor- tion established in Egypt by Joseph (Gen. xlvii: 24). This is convincing evidence that this prin- cess was from Egypt, and proves that, for pur- poses of protection, etc., this due was constantly gathered by the reigning prince. We suppose she hints at her father's government under this allusion to these inspectors, and is still Egyptian enough to insist on the propriety of paying the regular tribute to his sovereignty, as governor in chief. An extract from Mr. Swinburne's ac- count of a similar estate among the Spanish Arabs may explain the nature of these fruiteries and CANTICLES 36 their profits: “I cannot give you a more distinct idea of this people than by translating a passage in an Arabic manuscript in the library of the Escurial, entitled, “The History of Grenada, by Abi Abdalah ben Alkalhibi Aboaneni,” written in the year of the Hegira 778, A. D., 1375; Mahomet Lago being then, for the second time, king of Gren- ada. It begins by a description of the city and its environs, nearly in the following terms: ‘The city of Grenada is surrounded with the most spacious gardens, where the trees are set so thick as to resemble hedges, yet not so as to obstruct the view of the beautiful towers of the Alhambra, which glitter like so many bright stars over the green forests. The plain, stretching far and wide, produces such quantities of grain and vege- tables that no revenues but those of the first fam- ilies in the kingdom are equal to their annual produce. Each garden is calculated to bring in a net income of five hundred pieces of gold (aurei), out of which it pays thirty minae to the king. Beyond these gardens lie fields of various culture, at all seasons of the year clad in the richest verdure, and loaded with some valuable vegetable production or other; by this method a perpetual succession of crops is secured and a great annual rent is produced, which is said to amount to twenty thousand aurei. Adjoining you may see the sumptuous farms belonging to the royal demesnes, wonderfully agreeable to the be- holder from the large quantity of plantations of trees and the variety of plants. The vineyards in the neighborhood bring fourteen thousand aurei. Immense are the hoards of all species of dried fruits, such as figs, raisins, plums, etc. They have also the secret of preserving grapes sound and juicy from one season to another.” (Comp. FIFTH DAY, No. 20.) “N. B. I was not able to obtain any satisfactory account of these Grenada aurei, gold coins.” (Swinburne's Travels in Spain, Letter xxii, p. 164.) DAY OF MARRIAGE. We have supposed that this Sixth Day is the day of marriage; as this has not usually been understood we shall con- nect some ideas which induce us to consider it in that light. Leo of Modena says that (I) “The Jews marry on a Friday if the spouse be a maid (Thursday if a widow).” Now Friday morning is the time of this eclogue, supposing the poem began with the first day of the week. (2) “The bride is adorned and led out into the open air;” so in this eclogue the bride's mother “brings her out” for that purpose (3) “into a court or gar- den;” so in this eclogue the ceremony passes “under a citron tree,” consequently in a garden. This eclogue, then, opens with observation of the nuptial procession after marriage; and we learn that the ceremony had taken place by the follow- ing conversation, in which the bridegroom alludes to the maiden bashfulness of his bride as huving required some address to overcome. Moreover, the bride solicits the maintenance of perpetual constancy to herself, as implied in the connection now completed; with attention to the intercsts of a particular friend she transfers all her private property to her husband, yet reserves a govern- ment-due to her royal parent in Egypt; and the eclogue closes, both itself and the poem, by mu- tual wishes for more of each other's conversation and company. (See the article MARRIAGE.) CONCLUSIONs. It is now time to conclude our investigation of this poem ; but we must pre- viously observe how perfectly free it is from the least idea of indelicacy; that allusions to matri- monial privacies which have been fancied in it, are absolutely groundless fancies; and that, not till the Fifth Day, is there any allusion to so much CANTICLES as a kiss, and then it is covered by assimilation of the party to a sucking infant brother. The First Day is distance itself, in point of conversation; the Second has no conversation but what passes from the garden below up to the first-floor win- dow ; the Third Day is the same in the morning, and the evening is an invitation to take an ex- cursion and Survey prospects; as to the compari- Son to a well, delicacy itself must admire, not censure, the simile. The Fourth Day opens with a dream, by which the reader perceives the inclina- tion of the dreamer and the progress of her affec- tion; but the bridegroom himself does not hear it, nor is he more favored by it, or for it; on the contrary, the lady permits him in the evening to sport his military terms as much as he thinks proper; but she does not, by a single word, ac- quaint him of any breach he had made in her heart. We rather suspect that she rises to retire Somewhat sooner than usual, thereby counterbal- ancing, in her own mind, those effusions of kind- ness to which she had given vent in the morning. The Fifth morning is wholly occupied by the ladies’ praises of the bride's dress; she herself does not titter a word; but, in the evening of that day, as the marriage was to take place on the morrow, she merely hints at what she could find in her heart to do, were he her infant brother; and for the first time he hears the adjuration, “if his left arm was under her head” on the duan cushion, etc., and the discourse, though evidently meant for her lover, yet is equivocally allusive to her supposed fondling. It must be admitted that after the marriage they make a procession, accord- ing to the custom of the place and station of the parties, in the same palanquin together, and here they are a little sociable; but modesty itself will not find the least fault with this sociability, nor with one single sentence, or sentiment, uttered on this occasion. We appeal now to the candor, understanding and sensibility of the reader, whether it be pos- sible to conduct a six-day conversation between persons solemnly betrothed to each other, with greater delicacy, greater attention to the most rigid virtue, with greater propriety of sentinuent, discourse, action, demeanor and deportment. The dignity of the persons is well sustained in the dig- nity of their language, in the correctness of their ideas and expressions; they are guilty of no repe- titions; what they occasionally repeat they vary, and improve by the variation ; they speak in poetry, and poetry furnishes the images they use; but these images are pleasing, magnificent, varied and appropriate; they are, no doubt, as they should be, local, and we do not feel half their propriety because of their locality; but we feel enough to admit that few are the authors who could thus happily conduct such a poem ; few are tle per scºuages who could sustain the characters in it, and few are the readers in any nation, or in any time, who have not ample cause to admire it and to be thankful for its preservation as the SoNG OF SONGS. 6. Explanation of the Plates. Mr. Taylor has collected representations of several descrip- tions of those carriages which are used in the East, and which are supposed to be alluded to in the opening of the second day of this poem. We select the most important. Behold him seated, placed in his carriage, thus: looking out through the apertures, or front win- dows. Gleaming, showing himself, or, rather, being just visible, just glimpsing through, or be- tween the lattices, perhaps appended to the aper- tures in front of the carriage. This engraving represents a traveling carriage; not a carriage CANTICLES for state or splendor. But in the Third Day we have the description of , a superb and stately equipage, different, no doubt, from the former, be- cause built expressly by the royal lover, to suit the dignity of his intended nuptials. Such a palan- quin we have in the accompanying engraving, and this is what may be more particularly examined by the description given in the poem. “King Solomon hath built for himself a nuptial palan- quin; its pillars” (or what we should call its poles) “are made of cedar wood”—Lebanon wood—perhaps, indeed, the whole of its wood- work might be ce- dar; but the poles, as being most con- spicuous, are men- E.'s tioned in the first tº place. Now, it is every way unlikely that So lo m on would make these pillars of silver, as we read in our : common version; the use of silver poles does not ap- ==~~~ pear; but the top, covering, roof, can- opy — literally the zo/ling and unrolling part, that which might be Folled up—was of silver tissue. This canopy, or roof, is clearly seen in the engraving; and it is or- namented with tassels and a deep kind of hanging fringe, perhaps of silver also. But the lower car- riage, or bottom, was of golden tissue, meaning that part which hangs by cords from the pillars or poles; that part in which the person sat—literally, the ridden-in part, which we have here rendered the carriage—was of gold. The internal part of this carriage was spread with are gamen. Was this a finely wrought carpet, adorned with flowers, mot- tos, etc., in colors, as some have supposed ? How, then, was it purple, as the word is always held to denote P We see at each end of the carriage a kind of bolster or cushion, or what may answer the purpose of easy reclining. Is this covered with chimtg? or very fine calico & Was such the carriage lining of Solomon's palanquin, but worked with an ornamental pattern of needle-work, and presented to the king by the daughters of Jerusa- lem ż We presume we have now approached nearly to a just understanding of this poetical description; no doubt the royal vehicle was both elegant and splendid. We have attempted to distinguish its parts with their particular applications. The propriety of our departing from the customary mode of understanding these verses must now be left to the reader's decision; but if the words of the original be so truly descriptive of the parts of this carriage as we have supposed, we may an- ticipate that decision with some satisfaction. 1) Egyptian Dresses. There are two ideas which ought to be examined before we can justly ascertain the particulars of the bride’s appearance: First, Was her dress correspondent to those of the East in general P or, secondly, as she was an Egyp- tian, was her dress peculiarly in the Egyptian taste? To meet these inquiries we propose to offer a few remarks on the peculiarities of Egyp- tian dress, presuming that some such might belong to the dress worn by this lady; and indeed, that these are what give occasion to the admiration of the ladies of the Jerusalem harem, who, observing her magnificent attire, compliment every part of that attire as they proceed to inspect it in the following order. (See the notes in illustration of the FIFTH DAY.) ſºn ſº §§ SSS º N§§ | ) Sº t 5: sº- 362 CANTICLES (3) Sandals. (See figure on page 363.) (3) Selvedges of Thy Thigh Apparel. We have already examined the import of this word. If we look at the accompanying figure we shall find that in front of the drapery, which descends down the thigh from the waist to the ankle, that is to Say, where the edges of the drapery meet in front, is a handsome border of open-work; this is very distinct, and it answers exactly to the de- scription and words used to denote it in the poem ; it is (I) at the return—the selvedge—of the drapery; (2) it appertains to the thigh and accompanies it like a petticoat; (3) it is pinked, or Open-worked, into a pattern, which has evi- dently cost great labor; the performance of ex- cellent hands ! This figure is - -- truly Egyptian, for it is from © the Isiac Table. We find the Same kind of ornament worn by Grecian ladies, but on the outside of the thigh, as ap- pears in the Hamilton vases. Whether we read returning edge, selvedge, or front bord- ers, etc., of this drapery, is in- different to the idea here stated. (4) Thy Girdle Clasp. (See figure on page 363.) (5) Bodice, body vest. (See figure on page 363.) (6) Nipples. Observe that the Egyptian figure above has the breast and nipple entirely naked, and has a kind of neck- inger, which crosses the bosom and is brought between the breasts, so that the wearer might have covered the breast ** had she pleased; but the breast itself is left—as if carefle/Zy left—uncovered in all these figures; we presume, therefore, that this was anciently a cus- tomary mode of dress, rendered necessary by the heat of the country. It appears on various mum- mies and on many other Egyptian representa- tions. Sonnini says (vol. iii, p. 204): “The Egyp- tian women have no other clothing than a long shift, or jacket, of blue cloth, with sleeves of an extraordinary size. This manner of dressing themselves by halves, so that the air may circu- late over the body itself and refresh every part of it, is very comfortable in a country where close or thic/* /h a 6 ºf s z0/ozz/d make the h ea & info/er- able.” We must not judge of the propriety of Egyptian costumes by the necessary defenses against the variations and ch?//s of northern cli- mates. The reader will , observe the head-dress in this figure; the hair, which we presume is meant to represent curls; the pec- toral, the covering of the bosom; the petticoat, its border, ornaments, etc. 2. Br i de ’s T) ress. This figure represents an Oriental lady in full dress, from Le Bruyn. (1) Head-Dress. The reader will observe the head-dress, which con- sists of a cap set with pearls in various forms, the center hanging over § ſºº 2 % c W 21 AN | ...!! 2 W º & | * (v) - N º, N * Bride's Dress, CANT1CLES the forehead. On the top of this cap rise a number of Sprigs of jewelry work, which imitate, in pre- cious Stones, the natural colors, etc., of the flow- ers they are meant to represent. The stems are made of gold or silver wires, and the leaves, we Suppose, are made of colored foil. We saw, in the former plate, that Egyptian ladies wore a high-rising composition of ornaments; and we See in this figure a composition little, if at all, less aspiring. In fact, then, this head-dress ren- ders very credible the idea of our translators, “thy head-dress upon thee is like Carmel !”— whether, by Carmel, we understand Mount Car- mel, in which case the allusion may be to the trees growing on it; or, as the word signifies, a fruitful field, whose luxuriant vegetation dis- plays the most captivating abundance. (2) Jewels. From the cap of this head-dress hangs a string of pearls, which, passing under the chin, surrounds the countenance. We observe also on the neck a collet of gems and three rows of pearls. These are common in the East; and Something of this nature, we presume, is what the bridegroom alludes to when he says (Eclogue ii. in the First Day) : “Thy cheeks are bright, or splendid, with bands, thy neck with collets,” meaning bands of pearls surrounding the counte- nance and glistening on the cheeks; and collets of gems, or other splendid or shining substances, disposed as embellishments. Observe also the ornaments suspended by a gold chain, which hangs from the neck. These, though not, strictly speaking, girdle-clasps, yet have much the same effect in point of decoration, and are composed of precious stones, including, no doubt, rubies, “rich in mingled wine.” Observe the rings worn on the fingers; the wrist-bands of the vest, the flow- ers brocaded on it, on the veil, etc. (3) Dressing of the Hair. The figure also shows distinctly the difference between locks and tresses of hair. The locks are those which hang loosely down the temples and cheek; the tresses are those braids which naturally hang down the back, but which, in order to show their length, are in this instance brought forward over the shoulder. The reader will observe how these are plaited. Now, this mode of dressing the hair seems to have little allusion to the color of pur- ple, or to require purple-colored ribands, or rib- ands of any color. It may rather be fancied to resemble a mode of weaving, such as might be practised at Arech or Erech, whence it might be denominated Arech men, that is, “from the city of Arech,” and, could this be admitted, we should perhaps find something like the following ideas in this passage: “Thy head-dress is a diffuse, spread- ing appearance, iike vegetation and flowers (q. chemille 2).” “Thy tresses are close, compact, stuck together like an intiſtiately wuvell U1 wu, kuul texture,” say a carpet, diaper, calico, etc. It is true this figure shows only a few tresses, but we ought to extend our conception to a much greater 11timber, for Lady Montague says: “I never saw, in my life, so IIIaily fine heads of hair. In one lady's I have counted a hundred and ten tresses, all natural.” Now, what numerous intri- cacies, meanderings, convolutions, etc., would a hundred and ten tresses ſurnish by dexterous plaiting ! And as long hair, capable of such orna- mental disposition, was esteemed a capital part of personal beauty, how deeply, how inextricably, was the king—his affection—entangled in such a labyrinth of charms, adorned in the most becom- ing manner and displayed to the greatest advan- tage 1 #he sex has always been proud of this natural ornament; and when art and taste have well ar- 363 CANTICLES ranged it, all know that its effects are not incon- siderable. The reader will recollect that we have already stated embarrassments on the subject of the word Aregamen. We have taken some pains to examine passages where it occurs; but we can- not acquiesce in the opinion that it means purple; that...is, the color of purple only. Nevertheless, as all the dictionaries, and lexicons, and concord- * are against us, we suspend our determina- 1OIl. (*) Sandals. There is a figure in Sandys which shows the sandals not only adorned with flowers wrought on them, but which, be- ing Sandals on ly, ermit the whole Oot to be seen; and being /eighteſters, they make the wear- S. er Seem S O much š7~~. taller than Otherwise ====<- she would be that the bridegroom may - we l l compare his bride to a palm tree, up to whose top he desires to climb that he may procure its fruit (Cant. vii:8). This figure also shows an ornament around the ankle, and a girdle, perhaps of silver embroidery. (5) Vest. º engraving is from “Estampes Heighteners. dić, Zevant,” an will assist to illus- - S. S. trate the compar- ison which our translation renders, “thy belly is a heap of wheat set about with lilies.” In the first place, instead of heaff, read sheaf, of wheat. Secozza/y, for be//y, read boaſ- Žce, or vesſ; that is the covering of the belly. Third/y, for sef a é o te t, re a d bound about, or £zed S º º ºS. :=::; Eº. º N % º º ſ *:E.-Kº ºts=sº: ...: 'º' 4. §º ) | % SS sJ 7.>- s yº $s i tºp with a band of ſ §§§ lilies. In short, the } |/Aſſ") º comparison is – a Z ' ', <-SS vest of gold tissue, Vest. tied up with a broad girdle of white satin, or of silver tissue, like that of this figure, to a sheaf of wheat standing on its end, and tied around its middle by a broad band of lilies, twisted into itself, whose heads would naturally hang down loosely, like the end of the girdle of this figure. Having given the above as our idea of this comparison, it may be proper to say that if f he words set about be abso- lutely retained, then the silver flowers on this ground of gold tissue may answer that idea; but this does not appear to be so correct a translation. We may be allowed also to observe how entirely this explanation removes every indelicacy to which our translation is exposed; and how greatly it is recommended by its simplicity. (6) Oriental Ladies’ Dress. This investiga- tion of the bride's dress may be closed with propriety by the following description of a dress worn by lady Montague as given by herself; also, that of the fair Fatima, of whom she says, “She was dressed in a caftan of gold brocade, flowered with silver, very well fitted to her shape, and showing, to admiration, the beauty of her bosom, only shaded by the thin gauze of her shift. Her drawers were pale pink, her waistcoat green and silver; her slippers white satin, finely embroid- CANTICLES ered; her lovely arms adorned with bracelets of diamonds and a broad girdle set around with diamonds; upon her head a rich Turkish hand- kerchief of pink and silver, her own fine black hair hanging a great length in various tresses; and on one side of her head some bodkins of jewels. - - “When I took my leave, two maids brought in a fine silver basket of embroidered handkerchiefs; she begged I would wear the richest for her sake, and gave the others to my woman and inter- pretess.” (The dudi, love-favors, of our poem, passim.) “The first part of my dress is a pair of drawers; very full, that reach to my shoes, and conceal the legs more modestly than your petticoats. They are of a thin, rose-colored damask, brocaded with silver flowers. My shoes are of white kid leather, embroidered with gold. Over this hangs my Smock, of a fine white silk gauze, edged with embroidery. This smock has wide sleeves, hang- ing half way down the arm, and is closed at the neck with a diamond button; but the shape and color of the bosom are very well to be distin- guished through it. “The antery is a waistcoat, made close to the shape, of white and gold damask, with very long sleeves falling back, and fringed with deep gold fringe, and should have diamond or pearl but- tonS. “My caftan, of the same stuff with my drawers, is a robe exactly fitted to my shape, and reaching to my feet, with very long, straight, falling sleeves. Over this is my girdle, of about four fingers broad, which all that can afford it have entirely of diamonds and other precious stones. Those who will not be at that expense have it of exquisite embroidery on satin ; but it must be fastened before with a clasp of diamonds. “The curdee is a loose robe they throw off, or put on, according to the weather, being of a rich brocade, (mine is green and gold), either lined with ermine or sables; the sleeves reach very little below the shoulders. “The head-dress is composed of a cap, called talpock, which is, in winter, of fine velvet em- broidered with pearls or diamonds, and in summer of a light shining silver stuff. This is fixed on one side of the head, hanging a little way down, with a gold tassel, and bound on, either with a cir- cle of diamonds (as I have seen several) or a rich embroidered handkerchief. On the other side of the head, the hair is laid flat; and here the ladies are at liberty to show their fancies; some putting flowers, others a plume of heron's feathers, and in short what they please; but the most gen- eral fashion is a large bouquet of jewels, made like natural flowers; that is, the buds of pearl; the roses of different colored rubies; the jessa- mines of diamonds; the jonquilles of topazes, etc., so well set and enameled, it is hard to imagine any thing of that kind so beautiful. “The hair hangs at its full length behind, di- vided into tresses braided with pearls or ribands, which is always in great quantity. I never saw in my life so many, fine heads of hair. In one lady's I have counted a hundred and ten of these tresses, all natural ; but it must be owned that every kind of beauty is more common here than with us. They generally shape their eyebrows; and both Greeks and Turks have the custom of putting round their eyes a black tincture that, at a distance or by candle light, adds very much to the blackness of them. They dye their nails a rose color; but I cannot enough accustom myself to the fashion to find any beauty in it.” Letters xxix., xxxiii. 364 CANTICLES &. I ridegroom’s T) ress. We have elsewhere (see CROWN) bestowed some thoughts on the na- ture and shape of the royal crown of the kings of the Jews, and we wish now to recall those thoughts to the mind of the reader. (1) The Crown. We observed that the crown of king Saul was called nager, or separated; but a very different word, othar, is used to express the cir- clet with which the mother of Solomon encircled his head on the day of his mar- riage. Our translation ren- ders both these words by one English appellation, crown; and the word othar is thus rendered, where, as it seems, it gives incor- Portrait of Tigranes, King rect notions of the sub- of Armenia, Showing ject intended. ... In distin- “separated" cap. guishing the different forms of this part of dress, we consider the cap or crown (or both ideas in one, the crowned cap), in the annexed figure, as being the nazer, or “separated” cap of Scripture. This is a portrait of Tigranes, king of Armenia; and it contributes, with others, to authorize our distinction. In addition, how- ever, to these, we have also representations of a cap, the separations of which are very evident behind; and one of these separated parts falls on each shoulder, down the back of the wearer. This goes not only in corroboration of the pro- posed distinction in the form and nature of the crowns of Jewish monarchs, but also strongly tends to establish the nature of the shebeta, or royal coat of close armor. It was not, then, a royal cap of state with which the mother of Solomon decorated his head at his nuptials; that was probably made by a more professed artist; neither was it proper to be worn at such a personal ceremony, but only on state occasions; but if the queen mother had taken pains to embroider a muslin fillet; if she had worked it with her own hands, and had em- bellished it with a handsome pattern, then it was paying her a compliment to wish the daugh- ters of Jerusalem should go forth to admire the happy effects of this instance of maternal atten- tion and decorative skill. (2) Royal Seat. The accompanying, portrait of Nadir, Shah of Persia, from Frazer, shows his #: cious stones and ery. The man- kind of throne dress to abound º º ner of the king's on which he sits, º in pearls, pre- &# * golden embroid- sitting, and the º may perhaps % give some hint |% ºf of the manner º of the Bride- \%.S. ºff groom's sitting C º º in the First Day. ſº SS This is not the royal throne of state, the 7zzzzs- nted of India; that is usually &= -- ºº::== #E. E.ſº g g *::=#=%" ~~ *-->: Stationed in one 꺞 place, where it sº y is fitted up with all imaginable magnificence, and to which it is fixed, whereas, this seat is movable, and is carried CANTICLES from place to place, as wanted. Some such settee 365 was perhaps occupied by Solomon, when he visited his Bride; SO that the king sat, while his compan- ions stood on each hand of him, forming a circle. It is necessary to distinguish the kind of throne; because there are: (1) The musnud itself, or throne of state, (2) This kind of ceat or settee. (3) A kind of palanquin (called takht revan, that is mozyzng-throne), and others, all of which are thrones, but their names and applications are not the same in the original text of Scripture. (3) J e wels. This figure is copied from De ... la Valle, and is a portrait i of Aurengzebe, the Mogul Of India. Observe the , pearls, etc., in his turban; , the collets of pcarls and § : štº | gems hanging from his §|ſº * neck; the same at his § | §§§ wrists; so the Bride says §ſ; §§ of her Prince, “his wrists, §§§ # that is, his wrist-bands, QRN Nº \ the or n a ments at his § § N §N N § wrists, are circlets of gold, & full set with top a zes.” \%. These topazes occupy ' ' ' the place of the pearls in Our figure. (4) Shoes and Girdle. Observe, also, his shoes, which, being gold embroidery, are the bases of purest gold, from which rise his legs like pil- lars of marble. Observe, too, that the stockings, fitting pretty closely to the legs, give them an appearance much more analogous to pillars or columns, than when the drawers are full, and occupy a considerable space, as they are com- monly worn in the East. The reader will remark the nature and enrichments of this girdle, which is, no doubt, of gold embroidery. (5) Royal Tent. The tent may give some idea of that of Solomon, to which the ladies compare the Bride; they say she is “attractive as the tent of Solomon ;” and certainly a tent so ornamented and enriched, so magnificently embellished, is attractive; attractive in the same manner as a magnificent dress, when worn by a person. If this tent be of black velvet, the golden enrich- ments embossed upon it must have a grand effect. It should be recollected that the passage demands the strongest contrast possible to the “tents of Kedar,” or the black tents of wandering Arabs; and, were it not for a following verse, the ref- erence should be to the Bride's dress—discom- posed—all in a flutter—after a long journey, from which she is but alighted at the moment—rather than to her person, or complexion, which sub- sequently is described as fair, etc., by terms ab- solutely incompatible with blackness or swarthi- ness. The coverings annually sent by the grand seignior for the holy house at Mecca, are always black. Mr. Morier has delineated a tent, in- tended to represent that of the prophet, the front of which is all but covered with jewels; the whole sides and the top with ornaments, shawl- patterns, etc. (Trave/s in Persia, vol. ii, p. 181.) (6) Another Girdle. This is a portrait of the grand seignior, sultan Achmet. But it shows a girdle, or rather the clasp which fastens it, of a different nature from the former. This appears to be made of some solid material (ivory, per- haps), thickly studded over with precious stones, whereby it corresponds perfectly with that de- scribed by the Bride, as bright ivory over which N § s W. Sl § is tºN º § CAPERNAUM the sapphire plays; for these gems may as well be sapphires as any other. The general appear- ance of the sultan's figure is noble and majestic, and may answer, not inadequately, to the descrip- tion given of her beloved by the Bride. It would be a considerable acquisition to sacred literature if those incidents which are furnished by the Greek poets, and, which resemble certain incidents in this poem were collected for the pur- pose of comparison; they would be found more frequent and more identical than is usually imag- ined. But this purpose would be still more com- pletely accomplished, by a comparison with those productions of the Persian and Hindoo poets which have been brought to our knowledge by the diligence and taste of our countrymen in India. It may safely be said, that every line of the Hebrew poem may be illustrated from Indian Sources. Even that incident, so revolting to our manners, of the lady's going out to seek her beloved by highl, is perſectly correct, according gº(\ lº º Sºº º ſ! ši % # Ç * : §§§s=E Cº - - rºw ||||}: N Sº G// % s W .* º . . . . to Indian poetical costume, as appears by Cali- dasa's Megha Diſta (line 250 of Mr. Wilson's translation), also the Gitagovinda, translated by Sir William Jones (Asiatic Researches, vol. iii), and others which have been subsequently added to the stores of English literature. CAPER (kā'për), (Heb. nºs, ab-ee-yo-nazy', provocative of desire, the caper berry, Eccles. xii:5), the undeveloped fruit of Ca/Zaris spinosa, Lat., a plant growing everywhere in clefts of rocks and walls. - It is stimulant, and supposed to be aphrodis- iac. If caperberry be the correct rendering of ab-ee-yo-maw’ the meaning of the passage is that even the caperberry shall fail to excite desire, a meaning in effect similar to that of A. V. (Barnes, Bib. Dict.). (See ABIYonAH.) CAPERNAUM (ka-pêr'na-úm), (Gr. Katrepwaoſ;H, Åaft-er-ma-oom'), a city on the northwestern side of the Lake of Gennesareth, and on the border of the tribes of Zebulun and Naphtali. (1) Prophecy. The infidelity and impenitence of the inhabitants of this place, after the evidence given to them by our Saviour himself of the truth of his mission, brought upon them this heavy denunciation:—“And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell; for if the mighty works which have been done in thee had been done in Sodom, it CAPERNAUM would have remained unto this day,” etc. (Matt. xi:23). This seems to have been more than any other place the residence of Christ after he commenced his great mission; and hence the force of the denunciation, which has been so completely ac- complished, that even the site of Capernaum is quite uncertain. Dr. Robinson (Bib. Researches, iii, 288-294) exposes the errors of all previous travelers in their various attempts to identify the site of Capernaum; and, from a hint in Quares- mius, he is rather inclined to look for it in a place marked only by a mound of ruins, called by the Arabs, Khan Minyeh. This is situated in the fertile plain on the western border of the Lake of Gennesareth, to which the name of ‘the land of Gennesareth’ is given by Josephus (De Bell. Jud. iii, Io, 8). (2) Tountains. In this plain Josephus places a fountain called Capharnaum; he says nothing of the town ; but, as it can be collected from the Scriptural intimations that the town of Caper- naum was in this same plain, it may be safely con- cluded that the fountain was not far from the town, and took its name therefrom. In this plain there are now two fountains, one called 'Ain el Madauwarah, the ‘Round Fountain’—a large and beautiful fountain, rising immediately at the foot of the western line of hills. This Pococke took to be the Fountain of Capernaum, and Dr. Robinson was at the time disposed to adopt this conclusion. There is another fountain called 'Ain et-Tin, near the northern extremity of the plain, and not far from the lake. It is overhung by a fig-tree, from which it derives its name. (3) Ruins. Whichever be the Capharnaum, we should look for some traces of an ancient town in the vicinity, and, finding them, should be justi- fied in supposing that they formed the remains of Capernaum. There are no ancient remains of any kind near the Round Fountain, which is one of the reasons against its claim to indicate the site of ancient Capernaum. But near the 'Ain et-Tin is a low mound of ruins, occupying a considerable circumference, which certainly offer the best prob- ability which has yet been offered of being the remains of the doomed city; and if these be all its remains, it has, according to that doom, been brought low indeed. Near the fountain is also a khan, which gives the name of Khan Minyeh to the spot. This khan is now in ruins, but was once a large and well-built structure. Close on the north of this khan, and of the fountain, rocky hills of considerable elevation come down quite to the lake, and form the northern termination of the plain. It is important to add, that Quares- mius expressly states that, in his day, the place called by the Arabs Minyeh, was regarded as marking the site of Capernaum (Elucid. T. S. ii, p. 804). Capernaum is not mentioned in the Old Testa- ment, and perhaps did not arise till after the cap- tivity. The Rev. J. L. Porter, A. M., says: “I reached the brow of a bluff promontory, which dips into the bosom of the lake. Below me now opened up the fertile plain of Gennesaret. At my feet, beneath the western brow of the cliff, a little fountain burst from a rocky basin. A fig-tree spreads its branches over it, and gives it a name, 'Azm-ef-7%71, “the fountain of the fig.” Beside it are some massive foundations, Scarcely distin- guishable amid the rank weeds, and away beyond it, almost covered with thickets of thorns, briars, and gigantic thistles, I saw large heaps of ruins and rubbish. These are all that now mark the site of Capernaum. Christ's words are fulfilled 366 CAPHTOR to the letter.” (The Buried Cities of Bashan, 1891, p. IO7.) CAPH (kāf), D, the eleventh letter of the Hebrew alphabet. English K comes from the same source; but C and, especially before e and i, or when final, Ch are employed as its representative in an- glicized Hebrew names. Caph stands at the head of the eleventh section of Ps. cxix, in which section each verse begins with this letter in the original. CAPHAR (kā'phar), (Heb. Tà, Aaſer, from a root signifying to cover), one of the many words used in the Bible to denote a village. As an appellative it is found in I Chron. xxvii: 25; Cant. vii: II; and I Sam. vi :18; the last being Copker (YES). Its chief interest arises from its forming a part of the name Capernal1m, i e., Capharmahum. CAPHAR - SALAMA (kāph'ar-săl'a-mă), (Gr. Xaqapoaxapad, Åhah-far-sa/-ah-mah', village of Sa- lem), a place (Joseph. Anſ. xii:IO, Sec. 4) at which a battle was ſºft between Judas Maccabaeus and Nicanor (I Macc. vii:3I). From the fugitives having taken refuge in the “city of David,” it would appear to have been near Jerusalem. It may be the later Carvasalim, near Ramah. CAPHENATHA (ka-phén'a-tha),(Gr. xaſpevabá, Æaf-en-a-tha'), a place apparently close to and On the east side of Jerusalem, which was repaired by Jonathan Maccabaeus (I Macc. xii:37). The name is derived by Lightfoot from Caph- nioth, the Talmudic word for unripe figs. It may possibly have been the tower that stood out from the upper house of the king (Neh. iii:25), Called also Chaphenatha. CAPHTHOR (kāph' thär). See CAPHTOR. CAPHTHORIM (kāph' tho-rím), (1 Chron. i. 12). See CAPHTORIM. CAPHTOR (kāph'tór), (Heb. *2, Aaſtore', Deut. ii:23; Jer. xlvii:4; Amos ix:7), was the real and proper country of the Philistines. There has been a great diversity of opinion with regard to the exact situation of that country. The general opinion that Caphtor was Cappa- docialis, upon the whole, founded more on the ancient versions of the Bible, such as the Sep- tuagint and the Targums, than on any sound argument. Against this opinion have been urged (1) The authority of Josephus, who seems to seek Caphtor somewhere between Egypt and Ethi- opia; (2) that the Caphtorim came originally from Egypt, from which Cappadocia is so far removed, that it seems highly improbable that an Egyptian colony could first have emigrated thither, and then again removed to Palestine, still more remote; (3) that Caphtor and Cappadocia are very dissimilar names, even in sound; (4) that Caphtor is (Jer. xlvii:4) designated as an island (“N, aia), though *N sometimes also signi- fies a coast. Others, again, such as Calmet, and still more J. G. Lackemacher (Obser. Pllil... p. 2, II sq.): have tried to prove that the Philistines derived their origin from the island of Crete, because- (1) Caphtor is, with Jeremiah, an island. and (2) the proper name of the Philistines is Chere- thites,” Kerethin (Ezek. xxv :16; Zeph. ii:5). Calmet's earlier opinion (found in the first edi- tion of his Comment on Genesis, but which he afterwards recalled, is that Caphtor is the island of Cyprus. CAPHTO RIM Forster (Epist. ad Michael, p. 17, sq.) thinks that the Caphtorim had lived on the Egyptian coast (as *N in Jer. xlvii:4 is also used of sea- coasts), somewhere about Damietta. From hence, he supposes a colony of that people, and their brethren and easterly neighbors, the Casluchim, had gone forth, in the period between the first wars of the world (described in Gen. xiv), and the birth of Isaac, and settled on the southern coast of Palestine, under the name of the Phil- istines, after having expelled the Avim, who lived about Gaza (see AvLM). Only in subse- quent times, Forster thinks, these new Philistines had again sent a colony, who conquered the province of Lapethus, in the island of Cyprus. This colony he identifies with the Ethiopians, who lived, according to Herodotus (vii:88), upon that island. There is much solid ground in favor of this opinion. Schaff thinks it is more probably identical with Caphtur, and the northern delta of Egypt. CAPHTORIM (kāph'to-rim), (Heb. Fº, af. to-reem'), a tribe descended from the Egyptians (Gen. x:14; I Chron. i. I2), and inhabiting Caphtor (Deut. ii:23). (See CAPHTOR.) CAPPADOCIA (kāp'pa-dò'ci-á, -dò'shi-á), (Gr. Kattra60kta, Áaž-fad-o/*-ee'ah), an ancient province of Asia Minor, bounded on the north by Pontus, on the east by the Euphrates and Armenia Minor, On the south by Mount Taurus (beyond which are 3. and Syria), and on the east by Phrygia and alatia. The country is mountainous and abounds in water, and was celebrated for the production of wheat, for its fine pastures, and for its ex- cellent breed of horses, asses and sheep. The inhabitants were notorious for their dullness and vice. They were called ‘Syrians’ in the age of Herodotus (i:72; v :49), and even in Strabo's days they bore the name of ‘Leuco-Syrians,’ i. e., ‘White Syrians’ (xii, p. 544), in contradistinction to those dwelling beyond the Taurus, whose com- plexion was darkened by the sun. Cappadocia was subjugated by the Persians under Cyrus. It continued to be governed by tributary kings under the Romans till A. D. I7, when Tiberius made it a Roman province. Christianity was very early propagated in Cappadocia, for St. Peter names it in addressing the Christian churches in Asia Minor (I Pet. i :I). Cappadocians were present at Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost (Acts ii:9), and afterward Christians of , the province were addressed by Peter (I Pet. i :I). CAPTAIN (kāp'tín). As a purely military title, Captain in general answers to Yº, the He- brew Sar in the Hebrew army, and xixtapxos, frihaemus, in the Roman. "Sº, Aaaa-zseem', which is occasionally rendered captain, applies some- times to a military (Josh x:24; Judg. xi.;6, II; Is. xxii:3; Dan. xi:18), sometimes to a civil command (e. g., Is. i. Io; iii:6). Its radical sense is division, and hence decision without reference to the means employed. The term illustrates the double office of the Shophet', or dictator. (Smith, Bib. Dict.) It is a broad designation for an official, whether he be the commander-in-chief of the army (Gen. xxi :22; Judg iv:2; I Sam. xiv:50; 2 Sam. x:I6), or the commander of a division of the army (2 Sam. xviii:2, 5), or part of a division (I Kings xvi :9); an officer over 1,000 men or IOO men or 50 men (Num. xxxi :14, 48; I Sam. viii:I2; xvii: 18; xviii: 13; xxii:7; 2 Sam. xviii:I ; 2. Kings i:9; Is. iii:3); the commander of the king's body 367 CAPTIVITY guard (Gen. xxxvii:36; and 2 Kings xxv :8; Dan. ii: 14, where the word is Rab), or of a post of sentries (Jer. xxxvii: 13, in Hebrew Ba'al). (Davis, Bib. Dict.) The “captain of the temple” mentioned by St. Luke (xxii:4; Acts iv: I ; V :24), in connection with the priests, was not a military Officer, but superintended the guard of priests and Levites, who kept watch by night in the Temple. The office appears to have existed from an early date (the “priests that kept the door.” 2 Kings xii:9; xxv :18). The Greek term archagos, rendered captain (Heb. ii:Io), has no reference whatever to a military office. Figuratite. (I) In Josh. v :13-15 God is called the Captain of the Lord's host, that is, of Israel; all Israel's battles were in his cause. Joshua and the other leaders were the deputies of the Great Captain of Salvation. He is also called the “Captain” or author “of salvation.” (Heb. ii:Io). Yet more so is Jesus, Captain of the Lord's spiritual hosts. (2) The Antichristian cap- tains are their chief rulers in church, or state, who command, direct, or excite others, to Oppose the Redeemer (Rev. xix :18). ºrrain OF THE GUARD (kāp' tin Öv the gård). Title of the officer (A. V.) to whose custody Paul and other prisoners were committed at Rome (Acts xxviii:I6, A. V). He was a strato- pedarchos, or commander of a legion, in this particular instance the chief officer of the legion known as the praetorian guard (R. V. margin). The captain of the temple was not a military officer, but the commander of the guard of Levites who kept watch at the Temple (Acts iv: I ; v :24; 2 Matt. iii:4; Antiq. xx:6, 2; War vi :5, 3). Under him were subordinate officers of the sev- eral divisions of the guard (Luke xxii;4, 52). (Davis, Bib Dict). - CAPTIVE (kāp'tiv), (Heb. Tºº, sheb-ee', to be taken away captive), one taken prisoner in war. There is a threefold captivity mentioned in the Scriptures. (1) Personal and bodily, when men are apprehended by the enemy, and are carried out of their own land and held in slavery (Deut. xxviii:27-48; Gen. xiv:I4; Jer, lii:29, 30). (2) Evangelic, when one is apprehended and drawn by Christ's almighty love, and has his whole heart and affections subdued by the obedience of faith (2 Cor. x:5). (3) Sinful, when one is carried away, and oppressed or enslaved under the power of Satan and his own inward corrup- tion (Rom. vii:23; I Sam. xxx:3; 2 Tim. ii:26). CAPTIVITY Gap-twº-y), (Heb. *, goah, exile, removal). (1) Expatriation. The word captivity, as ap- plied to the people of Israel, has been appropriated, contrary to ille analogy of our language, to illeaii expatriation. The violent removal of the entire population of a city, or sometimes even of a dis- trict, is not an uncommon event in ancient history. As a measure of policy, no objection to it on the ground of humanity was felt by anyone; since in fact, it was a very mild proceeding, in compari- son with that of selling a tribe or nation into slavery. Every such destruction of national ex- istence, even in modern times, is apt to be em- bittered by the simultaneous disruption of relig- ious bonds; but in the ancient world, the positive Sanctity attributed to special places, and the local attachment of Deity, made expatriation doubly severe. The Hebrew people, for instance, in many most vital points, could no longer obey their sacred law at all, when personally removed from CAPTIVITY Jerusalem; and in many others they were forced to modify it by reason of their change of cir- Cl1111Stall CeS. Two principal motives impelled conquering powers thus to transport families in the mass: first, the desire of rapidly filling with a valuable population new cities, built for pride or for policy; next, the determination to break up hostile or- ganizations, or dangerous reminiscences of past greatneSS. - The expatriation of the Jewish people belongs to two great eras, commonly called the first and second Captivity; yet differing exceedingly in character. It is to the former that the above re- marks chiefly apply. In it, the prime of the na- tion were carried eastward by the monarchs of Assyria and Babylon, and were treated with no unnecessary harshness, even under the dynasty that captured them. So far were they from the condition of bondsmen, which the word ‘captive' suggests, that the book of Susanna represents their elders in Babylon as retaining the power of life and death over their own people (i:28), when Daniel was as yet a very young man. The au- thority of that book cannot, indeed, be pressed, as to the chronology; yet the notices given by Eze- kiel (xiv:I ; xx:I) concur in the general fact, that they still held an internal jurisdiction over their own members. (2) First Captivity. That which we name the first Captivity, was by no means brought about by a single removal of the population. In fact, from beginning to end, the period of deportation occupied full I5o years; as the period of return reaches probably through IOO. The first blow fell upon the more distant tribes of Israel, about 74I B. C.; when Tiglath-pileser, king of Assyria (2 Kings xv :29), carried off the pastoral popula- tion which lived beyond the Jordan, with Zebulun and Naphtali. To this event allusion is made in Isaiah ix: I ; a passage very ill translated in Our received version. In the time of this conquering monarch, Assyria was rapidly rising into power, and to aggrandize Nineveh was probably a great Object of policy. His successor, Shalmaneser, made the Israelitish king Hoshea tributary. When the tribute was withheld, he attacked and reduced Samaria (B. C. 721), and by way of pun- ishment and of prevention, transported into AS- syria and Media its king and all the most valuable population remaining to the ten tribes (2 Kings xvii:6). The families thus removed were, in great measure, settled in very distant cities; many of them probably not far from the Caspian Sea ; and their place was supplied by colonies from Baby- lon and Susis (2 Kings xvii:24). (3) Second Captivity. Such was the end of Israel as a kingdom. An interval of more than a century followed before Judah was to suffer a similar fate. Two separate deportations are nar- rated in the book of Kings, three in that of Jeremiah, while a fourth and earlier one appears in the book of Daniel. Jeremiah dates by the years of Nebuchadnezzar's reign (who came to the throne, B. C. 605 or 604), and estimates that in his seventh year 3,023 were carried off, in his eighteenth 832, and in his twenty-third only 745; making in all, as the writer is careful to note, 4,600 (Jer, lii:28, etc.). The third removal he ascribes to Nebuzaradan, the Babylonian general. That some error here exists, at least in the num- bers, appears undeniable; for 4,600 persons was a very petty fraction of the Jewish people; and, in fact, 42,360 are stated to have returned im- mediately upon the decree of Cyrus (Ezra ii:64). In 2 Kings xxiv:8–16, we find 18,000 carried off at once, in the third month of king Jehoiachin, 368 CAPTIVITY and in the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar; which evidently is the same as the first removal named by Jeremiah, and may be placed in B. C. 598. After this, the vassal king Zedekiah having re- belled, his city is beleaguered, and, finally, in his eleventh year, is reduced (B. C. 588) by Nebu- chadnezzar in person ; and in the course of the same year, ‘the nineteenth of Nebuchadnezzar’ (2 Kings xxv :8). Nebuzaradan carries away all the population except the peasants. Perhaps we need not wonder that no mention is made in the ‘Kings' of the third deportation ; for the ac- count of the destruction was in a manner com- plete upon the second invasion. There is a greater difficulty in the statement with which the book of Daniel opens, which is generally inter- preted to mean that in the third year of Jehoiakim Nebuchadnezzar besieged and captured Jerusalem, partially plundered the temple and carried off the first portion of the people into captivity, among whom was Daniel. The text, however, does not explicitly say so much, although such is the ob-- vious meaning; but if this is the only interpreta- tion, we find it in direct collision with the books of Kings and Chronicles (which assign to Jehoia- kim an eleven years' reign), as also with Jeremiah xxv :I). The statement in Daniel partially rests on 2 Chron. xxxvi :5, which is itself not in per- fect accordance with 2 Kings xxiv. In the earlier history, the war broke out during the reign of Jelhoiakim, who died before its close; and when his son and successor, Jehoiachin, had reigned three months, the city and its king were captured. But in the Chronicles, the same event is made to happen twice over, at an interval of three months and ten days (2 Chron. xxxvi;6 and 9), and even so, we do not obtain accordance with the received interpretation of Daniel (i: I-3). It seems, on the whole the easiest supposition, that ‘the third year of Jehoiakim' is there a mis- take for the third month of Jehoiachin. On the whole, it is pretty clear that the people of Judah, as of Israel, were carried out of their land by two principal removals. The former, B. C. 598, was directed to swell the armies and strengthen the towns of the conqueror; for of the 18,000 then carried away, I,000 were ‘craftsmen and Smiths, all strong and apt for war,’ and the rest are called ‘mighty men of valor.” (Yet there is a difficulty about verses I4 and I6 in 2 Kings xxiv). It was not until the rebellion of Zedekiah that Nebuchadnezzar proceeded to the extremity of breaking up the national existence, B. C. 588. As the temple was then burnt, with all the palaces and the city walls, and no government was left but that of the Babylonian satrap, this latter date is evidently the true era of the captivity. Pre- viously Zedekiah was tributary; but so were Jo- siah and Alhaz long before ; the national existence was still saved. (4) The Return. Details concerning the Re- turn from the captivity are preserved in the books denominated after Ezra and Nehemiah ; and in the prophecies of two contemporaries, Haggai and Zechariah. The first great event is the de- cree of Cyrus, B. C. 536, in consequence of which 42,360 Jews of Babylon returned under Sheshbaz- zar, with 7,337 slaves, besides cattle. This ended in their building the altar, and laying the founda- tion of the second temple, 53 years after the de- struction of the first. The progress of the work was, however, almost immediately stopped ; for Zerubbabel, Jeshua and the rest abruptly refused all help from the half-heathen inhabitants of Sa- maria, and soon felt the effects of the enmity this induced. That the mind of Cyrus was changed by their intrigues, we are not informed; CAPTIVITY but he was probably absent in distant parts, through continual war. When Darius (Hystaspis), an able and gen- erous monarch, ascended the throne, the Jews soon obtained his favor. At this crisis, Zerub- babel was in chief authority (Sheshbazzar per- haps being dead), and under him the temple was begun in the Second and ended in the sixth year of Darius, B. C. 520-516. Although this must be reckoned an era in the history, it is not said to have been accompanied with any new immigra- tion of Jews. We pass on to ‘the seventh year Of king Artaxerxes' (Longimanus), Ezra vii:7, that is, B. C. 458, when Ezra comes up from Babylon to Jerusalem, with the king's commenda- tory letters, accompanied by a large body of his nation. The enumeration in Ezra viii, Imakes them under I,800 males, with their families; per- haps, amounting to 5,000 persons, young and Old ; of whom II3 are recounted as having heathen wives (Ezra x:I8-43). In the twentieth year of the same king, or B. C. 445, Nehemiah, his cup- bearer, gains his permission to restore ‘his fathers' Sepulchres,’ and the walls of his native city; and is sent to Jerusalem with large powers. This is the crisis which decided the national restoration of the Jewish people; for before their city was fortified, they had no defense against the now confirmed enmity of their Samaritan neighbors; and, in fact, before the walls could be built, sev- eral princes around were able to offer great oppo- sition. (See SANBALLAT.) The Jewish popula- tion was overwhelmed with debt, and had gen- erally mortgaged their little estates to the rich, but Nehemiah’s influence succeeded in bringing about a general forfeiture of debts, or at least of the interest; after which we may regard the new order of things to have been finally established in Judaea (see NEHEMIAH). it is probable that numerous families returned in small parties, as to a secure home, until all ºwaste land in the neighborhood was reoccu- 162C1. D (5) Remaining in Dispersion. The great mass of the Israelitish race nevertheless remained in dispersion. Previous to the captivity, many IS- raelites had settled in Egypt (Zech x:II ; Is. xix: 18), and many Jews afterwards fled thither from Nebuzaradan (Jer. xli :17). Others, appear to have established themselves in Sheba (see Jost's Geschichte, etc.), where Jewish influence became very powerful (see SHEBA). (6) The Ten Tribes. It is maintained by Von Bohlen (Genesis, p. cxvi) that the ten tribes in- termarried so freely with the surrounding popu- lation as to have become completely absorbed ; and it appears to be a universal opinion that no one now knows where their descendants are. But it is a harsh assumption that such intermarriages * cre corn nanner with the ten tribes than with the two; and certainly, in the apostolic days, the twelve tribes are referred to as a well-known peo- ple, sharply defined from the heathen (James i: I ; Acts xxiv:7). Not a trace appears that any re- p111sive principle existed at that time between the Ten and the Two. “Ephraim no longer envied Judah, nor Judah vexed Ephraim;’ but they had become ‘one nation;’ though only partially ‘on the ºnomintains of Israel' (Is. xi :13; Ezek. xxxvii:22). ſt would seem, therefore, that the result of the raptivity was to blend all the tribes together and produce a national union which had never been effected in their own land. If ever there was a difference between them as to the books counted sacred, that difference entirely vanished; at least no evidence appears of the contrary fact. When, moreover, the laws of landed inheritance no 24 e & From this time forth 369 CAPTIVITY longer enforced the maintenance of separate tribes and put a difficulty in the way of their intermar- riage, an almost inevitable result in course of time was the entire obliteration of this distinc- tl On. (7) Under Cyrus. When Cyrus gave permis- Sion to the Israelites to return to their own coun- try, and restored their sacred vessels, it is not wonderful that few persons of the ten tribes were eager to take advantage of it. In two centuries they had become thoroughly naturalized in their eastern Settlements; nor had Jerusalem ever been the centre of proud aspirations to them. It is perhaps remarkable that in Ezra ii:2, 36 (See also x:18, 25), the word Israel is used to signify what we might call the laity as opposed to the priests and Levites, which might seem as though the writer were anxious to avoid asserting that all the families belonged to the two tribes. (If this is not the meaning, it at least shows that all dis- criſiliilating force in thc words Israel and Judah was already lost. So, too, in the book of Esther, the twelve tribes through all parts of the Persian empire are called Jews.) Nevertheless, it was to be expected that only those would return to Jerusalem whose expatriation was very recent ; and principally those whose parents had dwelt in the Holy City or its immediate neighborhood. The re-migrants doubtless consisted chiefly of the pious and the poor, and as the latter proved do- cile to their teachers, a totally new spirit reigned in the restored nation. (8) Influence of Ezra. Whatever want of zeal the anxious Ezra might discern in his com- rades, it is no slight matter that he could induce them to divorce their heathen wives—a measure of harshness which St. Paul would scarcely have sanctioned (I Cor. vii:I2); and the century which followed was, on the whole, one of great religious activity and important permanent results on the moral character of the nation. Even the prophetic spirit by no means disappeared for a century and a half; although at length both the true and the false prophets were supplanted among them by the learned and diligent scribe, the anxious commentator and the over-literal or over-figura- tive critic. In place of a people prone to go astray after sensible objects of adoration, and readily admitting heathen customs, attached to monarchi- cal power, but inattentive to a hierarchy; care- less of a written law and movable by alternate impulses of apostasy and repentance; we hence- forth find in them a deep and permanent rever- ence for Moses and the prophets, an aversion to foreigners and foreign customs, a profound hatred of idolatry, a great devotion to priestly and Le- vitical rank, and to all who had an exterior of piety; in short, a slavish obedience both to the law and to its authorized expositors. Now, first, as far as can be ascertained (observe the particu- larity of detail in Neh. v111:4, etc.), were the syna- gogues and houses of prayer instituted, and the law periodically read aloud. Now began the close observance of the Passover, the Sabbath and the Sabbatical year. Such was the change wrought in the guardians of the Sacred Books that, whereas the pious king Josiah had sat eighteen years on the throne without knowing of the existence of ‘the Book of the Law’ (2 Kings xxii:3, 8); in the later period, on the contrary, the text was watched over with a scrupulous and fantastic punc- tiliousness. From this era the civil power was absorbed in that of the priesthood, and the Jewish people affords the singular spectacle of a nation in which the priestly rule came later in time than that of hereditary kings. Something analogous may perhaps be seen in the priestly authority of CARAVAN Comana in Cappadocia under the Roman sway (Cicero, Ep. ad Div. XV:4, etc.). (9) Fesults of Captivity. In their habits of life also the Jewish nation was permanently af- fected by the first captivity. The love of agricul- ture, which the institutions of Moses had so vig- orously inspired, had necessarily declined in a forcign land, and they returned with a taste for commerce, banking and retail trade which was probably kept up by constant intercourse with their brethren who remained in dispersion. The same intercourse in turn propagated toward the rest the moral Spirit which reigned at Jerusalem. The Egyptian Jews, it would seem, had gained little good from the contact of idolatry (Jer. xliv :8); but those who had fallen in with the Persian religion, probably about the time of its great reform by Zoroaster, had been preserved from such temptations and returned purer than they went. In Egypt and Arabia, in Babylonia, Assyria, Media, masses of the nation were planted, who, living by traffic and by banking, were necessi- tated to spread in all directions as their numbers increased. By this natural progress they moved westward, as well as eastward, and, in the time of St. Paul, were abundant in Asia Minor, Greece and the chief cities of Italy. (10) Under the Romans. The extermination suffered by the Jewish inhabitants of Palestine under the Romans far better deserves the name of captivity, for, after the massacre of countless thousands, the captives were reduced to a real bondage. According to Josephus (De Bell. Jud. vi. 9, 3), I, IOO,000 men fell in the siege of Jeru- Salem by Titus, and 97,000 were captured in the whole war. Of the latter number, the greatest part was distributed among the provinces, to be butchered in the amphitheaters or cast there to wild beasts; others were doomed to work as pub- lic slaves in Egypt; only those under the age of seventeen were sold into private bondage. An equally dreadful destruction fell upon the re- mains of the nation, which had once more assem- bled in Judaea, under the reign of Hadrian (A. D. I33), which Dion Cassius concisely relates, and by these two savage wars the Jewish population must have been effectually extirpated from the Holy Land itself, a result which did not follow from the Babylonian captivity. Figuratite. Captivity also signifies a multi- tude of captives, who had made others captive. “Children of the captivity” denotes those who were in captivity, or their posterity (Ezra iv:I). “The Lord turned the captivity of Job” (Job xlii: Io) means that he released him from his suffer- ings and restored him to prosperity. Jesus leads captivity captive, when he , makes his enemies serve as his slaves in promoting his work, and when he apprehends and subdues his people by the word of his grace, and places them in their new covenant state (Eph. iv:8; Comp. Ps. lxviii:18). CARAVAN (kär'à-vān) is the name given to a body of merchants or pilgrims as they travel in the East. (1) Composition. The company composing a caravan is often very numerous, consisting, it may be, of several hundred persons, and as many thousand camels, and it may be supposed that the assembling of so many individuals, together with the orderly distribution of their respective bales of merchandise and traveling equipage, is an affair requiring both time and the most care- ful attention. Accordingly, the packing and un- packing of the camels as well as the general Serv- 370 CARAVAN ice of the caravans employ a great many hands, some of whom, by dint of economy and active habits often raise themselves from the condition of servants to the more respectable status of mer- chants, who travel on their own account or in the capacity of carriers. Any person can, under certain regulations, form a caravan at any time. But generally there are stated periods, which are well known as the regular starting times for the mercantile journeys, and the merchants belong- ing to the company, or those travelers who are desirous of accompanying it for the benefit of a safe conduct, repair to the place of rendezvous where the caravan is to be formed, exhibiting, as their goods and camels successively arrive, a motley group—a busy and tumultuous scene of preparation, which can be more easily conceived than described. As in the hot season fine fravel- ing is performed under night, the previous part of the day on which the caravan leaves is con- sumed in the preparatory labors of packing—an indispensable arrangement, which has been ob- served with unbroken uniformity since the days of Ezekiel (xii:3), and then, about eight o'clock, the usual starting time, the whole party put them- selves in motion, and continue their journey with- out interruption till midnight (Luke xi :5, 6) or later. At other seasons they travel all day, only halting for rest and refreshment during the heat of noon. The distances are measured by a day's journey, and from seven to eight hours seem to have been a usual day's journey for caravans (Hornemann, p. 150); so that, estimating the slow and unwieldy gait of a camel at two and one-half miles an hour, the average rate of travel will be from seventeen to twenty miles per day. (2) Earliest Caravan. The earliest caravan of merchants we read of is the itinerant company to whom Joseph was sold by his brethren (Gen. xxxvii). Here we find the Ishmaelites from Gilead conducting a caravan loaded with the spices of India, the balsam and myrrh of Hadra- maut, and in the regular course of their traffic proceeding to Egypt for a market. The date of this transaction is more than seventeen centuries before the Christian era, and notwithstanding its antiquity, it has all the genuine features of a caravan crossing the desert at the present hour. (3) Pilgrims. Besides these communities of traveling merchants in the East there are caravans of pilgrims, i. e. of those who go for religious purposes to Mecca, comprising vastly greater mul- titudes of people. Four of these start regularly every year—one from Cairo, consisting of MO- hammedans from Barbary ; a second from Damas- cus, conveying the Turks; a third from Babylon, for the accommodation of the Persians, and a fourth from Zibith, at the mouth of the Red Sea, which is the rendezvous for those coming from Arabia and India. The organization of the ill- mense hordes which, on such occasions, assemble to undertake a distant expedition, strangers to each other, and unaccustomed to the strict dis- cipline which is indispensable for their comfort and security during the march, though, as might be expected, a work of no small difficulty, is accomplished in the East by a few simple arrange- ments which are the results of long experience. One obvious bond of union to the main body, when traveling by night and through extensive deserts, is the music of the Arab servants, who, by alternate songs in their national manner, be- guile the tedium of the way, while the incessant jingling of innumerable bells fastened to the necks of the camels—a characteristic feature of Orien- tal caravans—enlivens the patient beasts, frightens animals of prey and keeps the party together. CARAVAN To meet all the exigencies of the journey, how- ever, which would be a task impracticable with- out the establishment of some kind of order, and a prudent division of labor, the caravan is placed under the charge of a caravan bashë, the chief who presides over all, and under whom there are five leading officers appointed to different depart- ments—one who regulates the march; a second, whose duties only commence at halting time; a third who superintends the servants and cattle ; a fourth who takes charge of the baggage; a fifth who acts as paymaster. This description of the general economy of cara- vans we follow up by the account given by Pitts of the Hadj caravan, which he accompanied to Mecca, and embracing so many minute details, that it may be both interesting and instructive to the reader to be furnished with it in the traveler's own words. ‘The first day,’ says he, ‘we set out from Mecca, it was without any order at all—all hurly-burly; but the next day every one labored to get forward, and in order to do it there was many times much quarreling and fighting. But after everyone had taken his place in the cara- van they orderly and peaceably kept the same place till they came to Grand Cairo. They travel four camels abreast, which are all tied one after another, as in teams. The whole body is divided into several cottors, or companies, each of which has its name, and consists, it may be, of several thousand camels; and they move, one cottor after another, like distinct troops. At the head of each cottor is Some great gentleman or officer, who is carried in a thing like a litter, borne by two camels, one before and the other behind. At the head of every cottor there goes likewise a sumpter camel, which carries his treasure, etc. This camel has two bells, hanging one on each side, the Sound of which may be heard a great way off. Others of the camels have bells round about their necks, like those which our carriers put about their fore horse's neck, which, together with the servants who belong to the camels, and travel on foot, singing all night, make a pleasant noise, and the journey passes away delightfully. Thus they travel in good order every day till they come to Grand Cairo; and were it not for this order you may guess what confusion would be among such a vast multitude. They have lights by night (which is the chief time of traveling, because of the exceeding heat of the sun), which are carried on the top of high poles, to direct the hadjis, or pilgrims, on their march. These are somewhat like iron stoves, into which they put short dry wood, which some of the camels were loaded with ; it is carried in great sacks, which have a hole near the bottom, where the servants take it out as they see the fire needs a recruit. Every cottor has one of these poles belonging to it, some of which have ten, sorrie twelve, of these lights on their tops, or more or less; they are likewise different in figures as well as in num- bers—one perhaps oval-way, like a gate; another triangular, or like N or M, etc., so that every- one knows by them his respective cottor. They are carried in the front and set up in the place where the caravan is to pitch, before that comes up, at some distance from one another. They are also carried by day, Ilot lighted ; but yet, by the figure and number of them, the hadjis are directed to what cottor they belong, as soldiers are by their colors where to rendezvous; and without such directions it would be impossible to avoid confusion in such a vast number of people.’ (4) March of Israel. This description of the Hadj caravans that travel yearly to Mecca bears so close a resemblance to the far-famed 371 CARAVAN journey of the Israelites through almost the same extensive deserts that, as, the arrangement of those vast traveling bodies seems to have undergone no material alteration for nearly four thousand years, it affords the best possible commentary illustrative of the Mosaic narrative of the Exodus. Like them, the immense body of Israelitish emigrants, while the chief burden developed on Moses, was divided into companies, each company being under the charge of a subordinate officer, called a prince (Num. vii). Like them, the Hebrews made their first stage in a hurried manner and in tumultuous disorder (Exod. xii; II); and, like them, each tribe had its respective standard, which was pitched at the different stages, or thrust per- pendicularly into the ground, and thus formed a central point, around which the Straggling party spread themselves during their hours of rest and leisure (Num. ii:2). Like them, the signal for starting was given by the blast of a trumpet, or rather trumpets (Num. x:2, 5); and the time of march and halting was regulated by the same rules that have been observed by all travelers from time immemorial during the hot season. Like theirs, too, the elevation of the standard, as it was borne forward in the van of each company, formed a prominent object to prevent dispersion, or enable wanderers to recover their place within the line or division to which they belonged. Nor was there any difference here, except that, while the Israelites in like manner prosecuted their journey occasionally by night as well as by day, they did not require the aid of fires in their standards, as the friendly presence of the fiery pillar superseded the necessity of any artificial lights. One other point of analogy remains to be traced in the circumstance of Hobah being en- listed in the service of the Hebrew caravan as its guide through the great Arabian desert. At first sight the extreme solicitude of Moses to secure his brother-in-law in that capacity may appear strange, and not easily reconcilable with the fact that they enjoyed the special benefit of a heavenly guide, who had guaranteed, in a Super- natural manner, to direct their progress through the wilderness. But the difficulty will vanish when it is borne in mind that, although the pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night suf- ficed to regulate the main stages of the Hebrews, foraging parties would at short intervals require to be sent out, and scouts to reconnoiter the country for fuel, or to negotiate with the native tribes for provender and water. (5) Jewish Pilgrims. The bands of Jewish pilgrims that annually repaired from every corner of Judaea to attend the three great festivals in Jerusalem, wanted this government and distribu- tion into distinct companies and seem to have resembled less the character of the great Mecca caravans than the irregºlar processions of the Hindoos to and from the scene of some of their religious pageants. As in a crowd of this motley description not the slightest regard is paid to regularity or order, and everyone, of course, takes the place or mingles with the group that pleases him, the separation of the nearest friends for a whole day must, in such circumstances, be a common and unavoidable occurrence, and yet anxiety is never felt, unless the missing one fail to appear at the appointed rendezvous of the family. In like manner among the ancient Jews the inhabitants of the same village or district would naturally form themselves into traveling parties for mutual security as well as for enjoy- ing the society of acquaintance. The poorer sort would have to travel on foot, while females and those of the better class might ride on asses and CARAVANSARY 372 cameis. But as their country was divided into tribes, and those who lived in the same hamlet or canton would be more or less connected by family ties, the young, the volatile and active among the Jewish pilgrims had far more inducements to disperse themselves amongst the crowd than those of the modern processions, numbers of whom are necessarily strangers to each other. In these circumstances it is easy to understand how the young Jesus might mingle successively with groups of his kindred and acquaintance, who, captivated with his precocious wisdom and piety, might be glad to detain him in their circle, while his mother, together with Joseph, felt no anxiety at his absence, knowing the grave and sober char- acter of their companions in travel, and the inci- dent is the more natural that his parents are said to have gone ‘one day's journey from Jerusalem before they missed him;’ since, according to the * * * * ====< * * .2. | | | ; º ºlºlºſ; g º gº & ſ tº: Eğ § º * 2 / fº § CARAVANSARY the same class in this country, much less do they approximate to the character and appurtenances of European hotels. (2) Egyptian Inn. The Egyptian inn, where the Sons of Israel halted to bait their asses, was probably, from the remote period to which it be- longed, of a rude and humble description, in point both of appearance and accommodation—merely a shed, under the roof of which the cattle and their drivers might obtain shelter from the heats of noon and the dews of midnight, and such is the low state of art, or the tyrannical force of custom in the East, that few establishments of this kind in the present day can boast of improvements that render them superior to the mean and naked poverty of those which received the pilgrims of the patriarchal age. (3) Innkeepers. Among the Egyptians, and indeed among the ancients generally, the keepers ---------" % º - ..----" N \\ \\ N N º º % § ‘… <2 º #. º prºº * %%% %|ſs º §. j f | | #iſ fift| Tºij || || # º §. itſ | | | # ill HELETE º– Q #4 # . gº º * §§ º º º § #º:=: #. º . | | | #jºlf ºlºr= { ºzº#º º | º --~~~~"Tºº-º- --- Kahn, or Inn. present, and probably the ancient, practice of the East, the first stage is always a short one, sel- dom exceeding two or three hours. CARAVANSARY (kär'à-ván'sá-ry). In the days of the elder patriarchs there seem to have been no places specially devoted to the re- ception of travelers, at least in the pastoral dis- tricts frequented by those venerable nomades; for we find Abraham, like the Oriental shepherds of the present day, under a strong sense of the diffi- culties and privations with which journeying in those regions was attended, deeming it a sacred duty to keep on the outlook, and offer the way- faring man the rites of hospitality in his own tent. - (1) First Mention. The first mention of an inn, or house set apart for the accommodation of travelers, occurs in the account of the return of Jacob's sons from Egypt (Gen. xlii:27), and as it was situated within the confines of that country, and at the first stage from the metropolis, it is probable that the erection of such places of entertainment originated with the Egyptians, who were far superior to all their contemporaries in the habits and the arts of civilized life, and who, though not themselves a commercial people, yet invited to their markets such a constant influx of foreign traders that they must have early felt the necessity and provided the comforts of those public establishments. The ‘inns' where travel- ers lodge in the East do not, however, bear the least resemblance to the respectable houses of of houses of public entertainment were always women (Herod. ii:35), and hence we can easily account for the ready admission which the spies obtained into the house of Rahab, “on the wall of Jericho,' situated, as such houses were, for the reception of strangers, for the most part at the gate or entrance into the town (Josh. ii:I). This woman is called a harlot in our translation. But the Hebrew, gomah, signifies also the land- lady of an inn or tavern—most of whom, doubt- less, in ancient times, were women of easy virtue —the more so as the idolatrous religion to which they were educated encouraged prostitution, and hence there being only a single word in the origi- nal descriptive of both professions, and the first having been adopted by the Septuagint, which was the common version of the Jews in the days of Paul and James (Heb. xi :3I ; James ii:25), those two apostles might have used the same ex- pression that they found there. The original Hebrew, however, admits of being translated by another word, to which no degrading or infamous associations are attached. (4) In the Time of Christ. The state of Judaea, in the time of Christ and the apostles, was probably, in respect to means of communica- tion, much superior to that of any Oriental coun- try in the present day, and we may be disposed to conclude that for the encouragement of inter- course between distant parts, that country was then studded with houses of public entertainment on a scale of liberal provision at present un- CARAVANSARY known in the same quarter of the world. But the warm commendations of hospitality so fre- quently met with in the works of contemporary classical writers, as well as the pressing exhorta- tions of the inspired apostle to the practice of that virtue, too plainly prove that travelers were then chiefly dependent on the kindness of private individuals. The strong probability is that the ‘inns' mentioned in the New Testament find their true and correct representations in the Eastern khans and caravansaries of the present day, and that, although the Jews of that period could not have been acquainted with the largest and most magnificent of this class of buildings, which do not date earlier than the commencement of the Mecca caravans, and which the devotion of Opu- lent Mussulmans then began to erect for the ac- commodation of the pilgrims, they had experi- ence of nothing better than the bare walls and cell-like apartments of such edifices as we have described above. Bishop Pearce, Dr. Campbell and others, indeed, have labored to show that karáXupa, guest chamber, the word used by Luke to denote the place whence Mary was excluded by the previous influx of strangers, is not Synony- mous with travôoxeſov, the com/zon 27771, the house to which the good Samaritan brought the wounded stranger, although in both instances our translators, for want of corresponding terms in the English language, have indiscriminately ren- dered it by ‘inn.’ Kataluma signifies the guest chamber (Mark xiv:14; Luke xxii; II), and it is extremely probable that, as upper rooms were al- ways the largest in a house, and most suitable for the reception of a numerous company, every re- spectable householder in Jerusalem appropriated one gratuitously to his friends, who flocked to Jerusalem at the annual feasts, and who, from that circumstance might call it their ‘inn.’ Pan- dokeion, again, was a house set apart for the ac- commodation of all strangers who could pay for their lodging and entertainment, and as the name seems to imply, was of a mean description, having no partition wall, men and cattle being both in- cluded under the same roof, the former Occupy- ing one side, and the latter the other. Bethlehem being the chief city of the family of David, a karáXvua, guest chamber, might have been placed by the kindness of some friend at the service of Joseph and Mary, who were wont to resort to it as often as business or friendship called them to town. But as the same privilege might have been offered to others, who, owing to the general census, flocked in such unwonted numbers that the first Comers completely OC- cupied every vacant space, they were obliged to withdraw to the travöoxeſov, com/207 2nn, where, in the only retired corner, viz., at the head of the cattle, the mother of Jesus brought forth her child. And ULCasions are coustantly occurring to set multitudes on travel, many of whom are driven, like Joseph and Mary, for want of room, from the inn to the adjoining stables. Many caravansaries, however, have not the ac- confirmodation of stables, the cattle being allowed to range in the open area, and hence has arisen an opinion warmly espoused by many learned writers and supported by a venerable tradition, that our Lord was born in an adjoining shed, or probably in a subterranean cave, like the grotto that is sometimes connected with the fountain of the place. The most complete establishments have very excellent stables in covered avenues, which extend behind the ranges of apartments—that is, between the back walls of these ranges of build- ings and the external wall of the khan, and the entrance to it is by a covered passage at one of 373 CAR CHEMISH the corners of the quadrangle. The stable is on a level with the court, and consequently below the level of the buildings, by the height of the platform on which they stand. Nevertheless, this platform is allowed to project behind into the stable, so as to form a bench, to which the horses' heads are turned, and on which they can, if they like, rest the nose-bag of haircloth, from which they eat, to enable them to reach the bottom when its contents get low. It also often happens that not only this bench exists in the stable, but also recesses corresponding to those in front of the apartments, and formed by the side walls which divide the rooms, being allowed to project behind into the stable, just as the projection of the same walls into the great area forms the re- cesses in front. These recesses in the stable or the bench, if there are no recesses, furnish ac- commodation to the servants and others who have charge of the beasts, and when persons find on their arrival that the apartments usually appro- priated to travelers are already occupied, they are glad to find accommodation in the stable, particu- larly when the nights are cold or the season in- clement. It is evident, then, from this descrip- tion, that the part of the stable called ‘the man- ger,’ could not reasonably have been other than one of those recesses, or at least a portion of the bench which we have mentioned, as affording ac- commodation to travelers under certain circum- StanceS. CARBUNCLE (kär"bün-k'l). The representative in the A. V. of the Hebrew words ek-dawāh, Tºš, blaze, sparkle, and baw-rek-ath', baw-reh'Éath, FPP FP73, shining like lightning. According to Dana, Pliny called three distinct minerals, the ruby spinel, the garnet and the sapphire, carbuncles. (See SAPPHIRE.) Perhaps the term ekdach may be a general one to de- note any bright, sparkling gem, but as it occurs only once (Is. liv :12), without any collateral evi- dence to aid us, it is impossible to determine the real meaning of the word. Baréketh is rendered smaragdus by Josephus, the Seventy and the Vulgate; and this is vin- dicated by Braun. (De Vest. Sacerd. Heb. p. 517, sq.) It was the third stone in the first row of the sacerdotal breastplate (Ex. xxviii:17; xxxix:IO), also one of the mineral treasures of the king of Tyre (Ezek. xxviii: 13). CARCAS (kär'kas), (Heb. P2 2, Aar-kas', se- vere), the seventh of the seven chamberlains, or ºuchs of King Ahasuerus (Esth. i: IO), B. C. 4ö3. GARCASE (kar'kas), (Heb. mostly nº neº-ay. * law', º, øeh'gher), the dead body of man or beast (Josh. viii.20; is giv:10: Heb. iii:17, etc). The Mosaic law was very strict in relation to the care of the dead, and the instructions given were in accordance with the most recent discov- eries of science. A dead body rendered the tent and all open cooking utensils unclean for seven days. Thorough purification was also enjoined after touching a corpse. (See UNCLEANNESS.) CARCHEMISH (kär'ke-mish), (Heb. *T2, Æar-Āem-eesh'), formerly Charchemish (2 Chron. xxxv.2O). A great fortress, west of the Euphrates, at a ford of the river and north of its confluence with the Sajur. It was also the eastern capital of the Hittites. - The Assyrian king, Assur-Natsu-pal (B. C. 885 to 860), threatened to assault it, but was bought CARE off with rich and numerous presents, for the un- interrupted prosperity of several centuries had filled it with merchants and riches. Sargon captured it in 717 B. C., and with it fell the empire of the Hittites (IS. x:9). In the prophecy of Jeremiah against Egypt he states: ‘Against the army of Pharaoh-necho, king of Egypt, which lay on the river Euphrates, at Car- chemish, and which Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, overthrew (B. C. 605) in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, the son of Josiah, king of Judah' (Jer. xlvi :2). According to 2 Chron. xxxv :20, Necho had five years before defeated and slain Josiah, who was in alliance with Baby- lon and had advanced to the Euphrates to take Carchemish. It is possible that the ruin of Carchemish dates from the battle. However that may be, long be- fore the beginning of the Christian era it had been supplanted by Mabog or Membij, and the great sanctuary which had made it a ‘holy city’ was transferred to its rival and successor. To Mr. Skene, for many years the English con- sul at Aleppo, is due the credit of first discover- ing the true site of the old Hittite capital. On the western bank of the Euphrates, midway be- tween Birejik and the mouth of the Sajur, rises an artificial mound of earth, under which ruins and sculptured blocks of stone had been found from time to time. It was known as Jerablüs, or Kalaat Jerablüs, ‘the fortress of Jerablüs,’ some- times wrongly written Jerabis; and in the name of Jerablüs Mr. Skene had no difficulty in recog- nizing an Arab corruption of Hierapolis. In the Roman age the name of Hierapolis, or “Holy City,' had been transferred to its neighbor Membij, which inherited the traditions and religious fame of the older Carchemish ; but when the triumph of Christianity in Syria brought with it the fall of the great temple of Membij, the name disappeared from the later city and was remembered only in connection with the ruins of the ancient Car- chemish. CARE (kär), CARES, (Gr. Aépuva, mer'ím-mah). The Greek word has the sense of being drawn in different directions, and answers to our dis- traction. It is used in the sense of anxiety in I Pet. v.:7, where it is contrasted with pºw, Zzze/o, to be of interest to, and may be read, “Casting all your anxiety upon him, for he is interested in you” (Comp. Ps. lv.22; Luke viii:14; xxi:34). CAREAH (ka-ré'ah), (Heb. Tº, Aaw-ray'akh, bald head), father of Johanan (2 Kings xxv:23), elsewhere spelt Kareah (B. C. 588). CAREFULNESS (kär'ful-nēs), (Heb. "???", deh- azy-gazeſ', trouble, Ezek. xii:18, 19; Gr. atrovöß, s?oo- day', dispatch, haste, diligence, 2 Cor. vii:II). “Without carefulness” is the rendering of Gr. duépupivos, aſſe-er'?/2-mos (I Cor. vii:32), without anxiety or worry. CARELESS and CARELESSLY have always the meaning of without trouble or anxiety, in security (the Heb. meaning always ‘to trust' or ‘confidence'); ‘careless' (Judg. xviii:7; Is. xxxii;9, Io, I I; Ezek. xxx:9, but R. V. adds Prov. xix:16, Heb. ‘a despiser'); ‘carelessly' (Is. xlvii:8; Ezek. xxxix:6; Zeph. ii:15). (Hastings' Bib. Dict.) CAREM (kā'rém), (Gr. Kapéu, Áah-rem'), a city of Judah interpolated by the Sept. (Josh. xv.:59). Probably Beth-Haccerem. CARIA (kā'ri-á), (Gr. Kapta, Áari'a), a country lying at the southwestern extremity of Asia Minor (I Macc. XV:22, 33). It was a separate district, B. C. I39, having the enjoyment of the privilege of freedom granted by 374 CARMEL the Romans. It was a little later incorporated in the province of Asia. Its principal towns were Halicarnassus, Cnidus and Myndus, which are all mentioned in the rescript of the Roman sen- ate. Halicarnassus was the birthplace of Herod- otus; Cnidus is mentioned in Acts xxvii:7, as having been passed by St. Paul on his voyage to Rome. CARITES (kär’i-tês). See CHERETHITES AND P. CARMANIANS (kār-mâ'ni-anz), (Carmamä). The inhabitants of Carmania, a province of Asia on the north side of the Persian Gulf (2 Esdr. XV:30). They are described by Strabo (xv. p. 727) as a warlike race, worshiping Ares alone of all the gods, to whom they sacrifice an ass. None of them 111a1 ried till he had cut off the head of an enemy and presented it to the king, who placed it on his palace, having first cut out the tongue, which was chopped up into small pieces and mixed with meal, and in this condition, after being tasted by the king, was given to the warrior who brought it to his family to eat. Nearchus says that most Of the customs of the Carmanians, and their language, were Persian and Median. (Smith, Bib. Dict.) CARMEL (karmel), (Heb. *TP, Aarmel, a planted field, park, garden). 1. A range of hills extending northwest from the plain of Esdraelon, and ending in a promon- tory or cape which forms the Bay of Acre. The extent of this range of hills is about six miles, not in a direct line, but the two extremi- ties (on the western side towards the sea) jut out, and Stand over against each other, forming a bow in the middle. The height is about 1,500 feet; and at the foot of the mountain, on the South, runs the brook Kishon, and a little further north, the River Belus. Mount Carmel consists rather of several connected hills than of one ridge, the north and eastern parts being some- what higher than the southern and western. The foot of the northern portion approaches the water very closely, so that, when seen from the hills northeast of Acre, the mountain appears as if dipping his feet in the western sea;' but further South it retires more inland, so as to leave be- tween the mountain and the sea an extensive and very fertile plain. Mount Carmel forms the only great promon- tory upon the coast of Palestine. According to the reports of most travelers the mountain well deserves its Hebrew name (Carmel—country of vineyards and gardens). Mariti describes it as ‘a delightful region,’ and says the good q11ality of its soil is apparent from the fact that many Odoriferous plants and flowers, as hyacinths, jonquils, tazettos, anemones, etc., grow wild upon the mountain (Travels, p. 274, sq). Otto von Richter (Wallfahrten, p. 64) gives the fol- lowing account: Mount Carmel is entirely cov- ered with verdure. On its summit are pines and oaks, and further down olives and laurel trees, everywhere plentifully watered. It gives rise to a multitude of crystal brooks, the largest of which issues from the so-called Fountain of Elijah ; and they all hurry along, between banks thickly over- grown with bushes, to the Kishon. Every species of tillage succeeds here admirably under this mild and cheerful sky. The prospect from the summit of the mountain over the gulf of Acre and its fertile shores, and Over the blue heights of Lebanon and the White Cape is enchanting. Isaiah (xxxv :2) alludes to ‘the excellency (splen- did ornaments) of Carmel.’ So, on account of the graceful form and verdant beauty of the sum- CARMELITE mit, the head of the bride in Cant. vii:5 is com- pared to Carmel. It was also celebrated for its pastures, and is therefore ranked with Bashan in Is. xxxiii:9; Jer. xlvi :18; Amos i :2). A forest probably consisting chiefly of fruit trees, was in its midst (Mic. vii:14). The mountain is of compact limestone, and, as often happens where that is the case (see CAVE), there are in it very many caverns—it is said, more than a thousand. In One tract, called the Monk's Cavern, there are as many as four hundred ad- jacent to each other, furnished with windows and with places for sleeping hewn in the rock. That the grottoes and caves of Mount Carmel were already, in very ancicnt times, the abode of prophets and other religious persons is well known. The prophets Elijah and Elisha often re- sorted thither (I Kings xviii: 19, sq. 42; 2 Kings ii:25; iv:25, and comp. perhaps I Kings xviii:4, I3). At the present day is shown a cavern called the cave of Elijah, a little below the Monks' Cavern already mentioned, and which is now a Moslem sanctuary. Upon the summit is an an- cient establishment of Carmelite monks, which order, indeed, derived its name from this moun- tain. The old convent was destroyed by Abdallah Pasha, who converted the materials to his own use; but it has of late years been rebuilt on a somewhat imposing scale by the aid of contribu- tions from Europe. 2. Another Carmel, among the mountains of Judah, is named in Josh. xv :55. It was here that Saul set up the trophy of his victory over Ama- lek (1 Sam. xv :12), and where Nabal was shear- ing his sheep when the affair took place between him and David, in which Abigail bore so con- spicuous a part (I Sam. xxv.2, sq.). This Car- mel is described by Eusebius and Jerome as, in their day, a village, with a Roman garrison, ten miles from Hebron, verging toward the east. From the time of the Crusades till the present century its name seems to have been forgotten. But it was recognized by recent travelers under the name of Kurmul. The place is now utterly desolate, but the ruins indicate a town of consid- erable extent and importance. The most remark- able ruin is that of a castle, quadrangular, stand- ing on a swell of ground in the midst of the town. A minute description of this and the other re- mains is given by Dr. Robinson (Bib. Researches, ii. pp. 195-20I). The distance of this place from Hebron is about nine Roman miles. CARMELITE (kär"mel-ite), (Heb. "???, Aar' me?-?), a native of Carmel in the mountains of Judah (I Sam. xxx:5; 2 Sam. ii:2; iii:3; xxiii:35; I Chron. xi:37). CARMELITESs (armelites), (Heb. * * Æar' mel-/ith), a woman of Carmel of Judah; used only of Abigail, the favorite of David (I Sam. xxvii:3; 1 Chron. iii: I). CARMI (kär"mi), (Heb. *T2, Aar'mee', fruitful, noble). 1. A man of Judah, father of Achan, the “trou- bler of Israel” (Josh. vii: 1, 18; 1 Chron. ii:7), accord- ing to which he is the son of Zabdi or Zimri. In I Chron. iv:I the name is given as the son of Judah, but the same person is probably in- tended. 2. The fourth son of Reuben, founder of the family of Carmites (Gen. xlvi :9; Ex. vi. I4; Num. xxvi :6; I Chron. v :3), B. C. 1872. CARMITES (kär'mites), (Heb. *T2, Aar'/mi), a branch of the tribe of Reuben, descended from Carmi (2) (Num. xxvi;6). 375 who “saw the king's face” (Esth. i: I4), CART CARNAIM (kār-nā’im), (Sept. Kapwatv, Áar-ma'- 2n). See ASHTAROTH. CARNAL (kär'nal), (from Gr. odpę, sarx, flesh), having the nature of flesh (Rom. vii:I4); governed by mere human nature, not by the Spirit of God (I Cor. iii:1, 3, “fleshly”). The ceremonial ordinances were carnal; they related immediately to the bodies of men and beasts (Heb. vii:I6 and ix:Io). Wicked men are carnal, and carnally minded; are under the do- minion of their sinful lusts, and habitually think of, desire after, and delight in, sinful and fleshly pleasures and enjoyments (Rom. viii:6, 7). Saints, especially if weak, are carnal; much sin continues in and prevails over them if their care for and delight in worldly things is great (Rom. vii; I4; I Cor. iii. 1-4). Ministers’ weapons are not carnal, are not merely human and natural (2 Cor. x:4). CARNION (kär'ni Ön). See ASIITAROTH. CARPENTER (kär'pën-tär), (Heb. ºl, Ahaw- 7-azº/s/...', 2 Sam. v. II; I Chron. xiv:1; Is. xliv, I 3, etc.; Gr. Téktov, tek' tone, Matt. xiii:55; Mark vi:3). A general term, including an artificer in stone and metal as well as wood. (See HANDICRAFT.) CARPUS (kär'pus), Gr. Káptros, Aarºos, fruit), a ºple of Paul who dwelt at Troas (2 Tim. IV: I3). CARRIAGE (kärºj) (Heb. *, *ekee). This word occurs only six times in the text of the A. V., and it may be useful to remind the reader that in none of these does it bear its modern sense, but signifies what we now call “baggage” (I Sam. xvii: 22 ; IS. X:28 ; I Macc. ix:35, 39 ; Acts xxi. I 5). In the margin of I Sam. xvii:20, and xxvi.5, 7– and there only—“carriage” is employed in the sense of a wagon or cart; the “place of the car- riage” answering , to “trench” in the text. The Hebrew word is Tºp, magalah", and the allusion is to the circle of wagons which surrounded the en- campment (Ges. Thes. 989). The Revised Version has substituted the appro- priate modern word in place of the obsolete term carrzage. CARSHENA (kär'she-nā or kār-shë'ná), (Heb. sººne, AEar-shen-azy"), one of the seven princes B.C. 483. CART (käri), (Heb. º. ag-aw-law'). . The Hebrew word rendered by our translators in some places by “wagon,' and in others by ‘cart,' denotes any vehicle moving on wheels, and wº ^s --- - 2\ Sºs A r." s==- - - Sº 'NS :- Sºlºš * **2" S - º a N §§ - - § \ § N §§ . S N §§ - § ſº § - §§ Egyptian Cart, with Two Wheels. usually drawn by oxen; and their particular char. acter must be determined by the context indicat- ing the purpose for which they were employed. First, we have the carts which the King of Egypt CARVING 376 sent to assist in transporting Jacob's family from Canaan (Gen. xlv.: IQ, 27). From their being so sent it is manifest that they were not used in the latter country; and that they were known there as being peculiar to Egypt is shown by the con- firmation which they afforded to Jacob of the truth of the strange story told by his sons. These carts, or wagons, were, of course, not war- chariots, nor such curricles as were in use among the Egyptian nobility, but were not suited for traveling. - Elsewhere (Num. vii:3, 6; I Sam. vi :7) we read of carts used for the removal of the sacred arks and utensils. These also were drawn by two OX6211. º A very curious vehicle used for such purposes by the Egyptians is little more than a platform on wheels; and the apprehension which induced Uzzah to put forth his hand to stay the ark when shaken by the oxen (2 Sam. vi :6), may suggest that the cart employed on that occasion was not unlike this, as it would be easy for a jerk to dis- place whatever might be upon it. - As it appears that the Israelites used carts, they doubtless employed them sometimes in the re- moval of agricultural produce, although we are not aware of any distinct mention of this prac- tice in Scripture. This is now the only use for which carts are employed in Western Asia. Assyrian Cart. Figuratite. The expression, “Woe unto them that draw ... sin, as it were, with a cart rope” (Is. v :18), is understood by some to refer to the binding of burdens upon carts, and so to the enslaving power of sin. Others think that cart rope is used in the sense of a trace, and that the metaphor is employed to illustrate the heavy burdens which must be drawn by the sinner. cARVING (karving), (Heb. *F, Aawlah, carve). The art of cutting letters, figures or images in wood, stone, ivory, metal or other material. Carve is rendered in the Auth. Vers, by several Hebrew words derived from Kawlah. It denotes sc11!pf11re (I Kings vi 20, 32, 35). It is applied to wood (I Kings vii:36), to gems (Ex. xxviii:9, 36; 2 Chron. ii:7, I4), to stone (Zech. iii:9). There was carved work in the construction both of the Tabernacle and the Temple (Ex. xxxi :2, 5; xxxv :33; 1 Kings vi :18, 35 ; Ps. lxxiv:6), as well as in the ornamentation of the priestly dresses (Ex. xxviii:9-36; Zech. iii:9; 2 Chron. ii:7, 14). Bezaleel, a man of Judah, and Aholiab were gifted for the work of carving for the tabernacle. In Solomon's time Huram the Phoenician had the chief care of this as of the larger architectural works. CASEMENT (kås'ment), (Heb. ***, esh-nawb', lattice window, Prov. vii:6). (See House.) - CASIPHIA (ka-siph'i-á), (Heb. Sº, Áaw-sif. yazy", white, shining). Ezra says that when return- CASTOR AND POLLUX ing to Judea he sent to Iddo, who dwelt at Ca- siphia; perhaps Mount Caspius, near the Caspian Sea, between Media and Hyrcania, or in or near Babylon, where were many captives (Ezra viii:17). CASLEU (kás'leu): name of the Jewish month (Neh. i: I; Zech. vii: I) elsewhere written CHISLEv or CHISI.F.U. - CASLUHIM (käslu-him),(Heb. Fºr?,Aas-ſoo'. Áhee?”), properly Casluchim, a people whose pro- fº was a son of Mizraim (Gen. x:14; I Chron. 1 : I.2). He, or they, for the word applies rather to a people than to an individual, are supposed by Bochart and others to have carried a colony from Egypt, which settled in the district between Pelu- sium and Gaza, or, in other words, between the Egyptians and the Philistines. Perhaps they were the inhabitants of Cassotis, a district on the Mediterranean Sea. There are some grounds for this conjecture; but it is impossible to obtain any certainty on so obscure a subject. CASPHOR (käs'för), (Gr. Xaorqºp, Aas-fore'), one of the fortified cities in the “land of Galaad” east of the Jordan (I Macc. v.:26), in which the Jews took refuge from the Ammonites under Tim- otheus (comp. v. 6), and which with other cities was taken by Judas Maccabaeus (v. 36). In the latter passage the name is given as Casphon, and in 2 Macc. xii; 13 as Caspis, if indeed the same place is referred to, which is not quite clear. Josephus calls it Casphoma (Antig. xii;8, 3), CASPIS (kås'pis), (Gr. Káatruv, AEas'??n), a strong fortified city—whether east or west of Jordan is not certain. It was taken by Judas Maccabaeus with great slaughter (2 Macc. xii: 13, 16). CASSIA (kāsh'à), (Heb. "...P, Aid-daw', shriveled, Exod. xxx:24; Ezek. xxvii:19; "Pºp, Aets-ee-aw', peeled). One of the ingredients in the composition of the “oil of holy ointment.” In Ezekiel it is men- tioned where “bright iron, cassia and calamus” are mentioned as articles of merchandise in the markets of Tyre. The Septuagint (in one pas- Sage) and Joseph. (Ant. iii:8, sec. 3) have iris, i. e., some species of flag, perhaps the Iris floren- tina, which has an aromatic root-stock. Sym- machus and the Vulg. (in Ex. xxx:23) read Stacte, “liquid myrrh.’ The translation of cassia by Áiddá% is supported by the Chaldee and Syriac, with most of the European versions. It probably denotes a species of the bark or wood. On the margin R. V. has costus. The costus of the an- cients was discovered by Falconer to be a com- posite plant with purple flowers, now called Aplo- taris lappa, growing in Cashmere from eight thousand to nine thousand feet above the sea level. It is exported to various countries, the valuable part being the root. The Chinese burn it in their temples for incense. (Davis, Bib. Dict.) Named only in the plural in Ps. xlv.:8 in connec- tion with myrrh and aloes to scent garments. . It probably refers to the peeled bark of some species of cinnamon. (See KINNAMON). CASTANET (käs’tá-nēt). See MUSICAL INSTRU- MENTS. CASTLE (käs"1). See ForT, FORTIFICATIONS. CASTOR and POLLUX (kås'tūr Ānd pè1'lúks), (Atóakovpot), the Dioscuri, £292m sons: in heathen mythology the twin sons of Jupiter by Leda. They had the special province of assisting persons in danger of shipwreck (Theocrit. Id. xxii: I; Xenoph. Symp. viii:29. Comp. Horat. Carm. i:3, 2; iv:8, 31); and hence their figures were often adopted for the sign (to trapáo muov, insigne), from which a ship de- CAT rived its name, as was the case with that 'ship of Alexandria' in which St. Paul sailed on his jour- ney for Rome (Acts xxviii:11). CAT (kát), (Gr. at Novgos, ah-ee"/oo-ros). ... It might be assumed that the cat was a useful, if not a necessary, domestic animal to the Hebrew people in Palestine, where corn was grown for exportation, as well as for consumption of the resident population, twenty or thirty fold more than at present, and where, moreover, the condi- tions of the climate required the precaution of a plentiful store being kept in reserve to meet the chances of Scarcity. The animal could not be unknown to the people, for their ancestors had witnessed the Egyptians treating it as a divinity. Yet we find the cat nowhere mentioned in the canonical books as a domestic animal. And in Baruch it is noticed only as a tenant of Pagan temples, where no doubt the fragments of sacri- ficed ailiinals and vegetables attracted verIIlin and rendered the presence of cats necessary. This singular circumstance, perhaps, resulted from the animal being deemed unclean, and being thereby excluded domestic familiarity, though the He- brews may still have encouraged it, in common with other vermin-hunters, about the outhouses and farms, and corn stores, at the risk of some loss among the broods of pigeons which, in Pal- estine, were a substitute for poultry. With regard to the neighboring nations just named, they all had domestic cats, it is presumed, derived from a wild species found in Nubia and first described by Ruppel under the name of Felis Maniculata. The typical animal is smaller, more slender and more delicately limbed than the European. The fur is pale, yellowish gray, with Some dark streaks across the paws and at the tip of the tail. In the domesticated state it varies in colors and markings, for the ancient monuments of Egypt contain many painted figures which show them cross-barred like the wild species in Europe. CATERPILLAR (kát'êr-pí1'lér). See CHAs IL. CATHOLIC CHURCH, ROMAN (IN THE UNITED STATES). The history of the Catholic Church in the ter- ritory now comprised by the states of the Union is the subject of this sketch. This history has two periods: the Mission period, during which the church's work was carried on by missionaries imported from Spain, France and England, and holding their jurisdiction from ecclesiastical su- periors in those respective countries; and the Hierarchical period, which began with the estab- lishment of the Episcopal See of Baltimore, and continues down to the present day, during which period the church’s work was, and is, carried on by a clergy organized in diocesan groups and holding jurisdiction from bishops appointed by the Holy See to govern determined districts known as dioceses. The former period extends from the arrival of Spanish missionaries in Florida, I521, to the appointment of the Rt. Rev. John Carroll to the see of Baltimore, 1789. There 1s an overlap- ping of this dividing line in the case of New Mexico and California for the reason that they came into the Union after the erection of the see of Baltimore. Spanish missionaries evangelized Florida, Ala- bama, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, 1521–1848. French missionaries evangelized Maine, northern New York, the southern coasts of the great lakes, the valleys of the Ohio and the Mississippi, 1604-1789. There is here an over- lapping in the case of Louisiana, which entered the Union in 1812. English missionaries evan- 377 CATHOLIC CHURCH, ROMAN gelized the Atlantic coast from Maine to Vir- ginia, I634-1789. (1) The Spanish Missions. In 1521 Ponce de Leon brought with him to Florida a certain num- ber of missionaries; but this expedition was driven back by the natives after a very short stay on land. Five years afterward, 1526, with Vasquez de Ayllon sailed two Dominican fathers and a lay brother. Ayllon reached the Chesapeake and formed a settlement, San Miguel, not far from the spot where almost a century later the English founded Jamestown. A temporary chapel was erected and the services of the church were cele- brated as long as the settlement lasted. It did not last long. Ayllon died, a severe winter set in, disease came, the settlers quarreled, and the Indians attacked them. When spring came, the colonists, disgusted and despairing, set sail for Cuba. In 1527 another expedition under Pam- ſilo de Narváez, with Franciscan and secular priests, was scattered by the natives and lost at Sea. Eleven years later, 1538, in the expedition of Hernando de Soto, most of the priests accom- panying him perished in the long, weary marches from Florida to Virginia and from the Atlantic to the Mississippi, in whose waters the ill-fated leader was buried. Eleven years later, I549, Luis Cancer de Barbastro, a Dominican, led to the Floridian coast a band of his brother religious, only to meet, on landing, a martyr's death. Ten years later, I559, fifteen hundred soldiers, many settlers, and four Dominican fathers, gathered in thirteen vessels, and started once more for Florida, under the command of Tristan de Luna. A cy- clone struck the fleet, destroying eight vessels and scattering the others. Those that escaped the storm remained on land for two years, were picked up by a passing fleet and brought back to Cuba. The government of Spain, after so many failures, decided that no more colonizing should be at- tempted in Florida; but just then France was trying to get a foothold on the southern Atlantic coast, and in order to keep France out, Spain made one supreme effort that succeeded in the permanent occupation and evangelization of Flor- ida by Spanish troops and missionaries. In 1565 was founded St. Augustine, the oldest city in the United States. Before the end of seventy years the number of Christian Indians was reckoned at twenty-five or thirty thousand, distributed among forty-four missions, under the direction of thirty-five Franciscan missionaries; while the city of St. Augustine, in care of secular priests, was well equipped with religious institutions and or- ganizations. The Indian languages were reduced to grammar, and books of instruction and prayer were written and published by the missionaries for the use of the natives. For one hundred and fifteen years Florida was in the exclusive pos- session of the Spanish government and the Span- ish missionaries. In 168o the settling of Scotch Presbyterians at Port Royal in South Carolina was the signal for a war of races, which went on, with intervals of quiet, until the treaty of Paris, 1763, transferred Florida to the British Crown. Out of the wrecked expedition of Pamfilo de Narvaez to Florida, 1527, Cabeza de Vaca, with three companions, was saved; and for ten years they wandered among the Indians of the South- west, finally making their way to Mexico, with wonderful reports of the countries they had traversed. Expeditions soon followed into those countries that went by the name of New Mexico. Noticeable are the expeditions of the Franciscan Mark of Nizza, I530; of Coronado, 1542, in which the Franciscan monk, John of Padilla, fell a martyr to his zeal for the CATHOLIC CHURCH, ROMAN 3 cause of religion. However, it was only in 1590 that a permanent occupation was effected, and the city of Santa Fé was founded by Don Juan de Onate. The missionary work was undertaken by Franciscan friars. After the first months of hardship and discouragement the work of evan- gelization went ſol ward at a marvelous rate; most of the natives were reckoned as being within the pale of the church; not less than sixty friars at once were in the field. Fourscore years after the founding of the colony, I680, the Indians rose in rebellion against the Spanish government; in a few weeks no Spaniard was left north of El Paso : Christianity and civilization were swept away at one blow. In a few years the Spanish power, taking advantage of the anarchy and the famine which fell upon the Indians after their rebellion, reoccupied the country and the missionaries were brought back. The work of the Gospel did not attain thereafter the success it had before the re- bellion, The later history of Spanish Christianity in New Mexico is a history of decline and decay; the white population increased, while the Indian dwindled. When New Mexico became part of the United States the number of missionaries was small, only seventeen, and the Indians were only some 20,000 out of a total population of 80,000. New Mexico, in Spanish times, comprised a large portion of our present territory of Arizona. Here the Franciscans labored in the conversion of the natives until the rebellion of 1680, after which period the field passed into the hands of the Jesuits until their suppression by the Spanish gov- ernment in 1767. Their central point was St. Francis Xavier del Bac, where still stands a noble church, and the best known of their missionaries was Father Kino. After the suppression of the Jesuits the missions of Arizona fell back to the Franciscans of New Mexico. Mission work in Texas began in 1689. H. H. Bancroft (“North Mexican States and Zeras," vol. xv, p. 631) sums up the condition of the Texan missions about the year 1785, naming his author- ities. From this summing up it appears that while the Spanish population, pure and mixed, was about 3,000, the Christian Indians were only 500. The number of natives baptized since 1690 was less than 10,000, and at no time had the neophytes ex- ceeded 2,000. The church buildings and decora- tions that are still in existence to-day show to what efficiency in handiwork the Indians were trained. * Though expeditions northward from Mexico along the coast of California were begun as early as 1542, yet it was only in 1769 that a permanent occupation was effected by the Spaniards and mission work was begun by the Franciscans in the present state of California. . The founder of the California missions was the famous Juniperro Serra. About him as a man and as a Christian there is complete agreement on all sides ; his name stands for what is best in religion and for what is most romantic in Spanish annals. He segregated his Indian converts from the military and the Spanish colonists. The military, composed the Presidio, the Spanish colonists the Pueblo, and the Indian converts the Mission. . This was a wise policy. The neighborhood of the military force was undoubtedly advantageous and frequently necessary for the safety of a mission. The intro- duction of white colonists was beneficial in put- ting before the Indians object lessons of agricul- fire and industry. But whereas Soldiers and Set- tlers were not likely to be, at all times, models of the religion they professed, it was prudent to keep the newly converted Indians from too close a con- tact with the Spaniard. Within the missions only * | 8. CATHOLIC CHURCH, ROMAN Christian natives resided, under the immediate spiritual and temporal government of the Fathers. Clustered around the mission buildings, wherein the children were educated and trained to mechan- ical and industrial trades, were the thatched huts in which lived the Indians. Forty-three years after the first foundation there were eighteen mis- sions and a Christian native population of 15,500. Sixty-five years after the foundation there were twenty-one missions, with a native population of 30,600. During the first quarter of this century (1808–1824) took place in Mexico the rebellion against Spanish rule and the establishment of the republic. This revolution brought on the secu- larization of the missions. Secularization meant the confiscation of the mission properties and the expulsion of the Franciscans. The total ruin of the missions and the return of the Indians to Savage life were the results of this inopportune policy. (2) The French Missions. The land reached by the Cabots in 1494 was Cape Breton Island, “which name,” says Parkman, “found on the oldest map, is a memorial of very early French voyages.” There is reason to believe that before the voyage of Cabot, French fishermen frequented the banks of Newfoundland; there is evidence that they did so as early as the year 1504. In the year I524 Giovanni da Verrazano, a Florentine sailor in the service of Francis I, touched the American coast near Cape Fear, in North Caro- lina, and skirted it northward as far as latitude 50. In three voyages—1534, 1535, 1541—Jacques Cartier ascended the St. Lawrence to a great Indian village, back of which rose a majestic mound that Cartier named Mount Royal ; he had christened Montreal. For half a century no French expeditions to the western continent took place on account of the disturbed condition of France. In 1603 Samuel de Champlain made a voyage of exploration up the St. Lawrence as far as Montreal. In 1605 he accompanied an ex- pedition to Nova Scotia as royal geographer, and surveyed our northern coasts as far south as Bos- ton Harbor. In 1608 he laid the foundations of Quebec, and this was the beginning of the great French colony of Canada called New France. In 1614 four Recollects (a branch of the Fran- ciscan order) came out to New France to attend to the spiritual wants of the settlers and convert the surrounding tribes. In 1625 came to Quebec the first band of Jesuits, whom the Recollects had called to their aid and to whom they left the field a few years later. In the days of French supremacy Canada com- prised Maine and northern New York. From I61 I till 1760, with short intervals of absence, the Jesuits labored among the Indians of Maine and converted most of them. In the list of their Maine missionaries the two most conspicuous names are Druillettes and Rale; the former by reason of his relations with the colony of Massa- chusetts, the latter by reason of his death at the hands of Massachusetts troops. In 1726 the In- dians of Maine became the subjects of England. After 1760, until early in the present century, they were left without missionaries, yet they did not lose the faith. Perhaps, for all we know, priests from Canada made them stealthy visits, and the Indians frequently visited the Canadian missions. Parents baptized and instructed their children. Every Sunday they assembled in the chapels of their villages, and before the priestless altars chanted mass and vespers, the Gregorian melodies being handed down from generation to generation. When the War of Independence was declared, the Indians of Maine joined the army CATHOLIC CHURCH, ROMAN 379 of Washington. To-day one thousand descend- ants of the neophytes of Druillettes and Rale hold the faith and sing the chants of their Cath- olic forefathers in the diocese of Portland, Maine. Northern New York was the home of the fierce Iroquois, who were ever the determined enemies of the French and the allies of the English in the contest of those two nations for supremacy in America. All Canada was in terror of these savages. “No man,” says Parkman, “could hunt, fish, till the fields, or cut a tree in the forest, without peril to his scalp.” “I had as lief,” writes a Jesuit, “be beset by goblins as by the Iroquois; the one are about as invisible as the other; our people are kept in a closer confinement than cver were monks or nuns in our smallest convents in France.” These savages first came in contact with the French missionaries (1642) when they captured Father Jogues on his way to the Huron country, now the province of Ontario. Jogues was run through the gauntlet in every village, was tied to the stake to be gashed and slowly burned, had his hands mutilated and was pre- served from final death only to be made a slave. He was released by the kindness and generosity of the Dutch of Fort Orange (now Albany), was sent down the Hudson to Manhattan, and thence made his way to France. The heroic missionary returned to the Iroquois country in 1646, was again put through his former tortures and finally brained by a tomahawk, October 18, 1646. The scene of his death was the present village of Auriesville, Montgomery county, N. Y.; a small Catholic chapel marks the spot. Fathers Bressani (1644) and Poncet (1653) were likewise subjected to the cruelties of these savages, and by the shed- ding of their blood prepared the Iroquois soil for the Gospel seed. It was in 1654 that missions were permanently established among them ; and they were continued with great success until 1687. During this period God’s grace produced mar- velous holiness in many a child of the forest; warriors, proud and cruel, were turned into hum- ble and merciful servants of the cross; women and maidens were made as chaste and virtuous as the female saints and martyrs of the first Chris- tian centuries; the chapels were frequented morning and evening, and the hymns of the old Church resounded throughout the woods of northern New York. According to the Relations of the Jesuits, between the years 1668 and 1678, there were two thousand two hundred and twenty- one baptisms in these missions. These figures, however, give an incomplete idea of the work done, for the reason that it was the policy of the fathers to lengthen the catechumenate of their dusky disciples so that the number of attendants at instructions and services was far beyond that of the baptized. Tile political jealousies and the almost constant wars between France and Eng- land put all end to this work of God. To-day remnants of the Iroquois tribes, still Catholic, are fo he found in Canada to the number of about three thousand. In the Northwest, along the shores of Lake Superior and Lake Michigan, were numerous Algonquin tribes that were first visited by the Jesuit missionaries in 1641. Permanent stations were established among them some twenty years later. In 1661 Father Menard established a mis- sion in Keweenaw Bay, and in 1665 Father Al- louez set up a mission in Ashland Bay. Ther:ce- forth missionary work in the West was reduced to a system, and central points were chosen for mission sites. Such a point was Sault Ste. Marie, a noted fishing place; for then, as to-day, the CATHOLIC CHURCH, ROMAN rapids were full of whitefish, and Indians from a distance came thither in crowds. Another cen- ter was La Pointe (now Ashland). Michili- mackinaw (now Mackinaw) and the great Mani- toulin islands were also chosen as mission sites. There was another spot in that western country famous for fish and game—Green Bay. In its neighborhood were a motley crowd of dusky in- habitanfs—Menominees, Pottowatomies, Winne- bagos, Sacs, Mascoutins, Miamis, Kickapoos, Outagamies. As early as 1669 Allouez founded there the mission of St. Francis Xavier. These were the early mission posts. The missions of the West do not record the bloody martyrdoms that marked those of the Huron and the Iroquois nations. The absence of any cruelties inflicted on the missionaries is evi- dence that already Christianity, now in contact with the tribes for many years, had gained their respcct and was beginning to Soſtell their fierce natures. But here more than elsewhere the mis- sionaries had to suffer from the rigor of the cli- mate, the dangers of long voyages by water and land, the absence of the comforts of civilization as to food, dwelling, Society; and from the oppo- sition and obstacles by which their work was impeded; opposition on the part of the Indians— medicine-men and polygamy; on the part of the French traders—licentiousness and brandy. It is no wonder the success of the missionaries was slow. Moreover, it must be kept in mind that success is to be measured not so much by the number of baptisms at any one period as by the silent influence of Christian teaching on the In- dian nature. It must also be remembered that the catechumens always outnumbered the bap- tized. A few statistics from the Relations of the Jesuits gives some idea of the work done: In I669, at La Pointe, Ashland Bay, two villages out of five were entirely Catholic; in 1677 there were I,800 Catholics at Mackinaw ; in 1676 there were 500 Catholics at Green Bay; in 1670, at Sault Ste. Marie Bruillettes baptized I2O children and 300 adults. Besides mission work the mission- aries were occasionally engaged in discovery, and thus were immortalized the names of Marquette and Hennepin. The foundation of Detroit by Cadillac, 1701, brought about great changes in the mission. Cadillac's plan was to gather around this new post all the western tribes east of the Mississippi. His intention was to prevent their trade from going northward to the English in the Hudson Bay country, whither it was coaxed by better prices and cheaper brandy. The Jesuits opposed the policy of Cadillac, holding that the less con- tact there was between the Indians and the whites the better for the Christianization and civiliza- tion of the former. The missions dwindled while Letroit grew and drew the indians to 1t. The suppression of the Jesuits by the French gov- ernment and the Surrender of New France to England put an end to the glorious work which the Society had carricq on in the Northwest for the period of one hundred years. To-day there are about twenty thousand Catholic Indians in our Western States, who are descendants of the tribes evangelized by the Jesuits during those one hundred years. The Illinois country (Illinois and Indiana as far south as the Ohio) and Louisiana (the ter- ritory south of the Ohio to the Gulf) were also the theater of missionary work by the Jesuits and sccular priests from Quebec during the period of French supremacy. Little result among the In- dians of Louisiana was obtained because the mis- sionaries were almost entirely occupied in the CATHOLIC CHURCH, ROMAN white settlements. In the Illinois country much mission work was done among the Illinois and Miamis, whose population did not exceed eighteen thousand souls. The most successful period of the Illinois missions was from 1725 to 1750. The principal centers were Kaskaskia, Fort St. Louis, Cahokia, Peoria, St. Joscph at the head of Lake Michigan, Fort Chartres, Vincennes and in later times Ste. Genevieve and St. Louis. From all this country the Indians have disap- peared and the French settlers at the points named have become the nuclei of flourishing Catholic communities. To-day we find traces of the work of the early missionaries among our present Indians, who formerly lived in the East and the Northwest, in Florida and New Mexico, but none among the Indians from the lower Mis- sissippi Valley, if we except a small band of Quapaws from Arkansas, now living in the Indian Territory. The blame must be laid to the misun- derstanding between the Jesuits and the seculars; the Jesuits and the Capuchins of Louisiana; to the want of zeal in the government for the work of the missions, to the suppression of the society just at the time it was entering this field, and, finally, to the political jealousies and wars of the Euro- pean nations fighting for the mastery of North America. It is a pity; for the Indians whose former home was in that section are the most civilized, cultivated and wealthy of the 248,340 still remaining in the United States, according to the calculations of the Indian Bureau. Of this total it is hard to say how many are Catholics. Hoffman's Catholic Directory of 1894 says 97,850; Sadlier's Catholic Directory of 1894 says 58,750; the Independent of April 5, 1894, says 45, Izo; perhaps it will be safe for us to Say 50,- ooo. At any rate, this may be said with certainty: That there was not a tribe in all the extent of the United States to which the gospel was not 380 CATHOLIC CHURCH, ROMAN reason that the whites soon drove the aborigines from those states. In 1691 the Protestant settlers in Maryland having become more numerous than the Catholic, Lord Baltimore's act of toleration was revoked, the Anglican was made the established church, and then began for the Catholics of Maryland from that of England, preached by Catholic missionaries from the year 1520 down to the time of our War of Independ- ence; and again, this, that the missionaries of the old church are now once more at work among the aborigines, parked in their reservations, to preserve the fruits of the labors of their prede- cessors, and to reclaim to Christianity and civili- zation the sad remnants of a race once the master of this splendid domain. - (3) The English Missions. After an unsuc- cessful attempt at the foundation of a colony in Newfoundland, Lord Baltimore secured from the English crown, 1632, a grant of land including the present states of Maryland and Delaware. He was to be the lord proprietary; that is to say, the viceroy of this territory, with all legislative and executive powers under the sovereignty of the crown. He could admit to his colony or could lºeep out of it whom he chose. That he, though a Catholic, admitted Christians of all de- nominations and guaranteed to them religious equality, is a fact that entitles him to the credit of being the originator of religious liberty on this continent. Such was the policy of the Baltimores from the very beginning of their colonization, and the policy was enacted into a law in 1649. The colonists of Lord Baltimore landed from the Ark and the Dove at the mouth of the Po- tomac, March 25, 1634. With them were two Jesuits, White and Altham. The work of the church from Virginia to Massachusetts remained exclusively in the hands of the Society of Jesus from 1624 to 1790, or the space of 156 years. Their labors extended into Pennsylvania, New Jersey and New York, and were concerned mostly with the Catholic settlers from Europe. With Indians they had very little to do, for the a period of legal proscriptions and persecutions like those of New England, that lasted until the War of the Revolution. In the War of Inde- pendence, Catholics joined the army and the navy in numbers out of all proportion to their popu- lation. Catholic officers from Catholic lands (Ire- land, France and Poland) came to offer their services to the cause of liberty. France and Spain were the first to recognize our independence and send legations. Our first diplomatic circle was Catholic; this accounts for the solemn church services to which the federal authorities and mili- tary officers were invited on great national oc- casions. Then came to our shores French fleets and French regiments, with their chaplains and religious services. The spirit of intolerance gave way gradually before these Catholic manifesta- tions and a new keynote was sounded in the fol- lowing words of the Continental Congress, 1774: “As an opposition to the settled plan of the British administration to enslave America will be strengthened by a union of all ranks of men within this province, we do most earnestly rec- ommend that all former differences about religion or politics from henceforth cease and be forever buried in oblivion.” The Revolutionary War broke the connection of the Catholic communities in the colonies with the Vicar Apostolic of London. A decree making . the church of the United States a body distinct and appointing the V. Rev. John Carroll Prefect Apostolic of the church in the United States, was issued by the Propaganda, June 9, 1784. The following year Father Carroll sent to Rome a Relation of the State of Religion in the United States: In Mary- land were 15,800 Catholics; in Pennsylvania, 700; in Virginia, 200; in New York, I,500; in the territory bordering on the Mississippi, an unas- certainable number destitute of priests; in Mary- land there were 19 priests; in Pennsylvania, 5. In November, 1789, Father Carroll was appointed Bishop of Baltimore. When the news reached England, Thomas Weld of Lulworth Castle, a personal friend of Carroll, invited him to allow the ceremony of his consecration to take place in the chapel of the castle. Carroll accepted the invitation and was consecrated August 15, 1790, by the Rt. Rev. Charles Walmesley, Senior Vicar Apostolic of England. The mission period of the church in the United States was closed, and the hierarchical period was opened hy this event. (4) The Hierarchical Period, 1790-1898. As it would take too much space to relate in detail the expansion of the church during this period, we present a single table showing the present con- dition of the church in the United States. Present Condition of the Catholic Church in the United States. Archbishops. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I I Bishops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 Religious Clergy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,774 Secular Clergy . . . . . . . . & © tº º e s e s e e e s e e º e 8,137 Churches. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,946 Missions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e gº © e º ºs e e º e º a 3,472 Stations and Chapels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5, IOS Universities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I6 Secular Seminaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Students in the above . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,OO2 CATHOLIC CHURCH, ROMAN Religious Seminaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 Students in the above. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,871 Colleges for Boys. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 IS Academies for Girls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 614 Parishes with Schools. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . º 3,636 Children in the above. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 819,575 Orphan Asylums . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 Orphans. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33,039 Charitable Institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 757 Catholic Population. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,856,622 It has been stated above what was the Catholic population in the thirteen colonies at the end of the last century. A small accession came with the annexation of Louisiana, Florida and the French possessions on the lakes and in the basins of the Mississippi and the Ohio. In 1830 the Catholic population was 361,000. Since then the annexation of New Mexico and California have added a few thousand (say fifteen thousand); but the chief sources of growth were innmigration, So abundant since 1829, and the natural increase of population, admittedly larger with Catholics than with Protestants. We have had some losses; not, however, so extensive as has been claimed. Not only immigration, but conversions also have added to the number of Catholics and have offset, if not completely, at least in part, their past losses. On this point Leonard Woolsey Bacon, in “History of American Christianity,” vol. 13 of “The American Church History Series,” writes: “It has not been altogther a detriment to the Catholic Church in America that the social status and personal composition of its congregations, in its earlier years, have been such that the transi- tion into it from any of the Protestant churches could be made only at the cost of a painful self- denial. The number of accessions to it has been thereby lessened, but the quality of them has been severely sifted.” - Two memorable movements, one within and one without the church, Trusteeism and Know- nothingism, were dangers through which the church passed with some loss, but with final tri- umph. Trusteeism began in New York as early as 1785 and ended in Buffalo in 1852. Within that period it is to be met with in New York, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New Orleans and Vir- ginia. It consists in the following assumptions: Trustees, not content to hold and administer church property, furthermore asserted that the congregation, represented by its trustees, had the right to choose its pastor, to dismiss him at pleas- ure and that the ecclesiastical superior or bishop had no right to interfere beyond confirming the action of the trustees. Such principles are sub- versive of the constitution of the church and were fought until they were completely eliminated from the minds of the laity. “One effect of the enormous immigration,” writes Leonard Woolsey Bacon in the work quoted above, “was inevitably to impose upon this church, according to the popular apprehen- sion, the character of a foreign association. It was in like manner inevitable, from the fact that the immigrant class are preponderantly poor and of low social rank, that it should for two or three generations be looked upon as a church for the illiterate and unskilled laboring class. An inci- dent of the excessive torrent rush of the immi- gration was that the Catholic Church became to a disproportionate extent an urban institution, mak- ing no adequate provision for the dispersed in agricultural regions. * “Against these and other like disadvantages the hierarchy of the Catholic Church have struggled heroically, with some measure of success. The steadily rising character of the imported popu- 381 CATHOLIC CHURCH, ROMAN lation in its successive generations has aided them. If in the first generations the churches were con- gregations of immigrants served by an imported clergy, the most strenuous exertions were made for the founding of institutions that should Se- cure to future congregations born upon the soil the services of an American-trained priesthood. One serious hindrance to the noble advances that have nevertheless been made in this direction has been the fanatical opposition levied against even the most beneficent enterprises of the church by a bigoted Native-Americanism. It is not a hope- ful method of conciliating and naturalizing a foreign element in the community to treat them with Suspicion and hostility as alien enemies. The shameful persecution which the mob was for a brief time permitted to inflict on Catholic churches and schools and convents had for its chief effect to confirm a foreigner in his adher- ence to his Church and his antipathy to Protes. tantism.” The Know-nothing movement lasted from 1830 to 1850 and showed its worst features lºoston, Philadelphia, New York and Louis- V1116. The great Civil War, that assured by an ap- palling sacrifice of wealth and lives the faltering unity of this nation, and shattered for a time the seeming unity of many religious denomina- tions, did but bring into clearer evidence the hierarchial unity of the Catholic Church. Its members, it is true, divided off on political grounds; it was their right and, as they sup- posed, their duty; but there was not any division in organization, discipline and faith. To both sides of the conflict the Church sent her heroes of charity, and oftentimes, indeed, the same heroes to both sides; detailed her priests from the parish and the college, her nuns from the Orphan asylum and the schoolroom, to the camp, the hospital, the prison and the bloody battle-field. Meanwhile her sacred edifices resounded with earnest peti- tions to heaven for peace, with solemn requiems for the fallen on the field; and not infrequently they were turned into hospitals for the wounded and the dying brought in from the battle raging near by. The chief formative forces of the Church's interior life were her legislative assemblies. Coun- cils are ecumenical, plenary or national, and pro- vincial. An assembly of all the Catholic bishops of the world, convoked by the authority of the Pope, or at least with his consent, and presided over by him or his legates, is an ecumenical council. An assembly of all the bishops of a country—say the United States—convoked by the primate or other dignitary commissioned thereto by the Pope, is a national or plenary council. An assembly of all the bishops within the territory known as a province, convoked and presided over by the metropolitan or archbishop, is a prºvincial diocese, convoked and presided over by the council. An assembly of all the priests of a bishop, is a diocesan Synod. Ecumenical councils define doctrine and deal with matters of discipline concerning the Church in the whole world. Plenary and provincial coun- cils do not define, but at most only repeat the doctrine defined by the ecumenical councils; their chief purpose is to apply by explicit statutes, to each country or province the universal discipline determined by the ecumenical councils and the Holy See, or to initiate such discipline as the peculiar circumstances of the nation or provinge demand. Diocesan synods promulgate and apply more intimately to each diocese the disciplinary enactments of the Holy See, the ecumenical, plenary and provincial councils, emphasizing those CATTLE 382 enactments which the specific conditions or abuses in each diocese render most necessary. Numerous diocesan Synods have been held in the United States, and not a few provincial coun- cils, at least in the elder provinces; and three plenary councils have been held within this first century of the organized hierarchy. The col- lection of the acts of those various assemblies is an important source of our Church history. The most remarkable Catholic event in the last decade was the establishment of the Apostolic Delegation in Washington. The Pope has the right to be present in the Church of each country through a representative, if he deem it expedient. Legates represent the person of the sovereign pontiff. They are sent to exercise his authority So far as it is communicated to them. They are not sent to seize or lessen or absorb the authority of the local bishops, no more than the papacy itself seizes or lessens or destroys the local epis- copate. They arc not aliens, like ambassadors to a foreign country; they are, wherever they may be, within the household of the supreme father who sent them, for they are within the Church directly subject to him ; they are in the ecclesias- tical territory of their sovereign. To the Catho- lic, wherever he may be, considered from the re- ligious point of view as a Catholic, the Pope is not a foreigner, and his representative is not a foreigner. Not only is the right to send delegates to the churches of the world inherent in the papacy, but it has been exercised by the Holy See from the earliest times of Christianity, as might be abun- dantly proved if that question were the specific subject matter of these pages. It is well to know that the establishment of the Apostolic Delega- tion in the United States is not due, as many suppose, to accidental and transitory causes, though such may have furnished the occasion; but that it is the natural consequence of the first principles of our Church Constitution, and is in perfect accord with traditional practice of past ages. It is hardly necessary to add that the dele- gation to the United States is strictly ecclesias- tical and not at all diplomatic. The American delegate is accredited to the Church, not to the government of the United States. T. O’G. CATTLE (kát’t'1). See BEASTs; BULL. CAUDA (kau-da). See CLAUDA. CAUL (kal), (Heb.F.T. yoh-theh'reth, diaphragm or midriff). 1. It generally means a network, and is employed to signify the midriff, or network or the lesser omentum, a layer of the inner lining of the cavity of the belly partly enveloping the liver of all animals, as the greater omentum does the stomach (Ex. xxix: I 3, 22; Lev. iii:4, IO, I5). 2. A covering of network for worrien's heads (IS. iii:18). Figuratite. “To rend the caul” of one's heart, is violently to bereave him of life, and, as it were, tear him asunder quickly, in the manner of wild beasts (Hos. xiii:8). CAUSEY (ka'zy) or CAUSEWAY (kaz'wä), (Heb. Tºpº, mes-i/-/aw'; Fr. chaussée), a raised or paved way (I Chron. xxvi; 16, 18 and Prov. xv.19, 2/2argin, in the A. V. ed. 1611), but afterwards changed to, causeway, a corruption for causey. “Causeway,” however, is found in the margin of Is. vii:3 in A. V. ed. I61 I. CAVE (kāv), (Heb. myº, meh-aw-razy"), in A.V. Is. ii:19, hole (Is. xxxii; I4; Jer. vii:II, dem). Comp. Josh. x:16, 17. A hollow place in the side of a hill; a den or hole in the earth. CAVE The geological formation of Syria is highly favorable to the production of caves. It consists chiefly of limestone, in different degrees of den- sity, and abounds with subterranean rivulets. The Springs issuing from limestone generally contain carbonate of lime, and most of them yield a large quantity of free carbonic acid upon exposure to the air. To the erosive effect upon limestone rocks, of water charged with this acid, the formation of caves is chiefly to be ascribed. The subordinate strata of Syria, Sandstone, chalk, basalt, natron, etc., favor the formation of caves. Consequently the whole region abounds with subterranean hol- lows of different dimensions. Some of them are of immense extent; these are noticed by Strabo, who speaks of a cavern near Damascus capable of holding 4,000 men. (1) First Mention. The first mention of a cave in Scripture relates to that into which Lot and his two daughters retired from Zoar after the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. xix : 30). It was some cavern in the mountains of Moab, but tradition has not fixed upon any of the numerous hollows in that region. (2) Machpelah. The next is the cave of Mach- pelah, in the field of Ephron, which Abraham pur- chased of the sons of Heth (Gen. xxv :9, Io). There Abraham buricó Sarah, and was himself afterward buſied ; there also Isaac, Rebecca, Leah and Jacob were buried (Gen. xlix:32; 1:13). The cave of Machpelah is said to be under a Mahom- etan mosque, surrounded by a high wall called the Haram ; but even the Moslems are not allowed to descend into the cavern. The tradition that this is the burial place of the patriarchs is supported by an immense array of evidence. (3) Makkedah. The situation of the cave at Makkedah, 1nto which the five kings of the Am- morites retired, after their defeat by Joshua, and into which their carcasses were ultimately cast, is not known (Josh. x:16, 27). (4) Artificial. Some of the caves mentioned in the Scriptures were artificial, or consisted of nat- ural fissures enlarged or modified for the purposes intended. It is recorded (Judg. vi :2) that, ‘be- cause of the Midianites, the children of Israel made them the dens which are in the mountains, and caves and strongholds.” Caves made by art are met with in various quarters. An innumerable multitude of excavations are found in the rocks and valleys around Wady Musa, which were prob- ably formed at first as sepulchers, but afterward inhabited, like the tombs of Thebes. (5) Dwelling Places. Caves were used as dwelling places by the early inhabitants of Syria. The Horites, the ancient inhabitants of Idumaea Proper, were Troglodytes or dwellers in caves, as their name imports. Jerome records that in his time Idumaea, or the whole southern region from Eleutheropolis to Petra and Ailah, was full of habitations in caves, the inhabitants using subter- ranean dwellings on account of the great heat. The Scriptures abound with references to habita- tions in rocks; among others, see Num. xxiv:21; Cant. ii:14; Jer. xlix:I6; Obad. 3. Even at the present time many persons live in caves. (6) Places of Refuge. Caves afforded excel- lent refuge in the time of war. Thus the Israel- ites (I Sam. xiii:6) are said to have hid them- selves in caves, and in thickets, and in rocks, and in high places, and in pits. See also Jer. xli :9; Joseph. Antiq. xii: II, I. Hence, then, “to enter into the rock, to go into the holes of the rocks, and into the caves of the earth' (Is. ii:19), would, to the Israelites, be a very proper and familiar way to express terror and consternation. The pits CEDAR 383 spoken of seem to have consisted of large wells, in ‘the sides' of which excavations were made, leading into various chambers. Such pits were sometimes used as prisons (Is. xxiv:22; li:I4; Zech. ix:II); and with niches in the sides, for burying places (Ezek. xxxii:23). Many of these vaulted pits remain to this day. (7) Strongholds of Engedi. The strongholds of Engedi, which afforded a retreat to David and his followers (I Sam. xxiii:29; xxiv.: I ), can be clearly identified. They are now called 'Ain Tidy by the Arabs, which means the same as the He- brew, namely, ‘The Fountain of the Kid.’ ‘On all sides the country is full of caverns, which might serve as lurking places for David and his men, as they do for outlaws at the present day. The whole scene is drawn fo the life’ (Robinson, ii:203). (8) Adullam. The cave of Adullam, to which David retired to avoid the persecutions of Saul (I Sam. xxii:I, 2), and in which he cut off the skirt of Saul’s robe (I Sam. xxiv:3), is an im- mense natural cavern of the Wady Khureitun, which passes below the Frank mountain. (9) Fortified Caverns. Caverns were also fre- quently fortified and occupied by soldiers. Jo- sephus often mentions this circumstance. lates also that Herod sent horsemen and footmen to destroy the robbers that dwelt in caves and did much mischief in the country. The mention of cazes of robbers reminds us of Our Lord's words, in which he reproaches the Jews with having made the Temple, a trij)\atos \matów, a deſt of thieves (Matt. xxi.13). In the for- mer of these passages Josephus calls them toys év toºs o Tºm Natous Xmatas, Z/he robbers 277 f/he cazes, and in the latter, Amatów Tuvøv ev aſtrºm) atous katotków- vTwv, certazzº robbers , Ziving in caves. Certain caves were afterward fortified by Josephus him- Self during his command in Galilee under the Romans. . In one place he speaks of these as the Caverns of Arbela, and in another as the caverns near the lake Gennesareth. A fortified cavern existed in the time of the Crusades. It is men- tioned by William of Tyre as situate in the coun- try beyond the Jordan sixteen Roman miles from Tiberias. (10) Cave of Elijah. The cave of Elijah is pretended to be shown, at the foot of Mount Sinai, in a chapel dedicated to him, and a hole near the altar is pointed out as the place where he lay. CEDAR (sê'dër), (Heb. TN. eh"reg). See EREs. CEDRON (sê'dron), (John xviii:1). See KIDRON. CEILED or CEILING (sêld, sel'íng). 1. Heb. Tºº, AE/aw-ſaw', to veil or incase (2 Chron. iii.5, “He ceiled the greater house with fir-tree”). 2. P, saw-ſan', to cover, “It is ceiled with cedar” (Jer v.vii. 1). * * *yº is º 3. TTP, shaw-kheef, cut thin (Ezek. xli.16). The Orientals bestow much attention upon the ceilings of their principal rooms. Where wood is not scarce they are usually composed of one curious piece of joinery, framed entire and then raised and nailed to the joists. These ceilings are often divided into small square compartments, but are sometimes of more complicated patterns. Wood of a naturally dark color is commonly chosen, and it is never painted. In places where wood is scarce, and sometimes where it is not particularly so, the ceilings are formed of fine plaster, with tasteful moldings and ornaments, colored and relieved with gilding and with pieces of mirror inserted in the hollows formed by the involutions of the raised moldings of the ara- besques, which enclose them as in a frame. The He re- . CENSUS antiquity of this taste can be clearly traced by actual examples up to the times of the Old Tes- tament, through the Egyptian monuments, which display ceilings painted with rich colors. These satisfactorily illustrate the peculiar em- phasis with which "ceiled houses' and ceiled chambers' are mentioned by Jeremiah (xxii:I4) and Haggai (i:4). & CELLAR (sé1'lér), (Heb. T}^N, o-zsawr', some- thing laid up), an underground vault for storage of wine and oil (I Chron. xxvii:27, 28). The same word is applied to the royal treasury (I Kings xiv:26), and also to the treasury of the Temple (I Kings vii:51). CENCHREAE (sén'kre-ae), (Gr. Keyxpeat, Æeng. Åhreh-a'/hee, like millet grains), one of the ports of Corinth, whence Paul sailed for Ephesus (Acts xviii:18). It was situated on the eastern side of the isthmus, about seventy stadia from the city; the Other port on the western side of the isthmus was Called Lechaeum. (See CoRINTH.) CENSER (sên'sār), (Heb. Tºº?, maſſ/-faw', a firepan; ºp”, miſ-zeh"reth, from Tºº, miſſ- tawr', incense), the vessel in which incense was presented in the temple (2 Chron. xxvi; 19; Ezek. viii: I I; Ecclus. 1:9). Censers were used in the daily offering of in- cense and yearly on the day of atonement, when the high-priest entered the Holy of Holies. On the latter occasion the priest filled the censer with live coals from the sacred fire on the altar of burnt-offering, and bore it into the Sanctuary, where he threw upon the burning coals the ‘Sweet incense beaten small' which he had brought in . his hand (Lev. xvi :12, I3). In this case the in- cense was burnt while the high-priest held the censer in his hand, but in the daily offering the censer in which the live coals were brought from the altar of burnt-offering was set down upon the altar of incense. This alone would suggest the probability of some difference of shape between the censers used on these occasions. The daily censers must have had a base or stand to admit of their being placed on the golden altar, while those employed on the day of atonement were probably furnished with a handle. In fact, there are different names for these vessels. Those in daily use were called miktereth, from the He- brew word denoting incense; whereas that used on the day of atonement is distinguished by the title of michtah or ‘coal-pan.’ We learn also that the daily censers were of brass (Num. xvi :39), whereas the yearly one was of gold. The numerous figures of Egyptian censers, con- sisting of a small cup at the end of a long shaft or handle (often in the shape of a hand), probably offer adequate illustration of those em- ployed by the Jews on the day of atonement. It is observable that in all cases the Egyp- tian priests had their costly incense made up into small round pellets, which they projected successively from between their finger and thumb into the censer, at such a distance that the opera- tion must have required a peculiar knack, to be acquired only by much practice. As the incense used by the Jews was made up into a kind of paste, it was probably employed in the same manner. CENSUS (sén'sús). This term does not occur in the A. V., although found in the original (Matt. xvii:25, kāvgos, Aame'sos, A. V.“tribute”). The act is, however, referred to in the Heb. Tºº, m?f. Æawd", or mºre, Zeß-ood-dazy", numbering; and the Gr. 3Toypadſ, aft-og-raf-ay", enrollment). (See POPULATION.) CENTURION CENTURION (sén-tū’rī-lìn), (Gr. Škarovrápxms, he/*-a-don-far'A/hace, and ékatóvapxos, he/*-a-ton'tar- Áhos, commander of a hundred), a Roman military Officer in Command of a hundred men, as the title implies. Cornelius, the first Gentile convert to Christian- ity, held this rank (Acts x:I, 22). Other Cen- turions are mentioned in Matt. viii:5, 8, 13; xxvii:54; Luke vii:2, 6; Acts xxi :32; xxii:25, 26; xxiii:17, 23; xxiv:23; xxvii:I, 6, II, 31, 43; xxviii:I6. es CEPHAS (sê'phas), (Gr. Knºpäs, Aay fas'). A surname which Christ bestowed upon Simon (John i:42), and which the Greeks rendered by IIérpos and the Latins by Petrus, both words meaning a ‘rock,” which is the signification of the Original. (See PETER.) CERATIA (se-ra'tia), (Gr. Keparta, Äer-ah-tee'ah), (Ceratonia) is the name of a tree of the family of Leguminous plants, of which the fruit used to be callcd Sz/zylta edu/is and Sz/27%a afte/c2s. The word Kerateeon occurs in Luke xv :16, where it has been translated husks in the author- 2sº 9. D § Ø <-2^_^_^- - - * S Š / ‘S wº Ø cº’ Ž S-> \ º Sºº-ºº: Sº Tº £º §§* . iº N. º § ..º. º S. & S. gº §§ , Nº ... º. RS N & , , w §§ §§§§§ §º;§§º Husks of the Bible. ized version. The Italians call the tree Caroba, the French Carroubier, and the English Carob- tree. By come it has been thought, hit appar- ently without reason, that it was upon the husks of this tree that John the Baptist fed in the wil- derness ; from this idea, however, it is often called St. John’s Bread and Locust-tree. The Carob-tree grows in the south of Europe and north of Africa, usually to a moderate size, but it sometimes becomes very large, with a trunk of great thickness, and affords an agreeable shade. The quantity of pods borne by each tree is very considerable, being often as much as 800 or goo pounds weight; they are flat, brownish-colored, from 6 to 8 inches in length, of a subastringent taste when unripe, but, when come to maturity, they secrete, within the husks and round the seeds, a sweetish-tasted pulp. When on the tree the pods have an unpleasant odor, but when dried upon hurdles they become eatable, and are valued by poor people, and during famine in the coun- 384 CHABAZZELETH tries where the tree is grown, especially in Spain and Egypt, and by the Arabs. They are given as food to cattle in modern, as we read they were in ancient, times; but, at the best, can only be considered very poor fare. CETUBIM (két'u-bim), (Heb. Fº, Aet-u- Özm', the writings). One of the three larger divisions of the Old Testament used by the Hebrews, and thus dis- tinguished from the Law and the Prophets as being in the first instance committed to writing and not delivered orally. Hence the book of Daniel is , found in this division. This is the division of Scripture known also by the corre- sponding Greek name of Hagiographa. It con- tained Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Canticles, Ruth, LaIIle11tations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra and Nehemiah, and Chronicles. CHABAZZELETH (kā-báz’ze-leth), (Heb. nºn, chab-af-se/-eth'), occurs in two places in Scripture, first in the passage of Cant. ii:I, where the bride replies, ‘I am the A'ose of Sharon and the lily of the valleys;' and secondly, in Is. xxxv.1, “The wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them, and the desert shall rejoice and blossom as the rose.” In both passages we see that in the Auth. VerS., as also in some others, the word is con- sidered to indicate the rose. The Sept. renders it simply by flower in the passage of the Canticles. In this it has been followed by the Latin Vulgate, Luther, etc. It is curious, however, as remarked by Celsius (Hiero, i, p. 489), that many of those who translate chabazzeleth by rose or flower in the passage of the Canticles render it by lily in that of Isaiah. The rose was, no doubt, highly esteemed by the Greeks, as it was, and still is, by almost all Asiatic nations, and, as it forms a very frequent Subject of allusion in Persian poetry, it has been inferred that we might expect some reference to so favorite a flower in the poetical books of the Scripture, and that no other is better calculated Lilium Chalcedonicum. to illustrate the above two passages. But this does not prove that the word chabazzeleth, or any CHABRIS similar one, was ever applied to the rose. Other flowers, therefore, have been indicated, to which the name chabazzeleth may be supposed, from its derivation, to apply more fitly. Rosenmüller re- marks that the substantial part of the Hebrew name shows that it de not e s a flower grow in g from a bulb. Some, there- fore, have selected the asphodel as the bulbous plant in- tended. Celsius has al- ready remarked that Bochart has translated chabaz- zeleth by narcissus; and not with Out re a SO n, as SOme Oriental translators have so explained it. In the Targum, Cant. ii:I, instead of chabazzeleth we have m a ré o żſz, which, how ever, should have been written narkos. Narkom and narkos are, no doubt, the same as the Persian nurgus, and which, throughout the East indicates Narcissus Tazetta, or the polyan- thus narcissus. The ancients describe and allude to the narcissus on various occasions, and Celsius has quoted various passages from the poets indi- cative of the esteem in which it was held. As they were not so particular as the moderns in dis- tinguishing species, it is probable that more than one may be referred to by them, and, therefore, that N. Tazetta may be included under the same name as N. Poeticus, which was best known to them. That the narcissus is found in Syria and Palestine is well known, as it has been mentioned by several travelers; and, also, that it is highly esteemed by all Asiatics from Syria even as far as India. Hence, if we allow that the word chabazzeleth has reference to a bulb-bearing root, it cannot apply to the rose. The narcissus, there- fore, is as likely as any other of the bulbous tribe to have been intended in the above passages. —J. F. R. (See ROSE.) CHABRIS (kā'bris), (Sept.Xagpts, Åhah-öris'), the son of Gothoniel, one of the three “rulers” of Beth- ulia in the time of Judith (Jud. vi.15; viii:Io; x:6). The name is identified with Kedesh (Josh. xv.23) by Fritzsche. CHAFF (chäf), (Heb. Yºo, motes), the refuse of winnowed grain, consisting of husks and broken straw (Job xxi.; 18; Ps. i.4; xxxv :5; Is. xvii: 13; xxix.5, Ali. 13, HUS. Aiii.3; Zuºli. ii.2). I • 1 24; xxxiii: I I the word rendered “chaff” is Åhazy- s/asſº', and means dry grass, Aay. It Only occurs in the above passages. Teh'ben (Heb. i-A), I’en- dered “chaff” in Jer. xxiii:28, is elsewhere trans- lated straw (Edod. v.:7, Io). The Chaldee word Tºy, oor, is rendered chaffin Dan. ii:35. Figuratite. Wicked men, particularly hypo- crites, are likened to “chaff” (Hos. xiii:3; Matt. iii:12). From the last passage it appears that the husbandmen in Judea burned the chaff, and in that country, where, at the close of harvest, all things are so parched and dry, it would be im- possible to extinguish a mass of burning chaff. False doctrines are called “chaff;” they are vile, useless and unsubstantial, and cannot abide the trial of God's word or Spirit (Jer. xxiii:28). sº †Zy Lilium "Candidum. ; : ; . . . . ; f : I tº + 1 i i & J Uli i u i. 1 R. W a 385 CHALCEDONY Fruitless projects are like “chaff” and “stubble;” they are unsubstantial and easily overturned by the blasts of opposition (Is. xxxiii: II). The AS- Syrians were like the “chaff of the mountains,” when the angel destroyed most of their army and the rest fled home with great precipitation (IS. xvii: 13; xxxvii:7, 36, 37). CHAIN (chán), (Heb. T-T), raw-beed", literally, collar), and the one promised to Daniel (Dan. v.:7; Heb. Flººd, ham-oo-mayå', necklace). Chains of gold appear to have been as much used among the Hebrews for ornament or official distinction as they are among ourselves at the present day. The earliest mention of them occurs in Gen. xli :42, where we are told that a chain of gold formed a part of the investiture of Joseph in the high office to which he was raised in Egypt; a later instance occurs in Dan. v :29, from which we learn that a golden chain was part of a dress of honor at Babylon. In Egypt the judges wore chains of gold, to which was attached a jeweled figure of Thrmei, or Truth, and in that country similar chains were also worn as orna- ments by the women. It is not, however, neces- sary to suppose that the Hebrews derived this custom from the Egyptians, for the fact that chains are mentioned among the spoil of the Mid- ianites shows that they were in use among people whose condition of life more nearly resembled that of the Israelites before they obtained posses- Sion of Canaan. It would seem that chains were worn both by men and women (Prov. i :9; Ezek. xvi; II), and we find them enumerated among the ornaments of brides (Cant. i : Io; iv:9). It was a custom among the Romans to fasten a prisoner with a light chain to the soldier who was appointed to guard him. One end of it was at- tached to the right hand of the prisoner, and the other to the left hand of the soldier. This is the chain by which Paul was so often bound, and to which he repeatedly alludes (Acts xxviii:20; Eph. vi :20; 2 Tim. i :16). When the utmost se- curity was desired, the prisoner was attached by two chains to two soldiers, as was the case with Peter (Acts xii:6). Figuratite. (I) God's law is a chain; it re- strains from sinful liberty; is uneasy to corrupt men, and is a great ornament to the Saints who obey it (Prov. i. 9). (2) The great chain with which Satan is bound for a thousand years is the powerful restraints of Divine Providence, and the just laws against great crimes faithfully exe- cuted (Rev. xx:I). (3) Bondage and trouble are chains; they restrain our liberty, render us un- easy and are shameful badges of our guilt, and yet, if borne for Christ, are an honorable orna- ment (Lam. iii:7; 2 Tim. i:16). Make a chain, prepare for captivity and slavery (Ezek. vii:23). (4) Pride 1s a chain, which keeps men under its power, and by a discovery of it in their con- duct, they use it, as if ornamental to them (Ps. lxxiii:6). CHALCEDONY (kāl-séd'ö-ny), (Gr. XaXkmööv, Āha/-äay-dohn', copperlike), occurs only in Rev. xxi: 19. It is a precious stone, supposed by some to be the same that occurs in the Hebrew Scriptures (Exod. xxviii:18) under the name of mož/he/3 (trans- lated emerald); but this is doubtful. It was named from the town Chalcedon, where Áa/AEos, copper, was found. Chalcedony is a variety of amorphous quartz and the distinction between it and agate is not very satisfactorily established. It is harder than flint, specific gravity, 2.04, commonly semi- transparent, and is generally of One uniform color 25 CHALCOL 386 throughout, usually a light brown and often nearly white, but other shades of color are not infre- quent, such as gray, yellow, green and blue. Chalcedony occurs in irregular masses, commonly forming grotesque cavities, in trap rocks and even granite. It is found in most parts of the world, and in the East is employed in the fabri- cation of cups and plates, and articles of taste, which are wrought with great skill and labor and treasured among precious things. In Europe it is made into snuffboxes, buttons, knife handles and other minor articles. CHALCOL (kål"köl). See CALCOL. CHALDAEA (kāl-dé'à), or CHALDEA. A country in Asia, the capital of which, in its widest extent, was Babylon. It was originally of small extent, but the empire being afterwards very much enlarged, the name is generally taken in a more extensive sense and includes Babylonia. (See CHALDAEAN.S.) e CHALDAEANS (kāl-de'āns), (Heb. FT-2, Aas- dim') is the name which is found appropriated in parts of the Old Testament to inhabitants of Babylon and subjects of the Babylonian king- dom. (1) Inhabitants as Subjects of Babylonia. In 2 Kings xxv, where an account is given of the siege of Jerusalem in the reign of Zedekiah, by Nebuchadnezzar, the latter monarch is ex- pressly designated ‘King of Babylon,' while his troops in general are spoken of as ‘Chaldees,' ‘the army of the Chaldees.” In Isaiah xiii : 19, Babylon is called ‘the glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldees’ excellency;’ and in xxiii: I3 of the same book the country is termed ‘the land of the Chaldaeans.’ So in Daniel ix:I, ‘In the first year of Darius, of the seed of the Medes, which was made king over the realm of the Chal- daeans.’ Ptolemy uses the term XaX6ata, Cha/- data, for that part of Babylonia which, lying on the southwest, borders on Arabia Deserta. Strabo speaks to the same effect, and Pliny terms Baby- lon Chaldaicarum gentium caput, the head of the Chaldaean nations. The origin and condition of the people who gave this name to Babylonia have been subjects of dispute among the learned. Probably, however, they were the same people that are described by Greek writers as having originally been an uncultivated tribe of mountain- eers, placed on the Carduchian Mountains, in the neighborhood of Armenia, whom Xenophon describes as brave and fond of freedom (Cyrop. i:3I; Amab. iv:3, 4, 7, 8, 25). In Habakkuk (i:6–Io) the Chaldaeans are spoken of in corre- sponding terms: ‘Lo, I raise up the Chaldaeans, that bitter and hasty nation, which shall march through the breadth of the land to possess the dwelling places that are not theirs; they are ter- rible and dreadful ; their horses are swifter than leopards and more fierce than evening wolves; their horsemen shall spread themselves; they shall fly as the eagle that hasteth to eat.' They are also mentioned in Job i :17: ‘Chaldaeans fell upon the camels (of Job) and carried them away.’ These passages show not only their warlike and preda- tory habits, but, especially that in Job, the early period in history at which they were known. As in all periods of history hardy and brave tribes of mountaineers have come down into the plains and conquered their comparatively civi- lized and effeminate inhabitants, so these Arme- nian Chaldaeans appear to have descended on Babylon, made themselves masters of the city and the government, and eventually founded a dominion, to which they gave their name, as well as to the inhabitants of the city and the country CHALDAEANS tributary to it, infusing at the same time young blood and fresh vigor into all the veins and mem- bers of the social frame. What length of time the changes herein implied may have taken can- not now be ascertained. (2) Kingdom of Babylon. Of the kingdom of Babylon, Nimrod (Gen. x:8, sq.) was the founder and first sovereign. The next name of a Babylonian monarch is found in Gen. xiv:I, where ‘Amraphel, king of Shinar, is cursorily men- tioned. (See AMRAPHEL.) A long interval oc- curs, till at last, in 2 Kings xx : 12, 13, the name of another is given : ‘Berodach-baladan, the son of Baladan, king of Babylon,’ it appears ‘sent letters and a present unto Hezekiah, for he had heard that Hezekiah had been sick. And Hezekiah hearkened unto them, and shewed them all the house of his precious things; there was nothing in his house, nor in his dominion that Hezekiah Shewed them not.’ On becoming acquainted with this fact, the prophet Isaiah announced that the treasures of the kingdom would be plundered and taken to Babylon, along with the descendants of Hezekiah, who were to become eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon. The friendly act which passed between these two kings took place in the year B. C. 713. About a hundred years later the prophets Jeremiah and Habakkuk speak of the invasion of the Chaldaean army. (3) Nebuchadnezzar. Nebuchadnezzar now appears in the historical books and in Ezra v : I.2, is described as ‘the king of Babylon, the Chal- daean, who destroyed this house (the Temple) and carried the people away into Babylon.” How ex- tensive and powerful his empire was, may be gathered from the words of Jeremiah (xxxiv:I): ‘Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, and all his army, and all the kingdoms of the earth of his dominion, and all the people, fought against Jerusalem.” The result was that the city was sur- rendered, and the men of war fled, together with King Zedekiah, but were overtaken in the plains of Jericho and completely routed. The Israel- itish monarch was carried before Nebuchadnez- zar, who ordered his eyes to be put out, after he had been compelled to witness the slaughter of his sons. He was then bound in fetters of brass and conveyed a captive to Babylon. (4) Evil-merodach. The next Chaldee-Baby- lonian monarch given in the Scriptures is the son of the preceding, Evil-merodach, who (2 Kings xxv :27) began his reign (B. C. 562) by deliver- ing Jehoiachin, king of Judah, after the unfor- tunate sovereign had endured captivity, if not incarceration for a period of more than six-and- thirty years. Circumstances incidentally recorded in connection with this event serve to display the magnitude and grandeur of the empire, for it appears (verse 28) that flhere were of her capfive kings in Babylon besides Jehoiachin, and that each one of them was indulged with the distinction of having his own throne. (5) Belshazzar. With Belshazzar (B. C. 538), the son or grandson of Nebuchadnezzar, closes the line of Chaldaean monarchs. In the seven- teenth year of his reign this sovereign was put to death while engaged with all his court in high revelry, by Cyrus. when he took the city of Babylon in the night season (Dan. v :30), and established in the city and its dependencies the rule of the Medo-Persians. (See BABYLON ; BEL- SHAZZAR; CY RUS). (6) Chaldaean Immigration. Authentic his- tory affords no information as to the time when the Chaldaean immigration took place. It is pos- sible that, at a very early period, a tribe of Chal- dees wandered into Babylon and gave to the land CHALDAEANS 387 the seven Chaldee kings mentioned by Berosus; but it is possible also that the Chaldaeans entered in a mass into the Babylonian territory for the first time not long before the era of Nabonassar (B. C. 747), which Michaelis and others have thought the words of Isaiah render probable (chap. xxiii: 13), ‘Behold the land of the Chal- daeans, this people was not, till the Assyrian founded it for them that dwell in the wilderness.’ The circumstance, moreover, that a Shemitic dia- lect is found to have prevailed in Babylon, cor- roborates the idea that the Chaldaeans were immi- grants, since the northern Chaldaeans must, from their position, have spoken a different form of Speech. (7) Kingdom of the Chaldees. The kingdom Of the Chaldees is found among the four ‘thrones' spoken of by Daniel (vi, vii, sq.), and is set forth under the symbol of a lion having eagles' wings. The government was despotic, and the will of the monarch, who bore the title of ‘King of Kings' (Dan. ii:37), was Supreme law, as may be seen in Dan. iii: 12, 14, 28. The kings lived inaccessible to their subjects in a well-guarded palace, denomi- nated, as with the ancient Persians (Xenop. Cyrop. I), ‘the gate of the king' (Dan. ii:49, com- pared with Esther ii: 19, 2I, and iii:2). The number of court and state servants was not small ; in Dan. vi. I, Darius is said to have set over the whole kingdom no fewer than ‘an hun- dred and twenty princes.’ The chief officers ap- pear to have been a sort of ‘mayor of the palace,’ or prime minister, to which high office Daniel was appointed (Dan. ii:49), ‘a master of the eunuchs' (Dan. i :3), ‘a captain of the king's guard’ (Dan. ii: I4), and ‘a master of the magicians,' or presi- dent of the Magi (Dan. iv:9). Distinct probably from the foregoing was the class termed (Dan. iii:24, 27) ‘the king's coun- sellors,' who seem to have formed a kind of ‘privy council’ or even cabinet’ for advising the mon- arch and governing the kingdom. The entire em- pire was divided into several provinces (Dan. ii:48; iii: I ), presided over by officers of various ranks. An enumeration of several kinds may be found in Dan. iii:2, 3. The head officers, who united in themselves the highest civil and mili- tary power, were denominated ‘presidents’ (Dan. vi:2); those who presided over single provinces Or diº bore the title of governor (Hagg. 1 : I , 11 :2). The administration of criminal justice was rigorous and cruel, will being substituted for law, and human life and human suffering being totally disregarded. Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. ii:5) de- clares to the college of the Magi: ‘If ye will not make known unto me the dream with the in- terpretation thereof, ye shall be cut in pieces, and Cº.1% ºf 1: * - --- - - - r ro r, ºr 1 on e^ Dº 11 iClü C C C ºr 8 * * * * * Q tº . ~ * i u ºr your houses Slia Dan. :ii: 19; vi :8; Jer. xxix:22). (8) Religion. The religion of the Chaldees was, as with the ancient Arabians and Syrians, the worship of the heavenly bodies; the planets Jupiter, Mercury and Venits were honored as Bel, Nebo and Meni, besides Saturn and Mars (Gesenius On Isaiah). Astrology was naturally connected with this worship of the stars, and the astronomical observations which have made the Chaldaean name famous were thereby guided and advanced. (9) Language. The language spoken in Baby- lon was what is designated Chaldee, which is Semitic in its origin, belonging to the Aramaic branch. The immigrating Chaldaeans spoke prob- ably a quite different tongue, which the geo- graphical position of their native country shows to have belonged to the Medo-Persian Stock. CHALDAEAN PHILOSOPHY (10) The Wise Men. The term Chaldaean represents also a branch of the order of Baby- lonian Magi, In, Dan. ii:2 they appear among ‘the magicians, and the astrologers and the sorcerers,' who were called for to shew the king his dream.’ In the tenth verse of the same chapter they are represented as speaking in the name of the rest, or otherwise theirs was a general designation which comprised the entire class (Dan. iv.:7; v:7); a general description of these different orders is found in Dan. v :8, as ‘the king's wise 1116211. (11) Chaldee Language is the name by which the elder form of the Aramaic idiom is generally distinguished. Whether there is any authority in the Old Testament for applying this designation to the Aramaic language is a question which depends on the sense in which the expression ‘tongue of the Chaldees,’ in Dan. i :4, is to be taken ; and which involves such important historical points that it does not come within the scope of this arti- cle. Avoiding debatable points, however, we ap- ply the name Chaldee language to that Aramaic idiom which, in our present text of the Old Testa- ment, is employed in the passages of Daniel, from ii:4 to vii:28; in Ezra, from iv :8 to vi :18, and vii. from 12 to 26; in Gen. xxxi:47, and in Jer. x: II ; as also to that in which several translations and paraphrases of portions of the Old Testa- ment, the so-called Targums, are written. The language is thus distinguished, as to the nature of the documents in which it is employed, into Biblical and Targumical Chaldee. We have already (see ARAMAIC LANGUAGE) no- ticed those several features which the Chaldee possesses in common with the Syriac; and it now remains to define these, certainly not marked, characteristics by which it is distinguished from it. These are: the predominance of the a sound where Syriac has o ; the avoidance of diphthongs and of half-silent letters; the use of dagesh- forte; the regular accentuation of the last syllable, and the formation of the infinitives, except in Peal, without the preformative 2. The mode of writing is also much less defective than in Syr- iac. (See VERSIONS OF SCRIPTURE, II.) CHALDAEAN PHILOSOPHY (kāl-dā'ān fi- lös'ö-fy). This is a subject of interest to the stu- dent of the Bible, in consequence of the influence which the Babylonian Pºiº exerted on the opinions and manner of thinking of the Israelites during their captivity in Babylon–an influence of a general and decided character, which the Rab- bins themselves admit, in alleging that the names of the angels and of the months were derived by the house of Israel from Babylon. The system of opinion and manner of thinking which the captives met with in Babylon cannot be characterized exclusively as Chaldaean, but was made up of elements whose birthplace was in various parts of the East, and which appear to have found in Babylon a not uncongenial soil, where they grew and produced fruit which co- alesced into one general system. Of these ele- ments the two principal were the Chaldaean and the Medio-Persian or Zoroastrian. (1) Star Worship. The Chaldaeans who lived in a climate where the rays of the sun are never darkened, and the night is always clear and bright by means of the light of the moon and stars, were led to believe that light was the soul of nature. Accordingly it was by the light of the sun and stars that the universal spirit brought forth all things; and therefore the Chaldaeans offered their homage to the Supreme Being in the heavenly bodies, where he appeared to them in a special CHALDAEAN PHILOSOPHY manner to dwell. As the stars form separate bod- ies, innagination represented them as distinct ex- istences, which had each their peculiar functions, and exerted a separate influence in bringing forth the productions of nature. The idea of a universal spirit disappeared, as being too abstract for the people, and not without difficulty for cultivated minds; and worship was offered to the stars as so many powers that governed the world. It is easy to see how the Chaldaeans passed from this early corruption of the primitive religion of the Bible to a low and degrading polytheism. As light was regarded as the only moving power of nature, and every star had its own influence, so natural phenomena appeared the result of the particular influence of that heavenly body which at any given time was above the horizon; and the Chaldaean philosophers believed that they found the cause of events in its position and the means of foretelling events in its movements. These vicws, and perhaps the extraordinary heat and the pestilential winds which in certain months prevail in the country, and against which there is no protection except in the hills, led the Chaldaeans to the mountains which gird the land. On these observatories, which nature seems to have expressly formed for the purpose, they studied the positions and movements of the heav- enly host. They thought they saw that similar phenomena were constantly accompanied by the same conjunction of the stars, which seemed to observe regular movements and a similar CO111 Se. On this the Chaldaean priests came to the con- viction that natural events are bound together, and that sacrifices do not interrupt their course; that they all have a common origin, which works according to unknown principles and laws, whose discovery is so important as to deserve their best attention. The heavenly bodies themselves are obedient to these laws; their formation, position and influence are consequences of these universal laws, by which nature was controlled. This determined the Chaldaeans to seek in the heavens the knowledge of the original cause which created the world, and of the laws which that cause followed in the formation of things, and in the production of phenomena, since in the heavens dwelt the power which brings all things forth. (2) First Cause. It could not be doubted that this power possessed intelligence, and the opera- tions of the mind appear to have so much re- semblance to the subtlety and fleetness of light that men who had only imagination for their guide had no hesitation in representing intelli- gence as a property of light, and the universal spirit of highest intelligence as light itself. The observations of the Chaldaeans had taught them that the distances of the Ctarg from the earth are unequal and that light decreases in its approach to the earth, on which they concluded that light streams forth from an endless foun- tain far removed from the earth, in doing which it fills space with its beams, and forms the heav- enly bodies in different positions and of different magnitudes. The creative spirit was therefore set forth by them under the image of an eternal inexhaustible fountain of light. - The space which contained the First Cause, or Fountain of radiations, was filled with pure and happy intelligences. Immediately beneath this region began the corporeal world, or the empy- reum, which was a boundless space, lighted by the pure light which flowed immediately from the Great Source; this empyreum was filled with an infinitely less pure fire than the original light, 388 CHALKSTONE but immeasurably finer than all bodies. Below this was the ether, or grosser region, filled with still grosser fire. Next came the fixed stars, spread over a wide region, where the thickest parts of the ethereal fire had come together and formed the stars. The world of planets suc- ceeded, which contained the Sun, moon, and the wandering stars. Then came the last order of beings—the rude elements which are deprived of all activity, and withstand the motions and influence of light. (3) Good and Bad Spirits. The different parts of the world are in contact, and the spirits of the upper regions can influence the lower, as well as descend and enter into them. As the chaotic elements were without shape and motion, the spirits of the higher regions must have formed the earth, and human Souls are Spirits sprung from them. To these spirits from above the system of the Chaldacans ascribed all the productions, appear- ances, and movements upon the earth. The formation of the human body, the growth of the fruits, all the gifts of nature, were attributed to beneficent spirits. In the space below the moon, in the midst of night, tempests arose, lightnings threaded the dark clouds, thunder broke forth and laid waste the earth, there were ſound Spirits of darkness, corporeal demons spread through the 21ſ. (4) Cabala. As the good and the bad spirits had various degrees of power, and different offices, so they had names given to them which described their functions. As the good spirits were under an obligation to protect men and furnish Succor in their need, they were compelled to learn human language; accordingly, it was believed that a guardian angel against every evil was possessed by every one who bore his mysterious name— a name which was to be pronounced only when succor was needed. All manner of names, were therefore devised, by which the good spirits were conjured or in- formed of human necessities; and all the Com- binations of the alphabet were exhausted in order to bring about a commerce between men and angels. Here is the origin of the Cabala, which gave strange names to these Spirits in Order to bring them into connection with men, and by this means to do wonderful things (Matt. xii; 24- 27). These names also sometimes served to drive bad spirits away; they were a kind of exorcism. A power, too, was ascribed to the name of the spirit, or to the image which marked his Office— a power which forced the spirit to come on be- ing called; and, accordingly, it was held that this name carved on a stone kept the Spirit near the person who wore the stone—a notion in which is probably found the origin of Talismans, which were formed either by words or symbolical fig- U11' eS. CHALDEES (kål"deez or kāl-deez"). Another form of Chaldaeans used in the expres- sion Ur of the Chaldees (Gen. xi.;31 : Neh. ix:7), and also sometimes in A. V., when there is no mention of Ur (2 Kings xxiv:2; XXV:4, IO, I3, 25, 26; 2 Chron. xxxvi :17; Is. xiii:19). CHALKSTONE (chak'stön). A stone taken from the limestone rocks which constitute a marked feature of Palestine. It is easily reduced to powder, and sometimes burned in order to be employed as lime. To make the stones of altars like chalkstones, is to pull them down, break them to pieces, and entirely abolish the idolatrous worship (IS. xxvii:9). CHALPHI - 389 CHALPHI (kål"phi), in A. V. Calphi. Father of Judas, one of the two captains who fought with Jonathan Maccabaeus at Hazor (I Macc. xi :70). CHAMBER (chäm'bër). 1. A retired room and especially an upper TOO111. * 2. A hall where a king gives audience, or a deliberative body meets, as presence chamber, senate chamber. 3. A legislative and judicial body; an assem- bly or association, as the Chamber of Deputies. Figuratite. The term chamber is applied to the heavens (Ps.civ :3, 13). It is used to indicate the isolation of closet prayer (Is. xxvi :20). Job calls the southern constellations, or the regions of the southern sky, “the chambers of the South.” (Job ix:9). CHAMBERING (chäm'bér-íng), (Gr. Kottm, Åoy'- tay). Coarse and licentious conduct, illicit inter- Course (Rom. xiii: 13). CHAMBERLAIN (chäm'bār-lin), (Heb. Pºlº, saw-reece', eunuch officer). (I) A keeper of the king's bed-chamber, or a steward (Esth. i. Io). (2) City treasurer, to whom the receipt and expend- iture of the public money were intrusted (Rom. xvi;23). CHAMBERS OF IMAGERY (chäm'bërs Óv im'āj-ry). The scenes of pictorial representation referred to by this phrase are connected with an inter- esting passage in the history of Ezekiel and the Jewish exiles, who were stationed in Assyria, on the banks of the Chebar (Ezek. viii). Ezekiel, in presence of his friends, consisting of the exiled elders of Judah, was suddenly wrapt in mystic vision, and graciously shown, for his own satisfaction, as well as that of his pious associates, the reasons of God's protracted controversy with Israel, and the Sad necessity there was for still dealing harshly with them. Transported to the city and temple of Jerusalem he there saw national apostasy and corruption, sufficient to justify, both to the mind of the prophet and his circle of pious associates, fbe severity of the divine judgments on Israel. (1) Statue of Baal. The first spectacle that caught his eye was a colossal statue, probably of Baal, around which crowds of devotees were per- forming their frantic revelries, and whose for- bidden ensigns were proudly blazoning on the walls and portals of his house. Leading him to that side of the court along which were ranged the houses of the priests, his conductor pointed to a mud-wall (verse 7), which, to screen them- selves from observation, the apostate servants of the true God had raised ; and in that wall was a Small chiik, by wideiting which he discovered a passage into a secret chamber, which was com- plotcly impervious to the rays of the sun, but which he found, on entering, to be lighted up by a profusion of brilliant lamps. The sides of it were covered with numerous paintings of beasts and reptiles—the favorite deities of Egypt; and, with their eyes intently fixed on these decorations was a conclave of seventy persons, in the garb of priests—the exact number, and in all proba- bility the individual members, of the Sanhedrim, who stood in the attitude of adoration, holding in their hands each a golden censer, containing all the costly and Odoriferous materials which the pomp and magnificence of the Egyptian ritual re- quired. The scene described was wholly formed on the model of Egyptian worship; and every One who has read the works of Wilkinson, Belzoni, CHAMBERS OF IMAGERY Richardson, and others, will perceive the close resemblance that it bears to the outer walls, the Sançtuaries, and the hieroglyphical figures that distinguished the ancient mythology of Egypt. (2) Sacred Paintings. In order to show the reader still further how exactly this inner chamber that Ezekiel saw was constructed after the Egyp- tian fashion, we subjoin an extract from the work of another traveler, descriptive of the great Temple of Edfou, one of the admired relics of an- tiquity; from which it will be seen that the de- generate priests of Jerusalem had borrowed the whole style of the edifice in which they were celebrating their hidden rites—its form, its en- trance, as well as its pictorial ornaments on the walls—from their idolatrous neighbors of Egypt: —"Considerably below the surface of the adjoin- ing building,’ says he, “my conductor pointed out to me a chink in an old wall, which he told me I should creep through on my hands and feet. After proceeding about ten yards in utter dark- ness, the heat became excessive, the breathing was laborious, the perspiration poured down my face, and I would have given the world to have got out; but my companion, whose person I could not distinguish, though his voice was audible, called out to me to crawl a few feet farther, and that I should find plenty of room. I joined him at length, and had the inexpressible satisfaction of Standing once more upon my feet. We found ourselves in a splendid apartment of great magni- tude, adorned with an incredible profusion of Sacred paintings and hieroglyphics.” . (3) Orgies of Tammuz. It might have been Supposed impossible for men to have sunk to a lower depth of superstition than that of imitating the Egyptians in worshiping the monsters of the Nile, or the vegetable produce of their fields and gardens, had not the prophet been directed to turn yet again and he would see greater abomina- tions than they did. “Then he brought me to the gate of the Lord's house, which was towards the north; and behold there sat women weeping for Tammuz' (verse I4). This, the principal deity of the Phoenicians, and who was often called also by that people Adoni, that is, My Lord, became afterwards famous in the Grecian mythology under the well-known name of Adonis; and the circumstances of his being selected for the subject of their most beautiful fiction by so many of the classic poets is a sufficient proof of the great popular interest his name and ritual excited among the idolaters of the ancient world. It is said to have originated in a tragic adventure that befell an intrepid and beau- tiful prince of Phoenicia, who was killed while hunting a wild boar, by which that land was in- fested, and whose untimely death in the cause of his country was bewailed in an annual festival iield to coinincInorate the disastrous event. Dur- ing the seven days that the festival lasted the Phoenicians appeared to be a nation of mourners; and in every town and village a fictitious repre- sentation of Tammuz was improvised for the occa- Sion, and the whole population assembled to pour forth their unbounded sorrow for his hapless fate. (See TAMMUz.) These violent efforts in mourning were always followed by scenes of the most licentious and re- volting revelry, which, though not mentioned, are manifestly implied among the ‘greater abomina- º which degraded this other group of idol- a UC I’S. (4) Sun Worship. Besides the hieroglyphics of Egypt and the orgies of Tammuz, there was another form of superstition still, which in Jeru- Salem, then almost wholly given to idolatry, had CHAMELEON its distinguished patrons. ‘Turn thee yet again,” said his celestial guide to the prophet, and thou shalt see greater abominations than these’ (verse I6). And he brought him unto the inner court of the Lord’s house, and behold at the door of the Temple of the Lord, between the porch and the altar were about five-and-twenty men with their backs towards the Temple of the Lord, and their faces towards the east; and they worshiped the sun towards the east.” Perhaps of all the varieties of superstition which had crept in among the Hebrews in that period of general decline, none displayed such flagrant dishonor to the God of Israel as this; for, as the most holy place was situated at the west end of the Sanctuary, it was impossible for these twenty-five men to pay their homage to the rising sun without turning their backs on the consecrated place of the divine pres- ence. Could stronger proofs be wanted that the Lord had not forsaken Israel, but was driven from them 2 This was the lesson intended, and actually accomplished by the vision. CHAMELEON (kā-mâ'lē-ăn), (Heb. TB, or TB; Áo'aéh). It appears to be a satisfactory transla- tion of the Hebrew timesheſ/eeth, which denotes a small species of lizard, celebrated for the faculty it has of changing the color of its skin. This property, however, has no reference to the Substance it may be placed on, as generally as- serted, but is solely derived from the bulk of its respiratory organs acting upon a transparent skin, and on the blood of the animal. The chameleons form a small genus of Saurians, easily distin- guished by the shagreened character of the skin, and the five toes on the feet, divided differently from those of most other animals, there being, if the expression may be allowed, two thumbs op- posed to three fingers. Their eyes are telescopic, move separately, and can be directed backwards or forwards. Chameleons are slow, inoffensive, and capable of considerable abstinence from food, which consists solely of flies, caught by the rapid protrusion of a long and viscous tongue. Among themselves they are irascible, and are then liable to change their colors rapidly : dark yellow or grey is predominant when they are in a quiescent state, but, while the emotions are in activity, it passes into green, purple, and even ashy black. The species found in Palestine and all Northern Africa is the common Chameleon Africanus, and is that referred to in Lev. xi :30, where unclean animals are mentioned. CHAMOIS (shām’my or sha-moi"), Deut. xiv:5. The true chamois is believed never to have lived in Arabia or Palestine. It is now thought that this animal of the Bible was a species of wild sheep (Ovis tragelephus) formerly abundant among the mountains of Sinai, but now apparently confined to Africa. (See ZEMER.) CHAMPAIGN (shām-pân'), (Heb. Tº, ar- azy-baw', plain, waste, desert, open country, Deut. xi:30, A. V.). (See ARABAH.) CHAMPION (chám'pſ-àn), (Heb. Tº, ghiº- bore', I Sam. xvii:51; elsewhere “mighty man”). The Hebrew word sometimes means a chal- lenger, as the representative of a people (I Sam. xvii:4, 23). CHANAAN (kā'naan, kā'nan or kā'na-an), the manner of spelling Canaan in the A. V. of the New Testament and Apocrypha (Judith v:3, 9, Io; Acts vii:II; xiii:19). CHANAANITE (kā'naan-ite), for CANAAN- ITE. (Judith v:16). 390 CHAOS CHANOCH (kā'noch), (Gen. iv:17, marg.), a form of Enoch, more accurately representing the Hebrew. - CHANCE (cháns), to meet unexpectedly (Deut. xxii:6; 2 Sami. i.6). An unexplained circumstance (I Sam. vi., ix). A meeting apparently accidental (Luke X:31). CHANCELLOR (chán'sèl-lér), (Heb. Fº"?}} beh-a/e'ſſe/i-ame', lord of judgment), the Chaldee title of the Persian governor of Samaria (Ezra iv: 8, 9, 17). CHANNEL (chán'nél), (Heb. Pº, valley). 1. The bed of a river or of the sea (Ps. xviii: I5; Is. viii:7). 2. The rendering (Is. xxvii:12) of SHIBBOLETH (which see). CHAOS (kā'ös), a term taken from the Greek mythology, according to which Chaos was the first existence and the origin of all subscquent forms of being (Hesiod, Zheogon. II6; Ovid, Metamorph. i:5). The description which Ovid gives of Chaos it- self, and of the formation of the world from the chaotic mass, bears so many striking resemblances to the Mosaic account of the creation that one can scarcely fail to regard it as having been derived from tradition. (1) The Chaos of Genesis. Our present object is to inquire what the Chaos was of which Moses speaks (Gen. i :2). Was it the first form in which matter was created P and do the succeeding opera- tions described relate to the very beginning of material order and animal life? Or was it merely a condition preparatory to the reorganization of the world, which had already been the abode of living beings?—in other words, is the first verse of the inspired record to be dissociated from the succeeding, and to be understood only as a declaration of the important truth, that the visible universe was not made from anything already existing (Heb. xi :3); whilst the con- fusion and darkness which are described in the succeeding verse relate to a state long subse- quent to the ‘beginning,’ and were introductory to a new order of material existence, of which man is the chief and lord P. The first of these opinions is not only in accordance with the an- cient notions of chaos to which we have referred, but is that which would be naturally maintained, unless cause be shown to the contrary. No One would gratuitously assume a long interval, where it must be admitted there is no intimation of such an interval having occurred. Accordingly, most interpreters who have been ignorant of geological phenomena, have at once decided that the chaos of which Moses speaks was the form in which matter was first created. Some have even de- clared that there cannot have been any such in- terval as we have spoken of. But on the other hand, the world gives intimations, in the rocks which compose its crust, of various and long-con- tinued changes both of condition and of inhabi- tants. (2) Rock Formation. Those who have care- fully examined these different forms of being, and have attentively studied the circumstances in which their remains are now found, have been forced to the conviction that in many cases the rocks have been gradually formed by deposition at the bottom of an ocean, which has been suc- cessively the habitation of races differing alike from each other and from those now existing: that the coeval land likewise has had its distinct races of inhabitants, and that the land and water aw-fee/3', CHAPEL r 391 have changed places many times in the history of the world. It is impossible to do more than barely glance at these geological facts; but it will be seen that they lead to these three conclusions: (1) That the world has existed during some long period before the Mosaic record of creation in six days; (2) that during that period it was the abode of animals differing in organization and structure from those now found on its surface; and (3) that it has been exposed to various convulsions and reorganizations, more or less general. (3) Common View Not Biblical. In the face of these facts it appears impossible to hold the ordinarily received opinion that the universe was created only just before the creation of man ; and the question then is, how are these facts to be reconciled with the Mosaic narrative P Not by denying the evidence of our senses (which is, in truth, a very dangerous mode of upholding the sacred record, though it has been adopted by those who especially claim to themselves the title of Scriptural Geologists), nor, on the other hand, by treating the Mosaic account as a mythus, or allegorical representation (a mode of explana- tion which, if ever admissible, ought not to be resorted to without the most pressing necessity), but surely by re-examining the interpretation we have put on the words of Scripture, and by Seek- ing to ascertain whether the discrepancy does not arise from our view of the narrative. (4) Biblical Teaching. If we keep in mind that the revelation of God to man is not intended to teach physical science, that it never speaks the language of philosophy, but of appearances, and that it tells of these only so far as they relate to the human race, we obtain a clue by which we may be safely guided through these difficulties. We shall not then wonder that no notice should be taken of previous conditions and inhabitants of this earth, supposing such to have existed. The first sentence of the inspired record will then be regarded as the majestic dec- laration of a fact, which the world had lost sight of, but which it deeply concerned men to know. What occurred subsequently, until the earth was to be furnished for the abode of man, is to be gathered not from the written word, but from the memorials engraven on the tablets of the world itself. The succeeding verse of the Mosaic account then relates to a state of chaos, or con- fusion, into which the world was thrown imme- diately before the last reorganization of it. Geol- ogists are not, indeed, at present (if ever they may be) in a condition to identify the disruption and confusion of which we suppose Moses to speak with any one of these violent convulsions; but that events which might be described in his language have faken place in the world's historv. over considerable portions of its surface, seems to be fully established. Whether the chaos of which we are now speaking was universal, or was confined to those regions which formed the cradle of the human race, is a question on which we do not feel it needful to enter. We do not regard the evidence which geology furnishes as com- plete enough to decide such a point. (See Cos- MOGONY.) CHAPEL (cháp'é), (Heb. ºº, miº-dawsh', sanctuary, holy place), a house for public wor- ship. Bethel is called the king's chapel, because there the kings of Israel worshiped the golden calf (Amos vii:I3). * * * > The term “chapel” is also applied in the A. V. CHARGOL to places for idol-worship (eiów)\eta, tepévn) (I Macc. i:47; 2 Macc. x:2; xi:3). CHAPITER (cháp'ī-ter). 1. Heb. nºn- Áo-the-reth", crown. 2. Heb. ÜNT, roshe, head. 3. Heb. Fº, tseh'ſeth, to encircle. The upper part of a pillar; that on which there rests the thing which the pillar is intended to support. It is generally called the capital, and differs in the different orders of architecture, varying in form and ornamentation according to the order of architecture used in the building (Ex. xxxvi :38; xxxviii:17, 19; I Kings vii:I9, 2O). (See TABERNACLE ; TEMPLE.) CHARASHIM, THE WALLEY OF (kär'a- shím), (Heb. Fºr, Ahar-aw-sheem", craftsmen) mentioned in I Chron. iv: I4 as having been settled by Joab, of the tribe of Judah; and in Neh. xi.;35 as inhabited by Benjamites after the Captivity. The Talmud makes it to consist of the valleys of Lod and Ono. Dr. Robinson argues that Charashim may have been a side valley near Lod. Conder suggests the ruin Hirsha as an echo of the name on the slope of a wady one and three-fourths miles southeast of Aijalon and II miles west-northwest of Jerusalem. CHARCHEMISH (kär'ke-mish), (2 Chron.xxxv. 2O). Same as CARCHEMISH. CHARGER (chár'jër). 1. (Heb. Typ, Åeh-aw-raw'), from a root sig- nifying hollowness, a deep dish or bow/ (Num. vii: 13, 19, 25, 31, 37, 43 and other verses). The “chargers” mentioned in Numbers are said to have been of silver, and to have weighed each 130 shekels, or 65 oz. (Hussey, Anc. Weights, c. ix, p. 190). 2. (Heb. ºs, ag-ad-taw/), found only in Ezra i:9, a shallow vessel for receiving water or blood, also for presenting offerings of fine flour with oil (Num. vii:79; Ges. Thes. 22). 3. The daughter of Herodias brought the head of John the Baptist “in a charger” (Gr. Ttvač, Matt. xiv:8, II; Mark vi;25, 28), probably a dish, trencher or platter. CHARGES (charj'ez). “Be at charges with them” (A. V. Acts xxi.;24), R. V. “for them,” means “pay the expense of their offerings.” CHARGoL (kar'go). (Heb. *T, chargo, serpent-fighter, A. V. beetle, found only in Lev. xi :22. R. V., cricket). - This word cannot mean the beetle. No species of scarabaeus was ever used as food by the Jews, or perhaps any other nation. Nor does any l-nown species answer to the generic description given in the preceding verse. It is plain that the chargol is some winged creature, which has at least four feet, which leaps with its two hind jointed legs, and which we might expect, from the permission, to find actually used as food. This description agrees exactly with the locust- tribe of insects, which are well known to have been eaten by the common people in the East from the earliest times to the present day. In attempting to ascertain the particular species of locust intended by the word ‘chargol,’ great deference is due to the term adopted by the Sep- tuagint and repeated by Jerome, which is evi- dently a creature that fights with serpents. In- applicable as such a description might seem to be to the habits of any known species of locust, it may, nevertheless, help to identify the species CHARIOT RACES of which we are in search. Now the ancients have certainly referred to the notion of locusts fighting with serpents (Aristot. Hist. Anim. ix:9; Plin. Hist. Nat. xi :35). Although this notion is justly discarded by Cuvier (Grandsagne's edition of Pliny, Parisiis, 1828, p. 451, note), yet it may serve to account for the application of the term serpent-fighters to a species of locust. For this word instan:ly suggests a reference to the ichneu- mon, the celebrated destroyer of serpents and other vermin ; and it is remarkable that Hesychius, in the second century, applies the word 64 touéxos serpent-fighting, both to the ichneumon, and a species of locust having no wings. Now there is one kind of locusts, the genus truaralis (fierce or cruel), inhabiting Africa and 392 China, and comprehending many species, which hunts and preys upon insects. It is also called the truatalis masutus, or long-nosed. May not, then, this winged, leaping, insectivorous locust, and its various species, be the chargolf - It may be observed that it is no objection to the former and more probable supposition, that a creature which lives upon other insects should be allowed as food to the Jews, contrary to the general principle of the Mosaic law in regard to birds and quadrupeds, this having been unques- tionably the case with regard to many species of fish coming within the regulation of having ‘fins and scales,’ and known to exist in Palestine at the present time—as the perch, Carp, barbel, etc. CHARIOT RACES. See GAMES. CHARIOTS (chár'i-6ts), (Heb. "???, mer-Āaw- baw'; Pº, mer-Āawā'). The Scriptures employ different words to de- note carriages of different sorts, but it is not in every case easy to distinguish the kind of vehicle which these words severally denote. We are now, however, through the discovery of ancient Sculp- tures and paintings, in possession of such in- formation respecting the chariots of Egypt, AS- syria, Babylon, and Persia as gives advantages in the discussion of this subject which were not possessed by earlier writers. The chariots of these nations are, in fact, mentioned in the Scrip- tures; and by connecting the known with the unknown, we may arrive at more determinate conclusions that have hitherto been attainable. (1) Early Mention. The first chariots men- tioned in Scripture are those of the Egyptians; and by close attention to the various notices which occur respecting them, we may be able to discriminate between the different kinds which were in use annong that people. The earliest notice on this head occurs in Gen. xli:43, where the king of Egypt honors Joseph by commanding that he should ride in the second of the royal chariots. This was doubtless a state- chariot, and the state-chariots of the Egyptians do not appear to have been different from their war-chariots, the splendid military appointments of which rendered them fit for purposes of royal pomp. This view of the matter is confirmed by our finding that although the same word (mer- cabah) is again used for chariots of state in Gen. xlvi :29, I Sam. viii:II, 2 Sam. xv : I, it undoubt- edly denotes a war-chariot in Exod. xv.:4; Joel ii:5. In Is. ii:7, the same word appears to com- prehend chariots of every kind which were found in cities. (2) Private Carriages. We also observe that where private carriages were known, as in Egypt, they were of the same shape as those used in war, and only differed from them by having less complete military accouterments, although CHARIOTS even in these the case for arrows is not wanting. One of the most interesting of the Egyptian paintings represents a person of quality arriving late at an entertainment in his curricle, drawn (like all the Egyptian chariots) by two horses. He is attended by a number of running footmen, one of whom hastens forward to knock at the door of the house, another advances to take the reins, a third bears a stool to assist his master in alighting; and most of these carry their sandals in their hands that they may run with the more ease. This conveys a lively illustration of such passages as I Sam. viii:II ; 2 Sam. xv : I. (3) War Chariots. The principal distinction between these private chariots and those actually used in war was, as appears from the monu- ments, that in the former the party drove him- self, whereas in war the chariot, as among the Greeks, often contained a second person to drive it, that the warrior might be at liberty to em- ploy his weapons with the more effect. But this was not always the case; for in the Egyptian monuments we often see even royal personages alone in their chariots, warring furiously, with the reins lashed round their waist. So it ap- pears that Jehu (who certainly rode in a war- chariot) drove himself; for his peculiar style of driving was recognized at a considerable dis- tance (2 Kings iz :20). (4) Definition of Terms. There has been some speculation as to any difference of meaning between the preceding word mercabah and mer- cab. In Lev. xv :9 (rendered in the Auth. Vers. ‘saddle') and Cant. iii: IO (rendered ‘the bot- LU11') it lias Lee11 undel sluud by SUlue LU de- note the seat of a chariot. To this view there is the fatal objection that ancient chariots had no seats. It appears to denote the seat of a litter (the only vehicle that had a seat), and its name mercab may have been derived from the general resemblance of the body of a litter (distinguished from the canopy, etc.), both in form and use, to that of a chariot. Another word, rekeb, from the same root, ap- pears to signify a carriage of any kind, and is especially used with reference to large bodies of carriages, and hence most generally of war-char- iots; for chariots were anciently seldom seen to- gether in large numbers except when employed in war. It is applied indifferently to the war-chari- ots of any nation, as to those of the Egyptians *NST ſº- lºsº *-ºs ſº 5 #$ N Assyrian Chariot. (Exod. xiv:9), the Canaanites (Josh. xvii: 18; Judg. i:19; iv:3), the Hebrews (2 Kings is :21, 24; x:16), the Syrians (2 Kings v :9), the Per- sians (Is... xxi.;7, 9). By a comparison of these references with those passages in which mercabah occurs, we find the two words applied with so little distinction to all sorts of carriages as to suggest that they were used indifferently and interchangeably. o There is another word which is sometimes rendered by chariot, viz., "agalah, but as we have CHARIOTS elsewhere (see CART) shown that it denotes a plaustrum, cart or wagon, drawn by Oxen, we need not here return to the subject. In the prophecy of Nahum, who was of the first captivity, and resident (if not born) at El- kosh, in Assyria, there is much allusion to chari- ots, suggested doubtless by their frequency before his eyes in the streets of Nineveh and throughout the Assyrian empire. Chariots also of other nations are mentioned, as of Assyria (2 Kings xix:23; Ez. xxiii:24), Syria (2 Sam. viii and 2 Kings vi. I4, I5), Persia (Is. xxii:6), and lastly Antiochus Eupator is said to have had 300 chariots armed with scythes (2 Macc. xiii:2). (5) New Testament Mention. In the New Testament, the only mention made of a chariot, except in Rev. ix:9, is in the case of the Ethio- pian or Abyssinian cunuch of Queen Candacc, who is described as sitting in his chariot reading (Acts viii:28, 29, 38). - Figuratite. To denote the speed and resistless power and majesty with which God effects his purposes, he is represented as possessing chariots. These are angels, providences, clouds, or any other natural phenomena, in the agency and mo- tion of which he displays his greatness and power, opposes and conquers his foes, and Sup- ports and protects his people (Ps. lxviii: 17; Hab. iii:8; Is. lxvi :15; Jer. li:21 ; Zech. vi : I). The binding the chariot to the swift beast im- ports fleeing off from the enemy with the utmost speed (Mic. i :I3). In imitation of the Persians and other heathen kings, Manasseh and Amon consecrated chariots to the sun; but Josiah des- troyed them (2 Kings xxiii: II). The “four chariots” proceeding from between mountains of brass may denote the four noted monarchies which, according to the eternal pur- pose of God, have, from Small beginnings, and amidst great opposition, appeared in the world, and in their turn conquered the nations. The “chariot with red horses” may denote the Assy- rians and Chaldeans, cruel and bloody; that with black horses, the Medes and Persians, sometimes arrayed in black, and terribly distressful ; that with white horses, the Greeks, astonishingly vic- torious, and overrunning the very places which the Medes and Persians had done; that with grizzled and bay horses, the Romans and Goths who pushed their conquests chiefly to the south- ward. Or might these “chariots” signify angels, as employed in the dispensations of providence, of bloody wars and persecutions, of famines and Destilence, of joy and prosperity, of events won- derfully mixed P. Or, might they signify gospel ministers, in their diversified conditions P or in the periºds apostolic, Antichristian, millennia!, a 4-c (7cch. :::: 9). “Chariots of fire, and horses of fire” (2 Kings ii:II) signifies some bright effulgence which, in the eyes of the spectators, resembled those ob- jects. “Chariot man” (2 Chron. xviii:33) is an- º name for “driver of chariot” (I Kings xxii: 34). Ministers and eminent saints are the “chariots and horsemen” of a country; such is the regard God shows them, such the power of their prayers and holy conversation, that they are a noted means of the victories and preservation of their coun- tries (2 Kings ii:I2; xiii:14). The former passage teaches that, as earthly kingdoms are dependent for their defense and glory upon warlike preparations, a single prophet has done more for the preservation and prosperity of Israel than all her chariots and horsemen. ( 7 a 2-1- - , , , r_Q f * } : * g 's' & º * —". 393 CHARITY CHARIOTS OF WAR (chár'i-àts Öv war). The Egyptians used horses in the equipment of an armed force before Jacob and his sons had settled in Goshen; they had chariots of war, and mounted asses and mules, and therefore could not be igno- rant of the art of riding; but for ages after that period Arab nations rode on the bare back, and guided the animals with a wand. Others, and probably the shepherd invaders, noosed a single rope in a slipknot round the lower jaw, forming an imperfect bridle, with only one rein; a practice still in vogue among the Bedouins. Thus cavalry were but little for- midable, compared with chariots, until a complete command Over the horse was obtained by the discovery of a true bridle. This seems to have been first introduced by chariot-drivers, and there are figures of well-constructed harness, reins, and mouthpieces in very early Egyptian monuments, representing both native and foreign chariots of war. These differed but little from each other, both consisting of a light pole, suspended between and on the withers of a pair of horses, the after end resting on a light axle-tree, with two low wheels. Upon the axle stood a light frame, open Egyptian War Chariot. behind and floored for the warrior and his chari- oteer, who both stood within ; on the sides of the frame hung the war-bow, in its case; a large quiver with arrows, and darts had commonly a particular sheath. In Persia, the chariots, ele- wated tºpon wheels of considerable diamotor, had four horses abreast; and, in early ages, there were occasionally hooks or scythes attached to the axles. In fighting from chariots great dexterity was shown by the warrior, not only in handling his weapons, hut also in stepping oi1t 11pon the pole to the horses' shoulders, in order the better to attain his enemies, and the charioteer was an important person, sometimes equal in rank to the warrior himself. Both the kingdoms of Judah and Israel had war-chariots, and, from the case of King Josiah at the battle of Megiddo it is clear they had also traveling vehicles, for being wounded he quitted his fighting chariot, and in a second, evidently more commodious, he was brought to Jerusalem (2 Chron. xxxv :24). CHARITY (chár'í-ty), the Greek word áyárm, ag-a/, 'Zay, frequently thus rendered in the A. V. CHARMING OF SERPENTS of the N. T. (e.g., I Cor. xiii throughout), is that which is more usually translated “ love” in the same version (e.g., John XV throughout). The translation of the word by ‘love' is the moré proper, seeing that “charity' has acquired a signification in Our language which limits it to overt acts of beneficence. 'A'ydırm denotes that kindly state of mind or feeling which renders a person full of such good will or affectionate re- gard towards others as is always ready to evince itself in word or action. In short, it describes that state of feeling which the apostle enjoined the Romans (xii:Io) to entertain : ‘Be ye kindly affectioned one to another.’ This extended mean- ing of the word explains the pre-eminence which the apostle assigns to the virtue which it implies Over every other Christian grace (I Cor. xiii). CHARMING OF SERPENTS (chârm'ing &v sèr'pents). See ADDER. CHARMIS (kär"mis), (Gr. xappils, char-mºs'), son . Of Melchiel, one of the three “rulers” of Bethulia (Judith vi.15; viii:10; x:6). - CHARRAN (kär"ran), (Acts vii:2, 4). HARAN. CHARTUMMIM (kār-tim'mim), (Heb. Fºn, Æhar-tome', using charms). This is the title rendered ‘magicians' in our version, applied to the “wise men' of Egypt (Gen. xli:8, 22; Exod. vii:II ; viii:7, 18, 19; ix:II), and of Babylon (Dan. i :20; ii:2) The word ‘magi- cians' is not in either case properly applied, as the magi belonged to Persia rather than to Baby- lon or Egypt; and should be altogether avoided in such application, seeing that it has acquired a sense different from that which it once bore. The Hebrew word properly denotes “wise men,’’ as they called themselves and were called by others; but, as we should call them, ‘men eminent in learning and science,’ their exclusive possession of which in their several countries enabled them occasionally to produce effects which were ac- counted Supernatural by the people. CHARUL (kärºul), (Heb. º. Ahar roof'), occurs in three places in Scripture, and in them all is translated ‘mett/es' in the A. V. Thus in Prov. xxiv:30, 31, it is written, ‘I went by the field of the slothful, etc., and, lo it was all grown over with thorns, and nettles (charullim) had covered the face thereof.” So in Job xxx:7, it is stated that he was insulted by the children of those whom he would formerly have disdained to employ, and who were so ab- ject and destitute that “among the bushes they brayed; under the nettles they were gathered to- gether;’ and in Zeph. ii:9, ‘Surely Moab shall be as Sodom, and the children of Ammon as Go- morrah, even the breeding of nettles, and salt- pits, and a perpetual desolation.” Considerable difficulty has been experienced in determining the plant which is alluded to in the above passages. Hence brambles, the wild plum and thistſes, have been severally selected; but nettles have had the greatest number of supporters. Of all these determinations, however, it must be observed that they amount to nothing more than conjectures. All that is implied is that neglected fields, that is, fields in cultivation which are neglected, will become covered with weeds, and that these should be of a kind such as idlers, as in the passage of Job, might take shelter under, or lie down among. This passage, indeed, seems to preclude any thorny plant or nettle, as no one would vol- untarily resort to such a situation, See 394 CHASMIL Moreover, it is worthy of remark that there is a word in a cognate language, the Arabic, which is not very dissimilar from charul or kha- rul, and which is applied to plants, apparently quite suitable to all the above passages. The word khardul is applied in all old Arabic works, as well as at the present day, to different species of mustard, and also to plants which are em- ployed for the same purposes as mustard, and it is not very unlike the kharul or charul of Scrip- ture. In fact, they do not differ more than many words which are considered to have been origi- nally the same. Some of the wild kinds of mus- tard are well known to spring up in cornfields, and to be the most troublesome of all the weeds with which the husbandman has to deal ; one of these, indeed, Sinapis arvensis, is well-known as abun- dant in our fields, where it is a very troublesome weed, and also in waste ground when newly dis- turbed. Some of these are found in Syria and Pales- tine so large that one of them has been supposed to be the mustard tree alluded to by our Saviour. S. arvensis being so widely diffused, is probably also found in Palestine, though this can only be determined by a good botanist on the spot, or by a comparison of genuine specimens. But there is another species, the S. orientalis, which is common in cornfields in Syria, and south and middle Europe, and which can scarcely be dis- tinguished from S. arvensis. Either of these will suit the above passages, and as the name is not very dissimilar. we are of opinion that it is better entitled to be the charul of Scripture than any other plant that has hitherto been adduced. CHASE (châs). See HUNTING. CHASIL (kasi), (Heb. *E, Ahaw see”, de- vourer, Eng. Vers. cater/2//ar), occurs in A/eózezw. I Kings viii:37; 2 Chron. vi.28; Ps. lxxviii:46; Is, xxxiii:4; Joel i :4; ii:25. In the Auth. Vers. I Kings viii:37; 2 Chron. vi:28; Ps. lxxviii:46; cv :34; Is. xxxiii:4; Jer. li: I4, 27; Joel i :4; ii:25. The English word caterpillar belongs strictly to the larvae of the genus lepidoptera, and more especially, to the larvae of a section of it, the A aft2ZZondae. It is, however, far from provable that the chasil is any species of caterpillar. The root from which it is derived, signifies to ‘con- Sume' or ‘devour,’ and it is especially used to de- note the ravages of the locust (Deut. xxviii:38). The Arabic and Syriac cognates also signify to consume. The word 8poßxos, by which it is frequently rendered in the Septuagint, from Épºckw, I eat up, conveys also the idea of rav- enousness. All these names indicate a creature whose chief characteristic is voracity, and which also attaches to all the species of locusts. The ancients, indeed, concur in referring the word to the locust tribe of insects, but are not agreed whether it signifies any particular species of lo- cust, or is the name for any of those states or transformations through which the locust passes from the egg to the perfect insect. The Latin Fathers take it to mean the Aarza of the locust, and the Greek understand it as the name of an adult locust. The Septuagint, in Lev. xi :22, seems to dis- tinguish the bruchus ‘and its kind’ from the com- mon locust as differing not in age, but in species. It also ascribes flight to the brookhos, and speaks of it as a distinct species, so that it is difficult to suspect it of an egregious error. CHASMIL (kås'mi), (Heb. ???", khash-man, Ezek. i:4, 27; viii:2), was probably a composition of * CHASTE, CHASTITY several sorts of metal, since even electron, by which the word is rendered by the ancients, fre- quently signifies a composition of gold and silver. CHASTE, CHASTITY (châst, châs' ti-ty), (Gr. àºyvös, /ag-nos', &Yvótºms, hag-not'ace, dedicated, hence, holy, clean), freedom from lustful actions or thoughts (Phil. iv:8; 1 Tim, v.22; I Pet. iii.2). The word is applied to God in I John iii:3; James iii:17. CHASTEN (chá's'n). See CHASTISEMENT. CHASTISEMENT (chás'tiz-ment). 1. (Heb. "p. ſyazv-sar', prilâarily to instruct, then to chasten, Deut. viii:5; xxi.18; Ps. vi. 1; xxxviii: I; xciv.2). 2. (Heb. "P., yaw-kakh', to cºnvict.) This word is translated chasten in 2 Sam, vii:14; Job xxxiii: I9. 3. (Heb. ' º, aw-maw', to humble oneself, is translated “to chasten thyself” in Dan. x:12.) In the New Testament we have trauðečw, Zahee- a'yoo'o, to instruct, Chasten, train, etc. CHATZIR (kát'zir), (Heb. Tººl, Á/hazy-Z'seer"), or Chazir, also Chajir. This word occurs in several places in the Old Testament, where it is variously translated as grass, in I Kings xviii:5; 2 Kings xix :26; Job xl:I5; Ps. xxxvii:2, etc.; herb in Job viii:I2; hay, in Prov. xxvii:25, and Is. xv.:6; and court, Leeks. in Is. xxxiv:I3; but in Num. xi :5, it is trans- lated leeks. Hebrew scholars state that the word signifies ‘green’ or 'grass' in general; and it is no doubt clear, from the context of most of the above passages, that this must be its meaning. There is therefore no reason why it should not be so translated in all the passages where it oc. curs, except in the last. In the passage of Num. xi :5, where the Israel- ites in the desert long for ‘the melons, and the leeks, and the Onions, and the garlic of Egypt, it is evident that it was not grass which they de- sired for food, but some green, perhaps grass-like vegetable, for which the word chatzir is used, and which is above translated leeks. In the same 395 CHEDORLAOMER way that, in this country, the word greens is applied to a variety of cabbage. It is more than probable, therefore, that chatzir is here similarly employed, though this does not prove that leeks are intended. That the leek is esteemed in Egypt we have the testimony of Hasselguist, who says, ‘that the kind called karrat by the Arabs must certainly have been one of those desired by the children of Israel; as it has been cultivated and esteemed from the earliest times to the present time in Egypt.” CHAVAH (kā’vah), (Gen. iii:20, marg.), a form of Eve, more closely representing the Heb. CHEBAR (ké'bar), (Heb. "33, Aeb-awr', length), a river of Mesopotamia, upon the banks of which King Nebuchadnezzar planted a colony of Jews, among whom was the prophet Ezekiel (2 Kings xxiv:15; Ezek. i: I, 3; iii:15, 23; X:15, 22). This was supposed to be the same river that was known among the Greeks as the Chaboras, and which now bears the name of Khabour. It flows to the Euphrates, through Mesopotamia, and is the only considerable stream which enters that river, at Circesium. The view now obtains that the Chebar was a Babylonian canal. Similar streams were known by the name nar, river. - It is a name which might properly be given to any large river. It is sometimes identified with Nahr Malcha, or the Royal Canal of Nebuchad- 11622 Z3.1". CHEBEL (kebei), (Heb. ºneh-be"), literal. ly means “rope” (Josh. ii:15; I Kings xx:31, etc.). From this it came to denote a “band" of men (Ps. cxix:61). In a topographical sense it means a “tract” and is always applied to the region of Argob (Deut. iii: 13, 14; I Kings iv:I3). s CHECKER work (chék'er würk), (Heb. "???, seb-aw-àaw', network). This word is used to describe the lattice work of the balustrade upon the columns of the Temple (I Kings vii:17). In verse 18, the same word is translated “network.”. CHEDEK (ké'dek). See THORNs. CHEDORLAOMER (kéd'or-lā'o-mer or kéd'or- lä-5' mer), (Heb. nº. Æed-or-lazy-o' mer), king of Elam, and leader of the five kings who invaded Canaan in the time of Abraham (Gen. xiv:4). We thus know that Abraham came out of Ur of the Chaldees, and by way of Haran finally reached Palestine, where he cared for his flocks and herds, and also recaptured the booty which had been taken from the cities of the plain. We learn from Genesis that Chedorlaomer, who led the invaders, was king of Elam, but that is all. A --- 4:... -41* or 1; a lºt or +1, a cº-h; act inn 11 st conne from *S* * * *...* A. A. A ***, *...* * * *...* *-* A i. A * * .*, *, *. J. R. ºr ~ *-i - J *~ *-* * * ~ * * * * = a x, y = * * * * * * * * the recovered monuments of the East. (1) Primitive Peoples. At the time when Terah and his son Abraham left Southern Baby- lonia, it was inhabited by various races, the original race being probably of the negrite type— very dark and small and no match for the larger and stronger races which followed. They formed the original basis of the population of both Babylonia and Elam to the cast. With them, and dominant over them, were two other rival and generally hostile races, inhabiting Babylonia, one of which we may call Mongolian, which came from the east or northeast, by way of Elam, while the other was Semitic, and came from the west, from Arabia. Abraham belonged to this Semitic stock, which had succeeded the Mon- gol invasion and had conquered the country. CHEDORLAOMER 396 (2) Mongolian Invasions. 2300 B. C. occurred one of the most important and revolutionary events in the history of the early world, and one whose full extent only now begins to be understood. It was nothing less than the bursting out of a great flood of Mongol people, which overran all that was then known of the civilized East or West. Such a horde of conquerors had subdued the negrite population of Babylonia and Elam before the beginning of history, and now came another such inva- SIO11. This horde, of about 2300 B. C., the first of which we have historical knowledge, divided, as it seems, into two streams. One of these crossed the upper Tigris and Euphrates, reached the Med- iterranean coast, and proceeded southward, until it at last reached Egypt, and leaving kindred people behind it, there founded the dynasty of the hafed Shepherd or Hyksos kings, which over- threw the fourteen Lll regular dynasty. All of this took time, and must be considered in rela- tion to an already considerably Mongolianized Phoenicia. The other division of the Mongolian invasion passed down east of the Tigris, over the territory which was afterward Persia, into the Southern Persian territory of Elam, where it found a kindred population in control, and then crossed the Tigris into Babylonia, where the Semites were the ruling people. This great invasion, of which we have pretty definite knowledge, and which we call Elamite, was substantially con- current with the conquest of Egypt, by the in- vasion of the Canaanite or Phoeniciari, the Uld Mongolian nomads, who founded Avaris and the Hyksos dynasty. The most distinguished of these Mongolian or Elamite conquerors of Babylonia was Kudur- Nahunta, whose name means “the servant of the god Nahunta.” g This Elamite conquest probably covered all of Southern Babylonia, although the farthest extent of it known to us was the plunder in the year 2285 B. C., of the city of Erech, and the capture of the image of Nana, which was carried to Susa, and was recovered by Assur-bani-pal, king of Assyria, 1800 years later. From Erech to Ur of the Chaldees was not a long distance. At this time there must have been a great emigration of the Semites, who fled from this irresistible invasion. They went north and formed a homogeneous Semitic population farther up the valleys of the two rivers, the basis of the later Assyrian empire. (3) Departure of Terah. About this time Terah and his family left their ancestral home for the North, and we may conjecture, with great probability, that the Elamite invasion explains in part their departure; we may believe that they were the representatives of the dispossessed aris- tocracy which went to the northern plain of Haran, carrying, as we know, with them, the worship of Sin, the moon god of Ur. (4) Abraham and the Early Kings. In time, Abraham at the command of God moved farther to the Mediterranean coast, and wandered over the land of Canaan. It was while he was there that the invasion of Palestine occurred, led by Chedorlaomer, or, as his Elamite name would be, Rudur-Lagamar, meaning the servant of the goddess Lagamar, who, perhaps, represented the Dawn, and a name parallel to that of his great predecessor, Kudur-Nahunta. Kudur-Nahunta’s son was Simti-Shilhak, who was the father of Kºidur-Mabug, who was the father of Eri-Aku (in Semitic, Rim-Sin) of Somewhere about CHEESE Larsa, probably the Arioch, king of Ellasar, who was one of those who made the raid on Canaan (see ARIOCH) with Chedorlaomer (Kudur-La- gamar), king of Elam. We do not know just what was the extent and purpose of this invasion, but we may be sure that the Semite Abraham, who had been driven by the Elamites out of his ancestral home, had mo good will towards the house of Kudur-Na- hunta, nor any of his successors. He lived at some distance from the rich cities which were attacked, and was personally safe; but he was not only glad to rescue his nephew Lot, but also to avenge as far as possible the injuries which he and his father had suffered, and which made them wanderers from their early home. The opportunity was offered on the re- treat. We must not imagine Abraham, with his three hundred and eighteen men, as attacking the combined army of the invaders. What he prob- ably did was to follow and surprise a separate detachment which had lingered to attack and spoil Sodom, or had charge of prisoners. These were suddenly overcome, and the prisoners and spoil retaken (Gen. xiv: I4–16). (See ABRAHAM ; LOT.) Kudur-Lagamar is the last one of this line of Elamite or Mongolian kings ruling over Baby- lonia that is known to us. It is supposed by some that Amraphel, king of Shinar, who was also in the invasion of Kudur-Lagamar (Che- dorlaomer) is the same as Hammurabi, who later drove out the Elamites and restored a Semitic line of rulers and who reigned until about 16oo B. C. (See AMRAPHEL.) Another Elamite or Kassite dynasty conquered Babylonia and held it for some 300 years. Such a wide view of early Oriental history as we have taken explains not only the relations of Abraham to the politics of Ur of the Chaldees, and the reason for his hostility to the Elamites, but it also explains the fact, so surprising to scholars, of the wide use of the cuneiform writ- ing in Palestine, a few centuries later, as proved by the Tel-Amarna tablets. (See TEL-AMARNA TABLETS.) The Elamites used the cuneiform script. This raid of Kudur-Lagamar was one of a large number which brought Canaan under the rule of Elam and Babylonia, but not with the nearer Egypt. Its literature and writing were Babylonian, not Egyptian. We may not be sur- prised if we learn that its religion, and its notions of cosmogony, and all its faiths and legends were closely allied to those of Babylonia. (See Chedor- laopher and Abraham, William Hayes Ward, D. D., Hom. Rezy., July, 1894; Sayce, Patriarchal Palestine, pp. 33, 64, 168; Price, The Monuments and the Old Testament, pp. IOI, 293.) CHEEK (chek), (Heb. Yº, Zekh-ee"). In the Mosaic economy a part of the priests’ provision comprehended the cheeks and maw of the sacrifice (Deut. xviii:3). Cheek-teeth appear to be the grinders, strong and resistless in the lion (Joel i :6). - tº Figuratite. To Smite one upon the cheek was a vile insult as well as an injury (Job xvi; Io; Lam, iii:30; Mic. vii; Luke vi;29). In Psalms iii:7, the term is used to indicate destruction. The idea of strength is conveyed in Joel i :6. CHEESE (cház) is mentioned three times only in the Bible under a different Hebrew name, as sººn ***Nº, Ahah-re-fsay' he-Åhaw-lawó', slices, g *A* Sr*., or segments, of cheese (1 Sam, 17:18); Tº Fº, CHELAL sheph-owth' baw-Kawr', according to the Chaldee and the rabbins, cheese of cows (2 Sam. 17:29); Tºº, gheb-ee-naw' (Job x:10), Coagulated milk. In this, the most important passage in which this preparation from milk is mentioned in Scrip- ture, Job, figuratively describing the formation of the fetus in the womb, says: ‘Hast thou not poured me out like milk, And curdled (condensed, solidified) me like cheese?’ (x :Io). There is much reason to conclude that the cheese used by the Jews differed in no respect from that still common in the East; which is usu- ally exhibited in small cakes about the size of a tea saucer, white in color, and excessively salt. It has no rind, and soon becomes excessively hard and dry—heing, indeed, not made for long keep- ing. It is best when new and comparatively soft; and, in this state, large quantities are consumed in lumps or crumbs not made up into cakes. All cheese in the East is of very indifferent quality, and it is within the writer's own knowledge that the natives infinitely prefer English or Dutch cheese when they can obtain it. In making this cheese, the thing used to curdle the milk is either butter-milk or a decoction of the great-headed thistle, or wild artichoke. The curds are after- wards put into small baskets made of rushes or palm leaves, which are then tied up close, and the necessary pressure applied. (See I Sam. xvii:18; 2 Sam. xvii:29.) - A valley at Jerusalem bore the name Cheese- mongers. CHELAL (kelal), (Heb. *, *ekawi, perfec. tion; XaXáX, cha/a/), Ezra x:30, where he is men- tioned as one of the eight sons of Pahath-Moab, who all took “strange wives” (B. C. 458). CHELBENAH (kè-benah), (Heb. Tº, Ahai. ben-azy'), is mentioned in Exod. xxx:34 as one of the substances from which the incense for the sanctuary was to be prepared: ‘Take unto thee sweet spices, stacte (opobalsamum, R. V.), and onycha and (chelbenah) galbanum.’ The Hebrew word is very similar to the Greek XaX/3ávn, ga/ðan- um, which occurs as early as the time of Hippoc- rateS. Galbanum then is either a natural exudation, or obtained by incisions from some umbelliferous plant. It occurs in commerce in the form either of tears or masses, commonly called lump-gal- banum. The latter is of the consistence of wax, tenacious, of a brownish, or brownish yellow color, with white spots in the interior, which are the agglutinated tears. Its odor is strong and halsamic, hut disagreeable and its faste warm and bitter. It is composed of 66 per cent. of resin, and 6 of volatile oil, with gum, etc., and im- purities. It was formerly held in high esteem as a stimulant and anti-spasmodic medicine, and is still employed as such, and for external applica- tion to discuss indolent tumors. It was the practice of the ancients to mix gal- banum with the most fragrant substances with which they were acquainted. The effect of such mixture must depend upon the proportion in which it or any other strong-smelling substance is intermixed, more than upon what is its peculiar odor when in a concentrated state. We need not, therefore, inquire into the reasons which have been assigned to account for galbanum being in- termixed with stacte and onycha as Sweet Spices. We see that the same practice existed among the Greeks and the Egyptians. 397 CHENAANAH CHELGIAs (keishias), (Heb. ºn, Ahiºee. yawā', the portion of the Lord), Hilkiah, the father of Susanna. Tradition makes him the brother of Jeremiah, and identifies him with the priest who found the copy of the law in the time of Josiah (2 Kings xxii:8). CHELLIANS (kël-li-anz), (Judith ii:23). See CHELLUS. CHELLUH (keliuh), (Heb. Tº, Aeroo Aah. ee, robust), one of the sons of Bani, who had for- eign wives (Ezra x:35), B. C. 458. Called also Cheluhi. CHELLUS (kël-luz), (Gr. XeXXoºs, A/he/-/oos'), named amongst the places beyond Jordan to which Nebuchodnosor sent his summons (Judith i9). CBIELOD (kë'löd). The sons of Chelod were among those who obeyed the summons of Nebuchodnosor to his war with Arphaxad (Judith i:6): . The word is evidently corrupt and probably a nickname of the Syrians, “sons of the moles,” (ºn, holed). - CHELUB (ke'lub), (Heb. Fº, Kezooh', a cage). 1. The brother of Shuah and father of Mehir, of the tribe of Judah (I Chron. iv: II). 2. The father of Ezri, who was David's chief gardener (I Chron. xxvii:26), B. C. after IOOO. CHELUBAI (ke-ubai), (Heb. *, Aeloo-bah- ee), one of the sons of Hezron (I Chron. ii:9); else- where in the same chapter (verses 18, 4.2) called CALEB (which see). CHEMARIM (kém'a-rím), (Heb. Fº, Aem-aw- reema', Zeph. i:4). In 2 Kings xxiii:5, it is rendered “idolatrous priests,” and in Hos. x:5, “priests.” In the He- brew usage of the word, it is exclusively applied to the priests of the false worship. CHEMOSH (ké'môsh), (Heb. ***, Åem-osh'), is the name of a national god of the Moabites (I Kings xi:7; 2 Kings xxiii: 13; Jer. xlviii:7; who are for this reason called the people of Chemosh,' in Num. xxi:29), and of the Ammonites (Judg. xi.;24), whose worship was introduced among the Israel- ites by Solomon (I Kings xi:7). No etymology of the name which has been pro- posed, and no attempt which has been made to identify this god with others whose attributes are better known, are sufficiently plausible to deserve particular notice. The only theory which rests on any probability is that which assumes a re- semblance between Chemosh and Arabian idol- atry. Jewish tradition affirms that he was wor- shiped under the symbol of a black star, and Maimonides states that his worshipers went bare- headed and abstained from the use of garments sewn together by the needle. The black star, the connection with Arabian idolatry, and the fact that Chemosh is coupled with Moloch (I Kings vi:7), favor the theory that he had some analogy with the planet Saturn. Solomon erected a high place for him near Jerusalem (I Kings xi :7), which was afterwards defiled by Josiah (2 Kings xxiii: 13). * * * * 'CHENAANAH (ke-nā'a-nah')(Heb. Tº, Aen- ah-an-aw', flat, low). 1. Son of Bilhan, descendant of Benjamin, head of the Benjamite house (I Chron. vii: Io), prob- ably of the family of Belaites (B.C. 1020). 2. Father or ancestor of Zedekiah, the false prophet, who encouraged Ahab to go up against Ramoth-Gilead (I Kings xxii: I I, 24: 2 Chron. xviii: Io, 23). Perhaps the same as 1 (B. C. 896). CHENANI CHENANI (kén'a-ni), (Heb. "???, Aen-aw-nee', Jehovah appointed or made). One of the Levites who officiated at the solemn purification of the people under Ezra (Neh. ix:4), B. C. 459. wn º º CHENANIAH (kën'a-ni'ah), (IIeb. "??, Ken- am-yaw', God's goodness). A master of the temple music, who conducted the grand musical services when the ark was re- moved from the house of Obed-edom to Jeru- salem (I Chron. xv.:22). CHEPHAR-HAAMMONAI - (ké'phar-ha-ám'- mo-nāi), (Heb. Tº ****, kefar' haw-am-mo-mee', village of the Ammonites). A place mentioned among the towns of Ben- jamin (Josh. xviii:24). No trace of it has been found, but it doubtless preserved the memory Of all Auluſ ite, incursion into the ravineg that ran back from the Jordan into thc highlands of Ben- jamin. ** * CHEPHIRAH (ke-phi'rah), (Heb. "Tºº, kef-ee- raw", with the definite article, "Tºº, hać-Åef-ee- z-aw', except in the later books), a city of the Gib- eonites, given to Benjamin (Josh. ix:17; xviii.26). It appears to have been a village of the Hivites, and to have retained its name, to whatever size it might afterwards have attained. It continued to exist after the captivity (Ezra ii:25; Neh. vii: 29). Its site is the ruin Kefireh, eight miles west- northwest of Jerusalem, about two miles east Of Záſa (Ajalon) (Robinson iii. I46). CHERAN (ké'ran), (Heb. lº, Áer-awn, union), one of the sons of Dishon the Horite (Gen. xxxvi. 26; I Chron. i.4I), B. C. IQ20. CHERETHIM (kér'e-thim), (Heb. Fº, Aher- ee-ſheeze', Ezek. xxv.16). The plural form is else- where CHERETHITES (which see). CHERETHITES and PELETHITES(kér'e-th- ites and pé'leth-ites), (Heb. Yºº, Aer-ay-thee'), names borne by the royal life-guards in the time of David (2 Sam. viii:18; I Chron. xviii:17). Pre- vailing opinion translates their names “Headsmen and Foot-runners.” The former word is used for woodcutters (2 Chron. ii: Io), and it might seem probable that the Cherethites, like the lictors of the Roman dictator, carried axes, both as a badge of office and for prompt use. That they were strictly a body-guard is distinctly stated in 2 Sam. xxiii: 23. The grammatical form of the Hebrew words is nevertheless not quite clear, and as the Chere- thites are named as a nation of the south (I Sam. xxx : I4), some are disposed to believe Crethi and Plethi to be foreign Gentile names used collect- ively. No small confirmation of this may be drawn from 2 Sam. xv :I8: “All the Cherethites and all the Pelethites and all the Gittites, six hundred men.” In three places the name Carite appears in their stead (2 Sam. xx :23; 2 Kings xi :4, 19, both Revised Version). It has been suggested that this name preserves the memory of Carian inhabitants of Crete, alluded to by classical writers. CHERITH (kā'rith), (Heb. FTP, Aer-eeth", tor- rent of the gorge), a river in Palestine, . On , the banks of which the prophet Elijah found refuge (I Kings xvii:3-7). Eusebius and others have conceived themselves bound by the words rendered “east of the Jor- dan,’ to seek the river in the Trans-Jordanic country; but although the words sometimes re- 398 CHERUB, CHERUBIM quire this translation, they may also be rendered ‘towards,” or ‘before the Jordan,’ that is, in com- ing from Samaria. And this interpretation, which places the Cherith west of the Jordan, agrees with the history, with Josephus, and with the local traditions, which have uniformly placed the river of Elijah on this side the Jordan. Dr. Robinson drops a suggestion that it may be the Wady Kelt, which is formed by the union of many streams in the mountains west of Jericho, issuing from a deep gorge, in which it passes by that village and then across the plain to the Jordan. It is dry in summer. Some identify it with Wady Fusail, a little farther north, and yet others think it was some stream on the other, or eastern, side of the Jordan. Wady Yabis, oppo- site Beth-shean, may be the place. (Harper, Bible and Mod. Dis., p. 299.) CHERUB (ké'rub), (Heb. Pº, Aer-oob', a city); apparently a place in Babylonia from which some persons returned to Judaea with Zerubbabel (Ezra ii:59; Neh. vii: 61). CHERUB, CHERUBIM (chér’āb, chér'ā-bím), (Heb. PTP, Aer-oo!', one grasped, held fast), in the singular Only in Exod. xxv.19; 2 Sam. xxii:II; I Kings vi.24, 25, 27; 2 Chron. iii: I I, I2; Ps. xviii:Io; Ezek. x:2, 7, 9, 14; xxviii:14, 16; cherubiin, plural, Pº, Aer-oo-beem', the name of certain symbolical figures frequently mentioned in Scripture. Hebrew nouns of the masculine gender generally end in im, and Our translators, in adopting this form into their version in preference to the En- glish cherubs, have 1n several places improperly added the letter s to the termination of the word, and so given us cherubims. (1) Symbolical of Ruling Powers. One sys- tem regards the cherubim as symbolical of the chief ruling powers by which God carries on the Operations of nature. As the heaven of heavens was typified by the holy of holies in the Levitical tabernacle (Heb. ix:3-12, 24–28), this system considers that the visible heavens may be typified by the holy place or the outer sanctuary, and ac- cordingly finding, as its supporters imagine they do, the cherubim identified with the aerial firma- ment and its elements in such passages as the fol- lowing: ‘He rode upon a cherub, and did fly, yea, he did fly upon the wings of the zwind,” where the last hemistich is exegetical of the former (Ps. xviii:Io); ‘Who rideth upon the heavens in thy help, and in his excellency upon the sky’ (Deut. xxxiii:26; Ps. 1xviii:4); ‘He maketh the clouds his chariot;’ he is said to descend in fire (Exod. xix:18), and between which he dwelt in light (I Tim. vi. I6), and it was in this very man- ner he manifested his Divine glory in the Taber- nacle and Temple—they interpret the cherubirri, on which the Lord is described as riding, to be symbolical of the wind, the clouds, the fire, the light; in short, the heavens, the atmosphere, the great physical powers by which the Creator and preserver of the universe carries on the operations of nature. (2) Ecclesiastical Rulers. A second system considers the cherubim, from their being insti- tuted immediately after the Fall, as having par- ticular reference to the redemption of man, and as symbolical of the great and active rulers or ministers of the church. Those who adopt this theory as the true explanation of their emblemat- ical meaning, are accustomed to refer to the liv- ing creatures, or cherubim, mentioned in the Apocalyptic vision (Rev. iv:6), improperly ren- dered in our English translation ‘beasts,’ and which, it is clear, were not angels, but redeemed CHERUB, CHERUBIM men connected with the church, and deeply in- terested in the blessings and glory procured by the Lamb. The same character may be ascribed to the living creatures in Ezekiel’s visions, and to the cherubim, which stood over and looked into the mercy-seat, sprinkled with the blood of the atonement, and on the Shechinah, or divine glory arising from it, as well as the cherubic figures which were placed on the edge of Eden, and thus the cherubim, which are prominently introduced in all the three successive dispensations of the Covenant of grace, appear to be symbols of those who, in every age, should officially study and pro- claim the glory and manifold wisdom of God. It may be observed in general that they both involve the leading idea that the cherubim were Symbols, either directly emblematic of Deity, or significant of the ruling powers by which the agency of God is carried on in the natural and moral world. (3) Levitical Tabernacle. Figures of the cherubim were conspicuous implements in the Levitical Tabernacle. Two of them were placed at each end of the mercy-seat, standing in a stoop- ing attitude, as if looking down towards it, while they overshadowed it with their expanded wings, and, indeed, they were component parts of it, formed Out of the same mass of pure gold as the mercy-seat itself (Exod. xxv :I9). (4) Solomon’s Temple. These figures were afterwards transferred to the most holy place in Solomon's temple, and it has been supposed from I Chron. xxviii: 18 that that prince constructed two additional ones after the same pattern, and of the same solid and costly material, but whether it was with a view to increase their number in accordance with the more spacious and magnifi- cent edifice to which they were removed, or merely to supply the place of those made by Moses, which in the many vicissitudes that befell the ark might have been mutilated or entirely separated from the mercy-seat to which they were attached—is not ascertained. This much, however, is known, that Solomon erected two of colossal dimensions in an erect posture with their faces towards the walls (2 Chron. iii:I3), covering with their out- stretched wings the entire breadth of the debir, or most holy place. These sacred hieroglyphics were profusely embroidered on the tapestry of the tabernacle, on the curtains and the great veil that separated the holy from the most holy place (Exod. xxvi : I-31), as well as carved in several places (I Kings viii:6-8) on the walls, doors and sacred utensils of the temple. The position occupied by these singular images at each extremity of the mercy-seat—while the Shechinah, or sacred flame that symbolized the Divine presence and the awful name of Jehovah in written characters were in the intervening space —gave rise to the well-known phraseology of the sacred writers, which represents the Deity dwell- ing between or inhabiting the cherubim, and, in fact, so intimately associated were they with the manifestation of the Divine glory that whether the Lord is described as at rest or in motion, as seated on a throne, or riding in a triumphal chariot, these symbolic figures were essential ele- ments in the description (Num. vii:89; Ps. xviii: Io; lxxx:1 ; xcix:1 Io; Is. vi. 2; xxxvii:16). (5) Uniform in Figure. Rejecting the opinion of those who maintain that the cherubim were of various shapes, we assume it to be, if not absolutely certain, at least highly probable, that in all the passages of Scripture where they are spoken of their figures were uniform. & (6) First Mention. The first occasion on which they are mentioned is on the expulsion of 399 CHERUB, CHERUBIM our first parents from Eden, when the Lord placed cherubim on the east of the garden (Gen. iii:24). The word, translated on the east,' may signify as well ‘before or on the edge of ;’ and the his- torian does not say that the Lord placed there cherubim, but the cherubim. Besides, yashab rendered by our translators ‘placed,” signifies properly ‘to place in a tabernacle,’ an expression which, viewed in connection with some incidents in the after history of the primeval family (Gen. iv :I4-I6), seems a conclusive establishment of the Opinion that this was a local tabernacle, in which the symbols of the Divine presence were mani- fested, suitably to the altered circumstances in which man after the Fall came before God, and to the acceptable mode of worship he was taught to observe. That consecrated place, with its striking symbols, called ‘the presence of the Lord,' there is reason to believe, continued till the time of the deluge, otherwise there would have been nothing to guard the way to the tree of life; and thus the knowledge of their form, from the longevity of the antediluvians, could have been easily transmitted to the time of Abraham (Faber, A/ora Mosaica, b. ii. chap. 6). Moreover, it is an approved opinion that, when '':ose emblems were removed at the close of the patriarchal dis- pensation from the place of public worship, the ancestors of that patriarch formed Small models of them for domestic use, under the name of Seraphim, or Teraphim, according to the Chaldee dialect. (7) Furniture of the Tabernacle. The next occasion in the course of the sacred history on which the cherubim are noticed is when Moses was commanded to provide the furniture of the tabernacle (Exod. xxv :18-20; xxxvii:7-9); and, although he received instructions to make all things according to the pattern shown him in the Mount, and although it is natural to suppose that he saw a figure of the cherubim, yet we find no minute and special description of them, as is given of everything else, for the direction of the artificers (Exod. xxvi :31). The simple mention which the sacred historian makes, in both these passages, of the cherubim, conveys the impres- sion that the symbolic figures which had been introduced into the Levitical tabernacle were sub- stantially the same with those established in the primeval place of worship on the outskirts of Eden, and that by traditional information, or some other means, their form was so well known, both to Bezaleel and the whole congregation of Israel, as to render superfluous all further de- scription of them. On no other ground can we account for the total silence as to their configura- tion, unless we embrace the groundless and un- worthy opinion of those who impute to the author of the Pentateuch a studied concealment of Some parts ol His ritual, aller the mailmer Ol the Mystics. (8) Vision of Ezekiel. But there was no mystery as to those remarkable figures, for Eze- lciel lanew at once (x :20) the living creatures which appeared in his vision supporting the throne of God, and bearing it in majesty from place to place, to be cherubim, from having frequently seen them, in common with all other worshipers, in the carved work of the outer sanctuary. More- over, as is the opinion of many eminent divines the visionary scene, with which this prophet was favored, exhibited a transcript of the Temple, which was shown in pattern to David, and after- wards erected by his son and successor; and, as the chief design of that later vision was to in- spire the Hebrew exiles in Babylon with the hope of seeing, on their return to Judaea, another tem- CHERUB, CHERUBIM ple, more glorious than the one then in ruins, it is reasonable to believe that, as the whole style and apparatus of this mystic temple bore an exact resemblance (I Kings vi.2O) to that of Solomon's magnificent edifice, so the cherubs also that ap- peared to his fancy portrayed on the walls would be fac-similes of those that belonged to its ancient prototype. Taking, then, his description of them to be the proper appearance that belonged in com- mon to all his cherubic creatures (chaps, i, x, xli), we are led to conclude that they were compound figures, unlike any living animals or real object in nature; but rather a combination, in one nonde- script artificial image, of the distinguishing fea- tures and properties of several. The ox, as chief among the tame and useful animals, the lion among the wild ones, the eagle among the feathery tribes, and man, as head over all—were the ani- mals which, or rather parts of which, composed the symbolical figures. Each cherub had four (listinct faces on One neck—that of a man in front, that of a lion on the right side, and of an ox on the left; while behind was the face of an eagle. Each had four wings, the two under ones covering the lower extremities (Heb. the feet), in token of decency and humility, while the upper ones, spread out on a level with the head and shoulders, were so joined together, to the edge of his neighbors' as to form a canopy; and in this manner they soared rather than flew, without any vibratory motion with their wings, through the air. Each had straight feet. The Hebrew version renders it “a straight foot;’ and the probability is that the legs were destitute of any flexible joint at the knee, and so joined together that its loco- motions must have been performed in some other way than by the ordinary process of walking, or lifting one foot after another. The ideal picture, then, which Ezekiel’s de- scription would lead us to form of the cherub, is that of a winged man, or winged ox, according to the particular phase it exhibited or the particu- lar direction from which it was seen. - (9) Corruption of Early Worship. Whether the golden calf constructed by Aaron might be— not the Apis of Egypt—but a representation of the antediluvian Cherubim, as some suppose, from its being made on ‘a feast to the Lord,” and called ‘the gods of Israel’ (Exod. xxxii:5), and whether Jeroboam, in the erection of his two calves, intended a schismatic imitation of the sacred symbols in the Temple of Jerusalem, rather than the introduction of a new species of idolatry (I Kings xii:28), we shall not stop to inquire. But as paganism is a corruption of patriarchal worship—each nation having added something to its own taste and fancy—perhaps we may find a confirmation of the views given above of the compound form of the cheriihim in the strange figures that are grouped together in the heathen deities. The numerous ox-heads, for instance, in the statue of the ancient Diana, and particularly the Asiatic idols, almost all of which exhibit several heads and arms attached to one person, or the heads of different animals combined, afford a col- lateral proof, similar to the universal prevalence of sacrifice, that the form of the primitive cheru- bim has been traditionally preserved and ex- tended over a large portion of the world. The opinions concerning the design of the cherubim are as diversified as those relative to their form. All are agreed that they had a sym- bolical meaning, although it is not easy to ascer- tain it. The ancients, as well as the fathers, considered that they had both a physical and a metaphysical object. Thus, for instance, Philo 400 CHESIL regarded them as signifying the two hemispheres, and the flaming 'Sword the motion of the planets; in which opinion he is joined by some moderns, who consider them to have been nothing more than astronomical emblems—the Lion and the Man being equivalent to Leo and Aquarius—the signs of the zodiac (Landseer, Sab. Resear. p. 315). Irenaeus views them as emblematic of sev- ‘eral things, such as the four elements, the four quarters of the globe, the four gospels, the four universal covenants (Adv. Haeres, iii:II). Ter- tullian supposed that the cherubic figures, par- ticularly the flaming sword, denoted the torrid zone (Apol. cap. 47). Justin Martyr imagined that the living creatures of Ezekiel were sym- bolical of Nebuchadnezzar, the Assyrian mon- arch, in his distress; when he ate grass like an ox, his hair was like a lion's, and his nails like a bird’s claws (Quaest. xliv). And Athanasius sup- posed that they were significant of the visible heavens (Quaest. ad. Antiocl. cxxxv). The opin- ions of the moderns may be reduced to three systems. Hutchinson and his followers consider the cherubim as emblems of the Trinity, with man incorporated into the Divine essence. But the grand objection to this theory, where it is at all intelligible, is that not only are the cherubim, in all the places of Scripture where they are introduced, described as distinct from God, and no more than His attendants, but that it represents the Divine Being, who is a pure spirit, without parts, passions, or anything material, making a visible picture of himself, when in all ages, from the beginning of time, he has ex- pressly prohibited ‘the likeness of anything in heaven above’ (See Parkhurst, Heb. Lexicon, sub voce). Another system regards the cherubim as symbolical of the chief ruling powers by which God carries on the operations of nature. As the heaven of heavens was typified by the holy of holies in the Levitical tabernacle (Heb. ix:3-12, 24-28). ' (10) Literature. The subject is extensively discussed in the standard works on the Theology of the Old Testament, by Oehler, Smend, Schultz, Dillmann; and on the Archaeology, by Nowack and Benzinger. See also Cheyne’s ‘Ercursus’ in vol. ii. of his Isaiah, and his notes on the word in Com. on Psalms. g cHESALondºsa-lón) (Heblº, kesaw-lone, strength, fortress). e One of the landmarks on the west part of the north boundary of Judah (Josh. xv : IO). Early historians differ somewhat concerning its exact location, but they agree that it was a large town near Jerusalem. It is commonly identified with the village of Kesla, ten miles west of Jerusalem. CHESED (ke'sed), (Heb. Tº, Reh'sed, doubtful signification), the fourth named of the sons of Na- hor (Abraham's brother) by Milcah (Gen. xxii:22), B. C. between 2088 and 1870. It is noticeable that the eldest of the brothers of Chesed is Uz, and that in Job. i the Casdim (translated Chaldaeans) are found invading the territory of Uz. Gen. xxii:21, 22 probably repre- sent, in the terms of genealogy, the supposed kin- ship of allied clans who dwelt in Mesopotamia. The Hebrew tradition gives the names of tribes identified with various localities on the borders of the plain of Mesopotamia (H. E. Ryle, Hast- ings' Bib. Dict.). l- CHESIL (ké'sil), (Heb. ???, kes-eel", fleshly, carnal, ungodly), a city of Judah (Josh. XV:30). Eusebius calls it Xil, and places it in the South of Judah. CHEST In the list of towns given to Simeon out of Judah the name Bethuſ occurs (Josh. xix:4) in place of Chesil as if identical with it. This is strengthened by the reading Bethuel in 1 Chron. 1V:3O. CHEST (chést). are translated by this term: 1. Tº, aw-rome', which, with two exceptions, is always used of the Ark of the Covenant. These two exceptions are the “coffin” of Joseph (Gen. l:26), and the “chest” in which the alms were Collected by Jehoiada (2 Kings xii:9, Io; 2 Chron. xxiv:8-II). * 2. E";, ghen-azy-zeem’, “chests,” Ezek. xxvii: 24 only; “treasuries,” Esther iii:9; iv:7. CHESTNUT-TREE (chés'nāt-tre'). See ARMON. CHESULLOTH (keisū’īoth), (Heb. nº, Aes. oo/-/oth", fatness, the loins), one of the towns of Issachar (Josh. xix:18). It appears to be between Jezreel and Shunem, but not far enough north to be the Acchaseluth mentioned by Eusebius and Jerome. Perhaps the same as CHISLOTH-TABOR. CHETH (kéth), in R. V. Heth. “The eighth let- ter of the Hebrew alphabet. It stands at the be- ginning of the eighth section of Ps. cxix, in sev- eral versions, in which section each verse begins with this letter.” (Davis, Bib. Dict.) CHETTIIM (kët-ti’im), (1 Macc. i.1). CHITTIM. CHEZIB (ké'zib), (Heb. Plē, Aeg-eeb', deceitful, lying), a name mentioned in Gen. xxxviii.5, where the Canaanitess Bathshua bore Judah his third son, Shelah. It was probably in the low country of Judah, and no doubt identical with Achzib and Chozeba. e CHIDON (ki'don), (Heb. *TP, Áee-dohn', destruc- tion, a javelin), the threshing-floor where Uzzah was suddenly struck dead (I Chron. xiii:9). In 2 Sam. vi;6, it is called “the threshing-floor of Na- chon;” but we neither know whether the names of Nachon and Chidon are those of men or of places, nor if they are really two distinct names for the same person or spot, but simply corruptions one of the other. - CHILD, CHILDREN (child, chil'dren), (Heb. º, yº). The word ‘children’ is sometimes used in the plural number, when meant to designate only one male issue (comp. I Chron. ii:3I ; 2 Chron. xxiv: 25; xxxiii:6). In such places ‘sons' is equivalent to offspring, all of whom had probably died ex- cept the last-mentioned in the text. The more children—especially of male children—a person had among the Hebrews the more was he hon- ored, it being considered as a mark of Divine favor, while sterile people were, on the contrary, See held in contempt (comp. Gen. xi :30; xxx: I ; I Sam. ii:5; 2 Sam. vi.23; Ps. cxxvii:3, sq.; cxxviii:3; Luke i :7; ii:5). That children were often taken as bondsmen by a creditor for debts contracted by the father is evident from 2 Kings iv : I ; Is. 1:1 ; Neh. v :5. Among the Hebrews a father had almost unlimited power over his chil- dren, nor do we find any law in the Pentateuch re- stricting that power to a certain age; it was indeed the parents who even selected wives for their sons (Gen. xxi:21; Exod. xxi:9, Io, II; Judg. xiv:2, 5). It would appear, however, that a father's power over his daughters was still greater than that over his sons, since he might even annul a sacred vow made by a daughter, but not one made by a son (Num. xxx:4, 16). Children, cursing or assaulting their parents were punished by the Two distinct Hebrew words. 401 CHILD, CHILDREN Mosaical Law with death (Exod. xxi :15, 17; Lev. xx:9), a remarkable instance of which is quoted by Christ (Matt. xv.:4, 6; Mark vii:9). Before the time of Moses a father had the right to choose among his male children and declare one of them (usually the child of his favorite wife) as his firstborn, though he was perhaps only the young- est. Properly speaking, the ‘firstborn' was he who was first begotten by the father, since polyg- amy excluded all regard in that respect to the mother. Thus Jacob had sons by all his four wives, while only one of them was called the first- born (Gen. xlix:3); we find, however, instances where that name is applied also to the firstborn on the mother's side (I Chron. ii:50; comp. v.:42; Gen. xxii:21). The privileges of the firstborn were considerable, as shown in BIRTHRIGHT. The firstborn son, if not expressly deprived by the father of his peculiar rights, as was the case with Reuben (Gen. xlix), was at liberty to sell them to a younger brother, as happened in the case of Esau and Jacob (Gen. xxv :31, sq.). Considering the many privileges attached to first- birth, we do not wonder that the Apostle called Esau a thoughtless person (Heb. xii:16). There are some allusions in Scripture to the modes in which children were carried. Several of these allusions seem to import that they were carried bundled on the back; Is. xlix:22 represents them as carried on the shoulder. On the influence of heredity, G. M. Mackie (Hastings' Bib. Dict.) says: Given a life with little change in its outward conditions, and with a law that controlled every detail of life, it fol- lowed that time would be an intensifier of the parental features. Among the Arabs the epithet ‘dog’ has for its climax ‘son of a dog." As one of their proverbs states the problem, “If the father be onion and the mother garlic, how can there be Sweet perfume?' When Saul asked the young slayer, of Goliath, ‘Whose son art thou, young man?' (I Sam. xvii:58) the answer would not only reveal the family of David, but also account in part for the courage he had shown. Hence the incriminations, ‘Ye are the children of them that killed the prophets' (Matt. xxiii:31); ‘If ye were Abraham's children ye would do the works of Abraham' (John viii:39); and the defense, “How can Satan cast out Satan?’ (Mark iii:23; Ezek. xviii:2; Acts xiii:Io). (See ADOPTION ; BIRTH ; BIRTHRIGHT ; EDUCATION.) Figuratite. 1. The Jews are compared to a child or infant cast out and forsaken of its mother, or infant lying in its blood; their origin was base, their condition in Egypt extremely mean, and they were exposed to the most bloody cruelty, but God exalted them into a glorious kingdom (Ezek. xvi :I-I4). They are the “chil- dren of the kingdom,” who are now cast out to trouble, while the Gentiles are admitted into the church and a state of fellowship with God (Matt. viii: 12). They, while cleaving to their burden- Some ceremonies, as a ground of justification, are the “children of the bond-woman” (Gal. iv:3I). 2. The saints are called the “sons or children of God;” they are graciously adopted into his Spiritual family, begotten into his image, endued with his Spirit, and entitled to privileges unnum- bered, and an inheritance that fadeth not away; they are heirs of righteousness, salvation, of the promises, nay, of God himself (John i:12; Rom. viii: 14-17). They are the “children or seed” of Wisdom, or Christ; by his travail unto death, and suffering, and by the influence of his regen- erating Spirit, he begets them again (Matt. xi :19; Is. liii:Io). They are “children of light;" be- gotten of God, the purest light, by means of his 26 CHILD, CHILDREN 402 pure and enlightening word; they have the knowledge of Divine things, walk in the light of God's countenance and law; the light of their good works shines before men; and they are heirs and expectants of the inheritance of the saints in light (Luke xvi :8). They are “children of promise;” by the promises of the gospel, they are quickened, supported, comforted, and secured of eternal life (Gal. iv:29). They are “children of the resurrection ;” then they shall be raised from the dead, fully conformed to God, and enter on the complete possession of their glorious inher- itance in heaven (Luke xx :36). They are “chil- dren of 2ion ; of Jerusalem; of the kingdom; and of the free woman ;” they are spiritually horn, instructed and nourished in the church ; they are under the covenant of grace, have a spirit of liberty, are freed from the slavery of sin and Satan, and of the broken law; and now, un- der the gospel, are free from burdensome cere- monies, and serve God with cheerfulness of heart (Ps. cxlix:2; Matt. xiii:38; Gal. iv:31 ; Is. lx:4). 3. Christ's disciples were “children of the bride-chamber;” they had early and peculiar in- timacy with him, the glorious Bridegroom of souls (Matt. ix:15). The title son of man is given to Ezekiel, Daniel and Jesus Christ, but whether it was a title of dignity, importing their peculiar excellency, or whether a mark of our Saviour's debasement, and his delight in our na- ture; or a mark of the low origin and frailty of these prophets, to be remembered by them amidst their visions, is not agreed (Ezek. ii: I ; Dan. vii: 13; viii:17). - The wicked are “children of this world;” they are never born from above; have no portion of felicity, but in this world; nor do they study to fulfill any thing but its lusts (Luke xvi :8). They are represented as “sons of men,” or Adam ; in him they were corrupted; his transgressions they imitate; they have no spiritual birth (Ps. iv :2; xii:I ; lvii:4). They are “children of the devil;” they are devoted to the wickedness he introduces into the world; they cheerfully imi- tate, obey and serve him (John iii: 18; viii:44). They are “children of darkness;” they are in a state of darkness and condemnation; their heart is full of ignorance and their practice of things shameful and wicked (I Thess. v :5). They are “children of disobedience and iniquity;” their car- nal mind is enmity against God; their whole praç- tice is a continued rebellion against his law and a treacherous departure from him (Eph. ii:2; Is. lvii:4; Hos. ii:4; ix). They are “children of wrath;” they are naturally full of enmity against God and heirs of his just wrath (Eph. ii:3). 5. Persons eminently wicked are called “chil- dren of Belial” (Deut. xiii:I3). - G. The “cliildren of Abraham” are such as de scended from him by natural generation—the Ishmaelites, Israelites, Edomites, etc.—or such as resemble him in faith and holiness (Luke iii:8; John viii:39; Gal. iii:7; Matt. iii:9). 7. The “children of the desolate” are more than of the married wife; the converts of the long desolate Gentile world are more numerous than those of the Jewish nation, long espoused to Christ; the converts of the church after Christ's departure to heaven are more numerous than when she enjoyed his presence on earth (Is. liv :I). See the word BARREN, where reason is adduced to show that the “children of the desolate” are the posterity of Abraham converted to Jesus un- der the restored state of the Jewish church. 8. “Strange children” are heathens or wicked persons, or children born to the Jews by heathen- ish women (Ps. cxliv :7; Neh. ix; Hos. v :7). CHINNERETH CHILDBEARING (child'bár'ing), (Gr. rekvoyovia, te/8-nog-on-ee'ah). As a consequence of the sin of our first parent it was said to her, “In sorrow thou shalt bring forth children” (Gen. iii:16). Commenting on this, Delitzsch says: “That the woman should bear children was the original will of God; but it was a punishment that henceforth she was to bear them in Sorrow, i. e., with pains which threatened her own life as well as that of the child.” The language of the apostle: “Not- withstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity,” etc. (I Tim. ii:15), implies that a patient endurance of this penalty shall contribute to woman's spiritual benefit. (Barnes, Bib. Dict.) But as the curse has been lifted from labor by the coming of Christ so has the curse from childbearing. Troper hygiene and anaesthetics can remove almost all the pains attendant on childbirth among civilized people. It is the highest glory of woman to be a faithful Christian mother. CHILDBIRTH (child’bàrth'). See CHILD, CHILDREN. CHILDREN OF GOD (chil'drén 5v göd). ADOPTION. CHILDREN OF ISRAEL rā-él). See ISRAEL. CHILEAB (kīl'e-āb). DANIEL. * CHILION (kºli'on), (Heb. Tºº?, Ailyone, pin. ing), son of Elimelech and Naomi, and husband of Orpah (Ruth i :2-5; iv:9). He is called “an Ephrathite,” perhaps for Ephraimite, “of Bethle- hem-judah” (B. C. I360). CHILMAD (kīmā), (Heb. Tº, Ailmawd), a city of Asia (Ezek. xxvii:23), mentioned in con- junction with Sheba and Asshur, which Rawlin son identifies with Åa/wadha. - CHIMHAM(kīm'hām), (Heb. Ejº, Æzzzz-/*azvyn', longing, pining; xapadu, chamaa/2). 1. A follower and perhaps a son of Barzil- lai, the Gileadite, and one who followed David to Jerusalem, after the war with Absalom, and who was enriched by David with a possession at Beth- lehem, in consideration of his father Barzillai, whose generous assistance David had experienced (2 Sam. xix:37-40), B. C. IO23. 2. In later times an inn stood here, and it was well known as the starting point for travelers from Jerusalem to Egypt (Jer. xli :17). The inn bore Chimham's name for at least four centuries and may have been the one which six centuries later could not furnish room for two travelers with an infant child (Luke ii:7). CHINNERETH (kin'ne-réth), (Heb. ºº, Ain- neh"reth, harp-shaped), or CHINNEROTII (IICb. Fºº, Ain-mer-oth', 1 Kings xv.20, “Cinneroth"), one of the “fenced cities' of the tribe of Naphtali (Josh. xix:35). In the A. V. Of 16II, and other early editions, the name is spelt “Cinnereth,” which it seems likely was an ancient Canaanite name existing prior to the Israelite conquest, and, like other names, adopted into the Israelite lan- guage. It is also the earlier name of the Lake Gennesar- eth (which is supposed to be a corruption of Cin- nereth), from which we may collect that the town lay on the western border of the lake, and was of sufficient consequence to give its own name to it (Num. xxxiv:II; Josh. xiii:27). It is even supposed that Cinnereth, afterwards Gennesareth, was the earlier name of the town of Tiberias, and under the latter change still extended its own See (chil'drén Öv iz'- See ABIGAIL; DAVID; CHIOS 403 denomination to the lake; nor is there anything improbable in this conjecture. The town, or the lake, seems to have given its name, with a slight change to a district (I Kings xv :2O). - On the temple walls of Karnak, at Thebes, Thothmes III (B. C. 16oo) gives a list of Canaan- itish towns submitting to him among which Chin- nereth is found. CHIOS (ki'ös), (Gr. Xíos, Ahee'os), one of the principal islands of the Ionian Archipelago, men- tioned in Acts xx: I 5. It belonged to Ionia and lay between the islands Lesbos and Samos, and distant eight, miles from the nearest promontory of Asia Minor. It is thirty miles long from north to south, and its greatest breadth ten miles. It is very fertile in cotton, silk and fruit, and was anciently cele- brated for its wine. The principal town was also called Chios and had the advantage of a good harbor (Strabo xiv. p. 645). St. Paul's vessel passed it on his last voyage to Palestine (Acts xx:I5). It was one of the seven places that claimed to be the birthplace of Homer; and a much stronger body of tradition speaks in favor of it than for any of the other claimants. Like Cnidus, Cos, Cyzicus, Ilium, Samos, Smyrna, Mitylene, and many other cities of the province of Asia, Chios had the rank of a free city, which implied merely that in certain respects it was administered ac- cording to native law, while other Asian cities were administered according to Roman law. (W. M. Ramsay, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) The island is now called by the Greeks Khio, and by the Italians Scio. The wholesale massacre and enslavement of the inhabitants by the Turks in 1822 forms one of the most shocking incidents of the Greek war. CHISLEU (Kisieu), (Heb. ???, Aislave, Neh. i: I), is the name of that month which is the third of the civil and the ninth of the ecclesiastical year of the Jews, and which commences with the new moon of our December. It corresponds, in Josephus, to the Macedonian month, 'Atrex\aſos, Ape//aeus. As it is now admitted that Chisleu is one of those Persian names of months which the Jews adopted after the captivity, it is fruitless to search for a Syro- Arabian etymology of the word. The memorable days which were observed in this month were: The feast of the dedication of the Temple, in commemoration of its being puri- fied from the heathen abominations of the Sy- rians, which was celebrated by illuminations and great demonstrations of joy for eight days, be- ginning from the 25th of this month (I Macc. iv :59); and a fast on account of Jehoiakim hav- ing, in this month, burnt the roll containing Jere- miah's prophecy (Jer. xxxvi :22, 23). There is Some dispute whether this fast was observed on the 6th or on the 28th of the month. It is an argument in favor of the earlier day that the other would fall in the middle of the eight days' festival of the dedication. CHISLON (kis'lon), (Heb. mº, Åis-lone', strong, hope, trust, confidence), father of Elidad, prince of the tribe of Benjamin, chosen to assist in the division of Canaan (Num. xxxiv:21), B. C. between I618 and I490. CHISLOTH-TABOR (kisſloth-tä'bor), (Heb. *:: nº, &is-dàth' taw-bore', loins of Tabor). CHOBA A city on the side of Mount Tabor (Josh. xix: I2, I8), which Eusebius and Jerome call Casalus, or Exalus, and place ten miles from Diocaesarea, eaSt. It is called Tabor, only, in verse 22, and there is at this day a village so called by the Arabs, at the foot of the mountain. It is, however, prob- able that this was a fortification higher up the mountain, perhaps on the top of it; whence it might be called the confidence of Tabor. It is commonly identified with the modern village of Iksal or Ksal, standing on a rocky height west of Tabor. Probably the same as CHESULLOTH (which see). CHITTAH (kit' tah). See WHEAT. CHITTIM or KITTIM (kit' tim or kit'tim), (Heb. Fº, Fºº, Ahit-teem", kit-tee-eem', an is- lander). - A branch of the descendants of Javan, the son of Japheth (Gen. x:4). The plural termination of Chittim, and other names in this ethnograph- ical Survey (verses I3, I4), renders it probable that the term son must be understood, not in the strict sense of that relation. On the author- ity of Josephus, who is followed by Epiphanius and Jerome, it has been generally admitted that the Chittim migrated from Phoenicia to Cyprus and founded there the town of Citium, the mod- ern Chitti. ‘Chethimus possessed the island of Chethima, which is now called Cyprus, and from this, all islands and maritime places are called Chethim by the Hebrews' (Joseph. Antiq. i :6, Sec. I). Cicero, it may be remarked, speaks of the Citians as a Phoenician colony (De Finibus, iv :20). Some passages in the prophets (Ezek. xxvii:6; Is. xxiii:I, I2) imply an intimate con- nection between Chittim and Tyre. At a later period the name was applied to the Macedonians (I Macc. i : I, and viii:5). Hengstenberg has lately endeavored to prove that in every passage in the Old Testament where the word occurs it means Cyprus, or the Cyprians. On Num. xxiv: 24, he remarks that the invaders of Ashur and Eber are said to come not from Chittim, but from the coast of Chittim, that being the track of ves- sels coming from the west of Palestine. In Dan. xi:30, he contends that the use of the absolute form, instead of the construct, denotes a less inti- mate connection with the following word, and that the phrase means, like that in Balaam’s pro- phecy (to which he supposes the prophet alludes), ships sailing along the coast of Chittim. The Vulgate translates Chittim, in this passage, Ro- manos, an interpretation adopted by several of the ancient Jewish and Christian writers. After a careful examination, Chittim seems to be a name of large signification (such as our Levant), ap- icq to the islands and coasts of the Mediter- ~i? - - 4 PA 1 °C ºu. [...".9 4. It i \,-- 4. ranean, in a loose sense, without fixing the par- ticular part, though particular and different parts of the whole are probably in most cases to be understood. - CHIUN (ki'un). See REMPHAN. CHLOE (klö'e), (Gr. XXöm, tender shoot or herb- .#. a Christian woman at Corinth, some members of whose family, afforded Paul intelligence con- cerning the division which reigned in the church at that place (I Cor. i. 11). CHOACH (kö'ak). See THORNs. CHOBA (khô'ba), (Gr. Xogá, Āhoh-bah"), a place mentioned in Judith iv:4, apparently situated in the Central part of Palestine, probably the same as CHOBAI. CHOBAI 404 CHOBAI (köb'a-i), (Gr. Xagat, Æhoh-bah-ee', Cho- bai), occurs in Judith xv:4, 5; in verse 5 the Greek is Xagó, Choba. The name suggests Aſobah, es- pecially in connection with the mention of Damas- cus in verse 5. CHOENIX (koe'nix), (Gr. Xoſvić, Rev. vi.6 marg.) a dry measure holding almost an English quart. CHORASHAN (ko-ra'shan), (Heb. i* T2, Aor- aw-shawn', furnace of smoke). One of the places where David went to hunt (I Sam. xxx:30). The towns in this catalogue are all south Cf Hebron, and Chorashan may, therefore, be identical with Ashan of Simeon, but this is quite uncertain. CHORAZIN (ko-ra'zin), (Gr. Xopatív, Æhor-ad- 22n'). A town mentioned in Matt. xi :21 ; Luke x : 13, in connection with Bethsaida and Capernaum, not far from which, in Galilee, it appears to have been situated. Jerome makes it a village of Galilee, on the shore of the lake Tiberias, two miles from Capernaum (Onomast., art. Chorozain). Discov- eries recently made two miles north of Tell Hüm identify the ruins there, known as Kerageh, with the ancient Chorazin. The ruins cover a large area, and consist of a synagogue, the orna- ments being cut in black basalt rock, walls of dwellings, columns which supported the roofs and doorways, some of them in a tolerably perfect con- dition, and a paved roadway leading to the great caravan-route to Damascus. (See CAPERNAUM). CHOSAMEUS (kös'a-mê'us). See SIMON CHos- AMEUS. º CHOZEBA (ko-zé'bá), (Heb. NPP, Ao-geb-aw', deceitful; Sept. xwºmgá, chożeba), a town in Judah (I Chron. iv:22). This word and CHEZIB both prob- ably refer to the same place which is elsewhere called ACHzIB, the place where Shelah was born. CHRIST (krist). See JESUS CHRIST; MESSIAH. CHRISTIAN (kris'chan), (Gr. Xpta ravös, Åhris- fee-an-os', follower of Christ). The disciples of our Lord Jesus were thus first denominated at Antioch, shortly after the time of Paul's conversion, Acts xi :26. This name was given them either by divine direction, or was a term of contempt applied by their enemies. They were known to each other as brethren of one family, as disciples of the same Master, as be- lievers in the same faith, and as distinguished by the same endeavors after holiness and consecra- tion of life; and so were called brethren (Acts xv. 1, 23; I Cor. vii: 12), disciples (Acts ix:26, xi:29), believers (Acts v :14), saints (Rom. viii: 27; xv :25). It would seem that the name “Chris- tian,” which, in the only other cases where it ap- pears in the New Testament (Acts xxvi :28; I Pet. iv :16: Comp. Tac. Ann. xv.:44), is used con- temptuously, could not have been applied by the early disciples to themselves, nor could it have come to them from their own nation the Jews; it appears, therefore, to have been imposed upon them by the Gentile world, and no place could have so appropriately given rise to it as Antioch, where the first Church was planted among the heathen. “Its inhabitants were celebrated for their wit and a propensity for conferring nick- names (Procop. Pers. ii:8, p. 105). The Emperor Julian himself was not secure from their jests (Amm. Marc. xxii:14). Apollonius of Tyana was driven from the city by the insults of the inhabi- tants (Philostr. Vit. Apoll. iii:16). Their wit, however, was often harmless enough (Lucian, De Saltat. 76), and there is no reason to suppose that the name “Christian” of itself was intended as a CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF HISTORY term of scurrility or abuse, though it would nat- urally be used with contempt.” (Smith, Bib. Dict.). The saints are justly denominated Christians, because they belong to, obey, and imitate Jesus Christ; and are anointed with the same Spirit of God. To constitute onc a true adult Christian, he must be united to Christ as his head; have Christ and his Spirit dwelling in his heart; have Christ's grace implanted in all the faculties of his Soul; and must believe, profess, and practice Christ's truths, in conformity to his example and commands. - CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF HISTORY. (1) The Apostolic Church (A. D. 30-101). The visible Church consists of the organized be- lievers in Christ, and the followers of his life. In secular history the spiritual forces lie largely in the background, but in the life of the Church they have come out boldly into the foreground. Christ immediately before his ascension com- manded his disciples to remain in Jerusalem until they should be endued with power from on high. Without the descent of the Spirit at Pentecost there would have been no impulsive power in Christianity. The organization of the Church took place immediately after the remarkable scenes at Pentecost. Orders of ministers and lay mem- bers were established for the preaching of the gos- pel, the care of the needy, and the building up of the body of believers. The most simple arrange- ments were made for government, as the believers were as yet but few and confined to a narrow ter- ritory. The more elaborate polity was left for the future needs of the Church. The practical life of the Christians was at once simple and beautiful. It was a type of all the es- sential qualities which Christ had taught as re- quisite for pure living and final salvation. Sim- plicity of faith and intense brotherly love had their practical demonstration in the equal distribution of temporal possessions. The community of goods did not arise from a divine command, but was merely the natural effect of that broad charity which sprang from the love of Christ and the pos- session of the Spirit. The real majesty of the early Church lay in its spontaneous quality. To crown all, there was a boundless fervor in com- municating the gospel. The whole world seemed small. What the apostles had felt and known was now their sole passion. Both the apostle and thc unlettered believer, each in his own best way, preached the new life in Christ, that all men might share its sacrifice here and its holy joy hereafter. In the Acts of the Apostles we have the chief source of information concerning the fields of work of the different apostles, The Epistles of Paul and his associates supply missing links in that more formal history. To these may be added the somewhat vague statements of writers from the second century to the fourth, many of which rest on the oral traditions of the early Church. Peter represented the Jewish type of Christi- anity. He was slow to learn that Christianity was designed for all men. He made an evangelistic tour through portions of Asia Minor. At the time of writing his first Epistle he was in Babylon, where there was a large Jewish population. He confined his labors principally to the East. -- Paul towers far above all the apostles in the majesty of his character, the scope of his genius, the depth of his learning and the sublime quality of his labors. His call was to the Gentiles. He made three great missionary tours through Asia Minor and Southeastern Europe. - CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF HISTORY John represented the mediating element between Judaism and paganism. The scenes of his labor seem to have been, for the first twenty years after Pentecost, chiefly in Palestine; later in the valley of the Tigris and Euphrates; then at Jerusalem, whence on the capture of that city by Titus he fled to Ephesus. His residence here was inter- mitted by his exile to the island of Patmos. He died in Ephesus about A. D. 98, when about one hundred years old. - The labors of the other apostles were widely bestowed. James, the Elder, suffered martyrdom in Jerusalem about A.D. 44. James, our Lord's brother, preached in Jerusalem, and finally died there a martyr. It was believed that Philip labored in Phrygia; Simon Zelotes, in Egypt and the neighboring African coast; Thomas, in India; Andrew, in Scythia, Asia Minor, Thrace and Greece; Matthias, in Ethiopia; Judas, called Leb- baeus or Thaddeus, in Persia; and Bartholomew, in Lycaonia, Armenia and India. (2) The Patristic Church (A. D. 101-313). When Christianity came forward with its strange claims upon the confidence of men there was but little in its exterior which could awaken sym- pathy. The most despised land had produced it. Its Founder had suffered death on the shameful cross. Its first apostles were of humble origin, and, with the exception of Paul, not one had drunk at the classic fountains. That a new faith, with such multiform disadvantages, should vent- ure upon such a hostile field, where the literature and traditions of many centuries held firm ground, seemed a hopeless task. But the heroism of the first preachers of Christianity was not disturbed by the number or strength of the enemy. The promise of their Founder was the basis of their faith. They wrought on and expected triumph over every foe. The path of the Greek to mastery had been through all fields of intellectual development. Out of the old Pelasgic cradle he had grown to the full grandeur of Attic manhood. The blood of many tribes flowed through his veins, and he had absorbed the strongest and best elements of all. The growth of their philosophical systems was contemporaneous with their national prosperity. The dealing with the fundamental questions of human existence and destiny by Socrates and Plato reveals a deep moral purpose. The most spiritual of the entire circle of Greek philosophers was Plato. In many departments of his philoso- phy, such as the unity and spirituality of God and the immortality of the soul, he made, though un- consciously, very near approaches to the truths of revelation. Eusebius said: “Plato alone, of all the Greeks, reached the vestibule of truth and stood upon its threshold.” When Christianity began its contest for the world's possession, the Roman rule was universal. Law was the Roman habit and to govern was the Roman passion. The hold of the old mythology was broken, and a general skepticism as to all be- liefs prevailed. But the emperors regarded the preservation of the ancestral faith as the great bul- wark of the throne. Political government and fi- delity to the prevailing mythology were held to be inseparable. Hence Christianity was bitterly opposed, so soon as its antagonism was discovered. It was seen to be hostile to the elaborate temple Service. The more clearly Christianity came into view, the more stringent became the measures for its suppression. The Christians made no conceal- ments. They absented themselves from the tem- his dominions. 405 CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF HISTORY ples, threw off all faith in the ruling mythology, and openly declared their hostility to it. The Twelve Tables of the Roman law forbade the existence of foreign faiths within the domin- ions, but the usage had been to conciliate the con- quered provinces by toleration of the existing re- ligions. The appearance of the Christians, how- ever, was the signal for the revival of the old prohibition. The bonds uniting the Christians were close. Their separate services were declared an act of hostility to the country. They were accused of disobedience to the laws and of a spirit ripe at any moment for insurrection. They were charged with immoral practices at their services. All public calamities, such as earthquakes, inundations, pesti- lence, and defeat in war, were attributed to them. A popular proverb ran thus: “Deus non pluit— duc ad Christianos 1”—“It does not rain—lead against the Christians !” From A. D. 64 to 313, until Constantine granted an edict of toleration to the Christians, persecu- tions prevailed about seventy years. All forms of torture and violent death were inflicted. There was no security at home. The exiles were numer- ous, but the Christians carried their faith and life with them to their new places of abode, where they built up societies, which in turn became centers for the wider dissemination of the gospel. Christianity had conquered in the realm of political life. (3) Christianity and the Roman Empire (A. D. 313-768). Constantine declared himself a Christian in sympathy, early in his reign. Before the decisive battle of the Rubra Saxa with Maxentius he claimed to see in the sky the sign of the cross, with the words, En touto nika—“By this conquer.” He accepted the token as an argument in favor of Christianity, gained the battle for the crown of the Roman empire, and henceforth avowed his belief in Christianity. His vision, though in the line of his sympathies, was probably only a shrewd method to attract the Christians to his support. He carried the labarum, a standard inscribed with the cross, in all his subsequent wars. His policy was at first to make all Christians favor his rule, and by granting concessions to heal the alienation from the empire which the repressive policy of his predecessors had produced. The edict tolerating Christianity as one of the legal religions of the empire was published in A. D. 313. But in 323 he enlarged the scope of his favor and made Christianity the established faith of all Among the chief special acts of Constantine in favor of the Church were: his order for the civil observance qf Sunday, his con- fiscation in the East of pagan temples for Chris- tian churches, his emancipation of slaves, his ex- emption of the clergy from military and municipal duty, and his ardent promotion of Christian edu- catio: al...vus is subjects. It was a happy day when the Christians could walk abroad without fear of persecution. But Constantine claimed the right to supervise re- ligion, as the emperor had always done in the case of paganism. He accounted himself still the great high priest, or Pontifex Maximus, and assumed the prerogative to compose differences, decide questions of religious policy, call ecclesi- astical councils, and appoint the leading of- ficers. He had no faith in paganism, but would not suppress it. His line of conduct was to allow it to go on as he found it, and yet to help the Christians to conquer it. He was, of all successful rulers, the most successful trimmer. Hitherto the Church had been a grand moral unity, held together by ties of love and doctrine. But now it was absorbed by the State. Its frame- CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF HISTORY work was lost in the body politic. Freeman says: “The Church conquered the State.” This is a great error. Constantine’s adoption of Christian- ity as the State religion was the conquest of the Church by the State. All the moral forces of the Church were now impaired. The bondage of the Church to the State, thus early begun, pro- duced the great evils of the following twelve cen- turies—superstition, the purchase of office, the an- gry controversy about theological trifles, the moral corruption of the clergy and the ignorance of the IIla SSCS. When Julian came to the throne in 361, for a time he was silent as to his attitude toward the Christians, but he soon exhibited a spirit of refined opposition to all Christian institutions and doc- trines. He issued no formal edict against Chris- tianity, but raised barriers on every hand. He was the last ruler on the Roman throne who was hostile to Christianity. He passed into history as Julian the Apostate. The epithet is probably a misnomer, as it is not likely that Julian was ever a real disciple of Christ. The march of the Roman bishop towards pri- ority throughout the Christian world was steady. Bishop Leo I. (440-461) was a man of strong in- tellect, and he did much to clothe himself with power and prestige. But the most eminent incum- bent of the Roman episcopate was Gregory, who was called the Great, and ruled A. D. 590-604. Un- der him every department of the priesthood and the episcopacy advanced in strength. - Roman centralization became constantly greater. Church offices multiplied rapidly, and the close of the early period was the signal for larger measures for Roman primacy. The Bishops of Rome were the real rulers of Southern Europe from the Constantinian dynasty to the reign of Charles the Great. (4) The Mediaeval Church (A. D. 768–1517). The significance of the Middle Ages lies in their transitional character. It was the far-reaching mission of this remarkable period to test the pow- er of Christianity for meeting the wants of new nations; to withstand the shock of all philosophi- cal schools; to sift and preserve the best that re- mained of the ancient world and pass it safely down for modern use ; and, above all, to prove the ultimate power of Christianity to rise above the infirmities of those who professed it, and to lay the foundations of a new spiritual life by a re- turn to the pure, apostolic example. the Mediaeval Church was to conduct man from the narrow limits of the pagan to the Protestant world. The first period of the Mediaeval Church ex- tends from Charles the Great to the papacy of Cregory VII.-A. D. 768–1073 This was the time of the full appropriation and unification of the Germanic and other northern elements. Moham- medanism, lying at the border-line between the ancient and the mediaeval time, arose as a coun- ter-force to Christianity. Papal supremacy in Church and State culminated. Looked upon in retrospect, there is almost no intellectual or polit- ical treasure of the nineteenth century whose precious seeds were not cast into the ready soil between the ninth and sixteenth centuries. The process of centralization north of the Alps began with Charles the Great—Charlemagne. His rule was the signal of death to the tottering Ro- man empire. It was also the first prophecy of the ascendency of the new Gothic nations of the North and of their firm place in the later life of Europe. In him the old classic conditions disap- peared and the new political life began its career. The office of . 406 CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF HISTORY Charles the Great ascended the throne on the death of his father, Pepin, in 768. He divided with his brother, Carloman, the Frankish empire. Carloman died in 771, and Charles the Great unit- ed his own empire with that of the rest of the family and claimed rule over all, without regard to the rights of his brother's family. The soil was now prepared for the new European life— the Church and the State working hand in hand for universal dominion. Charles the Great re- garded himself as a theocratic lord. His notion of himself was not that he was a mere successor of Constantine or Augustus Caesar, but of David or Solomon—the head of a vast theocracy. To the pope, Leo III., he made this declaration of their mutual relations: “It is my bounden duty, by the help of the Divine compassion, everywhere to de- fend outwardly by arms the holy Church of Christ against every attack of the heathen and every de- vastation caused by unbelievers; and inwardly to defend it by the recognition of the general faith. But it is your duty, Holy Father, to raise your hands to God, as Moses did, and to support my military service by your prayers.” Leo III ac- cepted this declaration with the utmost com- plaisance. Charles the Great surrounded himself with learned men. Alcuin of England was his adviser in all literary and educational matters. Guizot calls Alcuin the “intellectual prime-minister of Charles the Great.” The final and complete cementing of papal and imperial interests took place undcr Charles the Great. In the midst of the magnificent Christmas festivities of the year 800 in the city of Rome, Leo III. advanced towards Charles and placed upon his head a golden crown with these words: “Life and victory to Charles Augustus, crowned by God the great and pacific emperor l’” As com- pensation for this important papal service Charles enlarged the papal territory which had been first given by his father Pepin, and placed the papacy itself, as a temporal sovereignty, on a plane en- tirely new to history. Charles' successors were a group of steadily dis- solving lights. The extinction of the Carlovingians in 987 was simultaneous with the complete as- cendency of the papacy. By the time the last de- scendants of the great Charles were spending their closing days as mere weak functionaries in the palace of Laon, the Church had become proprietor of more than all its old prerogatives, and was holding its new territory with a grasp which re- laxed only when its arm was stretched for more. (5) The Crusades (A. D. 1096-1270). The origin of the Crusades is to be ſound in the occu- pation of Palestine by its Mohammedan conquer- ors. The pilgrims from Europe cherished the warmest attachment to the sacred places. The Mohammedans not only occupied them, but per- secuted the pilgrims. The sanctuaries were pro- faned, and the venerated patriarchs were thrown into prison. Christian merchants from Pisa, Amalfi, Genoa and other rich Italian ports were for: tunate if they escaped with their lives. The evil reports came back to Europe, and then began a series of military expeditions against the Moham: medans. These were called Crusades because of the cross (crux) worn by the warriors. Pope Gregory VII, was the first, it is believed, who conceived the idea of sending from Europe an armed expedition, not only to punish the Mo- hammedan rulers, but to occupy and rule the country. His successors, Victor III., and Urban II., indulged the same strong hope. All that was wanting were popular leaders who would fire the CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF HISTORY heart of Christian Europe. These appeared in Walter the Penniless and Peter the Hermit. The latter had been a soldier under the counts of Boulogne, but forsook his military career, made a journey to Palestine, and saw the indignities suf- fered by the pilgrims. He returned to Europe, traveled through Italy and France, and aroused the people to a frenzy of indignation against the Moslems. He was a dwarf, wore neither shoes nor hat, and rode an ass. His appeals were ir- resistible. Multitudes regarded him as the repre- sentative of a holy cause, and through him 40,- ooo men joined the first Crusade. The varied fortunes of the Crusaders furnish a striking picture. The best blood of Europe was boiling in sympathy with Christians in their as- pirations to kneel beside the Holy Sepulcher at Jerusalem and rule over the land in which Jesus had lived. Six different armies constituted the first Crusade. They numbered six hundred thou- sand people, who were led by Godfrey, Hugh the Great, Tancred, Raymond of Toulouse, and Rob- ert of Normandy. This Crusade, begun in Io96, resulted in the capture of Jerusalem within two years, and in making Godfrey of Bouillon king of the sacred city. In the next Crusade St. Bernard was the Apos- tle. Louis VII. of France and Conrad III. of Germany led one million two hundred thousand men against the Saracens. The great object was to reduce Damascus, as a support to the kingdom of Jerusalem. . It was a failure, and only the mere fragments of the armies reached Europe again. Saladin, the great Mohammedan chief, conquered Jerusalem in 1187, and this was the signal for the third Crusade to rescue the Holy City and the entire country. Germany under Frederic Bar- barossa, France under Philip Augustus, and En- gland under Richard Coeur de Lion united their forces. Through division among the leaders this also failed. The fourth Crusade led by the Knights of St. John, and the fifth inspired by the authority of Pope Innocent III. and the fervor of Fulk of Neuilly, but afterward diverted by the Venetian doge Dandolo to the conquest of Zara and the establishment of the Latin empire of Constantino- ple, also ended in disaster. The sixth Crusade (1228) under the direction and through the diplomacy of Frederick II of Germany proved a success. Palestine was ceded to the emperor, and became a Christian land; but was lost during the seventh, which followed in 1248, under the leadership of Louis IX. of France. The eighth and last Crusade (1270) was also under the guidance of Louis IX. of France. It proved the final failure of the series. Europe was ex- hausted and the cause was lost. The Crusades seem to have saved France, Cen- tral Germany, Scandinavia and even Britain from the hand of the Saracen. All of Central and Western Europe had been torn up by a feudal and predatory system. The Crusades broke up this system and bound the people together by a common law. When the last Crusader came home from Palestine he found himself a member of a broad commonwealth and not the head of a clan. The cruelty of rulers was arrested. The voice of the people was heard for the first time, and kings learned that there was a limit to their au- thority. Commerce took larger and freer shape. The far Eastern countries were brought into close relationship with the Western. (6) The Eastern and the Western Church. Many things early contributed to give pre-emi- nence to the bishop of Rome. The Church at 407 CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF HISTORY Rome was firm in the midst of many heresies. After the overthrow of Jerusalem it was believed to be the oldest apostolic Church. In the giving of alms, in missionary zeal and in devotional pur- ity, the Roman Christians had no superiors. The certain residence of Paul in Rome, and the already growing impression of Peter's sojourn there, were important apostolical associations which clothed the Roman society with great sanctity. By the middle of the second century there was frequent mention of the primacy of Rome. So soon as this Intimation was expressed strong words were Spoken against it. The resisting force lay in the Eastern Church, where Antioch was leader. But there was little cohesion in the East. It was regarded as provin- cial, while in spiritual affairs Rome came con- stantly into more prominent leadership. The pro- tests from the East after a time received little or no attention. When Firmilian, the bishop of Cap- padocian Caesarea, dared to charge Stephen of Rome with boasting of episcopal superiority he was laughed at in the Western metropolis. When Constantine made the obscure Byzantium (thereafter called Constantinople), which had been subordinate to Heraclea, the capital of Thrace, his vast capital and the center of imperial authority, much advantage to the Church was expected. But when he passed away, there was little purity left. The palace became a nest of intrigue and revolu- tion. But the Roman Church life had the equi- poise of power. It had neither the wish nor the talent for theological invention. The divisions of the Eastern empire, the de- cline of moral life, the universal spread, of con- troversy, and particularly the pre-eminent ability of several of the bishops of Rome, were calculated to advance the claims of that patriarchate above all others. Gregory the Great devoted himself to the purification of the life of the Church and the enforcement of monastic discipline. He was es- pecially active in his encouragement of missions. Under him the authority of the Roman bishop advanced far beyond its former dimensions. He created the papacy of history. He preserved ami- cable relations with the emperor, and yet held firmly to his ecclesiastical independence. From the middle of the eleventh century to the thirteenth the papacy grew into enormous pro- portions. There never floated before the mind of Julius Caesar or Trajan a larger empire than that to which Gregory VII (Hildebrand) and other occupants of the Roman see aspired. The doctrinal divergence between the East and the West was first perceptible in the different teaching on the divinity of the Holy Ghost. The Council of Constantinople decided in 381 that the Holy Ghost is equal in essence with the Son, and that both are consubstantial with the Father. The Western teaching, guided chiefly through the clear and logical intellect of Augustine, held that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. In 589 the Toledo Council, in accordance with this view, added to the symbol of Constanti- nople the term Filioque—“and from the Son.” The Eastern Church held that the patriarch of Constantinople was equal in rank to the Roman bishop. At Rome this claim was indignantly re- jected. The complete schism took place in IOS4. Con- stantine Monomachus, the Byzantine emperor, hav- ing in view a war, applied to the Roman pope for friendly support. This overture awakened the wrath of Michael Cerularius, patriarch of Con- stantinople, and of Leo of Achrida, metropolitan of Bulgaria. They wrote a letter to the bishops CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF HISTORY of the Latin Church, charging it with grave doc- trinal errors and urging it to renounce them. This letter reached Pope Leo IX. He was intensely excited, and bitter letters passed between Rome and Constantinople. The pope sent three dele- gates to the latter city. But only a fiercer ani- mosity ensued. The signal of an open and final rupture was given by the issuing of a public ex- communication of the patriarch by the legates,in the Church of St. Sophia, and their withdrawal to Rome. During the Crusades, which united all Christen- dom in their chief purpose, and until the middle of the fifteenth century, strong but futile attempts were made to restore the unity of the East and the West. But when the Byzantine empire went down in 1453 all serious and general efforts for union ceased. & (7) Mediaeval Missions in Europe. The spread of Christianity continued steadily. Columban and Gallus from Britain were the pioneers in evange- lizing the Germans, and were followed by Willi- brod and Winfried, both Englishmen. Winfried, or as , he is better known under his Latin name Boniface, was the great apostle of Germany, where he organized the Church about the middle of the eighth century. He was martyred among the Frisians. From the centers in Germany and France, from Ireland, the “Holy Isle,” and from England, mis- sionaries co-operated in founding missions among the heathen dwelling in the remoter parts of Eu- rope. The monasteries kept up a close brother- hood. Monks went out from them, threaded the forests and climbed the mountains of rude and barbarous peoples, and spent their lives amid all possible dangers, in their endeavor to extend Christianity. Many of them fell by violent hands. Sometimes the rulers were the first to accept the gospel, but often it ascended from the poor and the lowly, step by step, until the throne was reached and Christianity was publicly proclaimed as the faith of the State. * Harold, king of Jutland, was aided to the throne of his fathers against his competitors by the Car- lovingian emperor, Louis le Débonnaire. Harold and his queen were then baptized in the Cathedral of Mentz in 826, and ever afterwards befriended the gospel. Anskar, a monk of Corbey, accompan- ied them back to Denmark, with a view to organize the Church in that country. A rebellion was ex- cited against Harold, and he was obliged to flee from the country. Anskar was also driven out, but rather than give up his missionary work he turned his eyes toward the still more savage Swe- den and determined to plant missions there. In 831 Anskar, with Witmar, his brother monk, proceeded to Sweden with gifts for the king of the country. . While on their voyage they were at- tacked by pirates, lost all their possessions and barely escaped with their lives. They reached Birka on the Malar Lake; the king welcomed them, and in a short time his counsellor, Herigar, became a Christian convert. Anskar went to Rome, was consecrated an arch- bishop, and departed to preach the gospel to the northern nations. He made a second visit to Sweden in 855. He died in 865, but before his death saw. Christianity taking firm hold through- out Scandinavia. He was one of the most beau- tiful characters of the whole mediaeval period. The first positive accounts we have of the intro- duction of the gospel into Norway is that it was carried thither by some seafaring youth. Olaf the Thick, king of Norway, called St. Olaf, was the first to organize the Church on a permanent basis in IoI9. 408 CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF HISTORY The gospel reached Iceland from Norway, and during the tenth century was fully established there by Olaf Trygvesen. From Iceland the gos- pel was carried to Greenland. Even from these remote regions Rome was strenuous to gather gifts for her treasury. The Greenland Christians paid their tithes to Rome in walrus teeth. Cyril and Methodius, two Greek monks, were the first to introduce the gospel among the Bul- garians and also among the Moravians. Cyril was a theologian and Methodius a painter, and the lat- ter's picture of the Day of Judgment had as much to do with the conversion of the people as the arguments of the former. They made a Slavonic version of portions of the Scriptures. During this formative period the Bulgarian Church had its re- lations with Rome. The Russian princess Olga embraced Christian- ity in 955. Her son Swiatóslav was proof against all her importunities to follow her example. Her grandson Vladimir, however, accepted Christian- ity and caused churches to be organized and the people to be instructed in the use of the Slavonic Scriptures and liturgy. Poland received the gospel through Christian refugees from Moravia, when that kingdom was broken up. Hungary first became acquainted with Christianity through the instrumentality of certain of her princes while visiting Constantinople. The wild tribes of the Wends between the Saale and the Oder, after an unsuccessful attempt by Gott- schalk in IO47, were brought over to the Chris- tian faith in II68 when Absalon, bishop of Roes- kilde, burned the last Wendic idol. (8) The Reformation. Martin Luther (A.D. 1517-1545). From the eighth century to the middle of the eleventh, the German people became evangelized and gave full promise of their future large place in universal Christian thought and life. At the end of the Middle Ages the Saxon and the Latin Church confronted each other. The Latin represented the past; the Saxon, the future and the permanent. The force which destroyed the old and strong Roman conditions was titanic. The Saxon hammer was irresistible. The Germans of the North were kinsmen to the Saxons and Angles of Britain. Wycliffe and Luther were from a common cradle of Teutonic honesty and liberty. Protestantism was an oak of young and vigor- ous growth in the first quarter of the sixteenth century, but its roots lay deep in the soil of the twelfth and the intervening centuries. Among those whose work directly contributed to the Re- formation are, in France: Hugo (Io97-II41) and Richard (died II.7.3), both of St. Victor, Peter d’ Ailly (1350-1425), John Charlicr Gcrson (1363- I429) and Nicholas Clémanges (I360–1440); in Germany Master Eckart (died about 1328), John Tauler (1290-1361), and Henry Suso (1295–1365); in the Netherlands, John Ruys- broek (1293-1381) and John of Goch (1401-1475); in Bohemia, John Huss (1373-1415) and Jerome of Prague (died 1416); in England, John Wycliffe (born about 1315); and, in Italy, Jerome Savona- rola (died 1498). The Reformation had two characteristics—one national, with all the individuality of race and land that might be expected; the other cosmopol- itan, having general fibre and color, always the same, whatever the country or people, from Nor- way to the Alps, and from Transylvania to the Bay of Biscay. The Reformation has proved to be the chief turning-point in modern history. It is that great religious and intellectual revolution which marks the boundary line between the Mid- dle Ages and the Modern Period. CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF HISTORY The call for regeneration was deep and loud. Superstition had become interwoven with the pure doctrine of the gospel. The morals of the clergy, from the papacy down to the humblest monks, had become currupt. The highest ecclesiastical offices were reached by vicious means. The com- mon people were purposely kept in ignorance. Against these evils, ruinous at once to intellect and soul, the Reformers made their bold protest, and called upon the people to rally to their stand- ard. Their aim was, at first, a purification of the Church within itself and by its own servants. This proved a total failure. The next step was to with- draw from the fold and establish an independent confession and a separate ecclesiastical structure. This succeeded; and the result is that vast and ag- gressive sisterhood of Protestant Churches which exists to-day in all the advanced countries of the world. All the Teutonic nations had been ripening for the great eccelsiastical revolt, and Central Ger- many now became the theater for the Reforma- tion. The popular mind was so fully ready that the only great need now was a man of sufficient courage, ability and singleness of purpose to be- come the representative of his generation. Luther responded to the universal aspirations for a leader to guide Surely and safely into the new paths. Martin Luther was born in Eisleben, Saxony, November 12, 1483, and died in the same place February 18, 1546. His father was a miner of humble tastes and scanty means. His mother used to carry on her back the wood necessary for the comfort of the humble home. In this son were the calm judgment, the solid sense, and the sturdy valor of the colder blood of the North. But with these was blended the current of a gen- tle, cheerful and tuneful nature, a sympathetic and social feeling, which stood him in good stead in his later struggles. He was educated at Magdeberg, Eisenach, and the University of Erfurt, and in 1508 he entered upon his great career as a professor in the Uni- versity of Wittenberg. On October 31, 1517, he nailed his Theses to the door of the Schlosskirche of Wittenberg, and then began the storm which lasted until the day of his death. (9) The Reformation in England. (A. D. 1509–1603.) To England belongs the hon- or of having discovered the need of a universal religious regeneration in Europe. The beginnings of reform centered in Wycliffe, a student and afterwards a professor in Ox- ford. His first position of hostility to the prevail- ing doctrines was his denunciation of the mendi- cant monks, who went up and down the land, ex- torting money from the people, and preaching against learning and progress in every form. He became master of Canterbury Hall, the Christ College of a later day. The Pope issued a bull in I370 to eject Wycliffe, who replied in a ringing tract. Edward III, the king, took up the cause of Wycliffe, who was appointed a royal chaplain and rector of Lutter worth. Wycliffe gained a clearer view of the corruptions of the Church and preached boldly against them. Twice he was tried and escaped, yet not without being forbidden to preach and write. But he continued to hurl an- athemas against willful pope and deluded priests. He died a natural death at Lutterworth. Wycliffe’s greatest service to the Reformation was his translation of the Bible into English. While the people were fully ready for religious revolt, the first organized rupture with Rome came from the king, Henry VIII. Many learned Prot- estants from the Continent settled in Oxford and 409 CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF HISTORY Cambridge, and conducted discussions in favor of the Reformation. Among them were Ochino, Peter Martyr, Martin Bucer, Paul Fagius, and Tremellius. But greatest of all the men from abroad was Erasmus, whose Greek New Testa- ment found a ready entrance into England. Henry's grievance against Rome was purely per- Sonal. He resolved on a divorce from Catherine of Aragon and to marry Anne Boleyn. To this the pope refused his consent. This brought the question to a crisis, and Henry broke the ties which had hitherto bound him to the papacy. John Colet (1466-1519) and Sir Thomas More (1480-1535) were of great influence in bringing about the revolution in the popular mind. Thos. Cranmer, despite his time-serving pliancy, was of all men of his time the most powerful in has- tening the English reform, and the publication of the Bible in the language of the people was the most powerful single agency in the spreading the leaven through the nation. The young Edward, who succeeded Henry, was a Protestant, but he died early, and was succeed- ed by Mary, a rigid Roman Catholic. Cranmer, Latimer and Ridley were thrown into the Tower. Cranmer, in a moment of weakness, signed a re- cantation, but soon withdrew it. He, with Lati- mer and Ridley, was burned at the stake in 1556. A low estimate of the number of persons burned places the martyrdoms at two hundred. The number would have been much greater had not many leading Reformers fled to the Continent. Elizabeth succeeded Mary in 1558. She at once recognized Protestantism as the national faith, and Protestants were placed in charge of all the churches. Among the exiles who now returned were the Puritans who looked upon the elaborate ceremonial, the episcopacy, the use of robes, and the mild observance of the Sabbath as wretched remnants of the evil times. They refused to ob- serve the new order and would establish one of their own in harmony with the example of the Genevan Church. Elizabeth took strong ground against the Puritans; but despite all its divisions English Protestantism became strong and perma- nent under Elizabeth. Robert Brown, born about 1550, was a student at Cambridge. While there he adopted and advo- cated Puritan views. His followers were alike firm in their hostility to the Church of England and the Church of Rome. They also opposed the synodal and presbyterial government of the Pres- byterians and were for that reason called sepa- ratists or Independents. The Brownists were per- secuted by ecclesiastical courts. Unable to circu- late their writings or hold public services, they fled from England and organized a church in Amsterdam, and afterwards in Leyden. In the latter place John Robinson was their pastor. They resolved on leaving Hoiſand and set sail for the New World. They landed at Plymouth, Massa- chusetts, in 1620, and became the chief factor in the civil and religious development of the colonies and the United States. (10) Results of the Reformation. The good fruits of the Reformation are many and wide- spread. Hitherto but little liberty had been granted to the common people. All the political convul- sions brought small return to them. The effect of the Reformation was to create in the people a thirst for liberty and for a higher and purer citi- zenship. Wherever the Reformation extended it made the masses more self-asserting. Social respect and order were introduced and subjected to firm regul- lation. Nations were taught a higher regard for CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF HISTORY each other's rights, and kings learned that their subjects were no longer mere playthings or serfs. In some countries the aspiration for independ- ence took organized shape. The Reformation be- came the mother of republics. The Dutch Republic was born of the efforts of the Protestants of the Netherlands to secure lib- erty of conscience. No thought of civil independ- ence animated the Dutch at the outset. They fought simply for liberty of doctrine and wor- ship. But once in the current they were carried on. They builded more wisely than they knew, and so founded a nation whose commerce covered every sea, whose discoveries reached the anti- podes, and whose universities became the pride and wonder of Europe. The American Union owes a large measure of its genesis to the European struggle for reform. The Germans who came with Penn to this country were strongly attached to the doctrines of Luther, and immediately began to build churches and es- tablish schools in that interest. The Dutch who settled in New York and the adjacent country brought with them a fervent love of Protestantism, which had been the creative force of their nation at home, and which their fathers had bought at the price of their treasure and blood. The Swedes of New Jersey and Delaware were animated by the same ardent spirit which had burned in their hearts in their ancestral home. The Huguenots, who settled in many places along the coast from Massachusetts down to Georgia, found that safe asylum which was denied them at home because of their fidelity to conscience. The Pilgrims, who came over in the Mayflower and became the strong- est nucleus in the development of our Northern colonies, were fugitives from oppression in their native England. All these elements, the finest wheat from the trampled harvest-fields of Europe, combined on these shores and became a unit in this Western planting of evangelical Christianity. The promotion of learning was not the least benefit conferred upon the world by the Reforma- tion. Cultured men were its first advocates. The universities were the cradles of Protestantism. The translation of the Scriptures had the effect to formulate and solidify the languages as no other literary movement had been able to do it. Wy- cliffe's Bible preserved the Saxon tongue, and our Authorized Version, or King James' Bible, shows its constant dependence upon his translation. Luther found German a mere conglomeration of rude and coarse dialects. In his translation of the Bible he grouped the best and purest idioms and for the first time made the German language a unit. - Universities took on new life and were multi- plied as an immediate fruit of the Reformation. The University of Leyden was the first creation of the new nation, after the siege of that city was raised and the Spanish troops withdrawn. Dur- ing the centuries since, the Reformation more than, twenty universities, three-fourths of which are Protestant, have been founded in Germany alone. Holland has built up in addition to the University of Leyden five other universities, all of which are the direct results of her Protestantism. Not until now, and only as a fruit of the Reformation, was the gospel generally preached in the popular lan- guage. When the Reformation was once in prog- ress the printing press was free. The study of all the languages became a new fascination which no edict could destroy. Public schools, though crude at first, were introduced in Germany, di- rectly through Luther’s labors. The intermediate schools, between the primary and highest educa- 410 CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF HISTORY tion, were soon established. The German gym- nasium of our times owes its real origin to the period of the Reformation. Wherever the Re- formation triumphed and became a permanent force, the cause of education, good morals, and political liberty advanced securely and rapidly. (11) The American Church—Colonial Period. (1492-1783.) , Europe in the sixteenth century was in convulsions. The reformatory movements reacted on the political life of all the central na- tions. Every land was divided into factions. One class, receiving its inspirations from Rome, wished to continue the old order, with the pope as prac- tical Sovereign. Another class, craving liberty and an accommodation to the new order, was will- ing to break loose from the Roman see, but de- sired to retain many of the Roman usages. A third class saw nothing but antichrist in Rome, and found hope only in casting off every reminder of papal doctrine and custom. The transfer of the conflicts of Europe to Amer- ica marked the new era. Whenever a colony came to America, it no sooner settled in its new habitat than it revived, under broader conditions, the Struggle in which it had been engaged in the mother country. The Cavalier of the Virginia Colony surrendered none of his old attachment to the Church of England. The Plymouth Pil- grim was even more intense in his revolt against both Romanism and Protestant Episcopacy than he had been when a Brownist at Scrooby, a parishioner of Robinson at Leyden, or a Pil- grim on the Mayflower. In the New World were fought out by contestants, fewer in number and more widely scattered, the issues which had driven the colonists to the Western wilds. The religious motive was supreme in the mind of all the best colonists. To enjoy the free exer- cise of conscience was the Pilgrim’s one pas- sion, whose bright flame no distance from native land, nor stormy seas, nor rigor of climate, nor danger of death by savage hands, could quench. Our first settlers came as Christians, lived as Christians, and planted the religious principles as the richest inheritance for their posterity. They brought the best aspirations of the Old World and determined to realize them in the New. The hour of American colonization was the fittest one in all modern times for the New World to receive the best which the Old had to give. The territorial distribution of the colonists was not less providential. The acquisitions of the Spanish knights and Jesuit fathers who accompa- nied them were confined to a doubtful settlement in Florida, to the great province of New Spain (Mexico), and to a strip of the Pacific coast. The French Roman Catholic explorers and the Jesuit fathers were limited to Indian evangelization and an uncertain territory along the St. Lawrence, the northern chain of lakes, and the Mississippi val- ley. The great field of English colonization lay between these two. It is the temperate belt of North America—the region which nature had fit- ted for the most aggressive mission in Western civilization. Spain now holds no foot of land on the North American continent. Louisiana passed from her hands into French possession, and in 1803 the French sold it to the United States. The French bade fair to own all Canada. The ownership was at last reduced to the fortunes of one battle— that of Quebec. The pivotal hour of all American Church history was that in which the brave Mont- calm met his fate at the hands of the victorious but dying Wolfe, on the plains of Abraham, Sep- tember 13, 1759. CHRISTIAN CHURCH OF HISTORY This culmination of a long and bitter series of wars between France and England made the Eng- lish the possessors of that immense tract lying be- tween the United States and the polar seas and extending from the Atlantic to the Pacific. The war with Mexico, closing in 1848, gave the Unit- ed States the great State of Texas, with its vast area of two hundred and seventy-five thousand square miles. The fifth decade of the eighteenth century was marked by the “Great Awakening” which be- gan under the preaching of Jonathan Edwards at Northampton, and swept through all the colonies. A general spiritual decline marked the religious life of the Colonial Church from about 1765 until the end of the century. The absorbing topic was the struggle for national independence. All spir- itual interests languished. At 110 time in the his- tory of the American Church was the condition SO serious. It was a question, How would Chris- tian people act with the boon of a nation in their hands? Until the beginning of the nineteenth century it was doubtful whether the national in- dependence would prove a spiritual blessing or a C111 Se. (12) The American Church—National Pe- riod. (1783-1898.) The Church had been a part of the colonial system. The citizen had been taxed for the support of the Church. When the Revolution severed the civil bonds with England, a strong tendency at once set in towards the sepa- ration of the Church from all political govern- ment. The people began to insist on placing the Support of the Church, in all its departments, upon the voluntary judgment of its adherents. This assertion of the voluntary principle in ecclesiasti- cal support and government was one of the most Original of all the great phenomena of this initial stage of our national life. Virginia was the scene of the first great move- ment to carry into practical effect the voluntary principle. To the Baptists belongs the honor of being the herald. Thomas Jefferson, who in re- ligious matters was to all intents and purposes a Frenchman, has the honor of being one of the earliest and most consistent advocates of religious freedom. The close connection of the colonies with France during the Revolutionary War favored the im- portation of the infidelity then rampant in that country. The churches were demoralized and could offer no sufficient opposition. The new in- fidelity spread like wildfire. Edition after edi- tion of the infidel publications of the old world were sold in America. French thought became fashionable. Many public men were smitten by the contagion. he young men of the colleges were peculiarly st1scenfihle to the halefill influences of the ris- ing star of unbelief. The man who did more than any other, perhaps, to stay this tide and bring the people back to saner thoughts was Timothy Dwight, president of Yale College from 1795 to his death, in 1817. From the day that the young president faced his students, infidelity has been a vanishing force in the history of the American people. This overthrow was mightily helped by the great revival which visited the country at that critical time. This revival of 1797-1803 had several important centers of Operation. The movement began al- most simultaneously in widely separated regions and spread until the intervening spaces were cov- ered by its effects. The colleges shared largely in its benefits. The reclaiming of the colleges from infidelity to Chris- 411 CHRISTIANS tianity had an immense significance. Never since has religion been at so low an ebb in these cen- ters of intellectual life; and from these college revivals have come some of the most earnest and successful Christian workers the Church has ever known. This revival also imparted a great impulse to- wards evangelization, especially in the West, where the results are still appearing to the pres- ent time. Other advantages to the Church grew out of that wonderful work of grace. The rem- nants of the Half-way Covenant were swept away. Missions among the neglected at home, the Indians and negroes, were revived and organized anew. The founding of Sunday-school unions, Bible and Tract societies, and other benevolent institu- tions, sprang out of the warm inspiration of this great Spiritual ingathering. The Roman Catholic preoccupation of the West and South gave abundant promise of a permanent population of adherents to that communion. From the headwaters of the Mississippi down to the Gulf, and along the tributary rivers, there had been settlements of the Jesuits, which preserved the Roman Catholic spirit after the most of the missions had been broken up. The population was in large part French, with a Spanish ad- mixture, and the Roman Catholic faith predom- inated everywhere. - - The Protestant current westward did not take the shape of a religious movement. It was simply the expansion of the solid and permanent poula- tion east of the Alleghenies. The great religious currents moved along the parallels of latitude westward with a steadiness and persistency which belong to the rarer spiritual phenomena of mod- ern times. The moral significance of the Western and Southwestern occupation by the Protestants of the United States is vast. We are too near the scene, and the time is too recent, to comprehend the grandeur of the achievement. Centuries must elapse before the transformation can be seen in all its meaning and proportions. Our religious liter- ature, the pulpit, our denominational treasuries, have all been enriched beyond calculation by the contributions which the West has made with lib- eral hand and sublime faith. J. F. H. CHRISTIAN ENDEAVOR. See article On page I755. CHRISTIANS (kris'chans improperly pro- nounced christ-ians), a denomination usually styled “The Christian Connection” or sometimes “The Christian Church.” Among the minor denominations, in the United States and Canada, there is a people rejecting all names but Christian. e (1) General Position. Their real attitude to- ward the religious world is such that some of their own ministers contend that they are not a denomi- nation, except in the sense of being named. Speak- ing as one of them, the writer states, their gen- eral position as follows: “The Bible is our only rule of faith and practice, to the exclusion of hu- man statements, creeds or confessions; Jesus Christ is our only leader; we accept no name but Christian; Christian character is our only test of fellowship; individual interpretation of the Scriptures is allowed to everyone; and we seek the union of the followers of Jesus.” This last purpose has been expressed more prominently within a few late years than before. ... In the be- ginning, the assertion was rather of liberty. (2) Origin. On November 1, 1792, a General Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church was held at Baltimore. During the session Rev. CHRISTIANITY COMPARED 412 James O’Kelly, a presiding elder, offered a reso- lution providing that ministers dissatisfied with the charges to which they were assigned might appeal to the conference, and if the appeal were sustained, the bishop should make another assign- ment. The resolution was lost, after animated de- bate. The next day O'Kelly and about thirty other ministers resigned from the conference. The next year, Christmas day, they met at Manakin, N. C., and organized a body known as “Repub- lican Methodists,” not intending fully to cut them- selves off from the Methodist Church. But within a year, at Lebanon Church, Surry county, Virginia, at the suggestion of Rev. Rice Haggard, they voted to bear only the name “Christian,” to take the Bible as their only creed, and to allow each church to govern itself. In the year 1801, Rev. Abner Jones, trained among the Baptists, organized the first Christian church in New England, at Lyndon, Vt. In 1801 and 1802, occurred the great Caneridge revival, in Kentucky, following which Barton W. Stone, Da- vid Purviance, and others of the Presbyterian Church, came out on the ground virtually occu. pied by the brethren of the east and south already spoken of. These western ministers were largely influenced by the conduct of many young converts of the revival, who, when solicited to unite with the churches, hesitated; expressing the wish to remain simply Christians, to take Christ for their only leader, and the Bible for their only creed, and to have equal fellowship for all Christians. These three bodies of people, in their several districts, were ignorant of the Springing up of a people in any other locality teaching, the same doctrines. A few years later, when learning of each other, they recognized their Oneness, and organized somewhat loosely. There was thus what was practically a simultaneous revolt against the three great American churches; against the Methodists in North Carolina and Virginia, against the Baptists in New England, and against the Presbyterians in Kentucky and Ohio. They are the manifestation of an important relig- ious movement that is wholly American. Yet the common phrase, “the Bible our only creed,” ever drives us for inspiration, for law, and for doctrine, to Palestine. Though we sprang up in the wilder- ness, we refer to chapters xi, xii and xiii of Reve- 1ation for explanation of that fact. Yet though our origin has been largely rural, our history has shown a spirit of leadership not merely in early home missionary activities, but a pioneer. ship in subjects of public thought. We estab- lished the first religious newspaper; we estab- lished the first college (Antioch) giving fully equal rights and honors to both sexes, etc. J. J. S. CHRISTIANITY COMPARED WITH OTHER, RELIGIONS. We believe that Christianity is the absolute re- ligion, and that it alone can become universal; but we cannot believe this intelligently, until Chris- tianity is compared with other religions which have given light and life to millions of men and women, and from which have sprung civilizations with their splendid trophies of literature, science, art, morals, as well as great political and industrial systems. For the first time in history, all the families of mankind can become acquainted with each other and in- vestigate the secrets of each other's lives. In these circumstances, comparison of religions cannot be escaped. Faith welcomes, instead of shrinking from, the necessity. WITH OTHER RELIGIONS (1) Brahmanism. Little need be said concern- ing Brahmanism. It is the religion of the great majority of the people of India, and is essen- tially local, rather than universal. It cannot live out of India. The strength and the weakness of its doctrine of God is that according to it God is in everything and is everything. “Everything, from the lowest estate of a straw to the highest estate of a God, is Brahmā.” It thus admits His unity, but denies His character and personality. There is, therefore, no basis for a fundamental distinc- tion between morality and immorality. Caste, which constitutes its great strength, is also a fa- tal weakness, because, though originating in his- torical necessities, it is essentially anti-national and anti-social. Mankind now will, not accept a religion which is inconsistent with the truths of the unity of the race, its liberty, the equality of its members before God and before the law, the right of the meanest to rise to the highest place and to the fullest self-realization, with the hope of prog ress to infinite horizons. Brahmanism denies the Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man. Its compact structure is now being honey-corribed by the thousand influences of the government, the courts of justice, the literature, the education, the Social, sanitary, economical and physical sci- ence of a Christian people, as well as by direct missionary enterprise. Its fall is as certain as anything future can be, though its place will not be taken by any of the existing Christian organiza- tions. When India absorbs the spirit of Christ, it has intellectual and spiritual strength enough to develop a theology and a church suited to its own soil. Native churches in India are, as yet, little better than exotics. (2) Buddhism. To Gautama, even before he became Buddha, or Enlightened, the ideal man was the dignified ascetic, free from all ties and relationships, and holding out his bowl for rice, uncaring whether it was filled or not. This mendi- cant, the flower of Brahmanism, was seeking for liberation from self and absorption into the Su- preme existence. All other men were subject to vanity and delusions. No wonder that to a noble nature, imbued with this conviction, the full truth should be revealed, after long study and medita- tion, that man himself is greater than his ap- pctitcs, passions or desires; and that by rising su- perior to these he can attain to a liberation which means escape from the danger of rebirth. Before the simplicity and power of this way of salvation —salvation above all from the craving for con- tinuous personal life—sacrifices and penances lost their efficacy and the Veda its supernatural au- thority. His simple and sublime teaching was that the true greatness of man, in one word his life, consists, not in the abundance of the things which he possesses, but in himself or in moral culture; in Christian language, he learned that the kingdom of God is within and that it is all-sufficient. This spiritual truth transfigured him. It took possession of disciples who gathered round him from various castes, and it filled them with such power that India became transformed. Never was a grander testimony on a great scale borne to the might of the Spirit. Not only at its beginning, but when India was ruled by Buddhist kings, it disdained the use of carnal weapons of every kind, and it continued to be a reforming force for centuries. Missionaries went forth, North, South, East and West, filled with a holy enthusiasm which enabled them to win in time all Eastern Asia to the Faith. Before the truth of man's essential greatness and the living witness borne to the truth by converts of every caste, from the Brahman to the Chandala, CHRISTIANITY COMPARED the iron bands prescribed by caste fell to the ground. The equality and fraternity of men were recognized. How then shall we explain the failure of Buddhism 2 For it has failed, more completely than Brahmanism, to meet the spiritual necessity of any race except the Mongolian. India rejected a doctrinal system which had no room for the ideas of sin, atonement, and the significance of life which Brahmanism had tried to express. Its home since has been in countries of a lower type of civilization, such as Burmah, Siam, Thibet, China, Corea and Mongolia. The Aryan and Semitic peo- ples will never adopt it, for they have truer con- ceptions of God, of the worth of human life and the significance of the world, than any which it presents. The fundamental weakness of Buddhism is that it denies all reality. According to it, there is no God and the supreme aim of man is to cease to be. There is no need of a Creator, for there is force in the world, and as no force can ever be lost, why should it not have been from the begin- ning P What we call the soul does not survive death. “He is a heretic who holds that man has a permanent soul or self separate from the body.” The consequences of our past, hypostasized as Karma or Act, alone survive, and round this fancied Karma new bodies repeatedly gather, until Nirvana is attained. No such uncom- promising system of pessimism has ever been successfully preached. Therefore it had to fail, though successful for a time, partly as a develop- ment and partly as a recoil from Brahmanism. (See BUDDHISM AND CHRISTIANITY CONTRASTED.) (3) Confucianism, like Brahmanism, is es- sentially a local, rather than a universal religion. Rooted in the soil, the history and the ideals of China, it cannot extend far beyond its boundaries. Unlike Buddhism, it plants itself firmly on this world, considering it and the relations of life ev- erything. Thus practically ignoring the spiritual, it left a void, felt even by a materialistic people, which Buddhism—invited into the country—filled in a crude fashion. This explains why almost every Chinaman is both a Confucianist and a Buddhist. A more striking confession that each religion is one-sided could hardly be given. To Confucius, society was the great reality; and as social disorders abounded in his time, he had to look for a remedy. He found the remedy in the wisdom of the past, and to the task of com- piling and editing its precious records he gave his whole strength. His influence on China, through his disciples, and still more through his classics, is the greatest illustration history gives of what can and what cannot be done by education, and by law, custom, institutions, and ritual. He believed that man is good by nature and that if only a gotind cdtication be given and a right example set -> *-* it a i \-i \- " i i. i*- *...” A 1 J.A. º. *> by his superiors, he will assuredly be moral. Edu- cation therefore lies at the foundation of society and the governing classes are the consummate flower of the educational system. They have been drilled in ethics from their youth and the inculca- tion of duty is backed up by examples from the lives of ancient worthies. The practical results may be seen in the present condition of the Chinese people; industrious and law-abiding, but low in their aims and destitute Of the mighty hopes which make us men; their literati filled with self-conceit and contempt for Others, but narrow, bigoted and puerile themselves. Confucius ignored the spiritual world, not seeing that the spiritual rules the material. He was a historian, scribe, teacher, or, as he himself said, a “transmitter;” but he was not a prophet, or 413 CHRISTIANITY UNIVERSAL RELIGION “maker.” Mankind needs both. Israel had Moses and the Prophets as well as Ezra the scribe. We have the spirit of Jesus as well as great legalists and theologians. (4) Mohammedanism. Mohammedanism is monotheistic. God is in heaven; not as he is to the Hindu, in everything. To the Buddhist, there is no reality; to the Confucianist, society with its order and settled government is all-sufficient; to the Moslem, God is the one reality and man's glory is to do or to bow to his will. “Islam means that we must submit to God.” And there is no complexity in the divine nature. The doctrine of the Trinity is inconceivable. God is an arithmetical unit. The gulf between God and man is not bridged Over by the incarnation. There is therefore no ministration of the Spirit and no provision for bringing man into that filial relation to God in which alone his true life consists. Instead of the Person of Jesus and the Spirit of Jesus, Mohammedanism offers only an imperfect prophet and an imperfect book. It gives thus an inade- quate conception of God and equally an inadequate conception of man. When man is only the subject, servant or slave of God, he cannot be the child and heir. Dependence on God is taught, but not the high privilege of fellowship with Him nor the law of progress. This inadequate conception of man is seen most clearly in Mohammed's low estimate of woman, and the consequent degradation of fam- ily and social life. (5) Christianity. Christianity is based on the essential identity of God and man, and on their reconciliation in Jesus, crucified for us and now dwelling in us by his Spirit. It has already vindi- cated itself in comparison with other religions, and “the history of the world is the judgment of the world.” The highest civilization is commen- surate with Christendom, and from this verdict of humanity there can be no appeal. As the re- ligions of Babylon and Egypt, of Greece and Rome, of the Germanic and Scandinavian peo- ples have passed away, not without leaving be- hind an inheritance absorbed by the religion of Jesus, so shall it be with the other great religions. Each of them is acting the part of a school- master to bring their worshipers to the Christ, even as the Law did for Israel; and each may leave some residuum in the system which super- sedes it for the use of its late votaries. M. G CHRISTIANITY THE UNIVERSAL RE- LIGION. Scholars sometimes claim that there are uni- versal religions, and they mention Christianity, Buddhism, and Mohammedanism. The conscious- ness of Christendom eliminates instantly and em- phatically the claims of the Ruddhist and the Mos- lem faiths to universal acceptance, and wise Ob- servation eliminates them both from any serious regard so far as the future of Christendom is con- cerned. They can not make themselves at home in our western world. They have few natural affilia- tions with Christendom. They represent either what we have left behind, or what we can never assimilate. (1) Its Nature. That Christianity is essentially a universal religion is evident from its nature, which must be identified with the mind or person- ality of Jesus Christ. It cannot be seriously de- nied that He is universal in His character, His purposes, and in His conquests. There is nothing provincial, local, or merely national about Him. He was and is the Son of Man, the Son of Humanity, the Representative of all races, nationalities, con- CHRISTIANITY UNIVERSAL RELIGION 414 ditions, and of both sexes. He is the reconcilia- tion of all diversities and the consummation of all human possibilities. He is also the Son of God, the realization in human life of the mind of the Eternal, the revelation to man of God's fatherly heart and His redeeming purposes. (2) Universality. A universal religion must meet universal wants. It must be immediately adapted to the profoundest needs of the human soul. It must be able to redeem human nature from pollution, from guilt, and to so reinvigorate the human spirit as to make it strong in true righteousness, benevolence, and hope. A relig- ion like Buddhism, which has mere pity for man’s misery and makes no adequate pro- vision for the healing of man's sin, and which fails to give man a vital hold of an infinite father- ly love, cannot be universal. A system of faith that is not in harmony with the highest ethics, and which exhausts its uplifting and progressive pos- sibilitics in a brief and limited history, can never become a universal religion. Mohammedanism has shown itself an excellent cure for idolatry and the lower forms of savagery, but it soon leads to a state of intellectual and moral stagnation, and is so fettered by its fundamental creed that it can have no strong affiliations with the hu- manities and hopes of modern progressive civiliza- tion. (3) Standard. A survey of the world as it Spreads out before us at the present time is a strong evidence that Christianity is rapidly universalizing itself. It has become the stand- ard to which other religions are adjusting their teachings. Nothing is more evident than that the progressive minds among the Hindus and Buddhists are endeavoring to make Some parts of their creed as Christian as possible. Christianity is already the religion of those who control the destinies of the race, and, however imperfectly the so-called Christian nations are be- having in their dealings with the Orient, they con- tain within themselves a Life which sharply re- bukes their own imperfections, and which fur- nishes the ideal to which more and more they must approximate. A universal religion must not leave the Sorrowing and troubled and oftimes despairing heart of man in doubt with regard to the Supreme Love which reigns in the heavens and is control- ling the destinies of mankind. It must so reveal that love in a human life as to make it a living and perpetual reality. It must provide a standard which can never be outgrown, and furnish mo- tives of enduring energy that shall lead men to aspire to live nearer and nearer to that standard. It must furnish a body of spiritual teaching which has in it so much of God’s mind that man cannot outgrow it. It must pi U vide ſul the satisfaction of human hope and human affection by bringing the assurances of a happy immortality close to the Sorrowing and troubled life of the present. I find in Christianity, and in Christianity alone, that which meets all these conditions and needs. I discover that Christ, who is the substance of Christian faith, is exalted more and more before the minds and moral imaginations of men. In a thousand ways He is drawing nations toward Himself. The lines of progress center in Him. He is the inspiration of hope and the object of de- sire. The greatest of modern Hindu reformers, Keshub Chunder Sen, saw in Him the world's re- conciliation and redemption. When received into the heart, He satisfies the Japanese as truly as the American, the Hindu as perfectly as the Euro- pean, CHRISTMAS My conviction that Christianity is yet to become the religion of all nations has been vastly strength- ened by what I have seen of the decadent civiliza- tions and systems of the Orient. I acknowledge that these Eastern systems still have a strong, though at times a despairing grip over the Asiatic peoples, but they have been put on the defensive; they have come to feel that there is a mighty spiritual power which seeks to replace them with something better. Their natural antipathy to that which comes from the West, and their abhorrence of the sins and crimes of those who represent Christian nations, have still not been able to keep from them the spiritual and ethical superiorities of the Christian system. There have been such noble examples of Christly living and teaching in the Orient that even non-Christian scholars confess that the highest types of character yet evolved by our race are found among some of the Christian missionaries in the Orient. I do not look for the speedy disintegration of these ancient systems; I do look for a wiser approach on the part of Christianity toward the representatives of Hindu- ism, Buddhism, and Islam. Christendom itself is so furrowed with imperfection and weakened by discord that it hardly seems worthy to secure any sudden and very rapid dominion in Asia; but the dawn of a better Christendom means the dawn of Christian civilization in Asia and throughout the world. The feeling of a universal human brotherhood is entering the heart of humanity, and this has a distinctively Christian origin. Fraternity is the key to the solution of the social and ecclesiastical probler11s of Europe and America; and just so far as the spirit of true brotherhood enters the Hindu, Chinese, and Japanese mind, just so far will some of the peculiar creeds or dispositions of the Orien- tal spirit be sloughed off. There is no true progress possible to the Hindu and Chinese civilizations without a new standard of womanhood, and a new conception of the unity, personality, righteousness, and love of God. These can be derived only from a pure Christianity. It deserves world-wide ac- ceptance, and , therefore will ultimately secure it. It is the only religion which from first to last shows us God seeking with loving and redemptive purpose after man, instead of man groping through mists of error, through weary centuries, after the unknown God. Christianity is the religion of re- demption, of intellectual freedom, of popular liber- ty, of unending progress, of world-wide hope, and therefore it will be universal, J B CHRISTMAS (kris' mas). An annual church festival (December 25th), and in some states of the Union a legal holiday, which is held in memory of the birth of Christ. Concerning the exact time at which the birth of Our Lord really occurred, authorities differ. The first records we find of the observation of this day are in the second century, about the time of the emperor Commodus. The decretal epistles, indeed, carry it up a little higher, and say that Telesphorus, who lived in the reign of Antoninus Pius, ordered divine service to be celebrated and an angelic hymn to be sung the night before the nativity of our Saviour. That it was kept before the time of Constantine we have a melancholy proof; for whilst the persecution raged under Diocletian, who then kept his court at Nicomedia, that tyrant, among other acts of cruelty, finding multitudes of Christians assembled together to celebrate Christ’s nativity, commanded the church doors where they were met to be shut, and fire to be put to it, which soon reduced them and the church to ashes, CHRONICLES GHRONICLES (krön-i-k'ls'). This name seems to have been first given to two historical books of the Old Testament by Jerome (Prolog. Galeat.). The Hebrews call them Dº Yº", i.e., words of days, diaries, or journals, and reckon them but one book. The Alexandrian translators, who regarded them as two books, used the appellation, things omitted, as if they were supplementary to the other historical records belonging to the Old Testament canon. (1) Contents. In I Chron. i-ix. is given a series of genealogical tables interspersed with his- º notices. These genealogies are not com- plete. I Chron. x-xxix. contains the history of David, partly agreeing with the account given of him in the books of Samuel, though with several im- portant additions relating to the Levites. 2 Chron. i-ix. contains the history of Solomon. 2 Chron. x-xxviii. furnishes a succinct account of the kingdom of Judah while Israel still re- hººd. but separate from the history of the atter. 2 Chron. xxix-xxxvi. describes the kingdom of Judah after the downfall of Israel, especially with reference to the worship of God. - From this analysis it appears that the Chronicles contain an epitome of Sacred history, particularly from the origin of the Jewish nation to the end of the first captivity. & (2) Diction. The diction is such as suits the time immediately subsequent to the captivity. It is substantially the same with that of Ezra, Nehe- miah, and Esther, which were all written shortly after the Babylonish exile. It is mixed with Aramaºisms, marking at once the decline of the Jews in power, and the corruption of their native tongue. The pure Hebrew had been then laid aside. It was lost during their sojourn in Babylon. The Orthography is characterized by an adoption of the matres lectionis and frequent interchange of the weak letters with other peculiarities. (3) Age and Author. Internal evidence suffi- ciently demonstrates that the Chronicles were writ- ten after the captivity. Thus the history is brought down to the end of the exile, and mention is made of the restoration by Cyrus (2 Chron. xxxvi :21,22). It is certain that they were com- piled after the time of Jeremiah (2 Chron. xxxv : 25), who lived to see the destruction of Jerusalem by the Chaldaeans. The genealogy of Zerubbabel is even continued to the time of Alexander (I Chron. iii:19-24). The same opinion is supported by the character of the orthography and the nature of the language employed, as we have already seen, both which are Aramaean in complexion, and harmonize with the books confessedly written after the exile. The Jews generally ascribe the Chronicles to ~bo ºr rote thern n fter the return from the captivity, assisted by Zechariah and Haggai. But Calmet contends that if there be some things which seem to determine for Ezra as the author, others' seem to prove the contrary. (a) The author confiniles the genealogy of Zerub- babel down to the twelfth generation; but Ezra did not live late enough for that. (b) In several places he supposes the things which he mentions to be then in the same condition as they had for- merly been, for example, before Solomon, and be- fore the captivity (2 Chron. v. 9, and I Kings viii: 8). (See also I Chron. iv:41, 43; v. 22, 26; 2 Chron. viii:8, and xxi : Io). (c) The writer of these books was neither a contemporary nor an original writer; but a compiler and abridger. He had before him ancient memoirs, genealogies, annals, registers, and other pieces, which he often quotes T~~~ -i-º-, *, *y 415 CHRONICLES or abridges. Still the weight of opinion is in favor of the authorship of Ezra. It seems that the chief design of the Chronicles was to ex- hibit correctly the genealogies, the rank, the func- tions, and the order of the priests and Levites; that, after the captivity, they might more easily resume, their proper ranks, and reassume their ministries. He had also in view to show how the lands had been distributed among the fam- ilies before the captivity, that subsequently each tribe, so far as was possible, might obtain the ancient inheritance of their fathers. - (4) Record of Distribution of Lands. These two purposes, which are closely allied, will serve to demonstrate the perfect congruity of all that is peculiar in the Chronicles. They account for the genealogical tables, the specifications of tribes and families with their situation, as also for a variety of reſerences to the priests and Levitcs, to the preparations made by David for building the temple, the reformations which took place at dif- ferent periods, the prosperity of such kings as feared Jehovah and walked in his ways, to the marvelous interpositions of Heaven on behalf of those who trusted in Him alone, to the idolatry of Israel and their consequent misfortunes. The books of Chronicles as compared with those of Kings are more didactic than historical. The historical tendency is subordinated to the didactic. Indeed, the purely historic form appears to be pre- served only in so far as it presented an appro- priate medium for those religious and moral ob- servations which the author was directed to ad- duce. Samuel and Kings are more Occupied with the relation of political occurrences; while the Chronicles furnish detailed accounts of eccle- siastical institutions. (5) Sources. A thorough examination of these books as compared with those of Samuel and Kings will satisfy the inquirer that the latter were known to Ezra and extensively used by him in the composition of Chronicles. The earlier books themselves must have been compiled from annals. So far as the history con- tained in them is concerned, it bears little evi- dence of originality. It is true that the books of Samuel present no references to national records such as occur in Kings, but their internal char- acter and structure evince their derivation from annals contemporaneous with the events they re- late. But the books of Samuel and Kings are not the only source from which the Chronicles have been taken. Public documents formed the com- mon groundwork of the three histories. The Pentateuch has also been used in their compila- tion. A comparison of the first nine chapters of I Chron. with the Mosaic books will show the parallelism existing hetween them: and it should be especially noticed that I Chron. ix.43–54 agrees verbatim with Genesis xxxvi :31-43. Perhaps, how- ever, this passage in both has been drawn from the same source. * It is evident that the Chronicles were compiled not only from former inspired writings, but, for the most part, from public records, registers, and genealogies belonging to the Jews. That national annals existed there can be no doubt. They are expressly mentioned, as in . I Chron. xxvii:24. They contained an account of the most important events in the history of the Hebrews, and were generally lodged in the tabernacle or temple, where they could be most conveniently consulted. The histories of kings appear to have been usual- ly written by prophets (I Chron. xxix:29; 2 Chron. ix:29; xii:15; xiii:22). Hence they con- CHRONICLES stantly refer to the divine rewards and punish- ments characterizing the theocracy. These his- torical writings of the prophets were, for the most part, inserted in the public annals, as is evident from 2 Chron. xx:34; xxxii:32; xii; I5; xxiv:27. Whether they were always so inserted is questionable, for they seem to be distinguished from the annals of the kingdom in 2 Chron. xxxiii: IQ. From such sources Ezra extracted the accounts which he was prompted to write for the use of mankind in all ages. We cannot believe that his selection was indiscriminate or careless. His in- spiration effectually secured him against every- thing that was inaccurate or unsuitable to the pur- poses for which he was supernaturally enlight- ened. That he committed mistakes cannot for a moment be admitted, else his history is impugned and its position in the canon incxplicable. His veracity, integrity, and scrupulous exactness must be held fast by every right-minded believer. (6) The Character of Such Statements as are Peculiar to the Chronicles. From an inspection of I Chron. xvi;4-4I; I Chron. xxii-xxvi;28; xxviii; xxix; 2 Chron. xv : I-15; 2 Chron. xvii:7, etc.; xxvi; I6-2I ; xxx; xxxi, it will be manifest that it was one design of Ezra to notice with particu- larity the order of the divine worship as estab- lished by David and Solomon, with various ref- ormations in the theocracy that took place at dif- ferent times. The Levitical priesthood, and the public service of God, are specially noticed and prominently brought into view. From 2 Chron. xiii.; xx:22, etc.; xix:2, etc.; xxv :7, etc., it is evi- dent that God’s miraculous interference on behalf of Judah, and his displeasure with idolatrous Israel, were also intended to be depicted. In ac- cordance with the same object, pious kings evin- cing appropriate zeal for the glory of Jehovah are commended, and their efforts marked with ap- proval (comp. 2 Chron. xiv:6-15; xvii: Io, etc.; xx; xxvi :5, etc.; xxvii:4-6, etc.), while the ruin of idolatrous practices is forcibly adduced (2 Chron. xxi:Io, II, etc.; xxviii:5, etc.; xxxiii: II, etc.; xxv : I4, etc.; xxxvi :6). (7) Conclusions. Such are the character- istic peculiarities of these books; and we now ask the impartial reader to consid- er if they be not worthy of the Holy Spirit under whose guidance the Chronicles were written. Are they not admirably in unison with the character of Ezra the high-priest and re- former ? What more natural, or more accordant with the solicitudes of this holy man, than to dwell upon such matters as relate to the wor- ship of Jehovah, to the priests, and Levites? Sure- ly he was appropriately directed to record the reformations effected by godly kings, and the dis- aslrous consequences of forsaking the true God, whose zeal was abundantly manifested in reform, and to whom idolatry was peculiarly offensive. And yet upon these very chapters and paragraphs charges the most flagrant have been founded. The author of them has been accused of hatred to Israel, predilection for the Levites, love of the marvelous, design to magnify pious kings and to heighten the mistakes of the kingdom of Israel. It is unnecessary to enter into any refutation of these monstrous accusations. They bear with them their own condemnation. They are the offspring of that Rationalism which resolves to see nothing but what it relishes. On every page of these his- torical books are impressed genuineness and hon- esty. The writer candidly refers to the sources whence his information was derived; and con- temporary readers, placing implicit reliance on his 416 CHRONOLOGY statements, allowed the original documents to perish. He relates many things disgraceful to Judah and its kings, while he evinces no desire to palliate or conceal sin. He even retains, as we have seen before, expressions incongruous with his own age, and therefore exactly copied from the ancient records. Surely a writer guilty of falsification would have been careful to alter these into exact correspondence with his own times. Transparent simplicity of character needs not such minutiae. CHRONOLOGY meant originally, as appears from its Greek roots (xpóvos, time, Xóyos, reason, Science), the scientific measurement of time; as such it is a branch of astronomy. More commonly it means the ascertaining and arrangement of the times of the occurrence of events; as such it is a branch of history, and is essential to its proper arrangement and to its philosophical development and narration. For as later events depend upon and Spring from earlier ones, the gravest mis- understandings of the lessons of history must follow upon inversions of the true order of oc- currences; and a student can have no adequatc knowledge of the life of a man or of a nation, however vivid and correct his mental pictures of it may be, unless these are properly woven into thc web of time. 1. TXifficulties of Chronology. (1) The Indifference of Ancient Writers. Authors, especially in the Orient, were accustomed to record their facts without regard even to such dates as they might have given. All demands were satisfied when known oc- currences were referred to definite periods, as within a certain generation, or under a specific dynasty, or within the reign of a given ruler already familiar to the contemporaries addressed ; for our modern method of historical notation ac- cording to the calendar was something altogether unknown to the ancients. Nor does it follow that because such documents were dateless they were unhistorical, or in any sense to be discredited. Rather, as such was the universal custom of the times with historians, a departure from that method would at once justify a suspicion against #. ancient document as unauthentic and incred- 1D162. Monuments may have been erected long after the event which they commemorate and may carry traditional inscriptions. It has been found in Egypt that kings altered inscriptions. Rameses II and others did this to claim glory for deeds of others. Contemporary inscriptions are found to have been mendacious. Egyptian and Assyrian monarchs boasted grandly of conquests never made; the London Monument lied in ascribing to Roman Catholics the origin and spread of the great ſire of 1666, which it commemorated. (2) Use of Round Numbers. Similar to this indifference as to fact is the frequent use of in- definite round numbers. This is common in or- dinary speech now as formerly. Even in modern history, the Hundred Years' War between Eng- land and France began in A. D. . I337, and ended in 1453. Gesenius remarks upon such use of the numbers forty, seventy, and seven, used as in English for many and several, he might have said the same of hundred. In English that word passed from meaning a number of freemen to mean a certain territory. Jesus bade Peter to for- give seventy times seven times: it would be a comical absurdity to take this literally. If, then, we read that Gideon and Eli each judged Israel forty years, and Saul reigned forty years (Acts xiii:21), and David and Solomon reigned each CHRONOLOGY 417 * forty years, we may suspect that these are not chronological numbers, but oriental expressions for long reigns. This number is common in the book of Judges. - (3) Lack of an Era. Modern writers have a great advantage over the ancients in having a definite point of time from which to reckon for- ward or backward, to-wit, Saturday, January I, A. D. I. They have, too, the benefit of Caesar's establishment of the length of a year, beginning January I, and of Gregory's correction, made possible by modern astronomy. But this adop- tion of the Christian era was so late that it was not generally used until after Charlemagne—say A. D. 800. Greek writers had indeed the com- putation by Olympiads; but they used this so lit- tle that Thucydides, writing about 360 years after the first Olympiad, dates but twice by the Olym- pic Era ; Xcnophon, still later, uses it twice; and Timaeus, living over 500 years after the estab- lishment of the era, is the first to use it regularly. The Romans reckoned from the foundation of Rome, but did not agree upon the date of the era, and preferred to date an event by naming the consuls then in office. So oriental writers generally said that an event was in such a year of such a king, if the event occurred in a king- dom. But periods of anarchy and of conflicting dynasties and instances of co-regency of a father and son make this method uncertain for us. The prophet Amos (i:I) dated a prophecy from an earthquake: that was familiar enough for his hearers, not for us. (4) Length of Years and Time of Begin- ning. To us it seems natural to fix the length of the year by the seasons, which recur with a Sort of regularity, but which shade one into an- other so that no definite line of demarcation be- tween them can be drawn, except by astrono- mers. Our system involves a great series of previous observations, and a study of astronomy that could be perfected only with modern instru- ments. Simple as it seems to us, it is complex to simple minds; and few of the educated carry its facts and reasons in their minds. It was easier in old times to let the priests arrange the sacred days upon which the year depended, and to let them put in or leave out a few days to accord with the seasons. Indeed, it was this priestly func- tion that enabled Julius Caesar, as Pontifex Max- imus in charge of such matters, to establish the system which lasted in Europe I,627 years and is still maintained in Russia; yet philosophic Cicero made a jest of it. We find a great variety in the length of the year in various countries and times, and in the season chosen for the beginning of the year. As it is much easier to observe the moon than the sun, it was natural to measure off years by lunations. People of littie culture would soon find that the counting of twelve new moons brought them to about the same season, with a year of 354 days, and months alternately twenty-nine and thirty days long. Then their priests must deter. mine whether they will follow the moon, putting in a day now and then upon a chosen month, since the lunations are not exactly twenty-nine and a half days long. The Arabian or Mohammedan years adhere to the lunations, so that in the course of 897 years their new year's day fell upon every day of the Julian calendar: upon most of them re- peatedly. But many nations observed festivals depend- ent upon the seasons as a festival welcoming the spring ; or one of thanksgiving after harvest, If such were set upon some particular day of the year or month, the new year's day must not be al- CHRONOLOGY lowed to wander far, and the priestly order must keep the length of the year on an average near 365 days by lengthening the months or by adding days. Most of the ancient nations adopted this plan. But there was a great variety in the time of beginning the year. The Romans began the year 1n March, as the season of planting, vaguely sug- gested by the equinoxes; and the Hebrews had the same beginning, marked by their great relig- ious festival, the Passover. Several other nations had the same, which seems one of the points sug- gested by nature itself. But the later Jews adopt- ed a civil calendar which has now superseded the other, so that they celebrate the opening of their new year in the autumn; and what was formerly their seventh month is now the first. This brings their new year's day near the autumnal equinox, another time suggested by nature, when the labor of cultivation is done and the grains and most of the fruits are harvested. The French scientists chose the autumnal equinox as the point for begin- ning their new era of 1792, when they hoped to bring mankind to reckox, from the fruition of their great Revolution. Caesar fixed the beginning of the year now used in all Europe and in lands colonized by Europeans near midwinter. On the other hand the Olympic years began at midsummer. Now to illustrate confusion arising from these various beginnings of a year, Suppose we learn that an event occurred in the first year of the 94th Olympiad. By our calendar that Olympic year began in July of B. C. 404, and ended in July B. C. 403. Hence if no circumstances show in what season of the year the event occurred, the historian cannot say in which of the two years he must place it. De Quincey shows that at a certain period of English history, owing to the use of January I and of March 25 for New Year's Day and to the intro- duction of New Style, an error of two years might Occur. (De Quincey's Works, Essay on Pope.) (5) Conflict of Authorities furnishes as great a difficulty as the indifference and the looseness of enumeration discussed above. Sometimes the con- flict is in the text of an author, by the occurrence of irreconcilable statements. Thus in 2 Chron. xxi.;2O, we are told that King Jehoram was thirty-two years of age at accession, and died after a reign of eight years, at the age of forty. The next chapter tells us (verse 2) that his youngest Son Ahaziah succeeded him, being forty-two years old at accession, so that he must have been born two years before his father, and other sons were born earlier, or else there was a long unrecognized interregnum, or a mistake has occurred. Here we have a parallel passage in 2 Kings viii:26, which Says twenty-two instead of forty-two, making it probable that a “mem” was erroneously written for a “kaph,” a figure 4 for 2. But the LXX says, at least in the best MSS., twenty, and neitiner twenty-two nor forty-two. But discrepancies and conflicts are not always so easily dealt with, as will appear below. Au- thors of equal credibility sometimes differ widely; and the chronologer who follows one rather than another proceeds often by a judgment for which he may not be able to give a definite reason. The students of history, whether that of the Bible or of other books, must expect to find men of the great- est learning and keenest research unable to agree upon dates; and he must learn to respect them none the less, and to avail himself of their labors thankfully, leaving riddles of time undecided. (6) Dates Before B. C. 700 All Uncertain. This may be asserted positively so far as present research can go; no date prior to B. C. 700 is absolutely certain, though many are sufficiently 27 CHRONOLOGY approximate, except 776, 753, 747, which are eras or points from which to reckon. And of these, except 747, there is no certainty that the events they have been held to commemorate occurred just then. The regular establishment of the Olym- pic games may, as Mahaffy shows, have been before or after B. C. 776; but that is the era of the Olympiads none the less. Most historians take B. C. 753 as the date of the founding of Rome; yet Roman writers differed to the extent Of 28 years as to the founding in fact. The era of Nabonassar, B. C. 747, is fixed by astronomical - records; that is sure; and so far as human events can be correlated with those records of the sun, moon, and stars, we can be sure of their date. But even with the aid of astronomy, we may still meet very perplexing problems. Thus the date of the battle between Medes and Lydians, upon the fixing of which many other dates depend, seems easily settled by the fact that the conflict was arrested by the occurrence of a total eclipse in the midst of it; but the astronomers find several eclipses that answer the conditions of the story, these phenomena ranging from B. C. 625 to B. C. 583. Most historians adopt the eclipse of B.C. 610. (7) Antiquity of Man. The knowledges which constitute the sciences of geology and archaeology are insuperable obstacles to the schemes of chron- Ology that attempt to fix a date for the creation of the world and the appearance of man upon it. It is now seen that the creation of the world was progressive, indeed, as represented in Genesis but that He to whom a thousand years is as onc day neither hasted nor tarried; whether from nebular fire mist or from cosmic confusion, the “tohu bohu” of Genesis i;2, God took myriads of years to shape the earth so that it might be habitable. And it is proved that the human race has been here too long to fit the schemes of Cal- met, Usher, and Hales, whose work is summed up in the chronological table given in this work. The very ruins of Egypt indicate a civilization there in full bloom at least B. C. 6000; Maspero says B. C. Io,000; and man was on earth long before such progress was wrought out. The best Christian scholarship now recognizes these facts, and ceases to peer into the impenetrable darkness and mystery that covers the beginnings. The literal is the least tenable of the interpretations of Genesis. 2. Chronology of the Old Testament. (1) From Adam to Noah. The genealogy of Gen. v : I-32 and vii:6, gives basis for this calcu- lation. This has come down to us in three forms: the present Hebrew text; the Samaritan Penta- teuch, which was transcribed probably about B. C. 430, from the Hebrew text of that time; and third, the Septuagint, the translation of which be- gan about B. C. 283, and was continued for over a century. These three were discrepant, as ap- pears in the following table: - Age of each when next was born or event occurred NAME. Heb. Sam. | LXX. Adam. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I3O I30 230 Seth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - IO5 IO5 2O5 Enosh. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 90 I90 Kenan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7o 7o 17o Mahalalel. . . . . . . . . . . . 65 65 I65 Jared. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I62 62 I62 Enoch. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 65 165 Methuselah . . . . . ." . . . 187 67 167 Lamech . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I82 53 I88 Noah. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6OO 6OO 6OO Years from Creation to the Flood. . . . . . . . 1656 I307 2242 418 CHRONOLOGY The question arises at once, which of the three, if any one, is to be taken as correct and the stand- ard? Naturally, one answers, the Hebrew text, as the original. So thought the translators of I6II ; and they followed that text slavishly, even where corruption in transcription had made non- Sense, and where there was manifest error, as in the case cited above, 2 Chron. xxii:2, compared with 2 Kings viii:26; and if in this instance both these had concurred in mistake, the text of the LXX (which was good enough for St. Paul and Luke) offered sufficient reason for avoiding an absurdity. But this bibliolatrous regard for the Hebrew text did not arise even among the Jews until long after the final dispersion, when the Masorets fixed the text. Prior to that, as is shown abundantly by Robertson Smith, in his popular lectures on “The O. T. in the Jewish Church” changes in the Hebrew text were not uncommon : one chapter of Jeremiah (xxvii) was SO changed that his words were in substance. reversed, and he was made to prophesy falsely. From these facts it may be seen that the scribes took liberties with the text, especially with what we call the historical books, concentrating their attention and their exactitude upon “The Law.” The variations of the three texts above cited imply the taking of liberties which surely would not have been taken if the copyists and translat- ors had supposed the genealogies and numbers to rest upon genuine historical documents. They evidently recognized only conjectural and tradi- tional narration, shaped long before calendars were devised, the art of writing invented, or rec- ords kept. That a Hebrew text or several He- brew texts were the original source of the Samar- itan and the Septuagint, no one will dispute; but he who says that it was the Masoretic text we now have will find that he has vouched for the unprovable. The early history of what was to them the Adamite world is thrown into the form of genea- logical tables, in the making of which certain purposes appear beyond the giving of history. The number of the patriarchs, ten, is a selected number, to fit into a scheme, just as in Matthew the number of generations, twice the sacred num- ber seven, is forced by the omission of three per- sons: so here the patriarchs are found from Adam to Noah, inclusive; and then a series of ten from Shem to Abraham or Terah as we shall notice below. Whether we take one or the other of the three texts, we do not secure certainty; and among the learned each has its advocates. The calculation of the LXX was that of the Hellenist Jews, of the early Christian church, and of some modern scholars, among whom, in England, are Hales, Poole, and Prof. Rawlinson. These seek to lengthen the time before the Flood, since the antiquity of man requires a period for which even the long ages of the LXX are not sufficient. The students of these patriarchal tables, after observing the carelessness of Hebrew genealogies with their frequent omissions, will find himself obliged to say of the genealogies prior to Abraham that in them we have probably only the more im- portant names of the lives of descent, the purpose of their transmission not being history in our modern sense, but to show a line of descent. We start from one made of the red earth into whom God poured the breath of physical life and the in- spiration of understanding (Job xxxii:8); we reach the Father of the Faithful, the “Faithful Abraham” of the Galatian Epistle (iii:9). That the first man was of earth we know, not by the gross conception of a form made of mud and then CHRONOLOGY made alive; but because the sentence “dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return” is proved by experience, which shows of what we are made. Nor need we quarrel with the evolutionist for giv- ing man a long line of simian predecessors if it pleased the Creator so to develop by slow degrees or by greater steps the final form : Man was cre- ated only when the inspiration of which Elihu spoke to Job befell that form, and true life, with intellectual powers not limited to instinct nor heredity, and with “the powers of an endless life” (Heb. vii:I6), became its crown. Was it about Such questions as puzzle us here that Paul spoke with fine scorn : “Shun foolish questionings and genealogies”—“unprofitable and vain?” (Titus iii: 9). Who were fighting over genealogies in his day 2 (2) LUIlg. Lives of Patriarchs. Of these four things may be said: . (I) We may take them liter- ally. We ca111101 ſtoin the fact that few Imen live now to be a hundred years of age—and none much more—presume to say that it was impossible for men to have lived nine centuries. We may say that if the historical verity of the document is doubtful we may refuse to accept it on that point. Perhaps, as Some suggest, the original list was of names only, to which some later scribe added numbers. Possibilities and guesses are endless. (2) We may claim that the word years is too vague, occurring in a document in which the ages of creation are called days; that the writer speaks of seasons, or other periods. (3) More plausibly it is suggested that “for the ages before Moses the Old Testament writers made the head of a family group or clan Stand for his descendants composing such a community, till a new community of the same kind branched off from it. . . . In the old Semitic languages it was a very common usage to denote such a family or kin by the name of its an- cestral head; and fhe very designation of such a community was the term (Heb.) Chai, ‘a life.’” Thus J. W. De Forest (Old and New for 1872, vi :497) says Abel is a tribe of shepherds, victims of the first reported war, extinguished by Cain, a fierce predatory clan, which was expelled from the Social center of the Adamites. Jared means rul- ing ; it was a predominant clan; Jared's sons and daughters were its colonies. The reader will find amusement if not instruction in the extremes to which De Forest carries his notion. (4) One may follow Swedenborg and give to these chapters an inner sense which will atone for the loss of the outward literal verity. Perhaps there are other ways of dealing with these long lives. (3) The Flood and Civilization. Singularly, the nature and extent of the Flood and the origin and development of civilization become involved in this question of time, but not in any question of definite chronology. It is said that no scheme yet proposed gives time enough after the Flood for the development of civilization and institutions. Did civilization develop from different origins and various centers? Is it not rather true that there is but one civilization which spread and was planted from a single source, as one torch may light many ? It is a favorite theory of some that man has arisen slowly from savagery; but others claim that Savages and barbarians are fallen men. This article is not the place for discussing these questions; but the reader will see that they in- volve demands for aeons of time if all men are to have risen from savagery or simian conditions. Was the flood real or symbolical ? Did the flood Strip the whole globe of all inhabitants, except the Noahite family P Or was it limited in extent, leaving most of the world untouched, so that in 419 CHRONOLOGY the undevastated regions there was time enough for all the development that is shown to have existed P. Have savage or barbarous people risen in civilization or shown tendencies to do so without contact with the civilized P And in China we have an example of what is to us an arrest of civilization, without retrogression. When the chronologer asks for time, many such questions confront him. (4) From the Flood to Abraham. We have a genealogical table for this period in Gen. xi : IO-26, probably from the same source as the former one, and subject to the same difficulties from its triple form. Age of each when next was born or event occurred NAM E. Hely. Saul. LXX. Shem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TOO | OO I OO Arphaxad . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 I 35 I35 Cainan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . & & e & I 30 Shelah. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3O I3O I3O Eber. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 I34 I34 Peleg. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3O I 30 I3O Reu. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 I32 I32 Serug. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3O I3O I3O Nahor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 79 I79 Terah. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7o 7o 7o Abraham born . . . . . . . . & º e tº tº º ºf e 390 IO4O I270 Yrs. Of Shem's life be- fore the Flood. . . . . . IOO IOO IOO From Flood to birth of Abraham . . . . . . . . . . . 29O Q4O I 170 The age of Shem before the Flood must be sub- tracted to get the time from the Flood to Abra- ham's birth. Here again are ten patriarchs if we count Cainan and include Terah; then Abraham stands at the head of the new movement in a more definitely historical era. But shall Cainan be included ? Reasons for adopting the insertion of the name by the LXX are, first, it is impos- sible to account for the presence of the name if it were not in some authentic copy of the Hebrew text in B. C. 283. Second, names are more easily left out than inserted. Omissions in the genealo- gies of the Hebrew text are common enough to warn us that counting by generations as they are given is unsafe. Compare Ezra vii:I-5 with I Chron. vi :4-15; there is a discrepancy of eight generations, since two must be put in between Ezra and Seraiah. Jehu is the son of Jehosha- phat, the son of Nimshi, in 2 Kings is :2, I4; but in verse 20 of the same chapter, in I Kings xix: I6, . and in 2 Chron. xxii:7 he is Jehu, son of Ninishi. Labań in Gen. xxii:20, 23, and xviii: 5, is son of Bethuel; but in xxix:5, he is son of Nahor, the father of Bethuel. In an extreme case, Shebuel, contemporary of David, is called son of Gershon, the son of Moses (I Chron. xxvi : 24). Third, Cainan is in the genealogy of St. Luke iii:36. The theory that from Luke it was worked back into the text of the LXX is an extreme one. The question is pressing, if this “second Cainan,” as he is called, is genuine, how came he to be left out? if not genuine, how came he to be put in P. It must be said, how- ever, that the general opinion of chronologers is against him. Perhaps Abraham is to be counted as the tenth in this second group. Put to the length of time assigned to these patriarchs, which is in the Hebrew text only 290 years, there is the fatal objection that time CHRONOLOGY 420 enough is not given after the denudation of the earth by the Flood for the growth of the great nations of Abraham's time, the history of some of which is known to run back from 3000 to 6000 years before the time of Abraham. Such are Chaldaea, Assyria, and Egypt. . Even the II 70 years of the LXX are insufficient. Trom these two series of ten patriarchs, then, it is im- possible to deduce any defensible system of chron- ology. The development of the genealogies of the Noahites in Gen. x shows that names of nations, as Mizraim, Sudim, Philistim, Caphtorim, are used as if personal names. (5) From Birth of Abraham to the Exodus. Gen. xxi :5, gives age of Abraham at the birth of Isaac, who was 60 years old at the birth of Jacob (Gen. xxv :26). Gen. xlvii:9, gives age of Jacob when he went to Egypt. Exod. xii:40 states defi- nitely the length of the sojourn in Egypt at 430 years, for which the 400 of Gen. xv.: I 3, and of Stephen’s speech in Acts vii:6, may be taken as round numbers. But the LXX and the Samari- tan Version divide the 430 years into two equal parts, calling the first the sojourn of the patri- archs in Palestine, and the other 215 years the sojourn in Egypt. Hence the following table: Age of Abraham on leaving Haran. . . . 75 | . . . Age of Abraham at the birth of Isaac. IOO IOO Age of Isaac at the birth of Jacob . . . . . 6O | 6o Age of Jacob at the descent into Egypt 130 I 30 Years of the patriarchal sojourn in Canaan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 I 5 Years of the patriarchal sojourn in Egypt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43O 43O Years of the sojourn in Egypt accord- ing to LXX -- ? -º-º-º-º: From the birth of Abraham to the Exodus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72O The main question here is the time of the going into Egypt and of the coming out, in relation to Egyptian history. The stay in Palestine was con- verted into the 430 years because Palestine was a long time under Egyptian Sway, and was cer- tainly so at the time of the exodus and probably fifty years later, covered by the round number, forty years, as the time of the wandering. It is now generally agreed that Joseph could have been received and advanced, as told in Genesis, only during the time of the Hyksos, or Shepherd Kings, one of the last of whom was Apepi (Apho- phis). But the time of the Hyksos is uncertain : they were in Egypt several centuries, and were driven out not later than B. C. I530. Other dates given for the close of this period are: Wiede- mann, I750; Brugsch, I706 ; Marlette, I703 ; Raw- linson, 1640; Lepsius, I59I. Then followed the great dynasties, the xviiith and xixth, during which the Egyptian power was extended over Sinai, Idumaea, Palestine, and Phoenicia. Their time lasted till about I2OO: Mariette says 1288: Lepsius, I269 : not later than II80, says Wen- de11. The Pharaoh of the oppression, under whom the children of Israel built the treasure cities Pithom and Raamses (Exod. i :II) was Rameses II. This fact, long conjectured, has been defi- nitely settled by Naville's identification of Pithom and discovery that it was built by Rameses II. The Exodus has usually been assigned (by Brugsch, Ebers, Rawlinson, Sayce, and others) to the reign of Menephtah (Merenptah) or Seti II, the immediate successors of Rameses II. Since, CHRONOLOGY however, both of these kings were no mean sov- ereigns, and apparently controlled both Palestine and the Sinaitic Peninsula, it may be better (with Kittel, Maspero, Wiedemann, and others), to place the exodus in the time of anarchy, and hence of weakness, which was in the xxth dynas- ty; McCurdy would place it in the last years of the reign of Rameses III (not later than B. C. II80 to II48) or after that, but probably B. C. I2OO. This date leaves the time for the wander- ing migration, called in round numbers forty years, ending about II50. (6) From the Exodus to the Building of the Temple. This period is said in I Kings vi.1, to be 480 years; the LXX says 440. Solomon began, it is there said, to build the temple in the fourth year of his reign, that is, three full years after his Succession, which is dated at B. C. 993 by Dunck- er, and at IOI7 by Oppert, and at intermediate dates by others. The foundation must be dated, then, as late as B. C. 900 or IOI4. But 480 years earlier carries us back to B. C. I.470 or 1494 for the exodus. But the Egyptologists, with their present light on the time of Menephtah, cannot put the exodus, if it occurred in his time, further back than B. C. I300, cutting this period from 480 years to about 300. Really, the book of Judges gives very few data. If we tabulate the times mentioned between the exodus and the temple, we have this result : The sojourn in the wilderness. . . . . . . . . . 40 years Period of Conquest, Joshua ruler. . . . . . . . 230 “ Israel serves Cushan-rishathaim . . . . . . . . 8 “ Deliverance by Othniel: the land rests. . 4o “ Israel serves Eglon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... I8 “ Deliverance by Ehud: the land rests. . . 8o “ Oppression by Jabin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2O “ Deliverance by Deborah: the land rests. 40 “ Oppression by Midian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 “ Deliverance by Gideon: the land rests. . 4o “ Abimelech reigns over Israel. . . . . . . . . . 3 “ Tola judges Israel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 “ Jair judges Israel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 “ Oppression by Ammon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 “ Jephthah judges Israel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 “ Ibzan judges Israel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 “ Elon judges Israel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IO “ Abdon judges Israel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 “ Oppression by the Philistines. . . . . . . . . . 4o “ Samson judges Israel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2O “ Eli's period, I Sam. iv:18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4o “ Samuel as judge, I Sam. vii.2 . . . . . . . . . . 2O Saul's reign, Acts xiii:21 (not in O. T.). . 40 “ David's reign, I Kings ii: I I. . . . . . . . . . . . 4o “ Of Solomon's time before founding . . . . . 3 “ Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 623 “ This shows that the judgeships and the foreign oppressions overlapped each other, each being sometimes local in the land, and thus contem- poraneous. The recurrence of Io and its mul- tiples, 20, 40, 80, shows that the numbers are vague and imaginary. No satisfactory chronology of the period is possible. Every period of time given in the table is either questionable or lapped upon some other except the three years of Solomon ; and if the forty years assigned to him is as vague as other round numbers, even that is uncertain. The time necessary for the conquest is reckoned at thirty years. The twenty years assigned to Sam- uel are a doubtful inference from I Sam. vii:2; in I Sam. vii: I5 it is said that he judged Israel all the days of his life; the next chapter represents him as old when he aids in making Saul a king; and there is no evident connection between the CHRONOLOGY stay of the ark at Kirjath-jearim and his office as judge, which must have lapsed, at least from the calculation, when Saul became king, though the people seem to have regarded Saul as general of the army and Samuel as their judge at the same t1nne. Saul’s reign is put down as forty years; but Paul probably used forty as an equivalent of many; for he surely knew that no length of reign is as- signed in the Old Testament. Duncker allows his accession at Io&o and his reign to have been twenty-two years; Noeldeke gives him ten; IIales, thirty-four ; Josephus, twenty. Now counting from 1200, the most probable date of the Exodus to Duncker's date for the founding of the temple, the latest allowable date, we have 207 years in place of 480; and if we put back the Fxodils to Marieffe’s date of the end of I)ynasty xix, we have only 295 years. The number 480, four times I2O, was asumed as a typical round number for a long time, I2O being itself made by the mystic number three and the vague number forty. But this number 48o seems to have been fixed in the text very early, since only the LXX varies from it, giving instead 440. Josephus, how- ever, had as little regard for it as for his own con- sistency, his datings summing up at 592, 612 and 632 years. Even Paul’s statement (Acts xiii: 17- 22) does not sustain 480, as he makes 450 years be- tween the death of Moses and King Saul. (7) From the Founding of Solomon’s Tem- ple to the Babylonian Destruction of It. For this period we have the lists of the kings of Is- rael and Judah, wherein three points of synchro- nism can be fixed ; and we have points in Assyr- ian and Babylonian history so settled by the dis- coveries from the records of those countries that there is now no controversy about them. There are necessary, however, some adjustments of the statements of the books of Kings and Chron- icles as to the length of reign of the several monarchs, for reasons given below. It is to be noticed, too, that the books that we have are not the original records; perhaps they are not even second-hand. They were written after the close of the period, of course; they are not a compila- tion direct from royal annals. The writer (or writers?) refers often for his authority to “the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel,” and to a like book for Judah, “the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judaea;” but this lan- guage rather implies that he used a compilation from the royal archives, “the Book of the Chron- icles,” he says. The writer is of the southern kingdom; were the royal records of the northern kingdom saved in the sack of Samaria and brought to Jerusalem P And when the capitals— Samaria and Jerusalem—were forcibly captured, and men were anxious to the utmost for their lives and the lives of te * * * most self-possessed and the most favored by cir- cumstances are far more likely to have saved from their scanty libraries some compendium of facts from which a later writer has selected facts which he has expanded or condensed, and woven together in the books—sole and precious rem- nants—that we now have. The author of Kings and Chronicles dates the accession of each king in Israel by the regnal years of the king in Judah, and vice versa. This shows a comparison of two records, for original state records would surely never contain such cross-references. An English keeper of Official records does not say: “James I became king of England in the fourteenth year of Henry IV of France.” In a statement so carefully made, the sum of the length of the reigns of one line should £- *- :1 *--~~~ +!-- sº V ºi i * M. M. Sº + º-, -, * :- - -, -ī- 1 : * ~ * lii Ci i J. Lv i = 1 1 1 1 C J } 421 CHRONOLOGY agree exactly with the sum of the reigns of the other when a common point is found. Thus Rehoboam and Jeroboam I began together: so did Athaliah and Jehu. The following table shows the lengths of reigns between these accessions; Zimri's reign of one week falls in the first year of Omri : Rehoboam. . . . . . . . . I7 || Jeroboam . . . . . . . . . . 22 Abijam. . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | Nadab. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Asa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4I | Baasha . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Jehoshaphat. . . . . . . 25 | Elah. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Joram. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Zilliri. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ahaziah...... . . . . ... I | Omri. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 2 — Ahab . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 95 || Ahaziah . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Joram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 2 98 The discrepancy evidently arises from the He- brew method of reckoning time, and from count- ing the calendar year, twice in some cases, as the last year of one king and the first year of his suc- cessor. The reckoning of part of a year or of a day as a full year or full day is illustrated famil- iarly in the entombment of Jesus a few hours of Friday, all Saturday, and a first fragment Qf Sunday, being called three days. There may be also a co-regency the time of which is counted for both kings. Thus it is made evident by co- aptation of the data given that the period of these reigns is neither 95 nor 98 years, but 90: the lap- ping of one reign upon the year of another reign and the co-regency of Jehoram, and Jehoshaphat become evident in this comparison, and the ap- parent time is shortened. (8) Table of Synchronisms, Judah and Is- rael. Rehoboam’s first year. . . . . . 1| 1 Jeroboam's first. his reign. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17|17 Jeroboam. Jeroboam’s 18th, Abijam's. I |18 (1 K. xv.1). Jeroboam's 20th, Abijam's. 2O Jeroboam. Asa's beginning, I K. xv.:9.. Asa's first full year. . . . . . . . . Asa (I K. xv.:25). . . . . . . . . . 21 Jeroboam. I Nadab, 22d Jeroboam. Asa (I K. XV:28, 33) . . . . . . . 3| I Baasha, 2 Nadab. Asa (I K. xvii-8)... . . . . . . . 26|| 1 Elah, 24 Baasha. Asa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27| Zimri, 7d. (I K. xv.:Io). (Tibni vs. Omri 4 yrs.) Asa. 27| 1 Omri (I K. xvi :16), Asa (I K. xvi :29)... . . . . . . 38|| 1 Ahab, 12 Omri. Jehoshaphat begins, Asa... 41 || 4 Ahab. Jehoshaphat's full year.... I | 5 Ahab. Jehoshaphat (I K. xxii:51). I7] I Ahaziah, 21 Ahab. Jehoshaphat (2 K. iii:1).... 18| I Joram, 22 Ahab, 2 Ahaziah. Jehoshaphat 22, Jehoram... 5 Joram (2 K. viii:16). Jehoshaphat 25, Jehoram... 4| 8 Joram. Jehoram and Ahaziah...... 1|12 Joram (2 K. viii:25). his only year.... . . . . . . . . . 1|12 Jehu kills both kings. It is objected to a part of the history of the Kings of Israel that both the Moabite stone of King Mesha and the Assyrian records make Omri of much greater importance than suits the short reign of twelve years, four of which were spent in a struggle against his rival, Tibisi. In t syrian records the designation of the kingdom of Israel is “the land of the house of Omri.” Even Jehu is put down as of the dymasty of Omri. King Mesha in the famous inscription records that he was overcome by Omri, and was subject until he revolted from Joram. He says. “And Omri took possession of the new land of the Mehedeba and it (Israel) dwelt therein during his days, and half his sons' days, forty years.” The number forty may be the vague forty, meaning many; but the impression of the power of Omri was great both in Assyria and in the immediate vicinity of this king. Duncker suggests that more time should be given him by a diminution of the time of Baa- sha. Ahab was a great warrior, had political and family connections with Tyre, Judah, and Syria, and was against the increasing power of Assyria ſ: -, -ī-, - A -: .L. I. I. L. 1 1 \, . A. J. CHRONOLOGY at the battle of Karkar in B. C. 854, near the end of his reign. The rest of this period (to the fall of Jerusa- lem) is more difficult so far as the chronology of Isreal is concerned. Chronologers have room for much guessing as to the best way out of the diffi- culty, for no proof is possible. The capture of Samaria and the end of the kingdom of Isreal oc- curred, according to 2 Kings xviii: Io, in the sixth year of Hezekiah of Judah and the ninth year of HOShea of Israel. Starting from the point of agreement afforded by the concurrence of the usurpations of Athaliah in the one state and of Jehu in the other, we have in 2 Kings this list Of kings and times: Athaliah . . . . . . 6 years Jehu . . . . . . 28 years Joash . . . . . . . . . . 4o “ Jehoahaz. I7 “ Amaziah . . . . . . 29 “ Joash . . . . . I6 “ Azariah . . . . . . . 52 “ Jeroboam. 4I “ Jotham . . . . . . . . I6 “ Zachariah. 6 months Ahaz. . . . . . . . . . I6 “ Shallum... I “ Hezekiah . . . . . 6 “ Menahem. IO years -- Pekahiah. 2 “ 165 years | Pekah . . . . 20 “. Hoshea ... 9 “ I43 y. 7 m. Here is a discrepancy of over 21 years, or more than one eighth of the period of 165 years. Two years are easily disposed of in the way of co- regency; but the ways of disposing of the remain- ing nineteen show how uncertain and unsatisfac- tory are all the proposed expedients. That adopt- ed by most chronologers is to insert an interreg- num of eleven years between Jeroboam II and Zachariah, and another between Pekah and Hoshea, , of eight years' duration. This change makes the time of the northern kingdom agree with the time of the southern. But one may well question whether the Southern can be made the standard, since in 2 Kings xviii:IO and 13 the fall of Samaria and a great invasion by Sennacherib are placed in the sixth and fourteenth years of Hezekiah, eight years apart when they were 20 years apart, B. C. 721 or 722, and B. C. 701. Ewald recognizes the error as 21 years, and in place of interregna adds twelve years to Jero- boam’s ‘reign and nine to Pekah's. Thenius sees that a slight substitution of Hebrew numeral characters which resemble each other, one fif- teen for one fourteen and twelve for eleven will give those kings 51 years and 30 : Lepsius makes those reigns 52 and 30 years; Bunsen gives Jero- boam II 61 years, letting Pekah remain at 20. If the data could be co-ordinated, the ingenuity and labor of biblical students would by this time have evolved something better than the guesses of which we have given samples, for there are many more. The assumption of co-regencies may force a sort of agreement, at the whim of the writer. Fortunately there is another valuable and relia- ble source of chronology of these times that will fix a number of dates for us, the Assyrian Canon, in the form of annals. Its mention of an eclipse which the astronomers find to have occurred in B. C. 763 correlates the Canon to our Christian Era. Assyria was extending its power westward in the ninth century B. C., and thus touched per- sons of this period of the Israelitish kingdom. Ahab was in the battle of Karkar against As- Syria, B. C. 854: his death may be placed in 853, and Joram followed him the next year. Jehu, after slaughtering all of the family of Ahab within his reach, was obliged to fulfill Ahab's and Joram's obligation, and to pay tribute to Shalma- neser II, in 842, just twelve years after the battle 422 CHRONOLOGY of Karkar ; this may have been in the second year of his reign, making his accession B. C. 843. Aza- riah or Uzziah has war with Assyria, Tiglath- Pileser II (or Pul) 742-740. Menahem pays trib- ute 738 and Ahaz B. C. 734. Pekah is conquered by Tiglath-Pileser II, 734, and Hoshea succeeds him the same year; but Shalmaneser IV dcthrones him B. C. 722. The following is Duncker's list of kings from 800 : | JUDA.H. (Accession dates). ISRAEL. Joash . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837 || Jehoahaz . . . . . . . . . . 815 Amaziah . . . . . . . . . . 797 || Joash . . . . . . . . . . . . . 798 Azariah (Uzziah). .. 792 || Jeroboam II. . . . . . . 790 Jotham . . . . . . . . . ... 740 || Zachariah . . . . . . . . . 749 Ahaz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 734 | Shallum. . . . . . . . . . . 748 Hezekiah. . . . . . . . . . 728 || Menahem . . . . . . . . . 748 Manasseh . . . . . . . . . 697 | Pekahiah. . . . . . . . . . 738 Amon . . . . . . . . . . . . . 642 | Pekah . . . . . . . . . . . . . 736 Josiah . . . . . . . . . . . . . 640 | Hoshea . . . . . . . . . . . 734 Jehoahaz (3 mos.).. 609 | End of Israel. . . . . . 722 Jehoiakim . . . . . . . . . 609 Jehoiachin (3 mOs). 597 Zedekiah. . . . . . . . . . 597 End of Judalı. . . . . . 586 Concerning but few of the later kings is there any dispute; the biblical record offers hardly any difficulties. Perhaps Hezekiah was co-regent with his father Ahaz; that has been suggested to ac- count for the inconsistency mentioned above; but º supposition unsettles more dates than it set- tleS. - By the errors and inconsistencies, as shown above, up to the date of the destruction of the temple by Nebuchadnezzar, it is made plain that no precision can be found in the placing of dates and numbers until the time is reached when docu- ments other than the biblical can be brought in as aids. The numbers given must often have been conjectural, reminding the investigator of Renan's dictum, that the Orientals give definite numbers, but they never count. There seems to have been an attempt to make the period from the building of Solomon's Temple to the rebuild- ing by Zerubbabel just 480 years, that favorite number, and to make the duration of the Israel- itish kingdom just half of 480, or 240 years. How easy to remember if we could make up a table like this: From Abraham's birth to Exode . . . . . . 3x240–72O From Exode to first Temple. . . . . . . . . . 2x240=48O From first Temple to fall of Samaria. . Ix240=240 From first Temple to second . . . . . . . . . 2x24O=48O The last two lines of this table are approxi- mate, near enough for an oriental ; but the sec- ond line is far away, and the first is in the clouds. (9) Post-Exilic Chronology. This is sup- plied in the Old Testament by the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, and, if we include the Apocrypha, by I and 2 Esdras and I and 2 Maccabees. Daniel belongs to the class of apocalyptic prophecy, and its facts are more precisely set forth elsewhere. The episode of Esther furnishes no datable fact or facts at all ; Tobit and Judith are romances. This period of time is dealt with sufficiently and satisfactorily in the Chronological Table of this volume, to which the reader is referred. These are principal dates: Persians take Babylon . . . . . . . . . . . . 538 B.C Temple rebuilt by Zerubbabel. . . . . . 536–515 Ezra reaches Jerusalem. . . . . . . . . . . . 458 Nehemiah's mission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445 Ptolemy I Lagi takes Jerusalem . . . . 32O Septuagint begun about, , , , , , , . . . . . 285 CHRONOLOGY Antiochus takes Jerusalem . . . . . . . . . 170 B.C. Rise of Maccabees. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I66 Pompey takes Jerusalem. . . . . . . . . . . 63 Herod, as king, takes Jerusalem. . . . 37 Herod's Temple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29–18 3. Chronology of the NetwTestament. In the endeavor to place the events of the New Testament upon the long calendar of time, we are not without serious difficulties; but they are entirely different from those of the Old Testament. There our documents were few, but they professed to give us lists of names and statements of years, length of lives and duration of reigns and dynasties; here we have documents many, including the non-biblical; but the bibli- cal texts are so full of their one great purpose that thcy are indifferent to times and seasons; and we learn of them by incidental mention and vague hints only. Jesus came—and went; what matter when P The Problems group around two centers; first, the birth, life, and death of Jesus; second, about Paul of Tarsus and his career, to which the movements of the apostles between Jesus and him form but an unimportant preface or intro- duction. 1. The Time of Christ, the Christian Era. (1) The Birth of Christ. It is a familiar fact that we owe the devising of the Christian era to a monk in Rome, Dionysius Exiguus, or The Little, in the sixth century; and that the state of historical literature within his narrow circle was such that he fixed the beginning of the era upon Saturday, January I, A. D. I, which was the forty-sixth of the years of Julius Caesar's reformed calendar, and the year of Rome 754 by Varro's computation. But when inquiry began to be made into the real date of the birth of Jesus, the opinion soon prevailed that the birth was four years earlier, an opinion arising from better information as to the time of Herod's death, and from the offhand inference from the second chapter of Matthew. We are not to suppose that Dionysius believed that Jesus was born on January I, A. D. I. He wished to make the years of the Christian Era agree with the Julian. The church at Rome had been celebrating December 25th in honor of the nativity; and though this custom, probably decreed by the Bishop or Pope Julius I (337-352 A. D.), had originally been adopted in further- ance of the shrewd policy of the church to sub- stitute great Christian festivals for great pagan ones, and so to put a festival of the nativity in place of the jolly Saturnalia of Rome, it natur- ally led to the belief that Jesus was born Decem- ber 25th. The Greeks, not yet separated from the Romans, were in the time of Dionysius celebrat- ing January 6th ; his initial day of the new era fell between the two. If we should judge from Luke ii:8, we should put the Dies Natalis in any other of the four seasons rather than in the W111ter. Dionysius certainly accepted the Roman tradi- tion, and must have believed that Jesus was born just a week before January I, A. D. I ; to- wit, on Saturday, December 25, B. C. I ; for there is no year zero. Alid iſ in accord with current opinion we date the event four years earlier we º: say that Jesus was born December 25, . C. 5. (2) The Star of Bethlehem. Matthew tells us the story, unrecorded by the other evangelists, of the coming of the Magi or Wise Men of the East in obedience to the indications of a star. 423 CHRONOLOGY “For we have seen his star in the east,” or it may mean, “at its rising.” It is more likely, how- ever, that this locative phrase, “in the east,” de- noted the place of the seeing, as if “we in the east saw this star.” Why should they have come westward if the eastern rising of the Star at- tracted them? Great search has been made by astronomers for record of some remarkable ap- pearance in the heavens about the year B. C. 4; but neither comet nor new upblazing star like the famous one that flashed up in 1572 in Cas- siopeia, and shone for sixteen months before it vanished, is found. Kepler found that there was a notable conjunction of Jupiter, Saturn, and Mars, in the constellation Pisces in B. C. 6; but that was not a star, and does not seem to have been noticed. Prof. Elias Colbert has collated evidences of a widespread anticipation of the coming of Some great one, such anticipation as is voiced in Vir- gil’s Eclogue IV, the “Pollio,” written in B. C. 40, which foretells the golden age of peace to fol- low the birth of a wonderful boy. Dr. Clarke gives similar prophecies from Jewish writers. Prof. Colbert finds some of these refer to a virgin mother. This directed his attention to the con- stellation Virgo in the Zodiac, the emblem of harvest and plenty. He finds that in B. C. 4 the star Spica, “Alpha Virginis,” reached the celestial equator or equinoctial in its passage Southward caused by the same movement that makes the pre- cession of the equinoxes. He says that magian astronomers must have noticed this rare position of Spica; and that moved by the old prophecy they may have looked for the Divine boy. But one verse (Matt. ii:9) puts aside all the as- tronomers. When the magi left Jerusalem they saw the star in motion, going southward toward Bethlehem; they followed it until it “stood over where the young child was.” Then the Star of Bethlehem was a miraculous vision granted to them only; as Dr. Clarke says, “a simple lumin- ous meteor in a star-like form, and at a very short distance from the ground;” for if it had been high, it could not have pointed plainly to the house of the manger (Luke ii:7). (3) Death of Herod. But the astronomers help us grandly on the next question. While in consequence of different ways of reckoning it is a little uncertain from what time to begin to reckon the years of Herod's reign as given by various and varying historians, all point to B. C. 3 or B. C. 4 for his death. Josephus relates that an eclipse of the moon occurred while Herod lay sick at Jericho with his fatal illness, and he just then re- vived. Soon worse again he was carried to the baths of Callirrhoë; gaining nothing, he was brought again to Jericho, whither he summoned the principal men of the nation, intending to have them all slaughtered, that there might be mourn- ing in the land at his death. Then the desired consent of Augustus to the execution of Anti- pater, Herod's son, arrived, and the prince was killed. Five days later Herod died, and the Pass- over was at hand when the week of the funeral was spent. The Passover of that year (B. C. 4) was on April 9th. The eclipses of that time visible in Palestine were on March 23, B. C. 5, which al- lows no time for the events related ; Sept. I5, B. C. 5, which allows too much time, considering the mortal illness of the tyrant; and March 12-13, B. C. 4, which gives 18 days before the Passover. If this time be deemed too short, we may count from the September eclipse; but in either case the death was in March B. C. 4. - (4) The Nativity. Now the story of Matthew requires us to allow before the death of Herod CHRONOLOGY 424 time enough for the flight of Joseph and Mary into Egypt, after the birth of Jesus; and if there were reasons for Herod's time limit of two years and under, we may put the birth of Jesus two years before Dec. 25th of B. C. 5, which was the Christmas next before Herod's death. The birth may have occurred then in B. C. 7, or B. C. 6, or i. C. 5, but not later if we depend upon these ata. (5) The Census of Quirinius (A. V. says Cy- renius). St. Luke fixes time of the birth of Jesus by an enrollment ordered by the Emperor Augus- tus, and effected by the governor or legate Qui- rinius. This governor did take a census soon after A. D. 6, when he was sent as governor after Archelaus was deposed at that date; but he cer- tainly could not have taken a census in B. C. 4 Or 5, since the governors are known from the year B. C. 9 onward. They were Marcus Titius, Caius Sentius Saturninus, and Publius Quintil- ius Varus. The death of Herod occurred in the time of Quintilius Varus. If Quintilius had taken a census, it might be said that Luke or a copyist had written Quirinius for Quintilius. But no en- rollment is known of in his time. If there were any, it was made for Herod for his own pur- poses; but in that case it would have been men- tioned by Josephus. The census of Quirinius, when he took it, raised a revolt. He was twice governor of Syria under Augustus, but no cen- sus can be found, save the one of later date. Greek statement (Luke ii :2) is airm dtroypaſpi, Tp(6tm éyéveto #yepovetſovros tiſs 2 uptas Kupmvtov. Ac- Cording to Greek ways, this must mean, “This was taken as the first census [of several] while Quirinius ruled Syria.” Adam Clarke wants to translate Tptºrm as if it were a preposition mean- ing before, as if he were saying, “This census oc- curred before Quirinius was governor;” this he does not defend as a classical Greek usage, but finds similar instances in John i:30; irpótos uov, “he was before me,” and John xv.18, Čuč irpátov ūgāy peptankev, “it hated me before it hated you,” and in the LXX, 2 Sam. xix:43, A6)os plov trpáros . . Toi 'Iow8a, “our word before Judah’s.” But in none of these places does trpáros necessarily mean time; in the first and in the last of them it de- notes priority in rank, not in time; and in John xv :18 it means more than, the idea of superior- ity. Michaelis and others think that Luke wrote, “irpó rifts” which a copyist made into trptºrm; this would relieve all difficulty, as it would say, “This enrollment occurred before that of Quirinius.” But no MSS. has such text. The result of the investigation is that we must say that Luke used the wrong name when he wrote Quirinius; and this gospel gives no aid in determining the time of the Nativity. Tertul- lian brings real help. He was a Roman lawyer of vast erudition, and is in this case an independent witness. In his controversy with Marcion he mentions a census taken in Judaea by Sentius Saturninus as one that would contain an account of the family to which Jesus belonged. Now Sat- urninus was succeeded B. C. 6 by Varus; and as the census was a completed work when Varus took the office, the birth of Jesus is to be set as early as B. C. 6, probably in B. C. 7. This date will not disagree with Matthew, and is the final conclusion from the data. (6) The Genealogies of Jesus in Matthew and Luke are, as was shown above, of no use in set- tling questions of time. Every genealogist and every historian is familiar with the fact that a man may be traced from an ancestor by different lines with a different number of steps in the two or more lines. For example, Henry IV of France, The CHRONOLOGY Bourbon, was the eleventh descendant from St. Louis in the French line, but the thirteenth through the house of Navarre. Genealogies can give but an approximate date at best, when there is no question of the links of the chain. The chronologer can do nothing with the fact that by One genealogy thirty names lie between David and Jesus, and forty-one by the other. (7) The Baptism of Jesus was in effect the beginning of his ministry, the duration of which is an important question. After the forty days in the wilderness of temptation, “from that time Jesus began to preach” (Matt. iv:17; Luke iv: I4, I5). Luke says, airós #v 'Imaois àpxögevos &ael érôv Tptákovra, “Jesus himself began to be about 30 years of age,” as the A. V. has it. This is sus- ceptible of two interpretations: the common un- derstanding of the words is that this was the be- ginning of his thirtieth year, positively; but dpxópevos may refer to the beginning of his preaching, as in Luke xxiii:5; Acts i:22; and Acts x:37. The rest of the phrase is elastic; a man of 28 or one of 32 would be about 30 years of age. Taking the shortest time, from birth in B. C. 6 we are brought to A. D. 22, if we reckon him 28 years of age, the earliest limit. John is said to have begun to baptize in the fif- teenth year of Tiberius. If this be reckoned from the time when Tiberius became co-regent with Augustus, A. D. I2, John began his career in A. D. 27; if from the death of Augustus, in A. D. 29. We must date the baptism of Jesus between A. D. 22 and A. D. 29. In John ii:I3 we are told that Jesus went to Jerusalem to the Passover, apparently but a few weeks after he began to speak in the synagogues of Galilee. At Jerusalem the Jews said to him, “Forty and six years was this temple in build- ing.” Herod began it B. C. 19; the forty-sixth year brings us to A. D. 27, agreeing with the cal- culation from the regency of Tiberius, and fixing the baptism at A. D. 26 or 27, and thus the begin- ning of the ministry of Jesus, with the first Pass- Over of John ii :13 in A. D. 27. (8) Duration of the Ministry. The only mode of determining this from the gospels is by finding how many Passovers Jesus attended— two or three ? John speaks of three (ii:I3; vi :4, and xii:55); and Farrar (Encyc. Brit. s. v. Jesus) says, “On other grounds it is probable that there was one Passover during the ministry which our Lord did not attend.” The three Passovers may also be inferred obscurely from passages in Mark. There was then a ministry of more than two years, the silence of Matthew and Luke availing nothing to the contrary; and while the Valentinians limited the ministry to one year, (how wonderful that such a powerful influcmcc should be thrown into the world in a single year !), the prevalent opinion soon was that the ministry lasted three years. Nevertheless the evidence is scanty, and the ques- tion intricate, so that there are plausible reasons for the short term. (9) The Crucifixion. The Roman governor at that time was Pontius Pilate. Josephus gives his term of office as ten years, ending in A. D. 37, as he was on his way to Rome when in that year Tiberius died. Including Luke iii: I we have rea- son to say he came to Palestine during A. D. 27; and the incidents of Luke xiii: I and xxiii :12 indicate a residence of a year or two before the crucifixion. Caiaphas was high priest, appointed before Pilate came, and deposed by the next gov- ernor; according to Josephus, before the death of Herod Antipas in twentieth year of Tiberius, or CHRONOLOGY A. D. 34. The limits of the time of the crucifix- ion are A. D. 28 and A. D. 33 at the Passover t1111e. - The event occurred on Friday. On what years was it possible for the Passover and the Friday to fall into the relation indicated in the gospels? The discussion long rent the church in what was called the Quartodeciman controversy, so called because the Quartodeciman party maintained that the crucifixion fell on the 14th of the month Nisan, which accords with the fourth gospel, while the story of the three Synoptic Gospels puts that agony on the I5th. The almost endless minutiae of the discussion cannot be reproduced here. But within the limits stated above, the years 28, 31 and 32 will not fit either hypothesis; we have left 29, 30 and 33, between which modern opinion still wavers. On grounds already stated, to-wit, the date of the Nativity, the date of the baptism, the age of Jesus, the three Passovers, at the last of which his life was ended, the date A. D. 33 is quite improbable, and A. D. 29 the most probable, with A. D. 30 its close rival, if not superior. 2. Chronology of the -/1postolic period. The fixing of dates in this period is made diffi- cult by the usual lack of definiteness in the narra- tion ; and the most that can be relied upon is what is gained from the connection of events with per- sons and events known to non-biblical history; and these are often too uncertain. (1) In Palestine, the Death of Herod. Herod Agrippa, grandson of Herod the Great, was made king by Caligula . in A. D. 37; and Judaea was added to his Syrian domains by Claudius. His reign of seven years ended in A. D. 44. This marks the martyrdom of James, the Apostle, brother of John. (2) In Palestine, a Famine. The reign of Claudius had several periods of scarcity, of which Tacitus notices one as very severe at Rome itself. The one in Judaea is told of by Josephus, and was not limited to a single year, probably in A. D. 46–48. This is told of in Acts xi, and marks the early period of Paul’s missionary work with Bar- nabas. (3) In Damascus, King Aretas. Aretas was a king at Petra, in Idumaea; how he came into possession of Damascus is not plain. Prior to the death of Tiberius, Aretas was in a quarrel with Herod Antipas ; and the governor of Syria, Vitel- lius, was ordered to help Herod, about A. D. 37. Aretas was not in Damascus himself in Paul's stay, but had a governor there. All that can be determined is that this sway of Aretas was after A. D. 33, and before A. D. 48. It is supposed by Conybeare and Howson that he held Damascus by favor of Caligula, emperor in A. D. 37-41. This is all the help we get to aid in dating the conver- sion of Saul of Tarsus. If the apostle's escape was in A. D. 38, and that was at the end of his three years, we may put his conversion in A. D. 35 or 36; for by Jewish reckoning, three years need be parts only of three years. This will not suit those who hurry the events at Jerusalem and put the martyrdom of Stephen and the conversion of Saul in the same year, and near the time of the crucifixion. (4) In Cyprus, Sergius Paulus. Secular His- tory gives no trace of the proconsulship of this 1112.11. (5) Jews Expelled from Rome. Suetonius tells of this, saying of Claudius, “Judaos, im- pulsore Chresto assidue tumultuantes, expulit.” This may mean that Chrestus—otherwise un- heard of—raised riots in the ghetto, or that there were riots among the Jews about Christ. Tacitus, whose record of Claudius' time for all years ex- 425 CHRONOLOGY cept A. D. 47-54 is missing, mentions the expul- Sion of astrologers in A. D. 52, but says nothing of Jews. This date accords well with the probable residence of Paul at Corinth, and the coming thither of Aquila and Priscilla. (6) At Corinth, Gallio. Gallio, originally Au- naus Novatus, brother of the famous Seneca, was pretty Surely not appointed proconsul in Achaia until after A. D. 49; for Seneca does not recog- nize his name Gallio in a treatise written about 49, and Seneca was in disfavor prior to that date. We may dale Gallio's officeholding about A. D. 50, but for how long is not known. He died A. D. 65. Probably Paul was before him in A. D. 52 Or 54. (7) In Palestine, Herod Agrippa II. This Herod was a great-grandson of Herod I the Great and Son of Herod Agrippa I, and nephew of the Herod, king of Chalcis, who married Salome, daughter of Herodias. Agrippa II succeeded his uncle in A. D. 48, and in A. D. 53 had the north- ern part of Palestine, at which time he gave his sister Drusilla to Azizus of Emesa, whom she left for Felix. Paul’s coming before Agrippa and Felix must be as late as A. D. 54, and may be later. (8) Felix and Festus in Palestine. Both the coming and the departure of Felix are involved in darkness. He seems, from the account of Josephus taken with that of Tacitus, to have been in Palestine in some subordinate position before he, being brother of Nero's favorite, Pallas, was made procurator or governor. Probably this occurred in A. D. 52. He was not removed before A. D. 56, and his trial at Rome was not later than 61. Some put his recall as early as 57, others in 60. This difficulty seriously affects the dates of Paul’s career and his two years of de- tention at Caesaraea. Most students prefer the date A. D. 60 for the coming of Festus, putting the arrest of Paul in A. D. 58; his hearing before Festus, Agrippa, and Berenice and the voyage to Rome, A. D. 60-61. To fix his death at 64 or 68 is but guessing and not history. The author of “Quo Vadis' has liberty for his extrava- gancés under the maxim “Poetis mentiri Zicet,” the historian stops at the edge of his record. (9) The Galatian Visit. Paul’s conferences with other apostles are told of in Gal. i:18, IQ, and ii: I. If we date the conversion at A. D. 36 and allow for the looseness of expression com- mon among orientals, we may put the first visit in A. D. 38 and the next in 50, as Conybeare and Howson do. Or putting the second visit in 50 and saying that I4 + 3 = I7, we may put the conversion back to 33, as some later writers wish to do. Conybeare and Howson date Paul’s Epis- tles thus: Reaching Coriniii, writes 1 Thess. Sulu ...A. D. 52 Corinth to Ephesus in 54, writes I Cor., spring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 In Macedonia in autumn, writes 2 Cor. . . 57 At Corinth, winter, writes Galatians. . . . . 57 Corinth, spring, writes Romans. . . . . . . . . . 58 At Rome writes Philemon, Coloss. and Eph, spring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 — writes Philippians, autumn . . . . . 62 - - * * * Acquitted in 63, spring, to Macedonia and Asia; in Spain 64-66, and again to Asia, he writes: From Macedonia, I Tim., summer. . . . . . . A. D. 67 From Ephesus, Titus, autumn . . . . . . . . . . . 67 In prison at Rome, spring, 2 Tim . . . . . . . . 68 Executed in May or June . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Prof. Harnack, one of the latest to lay lines in the mists of uncertainty, dates thus: A. D. 48-49, CHRYSOLITE I and 2 Thessalonians ; 53, I Cor., Gal., and 2 Cor. ; 53-54, Romans; 57-59, Coloss., Philemon, Ephes. (perhaps not Paul's), Phil.; 59-64, the kernels ºf the Pastorals to Timothy and Titus, finished by another. Hebrews he ascribes to Bar- nabas, probably somewhere between 65 and 95; to John the Presbyter and not the Apostle he ascribes the Apocalypse, 93 to 96, and the fourth gospel and the three epistles, between 89 and IIo. The gospel of Mark he dates 65–70, followed by Matthew’s, 70-75, and by Luke and Acts, 78-93. I Peter, between 60 and 96, and 2 Pet, some- where from I50 to 180, he says are not from the Apostle; and he sets the Epistles of Jude and James after IOO and I2O. Yet after thus defying tradition, he urges that more credit be given to it, saying, “A time will come when . . . what . can be ascertained will be gen- erally recognized, (including) the gen- eral truth of tradition, apart from a few impor- tant exceptions. Partly before the destruction Of Jerusalem (A. D. 70), and partly by the time of Trajan (98-II7), all the fundamental stamps of Christian traditions, teachings, pronounce- ments, and even ordinances, except the New Testament as a collection, were essentially per- fect; and it is necessary to conceive of their in- stitution within that period, and to realize how the general ground lines of catholicism must be con- ceived of in the time between Trajan and Com- modus (II.7-190).” CHRYSOLITE (kris'ö-lit), (Rev. xxi.20). TARSHISH. CHRYSOPRASUS (kri-sép'ra-săz), örpagos, Arus-off'ra-sus, Rev. xxi.20). HAM.) - CHUB (kūb), (Heb. Dº, Áoob), a word which oc- curs only in Ezek. xxx:5. It would appear to be the name of a country or people in alliance with Egypt, and probably of northern Africa or of the lands near Egypt to the south. CHUN (kūn), (Heb. 5, Áoom, founding), a city of Syria, conquered by David (I Chron. xviii:8). In the parallel passage (2 Sam. viii:8) it is called Berothai, i. e., probably Berytus, now Beirut. (See BEROTHAI.) CHURCH (chúrch), (Gr. "Ekk\mata, ek-Alay-see'a, assembly). The original Greek word, in its larger significa- tion, denotes a number of persons called together for any purpose, an assembly of any kind, civil or religious. As, however, it is usually applied in the New Testament to religious assemblages, it is very properly translated by ‘assembly,’ in the few instances in which it occurs in the civil sense (Acts xix :32, 39, 41). It is, however, well to note that the word rendered ‘assembly' in these verses is the same which is elsewhere rendered ‘church.” In a few places the word occurs in the Jewish sense, of a congregation, an assembly of the peo- ple for worship, either in a synagogue (Matt. xviii:17) or generally of the Jews regarded as a religious body (Acts vii:38; Heb. ii :12). The text last cited is quoted from Ps. xxii:22, where the Septuagint uses ékk\mata for the Hebrew bº, gahal, which has the same meaning, namely, assembly, congregation, or a called or invited gathering. Elsewhere also this word which we render ‘church’ in the New Testament is used by the Septuagint for the Hebrew word which we render ‘congregation’ in the Old Testament. But the word most frequently occurs in the Christian sense of an assemblage (of Christians) generally (I Cor. xi.;18). Hence it denotes a See (Gr. Xpwo- (See SHO- 426 CILICIA church, the Christian church; in which, however, we distinguish certain shades of meaning, viz. – I. A particular church, a church in a certain place, as in Jerusalem (Acts viii: I ; xi :22, etc.), in Antioch (Acts xi:26; xiii:1, etc.), in Corinth (I Cor. i. 2; 2 Cor. i :1), etc. 2. Churches of (Gentile) Christians, without distinguishing place (Rom. xvi;4). 3. An assembly of Christians which meets anywhere, as in the house of any one (Rom. xvi :5; I Cor. xvi :19; Philem. 2). The Church universal—the whole body of Christian believers (Matt. xvi; 18; I Cor. xii:28; Gal. i. 13; Eph. i :22; iii: Io; Heb. xii:23, etc.). CHUSHAN-RISHATHAIM (kū'shan - rish'a- thä'im), (Heb. Tº Pº, Áoo-sham'rish-aw-thah'- 3.27%), a king of Mesopotamia, by whom the Israel- ites were oppressed for eight years (B. C. 1575 to B. C. I567), until delivered by Othniel (Judg. iii: 8-10). (See CTISHAN-RISHATHAIM.) CHUZA (kü'zā), properly Chuzas, (Gr. Xovčás, Áhood-gas"), steward of Herod Antipas, whose wife Joanna was one of those who employed their means in Contributing to the wants of Christ an his apostles (Luke viii:3; xxiv:Io). - CICCAR (sic'cār), (IIeb. Tºº, Kiſſ-Åawr',circuit), a topographical term applied especially to the Jordan. (See JORDAN; CITIES OF THE PLAIN.) CILICIA (si-lish'í-á), (Gr. KiXukta, Cz//cza), the Southeastern part of Asia Minor, bounded on the west by Pamphylia; separated on the north from Cappadocia by the Taurus rangc, and on the east by Amanus from Syria; and having the Gulf of Issus (Iskenderoon) and the Cilician Sea (Acts xxvii:5) on the South. By the ancients the eastern part was called Cilicia Propria proper, or the level Cilicia; and the western, the rough or mountainous. The former was well watered, and abounded in various kinds of grain and fruits (Xenoph. Anab. i:2. Sec. 22). The chief towns in this division were Issus (Xenoph. Anab, i.4), at the southeastern extremity, celebrated for the victory of Alexander Over Darius Codomannus (B. C. 333), and not far from the passes of Amanus or the so-called gates of Amanus (Polyb. xii:8); Solaº, originally a colony of Argives and Rhodians, the birthplace of Menander, the comic poet (B. C. 262), the stoic philosopher Chrysippus (B.C. 206), and of Aratus, author of the astronomical poem The Things Seen (B. C. 270); and Tarsus, the birthplace of the Apostle Paul. (See TARSUs.) Cilicia Trachea furnished an inexhaustible supply of cedars and firs for ship-building ; it was also noted for a species of goat, of whose skins cloaks and tents were manufactured. Its breed of horses was so superior that 360 (one for each day of the year) formed part of thc annual tribute to the king of Persia (Herod. iii:90). The neighborhood of Corycus produced large quantities of saffron. Herodotus says that the first inhabitants of the country were called Hypachaei, "Traxalot; and derives the name of Cilicia from Cilix, son of Agenor, a Phoenician settler (vii:91). He also states that the Cilicians and Lycians were the only nations within the Halys who were not conquered by Croesus (i:28). Though partially subjected to the Assyrians, Medes, Persians, Syrians, and Romans, the Eleuthero, or free, Cilicians, as the inhabitants of the moun- tainous districts were called, were governed by their own kings (Reguli, Tacit. ii:78) till the time of Vespasian. The Seacoast was for a long time occupied by pirates, who carried on the ap- propriate vocation of slave-merchants, and found CINNAMON 427 ample encouragement for that nefarious traffic among the Opulent Romans (Mannert, vi :I ; Stra- bo, xiv:5); but at last their depredations became So formidable that Pompey was invested with extraordinary powers for their suppression, which he accomplished in forty days. He settled the surviving freebooters at Solae, which he rebuilt and named Pompeiopolis. Cicero was proconsul of Cilicia, and gained some successes over the mountaineers of Amanus, for which he was re- warded with a triumph (Epist. ad Fam. xv.:4): Many Jews were settled in Cilicia (Acts viz.9). According to the modern Turkish divisions of Asia Minor, Cilicia Proper belongs to the Pashalic of Adana; and Cilicia Trachea to the Liwah of Itchi! in the Mousselimlik of Cyprus. CINNAMON (sin'nā-mün). See KINNAMON. CINNEROTH (sin'ne-róth), (Heb. nº, Ain-me- *04%), a district 11a111ed with the “land of Naphtali” (I Kings XV:20). It probably took its name from the adjacent city or lake, which in modern edi- tions, is spelt Chinneroth. Possibly it was the Small district north of Tiberias afterwards known as “the plain of Gennesaret.” (See CHINNERETH.) CIRAMA (sir'a-mâ), mentioned (I Esdr. v:20) as returning from Babylon with Zorobabel. (See RAMAH.) CIRCLE (sêr'k'1), (Heb. Sin, Åhoog). In Isaiah we read of “the circle of the earth’ (Is. xl:22). The Bible therefore taught the globular shape of the earth long before the fact was discovered by modern astronomers. In Job xxii; I4 the same word is translated “cir- cuit.” CIRCUIT (sêr'kit). In 1 Sam. vii.16 (Heb. Prº, Saw-bač', to revolve) a regular tour of inspection; in Eccles. i.6 the periodical direction of the winds, which in the east are quite regular in their seasons. Also the act of going round (Heb. "Pºpº, tek-oo- ſaw', revolution); the apparent diurnal revolution of the sun around the earth (Ps. xix:6); the com- pletion of a year (Exod. xxxiv:22). CIRCUMGISION (ser'kūm-sizh'in), (Heb. Tºº, *too-law', Gr. reputouff, Žer-it-om-ay", a cutting around). (1) History. The history of Jewish Circum- cision lies on the surface of the Old Testament. Abraham received the rite from Jehovah, Moses established it as a national ordinance, and Joshua carried it into effect before the Israelites entered the land of Canaan. Males only were subjected to the Operation, and it was to be performed on the eighth day of the child's life; foreign slaves also were forced to submit to it, on entering an Israel- ite's family. Those who are unacquainted with Other Sources of information on the subject be- sides the Scriptures might easily suppose that the rite was original with Abraham, characteristic of his seed, and practiced among those nations only who had learned it from them. This, however, appears not to have been the case. First of all, the Egyptians were a circum- cised people. Vonck, followed by Wesseling (ad Herod. ii:37) and by numerous able writers, al- leged that this was not true of the whole nation, but of the priests only; that at least the priests were circumcised is beyond controversy. No one can for a moment imagine that they adopted the rite from the despised shepherds of Goshen; and We are immediately forced to believe that Egyp- tian circumcision had an independent origin. A great preponderance of argument, however, ap- pears to us to prove that the rite was universal CIRCUMCISION among the old Egyptians, as long as their native institutions flourished; although there is no ques- tion that, under Persian and Greek rule, it gradu- ally fell into disuse, and was retained chiefly by the priests and by those who desired to cultivate ancient wisdom. Herodotus distinctly declares that the Egyptians practiced circumcision; and that he meant to State this of the whole nation is manifest (Herod. ii:37). It is difficult to suppose that the historian could have been mistaken on this point, consider- ing his personal acquaintance with Egypt. Further, he informs us that the Colchians were a colony from Egypt, consisting of soldiers from the army of Sesostris. With these he had conversed (ii: 104), and he positively declares that they practiced circumcision. The same remark will apply to the savage Troglodytes of Africa, every branch of whom, except one (the Kolobi), as Diodorus informs us (iii:3I), was circumcised, having learnt the practice from the Egyptians. Herodotus, moreover, tells us that the Ethio- pians were also circumcised; and he was in doubt whether they had learned the rite from the Egyptians, or the Egyptians from them. By the Ethiopians we must understand him to mean the inhabitants of Meroe or Sennaar. In the present day the Coptic Church continues to practice it; the Abyssinian Christians do the same; and that it was not introduced among the latter with a Judaical Christianity appears from their perform- ing it upon both sexes. Oldendorp describes the rite as widely spread through Western Africa— I6 deg. On each side of the Line,—even among natives that are not Mohammedan. In later times it has been ascertained that it is practiced by the Kafir nations in South Africa, more properly called Kosa, or Amakosa. How far the rite was extended through the Syro-Arabian races is uncertain. The Philistines, in the days of Saul, were however uncircumcised; so also, says Herodotus (ii: IOA), were all the Phoe- nicians who had intercourse with the Greeks. That the Canaanites, in the days of Jacob, were not all circumcised, is plain from the affair of Dinah and Shechem. The story of Zipporah (Exod. iv: 24, 25) who did not circumcise her son until fear came over her that Jehovah would slay her hus- band Moses, proves that the family of Jethro, the Midianite, had no fixed rule about it, although the Midianites are generally regarded as children of Abraham by Keturah. On the other hand, we have the distinct testimony of Josephus (Antiq. i : I2, 2) that the Ishmaelite Arabs inhabiting the district of Nabathaea were circumcised after their 13th year: this must be connected with the tradi- tion which no doubt existed among them, of the age at which their forefather Ishmael underwent the rite (Gen. xvii:25). A negative argument is more or less dangerous: yet there is something . striking in the fact that the books of Moses, of Joshua, and of Judges never bestow the epithet wn circumcised as a reproach on any of the Seven nations of Canaan, any more than on the Moabites or Ammonites, the Amalekites, the Midianites, or other inland tribes with whom they came into con- flict. On the contrary, as soon as the Philistines become prominent in the narrative, after the birth of Samson, this epithet is of rather common Oc- currence. The fact also of bringing back, as a trophy, the foreskins of slain enemies, never oc- curs except against the Philistines (I Sam. xviii: 25-27). We may perhaps infer, at least, until other proof or disproof is attained, that while the Philistines, like the Sidonians and the other mari- CIRCUMCISION time Syrian nations known to the Greeks, were wholly strangers to the practice, yet among the Canaanites, and all the more inland tribes, it was at least so far common that no general description could be given them from the omission. It appears from Josephus (Antiq. xiii:9) that when Hyrcanus subdued the Idumaeans he forced them to be circumcised on pain of expatriation. This shows that they had at least disused the rite. But that is not wonderful, if it was only a custom, and not a national religious ordinance; for, as Michaelis observes, the disuse of it may have dated from the edict of Antiochus Epiphanes, of which it is said (I Macc. i : 41, 42), ‘The King Antiochus wrote to all his kingdom, that all should be one people; and that all should keep the ordinances of his country: and all the nations ac- quiesced according to the word of the king.’ The rather obscure notices which are found in Jeremiah and Ezekiel of the circumcision of the nations who were in immediate contact with Israel admit of a natural interpretation in con- formity with what has been already adduced (Jer. ix:25; Ezek. xxxi : 18; also xxxii: 19, et passim). The difficulty turns on the new moral use made of the term ‘uncircumcised,’ to mean simply impure. How far the rite of circumcision spread over the southwest of Arabia no definite record shows. The silence of the Korān confirms the statement of Abulfedà that the custom is older than Mo- hammed, who, it would appear, in no respect re- garded it as a religious rite. Nevertheless it has extended itself with the Mohammedan faith, as though it were a positive ordinance. Pocock (Specimen Hist. Arab., p. 309) cites a tradition, which ascribes to Mohammed the words: “Circum- cision is an ordinance for men, and honorable in women.’ This extension of the rite to the other sex might, in itself, satisfy us that it did not come to those nations from Abraham and Ishmael. We have already seen that Abyssinian circumcision has the same peculiarity: so that it is every way probable that Southern Arabia had the rite from the same source or influence as Ethiopia. In fact, the very closest relations are known to have sub- sisted between the nations on the opposite coasts of the Red Sea. (2) Moral Meaning. The moral meaning of the word ‘uncircumcised’ was a natural result of its having been made legally essential to Hebrew faith. ‘Uncircumcised in heart (Lev. xxvi :41) and ears' (Jer. vi. Io) was a metaphor to which 428 a prophet would be carried, as necessarily as a Christian teacher to such phrases as ‘unbaptized in Soul,' or ‘not washed by regeneration.’ (3) Origin and I’urpose. If, however, we try to take a step farther back still, and ask why this ordinance in particular was selected, as so emi- tiently essential to the seed of Abraham, we prob- ably find that we have reached a point at which we must be satisfied with knowing the fact without the reason. Every external ordinance, as for in- stance baptism, must have more or less that is ar- bitrary in it. It is, however, abundantly plain that circumcision was not intended to separate the Jews from other nations generally, for it could not do so; and, least of all, from the Egyptians, as the words in Joshua v :9 show. Rather, it was a well known and already understood symbol of purity. A great deal of speculation and argument has been employed on the utility and origin of the rite to the Egyptians and others. Herodotus, long ago, declared that it was adopted for cleanliness, kaffaptóTmros etveka, and a slight acquaintance with the ideas of the Turks, concerning per- CISTERN sonal defilement will make it easy to believe that an idea of cleanliness continued the practice among nations which had once become habituated to it. By the ancient Egyptians this same spirit was carried to a great height; nor is it wonderful that in hot climates detailed precepts of cleanliness form a very large part of primitive religion. But we can hardly rest in this as a sufficient account of the origin of the rite. It was practiced, moreover, by the males of African tribes so savage and so little devoted to religious ceremonialism that a broader ground must be sought for it than simple cleanliness. The fact, also, that most of these nations per- formed whatever operation it was, not on in- fants, but on those who were advanced towards marriageable age, conspires to indicate that some physical inconvenience gradually showed itself (as with the Bushmen females, through the en- largement of the parts), of which they desired to get rid. Jost looks upon infant circumcision as the distinguishing mark of Judaism ; and this may be nearly correct, though we have seen that, ac- cording to Abulfedà, some Arabs delayed it only till after teething. If an independent and human origin has been discovered for Egyptian circumcision, the thought of necessity arises that the Israelites must have had it from the same sources as the nations around then ; and it has been discussed (Spencer, De Leg. Heb.) whether they even borrowed it from the Egyptians. The idea has naturally given much offense; but in truth the question involves no peculiar difficulty ; it is only part of another far wider inquiry. It is well known that many Other ancient nations had various ceremonies and institutions in common with the Jews, and that the Hebrew law is by no means in all points orig- inal. That sacrifice pre-existed is on the surface of the Bible History. The same, however, is true of temples, tabernacles, priests, ever-burning fire, oracles, etc. The fact has been often denoted by saying that the Jewish institutions are a selection, revision and re-enactment of an older patriarchal religion. - The process of restoring a circumcised person to his natural condition by a surgical operation was sometimes undergone. Against this Paul cautions the Corinthians (I Cor. vii:18). The attitude of early Christianity towards circum- cision as a rite necessary to salvation is one of absolute hostility (Acts xv : I ; Gal. v :2). While the Apostles forbade its imposition by authority on the Gentiles, as in the case of Titus (Gal. ii: 3-5), they made no objection to its practice as a matter of expediency, as in thc case of Timothy (Acts xvi;3). (4) Modern Surgery. Circumcision is strongly recommended by a multitude of the mediual pi U- fession as a remedy for many nervous diseases so often apparent in children of the present day. The most beneficial results have frequently fol- lowed the operation. Criticism has been made by medical men re- garding the employment of unskilled persons by Jews in performing the operation, who are not always cleanly in their persons and methods. CIS (sis), (Acts xiii:21). See KISH, I. CISAI (si'sāi), (Esth. ii:5). See KISH, 2. CISTERN (sis'térn), (Heb. hip, bore', well, pit). In a country which has scarcely more than one perennial stream, where fountains are not abun- dant, and where the months of summer pass with- out rain, the preservation of the rain water in cisterns must always have been a matter of vast CISTERN importance, not only in the pasture grounds, but in gardens, and, above all, in towns. Hence the frequent mention of cisterns in Scripture, and more especially of those which are found in the open country. These were, it seems, the prop- erty of those by whom they were formed (Num. xxi.22). They are usually little more than large pits, but sometimes take the character of exten- sive subterranean vaults, open only by a small mouth, like that of a well. They are filled with rain water, and (where the climate allows) with Snow during winter, and are then closed at the mouth with large flat stones, over which sand is spread in such a way as to prevent their being easily discovered. If by any chance the waters which the shepherd has thus treasured up are lost by means of an earthquake or some other cas- ualty, or are stolen, both he and his flocks are exposed to great and innminent danger; as are also travelers who hasten to a cistern and find its waters gone. For this reason a failure of water is used as the image of any great calamity (Is. xli:17, 18; xliv :3). There is usually a large de- posit of mud at the bottom of these cisterns, so that he who falls into them, even when they are without water, is liable to perish miserably (Gen. xxxvii:22, sq.; Jer. xxxviii:6; Lam. iii:53; Ps. x1:2; lxix:I5). Cisterns were sometimes used, when empty, as prisons, and indeed prisons which were constructed underground received the same name, "P (Gen. xxxix:20; xl:15). * In cities the cisterns were works of much labor, for they were either hewn in the rocks or surrounded with subterranean walls, and lined with a fine incrustation. The system which in this respect formerly prevailed in Palestine is, doubtless, the same that exists at present; and indeed there is every probability that most of the cisterns now in use were constructed in very an- cient times. The main dependence of Jerusalem at the present day is on its cisterns, and this has probably always been the case. There are im- mense cisterns now and anciently existing with- in the area of the temple, supplied partly by rain water and partly by an aqueduct from Solo- mon's Pools, and which, of themselves, would furnish a tolerable supply in case of a siege. But, in addition to these, almost every private house in Jerusalem of any size is understood to have at least one or more cisterns, excavated in the soft limestone rock on which the city is built. The cisterns have usually merely a round opening at the top, sometimes built up with stonework above, and furnished with a curb and a wheel for the bucket, so that they have externally much the appearance of an ordinary well. The water is conducted into them from the roofs of the houses during the rainy season, and, with proper care, remains pure and sweet during the whole summer and autumn. In this manner most of the larger houses and the public buildings are supplied. The Latin convent, in particular, is said to be amply furnished, and in seasons of drought is able to deal out a sufficiency for all the Christian inhabit- ants of the city. Most of these cisterns have undoubtedly come down from ancient times, and their immense ex- tent furnishes a full solution of the question as to the supply of water for the city. Under the dis- advantages of its position in this respect, Jeru- salem must necessarily have always been depend- ent on its cisterns; and a city which thus an- nually laid in its supply for seven or eight months could never be overtaken by a want of water during a siege. Nor is this a trait peculiar to the Holy City, for the case is the same through- 429 CITIES, FOUNDING OF out all the hill country of Judah and Benjamin. Fountains and streams are few, as compared with Europe and America, and the inhabitants, there- fore, collect water during the rainy season in tanks and cisterns in the cities, in the fields and along the high roads, for the sustenance of them- Selves and of their flocks and herds and for the comfort of the passing traveler. Many, if not the most, of these are obviously antique, and they exist not unfrequently along the ancient roads which are now deserted. Thus, on the long-forgotten way from Jericho to Bethel, ‘broken cisterns' of high antiquity are found at regular intervals. That Jerusalem was thus ac- tually supplied of old with water is apparent also from the numerous remains of ancient cisterns still existing in the tract north of the city, which was Once enclosed within the walls, and which modern cxcavations have investigated carefully. Figuratite. The left ventricle of the heart, which retains the blood till it be redispersed through the body, is called a cistern (Eccles. xii: 6). Wives are called cisterns, as they, when dutiful, are a great pleasure, assistance and com- fort to their husbands (Prov. v . I5). The com- parison of a wife to a cistern, in the passage just quoted, means, “Keep at home, wander not to others,” follow not her who says, “Stolen waters are sweet.” Idols, armies and outward enjoy- ments, when trusted to, are “broken cisterns that can hold no water;” they can afford no solid or lasting happiness and comfort (Jer. ii: 13). They are soon emptied of all the aid and comfort which they possess and cannot fill themselves again. - CITIES (sit'íz). See Towns. CITIES, FOUNDING OF (cit'íz, found'ing Öv). The beginnings of the first cities when they had as yet no models for civic government is a very interesting study. (1) Signification of Words. The principal Semitic words employed for “city” are in them- selves very suggestive. We have first a word which signifies the “meeting place” of men, of flocks and herds, of caravans and of great routes of travel. It indicates a gathering place, a good station for trade, and a convenient depot for sup- plies. In a historical sense it includes everything from the most insignificant village to Jerusalem (I Kings i:4I-45; IS. i :21, etc.) and Carthage, “new city.” - A second word suggests a slightly different thought. It is a “watching place,” a collection of people having property of value over which they erected a primitive watch tower (cf. Judg. ix:51 ff., for one of Canaanitic origin). This indi- cates a stage at which the encampment or depot is no longer likely to be broken up. The town was secured by the watch tower, which later be- came an adjunct of regular walls and gates, or was enlarged into a citadel (e. g. Judg. ix:46). A poetical designation among the Babylonians and Assyrians was alu. Originally meaning a number of tents, it commemorates the encamp- ment as the foundation of a subsequent city. We have also the word “Medina,” meaning “jurisdiction.” It is employed, however, in He- brew and Biblical Aramaic, only of provinces, or loosely, of a country generally. In Syriac, Arabic and modern Hebrew it means only a city. (2) Beginnings. The typical Semitic city, large or small, retained plainly the traces of these historical beginnings. It was in the “broad place” near the gate that the public meetings were held (Neh. viii: I-3), where the elders of the city sat for conference and where there were CITIES OF REFUGE judicial proceedings (Job xxix:7 ff.; Prov. xxi: 22, etc.; also 2 Sam. xv.2; Deut. xvii:5). This was a marked feature of Jerusalem, throughout Old Testament history. . The great bazaars also, as a rule, near the principal gate, perpetuated the old institution of the depot and market at the meeting place of caravan roads by an exposition Of wares from far and near. Damascus, for instance, still has bazaars not unlike those which Ahab was permitted by treaty to hold there twen- ty-seven centuries ago (I Kings xx:34). The wide areas which were set apart for one trade or another (Jer. xxxvii:21) long constituted the Only streets, and the multiplied booths and bazaars illustrated the growth of the “city” from the prim- itive villages. hat are now called streets were mostly crooked and narrow passages from one “quarter” to another, and a straight avenue was a notable exception. Hence the distinguishing name given to º street called “Straight” in Damascus (Acts 1X : II ) . Thus the building of cities is recognized by the Bible (Gen. iv: I7) as a step towards civilization. (3) Government. It accordingly marks the first type of Semitic government, but we are not to suppose that the early Semites who founded and perpetuated villages and towns in Babylonia, Mesopotamia or Palestine passed rapidly to the methods of city life from the nomadic mode of existence. Neither are we to suppose that the habits of primitive patriarchal rule were speedily discarded. On the contrary, it is possible to trace the influence of the patriarchal system in the es- tablishment and regulation of the Semitic cities, and even to find there some reproduction in type of the essential elements of the old tribal govern- 1Thent. Throughout the North Semitic realm the simple constitution of the city or state included the rule of a “king” between whom and the common peo- ple there stood a circle of nobles or “great men,” the position of the one or the others being nor- mally hereditary. This king was, we may assume, the chief elder of the clan which founded the settlement, and his principal function was not to rule, but to act as a referee, to represent his people in treaties and to perform generally the duties of leader among the council of prominent men. After this the development of functionaries was a matter of easy transition. An instance of the development of the “council of elders” is described in Exod. xviii, where Jethro the Midianite gives advice upon which the organization of the clans of Israel was carried Out. - After a time the “counsellor” became a “king,” and the Oriental monarchs still retain the sim- plicity of administrative type characteristic of the earliest “kingdoms.” These cities maintained a separate and an inde- pendent existence, and this often resulted in seri- ous conflicts between them, but confederations were sometimes formed to enable them to suc- cessfully meet the common invader. (History, Prophecy and the Monuments. By James F. Mc- Curdy, Ph. D., LL.D., pp. 32-34.) CITIES OF REFUGE (sit'íz čv réf'āj), (Heb. tº º, aw-ray ham-mi-awt). Places of refuge where, under the cover of religion, the guilty and the unfortunate might find shelter and protection were not unknown among the ancient heathen. (1) Early Abuse. The jus asyli, or right of shelter and impunity, was enjoyed by certain 430 CITIES OF REFUGE places reputed sacred, such as groves, temples and altars. This protective power commonly spread itself over a considerable district round the holy spot, and was watched over and pre- served by severe penalties. Yet the fate of Pau- sanias, were there no other, similar case, shows that it could not always stand against the assaults of popular indignation. Among the Greeks and Romans the number of these places of asylum became in process of time very great, and led, by abuse, to a fresh increase of criminals. Tiberius, in consequence, caused a Solemn inquiry into their effects to be made, which resulted in a diminution of their number and a limitation of their privileges. In the Apocrypha (2 Macc. iv:33) mention is made of a city having the jus asyli, the right of asylum—"Onias withdrew himself into a sanc- tuary at Daphne that lieth by Antiochia.’ The temple of Diana at Ephesus (Acts xix:27) was also a heathen asylum, whose privileges in this respect increased with the progress of time. (2) Asylums in Churches. This pagan cus- tom passed into Christianity. As early as Con- stantine the Great, Christian churches were asy- lums for the unfortunate persons whom an out- raged law or powerful cncmics pursued. Theodo- sius, in 431, extended this privilege to the houses, gardens and other places which were under the jurisdiction of the churches, and the synod of Toledo, in 681, widened the right of asylum to thirty paces from every church. Since then this ecclesiastical privilege prevailed in the whole of Catholic Christendom, and was preserved un- diminished, at least in Italy, so long as the papal independence remained. The right acted bene- ficially in ages when violence and revenge pre- dominatcd, and fixed habitations were less com- mon than now ; but its tendency to transfer power from the magistrate to the priesthood was injuri- ous to the inviolability of law and the steady ad- ministration of justice. It has accordingly in recent times been abrogated by most govern- 111611tS. (3) Framing of the Institution. Among the Jew the ‘cities of refuge' bore some resemblance to the asylum of the classic nations, but were happily exempt from the evil consequences to which reference has been made, and afford, even to the present day, no mean proof of the superior wisdom and benignant spirit of the Jewish laws. The institution was framed with a view to abate the evils which ensued from the old-estab- lished rights of the blood-avenger (see BLOOD- REVENGE), and thereby to further the prevalence in the nation of a mild, gentle and forgiving spirit. *::::m the laws on this point (Exod. xxi :13; Num. xxxv :II-32 ; Deut. xix:I-I3) it appears that Moses set apart out of the Sacerdotal cities six as “cities of refuge.” There were, on the eastern side of the Jordan, three, namely, Bezer in the wilderness, in the plain country of the Reubenites, and Ramoth in Gilead of the Gadites, and Golan in Bashan of the Manassites' (Deut. iv:41, 42); on the western side three, namely, ‘Kedesh in Galilee in Mount Naphtali, and Shechem in Mount Ephriam, and Kirjath-arba, which is Hebron, in the mountain of Judah' (Josh. xx:7). If found desirable, then other cities might be added. An inspection of the map will show how wisely these places were chosen so as to make a city of refuge easy of access from all parts of the land. To any one of these cities a person who had unawares and unintentionally slain any one might flee, and if he reached it before he was overtaken by the avenger of blood, he was safe within its shelter, CITIES OF RF FUGE provided he did not remove more than a thousand yards from its circuit, nor quit the refuge till the decease of the high priest under whom the homi- cide had taken place. If, however, he transgressed these provisions, the avenger might lawfully put him to death. The roads leading to the cities of refuge were to be kept in good repair. Before, however, the fugitive could avail himself of the shelter conceded by the laws, he was to undergo a Solemn trial, and make it appear to the satis- faction of the magistrates of the place where the homicide was committed that it was purely acci- dental. Should he, however, be found to have been guilty of murder, he was delivered ‘into the ºls of the avenger of blood, that he might ie.’ (4) Bribes Unavailing. And the Israelites were strictly forbidden to spare him either from considerations of pity or in consequence of any pecuniary ransom. This disallowal of a compen- sation by money in the case of murder shows a just regard for human life, and appears much to the advantage of the Hebrew legislation when compared with the practice of other countries (Athens, for instance, and Islam), in which pecuniary atonements were allowed, if not en- couraged, and where in consequence the life of the poor must have been in as great jeopardy as the character of the wealthy. - (5) The Homicide. The asylum afforded by Moses displays the same benign regard to human life in respect of the homicide himself. Had no obstacle been put in the way of the Goel, instant death would have awaited any one who had the misfortune to occasion the death of another. By his wise arrangements, however, Moses interposed a seasonable delay and enabled the manslayer to appeal to the laws and justice of his country. Momentary wrath could hardly execute its fell purposes, and a suitable refuge was provided for the guiltless and unfortunate. Yet, as there is a wide space between the inno- cence of mere homicide and the guilt of actual murder, in which various degrees of blame might easily exist, so the legislator took means to make the condition of the manslayer less happy than it was before the act or the mischance, lest entire impunity might lead to the neglect of necessary precaution and care. With great propriety, there- fore, was the homicide made to feel. Some legal inconvenience. Accordingly, he was removed from his patrimony, restricted in his sphere of locomotion, affected indirectly , in his pecuniary interests, and probably reduced from an affluent or an easy station to one of service and labor. The benefit of the protection afforded was common to strangers and sojourners with native Israelites. (6) Rabbinical Authority. What ensues rests on the authority of the Rabbins. In order to give the fligiitive all possible advantage in his flight it was the business of the Sanhedrim to make the roads that led to the cities of refuge conven- ient by enlarging them and removing every ob- struction that might hurt his foot or hinder his speed. No hillock was left, no river was allowed over which there was not a bridge, and the road was at least two and thirty cubits broad. At every turning there were posts erected bearing the words Refuge, Refuge, to guide the unhappy man in his flight, and two students in the law were appointed to accompany him, that, if the avenger should overtake him before he reached the city, they might attempt to pacify him till the legal investigation could take place. When once settled in the city of refuge the manslayer had a convenient habitation assigned him gratuitously, and the citizens were to teach 431 CITIES OF THE PLAIN him some trade whereby he might support him- Self. To render his confinement more easy, the mothers of the high-priests used to feed and clothe these unfortunate fugitives, that they might not be impatient and pray for the death of their sons, on whose decease they were restored to their liberty and their property. If the slayer died in the city of refuge before he was released, his bones were delivered to his relations, after the death of the high-priest, to be buried in the sepulchre Of his fathers. In addition to the right of asylum reference appears to be made to a custom which prevailed from very early times, both among the chosen people and the nations of the world, of fleeing, in case of personal danger, to the altar. With the Jews it was customary for the fugitive to lay hold of the horns of the altar, whether in the tabernacle or temple; by which, however, shelter and security were obtained only for those who had committed sins of ignorance or inad- vertence; thus true did Moses remain to his prin- ciple that the wilful shedding of human blood could only by blood be atoned—a principle which the advances of civilization and the spread of the gentle spirit of the gospel have caused to be questioned, if not exploded (Exod. xxi.; I4; I Kings i:50; ii:28). From the last two passages it seems that state criminals also sought the pro- tection of the altar, probably more from the force of custom than any express law. Their safety, however, depended on the will of the king, for in the passages referred to it appears that in one case (that of Adonijah) life was spared, but in the other (that of Joab) it was taken away even ‘by the altar' (Comp, Matt. xxiii:35). CITIES OF THE PLAIN (cit'íz čv the plân), This subject has been ably treated in the light of recent discoveries by the eminent Sir William Dawson in his Egypt and Syria, from which the following epitome is made: (1) Name. The name “Dead Sea’ is modern and unknown to Bible writers, who call it the ‘Salt Sea,” “the Sea of the Plain, or Ghor,’ ‘the East Sea,” etc.” No ideas of desolation are here associated with it. On the contrary, the plain at its northern end is said to have resembled the Garden of the Lord, and Engedi on its western side was celebrated for its vineyards and its beauty. But how does this accord with the terrible story of the destruction of the Cities of the Plain P (2) Topography. To understand this we must note the topography of the Ghor or depressed Jordan valley in connection with the historical notices in the book of Genesis. It may be affirmed in the first place that Sodom and its companion cities were not, as held by later tradition, at the south end of the sea, but at its northern end. Canon Tristam has ably supported this view, as has also Dr. Merrill in his work, East of the Jordan. This northern end of the sea must at the time have occupied approxi- mately its present position. This appears from the name, “Cities of the Plain,’ or Ciccar—that is, the Jordan valley, or the lower end of it. It is also stated that Abraham and Lot could see this plain from the high ground between Bethel and Hai, whence only the northern end of the Dead Sea is visible Abraham could not see the cities of Mamre, but he saw their smoke ascending. The most convincing geographical note, however, is that in Genesis xiv., which describes the inva- sion of Canaan by the five Eastern kings in the days of Abraham. They are said to have come down on the east side of the Dead Sea, to have defeated the Hivites and Amalekites on the SO11th CITIES OF THE PLAIN and then to have come up by way of Engedi (Hazezon-Tamar) on the west side of the sea, and to have fallen on the Sodomites and their allies from the southwest. Thus the Book of Genesis, from which alone we have any contem- porary account of these cities, fixes their position. (3) Manner of Destruction. The manner of their destruction also connects them with the locality. We are told that there were 'slime pits' —that is, petroleum wells—in their vicinity. Now, regions of bitumen, like that of the Dead Sea, are liable to eruptions of the most dangerous char- acter. Of these we have had examples in the oil regions of America. Now, if we suppose that at the time referred to accumulations of inflammable gas and petro- leum existed below the Plain of Siddim, the escape of these through the opening of a fissure along the old line of fault might produce the effect described—namely, a pillar of smoke ris- ing up to heaven, burning bitumen and Sulphur raining on the doomed cities and fire spreading over the ground. The attendant phenomenon of the evolution of saline waters, implied in the destruction of Lot's wife would be a natural accompaniment, as water is always discharged in such eruptions; and in this case it would be a brine thick with mud and fitted to encrust and cover any object reached by it. (4) Lot's Wife. The fate of Lot's wife, as briefly told in Genesis, implies that she lingered behind until overtaken by the fire and saline ejections, and that when the survivors sought her remains they found only a heap of saline incrustation marking the place where she perished. In relation to Lot's wife, the term which is translated ‘pillar' is netsib, and it should be ren- dered ‘mound.’ The erroneous word pillar was probably suggested to the translators by the pil- lar-like masses of salt that jut out of the salt cliff of Jebel Usdum. (5) Causes of Destruction. With reference to the causes of the destruction of the cities, these are so clearly stated in a perfectly uncon- scious and incidental manner in Gen. xix. that Sir William Dawson thinks no geologist, on comparing the narrative with the structure of the district, can hesitate as to the nature of the phe- nomena which are presented to the observation of the narrator. Nor is there any reason to sup- pose that the history is compounded of two nar- ratives giving different views as to their prox- imate causes or natural probability. We learn from the narrative that the destruc- tion was caused by ‘brimstone and fire;’ that these were rained down from the sky; that a dense column of smoke ascended to a great height, like the smoke of a furnace or lime-kiln, and that along with, or immediately after the fire, there was an emission of brine or saline mud, capable of encrusting bodies (as that of Lot's wife) so that they appeared as mounds of salt. (6) Definition of Word. The only point in the statements in regard to which there can be any doubt is the substance intended by the He- brew word translated ‘brimstone.’ It may mean sulphur, of which there is an abundance in some of the Dead Sea deposits, but there is reason to suspect that, as used here, it may rather denote pitch, since it is derived from the same root with Gopher, the Hebrew name apparently of the cypress and other resinous woods. If, however, this were the intention of the writer, the ques- tion arises, why did he use this word gaphrith when the Hebrew possesses other words suitable to designate different forms of petroleum and asphalt P. The writer of the Pentateuch had not 432 CITIES OF THE PLAIN studied the chemistry of the Egyptian schools to no purpose, and the most likely reason why he used this term was that he wanted one which his readers would understand as including any kind of mineral pitch or oil, and possibly sulphur as Well. It would have been well if later writers, who have undertaken to describe the fires of Gehenna in terms taken from the destruction of the Cities of the Plain, had been equally cautious. In con- nection with this it is interesting to note that in the notice of the pits in the vale of Siddim, the specific word chemar—asphalt—is used, and it is in this particular form that the bituminous exu- dations of the region of the Dead Sea usually appear. (7) Bituminous Matter. The source of the bituminous matter is in the great beds of bi- tuminous limestone of the Upper Cretaceous age which appear at Neby Mousa, on the Jericho road, and at many other places in the vicinity of the sea, and no doubt underlie its bed and the lower part of the Jordan plain. From these beds bituminous and gaseous matter must have been at all times exuding. Further, the Jordan valley and the Dead Sea basin are on the line of a great fault or fracture traversing these beds, and affording means of escape to their products, es- pecially when the districts are shaken by earth- quakes. We have thus only to suppose that at the time in question reservoirs of condensed gas and pe- troleum existed under the plain of Siddim, and that these were suddenly discharged, either by their own accumulated pressure or by an earthquake shock fracturing the overlying beds, when the phenomena described by the writer in Genesis would occur, and after the eruption the site would be covered with a saline and sulphurous deposit, while many of the sources of petroleum previously existing might be permanently dried up. (8) Subsidence of Ground. In connection with this there might be subsidence of the ground over the now exhausted reservoirs, and this might give rise to the idea of the submergence of the cities. It is to be observed, however, that the paren- thetic statement in Gen. xiv:3, ‘which is the Salt Sea, does not necessarily mean under the sea, and that it relates not to the cities themselves but to the plain where the battle recorded in the chapter was fought at a time previous to the eruption. It is also to be noted that this partic- ular locality is precisely the one which, as pre- viously stated, may be supposed to have sub- sided, and that this subsidence having occurred subsequently may have rendered the march of the invading army less intelligihle to the later reader. (9) Beal Occurrence. It seems difficult to imagine that anything except the real occurrence of such an event could have given origin to the narrative. No one unacquainted with the structure of the district and the probability of bitumen eruptions in connection with this structure would be likely to imagine the raining of burning pitch from the sky, with the attendant phenomena stated so simply,and without any appearance of exaggera- tion, and with the evident intention of dwelling on the spiritual and moral significance of the event, while giving just as much of the physical features as was essential to this purpose. It may be added here that in Is. xxxiv:9-10, there is a graphic description of a bitumen erup- tion which may possibly be based on the history CITIM 433 now under consideration, though used figura- tively to illustrate the doom of Idumea. In di- recting attention to the physical phenomena at- tendant on the destruction of the Cities of the Plain, Sir William Dawson does not desire to detract from the providential character of the catastrophe nor from the lesson which it teaches. He merely wishes to show that its author has described, in an intelligent manner, appearances which he must have seen or which were de- Scribed to him by competent witnesses. Dr. Daw- Son wishes also to indicate that the statements made are in accordance with the structure and possibilities of the district as now understood after its scientific exploration. From a scientific point of view the narrative is an almost unique description of a natural phenomenon of much interest and of very rare occurrence. (10) Physical Results. An important note, with reference to the destruction of these cities, appears in the statement in Gen. xiv. that the Vale of Siddim had bitumen pits or wells, and that these were so abundant or important as to furnish a place of retreat to, or impede the flight of, the defeated kings of Sodom and Gomorrah. These bitumen pits have disappeared, unless their remains are represented by the singular pits de- scribed by Dr. Merrill as occurring near Wady Nimrim. Their existence in the times of Abra- ham would bespeak a much greater abundance of bituminous matter than that now remaining, and it is possible that the eruption which destroyed the Cities of the Plain may have to a great extent exhausted the supply of petroleum. There is no reason to believe that the destruc- tion of Sodom and Gomorrah was connected with any important changes in the limits of the Dead Sea, though it is highly probable that some sub- sidence of the valley took place and may have slightly affected its levels relatively to the Jor- dan and the sea; but it would appear from Deut. xxix:23 that the eruption was followed by a per- manent deterioration of the district by the saline mud with which it was covered. It is not likely, however, that this referred to a very extensive area; and the deposit produced would be so like to those of the Dead Sea that it would not be easy to distinguish it unless re- mains of man and his works were found under it. Sir William Dawson fully agrees with Dr. Mer- rill that these remains are to be sought for on the Plain of Shittim, at the northeast corner of the Dead Sea, where, as he informs us, there are still Several ancient city sites, some of which may belong to the cities in question, which were, how- ever, probably of small size and near to one an- other.—Egypt and Syria, by Sir J. William Daw- Son, C. M. G., LL.D., F. R. S., pp. 124-132. CITIM (sit'im), (1 Macc. viii.5). See CHITTIM. CITIZENSHIP (Sitſi-zºn-ship), (Gr. Toxcreta, Žoz. ee-à"aft, civitas, citizenship). Strict isolation did by no means, as some sup- pose, form the leading principle in the system of theocracy as laid down by Moses, since even non- Israelites, under various names, not only were allowed to reside in Palestine, but had the fullest protection of the law, equally with the native Israelites (Exod. xii:19; Lev. xxiv:22; Num. xv.:15, XXXV:15; Deut. i.16; xxiv:17; the law of usury, Deut. xxiii:20, made, however, an exception), and were besides recommended in general terms by. Moses to humanity, and charity (Exod. xxii:21, xxiii:9; Lev. xix:33, 34; Deut. x:18; Çomp Jer. vii;6; Mal. iii:5; Joseph. Contra Ap. ii:28), as well as to a participation in certain prerogatives granted to the poor of the land, such CLAUDIUS as a share in the tithe and feast offering, and the harvest in the Jubilee year (Deut. xiv:29; xvi; Io, I4; xxvi. II ; Lev. xxv :6). In return, it was required on the part of non- Israelites not to commit acts by which the relig- ious feelings of the people might be hurt (Exod. Xx: Io; Lev. xvii. Io; xviii.20; xx:2; xxiv:I6; Deut. v . I4). The eating of an animal which had died a natural death (Deut. xiv:21) seems to have been the sole exception. The advantage the Jew had over the Gentile was thus strictly spir- itual, in his being a citizen, a member of the the- Ocracy, of the community of God, on whom posi- tive laws were enjoined. But even to this spir- itual privilege Gentiles were admitted under cer- tain restrictions (Deut. xxiii: I-9); thus we find among the Israelites an Edomite (I Sam. xxi :7), as also a Hittite (a Canaanite). The only nations that were altogether excluded from the citizen- ship of the theocracy by especial command of the Lord were the Ammonites and Moabites, from a feeling of vengeance against them ; and in the same situation were all castrated persons, and bastards, from a feeling of disgrace and shame (Deut. xxiii:I-6). In the time of Solomon no less than 153,600 strangers were resident in Pales- tine (2 Chron. ii:17). Roman citizenship (Acts xxii:28, jus civitatis, civitas) was granted in the times of the emperors to whole provinces and cities (Dion Cass. xli:25; Suet. A 24g. 47), as also to single individuals, for some service rendered to the state or the im- perial family (Suet. Aug. 47), or even for a cer- tain sum of money (Acts xxii:28; Dion Cass. xli: 24). The apostle Paul was a Roman citizen by family, and hence his protesting against Corporal or capital punishment (Acts xvi :37). CITRON (sit'ron). See TAPPUACH. CLAUDA (klau'dá), (Gr. KNagón, Álou'day). 1. A small island off the southwest coast of Crete, mentioned in Acts xxvii:I6. It was also called Gaudos (Mela, ii:7; Plin. Hist. Nat. iv:42), and now bears the name of Gozzo, corrupted by the Italians from the Greek name Claudanesa, or Gaudonesi. 2. A Christian woman of Rome, mentioned in 2 Tim. iv:2I. Some think she was a Briton, a sister of Linus and daughter of King Tiberius Claudius Cogidunus, an ally of Rome. She may have taken the name of Rufina from Pomponia, the wife of Aulus Plautus, the Roman commander in Britain, and have come to Rome in her train (T. Williams, Claudia and Pudens, Llandovery, 1848; E. H. Plumptre in Ellicott, N. T. Comm. ii. p. 185; but against the theory, Lightfoot, Apost. Fathers, Clem. i. pp. 29 and 76–79). (W. Lock, Hastings' Bib., Dict.) She ap- pears to have become the wife of Pudens, men- tioned in the same verse. - CLAUDIUS (klau'di-ūs), (Gr. KXagótos), the fifth Roman emperor and successor of Caligula, A. D. 41-54 (Acts xi:28; xviii:2). His full name was Tiberius Claudius Nero Germanicus. Previously to his accession he led rather a dis- solute life, and the throne was in a great measure secured to him through the address and solicita- tions of Herod Agrippa (Joseph. Antiq. xix:2, l, c. 3 and 4; Comp. Suet. Claud. Io). This obli- gation he returned by great and peculiar favors to that personage; and the Jews were generally treated with indulgence till the ninth year of his reign, when those who abode at Rome were all banished thence (Acts xv :iii:12; Comp. Suet. Claud. 25). Several famines occurred tunder Claudius, one of which, in the fourth year of his reign, extended to Palestine and Syria, and ap- 28 CLAUDIUS FELIX 434 pears to be that which was foretold by Agabus (Acts xi :28). CLAUDIUS FELIX (klau'di-às fé'lix). See FELIX; DRUSILLA. CLAUDIUS LYSIAS (klau'di-üs lish’i-as). See LYSIAS. CLAW (kla), (Heb. Tºº?, far-saw'), the sharp, hooked end of the foot of a bird, or animal; the hoof solid or split. As in older English claw was used for an animal's Aooſ, and for any of the parts into which a cloven hoof is divided, so in Deut. xiv:6, A. V., we read, “And every beast that parteth the hoof and cleaveth the cleft into two claws, . ... that ye shall eat' (R. V., ‘and hath the hoof cloven in two'); and in Zech. xi :16, he shall eat the flesh of the fat and tear their claws in pieces' (R. V., ‘hoofs'). The Hebrew is parsah, the ordinary word for ‘hoof,’ in both passages (Cf. Lovell, 1661). (J. Hastings, Bib. Dict.) Figuratite. To tear claws in pieces is to de- vour ravenously the last morsel of flesh or fat. It refers to the cutting off of every means of pro- tection, resistance or conquest (Zech. xi :16). CLAY (klá), (Heb. ***, teet, properly mire or mud), A substance frequently mentioned in Scripture, chiefly with reference to its employment by the potter, the elegant and useful forms assumed by the rude material under his hands supplying a significant emblem of the Divine power over the destinies of man (Is. lxiv:8; Rom. ix:21). A remarkable allusion to the use of clay in sealing occurs in Job xxxviii: I4, ‘He turneth it as clay to the seal.’ This may be explained by reference to the ancient practice of impressing unburnt bricks with certain marks and inscriptions which were obviously made by means of a large seal or stamp. We trace this in the bricks of Egypt and Babylon. (See BRICKS.) Modern Oriental usages supply another illustration. Travelers, when en- tering the khans in towns, often observe the rooms in which goods have been left in charge of the khanjee sealed on the outside with clay. A piece of clay is placed over the lock and impressed by a large wooden stamp or seal. Figuratite. (I) Men are compared to clay; their bodies are formed of it; they are frail and easily undone (Is. xxix:I6; xli :25; lxiv:8). (2) In Nebuchadnezzar's image the Roman kingdom is compared to a mixture of iron and miry clay, to denote that notwithstanding its having been once very powerful, yet it should become weak, and be easily destroyed by the barbarous Goths, Huns, Vandals, Heruli, etc. (Dan. ii:33-35, 42). (3) Trouble is like miry clay; it is very uncomfort- able; men gradually sink into it, and with diffi- culty can they escape it (Ps. xl :2). (4) Wealth and other worldly enjoyments are likened to a load of thick clay; they are of small value for an immortal soul, and are often polluting, enslav- ing and burdensome (Hab. ii:6). (5) The clay wherewith Jesus anointed the eyes of the blind man may denote ordinances which are contempt- ible in the view of worldly men, or convictions which render men blind in their own view (John ix:6, 15). (6) The earth is turned up as clay to the seal; when it is fresh plowed it is ready to receive any impression, and when the warmth of summer returns it assumes a comely appear- ance (Job xxxviii:14). Bricks are often printed with figures from a cut die or seal. Travelers to the East assure us that the lock of the room or apartment in a caravansary, where goods are de- posited, is often sealed with clay. The keyhole CLEMENT is covered with a mass of clay and a seal applied, In the passage quoted, the turning of clay to the seal and the reducing of the shapeless mass to order and beauty is compared to morning reduc- ing the shapeless masses of the dark night to reg- ularity and order. CLEAN (klén). Several Hebrew and Greek words arc translated “clean” and “cleanness.” They mean primarily freedom from dirt, Żurity, . but they also often indicate ceremonial cleanness. Ethical and Figuratite. Closely related to this ceremonial use is the ethica/, and quite as old. In passages like Ezek. xxxvi :25; Luke xi :41, and especially John xiii. Io; xv. 3, we see the one pass. ing into the other; in others the ethically stands out from the ceremonially religious meaning. Take first of all some passages where the Hebrew is the usual verb (taher) or adjective (tahor) used for ceremonial cleanness: Ps. xix:9, ‘The fear of the Lord is clean' (that is, the religion of Jehovah is morally undefiled, in contrast to heathen re- ligions. Comp. Ps. xii:6, the words of the Lord are pure words,” where the Hebrew is the same, a word frequently applied to ‘pure' gold); Lev. xvi : 30, ‘from all your sins shall ye be clean’; Gen. xxxv :2, ‘Put away the strange gods that are among you, and be clean, and change your gar ments;’ Ps. li:7, ‘Purge me with hyssop and I shall be clean ;’ li:Io, “Create in me a clean heart.’ Next, where the Hebrew is bar, that is, “clean' because cleansed, ‘bright' because polished (as a pointed arrow, Is. xlix:2); Ps. lxxiii:1, ‘such as are of clean heart;’ Job xi :4, ‘I am clean in thine eyes;’ comp. Is. lii: I I, ‘be ye clean that bear the vessels of the Lord.’ Finally, where the Hebrew is gakhah, or gakhak, ‘be clean,” gak, “clean,’ al- ways in a moral sense, Job xv : I4, ‘What is man that he should be clean P’ ix:30, ‘If I wash my- self with snow water and make my hands never so clean ;’ xv : I5, ‘the heavens are not clean in his sight;" xxxiii:9, ‘I am clean, without transgres- sion;’ Prov. xvi;2, ‘all the ways of a man are clean in his own eyes' (J. Hastings, Bib. Dict.). The cleanness or purity of the saints lies in their having a clean heart and pure hands; in having their conscience purged from guilt by the applica- tion of the Saviour's righteousness; their mind, will, and affections sanctified by his spirit, en- dowed with implanted grace, and free from the love and power of sinful corruption ; their out- ward conversation being holy and blameless. Cleanness of teeth is want of provision to eat (Amos iv:6). Clean, purely, also denote full, fully (Lev. xxiii:23; Josh. iii:17; Is. i :25). (See UNCLEAN, UNCLEANNESS.) CLEFT (klēft). A number of Hebrew words are rendered thus. The primary meaning is divided or s//#/. In AIIlos vi. 11, Is. xxii:9 it is translated “breaches.” In Is. ii:21, Jer. xlix:16, and elsewhere it is rendered “cleſt” of a rock; it is also applied to the hoof of an animal (Deut. xiv:6). CLEMENT (klēm"ent), (Gr. KXàums; Lat. Clem- ems, Clement), a person mentioned by Paul (Phil. iv:3). #is Clement was, by the ancient church, iden- tified with the bishop of Rome of the same name (Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iii:4; Constitut. Apost. vii: 46); and that opinion has naturally been followed by Roman Catholic expositors. It cannot now be proven incorrect, but the suspicion exists that the case here may be as with many other names in the New Testament, which have been assigned to celebrated persons of a later period. Clement is said to have lived to the third year of the em- peror Trajan (A. D. IOO), when he suffered mar- tyrdom. CLEOPAS There is an epistle of Clement to the Corin- thians, which was highly esteemed by the ancient church, and was publicly read in many churches. (See EPISTLES, APostolicAL.) CLEOPAS (kle'o-pâs), (Gr. KXeótas, AE/eh-off'as, contraction of Gr. KXeóiratpos, of a renowned father). One of the two disciples to whom Jesus ap- peared in the way to Emmaus (Luke xxiv:18). He is not to be confounded with the other Cleo- phas, or rather Clopas, who was also called Al- phaeus (John xix:25). (See ALPHAEUs.) CLEOPATRA (klé'o-pâ'trá), the name of numer- Ous Egyptian princesses derived from the daugh- ter of Antiochus. 1. The wife of Ptolemy Epiphanes, king of Egypt. Some are of opinion that this princess is described in Dan. xi :17, under the title “Daugh- - ter of Women.” 2. A daughter of Ptolemy VI, Philometor and Cleopatra (I), who was married first to Alexan- der Balas, B. C. I50 (I Macc. x:58), and after- wards given by her father to Demetrius Nicator when he invaded Syria (I Macc. xi :I2; Joseph. Antiq. xiii:4, Sec. 7). During the captivity of Demetrius in Parthia (see DEMETRIUS) Cleopatra married his brother Antiochus VII (Sidetes), and was probably privy to the murder of De- metrius on his return to Syria, B. C. 125 (App. Syr., chap. 68; yet see Joseph. Antiq. xiii:9, sec. 3; Just. xxxix:I). She had two sons by De- metrius. She murdered Seleucus the elder, and then raised to the throne the younger Antiochus VIII, called Grypus. As he was unwilling to gratify her ambitious designs, she attempted to make away with him by offering him a cup of poison, but was compelled to drink it herself (B. C. I2O). CLEOPHAS (klē'o-phâs), (Gr. KXatrás, AE/o-fas') or rather Clopas (John xix:25), who was also called Alphaeus. (See ALPHAEUS; CLEOPAS). CLERK (klērk), (Acts xix:35). See TOWN CLERK. CLIFT (klift), an old form of cleft (Ex. xxxiii:22; Is. lvii. 5). In Is. xxxii; I4 the margin seems to use cliff for cliff, in the A. V. as elsewhere in old English writers. CLIMATE (kli'māt). See PALESTINE. CLOAK (klök), an article of dress, as a covering Or veil. See DRESS. Figuratite. A fair pretense or excuse, con- cealing covetousness, malice, unbelief (I Thess. ii:5; I Peter ii:16; John xv 22). God's geal is called his cloak ; it plainly appears in punishing his enemies and in delivering his people (Is. lix:17). CLOSET (klöz'ét), (Heb. "?", khoop-flaw', can- opy). It is translated “curtains” (Joel ii.16), and also “chamber" (Ps. xix:5). In the New Testament the word (Gr. rapetov, fam-ion) is used to convey the idea of retirement or privacy (Matt. vi;6; Luke xii:3). cLoTHING (dothing), (Heb. nº, tºo. sheth"). (See DRESS.) º Man originally went naked (Gen. ii:25). Skins of beasts were the first real clothing (Gen. iii: 21). The art of manufacturing cloths by Spinning and weaving is of very great antiquity (Gen. xiv:23; xli:42; Job vii:6). The materials woven and used for clothing were wool (Prov. xxxi.19; Lev. xiii:47; Job xxxi.20), linen (Exod. ix:13; Lev. xvi;4), byssus, a fabric made of Cotton or flax (Gen. xli:42; Luke xvi;19), silk (Ezek. xvi;IO, 435 CLOTHING 13; Rev. xviii:12), goats' hair (Rev. vi.12), and camels' hair (Mat. iii:4). The Hebrews, and, in fact, the Orientals gen- erally, wore only an upper and an under dress. The upper, or cloak ; the under, or coat. It was seldom that in addition to these they wore shirts or drawers, though these were worn when on visits of ceremony or friendship. The shirt and drawers were of gauze or cotton, that of the fe- males being ornamented. The coat, or under gar- ment, was often made of linen, but as often of woolen, and hung down very near the ground, unless when tucked up for walking or for work. The Scribes wore theirs longer than ordinary, to mark their uncommon gravity and holiness (Luke Xx:46). The cloak, or upper garment, now generally known under the name of hyke, was made of wool, and was a long piece of broadcloth thrown over the shoulders and folded round the body; and which, yet more than the coat, required to be girded up when they journeyed or set themselves to work (Luke xii:37). When this upper gar- ment was laid aside the person was said to be “naked” (John xxi :7)—a mode of speech which explains the nature of David's dress when he danced before the ark, simply that he laid aside his upper garment that he might dance more freely. The veil was worn by women in the presence of strangers (Gen. xxiv:65; Cant. v:7); but it was not uncommon for them to go with face unveiled (Gen. xxiv:I5; xxvi :8; Judith x: 7, 14). It appears from various passages (such as 2 Kings i :8; Is. xx:2; Matt. iii:4; Heb. xi : 37) that the prophets usually wore a rough or hairy garment. Princes, especially great kings and priests, gen- erally wore white garments; such were also worn on the occasions of great joy and gladness (Eccl. ix:8). In mourning, men generally wore sack- cloth, or haircloth. Prophets, being professed mourners, often wore a mourning dress of coarse stuff or skin (2 Kings i:7, 8; Matt. iii:4). False prophets, in order to deceive the people, clothed themselves after the same manner (Zech. xiii:4). Among the Hebrews neither sex was permitted to wear such form of apparel as was used by the other (Deut. xxii:5). Probably people gener- ally went bareheaded; however, turbans were on occasion worn by both sexes (Job xxix:14, R. V. margin; Is. iii:20; Ezek. xxiii:I5). Great men's children had often their garments striped with divers colors (Gen. xxxvii:3; 2 Sam. xiii:18). Isaiah largely describes the apparel of the Jewish women in his time. It is plain they were gaudy and fine; but we are now quite uncer- tain of their particular form (Is. iii: 16–24). In the East, both bridegroom and bride, on their marriage day, appear in several suits of apparel; and as great men freq11ently change their gar- ments on solemn days, and make presents of them, get new ones on joyful occasions, and Sup- ply their guests with them on festivals of mar- riage, or the like, it is necessary for them to have a great stock of them always in their wardrobe (Gen. xlv.:22; Judg. v :30; I Sam. xviii:25; Ps. cii:26; Is. iii:6, 7; Matt. xxii:12; Rev. xxi :2). Sandals were worn when outside of a room, be- ing an imperfect shoe consisting of a sole of wood or leather (Ezek. xvi :IO), fastened to the bare foot by straps passing over the instep and around the ankle (Gen. xiv:23; Is. v. 27; Acts xii:8). Figuratite. (I) To be clothed with worms is to be infected all over with a loathsome dis- ease, or to have one's skin crawling with vermin CLOTHES, RENDING OF (Job vii:5; x:II). (2) “To be clothed with shame and cursing” is to be exceedingly exposed to reproach, contempt, confusion and ruin (Ps. cix:18, 19; czxxii:18). (3) To be “clothed with salvation and praise” is abundantly to possess deliverance, happiness and comfort (IS. lxi:3, IO). (4) To cover one's self with violence, as with a garment, is to practice injustice and oppression, without shame or even with boasting, as if it were honorable (Ps. lxxiii:6). (5) False teachers put on “sheep's clothing,” when they pretend to great innocency, holiness and usefulness (Matt. vii;IS). (6) The rending or tearing of garments imports great grief or horror #. xiv:63; Acts xiv: I4). CLOTHES, RENDING OF (klöthz, rénd'ing Öv). See CLOTHING, Figurative, 6; REND. CLOUD (kloud), (Heb. principally P2, awb, and t l?, aw-mawn'), (Gr. veſpéAm, nefel'ay, covering of the sky). The allusions to clouds in Scripture, as well as their use in symbolical language, must be under- stood with reference to the nature of the climate, where the sky scarcely exhibits the trace of a cloud from the beginning of May to the end of September, during which period clouds so rarely appear, and rains so seldom fall, as to be con- sidered phenomena—as was the case with the harvest rain which Samuel invoked (I Sam. xii: 17, 18), and with the little cloud, not larger than a man's hand, the appearance of which in the west was immediately noticed as something re- markable not only in itself, but as a sure har- binger of rain (I Kings xviii:44). The Lord appeared at Sinai in the midst of a cloud (Exod. xix:9; xxxiv:5); and after Moses had built and consecrated the tabernacle, a cloud filled the court around it, so that neither Moses nor the priests could enter (x1:34, 35). The same occurred at the dedication of the temple by Solomon (2 Chron. v : 13; I Kings viii:Io). When, then, the cloud appeared on the tent, in front of which were held the assemblies of the people, in the desert, it was believed that God was then present, for the motion of the cloud which rested on the tent was a sign of the Divine presence (Exod. xvi; Io; xxxiii:9; Num. xi.25). The angel descended in the cloud and from thence spoke to Moses, without being seen by the people (Exod. xvi;Io; Num. xi :25). It is equal in Scripture, when mentioning the presence of God, to represent him as encompassed with clouds, serv- ing as a chariot, and veiling, his dreadful majesty (Job xxii:14; Is. xix:I ; Matt. xvii:5; xxiv:30, etc.; Ps. xviii:11, 12; xcvii:2; civ :3). The Son of God is described as ascending to heaven in a cloud; (Acts i :9) and at his second advent, as descending 11pon clot1ds (Matt. xxiv:30; Rev. xiv:I4, 16). Figuratite. (I) In allusion to the pillar of cloud and fire in the wilderness, God is said to create a cloud and smoke by day, and the shining of a flaming fire by night, upon the dwellings and assemblies of Zion, when he remarkably protects, guides and comforts his people (IS. iv:5). (2) The cloud of glory that hovered over the mercy- seat signified the majestic and marvelous pres- ence of God as revealed in Christ, with his church (I Kings viii:Io). (3) . God is likened to a cloud of dew in the heat of harvest; his ful- ness is unsearchable, his approaches quick, and his presence very comforting (IS. xviii:4). (4) God often appeared in a cloud, to mark his majesty; and to intimate that his glory, purposes, and works are unsearchable (Exod. xvi;Io; PS. civ 3; Matt. 436 CLOUT xvii:5). (5) He rides on swift clouds, or has them for the dust of his feet, when he comes in a speedy and awful manner to deliver his people and destroy his enemies (2 Sam. xxii: 12; Is. xix: I; Neh. ix:I2). (6) C/oud's and darkness are round about him, when his providences are very myster- ious and awful (Ps. xcvii:2). Christ was received up into heaven by a cloud, when he ascended; and at the last day, will come in the clouds, making them his throne while he judges the world (Acts i:9; Dan. vii: 13; Rev. i :7). (7) He is clothed with a cloud, when his work is obscure and ter- rible (Rev. x:I). (8) His sitting on a white cloud denotes the glorious display of his equity, holiness, power, and authority, in the execution of his judgments (Rev. xiv.; I4, and xx :II). (9) Ministers and ordinances are likened to clouds; by the authority of heaven they are appointed, and by them God comforts and directs his people, and communicates his grace to them (IS. v :6). (Io) Saints are called a cloud; their number is great (Is : lx:8; Heb. xii:I). (II) Hypocrites and false teachers are clouds without water; they promise usefulness, but, being without true solid- ity, value, and knowledge, are easily carried about by their own pride and ambition, and by the winds of false doctrines (2 Pet. ii :17). (I2) Men, in general, are as a vanishing cloud; while they live, they have but little of true happiness and com- fort, and their days hasten to an end (Job vii:9). (13) Sins are compared to a cloud; how vast their numbers | how they darken our souls, sepa- rate between God and us! By his free forgive- ness, by the shining of his countenance, and the breathing of his Spirit only can they be dispelled (Is. xliv :22). (I4) Afflictions are a cloud; their ingredients are many, their nature awful and mysterious; they bereave men of their glory and joy (Lam. ii:I). (I5) The favor of a king is like a cloud of the latter rain, very useful and pleasant (Prov. xvi :15). (16) The goodness of the ten tribes of Israel was like a morning cloud, and early dew; whatever appearances of reformation were among them under Jehu, and whatever pros- perity they had under Joash, and Jeroboam his son, or Pekah, they all quickly came to an end (Hos. vi. 4). (17) Armies are likened to a cloud, because of their number, and their threatening to overwhelm and ruin all around (Ezek. xxxviii: 9). CLOUD, PILLAR OF (kloud, pil'lér Šv). PILLAR. CLOUT (klout). The word ſaw-law' (Heb. sº, Josh. ix:5), properly means to cover, i.e., to patch, and denotes that the sandals of the Gibeonites were mended, as if they had become old and worn during their journey. It probably in its primary meaning meant a blow, as “a clout on the head.” 3. The “cast clouts” (Heb. Tºp, seh-khazy- bazy", Jer. xxxviii:11, 12) put under the prophet's arms to prevent the cords cutting into the flesh while he was being drawn out of the dungeon were old clothes or rags. As a verb (Josh. ix:5) ‘old shoes and clouted upon their feet’ (Amer. R. V. ‘patched’). Comp. Shaks. 2 Henry VI, iv. ii. I95– ‘Spare none but such as go in clouted shoon;' and Latimer, Serm. p. IIo, “Paul, yea, and Peter too, had more skill in mending an old net, and in clouting an old tent, than to teach lawyers what diligence they should use in the expedition of matters.’ The word is Celtic, and came in early, but Wycliffe, in Josh. ix:5, has “Sowid with patchis'. J. Hastings' Biö. Zicº.). See CLUB CLUB (klūb), (Job xli:29, R.V.). The “club” was a Common weapon among shepherds. The rod, Scepter, or club of iron (shebhet bar- zel, PS. ii:9) was carried by kings, as seen in the Assyr. reliefs in the Kouyunjik Gallery, B. M., especially the figure of Assur nazir pal. Comp. IS. x:5 ‘HO Assyrian, the rod (shebhet) of mine anger.’ (W. E. Barnes, Hastings' Bib. Dict.). (See DART.) CNIDUS (ni'dus), (Gr. Kvtö0s, Amee' dos), other- wise GNIDUs, a town and peninsula of Doris in Caria, jutting out from the southwest part of Asia Minor, between the islands of Rhodes and Cos. It was celebrated for the worship of Venus (Strabo, xiv. p. 965; Plin. Hist. Nat. xxxvi :15; Hom. Odyss. i.30). The Romans wrote to this city in favor of the Jews (1 Macc. xv :23), and St. Paul passed it in his way to Rome (Acts xxvii:7). - COAL (köl). The Hebrew words most fre- quently and properly translated coal are two. 1. nºns, gah-A/teh'/eth, burning coal, Lev. xvi; I2; 2 Sam. xiv:7; xxii:9, 13; Job xli:21; Ps. xviii:8, 12; cxx:4; cxl:Io; Prov. vi.28; Is. xlivii.9; Ezek. i:13; XX1V . II. 2. Pº, Žeh-khawm', charcoal, coal, Prov. xxvi;21; Is. xliv, I2; liv:16. In the New Testament we have in John xviii: 18, ‘a fire of coals.’ The word here evidently means a mass of live charcoal, as also in xxi :9, and Rom. xii:20. It is generally assumed that, in those numer- ous passages of our version in which the word coal occurs, charcoal, or some other kind of artificial fuel, is to be understood; at all events, that the word has not its English meaning. The idea is founded upon the supposition that fossil coal was not known to the ancients as an article of fuel, but the existence of coal in Syria is placed beyond a doubt. Many indications of coal occur in the Lebanon mountains; the seams of this mineral even protrude through the superincum- bent strata in various directions. It is also found at Cornali, eight miles from Beirout. A passage in Theophrastus indicates that “the smiths” of Greece used fossil coal nearly 300 years B. C., but this does not prove that coal in the proper sense was known and employed by the Hebrews. Figurati &e. (I) God’s judgments are com- pared to coals or coals of juniper: they are ter- rible to endure, and sometimes of long continu- ance (Ps. cxl : Io, and cxx:4). (2) The objects or instruments of his judgments are likened to coals (Ps. xviii:8). (3) Christ's promise of forgive- ness and grace is a live coal taken from the altar; conveyed to us through his person and righteous- ness; it melts our hearts into godly sorrow, warms them with love, and purges away our dross of sinful corruption (Is. vi :6). (4) A man's posterity is a burning coal; in them progenitors act, shine, and are comforted (2 Sam. xiv:7). (5) Good deeds done to our enemies among men are as coals of fire heaped on their heads; they tend to melt and pain their hearts with grief for injuring us, and make them to love us; as they occasion the speedy infliction of terrible judg- ments upon them (Rom. xii:20; Prov. xxv :22). (6) Harlots and temptations to unchastity are as burning coals; they can scarcely be approached without inflaming our lusts and wounding our souls (Prov. vi.28). (7) Strife and contention are as burning coals; they spread terribly, and hurt and ruin everything near them (Prov. xxvi; 21). (Brown, Bib. Dict.). 437 COCKCROWING |COAST (köst), stands often for “border" (Judg. xi.20; I Sam. v.:6; Matt. viii:34, etc.). COAT (köt). See DRESS; CLOTHING. COAT OF MAIL (köt Öv mál). See ARMs, ARMOR. COCK (kök). The Hebrew word T. P. bar-boor', which is mentioned only in connection with Solo- mon's table, has been rendered swans, geese, guinea fow/s, and fatted fish, as well as the faſted fowl of the A. V. and the R. V.; Gr. 3Xéktap, al- eA' fore, the male of the well known domestic fowl ga//us domesticus. It is somewhat singular that this bird and poul- try in general should not be distinctly noticed in the Hebrew Scriptures; especially as rearing galli- naceous fowls was an object of considerable eco- nomical importance in Egypt, and their flesh one of the principal resources for the table in every part of Southern and Western Asia. They were, it may be surmised, unknown in Egypt when the Mosaic law was promulgated, and, though im- ported Soon after, they always remained in an un- determined condition, neither clean nor unclean, but liable to be declared either by decisions swayed by prejudice, or by fanciful analogies; perhaps chiefly the latter, because poultry are devourers of unclean animals, scorpions, scolopendra, small lizards, and young serpents of every kind. But although rearing of common fowls was not encouraged by the Hebrew population, it is evi- dently drawing inferences beyond their proper bounds when it is asserted that they were un- known in Jerusalem, where civil wars, and Greek and Roman dominion, had greatly affected the national manners. & In the denials of Peter, described in the four Gospels, where the cock-crowing is mentioned by our Lord, the words are plain and direct, not we think admitting of cavil, or of being taken to signify anything but the real voice of the bird, cock-crow, as it is expressed in Mark xiii:35, in its literal acceptation, and not as denoting the sound of a trumpet, so called, because it pro- claimed a watch in the night; for to what else than a real hen and her brood does our Saviour allude in Luke xiii:34, where the text is proof that the image of poultry was familiar to the disciples, and consequently that they were not rare in Judaea P To the present time in the East, and on the Continent of Europe, this bird is still often kept, as amongst the Celtae (Caesar, Bell. Gall. iv : I.2), not so much for food as for the purpose of announcing the approach and dawn of day. The origin of our domestic poultry is undoubtedly Asiatic, but there is considerable doubt as to the precise breed from whence they are sprung. It is figured on the ancient Egyptian monuments. COCKATRICE (kök'à-tris). See SERPENT, COCK-CROWING (kök'krö'íng). The cock usually crows several times, about midnight, and again about , break of day. The latter time, because he then crows loud- est, and his ‘shrill clarion' is most useful by sum- moning man to his labors, obtained the appellation of the cock-crowing emphatically, and by way of eminence; though sometimes the distinctions of the first and second cock-crowing are met with in Jewish and heathen writers. These times, and these names for them, were, no doubt, some of the most ancient divisions of the night adopted in the East, where ‘the bird of dawning' is most prob- ably indigenous. The latter & Nekropodovia, cock- crowing, was retained even when artificial di- visions of time were invented. In our Lord's time the Jews had evidently adopted the Greek and COCKLE Roman division of the night into four periods, or watches, -each consisting of three hours; the first beginning at six in the evening, in the second watch, al. d in the third watch (Luke xii:38); in the fourth watch of the night (Matt. xiv:25; Mark vi :48). These watches were either num- bered first, second, third, and fourth, as now spe- cified, or were called late, middle of the night, early, and cock-crowing. These are all mentioned (Mark xiii:35). It has been considered a contradiction that Mat- thew (xxvi :34) records our Lord to have said to Peter, before the cock crow thou shalt deny me thrice, whereas St. Mark (xiv:30), says, before (the cock) crow twice. But Matthew, giving only the general sense of the admonition (as also Luke xxii:34; John xiii:38), evidently alludes to that only which was customarily called the cock- crowing, but Mark, who wrote under Peter's in- spection, more accurately recording the very words, mentions the two cock-crowings. Another opinion prevails regarding the signal to which the four Evangelists allude in connection with Peter’s denial of our Lord. It is held that it was the voice of the trumpet which announced º closing of one watch and the beginning of an- Other. In our Lord’s time the Jews had adopted the Roman division of time by which the night was measured with four watches; these were some- times designated by the terms, “even, midnight, cock-crowing, and morning” (see Mark xiii:35). Jerusalem being at that time a Roman military station, the placing and relieving of the guard was in force, and the changes of the watch were indicated at regular intervals by the sounding of a trumpet. The first watch was from six until nine, the second from nine until twelve, the third from twelve until three, the fourth from three until six in the morning. The third watch, which terminated at three in the morning, was signaled at its close by three peals of the trumpet with a little interval between them, and this threefold signal was termed by the Romans, gallicinium. A recognition of this fact explains the apparent discrepancy between Mark and the other Evangel- ists, three of whom speak only of the cock crow, including in that term the whole of the threefold signal, while Mark, who is more explicit, speaks of two of these trumpet peals belonging to the close of the third watch of the night (Mark xiv:68–72). That this cock-crowing could not have been the voice of the barnyard fowl is evident from a consideration of the above facts, and also in view of the testimony of the Talmud to the effect that neither the pliesthood nor the laymen were allowed to keep hens in Jerusalem. The priests who ate of holy things were not al- lowed to raise them anywhere in Palestine, but the common people could keep them outside the Holy City. This was not because the fowls were considered unclean and therefore unfit for food. They could be eaten, and could be brought into the city after they were dressed ; but the commen- tators upon the Talmud explain the interdiction as follows: “They do not breed cocks and hens in Jerusalem because of the holy things—that is, these fowls by scratching are continually bringing up insects, and reptiles which are unclean, by which the sacrifices which are eaten as food might be polluted.” (See Mishna, Baba Kami, * % cocKLE (kök-k'i), (Heb. ºº, bosh-aw'). The word rendered cockle (Job xxxi.;40) should 438 COLLAR be, as in the margin of the A. V., stinking weeds, or of R. V. moisome weeds. This word may denote troublesome or offensive weeds in general (Job xxxi:40). But the arums, which abound in Galilee and other Eastern regions, have precisely the odor indicated by the original, and may be the plants meant. The wild grapes (IS. v :2, 4) should be rendered stinking fruits. Such are the fruits of Solanum nigrum, L., a plant growing in all vineyards in this land, the fruit of which is black, resembling a small grape, and having an ill odor, which would correspond with the requirements of the comparison. It is called in Arabic 'inab-edh-dháð, wolf’s grapes. The proximity of these offensive growths is some- times scarcely endurable. CCELESYRIA (sêl'é-syr'i-á), (Gr. ) kot\m Xupta, Åay Aoi'Zay soo-ree'ah, the hollow Syria). This name, which is evidently of Grecian origin in the times of the Seleucidae, was originally ap- plied to the valley lying between the mountain- ranges of Libanus and Anti-Libanus. It was also used to denote the whole tract of country, with the exception of Judaea and Phoenicia, reaching from Seleucis to Arabia and the confines of Egypt (Strabo, xvi. 2, vol. iii. p. 365, ed. Tauch, ; Polyb. Hist. v. So, sec. 3). In the time of David, Coele- Syria was probably included in ‘Syria of Damas- cus,” which was conquered by that monarch (2 Sam. viii:6), but recovered from Solomon by Rezon the son of Eliadah (I Kings xi :23). The possession of it was an object of many struggles between the Seleucidae and the kings of Egypt. Amyce, the name of the plain through which the Orontes flowed, is derived by Bochart from the Syriac Amica, which means deep, and is nearly synonymous with the Greek word Koilay, hol- /ow. Celosyria is found in the Apocrypha. The same learned writer supposes that Syro- phoenicia is the same as Coelesyria. Scythopolis and Gadara are mentioned by Josephus as cities of Coelesyria (Antiq. xiii. 13 sec. 2, sec. 3). The name frequently occurs in the Apocrypha (I Macc. x:69; 2 Macc. viii:8; x:II ; I Esdr. ii: 17, 24; iv: 48; vii: I); in I Esdr. vi :3, it is called simply Syria. Under the emperor Diocletian, Phoenice and Coelesyria formed one province, called Phoenicia Libanica. Under the present Turkish government the western part of Coelesyria is in the Pashalic of Saide, and the eastern in the Pashalic of Damas- Cl1S. COFFER (köffér), (Heb. º, ar-gawg', sus- pended), a movable box or chest hanging from the side of a cart. The word is found only in I Sam. vi :8, II, I5. (See ARK OF THE COVENANT ; CHEST.) CoEFIN (köffin), (Heb. Tº, aw-roote'), a casket for the dead (Gen. 1:26). (See BURIAL AND SEPULCHERs; DEAD.) - cogITATION (köj'í-tá-shūn), (Heb. ???, rah- yone', Dan. vii:28), elsewhere rendered simply “thought.” COIN (koin). See WEIGHTS AND MEASUREs. COLA (kö'lá), (Gr. XaXá, Áhoh-la'), a place men- tioned with Chobai (Judith XV:4). It has not been identified. º colhozEH (kol-ho'zeh), (Heb. Tº Holkho. zeh", every seer), a descendant of Judah, being the son of Hazaiah and father of One Baruch (Neh. xi:5), B. C. before 445. COLIUS (kö'li-ūs), (I Esdr. ix:23). See KE- LAIAH. collar (köI'lér), (Heb. "?, peh). 1. An aperture (Job xxx:18). Job's trouble COLLECTION bound him closely, firmly, and fast as the collar of his garment. ; : “It is frequently assumed that the reference is to Job's emaciated condition, which causes his outer garments to cling to him like the neck of the close-fitting inner tunic. Davidson suggests that the idea may be that through Job’s writhing un- der his pains his clothes are twisted tightly about him. Dillman finds a reference to the unnatural swelling of Job's body by elephantiasis till his garment becomes tight like a collar.” (G. M. Mackie, Hastings' Bib. Dict.). 2. A peculiar kind of pendant (Judg. viii.26; Heb. "??, met-ee-faw'), rendered “chains” in Is. iii:I9. º collECTION (köl-lék'shūn), (Heb. Fºº, mas- a 17th'). J 1. ) The process of collecting or gathering as the collection of specimens, or of letters. 2. A collection of money for charitable or other purposes (2 Chron. xxiv:6, 9). COLLEGE (kö1'1éj), (Heb. Tºº, mish-meh', repe- tition, 2 Kings xxii:14), the residence of the prophetess Huldah. The word mishneh was probably used as a proper name. The same Hebrew word in Zeph. i:Io, is translated “second” where allusion is made to different portions of Jerusalem (Neh. xi :9). The translation is derived from the Targum of Jonathan which has “house of instruction,” a school-house supposed to have been near the Tem- ple. Others explain it as denoting the quarter of the city allotted to the Levites, who were a second, or inferior order as compared to the priests. It was probably the “lower” city, # &\\m tróAis, the other city, of Josephus. COLLOPs (köI'lúps), (Heb. "Fº, fee-maw', to be plump). The term is applied to the thick flakes of fat flesh upon the haunches of a stall fed Ox. It is employed as the symbol of irreligious pros- perity (Job. xv.:27). g COLONY (köl'ö-ny), (Gr. Koxdºvia). This distinction is applied to Philippi in Mace- donia (Acts xvi :12). Augustus Caesar had de- ported to Macedonia most of the Italian communi- ties which had espoused the cause of Antony; by which means the towns of Philippi, Dyrrachium, etc., acquired the rank of Roman colonies (Dio Cass. p. 455). They possessed the jus Italicum (Italian right), consisting, if complete, in a free municipal constitution, such as was customary in Italy, in exemption from personal and land taxes, and in the commerce of the soil, or the right of selling the land. COLORS (kül'èrs), (Gen. xxxvii:3). The art of coloring cloth scems to have attained to great perfection among the Jews, though it did not originate with them, but with their idolatrous neighbors, the Phoenicians and Egyptians, the for- mer supplying the dyes, the latter the mode of applying them. Four artificial colors are spoken of in the Bible. 1. Purple, which was derived from a shell-fish native to the Mediterranean Sea. The coloring- matter was found in a small vessel in the fish, and the rest of the fish was useless. Purple was the royal and noble color, indicative of wealth and station (Judg. viii:26; Esth. viii:15; Luke xvi; 19; Rev. xvii:4). 2. Blue, produced from a similar source, used in the same way, and for the same purposes (Ex. xxv :4; Esth. i :6). • Scarlet and crimson appear to express the 439 COLORS same color. “The dye was produced from an in- sect somewhat resembling the cochineal, which is found in considerable quantities in Armenia and other Eastern countries”—Smith. The three col- ors above mentioned, together with white, were employed in the tabernacle curtains and in the vestments of the priests. 4. Vermi/ion was used in fresco-painting (Ezek. xxiii:I4), for coloring the idols themselves, and for decorating the walls and beams of houses (Jer. xxii:14). The natural colors noticed in the Bible are white, black, red, yellow, and green, yet only three colors are sharply defined, white, black, and red. To show the vagueness of the use of the others, the tint green (translated “yellow” in the A. V.) is applied in the Hebrew to gold (Ps. lxviii: 13) and to the leprous spot (Lev. xiii.49). (Schaff, Bzó. ZXict.) (See PURPLE, BLUE, CRIMSON, SCARLET.) Figuratite. (1) White is often used to repre- sent what is pure and glorious. (I) God having hair white as wool, and white garments, and riding on a white cloud, denotes his eternity, wisdom, holiness, and the equity of his providential conduct. (Dan. vii:9. Is. xix:I. Rev. xiv:14. (2) Christ is zwhite, he is pure in his Godhead, holy, highly exalted, and abounding in love; and he is ruddy, and red in his apparel; he appeared in our nature, and suffered in it; and in the execution of his wrath, conquers and destroys his enemies (Cant. v :Io; Is. lxiii: 1, 2). (3) His hair white as wool, de- notes his eternity, and wisdom (Rev. i :14). (4) The whiteness of his throne imports the holiness, equity, and glory of his procedure in the last judg- ment (Rev. xx:II). (5) The white horses of Christ and his people, are the pure truths of the gospel, by means of which they obtain spiritual vic- tories (Rev. vi. 2; xix:14). (6) Saints are made white, when freed from guilt and sin (Ps. li:7); their white raiment is the righteousness of Christ appropriated by faith, and their sanctification; the state of heavenly glory, in which they are peaceable, noble, and triumphant kings and priests unto God (Rev. iii:4, 5; iv:4; xv.6) and (vii: I4). (7) The Nazarites were whater than milk, when they kept their vows, and looked fresh and comely (Lam. iv.:7). (8) The fields were white to harzesz, or ripe, when multitudes seemed fond of hearing the gospel, by the power of which men are cut off from their natural state, gathered to Jesus, and bound up in the bundle of life with him (John iv: 35). (2) Black. (I) Blackness, applied to gates, skin, face, raiment, imports great distress, bitter grief and mourning (Jer. xiv:2 and viii:21; Joel ii:6; Mal. iii:14). (2) When applied to the hair of one's head, it signifies beauty, fresh- ness, and soundness (Lev. xiii:37; Cant. v. II). (3) With respect to remaining corruptions and af- flictions, and often to the views of unbelievers the church and people of God are black ; but in re- spect of Christ's ordinances, and implanted grace, they are comely (Cant. i :5, 6). (4) To mark dread, fear, and perplexity, the Jews and Assyrians are called black (Joel ii:6; Nah. ii: Io). (5) Hell is called the blackness of darkness. Red; Redness. (1) Redness of horses, and redness of the wine of God’s wrath, denote the fearful and bloody effects of God’s judgments (Zech. I :8, and vi :2; Rev. vi :4; Ps. lxxv :8). (2) Redness ascribed to the church as a vine, denotes her exposure to bloody trouble and persecution, and their bringing forth good fruit to God (Is. xxvii:2). (3) The redness of the heathen dra- gon, signified the bloody persecutions of the Chris- tians by the Roman emperors (Rev. xii:3). (4) COLOSSAE The redness of a leprous infection in flesh or gar- ments, might denote angry refusal of reproof, and furious defense of faults (Lev. xiii:19, 42, 49), and (xiv:37). (5) Redness of eyes, imports hav- ing plenty of wine, or being drunk with it (Gen. xlix: I2; Prov. xxiii:29). (4) Green. (I) As green is the color of flour- ishing grass, it is used as an emblem of pleasant- ness, prosperity, fullness of wealth, grace, or com- fort. Jesus Christ is called a green tree, to mark his unbounded and never-failing fullness of grace and fructifying virtue (Luke xxiii:31 ; Hos. xiv: 8). (2) Saints are green trees, or green things; they still retain the Spirit of grace, and grow in grace and good works; and are delightful to behold (Ps. lii:8; Rev. ix:4). (3) Men abounding in prosperity, honor, and wealth, are called green trees (Ezek. xvii:24 and xx:47). (5) Blue. In types and emblems it signified heavenliness, purity, humility, etc. (Exod. xxv :4; 440 COLOSSIANS, EPISTLE TO THE with Laodicea and Hierapolis, destroyed by an earthquake. This, according to Eusebius, was in the ninth year of Nero ; but the town must have been immediately rebuilt, for in his twelfth year it continued to be named as a flourishing place (Nicet. Chron, p. I I5). It still subsists as a vil- lage named Chonas. The huge range of Mount Cadmus rises immediately behind the village, close to which there is in the mountain an immense perpendicular chasm, affording an outlet for a wide mountain torrent. The ruins of an old castle stand on the summit of the rock forming the left side of this chasm. There are some traces of ruins and fragments of stone in the neighborhood, but barely more than sufficient to attest the exist- ence of an ancient site; and that this site was that of Colossae is satisfactorily established by the Rev. F. V. J. Arundell. COLOSSIANS, EPISTLE TO THE. (1) Content of the Epistle. This writing be- º §§ NSN º L. . . . . . . ºº:- ºrº gº - % t \\ º º \ § Ş. . § º, § tºº. % Colossae. xxvi.1, 31, 36; xxviii:31; Prov. xx:30). Among gins with the salutation of Paul and Timothy to the Hebrews it was the Jehovah color, the symbol of the revealed God (comp. Exod. xxiv: Io; Ezek. i:26). Delitzsch says: “Blue denotes the soft- ened divine majesty condeccending to man in grace” (Iris, p. 48). It also represented reward. (6) Purple. Purple, as the dress of kings, was associated with royalty and majesty (Judg. viii: 26; Esth. viii: 15; Cant. iii: Io; vii:5; Dan. v :7, 16, 29, A. V. “Scarlet”). COLOSSAE (ko-lós'se), (Gr. Ko)\oora'at, Æo/-os- Sq/*-ee"), improperly spelled Colosse (Col. i2), a City of Phrygia, on the river Lycus (now Gorduk), not far from its confluence with the Maeander, and near the towns of Laodicea, Apamea, and Hier- opolis (Col. ii. 1; iv:13, 15; Comp. Plin. Aſist. Naz. v:41; Strabo xii, p. 576). A Christian church was formed here very early probably by Epaphras (Col. i :7; iv:12 sq.), con- sisting of Jews and Gentiles, to whom Paul, who does not appear to have ever visited Colossae in person (Col. ii: 1) addressed an Epistle from Rome. Not long after, the town was, together the Christians of Colossae, (i:I-2), which is fol- lowed by an expression of thanksgiving for the grace of God manifested in the experience of the Cologgian Christians, (i:3 G). Then comes a gen- eral prayer for their enlightenment and confirma- tion in faith, (i:9-23). This leads to the state- ment of the cardinal doctrine of the faith, which is the “mystery hid from all eyes, but now mani- fested to the saints of God,” i. e. the indwelling Christ, (i:24-29). The theme thus brought be- fore the reader is then taken up and the doctrine of the supremacy of Christ is cleared and estab- lished by the repudiation of speculative concep- tions regarding the constitution of the spiritual universe and certain ceremonial usages deduced from them, (ii:I-23). As against these useless ritual practices, the writer then commends certain ethical principles and precepts of life, (iii and iv). These grow out of participation in the life of the Risen Lord, (iii:I-4). The fruit of them is the mortification of the sinful nature, (iii:5-II), whose counterpart is the vivification of the new or holy COLOSSIANS, EPISTLE TO THE 441 character, (iii: 12-17). Practically, the new life should evince itself in ideal domestic harmony, (iii:18-25), and in prayer and unblemished con- duct among men, (iv :I-6). The writer then adds Some items of a personal nature and closes with a common salutation, or benediction, (iv :7-18). (2) The Colossian Heresy. The subject of the epistle is the supremacy of Christ over all prin- cipalities and powers conceivable. Such powers and principalities, it appears, were being com- mended by the adherents of a certain “philosophy.” By implication, Christ's authority and sphere of ac- tion were presented as limited and remote from men. There was here, of course, the influence of the pagan polytheism, and the design of the epistle is to check this influence and restore to the Colossian Christians their absolute and pure con- fidence in Christ as the all-in-all of the Universe. The exact classification of this philosophy and of those who taught it at Colossae have been a question in dispute among critics. One of the earliest views regarding them was that they were disciples of John the Baptist (Heinrichs Nov. Test. Kop. vii. pt. ii. p. 158) Michaelis & Storr thought they were Essenes. Hug believed they were Mag- ians (Introd. vol. ii, p. 449, Eng. tr.). Neander made them syncretists who attempted to com- bine Oriental theosophy and asceticism with Chris- tianity (Planting and Training of the Church, Chap. i. p. 374). Lightfoot describes them as a class of incipient Gnostics who sprang from the Essenism of the preceding age. It has been put be- yond doubt that there were, even before the advent of Christ, heretical sects within Judaism, especial- ly at the centers where Judaism came in contact with Hellenism. These interpreted the Old Testa- ment in a speculative manner and developed their Speculations into a cosmogony and a theology quite similar to the theogonies and cosmogonies of the later Gnostic sects. The errors taught at Colossae were kindred to these speculations. They constituted a system (“philosophy”) characterized by intellectual exclusiveness, as against which Paul contends for the universality of the Gospel, (i:28), which he designates as the true “wis- dom,” (qo@ta), “intelligence,” (qºverts), “knowledge,” (Yvógus), and “perfect knowledge,” (ertyvoorus), (i:9, 28; ii:2, 3; iii: Io, 16; iv:5). As the teach- ers of the error constituted themselves into an Organization and practiced rites of initiation, the Apostle “contrasts with these the one univer- sal, comprehensive mystery, the knowledge of God in Christ.” This mystery exhausts all wis- dom. It contains “all the treasures of wis- dom and knowledge hidden in it.” If the false teachers said “We, and we alone, pos- sess wisdom,” the apostle responded, “True wis- dom is offered to all in the revelation of God through Jesus Christ.” But the philosophy taught by these teachers included a doctrine of beings intermediate between God and the world. The function of these beings was to bridge over the chasm supposed to exist between the true God and the coarse material universe. They were supposed to have a share in the creation and government of the world. Against this doctrine the Apostle sets over the doctrine of the One Eternal Son, the Word begotten before the worlds, (i:15-20; ii: 9-15). Christ was the word become Incarnate, and in him men had all they required. He was the image of the invisible God. He was before all things, and by him all things consist. In him they were complete and he would present them to God, holy, unblamable, and unreprovable, provided they continued steadfast in the faith. Further, this “philosophy” led to asceticism. It drew a distinc- COLOSSIANS, EPISTLE TO THE tion between kinds of meats and drinks (ii:16), and insisted that those forbidden should not even be handled or tasted or touched (ii:21), with the intent of checking fleshly indulgence (ii:23). All of these prescriptions, Paul consistently with his whole attitude towards the doctrine of salvation by works, denounces as valueless. Christians have risen above them (ii:8, 20–22). They have found the true and only remedy for sin—the resurrec- tion of the inner man through Christ, (iii:I). In this way a new life has been born within them which is able to overcome the evil tendencies that work through the flesh. (3) The Church at Colossae. The church to which this letter was addressed was one of sev- eral in the same general neighborhood. The town of Colossae (see COLOSSAE) was situated in the val- ley of the Lycus. Not far from it were the cities of Laodicea and Hierapolis. In these two, as well as at Colossae, Christian communities had been established and had existed for some time before the writing of the epistle. The founder of the church at Colossae was Epaphras, a Gentile from Phrygia, converted to the Gospel under the preach- ing of Paul, (iv : I.2). It has been supposed that this Epaphras became the missionary of the gen- eral region and founded not only the church at Colossae, but also those at Laodicea and Hierapolis. In any case, the Apostle himself declares that he was personally unknown to all these churches; (i:4, 8, 9; ii:1, 5), though he had come in con- tact with individual members in them, such as Philemon and Epaphras, and he reckons them as fruits of his ministry inasmuch as Epaphras him- self, as already said, was one of his converts and, in a manner his vicar. The conditions already described as prevailing in the Colossian church, and calling for such a letter as Paul wrote, must have been to some extent the same as those found at Laodicea ; for Paul directs that the letter be read in the church at Laodicea, (iv :16), and betrays some concern as to the peace and welfare of that church also, (ii: I). From an allusion made in this connection to a letter to the church in Laodicea, (iv :I6), it has been inferred that Paul wrote such an one and that it has not been preserved. Another inference from this al- lusion identifies the letter to the Laodiceans with the Epistle to the Ephesians (see EPHESIANS). It is impossible to reach a definite conclusion in this subject beyond the negative one that the epistle current in the ancient church under the title of Laodiceans was not the document alluded to in Col. iv:I6. - (4) Time and Place of Composition. The question now may be approached, in what place and at what time of his life did Paul write the Epistle to the Colossians? In the received text (Tertus Receptus) the subscription answered the first part of the question by assigning the letter to Paul’s Roman sojourn. The correctness of this subscription has been, however, recently disputed. Several excellent scholars (Schulz, Thiersch, Reuss, Sabatier, Weiss, and Meyer) have found reasons for believing that the epistle was written from Caesarea during the Apostle's imprisonment in that city. Upon examination, these reasons prove inconclusive. On the other hand, the state- ment of the subscription is borne out by stronger considerations than any adduced for Caesarea as the place of the composition of the letter. Con- sequently, the more recent scholars are inclined to accept the older view and assign the letter to Paul’s Roman imprisonment (see Holtzmann, Go- det, T. K. Abbott, Zahn, etc.) But if Paul wrote to the Colossians from Rome, the most probable COLOSSIANS, EPISTLE TO THE 442 date for his writing seems to be the end of the year 62 or the beginning of 63 A. D. The occasion and design of writing have been partly given already. The Colossian Christian community was composed chiefly of converts from among the Gentiles, (i: I3, 2I-27; ii: 13; iii:6, 7). Epaphras, the founder of the church, was a disciple of Paul. He had doubtless taught it the gospel as he had heard it from Paul. But his teaching was in danger of being corrupted by the rise in the community of a certain system of error (the “philosophy” already characterized above). In his perplexity, he resorted to Paul to lay the case before him. In the epistle, we have Paul’s re- sponse to the personal appeal of Epaphras. (5) Genuineness. But did Paul write the letter after all P This question was answered in the negative first by Meyerhoff in 1838. The reasons upon which this scholar based his conclusion were mainly these three: (1) That the style of the epistle was different from the style of the other Pauline writings. (2) That the heresy.combated in it was the Gnosticism of Cerinthus which arose only after the days of Paul. And (3) that Colos- sians appeared to be a condensation of Ephesians. The view of Mayerhoff was taken up and elab- orated by the leaders of the Tübingen school of criticism. Baur and Schwegler, upon grounds similar to those already cited, and further because the denial of the genuineness of the epistle harmon- ized with their preconceived philosophy of the de- velopment of thought in the apostolic age, argued strenuously against the Pauline authorship of Colossians. Out of the efforts to prove the spuriousness of the epistle, arose two efforts to assign to it a semi-authentic character. First Ewald conceived the idea that the substance of the thought was Paul’s, but that it was written down by Timothy, to whom the apostle had committed this task, after explaining the situation to him and approv- ing of some suggestions made by him. This the- ory required the introduction of a large subjective element into the solution of the problem and found no favor. & The second view propounded to, account for the differences between Colossians and the other epistles of Paul is the interpolation theory. This view was elaborated by Holtzmann and assumes that Paul did write a short letter to the Colos- sian church. This letter was taken by a Gnostic of the early part of the second century and used as a basis of the Epistle to the Ephesians. After- ward, the same person conceived the notion of expanding the original Colossian Epistle into our present letter. This view is carefully worked out and supported by its originator in a keen critique. Nevertheless, it has found but few advocates Von Soden is one of these; but even he qualifies his endorsement of Holtzmann's theory by reduc- ing very largely the number of passages inter- polated. Pauline authorship is at present denied to the epistle by Pfleiderer, Hilgenfeld and Weiz- säcker, whereas its genuineness is accepted by Sabatier, Lightfoot, Weiss, Farrar, Salmon, Godet, Zahn, Abbott, and the majority of scholars in general. (6) Conclusion. These discussions have brought into view two important matters con- nected with the epistle. First, the emphatic place given to correct conception of the person of Christ in the apostolic age. It was the Christological section, i :15-20, which served to raise doubts of Pauline authorship. The removal of these doubts leaves the Christology of the epistle in bolder relief than it was before they were suggested. COLOSSIANS, EPISTLE TO THE Secondly, the relations of the Epistles to the Ephesians and to the Colossians are cleared. These relations are not correctly presented when it is said that Ephesians is an elaboration of the nucleus of Colossians by a later author, or that it is an imitation of Colossians, or further that Colossians is an abridgment of Ephesians. The two epistles move in the same sphere of thought and are expressed in language and style possessing the same general characteristics. These similari- ties grow out of the fact that the author wrote both at nearly the same time when his own mind was possessed by nearly the same line of thought. The differences between the epistles are such as might be expected to come from the different con- ditions prevailing in the midst of those to whom they were respectively addressed. (See EPHE- SIANS.) (7) Helps to the Study of the Epistle. The most thorough separate commentary on Colos- sians, in English, is that by Tightfoot. Qther good commentaries are Abbott's (in the International Critical Series), Ellicott’s, Maclaren's (in the Ex- positor's Bible), Moule's (in the Cambridge Bible also the same author's Colossian Studies), Barry's and Ll. J. Davies'. Of the older works, Eadie’s may be mentioned as full of merit. In commentaries upon the whole New Testament, Colossians is adequately treated by Meyer and Alford. The Expositor’s. Greek Testament (now in preparation) may be expected to be excellent on this writing. A. C. Z. The following analysis of the epistle has been made by J. O. F. Murray, Hastings' Bib. Dict. (a) The opening section, after the salutation (verses I, 2), is devoted to an elaborately expand- ed thanksgiving (verses 3-24). St. Paul singles out for special mention the fruitfulness of the knowl- edge of the truth among the Colossians as wit- nessed by their evangelist Epaphras (verses 3-8), and prays for a further development, springing from the same source, to take practical effect in walking worthily of the Lord, as they give thanks to the Father for their deliverance from the power of darkness into the kingdom of the Son of His love (verses 9-16). This reference to the Son leads to a full, though condensed, statement of the office of the Son— (a) In relation to the universe as the source and goal, and the present principle of coherence for all creation (verses I5-17), and (b) In relation to the Church as being now in His risen state not only the permanent home of all the divine perfections, but also the source of an all-embracing reconciliation by His death (verses 18–20), a reconciliation the power of which the Colossians had already experienced, and which would not fail of its final consummation if they continued as they had begun, faithful adher- ents of the world-wide gospel of which St. Paul was in a special sense the minister. (b) This personal reference forms the starting- point of the second section of the epistle (i:24- ii:5), in which St. Paul introduces himself to his correspondents, explaining his unique position in relation to the consummation of the divine revela- tion, and his efforts to bring the hearts of all men under the full power of its influence (i:24-28). This will help them to understand the interest that he takes in them and in their neighbors, even though they had never met in the flesh, and also the ground for his prayer for their enlightenment (ii: 1-3). This section closes with a brief warn- ing against some plausible deceiver, coupled with a renewed assurance of his close sympathy with them, and his joy in their constancy (verses 4, 5). COMFORT (c) He passes now to a series of special exhor- tations and warnings, which occupy two chapters (ii:6; iv:6 sq.), and fall into five subdivisions. (a) The first of these (ii:6-19), is in its main purpose an exhortation to retain their hold on and to develop into all its practical consequences the personal relation to Christ which the gospel had made known to them. As this was the point on which the Colossians had most to fear from false teachers, the exhortation (verses 6, 7) is accom- panied by an explicit warning (verse 8), and a careful statement of the grounds on which the Christian who grasps the true conception of the Person of Christ is assured of a complete moral development, and receives, by union in baptism with the death and resurrection of Christ, the reality of that separation from his evil nature which had been foreshadowed by circumcision (verses 9-15). In the light of this thought, the at- tractiveness of outward observances for the at- tainment of purity and the necessity for angelic mediation disappear (verses I6-19). (b) In the second subdivision (ii:30-iii:4), union with the death of Christ is shown to be a deliverance from formal and material restrictions, and union with His resurrection determines the true sphere of Christian thought and life. (c) The third subdivision develops the same thought in its present practical application to moral effort, with relation (I) to the appetites and passions (the members on the earth) which need to be done to death, and the evil habits which must be stripped off (iii:5-II), and (2) to the new graces which the Christian must seek to acquire (verses I2-14), and the new principles by which he should regulate his practice (verses 15-17). (d) The fourth subdivision (iii: 18–iv :I), ap- plies the new principle to the fundamental rela- tions of family life, husbands and wives, parents and children, masters and servants. (e) The last subdivision (iv :2-6) contains an exhortation to perseverance in prayer, and to dis- cretion in their relations with the heathen world. (d) The letter closes with a commendation of the messengers, Tychicus and Onesimus, by whose hands it was sent (iv :7-9), and a group of per- Sonal salutations (verses IO-I6). COMFORT (käm'fert), (Heb. "T3, maw-kham', to comfort, give forth sighs; Gr. trapaka)\éal, far- aÁ-a/-eh'o, to call alongside, help). - Our English word is from Lat. confortare (con fortis), to strengthen greatly, and means to ease, enhearten, encourage, inspirit, enliven, console, cheer. - Spiritual comfort is that pleasure of the soul which arises from the consideration of what God in Christ is to us with respect to relation, and of what he has done for and infallibly promised to us (2 Cor. i.4). The Holy Spirit is the author of it; the Scriptures are the established ground and means of it; and ministers and godly companions are the instruments and helpers of it (John xvi;7; Ps. cxix:49, 50; 2 Cor. i.5, 6, 7 and vii;6, 7). (See CONSOLATION.) COMFORTER (küm'fért-ér),(Gr. trapdx\mros, par- a/#!/ay-Žos). See HOLY GHOST; PARACLETE. COMING OF CHRIST (küm'ing Šv krist), (Gr. trapovata, Žar-oo-see'ah, a being present), Our Lord's first appearance in the flesh (1 John v:20; 2 John vii), or future appearance at the last day. (See MILLENNIUM.) COMMANDMENTS, TEN (köm-mänd-ments). See DECALOGUE. COMIMIENTARY. (1) Meaning. By commentary, in its theologi- cal application, is usually meant an exhibition of 4 '3 COMMENTARY the meaning which the sacred writers intended to Convey ; or a development of the truths which the Holy Spirit willed to communicate to men for their saving enlightenment. This is usually ef- fected by notes more or less extended—by a series of remarks, critical, philological, grammatical, or popular, whose purport is to bring out into view the exact sentiments which the inspired authors meant to express. The ideas contained in the Old and New Testaments are thus transferred into other languages and rendered intelligible by the help of oral or written signs. There is a high and holy meaning in the words of holy men who spake as they were moved. . To adduce this in a per- Spicuous form is the important office of the com- mentator. As there never has been, and from the nature of the case there never can be, a universal language, God selected for the revelation of his will those languages which were in all respects the fittest media for such a purpose. Hence arises the necessity of transplanting from these individ- ual dialects the momentous truths they were se- lected to express; and of clothing in the costume of various people, as far as that costume can be adapted to such an object, the precise sentiments which were in the minds of the inspired writers. It is true that this can be only imperfectly done, Owing to the various causes by which every lan- guage is affected ; but the substance of revelation º be adequately embodied in a great variety of garD. The following may be noticed as: (2) Characteristics. (I) An elucidation of the meaning belonging to the words, phrases, and idioms of the original. (2) Another characteristic of commentary is an exhibition of the writer's scope, or the end he has in view in a particular place. It ascertains the precise idea he intended to inculcate in a given locality, and how it contributes to the general truth enforced. a (3) In addition to this, the train of thought or reasoning pursued throughout an entire book or epistle, the various topics discussed, the great end of the whole, with the subordinate particulars it embraces, the digressions made by the writer— these, and other particulars of a like nature, should be pointed out by the true commentator. (4) Another characteristic of commentary is, that it presents a comparison of the sentiments contained in one book, or one entire connected portion of Scripture, with those of another, and with the general tenor of revelation. A beautiful harmony pervades the Bible. Diversities, indeed, it exhibits, just as we should a priori expect it to do; it presents difficulties and mysteries which we cannot fathom ; but, with this variety, there is a uniformity worthy of the wisdom of God. (3) Tiffers from Translation. From what has been stated in regard to the constituents of commentary, it will also be seen that it differs from translation. Its object is not to find words in one language corresponding to those of the original language of the Scriptures, or nearly re- sembling them in significance, but to set forth the meanings of the writers in notes and remarks of considerable length. Paraphrase occupies a mid- dle place between translation and commentary : partaking of greater diffuseness than the former, but of less extent than the latter. (4) Different Kinds. There are two kinds of commentary which we shall notice, viz., the crit- ical and the popular: (1) Critical. The critical contains grammat- ical and philological remarks, unfolds the gen- eral and special significations of words, points out idioms and peculiarities of the original languages, COMMENTARY and always brings into view the Hebrew or Greek phraseology employed by the sacred writers. In a word, it takes a wide range, while it states the processes which lead to results, and shrinks not from employing the technical language common to scholars. (2) Popular. Popular commentary states in perspicuous and untechnical phraseology the sen- timents of the holy writers, usually without de- tailing the steps by which that meaning has been discovered. It leaves philological observations to those whose tastes lead them to such studies. All scientific investigations are avoided. Its great object is to present, in an attractive form, the thoughts of the sacred authors, so that they may vividly impress the mind and interest the heart. The limits of critical and popular commen- tary are not so wide as to prevent a partial union of both. Both may state the import of words and phrases; both may investigate the course of thought pursued by prophets and apostles. They may develop processes of argumentation, the scope of the writers' remarks, the bearing of each par- ticular on a certain purpose, and the connection between different portions of Scripture. In these respects critical and popular commentary may substantially coincide. Perhaps the union of both presents the best model of commentary, provided the former be divested of learned parade and re- pulsive technicalities, and the latter be perspicu- ously full. The results which it is the great ob- ject of every commentator to realize are simply the ideas which the inspired writers designed to set forth. These constitute theology. They are emphatically the truth. They are the holy mind of God, as far as he has thought fit to reveal it to men—the pure and paramounit realities which metamorphose the sinner into the saint. The com- mentator who comes short of this important end, or fails in exhibiting the whole counsel of God in its harmonious proportions, is not successful. (5) Earlier Commentaries. The following are some of the earlier commentators on the Bible : * - - Calvin.—In all the higher qualifications of a commentator Calvin is pre-eminent. It has been well remarked that he chiefly at- tended to the logic of commentary. He possessed singular acuteness, united to a deep acquaintance with the human heart, a comprehension of mind by which he was able to survey revelation in all its features, and an enlightened understanding com- petent to perceive sound exegetical principles, and resolute in adhering to them. He can never be consulted without advantage, although not all his opinions should be followed. His works pre- sent specimens of exegesis that deserve to be ranked among the best extant, because they are occupied with the spiritual essence of the Bible— with the theology of the inspired writers. Bega.—Beza's talents are seen to great advan- tage in expounding the argumentative parts of the Bible. He was better acquainted with the theol- ogy than the criticism of the New Testament. Hammond.—This learned annotator was well qualified for interpretation. His paraphrase and annotations on the New Testament possess con- siderable value; and many good Specimens of criticism are found in his notes. Poole.—Poole's annotations on the Holy Bible contain several valuable, judicious remarks. But their defects are numerous. The pious author had only a partial acquaintance with the original. He was remarkable neither for profundity mor act1teneSS. Poli Synopsis Criticorum.—In this large work, the annotations of a great number of the older 444 COMMENTARY commentators are collected and condensed. But they are seldom sifted and criticised, so that the reader is left to choose among them for himself. Grotius.--This very learned writer investigates the literal sense of the Scriptures with great dili- gence, and success. . He had considerable exe- getical tact, and a large acquaintance with the heathen classics, from which he was accustomed to adduce parallels. His chief defect is in spirit- wal discernment. Hence he rests in the literal meaning in many cases, where there is a higher or ulterior reference. Le Clerc.—Excellent notes are interspersed throughout the commentaries of this author, which the younger Rosenmüller transcribed into his Scholia. His judgment was good, and his mode of interpretation perspicuous. Calmet.—Calmet is perhaps the most distin- guished commentator on the Bible belonging to the Roman Catholic Church. In the higher qualities of commentary his voluminous work is very de- ficient. It contains a good collection of historical materials, and presents the meaning of the original where it is already plain. Patrick, Lowth, Arnold and Whitby.—Bishop Patrick had many of the elements belonging to a good commentator. His learning was great when we consider the time at which he lived, his method brief and perspicuous. Lowth was inferior to Patrick. Whitby presents a remarkable com- pound of excellences and imperfections. In phil- osophy he was a master. In critical elucidations of the text he was at home. Nor was he wanting in acuteness or philosophical ability. His judg- ment was singularly clear, and his maner of an- notating straightforward. Yet he had not much comprehensivenes of intellect, or a deep insight into the spiritual nature of revelation. Henry.—The name of this good man is vener- able, and will be held in everlasting remembrance. His commentary does not contain much expo- sition. It is full of sermonizing. In thorough- ness and solidity of exposition he is not to be named with Calvin. Doddridge.—The taste of this pious commen- tator was good, and his style remarkably pure. He had not much acumen or comprehension of mind; but he had an excellent judgment, and a calm candor of inquiry. Scott.—The prevailing characteristic of Scott's commentary is judiciousness in the opinions ad- vanced. The greater portion of it, however, is not proper exposition. The pious author preaches about and paraphrases the original. 4. Clarke.—In most of the higher qualities by which an interpreter should be distinguished, this man of much reading was wanting. His histo- rical and geographical notes are the best. B. F. C. Alose/ei/Zer.—The Scholia of this laborious writer extend over the greater part of the Old Testament. Looking to the last editions, they are unquestionably of high value. They bring together a mass of annotations such as is sufficient to satisfy the desires of most Biblical students. Yet the learned author undertook too much to perform it in a masterly style. Hence his materials are not properly sifted, the chaff from the wheat. * Olshausen.—The best example of commentary on the New Testament with which we are ac- quainted has been given by this writer. It is a model of exposition unrivalled in any language. Verbal criticism is but sparingly introduced, al- though even here the hand of a master is appar- ent. Tholuck.—The commentaries of this eminent writer on various books of the New Testament, COMMERCE especially those on the Epistles to the Romans and Hebrews, exhibit the highest exegetical excel- lences. While he critically investigates phrases and idioms, he ascends into the pure region of the ideas, unfolding the sense with much skill and discernment. His commentary on John is of a more popular cast. His interpretation of the Bergpredigt, or Sermon on the Mount, is very valuable. - In addition to these, Germany has produced other specimens of commentary that Occupy a high place in the estimation of competent judges. Lucke, on John's writings, especially in the third edition now in progress; Gesenius, on Isaiah ; De Wette, on the Psalms; Håvernick, on Ezekiel and Daniel; Billroth, on the Corinthians; Harless, On the Ephesians; and Baehr, on the Colossians—pos- sess much merit, accompanied, it is true, with some serious faults. As examples of thorough and solid commentary, the English language pre- sents none equal to those of Professor Stuart On the Epistles to the Romans and Hebrews. (6) Later Commentaries. A valuable com- mentary on the Epistle to the Romans we also possess in that of Professor Hodge, although the author cannot be said to have gone far beyond Calvin, in whose steps he has closely trodden. Among the later commentaries of value are those of Henry Alford; C. J. Ellicott; F. Godet; Keil and Delitzsch; Heinrich A. W. Meyer; J. D. Michaelis; R. C. Trench. (AVožes on the Mzrac/es, Notes on the Parables, etc.); F. G. A. Tholuck; D. D. Whedon. comMERCE (köm'měrs), (Heb. Tºº, saw-Khar', a primitive root; to trave/ round, specifically as a Żeddler). The idea conveyed by this word is represented in the sacred writings by the word trade. - (1) Origin. The origin of commerce must have been nearly coeval with the world. As pas- turage and agriculture were the only employments of the first inhabitants, so cattle, flocks, and the fruits of the earth were the only objects of the first commerce, or that species of it called barter. It would appear that some progress had been made in manufactures in the ages before the flood. The building of a city or village by Cain, however in- significant the houses may have been, Supposes the existence of some mechanical knowledge. The musical instruments, such as harps and Organs, the works in brass and in iron exhibited by the succeeding generations, confirm the belief that the arts were considerably advanced. The construc- tion of Noah's ark, a ship of three decks, covered over with pitch, and much larger than any modern effort of architecture, proves that many separate trades were at that period carried on. That enor- mous pile of building, the tower of Babel, was constructed of bricks, the process of making which appears to have becn well understood. Such of the descendants of Noah as lived near the water may be presumed to have made use of vessels built in imitation of the ark—if, as Some think, that was the first floating vessel ever seen in the world but on a smaller scale, for the pur- pose of crossing rivers. In the course of time the descendants of his son Japheth settled in the isles of the Gentiles,’ by which are understood the islands at the cast cnd of the Mediterranean Sea, and those between Asia Minor and Greece, whence their colonies spread into Greece, Italy, and other western lands. (2) Sidon. Sidon, which afterwards became so celebrated for the wonderful mercantile exertions of its inhabitants, was founded about 2,200 years before the Christian era. The neighboring moun- 445 COMMERCE tains, being covered with excellent cedar-trees, furnished the best and most durable timber for ship-building. The inhabitants of Sidon accord- ingly built numerous ships, and exported the prod- uce of the adjoining country, and the various articles of their own manufacture, such as fine linen, embroidery, tapestry, metals, glass, both colored and figured, cut, or carved, and even mir- rors. They were unrivaled by the inhabitants of the Mediterranean coasts in works of taste, ele- gance, and luxury. Their great and universally acknowledged pre-eminence in the arts procured for the Phoenicians, whose principal seaport was Sidon, the honor of being esteemed, among the Greeks and other nations, as the inventors of commerce, ship-building, navigation, the applica- tion of astronomy to nautical purposes, and par- ticularly as the discoverers of several stars nearer to the north pole than any that were known to other nations; of naval war, writing, arithmetic, book-keeping, measures and weights; to which it is probable they might have added money. Egypt appears to have excelled all the neighbor- ing countries in agriculture, and particularly in its abundant crops of corn. The fame of its fer- tility induced Abraham to remove thither with his numerous family (Gen. xii: Io). (3) Early Mention of Money. The earliest accounts of bargain and sale reach no higher than the time of Abraham, and his transaction with Ephron. He is said to have weighed unto him ‘400 shekels of silver, current money with the merchant’ (Gen. xxiii:16). The word merchant implies that the standard of money was fixed by usage among merchants, who comprised a numer- ous and respectable class of the community. Manufactures were by this time so far advanced, that not only those more immediately connected with agriculture, such as flour ground from corn, wine, oil, butter, and also the most necessary articles of clothing and furniture, but even those of luxury and magnificence, were much in use, as appears by the ear-rings, bracelets of gold and of silver, and other precious things presented by Abraham’s steward to Rebecca (Gen. xxiv: 22, 53). Although at a time too early to be dated the precious metals, gold and silver, were used as media of exchange, it is to be noticed that they were so used in the way of barter, and not as money in our sense of the term, which implies a definite weight bearing a stamp. The metal was weighed out, just as other articles would be weighed that were not sold by measure. We have no suggestion of the standard of weight. It is natural to suppose that the Phoenicians would be the first to appreciate the convenience of coin, money to be told out by number ; but archaeolo- gists do not give them credit for the invention. The earliest known coins are Lydian, struck by the Mermnad kings, the earliest of whom, Gyges (Gugu or Gog), usurped the throne about 700 B. C. The Lydians were rivals of the Phoenicians in ingenuity, in fine workmanship, and even in commerce, especially on internal trade, as con- trasted with maritime and coastal. Professor Sayce credits their merchants with being the first to devise inns upon regular lines of commerce. We Inced not hesitate, then, to credit them with , the invention of money when the evidence of the earliest coins certainly is in their favor. Pliny ascribes the invention to Servius Tullius. As that monarch is largely the creature of fable, this means only that the earliest Roman coinage (cop- per) was traditionally assigned to him. As to Lydia, see Sayce's article in Encyc, Brit., s. v. COMMERCE (4) Arabian Commerce. In the book of Job, whose author, in the opinion of the most learned commentators, resided in Arabia, and was con- temporary with the sons of Abraham, much light is thrown upon the commerce, manufactures, and science of the age and country in which he lived. There is mention of gold, iron, brass, lead, crystal, jcwcls, thc art of weaving, merchants, gold brought from Ophir, which implies commerce with a remote country, and topazes from Ethiopia; ship-building, so far improved that some ships were distinguished for the velocity of their mo- tion ; writing in a book, and engraving letters or writing on plates of lead and on stone with iron pens, and also seal-engraving; fishing with hooks, and nets, and spears; musical instruments, the harp and organ; astronomy, and names given to particular stars. These notices tend to prove that, although the patriarchal system of making pastur- age the chief object of attention was still main- tained by many of the greatest inhabitants where the author of the book of Job resided, the sciences were actively cultivated, the useful and ornamental arts in an advanced state, and commerce prose- c11ted with diligence and success. The inhabitants of Arabia appear to have availed themselves, at a very early period, of their advantageous situation between the two fertile and opulent countries of India and Egypt, and to have obtained the exclusive monopoly of a very profitable carrying trade between those countries. The merchants of one of these caravans bought Joseph from his brothers for twenty pieces of silver, that is about 2l. IIs. 8d. Sterling or thirteen dollars, and carried him into Egypt. The south- ern Arabs were eminent traders, and enjoyed a large proportion, and often the monopoly, of the trade between India and the western world. (5) Egyptian Manufactures. At the period when Joseph’s brethren visited Egypt, inns were established for the accommodation of travelers in that country and in the northern parts of Arabia. The more civilized southern parts of the penin- sula would no doubt be furnished with caravan- saries still more commodious. During the residence of the Israelites in Egypt manufactures of almost every description were carried to great perfection. Flax, fine linen, gar- ments of cotton, rings and jewels of gold and silver, works in all kinds of materials, chariots for pleasure, and chariots for war, are all mentioned by Moses. They had extensive manufactories of bricks. (6) Foreign Colonies. The expulsion of the Canaanites from a great part of their territories by the Israelites under Joshua, led to the gradual establishment of colonies in Cyprus, Rhodes, and several islands in the AEgean Sea; they pene- trated into the Euxine or Black Sea, and, spread- ing along the shores of Sicily, Sardinia, Gaul, Spain, and Africa, established numerous trading places, which gradually rose into more or less im- portance. At this period mention is first made of Tyre as a strong or fortified city, whilst Sidon is dignified with the title of Great. (7) Reigns of David and Solomon. During the reign of David, king of Israel, that powerful monarch disposed of a part of the wealth obtained by his conquests in purchasing cedar-timber from Hiram, king of Tyre, with whom he kept up a friendly correspondence while he lived. He also hired Tyrian masons and carpenters for carrying on his works. Solomon, the son of David, culti- vated the arts of peace, and indulged his taste for magnificence and luxury to a great extent. He employed the wealth collected by his father in 446 COMMON works of architecture, and in strengthening and improving his kingdom. He built the famous Temple and fortifications of Jerusalem, and many cities, among which was the celebrated Tadmor or Palmyra. From the king of Tyre he obtained cedar and fir, or cypress-timbers, and large stones cut and prepared for building, which the Tyrians conveyed by water to the most convenient land- ing-place in Solomon's dominions. Hiram also sent a vast number of workmen to assist and instruct Solomon’s people, none of whom had skill ‘to hew timber like the Sidonians.’ Solomon, in exchange, furnished the Tyrians with corn, wine, and oil, and received a balance in gold. Solomon and Hiram appear to have subse- quently entered into a trading speculation or ad- venture upon a large scale. Tyrian shipwrights were accordingly sent to build vessels for both kings at Eziongeber, Solomon's port on the Red Sea, whither he himself went to animate then with his presence (2 Chron. viii:17). These ships, conducted by Tyrian navigators, sailed in company to some rich countries called Ophir and Tarshish, regarding the position of which the learned have multiplied conjectures to little purpose. The voy- age occupied three years; yet the returns in this new found trade were very great and profitable. This fleet took in apes, ebony, and parrots on the , coasts of Ethiopia, gold at Ophir, or the place of traffic whither the people of Ophir resorted; it traded on both sides of the Red Sea, on the coasts of Arabia and Ethiopia, in all parts of Ethiopia beyond the straits when it had entered the ocean; thence it passed up the Persian Gulf, and might visit the places of trade upon both its shores, and run up the Tigris or the Euphrates as far as these rivers were navigable. After the reign of Solorrior the commerce of the Israelites seems to have very materially declined. An attempt was made by Jehoshaphat, king of Judah, and Ahaziah, king of Israel, to effect its revival ; but the ships which they built at Ezion- geber having been wrecked in the harbor, the un- dertaking was abandoned. (8) Tyre. The rising prosperity of Tyre soon eclipsed the ancient and long-flourishing commer- cial city of Sidon. About 600 years before Christ her commercial splendor appears to have been at its height, and is graphically described by Ezekiel (xxvii). The vast wealth that thus flowed into Tyre from all quarters brought with it its too general concomitants—extravagance, dissipation, and relaxation of morals. The subjection of Tyre, ‘the renowned city which was strong on the sea, whose merchants were princes, whose traffickers were the honorable of the earth,’ by Cyrus, and its subsequent over- throw by Alexander, after a determined and most formidahle resistance, terminated alike the gran- deur of that city and the history of ancient com- merce, as far as they are alluded to in Scripture. G. M. B. COMMON (köm'mün), (Gr. Kouvös, Åoy-nos', be- longing to several). The Greek term properly signifies what belongs to ad! (as in Wisd. vii:3), but the Hellenists applied it (like the Hebrew, Khole) to what was profane, i. e., not holy, and therefore of common or promiscuous use (Acts X: I4). They also applied the term to what was impure, whether naturally or legally (as in Mark vii:2, compared with Macc. i :47, 62). And, finally, it was used of meats forbidden, or such as had been partaken of by idolaters, and which, as they rendered the partakers thereof impure, were them- selves called common and unclean. COMMONWEALTH COMMONWEALTH (köm'mün-welth'), (Gr. troXpreta, pol-ee-ti'ah, a state), spoken of the theo- cratic or divine commonwealth (Eph. ii: 12); else- where, “freedom” (Acts xxii:28, R. V. “citizen- ship ’’). : COMMUNICATE (köm-mü'ni-kāt), (Gr. Kovovia, Æoy-mohn-ee'ah, Heb. xiii.16), from root meaning partnership, sharer; used intransitively, to partici- pate (Phil. iv: I4). COMMUNION (köm-mün'yūn), (Gr. kouvøvla, Äot- moh' mee-ah, community), a fellowship or agree- ment, when several persons join and partake to- gether of one thing (2 Cor. vi.14; I John i:3); hence its application to the celebration of the Lord's supper as an act of fellowship among Christians (I Cor. x:16); and it is to this act of participation or fellowship that the word “communion' is now restricted in the Fnglish language, the more famil- iar application of it having fallen into disuse. COMMUNION OF SAINTS (köm-mün'yūn ôv sånts), a part of Article III of the Apostles' Creed: “I believe in the Holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints.” The phrase is not found in the creeds of the Greek Church; and in the West we find it first in Faustus, Bishop of Reji, South Gaul, A. D. about 455. Among the views held are: (1) Roman Catholic. “The communion of saints consists in the union which binds together the members of the Church on earth, and connects the Church on earth with the Church suffering in purgatory and triumphant in heaven. The faith- ful on earth have communion with each other be- cause they partake of the same Sacraments, are under one head, and assist each other by their prayers and good works. . . . They communicate with the souls in purgatory by praying for them, . ..with the blessed in heaven by obtaining their prayers” (Cath. Dict., s. v.). (2) Protestant. The Churches of the Refor- mation rejected these views, although Protestant definitions vary somewhat. (a) Luther declared the Church was the body of believers, who, by faith, were saints; hence the phrase was exeget- ical of the “Holy Church.” So also the Reformed Church, at first in its symbols, the First Helvetic and the Scotch Confession of 1560. (b) Calvin understood it as a peculiarity of the Church. “It excellently expresses the character of the Church; as though it had been said that the saints are united in the fellowship of Christ on this condi- tion, that whatever benefits God bestows upon them they should mutually communicate to each other.” He is followed in the Geneva and Heidel- berg Catechisms, and in the Westminster Cate- chism, which says: “All saints . . . being united to one another in love, they have communion in each other's gifts and graces, and are obliged to the pcrformance of such duties, public and private, as do conduce to their mutual good, both in the inward and outward man.” (c) Pearson and Leighton agree substantially in stating that Chris- tians have communion with the Father (I John i: 3; 2 Pet. i :4), with Christ (I John i:3; John xvii:23), with the Holy Ghost (Phil. ii: I ; 2 Cor. xiii:I4), with angels (Heb. i:14; Luke xv : Io; Matt. xvii: Io), with all saints on earth as the liv- ing members of Christ (John i:7; Col. ii:19), and that they form one family with the saints who are in glory (Heb. xii:22, 23). (Barnes, Bib. Cyc., Mc. & Str. Biff. Cyc.) COMMUNITY OF GOODS (köm-mü'ni-ty. Öv gööds). A state of things which obtained in the early Church (Acts ii:44, 45; iv:32, 34). 447 CONCUBINAGE COMPASS (küm'pas), (Heb, usually PPP, saw- baë', to revolve), used in the A. V. as a noun, as to “fetch a compass” (Num. xxxiv:5; Josh. XV:3, etc.; Acts xxviii: 13, Gr. reptépxopat, to go around). COMPASSION (köm-pāsh'in), (Heb. 797, Aheh'- sed, kindness; Gr. Neos, eſ’eh-os, compassion). It is rendered “mercy” in Micah viz8. (See also Matt. V:7; xxiii:23; James iii:17). COMPEL (köm'pël), the rendering in the A. V. (Matt. v:41; xxvii:32; Mark xv.21) of the technical Greek term ang-ar-yew'o (äyyapetºw), literally, “to employ a courier.” In Luke xiv:23 the Greek word (ávaykd; w, an-ang-AEad"zo) has the milder sense of to large with great zeal. It is thus that Christians are to compel sinners to come in to Christ's house, when with the ut- most earnestness and concern they show them their sinfulness and danger; the excellency, love, and loveliness of Christ; the happiness of those who receive him; their warrant and the command of God to believe in him; and beseech them, as in Christ's stead, to be reconciled to God (2 Cor. v:20). COMPREHEND(köm'pré-hénd'), (Heb. bºb, Åool, Is; xl;12), from primitive root, to keep in, to con- tain, to hold as in a measure. 1. To enclose (Is. x1:12). 3. To sum up (Rom. xiii:9). 8. To perceive clearly, understand fully (John i:5). To comprehend with all saints the un- bounded loye, of Christ is to have a clear, exten- nºwledge of its nature and effects (Eph. 111 . I& ). CONANIAH (kön'a-ni'ah), (Heb. **, Ao- man-yaw'hoo, Jah has sustained or made). 1. A Levite ruler who had charge of the of— ferings and tithes in the time of Hezekiah (2 Chron. xxxi :12, 13, A. V. “Cononiah”). 3. One who made large offerings for the pas- chal sacrifices as renewed by Josiah (2 Chron. xxxv :9). (B. C. 726). CONCISION (kön-sizh'in), (Phil. iii:2), (Gr. # karatouff, mutilation, or concision), a term by which St. Paul denominates the Judaizers who insisted On circumcision as being necessary for Gentile COn VertS. - CONCORDANCE (kön-kórd'ans), the name as- signed to a book which gives the words contained in the Holy Scriptures in alphabetical order, with * ºrence to the place where each may be OUIIlCl. concUBINAGE (kön-kübi-nāj), (Heb. tºº, Žee-Zeh'ghesh, a half wife), in a scriptural sense, means the state of cohabiting lawfully with a wife of second rank, who enjoyed no other conjugal right but that of cohabitation, and whom the hus- band could repudiate and send away with a small present (Gen. xxi.; I4). . In like manner, he could by means of presents, exclude his children by her from the heritage (Gen. xxv :6). Such concubines had Nahor (Gen. xxii:24), Abraham (xxv :6), Jacob (xxxv : 22), Eliphaz (xxxvi; I2), Gideon, Saul (2 Sam. iii:7), David (2 Sam. v : 13; xv :16; xvi :21), Solo- mon (I Kings xi :3), Caleb (1 Chron. ii:46), Manasseh (ib. vii. 14), Rehoboam (2 Chron. xi : 2I), Abiah (2 Chron. xiii:21), and Belshazzar (Dan. v.2). (1) Causes. To judge from the conjugal his- tories of Abraham and Jacob (Gen. xvi and XXX), the immediate cause of concubinage was the barrenness of the lawful wife, who in that case CONCUBINAGE introduced her maid-servant, of her own accord, to her husband, for the sake of having children. Accordingly we do not read that Isaac, son of Abraham, had any concubine, Rebecca, his wife, not being barren. In process of time, however, concubinage appears to have degenerated into a regular custom among the Jews, and the institu- tions of Moses were directed to prevent excess and abuse in that respect, by wholesome laws and regulations (Exod. xxi :7-9; Deut. xxi : IO-14). It would seem that the unfaithfulness of a concubine was not regarded as an act of real adultery (Lev. xix:20). To guard adult male offspring from de- bauchery before marriage, their parents, it appears, used to give them one of their female slaves as a concubine. She was then considered as one of the children of the house, and she retained her rights as a concubine, even after the marriage of the son (Exod. xxi :9, II). When a son had inter- course with the concubine of his father, a sort of family punishment, we are informed, was inflicted on him (Gen. xxxv :22; I Chron. v : I). (2) Children. With regard to the children of the wife and concubine, there was not the differ- ence that our illegitimacy implies; the latter were a supplementary family, and their names occur in the patriarchal genealogies (Gen. xxii:24; I Chron. i :32). The rights of a Hebrew concubine, who had becn bought of her fathcrand of a Gen- tile taken in war, were protected by law (Exod. xxi :7; Deut. xxi : Io), but the rights of a concubine who had been bought as a foreign slave were un- recognized, and those of a Canaanitish woman prohibited. - In the Talmud (tit. Cetuboth), the Rabbins dif- fer as to what constitutes concubinage; some re- garding as its distinguishing feature the absence of the betrothing ceremonies (sponsalia), and of the dowry (libellus dotis), or portion of property allotted to a woman by special engagement, and to which she was entitled on the marriage day, after the decease of the husband, or in case of repudia- tion; others, again, the absence of the latter alone. (3) Roman Custom. The Roman law calls concubinage an allowed custom. When this ex- pression occurs in the constitutions of the Chris- tian emperors, it signifies what we now some- times call a marriage of conscience. The concu- binage tolerated among the Romans, in the time of the Republic and of the heathen emperors, was that between persons not capable of contracting legal marriage. Inheritances might descend to children that spring from such a tolerated cohabi- tance. Concubinage between such persons they looked on as a kind of marriage, and even allowed it several privileges; but then it was confined to a single person, and was of perpetual obligation, as much as marriage itself. Concubinage is also used to signify a marriage with a won an of in- ferior condition, to whom the husband does not convey his rank, much like the morganatic mar- riages of European princes. The connection was considered so lawful that the concubine might lºcused of adultery in the same manner as a W116. This kind of concubinage is still in use in some countries, title of halb-ehe (half-marriage), or left-hand marriage, in allusion to the manner of its being contracted, namely, by the man giving the woman his left hand instead of the right. This is a real marriage, though without the usual Solemnity, and the parties are both bound to each Other forever, though the female cannot bear the husband's name and title. 2. 448 CONFECTIONARY CONCUPISCENCE (kön-kü'pís-sens), (Gr. &mi- 6vpta, eff-ee-t/koo-mee'ań, a longing, Rom. vii:8; Col. iii:5), evil desire. . It denotes: 1. The imperfection of our nature, from whence all our actual sin proceeds (Rom. vii:7; James i: 3. Actual motions and inclinations of our heart toward sinful deeds (Rom. vii:8). 3. Unchastity, especially of desire (Col. iii:5; I Thess. iv:5). CONIDESCENSION OF CHRIST. This is a term used to express the meaning of Kenosis, or the Incarnation. It was applied to the limitations upon the Christ in His incarnate human life; to the limitations imposed upon Divine omnipotence and Divine omniscience within the human sphere of action, in order to allow a real growth and action of human will and human knowledge. The term, Condescension of Christ, or its equiv- alent word, Kenosis, was sometimes used widely to apply to all such limitations, sometimes (e. g., in the discussions on the 17th century) it was used, in antithesis to Kpºpus, of a virtual surrender of such attributes, as opposed to a pos- session but conscious restraint in the use of them. On these exact points the Bible does not define, huf it supplies the factors that have to be recon- ciled, viz., the reality of a Divine oneness be- tween the Father and the Son (John i: I-18; x:30; Heb. i :3), certain limitations of perfect inter- course between the Father and the Incarnate Son (Matt. xxvii:46), certain statements of the Lord Himself as to the limitations of His own knowl- edge (Mark xiii:32) and of His own glory’ (John xvii:4), and statements of New Testa- ment writers as to the reality of temptation, and of growth in wisdom and learning in Him (Luke ii:IO-52; Heb. iv:15; v :7, 8). (See KENOSIS; INCARNATION.) !- CONDUIT (kön'dit), (Heb. Tºº, teh-aw-law', a channel, “watercoursc,” Job xxxviii:25; “trench," I Kings xviii:32-38). The aqueduct made by Hezekiah to convey the water from the upper pool of Gihon into the west- ern part of Jerusalem (2 Kings xviii: I7; xx:20; Is. vii:3; xxxvi :2). • CoNEY (kö’ny), (Heb. ??, shaw-fawn', a hare, hedgehog, or rabbit). See SHAPHAN. "Allºw, t ſº \nº tº º Fººd º º ‘. . . . . * * * º 3 º * º Fº º tº -ºº: –––––. T Coney. CONFECTION (kön-fék'shūn), (Heb. "E", ro'- ÆaÅh), a perfume made by Moses (Exod. xxx:35). CONFECTIONARY (kön-fék'shūn-ā-ry), (Heb. . "Pº, raw-Aakh"), a woman who was a perfumer, (I Sam. viii: 13). “And he will take your daughters to be confec- tionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers.” We now use the form confectioner; but confectionary was the older form. But myself • Who had the world as my confectionary. SHAKESPEARE, CONFERENCE CONFERENCE (kön'fer-ens), (Gr. ºrpogavariëmut, Żros-an-aſ-ith'ay-mee, to communicate, Gal. ii.6.) The coming together to discuss questions and to deliberate upon subjects. It was used originally as converse, or conversa- tion. This is Bacon's meaning in the passage, Essays ‘Of Studies' (p 205, Gold. Treas. ed.), “Reading maketh a full man; Conference a ready man; and Writing an exact man.' tº- CONFESSION (kön-fésh'in), (Heb. from "º, yaw-dazy", literally, to use, i. e., extend the hand), is used in the Old Testament in the sense of acknowledging one's sin (Lev. v.:5; Job xl:14; Ps. xxxii:5). Jesus Christ will “confess his people” at the last day: will publicly own them his children, bride, and faithful servants (Luke xii:8). They “con- fess him” before men, when, notwithstanding of danger and opposition, they openly profess and adhere to his truth, observe his ordinances, and walk in his way (Matt. x:32). To “confess God,” is to praise and thank him (Heb. xiii:15). To “confess sin,” is candidly to acknowledge our guilt before God, who can pardon or punish us: or to our neighbor, whom we have offended, or who can give us proper instruction and comfort (Ps. xxxii:5; Matt. iii:6; James v :16). CONFLAGRATION, GENERAL (kön' flä- grä'shūn, jën'êr-al). The opinion that the end of the world is to be effected by the agency of fire is very ancient, and was common amongst heathen philosophers (Ovid, Metamorph. i :256). Other testimonies are quoted by Grotius (De Veritate Rel. Chr., lib i : Sec. 22). It is not easy to discover the origin of this Opinion; it can scarcely be traced to tradition de- rived from revelation, since there is no distinct reference to such a catastrophe in the Old Testa- ment. It is, moreover, remarkable, considering how universal and definite is the ordinary belief on the subject, that there is only one passage in the New Testament, viz., 2 Pet. iii:7, Io, which can be adduced as speaking distinctly of this event. This passage is, indeed, very explicit, but it should not be forgotten that some learned and able ex- positors have referred it altogether to the destruc- tion of Jerusalem and of the Jewish polity. CONFUSION (kön-fü'zhūn), (Heb. Ann, to"hoo, Is... xxxiv:II; xli:29). The root of the word means to lie waste, desert, without form; the huddling of things together; perplexity; disorder; shame; ruin (Isa. xxiv:Io; Ps. xxxv :4). Unnatural intimacy with beasts, or of a man with his daughter-in-law, is confusion; is a horrid and shameful blending of natures or persons which ought to be kept distinct. But the word might be translated, A shocking crime (Lev. xviii:25, and xx : I.2). Idols and the Egyptians were the confusion of the Jews; they were the means Or the occasion of bringing them to shame, disorder, perplexity, and ruin (Is. xli :29, and xxx:3). , Confusion of face denotes per- plexity and shame, which make one doubtful, or to blush to look anywhere (Ezra ix:7). (Brown). (Gr. dºgtaotaota, , ak-at-as-tah-see'ah, Jas. iii:16) instability, disorder, tumult. Wycliffe has un- steadfastness; Cranmer has unstableness; Geneva has sedition. CONFUSION OF TONGUES (kön-fü'shūn 8w tüngz). See BABEL, ToweR OF. CONGRE GATION (kön-gré -gã'shūn), (Heb. nºy, ay-dazey', Or -yº, mo-ade' , Gr, ovva yajnytj, Soon-ag-O-gay'). 449 i. CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH 1. In the Old Testament it denotes the He- brew people in its collective capacity, under its peculiar aspect as a holy community, held together by religious rather than political bonds. Deut. xxxi:30; Josh. viii:35; I Chron. xxix: I, , etc. “Sometimes it is used in a broad sense, as inclu- sive of foreign settlers, Exod. xii; IQ, but more prop- erly as exclusively appropriate to the Hebrew element of the population. Num. xv. 15.” The congregation was governed by the chief of the tribes and families, but from these was selected a council of 70 elders. Num. xvi;2; xi :16. This was a permanent institution, for these represent- atives of the people—who at first met at the door of the tabernacle at the call of one silver trumpet, while the congregation came at sound of the two, Num, x:3, 4, 7–became in post-exilic days the Sanhedrin. Doubtless these meetings of the elders are often meant when the term “congregation” is used. Thus they meet to elect a king. I Sam. x:17. Their decisions bound the nation. Josh. ix: I5, 18. 2. In the New Testament it means the Chris- tian Church at large or a local congregation, but in King James’s Version the corresponding Greek word (ecclesia), when used of a religious assembly, is always rendered “church,” even in Acts vii:38, where it means the Jewish congrega- tion in the wilderness. King James expressly commanded the revisers to do this, in opposition to the Geneva Version, which uses the more literal rendering “congregation.” In Acts xix:32, 39, 40 it means simply a popular assembly. Schaff, Bib. Dict.). congBEGATION, MoUNT OF THE (Heb. Tº Tº, harmo-ade'), supposed by some to refer to Mount Moriah as the site of the Temple (Is. xiv:13), but Zion was neither a northern point of the earth, nor was it situated on the north of Jeru- salem. The name denotes some place of religious wor- ship among the Babylonians. Delitzsch says, “The prophet makes the king of Babylon speak after the general notion of his people, who placed the seat of the Deity on the summit of the northern moun- tains, which were lost in the clouds.” CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH (kön-gré-gā'- shün-al chârch). What are known as the Congregational Churches of America and of Great Britain are not the only churches which are congregational by organization. The Baptists, the Christians, the Unitarians, and several other religious bodies have substantially the same polity, so that nearly thirty-eight per cent of all assemblies for public worship in the United States are of this type of government. But the group of churches known by the title of “Congregational” are so one in his- tory, faith, character, worship, missionary activi- ties and responsible mutual relationship, that they constitute as distinct a denomination as any in America. (1) Origin. Amcrican Congregationalism had its origin in England in the reign of Elizabeth. Many English Protestants felt that the Reforma- tion, as introduced under that great queen, had not gone far enough toward the realization of what they believed that the Bible taught that a Christian church should be. These seekers for a more per- fect Reformation were of two classes, the Puri- tans, a large party who believed in the possibility of a reformed national church, and the Separat- ists, a comparatively small and radical party, who agreed in general with the Puritans as to the direction in which churchly reforms should be 29 CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH sought, but held that Christians should separate from the national church and Organize local con- gregations composed exclusively of persons of professed Christian experience. The first to proclaim these Separatist views suc- cessfully was Rev. Robert Browne, a graduate of Cambridge University. In 1580 he formed a Con- gregational Church in Norwich. A similar church completed its organization at London in 1592, and another came into being at Scrooby, one hundred and fifty miles north of London, in 1605 or 1606. The latter had Richard Clyfton, John Robinson, William Brewster and William Brad- ford among its members. Persecution compelled all these churches to flee from England to Holland. That formed at Scrooby settled at Leyden in 1609, and a considerable portion of its membership, un- der the lead of Brewster and Bradford, crossed the Atlantic in the “Mayflower,” and founded the first permanent settlement in New England at Plymouth in 162o. (2) Early Growth. Not long after Congrega- tionalism was thus brought by Separatists to America, political and ecclesiastical tyranny in England induced many prominent Puritans to emigrate to New England. Massachusetts, Con- necticut and New Hampshire were settled by Puritans, and beginning with the formation of a Congregational Church substantially like that of Plymouth at Salem in 1629, Congregational Churches were spread by Puritan settlers over the New England colonies. By 1637, when they held their first synod, or general council, they numbered 22 ; by 1646, when the Cambridge Synod formulated their polity, they had grown to 53. In 1760, there were 530 Congregational Churches in New England. By 1816, they had multiplied to 1,000; and at the present time the churches of the denomination in the United States number 5,625; their ministers about 5,500, and their communi- cants 630,000. As late as 1820, four-fifths of the Congregational Churches were in New England. Now nearly three-fourths are in other parts of the United States. Some few of the way-marks of this long history have been, Eliot’s efforts for the conversion of the Indians, from 1646 onward; the “Great Awaken- ing” under George Whitefield and other evangel- ists, 1740-41 ; Jonathan Edwards and the New England theology; home missions organized, 1798; the first theological seminary opened (Andover), 1808; the American Board of Foreign Missions formed, 1810; the Triennial National Council in- stituted, 1871; the Christian Endeavor Society in- augurated, 1881 ; the International Congregational Council, 1891. Congregationalism has always believed in popu- lar education. Its first school (Boston) was Upuud in 1635. The first of a long Cories of colº leges (Harvard) was founded in 1636; and the list of such institutions of higher learning essentially related to Congregationalism now embraces forty- one, besides seven theological Seminaries. (3) New Testament Pattern. The founders of Congregationalism believed that the New Testament contains a minute and authoritative pattern of what a church should be in organiza- tion and government. Few of their present suc- cessors would make so sweeping a claim ; but Congregationalists generally hold that the Scrip- tures set forth certain broad principles of Chris- tian life and practice which should dominate the government and worship of a church as truly as the conduct of an individual believer. While Congregationalists freely recognize that all Chris- tians, throughout the world, are spiritually, but 450 CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH not governmentally, one—the Church universal— they have held from the beginning that the proper organized form of the Church is not national, synodical or diocesan, but in self-governing con- gregations—hence the name, Congregationalist. Each of these congregations—or, more properly, churches—is to be composed exclusively of mem- bers of professed Christian faith and experience, united one to another, and to their Lord, by a cov- enant, assent to which is required on admission to the church. Of each congregation Christ is the immediate Head, hence no superior human au- thority can interfere with its control of its own concerns. It chooses its own officers, regulates its own worship, formulates its creed and covenant in words of its own selection, and conducts all its business by the votes of its membership, either directly or through committees. Hence Congre- gational Church government is spiritual democ- racy. The officers of a Congregational Church were originally a “pastor,” a “teacher,” one or two “ruling elders,” and several “deacons.” In theory, and in practice in one instance of early Congrega- tional history, “widows” or deaconesses were to be added to the officers named, all being thought to be required by the New Testament. But these officers were speedily felt to be too numerous, and the official equipment of a Congregational Church usual, for more than two centuries past, has been a pastor and deacons. Besides the deacons, from two to eight in number customarily, churches of size have a “prudential” committee to aid the pas- tor in administration; but no act is final unless ap- proved by the church itself. Congregationalists have always felt that religious knowledge was no monopoly of a few, but the privilege of all ; hence they have emphasized learning in the pews as well as in the pulpit. Their churches have been charac- teristically of a missionary spirit; and their wor- ship has been, and is still essentially, of a non- liturgical character. But while each Congregational Church is inde- pendent and self-governing, it is not alone. Since Christ is the immediate head of each church, these churches are equal, they are like brothers and sis- ters in one family. As members of a Christian household, they owe one to another counsel in perplexity, advice in important decisions, aid in poverty, and admonition when in error. Hence arises the Congregational thought of responsibil- ity, as well as local independence. (4) Advisory Councils. This responsibility finds expression in “advisory councils;” i. e., in all matters of importance, like organizing a church, settling a pastor, or healing a q11arrel within the church, Congregationalists believe that the advice of the representatives of other Congregational Churches, assembled by invitation, should be sought. Besides these occasional councils, which are summoned only to advise on the particular question under consideration and are not perma- nent bodies, Congregational fellowship finds ex- pression in local “conferences” and “associations,” often embracing the churches of one county; in state conferences; and in the Triennial National Council. In these permanent bodies the churches are represented by delegates. None of these bod- ies are judicial; but though merely advisory their counsel has great weight. While each Congregational Church can express its conception of Christian truth in words of its own choosing, Congregationalists, gathered in their public conventions, have never hesitated to give testimony to their faith. Thus, in 1648, the Cambridge Synod approved the doctrinal sections CONIAH of the Westminster Confession; in 1680, a council representative of the churches of Massachusetts approved the modification of the same Confession made by the English Congregationalists in 1658. Similar action was taken by the churches of Connecticut in 1708. The National Council in 1865 adopted a statement of belief; and a creed was put forth, in 1883, by a commission ap- pointed by the National Council in 1880, which was further approved for publication in its model “Manual” for a Congregational Church, by the same body in 1895. No Congregational Church is required to subscribe to this creed, but many have adopted it as their expression of faith, and it represents as fairly as any statement could the position to-day of the great majority of Congre- gational Churches and ministers. (5) Missionary Work. The missionary work of these churches is mainly conducted through six Societies, viz.: the “American Board;” the “Amer- ican Missionary Association ;” the “Congregation- al Home Missionary Society;” the Congregation- al Church Building Society;” the “Congregational Education Society;” and the “Congregational Sunday-School and Publishing Society.” Congregationalists believe this system to be pe- culiarly illustrative of the fraternal spirit of the Gospel; they regard it also as admirably adapted to the intelligent, self-governing communities of democratic America, to the development of whose characteristic institutions it has contributed much in the past. But the Congregational Churches of America have never claimed to be the only true churches; and they stand ready to unite in federal co-operation, as far as opportunity may offer, with churches of the Protestant type of faith commonly known as “evangelical.” W. W. CONIAH (ko-ni'ah), (Heb. "Yº, Áon-yaw'hoo, Jah is creating). See JECONIAH. CONONIAH (kön'o-ni'ah). See ConANIAH. CONSCIENCE (kön'shens), (Lat. conscientia, consciousness; Gr. ovvetómorus, soon-2'day-s?s). (1) Views Regarding Conscience. I. /. Stuart Mill. Strictly, the name is applicable to the power by which we know moral law. Popularly, the nanue is given indiscriminately to the knowing power, and to the dipositions and sentiments con- cerned with morals. “The internal sanction of duty, whatever our standard of duty may be, is one and the same—a feeling in our own mind, a pain more or less intense, attendant on violation of duty. . . . This feeling, when disinterested, and connecting itself with the pure idea of duty, and not with some particular form of it, or with any of the merely accessory circumstances, is the es- sence of conscience.” J. S. Mill, Utilitarianism, P. 4. 2. Bain. “I entirely dissent from Dugald Stewart, and the great majority of writers on the theory of morals, who represent conscience as a primitive and independent faculty of the mind, which would be developed in us, although we never had any experience of external authority. On the contrary, I maintain that conscience is an imitation within ourselves of the government yº us.”—Bain. Emotions and Will, 3d ed., p. 285. * 3. Sedgwick. “I find that I undoubtedly seem to perceive, as clearly and certainly as I see any axiom in arithmetic or geometry, that it is ‘right’ and ‘reasonable,” and the ‘dictate of reason,’ and 'my duty,’ to treat every man as I should think that I myself ought to be treated in pre- cisely similar circumstances.”—Sedgwick. Meth- ods of Ethics, 470. (Fleming, Vocab. of Phil.) 451 CONSECRATION 4. Schaff. Conscience is the inborn sense of right and wrong, the moral law written on our hearts which judges of the moral character of our motives and actions, and approves or censures, condemns or justifies us accordingly. Rom. ii: I5. This universal tribunal is established in the breast of every man, even the heathen. It may be weakened, perverted, stupefied, defiled, and hard- ened in various ways, and its decisions are more or less clear, just, and imperative according to the degree of moral culture. John viii:9; Acts xxiii: I ; xxiv:I6; Rom. ix:I; and 1 Tim. i :5. (2) Terms Applied to Conscience. In Ethics, a large number of terms have arisen, in which are indicated the various theoretical and practical judgments involved in its questions. Among the most important of these are the ſollowing: approv- ing and disapproving; careless, lax, morbid, nar- row, micrologic, solicitous about trifles; Scrupu- lous: certain and uncertain; proportional; complete and incomplete; concomitant, when it regards things present; consequent, things past; antece- dent, things future; dissuading and persuading ; natural ; educated and uneducated ; erroneous and right; free and servile; gnawing, biting, stinging, wounded; good and bad; tranquil, calm, quiet; im- probable and probable; torpid and wakeful. (Fleming). CONSECRATION (kön'sé-krä'shūn), the render- ing of several words in the original. Among them are Heb. Frº, Ahah'ram, to devote; Tºº, meh'zer, separation. It is the act of solemnly setting apart a person or thing to the service of God. By various trans- actions (such as the circumcision of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob ; and the covenant made with them, in reference to their posterity, in their pass- ing through the Red Sea; in their appearance be- fore God at Mount Sinai, and the solemn covenant there ; and in the solemn dedication of them- selves at Ebal and Gerizim), the whole Hebrew nation were “consecrated” to be the peculiar peo- ple and servants of God (Exod. xiv. xix. xxiv.; Deut. v., xxvi, xxvii, xxix). To commemorate the destruction of the first-born of the Egyptians, the first-born of Israel, man and beast, were “con- secrated” to be the Lord's (Exod. xiii). By washing, offering of sacrifice, and sprinkling of oil or blood, were the Levites, in room of the first- born, and the priests, and the tabernacle, temple, and sacred furniture, “consecrated” to the cere- monial service of God (Exod. xxviii:29; Num. i:49; iii: Io; vii, viii; 2 Chron. ii:4; vii:9; Ezra vi :16, 17). The tithes and first-fruits were really, but less solemnly “dedicated” to the service of God. The Jews “dedicated” their houses, and even the walls of their city; probably this was done with prayer and thanksgiving (Deut. xx:5; Neh. xii:27). Joshua “dedicated” the Gibeonites, and the silver and gold of Jericho (Josh. vi., ix). Not a few “consecrated” themselves to serve God in the capacity of Nazarites, or Nethinims (Num. vi). Manoah devoted Samson his son; and Han- nah, Samuel her son, to the perpetual service of God (Judg. xiii; I Sam. i :21, 22). Many “dedi- cafed” their money, fields, and caffle to the I ord (Lev. xxvii). Moses, Samuel, Saul, David and his successors, and other warriors, “dedicated” part of the spoil they took in battle (Num. xxxi.; I Kings xv :15; 1 Chron. xxvi :26-28). When Judas Maccabaeus purged the temple, he solemnly “dedicated” it to its holy use, and appointed the feast of dedication to be yearly observed (John x:22). w CONSOLATION CONSOLATION (kön'sö-lä'shūn). Christ is the consolation of Israel; with predic- tions of his coming and kingdom the ancient prophets comforted the Jews; and in every age, his person, righteousness, fullness, and love, are the source and substance of his people's comfort against every trouble (Luke ii:25). Are the con- solations of God small with thee? Do you con- temn our divine advices, which we have given you for your direction and comfort? (Job xv : II). (See CoMFORT; Holy GHOST.) CONSTELLATIONS (kön'stël-lä'shüns). See ASTRONOMY. CONSUMPTION (kön-simp'shūn), possibly tuberculosis (Zech. xiv:12). CONTAIN (kön-tān"), (Gr. )kpatetſouai, eng-krat- yoo'07/2-a/hee, I Cor. vii:9, to exercise self-re- straint in diet and chastity). In general (1) to take in; hold (1 Kings viii:27). (2) In particular, to peruse fully (John xxi.25). CONTENTION (kön-tën'shin), (Heb. lºº, maw- dohn', strife; 2"), reeb, pleading; Gr. ºpus, er'2s). A violent effort to obtain, or resist, something; contest, strife (Phil. ii:3; James iii: 14, 16). It is sinful, when, with anger we strive with one another (Prov. xiii: Io); or lawful, when we eagerly promote that which is good, notwith- standing great opposition (I Thess. ii:2). We contend earnestly for the faith, when, notwith- standing manifold suffering and danger, we are strong in the faith of God’s truth contained in his word; zealously profess and practise it, and ex- cite others to do so (Jude 3). CONTENTMENT (kön-tênt’ ment), (Gr. atráp- keta, Özv-Čar'Az-ah, sufficiency, 2 Cor. ix:8). The perfect faith, or trust which makes one in- dependent of outward circumstances (Phil. iv: II ; I Tim. vi :6, 8). It is a disposition of mind undisturbed by envy, or anxiety (James iii: 16; Matt. vi :25, 34). CONTRITION (kön-trish'in), (Heb. NP, dazy- Æaw', bruised; Our English word is from Lat. con- Zrztus). It denotes being broken; bruised; deeply affect- ed with grief (Ps. xxxiv:18 and li:17; Is. lvii:15 and 1xvi :2). CONVENIENT (kön-vén'yent), (Gr. kaðiro, Æath-ay"Åo, to come to), signifies “becoming, fit- ting, appropriate” in several passages (Prov. xxx:8; Jer. xl:4; Rom. i:28; Eph. v.:4; Philem. ver. 8). It occurs Once in the dedication of James' translators. It was an ancient Latin tense of the word. CONVENT (kön-vént'), (marg. of Jer. xlix:19 and l:44), to Convene, to summon to a tribunal; Lat. conven??"e. convºngANT (ºn-ves'an), (Ilel, Tº, Aww. ZaAE', Josh. viii:35; I Sam. xxv.15), to come contin- ually, follow, accustomed to haunt, walking among and dealing with. CONVERSATION (kön'vār-să'shūn). 1. (Heb. F., deh' reA, Ps. 1:23), road, way, cus- tom, manner; R. V., marg., “way.” 2. (Gr. 7póTos, trop'os, Heb. xiii:5), deportment, style, mode of life. It thus means conduct, or mode of life, espe- cially with respect to morals (Ps. xxxvii:14; Eph. iv.:22; Heb. xiii:5; I Peter i:15). 3. (Gr. troXtreupa, Žoſ-2t'yote-mah), to behave as a citizen (Phil. i:27). In Phil. iii:2O, “our conversation is in heaven” means “we are citizens of heaven,” or “our citi- zenship is in heaven,” i. e., Christians are citizens 452 CON VICTION of the heavenly kingdom and their daily civil con- duct should correspond with the teachings of the gospel of the kingdom. CONVERSION (kön-vèr'shūn), (Gr. Štworpoq ft, ep-is-trof-ay", Acts xv.3, rendered “conversion,” literally, turning toward). Conversion, a change from one state to another. Conversion may be (I) Merely external, or that which consists only in an outward reformation.— (2) Doctrinal, or a change of sentiments.-(3) Saving, which consists in the renovation of the heart and life, or a turning from the power of sin and Satan unto God, Acts xxvi :18, and is pro- duced by the influence of divine grace on the Soul.—(4) Sometimes it is put for restoration, as in the case of Peter, Luke xxii:32–(5) The in- strumental cause of conversion is usually the min- istry of the word; though sometimes it is pro- duced by reading, by serious and appropriate con- versation, sanctified afflictions, etc. (6) “Conver- sion,” says the great Charnock, “is to be distin- guished from regeneration thus—Regeneration is a spiritual change; conversion is a spiritual motion; in regeneration there is a power con- ferred; conversion is the exercise of this power; in regeneration there is given us a prin- ciple to turn; conversion is our actual turning. In the covenant, God’s putting his Spirit into us is distinguished from our walking in his statutes from the first step we take in the way of God, and is set down as the cause of our motion, Ezek. xxxvi :27. In renewing us, God gives us a pow- er; in converting us, he excites that power. Men are naturally dead, and have a stone upon them; regeneration is a rolling away the stone from the heart, and a raising to newness of life; and then conversion is as natural to a regenerate man as motion is to a lively body. A principle of activ- ity will produce action. In regeneration, man is wholly passive; in conversion, he is active. The first reviving us is wholly the act of God, with- out any concurrence of the creature; but after we are revived we do actively and voluntarily live in his sight. Regeneration is the motion of God, in the creature; conversion is the motion of the creature to God, by virtue of that first principle; from this principle all the acts of believing, re- penting, mortifying, quickening, do Spring. In all these a man is active; in the other he is merely passive.” Conversion evidences itself by ardent love to God, Ps. lxxiii:25, delight in his people, John xiii:35, attendance on his ordinances, Ps. xxvii:4, confidence in his promises, PS. ix:IO, abhorrence of self, and renunciation of the world, Job xlii:6; James iv:4; submission to his au- thority, and uniform obedience to his word as in Matt. vii:20. (See REPENTANCE ; REGENERA- tion ) CONVICTION (kön-vik'shūn), (Gr. ÉXéyxw, el- eng'Ého, to convict, reprove, John viii:46, A. V. “convinceth.” The R. V., changes the rendering to “convicteth.” In I Cor. xiv:24, A. V., “con- vinced” is in R. V. “reproved;” in Tit. i.9 “con- vince” is changed to “convict,” etc.). (I) Conviction, in general, is the assurance of the truth of any proposition. (2) In a religious sense, it is the first degree of repentance, and implies, an affecting sense that we are guilty before God; that we can do nothing of ourselves to gain his forfeited favor; that sin is very odious and hate- ful, yea, the greatest of evils. (3) There is a natural conviction which arises from natural con- science, fear of punishment, moral suasion, or alarming providences, but which is not of a per- manent nature. (4) Saving conviction is the CONVINCE work of the Spirit, as the cause; though the law, the conscience, the Gospel, or affliction, may be the means, John xvi;8, 9. CONVINCE (kön-vins'). See CoNviction. CONVOCATION (kön-vö-kāshān), (Heb. Nº, mik-raw', a holy assembly, Num. x:2; IS. i. 13). This term is applied invariably to meetings of a re/igzou's character, in Contradistinction to congre- gatzon, in which political and legal matters were occasionally settled. On the sabbath, on the day of the passover, on the first and seventh days of unleavened bread, on the days of Pentecost and expiation, on the first and eighth of the feast of tabernacles, the Jews had their solemn convocations (Exod. xii: I6; Lev. xxiii; Num. xxviii; xxix; Neh. viii:18). COOK, COOKING (köök, köök'ing). See FooD. COOS (kö'os), (Gr. Kós, AEoce), Cos or Co (now Stan-Co or Stanchio), a small and fertile island in the AEgean Sea, near the coast of Caria, in Asia Minor, almost between the promontories on which the cities Cnidus and Halicarnassus were situated. It was celebrated for its wine, silks, and cot- ton of a beautiful texture. The island is mentioned in I Macc. xv.:23; Acts xxi : I. It is about twenty- one miles long by six broad. Its principal city has been seriously injured more than once by earth- quakes. COPING (köping), (Heb. "Pº, tayſakh, a hand- breath, a course of stones, either flat or sloping, to throw off the water (I Kings vii:9). COPPER (köp'për), (Heb. Fºrſº, meAh-o'sheth). Tubal Cain is recorded as the first artificer in brass and iron (Gen. iv:22). In the time of Solomon, Hiram of Tyre was celebrated as a worker in brass (I Kings vii: I4; comp. 2 Chron. ii: I4). To judge from Hesiod and Lucretius the art of working in copper was even older than that in iron, probably from the fact that it was found in larger masses, and from its requiring less labor in the process of manufacture. Palestine abounded in copper (Deut. viii:9), and David left behind him an immense quantity of it to be employed in building the Temple (I Chron. xxii:3-14). All sorts of vessels in the Tabernacle and Temple were made of copper (Lev. vi.28; Num. xvi :39; 2 Chron. iv:16; Ezra viii:27), weapons, and more especially helmets, armor, shields, spears (I Sam. xvii:5, 6, 38; 2 Sam. xxi. 16), also chains (Judg. xvi :21), and mirrors (Exod. xxxviii:8). The larger vessels were moulded in foundries, as also the pillars for architectural ornaments (I Kings vii). It would however appear (I Kings vii: I4) that the art of copper-founding was, even in the time of Solomon, but little known among the Jews, and was peculiar to foreigners, particularly the Phoenicians. Michaelis (Mos. Recht iv:217, 314) observes, that Moses seeins to have given to cop- per vessels the preſerence over earthen, and on that ground endeavors to remove the common prejudice against their use for culinary purposes. Fº copper, also, money was coined (Matt. 3 :9). COPPERSMITH (köp'për-smith'), (Gr. xaxkeiſs, Áha/4-yooce', a brazier), a worker in any kind of metals; probably Alexander, an opponent of St. Paul, was so called (2 Tim. iv:14) because copper was in such common use. (See HANDICRAFT.) COPTIC VERSION (köp'tík ver'shūn), See VERSIONS, ANCIENT EGYPTIAN, 453 CORBAN COR (kör), (Heb. "E, AEor), a measure for both liquids and solids, containing ten ephahs or baths (Ezek. xlv.: Io).. Rendered “measure” except in I Esdr. viii:20. CORAL (kör'al), (Heb. "??], raw-mazy", red coral.) It is usually understood to be denoted by the word as above, in Job xxviii: 18; Ezek. xxvii: I6; and this interpretation is not unsuitable, al- though the etymology is not well made out, and the dialects afford little support. The ancient translators were evidently much perplexed to de- termine whether the word peninim (Job xxviii: 18; Prov. iii: I5; viii: II; xx: I5; xxxi : Io; Lam. iv :7) meant corals or pearls. This will always be doubtful; but the text in Lalil. iv.:7, by de- scribing the article as red, suggests a preference of the former. Winer indeed remarks that it is scarcely credible such a product should have circulated under two different names (if ramoth also means coral); but surely there is no difficulty in conceiving that one word may have denoted coral generally, while another may have distin- guished that red coral, which was the most es- teemed and the most in use for ornament. Coral is a marine calcareous substance of vari- ous colors and forms, the production of a species of zoophyte. In growth and external appearance, coral is like a beautiful plant, being fixed by its root to the rock, and spreading out its branches from main stems. But it has not the life of a plant. It is the work of innumerable animals, which ap- parently live in communities, and so connected, that the prey consumed by one contributes to nourish all. The animal is very simple: it is nothing more than a sack or bag, with eight tenta- cula, or arms, to seize its prey. This animal ap- pears to possess the faculty of abstracting cal- careous particles from the ocean, and depositing them in a solid mass. So rapid is their multipli- cation, so speedy the growth of their work, that it eventually forms reefs of rock, not only danger- ous to navigation, but which, rising above the wa- ter, become islands, fit for the abode of men. Among these are the famed Bermuda Islands in the Atlantic, the waters surrounding them, brought by the Gulf stream, being warm enough to allow the coral animals to live and work. CORBAN (kôr'ban), (Gr. kopgåv, Áor-ban', an offering), a Hebrew word employed in the Hellen- istic Greek, just as the corresponding Greek word doron was employed in the Rabbinical Hebrew (Buxtorf, Zer. A'ab. col. 579) to designate an obla- tion of any kind to God. It occurs only once in the New Testament (Mark vii:II), where it is ex- plained (as also by Josephus, Antig. 1, 4, c. 4, Sec. 4, Contra AA. l., I, sec. 22) by the word doron. The Jews sometimes swore by Corban, or by gifts offered to God (Matt. xxiii: 18). A person might interdict himself, or a child be interdicted by his parents, from the use of certain things lawful in themselves. The thing thus interdicted was considered corban. A person might thus ex- empt himself from any inconvenient obligation. It was with such practices that our Lord found fault (Matt. xv.:5; Mark vii: II), as destroy- ing the spirit of the law. Grotius shows that this and similar formulae were not used to signify that the thing was actually devoted, but was simply in- tended to prohibit the use of it from the party to whom it was thus made corban, as though it were said, ‘If I give you anything or do anything for you, may it be as though I gave you that which is devoted to God, and may I be accounted per- jured and sacrilegious.' Thus the Jews permitted CORBE even debtors to defraud their creditors, by con- secrating their debt to God; as if the property were their own, and not rather the right of their creditor. It would, indeed, seem surprising that such a vow as this (closely analogous to the modern profanity of imprecating curses on one's self if certain conditions be not fulfilled) should be considered to involve a religious obligation from which the party could not be freed even if afterwards he repented of his rashness and sin. It appears, however, from Rabbinical authority that anything thus devoted, except within cer- tain limitations, was irreclaimable (Grotius, An- notationes in Matt. xv :5), and that even the hasty utterance of a word implying a vow was equivalent to a vow formally made. Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrkanos (A.D. 90), who felt in several ways the influence of Christianity, was apparently the first Rabbi to advocate retractation of vows. I render Nedarimix :I thus: “Rabbi Eliezer said that when rash vows infringe at all on paren- tal obligations, Rabbis should suggest a retracta- tion (lit. open a door) by appealing to the honor due to parents. The sages dissented. Rabbi Zadok said, instead of appealing to the honor due to parents let them appeal to the honor due to God; then might rash vows cease. The sages at length agreed with Rabbi Eliezer, that if the case be directly between a man and his parents (as in Matt. xv :5), they might suggest retractation by appealing to the honor due to parents.’ CORBE (kör"be), (Gr. Xopgé, Aor-be', 1 Esdr. v. I2), a name apparently answering to Zaccai in the lists of Ezra and Nehemiah. It should have been spelled Chorbe to correspond with the Greek. coRD (körd), (Heb.º, Ahenºeſ, rope, cord). (1) The Material of which cord was made varied according to the strength required. Wil- kinson says that flax was used for making ropes, string, and various kinds of twine; for large ropes, however, of ordinary quality and for common pur- poses, the fibers of the date tree were employed, as at the present day. The strongest rope was probably made of strips of camel hide, still used by the Bedouins for drawing water. Other mate- rials are mentioned, as reeds, rushes, osier, etc. (2) Uses. The following uses of cord are men- tioned: (1) For fastening a tent (Exod. xxxv : 18; xxxix:40; Is. liv :2). (2) For leading or binding animals, as a halter or rein (Psa. cxviii: 27; Hos. xi :4). (3) For yoking them either to a cart (Is. v :18) or a plow (Job xxxix:Io, A. V. “band”). (4) For binding prisoners (Judg. xv :I3; Ps. ii:3; cxxix:4; Ezek. iii:25). (5) For bowstrings (Ps. xi :2) made of catgut; such are spoken of in Judg. xvi :7 (A. V. “green wifhes,” hiſt more properly fresh or moist how- strings). (6) For the ropes or “trackings” of a vessel (Is. xxxiii:23). (7) For measuring ground (2 Sam. viii:2; Jer. xxxi:39; Amos vii: I7; Zech. ii: I); hence cord or /?ne became an expression for , an inheritance (Josh. xvii:14; xix:9; Ps. xvi;6; Ezek. xlvii: 13), and even for any defined district (Deut. iii:7). (8) For fishing and snaring. (9) For attaching articles of dress, as the “wreathen chains,” which were rather twisted cords, worn by the high priests (Exod. xxviii:14, 22, 24; xxxix:15, 17). (Io) For fastening awnings (Esth. i :6). (II) For attaching to a plummet. (I2) For drawing water out of a well or raising heavy weights (Josh. ii:15; Jer. xxxviii:6, 13). (Mc. & Str. Bib. Cyc.) Figuratite. (1) To put cords about one's reins, to gird one's self with a cord, was a token of sorrow and humiliation (Job xii: 18; 1 Kings 454 CORINTH xx:31,32). (2) Cord is often used for inheritance: “I will give thee the land of Canaan, the cord of thine inheritance,” Psalm cv : II, margin. “Joseph hath a double cord,” (Ezek. xlvii: 13. Eng. tr. two portions); which expression originated from the custom of measuring land with a cord. So Joshua distributed to every tribe a certain num- ber of cords, or acres. (3) “My cords (Eng. tr. the lines, that is, my lot) are fallen unto me in pleasant places” (Ps. xvi :6). (4) To stretch a cord or line about a city signifies, to ruin it, to destroy it entirely, to level it with the ground (Lam. ii:8). (5) The cords extended in setting up tents furnish several metaphors (Is. xxxiii:20; Jer. x:20). (6) The silver cord, that is broken at death, is the pith or marrow of the back-bone, the spinal cord (Eccles. xii:6). (7) The cords of God, which wicked men cast from them, are his government and laws, which are un- easy to them as they restrain their liberty, and bind them to duties which they hate. (Ps. ii:3). (8) God draws with cords of a man, and bands of love, when he employs rational and gentle argu- ments, and humane methods, such as men em- ploy when inducing others, as, for instance, a fa- ther guiding a child, who is learning to walk, with leading strings. (9) The cords of a church or state, are her constitutions, laws, rulers, power, and wealth, which connect and establish the vari- ous parts of it; and by the ruin of the former of which, the church and the state are disordered or dissolved (Is. liv :2; Jer. x:20). (Io) The harmonious society of friends is a three-fold cord, not easily broken ; each contributes to strengthen and support the whole body (Eccl. iv: I.2). (II) The cords of sinners, are the snares by which they catch and ruin weak and innocent persons. (Ps. cxxix:4, and czl:5). (I2) The cords of sins are their corrupt lusts, and habits, the curse of God’s law, and the punishment denounced by it, which hold transgressors that they cannot es- cape. (Prov. v :22). (I3) Men draw iniquity with cords of vanity, and sin as with a cart rope, when, with unsubstantial pretences of pleasure, profit, and the like, they engage themselves and others to act wickedly; and, with all their might and dili- gence, endeavor to commit it (Is. v :18). (I4) Afflictions are cords; they restrain our liberty, and ought to draw us to God; nor can we free our- selves from them at pleasure (Job xxxvi :8). CORE (kö're), (Gr. Kopé, AEo-re'), the Greek form of Korah, Ecclus. xlv.:18; Jude II). (See KOR- AH, I). CORIANDER. (kö’rī-ān'dār), (Heb. "3, gad), a round aromatic seed. The coriander plant (Coriandrum sativum) grows wild in Palestine and neighboring countries, and 1s often cultivated 1n the United States. The seeds are globular, and when dry are pleasant to the taste and smell, and incrusted with sugar, are often sold by confectioners. We are told that the particles of manna were shaped like coriander seed. (See GAD.) CORINTH (kör'inth), (Gr. Kópav00s, Åor'7m-thos, ornament, beauty), a Grecian city, placed on the isthmus which joins Peloponnesus (now called the Morea) to the continent of Greece. (1) Topography. A lofty rock rises above it, on which was the citadel, or the Acrocorinthus. It had two harbors: Cench reac, on the eastern side, about 70 stadia distant; and Lechaeum, on the modern Gulf of Lepanto, only 12 stadia from the city (Strabo, viii:6). Its earliest name, as given by Homer, is Ephyre. Owing to the great difficulty of weathering Malea, the southern prom- CORINTH - 455 ontory of Greece, merchandise passed through Corinth from sea to sea; the city becoming an entrepot for the goods of Asia and Italy (Strabo, viii:6). At the same time it commanded the traf- fic by land from north to south. An attempt made to dig through the isthmus was frustrated by the rocky nature of the soil; at one period, how- ever, they had an invention for drawing galleys across from sea to sea on trucks. With such ad- vantages of position, Corinth was very early re- nowned for riches, and seems to have been made by nature for the capital of Greece. When the Achaean league was rallying the chief powers of Southern Greece, Corinth became its military center. The canal across the isthmus has been recently cut through, (2) Destruction by Romans. The fatal blow fell on Corinth (B. C. 146), when L. Mummius, by order of the Roman Senate, barbarously de- stroyed that beautiful town (Cicero, Verr. i :21), eminent even in Greece for painting, sculpture, and all designs in metal and pottery. (3) Corinth of the New Testament. The Corinth of which we read in the New Testament was quite a new city, having been rebuilt and es- tablished as a Roman colony, and peopled with freedmen from Rome (Pausanias and Strabo, w. s.) by the dictator Caesar, a little before his as- sassination. Although the soil was too rocky to be fertile, and the territory very limited, Corinth again became a great and wealthy city in a short time, especially as the Roman proconsuls made it the seat of government (Acts xviii.) for south- ern Greece, which was now called the province of Achaia. In earlier times Corinth had been celebrated for the great wealth of its Temple of Venus, which had a gainful traffic of a most dis- honorable kind with the numerous merchants res- ident there—supplying them with harlots under the pagan forms of religion. The same phenom- ena, no doubt, reappeared in the later age. The little which is said in the New Testament seems to indicate a wealthy and luxurious community, prone to impurity of morals; nevertheless, all Greece was so contaminated, that wermay easily overcharge the accusation against Corinth. The capture of Constantinople by the Venetians and the Crusaders in I2O4 was immediately followed by the surrender of Corinth. In 1446 the Turks took it, and in 1687 the Venetians retook it; the Turks capturing it again in 1715. In 1823 it joined in the successful great rebellion. In February, 1858, it was nearly destroyed by an earthquake, but has since been restored. It is now called Gortho. (Davis, Bib. Dict.) (4) Corinthian Church. The Corinthian Church is remarkable in the Epistles of the Apos- tle Paul by the variety of its spiritual gifts, which seem for the time to have eclipsed or superseded the office of the elder or bishop, which in most churches became from the beginning so prom- inent. Very soon, however, this peculiarity was lost, and the bishops of Corinth take a place co- ordinate to those of other capital cities. One of them, Dionysius, appears to have exercised a great influence over many and distant churches, in the latter part of the second century. Paul ar- rived at Corinth, (Acts xviii: 1.) and lodged with Aquila and his wife Priscilla, who, as well as him- self, were tent-makers. He preached in , the Jewish synagogue, and converted some to the faith Of Christ; and from there he wrote two Epistles to the Thessalonians. Finding that the Jews of Corinth, instead of being benefited, opposed him with blasphemy, he shook his raiment, and turned to the Gentiles, lodging with Justus, surnamed coRINTHIANS, EPISTLES TO THE Titus. There is great probability that Paul visited Corinth a second time, (Acts xx:2; and 2 Cor. xii: 14; xiii: 1.) and a third time, on his second return to Rome, 2 Tim. iv:20. (See ACTS OF THE APOSTLES; PAUL.) coRINTHIANs, EPISTLES TO THE. 1. First Epistle. (1) Genuineness. The testi- mony of Christian antiquity is full and unanimous in ascribing this inspired production to the pen of the Apostle Paul. The original form of this testimony need not be given here. It has been collected and presented by writers in the canon of the New Testament (See Charteris' Canonicity, pp. 222-232. Westcott, On the Canon of the New Testament and Zahn, Gesch. des Neufest. Kanons). Suffice it to Say that the epistle comes down with every possible external attestation of genuineness that could have been demanded by the most rigid literary criti- C1SITT. This external attestation is fully supported by the claims and marks of authorship to be found within the epistle. It reveals a perfectly consistent and intelligible historical situation; its allusions and undesigned coincidences, its style and type of thought all harmonize with the theory of Pauline origin. Accordingly, even within the most rigid critical schools until quite recently and with very few and sporadic exceptions, the genuineness of Ist Corinthians was not called in question. The Tübingen School placed it, with the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians and the Second to the Corinthians, within the nucleus of the undoubted Pauline writings. Bruno Bauer was the sole ex- ception to this unanimity of opinion until 1882. Since that date a series of attacks have been made on the genuineness of this writing as well as on all of the others associated with it by the Tübingen critics. The source of these attacks is chiefly a Dutch School of Criticism consisting of Loman, Naber, Pierson, and Van Manen. The result of this hypercriticism would be the dissolution of the personality of Paul and the explanation of Paulin- ism as a product of a form of evolution within Judaism. The arguments employed in support of the view are characterized as “wildly sub- jective and arbitrary” and have been disallowed by the vast majority of scholars. An independent effort to cast doubt on the genuineness of all the writings ascribed to Paul, was made by R. Steck who undertook to base his view upon literary and historical data found in the Book of Acts and in the extra-canonical writings of the period. But this effort, like that of the Dutch school, has met with no sufficient endorsement to entitle it to the attention of others than very narrow specialists, (See Steck, Der Galater brief mach seiner Echth eit wntersucht; 1888. Loman, Questiones Paulinae in Theo. Tid. 1882–1886; Naber and Pierson, Ver- isimilia; Van Mancn, Jahrbucher fuer Protest. Theol. 1883-1887.) (2) Structure and Content. The construction of the epistle is like that of Paul’s other writings. It begins with a greeting which is followed by a thanksgiving for the good which is in the church. It takes up next the questions of doctrine and life on which the church needs instructions and warnings. It concludes with particular com- munications. Of these three sections, the first occupies i: I-9; the second, i : IO; xv :58, and the third, xvi. The second and most extensive of the sections contains Paul’s admonitions on the following subjects: Party spirit in the church at Corinth, i : Io; iv:21, the moral Scandal caused by CORINTHIANS, EPISTLES TO THE the toleration of the incestuous offender, v : 1-13; litigation before the unrighteous, vi :I-II ; fornica- tion, vi :12-20. At this point, the epistle becomes an answer to certain questions propounded to Paul by the church. The first of these questions referred to marriage, vii: I-40; the second was concerning eating of the flesh of the victims sacrified to idols, and led the Apostle to state the great principle of Christian liberty, viii:x ; the next question was evidently about the idea of serv- ices of worship and included minor questions as to covering the head by women, xi.; I-16, as to love feasts and the Lord's Supper, xi : 17-34, and as to abuses in speaking with tongues, xii: I ; xiv:40. The next question was regarding the resurrection from the dead and leads to a thorough discussion Of the subject from the Apostle's point of view, xv. The epistle then closes with some directions regarding the collection for the poor saints, per- Sonal allusions and the autograph benediction of the Apostle. (3) Occasion and Purpose. The epistle seems to have been occasioned partly by some intelligence received by the Apostle concerning the Corinthian church from the domestics of Chloe, a pious female connected with that church (i:II), and, probably, also from Common report (ākočerat, it is heard, v.1); and partly by an epistle which the Corinthians themselves had addressed to the Apostle, asking advice and instruction on several points (vii: I ), and which probably was conveyed to him by Ste- phanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus (xvi :17). Apol- los, also, who succeeded the Apostle at Corinth, but who seems to have been with him at the time this epistle was written (xvi :12), may have given him information of the state of things among the Christians in that city. From these sources the Apostle had become acquainted with the painful fact that since he had left Corinth (Acts xviii:18) the church in that place had sunk into a state of great corruption and error. One prime source of this evil state of things, and in itself an evil of no inferior magnitude, was the existence of Schisms or party divisions in the church. “Every One of you,” Paul tells them, ‘saith I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, and I of Christ' (i: I.2). This has led to the conclusion that four great parties had arisen in the church, which boasted of Paul, Apollos, Peter, and Christ, as their respective heads. The existence in many of the early churches of a strong tendency towards the ingrafting of Judaism upon Christianity is a fact well known to every reader of the New Testa- ment; and though the church at Corinth was founded by Paul and afterwards instructed by Apollos, yet it is extremely probable that as in the churches of Galatia so in those of Achaia this tendency may have been strongly manifested, and that a party may have arisen in the church at Corinth opposed to the liberal and spiritual sys- tem of Paul, and more inclined to one which aimed at fettering Christianity with the restrictions and Outward ritual Of the Mosaic dispensation. But that there really were in the Corinthian church Sects or parties specifically distinguished from each other by peculiarities of doctrinal sentiment may be seriously questioned. That erroneous doctrines were entertained by individuals in the church, and that a Schismatical spirit pervaded it, cannot well be doubted. But these two in all likelihood were not formally connected with each other. Schisms often arise in churches from causes which have little or nothing to do with diversities of doc- trinal Sentiment among the members; and such probably were the schisms which disturbed the church at Corinth. At least this is to be legitimate- 456 CORINTHIANS, EPISTLES TO THE ly inferred from the circumstance that the exist- ence of these is condemned by the Apostle, with- out reference to any doctrinal errors out of which they might arise; whilst, on the other hand, the doctrinal errors condemned by him are denounced without reference to their having led to party strifes. We may therefore take it for granted that the schisms arose merely from quarrels among the Corinthians as to the comparative excellence of their respective teachers—those who had learned of Paul boasting that he excelled all others, and the converts of Apollos and Peter advancing a similar claim for them, whilst a fourth party haughtily repudiated all subordinate teaching, and pretended that they derived all their religious knowledge from the direct teaching of Christ. The language of the Apostle in the first four chapters, where alone he speaks directly of these schisms, and where he resolves their criminality not into their relation to false doctrine, but into their having their source in a disposition to glory in men, must be regarded as greatly favoring this vicw. Comp. also 2 Cor. v :I6. Besides the schisms and the erroneous opinions which had invaded the Church at Corinth, the Apostle had learned that many immoral and dis- Orderly practices were tolerated among them, and were in some cases defended by them. A con- nection of a grossly incestuous character had been formed by one of the members, and gloried in by his brethren (v : 1, 2); law-suits before heathen judges were instituted by one Christian against another (vi : I); licentious indulgence was not so firmly denounced and so carefully avoided as the purity of Christianity required (vi :9-20); the pub- lic meetings of the brethren were brought into disrepute by the women appearing in them un- veiled (xi:3-Io), and were disturbed by the con- fused and disorderly manner in which the persons possessing spiritual gifts chose to exercise them (xii-xiv); and in fine the dyátrat, love feasts, which were designed to be scenes of love and union, became occasions for greater contention through the selfishness of the wealthier mem- bers, who, instead of sharing in a common meal with the poorer, brought each his own repast, and partook of it by himself, often to excess, while his needy brother was left to fast (xi :20-34). The judgment of the Apostle had also been solicited by the Corinthians concerning the comparative advantages of the married and the celibate state (vii: I-40), as well as, apparently, the duty of Christians in relation to the use for food, of meat which had been offered to idols (viii:1–13). For the correction of these errors, the remedying of these disorders, and the solution of these doubts, this epistle was written by the Apostle. 4) A Previous Epistle. Was there any epistle to the Corinthians before this one 2 From an expression of the Apostle in chapter v : 9, it has been inferred by many (Dean Farrar among others) that the present was not the first epistle addressed by Paul to the Corinthians, but that it was preceded by one now lost. For this opinion, however, the words in question afford a very unsat- isfactory basis. They are as follows: éºypaya jutv év tá, étuorroMº, k. T. A. Now these words must be rendered either “I have written to you in this epis- tle,” or ‘I wrote to you in that epistle;’ and our choice between these two renderings will depend partly on grammatical and partly on historical grounds. As the aorist én/paya may mean either “I wrote’ or ‘I have written,' nothing can be con- cluded from it in either way. It may be doubted, however, whether, had the Apostle intended to refer to a former epistle, he would have used the article rà simply, without adding former, CORINTHIANS, EPISTLES TO THE In support of this conclusion it may be added, (I) that the Apostle had really in this epistle given the prohibition to which he refers; (2) that it is not a little strange that the Apostle should, only in this cursory and incidental manner, refer to a circumstance so important in its bearing upon the case of the Corinthians as his having already addressed them on their sinful practices; and (3) that had such an epistle ever existed it may be supposed that some hint of its existence would have been found in the records of the primitive Church, which is not the case. (5) Paul's Visits to Corinth. From 2 Cor. xii: 14 and xiii: I, compared with 2 Cor. ii:1, and xiii:2, it appears that before the writing of that epistle Paul had twice visited Corinth, and that one of these visits had been after the Church there had fallen into an evil state; for otherwise his visit could not have been described as one év A&T m, and one dur- ing which God had humbled him before them. Interpreters have differed widely as to the meaning of the references to these visits. Some have understood the Apostle to say in them not that he had actually come to Corinth, but that he had planned to come. This was the view of Baur, Hilgenfeld, and others. But against this view, Meyer and Godet have argued from the plain and obvious sense of the language used, that the visits were actual and not simply projected. But if actual, did the second visit precede the writing of the first epistle, or did it fall between the two epistles? In favor of the first alternative, Reuss reasons from xvi :7, “I will not see you in passing.” But this is certainly not conclusive. We must accordingly, accept the view of those who place the second visit between the two letters. This view explains how it was possible for the Corinthians to say as they did (iv :18) that Paul was always postponing his visit. This they could not have said if the visit in question had just pre- ceded the first Epistle. In favor of this view, fur- ther is the fact of the Apostle's silence as to a sec- ond visit. In the first epistle, he repeatedly alludes to incidents that occurred in the first visit (i:8, 9; i:23; ii: I, I2, I3; xii; I4, 2I.), but to none that occurred in the second, although this was by the very supposition, fresher in his mind. (6) Date and Place of Composition. The question when and where the Epistle was written, must be answered in the light of what the Apostle says in xvi :8, 19, taken together with v. 7, 8. From these passages, it appears that he was at Ephesus and was to stay there some time longer “until Pentecost.” But from the general chronology of the life and ministry of Paul, we learn that he so- journed at Ephesus from 55 to 58 A. D. It has therefore been inferred with reason, that the letter was written about Easter in the year 57. The subscription intimates that this epistle was conveyed to Corinth by Stephanas, Fortunatus, Achaicus, and Timothy. As respects the last named there is evidently a mistake, for from chap- ter xvi;IO, it appears that Timothy's visiting Cor- inth was a thing not certain when this letter was finished, and from 2 Cor. viii:17, 18, it appears that Timothy did not visit Corinth till afterwards. Comp. also Acts xix:22. As respects the others, this tradition is probably correct. 2. Jecond Epistle. (1) The Interval Be- tween the Two Epistles. Not long after the trans- mission of the first epistle, the Apostle made a spe- cial visit to Corinth, not recorded in Acts, return- ing, however, immediately to Ephesus. Here he continued his work until his success roused the op- position of Demetrius and the guild of the silver- 457 CORINTHIANS, EPISTLES TO THE Smiths. In consequence of the riotous uproar which followed (Acts xix:93 sq.), he left for Troas, where he expected to meet Titus with news from Corinth. But in this he was dis- appointed. Accordingly, he proceeded to Mace- donia and there at length his desire for in- formation on the state of affairs in the Corinthian church was gratified by the arrival of Titus (ii: 13; vii:15 sq.) * Meanwhile, some claim (Godet among them) that Paul wrote to this church another letter which has not been preserved to us. The reasons, how- ever, adduced for the existence of such an intermediate letter, have never appeared strong enough to convince the majority of expert schol- ars, and the preponderance of opinion is against the hypothesis. It appears to be, upon the whole, a gratuitous and unnecessary supposition. (2) Occasion and Purpose. The intelligence brought by Titus concerning the church at Co- rinth was on the whole favorable. The censures of the former epistle had produced in their minds a godly sorrow, had awakened in them a regard to the proper discipline of the church, and had led to the exclusion from their fellowship of the in- cestuous person. This had so wrought on the mind of the latter that he had repented of his evil courses, and showed such contrition that the Apostle now pities him, and exhorts the church to restore him to their communion (2 Cor. ii:6-II ; vii:8, sq.). A cordial response had also been given to the appeal that had been made on behalf of the saints in Palestine (ix:2). But with all these pleasing symptoms there were Sóme of a painful kind. The spirit of strife had evidently abated in a marked degree. But some who were perhaps from the first unfavorably disposed towards him came forward now boldly denying his authority on the alleged ground that he was not an apostle. This along with other news, brought him by Titus led the Apostle to compose his second epistle, in which the language of commendation and love is mingled with that of censure, and even of threatening. (3) Contents. This epistle may be divided into three sections. In the first, (I-iii), the Apostle chiefly dwells on the effects produced by his first epistle and the matters there with connected. In the second (iv.-ix.) he discourses on the sub- stance and effects of the religion which he pro- claimed, and turns from this to an appeal on be- half of the claims of the poor saints on their lib- erality. And in the third (x-xiii) he vindicates his own dignity and authority as an apostle against the parties by whom these were opposed. (4) Date and Place of Composition. But when did Paul write this letter and where? What has been already said fixes the date and place of writing as Ephesus and the summer of 58. Wiese- ler propounded the theory that the whole epistle was not composed at the same time. The differ- ence of the matter and style between chapters i-vi and vii-xiii led him to suppose that the first of these two parts was written before the arrival of Titus and the second after the Apostle had heard his report. The difference between the two parts of the epistle, however, is not so great as to war- rant s11ch a difference of time in their composi- tion. It is sufficiently accounted for, as Godet shows, by the supposition that the Apostle's mind reverts in the first part to the thoughts occurring to him before the arrival of Titus and in the sec- ond, to those subsequent to that event. Upon the basis of the difference of content between chapters i-ix and chapters x-xiii, some recent critics (Haus- rath, Pfleiderer, and Schmiedel) have based still CORINTHUS another view of the origin and relation of these two parts of the letter. They allege that the last four chapters were written before the first nine. Still another theory propounded, is that Paul's two let- ters to the Corinthians were originally three, the first comprising eight fragments of the first epis- tles, and written in the winter of 56-57; the second consisting of six fragments of the first epistle and four of the second, and written at Easter, 57; and the third consisting of the first seven chapters of the second epistle, written in the summer of 58. It is hardly necessary to do more than mention these views as they have found no advocates out- side the circle of their propounders. 3. Helps on the Epistles to the Corin- thians. Among the best commentaries on these epistles, in English, are J. A. Beet’s on both. Also A. P. Stanley's on both, besides those in the com- mentaries on the whole New Testament by Meyer, Alford, the Expositor’s, etc. On First Corinthians separately, Godet's, T. C. Edwards', and C. J. Ellicott’s, are especially valuable; also Marcus Dods' (in the Expositor’s Bible). On Second Corinthians, James Denney's (in the Etpositor’s Bible) stands alone. W. L. A. and A. C. Z. CORINTHUS (ko-rin' thus), a Latin form for CoRINTH, found in the A.V. in the subscription to the Epistle to the Romans. CORMORANT (kör’mö-rant). In the list of un- clean birds (Lev. xi:17, Deut. xiv:17) the word cormorant, is probably the correct rendering of the Heb. mº, shaw-lawł', bird of prey. It is a large black bird, living by fishing. Its scientific name is Phalacrocorax carbo. In all other places in the A. V. where cormorant is used pelican should be substituted for it, as the true rendering of the original, TSE, AEaw-ath', vom- iting. The true cormorant is found along the salt and fresh waters of Syria, and is certainly a “plunger,” so that there is no reason for a change in the passages of the Pentateuch, as some have suggested. These birds are as large as the raven, of a dark color, with long necks, webbed feet, feed upon fish, and are proverbial for their voracity. (See SALACH). - CORN (körn). The Hebrew word lº, daw- gawn', which is rendered ‘grain,’ ‘corn,' and some- times ‘wheat’ in the Authorized Version, is the most general of the Hebrew terms, representing ‘corn,' and is more comprehensive than any word in our language, seeing that it probably includes not only all the proper corn grains, but also vari- ous kinds of pulse and seeds of plants, which we never comprehend under the name of ‘corn or even of ‘grain.' Duw-gu wil ulay, Illel eſule, be taketſ to represent all the commodiLies which we describe by the dif- ferent words corn, grain, seeds, peas, beans, Among other places in which this word occurs, see Gen. xxvii:28-37; Num. xviii:27; Deut. xxviii:51 ; Lam. ii: 12, etc. There is another word, bar, which denotes any kind of cleansed corn, that is, corn purified from the chaff and fit for use (Gen. xli:35-49; Prov. xi :26; Job xxxix:4; Joel ii:24). The same word is more rarely used to describe corn in a growing state (Ps. lxv : I.3). The word sheber, which is sometimes rendered corn, denotes in a general sense ‘provisions' or ‘victuals,’ and by consequence ‘corn,’ as the principal article in all provisions (Gen. xlii: 1, 2, 19; Gen. xxvii:28; Neh. x:39, etc.). It is evident from Ruth ii: 14; 2 Sam. xvii:28, 29, etc., that parched corn (i.e., grain) constituted 458 CORN part of the ordinary food of the Israelites, as it still does of the Arabs resident in Syria. Their methods of preparing corn for the manufacture of bread were the following: The threshing was done either by the staff or the flail (Is. xxviii: 27, 28)—by the feet of cattle (Deut. xxv :4)—or by “a sharp threshing instrument having teeth.” (IS. xli: I5), which was something resembling a cart, and drawn over the corn by means of horses or oxen. When the corn is threshed, it is sepa- rated from the chaff and dust, by throwing it for- ward across the wind, by means of a winnowing fan, or shovel (Matt. iii: 12), after which the grain is sifted to separate all impurities from it, Amos is :9; Luke xxii:31. Hence we see that the threshing-floors were in the open air, Judg. vi. II ; 2 Sam. xxiv:18. The grain thus obtained was commonly reduced to meal by the hand-mill, which consisted of a lower mill-stone, the upper side of which was concave, and an upper mill-stone, the lower surface of which was convex. The hole for receiving the corn was in the center of the upper mill-stone; and in the operation of grinding the lower was fixed, and the upper made to move round upon it, with considerable velocity, by means of a handle. These mills are still in use in the East, and in some parts of Scotland. Dr. E. D. Clarke says, “In the island of Cyprus I ob- served upon the ground the sort of stones used for grinding corn, called querns in Scotland, common also in Lapland, and in all parts of Palestine. These are the primeval mills of the world; and they are still found in all corn countries, where rude and ancient custorris have not been liable to those changes introduced by refinement. The em- ployment of grinding with these mills is confined solely to females; and the practice illustrates the S. § N § § §§ º º º sº * . -* s *.tº §.. ..--> §: prophetic observation of our Saviour, concerning the day of Jerusalem's destruction: “Two women shall be grinding at the mill; one shall be taken, and the other left,” Matt. xxiv:4I. Mr. Pennant, in his Tour to the Hebrides, has given a particular account of these hand-mills, as used in Scotland, in which he observes that the women always ac- company the grating noise of the stones with their voices; and that when ten or a dozen are thus em- ployed, the fury of the song rises to such a pitch, that you would, without breach of charity, imagine a troop of female demoniacs to be assembled. As the operation of grinding was usually performed in the morning at day-break, the noise of the fe- males at the hand-mill was heard all over the city, which often awoke their more indolent masters. The Scriptures mention the want of this noise as a mark of desolation in Jer. xxv : Io, and Rev. xviii:22. There was a humane law, that “no man shall take the nether or upper mill-stone in pledge, CORNELIUS for he taketh a man's life in pledge,” Deut. xxiv: 6. He could not grind his daily bread without it. (Calmet.) - “Corn of all kinds is carried in sheaves from the harvest-fields on asses, mules, horses, or camels. It is threshed by the nauraj or mauraj (Heb. 7/167"ag), and winnowed, and stored in earthen, barrel-shaped receptacles or oblong bins in the houses (2 Sam. iv:6), or in pits under the floor (2 Sam. xvii:9), or in store-houses (2 Chron. xxxii:28). . It is now often stored in un- derground chambers, with domed roofs, at the top of which is an opening to introduce the corn and remove it. These chambers, contrary to what might be expected, are dry and free from vermin. They are sometimes excavated in the rock, at other times in a sort of soft marl called huw- wóra/.” (G. E. Post, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) The different products coming under the de- nomination of corn, are noticed under the usual heads, as BARLEY, WHEAT, etc.; their culture, un- der AGRICULTURE; their preparation, under BREAD, FooD, MILL, etc. Figuratite. (1) A handful of corn sown on the top of the mountains, may denote Christ himself, the corn of wheat, as preached, or his gospel-truths and ordinances, dispensed by a few apostles and other preachers, in places spiritually barren to an eminent degree, and yet remarkably fruitful in the conversion of multitudes, and the production of much grace and many good works (Ps. lxxii:16). (2) The people of God revive as the corn; when watered with the rain of his word and Spirit, and warmed by the rays of the Sun of righteousness, they recover from spiritual decays, pleasantly flourish, and forebode a rich harvest of eternal blessedness (Hos. xiv:7). (3) Good men dying in old age are as a shock of corn coming in in its season; being fully prepared for death, they are carried by angels into the heaven- ly mansions (Job v :26). (4) Blessings, whether temporal or spiritual, are likened to corn, to de- note their necessity and eminent usefulness for men's souls... or bodies , (Is., lxii:8; , Ezek. xxxvi :29; Hos. ii:9; Zech. ix:17). (5) Manna is called corn of heaven; it fell from heaven, and sustained men's lives as grain does (Ps. lxxviii: 24). CORNELIUS (kor-nē'li-às), (Gr. Kopvij}\tos, Kor- 7tay"/ee-os). (1) Family and Station. The centurion of this name, whose history occurs in Acts x, most probably belonged to the Cornelii, a noble and distinguished family at Rome. He is reckoned by Julian, the Apostate, as one of the few persons of distinction who embraced Christianity. His sta- tion in Society will appear upon considering that the Roman soldiers were divided into legions, each legion into ten cohorts, each cohort into three bands, and each band into two centuries or hun- dreds; and that Cornelius was a commander of a (ºfted. ékarovrápxms, belonging to the ſta/ian a Il Cl. . (3) Religious Position. The religious posi- tion of Cornelius, before his interview with Peter, has been the subject of much debate. It is con- tended, that he was what is called a proselyte of the gate, or a Gentile, who, having renounced idolatry and worshiping the true God, submitted to the Seyen (supposed) precepts of Noah, fre- quented the synagogue, and offered sacrifices by the hands of the priests; but, not having received Cºrcumcision, was not reckoned among the Jews. But on the whole it is more probable that he be: longed to the class of pious Gentiles who had so 459 CORNELIUS far benefited by their contact with the Jewish people as to have become convinced that theirs was the true religion, who consequently worshiped the true God, were acquainted with the Scriptures of the Old Testament, most probably in the Greek translation, and observed several Jewish customs, as, for instance, their hours of prayer, or anything else that did not involve an act of special profession. This class of persons seems referred to in Acts xiii: 16, where they are plainly distinguished from the Jews, though certainly mingled with them. To the same class is to be referred Candace's. treasurer (Acts viii:27, etc.); and in earlier times, the midwives of Egypt (Exod. i :17), Rahab (Josh. vi.25), Ruth, Araunah the Jebusite (2 Sam. xxiv:18, etc.), the persons mentioned I Kings viii:41, 42, 43, Naaman (2 Kings v : 16,17). (3) The First Fruits of the Gentiles. It is reasonable, therefore, to regard Cornelius as hav- ing been selected of God to become the first fruits of the Gentiles. His character appears suited, as much as possible, to abate the prejudices of the Jewish converts against what appeared to them So great an innovation. It is well observed by Theophylact, that Cornelius, though neither a Jew nor a Christian, lived the life of a good Christian. He was pious, influenced by spontaneous rever- ence to God. He practically obeyed the restraints of religion, for he feared God, and this latter part of the description is extended to all his family or household (verse 2). He was liberal in alms to the Jewish people, which showed his respect for them, and he ‘prayed to God always,’ at all the hours of prayer observed by the Jewish nation. Such piety, obedience, faith, and charity, prepared him for superior attainments and benefits, and secured to him their bestowment (Ps. xxv :9; 1:23; Matt. xiii: I2; Luke viii: 15; John vii:17). (4) Two Visions. The remarkable circum- stances under which these benefits were conferred upon him are too plainly and forcibly related in Acts x: to require much comment. While in prayer, at the ninth hour of the day, he beheld, in waking vision, an angel of God, who declared that ‘his prayers and alms had come up for a memorial before God,” and directed him to send to Joppa for Peter, who was then abiding at the house of one Simon, a tanner.’ Cornelius sent accordingly; and when his messenger had nearly reached that place, Peter was prepared by the symbolical revela- tions of a noonday ecstasy, or trance, to under- stand that nothing which God had cleansed was to be regarded as common or unclean. It is well remarked by Paley, that the circum- stances of the two visions are such as to take them entirely out of the case of momentary miracles, or of such as may be accounted for by a false percep- tion. ‘The vision might be a dream ; the message could not. Either communication taken separate- ly might be a delusion; the concurrence of the two was impossible to happen without a Supernatural cause' (Evidences, prop. i. chap. 2). The in- quiries of the messengers from Cornelius Sug- gested to Peter the application of his vision, and he readily accompanied them to Joppa, attended. by six Jewish brethren, and hesitated not to enter the house of one whom he, as a Jew, would regard as 11nclean. The Apostle waived the too fervent reverence of Cornelius, which, although usual in the East, was rendered by Romans only to their gods; and mutual explanations then took place betwccn him and the centurion. After this the Apostle proceeded to address Cornelius and his assembled friends, and expressed his conviction that the Gentiles were no longer to be called un- clean, and stated the leading evidence and chief CORNER doctrines of the Gospel. While he was discours- ing, the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit, con- trary to the order hitherto observed, of being pre- ceded by baptism and imposition of hands, fell on his Gentile auditors. Of this fact Peter and his companions were convinced, for they heard them speak with tongues, foreign and before unknown to them, and which Peter and his companions knew to be such by the aid of their own mirac- ulous gifts, and, under divine impulse, glorify God as the author Öf the Gospel. The Jewish brethren who accompanied Peter were astonished upon perceiving, by these indubitable indications, that the Holy Spirit was poured out upon the Gentiles, as upon themselves at the beginning (x : 45). Peter, already prepared by his vision for the event, and remembering that baptism was by the command of Jesus, associated with these miraculous endowments, said, ‘Can any man forbid water that these should be baptized, who have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?’ and yet, agreeably to the apostolic rule of committing the administra- tion of baptism to others, and, considering that the consent of the Jewish brethren would be more ex- plicit if they performed the duty, he ordered them to baptize Cornelius and his friends, his house- hold, whose acceptance as members of the Chris- tian church had been so abundantly testified. CORNER. (kör'něr), (Heb. "# pin-maw", pinna- cle). (1) An angle, as the corner of a house or street (Prov. vii:8). (2) (Heb. HSE, Żay-aw', mouth, hence sidc, thc extreme part), the side of anything, as the points of the compass; sometimes rendered “quarter,” “side;” districts of a country (Neh. ix:22). (3) (Heb. ??, Æaw-mawf', edge), used in Is. xi:12; xxx:20; Ezek. vii:2, to express the “four corners of the earth,” or the whole land. (4) (Heb. Anº, AEazy-thafe', shoulder), the side of a building (I Kings vi;8). (5) (Heb. Pº, mik-zso'ah, angle), the exter- nal extremities of the tabernacle (Exod. xxvi;24). (6) (Heb. P22, Žah'am, step), a term applied perhaps to the feet of the ark and laver (Exod. xxv. 12). (7) (Heb. yºs, &say-law, rib, or side, Exod. xxx:4; xxvii:4). See RIB. The Greek word Yavia, go-mee'ah, may mean the corner of a street, forming a square (Matt. vi.5), or a dark recess used for secrecy (Acts xxvi;26). CORNER GATE (kör'nér gāt). This gate was at the northwest corner of Jerusalem (2 Kings xiv:13; 2 Chron. xxv.23). See JERUSALEM. CORNER STONE (kör'nér ston), (Heb. Tº lº, eh'ben pin' maw, Job xxxviii.6; Is. xxviii.16; Gr. Kepax'ſ Yovias, Aéeſ-a/-ay' go-mee'as). The chief corner stone was a large and massive stone so formed as when placed at a corner, to, bind together two outer walls of an edifice. This properly makes no part of the foundation, from which it is distinguished in Jer. li:26; though, as the edifice rests thereon, it may be so called. Sometimes it denotes those massive slabs which, being placed towards the bottom of any wall, serve to bind the work together, as in Is. xxviii:16. Of these there were often two layers, without cement, or mortar (Bloomfield, Recens Synop, on Eph, ii:20). This explanation will sufficiently 460 corner stone' is COSAM indicate the sense in which the title of ‘chief corner stone' is applied to Christ. For various superstitions and religious rites connected with the corner Stone, comp. Trumbull, Threshold Covenant, 22, 51, 55. (See Found.ATION.) Figuratite. The symbolical title of ‘chief applied to Christ in (Eph. ii:20, and I Pet. ii:6), which last passage is a quotation from Is. xxviii:I6, where the Septua- gint has the same words for the Hebrew pinnaw. There seems no valid reason for distinguishing this from the stone called ‘the head of the corner’ (Matt. xxi :42; which is the Sept. translation of pinnah, in Ps. cxviii:22), although some contend that the latter is the top stone or coping. The figure of Eph. ii:20, is well explained by Grimm. As the corner stone is inserted at the angle of a building, holding two walls together and support- ing the superstructure, so Christ unites Jew and Gentile, and is the support of the Church. The additional thought of I Pet. ii:8, can be without violence derived from the same figure. As one recklessly turning the corner of a building may stumble over the corner stone, so, while some find in Christ their support, others stumble at Him and perish (Comp. Alford and Ellicott on Eph. ii:20). (J. A. Selbie, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) *. CORNET (kör'nét), (Heb. "Fºº, shophar), a loud sounding instrument used by the ancient Hebrews for announcing the “Jubilee" (Lev. xxv.9) and other important events (ſer. iv:5, 9). It was made out of the horn of a ram or chamois, or sometimes of an ox. It was about eighteen inches in length. (See MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS.) CORRECTION (kör-rék'shūn), (Heb. Tº yaw- sar', to instruct, chastise; nº. yazy-ÅaÁ/?', to man- ifest, reason with, reprove). In “He that chastiseth the heathen, shall not he correct?” (Ps. xciv :Io) both Hebrew words are used in the above order. (See also Job v : I7). The scriptures are for correction; by their power- ful influence they prick a man to the heart, and make him amend his evil courses (2 Tim. iii:I6). CORRUPTION (kör-rüp'shūn). A number of Hebrew and Greek words are thus translated. They signify (1) The decay of the body (Ps. xvi;IO). (2) The blemishes of an animal thus rendered unfit for sacrifice (Lev. xxii:25). (3) The moral ruin caused by sin (Deut. ix:12). (4) Everlasting ruin (Gal. vi:8). CORRUPTION, MOUNT OF (kór-rüp'shün, mount Šv). The Mount of Olives is called the “mount of corruption,” because there Solomon built high places or temples for abominable idols, to gratify his heathenish wives (2 Kings xxiii: 13). “On the right hand of the mount of corruption.” Chaldee and other versions read “the Mount of Olives,” obviously deriving the word rendered corruption mashchith, from mashach, to anoint, with reference to the oil produced by the famous olives of this mountain, rather than from the Chal- dee word meaning to destroy. We agree with this, as the Mount of Olives is no doubt intended, whatever name be given to it. With this the Jews agree, in so far that they place the mount of cor- ruption immediately fronting the Temple on the east, which makes it the Mount of Olives. (Kitto, Pictorial Bib.) COS (kös). See Coos. COSAMI (kö'sam), (Gr. Kwordſ, Åo-sam', a diviner, Luke iii.28), This name Occurs nowhere else in COSMOGONY 461 ihe Bible. He was the son of Elmodam, and fifth before Zorobabel in the generations of ‘Joseph, the husband of Mary.’ COSMOGONY (köz-mög'ö-ny), (Gr. koguoyovia, Åo2-//zog-o-me'ah), from the Greek words cosmos, universe, and gigºlesthai, to be born, signifies the creation of the universe. 1. Cosmogony of Genesis. The book of Genesis opens with a cosmogony, i. e., an account of the origin of the universe. It has been alleged that there are two parallel cosmog- onies in the opening chapters of the book, the first of which is given in i-ii:4 and the Second in ii:4-7. But it is only by a hard stretch of the term that the second of these can be called a cos- mogony. At the first glance, as well as after ma- turer study, it appears to be a brief introduction to the account of the origin of man. It is in no sense a comprehensive narrative of the origin of the world, but a summary statement preparing the way for what follows. It looks upon a certain portion of the earth as the local habitation of the first man and treats of the preparation of this habitation: It contains no special data as to the successive stages in which the world came into being. To treat it as a variant cosmogony would be to detach it from the larger section to which it belongs and to misunderstand its meaning. If we now examine the cosmogony given in Gen. i., ii:1-3, we shall find that it begins with the general statement in verse I, that “God created the heaven and the earth”; i. e., the universe; for all things are included in the two terms, heaven and earth. This general statement is then expli- cated in a series of seven paragraphs. Each one of these gives the so-called work of one day. The first traces the progress of the earth from a chaotic (“formless and void”) mass under the in- fluence of the spirit of God to a luminous or illuminated body. The second tells of the separa- tion between the firmament and the waters above and the earth with the waters beneath ; the third, of the separation between the dry land and the seas and of the appearance of vegetable life; the fourth, of the emergence of the sun, moon, and stars and their use as standards or measurements of time; the fifth, of the production of animal life in the waters of the sea and in the air (fishes and birds); the sixth, of the creation of animal life on land, culminating in man. The seventh records the hallowing of the seventh day as the day of the rest of God. All but the last of these paragraphs end with the formula : “And there was evening and there was morning, one day,” “a second day,” etc. - How is this account to be understood? Is it to be taken as a precise history of the way in which the world came into being, or is it a poetical or even allegorical portraiture of certain moral and religious principles? Light has been thrown on the subject by recent research, both in the sphere oſ archaeology and in that of natural science. The cosmogony of Genesis bears certain resemblances to the cosmogonies of the ancients. 2. Cosmogony of the Ancients. (1) Greeks and Romans. Of the cosmog- onies of the ancients, the most familiar is that which passed current among the Greeks and Romans. This was gathered into form early, by the poet Hesiod. In the beginning, it ran, the world was a great, shapeless mass called Chaos. Out of Chaos sprang first the spirit of love—Eros —and the broadchested earth—Gaea; then dark- ness—Erebos—and night—Nyx; from the union of the two latter arose the clear sky—Aether—and COSMOGONY the day—Hemera. The earth, by virtue of the power by which it was produced, brought forth the firmament—Uranos—the mountains and the Sea—Pontos. Thereupon, Eros moved the beings thus far produced to come together in pairs. Uranos and Gaea first being joined together, peopled the earth with Titans, Giants and Cy- clops. Out of these beginnings grew in the course of time the gods of Olympus, the heroes, and the human race in successive ages. (2) Egyptian. According to the Egyptian cos- mogony, the universe is a gradually developing divinity. It is not, however, a unit, but a qua- ternity. Its four members are: Kneph, Spirit; Neith, matter; Sevech, time; and Pascht, Space. These are all independent and underived. The last two, time and space, are passive; the first two combine to produce the visible world. Neith is conceived of as in the form of a great ball—the primitive or cosmic egg—around which Kneph broods as a subtle substance, preparing it for its transformation. The first product of this brood- ing of the Spirit over matter is Ptah, or the fire and light element. In the next stage of develop- ment, two vast material divinities arise; i. e., the firmament Pe and the earth, Anuke. Above the vault of heaven there remain the subtle dark fluid substances of the primitive stage; these are the waters above the heavens. The masses below the vault are then shaped into the sun, moon and stars. With the creation of the sun, the period of universal light—Ptah—comes to an end. How long this period was, it is impossible to tell, as there was no sun to measure it. After the origin of the sun and moon, the world was gradually brought to its present form, the earth occupying the center. (3) Phoenician. The Phoenician cosmogony began, like the Greek, with Chaos as the primitive being, but placed side by side with, or rather with- in Chaos, the primitive Spirit. A third factor is also introduced in the form of Desire, but it is impos- sible to say definitely whether as primitive or derived from the other two. In any case, from the union of Desire with Spirit was born Mół (mire—mud—water). Möt made himself into an egg and developed into the world. (4) Babylonian. The Babylonian account of the creation, unearthed and deciphered within the last half of the nineteenth century, is worth re- citing. It goes back to the time when nothing existed. “There was a time when what is over- head was not called heaven, what is beneath was not yet called earth. The abyss, the ancient, their progenitor, the mother Tiamat was the bearer of them all. Their waters were altogether unscat- tered. The fields were not prepared, the moor was not seen. At that time none of the gods had appeared; neither was anyone's name implored, nor was any destiny fixed. The gods were created. . . . Lachmu and Lachamu issued forth, and they brought forth. . . . .Am Sar and Ki Sar were created. A long time passed. . . . the God Anu (Bel) and Ea were born, An S'ar and Ki Sar bore them. These four ancient cosmogonies, which may be regarded as the best out of a large number, illus- trate the resemblances and differences existing be- tween the extra-biblical and the biblical accounts of the creation. 3. Tesemblances and TXifferences. The re- semblances are: (1) They all begin with chaos. (2) The first stage after chaos is in all the crea- tion of light. (3) The next stage is the process, with some at least, of the separation of dry land COSMOGONY 462 from the sea just as in Genesis i. (4) The sun and other heavenly bodies follow in the next stage in all the cosmogonies that make special mention of them. (5) Animals and mankind appear last in all. The differences between the Biblical and the other cosmogonies are, however, also to be noted: (1) According to the Biblical cosmogony, God precedes the world; according to all the others, the gods are born into existence in the de- velopment of the world. Genesis i gives a cos- mogony in the strict sense of the word; the mythologies contain a confused theogony in their cosmogonies. (2) According to Genesis, God is dis- tinct from and above the world, forming it by His word; according to the mythologies, the gods are a part of the universe, sharing in the common de- velopment. (3) According to Genesis, God is one; according to the mythologies a multitude of gods emerge into existence. (4) According to Genesis, the universe has a definite plan and goal which it reaches and is pronounced very good; according to the mythologies, the universe reaches its pres- ent condition as if haphazard. 4. Modern Jcience. But we may now inquire into the conclusion of modern science on the sub- ject of the beginnings of the world. Until re- cently, this question was supposed to be beyond the reach of true science. It is now agreed upon, however, that science must begin with a theory, the primitive condition of all things and their transformation into their present state. While there are still differences of view, there is a grow- ing tendency towards the acceptance of the nebular hypothesis as a true cosmogony. (1) Nebular Hypothesis. What then is the nebular hypothesis? It is the supposition first put forth as a philosophical speculation by Kant and subsequently elaborated as a scientific theory by La Place that in the earliest stage of its exist- ence, the universe was an inchoate mass of ex- tremely rarified matter. According to the laws of gravitation, this mass assumed the form of an immense sphere and began to revolve on an axis, In consequence of this rotation, it became flattened at the poles and expanded at the equator. This, with the condensation and contraction of the mass, led to the separation of the equatorial portion of it and the formation of the same into a ring like the rings of the planet Saturn. The ring, on account of unexpual condensation in different portions of it, broke into a number of fragments, each of which went through a process similar to that of the whole 1nass, and thus stellar systems, and in particular the solar system, were formed. In each of these systems, the conditions above described being present, through the same process planets and satellites came into existence. A single glance at this theory and its relation to Mosaic cosmogony reveals the fact that there can be no conflict between the two. The nebular hypothesis leaves the question of the First Cause out of view as beyond the reach of science strictly so called. It begins with the “heavens and the earth ;” i. e., the universe as already created in a chaotic mass; it assumes further that motions, is- suing in heat and light, have been inserted into this mass, perhaps created together with it, and then proceeds to account for the formation of planets and suns, and within these (especially within the terrestrial sphere) for the formation of the firma- ment and the separation of the waters above and the waters beneath. The correspondence between the two is, however, from the nature of the case very general. At one point, this correspondence is particularly striking and unexpected. According to the nebular hypothesis, as well as according to COSMOGONY the Mosaic account, light precedes the formation of the sun and the other celestial bodies. At the point where the nebular hypothesis leaves the story of the origin of the world, the science of geology takes it up and continues it. (2) Geology. When the earth’s crust was formed in accordance with the laws mentioned in the above brief sketch of the nebular hypothe- sis, it was surrounded by a dense mass of vapors. Part of this mass was condensed and precipitated to the surface of the earth, con- stituting a continuous and all-enveloping Sea. The rest remained suspended in the form of an unbroken shell of thick, impenetrable cloud or hy- grosphere. The further condensation of the cen- tral mass of the earth caused shrinkages and wrinklings on the surface. The elevations thus formed appeared as mountains and continents, while the depressions became the basins of the oceans and seas. Meantime, life in its lowest forms also appeared, though science does not upſ- dertake to say whence and how. But life, Once introduced, went on progressing and becoming more and more complex and differentiated. The earliest forms of life appear to have been “com- prehensive” or intermediary between animal and vegetable. Out of these arose the protophytes, or first plants, and the protozoa, or first animals. Then appeared fishes, next reptiles, next birds; last mammals, followed by man. This order is not the same as that given in the six days, or stages, of creation in Genesis. For here, plants of all kinds —“grass, herbs, fruit, trees, yielding fruit after their kind”—are created on the third day. Fishes, or sea-monsters—“moving creatures that move” —and birds, are created on the fifth day; and liv- ing creatures or beasts, defined as “cattle and creeping things”—reptiles—and finally man, were created on the sixth day. The discrepancies are seen at a glance and have led to many ways of looking at them. (3) Discrepancies. In general, these may be reduced to three classes: (1) Those of the |Harmonists; (2) those of the Collisionists; and (3) those of the Parallelists. (1) The Harmonists strive to bring thc data fur- nished by geology into perfect accord with the Genesis narrative. As the facts of geology are fixed and admit of but a single interpretation, any attempt to remove the discrepancies between the teachings of this science and the portraiture of Genesis must be based on some interpretation of the Biblical text. Of such interpretations, there have been attempted a very large number. It will be sufficient to mention here some that have ob- tained currency among Bible students. (a) The first of the systems of harmonization is that according to which Genesis and geology give accounts of totally different matters. At- cording to this view Genesis i : I, states in a single sentence the fact of the creation of the world, in- cluding the earth with all its contents. Between this verse, however, and what follows, there is a gap. The second verse begins with a devastation and ruin. This is not primitive chaos, but the re- sult of a convulsion or cataclysm. “The earth was without form and void and darkness was upon the face of the deep.” All that geology now discovers and deciphers of the earth's history be- longs to the period preceding the cataclysm ob- scurely alluded to in this statement. The subse- quent portion of the chapter gives, according to this view, an account of the reconstruction of the terrestrial world after this cataclysm, in six or- dinary or solar days of twenty-four hours each. Of such reconstruction, geology could naturally COSMOGONY 463 know and say nothing. Thus the two accounts are mutually supplementary and the harmony be- tween them is complete. The difficulties of this method of reconciliation need not here be pointed Out. (b) Another way of harmonizing Genesis and geology is that proposed by geologists like Hugh Miller, Dana and Dawson, and accepted by such men as Gladstone. These authorities, though dif- fering among themselves, have this in common, that they take the Hebrew words meaning “grain,” “herbs,” “trees,” “birds,” “reptiles” and give them broader meanings than the same admit of in other passages, and thus create artificial correspond- ences between the two accounts. Such corre- spondences, however, though seen by their own au- thors, are not readily accepted by others as evi- denced by the differences among the harmonists of this class. And in general, Hebrew scholars have failed to endorse the interpretations put on Hebrew terms by them. In some cases, Hebraists have gone further and protested against these in- terpretations. (c) A third class of harmonists confess them- selves unable to find perfect accord between the accounts, but ascribe the failure to the imperfec- tion of the data furnished by geology. In the pres- ent condition of our knowledge, they say, these discrepancies are insuperable; but geology is a new science, it is a growing science, and we may expect that when it gathers all the facts together, if indeed it ever shall succeed in doing so, its pic- ture of the creative period will be identical with that of Genesis. That this is rather an abandon- ment of the efforts to reconcile than a successful reconciliation of the accounts is evident on the face of it. (2) But if harmonies of Genesis and geology have not been successful in general, must we ac- cept the conclusion of the Collisionists, which is that these two cosmogonies contradict each other at every point? Are the discrepancies between them actual contradictions? Those who answer in the affirmative do not agree among themselves. Some consider the first chapter of Genesis a legend or myth on a perfect level with the mytho- logical cosmogonies of the ancients, and refuse to assign to it any value whatever. Others regard it as a legend indeed, but one in which the divine Spirit has chosen to embody certain great moral and spritual lessons. While the vehicle itself is no different from the myths of other ancient peo- ple, the lessons conveyed to mankind through it raise it infinitely above them. Both forms of the collisionist view ignore the facts. There is a gen- eral resemblance between the account in Genesis and that of geology which is worthy of attention. (3) We are thus led to the Parallelists’ view of these accounts, which consists in putting them side by side and noting their resemblances and differ- ences, without IIIaking an eſſort to bring about a reconciliation between them, if they should prove to be divergent, or expecting them to conflict upon the ass11mption that because the Genesis account is an ancient one it must necessarily conflict with modern science. The two records move upon dif- ferent planes, but these two planes are parallel to one another. Each of them has a specific design and the details in each are selected and arranged with a view to making it a perfect means towards this end. Neither could be substituted for the other. Moreover, each is drawn up within a defi- nite environment and its form is determined by this environment. The geological account is a nineteenth century grouping of certain facts with a view to satisfying a scientific need; the Genesis COSMOGONY account is a pre-Christian presentation emphasiz- ing the place of God in the origin of the world. Perfect correspondence between them does not exist. And yet a general similarity of order can- not be denied. This parellelism is such as grows out of the fact that both touch on the same main subject. But whereas one is intended to show up the First Cause and the ultimate purpose of the creation, the other aims to trace its course as a process possessing an interest of its own. The differences between the accounts are also precisely such as might have been expected from the pur- pose and nature of each as compared with the other. The geological record apart from that of Genesis would be defective, as it cannot go back to the primary cause of the creation. The Genesis account, compared with that of geology, cannot be regarded as accurate in every detail. But its lack of accuracy in no way militates against its being accepted as in general true. This “true- ness” as Gladstone says “is truth or trueness as conveyed and comprehended by the mind of man; and further, by the mind of man in a comparative- ly untrained and infant state.” (Impregnable Rock, p. 38.) Language, and in fact all other modes of expression are means towards ends. It may occur that “with the aim in view, words of figure liter- ally untrue might carry more truth home than words of fact; words less exact will even now often carry more truth than words superior in exactness.” (Impregnable Rock, p. 49.) (4) Biology. Apart from geology there has arisen another science of recent years which claims to have something to say on the early periods of the world’s history, namely, the Science of biology. And the point of con- tact between biology and the cosmogony of Genesis is its adoption of the law of evo- lution. Through the operation of this law biology claims to explain the successive appearance of the various forms of life as links in a connected chain. All that the cosmogony of Genesis had described as the creation of “grain,” “herb,” “fruit-tree yielding fruit,” “moving creature that hath life,” “fowl” flying above the earth, “sea-monster,” “creeping thing,” “cattle,” and “beast of the earth,” and the physical frame and life of man himself, biology classifies under orders, classes, families, genera, Species, and varieties; and traces them all in their multitudinous forms from a few primor- dial germs, perhaps even from one. The question which is thus raised between Genesis and biology is : Can the theory of evolution be held in con- sistency with the general trustworthiness of the account in Genesis? In order to obtain a satis- factory answer to this question, it is necessary to posit first of all that biology has no right to and does not undertake to account for causes, but only for successions and varieties of phenomena. It can look upon evolution only as a process or method in nature, and not as a force or cause which brings things or entities into existence. In other words, we must distinguish between evolu- tion as a method according to which the underly- ing cause or causes bring about new forms out of old ones, and evolution as a philosophy of cause or being. Further than this, biological evo- lution must be understood as concerned simply with the phenomena of life and as distinguished from cosmical evolution, which undertakes to ex- plain the origin of inorganic forms as well as forms of life upon the same principle. It does not come within the scope of the principle of bi- ological evolution to inquire how life originated. It leaves the answer to that question to philos- ophy. Naturally, philosophy aims to take up the COSMOGONY question and answer it, in a manner, similar to that of biology, through its theory of Cosmic evo- lution. But with that biology has nothing to do. Assuming that life has somehow come on the earth, it traces it from its simple and single be- ginning, by slow and gradual modifications—“in- sensible gradations”—through successive forms and stages up to IIIail. Is the creation of the various forms of life as pictured in Genesis inconsistent with this effort of modern biology to trace them all to one beginning and one process of development? It was for a long time supposed that it was. Under the influ- ence of ancient and medieval interpretation, it was supposed that the account in Genesis could only be harmonized with a theory of the special creation of each species of life. But on a close scrutiny, this interpretation does not seem to be necessary. There is nothing in the text to indicate that the author or original readers of the record had the creation of each species by a separate divine fiat in mind. On the contrary, while the account can- not be said to teach the passage of species into one another or to involve the modern doctrine of evolution, it certainly leaves room for that doc- trine. The creator is represented as endowing the material elements with the power to produce cer- tain forms of life. “And God said, let the earth put forth grass,” etc. “Let the waters bring forth abundantly moving creature that hath life,” etc. “Let the earth bring forth the living creature after its kind,” etc., i : II, 20, 24. There is at least a suggestion here of what scientists (Le Conte) call “resident forces.” There are further sug- gestions of heredity in the command that plants and animals shall bring forth, each “after its kind.” There is the suggestion of adaptation to environment in the fact that the waters, the air, and the earth are each commanded to bring forth each the forms of life best suited to subsist in it. There is the suggestion of fecundity in the com- mand to multiply and replenish the earth. And finally there is a suggestion of the law of the sur- vival of the fittest in the subordination of the low- er forms to the higher and of all to man. These are no more than mere shadowy suggestions. It it not to be thought for a moment that they show a knowledge of modern scientific theories on the part of the ancient writer. Yet they indicate how free his mind was of any other theory of creation which might lay claims to exclusive consistency with his view of the origin of living forms upon the earth. (5) Biblical Bearing. The bearing of the doctrine of evolution on the Biblical portraiture of the origin of man’s intellectual and moral na- ture falls rather within the scope of an article on Anthropology than within that on Cosmogony. It may be said, however, that even that part of Genesis has been found to raise no difficulty in the way of a full acceptance of both the scientific theory and the Biblical record. If finally we turn from organic evolution to cos- mic evolution as a favorite doctrine in modern thought, and institute a comparison between it and the statements of Genesis, we shall find the same parallelism without absolute harmony which we have found between the cosmogony of modern science and the record of Genesis. Evolution in this sense is defined by Herbert Spencer as “an integration of matter and concomitant dissipa- tion of motion, during which the matter passes from an indefinite, incoherent homogeneity to a definite, coherent heterogeneity, and during which the retained motion undergoes a parallel transfor- mation.” (First Principles, c. xvii:I45. p. 396.) 464 COTTON It is to be noted that evolution in this definition is a mere process. It is not a principle or cause. As a process, it may be held with a materialistic (pantheistic), theistic, or agnostic system of the- ory of the nature of the First Cause. Herbert Spencer himself, followed by many, holds to evo- lution upon an agnostic basis. He asserts that the First Cause, though existing, is not knowable. Others make matter itself the first cause and evo- lution the process of its blind self-unfolding. Still others postulate a personal God as a First Cause and evolution as the method of his work- ing. If this last metaphysical basis be put under the theory of evolution, all inconsistency between it and the cosmogony of Genesis vanishes. On the contrary, certain resemblances emerge which, though not indicating an anticipation of the mod- ern thought by the Biblical writer, at least show that his mind was not pre-occupied by a rival the- ory. These resemblances are especially striking in the characterization of the process of transi- tion from the first to the subsequent stages of the world's history. Evolution represents the transi- tion as a passage of matter from a state of “in- definite, incoherent homogeneity” to a state of “definite, coherent heterogeneity.” Genesis asserts that God in the beginning created heaven and earth and that “the earth was without ſorrrl and void;” i. e., in a state of “indefinite, incoherent homogeneity” and that from this state it passed by gradual stages into a state in which a firma- ment, land and water, grass, herbs, and trees, sun, moon, and Stars, animals and man appeared in order. In other words, a definite, coherent hetero- geneity was gradually evolved out of the pre- ceding opposite conditions (see Matheson, Can the Old Faith live with the Newf) If it be borne in mind that Genesis was not written in order to teach science and philosophy, but to show God’s earliest dealings with his people, this ab- sence of real conflict between its representations and the teachings of modern science will be seen to show a soberness and soundness in the mind of its author which fitted him to become the ve- hicle of God’s revelations to the world. The product may be called history, legend, or even myth or allegory. But whatever it be called, there is nothing in it which makes it difficult to believe that its author was inspired by God. . C. Z. COTES (köts), (Heb. only in the plural, nº, av-ay-roth', stalls), pens or inclosures for flocks (2 Chron. xxxii:28). COTTAGE (köt’tāj). 1. A hut made of boughs (Is. i.8; Heb. nºt, sook-kaw') for the purpose of temporary shelter. It is rendered “booth” in Job xxvii:18. 2 nº tº, zme/-oo-magg', occurs in Ig.xxiv:20, “The earth shall be removed like a cottage.” It should be translated to swing to and fro like a hammock. It appears to have been a swinging bed suspended from the trees or an even frailer structure than No. 1 (rendered “lodge,” Is. i :8). 3. The cottages mentioned in Zephaniah (ii:6; Heb. Fº, Ae-roth", literally, diggings) are thought by some to mean wells, but probably were exca- vations made by the shepherds as a protection against the sun. (Mc. & Str. Bib. Cyc.) COTTON (köt’t'n). In the Book of Esther, i.6, the word corresponding to “green’ in the Author- ized Version is P2.2, AEarðas, and no doubt means COtton. COUCH But we have only the Hebrew names to assist us in our inquiries. The same names have been applied by the ancients, and by writers in later times, sometimes to cotton and sometimes to linen, and we are unable to ascertain whether the earlier authors were more precise than their successors. Thus, fine linen was called othone. This is con- sidered by Celsius and Forster to be an Egyptian word, and to correspond to athon or ethon. From the time that the mummies of Egypt were found to be enveloped in pieces and rolls of cloth, dif- ferent authors have adduced these as evidence that the Egyptians were acquainted with cotton. But the microscope has proved that all the speci- mens were of linen, and not of cotton. Cotton is found apparently wild in Upper Egypt; it is cultivated on the west coast of Africa, but it has not yet been settled whether these are indigenous or introduced plants. The difficulty of ascertaining whether cotton was known to the Egyptians having been shown to be sufficiently great, even when we have such a substance as mummy-cloth to deal with, it is hardly necessary to add that it is still more diffi- cult to say whether it is mentioned in the Scrip- tures. Though it is probable that cotton was im- ported into Egypt and known to the Hebrews, it is extremely difficult to prove the fact. Pas- sages have been quoted from Arrian and others to prove that it grew and was used for clothing in India. (See Byssus). COUCH (kouch). See BED; SEAT. COUCHING PLACE (kouch'ing plas), (Heb. Yanº, zmar-bates'); a resting place for flocks (Ezek. xxv.5), a term used to denote the utter ruin of Ammon. COULTER (kö1'tär), (Heb. nº, ayth, 1 Sam. xiii:29, 21), according to Is. ii:4, Mic, iv:3, and Joel iii:IO, is an iron instrument used in agricul- ture, the majority of the ancient versions rendering it plowshare. COUNCIL (koun'sil). In the Old Testament council is the rendering of the Heb. Tºº, rig. maw', literally, a heaf (Ps. lxviii:27), a throng or company of persons. Two Greek words are thus rendered in the New Testament: (1) ovvéðptov, the Jewish governing body, the great council of the Sanhedrim, which sat at Jerusalem. (2) ovvéöpua (Matt. x:17; Mark xiii:9), the lesser courts, of which there were two at Jerusalem, and one in each town of Palestine. The constitution of these courts is a doubtful point; according to Talmudical writers the num- ber of judges was twenty-three in places where there was a population of I2O, and three where the population fell below that number (Mishn. Sanhedr. I, sec. 6). Josephus, however, gives a different account: he states that the court, as con- stituted by Moses (Deut. xvi; 18; Comp. Ant. iv: 8, Sec. I4), consisted of seven judges, each of whom had two Levites as assessors; accordingly in the reform which he carried out in Galilee, he appointed seven judges for the trial of minor of- fenses (B. J. ii:20, sec. 5). (Smith, Bib. Dict.) (See SAN HEDRIM.) COUNCIL, HOUSE (koun'sſl hous), (Gr. ovvé- 8ptov, soon-eh'dree-on, Sanhedrim, a sitting to- gether), a building in Jerusalem west of the temple, near the gymnasium and adjoining the innermost city wall (War v. 4, 2), where the San- hedrim probably met. During the course of the contest for the pos- session of the city by the Romans it was burned by Titus. 465 COURSE OF PRIESTS AND LEVITES COUNSELOR (koun'sél-ār), (usually Heb. Yº, yaw-ats'). 1. An adviser upon any matter (Prov. xi.; I4; XV:22; 2 Chron. xxii:3, etc.). 2. The king's state adviser (2 Sam. xv:12; Ezra vii:28; I Chron. xxvii:33, etc.). CountERVAIL (kounter-val'), (Heb. º. shaw-vazy'), to act against with equal force, power, Or effect; to thwart or overcome the action of the enemy (Esth. vii:4). COUPLING (küp'ling), (Heb. 72'ſ, Ahaw-bar', to join), of curtains (Exod. xxvi;4, 5, Io; xxviii:27; xxxvi; I I, etc.) and wooden beams or girders for fastening a building (2 Chron. xxxiv:II). COURAGE, COURAGEOUS (kür'âj, kür-ā'jús), (Heb. Pº, May-bazvó', heart, Dan. xi:25; TY, roo'- akh, breath, life, spirit, Josh. ii: II; Yº, aw-mats', to be alert, strong, Deut. xxxi.;6, 7, etc.; Pl.], Āhaw-zań', to seize, Josh. xxiii:6; 2 Sam. x:12; xiii:28; 2 Chron. xv.:8, etc.; Gr. 64poros, thar'sos, Courage, cheer, Acts xxviii: I 5). Courage is ranked as one of the four cardinal virtues (Wis. viii:7) according to the classifica- tion derived from Grecian philosophers. It is that condition of mind into which fear does not enter; which enables us to face difficulties and dangers with firmness and fearlessness. It may be compared with bravery as fol- lows: Braziery is shown in overcoming the Ob- stacle of the moment; courage seeks to avert the distant evil that may possibly arrive. Bravery is a thing of the moment, that is or is not, as cir- cumstances may favor; it varies with the time and season; courage exists at all times and on all occasions. (Crabb.) In the early days of Israel’s battles, courage in its simplest sense was naturally rated very high. The courageous feats of Jonathan and David and others are related with admiration (e.g. I Sam. xiv, xvii). We hear much of “men of valor’ (Judg., Sam. and especially Chron). The faint-hearted are not to be allowed to serve in battle (Judg. vii:3; Deut. xx:8; I Macc. iii:56). Between the earlier kings and the Maccabees we hear little or nothing of courage in war. The courage of endurance shown by martyrs is a lead- ing topic in Dan., Macc., and parts of the New Testament, especially Heb. xi; I Pet. and Rev. (W. O. Burrows, Hastings' Bib. Dict.). COURSE (körs). This word is used in Scrip- ture in the sense of onzeyard mozzement, advance, frogress, in a particular, direction, as of a shift (Acts xvi;II; xxi. 1-7); of the stars (Judg. v.2.0); a career (2 Tim. iv:7). It denotes the path in which the onward move- ment takes place, as of a river (Is. xliviá). Figuratite. It denotes one's manner of life (Jer. viii:6; xxiii: Io); also the manner of the present age (Eph. ii:2). coursF of PRIESTs AND LEVITES (körs &v prests ànd lè'vits), (Heb. nºnº. makh-al- o'Aeth, Gr. 64 muepta, ef-ay-mer-ee'ah, lasting for a day). The division made by David of the priests and Levites into twenty-four classes or orders, with a president at the head of each class. . In I Chron. xxiv. we have an account of the divisions of the priests into twenty-four classes, courses, or orders, who ministered at the altar in rotation. The courses were distinguished by the name of the most prominent member of the family from which 30 COURT the course was taken. The eighth of these courses fell to the family of Abia or Abijah ; and to this course belonged Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist (Luke I, 5). (See ABIA). courT (kört), (Heb. generally "#7, Ahaw- Zsare'), an open inclosure; appliº. in Scripture fre- quently to the inclosures of the tabernacle and temple. t It also means the court of a prison (Neh. iii:25; Jer. xxxii:2), of a private house (2 Sam. xvii:18), and of a palace (2 Kings xx :4; Esth. i:5, etc.). In the New Testament the Gr. at Nºí, ów-lay', indicates an open court (Rev. xi :2), while “kings' courts” is the rendering of the Greek word Baathetov, a palace. (See HOUSE.) - The word is often used in the plural (Ps. lxv :4; lxxxiv:2). The courts belonging to the temple of Jerusalem were three: (I) The court of the Gen- tiles, because the Gentiles were allowed to enter no further; (2) The court of Israel, because Israelites, if clean, had a right of admission into it; (3) The court of the priests, where the altar of burnt-offerings stood, and where the priests and Levites exercised their ministry. “Court for owls” (Is. xxxiv:13) is rendered by Delitzsch (Com., in loc.) “pasture for ostriches.” COURTS, JUDICIAL. See LAw. COUSIN (küz''n), (Gr. ovyyevås, soong-ghen-ace'). The child of an uncle or an aunt (Luke i36, 58). Sometimes applied to more distant relationships. Shakespeare uses it of a nephew (Azng /o/in, I I I, iii., 6), a niece (Twelfth AWight, I, iii, 5), an uncle (1, v, 131), etc. Thus, As You /i/Ée /#, I, iii,44— - Aºosa/ind–Me, uncle? IXuàe A'rederick—You, cousin. COUTHA (kou' tha), mentioned (I Esdr. v.32) as one of those whose sons were servants in the temple after the return from captivity, but the Hebrew lists (Ezra ii:53; Neh. vii:55) contain no corresponding names. covENANT (kāv'é-nant), (Heb. FTP, ber-eeth", cutting). Among other instances of anthropomor- phic forms of speech employed in Scripture is the use of the term covenant to designate the divine dealings with mankind, or with individuals of the I a Ce. (1) Mutual Contract. In all such cases, the proper idea of a covenant or mutual contract be- 466 COVENANT fixed arrangements, or laws of nature, as the regu- lar succession of day and night (Jer. xxxiii:20), and such religious institutions as the Sabbath (Exod. xxxi :16); circumcision (Gen. xvii:9, Io); the Levitical institute (Lev. xxvi :15); and in gen- eral any precept or ordinance of God (Jer. xxxiv: I3, I4); all such appointments forming part of that system or arrangement in connection with tween parties, each of which is bound to render certain benefits to the other, is obviously excluded, and one of a merely analogical nature substituted in its place. Where God is one of the parties, and man the other, in a covenant, all the benefits con- ferred must be on the part of the former, and all the obligations sustained on the part of the lat- ter. Such a definition, therefore, of a divine cove- nant as would imply that both parties are under conditions to each other is obviously incorrect, and incompatible with the relative position of the parties. (2) God’s Promise. We should prefer defining God’s covenant with man as a gracious engage- ment on the part of God to communicate certain tiºnerited favors to men, in connection with a particular constitution or system, through means of which these favors are to be enjoyed. Hence in Scripture the covenant of God is called his ‘counsel,” his ‘oath,’ his ‘promise' (Ps. lxxxix:3, 4; cv : 8-II : Heb. vi :13-20; Luke i :68–75; Gal. iii: I5-18, etc.); and it is described as consisting whol- ly in the gracious bestowal of blessing on men (Is. lix :21 ; Jer. xxxi :33, 34). Hence also the application of the term covenant to designate such which the blessings of God’s grace were to be enjoyed. (3) Ratification. The divine covenants were ratified with the sacrifice of a piacular victim, the design of which was to show that without an atonement there could be no communication of blessing from God to man. Thus when God made a covenant with Abraham certain victims were slain and divided into halves, between which a smoking furnace and a burning lamp, the sym- bols of the divine presence, passed, to indicate the ratification of the promises conveyed in that cove- nant to Abraham ; and here it is deserving of no- tice, as illustrating the definition of a divine cove- nant above given, that the divine glory alone passed between the pieces; whereas had the cove- nant been one of mutual stipulation, Abraham also would have performed the same ceremony (Gen. xv : I-18). In like manner, the Levitical covenant was ratified by sacrifice (Exod. xxiv.: 6-8); and the Apostle expressly affirms, on this ground, the necessity of the death of Christ, as the mediator of the new covenant ; declaring that where a cove- nant is, there also of necessity must be the death of the appointed victim (Heb. ix:16). (4) The Everlasting Covenant. Of the divine covenants mentioned in Scripture the first place is due to that which is emphatically styled by Jehovah, ‘My covenant.’ This is God’s gracious engagement to confer salvation and eternal glory on all who come to him through Jesus Christ. It is called sometimes ‘the everlasting covenant’ (Is. lv:3; Heb. xiii:20), to distinguish it from those more temporary arrangements which were con- fined to particular individuals or classes; and the second, or new, or better covenant, to distinguish it from the Levitical covenant, which was first in order of time, because first ratified by sacrifice, and became old, and was shown to be inferior, because on the appearance of the Christian dis- pensation it was superseded, and passed away (Jer. xxxi :31 ; Gal. iv:24; Heb. vii:22; viii:6-13; ix: I5–23; xii:24). Though this covenant was not, strictly speaking, ratified before the death of Christ, the great sacrificial victim (Heb. xiii:20), yet it was revealed to the saints who lived before his ad- vent, and who enjoyed salvation through the retro- spective power of his death (Rom. iii:25; Heb. ix:15). To the more highly favored of these God gave specific assurances of his gracious purpose, and on such occasions he was said to establish or make his covenant with them. Thus he estab- lished his covenant with Noah (Gen. ix:8, 9); with Abraham (Gen. xvii:4, 5); and with David (Ps. lxxxix:3, 4). nants so much as renewals of the promises of the everlasting covenant, coupled with certain tempo- rary favors, as types and pledges of the fulfilment of these promises. (5) The Old or Sinaitic Covenant. The old or Sinaitic covenant was that given by God to the Israelites through Moses. It respected especially the inheritance of the land of Canaan and the temporal blessings there with connected; but, it stood related to the new covenant, as embodying a typical representation of those great truths and blessings which the Christian dispensation un- folds and conveys. These were not distinct cove-, COVENANT OF SALT In the system of a certain class of theologians great importance is attached to what they have technically called ‘the covenant of works.’ By this they intend the constitution establishcq by God with Adam, during the period of his inno- cence. So far as this phraseology is not under- stood to imply that man, even in his sinless state, was competent to bind Jehovah by any condi- tions, it cannot be objected to. It seems also to have the sanction of one passage of Scripture, viz. Hos. vi :7, which almost all the best inter- preters agree in rendering thus: “But they like Adam have transgressed the covenant.’ - (6) The Covenant of Redemption. Theolo- gians have also spoken of ‘the covenant of redemp- tion,’ by which they mean an engagement entered into between God the Father and God the Son from all eternity, whereby the former secured to the latter a certain number of ransorried sinners, as his church or elect body, and the latter engaged to become their surety and substitute. By many the propriety of this doctrine has been doubted; but the references to it in Scripture are of such a kind that it seems unreasonable to refuse to ad- mit it. With it stand connected the subjects of election, predestination, the special love of Christ to his people, and the salvation of all that the Father hath given him. Sometimes a mere human contract is called God’s covenant, in the sense of involving an ap- peal to the Almighty, who, as the Judge of the whole earth, will hold both parties bound to fulfil their engagement. Compare I Sam. xx:8; Jer. xxxiv.: IS, Io; Ezek. xvii: 18, 19. COVENANT OF SALT (küv'é-nant 3v salt). A common form of ratifying covenants among the Orientals was by the use of salt. (See SALT, COVENANT OF.) COVENANT, THE NEW. Under the Old Testament, the covenant of grace - was externally administered by promises, pro- phecies, Sacrifices, circumcision, the passover, and Other types and ordinances. Under the New, it is administered in the preaching of the gos- pel, baptism, and the Lord's supper; in which grace and salvation are held forth in greater ful- ness, evidence, and efficacy, to all nations (2 Cor. iii:6-18; Heb. viii.; Matt. xxviii:19, 20; I Cor. xi :23-28). But in both periods, the Mediator, the whole substance, blessings, and manner of ob- taining an interest therein by faith, are the very same, whom any difference (Heb. xiii:6; Gal. 111 :7-I4). COVERING THE HEAD (küv’ār-ing the hād) in prayer. “The Jewish men prayed with the head covered, nay, even with a veil before the face.”. But Paul disapproved of the practice (I Cor. xi.; I,6). COVERT (kāvārt) For THE SABBATH (Heb. nºn neº, zzzay-Sazø/º' /*as/l-s/lab-bazyżh', 2 Kings xvi;18). … The coverſ for the Sabbath, which Ahaz demol- ished, was a place in the court of the temple, where the royal family sat to hear the law on the Sabbath; or a shelter here erected to defend the people in a storm (2 Kings xvi :18). He has for- saken his covert as a lion; God has wrathfully forsaken his city and temple of Jerusalem; or rather Nebuchadnezzar has furiously marched from Babylon, his capital, or from his lodging at Riblah (Jer. xxv :38). COVET (kiv'ét). 1. Sinfully and immoderately to desire earthly enjoyments, as honor, wealth, pleasure (Josh. vii: 2I). 467 CRANE 2. To desire earnestly in a lawful manner (I Cor. xii:31). (See Cove TousNESS.) COVETOUSNESS (kāv'ét-is-nēs), (Heb. Tºº, chaw-mad", to desire; PS3, beh'ſsah, unlawful gain; Gr. TrAeovešta, Ž/e/*-on-ex-ee'ah, the desire to have more (Mark vii:22; Rom. i.29; Luke xii: I 5; Eph. V:3). It is an inordinate desire of earthly things, or of what belongs to our neighbor. Covetousness is a vice that becomes stronger in old age, when other vices are weakened; it can never be satisfied; it renders men the abhorrence of God, cruel, op- pressive, and unjust towards neighbors; and it be- trays the man into sins and miseries unnumbered (PS. x:3; Mic. ii:2; Deut. xvi :19; Job xx:15-17; Prov. i :19; I Tim. vi. Io). COW (kou). See BEEves; CA.F. COZ (köz), (Heb. Sip, Aoise, nimble). 1. A descendant of Judah (Chron. iv:8), B. C. between 1680 and 1430. 2. The name of one of the Levites (I Chron. xxiv: Io; Ezra ii:61; Neh. iii:4, 21; vii:63). In these passages the name has the article prefixed, and in the first of them it is retained in the A. V. (See HAKKOz.) COZBI (köz'bi), (Heb. ***, Aog-bee", false), a daughter of Zur, one of the chiefs of the Midi- anites, slain with Zimri by Phinehas (Num. xxv-6-8, I4, 15, 18; xxxi:8). CRACKLING (krák'kling), (Heb.hip, Áoſe, voice, i. e., noise). The laughter of a fool is like to the cracá/?ng noise of thorns burning; is senseless, base and of short duration (Eccles. vii:6). CRACKNEL (krák'nél), (Heb. plural Fºº, miſſ- Áood-deeme", a kind of biscuit or bun baked hard and punctured with holes (I Kings xiv:3). CRAFT (kräft). 1. Deceit, guile (Dan. viii.25). 2. Trade, Occupation (Acts xviii:3, and xix:25, 27). (See HANDICRAFT.) CBAFTSMAN (kräfts'man), one skilled in some mechanical trade (Deut. xxvii: I 5; Acts xix:24). (See HANDICRAFT.) CRAFTINESS, CRAFTY (kräft'ī-nēs, kräft'y), (Heb. PTP, aw-ram", to be bare, cunning, deceit- fulness, subtilty; Gr. travoup'Yia, Žazz-oorg-ee'ah, wiliness, adroitness, unscrupulousness, slyness). These are terms used to denote an aptitude to employ peculiar, secret, and fraudulent means to the attainment of an end (Job v: I2, I3; Ps. lxxxiii:3; Luke xx:23; I Cor. iii: 19; 2 Cor. iv:2; xii: 16, etc). CRANE (krān), (Is. xxxviii:14; Jer. viii:7), Cºb, soos and Thy, a-goor', occur in these pages as names of birds, and have been generally con- sidered as denoting the ‘crane' and ‘Swallow.' But translators are by no means agreed as to the appropriation of these names to the Hebrew terms, for if the ‘crane' of Europe had been meant by either denomination, the claiilorous habits of the species would not have been expressed as ‘chatter- ing;' and it is most probable that the striking characteristics of that bird, which are so elegantly and forcibly displayed in Hesiod and Aristophanes, would have supplied the lofty diction of prophetical inspiration with associations of a character still more exalted. ‘Ardea virgo' of Linn., the ‘Grus virgo' of later writers, and ‘Anthropoides virgo' of some, is the bird intended by agur, though not coming from the north, but from Central Africa, down the Nile, and in the Spring arriving in Palestine, while troops of them proceed to Asia CRATES Minor, and some as far north as the Caspian. This bird is not more than three feet in length; it is of a beautiful bluish grey, with the cheeks, throat, breast, and tips of the long hinder feathers and quills black, and a tuft of delicate white plumes behind each eye. It has a peculiar dancing walk, which gave rise to its French denomination of ‘demoiselle.’ CRATES (krä'tez), (Gr. kpárms, Ärah'face, ruler), a governor of the Cyprians who was left in charge of the castle of Jerusalem during the absence of Sostratus, in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes (2 Macc. iv: 29). CREATION (kré-ā'shūn), (1) Old Testament View. In the ideas implied by this term a subject of vast extent and most pro- found interest is suggested; at the same time one in reference to which but little can be said to be so certainly known or distinctly understood as to afford adequate satisfaction to that curiosity which is so naturally, excited in the human mind with respect to it. In the first place the doctrine of revelation on this point, in the most general view, is chiefly founded on the simple ascription of the original formation of all things to Divine power, and on the title of the ‘Creator' applied to the Deity. This is the constant language of all parts of Scripture, both of the Old and New Testaments; and in the meaning of the term ‘create’ we must seek the origin of those views which constitute the theological and revealed belief respecting the mode in which the world had its beginning. The meaning of this word has been commonly associated with the idea of ‘making out of noth- ing,' but when we come to inquire more precisely into the subject, we can of course satisfy ourselves as to the meaning only from an examination of the original phrases. Now, in the Hebrew Scriptures three distinct verbs are in different places employed with refer- ence to the same Divine act, viz.: bara, create; asah, make; and 2atoar, form or fashion, and though each of these has its shade of distinction, yet the best critics understand them as so nearly Synonymous that, at least in regard to the idea of making Out of nothing, little or no foundation for that doctrine can be obtained from the use of the first of these words. They are used indif- ferently and interchangeably in many passages; as, e. g. in Is. xliii:7, where they all three occur applied to the same divine act. The Septuagint renders indifferently by Towe’v, Zoz-ein', to make, and Križeuv, Atiaz'ein, to create. But, especially in the account of the Creation in Gen. i the verbs are used irrespectively in verses 7, 16, 21, 25, etc.; and, comparing Gen. i.27 and ii:7, man is said to have been created, yet he is also said to have been formed out of the ground. Again, in the Deca- logue (Exod. xx:II), the verb is asah', made, not created. In Gen. i the Septuagint has ef-oi'ay-sen, /*e made, throughout. The word bara implies neither positively, on the one hand, a formation out of nothing, nor, on the Other, positively a formation out of existing ma- terials, but it is absolutely indefinite and neutral as to either of these conditions. Thus the original expression ‘let there be light’ (Gen. i :3), by no means necessarily implies that light had never be- fore existed. Upon the whole, the only difference between the three verbs lies in the degree of force in the expression; bara, create, being simply the stronger and more emphatic word to express more forcibly the absolute power of the Creator. (2) New Testament View. In the New Testa- ment we have a similar indifferent use of the 468. CREATURE words to create and to make, in a great num- ber of passages. The former is applied to the origin of the world in Mark xiii: 19, and to the formation of man in I Cor. xi :9, and in some other places; but most remarkably in Col. i. 16. The same word is also applied in a spiritual sense in Eph. ii:IO and other passages, in which the figure clearly involves formation out of what ex- isted before; as also in Eph. iv:24, Col. iii:Io, etc. It manifestly implies previous materials in Heb. ix: II, as in the Septuagint version of the corre- sponding passage in Lev. xvi; 16. But more par- ticularly in Rom. i :20, the expression for the in- visible things of him from the creation of the zworld, etc., places in synonym the substantives corresponding to the verbs ‘create’ and ‘fashion’ or “form.’ If from the subject of the general idea of crea- tion we turn to that of the particular mode in which the ‘formation' of existing things (whether the crude material existed previously or not) is represented to have taken place, we find more ex- tensive and express declarations in various parts of the Bible. The sacred writers refer largely to the Divine will and the announcement of that will by His word as the immediate agent, as in PS. xxxiii:6, 9, and czlviii:5; Rev. iv: II, and many other places; and this reference to the Divine word is considered by many to be in effect the same with the more direct ascription of the work of creation to the Divine logos, zword, in John i:3; which again is czplicitly referred to the Son of God in Eph. iii:9, and Heb. i :2, 3; and again, Col. i: I6. These general representations of the creation all agree in speaking of it in terms of the most unbounded extent and universality of operation. This is observable in the last cited texts, and not less pointedly in Acts xiv:15, and xvii:24; Rev. x:6; besides many others; but it is to be ob- served, it is not expressed that this universal act took place at one and the same time, nor that it was either 2nstantaneous or gradua/. (See ADAM; COSMOGONY; NATURE.) CREATURE (kré'tūr), (Heb. ???, meh'ſesh, a breathing creature; Gr. Krtous, Azis' is, a making, thing made, Kriopia, Ætis' 27ta/, formation, Gen. i:21, 24, etc.). 1. It is a loose or general rendering in the Old Testament for any animal. 2. In the New Testament the word designates, (I) The whole creation or any created ob- ject or being, e. g. “Every creature of God is good” (I Tim. iv:4); “Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature” (Rom. viii:39, etc.). (2) Humanity or the whole human race. “Preach the Gospel to every creature” (Mark xvi; I5); “The creature was made subject to vanity,” etc. (Rom. viii:20, 2r). (3) By the creuture or vreulivn Llial waits for a glorious deliverance into the glorious liberty of the sons of God, some suppose that the Heathen gentiles are meant; but how these were unwillingly made subject to the bondage of cor- ruption, or how they waited and longed for a gospel deliverance, it is difficult to understand. Is it not more easy to represent the creature, or crea- tion, to be the irrational part of our world, which, by the providence of God, is subjected to vanity for man’s sin, and is often used instrumentally in wickedness, and which, at the last day, shall be perfectly delivered from this abuse? (Rom. viii: 19-23). (4) The implanted habit or principle of grace, and the man who possesses it, are called a new creature; it is formed from nothing by the almighty influence of the word and Spirit of God; it is quite new, and entirely opposite to the old CREATURE, LIVING principle of natural corruption (Gal. vi. I5; 2 Cor. v. I7). CREATURE, LIVING (kré'tür, liv'íng), (Ezek. i:5; x: IS, I7, 20). See CHERUB; CHERUBIM. CREEK (krek), (Gr. KöXtros, Åo/Zºos, bosom), a small bay of the sea, e.g., St. Paul's Bay, island of Malta, where the apostle was wrecked (Acts xxvii:39) or a corner of a harbor (Judg. V:I7), “abode in his breaches” (or creeks, Marg.). CREEPING THING (krep'ing thing), (Heb. Yº, sheh’rets, an active mass of minute animals; or, Heb. vº, zeh'/tes, Creeping). Any animal which creeps (Gen. i :24, 25), whether a land or a water reptile (vi :7; Ps. civ : 25), and whether crawling on the belly or creep- ing on four or more feet (Lev. xi :41, 42). It is applied to all the smaller mammalia. CRESCENS (krés'senz), (Gr. Kpijo-kms, Ärace'Éace, growing; Latin, crescens, increasing), an assistant of St. Paul's, and generally supposed to have been one of the seventy disciples of Christ. It is alleged in the Apostolical Constitutions (vii:46), and by the fathers of the church, that he preached the Gospel in Galatia, a fact probably deduced conjecturally from the only text (2 Tim. iv : Io) in which his name occurs. There is a less ancient tradition (in Sophronius), according to which Crescens preached, went into Gaul, and be- came the founder of the church in Vienne; but it probably has no other foundation than the re- semblance of the names Galatia and Gallia. CBETE (krét), (Gr. Kpfft m, Aray'tay, carnal, fleshly), one of the largest islands in the Mediter- ranean, now called Candia, and by the Turks, Kirid. It is 160 miles long, but of very unequal width —varying from thirty-five to six miles. It is sit- uated at the entrance of the Archipelago, having the coast of the Morea to the northwest, that of Asia Minor to the northeast, and that of Libya to the south. Great antiquity was affected by the inhabitants, and it has been supposed by some that the island was originally peopled from Egypt; but this is founded on the conclusion that Crete was the Caphthor of Deut. ii:23, etc., and the country of the Philistines, which seems more than doubt- ful (see CAPHTOR). Surrounded on all sides by the sea, the Cretans were excellent sailors, and their vessels visited all the neighboring coasts. The island was highly prosperous and full of people in very ancient times; this is indicated by its ‘hun- dred cities’ alluded to by Homer (Il. ii:649). The chief glory of the island, however, lay in its having produced the legislator Minos, whose institutions had such important influence in softening the manners of a barbarous age, especially in Greece. The natives were celebrated as archers. Their character was not of the most favorable descrip- tion. In short, the ancient notices of their char- acter fully agree with the quotation which St. Paul produces from ‘one of their own poets,’ in his Epistle to Titus (i :12), who had been left in charge of the Christian church in the island:—“The Cretans are always liars, eternal liars, evil beasts, 'brutes,' 'slow bellies,’ gorbellies, bellies which take lnng to fill Crete is named in 1 Macc. x:67. But it derives its strongest scriptural interest from the circum- stances connected with St. Paul’s voyage to Italy. The vessel in which he sailed, being forced out of her course by contrary winds, was driven round the island, instead of keeping the direct course to the north of it. In doing this, the ship first made the promontory of Salmone on the eastern side 469 CRITICISM AND ARCHAEOLOGY of the island, which they passed with difficulty, and took shelter at a place called Fair-Havens, near to which was the city Lasea. But after spending some time at this place, and not finding it, as they supposed, sufficiently Secure to winter in, they resolved, contrary to the advice of St. Paul (the season being far advanced), to make for Phoenice, a more commodious harbor on the western part of the island, in attempting which they were driven far out of their course by a furious east wind called Euroclydon, and wrecked on the island of Melita (Acts xxvii). It is not known who planted Christianity in Crete. If St. Paul did so, it must have been be- fore his first imprisonment, possibly in the course of a visit while he was staying at Corinth or Ephesus. Perhaps the Church in the island had been founded by Christian converts. St. Paul seems to imply from his words to Titus (Tit. i :5), ‘For this cause left I thee in Crete,’ that he had been to the island. The fact that Titus was left to supply all omissions and appoint elders in every city, shows that the Church had been established long enough to admit the presence of irregulari- ties, and had been imperfectly organized. (C. H. Prichard, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) CRETES (kréts), (Gr. Kpfires, Aray'tes). The word in Acts ii:II probably refers to Jews and proselytes. “Cretians” is used for the same term (Tit. i. 12), applied there to native Greeks. “Cretans” would be better in both passages. The subscription of the Epistle to Titus, A. V., states that it was written to Titus “first bishop of the church of the Cretans.” CRETIANS (kré'shans). See CRETEs. CRIB (krīb), (Heb. P-8, ay-booce', a stall or manger, Prov. xiv:4), the place from which the cattle and horses fed (Is. i:3; Job xxxix:9). In 2 Kings v:23 the word is rendered “bags.” CRICKET (krik'ét). See CHARGOL. CRIMSON (krim'z'n). See PURPLE, ETC. CRISPING PINS (krispíng pins), Fºr, Ahaw-reet'im, pockets, bags). These were the reticules carried by Hebrew women. They were often elegant and ornamented (Is. iii:22). - CRISPUS (kris' piis), (Gr. Kptotros, Aris'?os, for Latin crispus, curled), chief of the Jewish Syna- gogue at Corinth (Acts xviii:8), converted by St. Paul (I Cor. i. I4). sº According to tradition (Constitut. Apost, vii: 46) he was afterwards bishop of AEgina. His of- fice shows that he was a Jew, and his foreign name that he had mingled freely with foreign peoples. CRITICISM AND ARCHIZEOLOGY (krit'í- siz'm and ār'ké-öl'ö-jy). (1) No Real Antagonism. There is no real antagonism between archaeology and , literary criticism; on the contrary the archaeologist is bound to welcome all literary criticism which is based upon sufficient evidence and is conducted in accordance with a sound method. It prepares the way for file reception of his archaeological facts by explaining the meaning and character of the documents to which he applies them. But un- fortunately the literary criticism of the Old Testa- ment has come to signify a very different thing, and indeed it has gained notoriety chiefly from the startling and extravagant nature of its results, and the confidence with which it has been put forward, the confidence being in inverse propor- (Heb. CRITICISM AND ARCH AEOLOGY tion to the solidity of the foundations upon which these statements rest. (2) Assumptions. When we ask for the evi- dence upon which the unanimous belief of centu- ries is reversed and the authenticity and trust- worthiness of the Old Testament Scriptures are alike denied, we find that it consists almost en- tirely of a philological analysis made by modern European and American scholars. Passages are torn from their context and assigned to authors who are supposed to have lived centuries after the events which they record took place, if indeed they ever took place at all. And this is done on the strength of a few words or idioms which the philologist assumes to indicate a particular au- thor or particular date. The conclusions which are thus obtained are often supported only by microscopic contradictions detected in the text, many of which are due to the arbitrary interpre- tations of the critic or by his dogmatic assertion that the statements contained in it are incredible. (3) A Dead Language. In the first place it seems to be forgotten that the Hebrew is a dead language and that the critics are not even modern Orientals who are familiar with Eastern modes of thought and expression. (4) Fragmentary Literature. It is also for- gotten that the books of the Old Testament con- stitute but a fragment of the Hebrew literature that once existed, and that consequently our knowledge of both Hebrew lexicon and grammar are exceedingly imperfect. We are dependent for what we know upon the traditional interpretation of that fraction of it which is contained in the Old Testament. In a modern case of collaboration it is often im- possible to tell which portions were written by each author. How, then, can it be possible to do this in the case of the Hebrew Scriptures which were written so long ago, and in a tongue of which so little is actually known concerning its early uses and idioms? (5) A Literary Mosaic. If the so-called critic- al method is correct the Pentateuch, instead of being the work of Moses, is a literary mosaic cut from the works of various authors, and so clever- ly put together as to deceive even contemporaries and also the Jews, Samaritans and Christians up to the present day. So far from being the earliest portion of the Scriptures upon which the religion of Israel, rested, it is claimed that the Law is later than the Prophets and marks a period of real de- cline. The tabernacle with which it was asso- ciated, was also a fiction as much as the revela- tion on Mount Sinai. Against these conclusions, archaeology raises a protest which is daily grow- ing stronger and more emphatic. The position of the “critic” depends largely upon the unavowed assumption that the use of writing for literary purposes was not known among the Israelites until long after the days of Moses. But we now know that this assumption is entirely false. (See Assy R- IAN AND BABY LONIAN LIBRARIES; EGYPT, LITER- ATURE OF; TEL AMARNA, TABLETS OF.) (6) Belonging to Mosaic Age. Archaeological evidences are accumulating to the effect that por- tions of the Pentateuch must belong to the age of Moses. For instance: The tenth chapter of Gene- sis is a great geographical chart in which we find a record of the nations of the known world, and it is here stated that Canaan was the brother of Mizraim or Egypt. But this could be true only while Canaan was a province of Egypt, as it was during the 18th and 19th Dynasties. After the fall of the 19th Dynasty Canaan was separated from Egypt. 470 CRITICISM AND ARCHAEOLOGY Henceforth Canaan belonged to the geographical zone of Shem. Be it remembered that the 19th Dynasty was the time of the exodus of Israel from Egypt; therefore the historical statements of Genesis are being confirmed by the monuments. The account of the campaign of Chedorlaomer has also been fully vindicated. (See ARIOCH, CHEDORLAOMER.) It is now plain that the 14th chapter of Genesis, instead of being the late produc- tion which Some of the critics claimed, must go back to the period when the history of Babylonian Supremacy in Palestine was still known. Ar- chaeology has verified the names of “Amraphel, king of Shinar,’’ of “Arioch, king of Ellasar,” and even “Ta'al, king of nations,” and also the Ummam Manda or “nations” of Kurdistan whom Kudur-Laghamar (Chedorlaomer) arrayed under his banner. Numerous contracts have also been found which are dated in the reigns of Arioch and Amraphel. (See AMRAPHEL.) (7) Demonstrations. Some literary critics having decided that the account in the 14th chap- ter of Genesis was unhistorical and that the names of the Canaanitish kings were etymological fic- tions, it was necessary for them to deny the archae- ological ſacts which had been produced. Conse- quently Mr. Pinches, of the British Museum, and other competent Assyriologists were plainly told that they were mistaken in the reading of these names, and that too by men who could not read a word, or decipher a letter of the Assyrian. It was triumphantly stated and repeated anonymous- ly, in various journals, that the name of Kuder- Laghamar especially had a wholly different pro- nunciation ; but unfortunately for their theory their “demonstration” was hardly in print before Dr. Scheil ſound tablets in the Museum of Con- stantinople which when deciphered proved to be the letters of “Amraphel, king of Shinar,” and had been written after he had thrown Off the Elamite yoke. He referred to the Elamite su- premacy in Chaldea, and in one of them spoke of the presents which he was sending to a vassal Babylonian prince as a reward for his valor “on the day of Kuder-Laghamar’s defeat.” This valuable discovery was made in the summer of 1897, and it set at rest any doubts which might have obtained on that subject. - But literary criticism is not inclined to yield without a struggle, and while it now admits the reading of the names, it is urged that the cunei- form documents contain no account of Abraham, and that a fragment of Babylonian history must therefore have been introduced into a mass of fic- tion. It is forgotten that this “fragment” itself was recently pronounced fiction. The literary or “higher critic” had also declared that the mention of Salem in the gamc chapter was an anachronism, but we have learned from the Tel-Amarna tablets that the city of Salem was already important when they were written. (See TEL-AMARNA TABLETs). Even the names of Jacob and Joseph have been found by Prof. Pinches in a Babylonian contract tablet belonging to the period of Chedorlaomer, and the name of Abram (Abu-ramu) is in an- other contract tablet of the same date. (8) Other Testimony. Similar testimony has been found in a papyrus belonging to the 18th Dynasty. Not only is the political situation the same as that pictured in Exodus, but the geogra- phy is the same. The Babylonian account of the deluge presup- poses the Biblical account in its integrity. (See DELUGE.) - CRITICISM AND ARCH AEOLOGY 3Corn has been cast upon the fact that Abraham came from “Ur of the Chaldees.” It has been claimed that the family of Terah was Aramean, and not Chaldean; that it belonged to Haran; and that its Chaldean origin was a myth. Ur has been found, however, on the site of Mugheir in South- ern Babylonia, and proves to have been the seat of three powerful dynasties, the last of which ruled Babylonia and claimed sovereignty in Canaan only a short time before Abraham was born. Colonies of Canaanitish and Syrian mer- chants were settled at the time in Babylonia, and a contract which is dated in the time of Am- raphel's grandfather is signed by a witness who is called “The son of Abi-ramu” or Abram. (9) Illustrations. Many examples illustrate the life of the people during those long forgotten centuries of Oriental civilization which covered the period during which the Pentateuch was com- posed, and they also show that the Old Testament is in complete harmony with the facts which are confirmed by archaeology. - Neither the history nor the literature of the Old Testament any longer stands alone; the contem- poraneous monuments of the nations whose life was intertwined with that of Israel, as well as the literatures which are older than the productions of that people, may be now compared with them. (10) Comparative Methods. The comparative methods of science can at last be employed in the case of the Old Testament Scriptures, and we can test their truthfulness by the external evidence of entirely independent witnesses. - There are large portions of the Old Testament history which can be illustrated only by such re- search, and not covered by it, portions which from the necessity of the case do not admit of monu- mental confirmation. The scenes of home life in the history of the patriarchs, for example, can never be the subject of inscriptions. All that archaeology can do in such circumstances is to illustrate them from the life of other Orientals and to show that they contain nothing inconsistent with either history or geography. The wanderings of Israel are not likely to be recorded on monuments, but it can be shown that these wanderings are the necessary interlude be- tween the exodus and the conquest of Canaan, and that for both of these events there is sufficient ar- ºrial evidence. (See ExoDUs, GEOGRAPHY • OF. - Archaeology is the handmaid of the Bible, and not a substitute for it, but it has confirmed our confidence in the historical accuracy of the Old Testament in a two-fold manner: First, by show- ing the high literary culture of the age to which the books belong; and, secondly, by recent and wholly reliable archaeological discoveries which have shown that the doubts which had been cast upon the antiquity and credibility of fine Old Testament 11arratives are wholly unwarranted. (11) Menes. Previous to the spring of 1898 “critical science” had been assuring us that Menes, the reputed founder of the united mon- archy of ancient Egypt and leader of the first his- torical dynasty, was nothing more than a myth. His very name was shown to be an etymological invention of later times, even Maspero claiming that “the Menes of Egyptian tradition was fabu- lous.” (Maspero, History of Egypt.) M. de Morgan, however, the late director of the Antiquities of Egypt, discovered in that year a tomb at Negada, twenty miles north of Thebes, the contents of which are now in the Cairo Mu- seum. Among them are the skull and bones of a king who was buried in the central chamber of 471 CROCODILE the sepulcher, and there are various archaeological indications that these belong to the period which had been pronounced mythical. The tomb appears to have been made for Menes himself, and the very name which had been “proved” to be an in- vention can now be read in the hieroglyphs on one of the ivory objects now in the Museum at Cairo. (See MENEs.) Another illustration may be found in relation to Grecian history. For a long time the literary critics denied that there was any history in Greece before the age of Solon; but these men have been forced from the field by the excavations of Dr. Schliemann and others, who have verified Greek tradition by clothing the Achaean princes and the kings of Mycenae with flesh and blood. The re- mains of Troy have been found, although it had long been declared to have existed only in “cloudland.” We have called this class of men “literary critics” in contrast with those who employ the his- toric method and rest their conclusions upon his- torical facts. (See Fresh Light from the Monu- ments, by Prof. A. H. Sayce, LL. D., Oxford University. Hom. Rev. 1896, pp. 97, 98. The Monuments and The Old Testament. Prof. Ira M. Price.) CROCODILE (krök'ö-dil). Although the term Kpokööet)\os, lizard, crocodž/e, occurs in the Greek version, there is no specific word in the Hebrew of which it is the acknowledged representative. (See DRAGON; LEVIATHAN; WHALE.) The crocodiles which we have to notice at pres– ent consist of three varieties, or perhaps species, all natives of the Nile, distinguishable by the dif- ferent arrangement of the scutae or bony studs on the neck, and the number of rows of the same pro- cesses along the back. Their general lizard form is too well known to need particular description ; but it may be remarked that of the whole family of crocodiles, comprehending the sharp-beaked gavials of India, the alligators of the west, and the crocodiles properly so called, the last are sup- plied with the most vigorous instruments for swimming, both from the strength and vertical breadth of their tails and from the fingers of their paws having deeper webs. Although all have from thirty to forty teeth in each jaw, shaped like spikes, without breadth so as to cut, or surface so as to admit of grinding, the true crocodile alone has one or more teeth on each side in both jaws, exserted, that is, not closing within but outside the jaw. They have no external ear beyond a fol- licle of skin, and the eyes have a position above the plane of the head, the pupils being contractile, like those of a cat, and in some having a luminous greenish tinge, which may have suggested the allusion to ‘the lids of the morning’ (Job xli :18). The upper jaw is not movable, but, as well as the forehead, is extremely dense and bony ; the rest of the upper surface being covered with several rows of bosses, or plated ridges, which on the tail are at last reduced from two to one, each scale having a high horny crest, which acts as part of a great fin. Although destitute of a real voice crocodiles when angry produce a Snorting Sound, something like a deep growl; and Occasionally they open the mouth very wide, remain for a time thus exposed facing the breeze, and, closing the jaws with a sudden snap, cause a report like the fall of a trap-door. The gullet of the crocodile is very wide, the tongue being completely tied to the lower jaw; and beneath it are glands exuding a musky substance. On land the crocodile, next to the gavial, is the most active, and in the water it is also the species that most readily frequents CROOKBACKED the open sea. Of the immense number of genera which we have seen or examined, none reached to 25 feet in length, and we believe the specimen in the vaults of the British Museum to be one of the largest. Sheep are observed to be unmolested by these animals; but where they abound, no pigs can be kept, perhaps from these frequenting the muddy shores; for we have known only one in- stance of crocodiles being encountered in woods not immediately close to the water's side: usually they bask on sandy islands. As their teeth are long, but not fitted for cutting, they seize their prey, which they cannot masticate, and swallow it nearly entire, or bury it beneath the waves to macerate. Having very small excretory organs, their digestion requires, and accordingly they are found to possess, an immense biliary apparatus. They are oviparous, burying their eggs in the sand; and the female remains in the vicinity to dig them out on the day the young have broken the shell. Crocodiles are caught with hooks, and they seldom succeed in cutting the rope when properly prepared. Crocodiles and alligators take the sea, and are found on islands many leagues distant from other land. The fact is particularly notable at the Grand Caymanas, in the sea of Mexico, which is almost destitute of fresh water. It is indeed owing to this circumstance that the same species may frequent all the rivers of a great extent of coast, as is the case with some found in Africa, whence they spread to India and the Malayan islands. - CROOKBACKED (kröök’bàk’t), (Heb. 23, gić- bane', to be arched, or contracted). A humpback (Lev. xxi.20, 21). One with this infirmity could not serve as priest. CROP (kröp), (Heb. "Sº, moor-aw', conspicu- ous), this part of the bird was cast with its feathers among the ashes at the side of the altar of sacri- fice, and not burned with the rest of the fowl (Lev. i. 16). CROSS (krös), (Gr. oravpós stºzy-ros'). (1) Origin and Form. This word is derived from the Latin cru.a. Respecting the origin of its Greek representative there is some diversity of opinion. According to Eustathius and Hesychius, the Greek stauros, cross, is so called from its standing erect, or from its standing with its arms horigontal. Latin etymologists also derive the word from the Greek word his'-tay-mee, to place. In its general acceptation the cross is an instru- ment of punishment, and, metaphorically, punish- ment itself, as well as the pain which it inflicts, and generally any severe suffering or heavy trial. Instead of stauros the Greek word skolops, stake, is sometimes found as equivalent to the Latin C7'143°. In its simplest form, consisting of two pieces of wood, one standing erect, the other crossing it at right angles, the cross was known at an early age in the history of the world. Its use as an instru- ment of punishment was probably suggested by the shape so often taken by branches of trees, which seem to have been the first crosses that were employed. Trees are known to have been used as crosses (Tertull. Ap. viii:16), and to every kind of hanging which bore a resemblance to crucifixion, 'such as that of Prometheus, Andromeda, etc., the name was commonly applied. Among the Scy- thians, Persians, Carthaginians, Greeks, Romans, and the ancient Germans, traces are found of the cross as an instrument of punishment. (2) The Simple Cross. According to Lipsius and Gretser there were in general two kinds of crosses: (1) Crux simplex and (2) crux com- 472 CROSS posita or compacta. The first consisted of a stake on which the criminal was fastened or by which he was impaled. For the first kind of punishment a tree or a specially prepared Stake was used, on which the criminal was bound, and either left to perish or immediately put to death. For impaling (infixio) a long and sharpened piece of wood (pale) was employed, on which the criminal was put as on a Spit. (3) The Compound Cross. Of the crux com- posita or compound cross there were three sorts: I, crux decussata; 2, crux commissa; 3, crux im- missa. The crux decussata is also called An- drew's cross, because tradition reports that on a cross of this kind the Apostle Andrew suffered death. Jerome (Comment. on Jerem. c.:31) de- scribes this cross, saying in effect that the name indicates two lines cutting each other after the manner of the letter X. So Isidorus Hisp. (Orig. I, I, 3) says that the letter X denotes a cross and the number ten. The classic work upon the cross and the cruci- fixion of Jesus is Justus Lipsius's (d. 1606) De Cruce, I595. (4) The Crux Commissa. The crux commis- sa, Lipsius states, was formed by putting a cross piece of wood on a perpendicular one, so that no part of the latter may stand above the former. Of the crux immissa, or, as others prefer to term it, crux capitata, the following is given as the description:—a cross in which the longer piece of wood or pale stands above the shorter piece which runs across it near the top. It is dis- tinguished from the preceding by the part of the longer beam which is above the shorter or trans- verse. This form is found in paintings more fre- quently than any other, and on a cross of this kind our Saviour is believed by Lipsius to have suffered death. But in 1878, Herman Fulda, pas- tor near Halle, Germany, issued a work entitled Das Kreug und die Kreuzigung, which maintains that Lipsius and all his followers are wrong. This statement he fortifies by a fresh examination of the sources. According to Fulda, the cross of Jesus was a post. His hands were nailed on either side of it; his feet, the knees being much bent, were fastened by a stout cord to this post, but not nailed, and they, together with the nailed hands, supported the body. Owing to haste, he deems it probable that the customary “seat” fastened to the cross as a partial support was wanting. Fulda finds in this extremely painful position one reason for the speedy death of Jesus, which occasioned Pilate’s incredulity. (See CRUCIFIxION.) The three forms of the cross enlarged are as fol- lows (the first is the usual form; the second is probably the oldest). { * _ºlº Three Forms of the Cross. I. Usual Form of Cross. 2. Probably Oldest Form of Cross. . St. Andrew's Cross. (5) Emblem. The sign of the cross is found as a holy symbol among several ancient nations, who may accordingly be named, in the language of CROSS 473 Tertullian, crucis religiosos, devotees of the cross, Among the Indians and Egyptians the cross often appears in their ceremonies, sometimes in the shape of the letter T, at others in the usual form of the Roman Cross. At Susa, Ker Porter saw a stone cut with hieroglyphics and cuneiform in- scriptions, on which in one corner was a figure of a cross, thus H. The cross, he says, is generally understood to be symbolical of the divinity or eternal life, and certainly a cross was to be seen in the temple of Serapis as the Egyptian emblem of the future life, as may be learnt in Sozomen and Rufinus. Porter also states that the Egyptian priests urged its being found on the walls of their temple of Serapis, as an argu- ment with the victorious army of Theodosius to save it from destruction. From the numerous writings U11 Lllis subjuuL by La Croze, Jablongki, Zoega, Visconti, Pococke, Pluche, Petit Radel, and others, the symbol of the cross appears to have been most various in its significations. Sometimes it is the Phallus, sometimes the planet Venus, or the Nilometer, or an emblem of the four elements, or the seasons (Creuzer’s Symbolik, pp. 168-9). It is not therefore surprising that ancient and even modern Christian writers should on this sub- ject have indulged in some degree of refinement and mysticism. Justin Martyr (Apol. i :72) says: ‘The sign of the cross is impressed upon the whole of nature. There is hardly a handicraftsman but uses the figure of it among the implements of his industry. It forms a part of man himself, as may be seen when he raises his hands in prayer.’ In like manner Minutius Felix (c:29) : ‘Even nature itself seems to have formed this figure for us. We have a natural cross on every ship whose sails are spread, in every yoke that man forms, in every outspreading of his arms in prayer. Thus is the cross found both in the arrangements of nature, and among the heathen.” (See Phallic Worship, Robt. Allen Campbell.) (6) Alleged Discovery of the Cross of Christ. Of the cross on which Jesus was crucified four ecclesiastical historians (Socrates, i:13; Sozomen, ii: I ; Rufinus, i :7; Theodoret, i:18) concur in stating that it was found by the Empress Helena, mother of Constantine the Great. This event is assigned to the year of our Lord 326. Eusebius is silent on the discovery. “Having built a church over the sacred spot, Helena is reputed to have deposited within it the chief part of the real cross. The remainder she conveyed to Constantinople, a part of which Con- stantine inserted in the head of a statue of him- self, and the other part was sent to Rome, and placed in the church of Sta. Croce in Gerusalem- me, which was built expressly to receive the pre- cious relic. When subsequently a festival to com- memorate the discovery had becn catablished, the Bishop of Jerusaleiii, U11 Eastel Guiday, czhibited to the grateful eyes of eager pilgrims the object to see which they had traveled so far, and endured So much. Those who were persons of substance were further gratified by obtaining, at their full price, Small pieces of the cross set in gold and gems; and that wonder might not pass into in- credulity, the proper authorities gave the world an assurance that the holy wood possessed the power of Self-multiplication, and, notwithstanding the innumerable pieces which had been taken from it for the pleasure and service of the faithful, re- mained intact and entire as at the first.” The capture of Jerusalem by the Persians, A. D. 614, placed the remains of the cross in the hands of Chosroes II., who mockingly conveyed them to his capital. Fourteen years afterwards, Heraclius CROWN recovered them, and had them carried first to Con- stantinople, and then to Jerusalem, in Such pomp that on his arrival before the latter city he found the gate barred, and entrance forbidden. In- structed as to the cause of this hindrance, the Emperor laid aside the trappings of his greatness, and, barefooted, bore on his own shoulders the Sacred relic up to the gate, which then opened of itself, and allowed him to enter, and thus place his charge beneath the dome of the sepulcher. The figure of a cross has often been represented on the banners of contending armies, thus: ºl; | Cross of Constantine. Figuratite. (1) Troubles and afflictions, chief- ly those endured for Christ, are called a cross, they are painful, lingering, and attended with shame in the view of carnal men ; and to take up this cross is cheerfully to submit to it, from love to Christ (Matt. xvi :24). (2) The whole suffer- ings of Christ are called his cross, as on it he suffered in the most excruciating manner, in both soul and body at once (Eph. ii:I6; Heb. xii:2). (3) The doctrine of his sufferings is called his cross. (I Cor. i :18; Gal. v : II, and vi. I2.) (4) Enemies to his cross are such as undermine the necessity or virtue of his righteousness by their legal doctrine, worldly care, or licentious life, Phil. iii: 18. CROW (krö). See RAVEN. CROWN (kroun), (Heb. Tºº, meh'ger, literally, something set apart, consecration; hence, Con- secrated or dedicated hair, as of a Nazarite), is supposed to mean a diadem. (Heb. º, az-azy- zaw', crown.) Crowns are often mentioned in Scripture and in such a manner as in most cases to indicate the circumstances under which, and the persons by whom, they were worn; for they were less exclusive- ly worn by sovereigns than among modern nations. Perhaps it would be better to say that the term ‘crowns' was applied to other ornaments for the head than those exclusively worn by royal per- sonages, and to which modern usage would give such distinctive names as coronet, band, miter, tiara, garland, etc. (1) Origin. The royal crown originated in the diadem, which was a simple fillet fastened round the head, and tied behind. This obviously took its rise among a people who wore long hair, and used a band to prevent it from falling over the CROWN face. The idea occurred of distinguishing kings by a fillet of different color from that usually worn ; and being thus established as a regal dis- tinction, it continued to be used as such even among nations who did not wear the hair long, or was employed to confine the head-dress. We sometimes see this diadem as a simple fillet, about two inches broad, fastened round the otherwise bare head; we then find it as a band of gold. In this shape it sometimes forms the basis of raised ornamental work, in which case it becomes what we should consider a crown ; and indeed the original diadem may be traced in most ancient crowns. Then we find the diadem surrounding the head-dress or cap (figs. 3, 9, 13), and when this also is ornamented, the diadem may be con- sidered as having become a crown. The word ne2er is supposed to denote a diadem. It is ap- plied to the inscribed plate of gold in front of the high-priest's miter, which was tied behind by a ribbon (Exod. xxix:6; xxxix:30). This word is also employed to denote the diadem which Saul wore in battle, and which was brought to David (2 Sam. i :IO), and also that which was used at the coronation of the young Joash (2 Kings xi :12), º Ancient Asiatic Crowns. and, as another word is applied elsewhere to the crown used in this ceremonial, the probability is that the Hebrew kings wore sometimes a diadem and sometimes a crown, and that the diadem only was accessible to the high-priest, by whom Joash was crowned, the crown itself being most likely in the possession of Athaliah. As Ps. lxxxix was certainly composed by David, the regal use of the diadem is further indicated in verse 39. The more general word for a crown is atarah ; and it is applied to crowns and head ornaments of different sorts, including those used by the kings. When applied to their crowns, it appears to denote the state crown as distinguished from the diadem. This, the Rabbins allege, was of gold set with jewels; such was the crown which David took from the king of the Amorites (2 Sam. xii: 30), and afterwards wore himself, as did prob- ably his successors. (2) Early Sculptures. In Egypt and Persia there are sculptures representing royal crowns in the shape of a distinguishing tiara, cap, or hel- met, of metal, and of cloth, or partly cloth and partly metal. There are allusions in Scripture 474 CROWN (Rev. xii:3; xix:12) to the wearing of two or three fillets as a diadem. . These fillets may have been significant of dominion over Lower and Up- per Egypt, and Lower and Upper Egypt and Ancient Egyptian Crowns. Asia. These Egyptian tiaras were worn in war and on Occasions of state; but on ordinary occa- Sions a fillet or diadem was used.’ (3) Miter of the High Priest. It is impor- tant to observe that the miter of the high-priest, which is also called a crown (Exod. xxxix:30), was of similar construction, if not shape, with the addition of the golden fillet or diadem. Simi- lar also in construction and material, though not in form, was the ancient Persian crown, for which there is a distinct name in the book of Esther (i:2; ii: 17; vi :8), viz., kêther, which was doubt- less the kidaris or kitaris (the high cap or tiara) so often mentioned by the Greek historians. From the descriptions given of it, this seems to have been a Somewhat conical cap, surrounded by a wreath or fold. This one is worthy of very par- ticular attention, because it forms a connecting link bteween the ancient and modern Oriental crowns, the latter consisting either of a cap, with a fold or turban, variously enriched with aigrettes, or of a stiff cap of cloth, studded with precious StoneS. Crowns were so often used symbolically to express honor and power that it is not always safe to infer national usages from the passages in which they occur. Hence we could scarcely conclude from Ezek. xxiii:42 that crowns were worn by Jewish females, although that they wore some ornament which might be so called is prob- able from other sources. Mr. Lane (Arabian Nights, i. 424) mentions that until about two cen- turies ago a kind of crown was worn by Arabian females of wealth and distinction. It was gener- ally a circle of jeweled gold (the lower edge of which was straight, and the upper fancifully heightened to a mere point), surmounting the low- er part of a dome-shaped cap, with a jewel or some other ornament at the summit. It is certain that ‘crowns' of this or some simi- lar kind were worn at marriages (Cant. iii: II; Is. lxi : Io); and it would appear that at feasts and public festivals ‘crowns of rejoicing’ were cus- tomary. These were probably garlands (Wisd. ii:8; iv:2; Ecclus. i: II). Figuratite. (I) The crown was a symbol of victory and reward, victors being crowned in the Grecian or Olympic games. These crowns were usually made of leaves, which soon began to wither. They are more than once alluded to in the epistles (I Cor. ix:25; 2 Tim. ii:5; iv:8 y - CROWN OF THORNS I Pet. v .4) and contrasted with the incorruptible crown of life. (2) Anything that adds honor and glory to One. Thus the Lord was a crown of glory and a diadem of beauty to Judah; he protected, exalted, and reformed them, when the ten tribes were carried into captivity (Is. xxviii: 5, with 2 Chron. xxix-xxxiii). (3) The church is a crown of glory, and royal diadem to God; in her, his glory, power, and authority are clearly displayed (IS. lxii:3; Zech. ix:16). (4) Christ's crown of gold, his many crowns, are the media- torial power, authority, and glory assigned him by his Father; his manifold victories and high Sovereignty, and the ascription of all praise and honor to him by the church (Ps. cxxxii: 18; Rev. xix:I2; Cant. iii:II). (5) The church's crown of twelve stars is her heavenly, illumining, and directing doctrines of the prophets and apostles, which are her honor, and mark her royal state and marriage with Christ (Rev. xii: I). (6) Saints are a crown to ministers; are the ornament and honor of their labors (Phil. iv.: I ; I Thess ii: I9). (7) The Saint’s crown of glory, life, and righteousness is that royal and truly honorable state of glory, life, and holiness given them through the righteousness of Jesus Christ (Rev. iii: II, and ii: Io; I Pet. v :4; 2 Tim. iv:8). (8) The Saints cast their crowns before God’s throne; they undervalue themselves, and all they have, in comparison of him ; and ascribe their whole exist- ence, holiness, and happiness to Christ, and to God in him (Rev. iv:4, Io). (9) A good wife is a crown, and honor, and cause of wealth and power to her husband (Prov. xii:4). (Io) So are children a crown to their parents (Prov. xvii:6). (II) A hoary head, or gray hairs, is a crown; an honorable badge of wisdom and authority (Prov. xx:29, and xvi :31). (I2) Riches are a crown to the wise, as they gain and expend them honorably (Prov. xiv:24). (13) Honor, wealth, and authority are called a crown (Prov. xvii:6, xxvii:24, and iv:9). CROWN OF THORNS (kroun öv thärns), (Gr. atºpavov čá ákavóóv). - The Roman soldiers made a crown probably Out of a common Arabian plant, called nabk, which has “many small and sharp spines, soft, round, pliant branches, leaves much resembling ivy, of a very deep green, as if in designed mock- ery of a victor’s wreath.”—Hasselquist, quoted in AYRE : Treasury of Bible Knowledge. The sol- diers plaited the wreath for Christ rather as an insult than to cause suffering. (See THORN.) CRUCIFIXION (kru'sſ-fik'shūn), in Greek dvao Tavpoëv, an-as-ſote-room"; in Latin, cruci affºg- ere, in cruce// agere or fo//ere, in later times crucz. fgeze, whence our crucifixion. To describe this punishment the Jews used the general term Hºn. Žazy-Zaw', for crucifixion is a kind of hanging; whence Christ in the polemical writ- ings of the Jews is designated “the hanged one,” and Christians “worshipers of the crucifica.” (1) Cruel and Disgraceful. Crucifixion was a most cruel and disgraceful punishment. It was the punishment chiefly of slaves; accordingly the word furcifer, ‘cross-bearer,' was a term of re- proach for slaves, and the punishment is termed servile supplicium, “a slave's punishment.’ Free- born persons also suffered crucifixion, but only humiles, those of low condition and provincials. Citizens could not be crucified (Cic. Verr. i :5; Quintil. viii:4; Suet. Galb.). This punishment was reserved for the greatest crimes, as robbery, piracy, assassination, perjury, sedition, treason, 475 CRUCIFIXION and (in the case of soldiers) desertion. Its origin is ancient. In Thucydides we read of Inarus, an African king, who was crucified by the Egyptians. The Similar fate of Polycrates, who suffered un- der the Persians, is detailed by Herodotus, who adds, in the same book, that no less than 300 per- Sons were condemned to the cross by Darius, after his successful siege of Babylon. That the Greeks adopted it is plain from the cruel executions which Alexander ordered after the capture of Tyre, when 2,000 captives were nailed to crosses along the sea-shore (Q. Curtius, iv:4; Justin, xviii:3). With the Romans it was used under their early monarchical government, and was the death to which Horatius was adjudged for the stern and Savage murder of his sister (Liv. i :26), where the terms employed show that the punishment was not at that time limited to any rank or condition. It appears also from the passage that scourging then preceded crucifixion, as undoubtedly was custom- ary in later times. The column to which Jesus was fastened during this cruel infliction is stated by Jerome (Epist. ad Eustach.) to have existed in his time in the portico of the holy sepulcher, and to have retained marks of his blood. The Jews received the punishment of crucifixion from the Romans (Joseph. Antiq. xii; I4, 2; xx:6, 2; De Bell. Jud. ii:I2). Though it has been a matter of debate, yet it appears clear that crucifixion, properly so called, was not originally a Hebrew punishment. (Bormitii, ZXe cruce 712477. Æðraor. suff?. fuerit.) (2) Method. The condemned, after having been scourged (Liv. xxxvi :26; Prud. Enchir. xli : I), had to bear his cross, or at least the transverse beam, to the place of execution, which was gen- erally in some frequented place without the city. The cross itself, or the upright beam, was fixed in the ground. Arrived at the spot the delinquent was supplied with an intoxicating drink, made of myrrh and other bitter herbs (Pipping, Exercit. Acad. lv.), and having been stript of his clothing, was raised and affixed to the cross, by nails driven into his hands, and more rarely into his feet; sometimes the feet were fastened by one nail driven through both. The feet were occasionally bound to the cross by cords, and Xenophon as- serts that it was usual among the Egyptians to bind in this manner not only the feet but the hands. A small tablet (titulus), declaring the crime, was placed on the top of the cross (Sueton. Cal. 38; Dom. Io; Euseb. Hist. Eccles. v : I). The body of the crucified person rested on a sort of seat, stage (Iren. Adv. Her. ii:42). The crim- inal died under the most frightful sufferings—so great that even amid the raging passions of war pity was sometimes excited (Comp. p. 472, above). (3) Disposal of the Body. Sometimes the suf- fering was shortened and abated by breaking the legs of the criminal —crura fracta (Cic. Phil. xiii: 12). After death, among the heathens, the bodies commonly remained on the cross till they wasted away, or were devoured by birds of prey (IIorat. Epist. i. 16, 48; Non pasces in cruce corvos, Plaut. Mil. Glor. ii:A, 19; Plin. Hist. Nat. xxxvi :24). A military guard was set near the cross, to prevent the corpse from being taken away for burial (Plut. Cleomen. 39; Petron. Satyr. iii:6; Sen. Ep. IoI). But among the Jews the dead body was customarily taken down and buried. Josephus says (De Bell. Jud. v.2), ‘the Jews used to take so much care of the burial of men that they took down those that were con- demned and crucified, and buried them before the going down of the sun.” In order that death might be hastened, and the law might not be vio- * CRUCIFIXION, DEATH BY lated, the Jews were accustomed to break the legs (John Xix:31, 32, 33; Deut. xxi.22; Lipsius, De Cruc. lib. iii). The execution took place at the hands of the carnifex, or hangman, attended by a band of soldiers, and in Rome, under the supervision of the Triumviri Capitales (Tac. Ann. xv.:60; Lactan. iv:26). The accounts given in thc Gospels of the execution of Jesus Christ are in entire agreement with the customs and prac- tices of the Romans in this particular (Tholuck, Glaubwºrdigkeit der Evangel. Gesch. p. 361). (4) Abolition. The punishment continued in the Roman empire till the time of Constantine, when it was abolished through the influence of the Christian religion. Examples of it are found in the early part of the emperor's reign, but the reverence which, at a later period, he was led to feel for the cross, induced him to put an end to the inhuman practice. CRUCIFIXION, DEATH BY (kru'sſ'fik'shūn, déth bi). (1) Causes. Physically considered it is to be attributed to the sympathetic fever which is ex- cited by the wounds, and aggravated by exposure to the weather, privation of water, and the pain- fully constrained position of the body. Traumatic fever corresponds, in intensity and in character, to the local inflammation of the wound. In the first stage, while the inflammation of the wound is characterized by heat, swelling, and great pain, the fever is highly inflammatory; and the sufferer complains of heat, throbbing headache, intense thirst, restlessness, and anxiety. As soon as sup- puration sets in, the fever somewhat abates, and gradually ceases as suppuration diminishes and the stage of cicatrization approaches. But if the wound be prevented from healing, and suppuration continue, the fever assumes a hectic character, and will sooner or later exhaust the powers of life. When, however, the inflammation of the wound is so intense as to produce mortification, nervous de- pression is the immediate consequence; and if the cause of this excessive inflammation of the wound still continues, as is the case in crucifixion, the sufferer rapidly sinks. He is no longer sensible of pain, but his anxiety and sense of prostration are excessive; hiccup supervenes, his skin is moistened with a cold, clammy sweat, and death ensues. It is in this manner that death on the cross must have taken place in an ordinarily healthy constitution. The wounds in themselves were not fatal; but, as long as the nails remained in them, the inflammation must have increased in intensity until it produced gangrene. (2) Instances. De la Condamine witnessed the crucifixion of two women of those fanatic Jansenists called Convulsionaires. One of them, who had been crucified thrice before, remained on tlie cross for three hours. They suffered most pain from the operation of extracting the nails; and it was not until then that they lost more than a few drops of blood from their wounds. After they were taken down, they seemed to suf- fer little, and speedily recovered (Correspond. de Grimm et Diderot, ii:75). (3) Probable Recovery. The probabilities of recovery after crucifixion would of course depend on the degree of constitutional irritation that had been already excited. Josephus (Vita, 74) relates that of three of his friends, for whom he had obtained a release from the cross, only one sur- vived. The period at which death occurred was very variable, as it depended on the constitution of the sufferer, as well as on the degree of ex- posure and the state of the weather. It may, 476 CRUELTIES however, be asserted that death would not take place until the local inflammation had run its course; and though this process may be much hastened by fatigue and the alternate exposure to the rays of the sun and the cold night air, it is not completed before forty-eight hours, under or- dinary circumstances, and in healthy constitu- tions; so that we may consider thirty-six hours to be the earliest period at which crucifixion would Occasion death in a healthy adult. (4) Hunger and Thirst. Eusebius (A/ist. Fecſes. iii:8) says that many of the martyrs in Egypt, who were crucified with their heads downwards, per- ished by hunger. This assertion, however, must not be misunderstood. It was very natural to sup- pose that hunger was the cause of death when it was known that no food had been taken, and when, as must have happened in lingering cases of crucifixion, the body was seen to be emaciated. But it has been shown above that the nails in the hands and feet must inevitably have given rise to such a degree of inflammation as to produce mor- tification, and ultimately death; and it is equally certain that food would not, under such circum- stances, have contributed to support life. More- over, it may be added that after the first few hours, as soon as fever had been fully excited, the sufferer would lose all desire for food. The want of water was a much more important pri- vation. It must have caused the sufferer inex- pressible anguish, and have contributed in no slight degree to hasten death. Figuratite. (I) Christ is crucifted afresh, when his person or office is despised, hated, and blasphemed, or his righteousness and gospel utterly rejected (Heb. vi :6). (2) He is crucified at Rome, or in the Antichristian state, when his person and office are despised, his truth perverted, his righteousness blasphemed, and his people mur- dered (Rev. xi :8). (3) The saints are crucified with Christ; in his death he represented them, and, applied to their conscience, this renders them dead to the law, to sin, and to the world, and grad- ually effects the death of their indwelling corrup- tions (Gal. ii:20). (4) Their old man, or cor- rupt lusts, are crucified with him ; the law, which is the strength of sin, being slain by his fulfilment of it; and by their union with his person, and sharing of the views and virtue of his dying love, their indwelling sin is gradually weakened, and they are enabled through the Spirit to mortify the deeds of it (Rom. vi :6; Gal. v :24). (5) By him and his cross they are crucified to the zworld, and the world to them; by their professed cleaving to him, and the doctrine of his cross, they become contemptible to wicked and worldly men, and are separated from them (Gal. vi. 14). CRUELTTFS (kru'ál-tiz). The law given through Moses has been de- nounced as being unnecessarily severe, but law is always stern and uncompromising, and a way- ward people numbering more than six hundred thousand men besides women and children, were not to be trained in everything pertaining to their own welfare without strict military discipline. (1) Less Cruel Than English Code. The Mo- saic law, however, was less severe than was that of England even in the eighteenth century. The code which was given to Israel mentions only about seventeen capital crimes, while English law in the time of Blackstone (1723-1780) specifies no less than one hundred and sixty offenses which were by act of Parliament declared worthy of instant death. (See Blackstone's Com. iv:4, 15- I8, Christian's Edition, N. Y., 1822.) CRUELTIES The law itself then was less cruel than was that of England at a time when Great Brit- ain was the most civilized nation on the globe. (2) Vigorous Warfare. In relation to the vigorous warfare which Israel waged upon the peoples around them it is certain that in one or two cases, future civilization depended upon the extirpation of moral lepers, for even idolatry was sometimes the most innocent of their loathsome crimes. In cases like this, death was the most merciful thing that could come to the children, even though it came by the tempest or by the Sword, for they were poisoned by an heredity which would have made life a curse to them- selves and to all around them. In exterminating a nest of serpents one does not stop to enquire which members of the family may at that partic- ular time be innocent. A child who might witness a surgical operation would be able to see only the most barbarous cru- elty in the action of the surgeon in removing a limb, in order that the whole body might not be poisoned by its presence. So also men often judge of God’s penalties without a knowledge of future or even of present necessities. Would it not be better to suspend judgment in cases where we know so little of far-reaching results? (3) The Amalekites. The bloodthirsty Amal- ekites had hung along the line of the march and murdered in cold blood all who were unable to keep up with the main column of the Israelites, those who were old and feeble, or faint with weari- ness falling into their hands. And it appears that this was done not merely for the purpose of rob- bery or of disputing the possession of this dis- trict with the Hebrews, but to assail Israel as the nation which God had chosen to work out His Fº and if possible to destroy it (Deut. xxv : 17, 18). Hence the order was given for the practical ex- termination of a race in which there was found no good thing. And Israel being used as the ex- ecutor of the Divine penalty learned to avoid the abominations for which they were cut off. “Not for thy righteousness or the uprightness of thy heart, dost thou go to possess their land, but for the wickedness of these nations, the Lord thy God doth drive them out from before thee” (Deut. ix:1-6). (4) The Canaanites. Another illustration may be found in the conduct of the Canaanites. They were in the habit of practicing the most loathsome vices (Lev. xviii:22-24) and even burned their children in honor of their gods. Such was their depravity that the land is represented as “vomit- ing out her inhabitants.” The command to destroy a race which had be- come utterly unworthy of life, laid upon the peo- ple the awful responsibility of becoming the Di- vine instruments of justice, and they thus learned God’s abhorrence for that class of crimes. In speaking of the terrible and bloody measures which were employed by Cromwell in relation to the Irish insurgents, Carlyle says: “An armed soldier, solemnly conscious to him- Self that he is the soldier of God, the Just, a con- Sciousness which it well beseems all soldiers to have always, an armed soldier, terrible as death, relentless as doom; doing God's judgments on the enemies of God! It is not a phenomenon of a joyful but of an awful nature.” (Cromwell's Let- ters and Sáeeches, it 53. Second edition.) Ewald, the great German critic, in relation to this subject, writes as follows: “It is an eternal necessity that a nation, such as a great majority of the Canaan- 477 CRUSE ites then were, sinking deeper and deeper into the slough of discord and moral perversity, must fall before a people roused to a higher life.” (Hist. of Israel ii:237.) Note also the following from Dr. Thomas Ar- nold: “If we are inclined to think that God dealt hardly with the people of Canaan, let us think what might have been the fate of every other na- tion under heaven at this hour had the sword done its work more sparingly....The Israelites' sword in its bloodiest execution, wrought a work of mercy for all the countries of the earth to the very end of the world. . . . Whatever were the faults of Jephthah or of Samson, never yet were any men engaged in a cause more important to the whole world's welfare.” (Ser. iv. Wars of the Israelites.) (5) The Midianites. Another forcible illus- tration of the actual necessity of cutting off at least the male line of a corrupt people is found in the case of the Midianites. Here we find a people so vile that the mothers decked their virgin daughters in their gayest ap- parel, and sent them into the neighborhood of the Israelites with full instructions how to win the attention and admiration of the soldiers and then seduce them into wickedness and idolatry. (Jo- sephus Antig. Bk. iv, Ch. vi, Sec. 6. According to Reland this story is also preserved in the Samar. itan Chronicle and by Philo.) It was by means of their intercourse with this people that the plague came among the Israelites and cost twenty-four thousand lives (Num. xxv : 9). What wonder then that the order was given for the virtual extermination of the race? And yet Moses saved the girls who were still innocent, and they were taken into service in the Israelitish households, but no man was allowed to even marry a captive without at least a month of delay, during which time she might be won (Deut. xxi : I.2). s We have seen that in these extreme cases no quarter was given on account of the indescribable “abominations” of the people, but the general rule was the taking of captives and their humane treat- ment. “And he answered thou shalt not smite them ; would'st thou smite those whom thou hast taken captive with thy sword and thy bow P Set bread and water before them that they may eat and drink and go to their master” (2 Kings, vi :22. Also 2 Chron. xxviii:15). Thus the apparent cruelty of God is ever the necessary severity of the surgeon's knife, but shortsighted men too often sit in judgment upon the nature of the act, without taking into consider- ation either the necessity for it or the ultimate and probably incalculable good to be derived from it. Shall we venture to question the wisdom of Him “whose ways are past finding out?” “Justice and judgment are the habitation of His throne,” and though to us his ways may be at times sur- rounded with clouds and darkness, still “His ten- der mercies are over all His works.” E. A. R. CRUSE (krus). Three Hebrew words are thus translated: (1) Tsap-fakh'ath (nº), literally, spread out), commonly thought to be a flask, but more likely a shallow cup for holding water (I Sam. xxvi;II, I2). - (2) BaA-book' (PPTP), so called from the gur- g/ing sound in emptying (I Kings xiv:3), perhaps an “earthen bottle” for holding liquids (Jer, xix: I, Io). CRYSTAL (3) Tse/-o-Aheeth" (nº), probably a flat metal saucer of the form still to be found in the East. It occurs in 2 Chron. xxxv.13. (See BOTTLE; DISH; PITCHER.) CRYSTAL (kris' tal), (Heb. Tº, Aeh'ražh, kerach, and º, gazey'beesh, both rendered in the Sept. by kpógra)\\os, kroos' tal-los, ice, which also occurs in Rev. xxi.; II). There seems to be no doubt that crystal is in- tended by the Greek word in Rev. xxi : II, as in- deed the phrase of comparison “clear as crystal' would seem naturally to suggest. It is not very certain, nor very likely, that the Hebrew word gabish (Job xxviii:17) means crystal; but as the other word so rendered (kerach) denotes ice, to which crystal bears so much external resemblance; and as in Ezek. i :22 it occurs with an application so similar to the kpºo Tax\os, crystal, of Rev. xxi.; II, we may with much confidence take this to be its meaning. This is the more apparent when we recollect that crystal was anciently held to be only pure water, congealed by great length of time into ice harder than the common (Diod. Sic. ii:52; Plin. Hist. Nat. xxxvii:2), and hence the Greek word for it, in its more proper signification, also signifies ice. From this it necessarily followed that crystal could only be produced in the regions of perpetual ice; and this was accordingly the an- cient belief; but we now know that it is found in the warmest regions. Theophrastus (54) reckons crystal among the pellucid stones used for en- graved seals. In common parlance we apply the term crystal (as the ancients apparently did) to a glass-like transparent stone, commonly of a hexag- onal form, which, from being found in rocks, is called by mineralogists rock-crystal. It is a stone of the flint family, the most refined kind of Quartz. CUB (kūb), (A. V. Dº, Auð). Name of a people in alliance with Egypt in the time of Nebuchad- nezzar (B. C. 610). Probably AVub. The Seventy seem to read Lub, i. e., Libya. CUBIT (kü'bit), (Heb. "??, am-maw'; Gr. trāxvs, Żay'Āhoos, the forearm), a word derived imme- diately from the Latin cubitus, the lower arm. The length of the cubit has varied in different nations, and at different times. Derived as the measure is from a part of the human body, and as the human stature has been of very dissimilar length, the cubit must of necessity have been va- rious. That the cubit ammah, among the He- brews was derived as a measure from the human body, is clear from Deut. iii: II—after the cubit of a man.’ But it is difficult to determine whether this cubit was understood as extending to the wrist or the end of the third finger. As however the latter seems most natural, since men, when ignorant of anatomy, and seeking in their own frames standards of measure, were likely to take hoth the entire foot and the entire fore arm, the probability is that the longer was the original cu- bit, namely, the length from the elbow to the extremity of the longest finger. The Egyptian cu- bit, which it is likely the Hebrews would adopt, consisting of six hand-breadths, is found on the ruins of Memphis (Journal des Savans, 1822, Nov. Dec. Comp. Herod. ii: 149). The Rabbins also (Mischn. Chelim. xvii:9) assign six hand-breadths to the Mosaic cubit. By comparing Josephus (Antiq. iii:6, 5) with Exod. xxv :IO, it will, more- over, be found that the weight of his authority is in the same scale. According to him, a cubit is equal to two spans. Now, a span is equal to three 478 CUCUMBER hand-breadths (Schmidt, Bib. Mathemat. p. 117; Eisen-Schmidt, De Ponderibus, p. IIo); a cubit therefore is equal to six hand-breadths. The hand-breadth is found as a measure in I Kings vii:26 (Comp. Jer. lii:21). In the latter passage the finger-breadth is another measure. The span also occurs Exod. xxviii: T6. So that, it appears, measures of length were, for the most part, bor- rowed by the Hebrews from members of the hu- man body. Still no absolute and invariable stand- ard presents itself. If the question, What is a hand or a finger-breadth P be asked, the answer can be only an approximation to fact. If, how- ever, the palm or hand-breadth is taken at three and a half inches, then the cubit will amount to twenty-one inches. In addition to the common cubit, the Egyp- tians had a longer one of six palms—four inches. The Hebrews also have been thought to have had a longer cubit; for, in Ezek. xl:5, we read of a cubit which seems to be an ordinary “cubit and an hand-breadth ; see also Ezek. xliii: 13, where it is expressly said “the cubit is a cubit and an hand-breadth.’ The prophet has been supposed to refer here to the then current Babylonian cubit— a measure which it is thought the Jews borrowed during the pcriod of their captivity. In the New Testament, Our Lord characteris- tically employs the term cubit (Matt. vi :27; Luke xii:25) for the enforcement of a moral and spir- itual lesson. The term also occurs in John xxi : 8, and in Rev. xxi.; 17. In Lev. xix :35, justice in measures, as well as in weights, is strictly en- joined. CUCKOO (köök'öö), (Heb. Tº, shakh'af, lean- ness), occurs only in Lev. xi. 16; Deut. xiv:15; among birds of prey not clearly identified, but declared to be unclean. Our version and others have rendered it “cuckoo,” which, if correct, stands certainly out of the order of all affinity with the other species enumerated; and although the cuckoo is a winter and spring bird, distinctly heard, it appears, by Mr. Buck- ingham, early in April, while crossing the moun- tains between Damascus and Sidon, at that time covered with snow, it could scarcely deserve to be included in the prohibited list—for the species is everywhere scarce. Shachaph may be an imita- tion of its voice, since the Arabs call it Teer-el- Yakoub, or the bird of Jacob, because in its song it seems to repeat the patriarch's name. Bochart and Dr. A. Clarke derive Shachaph from Sache- peth, ‘a wasting,’ and thence apply it to the sea- gull or sea-mew, a bird pretended to be incapable of becoming plump or fleshy. The strength of the versions is in favor of the sea-mew, or gull. Geddes renders, “the horn- owl.” The opinion of Shaw, who 11nderstands it of the rhaad, or saf-saf, a granivorous and gregar- ious bird, which wants the hinder toe, is not im- probable if he refers this name to the species of Bustards or Pterocles, which reside in or ncar Palestine, or make their passage through that country in the proper season. C. H. S. CUCUMBER (ki'kūm-ber), (Heb. Tºp, miſſ. shaw', Is. i.8; Heb. Sºp, Aish-shoo', hard). This word is translated cucumber in Num. xi.;5. The cucumber is a garden vegetable well known in this country and cultivated in Palestine. Be- sides our own kind, another (Cucumis chate) is raised, having a fruit with less flavor, but larger. “Cucumbers form an important item in the sum- mer food of the poor, and are eaten with the rind on, without any condiment. In the oppressive CUD heat of summer they form a most grateful vege- table. I remember seeing dinner served out to an Arab school in Jerusalem, which consisted of a thin barley-cake and a raw cucumber to each boy.”—Tristram. The “lodge in the garden of cucumbers” (Is. i:8), rudely constructed of poles and boughs, may still be seen in many fields. It is intended to shelter a watchman set to protect the fruit from jackals and other animals, as well as from thievish men. When the crop is over and the lodge forsaken by the keeper, “the poles fall down, or lean every which way, and those green boughs with which it is shaded will have been scattered by the wind, leaving only a ragged, sprawling wreck, a most affecting type of utter desolation.”—Thomson. Job apparently had such ruins in mind (xxvii:18). (See KISHNIM.) CUD (küd). See UNCLEAN, UNCLEANNESs. C U M BIE R. L. A N ID PR, E S BYTE IR.I.A. N. CHURCH (küm'ber-land préz'by-té'ri-an chürch). (1) Origin. The Cumberland Presbyterian Church originated in the remarkable revival of religion which began in 1797 to develop itself in Kentucky, under the labors of James McGready, a minister of the Presbyterian Church. It has long been known as “the revival of 1800.” It rapidly grew to such proportions as to create a demand for Presbyterian ministers of the gospel beyond the ability of that church to supply. This circumstance caused the Cumberland Presbytery, of the Presbyterian Church, to ordain certain men who could not quite meet the doctrinal and edu- cational requirements of the Confession of Faith and Form of Government to which the Presby- tery was amenable. The doctrine to which partic- ular exception was taken was that contained in the famous third chapter of the Westminster Con- fession, relative to “the eternal decree” and “pre- terition.” The correlated doctrine of “a limited atonement” was also involved, of course. This action of the Cumberland Presbytery produced discussion in the Synod of Kentucky, of which it was a member. In 1806 the Cumberland Pres- bytery was dissolved by the Synod, some of its members having been placed already under prohi- bition to preach the gospel and administer its or- dinances. The presbytery had also taken the ground that this proscribing act was unconstitu- tional and void. These proscribed ministers wait- ed patiently and loyally for some years, hoping that the synod would at last redress their griev- ances. As a last resort and in order to save what they had represented to the General Assembly as “every respectable congregation” in that part of the country, three of these ministers, Finis Ew- ing, Samuel King, and Samuel McAdow met and reorganized the Cumberland Presbytery, or more properly speaking, perhaps, organized themselves into a presbytery bearing the name of the one which had been dissolved. This event occurred in what is now called Dickson County, Tennessee, February, 1810. Helice the name “Cumberland Presbyterian Church.” This action of the pro. scribed ministers was apparently a hazardous one, but it was taken after long and patient waiting and much prayer, and the step seems to have been abundantly justified by subsequent events. (2) Statistics. The new church began its life hopefully. Local churches here and there en- rolled themselves under its standard. In due course of time other persons were ordained to the ministry. The evangelical activity of both old and young was great. New local churches were 479 CUMBERLAND PRESBY. CHURCH rapidly multiplied. Other presbyteries were or- ganized. The first synod, known as the Cumber- land Synod, was organized in 1813 and the Gen- eral Assembly in 1829. The Form of Government to which these early ministers had been accus- tomed, viz., the Presbyterian, was retained. At present there are I29 presbyteries, I5 synods, 2,915 churches (reported), 1,571 ministers (report- ed), and 175,642 communicants, 293 churches mak- ing no report. The Cumberland Presbyterian Church extends from Pennsylvania to California, Oregon and Washington, and from the Lakes to the Gulf States. It is strongest in Tennessee, Texas, Missouri, Kentucky, and Illinois. Its prin- cipal Schools and colleges are Cumberland Univer- sity, Lebanon, Tennessee; Waynesburg College, Pennsylvania; Lincoln University, Illinois; Trin- ity University, Texas; Missouri Valley College, Marshall, Missouri; and the Theological Seminary, Lebanon, Tennessee. (3) Doctrines. The Cumberland Presbyterian Church at the very outset of its history set forth . a synopsis of its theological system, which “for substance of doctrine,” has continued the same to this day. * I. It was thought that the Westminster symbols implied the doctrine of eternal reprobation, where- as the Cumberland Presbyterians explicitly re- pudiated this. 2. The Westminster system teaches that al- though the atonement of Christ is “sufficient” for all men, it is prevented by an eternal decree from being “efficient” in the case of all men; the Cum- berland Presbyterians agreed that the atonement would not be efficient in the place of all men, but they denied that the cause lay in the unconditional, eternal decree, at least in the sense in which they understood the word unconditional. 3. The Westminster implied that some infants dying in infancy were lost—or all, as to that, so far as the logic of the system gave any right to affirm the contrary. The Cumberland Presby- terians did not like this, and, in harmony with their rejection of the doctrines of “preterition” and “the limited atonement,” consistently affirmed that all infants dying in infancy are saved. 4. The Westminster taught that the reason why the Holy Spirit does not on the basis of the atone- ment, bring saving grace to the heart of every sin- ner is the fact of the restriction placed on his work by the “eternal decree;” whereas, the Cumberland Presbyterians denied this, and affirmed that the reason lies in the fact that every sinner does not make a right use of the “common” grace which is bestowed upon all. As to the relation of these Cumberland Presby- terian principles both to the ecclesiastical and the general public, there is, of course, no doubt, that they are acceptable thereto. The Westminster symbols as modified by the Cumberland Presby- terian Church constitute the only type of Presby- terian doctrine which one could wisely promul- gate ſroin the pulpit; and on this type of doctrine the Cumberland Dresbyterian Church would, no doubt, cheerfully agree to become organically one with the other Presbyterian Churches of America, thus constituting one great Continental Presby- terian Church of America. This ought to be the objective point of all Presbyterian movements in our country, but no argument is needed to show that if this point is reached, it will be on the basis of some such modification of the Westminster as that held by Cumberland Presbyterians. R. V. F. CUMI CUMI (kü'mi), (Gr. Kojut, Æoo' mee, from Heb. •ºp, Æoo' mee), “arise” (Mark v.41). And he took the damsel by the hand and said unto her, Talitha cum?; which is, being interpreted, Damsel (I Say unto thee), arise. CUMMIN (küm'min), (Heb. *2, Æam-mome', preserving; Gr. Köpuyov, Åoo'min-on). Cummin. This is an umbelliferous plant, mentioned both in the Old and New Testaments, and which, like the dill and the coriander, continues to be culti- vated in modern, as it was in ancient times, in Eastern countries. These are similar to, and used for many of the same purposes as the anise and caraway, which supply their place, and are more common in Europe. All these plants produce fruits, commonly called seeds, which abound in essential oil of a more or less grateful flavor, and warm stimulating nature, hence they were em- ployed in ancient as in modern times, both as con- diments and as medicines. Cummin is first mentioned in Isaiah (xxviii: 25) : “When he (the ploughman) hath made plain the face thereof, doth he not cast abroad the fitch- es, and scatter the cummin ;’ showing that it was extensively cultivated, as it is in the present day, in Eastern countries, as far even as India. In the above chapter of Isaiah (verse 27) cummin is again mentioned: “For the fitches are not threshed with a threshing instrument, neither is a cart- wheel turned about upon the cummin, but the fitches are beaten out with a staff, and the cum- min with a rod.’ This is most applicable to the fruit of the common cummin, which, when ripe, may be separated from the stalk with the slight- est stroke, and would be completely destroyed by the turning round of a wheel, which, bruising the seed, would press out the oil on which its virtues depend. In the New Testament, cummin is mentioned in Matt. xxiii:23, where our Saviour denounces the scribes and Pharisees, who paid their ‘tithe of mint, and anise, and cummin, but neglected the weightier matters of the law. In the Talmudical tract Demai, quoted by Celsius (i. p. 519), cum- min is mentioned as one of the things regularly tithed. It is still known by its ancient name (AEam- mºm) throughout the Arabic world. GUNNYNG (kin'ning), (Heb. Pº, Ahaw-shab', Ps. cxxxvii:5, ability, skill, dexterity). It means (I) skillful, artful (Gen. xxv.27; Exod. xxxi.;4, and 480 CURE xxxv :35); (2) crafty, deceitful (Eph. iv:I4). In I Kings vii:I4 (Heb. dah'ath) it means knowledge, skillfulness. CUP (kūp), the translation mostly in the Old Testament of the Heb. Pº, AEoce, a receptacle; in the New Testament, of the Gr. trotºpwov, Zof-ay'- nee-on, a drinking vessel. 1. It means (I) a drinking vessel made of gold, silver, glass, wood, or the like (Gen. xl : I.3). (2) The liquor contained in it (I Cor. xi :27). 2. Cup of blessing (I Cor. x:16) is that which was blessed in entertainments of ceremony. 3. Cup of Salvation (Ps. cxvi :13) is a cup of thanksgiving, of blessing the Lord for his mercies. We see this practice where the Jews of Egypt, in their festivals for deliverance, offered cups of sal- vation. Some commentators believe “the cup of salvation” to be a libation of wine poured on the victim sacrificed on thanksgiving occasions, ac- cording to the law of Moses (Exod. xxix:40). ;: Cup of Joseph, or Cup of Divination, by which, according to the English translation, he is said to have divined (Gen. xliv :5). From cus- toms still used in the East, it seems probable that this, instead of being a cup by which to divine, was a cup of distinction, or one peculiar to the governor, which had been presented, as they now 3.1 e º Some parts, by the citizens whom he gov- er 116 Cl. Figuratite: (1) As by cups men's shares of liquor were given them, and affected them dif- ferently, the share of any thing is called a cup. So the soul-satisfying inheritance of the saints is called the portion of their cup (Ps. xvi;5); and the state of wicked men is called their cup (Ps. xi:6). (2) An abundant share of blessings, pros- perity, joy, and salvation is called a cup (Ps. xxiii:5, and czvi :13); and a share of terrible af- flictions is called a cup (Ps. lxxv :8; Is. li:17; Matt. xx:23, and xxvi;39; John xviii:II). (3) The cup of devils is liquor drunk at idolatrous feasts, and in mad revels (I Cor. x:21). (4) Men are likened to cups and platters; first their inside, or, heart, should be cleansed, and then their out- side, or practice (Matt. xxiii:25, 26). (5) Baby- lon is called a golden cup; great were her riches and wealth; and by her the Lord inflicted his judgments on the nations (Jer. li:7, and xxv). (6) Antichrist is said to have a golden cup, to de- note her abundant luxury, power, and wealth, and the specious means by which she seduces the na- tions to idolatry, superstition, and error (Rev. xvii: 4). (7) The cup of wine in the Lord's Supper is called a cup of blessing; it is solemnly set apart and dedicated to a holy use, and all the blessings of the new covenant are represented and sealed by it (I Cor. x:16). (8) To take the cup of salvation is, with clice ſul joy, glalilude, and praise, to take hold of and improve God’s deliverance and eternal redemption (Ps. cxvi. I3). There seems to be here an allusion to the drinking of the wine at the feast of the peace-offering. (9) To drink the cup of trembling, or of the fury of the Lord, is to be afflicted with sore and terrible judgments (Is. li:17; Ps. lxxv :8; Jer. xxv : I5-29; Matt. xx:23). CUPBEARER (kip-bár'ār), (Heb. Tºº, mash- Åeh", wine pourer), an officer of high rank among the Egyptians, Persians, and Assyrians, as well as the Jews. Such was the office of Rabshakeh (2 Kings xviii:17), Nehemiah (Neh, i:11). Solomon had cupbearers as attendants (I Kings x:5). CURE (kür), deliverance from disease. To cure a person is to heal his body or mind of their diseases and troubles (Luke vii:21). To CURIOUS cure a church or state is to reform it and restore it to order, freedom, power, and wealth (Jer. xxxiii:6, and xlvi; II). CURIOUS (kū'ri-às), (Gr. gos). 1. Made with great art. The word curious occurs in several passages Thus the “curious girdle” of the ephod is spoken of in Ex. xxviii:8, and in Ex. xxxv :32, the expres- Sion “curious works” is used to designate em- broidery or works of skill. The term curious in these passages is used in its original sense, namely, wrought with care and art (Latin “cura,” care). The “curious girdle” was a richly embroidered belt. A like use of this word was common in the literature of the seven- teenth century. Thus, - He, sir, was lapp'd In a most curious mantle, wrought by the hand Teptep-yos, Zer-ee'er- dº his queen mother. (SHAKs. Cymb. V, V, 3OI. 2. Mysterious; magical. Acts xix : 19. The reference is to the Ephesian spells, or charms, consisting of marks, letters or monograms written on Scraps of parchment and worn like amulets. (See MAGIC.) CURIOUSLY (ku'r-is-ly), (Heb.FT, raw-Aam’, to embroider, to variegate with colors). In Ps. cxxxix:15, there occurs the phrase “curi- ously wrought in the lower parts of the earth.” It is a figurative allusion to the pre-natal growth of the child and the adjusting the parts of its body, as the threads and colors are in tapestry. CURSE (kārs). Several Hebrew and Greek words are thus translated. To curse, signifies to imprecate, to call for mis- chief upon, or wish evil to, any one. Noah cursed his grandson Canaan (Gen. ix:25): Jacob cursed the fury of his two sons (Gen. xlix:7); Moses en- joins the people of Israel to denounce curses against the violators of the law (Deut. xxvii: I5, I6, etc.) Joshua pronounced a curse upon him who should undertake to rebuild Jericho. These curses were such as were either ordained by God himself and pronounced by men under the influence of his Spirit; or they were predictions of certain evils which would happen to individuals, or to a people, uttered in the form of imprecations. They were not the effects of passion, impatience, or revenge; and, therefore, were not things condemned by God in his law, like the cursing mentioned (Exod. xxi :17; xxii: 28; Lev. xix:I4). The Mosaic law forbade the cursing of father or mother (Exod. xxi :17) on pain of death, of the prince of his people (xxii:28), of one that is deaf (Lev. xix : 14) or perhaps absent so that he could not hear. Blasphemy, or cursing God, was a cap- ital crime (Lev. xxiv: Io, II). (See ANATHEMA.) God pronounced his curse against the serpent which had seduced Eve (Gen. iii: 14), and against Cain, who had imbued his hands in his brother Abel's blood, iv: II. He also promised to bless those who should bless Abraham, and to curse those who should curse him. The divine male- dictions are not merely imprecations, nor are they impotent wishes; but they carry their effects with them, and are attended with all the miseries they pronounce or foretell. The curse of the law signifies the just and law- ful sentence of God’s law, condemning sinners to suffer the full punishment of their sin, or the pun- ishment inflicted on account of transgression (Gal. iii: IO), and from which Christ redeems us by 481 CUSH “being made a curse for us.” (Gal. iii: 13; Comp. Rom. viii: I and Gal. iii: 13 with Rom. v.:16 and 2 Cor. iii:7-9. To curse, in an evil or blasphemous sense, is to affirm or deny anything with thoughtless or rash ºfessiºn. of Divine vengeance (Matt. xxvi : 74). CURTAINS (kär"tins). are thus rendered. 1. Hyº (yer-ee-azy', tremulous), the ten Cur- tains which covered the tabernacle of Moses (Exod. xxvi. I-13; xxxvi;8-17). The word afterwards be- Came a synonym for the tabernacle. 2. Fºº (maw-saw?', veil), the hanging for the door of the temple (Exod. xxvi;36, 37; xxxv. 15, etc.), and also the gate of the court about the tab- ei Ilacle (Exod. xxvii: 16; xxxv.17). 3. pi (doke, fineness. Is. xl:22), “He . . . . . . . stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spread- eth them out as a tent to dwell in.” There is a reference to the screen stretched over the summer courts of the rich Orientals. CUSFI (küsh), (Heb. Wºº, Koosh). 1. A son (probably the eldest) of Ham. In the genealogy of Noah’s children it is said, “Cush begat Nimrod” (Gen. x:8; I Chron. i : IO). Land of Cush. From Cush (Gen. x:6; I Chron. i :8), seems to have been derived the name of the land of Cush, which is commonly rendered by the Sept. Ethiopia, and by the Vulgate AEthio- pia; in which they have been followed by almost all other versions, ancient and modern. The Ger- man translation of Luther has Mohrenland, which is equivalent to Negroland, or the Country of the Blacks. A native was called Cush?, Aifftop, AEthiofs (Jer. xiii:23), the feminine of which was Cushith, A £Azo/zssa (Num. xii: I ), rendered Ethiopian woman, A. V., and Cushite woman, R. V., and the plural Cushiim, Albiotres, Æð/ºzo/es (Amos ix:7). The locality of the land of Cush is a ques- tion upon which eminent authorities have been divided; for while Bochart (Phaleg, iv:2) main- tained that it was exclusively in Arabia, Gesenius (Lear. in voce) held with no less pertinacity that it is to be sought for no where but in Africa. In this opinion he is supported by Schulthess of Zu- rich, in his ‘Paradies’ (p. II, IOI). Others again, such as Michaelis and Rosenmüller have supposed that the name Cush was applied to tracts of coun- try both in Arabia and Africa—a circumstance which would easily be accounted for, on the very probable supposition, that the descendants of the primitive Cushite tribes, who had settled in the former country, emigrated across the Red Sea to the latter region of the earth, carrying with them the name of Cush, their remote progenitor. This idea had been developed by Eichhorn, in his dissertation entitled Verisimilia de Cuschaez's, I774. The existence of an African Cush cannot rea- sonably be questioned, though the term is em- ployed in scripture with great latitude, Some- times denoting an extensive but undefined country (Ethiopia), and at other times one particular kingdom (Meroë). It is expressly described by Ezekiel as lying to the south of Egypt beyond Syene (xxix:Io; comp. xxx :4-6). Hence we find Mizraim and Cush (i. e. Egypt and Ethiopia) so often classed together by the prophets, e. g. Ps. lxviii:31; Is. xi.;II; xx:4; xliii:3; xlv.: I4; Na- hum iii:9. The inhabitants are elsewhere spoken of in connection with the Lubim and Sukkiim (2 Chron. xii:3; xvi;8; Jer. xlvi :7; Dan. xi :43), Sup- posed to be the Libyans and Ethiopic Troglodytes, Three Hebrew words 31 CUSH and certainly nations of Africa, for they belonged to the vast army with which Shishak, king of Egypt, ‘came out' of that country, against Reho- boam, king of Judah. In these, and indeed in most other passages where “Cush’ occurs, Arabia is not to be thought of ; the Ethiopia of Africa is beyond all doubt exclusively intended, and to the article ‘ETHIOPIA’ we refer the reader for the scriptural notices regarding it. Yet, though there is a great lack of evidence to show that the name of Cush was ever applied to any part of Arabia, there seems no reason to doubt that a portion of the Cushite race did early settle there. According to the ethnographic table in the tenth chapter of Genesis, Cush was the father of Seba, Havilah, Sabta, Raamah (whose Sons were Sheba and Dedan), Sabthecah, and also of Nimrod (Gen. x:7, 8; I Chron. i :9, Io). The last mentioned appears to have moved northward, first into Babylonia, and then into Assyria, but the others seem to have migrated to the south, though it is impossible accurately to trace out their settlements. Yet, even if we give Seba to Africa, and pass over as doubtful the names of Havilah, Sheba, and Dedan (for these were also the names of Shemitic tribes, Gen. x :28, 29; xxv :3), still, in Ezek. xxvii:22, Raamah is plainly classed with the tribes of Arabia, and nowhere are any traces of Sabtah and Sabthecah to be found but in the same country. By referring, however, to the rela- tive geographical positions of the south-west coast of Arabia and the east coast of Africa, it will be seen that nothing separates them but the Red Sea, and it is not unlikely that while a part of the Cushite population immigrated to Africa others remained behind, and were occasionally called by the same name. Thus in 2 Chron. xxi :16, among those who were stirred up against the Hebrews are mentioned the Philistines, and ‘the Arabs that were near the Cushites,’ and the expression “near' in this connection, can scarcely apply to any but dwellers in the Arabian peninsula. In the fifth century of our era the Himaryites, in the south of Arabia, were styled by Syrian writers Cushaeans and Ethiopians (Assemanni, Bibl. Orient. i :36o; iii:568). The Chaldee Paraphrast Jonathan, at Gen. x:6, and another paraphrast at I Chron. i :8, explain ‘Cush’ by Arabia. Niebuhr found in Yemen a tribe called Beni Chusi. The book of Job (xxviii:19) speaks of the topaz (pitalah) of Cush, and there was a Topaz Island in the Red Sea (Diod. Sic. iii:39; Pliny, Hist Nat. xxxvii:8; Strabo, xvi;4, 6). Yet most of these are circum- stances upon which we can lay but little stress; and the passage in 2 Chron. xxi : 16 is the only direct evidence we possess of the name “Cush' being applied in scripture to any part of Arabia, and even that does not amount to absolute dem- onstration. Some have sought for another Cush in more northerly regions of Asia, as in the Persian prov- ince of Chusistan or Susiana, in Cuthan, a dis- trict of Babylonia, etc.; and as Nimrod, the young- est son of Cush, spread his conquests in that direction, it is, no doubt, possible that his father's name might be preserved in the designation of some part of the territory or people. But here again the data are very unsatisfactory; and, in- deed, the chief thing which led to the supposi- tion is the mention in the description of the site of Paradise (Gen. ii: 13), of a land of Cush, com- passed by the river Gihon. (See EDEN.) The ancients, with the usual looseness of their geo- graphical definitions, understood by Ethiopia the eartreme south in all the earth's longitude. It is the mistaken idea of the scriptural term ‘Cush' * 482 CUSTOM being used in the same vague and indeterminate manner, that has led to so much confusion on this subject. (See ETHIOPIA.) 3. A Benjamite mentioned only in the title to Ps. vii. He was probably a follower of Saul, the head of his tribe (B. C. IoéI). Some Jewish interpreters take this name, black, as symbolic of the black heart and character of Shimei, who cursed David when he fled from Absalom (2 Sam. xvi;5 ff.): Others suppose him to be Saul, be- cause the Psalm seems to refer to the times of Saul rather than those of Absalom. CUSHAN (kü'shan), (Heb. lº, Žoo'shawn'), if the name of a person (Hab. iii:7), is probably the same as CUSHAN-RISHATHAIM (which see), king of Mesopotamia (Judg. iii:8, IO). CUSIIAN-RISHATHAIM (kü'shan-rish'a-tha'- im), (Heb. Enyºn jº, Æoo-sham' rish-aw-thah'- yim, A. V. “Chushan”). He was a king of Mesopotamia who oppressed Israel during the period of the Judges, eight years (Judg. iii:8). The country over which he ruled, ‘Aram of the Two Rivers,’ was in all probability the territory lying between the Euphrates and the Chabóras, the last of the tributaries of the Greek River. From his sway they were delivered by Caleb’s younger brother Othniel. Of Cushan-rishathaim nothing more is known directly, and his name has not yet been found in the inscriptions either of the Babylonians or Assyrians. • * Sayce believes there is a remarkable correspond- ence between this petty king and the reign of Rameses III. He says: “The eight years during which the king of Aram-naharaim oppressed Israel would ex- actly agree with the interval between the begin- ning of the Libyan attack upon Egypt and the campaign of the Pharaoh against Syria. We know from the Egyptian records that Mitanni of Aram-naharaim took part in the invasion of Egypt; we also know from them that the king of Mitanni was not among those who actually marched into the Delta. He participated in the southward move- ment of the peoples of the north, and nevertheless' lingered on the way. What is more probable than that he again sought to secure that dominion in Canaan which had belonged to some of his predecessors?” His conclusions have been questioned by Driver and Moore. (T. Nichol, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) (See CHUSHAN-RISHATHAIM ; OTHNIEL.) CUSHI (kü'shi), (Heb. ***, Koo-shee', Cushite or Ethiopian, black). 1. An ancestor of Jehudi, connected with the court of Jehoiakim (Jer. xxxvi; I4). 2. Father of the prophet Zephaniah (Zeph. i: I ). (B. C. 605). 3. A man apparently attached to Joab. He was evidently a foreigner and unaccustomed to th king, for he was unrecognized by the watchman, and the fact that Ahimaaz outran him would point to his ignorance of the Jordan Valley (2 Sam. xviii:21, 22, 23, 31, 32). (B. C. IO23). CUSTOM (küs’túm), (Heb. ºº, haſ awk', way tax, Ezra iv:I3, 20; vii;24; Gr. TéAos, teſ"os, tax). 1. Ordinary practice (Luke iv:16). 2. A practice long used, or derived from ances- tors (Judg. xi:39; John xviii:39). & 3. Frequent disease (Gen. xxxi.;35). 4. A tax upon persons or goods demanded by civil magistrates (I Macc. xi:35; Matt. xvii:25; Rom. xiii:7). CUSTOM, RECEIPT OF CUSTOM, RECEIPT OF (küs'tūm, ré-set'êv), (Gr. teNdjutov, teſ-o'nee-on), a term signifying a coſ- /ector's office, a to//-house (Matt. ix:9; Mark ii:I4; Luke V:27). CUTHAH (kū'thah or kūth'ah), (Heb. Tºº, Áoo- //hazy'), a district in Asia, whence Shalmaneser transplanted certain colonists into the land of IS- rael, which he had desolated (2 Kings xvii:24-30). From the intermixture of these colonists with the remaining natives sprung the Samaritans, who are called Cuthites in the Chaldee and the Talmud, and for the same reason a number of non-Semitic words which occur in the Samaritan dialect are called Cuthian. The situation of the Cuthah from which these colonists came is altogether unknown. Josephus places it in central Persia, and finds there a river of the same name (Antiq. ix: I4, 3; x:9, 7). Rosenmüller and others incline to seek it in the Arabian Irak. where Abulfeda and other Arabic and Persian writers place a town of this name, in the tract near the Nahr-Malca, or royal canal, which connected the Euphrates and Tigris to the south of the present Bagdad. Winer seems to prefer the conjecture of Stephen Morin and Le Clerc, which identifies the Cuthites with the Cossaei in Susiana (Arrian, Indic. xl.; Plin. Hist. Nat. vi :31 ; Diod. Sic. xvii: I I I, Mannert, ii:493). All these conjectures refer essentially to the same quarter, and any of them is preferable to the one suggested by Michaelis, that the Cuthites were Phoenicians from the neighborhood of Sidon, founding it upon reasons which no one regards as satisfactory, and which it is therefore unneces- sary to reproduce. CUTHITES (kūth'its). See SAMARITANs. CUTTINGS (kūt-tings), in the flesh, expressed by se/."ref (Heb. tºº, Lev. xix:28), saw-reh'ſeth (Heb. nº. 2nczszozz, Lev. xxi:5) and glad-go'dazº, (Heb. Tº, a cut, Jer. xlviii:37). Amongst the prohibitory laws which God gave the Israelites there was one that expressly forbade the practice embraced in those words, viz.: ‘Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead’ (Lev. xix:28). It is evident from this law that such a species of self-inflicted torture Ob- tained amongst the nations of Canaan; and it WaS adoption of so barbarous a habit, in its idolatrous form, that God led Moses to reiterate the prohi- bition: ‘They shall not make baldness upon their heads, neither shall they shave off the corner of their beards, nor make any cuttings in their flesh' (Lev. xxi :5; Deut. xiv:I). (1) Heathen Practice. Investing his imagin- ary deities with the attributes of cruelty, man has, at all times and in all countries, instituted a form of religion consisting in cruel rites and bloody ceremonies. Iſ then we look to the practices of the heathen world, whether of ancient or modern times, we shall find that almost the entire of their religion consisted of rites of deprecation. Fear of the Divine displeasure would seem to have been the leading feature in their religious im- pressions. The universal prevalence of human sacrifices throughout the Gentile world is, in it- self, a decisive proof of the light in which the human mind, unaided by revelation, is disposed to view the Divinity. It was doubtless such mistaken views of the character of God that led the prophets of Baal (I Kings xviii:28) to cut their bodies with lancets, supposing that, by mingling their own blood with that of the offered sacrifice, their god must be- 483 doubtless to guard his people against the CYPRESS come more attentive to the voice of entreaty. In fact it was a current opinion amongst the ancient heathen that the gods were jealous of human happiness; and in no part of the heathen world did this opinion more prevail, according to Sanchoniathon's account, than amongst the in- habitants of those very countries which Sur- rounded that land where God designed to place his people Israel. Hence we see why God would lay them under the wholesome influence of such a prohibitory law as that under consideration: ‘Ye shall not make any cutting in your flesh for the dead.’ (2) Violent Sorrow. The ancients were very violent in their expression of sorrow. Virgil rep- resents the sister of Dido as tearing her face with her nails, and beating her breast with her fists. Some think that that law of Solon's, which was transferred by the Romans into the Twelve Tables, that women in mourning should not scratch their cheeks, derived its origin from this law of Moses (Lev. xix :28). But, however this Opinion may be questioned, it would appear that the simple tearing of their flesh out of grief and anguish of spirit is taken, in other parts of scripture, as a mark of affection; thus (Jer. xlviii: 37), “Every head shall be bald, every beard clipped, and upon all cuttings.” Again (ch. xvi :6): “Both the great and the small shall die in the land; they shall not be buried, neither shall men lament for them, nor cut themselves.’ So (ch. xli:5) : “There came from Samaria fourscore men having their heads shaven and their clothes rent, and having cut themselves, with offerings to the house of the Lord.” The spirit of Islam is less favorable than that of heathenism to displays of this kind; yet examples of them are not of rare occurrence even in the Moslem countries of Western Asia, including Pales- tine itself. We may very safely infer that the expression “cuttings in the flesh,” in these passages of Scripture, was designed, as al- ready intimated, to declare the feeling of strong affection ; as though the living would say, ‘See how little we regard the pleasures of life, since now the 2–~~ object of our affection is re- =\Si moved from us! We must cutting in the Flesh. therefore come back to our former position, that it was against those self- inflicted tortures, by which the unhappy devotees vainly thought to deprecate the wrath of their angry gods towards their deceased relatives and friends, this law of Moses zvas es/ecza//y azmeed. CYAMION (sy-a-mân), (Gr. Kvapºv, Adod//7/20/in), a place opposite to Esdraelon (Judith vii:3, Gr.), per- haps the same as Camom, placed by Eusebius in the great plain, six miles from Legio, north. cyMEALs (simbals), (Heb. Sºº, ºil. tsel-ay' shaw-mah’, “loud cymbals;” "Pºº Yºs, isiſ-tse/-ay' ter-oo-azºy', “high sounding cymbals”). (See MUSIC.) tº CYPRESS (si'prés), (Heb. Tºº, ſeer-2aw', ilex). As in the case of the box tree there is nothing in the philology to indicate what tree is signified. The root, which is obsolete in Hebrew, signifies in Arabic to be strong or hard. The tree is men- tioned (Is. xliv :14) in connection with the cedar and the oak. It may have been the Syrian juniper, which grows wild upon Lebanon, as the cypress CYPRIANS never does in the Holy Land. The latter tree (Cupressus sempervirens) is a tall evergreen, the wood of which is heavy, aromatic, and remarkably durable. Its foliage is dark and gloomy, its form close and pyramidal, and it is usually planted in the cemeteries of the East. Coffins were made of it in the East, and the mummy-cases of Egypt are found at this day of the cypress-wood. The timber has been known to suffer no decay by the lapse of IIoo years. CYPRIANS (syp’rī-ānz), the people of Cyprus (2 Macc. iv:29). At the time mentioned they were governed by Egyptian viceroys. Sostratus left Crates, one of these rulers, in command of the castle of Jeru- salem, while he was summoned before the king. Barnabas, Paul’s associate, was a “Cyprian by birth,” translated “of the country of Cyprus” in the A. V. (Acts iv:36). CYPRUS (sy'prus), (Gr. Körpos, koo'ſ ros), the modern Aebris, one of the largest islands in the Mediterranean, and next to Sicily in importance. It is about 140 miles in length, and varies in breadth from 50 to 5 miles. From its numerous headlands and promontories, it was called Kepag- Tts, Åerast?s, or the A/ormed, and from its exu- berant fertility, Makapia, Macarza, or the blessed (beatam Cypruzz. Hor. Carm. iii:26, 9). Its prox- imity to Asia Minor, Phoenicia, and Egypt, and its numerous havens, made it a general rendezvous for merchants. “Corn, wine, and oil,’ which are so often mentioned in the Old Testament as the choicest productions of Palestine (Deut. xii:17; I Chron. ix:29; Neh. x:39; Jer. xxxi. 12), were found here in the highest perfection. The for- ests also furnished large supplies of timber for ship-building, which rendered the conquest of the island a favorite project of the Egyp- tian kings. It was the boast of the Cyprians that they could build and complete their vessels without any aid from foreign countries (Ammian. Marcell. xiv:8, sec. I4). Among the mineral prod- ucts were diamonds, emeralds, and other precious stones, alum, and asbestos; besides iron, lead, zinc, with a portion of silver, and, above all, copper. Cyprus was originally peopled from Phoenicia (see CHITTIM). Amasis I, king of Egypt, sub- dued the whole island (Herod. ii: 182). In the time of Herodotus the population consisted of Athenians, Arcadians, Phoenicians, and Ethiopians (vii:90). Under the Persians and Macedonians the whole island was divided into nine petty sover- eignties. After the death of Alexander the Great it fell to the share of Ptolemy, the son of Lagus. It was brought under the Roman dominion by Cato. Under the Emperor Augustus it was at first an imperial province, and afterwards, with Gallia Narbonensis, made over to the senate (Dion Cass. liv ; iv.). When the empire was divided it fell to the share of the Byzantine emperors. Cyprus was one of the first places out of Palestine in which Christianity was promulgated, though at first to Jews only (Acts xi :19), by ‘those who were scattered abroad' after Stephen's martyrdom. It was visited by Barnabas and Paul on their first missionary tour (Acts xiii:4), and subsequently by Barnabas and John Mark (Acts xv. 39). Paul sailed to the south of the island on his voyage to Rome (Acts xxvii:4). (See ELYMAs; PAPHos; SERGIUS PAULUS; SALAMIS.) CYRAMA (syr'a-mă), (I Esdr. v.:20). An in- correct form in the A. V. Of 16II, and Some early editions, for Cirama. CYRENE (sy-ré'ne), (Gr. Kupfivn, Åoo-ray'nay, Ghremma, in modern Arabic), a city in Upper 484 CYRENIUS Libya, founded about the year B. C. 632, by a Colony of Greeks from Thera (Santorini), a small island in the AEgean sea. Its name is generally supposed to be derived from a fountain (but according to Justin, Hist. xiii, a mountain), called Kupff, Cyre, near its site. It was the capital of a district, called from it Cyrenaica (Barca), which extended from the Gulf of Platea (Bomba) to the Great Syrtis (Gulf of Sidra). With its port Apollonia (Musa Soosa), about IO miles distant, and the cities Barca, Teu- chira, and Hesperis, which at a later period were named Ptolemais, Arsinoë, and Berenice (Strabo, xvii. vol. iii. p. 496, ed. Tauchn.), it formed the Cyrenaic Pentapolis. For above 180 years the form of government was monarchical; it then be- came republican ; and at last, the country became tributary to Egypt, under Ptolemy Soter. Strabo says that in Cyrene there were four classes of persons, namely citizens, husbandmen, foreigners, and Jews, and that the latter enjoyed their own customs and laws. At the commencement of the Christian era, the Jews of Cyrene were so nu- merous in Jerusalem that they had a synagogue of their own (Acts ii: Io; vi :9). Some of the first Christian teachers were natives of Cyrene (Acts xi :20; xiii:I). Simeon, who was com- pelled to assist in bearing the cross of the Savior, was a Cyrenian (Matt. xxvii:32; Mark xv :21 ; Luke xxiii:26). The ruins of Cyrene and the surrounding coun- try have been diligently explored within the last century; in 1817 by Dr. Della Cella, in 1821–22 by Capt. Beechey, and in 1826 by M. Pacho, a French traveler. A very interesting account of the results of their investigations is given in the Penny Cyclopaedia, under the article Cyrenaica. CYRENIAN (sy-ré'ni-an), (Gr. Kupmvaios, Åoo- ray-mah' wos), a native of Cyrene (Mark XV:21; Luke xxiii.26; Acts vi.9). - CYRENIUS (sy-ré'nï-às), (Gr. Kupffvios, AEoo- zay'?tee-yos, or, according to his Latin appellation, P. SULPITIUS QUIRINIUs), governor of Syria (Luke ii: I, 2). (1) Difficulties Regarding Census. The men- tion of his name in connection with the census which was in progress at the time of Our Lord's birth, presents very serious difficulties, of which, from the want of adequate data, historical and critical inquiry has not yet attained a satisfac- tory solution. The passage is as follows: at Tm # &roypaqi) Tp(6tm éyévero hºvepovetſovros Tās 2vptas Kvpmvtov, translated in the Authorized Version thus: “Now this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.’ Instead of “taxing’ it is now agreed that the rendering should be ‘enrollment,' or ‘registration' (of which use of the word án vyptºpeo 0w many czamplcs arc ad- duced by Wetstein), as it appears from Josephus that no taxing did take place till many years after this period. The whole passage, as it now stands, may be properly read, ‘This enrollment was the first while Cyrenius was governor of Syria.” This appears very plain, and would suggest no difficulty, were it not for the knowledge which we obtain from other quarters, which is to the effect, (1) that there is no historical notice of any en- rollment at or near the time of Our Lord's birth; and (2) that the enrollment which actually did take place under Cyrenius was not until ten years after that event. Since no historian mentions any such general enrollment of the whole empire, and since, if it had taken place, it is not likely to have been mentioned in connection with the CYRENIUS governor of Syria, it is now usually admitted that Judaea only is meant by the phrase rendered ‘the whole earth’ (but more properly ‘the whole land'), as in Luke xxi :26; Acts xi : 28; and per- haps in xxi:20. The real difficulties are thus re- duced to the two now stated. With regard to the enrollment, it may be said that it was probably not deemed of sufficient importance by the Roman historians to deserve mention, being confined to a remote and comparatively unimportant province. Many attempts have been made to remove these difficulties. Assuming, on the authority of Luke, that an enrollment, actually did take place at the time of our Lord's birth, one hypothesis proceeds to make out a probability that Cyrenius was then joint-governor of Syria along with Saturninus. It is known that a few years previous to this date, Volumnius had been joined with Saturninus as the procurator of that province; and the two Saturninus and Volumnius, are repeatedly spoken of together by Josephus, who styles them equally governors of Syria (Antiq. xvi :9, 1 ; xvi :9, 8) Josephus does not mention the recall of Volum- nius; but there is certainly a possibility that this had taken place before the birth of Christ, and that Cyrenius, who had already distinguished him- self, had been sent in his place. He would then have been under Saturninus, a hyepidºv, “gov- ernor,’ of Syria, just as Volumnius had been be- fore, and as Pilate was afterwards, of Judea. That he should here be mentioned as such by Luke, rather than Saturninus, is very naturally accounted for by the fact, that he returned, ten years afterwards, as procurator or chief gov- er 11 Or. (2) Another Explanation. Another explana- tion would read the passage thus:– This enroll- ment was made before Cyrenius was governor of Syria.’ The advocates of this view suppose that Luke inserted this verse as a sort of parenthesis, to prevent his readers from confounding this en- rollment with the subsequent census made by Cyrenius. Another mode of getting over the difficulty is sanctioned by the names of Calvin, Valesius, Wetstein, Hales, and others. They translate the words as follows, ‘In those days there went forth a decree from Augustus, that the whole land should be enrolled; but the enrollment itself was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.” The supposition here is, that the census was com- menced under Saturninus, but was not completed till two years after, under Quirinus. Hales reminds us that a little before the birth of Christ, Herod had marched an army into Ara- bia to redress certain wrongs which he had re- ceived; and this proceeding had been so mis- represented to Augustus that he wrote a very harsh letter to Herod, the substance of which was, that ‘having hitherto treated him as a friend, he would now treat him as a subject.’ And when Herod sent an embassy to clear himself, the em- peror repeatedly refused to hear them, and so Herod was forced to submit to all the injuries (Tapavoutas) offered to him (Joseph. Antig. xvi;9). Now it may be supposed that the chief of these injuries was the performance of his threat of treating him as a subject, by the degradation of his kingdom to a Roman province. For soon after Josephus incidentally mentions that ‘the whole nation of the Jews took an oath of fidelity to Caesar and the king jointly, except 6000 of the Pharisees, who, through their hostility to the regal government, refused to take it.’ The date of this transaction is determined by its having been short- ly before the death of Pheroras, and coincides 485 CY RUS with the time of this decree of enrollment and of the birth of Christ. The oath which Josephus mentions would be administered at the same time, according to the usage of the Roman census, in which a return of persons, ages, and properties, was required to be made upon oath, under penalty of confiscation of goods, as we learn from Ulpian. That Cyrenius, a Roman senator and procurator, was employed to make this enrollment, we learn not only from St. Luke, but by the joint testimony of Justin Martyr, Julian the Apostate, and Euse- bius; and it was made while Saturninus was presi- dent of Syria (to whom it was attributed by Ter- tullian) in the thirty-third year of Herod's reign, corresponding to the date of Christ’s birth. Cy- renius, who is described by Tacitus as ‘impiger 7/23/?tiae et acribus ministeriis,’ ‘an active soldier and rigid commissioner,’ was well qualified for all employment so odious to Herod and his subjects; and probably came to execute the decree with an armed force. The enrollment of the inhabitants, “each in his own city,’ was in conformity with the wary policy of the Roman jurisprudence, to pre- vent insurrections and to expedite the business; and if this precaution was judged prudent even in Italy, much more must it have appeared neces- º in turbulent provinces like Judaea and Gali- ee. At the present juncture, however, it appears that the census proceeded no further than the first act, namely, of the enrollment of persons in the Roman register. For Herod sent his trusty min- ister, Nicolas of Damascus, to Rome; who, by his address and presents, found means to mollify and undeceive the emperor, so that he proceeded no further in the design which he had entertained. The census was consequently at this time sus- pended; but it was afterwards carried into effect upon the deposal and banishment of Archelaus, and the settlement of Judaea as a Roman province. On this occasion the trusty Cyrenius was sent again, as president of Syria, with an armed force, to confiscate the property of Archelaus, and to complete the census for the purposes of taxation. This taxation was a poll tax of two drachmae a head upon males from fourteen, and females from twelve to sixty-five years of age—equal to about fifteen pence of our money. This was the ‘tribute money’ mentioned in Matt. xvii:24-27. The payment of it became very obnoxious to the Jews, and the imposition of it occasioned the insurrec- tion under Judas of Galilee, which Luke himself describes as having occurred ‘in the days of the taxing' (Acts v :37). By this statement Hales considers that ‘the Evangelist is critically reconciled with the varying accounts of Josephus, Justin Martyr, and Tertul- lian; and an historical difficulty satisfactorily Solved, which has hitherto set criticism at de- fiance.’ This is perhaps saying too much ; but the explanation is undoubtedly one of the best that has yet been given (Analysis of Chronology, iii:48-53; Lardner's Credibility, i. 248-329; Robinson, Addit. to Calmet, in “Cyrenius’; Wetstein, Kuinoel, and Campbell, on Luke ii:2, etc.). (See CHRONoLogy.) CYRIA (syr'ía), (Gr. Kvpta, Áooreeah, 2 John i:5), a Christian woman to whom the Second Epistle of John is addressed. (See JoHN.) CYRUS (sy'rus), (Heb. ºº, Áo'resh, Babyl. A uras/h, Old Persian Äteries/, , Gr. Kipos, AEoo' ros, Lat. Cyrus). The celebrated Persian conqueror of Babylon (B. C. 559), who promulgated the first edict for the restoration of the Jews to their own land (Ezra i : I, etc.). We are informed by Strabo that CY RUS 486 his original name was Agradates (xv :3, p. 320, ed. Tauchn.); but he assumed that of Kouros, or Khouresh (whichever was the most accurate Per- sian formi) doubtless on ascending the throne. We may perhaps compare it with the Hebrew kheres, which bears the same Sense. . But as this Hebrew word signifies a potsherd, a worthless bit of broken pottery, it cannot be the real meaning of the name of the great hero king. Sayce suggests that he took his new name from the river Cyrus, which ran near his capital, Pas- argadae; and adds that it cannot come from a word signifying the sun, as some have said. (1) Parentage. Herodotus and Xenophon agree that he was son of Cambyses, prince of Persia, and of Mandane, daughter of Astyages, king of the Median empire. Ctesias denies that there was any relationship at all between Cyrus and Astyages. According to him, when Cyrus had defeated and captured Astyages, he adopted him as a grandfather, and invested Amytis, or Amyn- tis, the daughter of Astyages (whose name is in all probability only another form of Mandane), with all the honors of queen dowager. His object in so doing was to facilitate the submission of the more distant parts of the empire, which were not yet conquered; and he reaped excellent fruit of his policy in winning the homage of the ancient, rich, and remote province of Bactria. Ctesias adds, that Cyrus afterwards married Amytis. It is easy to see that the latter account is by far the more historical, and that the story followed by Herod- otus and Xenophon is that which the courtiers published in aid of the Persian prince's designs. Yet there is no reason for doubting that, on the father's side, Cyrus belonged to the Achaemenidae, the royal clan of the military tribe of the Per- sians. (2) Records of Cyrus. In his own records he says (Cyl. 20-22) : “I am Cyrus, the king of mul- titudes, the great king, the powerful king, the king of Babylon, king of Sumer and Accad, king of the four quarters (of the world); son of Cambyses, the great king, king of the city of Anshan; the grandson of Cyrus, the great king, king of the city of Anshan ; the great-grandson of Teispes, the great king, king of the city of Anshan ; the endur- ing seed of royalty, whose reign Bel and Nebo loved, whose lordship for their hearts' delight they longed for.” This genealogical table shows that his royal ancestry had become thoroughly estab- lished on the throne, and that he was the legiti- mate heir to the headship of Anshan. (3) Conquest of Cyrus. Within ten years from his accession (B. C. 559) Cyrus absorbed the Median kingdom. How long previous to this time he had made conquests of minor tribes and peoples we have no means of knowing. In 549 we find (Nab.-Cyr. Chron, col ii. 1-4) : “[His troops] he assembled, and against Cyrus, the king of Anshan . . . . he marched. As for Astyages, his troops revolted against him, and he was seized and hand [ed over] to Cyrus. Cyrus marched to Ecbatana, the royal city; the silver, gold, goods and possessions of Ecbatana he carried forth and brought them to the land of Anshan.” This seems to have been a voluntary choice on the part of the Medes of Cyrus as their king, as against Astyages of the Umman-Manda. This throne became hence- forth the possession of Cyrus, and formed one of the chief elements in the great empire which he afterwards created. Cyrus occupied the next two or three years in the East in organizing and estab- lishing himself in his new realms, Persia in the meantime yielding to his arms. (4) The Fall of Babylon. In 546 (Nab,-Cyr, Esagila and the sacred precincts, nor CYRUS Chron. col. ii: Obv. 15-18), “in the month Nisan, Cyrus, king of the land of Persia, mustered his troops, and below the city of Arbela the Tigris he crossed; and in the month Iyyar to the land of Ish . . . . its king he slew, its goods he took, and his governor he placed therein.” In this western campaign Cyrus was a victor over Croesus, king of Lydia, and pushed his authority as far as the AEgan Sea. This gave him supremacy from the eastern limits of Media, through the upper plains of Mesopotamia, eastern, middle, and western Asia Minor. Further conquests in the East oc- cupy his attention until the year 539–538 B. C. The heavy and almost impregnable fortifications of Babylon were left for the last stroke. Fortunately we are not dependent upon the statements of second or third-hand historians for a description of the fall of Babylon. We have the records both of Nabonidus, the reigning and van- quished king, and of Cyrus, the conqueror. Though somewhat fragmentary in some places, they nevertheless furnish us with a reasonably good picture of that momentous event. Naboni- dus' own record will be cited first (Nab.-Cyr. Chron. col. i. Rev. I2-24) : “In the month Tam- muz (June) Cyrus having fought a battle at Ukhu on (the banks of) the river Zalzallat, against the troops of the land of Accad, the people of the land of Accad arose in revolt. Some persons were lcilled. On the fourteenth day Sippar was taken without fighting. Nabonidus fled. On the six- teenth day, Gobryas, governor of the land of Gutium, and the troops of Cyrus entered Babylon without fighting. Afterwards, Nabonidus, being shut up in Babylon, was taken. Until the end of the month, the shields of land of Gutium guarded the gates of Esagila. No arms had been Stored in had any weapons entered them. In the month Marchesvan (October), on the third day, Cyrus entered Baby- lon, the walls submitted before him. Peace for the city he established. Cyrus spake peace to Babylon, to the whole of it. Gobryas his governor he appointed governor of Babylon. From the month Chislev to the month Adar (November to February), the gods of the land of Accad, whom Nabonidus had carried to Babylon, returned to their own cities. On the IIth day of the month Marchesvan, at night, Gobryas . . . . the king's wife died. From the twenty-seventh of the month Adar to the third of the month Nisan, there was lamentation in Accad; all the people smote their heads.” This remarkable piece of the royal an- nals astonishes us by recording but one battle in the neighborhood of Babylon. That was fought near Accad, and resulted favorably for Cyrus' troops. Thence the way was open into the city of the empire. The reception of the army is equaled only by the liberty whiuli was a1111Uuſuell ſul Llie whole city. Cyrus' own cylinder gives us a no less wonder- ful story. This sets out by assuring the reader that Cyrus was thoroughly imbued with the idea that he was the man of destiny (Cyl. II-19, 22–24) : “He (Merodach) sought for, he found him, yea, he sought out an upright prince, after his own heart, whom he took by his hand, Cyrus, king of the city of Anshan; he called his name; to the sovereignty of the whole world, he called him by name. The land of Qutu and all the Um- man-Manda he subjected to his feet; the black- headed people, whom his hand conquered,—in faithfulness he governed them. Merodach, the great lord, the guardian of his people, beheld with joy the blessed deeds and his upright heart. To his own city Babylon, he issued orders to march; CY RUS 487 he bade him also take the road to Babylon; like a friend and helper he marched at his side. His wide-extended troops, whose number like the waters of a river could not be known, in full armor, marched at his side. Without clash or battle he (Merodach) made him enter Babylon. His own city Babylon he spared (from disaster); Nabonidus the king, who had not revered him, he delivered into his hand. The people of Babylon in a body, the whole land of Sumer and Accad, the nobles and the great ones, prostrated them- selves before him, kissed his feet, rejoiced at his sovereignty, their countenances shone. The lord (Merodach) who by his power had raised the dead, who had freed all from difficulty and dis- tress, they gladly did him homage, heeded his word. . . . When I had entered Babylon peace- fully, with rejoicings and great joy, I took posses- sion of the king's palace as my royal residence. Merodach, the great Lord [granted || me the open heart of the sons (inhabitants) of Babylon; and daily I invoked him. My great army I stationed peacefully throughout Babylon.” These two records of the capture of Babylon from two different sources—one might rightfully say from two opposing forces—present a marvel- ous harmony. They unite in the statement that the city made no resistance to the entrance of the army of Cyrus, neither was there any objection to his immediate assumption of control, unless, in the Nab.-Cyr. Chron, we interpret the guard about the temple of Esagila as a minor siege. On the other hand, the population of the city seems to have welcomed their new conqueror, deliverer, and ruler, as a friend and benefactor. The popular prejudice aroused by the faithful devotees of Bel and Nebo against Nabonidus for his neglect of worship, gladly transferred their fealty to one who honored and revered the great gods of Babylon. It had likewise become evident that the sway of Cyrus meant for other lands a renewed and con- tinuous political prosperity and a religious liberty unknown in the annals of other rulers. This ar- ray of facts freely opened the gates of Babylon to give Cyrus a royal welcome. In view of this direct testimony of two contemporaneous docu- ments, we are forced to the conclusion that the story of Herodotus that Cyrus diverted the waters of the Euphrates from its channel and marched in under the unguarded gates of the river cannot be true. . (5) The Policy of Cyrus. The policy adopted by Cyrus, and put into effect at once in Babylon, fostered the affectionate favor of the gods and of his subjects. (Cyl. 24-36) : “I permitted Sumer and Accad to have no gainsayer. In Babylon and in all its cities I was solicitous for the peace of the inhabitants. . . . Their sighing I quieted, I Soothed their sorrow. To [do] works Merodach, the great lord, gave [me] command. To me Cy- rus, the king that reveres him, and to Cambyses, the son, the issue of [my] body. . . . to the whole of my army he graciously inclined. . . . All the kings who abode in royal palaces, who in all parts of the world from the upper sea to the lower sea abode on dry land, the kings of the West-land, dwellers in tents, all of them brought their rich tribute into Babylon and kissed my feet. From . . . . Asshur . . . . Accad, Abnunak, the city of Zamban, the city of Mi-Turnu, Durili unto the border of Qutu, cities on the Tigris whose settle- ments were founded from of old,—the gods that abode in them I restored to their place, and settled them in an everlasting abode; all their population I gathered together and restored to their own dwelling-places, And the gods of the land of CY RUS Sumer and Accad whom Nabonidus, to the anger of the lord of the gods (Merodach), had brought into Babylon, by the command of Merodach, the great lord, I made to dwell safely in their own places, according to their desires. May all the gods , whom I brought into their own cities, daily before Bel (Merodach) and Nebo in- tercede for a long life for me ! may they speak in my favor, and to Merodach, my lord, let them say: Cyrus the king, who reveres thee, and Cambyses, his son, . . . made them dwell in a quiet habita- tion.” . . . . Unfortunately the remaining lines of this notable inscription are almost entirely broken away. What has been quoted gives us the Sweep of Cyrus’ Supremacy and the gist of his beneficent policy. He was the protector and the bounteous promoter of the welfare of his subjects. Their deities and their methods of worship were gra- ciously restored, and dignified by elevating them to their former positions. The peoples, too, who had been forcibly deported from their native lands were restored by the king's decree. This gener- ous policy, in contrast with that of preceding rulers, gave Cyrus unwonted influence and power over his retainers. It may be that the fact that he was an Aryan, with newer and freer ideas than those that had grown up in Semitic thought and power, threw an added charm about his person- ality and policy. - (6) Cyrus and Prophecy. The significance of the rise of Cyrus is vividly portrayed by the prophetic words to the exiles in Babylon. Words of comfort addressed to the exiles assure them (Is. xl : 1,2) that their punishment will soon cease. They shall return to their home-land, inhabit it and rebuild their cities and restore the waste places (Is. xliv :26). This shall be accomplished by a deliverer who is already on his way to con- quer. “Who hath raised up one from the East, whom he calleth in righteousness to his foot? he giveth nations before him and maketh him rule over kings; he giveth them as the dust to his sword, as the driven stubble to his bow. He pur- sueth them, and passeth on safely; even by a way that he had not gone with his feet. Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning P I, Jehovah, the first, and with the last, I am he’’ (Is. xli :2-4). Again we find, “Thus saith Jehovah to his anointed (selected), Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him, and I will loose the loins of kings; to open the doors before him, and the gates shall not be shut. . . . For Jacob, my servant’s sake, and Israel, my chosen, I have called thee by name: I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me. I am Jehovah, and there is none else; be- side me there is no God: I will gird thee, though thou hast not known me” (Is. xlv. : I, 4, 5). Cyrus is distinctly designated as the agent of Jehovah to conquer the nations. IIis mission was a provi- dential one, and in no sense because he was a worshiper of Jehovah, for the sake of his servant, Jacob. To deliver the Jews it was necessary that the great Babylon, the pride of her kings, the yoke of her subjects, should fall. Numerous prophecies from Jeremiah down had pictured her doom. But her conqueror is now at hand. “Come down and sit in the dust, O virgin daughter of Babylon; sit on the ground without a throne, O daughter of the Chaldeans: for thou shalt no more be called tender and delicate. . . . Sit thou silent, and get thee into darkness, O daughter of the Chaldeans: for thout shalt no more be called the lady of kingdoms.” “Thou art wearied in the multitude of thy coun- gels; let now the astrologers, the star-gazers, the CY RUS 488 monthly prognosticators, stand up and Save thee from the things that shall come upon thee. Be- hold they shall be as stubble, . . . there shall be none to save thee” (Is. xlvii: I, 5, 13, I5). Nothing that they can muster shall be able to avert the cer- tain doom of the wicked city. On the eve of its fall the prophet sees some of its consequences. “Bel (Merodach) bows down, Nebo crouches; their idols are upon the beasts, and upon the cat- tle: the things that ye carried about are made a load, a burden to the weary beast. They stoop, they bow down together; they could not deliver the burden, but themselves are gone into captivity” (Is. xlvi. I, 2). The substance of these and other prophecies is that Babylon must be humiliated, her proud position surrendered, and even her idols become a load for beasts and not a joy to their own worshipers. This last statement was fulfilled only in the sense that the idols, as contrasted with Jehovah's power who was bringing this about, <----------- | º ſ • *-* ~ * ~ * | 㺠ຠ######### | sº ºft A* * |*|\} º º º CY RUS fortress, Jerusalem, midway between western Asia and Egypt, was the first step towards the con- quest of that rival power. If Cyrus could con- serve that advantage by aiding the Jews to build and hold it, he would be setting up one battlement in the face of Egypt’s army. For one of his next strokes would be at that nation. (8) Cyrus and the Jews. Cyrus issued his proclamation authorizing the return of the Jewish exiles in the first year of his sovereignty as king of Persia (Ezra i : I, B. C. 538). It is entirely reasonable to conjecture that, in accordance with his general principles of government, he issued many similar documents. The copy quoted in Ezra i :2-4 gives a few only of the specifications Originally announced. In subsequent references to the document (Ezra iii:2-7; v : I3-16; vi. I-5), we discover that elaborate provisions were made for the building of the temple, as well as for the reinauguration of the worship of Jehovah. issº Hiſtſ #|: | rºl||||||}\! º º º |i liº * fºſſillº...!ºli §§§ E #. º %22 º • j : * 5 **ś §§ º §:=º. º *º sº. o Sºº- } #|||}|º ;wij š. ºil §§ iń ñº§ º º Lº ſº ſ|º ºff ºf *šN W //º $4. º-ºº: #jºiń | W H º ſº ſº-"ºff º |† Lººtº º - - - - - - - tº Of ...” would be merely a burden of useless material. For as Cyrus himself claimed, it was under the auspi- ces of the gods that he marched into Babylon. (See BABYLON.) (7) Evidences of Polytheism of Cyrus. His own appeals to the gods, and his avowal of their support, reveal Cyrus as a polytheist of a pro- nounced type. It was not a matter of monothe- ism, of a possible Zoroastrianism, that called his attention to the Jews, but other reasons of no mean proportions. (I) In addition to the restora- tion and rehabilitation of captive and dethroned deities, he says (Cyl. 32): “All of their peoples I gathered together and restored to their own dwelling-places.” This definitely stated national policy gives us one reason for the royal proclama- tion (Ezra i :2-4) issued in favor of the Jews. (2) It is altogether probable that Cyrus caught up from some one in Babylonia the mission which had been assigned him by the prophets. “Cyrus is my shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure: even saying of Jerusalem, She shall be built; and to the temple, thy foundation shall be laid” (Is. xliv :28). (3) To occupy and hold that strong Cyrus had not overlooked anything that would contribute to the rapid reclamation of this western waste. The proclamation was of such scope as to include the Jews in any part of his realm. The citizens of the empire were also authorized, if they chose, to render assistance to the pilgrims to Palestine. How generally they responded to the royal edict is stated in Ezra ii. This pilgrimage of less than fifty thousand of the faithful to the land of their fathers relieved the administration of Cyrus from the presence, in any part of the realm, of a dissatisfied, disturbing Jewish element. It also populated and built up a section of his ter- ritory which had been overrun and devastated by successive armies as Assyria and Babylonia. It likewise gave spirit to a people whose national life had been next to blotted out by a succession of well-deserved chastisements and captivities. In this event many of the brightest and most hopeful utterances of the great prophets found their ful- fillment, and their fruition. (The Monuments and the Old Testament, 1900. Prof. Ira M. Price, Ph. D., University of Chicago). TXABAREH 489 DALMATIA D DABAREH (dāb'a-réh), See DABERATH. . . . -? DABBASHETH (dāb'ba-shëth), (Heb. Fººl, dać-beh's he//, hump), a town on the border of Zebulun (Josh. xix: II). It is located at Dabsheh, near Jokneam, by Conder. DABERATH (dāb'e-räth), (Heb Fºº, daw-ber- ath", pasture), a town in the tribe of , Issachar, as- signed to the Levites (Josh. xix:I2; xxi:28; I Chron. vi:72). - It is probably the same as the Dabaritta in the great plain of Josephus (Vita, 62; De Bell. Jud., ii:21, 3); and the Dabira, , which Eusebius and Jerome place by Mount Tabor, in the region of Dio-Caesarea. It is recognized in the present Debürieh, a small village lying on the side of a ledge of rocks, just at the base of Taboon on the northwest (Robinson's Researches, , iii:210). It is erroneously spelled Dabareh (Josh. xxi:28). DAGAN (dā'gan). See CORN. DAGGER (dāg'gér), (Heb. P., Aheh"reb), any sharp instrument, particularly a weapon of war (Judg. iii: 16, 21, 22). DAGON (dā'gon), (Heb. ſºn, daw-go/in'), is the name of a national god of the Philistines at Gaza and Ashdod (Judg. xvi;23; I Sam. V:2-7 sq., I Chron. x: IO). As to the meaning of the name, Philo Byblius assumed the word to be derived from dagan, corn. This derivation is admitted by Bochart, who ar- gues that the fields of the Philistines were laid waste by mice, in order to show that Dagon was not the true god of agriculture, as he was thought to be ; and by Beyer, who makes the extraordinary assertion that we may conclude, from the send- ing of the five golden mice (to the God of Israel ! I Sam. Vi :4), that golden mice were offered to Dagon as an acknowledgment of his care in freeing their fields from mice. Each of these arguments is Open to the objection that the five golden piles—which were sent at the same time, and which, if they bore any reference to Dagon, would possibly not be reconcilable with his character as thc god of agriculture—are here altogether disregarded ; yet it is quite evi- dent that no conclusions can be legitimately drawn from the one unless they apply with equal force to the other. There are much better arguments, however, for the other etymology, which deduces the same from dag, fish, with the ending 672 (Ewald, Hebr. Gram, sec. 341). This derivation is 1101 only more in accord- ance with the principles of formation, but it is most decisively established by the terms employed in I Sam. v :4. It is there said that Dagon fell to the earth before the ark, that his head and the palms of his hands were broken off, and that ‘only Dagon was left on him.” If Dagon is de- rived from dag, fish, and if the idol, as there is every reason to believe, had the body of a fish with the head and hands of a man, it is easy to un- (Josh. xxi.28). most modern scholars. derstand why a part of the statue is there called Dagon in contradistinction to the head and hands; but not otherwise. That such was the figure of the idol is asserted by Kimchi, and is admitted by It is also supported by the analogies of other fish deities among the Syro- Arabians. Besides the Atergatis of the Syrians, the Babylonians had a tradition, according to Berosus (Berosi Quae supersunt, ed. Richter, p. 48, 54), that at the very beginning of their history an extraordinary being, called Oannes, having the entire body of a fish, but the head, hands, feet and voice of a man, emerged from the Erythraean sea, appeared in Babylonia, and taught the rude inhabi- tants the use of letters, arts, religion, law, and agriculture; that, after long intervals between, Other similar beings appeared and communicated the same precious lore in detail, and that the last of these was called Odakon ('Qöäkwu). Selden is persuaded that this Odakon is the Philistine god Dagon (De Diis Syris, p. 265). The resemblance between Dagon and Atergatis, or Derketo, is so great in other respects that Selden accounts for the only important difference between them—that of sex—by referring to the androgynous nature of many heathen gods. It is certain, however, that the Hebrew text, the Sept., and Philo Byblius, make Dagon masculine. Apparently, the worship of Dagon among the Philistines was conducted with a highly developed and technical ritual. We may infer this from the elaborate discussions and arrangements for re- turning the ark, as described in I Sam. v.:6, the golden mice and golden tumors as a guilt-offer- ing, the new cart, the new milch kine with their calves shut up at home. The temple of Dagon at Ashdod was destroyed by Jonathan the brother of Judas the Maccabee, about the year B. C. I.48 (I Macc. x:84). J. N. DAILY (dā'ly), (Gr. Štruočovos, eff-ee-oo'see-os, necessary, Matt. vi. II; Luke xi:3). The phrase really means the bread of our necessity, i. e., neces- sary for zes day by day. DAILY OFFERING or SACRIFICE (dā'ly- öf-fér-íng). See SACRIFICE. DALE, THE KING'S (dāl, the king's), (Heb. pº, ay' meſſ, depression), the name of a valley near Jerusalem where Absalom built a family monument (Gen. xiv:17; 2 Sam. xviii:18). It is also called the “Vale of Shaveh.” DALAIAH (da-layá), (Heb. Tº detaw-yaw", Jehovah delivers). See DELAIAH. DALETH (dā'leth). The fourth letter of the Hebrew alphabet. The English letter D comes from the same source, and represents it in anglicized Hebrew names. It stands at the head of the fourth section of Ps. cxix, in which section each verse of the Hebrew begins with this letter. DALMANUTHA (dāl'ma-ni'thä), (Gr. Aaxuav- ov64, da/-man-oo-thah'), a village near Magdala (Mark viii:Io; comp. Matt. xv.:39); probably on the western shore of the lake of Gennesareth, a little to the north of Tiberias. The exact site is un- known. DALMATIA (dāl-mâ'shi-á), (Gr. Aa)\uarta, da/- mat-ee'ah), a province of Europe on the east of the DALPHON Adriatic Sea, forming part of Illyricum, and con- tiguous to Macedonia. Titus was sent into this region by Paul to spread the knowledge of the Gospel. DALPHON (daiſon), (Heb. Tº dalyone') one of the ten sons of Haman ; killed by the Jews on the 13th of Adar (Esth. ix:7). - DAM (dām), (Heb. EN, a/ze), a mother among animals. The Mosaic code had several regulations respect- ing treatment of parents, even among animals (Exod. xxii:30; Lev. xxii:27; Exod. xxiii:19; Deut. xxii:6, 7). DAMAGES (dām'āj-ez), the restitution or re- muneration prescribed by law for offenses against the name, property or person of another. (See LAW.) DAMARIS (dām‘a-ris), (Gr. Aćpapts, dazzz'ar-zs), a woman of Athens, who was led to embrace Christianity by the preaching of St. Paul (Acts xvii:34). Some suppose she was the wife of Dionysius the Areopagite, who is mentioned before her; but 32° 2: 3. º- 490 DAMASCUS Damascus’ are found in Is. vii:8. It is expressly said the head of Syria is Damascus;’ also, Is. xvii:3, ‘the kingdom' is to cease ‘from Damascus.’ So that this place was obviously the metropolis of a Syrian empire. It gave name (Syria Damas- cena, Plin. Hist. Nat. v. I3) to a district of Syria, which, in I Chron. xix:6, is distinguished as ‘Syria-Maachah,” in the common English Version. The plain is about 400 stadia from the Mediter- ranean, and from six to eight days’ journey from Jerusalem. (2) Topography. Damascus—by some held to be the most ancient city in the world—is called by the Orientals ‘a pearl surrounded by emeralds.” Nothing can be more beautiful than its position, whether approached from the side of Mount Leb- anon, from the Desert to the east, or by the high road from the north from Aleppo and Hamah. For many miles the city is girdled by fertile fields, or gardens, as they are called, which being watered by rivers and sparkling streams, give to the vegetation, consisting principally of olive- trees, a remarkable freshness and beauty. Of all the cities of the East, Damascus is probably the most Oriental. Damascus. the construction in the Greek will not sanction this conclusion. The name Damaris does not occur elsewhere, whence some suppose it a corruption of Damalis, which was not an uncommon name; but the r and l are in Greek so constantly interchanged as to render this emendation Superfluous. DAMASCENE (dām'a-sén), a native or inhabi- tant of Damascus (2 Cor. xi:32). • DAMASCUS (da-măs'kus), (Heb. Fºl dam- meh'sež; (Gr. Aapaakós, dam-as-kos), called by the natives Es-Sham. º º (1) The Metropolis and Capital of Syria, also capital of an important pashalic of the same name, fies in a plain at the eastern foot of Anti- Libanus. It was sometimes spoken of by the an- cients as an Arabian city, but in reality it belongs to Syria. In 2 Sam. viii:5, 6, ‘the Syrians of Da: mascus' are spoken of, and the Words, Syria of The plain of Damascus owes its fertility and lovclincss to the river Barrada, which is supposed to be either the Abana or Pharpar of 2 Kings v : I2, and has been noticed under another head (see ABANA). The view of Damascus, when the traveler emerges from Anti-Libanus, is of the most en- chanting kind, and the surrounding country is dense with luxuriant foliage. (3) Origin and Early History. Of the origin of Damascus nothing certain is known. The building of it has been ascribed both to Abraham and to his ‘steward, Eliezer of Damascus.’ That the city existed as early as the days of Abraham is clear from Gen. xiv: I5; xv.2; but the way in which it is spoken of in these passages shows that even at the time to which they refer it was not a new nor an unknown place: for Abraham's steward is characterized as being of Damascus, DAMASCUS 491 and the locality of another town (Hobah) is fixed by Stating that it lay on the left hand of Damascus.” L. Müller (Ad Orig. Reg. Damas.) has undertaken to show that it was even then governed by its own rulers. How long it may have retained its independence cannot be deter- mined ; but it appears (2 Sam. viii:5, 6; I Chron. xviii:5, 6) that its monarch having unadvisedly attacked the victorious David, the Hebrew sov- ereign defeated the Syrians, making a great Slaughter of them, and, in his turn, subdued Damascus, and exacted tribute from its inhabi- tants. This subjection was not of long duration, for under his successor (I Kings xi :24) one Rezon, a servant of Hadadezer, king of Zobah, made himself master of Damascus, and, ruling Over Syria, ‘was an adversary to Israel all the days of Solomon.” After Rezon, Hezion occupied the throne; he was succeeded by his son Tabri- mon (I Kings XV:18, 19), who was in alliance with Asa, king of Judah. Preserving the same direct line, the crown then fell to Benhadad, who, having been in a league with Baasha, king of Israel, was bribed by Asa to desert his ally, and join himself in attacking Baasha, on whom the united forces inflicted great injury (1 Kings xv : I9, 20). In the time of Benhadad, son of the preceding monarch, Damascus was the head of a very powerful empire, since it appears (I Kings Xx: I) that ‘thirty and two kings' (doubtless petty princes or pashas, governors of provinces) ac- companied him in a campaign which he under- took against Samaria. Of Ahab, its king, he made insolent demands. The king of Israel therefore took counsel of 'all the elders of the land,’ and, being advised to resist, met the threats of Benhadad with these famous words:—‘Let not him that girdeth on his harness boast himself as he that putteth it off.” The Damascene king, undismayed, gave himself up to drinking and revelry. Ahab was under religious influences. The battle took place; the Syrians were defeated, and their king effected his retreat with difficulty. The subsequent opera- tions of the Damascenes, under their king, have already been stated (see BENHADAD). Hazael, the Successor of Benhadad, unwilling to give up hope of being master of Ramoth-Gilead, was attacked by the united forces of Judah and Israel, whom he vanquished, wounding Joram (2 Kings viii: 28); and, at a later period, under Jehu (2 Kings x:33), laid waste a large portion of the Israelitish kingdom and ‘threshed Gilead with threshing instruments of iron’ (Amos i :3). Determined on revenge (2 Kings xii:17), Hazael marched to Jerusalem, and was bought off by King Jehoash by a most costly sacrifice. He, however, took the kingdom of Israel (2 Kings xiii:3), and, though he treated the people oppressively, he was able to hand them over in subjection to his son, Benhadad III, who was thrice beaten (2 Kings xiii:24, 25) by the Israelitish king Jehoash, and deprived of all his conquests. Jeroboam II (2 Kings xiv:28) pursued these advantages, and captured Damascus itself. Subsequently a junc- tion took place between Israel and Damascus, when (2 Kings xvi;5, 6) Rezin, king of the lat- ter, and Pekah, king of the former, entered into a confederacy, and undertook an expedition against Ahaz, king of Judah (Is. vii:I). They succeeded in ‘recovering Elath to Syria,’ but could not prevail against Jerusalem (2 Kings xvi :6). Ahaz, however, urged by necessity, applied for aid to Tiglath-pileser, king of Assyria, who, being bribed by a munificent present, fell on Damascus, took it, carried the people of it captive to Kir (on the river Kur), slew Rezin, and united the Da- population. DAMASCUS mascene territory with his own kingdom (2 Kings xvi. 9; IS. viii:4; x:9; xvii: 1). (For confirmation from the monuments see McCurdy, History. Prophecy, and the Monuments; Dr. Ira Maurice Price, The Monuments and the Old Testament, p. 273, ff. ed.) - Damascus after this fell under the power of the Babylonians and Persians, from whom it was taken by Alexander the Great, as one consequence of his victory at Issus (Arrian, Exped. Alex. ii: I I, I5; Curt. iii: 12). Then it made a part of the kingdom of the Seleucidae, from whom it passed into the hands of the Romans (Flor. iii:5; Diod. Sic. xxxix:30). In the time of the Apostle Paul it belonged to the dependent kingdom of the Arabian prince Aretas. At a later period it was reckoned among the cities of Decapolis (Plin. Hist. Nat. V:16); then it was added to the prov- ince of Phoenice, and at last made a part of the province of Phoenicia Libanesia (Hierocles, Synec.). From the time of Hadrian it bore the honorary title of Metropolis, without enjoying the rights of a metropolis. Under the Greek emper- ors of Constantinople Damascus was the most cele- brated city of the East, remarkable for its wealth, luxury, magnificence, and its very large Christian A great era in its history is its con- quest by the Saracens, of which an account may be found in the writings of the Arabic historian Alwakidi (Ockley's Hist. of the Saracens). The war was begun about A. D. 633, by the celebrated Abubeker, the successor of Mohammed ; and end- ed in the capture of the city, and the substitution of Islamism for Christianity. It then became the capital of the whole Mussulman world, till the Caliphate was removed from it to Bagdad. The city continued under the sway of the caliphs of Bagdad till it came into the hands of the Turks, and was held and rendered famous by Noureddin and Saladin. In 1301 Timour the Tartar cap- tured the city and barbarously treated its inhab- itants. From Josephus (De Bell. Jud. i :2; xxv : 2; Xx:2; comp. Acts iz :2) it appears that its pop- ulation contained great numbers of Jews. Damascus is famous in the first age of Chris- tianity for the conversion and first preaching of the apostle Paul (Acts is :3, 20; Gal. i :17). The consequences might have been fatal to the apostle. for his life was endangered in this fanatical city. ‘In Damascus the governor under Aretas, the king, kept the city of the Damascenes with a garrison, desirous to apprehend me; and through a window in a basket was I let down by the wall, and es- caped his hands’ (2 Cor. xi :32-3). (4) The Present Condition. The interior of the city does not correspond with the exquisite beauty of its environs. In the Armenian quar- ter the houses are built with mud, and pierced towards the street by a very few small grated win- dows with red painted shutters. They are low, and the flat arched doors resemble those of stables. A filthy dunghill and a pool of stinking water are almost invariably before the doors. In some of these dwellings, belonging to the principal Arme- nian merchants, there is great internal richness and elegance. The furniture consists of magnifi- cent Persian or Bagdad carpets, which entirely cover the marble or cedar ſlooſ, and of numerous cushions and mattresses, spread in the middle of the saloon, for the members of the family to sit or lean against. There is a fine wide street, formed by the palaces of the agas of Damascus, who are the nobility of the land. The fronts of these palaces, however, towards the street, are like long prison or hospital walls, mere grey mud walls, with few or no windows, whilst at intervals is a great gate DAMASCUS opening on a court. But the interior is magnifi- cent. The bazaars are very striking. The great bazaar is about half a league long. There are long streets covered in with high wood-work, and lined with shops, stalls, magazines, and cafés. The shops are narrow, and go only a short way back. The merchant is seated in front, with his legs dou- bled up below him, and the pipe in his mouth. The magazines are stored with merchandise of all sorts, and particularly with Indian manufactures, which are brought in great profusion by the cara- vans from Bagdad. In the midst of the bazaars stands the finest khan in the East, that of Hussan Pasha. It is an immense cupola, whose bold springing arch recalls that of St. Peter's at Rome; it is in like manner borne on granite pillars. Not far distant is the principal mosque, formerly a church consecrated to St. John, whose skull and sepulchre, found in this holy place, give it such a sanctity that it is death for even a Moham- medan to enter the room where the relics are kept. Situated at the edge of the desert, at the mouth of the plains of Coele-Syria and the valleys of Galilee, of Idumaea, and of the coasts of the Sea of Syria, Damascus was needed as a resting- place for the caravans to India. It is essentially a commercial town. Two hundred merchants are permanently settled in it. Foreign trade is car- ried on by the Great Mecca caravan, the Bagdad caravan, the Aleppo, and by several small ones to Beirut (its sea-port), Tripoli, Acre, etc. Lamar- tine makes its population to be some 300,000, of whom 30,000 are Christians. Another estimate (McCulloch, Geograph. Dict.) gives only from 120,000 to I50,000 inhabitants, comprising 12,000 Christians and as many Jews, which is probably a pretty high estimate. Political changes and social influences have les- sened and mitigated the proverbial bigotry of the Damascenes. The lower classes, indeed, are still fanatical, but a better feeling on religion prevails in the higher. Winding round the walls on the outskirts of the city, one comes to a point where they were broken at the top, at which Paul is said to have been let down in a basket, to escape the indignation of the Jews, when (Acts ix) ‘the dis- ciples took him by night, and let him down by the wall in a basket.’ From hence, passing on through some pretty lanes, the traveler reaches an open green spot, surrounded by trees, over the tops of which can be seen the distant summits of Mount Hermon. At this place it is said Saul had arrived when (Acts is : 3) as he journeyed he came near Damascus, and suddenly there shined round about him a great light from heaven. These localities are pointed out with the greatest confidence by the Damascene Christians of all sects, and are held in great veneration ; nor is it difficult to suppose that the true spots have been handed down by tradition among the followers of the cross. “The street which is called Straight' (Acts ix:II) is still found in Damascus, or at any rate a street bearing that name. length,’ and “so-called because it leads direct from the gate to the castle or palace of the Pasha.’ The house of Judas, also, to which Ananias went, is Addison says it is ‘a mile in still pointed out, as well as that of Ananias him- self. How much credulity may have had to do in fixing on and perpetuating the recollection of these localities, it is probably easier to suspect than to ascertain. . R. B. Burckhardt, Arabia, p. 194; Lamartine, 7%az/e/s 27, f/he AEast, Addison's Dayza scies and Pa /myra, ii: Too; Bowring's Report on Syria; Stanley, Sinai and Palestine; Porter, Five Years in Damascus; Pococke, Travels; Kelley, Syria. DAN DAMINATION (dām-na'shūn), (Gr. 3rd Aeta, ap- oă"/ez-ah, destruction, losing away), a word gener- ally used, in a theological sense, to express a total loss of the soul; but this is not its proper import in all places where it occurs in Scripture; and the use of it is in Some passages of our translation extremely unfortunate. We read, John V :29, of the “resurrection to damnation;” of “eternal damnation” (Mark iii: 29) of the damnation of hell” (Matt. xxiii:33), where the stronger sense of the word is exacted by the context: but in Matt. xxiii:14, we read of the “greater damnation,” which evidently implies a lesser damnation; and in Rom. xiii:2, I Cor. xi.29, and I Tim, v : I.2, we should read “condem- nation,” or “judgment” (Rom. xiv:23). “He that doubteth is damned,” should be read “self- condemned.” DAN (dān), (Heb. i., dawn, a judge). (1) Son of Jacob. Dan was the fifth son of Jacob by the concubine Bilhah (Gen. xxx:3; XXXV:25), and founder of one of the tribes of Israel. Dan had but one son, called Hushim (Gen. xlvi;23) : notwithstanding which, when the Israelites came out of Egypt, this tribe contained 62,700 adult males (Num. i. 39), which made it the Second of the tribes in number, Judah only being above it. Its numbers were less affected in the desert than those of many other tribes; for at the Census, before entering Canaan, it mustered 64,400 Num. xxvi;43), being an increase of 1,700, which gave it still the second rank in population. But there is nothing in the history of the tribe corresponding to this eminence in population: the most remarkable circumstance in its history, how- ever, is connected with this fact. The original settlement assigned to the tribe in southwestern Palestine being too small for its large population, a body of them went forth to seek a settlement in the remote north, and seized and remained in per- manent occupation of the town and district of Laish, the inhabitants of which dwelt in greater Security and were more easily conquered than the neighbors of the tribe in its own proper territory (Josh. xix :47; Judg. i :34; xviii). The district regularly allotted to the tribe, although contracted, was very fertile. It had the country of the Philis- tines on the west, part of Judah with Benjamin on the east, Ephraim on the north, and Simeon on the South. The territory proved inadequate chiefly from the inability of the Danites to expel the Philistines and Amorites, who occupied parts of the land assigned to them. There is no doubt that the territory as allotted, but not possessed, extended to the Mediterranean through the coun- try of the Philistines. Samson was of this tribe, and its proximity to the Philistines explains many circumstances in the history of that hero. It ap- pears from that history that there was an under- current of private and social intercourse between the Philistines and the Danites, notwithstanding the public enmity between Israel and the former (Judg. xiii; xvi). (2) Town of Dan. The town, anciently called Laish, or Leshem, mentioned in the preceding article as having been conquered by a warlike col- ony of Danites, who named it after their tribe. The terms in which the condition of Laish is de- Scribed, previously to the conquest, indicate that the place belonged to the Sidonians, and that the inhabitants lived quiet and secure, ‘after the man- ner of the Sidonians,’ enjoying abundance of all things (Judg. xviii:7). They seem to have de- rived their security from the absence of any ad- verse powers in their neighborhood, and from con- DANCE fidence in the protection of Sidon, which was, however, too far off to render aid in the case of such a sudden assault as that by which they were overpowered. This distance of Sidon was care- fully noted by the Danite spies as a circumstance favorable to the enterprise; and it does not appear that Sidon ever made any effort to dispossess the intruders. Dan afterwards became a chief seat of Jeroboam’s idolatry, and one of the golden calves was set up there (I Kings xii:28, 29). It was conquered, along with other towns, by the Syrians (I Kings XV :20); and the name is familiar from the recurrence of the proverbial expression, ‘from Dan to Beersheba, to denote the extent of the Promised Land (Judg. xx:I ; I Sam. iii:20; 2 Sam. xvii: II). (See BEERSHEBA.) In the days of Eusebius, Dan was still a small village, which is placed by him four miles from Paneas, towards Tyre. As this distance corresponds to the position of the fountain at Tel el-Kady, which forms one of the sources of the Jordan, and is doubtless that which is called Dan by Josephus (Antiq. i :IO, 2), the situation of the city of Dan could not therefore have been that of Paneas itself, with which it has been in later times confounded. (See CAESAREA PHILIPPI.) There are no longer any ruins near the spring at Tel el-Kady, but at about a quarter of an hour north, Burckhardt noticed ruins of ancient habitations; and the bill which overhangs the fountains appears to have been built upon, though nothing is now visible (Burckhardt, Syria, p. 42 ; Robinson, Researches, iii:35I-358). The mound rises out of a close jungle of tall bushes and rank reeds, with larger trees on the higher slopes, until an irregular oblong plateau is reached, about forty feet high on the north side and eighty feet on the south, and resting upon one of the broad fringe-like terraces with which the skirts of Hermon sweep down towards the plain of Huleh (Lake Merom). G. A. Smith pre- fers to locate Dan at Banias. (3) An Arabian City. There was apparently a city named Dan in Southern Arabia, associated with Jason, from which the Phoenicians obtained wrought iron, cassia, and calamus (Ezek. xxvii: 19). This is not certain, however. (4) Camp of Dan. (Judg. xiii:25; xviii :12, A. V. “Mahaneh-dan”), the name given to the portion of country in which the Danites pitched before emigrating northward; or probably the lo- cation of some Danite families which remained. (5) Dan Even Unto Beersheba. Dan being the northern boundary of Canaan, and Beersheba its most southerly town, this proverbial saying ex- pressed the extreme length of the land (Judg. xx:I ; I Sam. iii:20, etc.). (6) There is a reference in Ezek. xxvii:19 in the A. V. to “Dan also " (Heb. lº), but the R. V. has it correctly “Vedan.” This is supposed to be Aden in Arabia, formerly the chief trading port of Arabia before the rise of Mochar. DANCE (dāns), (Heb. ºn, Ahoo!, to twist, dance, dancing, chorus). 1. The words in the original, rendered in our translation by this term, denote, properly, to leap for joy. (1) Ancient Dance. The character of the ancient dance was very different from that of ours, as appears from the conduct of Miriam, who ‘took a timbrel in her hand, and all the women went out after her with timbrels and with dances.’ Pre- cisely similar is the Oriental dance of the present day, which, accompanied of course with music, is led by the principal person of the company, the rest imitating the steps. The evolutions, as well as the songs, are extemporaneous—not confined to 493 DANCE a fixed rule, but varied at the pleasure of the lead- ing dancer; and yet they are generally executed with so much grace, and the time so well kept with the simple notes of the music, that the group of attendants show wonderful address and pro- rºy in following the variations of the leader's eet. (2) Sacred Dances. At a very early period, dancing was enlisted into the service of religion among many people; the dance, enlivened by vocal and instrumental music, was a usual accompani- ment in all the processions and festivals (Strabo, x); and, indeed, so indispensable was this species of violent merriment that no ceremonial was con- sidered duly accomplished, no triumph rightly cel- ebrated, without the aid of dancing. The Hebrews, in common with other nations, had their sacred dances, which were performed on their solemn anniversaries, and other occasions of commemorating some special token of the divine goodness and favor, as means of drawing forth, in the liveliest manner, their expressions of joy and thanksgiving. The performers were usually a band of females, who, in cases of public rejoi- cing, volunteered their services (Exod. XV:29; I Sam, xviii:6), and who, in the case of religious observances, composed the regular chorus of the temple (Ps. cxlix:3; cl:4), although there are not wanting instances of men also joining in the dance on these seasons of religious festivity. Thus Da- vid deemed it no way derogatory to his royal dig- nity to dance on the auspicious Occasion of the ark being brought up to Jerusalem. - His conduct was imitated by the later Jews, and the dance incorporated among their favorite usages as an appropriate close of the joyous Oc- casion of the feast of Tabernacles. (3) Perversion. (Buxtorf, De Synag. Jud. cap. 21). From being exclusively, or at least prin- cipally, reserved for occasions of religious wor- ship and festivity, dancing came gradually to be practiced in common life on any remarkable sea- sons of mirth and rejoicing (Jer. xxxi :4; Ps. xxx :II). In early times, indeed, those who per- verted the exercise from a sacred use to purposes of amusement were considered profane and in- famous; and hence Job introduces it as a dis- tinguishing feature in the character of the un- godly rich, that they encouraged a taste for dan– cing in their families (Job xxi.; II). During the classic ages of Greece and Rome Society under- went a complete revolution of sentiment on this subject; insomuch that the Grecian poets repre- sent the gods themselves as passionately fond of the diversion (Potter's Grec. Antiq. ii:400); and that not only at Rome, but through all the prov- inces of the empire, it was a favorite pastime, resorted to not only to enliven feasts, but in the celebration of domestic joy (Luke xv :25; Matt. xiv:6). Notwithstanding, however, the strong partiality cherished for this inspiriting amuse- ment, it was considered beneath the dignity of persons of rank and character to practice it. The well-known words of Cicero, that “no one dances unless he is either drunk or mad,' express the pre- vailing sense as to the impropriety of respectable individuals taking part in it; and hence the gay circles of Rome and its provinces derived all their entertainment, as is done in the East to this day, from the exhibitions of professional dancers. Amateur dancing in high life was, as that writer informs us, by no means uncommon in the volup- tuous times of the later emperors. But in the age of Herod it was exceedingly rare and almost un- heard of ; and therefore the condescension of Sa- lome, who volunteered, in honor of the anniver- sary of that monarch's birthday, to exhibit her DANGER 494 handsome person as she led the mazy dance in the saloons of Machaerus—for though she was a child at this time, as Some suppose (Michaelis, Introd.), she was still a princess—was felt to be a compliment that merited the highest reward. The folly and rashness of Herod in giving her an unlimited promise, great as they were, have been equaled and even surpassed by the munificence which many other eastern monarchs have lavished upon favorite dancers. (See HEROD; SALOME.) The Jewish dance was performed by the sexes separately. There is no evidence from sacred his- tory that the diversion was promiscuously enjoyed, except it might be at the erection of the deified calf, when, in imitation of the Egyptian festival of Apis, all classes of the Hebrews intermingled in the frantic revelry. In the sacred dances, although both sexes seem to have frequently borne a part in the procession or chorus, they remained in dis- tinct and separate companies (Ps. lxviii:25; Jer. xxxi : I.3). - 2. By “dance' the A. V. translates the Hebrew word Mach64, a musical instrument of percussion; according to many, used to accompany the dance, and hence called by the same name as the dance itself. Figuratite. Dancing in the Scriptures is ex- pressive of joy as contrasted with mourning (Ps. xxx: II, etc.). DANGER (dān'jër), (Gr. Švoxos, en'o/*/*-os, sub- ject to, liable to). (I) The different degrees of danger of the judgment, council, or hell-fire, denote different degrees of punishment, according to the greater or lesser heinousness of men's crimes; and there is an allusion to the Jewish courts, the lesser of which judged lesser crimes, and inflicted lesser punish- ments (Matt. v :21, 22). (2) Sailing was danger- ous, after the fast of expiation, on the tenth day of the seventh month; winter began, and the weather became stormy (Acts xxvii:9). DANIEL (dān'i-el or yūl), (Heb. 2Nº, dazy- 7tee-ya/e', God is my judge). 1. A celebrated prophet in the Chaldaean and Persian period. There are in the Bible two other persons of the same name—a son of David (I Chron. iii:I), and a Levite of the race of Ithamar (Ezra viii:2; Neh. x:6). (1) Early Life. Daniel was descended from one of the highest families in Judah, if not even of royal blood (Dan. i :3; comp. Joseph. Antiq. x:Io, I). Jerusalem was thus probably his birth- place, though the passage (Dan. ix:24) quoted in favor of that opinion, is considered by many commentators as not at all conclusive. We find the lad Daniel, at the age of twelve or sixteen years, already in Babylon, whither he had been carried, together with three other Hebrew youtlıs Uſ I aluk, A11auiall, Mishael and Azariah, at the first deportation of the people of Judah in the fourth year of Jehoiakim. (2) Enters the King’s Service. He and his companions were obliged to enter the service of the royal court of Babylon, on which occasion he received the Chaldaean name of Belshatgar (i. e., Beli princeps, princeps cui Belus favet), accord- ing to eastern custom when a change takes place in one’s condition of life, and more especially if his personal liberty is thereby affected (comp. 2 Kings xxiii:34; xxiv:17; Esth. ii:7; Ezra v : In this his new career, Daniel received that thorough polish of education which Oriental eti- quette renders indispensable in a courtier (comp. iii:6; Plat. Alcib, sec. 37), and was more espe- cially instructed ‘in the writing and speaking DANIEL Chaldaean’ (Dan. i :4). That Daniel had distin- guished himself, and already at an early period acquired renown for high wisdom, piety and strict observance of the Mosaic law (comp. Ezek. xiv: I4, 20; xxviii:3; Dan. i :8-I6) is very evident. A proper opportunity of evincing both the acute- ness of his mind and his religious notions soon presented itself in the custom of the Eastern courts to entertain the officers attached to them from the royal table (Athenaeus, iv: Io, p. 145, ed. Casaub). Daniel was thus exposed to the tempta- tion of partaking of unclean food, and of partici- pating in the idolatrous ceremonies attendant on heathen banquets. His prudent proceedings, wise bearing and absolute refusal to comply with such customs were crowned with the Divine blessing and had the most splendid results. (3) Interprets Dreams. After the lapse of the three years fixed for his education, Daniel was attached to the court of Nebuchadnezzar, where, by the Divine aid, he succeeded in interpreting a dream of that prince to his satisfaction, by which means—as Joseph of old in Egypt—he rose into high favor with the king, and was entrusted with two important offices—the governorship of the province of Babylon and the head inspectorship of the sacerdotal caste (Dan. ii:48). Considerably later, in the reign of Nebuchad- nezzar, we find Daniel interpreting another dream of the king's, to the effect that, in punishment of his pride, he was to lose, for a time, his throne, but to be again restored to it after his humiliation had been completed (Dan. iv). Here he dis- plays not only the most touching anxiety, love, loyalty and concern for his princely benefactor, but also the energy and solemnity becoming his position, pointing out with vigor and power the only course left for the monarch to pursue for his peace and welfare. (4) In Retirement. Under the unworthy suc- cessors of Nebuchadnezzar, Daniel and his de- Servings seem to have been forgotten, and he was removed from his high posts. His situation at court appears to have been confined to a very inferior office (comp. Dan. viii:27); neither is it likely that he should have retained his rank as head inspector of the order of magians in a country where these were the principal actors in effecting changes in the administration whenever a new succession to the throne took place. We thus lose sight of Daniel until the first and third year of King Belshazzar (Dan. v :7, 8), generally understood to have been the last king of Babylon. He was regent or co-king with his father, Nabonidus, and was slain when the Per- sians obtained the city. (See BELSHAzzAR ; BABY- LON : CYRUS; DARIUS.) (5) Restored to Office. Shortly before this event Daniel was again restored to the royal favor, and became moral preacher to the king, who overwhelmed him with honors and titles in consequence of his being able to read and solve the meaning of a sentence miraculously displayed, which tended to rouse the conscience of the wicked prince. Under the same king we see Daniel both alarmed and comforted by two remarkable visions (Dan. vii., viii), which disclosed to him the fu- ture course of events and the ultimate fate of the most powerful empires of the world, but in par- ticular their relations to the kingdom of God, and its development to the great consummation. After the conquest of Babylon by the united powers of Media and Persia, Daniel seriously busied himself under the short reign (two years) of Darius the Mede or Cyaxares II with the affairs of his people and their possible return from DANIEL, BOOK OF exile, the term of which was fast approaching, ac- cording to the prophecies of Jeremiah. In deep humility and prostration of spirit he then prayed to the Almighty, in the name of his people, for forgiveness of their sins, and for the Divine mercy in their behalf; and the answering promises he received far exceeded the tenor of his prayer, for the visions of the Seer were extended to the end of time (Dan. ix). (See DARIUS.) (6) Persecution. In a practical point of view also Daniel appeared at that time a highly-fav- ored instrument of Jehovah. Occupying, as he did, one of the highest posts of honor in the state, the strictness and scrupulousness with which he fulfilled his official duties could not fail to rouse envy and jealousy in the breasts of his col- leagues, who well knew how to win the weak monarch, whom they at last induced to issue a decree imposing certain acts, the perforillance of which, they well knew, was altogether at variance with the creed of which Daniel was a zealous pro- fessor. For his disobedience the prophet suffered the penalty specified in the decree; he was thrown into a den of lions, but was miraculously saved by the mercy of God—a circumstance which en- hanced his reputation and again raised him to the highest posts of honor under Darius and Cyrus (Dan, vi). (7) Patriotism. He had, at last, the happiness to see his most ardent wishes accomplished—to behold his people restored to their own land. Though his advanced age would not allow him to be among those who returned to Palestine, yet he never for a moment ceased to Occupy his mind and heart with his people and their concerns (Dan. x:I2). (8) Visions. In the third year of Cyrus he had a series of visions, in which he was informed of the minutest details respecting the future his– tory and sufferings of his nation, to the period of their true redemption through Christ, as also a consolatory notice to himself to proceed calmly and peaceably to the end of his days, and then await patiently the resurrection of the dead at the end of time. - From that period the accounts respecting him are vague, sometimes confused, and even Strange, and we hardly need mention the various fables which report his death to have taken place in Pal- estine, Babylon or Susa. H. A. C. H. . Second son of David, born at Hebron, of Abigail (I Chron. iii:I). 3. A descendant of Ithamar, who returned from Babylon with Ezra (Ezra viii:2). 4. One of the priests who sealed the covenant with Nehemiah. He is probably the same as Dan- iel Number 1 in this article, but not to be con- founded with Daniel Number 3. (B. C. 445.) DANIEI, BOOK OF (dān'yūl, book Šv). 495 This important, and in many respects remark- able, book takes its name not only from the prin- cipal person in it, but also and chiefly from him as its real author, there being no doubt whatever that, as the book itself testifies, it was composed by Daniel (Comp. vii: 1, 28; viii:2; ix:2). (1) Rank in Canon. It occupies, however, but a third rank in the Hebrew canon, not among the Prophets, but in the Hagiographa, Owing, no doubt, to the correct view of the colliposers of the canon, that Daniel did not exercise his pro- phetic office in the more restricted and proper sense of the term ‘prophecy.’ (2) Historical. The book of Daniel divides itself into two parts, historical (chaps. i-iv) and prophetic (chaps. vii-xii), arranged respectively in chronological order. Its object is by no means DANIEL, BOOK OF to give a summary historical account of the period of the exile, or of the life of Daniel himself, since it contains only a few isolated points both as to historical facts and prophetic revelations. But the plan or tendency which so consistently runs through the whole book is of a far different char- acter; it is to show the extraordinary and wonder- ful means which the Lord made use of, in a period of the deepest misery, when the theocracy seemed dissolved and fast approaching its extinction, to afford assistance to his people, proving to them that he had not entirely forsaken them, and mak- ing them sensible of the fact that His merciful presence still continued to dwell with them, even without the Temple and beyond the Land of Promise. The wonders related in Daniel (chaps. i-vi) are thus mostly of a peculiar, prominent and striking character and resemble in many respects those performed of old time in Egypt. Their divine tendency was, on the one hand, to lead the heathen power, which proudly fancied itself to be the con- queror of the theocracy, to the acknowledgment that there was an essential difference between the world and the kingdom of God; and, on the other, to impress degenerate and callous Israel with the full conviction that the power of God was still the same as it was of old in Egypt. (3) Language. The language of the book is partly Chaldaean (ii:4; vii:28) and partly He- brew. The latter is not unlike that of Ezekiel, though less impure and corrupt, and not so re- plete with anomalous grammatical forms. (4) Prophetic. The style is, even in the pro- phetic parts, more prosaic than poetical. The his- torical descriptions are usually very broad and prolix in details, but the prophecies have a more rhetorical character and their delivery is fre- quently somewhat abrupt; their style is descrip- tive, painting with the most lively colors the still fresh impression which the vision has made on the mental eye. - The following are the essential features of the prophetic tenor of the book of Daniel, while the visions in chap. ii and vii, together with their dif- ferent symbols, may be considered as embodying the leading notion of the whole: The development of the whole of the heathen power, until the com- pletion and glorification of the kingdom of God, appeared to the prophet in the shape of four pow- ers of the world, each successive power always surpassing the preceding in might and strength, namely, the Babylonian, Medo-Persian, Greek and Roman. The kingdom of God proves itself con- queror of them all—a power which alone is ever- lasting, and showing itself in its utmost glorifica- tion in the appearance of the Messiah, as Judge and Lord of the world. Until the coming of the Messiah the people of God have yet to go through a period of heavy trials. That period is particu- larly described in chapters viii and xi, illustrative of the last and heaviest combats which the king- dom of God would have to endure. The period until the appearance of the Messiah is a fixed and sacred number—seventy weeks of years (ch. ix). After the lapse of that period ensues the death of the Messiah; the expiation of the people is realized; true justice is revealed, but Jerusalem and the temple are in punishment given up to destruction. The true rise from this fall and corruption ensues only at the end of time. in the general resurrection (ch. xii). (5) Attacks Upon Its Unity. The unity of the book has been disputed by several critics, and more especially by Eichhorn and Bertholdt, who conceived it to have been written by more than one author, on account of some contradictions DANIEL, BOOK OF which they thought they had discovered in it, such as in i:21, compared with x:I, and in i:5-18, compared with ii:I. (6) Genuineness and Authenticity. Much greater is the difference of Opinion respecting the authenticity of the book. The oldest known opponent of it is the heathen philosopher Por- phyry, in the third century of the Christian era. He found no successor in his views until the time of the English deists, when Collins attempted to attack the authenticity of Daniel, as was done by Semler in Germany. In later times its authen- ticity has been questioned by a number of Biblical critics, who have made elaborate attacks upon it. The objections of these writers have been fully met and confuted. They rest, to a great extent, part- ly on historical errors, partly on the want of a sound exegesis, and, lastly, on the perversion of a few passages in the text. Thus it has turned out that several of the arguments have led to a far dif- ferent and even opposite result from what was originally meant, namely, to the defense of the authenticity of the book. The existence of a king Darius of the Medians, mentioned in chap. vi., is a thorough historical fact, and the very circumstance that such an insignificant prince, eclipsed as his name was by the splendor of Cyrus, and therefore unnoticed in the fabulous and his- torical chronicles of Persia, should be known and mentioned in this book, is in itself a proof of the high historical authority of Daniel. Nor does the whole dogmatic tenor of the book speak less in favor of its genuineness, since the dogmatic spirit of the Maccabaean period is essentially different from that which it exhibits, as, for example, in the Christology, which forms the substance and basis of Daniel. (See DARIUS.) A. C. (7) Interpretation. The book contains three representations of the world’s history, more or less closely related to each other, which, with their interpretations, may be outlined as follows: Ch. ii Ch vii Ch. viii A. Gº l le n=The lion =Babylonian Empire €2. Silver—The bear =The ram = Medo-Persian “ breast B raze n=The leopard=The he-goat=Grecian & & belly and thighs Iron legs =The fourth and iron beast and clay feet B. G old e n=The lion d =Roman =Babylonian Empire hea S i 1 v e r =The bear =The ram =Medo-Persian “ breast Braze n=The leopard=The he-goat =Macedonian “ helly and thighs Iron legs=The fourth and iron beast and clay feet C. Gol de n=The lion head S i 1 v e r =The bear = } The ram = Median 4 & =Syrian { { =Babylonian Empire breast B r a ze n=The leopard= belly and thighs Iron legs=The fourth and iron beast =Persian & =The he-goat=Grecian € $ and clay feet The interpretation A has been the one generally received. In fact, it was almost universal in the early Jewish and the Christian Church. B has had few advocates. C is now the prevailing inter- pretation. (E. L. Curtis, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) (8) Literature. The most important commen- tators on Daniel are, among the fathers, Ephraem Syrus, Jerome, Theodoret; among the rabbins, 496 DANIEL, BOOK OF Jarchi, Kimchi, Aben Ezra, Joseph Jacchiades; among the Protestant theologians, Melancthon, Calvin, Martin Geier, de Dieu, Venema, Chr. Bened. Michaelis, J. D. Michaelis. In more recent times critical works on Daniel have appeared by Bertholdt (1806), Rosenmüller (1832), Hävernick (1832), Lengerke (1835), Maurer (1836), Birks, The four prophetic empires, and The two later z'isions of Dan. ; Stuart, Commentary, Boston, 1850; Noyes, New Transl. of the Heb. Proph., vol. ii, 1866; Ewald (Proph. d. A. B.), 1867, Eng. tr., I881; Keil, 1869, Eng. tr., 1872; Zöckler (Lange's Bibelwerk), 1870, Eng. tr. and add. by Strong, 1875; Fuller (Speaker's Com.), 1876; Meinhold (Kgf. Kom.), 1889; Bevan, 1892; Behrmann (Hand. Kom.), 1894; Farrar (Earpositor's Bible), I895; Heng. Beitraege, 1831, Eng. tr., 1848; Tregelles, Defence of Authenticity, 1852; Auber- len, Der Prophet Daniel und Offenbarung Johan- mes, I854–57, Eng. tr., 1857; Pusey, Dam. the Pro- phet, 1864, 3d ed. I869; Fuller, Essay on the Au- thenticity of Daniel, 1864; Lenormant, La Divina- tion chez les Chald. (pp. 169-236), 1875; Cornill, Margoliouth in Earpos., April, 1890; Fuller in, Earpos., 3d series, vols. i., ii; Sayce HCM (pp. º:37) 1893; Terry, Proph. of Dan. Expounded, Iö93. The following works may also be consulted : The Old Testament Introductions of Karl F. Keil, Cornill, Driver, König, Strack et al., and the Old Testament Theologies of Dillmann, Schultz, Smend et al., and the Messianic or Old Testament Prophecies of Briggs, Delitzsch, Hof- mann (Weissagung u. Erfuellung), Orelli, Riehm, et al., and in the Histories of Israel or The Jews of Ewald, Grätz, Köhler, Kittel, Stade, Schürer et al. (9) Apocryphal Addenda. (See DEUTERO- CANONICAL BOOKS.) In the version of the Sev- enty, and in that of Theodotion, there are found some considerable additions to the book of Daniel which are wanting in the Hebrew canon. These are: (1) The Prayer of Azarias, etc. (Dan. iii: 24-51 ; (2) The Song of the Three Children (Dan. iii:52-90); (3) The History of Susanna (Dan. xiii); (4) The Narrative of Bel and the Dragon (Dan xiv). St. Jerome, who translated these, together with the canonical parts of the book of Daniel from the Greek version of Theodotion, observes: ‘Dan- iel, as received among the Hebrews, contains neither the history of Susanna, nor the Hymn of the Three Children, nor the Fables of Bel and the Dragon, all of which, as they are dispersed throughout the world, we have added, lest to the ignorant we should seem to have cut off a con- siderable part of the book, transfixing them at the same time with a dagger.’ Jerome further observes that the history of Susanna is considered by nearly all the He- brews as a fable, and that it is not read in the synagogues; for who, say they, could believe that captives had the power of starving their princes and judges? (Praef. ad Danielem). (1) The subject of the Prayer of Azarias, and of the Song of the three youths, Azarias, Ananias and Misael (the Hebrew names of Shadrach, Meshach and Abed-nego), consists in a petition for deliverance from the furnace, and a hymn of thanksgiving on the part of the young men for their preservation in the midst of the flames. De Wette (Lehrbuch) conceives that the Prayer and the Hymn betray marks of two different authors (Dan. iii:38; comp. with 53, 55, 84, 85, Stephen's Division), and that the latter, has the appearance of being written with a liturgical object. Certain it is that, from a very early pe- DANITES 497 riod, it formed part of the church service (see Rufinus, in Symbol. Apost., who observes that this hymn was then sung throughout the whole church, and Athanasius, De virginitate); it is one of the canticles still sung on all festivals in the Roman, and retained in the daily service of the Anglican church. (2) The History of Susanna is probably a moral parable, founded perhaps on some fact, and affording a beautiful lesson of chastity. The object of the Jewish author of the history of the destruction of Bel and the Dragon was, according to Jahn, 'to warn against the sin of idolatry Some of his brethren who had embraced Egyptian Superstitions. The book was, therefore, well adapted to the time, and shows that philoso- phy was not sufficient to keep men from aposta- tizing into the most absurd and degrading super- Stitions.’ The time of the writing Jahn ascribes to the age of the T'tolemics, when serpents were still worshiped at Thebes. (3) Bel and the Dragon is read in the Roman office on Ash Wednesday, and in the Church of England on the 23d of November. Susanna is read in the Anglican Church on the 22d of No- vember, and in the Roman on the vigil of the fourth Sunday in Lent. We shall conclude with the following observa- tion of Erasmus : ‘It is astonishing that what Jerome stabbed with his dagger is now every- where read and sung in the churches; nay, we read, without any mark of distinction, what Jerome did not fear to call a fable, the history of Bel and the Dragon, and which he would not have added had he not been apprehensive of seeming to have cut off a considerable portion of the sacred volume. But to whom did he fear to seem to do so? To the ignorant, as he himself observes. Of so much more weight to the igno- rant multitude is custom than the judgment of the learned' (Schol. super Praef. Hieron. in Dan- iel). e W. W. Davidson, Introd. to the Old Testament, iii:227 ff. ; Arnald, Comm. on the Apoe. Books; Fritzsche, Eveg. Handb. i., iii. DANITES (dān'ites), the descendants of Dan and those who belonged to his tribe (Judg. xiii:2; xviii: I, II; I Chron. xii:35). (See DAN.) DAN-JAAN (dān'jā'an), (Heb. 2: ..., dawn yah'an, Dan playing the pipe, 2 Sam. xxiv:6). The LXX and the Vulgate read “Dan in the woods.” One of the places mentioned as being visited by Joab when taking the census. It is given be- tween Gilead and Zidon, and may have been therefore in the vicinity of Dan (2 Sam. xxiv: 6). Van de Velde, Memoir, p. 3.) DANNAH (dān'nah), (IIeb. "#1, dan-naw', mur- muring), a city mentioned with Debir and Socoh, in the mountains of Judah (Josh. XV:49). It prob- ably lay south of Hebron. DAR (dār), (IIeb. Tºl, dar). This word occurs in Esth. i:6 as the name of one of the stones in the pavement of the magnificent hall in which Ahasu- erus feasted the princes of his empire. This would suggest that it must have denoted a kind of marble. Some take it to signify Parian marble, others white marble; but nothing certain is known about it. In Arabic the word dar sig- nifies a large pearl; but that pearls were also used in the pavements of even regal dining-rooms is improbable in itself and unsupported by any known example, (See ALABASTER.) DARIUS DARA (dā'rá), (Heb. Pººl daw-rah', bearer holder), a contraction of Darda (I Chron. ii:6). (See DARDA.) IDARCMONIM CONIM. DARDA (dār'dá), (Heb. Pººl, dar-dah!, pearl of knowledge), son of Mahol (B. C. 960), one of the four men renowned for wisdom, but whom Solomon excelled (I Kings iv:31). In I Chron. ii:6, however, the same four names Occur again as “sons of Zerah,” of the tribe of Judah, where Darda appears as Dara. Although the identity of these persons with those in 1 Kings iv has been much debated they are proba- bly the same. DARIC (dār'ik), (Heb. jºin, dar-Āe-mon', or liº, ad-ar-£on', drachma; Ezra ii:69; viii:27; Neh. vii:70, 71, 72; 1 Chron. xxix:7), a gold coin current in Palestine in the period after the return from Babylon. Translated in A. V. dram. That the Hebrew word is, in the Bible, the name of a coin and not of a weight appears from its similarity to the Greek appellation of the only piece to which it could refer. The allusions in Ezra and Nehemiah show that the coin was cur- rent in Palestine under Cyrus and Artaxerxes Longimanus. (See ADARCONIM.) DARIUS (da-ri'us) or rather Darjavesh (Gr. Aapeios, hence the Roman and modern form of the name; Old Persian ZXarayaza'zes/, Heb. tºº, dazy-reh-yaw-waysh"), the name under which three Medo-Persian kings are mentioned in the Old Testament. The original form of the name, to which the Hebrew and Greek words are only approxima- tions, has been read by Grotefend, in the cunei- form inscriptions of Persepolis, as Darheush, or Darjeush (Heeren's Ideen, i:2, p. 350). (1) Darius the Mede. The first Darius is ‘Darjavesh, the son of Achashverosh, of the seed of the Medes,’ in the book of Dan. ix:I. Much difference of opinion has prevailed as to the person here intended; but it appears from the passages in v:30, 3I ; vi :28 that Darjavesh, the Mede, obtained the dominion over Babylon on the death of Belshazzar, who was the last Chaldaean ruler (see BELSHAzzAR), and that he was the immediate predecessor of Koresh (Cy- rus) in the sovereignty. The historical juncture here defined belongs, therefore, to the period when the Medo-Persian army, led by Cyrus, took Babylon (A. D. 538); and Darjavesh, the Mede, must denote the first king of a foreign dynasty who assumed the dominion over the Babylonian empire before Cyrus. These indications all con- cur in the person of Cyaxares the Second, the son and successor of Astyages (see AHASUERUS) and the immediate predecessor of Cyrus. I. A. Pinches, Hastings' Bib. Dict., controverts this opinion. He says: “The passage in Dan. y : 31, where he is described as having received the kingdom (Revised Version) leads, one to , ask whether, in spite of the title of king which is given to him (vi :6, 7, etc.), he may not have been really governor only. In the Greek his- torians and in the Bab. Chronicle the name of Darius the Mede does not occur, he who preceded Cyrus to Babylon, on the Occasion of the siege and capture of that city, being Gobryas, who may thus be regarded as having “received the kingdom for him.’ Gobryas, like Darius the Mede (vi :I), appointed governors in Babylon, and seems also to have been in the attack which resulted in Bel- (dārk'mö-nim). See ADAR- 32 DARKNESS 498 shazzar’s death (Bab. Chronicle, Rev. col. i :1, 22). It will thus be seen that Cyrus gave great power to Gobryas, who was, in fact, his viceroy. Apparently, therefore, the later Jewish writers looked upon Gobryas as having as much author- ity as Belshazzar, whom they regarded likewise as king, though he does not appear ever to have reigned. The confusion of the names of Darius the Mede and Gobryas of Gutium (he being gov- ernor of that place, which is regarded as having included a part of Media), may have been due to the scribes, who, being more familiar with the Greek form of the name of Darius (the end of which, when carelessly pronounced, bears a cer- tain resemblance to that of Gobryas in that lan- guage) than with the, Hebrew form Daryawesh, wrote one name for the other; and there is also the possibility that one of Gobryas' names was Darius, which would account for the mistake.” In this view J. F. McCurdy, Barnes' Bib. Dict., concurs, saying it is impossible to make any other identification. (2) Darius Hystaspis. The second ‘Dar- javesh king of Persia, is mentioned in the book of Ezra (iv.-vii.) in Haggai, and in Zechariah, as the king who, in the second year of his reign, effected the execution of those decrees of Cyrus which granted the Jews the liberty to rebuild the tem- ple, the fulfillment of which had been obstructed by the malicious representations which their ene- mies had made to the immediate successors of Cyrus. It is agreed that this prince was Darius Hystaspis, who succeeded the usurper Smerdis (B. C. 521) and reigned thirty-six years. (3) Darius Nothus. The third, ‘Darjavesh the . Persian,’ occurs in Neh. xii:22, in a passage which merely states that the succession of priests was registered up to his reign. It is commonly be- lieved that this king was Darius Nothus, who came to the throne (B. C. 423), and reigned nine- teen years. Darius Codomannus is evidently the Persian king alluded to in I Macc. i : I. e dº we g DARKNESS (dārk'nés), (Heb, ºr, Æho-shek', the dark; Gr. o.kótos, skoł'os), in the physical sense, is specially noticed, on three occasions, in the Scriptures: 1. At the period of creation darkness, it is said, “was on the face of the deep” (Gen. i :2-4). (See CoSMOGONY.) 2. The plague of darkness in Egypt (Exod. x:21), “darkness that might be felt.” (See PLAGUES OF EGYPT.) 3. In the Gospels of Matthew (xxvii:45) and Luke (xxiii:44) we read that, while Jesus hung upon the cross, “from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.” That the darkness could not have proceeded from an eclipse of the sun is placed beyond all doubt by the fact that, it being then the time of the Passover, the moon was at the full. This darkness may, therefore, be ascribed to an extraor- dinary and preternatural obscuration of the Solar light, which might precede and accompany the earthquake which took place on the same occa- sion. For it has been noticed that often before an earthquake such a mist arises from sulphurous vapors as to occasion a darkness almost nocturnal (see the authors cited in Kuinoel ad Matt. Xxiv:29 and compare Joel ii:2; Rev. vi. I2, Sq.). Such a darkness might extend over Judaea, or that divi- sion of Palestine in which Jerusalem stood, to which the best authorities agree that here, as in some other places, it is necessary to limit the phrase trägav Tijv Yāv, rendered ‘all the land.’ Darkness is often used symbolically in the DAUGHTER Scriptures as opposed to light, which is the sym- bol of joy and safety, to express misery and ad- versity (Job xviii:6; Ps. cwii:Io; czliii:3; Is. viii: 22; ix: I ; lix:9, IO; Ezek. xxx: 18; xxxii:7, 8; xxxiv:I2). Figuratite. (I) Darkness of the sun, moon and stars is used figuratively to denote a general dark- ness or deficiency in the government or body politic (Is. xiii: Io; Ezek. xxxii:7; Joel ii:Io-31). (2) In Eph. v : II, the expression, ‘works of dark- ness,’ is applied to the heathen mysteries, on ac- count of the impure actions which the initiated performed in them. (3) “Outer darkness’ in Is. viii:22; Matt. viii:12; xxii: 13 and elsewhere refers to the darkness outside, in the streets or open country, as contrasted with the blaze of cheerful light in the house, especially when a convivial party is held in the night time. And it may be observed that the streets in the East are utterly dark after nightfall, there being no shops with lighted windows, nor even public or private lamps to impart to them the light and cheerfulness to which we are accustomed. This gives the more force to the contrast of the ‘outer darkness' with the inner light. (4) Darkness is used to represent the state of the dead (Job x :21 ; xvii: 13). (5) It is also employed as the proper and significant em- blem of spiritual blindness and ignorance (Is. ix:2; lz :2; Matt. vi.;23; John i:5; iii:19; 2 Cor. iv : I-6; I John ii:8, etc.). (6) To eat in dark- ness is to live in perpetual anxiety and distress amidst the outward comforts of life (Eccl. v :17.) (7) To meet with darkness in the day time, and to grope at noon, is to be exceedingly infatuated, or surprised with great trouble at the height of pros- perity (Job v :14). (8) The darkness is past, and the true light shineth. The ceremonial dispensa- tion is over, and Jesus is clearly exhibited in the Gospel. The state of ignorance, error, unbelief, and wickedness is over ; and believers have re- ceived the knowledge, felt the power and believed the promises of God (I John iii:8). DARKON (dār'kon), (Heb. "FTH, dar-Aome', perhaps bearer, or scattering). The children of Darkon returned from Babylon under Zerubbabel along with “the servants of Solomon’” (Ezra ii:56; Neh. vii:58), B. C. 458. DARLING (dār'ling), (Heb. T., yaw-Aheed", united, only, hence beloved), used in Ps. xxii:20; xxxv.17, of Zife as something very dear; hence self. º DAROM (dār'öm), (Heb. Fº, dazy-rom'). This word means the south, and as a proper name is usually understood to be applied to the southern- most part of Judaea, in Job xxxvii:17; Deut. xxxiii:23; Eccles. i:6; Ezek. xxi.;4; x1:24. DART (dārt), (Heb. Yº, Ahayfs, arrow), an in- strument of war, similar to an arrow or light spear (Job xli:26; Prov. vii:23; Eph. vi.16; 2 Sam. xviii:I4; 2 Chron. xxxii:5; Heb. xii:2O). (See ARMS, ARMOR.) DATES (dāts). See TAMAR. DATHAN (dā'than), (Heb. lºº, daw-thawn', fount), one of the chiefs of Reuben (B. C. I 190) who joined Korah in the revolt against the authority of Moses and Aaron (Num. xvi; I ; xxvi;9; Deut. xi:6; Ps. cwi:17). (See AARON.) DAUGHTER (da'tér), (Heb. F2, bath, feminine of là, bame, son; Gr. 6vyármp, thoo-gat'air). It has in Scripture a more extended applica- tion than our word daughter. Besides its usual and proper sense of— o DAUGHTER–IN–LAW 1. A daughter real or adopted, we find it used to designate : 2. A uterine sister, niece or any female de- scendant (Gen. xx:I2; xxiv:48; xxviii:6; xxxvi : 2; Num. xxv :I ; Deut. xxiii:17). Women, as natives, residents or professing the religion of certain places, as ‘the daughter of Zion' (Is. iii:16); “daughters of the Philistines' (2 Sam. i :20); “daughters of a strange God' (Mal. ii:II); ‘daughters of men,’ i. e., carnal women (Gen. vi :2), etc. 4. Metaphorically, small towns are called daughters of neighboring large cities—metropoles or mother cities—to which they belonged, or from which they were derived, as ‘Heshbon and all the daughters (Auth. Version, villages) thereof' Num. xxi :25; so Tyre is called the daughter of Sidon (Is. xxiii:I2), as having been originally a colony from thence, and hence also the town of Abel is called ‘a mother in Israel’ (2 Sam. xx : 19), and Gath is in one place (comp. 2 Sam. i :20; I Chron. xviii:I) called Gath-Ammah, or Gath the mother town, to distinguish it from its own de- pendencies, or from another place called Gath. See other instances in Num. xxi :32; Judg. xi :26; Josh XV :45, etc. - 5. The people collectively of any place, the name of which is given, as ‘the daughter (i. e., the people) of Jerusalem hath shaken her head at thee' (Is. xxxvii:22; see also Ps. xlv. : 13; cz.xxvii: 8; Is. x:30; Jer. xlvi. Ig; Lam. iv.22; Zech. ix:9). 6. The word ‘daughter,’ followed by a numeral, indicates a woman of the age indicated by the numeral, as when Sarah (in the original) is called ‘the daughter of ninety years' (Gen. xvii: The significations of the word ‘daughter’ in its scriptural use might be still more minutely dis- tinguished, but they may all be referred to one or other of these heads. Respecting the condition of daughters in fam- ilies (see Wom EN ; MARRIAGE). Figuratite. (I) Joseph is called ‘a fruitful bough whose daughters (branches) run over the wall’ (Gen. xlix:22). (2) The daughters of a city, chiefly a capital one, signify not only its in- habitants, but also lesser cities or villages (Num. xxi :25). (3) The saints are represented as daughters; they are dear to God and to their elder brother, Christ; they receive their all from him, and are affectionate and beautiful (Ps. xlv. : Io-I4. (4) The daughters of the horse-leech are her young ones, that are never satisfied with blood (Prov. xxx :15). (5) The daughters of music are brought low; in old age the lungs and other organs of singing are weakened, and the ears that attended to it become dull (Eccles. xii:4). (6) The daughters of frees are their branches and Sprouts (Gen. xlix:22). DAUGHTER-IN-LAW (da'ter-in-la'), (Heb nº. Åa/-law' Gr. vºuqq, noo?/e'fay), denotes, lit- erally, a bride, and has reference to a son's wife. DAVID (dā'vid), (Heb. T, daw-wid"); Chron, T], daw-veed", New Test. Aa3tº, dah-beed). The word probably means belozed (Gesenius). The reign of David is the great critical era in the history of the Hebrews. 1. Critical Era. It decided that they were to have for nearly five centuries a national mon- archy a fixed line of priesthood, and a solemn re- ligious worship by music and psalms of exquisite beauty; it finally separated Israel from the sur- rounding heathen, and gave room for producing those noble monuments of sacred writ, to the in- 499 DAVID fluence of which over the whole world no end can be seen. His predecessor, Saul, had many Successes against the Philistines, but it is clear that he made little impression on their real power, for he died fighting against them, not on their own border, but at the opposite side of his kingdom, in Mount Gilboa, . As for all the other 'enemies on every side'—Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites and the kings of Zobah—however much he may have vexed them’ (I Sam. xiv:47), they, as well as the Amalekites, remained unsubdued, if weakened. The real work of establishing Israel as lord over the whole soil of Canaan was left for David. 2. Authors of Tłiography. We learn from I Chron. xxix:29 that the life of David was written by Samuel, Nathan and Gad; also (from 2 Sam. i:18) it may be probably inferred that other in- formation concerning him was contained in the poems of Jasher. None of these works are before us in their original form. Materials from them have, however, been worked up by a later hand which, it would seem, has sometimes adopted whole passages from them, sometimes has modi- fied them and added connecting parts and ex- planations. Such, at least, is the conclusion to which everyone will find himself strongly pressed by a close criticism of the whole narrative. The change of name from Ishui to Ishbosheth (I Sam. xiv:49, and 2 Sam. ii:8, etc.), appears to indicate that compositions by different hands have been put together. That a duplicate account is found of the origin of the proverb, ‘Is Saul also among the prophets?' seems undeniable (I Sam. x: I-I2, and xix :20- 24); and if a single clear case of this sort is ad- mitted to exist, various others must probably fall under the same head. On this ground, doubtless, it is that the Vatican Septuagint has omitted chap, xviii: IO-II, since this attack of Saul on David's life ‘on the morrow’ is hard to reconcile with all that follows, and the verses appear to be a dupli- cate of chap. xix :9, IO. Less certain duplicates, and yet not free from difficulty, are the following: The men of Ziph twice betray David to Saul (chap. xxiii:I9, and xxvi :I); David twice spares Saul’s life under circumstances highly unlikely to recur (chap. xxiv and xxvi), and on each occa- sion Saul is melted into tenderness. The former event ends with an oath of David to Saul, which appears like a final termination of hostility, while the opening of chap. xxvii embarrasses us by its extreme abruptness, when the very opposite result might have been expected from that which im- mediately precedes. Comparing also chap. xxi : Io-I5 with chap. xxvii, it may seem that David's sojourn at Gath has been told twice over, for though each pair of events separately might with- out physical impossibility happen twice, yet, viewed collectively, the repetition of so many pairs surpasses all human probabilities. It has been necessary to premise so much, to show why we are disposed to be satisfied with rough results from the accounts of David's earlier life, which, as happens with all celebrated men who rise from a humble station, can hardly have been chronicled with the same precautions as those of his reign. 3. Life of Datºid. The life of David nat- urally divides itself into three portions: (1) The time which he lived under Saul. (2) His reign over Judah in Hebron. (3) His reign over all Israel. (1) In the Reign of Saul. In the first period we may trace the origin of all his greatness. His susceptible temperament, joined to his devotional tendencies, must, at a very early age, have made DAVID him a favorite pupil of the prophets, whose pe- culiar mark was the harp and the psalm (I Sam. x:1-12, and xix:20-24; see also 2 Kings iii:I5). His hospitable reception, when in distress, by Ahimelech the priest, and the atrocious massa- cre innocently brought by him on Nob, the city of the priests (I Sam. xxi and xxii:9-19), must have deeply affected his generous nature, and laid the foundation of his cordial affection for the whole priestly order, whose ministrations he him- self helped to elevate by his devotional melodies. At an early period he attracted the notice of Samuel, and if we are to arrange events accord- ing to their probable connection, we may believe that after David had been driven away from Saul and his life several times attempted, Samuel ven- tured on the solemn step of anointing him king. Whenever this took place, it must have produced on David a profound impression and prepared him to do that in which Saul had so eminently failed, viz., to reconcile his own military government with a filial respect for the prophets and an hon- orable patronage of the priesthood. Besides this, he became knit into a bond of brotherhood with his heroic comrades, to whom he was eminently endeared by his personal self-denial and liberality (I Sam. xxx:21-31; I Chron. xi :18). This, indeed, drew after it one of the most painful results, viz., the necessity of enduring the turbulence of his violent but able nephew Joab, nor could we expect that of a band of free- booters many should be like David. Again, dur- ing his outlawry, David became acquainted in turn not only with all the wild country in the land, but with the strongholds of the enemy all round. By his residence among the Philistines he must have learned all their arts and weapons of war, in which it is reasonable to believe the Israelites previously inferior (I Sam. xiii :19-23). With Nahash the Ammonite he was in intimate friend- ship (2 Sam. x:2); to the king of Moab he en- trusted the care of his parents (I Sam. xxii:3); from Achish of Gath he received the important present of the town of Ziklag (I Sam. xxvii:6). It must, however, be confessed that the details of the last passage, without professing to be miraculous, go beyond the limits of probabil- ity; for if we even suppose that David could commit the massacres there described, merely in order to hide his own perfidy, it is still incredible that the secret could have been kept and Achish continue to trust him (xxviii:2 and xxix:3). That Ziklag was a strong place may be inferred from I Chron. xii: I, 20. The celebrity acquired in successful guerilla warfare, even in modern days, turns the eyes of whole nations on a chieftain, and in an age which regarded personal heroism as the first qualification of a general (I Chron. xi :6) and of a king, to triumph over the persecutions of Saul gave David the fairest prospects of a kingdom. That he was able to escape the malice of his enemy was due in part to the direct help given him by the nations round, who were glad to keep a thorn, rankling in Saul’s side; in part also to the indirect results of their invasions (I Sam. xxiii:27). The account transmitted to us of David's dan- gers and escapes in this first period is too frag- mentary to work up into a history; nevertheless, it seems to be divisible into two parts, differing in character. During the former he is a fugitive and outlaw in the land of Saul, hiding in caves, pitching in the wilderness, or occasionally with great risk entering walled cities (I Sam. xxiii:7; in the latter he abandons his native soil entirely and lives among the Philistines as one of their chieftains (xxvii:I). While a rover in the land 500 IDAVID of Judah, his position (to our eyes) is anything but honorable, being a focus to which ‘all who were in distress, in debt or discontented gathered themselves’ (xxii:2). Yet, as the number of his followers became large, six hundred we read, (xxiii: 13), and David knew how to conciliate the neighboring sheep-masters by his urbanity and kind services, he gradually felt himself to be their protector and to have a right of maintenance and tribute from them. Hence he resents the refusal of Nabal to supply his demands, as a clear in- justice, and, after David's anger has been turned away by the prudent policy of Abigail, in bless- ing her for Saving him from slaying Nabal and every male of his family, the thought seems not to have entered his mind that the intention of Such a massacre was more guilty than Nabal's refusal to pay him tribute (xxv :34). This whole narrative is characteristic and instructive. By his marriage with Abigail he afterwards probably became rich (for she seems to have been a widow at her own disposal), and on passing immediately after into the land of the Philistines, he was en- abled to assume a more dignified place. Becom- ing possessed of the stronghold of Ziklag, he now appeared like a legitimate chieftain with fixed possessions, and no longer a mere vagabond and freebooter. This was accordingly a transition state in which David was prepared for assuming the kingdom over Judah. In Ziklag he was joined, not, as before, by mere outcasts from Israelitish life, but by men of consideration and tried warriors (I Chron. xii:I-22), not only of the tribe of Judah, but from Gad, Manasseh, and even “from Saul’s brethren of Benjamin.’ (2) Reign Over Judah in Hebron. Immedi- ately upon the death of Saul the tribe of Judah invited David to become their prince. His first step, after his election, was to fix upon Hebron as the center of his administration—an ancient city, honorable by its association with the name of Abraham, and in the middle of his own tribe. He then strengthened himself by a mar- riage with Maacah, daughter of Talmai, king of Geshur (2 Sam. iii:3); a petty monarch whose dominions were near the sources of the Jordan, and whose influence at the opposite end of the land must have added a great weight into David's scale. From Abigail, widow of the churlish Nabal, David, as we have already observed, seems to have received a large private fortune. Con- cerning his other wives we know nothing in par- ticular; only it is mentioned that he had six sons by six different mothers in Hebron. The chief jealousy was between the two tribes of Benjamin and Judah, as Saul had belonged to the former ; and a tournament was turned by mutual ill-will into a battle, in which Abner unwillingly slew young Asahel, brother of Joab. (On the syn- chronism of Abner and Asahel, see SAUL). “Long war,’ after this, was carried on between ‘the house of Saul and the house of David.' We may infer that the rest of Israel took little part in the con- test; and although the nominal possession of the kingdom enabled the little tribe of Benjamin to struggle for some time against Judah, the skill and age of Abner could not prevail against the vigor and popular fame of David. A quarrel be- tween Abner and Ishbosheth decided the former to bring the kingdom over to David. The latter refused to treat unless, as a preliminary proof of Abner's sincerity, Michal, daughter of Saul, was restored to David. The possession of such a wife was valuable to one who was aspiring to the kingdom. After giving her back, Abner pro- ceeded to win the elders of Israel over to David ; but Joab discerned that if this should be so DAVID brought about, Abner of necessity would displace him from his post of chief captain. He therefore seized the opportunity of murdering him when he was come on a peaceful embassy and covered the atrocity by pleading the duty of avenging his brother's blood. This deed was perhaps David's first taste of the miseries of royal power. He dared not proceed actively against his ruthless nephew, but he vented his abliorrence in a solemn curse on Joab and his posterity, and followed Abner to the grave with weeping. Anxious to purge himself of the guilt, he ordered a public wearing of sackcloth, and refused to touch food all the day. His sincere yet ostentatious grief won the heart of all Israel. The feeble Ishbo- sheth, left alone, was unequal to the government, and shortly suffered the same fate of assassina- tion. David, following the universal policy of Sovereigns (Tac. Hist. i :44), and his own pro- found sense of the sacredness of royalty, took vengeance on the murderers, and buried Ishbo- sheth in Abner's tomb at Hebron. eſ. . . . * * *:::::A; ** * 2:3: - * * * David's Tomb. (3) Reign Over All Israel. The death of Ishbosheth gave to David Supremacy over all Israel. The kingdom was not at first a despotic, but a constitutional one; for, it is stated, ‘David made a league with the elders of Israel in He- bron before Jehovah, and they anointed David king over Israel’ (2 Sam. v :3). This is marked out as the era which determined the Philis- tines to hostility (verse I7), and may confirm our idea that their policy was to hinder Israel from becoming united under a single king. Two vic- tories of David Over them follow, both near the valley of Rephaim ; and these were probably the first battles fought by David after becoming king of all Israel. Perceiving that Hebron was no longer a suit- able capital, he resolved to fix his residence far- ther to the north. On the very border of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin lay the town of Jebus, which with its neighborhood was occupied by Jebusites, a remnant of the old Canaanitish nation, so called. In spite of the great strength of the fort of Zion it was captured and the Jebu- sites were entirely expelled or subdued; after which David adopted the city as his new capital, greatly enlarged the fortifications and gave or restored the name of Jerusalem (see JERUSA- LEM). After becoming master of Jerusalem, David made a league with Hiram, king of Tyre, who supplied him with skillful artificers to build a splendid palace at the new capital. That the mechanical arts should have been in a very low state among the Israelites was to be expected, since before the reign of Saul even Smiths' forges 501 DAVID were not allowed among them by the Philistines. Nothing, however, could have been more profit- able for the Phoenicians than the security of cul- tivation enjoyed by the Israelites in the reigns of David and Solomon. The trade between Tyre and Israel became at once extremely lucrative to both, and the league between the two states was quickly very intimate. Once settled in Jerusalem, David proceeded to increase the number of his wives, perhaps in part from the same political motive that actuates other Oriental monarchs, viz., in order to take hostages from the chieftains around in the least offensive mode. This explanation will not apply to the concubines. We know nothing further concern- ing David's family relations than the names of eleven sons born in Jerusalem (2 Sam. v . I4, I5), of whom four were children of Bathsheba (I Chron. iii:5), and therefore much youngeſ than the elder sons. Jerusalem, now become the civil metropolis of the nation, was next to be made its religious center, and the king applied himself to elevate the priestly order, to swell the ranks of attending Levites and singers, and to bring the ark to Jeru- salem. The priests or Aaronites must, for a long time, have had little occupation in their sacred office, for the ark was at Kirjath-jearim, under the care of a private family. Indeed, during the reign of Saul, we find shewbread to have been set forth at Nob (I Sam. xxi.;4-6), by Ahimelech the priest; and it is possible that many other ceremonies were performed by them, in spite of the absence of the ark. But after the dreadful massacre per- petrated on the priestly order by Saul, few Aaron- ites are likely to have felt at ease in their voca- tion. At least Jehoiada (who, according to I Chron. xxvii:5, was high priest at this time, and joined David at Hebron with 3,700 Aaronites) was father of the celebrated warrior Benaiah, afterwards captain of David's bodyguard; a man whose qualities were anything but priest-like; and Zadok, afterwards high priest, who joined David “with twenty-two captains of his father's house' at the same time as Jehoiada, is described as ‘a young man mighty of valor’ (I Chron. xii: 27, 28). How long Jehoiada retained the place of high priest is uncertain. It is probable that no definite conception then existed of the need of having one high priest; and it is certain that David’s affection for Abiathar, because of his father's fate, maintained him in chief place through the greater part of his reign. Not until a later time, it would seem, was Zadok elevated to a coördinate position. The bringing of the ark from Kirjath-jearim to Jerusalem established the line of high priests in direct service before it; and from this time we may presume that the ceremonies of the great day of Atonement began to be observed. Previously, it would appear, the connection between the priest- hood and the tabernacle had been very loose. The priests fixed their abode at Nob, when the ark was at Kirjath-jearim, a very short distance; yet there is nothing to denote that they at all interfered with Abinadab in his exclusive care of the sacred de- posit. (Concerning the chronological difficulties involved in the stay of the ark at Kirjatll-jearim see the article SAUL.) When the ark entered Jerusalem in triumph David put on a priest’s ephod and danced before it. This proved the occasion of the rupture be- tween him and his royal spouse, Michal, which sooner or later was inevitable. Accustomed to see in her father’s court a haughty pre-eminence of the monarch over the priest, she could not sympathize with the deeper piety which led the DAVID royal Psalmist to forget his dignity in presence of the ark. The words of David to her, “Jehovah chose me before thy father and before all his Aozzse' (2 Sam. vi :21) sufficiently show Michal to have felt that she had been taken from her hus- band Phaltiel, merely to give color to David’s claim to the kingdom, and that David scorned to allow that he was in any way indebted to her for it. After this event the king, contrasting his cedar palace with the curtains of the tabernacle, was desirous of building a temple for the ark; such a step, moreover, was likely to prevent any fu- ture change of its abode. The prophet Nathan, however, forbade it, on pious and intelligible grounds. - 4. Principal Victories. David's further vic- tories are narrated in the following order: Philis- tines, Moab, Zobah, Edom, Northern League stirred up by the Ammonites, Ammon. (1) Philistines. The short and dry notice concerning the Philistines just gives us to under- stand that this is the era of their decisive, though not final, subjugation. Their towns were despoiled of their wealth (2 Sam. viii., xii.), and doubtless all their arms and munitions of war passed over into the service of the conqueror. - (2) The Moabites. The Moabites were a pas- toral people, whose general relations with Israel appear to have been peaceful. The slight notice of Saul’s hostilities with them (I Sam. xiv:47) is the only breach recorded since the time of Eglon and Ehud. In the book of Ruth we see them as friendly neighbors, and much more recently (I Sam. xxii:3, 4) David committed his parents to the care of the king of Moab. We know no cause, except David’s strength, which now drew his arms upon them. A people long accustomed to peace, in conflict with a veteran army, was struck down at once, but the fierceness of his triumph may sur- prise us. Two-thirds of the population (if we rightly interpret the words, 2 Sam. viii:2) were put to the sword; the rest became tributary. (3) Syrians. Who are meant by the Syrians of Zobah is still a problem (see ZoPAH). We here follow the belief that it was a power of northern Syria, then aiming at extensive empire, which had not only defeated and humbled the king of Ha- math, but had obtained homage beyond the Eu- phrates. The trans-Jordanic tribes in the time of Saul had founded a little empire for themselves by conquering their eastern neighbors, the Haga- renes; and, perhaps, occasionally overran the dis- trict on the side of the Euphrates, which Hada- dezer, king of Zobah, considered as his own. His efforts “to recover his border at the river Eu- phrates' first brought him into collision with David, perhaps by an attack which he made on the roaming Eastern tribes. David defeated not merely his army, but those of Damascus too, which came too late with succor, and put Israelite gar- risons into the towns of the Damascenes. (4) In the Valley of Salt. Another victory, gained ‘in the valley of salt,' ought, perhaps, to be read, as in I Chron. xviii: 12, and in the super- scription of Ps. lx., “over the Edomites,' not over the Syrians.” The verse which follows (2 Sam. viii: 14) seems to tell the result of this victory, viz., the complete subjugation and garrisoning of Edom, which, like Moab, was incorporated with David’s empire. Immediately before this last con- quest, as would appear, he wrote the 60th Psalm; and as that Psalm gives no hint of his achieve- ments against the king of Zobah and the Damas- cenes, this is a strong ground for believing that those successes were not gained till Somewhat later in time. 502 DAVID (5) The Ammonites. After David had be- come master of all Israel, of the Philistine towns, of Edom and of Moab, while the Eastern tribes, having conquered the Hagarenes, threatened the Ammonites on the north, as did Moab on the South, the Ammonites were naturally alarmed, and called in the powers of Syria to their help against a foe who was growing dangerous even to them. The coalition against David is described as con- sisting of the Syrians of Bethrehob and of Maacah, of Zobah and of Tob. The last country appears to have been in the district of Trachonitis, the two first immediately on the north of Israel. In this war we may believe that David enjoyed the important alliance of Toi, king of Hamath, who having suffered from Hadadezer's hostility, courted the friendship of the Israelitish monarch (2 Sam. viii:9, IO). We are barely informed that One division of the Israelites under Abishai was posted against the Ammonites; a second under Joab met the confederates from the north, 30,000 strong, and prevented their junction with the Am- monites. In both places the enemy was repelled, though, it would seem, with no decisive result. The Spirit of exaggeration is certainly displayed in the statement—whoever is answerable for it— (I Chron. xix :7) that the Syrian confederates brought with them 32,000 chariots, which are not noticed in the parallel place of 2 Sam. Perhaps the text is corrupt; for I,000 talents of silver (verse 6) appears a small sum to hire such a force with. A second campaign took place. The king of Zobah brought in an army of Mesopotamians, in addition to his former troops, and David found it necessary to make a levy of all Israel to meet the pressing danger. A pitched battle on a great scale was then fought at Helam—far beyond the limits of the twelve tribes—in which David was vic- torious. - The Syrians henceforth left the Ammonites to their fate, and the petty chiefs who had been in allegiance to Hadadezer hastened to do homage to David. (6) Capture of Rabbah. Early in the next season Joab was sent to take vengeance on the Ammonites in their own home by attacking their chief city, or Rabbah of Ammon. The natural strength of their border could not keep out vet- eran troops and an experienced leader, and, though the siege of the city occupied many months, and, indeed, it was prolonged into the next year, it was at last taken. It is character- istic of Oriental despotism that Joab, when the city was nearly reduced, sent to invite David to command the final assault in person. David gathered a large force, easily captured the royal town and despoiled it of all its wealth. His ven- geance was as much more dreadful on the unfor- tunate inhabitants Ilian ſo merly on the Moabites, as the danger in which the Ammonites had in- volved Israel had been more imminent. The per- sons captured in the city were put to death by torture, some of them being sawed in pieces, others chopped up with axes or mangled with harrows, while some were smothered in brick- kilns (2 Sam. xii:31; I Chron. xx:3); or, as some interpret these passages, he put them to work as prisoners. They were “put under the saws” in the same sense that they were put under the yoke. They were put to the axes and the har- rows—forced to work with , them, and made to pass through (or among) the brick-kilns. 5. Jºins and Penalties. (1) sin Against Bathsheba and Uriah, During the campaign against Rabbah of Ammon the painful and never-to-be-forgotten outrage of DAVID David against Bathsheba and her husband Uriah the Hittite took place. It is principally through this narrative that we know the tediousness of that siege, since the adultery with Bathsheba and the birth of at least one child took place during the course of it. (2) Rebellion of Absalom. The latter years of David's reign were afflicted by the inevitable results of polygamy and despotism, viz., the quar- rels of the sons of different mothers, and their eagerness to seize the kingdom before their father's death. Of all his sons, Absalom had nat- urally the greatest pretensions, being, by his mother's side, grandson of Talmai, king of Ge- shur, while through his personal beauty and win- ning manners he was high in popular favor. It is evident, moreover, that he was the darling son of his father. When his own sister Tamar had been dishonored by hcr half-brother Amnon, the eldest son of David, Absalom slew him in ven- geance, but in fear of his father then fled to his grandfather at Geshur. Joab, discerning David's longings for his son, effected his return after three years; but the conflict in the king's mind is strikingly shown by his allowing Absalom to dwell two full years in Jerusalem before he would see his face. The insurrection of Absalom against the king was the next important event; in the course of which there was shown the general tendency of men to look favorably on young and untried princes rather than on those whom they know for better and for worse. Absalom erected his royal standard at Hebron first, and ras fully prepared to slay his father outright, which might probably have been done if the energetic advice of Ahith- ophel had been followed. While they delayed David escaped beyond the Jordan, and with all his troop met a most friendly reception, not only from Barzillai and Machir, wealthy chiefs of pas- toral Gilead, but from Shobi, the son of the Am- monite king Nahash, whose power he had de- stroyed and whose people he had hewed in pieces. We likewise learn on this occasion that the for- tunes of David had been all along attended by 600 men of Gath, who now, under the command of Ittai the Gittite, crossed the Jordan with all their households, in spite of David's generous ad- vice that they return to their own country. . . . (3) Death of Absalom. Strengthened by the warlike eastern tribes, and surrounded by his ex- perienced captains, the king no longer hesitated to meet Absalom in the field. A decisive victory was won at the wood of Ephraim, and Absalom was slain by Joab in the retreat. The old king was heart-stricken at this result, and, ignorant of his own weakness, superseded Joab in the command of the host by Amasa, Absalom's captain. Perhaps Joab on the former occasion, when he murdered Abner, had blinded the king by pleading revenge for the blood of Asahel; but no such pretense could here avail. The king was now probably brought to his determination, partly by his dis- gust at Joab, partly by his desire to give the in- surgents confidence in his amnesty. If Amasa is the same as Amasai, David may likewise have retained a grateful remembrance of the cordial greeting with which he had led a strong band to his assistance at the critical period of his abode in Ziklag (I Chron. xii:18); moreover, Amasa, equally with Joab, was David's nephew, their two mothers, Abigail and Zeruiah, being sisters to David by at least one parent (2 Sam. xvii:25; I Chron. ii: 13, 16). (4) Assassination of Amasa. The unscru- pulous Joab, however, was not so to be set aside. Before long, catching an opportunity, he assassi- 503 DAVID nated his unsuspecting cousin with his own hand; and David, who had used the instrumentality of º to murder Uriah, did not dare to resent the €62C1. (5) New Insurrection. A quarrel, which took place between the men of Judah and those of the other tribes in bringing the king back, had encouraged a Benjamite named Sheba to raise a new insurrection, which spread with wonderful rapidity. Amasa was collecting troops as Dayid's general at the time when he was treacherously assassinated by his cousin, who then, with his usual energy, pursued Sheba, and blockaded him in Beth-maachah before he could collect his parti- sans. Sheba's head was cut off and thrown over the wall; and so ended the new rising. Yet this was not the end of trouble; for the intestine war seems to have inspired the Philistines with the hope of throwing off the yoke. Four successive battles are recorded (2 Sam. xxi :15-22), in the first of which the aged David was nigh to being slain. His faithful officers kept him away from all future risks, and Philistia was once more, and finally, subdued. (6) Conspiracy of Adonijah. The last com- motion recorded took place when David's end seemed nigh, and Adonijah, one of his elder sons, feared that the influence of Bathsheba might gain the kingdom for her own son Solomon, Adonijah's conspiracy was joined by Abiathar, one of the two chief priests, and by the redoubtable Joab, upon which David took the decisive measure of raising Solomon at once to the throne. Of two young monarchs, the younger and the less known was easily preferred, when the sanction of the existing government was thrown into his scale; and the cause of Adonijah immediately fell to the ground. Amnesty was promised to the conspirators, yet it was not very faithfully observed. (See SoLO- MON.) 6. Foreign Relations. (1) Toleration of Foreigners. Numerous in- dications remain to us that, however eminently David was imbued with faith in Jehovah as the national God of Israel, and however he strove to unite all Israel in common worship, he still had no sympathy with the later spirit which repelled all foreigners from co-operation with Jews. In his early years necessity made him intimate with Philistines, Moabites and Ammonites; policy led him into league with the Tyrians. He himself took in marriage a daughter of the king of Geshur; it is the less wonderful that we find Uriah the Hittite (2 Sam. xi.), Gether the Ish- maelite (I Chron. ii:17), and others, married to Israelitish wives. The fidelity of Ittai the Gittite, and his six hundred men, has been already alluded to. It would appear, on the whole, that in tolerat- ing foreigners Solomon did not go beyond the principles established by his father, though cir- cumstances gave them a fullcr development. (2) Standing Army. It has been seen that the reign of David began as that of a constitu- tional monarch, with a league between him and his people; it ends as a pure despotism, in which the monarch gives his kingdom away to whom So- ever he pleases, and his nominee steps at once into power without entering into any public en- gagements. The intensity of the despotism is strikingly shown in the indirect and cautious de- vice by which alone Joab dared to hint to the king the suitableness of recalling Absalom from banish- ment, though he believed the king himself to de- sire it (2 Sam. xiv). All rose necessarily out of the standing army which David kept up as an instrument of conquest and of power, by the side of which constitutional liberty could not stand. DAVID The standing army which Saul had begun to maintain was greatly enlarged by David. An account of this is given in I Chron. xxvii; from which it would seem that 24,000 men were con- stantly maintained on Service, though there was a relieving of guard every month. Hence, twelve times this number, or 288,000, were under a per- manent military Organization, with a general for each division in his month. On one occasion (2 Sam. viii:3) David fought against Hadadezer about a district on the river Euphrates. Yet it is not to be imagined that he had any fixed possession of territory So distant, which indeed could have had no value to him. (3) Slight Inclination for Commerce. A warrior from his youth, he seems to have had little perception of the advantages of commerce; and although the land of Edom was long under his power, he made no effort to use its ports of Eziongeber and Elath for maritime traffic. Much less was he likely to value the trade of the Eu- phrates, from which river he was separated by a tedious distance of desert land, over which, with- out the possession of Superior cavalry, he could not maintain a permanent Sovereignty. No at- tempt seems to have been made in David's reign to maintain horses or chariots for military pur- poses. Even chieftains in battle, as Absalom on his fatal day, appear mounted only on mules. Yet horses were already used in state equipages, ap- parently as a symbol of royalty (2 Sam. xv :I). (4) Archers and Slingers. That in the open- ing of Saul’s reign the Philistines had deprived the Israelites of all the most formidable arms is well known. It is probable that this may have led to a more careful practice of the sling and of the bow, especially among the southern tribes, who were more immediately pressed by the power of the Philistines. Such weapons cannot be kept out of the hands of rustics, and must have been essential against wild beasts. But from causes unknown the Benjamites were peculiarly cele- brated as archers and slingers (Judg. xx:I6; I Chron. viii:40; xii:2; 2 Chron. xiv:8; xvii:17), while the pastoral tribes beyond the Jordan were naturally able to escape all attempts of the Phil- istines to deprive them of shield, spear, and sword. Hence the Gadites, who came to David at Ziklag, are described as formidable and full- armed warriors, “with faces like lions, and swift as mountain roes’ (I Chron. xii:8). (5) Bodyguard of the King. The bodyguard of David was an important appendage to his state and a formidable exhibition of the actual despotism under which, in fulfillment of the warn- ing of Samuel, Israel had now fallen. (See CHER- ETHITES AND PELETHITES.) (6) Cabinet of David. The cabinet of David, (if we may use a modern name) is thus given (1 Chron. xxvii:32-34) with reference to a time which preceded Absalom's revolt: (1) Jonathan, David’s uncle, a counsellor, wise man, and scribe; (2) Jehiel, son of Hachmoni, tutor (?) to the king's sons; (3) Ahithophel, the king's counsel- lor; (4) Hushai, the king's companion; (5) after Ahithophel, Jehoiada, the son of Benaiah ; (6) Abiathar, the priest. It is added, ‘and the general of the king's army was Joab.” - (7) Royal Bailiffs. Twelve royal bailiffs are recited as a part of David’s establishment (I Chron. xxvii:25, 31), having the following de- partments under their charge : (1) The treas- ures of gold, silver, etc.; (2) the magazines; (3) the tillage (wheat, etc.?); (4) the vineyards; (5) the wine cellars; (6) the olive and sycamore trees; (7) the oil cellars; (8) the herds in Sharon; (9) the herds in the valleys; (IO) the 504 DAVID camels; (II) the asses; (I2) the flocks. Con- cerning the closing scenes of David's life no more need here be said; the celebrated enumeration of the people by Joab will be noticed under the ar- ticle STATISTICS. F. W. N. Z. Character. The eminently prosperous state in which David left his kingdom to Solomon appears to prove that he was, on the whole, faithfully served, and that his own excellent in- tentions, patriotic spirit and devout piety (meas- ured, as it must be measured, by the standard of those ages), really made his reign beneficial to his subjects. If it reduced them under despotism, yet it freed them from a foreign yoke and from intestine anarchy; if it involved them in severe wars, if it failed of uniting them permanently as a single people, in neither of these points did it make their state worse than it found them. We must not exact of David either to reign like a constitutional monarch, to uphold civil liberty, or by any personal piety to extract from despotism its sting. Even his most reprobate offense has no small palliation in the far worse excesses of other Oriental sovereigns; and his great superior- ity to his successors justifies the high esteem in which his memory was held. Dean Stanley, Smith's Bib. Dict., says: “The difficulties which attend on his character are val- uable as proofs of the impartiality of Scripture in recording them and as indications of the union of natural power and weakness which his char- acter included. The Rabbis in former times, and critics (like Bayle) in later times, have seized on its dark features and exaggerated them to the 11tmost. And it has been often asked, both by the scoffers and the serious, how the man after God’s own heart could have murdered Uriah, and seduced Bathsheba, and tortured the Ammonites to death P. An extract from one who is not a too- indulgent critic of sacred characters expresses at Once the common sense and the religious lesson of the whole matter: “Who is called ‘the man after God’s own heart?’ David, the Hebrew king, had fallen into sins enough—blackest crimes— there was no want of sin. And therefore the un- believers sneer, and ask: “Is this your man ac- cording to God’s heart?' The sneer, I must say, seems to me but a shallow one. What are faults, what are the outward details of a life, if the inner secret of it, the remorse, temptations, the often baffled, never-ended struggle of it be for- gotten ? David’s life and history, as written for us in those Psalms of his, I consider to be the truest emblem ever given us of a man’s moral progress and warfare here below. All earnest souls will ever discern in it the faithful struggle of an earnest human soul towards what is good and best. Struggle often baffled—sore baf- fled—driven as if into entire wreck; yet a strug gle never ended, ever with tears, repentance, true unconquerable purpose begun anew” (Carlyle's Heroes and Hero Worship, p. 72). Another distinguished writer says: “If we pro- ceed to put together, in its most general features, the whole picture of David which results from all these historical testimonies, we find the very foun- dations of his character to be laid in a peculiarly firm and unshaken trust in Jehovah, and the brightest and most spiritual views of the creation and government of the world, together with a constant, tender and sensitive awe of the Holy One in Israel, a simple, pure striving never to be untrue to him, and the strongest efforts to return to him all the more loyally after errors and trans- gressions. . . . His mouth continually over- flows with heartfelt praise of Jehovah, and his actions are ever redolent of the nobility inspired DAVID, CITY OF 505 by a real and living fear of him (for the errors by which he is carried away stand out promi- nently just because of their rarity). . . . . In the clear daylight of Israel's ancient history David furnishes the most brilliant example of the noble elevation of character produced by the old re- º (Ewald, Hist. of Israel, vol. iii, pp. 57, 5ö). 3. Literature. Dean Stanley, A/istory of the Jewish Ch., ii:49-155; Porter, Giant Cities, p. 232; Perowne, Book of Psalms i. xviii-xxiv.; Krum- macher, David, der Koenig, Eng. transl. N. Y., 1868. For the Analysis of Samuel, see Wellhausen, Composition (1889), pp. 248-266; Kuenen, On- deraoek (1887), i :386 f., or Hist. Krit. Einleitung (1890), i, ii:37–62, 72; Budde, Richter und Sam- uel (1890), pp. 210-276. For the text, Driver, Heb. Tert of Sam. (1800) ; Wellhausen, Text d. Buecher Sam. (1871). For the criticism of Chron- icles, ib. Prolegomena, Eng. tr. (1885), p. 171 ff. See, further, W. R. Smith, ‘David,” in Encycl. Ariz., 9th ed. ; Keil, Intr. Old Testament; Ewald, History, Eng. tr., iii:54-203; Stade, Geschichte (1889), i.224–299; Kittel, Hist. of the Hebrews, Eng. tr. (1896), ii:35-49, II9-182; Cheyne, De- vout Study of Criticism (1892). Mod. Criticism and the Preachings of the Old Testament, George Adam Smith, 1901). Figuratite. Jesus Christ is frequently called David, because he was the antitype of the former. He is the chosen one of God, who sprung from Bethlehem; the man according to his heart, that fulfills all his counsels. How noted his fidelity, meekness and humility his love to God, zeal for his honor and devout intimacy with him Thrice, that is, in his conception, at his baptism and at his ascension, he was plentifully anointed with the Holy Ghost above measure, to be the Head of God's chosen people. He is the covenant-head of his spiritual seed, who are kings unto God. He is our sweet psalmist, who sings for himself and indites our songs and tunes our hearts to praise God. He is our great prophet and king, who instructs, forms and governs his church, the Israel of God. Through what debasement, labor, reproach, temptation from the world, from heaven, from hell, from relations, from friends, from foes, did he obtain his kingdom and glory ! With what resignation, courage and steady eye to his Father's glory, and sure hope of a happy issue, he endured the whole. How he defeats and de- stroys the lions, the bears, the giants of opposi- tion | He fulfilled the law, destroyed death and the grave, and by the Gospel conquers the nations to the obedience of faith, and puts his chosen people in possession of the whole inheritance and dominion assigned them of God! How skillful, compassionate and righteous is he, in the govern- ment of his subjects; and how active in preparing the temple above for his people, and in prepar- ing them for it ! His mighly men, who, by the word of the gospel do wondrous exploits, are prophets, apostles, evangelists, pastors and teach- ers (Eph. iv: II f), and his faithful warriors are such as being discontented with their naf11ral state of poverty, debt and disgrace, desert the service of the world, and are enlisted in his service (Ps. lxxxix; Ezek. xxxiv, xxxvii.; Hos. iii:5). (See JESUS CHRIST.) DAVID, CITY OF (dā'víd). 1. The name given by David to the castle of Zion, which he captured from the Jebusites, and in which he dwelt (I Chron. xi:7). It was on the southwest side of Jerusalem. 2. Bethlehem was called the city of David (Luke ii:4, II), being the birthplace of the king. (See BETHLEHEM; JERUSALEM.) DAY / DAWN (dan). See DAY. Pax (dà), (Heb. bº, yo/le, Gr. huépa, hay-mer'- ah). (1) Civil or Calendar Day. The earliest measure of time on record is the day: ‘The evening and the morning were the first day’ (Gen. i;5). Here the word 'day' would seem to denote the civil or calendar day of twenty-four hours, including ‘the evening,” or natural night, and ‘the morning,” or natural day. It is remarkable that in this account ‘the evening,” or natural night, pre- cedes ‘the morning,” or day. Hence the Hebrew compound eh'-reb bo'-ker, evening-morning,' which is used by Daniel (vii:14) to denote a civil day. In fact, the Jewish civil day began, as it still does, not with the morning, but the evening—thus the Sabbath commences with the Sunset of Friday, and ends with the sunset of Saturday. (In the account of the days of creation we are, however, to understand periods of time. (See CREATION; COSMOGONY.) (2) Inconveniences of Reckoning. The in- conveniences resulting from a variable commence- ment of the civil day, earlier or later, according to the different seasons of the year, as well as the equally varying duration of the natural day and night, must have been very considerable, and are sensibly felt by Europeans when traveling in the East, where the ancient custom in this matter is still observed. These inconveniences must be less obvious to the people themselves, who know no better system ; yet they were apparent to sev- eral ancient nations—the Egyptians (Plin. Hist. Nat. ii:77), the Ausonians and others—and in- duced them to reckon their civil day from mid- night to midnight, as from a fixed invariable point, and this usage has been adapted by most of the modern nations of Europe. We thus real- ize the advantage of having our divisions of the day, the hours, of equal duration, day and night, at all times of the year; whereas among the Orientals the hours and all other divisions of the natural day and night are of constantly vary- ing duration, and the divisions of the day vary from those of the night, excepting at the equi- Il O.8 €.S. (3) Natural Day. The natural day was at first divided into three parts, morning, noon and evening, which are mentioned by David as hours or times of prayer (Ps. lv.: 17). The natural night was also originally divided into three parts, or watches (Ps. lxiii:6; xc :4). The first, or beginning of the watches, is men- tioned in Lam. ii:19; the middle watch, in Judg. vii:19, and the morning watch, in Exod. xiv:24. Afterwards the strictness of military discipline among the Greeks and Romans introduced an additional night watch. The second and third watches of the night are mentioned in Luke xii: 38, and the fourth in Maff. xiv:25. The four are mentioned together by our Lord in Mark xiii: 35, and described by the terms, ‘the late watch;’ ‘the midnight;" ‘the cock-crowing,” and ‘the morn- ing.’ (4) Division of Watches. The precise begin. ning and ending of each of the four watches is thus determined : I. Opsay, ‘the late,’ began at Sunset and ended with the third hour of the night, including the evening dawn, or twilight. It was also called “even-tide' (Mark xi :II), or simply “evening' (John xx:19). 2. Meso nuk to com, ‘the midnight,’ lasted from the third hour till midnight. 3. Alektoro-phonias, ‘the cock-crowing,’ lasted DAY from midnight till the third hour after, or to the ninth hour of the night. It included the two cock-crowings, with the second of which it ended. 4. Pro-i, ‘early,' lasted from the ninth to the twelfth hour of the night, or sunrise, including the morning dawn, or twilight. It was also called ‘morning,” or “morning-tide,’ hora being under- stood (John xviii:28). The division of the day into twelve hours was common among the Jews after the captivity in Babylon. The word hour first occurs in the book of Daniel (iv : 19), and it is admitted by the Jewish writers that this division of the day was borrowed by them from the Babylonians. Our Lord appeals to this ancient, and then long-estab- lished, division as a matter of public notoriety: º there not twelve hours in the day ?’ (John X1 :9). This, however, was the division of the natural day into twelve hours, which were therefore vari- able according to the seasons of the year, at all places except the equator, and equal, or of the mean length, only at the vernal and autumnal equinoxes, being longer in the summer half-year and shorter in the winter. The inconvenience of this has already been intimated. The first hour of the day began at sunrise; the sixth hour ended at mid-day, or noon; the sev- enth hour began at noon, and the twelfth hour ended at Sunset. The days of the week had no proper names among the Hebrews, but were distinguished only by their numeral order. (See WEEK.) Figuratite. (I) In prophetic language a day is put for a year; and So a week is seven years, a month thirty, and a year or time, 360 (Ezek. iv:5, 6; Dan. ix:24, and vii:25; Rev. iv: I5, and x:3). (2) One day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. God's duration is without succession of moments, so that a longer period is no more in his account, and in comparison with his eternity, than a shorter one (2 Pet. iii:8). (3) As the day is a period proper for work, so any noted occasion of mercy or judgment is called a day (Ps. xxxvii: 13; Mal. iv :I ; Jer. 1:4, 30). (4) The day of persons is either their birthday (Job iii: I) or the season of merciful opportunities and prosperity (Luke xix: 42; comp. Hos. vii:5; Amos V:8), or their day or season of ruin and trouble (Ps. xxxvii: 13, and cxxxvii:7; Job iii:8), or the eternal period of their complete happiness (Rom. xiii:I2). (5) A day of power is that period in which Jesus, by his word and spirit, powerfully converts similers to himself (Ps. cx:3). (6) A day of espousals is the period in which one, or rather many, souls are spiritually united to Christ (Cant. iii:II). (7) A day of slaughter signifies a time of excessive feasting, as when multitudes of peace offerings were slain or when some sumptuous feast is held (James v.5). (8) The day of vengeance in Christ's heart, and year of his redeemed, is the appointed time for punishing his enemies, and for saving, delivering and comforting his people (IS. lxiii:4). (9) The season of gospel light, opportunities and success is called a day and a day of salvation; it is a period of light, labor and comfort (Is. xlix: 8; 2 Chron. vi. 2; Ps. cxviii:23). (IO) Saving knowledge of Christ, and a state of gracious union with him, are called a day (I Thess. v .5, 8; 2 Pet. i:19). (II) The state of heavenly glory is called a day of redemption; there the ransomed constantly enjoy the light of God’s countenance, are delivered from bondage and trouble and are active in the service of God (Eph. iv:30). (I2) A great day is a season of something very great 506 DAY'S JOURNEY and wonderful; and that either of great mercy, as when the Jews shall be converted to the Lord (Hos. i. II), or of great trouble and vengeance, as on the Jews when led captive by the Chaldeans, and when almost destroyed by the Romans (Jer. xxx:7; Joel ii:3I ; Mal. iv:5), and on heathenism and Antichrist at their downfall (Rev. vi. 17, and xvi. I4). (I3) That day, in predictions, does not always signify the time of the events mentioned just before, but a noted period, as Is. xi :1, and xxvii: I, or of the last judgment (Jude 6). (14) This day denotes a time near at hand, as well as one present (Deut. ix: I, and xi :8). (I5) This day sometimes denotes eternity, wherein Christ was divinely begotten, and which admits of no yesterday or to-morrow (Ps. ii:7; Is. xliii: 13), or the period of his resurrection, when his eternal generation and divine Sonship were manifested (Acts xiii:33). (I6) The latter or last days de- note future time in general (Gen. xlix:I), the period of the New Testament dispensation (Is. ii:2), the last part of the Gospel period (I Tim. iv :I ; 2 Tim. iii:I), or the day of death and judg- ment (Jam. v :3. (17) A good day is one of pros- pcrity, feasting and gladness (Esth. viii: 17, and ix :22). (18) An evil or bitter day is a time of trouble and distress (Amos vi :3, and viii:IO). (19) To-day denotes a present season of grace and Op- portunity of salvation (Ps. xcv; Heb. iii. and iv). (20) In one day sometimes denotes suddenly, and all at once (Rev. xviii:8). (21) In the day time sig- nifies publicly, or at a set time (2 Pet. ii: 13; Ps. xlii:8), or in a time of scorching trouble and per- sccution (Is. iv:6). (22) All the day is con- stantly, habitually (Deut. xxviii:32; Ps. xxv :5). DAY OF ATONEMENT (dā Öv à-ton' ment). See ATONEMENT, DAY OF. DAY OF CHRIST (dā āv krist), also called “his day,” “that day,” “the day of the Lord.” The day of Christ is either the period of his humiliation and the time of the powerful spread of the Gospel (John viii:56), or the period of the Jewish destruction, and of the last judgment. The season is fixed; and great is, or will be, the work and discoveries made thcrein (2 Pet. iii: 12 ; I Cor. iii:13, and v :5; Phil. i :6); or the Christian Sabbath, which he set apart to commemorate the memory of his resurrection (Rev. i : Io); or the day of his coming again (see also I Cor. i :8; Phil. i :6; 2 Thess. ii :2). LAY OF JUDGMENT (dā āv jūj'ment). JUDGMENT. DAY OF THE LORD (dā āv the lörd). The day of the Lord often signifies the period when he will execute his fearful judgments (IS. ii: 12, and xiii:6; Ps. xxxvii: 13; Job xxiv.: I ; Zeph. i :14, 18). (See DAY OF CHRIST). DAY'S JOURNEY (dā’z ifir-ny), a standard often used in the Bible for reckoning distance (Gen. xxxi:23; Ex. iii: 18; Num. xi:31; Deut. i. 2; I Kings xix:4; 2 Kings iii:9; Jonah iii.3, 4; Luke ii:44; Acts i: I.2). But the term usually meant the actual time covered in a journey rather than any definite dis- tance. Its length would vary according to the nature of the ground traversed; on a level plain it would be longer than over a country broken by hills or water courses. Its distance would, again, be conditioned by the circumstances or capabili- ties of the traveler; a messenger on a hasty er- rand (Gen. xxxi :23) would achieve better results than a caravan, the rate of which would be regul- lated by the slowest beast of burden. A sturdy courier, without undue exertion, might put twenty-five to thirty miles behind him in a day; while a caravan, with its encumbrances, would See DAYS not be able to overtake more than about twenty miles at the most. The camel usually proceeds at a rate of about two and one-half miles an hour, and, as six to eight hours would be sufficient for a day, a caravan (probably implied Luke ii:44) might accomplish fifteen to twenty miles; with much impedimenta, as recorded in the travels of the patriarchs (Gen. xxx :36), or of the Israelites (Num. x:33), the day's journey would necessarily be much less.--A. Grieve, Hastings' Bib. Dict. (See SABBATH DAY's Journ EY.) DAYS (dāz), signify a period of duration; thus, the days of men are their whole life (Ps. xc:9). Figuratite. (I) The days of a free denote a long, happy period (IS. lxv.22). (2) The days of Christ denote the period of his powerfully gathering the nations to himself and governing his people (Jer. xxiii:6). (3) The days of heaven mark eternal duration (Ps. lxxxix:29). (4) The events that happen in a period (Ps. xxxvii: 18; xxxi :15, and cKix:84; IS. vii:17). (5) Persons of great age (Job xxxii:7). (6) The ten days of the church's tribulation denote a short time, or the ten years of persecution, from A. D. 3O2 to 312 (Rev. ii: IO). w DAYSMAN (dāz'män), (Heb. "P., yaw-kažh', to set right), an umpire, arbitrator or mediator (Job ix:33), is an old English word derived from day, in the specific sense of a day ſºred for a frza/. * DAYSPRING (dā'spring), (Heb. Tºº, shakh'ar, Job xxxviii:12; Gr. &varo'Xà, an-at-o/-ay"). Jesus Christ is called the day-spring that visits us from on high. By his appearance in Our na- ture, by his righteousness, resurrection, saving discoveries of himself, and appearance to judg- ment, he introduces light and comfort; and brings in a day of gospel dispensation, Spiritual knowledge, a gracious state and endless glory (Luke i :78). DAYSTAR (dā'stār), (Gr. ºpa'a pópos, focesſor'os, lightbearing; (Lat. Lucifer), the planet Venus, the morning star (2 Pet. i:19). Perhaps, in a lower sense, David is the star that came out of Jacob, and smote the corners of Moab, and destroyed the children of Sheth; but in the highest sense it refers to Jesus, the Bright and Morning Star, whose glory is bright, and ushers in an eternal day to his people; and so is their joy, and the terror of the wicked, who love the works of darkness. Compare Num, xxiv:17 with Rev. ii:28 and xxii:I6. DEACON (dé'k'n), (Gr. 6tákovos, dee-a/#' on-os, ministrant). This word in its more extended sense is used, both ill Scripture and in ecclesiastical writers, to designate any person who ministers in God’s S 627'7/1 Ce. 1. Officers in the Church. In 2 Cor. vi.4, the Apostle says, “But in all things approving our- selves as the ministers (deacons) of God.' Again (Eph. iii:7), ‘Whereof T was made a minister (deacon); and in Col. i:2, 3, he employs the same epithet to express the character of his office. In Rom. xv.:8, St. Paul calls our Lord deacon of the circumcision; and, in his Epistle to the Philip- pians, he addresses himself to the bishops and dea- cons (Phil. i :I). But it is in its more confined sense, as it ex- presses the third order or office of the ministry of the primitive Church, that we are to examine the meaning of the word Deacon. (1) Origin. Some say that the office of deacon had an existence before the election of the seven 607 DEACON persons of whom we read in Acts vi. That the duties of these seven deacons were not of an ex- clusively secular character is clear from the fact that both Philip and Stephen preached, and that one of them also baptized. (Smith, Bib. Dict.) Ignatius, a martyr-disciple of St. John, and bishop of Antioch (A. D. 68), styles them as once ‘ministers of the mysteries of Christ,’ adding that they are not ministers of meats and drinks, but of the Church of God (Ignat. Ep. ad Trall. n. 2). Cyprian, bishop of Carthage (A. D. 250), whilst referring their origin to Acts vi, styles them min- isters of episcopacy and of the Church (Cypr. Ep. 65, al. 3, ad Rogat.); at the same time he as- Serts that they were called ad altaris ministerium —to the ministry of the altar. Tertullian, a celebrated father of the second century, classes them with bishops and presbyters 3S §"; and leaders to the laity. - (2) Forbidden to Assume Priestly Func- tions. The fourth Council of Carthage expressly forbids the deacon to assume any one function peculiar to the priesthood by declaring, ‘Diaconus mon ad sacerdotium, sed ad ministerium conse- cratus.’ He is not ordained to the priesthood but for the purpose of ministering. (See also 18th Can. Con. Nic.) (3) Ordination of Deacons. His ordination, moreover, differed from that of presbyter both in its form and in the powers which it conferred. For in the ordination of a presbyter, the presbyters who were present were required to join in the imposition of hands with the bishop; but the ordination of a deacon might be performed by the bishop alone, because, as the 4th Can. of the 4th Council of Carthage declares, he was ordained not to the priesthood, but to the inferior services of the Church. - 2. Duties. We now proceed to notice what these services specifically were. (1) To Assist the Bishop. The deacon's more ordinary duty was to assist the bishop and presby- ter in the service of the sanctuary ; especially was he charged with the care of the utensils and orna- ments appertaining to the holy table (Isidorus, Epistola ad Landefredum). (2) At the Sacrament. In the administration of the Holy Sacrament, that it was theirs to hand the consecrated elements to the people is evident from Justin Martyr (Apol. ii. p. I52) and from Cyprian (Serm. v. ‘De Lapsis'). (3) Administer Baptism. Deacons had power to administer the sacrament of baptism (Tertull. De Bapt. c. 17; also Hieron. Dial. contr. Lucif. c. 4, p. 139). (4) Instructors. The Office of the deacon was not to preach, so much as to instruct and cate- chise the catechumens. His part was, when the bishop or presbyter did not preach, to read a hom- ily from one of the Fathers. St. Ambrose, Bishop of Milan, A. D. 380, says expressly that deacons, in his time, did not preach, though he thinks that they were all originally evangelists, as were Philip and Stephen. t (5) Receive Offerings. It was the deacon's business to receive the offerings of the people; and, having presented them to the bishop or presbyter, to give expression in a loud voice to the names of the offerers (see Cypr., Ep. Io, al. 16, p. 37, Hieron. Com. in Egek. xviii. p. 537). (6) "Imposition of Hands. Deacons were sometimes authorized, as the bishops' special del- egates, to give to penitents the Solemn imposi- tion of hands, which was the sign of reconcilia- tion (Cypr. Ep. 13, al. 18, ad Eter.). (7) Suspension of Inferior Clergy. Deacons had power to suspend the inferior clergy; this, DEACON ESS however, was done only when the bishop and presbyter were absent and the case urgent (Con- stit. Apost. viii:28). (8) Scribes and Disputants. The ordinary duty of deacons, with regard to general Councils, was to act as scribes and disputants according as they were directed by their bishops. In some in- stances they voted as proxies for bishops who could not attend in person ; but in no instance do we find them voting in a general Council by vir- tue of their office. But in provincial synods the deacons were sometimes allowed to give their voice, as well as the presbyters, in their own 133.11162. (9) Care of the Poor. But, besides the above, there were some other offices which the deacon was called upon to fill abroad. One of these was to take care of the necessitous, orphans, widows, martyrs in prison, and all the poor and sick who had any claim upon the public resources of the church. It was also his especial duty to notice the spiritual, as well as the bodily, wants of the people; and wherever he detected evils which he could not by his own power and authority cure, it was his duty to refer them for redress to the bishop. In general the number of deacons varied with the wants of a particular church. Sozomen (vii: 19, p. IOO) informs us that the church of Rome, after the apostolic model, never had more than seven deacons. (10) Celibacy. It was not till the close of the third century that deacons were forbidden to marry. The council of Ancyra, A. D. 344, in its Ioth Can., ordains that if a deacon declared at the time of his ordination that he would marry, he should not be deprived of his function if he did marry; but that if he married without having made i. º declaration, “he must fall into the rank of aics l’ (11) Required Qualifications. The qualifica- tions required in deacons by the primitive church were the same that were required in bishops and presbyters; and the characteristics of a deacon, given by St. Paul in his Second Epistle to Timothy, were the rule by which a candidate was judged fit for such an office. The second Council of Carthage, 4th Can., forbids the ordination of a deacon before the age of twenty-five; and both the Civil and Canon Law, as may be seen in Justinian's Novels, I23, c. 14, fixed his age to the same period. (12) Archdeacons. The primitive church had its archdeacon, though when the office was first instituted is a matter of dispute with learned men. He was not in priest’s orders; but was selected from the deacons by the bishop, and had consider- able authority over the other deacons and inferior orders. Neander, Ch. Hist (Torrey's transl.) i:184, ff.; Bingham, Orig. Eccles. bk. ii:20; Saw- yer, Organic Christianity, Ch. xiii.; Dexter, Con- gregationalism, p. 134 ff. DEACONESS (dé'k'n-ès), (Gr. Atakövtaara, dee- aß-on'2s-sa). 1. TXeaconesses of the Early Church. That the order of Deaconess existed in the Christian church, even ºn A/osto/2c days, is evident from Rom. xvi;I: “I commend unto you Phebe, our sister, which is a servant (offa'aw övåkovov, a deacon- ess) of the church which is at Cench rea. (1) Early Mention. The earliest Fathers of the church, moreover, speak of the same order of persons. (2) Ordination. It is a disputed point with some learned men whether deaconesses were or— dained by imposition of hands. However, the 508 DEAD fifteenth Canon of the Council of Chalcedon ex- pressly declares that deaconesses were so or- dained, and this is fully confirmed by the author of the Apost. Constitutions, viii:19. Still, deacon- esses were not consecrated to any priestly func- tion. Some heretics, indeed, allowed women to teach, exercise, and to administer baptism; but all this he sharply rebukes as being contrary to the apostolic rule (Tertullian, De Praescript. 4I). 2. 9tualifications. Certain qualifications were necessary in those who were taken into this order. (1) Widowhood. It was necessary that she should be a widow. On this Tertullian (Ad U.rorem, i :7, p. 275) thus expresses himselſ: ‘The discipline of the church and apostolical usage (al- luding to I Tim. v :9) forbid that any widow be elected unless she have married but one husband.’ Virgins, it is true, were sometimes admitted into the Order of deaconesses; but this was the excep- tion, and not the rule. (2) Motherhood. No widow, unless she had borne children, could become a deaconess. This rule arose out of a belief that no person but a mother can possess those sympathizing and tender feelings which Ought to amituate the deaconess in the discharge of her peculiar duties. (3) Once Married. The early church was very strict in exacting the rule which prohibits the elec- tion of any to be deaconesses who had been twice married, though lawfully, and successively to two husbands, one after the other. Thus Tertullian (Ad Uzorem, iv:7) says, “The apostle requires them (deaconesses) to be univirae—the wives of one man.” Others, however, give to these words of the apostle another sense. They suppose the apostle to exclude only those widows who, having divorced themselves from their former husbands, had married again. (See Suicer's Thesaurus, tom. i. p. 866.) J. TX uties. (1) Baptism of Women. One of thc peculiar duties, then, of the deaconesses was at the baptism of women. The custom of the early church being to baptize all adult persons by im- mersion (see Suicer's Thesaur. tom. i. p. 634), it was necessary to have the assistance of this order of persons. Epiphanius speaks of this practice in his Exp. Fid. xxi.; also Justin. Novel. vi. p. 6. (2) Instructors. Another duty the deacon- esses had to perform was to instruct and prepare the catechumens for baptism. (3) Visitation of Prisoners. In times of danger and persecution it was the duty of the deaconesses to visit the martyrs in prison, because they could more easily gain access to them, and with less suspicion and hazard than the deacoils. (4) Station at Church Door. The deaconesses stood at the entrance of the church in order to di- rect the women as to the place each one should occupy during divine service. How long this or- der continued in the Christian church is not quite certain (Juicer's Thesaurus, tom. i. p. 69). It was not however discontinued everywhere at once, and it was not till the tenth century that it was wholly abrogated, see Bona, Rep. Liturg. i:25, I5; How- son, Deaconesses, etc. (Lond.) ; Ludlow, Wom- an’s Work in the Ch. (Lond.); Ripley, Ch. Polity (Boston); Schaff. Apostolic Hist. Sec 135; ibid., Hist. of the Christian Ch. ii. sec 52). DEAD (déd), (Heb. Thº, muth, to die; Gr. vexpós, 7te/8-7°os', dead). - 5 Deprived of natural life (I Pet. iv:6; Ruth 1 : S ). 2. Without spiritual life; under the dominion of sin; void of grace; incapable to perform any spiritual exercise (Eph. ii: 1; 1 Tim. v :6); or even desperately obstinate in wickedness (Luke XV :24). DEAD SEA, THE 3. What never had life; as idols, etc. (Job xxvi :5; Is. viii: 19). tº 4. What has no continued existence, no living soul to be reunited to its body (Matt. xxii:32). 5. In a state of mortality; condemned or Sig- nally exposed to death (Rom. viii: IO; Gen. xx:3). 6. In a state of oppression, slavery, and des- perate-like wretchedness (Is. xxvi :19; Ezek. xxxvii:I-I4). 7. Unfit for generation, according to the power of nature (Rom. iv:19; Heb. xi : I.2). 8. Formal hypocrites; or much decayed in grace (Rev. iii: I). The resurrection of the dead (I Cor. XV :29). When an Israelite died in any house or any tent, all the persons and furniture in it contracted a pollution, which continued seven days (Num. xix:13-16). All who tôuched the body of one who died, or was killed in the open fields, all who touched men's bones, or a grave, were un- clean seven days. To cleanse this pollution, they formerly took the ashes of the red heifer, sacri- ficed by the high-priest on the day of solemn ex- piation : (Num. xix) on these they poured water in a vessel, and a person who was clean dipped a bunch of hyssop in the water, and sprinkled with it the furniture, the chamber, and the persons, on the third day and on the seventh day. It was re- quired that the polluted person should previously bathe his whole body, and wash his clothes; after which he was clean (ver. I7–22). Anciently the Jews had women hired to lament at funerals, and who played on doleful instruments, and walked in procession. The rab- bins say that an Israelite was enjoined to have two of these musicians at his wife's obsequies, be- sides the women hired to weep. Persons who met the funeral procession, in civility joined the com- pany, and mingled their groans. To this our Saviour seems to allude: (Luke vii:32). Figuratite. (I) Let the dead bury their dead; let men dead in sin bury those naturally dead; or let the dead lie unburied, rather than the preaching of the gospel be hindered (Matt. viii: 22). (2) Dead faith is that persuasion of Divine truth which flows not from spiritual life, and is not productive of good works (James ii:17, 29). (3) Dead works are those that flow not from a principle of spiritual life, but from corrupt nature, which is in a state of spiritual death (Heb. ix: I4). (4) To be dead to the law, as a covenant, is to be delivered from the obligations of it, and from a reigning inclination to be under it (Rom. vii:4); and it is dead to us when it can exercise no commanding or condemning power over our conscience (Gal. ii: 19). (5) Sin is dead relatively when it lies undiscovered and unregarded in the soul (Rom. vii:8); it is dead really when it is mortified and slain by the word, spirit, and blood of Christ (Rom. vi :6). (6) To die to sin, or be dead to it, is to be freed from the dominion of it, and the curse due to it by the blood of Christ, and by his grace drawn from the love and service of it (Rom. vi :7). (7) The saints are dead both to the law and to sin (Col. iii:3). DEAD SEA, THE (déd sé). In Scripture it is called the Salt Sea (Gen. xiv: 3; Num. xxxiv:12, etc.) the Sea of the Plain or Arabah (Deut. iii:17; iv:49, etc.), East Sea (Ezek. xlvii: 18; Joel ii:20; Zech. xiv:8; A. V. “former”). The name Dead Sea has been ap- plied to it since the second century, and it was also called the Asphalt Sea by early writers. 509 IDEATH DEAF (dēf or def), (Heb. ºl, khay-rashe'; Gr. kwſpós, AEo-fos', blunted). Moses enacted a statute of special protection to the deaf mute (Lev. xix:14). It might even be understood as extending them kindness (IS. xxix: 18, 35 ; Matt. xi :5; Mark vii:32). Figuratite. (1) Deafness is symbolical of a want of spiritual ability or concern to regard or understand divine things (Is. xlii: 18, 19 and xxix:18). (2) Saints are as deaf and , dumb, when they exercise the utmost patience and resig- nation under trouble; neither murmuring against God, nor angrily vindicating themselves before men (Ps. xxxviii: 13, and xxxix:9). DEAL (dèl), (Heb. Tº, aw'saw', deal; *Tºy, as- ee-ree'), a word often used in the sense of Żart, with fractional numbers (Ex. xxix:40). In the authorized version deal is used in the phrase “tenth deal’ or ‘tenth deals,’ for Heb. aseeron, wherever that word occurs (Revised Ver- sion ‘tenth part’ or ‘tenth parts'). DEARTH (dèrth), (Heb. PP.), raw-awb', hun- ger; Gr. Aqués, Mee-mos', scarcity), a scarcity of food in consequence of failure of rain (I Kings xvii:I), the plague of locusts (Ps. lxxviii:46), or the result- ant of improperly farming the land (Ruth i: I). DEATH (dēth), (Heb. nº. 772azy' veth, death). Since death can be regarded in various points of view, the descriptions of it must necessarily vary. If we consider the state of a dead man, as it strikes the senses, death is the cessation of natural life. If we consider the cause of death, we may place it in that permanent and entire cessation of the feeling and motion of the body which results from the destruction of the body. Among theologians, death is commonly said to consist in the separation of Soul and body, im- plying that the soul still exists when the body perishes. Death does not consist in this separation, but this separation is the consequence of death. As soon as the body loses feeling and motion, it is henceforth useless to the soul, which is therefore separated from it. Scriptural representations, names, and modes of speech respecting death: (1) Return to Dust. One of the most common in the Old Testament is, to return to the dust, or to the earth. Hence the phrase, the dust of death. It is founded on the description Gen. ii:7 and iii:19, and denotes the dissolution and destruction of the body. Hence the sentiment in Eccles. xii:7,-‘The dust shall return to the earth as it was, the spirit unto God, who gave it.’ (2) Removal of Breath. A withdrawing, ex- halation, or removal of the breath of life (Ps. civ :29). (3) This Tabernacle. A removal from the body, a being absent from the body, a departure from it, etc. This description is ſounded on the comparison of the body with a tent or lodgment in which the soul dwells during this life. Death destroys this tent or house, and commands 11s to travel on (Job iv:21; Is. xxxviii: 12). Whence Paul says (2 Cor. v : 1) “our earthly house of this tabernacle' will be destroyed; and Peter calls death a ‘putting off of this tabernacle’ (2 Peter i: I3, 14). e * (. (4) Unclothed. Paul, likewise uses the term grööerbat, eAdooesthai, to be unclothed, in reference to death (2 Cor. v:3, 4), because the body is rep- resented as the garment of the soul, as Plato calls it. The soul, therefore, as long as it is in the body, is clothed; and as soon as it is disembodied, is naked, DEBATE (5) Sleep. The terms which denote sleep are applied frequently in the Bible, as everywhere else, to death (Ps. lxxvi :5; Jer. li:39; John xi :13, sq.). Nor is this language used exclusively for the death of the pious, as some pretend, though this is its prevailing use. Homer calls sleep and death twin-brothers (Iliad, xvi;672). The terms also which signify to lie down, to rest (e. g. 22°, occumbere), also denote death. (6) Departure. Death is frequently compared with and named from a departure, a going away (Job x:21; Ps. xxxix:4; Matt. xxvi;24; Phil. i:23; 2 Tim. iv:6). Figuratite. Death, when personified, is de- scribed as a ruler and tyrant, having vast power and a great kingdom, Over which he reigns. But the ancients also represented it under some fig- ures which are not common among us. We rep- resent it as a man with a scythe, or as a skeleton, etc.; but the Jews, before the exile, fre- quently represented death as a hunter, who lays snares for men (Ps. xviii:5, 6; xci:3). After the exile, they represented him as a man, or some- times as an angel (the angel of Death), with a cup of poison, which he reaches to men. From this representation appears to have arisen the phrase, which occurs in the New Testament, to taste death (Matt. xvi :28; Heb. ii:9), which, however, in common speech, signifies merely to die, without reminding one of the origin of the phrase. The case is the same with the phrase to see death (Ps. lxxxix:48; Luke ii:26). Christ abolished death, and swallowed it up in victory, when by his own death he removed the curse and sting from his people’s natural death, and redeemed them from spiritual and eternal death. He will complete his victory over death natural hereafter, when he will raise them from the dead, and give them the full possession of eternal happiness (Is. xxv :8; I Cor. xv.;54, 55 ; 2 Tim. i : Io). (See Knapp's Christian Theol- ogy, by Dr. Leonard Wood ; Watson’s Institutes; "Christian Dogmatics, Martensen; Brown, Bib. Dict.) DEBATE (dē-bāt'), (Heb. º, maſs-tsaw'). Among evils of the Gentiles given in the Epistle to the Romans (i:29) Paul includes de- bate, the rendering of Gr. Špts, er' is, wrang- ling, strife (A.V.). In early English to debate was to fight and wrangle. DEBIR (dē'bir), (Heb. Tºº, deb-eer', sanctuary, place of the oracle). sº º 1. A city in the tribe of Judah, about thirty miles southwest from Jerusalem, and ten miles west of Hebron. It was also called Kirjath-sepher (Josh. xv.:15), and Kirjath-sannah (xv :49). The name Debir means ‘a word’ or ‘oracle,” and is applied to that most scorct and separated part of the Temple, or of the most holy place, in which the ark of the covenant was placed, and in which re- sponses were given from above the cherubim. From this, coupled with the fact that Kirjath- sepher means ‘book-city,” it has been conjectured that Debir was some particularly, sacred place or seat of learning among the Canaanites, and a re- pository of their records. ‘It is not indeed prob- able,’ as Professor Bush remarks, ‘that writing and books, in our sense of the words, were very common among the Canaanites; but some method of recording events, and a sort of learning was, doubtless, cultivated in those regions.” Debir was taken by Joshua (x :38); but it being afterward retaken by the Canaanites, Caleb, to whom it was assigned, gave his daughter Achsah in marriage to his nephew Othniel for his bravery in carrying 510 DEBORAH it by storm (Josh. xv. 16). The town was after- ward given to the priests (xxi :15). No trace of it is to be found at the present time. 2. A place belonging to Gad, beyond the Jordan (Josh. xiii:26). -> 8. A town on the north boundary of Judah near to the valley of Achor (Josh. xv.:7), and therefore back of Jericho. 4. A king of Eglon, in the low country of Ju- º one of the five hanged by Joshua (Josh. X 3, 23). DEBORAH (déb'o-rah), (Heb. Tºº, deb-o-razy", a bee). 1. The nurse of Rebekah (Gen. xxxv :8), whom she accompanied from the house of Bethuel (xxiv:59). - 2. A prophetess, wife of Lapidoth. She dwelt, probably, in a tent, under a well-known palm-tree between Ramah and Bethel, where she judged Israel (Judg. iv:4, 5). This probably means that she was the organ of communication between God and his people, and probably, on account of the in- fluence and authority of her character, was ac- counted in Some sort as the head of the nation, to whom q11estions of doubt and difficulty were re- ferred for decision. In her triumphal song she SayS— ‘In the days of Shamgar, son of Anath, In the days of Jael, the ways lay desert, And highway travelers went in winding by- paths. Leaders failed in Israel, they failed, Until that I Deborah arose, That I arose, a mother in Israel.” From the further intimations which that song contains, and from other circumstances, the peo- ple would appear to have sunk into a state of total discouragement under the oppression of the Canaanites; SO that it was difficult to rouse them from their despondency and to induce them to make any exertion to burst the fetters of their bondage. From the gratitude which Deborah ex- presses toward the people for the effort which they finally, made, we are warranted in drawing the conclusion that she had long endeavored to instigate them to this step in vain. At length she summoned Barak, the son of Abinoam, from Kedesh, a city of Naphtali, on a mountain not far from Hazor, and made known to him the will of God that he should undertake an enterprise for the deliverance of his country. But such was his dis- heartened state of feeling, and at the same time Such his confidence in the superior character and authority of Deborah, that he assented to go only On the condition that she would accompany him. To this she at length consented. They then re- paired together to Kedesh, and collected there— in the immediate vicinity of Hazor, the capital of the dominant power—ten thousand men, with whom they marched southward, and encamped on Mount Tabor. Sisera, the general of Jabin, king of Hazor, who was at the head of the Canaanitish confederacy, immediately collected an army, pur- sued them, and encamped in face of them in the great plain of Esdraelon. Encouraged by De- borah, Barak boldly descended from Tabor into the plain with his ten thousand men to give battle to the far superior host of Sisera, which was ren- dered the more formidable to the Israelites by nine hundred chariots of iron. The Canaanites were beaten; and Barak pursued them northward to Harosheth. Sisera himself, being hotly pur- sued, alighted from his chariot and escaped on foot to the tent of Heber the Kenite, by whose DEBT wife he was slain. This great victory (dated B. C. between 1409 and I296), which seems to have been followed up, broke the power of the native princes, and secured to the Israelites a re- pose of forty years' duration. During part of this time Deborah probably continued to exercise her former authority; but nothing more of her history is known. The song of triumph, which was composed in consequence of the great victory over Sisera, and said to have been ‘sung by Deborah and Barak,’ is usually regarded as the composition of De- borah; and was probably indited by, her to be sung on the return of Barak and his warriors from the pursuit. It is a peculiarly fine specimen of the earlier Hebrew poetry, and is one of the best of oriental poetry. We give a few verses from a revised version: Lord, when thou wentest forth out of Seir, When thou marchedest out of the field of Edom, The earth trembled, the heavens also dropped, Yea, the clouds dropped water. The mountains flowed down at the presence of the Lord, Even that Sinai at the presence of the Lord the God of Israel. >k >k >k >k >k xk xk x 2k x The kings came, they fought ; Then fought the kings of Canaan In Taanach by the waters of Megiddo; They took no gain of silver. They fought from heaven; The stars from their courses fought against Sisera. The river Kishon swept them away, That ancient river, the river Kishon. March on, my soul, with strength.’ (See BARAK; JAEL.) Deborah was not so much a judge as one gifted with prophetic command (Judg. iv:6, 14; v 7). DEBT (dēt), (Heb. T., yawd, hand). “Whoso shall swear by the gold of the temple— by the gift on the altar—is a debtor” (Matt. xxiii: 16); is bound by his oath ; is obliged to fulfil his vow. “I am debtor to the Greeks and barbarians” (Rom. i: I4); under obligations to persons of all nations and characters. Gal. v .3, he is a debtor—is bound—to do the whole law. Men may be debtors to human justice, or to divine justice; bound to obedience, and if that be not complied with, bound to suffer the penalties an- nexed to transgression. DEBTOR (dēt'ör), (Heb. Diri, chob, debtor, one bound, indebted; debt). A creditor could not enter a debtor's house when about to take a pledge for a loan (Deut. xxiv: Io, II ; Job xxii:6; xxiv:3, 7, 9). A mill, mill- stone or upper garment, could not be retained as a pledge of debt (Exod. xxii:26, 27; Deut. xxiv:6, 12). A debt that remained unpaid until the seventh year, could not be exacted during that period (Deut. xv : I-II). For the law at other times see Lev. xxv :14, 32, 39; 2 Kings iv.: I : Neh. v.: I, 13; Matt. xviii:25. In the time of Moses imprisonment for debt does not seem to have been practiced ; but it was in the time of Christ (Matt. xviii:34). Figuratite. Sinners are debtors to God: owe all obedience to the precept, and all satisfaction to the penalty of his holy law (Matt. xviii:27; Luke vii:41). Paul was debtor to both Jews and Gen- tiles, wise and unwise; he was bound by of— 511 DECALOGUE fice to preach the gospel to them (I Cor. ix:I6; Rom. i :14). Love to one another, is a debt which we ought to regard ourselves as never able to pay, and which by our love to others we ought con- tinually to be laying them under (Rom. xiii:8). DECALOGUE (dék'à-lóg), (Gr. AekáAoyos, dek- al"og-os). 1. The Moral Latw. Decalogue is the name by which the Greek fathers designated “the Ten Commandments,” which were written by God On tables of stone and given to Moses on Mount Sinai. (1) Name. In Hebrew the name is “ten words” (n.º. Fºll, had deh-bazy-reema' as-e/."reth, Exod. xxxiv:28; Deut. iv:13; x:4). (2) Author. The decalogue was written upon two stone slabs (Ex. xxxi :18), which having been broken by Moses (xxxii: IQ), were renewed by God (xxxiv: I, etc.). They are said (Deut. ix: IO) to have been written by the finger of God, an ex- pression which always implies an immediate act of the Deity. The decalogue is five times alluded to in the New Testament, there called command- ments, but only the latter precepts are specifically cited, which refer to our duties to each other (Matt. v :19; xv :9; xix:17; xxii:40; Mark X:19; Luke xviii:20; Rom. xiii:9; vii;7, 8; Matt. v ; I Tim. i :9, Io). Jeremy Taylor's Life of Christ, and Ductor Dubitan.; Rosenmüller's Scholia in Earod.). (See LAw.) 2. TXibisions. The circumstance of these precepts being called the ten words has doubtless led to the belief that the two tables contained ten distinct precepts, five in each table; while Some have supposed that they were called by this name to denote their perfection, ten being considered the most perfect of numbers (Philo-Judaeus De Deca- logo). This distinguished philosopher divides them into two pentads, the first pentad ending with Exod. xx:12, “Honor thy father and thy mother,’ etc., or the fifth commandment of the Greek, Re- formed, and Anglican churches; while the more general opinion among Christians is that the first table contained our duty to God, ending with the law to keep the sabbath holy, and the second, our duty to our neighbor. As they are not numerically divided in the Scriptures, so that we cannot posi- tively say which is the first, which the second, etc., it may not prove uninteresting to the student in Biblical literature, if we here give a brief account of the different modes of dividing them which have prevailed among Jews and Christians. These may be classed as the Talmudical, the Origenian, and the two Masoretic divisions. (1) Talmudical. According to this division the first commandment consists of the words “I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage' (Exod. xx:2; Deut. v :6); the second (Exod. iii:4), ‘Thou shalt have none other Gods beside me; thou shalt not make to thyself any graven image,” etc., to ver. 6; the third, ‘Thou shalt not take God’s name in vain,” etc.; fourth, “Remem- ber to keep holy the sabbath day,' etc.; the fifth, ‘Honor thy father and thy mother,” etc.; the sixth, “Thou shalt not kill ;’ the seventh, ‘Thou shalt not commit adultery;’ the eighth,’ ‘Thou shalt not steal ;’ the ninth, ‘Thou shalt not bear false wit- ness, etc.; and the tenth, ‘Thou shalt not covet,” etc., to the end. (2) Origenian. The next division is the Origemian, or that approved by Origen, and is that in use in the Greek and in all the reformed churches, except the Lutheran. Although Origen was acquainted with the dif- fering opinions which existed in his time in regard DECALOGUE to this subject, it is evident from his own words that he knew nothing of that division by which the number ten is completed by making the pro- hibition against coveting either the house or the wife a distinct commandment. In his eighth Homily on Genesis, after citing the words’ ‘I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt,’ he adds, “this is not a part of the commandment.’ The first commandment is, ‘Thou shalt have no other Gods but me,’ and then fol- lows, ‘Thou shalt not make an idol.’ These to- gether are thought by some to make one command- ment; but in this case the number ten will not be complete. Where then will be the truth of the Decalogue? But if it be divided as we have done in the last sentence, the full number will be evi- dent. The first commandment therefore is, ‘Thou shalt have no other Gods but me,’ and the second, ‘Thou shalt not make to thyself an idol, nor a likeness,” etc. Gregory Nazianzen and Jerome took the same view with Origen. It is also Sup- ported by the learned Jews Philo and Josephus, who speak of it as the received division of the Jewish Church. This division, which appears to have been forgotten in the Western Church, was revived by Calvin in 1536, and is also received by that section of the Lutherans who followed Bucer, called the Tetrapolitans. It is adopted by Calmet (Dictionary of the Bible, French ed., art. Zoz), This division, which appeared in the Bishops' Book in 1537, was adopted by the Anglican Church at the Reformation (I548), substituting seventh for sabbath-day in her formularies. The same division was published with approbation by Bonner in his Homilies in 1555. (3) First Masoretic. We shall next proceed to describe the two Masoretic divisions. The first is that in Exodus. According to this arrangement, the first two commandments (according to the Origenian or Greek division), that is, the com- mandment concerning the worship of one God, and that concerning images, make but one; the second is, ‘Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain,’ and so on until we arrive at the last two, the former of which is, ‘Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house,’ and the last, or tenth, ‘Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his servant,' etc., to the end. This was the division approved by Luther, and it has been ever since his time received by the Lutheran Church. This division is also followed in the Trent catechism, and may therefore be called the Roman Catholic division. Those who follow this division have been accustomed to give the decalogue very generally in an abridged form : thus the first commandment in the Lutheran shorter catechism is simply, ‘Thou shalt have no other gods but me;’ the Sec- ond, ‘Thou shalt not take the name of thy God in vain;’ the third, ‘Thou shalt sanctify the sabbath- day’ (Feyertag) A similar practice is followed by the Roman Catholics, although they, as well as the Lutherans, in their larger catechisms (as the Douay) give them at full length. This practice has given rise to the charge made against those denominations of leaving out the second command- ment, whereas it would have been more correct to say that they had mutilated the first, or at least that the form in which they give it has the effect of concealing a most important part of it from such as had access only to their shorter cate- chisms. (4) Second Masoretic. The last division is the second Masoretic, or that of Deuteronomy, some- times called the Augustinian. This division dif- fers from the former simply in placing the precept “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife’ before “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house,” etc.; 512 DECA POLIS and for this transposition it has the authority of Deut. v :21. The authority of the Masorites can- not, however, be of sufficient force to supersede the earlier traditions of Philo and Josephus. This division was that approved by Augustine who thus expresses himself on the subject: Fol- lowing up what he had said he observes, “but to me it seems more congruous to divide them into three and Seven, inasmuch as to those who diligently look into the matter, those which ap- pertain to God seem to insinuate the Trinity.’ And, indeed, the command, “Thou shalt have no other gods but me,’ is more perfectly ex- plained when images are forbidden to be wor- shiped. Besides, the sin of coveting another man's wife differs so much from coveting his house, that to the house was joined his field, his servant, his maid, his ox, his ass, his cattle, and all that is his. But it seems to divide the coveting of the house from the coveting of the wife, when each begins thus: ‘thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house,' to which it then begins to add the rest. For, when he had said, ‘thou shalt not covet thy neigh- bor's wife, he did not add the rest to this, saying, nor his house, nor his field, nor his servant, etc.; but these seem plainly to be united, which appear to be contained in one precept, and distinct from that wherein the wife is named. But when it is said, ‘thou shalt have no other gods but me,’ there appears a more diligent following up of this in what is subjoined. For to what pertains, ‘thou shalt not make an idol, nor a likeness; thou shalt not adore nor serve them,’ unless to that which had been said, ‘thou shalt have none other gods but me.’ The division of Augustine was followed by Bede and Peter Lombard. The learned Sonntag has entirely followed Au- gustine's view of this subject and has written a dissertation in vindication of this division in the Theologische. Studien und Kritiken, Hamburg, 1836-7; to which there has been a reply in the same miscellany from Züllg, in vindication of what he terms the Calvinistic division, or that of Origen, which is followed by a rejoinder from Sonntag. Sonntag is so convinced of the neces- sity of that order of the words, according to which the precept against coveting the wife precedes (as in Deuteronomy) that against coveting the house, etc., that he puts down the order of the words in Exodus as an oversight. The order in the Sep- tuagint version in Exodus agrees with that in Deuteronomy. The Greek church follows this order. Sonntag conceives that the Mosaic divis- ion of the decalogue was lost in the period be- tween the exile and the birth of Christ. g W. W. DECAPOLIS (de-kāp'o-lis), (Gr. AekátroXts, deſſ- aft'o/-is, ten cities). This appeals to det!ote, hot, as is frequently stated, a particular province or district, but cer. tain Ten Cities, including the adjacent villages (Joseph. Vit. Sec. 65), which resembled each other in being inhabited mostly by Gentiles, and in their civic institutions and privileges. In Matt. iv:25, it is said ‘multitudes followed Jesus from Galilee, and from Decapolis, and from Jeru- salem, and from Judaea, and from beyond Jordan.’ This must be considered as a popular mode of expression. We, therefore, cannot agree with Dr. Lightfoot in thinking it “absurd to reckon the most famed cities of Galilee for cities of De- capolis, when, both in Sacred and profane authors, Galilee is plainly distinguished from Decapolis' (Chorographical Decad. ch. vii sec. 1; Works, x. p. 238). Qne at least of the Decapolitan towns (Scythopolis, formerly Bethshan) was in Galilee, DElDAN and several, if not all the rest, were in the country beyond Jordan. Pliny gives the follow- ing list, but allows that a difference of opinion existed as to its correctness: (1) Damascus. (2) Philadelphia. (3) Raphana. (4) Scythopolis. (5) Gadara. (6) Hippos. (7) Dion. (8) Pella. (9) Galasa. (IO) Canatha. Josephus speaks of Gadara and Hippos as Grecian cities (Antiq. xvii:II, sec. 4), and calls Scythopolis the greatest city of the Decapolis (Bell. Jud. iii:9, sec. 7), from which it may be inferred that he excluded Damascus from the number. For Damascus and Raphana, Cel- larius substitutes Caesarea Philippi and Gergesa, and Ptolemy Capitolias (Winer’s Real-zºyāz-fer- buch, i. 308). The name Decapolis was in course of time applied to more than ten towns, a cir- cumstance which may in part account for the dis- crepancies in the list given by various writers. The Decapolitan towns referred to in the Gospels were evidently situated not far from the sea of Galilee (Mark v :20; vii:31). J. E. R. DEDAN (de'dan), (Heb. iſº, ded-awn, two persons, meaning doubtful). (1) Of the descendants of the Cushite Dedan, very little is known. It is supposed that they Settled in Southern Arabia, near the Persian Gulf; but the existence in this quarter of a place called Dadan or Dadena, is the chief ground for this conclusion. (2) The descendants of the Abrahamite Jokshan Seem to have lived in the neighborhood of Idu- maea; for the prophet Jeremiah (xlix:8) calls on them to consult their safety, because the calamity of the sons of Esau, i. e., the Idumaeans, was at hand. The same prophet (xxv :23) connects them with Thema and Buz, two other tribes of Arabia Petraea, or Arabia Deserta, as does Ezekiel (xxv : I3) with Theman, a district of Edom. It is not always clear when the name occurs which of the two Dedans is intended; but it is probably the Cushite tribe, which is described as devoted to commerce, or rather, perhaps, engaged in the carrying-trade. Its ‘traveling companies,” or caravans, are mentioned by Isaiah (xxi :13); in Ezekiel (xxvii:20), the Dedamites are described as supplying the markets of Tyre with flowing riding-cloths; and elsewhere (xxxviii: 13) the same prophet names them along with the mer- chants of Tarshish. DEDANIM (déd'a-nim or de-dā'nim), descend- ants of Raamah, grandson of Ham (Is:xxi.13). (See DEDAN.) DEDICATE, DEDICATION (déd'i-kāt, déd'ſ. kä'shūn), (Heb. 27, Ahaw-maž', to initiate; ºr, AEazy-dash', to pronounce clean). A religious ceremony, whereby anything is dedicated or consecrated to the service of God; and it appears to have originated in the desire to commence, with peculiar Solemnity, the practical use and application of whatever had been set apart to the divine service. Thus Moses dedicated the Tabernacle in the Wilderness (Exod. xl.; Num. vii.); Solomon his temple (I Kings viii.); the returned exiles theirs (Ezra vi :16, 17); Herod his (Joseph. Antiq. xv. II, 6). The Maccabees having cleansed the Temple from its pollutions under Antiochus Epiphanes, again dedicated the altar (I Macc. iv:52-9), and an annual festival was established in commemoration of the event. This feast was celebrated not only at Jerusalem, but everywhere throughout the country, in which respect it differed from the feasts of the Pass- over, Pentecost and Tabernacles, which could only be observed at Jerusalem. Not only were sacred 513 DELAIAH places thus dedicated, but some kind of dedicatory Solemnity was observed with respect to cities, walls, gates and even private houses (Deut. xx:5; Ps. xxx title; Neh. xii:27). We may trace the continuance of these usages in the custom of consecrating or dedicating churches and chapels, and in the ceremonies connected with the ‘open- ing' of roads, markets, bridges, etc., and with the launching of ships. DEDICATION, FEAST OF fest Öv). In John x:22, 23, we are told that Jesus was at Jerusalem, walking in Solomon's porch at the time of ‘the feast of the dedication, and it was winter.’ This is usually supposed to have been the feast commemorating the dedication by Judas Maccabaeus, which was celebrated in the month Cislev, about the winter solstice (answering to the 15th of December). There seems no reason to disturb this conclusion, for the dedication of Solomon’s Temple was in the seventh month, or autumn ; that of Zerubbabel’s Temple in the month Adar, in the spring; and, although that of Herod's Temple was in the winter, we know not that it was celebrated by an annual feast, while the Mac- cabean dedication was a festival much observed in the time of Christ. (See FEASTS.) DEED (ded). See LAND. DEEP (dep), (Heb. Pºlº, teh-om", deep place, the deep [sea]). See ABYSS. DEER (dēr). See ROEBUCK. º: DEFILEMENT (de-filment), (Heb. *S*, go-el, defilement, pollution). (See PQLLUTION.) DEGREE (dé-gre'), (Heb. nº, 77tah-a/-aw', a step). This term is used of a group of Levites “of the second degree” (I Chron. xv. 18) in the sense of rank or order of enumeration. REGREFs, SONG OF (dé-grez, sång &v), (Heb. nº nº, sheer /a/72-772a/*-a/-/ožh', song of steps), a title given to each of the fifteen psalms from czx to cxxxiv inclusive. (See PsALMs.) DEHAVITES (de-hă'vites), (Heb. N.Y., deh- /*azy-yay', or sº, deh-hazy-way', Ezra iv:9 only), inhabitants of that part of Assyria which was watered by the river Diaba (probably the Dai of Herodotus (i:125); a Persian tribe, Ezra iv:9). They were planted by the Assyrian monarch Esar-haddon or King Assur-bani-pal, after the completion of the captivity of Israel. DEHORT (dé-hôrt'), (Prov., ch. 7, cap.; I Pet, ch. 2), to dissuade. Only I Macc. ix:9, “they dehorted him, saying, We shall never be able, and in the headings of some chapters. “Dehort (fr. Lat. dehortari) is the opposite of ‘exhort.' * “Exhort” continues, but “dehort,” a word whose place “dissuade” does not exactly supply, has escaped us' (Trench, Eng. Pasſ and Pres.). DEKAR (de-kar), (Heb. Tºº!, deh"Aer, stab), Solomon's commissariat officer in the western part of the hill country of Judah (I Kings iv:9), B.C. IOI 4. DELAIAH (da'a-'ah), (Heb. Tº de' aw: yazy", freed by Jehovah). 1. Father of Shemaiah and son of Mehetabeel (Neh. vi. Io), B. C. 4Io. Son of Shemaiah, one of the “princes” in 3. time of Jehoiakim (Jer. xxxvi :12, 25), B. C O4. 3. A priest and leader of the twenty-third course in the temple service (I Chron. xxiv:18), B. C. IoI4. (déd'i-kä'shūn, 33 DELICATE 4. Descendants of Delaiah were among those of uncertain lineage, who returned from captivity with Zerubbabel (Ezra ii:60; Neh. vii:62), B. C. 536. * * DELICATE (dél'i-kāt), (Heb. ???, aw-nogue', Deut. xxviii:54; IS. xlvii: I; Jer. vi.2), luxurious, efferilinate, ſille, Ilice. DELICATELY (dèl'í-kāt-ly), (Gr. orata)\áw, spat-a/-a/,'o, I Tim. V:6, marg.), means given up to pleasure, voluptuousness, wantonness. DELICATE3 (dél’i-kätz), (Heb. "?"}, ed-maw", Jer. li:34), pleasure, delight, choice morsels, etc. Same as delicacies. The words denote most precious things, wealth, etc., that are to the desire as dainty meats to the stomach (Rev. xviii:2; Jer, li:34). He that deli- cately bringeth up his servant from a child shall have him become his son at length (Prov. xxix: 2I). He that too nicely and indulgently brings up his servant may expect him by and by to grow as bold and familiar, and as full of pretensions, as if he were an heir of the family. DELILAH (del-'ah), (Heb. ºº, deſſee-law, languishing, lustful), the woman who dwelt in the valley of Sorek, beloved by Samson (Judg. xvi; 4-18), B.C. about IO6O. The account as given in Judges does not say whether she was an Israelite or a Philistine, but she was probably the latter, and Sorek, her place of residence, was then within the Philistine terri- tory. Samson was frequently with her and al- lowed her to gain a great influence over him. That she was his wife is very improbable, not- withstanding that that is the opinion of Chry- sostom and other patristic writers. (See SAM- SON.) DELUGE (dèl'ij). The narrative of a flood, given in the book of Genesis (vii, viii), by which, according to the literal sense of the description, the whole world was overwhelmed and every terrestial creature destroyed, with the exception of one human fam- ily and the representatives of each species of ani- mal, Supernaturally preserved in an ark, con- Structed by Divine appointment for the purpose, need not here be followed in detail. The account furnished by the sacred historian is circumstan- tially distinct, and the whole is expressly ascribed to Divine agency, but, in several of the particu- lars, Secondary causes, as rain ‘thc opening of the windows of Heaven' (vii:II), and the breaking up of the fountains of the great deep,' are mentioned, and again the effect of wind in drying up the waters (viii: I). It is chiefly to be remarked that the whole event is represented as both commencing and terminating in the most gradual and quiet manner, without anything at all resembling the catastrophes and convulsions Often pictured in vulgar imagination as accom- panying it. When the waters subsided, so little was the surface of the earth changed that the vegetation continued uninjured; the olive-trees remained from which the dove brought its token. We allude particularly to these circumstances in the narrative as being those which bear most upon the probable nature and extent of the event, which it is our main object in the present article to examine, according to the tenor of what little evidence can be collected on the subject, whether from the terms of the narrative or from other sources of information which may be opened to us by the researches of science. Much, indeed, might be said on the subject in other points of view, and especially in a more 514 DEMETRIUS properly theological sense, it may be dwelt upon as a part of the great series of Divine interposi- tions and dispensations which the sacred history discloses. We may allude to the fact that in al- most all nations, from the remotest periods, there have prevailed certain traditional narratives and legendary tales of similar catastrophes. Such narratives have formed a part of the rude belief of the Egyptians, Chaldaeans, Greeks, Scythians and Celtic tribes. They have also been discov- ered among the Peruvians and Mexicans and the South Sea Islanders. (See Bryant, Ancient Mythology; Harcourt, On the Deluge; Ignatius Donnelly, Lost Atlantis.) The general results of geological researches show no evidence of any great aqueous revolution at any comparatively recent period having affected the earth’s surface over any considerable tract. Changes have been produced, but on a compara- tively small scale, and in isolated districts (Pye Smith, Geology and Scripture, p. 130, 2d ed.). Universality, the author shows, must be taken in the sense of great extent; often, indeed, the very same phrase is applied to a very limited region or country, as in Gen. xli :56; Deut. ii:25; Acts ii:5, etc.). Thus, so far as the description goes, the expression may refer to a local deluge. (See ANTEDILUVIANS.) DEMAS (dé'mas), (Gr. Amuās, day-mas'), a Thes- salonian mentioned by Paul (2 Tim. iv:IO), who was at first a most zealous disciple of the apostle (Col. iv:14; Philem. 24), and very serviceable to him at Rome during his imprisonment, but after- wards forsook him to follow a more secular life. DEMETRIUS (de-mé! tri-às), (Gr. Amujtpuos, day-may' free-os). 1. A goldsmith of Ephesus, who made niches, or little chapels, or portable models of the famous temple, for Diana of Ephesus, which he sold to foreigners (Acts xix:24). Observing the progress of the gospel, not in Ephesus only, but in all Asia, he assembled his fellow craftsmen, and represented that, by this new doctrine, not only their trade would suffer, but that the worship of the great Diana of Ephe- sus was in danger of being entirely forsaken. This produced an uproar and confusion in the city, till at length the town clerk appeased the tumult by firmness and persuasion. . A man mentioned by John as an eminent Christian (3 John I2). This is the only notice of him (A. D. about QO). DEMETRIUS (Gr. as above.) (1) Demetrius I. Demetrius Soter, king of Syria, reigned twelve years (B. C. 175). He was son of Seleucus IV., surnamed Philopater; but, being a hostage of Rome when his father died, his uncle, Antiochus Epiphanes, who in the in- terim arrived in Syria, procured himself to be ac- knowledged king and reigned eleven years; after him, his son, Antiochus Eupator, reigned two years. At length Demetrius Soter regained his father’s throne. He is often mentioned in the books of the Maccabees. (2) Demetrius II. Demetrius Nicanor, or Ni- cator, son of Demetrius Soter, was for many years deprived of the throne by Alexander Balas; but he at length recovered it by the assistance of Ptolemy Philometor, his father-in-law. After a number of vicissitudes, he was killed (B. C. I25), and was succeeded by his eldest son, Seleucus, to whom he left a dangerous rival in the person of Alexander, surnamed Zebina. (3) Demetrius III (surnamed Eukairos, “Prosperous,” and on coins Theos, Soter, Philo- metor, etc.) was a Son of Antiochus Grypus, and DEMON 515 grandson of Demetrius Nicator. On the death of his father civil wars ensued, in the course of which two of his elder brothers lost their lives, whilst Philip, the third, secured a part of Syria, and Demetrius established himself in Coele-Syria, with Damascus as his capital, by the aid of Pto- lemy. Lathyrus, king of Cyprus (Jos. Amt. xiii; xiii: 4). In Judaea, too, civil war broke out between Alexander Jannaeus and his Pharisee subjects. The latter invited the assistance of Demetrit.s (Jos. Ant. xiii; xiii:5; Wars, I ; iv:4), who pos- sibly regarded it as a good opportunity to extend his kingdom to its ancient limits on the west and the south. He entered the country with a large army, was joined by the insurgent Jews, and de- feated Jannaeus in a pitched battle near Shechem (Jos. Ant. xiii; xiv.: I ; Wars, I ; iv:5). After various vicissitudes he was taken prisoner and sent to Arsaces IX, and by him was confined until his death. He probably reigned from B. C. 95–88. R. W. Moss, Hastings' Bib. Dict. DEMON (dē-mon), (Gr. 6alpºwv, da/.'ee-zzzozym, and its derivative, 6alpóvuov, da/ee-mon'ee-on). This word has been used by ancient writers with great latitude, being applied by them to every order of beings superior to man, including even the highest. It is applied to any particular divinity. J'ummary of Opinions. Since no distinct ideas of the ancient Jewish doctrines concerning demons can be obtained from the Septuagint, we next have recourse to the heathens, and from their writings, owing to the universal prevalence of belief in demons, ample information may be obtained. The following is offered as a Summary of their opinions: (1) Middle Beings. Demons, in the theology of the Gentiles, are middle beings between gods and mortals. This is the judgment of Plato, which will be considered decisive: ‘Every demon is a middle being between God and mortal.’ He thus explains what he means by a middle being : ‘God is not approached immediately by man, but all the commerce and intercourse between gods and men are performed by the mediation of demons.’ He enters into further particu- lars: “Demons are reporters and carriers from men to the gods, and again from the gods to men, of the supplications and prayers of the one, and of the injunctions and rewards of devotion from the other” (Plato, Sympos., pp. 202, 203, tom. iii ed. Serran.). “And this,’ says the learned Mede, “was the aecumenical philosophy of the apostles' times and of the times long before them.’ (2) Of Two Kinds. kinds; the one were the souls of good men, which upon their departure from the body were called heroes, were afterward raised to the dignity of demons, and subsequently to that of gods (Plu- tarch, De Defect. Orac.). Plato (Cratylus, p. 398, tom. i edit. Serran.) says ‘the poets Speak ex- cellently who affirm that when good men die they attain great honor and dignity, and become de- mons.’ It is also admitted that Jamblichus, Hjer- ocles and Simplicius use the words angels and demons indiscriminately. Philo (De Gigantibus) says that souls, demons and angels are only dif- ferent names that imply one and the same sub- stance, and he affirms (De Somm.) that Moses calls those angels whom the philosophers call de- IIT Of S. (3) Souls of Bad Men. It was also believed that the souls of bad men became evil demons (Chalcid, in Platon. Tim., cap. 135, p.339). Ac- cordingly 6alpóvios often occurs in ancient, au: thors as a term of reproach. The other kind of demons were of more noble origin than the Demons were of two DEMONIAC human race, having never inhabited human bodies (Plato, Tim., pp. 41, 42, 69, 71, 75; Apuleius, De Deo Socratis, p. 690). (4) Objects of Worship. Those demons who had once been souls of men were the objects of immediate worship among the heathens (Deut. xxvi; I4; Ps. cwi:28; Is. viii:19), and it is in contradistinction to these that Jehovah is so fre- quently called ‘the living God’ (Deut. v :6, etc.; Farmer's Essay on the Demoniacs, Zassim). (5) Malignant. The heathens held that some demons were malignant by nature, and not merely So when provoked and offended. Plutarch says, ‘it is a very ancient opinion that there are cer- tain wicked and malignant demons, who envy good men, and endeavor to hinder them in the pursuit of virtue, lest men should be partakers of greater happiness than they enjoy' (Plut. Dion., p. 958, tom. i edit. Paris, 1624). On this passage Bishop Newton remarks: ‘This was the opinion of all the later philosophers, and Plutarch unde- niably affirms it of the very ancient ones' (Dissert. on the Proph., Lond., 1826, p. 476). Pythagoras held that certain demons sent diseases to men . and cattle (Diog. Laert., Vit. Pythag., p. 514, ed. Amstel.). Zaleucus, in his preface to his Laws (apud Stobaum, Serm. xlii), supposes that an evil demon might be present with a witness to influence him to injustice. In later times Josephus uses the word demon always in a bad sense, as do the writers of the New Testament, when using it as from them- selves, and in their own sense of it (De Bell. Jud. vii;6, sec. 3). “Demons are no other than the spirits of the wicked, that enter into men and kill them, unless they can obtain some help against them.” For proof of the latter assertion we must refer the reader to the contents of the New Testa- ment, and if necessary for a reconciliation of the apparent exceptions, to Farmer’s Essay.” Demons of New Testament. It is fre- quently supposed that the demons of the New Testament are fallen angels; on the contrary, it is maintained by Farmer that the word is never applied to the Devil and his angels, and that there is no sufficient reason for restricting the term to spirits of a higher order than mankind. They who uphold the former opinion urge that our Lord, when accused of casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of demons, replies, How can Satan cast out Satan? (Mark iii:23, etc.). There is no doubt but that Satan and Diabolus are the same, and hence Beelzebub and Diabolus are evidently the same being. It is further urged that it is but fair and natural to suppose that the writers of the New Testament use the word de- mons in the same sense 1n which 1t was under- stood by their contemporaries, which, as it appears from Josephus and other authorities, was, that of the spirits of the wicked, and that if these writ- ers had meant anything else they would have given notice of so wide a deviation from popular usage. The writings of the Fathers show that they sometimes understood the demons to be fallen angels; at other times they use the word in the same sense as the ancient philosophers. Justin Martyr affirms (Apol. i :2, p. 65) that ‘those persons who are seized and thrown down by the souls of the deceased are such as all men agree in calling demoniacs, or mad.' (Cretizer, Religions de l’Antiquité, iii, pt. I, pp. I-55; . pt. iii, p. 873 ff.; Campbell, Four Gospels, Prel. Diss., vi, pl. I). - . F. D. DEMONIAC (dē-mö'nï-āk), (Gr. 6alpout; opat, dahee-mon-id"zom-ahee, to be under the power of a demon, rendered “possessed with a devil,” pos- sessed of an evil spirit). - 1) EMON IAC Demonized persons, in the New Testament, are those who were supposed to have a demon or de- mons occupying them, suspending the faculties of their minds and governing the members of their bodies, so hat what was said and done by the demoniacs was ascribed to the indwelling demon. Apollonius thus addresses a youth supposed to be possessed : ‘I am treated contumeliously by the demon, and not by thee' (Comp. Matt. viii: 28, 31 ; Mark v.2; ix:12; Luke viii:27, 32). 1. Reality of TXemoniacal Possession. The correctness of the opinion respecting those who are called 6alp.ovićuevot in the New Testament which prevailed among the Jews and other nations in the time of Our Lord and his apostles has been called in question. On the one hand, it is urged that the details of the evangelical history afford decisive evidence of the truth and reality of de- moniacal possessions in the sense already ex- plained, at least during the commencement of Christianity; on the other hand, it is contended that the accounts in question may all be under- stood as the phenomena of certain diseases, par- ticularly hypochondria, insanity and epilepsy; that the sacred writers used the popular language in reference to the subject, but that they themselves understood no more than that the persons were the subjects of ordinary diseases. Here issue is joined—and it is to the evidence in this cause that our attention will now be directed. Those who contend that the demoniacs were really possessed by an evil spirit urge the follow- ing considerations : (1) Unusual Expressions. The demoniacs express themselves in a way unusual for hypo- chondriacal, insane or epileptic persons (Matt. viii:29; Mark i :24); they possessed supernatural strength (Mark v :4); they adjure Jesus not to torment them; they answer the questions proposed to them in a rational manner; they are distinctly said to have “come out of men and to have ‘en- tered into swine,’ and that consequently the whole herd, amounting to about 2,000, ran violently down a precipice into the sea (Matt. viii:32; Mark v:13). The supposition which has been main- tained by Lardner, among others, that the Swine were driven into the sea by the demoniacs is irre- concilable with the language of the narrative, be- ing also highly improbable in itself; madmen do not act in concert, and rarely pursue the same train of maniacal reasoning. (2) Not Mental Diseases. No mental diseases are predicated of the dumb (Matt. ix:32), or of the blind and dumb (Matt. xii:22). Do such dis- eases ever produce blindness? (3) Epilepsy. It is admitted that the symptoms of the youth described in Matt. xvii:15; Mark ix: I7; Lukc ix:39 coincide precisely with thosc of epilepsy, but they are attributed to the agency of the demon on that very account. (4) Spirit of Divination. The damsel at Philippi is said to have been possessed with a spirit of divination, which was the means of ob- taining much gain to her masters, and to have understood the Divine commission of Paul and his companions (Acts xvi; I7). Is this to be ascribed merely to an aberration of mind P (5) Confession. The demoniacs themselves confess that they were possessed with demons (Mark v :9); the same is asserted of them by their relatives (Matt. xv :22). The apostles and evan- gelists assert that persons possessed with demons were brought unto Jesus (Matt. iv:24; Mark i : 32), or met him (Luke viii:27). Jesus commands them not to make him known as the Messiah 516 DEMONIAC (Mark i :34, margin); rebuked them (Matt. xvii: 18). The evangelists declare that the demons de- parted from their victims at his command (Matt. xvii: 18; Mark ix:25, 26; Luke iv:35; xi :14); and Jesus himself asserts it (Luke xiii:32). (6) Distinctions. The writers of the New Testament make distinctions between the diseased and the demoniacs (Mark i :32; Luke vi :17, 18); and Jesus himself does so (Matt. x:8, etc.). r (7) Recognition of the Christ. The demo- niacs knew Jesus to be the Son of God (Matt. y111 º Mark i :24; v :7), and the Christ (Luke 1V 4 I ). :* (8) Jesus Calls Them Demons. Jesus ad- dresses the demons (Matt. viii:32; Mark v :18; ix:25; Luke iv:35); so does Paul (Acts xvi :18). Jesus bids them be silent (Mark i :25); to depart and enter no more into the person (Mark ix:25). (9) Called Demons by the Seventy. In Luke x the Seventy are related to have returned to Jesus, saying: ‘Lord, even the demons are subject to us through thy name; and Jesus replies (verse I8): “I beheld Satan, as lightning, fall from heaven.’ (10) No Discord Among Demons. When Jesus was accused by the Pharisees of casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons, he argued that there could be no discord among demoniacal beings (Matt. xii:25, etc.). (11) Natural History. Jesus makes certain gratuitous observations respecting demons (see Matt. xii:43, 44), which seem like facts in their natural history. In regard to the demon cast out of the youth, which the disciples could not cast Out, he says: ‘This kind (i. e., of demons) goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.' Can these words be understood otherwise than as revealing a real and particular fact respecting the nature of demons (Matt. xvii:21) P (12) Bound by Satan. The woman which had a spirit of infirmity, and was bowed together (Luke xiii:II) is, by our Lord himself, said to have been bound by Satan (v :16). In the same way St. Peter speaks of all the persons who were healed by Jesus, as being ‘oppressed of the devil' (Acts x:38). (13) Casting Out of Devils. It is further pleaded that it sinks the importance and dignity of our Saviour’s miracles to suppose that when he is said to have cast out devils all that is meant is that he healed diseases. 2. Theories of Opponents. To these argu- ments the opponents of the theory of real de- moniacal possessions reply generally that there can be no doubt that it was the general belief of the Jewish nation, with the exception of the Sadducees, and of most other nations, that the spirits of dead men, especially of those who had lived cvil lives, and died violent deaths, were permitted to enter the bodies of men, and to pro- duce the effects ascribed to them in the popular creed; but the fact and real state of the case was that those who were considered to be pos- ‘sessed were afflicted with some peculiar diseases of mind or body, which, their true causes not being generally understood, were, as is usual in such cases, ascribed to supernatural powers, and that Jesus and his apostles, wishing, of course, to be understood by their contemporaries, and owing to other reasons which can be pointed out, were under the necessity of expressing themselves in popular language, and of Seeming to admit, or at least of not denying, its correctness. They fur- ther plead that the fact, admitted on all hands, that the demon so actuated the possessed as that whatever they did was not to be distinguished DEMONIAC from his agency, reduces the question, so far as £/emo/tena are concerned, to one simple inquiry, namely, whether these phenomena are such as can be accounted for without resorting to Supernat- ural agency. They assert that the symptoms pred- icated of demoniacs correspond with the Ordi- nary symptoms of disease, and especially of hypo- chondria, insanity and epilepsy; that the Sacred writers themselves give intimations, as plain as could be expected under the circumstances, that they employed popular language; that consequently they are not to be considered as teaching doc- trines or asserting facts when they use such lan- guage, and that the doctrine of the agency of de- parted spirits on the bodies of men is inconsistent with certain peculiar and express doctrines of Christ and his apostles. (1) Symptoms Cured. With regard to the symptoms related of the demoniacs, it is urged that such persons as were called demoniacs in other cºuntries, and who seem to have labored under precisely the same symptoms, are recorded to have been cured by the use of medicine. Jo- Sephus and the Jewish physicians speak of medi- cines composed of Stones, roots and herbs being useful to demoniacs (Gittei, f. 67). The cure of diseases by such methods is intelligible, but is it rational to believe that the spirits of dead men were dislodged from human bodies by medical prescriptions f Maimonides (in Sabat. ii:5) says: “All kinds of diseases which are called melancholy they call an evil spirit' (Comp. Matt. xi :18; John vii:20: x:20). (2) Madmen. With regard to the two demoni- acs at Gadara (or one, according to Mark and Luke), it is concluded that they were madmen, who fancied that there were within them innumer- able spirits of dead men. Accordingly they dwelt among the tombs about which the souls of the dead were believed to hover, went naked, were ungovernable, cried aloud, attacked passengers, beat themselves and had in their frenzy broken every chain by which they had been bound. Strength almost superhuman is a common at- tendant on insanity. Their question, ‘Art thou come to torment us?’ refers to the cruel treat- ment of the insane in those times, and which they had no doubt shared, in the endeavors of men to “tame’ them. Both Mark and Luke the physi- czan describe the demoniac as a wºpovoúvra in ‘his right mind,” when healed, which implies previous insanity. (See also Matt. xii:22; xv.: 28; xvii: 18; Luke vii:21; viii:2; ix:42.) It is true that these demoniacs address Jesus as the Son of God, but they might have heard in their 111cid intervals that Jesus, whose fame was al- ready diffused throughout Syria, was regarded by the people as the Messiah. They show their in- sanity, ‘their shaping fancies,’ by imagining they were demons without number, and by requesting permission to enter the swine. Would actual demons choose such an habitation ? They speak and answer, indeed, in a rational manner, but agreeably to Locke’s definition of madmen, “they reason right on false principles, and, taking their fancies for realities, make right deductions from them. Thus you shall find a distracted man fancying himself a king, and with a right in- ference require suitable attendance. Others, who have thought themselves glass, take the needful care to preserve such brittle bodies' (Essay on Hitman Understanding, vol. i., chap. II, sec. 12). It is true that Jesus commands the unclean spirit (so called because believed to be the spirit of a dead man), bitt he does this merely to excite the attention of the people, and to give them full opportunity to observe the miracle. It is not 517 DEMONIAC necessary to suppose that the madmen drove the Swine, but merely that, in keeping with all the circumstances, the insanity of the demoniacs was transferred to them, as the leprosy of Naaman was transferred to Gehazi, for the purpose of illustrating the miraculous power of Christ; and though this was a punitive miracle, it might serve the good purpose of discouraging the expectation of temporal benefits from him. If the demoniac is represented as worshiping Jesus, it should be remembered that the insane often show great respect to particular persons. (3) Naturally Blind and Dumb. The men who were dumb, and both blind and dumb, are not said to have been disordered in their intellects any more than the blind man in John v. The disease in their organs was popularly ascribed to the influence of demons. It is observable that in the parallel passage (Matt. ix:32), the evan- gelist says the man was dumb. (4) Epilepsy. The symptoms of epilepsy in the youth described (Matt. xvii: 15) are too evi- dent not to be acknowledged. If the opinion of relatives is to be pressed, it should be noticed that in this case the father says his ‘son is lunatic.” It was most probably a case of combined epilepsy and lunacy, which has been common in all ages. Epi- lepsy was ascribed to the influence of the moon in those times. The literal interpretation of popular language would therefore require us to believe that he was ‘moonstruck,” as well as a demoniac. (5) Spirit of Apollo. The damsel at Philippi is said by Luke to have been possessed with a spirit of Apollo. It was her fixed idea. The gift of divination is said by Cicero to have been ascribed to Apollo (De Divinat. i :5). Insane per- sons, pretending to prophesy under the influence of Apollo, would be likely to gain money from the credulous. A belief among the common people that the ravings of insanity were sacred was not confined to Egypt. The larvati, the lymphatici, the cerriti of the Romans signify possessed per- sons. The apostle, who taught that an idol is nothing in the world,” did not believe in the reality of her soothsaying. Many demoniacs are men- tioned, the peculiar symptoms of whose diseases are not stated, as Mary Magdalene (Mark xvi :9), out of whom Jesus cast seven demons, i. e., re- stored from an inveterate insanity (seven being the Jewish number of perfection), supposed to be caused by the united agency of seven spirits of the dead. Yet she is said to have been healed (Luke W111 :2 ) . ô'ourist Rebuked Other Objects. If Jesus forbade the demoniacs to say he was the Christ, it was because the declaration of such persons on the subject would do more harm than good. he rebuked them he also rebuked the wind (Matt. viii:26), and the fever (Luke iv:39). If it be said of them they departed, so it is also said of the leprosy (Mark i :42). (7) Questionable Distinctions. It may be questioned whether the writers of the New Tes- tament make a distinction between the diseased and those possessed of demons, or whether they specify the demoniacs by themselves, as they spe- cify the lunatics (Matt. iv:24), merely as a dis- tinct and peculiar class of the sick. It is, how- ever, most important to observe that St. Peter includes “all” who were healed by Jesus under the phrase them that were oppressed of the devil, many of whom were not described by the evan- gelists as subjects of demoniacal possession. Some- times the specification of the demoniacs is omitted in the general recitals of miraculous cures (Matt. xi :5), and this, too, on the important occasion of our Lord sending to John the Baptist an account DEMON IAC of the miraculous evidence attending his preach- ing (Matt. xi :5). Does not this look as if they were considered as included under the sick? (8) Not All Knew Jesus. It cannot be proved that all the demoniacs knew Jesus to be the Mes- siah. (9) Addressed Persons. It is admitted that Jesus addresses the demons, but then it may be said that his doing so has reference partly to the persons themselves in whom demons were sup- posed to be, and partly to the bystanders; for the same reason that he rebuked the winds in an audible voice, as also the fever. (10) Our Lord’s Reply. With regard to our Lord's reply to the Seventy, it will not be urged that it was intended of a local fall of Satan from heaven, unless it may be supposed to allude to his primeval expulsion; but this sense is scarcely rel- evant to the occasion. If, then, the literal sense be necessarily departed from, a choice must be made out of the various figurative interpretations of which the words admit; and taking the word Satan here in its generic sense, of whatever is in- imical or opposed to the Gospel, Jesus may be un- derstood to say, I foresaw the glorious results of your mission in the triumphs which would attend it over the most formidable obstacles. Heaven is often used in the sense of political horizon (Is. xiv: I2, I3; Matt. xxiv:29). To be cast from heaven to hell is a phrase for total downfall (Luke x:15; Rev. xii:7-9). Cicero says to Mark An- tony : ‘You have hurled your colleagues down from heaven.” Satan is here used figuratively. Our Lord does not, therefore, assert the real oper- ation of demons. (11) Refutation of Charges. In the refuta- tion of the charge that he cast out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of the demons, he simply argues with the Pharisees upon their own prim- ciples, and ‘judges them out of their own mouth,' without assuming the truth of those principles. (12) Popular Creed of the Jews. The facts he seems to assert respecting the wandering of demons through dry places (Matt. xii:43) were already admitted in the popular creed of the Jews. They believed that demons wandered in desolate places (Baruch iv:35). Upon these ideas he founds a parable or similitude, without involving an opinion of their accuracy, to describe “the end of this generation.” The observations respecting prayer and fasting seem to have relation to that faith in God which he exhorts his apostles to ob- tain. Prayer and fasting would serve to enable them to perceive the Divine suggestion which ac- companied every miracle, and which the apostlcs had not perceived upon this occasion, though given them, because their animal nature had not been sufficiently subdued. (13) Loosing Daughter of Abraham. The application of the term Satan to the case of the woman who had a spirit of infirmity is plainly an argumentum ad hominem. It is intended to heighten the antithesis between the loosing of an ox from his stall and loosing the daughter of Abraham, whom Satan, as they believed, had bound eighteen years. (14) Cure of Diseases. The objection taken from the supposed consequence of explaining the casting out of demons to signify no more than the cure of diseases, that it tends to lower the dignity of the Saviour's miracles, depends upon the reader's complexion of mind, his prior knowl- edge of the relative dignity of miracles, and some other things, perhaps, of which we are not com— petent judges. (15) Theory Opposed to Express Doctrines. The theory of demoniacal possessions is opposed ^ 518 DENIAL to the known and express doctrines of Christ and his Apostles. They teach us that the spirits of the dead enter a state corresponding to their char- acter, no more to return to this world (Luke xvi.22, etc.; xxiii:43; 2 Cor. v . I ; Phil. i :21). With regard to the fallen angels, the representa- tions of their confinement are totally opposed to the notion of their wandering about the world and tormenting its inhabitants (2 Peter ii:4; Jude, verse 6). If it be said that Jesus did not correct the popular opinion, still he nowhere denies that the phenomena in question arose from diseases only. He took no side; it was not his province. It was not necessary to attack the misconception in a formal manner; it would be supplanted when- ever his doctrine respecting the state of the dead was embraced. To have done so would have engaged Our Lord in prolix arguments with a people in whom the notion was so deeply rooted, and have led him away too much from the pur- poses of his ministry. It was one of the many things he had to say, but they could not then bear them.’ It is finally urged that the antide- moniacal theory does not detract from the Divine authority of the Saviour, the reality of his mir- acles, or the integrity of the historians. Sub ju- dice lis est (Jahn's Biblisches Archaeologie, Up- ham’s transl. ; Winer’s Biblisches Real-woerter- buch, art. ‘Besessene;’ Moses Stuart’s Sketches of Angelology in Bibliotheca Sacra, London and New York, 1843; Roberts’ Oriental Illustrations of Scripture; Morrison, On Matthew, pp. 157– I68; Sam. Hopkins' Demoniacal Possessions of the New Testament, in Am. Presb. and Theol. Rev., October, 1865). J. F. D. DEN (dén), (Heb. "Nº, meh-aw-raw', with other Hebrew words), Is. xxxii:I4; Jer. vii:II, a cave, Is. xi:8, a hole, Ps. civ 22, a covert, Ps. x:9; Jer. ix:II; x:22, a Zazz, Heb. xi:38; Rev. vi.15; Matt. xxi.; 13; Mark xi:17, a recess for hiding. In Dan. vi. den of Zions is mentioned as a means of execution. This has been confirmed by discoveries at Baby- lon. (See Porter, Travels in Persia, ii. 476.) DENARIUS (dē-nā’rī-lìs), (Gr. 6mváptov, day-mar'- ee-on), the principal silver coin of the Romans, which took its name from having been originally equal to Zen ases. It was in later times (after B. C. 217) current also among the Jews, and is the coin which is called ‘a penny’ in the Authorized Version. The denarii were first coined in B. C. 269, or four years after the first Punic war began, and the more ancient specimens are much heavier than those of later dale. Those coined in the early period of the commonwealth have the average weight of 60 grains, and those coined under the empire of 52.5 grains. With some allowance for alloy, the former would be worth 8%d. (17 cents), and the latter 7%d, (I5 cents). It has been supposed, however, that the reduction of weight did not take place till the time of Nero, and in that case the denarii mentioned in the Gospels must have been of the former weight and value, although 15 cents is the usual computation. A denarius was the day-wages of a laborer in Palestine (Matt. xx : 2, 9, 13), and the daily pay of a Roman soldier was less (Tacit. Ann. i :17). In the time of Christ the denarius bore the image of the emperor (Matt. xxii:19; Mark xii:I5), but formerly it was im- pressed with the symbols of the republic. DENIAL (dé-ni-al). 1. Heb. *T2, AEazy-Ahash", to be untrue, disown (Josh. xxiv:27; Prov. xxx:9). 2. Gr. 3 trapwéopat, aft-ar-71e/h'oz/2-a/hee, to de- clare that one has no knowledge of or connection DENIAL OF CHRIST with another; of Peter denying Christ (Matt. xxvi. 34, sq., 75; Mark xiv:30, sq., 72; Luke xxii:34, 61); to deny one's self, to lose sight of one's self and one's own interests (Matt. xvi;24; Mark viii:34; Luke 1X:23). 㺠'Gr dpvéopat, ar-7teh'om-ahee, to deny a state- ment (Mark xiv:70) or occurrence (Acts iv: I6). DENIAL OF CHRIST (dé-ni-al Óv krist). PETER. See DENOUNCE (dé-nouns), (Heb. 733, maw-gad", Deut. xxx:18), primitive, to confront fairly, to stand boldly opposite, certify. Hence as in Deut. xxx:18 to announce, declare, proclaim. DEPOSIT (dē-pöz'it), property kept by one man at another's request, which could be used provided it was returned intact. Under the Mosaic law such property consisted of (I) money or stuff; (2) all ass, or all Ox, or a sheep, or ally beast (Ex. XXII:7-13; Lev. v 1.5, O.). DEPRAVITY (dé-práv'í-ty). In theology the term depravity deliotes Corruption, a change from perfection to impey fection, the sinfulness of man's nature. (See FALL OF MAN ; SIN). DEPTH (dépth). See AByss. DEPUTY (dép'ū-ty), the rendering of several words: Peh-khaw' (Heb. Tºº, Esth. viii:9; ix:3; R.V., governor); AVäts-fsawó' (Heb. P}3, aft/oznded), a Żrefect, Gr. div6%tratos, aztáh-oo'Zaz-os, Acts xiii: 7; Comp. xviii: 12. Vulg. and R.V., “proconsul.” In general, a deputy is an inferior ruler appointed by a superior (I Kings xxii:47). (See PROCON- SUL.) DERBE (dèr-be), (Gr. Aépgm, der' bay). A small town of Lycaonia, in Asia Minor, at the foot of the Taurian Mountains, 60 miles South by east from Iconium, and 18 miles east of Lystra. It was the birthplace of Gaius, the friend and fellow-traveler of Paul (Acts xx:4), and it was to this place that Paul and Barnabas fled when expelled from Iconium, A. D. 41 (Acts xiv:6, 2I). On his second missionary tour Paul again, visited Derbe (Acts, xvi;I). Hamilton, Re- searches in Asia Minor, ii:313. DESERTS (dēz'êrts), (Heb. "P.P., ar-aw-baw'). . In the East, wide, extended plains are usually liable to drought, and consequently to barrenness. Hence the Hebrew language describes a plain, a desert, and an unfruitful waste, by the same word, Arabah. The term, which is in general rendered ‘wilderness, `TP, mid-bawr', means, properly, a graging tract, uncultivated and destitute of wood, but fit for pasture –-a heath or steppe. The pastures of the zwilderness are mentioned in Ps. lxv.13; Joel i:19; Joel ii:20, and may be very well explained by reference to the fact that even the Desert of Arabia, which is utterly burnt up with excessive drought in summer, is in winter and spring covered with rich and tender herbage. Whence it is that the Arabian tribes retreat into their deserts on the approach of the autumnal rains, and when spring has ended and the droughts commence, return to the lands of rivers and mountains in search of the pastures which the deserts no longer afford. The same word may therefore denote a region which is desert, and also one which, at stated seasons, contains rich and abundant pastures. But in fact the word translated in our Bibles by “desert’ or ‘wilderness’ often means no more than the common, unculti- vated grounds in the neighborhood of towns on which the inhabitants grazed their domestic cattle. * 5 19 DEUTERO–CANONICAL BOOKS A great desert or wilderness is generally ex- pressed by the word Tºº, yesh-ee-mone', from Egº, yaw-shawm’, ‘to be waste or ‘desolate’ (I Sam. xxiii: IQ, 24; Is. xliii:19, 20). This word is espe- cially applied to that desert of Stony Arabia in which the Israelites sojourned under Moses Num. xxi.20; xxiii:28; Ps. lxviii:7; lxxviii:40, etc.). This was the most terrible of the deserts with which the Israelites were acquainted, and the only real desert in their immediate neighbor- hood. It is described under Arabia, as is also that Eastern desert extending from the eastern border of the country beyond Judaea to the Eu- phrates. It is emphatically called ‘the Desert,’ without any proper name, in Exod. xxiii:3I ; Deut. xi :24. (See EDOM ; ETHAM ; Juda H ; KA- DESH ; MAON ; PARAN ; SHUR ; SIN; SINAI.) DESIRE (de-zir'), (Heb. "Fººl, Ahem-daw), ' ' (a r’’: " ... 2 “without being desired” is used (2 Chron. xxi.20) in the sense of being unregretted. DESIRE OF ALL NATIONS (nà'shūns), literally the deſight or costly of all the nations (Hag. ii:7). The term is usually applied to the Messiah; but the proper translation would be, as in the Revised Version, “the desirable things of all nations shall come.” DESPITE (dé-spit"), (Gr. 3vv8ptºw, em-oo-brid"go, Heb. x:29, to insult, to treat with contempt; Heb. 989, sheá-awt", contempt, Ezek. xxv.6). DESPITEFUL (dé-spit’ful), (Heb. ???, sheh- awt", to push aside, Ezek. xxv.15; Gr. Čirmpeášw, eff-ay-reh-ad"zo, to insult ; A. V., “despitefully,” Matt. v.:44; Luke vi;28; Gr. 56ptºw, oo-Örzd"20, to abuse, Acts xiv:5; Rom. i.30). * DESTROYER (dé-stroi'ār), (Heb. Fºº, mash- Áheeth", an exterminator, Ex. xii:23), the agent employed in the slaying of the firstborn (Heb. xi.28; Gr. 6 ÖNoëpévov, Ad /o/-off-ryoo'om), the angel or messenger of God (2 Sam. xxiv:15, 16; 2 Kings xix:35; Ps. lxxviii:47; Acts xii:23). DESTRUCTION (dé-strik'shūn), (Heb. Tº-N, ab-ad-dome', a Żerishing, Job xxvi;6; xxxi:12; Ps. lxxxviii:II; Prov. xv. II), means a place of destruc- tion, abyss, and is nearly equivalent to SHEOL (which see). DESTRUCTION, CITY OF. See ON. DEUEL (de-u'el), (Heb. *S*, deh-oo-aſe, known of God), father of Eliasaph, the captain of the tribe of Gad at the time of the census in Sinai (Num. i:14; vii:42, 47; x:2O). In Num. ii: I4 the name occurs again as Reuel, owing to the interchange of the very similar in- itial letters (B. C. about 1657). DEUTERO-CANONICAL BOOKS (dü'tér-à- kā-nón'í-kal books), a term applied in modern times to denote those sacred books which, originally denominated ecc/esiastica/and affocry//ha/, were not in the Jewish or Hebrew Canon, but, as being con- tained in the old Greek versions, were publicly read in the early Christian Church. (See CANON; APOCRYPHA.) It is acknowledged by all that these books never had a place in the Jewish Canon. Rufinus made the same distinction in regard to the books of Scripture that Jerome did. After enumerating the books of the Old and New Tes- tament exactly according to the Jewish canon, saying: ‘These are the volumes which the Fathers have included in the canon, and out of which they would have us prove the doctrines of our faith,’ IDEUTERO–CANONICAL BOOKS —he adds: ‘However, it ought to be observed that there are also other books which are not canon- ical, but have been called by our forefathers ec- clesiastical; as the Wisdom of Solomon, and an- other called the Wisdom of the Son of Sirach. Of the same order is the book of Tobit, Judith and the books of the Maccabees. In the New Testament is the book of the Shepherd of Hermas, which is called the “Two Ways, or the Judgment of Peter;” all which they would have to be read in the churches, but not alleged by way of author- ity for proving articles of faith. Other Scriptures they call apocryphal, which they would not have to be read in the churches' (In Symb. Apost). 1. Early Catalogues. There were three, di- visions made by the ancient authorities, viz., the Canonical Scriptures, the Ecclesiastical, and the Apocryphal, or otherwise the canonical and apoc- ryphal, of which latter there are two kinds, viz., those which, having nothing contrary to the faith, may be profitably read, although not authen- tic, and those which are injurious and contrary to the faith. It is, however, maintained by Professor Alber that, when Jerome and Rufinus said the Ec- clesiastical books were read for edification, but-not for confirming articles of faith, they only meant that they were not to be employed in controversies with the Jews, who did not acknowledge their au thority. These fathers, however, certainly put them into the same rank with the Shepherd of Hermas. (1) Earliest Catalogue. The earliest cata- logue which we possess of the books of Scripture is that of Melito, Bishop of Sardis, preserved by Eusebius. From his statement, written in the year I70, it seems evident that there had been no cata- logue authorized by the church or any public body. He enumerates the books of the Jewish canon only, from which, however, he omits the book of Esther. (See ESTHER.) (2) Council of Laodicea. The first catalogue of the Holy Scriptures drawn up by any public body in the Christian church which has come down to us is that of the Council of Laodicea, in Phrygia, supposed to be held about the year 365. According to a canon of this council the books of the Old Testament which ought to be read are these: (1) Genesis; (2) Exodus; (3) Leviticus; (4) Numbers; (5) Deuteronomy; (6) Joshua, son of Nun ; (7) Judges, with Ruth ; (8) Esther; (9) I and 2 Kingdoms; (IO) 3 and 4 Kingdoms; (II) I and 2 Remains; (I2) I and 2 Esdras; (13) the book of I50 Psalms; (14) Proverbs; (15) Bcclesiastes; (16) Canticles; (17) Job; (18) the Twelve Prophets; (19) Isaiah ; (20) Jeremiah and Baruch, the Lamentations and the Epistles; (21) Ezekiel ; (22) Daniel. We have already given the books of the New Testament as enumer- ated by this council (see ANTILEGOMENA). This catalogue is not, however, universally acknowl- edged to be genuine. But besides the Hebrew Canon there were cer- tain other books publicly read in the primitive church, and treated with a light degree of respect, although not considered by the Hebrews, from whom they were derived, as of equal authority with the former. Josephus, a contemporary of the apostles, after describing the Jewish Canon (Contr. A p. i :8), which he says consists of 22 books, remarks: ‘but from the reign of Artaxerxes to within our memory there have been several things committed to writing, which, however, have not acquired the same degree of credit and ant- thority as the former books, inasmuch as the tradition and succession of the prophets were less certain.” These books seem to have been in- cluded in the copies of the Septuagint, which were 520 DEUTERO–CANONICAL BOOKS generally used by the sacred writers of the New Testament. It does not appear whether the apos- tles gave any caution against the reading of these books; and it has been even supposed that they have referred to them. Some of the uncanonical books, however, had not been extant more than 130 years at most at the Christian era, and could only have obtained a place in the Greek Scriptures a short time before this period; but the only copies of the Scriptures in existence for the first 300 years after Christ, either among the Jews or Christians of Greece, Italy, or Africa, contained these books without any mark of distinction that we know of. The Hebrew Bible and language were quite unknown to them during this period, and the most learned were probably but ill-informed on the subject, at least before Jerome's translation of the Scriptures from the original Hebrew. The Latin versions before his time were all made from the Septua- gint. We do not, indeed, find any catalogue of these writings before the Council of Hippo, but Only individual notices of separate books. Thus Clement of Alexandria (Stromata, A. D. 211), cites the Wisdom of Solomon and Ecclesiasticus, and Origen refers to several of these books, treat- ing them with a high degree of veneration. (3) Council of Hippo. The local Council of Hippo, held in the year of Christ 393, at which the celebrated Augustine, afterward Bishop of Hippo, was present, formed a catalogue of the sacred books of the Old and New Testament, in which the ecclesiastical books were all included. They are inserted in the following order in its 36th canon, viz.: ‘That nothing be read in the church besides the Canonical Scriptures. Under the name of Canonical Scriptures are reckoned Genesis, Ex- odus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, J11dges, R11th, four books of Kings, Remains, Job, Psalms of David, five books of Solomon, twelve books of the Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Hesther, Esdras, two books, Maccabees 2 books.’ (For the books of the New Testament, see ANTILEGOMENA.) (4) Council of Carthage. The third Council of Carthage, generally believed to have been held in 397, at which Aurelius, bishop of Carthage, pre- sided, and at which Augustine was present, con- sisting in all of forty-four bishops, adopted the same catalogue, which was confirmed at the fourth Council of Carthage, held in the year 419. (5) Roman Council. The next catalogue is that of the Roman Council, drawn up by Pope Gelasius and seventy bishops. The genuineness of the acts of this council has been questioned by Pearson, Cave and the two Basnages, but vindi- cated by Pagi and Jeremiah Jones. The catalogue is identical with the preceding, except in the order of the books. (6) Alexandrian Manuscripts. Some of the most important manuscripts of the Holy Scrip- tures which have descended to us were written soon after this period. The very ancient Alexan- drian MS. now in the British Museum contains the following books in the order which we here give them, together with the annexed catalogue: ‘Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deute- ronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 8 books. King- doms, 4; Remains, 2,-6 books. I6 Prophets, viz., Hosea, I; Amos, 2; Micah, 3; Joel, 4; Obadiah, 5; Jonah, 6; Nahum, 7; Ambacum, 8; Zephaniah, 9; Haggai, IO; Zechariah, I I ; Malachi, 12; Isaiah, 13; Jeremiah, I4; Ezekiel, 15; Daniel, 16. Esther; Tobit; Judith; Ezra, 2; Maccabees, 4; Psaltel and Hymns; Job; Proverbs; Ecclesiastes; Canti- cles; Wisdom; Wisdom of Jesus Sirach; 4 Gos- DEUTE RO–CANONICAL BOOKS pels; Acts, I ; 7 Catholic Epistles; I4 Epistles of Paul; Revelation; 2 Epistles of Clement, together tº º books; Psalms of Solomon.” These books are equally incorporated in all the manu- scripts of the Latin Vulgate (which was originally translated from the Septuagint). Those which Jerome did not translate from the Hebrew or Greek, as Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, were adopted from the older Latin version. Although the Canon of Scripture seemed now to be so far settled by the decrees of these Coun- cils, all did not conceive themselves bound by them, and it is observed by Jahn (Introd.) that they were not otherwise to be understood than ‘that the ecclesiastical books enumerated in this catalogue were to be held as useful for the edifica- tion of the people, but not to be applied to the confirmation of doctrines of faith.” Such appears at least to have been the sentiment of many emi- nent divines between this period and the sixteenth century. 2. Period of the Reformation. We are now arrived at the period of the Reformation when the question of the Canon of Scripture was warmly discussed. (1) Wycliffe’s Translation. Long before this period (viz., in 1380), Wycliffe had published his translation of the Bible, in which he substituted another prologue for Jerome's; wherein, after enumerating the “twenty-five' books of the He- brew Canon, he adds: “Whatever book is in the Old Testament, besides these twenty-five, shall be set among the Apocrypha, that is, without authority of belief.” He also, in order to distin- guish the Hebrew text from the Greek interpola- tions, inserted Jerome's notes, rubricated, into the body of the text. (2) Luther’s Bible. Although Martin Luther commenced the publication of his translation of the Bible in 1522, yet, as it was published in parts, he had not yet made any distinction between the two classes of books, when Lonicer published his edition of the Greek Septuagint at Strasburg in 1526, in which he separated the Deutero- canonical, or Apocryphal, books from those of the Jewish Canon, for which he was severely castigated by Morinus. (See Masch's edition of Le Long's Bibliotheca Biblica, vol. ii, p. 268). Arias Montanus went still further, and rejected them altogether. In 1534 the complete edition of Luther’s Bible appeared, wherein those books which Jerome had placed inter apocrypha were separated, and placed by themselves between the Old and New Testament, under the title ‘Apocry- pha-that is, books which are not to be consid- ered as equal to Holy Scripture, and yet are use- ful and good to read.’ (3) Council of Trent. A few years after, the divines of the Council of Trent assembled, and among the earliest subjects of their deliberation was the Canon of Scripture. ‘The Canon of Augustine,’ says Bishop Marsh, “continued to be the Canon of the ruling party. But as there were not wanting persons, especially among the learned, who from time to time recommended the Canon of Jerome, it was necessary for the Council of Trent to decide between the contending parties' (Comparative View, p. 97). The Tridentine Fathers had consequently a nice and difficult question to determine. - On the 8th April, 1546, all who were present at the fourth session of the Council of Trent adopted the canon of Augustine. The whole of the books in debate, with the ex- ception of 3d and 4th Esdras, and the Prayer of Manasses, are considered as canonical by the Council of Trent. But it must be recollected that 521 DEUTERO–CANONICAL BOOKS the decision of the Council of Trent is one by no means peculiar to this council. The third Council of Carthage had considered the same books canon- ical. ‘The Council of Trent,’ says Bishop Marsh, ‘declared no other books to be sacred and canon- ical than such as had existed from the earliest ages of Christianity. The ecclesiastical books were generally written within a period which could not have extended to more than two centuries before the birth of Christ. In the choice of the places which were assigned them by the Greek Jews resident in Alexandria and other parts of Egypt, who probably added these books to the Septuagint version, according as they became gradually approved of, they were directed ‘partly by the subject, partly by their re- lation to other writings, and partly by the periods in which the recorded transactions are Supposed to have happened.’ Their insertion shows how highly they were esteemed by the Greek Jews of Egypt; but whether even the Egyptian Jews ascribed to them canonical and Divine authority it would not be easy to prove (Marsh's Com- parative View). (4) Anglican Church. The following were the proceedings of the Anglican Church in ref- erence to this subject: In Coverdale's English translation of the Bible, printed in 1535, the deutero-canonical books were divided from the others and printed separately, with the exception of the book of Baruch, which was not separated from the others in this version until the edition of I550. They had, however, been separated in Matthew’s Bible in 1537, prefaced with the words, ‘the vol- ume of the book called Hagiographa.’ This Bible contained Olivetan's preface, in which these books were spoken of in somewhat disparaging terms. In Cranmer's Bible, published in 1539, the same words and preface were continued ; but in the edi- tion of 1549 the word Hagiographa was changed into Apocrypha, which passed through the suc- ceeding editions into King James' Bible. Olive- tan’s preface was omitted in the Bishop's Bible in 1568, after the framing of the canon in the Thirty-nine Articles in I562. In the Geneva Bible, which was the popular English translation before the present Authorized Version, and which was published in 1559, these books are printed separately, with a preface in which, although not considered of themselves as sufficient to prove any point of Christian doctrine, they are yet treated with a high degree of venera- tion. In the parallel passages in the margin of this translation references are made to the deut- ero-canonical books. In the first edition of the Articles of the Church of England, 1552, no catalogue of the ‘Holy Script- ure’ had yet appeared, but in the Articles of I562 the Canon of St. Jerome was finally adopted in the following order: Five books of Moses; Joshua ; Judges; Ruth ; I and 2 Samuel ; I and 2 Kings; I and 2 Chronicles; I and 2 Esdras; Esther ; Job; Psalms; Proverbs ; Ecclesiastes; Cantica; four Prophets the Greater; twelve Prophets the Less The books of the second canon were commended and enumerated as follows: I and 2 (3 and 4) Esdras, Tobias, Judith, the rest of the book of Esther, Wisdom of Jesus the son of Sirach, Baruch the Prophet, the Song of the Children, the Story of Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, the Prayer of Manasses, and I and 2 Maccabees. (5) Westminster Confession. The Westmin- ster Confession treated the books of the second Canon with less ceremony. After enumerating the canonical books (ascribing thirteen epistles only to Paul), they proceed to say that ‘the books DEUTERO-CANONICAL BOOKS called Apocrypha, not being of Divine confirma- tion, are no part of the Canon of Scripture, and therefore are of no authority in the Church of God, nor to be any otherwise approved or made use of than other human writings.’ Luther (on I Cor. iii:9, Io) had declared that the touchstone by which certain Scriptures should be acknowledged as Divine or not was the follow- ing: “Do they preach Jesus Christ or not P’ And among the moderns, Dr. Twesten (Vorlesungen zeeber die Dogmatik, 1829, vol. i., p. 421, sq.) has maintained a somewhat similar principle. (See Gaussen's Theopneustia.) The Confession of Augsburg, dated in 1531, contains no article what- ever on the Canon of Scripture; nor do the Lutherans appear to have any other canon than Luther's Bible. (For the sentiments of the Grcck Church, see Esdras; ESTHER ; MACCABEES.) J. Grounds and Authorities. We shall add a few words on the grounds and authorities adopted by different persons for deciding whether a work is canonical or not. Mr. Jeremiah Jones furnishes us with three different views on this subject : (1) Opinions of Papists. ‘The first,” he says, “is the opinion of the Papists, who have generally affirmed, in their controversies with the Protes- tants, that the authority of the Scriptures depends upon, or is derived from, the power of their church. By the authority of the church, those authors plainly mean a power lodged in the Church of Rome, and her synods, of determina- tion, what books are the Word of God, than which nothing can be more absurd or contrary to common sense ; for if so, it is possible, nay, it is easy, for them to make a book which is not Divine to be so.” (2) Internal Evidence. Another principle was that adopted by all the reformed communions (ex- cept the Anglican Church), viz., to use Mr. Jones’ words, that “there are inward or inmate evidences in the Scriptures, which, applied by the illumination or testimony of the Holy Spirit, are the only true proofs of their being the Word of God;’ or, to use the words of the French Reformed Communion in its Confession, which harmonizes with the methods adopted by the Scotch and Bel- gian communions, that upon the internal per- suasion of the Spirit they knew the Canonical from Ecclesiastical, i. e., Apocryphal, books. This method Mr. Jones thinks to be of a very extraordinary nature. ‘Can it be supposed,” he asks, ‘that out of ten thousand books, private Christians, or even our most learned reformers, should by any internal evidence agree precisely on the number of twenty-seven, which are now esteemed canonical, induced thereto by some char- acters those books contain, of their being written by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost?” (3) Testimony of Ilarly Cl11 is liaius. The third method is that approved of by Mr. Jones, viz., that tradition, or the testimony of the ancient Christians, preserved in their writings, is the best method of determining the subject. “This,” adds Mr. Jones, ‘is the method the first Christians constantly made use of to prove, against the here- tics, the truth of the sacred books, viz., by appeal- ing to that certain and undoubted tradition which assured them they were the writings of the per- sons whose names they bear. The chief objection which has been urged against this method is that it leaves the canonicity of each book to the deci- sion of every private individual, which is incon- sistent with the idea of a canon. Certain it is that the ancient church, in deciding on the pres- sent Canon, exhibited a wonderful theological tact, as the books which it has handed down as 522 DEUTERONOMY canonical, and these alone, are generally the same which, after having undergone the strictest or- deal that the learning and acumen of modern times have been enabled to apply to them, are acknowledged by the best critics to be authentic. In fact, the church has adopted the same methods for this purpose which Mr. Jones has considered to be the only ones Satisfactory to private individ- uals. Christians are thus in possession of the highest degree of satisfaction. The question in dispute, however, is not with regard to the Jewish Canon, but as to whether or not there is reliable testimony as to how far Our Saviour and his Apostles gave the stamp of their authority to any books not contained in this canon. We have no certain evidence as to the authority on which, or the time when, the Jewish Canon was collected, or of the cause of its closing ; and our best evidence in favor of the canonicity of the Hebrew Scriptures rests on the authority of Christ, as contained in the Scrip- tures of the New Testament. See, in addition to the works already cited, Vicenzi's Introductio in Scrip. Deutero-canon. (Stowe, in Bib. Sacra, April, 1854.) See also Edwin Colle Bissell, Historic Origin of the Bible. DEUTERONOMY (dü'tër-ön'ö-my), (Gr. Aey- Tepovópºtov, deu-fer-on-om"ee-on, repetition of the law), the Greek name given by the Alexandrian Jews to the fifth book of Moses. 1. Contents. It comprises that series of ad- dresses which the Lawgiver delivered (orally and by writing, i :5; xxviii:58, etc.) to assembled Israel in the Second month of the fortieth year of their wandering through the desert, when the sec- ond generation was about to cross the Jordan, and when the parting hour of Moses had nearly arrived. The book of Deuteronomy contains an account of the sublime and dignified manner in which Moses terminated that work, the accom- plishment of which was his peculiar mission. (1) Faithfulness of God. The speeches begin with the enumeration of the wonderful dealings of God with the chosen people in the early period of their existence. Moses clearly proves to them the punishment of unbelief, the obduracy of Israel, and the faithfulness of Jehovah with regard to his promises, which were now on the point of being accomplished. Fully aware of the tendencies of the people, and foreseeing their alienations, Moses conjures them most impressively to hold fast the commands of the Lord, and not to forget his rev- elations, lest curses should befall them instead of blessings (ch. i., iv). The lawgiver then expatiates on the spirit of the law and its reception into the hearts of men, both in a positive and negative way. Fear, he says, is the primary effect of the law, as also its aim. As Israel had once listened to the announcement of the fundamental laws of tle the UUI acy will a Saul eul feur, in like IIIaiſtler should man also receive, through the whole sys- tem of the law, a lively and awful impression of the holiness and majesty of God (ch. v). But as the essence and sum of the law is love to Jehovah, the only and true God, man shall by the law be reminded of the Divine mercy, so variously mani- fested in deeds; and this reflection is calculated to beget in man's heart love for God. This love is the only and true source from which proper respect and obedience to the law can proceed (ch. vi.). (2) Dangers. There were, however, two tempting deviations, in following which the peo- ple were sure to be led astray. The law, in its strict rigor, was but too apt to tempt them to de- sert Jehovah and to yield to idolatry (the very approval of which even in thought polluted the DEUTER ONOMY heart), by discontinuing to bear the heavy yoke of the law. Hence the most impressive warnings against Canaan's inhabitants and idols; and hence the declarations that Israel, in placing themselves on a par with the heathens, should have to en- dure an equal fate with them and be repulsed from the presence of Jehovah (ch. vii, viii). The other, not less dangerous, deviation is that of self-justification—the proud fancy that all the favors Jehovah had shown to his people were merely in consequence of their own deservings. Therefore Jehovah tells them that it was not through their own worthiness and purity of heart that they inherited the land of the heathens. It was only through his free favor ; for their sins bore too strong and constant testimony how little they ought to take credit to themselves for it (cli. ix). The history of the people, before and after the exile, shows these two deviations in their fullest bearings. Idolatry we find to have been the be- setting sin before that period, and presumptuous pride of heart after it; a proof how intimately ac- quainted the Lawgiver was with the character and disposition of his people, and how necessary, therefore, those warnings had been. Therefore, adds Moses, turn to that which Je- hovah, in giving you the tables of the law, and establishing the Tabernacle and priesthood, has intimated as a significant symbol, ‘to circumcise the foreskin of your heart,’ and to cherish love in your inward soul. Think of Jehovah, the just and merciful, whose blessings and curses shall be set before your eyes as a lasting monument upon the mounts Ebal and Gerizim (ch. x, xi). (3) Practical Life. The mention of that fact leads the Lawgiver to the domestic and practical life of the people when domesticated in their true home, the Land of Promise; which he further reg- ulates by a fixed and solid rule, by new laws, which for this, their new design and purport, form a sort of complement to the laws already given. There, in the land of their forefathers, Jehovah will appoint one fixed place for his lasting sanc- tuary. At that chosen spot alone are the sacrifices to be killed, while cattle in general, which are not destined for sacred purposes, but merely for food, may be slaughtered at all places according to con- venience—a regulation which still leaves in full force the previous laws concerning the eating of blood and the share of Jehovah in slaughtered cattle. This sanctuary was to be considered as the central point for all sacred objects. The whole land was, by means of the sanctuary established in the midst of it, consecrated and dedicated to Je- hovah. This consecration was incompatible with arly deſileliſeul whatsoever. On that account the Canaanites must be exterminated and all idola- trous abominations destroyed, since nothing ought to be added to or taken from the laws of God (ch. xii). For the same reason (i. e., for the sake of the holiness of the land, diffused from the sa- cred center) no false prophets or soothsayers are to be tolerated, as they may turn the minds of the people from the law, by establishing a different one, and therefore even a whole town given to the worship of idols must be demolished by force of arms (ch. xiii). Neither, in like manner, must the heathen customs of motirning be imitated, or unclean beasts eaten ; but the people must always remain true to the previous laws concerning food, etc., and show their real attachment to Jehovah and his religion by willingly paying the tithe as ordained by the law (ch. xiv). To the same end likewise shall the regulations concerning the years of release and the festivals of Jehovah (to be sol- 523 DEUTERONOMY emnized in the place of the new-chosen Sanc- tuary) be most scrupulously observed (ch. xv, xvi). Only unblemished sacrifices shall be offered, for all idolatrous worshipers must irrevocably be put to death by stoning. For the execution of due punishment, honest judges must govern the na- tion, while the highest tribunal shall exist in the place chosen for the Sanctuary, consisting of the priests and judges of the land. If a king be given by God to the people, he shall first of all accommo- date himself to the laws of God, and not lead a heathen life. Next to the regal and judicial digni- ties the ecclesiastical power shall exist in its full right; and again, next to it, the prophetic order (ch. xvii, xviii). Of all these institutions the du- ties of the judicial power are most clearly de- fined; for Jehovah does as little suffer that in his land the right of the innocent shall be turned aside as that indulgence shall be shown to the evil-doer (ch. xix). The exposition of the civil law is fol- lowed by that of the martial law, which has some bearing upon the then impending war with Canaan. These are again followed by a series of laws in reference to the preceding, and referring chiefly to hard cases in the judicial courts, by which Moses obviously designed to exhibit the whole of the civil life of his people in its strict application to the theocratic system of law and right. Therefore the form of prayer to be spoken at the offering up of the firstlings and tithe-the theocratic confes- sion of faith—by which every Israelite acknowl- edges in person that he is what God has enjoined and called him to be, forms a beautiful conclusion of the whole legislation (ch. xxi-xxvi). The blessings and curses of Jehovah, the two opposite extremes which were to be impressed upon the minds of the people at their entrance into Canaan, and which have hitherto been spoken of only in general terms, are now set forth in their fullest detail, picturing in the most lively . colors the abundance of blessings on the one hand and the awful visitations of heaven’s wrath on the other. The prophetic speeches visibly and grad- ually increase in energy and enthusiasm, until the perspective of the remotest future of the people of God lies open to the eye of the inspired Lawgiver in all its checkered details, when his words resolve themselves into the strains of a splendid triumphal song in which the tone of grief and lamentation is as heartrending as the announcement of Divine salvation therein is jubilant (ch. xxvii, xxviii). The history of the law concludes with a supple- ment concerning him who was deemed worthy by the Lord to transmit his law to Israel (ch. xxxiv). Thus much regarding the contents and connec- tion of the book of Deuteronomy. 2 Thäfe and Autfienticity. The date, how- ever, of the composition of Deuteronomy, as well as its authenticity, has given rise to a far greater variety of opinion, more especially among those who are opposed to the authorship of Moses. (1) Earliest of Mosaic Writings. The older critics considered Deuteronomy as the latest pro- duction of all the books of the Pentateuch, while the more recent critics have come to just the con- trary opinion, and declare it to be the earliest of the Mosaic writings. (2) Quoted by the Prophets. A very strong proof of the genuineness of the book lies in its relation to the later writings of the prophets. Of all the books of the Pentateuch, Deuteronomy has been made most use of by the prophets, simply because it is best calculated to serve as a model for prophetic declarations, as also because of the inward harmony that exists between the prophe- cies and the laws upon which they are based. DEUTER ONOMY 3. Objections. Among the arguments ad- vanced against the authenticity of Deuteronomy a TC : (1) The contradictions said to exist between this and the other books of Moses. (2) Certain anachronisms committed by the author. These contradictions are more especially alleged to exist in the festival laws, where arbitrary and unwarranted views are mostly entertained by such critics with regard to the nature and original meaning of the festivals, which they identify alto- gether with natural or season festivals, and with- out lending to them a more spiritual character and signification. (3) That the Sinai of the other books is always called Horeb in Deuteronomy. They forget, how- ever, that Horeb is the general name of the whole mountain, while Sinai is the special name of a par- ticular part of it. This distinction is, indeed, most Scrupulously observed everywhere in the Penta- teuch. (4) That Priests and Levites are used as synony- mous terms in Deuteronomy, while in the other books of the Pentateuch they are used as terms distinct from each other. By that expression, however, can only be meant the Levitical priests, i. e., the only legitimate priests. This meaning is borne out by Deuteronomy xviii:3-8, where a clear distinction is made between Priests and Levites. (5) That in Deuteronomy i :44 are mentioned the Amorites instead of the Amalekites, as in Num. xiv:45. Here also they have forgotten to notice that in the sequel of the very passage al- luded to in Deuteronomy both the Amorites and Amalekites are mentioned. (6) That the cause of the punishment of Moses is differently stated in Num. xxvii: 14 and Deu- teronomy iii:26. To this objection we reply that both the guilt and punishment of Moses are de- scribed in both books as originating with the peo- ple (comp. also Deut. xxxii:51, etc.). (7) Among the anachronisms in Deuteronomy are reckoned the allusions made in it to the Temple (xii; xvi; I, sq.) to the royal and prophetic pow- ers (xiii.; xviii:18) to the different modes of idol worship (iv :19; xvii:3), and to the exile (xxviii sq.). In suggesting these critical points, however, they do not consider that all these sub- jects are most closely and intimately connected with the spirit and principles of the law itself, and that all these regulations and prophecies ap- pear here in Deuteronomy, as necessary finishing points to the law, so indispensable for the better consolidation of the subsequent and later rela- tions of the theocracy. More anachronisms are said to be : (I) The sixty dwelling places of Jair mentioned Deut. iii: I4, sq. (comp. Judg. x:3 sq.; Josh. xii.1: 30; I Kings iv:I3; comp. also I Chron. ii:22, 23). We consider, however, that the men mentioned in the two passages are evidently different persons, though of the same name. Nor is it difficult to prove from other sources that there really existed at the time of Moses a man by name Jair. (2) The notice (iii:II) concerning King Og, which looks more like a note of a subsequent writer in corroboration of the story told in the chapter. But this hypothesis falls to the ground when we consider that Moses did not write for his contemporaries merely, but also for late pos- terity. 4. Mosaic Crigin. The book contains, more- over, not a small number of plain, though indirect, traces indicative of its Mosaic origin. We thus find in it: 524 DEUTERONOMY (1) Numerous notices concerning nations with whom the Israelites had then come in contact, but who, after the Mosaic period, entirely dis- appeared from the pages of history; such are the accounts of the residences of the kings of Bashan 1 :4). (2) The appellation of “mountain of the Amo- rites,’ used throughout the whole book (i:7, 19, 20, 44), while even in the book Joshua, soon after the conquest of the land, the name is already ex- º for 'mountains of Judah' (Josh. xi : IO, 2I ). (3) The observation (ii:Io) that the Emim had formerly dwelt in the plain of Moab; they were a great people, equal to the Anakim. This ob- Servation quite accords with Genesis xiv:5. (4) A detailed account (ii:II) concerning the Horim and their relations to the Edomites. (5) An account of the Zamzummim (ii:20, 21), One of the earliest races of Canaan, though men- tioned nowhere else. (6) A very circumstantial account of the Re- phaim (iii:3, 57.). with whose concerns the author Seems to have been well acquainted. The standing-point also of the author of Deuter- onomy is altogether in the Mosaic time, and had it been assumed and fictitious there must neces- sarily have been moments when the spurious author would have been off his guard, and un- mindful of the part he had to play. But no dis- crepancies of this kind can be traced, and this i. . itself an evidence of the genuineness of the OOIK. A great number of other passages force us likewise to the conclusion that the whole of Deuteronomy originated in the time of Moses. Such are the passages where (I) a comparison is drawn between Canaan and Egypt (xi : Io, sq.), with the latter of which the author seems thor. Oughly acquainted; (2) detailed descriptions are also given of the fertility and productions of Pal- estine (viii:7, Sq.); (3) regulations are given re- lating to the conquest of Canaan (xii: I, sq.; xx: I, Sq.), which cannot be understood otherwise than by assuming that they had been framed in the Mosaic time, since they could be of no use after that period. Besides, whole pieces and chapters in Deuter- onomy, such as , xxxii, xxxiii, betray in form, language and tenor a very early period in He- brew literature. Nor are the laws and regulations in Deuteronomy less decisive of the authenticity of the book. We are struck with the most re- markable phenomenon, that many laws from the previous books are here partly repeated and im- pressed with more energy, partly modified, and partly altogether abolished, according to the con- tingencies of the time, or as the new aspect of circumstances among the Jews rendered such steps, necessary (comp. e. g. Deut. xy:17, with Exod. xxi :7; Deut. xii, with Lev. xvii). 5. Jupplemental Portion. The part of Deuteronomy (xxxiv) respecting the death of Moses requires a particular explanation. That the whole of this section is to be regarded as a piece altogether apart from what precedes it, or as a supplement from another writer, has already been maintained by the older theologians (comp. ear. gr. Carpzov, Introd. in libr. V. T., i, p. 137), and this opinion is confirmed not only by the con- tents of the chapter, but also by the express dec- laration of the book itself on that event and its relations; for chapter xxxi contains the conclu- sion of the work, where Moses describes himself as the author of the previous contents, as also of the Song (chap. xxxii), and the blessings (chap, DEVIL xxxiii) belonging to it. All that follows is, con- Sequently, not from Moses, the work being com- pleted and concluded with chapter xxxiii. There is another circumstance which favors this opinion, namely, the close connection that exists between the last section of Deuteronomy and the beginning of Joshua (comp. Dcut. xxxiv:9 with Josh. i: I). Chapter xxxiv. of Deuteronomy is intended to serve as a point of transition to the book of Joshua, and indicate that it was written by the same author as the latter. The correct view of this chapter, therefore, is to consider it as a real supplement, but by no means as an interpolation. It is not out of order, even in our own day, for an editor to furnish addenda to an autobiog- raphy, giving an account of the author's death. It will be noted also that the book ºf Joshua is closed in the same way. This appendix may have been attached to the roll of manuscript soon after the death of Moses, or it may be, as some scholars suppose, that what is now the last of Deuteronomy was formerly the beginning of the Book of Joshua. These books were written before the invention of sections, divisions and chapters, as well as points and pauses. At that time several books were connected together by following each other on the roll. The beginning of one book, there- fore, might very easily be transferred to the end of the preceding one, and in process of time come to be considered its real conclusion. The author of this appendix was probably Joshua, the intimate friend of the great law- giver and his successor as the leader of Israel. He was the one of all others who should have pronounced the eulogy upon his master after his death. And a more positive indication of this authorship is found in the expressions, “Moses, the servant of the Lord,” and “Moses, the man of God.” Neither of these phrases is found in the preceding part of the Pentateuch, and it does not appear that Moses ever assumed such titles for himself. It was a favorite method with Joshua, however, in speaking of his dead friend and leader. The words “Moses, servant of the Lord,” occur more than a dozen times in the Book of Joshua, and are found both in the nar- rative matter and in the speeches attributed to the author. The other expression also was known in his day, for Caleb referred to “Moses, the man of God,” in addressing him. These facts strongly indicate that the author of the Book of Joshua also wrote the appendix to the book of Deuter- Onomy. On the literature of Deuteronomy, compare the article PENTATEUCII ; Riehm, Die Gesetzgebung Moses in lande Moab; Wordsworth, Holy Bible with Notes, vol. i.; Five Books of Moses, 2d ed. ; Schroeder, Das Deuteronomium (in Lang's Bibel- werk, A. T. iii.); Volck, Moses canticum ; Hors- ley, Notes on Deut., in Bib. Crit. i. DEVIL (dēv"l), (Gr. 6tá80Xos, dee-ab'oſ-os, ac- cuscr). 1. One who slanders another for the purpose of injury, a calumniator, e.g., a gossip monger (I Tim. iii:6; 2 Tim. ii:26; 1 John iii:8). - 2. “Devil” is the rendering of the Heb. Tºº, sazy-eer', hairy (Lev. xvii:7), a “goat,” or “satyr" (Is. xiii:21; xxxiv:14). (See SATAN.) DEVOTIONS (dē-vö'shūns), formerly meant the objects of worship, and not the acts themselves. In the former sense it is used correctly in Acts xvii:23, by which Paul means the temples, altars, shrines and the likes. 525 DIADEM DEW (dü), (Heb. ht, tal). The various passages of Scripture in which dew is mentioned, as well as the statements of travelers, might, unless carefully considered, convey the impression that in Palestine the dews fall copiously at night during the height of sum- mer, and supply in some degree the lack of rain (Judg. vi. 37-40). But, in fact, scarcely any dew does fall during the summer months—from the middle of May to the middle of August; but as it continues to fall for some time after the rains of Spring have ceased, and begins to fall before the rains of autumn commence, we may from this gather the sense in which the Scriptural refer- ences to dew are to be understood. Without the dews continuing to fall after the rains have ceased and commencing before the rains return, the sea- Son of actual drought, and the parched appear- ance of the country, would be of much longer duration than they really are. The partial re- freshment thus afforded to the ground at the end of a summer without dews or rains, is of great value in Western Asia, and would alone explain all the Oriental references to the effects of dew (Gen. xxvii:28; Deut. xxxiii: 13; Zech. viii:I2). Figuratite. (I) Christ, and God in him, are likened to dew; how pleasant, reviving and fructi- fying the influences of his word and spirit (Hos. xiv:5; Is. xxvi :19). The saints are as dew, for multitude, pleasantness and refreshing influence on others, around (Ps. cx:3; Mic. v :7). (2) An army is like falling dew, for their numbers and their seizing on everything near them (2. Sam. xvii :12). (3) Afflictions and sufferings are like dew, and drops of the night; are many and dis- agreeable, and yet have a happy and fructifying tendency (Cant. v.2; Dan. iv:25; HQs. vi.4). (4) The truths of God are as dew, falling gradu- ally, and often insensibly, on the Souls of men; they refresh, render them soft, pliable and fruit- ful in good works (Deut. xxxii:2). (5) Any- thing very delightful and refreshing is compared to dew; the king's favor is as dew; it mightily delights and actuates men (Prov. xix:12). (6) Harmony of brethren is as the dew of Hermon, very delightful, reviving and encouraging to good works (Ps. cxxxiii:3). (7) The dew lies on a man's branches when his soul prospers under the influences of God's word and Spirit, and his out- ward lot under the smiles of his providence (Job xxix:19). - DEXIOLABOS (déx-iöl'a-bos), (Gr. 6eštoxá80s, dechs-ee-o/-a'bos, a protector of the right side). This is the Greek word rendered ‘spearmen' in the Authorized Version of Acts xxiii:23. As it does not occur in the classical writers, and only this once in the Scriptures, it is uncertain what kind of soldiers is denoted by it. It strictly sig- nifies one who covers or guards the right side of any one. Hence it has been conjectured that, in the above passage, it denotes officers who perform the same functions in the camp as lictors did in the city—being appointed to apprehend malefac- tors and to guard criminals when led to execu- tion. DIADEM (di'ā-dém). thus translated: 1. 7 saw-neeſ' (Heb. Tºš, something woundabout the head), spoken of the turban of men (Job. xxix:I4). 2. Tsef-ee-razy' (Heb. Tºš, circlet, Is. xxviii:5), a royal tiara. 3. Mºſs-meh'ſeſh (Heb. Fº, the tiara of the high priest, Ezek. xxi:26). Three Hebrew words are DIAL The distinctive idea of ‘diadem’ is that of roy- alty, or regal power; while that of ‘crown' is the reward of victory in the games, the crown of civic worth, military valor, nuptial joy, festal glad- ness; but not the emblem of sovereignty (Rev. xii:3; xiii: I ; xix:I2). See Trench, Syn. of the New Testament. (See CROWN.) DIAL (di'al) (Heb. Hºp, Żmah-a/-aw', step). The invention of the sun-dial belongs most prob- ably to the Babylonians. Herodotus affirms that the Greeks derived from them the pole (supposed to mean the dial-plate), the gnomon and the division of the day into twelve parts (ii: IO9). The first mention in Scripture of the ‘hour' is made by Daniel, at Babylon (ch. iii:6). The circumstances connected with the dial of Ahaz (2 Kings xx : II; Is. xxxviii:8), which is perhaps the earliest of which we have any clear mention, entirely concur with the derivation of gnomonics from the Babylonians. Ahaz had formed an alliance with Tiglath-pileser, king of Assyria, (2 Kings xvi :7, 9); he was a man of taste and was ready to adopt foreign improve- ments, as appears from his admiration of the altar at Darnascus and his introduction of a copy of it Dial in Hindostan. into Jerusalem (2 Kings xvi;IO). ‘The princes of Babylon sent unto him to inquire of the wonder that was done in the land’ (2 Chron. xxxii:3I). Hence the dial also, which was called after his name, was probably an importation from Babylon. Different conjectures have been formed respect- ing the construction of this instrument. On the whole, the dial of Ahaz seems to have been a distinct contrivance rather than any part of a house. It would also seem probable, from the circumstances, that it was of such a size, and so placed, that Hezekiah, now convalescent (Is. xxxviii:21, 22), but not perfectly recovered, could witness the miracle from his chamber or pavilion. May it 1101 lave beetl situate in the middle court,’ mentioned 2 Kings xx :42 A dial has been dis- covered in Hindostan, near Delhi, the ancient cap- ital of the Mogul empire, whose construction would well suit the circumstances recorded of the dial of Ahaz. It seems to have answered the double purpose of an observatory and a dial—a rectangular hexangle, whose hypothen use is a staircase, apparently parallel to the axis of the earth, bisects a zone or coping of a wall, which wall connects the two terminating towers right and left. The coping itself is of a circular form, and accurately graduated to mark, by the shadow of the gnomon above, the sun's progress both be- fore and after noon; for when the sun is in the zenith he shines directly on the staircase and the shadow falls beyond the coping. A flat surface on the top of the staircase, and a gnomon, fitted the 526 DIANA building for the purpose of an observatory. Ac- cording to the known laws of refraction, a cloud or body of air of different density from the com- mon atmosphere, interposed between the gnomon and the coping of the dial plate below, would, if the cloud were denser than the atmosphere, cause the shadow to recede from the perpendicular height of the staircase and, of course, to re-ascend the steps on the coping, by which it had before noon gone down ; and if the cloud were rarer a contrary effect would take place. (See Bishop Stock's Translation of Isaiah, Bath, 1803, p. Io9.) The phenomenon on the dial of Ahaz, however, was doubtless of a miraculous nature, even should such a medium of the miracle be admitted ; noth- ing less than a Divine communication could have enabled Isaiah to predict its occurrence at that time and place; besides he gave the king his own choice whether the shadow should advance or re- tire ten degrees. There seems, however, to be no necessity for seeking any medium for this mira- cle, and certainly no necessity for supposing any actual interference with the revolution of the earth or the position of the sun. In the more dis- tinct and ample account of it in 2 Kings xx :9 it is simply said that the Lord, at the prayer of Isaiah, brought the shadow ten degrees hackward. The words in Is. xxxviii:8, and the sun went back ten degrees,’ are wanting in three of Dr. Kennicott’s MSS., and originally in two of De Rossi’s. Thus the miracle, from all the accounts of it, might consist only of the retrogression of the shadow ten degrees by a simple act of Al- mighty power, without any medium, Or, at most, by that of refracting those rays only which fell upon the dial. It is not said that any time was lost to the inhabitants of the world at large; it was not even observed by the astronomers of Babylon, for the deputation came to inquire con- cerning the wonder that was done in the land. It was temporary, local, and confined to the ob- servation of Hezekiah and his court, being de- signed’ chiefly for the satisfaction of that mon- arch. It is remarkable that no instrument for keeping time is mentioned in the Scripture before the dial of Ahaz (B. C. 700); nor does it appear that the Jews generally, even after this period, divided their day into hours. The dial of Ahaz was probably an object only of curious recrea- tion, or served at most to regulate the occupations of the palace.—Gumpach, Sonnenzeiger des Ahas; Reil and Delitzsche, Buecher der Könige, p. 345; Hopkins, Plumbline Papers, I ch. ii. * J. F. D. DIAMOND (di'münd), (Heb. Fºº, yah-hal- ome'), which the LXX renders by tag trus (ee' as-fis) in the first two cases and by a pºdpayöos (smear'ag- dos). (See YAHALOM; SHAMIR.) DIANA (di-ā'nā or di-ān'ā), (Gr. "Aprepus, ar'tem- Žs, Artemis), a celebrated goddess of the heathen, and one of the twelve superior deities. In the heavens she was Luna, or Meni (the moon), on earth Diana, in hell Hecate. She was invoked by women in childbirth under the name of Lucina. She was sometimes represented with a crescent on her head, a bow in her hand, and dressed in a hunting habit; at other times with a triple body (triple-faced Proserpine), and bearing instruments of torture in her hands. At Rome there is a full-length and complete image of this goddess, which is clearly an emblematical repre- sentation of the dependence of all creatures on the powers of nature, or the many and extensive bless- ings bestowed by nature on all ranks of exist- ence; whether man, lions, Stags, Oxen, animals of all kinds, or even insects. The goddess is symbol- DIBLAIM ized as diffusing her benefits to each in its proper station. Her numerous rows of breasts speak the º 'allegorical language, i. e., fountains of sup- ply. The Ephesian Diana was regarded as invested with different attributes from the Diana of the Greeks, and her worship was of a slightly differ- ent nature. (K. O. Müller, Hist. of the Dorians, i:403, Eng. Trans.). It is well known that many heathen deities re- Solve themselves into the sun and moon, and that Diana is the moon, in most or all of her offices and characters. “The precious things put forth by the moon” are mentioned so early as the days of Jacob ; and long afterward we fre- quently read of the “queen of heaven,” etc. The moon was also the goddess presiding over child- hit ſhi This deity was known by distinction as Diana of Ephesus, where she had a famous tem- ple (see EPHESUS), to some of the persons con- nected with which Paul rendered himself obnox- ious by the discharge of his apostolic duties (Acts xix:27, etc.). The large manufacture of silver shrines to this goddess is mentioned in Acts xix:24. DIBLAIM (dibºla-im). (Heb. Fºº, dº-Zahyim, cakes), mother of . Gomer, the wife of Hosea (Hos. i:3). Manger, Gesenius and others take it to be the name of Gomer's father (B. C. 725). DIBLATH (dib'lath), but accurately DIBLAH (Heb. Tººl, circle), mentioned in Ezek. vi.14 as a place at one extremity of Israel. The name may be an incorrect form for RIBLAH, the scene of the cruelties inflicted on the last king of Judah, and the massacres of priests by the king of Babylon (Davidson, A/eb. Text, Ezek. vi. I4). DIBLATHAIM (dib'la-tha'im). DIBLATHAIM. * DIBON (di'bon), (Heb. Tººl, dee-bone', a pining, a wasting away, a consumption, Is. XV:9). 1. The place was called also Dibon-Gad, from its having been rebuilt by the tribe of that name (Num. xxxii:34), a city on the northern bank of the Arnon, at the point where the Israelites crossed that river on their journey to the Jordan, and where their first encampment was made after having passed it. In later times we find it, with other towns in this quarter, in the hands of the Moabites (Is. xv.2; Jer. xlviii:18, 22). The site has been recognized by Seetzen, Burckhardt, Irby and Mangles at a place which bears the name of Diban, in a low tract of the district called the Koura, about three miles north of the Arnon (Modjeb). It was among the ruins of Dibon that Mr. Klein, in 1868, found the MoABITE STONE (which see). (See DIMON.) There was another place called Dibon in the tribe of Judah (Neh. xi.;25), perhaps the same that is called Dimonah in Josh. xv :22. It was re- inhabited by the people of Judah after the Captivity. DIBON-GAD (di'bon-gåd), (Heb. dibon-gad). See DIBON, 1. DIBRI (dib'ri), (Heb. "Tºº, diº-ree', perhaps eloquent), a Danite, whose daughter Shelomith married an Egyptian. Her son, was stoned for having “blasphemed ” (Lev. xxiv:II), B. C. Con- siderably before 1619. DIDRACHMA (di-drák'mā) or DIDRACH- MON (Gr. 6tópaxpov, dźd"drach-mon, a double drachma), a silver coin equal to two Attic drach- mae, and also to the Jewish half-shekel (Joseph. Antiq. iii:8, 2). It was therefore equivalent to about 32 cents of our money. By the law every Jew was re- See ALMON- 527 DIMONAH quired to pay half a shekel to the Temple (Exod. XXX: 13 Sq.), and this amount is represented by the didrachma in Matt. xvii:24, where it is used for the ‘tribute money' demanded of Christ. (See Money.) DIDYMUS (did'y-müs) (Gr. Atóvuos, did"oo- zºos, a twin), a surname of the Apostle Thomas, denoting that he was a twin, and if translated he would be called “Thomas the Twin' (John xi:16; XX:24; xxi.2). (See THOMAS.) DIET (di'ét), (Heb. nºs, ar-oo-khazy'), the term used of the daily allowance apportioned by Evil-merodach, king of Babylon, to his royal cap- tive, Jehoiachin, king of Judah (Jer, lii:34). (See FOOD). - DIGNITIES (dig'nï-tiz), (Gr. plural of 66%a, doºr"a/, glory), persons higher in honor (2 Pet. ii:Io; Jude viii). Perhaps used of angels who are spiritual beings of high dignity. DIKE (di-kē), (Gr. Atkm, dee'Aay, justice), the heathen Goddess of Justice, described as the daughter of Zeus and Themis (Hesiod, Op. 266; Theog. 902). The punishment of murderers is particularly ascribed to her; and therefore, besides being the goddess of punishment in a general sense, she is often to be considered the same as Nemesis or Vengeance. The word occurs in Acts xxviii:4, and is there rendered ‘vengeance,’ appellatively. DIKLAH (dik'lah), (Heb. "???, diA'law, a palm tree), a tribe descended from Joktan (Gen. x:27; I Chron. i.2 I). As the name in Aramaic and Arabic means a palm-tree, it has been judged necessary to seek the seat of the tribe in some territory rich in palm- trees. Bochart finds it in Southern Arabia, Mich- aelis in the region of the Tigris (from the analogy of the name Diglath); but where the ground of search is so uncertain, it is impossible to obtain any satisfactory result. * DILEAN (dil'e-ān), (Heb. ???, di/-awn', a gourd), a city in the low country of Judah (Josh. xv:38). Van de Velde suggests that it may be the modern Tºma, south of Ekron, but the exact site is unknown. DILIGENTIY (dil’i-jent-ly), (Gr. )kpt3ajorev, ay- Åree'ào-sen, Matt. ii:7), R. V. “accurately.” The word used is a Greek verb that means to inquire into details precisely. Bible title-page, edition 161 I : “The Holy Bible, with the former translations diligently compared and revised.” - DILL (dil), (Marg. Matt. xxiii:23). See ANISE. DIMNAH(dim'nah),(Heb.";º, dim-maw', dung), a city of Zebulun, given to the Levites of Merari's family (Josh. xxi:35). As it does not occur in Josh. xix:IO-I6, it may be a variation of Rimmon (I Chron. vi :77). If they are identical, Rimmon is probably the correct form. DIMON (di'mon), (Heb. i``', dee-mome', river bed). “The waters of Dimon” are mentioned as being in the land of Moab, east of the Dead Sea (Is. xv :9). It is probably the same as Dibon (Is. xv.2; Jer. xlviii:22). * * DIMonAH (di-mo'nah), Heb. Tºº?, dee-mo- maze'), a town in south Judah (Josh. XV:22). . . It undoubtedly occurs under the name Dibon. (See DIBON, 2). Knobel (Joshua, p. 423) identi- fies it with ed-Dheið, northeast of Tell Arád. See Van de Velde (J/e772., p. I52). DINAH. DINAH (di'nah), (Heb. "F", dee-maw", judgment or perh. judged), daughter of Jacob by Leah (Gen. :*). and therefore full sister of Simeon and €VI. While Jacob's camp was in the neighborhood of Shechem, Dinah was seduced by Shechem, the Son of Hamor, the Hivite chief or head-man of the town. Partly from dread of the consequences of his misconduct, and partly, it would seem, out of love for the damsel, he solicited a marriage with her, leaving the ‘marriage price' (see MAR- RIAGE) to be fixed by her family. To this Dinah’s brothers would only consent on the further condi- tion that all the inhabitants of the place should be circumcised. Even this was yielded; and Simeon and Levi took a most barbarous advantage of the compliance by falling upon the town on the third day, when the people were disabled by the effects of the operation, and slew them all (Gen. xxxiv). For this act of truly Oriental vindictiveness no excuse can be offered, and Jacob himself re- peatedly alludes to it with abhorrence and regret (Gen. xxxiv:30; xlix:5-7). To understand the act at all, however, it is necessary to remember, that any stain upon the honor of a sister, and especially of an only sister, is even at this day considered as an insupportable disgrace and inex- piable offense among all the nomade tribes of Western Asia. If the woman be single, her broth- ers more than her father, and if she be married her brothers more than her husband, are aggrieved, and are considered bound to avenge the wrong. Hence the active vengeance of Dinah’s full broth- ers, and the comparative passiveness of her father in these transactions. Of Dinah’s subsequent lot nothing is known. * DINAITES (di'na-ites), (Heb. 2", singular, dee- mah'ee), a people who opposed the rebuilding of the Temple (Ezra iv:9). They were colonists who had been placed in the cities of Sannaria by the governor of Assyria, after the captivity of the ten tribes by Shalmaneser. DINE (din). See BANQUET : ACCUBATION ; EATING. DINHABAH (din'ha-bah or din-hā'bah), (Heb. nºn, dºn-haw-baw', robbers’ den), a city of Edom (Gen. xxxvi;32; I Chron. i.43). It was the capital city and the birthplace of Bela, son of Beor, and King of Edom. I)IONYSIUS THE AREOPAGITE and PSEUDO-DIONYSIUS (di'o-ny'si-us the 3r'e- Öp'a-jite), (Gr. Atovčo tos, dee-on-oo'see-os). The name of ‘Dionysius the Areopagite' enliv- ens the scanty account of success which attended the visit of Paul to Athens (Acts xvii:34). Noth- ing further is related of him in the New Testa- ment; but ecclesiastical historians record some par- ticulars concerning his career, both before and after his conversion. Suidas recounts that he was an Athenian by birth, and eminent for his literary attainments, that he studied first at Athens and afterward at Heliopolis in Egypt; and that, while in the latter city, he beheld that remarkable eclipse of the sun, as he terms it, which took place at the death of Christ, and exclaimed to his friend Apol- iophanes, “Either the Divinity suffers, or sympa- thizes with some sufferer.” He further details that after Dionysius returned to Athens, he was ad- mitted into the Areopagus, and, having embraced Christianity about A. D. 50, was constituted Bishop of Athens by the Apostle Paul himself. Syncellus and Nicephorus both record the last particular. Aristides, an Athenian philosopher, asserts that he suffered martyrdom—a fact generally admitted by 528 DISCIPLES OF CHRIST historians; but the precise period of his death, whether under Trajan or Adrian, or, which is most likely, under Domitian, they do not deter- mine. Whatever credit may be given to these traditions, the name of Dionysius is certainly in- teresting in a literary point of view, owing to an attempt made by some writer, in after times, to personate the Areopagite; and who contrived to pass his productions on the Christian world as of the apostolic age, and thereby greatly influenced the Spirit both of the Eastern and Western Churches. The resemblance between the Areopagitica and the writings of Proclus and Plotinus is so obvious as to afford great probability that the Pseudo- Dionysius did not write much earlier than the fifth century (Cave's Hist. Literar. Coloniae, 1720, pp. I42, I43; Lardner's works, vol. vii, p. 371, ed. 1788; Fabric. Bib. Bibliog). J. F. D. DIOTREPHES (di-öt're-fez), (Gr. Atorpedºs, dee- of-ref-ace', Jove-nourished), a person who seems to have been One of the false teachers condemned by St. John in his third epistle. He appears to have been a presbyter or deacon —probably the former. He refused to receive the letter sent by John, thereby declining to subtnit to his directions or acknowledge his authority (3 John 9). Neander, Pflanzung, ii:647, 648 (Rob- inson's revised transl., p. 376). DISCERNING OF SPIRITS (diz-zörn'ing 3v spir'its), (Gr. 6tákpuris, dee-a/#'ree-sis, dia.Arisis, a thorough judging). This is now usually understood to mean a high faculty, enjoyed by certain persons in the apostolic age, of diving into the heart and discerning the Secret dispositions of men. It appears to have been One of the gifts peculiar to that age, and was espe- cially necessary at a time when the standards of doctrine were not well established or generally understood, and when many deceivers were abroad (2 John 7). This faculty seems to have been ex- ercised chiefly upon those who came forward as teachers of others, and whose real designs it was important that the infant churches should know. DISCIPLE (dis-si'p'l), (Gr. 9a0mrås, mazh-ay-face', a learner), a scholar or follower of any teacher, in the general sense. It is hence applied in the gospels not only to the followers of Christ, but to those of John the Bap- tist (Matt. ix: I4, etc.), and of the Pharisees (Matt. xxii:I6). Although used of the followers of Christ generally, it is applied in a special man- ner to the twelve apostles (Matt. x : I ; xi : I ; xx :17; Luke ix: I). After the death of Christ the word took the wider sense of a believer, or Christian ; i. e., a follower of Jesus Christ. DISCIPLES OF CHRIST (dis-si'p'ls öv krist). The religious people who are generally known as Disciples of Christ, or Christians, 1 epi esent a movement in the church in the interest of unity, peace and union, by a return in faith and in life to the Christianity described in the New Testa- ment. The inspiration of this movement is found in the words of our Lord, recorded in John xvii: 20, 21, as follows: “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; that they may be one as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.” (1) Origin. This movement began in the early part of the nineteenth century in different parts of the country. In 1891 the General Convention of the Disciples of Christ met in Allegheny, Pa. In that conven- iDISCIPLES OF CHRIST tion the standing committee on Christian union made a report which was adopted without a dis- senting vote. This report suggested as a basis of union: (1) The primitive creed; (2) the primi- tive ordinances; (3) the primitive life. (2) Creed. The primitive creed is this: I be- lieve in my heart that Jesus is the Christ the Son of the living God. (3) Primitive Ordinances. The primitive or- dinances are two—baptism and the supper of the Lord. A movement which has for its object the union of Christians ought to occupy a position out of the region of controversy. The Disciples Occupy such a position. In answer to the question, what is baptism P their reply is: “Baptism is the immer- Sion in water of a penitent believer in the name of the Lord Jesus, and into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” That this is baptism is denied by no one. Some do, indeed, say that there are other ways of being baptized, but no one says that the penitent believer who has been immersed in water, in the name of the Lord Jesus, and into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, has not been baptized. Persons who have been thus baptized are received into the fellowship of all the churches. No person is denied membership in any church, as above explained, on the ground that he has not been baptized. The Disciples, then, so far as baptism is concerned, occupy undisputed and indisputable ground. The baptism of infants, of unbelievers, is a subject of controversy, but not the baptism of penitent believers. Sprinkling, as a mode of baptism, is in debate; immersion is 11Ot. The supper of the Lord is a feast of love for such as are disciples of Jesus. This is clear from the testimony of Holy Scripture, “And as they were eating Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said: ‘Take, eat; this is my body.' And he took the cup and gave thanks, and gave it to them, Say- ing, ‘Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.’ ” (Matt. xxvi :26-28). (4) Primitive Life. The primitive life is the life that takes the man Christ Jesus as the model. The Christian life is not a life of rules and regu- lations, saying, “thou shalt not,” and “thou shalt.” It is a life inspired by devotion, a devotion in- spired by faith and love to the Sinless One. The real Christian tries to be and to do all things, in all places, and at all times, whatever the Lord Jesus would like him to be and do. That life is most truly Christian which is most like the life lived by the Son of God in the flesh and when he was among the sons of men. This, in brief, is the origin, the position, the aim of the people who are known as Disciples of Christ. The movement evidently was inspired by God. It was not planned by any man, nor by any company of men. The above facts clearly demonstrate the absolute accuracy of this state- Inent. (5) Statistics. The movement is remarkably popular among the people. They have responded to its call with great rapidity. The number of names together is now, according to the last re- port of the statistical secretary, made to the Gen- eral Convention in Indianapolis, in October, 1897, more than one million. Their organizations for aggressive evangelistic or missionary work are as follows: “The Amer- ican Christian Missionary Society,” “The Chris- tian Woman's Board of Missions” and “The For- eign Christian Missionary Society.” B. B. T. 529 DISCREPANCIES, BIBLICAL DISCREPANCIES, BIBLICAL (dis-krép-an- séz). 1. TSible Written at T)ifferent Times, Etc. The Bible is a book which was written during a space of twelve or fourteen hundred years by many scribes, the first of whom preceded by cen- turies the most ancient philosophers of Greece and Rome. The writers varied in position, attain- ments, and locality. The pen was held by the lawgiver in the wilderness and the tax-gatherer amidst the multitude; by the king on his throne and the shepherd in his tent; by the sage in the desert and the fisherman by the sea; it was held by accomplished scholars and by men who had been taught but little save by nature and by God. And yet it is evidently the work of the same great Author, for its plan and its purpose are one. We can only imagine the discords which would obtain in a scientific or historical work which had been prepared under such circumstances; but with stately step and perfect unity of design the Bible marches from the creation to the consummation —from Eden lost to Eden restored. With broken crowns and crumbling thrones on every side, it pursues the even tenor of its way. With nothing to fear and nothing to hide, it tells of the faults of its writers as unflinchingly as it tells of their virtues. Only one faultless character is de- scribed upon its pages and that is He who “was in all points tempted like as we are, and yet with- out sin” (Heb. iv:I5). The books of the Bible lived for hundreds of years in manuscript only, and the copyist is never infallible. What wonder, then, that there should be clerical errors, the occasional variation of a vowel or a numeral P These old manuscripts were copied by reverent hands. Kiel, Bleek, and other scholars assert that so great was the care be- stowed upon the Hebrew text “that it was the practice to count, not only the number of verses, but also of the words, and even of the letters of the various books, in order to ascertain the middle verse, middle word, and even the middle letter of each book.” (Bleek's Introduction to the Old Testament, ii:451.) But at a certain period numbers were expressed by letters of the alphabet, and some of the He- brew letters are so nearly alike that when written with a pen, unless perfectly formed, it is almost impossible to distinguish them from each other. No wonder, then, that this and other causes have led to slight errors which have caused the “vari- ous readings” so often spoken of by Biblical scholars. “But at the same time,” says Professor Stuart, “it is equally true that all these, taken together, do not change or materially affect any important point of doctrine, precept, or even history.” A great proportion, indeed the mass of variations in Hebrew manuscripts, when minutely scanned, amount to nothing more than the differences in spelling of a multitude of English words. What matters it as to the meaning, whether one writes honour or honor, whether he writes centre or center P” Revised Ed.) In relation to the Greek text, Professor Norton claims that as early as the close of the second century as many as sixty thousand manuscript copies of the Gospels were eartant.” (Genuine- mess of the Gospels, p. 50.) There was no possibility of corrupting so vast a number of copies in the interest of any sect or people. And even now, after these books have been circulated by the art of printing for hun- dreds of years, we still have about five hundred (Hist. Old Testament Canon, p. 178, 34 DISCREPANCIES, BIBLICAL manuscripts of the Gospels which have been found in various portions of the globe, and under cir- cumstances which would make any radical changes impossible, even the slightest clerical error being manifest by comparison with many of the others. Some of these manuscripts are more than fourteen hundred years old (one of them, a portion of which has been recently dis- covered, is thought to be more than seventeen hundred years old) and may have been prepared by those who had access to the originals written by the apostles themselves. And here, too, as in the Hebrew books, it is safe to say that no im- portant doctrine or fact has been imperiled by the slight variations in the text. No man refuses to accept an inheritance because the testator differs with him in relation to Orthog- raphy or grammar; why, then, should we hesitate about accepting the truths of the Bible because of a clerical error in the text? 2. Other Causes. But there are other causes of apparent discrepancies. (1) The Determination of the Seeker. There are many perversions of the text which are so transparent that they can only be ascribed to will- ful dishonesty, when they are published and scat- tered broadcast for the purpose of destroying the faith of those who believe in Christianity. (2) The Carelessness of the Reader. Many people do not stop to analyze what they read; nay, it would appear by their attempted quota- tions that they pay very little attention to what the book actually says. For instance, an editorial in a great daily paper has announced that “the good book says that bread is the staff of life l’’ It is needless to say there is no such text, al- though the prophet Ezekiel speaks of “the staff of bread” (Ezek. iv:I6). (3) Difference in the Dates of Passages. For instance, when creation was completed ; “God saw everything which he had made, and behold, it was very good” (Gen. i :31). And again we are told that “it repented God that he had made man upon the earth” (Gen. vi.6). But between the periods to which these statements refer there were hundreds of years of disobedience on the part of man. No wonder, then, that “God re- pented” or “turned from” his purpose of pre- serving the antediluvian race upon the earth. (4) Difference of Authorship in Certain Passages. . Thus it is said: “In the day thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die” (Gen. ii:17). And again it is said: “Ye shall not surely die” (Gen. iii :14). But God was the author of the first statement and the devil was the author of the second. It is needless to say that the first is correct and that man received his dying nature in consequence of disobedience. (5) Varied Use of Terms. The term genera- tion sometimes applies to the number of progen- itors and sometimes it is reckoned as a certain number of years, as in the English Court of Chancery. J. Tifferent basis of Jºtatement. (1) Dif- ferent Periods. Sometimes different periods were considered as the basis of a statement. For example, it was announced to Abraham that his “seed should be a stranger in a land that was not theirs and they should afflict them four hundred years” (Gen. xv :13). This was the prophecy. The historian states that “the sojourning of the children of Israel who dwelt in Egypt was four hundred and thirty years” (Exod. xii:40). - It will be remembered that the affliction did not begin until after the death of Joseph, when “there 530 DISCREPANCIES, BIBLICAL arose another king over Egypt that knew not Joseph” (Exod. i :8). - (2) Different Numbers. Sometimes numbers are inclusive, sometimes exclusive. It is said “those who died in the plague (whole number) were twenty and four thousand” (Num. xxv :9). While Paul says: “Neither let us commit forni- cation, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand” (I Cor. x:8). (3) Different Names, Etc. The name of a tribe sometimes given to posterity. Edom or Esau is sometimes used to designate the Edomites, who were the descendants of Esau, ‘as in Num. xx: 18. There are many similar instances. The same persons Or places sometimes had different names, either successively or at the same time. This Often occurred, as in the case of Barnabas, who was called Joses (Acts iv:36); Barsabas is called Justus and also Joseph (Acts i:23); Nathanael is another name for Bartholomew; Thomas is also called Didymus ; and Levi is another name for Matthew. The place called Enmishpat, which is Kadesh in the Hebrew text of Gen. xiv:7, is called Magdala in Matthew xv :39. Horeb is another name for Sinai. - (4) Various Persons, Etc. Various persons or places also have the same name. This often happens, as in the case of Joram, one of whom was king of Israel and the other king of Judah at the same time. There were many Pharaohs, this being the general name for the kings of Egypt. There were also three persons named Herod; and various similar instances occur. There was one Bethlehem belonging to the tribe of Zebulon (Josh. xix:15), and another in the territory of the tribe of Judah (Matt. ii:6). There were also two towns called Cana, as there are many duplicate names of towns and cities in our own day. Dan was the name of one of the Jewish tribes, and the town of Laish was afterward called Dan. It was also the name of a river—one of the two which formed the Jordan. (See DAN ; JAIR, etc.). A little attention to this class of facts will obviate many difficulties which appear insur- mountable to the careless reader. (5) Change in Meaning of Terms. All living languages are flexible, and in the course of the centuries the meaning of many words has been changed in the English tongue, and hence the value of the Hebrew and Greek texts. In Ps. cxix:147 we read: “I prevented (or preceded) the morning; I hoped in thy word.” The Sep- tuagint renders this passage: “I arose before it was morning,” etc. When King James' version was issued, one of the meanings of “let” was to hinder, as in Romans i:13. And other obsolete terms need examination in order that they may not obscure the meaning. 6) New Facts, Etc., Mentioned. One writer mentions facts omitted by others. This is es- pecially true concerning the Gospels, for in this case we have four different authors, each of whom gives us more or less of the particulars pertain- ing to the life of the Christ. Although these books were written during the first century, it was not until Christianity had been propagated through a great portion of the known world on the testimony of thousands of eye-witnesses to some of the principal facts which these writers record. It was not until many of the followers of Christ had sealed their testimony with their blood, not probably, until after Nero had lighted his gardens, with fires made by wrap- ping living Christians in garments covered with pitch (about A. D. 64). DISCREPANCIES, BIBLICAL The writing of these books by this time be- came a necessity in order that the principal events recorded therein might not be perverted by tra- dition; and it is certain that they could not have been thus presented to that generation, and ac- cepted by those who were cognizant of the great tragedy, either of their own knowledge or that of their personal friends, unless the books had been both genuine and authentic. The opening verses of the Gospel by Luke in- dicate that at that time there were already many incomplete histories of our Lord, and the variety evinced in the work of the four evangelists show that they wrote entirely independent of each other. There is no intimation even of arrangement, and evidently no collusion between these witnesses. Their testimony, therefore, is that which comes under the head of the very best criterion of hu- man testimony, viz.: substantial truth under cir- cumstantial variety. For instance, John speaks of Mary Magdalene as coming early to the sepul- cher (John xx:I). He does not say that she came alone, but speaks of her as the actor in the events immediately following. Matthew not only speaks of her, but adds that “the other Mary was with her” (Matt. xxviii:I). - Mark speaks of Mary Magdalene, the “other Mary,” mentioned by Matthew, and adds the name of another of the little group (Mark xvi :I). Luke mentions the names of three, and adds that “other women” were with them (Luke xxiv: Io). Thus he endorses the testimony of the others and adds to it. Again Luke Speaks of “a certain blind man who sat by the wayside And he cried, saying, 'Jesus, thou son of David, have mercy upon me’” (Luke xviii:35, 38). f Matthew does not mention this incident, but speaks of two blind men who besought him, ap- parently on the same day (Matt. xx :30). The first event occurred according to Luke, when they were approaching Jericho, while the one which Matthew records took place “as they de- parted from Jericho.” Cases like the above, and many others, indicate the necessity of studying the connection of the texts under consideration. We also find that Matthew speaks of “a woman of Canaan” who besought Jesus to have mercy upon her daughter (Matt. xv.22), while Mark, in recording the same circumstance, says that the woman “was a Greek, a Syro-Phoenician by na- tion” (Mark vii:26). Syro-Phoenicia being at this time a province of the former Greek but now Roman government, and inhabited largely by the descendants of Canaan, all of these statements were undoubtedly true. º Another illustration of the wonderful evidence of substantial truth under circumstantial variety is found in the fact that one writer speaks of the ascension of Christ as if it occurred on “the Mount called Olivet” (Acts i :9, 12), while Luke gives us to understand that he ascended from Bethany (Luke xxiv:50). Both statements are true because Bethany was situated on the slope of “the Mount called Olivet.” Thus we find that a little study solves these problems and shows the wonderful unity of these independent witnesses, some of whom mentioned circumstances which were omitted by the others. No one of the writers of the New Testament claimed to give a full account of the life, death and resurrection of our Lord. Indeed John dis- tinctly states that “Many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book” (John xx:30). But the glimpses which we here and there find of the liv- ing, loving and glorified Christ are quite enough a troublesome smarting. 531 DISEASES OF THE JEWS to bring us to him, if we live out his teachings to the children of men. E. A. R. DISEASES OF THE JEWS (diz-ez'éz, jüz). The most prevalent diseases of the East are cutaneous diseases, malignant fevers, dysentery and Ophthalmia. - . (1) Of the first of these the most remarkable are leprosy and elephantiasis. (See LEPROSY.) To the same class also belongs the singular dis- ease called the mal d’Aleppo, which is confined to Aleppo, Bagdad, Aintab and the villages on the Segour and Kowick. It consists in an eruption of one or more small red tubercles, which give no uneasiness at first, but, after a few weeks, be- come prurient, discharge a little moisture and Sometimes ulcerate. Its duration is from a few months to a year. It does not affect the general health at all, and is only dreaded on account of the scars it leaves. Foreigners who have visited Aleppo have sometimes been affected by it several years after their return to their own country. It is a remarkable fact that dogs and cats are like- wise attacked by it (Russell’s Nat. Hist. of Aleppo, ii.299). The Egyptians are subject to an eruption of red spots and pimples, which cause The eruption returns every year toward the end of June or beginning of July, and is on that account attributed to the rising of the Nile (Volney, i :231). (2) Malignant fevers are very frequent, and of this class is the great scourge of the East, the plague, which surpasses all others in virulence and contagiousness. (See PLAGUE.) (3) The Egyptian ophthalmia is prevalent throughout Egypt and Syria, and is the cause of blindness being so frequent in those countries. (See BLINDNESS.) - (4) Of inflammatory diseases in general, Dr. Russell (supra) says that at Aleppo he has not found them more frequent, nor more rapid in their course, than in Great Britain. Epilepsy and diseases of the mind are commonly met with. Melancholy monomaniacs are regarded as sacred persons in Egypt, and are held in the highest veneration by all Mahometans (Prosper Alpinus, De Med. Ægypt, p. 58). (5) Diseases are not unfrequently alluded to in the Old Testament, but, as no description is given of them, except in One or two instances, it is for the most part impossible even to hazard a con- jecture concerning their nature. The issue men- tioned in Lev. xv.:5 cannot refer to gomorrhaea zyżrzz/en/a, as has been supposed by Michaelis and Hebenstreit (Winer, s. v. Krankheiten); for the person who exposed himself to infection in the various ways mentioned was only unclean until the evening, which is far too short a time to allow of its being ascertained whether he had escaped contagion or not. Either, then, the law of puri- fication had no reference whatever to the con- tagiousness of the disease (which is hardly ad- missible), or the disease alluded to was really not contagious. - (6) Joram's disease is probably referable to chronic dysentery, which sometimes occasions an exudation of fibrine from the inner coats of the intestines. The fluid fibrine thus exuded coagu- lates into a continuous tubular membrane, of the same shape as the intestine itself, and as such is expelled. This form of the disease has been no- ticed by Dr. Good under the name of diarrhaea tubularis (Study of Med., i.287). A precisely sim- ilar formation of false membranes, as they are termed, takes place in the windpipe in severe cases of croup. DISH (7) Hezekiah suffered, according to our version, from a boil. The term here used, Tºº, shekh- een', means, literally, inflammation; but we have no means of identifying it with what we call boil. The same may be said of the plague of boils and blains (see BLAINS), and of the names of diseases mentioned in the 28th chapter of Deuteronomy, such as pestilence, consumption, fever, botch of Egypt, itch, scab. The case of Job, in which the term translated boil also occurs, demands a separate notice. (See JOB.) (8) Nebuchadnezzar's disease was a species of melancholy monomania, called by authors Zoan- thropia, or more commonly, lycanthropia, because the transformation into a wolf was the most ordi- nary illusion. Esquirol considers it to have origi- nated in the ancient custom of sacrificing ani- mals. But, whatever effect this practice might have had at the time, the cases recorded are inde- pendent of any such influence, and it really does Inot seem necessary to trace this particular halluci- nation to a remote historical cause, when we re- member that the imaginary transformations into inanimate objects, such as glass, butter, etc., which are of every day occurrence, are equally irrecon- cilable with the natural instincts of the mind. The same author relates that a nobleman of the court of Louis XIV was in the habit of frequently putting his head out of a window, in order to satisfy the urgent desire he had to bark. Calmet informs us that the nuns of a German convent were transformed into cats and went mewing over the whole house at a fixed hour of the day (Esquirol, Maladies Mentales, i :522). Illustra- tions of corresponding mental maladies might be furnished by the hundreds. (9) Antiochus and Herod died, like Sylla, from phthiriasis, a disease which was well known to the ancients. Plutarch, in his Life of Sylla, men- tions several names of persons who had died from it, amongst whom are Pherecydes the philosopher, Alcman the poet, and Mutius the lawyer. M. Alibert was consulted by a celebrated French academician, who complained that his enemies even pursued him into the academy, and almost carried off his pen (Dermatoses, i:585). Nothing is known respecting the immediate causes of this malady, but there is no doubt that it depends on the general state of the constitution, and must not be attributed to uncleanliness. Alibert men- tions the case of a person who, as soon as the parasitic animals had been destroyed, fell into a typhoid state, and shortly after died. The ques- tion of alleged demoniacal possession, so often mentioned in the New Testament, has been con- sidered under another head. (See Pºº ,-, -: rº- Slave Bearing Covered Dishes to Table. DISH (dish), (Heb. ???, sayſel, low), probably a shallow pan. e e Various kinds of dishes are mentioned in Scrip- ture, but it is impossible to form any other idea 532 DISPENSATION of their particular forms than may be suggested by those of ancient Egypt and of the modern East, which have much resemblance to each other. The sites of such ancient towns as were built of sun- dried bricks are usually covered with broken pot- sherds, some of them large enough to indicate the form of the entire vessel. These are remarkably similar to those in modern use, and are for the most part made of a rather coarse earthenware, covered, with a compact and strong glaze, with bright colors, mostly green, blue or yellow. Dishes and other vessels of copper, coarsely but thickly tinned, are now much used in the East, but how far this may have been anciently the case we have not the means of knowing. (See BASIN ; CUP.) DISHAN (di'shan), (Heb. ſºn. dee-shazwn', an- Other form of Dishon, antelope), youngest son of Seir the Horite, about B. C. IQ53 (Gen. xxxvi;21, 28, 30; I Chron. i.38, 42). * * DISHON (di'shön), (Heb. mºn, dee-shone', an- telope). - 1. The name of the fifth son of Seir, the Hor- ite (Gen. xxxvi :21, 26, 30; I Chron. i :38), B. C. about 1963. 2. Grandson of Seir and son of Anah (Gen. xxxvi :25; I Chron. i :4I). DISHONESTY (dis-àn'ès-ty), (Gr. alaxºvm, ahee- Sáhoo'nay, 2 Cor. iv:2), shame, disgrace. R. V., “shame.” Tyndale has 1421/ionesty. DISPENSATION (dis'pën-så'shūn), (Gr. oikov- opia, oy-Åon-om-ee'ah, management of household; hence English economy. (1) These are otherwise called “the ways of God,” and denote those schemes or methods which are devised and pursued by the wisdom and good- ness of God, in order to manifest his perfections and will to mankind, for the purpose of their in- struction, discipline, reformation and advancement in rectitude of temper and conduct, in order to promote their happiness. These are the grand ends of the divine dispensations, and in their aptitude to promote these ends consist their ex- cellence and glory. (2) The works or constitutions of nature are, in a general sense, divine dispensations, by which God condescends to display to us his being and attributes, and thus to lead us to the acknowledg- ment, adoration and love of our Creator, Father and Benefactor. (3) The sacred scriptures reveal and record other dispensations of Divine Providence, which have been directed to the promotion of the reli- gious principles, moral conduct and true happi- ness of mankind. These have varied in several ages of the world, and have been adapted by the wisdom and goodness of God to the circumstances of his intelligent and accountable creatures. In this sense the various revelations which God has communicated to mankind at different periods, and the means he has used, as Occasion has re- quired, for their discipline and improvement, have been justly denominated divine dispensations. (4) The various dispensations are known as the Patriarchal, the Mosaic, or Jewish, and the Chris- tian. They are called the dispensations of grace, the perfection and ultimate object of every other (see Eph. i: Io; iii:2). All these were adapted to the conditions of the human race at these several periods; all, in regular succession, were mutually connected and rendered preparatory one to the other, and all were subservient to the design of saving the world and promoting the perfection and happiness of its rational and moral inhabi- tants. (See CoVENANT.) DISPERSION OF ISRAEL (5) St. Paul uses the term to indicate thc office (duty) intrusted to him by God of proclaiming the Gospel (I Cor. ix:17; Col. i :25). (6) Those acts of God which affect men either in mercy or judgment, are called dispensations of Providence (which see). DISPERSION OF ISRAEL (dis-pêr'shūn), (Gr. 6tag tropé, dee-as-for-ah', rendered “dispersed,” John vii:35; “scattered,” James i: I; I Pet. i. 1). (See ISRAEL ; NATIONS, DISPERSION OF). DISPERSION OF NATIONS (dis-per'shün &v mä'shūLis). See NATIONS, DISPERSION OF. DISPOSITION (dis-pô-zish'in), (Gr. 6tarayå, dee-a/-ag-ay", Acts vii:53), an arrangement, instru- mentality. R. V., “received the law as it was or- dained by angels;” marg., “as the ordinance of angels.” - ‘Disposition' is the Rhemish word here (Wy- cliffe, Tyndale, Geneva have ‘ordinance;’ Cover- dale, Cranmer, ‘ministration'), and it is used in the archaic sense of administration. In the same sense ‘disposer' is used by Tyndale, in I Cor. iv:1. ‘Let men this wise esteeme us, even as the minis- ters of Christ, and disposers of the secretes of God.” (Hastings' Bib. Dict.) DISPUTE (dis-plit"), (Gr. 6ta\éyopat, dee-a/-eg'- om-ahee, Acts xix:8), to discuss, to reason. The only passage in which ‘dispute' seems to have the meaning of ‘wrangle' is I Tim. vi. 5, ‘Per- verse disputings of men of corrupt minds' (R. V. ‘wranglings'). Here Wycliffe has ‘fightyngis' and Rhemish ‘conflictes’ after Vulg. conflictationes, but Tyndale and the rest ‘disputations,’ a word which never seems to signify ‘altercation,’ ‘wrang- ling.' The Greek word is found nowhere else. (Hastings' Bib. Dict.). DITCH (dich), (Heb. Pā, geb, ditch, 2 Kings iii.16), a trench for holding cistern water; Job ix:31, a collection or pool of water. Also "º, shatchaw', pit, ditch (Prov. xxiii:27), used figur- atively. - DIVERS, DIVERSE (di'värz, di-vers'), (Heb. Eºsº, AE2/-ah'ſzm, of two sorts). 1. Several persons (2 Chron. xxx:II.) 2. Different (Judg. v.:30; Dan. vii:19). “Divers' has now dropped out of use, or, if used archaically, is restricted to the sense of ‘sev- eral.’ But formerly ‘divers’ and ‘diverse' were in- different spellings of the same adjective, which expressed, as above quoted, either varied,” “dif- ferent’ (Lat. diversus), or various,’ ‘several.’ The Hebrews were forbidden (I) to engender their cattle with divers kinds, as by coupling horses and asses; (2) to sow their fields or gardens with mingled seed; (3) to wear cloth made of linen and woolen wrought together. By these admoni- tions they were taught to beware of mingling themselves with the heathen ; or mingling the truths and ordinances of God with their own in- ventions; and to avoid purposing to mix nature and grace, the Messiah’s righteousness and their Own, in the work of their salvation (Lev. xix :19; Deut. xxii:9, II). (4) Divers weights and meas- ures are, a larger, to receive goods with, and a lesser, to give them out; this importing, as it does, deliberate dishonesty, is an abomination to the Lord (Prov. xx: Io, 23). (5) Diversity of gifts and operations are different forms, kinds and degrees of them (I Cor. xii;4, 6) DIVINATION (div'ſ-nā'shūn), (Heb. Fº, Ae/4'- sem, lot), is a general term descriptive of the vari- ous illusory arts anciently practiced for the dis- covery of things secret or future. 533 DIVINATION The human mind has always shown a strong curiosity to ascertain the course of fortune and the issue of present or contemplated scherries; and in those countries and ages where ignorance of physical laws has combined with superstition to debase it, it has sought to gratify this innate dis- position to pry into futurity by looking for pre- Sages in things between which and the object of its anxiety no connection existed but in the di- viner's imagination. Scarcely a single department of nature but was appealed to as furnishing, On certain conditions, good or bad omens of hu- man destiny; and the aspect of things which, perhaps by the most casual coincidence, marked Some event or crisis in the life of one or two in- dividuals, came to be regarded, by blind credulity, as the fixed and invariable precursor of a similar result in thc affairs of mankind in general. By Such cluildish and irrational notions was the con- duct of the heathen guided in the most important, no less than in the most ordinary occurrences of life; and thence arose the profession of augurs, Soothsayers, et hoc genus omne of impostors, who, ingrafting vulgar traditions on a small stock of natural knowledge, established their claims to the possession of an occult science, the importance and influence of which they dexterously increased by associating it with all that was pompous and imposing in the ceremonies of their religion. This science, if that can be called science which was the product of ignorance and fraud united, was divided into various branches, each of which had its separate professors. In a general view, divination may be considered as either natural or artificial ; the first being founded on the notion that the soul possesses, from its spiritual nature, some prescience of futurity, which it exemplifies particularly in dreams, and at the approach of death ; the second resting on a peculiar interpre- tation of the course of nature, as well as on such arbitrary observations and experiments as super- stition introduced. The different systems and methods that were anciently in vogue were almost incredible; as, for instance, Aéromancy, divining by the air; Arithmomancy, by means of num- bers; Capnomancy, by the smoke of sacrifices; Chiromancy, by the lines on the palms of the hands; Hydromancy, by water; Pyromancy, by fire, etc. But without attempting an enumeration and explanation of all the arts of divination that were anciently practiced, let us confine ourselves to the mention of those which occur in sacred his- tory (Exod. vii:11; Is. xliv :25; Jer. 1:35; Dan. ii:I2, etc.). (1) Wise Men. This is a term applied gener- ally to magicians, or men who were skilled in natural science. (2) Wizards. “Wizards,” or wise men, and “a witch,' from an Arabic verb signifying ‘to reveal,” both practicing divination by the same arts, i. e., pretending to reveal secrets, to discover things lost, find hidden treasures and interpret dreams. (3) Flight of Birds. One who foretold what was to happen by the flight of birds, or the use of lots. (See LOT.) Observer of Times. One who, though rendered by our translators “an observer of times,” foretold political or physical- changes by the mo- tion of the clouds, along with whom Isaiah con- joins those who made the same predictions from eclipses and the conjunction of the stars (xlvii: I3). (5) An Enchanter. “An enchanter’ was prob- ably one who practiced Ophiomancy, or the art of charming serpents, which was and still is a favorite trick of jugglery in the East. (6) Charmer. “A charmer,” one who placed DIVINATION words and things in a certain arrangement, or muttered them, as a kind of Spell. (7) Consulter with Familiar Spirits. “A consulter with familiar spirits,' or a ‘ventrilo- quist,’ was a wizard who asked counsel of his familiar, and gave the responses received from him to others—the name being applied in refer- ence to the spirit or demon that animated the per- son, and inflated the belly, so that it protuberated like the side of a bottle (see Lev. xx:27; I Sam. xxviii:8; also Acts xvi :16). (8) Necromancy. “A necromancer,’ one who, by frequenting tombs, by inspecting corpses, etc., like the witch of Endor, pretended to evoke the dead, and bring secrets from the invisible world (Gen. xli :8; Exod. vii:II ; Lev. xix:26; Deut. xviii: IO-I2). (9) Belomancy. Belomancy, as it is called, is a form of divination by means of arrows (Ezek. xxi :21 ; see also 2 Kings xiii: I4-IQ), a notable ex- ample of which occurs in the history of Nebu- chadnezzar, who, being undecided whether to march first against Jerusalem or Rabbah, allowed neither his policy nor resentment to decide the course of his expedition, but was determined wholly by the result of superstitious rites. The way of divining by arrows was, having first made them bright, ‘in order the better to fol- low them with the eye,’ to shoot them, and to prosecute the march according to the direction in which the greatest number of arrows fell ; or, having ‘mixed together' some arrows with the names of the devoted cities marked on them, to attack that first which was first drawn out; or to put in a bag three arrows, as is the prac- tice of the Arabs, one of which is inscribed with the words, ‘Command me, Lord,’ the second with “Forbid me, Lord,” while the third is left blank; so that if the first is taken out, he was to go; if the second, he was to desist; if the third is drawn, no decision being given, the experiment is to be repeated. § (10) Rhabdomancy. Rhabdomancy, or divin- ation by rods (Hos. iv: I2), has been con- founded with the preceding. But the instruments of divination which Hosea alludes to are entirely different from those described by Ezekiel, arrows being used by the latter, whereas the former speaks of ‘staff.” The form of divination by the staff was, after placing it upright, to let it fall, and decide by the direction in which it fell, or, according to others, by measuring the staff with the finger, saying at each span, ‘I will go,” or ‘I will not go,' and determining the course, accord- ing as it happened to be the one or the other at the last measurement. Both of these, as Jerome informs us, were frequently practiced by the As- syrians and Babylonians. Herodotus (vi) de- scribes the Alani women as gathering and search- ing anxiously for very smooth and straight wands to be used in this superstitious manner. (11) Images. Another way of divining was by ‘images' (Ezek. xxi :21), which are generally considered talismans, but which the Persian and other versions render astrological instruments or tables. (12) The Liver. Another form of divination was ‘by looking into the liver' of a newly-killed sacri- fice, and by observing its state and color accord- ing to certain rules, to draw a favorable or un- favorable omen. (13) The Cup. The last form which it is of consequence to notice as alluded to in Scripture was by ‘the cup.’ But in what manner it was prac- ticed; whether it was by observing the appear- ance of some magical ingredients that were in- fused into the vessel, or whether allusion is made 534 * DIVINATION to a famous cup which the immemorial tradition of the East says has been in the possession of some great personages, and represents the whole world; or, finally, whether the original word ren- dered ‘divineth,’ should be rendered by ‘search- ing’ or ‘inquiring earnestly,’ as many learned writ- ers, anxious to save the character of Joseph from the imputation of Sorcery (Gen. xliv :5), have labored to prove, it is absolutely impossible, and we shall not attempt, to determine. (14) Prevalence in Egypt. Egypt, the cradle of arts and sciences, if she did not give it birth, Seem to have encouraged the practice of divina- tion at an early age, and whether any of its forms had become objects of popular superstition, or were resorted to for the purposes of gain in the days of Joseph, it is well known that at the time of the Hebrew Exodus there were magicians in that country whose knowledge of the arcana of nature, and whose dexterity in the practice of their art, enabled them, to a certain extent, to equal the miracles of Moses. By what extraordinary powers they achieved those feats, how they changed their rods into serpents, the river water into blood, and introduced frogs in unprecedented numbers, is an inquiry that has occasioned great perplexity to many men of learning and piety. Some have imagined that the only way of ac- counting for the phenomena is to ascribe them to jugglery and legerdemain ; the serpents, the frogs and the other materials requisite having been se- cretely provided and dexterously produced at the moment their performances were to be exhibited. Others contend that these conjurors were aided by familiar spirits or infernal agents, with the Divine permission, in the performance of their wonderful feats. ‘Earth, air and ocean,’ says a sensible writer, ‘may contain many things of which our philosophy has never dreamt. If this consideration tend to humble the pride of learn- ing, it may remind the Christian that secret things belong not to him, but to a higher power.’ It is reasonable to suppose that as Moses never had been in any other civilized country, all the allusions contained in his writings to the various forms of divination were those which were prac- ticed in Egypt, and, indeed, so strong a taste had his countrymen imbibed there for this species of superstition that throughout the whole course of . their history it seems to have infected the na- tional character and habits. (15) Divination a Snare to the Hebrews. The diviners, who abounded both amongst the aborigines of Canaan and their Philistine neigh- bors (Is. ii:6), proved a great snare to the Israel- ites after their settlement in the promised land, and yet, notwithstanding the stern prohibitions of the law, no vigorous efforts were made to put an end to the crime by extirpating the practitioners of the unhallowed art, until the days of Saul, who himself, however, violated the statute on the night previous to his disastrous fall (I Sam. xxviii). (16) Chaldaea, the Mother Country of Divin- ers. But it was Chaldaea to which the distinction belongs of being the mother country of diviners. Such a degree of power and influence had they at- tained in that country (see CHALDAEA) that they formed the highest caste and enjoyed a place at court; nay, so indispensable were they in Chal- daean society that no step could be taken, not a relation could be formed, a house built, a journey undertaken, a campaign begun, until the diviners had ascertained the lucky day and promised a happy issue. A great influx of these impostors had, at vari- ous times, poured from Chaldaea and Arabia into the land of Israel to pursue their gainful occupa- DIVORCE tion, more especially during the reign of the later kings (Is. viii:19), and we find Manasseh not only their liberal patron, but zealous to appear as one of their most expert accomplices (2 Kings xxi :6; 2 Chron. xxxiii:6). The long captivities in Babylon spread more widely than ever among the Jews a devoted attachment to this superSti- tion, for after their return to their own country, having entirely renounced idolatry, and, at the same time, no longer enjoying the gift of prophecy or access to the sacred oracles, they gradually abandoned themselves, as Lightfoot has satisfac- torily shown, before the advent of Christ, to all the prevailing forms of divination (Comment. on Matt.). (17) Mosaic Denunciations Against. Against every species and degree of this seductive super- Stition the sternest denunciations of the Mosaic law were directed (Exod. xxii: 18; Lev. xix:26, 3I ; xx :27; Deut. xviii:Io, II), as fostering a love for unlawful knowledge and withdrawing the 1mind from God who only is wise; while, at the same time, repeated and distinct promises were given that in place of diviners and all who used enchantments God would send them prophets, messengers of truth, who would declare the Divine will, reveal futurity and afford them all the useful knowledge which was vainly sought for from those pretended oracles of wisdom. Much discussion, however, has been carried on by learned men to determine the question whether the ancient tribe of diviners merely pretended to the powers they exercised, or were actually assisted by demoniacal agency. The latter opinion is em- braced by almost all the fathers of the primitive church. (18) A System of Imposture. On the other hand, it has been with great ability and erudition maintained that the whole arts of divination were a system of imposture, and that Scripture itself frequently ridicules those who practiced them as utterly helpless and incapable of accomplishing anything beyond the ordinary powers of nature (IS. xlvii: I I-13; xliv :25; Jer. xiv:14; Jonah ii:8; see Faber’s Origin of Pagan Idolatry; Farmer's Dissert. on Miracles; Lightfoot's Works; Pot- ter’s Antiq. i :354; Stolberg's Hist. of Relig. iii; Goodwin’s Moses and Aaron, p. 216; Rosenmül- ler's Geog. vii: IOI, IO2; Gesenius's Comment. on Isaiah, app. xi; Richardson's Dissertation on the Manzers of Eastern Mations). - DIVORCE (di-vörs'), DIVORCEMENT (Heb. hºnº, Aer-ee-thooth'; Gr. 3rográriov, aff-os-tas'. . ee-on, a cutting, separating. See MARRIAGE. For literature on the subject see Alvah Hovey, The Scriptura/ Doctrine of Divorce, Boston, 1866; Joseph Tracy, The Bible Doctrine of Divorce in Bibl. Sacra, July, 1866. DIZAHAB (diz'a-hāb), (Heb. Pº, "", deegaw- Aawó', golden, region of gold), the name of a place not far from the plains of Moab, mentioned in Deut. i:1. Robinson identifies it with Dahab, a cape on the west shore of the Gulf of Akabah (i:147; ii:187, note). DOCTOR (dök'tér), (Gr. 616&arka)\os, did-as"Aa/-os, a teacher, Luke ii:46; Acts v. 34). . (1) Teacher of the law may, perhaps, be dis- tinguished from scribe, as rather teaching vivá voce than giving written opinions. (2) Doctors of the law were mostly of the sect of the Pharisees, but are distinguished from that sect in Luke v :I?. (3) Doctors or teachers are mentioned among Divine gifts in Ephes. iv:II. . 535 DODO DocTRINE (dokºtrin). 1. Leh'ſſakh (Heb. Tº something received), instruction (Deut. xxxii:2; Job xi:4; Prov. iv:2; Is. xxix:24). 2. Mo-say-raw (Heb. "Tºº, correction, chas- tisement, Jer. x:8). s 3. Shem-oo-aw' (Heb. nºw, something heard, and SO an announcement), proclamation, preach- ing (IS. xxviii:9). 4. Generally in the New Testament doctrine is from Gr. 6tóóo kw, dźd-as"/ºo, to teach (Matt. vii:28; Mark i.22, 27; Luke iv:32, etc.), but Once (Heb. vi; I) it is the rendering of Gr. Ndºyos, Zog'os, something spoken, instruction. 5. In general: The truths of the gospel are the doctrine of God, and according to godliness and sound doctrine. God in Christ is their author, matter and end, and they are pure, Solid, substan- tial and uncorrupted with error (I Tim. vi.;I, 3); Heb. vi :I ; 2 Tim. iv:3). And they are Christ's doctrine, as he is the chief preacher and great substance of them (Tit. ii: Io), and they are not his, i. e., not his only, nor his as a mere man, which the Jews supposed him to be, but the Father’s also (John vii:16). They are the doc- trine of preachers, as they are published by them (2 Tim. iii:Io). DOCUS (dö'kuz), (Gr. Aćk, do/*e, a little hold, a small stronghold near Jericho (I Macc. xvi. I 5, comp. verse 14) built by Ptolemaeus, the son of Abubus, and in which he entertained and mur- dered his father-in-law, Simon Maccabaeus, with his two sons. By Josephus (Ant. xiii:8, I; B.J. i.2, 3) it is called Dagon, and is said to have been “one of the fortresses” (épupićrav) above Jericho. The name still remains in ‘Ain Duk, a copious spring about four miles northwest of Jericho. A road leads by it from the Jordan valley into the hill country. Above the spring are traces of ancient fortifications. Also written Dok. DODAI (död'a-i), (Heb. Tº, do-dah'ee, probably another form for Dodo), an Ahohite, who com- manded the contingent for the second month under David (I Chron. xxvii:4); probably the same as DoDo (which see). DODANIMI (död'a-nîm), (Heb. F.T., do-dazy- neem", perhaps leaders; Sept. "Póðiot, Rhodiz), the descendants of the fourth son of Javan (Gen. x:4). Bochart and other commentators on the ethno- graphical sketch in Gen. x suppose that the first settlements of the Dodanim were in the southwest part of Asia Minor; where the country called by the Greeks Doris, with the neighboring isle of Rhodes, are conceived to exhibit traces of this origin, the Hebrew letters T (d) and h (r) being, from their similarity, often transposed. In fact, Some copies have the n, and read Rodanim (as in the margin of the Auth. Vers.). It is further sup- posed that settlers of this family may be traced in Thessaly and Epirus, where the name is traced in the city of Dodona and in the country of Doris. But there seems much of uncertainty in all these ingenious speculations. DODAVAH (död'a-vah), (Heb. ་་, do-dazy- waw'Aoo, beloved of Jehovah), father of Eliezer, who condemned Jehoshaphat's alliance with Aha! ziah (2 Chron. xx:37) B.C. before 895. Properly Dodavahu. DODO (dö'do), (Heb. ini", do-do', amatory). 1. Dodo, the Ahohite, was the father of Elea- zar, the Second of the three who commanded the “thirty” (2 Sam. xxiii:9; I Chron. xi :12). Either he or his son had charge of the second monthly 1DOE course (I Chron. xxvii:4). Here and in Samuel the name is Dodai, which is probably correct (B. C. ante I312). 2. Father of Elhanan, who was one of David's “thirty” (2 Sam. xxiii:24; I Chron. xi :26). 3. A man of Issachar, and ancestor of Tola (Judg. x:i), (B. C. ante IO46). DOE (dö), a female deer or antelope. In Prov, v:19, R. V., it is the female ibex or wild goat of Sinai. - DOEG (dö'ég), (Heb. X", do-ayg', fearful). An Edomite, and chief overseer of King Saul's flocks, which is an important trust in Oriental courts. At Nob he was witness of the assistance which the high-priest Ahimelech seemed to afford to the fugitive David, by furnishing him with the Sword of Goliath, and by supplying him with bread even from the sacred table (I Sam. xxi :7). Of this he failed not to inform the king, who, re- gardless of the explanation offered by Ahimelech, and finding that the chiefs censured him, and hesitated to lay their hands upon a person so sacred, commanded Doeg to slay him and his priests—a task which was executed with equal readiness and cruelty by the Edomite (I Sam. xxii: 18, sq.). DOG (dög), (Heb. Sº, Áeh'/e}, yelping; kvváptov, Áoo-mar'ee-on, puppy; ków.v, Áoo'ohn, dog; Arabic, Æe/ð), occurs in many places of Scripture (Exod. xxii:31; I. Sam. xvii:43; xxiv: I4; 2 Sam. ix:8; 2 Kings viii: 13; Ps. lix:6, I4, I5; Prov. xxvi;II, 17, etc.). - (1) An animal so well known, whose numerous varieties come under daily observation, requires no detailed description. There is, however, in Asia still extant one, perhaps more than one, species of dogs which never have been the com- panions of man, and there are races of uncertain origin, that may have been formerly domesticated, but which are now feral, and as fierce as wolves; while, from the particular opinions of Oriental nations, there are others, exceedingly numerous, neither wild nor domesticated, but existing in all the cities and towns of the Levant, without Owners, feeding on carrion and offals, and still having the true instinct of protecting property, guarding the inhabitants of the district or quar- ter where they are tolerated, and so far cherished that water and some food are not unusually placed within their reach. (2) The true wild species of Upper and Eastern Asia is a low, sharp-nosed, reddish cur-dog, not unlike a fox, but with less tail. In Persia and Turkey there exists a larger dog resembling a wolf, exceedingly Savage. Both are gregarious, hunt in packs, but are occasionally seen alone. They are readily distinguished from a wolf by their shorter unfurnished tails. In the time of the sojourning of Israel in Egypt, there were already in existence domestic dogs of the principal races now extant—the cur-dog or fox-dog, the hound, the greyhound, and even a kind of low-legged turnspit. All the above, both wild and reclaimed, there is every reason to believe were known to the Hebrews; and notwithstanding the presumed Mosaic prohibition, anterior habits and in some measure the necessity of their condition must have caused cattle-dogs to be retained as prop- erty (Deut. xxiii:18), for we find one of that race, or a house-dog, actually attending on travelers (Tobit v :16; xi :4). (3) Besides the cattle-dog, the Egyptian hound and one or two varieties of greyhound were most likely used for hunting—a pastime, however, which the Hebrews mostly pursued on foot. The street-dog, without master, apparently de- DOKHAN rived from the rufous cur, and in Egypt partak- ing of the mongrel greyhound, often more or less bare, with a mangy unctuous skin, frequently with several teeth wanting, was, as it now is, considered a defiling animal. It is to animals of this class, which no doubt followed the camp of Israel, and hung On its skirts, that allusion is more particularly made in Exod. xxii:3I ; for the same custom exists at this day, and the race of street-dogs still retains their ancient habits. (4) But with regard to the dogs that devoured Jezebel, and licked up Ahab's blood (I Kings xxi : 23), they may have been of the wild races, a spe- cies of which is reported to have particularly in- fested the banks of the Kishon and the district of Jezreel. (5) It is to be presumed that practically the street-dogs alone were considered as absolutely unclean, though all, as is the case among Moham- medans, were excluded from familiarity. (6) The cities of the East are still greatly dis- turbed in the night by the howlings of street-dogs, who, it seems, were similarly noisy in ancient times, the fact being noticed in Ps. lix:6, 14, and dumb or silent dogs are not unfrequently seen, such as Isaiah alludes to (lvi : Io). . H. S. Figuratite. (I) A dog, dead dog, or dog's head was expressive of the most insignificant person (2 Kings viii: 13; I Sam. xxiv: I4, and 2 Sam. ix:8, and iii:8). (2) Persons immodest and unclean, or who return to filthy doctrines and practices, or who bark and rail at such as they hate, are called dogs (Rev. xxii:15; Deut. xxiii: 18; 2 Pet. ii:22; Prov. xxvi :II ; Ps. lix:6, and xxii: 16;). (3) False teachers are dogs; they are inclined to abominable courses: are dumb dogs; do not faithfully warn and instruct men: are lazy dogs; do not faithfully work: are greedy dogs; that never get enough of worldly things; and are given to bark at and reproach the people of God (Phil. iii:2; Is. lvi :II). (4) The gentiles were reckoned as dogs by the Jews, but they ate of the crumbs that fell from Jesus' table; partook of some of his miracles, profited by them, and ap- plied his sufferings for the healing and food of their souls (Matt. xv.:27; Luke xvi;21). (5) Satan is called a dog to mark his vileness and hurtful- ness, in reproaching and harassing the Saints, though God made both him and his agents use- ful in driving them to himself (Ps. xxii:20). i§ | . } i | º 0 § § º . f . { \ \ W | º | Millet. DoRHAN (dökhān) or DoCHAN, (Heb. Tº do'Ahan), occurs in Ezek. iv:9; where the Prophet is s * W. º W W tº º c W * W W ºlwº . º - ºf a §§ * . - f \ºli. : // ſº ſ,ſ, i - - | - Wº º d 4 º *I'ſ] . . w * | --- - ºf * | º, | * I \ | º w º ſ d º º * = r º t º' º *A*, * º º | i{, }' ºl. I' tº * } / * * | | º § www. wº 1. tº DOLEFUL CREATURES directed to take unto him wheat, and barley, and beans, and lentils, and millet (doßhan) and fitches, and to put them into onc vessel, and to make bread thereof for himself. The Hebrew word dokhun is identical with the Arabic dukhun, which is applied in the present day by the Arabs to a small grain cultivated from the middle of Europe to the most southern part of India. This is the common millet, Panicum miliaceum of botanists. This is SO universally cultivated in the East as one of their smaller corn- grasses, that it is most likely to be the kind al- luded to in the passage of Ezekiel. J. F. R. DOLEFUL CREATURES (dö1'ful kré-türs), (Heb. Tº, o'akh, a howler, Is. xiii.21; A. V. marg., “Ochim”), refer to birds or beasts which utter shricks or howlings or Ominous sounds, such as the booming of owls, the walling cry of jackals, and the dismal howling of wolves. See Is. xxxiv: I3, I 4. Door (dor), (Heb. nº, de-leth), an entrance by which people go out and into houses, gardens, etc. The word is used for any kind of means of entrance to or going out. Figuratite. (I) Christ is called the door, and was figured out by the doors or gates of the tabernacle and temple. He, in his person and offices of mediation, is the means of our access to God (John x:9). (2) Slothful persons are as a door turning upon its hinges; they appear to be doing Something and yet make no progress in anything good (Prov, xxvi; I4). The door at which Christ knocks and demands entrance is the understand- ing, conscience and affections, and by these he enters into our hearts (Rev. iii.20; PS. xxiv:7, 9). (3) The door is shut after Christ's faithful ones have entered his marriage feast (Matt. xxv : Io; Luke xiii:25). (4) The door of faith is open to the gentiles when they have a clear warrant and invitation to believe set be- fore them in the gospel, and they are powerfully determined to receive Jesus and all his fullness as the gift of God and the means of access to his favor (Acts xiv:27). (5) An door was opened to the apostles and other min- isters when they had opportunity, with ap- pearance of success, to preach Christ to multi- tudes (I Cor. xvi :9; 2 Cor. ii: 12; Rev. iii:8). (6) Ministers have a door of utterance given them when they are helped by God to.preach the gospel with great plainness, readiness and boldness (Col. iv :3). (7) Ministers enter in by the door when they have a regular call from God to their office (John x:1, 2). (8) At the door, or before it, im- ports nearness, readiness to testify against, come upon, or judge us (Gen. iv.:7; Matt. xxiv:33; James v :9). (9) God’s making the valley of Achor a door of hope may import that, amid guilt and trouble, the beginnings of mercy shall en- courage to hope for still greater favors; or that ille UUuvelsiuſ Uſ Iliu Gaillaritans near that place was an earnest of the conversion of the gentiles (Hos. ii:15; John x). (See GATES.) Door KEEPER (dör'kép'êr), (Heb. Tºº, sho- are', Gr. 6vpapós, thoo-ro-ros', I Chron. XV:23, 24; John xviii:16; Acts xii:13). “Doorkeeper” in Ps. lxxxiv: IO (marg. “to sit at the threshold”) means one “at the threshold” either a beggar asking alms or a passer-by merely looking in. - DOORPOST (dör'post), the translation of Heb. Fe, saf (Ezek. xli:16), for THRESHOLD (which see). Moses enjoined upon the Israelites that they 537 effectual DOUBLE should write the divine commands “upon the posts of thy house and thy gates" (Deut. vi.9; Heb. "lº, mez-oo-zaw'). The allusions were figurative and spiritual. DOPHEAH (döph'kah), (Heb. "Bºº, doſ-AEaw', a knock), a station of the Israelites On the route to Sinai between the Red Sea and Rephidim (Num. xxxiii: 12, 13). Seetzen locates it at a place called Tobbacha, but the identification has not been generally ac- cepted. DOR (dôr), (Heb. Tººl, dore', dwelling), a town on the border of the Mediterranean, which Jerome places nine Roman miles north of Caesarea. It was one of the royal towns of the Canaan- ites (Josh. xi :2; xii:23), and was included in the heritage of Manasseh (Josh. xvii: II). The place, or rather the region to which it gave name, oc- curs again in I Kings iv: II, and in the Maccabees (I Macc. xv.:II) and Josephus (Antiq. xvi;4, 4) appears under the name of Dora. A place still exists, at the distance indicated by Jerome, under the name of Tortura, which Buckingham de- scribes as a small village with about forty or fifty houses and 500 inhabitants. It has a small port, formed by a narrow range of rocky islets, at a short distance from the sandy beach. DORCAS (dör'kas). See TABITHA. DOSITHEUS (dö-sith'e-às), (Gr, Aootbeos, dos- Žth'ee-os), a Levite priest who carried the transla- tion of Esther to Egypt (Esth. xi:I in Apoc- rypha). - DOTE (döt). 1. (Heb. *s, yaw-a/", Jer. 1:36), to be foolish, to lose one's senses through fear. “A sword is upon the boasters, and they shall dote.” 2. (Heb. Pº, aw-gab', Ezek. xxiii.5, sq.), primi- tive root, to love, to be foolishly fond. DOTHAIM (dö'thä-im). See DoTHAN. DOTHAN (dö-than), (Heb. kº", do' thawn, two wells), the place where Joseph found his brethren, who had wandered thither with their flocks from Shechem, and where he was treacherously sold by them to the Ishmaelites (Gen. xxxvii:17). It was here also that the Syrians were smitten with blindness at the word of Elisha (2 Kings vi :13). Dothan is placed by Eusebius and Jerome twelve Roman miles north of Sebaste or Samaria, and on the caravan track from Syria to Egypt. Here it was discovered by Van de Velde (i:364 ff), and Robinson (iii: 122), still called by its an- cient name. It is four or five miles southwest of Jenin and not far from the plain of Esdraelon. DOUBLE (düb"l), which is the translation of several Hebrew and Greek words, has many meanings. Thus, the BREASTPLATE (which see) was to be made of two thicknesses of cloth (Exod. xxxix:0). Figuratite. (I) God’s people receive of his hand double ſor all their sins. The Jews in their Chaldaean captivity received large punish- ment, sufficient to answer God’s designs with them (Is. xl:2). (2) The Jews had double for their shame, when their troubles and disgrace were removed, and great happiness and glory succeeded (Is. lxi :7). (3) Antichrist’s cup shall be filled double; the judgments of God shall, at last, be more dreadful than the persecution inflicted on the witnesses of Christ (Rev. xviii:6). (4) A double portion is either twice as much as any other (Deut. xxi :17), or a very large share (2 Kings ii:9). (5) A double garment is a lined DOUBT 538 one (Exod. xxxix:9). (6) A double heart, or mind, is that which pretends an inclination to good, and yet habitually works wickedness with pleasure; and is opposite to a single, honest, faithful, and sincere one (Ps. xii:2; James i:8). DOUBT (dout), to be uncertain what to think or believe (John x:24; Matt. xxviii:17). The New Testament gives us a series of terms which run through the shades of meaning ex- pressed by our words, perplexity, suspense, dis- traction, hesitation, questioning, Scepticism, Shad- owing down into unbelief. (I) Perplexity and suspense (Matt. vi.20; Luke xxiv:4; John xiii: 22; Acts xxv :20; 2 Cor. iv:8; Gal. iv:20. (2) Distraction (Luke xii:29; Matt. xiv:3I ; xxviii:17. (3) Hesitation (Luke xxiv:38; Rom. xiv.: I ; Phil. ii:14; Acts xi:12). (4) SAEeſticism and Un- belief (Matt. xxi.21; Mark xi:23; Rom. xiv:23; James i:6; Jude 22). DOUGH (dö), (Heb. Pº, baw-tsake', swelling from fermentation, Exod. xii:34, 39; Jer. vii: 18, etc.). The Israelites subsisted for a month on the bread prepared from the dough , which they brought away with them in their kneading- troughs on their shoulders (Exod. xii:34). In Oriental countries the process of fermentation is often dispensed with. DOVE (düv), (Heb. n;" yo-nazzy', Gr. Tepia repô, £er-2s-fer-a/.'). - Four species of wild pigeons are found in Bible lands, the ring dove, or wood pigeon, the stock dove, the rock dove, and the ash-rumped rock dove. They are all known by the name of hamám in Arabic. All pigeons in their true wild plumage have iridescent colors about the neck, and often re- flected flashes of the same colors on the shoulders, which are the source of the silver and gold feathers ascribed to them in poetical diction; and thence the epithet of purple bestowed upon them all, though most applicable to the vinous and slaty colored species. The coasts and territory of Syria are noted for the great number of doves frequenting them, though they are not so abun- dant there as in the Coh-i-Suleiman chain near the Indus. Syria possesses several species of pigeon: The Co/umba OEmas, or stock-dove, C. Palumbus, or ring-dove, C. Domestica, Lívia, the common pigeon in several varieties, such as the Barbary, Turkish or Persian carrier, crisp, and shaker. These are still watched in their flight in the same manner as anciently their number, gyra- tions, and other maneuvers were observed by soothsayers. The wild species, as well as the turtle-doves, migrate from Palestine to the south ; but stock and ring-doves are not long absent. By the Hebrew law, however, doves and turtle- doves were the only birds that could be offered in sacrifice, and they were usually selected for that purpose by the less wealthy (Gen. xv.:9; Lev. v :7; xii:6; Luke ii:24); and to supply the demand for them dealers in these birds sat about the precincts of the Temple (Matt. *g Figuratite. (I) The dove is the harbinger of reconciliation with God (Gen. viii:8, Io, etc.). (2) It is also a notcd symbol of tender and de- voted affection (Cant. i :15; ii:14, etc.). (3) It was the especial symbol of the Holy Spirit which descended upon our Saviour at his bap- tism, visibly with that peculiar hovering motion which distinguishes the descent of a dove (Matt. iii: I6; Mark i :Io; Luke iii:22; John i:32), and also of the meekness, purity, and splendor of right- DOVES’ DUNG eousness. (4) The ten tribes of Israel were like a silly dove without heart, when, by means of the Assyrian oppression, and their own civil broils, they were weakened, perplexed, dispirited, and took no care to avoid their ruinous afflictions (Hos. vii: II). (5) To 2/2014.7% like doves is to lament in the most bitter and desperate manner (Is. xxxvii.1:14, and lix: II : Nah. ii:7). DOVECOT (düv'kót). This is clearly designated (Is. lx:8) in describing the final restoration of the Jews after their long exile. - DOVES DUNG (düv's diing), (Heb. Pºtºſ, Æhar-ay'ſſo-nee/2", 2 Kings vi;25, which in the mar- gin is written tº 27">", dź0-yozzzzzz, both meaning the Same thing. (1) In the above compounds, khir and dib be- ing prefixed to yonim, the plural form for doves, the literal meaning is as above translated. By many the expression is considered to signify lit- erally the dung of pigeons, as in the passage of 2 Kings vi :25. (2) Different opinions, however, have been en- tertained respecting the meaning of the words which are the subject of this article, namely, whether they should be taken literally, or as a figurative name of some vegetable substance. The strongest point in favor of the former view is that all ancient Jewish writers have understood the term literally. Taking it, however, in this sense, various explanations have been given of the use to which the doves' dung was applied. Some of the rabbins were of opinion, that the doves' dung was used for fuel, and Josephus, that it was pur- chased for . ifs salt. Mr. Harmer has suggested that it might have been a valuable article, as be- ing of great use for quickening the growth of esculent plants, particularly melons. Mr. Ed- wards, as cited by Dr. Harris, remarks that it is not likely they had much ground to cultivate in so populous a city for gardens; and is dis- posed therefore to understand it as meaning the Offals or refuse of all sorts of grain, which was wont to be given to pigeons, etc. Dr. Harris, however, observes that the stress of the famine might have been so great as to have compelled the poor among the besieged in Samaria to devour either the intestines of the doves, after the more wealthy had eaten the bodies, or, as it might perhaps be rendered, the crops. Ornithogalum umbellatum. - - (8) Bochart, however, has shown (Hierogoicon ii:37) that the term 'pigeons' dung' was applied DOWRY by the Arabs to different vegetable substances. He quotes Avicenna as applying the term stercus columbarum to two different plants or substances. From this Bochart has been led to consider it as identical with another plant, which occurs under the name of kali, both in the Hebrew and Arabic languages, and which was one of the pulses used in ancient times, as at the present day, as an ar- ticle of diet. (See KALI.) With reference to this grain, it has been observed that ‘large quantities of it are parched and dried, and stored in maga- zines at Cairo and Damascus. It is much used during journeys, and particularly by the great pilgrim-caravan to Mecca; and if this conjecture be correct, it may be supposed to have been among the provisions stored up in the besieged city, and sold at the extravagant price mentioned in the text' (Pict. Bible). The late Lady Callcott, in her Scripture Herbal, 1842, adduces the orni- thogalum umbellatum, or common Star of Beth- lehem, as the ‘doves’ dung' of Scripture, and as- signs this, as well as ‘birds' milk,” as two of its vernacular names, and infers that the pigeons' dung which has been mentioned above as being eaten in England in the famine of 1316 was the roots of this plant. It is a native of this country, and also of Taurus, Caucasus, and Northern Africa. Dioscorides states that its bulbs were sometimes cooked with bread in the same way as the melanthium, and also that it was eaten both raw and roasted. The roots were also com- monly eaten in Italy and other southern coun- tries at an early period. DOWRY (dou-ry), (Heb. -n. mó'har, price paid for a wife, Gen. xxxiv:12; Exod. xxii:17; I Sam. xviii:25; 72), geh' bed, a gift, Gen. xxx:2O). In the East the bridegroom offers to the father of his bride a sum of money, or value to his satisfaction, before he can expect to receive his daughter in marriage. Of this procedure we have instances from the earliest times. (I) When Jacob had nothing which he could immediately give for a wife, he purchased her by his services to her father Laban (Gen. xxix:18). So we find Shechem offers to pay any value, as a dowry for Dinah (Gen. xxxiv:I2). In this pas- sage is mentioned, a distinction still observed in the East: (a) “A dowry” to the family, as a token of honor, to engage their favorable interest in the desired alliance; (b) “a gift” to the bride herself, e. g., of jewels and other decorations, a compliment of honor, as Abraham's servant gave to Rebekah. (2) We find king Saul (1 Sam. xviii:25) instead of wishing for a pecuniary ulu wiy from David, which David was sensible he could not pay in proportion to the value of the bride, required one hundred foreskins of the Philistines, thereby proposing his daughter in re- ward of valor, as Caleb had formerly done his daughter Achsah to whoever should take Kirjath- sepher; that is, he gave her as a reward of honor, without receiving the accustomed dowry (Josh. xv :I6). (3) The dowry was esteemed so essen- tial, that Moses even orders it in a case where it might otherwise, perhaps, have been dispensed with ; “If a man entice a maid, that is not be- trothed, he shall endow her to be his wife” (Exod. xxii:16); he shall make her the usual nuptial present; according to the rank which he holds in the world, and to that station which his wife might justly be expected to maintain ; propor- tionate, also, to that honor which he would have put upon her, had he regularly solicited her fam- ily for her ; that is, jewels and other trinkets. “If her father refuse his daughter,” he shall pay 539 Vaison, A. D. 529, about two centuries later. DRACHMA money, “according to the dowry of virgins;” that is, what the father of a virgin of that rank of life might justly expect should have been offered for his daughter when solicited in marriage. And this we find was the proposal made by Shechem, in reparation of the injury done to Dinah. DOXOLOGIES (döks'öl-ó-jiz), (Gr. 6080Aoyla, doz- 04-0g-ee'a, giving glory), ascriptions of glory or praise to God. (1) Scriptural. These are frequently found in the Psalms (e. g., xcvi:6; czii:I; cziii:1), and were used in the synagogue. The apostles very naturally used them (Rom. xi :36; Eph. iii:21; I Tim. i :17). We have also examples of celestial doxologies (Rev. v : 13; xix:I). The song of the angels in Luke ii:14 is a doxology. As to the doxology in Matt. vi. I3, see LORD's PRAYER. (2) Liturgical. There were hymns used in the service of the ancient Christians. (I) The dox- ology was only a single sentence, without a re- sponse, running in these words, “Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost, world without end, Amen.” Part of the latter clause, “As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be,” was inserted some time after the first composition. The fourth council of Toledo, A. D. 633, added the word honor to it, and read it, “Glory and honor be to the Father,” etc., because the prophet David says, “Bring glory and honor to the Lord.” It is not easy to say, at what time the latter clause was inserted. Some ascribe it to the council at Nice, and pretend it was added in opposition to the Arians. But the first express mention made of it is in the second º: 1S was called the Lesser Doºrology. (2) There was likewise another hymn, of great note in the an- cient church, called the Great Doxology, or An- gelical Hymn, the Gloria in Earcelsis, beginning with those words which the angels sung at our Saviour's birth, “Glory be to God on high,” etc. This was chiefly used in the communion service. It was also used daily in private devotions. In the Mozarabic liturgy, it is appointed to be sung before the lessons on Christmas Day. Chrysostom often mentions it, and observes, that the Ascetics, or Christians who had retired from the world, met together daily to sing this hymn, Who first composed it, adding the remaining part to the words sung by the angels, is uncertain. Some suppose it to be as ancient as the time of Lucian, about the beginning of the second century. Others take it for the “Gloria Patri ;” which is a dispute as difficult to be determined, as it is to find out the first author and original of this hymn. (3) There was another called the Trisagion, as old as the second century, beginning, “I herefore with angels and archangels, and with all the company of heaven, we laud and magnify thy glorious name.” They are still in use in church worship. DRACHMA (drāk-mâ), (Gr. 6paxpºff, drachma), a coin of silver, the most common among the Greeks, and which after the Exile became also current among the Jews (2 Macc. iv:19; x:20; xii:43; Luke xv.:8,9). . The earlier Attic drachmae were of the average weight of 66.5 grains, and in a comparison with the English shilling would be equal to about twenty cents. But the specimens of later times are of the average weight of only 61 grains, and some of less. In this state the drachma was counted equal to the denarius, which was at first worth about seventeen cents, and afterwards only fifteen cents. The value of the drachma of the New Testament may therefore have been about six- teen cents. The woman’s ‘ten pieces of silver' DRAG (drachma) in Luke xv.;8, would hence be equal to or about $1.65—that is, in nominal value, for the real value of money was far greater in the time of Christ than at present. DRAG (drág), (Heb. Tºº, 777A-77teh'neth), is mentioned as being the object of worship by fish- ermen (Hab. i. 15). It was a large fishing net. DRAGON (drág'on), in our version is used for the two Hebrew words Żhazz, |F, and than-ſteen', jº. It occurs principally in the plural form (Job xxx :29; PS. xliv :19; IS. xiii:22; xxxiv.: 13; xxxv : 7; Jer, ix:II; xiv:6; xlix:33; and Micah i :8). These texts, in general, present pictures of ruined, cities and of desolation in the wilderness. Where Thanim are associated with birds of the desert, they clearly indicate serpents of various species, both small and large, as already noticed in the article ADDER. In Jer. xiv:6, where wild asses Snuffing up the wind are compared to dragons, the image will appear in its full strength, if we understand by dragons, great boas and python- serpents, such as are figured in the Praenestine mosaics. They were common in ancient times, and are still far from rare in the tropics of both continents. Several of the species grow to an enormous size, and, during their periods of activity, are in the habit of raising a considerable portion of their length into a vertical position, like pillars, IO to I2 feet high, in order to survey the vicinity above the surrounding bushes, while with Open jaws they drink in a quantity of the current air. The same character exists in smaller ser- pents; but it is not obvious, unless when, threat- ening to strike, they stand on end nearly three- fourths of their length. Most, if not all, of these species are mute, or can utter only a hissing sound; and although the malli-pambu, the great rock- snake of Southern Asia, is said to wail in the night, we have never witnessed such a phenome- non, nor heard it asserted, that any other boa, python, or erpeton had a real voice; but they hiss, and, like crocodiles, may utter sounds somewhat akin to howling. Figuratite. (I) Satan is called a dragon be- cause of his power, malice, and hurtfulness (Rev. xx:2). (2) Cruel tyrants and conquerors, such as the kings of Assyria and Egypt, are likened to dragons, chiefly those of the water kind, as croc- Odiles, etc., for their terrible appearance and de- structive influence (Ps. lxxiv:13; Is. xxvii: I ; li: 9; Ezek. xxix:3). (3) The heathen empire of Rome is likened to a great red dragon; that is, a fierce and powerfully persecuting monster. Rome, in a most bloody manner, wasted the na- tions, and persecuted the church of God (Rev. xii :3). (4) The “dragon and his angels” were cast out into the earth, when the power of the bloody persecutors was brought low ; heathen idolatry and superstition banished out of the cities to villages; and the power of Satan and his agents trampled under foot (Rev. xii:9). (5) Anti- christ speaks as a dragon; by diabolic and heathen authority he teaches, and, under the most terrible penalties, imposes Pagan errors, superstition, and idolatry (Rev. xiii:2). (6) Wicked men are like dragons; they are the seed of the old serpent, and are full of sinful poison; and destruction and º are in all their ways (Is. xxxv :7; xliii: 2O ). DRAGON well (drăgon wel), (Heb. Tººn T., ame hat-tan-meen", fountain of jackals, Neh. ii: 13; comp. iii:13, 14), lay east of Jerusalem, near the valley gate. It is probably identical with the modern Užper Pool of Gihon, but much doubt 540 DREAM exists as to its identification. (See Robinson, Bzó. A'es. i. 473, 514, 1st ed.; Barclay, City of the Gt. A 2ng, p. 315). - DRAM (drām). See DARIC. DRAUGHT (drāft). 1. (Gr. d’Ypa, ag'rah, Luke v.9), a Catching of fish, a haul. * 2. (Gr. dºeëptów, afted-rome', Matt. xv.17, place for sitting apart), house of the sewer, the bowel, the intestine below the stomach. * DRAUGHTHOUSE (dräft-hous), (Heb. Tºº?, 7/2&AE/i-ar-aw-azy", literally, easing One's self), a Arizºy or sink. Jehu, in contempt for Baal, or- dered his temple to be destroyed and the place turned into a receptacle for ordure or offal (2 Kings x:27). DRAWER (dra'ér) OF WATER (Heb. P8°, sho-ayó', drawer, mah'yim, water, Deut. xxix: II; Josh. ix:21, 23). The work of the drawer of water was of a hard and servile character. DREAM (dren), (Heb. Fºr, Ahazome, Gr. êvap, oft' ar). Of all the subjects upon which the mind of man has speculated, there is perhaps none which has more perplexed than that of dreaming. Whatever may be the difficulties attending the subject, still we know that it has formed a chan- nel through which Jehovah was pleased in former times to reveal His character and dispensations to His people. (1) Causes. In regard to the immediate cause of dreaming the opinions of the ancients were very various. We believe that dreams are ordinarily the re- embodiment of thought which have before, in some shape or other, Occupied our minds. They are broken fragments of our former conceptions revived, and heterogeneously brought together. If they break off from their connecting chain, and become loosely associated, they exhibit ofttimes absurd combinations, but the elements still sub- sist. If, for instance, any irritation, such as pain, fever, etc., should excite the perceptive organs while the reflective ones are under the influence of sleep, we have a consciousness of objects, colors, or sounds being presented to us, just as if the former organs were actually stimu- iated by having such impressions communicated to them by the external senses; whilst, in conse- quence of the repose of the reflecting power, we are unable to rectify the illusion, and conceive that the scenes passing before us, or the sounds that we hear, have a real existence. ... This want of mutual co-operation between the different, fac. ulties of the mind may account for the disjointed character of dreams. This position might be fully substantiated by an appeal to the evidence 9: fact. Dr. Beattie speaks of a man who could be made to dream anything by whispering in his ear. Dr. Gregory relates of himself that, having once had occasion to apply a bottle of hot water to his own feet when he retired to bed, he dreamed that he was ascending the side of Mount AEtna, and that he found the heat of the ground almost insufferable. Persons who have had blisters applied to their heads have been known to dream of being scalped by a party of North American Indians. Sleeping in a Smoky room, we may dream of a house or a city being in flames. The smell of a flower applied to the nostrils may call forth the idea of walking in a garden; and the sound of a flute may excite in us the most pleas- urable associations. - Here, then, we discover one great source of tºº DREAM that class of dreams of which Solomon speaks in Eccles. v :7. * The only one of our mental powers which is not Suspended while dreaming is fancy, or imagi- nation. We often find memory and judgment alternately suspended and exercised. Sometimes we fancy Ourselves contemporaneous with persons who have lived ages before; here memory is at work, but judgment is set aside. We dream of carrying on a very connected discourse with a deceased friend, and are not conscious that he is no more ; here judgment is awake, but memory Suspended. The power, however, to judge cor- rectly, is always wanting in the dream. No mat- ter how absurd the premise may be, the mind in dreaming accepts it as correct. - In the dream the mind is creator, inventor, artist, musician, dramatist, poet, orator, etc. The humblest plowboy transcends often in his dreams all that a Shakespeare has ever written. Dream- ing is one of the most wonderful, if not the most wonderful of all the phenomena connected with the human mind. It gives a forceful suggestion of the infinite possibilities which lie in the soul, waiting for the opportunity to call them into active exercise. (2) Patriarchal Dispensation. How God revealed himself by dreams, and raised up per- Sons to interpret them, the Scriptures abundantly testify. Under the three successive dispensations we find this channel of communication with man adopted. It was doubtless in this way that God appeared to the father of the faithful, ordering him to forsake country, kindred, and his father's house, and to go into the land that he would show him. To this divine command Abraham paid a ready obedience. It was by a similar prompt obedience to the admonition conveyed to him in a dream that Abimelech, himself (Gen. xx:3) and Abraham, too, were saved from the evil conse- quences of his meditated act. In Gen. xxxi : Io, Jacob informs his wives that it was God who saw how Laban oppressed him——who had directed him to take the speckled, etc. cattle for his wages, and had ordered him to return home. . He obeyed ; and when Laban, designing to do Jacob some harm (Gen. xxxi :24), pursued, and after seven days overtook him, God, by a dream, prevented the meditated evil. Joseph, whilst yet a child, had dreams predictive of his future advancement (Gen. xxxvii:6-II). (3) Mosaic Dispensation. Such were some of the dreams by which God revealed himself under the patriarchal dispensation ; and that the same divine mode of communicating with man was continued under that of Moses is evident from an express word of promise (Num. x11:6). I hat dreams were one of the ways whereby God was wont to signify his pleasure to men under this dispensation is evident from the complaint of Saul to the spirit of Samuel (whom the witch pretended to raise up), when he asked him, ‘Why hast thou disquieted me to bring me up º' Saul answered, ‘I am Sore distressed; for the Philistines make war against me, and God is departed from me, and answers me no more; neither by prophets, nor by dreams; therefore I have called thee that thou mayest make known to me what I shall do.’ And, in order to guard against imposition, Moses pronounced a penalty against dreams which were invented and wickedly made use of, for the promotion of idolatry (Deut. xiii:I-5). Thus Zechariah (x :2) complains: ‘The idols have spoken vanity, and the diviners have spoken a lie, and have told false dreams; they comfort in vain.” And so Jeremiah (xxiii.25), ‘I have heard what the prophets said that prophesy lies in my 541 DREGS 11ame, saying, I have dreamed, I have dreamed,’ etc. Yet this abuse did not alter God's plan in the right use of them; for in the 28th verse of the same chapter it is said ‘the prophet that hath a dream, and he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully. What is the chaff to the wheat? saith the Lord.” When Gideon warred with the Amalekites, and was alarmed at their vast multitudes, he was en- couraged to do God's will by overhearing one of them relate his dream, and another giving the in- terpretation (Judg. vii). Again, it was in a dream that God was pleased to grant Solomon a promise of wisdom and understanding (I Kings iii:5, etc.). Here we may perceive what converse the Lord was pleased to hold with Solomon in a dream ; and the sacred record informs us how punctually everything herein promised was ful- filled. The knowledge of visions and dreams is reckoned amongst the principal gifts and graces Sometimes bestowed by God upon them that fear him; so it is said of Daniel and his companion, that ‘God gave them knowledge and skill in all learning and wisdom; and Daniel had under- standing in all visions and dreams (Dan. i :I7). And the God who had imparted this spirit unto his servant Daniel soon, in the arrangement of his providence, gave occasion for its exercise (Dan. ii). In the dream of Nebuchadnezzar a great variety of ends were attained in reference to Babylon, Israel, and indeed the world—all of which were worthy of God’s miraculous inter- ference. (4) Christian Dispensation. That this method of God's revealing himself was not confined to the legal dispensation, but was to be extended to the Christian is evident from Joel (ii:28), “And after- wards (saith the Lord) I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy; your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams.” In Acts ii:17 we find the Apostle Peter applying this to the illumination of the Holy Ghost. Accordingly, we read that when Joseph designed to put Mary away, because he perceived her to be with child, he was turned from his purpose by a dream, in which an angel made the truth of the matter known to him (Matt. i :20). And in the follow- ing chapter it is stated that God, in a dream, warned the wise men not to return to Herod. Moreover, in verses 13 and 19, Joseph is instructed to flee into and return from Egypt with the child Jesus. We inquire not how far God may have revealed himself to man beyond what Holy Scripture records, Some of the dreams, both of ancient and modern times, which lay claim to a divine character, are certainly striking, and may, for aught we know, have had, and may still have, a collateral bearing on the development of God’s purposes. - - . W. D. John Newton, concerned about his soul's inter- est, had a dream which made the way of Salvation clear to hirri. DREDGE (dréj), (Job xxiv:6, in marg., A.V., “mingled corn, or dredge”), a word still used in Wiltshire; dredge-malt, or malt made of oats and barley. DREGS (drégs). - 1. The rendering of the Heb. Yº, sheh’mer, Ps. lxxv.8, elsewhere Zees of wine. 2. Heb. hyº, koob-bah'ath, goblet (Is. li:17, 22), and rendered “dregs of the cup of my fury,” but better, “the goblet of his fury.” DRESS DRESS (drés), is used in Scripture in the follow- ing senses: Gen. ii:IS; Deut. xxviii:39; Gr. Yewpyéal, gheh-ore- gheh'o, Heb. vi.7). • 2. Preparation of food (Heb. "??, aw-saw', to make, Gen. xviii:7, 8; I Sam. xxv. 18; 2 Sam. xii:4, etc.). 3. Trimming lamps (Heb. Pº, yaw-tab', make right, Exod. XXX:7). The subject of the costume of the ancient He- brews is involved in much obscurity and doubt. 1. Jources of Information. There are, however, many allusions to dress in the Scrip- tures, and these form the only source of our pos- itive information. They are often, indeed, ob- scure, and of uncertain interpretation ; but they are invaluable in so far as they enable us to compare and verify the information derivable from other sources. These sources are: (1) The Costume of neighboring ancient nations, as represented in their monuments. (2) The alleged costume of Jews as represented in the same monuments. (3) The present costumes (which are known to be ancient) of Syria and Arabia. (4) Tradition. 2. The Monuments. The range of inquiry into monumental costume is very limited. Syria, Arabia, and Egypt are the only countries where monuments would be likely to afford any useful information; but Arabia has left no monumental figures, and Syria none of sufficiently ancient date; and it is left for Egypt to supply all the informa- tion likely to be of use. (1) Extent and Value. The extent and value of this information, for the particular purpose, we believe to be far less than is usually repre- sented. That we are not disposed to undervalue the information derivable from the Egyptian monuments for the purpose of illustrating Biblical history and antiquities, the pages of the present work will sufficiently evince. But the rage for this kind of illustration has been carried to such preposterous lengths, and is so likely in its fur- ther progress to confuse our notions of the real position which the Hebrews occupied, that it may not be an unwholesome caution to remind our readers that the Egyptians and the Hebrews were an exceedingly different people—as different in every respect as can well be conceived ; and that the climates which they inhabited were so very different as to necessitate a greater difference of food and dress than might be presupposed of countries so near to each other. This considera- tion appears to us to render of little value the very ingenious illustrations of Jewish costume which have been deduced from this source. (2) Home Manufacture. It is true that the Jewish nation was cradled in Egypt; and this circumstance may have had some influence on ceremonial dresses, and the ornaments of women; but we do not find that nations circumstanced as the Jews were, readily adopt the costumes of other nations, especially when their residence in Egypt was always regarded by them as temporary, and when their raiment was of home manufacture— spun and woven by the women from the produce of their flocks (Exod. xxxv :25). We find also that, immediately after leaving Egypt, the prin- cipal article of dress among the Hebrews was some ample woolen garment, fit to sleep in (Exod. xxii:27), to which nothing similar is to be seen among the costumes of Egypt. With respect to the supposed representation of 542 DRESS Jews in ancient monuments, if any authentic examples could be found, even of a single figure in the ancient costume, it would afford much Satisfaction, as tending to elucidate many passages of Scripture which cannot at present be with cey- tainty explained. The sculptures and paintings supposed to represent ancient Hebrews are con- tained in the painting described below. (3) Painting at Beni Hassan. A painting at Beni Hassan represents the arrival of some for- eigners in Egypt, and is supposed to figure the arrival of Joseph's brethren in that country. The accessories of the scene, the physiognomies of the persons, and the time to which the picture relates, are certainly in unison with that event, and though we must speak with hesitation on the subject, the conjecture is probably correct. ū ! § | N § % § s i º§ i º # T \ º | § sº § | % All the men wear Sandals. Some of them are clad only in a short tunic or shirt, with close sleeves ; others wear Over this a kind of sleeveless plaid or mantle, thrown over the left shoul- der, and passing under the right arm. It is of a striped and curiously figured pattern, and looks exceedingly like the fine grass woven cloth of the South Sea. Others have, instead of this, a fringed skirt of the same material. All the fig- ures are bare-headed, and wear beards, which are circumstances favorable to the identification. The fringed skirt of figure I is certainly a remarkable circumstance. Moses directed that the people should wear a fringe at the hem of their gar- ments (Num. xv :38); and the probability is that this command merely perpetuated a more ancient 11S212 €. - § Egyptian Sculpture in Other Tombs. This fringe reappears, much enlarged, in the other Egyptian sculpture in which Jews are sup- posed to be represented. These are in a tomb discovered by Belzoni, in the valley of Bab-el Melook, near Thebes. There are captives of different nations, and among them four figures, supposed to represent Jews. The scene is imag- ined to commemorate the triumphs of Pharaoh- Necho in that war in which the Jews were de- feated at Megiddo, and their king Josiah slain (2 Chron. xxxv, xxxvi). It will be seen that the dress of these figures differs little, excepting in the length of the fringe, from that of the skirted figure in the earlier painting; and so far this is a corroborative circumstance in favor of both. |DRESS (5) Behistun Rock. On the face of a rock, at Behistun, on the Median border of the ancient Assyria, there is a remarkable sculpture, repre- senting a number of captives strung together by the neck, brought before the king and conqueror. who seems pronouncing sentence upon them. The venerable antiquity of this sculpture is un- questionable ; and Sir R. K. Porter was led to fancy that the sculpture commemorates the sub- jugation and deportation of the ten tribes by Shal- maneser, King of Assyria (2 Kings xvii:6). There is no reason to think that the dress of the Jews was in any important respect different from that of the other inhabitants of the same and immediately bordering countries. The pre- vailing style was a close tunic under a loose outer garment, the latter being replaced sometimes by a cloak. The dresses were often of brilliant col- ors and variegated pattern. Such is the information ancient monuments. to be derived from § /*s \ NS-e w | Q || § W . ÇA + & º =/ Sº HE- J. Tradition. That to be obtained from tradition is embodied in the following: . (1) Monks and Pilgrims. In the dresses of monks and pilgrims, which may be traced to an ancient date, and which are an intended imitation of the dresses supposed to have been worn by the first disciples and apostles of Christ. (2) Conventional Garb. The garb conven- tionally assigned by painters to Scriptural char- acters, which was equally intended to embody the dress of the apostolical period, and is corrected in some degree by the notions oſ Oriental costume which were collected during the Crusades. 4. Arabian Costumes. We may now turn to modern sources of illustration. With the excep- tions of the foreign Turkish costume and the mod- ification thereof, and with certain local excep- tions, chiefly in mountainous regions, it may be said that there is one prevailing costume in all the countries of Asia between the Tigris and Mediterranean, and throughout Northern Africa, from the Nile to Morocco and the banks of the Senegal. This costume is substantially Arabian, and Owes its extension to the wide conquests of the Arabians under the first caliphs; and it is through the Arabians—the least changed of an- cient nations, and almost the only one which 543 DRESS has remained as a nation from ancient times—that the antiquity of this costume may be proved. This is undoubtedly the most ancient costume of Western Asia, and while one set of proofs would carry it up to Scriptural times, another set of Strong probabilities and satisfactory analogies will take it back to the most remote periods of Scrip- tural history, and will suggest that the dress of the Jews themselves was very similar, without being strictly identical. (1) Desert Tribes. It is to be observed, how- ever, that there are two very different sorts of dresses among the Arabians. One is that of the Bedouin tribes, and the other that of the inhabi- tants of towns. The distinction between these is seldom clearly understood, or correctly stated; but is of the utmost importance for the purpose of the present notice. Instead therefore of speak- ing of the Arabian costume as one thing, we must regard it as two things—the desert costume, and the town costume. If, then, our views of Hebrew costume were based on the actual costume of the Arabians, we should be led to conclude that the desert costume represented that which was worn during the pa- triarchal period, and until the Israelites had been some time settled in Canaan; and the town cos- tume that which was adopted from their neigh- bors when they became a settled people. This is a subject which, more than any other, requires the aid of pictorial illustration to render the details intelligible. Having provided our- selves with these, our further observations will most advantageously take the form of explana- tions of them, and of comments upon them. Under the notion that the desert costume be- longs to the patriarchal period, the precedence is here given to it. Only the outer articles of dress are distinctive, those which are worn under- neath being similar to other articles worn by the town and peasant classes, and which as such will be hereafter noticed. (2) Bedouin Head-dress. The distinctive head-dress of the Bedouin, and which has not been adopted by any other nation, or even by the Arabian townsmen, is a kerchief (keffeh) folded triangularly, and thrown over the head so as to fall down over the neck and shoulders, and bound to the head by a band of twisted wool or camel’s hair. We forbear at the moment from inquiring whether this was or was not in use among the ancient Hebrews. (3) Cloak. The cloak is called an abba. It is made of wool and hair, and of various degrees of fineness. It is sometimes entirely black, or entirely white, but is more usually marked with broad stripes, the colors of which (never more DRESS than two, one of which is always white) are dis- tinctive of the tribe by which it is worn. cloak is altogether shapeless, being like a Square sack, with an Opening in front, and with slits at the sides to let out the arms. The Arab who wears it by day, sleeps in it by night, as does often the peasant by whom it has been adopted; and in all probability this was the garment similarly used by the ancient Hebrews, and which a benevolent law, delivered while Israel was still in the desert, forbade to be kept in pledge be- yond the day, that the poor might not be without a covering at night (Exod. xxii:27). Among the Arab tribes or Moors of Northern Africa, the outer garment is more generally the bournoos (Fig. 3), a woolen cloak, not unlike the abba, but furnished with a hood, and this is some- times strangely confounded with a totally different outer-garment worn in the same regions, usually called the hyke, but which is also, according to its materials, quality, or color, distinguished by various other names; and writers have produced some confusion by not observing that these names refer to an article of raiment which under all these names is essentially the same. Regardless of these minute distinctions, this part of dress may be described as a large woolen blanket, either white or brown, and in summer a cotton sheet (usually blue or white, or both colors together). Putting one corner before over the left shoulder, the wearer brings it behind, and then under the right arm, and so over the body, throwing it be- hind over the left shoulder, and leaving the right arm free for action (Fig. 2). It is sometimes thrown over the head as a protection from the Sun or wind (Fig. 1), and calls to mind the various passages of Scripture in which per- sons are described as covering their heads with their mantles (2 Sam. xv.:30; I Kings à. Esth. vi.12). This article of dress, originally borrowed from the nomades, is known in Arabia, and extends westward to the shores of the At- lantic, being most extensively used by all classes of the population. The seat of this dress, and of the abba respectively, is indicated by the direction of their importation into Egypt. The hykes are imported from the west (i. e., from North Africa), and the abbas from Syria. The close resemblance of the above group of real costume to those in which the traditionary ecclesiastical and traditionary artistical costumes are displayed, must be obvious to the most cursory observer. It may also be noticed that the hyke is not without some resemblance, as to the manner in which it was worn, to the outer garment of one of the figures in the Egyptian family, supposed to repre- sent the arrival of Joseph's brethren in Egypt. 544 The . T)RESS 5. Village Costumes. We now turn to the costumes which are seen in the towns and villages of southwestern Asia. (1) Drawers. In the Scriptures drawcrs are only mentioned in the injunction that the high- priest should wear them (Exod. xxviii:42), which seems to show that they were not generally in use; nor have we any evidence that they ever became common. (See PRIEST.S.) Drawers de- scending to the middle of the thighs were worn by the ancient Egyptians, and workmen often laid aside all the rest of their dress when occu- pied in their labors. As far as this part of dress was used at all by the Hebrews, it was doubtless either like this, or similar to those which are now worn in Western Asia by all, except some among the poorer peasantry, and by many of the Bedouin Arabs. They are of linen or cotton, of ample breadth, tied around the body by a running string, or band, and always worn next the skin, not over the shirt as in Europe. It will be asked, when the poor Israelite had pawned his outer-garment ‘wherein he slept,’ what dress was left to him P. The answer is probably supplied in the cotton, or woolen frocks or shirts, which often, in warm weather, form the sole dress of the Bedouin peasants, and the lower class of townspeople. To this the abba or hyke is the proper outer robe, but is usually, in summer, dis- pensed with in the day-time, and in the ordinary pursuits and occupations of life. It is sometimes worn without, but more usually with, a girdle. (2) Shirt. The shirt worn by the superior classes is of the same shape, but of finer materials. If we call this a shirt, the Hebrews doubtless had it—the solc dress (cxcepting the cloak) of the poor, and the inner robe of the rich. Such, probably, were the ‘sheets’ (translated ‘shirts' in some versions), of which Samson despoiled thirty Philistines to pay the forfeit of his riddle (Judg. xiv:13, 19). It | {s( !se:= =\ ... :-º-º-º- Pºº-º-º: É. is shown from the Talmud, indeed, that the He- brews of later days had a shirt called chaluk, which it would appear was often of wool (Light- foot, Hor. Heb. on Luke, ix:3), and which is de- scribed as the ordinary inner-garment, the Outer being the cloak or mantle. This shows that the shirt or frock was, as in modern usage, the ordi- nary dress of the Jews, to which a mantle (abba, hyke, or bournoos) was the Outer covering. (3) Gown or Caftan. Among all the garments of persons of the superior class the shirt covered by a striped (sometimes figured) gown, or caftan, of mingled silk and cotton, was commonly worn. It descends to the ankles, with long sleeves, extend- ing a few inches beyond the fingers' ends, but di- 1DRESS vided from a point a little above the wrist, so that the hand is generally exposed, though it may be concealed by the sleeve when necessary; for it is customary to cover the hands in the presence of a ſ 3. #- **** | :-|: /ſ # à s N A. ## ”-E.4% * ºr ºr "Tº § s_3= %. ſys= person of high rank. It is very common, especially in winter, for persons to sleep without removing this gown, but only unloosing the girdle by which it is bound. It is not unusual within doors to see persons without any article of dress outside this; but it is considered decidedly as an undress, and no respectable person is beheld out of doors, or receives or pays visits, without an outer cover- ing. Hence persons clad in this alone are said to be ‘naked’ in Scripture—that is, not in the usual complete dress; for there can be no manner of doubt that this, or something like this, is the Keth-o'-meth of the Scripture (Exod. xxviii:40; Job xxx : 18; Is. xxii:21, etc.). A similar robe is worn by the women, as was also the case among the Israelites (2 Sam. xiii: 18, 19; Cant. v :3). It is in the bosom of this robe that various articles are carried, and hence the Scriptural expression of giving things into the bosom.’ 4) The Girdle. The girdle worn over this, around the waist, is usually a colored shawl, or long piece of figured white muslin. The girdle of the poorer classes is of coarse stuff, and often of leather, with clasps. This leathern girdle is algo much ugod by the Arabs, and hy persons of condition when equipped for journey. It is some- times ornamented with workings in colored worsted, or silk, or with metal studs, shells, beads, etc. Both kinds of girdles were certainly in use among the Hebrews (2 Kings i:8; Matt. iii:4; Mark i.G., Cullip. JC1. Aiii: I). It is lºnown to all readers of Scripture how often the ‘girdle' and the act of 'girding the loins’ is mentioned. It seems from 2 Sam. xx :8, that it was usual to wear a knife or poniard in the girdle. This custom is still general, and denotes not any deadly disposi- tion, but the want of clasp knives. Men of lit- erary vocations replace it by an inkhorn, as was also the case among the Israelites (Ezek. ix:2). (5) The Benish. Over the gown is worn either the short-sleeved gibbeh, which is a long coat of woolen cloth, or the long-sleeved benish, which is also of woolen cloth, and may be worn either over or instead of the other. The benish is, by reason of its long sleeves (with which the 545 IDRESS hands may be covered), the robe of ceremony, and is worn in the presence of superiors and persons of rank. Over one or both of these robes may be worn the abba, bournoos, or hyke, in any of the modes already indicated. Aged persons often wrap up the head and shoulders with the latter, in the manner shown. (6) Hyke or Wrapper. This same hyke or wrapper is usually taken by persons going on a journey, for the purpose of being used in the same manner as a protection from the sun or wind. This is shown in the annexed cut, representing a group of persons equipped for travel. The robe is here more succinct and compact, and the firm manner in which the whole dress is girded up about the loins calls to mind the passages of Scripture in which the action of 'girding up the loins’ for a journey is mentioned. (7) Swords. From this it is also seen that travelers usually wear a sword, and the manner in which it is worn is correctly shown. It would also appear that the Jews had swords for such occasional uses (Matt. xxvi :51 ; Luke xxii:36). (8) Baring the Arm. The necessity of baring the arm for any kind of exertion, must be evi- dent from the manner in which it is encumbered in all the dresses we have produced. This action is often mentioned in Scripture, which alone proves that the arm was in ordinary circumstances similarly encumbered by the dress. For ordinary purposes a hasty tucking up of the sleeve of the | A [- - Lº- E--> CF right arm suffices; but for a continued action spe- cial contrivances are necessary. The full sleeves of the shirt are sometimes drawn up by means of 35 DRINK cords, which pass round each shoulder, and cross behind, where they are tied in a knot. This cus- tom is particularly affected by servants and work- men, who have constant occasion for baring the arm; but others, whose occasions are more in- cidental, and who are, therefore, unprovided with the necessary cords, draw up the sleeves and tie them together behind between the shoulders. For the dress of women, see Wom EN ; SANDAL. DRINK (drink), (Heb. Tºº, prim. root), to imbibe (lit. or fig.). It denotes not only the drinking of a fluid to the Satisfying of thirst, or to create a sober cheerfulness (Gen. xliii:34; John ii: Io); but the receiving or enduring of things good or bad. On fast days the Jews abstained from drinking during the whole day, believing it to be equally of the essence of a fast, to suffer thirst as to suffer hunger. Figuratite. (I) To drink abundantly water, wine, and milk, is to receive God’s Spirit, and new-covenant blessings, in a plentiful degree (John vii:37; Zech. ix:I5-17). (2) To drink wa- ters out of one's cistern and well, is to enjoy the lawful pleasures of marriage (Prov. v . I5). (3) To drink a cup of gall, fury, astonishment, and trembling, is to undergo fearful miseries, that make one tremble and be astonished (Jer. xxiii:15 and xxv : I5; Ps. lx:3; Is. li:22). (4) To drink up iniquity as water, is with great pleasure to abound in the practice of wickedness (Job xv :I6). (5) To drink blood, is to be satisfied with slaugh- ter (Ezek. xxxix : 18). (6) Sennacherib drank strange waters, and dried up the rivers of besieged places, when his army exhausted the wells of the countries which he invaded, and dried up the cis- terns and wells of besieged cities; or when he con- quered the nations, and seized, their wealth, at pleasure (Is. Xxxvii:25); (7). The Jews drinking the water of the Nile and Euphrates signifies their entering into alliances with the Egyptians and Assyrians, (Jer. ii:18). (8) To drink one’s own water, to buy water to drink, or to drink water in measure, imports being reduced to the utmost dis- tress of famine and want (2 Kings xviii:27; Lam. v:4; Ezek, iv:II). (9), Our Lord commands us to drink His blood and to eat His flesh (John vi :53, 54), we eat and drink both figuratively, in the eucharist. DRINK, STRONG (drink, stróng), (Heb. Tº shay-Åazvr'). Sweet drink (what satiates or intoxicates) applies in its etymological sense to any beverage possessing intoxicating qualities. We shall class the various senses of the word under three heads, in the order in which we conceive them to have been developed. (1) Sweet Wine or Syrup. Shay-kazwr', lus- cious, saccharine drink or sweet syrup, especially sugar or honey of dates or of the palm-tree (de- bash); also, by accommodation, occasionally, the Sweet fruit itself. In Solomon's time and afterwards, says Dr. Harris, ‘the wine and sweet cordials seem gen- erally to have been used separately' (Nat. Hist. of Bible). It seems more probable, however, that the palm syrup or honey denoted by shay-kawr', was used both as a sweetmeat or article of food, and as a drink, like the Hebrew sob he and the Roman sapa (boiled wine), diluted with water, as with the modern grape and honey, syrups or sherbets (Prov. ix:2, 5). The derivative of she- char, expressive of its first signification, are nu- merous. Eastward and southward, following the Arabian channel and the Saracenic conquests, we Shaw-thazw', a 546 DRINK, STRONG meet with the most obvious forms of the Hebrew word still expressive of sugar. Thus we have the Arabic Sakar; Persic and Bengāli, shukkur (whence our word for sugar-candy, shukur-kund, 'rock-sugar'); common Indian, jaggree or ghag- gery; Moresque, sekkour; Spanish, azucar; and Portuguese, assucar (molasses being mel-de-as- sucar ‘honey of sugar,’ abbreviated). The wave of population has also carried the original sense and form northwards, embodying the word in the Grecian and Teutonic languages. Hence Greek, sqkehar; Latin, saccharum; Italian, gucchero; German, sucher and juderig; Dutch, suiker; Rus. sian, Sachar; Danish, sukker; Swedish, socker; Welsh, sivgwr; French, sucre; and our own com- mon, words sukkar (sweetmeat), sugar, and sac- charine. ‘Sukkarde' is also an old English word clearly traceable in sense and sound to the same Origin, and is used by the writers of the middle ages in the sense of dainty, dessert, or sweet- meat. To satisfy or cloy is the well-known property 9f sweet and luscious preparations (as honey, Proy. xxv.16, 27); whereas "strong drink,’ in the modern sense of intoxicating, is proverbial for Creating an appetite which is insatiable. The drinkers of it tarry long at the wine;’ they “rise up early in the morning and continue until night, till wine inflames them;’ and when, after suffer. ing its evils, they awake, their cry still is, ‘I will seek it yet again’ (Prov. xxiii:30-35; Is... v . II, 22). * (2) Date or Palm Wine. Date or palm wine in its fresh and unfermented state. Bishop Lowth translates Is. xxiv:9 thus, ‘With songs they shall no more drink wine (i. e., of grapes); The palm wine shall be bitter to them that drink it’— and observes, note in loc., that ‘this is the proper meaning of the word shekar; Gr., sikera. All en- joyment shall cease; the sweetest wine shall be- come bitter to their taste.’ Herodotus, in his account of Assyria, remarks that ‘the palm is very common in this country,’ and that ‘it produces them bread, wine, and honey’ (i:193). The Mohammedan traveler (A. D. 850) says that palm wine, if drunk fresh, is sweet like honey; but if kept, it turns to vinegar’ (p. 9). Mandeville, who traveled above 500 years ago, says, “Other trees there ben also, that beren wyn of noble sentement.’ He then describes the faggree or sugar palm, and adds, ‘the hony and the wyn and the venym ben drawen out of other trees, in the same manere and put in vessels for to kepe’ (p. 189). - Mandelsloh (1640), speaking of the village of Damre near Surat, records thus:—‘Terry or Palm Wine. In this village we found some terry, which is a liquor drawn out of the palm- trees, and drank of it in cups made of the leaves of the same tree. To get out the juice, they go up to the top of the tree, where they make an incision in the bark, and fasten under it an earthen pot, which they leave there all night, in which time it is filled with a certain sweet liquor very pleasant to the taste. They get out some also in the daytime, but that (owing to the great heat) corrupts immediately, and is good only for vinegar, which is all the use they make of it’ (Ambassador's Travels, p 23). Adam Fabroni, an Italian writer of celebrity, informs us that ‘the palm-trees, which particu- larly abounded in the vicinity of Jericho and Engaddi, also served to make a very sweet wine, DRINK, STRONG which is made all over the East, being called palm wine by the Latins, and syra in India, from the Persian shir, which means luscious liquor or drink’ (On the Husbandry of the Ancient Jews). - Dr. Shaw thus describes the unfermented palm wine: ‘This liquor, which has a more luscious Sweetness than honey, is of the consistence of a thin Syrup, but quickly grows tart and ropy, acquiring an intoxicating quality’ (Travels, i. 262). Sir G. T. Temple says: “We were daily supplied with the sap of the date-tree, which is a delicious and wholesome beverage when drunk quite fresh; but if allowed to remain for Some hours, it acquires a sharp taste, not unlike cider. It is called Zeghma, and, poetically, ‘the tears of the date,’–/eghma being a corruption of Zachryma. The Landers inform us that ‘Palm wine is the common and favorite drink of the natives' of Africa—that ‘the juice is called wine,’ and that ‘it is either used in this state, or preserved till it acquires rather a bitter flavor.” (Earpedition to the Niger, iii:307-8). With these facts before us, the language employed by the prophet in the Sub- lime chapter from which we quoted above, be- comes beautifully apposite. His prediction is that ‘the land shall be utterly spoiled,’ that the light of joy shall be turned into the gloom of Sorrow, even as the sweet drink which corrupts, grows sour and bitter to those who drink it. The pas- sage clearly indicates the nature of the drink to have been sweet in what the Jews esteemed its most valuable condition, but bitter in its fer- mented state. Hence the drunkard is represented in Is, v :20-22, as one who puts bitter for Sweet, and sweet for bitter.” This palm wine, like the honey of dates and sugar, was much valued as a medicine and cordial. (3) Shaykawr also denotes fermented or intox- icating palm wine. Various forms of the noun in process of time became applied to other kinds of intoxicating drink, whether made from fruit or from grain. Arrack has been commonly, but erroneously, derived from Sakar, and some, in- cluding Dr. Paxton (Illustrations of Scripture; Nat. Hist., p. 51), have confounded the arrack with the palm wine, forgetting that the original wine existed long prior to the discovery of arrack distillation. The true palm wine, also the shay- kawr of the Bible, is exclusively the juice of the palm-tree or fruit, whereas arrack is applied to the spirit obtained from fermented rice and other things, and is, as Dr. Shaw remarks, ‘the general name for all hot liquors extracted by the alembic' (Travels, i:262). Such liquors furnish more powerful means of intoxication than the ancients possessed, and derive their name, we apprehend, from a poisonous species of the palm-tribe, the areca, or ‘drunken date-tree,’ the nuts of which are mixed with betel-leaf, datura, and other drugs, and made into a confect or preserve, which the Indians chew, or put into their drink to make it intoxicating (Pomet On Drugs). The palm wine of the East, as we have ex- plained, is made intoxicating either by allowing it to corrupt and ferment, thereby losing the Sweet luscious character for which the Orientals esteem it, and becoming ropy, tart, and bitter; Or, in its fresh or boiled state, by an admixture of stimulating or stupefying ingredients, of which there is an abundance (see Olearius, Mandel- sloh, Linschoten, and others). Such a practice seems to have existed amongst the ancient Jews, and to have called down severe reprobation (comp. Prov. xxiii:30; Is. i :22; v : II, 22, and see Lowth in loc). 547 IDROSS DRINK-OFFERING (drink-6f'fér-ing). One kind consisted of wine (Num. xv :5; Hos. ix:4) which was poured around the altar (Exod. xxx:9). It was commonly joined with Tmeat-offering (Num. vi. I5, 17; 2 Kings xvi :13; Joel i :9, 13; ii:14). Drink-offerings were fre- quently devoted to heathen gods (Is. lvii:6; lxv : II: Jer. vii: 18; xix:13; xliv 17, 18; Ezek. xx:28). Libations of water also occur (2 Sam. xxiii:16; I Sam. vii;6; I Kings xviii:33, 34). Oil libations are likewise mentioned (Gen. xxxv.14). (See OFFERING.) DROMEDARY (drim'é-dā-ry), (Heb. ??], reh- Æesh, swift beast; Fº, ram-mawk', a brood mare). Besides Is. lx:6, Jer. ii:23, where it should be rendered young came/ (IIeb. ºpe, beh'ſſer), the word is also mentioned in I Kings iv:28 and Esth. viii. Io; in the first being an erroneous rendering of a Hebrew word signifying “swift beasts,” as in margin, and in the second another word signifying “//eares.” There is no clear and undoubted refer- ence to the dromedary in the Scripture. (See CAMEL.) º DROPPING, A CONTINUAL. We find this ex- pression in Prov. xxvii:15, where it is said: “A con- tinual dropping in a very rainy day and a conten- tious woman are alike.” From the LXX we learn the Sense to be “Drops of rain in a wintry day drive a man out of his house; in the same manner also does an abusive woman.” When we consider the construction of the Ordinary eastern house, the force of this comparison becomes evident. A very great number of them have simply roofs made of clay; SO when it rains, and especially when rains are of long duration and violent, the clay becomes Saturated, loosens, and allows the water to drop or pour down upon the helpless inmates. An oriental traveler relates his experience, which serves to il- lustrate the proverb. He says: “Last night we re- tired to rest in what appeared to be one of the best rooms which we have occupied during the journey; but at midnight we were roused by the rain descending through the roof, and were obliged to rise and seek shelter from the incessant dropping, in the corridor, which was better pro- tected.” - On the roofs of many of the houses in Syria are large cylindrical stone rollers which are used by the women, immediately after a shower, for the purpose of packing the softened earth, which is so easily soaked with the rain. This, however, seems sometimes to make matters worse. Dr. Lepsius says: “Being overtaken by a sudden shower at night I took refuge in a house on Mt. Lebanon. Ere long the rain softened the mud on the roof, and began to pour down on the bed. One of the number was sent out to fill up the crevices and draw about the stone roller. This only added to our misery by bringing down heaps of Stone and rubbish, and I was compelled to beg the host to desist from the well-meant kindness.” So the meaning of the proverb becomes very apparent. DROPSY (dröp'sy), (Gr. Vöpwirukós, hoo-droż-Żë- os', watery, Luke xiv:2). A disease characterized by an unnatural 2CC11- mulation of watery liquid in any cavity of the body or in the tissues. DROSS (drös) (Heb. *p, seeg, refuse), the im- purities separated from silver, etc., by the process of melting (Prov. xxv.4; xxvi;23); also the base meſſa/ itself before smelting (Is. i.22, 25; Ezek, xxii:18, 19). DROUGHT Figuratite. (I) The corruptions of a people, and their profane and wicked persons, are likened to dross; they are useless, and tend to defile others till God, by his grace and providence, separates them (IS. i :25; Ps. cxix:II9; Ezek. xxii:18, 19). (2) Silver is become dross, and wine is mixed with water, when God’s word is mixed with tra- ditions and errors; and rulers and professors become naughty and profane (Is. i.22). DROUGHT (drout), dryness caused by lack of rain (Gen. xxxi:40; Ps. xxxii:4). DROWN (droun), (Gr. karatov.rtºw, Áaz-a/-on- £id"go (Matt. xviii.6). Drowning was not a Jewish mode of capital punishment, nor was it practiced in Galilee, but was employed by the Greeks, Romans, Syrians, and Phoenicians (Matt. xviii:6). DRUM (driàm), (Gr. Túpairavov, Túravov, too'?an-on, from the verb riºrra, to beat). The word occurs in 2 Macc. vi.19, 28, but not in the Old Testament Or the New. (1) As a musical instrument a form of the drum was used by the Hebrews, especially by dancing women, called in A. V. TIMBREL, which see. (See MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS.) (2) In 2 Macc. it signifies an instrument of tor- ture, and is translated ‘the torture.’ Josephus calls the same instrument Tpoxós, a wheel. It was probably a wheel-like frame upon which a man was extended, as upon a St. Andrew's cross, and beaten to death ; see the passage cited, and verse 30, which speaks of the strokes or blows, mis- translated ‘stripes.’ ‘Breaking upon the wheel' was a punishment by torture in the Middle ages; but that was a prolonged misery, while the killing of Eleazar seems to have been completed at once. In Heb. xi :35 it is said ‘others were tortured ;’ the verb is literally tympanized, referring to this style of execution; beaten to death. DRUNK, DRUNKARD (drink, drink'êrd), (Heb. some form of "Pº, Shaw-kar', to be tipsy; Hºy, shazy-thaw', to imbibe; nº), 7-azºy-zyazy', to fill; NEP, saw-baw', to drink to excess; Gr. ºedºw, 2meth-oo'o, Gen. ix:21). Figuratite. (I) /)runkenness sometimes de- notes abundance, satiety (Deut. xxxii:42; IS. xlix: 26). (2) It means to be madly carried away with delusion, idolatry, error, and Superstition (IS. xxviii:7; Rev. xvii:2). (3) To be stupefied and overwhelmed with sore afflictions and miseries (Jer. xiii: 13; Is. lxiii:6). (4) To be given to lux- ury, wantonness, and lust (I Thess. V:7; Habak. ii:15). (5) Antichrist is drunk with the blood of the saints; with great pleasure he persecutes and murders multitudes of them (Rev. xvii:6). (6) To add drunkenness to thirst is to become worse and worse in idolatry and other wickedness (Deut. xxix:19). (See CUP.) DRUSILLA (dru-sil'lá), (Gr. Apoſaix}\a, droo'si/- /a/, youngest daughter of Herod Agrippa I. She was much celebrated for her beauty, and was betrothed to Epiphanes, prince of Com- magene; but was afterwards married to Azizas, king of Emesa, whom the procurator Felix in- duced her to abandon, in order to live with him. She is mentioned in Acts xxiv:24 (comp. Joseph. Antiq. xix. 9. I ; xx. 7. I, 2). This Antonius Felix had three wives, each named Drusilla. One of them was a granddaugh- ter of Antony and Cleopatra. DUDAIM (du-dā'im), (Heb. Fº", du-daw- y?/e'). 548 DUDAIM (I) This word, in its plural form, occurs only in two places of Scripture; first in Gen. xxx:14- I6; and secondly, in Cant. vii: 13. In the first passage it is mentioned several times: ‘Reuben went out in the days of wheat harvest, and found dudaim (mandrakes) in the field and brought them home to his mother Leah. Then Rachel said to Leah, give me of thy son's dudaim;’ also in The Mandrake. verse 16, it is said, “And Jacob came out of the field in the evening, and Leah went out to meet him, and said, Thou must come in unto me, for Surely I have hired thee with my son's dudaim ; and he lay with her that night.” (2) In the passage in Canticles we learn that these dudaim, or the plants which yielded them, gave Out a peculiar Odor: ‘The dudaim (mandrakes) give a smell, and at our gates are all manner of pleasant plants.’ From the above passages it is evident that the dudaim were collected in the fields, that they were fit for gathering in the wheat harvest in Mesopotamia, where the first occurrence took place; that they were found in Palestine; that they or the plants which yielded them diffused an odor. From this it is manifest that thcre is little to guide us in determining what plant is alluded to at such early periods, especially as no similar name has been recognized in any of the cognate languages. Hence great diversities of opinion have been entertained respecting the plant and produce intended by the name dudaim. These Dr. Harris has thus summed up : ‘Interpreters have wasted much time and pains in endeavoring to ascertain what is intended by the Hebrew word dudaim. Some translate it by “violet,” others “lilies,” “jasmins,” “truffles or mushrooms;” and some think that the ‘word means “flowers,” or “fine flowers.” Bochart, Calmet, and Sir Thomas Browne suppose the citron intended : Celsius is persuaded that it is the fruit of the lote-free; Hiller that cherries are spoken of ; and Ludolf maintains that it is the fruit which the Syrians call “mauz” (that is the plantain), resembling in DUKE figure and taste the Indian fig; but the generality of interpreters and commentators understand mandrakes, a species of melon, by 'dudaim.’ Here, however, the author has confounded the melon ‘cucumis dudaim' with the mandrake or mandra- gora, adopted by the generality of authors. (3) Considering that the earliest translators have given mandragora and Yabrok him as the synony- mous names for dudaim, and that the root and fruits of atropa mandragora have, from early times, been supposed to be possessed of the same properties which are ascribed to the dudaim, there does not appear to us any other plant, which has been yet adduced, better entitled than it to stand for the dudaim. But there does not exist sufficient collateral proof to confirm the selection by the Greek translator of the man- dragora as the dudaim, in preference to some other plants, which might be adduced, and to which similar properties have from ancient times been ascribed. J. F. R. DUIKE (dük). This word is from the Latin dux, “a captain or leader,’ from duco, “to lead.’ 1. It thus corresponds with tolerable exact- ness to the Hebrew al-Zoof' Gibs, friend), from alaph, to “lead,” “guide.’ This word, alluph, is usually rendered by ‘prince’ or ‘chief :’ but by ‘duke' in Gen. xxxvi : 15-30, where we find “dukes of Edom.’ 2. Mes-eek' (T-3, a prince, being aſto2nted), dukes of Sihon (Josh. xiii:21, “properly vassa/s of Sihon, princes created by the communication or pouring in of power” (K. and D., Com., in loc.). It is rendered “princess” (Ps. lxxxiii: I I; Ezek. xxxii:30; Dan. xi:8) and principal men” (Mic. v.:5). DULCIMIER (dül-sim-er), (Chald. Tºº?, ?es- an-tay-ree” ). translate this Hebrew word as du/czmer, but as this name is merely an Aramaic (“Chaldee") transliteration of Waxtºplov, (/sa/-äay’ree-on), the word must represent the psaltery, a stringed instru- ment, like the pºdºyaëts or väft)\a, a psaltery harp, W. Tplywyov (Ariet. Prob. xix:23, 2, cited by Liddell and Scott). The verb pa)\\w, from which the word Żsaſtery is derived, signifies to pull, pluck, twang. But the “dulcimer” of Scripture (Chald. nºb, soom-po-meh-yaw'), is quite another thing. The instrument denoted by this word was, in the opin- ion of the best Bible scholars, as well as of the Rabbins, a bagpipe like that in use at the present day among the peasants of northwestern Asia and southern Europe and called by them &agna, which is a word of similar gound to the word here used, sumphoniah (Dan. iii.5, Io, I5). It was composed of two pipes with a leathern sack, and produced a harsh, screaming sound. It has no resemblance at all to the modern dulcimer. (See MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS.) DUMAH (du'mah), (Heb. "?", doo-maw', si- lence). 1. A son of Ishmael, most probably the founder of an Ishmaelite tribe of Arabia, and So giving name to the principal place or district inhabited by that tribe (Gen. xxv :I4; I Chron. i :30; Is. xxi : II). 2. The region occupied by the Ishmaelites in Arabia (Gen. xxv :14; Is. xxi.; II). It is doubt- less the same that is still called by the Arabs Duma, the Stony, and the Syrian Duma, situ- ated on the confines of the Arabian and Syrian º with a fortress (Niebuhr, Beschreibung, p. 344). The Oxford Bible and Chappell. 549 DUNG 3. Dumah was also the name of a town in the tribe of Judah (Josh. xv :52), which Eusebius and Jerome place seventeen Roman miles from Eleu- theropolis, in Daroma. Figuratibe. As employed in Is. xxi.;II, Du- mah appears to be symbolical, meaning deep, complete “silence,” and therefore the land of the dead (Ps. xciv. 17; cxv.17). - DUMB (düm), (Heb. F28, iſ ſame', speechless; "*", doo-maw", Hab. ii:19; Gr. Kopås, Aosſos', blunted, as to tongue). It denotes (I) Such as cannot speak for want of natural abilities (Exod. iv.: I I ; I Cor. xii:2). (2) Such as cannot teach others for want of grace, knowledge, and courage (IS. lvi. Io). (3) Submissive and Silcnt under the dispensations oſ Providelice (Ps. xxxix:9). (4) Such as do not speak (Ps. xxxix:2; Ezek. iii:26). (5) Such as cannot speak in their own cause by rea- son of ignorance, fear, etc. (Prov. xxxi :8). (6) Rendered speechless by a divine ecstasy of won- der and amazement (Dan. x:15). (7) Zachariah's dumbness during his wife's pregnancy might fig- ure out the silencing and abolition of the cere- monial laws by Christ's appearance in Our nature; or that by means of his birth, and what followed, their true language and signification should be made known (Luke i :20). (8) A dumb and deaf spirit is one who, by his possession of persons, renders them dumb and deaf (Mark ix:17, 25). DUNG (düng), (Heb. neºs, ash'?oth, dung, dirt, rubbish). Among the Israelites, as with the modern Orientals, dung was used both for manure and for fuel. In a district where wood is scarce, dung is so valuable for the latter purpose, that little of it is spared for the former. (1) The use of dung for manure is indicated in Is. xxv : Io, from which we also learn that its bulk was increased by the addition of straw, which was, of course, as with us, left to rot in the dunghill. Some of the regulations connected with this use of dung we learn from the Talmud. The heaping up of a dunghill in a public place exposed the owner to the repair of any damage it might occasion, and any one was at liberty to take it away (Bava-kama, i :3, 3). Another reg- ulation forbade the accumulation of the dung- hill to be removed, in the Seventh or sabbatic year, to the vicinity of any ground under culture (Sabb, iii:I), which was equivalent to an inter- diction of the use of manure in that year; and this must have occasioned some increase of labor in the year enguing, (2) The use of dung for fuel is collected in- cidentally from the passage in which the prophet Ezekiel, being commanded, as a symbolical action, to bake his bread with human dung, excuses himself from the use of an unclean thing, and is permitted to employ cows' dung instead (Ezek. iv:12–15). This shows that the dung of animals, at least of clean animals, was usual, and that no ideas of ceremonial unclean- ness were attached to its employment for this pur- pose. The use of cow-dung for fuel is known to villagers in the west of England, who prefer it in baking their bread “under the crock,” on ac- count of the long-continued and equable heat which it maintains. (3) In many thinly-wooded parts of south- western Asia the dung of cows, camels, horses, asses, whichever may happen to be the most common, is collected with great zeal and dili- gence from the streets and highways, chiefly by DUNGEON young girls. They also hover on the skirts of the encampments of travelers, and , there are often amusing scrambles among them for the droppings of the cattle. The dung is mixed up with chopped straw, and made into cakes, which are stuck up by their own adhesiveness against the walls of the cottages, or are laid upon the de- clivity of a hill, until sufficiently dried. It is not unusual to see a whole village with its walls thus garnished, which has a singular and not very agreeable appearance to a European trav- eler. Towards the end of autumn, the result of the summer collection of fuel for winter is shown in large conical heaps or stacks of dried dung upon the top of every cottage. The usages of the Jews in this matter were probably similar in kind, although the cartent to which they pre- vailed cannot now be estimated. Figuratite. (I) Wicked men are likened to dung (Jer. xvi :4; Job xx:7). (2) To fall like dung, and handfuls of corn, is to be slain in multi- tudes (Ps. lxxxiii:19; Jer. ix:22). (3) Idols are called about forty-nine times dung-gods, or gillu- lim, to denote how useless and abominable they are (Deut. xxix:17, etc.). (4) God spreads the dung of men's sacrifices and solemn feasts on their faces when he rejects their religious services, be- cause of their hypocrisy and wickedness (Mal. ii :3). (5) The saints count all things but dung, or dogs’ meat, to win Christ; altogether worthless and abominable in comparison of him, and utterly insufficient to recommend them to the favor of God as a judge (Phil. iii:8). DUNGEON (dün'jún), (Heb. Yū, bor, pit, dun- geon), is distinguished from the ordinary prison as being more severe (Gen. xl:15; xli. I4; Ex. xii:29; Jer. xxxviii:6-13; Lam. iii:53). It usually consisted of a deep well or cistern. DUNG GATE (düng gat), (Neh. ii:13, “dung port;” iii: 13, 14; xii:3I), a gate of ancient Jerusa- ſem, located at the southwest angle of Mount Zion (J. Strong, AZarzzzony). It was probably called such on account of the piles of sweepings and garbage in the valley of Tophet below. (See JERUSALEM.) DUNGHILL (düng-hil), the translation of three Hebrew words and one Greek, and meaning: (1) A heap of manure (Is. xxv.19; Luke xiv:35). (2) Privy (2 Kings x:27); “draughthouse” (Dan. ii.5). Figuratite. To sit upon a dunghill denoted the lowest and most wretched condition of life (I Sam. ii:8; Ps. cxiii:7; Lam. iv:5). DUNKERS (dün'kérs), (the German Baptist Bretlur eII). • In 1708 a small company—eight persons—met on the bank of the Eder at Schwarzenau, Ger- many, and were baptized. This was ulie Legiu- ning of a new religious sect. A desire to follow more closely in the footsteps of the Master, and the conviction that this was impossible in any of the religious bodies of the time, led this com- pany to take this step. Alexander Mack, one of the eight, was the first minister chosen by this band. The church increased rapidly in numbers; but even in Witgenstein, where so many had found refuge from persecution, they were not allowed to dwell in peace. Mack and Hochman traveled and preached in many parts of Germany. Later they went to Holland, and while there they met William Penn. He was then greatly interested in his colony in the new world, and invited the Dunkers to settle in it. The de- sire to escape persecution led them to accept the offer, and in 1719 they began to emigrate to 550 DUST America. December 25, 1723, the first Brethren church was organized in America, the first mem- bers were received by baptism, and the first love feast was celebrated. This was at Germantown, Pa. Peter Becker was the first elder of the church in America. In 1729 Alexander Mack came. Divine services were held in private houses until 1770, when the members built them- selves a house of worship in Germantown. This building is still standing. Since then the Breth- ren have built churches in nearly every state and territory of the Union. They also have missions in Denmark and Sweden, in Asia Minor and in India. During the century and three-quarters which has passed since their organization at German- town there has been no change in their creed. The New Testament is their only creed, and as that does not change, they do not change. They hold that faith, repentance and baptism are es- sential to salvation. They believe that trine im- mersion is the apostolic method of baptism, and receive none as members without baptizing them in this way. The agape, or feast of love, as instituted by Christ and practiced by the early church, they restored in 1708. Just before par- taking of this meal they engage in the ordinance of feet washing, the brethren washing the feet of brethren and the sisters those of sisters. In connection with the feast of love, they receive the communion of bread and wine. After the Supper, and while still seated at the tables, the right hand of fellowship and the kiss of charity are extended, by the brethren to the brethren and by the sisters to the sisters. The Brethren teach and practice plain dressing. The wearing of gold for ornament is forbidden. The Brethren never go to law with each other; and they are not allowed to go to law with others without the consent of their congregations. They do not go to war, for their Master is the Prince of Peace and brought to this world a gospel of peace. Obeying the command of Jesus and James, they “swear not at all.” When called upon to give testimony, they affirm, but never under oath. No member of the church is allowed to belong to any secret Society. They believe that the mar- riage tie can be broken by death alone. Follow- ing the command of James, they anoint the sick with oil. They keep their own poor. More than a hundred years ago they forbade any member of the Brethren church to manufacture or sell in- toxicants. They forbid the use of alcoholic or malt liquors as a beverage. They are opposed to the use of tobacco. In 1782 they called the slave trade unchristian, and decided that no member could purchase or hold slaves. J. H. M. DURA (dü'rá), (Heb. sºn. doo-razy"), the plain in which Nebuchadnezzar set up his golden itſlage (Dan. iii: 1). Traces of the name have been idly sought in quarters too distant from Babylon to have been historically possible, as it is clear from the con- text that ‘the plain of Dura' could be no other than that plain (or some part of it) in which Babylon itself was situated. DURE (dür), (Gr. eart, es-ſee', consist, remain), R. V., “endure.” Yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth a while (Matt. xiii:21). This is the same word which we now write endure. Our word during comes from the same rOOt. DUST (düst), (generally Heb, Tº, aw-ſawr', powdered ashes, clay, dust), for DUTY 551 Figuratite. 1) The putting of dust and ashes on the head; rolling one's self in dust; sitting in the dust, putting the mouth in the dust; import great mourning and distress (Josh. vii;6; Mic. I: Io; Job xlii:6; Is. xlvii: I; Lam. iii.29). (2) The Jews throwing dust in the air against Paul imported an outrageous desire to have reduced him to powder (Acts xxii:23). , (3) The apostles shaking off the dust of their feet, against those who refused to receive them, imported a condem- nation of them (Matt. x: I4; Luke x:5). (4) The shaking one's self from the dust imports recovery from distress, contempt, and grief (Is. lii:2). (5) To lick the dust of one’s feet is to pay him the utmost reverence and subjection; as the subjects in some eastern courts fell on the earth, and kissed the dust at the feet of their sovereign (Ps. lxxii:9; Is. xlix:23). (6) To pant for the dust on the head of the poor, is to wish for their utter ruin, or to be earnestly covetous of their meanest enjoyments (Amos ii:7). (7) Dust shall be the serpent’s meat, i. e., Satan shall only harass wicked men; and wicked men shall have a poor pittance of outward enjoyments (Gen. iii: 14; Is. lxv :25). (8) Dust is put for the grave, where men's bodies are encompassed with, and turned into dust (Gen. iii:19; Job vii:21; Eccles. xii:7); and for a low and wretched condition (I Sam. ii:8; Nah. iii: 18; Ps. xxii:29). (9) Men are called dust and ashes; their bodies are formed from, nourished with, and shall return to dust (Gen. xviii:27). (Io) Dead men are called dust (Ps. xxx :9). (II) The Jews are likened to dust for their multitude (Gen. xiii: 16; Num. xxiii:Io; and for their great distress (2 Kings xiii:7); and the quails for their vast num- ber (Ps. lxxviii:27). (12) Affliction cometh not forth of the dust, neither doth trouble spring out of the ground; it comes not by mere chance or course of nature, but from a sinful cause, and by means of the providence of God (Job v :6). DUTY (dü'ty). 1. (Heb. "37, daw-bawr', a mat- ter, 2 Chron. viii: 14; Ezra iii.4), means the task of each day. 2. Heb. "?”, o-maw', cohabitation. In the New Testament the word is the render- ing of the Greek éqetNéao, of 2-/e/.'o, to be under obligation (Luke xvii: Io; Rom. xv.:27), and sig- nifies that which ought to be done. It thus denotes what one owes, is obliged to render by equity, law, or engagement (Ezek. xviii:II). The duty of marriage is the same with what Paul calls due benevolence, together with a proper authority in the family (Exod. xxi : Io; I Cor. vii:3). The duty of a husband's brother, if unmarried, was to marry the widow of his de- ceased brother, and raise up children to him (Deut. xxv 5-7). DWARF (dwarf), (Heb. Fºl, dak, beaten small, as in Lev. xvi;12), an incorrect translation for a lean or emaciated person (Lev. xxi.20). Such a person could not administer in the cere- monial service of the Tabernacle or Temple (see BLEMISH). DWELL (dwel), (Heb. Pº, yaw-shab', to re- main), to have a fixed residence in a place. Figuratite. (I) God dwells in light, in re- spect of his delight in, and independent possession of, his own glorious excellencies, and in respect DYSENTERY of his glorious residence amidst rays of inexpres- sible glory in heaven (I Tim. vi.16; I John iii:17). (2) He dwells in heaven, in respect of the con- tinued and delightful residence of his presence there (Ps. cxxiii:I). (3) He dwelt in the taber- nacle, temple, and city of Jerusalem; there the symbols of his presence were continued (Ps. cxxxii: I4 and lxviii:16). (4) He dwells in his church, and in and with his people, in the con- tinued bestowal of his ordinances, and of his gra- cious, supporting, and comforting influences (PS. ix:II; I John iv:12; Is. lvii:15). (5) The fullness of the Godhead dwell's bodø/y in Christ, that is, the divine nature, personally, perpetually, and truly, resides in his human nature, by the closest union with it (Col. ii:9). (6) Christ dwelt among men in his state of humiliation on earth (John i: I 4). (7) He dwed/s zn ozer heari's by fazz/; ; he is united to us as our head and husband; his righteousness is imputed to us, and applied to Our Conscience; his Spirit and grace are fixed in our hearts; he loves and delights in us, and furnishes our whole soul with his fullness (Eph. iii:17). (8) The Holy Spirit dweſ/s in us by personal residence and gracious influence (Rom. viii and ix; 2 Tim. i. I4; I Cor. iii:16). (9) The word of God dweſ/s in us rich/y when it is carefully studied, firmly be- lieved, closely applied, and diligently practiced (Col. iii:16; Ps. cxix:II). (IO) The saints dwell in God, and in Christ, they are united to, and nourished, supported, and comforted by him, and have sweet intimacy and fellowship with him (I John iii:24 and iv:16). (II) They dweſ/ 2n Zoze when they live in the faith of God's redeeming love to them, and in the exercise of love to him and his people (1 John iv:15). (I2) Their dwell- 2ng in the house of God, or in his courts, imports their frequent fellowship with him in his ordi- nances (Ps. xxvii:4 and lxxxiv:4). (I 3) Wicked- ness, vengeance, or judgment dwel/ in or on a person and land when they long continue there (Job xi:I4 and xviii: 15; Is. xxxii.16). (I4) Dweſ/ deep, literally make deep for dwellings (Jer. xlix : 8), seems to refer to a custom still common in Eastern countries of seeking refuge from danger in the recesses of rocks and caverns, etc. DWELLING (dwel'ing), the rendering of a number of Hebrew and Greek words. Human dwellings have been of different kinds from the earliest day to the present, caves, booths, tents, houses, and palaces, according to the character of the country, mode of living, and Occupation, as well as the degree of culture. (See House.) DYE (di), (Heb. yºn, Áhaw-mates', dazzling, Is. lxiii. 1; FTS, aw-dam'). The art of dyeing is of great antiquity. That the Jews learned it from the Egyptians and used the art during their wandering is evident from Exod. xxvi :I : xxviii:5-8. (See COLOR.S.) DYED ATTIRE (did it-tir'), (Ezek. xxiii:15; Heb. Fºº, teh-oo-ſeem"). This seems to refer to variegated turbans or dyed headbands. DYSENTERY (dis'én-tūr-y), (Gr. 6voevrepta, doo- sent-ter-ee'ah). A well-known disease marked by inflammation and ulceration of the lower part of the intestines, with hemorrhage from the bowels. Called bloody flux, A. V. (Acts xxviii:7, 8). EAGLE E EAGLE (e'g'l), (Heb. Tº, meh'sher, Gº, raw- Áhawm'; Gr. derós, ah-et-os'). - (1) The Eagle, in zoölogy, forms a family of several genera of birds of prey, mostly distin- guished for their size, courage, powers of flight, and arms for attack. The bill is strong and bent into a plain pointed hook, without the notch in the inner curve which characterizes falcons; the nos- trils are covered with a naked cere or skin, of a yellow or a blue color; the eyes are lateral, sunken, or placed beneath an overhanging brow; the head and neck covered with abundance of longish, narrow-pointed feathers; the chest broad, and the legs and thighs exceedingly stout and Sinewy, and feathered down to the toes; they are clothed in general with brownish and rust-colored feathers, and the tail is black, grey, or deep brown. Sea-eagles (genus Haliaëtus) have the tarsi or legs half bare and covered with horny scales; not un- usually the head, back, and tail more or less white. The larger species of both measure, from head to tip of tail, 3 feet 6 inches or more, and spread their wings above 7 feet 6 inches; but these are propor- tionately broad to their length : for it is the third quill feather which is the longest; as if the Cre- ator intended to restrain within bounds their rapidity of flight, while by their breadth the power of continuing on the wing is little or not at all im- peded. The claws of the fore and hind toe are particularly strong and sharp ; in the sea-eagles they form more than half a circle, and in length measure from 194 to 13% of an inch. Under the name of misr the scriptures include species of both the above, and in some cases, also, the larger vultures, or the genus vultur proper. (See VULTURE.) . (2) These majestic birds have their abode in Europe, on the shores of the Mediterranean, in Syria and Arabia, wherever there are vast woody mountains and lofty cliffs : they occupy each a single district, always by pairs, excepting on the coasts, where the sea-eagle and the osprey (Pan- dion haliaétus) may be found not remote from the region possessed by the rough-legged eagles. It is in this last genus, most generally represented by the golden eagle (aquila chrysaeta) that the most powerful and largest birds are found. That spe- cies in its more juvenile plumage, known as the ring-tailed eagle, the Imperial eagle, or mogilnick, and fhe hoofed eagle is found in Syria; and at least one species of the sea-eagles frequents the coasts, and is even of stronger wing than the others. These build usually in the cliffs of Phoenicia, while the others are more commonly domiciliated within the mountains. According to their strength and habits the former subsist on antelopes, hares, hyrax, bustard, stork, tortoises, and serpents; and the latter usually on fish ; both pursue the catta (pterocles), partridge, and lizard. The osprey alone being migratory retires to Southern Arabia in winter. None, excepting the last-mentioned, are so exclusively averse to car- rion as is commonly asserted: from choice or necessity they all, but in particular the sea-eagles, occasionally feed upon carcasses of horses, etc.; and it is well known in the East that they follow ": rmies for that purpose. Hence the allusions in Job and Matt. xxiv:28, though vultures may be 552 EAR * included, are perfectly correct. So again are those which refer to the eagle's eyrie, fixed in the most elevated cliffs. (3) The swiftness of this bird, stooping annong a flock of wild geese, with the rushing sound of a whirlwind, we have witnessed ; and all know its towering flight, suspended on its broad wings among the clouds with little motion or effort. Thus the predictions, in which terrible nations coming from afar are assimilated to eagles, have a poetical and absolute truth, since there are spe- cies like the golden, which really inhabit the whole circumference of the earth, and the nations al- luded to bore eagles' wings for standards, and for ºments on their shields, helmets, and shoul- erS. Figuratite. (I) The conquering kings of As- Syria, Egypt, and Babylon, are likened to eagles for their powers and dominion, and for their ravenous oppression, ravage, and murder of the nations (Ezek. xvii:3, 7; Hos. viii: I). (2) The Chaldean armies are said to have had eagles' wings, and to be “swift as eagles;” with speed they over- ran and destroyed the nations (Jer. iv: Ig; xlviii: 40; Lam. iv: 19; Dan. vii:4; Hab. i :8). (3) The Roman armies are likened to eagles; they had their standards surmounted with the image of an eagle; they ravaged and murdered the nations; and, coming from afar, terribly ruined the corrupt nation of the Jews (Deut. xxviii:49; Matt. xxiv: 28; Luke xvii:37). (4) The Edomites exalted themselves, and made their nest high as the eagles, they thought to secure themselves by the almost inaccessible rocks of their country (Jer. xlix:16; Obad. 4). To enlarge baldness as the eagles, is to be bereaved of all comfort, protection, and hap- piness, and oppressed with sorrow and grief on that account (Mic, i :16). EAR (er), (Heb. |N, o'zen), the organ of hear- ing. We learn from Scripture that blood was put upon the right ear of the priests at their consecra- tion (Exod. xxix:20; Lev. viii:23), and of the healed leper in his cleansing (Lev. xiv:14). (I) To hear in the ear is to have a thing pri- vately told us (Matt. x:27). (2) To bow down the ear, incline the ear, give ear, is carefully to attend to what is commanded or requested, and readily to do it. (Ps. xxxi. 2; Cxvi;2; CXXx:2, and xlix:I). (3) To uncover the ear is to whisper or tell a secret to one. (I Sam. ix:15). (4) To stop the ears 1mports the highest disregard and alj- horrence (Is. xxxiii: 15). (5) Open and obedi- ent ears' import readiness to hear, to receive, and obey instructions (Is. 1:5, and xlviii:8; Prov. xxv : I.2). (6) Heavy and dull ears import an in- capacity to perceive, or an unwillingness to em- brace and obey divine truths (Is. lix: I, and vi : Io). (7) Uncircumcised ears, and ears turned away from hearing the law, or ears stopped to good, im– port stupidity, obstinacy, and impenitency, which render men incapable of receiving good counsel or instruction (Jer. vi. Io ; Acts vii:5I ; Prov. xxi : 13, and xxviii:9). (8) Itching ears denote an excessive fondness to hear novelties, quaint speeches, etc. (2 Tim. iv:3). (9) Such as have ears and hear not are those that have oppor- tunities of learning God's truth, and have natural faculties to consider it, and yet never apply them EAR for that purpose (Is. xlii:20 and xliii:8; Mark viii:18). EAR (er). Used as a verb. 1. (Heb. Pºll, Áhaw-rash', I Sam. viii: 12, prim- itive root), to scratch, to engrave with tools, hence to plow with an instrument. 2. (Heb. 722, aw-bad", Deut. xxi.;4; Is. xxx: 24, primitive root), meaning to till, to dress, to work. - EARING (er'íng), (Heb. *Tº, Ahaw-rash', I Sam. viii:12). This word, which occurs in the Authorized Version (Gen. xlv.:6), is very often supposed to mean ‘collecting the ears of corn,' which would confound it with harvest, from which it is distinguished in this very passage. But the word is radically the same with harrow, and de- notes Z/owing, ſroul the Anglo-Saxon erzazt, ‘to plow.’ EARNEST (€r'nést), (Gr. 3p}agúv, ar-Arab-ohm', pledge), money which in purchase is given as a pledge that the full amount will subsequently be paid. The Hebrew word (lº, ar-aw-bone') was used generally for Ž/edge (Gen. xxxviii:17), surety (Prov. xvii:18) and hostage (2 Kings xiv:I4). ~. (1) Hesychius explains arrabohm by prodoma, somewhat given beforehand. This idea attaches to all the particular applications of the word, as, anything given by way of warrant or security for the performance of a promise; part of a debt paid as an assurance of paying the remainder; part of the price of anything paid beforehand to con- firm the bargain between buyer and seller; part of a servant’s wages paid at the time of hiring, for the purpose of ratifying the engagement on both sides. The idea that the earnest is either to be re- turned upon the fulfillment of the engagement, or to be considered as part of the stipulation, is also included. This word, carried around the Mediterranean by Tyrian commerce, appears in Latin as arrhabo, arrha, arra, and rabo ; in modern languages, Ital- ian, arra, caparra; Spanish, caparra; French, arr- hes. (2) The word is used three times in the New Testament, but always in a figurative sense; in the first (2 Cor. i :22), it is applied to the gifts of the Holy Spirit, which God bestowed upon the Apostles, and by which he might be said to have hired them to be the servants of his son; and which were the earnest, assurance, and com- mencement of those far superior blessings which He would bestow on them in the life to come, as the wages of their faithful services:—in the two latter (2 Cor. v :5; Fph, i : 13, T4), it is applied to the gifts bestowed on Christians generally upon whom, after baptism, the Apostles had laid their hands, and which were to them an earnest of ob- taining an heavenly habitation and inheritance, upon the supposition of their fidelity. This use of the term finely illustrates the augmented powers and additional capacities promised in a future State. EARRINGS (er'rings). - (1) No custom is more ancient or universal than that of wearing earrings, from which it would appear to be a very natural idea to attach such an ornament to the pendulous lobe of the ear. There are two words in Hebrew denoting ear- rings, viz., 7”, aw-ghee/, which is applied to •y T 9 y any kind of ring, particularly to earrings (Num. xxxi :50; Ezek. xvi : I.2). The name implies round- ness, and it is a fact that nearly all the ancient earrings exhibited in the sculptures of Egypt and 553 EARTH Persepolis are of a circular shape. The other word, Pº, meh-zem, is also applied to a nose- jewel. It most certainly denotes an earring in Gen. xxxv :4; but in Gen. xxiv:47; Prov. xi:22; IS. iii:21; it signifies a nose-jewel ; and it is doubtful which of the two is intended in Judg. viii:24, 25; Job xlii:II. Earrings of certain kinds were anciently, and are still, in the East, instruments or appendages of idolatry and superstition, being regarded as talismans and amulets. Such probably were the earrings of Jacob's family, which he buried with the Strange gods at Bethel (Gen. xxxv :4). (2) No conclusion can be formed as to the shape of the Hebrew earrings except from the sig- nification of the words employed, and from the analogy of similar ornaments in ancient sculpture. Those worn by the Egyptian ladies were large, round, single hoops of gold, from one inch and a half to two inches and one-third in diameter, and frequently of still greater size, or made of six single rings soldered together. Such prob- ably was the round ‘agil' of the Hebrews. Among persons of high or royal rank the ornament was Sometimes in the shape of an asp, whose body was of gold set with precious stones (see AMULET). Silver earrings have also been found at Thebes, either plain hoops like the earrings of gold, or simple Studs. The modern Oriental earrings are more usually jeweled drops or pendants than Egyptian Earrings. circlets of gold. The use of earrings appears to have been confined to the women among the He- brews. That they were not worn by men is im- plied in Judg. viii:24, where gold earrings are mentioned as distinctive of the Ishmaelite tribes. The men of Egypt also abstained from the use of earrings. EARTH (ärth). (1) There are two words in Hebrew which are translated sometimes by earth and some- times by Zazza. These are yºs, a/ 'zeň, and nºis, ad-aw-yeaw', both of which are rendered by ºyſ, in the Septuagint, and this Yī) is rendered by ‘earth,’ ‘land,’ ‘ground,’ in the New Testa- ment. The word adamah, however, is applied chiefly to the very substance of the earth, as soil, ground, clay, although sometimes denoting a re- gion, land, or country; whereas eretz more gener- ally denotes the surface of the earth, and is, hence, in the earlier parts of the Bible, opposed to Pº, shaw-mah 'ſim, ‘the heavens.’ (2) Besides the ordinary sense of the word or words rendered ‘earth’ in our translation—namely, as denoting mould, the surface of the earth, and the terrestrial globe—there are others in scripture which require to be discriminated. (I) ‘The earth’ denotes “the inhabitants of the earth’ (Gen. vi: II; xi :1). (2) Heathen countries, as distin- guished from the land of Israel, especially during the theocracy; i. e. all the rest of the world ex- EARTHEN WARE cepting Israel (2 Kings xviii:25; 2 Chron. xiii:9, etc.). (3) In the New Testament especially, “the earth appears in our translation as applied to the land of Judaea. As in many of these passages it might seem as if the habitable globe were intended, the use of so ambiguous a term as ‘the earth' should have been avoided, and the original ren- dered by the land,’ as in Lev. xxv :23; Is. x:23, and elsewhere. This is the sense which the orig- inal bears in Matt. xxiii:35; xxvii:45; Mark xv.: 33; Luke iv:25; xxi:23; Rom. ix:28; James v : 17. For the cosmological uses of the term, see GEOGRAPHY. EARTHENWARE (arth"n-wār). TER. º EARTHQUAKE (Črth-kwāk), (Heb. ºl, rah'- ash, vibration; Gr. oretopºds, s?ce-mos'). The quaking of the earth ; a vibratory or un- dulatory movement extending superficially over a wide area, and downward, it is believed, from a mile or two to more than thirty miles. The vi- brations are, perhaps, produced by contractions of portions of the earth's crust. Earthquakes and volcanoes are connected, and are confined to par- ticular regions constituting continuous lines. 1. Proximate Causes. (1) The proximate cause of earthquakes, though by no means accu- rately defined, seems referable to the action of in- ternal heat or fire. That the earth was once subject to the action of a vast internal power springing probably from the development of subterranean or central heat, the elevations and depressions, and the generally scarred and torn character of its exterior make sufficiently evident. A power sim- ilar in kind, but more restricted in degree, is still at work in the bowels of the earth, and occasion- ally breaks down all barriers and devastates cer- tain parts of the world. - (2) But although subterranean disturbances may be the true cause of all great earthquakes and eruptions, there can be little doubt that the oc- casion of those subterranean disturbances is often, if not always, to be sought outside the earth's crust. In times of great storm the mercury changes rapidly in height, and this corresponds to the rap- See POT- id addition or removal of many thousands of millions of tons to and from the areas of rising and falling barometer. When we hear that the barometer has risen or sunk half an inch, we do not commonly attach much importance to the change, nor, in most parts of the earth, is such a change likely to produce any remarkable effects. Even in regions where the crust of the earth is notably unstable, a change of half an inch in the height of the mercurial column is not ordinarily of great importance. Yet it might under certain conditions make such a change in the conditions of cquilibrium as to bring about an earthquake. Consider what it really means. When the barom- eter rises half an inch over an area of Io,000 square miles, less than a sixth of the area of Missouri, the pressure on that area is increased by 4,260,- OOO,000 tons. If a wave of atmospheric pressure passed over the United States in such sort that over the eastern half of the states the barometer were first half an inch lower than in the western half, and then half an inch higher, the effect would be as though a mass of about seven hundred thou- sand millions of tons were shifted from the west- ern to the eastern half of the United States. (3) We need not be surprised to find, then, that earthquakes have very often been preceded by re- markable atmospheric phenomena. Usually great earthquakes have not followed tremendous storms, but a condition of portentous calm, The air has 554 EARTHQUAKE been found oppressive for hours, perhaps days, be- fore the earthquake occurred. Remembering aft- erward the sense of oppression which had pre- ceded the subterranean disturbance, the ordinary observer has been apt to infer that the dull, heavy calm, the unrestful stillness, was nature's pause before the mighty throes in which her imprisoned energies found vent. But in reality the oppressive stillness has been simply the result of increased at- mospheric pressure, and this increased pressure brings about the earthquake as its direct conse- quence. (4) But while the action of atmospheric pressure in helping to excite subterranean activities must not be overlooked, the varying pressure exerted by seas and Oceans is a more potent disturbing factor. Atmospheric pressure is distributed in such a way that though the weight of air on any given area is continually changing, there are no sharply defined lines, at any time, which separate regions of less pressure from regions of greater pressure. It is otherwise, with the sea along a shore line. Here we have the sea acting with constantly varying in- tensity, as its level changes, on the seaward side of the shore line, while on the landward side there are no such variations of pressure. Let us con- sider what this means. Take a tolerably straight shore line 500 miles in length, and suppose that along this shore line a region of ocean IOO miles broad rises through a height of three feet under the combined action of sun and moon raising a tidal wave, and favoring strong winds urging the water shoreward. Then we have 50,000 square milcs of sca-watcr; three fect decp, added as so much dead-weight to that part of the earth's crust which underlies the seas along that shore. Each Square mile contains in round numbers 3,000,000 Square yards, or 27,000,000 square feet. The ad- ditional weight corresponds, then (as the added layer is three feet deep), to 50,000 times 81,000,- OOO cubic feet of water, each weighing 64 I-3 pounds, or to II6,000,000,000 tons. It is clear that the addition of so enormous a weight as this to the submerged part of the earth’s crust, outside the shore line, may well produce strains too great to be resisted. (Richard A. Proctor, LL.D.) 2. Regions of Most Frequent Earth- quaſces. (1) The manifestation of the awful phenomena which accompany earthquakes is generally restricted in its range. Accordingly geologists have laid down certain volcanic regions or bands within which this manifesta- tion most frequently takes place. Over these regions various traces of volcanic agency are found, such as either gaseous vapors or hot springs; also bituminous substances, and in some instances there are volcanoes in eruption. Several sources of bitumen are found on the Tigris, in the Persian mountains, ncar thc Kharoon, and at Bu- shire, as well as along the Euphrates. At Hit, especially, on the last-mentioned river, it exists on a very large scale, and, having been much used from the earliest times, seems inexhaustible. Abundant traces of it are also to be seen amid the ruins and over the entire vicinity of Hillah—the ancient Babylon. Syria and Palestine abound in volcanic appearances. Between the river Jordan and Damascus lies a volcanic tract. The entire country about the Dead Sea presents indubitable tokens of volcanic agency. (2) Accordingly these places come within one of the more common volcanic regions. The chief of these are—(1) that which extends from the Cas- pian Sea to the Azores; (2) from the Aleutian Isles to the Moluccas; (3) that of the Andes; (4) the African ; (5) the Icelandic, Syria and EARTHQUAKE 555 Palestine are embraced within the first band; and these countries have not unfrequently been sub- ject to earthquakes. That earthquakes were among the extraordi- nary phenomena of Palestine in ancient times is shown in their being an element in the poetical imagery of the Hebrews, and a source of religious admonition and devout emotion (Ps. xviii:7; Hab. iii:6; Nah. i :5; Is. v :25). 3. Historical. (1) The earthquake at Mount Sinai on the giving of the Law : “the whole mount quaked greatly’ (Exod. xix. I8). 2) The earthquake accompanied by fissures and sinking of the ground, by which Korah and his companions were destroyed (Num. xvi;3I); also (Jos. Amliq. iv., iii:3). (3) The earthquake in the days of Saul (I Sam. x1V : I 5). (4) The earthquake in the reign of Ahab, when Elijah (I Kings xix:II, I2) was directed to go forth and stand upon the mountain before Jehovah : ‘and behold Jehovah passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before. Jehovah ; but Jehovah was not in the wind; and after the wind an earth- quake; but Jehovah was not in the earthquake; and after the earthquake a fire; but Jehovah was not in the fire; and after the fire a still small voice.’ (5) A terrible earthquake took place ‘in the days of Uzziah, king of Judah' (B.C. from 790 to 740), which Josephus (Antiq. ix: Io, 4) says, 'shook the ground, and a rent was made in the Temple, so that the rays of the sun shone through it, which, falling upon the king's face, struck him with the leprosy,' being a punishment which the historian ascribes to the wrath of God consequent on Uz- ziah's usurpation of the priest's office. That this earthquake was of an awful character may be learnt from the fact that Zechariah (xiv:5) thus speaks respecting it—‘Ye shall flee as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah, king of Judah;’ and also that it appears from Amos (i: 1) that the event was so striking, and left such deep impressions on men's minds, that it became a sort of epoch from which to date and reckon; the prophet’s words are, ‘two years before the earthquake.’ (6) In the reign of Herod (B. C. 31, Sept. 2) an earthquake occurred in Judaea, ‘such as had not happened at any other time,’ destructive to men and animals (Jos. Ant. xv. v. 2). (7) The earthquake which occurred at the cruci- fixion of the Saviour of mankind (Matt. xxvii: 50-I ; Luke xxiii:44, 45; Mark XV:33), A. D. 29. This darkness has been misunderstood, and then turned to the prejudice of Christianity. (See DARKNEss.) The obscuration was obviously an attendant on the earthquake. Earthquakes are frequently attended by accompaniments which obscure the light of day during (as in this case from the sixth to the ninth hour, that is, from 12 o'clock at noon to 3 o'clock P. M.) several hours. If this is the fact, then the record is consistent with natural phenomena, and the darkness which skeptics have pleaded against speaks actually in favor of the credibility of the Gospel. Now it is well known to naturalists that such obscurations are by no means uncommon. It may be enough to give the following instances: A very remarkable volcanic eruption took place on the 19th of January, 1835, in the volcano of Cose- güina, situated in the Bay of Fonseca (usually called the Coast of Conchagua), in Central Amer- ica. The eruption was preceded by a rumbling noise, accompanied by a column of smoke which EAST issued from the mountain, increasing until it as- sumed the form and appearance of a large dense cloud, which, when viewed at the distance of thirty miles, appeared like an immense plume of feathers, rising with considerable velocity, and ex- panding in every direction. (8) The earthquake at the resurrection of Christ (Matt. xxviii:2). The word here rendered earth- quake does not of necessity mean that the convul- sion extended to the earth, but only that there had been such a concussion as to remove the Stone. (Albert Barnes, Com.) The Greek word seismos relates to a concussion of the air as well as of the earth. But there was a miraculous shaking of the ground in the particular place where the tomb was situated. (9) Earthquake at Philippi. This has often been considered a miraculous manifestation of Divine power, called forth for the release from prison of St. Paul and Silas (Acts xvi :26 ff.), A. D. 51. 4. Trophetic. Earthquakes being amongst the most terrible and impressive of natural phenom- ena, are made use of in the Bible for prophetic imagery connected with future calamitous events; thus: (1) “She (Ariel or Mount Zion) shall be visited of the Lord of hosts with thunder and with earthquake' (Is. xxix:6, R. V.). (2) “And there shall be famines and earthquakes in divers places' (Matt. xxiv:7). (3) “And I saw when he opened the sixth seal, and there was a great earthquake' (Rev. vi. I2). (4) “And he (the angel) taketh the censer, and he filled it with the fire of the altar, and cast it upon the earth; and there followed thunders, and voices, and lightnings, and an earth- quake' (Rev. viii:5). (5) “And there were killed in the earthquake seven thousand persons’ (Rev. xi :13). (6) “And there was a great earthquake, such as was not since there were men upon the earth’ (Rev. xvi :18). (E. Hull, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) EAST (äst). This word, which is used by Eng- lish writers in only two senses, viz., to denote either the quarter of the heavens where the sun rises, or the regions in the eastern part of the world, has frequently three senses in the Author- ized Version of the Bible. (1) It is sometimes used to mean the sun-rising (Heb. Tºp, mig-zawāh', rising, Ps. ciii:12), ‘as far as the east is from the west.” (2) It very frequently corresponds to P.E., Aeh- dem, (zwhat is 2n front of, before), the name given by the ancient Hebrews to a certain region, without any regard to its relation to the eastern part of the heavens, comprehending not onky Arabia Deserta and the lands of Moab and Am- mon, which really lay to the east of Palestine, but also Armenia, Assyria, Mesopotamia, Babylonia, and Chaldaea, which were situated rather to the north than the east of Judaea. Its geographical boundaries include Syria, the countries beyond the Tigris and Euphrates, the shores of the Indian ocean and of the Arabian gulf. The name given to this entire region by the Hebrews was the land of Kedem or East, and its miscellaneous population were called by them Sons of the East, , or Ori- entals. It seems that the inhabitants of this region were distinguished for their proficiency in the arts and sciences and were addicted in the time of Isaiah to superstition (Is. xxvi). (3) The wise men, who came from the East to Jerusalem at the birth of the Saviour, no doubt belonged to that region, “saying, We have seen his star in the East.” Campbell remarks that ‘to see either star or meteor in the east,' means, EAST, CHILDREN OF THE in English, to see it in the East-quarter of the heavens, or looking eastward. But this cannot be the Evangelist's meaning. The meaning mani- festly is, that when the magians themselves were in the East, they saw the star. So far were they from seeing the star in the East, according to the English acceptation of the phrase, that they must have seen it in the West, as they were by its guid- ance brought out of the East country westwards to Jerusalem. EAST, CHILDREN OF THE (Heb. F.ET-P, bezz-ay'/ºe/*-de/z). A general designation of the tribes occupying the east country, who inhabited the region border- ing on Ammon and Moab (Ezek. xxv :4, IO), dwelt as far north as a district where people of Haran pastured their flocks (Gen. xxix: I, 4), and ex- tended far southward into Arabia. (Davis, Bib. Dict.). EAST COUNTRY (est kün'try), (Gen. xi.2; Job i:3; Ezek. xlvii:8; Matt. ii:I). The Hebrews used the word kedem, or “east,” to describe any country which was before or in front of another—that is, to the east of it; and it generally refers to the region around and be- yond the rivers Tigris and Euphrates, including portions of Arabia, Mesopotamia, and Babylonia. EASTER (es' ter), (Gr. Trágya, Žas'Ahah, from Heb. "P#, Žež'sa/º/, the Passover). The occurrence of this word in the A. V. of Acts xii:4—“Intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people”—is chiefly noticeable as an ex- ample of the want of consistency in the translators. In the earlier English versions Easter had been frequently used as the translation of pascha, but Passover was substituted in all passages but this in the King James version. The anachronism of this version was inherited from older versions which avoided, as far as possible, expressions which could not be understood by the people. This is illustrated by such words as “robbers of churches” (Acts xix:37), “town-clerk” (xix: 35), “serjeants” (xvi :35), “deputy” (xiii:7, etc.). The translators acted on the principle of choosing, not the most correct, but the most familiar equiv- alents. (Comp. Trench, On the Authoriged Ver- sion of the New Testament p. 21 [2d ed. p. 49]. In the R. V. it is properly rendered Passover. (1) Festival of. It is an ecclesiastical festival commemorative of the resurrection of Christ. It originated in the circumstance that Christ was typified by the paschal lamb, ordained by Moses to be slain at the feast "of the Passover ; the feast being considered as a continuation, in its fulfill- ment, of the Jewish festival. The English name Easter, and the German Ostern, are derived from the name of the Teutonic goddess Ostera (Anglo- Saxon AEostre), whose festival was celebrated by the ancient Saxons with peculiar solemnities, in the month of April, and for which, as in many other instances, the first Roman Catholic mission- aries substituted the paschal feast. Easter was observed as a most joyous day— catechumens were dressed in white and solemnly baptized—the Lord’s Supper was administered with great solemnity—alms were liberally dis- tributed to the poor, etc. The day before Easter was called Sabbatum magnum, the great Sabbath —its observance was perpetuated long after the seventh-day Sabbath was discontinued; it was kept as a solemn fast, and by a nocturnal assembly called the Easter vigil. “By degrees the fast pre- paratory to Easter Sunday was lengthened, until, probably about the time of Constantine, it reached 556 EATING forty days (Quadragesima, Lent). The rejoicings were also continued through the whole period of fifty days (Quinquagesima) from Easter to the day of Pentecost (Whitsunday).” (Bennett, Christ. Archaeo/, p. 455). The day is now generally celebrated by the Christian Church of all faiths. (2) Controversies. As early as the second century, there were keen disputes respecting the day on which this feast should be kept: the East- ern church persisting in observing it on the same day with the Jews; while the Western celebrated . it on Sunday, as the day of Christ's resurrection. The dispute was finally settled at the Council of Nice, in 325, which ordained that it should be kept always and everywhere on one and the same day, and on the Sunday next after the full moon that came on or first after the vernal equinox (which falls on March 21st), provided that when that moon was full on a Sunday, Easter should be the Sunday after : thus it never could be coin- cident with the passover. According to this rule Easter may occur as early as March 22d, and as late as April 25th. As it is not in the Nicene can- ons, Dr. Waterland suggests that the council mere- ly prohibited the custom of the Quartodecimans, and ordered the observance to be always on Sun- day—the day to be fixed every year by the Alex- andrians. IIowever that may be, the foregoing rule has ever since governed the celebration of this festival, except in a few churches. 8. EAST SEA (Est se) or EASTERN SEA (Ezek. xlvii: 18; Joel ii :20). See DEAD SEA, THE. EAST WIND (est wind), (Heb. *T2, AEazy-deem', east). See WINDS. EATING (1) The ancient Hebrews did not eat indifferently with all persons; they would have esteemed themselves polluted and dishonored by º | ,"lº, |ff § \; º º | . º §§§ º • * sº | ||||| º # Whº ". º º º - º ſ ºft ºr |liſt | Washing Before or After Eating. eating with those of another religion, or of an odious profession. In Joseph’s time they neither ate with the Egyptians nor the Egyptians with them (Gen. xliii:32); nor in Our Saviour's time, with the Samaritans (John iv:9). The Jews were scandalized at his eating with publicans and sin- ners (Matt. ix: II). The Hebrews anciently sat at table, but after- wards imitated the Persians and Chaldeans, who reclined on table-beds, or divans, while eating, rest- ing the body on the left elbow and using chiefly the right hand. This peculiar position makes the scene described in Luke vii:36-50 perfectly natural, and also shows how one of the guests could repose his lead on another’s bosom (John xiii:23). Women were never present at Jewish meals as guests. EATING (2) Time of Principal Meal. The Jews, in Old Testament times, appear to have taken their prin- cipal meal at night, after the heat of the day was over. This, to be sure, is largely conjecture, Since we have no detailed information given us in the 557 EATING of God, and to be influenced thereby to activity in his worship and service (Ps. xxii:29). (4) To eat a roll, book, or word is thoroughly to con- sider, understand, and be affected by it (Ezek. iii: I ; Rev. x:9; Jer. xv :16). (5) To be eaten up or consumed with zeal is to have our thoughts and cares wholly taken up with a desire for and devot- ed to the welfare of the church, and the honor and | N *--------ees E tº Bible. See Ruth iii:7; Exod. xvi;12; xviii: 12, 13. The institution of the paschal feast in the evening likewise helps to confirm the Opinion €º º, ſiſ|| * ~" £º All ; : , d | º g º § 2 !) zº 4 j}. º syluſ) wº | º ,” . ; : fºllº-ººººººº. º º d'º t º: 2-S ſº §\Sº l º § 2-\ - % ºš N º £º ſº =/ \Si\S t º §§ Nº. ::::: º Nsº d § Ereºseo ſ *º #! - £: s== | N §§ h #º º hiş y; | #=#|É. #Eºf || || (### ==#|Nº. | s/Xº-Få3% _ºr-s " * ~USN Š -*. . . . ~~ Xº - \ s'ssº § \ §§§ ſº ~~ -** = §§§ º | -- ==#$º's *------. Sºss # ſº --- T====== † = − =:::: º Reclining at a Feast. (Exod. xii:6, 18). They made their other meal in the morning. In New Testament times they did not ordinarily breakfast until 9 o'clock (Acts ii: I 5), and on the Sabbath, as Josephus says, not before noon, because not till then was the service of the Synagogue completed. In the evening the more substantial meal took place. In general, the Jews led the simple, abstemious life of the modern Oriental, eating the fruits of the earth in the morn- ing, and meat only once a day, if at all. But be- sides this occasional reference to the ordinary life of the Jews, the Bible contains notices of nu- merous feasts in honor of all the events which broke the monotony of their existence. Leaving out of account the religious festivals and the for- mal banquets at the ratification of treaties and on other public occasions, we read of feasts given at marriages (Gen. xxix:22; Judg. xiv: Io), etc., on birthdays (Gen. x1 :20; Job i :4), etc., burials (2 Sam. iii:35; Jer. xvi :7), sheep-shearing (I Sam. xxv :2, 36; xiii:23). (See FEASTs ; FOOD.) (3) Tables. The tables which the Jews are represented as purifying by washing (Mark vii:4), are these kinds of beds (k\tvöv), they cleansed them as if they had been polluted by the recum- bence of strangers; unless it were c11stomary, as in point of neatness it ought to be, to wash the tables after every meal, and before they received guests again. (See ABLUTION.) Figuratite. (I) To eat žeoff/e or eat their flesh, is cruelly to oppress and destroy them; and to bereave them of all that they enjoy (Ps. xiv:4, Mic. iii:3; Rev. xvii:16, and xix : 18). (2) To eaf the flesh and drink the blood of Christ is with pleasure, appropriation, and desire, to know, believe on, and receive him in his person, incarna- tion, righteousness, and benefits, for the spiritual nourishment and life of our souls (John vi :53). (3) To eat and worship is to receive the fulness service of God (Ps. lxix:9 and czix:139). (6) To eat on the left hand, and eat the flesh of one’s own arm, is to be reduced to terrible straits of famine, and to destroy what might be useful for their own protection and relief (Is. ix:20). The Jew- ish priests did eat up the sin of God’s people: For the sake of their share of the sin-offerings, they gladly received information of scandals, and with pleasure feasted on, and pampered themselves with the Sacrifices offered for them (Hos. iv:8). (7) To Cat on the mountains is to partake of the idola- trous sacrifices offered in high places (Ezek. xviii: I5). (8) To eat dung and drink one’s own water, is to suffer, the utmost extremities of famine and misery in the siege of a city, etc. (Is. xxxvi : I.2). (O) To cat before the Lord was to attend the EBAL solemn feasts in his courts (Deut. xii:7). (Io) To eat with one is to be familiar with him (I Cor. v: II). (II) The lion is called the eater because he kills and feeds on a multitude of animals, and is himself preyed on by none (Judg. xiv:14). EBAL (e'bal), (Heb. ???, ay-bawl", to be bare, Stone). 1. One of the sons of Shobal, the son of Seir (Gen. xxxvi;23; 1 Chron. i.40). 2. Son of Joktan (I Chron. i:22). Some MSS., the Syriac and Arabic versions, read Obal, as in Gen. x:28 (B. C. 1694). EBAL and GERIZIM, MOUNTS (e'bal and géri-zim), (Heb. ??? Tº, har-ay-bawl", mount of stone, and Flº, gher-ee-zeem’, desert dwellers) Ebal and Gerizim, two mountains of Samaria, form the opposite sides of the valley which con- tained the ancient town of Shechem, the present Nabulus. From this connection it is best to notice them together. (1) The valley which these mountains enclose is about 200 or 300 paces wide, by above three miles in length; and Mount Ebal rises on the right hand and Gerizim on the left hand of the valley (which extends west-north-west) as a person approaches Shcchcm from Jerusalcm. It was on Mount Ebal that God commanded to be reared up an altar, and a pillar inscribed with the law; and the tribes were to be assembled, half on Ebal and half on Gerizin, to hear the fearful maledictions pronounced by the Levites upon all who should violate the obliga- tions of the Sacred code, and the blessings prom- ised to those who should observe them. (2) The tribes which responded with simul- taneous ‘Amens' to the curses, were to be sta- tioned on Mount Ebal, and thosc who answercq to the blessings, on Mount Gerizim. This grand cere- mony—perhaps the grandest in the history of na- tions—could not have found a more fitting scene; and it was duly performed by Joshua as soon as he gained possession of the Promised Land (Deut. xxvii:4, 13; Josh. viii:30-35). (3) Mounts Gerizim and Ebal rise in steep, rocky precipices, immediately from the valley on each side, apparently some 800 feet in height. The sides of both these mountains are equally naked and sterile, although some travelers - have chosen to describe Gerizim as fertile, and confine the sterility to Ebal. The only exception in favor of the former is a small ravine coming down op- posite to the west end of the town, which indeed is full of fountains and trees; in other respects both mountains are desolate, except that a few olive-trees arc scattered upon thcm. The side of the northern mountain, Ebal, along the foot, is full of ancient excavated sepulchers. The southern 111Uuillaiti is 11U w Called Uy llie iſliabilauts Jebel- et-Tür, though the name Gerizim is known, at least, to the Samaritans. Conder considers that upon the top of this mount may be the site of Joshua’s altar. EBED (6'bed), (Heb. Hºy, eh'àed, servant, but many MSS. have EBER). 1. Father of Gaal, who assisted the men of Shechem against Abimelech (Judg. ix:26, 28, 30, 31, 35), B. C. I.32 I. 2. Son of Jonathan, one of the sons of Adin, who returned from Babylon with Ezra (Ezra viii:6), B. C. 459. EBED-MELECH (e'bed-melek), (Heb. Flº"Tºº, e/.'bed-me/ 'Zeß, servant of a king), a eunuch or servant of king Zedekiah, who, being informed that 558 E BONY Jeremiah was imprisoned in a place full of mire informed the king of it, and was the means of his restoration to safety, though not to liberty. For this humanity he was promised divine protection, and after the city was taken by Nebuzaradan he was preserved (Jer. xxxviii:7; xxxix:16 ff). His name seems to be an official title—A zng's s/azye, i.e., minister (B.C. 589). (See JEREMIAH.) EBEN-BOHAN (€'ben-bo'han). See Bohan. EBEN-EZEL (eben-ezel), (Heb. *Sºl Ps, ea. ben-ha-e'zel, stone of departure), an old stone of testimonial, mentioned in I Sam. xx:I9. The circumstance which it commemorated is not known. EBEN-EZER (Šb'en-e'zer), (Heb. Tº 28, eh'- ben-hazy-ay"zer, stone of help), the name given to a stone which Samuel set up between Mizpeh and Shen, in witness of the divine assistance obtained against the Philistines (I Sam. vii; I2). Neither of these points has been identified with any certainty—the latter not at all. EBER (e'ber), (Heb. Tº, ay'ber, beyond). 1. Son of Salah, and great grand-son of Shem (Gen. x:21, 24; I Chron. i :19). Sometimes con- fused with HEBER. (B. C. 2448-1984.) 2. Son of Elpaal, a Benjamite. One of the founders of Ono and Lod (I Chron. viii :12). 3. A priest representing the family of Amok, in the days of Joiakim, son of Jeshua (Neh. xii:2O), B. C. 535. 4. A Gadite, head of a father's house in Gilead in Bashan (I Chron. v.: 13), B. C. 782. 5. A Benjamite, son of Shashak (I Chron. viii:22, 25), B. C. 535. **) Nº. EBIASAPH (e-bi'a-sāf), (Heb. Flº, e5-yaw- sawf' gatherer), a Kohathite Levite of the family of Korah, forcfather of Samucl the prophet and Heman the singer (I Chron vi;23, 37). He is thought by some to be the man mentioned in ix:19. His identity with Abiasaph is, however, very uncertain. The probability is that they were different persons. EBODA (e-bó'da), (Num. xxi. IO; xxxiii:43, 44), one of the stations of the Israelites in the wilder- ness. (See WANDERING, THE). EBONY (Šb'ún-y), (Ezek. xxvii:15). A black, heavy, and very hard wood, which was brought to ancient Tyre from India. It is suscepti- EBRON 559 ble of a fine polish, and is used for musical instru- ments and ornamental work. Ebony is the heart- wood of a tree (Džos/yros effemus) of the saille genus with the persimmon of our warmer states, and, like that tree, bears an edible fruit. Virgil in his Georgics mentions the black ebony of India. EBRON (€'bron), in A. V. Hebron. . A city on the boundary line of Asher (Josh. xix:28). Perhaps identical with Abdon. EBRONAH (e-brö'nah), (Heb. ":Tºº, eb-ro-maw", passage). One of the halting places of the Israelites next preceding Ezion-geber (Num. xxxiii:34, 35). From the derivation of the word the name may refer to the ford across the hcad of the Elanitic Gulf. The name is properly Abronah. EC.BATANA (ek-bät'a-nā). See ACHMETHA. EccLESIASTEs (ekklez; aster), (Heb. Fº Åo-he/h'/eth, preacher.) (1) The Hebrew Name. This book has ob- tained its Hebrew name from the designation of the principal person mentioned in it, who is thus self-styled in several passages. The feminine ter- mination of the name has given rise to the Opinion that Koheleth means a body or academy of sages, whose dicta are contained in this book; but this opinion is contradicted by the reading of the book itself, which thus commences: Words of Koheleth, the son of David, the king in Jerusalem. Hence it appears that Koheleth is intended for an epithet of Solomon. Compare also chapter i :12, “I, Kohe- leth, was king over Israel in Jerusalem.” With one exception, in chapter vii:27, the word Kohe- leth is always construed as a masculine noun. The various interpreters who consider Koheleth as expressive of a person, differ in their transla- tion of it in different manners. Some follow the Septuagint in which this word is translated Ek- klaysiastace, assembler. Others interpret it by collector, which implies, they state, that the author not merely intended to communicate his own wisdom, but that he had compiled the experi- ence of former sages. The verb Kohel, however, does not mean to compile, but always to assemble or to convene a meeting. It hence appears that the Septuagint translation, assembler, preacher, or teacher, is correct. Still there remains to be explained the feminine form of the word. The only correct explanation of this is, that Solomon was called Koheleth because he was personified Wisdom, and that Wisdom spoke through him. According to this interpretation, the construc- tion of Koheleth, both with the masculine and with the feminine, may be equally well explained. If with the masculine, the bearer of the name is considered; but if with the feminine, the wisdom, which animates him, is to be considered in view. (2) The Author. The circumstance that Solo- mon is introduced as the speaker in this book has induced most of the ancient interpreters to con- sider him as its author. But the greatest obstacle in the way of con- sidering Solomon to be the author, is the char- acter of the language. Many opponents of the Solomonic authorship certainly went much too far in their assertions. The Grecisms which Zirkle thought that he had found have now generally been given up. The Rabbinisms likewise could not stand the proof. The words, significations, and forms which seem to appertain to a later period of Hebrew literature, and the Chaldaisms, an abundance of which Knobel gathered, require, as Herzfeld has shown, to be much sifted. Never- ECCLESIASTES theless, it is certain that the book does not belong to the productions of the first, but rather to the second period of the Hebrew language. This alone would not quite disprove the authorship of Solo- mon, if we could produce any weighty argument in its favor. Among the other arguments which have been produced against Solomon's authorship, the only One which seems to have some importance, is that the author now and then forgets his fiction ; for instance, in chapter i: I2, where he says “I was king over Israel in Jerusalem.’ Supposing it now proved that Solomon is only introduced as the speaker, the question arises why the author adopted this form. The usual reply is, that Solomon among the Israelites had, as it were, the prerogative of wisdom ; and hence the author was induced to put into Solomon’s mouth that wisdom which he intended to proclaim, without the slightest intention of forging a supposititious volume. This reply contains some truth; but it does not exhaust the matter. The chief object of the author was to com- municate wisdom in general; but next to this, as appears from chapter i: I2, sq., he intended to in- culcate the vanity of human pursuits. Now, from the mouth of no one could more aptly proceed the proclamation of the nothingness of all earthly things than from the mouth of Solomon, who had possessed them in all their fullness; at whose command were wisdom, riches, and pleasures in abundance; and who had therefore full oppor- tunity to experience the nothingness of all that is earthly. (3) The Date. The history of the canon fixes the time after which the book cannot have been writ- ten. It cannot have been written after the times of Ezra and Nehemiah, under whom the canon was completed. The style alone furnishes the date before which the book cannot have been written ; that is, not before the time of Aramaean influence. But within these boundaries we are unable to produce any valid reasons for fixing the date more precisely. From internal evidence it appears that Koheleth was not written during the latter period of the first, but rather during the time of the second temple, since idolatry does not occur amongst the deviations combated by the author. The whole book seems to presuppose that the people were ex- ternally devoted to the Lord. The admonitions of the author to a serene enjoyment of life, and against murmuring; exhortations to be contented with Divine Providence, and the attacks upon a selfish righteousness of works, may best be ex- plained by supposing the author to have lived in a period like that of Malachi, in which there pre- vailed a Pharisaical righteousness of works, and melancholy murmurings because God would not recognize the alleged rights which they produced before him, and refused to acknowledge the claims they made upon him. (4) The Plan. The author places the funda- mental idea of the nothingness of all earthly things both at the beginning and at the end of his book, and during its course repeatedly returns to the same. This has induced many interpreters to suppose that the purpose of the author was to demonstrate this one idea; an opinion which, down to the most recent times, has been unfavor- able to the true interpretation of the book, be- cause everything, however reluctant, has been forced into an imaginary connection. The follow- ing is the correct view. The object of the author is not to teach an especial tendency of wisdom, but wisdom in general. Consequently, it is not at IECCLESIASTES all surprising if the connection suddenly ceases, and a new subject commences. That the idea of the nothingness of earthly mat- ters should strongly predominate may easily be ex- plained, since according to our author it forms a very important part of wisdom. He never, how- ever, intended to confine himself to this one idea, although he likes frequently to point it out in pass- ing, even when he is considering a matter from another point of view. The plan of this book has been the subject of much investigation. It is best to consider this plan as free as possible, and to employ its separate parts for its support. The commencement and the conclusion show the unity Of the whole. The greater part consists of isolated Observations concerning the course of the world, and the experience of his life. These are connected with general Sentences; and, finally, a very simple conclusion is deduced from the whole. It seems to me that a more artificial texture ought not to be sought for. Several interpreters have supposed that Koheleth consists of a dialogue between a considerate sage and a discontented skeptic. Others have thought that not two persons, but two voices, or two moods Of the same person, are to be distinguished, whose conflict is at the conclusion terminated in the vic- tory of the better part by faith. This opinion however, originated from an imperfect understand- ing, which seemed to discover everywhere irrec- oncilable ... contradictions. , Whoever penetrates deeper will perceive that the author remains un- changed from the beginning to the end. (5) Contents and Objects. Herc we consider only the fundamental idea, omitting isolated sen- tences of wisdom, and rules for the conduct of life. Nobody can entertain any doubt concerning this fundamental idea. It is contained in the sentence: “Vanity of vanities; all is vanity.’ It is, however, very important that this should be rightly understood. The question is, What is that all which is vanity P The author does not mean all in general, but only all of a certain genus. He himself explains this by defining this all in numerous passages; as, ‘all that is under the sun;' that is, earthly things in their separation from the heavenly. To this leads also the enumeration of the all in which occur only those things which belong to the earth—riches, sensual pleasure, hon- or, sphere of activity, human wisdom apart from God, self-righteousness. From many passages it appears that the author was far from compre- hending the fear of God and active obedience to his laws among that all which was vanity. This appears most strikingly from the conclusion, which, as such, is of the highest importance, and furnishes the undoubted measure for the correct- ness of the whole interpretation. ‘Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments; for this is the whole duty of man' (i. e., in this consists all that is in- cumbent upon him ; and his whole salvation de- pends upon it). For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, “whether good, or whether evil.” (Compare chapter xii: I : “Remember now thy Creator in the days of thy youth;’ ch. v :5-7, ‘For thou God;’ ch. vii: 18, and many other passages). A deep religious sense pervades the whole book. In reference to the pre- vailing idea, Ewald strikingly remarks, “There blows throughout this book a piercing chill against every earthly aim, and every vain endeavor; a con- tempt which changes into a bitter sneer against everything which in the usual proceedings of men is one-sided and perverse; an indefatigable pene- tration in the discovery of all human vanities and 560 ECCLESIASTES fooleries. In no earlier writing has all cause of pride and vain imagination so decidedly and so comprehensively been taken from man; and no book is pervaded by such an outcry of noble indig- nation against all that is vain in this world.’ From the contents of the book results its ob- ject. The author had received the mission to treat professedly and in a concentrated manner the high- ly important sentence. ‘Vanitas vanitatum, om- niaque vanitas,” which pervades the whole of Holy Writ; but he is not content with the mere theoret- ical demonstration, so as to leave to another teach- er its practical application, but places before us these practical results themselves: What is in- cumbent upon man, since everything else is naught? What real good remains for us, after the appearance in every seeming good has been de- stroyed 2 The answer is, Man shall not gain by cunning and grasping ; shall not consume himself in vain meditations, nor in a hurried activity; he Shall not murmur about the loss of that which is naught; he shall not by means of a self-made right- Ousness constrain God to grant him salvation; but he shall instead fear God (ch. xii: 13; verses 6, 7), and be mindful of his Creator (ch. xii:I); he shall do good as much as he is able (ch. iii: 12); and in other passages. And all this, as it is con- Stantly inculcated by the author, with a contented and grateful heart, freed from care and avarice; living for the present moment, joyfully taking from the hand of the Lord what he offers in a friendly manner. Man shall not be of a sorrowful countenance, but in quiet serenity enjoy the gifts of God. What would avail him all his cares and all his avarice? By them he cannot turn any- thing aside from him, or obtain anything, since everything happens as it shall happen. St. Jerome, in his commentary on chapter xii, verse I.3, relates that, according to the statement of the Hebrews, they were disinclined to receive it into the canon ; but that the conclusion of the volume had saved its divine authority. Similar doubts occur in the Talmud and other Jewish writings. These doubts were not, however, allowed to prevail, but were suppressed in deference to the conclusion of Kohe- 1eth. (6) Misunderstandings. Within the Christian Church the Divine inspiration of Koheleth, the Proverbs, and the Song of Solomon was denied by Theodorus of Mopsuestia. In recent times, the ac- cusers of Koheleth have been Augusti, De Wette, and Knobel ; but their accusations are based on mere misunderstandings. They are especially as follows:—(1) The author is said to incline to- wards a moral epicurism. All his ethical admoni- tions and doctrines tend to promote the comforts and enjoyments of life. But let us consider above all what tendency and disposition it is to which the author addresses his admonition, serenely and contentedly to enjoy God’s gifts. (a) He addresses this admonition to that specu- lation which will not rest before it has penetrated the whole depth of the inscrutable councils of God to that murmuring which bewails the bad- ness of times and quarrels with God about the sufferings of our terrene existence; to , that gloomy piety which wearies itself in imaginary good works and external strictness, with a view to wrest salvation from God; to that avarice which gathers, not knowing for whom ; making the means of existence our highest aim ; building upon an uncertain futurity which is in the hand of God alone. . (b) When the author addresses levity he speaks quite otherwise. For instance, in chapter vii:2, 4, ‘It is better to go to the house of mourning than to ECCLESIASTES the house of feasting; for that is the end of all men; and the living will lay it to his heart. Sorrow is better than laughter; for by the sadness of the countenance the heart is made better. The heart of the wise man is in the house of mourning; but the heart of fools is in the heart of mirth.” The nature of the joy recommended by the author is also misunderstood. Unrestrained merriment and giddy sensuality belong to those vanities which our author enumerates. He says to laughter, thou art mad, and to joy, what art thou doing? He says, chapter vii:5, 6, ‘It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise than for a man to hear the song of fools. For as the crackling of thorns under a pot, so is the laughter of a fool; this also is vanity.’ That joy which he recommends is joy in God. It is not the opposite, but the fruit of the fear of God. How inseparable these are is shown in passages like chapter v :6, vii:18; iii: 12, ‘I know that there is no good in them, but for a man to rejoice, and to do good in his life;’ and in many similar pas- Sages, but especially chapter xi :9, Io, and xii: I, “Remember now thy Creator in the days of thy youth,” etc. (c) In reference to these passages Ewald says, ‘Finally, in order to remove every doubt, and to speak with perfect clearness, he directs us to the eternal judgment of God, concerning all the doings of man, and inculcates that man, in the midst of momentary enjoyment, should never forget the whole futurity, the account and the consequences of his doings, the Creator and the Judge.’ Ewald adds, in reference to the con- clusion, “In order to obviate every possible mis- understanding of this writing, there is, verse 13, once more briefly indicated that its tendency is not, by the condemnation of murmuring to recom- mend an unbridled life; but rather to teach, in harmony with the best old books, the fear of God, in which the whole man consists; or that true singleness of life, Satisfying the whole man, and which comprehends everything else that is truly human. It is very necessary to limit the principle of joy which this book recommends again and again in various ways and in the most impressive manner; and to refer this joy to a still higher truth, since it is so liable to be misunderstood.’ (2) It is objected that in his views concerning the gov- ernment of the world the author was strongly in- clined to fatalism, according to which everything in this world progresses with an eternally un- changeable step ; (3) and that he by this fatalism was misled into a moral skepticism, having at- tained on his dogmatical basis the conviction of the inability of man, notwithstanding all his ef- forts, to reach his aim. However, this so-called fataliom of our author is nothing cloc but what Uui Lord teaches Matt, vi :25: ‘Take no thought,’ etc. And as for the moral skepticism, our author certainly inculcates that man with all his endeav- Ors can do nothing; but at the same time he recom- mends the fear of God, as the never-failing means of Salvation. Man in himself can do nothing; but in God he can do all. It is quite clear from chapter vii:16, 18, where both self-righteousness and wisdom, when separated from God, are de- Scribed as equally destructive, and opposite to them is placed the fear of God, as being their common antithesis, that our author, by pointing to the Sovereignty of God, did not mean to undermine morality: “He that feareth God comes out from them all.” If our author were given to moral skepticism, it would be impossible for him to teach retribution, which he inculcates in numerous pas- Sages, and which are not contradicted by others, in which he says that the retribution in individual 561 EDEN circumstances is frequently obscure and enig- matical. Where is that advocate for retribution who is not compelled to confess this as well as Our author P (4) This book has given offense also, by chapter iii:21, and similar passages, concern- ing immortality. But the assertion that there is expressed here some doubt concerning the im- mortality of the soul is based on a wrong gram- matical perception. The T cannot, according to its punctuation, be the interrogative, but must be the article; and our author elsewhere asserts positively his belief in the doctrinc of immortality (ch. xii:7). How it happens that he did not give to this doctrine a prevailing influence upon his mode of treating his subject has lately been in- vestigated by Heyder, in his essay entitled Ec- clesiasta de Immortalitate Animi Sententiac, Er- langen, 1838 (See Skeptics of the Old Testa- //enz, Prof. E. J. Dillon.) E. W. H. ECCLESIASTICUS (Šk-kle'zi-ás'ti-küs). See WISDOM OF SIRACH. ECDIPPA (ek-dip'pa). See ACHzIB. ECLIPSE (É-klips'). The Hebrews do not seem to have philosophized much on eclipses, which they considered as visible marks of God's anger (see Joel ii:IO, 31; iii:15; Job ix:7). Ezekiel (xxxii: 7), and Job (xxxvi:32), speak more particularly, that God covers the sun with clouds when he de- prives the earth of its light by eclipses. The date of Amos coincides with a total eclipse, which occurred Feb. 9, B. C. 784; and was visible at Jerusalem shortly after noon (Hitzig, Comm. in Proph.) ; that of Micah with the eclipse of June 5, B. C. 716, referred to by Dionys. Aſa/. ii:56, to which same period the latter part of the book of Zechariah may be probably assigned. A passing notice in Jer. xv.:9 coincides in date with the eclipse of Sept. 30, B. C. 610, so well known from Herodotus' account (i:74, IO3). The darkness that Overspread the world at the crucifixion cannot with reason be attributed to an eclipse, as the modn was at the full at the time of the Passover. (See DARKNESS.) ED (ed), (Heb. TX, ayd, a witness), a word in- Serted in the A. V. of Josh. xxii:34, apparently on the authority of a few manuscripts, and also of the Syriac and Arabic versions, but not existing in the generally received Hebrew text. It was the name given to the altar erected by the two tribes and a half, who were settled be- yond Jordan (Josh. xxii:34). It was probably a copy or repetition of that which was used among the Hebrews, their brethren, and it was built to zwitness to posterity the interest of these tribes in the altar common to the descendants of the patri- ai Uli Is. aul. Perhaps a better translation would be: “It (the altar) is a witness between us that Jehovah is God.” The entire sentence formed its name and was written on the altar, not merely “witness.” In this case “Ed” would not be a proper name. EDAR (e'dar), (Heb. 732, ay!der, a flock), a place mentioned in Gen. xxxv.21, beyond which was Jacob's first halting place between Bethlehem and Hebron. As Bethlehem was a pastoral country and, even at this time, abounds in watchtowers from which the shepherds overlook their flocks, Edar may have been a well known tower of that kind. EDEN (e'd'n), (Heb. Tº, ay'dem). The real origin of the name probably is found in the Assyr- ian ſainu (from Accadian edin), “plain.” But Eden has generally been supposed to mean de- Jights, pleasantness (LXX rpvpſ; Vulg. voluptas). 36 EDER 1. The home of Adam and Eve before their fall (Gen. ii:15). Its site has not been fixed. Two of its rivers are identified, the Euphrates, and the Hiddekel or Tigris; the others are disputed. Some say Gihon was the Nile and Pison the Indus. The best authorities agree that the “garden of Eden eastward” was in the highlands of Armenia, or in the valley of the Euphrates, but its precise location cannot be determined. The Bible, after the history. of the fall of our first parents, withdraws paradise lost from our view, and directs Our hope to the more glorious paradise of the future, with its river of life and tree of life (Rev. xxii:2). (See PARA- DISE.) 2. One of the places which furnished Tyre with richly embroidered stuffs. It is mentioned with Haran, Sheba, and Asshur; also with Beth-Eden (Amos i :5). The sons of Eden are mentioned with Gozan, Haran, and Rezeph, as subjects of AS- syrian conquest (2 Kings xix:12; Is. xxxvii: 12). Telassar seems to have been the chief place of the tribe. Eden was probably situated in the north- west of Mesopotamia, but positive evidence is wanting. 3. Beth-Eden (Heb.iº F2, bayth ay'dem, house of pleasure, house of Eden), was probably the name of a house of pleasure of the kings of Da- mascus (Amos i :5). 4. A Levite, son of Joah, who was one of the two who represented his family in the purification of the Temple in the days of Hezekiah (2 Chron. xxix:12), B.C. 726. 5. A Levite, probably identical with Eden, who nad charge of the freewill offering of God, under Kore, son of Imnah (2 Chron. xxxi : I5). EDER (e'dér), (Heb. T., ay!der, a flock). 1. One of the towns in the south of Judah on the borders of Edom. Its identity with the mod- ern Arad has been suggested (Josh. xv.21). 2. A Levite, of the family of Merari, in the time of David (I Chron. xxiii:23; xxiv:30), B. C. IOI.3. EDIFICATION (Šd'ſ-fi-kä'shūn), (Gr. oticoöouń, oy-Åod-om-ay", building), means building up. A building is therefore called an edifice. (1) Applied to spiritual things, it signifies the advancing, improving, adorning, and comforting the mind. A Christian may be said to be edified when he is encouraged and animated to fresh prog- ress in the ways and works of the Lord. The means to promote our own edification are prayer, self-ex- amination, reading the scriptures, hearing the gos- pel, meditation, attendance on all appointed or- dinances. To edify others, there should be love, spiritual conversation, forbearance, faithfulness, benevolent exertions, and uniformity of conduct. (2) To perceive the full force and propriety of the terms as used by the apostles, 1t 1s quite neces- sary to keep in mind the similitudes by which they generally describe a Christian church ; for, an at- tentive reader of the New Testament may readily observe that it is mostly with a direct reference to that particular object that these expressive terms occur. Thus for instance, we sometimes find them speaking of a church under the figure of a build- ing (Eph. ii:21; I Cor. iii:9). At others, a house, (Heb. iii:6; I Tim. iii:15). And frequently a temple (I Cor. iii:16, 17). A habitation for God (Eph. ii:22). Of this building, Jesus Christ is the foundation or chief corner-stone, laid by the doctrine of the apostles and prophets, he is that living stone, elect, and precious, on which Zion is founded,—and believers in him united together in a church capacity, are consequently spoken of, as 562 EDREI “lively stones, built up into a spiritual house” (I Pet. ii:5), thus constituting what Paul calls “the household of God” (Eph. ii :19), or “the household of faith” (Gal. vi. Io). EDIFY (§d'í-fi), (Gr. oiko60 uéa, oy-Åod-om-eh'o, Acts ix:31), to construct or be a house-builder. Used by old writers literally in this sense, but now in a spiritual or metaphorical sense. The Greek word is translated literally in Acts xx:32; see also Col. ii:7. (See EDIFICATION.) EDOM (e'dom), (Heb. Pºlº, ed-ome', red), called also Idumaea and Mount Seir. The country extended from the Dead Sea south- ward to the Gulf of Akabah, and from the valley of the Arabah eastward to the desert of Arabia, being about 125 miles long and 30 miles wide. It is a mountain-range of porphyritic rock form- ing the backbone of the country; above this rises sand-stone, assuming fantastic forms, while on either side of these formations are lime-stone hills. On the west, along the valley of the Arabah, the hills are low; on the east the mountains attain their highest. (See ESAU; IDUMAEA.) EDOMITEs (e'dom-ites), (Heb. Yºs, ed-o-mee), the descendants of Esau, who settled in the south of Palestine, and at a later period came into Con- flict with the Israelites (Deut. xxiii:7: Num. xx:14, sq.); frequently called merely Eaom (Num. xxiv: 18; Josh. xvi; 2 Sam. viii:14, etc.). (See ESAU; IDUMAEA.) EDREI (§d're-i), (Heb. `TS, ed-reh'ee, mighty). 1. One of the metropolitan towns of the king- dom of Bashan, beyond the Jordan. It was here that Og, the gigantic king of Bashan, was defeated by the Israelites, and lost his kingdom (Num. xxi :33-35; Deut. i :4; iii: I-3). Edrei afterwards belonged to eastern Manasseh (Josh. xiii:3I). The ruins of this city, still bearing the name Edr'a stand on a rocky promontory projecting from the southwest corner of Lejah. Others identify this place with the modern Der'at or Der'a, following Eusebius who mentions it in the Onomasticon as 24–25 Roman miles from Ashtaroth and about 27 miles east of Gadara. It was the seat of a bishop in the early ages of Christianity, and a bishop of Adraa sat in the council of Seleucia (A.D.381), and of Chalcedon A. D. 451). Adraa was the name given to the place by the Greeks: by the Crusaders it was known as Adratum, and also as Civitas Bernardi de Stampis. Abulfeda calls it Adsraat. The ruins cover an extent of about two miles in circumference, the principal being an immense rec- tangular building, with a double covered colon- nade all around, and a cistern in the middle. This seems to have been originally a Christian church, and afterwards a mosque. Near the town, in the hollow of the mountains, is a large reservoir cased with stone, near which are Llle I uills Uſ a large building, with a cupola of light materials. “In one of the Tel el-Amarna letters (B. M. 43. Io) it is called Astartu, and the writer of the despatch accuses a certain Biridasyi of taking the chariots out of it and giving them to the Bedouin. The neighboring city of Buzruna (Bostra) was at the time under a king of its own. W. Max Müller identifies the city of Autará in the Karnak List of Thothmes III (No. 91) with Edrei. Philologically the names would correspond, but the identification is impossible, as Autará is enu- merated among the towns of southern Palestine. Astartu or Ashtaroth is in an earlier part of the º (No. 28).” (A. H. Sayce, Hastings' Bib. Dict, 2. A town of Naphtali (Josh. xix:37), situated EDUCATION 563 near Kedesh. There are some ruins two miles South of Kedesh, called Tell Khuraibeh, or “Tell of the ruin,” which may be the ancient Edrei, but the site is not fully known. Porter identifies it with Tell Khuraibeh, near Kedesh; Conder, with Yater. EDUCATION (ād-li-kä'shūn). (1) Of secular education, in our sense of the word, the Jews knew little, but they enjoined the duty and enjoyed the privilege of religious and moral training at home and in public worship far more than any nation of antiquity. They learned from their parents and their public teachers, the Levites, and later the Rabbins, to read and write and commit the Law. During the Captivity they were brought into contact with the extensive learning of the Chaldaeans. Moses derived his knowledge from Egyptian priests, and Solomon was both a scholar and a wise man, to whose Open mind the gathered treasures of instruc- tion and the books of nature and human life brought lessons of priceless wisdom. (2) The people at large must have been ignorant of things outside of religion, and their religious exclusiveness would tend to keep them so, but there were men among them acquainted with men- Suration (Josh. xviii:8, 9), and with foreign lan- guages (2 Kings xviii:26), and who were skilled in writing, like the chroniclers of the various kings, and in keeping accounts, like the scribes who are often mentioned. In the days of the monarchy the advantages of education were se- cured by many in the so-called “schools of the prophets.” After the Captivity the Rabbins regularly gave instruction in the synagogues upon the Bible and the Talmud. In the entire history it holds good that boys remained up to their fifth year in the women's apartments and then their fathers began to instruct them in the Law. Later, the boys began at this age the Rabbinical books. The Captivity was in many respects an incalcula- ble blessing to the Jews. It taught them that there was something worth learning outside of the Mosaic books. Hence, after their return, they were a greatly improved people. It was then that Synagogues sprang up, furnishing practical in- struction. (3) After Jerusalem fell the Jews kept up these schools, and they exist even in this day. One valuable custom was the learning of a trade on the part of each one. Well known is the instance of Paul, who, although well trained, a pupil of Gamaliel, still could, and did, make tents. (Acts xviii:3; xxii:3.) 4) Girls were generally without much more education than the rudiments. Vef they colild at- tend the schools and learn more than to do needle- work, keep house, and care for the children. Women were far higher in the social scale among the Jews than at present among the Orientals. (5) The sect of the Essenes, by preference celi- bates, took great pains to instruct children, but confined their attention chiefly to morality and the Law. The Rabbins taught the physical sciences. In these schools the teachers sat on raised seats; hence Paul could say literally that he was brought up at the feet of Gamaliel. (Luke ii:46; Acts xxii:3.) Unmarried men and women were forbidden to teach boys. (6) The ancient Jews enjoyed more advantages in mental training than other contemporary na- tions. And if they knew little about matters of common information among us, they knew more than did the great mass of people living outside of Judaea. (Schaff, Bib. Dict.) EGOZ EDUTH (e'duth), (Heb. Fºº, ay-dooth", precept), stands as a part of the inscription of certain poet- ical compositions, indicating that the contents were of a revealed or sacred character; the title of Ps. lx, lxxx. EFFECT (€f-fékt), (Heb. "F:, daw-bawr', Ezek. xii:23). The term means “purport.” ERFECTUAL CALLING. See CALL. EFFECTUAL PRAYER. In James v. 16 the A. V. has “the effectua/ ſervezzá (Gr. Švepºyoupévm) prayer of a righteous man availeth much.” The R. V., renders it more accurately, “the supplication of a righteous man availeth much in its working.” (See TRAYER). EGG (§g), (Heb. Tºº, &ay-fsaw', from root mean- ing white). The passage in Deut. xxii:6 prohibits the taking of a sitting bird from its eggs or young. Eggs are mentioned as deserted (Is. x:14); of the Cockatrice (lix:5). Egg is contrasted with a SCOR- PION (which see) as an article of food (Luke xi:I2). Eggs were extensively used as FOOD (which see). Figuratite. “The white of an egg" is used (Job vi;6, “the juice of purslain,” R. V. margin) as a symbol of something 2ns???d. EGLAH (egºlah), (Heb. *, eg-law,' heifer), sixth wife of David, and mother of Ithream (2 Sam. iii:5; I Chron. iii:3). Many are of opinion that Eglah and Michal are the same, and that she died in labor of Ithream. See 2 Sam. vi.23. EGLAIM (Čg'la-im), (Heb. F232, eg-ah'yim), a city beyond Jordan, east of the Dead Sea, in the land of Moab, which Eusebius places eight miles south of Areopolis, i.e., Ar-Moab (Rabba). How- ever, in that place stands Kerak, the ancient Kir Moab. It awaits further research before complete identification. Probably the same as EN-EGLAIM. Eglon (egion), (Heb. **, eg-ſohn, calf-like). 1. A Moabite king who, assisted by the Am- monites and Amalekites, subdued the Israelites be- yond the Jordan, and the southern tribes on this side the river, and made Jericho the seat, or one of the seats, of his government (B. C. I527). This subjection to a power always present must have been more galling to the Israelites than any they had previously suffered. It lasted eighteen years, when (B. C. I509) they were delivered, through the instrumentality of Ehud, who slew the Moabitish king (Judg. iii: 12, 14, I5). (See EHUD.) 2. A city of Judah (Josh. x:3; xv.:39), in the low country. It was one of the five cities which joined in a confederacy with Adonizedek, king of Jerusalem, in attacking Gibeon. Eglon was afterwards visited by Joshua and destroyed. The modern Ajlan is doubtless the site of the city. EGOZ (e'goz), (Heb. rºs, eg-og'). This word occurs in the Song of Solomon, vi;II, ‘I went into the garden of nuts,' where probably “walnuts' are intended. The Hebrew name is evidently the same as the Persian gowg, which has been converted by the Arabs into jowa, by a process common in the case of many other words beginning with the inter- changeable letters gaf and jim. In both languages these words, when they stand alone, signify the walnut, goug-bun being the walnut-tree. It is more than probable that, if not indigenous in Syria, it was introduced there at a still earlier period, and that therefore it may be alluded to EGYPT in the above passage, more especially as Solo- mon has said, ‘I made me gardens and orchards, and planted trees in them of all kinds of fruits' (See NUTS.) - (Eccles. ii:5). & º Walnut. EGYPT (6'jypt), (Heb. Eººp, 277.sts-rah'yzzzz, Gr, h Atyvirtos, whence the modern A off through the Arabic Qióż). 1. General Features. (1) Topography. An- cient Egypt was divided into three geographical Sections—Upper Egypt in the south ; Middle Egypt in the center; and Lower Egypt, or the Delta, in the north. Upper Egypt is very narrow and bounded by mountains of no great height which rarely take the form of peaks. The northern coast of Egypt is low and barren, presenting no feature of interest, and affording no indication of the character of the country which it bounds. It is because of the almost entire absence of rain that no vegetation whatever is found on the desert rock formations to the east and the west of the valley of the Nile. In shape Egypt is like a lily with a crooked stem. The long stalk of the lily is the Nile valley itself, which is a ravine scooped in the rocky soil for seven hundred miles, from the first cataract to the apex of the Delta, sometimes not more than a mile broad, never more than eight or ten miles. No other country in the world is so Strangely shaped, so long compared to its width, SO straggling, so hard to go over from a single Center. Only the immediate valley of the Nile is arable Soil, and this is a very narrow strip. In the Delta there is a far wider stretch of cultivable land, ow- ing to the fact that the Nile here divides into numerous branches, but even here not all the land is available for cultivation, owing to numerous great swamps and large lakes. In antiquity the greater part of the Delta was swamp and meadow land; and its chief value lay in the fact that it was a good grazing country, and that its swamps and lakes made fine hunting grounds, abounding as they did in all sorts of aquatic birds. The lakes were full of fish, so that fishing was added to graz- ing and hunting, and thus the country possessed considerable resources even before agriculture be- came profitable. It is well known that Egypt owes 564 EGYPT this strip of good land to the Nile. In situation, natural strength and great resources, the political advantages of Egypt can hardly be overestimated. Egypt lies in the very route of the trade between Europe and Asia, and between Africa and the other, two continents. “It is the gate of Africa, and the fort which commands the way from Eu. rope to the East Indies.” The natural ports of the Red Sea and the Mediterranean have always been sufficient for its commerce, which that great inland, waterway — the Nile — has greatly aug- mented. (3) The Nile. From the remotest antiquity it has been said that Egypt “is the Gift of the Nile.” No artificial methods of renewing the soil could possibly equal what nature has here gratuitously provided in the deposits from the annual over- flows of this renowned river. When these floods have subsided the fields are again left dry and are covered with a rich mud. The husbandman has only to sow the seed and gather in the har- vest, since the soil requires little or no labor. These overflows have thus caused this famous land, in the midst of surrounding deserts, to be- come One of the most fertile regions of the globe and, in consequence, the granary of antiquity. The Nile takes its rise in equatorial Africa, in the two great lakes, the Albert and Victoria Nyangas. The great Victoria Nyanza lies in a zone where rain falls all the year round. The Nile is the only river in the world which is considerably larger in its upper course than it is towards its mouth. From the junction of the Atbara to its mouth, a dis- tance of I,680 miles, it receives no tributary, while its waters are diminished by evaporation, by ab- Sorption in the soil, and by the system of irrigation which extends the whole distance. The river gets less and less in size as it flows through this rain- less land to the soil of which it supplies, by count- less irrigation channels, more water than rain would supply. The White Nile, as above stated, takes its rise from the great lakes and tablelands lying under the equator. The Blue Nile takes its rise far to the southeast, out of the tablelands of Abyssinia, and joins the White Nile at Khartoum. (3) Climate. In no other country do the same climatic conditions exist as in Egypt. In some lo- calities the temperature hardly varies as much as fifty degrees during the year, while for eight months refreshing winds temper the heat. In Up- per Egypt rains and snow are impossible and clouds are never seen, while further down the val- ley an occasional cloud floats southward. The at- mosphere is remarkably dry and clear, except on the Seacoast, and the climate equable. In some portions of the country the heat is extreme dur- ing the greater part of the year and the winter comparatively severe in its cold. (1) Cities. The chief city of the south was the “hundred-gated” Thebes, the ruins of which extend for seven miles on both banks of the Nile. The Southernmost points of Egypt were Syené and the Island of Elephantiné, in the Nile. The lead- ing city of Middle Egypt was Memphis, famous for its ruins, and in the vicinity of which existed the famous Labyrinth and the Great Pyramids of Ghizeh-the most imposing monuments ever erect- ed by human hands. The Delta was in ancient times thickly studded with cities, including, on the western side the famous Greek City of Alexandria. This city in the later days of antiquity was the metropolis of Egypt and the commercial center of the civilized world, besides at the same time being the seat of learning and civilization. 2. Origin and History. There are many the- ories as to the origin of the Egyptians. Accord- EGYPT ing to the early Greek and Roman writers, the Egyptians themselves held the belief that they were the original inhabitants of their land. Early Beginnings. So far as the historical record on the surviving monuments of Egypt reaches back, their beginnings coincide with the first age of the stone period. Relics have been discovered in various parts of the country from Cairo to Luxor, in great numbers. They are the Same sort of prehistoric implements which prove to us the existence of man in so many other parts of the world at a geological period so remote that the figures given by our chronologists are but trivial. We find sculptured upon the early monu- ments types of various races—Egyptians, Israel- ites, Negroes and Libyans—as clearly distinguish- able in these paintings and sculptures of from four to six thousand years ago as the same types are 565 EGYPT the question, To what race do the Egyptians be- long? still remains open. Ethnologists and an- thropologists have decided after long study of skulls of mummies that they belong to the Cau- casian race. It is now generally believed that Some thousands of years before the Christian era the nation which afterward inhabited the Nile valley set out from Asia, and journeyed westward, crossing the Isthmus of Suez; entered Africa and Settled upon the banks of the Nile, and founded there a mighty kingdom. They are believed to have been kindred with other races of Southwest- ern Asia, such as the primitive Chaldaeans and the Southern Arabs. In Gen. x:I, 5, 6, where the table of nations is mentioned, it is stated : These are the generations of the sons of Noah ; Shem, Ham, and Japheth: and unto them were sons born after the ſlood. By these were the isles of the Centiles A Nile Farm. at the present day. No one can look at these sculptures upon the Egyptian monuments, or even the facsimiles of them as given by Lep- sius, without being convinced that they indi- cate even at that remote period a difference of races so great that long previous ages must have been required to produce it. Professor Rudolph Virchow, the distinguished German scientist, says: “I thought that I could obtain some evidences of the change of the Egyptians in historic time, by comparative investigation of the living with the re- mains and likenesses of the dead. I return with the conviction that so ſar as historical and pre- historic evidences reach, so far as man has been discovered, ancient Egypt and its neighboring lands have not essentially changed their popula- tions.” All that we are allowed to suppose on this subject is confined to the assumption that Egypt's pre-historic age must of necessity correspond to the time of the first development of arts and handicraft, and of human science. Egypt is designated in the old inscriptions, as well as in the books of the Christian Egyptians of later years, as the “Black Land,” which is read in the Egyptian language as Kem or Kami. When the earliest settlers on the Nile first made the “black land” their home is unknown. Accordingly divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations. And the Sons of Ham; Cush, and Mizraim, and Phut, and Canaan. - Now Ham is the same as Kham or Khem, Egypt, and a proof of this may be deduced from Ps. lxxviii:51, where it is said “And smote all the firstborn in Egypt; the chief of their strength in the tabernacles of Ham' (Ps. cxi:22). And again, ‘Wondrous works in the land of Ham, and ter- rible things by the Red Sea' (Ps. cwi:22). Miz- raim also mentioned in the table of the nations is Egypt itself (Gen. x:6, 13). The inhabitants of Kush (the region called after the sons of Ham) are represented on the Egyptian monuments. Their personal appearance is about the same, ex- cept that their skin is darker, and at this time they seem to have had a religion and speech al- most akin to the Egyptians. - We find Phut, the ‘Punt’ of the inscriptions, the land where spices came from, to be situated in the south of Egypt on both sides of the Red Sea. The fourth son, Canaan, is represented by the original inhabitants of Canaan. After the age of the Old Empire, the dominant race ceased to be pure. Thus the Pharaohs of the twelfth dynasty seem to have had Nubian blood in their veins; the EGYPT . 566 Phoenicians of the Delta have left their descend- ants, and the long dominion of the Hyksos must have affected the population of the country. The Egyptians resembled the modern Arabs in form and their Syrian neighbors in features. They were tall, and with the head well placed upon their shoulders; their movements were graceful and dig- nified. Their frames were spare and in color the men were brown and the women yellow. The forehead was straight but low, and the hair was usually black and straight. They were mild in their general character, polished in their manners, cleanly in their habits, religious and obedient by nature, and in consequence were a healthy, hardy people. &. Early Dynasties. The Egyptian monarchy according to the most moderate calculations must have already been in existence fifteen hundred Or two thousand years before the book of Exodus was written. Egyptian history shows that Moses was a con- temporary of the ‘Great Rameses' (or Ra-ám-ses), the Pharaoh of the oppression. The date of the Great Pyramid cannot be more recent than 3000 B.C. This is undoubtedly a great and venerable antiquity, but no unbiased judge can doubt that an immensely long period of years must have been required for the development of civilization up to the state in which we there find it. The investiga- tions in the bed of the Nile in connection with the rate of earth deposit by the Nile warrant the conclusion that man existed in that valley thou- Sands of years before the longest time admitted antil recently by chronologists. (A. D. White.) Menes. At present nothing is really known of the Egyptian rulers before Menes, the first his- torical king of Egypt. “The evidence of a vastly longer existence of man in the Nile Valley than could be made to agree with even the longest du- ration accorded by modern chronology is now seen to be overwhelming. Manetho, the Egyptian scribe at Thebes, in the third century B.C., as- signed a longer duration to human civilization than that which accords with the chronologies of modern writers. Manetho has given a statement according to which Mena, or Menes, must have lived nearly 6,000 years before the Christian era.” Many dates have been given by scholars for the reign of this king. Champollion Figeac gives it about B. C. 5867; Petrie, B. C. about 4777; Mari- ette, the eminent French authority, puts the date at 5004 B. C., and with this the foremost English authority, Professor Sayce, agrees; Brugsch, the leading German authority, puts it at about 4500 B. C. We have it, then, as the result of a century of work by the most trained Egyptologists that the reign of Mena must be placed close upon 7,000 years ago. (See Antiquity of Egypt by Andrew D. White, LL. D., Pop. Sc. Monthly, June, 1890.) Mena, or Menes, came from the town of Teni near Abydos. He built the great temple of Ptah and by many is supposed to have founded the great city of Memphis. He built a large dyke to protect the city, which is still in a good state of preservation, and protects Gizeh from excessive inundation. Menes was a mighty warrior, as the Libyans had reason to know. Very little was actually known of Menes until the recent discov- eries made by M. de Moyan, the late director of the Antiquities of Egypt, who believed that he had found the tomb and remains of this famous monarch. (See ARCHAEOLOGY; CRITICISM.) His son, Athothis, succeeded him and wrote many books on anatomy. The next king of note was Ata, or as the Greeks called him, Ouenephes. EGYPT He is famous for having built pyramids at Ko- chome. Of the other kings of the first, second and third dynasties but little of consequence is known. 4. Fourth Tynasty. The fourth dynasty was the One under which Egypt became famous. The information we get of this dynasty is from the monuments which the kings of this period erected. Senefru appears to have loved warfare. His body has never been found, although some believe his grave to be marked by the pyramid of Meydoum. (1) Cheops: The Pyramids. Next (B. C. 3733) came Xufu or Cheops, who is chiefly cele- brated for the immense pyramid called ‘Height’ which he built at Gizeh, the height of which is 450 feet and the breadth at the base 746 feet. The pyramids which are next in point of size are Chephren and Mycerinus. They were all built as graves. When a new king ascended the throne he began at once to build a pyramid. The site was chosen and a slanting shaft was bored out of solid rock; at the end of this shaft a chamber was hewn out large enough to contain the coffin in which was placed the king's body. On the flat site a comparatively small building was erected, the outer walls of which were steep Steps. An idea may be obtained of the amount of labor necessary for the building of the pyramid of Cheops when we consider that the causeway along which the stone was brought took ten years to build, the work being performed by a company of one hundred thousand men, changed every three months. Thus four millions of men were em- ployed on this work alone while it required scven millions more to build the pyramid itself. These pyramids, which date from the earliest period of Egyptian history, are to this hour the wonder of the world for size, for boldness, for exactness and for skillful contrivance. The four sides of the great pyramid built in the very earliest period of Egyptian civilization were adjusted to the cardi- nal points with the utmost precision. The day of the equinox can be taken by observing the sun- Set across the face of the pyramid, and the neigh- boring Arabs adjust their astronomical dates by its Shadow. Cheops was known as a great tyrant. The Egyptian nation hated him very bitterly on account of the labor he imposed upon them. (2) The Sphinx. Chephren, the successor of Cheops, built a smaller pyramid and the small temple behind the Sphinx. The Sphinx is in re- ality an immense lion with a man's head, repre- senting the God Harmachis. The outstretched paws make a narrow passage leading to a temple which was built in front of the lion; and as the name of Chephren has been found in inscriptions it is probable that this king caused this great sphinx to be hewn out of the solid rock. The total height of the 111U11u111tul is G5 fect, its length 190 feet. Originally the face was colored red, and covered with polished stone, but this polished sur- face has now disappeared. The features are sol- emn, awe-inspiring and majestic. The nose has fallen away and the beard is in the British Mu- Seli111. (3) Menkau Ra. Menkau Ra, or Mycerinus, like his two predecessors, built for himself a pyra- mid. His reign is supposed to have extended over sixty-three years. History believes him to have been a pious and good king. According to tra- dition he was a devout worshiper of the god Osiris. His pyramid, which is the third in Gizeh, is in the best state of preservation. During the researches of Colonel Vyse he found the stone sar- cophagus of the king, also the wooden cover of the inside coffin, which was made of cedar. EGYPT 567 The body of the king had been carried to an upper room in the pyramid, and had been literally torn in picces, most probably at the time the pyra- mid was broken open in search of treasure. My- cerinus was succeeded by Sheps-es-kaf, and thus closes the important fourth dynasty. The united reigns of the fifth and sixth dynasties occupied the next four hundred years, and what is called the Old Empire came to a close B. C. 3OOO. Here a gap occurs of about five hundred years, of which only the names of some of the kings are known. 5. Twelfth Tynasty. (1) Amenemha. The first king of the twelfth dynasty was called Amen- emha. His reign was one of great peace and pros- perity, and all his people, from the highest to the lowest, received blessings due them. A copy of a book lie wrote for his son, Usertsen I (who was associated with him in the kingdom) is full of in- structive information. This book is now in the British Museum. (2) Usertsen I. Usertsen I built many magnifi- cent edifices in Heliopolis and brought gold from Nubia and torquoise from the peninsula of Sinai. It is to this dynasty the splendid tomb of Nahre Se Khnum-hetep at Beni-Hassan belongs. His inscription mentions the first four sovereigns as having honored three successive generations of his family. (3) Amenemha III. Amenemha III, the suc- cessor of Usertsen III, was renowned for the greatest benefit ever bestowed upon Egypt. It is well known that the prosperity of that country depends upon a uniform inundation of the river Nile. Amenemha III built an enormous lake in the district called the Fayoum—Lake Moeris—Or ‘the great water.” It was surrounded on all sides by dams and was connected by canal with the Nile. In this lake the surplus water of the inun- dation was stored for future use. Amenemha III. also built a pyramid 246 feet high, and a wonder- ful palace called the Labyrinth, which Herodotus tells us contained within its walls four thousand and five hundred rooms. From the close of the Twelfth dynasty, ruled by Amenemha IV (B. C. 2200), to the Eighteenth dynasty, there is a gap of about five hundred years. (4) The Hyksos. About this time the Hyksos or “Shepherd Kings,’ were in power. They mi- grated from the east and settled at Memphis. Both the domestic and foreign policies of Egypt were completely changed by the invasions of the Hyk- sos. Previously, invasions and discoveries were not attempted. Now the canal between the Nile, at Bubastis, and the Red Sea, at Suez, was opened and the circumnavigation of thc African Continent was actually accomplished, while navigators were dispatched to determine the source of the Nile. Foreign conquests, also, were undertaken, prob- ably for the purpose of procuring timber for ship- building. 6. Eighteenth Dynasty. (1) Ahmes. The Hyksos were driven out by Ahmes, the first king of the eighteenth dynasty. Ahmes reigned twenty- two years and married Ahmes Neftari, a negress, who ruled some time after his death. The son of these rulers, Amenhotep, ruled eleven years. (2) Queen Hatasu. Then came Thothmes I, who associated his beautiful and powerful daugh- ter Hatasu, or Hashop, with him. She reigned for some years either alone or with her brother, Thothmes II. After his death Hatasu adopted the masculine garb and gave orders that her broth- er's name be erased from all monumental inscrip- tions. She ordered two granite obelisks with EGYPT Shining metal tops to be erected, and they were to stand forever (to record her works) before the gate of her father, Thothmes I. (3) Thothmes III. She was also associated with her brother Thothmes III, and the same fate befell her as her brother Thothmes II. Her name was carefully chiseled out of all inscriptions. After Hatasu's death Thothmes III was called ‘Great.” Bust of Thothrines III. Nations hastened to do him honor. Syria, Ethiopia and Phoenicia paid immense tribute. He it was who erected and inscribed with his own name the obelisk known as ‘Cleopatra's Needle,” which is now in Central Park, New York City. He reigned fifty-four years. Then came Amenhotep II and Thothmes IV. (4) Amenhotep III, in whose reign the arts were in greatest perfection, followed. He built the great statues of Memnon before the palace of Luxor. Tradition says one of these statues al- ways sang when the sun's rays shone upon it at dawn. Amenhotep is famous as having intro- duced the worship of the sun's disk and changed his name from Amenhotep to Khu-en aten—that is—‘the glory of the disk.” He founded a city Tel-el-Amana (see TELL AMARNA), where he built a great temple in worship of the sun's disk. Z. Nineteenth TXynasty. Next in importance Comes the nineteenth dynasty. (1) Ramoses I. Dut little has been learned about Rameses I, king of the nineteenth dynasty (about 1400 B.C.). He began a war with the Khita nations, which was continued by his son and suc-, CCSSC) l’. (2) Seti I. Seti I took up arms against the Asi- atics, warring with the Ethiopians, Libyans, and the Arabs. He was great in battle and the sculpf11res are many where he is represented fighting in hand to hand combat. He gave new names and erect- ed new fortresses in place of the old, abolishing everything that did not systematically tend to the rule of the king. He built Memnonium, a small temple, made a well in the desert, and erected an obelisk in Heliopolis. His sarcophagus, in beauti- fill colored marble, is now in Sir John Soane's Museum in Lincoln’s Inn Fields. (3) Rameses II. Rameses II succeeded Seti I. Wars were carried on with greater vigor than ever before. All countries, even those whom Egyptians had never known, began to learn of Rameses' sol- EGYPT diers. A prize poem called Pentaur, or by a poet - of that name, describing with great vividness the brave deeds of Rameses II, was inscribed on the walls of the temples at Abydos. (See EGYP- TIANS, LITERATURE OF ANCIENT.) All the best artists of that period painted great pictures of the battle of the Khita or Hittites. One of the pictures shows the king of Khilibu or Khiribu, an ally of the Khita king, being rescued from drown- ing by his own men, as the chariots were over- turned into the river. Rameses II is said to have gone too far into the thickest of the battle. In this dread time he prayed to his god ‘Amen,” who appearing encouraged him, and led him on to vic- tory. (Sayce, Old Testament History in the Light of Recent Discoveries in Egypt.) There is little doubt that the Pharaoh who persecuted the Israel- ites so bitterly was Rameses II. Both tradition and monuments prove that he was a builder and in each of his works he erected a monument which declared that the work had been done by captives. (See PITHoM.) In later years when Rameses was thirty-four, he married the daughter of the king of Khita, thus ce- menting a treaty between Egypt alld Khita. Rame- ses II reigned sixty-seven years. (4) Meneptah or Menephtah. The persecu- tion of the Israelites which Rameses began was bitterly prosecuted by Meneptah. (5) Egypt's Decline. By the time of the twenty-fifth dynasty Egypt had been divided into a number of small principalities. The light of Egypt's glory was fast fading. Amasis briefly kindled the dying spark, but upon his death Cam- byses, the Persian, became king. From this time, with a brief exception, Egypt ceased to be Egyp- tian. &. Egypt and the Bible. (1) Zoan. The Spade of the archeologist has revealed fire as a most destructive agent at the imperial Zoan, the Facsimile of Inscriptions on Rosetta Stone. Tanis of the Greeks. The unearthing of the pri- vate houses, in genuine Pompeiian style, reveals the sad havoc played by fire almost everywhere. By the mouth of Ezekiel, God had declared, “I 568 EGYPT will set fire in Zoan” (Ezek. xxx:14). We had known it was a desolate ruin; now we know Scientifically that fire was set in Zoan—most de- structively. (2) Joseph. On an altar, excavated at Am in the suburbs of Zoan, is engraved as a title that of the “Chief of the chancellors and royal seal bear- ings.” Under Pharaoh at Memphis, Thebes or Zoan, there could be but one such personage. Now this occurred, according to the montuments, under the Hyksos kings. Joseph was under a Hyksos king —probably Apepi, the last monarch of the XVIIth Dynasty. And, biblically speaking, Joseph had Such power. So we read: “Let Pharaoh look Out a man discreet and wise, and set him over the land of Egypt” (Gen. xli :33). Such an inscription as the above, therefore, reflects much light upon these vivid passages in the biography of Joseph. (3) Inscriptions at Tanis. A marked pecu- liarity of the Hyksos inscriptions at Tanis is that they are always in a line down the right shoulder, never on the left; whereas the native Egyptians inscribed either side indifferently. This Semitic honoring of the right shoulder recalls at once such passages as Exod. xxix:22; Lev. vii:32, 33; Num. xviii: 18. - The statement, “There went up with Joseph both chariots and horsemen” (Gen. I :9), disputed as impossible by Kalisch and others, who have said that there were no mounted 'horsemen in the Egyptian army, is established by two granite tablets which refer to “the very valorous upon horses,” and “strong upon their horses”—expres- sions applied to Rameses and his soldiers. The sublime hymn, “The horse and his rider hath he thrown into the Sea” (Exod. xv.21), becomes fact, as well as poetry, in the light of such texts from the long-buried monuments of a site like Zoan. In the Boston Museum of Fine Arts is an un- gainly statue of an elderly brother of the Pharaoh of the Exodus. This crouching figure is entitled “General of Cavalry,” while Meneptah was called “General of Infantry,’’ terms indicative of both mounted and foot soldiers in the armies of Egypt. (4) Goshen. Where in Egypt was the land of Goshen P Saft-el-Henneh, some four miles east of the railway station, Zagazig, is shown to be the site of the capital, in that land, and the all- important discovery is told in the volume of the Egyptian Exploration Fund entitled “Goshen, and the Shrine of Saft-el-Henneh.” Dr. Naville had read on two fragments in the Museum at Cairo inscriptions relating to this name; and when in his personal research he espied a block of black granite peeping from the mud at Saft-el-Henneh, his trained eye instantly recognized it as a third fragment of the monumelil [l U11, which the two fragments had been taken. Excavations followed with the proofs that this site, within the walls of brick, anciently was the city of Goshen, and the country about it the land of that name. (See GoSHEN.) - (5) Bubastis. A re-study is necessary of the ten chapters of Jeremiah, from , the 37th to the 47th chapter, inclusive, in which the events in Égypt following the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar are described, in order fully to appreciate the importance of such excavations as those of Tell-el-Defeneh, the site of the Daphnae of the Greeks and the Tahpanhes of Jeremiah. The most precious treasures revealed at Bu- bastis are the inscriptions of the XVIIIth Dynasty and of the Hyksos monuments. Declared the prophet Ezekiel: “The young men of Aven and EGYPT 569 of Pi-Beseth (i.e., Bubastis) shall fall by the sword; and these cities shall go into captivity” (Ezek. xxx:17). The name of Meneptah oc- curs several times upon the monuments; and the explorer also disinterred the first Hyksos statue ever found with the head-dress complete; and then another Hyksos statue. Near to the latter statue, now in the British Museum, was found the name that signifies his standard- Apepi—the last of the Hyksos kings, under whom Joseph entered Egypt. Bubastis adjoins what is now proved to have been “the land of Goshen,” where Jacob settled. (6) Tell-el-Amarna. The tablets found at Tell- el-Amarna (see TELL AMARNA) reveal to us much of the court and diplomatic life of the XVIIIth Dynasty, when Israel prospered in Egypt, and shows low Serililic influence and Semitic offi- cials were in favor particularly with Amenophis IV, who was known in Egyptian history as Khuen- aten, the heretic, because he worshiped the sun's disk. With the XIXth Dynasty came the king “that knew not Joseph” (Exod. i :8), when Israel, getting too strong numerically, passed under the harrow. A tablet disinterred at Lachish, the city of the Ammonites captured by Joshua, bears the name of Zimrida, the governor of Lachish, the very man mentioned in the Tell-el-Amarna tablets. So not only do the Tell-el-Amarna tablets estab- lish the existence of Lachish, but Lachish testifies to the existence of the tablets at that time. (See LACHISH). (Prof. A. H. Sayce.) 9. Egypt After the Excdus. After the Israel- ites had gone up out of Egypt there were no friendly relations with Egypt till the time of Solomon (I Kings iii: I ). (1) Shishak. Under the reign of Shishak, or Sheshank, first king of the twenty-second dynasty, the Egyptians made an attack upon Jerusalem (2 Chron. xii:2-4). A list of the towns captured is given on a wall in Thebes. Among them is Beth- horon, Ajalon, Megiddo, and Judah-melek, which Dr. Birch considers to be the royal city of Judah, i. e. Jerusalem (Birch, Hist. of Egypt). (2) Tirhakah. Tirhakah (2 Kings xix :9; Is. xxxvii:9), a king of the twenty-fifth dynasty is well known from Assyrian inscriptions. He had incited Tyre to rebel against the Assyrians, who consequently turned against Tirhakah and con- quered him under Esar–haddon. The Egyptians had offered help to the Jews if they would resist Assyria; but the weakness of Egypt was well known, for Rab-shakeh, remembering the success- ful attacks that Shalmaneser had made against dependencies of Dgypt, Lauilled IIezekiali with the vanity of any hope based on Egyptian alliance, and called her king “a bruised reed” (2 Kings xviii:21). (3) Pharaoh Necho. Two of the kings of the twenty-sixth dynasty are mentioned in the Bible, Pharaoh Necho and Pharaoh Hophra. The first (2 Kings xxiii.29) met Josiah in battle at Megiddo, where Josiah was slain, and Jehoiakim, the brother of Jehoahaz, whose real name was Eliakim, was made king in place of Jehoahaz, the lawful heir. The power of Pharaoh-Necho was soon broken by Nebuchadnezzar of Baby- lon, and “the king of Egypt came not again any more out of his land” (2 Kings xxiv:7; Jer. xlvi). (4) Pharaoh Hophra. Hophra assisted Je- hoiakim and Zedekiah to rebel against Nebuchad- nezzar (Jer. xliv). This brought about the con- quest of Egypt by Babylon, and after a few years EGYPTIANS, ART OF ANCIENT the prophecies of Ezekiel and Jeremiah regarding its destruction were fulfilled. ſ | | / $4%-ºll C ºriº #####-j #. % é Ǻ-º-º: : / If 3-5-- 'I'll sºil; ºf: -aº غ * º =” --- Egyptian Pharaoh, Queen and Fan Bearer." 10. Literature. The following works may be consulted on Egypt: Egypt and Palestine Photo- graphed and Described, 1870, 2 vols. roy. fol. ; Wilkinson, Sir J. G., The Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, new edition by S. Birch, LL.D., London, 1879, 3 vols. 8vo; Brugsch-Bey, Geschichte Aegyptem’s unter den Pharaonen. Nach den Denkmälern, Leipzig, 1877; Engl. translation, London, 2d ed., 1881, 2 vols.; F. Vigouroux, La Bible et les découvertes modernes en Egypte et en Assyrie, Paris, 1877, 2 vols.; Ebers, Aegypten im Bild und Wort, Leipzig, 1879. On modern Egypt: Lane, The Modern Egyptians, 2 vols., London, 5th ed., 1871 ; Zinke, Egypt of the Pharaohs and the Khedive, Lond., 1873; Klun- zinger, Upper Egypt, London, 1878. Maspero, Hist. anc. d. peup. de l’Or. class. (2 vols. I895-96, transl. SPCK); Ed. Meyer, Gesch. d. Altert. i. ii. (1884, 1893); do. Gesch. d. Alt. Æg. (1887); Er- man, AEgy/tem (passim); Petrie, Hist, of Eg, i, ii. (1894, 1896); Wiedemann, Agypt. Gesch. (1884 ff.); do. Gesch. v. Altag. (1891), with Special ref. to Old Testament: Mahaffy, Emp. of Ptols. (1895); Sayce, Patr. Palestine (1895). Translations in Records of the Past (first and second series). The Mont. and Žhe O/d Testament?, Ira M. Price. A/ist. of Bač. and Assyr., Robt. W. Rogers. EGYPTIANS, ART OF ANCIENT. We have not only the great Sphinx of Gizeh, so wonderful by its boldness and plastic char- acter, dating from the very first period of Egyp- tian history, but we have ranges of sphinxes, heroic statues and bas-relief, showing that even in the early ages this branch of art had reached an amazing development. As regards the perfec- tion of these, Lübke, the most eminent German authority on plastic art, referring to the early works in the tombs about Memphis, declares that EGYPTIANS, LITE RATURE OF ANCIENT as monuments of the period of the fourth dynasty they are an evidence of the high perfection to which the sculpture of the Egyptians had attained. Brugsch claims that every artistic production of those early days, whether picture, writing or sculpture, bears the stamp of the highest perfection in art. Maspero, the most eminent French au- thority in this field, declares that the art which con- ceived and carved this prodigious statue was a finished art; and Sir James Fergusson, the highest English authority, declares “We are startled to find Egyptian art nearly as perfect in the oldest periods as in any of the later.” G. E. EGYPTIANS, LITERATURE OF ANCIENT. By the Literature of the Ancient Egyptians we understand the entire written remains of this peo- ple. It came down partly as inscriptions upon hard material, partly on movable writing materials like leather and papyrus. Hard materials com- prise, in the first place, stone and wood, but also metal, terra cotta, cartonages, and even glass. Of stone are the temples and tombs, whose walls and ceilings, pillars and architraves were covered with inscriptions, then the sarcophagi and pillars Of tombs; also many amulets and sacrificial ves- sels. Of wood are the coffins, tablets and utensils. Regarding the exterior of the manuscripts, it may be said that leather was used previous to papyrus. 1. Early T) ocuments. The document of the founding of the Temple of Heliopolis, even as late as in the twelfth dynasty, was written upon leather. Papyrus did exist in that time, and much earlier, for even in the very oldest inscriptions which owe their existence to the builders of the pyramids of the fourth dynasty, hieroglyphics are found, which represent rolls of papyrus and writing ma- terials in the same form which they retained much later. (1) Styles of Writing. The nature of the dif- ferent styles of writing may be briefly made plain by the following: The pure hieroglyphic script consists of pictures of concrete objects and of freely invented symbolic forms. The hieratic let- ters are abbreviations of these pictures; the de- motic are a still greater simplifying of these. Concerning the application, the pure hieroglyphic script might be best compared with the uncials of the inscriptions upon our own monuments, the hieratic script with our print, and the demotic with our written characters. The pure hieroglyphics were used as script for monuments, because they consisted, as before said, of pictures, and because the architects early learned to make use of them to cover the surfaces of the buildings which they erected with an ornamenta- tion which was at the same time pleasing and full Uſ illeaiſing. (2) Successive Periods. These three different kinds of script, the pure hieroglyphic, the hieratic and thc demotic, were not used at the same period. The use of the hieroglyphics preceded that of any other; they are as old as the oldest monu- ment upon which we find them. We meet them as complete as Pallas Athene came from the head of Zeus. To follow their development is impos- sible. The hieratic script we first meet with upon the papyri of the twelfth dynasty. The demotic did not come into use until the eighth century before Christ. Nor did all three of these Scripts represent the same forms of language. The pure hieroglyphic script had for its founda- tion the ancient sacred language. The same is true of the older hieratic, but since the nine- teenth dynasty it rather accommodates itself (in 570 EGYPTIANS, LITE RATURE OF ANCIENT the texts of narrative character) to the spoken language. The demotic represents, even as its name (meaning script of the people) indicates, only the mode of speech of the people. It was used to write letters, for which reason it was also called the epistolographic. It was also used to write contracts, last wills, and the like. The older scripts were used to reproduce religious texts, or to record historic memories. The hieratic is gen- erally used to put in writing scientific or belletristic In atter. Up to the beginning of the nineteenth century a knowledge of the Egyptian language had not only actually perished, but the key to the decipherment of its writings was supposed to be irrevocably lost. The hieroglyphic characters were looked upon as symbols under which the mysteries of the religion had been concealed from the vulgar, and several attempts had been made to explain them. All efforts however were destitute of any scientific basis until the discovery of the Rosetta stone. See cut on page 568. 2. Religious Works. On the basis of the three different kinds of script we obtain the three following main classes into which we may divide the entire Egyptian literature: Religious, Scien- tific, and Belletristic matter. The religious part of the Egyptian literature throws all the others deeply into the shade, not only because The Books of the Dead, which were put into the graves of the deceased, were best guarded against destruc- tion, and were therefore preserved in a thousand- fold larger numbers than writings of a secular character, but because religion permeated the en- tire life of the Egyptians. ºf a jºinſ & 2: . L. : = 'ºſſ tº 2 =%:#Aºy" Scarabaeus with a part of the Ritual of the Dead. (1) Book of the Dead. The Book of the Dead is the starting point of the study of the Egyptian religion and acquaints us with the God-idea of the Egyptians, with many of their dogmas and their interpretations, with their mythology, their morals and their faith in immortality. It also teaches us their forms of calling upon the divine powers in prayers and hymns. It was put into the graves with the dead, and parts of it were written on many a tomb and on the inner sides EGYPTIANS, LITERATURE OF ANCIENT 571 EGYPTIANS, LITERATURE OF ANCIENT of the sarcophagi, to point out to the deceased the road through the other world and Serve him as an aid to memory. He had to know the “right word,” to use it as a magic weapon against the demons, which would meet him with hostile intentions, and as a key to open the locked portals upon his way. (2) Magic. There was also another element besides the religious which was intermixed in the wonderful effect of the “right word.” It was the Magic. We meet with it even in the oldest texts, which were discovered in the interior of Some pyramids. Here one sees that the people did not only endeavor to earn for themselves the fa- vor of the gods by prayer, coming from a be- lieving heart, but that they also tried to force the gods to do the will of the conjurer by the aid of magic formulas. There is also a list of special writings treating of Magic, like the Magic Papyrus Harris, the Magic Mythological Papyrus published by Ma- ruchi, or the later Coptic and Greek Magic Papyri, published after the beginning of the Christian era, and pieces of magic character are also found in many other manuscripts, especially in some of a scientific nature. 3. Jºcientific Literature. The scientific lit- erature treats of Theology, Jurisprudence and Philosophy. (1) Historic Texts. Historic texts give sketches of military campaigns and some biographies of prominent military leaders. Among the his- toric documents which the scholar who visits Egypt beholds are those which contain the sculp- tured tablets giving the list of kings. Each shows the monarch of the period doing homage to the lung line Uſ liis alluvstv. S. Laul Uſ thusu Sculptured monarchs has near him a tablet bearing his name. That great care was always taken to keep these imposing records correct is certain; the loyalty of subjects, the devotion of priests and the family pride of kings were all combined in this, and how effective this care was is seen in the fact that kings now known to be usurpers are carefully omitted. (2) Medical Works. The medical science of the Egyptians is taught us by the Papyrus Ebers, a voluminous handbook of Egyptian medicine. Even in this work we find parts of Magic, but the incantations which are to accompany the treat- ment of many a disease are not very numerous. The Papyrus Ebers was written under Amenophis I (eighteenth dynasty), in the sixteenth century before Christ, and is a collective work which con- tains many earlier medical writings, dating in part from very ancient time. A number of diagnoses testify to the excellent observation of the Egyptian physicians, and a special part treating of physiology proves that the heart had been recognized as the central organ of the human organism and its influence upon the circulation of the blood was also known. (3) Astronomical Methods. Thus far we only learn the methods of thc astronomers from pictures and their accompanying texts, which also inform us of a well-designed instrument which they had, the use of which was discovered by Schack von Schackenburg. It can only be said of the scientific literature of the Egyptians that it informs us regarding the Theology, the Jurisprudence, the Mathematics, the Medicine and Magic of the people somewhat in detail, and gives us a little information on the Succession of the regents and a few of the wars. 4. Telles Lettres. (1) Poetry. We also pos- sess Some Egyptian writings of a belletristic char- acter; for instance, samples of most of the classes of poetry, excepting the drama, for the simple dialogues which we have are not worthy of being called dramas. Specially valuable are also the Hymns, which properly belong to the class of theology, of these a few excel in beauty of rhythm and a deep con- ception of the godhead. The hymns also which were sung in the chapels of the tombs in honor of prominent deceased persons, are partly of poetic value. These “Nanies” (funeral dirges) do not show, as might be supposed, a very gloomy color- ing; on the contrary, we are surprised by a view of the world which we would not be likely to ac- credit to a people who called their earthly habita- tions temporal abodes and their tombs “eternal houses,” for they call upon us to enjoy whatever beautiful things life offers while wc may, and to remember that the capability to enjoy the gifts of life ends with death. sº- gº:-- The Sphinx, Cleared from the Sand. The Egyptian literature also contains other ex- amples of a lyrical nature. There are love songs in which beautiful passages are not wanting. Worthy of special mention are those which are contained in the London Papyrus Harris 500. The folksong is, according to its nature, of idyllic simplicity, sung, for instance, on the oc- casion of threshing, to stir up the activity of the cattle that were treading the corn. Some other lyrics are devoted to the fame of Pharaoh. Of specially peculiar character is the song celebrating the triumphal chariot of the king, in which every part of the chariot is compared with a characteristic trait of the monarch by the aid of a play of words, which seemed to be very popular with the Egyptians. For instance, after the wheel has been mentioned, it is said: “Thou crushest the nations under thy wheel.” In this lyric poetry, however, no meter, that is, a measure of words according to short and long Syllables, nor anything like it, can be per- ceived. The Egyptian poetry is, rather, like the Hebrew, in that it makes use of parallelisms to give the poetic expression beauty and greater EGYPTIANS, LITERATURE OF ANCIENT 572 EGYPTIANS, LITERATURE OF ANCIENT force. In these parallelisms the opposite parts strictly conform to each other, and therefore, the characters, for instance, in the Song of praise ad- dressed to Thutmosis the Third,” upon the pillar of el-Gise, appear as if they consisted of a suc- cessive row of verses. But none such exist, al- though in the Coptic, poems occur which are arranged in lines with final rhymes. - There are also other marks distinguishing the old Egyptian poetry from the prose. Ebers, for instance, found even a rhyme (not a final rhyme, but a rhyme only as an ornament of speech in the midst of the parts of the parallelisms), at the close of a narrative, or the incantations to flatter the ear and to help the memory to retain them. And that is not all. Alliterations, for in- stance, are of very frequent occurrence, even in for even these are found in the Egyptian litera- ture, and the most important production of this class is the “Epic of the Pentaur,” which was preserved in several copies upon Stone and papyrus. The poem treats of the war of Rameses II against the Kheta and their allies, of the great danger in which the Pharaoh was placed, when sur- rounded by enemies, and of his rescue by Amen. (2) Romance. The much more ancient history of Sinuhet (twelfth dynasty) I do not venture to call an epic. It only tells of the flight of a high official to a Semitic tribe, of his reception by, and his happy fate while with them, and also of his return home to the court of the Pharaoh and of his brilliant reception there. This story is justly classed with poetic literature, for the well-ornamented delivery of the recital is The Citadel of Cairo, from the Nile. the very oldest poetic pieces, the texts of the pyramids, and they are still found in the latest period of the Ptolemaic and Roman imperial period. - A love song in which every sentence begins with the name of a flower reminds us of the Ritornelle of the Italians. It is very beautiful and belongs to the songs in the London Papyrus Har- ris 500. Over the hieratic texts on many a papyrus there are also seen dots, generally in red, and the sign of an arm with thc hand downward. These dots sometimes support the parts or lines of a parallelism, and sometimes they only seem to give the reciter a hint. The arm with the hand down- ward, which is read Gerh, and means pause or rest, indicates that the reader should lower his voice and let a pause ensue. By this we see that many parts of the belletristic literature of the Egyptians were intended for recitation, especially the hymns and epic poems, * Thutmosis is the Greek form of this name. Elsewhere Dr. Ebers writes it Thothmes, as do many other Egyptolo- gists. Burgsch prefers the following orthography, Tehuti- mes, and some follow him, while Dr. W. M. Flinders Petrie writes the name Tahutmes.—EDITOR. strongly distinguished from sober prose. But it is true that just at the time (during the twelfth dy- nasty), when this story originated, a language which was overloaded with figures seems to have been in vogue. An example of this class of litera- ture is the story translated by Griffith of a peasant who is brought to court that the people there might be delighted by his manner of speech. ######º º Iſā;|&##|3 - ###|Nº|'ſ W\?\{{\tº\; ; ; ;Bºlā; ăzălăl, ºft &\\\\# is §§ 2)A >| |\ . \ D +. º * >k X. > / × × % + % +. % Sk k × % >}. X X- |X X- | \\ § ~~~% } While Earth Reclines Below. ports her body on his upraised arms. Seb, the earth, symbolized as a man, lies on the ground be- low. Ra was an entirely human god, and this name is maintained for the sun throughout the whole day and night. Harakhti, or Horus on the hori- zon, a compounding of Ra with Horus, is a hawk- headed god, who specially is the rising and morn- ing sun. Another form, Atmu or Tum, is the afternoon sun; and Khepra is the night sun. Atmu is the god who is theologically said to have created everything by the word of his power. Heliopolis, in the Î)elta, just below Cairo, was the special center of this worship; and the story of creation as told there was in three scenes : First, the separation of Ra and Atmu, Ra being the sun Air Supporting Sky, EGYPTIANS, RELIGION OF ANCIENT and Atmu the creator; second, the lifting of the sky (Nut) from the earth (Seb); third, the birth of the Nile and of cultivation. This corresponds to the first three days of Genesis; the separation of light from the Creator, the separation of the upper waters from the lower by space, and the production of Sea and land and plants. Specially connected with this Ra worship was the division of the day and night each into twelve hours. The Separate hours of day are not specially important, but the hours of night form the basis of one of the most essential beliefs of Egypt. Each hour was a different territory through which the sun passed, accompanied by his bodyguard of gods, and the Spirits of the faithful who accompanied him. Sev- eral religious works were adapted to this idea, or founded on it. The Book of the Dead, the Book of the Shades (Duat), and the Book of Gates or of Hades belong to this form of spiritual guide- book. In the earlier writings of the Book of the Dead the hours are not so prominent, and Osiris is more important than Ra as a patron of the dead; but in all the later writings Ra became more and more important, and the twelve hours are the basis of the whole system. The motion of the Sun was seen to be smooth and regular, as that of a boat on water; and rain was known to descend from the sky. Hence the conclusion was not un- natural that there was a river above in the sky, and the sun floated in a boat on that river. The boat or bark of the sun is therefore constantly represented, and the gods who formed his body- guard went with him in this boat. Whenever the sun as a moving body, was to be shown, as in rising or setting, the disk is figured on a boat. (6) The Abstract Religion. The forms of re- ligion that we have already noticed are compara- tively free from abstract ideas. The utmost that can be said of the animal worship is that it may have originated in the animals being adorned as embodying or exemplifying certain attributes. Of Osiris it may be that he was a god of vegetation; and Horus and Set are looked on as the principles of good and evil. The whole cosmogony is es- Sentially concrete, with hardly any abstraction traceable. But another class of gods, which stand quite apart from all the others, are essentially abstract. tº it. S ºn º §§ 㺠§§§ §ºl. - & º FTA N. ſº ºi;º. ####### tºll. º: §§ §:=#; ić : #. İTE; § § :º º* * |: É º| º | : : ; - *. š É rº §§§ {}} §§ º º º: išº § ſº § # § ; # Hypostyle Hall of the Esneh Temple, Ptah, the god of Memphis, is the creator; he is not like the creator Atmu, identified with the sun; nor like the creator Khnumu, a potter; but he is the Divine architect who ordains. And his com- panion goddess is even more abstract; Maat is law and orderly regulation, justice and principle, expressed in sign by the cubit measuring-rod. EGYPTIAN, THE Such is one great abstract conception, the creator . working by law and measure. Another pair of abstractions was that of the Divine Father, and of universal Mother Nature. The great father god was Min (otherwise ren- dered as Khem), represented by images furnished with a phallos, in whom all the beauty and life and vigor of nature rejoiced. And parallel to him was Hathor, the great mother, who was worshiped in every capital of the country, and identified in turn with all the other goddesses. In some places she was the sky, being identified with Nut, from whom sprang everything. In other places she was Isis, the principal Divine mother of the earlier mythologies. In the early times, before 2000 B. C., she seems to have received a quarter of the whole devotion of the land, but in later periods her importance diminished. There are some other gods of importance which do not form part of the main groups here repre- sented, and which were strictly local in origin. W. M. F. P. EGYPTIAN, THE (e-jip'shan), (Gr. 6 Aly&ntios, Ao az-guſº' fee-os). In Acts xxi:38 Claudius Lysias, the chief captain (Chiliarch), is represented as say- ing to St. Paul, “Art thou not then the Egyptian, which before these days stirred up to sedition and led out into the wilderness the four thousand men of the Assassins?” This Egyptian is mentioned by Josephus in both his works. While describing the procuratorship of Felix, he mentions the Sicarii or Assassins, then in distinction to these the religious impostors, then a certain Egyptian. The latter professed to be a prophet, and collected together a body of 30,000 persons, whom he led to the Mount of Olives, as- serting that the wall of Jerusalem would fall down before him, and that he could capture the city. Felix attacked him with a considerable force, and dispersed his followers, slaying 400, and taking prisoner 200. The Egyptian himself escaped. (A. C. Headlam, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) EGYPT, RIVER OF (e'jipt river), occurs re- B."; in A. V. (Num. xxxiv:5; Josh. xv.:47; I ings viii:65; 2 Kings xxiv:7; 2 Chron. vii:8; Is. xxvii: 12). It is not the Nile but the Wady el-‘Arísh, which flows through the northern portion of the Sinaitic peninsula, draining into itself the waters of many other wadies, and flows into the Mediterranean midway between Pelusium and Gaza (Maspero, Dawn of Civilization, 348). It derives its name from the village el-'Arish (the ancient Rhinoco- lura, Diodor. i :60), situated near its mouth. (J. A. Selbie, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) EHI (eſhi), (Heb. Yº, ay-Ahee', brotherly, brother, i. e., friend of Jehovah), head of one of the houses of Benjamin according to Gen. xlvi.2 I. He seems to be the same as Ahiram of Num. xxvi :38. If they are identical Ahiram is probably right as the family were called Ahiramites. The same name seems to have the form, Aharah (I Chron. viii:I), Ahoah (I Chron. viii:4), Ahiah (I Chron. viii:7), Aher (I Chron. vii :12). These variations seem to indicate the effacement of the original copies by time or injury. EHUD (e'hūd), (Heb. TX, ay-hood", union). 1. Son of Gera, of the tribe of Benjamin, one of the “Judges' of Israel, or rather of that part of Is- rael which he delivered from the dominion of the Moabites by the assassination of their king Eglon. These were the tribes beyond the Jordan and 577 * ELAH the southern tribes on this side the river. Ehud obtained access to Eglon as the bearer of tribute from the subjugated tribes, and being left-handed, or rather ambidextrous, he was enabled to use with a sure and fatal aim a dagger concealed under a part of his dress, where it was unsuspect- ed, because it would there have been useless to a person employing his right hand. The Israelites continued to enjoy for eighty years the independ- ence obtained through this deed of Ehud (Judg. iii: 15-30). Son of Bilhan, the son of Benjamin, the Patriarch (1 Chron. vii:Io, viii:6). (B. C. before 1856). EKER (e'kér), (Heb. Tº, ay'Áer, transplanted, foreigner, Lev. xxv :47), a rooting up, perhaps one transplanted, a foreigner, a descendant of Judah through the families of Jerahmeel and Hezron (I Chron. ii:27), B. C. after 1856. EKRON (Šk'ron), (Heb. Tºpy, e/3-7 ofte', exter- mination), one of the five Philistine states (Josh. xiii:3), and the northernmost of the five. In the general distribution of territory (uncon- quered as well as conquered) Ekron was assigned to Judah, as being upon its border (Josh. xiii:3; xv. II, 45); but was afterwards apparently given to Dan, although conquered by Judah (Josh. xv.: II, 45; xix:43; Judg. i :18; comp. Joseph. Antiq. v:1, 22; v :2, 4). In Scripture Ekron is chiefly remarkable from the ark having been sent home from thence, upon a new cart drawn by two milch kine (I Sam. v . Io; vi :1-8). In later days, it is named with the other cities of the Philistines in the denunciations of the prophets against that peo- ple (Jer. xxv :20; Amos. i :8; Zeph. ii:4; Zech. ix:5). The name of Ekron, or rather Accaron, occurs incidentally in the histories of the Cru- sades; and it has been recognized by Dr. Robinson (Bib. Researches, iii:24) in that of Akri, in a situ- ation corresponding to all we know of Ekron. Akri is a small Moslem village, five miles south of Ramleh. It is built of unburnt bricks, and, as there are no apparent ruins, the ancient town was probably of the same materials. FKRONITES, THE (€k'ron-ites), (Heb.º. ha-eń-roh-mee', with art), inhabitants of Ekron (I Sam. v.:Io). In Josh. xiii:3, it should be singular, “the Ekronite.” EL (él), (Heb. *s, a/e, mighty, especially the Almighty), God, either Jehovah or a false god; sometimes a hero or magistrate. It occurs as a prefix (and suffix) to several Hebrew words, e.g., e/-shaddaf. ELADAH (Ela-dah), (Heb. Tºš, e&aw-daw, God has decked), son of Tahath, a descendant of Ephraim (I Chron. vii:2O). ELAH (e'lah), (Heb. *, ay-law', oak or tere. binth). 1. Son of Baasha, king of Israel. After a reign of two years (B. C. 930-929) he was assassinated while drunk, and all his kinsfolk and friends cut off, by Zimri, ‘the captain of half his chariots.' He was the last king of Baasha's line, and by this catastrophe the predictions of the prophet Jehu were accomplished (I Kings xvi :6-14). 2. Aholibamah's successor in the government of Edom (Gen. xxxvi :4I ; I Chron. i :52). 3. Father of Hoshea, the last king of Israel (2 Kings xv :30; xvii:I). (B. C. 729.) 4. An Edomite “duke,” the son of Caleb, the son of Jephunneh (I Chron. iv: I5). (B. C. I618.) * 37 ELAM 5. One of the chiefs of the tribe of Benjamin at the time of the settlement of the country. He was son of Uzzi (I Chron. ix:8). (B. C. 536.) 6. Father of Shimei ben-Elah, a commissariat officer of Solomon in Benjamin (I Kings iv:18). (B. C. 960.) 7. A valley in which the Israelites were en- campca when David fought Goliath (I Sam. xvii: 19). It doubtless received this name, which some spell Alah (see ALLON), from the terebinth trees or from some remarkable terebinth tree, growing in it. Ecclesiastical traditions identify it with the present valley of Beit Hanina, about eight miles northwest from Jerusalem. In this valley olive trees and carob trees now prevail, and tere- binth trees are few ; but the brook is still indi- cated whence the youthful champion selected the ‘smooth stones’ where with he smote the Philis- tine. Dr. Robinson, however, disputes this an- cient tradition, and finds that the conditions of the history require him to identify the valley of Elah with the Wady es-Sumt (acacia valley), which he crossed on the road from Jerusalem to Gaza, about eleven miles southwest from the former city. His reasons are given in Biblical Researches, iii. 350; and he remarks that the largest specimen of the terebinth tree which he saw in Palestine still stands in the vicinity. ELAM (É'lam). (Heb. Eºy. ay-Zawm', hidden). 1. Mentioned in Gen. x:22, as a son of Shem, from whom the tribe or nation mentioned in chap- ter xiv:I, along with the kingdom of Shinar in Babylon, descended ; in Is. xxi :2, and Jer. XXV:25, Elam is connected with Media. In Ezra iv:9, the Elamites are described among the nations of the Persian empire; and in Dan. viii:2, Susa is said to lie on the river, Ulai (Eulaeus or Choaspes) in the province of Elam. These ac- counts lead to the conclusion that Elam was the same land which was designated by the Greeks and Romans by the name of Elymais, and which formed a part of the ancient Susiana, the mod- ern Khusistan. Elam was inhabited by vari- ous tribes of people. The Elymaei or Elamaei, together with the Kissi seem to have been the old- est inhabitants not only of Susiana proper but also of Persia; whence the sacred writers, under the name of Elam, comprehended the country of the Persians in general. They were celebrated for skill in archery, and hence the historical propriety of the scriptural allusions to the quiver and the bow of the Elamites (Is., xxii:6; Jer. xlix:34). Indeed, in the latter text the bow is distinctly men- tioned as the chief instrument of Elamite power— ‘I will break the bow of Elam, the chief of his might.” It would seem that Elam was very early a sepa. rate State with its own kings; for in the time of Abraham we find that Chedorlaomer, king of Elam, extended his conquests west of the Euphrates as far as the Jordan and the Dead Sea (Gen. xiv:1). (See “CHEDORLAOMER:” also “ARIOCH.”) Ezekiel (xxxii:24), mentions Elam among the mighty un- circumcised nations which had been the terror of the world; and about the same period (B. C. 500) Jeremiah threatened it with conquest and destruc- tion by the Chaldaeans (Jer. xlix:30, 34, sq.) This was accomplished probably by Nebuchadnezzar, who subjected Western Asia to his dominion ; for we find his successor Belshazzar residing at Susa, the capital of Elam, a province then subject to that monarch (Dan. viii:I, 2 ; Rosenmüller’s Biblical Geography, etc.) . With this the scriptural no- tices of Elam end, unless we add that Elamites are found among those who were at Jerusalem at 578 ELATH OR ELOTH the feast, of Pentecost (Acts ii:9); which implies that Jews descended from the exiles were settled in that country. Here also they are mentioned next to the ‘Medians,’ with whom they are also coupled by the prophets (IS. xxi :2; Jer. xxv :25). 2. A Korhite Levite, the fifth son of Meshele- miah; One of the Bene-Asaph in the time of David, the king (I Chron. xxvi;3), B. C. IOI4. - 3. A chief in the tribe of Benjamin and a son of Shashak (I Chron. viii:24). B. C. 536.) 4. The children of Elam, 1,254 in number, re- turned with Zerubbabel from Babylon (Ezra ii: 7; Neh. vii: I.2). With Ezra 71 more returned (Ezra viii:7). -- - 5. In the same lists is another Elam who also returned with the same number of men (Ezra ii:31 : Neh. vii:34). (B. C. before 536.) The co- incidence is curious and suspicious. For the sake of distinction he is called “the other Elam.” 6. A priest who assisted Nehemiah in the dedi- cation of the new wall of Jerusalem (Neh. xii: 42). (B. C. 446.) . One of the chiefs of the people who signed the gºvemn with Nehemiah (Neh. x:14). (B. C 4IO. ELAMITEs (e'lam-ites), (Heb. Sº,ale-maw- yee'),... were the original inhabitants of the country of . Elam, and descendants of Shem. They prob- ably derived their name from Elam, son of Shem- (Gen. x:22). A Cossaean or Cushite invasion seems to have driven the Elamites, in part, to the moun- tains. (See ELAM.) ELASAH (ei'a-sah), (Heb. Tºš, elaw-saw, God created). 1. One of the sons of Pashur, a priest, who married a Gentile wife (Fzra x :22). (B. C. 458.) 2. Son of Shaphan, who with another was sent to Nebuchadnezzar by King Zedekiah on a mis- sion, and with a letter from Jeremiah, the prophet, to º captives at Babylon (Jer. xxix:3). (B. C. 594. t Fleasah is the more correct rendering of the Hebrew. - ELATH (elath), (Heb. Fºs,ay-lath', a grove), or ELOTH (e'loth), (Heb. Fº, ay-/6th', a grove). It was a city of Idumaea, having a port on the eastern arm or gulf of the Red Sea, which thence received the name of Sinus Elaniticus (Gulf of Akaba). According to Eusebius, it was ten miles east from Petra. It lies at the extremity of the valley of Elghor, which runs at the bottom of two parallel ranges of hills, north and south, through Arabia Petraea, from the Dead Sea to the north- ern parts of the Elanitic Gulf. (1) Early Mention. The ſit st Little that it is mentioned in the scriptures is in Deut. ii:8, where, in speaking of the journey of the Israelites to- wards the Promised Land, these words occur— “When we passed by from our brethren the chil- dren of Esau, which dwelt in Seir, through the way of the plain from Elath, and from Ezion- geber.’ These two places are mentioned together again in I Kings ix:26, in such a manner as to show that Elath was more ancient than Ezionge- ber, and was of so much repute as to be used for indicating the locality of other places: the pas- sage also fixes the spot where Elath itself was to be found: ‘and King Solomon made a navy of ships in Eziongeber, which is beside Elath, on the shore (Num. xxxiii:35) of the Red Sea, in the land of Edom.’ (2) Under Israel's Kings. The use which EL-BETHEL 579 David made of the vicinity of Elath shows that the country was at that time in his possession. Accordingly, in 2 Sam. viii:14, we learn that he had previously made himself master of Idumaea, and garrisoned its strongholds with his own troops. Under One of his successors, Joram (2 Kings viii:2O), the Idumaeans revolted from Judah, and elected a king over themselves. Joram there- upon assembled his forces, ‘and all the chariots with him,' and, falling on the Idumaeans by night, Succeeded in defeating and scattering their army. The Hebrews, however, could not prevail, but ‘Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah unto this day;’ thus exemplifying the striking lan- guage employed (Gen. xxvii:40) by Isaac—"by thy sword shalt thou live, and shalt serve thy brother: and it shall come to pass when thou shalt have the dominion, that thou shalt break his yoke from off thy neck.’ From 2 Kings xiv:22, however, it ap- pears that Uzziah recovered Elath, and, having so repaired and adorned the city as to be said to have built, that is rebuilt it, he made it a part of his dominions. This connection was not of long con- tinuance; for in ch. xvi. ver. 6 of the same book, we find the Syrian king Rezin interposing, who captured Elath, drove out the Jews, and annexed the place to his Syrian kingdom, and ‘the Syrians came to Elath, and dwelt there unto this day.” (3) Roman Rule. At a later period it fell un- der the power of the Romans, and was for a time guarded by the tenth legion, forming part of Pal- aestina Tertia (Jerome, Onomn. S. V. Ailath; Strabo, xxi.;4, 4; Reland, p. 556). It subse- quently became the residence of a Christian bish- op. In the days of its prosperity it was much dis- tinguished for commerce, which continued to flourish under the auspices of Christianity. In the sixth century it is spoken of by Procopius as being inhabited by Jews subject to the Roman dominion (De Bell. Pers. i :19). (4) Under Islamism. In A. D. 630, the Chris- tian communities of Arabia Petraea found it ex- pedient to submit to Mohammed, when John, the Christian governor of Ailah, became bound to pay an annual tribute of 300 gold-pieces (Abulfeda, Ann. i. 171). Henceforward, till the present cen- tury, Ailah lay in the darkness of Islamism. (5) Present Condition. Mounds of rubbish alone mark the site of the town, while a fortress, Occupied by a governor and a small garrison un- der the Pasha of Egypt, serves to keep the neigh- boring tribes of the desert in awe, and to min- ister to the wants and protection of the annual Egyptian Haj, or pilgrim caravan. This place has always been an important station upon the route of the Egyptian Haj. Such is the importance of this caravan of pilgrims from Cairo to Mecca, both in a religious and political point of view, that the rulers of Egypt from the earliest period have given it convoy and protection. For this purpose a line of fortresses similar to that of Akaba has been established at intervals along the route, with wells of water and supplies of pro- visions (Robinson's Biblical Researches, vol. i. p. 250). J. R. B. XY 7 T- > LT. F. bN-ns: ºx EL-BETHEL (31'-bêth'-el),(Heb.” ‘’’: 28, ale- bayth-ale', the God of Bethel), God of Bethel, the name given by Jacob to an altar which he built (Gen. xxxv :7), and which stood, probably, in the very spot where he had formerly seen the prophetic dream of the ladder (Gen. xxviii: 12). (See BETHEL.) ---- ELDAAH (31'da-ah or ël-dā'ah), (Heb. Tºš, el-daw-aw', God of knowledge), one of the sons of Midian. The name does not occur except in Gen. ELIDER xxv.4 and I Chron. ii.33 (B. C. after 2063). Iſ there was any tribe that took this appellation no trace of it has been found. ELDAD and MEDAD (el'dad and me'dād), (Heb. Tº Tº, may-dawdl and el-dawd"). Two of the seventy elders appointed by Moses to assist him in the government of the people (Num. xi : 16, 26, 27). Although not present with the others at the door of the tabernacle, they were equally filled with the Divine spirit and be- gan to ‘prophesy' in the camp. Joshua, thinking this irregular, requested Moses to forbid them. This he refused to do and expressed a wish that the gift of prophecy might be widely diffused (Num. xi :26-29). (B. C. I658.) ELDER. (§l'dér), (Heb. iPl, zaw-kane', old). (1) Since in ancient times older persons would naturally be selected to hold public offices, out of regard to their presumed superiority in knowledge and experience, the term came to be used as the designation for the office itself, borne by an in- dividual, of whatever age. But the term “elder' appears to be also expressive of respect and rever- ence in general. The word occurs in this sense in Gen. 1:7, ‘Joseph went up to bury his father, and with him went up all the servants of Pharaoh, the elders of his house, and all the elders of the land of Egypt’; Sept. presbuteroi, old men or elders. (2) These elders of Egypt were, probably, the various state-officers. The elders of Israel, of whom such frequent mention is made, may have been, in early times, the lineal descendants of the patriarchs (Exod. xii:21). To the elders Moses was directed to open his commission (Exod. iii: I6) to the assembly of elders of the sons of Israel. They accompanied Moses in his first interview with Pharaoh as the representatives of the He- brew nation (verse 18); through them Moses is- sued his communications and commands to the whole people (Exod. xix:7; Deut. xxxi :9); they were his immediate attendants in all the great transactions in the wilderness (Exod. xvii:5); seventy of their number were selected to attend Moses, Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, at the giving of the law (Exod. xxiv.: I ), on which occasion they are called the nobles of the children of Israel, who did eat and drink before God, in ratifi- cation of the covenant, as representatives of the nation. In Num. xi :16, 17, we meet with the ap- pointment of seventy elders to bear the burden of the people along with Moses; these were selected by Moses out of the whole number of the elders, and are described as being, already, officers over the children of Israel. It is the opinion of Mich- aelis, that this council, chosen to assist Moses, should not be confounded with the Sanhedrim, which, he thinks, was not instituted till after the return from the Babylonish captivity. (See SAN HEDRIM.) (3) After the settlement in Canaan the elders seem to have been the administrators of the laws in all the cities (Deut. xix:12; xxi.;3, 4, 6, 19; xxii: I5, 25). The continuance of the office may be traced during the time of the judges (Judg. ii: 7); during that of Samuel (I Sam. xvi :4); un- der Saul (I Sam. xxx :26); and David (I Chron. xxi :16). The elders of Israel are mentioned dur- ing the captivity (Ezra x:I4), consisting either of those who had sustained that office in their own land, or were permitted by the Babylonians to ex- ercise it still among their countrymen. We meet with them again at the restoration (Ezra v : 5), and by them the Temple was rebuilt (vi :14). After the restoration and during the time of the ELEAD Maccabees, the Sanhedrim, according to Michaelis, was instituted, being first mentioned under Hyr- canus II (Joseph. Antiq. 9, 3); but elders are still referred to in I Macc. vii.33. Among the members of the Sanhedrim were the presbuteroi, elders. Thus we find the chief priest, or more frequently, also ‘chief priests and elders,’ ‘elders and scribes,’ and various other collocations. Like the scribes, they obtained their seat in the Sanhe- drim by election, or nomination from the execu- tive authority. The word elder, with many other Jewish terms, was introduced into the Christian church. In the latter it is the title of inferior ministers, who were appointed overseers among not over the flock; Gr. Šv ć, Vulg. ‘in quo' (Acts xx:17, 28; Tit. i.5, 7; I Pet. v:1-5). The term is ap- plied even to the apostles (2 John I; 3 John I). So also trpeggvréptov, body of elders, certainly includes even St. Paul himself (comp. I Tim. iv:I4 and 2 Tim. i:6). Still the apostles are distinguished from the elders elsewhere (Acts xv.6). The elder was constituted by an apostle or some one invested with apostolic authority (Acts xiv:23; see also the epistles to Timothy and John). The elders preached, Con- futed gainsayers (Tit. i :9), and visited the sick (James v :14). The word elders is sometimes used in the sense of ancients, ancestors, predeces- sors, like the word ápxalot, those of old (Matt. v.:21; Heb. xi.2). It is used symbo/ica//y (Rev. iv:4, etc.). The term Zºresöuteros, eſder, is plainly the origin of our word ‘ºriest' (see PRESBYTER). (Jahn Bzó/isches Archäo/., sec. 244; Mede's Works, fol. p. 27; Gesenius, Wörterózech, s. v.) J. F. D. ELEAD (ele-ad) (Heb. Tºš, eſſawa, God de- fender), a descendant of Ephraim, either through Shuthelah, the patriarch, or his son by the same name. . Some regard the second Shuthelah as a repetition of the first (I Chron. vii:21). ELEALEH (ele-aleh), (Heb. º. eſſaw-lay', whither God ascends), a town of the Reubenites east of the Jordan (Num. xxxii:3, 37); but which is named by the prophets as a city of the Moabites (Is. xv.:4; xvi;9; Jer. xlviii:34). It is usually mentioned along with Heshbon; and accordingly travelers find in the neighborhood of that city a ruined place, bearing the name of El Aal, which doubtless represents Elealeh. It stands upon the summit of a hill, and takes its name from its situation, Aal meaning “high.” It commands the whole plain, and the view from it is very extensive. It is about a mile and a quar- ter northeast of Heshbon. ELEASAH (e-le'a-sah), (Heb. Tºš,e/-aw-saw” God made). 1. Son of Helez, a descendant of Judah through the º of Hezron (I Chron. ii:39). (B. C. I305. 2. Son of Rapha, or Rephajah, and a descend- ant of Saul and Jonathan (I Chron. viii:37; i.<: 43). (B. C. 960.) Elsewhere the name is writ- ten ELASAH in the A. V. - ELEAZAR (ele-ā'zar), (Heb. Tºš, elaw. 2awr', God is helper); this was an exceedingly com- mon name among the Hebrews. 1. Eldest son of Aaron (Exod. vi.23, 25), who acted in his father's lifetime as chief of the tribe of Levi (Num. iii:32) (B. C. I619), and at his death succeeded him in the high-priesthood (Num. xx :28, sq.). His pontificate was contemporary with the military government of Joshua, whom he appears to have survived. A perfectly good understanding seems at all times to have subsist- ed between Eleazer and Joshua, as we constantly 580 ELECTA OR ECLECTA trace that co-operation and mutual support which the circumstances of the time and of the nation rendered so necessary. Eleazar is supposed to have lived twenty-five years after the passage of the Jordan, and the book of Joshua concludes with a notice of his death and burial. 2. A son of Aminadab, to whose care the ark was committed, when sent back by the Philistines (I Sam. vii:I). It is believed that Eleazar was a priest, or at least a Levite, though his name is not inserted among the Levites. (B. C. II24.) 3. One of the three most eminent of David's heroes, who ‘fought till his hand was weary', in maintaining with David and the other two a dar- ing stand against the Philistines after ‘the men of Israel had gone away.’ He was also one of the same three when they broke through the Phil- istine host to gratify David's longing for a drink of water from the well of his native Bethlehem (2 Sam. xxiii:9, Io, 13). (B. C. about IO46.) (See DAVID.) 4. The fourth of the Maccabaean brothers, sons of the priest Mattathias (I Macc. ii:5). He was crushed to death by the fall of an elephant which he stabbed under the belly in the belief that it bore the king, Antiochus Eupator (I Macc. vi. 43-46). (B. C. I64.) An aged and venerable scribe who, “as be- came his age, and the excellency of his ancient years, and the honor of his grey head,” chose rath- er to submit to the most cruel torments than con- form to the polluting enactments of Antiochus Epiphanes (2 Macc. vi. 18–31). (B. C. about 167.) 6. Son of Mahli and grandson of Merari. He was a Mcraritc Lcvite who is mention.cd as hav- ing only daughters who were married to their “brethren,” i. e., their cousins (I Chron. xxiii:21, 22; xxiv:28). (B. C. about 1618.) 7. A priest who was present at the feast of dedi- º under Nehemiah (Neh. xii:42). (B. C. 440. 8. Son of Parosh, a layman, who married a for- eign wife and had to put her away (Ezra x:25). (B. C. 4Io.) 9. A Levite, son of Phinehas (Ezra viii:33). (B. C. 459.) . 10, Son of Eliud, three generations above Jo- seph, the husband of Mary (Matt. i :15). ELECT (é-lèkt'), (Heb. TTP, bazy-Aheer', chosen and so rendered in 2 Sam. xxi.;6), used to denote those selected by God for special office, work, honor, etc. (IS. xlii: I; xlv.:4; lxv.9, 22). General Application of the Term. (1) Be- sides its scriptural and theological use; it had also an ecclesiastical meaning. (2) It was sometimes applied to the highest class of catechumens elected to baptism. (3) It was applied at other times to the baptized, admitted to the full privileges of their profession, and sometimes called the perfect. (4) The Manichaeans were divided into two great classes, the Audientes and Elect. ELECTA or ECLECTA (e-lék'ta), (Gr.’Ek\ekrá, eå-/e/*-fay', chosen). She was, as is generally believed, a lady of quality, who lived near Ephesus, to whom John addressed his second Epistle, cautioning her and her children against heretics, who denied the di- vinity of Christ, and his incarnation. Some think Electa, which signifies chosen, is not a proper name, but an honorable epithet; (elect lady, Eng. trans.) and that the Epistle was directed to a church. The same apostle salutes Electa, and her children, in his third Epistle; but the accounts of this Electa are as confused as those of the former. The Authorized Version translates the ELECTION words in question ‘the elect lady,’ an interpreta- tion approved by Castalio, Beza, Mill, Wolf, Le Clerc, and Macknight. Most modern critics, how- ever, Schleusner and Breitschneider in their Lexi- cons, Bourger (1763), Vater (1824), Goeschen (1832), and Tischendorf (1841), in their editions of the New Testament, Neander (History of the Planting of the Christian Church, vol. ii, p. 71, Eng. transl.), De Wette (Lehrbuch, p. 339), and Lücke (Commentary on the Epistles of St. John, pp. 31.4-320, Eng. transl.), agree with the Syriac and Arabic Versions in making Kupta a proper name, and render the words ‘to the elect Cyria.” Lardner has given a copious account of critical opinions in his History of the Apostles and Evan- gelists, c. xx. Works, vi :284-288. ELECTION (é-lèk'shūn), (Gr. Čk\oyń, ek-log-ay", choice, a picking out). The act of choice. This word has different ap- plications in the scriptures. (I) It signifies God's taking a whole nation, community, or body of men, into external covenant with himself, by giving them the advantage of revelation as the rule of their belief and practice, when other nations are without it (Deut. vii:6). (2) A temporary designation of some person or persons to the fill- ing up of some particular station in the visible church, or office in civil life (John vi :70; I Sam. x:24). (3) The gracious act of the Divine Spirit, whereby God actually and visibly separates his people from the world by effectual calling (John xv : 19). (4) That eternal, gratuitous, sovereign, and immutable purpose of God, whereby he select. ed from among all mankind, and of every nation under heaven, all those whom he effectually calls to be sanctified and everlastingly saved by Christ (Eph. i:4; 2 Thess. ii:13). (For the distinct Arminian and Calvinistic views see PREDESTINATION.) ELELOHE-ISRAEL (§1'e-ló'he-iz'ra-el), (Heb. bsº -nºs bs. a/e e/-0-/*ay' yts-razº/-a/e', God, the mighty God of Israel), the name of an altar built by Jacob in a piece of ground which he bought of Hamor, Shechem's father (Gen. xxxiii:2O). ELEMENTS (§1'é-ments), (Gr. arouxeſa, stoi- Åhei'ah). Hesychius explains a rolyeſa by trip, Wöwp, 77, Kal &#p, dip'öv Tó ord pata—ſºre, water, earth, and azz", of zy/.2c/; bodies are formzed. This, which is the simplest, may be called the primary sense of the word. A secondary use of the word relates to the organized parts of which anything is framed. The word occurs in its primary sense in 2 Pet. iii:IO, I2. - Figurative. The word occurs in a secondary sense in Gal. iv:3-9, ‘the eſe/zenſ's or rudźments of the zwor/d,” which the Apostle calls ‘very weak and Žoor elements,' or beggar/y elements. He introduces the word to preserve the unity of his comparison of the law to a Żedagogue (iii:24), and of persons under it, to children under tutors; and by the elements or rudźments of the world he evi- dently, means that state of religious knowledge which had subsisted in the world, among Jews and Gentiles, beforc Christ; the weakness of which, among the Jews, may be seen in Heb. vii: 18, 19; x: I, and among the Gentiles, in the Epistle to the Romans. - The word Stoikeia, in Heb. v.; I2 is restricted, by the addition of the utterances of God, to the rudiments of Christianity. (See Rosenmüller and Benson on the passages.) J. F. D. ELEPH (eleph), (Heb. *S, with the art. Aa. e/º/, the ox), a town allotted to Benjamin (Josh. xviii.28). From its name it may be inferred that the inhabitants followed pastoral pursuits, 581 trict in the province of Gaza. ELEUTHEROPOLIS ELEPHANT (el'é-fant), (Gr. ºpas, eſſe/p/as, ivory; for the meaning of Bºy, shen-haff-beeme', See Ivory). The word occurs frequently in the 1st and 2nd books of Maccabees. It is not mentioned in the A.V. of the canonical scriptures except in the marginal readings (Job x1:15; 1 Kings x:22; 2 Chron. ix:21). The elephant is the largest of all terrestrial animals, sometimes reaching to above eleven feet of vertical height at the shoulders, and weighing from five to seven thousand pounds; he is of a black or slaty ash color, and almost destitute of hair. The head, which is proportion- ately large, is provided with two broad pendulous ears, particularly in those of the African species, which are occasionally six feet in length. This Species has also wº, Inolar teeth on each side of the jaw, both above and below, and only three toe-nails on each of the hind feet; whereas the Asiatic Species is provided with only one tooth on each side above and below ; and though both have tusks or defences, the last-mentioned has them confined solely to the males; they are never of more than Seventy pounds weight, often much less, and in some breeds even totally wanting; while in the African both sexes are armed with tusks, and in the males they have been known Seven feet in length, and weighing above 150 pounds each. The forehead of the African is low ; that of the Asiatic high ; in both the eyes are com- paratively small, with a malevolent expression, and on the temples are pores which exude a viscous humor; the tail is long, hanging nearly to the heels, and forked at the end. But the most remarkable organ of the elephant, that which equally enables the animal to reach the ground and to grasp branches of trees at a considerable height, is the proboscis or trunk; a cylindrical elastic instrument, in ordinary condition reaching nearly down to the ground, but contractile to two- thirds of its usual length, and extensile to one- third beyond it; provided with nearly 4,000 muscles crossing each other in such a manner that the proboscis is flexible in every direction, and so abundantly supplied with nerves as to render the Organ One of the most delicate in nature. Elephants are peaceable towards all inoffensive animals, Sociable among themselves, and ready to help each other; gregarious in grassy plains; but more inclined to frequent densely-wooded mountain glens; at times not unwilling to visit the more arid wastes, but fond of rivers and pools, where they wallow in mud and water among reeds and under the shade of trees. The Asiatic Species, carrying the head higher, has more dignity of appearance, and is believed to have more sagacity and courage than the African ; which, however, is not inferior in weight or bulk, and has never been in the hands of such experienced managers as the Indian mahouts. C. H. S. ELEUTHEROPOLIS (êl'e-li-ther-op'o-lis), (Gr. "EXev6epôtroXts, eſſ-yoo-ther-off'o-/is, a free city), a place not named in Scripture, but which was an episcopal city of such importance in the time of Eusebius and Jerome that they assumed it as the point whence to estimate the distances and posi- tions of other cities in Southern Palestine. g It continued to be a great city until the sixth century; but after that we lose sight of it. .. Prof. Robinson has identified it with Beit-Jibrin, a village of moderate size, the capital of a dis- In and around this village are ruins of different ages, more extensive than any which had been seen in Pales- tine, excepting the substructions of the ancient * ELHANAN temple at Jerusalem and the Harem at Hebron. These ruins consist principally of the remains of a fortress of immense strength, in the midst of an irregular rounded enclosure, encompassed by a very ancient and strong wall. This outer wall is built of large squared stones, uncemented. Along this wall on the inside, towards the west and northwest, is a row of ancient massive vaults with fine round arches, apparently of the same age as the wall itself, and both undoubtedly of Roman origin. In the midst of the area Stands an irregu- lar castle, the lower parts of which seem to be as ancient as the exterior wall; but it has obviously been built up again in modern times. An in- scription over the gate shows that it was last re- paired by the Turks A. H. 958 (A. D. I551), nearly two years after the present walls of Jerusalem were built. Remains of ancient walls and dwell- ings extend up the valley; and at the distance of twenty minutes from the present village are the ruins of an ancient church, bearing the name of Santa Hanneh (St. Anne). Only the eastern end is now standing, including the niche of the great altar and that of a side chapel, built of large hewn stones of strong and beautiful masonry. Beit-Jibrin is twenty miles east of Askelon, and thirteen miles east-northeast from Hebron. ELHANAN (el-hanan), (Heb. Bºš, e&#haw. nawn', God is gracious). - 1. A warrior of the time of David, who dis- tinguished himself against the Philistines. Accord- ing to 2 Sam. xxi : 19, he was the son of Jaare Oregim, the Bethlehemite, and slew Goliath the Gittite. The A.V. inserts the words “the brother of" Goliath, etc., to make the passage conform with I Chron. xx :5, which says that Elhanan was the son of Jair or Jaor and slew Lahmi, Goliath's brother. The last is probably the more correct as Goliath, the Gittite, was killed by David (I Sam. xvii); though this has been questioned. (B. C. Io20.) 2. Son of Dodo of Bethlehem. He was one of David’s guard of “thirty” (2 Sam. xxiii:24; I Chron. xi :26). |- ELI (e'li), (Heb. ***, ay-lee', ascent, summit, raised up). 1. A descendant of Aaron through Ithamar (Lev. x:1, 2, 12), as appears from the fact that Abiathar, who was certainly a lineal descendant of Eli (I Kings ii:27), had a son, Ahimelech, who is expressly stated to have been “of the sons of Ithamar” (I Chron. xxiv:3; comp. 2 Sam. viii:17; Joseph. Antiq. v. 9, I). (1) High-Priest. Eli is generally supposed to have been the first high-priest of the line of Ithamar, Aaron’s youngest son. This is deduced from I Chron. xxiv:3, 6 (comp. as above, Joseph. 21 Juliq. v. 9, 1). It ulgo appears from thr nmissinn of the names of Eli and his immediate successors in the enumeration of the high-priests of Eleazar's line in I Chron. vi;4-6. What occasioned this remarkable transfer is not known—most probably the incapacity or minority of the then sole rep- resentative of the elder line; for it is very evident that it was no unauthorized usurpation on the part of Eli (I Sam. ii:27. 28). (2) Judge. Eli also acted as regent or civil judge of Israel after the death of Samson. This function, indeed, seems to have been intended, by the theocratical constitution, to devolve upon the high-priest, by virtue of his office, in the absence of any person specially appointed by the Divine King, to deliver and govern Israel. He is said to have judged Israel forty years (I Sam. iv: 18); 582 ELIAB the Septuagint makes it twenty; and chronologers are divided on the matter. But the probability seems to be that the forty years comprehend the whole period of his administration as high- priest and judge, including, in the first half, the twenty years in which Samson is said to have judged Israel (Judg. xvi :3I), when some of his civil functions in Southern Palestine may have been in abeyance. As Eli died at the age of nine- ty-eight (I Sam. iv: I5), the forty years must have commenced when he was fifty-eight years old. (3) His Sons. His sons, Hophni and Phine- has, whom he invested with authority, miscon- ducted themselves so outrageously as to excite deep disgust among the people, and render the Services of the tabernacle odious in their eyes. Of this misconduct Eli was aware, but contented himself with mild and ineffectual remonstrances, where his station required severe and vigorous aCtlCIn. (4) Prophetic Warnings. For this neglect the judgment of God was at length pronounced upon his house, through the young Samuel, who, under peculiar circumstances (see SAMUEL), had been attached from childhood to his person (I Sam. ii:29; iii:18). (5) Death. Some years passed without any apparent fulfillment of this denunciation—but it came at length in one terrible crash, by which the old man’s heart was broken. The Philistines had gained the upper hand over Israel, and the ark of God was taken to the field, in the con- fidence of victory and safety from its presence. But in the battle which followed, the ark it- self was taken by the Philistines, and the two Sons of Eli, who were in attendance upon it, were slain. The high-priest, then blind with age, sat by the wayside at Shiloh, awaiting tidings from the war, ‘for his heart trembled for the ark of God.' A man of Benjamin, with his clothes rent, and with earth upon his head, brought the fatal news; and Eli heard that Israel was defeated —that his sons were slain—that the ark of God was taken—at which last word he fell heavily from his seat, and died (I Sam. iv:18). The ultimate doom upon Eli's house was ac- complished when Solomon removed Abiathar (the last high-priest of this line) from his office, and restored the line of Eleazar in the person of Zadok. (See ABIATHAR.) (6) Character. Eli seems to have been a re- ligious man; there was no indication of hypocrisy or want of faith in God. But, though he may have been vigorous in other respects in his earlier years, he apparently had no adequate sense of pa- ternal authority, and contented himself with a mild rebuke, when the most unbending severity was de- manded, if lighter measures failed. It was no case of disrespect to himself or to a fellow- man, but the foulest abuse of the pliestliuud Uſ Jehovah, which he had been appointed, as head, to guard and honor. He must have been not only an easy or indulgent parent, but cold and phlegmatic by nature, else such a scandal would have roused him to prompt and vigorous action. (Geikie, Aſozers zwith the Bible.) 2. The last of our Saviour’s ancestors ac- cording to the flesh (Luke iii:23). 3. The exclamation of Christ on the cross (Matt. xxvii:46), (meaning “My God”). ELIAB (e-li'ab), (Heb. Pès, elee-awº', God is father). e © 1. 'Son of Helon and chief of the tribe of Zebulun, when the census was taken in the wilder- ELIADA - 583 ness of Sinai (Num. i :9; ii:7; vii:24, 29; x:16). (B. C. I657.) - 2. Son of Pallu or Phallu, who belonged to one of the chieſ families of the tribe of Reuben. His Sons or descendants Dathan and Abiram were leaders in the revolt against Moses (Num. xxvi :8, 9; xvi; I, I2; Deut. xi :6). (B. C. after 1856.) The eldest of David’s brothers (I Chron. ii: 13; I Sam. xvi;6; xvii: 13, 28), (B. C. 1063), whose daughter Abihail married her second cousin Rehoboam (2 Chron. xi :18). A Levite who was both doorkeeper and musician in the time of David (I Chron. xv :I8, 20; xvi;5). (B. C. IoI3.) 5. A Gadite refugee, who fleeing from Saul came to David (I Chron, xii:9). (B. C. Tofit.) 6. According to I Chron. vi. 27, a Levite, son of Nahath and ancestor of Samuel, the prophet. The name appears as Elihu in I Sam. i : I, and Eliel in I Chron. Vi :34). (B. C. 1250.) ELIADA (elia da), (Heb. 27.8, elyaw-daw, God is knowing). 1. Next to the youngest of the sons born to David after his establishment in Jerusalem (2 Sam. v . It ; I Chron. iii:8). He was apparently the son of a wife and not a concubine. In I Chron. xiv:7, the name seems to be changed to º but why, it is not possible to say. (B. C. IO33. 3. A Benjamite warrior, who led 200,000 of his tribe to Jehoshaphat's army (2 Chron. xvii:17). (B. C. 945.) --- ELIADAH (e-li'a-dah), (Heb. Pº, eſ-yaw- dazy", God knows), a less correct form of Eliada, an Aramite of Zobah, and father of Rezon, who harassed Solomon with a band of marauders (I Kings xi:23). f EiEAH (eli'ah) (Heb. Tºš, ay ſee yaw, God. Jehovah). - 1. A son of Jeroham, a Benjamite. He was chief of his tribe (I Chron. viii:27). (B. C. I.300.) 2. One of the sons of Elam, or Bene-Elam, who º, ºn a foreign wife (Ezra x :26). (B. C. 450. * ‘. . . ) ELIAHBA (e-li'ah-bá), (Heb. Sº, el-yakh- bazºy', whom God hides), a Shaalbonite, who was one of David's guard of ‘thirty' (2 Sam. xxiii:32; I Chron. xi:33), B. C. IO46. ELIAKIM (e-li'a-kim), Åeezz', God of raising). 1. Son of Hilkiah, steward of the household, or keeper of the palace under King Hezekiah (2 Kings xviii: 18, 26, 37). 2. See JEHOIAKIM. (Heb. cºs, e/-yazy- 3. A priest who assisted Nehemiah in the dedi- cation of the new wall of Jerusalem (Neh. xii:4I). (B. C. 446.) - 4. Brother of Joseph, and father of Azor (Matt. 1 : I.3). 5. Son of Melea and father of Jonan (Luke iii:30, 31). (B. C. after IoI2, ) - ELIAM (ei'am), (Heb. Fºs, eſſee-awm). 1. Father of David's wife Bath-Sheba (2 Sam. xi :3). In I Chron. iii:5, his name is given as Ammiel and the daughter's as Bath-shua. (B. C. Ioa6.) The transposition of letters in Ammiel does not alter the meaning. 2. Son of Ahithophel, the Gilonite ; he was one of David’s “thirty” guards (2 Sam. xxiii:34). (B. C. IoA8.) An ancient Jewish tradition Says Ilial the Eliaius wel e ille Salile per SU11. ELIAS (e-li'as), (Gr. 'HXias, ay-lee'as). See ELIJAH. t ELIEZER ELIASAPH (elia siph), (Heb. Tº , eºſaw Sazºſ", added of God). 1. Son of Deuel, and head of the tribe of Dan when the census was taken in Sinai (Num. i :14; ii:I4; vii:42, 47; x:20). (B. C. 1657.) ...”. Son of Lael, and a Levite chief (Num. iii:24). (B. C. 1657.) ELIASHIB (eºshib), (Heb. Fº, elyaw- sheeó', God will restore). 1. A high-priest, of the race of Eleazar, who Succeeded Joiakim, in the time of Nehemiah (Neh. iii: 1, 20, 21). (B. C. 445.) 3. A priest in the time of David. He occupied the eleventh place in the order of the governors of the sanctuary (I Chron. xxiv:12). (B. C. IOI.3.) 3. A son of Elioenai of the royal family of Judah (I Chron. iii:24). 4. A musician of the time of Ezra who had married a foreign wife (Ezra x:24). (B. C. 458.) 5. Son of Zattu (Ezra x:27). (B. C. 458.) 6. Son of Bani (Ezra x :36). These last two had also married foreign wives. (B. C. 458.) ELIATHAH (e-li'a-thah), (Heb. Tºš, eſſee- azey-ſhaw, to whom God comes), a Son of Heman. He with twelve of his family had charge of the twentieth division of the temple service (I Chron. XXV:4, 27), B. C. IOI3. |- ELIDAD (e-li'dad), (Heb. "Tºš, el-ee-dawd", loved of God), son of Chislon, of Benjamin, a deputy, appointed to divide the land of Canaan (Num. xxxiv:21), B. C. 1619. ELIEL (elie), (Heb. ***, elee-ale, God of gods). g 1. A head of that portion of the tribe of Manas- seh which was on the east of the Jordan (I Chron. v .24). (B. C. 1612.) 2. One of the chiefs in the tribe of Benjamin (I Chron. viii:20). (B. C. about 1340.) 3. Son of Toah, a forefather of the prophet Samuel. He is probably identical with Elihu 2. ' and Eliab (I Chron. vi :34). (B. C. about 1250.) 4. A Mahavite and prominent in David's guard (1 Chron. xi.;46). (B. C. 1048.) 5. A chief in the tribe of Benjamin, and one Of º; Bene-Shashak (I Chron. viii:22). (B. C. I340. 3. A Levite who had charge of the temple of- ferings in the time of Hezekiah (2 Chron. xxxi : I3). (B. C. 726.) 7. A Kohathite Levite, who was chief of the Bene-Chebron, when the ark was removed from the house of Obed-edom to Jerusalem (I Chron. xv :9, II). (B. C. IO42.) * 8. One of the Gadites, who came to David across the Jordan when he was hiding from Saul in the wilderness (I Chron. xii; II). One of David's guard of thirty men (I Chroti. xi :47). (B. C. IO48.) ELIENAI (e'li-e 'na-i), (Heb. sºyººs. e/-ee-ay- mah'ee, toward Jehovah are my eyes), One Of the Bene-Shimhi, a Benjamite, and chief in the tribe (1 Chron. viii:20), B. C. 1340. * ELIEZEReiszer), (Heb. Tºš, el-ee-enger, God of help). - This is the same name as Eleazar—whence came the abbreviated Lazar or Lazarus of the New Testament. It is proper to note this here, because the parable which describes Lazarus in Abraham's bosom (Luke xvi;23) has been Sup- posed to contain a latent allusion to the name of ELIEZER Eliezer, whom, before the birth of Ishmael and Isaac, Abraham regarded as his heir. 1. A steward of Abraham. Abraham, being promised a son, says:—'I go childless, and the steward of my house is this Eliezer of Damascus Behold, to me thou hast given no seed; and, lo, one born in mine house is mine heir' (Gen. xv.2,3). The common notion is that Eliezer was Abraham's house-born slave, adopted as his heir, and meanwhile his chief and con- fidential servant, and the same who was after- wards sent into Mesopotamia to seek a wife for Isaac. This last point we may dismiss with the remark that there is not the least evidence that ‘the elder servant of his house' (Gen. xxiv:2), whom Abraham charged with this mission, was the same as Eliezer; and our attention may there- fore be confined to the verses which have been quoted. . - It is obvious that the third verse is not properly a sequel to the second, but a repetition of the statement contained in the second; and, being thus regarded as parallel passages, the two may be used to explain each other. “Eliezer of Damascus,” or ‘Damascene-Eliezer,' is the subject of both verses. The obvious mean- ing is, that Eliezer was born in Damascus; and how is this compatible with the notion of his being Abraham's house-born slave, seeing that Abraham's household never was at Damascus? The expression, ‘the steward of mine house,” in verse 2, will explain the sense of ‘one born in mine house is mine heir,’ in verse 3. The first phrase, literally translated, is ‘the Son of posses- sion of my house,’ i. e. one who shall possess my house, my property, after my death ; and is therefore exactly the same as the phrase in the next verse, ‘the son of my house (paraphrased by ‘one born in mine house') is mine heir.’ This removes every difficulty. This view, that Eliezer was actually Abraham's near relative and heir-at-law, removes another dif- ficulty, which has always occasioned some embar- rassment, and which arises from the fact, that while he speaks of Eliezer as his heir, his nephew Lot was in his neighborhood, and had been, until lately, the companion of his wanderings. If Eliezer was Abraham's servant, it might well occasion surprise that he should speak of him and not of Lot as his heir. (B. C. 2088.) 2. The second of the two sons born to Moses while an exile in the land of Midian (Exod. xviii: 4). Eliezer had a son called Zebadiah (I Chron. viii:17). 3. One of the sons of Becher and grandson of Benjamin (I Chron. vii:8). (B. C. after 1856.) 4. One of the priests, who in the time of Da- vid, was appointed to accompany the ark on its removal from the house of Obed-edom to Jeru- salem (I Chron. xv :24). (B. C. Ioa 3.) 5. Son of Zichri, ruler of the Reubenites in the reign of David (I Chron. xxvii:16). (B. C. be- fore IoI3.) 6. A prophet, son of Dodavah (2 Chron. xx: 37), who uttered a rebuke against Jehoshaphat (2 Chron. xx:35–37). (B. C. 895.) 7. Son of Jorim, descendant of Nathan, Da- vid’s son (Luke iii:29). 8. A chief Israelite sent by Ezra to Casiphia on a commission (Ezra viii:16). (B. C. 457.) 9. A priest, who in the time of Ezra had married a foreign wife (Ezra x:18). (B. C. 456.) 10. A Levite, guilty of the same offense as 9 (Ezra x:23). 11. An Israelite who had also taken a foreign wife (Ezra x:3I). 584 ELIJAH ELIHABA (e-li'ha-ba). See ELIAHBA. ELIHoENAI (ai-ho ena-) (Heb. º. e/-ye-ho-ay-mah'ee, toward Jehovah are my eyes), One of the sons of Bene-Pahathmoab, who returned under Ezra with 200 men from captivity (Ezra viii.4), B.C. IO43-13. * EithoREH (gii-ho'reph), (Heb. Tºš, e. ee-Åho'ref, God of autumn), he and his brother Ahiah were of the scribes of Solomon (I Kings iv: 3), B.C. IoI5. ELIHU (e-li'hu), (Heb. sinºs, e/-ee-hoo”, my God is he). 1. One of Job’s friends, described as ‘the son of Barachel, a Buzite, of the kindred of Ram' (Job xxxii:2). This is usually understood to imply that he was descended from Buz, the Son of Abraham's brother Nahor, from whose family the city called Buz (Jer. xxv :23) also took its name. Elihu's name does not appear among those of the friends who came in the first instance to condole with Job, nor is his presence indicated till the debate between the afflicted man and his three friends had been brought to a conclusion. Then, finding there was no answer to Job's last speech, he comes forward with considerable modesty, which he loses as he proceeds, to remark on the debate, and to deliver his own opinion on the points at issue. The character and scope of his orations are described elsewhere. (See JoB, Book of.) It appears, from the manner in which Elihu introduces himself, that he was by much the youngest of the party; and it is evident that he had been present from the commencement of the discussion, to which he had paid very close at- tention. This would suggest that the debate be- tween Job and his friends was carried on in the presence of a deeply-interested auditory, among which was this Elihu, who could not for- bear from interfering when the controversy ap- peared to have reached an unsatisfactory conclu- sion. (B. C. about 2200.) 2. Son of Tohu, and forefather of the prophet Samuel (1 Sam. i :I). In I Chron. vi.34, Eliel occurs in the same position; Elihu is probably cor- rect. 3. Chief of the tribe of Judah (I Chron. xxvii:18). It is probably a variation of Eliab 3. 4. One of the captains of “thousands” from the tribe of Manasseh who assisted David against the band of Amalekites (I Chron. xii:20). (B. C. IO53.) . & 5. A porter in the house of Jehovah in the time of David. He was a Korhite Levite, the son of Shemaiah, of the family of Obed-edom (1 Chron. xxvi :7). (B. C. IoI3.) ELIJAH (elijah), (Heb. º. ay-ſee-yaw, God. Jehovah). - This wonder-working prophet is introduced to our notice like another Melchizedek (Gen. xiv:18; Heb. vii:3), without any mention of his father or mother, or of the beginning of his days. From this silence of scripture as to his parentage and birth, much vain speculation has arisen. 1. Elijah and Ahab. Some suppose that Eli- jah is called a Tishbite from Tishbeh, a city be- yond the Jordan. Others suppose that Tishbite means converter or reformer. (1) Denunciation. The very first sentence that the prophet utters is a direful denunciation of Ahab ; and this he supports by a solemn oath. ‘As the Lord God of Israel liveth, before whom I stand, there shall not be dew or rain these years (i. e. three and a half years, Luke iv: 25; James ELIJAH v:17), but according to my word’ (I Kings xvii: I). Before, however, he spoke thus, it would seem that he had been warning this most wicked king as to the fatal consequences which must re- sult both to himself and his people, from the iniq- uitous course he was then pursuing: and this may account for the apparent abruptness with which he opens his commission. We can imagine Ahab and Jezebel being greatly incensed against Elijah for having foretold and prayed that such calamities might befall them. For some time they might attribute the drought under which the nation suffered to natural causes and not to the interposition of the prophet. (2) The Brook Cherith. When, however, they saw the denunciation of Elijah taking effect far more extensively than had been anticipated, they would naturally seek to wreak their vengeance upon him as the cause of their sufferings. But we do not find him taking one step for his own preser- vation, till the God whom he served said, “Get thee hence, and turn thee eastward, and hide thy- self by the brook Cherith, that is before Jordan; and it shall be that thou shalt drink of the brook; and I have commanded the ravens to feed thee there’ (I Kings xvii:3, 4). Other and better means of protection from the impending danger might seem open to him ; but, regardless of these, he hastened to obey the Divine mandate, and ‘went and dwelt by the brook Cherith that is before Jordan’ (I Kings xvii:5). (See CHERITH.) Some commentators, availing themselves of the fact that orebim, which we translate ravens, means, in Ezek. xxvii:27, merchants, have tried to explain away the miraculous character of God’s preserva- tion of his servant at Cherith. Others again have thought that the original signifies Arabians, as in 2 Chron. xxi :16; Neh. iv.:7; where the like word is used; or possibly the inhabitants of the city Arabah, near Beth-shan (Josh. xv :6, and xviii: 18, etc.). still believe that ravens and not men were the instruments which God, on this occasion, em- ployed to carry needful food to his exiled and per- secuted servant; and in this he would give us a manifest proof of His sovereignty over all creat- ures. But, it has been inquired, how could these birds obtain food of a proper kind, and of a suffi- cient quantity, to supply the daily wants of the prophet? The answer to this inquiry is very sim- ple. We cannot tell. It is enough for us to know that God engaged to make a provision for him, and that He failed not to fulfill his engagement. We need not to speculate, as some have done, as to whether this supply was taken from Ahab's or Jehoshaphat’s table, or from that of one of the Seven thousand of Israel who had not bowed the knee to Baal. A fresh trial now awaits this servant of God, and in the manner in which he bears it we see the strength of his faith. For one year, as some Suppose, God had miraculously provided for his bodily wants at Cherith; but the brook which here- tofore had afforded him the needful refreshment there became dried up. - (8) Zarephath. . Encouraged by past experi- ence of his heavenly Father's care of him, the prophet still waited patiently till He said, “Arise (I Kings xvii:9), get thee to Zarephath, which belongeth to Zidon, and dwell there; behold, I have commanded a widow woman there to sustain thee.’ He then, at once, set out on the journey, and now arrived at Zarephath, he, in the arrange- Ilieill of God's providence, met, as he entered its gate, the very woman who was deputed to give him immediate support. In the face of such opinions as these, we 585 ELIJAH But his faith is again put to a sore test, for he found her engaged in a way which was well cal- culated to discourage all his hopes; she was gath- ering Sticks for the purpose, as she assured him, of cooking the last meal, and now that the famine prevailed there, as it did in Israel, she saw noth- ing before her and her only son but starvation and death. How then could the prophet ask for, and how could she think of giving, a part of her last morsel ? The same Divine Spirit inspired him to assure her that she and her child should be even miracu- lously provided for during the continuance of the famine; and also influenced her heart to receive, without doubting, the assurance. The kindness of this widow in baking the first cake for Elijah was well requited with a prophet's reward (Matt. x: 41, 42). She afforded one meal to him, and God afforded many to her (see I Kings xvii:16). (4) Answered Prayer. God saw fit to visit them with a temporary calamity which is narrated as follows: “And it came to pass that the Son of the woman, the mistress of the house, fell sick; and his sickness was so sore that there was no life left in him' (I Kings xvii:17). Verse 18 contains the expostulation with the prophet of this be- reaved widow ; she rashly imputes the death to his presence. Elijah retaliates not, but calmly takes the dead child out of the mother's bosom, and lays it on his own bed (verse 19), that there he may, in private, pray the more fervently for its restora- tion. His prayer was heard, and answered by the restoration of life to the child, and of gladness to the widow’s heart. (5) Message to Ahab. Since now, however, the long-protracted famine, with all its attendant horrors, failed to detach Ahab and his guilty peo- ple from their abominable idolatries, God merci- fully gave them another opportunity of repenting and turning to Himself. For three years and six months (James v : 17) the destructive famine had spread its deadly influence over the whole nation of Israel. Such was the state of things in Israel when Elijah once again stood before Ahab. Wish- ing not to tempt God by going unnecessarily into danger, he first presented himself to good Obadiah (I Kings xviii:7). This principal serv- ant of Ahab was also a true servant of God; and in recognizing the prophet he treated him with honor and respect. Elijah requested him to announce to Ahab that he had returned. Obadiah, apparently stung by the unkindness of this request, replied, ‘What have I sinned, that thou shouldest thus expose me to Ahab's rage, who will certainly slay me for not apprehending thee, for whom he has so long and so anxiously sought in all lands and in all confederate countries, that they should not harbor a traitor whom he looks upon as the author of the famine,' etc. More- over, he would delicately intimate to Elijah how he had actually jeoparded his own life in securing that of one hundred of the Lord’s prophets, and whom he had fed at his own expense. Satisfied with Elijah's reply to this touching appeal, where- in he removed all his fears about the Spirit's carrying himself away (as 2 Kings ii:II-I6; Acts viii:39), he resolves to be the prophet's messenger to Alhab. (6) Meeting with the King. Intending to be revenged on him, or to inquire when rain might be expected, Ahab now came forth to meet Elijah. He at once charged him with being the main cause of all the calamities which he and the nation had suffered. But Elijah ſlug back the chargc tipOn himself, assigning the real cause to be his own sin of idolatry. Regarding, however, his magis- ELIJAH terial position, while he reproved his sin, he re- quests him to exercise his authority in summon- ing an assembly to Mount Carmel, that the con- troversy between them might be decided, whether the king or the prophet was Israel’s troubler. (7) Mount Carmel. Whatever the secret motives which induced Ahab to comply with this proposal, God directed the result. Elijah offered to decide this controversy between God and Baal by a miracle from Heaven (I Kings xviii:19). As fire was the element over which Baal was sup- posed to preside, the prophet proposes (wishing to give them every advantage), that, two bullocks being slain, and laid each upon a distinct altar, the one for Baal, the other for Jehovah, which- ever should be consumed by fire must proclaim whose the people of Israel were, and whom it was their duty to serve. (8) Priests of Baal. Elijah wills to have sum- moned not only all the elders of Israel, but also the four hundred priests of Baal belonging to Jezebel’s court, and the four hundred and fifty who were dispersed over the kingdom (verse 19). Confident of success, because doubtless God had revealed the whole matter to him, he enters the lists of contest with the four hundred and fifty priests of Baal. Having reconstructed an altar which had once belonged to God, with twelve stones—as if to declare that the twelve tribes of Israel should again be united in the service of Jehovah—and having laid thereon his bullock, and filled the trench by which it was surrounded with large quantities of water, lest any suspicion of deceit might occur to any mind, the prophet gives place to the Baalites—allows them to make trial first. In vain did these deceived and deceiv- ing men call, from morning till evening, upon Baal —in vain did they now mingle their own blood with that of the sacrifice: no answer was given— no fire descended (verse 26). (9) Descent of Fire. Elijah having rebuked their folly and wickedness with the sharpest irony, and it being at last evident to all that their efforts to obtain the wished-for fire were vain, now, at the time of the evening sacrifice, offered up his prayer. The Baalites’ prayer was long, that of the prophet is short—charging God with the care of His covenant, of His truth, and of His glory— when, behold, ‘the fire came down, licked up the water, and consumed not only the bullock, but the very stones of the altar also’ (verse 38). The effect of this on the mind of the people was what the prophet desired : acknowledging the awful presence of the Godhead, they exclaim, as with one voice, ‘The Lord He is God; the Lord He is God l’ Seizing the opportunity whilst the people’s hearts were warm with the fresh conviction of this miracle, he bade them take those juggling priests and kill them, 10) Answer to Prayer for Rain. All this Elijah might lawfully do, at God's direction, and under the sanction of His law (Deut. xiii:5; xviii: 2O). Ahab having now publicly vindicated God’s violated law by giving his royal sanction to the execution of Baal's priests, Elijah informed him that he may go up to his tent on Carmel to take re- freshment, for God will send the desired rain (verse 41). In the meantime he prayed earnestly (James v :17, 18) for this blessing: God hears and answers: a little cloud arises out of the Mediter- ranean sea, in sight of which the prophet now was, diffuses itself gradually over the entire face of the heavens, and now empties its refreshing waters upon the whole land of Israel ! Here was another proof of the Divine mission of the prophet, from which, we should imagine, the whole nation 586 ELIJAH must have profited; but subsequent events would seem to prove that the impression produced by these dealings of God was of a very partial and temporary character. Impressed with the hope that the report of God's miraculous actings at Carmel might not only reach the ear, but also penetrate and soften the hard heart of Jezebel, and anxious that the reformation of his country should spread in and about Jezreel also, Elijah, strength- ened, as we are told, from on high, now accom- panies Ahab thither on foot. (11) Jezebel. How ill-founded the prophet's expectation was, subsequent events too painfully proved. Jezebel, instead of receiving Elijah obvi- ously as the messenger of God for good to her nation, now secretly conceives and openly declares her fixed purpose to put him to death (I Kings xix: I). Terrified by the knowledge of this vile woman’s design he fled into the wilderness and there longed for death. - (12) Angel Ministry. But God is still gracious to him. He now, alone in the wilderness and at Mount Horeb, will at once touch his heart and correct his petulancy by the ministration of His angel, and by a fearful exhibition of His Divine power. And having done this, revealing Himself in the gentle accents of a still voice, He announces to him that he must go and anoint Hazael king over Syria, Jehu king over Israel, and Elisha prophet in his own place, ere death can put a period to his labors (I Kings xix: I5). When God had comforted His prophet by telling him of these three instruments he had in store to vindicate his own insulted honor, then he con- . vinced him of his mistake in saying ‘I only am left alone,' etc., by the assurance that there were seven thousand in Israel who had not bowed the knee to Baal. (13) Elisha. Leaving the cave of Horeb, Eli- jah now proceeded to the field where he found Elisha in the act of ploughing, and, without utter- ing a word, he cast his prophet’s mantle over him, which was a symbol of his being clothed with God’s spirit (verse 19). The Divine impression produced upon the mind of Elisha by this act of Elijah made him willing to leave all things and fol- low him. (14) Naboth. For about six years from this calling of Elisha we find no notice in the sacred history of Elijah, till God sent him once again to pronounce sore judgments upon Ahab and Jezebel for the murder of unoffending Naboth (I Kings xxi : 17, etc.). How he and his associate in the prophetic office employed themselves during this time we are not told. We need not dwell upon the complicated character of Ahab's wickedness (I Kings xxi) in winking at the murderous means whereby Jezebel proclired for him the in- alienable property of Naboth. (See AHAB ; NA- BOTH.) When he seemed to be triumphing in the possession of his ill-obtained gain, Elijah stood before him, and threatened him, in the name of the Lord (I Kings xxi : 19–25), B. C. 869 (comp. 2 Kings is :21-26 inclusive), that God would retali- ate blood for blood, and that not on himself only— ‘his seventy sons shall die, and (comp. 2 Kings ix:Io) Jezebel shall become meat for dogs.” . Fearing that these predictions would prove true, as those about the rain and fire had done, Ahab now assumed the manner of a penitent; and, though subsequent acts proved the insincerity of his repentance, yet God rewards his temporary abasement by a temporary arrest of judgment. We see, however, in after parts of this sacred history, how the judgments denounced against ELIJAH him, his abandoned consort, and children, took effect to the very letter. - 2. Elijah and Ahaziah. Elijah again retires from the history till an act of blasphemy on the part of Ahaziah, the son and successor of Ahab, causes God to call him forth. (1) Message to Ahaziah. Ahaziah met with an injury, and, fearing that it might be unto death, he, as if to prove himself worthy of being the Son of idolatrous Ahab and Jezebel, sent to consult Baalzebub, the idol-god of Ekron; but the Angel of the Lord told Elijah to go forth and meet the messengers of the king (2 Kings i:3, 4), and as- sure them that he shall not recover. Suddenly reappearing before their master, he said unto them, ‘Why are ye now turned back?' when they answered, ‘there came a man up to meet us, and said unto us, Go, turn again unto the king that sent you, and say unto him, thus saith the Lord : is it not because thcre is no God in Isracl that thou sendest to inquire of Baalzebub, the god of Ekron P. Wherefore thou shalt not come down from that bed on which thou art gone up, but shalt surely die.’ (2) Armed Men. Conscience seems to have at once whispered to him that the man who dared to arrest his messengers with such a communica- tion must be Elijah, the bold but unsuccessful re- prover of his parents. Determined to chastise him for such an insult, he sent a captain and fifty armed men to bring him into his presence; but lo! at Elijah's word the fire descends from Heaven and consumes the whole band Attributing this destruction of his men to some natural cause, he sent forth another company, on whom though the same judgment fell, this impious king is not satis- fied till another and a similar effort is made to capture the prophet. The captain of the third band implored mercy at the hands of the prophet, and mercy was granted. (3) Death of Ahaziah. Descending at once from Carmel, he accompanies him to Ahaziah. Fearless of his wrath Elijah now repeats to the king himself what he had before said to his mes- sengers, and agreeably thereto, the sacred narra- tive informs us that Ahaziah died. (4) Translation of Elijah. The above was the last more public effort which the prophet made to reform Israel. His warfare being now accom- plished on earth, God, whom he had so long and so faithfully served, will translate him in a chariot of fire to Heaven. Conscious of this, he deter- mines to spend his last moments in imparting Divine instruction to, and pronouncing his last benediction upon, the students in the colleges of Refh-e1 and Jerichn; accordingly, he made a cir- cuit from Gilgal, near the Jordan, to Beth-el, and from thence to Jericho. Wishing either to be alone at the moment of being caught up to Heaven; or, what is more probable, anxious to test the affection of Elisha (as Christ did that of Peter), he delicately intimates to him not to ac- company him in this tour. But the faithful Elisha, to whom, as also to the schools of the prophets, God had revealed his purpose to remove Elijah, declares with an oath his fixed determina- tion not to forsake his master now at the close of his earthly pilgrimage. Ere yet, however, the chariot of God descended for him, he asks what he should do for Elisha. The latter, feeling that, as the former's successor, he was, in a sense, his son, and, therefore, entitled to a double portion; or rather, conscious of the complicated and diffi- cult duties which now awaited him, asks for a double portion of Elijah's spirit. Elijah, acknowl- 587 ELIKA edging the magnitude of the request, yet promises to grant it on the contingency of Elisha seeing him at the moment of his rapture. Possibly this contingency was placed before him in order to make him more on the watch, that the glorious departure of Elijah should not take place without his actually seeing it. Whilst standing on the other side of the Jordan, whose waters were mirac- ulously parted for them to pass over on dry ground, and possibly engaged in discourse about anointing Hazael king over Syria, angels descend- ed, as in a fiery chariot, and, in the sight of fifty of the sons of the prophets and Elisha, carried Elijah into Heaven. Elisha, at this wonderful sight, cries out, like a bereaved child, ‘My Father, my Father, the chariot of Israel and the horsemen thereof;’ as if he had said, Alas ! the strength and Saviour of Israel is 110w depal led ! But 110 ; God designed that the mantle which fell from Elijah as he ascended should now remain with Elisha as a pledge that the office and spirit of the former had now fallen upon himself. J. W. D. (5) Elijah on the Mount of Transfiguration. That wild figure, that stern voice, those deeds of blood, which stand out in such startling relief from the pages of the old records of Elijah, are seen by us all silvered over with the “white and glistering” light of the Mountain of Transfigura- tion (Matt. xvii:2; Mark ix:2). When he last stood on the soil of his native Gilead he was des- titute, afflicted, tormented, wandering about “in sheep-skins and goat-skins, in deserts and moun- tains, and dens and caves of the earth.” But these things have passed away into the distance, and with them has receded the fiery zeal, the de- structive wrath, which accompanied them. Under that heavenly light they fall back into their proper proportions, and Ahab and Jezebel, Baal and Ash- toreth are ‘forgotten, as we listen to the prophet talking to our Lord—talking of that event which was to be the consummation of all that he had suf- fered and striven for—“talking of his decease which he should accomplish at Jerusalem.” (Smith, Bib. Dict.) 3. Character. Elijah's character was one of great moral sublimity and unquestioning faith in God. The sterner side of his nature is mainly portrayed in the Old Testament. But the refer- ences in the New Testament set forth a very dif- ferent side of his character to that brought out in the historical narrative. They speak of his being a man of like passions with ourselves (James v :17); of his kindness to the widow of Sarepta (Luke iv:25); of his “restoring all things” (Matt. xvii:II); “turning the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disohedient to the wisdom of the just” (Mal. iv:5, 6; Luke i :17). The moral lessons to be derived from these facts must be expanded elsewhere than here; it will be sufficient in this place to call attention to the great differences which may exist between the popular and contemporary view of an eminent character, and the reaſ settled judgment formed in the prog- ress of time, when the excitement of his more brilliant but more evanescent deeds has passed away. Precious indeed are the scattered hints and faint touches which enable us thus to Soften the harsh outlines or the discordant coloring of the earlier picture. (Smith, Bib. Dict.) ELIKA (eli’ka), (Heb. Sº, eſſee-Raw, God his rejecter), one of David's guard (2 Sam. xxiii: 25). He was a Harodite, i. e., from some place called Charod, but his name is wanting in the Cor- responding list (1 Chron. xi:27), B.C. 1046. ELIM ELIMI (e'lim), (Heb. Eºs, ay-ſeem', trees), sec- ond station in the desert of Israel (Exod. xv.:27; Num. xxxiii:9), where they encamped for a month (Exod. xvi;I). ELIMELECH (e-limelek), (Heb. Tºš, elee. mee/."le/3, God the king), a native of Bethlehem, husband of Naomi, and father by her of two sons, Mahlon and Chilion (B.C. I 368). In a time of scarcity he withdrew with his family into the land of Moab, where he died (Ruth i: I-3). (See NAOMI; RUTH). s ELIoENAI (eli-o-ena-) (Heb. *S, elyo. ay-ma/*'ee, a contracted form of the name Elihoe- nai, toward /e/hovah are may eyes). - 1. A descendant of Benjamin and head of one of the families of the sons of Becher (I Chron. vii:8). (B. C. 1856.) 2. Head of one of the families of the Simeonites (I Chron. iv:36). (B. C. 1618.) 3. Grandson of Kore and son of Meshelemiah. He was a Korhite Levite, who with his father and sixteen others of his brothers and relatives guarded the east-gate of the “house of Jehovah.” As there were six Levites daily on guard at this gate, his turn would come every third day (I Chron. xxvi :3, 17). (B. C. IoI5.) 4. Eldest son of Neariah, son of Shemaiah. This would make him in the seventh generation . from Zerubbabel (I Chron. iii:23, 24). 460.) 5. Son of Pashur, and one of the priests in the days of Ezra, who married foreign wives (Ezra x:22). Perhaps he is the same as the one men- tioned in (Neh. xii:41), who assisted with trumpets at the dedication of the wall of Jeru- salem. (B. C. 457.) 6. Son of Zattu (Ezra x :27). He had married a foreign wife. (B. C. 457.) ELIPHAL (Šl'i-phil), (Heb. *S, eſſee-ſaw”, God his judge), one of David's guard, the son of Ur (1 Chron. xi:35), B.C. IO46. In 2 Sam. xxiii: 34, the name is given ELIPHELET. (See UR.) ELIPHALET (e-lipha-lè), (Heb. ºº, eſſee. ſeh'/ef, God delivers), the thirteenth and last of the sons born to David after his establishment in Jerusalem (2 Sam. v. I6; I Chron. xiv:7). In I Chron. iii:8 the name appears as ELIPHELET. ELPALET and PHALTIEL are also equivalents. (See ELIPHELET.) ELIPEIAZ (€l'i-phâz), (Heb. God the strong). 1. A son of Esau and Adah (Gen. xxxvi;4, Io, II, 16; I Chron. i :35, 36). (B. C. after 1963.) 2. One of the three friends who came to con- dole with Job in his affliction, and who took part in that remarkable discussion which occupies the book of job. (B. C. about 2200). He was of Teman in Idumaea ; and as Eliphaz the son of Esau had a son called Teman, from whom the place took its name, there is reason to conclude that this Eliphaz was a descendant of the former Eliphaz. Some, indeed, even go so far as to sup- pose that the Eliphaz of Job was no other than the son of Esau. This view is of course confined to those who refer the age of Job to the time of the patriarchs. Eliphaz is the first of the friends to take up the debate, in reply to Job’s passionate complaints. The scope of his argument and the character, of his oratory are described underanother head. (See JoB, Book OF.) He appears to have been the old- est of the speakers, from which circumstance, or from natural disposition, his language is more (B. C. Tºps, e/-ee-faz', 588 ELISHA mild and sedate than that of any of the other speakers. He begins his Orations with delicacy, and conducts his part of the argument with con- siderable address. His share in the controversy occupies chapters iv, v, xv, xxii. ELIPHELEH (siphºeien), (Heb. Tºº, e. ee-fe-ſay"hoo, whom God makes distinguished, whom God distinguishes), a Merarite Levite. David appointed him to play the harp at the time the Ark was brought up to Jerusalem (I Chron. xv:18, 2I), B.C. 982. ELIPHELET e-liph'e-lé), (Heb. º, elee. feh'/et, God of deliverance). 1. One of the sons of David, born after his establishment in Jerusalem (I Chron. iii:6). The name is given Elpalet (I Chron. xiv:5, 6). In I Chron. iii:8, the name occurs again as one of the sons of David. It is believed by some that there were not two sons by this name, but that it is a transcriber’s mistake. Both are omitted in Sam- uel; but both appear in two separate lists in Chronicles. (B. C. 989.) 2. One of David’s “thirty,” son of Ahashai, son of the Maachathite (2 Sam. xxiii:34). (B. C. . IO48.) In I Chron. xi :35, the name appears as Eliphal. 3. Son of Eshek and descendant of Saul and Jonathan (I Chron. viii:39). (B. C. 830.) 4. A leader of the Bene-Adonikam, who re- turned with Ezra from Babylon (Ezra viii: 13). (B. C. 459.) sº 5. One of the Bene-Hashum who, in the time of Ezra, marricq a forcign wife (Ezra x:33). (B. C. 458.) ELISABETH (e-líz'a-bêth), (Gr. "EXto 48er, el-ee- sab'et, from Heb. yºs, e/-ee-s/he/."ba/#, God her oath), wife of Zacharias, and mother of John the Baptist (Luke i:5). The name in this precise shape does not occur in the Old Testament, where the names of few females are given. But it is a He- brew name, the same in fact as ELISHEBA (which see). ELISEUS (äl'i-sé'us), (Gr. "EXuggalos), the same as Elisha in the English Translation of the New Testament (Luke iv:27). ELISHA (e-lisha), (Heb. *s, eleeshaw, God the deliverer). (1) Call. For the manner and the circum- stances in which Elisha was called to the prophetic office, see ELIJAH. (2) Successor to Elijah. Anxious to enter at once upon the duties of his sacred office, Elisha determined to visit the schools of the prophets which were on the other side of the Jordan. Ac- cordingly, returning to this river, and wishing that sensible evidence should be afforded, both to him- self and others, of the spirit and power of his de- parted master resting upon him, he struck its waters with Elijah's mantle, when they parted asunder and opened a way for him to pass over on dry land. Witnessing this miraculous transaction, the fifty sons of the prophets, who had seen from the opposite side Elijah's ascension, and who were awaiting Elisha's return, now, with becoming rev- erence, acknowledged him their spiritual head. (B. C. about 846.) (3) Divine Authority. The Divine authority by which Elisha became the successor of Elijah received further confirmation from the miracle whereby the bitter waters of Jericho were made sweet, and the place thereby rendered fit for the habitation of man (2 Kings ii: 19–22). As the general visitor of the schools of the ELISHA 589 prophets, Elisha now passes on from Jericho to the college which was at Bethel. (4) Mocked. Fre, however, he entered Bethel, there met him from thence (2 Kings ii:23, 24) children, or young people, who, no doubt instigated by their idolatrous parents, tauntingly told him to ascend into heaven, as did his master, Elijah. There was in their expressions an admixture of rudeness, infidelity, and impiety. But the in- habitants of Bethel were to know from bitter ex- perience, that to dishonor God’s prophets was to dishonor Himself; for Elisha was at the moment inspired to pronounce the judgment which at Once took effect: God, who never wants for instru- ments to accomplish his purposes, caused two she- bears to emerge from a neighboring wood, and destroy the young delinquents. (5) Assists Jehora.In. Jehoram, who reigned over Israel at this time, though not a Baalite, was yet addicted to the sin of Jeroboam : still he in- herits the friendship of Jehoshaphat, the good king of Judaea, whose counsel, possibly, under God, had detached him from the more gross idolatry of his father Ahab. Wishing to see the now re- volted king of Moab reduced to his wonted alle- giance to Israel, Jehoshaphat determined to go up to battle against him, together with Jehoram, and his own tributary the king of Edom. These com- bined armies met together on the plains of Edom. Confident in their own powers they press onward against the enemy; but, not meeting him, another of a more formidable character started up before them. In the midst of the arid plains of Arabia Petraea they could find no water. Jehoram de- plores the calamity into which they had fallen, but Jehoshaphat inquired for a prophet. On this, one of his courtiers said to Jehoram, ‘Here is Elisha, the son of Shaphat, who poured water on the hands of Elijah.” No sooner were they made acquainted with the fact that Elisha was at hand than the three kings waited upon him. Eli- sha, feeling that it was nought but superstitious fear, joined to the influence of Jehoshaphat, which led Jehoram thus to consult him, now in- dignantly and tauntingly advises him to go for succor to the gods of his father Ahab and of his mother Jezebel. The reproved monarch was then led to acknowledge the impotency of those gods in whom he had trusted, and the power of that God whom he had neglected. Still the man of God, seeing the hollowness of Jehoram's humilia- tion, continues: “As the Lord liveth, before whom I stand, surely were it not that I regard the pres- ence of Jehoshaphat, the king of Judah, I would not look toward thee.’ Having thus addressed Jehoram, Elisha desired a minstrel to be brought before him ; and now when his spirit is calmed by, perhaps, one of the songs of Zion, Jehovah approaches His prophet in the power of inspira- tion, as it is written, ‘The hand of the Lord came upon him.’ The minstrel ceases, and Elisha communicates the joyful intelligence that not only should water be miraculously supplied, but also that Moab, should be overcome. Accordingly the next morning, they realized the truth of this prediction. . But the same water which preserves their lives becomes the source of destruction to their enemies. The Moabites, who had received intelligence of the advance of the allied army, were now assembled upon their frontlers. When the sun was up, and its rosy light first fell upon the water, their vanguard, beholding it at a dis- tance, Supposed it to be blood. Thus the notion was rapidly spread from one end to another that the kings were surely slain, having fallen out amongst themselves. Hence there was a universal ELISHA shout, ‘Moab, to the spoil l’ and they went forward confident of victory. But beholding the Israelitish Squadrons advancing to meet them they fled in the utmost panic and confusion (2 Kings iii:4-24, etc). The war having terminated in the signal over- throw of the revolters, Elisha, who had returned home, is again employed in ministering bless- 111gS. (6) The Widow's Oil. The widow of a pious prophet presents herself before him (2 Kings iv: ), informs him that her husband having died in debt, his creditors were about to sell her two only sons, which, by an extension of the law (Exod. xxi.;7, and Lev. xxv :39), and by virtue of another (Exod. xxii:3), they had the power to do; and against this hard-hearted act she implores the prophet's assistance. Elisha therefore inquired how far she herself had the power to avert the threatened calamity. She replies that the only thing of which she was possessed was one pot of oil. By multiplying this, as did his predecessor Elijah in the case of the widow of Zarephath, he enabled her at once to pay off her debts and there- by to yer the liberty of her children (2 Kings 1V . I-7). . (7) Elisha and the Shunammite. In his visitations to the schools of the prophets his jour- ney lay through the city of Shunem, where lived a rich and godly woman. , Wishing that he should take up, more than occasionally, his abode under her roof, she proposed to her husband to con- struct for him a chamber. The husband at once consented, and, the apartment being completed and fitted up in a way that showed their proper con- ception of his feeling, the prophet becomes its oc- cupant. The woman was childless, and the grati- tude of the prophet for her disinterested kindness was evinced by the gift of a son, which the Lord, in answer to his prayer, bestowed upon her. This new pledge of their affection grows up till he is able to visit his fond father in the harvest-field, when all the hopes they had built up in him were ºrown by his being suddenly laid prostrate in death. The bereaved mother, with exquisite tenderness towards the feelings of the father, concealed the fact that the child was no more till she should see if it might please God, through Elisha, to restore him to life. She therefore hastens to Carmel, where she found the prophet, and informed him what had taken place. Conceiving probably that it was a case of mere suspended animation, or a swoon, the prophet sent Gehazi, his servant, to place his staff on the face of the child, in the hope that it might act as a stimulus to excite the ani- mal motions. But the mother, conscious that he was actually departed, continued to entreat that he himself would come to the chamber of the dead. He did so, and found that the soul of the child had indeed fled from the earthly tenement. Natural means belong to man; those that are supernatural belong to God: we should do our part, and beg of God to do his. On this principle the prophet on this occasion acted. God blesses the Iſleáils used, and answers the prayer presented by Elisha. The child is raised up and restored to the fond embrace of its grateful and rejoicing parents. (8) Healing of Naaman. The next remark- able event in the history of Elisha was the mirac- ulous healing of the malignant and incurable lep- rosy of the Syrian general, Naaman (2 Kings V: I, 27), whereby the neighboring nation had the op: portunity of learning the beneficence of that God of Israel, whose judgments had often brought them very low. The particulars are given under another head. (See NAAMAN.) - ELISHA (9) Elisha at Gilgal. Soon after this trans- action we find this man of God in Gilgal miraculously neutralizing the poison which had, by mistake, been mixed with the food of the prophets, and also feeding one hundred of them with twenty small loaves which had been sent for his own consumption (2 Kings iv:38, etc.) (10) Ax Raised. Notwithstanding the gen- eral profligacy of Israel, the schools of the proph- ets increased (B. C. 894.) This was, doubtless, ow- ing to the influence of Elisha. Accompanied by their master, a party of these young prophets, or theological students, came to the Jordan, and whilst one of them was ‘felling a beam (for the purpose of constructing there a house) the ax- head fell into the water.’ This accident was the more distressing because the ax was borrowed property. Elisha, however, soon relieved him by causing it miraculously to rise to the surface of the river. (11) Thwarts the Syrians. The sacred rec- ord again leads us to contemplate the prophet's usefulness, not only in such individual points of view, but also in reference to his country at large. Does the king of Syria devise well-concerted schemes for the destruction of Israel? God in- spires Elisha to detect and lay them Open to Jehoram. Benhadad, on hearing that it was he that thus caused his hostile movements to be frustrated, sent an armed band to Dothan in order to bring him bound to Damascus. (See BEN- HADAD.) The prophet's servant on seeing the host of the enemy which invested Dothan, was much alarmed, but by the prayer of Elisha God reveals to him the mighty company of angels which were set for their defense. Regardless of consequences, the prophet went forth to meet, the hostile band; and having again prayed, God So blinded them that they could not recognize the object of their search. The prophet then prom- ised to lead them to where they might see him with the natural eye. Trusting to his guidance they followed on till they reached the center of Samaria, when, the optical illusion being re- moved, Elisha stands in his recognized form be- fore them. The king was for putting them all to death ; but, through the interposition of him whom they had just before sought to destroy, they were honorably dismissed to their own coun- try. (B. C. 802.) (12) Famine in Samaria. But a year had scarcely elapsed from this time when Benhadad, unmindful of Israel’s kindness and forbearance, invests Samaria and reduces its inhabitants to a state of starvation. Still the king of Israel plunges deeper and deeper into sin, for he orders Elisha to be put to death, conceiving that it was his prayer which brought these suffering's upon himself and the nation. But God forewarng him of his danger, and inspires him to predict to the wicked king that by to-morrow “a measure of fine flour should be sold for a shekel, and two measures of barley for a shekel, in the gate of Samária.’ This assur- ance was not more comfortable than incredible; but when the lord on whose hand the king leaned expressed his disbelief, he was awfully rebuked by the assurance that he should see but not enjoy the benefit. The next night God caused the Syrians to hear the noise of chariots and horses; and conceiving that Jehoram had hired against them the kings of the Hittites and the king of Egypt, they fled from before the walls of Samaria —leaving their tents filled with gold and provis- ions—in the utmost panic and confusion. In this way did God, according to the word of Elisha, miraculously deliver the inhabitants of Samaria 590 ELISHA from a deadly enemy without, and from sore fam- ine within, its walls; another prediction moreover was accomplished; for the distrustful lord was trampled to death by the famished people in rush- ing through the gate of the city to the forsaken tents of the Syrians (2 Kings vii:5). (13) Elisha at Damascus. We next find the prophet in Damascus, but are not told what led him thither (B. C. 885). Benhadad, the king, whose counsels he had so often frustrated, rejoiced to hear of his presence; and now, as if he had forgotten the attempt he once made upon his life, dispatches a noble messenger with a costly pres- ent, to consult him concerning his sickness and recovery. The prophet replied that he should then die, though his indisposition was not of a deadly character. Seeing moreover, in prophetic vision, that the man Hazael, who now stood before him, should be king in Benhadad's stead; and that, as such, he would commit unheard-of cruelties upon his country, the prophet was moved to tears. How these painful anticipations of Elisha were realized the subsequent history of this man proved. (14) Jehu Anointed. For a considerable time after Elisha had sent to anoint Jehu king Over Israel we find no mention of him in the sacred record. We have reason to suppose that he was utterly neglected by Jehu, Jehoahaz, and Joash, who reigned in succession. Neither the sanctity of his life nor the stupendous miracles he wrought had the effect of reforming the nation at large : much of the time of his latter years was, doubt- less, spent in the schools of the prophets. (15) Death. At length, worn out by his public and private labors, and at the age of 90—during 60 of which he is supposed to have prophesied—he is called into eternity. Nor was the manner of his death inglorious; though he did not enter into rest as did Elijah (2 Kings xiii: I4, etc.). Amongst his weeping attendants was Joash, the king of Israel. He was probably Stung with remorse for having so neglected to acknowl- edge his national worth; yet, though late, God does not suffer this public recognition of his aged and faithful servant to go unrequited. The Spirit of prophecy again entering the dying Elisha, he informs Joash that he should prevail against the Syrians. Even after death God would put honor upon Elisha; a dead body having touched his bones came to life again (2 Kings xiii:21). (16) Character. Elisha was greater yet less, 1ess yet greater, than Elijah. He is less. We can- not dispense with the mighty past even when we have shot far beyond it. Those who follow cannot be as those who went before. A prophet like Elijah comes once and does not return. Elisha, both to his countrymen and to us, is but the successor, the faint reflection of his predecessor. Less, yet greater; for the work of the great ones of this earth is carried on by far inferior instruments but on a far wider scale, and it may be in a far higher spirit. The life of an Elijah is never spent in vain. Even his death has not taken him from us. He struggles, single-handed as it would seem, and without effect; and in the very crisis of the na- tion's history is suddenly and mysteriously re- moved. But his work continues; his mantle falls; his teaching spreads; his enemies perish. The prophet preaches and teaches, the martyr dies and passes away; but other men enter into his labors; What was begun in fire and storm, in Solitude and awful visions, must be carried on through win- ning arts, and healing acts, and gentle words of peaceful and social intercourse; not in the desert of Horeb, or on the top of Carmel, but in the crowded thoroughfares of Samaria, in the gar- ELISHAH dens of Damascus, by the rushing waters of Jor- dan.” (Prof. H. R. Hackett, Smith, Bib. Dict.) - *** ELISHAH (c-lishah), (Heb. Tºš, el-ce-shaw, God is salvation). A son of Javan (Gen. x :4), who seems to have given name to ‘the isles of Elishah,’ which are de- scribed as exporting fabrics of purple and Scarlet to the markets of Tyre (Ezek. xxvii:7). If the descendants of Javan peopled Greece, we may ex- pect to find Elishah in some province of that coun- try, but it is difficult to find any name on either the Italian or the African coast which can be com- pared with that of Elishah. The Tel-el-Amarna tablets have thrown a new light on the question. Several of them are ietters to the pharaoh from ‘the king of Alasia,’ a colin- try which a hieratic docket attached to One of them identifies with the Egyptian Alsa. Alsa, sometimes read Arosa, was overrun by Thothnies III, and is mentioned in the list of his Syrian con- quests engraved on the walls of Karnak (Nos. 213 and 236). Maspero (Recueil de Travau.r, x. p. 210) makes Alsa or Alasia the northern part of Coele-Syria. An unpublished hieratic papyrus, however, now in the Hermitage of St. Petersburg, which describes an embassy sent by sea to the king of Gebal in the time of the high priest Hir- Hor, states that the Egyptian envoys were wrecked on the coast of Alsa, where they were afterwards hospitably entertained by the queen of the country. Alsa or Alasia therefore must have adjoined the Mediterranean, and Winckler and W. Max Müller accordingly propose to see in it the island of Cyprus. Conder had already Sug- gested that Alasia atıd Elishah are one and the same. The two chief objections to the identifica- tion with Cyprus are that the ordinary Egyptian name of that island was Asi, and that Thothmes III includes the country among his Syrian con- quests. (A. H. Sayce, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) ELISHAMA (eisha-ma),(Heb. *S, cºee. Shazy-meazy', whom God hears). 1. Son of Ammihud, prince of the tribe of Eph- raim in the wilderness of Sinai (Num. i : Io; ii: 18; vii:48, 53; x:22). (B. C. 1658.) According to I Chron. vii:26, he was grandfather of Joshua. 2. One of the sons of David, born after his establishment at Jerusalem (2 Sam. v : 16; I Chron. iii:8; xiv:7). (B. C. Ioso.) In I Chron. iii:6, oc- curs this same name for another son of David, but in the other lists he is called Elishua. (B. C. IO50.) - 3. Son of Jekamiah, a descendant of Judah (I Chron. ii:41). (B. C. I28O.) 4. The father of Nethaniah and grandfather of Ishmael. By Jewish traditions he is identified with 3 (2 Kings xxv :25; Jer. xli :1). (B. C. 588.) 5. A scribe under Jehoiakim (Jer. xxxvi :12, 20, 21). (B. C. 604.) 6. One of the priests sent in the time of Je- hoshaphat, through the cities of Judah, to teach the people the law (2 Chron. xvii:8). (B. C. after 875.) * ELISHAPHAT (e-lish'a-phât), (Heb. tº e/-ee-shazy-faw?', God of judgment), son of Zichri; assisted Jehoiada, the high-priest, to enthrone the young king Joash (2 Chron. xxiii: I, etc.) B. C. 836. ELISHEBA (e-lish'e-bā'), (Heb. 2'-º', eſ-ee- s/he/i'bah, covenant-God), wife of Aaron, and hence the mother of the priestly family (Exod. vi.23), B. C. about 12 Io. 91 ELKANAH ***** |- º ELISHUA (él'i-shu'à), (Heb. 2”.8, el-ee-shoo'- ah, God is salvation), son of David, born at Jerusa- lem (2 Sam. v.:15; I Chron. xiv:5) B. C. IQ44. In thc list (I Chron. iii.6) the name is given as Elishama. ELIUD (e-li'ud), (Gr. ENow.6, el-ee-ood", from the Heb. Tºš, el-ee-/ned", God of majesty), Son of Achim, and father of Eleazar. In the paternal genealogy of Jesus the fifth in ascent (Matt. i. 14, 15). ELIZAPHAN (enza-pnán), (Heb. Tº elee. #sazy-fawn", Cod a protector). 1. Son of Uzziel, uncle of Aaron, and head of the family of Kohath (Num. iii:30; Exod. vi.22). Moses commanded Elizaphan to carry the corpses of Nadab and Abihti out of the camp (Lev. x:4). (B. C. I2IO). In Exodus and Leviticus the name is contractcd into Elsaphan. Ilis family assisted in the ceremony of bringing the ark to Jerusalem in the time of David (1 Chron. xv :8) and took part in the revival under Hezekiah (2 Chron. xxix: I3). (See ELZAPHAN.) 2. Son of Parnach, of Zebulun, a deputy ap- pointed to divide the land (Num. xxxiv:25). (B. C. I490.) * ELIZUR (e-li'zur), (Heb. -s-s eZ-ee-àsoor', God his rock), son of Shedeur, prince of the house of Reuben at the time of the taking of the census in the wilderness of Sinai (Num. i. 5; ii: Io; vii:30, 35; x: 18) B. C. about I2 IO. ELKANAH (aka-mah), Heb. T.I.'s, el-Kaw. 77aw', God the jealous or God creates), the name of several descendants of Korah mentioned in the Old Testament, for we are expressly told that “the children of Korah died not” in the rebellion of Korah (Num. xxvi; II). 1. The chief one is the husband of Hannah and father of Samuel. I Sam. i : I ff.; ii:II, 20; I Chron. vi :27, 34. The few words that are spoken of him set him in a very favorable light. He was a kind and faithful husband, a pious Hebrew, and a self-sacrificing father. Although he was a Levite, he did not apparently perform any of the usual offices. Judging from the sacrifices he of- fered annually, I Sam. I :4, and from the present he brought to the Lord when Samuel was dedi- cated, he was a man of wealth. 2. A descendant of Korah in the line of Ahi- moth, otherwise Mahath (I Chron. vi :26, 35). 3. Another man of the family of the Korhites who joined David while he was at Ziklag (I Chron. xii:6). From the terms of verse 2 it is doubtful whether this can be the well-known Levitical family of Korhites. Perhaps the same who afterwards was one of the doorkeepers for the ark (xv :23). (B. C. about 982.) 4. An Officer in the household of Ahaz, king of Judah, who was slain by Zichri, the Ephraimite, when Pekah invaded Judah (2 Chron. xxviii:7). (B. C. about 735.) 5. The father of one Asa, and head of a Levit- ical family resident in the “villages of the Neto- phathites” (I Chron. ix:16). (B. C. long before 536.) 6. Son of Korah, the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, according to Exod. vi. 24, where his brothers are represented as being Assir and Abiasaph. But in I Chron, vi :22, 23 (Heb. vii:8) Assir, Elkanah, and Ebiasaph are mentioned in the same order, not as the three sons of Korah, but as son, grandson, and great-grand- son respectively; and this seems to be undoubtedly correct. If so, the passage in Exodus must be understood as merely giving the families of the ELKOSH Korhites existing at , the time the passage was penned, which must, in this case, have been long subsequent to Moses. ELKosH (akosh), (Heb. *P*S, el Aosh). The prophet Nahum is called an Elkoshite, that is, a native of some place called Elkosh (Nahum i :I). There was a village of this name in Galilee in the time of Jerome; but the prophet was more probably born of Jewish exiles at Elkosh or Alkush in Assyria, near Mosul. The Jews themselves believe that he was born and buried there; and Jewish pilgrims from all parts still visit his alleged tomb. Alkosh is thirty-four miles north of Mosul (Nineveh), and is situated a little way up the side of a mountain, in the range to which it gives its name. It is entirely inhabited by Chaldee Christians, who have a convent higher up the mountains. A credible, but unproven, identifi- cation is with the town Elcesi or Helcesaei in Gali- lee, which was pointed out to Jerome as the birth- place of the prophet. ELKOSHITE (Él'kosh-ite). See ELKOSH. ELLASAR (Ella-sar), (Heb. Fºezaw-sawr’), a territory in Asia, whose king, Arioch, was one of the four who invaded Canaan in the time of Abraham (Gen. xiv:1). See ARIOCH. The place is not improbably Larsa, the remains Of which now constitute the mounds of Senkereh, to the Southeast of Erech. ELM (elm), (Heb. *s, ay-law'). The Authorized Version has this word in Hosea iv.: 13. . It is differently translated in every other place ALAH. (See OAK.) - ELMODAM (el-mê'dam), (Gr. "EXpwöäp, el-zzo- dam'), the son of Er in the genealogy of Joseph (Luke iii:28), B. C. 700. ELNAAM (el'naam), (Heb. Fº, eanaham, God his delight), father of Zeribai and Joshaviah, * two of David's guard (I Chron. xi:46), B. C. IoSO. ELNATHAN (Šl'na-thän), (Heb. Yºs, e/-7taw- £hawn). 1. Son of Achbor, and father of Nehushta, who was the mother of Jehoiakim, king of Judah. He opposed the king's burning of Jeremiah's prophe- cies; and was sent into Egypt to bring back the prophet Urijah (Jer. xxvi;22; xxxvi; I2; 2 Kings xxiv:8), B. C. 597. - 2. The name of three Levites in the time of Ezra (Ezra viii:16), B. C. 457. ELOHIM (€1'o-him). See GOD. ELOI (e-lö'i). See GOD. ELON (e'lon), (Heb. Tº say-lone, Strong, a man). 1. An Israelite of the tribe of Zebulun, who judged Israel ten years. He was preceded by Ibzan of Bethlehem, and succeeded by Abdon of Ephraim. The whole period covered by their ad- ministration was twenty-five years (from B. C. I IOO to II74); but it is probable that they were for a part of this time contemporary, each exer- cising authority over a few of the tribes. They appear to have Overawed the enemies of Israel by their judicious administration; for no war is men- tioned in their time (Judg. xii:8-15). (B. C. 1243-34.) 2. The Hittite, father of Bashemath, wife of ...) (Gen. xxvi :34; xxxvi :2). (B. C. before IQ03. 3. Chief of a family of Zebulun (Num. xxvi : 26; Gen. xlvi. I4), and founder of the Elonites. (B. C. 1856.) 592 ELZABAD 4. A city of Dan (Josh. xix :43) perhaps the same with Elon-beth-hanan (I Kings iv:9). Its site has not been identified. ELON - BETH - HANAN (e'lon-bêth-hă'nān), (Heb. R.T., bayth-haw-mawn', oak of the house). This, with two Danite towns, formed one of Solo- mon's Commissariat districts (I Kings iv:9). Per- haps identical with Elon. Its site is not Beit 'Anân, eight and a half miles northwest of Jerusa. lem. This place is in Benjamin, a different tax district, and the name is differently spelled (Davis, Bzó. Ozcz). ELONITES (e'lon-ites), (Num. xxvi.26). ELON, 3. ELOTH (eſloth), (Heb. *s, ay-ºth, grove of strong trees, I Kings ix:26; 2 Chron. viii:17; xxvi;2). See ELATH. t ELPAAL (eſpa-al), (Heb.º.eſ/a/al, God his reward), a Benjamite, son of Hushim (I Chron. viii:II), the founder of a numerous family (viii: 12- 18), B.C. 1618. The Bene-Elpaal seem to have lived in the neighborhood of Lydda (Lod), and extended to the Danite frontier. ELPALET (al'pa-le), (Heb. ºeſºaw-ſet). See ELIPHELET, I. - EL-PARAN (aparan),(Heb.l.º. º. ale-paw. rawn', Oak of Paran, Gen. xiv:6). See PARAN. ELTEKEH (eite-ken), (Heb. ST's, el-te-kay. God is its fear), a city of Dan, given to the Levites of Kohath's family (Josh. xix:44; xx i:23). ELTEKON (eite-kön), (Heb. Fº, eſſe-àone, God is straight). A town in the mountainous dis- trict of Judah (Josh. xv.:59). It is unidentified. ELTOLAD (el-tolad), (Heb. Tºš, el-to-lad, God's kindred, allied to him), a town of Judah (Josh. xv.:30) given to Simeon (Josh. xix:4; I Chron. iv:29). ELUL (equi), (Heb. *S, eCool, Neh. vi.15). This is the name of that month which was the sixth of the ecclesiastical, and twelfth of the civil, year of the Jews, and which began with the new moon of our September. According to the Me- gillat Taanith, the 17th day of this month was a public fast for the death of the spies who brought back a bad report of the land (Num. xiv:37). J. N. ELUZAI (e-lü'za-i or e-lü'za-i), (Heb. stºs, e/-oo-za/.'ee, God is defensive), one of the Ben- jamite warriors who joined David at Ziklag when he was fleeing from Saul (1 Chron. xii:5), B. C 1OOO. ELYMAS (él’y-mâs), (Gr. 'EX&pas, eZ-oo' mas), an appellative commonly derived from the Arabic A/ºzan (a zvise man ), which Luke interprets by ô Đôyos; it is applied, to a Jew named Bar-jesus, mentioned in Acts xiii:6-II (v. Neander's A/?sz. of Aìrst //anting of the Christian Church, i, p. 125, Eng. transl.). Chrysostom observes, in reference to the blindness inflicted by the Apostle on Bar- jesus, that the limiting clause for a seasozz' shows that it was not intended so much for the punish- ment of the Sorcerer as for the conversion of the deputy. z ELZABAD (812a-bād). (Heb. Tºš, e.gaw. bawd", given of God). 1. One of the thirty gallant men in David's army (I Chron. xii; I2). (B. C. before IOOO.) See ELZAPHAN 2. A Korhite Levite . (I Chron. xxvi :7), son of Shemaiah. He was of the family oſ Obed- edom and a porter in the temple. (B. C. IOOO.) ELZAPHAN (Šl'za-phân). See ELIZAPHAN. EMBALM (Ém-bäm'), (Heb. *27, Ahaw-mat", to spice), the process of preserving a corpse by means of spices (Gen. 1:2, 3, 26). (See BURIAL.) Three methods were employed by the Egyptians in embalming the bodies of the dead. Their choice depended chiefly upon the financial resources of the dead person's friends. It is estimated that the first cost about twelve hundred and fifty dol- lars, the second about three hundred dollars, and the third was quite inexpensive. Embalming was employed by the Hebrews in preserving the re- mains of Jacob and joseph. We infer that it was common in the time of Christ (John xii:7; X1X :39). EMBROIDERER (Šm-broid'êr-ār). This is the translation of the Heb. FP, raw-Aam’, in A. V. But if embroidery be confined to needlework it is almost certain that the word is never used in that sense. It rather refers to the patterns made by weaving different colored threads (Exod. xxvi : I, 31 ; xxviii:4, 39). EMEKKEZIZ (6'měk-ké'ziz), in A. V. Valley of Keziz (a vale cut off or vale of fissure). A town of Benjamin, evidently in a valley and apparently near Jericho and Beth-hoglah (Josh. xviii :21). Scarcely to be connected with wady el-Kaziz, a branch of the Kidron, which seems to lie too far west and south. (Davis, Bib. Dict.) EMERALD (ém'êr-ald), (Heb. Fº, noſek, shin- ing; N. T. and Apoc., Gr. o.p.dpayãos, s/zar'ag-dos, a precious stone). See NOPHECH. EMERODs (ém'er-odz), (Heb. ???, oſe, tumor, Deut. xxviii:27, etc.), a painful disease, especially promoted by sitting. For a punishment, it was sent upon the Philis- tines. It probably resembled the modern disease of the piles. It was customary with the heathens to offer to their gods figures of wax or metal representing the parts which had been cured of disease, whence it is inferred, in connection with I Sam, vi :5, that the priests and diviners of the Philistines recommended a similar course. EMIM (e'mim), (Heb. Eºs, ay-Zzzeez72', terrors), a numerous and gigantic race of people who, in the time of Abraham, occupied the country be- yond the Jordan, afterwards possessed by the Moabites (Gen. xiv:5; Deut. ii: IO.) The Emim may have belonged to the aggregation of nations sometimes called Turanian. If so we may compare their name, Emim, with aima, “tribe” or “horde,” which appears with little change in several languages, as the Tunguse, aiman; Buriat, aimah; Mongol, aimak, Livonian, aim. (Smith, Bib. Dict., 2d ed., S. v. “Emin.”) EMMANUEL (Šm-mān'ā-el), (Gr. "EupravováA, emz-man-oo-a/e', God with us; i. e., sazyzor (Matt. i:23). See IMMANUEL. EMMAUS (Ém"ma-ús), (Gr. 'Eupaoûs, em-mah- ooce', hot baths). 1. A village 60 stadia, or seven and a half miles, from Jerusalem, noted for Our Lord's interview with two disciples on the day of his resurrection (Luke xxiv:13). The same place is mentioned by Josephus (De Bell. Jud. vii:6, 6), and placed at the same distance from Jerusalem, in stating that Vespasian left 800 soldiers in Judaea, to whom he gave the village of Emmaus. The site is not now known. Eusebius and Jerome make it identical with the city of Emmaus, or ‘Amwas,' 593 ENCAMPMENT which lies not far from 160 stadia from Jerusa- lem. It is also identified with Lusiun, about mid- way between Jerusalem and Ramleh. There was another Emmaus, near Tiberias, on the lake of the Same name, where the hot baths which gave name to it are still frequented, and have a temperature of 130 Fahrenheit. 3. A walled town of some note 18 miles, or I60 stades, westward from Jerusalem by a circuit- Ous Roman road (I Macc. iii:40; ix:50; War ii:20, 4). Now ‘Am was.” EMMOR (Šm'môr), (Gr. 'Eupép), a Grecized form of the name Hamor, the father of Sychem (Acts vii:16). (See HAMOR.) EN (än), (Heb. Ty, aym, fountain), a prefix to many names of places in Hebrew from there being a living spring in the vicii iſ y. ENAM (e'nam), (Heb. Fºº, ha-ay-mawm', the double), a city in the lowland of Judah (Josh. xv.:34). It is probably the place in the “doorway” of which Tamar sat (Gen. xxxviii:14). In verse 21 the proper name Enaim, R. V., is more appropriate than the present translation “openly.” - ENAN (enan), (Heb. "??, ay-mawn', having eyes), the father of Ahira, who was “prince” of the tribe of Naphtali when Israel was numbered in the desert of Sinai (Num. i:15; ii:29; vii:78, 83; x:27). B. C. I2IO. ENCAMIPMENT (€n-kämp'ment). (1) The following renderings are given in the O. T. (Heb. Tºrº, makh-an-eh', from Tºº, Ahaw- mazeſ', to sit down, to pitch tent): A term applied to any band or company presenting a regular and settled appearance; a standing camp; a predatory or nomad party at rest (Gen. xxxii:2 I); an army or caravan when on its march (Exod. xiv:9; Josh. x:5; xi:4; Gen. xxxii:7, 8), and the resting-place of an army or company (Exod. xvi; I 3). Sometimes the verb refers to the casual arrangement of a siege (Ps. xxvii:3) or campaign (I Sam. iv: I). (Barnes' Bib. Dict., Mc. & Str. Cyc.) (2) Of the Jewish system of encampment the Mosaic books have left a detailed description. From the period of the sojourn in the wilderness to the crossing of the Jordan the twelve tribes were formed into four great armies, encamping in as many fronts, or forming a square, with a great space in the rear, where the tabernacle of the Lord was placed, surrounded by the tribe of Levi and the bodies of carriers, etc., by the Stalls of the cattle and the baggage: the four fronts faced the cardinal points while the march was eastward, but as Judah continued to lead the van, it follows that when the Jordan was to be crossed the direc- tion became westward, and therefore the general arrangement, so far as the cardinal points were concerned, was reversed, unless Judah and his two wings formed the rear in crossing the Jordan. It does not appear that, during this time, Israel ever had lines of defense thrown up ; b11ſ in after ages, when only single armies came into the field, it is probable that the castral disposition was not invariably quadrangular; and, from the many po- sitions indicated on the crests of steep mountains, the fronts were clearly adapted to the ground and to the space which it was necessary to occupy. The rear of such positions, or the square camps in the plain, appear from the marginal reading of I Sam. xvii:20, and xxvi :5 to have been enclosed with a line of carts or chariots, which from the remotest period was a practice among all the nomade nations of the north. C. H. S. 38 15 NCHANTMENT 594 EN–GAN NIM NORTH.-FOURTH DIVISION.—CAMP OF DAN: 157,600. DAN, g 62,700. 3. ASHER AND NAPHTALI, tr; S. 4I,5OO. 53,4OO. > tº º C/D > H * | 3 tº º T. 2. Wºm- 20 P- > 9 MERARITES, wn ºf C/D ſt º; S. 3,200. $* > *—3 *-* * -> (T) £r- # 3 #: 8 : U O CC O > * ; : | * : # º # I | 6 || 92 O f: H *- O O º; 3 o z S COURT OF THE *I. > * = Z | p: "A 2. C 3' tr; Z §§ | 2. # 3 + ; St TABERNACILE. ; tº 8: O O | {r} p4 * * > 92 tr; C - º ;3 -U :- {x} C/) O N O F § 3 2. § . Hr. C C 2. § “OS/*z 3 tº ‘E £4 : “SSIIIHLVHOXI # º H H. . -msm- ** ; 3. H •oS9'Sy “OOC'6S # : *CIVE) CINV NO3(INIS e •oos'9? “NGIGIſl3(H ‘OS!"ISI : NGIGIſhg[?I HO dAIVO-NOISIAICI CINOOGIS-"H.I.ſhCS ENCHANTMENT (§n-chánt’ment), the ren- dering in the A.V. of several Hebrew words: 1. LeA/k-aw-sheem' (Heb. sºn. whispers), is mentioned in Eccles. x:II. 2. Naw-khash' (Heb. Pº, to hiss), the auguries sought by Baalim (Num. xxiv:1), supposed to allude general/y to ophiomancy (divination by ser- pents). 3. Kheh'ber (Heb. Tºº!, society, spell, Is. xlvii: 9, 12), binding by incantations. (See DIVINATION.) ENDAMAGE (en-dam'āj), (Heb. Plē, mez-ax', Ezra iv:13), damage, hurt, the present form of the word. END OF THE WORLD. See ESCHATOLOGY. ENDOR (&n'dór), (Heb. TNTº, ame-dore', foun- tain of Dor). A town of Galilee, assigned to Manasseh, al- though lying beyond the limits of that tribe (Josh. xvii:II). It is mentioned in connection with the victory of Deborah and Barak (Ps. lxxxiii: Io); but it is chiefly memorable as the abode of the sor- ceress whom Saul consulted on the eve of the battle in which he perished (I Sam. xxviii:7, sq.). The name is not found in the New Testament; but in the time of Eusebius and Jerome the place still existed as a large village, four miles south of Mount Tabor. It has been identified as the village of Endór or Endſir, on the northern shoul- # of Little Hermon, six miles southeast of Naza- reth. ENEAS (e'ne-as). See AENEAS. EN-EGLAIM (en'ég'la-im or én/ég-lā'im), (Heb. rºy Ty, ame eg-la/,' yim, fountain of two calves). A town of Moab (Ezek. xlvii: Io), which Je- rome places at the northern end of the Dead Sea, at the influx of the Jordan. From this state- ment it has been conjectured that it is to be found in Ain el-Feshkhah, a spring at the north end of the coast. EN-GANNIMI (&n'gån'nim), (Heb. Pºlº, ame gam-neem", gardens' fountain). 1. A town of Judah (Josh. xv.:34), which Je- rome places near Bethel. 2. A Levitical city in Issachar (Josh. xix:21; xxi :29), probably the same as the Ginaen of Jo- sephus (Antiq. xx:6, I), and which Biddulph (in EN–GEDI Purchas, vol. ii. p. 135) identifies with the pres- ent Jenin, a town fiſteen IIIiles South of Mount Tabor, and which he and others describe as still a place of gardens and abundant water. It con- tains about four thousand inhabitants. EN-GEDI (&n-ge'di), (Heb. "Tºº, ame geh'aee, kids' fountain). 1. A city of Judah, which gave its name to a part of the desert to which David withdrew for fear of Saul (Josh. xv :62; I Sam. xxiv:I-4). Its more ancient Hebrew name was Hazezon-tamar; and by that name it is mentioned before the de- struction of Sodom, as being inhabited by the Amorites, and near the cities of the plain (Gen. xiv:7). In 2 Chron. xx:1, 2, bands of the Mo- abites and Ammonites are described as coming up against king Jehoshaphat, apparently round the south end of the Dead Sea, as far as En-gedi. And this, as we learn from Dr. Robinson, is the route taken by the Arabs in their IIlarauding expeditions at the present day. It has been identified with Ain-jidy of the Arabs, situated at a point On the western shore nearly equidistant from both ex- tremities of the lake. This spot was visited by Dr. Robinson, and he confirms the identification. The site lies among the mountains which here con- fine the lake, a considerable way down the descent to its shore. Here is the beautiful fountain of Ain-jidy, bursting forth at once in a fine Stream upon a sort of narrow terrace or shelf of the mountain, above 400 feet above the level of the lake. The whole of the descent below appears to have been once terraced for tillage and gardens; and near the foot are the ruins of a town, exhibit- ing nothing of particular interest, and built most- ly of unhewn stones. This we may conclude to have been the town which took its name from the fountain (Robinson, ii. 209-216). 2. The Wilderness of En-gedi is doubtless the immediately neighboring part of the wild region, west of the Dead Sea, which must be traversed to reach its shores. It was here that David and his men lived among the ‘rocks of the wild goats,’ and where the former cut off the skirts of Saul’s robe in a cave (I Sam. xxiv: I-5). the country is full of caverns, which might then serve as lurking-places for David and his men, as they do for outlaws at the present day. ENGINE (§n'jīn), a term exclusively applied to military affairs in the Bible. The Hebrew lºr, Ä/äzsh-shaw-bone' (2 Chron. xxvi;15) is its counter- part in etymological meaning, each referring to the ingenuity (engine, from ingenium) displayed in the COntrivan Ce. Assyrian War Engines. The chief projectiles were the catapulta for throwing darts, and the balista for throwing stones. Both these kinds of instruments were pre- pared by Uzziah for the defense of Jerusalem (2 Chron. .xxvi :15), and battering the wall is men- tioned in the reign of King David (2 Sam. xx: On all sides 595 ENGRAVING I5); but the instrument itself for throwing it down may have been that above noticed, and not the battering-ram. The ram was, however, a sim- ple machine, and capable of demolishing the strong- est walis, provided access to the foot was practi- cable; for the mass of cast metal which formed the head could be fixed to a beam lengthened sufficiently to require between one and two hun- dred men to lift and impel it. Z Z €9–7 (º Battering Ram. Of the balistae and catapultae it may be proper to add that they were of various powers. For bat- tering walls there were some that threw stones of fifty, others of one hundred, and Some of three hundred weight; in the field of battle they were of much inferior strength. Darts varied similarly from small beams to large arrows, and the range they had exceeded a quarter of a mile, or about 450 yards. All these engines were constructed upon the principle of the Sling, the bow, or the spring, the last being an elastic bar, bent back by a screw or a cable of sinews, with a trigger to set it free, and contrived either to impel darts by --~~ - Balista. its stroke, or to throw stones from a kind of spoon formed towards the summit of the spring. C. H. S. ENGRAVING (ān-gräv-ing). Engraved seals are spoken of at a very early period of the world. The names of the children of Israel were di- rected to be engraved on two stones, and the words “Holiness fo the Lord” were also to be engraved on the high priest’s breastplate, both to be like the engravings of a signet. (Exod. xxviii: II, 36). The signet is mentioned before Joseph was sold into Egypt. Job also speaks of engraving with an iron pen upon a rock (Job xix :24). The ten commandments were engraved (Exod. xxxii: I6), and graven images were undoubtedly among the earliest objects of idolatrous worship (Exod. xx :4; xxxii:4). Allusion is also made to the en- graver’s art in Ezek. xxiii: 14. The engraved lines were probably filled in with coloring matter. See also Acts xvii:29. (See SEALs; WRITING.) EN–HADDAH Figuratite. (I) The engrazyzng of the names of the twelve tribes, in the stones of the high- priest's shoulder and breastplate, denoted Christ's perpetual remembrance, esteem, and support of his people, and the impossibility of their separa- tion from him (Exod. xxviii: I I, and xxxix:14). (2) God's engraving the graving of the choice stone may denote his conferring on Christ every saving office, his preparing for him a human nature adorned with all gracious excellencies and his inflicting on him the deep penetrating strokes of his wrath (Zech. iii:9). (3) So the saints are graven on the palms of God's hands; he perpetual- ly thinks of, cares for, and does them good (Is. xlix:I6). EN-HADDAH (&n'hād-dah), (Heb. "Tº, ame- Æhad-daw', sharp or swift spring), a town of Is- Sachar (Josh. xix:2 I). Eusebius mentions a place of this name between Eleutheropolis and Jerusa- lem, ten miles from the former place. According to Knobel it is either the place by º called Judeideh, or else Beit-kad, near Gil- O3. EN-HAKKORE (&n'hāk'ko-re), (Heb. NºFiſ jº ane-ha/ē-ăo-ray', fountain of the crier). The spring which appeared in answer to the cry of Samson (Judg. xv.:19). Van de Velde would identify it with a spring at Tell-el-Lekiyeh, four miles north of Beer-sheba ; but as Samson's exploits were confined to a small circle there is no reason for extending them 30 miles from Gaza. Conjectur- ally it is near En-gannim. It has been identified by others with Ayun Kara, near Zoreah. - EN-HAZOR (&n-hā'zor), (Heb. 7S. Tº, ane- Áhaw-Ésore', fountain of a village), one of the fenced cities in the inheritance of Naphtali, dis- tinct from Hazor (Josh. xix:37). It has. not yet been identified, although R. W. Conder, Hastings' Bib. Dict, says: The most prob- able place for En-hazor seems to be //a2%reh, on the western slopes of the mountains of Upper Galilee, west of Kedesh. ENLARGE (&n-lärj'), (Heb. PT, raw-Ahab', 2 Sam. xxii:37; Ps. iv:1), to broaden, to make room, to set at liberty, to render more extensive. Figuratite. (I) Em/arging of borders or coasts imports conquest of more territory to dwell in (Deut. xii:20, and xix :8). (2) To en- large nations is to grant them deliverance, liberty, happiness and increase of numbers, territory, or wealth (Esth. iv: I4; Job xii:23; Deut. xxxiii: 2O). (3) Enlargement of heart imports loosing of spiritual bands, fulness of inward joy (Ps. cxix: 32); or extensive love, care, and joy (2 Cor. vi. II). (4) Enlargement of mouth, denotes readiness to answer reproaches, and to pour forth praise to God for his kindness (I Sam. ii:I). enlarges men in trouble, or enlarges their steps, when he grants them remarkable deliverances, and liberty to go where they please (Ps. iv: I, and xviii:36). ENLIGHTEN (&n-lit"n), (Heb. Yix, ore, illum- ination in every sense), means to give evidence of returning strength (I Sam. xiv:27, 29; Job xxxiii.30). Figurative. (I) (Heb. "33, maw-gāh'). God en/ightens his people's darkness when he frees them from trouble, grants, them prosperity, and gives them knowledge and joy (Ps. xviii:28). (2) (Gr. (bottºw, ſo-fid"go). He em/ightens their eyes when, by his word and spirit, he savingly teaches them his truth and shows them his glory (Ps. xiii and xix:8; Eph. i:18). 596 (5) God . ENOCH, BOOK OF EN-MISHPAT (en’mish'pat), (Heb. ???? Tº ane-mash-fazyż", fountain of judgment). , Moses says (Gen. xiv:7) that Chedorlaomer and his allies, having traversed the wilderness of Paran, came to the fountain of Mishpat, otherwise KADESH (which see). ENMITY (én'mi-ty), (Heb. "F"s, ay-baw'; Gr. éx6pa, eAA'thrah), deep-rooted hatred, irreconcil- able hostility (Gen. iii:15; James iv:4). (I) There is enmity between mankind and Some of the serpent tribe (Gen. iii: I5). (2) Friendship with this world, in its wicked members and lusts, is enmity with God, is opposed to the love of him, and amounts to an actual exerting of ourselves to dishonor and abuse him (James iv: 4; I John ii: 15, 16). (3) The carnal mind, or minding of fleshly and sinful things, is enmity against God, is Opposed to his nature and will in the highest degree; and, though it may be re- moved, cannot be reconciled to him, nor he to it (Rom. viii:7, 8). (4) The ceremonial law is called enmity; it marked God's enmity against sin, by demanding atonement for it; it occasioned men's enmity against God by its burdensome serv- ices; and was an accidental source of standing variance between Jews and Gentiles; or perhaps the enmity here meant is the state of variance be- tween God and men which was abolished by the death of Christ (Eph. ii: 15, 16). ENOCH (6'nok), (Heb. Fºr, Aham-oke', initiated or initiating; perhaps teaching or teacher). 1. Son of Cain (Gen. iv:17), after whom the first city noticed in Scripture was called. (B. C. 404I.) It was east of Eden, and its name is thought to be preserved in Hanuchta, which Ptolemy places in the Susiana. The spurious Berosus, and Adrichomius after him, place the city Enochia, built by Cain, east of Libanus, to- wards Damascus. 2. Son of Jared and father of Methuselah. Ac- cording to the Old Testament, he walked zwith God; and, after 365 years, he was not, for God took him (Gen. v .24). (B. C. 3550-3185.) The inspired writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews says, ‘By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death, and was not found, because God had translated him' (xi :5). Walking with God im- plies the closest fellowship with Jehovah which it is possible for a human being to enjoy on earth. As a reward, therefore, of his extraordinary sancti- ty, he was transported into heaven without the experience of death. Elijah was in like manner translated; and thus was the doctrine of immortali- ty palpably taught under the ancient dispensa- t1 OI). The traditions of the Jews have ascribed to Enoch many fabulous qualities. They have in- vested him with various attributes and excellencies for which the Bible furnishes no foundation. Ac- cordingly, he is represented as the inventor of let- ters, arithmetic, and astronomy; as the first author, from whom several books emanated. Visions and prophecies were commonly ascribed to him, which he is said to have arranged in a book. This book was delivered to his son, and preserved by Noah in the ark. After the flood it was made known to the world, and handed down from one generation to another. Hence the Arabians call him Edris, i. e., the learned (Koran, Sur. xix). 3. The first city mentioned in Scripture (Gen. iv :17), built by Cain, east of Eden and in the land of Nod. S. D. ENOCH, BOOK OF (É'nok, book Šv). The interest that once attached to the apocryphal book ENOCH, BOOK OF 597 of Enoch has now partly subsided. Yet a docu- ment quoted, as is generally believed, by an inspired apostle, can never be wholly devoid of importance or utility in sacred literature. (1) Authorship and Date. With regard to the a11thor and the time when the Book of Enoch was written various opinions have been advanced. But it seems to us to have been composed a little be- fore Christ’s appearance by a Jew who had studied well the book of Daniel. At the same time we freely confess that the Savior is spoken of in terms expressive of his dignity, character, and acts, surpassing the descriptions which other Jewish books present. Several circumstances render it apparent that it was originally composed in the Hebrew or Chaldee language. The Greek translation, in which it was known to the fathers, appears to be irrecoverably lost. There is no trace of it after the eighth century. The last remnant of it is presel ved by Sy11cellus. (2) Object. The leading object of the writer, who was manifestly imbued with deep piety, was to comfort and strengthen his contemporaries. He lived in times of distress and persecution, when the enemies of religion oppressed the righteous. The outward circumstances of the godly were such as to excite doubts of the Divine equity in their minds, or at least to prevent it from having that hold on their faith which was necessary to sustain them in the hour of trial. In accordance with this, the writer exhibits the reward of the right- eous and the punishment of the wicked. To give greater authority to his affirmations, he puts them into the mouth of Enoch. Thus they have all the weight belonging to the character of an eminent prophet and Saint. Various digressions are not without their bearing on the author's main pur- pose. The narrative of the fallen angels and their punishment, as also of the flood, exemplifies the retributive justice of Jehovah ; while the Jewish history, continued down to the Maccabees, ex- hibits the final triumph of His people, notwith- standing all their vicissitudes. Doubtless the au- thor lived amid fiery trial ; and, looking abroad Over the desolation, sought to cheer the sufferers by the consideration that they should be recom- pensed in another life. As for their wicked op- pressors, they were to experience terrible judg- ments. The writer seems to delight in uttering dire anathemas against the wicked. It is plain that the book grew out of the time when the author lived and the circumstances by which he was surrounded. It gives us a glimpse not only of the religious opinions, but also of the general features that characterized the period. (3) Possibly Quoted by Jude. Much un- necessary discussion has arisen over the question whether Jude really quoted the Book of Enoch or not. Some are most unwilling to believe that an inspired writer could cite an Apocryphal produc- tion. Such an opinion destroys, in their view, the character of the writing said to be inspired, and reduces it to the level of an ordinary composition. But this is preposterous. The Apostle Paul quotes several of the heathen poets; yet who ever sup- posed that by such references he sanctions the productions from which his citations are made, or renders them of greater value? All that can be reasonably inferred from such a fact is, that if the inspired writer cites a particular senti- ment with approbation, it must be regarded as just and right, irrespective of the remainder of the honk in which it is found. The Apostle's sanc- tion extends no farther than the passage to which he alludes. Other portions of the original docu- ment may exhibit the most absurd and Super- ENOS stitious notions. Others suppose that Jude quoted a traditional prophecy or saying of Enoch, and we see no improbability in the assumption. Others again believe that the words apparently cited by Jude were suggested to him by the Holy Spirit. But surely this hypothesis is unnecessary. Until it can be shown that the book of Enoch did not exist in the time of Jude, or that his quoting it is unworthy of an Apostle, or that such knowl- edge was not handed down traditionally within the Apostle's reach, we abide by the opinion that Jude really quoted the book of Enoch. While there are probable grounds for believing that Jude might have become acquainted with the circum- stance independently of inspiration, we ought not to have recourse to the hypothesis of immediate suggestion. On the whole, it is most likely that the book of Enoch existed beſore the time of Jude, and that the latter really quoted it in accordance with the current tradition. If so, the prophecy ascribed to Enoch was truly ascribed to him, be- cause it is scarcely credible that Jude writing by inspiration would have sanctioned a false state- ment. (4) Historical Value. Presuming that it was written by a Jew, the book before us is an im- portant document in the history of Jewish opin- ions. It indicates an essential portion of the Jew- ish creed before the appearance of Christ, and as- sists us in comparing the theological views of the later with those of the earlier Jews. It also serves to establish the fact that some doctrines of great importance in the eyes of evangelical Christians ought not to be regarded as the growth of an age in which Christianity had been corrupted by the inventions of men. We would not appeal to it as possessing authority. The place of authority can be assigned to the Bible alone. But apart from all ideas of authority, it may be fairly regarded as an index of the state of opinion at the time when it was written. Hence it subserves the confirmation of certain opinions, provided they can be shown to have a good foundation in the word of God. If it be conceded that certain doc- trines are contained by express declaration or fair inference in the volume of inspiration, it is surely some attestation of their truth that they lie on the surface of this ancient book. Let us briefly allude to several representations which Oc- cur in its pages:— - (5) Doctrines. (a) Respecting the nature of the Deity.—There are distinct allusions to a plurality in the Godhead. The doctrine of the Trinity seems to have been received by the writer and his contemporaries. In accordance with this view Christ is represented as existing from eterni- ty; as an object of invocation and worship; and as the supreme Judge of men and angels. (b) The doctrine of a future state of retribu- tion is implied in many passages, and the eternity of future punishment is also distinctly contained in the book of Enoch. Whatever value may be attached to the theological opinions expressed in the book of Enoch, it is apparent from the pre- ceding extracts that certain sentiments to which evangelical Christians assign a high importance, because, in their view, they are contained in Scrip- ture, appear to have prevailed at the commence- ment of the Christian era. To the serious in- quirer they can never be of trifling interest. ENOCH, CITY OF (6'nok). See ENOCH, 1. ENON (5'non). See MENON. ENOS (6'nos), (Heb. *i-s, em-6/ish", man, espe- cially as mortal, decaying), the son of Seth and ENOSH father of Cainan. He died at the age of 905. (B.C. 3937-3032). More properly ENOSH (Gen. iv.26; v:6, 7, 9, Io, I I; Luke iii:38). ENOSH (€'nosh), (I Chron. ii.1). Same as ENOS. ENQUIRE (én'kwir), (Heb. Pººl, daw-rash', to search, ask. Ps. xxvii:4; Acts ix:II; Gen. xxiv:57). (I) God’s enquiry after men’s iniquity imports his bringing it to light, and punishing for it. Job x:6. (2) Men’s enquiring of God, or of the Lord, denotes their asking his mind by his priests or prophets, or immediately from himself, what they should do, or that he would grant what they need. Judg. xx:27; I Sam. ix:9; x:22; 2 Sam. ii: I ; v : 19, 23; I Kings xxii:5; Gen. xxv :22; Ezek. xxxvi :37. (3) To enquire after God is to pray to him. (Ps. lxxviii:34). (4) To make enquiry after vows is to consider how the vow may be eluded and broken (Prov. xx:25). EN-RIMMON (en-rim'mon), (Heb. Tº TX.,ane- rim-mone', fountain of pomegranates). A place reinhabited after the return from cap- tivity (Neh. xi :29). It is very probable that the name is the same as “Ain and Rimmon” (Josh. xv :32), Ain, Remmon (Josh. xix:7), and Ain Rimmon (I Chron. iv:32; Neh. xi :29). Velde and Wilton place it at Um er-Ruzmá772;71, between Eleutheropolis and Beersheba, where there is a large Spring. EN-ROGEL (&n'ro'gel), (Heb. ??" Tº, ame ro- ga/e'), name means Foot-fountain, and is construed by the Targum into ‘Fuller's Fountain' because the fullers trod the clothes there with their feet. It was near Jerusalem, on the boundary-line be- tween the tribes of Judah and Benjamin (Josh. xv.:7; xviii:6; 2 Sam. xvii: 17; I Kings i :9). It has been usually supposed the same as the Foun- tain of Siloam. But Dr. Robinson is more in- clined to find it in what is called by Frank Chris- tians the Well of Nehemiah, but by the native in- habitants the Well of Job (Bir Eyº). There are only three sources, or rather receptacles of living water, now accessible at Jerusalem, and this is one of them. It is situated just below the junction of the Valley of Hinnom with that of Jehoshaphat. It is a very deep well, of an ir- regular quadrilateral form, walled up with large squared stones, terminating above in an arch on one side, and apparently of great antiquity. The well measures 125 feet in depth. In the rainy season the well becomes quite full, and sometimes overflows at the mouth. Usually, however, the water runs off under the surface of the ground, and finds an outlet some forty yards below the well. “But it has been proved to be the spring called by the natives ‘the mother of steps’ and by Christians the Virgin’s Well” (Harper, Báb, and Mod. Dict.). Conder (Palestine, p. 26) identifies En-roge1 with the Virgin’s Well, and thinks it the same as Be- thesda. ENSAMPLE (§n-sām"p'l). See ExAMPLE. EN-SHEMESH (&n-sha'mesh), (Heb. ??? Y, ame sheh' mesh, fountain of the sun), a landmark between Judah and Benjamin (Josh. xv.:7; xviii:17), east of the Mount of Olives. It is usually identified with the “well of the Apostles,” about a mile and a half below or east of Bethany, on the road to Jericho. ENSIGN (en-sin), (Heb. in N, 6th, Num. ii:2), Signal, sign, banner, standard. Figuratite. (I) God's setting ºf an ensign to the Assyrians, or others, imports his providen- 598 Van de reputation (Phil. i: I5). ENVY tial leading them forth to chastise his people, and punish his enemies, by war and spoil (IS. v :26, and xviii:3). (2) The setting up standards in a country imports approaching war and destruction (Jer. xlvi.21, and i :2). (3) Christ is a standard, or ensign; preached to Jews and Gentiles, he is the great means of assembling them to himself, and distinguishing them from others; he directs and animates them in their spiritual journey, and their warfare with sin, Satan, and the world; and enables them to oppose corruption and error: and for the same reason he is called a standard-bearer (IS. lix: IQ ; xi : IO; xlix:22, and lzii: IO). (4) God gives a banner to his people, to be displayed because of truth, when he accomplishes his prom- ise, Signally protects and delivers them, or affords them a valiant army to conquer their foes. Or it may refer to Christ, the promised Messiah, as the great security of the Jewish nation (Ps. lx :4). (5) The destruction of Sennacherib's army was like the fainting of a standard-bearer: it was very Sudden, and so universal among the commanders that Scarce one remained to bear the colors (Is. x: I8). (6) The Jews in these times were as an ensign on a high hill; they were reduced to a Small number, and obliged to flee to mountains and ji. for safety (Is. xxx:17). (See STAND- ARD. ENSUE (ān-sii), (Gr. 6táko, dee-d'Ao, I Pet. iii:11), to pursue, to follow after, to overtake, to per- Secute. EN TAPPUAII (&n'täp'pu-ah), (Heb. Tº TV, ame taff-ſoo'akh, fountain of Tappuach), a spring that marked one of the boundaries of Manasseh (Josh. xvii.7). It is probably identical with TAPPUAH. ENTREAT (én-tret'). 1. Gr. 56pt{w, hoo-brid"zo, to abuse, to use shame- fully, Luke xviii:32; Gr. xpdouau, Áhrah'om-a/hee, Acts xxvii:3, in same sense. 2. Gr. Épatów, er-o/-tah'oh, Phil. iv:3 (A. V. “intreat”), to ask, pray, beseech. ENVY (Čn'vy), (Heb. Tºp, Ain-aw'; Gr.p6óvos, fêhon'os). - 1. Feeling of uneasiness and displeasure at the prosperity of another, with the illicit wish that it was ours, not theirs (Ps. xxxvii: I ; lxxiii:3; Prov. xxiv: I, IQ, etc.). 2. The despicable passion which desires to bring another down below one's own level, while it covets the thing which he possesses (Prov. xxvii:4; Matt. xxvii: 18; Rom. i :29, etc.). The envious man sickens at the sight of enjoyment; he is easy only in the misery of others: all en- deavors, therefore, to satisfy an envious man are fruitless. (I) So Rachel envied her sister Leah because of her fruitfulness (Gen. xxx : I.). (2) Joseph's brethren envied him because his father loved him (Gcn. xxxvii: II). (3) The Jcws en- wied Paul and Barnabas because they preached the gospel of Christ (Acts xiii:4, 5). (4) Some preached Christ out of envy and strife, from dis- content at the high honors of the apostle Paul, and in order to vex his spirit and diminish his (5) Envy is more dan- gerous than open outrageous ‘anger and fury, as it is more abiding, and will make a man turn him- self into every shape to undo his neighbor (Prov. xxvii:4). It is often pointed against the most excellent and useful works (Eccl. iv:4). (6) It is its own punishment, is rottenness to the bones, and slays the silly one; it stops the blessings of heaven, and torments the Soul where it dwells, even unto death (Prov. xiv:30; Job v.2). EPAENETUS 599 EPAENETUS (ep-ên'é-tus), (Gr. 'Etratveros, eA-Z'- net-os, praised). A Christian resident at Rome when Paul wrote his Epistle to the Church in that city, and one of the persons to whom he sent special salutations (Rom. xvi :5). In the received text he is spoken of as being ‘the first fruits of Achaia, but ‘the first fruits of Asia’ is the reading of the best MSS. EPAIPHRAS (Šp'a-phrás), (Gr. 'Etraq pās, ep-aſ- nas', probably a contraction of Epaphroditus). An eminent teacher in the church at Colossae, denominated by Paul ‘his dear fellow-servant,’ and ‘a faithful minister of Christ' (Coloss. i :7; iv: I.2). From Paul’s Epistle to Philemon it appears that he suffered imprisonment with the apostle at Rome. It has been inferred from Coloss. i :7, that he was the founder of the Colossian Church; and Dr. Neander supposes that the apostle terms him a servant of Christ in our stead, because he committed to him the office of proclaiming the gospel in the three Phrygian cities, Colossae, Hiera- polis, and Laodicea, which he could not visit him- Self (Hist. of Planting, etc. i : pp. 200, 373, Eng. transl.). This language, however, is by no means decisive: yet most probably Epaphras was one of the earliest and most zealous instructors of the Colossian Church. EPAPHRODITUS (e-pâph-ro-di’tus), (Gr. 'Etra- ºppóðuros, eff-aſ-rod"ee-tos), a messenger (ätröorroMos, aft- os'ío-los) of the church at Philippi to the Apostle Paul during his imprisonment at Rome, who was entrusted with their contributions for his support (Phil. ii:25; iv:18). Paul’s high estimate of his character is shown by an accumulation of honorable epithets; brother, fellow worker, and way ſe/Zozy soldier. Epaphrodi- tus, on his return to Philippi, was the bearer of the epistle which forms part of the canon. Grotius and Some other critics conjecture that Epaphroditus was the same as the Epaphras mentioned in the Epistle to the Colossians. But though the latter name may be a contraction of the former, the fact that Epaphras was most probably in prison at the time Sufficiently marks the distinction of the persons. . E. R. EPENETUS (Šp'e-nē’tus). See EPAENETUs. EPHAH (É'phah), (Heb. "??, ay ſaw', dark- ness). 1. The eldest son of Midian dwelt in Arabia Petraea, and gave name to the city Ephah (Gen. xxv :4; I Chron. i :33). (B. C. about 1988.) The town and the Small extent of land around it made part of Midian on the eastern shore of the Dead Sea very different from another country of this name on the Red Sea. Ptolemy speaks of a town called Ippos on the eastern coast of the Dead Sea, a little below Modian or Midian. Is. lx:6, 7, seems to clearly connect the descendants of Ephah with the Midianites, Keturahite Sheba, and the Ishmaelites. 2. A concubine of Caleb, in the tuibe of Judah (I Chron. ii:46). (B.C. aſter 1856.) 3. Son of Jahdai, in the tribe of Judah (1 Chron. ii:47). (B.C. bet. 1836 and 1455.) EPHAH (6-fa), (Heb. Tºš, ay-ſazy'), a dry mea- Šure of capacity, equivalent to the bath for liquids. It contained three pecks and three pints. (See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.) EPHAI (6'phāi), (Heb. "Pº, o faż'ee, birdlike). A IIlai, whose sons were leſl in Judah aſter the deportation to Babylon (Jer. x1:8). (B. C. 548.) They seem to have been massacred by Ishmael (Jer. xli:3). EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THR, EPHER (e'pher), (Heb. Tº, ayfer, gazelle). 1. The second son of Midian, and brother of Ephah (I Chron. i :33). He dwelt beyond Jordan (I Kings iv: Io), and might people the isle of Upher in the Red Sea, or the city of Orpha, in the Diarbekr. (B. C. bet. 1988 and 1800.) 2. Son of Ezra (1 Chron. iv:17). (B. C. bet. I618 and I400.) 3. Head of a family of Manassites (1 Chron. v.: 24). (B. C. about 800.) EPHES-DAMMIM (É'phes-dām"mim), (Heb. Fºl Płł, ehfes dam-meem', boundary of blood, called Pas-dammim, I Chron. xi. I3). A place where the Philistines encamped between Socoh and Azekah just before Goliath was killed (I Sam. xvii: I). Commonly identified with the ruins Damun, about four miles to the northeast of Socoh, EPHESIAN (e-fé'zhan), (Gr. "Eq,éotos, eff/h-eh'- see-os), an inhabitant of Ephesus, used only of Trophimus (Acts xxi:29). . In the plural it is used for the whole city, noted for the worship of Diana (Acts xix:28, 34). “Ye men of Ephesus, what man is there that knoweth not how that the city of the Ephesians is a worshiper of the great goddess Diana, and of the image which fell down from Jupiter”? (Acts xix:35). This question of the town clerk is beautifully illustrated by an inscription which has been dis- covered by Chandler near the aqueduct at Ephe- sus, which states that “It is notorious that not only among the Ephesians but also everywhere among the Greek nations, temples are consecrated to her (Diana).” The similar adjective, Ephesine, “of Ephesus,” also occurs in Rev. ii: I, in some Greek MSS. EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE. (1) Structure and Content. This writing be- gins with the usual superscription of the Pauline letters including a self-naming of the writer and a benediction upon the readers (i: I, 2). This is immediately followed by a doxology or thanks- giving section, also characteristic of Paul’s letters. In this case, however, the thanksgiving is some- what lengthier and more meditative in its tone, including the writer’s thoughts on the subject of God's grace as exhibited in the foreordination of believers to be holy and without blemish before him. The ground of foreordination is God's “good pleasure,” and the end of it, “the praise of his glory.” The means through which it is realized in the world is the redemption secured through the Beloved (i:3-14). From this thanks- giving for the foreordaining grace of God the writer passes to a prayer for the readers that they might appreciate and “measure the whole range of the work accomplished in them by faith, the greatness of the Divine power that has been dis- played in their behalf, and the beauty of the hope to which this change entitles them” (i: IS-23). Thus far the writer introduces himself to his read- ers and makes known his hopes and prayer for them. From this point on he conveys to them his special message. This is given in two parts—a didactic and a practical one. In the didactic part of this message, the apostle begins with the thought already expressed in his prayer for a sense of appreciation of the magnitude of God's grace. He calls their attention to the nature of this grace (ii: 1-10); the ſormer alienation of the read- ers from God and their present reconciliation with Him as a result of this grace (ii: I I-22); his own share in the work of transmitting this grace to PPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE men and building up the community of those who accept it into a living body (iii: 1-13); and his new prayer for them that they might know their privileges and be strengthened spiritually and filled with the fulness of God (iii:I4-2I). The prac- tical part of the Epistle which begins with ch. iv urges upon the readers the realization of their membership in the one church which is the body of Christ. This should issue in endeavors to maintain the unity of the body (iv :I-6), and is the one of the various gifts bestowed upon them towards the healthy growth of the whole body (iv : 7-I6). All this they should do as a church, but also as individuals they should live worthily of their membership in Christ by cultivating a pure and spotless morality (iv :17; v :21). Then, as families, they should obey those laws of mutual subordination and consideration which are to make their domestic relations perfect. First, hus- bands and wives (v :22-33), then children and parents (vi: I-4) and finally servants and masters are thus urged to a perfect life. These exhorta- tions the apostle brings to a conclusion by return- ing to the thought of the church and her warfare and calling on his readers to gird themselves for this warfare (vi : IO-2O), and closes with a few words of a personal import to which he appends the usual benediction (vi :21–24). (2) To Whom Addressed. But who were the readers thuts addressed by the apostle? The question has received different answers. The oc- casion for difference of opinion is the doubt cast on the genuineness of the words év'Egeog, in Ephe- sus, in i: I, through the Omission of these words in a combination of ancient MSS. characterized by Lightfoot as almost always representing the origi- nal text in the Epistles of Paul. The various views proposed on the subject are briefly : (1) That the letter was addressed as traditionally held to the Church at Ephesus and that the omission of the words in question from the ancient MSS. and versions is due to some critical conjecture of an ancient copyist who thought that the contents of the Epistle did not bear out this address and therefore left them out. This view, however, has not found favor. Critically, such omission must have been made late, but, as a matter of fact, it is the earlier MSS. that makes it. Moreover, this view is based on the existence of a critical spirit in the early church which cannot be proved. A mere acci- dental Omission is not probable and in general no sufficient reason can be given for such omission. (2) A second class of critics, led by Grotius, re- vive the view of the ancient Gnostic Marcion and maintain that the church addressed is that at Lao- dicea and that we have in this Epistle the letter written to that church and alluded to in Col. iv:16, which was commonly supposed to have been lost. While this view is plausible for many reasons, it has been in modern times set aside in favor of an- other theory held in the following two varieties. (3) That the letter was an encyclical or circular addressed to a circle of churches without the spe- cial designation of any of them in the original copy. Such an encyclical might be localized at Ephesus and the phrase in Ephesus being inserted in i: I, would be perpetuated. In such a case the address would read, “to the saints existing (roſs otguy) and faithful in Christ Jesus.” (See Millî gan, AEncyclopædia Britannica, art. “EPHESIANs.”) As this construction is one, unusual in Greek, many have objected to the whole view associated with it and have resorted to another explanation. (4) That the encyclical was addressed to a defi- nite circle of churches and issued in separate copies to each of these churches. The original 600 EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE had a blank wherein the name of each of the cities of the circle could be inserted in each sepa- rate copy. The name Ephesus among others (Laodicea, Hierapolis) was thus introduced into one of these copies and gradually displaced the others by serving as the original of subsequent copies made for collections of Paul's Epistles. As the Original character and purpose of the Epistle, however, was remembered long after this period, the Omission from the text of some MSS. would also be natural. This view, proposed first by Ussher, has been accepted and held with some modifications by Bengel, Neander, Olshausen, Reuss, Ellicott, Lightfoot, Hort, B. Weiss, Moule, Abbott, etc. It best explains the facts of the case i. ºny be safely taken as fairly well estab- 1S1162C1. (3) Genuineness. The genuineness of the Epistle to the Ephesians was not called in ques- tion until the first quarter of the nineteenth centu- ry. Although Erasmus did express his apprecia- tion of the difference of style between it and the Other epistles of Paul, no one in the ancient or mediaeval church doubted that it was a writing of Paul's. In fact, the testimony of antiquity is fuller and clearer for the authenticity of Ephesians than for any of the other Pauline letters. This testimony goes back to Marcion, who, as already referred to, ascribed it to Paul, though alleging that it was addressed to the Laodiceans. Poly- carp somewhat earlier quotes from it, and Igna- tius addressing the Ephesians says to them in effect that they are the church to which “the sanc- tified Paul” “remembers them in Christ” in “the whole letter” (Ign. ad Eph. xii:3). This testi- mony, however, did not seem sufficiently strong to Usteri, a disciple of Schleimacher, who upon the basis of internal evidence surmised that it was written by Tychicus or some other companion of Paul and signed by the Apostle himself, who in general agreed with its content and adopted it as his Own. DeWette elaborated the objections to the au- thenticity of the epistle and came to the conclusion that it was a “verbose amplification” of the Epistle to the Colossians. These objections were further taken up by the Tübingen school (Baur, Schweg- ler, Köstlin, Hilgenfeld, Hausrath) and woven into their system of New Testament criticism. These critics ascribed Ephesians as well as Colos- sians to a writer of the middle of the second centu- ry who proposed it as an irenicon for the purpose of uniting the various factions of the Church. From these radical positions the criticism of more, recent years has been very slow to recede, if in- deed it may be said to have receded at all. David- Son in England, Hoekstra and others in Holland, and Pfleiderer, Weizsäcker, Ritschl, and the Ritschlians in Germany, together with Von Soden, Schmidel and others, still deny the Pauline au- thorship of Ephesians. On the other hand, how- ever, there are not lacking critics of the highest type of Scholarship who stoutly defend the older belief. Some of these are B. Weiss, Salmon, Godet, Zahn, and in fact the great body of con- Servative scholars. To these may be added further Some who, like Jülicher, take the position that though the Pauline authorship of the Epistle can- not be demonstrated, neither can the denial of such authorship be established. The external testimony is certainly exceedingly strong. In fact apart from theoretical and a priori grounds the argument for authenticity is more than sufficient to overcome all the objections alleged against it. Accordingly we may safely regard the Epistle as neither the work of a second-century disciple of Paul nor “deutero- Pauline” in the sense that it was thought out and EPHESLANs, EPISTLE TO THE 601 composed by a close companion of the Apostle's and adopted and signed by himself. (4) Time and Place of Composition. But when and upon what occasion did the Apostle write the Epistle? A clue to the answer is fur- nished by its relations to the Epistle to the Colos- sians. These two letters were carried to their re- spective destinations by the same messenger, Tychicus (Eph. vi :21, 22; Col. iv:7, 8). In fact, the words in which the apostle announces the fact and manner of sending Tychicus with the letters are nearly identical. If we add to this considera- tion the fact that the style of language and the cycle of thought in the two writings present strik- ingly close resemblances we shall be forced to the conclusion that Ephesians, like Colossians, was written from Rome about the end of the year 62 or the beginning of 63. (5) Design of the Epistle. The design of the Epistle has also called forth a variety of views. The Tübingen School of critics ascribed to the au- thor the desire to lift the church to a sense of her own unity by presenting her to herself as the Body of Jesus Christ and by holding before her at the same time a higher conception of the person of Jesus Christ than had been held hitherto. Such a presentation of unity would repress and cause to vanish all remnants of the conflict between Juda- ists and Paulinists. Others with Weiss and Gore hold that the Unity of the Church was more directly and primarily the theme of the Apostle. The occasion and need for emphasizing this idea was furnished by the existence of churches in Asia Minor which were planted by Paul alongside of others planted by others. These did not always harmonize with each other. Still others with Holtz- mann and Reuss find the theme of the Epistle in the idea of a Divine plan dominating the development of the moral plan of the universe. In this plan the apparent difference between Judaism and paganism finds its solution and disappears. Saba- tier (Apostle Paul) takes the ground that the epistle had a speculative aim. Hitherto the Apos- tle had preached the Gospel as a means of salva- tion; in this letter he raises it to the plane of a key to a cosmic philosophy. He shows that re- demption “is the eternal thought of God embrac- ing not only all the ages, but also the entire uni- verse.” The key to the design of the letter is to be found rather with Godet in iv: I, “I therefore beseech you to walk worthily of the calling where- with ye were called.” The aim is practical. The appeal to the sense of the greatness of the salva- tion enjoyed by believers, of the exaltation of Christ their redeemer, of the dignity and unity of the church, is in order that a degire for pure aud dignified living might be fostered thereby. The Christology, Soteriology, and Ecclesiology of the Epistle are seen in the light of this central thought and purpose of it to be not subjects of study for themselves, but means towards the ethically prac- tical end of raising the readers to a higher life in holiness. (6) Relations of Ephesians and Colossians. The similarities between the epistles to the Colos- sians and Ephesians have already been mentioned. They are striking and call for an explanation. They cover not merely the circle of thought in the two writings, but extend into verbal coincidences. The first theory set forth to account for them was that of DeWette. Assuming the genuineness of Colossians, this scholar asserted that the writer of Ephesians had borrowed from this letter of Paul's. Holtzmann on the contrary thinks that the priority is on the side of Ephesians. He does EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE not, however, concede the authenticity of either epistle in its present form, but alleges that, Paul having written a short letter to the Colossians, this was used by the author of Ephesians as the basis of his writing. The same writer, however, later added to and expanded the original Colos- sian Epistle. This view, though not accepted in its entirety, is thought by many to indicate the line along which a solution of the problem is to be sought (Hausrath, Mangold, Pfleiderer). It is difficult, however, to believe that a writer so well acquainted with the thought of Paul should have limited himself to but a single one of the Apostle's writings, and that a very brief one. - As has already been shown, no theory that pro- ceeds upon the assumption of the non-authenticity of this Epistle can be considered correct. Nor is Colossians to be considered 11011-Pauline (see CoLossIANs). But if both are Paul's writings the most natural explanation of their resemblances is to be found in the fact that he wrote both about the same time. But if so, he must have written Colossians first. The reasons for this order are the following: First, it would be natural that a specific need such as there was in Colossae for a message should receive attention first before the Apostle could think of a more general communica- tion such as he gives in Ephesians. Secondly, it is easier to account for the occurrence of the larger and freer working over of the thought in Ephesians if we assume that the Colossians pre- cedes than for the more condensed form in Colos- sians upon the basis of the precedence of Ephe- sians. Progress is generally from the briefer to the more lengthy form. Thirdly, it is more natural that Paul should have used in dealing with the broader and more general theme before him in writing Ephesians the material already in his mind in treating of the narrower and more specific theme of Colossians than the reverse. That the theme of Ephesians was more general may be easily seen from the diversity of view among scholars on this point. The use of the phrase “you also’ in Ephesians vi :21 has been alleged as a proof that the Colossian letter was already writ- ten, but the phrase simply implies that the apostle looks upon the Ephesians in connection with all other Christians, not simply the Colossians. Col. iv :I6, where the apostle suggests that the epistle from Laodicea (our Ephesians) should be read at Colossae, is said to support the supposition that the Ephesian Epistle was in existence when Colos- sians was written. But the reasoning is not con- clusive. The truth is, as above stated, the two letters were composed so nearly at the same time that either of them might be referred to in the other as already 1n existence. (7) Helps to the Study of Ephesians. The large works of Meyer, Alford, Olshapusen, and Lange contain good commentaries on the Epistle to the Ephesians. Of separate treatises for the English reader, Abbott's (in the International Critical Series) is the most scientific and thorough in method and scope. Barry’s (in Ellicott's New Testament Com. for English Readers). Beet’s, Ellicott’s, Eadie’s, L. J. Davies’, Sadler's, and Mc- Pherson’s are also all good from the point of view of exegetical and linguistic study. Findlay's (in the Earpositor's Bible), Blaikie's (in the Pulpit Com.), Gore’s and Moule’s (Ephesian Studies), are pure- ly expository. Moule has also written the volume on Ephesians in the Cambridge Bible. Hodge's and Dale's works are doctrinal expositions For the reader of German, Harless and von Soden (in the Hand Kommentar of Holtzmann and Lipsius) may be recommended as good. A. C. Z. EPHESUS 60. EPHESUS (Éph'e-sis), (Gr. "Eqegos, ef'es-os), an old and celebrated city, capital of Ionia, one of the twelve Ionian cities in Asia Minor in the Mythic tl II leS. (1) Location. It lay on the river Cayster, not far from the coast of the Icarian Sea, between Smyrna and Miletus. It was also one of the most considerable of the Greek cities in Asia Minor; but while, about the epoch of the introduction of Christianity, the other cities declined, Ephesus rose more and more. It owed its prosperity in part to the favor of its governors, for Lysimachus named the city Arsinoe, in honor of his Second wife, and Attalus Philadelphus furnished it with splendid wharfs and docks; in part to the favora- ble position of the place, which naturally made it the emporium of Asia on this side the Taurus (Strabo, xiv. pp. 641, 663). - (2) History. Under the Romans Ephesus was the capital not only of Ionia, but of the entire EPHESUS as one of the seven wonders of the world. It stood on a platform about 425 feet in length and 239% feet in width, measured from the lowest step. A flight of ten steps led to the pavement of the platform, and three more steps to the pave- ment of the temple. The temple itself was 34.2% feet in length and 164 feet in width. It consisted of two rows of eight columns each in front and rear, and two rows of twenty columns each on either side of the sanctuary. These with two columns at each entrance of the Sanctuary made one hundred in all. Each was a monolith of mar- ble 55 feet in height, and the eighteen at each end were sculptured. The roof was covered with large white marble tiles. The cella or inner Sanc- tuary, which these columns surrounded, was 70 feet wide and Ios long. Its internal Ornamenta- tion was of surpassing splendor, adorned with works of art by Phidias and Praxiteles, Scopas, Parrhasius, and Apelles. (Davis, Bib. Dict.) Site of Ephesus. province of Asia, and bore the honorable title of the first and greatest metropolis of Asia. The Bishop of Ephesus in later times was the president of the Asiatic dioceses, with the rights and privileges of a patriarch. In the days of Paul Jews were found settled in the city in no inconsid- erable number (compare Joseph. Antiq. xiv:IO, II), and from them the Apostle collected a Christian community (Acts xviii:19; xix: I ; xx: I6), which being fostered and extended by the hand of Paul himself, became the center of êºy in Asia Minor. On leaving the city the Apostle left Tim- othy there (I Tim. i : 3) : at a later period, accord- ing to a tradition which prevailed extensively in ancient times, we find the Apostle John in Ephe- sus, where he employed himself most diligently for the spread of the gospel, and where he not only died, at a very old age, but was buried, with Mary the mother of the Lord. Some make John bishop of the Ephesian communities, while others ascribe that honor to Timothy. In the book of Revelation (ii: 1) a favorable testimony is borne to the Chris- tian churches at Ephesus. - (3) Temple of Diana. The classic celebrity of this city is chiefly owing to its famous temple, and the goddess in whose honor it was built, natine- ly, ‘Diana of the Ephesians.’ The temple was a magnificent work of Ionic architecture, and ranked The earlier temple was burnt down on the night in which Alexander was born (B. C. 355), by an obscure person of the name of Eratostratus, who thus sought to transmit his name to posterity; and, as it seemed somewhat unaccountable that the goddess should permit a place which redounded so much to her honor to be thus recklessly de- stroyed, it was given out that Diana was SO en- gaged with Olympias, in aiding to bring Alexander into the world, that she had no time nor thought for any other concern. At a subsequent period, Alexander made an offer to rebuild the temple, provided he was allowed to inscribe his name. On the front, which the Ephesians refused. Aided, however, by the whole of Asia Minor, they suc- ceeded in erecting a still more magnificent tem- ple, which the ancients have lavishly praised and which it took two hundred and twenty years to complete. The theater was one of the largest known of all that have remained to modern times. The auditorium was semicircular, 405 feet in di- ameter, and the orchestra was I IO. The stage was 22 feet wide. The theater seated 24,500 persons. Among his other enormities Nero is said to have despoiled the temple of Diana of much of its treasure. It continued to conciliate no small por- tion of respect till it was finally burnt by the Goths in the reign of Gallienus. The ‘silver shrines' ºf EPHESUS the Dphesian Artemis mentioned in Acts xix:24, have been already noticed. (See DEMETRIUs.) (4) Sorcery and Magic. The Ephesian multi- tude were addicted to sorcery; indeed, in the age of Jesus and his Apostles, adepts in the occult sci- ences were numerous: they traveled from country to country, and were found in great numbers in Asia, deceiving the credulous multitude and prof- iting by their expectations. They were some- times Jews, who referred their skill and even their forms of proceeding to Solomon, who is still re- garded in the East as head or prince of magicians (Joseph. Antiq. viii:2, 5; Acts viii:9; xiii:6, 8). In Asia Minor Ephesus had a high reputation for magical arts (Orflnh, De Fphes I.ihris com- bustis). The books mentionca, Acts xix:I9, were doubt, less books of magic. How extensively they were in use may be learned from the fact that ‘the price of them’ was ‘fifty thousand pieces of silver.’ Very celebrated were the Ephesian letters ('Eq’égua ^páppiata), which appear to have been a sort of magical formulae written on paper or parch- ment, designed to be fixed as amulets on different parts of the body, such as the hands and the head (Plut. Sym. vii). Erasmus (Adag. Cent. ii. 578) says that they were certain signs or marks which rendered their possessor victorious in every- thing. (5) Ruins. The ruins of Ephesus lie two short days’ journey from Smyrna, in proceeding from which towards the southeast the traveler passes the pretty village of Sedekuy; and two hours and a half onwards he comes to the ruined village of Danazzi, on a wide, solitary, uncultivated plain, beyond which several burial grounds may be ob- served ; near one of these, on an eminence, are the Supposed ruins of Ephesus, consisting of shattered walls, in which some pillars, architraves, and frag- ments of marble have been built. The soil of the plain appears rich. It is covered with a rank, burnt-up vegetation, and is everywhere deserted and Solitary, though bordered by picturesque mountains. A few corn-fields are scattered along the site of the ancient city, which is marked by Some large masses of shapeless ruins and stone walls. Towards the sea extends the ancient port, a pestilential marsh. Along the slope of the mountain and over the plain are scattered frag- ments of masonry and detached ruins, but noth- ing can now be fixed upon as the great temple of Diana. There are some broken columns and cap- itals of the Corinthian order of white marble; there are also ruins of the theater above men- tioned, consisting of some circular seats and nu- merous arches. The supposed site still retains the name of the pal elit city, Asulvuk Ui Ayusuluk, a Turkisli word, which is associated with the same idea as Ephesus, meaning the City of the Moon (Fellows). But Kiepert, the noted German geographer, and Isaac Taylor, a great authority on names, say that Ayasaluk is a corruption of IIagios Theologos, the holy theologian, that is, St. John. A church dedicated to St. John is thought to have stood near, if not on the site of, the prescnt mosque. Arundell (Discoveries, vol. ii. p. 253) conjectures that the gate, called the Gate of Persecution, and large masses of brick wall, which lie beyond it. are parts of this celebrated church, which was fortified during the great Council of Ephesus. The tomb of St. John was in or under his church. Though Ephesus presents few traces of human life, and little but scattered and mutilated remains of its ancient grandeur, yet the environs, diversi- fied as they are with hill and dale, and not scant- 603 EPHPHATHA ily supplied with wood and water, present many features of great beauty. (6) Church at Ephesus. IIowever much the Church at Ephesus may (Rev. ii:2), in its earliest days, have merited praise for its ‘works, labor, and patience,' yet it appears soon to have ‘left its first love,’ and to have received in vain the admonition —"Remember, therefore, from whence thou art fallen, and repent and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou re- pent.' If any repentance was produced by this Solemn warning, its effects were not durable, and the place has long since offered an evidence of the truth of prophecy, and the certainty of the Di- vine threatenings, as well as a melancholy Sub- ject for thought to the contemplative Christian. Its fate is that of the once-flourishing seven churches of Asia: its fate is that of the entire country— a garden has become a desert. Busy centers of civilization, spots where the refinements and de- lights of the age were collected, are now a prey to silence, destruction, and death. Consecrated first of all to the purposes of idolatry, Ephesus next had Christian temples almost rivaling the pagan in Splendor, wherein the image of the great Diana lay prostrate before the cross; and, after the lapse of some centuries, Jesus gives place to Mahomet. and the crescent glitters on the dome of the re- cently Christian church. A few more scores of years, and Ephesus has neither temple, cross, cres- cent, nor city, but is ‘a desolation, a dry land, and a wilderness.” Even the sea has retired from the scene of devastation, and a pestilential morass, covered with mud and rushes, has succeeded to the waters which brought up ships Iaden with merchandise from every part of the known world. Several important councils were held in Ephesus, among which was the third ecumenical council (June 22-August 31, A. D. 431). A small Turk- ish town to-day represents the once noted city. (Mc. & Str. Cyc.; Modern Discoveries on the Site of Ancient Ephesus. J. T. Wood. 1890.) J. R. B. EPHLAL (&phia), (Heb. ***, of lawſ, judge), son of Zabad, of the house of Hezron and Jerah- meel; a descendant of Judah (I Chron. ii:37), B. C. I618. e EPHOD (eſphod), (Heb. 728, ay-ſode', ephod or image). ** A man whose son Hanniel, as head of the tribe of Manasseh, was one of those designated to assist Joshua and Eleazar in the division of the land of Canaan (Num. xxxiv:23). (B. C. ante 1618.) EPHOD (€fºod), (Heb. Tº, ay-ſode'), an ar- ticle of dress worn by the Hebrew priests. It was made of plain linen (I Sam. ii: 18; 2 Sam. vi. 14), except the ephod of the high priest, which was embroidered with various colors. It consisted of two parts, one covering the back and the other the breast, clasped together upon each shoulder with a large onyx stone, upon which were engraved the names of the twelve tribes, six on each stone; and upon the place where it crossed the breast was the breastplate. (See BREAST- PLATE OF THE HICH PRIEST.) It was further fas- tened by a “curious girdle of gold, blue, purple, scarlet, and fine twined linen.” The ephod, or something resembling it and called by the same name, was worn by others besides the priests. (1 Chron. xv.27 and passages before cited). (See PRIEST, IIEBREW PRIESTIIOOD.) EPHPHATHA (Éph'pha-tha), (Gr. 64 pagá, ef fath-a/.", be thou opened), a Syriac word, which our Saviour pronounced when he cured One deaf and dumb (Mark vii:34). EPHRAIM EPHRAIM (Č'phra-im), (Heb. El-Es, ef-ra/,' yim, fruitful). . 1. The younger son of Joseph, but who received precedence over the elder in and from the blessing of Jacob (Gen. xli :52; xlviii:I). That blessing was an adoptive act, whereby Ephraim and his brother Manasseh were counted as sons of Jacob in the place of their father; the object being to give to Joseph, through his sons, a double portion in the brilliant prospects of his house. (1) Two Tribes. Thus the descendants of Joseph formed two of the tribes of Israel, whereas every other of Jacob's sons counted but as one. There were thus, in fact, thirteen tribes of Israel; but the number twelve is usually preserved, either by excluding that of Levi (which had no terri- tory), when Ephraim and Manasseh are separate- ly named, or by counting these two together as the tribe of Joseph, when Levi is included in the account. The intentions of Jacob were fulfilled, and Ephraim and Manasseh were counted as tribes of Israel at the departure from Egypt, and as such shared in the territorial distribution of the Promised Land (Num. i :33; Josh. xvii:14; I Chron. vii:20). (2) Population. At the departure from Egypt, the population of the two tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh together amounted to 72,700 men capa- ble of bearing arms, greatly exceeding that of any single tribe, except Judah, which had some- what more. During the wandering, their number increased to 95,200, which placed the two tribes much higher than even Judah. At the Exode, Ephraim singly had 40,500, and Manasseh only 32,200; but a great change took place in their relative numbers during the wandering. Ephraim lost 8,000, and Manasseh gained 20,500; so that just before entering Canaan, Ephraim stood at 32,500, and Manasseh at 52,700. At the departure from Egypt, Ephraim, at 40,500, was above Ma- nasseh and Benjamin in numbers; at the end of the wandering it was, at 32,500, above Simeon only, which tribe had suffered a still greater loss of numbers (Comp. Num, i and xxvi). (3) Territory. One of the finest and most fruitful parts of Palestine, occupying the very cen- ter of the land, was assigned to this tribe. It ex- tended from the borders of the Mediterranean on the west to the Jordan on the east: on the north it had the half-tribe of Manasseh, and on the South Benjamin and Dan (Josh. xvi :5, sq.; xvii: 7, sq.). This fine country included most of what was afterwards called Samaria, as distinguished from Judaea on the one hand, and from Galilee on the other. The tabernacle and the ark were deposited within its limits, at Shiloh; and the pos- session of the sacerdotal establishment, which was a central object of attraction to all the other tribes, must, in no small degrec, have enhanced its importance, and increased its wealth and popula- tion. (4) Subsequent History. The domineering and haughty spirit of the Ephraimites is more than once indicated (Josh. xvii: I4; Judg. viii: 1-3; xii I) before the establishment of the regal govern- ment; but the particular enmity of Ephraim against the other great tribe of Judah, and the rivalry between them, do not come out distinctly until the establishment of the monarchy. In the election of Saul from the least consid- erable tribe in Israel, there was nothing to excite the jealousy of Ephraim ; and, after his heroic qualities had conciliated respect, it rendered the new king true allegiance and support. But when the great tribe of Judah produced a king in the person of David, the pride and jealousy of Eph- 604 EPHRAIM raim were thoroughly awakened, and it was doubt- less chiefly through their means that Abner was enabled to uphold for a time the house of Saul; for there are manifest indications that by this time Ephraim influenced the views and feelings of all the other tribes. They were at length driven by the force of circumstances to acknowledge David upon conditions; and were probably not without hope that, as the king of the nation at large, he would establish his capital in their central portion of the land. But when he not only established his court at Jerusalem, but proceeded to remove the ark thither, making his native Judah the seat both of the theocratical and civil government, the Eph- raimites became thoroughly alienated, and longed to establish their own ascendancy. The building of the temple at Jerusalem, and other measures of Solomon, strengthened this desire; and al- though the minute organization and vigor of his government prevented any overt acts of rebellion, the train was then laid, which, upon his death, rent the ten tribes from the house of David, and gave to them a king, a capital, and a religion suit- *: to the separate views and interests of the tribe. Thenceforth the rivalry of Ephraim and Judah was merged in that between the two kingdoms, although still the predominance of Ephraim in the kingdom of Israel was so conspicuous as to oc- casion the whole realm to be called by its name, especially when that rivalry is mentioned. 2. A city in the wilderness of Judaea, to which Jesus withdrew from the persecution which fol- lowed the miracle of raising Lazarus from the dead (John xi :54). It is placed by Eusebius (Ephron) eight Roman miles north of Jerusalem. This indication would seem to make it the same with the Ephraim which is mentioned in 2 Chron. xiii: 19, along with Bethel and Jeshanah, as towns taken from Jeroboam by Abijah. &. The mountain of Ephraim was a mountain or group of mountains in central Palestine, in the tribe of the same name, on or towards the bor- ders of Benjamin (Josh. xvii:15; xix:50; xx:7; Judg. vii:24; xvii: I ; I Sam. ix:4; I Kings iv :8). From a comparison of these pas- sages it may be collected that the name of ‘Mount Ephraim' was applied to the whole of the ranges and groups of hills which occupy the cen- tral part of the southernmost border of this tribe, and which are prolonged southward into the tribe of Benjamin. In the time of Joshua these hills were densely covered with trees (Josh. xvii: 18), which is by no means the case at present. In Jer. 1:19, Mount Ephraim is mentioned in opposition with Bashan, on the other side of the Jordan, as a region of rich pastures, suggesting that the val- leys among these mountains were well watered and covered with rich lierbage, whicli is true at the present day. 4. The forest of Ephraim in which Absalom lost his life (2 Sam. xviii:6-8), was in the coun- try east of the Jordan, not far from Mahanaim. How it came to bear the name of a tribe on the other side the river is not known. Some think it was on account of the slaughter of the Ephraim- ites here in the time of Jephthah (Judg. xii:4–6); but others suppose that it was because the Eph- raimites were in the habit of bringing their flocks into this quarter for pasture, for the Jews allege that the Ephraimites received from Joshua, who was of their tribe, permission to feed their flocks in the woodlands within the territories of any of the tribes of Israel; and that as this forest lay near their territories on the other side the Jordan, they were wont to drive their flocks over to feed there. EPHRAIM, GATE OF (See Jarchi, Kimchi, Abarbanel, etc.) (2 Sam. xviii:6.) 5. A place by the name of Ephraim is also men- tioned in 2 Sam. xiii:23. If it is a town there is no clew to its situation. EPHRAIM, GATE OF (É'phra-im). This was One of the gates of Jerusalem (2 Kings xiv:13; 2 Chron. xxv.23: Neh. viii:16; xii:39). As the gates of oriental cities were named after the locality towards which they looked, this was on the north side; probably near the present “gate of Damascus.” EPHRAIMITE (6'phra-im-ite), belonging to the tribe of Ephraim (Judg. xii:5). Elsewhere written Ephrathite. EPHRAIN (e'phra-in), (Heb. Tº, ef-rome'), a city of Israel which Abijah captured from Jero- boam (2 Chron. xiii:19). It has been conjectured that this place is identical with the Ephraim “by” which Absalom's Sheep farm was situated (2 Sam. xiii:23); with Ephraim (John xi :54); and with Ophrah (Josh. xviii:23); but nothing can be definitely stated. EPHRATAH or EPHRATH (eph'ra-tah or ëph'rath), (Heb. Tºš, ef-raw'ſhaw, fruitfulness, fruitful). ; The ancient name for BETHLEHEM (which See ). 2. The second wife of Caleb, son of Hezron. She was the grandmother of Caleb the spy (I Chron. ii:19, 50 ; perhaps also 24, and iv:4). (B. C. after 1856.) EPHRATHITE (&ph'rath-ite), (Heb. "Flº, ef. rawāh-ee"). 1. Applied to Elimelech and family as an in- habitant of Bethlehem (Ruth i :2). 2. The designation of Elkanah, father of Sam- uel (I Sam. i:1). EPHRON (6'phron), (Heb. lºº, ef-rome', fawn-like), a Hittite residing in Hebron, who sold to Abraham the cave and field of Machpelah as a Šamily sepulcher (Gen. xxiii:6-17; xxv.9; xlix:29, 30; 1:13), B.C. 2027. º EPHRON, MOUNT (e'phron, mount), (Heb. mºry-ºn. /ar-eſ-rome'), one of the landmarks of the northern boundary of the tribe of Judah, be- tween the water of Nephtoah and Kirjath-jearim (Josh. xv.:9). It is, therefore, probably the range of hills on the west of the Waay Bež-AHanzma. EPICUREANS (Šp'i ku-ré'anz or ép'i-kü're- anz), (Gr. "Etrukočpetou, eff-ee-koo'ri-oy). This was a sect of Gentile philosophers founded by Epicurus, B. C. 342–27I, who was born on the island of Samos, but taught his philosophy at Athens. They were in high repute at Athens in Paul’s day (Acts xvii:18). Among their doc- trines were these—that the world came into being and will be dissolved by chance, or by the effect of mechanical causes moved by chance; that all events happen by chance or are occasioned by mechanical causes; that the soul dies with the body; that there is no future retribution; and that man's chief happiness lies in pleasure or bod- ily ease. This philosophy obtained a wide popu- larity in Asia Minor and in Rome as well as in the city and land of its originator. It derided the mythology of the ancients, but proposed nothing better. It created a frame of mind hostile to all religion, and particularly to the serious doctrines of the gospel. (See PHILOSOPHY.) EPIPHANES (e-piph'a-nēz). See ANTIOcHUs, 4. 605 EPISCOPACY EPISCOPACY (i-pis'kö-pâ-sy). (1) Definition. Episcopacy expresses the form of governing the Christian church which is followed in the great majority of Christian com- munions. It is the plan of government in the vast Roman Catholic and Greek communions, in the widespread Anglican communion, the American Episcopal Church, the Swedish national church, with many other smaller bodies; in a modified form in the large Methodist communion, and a few other Protestant bodies. In fine, it is the form of government of at least four-fifths of the believers in Christ. The meaning of the word Episcopacy is a division of a country Occupied by the church into dioceses of greater or less extent, each one having at its head a bishop, who has under him priests and deacons. The powers of these bishops vary in various com- munions, but one power, at least, is the same in all—the power of Ordination as belonging to the bishop alone. He alone sets apart, Ordains, lays hands on certain persons to serve as priests and deacons, and in churches holding this doctrine only episcopally ordained ministers are allowed to officiate. (2) Apostolic Succession. Apostolic succes- sion, as connected with Episcopacy, means that this power of ordination vested in the bishop was received by him from other bishops, back in an unbroken line to apostolic times. Anglican theologians differ in their view of the apostolic succession. Some hold it a part of the essence of the church, others consider it historic and Script- ural ; but a Christian church can exist without it. It is false to say that in any part of the episco- pally governed bodies it is held that no one can be saved outside the Episcopal communions. Even the most bigoted Romanist would be unwilling to declare that any person loving God and his neigh- bor, and following after the example of Christ, was not in a state of Salvation. (3) Three Orders of the Ministry. To give a broad definition (to which, however, neither Methodist nor Reformed Episcopalians would as- sent), Episcopal communions hold that the being a part of one holy Catholic Apostolic Church in- volves the Catholic doctrine of three orders of clergy, tracing their succession back to apostolic times. Of course, this view is not held other- wise than on the weightiest grounds, and it is very unjust to the holders of it to say that they are the greatest obstacles in the way of accom- plishing the union of all Christians, an end so dear to every devout heart. In the first place, a view held by four-fifths of the Christian world cannot be rightly called obstructive by the small minority not holding it. The obstruction would seem to be the other way. Then, again, no Chris- tians pray more earnestly for the unity of Chris- tendom, dwell on it, and plan for it, than the va- rious Episcopal bodies. - (4) Episcopacy Essential to a Perfect Church. Let us briefly examine the grounds on which Episcopacy is essential to the constitution of a perfect church, and so held. We assume that our Lord, when on earth, organized some sort of a body for the propagation of his teach- ings. It would not have been reasonable to ex- pect that any doctrines could long continue in life unless they had human keepers and teachers. It is also assumed that it is a certain and undebata- ble fact that all Christians, from the second to the sixteenth century, were under Episcopal gov- ernment. No attempt will be made to argue from the constitution of the Jewish church as to the Christian. Such an argument would not be valid. EPISCOPALIAN 606 It will be granted that nowhere in Scripture is any sort of church government categorically or- dered. The basis of the argument will be the first words of the Preface to the ordination office in the Prayer Book: “It is evident unto all men diligently reading Holy Scripture and ancient authors that from the Apostles' time there have been three orders of ministers in the Christian church—bishops, priests and deacons. Now, our Lord certainly chose twelve ministers of His future church, whom he called apostles. We find these apostles in various parts of the New Testament ordaining others, whom they called bishops, or presbyters, inferior to themselves, and still others more inferior, whom they called deacons. We find, then, in the apostolic church three orders—apostles, bishops or presbyters, and deacons. It may be said that after all the apos- tles died only two orders remained ; but as there are eleven more outside the twelve called apos- tles in the New Testament, it is evident that the Apostolate was not confined to the twelve. It is conceded that the titles, bishop and presbyter, are given to the same person in the New Testa- ment, and that there was no difference in their rank; but, granting all that, the apostolic church evidently was ruled by apostles, presbyters, and deacons. The moment we step beyond the Bible and consult the earliest Christian authorities, we find a thoroughly satisfactory explanation of the reason why the highest rank in the ministry dropped the title apostle and took that of bishop for its designation. There are many who vouch for this. We give the words of but one, Theo- doret. He says: “In process of time the name of apostle was left to those who were in the strict sense apostles, and the name of bishop was con- fined to those who were anciently called apos- tles.” Humility was undoubtedly the reason for this, though the title died hard, since we find in that lately discovered fragment called the “Di- dache,” which cannot well be later than the sec- ond century, the words, “Let every Apostle who cometh to you be received as the Lord.” It is not necessary to cite any of the fathers about Episco- pacy. They knew nothing else; no other kind of government existed until the Reformation, in the sixteenth century, and surely if there had been any other, some mention would be made of it somewhere. It is not pretended that Episcopacy, with all its present formalities and limitations, existed in the primitive church ; those have been the growth of centuries; but certainly the thing itself was there. Such is the argument of those who hold Episcopacy to be the essence of a per- fect branch of the Catholic church. There is a large party in both the Anglican and American Episcopal churches which holds that while Epis- copacy is Scriptural and thoroughly historical, yet it is not one of the articles of a standing or a falling church, and Christian bodies well-pleas- ing to God exist without it. Even this school, however, does not look for any real unity of Christendom, unless, among other things, it be agreed that the government of the united body 'rest upon the ancient Episcopal lines. (See EPISCOPALIAN.) C. L. EPISCOPALIAN (à-pis'kö-pâ'lf-an). The term Episcopalian is a very broad one. In its generic meaning it would include every person who believes that Episcopacy is either the best form of church government or else the one di- vinely appointed form in the administration of ec- clesiastical affairs. It would thus include mem- bers of the Roman Catholic Church, the Greek Church, the Church of England, the Protestant EPISCOPALIAN Episcopal Church, the Reformed Episcopal Church, and Of all other churches having bishops among their high officials. Common usage, how- ever, has limited the term to Protestants who ad- here to Episcopacy derived through bishops from the Church of England as distinguished from those who are Presbyterians, Congregationalists, and the like. Episcopalians Irlay be divided into four schools —the High Church, the Low Church, the Broad Church, and the Reformed Episcopal Church. (1) The Advanced High Churchmen. High churchmen, especially those of the most advanced Order, desire to be called Catholics. They are ex- tremely unwilling that “the Holy Roman Church” should have a monopoly of the term. Their views may be epitomized as follows: In the Jewish Church there were high priests, priests, and Le- vites, representing three distinct orders in the Old Testament ministry; so there are three distinct Orders in the Christian Church—bishops, priests, and deacons. Christ Jesus Himself the great head of the church, in its very organization, insti- tuted this threefold ministry with the two sacra- ments of baptism and the Lord's supper. As the entity or essence of the first church was to be found in the Apostolate, so it is now contained in the Episcopate. The church in all the ages has preserved its visible structure, or corporate body, through the presence and functions of its bishops. The line of succession has been unbroken. Where there is no bishop there is no church. Authorit. I flows down through these divinely appointed offi- cers. They are the heaven-ordained conduits of saving and sustaining grace. From them the priesthood derive their powers, and without such priesthood no sacraments can be validly adminis- tered. The subject of baptism has a moral or spiritual change wrought in him by the applica- tion of water duly blessed. The Holy Ghost can- not operate to renew the soul without this outward Ordinance. In this sacrament we have “the cre- ation of a new heart, new affections, new desires, an actual birth from above, a gift coming down from God through the Holy Spirit.” If one receiving baptism shall willfully sin, he loses the life imparted to him, which can be re- stored only by confession and absolution. The regenerating and absolving priest holds that “the bread and wine offered and consecrated in the iiturgy or service of the holy Eucharist are by such consecration made to be truly and really the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ.” A minister who has received “the grace of orders” in the regular apostolical succession can alone bring about this mysterious change and he alone can declare judicially the forgiveness of sins. High churchmen who are not enrolled as ritualists, and who do not subscribe to the doctrine of the real presence of our Lord in the Eucharist, and who do not erect the confessional in their churches, are yet as tenacious as the ritualists are of the dogma of apostolic succession and of bap- tismal regeneration. (2) Low Churchmen. Low churchmen, so- called, are somewhat difficult to portray. All of them adhere to the historic Episcopate and believe that special blessings flow to the world through its possession by the church. They will use the verbiage of baptismal regeneration and yet give at least seven meanings to the term, no one of which teaches that a moral change is wrought in the heart by this sacramental rite. They are evan- gelical in their doctrinal beliefs. (3) Broad Churchmen. Broad churchmen are still more difficult to describe. Like the low churchmen they cling to Episcopacy, But it is not EPISCOPALIAN the sole channel through which God communicates His grace to men. The Episcopate form of gov- crimment is orderly, dignified and ancient, and therefore very desirable. The extremes of liberal- ism in doctrine are to be found among them. (a) Subdivision. The Rev. W. J. Conybeare, a well-known Church of England clergyman, has made the following subdivision: (I) High Church—normal type, Anglican ; exaggerated type, Tractarian (or Ritualistic); stagnant type, high and dry. (2) Low Church—normal type, “evan- gelical;” exaggerated type, Recondite; stagnant type, low and slow. (3) Broad Church—normal type, liberal; exaggerated type, concealed infidels; stagnant type, only a score in number. (b) Laws and Usages. By the laws and usages of the Church of England and the Protest- ant Episcopal Church, those only who have been Episcopally ordained can officiate as ministers in their sanctuaries. Ministerial interchange is for- bidden with non-Episcopal clergymen. The re- ordination of all ministers joining them from churches not Episcopal is required. All persons to be communicants in full must be confirmed by a bishop. (4) Reformed Episcopalians. Reformed Episcopalians hold that Episcopacy is not neces- sary to the being, but to the well-being of the church. They have, therefore, carefully preserved through their bishops the historic succession of the ministry as found in the Church of England and the Protestant Episcopal Church of America. They have eliminated the word “priest” from their prayer-book, the dogma of baptismal regen- eration from the office of baptism, and everything savoring of transubstantiation from the commu- nion service. They receive members from other Christian churches without requiring them to be confirmed, leaving confirmation to their own choice, although the rite of confirmation is ad- ministered by their bishops to all who, for the first time, ratify their former baptismal vows. They recognize the validity of the orders of the clergy of other Christian communions who are regularly ordained to the sacred office of the min- istry and receive them into their ranks without demanding re-ordination. They conduct their services without candles, incense or colored vest- ments, and have no sacerdotal features, such as a sacrificing altar, super-altar and the like. Their clergy preach the great essential doctrines of the Christian faith as taught by the fathers of “The Reformed Church of England” by which title it is known in law, and as they were also taught by the evangelical bishops and clergy of the Protest- ant Episcopal Church. 5) General Facts. During the American Revolution, soirie of the leading patriots, including Washington, and a majority of the signers of the Declaration of Independence, were Episcopalians. The marked influence of the wisdom and conserv- ative Spirit of these and others of their co-relig- ionists was felt in our wisely planned, generous and comprehensive civil government. The Episcopal Church, in its broadest sense, has stood preéminently for the Christian nurture of children, for improved styles of ecclesiastical architecture, for rich and reverent music, for the observance of sacred seasons, and for multiplied forms of practical philanthropy. The Episcopal Church is recognized more or less in every church thoroughly organized and aggressive. Bishops in fact, if not in name, exercise administrative Episcopal authority among them, as witnessed in presiding officers bearing various titles, and in local, state and national secretaries with other functionaries of kindred character. (See EPISCO- 607 EPISTLES PACY ; PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH ; REFORMED EPISCOPAL CHURCH ; ROMAN CATHOLIC Cºgº. EPISTLES (à-pis'1'2). Origin and T)i&ision. Epistles, which lay down the doctrines of the Christian religion, origi- nate, not from one apostle alone, but from all the four principal apostles; SO that one and the same Divine truth is presented to our eyes in various forms as it were in various mirrors, by which its richess and manifold character are the better displayed. The Epistles of the New Testament divide themselves into two parts—the Pauline and the so-called Catholic. (1) The Pauline Epistles. The Pauline Epis- tles are thirteen in number; or fourteen, if we add to them the Epistle to the Hebrews. The very peculiar character of the Pauline Epistles is SO Striking to any one who is not ignorant of the want of ease and originality conspicuous in the counterfeit writings of early times, as to leave not the least doubt of their genuineness. Depth of thought, fire of speech, firmness of character— these manly features, joined withal to the indul- gence of feelings of the most devoted love and af- fection, characterize these epistles. The amiable personal character of the apostle may be most beautifully traced in his Epistles to the Philippians and to Philemon. All the Epistles, except the one to the Romans, were called forth by circumstances and particular Occasions in the affairs of the communities to which they were addressed. Not all, however, were preserved. It is at least evident from I Cor. V :9 that a letter to the Corinthians has been lost; from Col. iv: 16, it has also been concluded— though probably erroneously, since there perhaps the letter to the Ephesians is referred to—that an- Other letter to the community of Laodicea has likewise been lost. Press of business usually com- pelled Paul—what was, besides, not uncommon in those times—to use his companions as amanuenses. He mentions (Gal. vi. II), as something peculiar, that he had written this letter with his own hand. Paul alludes to this (2 Thess. ii:2), and therefore writes the greeting (2 Thess. iii:17) with his own hand. Paul himself exhorted the communities mutually to impart to each other his letters to them, and read them aloud in their assemblies (Col. iv: I6). It is therefore probable that copies of these letters had been early made by the sev- eral communities, and deposited in the form of col- lections. So long therefore as the various com- nunities transmitted the manuscripts to each other, no other letters, it is obvious, could come into the collections than those to whose genuineness the communities to whom they were originally addressed, bore witness. Even Peter (2 Pet. iii: I6) seems to have had before him a number of Paul’s letters, as, about forty years later, a num- ber of letters of Ignatius were transmitted by Polycarp to Smyrna, while the church of Philippi forwarded to him those directed to them (Ep. Polic. Sub fin. ; Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iii:36). This Pauline collection, in contradistinction to the gos- pels, passed by the name of 6 diróa Toxos. The letters of Paul may be chronologically ar- ranged into those written before his Roman im- prisonment, and those written during and after it; thus beginning with his first letter to the Thessa- lonians, and concluding with his second to Tim- othy, embracing an interval of about ten years (A. D. 54–64). In our Bibles, however, the letters are arranged according to the pre-eminent parts and stations of the communities to whom they EPISTLES OF THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS 608 were addressed, and conclude with the epistles to the two bishops and a private letter to Philemon. (2) The Catholic Epistles. There is, in the first instance, a diversity of opinion respecting their name: some refer it to their writers (letters from all the other apostles who had entered the stage of authorship along with Paul); some, again, to their contents (letters of no special but general Christian tenor); others, again, to the receivers (letters addressed to no community in particular). None of these views, however, is free from difficulties. The last opinion is most decidedly justified by passages from the ancient writers (Euseb. Hist. Eccles. v. I8; Clem. Alex. Strom. iv: I5, ed. Potter, p. 606: Orig. c. Cels. i. 63). The Pauline Epistles had all their particular directions, while the letters of Peter, James, I John, and Jude were circular epistles. The Epis- tles 2 and 3 John were subsequently added, and included on account of their shortness, and to this collection was given the name Catholic Letters, in contradistinction to the Pauline, which were called Ö &troo toxos. A. T. EPISTLES OF THE APOSTOLIC IHATHERS. Under this head come those remains of Chris- tian antiquity which are ascribed to the writers usually styled the Apostolic Fathers, from the cir- cumstance that they were converted to the Chris- tian faith during the lifetime and probably by the instrumentality of the Apostles. One of these is said to have been written by Barnabas. (See BARNABAS, EPISTLE OF..) (1) Clement or Clemens Romanus. It will probably be generally admitted that no production of the early church approaches so near the apostolic writings, in the union of devout feeling with justness and sobriety of thought, as that de- nominated the ‘First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians’ but addressed in the name of ‘the Church, sojourning at A'ozze (h trapoukoúo a ‘Piºumv) to the Church of God sojourning at Corinth. The main object of this Epistle was to allay the dissensions which had arisen in the Corinthian church, and especially to repress the unruly spirit shown by many against their teachers. It is worthy of notice that Clement uniformly speaks of the opposition of the Corinthians against their presbyters, never of their insubordination to their bishop. In Clement’s Epistle only one book of the New Testament is expressly named, Paul’s first Epistle to the Corinthians; but though the Evangelists are not named, several sayings of Christ con- tained in our Gospels are repeated. There are also evident allusions to the Acts, all the Pauline Epistles (I Thessalonians excepted), the Epistles of Peter and James, and the Epistle to the He- brews. A tabular view of these passages is given by Dr. Lardner (Credibility of the Gospel His- tory, pt. ii. ch. ii.; Works, vol. ii. pp. 35-53). Eu- sebius, speaking of Clement’s Epistle, says, “He has inserted in it many sentiments taken from the Epistle to the Hebrews, and sometimes makes use of the identical expressions, from which it is evident that that composition is not a recent one. de Paul having addressed the Hebrews in their native language, some say that the Evan- gelist Luke, and others that this very Clement, translated the document; an opinion which is supported by the fact that the Epistle of Clement and that to the Hebrews are marked by the same peculiarities of style, and in both compositions the sentiments are not unlike.” (Hist. Eccles. iii:38, ed. Walessii, 1672, p. I 10.) As to the date of this epistle it has been fixed EPISTLES, SPURIOUS by Grabe, Galland, Wotton, and Hefele about the year 68; but Cotelerius, Tillemont, and Lard- ner think that it was written at the close of the Diocletian Persecution in 96 or 97. The following works have also been attributed to Clement, but, as they are unquestionably sup- posititious, we shall merely gives their titles. (I) The Apostolic Constitutions, in eight books. (2) The Apostolic Canons. (3) The Recognitions of Clement. (4) The Clementina. They are all printed in the Patres Apostolici of Cotelerius, vol. i. (Mosheim’s Commentaries, translated by Vi- dal, vol. i. pp. 270-274). (2) Ignatius. According to Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. iii. 36) and Origen (Hom. vi. in Luc.; Opera, ed. Lommatzsch, v. IO4), the second bishop, or, according to Jerome (De Vir. Illustr. xvi.), the third bishop of Antioch in Syria. Fif- teen epistles bear his name. Three of these (one addressed to the Virgin Mary, the other two to St. John) are preserved only in a Latin version. The rest are extant in Greek and in an ancient Latin version, and are addressed to Mary of Cassabolis or Neapolis, to Hero, to the churches at Tarsus, Antioch, Philippi, Ephesus, Magnesia, Trallium, Rome, Philadelphia, Smyrna, and to Polycarp. The first eight are unanimously al- lowed to be spurious. Of the remaining seven (which were written on his journey from Antioch to Rome, where he suffered martyrdom by ex- posure to wild beasts), there are two recensions, One longer, the other shorter. & (3) Polycarp’s Epistle to the Philippians. Ire- naeus, in a letter to Florinus the Valentinian, pre- served in part by Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. v. 20), gives an interesting account of his early recollec- tions of Polycarp, and refers to the epistles which he sent to the neighboring churches. Only one, however, has been preserved ; it was addressed to the Philippians, and in Jerome's time was pub- licly read in the assembly of Asia. (4) Shepherd of Hermas. (See HERMAs.) . E. R. EPISTLES, SPURIOUS (see APOCRYPHA). Of these many are lost, but there are several still extant; the principal are : The Epistle of Paul to the Laodiceans; The Third Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians; The Epistle of Peter to James; The Epistles of Paul and Seneca. (1) Epistle to the Laodiceans. There was an Epistle to the Laodiceans extant in the beginning of the second century, which was received by Marcion; but whether this is the same with the one now extant in the Latin language is more than doubtful. The original Epistle was most probably a forgery founded on Coloss. iv:I6. “There are some,’ says Jerome, ‘who read the Dpistle LU Llle Laodiccans, but it is universally re- jected.’ The original Epistle was most probably a forgery founded on Coloss. iv: I6. ‘And when this Epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans, and that ye likewise read the Epistle from Laodicea. The apparent ambiguity of these last words has induced some to understand St. Paul as Speaking of an epistle written by him to the Laodiceans, which he advises the Colossians to procure from Laodicea, and read to their church. “Some,’ says Theodoret, ‘imagine Paul to have written an Epistle to the Laodiceans, and accordingly produce a certain forged epistle; but the Apostle does not say, the Epistle to, but the Epistle from, the Laodiceans.” Bellarmine, among the Roman Catholics, and among the Protestants Le Clerc and others, suppose that the passage in Colossians EPOCH refers to an epistle of St. Paul, now lost, and the Vulgate translation—eam qua Laodicensium est—seems to favor this view. Grotius, how- ever, conceives that the Epistle to the Ephe- sians is here meant, and he is followed by Ham- mond, Whitby, and Mill, and also by Arch- bishop Wake (Epistles of the A/osto/ic Fathers). Theophylact, who is followed by Dr. Lightfoot, conceives that the epistle alluded to is I Timothy. Others hold it to be I John, Philemon, etc. Mr. Jones conjectures that the epistle now passing as that to the Laodiceans (which seems entirely compiled out of the Epistle to the Philippians) was the composition of some idle monk not long before the Reformation; but this opinion is Scarcely compatible with the fact mentioned by M.I. JUlles liiIIIselſ, ilial wirell Sixlus Uſ Sienna published his Bibliotheca Sancta (A. D. I560), there was a very old manuscript of this epistle in the library of the Sorbonne. This was first published by James Le Fevre of Esta- ples in 1517. It was the Opinion of Calvin, Louis Capell, and many others, that St. Paul wrote several epistles besides those now extant. One of the chief grounds of this opinion is the passage in I Cor. v :9. There is still extant, in the Armenian language, an epistle from the Corin- thians to St. Paul, together with the Apostle's reply. This is considered by Mr. La Croze to be a forgery of the tenth or eleventh century, and he asserts that it was never cited by any one of the early Christian writers. In this, however he is mistaken, for this epistle is expressly quote as Paul's by St. Gregory the Illuminator in the third century, Theodore Chrethenor in the sev- enth, and St. Nierses in the twelfth. Neither of them, however, is quoted by any ancient Greek or Latin writer (Henderson, On Inspiration, p. 497. The passages are cited at length in Father Paschal Aucher’s Armenian and English Gram- mar, Venice, 1819). - (2) The Epistle of Peter to James. Omitting the supposed epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, we notice the supposed epistle of Peter to James which is a very ancient forgery. It was first pub- lished by Cotelerius, and is supposed to have been a preface to the Preaching of Peter, which was in great esteem among some of the early Christian writers, and is several times cited as a genuine work by Clement of Alexandria, Theodotus of Byzantium, and others. It was also made use of by the heretic Heracleon, in the second century. Origen observes of it, that it is not to be reckoned among the ecclesiastical books, and that it is neither the writing of Peter nor of any other in- spired person. (3) The Epistles of Paul and Seneca consist of eight pretended Latin letters from the philoso- pher Seneca to St. Paul, and six from the latter to Seneca. Their antiquity is undoubted. St Jerome had such an idea of the value of these letters that he was induced to say, ‘I should not have ranked Seneca in my catalogue of saints, but that I was determined to it by those Epistles of Paul to Seneca and Seneca to Paul, which are read by many. The letters do not appear to have been mentioned by any other ancient writer; but it seems certain that those now extant are the same which were known to Jerome and Augustine. The genuineness of these letters has been maintained by Some learned men, but by far the greater num- ber reject them as spurious. W. W. EPOCH (É'pök), a point of time distinguished by some remarkable event, and from which suc- ceeding years are numbered. (See ERA.) 609 EP WORTH LEAGUE, THE EPWORTH LEAGUE, THE (êpwärth leg), OF THE METHODIST EPISCOPAI, CHURCH. (1) Birth of the Epworth League. The Church will always honor the cradles of great men and great institutions. Jerusalem, Bethle- hem and Tarsus are prominent in the thought of all Christians. Epworth, Oxford, John Street, New York, and St. George's in Philadelphia, will ever remain Meccas of Methodism. To this royal line must be added Cleveland, Ohio, where On May 14, 1889, the Epworth League was born. It was the fruit of the union of five other young people's Societies which had sprung up in the church. Twenty-seven delegates, after two days of prayerful conference, evolved the plans of the Epworth League. Within a few hours it re- ceived ille Uſſicial sailcliull Uſ ille Dual d Uſ Bishops, then in session at Delaware, Ohio. Hundreds of existing societies promptly adopted the new mame and constitution, many new chap- ters were organized, and this new brigade of the church wheeled into line with a precision un- paralleled. (2) Its Organ. “Our Youth,” an existing paper for young Methodists, became the repre- sentative of the League during its first year. The Board of Control at its first meeting advised that a regular League organ be established at Chicago. The first number of The Epworth Herald ap- peared June 7, 1890. The new paper met with a cordial reception. It has had a steady growth from the first, and is just now completing the eleventh year of its history. It has attained the largest circulation of any denominational weekly in the world, having a list of II5,000 sub- scribers. (3) Its Early Growth. During the first year 1,820 chapters were registered. The following year there were 3,782 new chapters added. The third year there was an increase of 2,500 chap- ters. Though the advance could not possibly continue at this rate, a notable increase has been made each year, until there are now registered in the central office, 20,699 Senior and 7,424 Junior Chapters. (4) Its Formal Adoption by the Church. The General Conference at Omaha, in May, 1892, formally adopted the League, and made it a de- partment of the church, with the central office at Chicago. Its privileges and limitations were carefully defined. Its government was vested in a Board of Control of twenty-nine members. The Board is composed of both laymen and ministers. It meets regularly twice during the quadrennium to elect a cabinet, revise the local constitution when necessary, and give general direction to the work, (5) Conventions. The young people soon began to meet in conventions for counsel and inspiration. District and state conventions fol- lowed each other in rapid succession. The cli- max of this rising tide of enthusiasm and con- nectionalism was reached in 1893 and 1894, when the first International Convention was held at Cleveland, the birthplace of the League. The attendance, the program, the fellowship, the mighty impulse for larger accomplishments, were all that could be desired. Similar gatherings were held at Chattanooga in 1895, Toronto in 1897, Indianapolis in 1899 and at San Francisco in IQOI. (6) In Other Churches. The year 1894 wit- nessed the formal adoption of the Epworth League by the Methodist Episcopal Church South, and the Methodist Church of Canada. 39 EP WORTH LEAGUE, THE (7) Its Object. The object of the League, as stated in the constitution, is “to promote in- telligent and vital piety in the young members and friends of the church; to aid them in the attainment of purity of heart and in constant growth in grace, and to train them in works of mercy and help.” (8) Its Membership. Young persons of good moral character may become members on nomina- tion by the cabinet and election by the local chapter. The cabinet is composed of the presi- dent, the five vice-presidents, the secretary and treasurer. - (9) Its Departments. The work is carried Out through seven departments, as follows: (1) Department of Spiritual Work. (2) Department of Mercy and Help. (3) Department of Literary Work. (4) Department of Social Work. (5) Department of Correspondence. (6) Department of Church Benevolence and Finance. (7) De- partment of Junior League Work. These de- partments with their subordinate items of work are arranged in the symbolism of a wheel—re- ferred to as the Epworth League Wheel. The colors are crimson and white. There are three mottoes, the chief of which is “Look up—Lift *io) Classes of Members. Whenever a chap- ter so decides, there may be two classes of mem- bers, active and associate. Active members sub- scribe to the following pledge: “I will earnestly seek for myself, and do what I can to help others attain, the highest New Testa- ment standard of experience and life. I will ab- stain from all those forms of worldly amusement forbidden by the Discipline of the Methodist Episcopal Church, and I will attend, so far as possible, the religious meetings of the Chapter and Church, and take some active part in them.” (11) General Officers. The general officers of the League for the current four years are as follows: * * President—Bishop I. W. Joyce, LL. D., Minne- apolis, Minn. First Vice-President—W. W. Cooper, Kenosha, Wis. Second Vice-President—Rev. W. H. Jordan, D. D., Sioux Falls, S. D. Third Vice-President—Rev. R. J. Cooke, D. D., Chattanooga, Tenn. Fourth Vice-President—F. W. Tunnel, Ger- mantown, Pa. Secretary-Editor—Rev. Joseph F. Berry, LL. D., 57 Washington Street, Chicago. Treasurer—R. S. Copeland, M. D., Ann Arbor, Mich. (12) Its Broad Fellowship. While the Ep- worth League is a denominational Society, loyal to its own church, it has always kept open doors for fellowship with all other Christian young people's societies. This spirit of comity is posi- tively declared in two of the mottoes. The re- sponsible leaders have always been willing to meet others on an equal footing of mutual rights and privileges. This spirit of fraternity received quickening in January, 1898, when the Young People's Society of Christian Endeavor and the various Epworth Leagues agreed to select uniform topics for the devotional meetings. The Baptist Young People's Union and the societies of several other churches subsequently adopted them. So that now thousands of young Christians through- out the world study the same great truth each week. What a proof and bond of faith and fel- lowship this is (13). Its Increasing Prospects. The present 610 ERA is by far the most prosperous year in the history of the organization. The extension plans outlined by the General Secretary have been received with cordial approval everywhere. District organiza- tions are particularly active. The training school idea has been given great prominence. Special emphasis is now being placed upon the study of the English Bible, Missions, Christian Steward- ship and personal evangelism. The horoscope is crowded with tokens of good and the horizon is bright with the gleams of a better age. J. F. B. EQUAL (É'kwal), (Heb. 25, taw-kan', Ezek. xviii.25), primitive root, balance, to measure out. (Heb. Tºº, znay-shawr', Ps. xvii:2), from prim- itive root, Tº, yaw-shar', to make even. (Heb. *. Jo-sher', Prov. xvii.26), to be straight or even, upright; equal in the sense of equity, justice, righteousness. In general then it "signifies (1) Just; righteous (Ezek. xviii.25). (2) Of the same excellency and dignity (John v:18; Phil. ii:6). (3) An intimate Companion; one of the same age, station, and opportunities (Ps. lv.: 13; Gal. i:14). ER (€r), (Heb. Tº, ayr, watchful). 1. Judah's eldest son, who married Tamar, but who, being wicked, brought himself to an untimely end (Gen. xxxviii:7; Num. xxvi;19), B. C. 1896. 2. A descendant of Shelah, the son of Judah (I Chron. iv:21), B. C. about 1806. 3. In the genealogy of Christ he is given as the Son of Jose, and father of Elmodam (Luke iii:28), B. C. about 725. ERA (e'rå), a series of years commencing from a certain point of time called an epocha. The generality of authors use the terms era and epocha in a synonymous sense; that is, for the point of time from which any computation begins. (1) Jewish. The ancient Jews made use of Several eras in their computation: (1) Some- times they reckoned from the deluge; (2) some- times from the division of tongues; sometimes from their departure out of Egypt; (3) and at other times from the building of the temple; (4) and sometimes from the restoration after the Babylonish captivity; (5) but their common era was from the creation of the world, which falls in with the year of the Julian period 953; and conse- quently they supposed the world created 294 years Sooner than according to our computation; (6) but when the Jews became subject to the Syro-Ma- cedonian kings, they were obliged to make use of the era of the Seleucidae in all their contracts, which from thence was called the era of contracts. This era begins with the year of the world 3692, of the Julian period 4402, and before Christ 312. (2) Profane History. In profane history are reckoned five eras: (1) The founding of the Assy- rian empire, B. C. I267; (2) the era of Nabonas- sar, or death of Sardanapalus, B. C. 747; (3) the reign of Cyrus at Babylon, B. C. 538; (4) the reign of Alexander the Great over the Persians, B. C. 330; (5) and the beginning of the calendar of Julius Caesar, B. C. 45. (3) Christian. The era in general use among the Christians is that from the birth of Jesus Christ, concerning the true time of which chronol- Ogers differ; some place it two years, others four, and again others five, or even seven years before the Vulgar era, which is fixed for the year of the world 4004; but Archbishop Usher, and after him the generality of modern chronologers, place it in the year of the world 4000. (4) Julian Period. In 1582 Joseph Scaliger proposed a new method of chronological compu- ERAN tation by what he called the Julian Period. He found chronologers, astronomers, and ecclesias- tical authorities using the cycle of the sun, 28 years; the lunar cycle, 19 years, and the period of the Roman Indiction, 15 years. The year one of each of these cycles he found might have oc- curred 4,713 years before the Christian era, and that such unity or concurrence of their unitary years could not happen again for 7,980 years (28 × 19 × 15 = 7980). This arbitrary point he proposed to assume as a starting point for chro- nology, and to name the ensuing period the Julian—an unfortunate name, leading an ordinary reader to confuse it with Julius Caesar’s reformed calendar. In it the year one of the Christian era is Julian 4714, which was IO of the solar cycle, 2 of the lunar, and 4 of indiction. Chronologers have found this arbitrary period convenient for certain purposes, especially for de- noting without ambiguity the years before our common era, and for comparing different eras. Thus the Olympiads began in July of Julian period 3938 (B. C. 776); the Seleucid era in Julian 4402 (B. C. 312); the Varronian Roman era April 21, Julian 396I (B. C. 753); Usher’s era of Crea- tion, Julian 7IO (B. C. 4004); Julius Caesar's re- formed calendar Jan. I, Julian 4669 (B. C. 45). Observe the sum of these pairs of numbers is always 4714. From the number of a year of the Julian period during the Christian era subtract 4713 to get the common date; thus the French Revolutionary era is Julian 6505, Sept. 22; 6505— 47I3 = I792, our date. For much information on these matters see Du Cange, Glossarium Mediae et Infima Latinitatis, s. v. Annus; Nicholas, Chronol. of Hist., Oxford Tables, and Encyc. Brit., s. v.v. Calendar and Chro- nology. (See CHRONOLOGY.) S. W. ERAN (é'ran), (Heb. lº, ee-razum', watching), son of Shutelah, son of Ephraim (Num. xxvi;36), and the founder of the family of Eranites (B. C. 1856). ERANITES (Č'ran-ites). See ERAN. ERASTUS (e-räs’tus), (Gr. "Epacrros, er'as-fos, be- loved). 1. A Corinthian, and one of Paul's disciples, whose salutations he sends from Corinth to the Church at Rome as those of ‘the chamberlain of the city' (Rom. xvi :23), A. D. 55. The words so rendered (treasurer of the city) denote an officer of great dignity in ancient times (comp. Joseph. Antiq. vii:8, 2). 2. We find an Erastus with Paul at Ephesus, whence he was sent along with Timothy into Ma- cedonia (Acts xix :22). They were hoth with the apostle at Corinth when he wrote, as above, from that city to the Romans; at a subsequent period Erastus was still at Corinth (2 Tim. iv:20), which would seem to have been the usual place of his abode. (A. D. 64.) He is probably not the same with I, for, in case he were, we must assume that he is IIIentioned (Rom. xvi :23) by the title of an office which he had once held and afterward re- signed. ERECH (e'rek), (Heb, º, eh'rek), cities which formed the beginning of Nimrod's kingdom in the plain of Shinar (Gen. x:Io). - It is not said that he built these cities, but that he established his power over them; from which we may conclude that they previously existed. Bo- chart seeks the name in the Aracca or Aracha of the old geographers, which was on the Tigris, upon the borders of Babylonia and Susiana (Ptolemy, vi;3: Ammian. Marcell, xxxiii;6, 26). This was 611 ERES OR AERES probably the same city which Herodotus (i: 185; vi : IIQ) calls Arderikka, i. e., Great Erech. The site of this ancient city has been recently identified by archeological research at Nippur. It was a very important city—the capital, in fact, of the mythical hero-king Gilgames. The ruins found on its site show the remains of elegant buildings with fluted walls, sometimes decorated with patterns formed with the circular ends of various colored cones inn- bedded in mortar, bricks bearing archaic Accadian and Babylonian inscriptions, etc. Remains of canals traverse the mass of hillocks (which in Some parts are nearly ninety feet high) and the country around the city, showing that it must have been well drained in ancient times. Those por- tions of the walls of the city which can be traced seem to have been in the form of an irregular cir- cle about forty feet high, and show that its average circumference was about six miles. The houses of the people are supposed to have extended be- yond the walls. (I. A. Pinches, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) It was the place of worship of the goddess Nana of the Sumerians, with whom the Senlitic inhabitants identified their goddess Ishtar. The temple dedicated to the goddess and called E- Anna (house of heaven) was built by Ur-Gur and Dungi and often restored. It now forms the ruin of El-Buwarije, while the general mass of ruins is called Warka, which has unhappily not been dug up. The city had inde- pendence at an early period, and is coupled by Hebrew tradition with the earliest centers of the land, and Babylonian records go far to prove that this is correct. It was, however, much more than a mere center of power. It was a seat of learning and must have had a library at a very early period. Many books in the library of Assur-bani-pal, and especially religious hymns, bear colophons which show that they were, copied from originals at Uruk. Strabo adds to this fact the statement that at Orchoë there was a school of Chaldeans, that is in his use of the word “astrologists.” This would indicate that culture was still resident in this city, though it had vanished from other more ancient centers. The political, literary, and reli- gious history of the city all make it of so great in- terest and importance that it is especially a mat- ter for regret that it has never been properly excavated. (Rogers, A/zsz. of Bač. ...} Assyr. vol. I, p. 289.) Among the inscribed and stamped bricks found in Erech are many of the time of the historical kings—Dºngi, Ur-Bau, Gudea, Sin-ga'sid, Merod- achbaladan [.. etc. Tºblets of the reigns of Nabopolassar, Nebuchadrezza: , Nabonidus, Cyrus, Darius, and some of the Seleucidae, have been ex- cavated in the site. In the ruins of the town and the country around, a large number of glazed earthenware coffins and other receptacles, used no doubt for the burial of the dead, mostly of the Parthian period, have been found, showing that part of the town and its neighborhood must have been used as a necropolis. (Hastings' Bib. Dict.). ERES or AERES (e'rez) (Heb. º, eh'rez), oc- curs in numerous places of Scripture, but authors are not agreed on the exact meaning of the term. (1) Pine or Cedar. Celsius (Hierobot. i :106, sq.), for instance, conceives that it is a general name for the pine tribe, to the exclusion of the cedar of Lebanon, which he considers to be indi- cated by the word BEROSH. The majority of au- thors, however, are of opinion that the cedar of Lebanon (Pinus Cedrus or Cedrus Libani of bot- anists) is alone intended. If we proceed to compare the several passages of Scripture in which the word Eres occurs, we shall E RES OR AERES equally find that one plant is not strictly ap- plicable to them all. (2) Early Notices of Cedar. The earliest no- tice of the cedar is in Lev. xiv:4, 6, where we are told that Moses commanded the leper that was to be cleansed to make an offering of two spar- rows, cedar wood, wool dyed in Scarlet, and hyssop; and in verses 49, 51, 52, the houses in which the lepers dwell are directed to be purified with the same materials. Again, in Num. xix:ö, Moses and Aaron are commanded to sacrifice a red heifer. “And the priest shall take cedar wood and hyssop and scarlet.’ The cedar was not a native of Egypt, nor could it have been procured in the desert without great difficulty; but the juniper is most plentiful there, and takes deep root in the crevices of the rocks of Mount Sinai. That some, at least, of the cedars of the ancients • cº- e ºf sº-c *:::::::: - zºº 612 E RES OR AERES Celsius was of opinion that the eres indicated the Pinus Sylvestris or Scotch pine, which yields the red and yellow deals of Norway, and which is likewise found on Mount Lebanon. This opin- ion seems to be confirmed by Ezekiel (xxvii:5), ‘They have made all thy ship boards of fir trees of Senir, they have taken cedar from Lebanon to make masts for thee,' for it is not probable that any other tree than the common pine would be taken for masts when this was procurable. Though Celsius appears to us to be quite right in concluding that ercs, in some of the passages of Scripture, refers to the pine tree, yet it seems equally clear that there are other passages to which this tree will not answer. (3) Cedar of Lebanon. It certainly appears improbable that a tree so remarkable for the mag- nificence of its appearance as the cedar of Leba- * , \ º: £% s: 'a sº Hº: * W *: ɺ Wºº-sº *ºws:42 s. gº ºf sº Cedars of Lebanon. were a species of juniper is evident from the pas- sages we have quoted ; the wood of most of them is more or less aromatic. At a later period we have notices of the various uses to which the wood of the eres was applied, as 2 Sam. v : II; vii:2-7; I Kings v :6, 8, Io; vi :9, Io, I 5, 16, 18, 20 ; v1.1 :2, 3, 7, II, I2; ix:II ; x:27; I Chron. xvii:6; 2 Chron. ii:8; ix:27; xxv :18. In all these passages the word eres is employed, for which the Arabic translation, according to Celsius, gives sunobar as the synonym. There is nothing distinctive stated respecting the char- acter of the wood from which we might draw any certain conclusion further than that, from the Selection made and the constant mention of the material used, it may be fairly inferred that it must have been considered as well fitted, or, rather, of a superior quality, for the purpose of building the temple and palace. From this, how- ever, proceeds the difficulty in admitting that what we call the cedar of Lebanon was the only tree intended by the name Eres. For modern experience has ascertained that its wood is not of a Superior quality. non should not have been noticed in the Sacred Scriptures, and this would be the case if we ap- plied eres exclusively to the pine, and berosh to the cypress. If we consider some of the remain- ing passages of Scripture, we cannot fail to per- ceive that they forcibly apply to the cedar of Lebanon and to the cedar of Lebanon only. Thus, in Ps. xcii: 12, it is said: ‘The righteous shall flourish like a palm tree, and spread abroad like a cedar of Lebanon.” It has been well remarked ‘that the flourishing head of the palm and the spreading abroad of the cedar are equally char- acteristic.” But the prophet Ezekiel (ch. xxxi) is justly adduced as giving the most magnificent and, at the same time, the most graphic description of this celebrated tree (verse 3) : ‘Behold, the As- syrian was a cedar in Lebanon with fair branches and with a shadowy shroud, and of an high stat- ure, and his top was among the thick boughs;’ (verse 5) ‘Therefore his height was exalted above all the trees of the field, and his boughs were multiplied, and his branches became long because of the multitude of waters;’ (verse 6) “All the p sight (Eccl. v :6). ERI fowls of heaven made their nests in his boughs, and under his branches did all the beasts of the field bring forth their young.’ Few trees divide so many fair branches from the main stem, or spread over so large a com- pass of ground. ‘His boughs are multiplied,’ as Ezekiel says, “and his branches become long,' which David calls spreading abroad. His very boughs are equal to the stem of a fir or a chest- nut. The second characteristic is what Ezekiel, with great beauty and aptness, calls his shadowy shroud. No tree in the forcst is more remarkable than the cedar for its close-woven, leafy canopy. Ezekiel’s cedar is marked as a tree of full and perfect growth, from the circumstance of its top being among the thick boughs.' The other prin- cipal passages in which the cedar is mentioned are I Kings iv:33; 2 Kings xix :23; Job x1:17; Ps. xxix:5; 1xxx : Io; xcii:I2; civ : 16; cxlviii:9; Cant. i. 17; v : I5; viii:9; Is. ii: 13; ix: Io; xiv:8; xxxvii:24; xli:19; xliv : 14; Jer. xxii:7, I4, 23; Ezek. xvii:3, 22, 23; Amos ii:9; Zeph. ii: 14; Zech. X1 : I, 2. The cedar of Lebanon is well known to be a widely-spreading tree, generally from 50 to 8o feet high, and when standing singly often cov- ering a Space with its branches, the diameter of which is much greater than its height. The hori- zontal branches, when the tree is exposed on all sides, are very large in proportion to the trunk, being disposed in distinct layers or stages, and the distance to which they extend diminishes as they approach the top, where they form a pyra- midal head, broad in proportion to its height. The branchlets are disposed in a flat, fan-like manner on the branches. The leaves, produced in tufts, are straight, about one inch long, slen- der, nearly cylindrical, tapering to a point, and are on short footstalks. The male catkins are single, solitary, of a reddish hue, about two inches long, terminal and turning upwards. The fe- male catkins are short, erect, roundish and rather oval; they change after fecundation into oval oblong cones, which, when they approach ma- turity, become from two and one-half inches to five inches long. Every part of the cone abounds with resin, which sometimes exudes from be- tween the scales. ERI (e'ri), (Heb. *T2, ay-ree', watching), son of Gad, and head of a family (Gen. xlvi. I6; Num. xxvi; 16), B. C. 1856. ERITES (6'rites), (Heb. *T*., hazy-ay-ree'), a branch of the family of Gad descended from Eri (Num. xxvi. I6). E.R.R. or E.R.R.U.R. (er or ér-rér), (Hel). nºn, 2014)- aw'. Ps. xcv:10), primitive root, to hesitate; to be undecided; to vacillate; to go astray; to wander; to be out of the right way; to mistake. In the Bible error is: (1) A mistake or over- (2) False doctrine, whereby one wanders from the rule of God's word (I John iv :6). (3) Sin of any kind, which is a wandering from the path of duty, and missing the end of God’s glory and our own good (Ps. Xix: I.2). (4) Unnatural lust (Rom. i :27). (5) The error of Balaam was his love of gain; and, in order to obtain it, tempting the Israelites to uncleanness and idolatry (Jude II). (6) Be it indeed that I have erred, mine error remaineth with myself; i. e. if I have mistaken views, I am likely to retain them for aught you have said ; or, if I have of— fended. I now suffer for it, and do not need that you should add to my affliction with your re- proachful speeches (Job xix:4). 613 Assyrian governors. ESAR-HADDON ESAIAS (e-zā'yas), (Gr. ‘Ha'atas, /kay-sa/-ee'as), a common New Testament form of ISAIAH. ESAR-HADDON (e'sar-hăd'don), (Heb. TBN, ay-sar'Ahad-dohn', gift of fire), the son of Sen- nacherib. The death of Sennacherib and the accession of his son marked the opening of a new era in the history of the Assyrian empire. (1) Sources of Information. The Biblical record (2 Kings xix:37) states that the assassins of Sennacherib “escaped into the land of Ararat, and Esar–haddon his son reigned in his stead.” This two-line notice covers a multitude of events. Fortunately, we have a brief inscription in the Babylonian chronicle that gives us a fragmentary portraiture of the political situation. “In the month of Tebet (December, 681 B. C.), the 20th day, Sennacherib, king of Assyria, his son in an 1nsurrection slew him. Twenty-three years Sen- nacherib administered the kingdom of Assyria. From the twentieth day of the month Tebet until the second day of the month Adar (February, 680), the insurrection prevailed in Assyria. In the month Sivan (May, 680), the eighteenth day, Esar-haddon, his son, seated himself upon the throne in Assyria.” The power of the insurrec- tion in Nineveh was broken at the end of one month and a half. - (2) Coming to the Throne. But the new king, who was probably occupied in suppressing rebel- lious subjects outside of Nineveh, was not for- mally installed as king until five months after the murder of his father. (3) Rebuilds Babylon. This new king in- augurated a new policy of administration and con- trol. He sought to restore to prosperity the Baby- lon and Babylonia which Sennacherib had so wan- tonly and cruelly laid waste and destroyed. He conciliated the population of that region by re- storing to their former position the humiliated gods of Babylon. He lifted the royal city out of its wasteness and ruin, and made it the proud abode of Nebo and Merodach. He declared him- self ruler of Babylon, but subordinate to those chief deities. His popular policy elevated him at once in the estimation of the people, and gave him almost undisputed command of this territory. His next move (678 B. C.) was toward the West-land. Phoenicia was the first to feel his power, and readily yielded, except the island city, Tyre. No resistance of any kind seems to have interfered with his southward march until he struck the Arabian desert. Here he spent presumably two years (675-674 B. C.) in the subjugation of Arab tribes on the east and southeast of the Gulf of Akaba, and in the Sinaitic peninsula. These con- |uests cut off from Egypt all supplies and allies rom their eastern friends and dependencies, and made Esar–haddon master of all the eastern roads to Egypt. (Prof. Ira M. Price, The Monuments and the Old Testament, pp. 194-5.) (4) Division of Egypt. He divided all the valley of the Nile from Thebes to the Mediter- ranean into twenty satrapies, over the less impor- tant of which he set governors of native descent, while over those which were important he placed It is highly creditable to Esar–haddon that, when he found himself con- queror of Egypt, he had the wisdom to act in a conciliatory manner to the vanquished. (5) Death. In B. C. 668 Egypt revolted, and while on the march to punish it Esar–haddon fell ill and died on the Toth of Marcheshvan (Octo- ber). His empire was divided between two of his sons, Samas-sum-ukin having Babylonia, while the rest of the empire passed to an older son, Assur- bani-pal, whose suzerainty Samas-Suſil-ukin was ESAU called upon to acknowledge. A third son, Assur- mukin-paliya, was raised to the priesthood, while a fourth became priest of the moon-god at Har- ran. (Sayce, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) (6) Character. He had sore trials and great difficulties. He had endured grievous defeats and sustained severe losses, but he had, nevertheless, had a glorious reign. That the provinces which Once paid great tribute were lost to the Indo- Europeans upon the northeast and northwest was less his fault than his misfortune. No king could well have done more than he, and it is to the credit of his ability that he did not lose much more, even the whole of Mesopotamia or even Assyria, for no army, however well led, was of permanent value against a moving mass of men with unknowing and unthinking thousands press- ing from the rear. These losses were far more than compensated by the gaining of the fertile and beautiful valley of the Nile. With this added, even though much was lost, Esar–haddon left the Assyrian empire larger and greater than it had ever been before. In battle and in siege, in war against the most highly civilized people and in war upon barbarians, Esar–haddon had been So successful that he must rank with Sargon and Tiglath-pileser II, and must be placed far in advance of his father, Sennacherib. In him, in spite of mercy shown a number of times, there raged a fierceness and a thirst for blood and re- venge that remind us forcefully of Asshur-nazir- pal. His racial inheritance had overcome his per- sonal mildness. In works of peace no less than in war he was great and successful. (Rogers, Hist, of Bab. and Assyr., vol. II, pp. 244-5.) ESAU (é'sau), (Heb. Yº, ay-sazyzy', hairy; Sept. "Haraj). 1. Name and Family. The origin and mean- ing of the name are not quite free from am- biguity. (1) Name. Simon renders it pilis opertus (covered with hair), and some such reason as this implies seems involved in the passage Gen. xxv : 25. Cruden, however, explains the name as mean- ing one who does (qui facit), an actor or agent. His surname of Edom (red) was given him, it appears (Gen. xxv :30) from the red pottage which he asked of Jacob, or, according to Gen. xxv :25, from the red color of the infant child. (2) Family. Esau was the eldest son of ‘Isaac, Abraham's son’ (Gen. xxv : 19) by Rebekah, ‘the daughter of Bethuel the Syrian of Padan-aram, the sister to Laban the Syrian.’ The marriage remaining for some time (about nineteen years; compare xxv :20, 26) unproductive. Isaac en- treated Jehovah, and she became pregnant. Led by peculiar feelings ‘to inquire of Jehovah, Re: bekah was informed that she should give birth to twins whose fate would be as diverse as their character, and, what in those days was stranger still, that the elder should serve the younger. On occasion of her delivery the child that was born first was ‘red, all over like an hairy garment; and they called his name Esau.’ Immediately after- ward Jacob was born (B. C. between 2004 and 1770). 2. T’ersonal History. In process of time the different natural endowments of the two boys be- gan to display their effects in dissimilar aptitudes and pursuits. While Jacob was led by his less robust make and quiet disposition to fulfill the duties of a shepherd's life, and pass his days in and around his tent, Esau was impelled, by the ardent and lofty spirit which agitated his bosom, 614 ESAU to seek in the toils, adventures and perils of the chase his occupation and Sustenance; and, as is generally the case in natures like his, he gained high repute by his skill and daring. (1) Sells His Birthright. A hunter’s life is of necessity one of uncertainty as well as hard- ship ; days pass in which the greatest vigilance and the most strenuous exertions may fail even to find, much less capture, game. Esau had on One occasion experienced such a disappointment, and, wearied with his unproductive efforts, ex- hausted for want of Sustenance, and despairing of capturing any prey, he was fain to turn his Steps to his father's house for Succor in his extremity. On reaching home he found his brother enjoying a carefully prepared dish of pottage, attracted by the odor of which he besought Jacob to allow him to share in the meal. His brother saw the exi- gency in which Esau was, and determined not to let it pass unimproved. Accordingly he puts a price On the required food. Esau was the elder, and had, in consequence, immunities and privileges which were of high value. The sur- render of these to himself Jacob makes the condi- tion of his complying with Esau’s petition. Urged by the cravings of hunger, alarmed even by the fear of instant death, Esau sold his birthright to his younger brother, confirming the contract by the sanction of an oath. Jacob, having thus got his price, supplied the famishing Esau with need- ful refreshments. (2) Marries. Arrived now at years of matur- ity, Esau, when 40 years of age, married two wives, Judith and Bashemoth. Some unhappy feelings appear to have previously existed in the family; for, while Esau was a favorite with his father, in consequence, it appears, of the presents of venison which the youth gave him, Jacob was regarded with special affection by the mother. These partialities and their natural consequences in unamiable feelings were increased and exag- gerated by Esau’s marriage. Even his father's preference of him may have been injuriously af- fected. The way was in some measure smoothed for the transference of the coveted birthright to the younger son. (3) Loses His Father’s Blessing. The time for the fulfillment of the compact between the brothers at length arrived. Isaac is ‘sick unto death.’ His appetite, as well as his strength, hav- ing failed, is only to be gratified by provocatives. He desires some savory venison and gives the requisite instructions to Esau, who accordingly proceeds in quest of it. On this Rebekah begins to feel that the critical time has come. If the hated Hittites are not to enter with her less fa- vored son into possession of the family property, the sale of the birthright must now in some way be confirmed and consummated. One essential particular remained—the father’s blessing. If this should be given to Esau all hope was gone; for this, like our modern wills, would deed the in- heritance and the accompanying headship of the tribe to Esau and his wives. Isaac, however, had lost his sight—indeed, all his senses were dull and feeble. It was there- fore not very difficult to pass off Jacob upon him as Esau. Rebekah takes her measures, and, not- withstanding Jacob’s fears, succeeds. Isaac, in- deed, is not without suspicion, but a falsehood comes to aid Jacob in his otherwise discreditable personation of Esau. The blessing is pronounced, and thus the coveted property and ascendency are secured. The affectionate endearments which pass between the deceiver and the abused old blind father stand in painful contrast with the ESAU 615 base trickery by which mother and son had ac- complished their end. Esau, however, returns from the field, ap- proaches his decrepit and sightless father, de- claring who he is. “And Isaac trembled very exceedingly, and said, Who? where is he that hath taken venison and brought it me, and I have eaten of all before thou camest, and have blessed him P-yea, and he shall be blessed.” On this Esau becomes agitated, and entreats a bless- ing for himself—"Bless me, even me also, O my father.’ Urging this entreaty again and again, even with tears, Isaac at length said unto him, ‘Behold, thy dwelling shall be the fatness of the earth, and of the dew of heaven from above; and by thy sword shalt thou live, and shalt serve thy brother, and it shall come to pass when thou shalt have the dominion that thou shalt break his yoke from off thy neck’ (Gen. xxvii). Thus deprived forever of his birthright, in virtue of the irrevocable blessing, Esau but too naturally conceived and entertained a hatred of Jacob, and even formed a resolution to seize the opportunity for slaying him, which the days of mourning consequent on the approaching de- cease of their father would be likely to afford. . Words to this effect, which Esau let drop, were repeated to his mother, who thereupon prevailed on her younger son to flee to his uncle Laban, who lived in Haran, there to remain until time, with º usual effect, might have mitigated Esau’s W1 <h. (4) Reconciled to Jacob. Meanwhile Esau had grown powerful in Idumaea and when, after many years, Jacob intended to return within the borders of the Jordan, he feared lest his elder brother might intercept him on his way, to take revenge for former injuries. He accordingly sent messengers to Esau in order, if possible, to disarm his wrath. Esau appears to have announced in reply that he would proceed to meet his return- ing brother. When, therefore, Jacob was in- formed that Esau was on his way for this pur- pose with a band of four hundred men, he was greatly distressed, in fear of that hostility which his conscience told him he had done something to deserve. What, then, must have been his sur- prise when he saw Esau running with extended arms to greet and embrace him P and Esau ‘fell on his neck and kissed him, and they wept.’ Jacob had prepared a present for Esau, hoping thus to conciliate his favor, but Esau at first cour- teously refused the gift—'I have enough, my brother, keep that thou hast unto thyself' (Gen. xxxiii). The whole of this rencounter serves to show that if Jacob had acquired riches, Esau had gained power and influence as well as property, and the homage which is paid to him indirectly, and by implication, on the part of Jacob, and directly, and in the most marked and respectful manner, by the females and children of Jacob’s family, leads to the supposition that he had made himself supreme in the surrounding country of Idiimaea. (5) Later Events. Esau from this time ap- pears but very little in the sacred narrative. He was ready to accompany Jacob, or to send with him an escort, probably for protection, but Jacob's fears and suspicions induced him to decline these friendly offers, and they separated on the same day that they met, after an interview in which Jacob's bearing is rather that of an inferior to his lord than that of a brother, and Esau’s has all the generousness which a high nature feels in forgiving an injury and aiming to do good to the injurer. The latter, we are merely told, ‘re- turned on his way to Scir' (Gen. xxxiii:I6). ESCHATOLOGY Jacob and Flsau appear together again at the funeral rites which were paid to their deceased father, but the book of Genesis furnishes no par- ticulars of what took place. Esau is once more presented to us (Gen. xxxvi) in a genealogical table, in which a long line of illustrious descendants is referred to “Esau, the father of the Edomites’ (Gen. xxxvi :43). 3. Character. Esau, with his wild Arab na- ture, was in this respect a true child of his age. He has the virtues, but also the defects, of his time and race. The strong, sinewy Son of the desert, with its boundless horizons and lawless freedom, his rough and hairy manhood marks splendid physical vigor, which urges to excite- ment and adventure. The old nomadic instincts of his race had come back in him in all their force. Restless, impulsive and fearless, he delighted to roam the wilderness free as the air or the bird, far from the restraints and tameness of settled habitations. Like a true Arab, he hated the dull pursuits of industry, and turned to his Spear and bow as alone worthy a man's regard. Light- hearted as a child, he was as careless of the fu- ture. With no self-control or manly thoughtful- ness, the enjoyment of the day was more to him than the greatest promises, for the realiza- tion of which he must wait. His bounding health and animal spirits engrossed him, and he found his delight only in their gratification. With all this, he had in him the making of a splendid man, for it must have been long a ques- tion whether his restless, unsettled ways were not the mere effervescence of youth ; and he showed the elements of a character that would have adorned home had he once Sobered into a quiet life. He was free-handed and generous, frank and honest, kindly and forgiving. If he was not devoted to his mother, he could hardly be expected to be so when there was no warmth shown to attract him, but he worshiped his father, who paid him with kind words and looks, and he thought no toil too great to minister to his hap- piness (Gen. xxv :28; xxvii:I). There was a radical defect, however, in his character that spoiled all and left nothing from the promise of the youth but a disappointing and unfruitful manhood. Life could not be so light and thoughtless as he made it, and ripen to any- thing worthy. He had no deeper and more sober nature to steady him as he grew older; no set. tled habits of honest toil; no fixed religious prin- ciple; no reverence for the future and unseen, and thus had nothing on which his better nature might fall back when the heyday of animal spirits and mere physical enjoyment were over. Brought up at the feet of Isaac, he might have learned to fear God, and live before Him, from his father’s example, even if he noted the blemishes with which religiousness was stained in the persons of his mother and his brother. But he had no seri- ousness in his nature, and lived only for excite- ment and pleasure. Indifferent to the godliness of his father's home in his youth and earlier manhood, he passed, in his later years, into the chieftain of a warlike tribe, a Stranger at once to the religion and traditions of his forefathers, and the bitter enemy of the “people of God” in later generations. (Geike, O. T. Characters.) ESCHATOLOGY (ês-kā-töl'ö-jy), (from Gr. êo Xaros, es' £hat-os, the last things). Eschatology gives an account of the final con- dition of man and the world as this is represented in Scripture. It refers principally to the second coming of Christ, the resurrection of the dead. . final judgment, and the consummation of all things. ESCHEW But besides exhibiting the Scripture views of the final condition of things, eschatology may take notice of the phenomena, the physical convulsions, or the national commotions amidst which the final condition is ushered in ; or it may go a step far- ther back and refer to the moral forces bringing about these manifestations and revealed in them. Hence it may refer to the views in the Old Testa- ment regarding the coming of Christ into the world as the Messiah of God as well as to the views entertained regarding his coming again. For a fuller discussion of the subject, we refer the reader to the articles on MESSIAH; MILLENNIUM ; COMING OF CHRIST ; WORLD, END OF THE; HEAVEN; HELL. ESCHEW (És-chu"), (Gr. ekk\tva, eſſ-AE/ee' mo, I Pet. iii:II), to turn away from, to shun. To keep free from (Job i. 1). ESDRAELOM (Šs-dra-e'lom). PLAIN OF. ESDRAELON, PLAIN OF (es'dra-ā'lon), (Gr. 'Eoopm)\tºv, es-dray-lon'). “The great plain of Esdraelon" extends across See ESDRAELON, central Palestine from the Mediterranean to the Jordan, separating the mountain ranges of Carmel and Samaria from those of Galilee. The western section of it is properly the plain of ACCHO, or 'Akka. The main body of the plain is a triangle. Its base on the east extends from Jezz??! (the ancient En-gannim) to the foot of the hills below Nazareth, and is about fifteen miles long; the north side, formed by the hills of Galilee, is about twelve miles long, and the South side, formed by the Samaria range, is about eighteen miles. The apex of the west is a narrow pass opening into the plain of 'Akka. This vast expanse has a gently undulating surface—in spring all green with corn where cultivated, and rank weeds and grass where neglected—dotted with several low gray tells, and near the sides with a few olive groves. This is that Valley of Megiddo, so called from the city of Megiddo, which stood on its southern border, where Barak triumphed and where king Josiah was defeated and received his death wound (Judg. v ; 2 Chron. xxxv). Prob- ably, too, it was before the mind of the Apostle John when he figuratively described the final con- flict between the hosts of good and evil who were gathered to a place called Ar-mageddon (from the Hebrew, meaning, the city of Megiddo; Rev. xvi; I6). The river Kishon—“that ancient river” so fatal to the army of Sisera (Judg. v :21)—drains the plain, and flows off through the pass westward to the Mediterranean. Two things are worthy of special notice in the plain of Esdraelon—its wonderful richness and its desolation. If we except the eastern branches there is not a single inhabited village on its whole surface, and not one-sixth of its surface is culti- vated. It is dotted with places of great historic and sacred interest, which are treated under their several names. On the east we have Endor, Nain, and Shunem, ranged around the base of the “hill of Moreh;” Beth-shean, in the center of the plain where the “valley, of Jezreel” opens toward Jor- dan; Gilboa, with the “well of Harod” and the ruins of Jezreel at its western base. On the south are En-gannim, Taanach, and Megiddo. On... the west apex, on the overhanging brow of Carmel, is the scene of Elijah's sacrifice; while close by runs the Kishon, on whose banks the false prophets of Baal were slain. On the north are Nazareth and Tabor. The modern Syrians call Esdraelon Meri ibn-'Amer, “the Plain of the Son of 'Amer.” (Smith, Hist. Geog., chap. I9; McC. and S., Cyc., Smith, Bib. Dict.) 616 ESDRAS, APOCRYPHAL BOOKS or ESDRAS (Čs' draz), APOCRYPHAL BOOKS OF (Gr. "Earépas, esdras). TBooks of Ezra. In several manuscripts of the Latin Vulgate, as well as in all the printed editions anterior to the decree of the Council of Trent, and in many since that period, there will be found four books following each other, entitled the first, Second, third, and fourth books of Ezra. The two first are the canonical books of Ezra and Nehemiah, the third and fourth form the sub- ject of the present article. They are the same which are called first and second Esdras in the English Authorized Version. (1) Third Book. The Third Book of Ezra is found in all the manuscripts of the Seventy, where it is called the first book, and precedes the second or canonical Ezra, which, in this version, includes the book of Nehemiah. . It contains IO9 kepa Nata It is a little more than a recapitulation of the his- tory contained in the canonical Ezra, interspersed with Some remarkable interpolations, the chief of which are chapter i, taken from 2 Chron. xxxv, xxxvi, part of the last chapter, from Neh. viii, and the narration of the themes or sentences of Zorobabel and the two other young men of Darius's bodyguard (3 Esdr. iii:4). The book is more properly a version than an original work. The style is acknowledged to be elegant, and not unlike that of Symmachus. This book was made use of by Josephus, who cites it largely in his Antiquities, but nothing further has been ascer- tained respecting the age either of the original or the translation. It is cited by Clemens Alex- andrinus (Stromata, i.), the author of the Im- perfect Work on Matt. (Hom. i.), Athanasius (Orat. iii. cont. Arianos), and by Cyprian (Epist. ad Pompeium). From the circumstance of Jerome's having declined to translate the third and fourth books of Ezra, they are (with the exception of the book of Job and the Psalms) the only portions either of the canonical or apocryphal writings of the Old Testament which have been preserved to us entire in the old Latin translation. This book does not, however, appear to have been included in the catalogue of any council, nor has any portion of it been read in the offices of the church. Having been rejected as apocry- phal by the Council of Trent, it has been removed, together with the fourth book, in the Sixtine and Clementine editions of the Vulgate, to the end of the volume, with the observation that they are thus retained in order to ‘preserve from being alto- gether lost, books which had been sometimes cited by some of the holy fathers. The following is the order of the books of the Old Testament declared to be canonical by this council : Five of Moses; Joshua ; Judges; Ruth ; four of Kings; two of Chronicles; two of Ezra (viz., Ezra and Nehe- miah); Tobit; Judith ; Esther; Job; Psalms; Proverbs; Ecclesiastes; Canticles; Wisdom ; Ec- clesiasticus; Isaias; Jeremias with Baruch ; Eze- kiel ; Daniel; twelve minor Prophets (viz., Hosea, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Micah, Nahum, Habak- kuk, Zephanias, Haggai, Zecharias, Malachi), and two of Maccabees. (2) Fourth Book. The fourth book of Ezra is quite of a different character from the former, and it has been even doubted whether it more properly belongs to the Apocrypha of the Old or the New Testament, but the circumstance of the author’s personating the celebrated scribe of that name has been supposed to have led to its obtain- ing a place in the former. It consists of a num- ber of similitudes or visions, resembling in some passages the Apocalypse. The descriptions are ESDRAS, APOCRYPHAL BOOKS OF acknowledged to be sometimes most spirited and Striking, occasionally rising to great sublimity of thought, energy of conception, and elegance of expression. Jahn supposes the author to have been a Jew, educated in Chaldea, who borrowed his style from Daniel, and who, having become a Christian, still retained his reverence for Cabalistic traditions. He places him in the first or early in the second century. (a) When Written. Dr. Laurence concludes from internal grounds that the book was written before the Christian era, after the death of Mark Antony, and before the accession of Augustus, or about the year thirty before Christ. Upon this hypothesis he conceives that besides that the doc- trine of the immortality of the soul and a separate state of spiritual existence between death and judg- ment are distinctly described as the general and popular belief, the most important use of the book consists in the testimony which it bears to the Jew- ish idea of the Messiah, who is herein clearly and familiarly denominated by the appellation of the Son of God—as well as to the belief that pre- viously to his appearance on earth he existed in heaven. (b) Author. Dr. Lee is strongly of opinion that the author of this book was contemporary with the author of the book of Enoch, or rather that both these books were written by one and the same author. It does not appear that Josephus was aware of its existence. (c) Remarkable Passage. Among the most re- markable passages in this book is that famous one (4 Ezra xiv) which ascribes the recension of the entire Scriptures to Ezra. It is well known that the Rabbins have a tradition, preserved in the Tal- mud, that on the rebuilding of the Temple Ezra assembled a college of I2O literati, known by the name of the Great Synagogue, for the purpose of collecting and arranging the Scriptures. Among the members are enumerated Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, Haggai, Zechariah, Ezra and Nehemiah, and Simon the Just. Ezra, who, they say, was the same with the prophet Malachi, they represent as the first, and Simon the Just, its latest surviving member, as the last president of the college. They further repre- sent all these eminent men as living at the same period under Darius Hystaspis, whom they sup- pose to be the same Darius who was subdued by Alexander, and also as that Artaxerxes who sent Ezra and Nehemiah to Jerusalem. Daniel is thus made to have lived to the time of Alexander the Great, and Simon the Just they hold to be the same with Jadduah, the high priest, who received Alexander in Jerusalem. To this synagogue the Rabbins ascribe the formation of the canon, to which they add that its members wrote Ezekiel, the twelve minor Prophets, Daniel and Esther, while Ezra wrote the book bearing his name, and the genealogies in Chronicles down to his time (Bava Bathra). that as there is no authority whatever for the existence of this synagogue, all that can be meant is that the canon was settled by Ezra and the others named as members of the synagogue, and closed by Simon, who filled the office of high priest for nine years till his death (B. C. 292). Dean Prideaux supposes that Ezra gave a new edition of the Scriptures, corrected the errors of transcribers, adding what appeared necessary for illustrating, correcting or completing them, chang- ing names and supplying what was wanting. (d) Possible Mistake. Eichhorn thinks it pos- sible that Simon the Just has been confounded in the Talmudical fable with Simon the Maccabee, Jahn (Einleitung, 28) supposes 617 ESHEL as he supposes that all the books in the canon could not have been written so early as the time of Simon the Just, but that the canon may have been closed under Simon the Maccabee (B. C. I4I-135). St. Jerome mistakes him for Simeon, the contemporary of our Savior. (See MACCA- BEES; WISDOM OF SIRACH ; SYNAGOGUE.) Although Esdras is included in the sixth ar- ticle among the other books read for edification, etc. (DEUTERO-CANONICAL), it will be observed that no lessons are taken from it in the offices of the Church of England. References are, however, made from it in the Authorized Version to paral- lel passages in the Old and New Testament. Grabe and others have conceived that this was the book cited as the ‘Wisdom of God’ (Luc. xi.49, comp. with 4 Esdras i:32). W. W. ESEK (€'sek), (Heb. Fº, &y-se/3', strife), the name of a well dug by the patriarch Isaac, in the valley of Gerar. It received its name “strife.” from the fact that the herdmen of the valley con- tended with him for its possession (Gen. xxvi;2O). ESHBAAL (shºba'al), (Heb. ***, esſ-bah. a/, Baal's man), the fourth son of King Saul (I Chron. viii:33; ix:39). He is doubtless the same person as /s/h-bosheth (I Sam. xxxi:2; Comp. with 2 Sam. ii:8). (See ISHBOSHETH.) ESHBAN (Ésh'ban), (Heb. |Pºs, esh-bazºyzz', wise hero), a Horite, son of Dishon, or more accurately Dishan (Gen. xxxvi;26; I Chron: i:41), B. C. I963. ESHCOL (esh'köl), (Heb. ????, esh-Aoſe', a bunch, cluster, especially of grapes). One of the Amoritish chiefs with whom Abraham was in alliance when his camp was near Hebron, and who joined with him in the pursuit of Chedorlaomer and his allies, for the rescue of Lot (Gen. xiv:I3, 24). 2. The name of the valley in which the Hebrew spies obtained the fine cluster of grapes which they took back with them, borne “on a staff between two,” as a specimen of the fruits of the Promised Land (Num. xiii:24). The cluster was doubtless large; but the fact that it was carried in this manner, does not, as usually understood, imply that the bunch was as much as two men could carry, seeing that it was probably so carried to prevent its being bruised in the journey. The valley of Eshcol probably took its name from the distinguished Amorite already mentioned, and is hence to be sought in the neighborhood of He- bron. Accordingly the valley through which lies the commencement of the road from Hebron to Jerusalem is indicated as that of Eshcol. This valley is now full of vineyards and olive-yards; the former chiefly in the valley itself, the latter up the sides of the enclosing hills. “These vine- yards are still very fine, and produce the finest and largest grapes in all the country.' - ESHEAN (e'she-àn), (Heb. º, esh-awn', sup port), a town of Judah, in the mountainous district (Josh. xv.:52). The place has not been fully identi- fied, although it has been supposed to be the same as the ruin es-Simia, near Dumah, and about eight and a half miles southwest by south of Hebron. ESHEK (e'shek), (Heb. Pº, ay-shek', oppres- sion), a Benjamite, descendant of Saul and founder of a noted family of archers (1 Chron. viii:39), B. C. before 588. ESHEL (esh'81), (Heb. ???, ay'sheſ), which should be translated fayzarzsä, as in R. V. (Gen. xxi:33; I Sam. xxii;6, marg.). ESHKALONITE (1) The first notice of this tree is in Gen. xxi : 33, ‘And Abraham planted a grove (eshel) in Beersheba, and called there on the name of the Lord.' The second notice is in I Sam. xxii:6: ‘Now Saul abode in Gibeah under a free (es/he/) in Ramah, having his spear in his hand, and all his servants were standing about him.’ Under such a tree also he and his sons were buried, for it is said (I Sam. xxxi :13): “And they took their bones and buried them under a tree (eshel) at Jabesh, and fasted seven days.” In the parallel passage of I Chron. x : 12, the word alah is em- ployed. This signifies a “terebinth tree,” but is translated oak in the Authorized Version. From the characteristics of the tamarisk tree of the East, it certainly appears as likely as any to have been planted in Beersheba by Abraham, be- cause it is one of the few trees which will flour- ish and grow to a great size even in the arid desert. #}} 2. A AºA' .. §§§ % $4%. º 3%; 2:- sº Nº. £3%% º - §§§ º $º § 2 ºf §§ {\ºtº - ºf . / Sº º: º ºiº. === § º ºr. º - Bºth t - -- -º-,-- Tw 'º - †. - - - *R > * sº - -me ºs- - Tamarisk Tree. It has also a name in Arabic, asul, very similar to the Hebrew eshel. Besides the advantage of affording shade in a hot country, it is also es- teemed on account of the excellence of its wood, which is converted into charcoal. It is no less valuable on account of the galls with which its branches are often loaded, and which are nearly as astringent as Oak-galls. The only difficulty is to ascertain the exact species. But as they are all SO similar, any of the arboreous species or vari- eties which flourish in the most barren situations would have the name asul applied to it, and this name would appear to an Arab of those regions the most appropriate translation for eshel, in the passage where Abraham is described as planting a tree and calling on the name of the Lord, the everlasting God. (See OAK; TAMARISK.) (2) ESHEL, also Eschel and Aishel, occurs in three places in the Scriptures, in one of which, in our Authorized Version, it is rendered grove, and in the otlier two ºr ee. Iſ we compare the pas- Sages in which the word eshel occurs, we shall see that there is no necessity for considering it a generic term. • I 4 ESHKALONITE (eshka-lon-ite), (Heb.ºs. esh-AEe/-o-mee'), the patrial designation (Josh. xiii:3) of an inhabitant of ASHKELON (which see). ESHTAOL (sh'ta-3), (Heb. *sºs, ash-law. ole'), a town of Dan, though it belonged first to Judah (Josh. xv.:33; Judg. xiii:25; xvi :31 : xviii: 2, 8, II, I2), Eusebius says it was ten miles from Eleutheropolis, toward Nicopolis, between Azotus and Askalon. It is called by Jerome, Asco. Eshtaol is thought to be the village of Eshū‘a, about one and a half miles east by north from Zorah, and thirteen miles west, slightly north from Jerusalem. - 618 ESSENCE, THE DIVINE ESHTAULITE (esh'ta-ul-ite' or ésh'tau-lite) (Heb. "?º, esh-taw-oo-Zee'), an inhabitant of Eshtal, and who at a later period, with the Zare- athites, belonged to the families of Kirjath-jearim (I Chron. ii:53). ESIITEMOA (esh'te-mo'à), (Heb. Pº, esh- tem-o'ah, obedience), or ESHTEMOH (Heb. HY2 hºs, es/l-fema-o', Josh.) 1. A town of Judah (Josh. xxi :14; xv.:50; I Sam. xxx:28). Eusebius says it was a large town in the district of Eleutheropolis, north of that city. It was ceded to the priests (I Chron. vi :57). The site has been found at Semā‘a, nine miles South of Hebron, a considerable village with the foundation of ancient walls designed for a large town. 2. In I Chron. iv:19 the name seems to be ap- plied to a person. ESHTON (€sh'ton), (Heb. inºs, es/h-tone', rest- ful), a son of Mehir and grandson of Chelub, of the tribe of Judah (I Chron. iv:II, I2), but Grove thinks it was probably a place in Judah. ESLI (és"li), (Gr. 'Eaxt, es-lee'), son of Nagge (Naggai) and father of Naum, of the maternal ancestry of Christ after the exile (Luke iii.25). He has been held to be the same with Elioenai, the son of Neariah and father of Johanan (I Chron. iii:23, 24). ESPOUSAL, ESPOUSE (€s-pouz'al, és-pouz'). To espouse (fr. Lat. Sãonsus, ptcp. of spondere, to betroth, through Old Fr. espouser), meant either to betroth or to marry. Figuratite. St. Paul says in 2 Cor. xi:2: ‘I have espoused to you one husband'; literally, ‘joined you unto,” and here the reference seems to be to marriage, not betrothal; ‘I have given you in marriage, though the betrothal, which was also carried out by the bridegroom's friend, may be meant. The promise of God to betroth Israel (Hos. ii: 19, 20) is very significant. He was to renew his covenant, not as a man remarries a divorced wife, but as one espouses a maid; the past is forgiven, and Jehovah makes a new cov- enant with his church, such as is made with a spotless virgin. He betroths his people forever, by an everlasting covenant, that neither time, sin nor anything else can disannul ; and in righteous- mess, consistently with his essential righteousness, and in judgment, with great wisdom and pru- dence; and in faithfulness, in fulfillment of his covenant and promise, and sincerely determined to fulfill the marriage trust toward them ; and in loving kindness and mercies to their persons, so wretched, guilty and rebellious. ESROM (es' rom), (Matt. i:3; Luke iii:33). HEZRON. ESSENCE (€s'sens), THE DIVINE. (Essence from Latin verb esse, to be). Berkeley says: “The absolute existence of un- thinking things without any relation to their being perceived is unintelligible. Their esse is percipi; nor is it possible that they should have any existence out of the minds or thinking things which perceive them.” Esse simpliciter, uncondi- tioned being, applied to God as self-subsistent. J. H. Fichte says: “It is that true being, which remains in itself the same, over against the in- finitely non-being, the appearance.” Hegel says it is “being (Sein), coming into mediation with self through the negativity of itself—the truth of being, the concept as established.” Kant teaches that it is “the primary internal See ESSENES 619 principle (the ground) of all that belongs to the possibility of a thing.” Schelling says: “It is that whereby a thing is in conformity with all things; opposed to Form, that whereby it is itself.” These are more philosophical than theological definitions. But theology has an intimate rela- tion to philosophy. And while the Scriptures do not contain such abstract terms as essence and substance, at the same time it must be admitted that some of the names under which God has re- vealed himself, as Elohim and Jehovah, refer directly to the eternal Divine essence. At all events theology has often made large use of these terms in its attempts to arrive at the proper and Scriptural conception of God. The questions have been earnestly discussed to what extent, if any, the Divine essence can be known to us; and, secondly, as to the relation ex- isting between the attributes of God and his es- sence. His attributes are the living realization of his essence. Accordingly, while the Divine es- sence is incomprehensible, we have nevertheless Some measure of true knowledge of God, knowl- edge that relates to his very essence. (See God, ATTRIBUTES OF.) The various books on systematic theology may be consulted, such as Hodge, Raymond, Pope, etc.; also Mansell's Limits of Relig. Thought. ESSENES (Šs-sénz'), (Gr. 'Earonvot, es-se-moi"), One of the three great Jewish sects, of which the Other two were the Pharisees and the Sadducees. (1) Name. The derivation of the name Es- senes is by no means certain. Philo (Quod omnis A robus /iber, sec. 12) deduces it from 8a tos, ‘holy.” Some have found its origin in the Hebrew Sº, aw-say-yaw'), ‘to heal,' supporting their opinion by reference to the fact that the Essenes were a class of men who professed to heal both mind and body. De Wette gives the preference to the Syriac word signifying ‘pious.” (2) Origin. These sects sprung up in the de- cline of the Jewish state, after the Babylonish cap- tivity, influenced in their rise and spread not less by ascetic philosophy than by the national degra- dation and the decay of morality. In all states re- ligion comes first, for it is spontaneous, the nat- ural answer of the heart to God. While the Pharisees gave their countenance to Sustain the past, with all its transmitted influ-. ences, indiscriminately, and the Sadducees ad- hered to the rejection of what was traditionary and adventitious, the Essenes attempted to form a third way, which, without neglecting the past, should bring new and powerful appliances to bear on the actual ills of society, seeking not merely to reform and repair, but rather to heal and revive. For this purpose they gave them- elves up to a contemplative mode of life, as well as to those labors by which only thought and prac- tice can be united in harmony, and the good which God designed he wrought out for man. Making Small account of the outward observances of the Pharisee, and standing religiously aloof from the skepticism and narrow worldly spirit of his oppo- nent the Sadducee, the Essenes aimed at somé- thing practical—sought to originate an influence which should stem the advance of corruption and pour a sanatory and life-giving power into the veins of society. (3) Organization. For this purpose they founded a brotherhood, devised institutions, and became the earliest example, if not the actual par- ent, of all the teeming brood of hermits, monks, friars and nuns, which have since been seen. ICSSIENIES They were a moral and religious order, while the Pharisees partook more of the character of a party (in the modern and political sense of the word), and the Sadducees exhibited not a few of the features of a sect. (4) Ethics, Manners and Customs. (a) The Essenes were ascetics. The ordinary pleasures of life they avoided as something morally bad, and held self-control and freedom from the slav- ery of the passions to be virtue. Marriage they despised. Selecting among the children of others those whom they considered the most promising, they endeavored to form them according to their own model. Neither riches nor poverty were known in their body. None had less, none more than chough. (b) Stewards were appointed by them, whose business it was to take duc care of what in each case was entrusted to them, not for their own individual advantage, but for the common good. (c) Buying and selling, as might be expected, were unknown among them ; give and take was their simple plan, which appears to have been observed no less between the members of different communities than between those of the same. (d) Their entire manner of life, indeed, was subject to the strictest rule. Only in their min- istrations of charity were they left free to the Spontaneous movements and impulses of their breasts. (e) Next to God, Moses was the object of their reverent homage. To blaspheme the name of Moses was a capital offense. As might be expected, their observance of the Sabbath was more strict than ordinary. Their food they cooked the day before. On the Sabbath day they would not re- move a vessel from its place, even for the most pressing wants of nature. (f) Their pursuits, trades and professions were such as conduce to human good. They tilled the ground; they made useful articles; they bred and pastured cattle, but in the fabrication of arms they took no part. Even peaceful pursuits which ministered to vice they carefully avoided. It must not be concealed, however, that some of their notions bordered on extravagance, and that some of their practices betrayed a fastidiousness which amounts to the ridiculous. (g) In morals they seem to have attained no ordinary excellence. Over anger they kept a guard like just stewards. All the passions they knew how to restrain. They were eminent for fidelity and ministers of peace. Their word was more to be trusted than some men's oaths. (h) The great aim of their inquiries, whether they searched the books of the ancients or studied the virtues of plants, was to gather such lessons of wisdom as might render them able to administer, like skillful physicians, to the maladies both of the mind and the body. (i) They had no slaves; all were free, serving one another. They repudiated lordships as un- just, as destructive of natural equality, as irre- ligious, as opposed to the laws of nature. Na- ture they held to be the common mother and instructress of all, and with them all men were brethren, not in name, but in reality. Thus, while they were careful to preserve a practical subordination in their communities, without which social existence is an impossibility, those who were highest amongst them held office merely for the common good, and in themselves were neither richer nor better clad than others, nor had they any political power. (j) Pain they disregarded; the miseries of life they held of small account, and they even pre- ferred death to living always. ESTHER The calm and unmoved firmness with which they endured at the hands of the Romans, during ‘the Jewish war,’ the cruelest tortures, and death itself, rather than be faithless to their convictions or forswear their order, serves to show that the ascetic spirit and the martyr Spirit have no little in common, and exhibits within the limits of Palestine the very same results, from the very same discipline, as Sparta was proud to call her OWI). (k) With their ascetic notions it was natural they should disregard the body, and the usual care which, especially among the ancients, was taken of it. Accordingly they considered oil a defilement, and if any one was anointed contrary to his will the body was carefully clear; Besides Josephus and Philo, the reader may consult Schurer Jewish Peop., div. ii, vol. ii: 190 ff.: Edersheim, Life and Times of the Mes- siah, ii:329, ff. ESTHER (€s' ter), (Heb. Tºº, es-fare', from Persian sizareh, star, the planet l'enſus). 1. Name and Family. She was a maiden of the tribe of Benjamin, born during the Exile, and whose family did not avail itself of the permis- sion to return to Palestine under the edict of Cyrus. Her parents being dead, Esther was brought up by her uncle, Mordecai. It should be observed that Esther is the name which the dam- sel received upon her introduction into the royal harem, her Hebrew name having been Hadassah, myrtle (Esth. ii:7). Esther is a Persian word. Gesenius cites from that diffuse Targum on this book, which is known as the second Targum On Esther, the following words: ‘She was called Es- ther from the name of the star Venus, which in Greek is Aster.” Gesenius then points to the Per- sian word Satárah, star, as that of which Esther is the Syro-Arabian modification, and brings it, as to signification, into connection with the planet Venus, as a star of good fortune, and with the name of the Syrian goddess, Ashtëreth, according to the etymology of the word, already referred to in that article. - 2. Tersonal History. (1) Chosen Queen. The reigning king of Persia, Ahasuerus, having divorced his queen, Vashti, on account of the be- coming spirit with which she refused to submit to the indignity which a compliance with his drunken commands involved, search was made throughout the empire for the most beautiful maiden to be her successor. Those whom the offi- cers of the harem deemed the most beautiful were removed thither, the eventual choice among them remaining with the king himself. That choice fell on Esther, who found favor in the eyes of Ahasuerus, and was advanced to a station en- viable only by comparison with that of the less favored inmates of the royal harem. Her Jewish origin was at the time unknown ; and hence, when she avowed it to the king she seemed to be in- cluded in the doom of extirpation which a royal edict had pronounced against all the Jews in the empire. (2) Saves Her People. This circumstance enabled her to turn the royal indignation upon . Haman, the chief minister of the king, whose re- sentment against Mordecai had led him to obtain from the king this monstrous edict. The laws of the empire would not allow the king to recall a decree once uttered ; but the Jews were author- ized to stand on their defense; and this, with the known change in the intentions of the court, averted the worst consequences of the decree. The Jews established a yearly feast in memory of 620 ESTHER, BOOK OF this deliverance, which is observed among them to this day (see PURIM). Such is the substance of the history of Esther, as related in the book which bears her name. &. Character. Esther appears in the Bible as a woman of deep piety, faith, courage, patriot- ism and caution, combined with resolution; a du- tiful daughter to her adoptive father, docile and obedient to his counsels, and anxious to share the king's favor with him for the good of the Jewish people. That she was a virtuous woman, and, as far as her situation made it possible, a good wife to the king, her continued influence over him for So long a time warrants us to infer. And there must have been a singular grace and charm in her aspect and manners, since she “obtained favor in the sight of all that looked upon her” (ii:15). That she was raised up as an instrument in the hands of God to avert the destruction of the Jew- ish people, and to afford them protection, and for- ward their wealth and peace in their captivity, is also manifest from the Scripture account. (Arch- deacon Hervey, Smith's Bib. Dict.) Dr. Hervey adds: “But to impute to her the Sentiments put into her mouth by the apocryphal author of chapter xiv, or to accuse her of cruelty because of the death of Haman and his sons and the second day's slaughter of the Jews' enemies at Shushan, is utterly to ignore the manners and feelings of her age and nation, and to judge her by the standard of Christian morality in our own age and country instead. In fact the simplicity and truth to nature of the Scriptural narrative afford a striking contrast, both with the forced and florid amplifications of the apocryphal addi- tions and with the sentiments of some later com- mentators.” J. A. McClymont, Hastings' Bib. Dict, says: “While there are some things recorded of Esther that offend our Christian feeling—in particular her vindictive treatment of the bodies of Haman's sons (chap. ix:7), and her request for an exten- sion of time to the Jews at Susa for the slaughter of their enemies (chap. ix:I3)—regard must be had to the spirit of the age in which she lived and to the passions that had been excited by Haman's inhuman malignity.” Dr. William Wright in Kitto’s Bib. Cyc., says: “With reference to the somewhat sanguinary char- acter of Esther and Mordecai, John remarks that no difficulty arises from thence, seeing that they are not represented as saints, but as deliverers of their nation.” ESTHER (ester), Book OF, one of the eleven books styled Ketubim (see HAGIOGRAPHA), and of the five Megi//oth (see CANTICLES). (1) Name. It is called by the Jews Megillah Esther, and sometimes simply Megillah, as it forms by itself a distinct roll. In the Christian Church it has been also called Ahasuerus, which name it bears in some copies and printed editions of the Vulgate. In the Hebrew it is placed with the other Megilloth, after the Pentateuch, between the books of Joshua and, Ecclesiastes, and some- times among the Hagiographa, between Ecclesias- tes and Daniel. In the Vulgate, Tobit and Judith are placed between Nehemiah and Esther. Luther placed it immediately after Nehemiah, so as to make it the last among the historical books, although the book of Nehemiah was supposed to refer to a later history. His design in this ar- rangement was to prevent the books of Nehemiah and Ezra from being disunited. It has continued to retain this position in the Reformed versions. The Jews hold this book in veneration next to the books of Moses (see Carpzov's and Eichhorn's ESTHER, BOOK OF 621 Introductions). Aside from the subject of this book, which has been treated under AHASUERUS, the book of Esther has this peculiarity among the historical books, that although the author, a Per- sian Jew, records a remarkable preservation from destruction of that portion of his countrymen which remained in Persia after the exile, he does not refer their deliverance to the act of God, whose name is not even once mentioned. This has been explained by supposing that the author wished to avoid giving offense to the Persians, or that the whole was taken from the Persian annals, to which an appeal is made (chap. x:2). (See Pareau's Principles of Interpretation and Hottinger's Thés. Phil., p. 488.) (2) Date. Fsther was written in the late reign of Xerxes or in the first years of Artaxerxes I origina in IIs. (3) Author. Of the author nothing is known, nor have we any data on which to form a reason- able conjecture. Augustine (De Civitate Dei) ascribes the book to Ezra. Eusebius (Chronic. xlvii. d. 4), who observes that the facts of the history are posterior to the time of Ezra, ascribes it to some later but unknown author. Clemens Alexandrinus (Stromata, lib. i. p. 329) assigns it, and the book of Maccabees to Mordecai. The pseudo-Philo (Chronographia) and Rabbi Azarias maintain that it was written at the desire of Mor- decai by Jehoiakim, son of Joshua, who was high priest in the twelfth year of the reign of Ar- taxerxes. The minute details given of the ban- quet, the customs and regulations of the palace, and the names of people connected with the court, indicate that the author lived at Shushan, and probably at the court. The intimate knowledge of the private affairs of Esther and Mordecai bear out the hypothesis that the writer was Mordecai himself, and, like Daniel, Ezra and Nehemiah, who wrote an account of the affairs of their nation, so he wrote of the events recorded in Esther. (4) Relations of the King with Esther. The King Ahasuerus is probably Xerxes, son of Darius Hystaspis (see AHASUERUS), and Esther, a cap- tive, one of the king’s harem, was certainly not of the highest rank of wives, because it is known that the Persian kings chose their wives not from among the concubines, but from the noblest Per- sian families. The title of wife or queen may have been given to her, as to Vashti before her, as the favorite concubine, whose children, how- ever, would never have succeeded to the throne. This view of the relations of Esther and Ahasuerus removes all difficulty in reconciling the history of Esther with the scanty accounts left us by profane authors of the reign of Xerxes. (5) Canonical Authority. Some doubts have been thrown on the canonical authority of this book from the fact that it is never referred to in the New Testament, that it is not cited by Philo, and that it is omitted in several of the ancient Catalogues, some of which expressly exclude it from the canon. As to the New Testament, there are several other books whose authority is uniques- tioned which are never once referred to therein, viz. the books of Ruth, Ezra, Nehemiah, Canticles, Lainentations, and Ezekiel ; and the same may be said of Philo, who, although he mentions or refers to all the other books of the Jewish Canon, makes no reference to Ruth, Chronicles, Nehe- miah, Esther, Lamentations, Daniel, Ecclesiastes, and Canticles. Carpzov (Introduction) maintains that if is referred to in Matt. i : II. Its omission by Melito, A. D. 170 (see DEUTERO-CANoNICAL BOOKS) has been accounted for by supposing that he included it, as well as the book of Nehemiah, ESTHER, BOOK OF under the name of Ezra, and there are, in fact, some manuscripts of the Vulgate extant, in which Esther is called the sixth book of Ezra (Whis- ton's Josephus, b. xi, chap. 6, note). There are two works attributed to Athanasius, in both of which the book of Esther is excluded from the canon, the Festal Epistle, and the Sy- mopsis Scriptura. It is, however, held in great veneration in the Greek Church, and holds the same place in the authorized Bibles of that com- munion which Jerome's prefaces do in the Latin Vulgate. It has been questioned whether Josephus consid- ered the book of Esther as written before or after the close of the canon. All other ancient writers and catalogues include Esther among the books of the Jewish canon. Jerome expressly names it as the ninth book of the Hagiographa (Prologus Galeatus). It has, however, been classed by Sixtus of Sienna, Bellarmine, and others of the Roman church, in the second order of Sacred books, or as deutero-canonical; that is, according to these writ- ers, among those prophetical and apostolical books whose authority has not been always equally cer- tain, in opposition to those of the first class re- specting whose authority there has never been any dispute. Eichhorn considers as conclusive of Esther's having formed part of the Jewish canon, the fact of its having been translated by the Sev- enty, under the reign of Ptolemy Philometor, about the middle of the second century before Christ, before the time usually assigned to the translation of the prophets. For this date we have the authority of the subscription to the Sep- tuagint Version. So whatever doubts may have existed among some of the Christian fathers as to the authenticity of Esther, it does not appear that it was ever doubted by the Jews, or by the Christian Church in its collective capacity. The objections which have been advanced against the book of Esther on the ground of the follies, wickedness and cruelties narrated in it, have been ably refuted by Jahn and other critics, who have shown that these things are not recorded with ap- probation, but simply as facts of history, illustra- tive of the operations of the providence of God, with a view to effect the deliverance of his peo- ple (Henderson, On /ns/?raſzowl, p. 48). W. W. (6) Apocryphal Additions To. In the ver- sion of the Seventy the book of Esther, besides other variations, is enriched with several detached fragments which are not found in the Hebrew. These were also contained in the Old Latin, which was translated from the Greek, and were retained in his own version by Jerome, who removed them to the e11d of the book, in which position they are still found in all manuscripts and printed editions of the Vulgate, forming the last seven chapters according to Cardinal Hugo’s division. Luther proceeded still further, and removed them to a separate place among the Apocrypha. They are as follows: (1) The Greek version commences with what forms the IIth chapter in the Vulgate, “In the fourth year of the reign of Ptolemy and Cleo- patra,” describing Mordecai’s dream of the two dragons and the conspiracy of the two eunuchs (Vulg. xii). d (2) The king's letter for the destruction of the Jews (Vulg. xiii) follows in the Greek the 13th verse of chap. iii to verse I4. (3) The Prayer of Esther (Vulg. xiv), Septu- agint iv, commencing after the 17th verse in the Vulgate. - (4) A detailed and embellished description of ETAM Esther’s visit to the king (Vulg. xv), Septuagint v to verse 3. (5) The king's letter in favor of the Jews (Vulg. xvi), Septuagint viii, after I3th verse. (6) The whole concludes in the Septuagint with Mordecai's recollection of his dream of the great and little fountain and the two dragons (Vulg. i.), after which is the subscription, pur- porting that the letter concerning the feast of Purim was brought into Egypt by Dositheus and translated by Lysimachus in the fourth year of the reign of Ptolemy and Cleopatra (B. C. 165). ETAM (Č'tam), (Heb. Fº, ay-tawm',lair of wild beasts). 1. A town in the tribe of Judah, which was decorated by Solomon with gardens and streams of water, and fortified by Rehoboam along with Bethlehem and Tekoa (1 Chron. iv:3; 2 Chron. xi:6; Joseph. Antig. viii:7, 3). From this place, according to the Rabbins, water was carried by an aqueduct to Jerusalem. Josephus places it at fifty stadia (in some copies sixty) from Jerusalem (southward), and alleges that Solomon was in the habit of taking a morning drive to this favored spot in his chariot. Scholars are inclined to find Etam at a place about a mile and a half south of Bethlehem, where there is a ruined village called Urtas, at the bottom of a pleasant valley of the same name. Here there are traces of ancient ruins, and also a fountain, sending forth a copious supply of fine water, which forms a beautiful purl- ing rill along the bottom of the valley. A village of the tribe of Simeon (I Chron. iv :32). As the cities of Simeon were all in the extreme south this cannot be the same as I. 3. Etam the Rock. It is usually supposed that ‘the rock Etam,” to which Samson withdrew (Judg. xv.:8, II), was near the town of the same name now called Urtas, which seems to corre- spond to the ancient Etam. ETERNAL (É-têr'nal). The general rendering in the A. V. Of the Heb. =}º. o-lawme', the Gr. aidºv, ahee-o/izz', age, or aldºvuos, ahee-o'?tee-os, per- petual, and occasionally P.P., Aeh'dem, early, of yore. Both o-lawm' and ahee-ohn' are properly represented by “eternal,” inasmuch as they usually refer to indefinite time, Žast or future. 1. O-lawm', which means to hide, strictly des- ignates the occult time of the past, “time out of mind,” or time immemorial (Ps. xxv :6; Jer. vi:I6). 2. Ahee-ohn' corresponds remarkably with the Hebrew o-lawm' in nearly all of its meanings. Its derivation is from a verb meaning to breathe, blow, and denotes that which causes life. In the sense of unlimited duration must it always be taken, unless something appears in the Subiect or connection in which it occurs, to limit its sig- nification; that is, to show that it is used figura- tively, and not in its proper acceptation. When applied to God and spiritual things it indicates the endless succession of ages, which is the popular and necessary conception of the eter- nal. The New Testament usage is indicated as follows: In its adjective form it denotes forever (John vi :51, 58; xiv:16; Heb. v :6; vi :20, etc.); unto the ages, i.e., as long as the time shall be (Rom. i.25; ix:5; xi :36); from the ages, i. e., from eternity (Col. i.20; Eph. iii:9); before time was; i. e., be- fore the foundation of the world (I Cor. ii:7). In poetical and popular usages from the ages means from of old (Luke i :70; Acts ifi:21), from the most ancient times. Elsewhere of the future it is 622 ETHAN used in an unlimited sense, endless (2 Cor. iv:18; v: I ; Luke xvi :9; Heb. ix:I2; xiii:2O, etc.), espe- cially of the happy future of the righteous, as “life everlasting” (Matt. xix:16, 29; xxv :46), and often of the miserable fate of the wicked (Mark iii:29; Matt. xviii:8, etc.). (J. Newton Brown, Bib. Cyc.; Mc. and Str. Bib. Cyc.; Barnes, Bib. Cyc.) IETERNAL LIFE. See LIFE. ETERNITY OF GOD (é-têr'ni-ty 6v göd) is the perpetual continuance of his being, without begin- ning, end, or succession. . (1) That Ae is without beginning may be proved (I) From his necessary self-existence (Exod. iii:I4). (2) From his attributes, several of which are said to be eternal (Rom. i:20; Acts xv :18; PS. ciii:17; Jer. xxxi:3). (3) From his purposes, which are also said to be from eternity (Is. xxv :I ; Eph. iii: II; Rom. ix:II ; Eph. i:4). (4) From the covenant of grace, which is eternal (2 Sam. xxiii:5; Mic. v.2). (2) That he is without end may be proved from (I) His spirituality and simplicity (Rom. i:23). (2) From his independency (Rom. ix:5). , (3) From his immutability (I Pet. i:24, 25; Mal. iii: 6; Ps. cii:26, 27). (4) From his dominion and government, said never to end (Jer. x:Io; Ps. x:16; Dan. iv:3). (3) That he is without succession, or any dis- tinctions of time succeeding one to another, as moments, minutes, etc., may be proved from (I) His existence before such were in being (Is. xliii: I3). (2) The distinctions and differences of time are together ascribed to him, and not as succeed- ing one another; he is the same yesterday, to-day and forever (Heb. xiii:8; Rev. i :4). (3) If his duration were successive, or preceded by mo- ments, days and years, then there must have been some first moment, day and year when he began to exist, which is incompatible with the idea of his eternity; and besides one day would be but one day with him, and not a thousand, contrary to the express language of Scripture (2 Pet. iii:8). (4) He would not be immutable and per- fect if this were the case, for he would be older one minute than he was before, which cannot be said of him. (5) As the eternal, supreme cause he must of necessity have such a perfect, inde- pendent, unchangeable comprehension of all things that there can be no one point or instant of his eternal duration, wherein all things that are past, present and to come will not be as entirely known and represented to him in one single thought or view, and all things present and future be equally entirely in his power and direction, as if there was really no succession at all, but all things were actually present at once. ETHAM (É'tham), (Heb. Fº, ay-thawm'), a lace to the cast of the present Suez Callal, U11 Llle order of the desert, where Israel made its second station after leaving Egypt (Exod. xiii.20; Num. xxxiii.6). Canon Cook would identify it with Pithom or ancient Hierapolis; others with Seba Beer, “seven wells,” about three miles west of the Red Sea; Trumbull, with a “wall” from the Red to the Great Sea. ^ ETHAN (8'than), (Heb. kº, ay-thawn', per- petuity). 1. One of the four persons (“Ethan the Ezra- hite, and Heman and Chalcol and Darda”) who were so renowned for their sagacity that it is mentioned to the honor of Solomon that his wis- dom excelled theirs. In I Kings iv:31 Ethan is distinguished as ‘the Ezrahite' from the others, ETHANIM who are called ‘sons of Mahol’—unless, indeed, this word Mahol be taken not as a proper name, but appellatively, for ‘sons of music, dancing,' etc., in which case it would apply to Ethan as well as to the others. This interpretation is strength- ened by our finding the other names associated with that of Ethan in I Chron. ii:6 as ‘sons of Zerah, i. e., of Ezra, the same as Ezrahites. The evidence of identity afforded by this collocation of names is too strong to be resisted, and we must therefore conclude that Ethan and the oth- ers, the tradition of whose wisdom had descended to the time of Solomon, are the same who, in I Chron. ii:6, appear as Sons of Zerah, who was himself the son of the patriarch Judah. With this agrees the Jewish chronology, which counts them as prophets during the Sojourn in Egypt (B. C. after 1856). 2. A Levite, the son of Kishi, and one of the masters of the temple music (I Chron. vi.44; xv. 17), to whom the 89th Psalm is ascribed, and whom some interpreters suppose to be the Ethan of I Kings iv:31, to whose wisdom that of Solo- mon is compared (B. C. IOI4). 3. A Gershonite Levite, ancestor of Asaph, the singer (I Chron. vi. 42). (B. C. 1585.) ETHANIMI (Šth'a-nîm), another name for the month TISRI (which see). ETHBAAL (eth'ba'al), (Heb. º. ef/h-ba/a/, with Baal), a king of Sidon, father of Jezebel, the wife of Ahab (I Kings xvi;31), B. C. before 875. Josephus says that he was also king of Tyre. By this we may identify him with Eithobalus, a priest of Astarte, who usurped the throne of Tyre for thirty-two years (B. C. 940-908). The office which Ethbaal held may explain Jezebel’s idola- trous zeal. In the account of Sennacherib's cam- paign against the Hittites he says: “The power of the weapons of Assur, my lord, overwhelmed the cities of Great Sidon, Little Sidon . . . and they submitted unto me. Ethbaal (Tubahlu) I set on the royal throne over them, and I laid upon him annual tribute and gifts to my sov- ereignty, never to be discontinued” (Sayce, Higher Criticism, pp. 428, 429). ETHER (e' ther), (Heb. Tº, eh' ther, abundance), a city twenty miles from Eleutheropolis, near Malatha, in the south of Judah. Allotted first to Judah, afterwards to Simeon (Josh. xv.:42; xix:7). In the time of Eusebius it was quite a large town, placed by him near Malatha, in the interior of Daroma, that is below Hebron, east of Beersheba. It is called Tochen in I Chron. iv:32. The best suggestion as to its site is the ruined village of ‘Atr, about a mile northwest by north of Beit Jibrin. ETHIOPIA (ethi-6'pi-á), (Heb. Áoosh, country of burnt faces, Judith i: IO), is the name by which the English and most other versions render the Hebrew CUSH. 1. Name. As used among the Greeks and Romans, the word was employed in all the lati- tude of its etymological meaning, to denote any of the countries where the people are of a sable, sun-burnt complexion—Albioſ (Acts viii:27), "Al6- wórtorga (Num. xii:I), Al6tores (2 Chron. xiv:12), from attopat, to Özern, and &y, the face. But its use in the language of Scripture is much more restricted, and while it may sometimes include part of South- ern Arabia, it for the most part exclusively desig- nates the “Ethiopia of Africa.’ (See CUSH.) 2. Locality. By Ethiopia, or African Cush, in the widest acceptation of the name, the Hebrews understood the whole of the region lying south of sº º * 'l-, 6: 3 ETH IOPIA Egypt above Syene, the modern Assouan (Ezek. xxix: Io; xxx:5). Its limits on the west and South were undefined, but they probably regarded it as extending eastward as far as the Red Sea, if not as including some of the islands in that sea, Such as the famous Topaz Isle (Job xxviii:19), It thus corresponded, though only in a vague and general Sense, to the countries known to us as Nubia and Abyssinia, so famous for the Nile and Other great rivers. Hence the allusions in Scrip- ture (Is. xviii: I ; Zeph. iii. Io) to the far dis- tant 'rivers of Ethiopia,’ a country which is also Spoken Oſ (IS. xviii:2) in our version as the land ‘which the rivers have spoiled, there being a sup- posed reference to the ravages committed by in- undations (Bruce's Travels, iii, p. 158, and Tay- lor's Calmet, iii, pp. 593-4); but recent translators prefer to render the Hebrew ‘divide,’ as if he should say, ‘a land intersecſed by streams.’ But that part of the vast region of . Cush which seems chiefly intended in the passages of Scripture is the tract of country in Upper Nubia which became famous in antiquity as the king- dom of Ethiopia, or the state of Meroë. Its sur- face exceeded that of Sicily more than a half, and it corresponded pretty nearly to the present prov- ince of Atbara, between 13 and I8 degrees N. lati- tude. In modern times it formed a great part of the kingdom of Sennaar, and the Southern portion belongs to Abyssinia. Upon the island of Meroë lay a city of the same name, the met- ropolis of the kingdom, the site of which has been discovered near a place called Assur, about twenty miles north of the town of Shendy, under 17 degrees N. latitude. The splendid ruins of temples, pyramids and other edifices found here and throughout the district attest the high degree of civilization and art among the ancient Ethio- pians. &. Jeba. Josephus, in his account of the ex- pedition of Moses when commander of the Egyp- tian army against the Ethiopians, says that the latter at length retired to Saba, a royal city of Ethiopia which Cambyses afterward called Meroë, after the name of his own sister.” The opinion of Josephus that Meroë was identical with Seba accords well with the statement in Gen. x. Seba was the eldest son of Cush. He is not to be con- founded with either of the Shebas who are men- tioned as descendants of Shem (Gen. x:28; xxv : 3). Now this country of African Seba is classed with the Arabian Sheba as a rich but far-distant land (Ps. lxxii: IO). In Is. xliii:3 God says to Israel, ‘I have given Egypt for thy ransom, Cush and Sheba in thy stead,” and in Is. xlv. : 14, “The wealth of Egypt and the merchandise of Cush and of the Sebaim men of stature shall pass over to thee and shall be thine.” In common with the other Cushite tribes of Africa, the Ethiopian's skin was black, to which there is an obvious al- '...} in Jer. xiii:23: ‘Can the Cushite change his skin P’ 4. Inhabitants. Among the aboriginal inhab- itants of Ethiopia the first place is due to the Nu- bians. Next comes the territory of the Berbers, strictly so called, who, though speaking Arabic, evidently belong to the Nubian race. Above these regions beyond the Tacazzé and along the Nile the great mass of the inhabitants, though sometimes with a mixture of other blood, may be regarded as of Arab origin. But between the valley of the Nile and the Red Sea there is still, as of old, a variety of scattered aboriginal tribes, among whom the Arabic is much less common. Some of them spread themselves over the plains of the Asta- boras, or Tacazzé, being compelled to remove ETHIOPIA their encampments, sometimes by the inundations of the river, at other times by the attacks of the dreaded gimb, or gadfly, described by Bruce, and which he supposes to be the ‘fly which is in the utmost part of the rivers of Egypt’ (IS. vii:18). Another remarkable Ethiopic race in ancient times was the Macrobians, so called from their supposed longevity. They were represented by the ambas- sadors of Cambyses as a very tall race, who elected the highest in stature as king; gold was so abundant that they bound their prisoners with golden fetters—circumstances which again remind us of Isaiah's description of Ethiopia and Seba in chap. xlv.: I4. 5. History. The government was in the hands of a race or caste of priests, who chose from among themselves a king; and this form con- tinued down to the reign in Egypt of the Second Ptolemy, when Ergamenes, at that time king, mas- sacred the priests in their sanctuary, and became absolute monarch. Of the history of Ethiopia, previous to that last revolution, only scanty information has been pre- served, but it is enough to evince its high an- tiquity and its early aggrandizement. (1) An Independent State. In the Persian period it was certainly an independent and im- portant state, which Cambyses in vain endeavored to subdue. But its most flourishing era was be- tween the years B. C. and 700, when arose three potent kings, Sabaco, Sevechus, and Tar- hako, or Tirhakah, who extended their conquests over a great part of Egypt. Sevechus is supposed to have been the So or Sua king of Egypt, to whom an embassy was sent by Hoshea, king of Israel (2 Kings xvii:4), whose reign ended B. C. 722. He was thus the contemporary of Salma- nassar or Shalmaneser IV, king of Assyria, as was Tirhakah of the next Assyrian mon- arch, Sennacherib, who (about the year B. C. 7I4) was deterred from the invasion of Egypt merely by the rumor that Tirhakah was ad- vancing against him (2 Kings xix:9). There seems no reason to doubt that the remarkable prophecy in the eighteenth chapter of Isaiah was addressed to Tirhakah and his people to an- nounce to them the sudden overthrow of the Assyrian host before Jerusalem. In verse 7 it is intimated that, struck at the mighty deeds of the God of Judah, this distant people should send gifts to his dwelling-place at Zion. They were, no doubt, among the ‘many' who are described in 2 Chron. xxxii:23, as having ‘brought gifts unto Jehovah at Jerusalem, and presents to king Heze- kiah, so that he was magnified in the sight of all the nations.” The expectation of the entire con- version of the Ethiopians is frequently expressed by the Hebrew prophets (Zeph. iii: Io; Ps. lxviii: 32; lxxxvii. 4) and those who take pleasure in tracing the fulfillment of such predictions in subse- quent history may find it in Acts viii:27 (the con- version both to Judaism and Christianity of the treasurer of Queen Candace). - (2) Egypt and Ethiopia. Isaiah often men- tions Egypt and Ethiopia in so close political re- lation (see especially chap. xx:3–6). The same fact is noticeable in the latter prophets, and proves the continuance of a friendly understanding (Ezek. xxx :4, sq.; Jer. xlvi :9; Nahum iii:9; Dan. xi :43). In fine, Ethiopia is employed chiefly as the name of the national and royal family that were now in the ascendency. If we go back about two centuries, to the reign of Asa, king of Judah (B. C. about 950), we read of Zerah, or rather Zerach, an Ethiopian going out against him with a host of a thousand thousand men and three hundred chariots (2 Chron. xiv:9). 624 ETHIOPIC LANGUAGE It is doubtful whether this was an Ethiopian mon- arch or commander, or only. a mere Cushite ad- venturer; but that his army was mainly of African and not Arabian Origin is evident from the fact of its having included Libyans as well as Cushites (2 Chron. xvi :8), and from the mention of war- chariots, which never were in use in Arabia. There is every reason to conclude that the separate colonies of the priest-caste spread from Meroë into Egypt; and the primeval monuments in Ethiopia strongly confirm the native traditions reported by Diodorus Siculus, that the worship of Ammon and Osiris originated in Meroë, and thus render highly probable the opinion that com- merce and civilization, science and art, descended into Egypt from Nubia and the upper regions of the Nile. In proportion as we ascend into the primeval ages, the closer seems the connection be- tween Egypt and Ethiopia. The Hebrew poets seldom mention the former without the latter; the inhabitants of both are drawn as commercial nations. When Isaiah celebrates the victories of Cyrus their submission is spoken of as his most magnificent reward (Is. xlv.: I4). When Jeremiah extols the great victory of Nebuchadnezzar over Pharaoh-nechoh, near Carchemish, the Ethiopians are allied to the Egyptians (Jer. xlvi :9). When Ezekiel threatens the downfall of Egypt he unites it with the distant Ethiopia (Ezek. xxx:4). Every page, indeed, of Egyptian history exhibits proofs of the close intimacy in which they stood. (3) Queen Candace, who is mentioned in Acts viii:27, was doubtless the reigning sovereign of Meroë (see CANDACE), where it is likely a form of Judaism was at that period professed by a por- tion of the inhabitants, as seems to have been the case in the adjacent region of Abyssinia. The prophets (e. g. Is. xi.; II) sometimes allude to the Jews who were scattered throughout Cush. Ebed- melech, the benevolent eunuch of King Zedekiah, who showed such kindness to the prophet Jere- miah, was an Ethiopian (Jer. xxxviii:7; comp. Acts viii:27). Josephus calls the Queen of Sheba, who visited Solomon, a queen of Egypt and Ethi- opia, and with this agrees the tradition of the Abyssinians, who claim her as a native queen, give her the name of Maqueda, and maintain that she had a son by Solomon, called Menilek, who bore the title of David I. Yet Sheba was un- doubtedly in Arabia Felix, though it is possible that, in remote antiquities, the sovereignty of its monarchs extended across the Red Sea to the coast of Ethiopia. ETHIOPIAN (6'thi-5'pi-an), the designation of Zerah, (2 Chron. xiv:9), and Ebed-melech (Jer. xxxviii:7, IO, I2; xxxix:16). ETHIOPIAN EUNUCH (L'nik), baptized by Philip On the way between Jerusalem and Gaza (Acts viii.26 f.). His office of chamberlain under Candace was one of high rank. Tradition has it that this man, whose name was said to be Indich, first preached the gospel in Ethiopia. ETHIOPIANS (e'thi-Ö'pi-ans), (Heb. ºne, Aoosh; ***, Aoosh-ee', properly “Cush” or “Ethiopia” in two passages, Is. xx:4; Jer. xlvi.9). Elsewhere “Cush- ites,” or inhabitants of Ethiopia (2 Chron. xii:3, xiv:12; xvi;8; xxi.16; Dan. xi:43; Amos ix:7; Zeph. ii:12; Acts viii:27). (See ETHIOPIA). ETHIOPIAN WOMAN, the designation of Moses’ wife, Zipporah (Num. xii: 1). As Zip- porah is elsewhere termed a Midianite, the al- lusion may be to a later wife. ETHIOPIC LANGUAGE. The ancient Ethi- opic or Geez, which is the only one of the three ETHIOPIC VERSION dialects which either has been, or is now, gener- ally used in written documents of a sacred or civil kind, is to be classed as an ancient branch of the Arabic. This affinity is evident from the entire grammatical structure of the language; it is confirmed by the relation of its written char- acter to that of the Himyarite alphabet, and either supports or is supported by the assumption that Habesh was actually peopled by a colony from Southern Arabia. The grammatical structure of the Geez shows a largely predominant identity with that of Arabic, but it also possesscs Some traits which are in closer accordance with the other Syro-Arabian idioms and some which are peculiar to itself alone. (Habesh is Abyssinia.) he literature of the Geez language is very scanty indeed, and that little is almost exclusively of a Biblical or eccleciastical character. The Geez has ceased ever since the beginning of the fourteenth century to be the vernacular language of any part of the country, having been sup- planted at the court of the sovereign by the Am- haric. It still continues, however, to be the lan- guage used in religious rites, in domestic affairs of state and in private correspondence. J. N. ETHIO PIC VIERSION. This version of the Old Testament was made from the Greek of the Septuagint, according to the Alexandrian recen- Sion, as is evinced, among other things, by the arrangement of the Biblical books and by the admission of the Apocrypha without distinction. It is divided into four parts: The Law, or the Octateuch, containing the Pentateuch and the books of Joshua, Judges and Ruth ; The Kings, in thirteen books, consisting of two books of Samuel, two of Kings, two of Chronicles, two of Ezra (Ezra and Nehemiah), Tobit, Judith, Es- ther, Job, the Psalms; Solomon, in five books, consisting of Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Wisdom and Sirach; Prophets, in eighteen books, consisting of Isaiah, Jeremiah's prophecy and Lamentations, Baruch, Ezekiel, Daniel and the twelve minor prophets; lastly they have also two books of the Maccabees. Besides this they pos- sess an apocryphal book of Enoch, which they place next to that of Job. The critical uses of this version are almost exclusively confined to the evidence it gives as to the text of the Septuagint. The version of the New Testament was made direct from the Greek original. It is impossible to ascertain the date of the execution of either of these translations, but they may both be ascribed with much probability to the beginning of the fourth century. J. N. ETHNAN (Šth'nan), (Heb. lºš, eth-mawn', a giſt), soil of Aslıur and IIelah, descendant of Judah (I Chron. iv:7), B. C. after 1618. ETHNARCH (éth'nārk), (2 Cor. xi.;32), Greek word for governor. . ETHNI(êth'ni), (Heb. Sºns, eth-nee', munificent), a Gershonite Levite, forefather of Asaph the Singer (I Chron. vi;41), B. C. about 1420. ETHUN (êth'un), (Heb. Tes, ay-toon', from an unused root probably meaning to bind, probably twisted yarn, i.e., tapestry). The word occurs in Prov. vii:16, in connec- tion with Egypt, and as a product of that coun- try. It is translated fine linen in the Authorized Version. As Egypt was from very early times celebrated for its cultivation of flax and manu- facture of linen, there can be little doubt that ethun is correctly rendered, though some have thought that it may signify rope or string of Egypt. Hesychius states, uo doubt correctly, 625 ETZ_SHEMEN ‘that 606vn, oth-o'nay, was applied by the Greeks to any fine and thin cloth, though not of linen.’ Mr. Yates further adduces from ancient Scholia that 606val were made both of flax and of wool. In the New Testament the word 606viov, of linen, occurs in John xix:40: ‘Then took they the body of Jesus and wound it in linen clothes,’ Qi honeeois; in the parallel passage (Matt. xxvii: 59) the term used is ouvöövt, szzz-dom'ee, cazzóric or muslim, as also in Mark XV:46 and in Luke xxiii:53. We meet with it again in John XX:5, ‘and he stooping down saw the linen clothes lying.’ It is generally used in the plural to denote ‘linen bandages.” Otho' may, linem, occurs in Acts x:II, ‘and (Peter) saw heaven opened and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth,’ and also in xi :5, where this passage is repeated. From the preceding observations it is evident that otho' meeon may signify cloth made either of linen or cotton, but most probably the former, as it was more common than cotton in Syria and Egypt. (See Cotton and LINEN.) J. F. R. ETZ-ABOTH (etz'ā-böth),(Heb.n-P Yº, aytz-aw- both'), occurs in Lev. xxiii:40, and Neh. viii:15, and in both passages is mentioned along with et2- s/he//zen. These words occur also in Ezek. xx :28, where, as well as in the other passages, they are trans- lated thick trees: “For when I had brought them into the land, etc., then they saw every high hill and all the thick trees (eta-aboth), and they offered there their sacrifices. The word eig or Ota, used in several places in Scripture to desig- nate a tree, is said to be derived from the verb otze, ‘to fix,’ ‘to make steady.’ The word aboth, according to Celsius (Hierobot. i., p. 322), is by the Rabbins, as well as in the Chaldee and Syriac versions, understood to mean the myrtle. In the above passages it is more than probable that et2-aboth has a general and not a specific signification. There is no proof of the myrtle leing intended; in fact, it is not likely to have been found in any part of the wilderness, and no better material can be required for the construc- tion of booths than the boughs of thick or shady treeS. J. F. R. ETZ-HADAR (Ötz-hă'dar), (Heb. Tº Yº, ates- Aazy-dawr'), occurs only once in Scripture, in Lev. xxiii:40, where the Israelites are directed, in re- membrance of their dwelling in tents or booths when they were brought out of the land of Egypt, to leave their homes and dwell in booths for a season every year. “And ye shall take you on the first day the boughs of good/y frees (Žerz et2-hadar),' etc. Various translations have been made of the word, such as the olive and citron, but it is probable, as maintained by the majority of commentators, that the term is general, rather than specific, and there- fore that the fruit or branches of any goodly tree might be thus employed. \ ETZ-SHEMIEN (Étz-shë-men), (Heb. Tº Yº, aſes- s/he/i-mem'), occurs three times in Scripture, and is differently translated in all the three passages in the Authorized Version. At the rebuilding of the temple, Nehemiah (viii: I5) directs the Israelites to go forth unto the mount and fetch olive and pine branches (eta-shemen). This term occurs also in Is. xli:19: ‘I will plant in the wilderness the cedar, the shittah- tree, and the myrtle, and the etg-she men (here translated ‘oil tree'). The third mention of etg- shemen is in I Kings vi.23, where its wood is 40 EUBULUS described as being employed: “And within the Oracle he made two cherubim of eig-shemicn (translated olive-tree), each two cubits high.” If we collate the several passages in which et2- shemen occurs, we shall find reason to conclude that it is not the olive tree, as it is translated in I Kings vi 23, since in Neh. viii:15, the olive tree (salt) is distinguished from eta-shemen, which is there rendered pine tree; and that it is as little likely to be the pine tree, since in Is. xli :19 eig-shemen, translated onl-tree, is mentioned as distinct from both the fir and the pine. As no tree has yet been pointed out having a name similar either in meaning or sound to the Hebrew, and with wood of a good quality, it is better to con- sider eta-shemen as one of those not yet ascer- tained, than to add one more to the other unsatis- factory guesses. J. F. R. EUBULUS (eli-bü’lus), (Gr. EiſbovXos, yoo' boo-ſos, good in Counsel). One of those at Rome, mentioned by Paul as a Christian (2 Tim. iv.21), A. D. 64. EUCHARIST (li'kā-rist), (Gr. ebxaparta, giving of thanks), the sacrament of the Lord's Supper. The word in its original Greek ( eucharistia) properly signifies giving thanks; from the hymns and thanksgivings which accompanied that holy Service in the primitive church. (See LORD's SUPPER.) - JEUERGETES (eli-ár'ge-téz), (Gr. Eòepyárms, yoo- er-get"ace, benefactor). A title of honor, conferred at Athens by public vote, and so notorious as to pass into a proverb Luke xxii:25). Especially, title of Ptolemy III of Egypt. EUNICE (ii-ni'sé or ü'nis), (Gr. Eövíkm, yoo-mee'- £ay, good victory). The mother of Timotheus (2 Tim. i :5). Her Christianity is also mentioned (Acts xvi : I), and even her mother, Lois, lived in the faith of the expected Messiah, if she did not live to know that he had come in the person of Jesus of Nazareth (A. D. ante 47). (See TIMOTHY.) EUNUCH (i'nik), (Heb. PTP, saw-reece'; Gr. ečvoixos, yoo-moo'Ahos). This word, which we have adopted from the Greek, has, in its literal sense, the harmless mean- ing of ‘bed keeper,’ i. e., one who has the charge of beds and bedchambers; but as only persons deprived of their virility have, from the most an- cient times, been employed in Oriental harems, and as such persons are employed almost exclu- sively in this kind of service, the word “bed, keeper' became synonymous with ‘castratus.’ It fact there are few Eastern languages in which the condition of those persons is more directly expressed than by the name of some post or station in which they are usually found. The admission to the recesses of the harem, which is in fact the domestic estab- lishment of the prince gives the eunuchs such pe- culiar advantages of access to the royal ear and person as often enables them to exercise an im- portant influence and to rise to stations of great trust and power in Eastern courts. Hence it would seem that in Egypt, for instance, the word which indicated an eunuch was applied to any court officer, whether a castratus or not. The word which describes Joseph’s master as “an officer of Pharaoh’ (Gen. xxxvii:36; xxxix: I) is saris, which is used in the Hebrew to denote an eunuch and in these places is rendered ‘prince' in the Targum, and ečvoúxos, “eunuch,' in the Sep- tuagint. Authority would be superfluous in proof of a matter of such common knowledge as the em- 626 EUPHRATES ployment of eunuchs, and especially of black eu- nuchs in the courts and harems of the ancient and modern East. A noble law which, however, evinces the prevalence of the custom prior to Moses, made castration illegal among the Jews (Lev. xxi.20; Deut. xxiii:1). But the Hebrew princes did not choose to understand this law as interdicting the use of those who had been made eunuchs by others; for that they had them, and that they were sometimes, if not generally, blacks, and that the chief of them was regarded as hold- ing an important and influential post, appears from I Kings xxii:9; 2 Kings viii:6; ix:32, 33; Xx:18; xxiii:II ; Jer. xxxviii:7; xxxix:16; xii: I6. Samuel was aware that eunuchs would not fail to be employed in a regal court, for he thus forewarns the people: “He (the king) will take the tenth of your seed and of your vineyard and give to his eunuchs (A. V., ‘officers') and to his servants’ (I Sam. viii:15). Figuratite In Matt. xix:12 the term ‘eu- nuch' is applied figuratively to persons naturally impotent. In the same verse mention is also made of persons who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake;’ which is a manifestly hyperbolical description of such as lived in voluntary abstinence (Comp. Matt. v : 29, 30). EUODIA (eli-Ö'di-á), the correct form of EUO- DIAS (which see). l EUODIAS (eli-Ö'di-as), (Gr. Eòoötas, yoo-od-ee'as, fragrant. The English form is properly Euodia, which is the nominative case of Eöwötas), a female member of the church at Philippi, A. D. 57, who seems to have been at variance with another female member named Syntyche. Paul describes them as women who had “la- bored much with him in the gospel,' and implores them to be of one mind (Philip. iv:2, 3). EUPHRATES (eli-phrā'těz), Heb. hºp, Zer. azwth", to break forth; Gr. Eöqpárms, yoo-frat’ace), termed in Deut. i.7, ‘the great river,' where it is mentioned as the eastern boundary of the land which (verse 8). God gave to the descendants of Abraham. In Gen. ii:14 the Euphrates (Perath), is stated to be the fourth of the rivers which flowed from a common stream in the garden of Eden. Its modern name is Phrat. Divines and geographers have taken much trouble in order to learn the position of Eden from the geographical particulars given in the Bible, without remembering that probably nothing more than a popular description was intended. In consequence of its magnitude and impor- tance, the Euphrates was designated and known as ‘the river,’ being by far the most considerable stream in Western Asia. Thus in Exod. xxiii:31 we read, ‘from the desert unto the river' (Comp. Is. viii:7). (1) Sources. It has two sources and two arms —a western and an eastern—which rise in the mountains of Armenia. Of these streams, the western is the shorter, and is called Kara Sou, or Melas; the eastern is itself made up of several streams, the longest of which bears the name of Murad, or Phrat. The two arms unite about three days’ journey from Erzeroom, near which rise two of the tributaries that concur in forming the Phrat. Thus uniting, they give rise to the Euphrates strictly so called, which, flowing to the south, divides Armenia from Cappadocia; but, being driven westward by the Anti-Taurus and Taurus Mountains, it works its circuitous way through narrow passes and over cataracts, until, breaking through a defile formed by the eastern EUPOLEMUS extremity of Mons Amanus (Alma Dagh), and the northwestern extremity of Mons Taurus, it reaches the plain country not far from Samosata (Schemisat), then winds south and southeast, passing the north of Syria and the northeast of Arabia Deserta, and at length, after many wind- ings, unites with the Tigris, and thus united finds its termination in the Persian Gulf. In conjunc- tion with the Tigris it forms the rich alluvial lands of Mesopotamia, over which it flows or is carried by canals, and thus diffuses abroad fer- tility and beauty. At Bagdad and Hillah (Baby- lon), the Euphrates and Tigris approach com- paratively near to each other, but separate again, forming a kind of ample basin, till they finally become one at Koorma. Under the Caesars the Euphrates was the eastern boundary of the Ro- man empire, as under David it was the natural limit of the Hebrew monarchy. (2) Size. Although occasionally much more, the breadth of the Euphrates varies between 200 and 400 yards; but for a distance of sixty miles through the Lemlun marshes the main stream narrows to about 80 yards. The general depth of the Upper Euphrates exceeds eight feet. In point of current it is for the most part a sluggish stream, for, except in the height of the flooded Season, when it approaches five miles an hour, it varies from two and a quarter to three and a half, with a much larger portion of its course under three than above. But it is shallow enough in some places for loaded camels to pass in au- º the water rising to about four and a half eet. The length of the entire stream is about 1,780 miles. Of this distance, I,200 miles is navigable for boats. It is very abundant in fish. The water is somewhat turbid, but, when purified, is pleas- ant and salubrious. The Arabians set a high value on it, and name it Morad Sou—that is water of desire, or longing. The river begins to rise in March, and continues rising till the latter end of May. The consequent increase of its volume and rapidity is attribu- table to the early rains, which, falling in the Armenian Mountains, swell its mountain tribu- taries, and also in the main to the melting Of the winter snows in these lofty regions. About the middle of November . the Euphrates has reached its lowest ebb, and, ceasing to decrease, becomes tranquil and sluggish. The Euphrates is, on many accounts, an object of more than ordinary interest. The great river' is linked with the earliest times and some of the most signal events in the history of the world. Appearing among the few notices we have of the ſil st: Uliulitiuſ of the earth and of humankind, if continues, through the whole range of Scripture history down to the present hour, an object of cu- riosity, interest, wonder, hope or triumph. In ancient, as well as in modern times, the Euphrates was used for navigation. Herodotus states that boats—either coracles or rafts, floated by inflated skins—brought the produce of Ar- menia down to Babylon. The trade thus carried on was considerable. Figuratite. The prophets made use of the Euphrates as a figurative description of the As- svrian power, as the Nile with them represented the power of Egypt; thus in Is. viii:7: ‘The Lord bringeth up upon them the waters of the river, strong and many, even the king of Assyria' (Jer. ii:18). (Rawlinson’s Herodotus, vol. I, essay ix). e B. EUPOLEMUS (eu-pôl'e-müs) (Gr. EötróNeuos, yoo- fo/ee-mos, good in war), the “son of John, the son formed or not. 627 EV IIDENCE of Accos,” one of the envoys sent to Rome by Judas Maccabaeus, cir. B. C. 161 (I Macc. viii:17; 2 Macc. iv:II; Joseph. Amt. xii;IO, sec. 6). BUROCLYDON (i-rok'lí-dòn). See WINDs. EUTYCHUS (eli'ti-küs), (Gr. EärvXos, yoo"too- Áhos, fortunate). A young man of Troas, who sat in the open window of the third floor while St. Paul was preaching late in the night, and who, being over- come by sleep, fell out into the court below (A. D. 55). He was taken up dead,” but the Apostle, going down, extended himself upon the body and embraced it, like the prophets of old (I Kings xvii:21 ; 2 Kings iv:34); and when he felt the Signs of returning life, restored him to his friends with the assurance that ‘his life was in him.’ Before Paul deparfed in the morning the youth was brought to him alive and well. It is disputed whether Eutychus was really dead or only in a Swoon, and hence, whether a miracle was per- It is admitted that the circum- stances and the words of Paul himself sanction the notion that the young man was not actually dead, but, on the other hand, it is contended that the words of the narrator, ‘taken up dead,” are too plain to justify us in receiving them in the modified sense of ‘taken up for dead,” which that 1nterpretation requires (Acts Xx:5-12). EVANGELISTS (é-ván'jël-ists), (Gr. eſſayye) to - Tás, yoo'ang-ghe/-is-face', a messenger of good news). This term is applied in the New Testament to a certain class of Christian teachers who were not fixed to any particular spot, but traveled either in- dependently or under the direction of one or other of the Apostles, for the purpose of propagating the Gospel. Philip, one of the seven deacons, is termed the Evangelist (Acts xxi :8). St. Paul ex- horts Timothy ‘to do the work of an Evangelist’ (2 Tim. iv:5), and though this name is not given to Titus, the injunctions addressed to him, and the Services he rendered, are so similar as to render the propriety of applying it to him unquestionable. In the Epistle to the Ephesians (iv :II) the Evan- gelists are expressly distinguished from the pas- tors and teachers. The chief points of difference appear to be that the former were itinerant, the latter stationary; the former were employed in introducing the Gospel where it was before un- known ; the business of the latter was to confirm and instruct the converts statedly and permanently. (Campbell's Lectures on Ecclesiastical History, vol. i. pp. I48-150. . F. R. EVANGELICAL ASSOCIATION. See article On page 1756. EVE (ave), (Heh "ººl, Khaz-7ſaw', life giver), the name given by Adam to the first woman, his wife (Gen. iii:2O). EVENING (6'v'n-íng). See DAY. EVI (6'vi), (Heb. "ş, ev-ee", desire), one of the five princes of Midian slain by the Israelites. His lands were allotted to Reuben (Num. xxxi:8; Josh. xiii:21), B. C. I 452. EvilDENCE (ev'í-dens), (Heb. Tºº, sîſ-raw, Jer. xxxii:Io ff.), a “bill of sale,” a register, docu- ment, deed, written paper). - In general it is that perception of truth which arises either from the testimony of the senses or from an induction of reason. The evidences of revelation are divided into internal and external. That is called internal evidence which is drawn from the consideration of those declarations and doctrines which are contained in it; and that is called carternal which arises from some other cir- EVIL cumstances referring to it, such as predictions con- cerning it, miracles wrought by those who teach it, its success in the world, etc. (I) Moral evi- dence is that which, though it does not exclude a mere abstract possibility of things being otherwise, yet shuts out every reasonable ground of suspect- ing that they are so. (2) Evidences of grace are those dispositions and acts which prove a person to be in a converted state, such as an enlightened understanding, love to God and his people, a de- light in God’s word, worship and dependence on him, spirituality of mind, devotedness of life to the service of God, etc. - IEVIL (É'v'l), is the comprehensive term under which are included all disturbances of the divinely appointed harmony of the universe. Christian doctrine, in accordance with the Scriptures, care- tº distinguishes between physical and moral €V 11. gº (1) Physical Evil. Physical or natural evil is whatever destroys or any way disturbs the per- fection of natural beings, such as blindness, dis- eases, death, etc. (2) Moral Evil. Moral evil is the disagree- ment between the actions of a moral agent, and the rule of those actions, whatever it be. Ap- plied to choice, or acting contrary to the moral or revealed laws of the Deity, it is termed wickedness, or sin. Applied to an act contrary to a mere rule of fitness, it is called a fault. (3) Origin of Evil. Dr. Samuel Clarke, in his “Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of God,” deduces from the possibility and real exist- ence of human liberty an answer to the question, What is the cause and origin of evil? For lib- erty, he says, implying a natural power of doing evil, as well as good, and the imperfect nature of finite beings making it possible for them to abuse this their liberty to an actual commission of evil, and it being necessary to the order and beauty of the whole, and for displaying the infinite wis- dom of the Creator, that there should be different and various degrees of creatures, whereof, conse- quently, some must be less perfect than others, hence there necessarily arises a possibility of evil, notwithstanding that the Creator is infinitely good. In short, thus: all that we call evil is : An evil of imperfection, as the want of certain faculties and excellencies which other creatures have; nat- ural evil, as pain, death and the like; or moral evil, as all kinds of vice. (I) The first of these is not properly an evil, for every power, faculty or perfection which any creature enjoys, being the free gift of God, which he was no more obliged to bestow than he was to confer being or existence itself, it is plain the want of any certain faculty or perfection in any kind of creatures which never belonged to their nature, is no more an evil to them than their never having been created or brought into being at all could properly have been called an evil. (2) The second kind of evil, which we call nat- ural evil, is either a necessary consequence of the former—as death to a creature on whose nature immortality was never conferred, and then it is no more properly an evil than the former—or else it is counterpoised, in the whole, with as #. or greater good, as the afflictions and suf- erings of good men, and then also it is not prop- erly an evil; or else, lastly, it is a punishment; and then it is a necessary consequent of the third and last sort of evil, namely, moral evil. (3) This arises wholly from the abuse of lib- erty, which God gave to his creatures for other purposes, and which it was reasonable and fit to give them for the perfection and order of the 628 EWES whole creation; only they, contrary to God’s in- tention and command, have abused what was necessary for the perfection of the whole, to the corruption and depravation of themselves. And thus all sorts of evils have entered into the world, without any diminution to the infinite goodness of its Creator and Governor. This is obviously all the answer which the question respecting the origin of evil is capable of receiving. It brings us to the point to which the Scriptures themselves lead us. And though many questions may yet be asked respecting a subject So mysterious as the permission of evil by the Supreme Being, this is a part of his coun- sels of which we can have no cognizance, unless he is pleased to reveal them ; and as revelation is silent upon this subject, except generally, that all his acts, his permissive ones as well as others, are “wise and just and good,” we may rest assured that, beyond what is revealed, human wisdom in the present state can never penetrate. (See SIN.) EVILDOER (Č'v'l-dòö’ér), one who is wicked, from the Heb. PP.), raw-ah', to break, and so to render of no account or worthless (Ps. xxxvii:1; Is. i.4, etc.). The Greek word (kakotrotós, AEaÁ-of- oy-os') is the same as the English “Doer of evil” (I Pet. ii: 12, 14; iii:16; iv: I 5). - EVIL-FAVOREDNESS (é'v'l fä'vérd-nēs), scur- vy, etc., the general term for such blemish, wound, or imperfection, as rendered an animal unfit for sacrifice (Deut. xvii:I; comp. Lev. xxii:22-24). EVIL-MERODACH (6'vil-me-ro'dak), (Heb. Tº º, ev-ee/-mer-o-dań"), son and successor of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, who, on his accession to the throne (B. C. 562), released the captive king of Judah, Jehoiachin, from prison, treated him with kindness and distinction, and set his throne above the thrones of the other con- quered kings who were detained at Babylon (2 Kings xxv.27; Jer, lii:31-34). (See CHAL- DAEANS.) A Jewish tradition (noticed by Jerome on Is. xiv:29) ascribes this kindness to a personal friendship which Evil-merodach had contracted with the Jewish king when he was himself con- signed to prison by Nebuchadnezzar, who, on re- covering from his seven years' monomania, took offense at some part of the conduct of his son, by whom the government had in the meantime been administered. This' story was probably invented to account for the fact. The cuneiform equivalent of his name is AmA/ (Azé!)-Maruduk (cf. Haupt in Zeitsch. f. Assyr. ii:266 and 284 f.), ‘man (servant) of Merodach.' According to Berosus he administered the king- dom during his two years' reign (562-560) with indiscretion and wanton unrestraint. Tiele (Bab.- Assyr. Ges. pp. 457, 464) concludes, on the basis of this character of Evil-merodach, that the be- nevolent act toward Jehoiachin should be attribu- ted to his successor on the throne of Babylon. We possess as yet none of his annals, though sev- eral contract tablets date from his reign. In the year 560 his brother-in-law, Neriglissar (Merga/- sar-usur, “Nergal preserve the king'), in a con- spiracy, slew him and seized the throne. (Ira M. Price, Hastings' Bib. Dict.) EWER (li'ér), or pitcher accompanying a wash- basin (John xiii.5). EWES (Liz), the rendering in the A.V. of sev- eral Hebrew words for the female sheep. (See SHEEP.) EXACTOR ExACTOR (gz-ākter), (Heb.º, maw-gas', to drive, tax, tyrannize, Is. lx:17), a word used to * a driver (taskmaster, Exod. iii:7; Job iii:18; S. ix:4). EXACTRESS (égz-ākt'rés), (Is. xiv:4, marg.); Lat. exactor, Collector of taxes. The city of Baby- lon as an exactress of gold. EXALTATION OF CHRIST (&gz'al-ta'shūn), Consisted in his rising again from the dead on the third day; in ascending up into heaven; in sitting at the right hand of God the Father, and in coming to judge the world at the last day. (See articles RESURRECTION; ASCENSION; INTERCESSION and WORLD, END OF THE.) - EXAMPLE (Čgz-ám'p'l). - (1) The rendering in the A. V. of several Greek words: (1) In Matt. i. 19, £ar-ad-igue-mat- 2d"go (trapačetypati;w, to show alongside the public), is to expose to infamy; (2) Digh-mah (Öe Ypa, Jude 7) and hoof-od"?gue-mah (inrööetypa John xiii:15; Heb. iv: II, viii:5; ix:23; James v. Io; 2 Pet. ii.6) mean a specimen, an exhibit, with the idea of imitation; (3) Hoof-og-ram-mos' (Ötroypaſſiés, an underwriting, I Pet. ii:21) is a copy for imita- tion; (4) Too-ºos (rºtos, scar, I Cor. x:16) is some- thing struck, and so a die, resemblance. (Mc. & Str. Bib. Cyc.; Barnes' Bib. Dict.) (2) Example in a moral sense is either taken for a type, instance, or precedent for our ad- monition, that we may be cautioned against the faults or crimes which others have committed, by the bad consequences which have ensued from them; or example is taken for a pattern for our imitation, or a model for us to copy after. That good examples have a peculiar power above mere precepts to dispose us to the practice of virtue and holiness, may appear by consider- ing: “ (I) That they most clearly express to us the nature of our duties in their subjects and sensible effects. General precepts form abstract ideas of virtue, but in examples, virtues are most visible in all their circumstances. (2) Precepts instruct us in what things are our duty, but ex- amples assure us that they are possible. (3) Ex- amples, by secret and lively incentive, urge us to imitation. We are touched in another manner by the visible practice of good men, which re- proaches our defects and obliges us to the same ă. which laws, though wise and good, will not effect.” (3) The life of Jesus Christ forms the most beautiful example the Christian can imitate. Un- like all others, it was absolutely perfect and uni- form, and every way accommodated to our pres- ent state. In him we behold all light without a shade, all beauty without a spot, all the purity of the law, and the excellency of the gospel. Here we see piety without superstition and mor- ality without ostentation ; humility without mean- ness, and fortitude without temerity; patience without apathy, and compassion without weak- ness; zeal without rashness, and beneficence with- out prodigality. The obligation we are under to imitate this example arises from duty, rela- tionship, engagement, interest and gratitude. (See article JESUS CHRIST.) EXCOMMUNICATION (éks'köm -mu'mi-kā'- shun), (Gr. 3¢opiapós, afthorismos). . . The act of excommunicating, or rejecting, a cut- ting off, deprivation of communion or the privi- leges of fellowship or intercourse, specifically a penalty, , or censure, whereby persons who are guilty of any notorious crime or offense are sep- arated from the communion of the church and deprived of all spiritual advantages. 629 EXECRATION (1). Jewish. The Jewish excommunication was threefold, as designated by the Hebrew terms, **, mid-doo’i, Flº, Ahay’rem, Nº, sham-math- thaw'. But the first and third are used synony- mously in the Talmud, and only the distinction between two kinds has been handed down: the temporary exclusion (*) and the permanent ban (PJM), the Anathema. (See ANATHEMA.) The first is intimated in John ix:32, the second in I Cor. v:5, and the third in I Cor. xvi;22. (2) Christian. Excommunication is founded upon a natural right which all societies have of excluding out of their body such as violate the laws thereof, and it was originally instituted by Our Lord (Matt. xviii; I Cor. v., etc.) for pre- serving the purity of the church. Christian "ex- communication is of three kinds: (1) The greater, by which the person offending is sep- arated from the body of the faithful; thus Paul excommunicated the incestuous Corinthian (I Cor. v I-5). (2) The lesser, by which the sinner is forbidden the sacraments. (3) That which suspends him from the company of believers; which seems to be hinted at (2 Thess. iii:6). (3) Effect of Excommunication. The prin- cipal effect of excommunication is to separate the excommunicated from the Society of Christians, from the privilege of being present in religious assemblies, from the eucharist, from attendance at the prayers, the Sacraments, and all those du- ties by which Christians are connected in one Society and communion. An excommunicated person is, with regard to the church, as a heathen man and a publican (Matt. xviii:17). EXECRATION (eks'é-krä'shūn). The Greek word so rendered, Karápa, Áat-ah'rah, curse, occurs in Num. xxiii:8; xxiv:9; Josh. vi.26; 1 Sam. xvii:43. It is used also in profane authors to denote the im- precations which it was customary among ancient nations to pronounce upon their enemies for the purpose of calling down the divine wrath, brand- ing them with infamy, and exciting against them the passions of the multitude. (1) By Friests. These imprecations were chiefly pronounced by priests, enchanters, or prophets (see BALAAM). The Athenians made use of them against Philip of Macedon. They con- vened an assembly, in which it was decreed that all statues, inscriptions, or festivals among them, in any way relating to him or his ancestors, should be destroyed, and every other possible reminis- cence of him profaned; and that the priests, as often as they prayed for the success of the Athe- nian affairs, should pray for the ruin of Philip. It was also customary, both among the Greeks and Romans, after having destroyed cities in war, the revival of whose strength they dreaded, to pronounce execrations upon those who should rebuild them. (2) Against Rebuilding. The Romans pub- lished a decree full of execrations against those who should rebuild Carthage (Zonaras, Annal.). An incident somewhat analogous is related (Josh. vi :26) after the taking of Jericho. From the words ‘and Joshua adjured them at that time,’ it is likely that he acted under a divine intimation that Jericho should continue in ruins, as a monu- ment of the divine displeasure and a warning to posterity. The words ‘cursed be the man (the in- dividual) before the Lord that riseth up and buildeth this city Jericho, although transformed into an execration by the word supplied by the translators, amount to no more than a prediction F.XERCISE, BOL) ILY that ‘he shall lay the foundation thereof in his firstborn, and in his youngest son shall he set up the gates of it,' that is, he shall meet with so many impediments to his undertaking that he shall outlive all his children, dying in the course of zeature before he shall complete it. (3) In the Psalms. The execrations in Ps. lxxxiii, probably written on the Occasion of the confederacy against Jehoshaphat, and other in- stances of a like nature, partake of the execra- tions of the heathens in nothing but form, being the inspired predictions or denunciations of divine vengeance against the avowed enemies of the God of Israel, notwithstanding the proofs they had witnessed of his supremacy; and the object of these imprecations, as in many other instances, is charitable, namely, their conversion to the true religion (verse 18; see also Ps. lix : I.2). J. F. D. EXERCISE, BODILY (€ks'êr-siz, bčd'í-ly), (Gr. oroplarukň yvpavaata, so-mat-ee-Åay' goo?/2-mas-ee'- a/h), physical training, gymnastics (I Tim. iv:8). The apostle seems to disparage, not the athletic discipline, but rather that ascetic mortification of the fleshly appetites and even innocent affections (comp. I, Tim. iv:8; Col. ii:23), characteristic of some Jewish fanatics, especially the ESSENES (which see). EXHORTATION (éks'hör-tä'shūn), (Gr. Trapák- Amots, Žar-aft'Aay-sis, literally a calling near, in- vitation and thus entreaty, 2 Cor. viii.4); admon?- £zon or hortatory public instruction (Luke iii: 18; Acts xiii: I 5; I Tim. iv:13); also consolation or com- fort (Rom. xv.:4, etc.) It has been defined as “the act of presenting such motives before a person as may excite him to the performance of duty.” The Scriptures en- join ministers to exhort men, i. e., to rouse them to duty by proposing suitable motives (Is. lviii. 1; Rom. xii:8; 1 Tim. vi. 2; Heb. iii: 13); and it was also the constant practice of prophets (Is. i. 17; Jer. iv:14; Ezek. xxxvii), apostles (Acts xi :23), and of Christ himself (Luke iii:18). (McC. and S., Cyc.) EXILE (éks'il), (Heb. nº. gazey-law', to denude, 2 Sam. xv.19; "P}, tsaw-aw', to fift over in order to s/7/7, figuratively to defopulate, Is... li:14), a transported captive or captive exile. (See CAP- TIVITY.) EXODUS, BOOK OF (Éks' 3-dûs), (Gr. "E:oãos, eås'o-dos, in the Hebrew canon, the second book of Moses, so called from the principal event recorded in it, namely, the departure of the Israelites from Egypt. . With this book begins the proper history of that people, continuing it until their arrival at Sinai, and the erection of the sanctuary there. It trans- ports us in the first instance to Egypt, and the quarter in which the Israelites were domiciled in that country. We do not find in the Pentateuch a real history of the people of Israel during that period. Such a history, in the more strict accep- tation of the term, has no place in an historical sketch of the kingdom of God, where the mere description of the situation and condition of the people is all that is requisite. From that descrip- tion we learn satisfactorily how the people of the Lord were negatively prepared for the great ob- ject which God had decreed with regard to them. This is the important theme of the history of the Pentateuch during the whole long period of four hundred years. (1) Life of Moses. Exodus is very circum- stantial in its account of the life of Moses, which, instead of partaking of the character of usual biography, manifests in all its details a decided sº 630 EXODUS, BOOK OF aim of evincing how, by the miraculous dispensa- tion of the Lord, Moses had been even from his earliest years prepared and reared to become the chosen instrument of God. In this book is de- veloped, with particular clearness, the summons of Moses to his sacred office, which concludes the first important section of his life (Exod. i-vi). No human choice and no self-will, but an im- mediate call from Jehovah alone, could decide in so important an affair. Jehovah reveals himself to him by his covenant name, Yahweh, and vouchsafes him the power to work miracles such as no man before him had ever wrought. It was not the natural disposition and bent of his mind that induced Moses to accept the office, but solely his submission to the express will of God, his obedience alone, that influenced him, the law- giver, to undertake the mission. The external re- lation of Moses to his people is also clearly de- fined (comp. ear. gr. Exod. vi. I4, sq.) This furnishes the firm basis on which is founded his own as well as Aaron's personal authority, and the respect for his permanent regulations. (2) Deliverance from Bondage. A new sec- tion (vii-xv) then gives a very detailed account of the manner in which the Lord glorified himself in Israel, and released the people from the land of bondage. This section of the history then con- cludes with a triumphal song, celebrating the vic- tory of Israel. In ch. xvi-xviii, we find the in- troduction to the second principal part of this book, in which is sketched the manifestation of God in the midst of Israel, as well as the promul- gation of the law itself, in its original and funda- mental features. This preparatory section thus furnishes us with additional proof of the special care of God for his people; how he provided their food and water, and how he protected them from the assaults of their foes. In ch. xv.:22, sq., not all, but only the remarkable resting places are mentioned, where Jehovah took special care of his people. (3) Civil Regulations. In the account (xviii) of the civil regulations framed by the advice of Jethro, a strong line of demarcation is drawn be- tween the changeable institutions of man and the divine legislation which began then to be estab- lished, and which thenceforth claims by far the greatest part of the work. At the commencement of the legislation is a brief summary of the laws, with the Decalogue at their head (xix-xxiii). The Decalogue is the true fundamental law, bear- ing within itself the germ of the entire legisla- tion. The other legal definitions are only further developments of the Decalogue. These definitions manifest the power and extent of the law itself, showing what an abundance of new regulations result from the simple and few words of the Decalogue. (4) Conclusion of Covenant. Upon this basis the covenant is concluded with the Israelites, in which God reveals himself in agreement with the understanding and the exigencies of the people. Not until this covenant was completed did it be- come possible for the Israelites to enter into a communion with God, confirmed and consecrated by laws and offerings, and thereby to receive further revelations from him (ch. xxiv). (5) Dwelling of God in the Midst of Israel. Whatsoever after this, in the twenty-fifth and in the following chapters, is communicated to the people, concerns the dwelling of God in the midst of Israel. By this dwelling of God among Israel it is intended to show, that the communion is permanent on the part of God, and that on the part of the people it is possible to persevere in communion with God. EXODUS, BOOK OF (6) Sanctuary and Sacred Symbols. Con- sequently there follows the description of the sanctuary, the character of which is symbolical. The sacred symbols are, however, not so much expressed in formal declarations, as contained in the whole tenor of the descriptions. The symbolics begin with the central point, the holy of holies, which unites in itself the impeaching law and the redeeming symbol of divine mercy, and thus sets forth the reconciliation of God with the people. This is followed by the description of the Sanc- tuary, representing those blessings which through the holy of holies were communicated to the sub- jects of the theocracy, and serving as a perpetual monument of Israel’s exalted destiny, pointing at the same time to the means of attaining it. Last comes the description of the fore-court, Symboliz- ing the participation of the people in those bless- ings, and their sanctified approach to the Lord. The description then proceeds from the Sanctuary to the persons officiating in it, the priests, charac- terized both by their various costumes (xxviii), and the manner of their inauguration (xxix). Then follows, as a matter of course, the descrip- tion of the service in that sanctuary and by those priests, but merely in its fundamental features, confining itself simply to the burnt and incense offerings, indicating by the former the preparatory inferior service, and by the latter the complete and higher office of the sacerdotal function. But, by contributing to the means of establishing public worship, the whole nation shares in it; and there- fore the description of the officiating persons very properly concludes with the people (xxx). (7) Tabernacle and Furniture. As a suitable sequel to the former follows the description of the use and nature of the implements requisite for the service of the priests, such as the brass laver for sacred ablutions, the preparation of the perfume and anointing oil (xxx:17–38). These regulations being made, men endowed with the Spirit of God were also to be appointed for making the Sacred tabernacle and all its furniture (xxxi : I-2). The description of the sanctuary, priesthood, and mode of worship, is next followed by that of the sacred times and periods (xxxi :12, sq.) Of the Sacred times there is here only appointed the Sabbath, in which the other regulations are contained as in their germ. God having delivered to Moses the tables of the law, the construction and arrange- ment of the tabernacle might thus at once have been begun, had its further progress not been in- terrupted by an act of idolatry on the part of the people, and their punishment for that offense, which form the subject of the narrative in ch. xxxii-xxxiv. Contrary and in opposition to all that had been done by Jehovah for and in the presence of Israel, the subjective formidable apos- tacy of the latter manifests itself in a most melancholy manner, as an ominously significant prophetic fact, which is incessantly repeated in the history of subsequent generations. The nar- rative of it is therefore closely connected with the foregoing accounts—Jehovah's mercy and gra- cious faithfulness on the one hand, and Israel’s barefaced ingratitude on the other, being in- timately connected. This connection forms the lead- ing idea of the whole history of the theocracy. It is not till after the narrative of this momentous event that the account of the construction and completion of the tabernacle can proceed (xxxv- x1), which account becomes more circumstantial in proportion as the subject itself is of greater importance. Above all, it is faithfully shown that all was done according to the commands of Jehovah. In the descriptive history of Exodus a fixed 631 EXODUS, BOOK OF . plan, in conformity with the principles above stated, is consistently and visibly carried through the whole of the book, thus giving us the surest guarantee for the unity of both the book and its author. (8) Criticism. (a) For neological criticism it was of the utmost importance to stamp this book as a later production, the miracles contained in its first part but too manifestly clashing with the principles in which that criticism takes its starting point. Its votaries therefore have endeavored to show that those miracles were mythological fic- tions which had been gradually developed in process of time, so that the very composition of the book itself must necessarily have been of a later date. Neither do we wonder at such at- tempts and efforts, since the very essence and cen- tral point of the accounts of the miracles given in that book are altogether at variance with the prin- ciples of rationalism and its criticism, which can by no means admit the rise and formation of a people under such miraculous circumstances, such peculiar belief, and, in a religious point of view, such an independent existence, at the side of all the other nations of antiquity. Indeed, the spirit- ual substance of the whole, the divine idea which pervades and combines all its details, is in itself such a miracle, such a peculiar and wondrous phenomenon, as to lend natural support and un- deniable confirmation to the isolated and physical wonders themselves; so that it is impossible to deny the latter without creating a second and new wonder, an unnatural course in the Jewish history. Nor is that part of the book which contains the miracles deficient in numerous historical proofs in verification of them. (b) As the events of this history are laid in Egypt and Arabia, we have ample opportunity of testing the accuracy of the Mosaical accounts, and Surely we find nowhere the least transgression against Egyptian institu- tions and customs; on the contrary, it is most evi- dent that the author had a thorough knowledge of the Egyptian institutions and the spirit that pervaded them. Exodus contains a mass of in- cidents and detailed descriptions which have gained new force from the modern discoveries and researches in the field of Egyptian antiquities. (See ExoDUS, GEOGRAPHY OF THE.) The descrip- tion of the passage of the Israelites through the desert also evinces such a thorough familiarity with the localities as to excite the utmost respect of scrupulous and scientific travelers of our own time for the authenticity of the Pentateuch. Nor is the passover-festival, its rise and nature, less confirmatory of the incidents connected with it. (c) The arrangements of the tabernacle, described in the second part of Exodus, likewise throw a favorable light on the historical authenticity of the preceding events; and the least ten- able of all the objections against it are, that the architectural arrangements of the tabernacle were too artificial, and the materials and richness too costly and precious for the condition and position of the Jews at that early period, etc. But the critics seem to have overlooked the fact that the Israelites of that period were a people who had come out from Egypt, a people possessing wealth, Fgyptian culture and arts, which we admire even now, in the works which have descended to us from ancient Egypt; so that it cannot seem strange to see the Hebrews in possession of the materials or artistical knowledge requisite for the construction of the tabernacle. Moreover, the establishment of a tent as a sanctuary for the |Hebrews can only be explained from their abode in the desert, being in perfect unison with their then roving and nomadic life. (d) The extremely EXODUS, GEOGRAPHY QF THE simple and sober style and views throughout the whole narrative afford a sure guarantee for its authenticity and originality. All these incidents are described in plain and clear terms, without the least vestige of later embellishments and false extolling of former ages. The Pentateuch, some critics assert, is written for the interest and in favor of the hierarchy; but can there be more anti-hierarchical details than are found in that book? The whole representation indicates the strictest impartiality and truth. (See PENTA- TEUCH.) H. A. C. H. (9) Three Authors. G. Harford-Battersby, in presenting the view that three authors were con- cerned in the production of Exodus, says: “But when it is shown that the present narrative is made up of three, so far contrasting with one an- other as to prove themselves much later in date than the period of which they treat, and the work, not merely of different individuals, but of differ- ent schools of historical writing ; and when the further step is taken of disentangling, with in- finite pains of many laborers in many lands, the several threads of narrative, and recombining them in something like their original connections, the work of constructive criticism must be held to have been well known. Each document has its individual standpoint, even as each of the Synop- tic Gospels presents its own picture of the life of Christ. The Book of Exodus is like a grand symphony, which was once thought to give har- mony without discord, but is now being found, in virtue of elements which by themselves are sharply discordant, to sound forth a yet richer harmony.” EXODUS, GEOGRAPHY OF THE. The geography of “the Exodus” was for a long time a problem which seemed to be beyond solution. Many critics who knew nothing of the physical conditions of the country, and nothing of the sur- roundings were free to declare that so great a mul- titude of people could never have passed over the route which the author of the Pentateuch claims that they did pass over, that they never could have been fed in such a wilderness, and that there never was any “manna from Heaven,” etc. But science came to the rescue and the whole Peninsula of Sinai was carefully surveyed by the officers of the English government. The Ord- nance Survey in the Peninsula of Sinai has set- tled many questions which were before open to discussion even among scholars, therefore a new presentation of this subject in the light of all available scientific information must be of great value. 1. Óestimony of Jir William Tatwson. In this important field we have no higher authority than Sir J. William Dawson, C.M.G., LL.D., F.R.S., who was one of the most eminent among modern geologists. This careful scholar not only studied all the official reports upon this subject, but gave a great deal of time to the actual individ- ual investigation of the land, in the light of modern science, and rigidly examined the route over which this people passed. We therefore present the following abridgment of the discus- sion of the subject from his pen : (1) The Ordnance Survey. In so far as the journey of the Hebrews from the Red, Sea to Sinai is concerned, little remains to be done with reference to the geographical details. The admirable work of the Ordnance Survey, has forever settled all questions respecting the Mount of the Law and the way thither. It has done more than this; for the accurate labors of the scien- tific surveyor, while they have dissipated multi- tudes of theories formed by unscientific travelers, 632 ExoDUS, GEOGRAPHY OF THE have vindicated in the most renmarkable manner the truthfulness of the narratives in Exodus and Numbers. Every scientific man who reads the reports of the Survey and studies its maps, must agree with the late Professor Palmer that they “afford satisfactory evidence of the contemporary charac- ter of the narrative.’ They prove, in short, that the narrator must have personally traversed the country and must have been a witness of the events he narrates. More than this; they show that the narrative must have been a sort of a daily journal, written from time to time as events proceeded, and not corrected even to reconcile apparent contradictions, the explanation of which only becomes evident on study of the ground. (2) From Rameses to the Red Sea. The labors of the Survey did not extend to the route of the Exodus from Rameses to the Red Sea; and on that portion of it, some uncertainty ex- isted until a very recent date. More especially was this true in consequence of the theory ad- vanced by the learned Egyptologist, M. Brugsch, who, having arrived at the conclusion that the city of Rameses, the point of departure of the Exoduſs, is identical with ZOAN, (which see), con- cluded that the route of the Israelites lay, not to the Red Sea, but along the border of the Medi- terranean. Fortunately the recent discovery by M. Naville (‘The Store City of Pithom,’ Lon- don) of the true site of Pithom at Tel el Mask- hutah in the wady Tumilat, when conjoined with the fact that Pithom was the chief city of the district of Succoth mentioned in the Exodus, and that it was one of the two “store cities' or garri- son towns, that the Israelites are said to have been compelled to build for Pharaoh in the land of Goshen, has thrown a flood of light on the subject. It marks one stake of the Exodus, and also carries with it the consequence that as Rameses must have been one day's march, or thereabout, to the west of Succoth, it also was in Wady Tum- ilat, but at the western end of it. Certain ruins at the entrance of the wady Tumilat, hitherto regarded by many as marking the site of Pithom, are therefore in all probability those of Rameses. Further, as the monuments at both places indi- cate that Rameses the Great (or Rameses II) was their builder, the view held by the majority of Egyptologists, that this king was the Pharaoh of the oppression, is confirmed. The site of Pithom is distinctly visible from the railway, about twelve miles west of Ismailia, and presents the ruins of fortifications and ex- tensive granaries built with crude brick, some portions of which probably date from before the Exodus, though the site was Occupied down to Roman times as the chief town of Succoth and an important fronticr post. (Sec PITIOM.) (3) A New Dynasty. It is interesting to notice that Rameses I, the grandfather or grand- uncle of Rameses II, was the founder of a new dynasty, that Seti I and his Son Rameses II were both constructors of important public works in Lower Egypt, that both carried on great for- eign wars, draining the resources of Egypt, and that both were great temple builders, and devoted to the interests of the priesthood. These facts illustrate the statement respecting a new king who ‘knew not Joseph,” (Exod. i :8) and afford reasons for the hardness of the bondage to which the Israelites were subjected as a for- eign people doomed to compulsory labor. Taking it for granted, then, that the time of the Exodus was in the reign of Menephtah, the son and successor of Rameses, that the wady EXODUS, GEOGRAPHY OF THE Tumilat was the land of Goshen, or a principal part of it, and that Rameses and Succoth were in this valley let us study the geographical condi- tions of the question. (4) Geographical Conditions. On the east side of the delta of the Nile; about fifty miles northeast of Cairo, a narrow valley of cultivated Soil extends eastward about eighty miles. This valley, wady Tumilat, anciently the land of Goshen or Gesen, is only a few miles wide at its western end, and gradually narrows towards the east. The recent surveys of the British Military Engi- neers (Lt.-Col. Ardagh, Major Spaight, and Lieut. Burton, R. E.) also render it certain that this valley once carried a branch of the Nile, which discharged its waters into the Red Sea. This branch, or a canal representing it, in 1st have existed in the days of Moses. At present this valley is watered by the Sweetwater Canal, run- ning from the Nile to Suez; and though prob- ably inferior to the land of Goshen, in its best. days (see GOSHEN) is still one of the most beauti- ful districts in Egypt, at least in its western part. The position of this valley accords wonderfully with the scriptural notices of it. It would be the only convenient entrance into Egypt for Jacob with his flocks and herds. It was separated to a great degree from the rest of Egypt, and was emi- nently suited to be the residence of a pastoral and agricultural people, differing in their habits from the Egyptians, and accustomed in their modes of life to the habits of Palestine. At the date of the Exodus, as we are informed by Psalms 1:xviii: 12, the court of Pharaoh was held in Zoan or Tanis, about thirty miles to the north of the land of Goshen. } Goaded by oppression and stimulated by the exhortations and prophecies of Moses and Aaron, the Hebrew bondsmen had assumed an attitude of passive resistance, and had probably gathered in great numbers at Rameses and its vicinity, a most convenient rallying place, both for those in the land of Goshen and those scattered over other parts of Egypt. Moses and Aaron passed to and fro between Zoan and Rameses acting as ambassadors of their people (Exod. iv:29; v : I). The king's chariot force, assembled at or near Zoan, commanded the land of Goshen. The Hebrews, therefore, could not move without the king's consent. Knowing this, and knowing also that the beginning of actual civil war might be the signal for rebellion among other subject Asiatic people, the king thought best to temporize. In such cases of political deadlock, providence often cuts the knot. It was so in this instance. (5) Beginning of the Exodus. The continued plagues inflicted upon Egypt at length pro- duced such discontent among , the people that the king was forced to let the Hebrews go. The mandate was no sooner given than it was acted upon, for if Pharaoh should change his mind, he still had them in his power for two days' 111arch at least. The camp at Rameses was therefore broken up; and, gathering up their countrymen as they passed, and receiving from the Egyptians gifts and contributions in lieu of the property they had to leave behind, they hur- ried on eastward, executing in one day ap- parently a march of twelve or fifteen miles. This is a long march for such a body of fugitives; but their haste was great and their tribal organiza- tion was good, while their powers of walking may be supposed to have resembled those of the pres- ent fellahs of Egypt. They are said to have reached the district of 633 EXODUS, GEOGRAPHY OF THE SUCCOTH (which see), and to have encamped within its limits, probably to the west of Pithom. There is no more likely place for this encamp- ment than the neighborhood of Kassassin, where there is abundance of forage and water, and a defensible position, reasons which weighed in our own time with Sir Garnet Wolseley in selecting this as a halting point in his march on Tel-el- Kebir. Meeting with no molestation or pursuit, they continued their march on the following day, and encamped at Etham, on the edge of the desert of Etham, at the eastern end of the wady Tumilat. We learn from Numbers xxxiii:8 that all the desert east of the present Suez Canal was called the desert of Etham, and the ‘edge’ of this desert on the route followed by the Israelites must have heen near the present town of Ismailia, at the head of Lake Timsah. Probably the encampment was not far from the present Nefish station, a little west of the town, and it is worthy of note that here the desert presents, in consequence of a slight eleva- tion above the bottom of the wady, a better de- fined ‘edge’ than usual. When at Ismailia we rode over this ground and could imagine the Hebrew leader looking out from the sand hills behind his encampment, with anxious eyes, to the east and the South, where his alternative lines of march lay, and to the west, whence Pharaoh’s chariots might be ex- pected to follow him. But here a new, and at first sight, a strange order is given to the fugitives. They are not to go any farther eastward in what seems the di- rect road to Canaan. They are to turn to the south, at right angles to their former course along the west side of Lake Timsah and the Bitter Lake, the latter then probably the northern end of the Yam Suph or Red Sea. The explanation given to Moses is that by this movement God will be honored upon Pharaoh, and upon all his host’ (Exod. xiv:4); but in what way is not stated beforehand. In executing this apparently retrograde move- ment, Moses appears to have kept in view, as heretofore, the wisest means to protect his people in all events, and without reference to any possible miracle. And here I would note that the gathering at Rameses, the holding the people in readiness for instant motion, the march by the wady Tumilat, and the position taken up at Etham, are all vindicated by the ground as good and wisely planned strategetical movements. Moses and the elders of Israel were not mere waiters on Providence. They were men of thought and ac- t1On. (6) Place of Crossing. The full responsibility of his position was now upon the leader of the Exodus. He had, it is true, passed over the perilous open country between Etham and the defile of Geneffeh, but here he must make a stand. The children of Israel were, however, in no mood to fight for their liberty, and it appears from Tºxod. xix that they would rather surrender and return to Egypt. Moses remonstrated and as- sured them that the Lord would fight for them : but it was of no avail. And when he ‘cried unto the Lord' the order was given to plunge into the sea and cross it. The people who would not fight were willing to flee. They had faith in God, though their long bondage had made them, cow- ards as regarded the Egyptians. Their faith was rewarded by a miraculous passage, in regard to which a ‘strong east wind’ driving the waters before it, is especially mentioned as a secondary cause (Exod. xiv:21). After a somewhat care- ExoDUS, GEOGRAPHY OF THE ful examination of the country in reference to the crossing place, I believe that only one spot can be found which will satisfy the conditions of the Mosaic narrative, namely, the south part of the Bitter Lake, between station Fayid on the railway and station Geneffeh. Near this place are some inconsiderable ancient ruins, and flats covered with arundo and Scirpus which may represent Pi—hahiroth. On the west is a some- what detached peak, known as Jebel Shebremet, more than five hundred feet high, commanding a wide prospect and forming a most conspicuous object to the traveler approaching from the north. Here also is a basin-like plain, Suitable for an encampment, and at its north side the foot of Jebel Shebremet juts out so as to form a narrow pass, easy of defense. Here also the Bitter Lake narrows and its shallow part begins, and a north- east wind, combined with a low tide, would pro- duce the greatest possible effect in lowering the Water. It may be further observed as an incidental cor- roboration that the narrative in Exodus States that after crossing the sea the Israelites journeyed. three days and found no water. From the place above referred to, three days' journey would bring them to the Wells of Moses, opposite Suez, which thus come properly into place as the Marah of the narrative, whereas the ordinary theory of crossing at Suez would bring the people at once to these wells. After crossing the Red Sea they journeyed through the wilder- ness of Etham into the wilderness of Shur, and in three days encamped at the wells of Marah º Exod. xiii.20; Num. xxxiii:8; Exod. xv.: 22 ). The three days' journey here would not be long ones, but there was now no reason for haste, and the absence of water would not be favorable to long marches. - (7) Physical Changes. The question has often been raised whether at the time of the Ex- odus, the Red Sea extended farther north than at present. In answer to this it may be stated, in the first place, that the terms of the narrative in Exodus imply, and the geological structure of the country proves that there must have been a land connection between Africa and Asia, north of Ismailia, at the place which is now the highest point of the isthmus. & Further, without entering into details, I may say that there are also good geological reasons for the belief that there has been in modern times a slight elevation of the isthmus on the South side, corresponding to the slight depression known to have occurred on the north side. It seems also certain that in the time of Moses a large volume of the Nile water was during the inundation sent castward toward the Red Sea. There is, there- fore, nothing unreasonable in supposing that the Bitter Lake at the time of the Exodus consti- tuted an extension of the sea. Further, such an extension would be subject to considerable fluctu- ations of level, occasioned by the winds and tides. These now occur towards the head of the sea. Near Suez I passed over large surfaces of des- ert, which I was told were inundated on Occasion of high tides and easterly winds, and at levels which the sea now fails to reach, there are sands holding recent marine shells in such a state of preservation that not many centuries, may have elapsed since they were at the bottom of the Sea. 2. Other Jºcientists. Professor Hull takes nearly the same view with reference to the con- dition of the isthmus at the time of the Exodus. It has also been advocated by Ritter and by Mr. 634 ExoDUS, GEOGRAPHY OF THE Reginald S. Poole. It appears to be strongly confirmed by the inscriptions discovered by Naville at Pithom. He finds also that a place called Pi- kerelmet lay at no great distance eastward from Pithom, and supposes that this may be the Pi- hahiroth of Exodus xiv:2, 9, (See PI-HAHIROTH.) He also finds that down to Roman times Pithom, or Heroëpolis (Hieroöpolis), as it was called, is described as being near to the Red Sea, which must to some extent, have been navigable up to Lake Timsah. Naville is disposed to place Pi—hahiroth and consequently the place of crossing, farther up to the north than Bitter Lake, or between this and Lake Timsah. My impression is, however, that these places are too near Etham, and too far from the probable site of Marah, to fulfill the conditions of the narrative. 3. Tsiblical J tatements. There are two state- ments in Exodus and Numbers which have always appeared to me to fix the meaning of the author of the narrative, who has been found in other cases scrupulously exact in his geographical state- In entS. (1) Opinion of Pharaoh. The first is the opin- ion attributed to Pharaoh, when he heard of the Southward march from Etham, that the Israelites were entangled in the land, and that the wilder- ness had shut them in. Unless the Red Sea or some other impassable obstacle existed south of Lake Timsah he could not have formed this opin- 1O11. (2) Etham and Shur. The second state- ment referred to is in the use of the terms “Etham’ and ‘Shur,’ and the three days’ journey before reaching Marah, which I take to be the wells of Moses opposite Suez, though I know the site is usually placed farther south. Putting to- gether the statements in Exodus and Numbers, we find the first desert encampment at Etham on the border of that desert. Then, after crossing the Red Sea, we find the people still in the desert of Etham, and journeying in it three days into the desert of Shur in the south. Now, if the desert of Etham is that of the Atamu or border land of Egypt, and the desert of Shur, or the wall, is that bounded by the wall of the escarpment of the Tih, and if the wells of Marah are the first great springs that issue from the base of this escarpment, we have a clear and accurate topographical description, given in a few words, but in a manner to emphasize the first journeys in the waterless desert and the first experience of the brackish desert springs, so dif- ferent from the sweet waters of the Nile. (3) Strategical Reasons. Another point of inquiry relates to the reason why the army of IS- rael did not cross the neck of land between Lake Timsah and the Bitter Lake rather than go far- ther south. A sufficient reason for this may ap- pear to be the command to pass southward to the Red Sea, that God’s purpose with reference to the Egyptians might be fulfilled. But if we look for prudential and strategical reasons in addition, these may be found in the difficulty of crossing at this place in face of an approaching Egyptian army, even if crossing there was practicable, which the considerations above stated render at least doubtful, and in the possible existence of Egyptian garrisons in this part of the isthmus, where at other periods they are known to have been posted. With reference to this last consideration, it has often been overlooked that the king of Egypt was about this time obliged to meet a serious invasion of Libyans and other peoples on the west, and that this may have compelled him to withdraw or weaken his garrisons in the east. This would give EXODUS, THE special facilities to the movement of the Israelites, and was a providential aid in their favor, while the particular places from which troops had been removed may have been a factor in certain move- ments. The recent revelations of the Egyptian records give us the right to affirm that a re- markable preparatory provision was made in the providence of God for the deliverance of His peo- ple by political and military events altogether be- yond their control.” Egypt and Syria, by Sir J. Wºm Dawson, C. M. G., LL. D., F. R. S. (pp. 5I-74). The reader may refer to Dr. Kellogg's Lectures on Abraham, Joseph and Moses; Report of the Ordnance Survey on Sinai (British Government); Pithom, by Naville; Trumbull’s Kadesh Barnea ; and Palmer's Desert of the Exodus. Egypt and Syria, by Sir J. William Dawson, C. M. G., L.L.D., F. R. S. (pp. 51-74). ExoDUs, THE (eks'8-dis), (Heb. nº? Tº ve-ale'leh She-moth', a going out, a way out). The intention of Jehovah to deliver the Israel- ites from Egyptian bondage was made known to Moses from the burning bush at Mount Horeb, ºle he kept the flock of Jethro, his father-in- a.W. (1) Preparatory History. Under the divine direction Moses, in conjunction with Aaron, as- Sembled the elders of the nation, and acquainted them with the gracious design of Heaven. After this they had an interview with Pharaoh, and requested permission for the people to go, in order to hold a feast unto God in the wilderness. The result was, not only refusal, but the doubling of all the burdens which the Israelites had pre- viously had to bear. Moses hereupon, suffering reproach from his people, consults Jehovah, who assures him that he would compel Pharaoh ‘to drive them out of his land.’ ‘I will rid you out of their bondage, and I will redeem you with a stretched-out arm and with great judgments' (Exod. iii-vi :6). Then ensue a series of miracles, commonly called the plagues of Egypt (Exod. vi-xii). (See PLAGUE.) (2) Departure. At last, overcome by the calamities sent upon him, Pharaoh yielded all that was demanded, saying, ‘Rise up, and get you forth from among my people, both ye and the children of Israel; and go serve the Lord as ye have said; also take your flocks and your herds, and be gone.” Thus driven out, the Israelites, to the number of about 600,000 fighting men, ready for war (Num. i :46), beside women and children, and men not fit for war, left the land, attended by a mixed multitude, with their flocks and herds, even very much cattle (Exod. xii:3I, Sq.) Being ‘thrust out' of the country, they had not time to prepare for themselves suitable provisions, and therefore they baked unleavened cakes of the dough which they brought forth out of Egypt. On the night of the selfsame day which termi- nated a period of 430 years, during which they had been in Egypt, were they led forth from Rameses, or Goshen. (See GosłIEN.) (8) Route. There is considerable difficulty in settling the exact route of the Exodus. The miracles by the hand of Moses were wrought at Zoan, that is Tanis (Ps. lxxviii :12), and Rameses was a suburb of that capital. Thence the Israel- ites journeyed to Succoth (Exod. xii:37), the site of which is marked by Tell el-Maskhutah in the wady Tºumilat, 32 miles south-southeast of Tanis and II miles west of Ismailia. They did not take the shortest route to Palestine, which lay through the land of the Philistines, but they went by the way of the wilderness by the Red Sea 635 EXODUS, THE (xiii:17, 18). Their first encampment after leav- ing Succoth was Etham. The site has not been identified; but it was on the edge of the wilder- ness (verse 20). Thence they turned back and en- camped before Pi—hahiroth, between Migdol and the sea, before Baal-zephon (xiv:2; Num. xxxiii: Z). This camp has not been definitely located. It was, however, west of the Red Sea. (Davis, Bib. Dict.). w (4) Passage of the Sea. When they were en- camped before PI-HAHIROTH (which see) be- tween Migdol and the Red Sea, news is carried to Pharaoh which leads him to see that the Israelites had really fled from his yoke; and also that, through some (to him) unaccountable error, they had gone towards the southeast, had reached the Sea, and were hemmed in on all sides. He sum- mons his troops and sets out in pursuit—all the horses and chariots of Pharaoh, and his horsemen and his army;’ and he overtook them encamping by the Sea, beside Pi—hahiroth, before Baal-zephon, (Exod. xiv:9). The Israelites see their pursuing enemy approach, and are alarmed. Moses assures them of divine aid. A promise was given as of God that the Israelites should go on dry ground through the midst of the sea; and that the Egyp- tians, attempting the same path, should be de- stroyed; “and I will get me honor upon Pharaoh and all his host, upon his chariots and his horse- men' (verse I7). Here a very extraordinary event takes place: ‘The angel of God, which went be- fore the camp of Israel, removed and went be- hind them; and the pillar of the cloud went from before their face and stood behind them; and it came between the camp of the Egyptians and the camp of Israel; and it was a cloud and darkness to them, but it gave light by night to these; so that the one came not near the other all the night' (verses 19, 20). Then comes the division of the waters, which we give in the words of the sacred historian: ‘And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and the Lord caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all that night, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided. And the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea upon the dry ground; and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand and on their left. And the Egyptians pursued and went in after them to the midst of the sea, even all Pharaoh’s horses, his chariots, and his horsemen,” but not Pharaoh himself. Delays are now oc- casioned to the Egyptians; their chariot-wheels are supernaturally taken off, so that ‘in the morn- ing-watch they drave them heavily.’ The Egyp- tians are troubled ; they urge each other to fly from the face of Israel. “Then Moses stretched forth his hand over the sea, and the sea returned to his strength when the morning appeared; and the Fgyptians fled against it; and the Lord overthrew the Egyptians in the midst of the sea. And the waters returned and covered the chariots and the horsemen and all the host of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them ; there remained not as much as one of them. But the children of Israel walked upon dry land in the midst of the sea, and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand and on their left. And Israel saw the Egyptians dead upon the Seashore; and the people feared the Lord, and believed the Lord and his servant Moses' (verses 28, 3I). (5) Objections. The opposition to the scrip- tural account has been of two kinds. Some writers (Wolfenb. Fragm. p. 64, sq.) have at once declared the whole fabulous; a course which ap- pears to have been taken as early as the time of Josephus (Antiq. ii:16, 5). Others have striven to cxplain the facts by the aid of mere natural EXODUS, THE causes; for which see Winer, Handwórterbuch, in Meer Rothes. A third mode of explanation is pursued by those who do not deny miracles as such, and yet, with no small inconsistency, seek to reduce this particular miracle to the smallest dimensions. Writers who see in the deliverance of the Hebrew's the hand of God and the fulfill- 111erit of the divine purposes, follow the account in Scripture implicitly, placing the passage at Ras Attaka, at the termination of the Valley of Wan- dering ; others, who go on rationalistic princi- ples, find the sea here too wide and too deep for their purpose, and endeavor to fix the passage a little to the south or the north of Suez. According to Mr. Blumhardt the Red Sea at Suez is exceedingly narrow, and it cannot be that the Israelites here experienced the power and love of God in their passage through the Red Sea. The breadth of the sea is at present scarcely a quarter of an hour by Suez. Now if this be the part which they crossed, how is it possible that all the army of Pharoah, with his chariots, could have been drowned P. It is his opinion that the Israelites experienced that wonderful deliverance about thirty miles lower down. This opinion is also strengthened by most of the Eastern churches, and the Arabs, who believe that the Israelites reached the opposite shore at a place called Gebel Pharaon, which on that account has received this name. If we accept this opinion, it agrees very well with the Scripture. Still more impor- tant is the evidence of Dr. Olin (Travels in the East, New York, 1843). Dr. Olin, agrees with Robinson in fixing Etham “on the border of the wilderness which stretches along the eastern shore of the arm of the sea which runs up above Suez.” At this point he says the Hebrews were com- manded to turn. They turned directly south- ward and marched to an exposed position, hemmed in completely by the sea, the desert, and Mount Attaka. A false confidence was thus ex- cited in Pharaoh, and the deliverance was made the more signal and the more impressive alike to the Israelites and to Egypt. Admitting the possi- bility that the sea at Suez may have been wider and deeper than it is now, Olin remarks, ‘it must still have been very difficult, if not impos- sible, for the army of Israel, encumbered with infants and aged people, as well as with flocks, to pass over (near Suez) in the face of their ene- mies' (i.; 346). Besides, the peculiarities of the place must have had a tendency to disguise the character and impair the effect of the miracle. The passage made at the intervention of Moses was kept open all night. The Egyptians followed the Hebrews to the midst of the sea, when the sea engulfed them. ‘The entire night seems to have been consumed in the passage. It is hardly credible that so much time should have been con- sumed in crossing near Suez, to accomplish which one or two hours would have been sufficient.” “Nor is it conceivable that the large army of the Egyptians should have been at once within the banks of so narrow a channel. The more ad- vanced troops would have reached the opposite shore before the rear had entered the sea; and yet we know that all Pharoah’s chariots and horsemen followed to the midst of the sea, and, together with all the host that came in after them, were covered with the returning waves’ (i. 348). Preferring the position at Ras Attaka, Olin states that the gulf is here ten or twelve miles wide. ‘The valley expands into a consid— erable plain, bounded by lofty precipitous moun- tains on the right and left, and by the sea in front, and is sufficiently ample to accommodate the vast number of human beings who composed the two 636 * EXORCISM AND EXORCIST armies.’ ‘An east wind would act almost directly across the gulf. It would be unable to coöperate with an ebb tide in removing the waters—no ob- jections certainly if we admit the exercise of God's miraculous agency;' but a very great impediment in the way of any rationalistic hypothesis. ‘The channel is wide enough to allow of the move- ments described by Moses, and the time, which embraced an entire night, was sufficient for the convenient march of a large army over such a distance.’ ‘The opinion which fixes the point of transit in the valley or wady south of Mount At- taka derives confirmation from the names still attached to the principal objects in this locality. Jebel Attaka, according to Mr. Leider, who only confirms the statements of former travelers, means in the language of the Arabs “the Mount of De- liverance.” Baiideah or Bedáah, the name of this part of the valley, means “the Miraculous,” while Wady el Tih means “the Valley of Wan- derings.” Pi—hahiroth, where Moses was com- manded to encamp, is rendered by scholars “the mouth of Hahiroth,” which answers well to the deep gorge south of Attaka, but not at all to the broad plain about Suez' (i. 350). J. R. B. (6) Date of Passage. Hales places the Exo- dus in B. C. 1648, Usher in B. C. I.491, Bunsen in B. C. I520, and Poole in B. C. 1652. About B. C. I658 may perhaps be deemed the probable date, (See ExoDUs, GEOGRAPHY OF THE ; MAN NA; SINAI; WANDERING. But see CHRONOLOGY, which article shows that the latest conclusions of Egyp- tologists put the Exodus about 1200 B. C.) EXORCISM and EXORCIST (éks'ör-siz’m, ěks'or-sist), (Gr. §§opkio Tiffs, ex-or-Āzs-face', he who exacts an oath, Acts xix:13). The belief in demoniacal possessions, which may be traced in almost every nation, has always been attended by the professed ability, on the part of some individuals, to release the unhappy victims from their calamity. The allusions to the practice of exorcism among the Jews, contained both in their own authors and in the New Testa- ment, are too well known to render quotations necessary. In some instances this power was considered as a divine gift; in others it was thought to be acquired by investigations into the nature of demons and the qualities of natural productions, as herbs, stones, etc., and of drugs compounded of them by the use of certain forms of adjurations, invocations, ceremonies, and other observances. Among all the references to exor- cism, as practiced by the Jews, in the New Testa- ment (Matt. xii:27; Mark ix:38; Luke ix :49, 5o), we find only one instance which affords any clue to the means employed (Acts xix : I.3); from which passage it appears that certain professed exorcists took upon them to call over a demoniac the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, ‘We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth.’ Their pro- ceeding seems to have been in conformity with the well-known opinions of the Jews in those days, that miracles might be wrought by invok- ing the names of the Deity, or angels, or pat- riarchs, etc. The epithet applied to these exor- cists (those traveling about, Vulg. de circumeun- tibus Judais) indicates that they were traveling mountebanks, who, beside skill in medicine, pre- tended to the knowledge of magic. The office of the exorcist is not mentioned by Paul in his enumeration of the miraculous gifts (I Cor. xii: 9) though it was a power which he possessed him- self, and which the Savior had promised (Mark xvi :17; Matt. x:8). 1. F. D. Among the Reformers opinion and practice were divided respecting exorcism. Luther and Melancthon favored it, but it was decisively re- EXPECT jected by Zwingli and Calvin (Instit. iv. c. 15, 19). (See MAGI.) BXPECT (Šks-pékt), (Gr. Šköéxopat, eA-dekh'om- aftee, Heb. x:13), to look for, wait for. Thus in Douay Bible the comment on Sirach xi:8 is ‘Expect the end of another man's speach, before you begin to answer. Expect also if anie that is elder, or better able wil answer first.” Expect is used in this way in Job xxxii:4 (marg.), 2 Macc. ix:25, and Heb. x:13, “From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.” EXPEDIENCY (eks-pê'di-en-sy), EXPEDI- ENT (Gr. ovuqépa, soozz-ſer'o, to advantage). Expedient is never found in A. V. in the sense of ‘expeditious’ as so often in Shakespeare. On the other hand, it never means merely ‘conven- ient' (opposed to whaf is rigidly right), as in modern English. In 2 Cor. xii:I the word means profitable as the A. V. and R. V. translate the term elsewhere except in Matt. xviii:6, “it were better” and in xix:Io, A. V. it is not good.” R. V. “it is not expedient.” Coverdale translates Jer. xxvi; I4, ‘Now as for me: I am in your handes, do with me as ye thinke expedient and good,’ though his spirit is the opposite. (Hast- ings' Bib. Dict.) In the case of the declaration of St. Paul, “Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend” (I Cor. viii:I3),—a true rule of expediency is laid down. “It is impossible to state more strongly than does the apostle the obligation to refrain from indulging in things indifferent when the use of them is an occasion of sin to others. Yet it is never to be forgotten that this, by its very nature, is a principle the application of which must be left to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. No rule of conduct founded on expediency can be enforced by church discipline. It was right in Paul to refuse to eat flesh for fear of causing others to offend, but he could not justly be sub- jected to censure had he seen fit to eat. The same principle is illustrated in reference to cir- cumcision. The apostle utterly refused to cir- cumcise Titus, and yet he circumcised Timothy, in both cases acting wisely and conscientiously. Whenever a thing is right or wrong, according to circumstances, every man must have the right. to judge of those circumstances. Otherwise he is judge of another man’s conscience, a new rule of duty is introduced, and the catalogue of adiaphora (i. e., things indifferent or nonessen- tial), which has existed in every system of ethics from the beginning, is simply abolished” (T. W. Chambers, D. D., in Meyer's Com. on I Cor. viii.) EXPERIENCE (€ks-per-ens), (Heb. ºr, maw- Ahash", to observe diligently, Gen. xxx:27; º; zaw-aw', to see, Eccles. i. 16; Öokupºğ, doß-ee-may', proof, testing, Rom. v.:4; 2 Cor. ix:13). (I) It therefore denotes long proof and trial, by seeing, feeling, or the like. Patience works eaperience, and experience hope, (2) By bearing tribulation in a patient and resigned manner, we observe and feel much of the goodness of God to us, and of the working of his grace in us; and are thereby encouraged to hope for further sup- port, deliverance, grace, and glory, and every good thing (Rom. V:4). (3) An experiment is a practical trial (2 'Cor. ix:13). ſ EXPIATION (éks-pî-ā'shūn). See ATONEMENT; SACRIFICE. i - EXPIATION, DAY OF (§ks-pî-ā'shūn). See ATONEMENT, DAY OF. 637 EYE EXPRESS (Šks-prés'), (Gr. xapakrip, Ahar-ak- tare', Heb. i:3, from to sharpen to a point, akin to "pāq, w, graf'o, to scratch, grave, write), exact im- age, likeness, copy, figure; hence, the word char- acter as a figure graven or stamped upon. The translation of the R. V. “the very image” is after Tyndale; the Geneva (“ingraved forme’) tries to bring out the sense of the Greek word, which is properly what stands engraven on any object, as a seal (Davidson), and this is the mean- ing of A. V. express image; comp. Shaks. Ham- let, II ii:299, ‘What a piece of work is a man . . . in form and moving, how express and admirable !’ which Aldis Wright explains thus: “Exact, fitted to its purpose, as the seal fits the stamp.” (Hastings' Bib. Dict.) EYE (i), (Héb. ?P, ah'yin; Gr. 64.0axués, of tha/. 7/20s'). In most languages this important organ is used by figurative application, as the symbol of a large number of objects and ideas. In the East such applications of the word ‘eye’ have always been uncommonly numerous; and they were so among the Hebrews. Figurative. (1) A fountain frequently. (2) Color (Num. xi:7, in the Hebrew ; see margin). (3) The face or surface (Exod. x:5, I5; Num. xxii:5, II, as “the face, i. e., eye of the land”); the expression between the eyes means the fore- head (Exod. xiii:9, 16). (4) In Cant. iv:9 “eye” seems to be used poetically for look. (5) “Eye.” (Prov. xxiii:31, A. V. “color”) is applied to the beads or bubbles of wine when poured out. (6) The eyes are blinded, closed, or darkened when the mind is destitute of spiritual knowledge; and so ignorant, obstinate, or biased, that it cannot discern between good and evil (Acts xxviii:27; Rom. xi :Io; Deut. xvi :19. (7) Eyes are toward the Lord, as the eyes of servants to their masters, to observe what he is, and does, or requires; and to look for and expect necessary blessings from him (Ps. xxv :15 and cxxiii:2). And they fail for God's word, salvation, and presence when by long exercise they are nearly wearied out (Ps. cxix:82, 123, and lxix:3; Is. xxxviii:I4). (8) Angels are full of eyes within, before, and behind, or on the back; they have an extensive knowledge of their own heart and way, and of the truths of Christ, and providence of God, and watchfully inspect and care for the souls of men (Rev. iv:6, 8; Ezek. i :18). (9) The eyes of wise men are in their head; their knowledge is useful, and prop- erly applied (Eccl. ii:I4) : but the eyes of fools are in the ends of the earth; their thoughts and cares unsettledly go out after what they have no concern with (Prov. xvii:24). (Io) Kings scatter away evil with their eyes; restrain it, and reform from it by a careful inspection of affairs, and by frowning on evil doers (Prov. xx:8). (II) Job was eyes to the blind, and feet to the lame; he was a helpful director, assistant, and comforter of the distressed ; a teacher of the ignorant, and reliever of the weak (Job xxix:15). (I2) To have a single eye is to have the mind divinely and clearly instructed, and unremittingly set upon knowing the mind and will of God, in order to glorify him. Where this is, the whole body is full of light, the person is rightly directed (Matt. vi. 22). (13) To have an evil eye is to be of a churlish and envious disposition and behavior (Prov. xxiii:6; Matt. xx:15). (14) To have a bountiful eye is to show kindness, and seek op- portunities of doing or bestowing favors (Prov. xxii:9). (15) Lofty eyes import pride and self- conceit (Prov. xxx:13). (16) To be wise or pure EYESALVE in one’s own eyes is to be so in his own opinion, without being really so (Prov. iii:7 and xxx:12). (17) Wanton and adulterous eyes are such as ex- press wanton and lascivious looks (Is. iii:16; 2 Pet. ii: I4). (18) Open eyes import full capac- ity and readiness to observe and regard (Num. xxiv:3; 1 Kings viii:29); or readiness to punish (Job xiv:3). (19) Sometimes the opening of the eyes denotes giving to persons who were blind their sight, or making them to observe what they did not before (John ix:32; Gen. xxi: IQ). (20) To fix the eyes on one imports delight in, and care of him (Ps. ci:6); to look favorably towards him (Gen. xliv :21); or expectation of some direc- tion from him (I Kings i:2O). (21) To have eyes that see not, and ears that hear not, is to have natural faculties to discern, and even a natural knowledge of divine things, without any spiritual understanding thereof (Is. vi. Io; Rom. xi :8). (22) As the eye is very useful and tender, and right hands and feet very useful, any earthly en- joyment, or lust, or whatever is very useful and dearly beloved by one is compared to right eyes, hands, and feet (Matt. v :29, 30, and xviii:8, 9). (23) To pluck out the eyes, and give them to one, is to love him so dearly as to be ready to part with the dearest things for his sake. (Gal. iv:15). Hence God’s people are compared to the apple of his eye, to denote how dear they are to him, and how tenderly he sympathizes with them, and keeps them (Ps. xvii:8; Zech. ii:8). (24) Sins, greater or less, as they obstruct our clear views of God, and ought to be painful to our conscience, are lik- ened to motes and beams in the eye (Matt. vii:3). (25) Sore troubles, or troublers, are likened to pricks and thorns in the eyes (Num. xxxiii:55; Josh. xxiii: 13). (26) In one’s eyes is in his sight, or in his view and opinion (Jer. vii; II ; 2 Sam. xix:27). (27) Before one’s eyes is publicly (Gen. xlii:24; or notoriously (Is. lxv :12). (28) The eye is not satisfied with riches; the covetous mind is not satisfied with them (Eccl. iv:8, and i :8). (29) Men have the sword on their right eye, and it is utterly darkened when their natural knowl- edge and sagacity is taken from them, as it was from the Jews before the taking of Jerusalem by Titus; or they were bereaved of their temples, and whatever else is dear to them (Zech. xi :17). EYESALVE (i'sāv), (Gr. ko)\\oºpwov, Ao/-ſoo'ree- on, diminutive of kox\ºpa, Áo/-ſoo'ra, coarse bread of cylindrical shape), a preparation shaped like a Áo/Zooza. later, a poultice: still later a salve used for healing or strengthening the eyes (Rev. iii:18). Symbolically, Christ's word and spirit are likened to eyesalve, as thereby our judgment is rectified, and we are enabled, to discern the things of God (Rev. iii:18). EYES, BLINDING OF. See PUNISHMENTs. EYES, COVERING OF THE (Gen. xx;16). This is a phrase on the meaning of which there is a variety of , opinions. Some understand it to signify that Abimelech advised Sarah and her women, while in or near towns, to conform to the general custom of wearing veils. (See VEILS). Another view has been given as follows: “By the “covering of the eyes' we are not to understand a veil, which Sarah was to procure for a thousand shekels, but it is a figurative expression for an atoning gift . so that he may forget a wrong done, and explained by the analogy of the phrase, he covereth the faces of the judges, i. e., he bribes them (Job ix:24).” (K. and D., Com., in loc.) EYESERVICE (i'sérv'ís), (Gr. 646&NuočovXeta, of-thal-mod-oo-li'ah, Eph. vi.6; Col. iii.22), sight- labor, that is, that needs watching. Eyeservice is a literal translation of the Greek, 638 |EYES, PAINTING THE and seems to have been coined by Tyndale, although he uses it only in Colossians, in Ephesians giving ‘service in the eye sight.' The word was at once adopted into the language. The Greek word is found nowhere else: , ‘This happy expres- sion,’ says Lightfoot, “would seem to be the apostle's own coinage. (Hastings' Bib. Dict.) EYES, PAINTING THE. The custom of painting the eyes, or rather the eyelids, is more than once alluded to in Scripture, although this Scarcely appears in the Authorized Version, as our translators, unaware of the custom, usually render ‘eye’ by ‘face,’ although ‘eye’ is still preserved in the margin. So Jezebel painted her eyes,” lit- erally, put her eyes in paint,’ before she showed herself publicly (2 Kings ix:30). This action is forcibly expressed by Jeremiah (iv.:30), ‘though thou rendest thine eyes with painting.” Ezekiel (xxiii:40) also represents this as a part of high dress—‘For whom thou didst wash thyself, paint- edst thy eyes, and deckedst thyself with ornaments.’ The custom is also, very possibly, alluded to in Prov. vi. 25—‘Lust not after her beauty in thine heart, neither let her take thee with her eyelids.” It certainly is the general impression in Western Asia that this embellishment adds much to the languishing expression and seducement of the eyes, although Europeans find some difficulty in appreciating the beauty which the Orientals find in this adornment. The following description of the process is from Mr. Lane's excellent work on the Modern Egyp- tians (i:41-43) : “The eyes, with very few excep- tions, are black, large, and of a long almond form, with long and beautiful lashes and an exquisitely Soft, bewitching expression; eyes more beautiful can hardly be conceived : their charming effect is much heightened by the concealment of the other features (however pleasing the latter may be), and is rendered still more striking by a practice uni- versal among the females of the higher and middle classes, and very common among those of the lower orders, which is that of blackening the edge of the eyelids, both above and below the eyes, with a black powder called kohhl. This is a collyrium, commonly composed of the smoke-black which is produced by burning a kind of Æðdm—an aromatic resin—a species of frankincense, used, I am told in preference to the better kind of frankincense, as being cheaper, and equally good for the purpose. Kohhl is also prepared of the smoke-black pro- duced from burning the shells of almonds. These two kinds, though believed to be beneficial to the eyes, are used merely for ornament; but there are several kinds used for their real or supposed medical properties; particularly the powder of sev- eral kinds of lead ore; to which are often added sarcocolla, long pepper, sugar-candy, fine dust of a Venetian sequin, and sometimes powdered pearls. Auliuluily, it is said, was ful illully used for paint- ing the edges of the eyelids. The kohhl is applied with a small probe, of wood, ivory, or silver, tapering toward the end, but blunt: this is moist- ened, sometimes with rose water, then dipped in the powder, and drawn along the edges of the eyelids: it is called mir'wed; and the glass vessel in which the kohhl is kept, mook'hhol’ah. The custom of thus ornamenting the eyes prevailed among both sexes in Egypt in very ancient times: this is shown by the sculptures and paintings in the temples and tombs of this country; and kohhl- vessels, with the probes, and even with the re- mains of the black powder, have often been found in the ancient tombs. I have two in my possession. But, in many cases, the ancient mode of orna- menting with the kohhl was a little different from the modern. I have, however, seen this ancient EZAR mode practiced in the present day in the neighbor- hood of Cairo; though I only remember to have noticed it in two instances. The same custom ex- isted among the Greek ladies, and among the Jew- ish women in early times.’ - Sir J. G. Wilkinson alludes to this passage in Mr. Lane's book, and admits that the lengthened form of the ancient Egyptian eye, represented in the paintings, was probably produced by this means. ‘Such (he adds) is the effect described by Juvenal (Sat. ii:93), Pliny (Ep. vi.2), and other writers who notice the custom among the Romans. At Rome it was considered disgraceful for men to adopt it, as at present in the East, ex- cept medicinally, but if we may judge from the similarity of the eyes of men and women in the paintings at Thebes, it appears to have been used by both sexes among the ancient Egyptians. Many of the kohl-bottles have been found in the tombs, together with the bodkin used for applying the moistened powder. They are of various ma- terials, usually of stone, wood or pottery; some- times composed of two, sometimes of three or four separate cells, apparently containing each a mix- ture, differing slightly in its quality and hue from the other three. Many were simple round tubes, vases, or small boxes; some were ornamented with the figure of an ape or monster, supposed to assist in holding the bottle between his arms, while the lady dipped into it the pin with which she painted her eyes; and others were in imitation of a col- umn made of stone, or rich porcelain of the º manufacture. (Ancient Egyptians, iii: 3&2). * The name of one of Job’s daughters (Job xlii: I4), Keren-happuch, means paint-horn, a recep- tacle of the kohl or kohhl: she brought beauty to the family. EZAR (É'zar), the form found (I Chron. i.38) in many editions of the A.V. in place of the correct form EZER. EZBAI (&z'ba-i), (Heb. "Pê, eg-bah'ee, hyssop- like), the father of Naarai, who was one of David's guard of “thirty” (1 Chron. xi:37), B.C. 1046. EZBON (Šz'bön), (Heb. lº, eſs-bone', uncertain derivation). 1. Son of Gad, and founder of one of the Gadite families (Gen. xlvi; 16; Num. xxvi; 16). In the latter passage the name appears as Ozni in the A. V., probably on account of a corruption (B. C. 1856). Son of Bela and grandson of Benjamin (I Chron. vii:7). Singularly, however, he is fiot elsewhere mentioned. He possibly belonged to a family incorporated into Benjamin after the slaughter mentioned (Judg. xx), B. C. IO2O. EZEKIAS (Šz'a-ki'as), a Grecized form (Matt. I: 9, IO) of the name of King HEZEKIAH (which see). EZEKIEL (e-zekiel), (Heb. *NET, yesh-ea. : whom God will strengthen, or God will pre- Va. 1 | }. (1) Name and Family. One of the greater prophets, whose w litiugs, butli in ille Hebrew and Alexandrian canons, are placed next to those of Jeremiah. He was the son of Buzi the priest (ch. i : 3), and, according to tradition, was a native of Sarera (Carpzov, Introd., pt. iii. p. 200). Of his early history we have no authentic in- formation. We first find him in the country of Mesopotamia, ‘by the river Chebar' (ch. i : I), now Khaëtºr, a stream of considerable length flowing into the Euphrates near Circesium, Kirk- esia (Rosenmüller's Bibl. Geog. of Central Asia in Bibl. Cabinet, vol. ii. p. 180). On this river 639 EZEKIEL Nebuchadnezzar founded a Jewish colony from the captives whom he brought ſi 011, Jerusaleul when he besieged it in the eighth year of king Jehoiachin (2 Kings xxiv: I.2). This colony, or at least a part of it) was settled at a place called Tel-Abib, which has been thought by some to answer to the Thallaba of D'Anville (Rosenm., Bibl. Geog., vol. ii, p. 188); and it seems to have been here that the prophet fixed his residence. (2) Personal History. He received his com- mission as a prophet in the fifth year of his cap- tivity (B. C. 594). Many critics suppose (from ch. i : 1) that this event took place in the 30th year of his age. Ezekiel is remarkably silent re- specting his personal history; the only event which he records (and that merely in its connection with his prophetic office) is the death of his wife in the ninth year of the captivity (ch. xxiv:18). He continued to exercise the prophetic Office during a period of at least twenty-two years, that is, to the 27th year of the captivity (ch. xxix:17); and it appears probable that he remained with the cap- tives by the river Chebar during the whole of his life. That he exercised a very commanding in- fluence over the people is manifest from the num- erous intimations we have of the elders coming to inquire of him what message God had sent through him (ch. viii: I ; xiv:I ; xx: I ; xxxiii:31, 32, etc.). Carpzov (pp. 203-204) relates Several traditions respecting his death and Sepulcher. It is there said that he was killed at Babylon by the chief of the people on account of his having reproved him for idolatry; that he was buried in the field of Maur in the tomb of Shem and Arphaxad, and that his sepulcher was still in existence. Such traditions are obviously of very little value. Q Ezekiel was contemporary with Jeremiah and Daniel. The former had sustained the prophetic office during a period of thirty-four years before Ezekiel’s first predictions, and continued to pro- phesy for six or seven years after. It appears probable that that the call of Ezekiel to the pro- phetic dffice was connected with the communica- tion of Jeremiah’s predictions to Babylon (Jer. li: 59), which took place the year preceding the first revelation to Ezekiel (Håvernick, p. ix). The greater part of Daniel's predictions are of a later date than those of Ezekiel; but it appears that his piety and wisdom had become proverbial even in the early part of Ezekiel’s ministry (ch. xiv:I4, I6; xxviii:3). (3) Character. Most critics have remarked the vigor and surpassing energy which are manifest in the character of Ezekiel. The whole of his writings show how admirably he was fitted, as well by natural disposition as by spiritual en- dowment, to oppose the “rebellious house,' the ‘people of stubborn front and hard heart,’ to whom he was sent. The figurative representations which abound throughout his writings, whether drawn out into lengthened allegory, or expressing mat- ters of fact by means of symbols, or clothing truths in the garb of enigma, all testify by their definiteness the vigor of his conceptions. Things seen 1n visions are described with all the minute- ness of detail and sharpness of outline which belong to real existences. But this characteristic is shown most remarkably in the entire subordi- nation of his whole life to the great work to which he was called. We never meet with him as an ordinary man; he always acts and thinks and feels as a prophet. This energy of mind devel- oped in the one direction of the prophetic office is strikingly displayed in the account he gives of the death of his wife (ch. xxiv:15-18). It is the only memorable event of his personal history EZEKIEL, BOOK OF 640 which he records, and it is mentioned merely in reference to his soul-absorbing work. There is Something inexpressibly touching as well as char- acteristic in this brief narrative—the ‘desire of his eyes’ taken away with a stroke—the command not to mourn—and the simple statement, “so I Spake unto the people in the morning and at even my wife died; and I did in the morning as I was commanded.' That he possessed the common Sympathies and affections of humanity is mani- fest from the beautiful touch of tenderness with which the narrative is introduced. We may even judge that a mind so earnest as his would be more than usually alive to the feelings of affection when Once they had obtained a place in his heart. He then, who could thus completely subordinate the strongest interests of his individual life to the great work of his prophetic office, may well command our admiration and be looked upon as “a truly gigantic phenomenon.” It is interesting to contrast Ezekiel in this respect with his con- temporary Jeremiah, whose personal history is continually presented to us in the course of his writings; and the contrast serves to show that the peculiarity we are noticing in Ezekiel belongs to his individual character, and was not neces- sarily connected with the gift of prophecy. That Ezekiel was a poet of no mean order is acknowledged by almost all critics. EZEKIEL, BOOK OF (e-zé'ki-el). (1) Genuineness. The genuineness of the writ- ings of Ezekiel has been the subject of very little dispute. According to Jewish tradition doubts were entertained as to the canonicity of the book On the ground of its containing Some apparent contradictions to the law, as well as because of the obscurity of many of its visions. These, however, were removed, it is said, by Rabbi Hana- nias, who wrote a commentary on the book, in which all these difficulties were satisfactorily solved (Mischna, ed. Surenhusius, Praf. ad Part. iv ; Carpzov. Introd., pt. iii. p. 215; but still, on account of their obscurity, the visions at the begin- ning and close of the book were forbidden to be read by those who were under thirty years of age (Carpzov., p. 212). Some minor continental critics of the last cen- tury have impugned the canonicity of the last nine chapters, but their arguments have little weight or probability. The book belongs to that not very numerous class which, from beginning to end, maintains by means of favorite expressions and peculiar phrases such a unity of tone as by that circumstance alone to prevent any suspicion that separate portions of it are not genuine. (2) Canonicity. The canonicity of the book of Ezekiel in general is satisfactorily established by Jewish and Christian authorities. There is, indeed, no explicit refcrence to it, or quotation from it, in the New Testament. Eichhorn (Ein- leit. p. 218) mentions the following passages as having apparently a reference to this book (Rom. ii:24; comp. Ezek. xxxvi :21 ; Rom. x:5; Gal. iii: 12; comp. Ezek. xx: II; 2 Pet. iii:4; comp. Ezek. xii:22, but none of these are quotations). The closing visions of Ezekiel are clearly referred to, though not quoted, in the last chapters of the Apocalypse. The prophet Ezekiel is distinctly re- ferred to by the son of Sirach : Egekiel, who saw a vision worthy of belief, which the Cherubim pointed out to him upon a chariot; and also by Josephus (Antiq. x:5, Sec. I ; 6, sec. 3; 7, Sec. 2; 8, sec. 2). The book of Ezekiel is also mentioned as form- ing part of the canon in the catalogues of Melito, Origen, Jerome and the Talmud. º EZEKIEL, BOOK OF (3) Unity. There is no evidence that the book, as at present existing, was ever considered two; and the testimony of Josephus himself that only twenty-two books were received as sacred (Contr. Apion. i.8), appears quite opposed to such a sup- position, since in whatever way the division of the Old Testament into twenty-two books is made there cannot be two out of the number left for Ezekiel. (4) Predictions. The central point of Ezekiel's predictions is the destruction of Jerusalem. Pre- viously to this catastrophe his chief object is to call to repentance those who were living in care- less security; to warn them against indulging in blind confidence that, by the help of the Egyp- tians (Ezek. xvii: 15, 17; comp. Jer. xxxvii.7), the Babylonian yoke would be shaken off, and to assure them that the destruction of their city and temple was inevitable and fast approaching. After this event his principal care is to console the cap- tives by promises of future deliverance and re- turn to their own land, and to encourage them by assurances of future blessings. His predictions against foreign nations stand between these two great divisions, and were for the most part uttered during the interval of suspense between the Di- vine intimation that Nebuchadnezzar was besieging Jerusalem (chap. xxiv:2), and the arrival of the news that he had taken it (chap. xxxiii:21). The predictions are evidently arranged on a plan cor- responding with these, the chief subjects of them, and the time of their utterance is so frequently noted that there is little difficulty in ascertaining their chronological order. This order is fol- lowed throughout, except in the middle portion re- lating to foreign nations, where it is in some in- stances departcq from to secure greater unity of Subject (for example, chap. xxix:17). (5) Arrangement. The arrangement, by whomsoever made, is very evidently designed, and it seems on many accounts most probable that it was made by Ezekiel himself. This is maintained by Håvernick on the following grounds: (1) The arrangement proceeds throughout on a plan cor- responding with the subjects of the predictions. In those against foreign nations chronological is united with material order, whilst in those which relate to Israel the order of time is strictly fol- lowed. (2) The predictions stand in such con- nection with each other that every part has ref- erence to what has preceded it. Historical notices are occasionally appended to the predictions, which would scarcely be done by a transcriber; for ex- ample, the notice respecting himself in chaps. xi, xxiv, xxv, and the close of chap. xix, which Håvernick translates ‘This is a lamentation and was for a lamentation.’ (6) I)ivisions. The whole book is divided by Håvernick into nine sections, as follows: I. Ezekiel's call to the prophetic office (chap. 1-111 . I & ) • 2. sºle of symbolical representations and par- ticular predictions foretelling the approaching de- struction of Judah and Jerusalem (chap. iii: 16; vii). 3. Series of visions presented to the prophet a year and two months later than the former, in which he is shown the Temple polluted by the wor- ship of Adonis—the consequent judgment on the inhabitants of Jerusalem and on the priests—and closing with promises of happier times and a purer worship (chap. viii-xi). 4. A series of reproofs and warnings directed especially against the particular errors and preju- dices then prevalent amongst his contemporaries (chap. xii-xix). EZEL 5. Another series of warnings delivered about a year later, announcing the coming judgments to be yet nearer (chap. xx-xxiii). 6. Predictions uttered two years and five months later, when Jerusalem was besieged, an- nouncing to the captives that very day as the com- mencement of the siege (comp. 2 Kings xxv : I), and assuring them of its complete overthrow (chap. xxiv). 7. Predictions against foreign nations (chap. xxv-xxxii). 8. After the destruction of Jerusalem a pro- phetic representation of the triumph of Israel and of the kingdom of God on earth (chap. xxxiii- xxxix). * 9. Symbolic representation of Messianic times and of the establishment and prosperity of the kingdom of God (chap. xl.-xlviii). (7) Obscurity. The latter part of the book has always been regarded as ‘very obscure. It will be seen by the brief notices of the contents of the section which we have given above that Håver- nick considers the whole to relate to Messianic times. The predictions respecting Gog (chap. xxxviii-xxxix) have been referred by some to An- tiochus Epiphanes; by others to Cambyses, to the Chaldaeans, the Scythians, the Turks, etc. Mr. Granville Penn has interpreted them of Napoleon and the French (The Prophecy of Ezekiel con- cerning Gogue, etc., 1815). The description of the temple (chap. xl.-xliii) has been thought by many to contain an account of what Solomon's temple was ; by others of what the second temple should be. The difficulties of all these hypotheses seem to be insuperable. (8) Style. Michaelis remarks truly that Eze- kiel lived at a period when the Hebrew language was declining in purity, when the silver age was succeeding to the golden one. It is, indeed, to the matter rather than the language of Ezekiel that we are to look for evidence of poetic genius. His style is often simply didactic, and he abounds in peculiarities of expression, Aramaisms, and grammatical anomalies, which, while they give in- dividuality to his writings, plainly evince the de- cline of the language in which he wrote. & F. W. G. EZEL (ezel), (Heb. ???, eh'zel, separation, de- parture), a stone near Saul's residence which was the scene of the parting of David and Jonathan (I Sam. Xx: Ig). EZEM (e'zem), (Heb. Fº, eh'ſsem, bone), one of the towns belonging to Simeon (I Chron, iv:29). In Josh. xix:3, the name appears slightly changed in the Heb., which gives the reading AzEM (which see). . EZER (e'zer), (Heb. Tºº, eh'zer, help). 1. A son of Ephraim, slain by the inhabitants of Gath while engaged in a foray on their cattle (I Chron. vii:21), B. C. about 1680. 2. A priest who took part in the dedication of the walls of Jerusalem in the time of Nehemiah (Neh. xii:42), B. C. 446. Son of Hur and father of Hushah (I Chron. . iv :4), B. C. 1658. 4. A Levite, son of Jeshua, who ruled Mizpeh. He helped repair the walls of Jerusalem in the time of Nehemiah (Neh. iii :19), B. C. 446. 5. A Gadite warrior who came to David in the wilderness (I Chron. xii:9), B. C. IO54. 6. (Heb. my, ay'zer, treasure, Ges., union, Fürst), a son of Seir, and chief of Edom (Gen. xxxvi;21, 27, 30; I Chron. i.38, 42), B.C. about 1927. In I Chron. ii.38 the form EZAR appears in many 641 E Z RA modern cditions; but the edition of 161 I has the correct form Ezer. EZIONGEBER (e'zi-on-gā’ber or gé'bur) (Heb. Tº Tºº, eſs-yonegheh'ber, giant's back bone), a very ancient city lying not far from Elath, on the eastern arm of the Red Sea. * It is first mentioned in Num. xxxiii:35, as one of the stations where the Hebrews halted in their journeyings through the desert (Deut. ii:8). From its harbor it was that Solomon (I Kings iz :26) sent the fleet which he had then built, to the land of Ophir, whence they fetched 420 talents of gold. Here, also, Jehoshaphat (I Kings xxii:48; 2 Chron. xx:36) built a fleet ‘to go to Ophir, but because he had joined himself with Ahaziah, “king of Isracl, who did wickedly,' 'the ships were broken that they were not able to go to Tarshish.’ No trace of Eziongeber seems now to remain, un- less it be in the name of a small wady with brack- ish water, Ain el-Ghudyan, opening into el-Arabah from the western mountain, some distance north of Akabah. However different the names el- Ghudyan and Ezion may be in appearance, yet the letters in Arabic and Hebrew all correspond (see R. B. ELATH). & EZNITE (ez'nite), (Heb. iš2, ay'ísézz, Spear, sharp), he was, according to 2 Sam. xxiii:8, named Adino, prefect of David's bodyguard. This seens to be another name for Josheb- basshebeth, a Hachmonite. In the parallel sen- tence (I Chron. xi :II) other not very different Hebrew words occur, translated in the A. V., “lifted up his spear.” Gesenius (Thes. pp. 994, 995) and Kennicott (Dissertation i, pp. 71-128) maintain that the translation of the Chronicles is COrrect. - Luther expresses the following opinion : “We believe the text to have been corrupted by a writer, probably from some book in an unknown char- acter and bad writing, so that orer should be sub- stituted for adino, and ha-egmib for eth hanitho;” that is to say, the reading in the Chronicles (I Chron. xi :11), “he swung his spear,” should be adopted (K. and D., Com.). The phrase in 2 Sam. xxiii:8, “that sat in the seat,” is taken by Gesenius to be the name of this warrior, as given above, Josheb-bashshebeth ; a name to be found in the R. V. at this place with the difference of an s for sh. The Douay Version gives “Jeshabam sitting in the chair. . . . . was like the most tender little worm of the wood who killed 800 men at One onset.” The name Adino is omitted, although it is in the LXX. Jashobeam is in I Chron. xi : II, A. V., as the name. * tº * * EZRA (éz'rá), (Heb. Nºy, ez-raw', help; Sept. "Ea'6pas, es' dras). The form of the name is Chaldaic or Aramaic. 1. One of the priests who returned with Zerub- babel from Babylon (Neh. xii: 1). In Neh. x:2-8 the name is written AZARIAH. A descendant of Judah, the father of sev eral sons. His own parentage is not given (I Chron. iv:17). 3. The celebrated Ezra was a Jewish scribe and priest, who, about the year B. C. 458, led the second expedition of Jews back from the Babylonian exile into Palestine. This Ezra ought to be distinguished from the Ezra who went up as one of the chiefs of the priests and Levites under Zerubbabel (Neh. xii:I, I3, 33). 1. Family. Ezra was a lineal descendant from Phinehas, the son of Aaron. He is stated in Scripture to be the son of Seraiah, the son of Azariah, which Seraiah was slain at Riblah by 41 EZRA order of Nebuchadnezzar, having been brought thither a captive by Nebuzaradan. But as I 30 years elapsed between the death of Seraiah and the departure of Ezra from Babylon, and we read that a grandson of Seraiah was the high priest who accompanied Zerubbabel on the first return to Jerusalem, seventy years before Ezra returned thither, we may suppose that by the term son here, as in some other places, the relationship of grandson, or of a still more remote direct de- scendant, is intended. In addition to the informa- tion given in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, that Ezra was a ‘ready scribe of the law of Moses,’ ‘a scribe of the words of the Commandments of the Lord and of his statutes to Israel,’ ‘a scribe of the law of the God of Heaven,” and ‘a priest.’ We are told by Josephus that he was high priest of the Jews who were left in Babylon; that he was particularly conversant with the laws of Moses, and was held in universal esteem on ac- count of his righteousness and virtue. The rebuilding of the temple of Jerusalem, which had been decreed by Cyrus in the year B. C. 536, was, after much powerful, and vexa- tious opposition, completed in the reign and by the permission of Darius Hystaspis, in the year B. C. 515. 2. History. (1) Appointed Leader. In the year B. C. 457 Ezra was sent by ‘Artaxerxes Longimanus and his counsellors to inquire con- cerning Judah and Jerusalem, according to the law of his God, which was in his hand, and to carry the silver and gold which the king and his counsellors freely offered unto the God of Israel.' Permission was also granted to him to take with him all the silver and the gold which he could find in all the province of Babylon, together with the free-will offerings which the people and priests offered for the house of God at Jerusalem. Of this treasure he was directed to employ as much as was requisite in the purchase of offerings according to the law of Moses, and the surplus he was to lay out according to his discretion for the maintenance of the externals of religion. Ezra was also charged to convey vessels for the house of God in Jerusalem, and, lest these gifts should be insufficient, he was empowered to take from the king’s treasure-house as much as should be wanted to supply everything needful for the house of the Lord. At the same time that this commission was given to Ezra, Artaxerxes ILongi- manus issued a decree to the keepers of the king's treasure beyond the river, to assist Ezra in every- thing in which he needed help, and to supply him liberally with money, corn, wine, oil and salt. It was further enacted that it should not be lawful to impose tribute upon any priest, Levite or other Derson concerned in ministration in the house of God. Ezra was commissioned to appoint accord- ing to the wisdom of God which was in his hand,’ magistrates and judges to judge all the people beyond the river that knew the laws of his God; and was enjoined to teach them to those who knew them not. The reason of the interest for the worship of God at this time evinced by Arta- xerxes, appears to have been a fear of the Divine displeasure, for we read in the conclusion of the decree to the treasurers beyond the river, ‘What- soever is commanded by the God of Heaven let it be diligently done for the house of the God of Heaven ; for why should there be wrath against the realm of the king and his sons?' We are also told (Ezra vii:6) that the king granted Ezra all his request, and Josephus informs us that Ezra, being desirous of going to Jerusalem, requested the king to grant him recommendatory letters to the governor of Syria. We may there- 642 EZRA fore suppose that the dread, which Axtaxerxes entertained of the Divine judgment, was the con- sequence of the exposition to him by Ezra of the history of the Jewish people. (2) Preparations. Ezra assembled the Jews who accompanied him on the banks of the River Ahava, where they halted three days in tents. Here Ezra proclaimed a fast, as an act of humilia- tion before God and a season of prayer for Divine direction and safe conduct; for, on setting out, he was ashamed to require a band of soldiers and horsemen to help them against the enemy by the way,' because he had asserted to the king that the hand of his God is upon all them that seek him for good. Ezra next committed the care of the treas- ures which he carried with him to twelve of the chief priests, assisted by ten of their brethren, appointing these to take charge of the treasures by the way and deliver them safely in the house of the Lord at Jerusalem. (3) At Jerusalem. On the twelfth day from their first setting out Ezra and his companions left the River Ahava and arrived safely at Jeru- salem in the fifth month, having been delivered from the hand of the enemy and of such as lay in wait by the way. Three days after their arrival the treasures were weighed and delivered into the custody of some Levites. The returning exiles offered burnt offerings to the Lord. They de- iivered also the king's commissions to the viceroys and governors, and gave needful help to the people and the ministers of the Temple. (4) Foreign Wives. When Ezra had dis- charged the various trusts committed to him the princes of the Jews came to him and complained that the Jewish people generally, who had re- turned from the captivity, and also the priests and Levites, but especially the rulers and princes, had not kept themselves separate from the people of the land, but had done according to the abomi- nations of the remnant of the nations whom their forefathers had driven out, and married their daughters and allowed their children to inter- marry with them. On hearing this Ezra was deeply afflicted; and, according to the Jewish custom, he rent his mantle and tore the hair of his head and beard. They gathered round him all those who still feared God and dreaded his wrath for the transgression of those whom he had brought back from captivity. Having waited till the time of the evening sacrifice, Ezra rose up, and, having again rent his hair and his garments, made public prayer and confession of sin. The assembled people wept bitterly, and Shechaniah, one of the sons of Elam, came forward to propose a general covenant to put away the foreign wives and their children. Ezra then arose and admin- istered an oath to the people that they would do accuſ lingly. (5) Commission of Investigation. Procla- mation was also made that all those who had re- turned from captivity should within three days gather themselves together unto Jerusalem, under pain of excommunication and forfeiture of their goods. The people assembled , at the time ap- pointed, trembling on account of their sin and of the heavy rain that fell. Ezra addressed them, declaring to them their sin, and exhorting them to amend their lives by dissolving their illegal connections. The people acknowledged the justice of his rebuke, and promised obedience. They then requested that, as the rain fell heavily, and the number of transgressors was great, he would ap- point times at which they might severally come to be examined respecting this matter, accom- panied by the judges and elders of every city. A commission was therefore formed, consisting of EZRA Ezra and some others, to investigate the extent of the evil. This investigation occupied three months. In Neh. viii. we read that, on the occasion of the celebration of the feast of the seventh month, subsequently to Nehemiah's numbering the people, Ezra was requested to bring the book of the law. of Moses; and that he read therein standing upon a pulpit of wood, which raised him above all the people. (6) Later History. Josephus tclls us that Ezra died soon after this celebration of the Feast of Tabernacles, and was buried at Jerusalem with great magnificence. According to some Jewish chroniclers he died in the year in which Alexander came to Jerusalem, in the same year in which took place the death of the prophets Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi, and in which prophecy became ex- tinct. According to other traditions Ezra returned to Babylon and died there at the age of I2O Fear S. (7) Death. The Talmudic statement is that he died at Zamzumu, a town on the Tigris, while on his road from Jerusalem to Susa, whither he was going to converse with Artaxerxes about the affairs of the Jews. A tomb said to be his is shown on the Tigris, about twenty miles above its junction with the Euphrates. J. Character. Ezra was distinguished by an ardent love for the word of God. “He had pre- pared his heart to seek the law of the Lord, and to do it, and to teach in Israel statutes and judg- ments” (Ezra vii: IO). He was faithful in instruc- tion, and delighted “to teach the laws of his God to such as knew them not” (verse 25). He is a con- spicuous example of a man who devoutly believed in Divine providence and who was ever praying for the “good hand of God” to be upon him. While a man of prayer he was also thoroughly practical in attending to the affairs of life, and manifested a firm and inflexible will in carrying out his plans. He was willing to endure any privations or make any sacrifices to advance his national religion and secure the best interests of his people, whom he so ardently loved. 643 EZRA, WRITINGS OF EZRA, WRITINGS OF. The canonica/ wrif. ings of Ezra are, besides the book which bears . 11a11ue, IIIost likely the two books of the Chron- 1C1628. The reasons for ascribing the books of Chron- icles to the authorship of Ezra have already been investigated in the article CHRONICLES (which See). Some authors have ascribed the books of Nehemiah and Esther likewise to Ezra, although they differ in style. (See EstEIER ; NEHEMIAH.) 1. Teck of Ezra. (1) Authenticity. Ezra Speaks from chap. vii:27 to chap. ix: I5, in the first person. ‘There is an essential difference be- tween public events which a man recollects, though only as in a dream, to have heard of at the time when they occurred, and those which preceded his birth. The former we think of with reference to ourselves; the latter are foreign to us. The epoch Tomb of Ezra. and duration of the former we measure by our own life; the latter belong to a period for which our imagination has no scale. Life and definite- ness are imparted to all that we hear or read with respect to the events of our own life' (Niebuhr, On the Distinction Between Annals and History). These remarks, which Niebuhr made in reference to Tacitus, are, in a great measure, applicable also to Ezra and account for several of those differ- ences between the various parts of his book, which have so much startled some modern Biblical Schol- ars that they have presumptuously undertaken to show the precise seams or sutures by means of which various fragments of different authors were brought together. In this attempt they have been especially guided by the change of the third to the first person, for which change we account by the above remarks of Niebuhr. - Instances of similar change of person are so frequent in ancient authors that rhetoricians have introduced it among the rhetorical figures under the name of enallage personarum. The prophet- ical writings of the Old Testament furnish exam- ples of such éva)\aff. ... For instance, Ezek. i: 1–3; Zech. i :1, vi :1, vii:I, 4, 8; Jer. xx: I, Sq. Comp. with verse 7, sq. xxi : I ; xxviii: I-5, XXXii: I-8; Hos. i :2-3, iii:1. So also in Habakkuk, Dan- EZRA, WRITINGS OF iel, etc. The frequency of this éva)\\ayºff, es- pecially in the prophetical parts of the Old Testa- ment, arises from either the more objective or more subjective tendency of the style, which, of course, varies in harmony with the contents of the chapter. We may observe this éva)\\ayºff even in our own writings, from which we are certainly taught by modern scholastic usage to eradicate it, al- though it would, if preserved, frequently give greater freshness to our communications. We have made these remarks in order to show the per- fect futility of the chief argument adduced by modern writers against the original unity of the book of Ezra, Some of whom, on account of the cmallage personarum, assert that chap. vii:I-26 was written by an author different from that of the portion immediately following, up to chap. ix: I5; and that, again, the subsequent portion to the end of the book was indited by a still different writer. We pass over other still more futile arguments against the authenticity of the book and express our opinion that even Håvernick does not rightly set forth the truth of the matter when, in his Einleitung, he says that this enallagé arose from Ezra's imitation of the prophetic usage. (2) Contents. The book of Ezra contains memorabilia, or records of events occurring about the termination of the Babylonian exile. It com- prises accounts of the favors bestowed upon the Jews by Persian kings; of the rebuilding of the temple; of the mission of Ezra to Jerusalem, and his regulations and reforms. Such records form- ing the subject of the book of Ezra, we must not be surprised that its parts are not so intimately connected with each other as we might have ex- pected if the author had set forth his intention to furnish a complete history of his times. (3) Period Covered. The events narrated in the book of Ezra are spread over a period of about seventy-nine years, under the reigns of Cyrus; Cambyses; Magus, or Pseudo-Smerdis ; Darius Hystaspis; Xerxes, and Artaxerxes, in the eighth year of whose reign the records of Ezra cease. (4) Similarities to Chronicles. The begin- ning of the book of Ezra agrees verbatim with the conclusion of the second book of Chronicles, and terminates abruptly with the statement of the divorces effected by his authority, by which the marriages of Israelites with foreign women were dissolved. - Since the book of Ezra has no marked conclu- sion, it was, even in early times, considered to form part of the book of Nehemiah, the contents of which arc of a similar description. As, how- ever, the book of Ezra is a collection of detached records of remarkable events occurring at the CUliulusion of the exile and in the times immedi- ately following it, attempting no display of the art of book-making, the mere want of an arti- ficial conclusion cannot be considered a sufficient reason for regarding it as the first portion of Nehemiah. It is, however, likely that the sim- ilarity of the contents of the books of Ezra and Nehemiah was the cause of their being placed together in the Hebrew Bible. (5) Arrangement. The arrangement of the facts in the book of Ezra is chronological. The book may be divided into two portions: (1) The first consists of chapters i-yi, and contains the history of the returning exiles and of their re- building of the temple, and comprises the period from the first year of Cyrus (B. C. 536) to the 644 EZRI sixth year of Darius Hystaspis (B. C. 515). (2) The second portion contains the personal history of the migration of Ezra to Palestine in the sev- enth year of Artaxerxes. This latter portion, embracing chapters vii-x, is an autobiography of Ezra during about twelve or thirteen months, in the seventh and eighth years of the reign of Artaxerxes Longimanus. - 2. Non-canc nical Rocks. Thus far mention has been made of the canonical book of Ezra; there are, however, four books that have received this name, viz., the book noticed above, the only one which was received into the Hebrew canon under that name; the book of Nehemiah and the two apocryphal books of Esdras, concerning which see ESDRAs. º C. H. F. B. EZRACH (Šz'råk), (Heb. 7]?', e.g-rawch'). This word occurs only once in Scripture, namely, in Ps. xxxvii:35: ‘I have seen the wicked in great power, spreading himself like a green bay tree' (e.grach). Commentators and translators have differed respecting the meaning of this word, some supposing it to indicate a specific tree, as the laurel, and others, supported by the Septuagint and Vulgate, the cedar of Lebanon. It is by some considered to mean an evergreen tree, and by others a green tree that grows in its native soil, or that has not suffered by transplanting, as such a tree spreads itself luxuriantly. It appears likely that the Hebrew word must have been derived from the Arabic ashruk, which is described in Arabic works on Materia Medica as a tree having leaves like the ghar, that is, the bay tree or laurus nobilis of botanists. If egrach, therefore, was orig- inally the same word as ashruk, then it would in- dicate some tree resembling the bay tree rather than the bay tree itself; but until that can be dis- covered the latter is, upon the whole, well suited to stand as its representative. The bay tree is well known to be common in the south of Europe, as in Spain, Italy, Greece and the Levant. It is usually from twenty to thirty feet in height, often having a bushy appearance, from throwing up so many suckers; but in Eng- land it has attained a height of sixty feet, which is not unusual in warmer climates. It is unnecessary to allude further to the celebrity which it attained among the ancients—a celebrity which has not yet passed away, the laurel wreath being still the Sym- bolical crown as well of warriors as of poets. Its ever-green, grateful appearance, its thick Shade, and the agreeable spicy odor of its leaves, point it out as that which was most likely in the eye of the Psalmist. (See BAY TREE.) J. F. R. EZRAH (§z'rāh), (Heb. Tº, ez-razy", a form of eger or egra), a descendant of Judah (I Chron. iv.: I'7). EzRAHITE (ez'ra-hite), (Heb. "Tºº, ez-raw- Ahee'), the designation of Ethan (I Kings iv:31; Ps. lxxxix), and Heman (Ps. lxxxviii). The word is derivable from Ezrah, or Zerach, which is almost the same in Hebrew. In I Chron. ii:6, Ethan and Heman are given as Sons of Zerah. Another Heman and Ethan are given as musicians and Levites (1 Chron. vi) and else- where. * EZRI (āz'ri), (Heb. "Tºº, ez-ree', help of Jeho- vah). A son of Chelub and superintendent of those who worked in the field for David (I Chron. xxvii:26), B. C. IOI4. ſaeºſ， šºšº sae 3 9015 07331 9322 2 Li- O >– H− CO CC LLI > 2 TD s - e : , ; & # * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --- * 3 & 4 × 3 --> x 3.3° “ . . . A Y : * : * ~ : & 53 -: * ~ * ~ ** * * * * * * * : *- : Fºr eºs is a cºsº. 3- ºr ; ; ; sº sº. º-º-º: º-------> < x < *s---. * * * **, *, * * * * : * : *, * g : tº . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * * * * : * ~ * * * *- : * ~ : . . . . . . . . . . . . ; * * * : ***** * * * * * ***.*.* *** * ***** * *, *, *, *, *, *.*.*.*.*.*.* - º - >< a. i - a . . . . . . “ -: * ~ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * … º.º. º.º.º.º. :* - sº : * * * *** ***** * * * * * * * *rºsº a s ºr a ºp-e ºs º-º: * * * , * ºr * * *- : - - --> º º --~~~~ : --- w -: *- : * : : - . . ºf . . … 3 *** ***.*.*.*.*** ** tºº sº ºr kººrs .… g . . fºr ºs *** **w-ºrtº, sº sº.º.º. º.º.º.º.º. w - - º * &-3 × 3-...-º * - sº a sº-sºº, º fºr arºstes tºº-s: ** * **** ºr is ºº º … . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * ~ * - - - - - - - - ºº::... ii. 2 ... . . . . ...; . . . . . . . . . . . - º -----> - º, . . . . * * * * ***** *-* * . . . . º - > i.e., ... ..., tº-º-º-º: ºº::::::::::::::::::::::::: - - ... . . . . . . .;; - sº... . . . . . . . ... º.º.º.º.º.º.º. º *::: **** * * * * * **, * * * º § 3. . . . º, sº ºr ºr , . . . . . * * * * * * * * * * Fºº sº. º. º - g- R *** * * * * * * * * * *** * * : - - - - - - - -, 3-ºxºs sº, sº > < * ºf “ . . . . . * * * * * * * * * * * r * *- : ... .sº --- * * * ~ * r * * * : * * * - º - zºº-º-º--- • * : * : * * * * * : * , - - 2 × 3 × - . . . . . . . . . . *...* * * * *-* < x*śsº cº-º-º: sº s. 2., 3. … . . . . . # * * * * * * * * *-* * * * * * * * * * * * * * . . . . . . . . . ; ;… . . . .tºs.sºs., ...--sºº. . . . . ; ºr ... . . . - ºr. º-º-º-º-º: ºr ºrº-ºººººººº sº... .º.º. º.º.º.º.º.º.º.º.º. ... ..… º.º.º.º.º. º. ... - º- • * x a . x_i, ------------------- - *-*. . . . . . . * : * *, * . . . . . . . . . tº-3 # * * * * gº --> <- 3 & 43. 2, ... *-* ~ * - 23 gº S-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º: * : ******** ********* *****-wºº.º.º. Fºr 2.3 × . º.º.º. º . - - - -: * * * * ~ * s: º 'º', ; *.x-sºº. º.º.º. w - - - - -ºxº gº § - - --- - ºf … sº tº gº º f : * * * * *-* : c º * * ------- ; cº --- + … " - - - - º w §. - º: *.*.* * * * * : * : * * : *** f.º. w º º “º …º. - * sº º º w º: ºš *** *-*.s.º. º. º ºsº a - ºr . . . . . . º º-3 §§ºº 's º - *** * * : . . . . . - • * * * * w --- * : : - - - -2." - - º - º º w N- g * P = < *, * * * * * *.: sº -- º-º-º: º:3: ***** * * * * * * ***.*.*.*.* ºr º: exº e º ºr ºne ºr e.g.: = * : *...; arº º ! {^**** §º : . . . . - - … 3 * : *- : - zº rºº a sº - . . . . . . . . . . . ºr gº * * : * º 3 * ſº sº r * * * * * * 3 ºf tº saxºº. 3 & ..º.s º * : * * * * * * * * * * : * * * -------> --~~~~< * : - « g : - - -s ºr , ,-,-,------- * * * * * :: * * * * * * r s gº º *** * * * * **-t-2 ... * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *.*.*.*.*.*.*. - tº * * ~ * º Hº ºf - --- - - * * * * * * * * * - ---> gº º * { … • * . . . . * *, * : * * * : ; ; ; a - -, - . . - ~ > sº. º º - ſº : … . g º ºs., , ; - ** * * * * - - w ******** * *- :---ºr s 3-3-3-ºl assº -ºs.º.º.º. tº º --- º, ſº gº º ºr sº - . 3. * * * * * * * * * * : *, **** sº tº: * : * ~ *rs ºxº-º-º; as a º - ... & º: : “ . -º-, - . . . . . . . . . . . . . - d 3- --------- - º * * : * * * * * ~ * … . . . . fºr sº º - rez, a tº º ºs sº. - … " §§º *** *::::::: º º & - §: ~ * … * * * * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; § 5-º-º-o-º-º-º: * * * : * ~ * ~ * - * * * * * *- : * : * Y Y ~ * * --- * 2: ...º. - § * * * **********, *-*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*, *, *.*.*.* tº ; ºr *** * * * * * * * : * : * * * * * *º-º-º: º C - k * * * * * * : * : * : * ~ * >-- § 2 -º-º: --- * - sº tº ºr º -- - * = * :- - - -,-,-- . . . . * * * * 3-3 º - - * ***.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.* & ſº º, zºº rºº., ºf w sº...º.º.º.º. º.º.º. -º * * * * ----- w º sº tºº tºº gº sº. ºf -, ... ...º.º... iſ §§ ..., º sº ... i. º.º.º.º. ; º gº º ... * * º ----- R - 9 *. * ºr sº cº- - … ºr * * * 4.x: ; * * * * * ***** * * x: {& &? “ fººt * * * 7 sº º, º ºº::...º.º.º.º.º. º.º. ...: - - - - - - -W sº. . . . . ºf -- - ----- ºf <-------- w - sº sº sº º º, º. ºº ğ. - - - - - w *... ..., ; , , ºr º, ... tºº s -------------- … . . . ...s. . . . . . . . ... . . . . w . . . . . . . - … º. º. * . . - º ... . . . . . . . . . . ~ ... . . . . . . v - w - * ... tº sº tº a sº tº º e.g. * ****** * * * * * * *-ºss-sºº 4-s ess tº rºº & * f : * * * * * * * * * w * ..., tº - *** * * * ******* *** **** **** * * *-ºs º ºssº sº..… sº... º.º.º.º.º. 3 ºr º: --> 2 * ~ * * : * : * > * > . . . . . is - - #2 * = . . . . . . * … .º.º.º.º.º.º.º.º. * - " - º gºº. . . . * : - . . " ºf rºº ºf .....…. Rºº.º.º.º.º. w sº...º. is cº-º-º: º º ..º.º.e. º.º.º.º.º. º Rºssº...º.º.º.º.º.º.º.º.º. sº ºr 3 - sº & sº - sº & sººn. …; , ; ... . . . . . . . . . . . .º.º.º.º... . . sº tºº... . - - <º sº a - ** & & ºr = < * : * ~ x2 ... s. 3 Sº cººrºº: º ºf ºr º * . . - ~. º. ºss-ºriºs: & sº - - - - ------------ . - - * * *- : . . * *-*. - -º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º-º: sº tºº - & . . . . . . . …º - * *** *********** * * * * * * *...*.*, * * * * ***, * * * * : * * * º, , ;... w R. . . ... . . w ºn ... x-º-y & 3 º' * ***.*.*.*.*.*.* tº wº w - - º - -------- - * * * * * ... : - - - - - ; : : - º * * *- : . . . . . . . . .x: * * * *z - º º - - - * *.*.*.*.*.* * : ***.*.*.*.*.x. *::: * *** sº ºrº sº gº ºf ºxºº. . . --> 3-5----- - tº ; , , ... . . . . . . . . . . . . S. º.º.º.º.º. - . - º ". . . . . . - --> - ~. - - ------> ~ º-º § s --> *:::º 3 º'. “iº V. - º rºz. . i : ; ; ; ------ Fºx.<= ** * : * ~ * - - º, sº s & sº tºº * * * * * * * * * * * * *... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - ... * --> Fº -- - --------------- t -ºº º f : * * º 3,4-ºxºº. … º ºg ºf: p: “tº **.*.*.* : * :-º-º-º: £4׺ sº sº. --- a. ſº - ---------------- º : sº.º. , ; .. º ******* .* º - w w - º - º º ºr tº sº. tº ººz. ..… . . . . : º i tº ...º.º.; #. * :-...} º : . . ...º.º.º. º:::::::::::::: º - - * - a . . . . * * * jº º & * *** ** : . * * . - ... : - - ---> * * - ºf sº, * ºr ºl... * * * * * * * * * º ; : tº ºtº - sº ... º. i W ; : º : - w w º - º º - ~ - - * , * r * ~ - w - - - r º - - - - sº - - ^ º S-º - º & ºr gº. - c.- : * ~ * - - -> º d § : - ~ - ; : " : * - - - # ‘. . . º - ; : * * jº º *...* & º º : º & *...* * * * * * **, ºr * ...: : º * * * * * * - ºr . º - * * * ºr > -º ... " : ; z º.º. H ºº: x-3 5-3 * * * * * * **, * * - * * * * * : * * * * * : *.*, *, *, *, * > . . . º, º sº. " : º: * * : * * * * * : * : -; * * * * * *- : * : ; ; ; ; ; ; *gº ºf # *** ****** * * * * * * : . . . . * * * * * * * § 2. ~ : ::... º. ºº 3 º º - º '-'. . . * * * Sº sº º º s § - 3 - ... *.*.*.* º, . . . º - - * : * ~ * ------> 3. ::::::::::: - - *::: *, *s