Page images
PDF
EPUB

APPENDIX.

PICTORIAL BIBLE.-VOLUME II

NOTE 21, p. 2.-The view taken by Dr Kitto of the character and plan of the Book of Judges, requires some modification; and we propose to give in this note a brief statement with regard to these points, as also some remarks on the chronology, supplementary of those in the text. The Book of Judges naturally divides itself into three parts. The first part (chap. i.-ii. 5) contains a brief statement of the results of the war between the Israelites and the former inhabitants of Canaan, carried on by the individual tribes after their dispersion over the land. In this section we are informed, not so much of what was accomplished, as of what remained unaccomplished: we are told how far short the tribes fell of the entire conquest of those possessions whose allotment and boundaries are narrated in the Book of Joshua. For this shortcoming, they were rebuked by God, who sent his angel down to Bochim, to remonstrate with them for failing to execute the Divine commands in regard to the nations of Canaan (chap. ii. 1-5). Such are the contents of the first part: it exhibits in detail the extent to which each tribe failed in the performance of its duty, and relates how God remonstrated with them on account of their delinquency. The second part of the book extends from chap. ii. 5 to the end of chap. xvi. The scope of this part is to illustrate, by historical examples, the operation of the principle so forcibly stated in the introductory section (chap. ii. 11-19)-namely, that so long as Israel sought the Lord, they prospered; and when they forsook him, they fell into the hands of the oppressor. It is important, however, to observe, that it is expressly stated (chap. ii. 18, 19), that the periods of Israel's faithfulness to God were coincident with, and terminated by, the lives of the judges who ruled them; so that it came to pass, when the judge was dead, that they returned, and corrupted themselves more than their fathers.' It follows from this circumstance, that there is no large gap in the chronology of the period whose history is contained in the second portion of the book. To shew what we mean, let us consider the narrative of the first deliverance (chap. iii. 8-12). Israel served Chushan-rishathaim eight years-was delivered by Othniel, the son of Kenaz, and enjoyed rest (during his lifetime) for forty years. After his death, 'the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the Lord,' in consequence of which they became the subjects of Eglon, king of Moab, and continued in this condition for eighteen years. Now, we might not unnaturally suppose, that between the forty years of rest and the eighteen years of servitude, a considerable space of time intervened, during which the people only gradually fell away from God; and, indeed, we might even suppose, that the good example of their judges would sometimes operate on them so salutarily, as to keep them comparatively free from idolatry for many years. According to chap. ii. 18, 19, this could not have been the fact. Of course, we are not entitled to press that general and preliminary statement

[blocks in formation]

so far as to infer, that the relapse into idolatry, and consequent subjection to foreign dominion, followed on the very day, or even within the year, of the judge's death; but we are entitled to infer, that the change took place in a short space of time-short absolutely, and short in comparison with the periods of rest and servitude. It is, in fact, doubtful whether we should not regard the transition period as included in the numbers which represent the duration of the periods of subjection. Be this as it may, we conclude that, since the whole of the second part consists of the narrative of a series of deliverances and rests, alternating with periods of subjection to foreign powers (see the end of each of the sections of this part), the history is strictly continuous; and the chronological data, if they do not collectively represent the entire duration of the time of the Judges, are, at all events, not separated from each other by any undetermined interval of importA corroborative proof of the continuity of the history may be found in the circumstance, that in the case of five out of the twelve judges (Tola, Jair, see x. 2, 3; Ibzan, Elon, Abdon, see xii. 8-15), our information is almost confined to the length of time during which each ruled. If the object of the writer was merely to give illustrations of God's method of dealing with Israel, without any ulterior regard to historical completeness, why should he have introduced such notices as those referred to, which have no value except what arises out of the chronological data which they contain?

ance.

The third part of the book is generally viewed as forming an appendix, supplementary of the preceding historical sketch. It consists of two interesting narratives, which throw great light upon the character of the time when they were transacted, but which, being entirely unique in their nature, could not well be incorporated with the history of the judges, and were consequently appended by themselves at the end of the history, without regard to chronological order. The existence of such an appendix argues strongly in favour of a regular plan pervading the Book of Judges; for he who has no method in writing, cannot be anxious to preserve unity in his materials.

The idea, then, which pervades and gives unity to the Book of Judges, is the following:-God had commanded the Israelites to drive out the Canaanites, and to take possession of the land, according to the boundaries defined in the Book of Joshua; to keep themselves separate from those heathen nations, and remain faithful to the God of their fathers. How far had they complied with these commands? To answer this question is the grand object of our book; and the answer which it affords contains a continuous, though very summary, history of the Israelitish commonwealth throughout several centuries.

We come now to speak of the chronology of the Book of Judges. It has been stated that the history contained in our book is continuous; it remains to state that it is also consecutive. In order to get rid of the difficulties attending

689

[ocr errors]

the adjustment of the chronology of the period, several writers have had recourse to the expedient of making some of the judges contemporaneous; ruling not in succession over all Israel, but at the same time over parts of the nation. The judges certainly exercised their authority and influence more particularly in individual tribes, and only indirectly over the whole nation; but it is decidedly contrary to the meaning of the book, to represent any two of the judges as ruling in different parts at the same time. At the commencement of each new section, it is always the nation collectively which is spoken of. (See, for examples, chap. iii. 12; iv. 1; vi. 1; and more particularly chap. x. 1-3, where Tola, a man of Issachar, is said to have judged Israel 23 years, and Jair, a Gileadite, is also said to have judged Israel for 22 years.) The history being both continuous and successive, it would at first sight appear as if all that was necessary, in order to fix with tolerable accuracy the duration of the entire period of the judges, were to sum up the various chronological items. This done, there results 410 or 430 years (according as Samson ruled 20 or 40 years), plus an unknown number of years during which Shamgar ruled. But this result is inconsistent with the datum of 1 Kings vi. 1, according to which the whole period from the Exodus to the building of the Temple was only 480 years. This is the great difficulty to be removed. Some, and amongst these Dr Kitto, have sought the solution in rendering suspicious the authority of 1 Kings vi. 1 (see Dr Kitto's note at page 80), or in altering the number of years, so as to correspond with the numbers in Judges. This method, however, must always remain unsatisfactory. Accordingly, others have turned their attention to the numbers in Judges, and have sought, by arbitrary combinations, to force the two chronological sources into agreement. Such a procedure, as already stated, is out of the question; but although nothing can be gained by mere arbitrary combinations, the nature of the numbers themselves suggests a probable solution. It is certainly very remarkable, that the number 40 should recur so often, not only in the Book of Judges, but also in application to other periods of the history of Israel. We find 40 years assigned as the period of the Wandering; 40 years for the rest under Othniel; 80, or twice 40, for the rest under Ehud; 40 for the peace under Deborah and Barak; 40 for the peace under Gideon; 40 years for the servitude under the Philistines; 40 years during which Eli exercised the office of judge in Israel; and, finally, 40 years for the respective reigns of Saul (see Acts xiii. 21), David, and Solomon. This so frequent recurrence of the number 40 suggests the thought, that the latter is not employed to indicate a precise number of years, but some natural period of time, which, on the whole, is fairly represented by the number 40. There cannot possibly be any objection on principle to this view of the matter, for it is a very generally received opinion amongst commentators, that there are at least two distinct classes of cases in which the numbers employed to indicate time are not to be taken strictly and literally. We refer to the use of the number 7 as the perfect or sacred number, and to the prophetic practice of indicating a period of years by a number of days. What natural period, then, may we suppose 40 years to represent? The duration of one generation of men naturally suggests itself to one's thoughts. No doubt, we are accustomed in our own time to reckon only 30 years to a generation; but that the Israelites did actually assign 40 years as the natural duration of a generation, we know from the history of the Wandering in the Wilderness. The children of Israel were to wander, and actually did wander, until all the generation that came out of Egypt had perished; and the time during which that took place is stated as 40 years. It may be assumed, therefore, that in the Book of Judges 40 years has been reckoned for periods of time of considerable, or what might be called long duration, whose continuance was not determinately known; the general reason for the adoption of this number being, that it represented the period of a generation, and the particular reason, in most cases, that the time in question was co-extensive with the life of the judge who ruled

during its course. The latter fact, that the period was bounded by the life of the judge, suggested the idea of a generation; and the idea of a generation suggested that of 40 years. This view of the use of the number 40 is confirmed by the consideration that, with one exception, it is applied only in reference to the times of peace; and that, too, only in the case of those judges whose history is given at length. The periods of oppression are evidently strictly determined by the numbers 8, 18, 20, 7, 18; and the duration of the rule of the judges who are little more than mentioned, by the numbers 23, 22, 7, 10, 8.

According to the above view, the chronology of the period of the Judges is in itself indeterminate; and it must be fixed by reference to the historical number in 1 Kings vi. 1, in the following way :-From the Exodus to the beginning of the period of the Judges, we must reckon 65 years-namely, 40 till the death of Moses, and 25 til the death of Joshua. From the building of the Temple to the anointing of Saul, we must reckon backwards 63 years— 3 of Solomon's reign, 40 to David's reign, and 20 to Saul's. Adding these two numbers together, we get 128, which taken from 480, leaves 352 years for the time of the Judges, including Samuel in that period. Again: the statement made by Jephthah, contained in Judges xi. 26, presents a chronological datum of some importance in this inquiry. Reckoning backwards from Samuel to Jephthah, and allowing 20 years for the time during which the former ruled Israel, we obtain in all 111 years-6 for Jephthah, 7 for Ibzan, 10 for Elon, 8 for Abdon, 20 for Samson, 40 for Eli, and, as already stated, 20 for Samuel. This number taken from 352, leaves 241 years as the time intervening between the beginning of Jephthah's rule and the death of Joshua. Now, the territory east of the Jordan was in the possession of the Israelites before the death of Moses, and therefore the whole period of their occupation could not, at the time of Jephthah, be less than 266, or, in round numbers, 270 years. Jephthah stated it as 300 years-sufficiently accurate for a general statement of time, and especially so when we consider that it was Jephthah's interest to exaggerate the length of time during which the Israelites held the territory in question. LỄ, however, we take all the numbers before Jephthah literally, we will have from the death of Moses to the end of the oppression by Ammon at least 350 years, in which case it is impossible to account for Jephthah's limiting it to 800 years, otherwise than by supposing that he really did not know how long the time was, but spoke very much at random. This supposition, of course, is inadmissible; and the statement made by Jephthah to the Ammonites must be regarded as a confirmation of the views above indicated.

The other methods of treating the chronology of our book recently propounded-for example, by Bertheau | (Das Buch der Richter und Rut Erklärt), Lepsius (Egypt, Ethiopia, and Sinai), and Bunsen (Egypt's Place in Universal History)-need only be generally referred to. Bertheau applies the view that the number 40 is used to represent a generation to 1 Kings vi. 1; and accounts for the number 480, by supposing that it is founded on a calculation of 12 generations, from the Exodus to the building of the Temple. In order to make out 12 forties, he is obliged to reckon the generation after Joshua (see Judges ii. 10) as one of them (see on this point note 23, below), and to reckon twice 20 years to Samson (see chaps. xv. 20, and xvi. 31). Those who desire to see at length Bertheau's ingenious, but somewhat forced calculation, are referred to the above-mentioned commentary. The investigations of Lepsius and Bunsen, on the other hand, are not confined to the data of Scripture; their object being to correct the Scriptural chronology by reference to that of Egypt-a very uncertain method truly, as may be seen from the fact, that the former of these illustrious men finds it necessary to allow only about 90 years from the entrance of Jacob to the exodus of Moses,' whilst the latter allows an interval of 1440 years! (See Egypt, Ethiopia, and Sinai, p. 475, and the note there.)

NOTE 22, p. 10.-We propose in this note to make some observations on several points connected with this chapter which require explanation.

1. From the beginning of the 1st verse of the chapter: 'Now after the death of Joshua,' &c., it would seem to follow, that all the transactions therein narrated took place subsequently to the death of that distinguished servant of the Lord. On examination, however, it is found that the chapter contains several accounts, which are found in nearly identical terms in the Book of Joshua. The account contained in 'Judges i. 10-15, is given also in Joshua xv. 14-19; the statement in v. 21 appears likewise in Joshua xv. 63; that in vv. 27, 28, is substantially the same with Joshua xvii. 12, 13; and v. 29, with Joshua xvi. 10. The reader is here reminded also of the conquest of Leshem by Dan, contained in Judges xviii., and referred to in Joshua xix. 47. In order to account for the appearance of these sections in both books, some have supposed that they were taken out of the Book of Joshua by the author of the Book of Judges; others, as Bertheau, Hävernick, &c., have upheld the reverse opinion; whilst a third party have tried to account for the phenomenon, by supposing the existence of a third historical authority, which the authors of both books consulted in common. All these are violent, and therefore unsatisfactory expedients, and contrast unfavourably with the simple view set forth by Keil (in the introduction to his Commentar über das B. Josua). That view regards the sections as independent of each other, although referring to the same events, and represents these events as having happened before either book was written. From this it follows, that the Book of Joshua cannot have had for its author the individual from whom it received its name, for, as already hinted, we must regard the entire contents of the 1st chapter of Judges as referring to events which happened after the death of Joshua. The author of Joshua, however, was certainly a contemporary of the events which he narrates, as appears from the occasional use of the first personal pronoun (see, for example, Joshua v. 1, 6); and in all probability was one of those elders that outlived Joshua, who had seen all the great works of the Lord that he did for Israel,' Judges ii. 7. Regarding, then, the incidents in question as having happened after Joshua's death, but before the composition of the two historical books in which they are narrated, everything becomes immediately clear. The sections in question were introduced in the Book of Joshua, as it were, parenthetically, because, though not strictly belonging to the general connection of the narrative, they were of too much intrinsic interest (enhanced by their recent occurrence) to be entirely omitted. In Judges, these same incidents fell to be noticed, not merely as interesting facts, but as forming part of a group of facts collected into one view for a special purpose.

The pre

2. After the death of Joshua, symptoms of renewed hostility on the part of the enemies of Israel soon made their appearance. The Canaanites-not the inhabitants of Palestine in general, but those who dwelt 'by the sea, and by the coast of Jordan' (see Numbers xiii. 29)-muster their forces at Bezek, and the tribe of Judah is appointed by God to lead the attack against them. Having defeated the enemy there assembled, and taken captive their king, the Judahites next proceed southward to Jerusalem. (Verse 8 should be translated: And the children of Judah fought,' &c., in the imperfect and not pluperfect tense. sent translation has arisen from the circumstance, that the succeeding part of the narrative is contained in Joshua.) They take Jerusalem, and thence proceed, still southward, to complete the conquest of their own territory, by fighting 'against the Canaanites that dwelt in the mountain, and in the south, and in the valley'-the three natural divisions of the lot of the children of Judah (see Joshua xv. 21, &c.), arranged in order from north to south. The course followed by the children of Judah in this expedition, shews that Bezek was not a town in the territory of that tribe, and we cannot do otherwise than identify it with the Bezek mentioned by Jerome as lying seven miles from Shechem, on the road to Neapolis (Bethshan). (See Kitto's note to 1 Sam. xi. 8.)

3. In verse 13, Othniel is called the son of Kenaz, and younger brother of Caleb. An epithet similar to the son of Kenaz,' is likewise applied to Caleb in Numbers xxxii. 12; Joshua xiv. 6, 14, where he is called the son of Jephunneh the Kenezite. In Genesis xxxvi. 11, Kenaz is mentioned as a descendant of Esau; and therefore neither he nor his posterity belonged to the children of Israel. Caleb was thus, at the same time, the head of a tribe in Israel, and somehow connected with a people who did not belong to the Israelitish community. Doubtless, this points to an intermixture of the families of Judah with those of the Kenezites, of which, indeed, the narrative before us presents an interesting example.

4. The clause, 'for thou hast given me a south land,' in verse 15, would be more correctly rendered, 'for thou hast given me away into the land of the south.' The Kenezites dwelt in the southern country, about the boundaries of Judah. As this region was an unfruitful wilderness, Achsah thought with regret of leaving her father's fertile and well-watered territory for such a home as she was about to go to, and urged her husband to ask the field' (not a field) from her father. He refused to do so, however; and therefore she asked this portion from her father herself, and obtained from him the field with the two springs, the upper and the nether.

NOTE 23, p. 11.-The passage, chap. ii. 11. to chap. iii. 6, has been generally regarded as a sort of introduction to the second part of the Book of Judges. Bertheau, however, maintains that the section in question refers to one particular generation-that, namely, referred to in verse 10: 'And there arose another generation after them, which knew not the Lord, nor yet the works which he had done for Israel.' It seems to favour this opinion, that verse 6 begins the history anew from the death of Joshua, and gives a simple historical account of the latter event, and of the religious condition of the contemporary and following generations of the Israelites. But not to mention that, on the supposition of Bertheau, Othniel would be made to die at a greater age than he probably attained, see chap. iii. 11, compared with chap. i. 13, the whole character of the section militates against the idea of a special generation being described throughout it. We must rather understand the matter as follows:-The writer does proceed, in verse 10, to mention the generation after Joshua, and to contrast it with the generation which preceded it; but in characterising its degeneracy, he was conscious that he was merely describing the first exhibition of a phenomenon that was continually repeated in all its leading features; and, consequently, his account of that generation forthwith merges into a picture of the general character of the whole period of the judges. This is clearly seen in verses 16-19, which evidently depict the general facts underlying every part of the succeeding history.

NOTE 24, p. 16.-These verses, taken in connection with verses 3 and 21-23 of the preceding chapter, reveal the various designs of God in permitting the Canaanites still to remain in the land. 1. He wished to try Israel. Had there been none of the former inhabitants of Palestine left behind, it would have been put out of the power of the Israelites to disobey God's injunction to keep themselves from intercourse with these peoples, and to eschew their idolatrous practices. 2. The presence of these nations acted as a punishment (chap. ii. 3) to Israel. Whenever they turned their hearts from God, and were unfaithful, they invariably were allowed to fall into the hands of their enemies. 3. But God wished not only to make provision for punishing disobedience, He desired also to have an opportunity of doing Israel good when it turned its face towards Him. This is shewn in chap. iii. 2, which we thus render: 'Only that He [Jehovah] might know the children of Israel [how they stood towards him-this is the first design, trial], and might teach them war-that is, those who before had not known them' [from experience]. The them, which we have put instead of 'thereof,' as the original requires, evidently refers to 'the wars of Canaan' spoken

of in the first verse. What wars were these ?-doubtless the great wars, the celebrated wars of Joshua. God designed, therefore, to cause the after-generations of Israel to know these renowned wars. What does this mean? It means that God desired to have an opportunity of displaying His power again in behalf of the people of Israel, as He had done in times bygone in behalf of their fathers; that He might be to them, when they turned to Him unfeignedly, the same powerful deliverer, the same God of battles, as He had been in the days of old.

NOTE 25, p. 34.-The Ophrah mentioned here (verse 11) and in other parts of Gideon's history, must be distinguished from the Ophrah in Benjamin, enumerated amongst the cities of that tribe in Joshua xviii. 23, and mentioned in 1 Samuel xiii. 17 as situated in the land of Shual; which last is probably identical with the land of Shalim,' spoken of in 1 Samuel ix. 4. The present Ophrah was in the tribe of Manasseh, in the district which belonged to the family of Abiezer (see Joshua xvii. 2), and was called, by way of distinction, Ophrah of the Abi-ezrites, as appears from chap. vi. 24, and viii. 32, and also Gideon's city, as in chap. viii. 27. The exact position of both these

towns is unknown.

[ocr errors]

It is worthy of notice, that in verse 11, the original Hebrew speaks not of an oak, but of the oak (2), which was in Ophrah. This implies that the oak was still to be seen at that place in the days of the writer of Judges, and in accordance with this, we find it actually stated respecting the altar which was built under the oak, that 'unto this day it is yet in Ophrah of the Abi-ezrites.'

We note also on this verse, that at first the angel appeared to Gideon as being only a wayfaring-man, with a staff in his hand (verse 21), who had sat down under the shadow of the oak to snatch some refreshment and repose. He enters into conversation with Gideon on the topic that is uppermost in the minds of all the people dwelling in that part of the land-the grinding oppression of the plundering Midianites; and urges him to exert his well-known valour in the behalf of his country. Gideon, in reply (verse 13), calls the angel ; which is equivalent to sir, or my master. In verse 15, however, he addresses him as "; which is generally applied only to God.

NOTE 26, p. 35.-The expression, need not mean the bullock to whom the epithet 'second' belonged; but merely a second bullock, in addition to the first mentioned. The following view of the matter gives the most probable explanation of the various points requiring notice. On the night of the same day on which the previously related transaction took place, the Lord appeared again unto Gideon, to give him more particular instructions in regard to the commencement of the work of deliverance. Idolatry was the cause of the people's sufferings; that, therefore, must first be publicly and signally denounced by Gideon. His father had an altar consecrated to Baal, with an Asherah attached, which at the same time served as altar for the whole city (verses 28, 29), Joash being the head of the community. This altar, with the Asherah, must be destroyed, and, raised on high so as to be in the view of all, an altar must be erected to Jehovah on the summit of the fortress of the city (verse 26).

The occasion chosen for the accomplishment of these designs is one on which Joash is about to offer up a sacrifice to Baal-doubtless in order to obtain from that false divinity protection for the city against the impending attack of the Midianites (verse 33). For that solemnity, Joash has a bullock set apart-' thy father's young bullock;' and the materials necessary for the sacrifice are lying ready at the altar. (y, in verse 26, refers to the prepared materials; these Gideon was to take away, and with them to build an altar to the Lord.) Gideon is instructed to take a second bullock, in order to offer up a sacrifice to God; probably because the bullock of his father was

TTT

regarded as defiled by being consecrated to Baal. Although, however, the latter could not be used in sacrifice, it might be used as a beast of burden, and was probably employed to transport the materials from the place where the altar of Baal stood to the spot where the new altar was about to be erected.

NOTE 27, p. 52.-There is one argument, advanced first by Hengstenberg, to prove that Jephthah did not take away the life of his daughter, which we shall here state, particularly as it refers to a subject on which, so far as we know, Dr Kitto has made no remarks in his notes. Hengstenberg shews, from several passages of Scripture, that there existed among the Israelites an institution of holy women of a strictly ascetic order, who had relinquished worldly cares, and devoted themselves to the Lord. The first passage is in Exodus xxxviii. 8: 'And he made the laver of brass, and the foot of it of brass, of the looking-glasses of the women assembling, which assembled at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.' These services, according to the ancient Jews, and the Alexandrian Septuagint (which translates the Hebrew by τῶν μηστευσασῶν, the mirrors of the fasting women), were not of an external kind, but entirely spiritual or devotional. That they were of an ascetic character, is shewn by the fact, that the freewill-offering of these women consisted in the brazen mirrors which were employed by females to direct them in the decoration of their persons. The giving up these mirrors was an act of similar significance to that of allowing the hair to grow on the part of the Nazarite. Both indicated, by the neglect of the personal appearance, a disregard of the means of pleasing the world, and established a palpable separation between the parties and the general community. institution is referred to again in 1 Samuel ii. 22, and a third time in Luke ii. 37, where it is said of Anna that she departed not from the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and day. This last passage indicates clearly the nature of the occupations of these female servants of the Lord. Hengstenberg points out the existence of a similar institution in Egypt, referring to Herodotus's account of the founding of the two oracles in Egypt and in Greece; and the account, by the same author, of the bed-chamber in the Temple of Belus, at Babylon, in which a woman always slept, &c. (For further particulars on this head, see Hengstenberg-Egypt and the Books of Moses, section on the Institution of the Holy Women.") Hengstenberg contends that Jephthah's daughter really became a member of this order of sacred females. His

This

proofs, however, are very unsatisfactory; and after what is said in the text by Dr Kitto on the general subject, it will be sufficient here to remark, that the argument from the use of a word meaning to celebrate, in regard to the yearly indeed, tells in favour of the opinion that she was sacrificed. commemoration of the virgin, is utterly futile, or rather, It is evident that the Israelites were excessively prone, throughout the whole period of the judges, to adopt the human sacrifices were actually performed by the latter, idolatrous practices of their heathen neighbours. Now, and may, as readily as any other bad practice, have become customary among the Israelites. In such a case, their view of the transaction would be very different from ours; and though they might not certainly celebrate the death of Jephthah's daughter for its own sake, or viewed by itself, they might quite well celebrate the praises of the virgin heroine who had freely offered herself up as a thank-offering for the deliverance of her country. We might well ask, generally, Why so much ado about the matter?-why festival, if all that took place was merely the trifling and relate it at such length, and commemorate it by an annual common-place occurrence of a virgin passing from the ordinary occupations of the world into a religious retirement? The whole tone and contents of the narrativethe very fact of its being thought worthy of such prominence in the history-produce an irresistible conviction in our mind that the virgin daughter fell a sacrifice to the blind and heathenish zeal of her fatally conscientious parent.

NOTE 28, p. 72.-In these two chapters, mention is made of four sacred things-an ephod, a massekah, a pesel, and teraphim. What were these? Hengstenberg (Genuineness of the Pentateuch, vol. ii.) makes the pesel a graven image; massekah, its pedestal; the ephod, its clothing or covering; and the teraphim, the substitute for the twelve stones in the breastplate, occupying the same place, and serving the same purpose. Except the first, these interpretations are extremely doubtful, and the grounds on which they are founded are far-fetched and unsatisfactory. There is no reason why we should not here, as in Exodus xxviii., regard the ephod as the iwuis, or shoulder-garment, which was the high-priest's badge of office. Instead of serving as a garment to cover Micah's graven image, the ephod mentioned in these chapters was doubtless the official garment of his household priest.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

As for the massekah, it is to be observed that the same word is applied to the golden calf in Exodus xxxii. by, and in Deuteronomy ( simply). It is also used in reference to the calves set up by Jeroboam, as in 1 Kings xiv. 9; 2 Kings xvii. 16. Hence it may be inferred, that massekah here denotes a molten image of some creature; but whether of a calf, as the symbol of God (as Bertheau and others allege, founding on the passages just cited), or of some other animal, must remain doubtful. The pesel was evidently closely connected with the ephod, as in chap. xviii. 18 it is spoken of as TENEN; that is, the graven image of the ephod. It may not improbably have been a small image carved upon the surface of the ephod, presenting to the eye a prominent object on the breast of the priest, and serving an analogous purpose with the image of the goddess Thinei, which was worn suspended from the neck, by the persons who filled the office of chief judge in ancient Egypt. In addition to what Dr Kitto has written regarding the teraphim (see his note at Gen. xxxi.), the following explanation of them, given by Bonomi (Nineveh and its Palaces, Illustrated London Library, 1852), may not be unacceptable. In a certain part of the ruins of Khorsabad-namely, the King's Court-in front of the doors of a porch, were found holes in the pavement, the size of one of the bricks of which the latter is composed, and about 14 inches in depth. These holes are lined with tiles, and have a ledge round the inside, so that they might be covered by one of the bricks of the pavement without betraying the existence of the cavity. In these cavities, Botta found small images of baked clay, of frightful aspect, sometimes with lynx head and human body, and sometimes with human head and lion's body;' and, in short, exhibiting a variety of hideous shapes and attitudes.

The thresholds of the entrances, before which these holes were found, consisted of single slabs of gypsum, covered with long cuneatic inscriptions. What purpose were these cavities and inscriptions designed to subserve? Bonomi suggests that they were designed for the protection of the apartments into which the entrances led. "We find the principal doorways guarded either by the symbolic bulls, or by winged divinities. We next find upon the bulls themselves, and on the pavement of the recesses of the doors, long inscriptions, always the same [and containing the same name], probably incantations or prayers; and, finally, these secret cavities, in which images of a compound character were hidden. Thus the sacred or royal precincts were trebly guarded by divinities, inscriptions, and hidden gods, from the approach of any subtle spirit, or more palpable enemy, that might have escaped the vigilance of the king's body-guard,' p. 157. Bonomi further identifies the clay images with the teraphim, founding partly on the meaning of the root of the latter word-to terrify, coupled with the hideous aspect of the images; partly on the plural form of the word, in connection with their compound form; also following a different etymology, on the signification of the Arabic word 'tarf,' which means a boundary or margin (if derived from this word, teraphim would be the guardians of the thresholds); and, lastly, on the evident identity of teraphim with telefin, the name by which the modern Persians call their talismans. Bonomi concludes:

'If these analogies in themselves do not amount to actual proof that the teraphim of Scripture are identical with the secreted idols of the Assyrian palace, they are, at all events, curious and plausible; but when supported by what we know of the existing characteristics and superstitions of Eastern nations-of the pertinacity with which all Orientals adhere to ancient traditions and practices-of the strongly implanted prejudices entertained in the court of Persia respecting the going out and coming in of the shah to his palace and of the belief in unseen agencies, and the influences of the Evil Eye, which has prevailed in all countries, and still exists in some, more especially in those of Asia and the south of Europe-our conjecture seems to amount almost to certainty.'-Nineveh and its Palaces, p. 158.

On the whole, then, we may reasonably conclude, that the teraphim, so frequently mentioned in Scripture, were tutelary gods of the household. This view, besides being borne out and illustrated by the remarks just quoted from Bonomi, suits very well the passages in which teraphim are mentioned. We must not be surprised if we find these images spoken of in the Bible as being used by those who were worshippers of the one true and living God, for substantially the same thing may be found among ourselves. The influence which some persons attribute to charms, is tutelary images; and therefore, practically, he who bears of the same kind as that which was supposed to reside in charms about his person may be said to believe in strange gods.

NOTE 29, p. 107.-Sculptures representing this Dagon god have been found amongst the ruins of Nineveh, both at Khorsabad by M. Botta, and at Kouyunjik by Mr Layard. The representation of this monster, which appears among the sculptures of Khorsabad, is nearly identical with that given by Dr Kitto in the text as appearing on medals of Philistine towns. The sculptures at Kouyunjik present a somewhat different appearance: at each of two entrances into one of the chambers of the Kouyunjik palace, Mr Layard found two colossal bassreliefs of the so-called fish-god, of which the upper part had been destroyed, so that what remained could only give an idea of the form of the lower parts of the body. Means of restoring the entire form, however, were fortunately obtained by the discovery of an agate cylinder on which the same form reappeared. The form of a fish was so combined with that of a human being, that 'the head of the fish formed a mitre above that of the man, while its scaly back and fan-like tail fell as a cloak behind, leaving the human limbs and feet exposed. The figure wore a fringed tunic, and bore the two sacred emblems-the basket and the cone.' Mr Layard identifies this mythic form with the Oannes of the Chaldeans, referred to in Dr Kitto's note. Certainly the form on the cylinder, and on the broken slabs, corresponds exactly with the description given in the fragment of Berosus, according to which the monster had the entire body of a fish; but under the head of the fish, was that of a man, and attached to the tail were human feet. In the ruins at Nimroud, at the entrance to a small temple, Mr Layard found sculptures of fish-gods, of a different form from that of those above described. The fish's head here also formed (part of) the cap of the figure, but the tail reached no further than the waist of the man. This figure

also held in its left hand a basket, and in its right a cone. With regard to the significance of these mythic forms, a recent writer in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (vol. xvi., part 1, 1854) advances the view, that the fishgod represented the constellation of Pisces. This view is connected with a system of interpreting the symbolical figures from Nineveh, according to which the Assyrian mythology is made to rest upon an astronomical basis. This system will be more fully explained in a subsequent note on 2 Kings xxi., and the reader is referred to that note for some additional observations on the Dagon god.

NOTE 30, p. 110.-In this note we shall make a few remarks on certain parts of this chapter which require

« PreviousContinue »