made by some critics; and on these it seems right to say a few words before this article is concluded. (1) The prayer of Solomon (1 Kings viii. 22—53) is thought by some not to be a genuine utterance of that king, but to be the composition of Jeremiah, or some other writer of the Captivity period, a vaticinium ex eventu or "prophecy after the event," based perhaps on some tradition of Solomon's having made a solemn prayer at the Dedication of the Temple, but really first written some centuries afterwards. When such a view is put forward, when an integral portion of a work-found in all the MSS.-—is separated off from the rest and assigned to a period several centuries later, it is natural to ask, in the first place, on what is this opinion based? what grounds are alleged for it ? In the present instance, the grounds appear to be two only-first, the captivity of the Jews is plainly declared in the prayer, and therefore, real prophecy not being regarded as possible, the document, it is supposed, must have been written after the Captivity had commenced; and, secondly, the late composition of Deuteronomy being assumed as a fact, and the references to Deuteronomy in the prayer being numerous and unmistakable, it follows that the prayer must be of a late date, Deuteronomy being so. These are, it is believed, the sole grounds taken. It is not pretended that the language of the prayer is critically distinguishable from that of the chapters preceding or following it. Nor is it alleged that the thoughts are unsuitable to the time of Solomon. Thus the view maintained rests upon two assumptions-(a) that prophecy is impossible; and (b) that Deuteronomy was not written till long after the time of Solomon. Now, with regard to the first of these two assumptions, it is enough to say, that it is simply a denial of the supernatural, and scarcely consistent even with deism; to combat it, in a work addressed to Christians, would be out of place; and we therefore pass it by. With respect to the other ground, we think it enough to refer the reader to the 66 Introduction to Deuteronomy" already published in this work, where they will find the late composition of the book refuted, and its Mosaic authorship shown to be in the highest degree probable. There are thus absolutely no solid reasons for suspecting the prayer; it breathes a spirit closely akin to the Davidical Psalms, with which its language is also in harmony; it is a document of a kind that would be likely to be inserted in the state records; and it has a double sanction, being given as Solomon's, not only by the writer of Kings, but also by the compiler of Chronicles, an independent authority, and one who in this matter evidently did not draw from Kings, but from some larger source, probably the state records 1 See Ewald, Geschichte d. Volkes Israel, vol. iii., p. 404. 2 See BIBLE EDUCATOR, Vol. I., pp. 273-276. 3 The prayer of Solomon on this solemn occasion would as naturally be entered in the state records as the psalm of David when he brought the ark into Jerusalem (see 1 Chron. xvi. 7-36). 4 A comparison of 1 Kings viii. 50-53 with 2 Chron. vi. 40-12 shows this. themselves, which must have still existed in his day, since he refers his readers to them continually." (2) Objection is taken to those portions of Kings which treat of the histories of Elijah and Elisha. These portions, it is said, are not drawn from the state records but from an entirely different source. They come from some collection of traditions respecting those persons made many years after their deaths, either by the writer of Kings, or by some other person, from the mouths of the common people. They may, therefore, safely be set aside as unhistorical. Here again, if we examine into the ground of the assertions made, we shall find that in the objectors' minds the only real reason for separating off these narratives from the rest of the work is, that they contain accounts of miracles, and the critics in question have laid it down as an axiom, that miracles are impossible. Not the shadow of a philological, or critical reason has been shown for separating off any part of the account of Elijah, or more than two passages of the account of Elisha, from the rest of Kings and attributing them to a peculiar source, or to a special author. The actions of Elijah are mainly of a public character, and would as naturally form part of the "Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel," as the actions of Isaiah did of the "Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah" (see 2 Kings xix.-xx.). And the actions of Elisha are largely of this character. The foretold destruction of Moab (2 Kings iii. 14-25), the cure of Naaman the Syrian (ib., v. 1-19), the revelation of the King of Syria's designs (ib., vi. 8—12), the capture of one of his armies (ib., 13-23), the foretold deliverance of Samaria (ib., vii. 1—20), the journey of Elisha to Damascus (ib., viii. 7—14), the anointing of Jehu (ib., ix. 1-10), the interview between Elisha and Joash (ib., xiii. 14—19), were public matters, and were such as the Israelite historians-members, let it be borne in mind, of the prophetical order-would be almost certain to have entered in the state archives. To a small portion only of what is told us of Elisha does a private character attach. The miracles related in 2 Kings iv., vi. 1—7, and viii. 1-6, were in a certain sense private; they would originally be known to few. and would scarcely find a place in the state records. It is not unlikely that these portions of his narrative were taken by the author of Kings from a biography of Elisha, written in a familiar style, and in language containing provincialisms. But they need not on that account be any the less authentic. It is a gratuitous and improbable supposition that the miracles of the great Israelitish prophets were collected "long after their deaths." The natural thing would be that at the close of a great prophet's career, his special successor, if he had one, or otherwise some favourite disciple, should collect his miracles and other remarkable deeds and commit them to writing. Elisha may probably have done this for &c. 5 1 Chron. xxvii. 24; xxix. 29; 2 Chron. ix. 29; xii. 15; xiii. 22, 6 De Wette, Einleitung in d. Alt. Test., p. 185. 7 Some peculiar forms of speech, which seem to be provincial, occur in 2 Kings iv. 1-37, and viii. 1-6. ANIMALS OF THE BIBLE. BY THE REV. W. HOUGHTON, M.A., F.L.S., RECTOR OF PRESTON, SALOP. HF Columbida, pigeon and dove family, There are many allusions to pigeons and turtle-doves in the Bible. Two Hebrew words express either a pigeon or a turtle-dove, viz., tôr, always translated "turtledove" or "turtle," and yônáh, "pigeon" or "dove (A. V.). Another word, gôzâh, occurs in Gen. xv. 9, as the name of "a young pigeon," from a root, meaning "to chirp." The first mention of a dove occurs in the Biblical account of the Deluge (Gen. viii. 8), where we read that Noah sent forth from the ark one of these birds three times. On the first occasion it soon returned; on the second it came back with an olive-leaf in its mouth; on the third time it came back no more. A pair of turtle-doves or two young pigeons was by the Levitical law allowed as a substitute in some of the offerings for a lamb or a kid in the case of poor persons (see Lev. i. 14; v. 7; xii. 6, 8; Luke ii. 24). A Nazarite, in the case of accidental defilement from a dead body, was ordered to bring to the priest on the eighth day two turtles or young pigeons to be sacrificed, one for a burnt-offering, the other for a sin-offering, as an atonement (Numb. vi. 10). With a view to facilitate the purchase of these birds for offerings, the Jews in our Lord's time established a kind of market within the court of the Temple, a proceeding emphatically condemned by Christ (Matt. xxi. 12; John ii. 14—16). 66 The rapidity of a pigeon's flight is alluded to in Ps. Iv. 6: "Oh that I had wings like a dove! for then would I fly away, and be at rest." Also in Hos. xi. 11: "They shall hasten trembling [A. V., "tremble"] as a bird out of Egypt, and as a dove out of the land of Assyria." The plaintive voice of the dove is alluded to by Hezekiah in his sickness (Isa. xxxviii. 14): “I did mourn as a dove." See also lix. 11, and Nah. ii. 7, in which latter passage the maids of the city of Nineveh, personified as a queen, are represented mourning the fate of their mistress as with the voice of doves. The beautiful metallic lustre seen in certain angles of the light on the necks of some pigeons, notably on that of the stock dove, Columba anas (whence indeed its specific name œneus, "of bronze"), is referred to by the Psalmist, though the passage has been variously translated: Though ye have lien (p. p. of verb to lie, A. S. licgan, p. p. legen, common in the sixteenth century) among the pots, yet shall ye be as the wings of a dove covered with silver, and her feathers with yellow gold" (Ps. lxviii. 13). A better rendering of the Hebrew words would be, "If ye lie among the sheepfolds, it is as the wings of the dove," &c. The glittering of the dove's feathers in the sun is an emblem of peace and prosperity. If God gives His people peace, it is well, and all is joyous as the play of colours on a stock dove's neck; if God causes war and scatters Israel's enemies, it is as when he illumines dark Salmon with glistening snow (ver. 14), another emblem of joy. This is Hengstenberg's explanation, which seems to us simple and natural. Some commentators refer the scattering of the kings in their glittering armour to the white patches of snow lying in broken masses on the dark forest boughs; others think the whiteness refers to the bleached bones of the slain, comparing the "campi ossibus albent" and "humanis ossibus albet humus" of Virgil (Æn., xii. 36) and Ovid (Fasti, i. 558). See Maurer, Delitzsch, and Perowne, on this subject. Nevertheless, the passage is obscure; the literal rendering of the words is so uncertain, that the import of the whole passage can only be, to a great extent, a matter of conjecture. The gentleness 1 The text here is obscure. "And Huzzab shall be led away, she shall be brought up, and her maids shall lead her as with the voice of doves, tabering upon their breasts." The following more correctly represents the original: "It has been determined ( hoph. of 13), she (Nineveh) is laid bare, carried into captivity, and her maids groan like the cry of dores, smiting on their breasts." 2 See Speaker's Commentary, iv., p. 321. of the dove is alluded to by our Lord: "Be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves" (Matt. x. 16). Doves' eyes were considered very beautiful (Cant. i. 15; iv. 1; v. 12). The wild rock-pigeon builds its nest in lofty cliffs and in deep gorges. This is referred to in Cant. ii. 14: "O my dove, thou art in clefts of the rock, in the secret places of the cliffs" ("stairs," A. V.); "O ye that dwell in Moab, leave the cities, and dwell in the rock, and be like the dove that maketh her nest in the sides of the hole's mouth" (Jer. xlviii. 28). in the second week in April, and clouds of doves are feeding on the clovers of the plains. They stock every tree and thicket. At every step they flutter up from the herbage in front; they perch on every tree and bush; they overspread the whole face of the land. So universal, so simultaneous, so conspicuous their migration, that the prophet might well place the turtle-dove at the head of those birds which observe the time of their coming'" (Nat. Hist. Bib., p. 219). The collared turtle (T. risorius) occurs in The migration of the turtle-dove, whose return to Palestine in the spring is, as Dr. Tristram says, one of the most marked epochs in the ornithological calendar, is definitely mentioned by the prophet Jeremiah: "The turtle and the crane and the swallow observe the time of their coming" (viii. 7); and by the author of the Canticles: "For, lo, the winter is past, the rain is over and gone; the flowers appear on the earth; the time of the singing of birds is come, and the voice of the turtle is heard in our land" (Cant. ii. 11, 12). The dove here especially alluded to is the Turtus auritus. "Search the glades and valleys even by sultry Jordan at the end of March, and not a turtle-dove is to be seen. Return great numbers near the springs and streams on the shores of the Dead Sea where trees grow; and here it resides throughout the year. In the summer it spreads northwards up the Jordan valley, and may be seen in the woods of Mount Tabor and Gilead. This bird is a larger variety, and darker in plumage than the dove so frequently kept in cages and aviaries in England, so familiar to all. Dr. Tristram says that Palestine appears to be almost the western limit of this bird. It is very common in India, but is not found in a wild state in Europe. The palm turtle (T. Senegalensis), like the preceding species, is non-migratory, being a permanent resident The domestication of the pigeon dates from very early times. The prophet Isaiah probably refers to tame birds when he says, "Who are these that fly as a cloud, and as the doves to their windows?" (Isa. lx. 8); but Professor Lepsius informed Mr. Darwin that, as early as the fifth Egyptian dynasty, or 3000 B.C., pigeons were domesticated; and Dr. Birch, of the British Museum, says that the pigeon appears in a bill of fare in the previous dynasty. In Palestine at the present day the pigeon is "the invariable companion of man wherever he has a settled habitation. The village sheikh marks heads of the family through the common door." The pigeon tribe is exceedingly abundant in Palestine. This is accounted for by the botanical character of the country, which is extremely rich in various kinds of clover, trefoil, and other leguminous plants, on which the birds delight to feed. Our word pigeon is from the Latin pipio (a young pigeon), that from pipire, "to chirp as a young bird." Dove is from the Anglo-Saxon duva, that from dûfan, "to dive" or "to duck the head," in allusion to the well-known habits of the family. MEASURES, WEIGHTS, AND COINS OF THE BIBLE. BY F. R. CONDER, C.E. HEBREW MEASURES OF CAPACITY. HE actual content of the measures of capacity mentioned in the Bible is, up to the present time, a moot point. One reason of the obscurity which has been allowed to rest on the subject is this. Josephus makes repeated reference to Hebrew measures, and explains them to his readers by the use of Greek terms, that only approximately coincide. Thus in one place (Ant., viii. 2, 9) he says that the bath contains 72 resta; that is to say, that it is equal to the Greek metretes, or a little over ten gallons. In another passage (Ant., xv. 9, 2) he says that the kor is equal to ten Attic medimni; which gives a bath of a little over eight gallons. In a third place (Ant., iii. 15, 3) he makes seventy kori equal to forty-one Attic medimni. And his references, in two other passages, to the cotyle and the choa are no less inconsistent with one another, and with the foregoing comparisons. It is thus evident that no accurate determination of these ancient measures is to be obtained from Josephus. If we say, in round numbers, that the hin is the Jewish gallon, and the kor the Jewish quarter, we shall be nearer the mark than if we attempt to work out elaborate equivalents on the plan hitherto pursued. Maimonides, in his commentary on the tract of the Talmud, De Angulo (c. viii. m. 5), gives us a measurement of the log, a small measure of capacity, in digits. But the question of the size of this digit is left open. If we take the Hebrew digit of two barley corns, we obtain too small a result. If we consider the pollex of Maimonides to equal an English inch, we have too large a result. It is useless to attempt to base a metrical system on so vague a foundation. direct mathematical accordance with those of length. We have a positive check as to this determination, by weight. Twenty-four cubic inches, or 6752 of an English pint, contain 6,060 grains of water at 62° Fahrenheit. Maimonides states that the weight of water which an anphak, or quarter log, will contain, is equal to twentysix Egyptian drachmæ. He does not state the temperature employed; and further, there is a doubt as to the exact weight of the drachma. The Attic drachma (about B.C. 25) weighed 61-3 troy grains, and it subsequently fell to 57 grains, or lower. Rabbi David2, who was the sixth from Maimonides, estimated the weight of the anphak of water, at twenty-five drachmæ. If we consider the apothecaries' drachm of sixty troy grains to be the unit employed, the determination of Rabbi David would make a log of water weigh 6,000 grains. The heavier drachma would give 6,240 grains; the lighter, 5,928 grains. It is thus clear that our own result of 6,060 grains is not far from the precise truth. The difficulty experienced, in modern times, in establishing a geometrically accurate standard of measurements, at an arbitrarily fixed temperature of 62° Fahrenheit, was not fully overcome until Sir Joseph Whitworth supplied to mechanical science a method which may be considered practically perfect. The The Oral Law, however, has referred the Hebrew attempt made by the French men of science to base measures of capacity to the natural standard of the a new metrical system, by means of astronomical contents of an egg. The log, one of the smallest observations, on the polar diameter of the earth, is dimensions in the scale, is equal to the contents of six now known to be inexact in its results. The kiloeggs. These are said by the Ghemarists to be middle-gramme3 was intended to be the weight of a cubic sized birds' eggs; which they take to be represented décimètre of pure water, at its maximum density; but by the largest eggs of the domestic hen. Although a question may arise, how far such a standard can be considered as permanent, our first step must be to ascertain what the cubic contents of a large hen's egg actually are. A considerable range of difference, in the size of the eggs of the hen, actually exists. But from a series of measurements of full-sized eggs, as they are laid in this country, we arrive at an average of four cubic inches of contents. It is extremely rare to find an egg exceed this capacity by more than five per cent. There is an obvious advantage in making use of so simple a unit. Not only are all calculations thus rendered extremely but further, as afterwards will appear, the simple; Hebrew measures of capacity are thus brought into it is, in fact, somewhat greater. The imperial gallon is stated in an Act of Parliament to contain 277.274 cubic inches; but its actual contents, according to the standard volume of 10lb. avoirdupois of pure water at the temperature of 62° Fahrenheit, under the pressure of thirty inches of mercury, is stated by Professor Rankine to be actually 277 123 cubic inches. The Roman modius, the Hebrew sea or satum, and the English peck, are so nearly identical in their cubic contents, that it is difficult to oppose the idea 1 History of Jewish Coinage, p. 234. 2 Tract De Angulo, iii, 6, commentary of Guisius. 3 Useful Rules and Tables. By W. J. M. Rankine, p. 97. |