[Page 253.]—Insult to the beard.] The Scriptures contain proofs of the susceptibility of the Hebrews on the subject of an indignity offered to their beards, 2 Sam. x. 1-5. “The Arabs,” says Niebuhr, “never shave off their beard. In the mountains of Yemen, where strangers are seldom seen, it is a disgrace to appear shaven: they supposed our European servant had committed some crime, for which we had punished him by cutting off his beard.” I am not aware, however, that the cutting off the hair was a judicial punishment among the Jews, unless Nehemiah xiii. 25. Isaiah 1. 6. should be thought to refer to it. The effect produced upon Elisama, by Myron’s action, will hardly be thought to be exaggerated when compared with the following passage from D'Arvieux’s account of the Arabs: “The Arabians have so much respect for their beards that they look upon them as sacred ornaments; nothing can be more infamous than for a man to be shaved; they make the preservation of their beards a capital point of religion, because Mahomet never cut off his. Among them it is more infamous for any one to have his beard cut off, than among us to be publicly whipped or branded with a hot iron. Many men in that country would prefer death to such a punishment. The wives kiss their husbands’ beards and children their fathers’, when they come to salute them: the men kiss one another’s beards when they salute in the streets, or come from a journey. They admire and envy those who have fine beards. ‘Pray do but see,’ they cry, ‘that beard; the very sight of it would persuade any one that he to whom it belongs is an honest man.’ If any one with a fine beard is guilty of an unbecoming action, ‘What a disadvantage is this,’ they say, ‘to such a beard! How much such a beard is to be pitied!’ If they would correct any one’s mistakes, they will tell him, ‘For shame of your beard! Does not the confusion that follows such an action light on your beard?’ If they entreat any one, or use oaths in affirming or denying any thing, they say, ‘I conjure you by your beard, by the life of your beard, to grant me this—or by your beard this is or is not so,’ They say farther, in the way of acknowledgment, ‘May God preserve your blessed beard! May God pour out his blessings on your beard!’ And in comparisons, 'This is more valuable than one’s beard,'” Mœurs des Arabes par M. D'Arvieux, quoted in Fragments to Calmet, xciii. Niebuhr (Descr. de l'Arabie, p. 26) mentions an Arab who was so highly offended that a man had even accidentally let fall some of his spittle on his beard, that it was with great difficulty he could be prevented from taking sanguinary vengeance for the affront. The reader who remembers Dr. Clarke’s description (Travels, v. 242.) of the paroxysm of ungovernable rage produced in an Arab by a blow, will not think the account in the text hyperbolical. “The Arab, recovered from the shock he had sustained, sought only to gratify his anger by the death of his assailant. Having speedily charged his tophaike, (musquet) although trembling with rage to such a degree that his whole frame appeared to be agitated, he very deliberately pointed it at the object of his revenge, who only escaped assassination by dodging beneath the horses, as often as the muzzle of the piece was directed against him. Finding himself thus frustrated in his intentions, his fury became ungovernable: his features livid and convulsed, seemed to denote madness: no longer knowing what he did, he levelled his tophaike at the captain of Djezzar’s guard.”
[Page 254.]—Ramoth Gilead.] It was fifteen miles to the westward of Philadelphia or Amman. (Reland, p. 474, Burckhardt, p. 358.) Its site, therefore, must be near that of Szalt, (Burckhardt, p. 347) perhaps El Meysera, which stands on the Zerka, the Jabok of Scripture, and near the mountains which are still called Djebal Djalaad (Gilead.) Or if the words of Jerome, (Loc. Heb.) “juxta fluvium Jabbok,” should be thought not necessarily to imply that it was on the Jabbok, the site of the ruined towns Djelaad and Djelaoud on mount Gilead itself, (Burckhardt, 348.) will suit the elevated position implied in the name Ramoth. The Arnon is now called Modjet. See Burckhardt’s map. Mr. Buckingham supposes Ramza (which is not upon the Zerka, nor on mount Gilead) to be Ramoth. Travels, p, 337.
[Page 255.]—Dromedaries.] The camel is the heavy beast of burden; the dromedary is used on all occasions which require great expedition. Shaw’s Travels, 167. The Arabs represent their speed as many times exceeding that of the fleetest horse.
[Page 256.]—The Goël.] The Jewish law respecting homicide and the avenger of blood, has been fully discussed by Michaelis, § 131-136, who has well illustrated the humanity and wisdom of the Mosaic legislation, especially as contrasted with the precepts of the Koran. What is said in the text of the practice of the east, applies in modern times, at least, chiefly to the Bedoween Arabs. See Niebuhr, Descr. p. 28.
It may be observed, that Goël denoted the next of kin, not merely in his character of avenger of blood, but as having the right of redemption of an estate; (Mich. §. 137.) which may seem to make the etymology given in the text doubtful.
[Page 259.]—The balm of Gilead had been applied externally and internally.] The balm of Mecca is at this day used internally in Palestine, according to Hasselquist; but I am not aware of any proof that it was so anciently. “Les Hébreux ne parlent jamais des remèdes, quand il s’agit de maux internes, de fièvres, de langueurs, de peste, de douleurs de tête ou d’entrailles, mais seulement lorsqu’il y a blessure, ou fracture, ou meurtrissure.” Calmet sur la Médecine des Hébreux, Diss. vol. i. p. 331. That the Levites practised medicine, is probable from the analogy of other sacerdotal castes, and from their being appointed to decide in cases of leprosy: in their forty-eight cities they would be sufficiently dispersed throughout the country to serve as physicians to the people.
[Page 261.]—Customs of mourning.] That it was usual in mourning to cover the lower part of the face, appears from Ezek. xxiv. 16. where the prophet is forbidden to adopt the customary marks of grief. “Forbear to cry, make no mourning for the dead, bind the tire of thine head upon thee, and put on thy shoes upon thy feet, and cover not thy lips, and eat not the bread of men.” It appears from Addison’s account of the Jews in Barbary, (Harmer, iii. 382.) that they still muffle the lower part of the face in mourning. Probably the object was the same as that of the muffling the lower part of the leper’s face, (Lev. xiii. 45.) to give an indistinct and lugubrious sound to the voice. Geier de luctu Hebræorum, 259. The same passage of Ezekiel shows that it was customary to lay aside the turban, (Harmer, iii. 386. Baruch vi. 31.) and go barefoot in mourning, (Judith x. 4.) “Habebis calceamenta in pedibus quæ lugentes solent abjicere: unde et David, Abassalon filium fugiens et penitens super nece Uriæ, nudis pedibus incedit.” Hieronym. in Ezek. loc. cit. 2 Sam. xv. 30. The laying aside the sandals was a mark of humiliation, as well as sorrow; hence in times of public calamity the Romans practised a solemn supplication, called nudipedalia. “Cum stupet cœlum et aret annus nudipedalia denunciantur, magistratus purpuras deponunt.” Tert. de Jej. 16. Geier, p. 306. The rending of garments, beating the breast, strewing ashes on the head, and putting on sackcloth, need no illustration.
The Alijah was probably the upper chamber in which the body of Tabitha (Acts ix. 37.) was laid. Of the hasty interment of the Jews in later times, the history of Ananias and Sapphira is a sufficient proof. Such is the present practice of the east. Russell, i. 306.
It is plain, from the New Testament, that the custom of employing hired mourners prevailed among the Jews in our Saviour’s time; (Matt. ix. 23. Mark v. 38.) and probably the “mourning women” (Jer. ix. 17.) are to be understood of hired mourners, such as the Romans called præficæ. It is mentioned (Amos viii. 3.) as a characteristic of a great mortality, that the dead should be cast forth in silence. Males seem also to have been employed as mourners. Amos v. 16.
[Page 262.]—The body was wrapped in a sheet.] That the arms and feet were swathed separately, and not fastened to the body or together, is rendered probable by John xi. 44. where Lazarus, when raised to life, is represented as coming forth from the sepulchre, before the grave clothes are taken off. The sheet is the σίνδων, in which, according to Matt, xxvii. 59. Joseph of Arimathea wrapt the body of our Saviour, on the evening of the crucifixion, when there was no time for the minute bandaging with the κειρίαι, mentioned in the history of Lazarus. But whether both were combined, as mentioned in the text, may be doubted.