it out, then I will give you thirty sheets, and thirty change of garments. (Judges xiv. 12.) This week was spent in feasting, and was devoted to universal joy. To the festivity of this occasion our Lord refers: - Can the children of the bride-chamber mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them? but the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast." (Mark ii. 19, 20.)1

The eastern people were very reserved, not permitting the young women at marriages to be in the same apartments with the men; and, therefore, as the men and women could not amuse themselves with one another's conversation, the men did not spend their time merely in eating and drinking; for their custom was to propose questions and hard problems, by resolving which they exercised the wit and sagacity of the company. This was done at Samson's marriage, where he proposed a riddle to divert his company. (Judg. xiv. 12.) At nuptial and other feasts it was usual to appoint a person to superintend the preparations, to pass around among the guests to see that they were in want of nothing, and to give the necessary orders to the servants. Ordinarily he was not one of the guests, and did not recline with them; or, at least, he did not take his place among them until he had performed all that was required of him. (Ecclus. xxxii. 1.) This officer is by St. John (ii. 8, 9.) termed 'Apxiтpíkλivos and 'Hyouμevos by the author of the book of Ecclesiasticus: as the latter lived about the year 190 B. C., and while the Jews had intercourse with the Greeks, especially in Egypt, it is most probable that the custom of choosing a governor of the feast passed from the Greeks to the Jews. Theophylact's remark on John ii. 8. satisfactorily explains what was the business of the ȧpxiτpikλivos:-" That no one might suspect that their taste was so vitiated by excess as to imagine water to be wine, our Saviour directs it to be tasted by the governor of the feast, who certainly was sober; for those, who on such occasions are intrusted with this office, observe the strictest sobriety, that every thing may, by their orders, be conducted with regularity and decency."

At a marriage-feast to which Mr. Buckingham was invited, he relates that when the master of the feast came, he was "seated as the stranger-guest immediately beside him: and on the ejaculation of 'B 'Ism Allah' being uttered, he dipped his fingers in the same dish, and had the choicest bits placed before him by his own hands, as a mark of his being considered a friend or favourite; for this is the highest honour that can be shown to any one at an eastern feast."

"Two interesting passages of Scripture derive illustration from this trait of eastern manners. The first is that, in which the Saviour says, 'When thou art bidden of any man to a wedding, sit not down in the highest room, [that is, place or station,] lest a more honourable

Harwood's Introd. vol. ii. p. 123. Bruning states that the Jews distinguish between a bride who is a virgin, and one who is a widow; and that the nuptial feast of the former lasted a whole week, but for the latter it was limited to three days. Antiq. Hebr. p. 71. * Robinson's Greek Lexicon, voce 'Aрxiтpíkλivos. Alber, Interpretatio Sacræ Scripturæ, tom. ix. p. 83.

Theophylact as cited in Parkhurst's Greek Lexicon, voce 'AрXITρíkλivos.

man than thou be bidden of him: and he that bade thee and him come and say to thee, Give this man place: and thou begin with shame to take the lowest room. But when thou art bidden, go and sit down in the lowest room; that when he that bade thee cometh, he may say unto thee, Friend, go up higher: then shalt thou have worship in the presence of them that sit at meat with thee.' (Luke xiv. 8-10.) In a country, where the highest importance is attached to this distinction, the propriety of this advice is much more striking than if applied to the manners of our own; and the honour is still as much appreciated throughout Syria, Palestine, and Mesopotamia, at the present day, as it was in those of the Messiah. The other passage is that, in which, at the celebration of the passover, Jesus says (Matt. xxvi. 23.), He that dippeth his hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me.' As there are but very few, and these always the dearest friends, or most honoured guests, who are seated sufficiently near to the master of the feast to dip their hands in the same dish with him (probably not more than three or four out of the twelve disciples at the last supper enjoyed this privilege), the baseness of the treachery is much increased, when one of those few becomes a betrayer; and in this light the conduct of Judas was, no doubt, meant to be depicted by this pregnant expression."

V. Marriage was dissolved among the Jews by DIVORCE as well as by death. Our Saviour tells us, that Moses suffered this because of the hardness of their heart, but from the beginning it was not so (Matt. xix. 8.); mening that they were accustomed to this abuse, and to prevent great r evils, such as murders, adulteries, &c. he permitted it whence it should seem to have been in use before the law; and we see that Abraham dismissed Hagar, at the request of Sarah. It appears that Samson's father-in-law understood that his daughter had been divorced, since he gave her to another. (Judg. xv. 2.) The Levite's wife, who was dishonoured at Gibeah, had forsaken her husband, and never would have returned, if he had not gone in pursuit of her. (Judg. xix. 2, 3.) Solomon speaks of a libertine woman, who had forsaken her husband, the director of her youth, and (by doing so contrary to her nuptial vows) had forgotten the covenant of her God. (Prov. ii. 17.) Ezra and Nehemiah obliged a great number of the Jews to dismiss the foreign women, whom they had married contrary to the law (Ezra x. 11, 12. 19.); but our Saviour has limited the permission of divorce to the single case of adultery. (Matt. v. 31, 32.) Nor was this limitation unnecesary; for at that time it was common for the Jews to dissolve this sacred union upon very slight and trivial pretences. A short time before the birth of Christ, a great dispute arose among the Jewish doctors concerning the interpretation of the Mosaic statutes relative to divorce; the school of Shammai contend

1 Buckingham's Travels in Mesopotamia, vol. i. pp. 406, 407.

Among the Bedouin Arabs, a brother finds himself more dishonoured by the seduction of his sister than a man by the infidelity of his wife. This will account for the sanguinary revenge taken by Simeon and Levi upon the Shechemites for the defilement of their sister Dinah. (Gen. xxxiv. 25-31.) See D'Arvieux's Travels in Arabia the Desert, pp. 243, 244.

ing that it was allowable only for gross misconduct or for violation of nuptial fidelity, while the school of Hillel taught that a wife might be repudiated for the slightest causes. To this last-mentioned school belonged the Pharisees, who came to our Lord, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause for any thing whatever that may be disagreeable in her? (Matt. xix. 3.) Upon our Lord's answer to this inquiry, that it was not lawful for a man to repudiate his wife, except for her violation of the conjugal honour, the disciples (who had been educated in Jewish prejudices and principles) hearing this, said - If the case of the man be so with his wife, if he be not allowed to divorce her except only for adultery, it is not good to marry! (Matt. xix. 10.) This facility in procuring divorces, and this caprice and levity among the Jews, in dissolving the matrimonial connection, is confirmed by Josephus, and unhappily verified in his own example: for he tells us that he repudiated his wife, though she was the mother of three children, because he was not pleased with her behaviour.'

CHAP. IV.

BIRTH, NURTURE, ETC. OF CHILDREN.2

I. IN the East (as indeed in Switzerland and some other parts of Europe), where the women are very robust, child-birth is to this day an event of but little difficulty3; and mothers were originally the

1 Josephus de Vita sua, c. 76. Home's History of the Jews, vol. ii. p. 358. Harwood's Introd. vol. ii. p. 125. Calmet's Dissertation sur le Divorce, Dissert. tom. i. pp. 390, 391. The following are some of the principal causes for which the Jews were accustomed to put away their wives, at the period referred to:-1. "It is commanded to divorce a wife, that is not of good behaviour, and is not modest, as becomes a daughter of Israel."-2. "If any man hate his wife, let him put her away."-3. "The school of Hillel saith, If the wife cook her husband's food illy, by over-salting it, or over-roasting it, she is to be put away."-4. Yea, “If, by any stroke from the hand of God, she become dumb or sottish," &c.-5. R. Akibah said, "If any man sees a woman handsomer than his own wife, he may put her away: because it is said, 'If she find not favour in his eyes.'" (Lightfoot's Hora Hebraicæ, on Matt. v. 31.-Works, vol. xi. p. 118. 8vo. edit.) This last was the cause assigned by Josephus for repudiating his wife in the passage

above cited.

2 This chapter is compiled from Michaelis's Commentaries, vol. i. pp. 427–430. 443— 447. Lewis's Origines Hebrææ, vol. ii. pp. 240-310. Calmet's Dictionary, article Adoption. Bruning, Antiq. Hebr. pp. 1-11. Pareau, Antiquitas Hebraica, part iv. c. 6. de liberorum procreatione et educatione, pp. 442-446. "The

s Harmer's Observations, vol. iv. p. 433. Morier's Second Journey, p. 106. constitutions of those" [women] "who are hardy, are better able to bear the common accidents of child-bearing; and they suffer less, because they have less feeling and apprehension"...."than those who live in affluence, the frame of whose bodies, and the sensibilities of whose minds are altered, and often depraved, by the indulgence of parents when they are infants, and by their own luxury when they are adults. When the Egyptian midwives were charged before Pharaoh with disobedience to his orders, because they preserved the lives of the Hebrew children, they pleaded in their excuse that the Hebrew women were not like the Egyptian: "they were lively and were delivered before they (the midwives) could come to them." The Hebrew women were slaves, accustomed to labour and hard living; but we may presume that the Egyptians suffered all the evils arising from indolence and luxury." Dr. Denman's Essay on Difficult Labour, pp. 15, 16. London, 1787. 8vo.

only assistants of their daughters, as any further aid was deemed unnecessary. This was the case of the Hebrew women in Egypt. (Exod. i. 19.) It is evident from Gen. xxxv. 17., and xxxviii. 28., that midwives were employed in cases of difficult parturition; and it also appears that in Egypt, from time immemorial, the care of delivering women was committed to female midwives. (Exod. i. 15. et seq.) From Ezek. xvi. 4., it seems to have been the custom to wash the child as soon as it was born, to rub it with salt, and to wrap it in swaddling clothes. (The Armenians, to this day, wash their new-born infants in salt and water previously to dressing them.) The birth-day of a son was celebrated as a festival, which was solemnised every succeeding year with renewed demonstrations of festivity and joy, especially those of sovereign princes. (Gen. xl. 20.; Job. i. 4.; Matt. xiv. 6.) The birth of a son or of a daughter rendered the mother ceremonially unclean for a certain period: at the expiration of which she went into the tabernacle or temple, and offered the accustomed sacrifice of purification, viz. a lamb of a year old, or, if her circumstances would not afford it, two turtle-doves, or two young pigeons. (Lev. xii. 1-8.; Luke i. 22.)

On the eighth day after its birth the son was circumcised, by which rite it was consecrated to the service of the true God (Gen. xvii. 10. compared with Rom. iv. 11.): on the nature of circumcision, see pp. 295, 296. suprà. At the same time the male child received a name (as we have already remarked in p. 297.); in many instances he received a name from the circumstances of his birth, or from some peculiarities in the history of the family to which he belonged (Gen. xvi. 11., xxv. 25, 26.; Exod. ii. 10., xviii. 3, 4.); and sometimes the name had a prophetic meaning. (Isa. vii. 14., viii. 3.; Hos. i. 4. 6. 9.; Matt. i. 21.; Luke i. 13. 60. 63.)

II. "The FIRST-BORN, who was the object of special affection to his parents, was denominated, by way of eminence, the opening of the womb. In case a man married a widow who by a previous marriage had become the mother of children, the first-born as respected the second husband was the child that was eldest by the second marriage. Before the time of Moses, the father might, if he chose, transfer the right of primogeniture to a younger child, but the practice occasioned much contention (Gen. xxv. 31, 32.), and a law was enacted over-ruling it. (Deut. xxi. 15-17.) The first-born inherited peculiar rights and privileges.-1. He received a double portion of the estate. Jacob in the case of Reuben, his first-born, -bestowed his additional portion upon Joseph, by adopting his two sons. (Gen. xlviii. 5-8.) This was done as a reprimand, and a punishment of his incestuous conduct (Gen. xxxv. 2.); but Reuben, notwithstanding, was enrolled as the first-born in the genealogical registers. (1 Chron. v. 1.)-2. The first-born was the priest of the whole family. The honour of exercising the priesthood was transferred, by the command of God communicated through Moses, from the tribe of Reuben, to whom it belonged by right of primogeniture, to that of Levi. (Numb. iii. 12-18., viii. 18.) In consequence of this fact, that God had taken the Levites from among the children

of Israel, instead of all the first-born, to serve him as priests, the first-born of the other tribes were to be redeemed, at a valuation made by the priest not exceeding five shekels, from serving God in that capacity. (Numb. xviii. 15, 16., compared with Luke ii. 22. et seq.)-3. The first-born enjoyed an authority over those who were younger, similar to that possessed by a father (Gen. xxv. 23. et seq.; 2 Chron. xxi. 3.; Gen. xxvii. 29.), which was transferred in the case of Reuben by Jacob their father to Judah. (Gen. xlix. 8-10.) The tribe of Judah, accordingly, even before it gave kings to the Hebrews, was every where distinguished from the other tribes. In consequence of the authority which was thus attached to the first-born, he was also made the successor in the kingdom. There was an exception to this rule in the case of Solomon, who, though a younger brother, was made his successor by David at the special appointment of God. It is very easy to see in view of these facts, how the word first-born came to express sometimes a great, and sometimes the highest dignity." (Isa. xiv. 30.; Psal. Ixxxix. 27.; Rom. viii. 29.; Coloss. i. 15-18.; Heb. xii. 23.; Rev. i. 5. 11.; Job xviii. 13.)

III. In the earliest ages, mothers suckled their offspring themselves, and, it should seem from various passages of Scripture, until they were nearly or quite three years old: on the day the child was weaned, it was usual to make a feast. (2 Macc. vii. 27.; 1 Sam. i. 22-24.; Gen. xxi. 8.) The same custom of feasting obtains in Persia and India to this day. In case the mother died before the child was old enough to be weaned, or was unable to rear it herself, nurses were employed; and also in later ages when matrons became too delicate or too infirm to perform the maternal duties. nurses were reckoned among the principal members of the family; and, in consequence of the respectable station which they sustained, are frequently mentioned in sacred history. See Gen. xxxv. 8.; 2 Kings xi. 2.; 2 Chron. xxii. 11.

These

"The daughters rarely departed from the apartments appropriated to the females, except when they went out with an urn to draw water, which was the practice with those who belonged to those humbler stations in life, where the ancient simplicity of manners had not lost its prevalence. (Exod. ii. 16.; Gen. xxiv. 11. 16., xxix. 10.; 1 Sam. ix. 11, 12.; John iv. 7.) They spent their time in learning those domestic and other arts, which are befitting a woman's situation and character, till they arrived at that period in life, when they were to be sold, or by a better fortune given away, in marriage. (Prov. xxxi. 13.; 2 Sam. xiii. 7.) The daughters of those who by their wealth had been elevated to high stations in life, so far from going out to draw water in urns, might be said to spend the whole of their time within the walls of their palaces. In imitation of their mothers, they were occupied with dressing, with singing, and with dancing; and, if we may judge from the representations of modern travellers, their appartments were sometimes the scenes of vice. (Ezek. xxiii. 18.) They went abroad but very rarely, as already intimated, and the

1 Jahn's Archæologia Biblica, by Mr. Upham, § 165.

2 Morier's Second Journey, p. 107. Roberts's Oriental Illustrations, p. 24.