of our tent, was a fine cool fountain, from which we obtained our supply; it is sunk in the ground and arched over, with a flight of steps by which to descend to it. Just north of the town, too, by the side of the road along the bed of the valley, is another small fountain; which seemed to serve chiefly at this season for watering animals. "The pools above described are doubtless of high antiquity; and one of these is probably to be regarded as the pool of Hebron, over which David hanged up the assassins of Ishbosheth. (2Sam. 4. 12.)" POOR. This word, in the Scriptures, often denotes not so much a man destitute of the good things of this world, as a man sensible of his spiritual wants. In this sense the greatest and richest men of the world are on a level with the poorest in the eyes of God. characters of the Messiah was, to judge the poor, (Psalm From some special instances, poverty was sometimes considered by the Jews as a punishment from God, (1Sam. 2. 36,) and Job also speaks of it as of a prison and a state of bondage, (ch. 36. 8,) but a more consolatory view is taken by the Prophet Isaiah, (48.10,) who compares it to a furnace or crucible wherein metals are purified. POPLAR, libneh, (Gen. 30. 37; Hosea 4. 13;) Sept. in Hosea, λeuêŋ. This is very probably the Populus alba, or white poplar, which corresponds with the etymology; but the Arabic version in both places, and the Septuagint in the former passage, interpret libneh as the styrax, or storax shrub, out of which flows a well-known odoriferous milky gum. Under the Mosaic law, for those whom misfortune or other circumstances had reduced to poverty, various humane regulations were made. Notwithstanding Moses had, by his statutes relative to the division of the land, studied to prevent any Israelites from being born poor, yet he nowhere asserts that there would actually be no poor. On the contrary he expressly affirms, (Deut. 15. 11,) "The poor shall never cease out of thy land;" and he enjoins the Hebrews to open wide their hands to their brethren, to the poor and the needy in their land. He exhorts the opulent to assist a reduced Israelite with a loan, and not to refuse even though the sabbatical year draw nigh, (Deut. 15. 7-10,) and no pledge was to be detained for the loan of money that served for the preservation of the debtor's life or health, (Deut. 24.12,13,) or was necessary to enable him to procure bread for himself and family, as the upper and nether mill-stones. During harvest the owner of a field was prohibited from Theophrastus mentions the white poplar as growing reaping the corn that grew in its corners, or the after in Egypt and Syria, beside which the black poplar, the growth; and the scattered ears or sheaves carelessly left aspen, and the Lombardy poplar grow in Palestine. The on the ground equally belonged to the poor. After a aspen, whose long leaf-stalks cause the leaves to tremble man had once shaken or beaten his olive-trees, he was with every breath of wind, unites with the willow and not permitted to gather the olives that still hung on the oak to overshadow the water courses of the Lower them; so that the fruit which did not ripen until after Lebanon, and with the oleander and the acacia to adorn the season of gathering, belonged to the poor. (Levit. the deep ravines of Southern Palestine. Lord Lindsay 19. 9,10; Deut. 24. 19,20,21; Ruth 2. 2-19.) Also describes the Lombardy poplar, so common in England, whatever grew during the sabbatical year, in the fields, as growing with the walnut-tree and weeping-willow gardens, or vineyards, the poor might take at pleasure. beside the deep torrents of the Upper Lebanon. Poplars Another privilege enjoyed by the poor was, what were are also abundant in the groves which extend for many called second tenths and second firstlings. "Besides the miles around Damascus. tenth received by the Levites, the Israelites were obliged to set apart another tenth of their field and garden produce; and in a similar manner of their cattle, a second set of offerings, for the purpose of presenting as thank-offerings at the high festivals." (Michaëlis.) Of these thank-offerings only certain fat pieces were consumed on the altar; the remainder, after deducting the priest's portion, was appropriated to the sacrifice feasts, to which the Israelites were bound to invite the stranger, the widow, and the orphan. "When any part of these tenths remained, which they had not been able to bring to the altar or to consume as offerings, they were obliged every three years to make a conscientious estimate of the amount, and without presenting it as an offering to God, employ it in benevolent entertainments in their native cities." (Deut. 12. 5-12,17-19; 14. 22-29; 16. 10,11; 26. 12,13.) Those who participated in these entertainments were evidently not regarded as beggars, as Moses does not mention the term, but we read of beggars in the time of the Judges, (1Sam. 2.8,) and the Kings. (Psalm 109. 10.) To those who suffer from lack of the world's goods, the Scriptures offer abundant consolation. One of the POPULATION OF THE HOLY LAND. See SYRIA. PORCH. See DWELLING-HOUSE. PORCH OF SOLOMON. See TEMPLE. PORTER, ww shoir, (2Kings 7. 10,11; 2Chron. 31.14,) a gate-keeper, a porter. The Levites discharged the office of porters of the Temple both day and night, and had the care of the treasure and offerings. Properly speaking the office of these porters was in some respects military, and they were the soldiers of the Lord, and the guards of his house, to whose charge the several gates of the courts of the sanctuary were appointed by lot. (1Chron. 26. 1,13,19.) They waited at every gate; and were not permitted to depart from their service, (2Chron. 35. 15,) and they attended by turns in their courses, as the other Levites did. (2Chron. 8. 14.) Their proper business was to open and shut the gates, and to attend at them by day, as a kind of peace-officers, in order to prevent any tumult among the people; to keep strangers, and the excommunicated and unclean PORTER persons from entering into the holy court, and to prevent whatever might be prejudicial to the safety, peace, and purity of the holy place and service. They also kept guard by night about the Temple and its courts. They are said to have been twenty-four in number, including three priests, and to have stood sentry at so many different places. There was an officer over the whole guard, called by Maimonides, "the man of the mountain of the house," who frequently walked round to see that all were at their posts, and attentive; when he passed a sentinel that was standing, he said, "Peace be unto you;" but if he found one asleep, he struck him, and he had liberty to set fire to his garment. This may, perhaps, be alluded to in the following passage: "Behold I come as a thief," that is, unawares; "blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments." (Rev.16.15.) The 134th Psalm appears to be addressed to these watchmen of the Temple, "who by night stand in the house of the Lord," and in which they are exhorted to employ their waking hours in acts of praise and devotion. See WATCHMAN. PORTION, P hhalak. (Gen. 14. 24.) In addition to the sense of dividing or allotting, this word is used in reference to a custom still prevalent among princes and rich people in the East, not only to invite their friends to feasts, but to send a portion of the banquet to those that cannot well come to it, especially their relations and those in a state of mourning. This sending of portions to those for whom nothing was prepared, is alluded to in Nehemiah 8. 10, where it is said, “Go your way, eat the fat, and drink the sweet, and send portions unto them for whom nothing is prepared, for this day is holy unto our Lord: neither be ye sorry; for the joy of the Lord is your strength." The historian is here describing a national festival where every one was supposed to be equally concerned; those then for whom nothing was prepared, it should seem, means those that were in a state of mourning; mourning for private calamities being here supposed to take place of rejoicing for public concerns. But it is not only to those that are in a state of mourning that provisions are sometimes sent; others are honoured by princes in the same manner who could not conveniently attend the royal table, or to whom it was supposed not to be convenient. M. D'Arvieux mentions that in Syria, when the grand emir of the Druses, with whom he resided, found it incommoded him to eat with him, he politely desired him to take his own time for eating, sending him what he liked from his kitchen and at the time he chose. Thus David it may be presumed did to Uriah, for it is recorded, "there followed him a mess of meat from the king." (2Sam. 11. 8,10.) We likewise read in the Book of Esther 9. 19, "Therefore the Jews of the villages, that dwelt in the unwalled towns, made the fourteenth day of the month Adar a day of gladness and feasting, and a good day, and of sending portions to one another." Roberts says, "On the first of the Hindoo month of July, also on the first day of the new moon of their October, the people send portions of cakes, preserves, fruits, oil, and clothes, one to another." See INHERITANCE; TESTAMENT. POSSESSION. The inquiry respecting demoniacal possession, so often mentioned in the New Testament, and likewise in the writings of profane authors of antiquity, is a very intricate and a difficult one. The neological school contend that the demoniacs of the Scriptures were all of them either madmen, epileptics, or persons subject to melancholy; and they make their appeal in behalf of their opinions to physicians. They accordingly, in their interpretation of those expressions which are employed in reference to demoniacs, proceed on the principle that the sacred writers meant by them the same, and nothing more, than would be naturally meant in case the possessed persons were merely the subjects of these diseases. But the great majority of theologians take a more literal and a sounder view of the subject; they justly consider the expressions in the New Testament as clearly implying that the demoniacs were possessed by an evil spirit, and they see in this state of things the providence of God, which thus made even devils bear witness to the divinity of Our blessed Lord. We draw principally from Professor Jahn the following summary of the chief considerations which are ordinarily employed to prove that the demoniacs were really possessed with a devil, and which must appear quite conclusive to any unprejudiced mind. I. These demoniacs expressed themselves in a way which is not done by epileptic, melancholy, or insane persons, as in Matthew 8. 28; Luke 8. 27; Mark 5. 7; they requested Jesus not to torment them, and they answered with propriety questions which were proposed to them. In one instance the demons departed from them and entered into swine, and in this particular case it surely cannot be said that madness or melancholy, the mere phrensy or wanderings of the brain, went out of the possessed persons into the herd. The supposition which some make, that the swine were driven into the sea by the demoniacs, is destitute of all probability, for they would have been more likely to have been driven in many more directions than one, by persons of such an undisciplined and irrational character; especially as they were two thousand in number. II. No symptoms of disease are mentioned in the case of the dumb demoniac, introduced in Matthew 9. 32 and Luke 11. 14, nor in that of the dumb and blind demoniac, spoken of in Matthew 12. 22. The possessed persons, therefore, in both of these instances, were in a sound state of body and health, with this exception merely, that the devil (for this certainly could not have been done by epilepsy, melancholy, or madness,) obstructed their organs of speech and vision. III. It is admitted that the circumstances attending the case of the lunatic in Matthew 17. 15, are such as might be expected in the case of a person afflicted with the epilepsy; but then it should be particularly noticed that the effects, in this instance, as well as in others, are attributed to the agency of the devil. IV. We are informed that the damsel at Philippi (Acts 16. 16,) practised divination, which evidently could not have been done by a mad or deranged person. We must conclude, therefore, that she was under the influence of an evil spirit. V. The demoniacs themselves say, that they are possessed with a devil; the Jews of the New Testament who happened to be concerned on account of their relationship to the person, or in any other way, in a case of demoniacal possession, assert the same thing; the Apostles and Evangelists likewise allege that persons possessed with demons were brought to Jesus, and that the demons departed at his command. (Matt. 4. 24; 7. 22; 9. 33; 12. 28; Mark 1. 32,39; 9. 25; Luke 4. 41; 8. 2,30,38; 9. 49.) Our Lord himself also asserts that he casts out devils. (Luke 11. 19; Matt. 12. 27,28.) VI. The sacred writers make an express distinction between demoniacs and the sick; and likewise between the exorcism of demons, and the healing of the sick. (Mark 1. 32; Luke 6. 17,18; 7. 21; 13. 32.) Demo niacs, therefore, were not persons afflicted with diseases in the way that has been supposed. VII. Demoniacs knew, what madmen, insane persons, epileptics, and melancholy men could not of themselves know; that Jesus was the Son of God, the Messiah, the son of David. (Mark 1. 24; 5. 27; Matt. 8. 29; Luke 4. 34.) VIII. Jesus speaks to the demons, and asks them their names; and we find that they answer him. He also threatens them, commands them to be silent, to depart, and not to return. (Mark 1. 25; 5. 8; 9. 25; Matt. 8. 29-31; Luke 4. 35; 8. 30-32.) IX. When the seventy disciples returned from their labours, one prominent cause of their joy was that the devils, when the name of Christ was pronounced, obeyed them. Our Lord answered them as follows. "I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven. Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you. Notwithstanding, in this rejoice not, that the spirits are subject unto you; but rather rejoice, because your names are written in heaven." (Luke 10. 18-20.) X. When Our Saviour was accused by the Pharisees of casting out devils by the aid of Beelzebub, he replied that the kingdom, the city, or the family, in which were dissensions and discords, would of itself perish; and that consequently, if there were such discords in the kingdom of Satan, as to induce one devil to exert his power in the expulsion of another, it could not long exist. To these things he immediately adds, "If I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges. But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you. Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? And then he will spoil his house." (Matt. 12. 25,28; Mark 3. 23-25; Luke 11. 17-19.) XI. Our Lord also makes the following remarks in respect to the demons or evil spirits in Matthew 12. 43; and in Luke 11. 24: "When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, but finding none. He saith, I will return to my house, whence I came out. And when he cometh, he findeth it swept and garnished; then goeth he and taketh seven other spirits more wicked than himself; and they enter in and dwell there, and the last state of that man is worse than the first." It is very clear that a person would not naturally understand expressions of this kind in respect to a disease. XII. The woman in Luke 13. 11, who was bowed down with the spirit of infirmity, is said by Our Saviour, in the sixteenth verse, to have been bound by Satan. The Apostle Peter, in like manner, asserts in Acts 10. 38, that all who had been oppressed by the devil were healed by "Jesus of Nazareth, the anointed of God." XIII. What are now regarded as the wonderful miracles of Our Lord, would appear of but comparatively little importance and little worth, if it should be admitted that he did not actually cast out devils, but merely healed diseases. The Church Fathers accordingly embraced, without any dissenting voice, the opinion, that the persons of whom we have been speaking were really possessed with demons, and the Church itself, in accordance with this opinion, instituted an order of persons called exorcists. Whatever difficulties may seem to attach to the common, simple, and ancient interpretation of the different cases of possession, it must be regarded as most probably correct, for this very satisfactory reason, that the difficulties of the new interpretation are always greater. On one side we have the wonderful doctrine that it pleased the Almighty to permit invisible and evil beings to pos sess themselves in some incomprehensible manner of the bodies and souls of men; on the other we have the Evangelists inconsistent with themselves, and a narrative which is acknowledged to be inspired, and to be intended for the unlearned-unintelligible and false. Between such difficulties we prefer the former; and if we cannot comprehend how such things could be, we submit to the infinite wisdom and power of the Supreme, and surrender our imperfect reason to the guidance of Divine revelation. The difference between Christianity and philosophy, or the mode of speculating which assumes that title, may be said to consist in this: in matters of philosophy the vulgar may be in error, and the speculatists may be right; but in Christianity the popular opinion is generally right, and the philosopher who would fashion the statements of Scripture according to his own notions of truth and falsehood, is sure to conclude with error, probably in infidelity. The doctrine of demoniacal possession is consistent with the whole tenor of Scripture. Evil is there represented as having been introduced by a being of this description, who in some wonderful manner influenced the immaterial principle in man; and the continuance of evil in the world is frequently imputed to the continued agency of the same being. His delight is in every possible way to harass and injure mankind, both as to mind and outward estate. The doctrine also is consistent with the dictates of reason. If one man may cause evil to another, a thing which is done in thousands of instances every day, is it not possible that evils of a different kind might be produced by means of other beings, while the moral government of God remained unimpeached? The supposition that the demoniacs spoken of in Scripture were lunatics, is fraught with numerous and insuperable difficulties. The facts recorded of them demonstrate that they were not merely such. Insane persons either reason rightly on wrong grounds, or wrongly on right grounds, or blend right and wrong together. But these demoniacs reasoned rightly on right grounds; they uttered propositions undeniably true, and such as were always perfectly adapted to the occasions. They excelled in the accuracy of their knowledge the disciples themselves; at least we never find any of these applying to Our Lord the epithet of "the Holy One of God." They were alike consistent in their knowledge and their language. Their bodies were agitated and convulsed; the powers of their minds were controlled in such a manner that their actions were unreasonable; yet they addressed Our Lord in a consistent and rational, though in an appalling and mysterious manner. Our Lord answered them, not by appealing to the individuals whose actions had been so irrational, but to something distinct from them, which he requires and commands to leave them: that is, to evil spirits, whose mode of continuing evil in such instances had been so fearfully displayed. These evil spirits answer him by an intimate knowledge of his person and character, which was hidden from the wise and prudent of the nation. Before Him, as their future Judge, they believed and trembled, saying, "Art thou come to torment us before the time?" It is no reasonable objection that we do not read of such frequent possessions before or since the appearance of Our Redeemer on earth. It seems, indeed, to have been ordered by a special providence, that they should have been permitted to be then more than usually common; in order that He, who came to destroy the works POSSESSION of the devil, might the more remarkably and visibly triumph over him; and that the machinations and devices of Satan might be more openly defeated, at a time when their power was at its highest both in the souls and bodies of men; and also that plain facts might be a sensible confutation of the Sadducean error, which denied the existence of angels or spirits, (Acts 23. 8,) and prevailed among the principal men both for rank and learning in those days. The cases of the demoniacs expelled by the Apostles were cases of real possession; and it is a well known fact, that in the second century of the Christian era, the apologists for the persecuted professors of the faith of Christ appealed to the ejection of evil spirits as a proof of the Divine origin of their religion. Hence it is evident that the demoniacs were not merely insane or epileptic patients, but persons really and truly vexed and convulsed by unclean demons. Jortin remarks, that "where any circumstances are added concerning the demoniacs, they are generally such as show that there was something preternatural in the case; for these afflicted persons unanimously joined in doing homage to Christ and his Apostles; they all knew him and unite in confessing his divinity. If, on the contrary, they had been lunatics, some would have worshipped, and some would have reviled him, according to the various ways in which the disease had affected their minds." At the present day, as Roberts informs us, "The universal opinion in the East is, that devils have the power to enter into and take possession of men, in the same sense as we understand it to have been the case, as described by the sacred writers. I have often seen the poor objects who were believed to be under demoniacal influence, and certainly, in some instances, I found it no easy matter to account for their conduct on natural principles; I have seen them writhe and tear themselves in the most frantic manner; they burst asunder the cords with which they were bound, and fell on the ground as if dead. At one time they are silent, and again most vociferous; they dash with fury among the people, and loudly pronounce their imprecations. But no sooner does the exorcist come forward, than the victim becomes the subject of new emotions; he stares, talks incoherently, sighs and falls on the ground; and in the course of an hour, is as calm as any who are around him. Those men who profess to eject devils are frightful-looking creatures, and are seldom associated with, except in the discharge of their official duties. It is a fact, that they affect to eject the evil spirits by their prince of devils. Females are much more subject to these affections than men; and Friday is the day of all others on which they are most liable to be attacked. I am fully of opinion that nearly all their possessions would be removed by medicine, or by arguments of a more tangible nature. Not long ago a young female was said to be under the influence of an evil spirit, but the father, being an unbeliever, took a large broom and began to beat his daughter in the most unmerciful manner. After some time the spirit cried aloud, 'Do not beat me! do not beat me!' and took its departure. There is a fiend called Poothani, which is said to take great delight in entering little children; but the herb called pa-maruta is then administered with great slow. In the country of Job a camel would travel at little more than two miles an hour; but those who carried messages in haste moved very differently, and their haste appeared the greater by contrast. The runners, or "posts" as we translate the word, sometimes ride dromedaries, a remarkably swift sort of camel which can outrun the swiftest horses. With what energy then might Job say, "My days are swifter than a post;" instead of moving slowly like a caravan, they have disappeared with the swiftness of a messenger mounted on a dromedary. Some writers have thought that the use of posts as a system originated with the Persians. Diodorus Siculus observes that the kings of Persia, in order to have intelligence of what was passing through all the provinces of their vast dominions, placed sentinels at eminences, at convenient distances, where towers were built. These sentinels gave notice of public occurrences from one to another, with a very loud and shrill voice, by which news was transmitted from one extremity of the kingdom to another with great expedition. But as this could not be practised except in the case of general news, which it was expedient that the whole nation should be acquainted with, Cyrus, as Xenophon relates, appoint couriers and places for post-horses, building on purpose on all the high roads, houses for the reception of the couriers, where they were to deliver their packets to the next, and so on. This they did night and day, so that no inclemency of weather was to stop them; and they are represented as moving with astonishing speed. Herodotus owns that nothing swifter was known for a journey by land. Xerxes, in his famous expedition against Greece, planted posts from the Ægean Sea to Shushan or Susa, to send notice thither of what might happen to his army; he placed also messengers from station to station, to convey his packets, at such distances from each other as a horse might easily travel. The regularity and swiftness of the Roman posts were likewise admirable. Gibbon observes, "The advantage of receiving the earliest intelligence, and of conveying their orders with celerity, induced the emperors to establish throughout their extensive dominions the regular institution of posts. Houses were everywhere erected at the distance only of five or six miles; each of them was constantly provided with forty horses; and by the help of these relays, it was easy to travel a hundred miles a day along the Roman roads." In the time of Theodosius, Cesarius, a magistrate of high rank, went post from Antioch to Constantinople. He began his journey at night, was in Cappadocia (one hundred and sixty-five miles from Antioch) the ensuing evening, and arrived at Constantinople the sixth day about noon. The whole distance was seven hundred and twenty-five Roman, or six hundred and sixty-five English miles. The institution of posts disappeared from Europe. with the breaking up of the Roman empire, and its re-establishment is generally attributed to Louis XI. of France, in the middle of the fifteenth century. POSTURE. The posture of persons acting, determines, in some measure, the nature or kind of their actions. Thus, in the language of Scripture, Standing signifies resisting, defending, struggling, and contending for victory, giving assistance to friends. In Acts 7. 55, Christ is said to be standing when he appeared to Stephen, as ready to assist him in his agony. To stand before another is a posture of service. (Deut. 10. 8; 1Kings 10. 8; 1Sam. 16. 22; Luke 1. 19.) Walking among or in the midst, is a posture of dignity and authority, of one that is busy, and watching and defending those whom he walks about or amongst. Thus God, to represent himself as protecting and governing the Israelites, says, in Leviticus 26. 12, "And I will walk among you, and will be your God, and ye shall be my people;" and the protecting angel in Daniel 4. 13,23, is called a watchman or patroller, one that goes about to defend from any surprise. Sitting signifies ruling, reigning, judging, and enjoying peace. Thus in Judges 5. 10, "Ye that sit in judgment," are the magistrates or judges. In 2Samuel 19. 8, "The king sitteth in the gate," that is, he is ready to execute any duty belonging to the kingly office. To sit on the throne is always synonymous to reigning, a seat or throne being the symbol of government. Sitting with other adjuncts has a different signification. To sit upon the earth, or on a dunghill, signifies to be in extreme misery. To sit in darkness, is to be in prison and slavery. To sit as a widow, is to mourn as a widow. To fall down or prostrate oneself before ano ther, is the symbol of submission and homage. (Gen. 37. 7,8; Isai. 45. 14.) POT. The word kili, employed in Leviticus 6. 28, signifies a brazen pot; but it likewise in other places denotes any kind of vessel or utensil. (Gen. 31. 37.) The word n tsinstsineth, (Exod. 16.33,) is also rendered "pot" in our version, but it means rather a basket to keep things in. The forms of the pots and other vessels used by the Egyptians may be ascertained by reference to the paintings in the tombs of Egypt copied in this work, and likewise to various specimens preserved in the British Museum. It is highly probable that those of the Jews were very much of the same sort. See POTTERY. POTIPHAR, Di Sept. Пeтeppns, (Gen. 37. 36,) an officer of the court of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and captain of the guard, who purchased Joseph of some Midianitish merchants, and made him superintendent of his house. Listening, however, afterwards to the false charges of his wife, he threw Joseph into prison, where he was rigorously confined; but this does. not seem to have been of long continuance, for we find that Joseph was afterwards entrusted with the management of the prison. (Gen. 39. 19-23.) Some expositors have made a distinction between the master of Joseph and the keeper of the prison into which he was thrown; while others with more probability have conjectured that Potiphar, after having punished Joseph in a transport of wrath and jealousy, acknowledged his innocence; but that in order to avoid disgracing his wife, instead of restoring Joseph to his former office, he confided to him the command of the state prison. See JOSEPH. POTIPHERAH, Yi (Gen. 41. 45,) the priest of On, is known only from the circumstance of his having given his daughter in marriage to Joseph. (Gen. 46. 20.) Jablonski conjectured the name to be the same as the Coptic ПIHONT-ØPH, priest of the sun, which from the recent discoveries among the Egyptian monuments appears to be well founded. See ON. POTSHERD, hheres, (Job 2. 8; Isai. 45. 9,) a fragment of broken pottery. Dr. Mason Good observes on the passage in Job 2. 8, "When the art of metallurgy was but in its infancy, almost all the domestic utensils employed for every purpose were of pottery alone. Pottery may hence be fairly supposed the oldest of the mechanical inventions; and on this account the Hebrew term hheres, a potter, pottery, or potsherd, became afterwards extended to signify wares of every other kind, or their fabricators, and hence artisans in general, whether in brass, iron, wood, or stone. The same word also, when used in the signification of a potsherd, a fragment of pottery, was also employed to import a sharp instrument in general, as a rasp, scraper, or scalpel, a sense in which it has to this day descended to the Arabs; for the Arabic word, (identically, as to letters, the same as the Hebrew hheres,), as a verb, implies to scrape or rasp with an edged tool, the purpose to which the hheres, or sherd, was directed in the text, and as a substantive, a scab, or sharp and morbid incrustation of the skin: the object to which it was applied." See POTTERY. POTTAGE, T nazid. (Gen. 25. 29,34.) The red pottage for which Esau profanely bartered his birthright was prepared as we learn from this chapter by seething lentiles in water; but the common pottage in the East, little pieces, and boiling them with flour, rice, and at the present day, is made by cutting their meat into parsley, all which is afterwards poured into a proper vessel. Professor Robinson when at Akabah says, “We bought little except a supply of lentiles or small beans, which are common in Egypt and Syria under the name of 'adas; the same from which the pottage was made for which Esau sold his birthright. We found them very palatable, and could well conceive that to a weary hunter faint with hunger they might be quite a dainty.” Roberts says, "The people of the East are exceedingly fond of pottage, which they call kool. It is something like gruel, and is made of various kinds of grain, which are first beaten in a mortar. The red pottage is made of kurakon, and other grains, but is not superior to the other. For such a mess, then, did Esau sell his birthright. When a man has sold his fields or gardens for an insignificant sum, the people say, 'The fellow has sold his land for pottage.' Does a father give his daughter in marriage to a low caste man, it is observed, 'He has given her for pottage.' Does a person by base means seek for some paltry enjoyment, it is said,‘For one leaf of pottage, he will do nine days' work.' Has a learned man stooped to anything which was not expected from him, it is said, 'The learned one has fallen into the pottage-pot.' Of a man in great poverty it is remarked, Alas! he cannot get pottage. A beggar asks, 'Sir, will you give me a little pottage? Does a man seek to acquire great things by small means, 'He is trying to procure rubies by pottage.' When a person greatly flatters another, it is common to say, 'He praises him only for his pottage.' Has an individual lost much money by trade, The speculation has broken his pottage-pot." Does a rich man threaten to ruin a poor man, the latter will ask, 'Will the lightning strike my pottage-pot?"" See LENTILES. POTTER, POTTERY, " yotsir. (Psalm 2.9.) A potter is a maker of earthen vessels, of whose art there is frequent mention made in Scripture. Among the remains of the manufactures of ancient nations, none are more conspicuous or more generally distributed than vessels in the form of urns. Although the materials of these are in many instances merely baked clay, the makers appear to have exercised the greatest skill and ingenuity in their formation; and the result is, that in no instance is the taste of the ancients displayed to greater advantage than in the efforts of the potter. Even the rudest nations exhibit traces of genius in the formation of their earthen utensils. Perhaps the perfection of these specimens of ancient art may in a considerable degree be attributed to the nature of the mate |