ings. The song might also be sung on the way by individuals or in choirs. They congratulated each other on their journey." See HEBREW POETRY.

PSALTERY. See MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS.

PTOLEMAIS, IITоλnμais, the name borne in the time of the Apostles (Acts 21.7) by the ancient Accho, Ѕее Ассно. now known as Akka, or Acre. Professor Robinson, in his recent Biblical Researches in Palestine, says, "The name of 'Akka, or Ptolemais, recalls many a deadly struggle. There Napoleon was baffled, and driven back from Syria; and in our own day, torrents of blood have flowed within and around its walls, during the long siege and subsequent capture of the city by the Egyptian army, in A.D. 1832.

"The ink with which these lines were penned was hardly dry, when the coasts of Syria were again visited by war; "Akka became the closing scene of the struggle between the allied English and Austrian fleets, and the forces of Mohammed Ali. On the third day of November, 1840, 'Akka was bombarded for several hours, until the explosion of a magazine destroyed the garrison, and laid the town in ruins." See SYRIA.

PUBLICAN, TEλwvns. (Matt. 9. 9.) The term. "publican" employed by our translators in this and other passages, is derived from the Latin publicani, the name of a kind of corporate bodies among the Romans who farmed the public revenue, and had their subordinates, to whom the appellation given by the Evangelist more properly applies, in all the provinces of the empire. The principals were men of great consideration in the government, and Cicero says, that among these were the flower of the Roman knights, the ornaments of the city, and the strength of the commonwealth; but the deputies, the under-farmers, the commissioners, the publicans of the lower order,-who were at least in some cases natives of the provinces, (Matt. 9. 9,) whilst the superiors were Romans by birth,-for their rapine and extortion, were looked upon as so many thieves and pickpockets. Josephus has made mention of several Jews who were Roman knights, whence Dr. Lardner thinks it probable that they had merited the equestrian rank by their services in collecting some part of the

revenue.

The ordinary taxes which the Romans levied in the provinces were of three sorts: (1,) Customs upon goods imported and exported; which tribute was therefore called Portorium, from portus, "a haven;" (2,) A tax upon cattle fed upon certain pastures belonging to the Roman state, the number of which being kept in writing, this tribute was called Scriptura; (3,) A tax upon corn, of which the government demanded a tenth part; this tribute was therefore called Decenna.

The collectors of these tributes were known by the general name of Teλwvat, that is, tax-gatherers. Some of them, mentioned in Scripture, seem to have been receivers-general for a large district, as Zaccheus, who is styled "a chief publican,” apxiteλwvns. Matthew, who is termed simply "a publican," Teλwvŋs, was one who sat at the receipt of custom where the duty was paid upon imports and exports. (Matt. 9. 9; Luke 6. 29; Mark 2. 14.) These officers, at least the inferior ones, were generally rapacious, extorting more than the legal tribute, (Luke 3. 13;) thence they were reckoned infamous by the rest of the people, and various passages in the Gospels show how odious they were to the Jews, (Mark 2. 15,16;) insomuch that the Pharisees would hold no communication whatever with them, and imputed it to

Our Saviour as a crime that he sat at meat with publi cans. (Matt. 9. 10,11; 12. 19; 21. 31,32.) The payment of taxes to the Romans under any circumstances was accounted by the Jews an intolerable grievance; hence those Jews who assisted in collecting them were detested as plunderers in the cause of the Romans, as betrayers of the liberty of their country, and as abettors of those who had enslaved it; this circumstance will account for the contempt and hatred so often expressed by the Jews, in the Evangelical histories, against the collectors of taxes or tribute.

The parable of the Pharisee and the publican (Luke 18. 10-13) will derive considerable illustration from these circumstances. Our Saviour, in bringing these two characters together, appears to have chosen them as making the strongest contrast between what, in the public estimation, were the extremes of excellence and villany. The Pharisees were the most powerful and popular sect among the Jews, and made great pretences to piety, whilst the very name of publican was synonimous with extortioner, and all who followed that profession were regarded with the extreme of hatred and contempt.

PUBLIUS, ПOTλos, (Acts 28. 7,) the Roman governor of Malta at the time of St. Paul's shipwreck, who miraculously healed Publius' father of a dangerous malady. The bay in which the vessel was wrecked was contiguous to his estate, and he most probably entertained the Apostle during his three months' stay in that island. (Acts 28. 11.) An ancient inscription, found at Malta, designates its governor by the same appellation, IIpwTos, or "chief-man," which St. Luke gives to Publius. See MELITA.

PUDENS, Hovdns. (2Tim. 4. 21.) This person, mentioned by St. Paul, was thought by ancient writers to have been a Roman senator, converted by St. Peter; but there is reason to think they confounded with him another Pudens, a senator said to be father of Prasidus and Prudentiana above a hundred years afterwards. The Greeks put Pudens in the list of the seventy disciples, and say that after the death of Paul he was beheaded by Nero; and some writers think that Claudia, mentioned by Paul after Pudens, was his wife; but this is all merely conjectural.

....

PUFF. The Psalmist says, "The wicked,... as for all his enemies, he puffeth at them." (Psalm 10. 6.) This is still an Oriental figure of speech. Roberts says, "Of a proud and powerful man in the East it is said, 'He puffs away his fears; that is, they are so contemptible, so light, that like a flake of cotton, he puffs them from his presence. Great is the contempt which is shown by puffing through the mouth, and blowing through the nostrils.”

I. PUL, the name of a people remote from Palestine, mentioned in Isaiah 66. 19. The Septuagint translate the word Poud, confounding it with Phut; the Vulgate renders it Africa; and Bochart says it is the island of Philæ, or Elephantine, in Upper Egypt; but it is impossible, at the present time, to determine the question.

II. An Assyrian king, who rendered the kingdom of Israel tributary. He invaded the kingdom shortly after Menahem had usurped the throne, and received from him a thousand talents of silver to support him in his kingdom. (2Kings 15. 19.) See ASSYRIA; ISRAEL, KINGDOM OF.

PULSE

PULSE, ↳ kali, (Lev. 23. 14,) a general term, applied to those grains or seeds which grow in pods, as beans, peas, vetches, &c. Our English word is said to be derived from phul, a bean, but this is questionable.

The Vulgate renders kali, in 2Sam. 17. 28, frixum cicer, or "parched peas," which is very probably correct; for Dr. Shaw informs us that the Cicer garamanços, or chick peas, are in the greatest repute in the East, after they are parched in pans or ovens, then receiving the name of leblebby. This practice seems to be of great antiquity, for Plautus speaks of it as very common in his time; and Horace mentions parched peas as the food of the poorer Romans.

In Daniel 1. 12-16, the word rendered "pulse" is Dyn zaraim, which may signify seeds in general, for various kinds of grain, as wheat, barley, peas, &c., were dried and pressed for food by the people of the East. See FOOD.

PUNISHMENTS. The punishments mentioned in the Scriptures may be said generally to be comprised in the Apostle's recapitulation of the sufferings of the righteous in former times: "Some had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment: they were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword." (Heb. 11. 36,37.) Of these punishments some were inflicted by the Jews in common with other nations, and others were peculiar to themselves. They were usually divided into two classes, capital and non-capital.

The capital punishments of the Jews have been distinguished by the Talmudical writers into lesser deaths, and such as were more grievous; but there is no authority in the Scriptures for these distinctions, neither are the Rabbins agreed among themselves what particular punishments are to be referred to these two heads. A capital crime was by the inspired writers termed generally a sin of death, (Deut. 22. 26,) or a sin worthy of death, (Deut. 21. 22,) which mode of expression is adopted or rather imitated by the Apostle John, who distinguishes between a sin unto death, and a sin not unto death. (1John 5. 16.) Criminals, or those who were deemed worthy of capital punishment, were called sons or men of death, (1Sam. 20. 31; 26. 16; 2Sam. 19.29, marginal rendering;) just as he who had incurred the punishment of scourging was designated a son of stripes. (Deut. 25. 2.) Those who suffered a capital punishment were said to be put to death for their own sin, (Deut. 24. 16; 2Kings 14. 6;) a similar phraseology was adopted by Our Lord when he said to the Jews, "Ye shall die in your sins." (John 8. 21-24.) Eleven different sorts of capital punishments are mentioned in the sacred writings.

(1.) Beating to death, πνμπavioμos, was a punishment in use among the Greeks, and was designed for slaves. The criminal was suspended to a stake and beaten with rods till he died. (2Macc. 6. 10,19,28,30; Heb. 11. 35.)

(2.) Burning offenders alive is a punishment which Moses commanded to be inflicted on the daughters of priests who should be guilty of unchastity, (Levit. 21. 9,) and upon a man who should marry both the mother and the daughter. (Levit. 20. 14.) This punishment seems to have been in use in the East, from a very early period. When Judah was informed that his daughter-in-law was pregnant, he condemned her to be burnt. (Gen. 38. 24.) Many ages afterwards we find the Babylonians or Chaldæans burning certain offenders alive, (Jerem. 19. 22, Dan. 3. 6;) and this mode of

1107

punishment was not uncommon in the East in the

seventeenth century.

(3.) Crucifixion was practised among several ancient nations, as the Egyptians, Persians, Greeks, and Carthaginians, as well as the Romans. The Carthaginians. generally adjudged to this death their unfortunate and unsuccessful commanders. There are many unhappy instances of this. They crucified Bomilcar, whom Justin calls their king, when they detected his design of joining Agathocles. They erected a cross in the midst of the forum, on which they suspended him, and from which with a great and unconquered spirit, amidst all his sufferings, he bitterly inveighed against them, and upbraided them with all the black and atrocious crimes they had lately perpetrated. But this manner of executing criminals prevailed most among the Romans. It was considered an infamous punishment, and was chiefly inflicted on vile, worthless, and incorrigible slaves. In reference to this, the Apostle, describing the condescension of Jesus, and his submission to this most opprobrious death, represents him as taking upon him the form of a servant, (Phil. 2. 7,8,) and becoming obedient to death, even the death of the cross.

Crucifixion was universally and deservedly reputed the most shameful and ignominious death to which any one could be exposed. In such an exit were comprised every idea and circumstance of odium, disgrace, and public scandal. Hence the Apostle extols and magnifies the love of Our Redeemer, in "that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us," and "for the joy set before him, endured the cross despising the shame," (Rom. 5. 8; Heb. 12. 2;) disregarding every circumstance of public indignity and infamy with which such a death was loaded. It was from the idea they connected with such a death, that the Greeks treated the Apostles with the last contempt and pity for publicly embarking in the cause of a person who had been brought to this reproachful and dishonourable death by his own countrymen. The preaching of the cross was to them foolishness, (1 Cor. 1. 23;) the promulgation of a system of religion that had been taught by a person, who, by a national act, had publicly suffered the punishment and death of the most useless and abandoned slave, was, in their ideas, the extreme of infatuation; and the preaching of Christ crucified, publishing in the world a religion whose founder suffered on a cross, appeared the last absurdity and madness. The heathens looked upon the attachment of the primitive Christians to a religion whose publisher had come to such an end, as an undoubted proof of their utter ruin, that they were destroying their interest, comfort, and happiness, by adopting such a system founded on such a dishonourable circumstance. The same inherent scandal and ignominy had crucifixion in the estimation of the Jews. They, indeed, annexed more complicated wretchedness to it, for they esteemed the miscreant who was adjudged to such an end not only to be abandoned of men, but forsaken of God: "He that is hanged," says the Law," is accursed of God." (Deut. 21. 23.) Hence St. Paul, representing to the Galatians the grace of Jesus, who released us from that curse to which the Law of Moses devoted us, by being made a curse for us, by submitting to be treated for our sakes as an execrable malefactor, to show the horror of such a death as Christ voluntarily endured, adds, “It is written in the Law, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree!" (Gal. 3. 13;) and from this express declaration of the Law of Moses concerning persons thus executed, we may account for that aversion the Jews discovered against Christianity, and perceive the reason of what St. Paul asserts, that their preaching of Christ crucified was to the Jews a stumbling block. (1 Cor. 1. 23.) The

circumstance of the cross caused them to stumble at the very gate of Christianity.

The person who was subjected to the punishment of crucifixion among the Romans was deprived of all his clothes excepting something around the loins. In this state of nudity, he was beaten, sometimes with rods, but more generally with whips. Such was the severity of this flagellation that numbers died under it. In addition to scourging, Our Lord was crowned with thorns and made the subject of mockery, but nothing of this kind could be legally done, or in other words, insults of this kind were not among the ordinary attendants of crucifixion. They were owing, in this case, merely to the petulant spirit of the Roman soldiers. (Matt. 27. 29; Mark 15. 17; John 19. 2-5.)

The criminal, having been beaten, was subjected to the further suffering of being obliged to carry the cross himself to the place of punishment, which was commonly a hill, near the public way and out of the city. The place of crucifixion at Jerusalem was a hill to the north-west of the city.

The cross, σTaupos, a post, otherwise called the unpropitious or infamous tree, consisted of a piece of wood erected perpendicularly, and intersected by another at right angles near the top, so as to resemble the letter T. The crime for which the person suffered, was inscribed on the transverse piece near the top of the perpendicular one. There is no mention made in any ancient writer of anything, on which the feet of the crucified person rested. Near the middle, however, of the perpendicular beam there projected a piece of wood, on which he sat, and which served as a support to the body, since the weight of the body might otherwise have torn away the hands from the nails driven through them. The position which is taken by some, that the persons who suffered crucifixion, were not in some instances fastened to the cross by nails driven through the hands and feet, but were merely bound to it by ropes, cannot be proved by the testimony of any ancient writer whatever; while that the feet as well as the hands were fastened to the cross by means of nails is expressly asserted by Plautus. In regard to the nailing of the feet, it may be also remarked, that Gregory Nazianzen has asserted, that one nail only was driven through both of them, but Cyprian, who had been a personal witness to crucifixions, and is consequently in this case the better authority, states, on the contrary, that two nails or spikes were driven one through each foot. The crucified person remained suspended in this way, till he died. While he exhibited any signs of life, he was watched by a guard, but they left him, when it appeared that he was dead. The corpse was not buried except by express permission, which was sometimes granted by the emperor on his birth-day, but only to a very few. An exception, however, to this general practice was made by the Romans in favour of the Jews, on account of Deuteronomy 21. 22,23, and in Judæa, accordingly, crucified persons were buried on the same day. When, therefore, there was not a prospect that they would die on the day of the crucifixion, the executioners hastened the extinction of life, by kindling a fire under the cross, so as to suffocate them with the smoke, or by letting loose wild beasts upon them, or by breaking their bones upon the cross with a mallet, or by piercing them with a in order that they might bury them on the same

day.

The Jews, while under the jurisdiction of the Romans, were accustomed to give the criminal, before the commencement of his sufferings, a medicated drink of wine and myrrh. The object of this was to produce intoxication, and thereby render the pains of crucifixion less

sensible to the sufferer. This beverage was refused by Our Saviour, for the obvious reason that he chose to die with the faculties of his mind undisturbed and unclouded. (Matt. 27. 34; Mark 15. 23.) The drink the Roman soldiers subsequently offered to the Saviour was a mixture of vinegar and water, denominated posca, and was a common drink for soldiers in the Roman army. (Luke 23. 36; John 19. 29.)

It was customary for the Romans, on any extraordinary execution, to put over the head of the malefactor an inscription denoting the crime for which he suffered. Several examples of this occur in the Roman history. It was also usual at this time at Jerusalem to post up advertisements, which were designed to be read by all classes of persons, in several languages. Titus, in a message which he sent to the Jews when the city was on the point of falling into his hands, and by which he endeavoured to persuade them to surrender, said, “Did you not erect pillars, with inscriptions on them in the Greek, and in our [the Latin] language, 'Let no one pass beyond these bounds?"" In conformity to this usage, an inscription by Pilate's order was fixed above the head of Jesus, written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, specifying what it was that brought him to this end. This writing was by the Romans called titulus, a title, and it is the very expression made use of by the Evangelist John: "Pilate wrote a title (eypayE TITλOV,) and put it on the cross." (John 19. 19.) After the cross was erected, a party of soldiers was appointed to keep guard, and to attend at the place of execution till the criminal breathed his last; thus also we read that a body of Roman soldiers, with a centurion, were deputed to guard Our Lord and the two malefactors that were crucified with him. (Matt. 27. 54.)

(4.) Dismemberment. This method of putting criminals to death prevailed among the Chaldæans and Persians. When this punishment was inflicted, the left hand and right foot, or both feet and hands, were cut off at the joints. (Dan. 2. 5; Matt. 24. 51; Luke 12. 46.) A mutilation, in this way, of persons who had been punished with death, is mentioned in 2Samuel 4. 12.

(5.) Drowning was a punishment in use among the Syrians, and was well known to the Jews in the time of Our Saviour, though we have no evidence that it was practised by them. It was also in use among the Greeks and Romans. The Emperor Augustus, we are told, punished certain persons who had been guilty of rapacity in the province of Syria or Lycia, by causing them to be thrown into a river, with a heavy weight about their necks. Josephus also informs us that the Galileans revolting, drowned the partisans of Herod in the sea of Gennesareth. To this mode of capital punishment Our Saviour alludes in Matthew 18. 6. It is still practised in India; a large stone is tied round the neck of the criminal, who is cast into the sea, or into deep

water.

(6.) Hanging does not appear to have been a punishment among the Jews after their settlement in Palestine; although Joshua hung the king of Ai on a tree until evening. (Josh. 8. 29.) In Egypt, however, it was a customary punishment for many capital crimes; and the criminals were kept bound in prison till their fate was decided; being confined under the immediate superintendence, and within the house, of the chief of the police.

(7.) Precipitation, or casting headlong from a window, or from a precipice, was a punishment rarely used; though we meet with it in the history of the Kings, and in subsequent times. Thus the profligate Jezebel was precipitated out of a window, (2Kings 9. 30-33,) and the same mode of punishment is still practised in Persia.

Amaziah, king of Judah, barbarously forced ten thousand Idumæan prisoners of war to leap from the top of a high rock. (2Chron. 25. 12.) The Jews attempted to precipitate Jesus Christ from the brow of a mountain. (Luke 4. 29.) James, surnamed the Just, was thrown from the highest part of the Temple into the subjacent valley. The same mode of punishment, it is well known, obtained among the Romans, who used to throw certain malefactors from the Tarpeian rock. A similar practice is still in use among the Moors in Barbary.

(8.) Sawing asunder, was occasionally practised by the Jews. The criminal was sometimes sawn asunder lengthwise, which was more especially the practice in Persia. The Prophet Isaiah, according to the Talmudists, was put to death in this manner. David inflicted this punishment upon the conquered inhabitants of Rabbath Ammon. (1Chron. 20. 3.)

(9.) Slaying with the Sword. Decapitation, or beheading, was a method of taking away life that was early practised. This mode of punishment, therefore, must probably have been known to the Hebrews. And it may be remarked, that if in truth there occur no indubitable instances of it in the time of the early Hebrew kings, it is clear that something, which bears much relationship to it, is meant in such passages as the following. (2Sam. 4. 7; 2Kings 10. 6-8.) It appears in the later periods of the Jewish history, that Herod and his descendants, in a number of instances, ordered decapitation. (Matt. 14. 8-12; Acts 12. 2.) "It becomes us to observe, however," says Professor Jahn, "lest these remarks should carry an erroneous impression, that beheading was not sanctioned by the laws of Moses. The Mosaic punishment, the most correspondent to it, was that of the sword; with which the criminal was slain in any way which appeared most convenient or agreeable to the executioner. That this statement in respect to the liberty exercised by the executioner is correct, may be indeed inferred from the phrase, 'Rush upon him,' y piga boi, (Judges 8. 21,) and 'He rushed upon him,' y vayiphga boi. (1Sam. 22. 18; 2Sam. 1. 15.) The probability is, however, that the executioner generally thrust the sword into the bowels of the criminal."

(10.) Stoning, in the Mosaic law, was denounced against idolaters, blasphemers, sabbath-breakers, incestuous persons, witches, wizards, and children who either cursed their parents or rebelled against them. (Levit. 20. 2,27; 24. 14; Deut. 13. 10; 17. 5; 23. 21-24.) It was the punishment most generally denounced in the Law against notorious criminals; and is intended by the indefinite term of "putting to death." (Levit. 20. 10, compared with John 8. 5.) Michaëlis supposes that the culprit was bound previously to the execution of the sentence. Moses (following probably some ancient custom,) enacted that witnesses should throw the first stone against the criminal, and after the witnesses, the people. (Deut. 13. 10; 17. 7; Josh. 7. 25; John 8. 7.) Instances of persons being stoned in the Old Testament occur in Achan, (Josh. 7. 25 ;) Adoram, (1 Kings 12. 18;) Naboth, (1 Kings 21. 10;) and Zechariah. (2Chron. 24. 21.) The assertion of the Talmudists, (Sanhedrin 6. 1-4,) that the criminal was first thrown off from an elevated scaffolding, and then stoned, is a mere fable.

This mode of punishment is meant in Leviticus 20. 10, where the discourse is concerning adulterers. Accordingly, this is the construction to be put upon the passage in Ezekiel 16. 38,40, and in John 8. 5. Compare likewise Exodus 31. 14, and 35. 2, with Numbers 15. 35,36. The opinion, therefore, of the Talmudists, who maintain that strangulation is the punishment

1109

meant in the passage referred to in Leviticus, is not to be admitted.

(11.) Strangulation, to which an allusion is made in 1Kings 20. 31, is by the more recent Jews attributed to Moses, but without cause. They suppose strangulation is meant, when the phrase "He shall die the death," is read. As that phrase, in their estimation, is meant to express the easiest death by which a person can die, they suppose the mode of death intended is no other than that of strangulation. A person will be surprised at their notions of an easy death, when he understands the method by which it was effected to have been as follows. The criminal (as the punishment, according to their account, was inflicted,) was thrust up to his middle in mud; a handkerchief was then tied round his neck, which was drawn by the two ends in opposite directions by two lictors; and while the process of strangulation was going on in this way, melted lead was poured down his throat.

(12.) Exposing to wild beasts, appears to have been a punishment among the Medes and Persians. It was inflicted on the Prophet Daniel, who was miraculously preserved. (Dan. 6. 7,12,16-24.)

The Romans, for the gratification of the people, compelled their criminals, and also captives taken in war, to fight with wild beasts in the amphitheatre. This was a death to which the primitive Christians were frequently exposed. (2Tim. 4. 17, comp. 1 Cor. 15. 32.) They likewise compelled them to contend with one another in the manner of gladiators, till their life was thus terminated.

Of the non-capital punishments among the Jews, the following were the principal.

(1.) Banishment, was not a punishment enjoined by the Mosaic law, but after the Captivity, both exile and forfeiture of property were introduced among the Jews; it also existed under the Romans, by whom it was called diminutio capitis, because the person banished lost the right of a citizen, and the city of Rome thereby lost a head. But there was another kind of exile, termed disportatio, which was accounted the worst kind. The party banished forfeited his estate; and being bound, was put on board ship, and transported to some island specified exclusively by the emperor, there to be confined in perpetual banishment. In this manner the Apostle John was exiled to the little island of Patmos, (Rev. 1. 9,) where he wrote his Revelation.

(2.) Blinding, was not ordinarily practised among the Hebrews as a punishment of crime, nor was it in fact thus practised among other nations, but rather resorted to in cases where the person whose eyes were put out would otherwise have been in a condition to have engaged in plots against the existing government. It was from the fear of this, that the eyes of rebellious kings were put out, (2Kings 25. 7; Jerem. 52. 11;) and Eastern princes in modern times, more particularly the Persians, have often resorted to this barbarous expedient to ward off danger to their authority from suspected rivals.

(3.) Cutting off the hair of criminals seems to be rather an ignominious than a painful mode of punishment; yet it appears that pain was added to the disgrace, and that the hair was violently plucked off, as if the executioner were plucking a bird alive. This is the literal meaning of the original word, which in Nehemiah 13 25 is rendered "plucked off their hair;" sometimes hot ashes were applied to the skin after the hair was off, in order to render the pain more exquisitely acute. the spurious book commonly termed the Fourth Book of Maccabees, it is said that the tyrant Antiochus Epiphanes caused the hair and skin entirely to be torn off the heads of some of the seven Maccabean brethren. As an

In

historical composition, this book is utterly destitute of credit, but it shows that the mode of punishment under consideration was not unusual in the East. This sort of torture is said to have been frequently inflicted on the early martyrs and confessors of the Christian faith.

(4.) Scourging, was an ignominious punishment, appointed for several offences in the Mosaic law, but the extent to which it could be carried was confined within moderate limits, (Deut. 25. 3,) though among the Gentile nations it was often inflicted with such severity as to cause death.

Sir John Gardner Wilkinson observes, that in ancient Egypt, "in military as well as civil cases, minor offences were generally punished with the stick; a mode of chastisement still greatly in vogue among the modern inhabitants of the Valley of the Nile, and held in such esteem by them, that convinced of (or perhaps by) its efficacy, they relate 'its descent from heaven as a blessing| to mankind.'

"The bastinado was inflicted on both sexes, as with the Jews. Men and boys were laid prostrate on the ground, and frequently held by the hands and feet, while the chastisement was administered; but women,

From the Mcnuments.

as they sat, received stripes on their back, which were also inflicted by the hand of a man. Nor was it unusual for the superintendents to stimulate labourers to their work by the persuasive powers of the stick, whether engaged in the field or in handicraft employments; and

From the Monuments.

boys were sometimes beaten without the ceremony of prostration, the hands being tied behind their back, while the punishment was applied." See BASTINADO; SCOURGING.

Beside these punishments, which were common also to the surrounding nations, there were some which, being grounded on passages of the Law, were peculiar to the Jews. First may be mentioned ignominious treatment of the bodies of criminals. The bodies of those who had been stoned were burnt, (Josh. 7. 16-26,) and another mark of infamy was the suspension of the dead body on a tree or gallows. This was customary in Egypt. (Gen. 40. 17-19.) The person suspended was considered as a "curse," an "abomination in the sight of God," and as receiving this token of infamy from his hand. The body, nevertheless, was to be taken down and buried on the same day. (Numb. 25. 4,5; Deut. 21. 22,23.) Posthumous suspension of this kind, for the purpose of conferring ignominy, is a very different thing from the crucifixion that was practised by the Romans, notwithstanding that the Jews gave such an extent to the law in Deuteronomy 21. 22,23, as to include the last-named punishment. (John 19. 31, et seq.; Gal. 3. 13.) Heaps of stones were raised, either directly upon the dead body of a criminal, or upon the place where it was buried. (Josh. 7. 25,26; 2Sam. 18. 17.) The pile of stones that was gathered in this way was increased by the contributions of each passing traveller, who added to the heap in testimony of his aversion to the crime.

מרן אא sham atha, or שם אתא cation was termed