« PreviousContinue »
being the names of Nahor's sons (Gen. xxii. | deserts, the Bedawees have from time immemorial demanded tribute or presents from all travellers or caravans (Isa. xxi. 13) passing through their country; the transition from which to robbery is so natural, that they attach to the latter no disgrace, plundering without mercy all who are unable to resist them, or who have not secured the protection of their tribe. Their watching for travellers in the ways,' i e. the frequented routes through the desert, is alluded to Jer. iii. 2; Ezra viii. 31; and the fleetness of their horses in carrying them into the 'depths of the wilderness,' beyond the reach of their pursuers, seems what is referred to in Isa. lxiii. 13,
D. Lotites, viz.:
(a) Moabites, who occupied the northern portion of Arabia Petræa, as above described; and their kinsmen, the-
(b) Ammonites, who lived north of them, in Arabia Deserta.
Besides these, the Bible mentions various other tribes who resided within the bounds of Arabia, but whose descent is unknown, c. g. the Amalekites, the Kenites, the Horites, the inhabitants of Maon, Hazor, Vedan, and Javan-Meusal (Ezek. xxvii. 19).
In process of time some of these tribes were perhaps wholly extirpated (as seems to have been the case with the Amalekites), but the rest were more or less mingled together by inter-marriages, by military conquests, political revolutions, and other causes of which history has preserved no record; and thus amalgamated, they became known to the rest of the world as the ARABS, a people whose physical and mental characteristics are very strongly and distinctly marked. In both respects they rank very high among the nations; so much so, that some have regarded them as furnishing the prototype-the primitive model form-the standard figure of the human species. The inhabitants of Arabia have, from remote antiquity, been divided into two great classes, viz. the townsmen (including villagers), and the men of the desert, such being the meaning of the word Bedawees' or Bedouins, the designation given to the dwellers in the wilderness.' From the nature of their country, the latter are necessitated to lead the life of nomades, or wandering shepherds; and since the days of the patriarchs (who were themselves of that occupation) the extensive steppes which form so large a portion of Arabia, have been traversed by a pastoral but warlike people, who, in their inode of life, their food, their dress, their dwellings, their manners, customs, and government, have always continued, and still continue, almost unalterably the same. They consist of a great many separate tribes, who are collected into different encampments dispersed through the territory which they claim as their own; and they move from one spot to another (commonly in the neighbourhood of pools or wells) as soon as the stinted pasture is exhausted by their cattle. It is only here and there that the ground is susceptible of cultivation, and the tiliage of it is commonly left to peasants, who are often the vassals of the Bedawees, and whom (as well as all townsmen') they regard with contempt as an inferior race. Having constantly to shift their residence, they live in movable tents (comp. Isa. xiii. 20; Jer. xlix. 29), from which circumstance they received from the Greeks the name of Scenites, dwellers in tents [TENTS]. The heads of tribes are called sheikhs, a word of various import, but used in this case as a title of honour; the government is hereditary in the family of each sheikh, but elective as to the particular individual appointed. Their allegiance, however, consists more in following his example as a leader than in obeying his commands; and, if dissatisfied with his government, they will depose or abandon him. As the independent lords of their own
Their warlike incursions into more settled districts are often noticed (e. g. Job i. 15; 2 Chron. xxi. 16; xxvi. 7). The acuteness of their bodily senses is very remarkable, and is exemplified in their astonishing sagacity in tracing and distinguishing the footsteps of men and cattle. The law of blood-revenge sows the seeds of perpetual feuds; and what was predicted (Gen. xvi. 12) of the posterity of Ishmael, the wild-ass man' (a) term most graphically descriptive of a Bedawee, holds true of the whole people [BLOOD-REVENGE). They show bravery in repelling a public enemy, but when they fight for plunder, they behave like cowards. Their bodily frame is spare, but athletic and active, inured to fatigue and capable of undergoing great privations: their minds are acute and inquisitive; and though their manners are somewhat grave and formal, they are of a lively and social disposition. Of their moral virtues it is necessary to speak with caution. They were long held up as models of good faith, incorruptible integrity, and the most generous hospitality to strangers; but many recent travellers deny them the possession of these qualities; and it is certain that whatever they may have been once, the Bedawees, like all the unsophisticated children of nature,' have been much corrupted by the influx of foreigners, and the national character is in every point of view lowest where they are most exposed to the continual passage of strangers.
In the language of the Arabians we find the full and adult development of the genius of that group of languages of Western Asia which is now usually distinguished as the Syro-Arabian. In the abundance of its roots, in the manifold variety of its formations, in the syntactical delicacies of its construction, it stands pre-eminent as a language among all its sisters. Every class of composition also: the wild and yet noble lyrics of the son of the desert, who had nothing to glory in but his sword, his guest, and his fervid tongue;' the impassioned and often sublime appeals of the Koran; the sentimental poetry of a Mutanabbi; the artless simplicity of their usual narrative style, and the philosophic disquisition of an Ibn Chaldûn; the subtleties of the grammarian and scholiast; medicine, natural history, and the metaphysical speculations of the Aristotelian school-all have found the Arabic language a fitting exponent of their feeling and thought. And, although confined within the bounds of the Peninsula by circumstances to which we owe the preservation of its pure antique form, yet Islam made it the written and spoken language of the whole of Western Asia, of Eastern and Northern Africa, of Spain, and of
some of the islands of the Mediterranean; and the ecclesiastical language of Persia, Turkey, and all other lands which receive the Mohammedan faith; in all which places it has left sensible traces of its former occupancy, and in many of which it is still the living or the learned idiom. The close affinity, and consequently the incalculable philological use, of the Arabic with regard to the Hebrew language and its other sisters, may be considered partly as a question of theory, and partly as one of fact. The former would regard the concurrent records which the Old Testament and their own traditions have preserved of the several links by which the Arabs were connected with different generations of the Hebrew line, and the evidences which Scripture offers of persons speaking Arabic being intelligible to the Hebrews; the latter would observe the demonstrable identity between them in the main features of a language, and the more subtle, but no less convincing traces of resemblance even in the points in which their diversity is most apparent. Thus springing from the same root as the Hebrew, and possessing such traces of affinity to a late period of Scripture history, this dialect was further enabled, by several circumstances in the social state of the nation, to retain its native resemblance of type until the date of the earliest extant written documents. These circumstances were, the almost insular position of the country, which prevented conquest or commerce from debasing the language of its inhabitants; the fact that so large a portion of the nation adhered to a mode of life in which every impression was, as it were, stereotyped, and knew no variation for ages; and the great and just pride which they felt in the purity of their language, which is still a characteristic of the Bedouins.
The principal source of the wealth of ancient Arabia was its commerce. So early as the days or Jacob (Gen. xxxvii. 28) we read of a mixed caravan of Arab merchants (Ishmaelites and Midianites) who were engaged in the conveyance of various foreign articles to Egypt, and made no scruple to add Joseph, a slave, to their other purchases. The Arabs were, doubtless, the first navigators of their own seas, and the great carriers of the produce of India, Abyssinia, and other remote countries to Western Asia and Egypt. Various Indian productions thus obtained were common among the Hebrews at an early period of their history (Exod. xxx. 23, 25). The traffic of the Red Sea was to Solomon a source of great profit; and the extensive commerce of Sabaa (Sheba, now Yemen) is mentioned by profane writers as well as alluded to in Scripture (1 Kings x. 10-15). In the description of the foreign trade of Tyre (Ezek. xxvii. 19-24) various Ārab tribes are introduced (comp. Isa. lx. 6; Jer. vi. 20; 2 Chron. ix. 14). The Nabathæo-Idumæans became a great trading people, their capital being Petra. The transittrade from India continued to enrich Arabia until the discovery of the passage to India by the Cape of Good Hope; but the invention of steam-navigation has now restored the ancient route for travellers by the Red Sea.
Arabia, in ancient times, generally preserved its independence, unaffected by those great events which changed the destiny of the surrounding nations; and in the sixth century of cur æra,
the decline of the Roman empire and the corruptions and distractions of the Eastern church favoured the impulse given by a wild and warlike fanaticism. Mahomet arose, and succeeded in gathering around his standard the nomadic tribes of central Arabia; and in less than fifty years that standard waved triumphant from the straits of Gibraltar to the hitherto unconquered regions beyond the Oxus.' The khalifs transferred the seat of government successively to Damascus, Kufa, and Bagdad; but amid the distractions of their foreign wars, the chiefs of the interior of Arabia gradually shook off their feeble allegiance, and resumed their ancient habits of independence, which, notwithstanding the revolutions that have since occurred, they for the most part retain. At present, indeed, the authority of Mehemet Ali, the Pasha of Egypt, is acknowledged over a great portion of the northern part of Arabia, while in the south the Imam of Maskat exercises dominion over a much greater extent of country than did any of his predecessors.
ARAD, an ancient city on the southernmost borders of Palestine, whose inhabitants drove back the Israelites as they attempted to penetrate from Kadesh into Canaan (Num. xxi. 1), but were eventually subdued by Joshua, along with the other southern Canaanites (Josh. xii. 14, comp. x. 41; also Judg. i. 16). Eusebius and Jerome place Arad twenty Roman miles from Hebron. This accords well with the situation of a hill called Tell 'Arad, which Dr. Robinson observed on the road from Petra to Hebron. He describes it as a barren-looking eminence rising above the country around.' He did not examine the spot, but the Arabs said there were no ruins upon or near it, but only a cavern. The name alone is, however, too decisive to admit a doubt that the hill marks the site of the ancient Arad.
A'RAM, the name given by the Hebrews to the tract of country lying between Phoenicia on the west, Palestine on the south, Arabia Deserta and the river Tigris on the east, and the mountain range of Taurus on the north. Many parts of this extensive territory have a much lower level than Palestine, but it might receive the designation of the highlands,' because it does rise to a greater elevation than that country at most points of immediate contact, and especially on the side of Lebanon. Aram, or Aramæa, seems to have corresponded generally to the Syria and Mesopotamia of the Greeks and Romans (see those articles). We find the following divisions expressly noticed in Scripture:-1. ARAM-DAMMESEK, the 'Syria of Damascus' conquered by David, 2 Sam. viii. 5, 6, where it denotes only the territory around Damascus ; but elsewhere Aram,' in connection with its capital Damascus,' appears to be used in a wider sense for Syria Proper (Isa. vii. 1, 8; xvii. 3; Amos i. 5). To this part of Aram the land of Hadrach ' seems to have belonged (Zech. ix. 1). 2. ARAMMAACHAH (1 Chrou. xix. 6), or simply Maachah (2 Sam. x. 6, 8), was not far from the northern border of the Israelites on the east of the Jordan (comp. Deut. iii. 14, with Josh. xiii. 11, 13). 3. ARAM-BETH-RECHOB, the precise locality of which cannot with certainty be determined. 4. ARAM-ZOBAH / Sam. x. 6). Jewish tradition
has placed Zobah at Aleppo, whereas Syrian tradition identifies it with Nisibis, a city in the north-east of Mesopotamia. The former seems a much nearer approximation to the truth. We may gather from 2 Sam. viii. 3, x. 16, that the eastern boundary of Aram Zobah was the Euphrates, but Nisibis was far eyond that river. The people of Zobah are uniformly spoken of as near neighbours of the Israelites, the Damascenes, and other Syrians; and in one place (2 Chron. viii. 3) Hamath is called Hamath-Zobah, as pertaining to that district. We, therefore, conclude that Aram-Zobah extended from the Euphrates westward, perhaps as far north as to Aleppo. It was long the most powerful of the petty kingdoms of Aramæa, its princes commonly bearing the name of Hadadezer or Hadarezer. 5. ARAM-NAHARAIM, i. e. Aram of the Two Rivers, or Mesopotamia. The rivers which enclose Mesopotamia are the Euphrates on the west and the Tigris on the east; but it is doubtful whether the Aram-Naharaim of Scripture embraces the whole of that tract or only the northern portion of it (comp. Gen. xxiv. 10; Deut. xxiii. 4; Judg. iii. 8). A part of this region of Aram is also called Padan-Aram, the plain of Aram (Gen. xxv. 20; xxviii. 2, 6, 7; xxxi. 18; xxxiii. 18), and once simply Padun (Gen. xlviii. 7), also Sedch-Aram, the field of Aram (Hos. xii. 13).
But though the districts now enumerated be the only ones expressly named in the Bible as belonging to Aram, there is no doubt that many more territories were included in that extensive region, e. g. Geshur, Hul, Arpad, Riblah. Tadmor, Hauran, Abilene, &c., though some of them may have formed part of the divisions already specified. It appears from the ethnographic table in the tenth chapter of Genesis (vers. 22, 23) that Aram was a son of Shem, and that his own sons were Uz, Hul, Gether, and Mash. Another Aram is mentioned (Gen. xxii 21) as the grandson of Nahor and son of Kemuel, but he is not to be thought of here. The descent of the Aramæans from a son of Shem is confirmed by their language, which was one of the branches of the Semitic family, and nearly allied to the Hebrew.
The Aramaic language-that whole, of which the Chaldee and Syriac dialects form the partsconstitutes the northern and least developed branch of the Syro-Arabian family of tongues. Its cradle was probably on the banks of the Cyrus, according to the best interpretation of Amos ix. 7; but Mesopotamia, Babylonia, and Syria form what may be considered its home and proper domain. Political events, however, subsequently caused it to supplant Hebrew in Palestine; and then it became the prevailing form of speech from the Tigris to the shore of the Mediterranean, and, in a contrary direction, from Armenia down to the confines of Arabia. After obtaining such a wide dominion, it was forced, from the ninth century onwards, to give way before the encroaching ascendency of Arabic; and it now only survives, as a living tongue, among the Syrian Christians in the neighbourhood of Mosul. According to historical records, and also according to the comparatively ruder form of the Aramaic language itself, we might suppose that it represents, even
in the state in which we have it, some image of that aboriginal type which the Hebrews and Arabians, under more favourable social and elimatical influences, subsequently developed into fulness of sound and structure. But it is difficult for us now to discern the particular vestiges of this archaic form; for, not only did the Aramaic not work out its own development of the original elements common to the whole SyroArabian sisterhood of languages, but it was preeminently exposed, both by neighbourhood and by conquest, to harsh collision with languages of an utterly different family. Moreover, it is the only one of the three great Syro-Arabian branches which has no fruits of a purely national literature to boast of. We possess no monument whatever of its own genius; not any work which may be considered the product of the political and religious culture of the nation, and characteristic of it-as is so emphatically the case both with the Hebrews and the Arabs. The first time we see the language, it is used by Jews as the vehicle of Jewish thought; and although, when we next meet it, it is employed by native authors, yet they write under the literary impulses of Christianity, and under the Greek influence on thought and language which necessarily accompanied that religion. These two modifications, which constitute and define the so-called Chaldee and Syriac dialects, are the only forms in which the normal and standard Aramaic has been preserved to us.
AR'ARAT occurs nowhere in Scripture as the name of a mountain, but only as the name of a country, upon the mountains' of which the ark rested during the subsidence of the flood (Gen. viii. 4).
The only other passages where 'Ararat' occurs are 2 Kings xix. 37 (Isa. xxxvii. 38) and Jer. li. 27. In the former it is spoken of as the country whither the sons of Sennacherib, king of Assyria, fled, after they had murdered their father. This points to a territory which did not form part of the immediate dominion of Assyria, and yet might not be far off from it. The description is quite applicable to Armenia, and is supported by the tradition of that country. The other Scripture text (Jer. li. 27) mentions Ararat, along with Minni and Ashkenaz, as kingdoms summoned to arm themselves against Babylon. In the parallel place in Isa. xiii. 2-4, the invaders of Babylonia are described as 'issuing from the mountains; and if by Minni we understand the Minyas in Armenia, and by Ashkenaz some country on the Eurine Sea, which may have had its original name, Arenos, from Ashkenaz, a son of Gomer, the progenitor of the Cimmerians (Gen. x. 2, 3)—then we arrive at the same conclusion, viz., that Ararat was a mountainous region north of Assyria, and in all probability in Armenia. In Ezek. xxxviii. 6, we find Togarmah, another part of Armenia, connected with Gomer, and in Ezek. xxvii. 14, with Meshech and Tubal, all tribes of the north. With this agree the traditions of the Jewish and Christian churches, and likewise the accounts of the native Armenian writers.
But though it may be concluded with tolerable certainty that the land of Ararat is to be identified with a portion of Armenia, we possess no historical data for fixing on any one mountain
in that country as the resting-place of the ark.
The earliest tradition fixed on one of the chain of mountains which separate Armenia on the south from Mesopotamia, and which, as they also inclose Kurdistan, the land of the Kurds, obtained the name of the Kardu, or CarduchianNoah's Mountain.' range, corrupted into Gordiæan and Cordyæan. This was at one time the prevalent opinion among the Eastern churches, but it has now declined in credit and given place (at least among the Christians of the West) to that which now obtains, and according to which the ark rested on a great mountain in the north of Armeniato which (so strongly did the idea take hold of the popular belief) was, in course of time, given the very name of Ararat, as if no doubt could be entertained that it was the Ararat of Scripture. We have seen, however, that in the Bible
Ararat is nowhere the name of a mountain, and by the native Armenians the mountain in question was never so designated. Still there is no doubt of the antiquity of the tradition of this being (as it is sometimes termed) the 'Mother of the World.' The Persians call it Kuhi Nuch,
The mountain thus known to Europeans as Ararat consists of two immense conical elevations (one peak considerably lower than the other), towering in massive and majestic grandeur from the valley of the Aras, the ancient Araxes. Smith and Dwight give its position N. 57° W. of Nakhchevan, and S. 250 W. of Erivan; and remark, in describing it before the recent earthquake, that in no part of the world had they seen any mountain whose imposing appearance could plead half so powerfully as this a claim to the honour of having once been the
stepping stone between the old world and the | sink into insignificance when compared to it. It new. It appeared,' says Ker Porter, 'as if the is perfect in all its parts; no hard rugged fea hugest mountains of the world had been piled ture, no unnatural prominences, everything is upon each other to form this one sublime im- in harmony, and all combines to render it one mensity of earth and rocks and snow. The icy of the sublimest objects in nature.' peaks of its double heads rose majestically into the clear and cloudless heavens; the sun blazed bright upon them, and the reflection sent forth a dazzling radiance equal to other suns. My eye, not able to rest for any length of time upon the blinding glory of its summits, wandered down the apparently interminable sides, till I could no longer trace their vast lines in the mists of the horizon; when an irrepressible impulse immediately carrying my eye upwards, again refixed my gaze upon the awful glare of Ararat.' To the same effect Morier writes:- Nothing can be more beautiful than its shape, more awful than its height. All the surrounding mountains
Several attempts had been made to reach the top of Ararat, but few persons had got beyond the limit of perpetual snow. The honour was reserved to a German, Dr. Parrot, in the employment of Russia, who, in his Journey to Ararat, gives the following particulars:-The summit of the Great Ararat is in 39° 42′ N. lat., and 61° 55' E. long. from Ferro. Its perpendicular height is 16,254 Paris feet above the level of the sea, and 13,350 above the plain of the Araxes. The Little Ararat is 12,284 Paris feet above the sea, and 9561 above the plain of the Araxes.' After he and his party had failed in two attempts to ascend, the third was suc
cessful, and on the 27th September (o. s.), 1829, they stood on the summit of Mount Ararat. It was a slightly convex, almost circular platform, about 200 Paris feet in diameter, composed of eternal ice, unbroken by a rock or stone: on account of the immense distances, nothing could be seen distinctly.
Since the memorable ascent of Dr. Parrot, Ararat has been the scene of a fearful calamity. An earthquake, which in a few moments changed the entire aspect of the country, commenced on the 20th of June (o. s.), 1840, and continued, at intervals, until the 1st of September. The destruction of houses and other property in a wide tract of country around was very great; fortunately, the earthquake having happened during the day, the loss of lives did not exceed fifty. The scene of greatest devastation was in the narrow valley of Akorhi, where the masses of rock, ice, and snow, detached from the summit of Ararat and its lateral points, were thrown at one single bound from a height of 6000 feet to the bottom of the valley, where they lay scattered over an extent of several miles.
ARAU'NAH, or ORNAN, a man of the Jebusite nation, which possessed Jerusalem before it was taken by the Israelites. His threshing-floor was on Mount Moriah; and when he understood that it was required for the site of the Temple, he liberally offered the ground to David as a free gift; but the king insisted on paying the full value for it (2 Sam. xxiv. 18; 1 Chron. xxi. 18).
ARCHELA'US, son of Herod the Great, and his successor in Idumæa, Judæa, and Samaria (Matt. ii, 22) [HERODIAN FAMILY].
ARCHIP'PUS, a Christian minister, whom St. Paul calls his fellow-soldier,' in Philem. 2, and whom he exhorts to renewed activity in Col. iv. 17. From the latter reference it would seem that Archippus had exercised the office of Evangelista sometimes at Ephesus, sometimes elsewhere; and that he finally resided at Colosse, and there discharged the office of presiding presbyter or bishop when St. Paul wrote to the Colossian church.
ARCHITECTURE. It was formerly common to claim for the Hebrews the invention of scientific architecture, and to allege that classic antiquity was indebted to the Temple of Solomon for the principles and many of the details of the art. This statement, however, is totally without foundation.
There has never in fact been any people for whom a peculiar style of architecture could with less probability be claimed than for the Israelites. On leaving Egypt they could only be acquainted with Egyptian art. On entering Canaan they necessarily occupied the buildings of which they had dispossessed the previous inhabitants; and the succeeding generations would naturally erect such buildings as the country previously contained. The architecture of Palestine, and, as such, eventually that of the Jews, had doubtless its own characteristics, by which it was suited to the climate and condition of the country; and in the course of time many improvements would no doubt arise from the causes which usually operate in producing change in any practical art.
From the want of historical data and from the total absence of architectural remains, the degree in which these causes operated in imparting a peculiar character to the Jewish architecture cannot now be determined; for the oldest ruins in the country do not ascend beyond the period of the Roman domination. It does, however, seem probable that among the Hebrews architecture was always kept within the limits of a mechanical craft, and never rose to the rank of a fine art. Their usual dwelling-houses differed little from those of other Eastern nations, and we nowhere find anything indicative of exterior embellishment. Splendid edifices, such as the palace of David and the temple of Solomon, were completed by the assistance of Phoenician artists (2 Sam. v. 11; 1 Kings v. 6, 18; 1 Chron. xiv. 1).
After the Babylonish exile, the assistance of such foreigners was likewise resorted to for the restoration of the Temple (Ezra iii. 7). From the time of the Maccabean dynasty, the Greek taste began to gain ground, especially under the Herodian princes, and was shown in the structure and embellishment of many towns, baths, colonnades, theatres and castles. The Phoenician style, which seems to have had some affinity with the Egyptian, was not, however, superseded by the Grecian; and even as late as the Mishna, we read of Tyrian windows, Tyrian porches, &c. [House].
With regard to the instruments used by builders-besides the more common, such as the axe, &c., we find incidental mention of the compass, the plumb-line (Amos vii. 7), and the measuring-line.
AREOP'AGUS, an Anglicized form of the original words, signifying in reference to place, Mars Hill, but in reference to persons, the Council, which was held on the hill. The Council was also termed the Council on Mars Hill; sometimes the Upper Council, from the elevated position where it was held; and sometimes simply, but emphatically, the Council: but it retained, till a late period, the original designation of Mars Hill. The place and the Council are topics of interest to the Biblical student, chiefly from their being the scene of the interesting narrative and sublime discourse found in Acts xvii., where it appears that the apostle Paul, feeling himself moved, by the evidences of idolatry with which the city of Athens was crowded, to preach Jesus and the resurrection, both in the Jewish synagogues and in the market-place, was set upon by certain Epicurean and Stoic philosophers, and led to the Areopagus, in order that they might learn from him the meaning and design of his new doctrine. Whether or not the Apostle was criminally arraigned, as a setter forth of strange gods, before the tribunal which held its sittings on the hill, may be considered as undetermined, though the balance of evidence seems to incline to the affirmative. Whichever view on this point is adopted, the dignified, temperate, and highminded bearing of Paul under the peculiar circumstances in which he was placed are worthy of high admiration, and will appear the more striking the more the associations are known and weighed which covered and surrounded the spot where he stood. Nor does his eloquent discourse appear to have been without good effect; for