How the principal modes of sacrificial offerings, such as they had naturally developed nearly alike everywhere throughout antiquity, and as they had obtained in the pre Mosaic times among the Hebrews, were adopted in the Mosaic legislation, and adapted to its exalted religious character, we can only indicate here in the briefest outlines Those pre-Mosaic sacrifices were chiefly of three kinds: first, the "propitiatory." i.e., £111 offering enjoyed by the deity in any form that would be grateful to him, conciliate him, procure his aid and blessing in times of need or for some special undertaking, and would further obtain his foralYcness, if something had been done unwittingly that might have offended him. This kind of sacrifice, whether bloody or unbloody (e•g., harvest sacrifice). appears to have been fully burned (Olali). The second kind partook more of the nature of sacrificial meals, in which boils the divinity, the priest, the man who offered the sacrifice, together with his friends, took a part. It was a solemn and joyous oblation, expressing the thanks of the individual for some obtained favor, in which he wished others to join. Only the parts supposed to be the choicest were burned upon the altar; the priests received some other parts, and the rest formed the grateful sacrificial repast (Schack Shelamim). The last was the expiatory sacrifice, intended as an equivalent for some deadly crime, NvIiich either was not punishable by the existing lows, or which had been committed under circumstances that would not have warranted cap ital punishment. From the notion that the blood of the murderer was necessary for " the cleansing of the blood that is shed" (cf. Numb. xxxv. 33) sprang that other, it would appear, that there was expiatory power in the blood itself; and that further, the blood of an animal was a fitting representative of, and equivalent for that of the human criminal, who had only to transfer, as it were, his sin to the animal by his hand upon its head, and perhaps using a formula to that effect. The flesh of animal was not deemed fit for the altar, and was probably burned at seine other place (Chattath, Asham). The Mosaic legislation. finding such general elements ready, pro ceeded eclectically. They were partly embodied with considerable alterations. and partly rejected unconditionally. The anthropopathic idea of the "agreeable smell," as wel: as the notion of the expiatory power of the. blood, were retained—time latter, however, with this modification, that the poor were allowed to use flour instead of meat, for their sin-offerings. But the principal alterations introduced were the abolition of all poly theistic rites from the sacrificial service, of all the immoral, obscene, and horrible cere monies connected with the heathen practice, and finally, the totally different definition and limits given to the " sin-offering." While formerly everything could be expiated by a sacrifice, henceforth only unpremeditated sin could by this means be effaced; while there was no expiation for any premeditated crime; the law simply took its course in that case.* Further, many things till then permitted were prohibited, and thus fell under the denomination of "sin," and certain purifications—beneficial in themselves— were connected with the expiatory sacrifice, and their practice thus strongly enforced. This extension of the notion of " siu-offering" rendered a subdivision of it necessary; the more venial, or rather unconscious transgressions, were treated differently from the less pardonable ones in the ritual.
While Mosaism thus seemed, in its adoption of the rite of sacrifice, to make one of the most important concessions to heathenism, this very rite was, on the other hand, calculated to attract the early Hebrews to the worship of Jehovah, and at the same time to wean them from the horrible practices connected with it among the Canaanites. But more: during the primary stages of the people's existence it served, by inculcating observances which were at once hygienic and symbolic of purity and holiness, as a powerful means of education and culture. In order, however, that these beneficial con sequences premeditated by the law-giver should not be frustrated, it was necessary above all things to keep the strictest possible supervision over it; and this was best established by the legal transfer of the whole sacrificial service to one single spot of the land, finally. the temple at Jerusalem. The "heights" and their "heathen abominations" were thus theoretically abolished, and the sacrifice that only at one central point could in reality be said to be offered up for the "whole community of 'Israel," went far, under these cir cumstances, to awaken and to strengthen a common spirit of nationality and patriotism, which was further aided by the periodical pilgrimages. For the details of the Jewish sacrifices we must refer to the Old Testament generally.
As to the different opinions held by Jewish and Christian authorities regarding sacri fice when offered up in expiation of a sin, either by the people or by individuals, suffice it here to mention that they are divided between • the various notions of the offering beimg either a present to the offended deity, a civil punishment (mulcta), or, finally, a kind of substitute for the sinners themselves. The latter is the view held by many of the rabbinical writers as well as clmrch fathers. The life (Nephesh) of the animal or its blood (Lev. xvii. 11) was distinctly said to make "the atonement for the soul." This notion of a representative victim is one that belonged to the whole ancient world, and often finds its expression in the Old Testament. The sacrifice of the covenant (Ter. xxxiv. 18, etc.), the scapegoat (Lev. xvi. 21), and the like, arc so many embodiments of this idea, which by Christian divines is held to have found its acme and final fulfillment in the sacrifice of God himself, as the "Man Christ," who united in himself the priest, the offerer, and the sacrifice. In fact, the whole institution of sacrifices is throughout the New Testament and the fathers held to have been merely typical of this final act, by which the sin of man was expiated. Sec ATONEMENT, MASS.
The Jewish sacrifices, rejected already by the Essenes, ceased with the downfall of the temple in although the Samaritans, who claim to retain exclusively the Mosaic covenant, still continue this rite on mount Gerizim on the Passover. The ortho dox Jews, however, include in the prayers for the restoration of the visible sanctuary on Zion also that of the restoration of the sacrifices " in their order and proper rule," " of the priests to their service, and the Levites to their songs and hymns," and each day, Sabbath or feast, the sacrifice incumbent upon it is mentioned in the prayers; and on fast-days, especially on the day of atonement, the diminution of bodily substance sup posed to arise from the abstinence, the " the fat and blood" may, it is supplicated, be considered by God as tantamount for that or the sacrificial animals which, through their sins, the people are not now deemed worthy of offering up. The modern (extreme) party of reformed Jews, however, repudiate, together with the literal interpretation of the Nlessianic prophecies, also that notion of the sacrifices ever being restored again.
We can only very briefly touch upon the sacrificial customs among other nations of antiquity. The same feeling of dependence upon supreme, invisible, but ever-present powers, engendered, as we said at the beginning, everywhere nearly the same expres sions of awe, gratitude, and the like. The gifts proffered differed, according to the degree of culture, the mode of life, and the products of the soil among the different peoples. No less was the significance attached to the gift different in proportion to the mental development of those who offered; at one time considered as a present, to be taken and,sensually enjoyed, as it were, by the Deity, it at others assumed a higher and purely sirabolical aspect, as an expression of gratitude, love, repentance. In the same proportion, the gifts themselves varied, not only respecting their nature, but also re specting their value. While Mongols and Tartars, Lapps and Negroes, most of the ancient nomadtribes in fact, generally sacrificed the milk and the uneatable parts of the animal only, its bones, horns, skin, etc., the Greeks and Romans offered not 'infrequent ly thousands of the choicest, most immaculate animals, and the sacrificial vessels were with them, as with the Hebrews, wrought of the most precious metals. Votive offer ings—arms, spoil, garments, tools, locks, poems, etc.—customary in the better days of Rome and Greece, and the sacrifice of chastity ou the part of maidens and women— chiefly the custom of Babylon, Phenicia, Cyprus, etc.—likewise fall under the denomi nation of sacrifice in its wider sense. Among the Indians, Bactrians, Medes, and Per shuts, the sacrifices consisted of fruits, libations, animals, and the like, and were of many degrees and numbers. Among the first-named, the study of the Vedas was reckoned as the first round in the sacrificial ladder. Whh the Persians (see GUEBRES, PARSEES), the priests at the Damns sacrifice, instituted in honor of Zerdusht the law giver, eat small unleavened cakes, and drink Horn-juice, which is to represent the blood of the prophet. They also have sacrifices for the souls of the deceased. The Buddhists offer flowers and first-fruits only; their animal sacrifices are represented by small animal figures kneaded of dough, offered up on certain occasions. Of the "classical" peoples aml their sacrificial debauches, which followed the primeval frugality in their offerings no less than in their lives, we need not speak here, save as far as they, too, indulged in the rite of human sacrifice from their very earliest period to their decadence. Among the Greeks, the legendary tales of the daughters of Erechtheus, and of Iphigeneia in mythical times, the sanctuary of Zeus Laphystius at Halos and at Lyc'ea, in Arcadia, the offering up of three Persians by Themistoeles before the battle of Salamis, are tokens sufficiently indicative of the generality of the practice. Among the Romans, human sacrifices, in use during the republic—either enthusiastic voluntary deeds of patriotism, or simply a kind of execution in punishment of a deadly sin—were prohibited in later times by the senate; but both Augustus and Sextus Pompeii's committed wholesale murders by way of political sacrifice to the gods. That this abomination of slaughter ing men in honor of God at stated periods, flourished to an awful extent among our northern ancestors—Scandinavians and Germans, as well as among Gauls and other Celts—need hardly be added. At Upsala, every ninth year, a great sacrifice of expia tion was offered up, consisting of nine human beings and sixty-three animals. The Danes, in the same manner, held a sacred sacrifice every ninth year, of ninety-nine men, besides horses, dogs, cocks, and other domestic animals (see the EDDAS; Sagen bibliothele; I'ertz, Mon. Germ. _Gist.; Script. passim, etc.). The German tribes, even after their conversion to Christianity, continued to offer up their prisoners of war, as of yore, just as the Franks brought their sacrifices both to their ancient gods and to Christ. Any illness, danger, s!ckness—the slightest inducement, in fact—sufficed to move the Gauls toward a human holocaust, in the fashion of the worshipers of Baal and Moloch. At the death of a man, all his possessions, movable and immovable, including slaves, clients, wives, and all, were offered up to his manes. See SUTTEE. That the ancient Mexicans, the negroes, and other wild tribes, were highly proficient in this sort of wholesale slaughter, need hardly be added: the king of Dahomey's practices, and the fruitless remonstrances of our own government, are a too well-known illustration of the firm hold this kind of murder in honor of the Deity has of the human mind. In conclusion, may we not consider the cruelties and massacres committed upon the Jews in the middle ages, in the name of Christ, as a last offspring of that Moloch or Baal worship which seems to be an instinct in the superstitious mind, whether Pagan or Christian?