CHARTUMMIM ; Sept. bracaot, ckappaeol). This is the title rendered ' magicians' in our version, applied to the ` wise men' of Egypt (Gen. xli. 8, 24Exod. vii. ; viii. 7, 58, 59 ; ix. 1), and of Babylon (Dan. i. zo ; ii. 2). The word ` magicians' is not in either case properly applied, as the magi belonged to Persia, rather than to Babylon or Egypt ; and should be alto gether avoided in such application, seeing that it has acquired a sense different from that which it once bore. The Hebrew word properly denotes wise men,' as they called themselves, and were called by others ; but, as we should call them, men eminent in learning and science,' their exclu sive possession of which in their several countries enabled them occasionally to produce effects which were accounted supernatural by the people. Pytha goras, who was acquainted with Egypt and the East, and who was not unaware of the unfathomable depths of ignorance which lie under the highest attainable conditions of human knowledge, thought the modest title of philosopher (OiXocroOos), lover of wisdom,' more becoming, and accordingly he brought it into use ; but that of wise men' still retained its hold in the East.
Gesenius concludes that the Egyptian Charturn rninz those of the Egyptian priests who had charge of the sacred records. His etymological reasons may be seen in his Thesaurus. There can be little doubt that they belonged to some branch of the priesthood, seeing that the more recondite departments of learning and science were cultivated exclusively in that powerful caste.
CHARUL 611r1) occurs in three places in Scrip ture, and in them a]] is translated nettles' in the A. V. (Prov. xxiv. 30, 3i ; Job xxx. 7 ; Zeph. ii. 9). Considerable difficulty has been experienced in de termining the plant which is alluded to in the above passages, which, as Celsius says, sacris scriptoribus parcius memorata, et notis paucissimis descripta, ac distincta.' The majority of transla tors and commentators have thought that some thorny or prickly plant, or a nettle, is intended by the charul, on account of the other plants which are mentioned along with it. Hence brambles, the wild plum, and thistles, have been severally selected ; but nettles have had the greatest number of sup porters. Celsius however prefers the Zizyphus Pa ]iurus, or the plant which has been called Christ's thorn, as that best suited to the several contexts.
Of all these determinations, however, it must be observed that they amount to nothing more than conjectures, because, as Rosennafiller says, the cognate languages have not this word, and also because ' the Greek translators of Alexandria in the first and last of these three places entirely deviate from our present Hebrew text ; but in the passage of Job they translate charul by wild shrubs.' To us it does not appear, from the import of the above passages, that a thorny plant is necessarily meant by the term under review. All that is im plied is that neglected fields, that is, fields in culti vation which are neglected, will become covered with weeds, and that these should be of a kind such as idlers, as in the passage of Job, might take shel ter under, or lie down among. This passage, in deed, seems to preclude any thorny plant or nettle, as no one would voluntarily resort to such a situa tion ; and one of the commentators, as quoted by Celsius (ii. p. 168) appears to have been of the same opinion : Bar Bahlul aped Castellum Pisa vel cicercu]as explicat :' that is, he considers pease, or rattier vetches, to be intended. Moreover, it is
worthy of remark, that there is a word in a cog nate language, the Arabic, which is not very dis similar from charul or kharzel, and which is applied to plants apparently quite suitable to all the above passages. The word khardal is applied in all old Arabic works, as well as at the present day, to different species of mustard, and also to plants which are employed for the same purposes as mustard (as we hope to be able to shew in the article SINAPI), and it is not very unlike the kharul or charid of Scripture. In fact, they do not differ more than many words which are considered to have been originally the same. Some of the wild kinds of mustard are well known to spring up in corn fields, and to be the most troublesome of all the weeds with which the husbandman has to deal : one of these, indeed, sinapis arvensis, is well known to be, and is specially mentioned by a modern bo tanical author, Sir James Smith, as abundant in corn-fields, where it is a very troublesome weed, and also in waste ground, when newly disturbed. So also, as old a writer as Gerarde, in his Herbal, says, ' There be three sorts of wild turneps ; one, our common rape, which beareth the seed whereof is made rape-oil, and feedeth singing birds : the other, the common enimy to come, which we call charlock.' He likewise mentions that this is also called can'ock, chadlock, and kedlack, words which it is curious to observe for their resemblance to khardul, kharul, or charul, and which are applied in our country to this wild kind of mustard, as khardul is to the species of mustard indigenous in different parts of Asia. That some of these are found in Syria and Palestine is well known, as Russel mentions the above sinapis arvensis, or charlock, as common in the neighbourhood of Aleppo, and, in fact, it is one of the most widely diffused of the species. Decandolle, in his Syst. Natural. ii. p. 6r5, describes it as Habitat arvis, vineis, agris Europa; interdum nimis copiosa, a Lusitania ad Petropolim, a Sicilia ad Daniam, ab Anglia ad Tauriam.' Irby and Mangles moreover state, that in their journey from Bysan to Adjeloun they met with the mustard plant growing wild, and as high as their horses' heads. In fact, so large do some of the species grow in these countries, that one of them has been supposed to be the mustard tree alluded to by our Saviour. S. arvensis being so widely diffused is probably also found in Pales tine, though this can only be determined by a good botanist on the spot, or by a comparison of genuine specimens. But there is another species, the S. orientalis, which is common in corn-fields in Syria, and south and middle Europe, and which can scarcely be distinguished from S. arvensis. Either of these will suit the above passages, and as the name is not very dissimilar, we are of opinion that it is better entitled to be the charul of Scripture than any other plant that has hitherto been adduced. It would be the first to spring up :n a carelessly cultivated field, and choke the neglected corn, while it would soon cover deserted fields, and might readily be resorted to for shelter from a hot wind, or even from the rays of the sun, when growing so large as is described by some of the travellers in the Holy Land.—J. F. R.