CHERUBIM (n+nnz or sing. zrz ; LXX. Xepov(3lg; A. V. Cherubims, where the s is a superfluous addition to the Hebrew plural form. The singular is seldom used when they are spoken of generically, except in Ps. xviii. r I, and as a proper name Ezr. ii. 59). Cherubim' is the name given by the sacred writers to certain well-known religious symbols, intended to represent a high order of spi ritual beings, and variable, within certain condi tions, by the pictorial or poetic imagination of the Hebrew people. A correct conception of their nature and purpose is of so much importance, that it has occupied the attention of almost every writer, Jewish and Christian, who has devoted himself to biblical criticism ; yet, after the vast learning and labour which has been applied to an elucidation of this interesting and difficult subject, many of our conclusions must still remain, in a high degree, in definite and uncertain.
I. As the chief data for our inquiry lie within the narrow limits of a few passages, to which con stant reference must be made, it will be best to commence by bringing these passages together, and subjecting them to a careful analysis. In the book of Genesis cherubim are only once mentioned (Gen. iii. 24), where the office of preventing man's access to the tree of life is assigned to the cherubim not as in A. V. cherubims') with the flame of the waving sword.' They are thus ruptly introduced, without any intimation of their shape and nature, as though they were too well understood to require comment. That some angelic beings are intended is obvious, and the attempts to refer the passage to volcanic agency (Sickler, Ideen zu einem Vulkan, Erdglobus, p. 6), or to the inflam mable bituminous region near Babylon (him ii. 109, etc.), is a specimen of that valueless rational ism which unwisely turns the attention from the inner spirit of the narrative to its mere external form. We might perhaps conjecture, from the use of the article, that there were supposed to be a defi nite number of cherubim, and it seems that four is the mystic number usually attached to the concep tion of them. As the number four has special sig nificance in Hebrew symbolism—being the number to express the world and divine revelation (Baehr's Symbolik i. t19, ..y.)—this consideration must not be lost sight of.
We next meet with cherubim in Exod. xxv. IS (xxxvii. 7), where Moses receives the command to make two cherubim of solid gold, one at each end of the capporeth or mercy-seat, and out of the same piece with it 07Dnm-p), with outstretched wings and ` faces one to another and towards the mercy seat.' Here, again, the introduction of the cheru bim is equally abrupt, and it is most remarkable that, while the minutest instructions are given for the other details of the tabernacle furniture, the cherubim are left entirely undcscribcd, and we only learn that they were single figures with faces and wings. But with what faces ? If we may trust the unanimous testimony of Jewish tradition, we must suppose that they are the faces of human be ings, according to the positive assertion of Maimo nides, Abarbanel, Aben Ezra, etc. (Otho. Lex. Rab. s. v. Cherubim; Buxtorf, Hist. Arc. p. too). In this connection, we may observe, without pressing it into the argument, the fact that the phrase ` faces one to another,' is literally, `faces, man to his xxv. 20) ; nor do we see any difficulty in the command that they were to look ` one to another' towards the mercy-seat,' because the former expression may only mean that they were to be exactly opposite to each other. Similar figures were to be enwoven on the ten blue, red, and crimson curtains of the tabernacle (Exod. xxvi. r). The promise that God would `meet and commune with Moses from between the two cheru bim' (Exod. xxv. 22), originates the constant occur rence of that expression as a description of the divine abode and presence (Num. vii. 89 ; I Sam.
iv. 4 ; Is. xxxvii. 16 ; Ps. lxxx. r ; xcix. 1, etc.) It has been sometimes disputed whether the colossal cherubim of olive wood, overlaid with gold, with outspread wings, touching in the centre of the oracle and reaching to either wall, placed by Solo mon in the Holy of Holies, were substitutes for, or additions to, the original golden pair. The lat ter is probably the truth, for had the Mosaic cheru bim been lost, we should have been informed of the fact. All that we learn about these figures is, that they each had a body ten cubits high (t Kings v. 23), and stood on their feet (z Chron. iii. r3), so that the monstrous conception of winged child-faces is an error which should long ago have been banished from Christian iconography (De Saulcy, Hist. de l'Art Yua'aique, p. 25). The expression cheni bims of image work,' in 2 Chron. iii. to LXX., gryov be Etacup, Vulg. opere statuario, Marg., of moveable work), is very obscure, hut would probably give us no farther insight into the subject (Dorjen, de open Zaazyim in Ugolini, The:. viii. No. 6) ; but in r Chron. xxviii. r8, 19, we learn that David had given to Solomon a model for these figures, which are there called ` the chariot of the cherubim' (Vulg. quadriga cherubim). We are not to suppose from this that any wheels supported the figures, but we must take ` cherubim in ap position to ' chariots ' (Bertheau, ad lee.) The same phrase is found in Eccles. xlix. S, and is in both cases an allusion to the poetical expression, ' He rode upon a cherub, and did fly' (2 Sam. xxii. r r ; Ps. xviii. so), an image magnificently ex panded in the subsequent vision of Ezekiel, which for that reason has received from the Rabbis the title of rizz1n, the chariot.' Although the mere word cherub' is used in these passages, yet the simple human figure is so totally unadapted to per form* the function of a chariot, that we are almost driven to the conclusion arrived at by De Saulcy on this ground alone, that the normal type of the cherub involved the body of an ox, as well as spreading wings and a human face (hist. de I 'Arl yudaique, p. 29). If this conjecture be correct, we shall have in these symbols a counterpart, exact in the minutest particulars, to the human-headed oxen, touching both walls with their wings, which have been discovered in the chambers of Nimroud and Khorsabad. This close analogy has been pointed out by Mr. Layard and others (Nineveh and Babylon, ii. 643). We shall find further on, the strongest additional confirmations of this re markable inference. We may here mention the suspicion of its truth, which we cannot but derive from the strange reticence of Josephus, who in one place (Antiq. iii. 6. 5) calls the cherubim winged creatures, unlike any existing shape (Z6ia V ETELVa, Akopcpilv 8' T fur' cipOpthrcov 4copou4pcop zrapazrk,))o-ea), and in another (viii. 3. 3), declares that no one could even conjecture their true form (cads. O7roicti Taus eltreip siedoat livarae). Now, it is hardly conceivable that an emblem seen daily by multitudes of priests, and known to the Jews from the earliest ages, could be so completely secret and forgotten as this. If the cherubim were simply winged genii, there would have been no possible reason why Josephus should have been ashamed to mention the fact, and, in that case, he would hardly have used the ambiguous word Z(.30r. lf, on the otherhand, they were semi-bovine in shape, Josephus, who was of course familiar with the re volting idolatry of which his nation was accused (Tac., Hist. v. 4 ; Jos. c. Apion, ii. sec. 7, p. 475), had the best reason to conceal their real form (Spencer, de Legg. Rill. llebr., III. iv. 2 ad ff.), and to avert, as far as possible, all further inquiry about them.