If we again look at the text, Jeplithah vows that whatsoever came forth from the door of his house to meet him shall surely be the Lord's, and I will offer it up for a burnt-offering,' which, in fact, was the regular way of making a thing wholly the Lord's. Aftenvards we are told that he did with ber according to his vow,' that is, according to the plain meaning of plain words, offered her for a burnt-offerin,g. Then follows the intimation that the daughters of Israel lamented her four days every year. People lament the dead, not the liv ing. The whole story is consistent and intelligible, while the sacrifice is understood to have actually taken place ; but becomes perplexed and difficult as soon as we begin to turn aside from this obvious meaning in search of recondite explanations. The circumstances of this immolation we can never know. It probably took place at some one of the altars beyond the Jordan. That it took place at the altar of the tabernacle, and that the high-priest was the sacrificer, as painters usually represent the scene, and even as some Jewish writers believe, is outrageously contrary to all the probabilities of the case.
Professor Bush, in his elaborate note on the text, maintains with us that a human sacrifice was all along contemplated. But he suggests that during the two months, Jephthah might have obtained better information respecting the nature of vows, by which he would have learned that his daughtel could not be legally offered, but might be redeemed at a valuation (Lev. xxvii. 2-12). This is possible, and is much more likely than the popular alterna tive of perpetual celibacy : but vve have serious doubts whether even this meets the conclusion that he did with her according to his vow.' Besides, in this case, where was the ground for the annual lamentations' of the daughters of Israel, or even for the celebrations' which some understand the word to mean ? See the Notes of the Pictorial Bible and Bush's Notes on Yudgcs ; comp. Cal met's Dicsertation :ler le Neu de ,eIhte, in Com ment. Litteral, tom. ii. ; Dresde, Votrem yeththa, ex Antig. illustr. 1778; Randolf, d. Gellibdes .7ephlha, in Eichhorn's Repertorium, viii. 13 ; Lightfoot's Harmony, under Judoes xi.
b. , Embhin, cap. xvi., Sermon on Judges xi. 39 ; Bishop Russell's Connection of Sacred and Prolizne Histoly, i. 479-492.—J. K.
Addendum.—In this article the opinion that Jephthah offered up his daughter as a burnt-offering to the Lord is supported by the usual arguments, but the reasons for the other view hardly receive justice. It may be well, therefore, briefly to state them. r. Jephthah, in making his vow, must have distinctly contemplated the possibility, or rather the probability, that the first thing that should come forth from his house to meet him on his return would be a human being. He must, therefore, have clearly intended to offer to the Lord in some way a human being, in case such was the first to come forth. 2. It is improbable that he delibe rately purposed to slay and offer as a burnt-offering to the Lord one of his fellow-creatures, in case such should be the first to come forth to meet him. We have no reason to regard Jephthah as a barbarian or as a heathen, though he led a roving and warlike life. He was a worshipper of Jehovah, as his vow indicates, and if he knew anything of the true God at all he must have known that a human sacrifice would be abominable to him. We may presume, also, that his own feelings would have revolted from such an act. It is not until idolatry had
taken firm hold of the Israelites that we find such sacrifices regarded by them otherwise than with horror. When the king of Moab in his extremity slew his son as a sacrifice to his God, the deed filled the Israelites with anger and abhorrence (2 Kings iii. 27) : can we suppose that one of their own judges would deliberately purpose and actually offer a similar sacrifice ? 3. According to the Mosaic law a man might vow to the Lord persons or animals (Lev. xxvii. 1-13); the former being re deemable, the latter not, except in the case of un clean animals. Now Jephthah seems to have dis tinctly contemplated this alternative in his vow, for his words were ri913b Irrr6pril rnry +rm, which may be rendered It shall be to, the Lord, or I will offer it for an offering.' It is true that this is not the usual meaning of the conj. 1, but it is sometimes so used, and the context seems to re quire such rendering here ; for as everything de voted to the altar was given to the Lord, it would have been superfluous to add this had not an alterna tive been contemplated. In making his vow, there fore, Jephthah probably intended to offer in sacrifice only an animal in case that should be the first to meet him ; in the case of a human being his vow bound him to devote him or her irredeemably to the Lord. 4. Jephthah did to his daughter accord ing to his vow. But it is not said that he offered her in sacrifice ; and in so singular a case it can hardly be supposed that the writer would have failed to say this had it really been done. 5. Jeph thah's daughter requested to be allowed to go with her companions for tivo mmtlis up and down among the mountains to bewail her virginity. Now, if it was to death she was doomed, why mourn her virginity ? or, if by this is meant merely her young life, why not spend her last hours in her father's house ? why go to lonely and unfrequented places with her companions to utter her wail ? why not enjoy all the comfort she could so long as life was allowed her ? If, on the other hand, it was to perpetual virginity she was doomed, what more natural than that, with her virgin associates, she should mourn this which, in her estimation and theirs, would appear a sacrifice as great as that of life, and should select for this a solitary scene far from the inspection or hearing of the other sex ? 6. If Jephthah's daughter was put to death, what need was there for adding that she knew no man ?' As she was a virgin at the time of the vow, have not these words a prospective sense, and intimate that though she lived after this she never ceased to be a virgin ? 7. The A. V., following the older versions, says that the daughters of Israel vvent yearly to lament the daughter of Jephthah.' But is rror6 properly rendered by lament ? For this the usage of the word gives no authority. In Piel the verb denotes to _praise, celebrate, rehearse in eulogy (comp. Judg. v. ri), so that the proper ren dering of the passage is, The daughters of Israel went yearly to celebrate the daughter of Jephthah.' But why so if she was offered in sacrifice ? On the other hand, if she was devoted to perpetual vir ginity, her virtue would merit perpetual celebration (comp. Eurip., Hippo/., 1425, ff., especially the words cid uovo-wrotos els cre rapOevcov lo-rat Ae pekunt). See the article JEPHTA by Cassel in Her zog's Real Cycl.—W. L. A.