22], which enabled them to withstand Moses, were doubtless imposing, though so inferior to the miracles by which they were ultimately foiled (viii. 19), and their gods confounded (xii. 12). The conjecture of Aben Esra, that it was their skill in the secrets of physical science' (quoted in Carpzov, Apparatus, 543), such as is attributed to the Etrurian fulguratores by Humboldt (Ii'osmos, I. c.), which enabled them to sustain their impious contest, is not unreasonable. The names of two of these Chartumniim [or are given by St. Paul, Tim. iii. 8. (For Talmudic traditions about these, see Buxtorf, Lex. Ch. Tal. 945 ; Cfr. Pliny, Hist. Nat. xxx. t, who associates 7amnes and 7otapes with Moses as `Yews; Apuleius, Apol. to8 [ed. Casaub.], who mentions 7annes, etc., as inter magos celebrati ; Numenius Pythag. in Euseb. Prop. Evang. ix. 8, who mentions 'Iaiwijs teat 'lauppijs ' Az-Orr:in and Mowraios 6 'IouSetios. The Moslems call these magicians Saa'zir and Gadur ; D'Herbelot, s. v. Mousa ; and Sale, Koran, 237 ; Schoettgen, .Hor. Hebr. 893 ; Rosenmiiller, on Exod. I. c.) The N. T. gives us the names of other diviners also-in this respect differing observ ably from the reserve of the O. T.-e.g. of Simon Magus (Acts viii. 9, of larjesus or Elymas (Acts xiii. 6, 8, b p.d^yos); the sons of Sceva (Acts xix. 13, r4, lEopneara(). We have alluded to the supposed scientific basis of the arts of these ?zzynn, or ?ann, or =trill (for the identity of these see Kalisch, on Exod. p. 114 ; and Keil and Delitzsch's Bibl. Conzmentar. i. 357) ; by Umbreit, on Job, and Deyling (Observ. ss. iii, 129), the < the blackness of the day,' in Job iii. 5, are taken to mean certain incantations which darken the day,' practised by magicians (whom Winer, ii. 719, thinks indicated in the 8th verse by the words that curse the day,' and) who were able, as the superstitious imagined, to change the brightest day into the darkest mid night. Popular ignorance has always connected magic power with scientific skill. The foretelling of the rise and setting of sun, moon, and stars, and the prediction of eclipses, used to invest astro nomers of old with a marvellous reputation (hence Virg. "En. iv. 439. Vertere sidera intro, ricctur. nosque ciet Manes, etc. ; Ovid, Ma'am. xii. 263. Deduxisse canendo cornua lzrzio ; Horat. Epod. v. 45, Q11CP s id e lunamque ado deripit ; i. 2, 42, Have ego de cola diicentem sidera vide [magico saga nzinisterio.] So Shakespere's magi cian, Prospero, says (Tempest, V. 1), By whose aid I have bedininzed the noon-tide sun ; and (ibid.) Caliban's mother was a witch and one so strong she could control the moon ; so again Milton, While the labouring moon eclipses at their charms. In Exod. xxii. 18, the feminine rinti= is translated a witch in A. V. In the Theocratic system, where women as well as men were endued with super natural gifts (such as Deborah, Hannah, Huldah), female pretenders were to be found-indeed, ac cording to Maimonides (Aloreh Nev. iii. 37), and Babyl. Gemara (Sanhed [Ugol. Thes. xxv. 776]), more rife even than males. Their divination is re ferred to in Ezek. xiii. 23, and described ver. i7-22 (Cfr. H. G. Triumphii Dissert. de pulvillis et peplis prophetiss [in Thes. Nov. suppl. ad Crit. Sacr. i. 972], and Ephrem Syrus, in Rosenmiiller, in loc., who supposes the pillows' to be amulets \ for divination fitted to their sleeves).
(a'.) The next phrase in the Mosaic catalogue of forbidden divination is (Deut. xviii.
a charmer' (LXX. braciScov grao137)zi ' • Vulg. Incantator). The root of these words denotes binding, or joining together. Gesenius (by Robin son, p. 293) refers to a species of magic which was practised by binding magic knots (Cfr. Gordian knot). Carpzov, Apparatus, 544, quotes Rabbini cal authority, and Bochart (Theroz. ii. 3, 6), for a kind of divination which drew together noxious creatures (serpentes and scorpions) for purposes of sorcery ; and in Ps. lviii. 6, the very phrase before us is applied to serpent charmers. (See above under (b) ). Gaulmin (in Carpzov) men tions SEnn6s OciLy, as if the very gods might be bound by magic arts. The LXX. version suggests our spell-bound. Spell is a kind of incantation per sermones vel verba,' says Somner. Hence the frequent allusions to such a charm in poetry. The refrain in the chorus of the Furies (2Eschyl. Eumen. 296, 318, 327), Davos 46Auturcs, cuiovec [a spell-blight] &bras, is imitated by Byron (Manfred, i. 1) Lo ! the spell now works around thee, And the clankless chain bath bound thee, O'er thy heart and brain together Hath the word been passed-now wither !' So Milton (Comm, 85z), She can unlock the clasping charm and thaw the numming spell;' Jonson's witch (in the Sad Shepherd), is said to rivet charms ;' and Beaum. and Fletcher (The Loyal Subject, ii. 2), What strange spells these rings have!' This last quotation directs us to the best explanation of divination by -cri. Its idea is binding together; the ring has always been re garded as the symbol of such conjunction [cfr. wedding-ring, in marriage service of Church of England.] In the phenomena of SanruXonaprela, or divination by ring (see Potter, ii. 18 ; Occult Sciences, 343), we have the most exact illus tration of the subject before us. Josephus (Antiq. viii. 2. 6), among the attributes of king Solomon's wisdom, ascribes to him much magical skill, and with the rest, Tip' Kara. rCov 6,141.6vwv 'Army, eirceScis re [cfr. our Sept. word] ars a-apTryopeiral Ta vocrAieara Kai rpbrour *prw' and goes on to specify an instance of exorcism by virtue of Solomon's magic ring, rats 15io-c roi3 rdv SatcriALov, K. T. X. (s. v. Gianz, already quoted), calls Djemscheed the Solomon of Persia, and according to Minutoli (Reise, 83), Solomon is ordinarily regarded in Mos lem countries as the great master of divination (see Winer, s. v. Zauberei).
(e.) nit.; a consulter with familiar spirits' (LXX. ; Vulg. Qui Pythones con sulit). Most writers treat this class of diviners as necromancers ; so Gesenius, Thes. i. 34 ; and so the author of the art. Divination, in Smith's Bibl. Diet. [5.] But whatever be the close connection of the two as deducible from other passages, it is impossible to suppose that in Deut. xviii. 11, ZiN is synonymous with n+rTri They would not occupy two distinct and not consecutive places in the list. Sound criticism requires that the two phrases should be kept separate. Bottcher, De Inferis, carefully distinguishes between the two expressions. In page 108 he lays down these positions ; fix in necro mantia positum proprie non necromantern ipsum neque spectrum aut daernonem, sed ventroloqui quiddam utri simile dictum fuisse ;' and then, ' in necromantia ventriloquos non peculiariter sed po tissimum versari solitos fuisse.' Bottcher iden tifies the fix, which occurs in the plural in Job xxxii. 19 (in its primary sense of a leathern bottle, or waterskin), with the noun of the same form which is found in so many other passages with a different meaning. In these, the LXX. has in variably used tyyao-rpigtZ-os, as the best ren dering. This version connects our phrase with ventriloquism, as a branch of the divining art.* (For the supposed connection between the primary and secondary senses of fix, see Gesenius in Thes. i., and Lex. by Robinson, p. 20, also Bott cher, p. 107. The analogy is also in close con sistency with the words of Job, I. c., especially in the Vulgate : En venter nzens quasi mustum absque spiraculo'—Umbreit, iu lee.) Having settled the sense of the word, Bottcher goes on to draw a noticeable distinction in certain phrases where it occurs. First, niN in the singular num ber designates the filmi/iar spirit (i.e., what he calls murmelbauch, venter fremens [in a correct sense]; or murmelwesen, (Ionian frenzens [in a superstitious sense]). Hence we have such phrases as fix i+p, mistress [or owner] of a familiar spirit]' (t Sam. xxviii. 7); fIN a consulter or questioner of a familiar spirit [i. e., says Bottcher, ventriloqnus vates ipse'] (Deut. xviii. I 1). Se condly, niN, when governed by the particle a refers not to the vales, or professional consulter, but to the person who requests his aid : thus, while Z'IN Z.s:ti is said of the diviner, Loc. cit., (with the particle) is applied to King Saul, who sought the familiar spirit by the aid of the vales, or pythonissa (t Chron. x. 13). discrimen,' says Bottcher, est etiam aped Tar gumistas et Talmudicos.' (Compare I Sam. xxviii. 8, Divine to me, flt.t.;, by the familiar spirit.') Thirdly, in the plural, is used in a concrete sense, to indicate the ventriloquists or diviners themselves, and not the familiar spirits' which were supposed to actuate them. (De Inferis. p. rot, sec. 205, where the learned writer adduces similar cases of metonymy from other languages : as slow-bellies,' Tit. i. 12 ; so our Wits about town;' the German Witzkopfe,' Dickbliuche,' etc.) By this canon we discover the general accuracy of our A. V. in such passages as Lev. xix. 31, where is well rendered, Them that have familiar spirits.' Comp. Lev. xx. 6 ; I Sam. xxviii. 3, 9 ; 2 Kings xxiii. 24 Is. viii. 19 ; xix. 3. In Is. xxix. 4, the same con crete rendering is applied to fix in the singu lar, contrary to Bottcher's first and third canons , but this rendering is inferior to what Bilittcher would suggest, viz. :—` Thy voice shall be as of a familiar spirit, out of the ground,' etc. This is the only passage where the accuracy of our version, thus tested, seems to be at fault ; it con trasts strikingly with the LXX. in this point, which maintains no distinction between the sing. and the plur. of this word, other than the mechanical one of putting /-y-yao-rpipuos for f1X, and 17-yacr rpli.w5m for rink. The Vulgate is more cautious, e.g., it renders most of the plurals magi, rightly ; but is, on the whole, inferior to A. V. in its ac curacy, for it translates both the sing. Zit; of 2 Kings xxi. 6, and the plur. ritii of 2 Kings xxiii. 24, by the same word, Pythones, and simi larly Is. viii. 19, and xix. 3. (For a description of the Delphian, Pythia, or Pythonissa, and why ven triloquist faculties were attributed to her [whence one of her designations, see Pot ter's Antiqq. c. ix. A vast amount of information touching the IIebrew and its con nection with the witch of Endor, is contained in the treatises of Leo Allatius, and Eustathius An tiochen., De Engastrimytho ; and the Samuel redl y/vies of Michael Rothard, all reprinted in Critici Sacri, viii. 303-458. See also St. Chrysostom, Opera [ed. Bened.], val. vii. p. 445.) A concise statement is contained in Bottcher's work, pp. 111-115. The identity of fiX and rfiZX with Necromancy, con traiy to Bottcher's view, is maintained in D. Dissertatio, especially in chap. vi., whom Gesenius follows, in Thes. s. v. Z''N. See the Dissertatio irz Ugol. Thes. xxiii. 517-528. For ancient Jewish opinions on the apparition of Samuel to Saul, see Josephus, vi. 14. 2, and Whiston's note in loc., and Ecclesiasticus xlvi. 20. On this subject, the second letter of Sir W. Scott, On DemonoloDz and Witchcraft,' with the note in the appendix of the volume, is well worthy of perusal. Whatever reality God may have permitted to this remarkable case of divination, the resort to it by Saul was most offensive to the Divine Being ; the king's rejection is partly ascribed to it in I Chron. x. t3 : somewhat similar is the reason assigned for God's vengeance on Manasseh (2 Kings xxi. See the remark able canons, 61 and 65, of the Trullan [Quinisex tam] Council ; Beveregii Synod. i. 227, 235).