the weight rested upon the table, and not upon the points that hung over. The lowest cake of either row they laid upon the plain table; and upon that cake they laid three golden canes at distance one from another, and upon those they laid the next cake; and then three golden canes again, and upon them another cake; and so of the rest, save only that they laid but two such canes upon the fifth cake, because there was but one cake more to be laid upon. Now these which I call golden canes (and the Hebrews call them so also) were not like reeds or canes, perfectly round and hollow through, but they were like canes or kexes slit up the middle; and the reason of laying them thus betwixt cake and cake was, that by their hollowness air might come to every cake, and all might thereby be kept the better from mouldiness and corrupting; and thus did the cakes lie hollow, and one not touching another, and all the golden canes being laid so, as that they lay within the compass of the breadth of the table; the ends of the cakes that lay over the table on either side bare no burthen but their own weight. "On the top of either row was set a golden dish with a handful of frankincense, which, when the bread was taken away, was burnt as incense to the Lord, (Lev. xxiv. 7.) and the bread went to Aaron and his sons, or to the priests, as their portions to be eaten." H So far this learned author This is a representation of this table, as usually acquiesced in, on rabbinical authority. The table itself is a parallelogram; in the middle stands a vase with its covering, which vase is understood to contain incense; at each end of the table stands a pile, formed by the loaves of shew-bread; this pile is upheld by golden prongs, which prevent the loaves from slipping out of their places; and between the loaves are golden pipes, laid for the admission of air, to prevent any kind of mouldiness, &c. from attaching to the bread. The reader will observe the great height of these piles. We cannot but wonder at the conduct of whoever originally made the design for this table; by what authority could he place on these prongs the head of any animal, whether ox or sheep? or was it in allusion to the four heads of the cherub? (as there were four of these prongs, two on each side of the table.) It should seem to be the head of a young bull; but, if so, if there were really any tradition of such a head, might it not become the origin of that calumny which reported, that the Jews worshipped an ass's head? (see Ass ;) for it is remarkable that the calumny does not say a complete ass, but the head of an ass; and, possibly, some such mistake might give occasion to it:-for, had it said an ox's head, the report had not been far from the truth, if this representation be authentic. However, that must rest on the rabbins, whose accounts are its authorities; or on whatever authority the original designer might have to plead. It should appear by this figure, that the crown of carved work around the rim of the table rose above the superficial level of the table; if so, as Lightfoot justly remarks, the loaves could not exceed it, so as to overhang its edge, but must be confined within its limits. It will be observed, that the legs of this table are distinct and insulated; not being strengthened by a rail, or any similar connection with each other, in any part. As the foregoing figure has no authority beside description, we have here given a representation of the shew-bread table, as it is delineated on the arch of Titus, but restored to somewhat of its true appearance. This shows no loaves placed upon it; and probably Titus found it thus vacant, when it became his prey; but it shows a cup, standing at one end of the table, nearly, or altogeth er, on the spot where, according to the rabbins, one of the piles of bread should be; and in fact, in such a part that it would be impossible to place one of those piles, without removing the cup. We observe, too, nothing of the supposed golden props, or sup ports to those piles, in this figure. From this situation of the cup we have ventured to surmise the possibility, that there was on the table a second cup, (which we have hinted at by dotted lines,) in a part of the table answerable in point of symmetry to that of the first cup. It is true, however, that a single cup might stand in the middle of the front of the table; but what if there were in the middle a small box of incense and a cup standing on each side of it? It is probable the reader will be struck with the manner of ranging the loaves in this engraving, which appears to differ altogether from the rabbinical pile; that supposing them to be laid one upon another in height; this supposing them to be laid by the side of one another in length. We gather this order of the loaves, (1.) from the use of the Hebrew word itself, (y, érek,) which our translators certainly understood in this sense, and have very properly rendered, in Lev. xxiv. 6. "two rows, six in a row"-not two piles, six in a pile; but a row, that is, at length, one loaf by the side of its fellows. The word denotes an orderly arrangement of the subjects to which it refers; so, Prov. ix. 2, “Wisdom hath furnished, arranged the provisions on the table; but provisions are not arranged on a table in piles, one upon another; but in rows, one by the side of another, or one row before, one behind, another. So, Numb. xxiii. 4, "I have arranged seven altars;" surely not one over the other, but in a line. It denotes also an army, that is, rows of soldiers, standing side by side; the inference, therefore, is that the word is conclusive against the rabbinical notion of piles of shew-bread, since it denotes distributions or arrangements, and those in ranks or rows. (2.) As these twelve loaves represented an offering from each of the twelve tribes, it was fit that each tribe should be equally open to the view of the person to whom, as it was understood, the present was presented, that no tribe might seem to be slighted or neglected; but in piles this could not be, as the under loaf would necessarily appear pressed, and concealed by those above it; consequently, the tribe it referred to would be symbolically injured and disgraced by such a situation of its representative. (3.) The very construction and form of the table, as it appears in the arch of Titus, shows the impossibility of adopting the prongs of the first engraving above, because that stem which reaches from the table to the ground, at the very nearest possible situation for it to the end of the table, must have run down directly before the leg of the table, (which is very unlikely, considering the situation of the eup,) by reason of the absence of that part of the table which was cut away; and these piles could not be placed nearer to the centre of the table because of the covercle containing incense, &c. which stood there, as in that engraving. On the whole, therefore, probability leads to the opinion, that the loaves were placed in two rows, six in each row; that they were of a certain convenient breadth, commensurate to the surface of the table, but of a more considerable height, as suggested by dotted lines; and they might be as much higher, above the full height of the cup, as was necessary. This is supposing that they contained the whole quantity of flour understood to be allotted to them in Leviticus. They might resemble our half-peck or peck loaves; or what are called bricks, by our bakers. This arrangement of the loaves, too, admits perfectly of that diminution of the table in front, which appears in what we have considered as the authentic representation; it admits also a place for the conjectural cup on the other side of the table; and it leaves a space between these two cups, which might be occupied by something else to complete the table; such as incense, salt, &c. It is indifferent to this arrangement, whether the loaves were round or square. This plan shows, by the strong lines, what were the limits of the table as taken by Titus; and its dotted lines hint at its limits as made by Moses. It is natural to ask, Who directed these alterations? Did they obtain under Solomon, the Maccabees, or Herod? They seem to imply a spirit of innovation, which one should little expect to find among a people so attached as the Jews were, to the peculiarities of their ritual, and to their religious services. Moses seems to say, (Lev. xxiv. 8.) that the Israelites furnished the loaves presented before the Lord; but this ought to be understood only, as they paid the first-fruits and tenths to the priests (which was the chief of their income.) And of these tenths and first-fruits the priests took wherewith to make the shew-bread, and whatever else it was their duty to furnish, in the service of the temple. In the time of David, (1 Chron. ix. 32.) the Levites of the family of Kohath had the care of the shew-bread, or, as it is called in the Chronicles, "the bread of ordering." Probably the Levites baked and prepared it; but the priests offered it before the Lord, 1 Chron. xxiii. 28. However, Jerome says, from a tradition of the Jews, that the priests sowed, reaped, ground, kneaded, and baked the shew-bread. It is more difficult, however, to ascertain the use of the shew-bread, or what it represented, than almost any other emblem in the Jewish economy. The learned Dr. Cudworth has the following remarks on the subject in his treatise on the Lord's supper: "When God had brought the children of Israel out of Egypt, resolving to manifest himself in a peculiar manner present among them, he thought good to dwell amongst them in a visible and external manner; and, therefore, while they were in the wilderness, and sojourned in tents, he would have a tent or tabernacle built, to sojourn with them also. This mystery of the tabernacle was fully understood by the learned Nachmanides, who, in few words, but pregnant, expresseth himself to this purpose: The mystery of the tabernacle was this, that it was to be a place for the Shekinah, or habitation of Divinity, to be fixed in;' and this, no doubt, as a special type of God's future dwelling in Christ's human nature, which was the true Shekinah; but when the Jews were come into their land, and had there built them houses, God intended to have a fixed dwelling-house also; and, therefore, his movable tabernacle was to be turned into a standing temple. Now, the tabernacle, or temple, being thus as a house, for God to dwell in visibly, to make up the notion of dwelling or habitation complete, there must be all things suitable to a house belonging to it. Hence in the holy place, there must be a table and a candlestick, because this was the ordinary furniture of a room, as the fore-commended Nachmanides observes. The table must have its dishes, and spoons, and bowls, and covers belonging to it, though they were never used; and always furnished with bread upon it. The candlestick must have its lamps continually burning. Hence also there must be a continued fire kept in this house of God upon the altar, as the focus of it; to which notion, I conceive, the prophet Isaiah doth allude, (chap. xxxi. 9.) Whose fire is in Zion, and his furnace in Jerusalem;' and besides all this, to carry the notion still further, there must be some constant meat and provision brought into this house; which was done in the sacrifices that were partly consumed by fire upon God's own altar, and partly eaten by the priests, who were God's family, and therefore to be maintained by him. That which was consumed upon God's altar, was accounted God's mess, as appeareth from Malachi, (i. 12.) where the altar is called God's table, and the sacrifice upon it, God's meat: Ye say, The table of the Lord is polluted, and the fruit thereof, even his meat, is contemptible.' And often, in the law, the sacrifice is called God's on, lehem, that is, his bread or food. Wherefore it is further observable, that, besides the flesh of the beast offered up in sacrifice, there was a mincah, that is, a meat or rather bread-offering, made of flour and oil; and a libamen, or drink-offering, which was always joined with the daily sacrifice, as the bread and drink which was to go along with God's meat. It was also strictly commanded, that there should be salt in every sacrifice and oblation, because all meat is unsavory without salt, as Nachmanides hath here also well observed: Because it was not honorable that God's meat should be unsavory, without salt. Lastly, all these things were to be consumed on the altar only by the holy fire, which came down from heaven, because they were God's portion, and therefore to be eaten or consumed by himself, in an extraordinary manner." We have remarked, that the shew-bread was eaten by none but priests; nevertheless, David, having re ceived some of these loaves from the high-priest Abimelech, ate of them, without scruple, in his necessity; (1 Sam. xxi. 6-9.) and our Saviour uses his example to justify the apostles, who had bruised ears of corn, and were eating them on the sabbath day, Matt. xii. 3, seq. BREAST, BOSOM. The females in the East are more anxiously desirous than those of northern climates of a full and swelling breast; in fact, they study embonpoint of appearance, to a degree uncommon among ourselves; and what in the temperate regions of Europe might be called an elegant slenderness of shape, they consider as a meagre appearance of starvation. They indulge these notions to excess. It is necessary to premise this, before we can enter thoroughly into the spirit of the language in Cant. viii. 8-10. which Mr. Taylor renders somewhat differently from our public translation. BRIDE. Our sister is little, and she hath no breasts; being as yet too young; immature; What shall we do for our sister, in the day when she shall be spoken for? BRIDEGROOM. If she be a wall, we will build on her [ranges] turrets of silver; BRIDE. If she be a door-way, we will frame I am a wall and my breasts like Thereby I appeared in his eyes as This instance of self-approbation is peculiarly in character for a female native of Egypt; in which country, Juvenal sneeringly says, it is nothing uncommon to see the breast of the nurse, or mother, larger than the infant she suckles. The same conformation of a long and pendent breast is marked in a group of women musicians, found by Denon painted in the tombs on the mountain to the west of Thebes; on which he observes, that the same is the shape of the bosom of the present race of Egyptian females. The ideas couched in these verses appear to be these, "Our sister is quite young," says the bride;-"But," says the bridegroom, "she is upright as a wall; and if her breasts do not project beyond her person, as Kiosks project beyond a wall, we will ornament her dress [head-dress?] in the most magnificent manner with turret-shaped diadems of silver." This gives occasion to the reflection of the bride, understood to be speaking to herself aside"As my sister is compared to a wall, I also in my person am upright as a wall; but I have this further advantage, that my bosom is ample and full, as a Kiosk projecting beyond a wall; and though Kiosks offer repose and indulgence, yet my bosom offers to my spouse infinitely more effectual enjoyment than they do." This, it may be conjectured, is the simple idea of the passage; the difference being that turrets are built on the top of a wall; Kiosks project from the front of it. The name Kiosk is not restricted to this construction, but includes most of what are commonly called summer-houses or pavilions. [This exposition forms a part of Mr. Taylor's translation of the whole book of CANTICLES, which is inserted under that article. See the remarks there prefixed. R. I. BREASTPLATE, a piece of defensive armor to protect the heart. The breastplate of God is righteousness, which renders his whole conduct unassailable to any accusation. Christians are exhorted to take to themselves "the breastplate of righteousness," (Eph. vi. 14.) and "the breastplate of faith and love," 1 Thess. v. 8. Being clothed with these graces, they will be able to resist their enemies, and quench all the fiery darts of the wicked one; a beautiful simile. II. BREASTPLATE, a piece of embroidery about ten inches square, (Exod. xxviii. 15, seq.) of very rich work, which the high-priest wore on his breast. It was made of two pieces of the same rich embroidered stuff of which the ephod was made, having a front and a lining, and forming a kind of purse, or bag, in which, according to the rabbins, the Urim and Thummim were enclosed. The front of it was set with twelve precious stones, on each of which was engraved the name of one of the tribes. They were placed in four rows, and divided from each other by the little golden squares or partitions in which they were set, according to the following order. BUB [213] to be severed from the priestly garments; and it was called "the memorial," (Ex. xxviii. 15.) being designed to remind the priest how dear those tribes should be to him, whose names he bore upon his heart. It was also named the "breastplate of judgment," probably because by it was discovered the judginent and the will of God; or because the highpriest who wore it was the fountain of justice, and put on this ornament when he exercised his judicial capacity in matters of great consequence, which concerned the whole nation. Compare URIM and THUMMIM. BRIDE, a new-married female. In the typical language of Scripture, the love of the Redeemer to the church is energetically alluded to in the expression, "the bride, the Lamb's wife," Rev. xxi. 9. See MARRIAGE, and CANTICLES. BRIDEGROOM, see MARRIAGE, and CANTI CLES. BRIERS, see THORNS. BRIMSTONE, a well known substance, extremely inflammable, that may be melted and consumed by God destroyed the fire, but not dissolved in water. cities of the plain by raining upon them fire and brimstone, Gen. xix. 24. The wicked are threatened with this punishment, Psal. xi. 6; Rev. xxi. 8. BROOK, properly TORRENT, in Greek, Xenagos; in Hebrew, nachal. A brook is distinguished from a river, for a river flows at all times, but a brook at some times only; as after great rains, or the melting of snows. As the Hebrew nachal signifies a valley, as well as a brook, one is often used for the other; as the brook of Gerar, for the valley of Gerar. But this ambiguity is of little consequence, since generally there are brooks in valleys. BROTHER is taken in Scripture for any relation, a man of the same country, or of the same nation, for our neighbor, for a man in general. It is probable that James, Joses, and Judas, (Matt. xxvii. 56.) though called brethren of Jesus, were not strictly his natural brothers; but (according to the usage of the Hebrews, in extending names of affection from the proper kin to which they accurately applied, to more distant relatives) cousins. James and Joses were sons of Mary, (certainly not the Virgin,) Matt. xxvii. 56. James and Judas were sons of Alpheus, (Luke vi. 15, 16.) and Alpheus is most probably Cleophas, husband of Mary, sister of the Virgin, John xix. 25. Brother is one of the same nation (Rom. ix. 3, &c.)-one of the same faith, (first Epistle of St. John,) one of the same nature, Heb. ii. 17. Thus we see a regular gradation in the application of the word brother in Scripture, and most, perhaps all, languages employ some equivalent extension of it. We say in English, a brother of the same trade-a brother of the same color-"brother black," &c. Of Of the the same disposition-"brother miser." And to express same vice-"brother thief," &c. many other ideas of similarity, we often attach meanings no less extensive to this word, than are denoted by it when it occurs in its loosest sense in holy writ. By the law, the brother of a man who died with- BUBASTIS, a famous city of Egypt. Ezekiel BUCKET, see WATER. BUCKLER. (See ARMS, ARMOR.) It was a defensive piece of armor, of the nature of a shield; and is spoken figuratively of God, (2 Sam. xxii. 31; Ps. xviii. 2, 30; Prov. ii. 7.) and of the truth of God, Ps. xci. 4. To BUILD. In addition to the proper and literal signification of this word, it is used with reference to children and a numerous posterity. Sarah desires Abraham to take Hagar to wife, that by her she may The midwives who refused be builded up, i. e. have children to support her family, Gen. xvi. 2. obedience to Pharaoh's orders, when he commanded them to put to death all the male children of the Hebrews, were rewarded for it; God built them houses-gave them a numerous posterity, says Calmet. But some think the passage signifies that the numbers of children which the midwives saved. houses of the Israelites were established by the The LXX read, "they (the midwives) made themselves houses," more extensive than mere families; and Josephus says, they were Egyptian women; if so, the phrase expresses the accumulation of wealth, or great fortunes, Exod. i. 21. [This last is the more BUL, the eighth month in the Hebrew calendar, probable meaning. R. According to some, (which is afterwards called Marchesvan; answering nearly to our October, O. S. the more probable supposition,) it corresponded to The name signifies rain the lunar month from the new moon of November to that of December. month. It is the second month of the civil year, and the eighth month of the ecclesiastical year. only find the name Bul in 1 Kings vi. 38. under the has twenty-nine days. (See JEWISH CALENDAR.) We reign of Solomon. It BULL, BULLOCK. This animal was reputed clean, The Septuaand was generally used in sacrifice. gint and Vulgate often use the word ox; comprehending under the word rather the species, than the sex or quality, of the animal; like our word bullock. The ancient Hebrews, in general, never mutilated any creature; and where in the text we read ox, we are to understand a bull, Lev. xxii. 24. The beauty of Joseph is compared to that of a bullock. The Egyptians had a particular veneration for this animal; they paid divine honors to it; and the Jews are supposed to have imitated them in their worship of the golden calves. Jacob reproaches his sons, Simeon and Levi, for having dug down the "for hamstringing a bull," Gen. xlix. 6. wall of the Sichemites; but the LXX translate the Hebrew, Many of the ancient fathers explained this passage of Christ, and referred it to his being put to death by the Jews. The Hebrew signifies either a wall or a bull. Bull, in a figurative and allegorical sense, is taken for powerful, fierce, insolent enemies. "Fat bulls (bulls of Bashan) surrounded me on every side," says the Psalmist, Ps. xxii. 12. and lxviii. 30. "Rebuke the beast of the reeds, the multitude of the bulls;" Lord, smite in thy wrath these animals which feed in large pastures, these herds of bulls. And Isaiah says, (chap. xxxiv. 7.) "The Lord shall cause his victims to be slain in the land of Edom, a terrible slaughter will he make, he will kill the unicorns, and the bulls," meaning those proud and cruel princes who oppressed the weak. BURDEN, a heavy load. The word is commonly used in the prophets for a disastrous prophecy. The burden of Babylon, the burden of Nineveh, of Moab, of Egypt. The Jews asking Jeremiah cap tiously, What was the burden of the Lord? he | mies; but it was withheld from self-murderers till answered them, You are that burden; you are, as it after sunset, and the souls of such persons were bewere, insupportable to the Lord; he will throw you lieved to be plunged into hell. This concern for on the ground, and break you to pieces, and you burial proceeded from a persuasion of the soul's imshall become the reproach of the people, Jer. xxiii. mortality. Jeremiah (viii. 2.) threatens the kings, 33-40. The burden of the desert of the sea priests, and false prophets, who had adored idols, (Isaiah xxi. 1.) is a calamitous prophecy against that their bones should be cast out of their graves, Babylon, which stood on the Euphrates, and was and be thrown like dung upon the earth. The same watered as by a sea; and which, from being great prophet foretold that Jehoiakim, king of Judah, who and populous, as it then was, would soon be reduced built his house by unrighteousness, and who abanto a solitude. See BABYLON. doned himself to avarice, violence, and all manner of vice, among other severe punishments, should be buried with "the burial of an ass" that he should be cast out of the gates of Jerusalem into the common sewer, ch. xxii. 18, 19. It is observed, (2 Macc. v. 10.) that Jason, who had denied the privilege of burial to many Jews, was himself treated in the same manner; that he died in a foreign land, and was thrown like carrion upon the earth, not being laid even in a stranger's grave. Good men made it part of their devotion to inter the dead, as we sce by the instance of Tobit. The burden of the valley of vision, (Isaiah xxii. 1.) is a denunciation against Jerusalem, called, by way of irony, "The Valley of Vision," though it stood on an eminence. It is called "of Vision," or "of Moriah," because it is thought that on mount Moriah Abraham was about to sacrifice Isaac. The burden of the beasts of the south, (Isa. xxx. 6.) evidently respects Judea, but we cannot perceive on what account it has this inscription. It may be, that copiers supplied it; for it seems to make no sense with the context, but, on the contrary, interrupts and suspends it. The text may be thus read, (ver. 4, 5.) -The Jews sent their ambassadors as far as Tanis and Hanes; but they were confounded when they saw that these people were not in a condition to assist them. (The burden of the beasts of the south.) They went, I say, "into the land of trouble and anguish, from whence come the young and old lion, the viper and fiery flying serpent; they will carry their riches upon the shoulders of young asses, and their treasures upon the bunches of camels, to a people that shall not profit them." It may then be a marginal note or inscription, crept into the text, and drawn from the mention of the beasts of burden that go down to Egypt, i. e. the south.-Zechariah says, (xii. 3.) "In that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people. All that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it." Those that would lift it shall be hurt [strain themselves] by it. All nations around Jerusalem tried their strength against it; the Assyrians, the Chaldeans, the Persians, the Egyptians, &c. but all these had been hurt by the Jews. They have taken the city, it is true, but they paid dearly for their victory by their losses. Jerome observes, that in the cities and villages of Palestine, there was an old custom, which continued even to his time, to have great and heavy round stones, which the young people lifted up as high as they could, by way of exercise, and to try their strength. He assures us, moreover, that in the citadel at Athens, near the statue of Minerva, he had seen an iron ball of very great weight, and which he could not move but with difficulty, with which they heretofore used to try the strength of the athlete, that their powers might be known, and that they might not be too unequally matched. Many think that "the stone of Zoheleth," (1 Kings i. 9.) was one of these stones of burden; and Ecclesiasticus (vi. 21.) alludes to this custom, when he says, "She will lie upon him as a mighty stone of trial, and he will cast her from him ere it be long." The weight, or burden of the day, (Matt. xx. 12.) expresses the labor and toil of the day, during many hours, especially the meridian heat. BURIAL. The Hebrews were, at all times, very careful in the burial of their dead; to be deprived of burial, was thought one of the greatest dishonors, or causes of unhappiness, that could befall any man; (Eccl. vi. 3.) being denied to none, not even to ene A remarkable expression of the Psalmist (Ps. exli. 7.) appears to have much poetical heightening in it, which even its author, in all probability, did not mean should be accepted literally; while, nevertheless, it might be susceptible of a literal acceptation, and is sometimes a fact. He says, "Our bones are scattered at the grave's mouth, as when one cutteth and cleaveth wood upon the earth." This seems to be strong eastern painting, and almost figurative language; but that it may be strictly true, the following extract demonstrates:-"At five o'clock we left Garigana, our journey being still to the eastward of north; and, at a quarter past six in the evening, arrived at the village of that name, whose inhabitants had all perished with hunger the year before; their wretched bones being all unburied and scattered upon the surface of the ground, where the village formerly stood. We encamped among the bones of the dead; no space could be found free from them; and on the 23d, at six in the morning, full of horror at this miserable spectacle, we set out for Teawa; this was the seventh day from Ras el Feel. After an hour's travelling, we came to a small river, which still had water standing in some considerable pools, although its banks were destitute of any kind of shade." (Bruce's Travels, vol. iv. p. 349.) The reading of this account thrills us with horror; what then must have been the sufferings of the ancient Jews at such a sight?-when to have no burial was reckoned among the greatest calamities; when their land was thought to be polluted, in which the dead (even criminals) were in any manner exposed to view; and to whom the very touch of a dead body, or part of it, or of any thing that had touched a dead body, was esteemed a defilement, and required a ceremonial ablution? There was nothing determined particularly in the law as to the place of burying the dead. There were sepulchres in town and country, by the highways, in gardens, and on mountains; those belonging to the kings of Judah were in Jerusalem, and the king's gardens. Ezekiel intimates that they were dug under the mountain upon which the temple stood; since God says, that in future this holy mountain should not be polluted with the dead bodies of their kings. The sepulchre which Joseph of Arimathea had provided for himself, and in which he placed our Saviour's body, was in his garden; that of Rachel was adjacent to the highway from Jeru |