■i/;:,0%; H ■ 
 
 ^ ft*" 
 
LIBRARY 
 
 OF THF. 
 
 University of California. 
 
 GIKT OK 
 
 \ 
 
 Class 
 
THE EPHOD: 
 
 ITS FORM AND USE. 
 
 THEODORE CLINTON FOOTE. 
 
 DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD OF UNIVERSITY STUDIES OF 
 
 THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY IN CONFORMITY WITH 
 
 THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF 
 
 DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY. 
 
 Reprinted from the Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. XXL, Part /., igo2. 
 
 BALTIMORE. 
 
 1902. 
 
,1^ 
 
 \c- 
 
 -0 
 
 yrj^ 
 
 V 
 
THE EPHOD: 
 
 ITS FORM AND USE. 
 
 1. INTRODUCTION. 
 
 THE popular notion of the Hebrew 'ephodh is that of a long flow- 
 ing garment, and is drawn in part, no doubt, from the descrip- 
 tion in Ex. 28 and 39, but also very largely from pictorial Bibles, 
 representing a high priest in a long robe, and from sacred prints of 
 little Samuel in a neat white tunic not unlike the surplice of a modern 
 choir boy. 
 
 Learned commentators have set forth many widely divergent views 
 concerning the ephod, which fall roughly into two classes. The first 
 class presents a view, based upon Ex. 28 and 39, that the ephod was 
 a garment, and never anything else.^ This is the opinion of all the 
 old commentators. St. Jerome, Ep. ad Marcellain, writes : " There 
 were two kinds of ephods : one, used solely by the high priest, which 
 is the kind now generally referred to ; the other, of linen, used by 
 minor priests and worn also by the Levites and even by laymen, when 
 engaged in a sacred rite." 
 
 The same view is emphatically stated by Thenius." The ephod 
 is nowhere (not even in Hos. 3^) anything else than a shoulder gar- 
 ment, as is shown also by the fact that all the Versions, in all passages 
 where the word occurs (with the single exception of the unimportant 
 Arabic translation of Jud. 8^"), either put the name itself, or garment, 
 mantle and the like. 
 
 1 This view is advanced by ancient writers such as Josephus and Jerome, in 
 the Middle Ages by Rashi, and since then by Bertheau, Braunius, Cassell, Dill- 
 mann, Duff, Gesenius-Buhi, Keil, Kohler, Konig, Lotz, Maimonides, McClintock 
 and Strong, Meyer, Riehm, J. Robertson, Thenius, and Zeller. 
 
 2 "Die Biicher Samuels" (in the Kgf. exeg. Handb.), 2d ed., Leipzig, 1864, 
 new ed. by Lohr. 
 
 I 
 
2 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 An English view to the same effect is given in a recent book'"' by 
 Professor Robertson, of Glasgow ; speaking of Gideon's ephod, he 
 says : "Whatever was made, was a thing of magnificence, and implied 
 costly surroundings ; but it is not, by all this, proved that ephod 
 means an image. It may have been merely a coat of extraordinary 
 magnificence, so heavy that it could stand alone, as we say ; it may 
 have been placed upon an image ; but it was an ephod, and an 
 ephod, so far as the usage of the language tells us, was a coat or 
 covering." 
 
 The second class of views concerning the ephod would make it 
 in some places an image and in others a garment.* The citations 
 are given somewhat at length because they are the most authoritative 
 and recent critical opinions. 
 
 Benzinger says ^ that Yahweh was very commonly represented by a 
 bull, but almost more frequently the idol was what is called an ephod. 
 It appears as the proper object of worship in the celebrated sanctua- 
 ries of Dan (Jud. 17 and 1 8), Ophra (Jud. 8^*^), Nob (i Sa. 21^" 23*'). 
 Of course it represented Yahweh. About its form we know nothing. 
 From the name ephod ' covering, garment,' it may be concluded that 
 it had a kernel of wood, clay, or cheap metal, and over it a mantle 
 of gold or silver, often of great value. Its special significance lies in 
 this, that it was inseparably connected with the sacred lot. The 
 management of the ephod was, therefore, the affair of the priest ; at 
 any rate the ephod needed a servant and, as a rule, a house also. It 
 was the means whereby one inquired of God. It is remarkable that 
 the official garment of the priests is likewise called ephod — more 
 exactly ephodh badh, the 'linen ephod,' i Sa. 2^^ and elsewhere, to 
 distinguish it from the former. It is not a bad idea of Smend's that 
 perhaps the image was originally clothed in an ephodh badh ; cf. the 
 custom among the old Arabs of putting on garments and swords 
 (Wellhausen, Skizzen, III. 99).*^ The expression nose ephodh, as the 
 name of the priest, which was afterwards referred to the linen coat, 
 
 8 Early Religion of Israel, Edin. and London, 1892, p. 231. 
 
 * Variously modified, this view is advanced by Alizon, Benzinger, Budde, De 
 Wette, Driver, Eichhorn, Gesenius, Graniberg, Hengstenberg, Kautzsch, Kittel, 
 Kuenen, Marti, Maybaum, J. D. Michaelis, Montefiore, Moore, Nowack, Reuss, 
 H. Schultz, Smend, W. R. Smith, Stade, Studer, Vatke, and Wellhausen. Duhm 
 thinks a ' mask,' Sellin a ' quiver ' ; cf. below, p. 4. 
 
 '' Hebr'dische Archdologie, 1894, p. 382 f. 
 
 ^ Wellhausen, I.e., says it is not necessary to suppose that garments and swords 
 were put on images; they may have been put on stones or trees. 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 3 
 
 meant originally nothing else than the bearer of the image (i Sa. 14', 
 LXX).' 
 
 Professor Moore, of Harvard, in his Commentary on Judges, New 
 York, 1S95, p. 379, has the following: "Gideon's ephod . . . was 
 clearly an idol of some kind," adding in a footnote, "It would be 
 more exact to say, an agalma; in using the word idol here and below, 
 I do not wish to be understood to assume that it was iconic. All that 
 can with certainty be gathered from them [the passages where ephod 
 occurs in Judges and Samuel] is that it was a portable object which 
 was employed or manipulated by the priest in consulting the oracle. 
 In the Priests' Law-book, the ephod is a part of the ceremonial dress 
 of the high priest, to which the oracle-pouch containing Urim and 
 Thummim is attached ; but, while it is probable that the oracle of 
 the high priest is a survival of the ancient priestly oracle by the 
 ephod, it is impossible to explain the references to the ephod in Judges 
 and Samuel by the descriptions in P." More recently,- Moore sug- 
 
 "^ It may be as well to introduce here some consideration of the ephodh badh, 
 which, in the above extract, is supposed to mean ' linen ephod.' The word HH, 
 ' linen,' has no etymology, although it has been proposed to regard it as an error 
 for "1-, connected with kad, the Sumerian prototype of the Assyrian kitii, which 
 may have meant ' linen.' The most serious objection to the rendering ' linen,' 
 however, is found in Ex. 39-^ (see below, p. 11), where it is stated that the "C:"I2 
 IS, supposed to mean ' linen breeches,' were made of ti-'Si', a material which may 
 mean ' muslin ' or ' linen.' The I,XX omits "12, though Theodolion restores it 
 transliterated, thus showing that the word was not understood. The Targum 
 rendering is the same as that of our English versions. It seems clear that 1— did 
 not mean the material of the garment, and was misunderstood by the time the 
 Versions were made. Professor Haupt has suggested that the 13 HISK is equiva- 
 lent to Trepl^uifia fioplov, siibligaculum ineinhri ; 13, a ' member ' of the body, as 
 in Job i8i'5*, is identical with 13, a 'part,' cf. pars {virilis). In Ex. 25i3ff- 
 I Ki. 8" Num. 4^, 3'13 means ' poles ' (Latin asser) just as <pa\\6$ may be 
 connected with pdhis. The (pa\\6s was originally a piece of fig or olive wood. 
 The expression in Ex. 28^-, 13 "C;3tt, rendered ' linen breeches,' is probably to 
 be understood as a 'covering of the nakedness,' i.e. 'kilts' (see Note A). The 
 two phrases which follow, viz. : mil? lil'3 ri'DSb ' to cover the flesh of naked- 
 ness,' and Vl" Q'?l' 111 D"ri^D ' they shall reach from the loins even to the 
 thighs,' seem to be explanatory glosses. Josephus, Antiquities, iii. 7. I, calls it 
 the Sid^oj/xa wepi to. aiSoTa, and Philo -Trfpi^wp-a els aidoiwv CKiir-qv. The mikhnese 
 badh, if this interpretation of 13 be correct, will not be 'breeches' (cf. Pesh. 
 Xaina = ■Kipl^wp.a), but like the Scotch kilt, a very short skirt such as is 
 seen in representations on Egj'ptian and Babylonian monuments. (For an 
 extended examination of the passages with 13, see Note D.~) We must then 
 understand epitodk badh to be epitodh partis (znrilis). 
 
 ^ Cheyne-Black's Encyclopaedia Biblica, vol. ii.. New York, 1901, under 
 " Ephod." 
 
4 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITER-VfURE. 
 
 gests that the ephod may have been a loincloth ; but adheres to his 
 former distinction between the ephod-garvient and ephod-idol. 
 
 Professor Marti, of Berne, after discussing the Teraphim, says : ^ 
 " Not with the same certainty can the origin of the ephod be deter- 
 mined. It is certain, however, that it also signifies an image of a 
 god. But where we now find it in the O.T. in this sense, it must 
 be taken as an image of Yahvveh (in Ophra, where Gideon sets it up, 
 Jud. 8-''-'^, in Dan, Jud. i8^**^, also before in Yf^-, and in Nob, 
 I Sa. 21'" 2-^^-^. It could, therefore, owe its origin only to a subse- 
 quent period. This, however, is not probable. Here also it is 
 much easier to assume that the old custom of making images of 
 gods, as the Teraphim at any rate testifies to, was transferred to 
 Yahweh. Therefore we have to discuss here the sacred object called 
 the ephod. 
 
 " The name ephod points to the fact that, earlier, these images had 
 an overlaying of silver or gold (cf. Jud. 8-"^ i?^*^'), and that even 
 molten images were found (cf. Ex. 32, i Ki. 12--)." 
 
 Professor Sellin, of Vienna,^" speaking of arrows used in giving the 
 tordh, says : " Perhaps they were bound together in a bundle (cf. 
 I Sa. 25"^), at any rate carried in or at the ephod. This must have 
 been either a covering over the arrows, just as the bow and arrows 
 of a warrior were put in a covering (Hab. 3^ Zech. 9'^), or more 
 probably a girdle or band on which was carried the quiver with the 
 arrows (cf. "ITIS!), and in the course of time the name of the band 
 came to signify the entire oracle instrument. IISX never signifies an 
 image of a god, no matter how much this is maintained as certain ; 
 not even Jud. S-*"- (cf. Konig, Haiiptprobleinc, p. 62). Rather is 
 this signification excluded by Jud. 17^*" 18'*-" Hos. 3* (cf. also 
 Ez. 21-') ; molten image, ephod, and teraphim are three separate 
 things. Nor is that meaning possible in i Sa. 14'^, for one man did 
 not carry the image before his people ; more likely a wagon was 
 used. Or^ the other hand, the word in these passages, and also in 
 I Sa. 23" 30^ can as little signify the simple priestly garment, which, 
 precisely to distinguish it from that ephod, was called ephodh badh 
 (i Sa. 2^** 22'^ 2 Sa. 6^''). Now ephodh is certainly a covering of 
 metal or with metal woven into it (Is. 30'" Ex. 28'* 39')- It seems 
 to me to follow as a certainty from i Sa. i^^. is. « lxX, 30', that 
 
 '^ Die Geschichte der israelitiuhen Religion, Strassburg, 1897, PP- 29 and 
 
 lOI. 
 
 ^^ Beitr'dge zur israelitischen ttnd jitdischen Keligionsgeschichte, Leipzig, 1897, 
 II., p. 115 ff. 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 5 
 
 ephodh has this meaning, and was, therefore, either a covering over 
 the Urivi, or, better, a band on which the priest carried it." " 
 
 Professor Kautzsch ^- explains ephod as ' covering,' especially the 
 linen shoulder garment of the priest. In the Textbibel it is always 
 retained wherever it signifies an image of Yahweh used for oracular 
 purposes, overlaid with precious metal or perhaps more correctly a 
 shoulder garment. 
 
 Professor Budde says : ^' " It is true that ephod signifies also a 
 priestly garment, but only with the addition badh ( i Sa. 2^^ ; 2 Sa. 6" ; 
 I Chr. 15"'). Both significations are later combined in the ephod of 
 the high priest in the source P, the shoulder garment into which the 
 oracle of the Uriin and Thummim was inserted. The old ephod of 
 our passage and those referred to, must somehow have represented 
 the Deity, and also have been, at a later time, repudiated. The 
 gold formed the covering of a kernel of another material ; but 
 whether the word ephod is to be derived from a root signifying to 
 draw over, cover, according to Is. 30", remains very questionable." 
 
 For convenience of reference, the description of the ephod as 
 found in the Priests' Code is here given, being condensed from 
 Ex. 28 and 39. 
 
 Ex. 39- : " Moses made the ephod^^ of gold, blue, and purple, and 
 scarlet, and fine twined linen. They beat the gold into thin sheets 
 and cut it into wires, to work it in the blue, in the purple, in the 
 scarlet, and in the fine twined linen, the work of the skilled weaver. 
 They made shoulder pieces for the ephod, joining together : the ephod 
 was joined together at the two ends. The skilfully woven piece that 
 was upon it, to gird it on with, zvas of the same piece and similar 
 ivorkmansJdp. And he made the ornament (breastplate), the work 
 of the skilled weaver, like the work of the ephod. The ornament was 
 square and double, being a span in length and breadth. They bound 
 the ornament by its rings, to the rings of the ephod with a lacing of 
 blue to keep it in place on the skilfully woven piece of the ephod that 
 it might not be loosed from the ephod." Ex. 28^" : " Thou shall put 
 in the ornament oi 'yxdigWitXiX. the Urim and Thummim that they may 
 be upon Aaron's heart.'' Ex. 39--' : " Moses made the robe of the 
 
 ^^ Dr. Sellin's view does not exactly fit either of the two classes. 
 
 12 Textbibel des Alten mid A'etien Testaments. Erklarung tier Fremdworter, 
 s.v. " Ephod." 
 
 J3 Richter, Freiburg, 1897, P- 68. 
 
 1* The italicized parts, read consecutively, will give as clear an idea of this 
 ephod as can be gotten from such a confusing description. 
 
6 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LlTER.VrUKE. 
 
 ephod of woven work, all of blue, and the hole of the robe in the 
 middle of it. They made upon the skirts of the robe pomegranates 
 of blue, etc." 
 
 It must not be forgotten that the above account, taken from the 
 book of Exodus, is several centuries later than the latest pre-exilic 
 mention of the ephod ; and to attempt to make it a starting-point 
 in an investigation of the ancient ephod, would be like trying to 
 understand Gutenberg's first attempt at printing by starting with an 
 intricate description of the latest cylinder press. If one is con- 
 strained to question the later composition of the Priests' Code, the 
 following investigation may help him to see that this is not an arbi- 
 trary, but rather an unavoidable, conclusion. 
 
 The graphic account which follows presents the ephod in quite as 
 interesting if not so picturesque an aspect, and leads one to inquire 
 what the ephod actually was. 
 
 In 2 Sa. 6^^*'^- is the story '^ of the bringing up of the Ark from the 
 house of Obed-Edom, to the tent ^'' made for it at Jerusalem. David 
 had not only succeeded Saul on the throne of Israel, but had also 
 married his daughter Michal, i Sa. iS'", who held a prominent posi- 
 tion among his many wives. The procession in which the Ark was 
 borne, moved along with pomp and ceremony. David danced before 
 the sacred palladium with great enthusiasm, being girded with an 
 ephod. All the Israelitish nation assisted in bringing up the Ark of 
 Yahweh with shouting and the sound of trumpets. As the Ark 
 entered the city the women lined the way. David danced with great 
 spirit, and Michal, looking out from the palace, saw him and became 
 exceedingly angry. 
 
 The Ark was at length placed in the tent, and David, thoroughly 
 exhausted by the long festivity, returned to his palace to greet his 
 family. So far overcome by her feelings that she forgot all other 
 
 ^5 Taken from the document J, probably not later than S50 li.C. 
 
 1*^ The distinctive name for the Tabernacle is JSv C, ' dwelling,' though it was 
 very commonly described as ni,"tt ^HS, 'Tent of Meeting.' David evidently 
 knew nothing of the Tabernacle of the Priests' Code, Ex. 26 and 35, but impro- 
 vises a tent for the reception of the Ark. A comparison of 2 Chr. i* with i^' 
 shows that the 'Tent of Meeting,' "ir'Q SlS, was at Gibeon, according to the 
 Chronicler, but it is inconceivable that David could have known of such a 
 divinely ordained and venerable Tent, made especially for the Ark, and then 
 have improvised another. The consciousness of its unfitness leads David to plan 
 the building of a temple. It may be noted, also, in connection with the above 
 narrative, that, if our explanation of ephod be correct, David could not have 
 known of Ex. 20''^^, forbidding indecent exposure during sacred rites. 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 7 
 
 considerations, Michal went out to meet her royal spouse and said, 
 " How glorious was the king of Israel to-day, who uncovered himself 
 to-day in the sight of the handmaids of his servants, as one of the 
 shameless fellows ! " David said to Michal, " I will dance ^' before 
 Yahweh ! Blessed be Yahweh, who chose me in preference to thy 
 father and all his kin, to appoint me prince over the people of 
 Yahweh ! Therefore I shall play before Yahweh. And even if I 
 should uncover myself still more and be contemptible in thine eyes, 
 I am sure that the girls you allude to will respect my royal dignity." '^ 
 The story closes with the statement : " And Michal the daughter of 
 Saul never had another child." Orthodox commentators attribute 
 the curse of barrenness to divine retribution. It is more natural, 
 howev^er, to suppose that David was so disgusted with Michal that 
 he ceased visiting her, which was social death to the member of a 
 harem. ^Slichal's jealousy would evidently not have been aroused 
 if the ephod had been, as is commonly supposed, a long flowing 
 garment. It is more likely that David was divested of his clothing, 
 as was, on certain occasions {e.g. i Sa. 19-'') customary among 
 Semitic peoples [see Note ^], and was girded with the ephod, as if 
 an apron, or as Professor Haupt has suggested, a loincloth. 
 
 Resume. — The principal views regarding the ephod are as follows : 
 (i) It was always a garment worn by a priest; (2) it was always a 
 garment, whether on priest or idol ; (3) it was a garment and also 
 an idol ; (4) it was a garment and a quiver or quiver belt. The only 
 description given in the O.T. shows that the ephod was something 
 depending from the shoulders to the waist, and put on over a long 
 robe. But this entirely fails to satisfy the narrative in 2 Sa. 6. 
 
 1" The Received Text is evidently corrupt. After the words n'n' 'JET* the 
 LXX has ri'iT "^'"121 1|5"1K. The phrase 7S"ll'' TT seems like an explanatory 
 gloss. For Ti'T'i;", ' I will be vile,' the LXX reads koX a.iroK<iKv<p6ri(TOfj.ai = 
 T'7^13'', * I will uncover myself,' thus making clear an otherwise confused state- 
 ment. The Masoretic text shows signs of having been tampered with. T'T'i'SJI 
 is an indefinite expression not corresponding to nX'tt I'L'. The LXX reading 
 "^'I'l'^, ' in thine eyes,' for ' in my eyes,' brings out the antithesis which lies 
 between Michal's feeling and that of the handmaids. Driver strangely neglects 
 the LXX on this passage; cf. Xo/es on the Hebrew Text of Samuel, Oxford, 1890, 
 p. 210. The Hebrew text restored would then read: "|1"1-1 njl3']K n",T "27 
 
 ['rx-if bi'] n',T nr Sr t;; 'iik n'i'? t'z hiti" T"^^ '- "'"- "^'^'^ ^"^' 
 
 ** Literally: "And I shall play before Yahweh. And I shall uncover myself 
 more than this, and I shall become contemptible in thine eyes, but with the 
 handmaids which you spoke of, with them, let me be honored." ^ 
 
 CV/NIVERSITV J 
 
JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 2. WHAT WAS THE EPHOD? 
 
 The ephod is mentioned in seventeen different passages in the 
 Old Testament, and the word, with slight variation in form, occurs 
 fifty times. In studying the different passages, we must not overlook 
 the fact that the O.T. is not a homogeneous whole. If, therefore, 
 we wish to ascertain the original idea of the ephod, we must treat 
 the passages in chronological order. They cover a period of about 
 400 years, approximately from 800 b.c. to 400 B.C., while the actual 
 time between Gideon's ephod, Jud. 8-', and tlie latest mention of 
 the ephod may have been well on to 1000 years. There was time 
 for development ; and it is possible that the post-exilic ephod was 
 quite different from that of ancient Israel. 
 
 Wore than half of all the places where the word ephod occurs 
 belong to the priestly sections of Exodus and Leviticus, which are 
 known to be not older, /// their present shape, than 500 b.c. The 
 historical books are not the work of a single writer, but are com- 
 posed of several strata. The oldest stratum, or what is called the 
 Judaic document, was compiled not later than 800 b.c, and to this 
 document we must assign most of the passages from Judges and 
 Samuel in which the ephod is mentioned. For convenience of 
 reference, the pre-exilic passages are here given. 
 
 (i) Jud. 82", b'2 i:n (D) nnsp titd in^K jri tss"? ^xi-i) imx tT" (j) 
 
 CC VinX 7'K"'i"ii", "Gideon made an ephod of it [the gold and raiment], 
 and put it in his city Ophra, and all Israel went astray after it there." 
 LXX, eh e0£t>5. Alia exempt, ecpovd. Procopius in Catena Niceph. T. II., 
 p. 180: £(^0115, [xavrelov rj €i5u}\ov. 'A, eirivdv/xa. V, Feciique ex eo 
 Gedeon ephod. Pesh., K^ET 121". 
 
 (2) Jud. 175, D"£-im T2K rU'l D'hSk D'S "h T\T):> D'Xni (J), "Micah had 
 
 a private chapel, and he made an ephod and teraphim." LXX, c0w5 koX 
 0ipa<piv. Syro-Hex., ei alia exempt., e<povd; 'A, ivwfiida; Z, evdv/xa 
 Upa7iK6v; 'A, fiopcpui/xara; 2, eldwXa. V, Qui aedicidam quoque in ea 
 Deo separavit, et fecit ephod et teraphim, id est, vestem sacerdotalem, et 
 idola (O.L. et penates). Pesh., NC'IS m2 nri". 
 
 (3) Jud. iS'S O'S-li-n T£S rh'A'T, C-rrr U" "3 Cni'Tn (J), "Do you know 
 
 that there are, in these houses, an ephod and teraphim?" LXX, e0w5 
 (rt/. ex. f(povd) Kal depcLKpiv. V, iVostis quod in domibus istis sit ephod, et 
 teraphim ? Pesh., SD'nEI «rne\ 
 
 (4) Jud. 18I", n'Snnn nSI TEKH nS', "And the ephod and the teraphim." 
 
 Perhaps a later addition, cf. Moore's Judges, Internat. Com., p. 397, and 
 SBOT., Judges, p. 621. 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 9 
 
 (5) Jud. 18I8, D"B-inn MKI -nSKH boa n^ inp'l (J), "They took the image, 
 
 the ephod, and the teraphim." LXX, Kal e\aj3ov rb ■yXvirrbv Kai to ^^ 
 €<pu8 \_alia, €<povb'\ Kal rb ffepacpiv. V, Ttderunt igitur qui intraverant, 
 
 sctilptile, ephod, et idola. 
 
 (6) Jud. i82o, bcsn ns'1 D'snnn nxi niBKn nx nj^i (j), "He took the 
 
 ephod, the teraphim, and the graven image." LXX, rh e<^cj5 \^alia, 
 i(po\jb'\ KoX rh dfpa(pii> Kal t6 yXvwTbv. V, et tidit ephod et idola, ac 
 sculptile. 
 
 (7) I Sa. 2I8, na mas nun lu: m>T "is nx n-irts bi^iatn (e^), "Samuei 
 
 ministered before Yahweh, a child, girded with an ephodh badh." LXX, 
 Kai '^afiovrfK ^v Xeirovpywv ivdnriov Kvpiov TraLddpiov wepLe^waixivov €(pov5 
 ^ad \_alia exenipl., /3ap-']. 'A, i-rr^vdufia i^aipeTov. 2, e(f>ov8 Xivovv. 
 O, e(po}d ^ap. V, puer, accinctus ephod lineo. Pesh., X^m XmS. 
 
 (8) I Sa. 228, ^i^ -iiES nXtrS (RD), 'To l^ear an ephod before Me." LXX, 
 
 Kal aXpi.iv e4)ov5 \_alia, ivibiriov i/jLov^. V, et portaret ephod coram me. 
 
 (9) I Sa. 143, "IISK KC3 . . . rrnif (J), "Ahijah bearing an ephod." LXX, 
 
 alpoiv e(pov8. A, (pipojv iireduT-qv. V, portahat ephod. 
 
 (10) I Sa. 1418*-, ^IDK 'IT las"! . . , (msx) ntT'^n rrnxb "^ixtr niaK^^i q) 
 
 "]T, " Saul said to Ahijah, Bring hither the ephod, for he bore the ephod 
 at that time among the Israelites. . . . And Saul said, Withdraw thy 
 hands." LXX, irpocrdyaye rb €(povd ■ on. avrbs Tjpev rb ecpovd [a/ia 
 exenipl., 6ti ^v t] Ki^ojrbs rod deov'\ iv rri rj/xipq. eKeifri ivunrtov laparjX . . . 
 Kal eiire SaouX 7rp6s rbv iepia, 'Zvvdyaye rds xetpcis (tov. V, Applica 
 arcam Dei . . . et ait Saul ad sacerdotem : Conlrahe nianum tuatn. 
 
 19 Kal rb e(pio8 probably indicates that "IIBKH 702, which means the image of 
 the ephod, is a copyist's error, representing an original text llSJ^n flKI bcsn. 
 This text is given in Field's He.xapla, with inpb for inp"1. 
 
 -'' Hieroiiyini 0pp., T. vi., p. 903 : Et vestitus, inquit, erat Samuel ephod BAD, 
 id est, indumenta lineo ; had enim linum appellatur, unde et BADUIM Una di- 
 cuntur. Pro quo Hebraico Latinoque sermone male quidam legunt ephod bar; 
 siquidem bar autjilius appellatur a\it/rumenti manipulus, aut electus, aut ov\o%, 
 id est, crispus. 
 
 21 The Received Text reads: .TH ^3 D^'^bKn Jn^? rwr\ n'n«b SlHlT ni2N'1 
 : bt^na" 'D21 Xinn nvn D\nb«n |n>«. For "Xn JI-IK; n^^an must be read, with 
 LXX, niBKH nCjri, not only because the Ark was at Kirjath Jearim at the time, 
 but because the instrument of divination was not the Ark, but the ephod, which 
 v.^ takes pains to tell us Ahijah had with him. rill"an is the regular expression 
 used with the ephod (cf. 239 30'). As to '?«-lt"' "Jm . . . D'n'^S'n pIX .TH 'D, 
 Driver remarks (cf. Azotes on Samuel, 1890, p. 84) : TXTil" "-1 is untranslatable, 
 1 never having the force of a preposition such as UV, so as to be capable of being 
 a predicate with HTT. We must read, with LXX, Kinn Dm "I^SSn SC: Nin "D 
 bs"lC" "2^. It is certainly better to suppose '321 to be corrupted from "27 
 than that ''Ith has fallen out, leaving '321. Driver {loc. cit.) objects that "27 
 7K"lC" alone at the end of a clause is bald, and against the usage of Heb. prose. 
 It is true that in Joshua and Chronicles T'KIt'' "JD is more common, but cf. '327 
 •^Xlt" in Josh. 116 2 Sa. iqIS- is i Chr. igi^- w also bs-lt' '3£D in 2 Sa. iqIS, and 
 •rX-ir' '32'?a in I Chr. 19I8. In two of the places cited bxit" '32^ ends the 
 first half of the verse, and 7K"lU!""bl7 stands repeatedly at the end of the verse. 
 
lO JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 (11) I Sa. 21 w -nsK,-i nnx nbt]Dn nmb N"n n:n . . . nhi n-in (ei), "The 
 
 sword of Goliath . . . there it is, wrapped in a mantle, behind the ephod." 
 LXX, iveiXTifiiyr] ?jv iv Ifiarit^, 9 adds, dwlcTw ttjs ^ttui/xiSos.'-- 2, €(povd, 
 A, ^irevdufxaTos. V, est involittus pallio post ephod. 
 
 (12) I Sa. 2218, -12 -nsx KTO r'K ntram D'ibty snn nvn n^;i (j), "He 
 
 killed that day eighty-five men bearing an ephodh badh." LXX, iravrai 
 aipovras ecpovd [Alex. 'Klvov^. A, cpipovras iirivdvp-a i^aiperov. V, viros 
 vestitos ephod liiieo. 
 
 (13) I Sa. 23^, ITS 1"!'' TIBX, "An ephod went down in his hand." Probably 
 
 a marginal gloss; cf. SBOT., Sanniel, p. 70. 
 
 (14) I Sa. 239, mSXn nty-an \r\'zr\ -in;nN ^K ItiK^I (J), "(David) said to the 
 
 priest, Abiathar, Bring hither the ephod." LXX, ■wpoaa'^a.'^t to eipovd 
 Kvpiov. 'A, eyyicrov to evdv/iia (fort. ^Tr^cSn/xa). V, AppUca ephod. 
 
 (15) I Sa. 30", -in^nx rri mcsn ns* nj nc'iin . . .nrrrs* ■?« tt n^x-i (j) 
 
 in '7K "IlEXn nX, " David said to Abiathar, Please bring me the ephod; 
 and Abiathar brought David the ephod." LXX, irpoffdyaye t6 ecpovd; 
 'A, Tvpocriyyiffov dri fxoi to iirivdv/xa; 2, (TTrjcrov wpbs p.^ ttjv iirdip-iSa; 
 V, Applica ad me ephod. 
 
 (16) 2 Sa. 6'4, "O mSi? "llJn m-n (J), "David was girded with an ephodh 
 
 badh?-^ LXX, ivBedvKws <TTo\r)v e^aWou ; 'A, eTr^vdvpa i^aipeTov ; 
 S, VTTodvTriv (fort. eirevdvT-qv') 'Kivovv. Praeterea Jl/ontefalconio edidit : 
 dWos e<pud ^va-ffLvov ex j Pa ml. 15-', tct videtur. V, David erat 
 accinctus ephod lineo. Pesh., KSCI—T t^mS. 
 
 (17) I Ki. 226^ 'ns* nn "isb <"n2Nn> nx nxt'3 "d -^rT^^s* )h nn crni,--* "i 
 
 will not kill thee now, because thou hast carried the ephod before my 
 father David." LXX, /cat o\i davarucroj ere oti rjpas ttjv ki^utov ttis 
 diadrjKrjs Kvplov ivicTriov tov waTpds p.ov. V, quia porta sti arcam Domini 
 Dei. 
 
 (18) Hos. i\ (740 B.C.) D'S-im ^lEK pXI . . . "^Xnt:" "3:3 1211", "The Israelites 
 
 shall abide without ephod and teraphim." LXX, ovhe iepaTeias, ovdi 
 
 22 Hieronymus, in Epist. LXIV. ad Fabiolam, 15 (Opp.T. L, p. 363) : Se.xtum 
 est vestimentum, quod Hebraica lingua dicitur EPHOD. LXX, ivuplda, id est 
 superhumerale appellant; Aq. in^vdvp-a, nos ephod sxao ponimus nomine. 
 
 23 See above, p. 3, note 7. 
 
 2* This passage is to be compared with i Sa. 14I8, where Ark was evidently 
 substituted for ephod z.iier the LXX was made; see note 21, p. 9 above. In this 
 passage the LXX represents a text : m,T IT'ID p1i< TX 21X^3 '3, so that if the 
 change of TISX to f1"lX took place, it was earlier than the LXX, provided the 
 LXX has not been altered. There are two arguments for reading T2X, apart 
 from any desire to suppress the word ephod (for which see p. 40), and apart from 
 its being a natural thing for a scribe to recall the bringing of the Ark to Jeru- 
 salem (2 Sa. 6), and write JTlX for TEX: (i) The expression is unsuitable, for 
 no one person ever bore the Ark, and, on the other hand, IIBX Ktl'D is the regular 
 expression for the priest with the ephod; (2) the context does not suit Ark and 
 does suit ephod, for v.^^* refers to the afflictions which Abiathar shared with 
 David, which can only refer to the time when David was fleeing before Saul, and 
 Abiathar was with him, bearing not the Ark but the ephod, as is evident from 
 I Sa. 23^ and 30'^. 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 1 1 
 
 StjXwi'; 'a, Kal aKOVOVTOs 5t' ev5vnaTos Kai oia fj.op(pwfxdTU}v; 2, 0, oi;5^ 
 E0w5, ovd^ Qepa^iv.-^ V, sine ephod et sine theraphim ; O.L. 7ieque 
 Ephod (^simulacrum) et Teraphim {penates). Pesh., miBK tTzS N'T'11 
 KI2C3 CKC1. 
 
 Two post-exilic passages are appended : 
 
 (19) Is, 3022, , , _ a-itn -[2n) n2Di2 niEK nxi "[£C3 ^b'ca "isi: nK 26nj<j2t2i, 
 
 " Thou shall defile the silver plating of thy images and ihy molten gold 
 band; thou shalt scatter them." LXX, Kai /xiaveis \_alia exempt. koX 
 e|ape?s] rb. fi8o}\a to. irepirjpyvpujfxeva Kal 7rept/cexpi;(rw;u.e'ca XeTrra Troirjcris. 
 V, laminas sculptilium . . . vestimentuni conjlatilis. 
 
 (20) Ex. 39'-^-28, -ITC'ia tt -I2n 'p::p nSI , . . I'rr'l (P), "They made the 
 
 mikhnese habbadh of fine linen." LXX, /cat to. irepicrKeX-^ [O, ^a5] f\- 
 ptjffffov KeKXcJcr/xivTjs. V, feminalia quoque linea, byssina. The Targum 
 Onkelos has: TUT pD"; Kltin 'C:ra -''T\'>, Samaritan Targum: 'r-IU? 
 
 nnra nb'ia ^s nnxar. Pesh. has «::m xjs^ns (z.^. wepi^uifia ^(laaov). 
 
 Targum Onkelos, in Lev. 6*, gives the plural f"Dj2IS1. 
 
 A. THE FORM OF THE EPHOD. 
 I. Was a a Garment? 
 
 In the following investigation, the word ephod will refer to that 
 which was in use before the Exile ; and the chronological order will 
 be observed wherever conducive to practical results. 
 
 As the narrative in 2 Sa. 6" has been already referred to,^ we may 
 begin by noting the conclusion to be drawn from it ; namely, that in 
 spite of the popular view, the ephod was not a long flowing garment. 
 David admits that he had uncovered himself so as to justify Michal's 
 censure, had it not been before Yahweh. That he could have un- 
 covered himself still more shows that he was not nude, and suggests 
 the idea that his brief covering answered the purpose of a loincloth. 
 It is instructive to compare the post-exilic account of this event, in 
 I Chr. 15, and note that the scribe thought it indecorous. Hence 
 he "clothed" David with a "long linen robe,"^" omitted "ll^n 
 
 25 Hieronymus, XXIX. ad Marcellam : In Osee . . . pro sacerdotio et manifes- 
 tationibus, in Hebraeo est, sine Ephod et sine Teraphim ; sicut Theod. et Sym. 
 transtulerunt. 
 
 2fi nXJam, instead of CnK!2t:i, with the LXX, and in harmony with "ECr and 
 D"!Tri. For an extended consideration of this passage, see below, p. 16 f. 
 ^2" Cf. Merx, Chrestom. Targum. p. 214: numquam a brevi instruendum. 
 
 28 Kohn, Samar. Stiidien, Breslau, 1868, p. 59, commenting on "^X^L' (in 
 Ex. 30^*) says : Der Ubersetzer hat "12 offenbar gleich dem arab. bdda, " weiss 
 sein " genommen. 
 
 29 See above, p. 6 f. 
 
 8' I Chr. 1527, pn b'yaS "^nira may be an intentional alteration of ^"'^ 
 mSXn, Ex. 2831. 
 
12 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 ' girded ' in connection with the ephod, and, apparently to justify 
 Michal's contempt, substituted for *I2"15^ * dancing,' the word pPlt^tt 
 ' playing,' which is as equivocal ^^ in Hebrew as in English. The 
 episode with JNIichal is omitted. 
 
 But the expression in 2 Sa. 6", " girded with an ephodh hadh" 
 does not imply a garment. David does not %vear it, it is hung about 
 his loins by a girdle. In the same way a sword is girded upon the 
 loins. The original meaning of "l^H, as of Arab, hagara, is ' sur- 
 round, enclose,' etc. ; hence ' bind on,' and also ' prevent access to ' ; 
 whence mijn ' a girdle,' corresponding to higiir, ' enclosure, lap.' 
 Now mi^rt'''" is the word used in Gen. 3" for the fig-leaf covering 
 made by Adam and . Eve, " they made themselves aprons," VC^^I 
 rnin Dn?. The margin of the A.V. calls it " a thing to gird on." 
 The meaning is evidently a loincloth. The Fr. gi'ron has the mean- 
 ing ' lap ' and also a heraldic design of triangular shape, like a primi- 
 tive loincloth.''^ But the point is that I^IPf ' gird ' does not imply 
 a garment, but a girding, which is associated with the waist and 
 loins. 
 
 In fact, the ephod was not a garment at all. By a garment is 
 meant something that is worn as clothing • a towel, e.g., is not a 
 garment, though a waiter may carry it on his arm ; nor is a crown, 
 although it is said to be worn. By referring to the passages bearing 
 on the ephod, it will be seen that twice the ephod is associated 
 with teraphim, which proves nothing. Gideon's ephod is " put " 
 in his city Ophra. The ephod at Nob was on the wall, or floor, 
 with Goliath's sword wrapped in a mantle " behind " it. When 
 Abiathar flees to join David, he takes the Nob ephod " in his 
 hand." Three times the ephod is " brought " to a person to be 
 used in divination. These passages would surely not suggest a gar- 
 ment. But there are three other passages, where one might point 
 to the English versions as showing conclusiv'ely that a garment was 
 meant, for in each case the translation is " wearing an ephod." The 
 
 ^1 Cf. the older form pr\1 in Gen. 26^. Professor Haupt has kindly pointed 
 out that Arab, ba ala III. means both la aha and jama' a ; ha'ala is a denomina- 
 tive verb derived from ba' I, 'husband'; cf. Trat^e = Sxffe in note 12 of Haupt's 
 paper on " Ecclesiastes " in the Philadelphia Oriental Sttidics, p. 265; cf. afso 
 the use of ludere in Hor. Ep. 2, 2, 214; and " play " in Milton, P. L. 9, 1045. 
 
 32 For other instances of the use of "IJin see Ex. 12^^ Jud. 3^^ i Ki. 20'^ 
 2 Ki. 429 9I Prov. 31 17 Is. 32I1 Ez. if^ etc. 
 
 33 For a photograph of such a loincloth, see Mission Scientifiqne dii Cap Horn, 
 Hyades et Deniker (Tome VII.), pi. xii., Paris, 1891. See also p. 42 below, fig. 2. 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 
 
 verb that is translated " wearing " is XtT] ' bear ' ; the Greek and 
 Latin have atpw and portare. But there are no instances in classical 
 literature of al'/aw or portare by themselves, meaning to wear as a 
 garment ; and X*^'], one of the commonest verbs in the O.T., used 
 perhaps a thousand times, never has the meaning ' wear,' except it 
 be made for these three places, as in the English versions. In one 
 of these places, i Sa. 22^'^, St. Jerome, influenced, it may be, by the 
 word in, supposed to mean ' linen,' ^^ translates vestitos ephod Imeo, 
 but there is no reason for it, since the Hebrew and Greek are the 
 same. Now it is true that the Century Dictionary says that one 
 meaning of wear is ' carry ' ; as, e.g., country people will advise a 
 person to wear a potato in the pocket to keep off rheumatism ; but 
 the converse does not follow; carry never means 'wear.' These 
 mistranslations of XvT] by the English " wear " in the familiar phrase 
 " wearing an ephod," together with the anachronism of the Priests' 
 Code, are accountable for the notion that the ephod is essentially a 
 garment.*^ 
 
 2. JVas the Ephod an Idol? 
 
 We have now to examine the passages in Judges, i Sa. 21^, and 
 Is. 30", where almost all critical commentators have felt constrained 
 to suppose that an idol, image, agalma, or the like, is meant. A 
 notable exception is Professor Wilhelm Lotz, of Erlangen, whose 
 admirable article ^^ on the ephod is apparently unknown to recent 
 writers. It is, of course, an easy way of escaping a difficulty to say, 
 here the ephod is an idol and here it is a garment, but it is unscien- 
 tific. The feeling that it was a makeshift has given rise to many 
 curious conjectures, to show, if possible, some connection between 
 the idol and the garment ; and so the theory has been evolved that 
 the ephod is the covering of the wooden core of an idol, and hence 
 a covering, i.e. a garment. Or, working in the other direction, it 
 has been thought that the ephod was a priestly garment on an idol, 
 and then identified with the idol. Some have grasped eagerly at 
 
 "^* Cf. note 7 on p. 3 above. 
 
 ^^ In German the verb tragen may translate both Kw"3 * bear ' and U'^b ' wear.' 
 This fact has added to the confusion, since by the expression Ephodirager no 
 distinction is made between ' ephod-wearer' and ' ephod-bearer.' Since writing 
 the above I have noticed that Professor Moore observes that Nw'2 does not mean 
 'wear'; cf. the Internat. Com. on Judges, 1895, P- S^^' note. 
 
 ^ See Kealencykloptrdie fi'ir prot. Theologie u. Kirche, third edition, vol. v, 
 Leipzig, 1898, under "Ephod." 
 
14 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 the apparent distinction between ephodh and ephodh badli, making 
 the former an idol and the latter a garment, thus throwing the diffi- 
 culty of unifying the two back upon the Hebrews themselves. But 
 the distinction does not hold good. Others, not finding any distinc- 
 tion in the Masoretic text, wish to make one, and, as Wellhausen, 
 propose to point 112X when it means an idol ! ^' But it must first 
 be determined when an idol is meant. If the LXX is any criterion 
 when transHterations are used, Gideon's and Micah's ephod would 
 be I'iSS!, represented by ec^wS, and the other places IISS!, repre- 
 sented by ec^ouS. But those who understand an idol always take it 
 so of the ephod at Nob, where the Greek has shoulder piece ; and so 
 the distinction is merely due to different translators pointing an 
 unknown word, sometimes T12X and sometimes TlSS. In fact, 
 they are all forced explanations, arising from giving undue weight 
 to minor details, and neglecting the fundamental principle that a 
 thing is what it is used for; and also the ethnological axiom that 
 " all worships that contain heathenish elements are traditional, and 
 nothing is more foreign to them than the introduction of forms for 
 which there is no precedent of usage." ^ If the ephod is an article 
 of clothing, then it is a garment and is worn ; if it is to represent 
 a deity, then it is an idol and is worshipped ; but if, being neither 
 of these, it is connected with sacred lots, then it is a means of con- 
 sulting an oracle and is divined with. It is hard to discard the 
 notion of the garment-ephod, but it is based solely on mistranslations 
 arising from preconceived ideas, and the same is the case with the 
 notion that the ephod was an idol. The expressions upon which 
 the idea of the idol-ephod is based are the following from Jud. '&^' , 
 mssb p:J"[3' imS '^T\ " Gideon made an ephod of it " (cf. above 
 p. 8, No. i). This cannot be forced to mean that all the gold went 
 into the ephod — imS refers as much to the purple raiment as to 
 the gold ornaments — probably but a small fraction became the 
 material of the ephod (if, indeed, any of it did !), as this very con- 
 densed statement seems to cover much more than is expressed ; for 
 instance, the cost of making, the cost of the shrine, etc., imX H_'1 
 m2V3 n^VS, "and put it in his city Ophra." This verb is usually 
 translated ' set up,' as though it had no other meaning ; but it also 
 signifies ' put ' or ' place,' as in Jud. 6'^" Gideon says, " Behold," "'^jX 
 T^t2, " I will put a fleece of wool on the threshing floor." This 
 
 3' See Geschichte Israels, Berlin, 1S83, p. 95. 
 
 •^* Robertson Smith, O. T. in the Jewish Church, 18S1, p. 228. 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 1 5 
 
 verb may mean simply to ' leave ' somewhere, as in Gen. 33^', nriJX 
 K3 " Let me now leave some of the people with thee." One might 
 as pertinently argue that the Ark was an idol, because 2 Sa. 6'^ 
 reads IHK 132^111, as to force the expression in the case of the ephod.'' 
 D^ innX bxn^r^ h^ i:ri, " all Israel went astray after it there." 
 Without this comment, it is unlikely that the notion of an idol-ephod 
 would ever have been evolved. The verb zandh, in this use, occurs 
 eighteen times, and is usually followed by " after " strange gods, gods 
 of the heathen, or idols, also " from " the true God. But the phrase 
 can also be used of seeking " after a man," and " unto those having 
 familiar spirits," Lev. 20'*-, and even " after whatever pleases the 
 eyes," Nu. 15^^. This expression,*^ then, does not always mean an 
 idol, and hence it cannot be pressed in this particular instance, to 
 imply an idol. On the contrary, one might argue that Jud. 8^ was 
 conclusive evidence that in verse 27 it means something different, 
 for " as soon as Gideon was dead," the Israelites again went astray 
 after Baalim, implying that when he was alive he had kept them 
 from idolatry. But why may not the phrase '^"in>5 H]! refer to a 
 lot-oracle, as may also be the case in Hos. 4^- (cf. below, p. 36) ? 
 This phrase, however, probably represents a later editorial comment ; 
 the original narrative, it is agreed, had no criticism to make on 
 Gideon's ephod.'*^ But a narrative that has been added to is 
 likely to be inconsistent. Professor Moore, of Harvard, has sug- 
 gested as possible that ephod has supplanted a word like eloliim. If 
 so, it is easy to account for the condemnatory comment, but it is 
 hard to see how ephod could have been substituted and the comment 
 allowed to stand, in an age when the ephod was unquestionably 
 revered. But the point is that the phrase in question does not prove 
 an idol, but may only refer to a popular craze for some unapproved 
 use of divination. 
 
 Again, if we pass to Jud. 17 and 18, Micah makes an ephod and 
 teraphim. There seems to be a double strand in the narrative, one 
 
 ^^ Professor Moore, in Liternaiional Corn, fiufges, 1895, P- 379' renders 'set 
 up,' and makes it a proof along with the next phrase, that the ephod was " clearly 
 an idol of some kind." He concludes that this verse, Jud. 8-', " imperatively 
 requires this interpretation." 
 
 ••"* For an extended examination of the phrase zdiidh axre, see my paper in the 
 Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. xxii., pp. 64-69. 
 
 ^1 In Chronicon Hebr., 1699, p. 407, ViPtX in this passage is interpreted to 
 mean after him, i.e. after Gideon''s death ; when the Israelites took the amiciilum 
 and used it in idolatry. 
 
1 6 JOURNAL OF Bir.LICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 part of which tells of the making of a HDEipi T'CS, " a graven and 
 a molten image," and commentators have tried to establish a parallel 
 between them and the ephod and teraphim of the other strand of 
 the narrative. Moore, however, ingeniously eUminates the HwElS,''^ 
 showing that the apparent parallel gives no ground for thinking 
 Micah's ephod an image. Canon Driver is certainly right in styling 
 Micah's ephod and teraphim "instruments of divination." ■*" 
 
 Again, in i Sa. 21^'-, where it is said that the sword of Goliath was 
 wrapped in a mantle " behind the ephod," it is commonly held to 
 mean that the ephod must have stood free from the wall in order to 
 have the sword behind it, thus suggesting an idol ; but, as Lotz points 
 out (cf. above, p, 13), it is much more likely that the sword was 
 a trophy or votive offering, cine Art Wcihgcschcnk, and was hanging 
 from some large peg, upon which, when not in use, the ephod also 
 was hung. He concludes : To decide from this passage that the 
 ephod is a statue standing clear of the wall, an image of Yahweh, is 
 incorrect. 
 
 Finally, there are other commentators and scholars from Michaelis 
 and Vatke, who is very sure, to Duhm, Smend, Gesenius-Buhl, Marti, 
 and Budde, who considers it "very questionable," who hold a theory 
 that the ephod was a ' covering, garment,' or ' mask ' of an idol and 
 so practically identified with it. The theory that 12S meant origi- 
 nally 'to cover' is based on Is. 30- (cf. above, p. 11, No. 19), which 
 remains to be considered. It reads as follows : *'\ti*l nX <n)XI2I01 
 'T\ Cnn "[Dm HDES: rr\ti^ rii^l "|£D3 ^b-DS, "Thou shalt 
 defile the silver plating of thy images and thy molten gold band ; 
 thou shalt scatter them," etc. Comparing the Greek and Latin 
 versions, it will be seen that the Latin is simply Hebrew in Latin 
 words with an epexegetical rendering of niEX by vestimcntum. 
 The Greek, however, is a translation, treating the Hebrew idiom 
 in the first half as an instance of synecdoche. It can hardly be 
 regarded otherwise than as a rhetorical figure, where the silver 
 plating and the molten gold band of the D''7'^D2 are put for the 
 images themselves. To think with Duhm, that the writer is making 
 a special point of the outward decoration of the images, is to over- 
 look the evident condemnation of idols, not merely their adorning. 
 Cast away the ''122C and you still have the 7DS. It seems unlikely 
 that n2D^ is parallel with '''^'03, for one would surely expect DiDD, 
 
 *2 See Internat. Com. fudges, 1895, p. 375 f. 
 *8 See LOT., 7th ed., 1898, p. 168. 
 
foote: tH^^ho^; ^^^ 17 
 
 and so the English versions have tacitly rendered it. But the chief 
 difficulty is that DDuJi never means ' molten image,' when, as here, 
 it is a genitive. It means a ' casting,' and as a genitive it means 
 that the iw/iien regens is not carved, nor beaten, but cast. IT^ES is 
 the regular feminine of TIDS, and HSStt n'lESI means a ' cast band,' 
 just as n2C!!3 'T'^V is a 'cast calf,' and H-EXS ^^'T'^5 'cast gods.' 
 The parallelism is between "'ISiC ami mSX, the ' ornaments ' of the 
 D v'^DD ; and there is no rule that requires parallel expressions to be 
 synonyms in more than one sense. The two things are ornaments ; 
 it is not necessary that they should both be coverings, nor of the 
 same material. But the ''1211 was not a covering like a garment, but 
 apparently a decoration of an image made with silver leaf, — some- 
 thing to make it shine. The aphuddah ^ was like it inasmuch as it 
 was an ornament, a gold band, whether as a loincloth or belt it is 
 impossible to say ; perhaps it was the ancient ephod. Hence there 
 is nothing here on which to base a theory that the ephod was an idol. 
 
 These, then, are the passages that are claimed for an idol-ephod, 
 and all of them, as has been shown, are patient of a quite different 
 interpretation. It is possible to grant that they may be understood 
 of an idol, if this fact were assured beforehand ; but to ground a 
 theory on them that is inconsistent with passages better understood, 
 is unscientific. 
 
 But if the ephod was not an idol, neither was it a gold covering of 
 a wooden core. This distinction belongs more to craftsmen than 
 to critics ; for what worshipper in gazing at such an idol (for idol 
 it would be) could distinguish between the inner core and the outer 
 covering? There is no doubt that wooden kernels were overlaid with 
 gold and silver, as in Baruch 6''', but they were idols not ephods. 
 Etymologically nothing is gained, for the denominative from ephod 
 is not ' to cover ' but ' to bind.' Another theory has been advanced 
 by Duhm,^^ that the ephod was the mask of the idol, which was worn 
 by the priest in consulting the oracle. But the girding of the ephod 
 
 *^ The derived meaning of mSK, 'binding,' from "i'SS (see below, p. 45), is 
 confirmed by the lateness of this verse, which, by Duhm (cf. Marti), is placed as 
 late even as the second century B.C. It is apparently a misplaced verse, as it does 
 not accord with the context, which is improved in point of coherency by omitting 
 it. Perhaps it belongs after Is. 31*', where it harmonizes with the context. The 
 interpolation of passages referring to idols is not uncommon in Isaiah, as Professor 
 Haupt has pointed out in his reconstruction of Is. 40; see V)xVigvX\r{% Marksteine, 
 Leipzig, 1902; cf. Is. 4o'9-2o 416-'? 44^'-'^ 4'^'^"^. 
 
 *5 Das Buck Jesaia, 1892, on 30'-'-. 
 
1 8 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 was not over the eyes, but about the loins (cf. above, p. 12). Again, 
 to escape the idol-epliod, if possible, the theory has been advanced, 
 most recently by. Marti, that the ephod was a gold or cloth garment 
 hung upon an idol. That this was customary among the Hebrews 
 is not clear, but for other Semitic peoples, see Baruch 6''^. Granting 
 the fact, however, how can it be shown that the garment was the 
 chief, and the idol the inferior, object in the cult? If people were 
 led into idolatry by an idol with a garment on it, it certainly was not 
 due to the garment ! This theory starts with the idea that the ephod 
 was a garment. It is consistent, but the starting-point is wrong. 
 The ephod is an instrument of divination. 
 
 B. THE USE OF THE EPHOD. 
 
 Important as is the light thrown upon an unknown object by its 
 context and environment, it is altogether inferior to that which comes 
 from a knowledge of its use. In about half the passages cited for 
 the ephod there is nothing to suggest a use. To say that the ephod 
 had always a religious significance is not to point out a use. To say 
 that "bearing an ephod" is almost synonymous with priest is true, 
 but it does not tell what the ephod was for. It does, however, enable 
 us to draw a reasonable inference, that, as one of the chief duties, 
 if not the foremost duty, of a priest ■"' in the time of the Judges was 
 to obtain divine oracles, so the ephod, his constant companion, was 
 used in divination. Some travelling Danites (Jud. 18^") learn that 
 Micah has an ephod and teraphim, and immediately desire to con- 
 sult the oracle. On a subsequent migration, they carry off for their 
 own use, priest, ephod, and teraphim. David, during his flight from 
 Saul, is accompanied by the priest Abiathar ; and on two occasions, 
 I Sa. 23^ 30^, it is recorded that he said to the priest TlSSH nt-'^^n, 
 " Bring me the ephod." '"^ Abiathar brought the ephod, and David 
 
 ^'^ In ancient Israel, religious functions were not restricted to a special order 
 of men (cf. below, p. 41, n. 103), but every man was free to offer sacrifice or obtain 
 oracles by the use of lots. Later the oracular function was restricted to a particu- 
 lar order, and ephod-bearer became synonymous with priest. The Hebrew fnS, 
 priest, is the Arabic kdhin, ' foreteller.' Later still the function of sacrifice was 
 taken over to the priests, and the oracular function, at least in theory, was 
 restricted to the high priest. For a similar change among the Incas of Peru, see 
 Reville, Hibbert Lectures, 1884, p. 230 f. 
 
 *^ Bertheau, Das Buck der Richter unci Ruth, Leipzig, 1883, p. 163, says: 
 " The demand of David, ' Bring the ephod,' means the same as ' Consult Yahweh.' 
 But it is David who consults Yahweh. The words are plain enough, and there 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 1 9 
 
 inquired of Yahweh. In both instances the answer David receives is 
 what one might get by drawing lots. In addition to these passages, 
 there is a similar one in i Sa. 14^*, which will be considered later, 
 where Saul says to the priest Ahijah, " Bring the ephod," and appar- 
 ently consults the oracle as David did. Now three such indisputable 
 instances, where the action has every appearance of being quite 
 customary, seem to establish the point that the ephod is directly 
 connected with divination. Of course, it is understood that there 
 is nothing in any other passage bearing on the ephod to oppose this 
 conclusion. One other passage may be noted in this connection. 
 In I Sa. 28", where Samuel's spirit is brought up to be consulted by 
 Saul, as in his lifetime, he comes up, according to a variant of the 
 LXX,''^ with an ephod about him. 
 
 To discover what purpose the ephod served in divination, some 
 consideration must be given to that subject. By divination is meant, 
 foretelling events by means that are direcdy influenced by supernatural 
 power. Among the ancients, the means used were legion ; but among 
 the Hebrews hardly more than three kinds were practised, - — div'ina- 
 tion by clairvoyance, by dreams, and by lot. The first was the office 
 of the seer ; the last, at least in the early days, that of the priest. 
 For the purposes of this investigation, it is necessary to consider only 
 divination by lot.'*^ The point to be determined is how the ephod 
 was used in divining by lot. In the performance of this function, 
 only two things, apparently, were indispensable : the sacred lots and 
 some receptacle in which they were placed. The ephod may have 
 been such a receptacle. Its association with I^H ' gird ' suggests an 
 apron from which the lots were cast, or a bag or pouch girded about 
 the loins. To determine which of these the ephod was, it is neces- 
 sary to know how lots were used. 
 
 is no suggestion of technical language. The expression is verlially varied in 30', 
 where 'v shows that David wanted the ephod to use. If Abiathar had carried 
 David's mouchoir (in modern Hebrew TlIC = smiariu;ii), he might have asked 
 for it in the same way (cf. 2 Ki. 4"), with the addition of the suffix of the first 
 person." 
 
 *^ The reading of this variant, of uncertain origin, is a.v7)p irpeff^vrepos dvalBai- 
 vuv, Kal avTos TrepiiieliX-q/xevos ecpovS. But even supposing the Hebrew ~"EK niiU 
 instead of b'L'Ji, the verb Hul.', which is never used with ~"£K, would go far to 
 condemn the reading. 
 
 ■** The expression divination by lot is used without regard to the nature of the 
 lot, and therefore includes arrows and rods, but does not include dice, which were 
 not used as sacred lots (cf. below, p. 25). 
 
20 JOURNAL OF lillJLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 I. The Connection of the Ephod zuith Divination. 
 
 It has been noted that there was not among the Hebrews that 
 diversity in the methods of divination that obtained among the 
 Greeks and Romans and also other Semitic peoples.'" Apart from 
 the office of the seer, and ambiguous allusions to the rod and to 
 teraphim, the method was always casting lots. There is no doubt 
 that in early times as well as much later, the Hebrews constantly 
 sought the will of God by lots. In order to use such means, it is 
 necessary to have some receptacle in which the lots are placed. 
 From the passages already examined, it has been inferred that the 
 ephod, whether of gold or cloth, was such a receptacle. It could be 
 carried about by the priest or girded upon the loins for use. 
 
 Tlie fact that the ephod was girded upon the loins seems to indi- 
 cate that both hands must be free to use it, and suggests the idea 
 that lots were drawn out of it. An examination has been made of 
 all the statements in regard to the use of lots, to determine whether 
 they were drawn or cast ; for this point is essential in forming an 
 idea of the shape of the ephod. There is, in fact, but one passage 
 which gives any hint as to hoiu the ephod was used — i Sa. 14''*'-", 
 which may be assigned to a time prior to 800 B.C. and may be a 
 contemporary account. The text is corrupt, but can be restored 
 from the Versions (cf. above, p. 9). The previous narrative tells 
 how Jonathan and his armor-bearer had put the PhiUstines to rout, 
 causing a great tumult which was noticed by Saul's watchmen at 
 Gibeah of Benjamin. Saul at once assembled the people, and found 
 that Jonathan and his armor-bearer were missing. Thereupon he 
 said to the priest Ahijah, " Bring the ephod." While Saul was speak- 
 ing with the priest, the tumult in the Philistine camp burst out anew 
 and grew louder and louder. At this point there is a break in the 
 narrative, and a blank space in the text (p1D2 !,'1£(-X3 SpD£) ''' — 
 possibly indicating a lacuna — then Saul said to the priest, "Take 
 
 ^^ See Haupt's " Babylonian Elements in the Levitical Ritual," in vul. xix 
 of JBL., p. 56. 
 
 ^1 This Masoretic note, of course, means only that there was a break in the 
 middle of the verse, caused by a defect in the surface written on, or quite possibly 
 by illegibility of writing or an erasure, in the archetype from which all subse- 
 quent copies of the O.T. are derived (cf. W. R. Smith, O.T. in Jeiv. Church, 
 2d ed., p. 56; Lagarde, Mitthcil., I., 19 ff., cf. Gesenius-Kautzsch, § 3, c,'). It 
 is the lack of connection with what follows that suggests a lacuna. One would 
 expect the priests' answer in the negative, which Saul characteristically refused 
 to accept. 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 21 
 
 out thy hands." ^- Thereupon Saul called out ^^ to attack: the people 
 with him took up the shout and they came to the battle. The inter- 
 est in the narrative for this investigation centres in the words of Saul 
 to the priest, "Take away" or "withdraw thy hand," or "hands," 
 if we adopt the plural of the Greek ; the Hebrew may be read either 
 way. These words, as a rule, are interpreted to mean that Saul, 
 naturally impatient, told the priest to cease consulting the oracle. 
 Thenius, for instance, says, " ' Withdraw thy hand,' i.e. let it be ; we 
 will not draw lots." That this exegesis is not satisfactory is shown 
 by the emphasis which commentators place upon Saul's natural 
 impatience. He would not wait for Samuel on one occasion ; but 
 his impatience on this occasion was not so much due to temperament 
 as to the bleating of the sheep ! On the other hand, Saul was like 
 the men of Athens, in all things too superstitious to take any step 
 without using divination, and when by ordinary means he could 
 obtain no favorable answer, he must have recourse to witchcraft. 
 Other commentators, again, explain the passage by an inference 
 drawn from it in this way : if Saul did not wait to consult the oracle, 
 it must have been very complicated and long, says Benzinger ; ^ 
 another commentator quotes Benzinger to the effect that the con- 
 sultation of the ephod w-as a long process, and this is the reason Saul 
 did not wait. But if the ephod was not a magical affair, as almost 
 all the modern commentators vaguely imply, but merely an apron 
 from which the lots were cast, or a pouch intc^ which the priest put 
 his hands and drew the lots, the simplest explanation is that Saul 
 was in a hurry to attack the Philistines, and said to the priest, " Take 
 thy hands out," in order that he might know the decision of the 
 oracle. In regard to the answer given by the lot-oracle, it is possible 
 that in i Sa. 28'' we should translate in3> S^ " did not give a favor- 
 able answer," instead of "answered him not." The verse will then 
 read, " When Saul inquired of Yahweh, Yahweh did not give him 
 
 '•'- '^T ^bX; LXX, 'Lvva.-^a.'ie ras x^^'P'^s '^°v- T^' is probably written defec- 
 tive for "I'"^"» ^s ""n, 'thy ways,' for ~'-"n, in Ex. -^-^^ Jos. i* Ps. 119*"; also 
 D2T for C2"T in Ps. 134-; cf. Ges.-Kautzsch, §91,-^. '^CN, 'withdraw,' though 
 the ordinary meaning is ' gather ' ; Jt is used of Jacob ' drawing ' his feet into bed, 
 and also being 'taken' to his people. Gen. 49'-'; it has the meaning 'to take 
 away' in Is. 16I" 57^ 60^' Jer. 48'^* Hos. 4* Joel 2^'' 31^. 
 
 ^^ py*'! I'nay be read py"'' with V, condamavit, and frequently LXX, (j36rja£. 
 
 ^* I/e/\ Archaologie, p. 408. But he continues quite rightly : " if one had to 
 exclude by a series of questions the different possibilities, as this is very clearly 
 represented in i Sa. logoff-." It was, however, a simple matter when but one 
 question was put. 
 
 ^' or THE 
 
 VJNIVERSITV , 
 
22 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 a favorable answer/" either by dreams, or by Uriin, or by Prophets." 
 It is evident that Saul tried one method of divination and then 
 another, and finally resorted to witchcraft. It seems impossible that 
 the use of the sacred lots should give no answer at all, though tradi- 
 tion probably allowed but one use of them in a single inquiry. In 
 the present case, Saul presumably received a favorable answer. 
 This seems a satisfactory glimpse of the ephod in use, and the con- 
 clusion drawn from it would be that the ephod was a receptacle into 
 which the hands are put to draw the lots. 
 
 But as lots are almost always spoken of as cast, the question arises 
 whether in antiquity the custom of drawing lots ever obtained. 
 There are ten verbs in Hebrew which are used in connection with 
 lots in the O.T. They are : sr, nSm, h't'V, ^n:, b^lSH, S^SH, 
 '7S3, n'^Tw'Tl, ■^"^^ and m^. Seven of them mean 'to cast, throw, 
 let fall ' ; while three signify ' to come up ' and ' out,' as from a 
 shaken receptacle. These verbs seem to show that among the 
 ancient Hebrews, at least, lots were not drawn, but cast. Among 
 the Romans, also, the common expression is " to cast lots." Cicero, 
 however, mentions, as if nothing unusual, that the oracular lots in 
 the temple of Fortuna at Praeneste were mingled and drawn by a 
 child. Quid igitiir in his \_sortibiis\ potest esse certi, quae Fortunae 
 vionitu pueri manu niiscentur atque ducuntur:'^ On the other hand, 
 in the Iliad, HI. 316 ff"., we read that Hector shakes the lots in a 
 helmet with an up and down motion,^' with averted face to prevent 
 any suspicion of partiality, and the lot of Paris quickly leaped forth.^ 
 In the same way the ephod, if it were originally a loincloth as has 
 been suggested (cf. above, p. 7), would furnish a lap from which 
 the lots could be cast. That the shaking of the lap was to some 
 extent a familiar action, is seen from Neh. 5'^, "I shook out my lap, 
 saying, so God shake out every man from his house." But in Prov. 16^ 
 we read : 
 
 *5 Professor Haupt has shown, in BELR., note 47 (see JBL., 1900, 1.), that 
 ii;i', when indicating the answer to an oracle, technically means the favorable 
 answer. 
 
 ^ De Diviitatione, II. 41, 86. 
 
 5' Professor Gildersleeve kindly suggested to me that the motion was indicated 
 by the verb irdWeiv which is used of Hector dandling his little son. 
 
 ^^ (li% S.p i<pav, irdWev 5k fiiyas KopvdaioXos EKTwp 
 5.\j/ bpbuv Yidpios bk doGi^ iK xXr^pos 6povcr€v. 
 
 I have to thank Professor Haupt for the additional references : Sophocles, Electra, 
 710; Alcman, fragment 63, 11. 24, 400; 15, 191; Herod. 3, 128. 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 2$ 
 
 The lot is cast in the lap, 
 
 But the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord. 
 
 Evidently the verse does not fit the theory of casting out of \\\q. lap. 
 The word p'^H [see Note C], rendered ' lajD ' in this verse, is ambigu- 
 ous. The English word associated with it is ' bosom/ as also with 
 sinus and koAttos. But it is quite misleading to translate p^PI by 
 ' bosom.' It is true that bosom has a wide range of meanings, but 
 the universal significance of the word when used alone is that part 
 of the body where the heart is ; and this, it may safely be said, |Tn 
 never means. It would be impossible for us to say, " My reins are 
 consumed within my bosom," and in Job 19"' iTH evidently refers 
 to the abdominal cavity including the liver and intestines, the seat 
 of the affections among the ancients, which we associate with the 
 heart, and the upper or thoracic cavity of the body. This is respon- 
 sible for the confusion in the rendering of p^H, and the same exists 
 in regard to sinus and koXtto^. 'Bosom' or ' heart ' is a legitimate 
 translation so long as they are used merely for the abstract idea of 
 affection ; but when the ancient seat of the passions had given rise 
 to a whole sphere of associations with that part of the body about 
 the loins and waist, such a translation as ' bosom ' is entirely mis- 
 leading. In sinus and ko'Attos the original idea seems to be that of 
 bulging, protuberance, etc., hence the part of the body containing the 
 viscera; then the folds of a garment where it hangs over the girdle ; 
 whence the lap, a place of concealment, a pocket ; and even a con- 
 cave surface, bowl, urn. The etymology of TST\ is not clear, but its 
 meanings have developed on the same lines. Hence when we read, 
 "The lot is cast in the p^H," the reference is not necessarily to the 
 lap of a garment, but more likely to a pouch or urn. But this, again, 
 does not accord with the verbs which seem to mean 'cast out of,' as 
 Hector cast the lot out of the helmet. 
 
 The word that is almost invariably used in general reference to lot 
 casting is 7m3 ' lot.' The 7113 is originally a pebble, thus suggest- 
 ing that lots were commonly small and round. They may have been 
 black and white, or inscribed with some symbol. In Lev. i6'*'^, Aaron 
 casts lots for the scape-goat : mSia D"i;';rn ^7^ bi: |1nS iDII and 
 b"n:n rS:? rh^ ItrX "l^!?t'n. instead of rendering with the R.V., 
 "Aaron shall cast lots upon the tivo goats, and the goat upon 
 which the lot fell," it is better to read, " Aaron put the lots for the 
 
24 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 two goats into some receptacle, and the goat upon 7uhich the lot 
 came iip^'' plainly referring to a receptacle answering, perhaps, to 
 the helmet of Hector. 
 
 But in the Talmudic tract Yoma (XX2V), 4, i, the whole matter is 
 put in a different light. Here we read, " The high priest put his 
 hands into the urn and took out two lots ; upon one was written For 
 Yahweh, and upon the other was written For Azazeiy'^'^ Evidently 
 this was the traditional custom of drawing lots. The word for ' urn,' 
 ^^y>_ or ''27p, seems to be the late Greek KaXirr}, possibly akin to 
 koAttos. something hollowed out. The Gemarah explains that the 
 *'5!7p ' urn ' was made of wood, but on one occasion a man had 
 become renowned by making one of gold ; that the high priest 
 snatched the lots out quickly so as not to feel of them ; that the lot 
 which was drawn in the right hand was for the goat which was near 
 his right side, and it was considered a happy augury when the right 
 hand held the lot inscribed mn'^'^. 
 
 The Talmudic tract Bdbd Bathrd (S^nS S2^), 122, a, also has 
 an instructive account. Eleazar stands before Joshua, bearing the 
 Urim and Thummim and casting lots to divide the land among the 
 twelve tribes of Israel. There were two urns used, one containing 
 twelve lots, each with the name of a tribe written on it ; the other 
 containing twelve apportionments of land. The priest put one hand 
 into each urn, and drew in one hand the tribe, and in the other 
 hand the portion of Canaan which was to be theirs. In both this 
 instance and in the one before mentioned, there was a solenm com- 
 muning with the Holy Spirit, who \vas believed to direct the drawing. 
 This drawing of lots suggests the comparison of the method of choos- 
 ing officers at Athens, where two urns were used, one for the names 
 of the candidates, the other with white and colored beans, the person 
 being chosen whose name was drawn simultaneously with a white 
 bean."*' 
 
 Of course the Mishnah is not the Old Testament, l)ut it claims in 
 Firqe aboth (m2X ''pIS), I. i, to record faithfully the ancient oral 
 law, and it reaches back as a written authority to the time of the Second 
 Temple. Here then we have a clear tradition that the lots were put 
 into an urn, or two urns as the occasion demanded, and then drawn. 
 
 s^vbr ains nnxi ccb ''b'a r-rr -irs rn'b-r: "x* rh::r: •E'rpr ^-rct 
 ,h^vt^vh 
 
 ^^ See Seyffert's Diet, of Classical Aiitiqititics, unJer "Officials." The urn 
 used was called K\r)pwTpls; cf. on this subject, kXtjpoo; 6fi(f>dv, 'to obtain an oracle 
 by lot '; KXdpoii deowpoiriuv, ' to divine by lot "; cf. Eur. P/ia'/tissu', 852. 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 25 
 
 This oral tradition helps one to understand the account of the allot- 
 ment of Canaan as given in Joshua. For instance in Josh. 17'^ we 
 find the descendants of Joseph complaining that Joshua had placed 
 for them but one portion for an inheritance, whereas they were really 
 
 two tribes, "inx bzm iHs Sii: nbn: 'b nnn: vMt2. This seems 
 
 to point to the two urns, one for the lots and one for the apportion- 
 ments, and the traditional method of drawing lots. We may compare 
 here a passage in Acts 8-^, where Peter tells Simon Magus that he has 
 neither part (7—!!?) nor lot ('^'"113?) in the matter. Ovk lo-rt <tol 
 fxepU oiSe KXrjpo<; iv tiS Xoyu) tovtio''^ — nothing in either urn, may 
 have been in the mind of the writer, who was doubtless familiar with 
 Jewish customs ; or more likely the expression was idiomatic and 
 originated in this custom. Cf. Sap. 2^. 
 
 But notwithstanding these undoubted instances of drawing lots, 
 the fact remains that the verbs used to express the use of lots are 
 almost all verbs of casting. To settle the matter, if possible, the 
 crucial instance of casting lots for the robe, Ps. 22''-', was chosen for 
 investigation, as being the one most commonly associated with cast- 
 ing dice. This suggested Roman usages and the child drawing the 
 lot at the Prcenestine Oracle. Authorities like Pauly, Smith's Classi- 
 cal Antiquities, and Marquardt's Romische Staatsvenualtuiig have 
 accepted the expression " to cast lots " as stating some unexplained 
 custom. The latter, however, refers, in a note, to Servius on the 
 ^neid, a passage which will shortly be considered. A distinction 
 must first be made between the use of soi's or kA^^os ' lot,' and tes- 
 serae, tali, Kvfioi and do-rpayaAot ' dice.' These do not enter into 
 this investigation, as they are entirely confined to the gaming sphere. 
 The common expression with dice is " playing," " using," or " throw- 
 ing." In the Roman world the use of dice was prohibited by the 
 Lex Titia et Pitblicia et Cornelia ; the Roman soldiers could not 
 have used them under the eyes of a centurion ; and even in Decem- 
 ber, during the Saturnalia, they could have had no connection with 
 divination. 
 
 To return to the lot, the verbs used with sors are mostly verbs of 
 casting like conicere, deice7-e, inittei-e, etc., but not the idea of casting 
 out of a vessel, but generally /;/ sitellam, which seems to have been 
 a vessel with a small mouth, and filled with water, in which the lots 
 
 61 Salkinson-Ginsljurg translate : nn irnr rhn:^ pby\ "^ pS. Delitzsch : 
 b'y\Ti yhr\ "■^ J"K. pbn may have denoted originally a smooth pebble (Is. 57^) 
 used as a lot. \y7\^ ' to allot' may be denominative; cf. .Albert Schultens, quoted 
 in Gesenius' Thesaurus. 
 
26 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 were put, but only one of them, as they floated on the top, could 
 appear in the small opening. Otherwise the sitella was used without 
 water, lots being drawn from it, as Livy, 25, 3, 16, sitella lata est, ut 
 sortirentur. The expression /;/ sitellam is like the in uniam of 
 Est. 3^^, missa est sors in urnam, but there is no Hebrew equivalent 
 for in itrnain. Finally much light is thrown on the subject by a 
 passage in the Casina of Plautus, 2, 5, 34, which shows that to speak 
 of casting lots did not imply that they were not also drawn at the 
 same time. Stalino says " Coniciaui sortes in sitellam et sortiar Tibi 
 at Chalino." 
 
 The passage in the yEneid, I. 508 f. refers to the assignment of 
 the daily tasks by lot : 
 
 Jura dabat legesque viris, operiiiuque lahorem 
 parlibus cvqtiabat ins/is, a2it sorte trahebat. 
 
 Servius notes that Vergil had used the correct expression : Sorte 
 trahebat ; proprie lociitus est. Trahuntur ciiiin sortes, hoc est, edu- 
 cuntur. 
 
 Further investigation showed that drawing lots was probably the 
 general method in classical antiquity. Sortior, indeed, denominative 
 from sors, and meaning to draw lots, as also KXrjpovfxaL, is a fair index 
 of the use of sortes, even where it is distinctly stated that the lots 
 were cast. " Coniciam sortes in sitellam et sortiar" makes the 
 matter quite plain. This conclusion taken in connection with the 
 Hebrew tradition as found in the Mishnah and O.T. lays it open 
 to serious doubt whether a custom of casting a lot out of a vessel ever 
 existed. 
 
 But there still remains the query : If lots were drawn in divina- 
 tion, why was casting lots the well-nigh universal expression ? The 
 solution of this difficulty seems to lie in the difference between our 
 point of view and that of the ancients in respect to divination. They 
 believed in it, as a rule, whether Latins or Greeks, and still more the 
 Hebrews. It was an integral part of their religion. The ceremony 
 was accompanied with prayer, and it was unquestionably believed 
 that the Supreme Wisdom directed which lot should come forth, i.e. 
 be drawn. The human element was, as far as possible, eliminated 
 from the drawing. The priest communed with God and snatched 
 the lots suddenly (see above, p. 24). The impersonal expressions 
 are used : the lot came up or came forth (see the verbs, p. 22, above). 
 The statement that the lot was drawn by the priest is distinctly 
 avoided, as though implying that God did not order it. So the child 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 
 
 UNIVERGlTY 
 
 _ or 
 
 was employed at Praeneste (as, perhaps, little Samuel at Shiloh), as 
 being more purely an instrument by whom God made known His 
 will. The peasants in Italy still seek for children to draw lots for 
 them, and in Germany the orphan children draw in the lotteries. 
 Evidently man's part was merely the casting the lots into the urn — 
 it was impious to speak of a man drawing them. So Prov. i6^^ seems 
 to be the key, when rightly understood, to the whole difificulty. The 
 lot is cast in the urn, but the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord.®^ 
 In drawing, man was an impersonal agent — the lot came out. It 
 was man's part to prepare the lots and cast (which may have had 
 the sense of mingling) them in some receptacle. Hence the verbs 
 used with lots are not those of drawing, but casting. 
 
 We have seen that lots were really drawn in divination. This 
 requires a receptacle of a different kind than would be necessary if 
 lots were cast out on the ground. A receptacle would be needed 
 that concealed the lots from sight and that could be fixed in such a 
 way that the hands would be free to use it. An urn set upon a tripod 
 would answer the purpose if it were so shaped that the lots could 
 not easily be seen. But this end could more easily be attained by 
 using a pouch which would have the additional advantage of being 
 portable, and when used could be hung at the waist. This seems to 
 have been the nature of the ephod. But it is necessary to extend 
 this investigation so as to include those objects which are connected 
 with divination by lot. 
 
 1. The Teraphim. 
 
 There are two considerations which make it necessary to include 
 teraphim. The ephod is associated with teraphim in Jud. 17 and 18, 
 and Hos. 3^ ; and the teraphim are associated with divination '''' in 
 Gen. T^d''^ ; also in Ezek. 21-*^ and Zech. 10-. 
 
 That the teraphim were of the nature of idols or simulacra, no 
 one denies. Laban accuses Jacob of steahng his gods. Micah uses 
 the same expression. In i Sa. 15^ teraphim are condemned along 
 
 *'- In Prov. i^*, the robbers say to the young man, "SiflS TSU Iv^lJ, "cast in' 
 thy lot among us," i.e. put your name on a lot and cast it with our lots, so that 
 you will have the same chance of getting the booty as we have. But the " lot " 
 may also be interpreted to mean the portion (cf. Jer. 13-^) of the young man — 
 put it in with our funds, let us have one purse. See Dr. Philip Schaff's small 
 Diet, of the Bible, under " Lots." 
 
 •'■' See Robertson Smith, O.T.in Jewish Church, p. 226, ist ed., and Maybaum, 
 Die Entwickelung des altisraelitischen Prophetenthums, 1 8S3, p. 1 6. 
 
28 JOURNAL OF llIIiUCAL LITERATURE. 
 
 with idolatry, and appear in the same connection in 2 Ki. 23-*. Va- 
 rious theories have been advanced concerning teraphim. Wake, in 
 Serpent Worship, p. 47, quite arbitrarily identifies teraphim with 
 seraphim and refers it to what he styles " the serpent symbol of the 
 Exodus called seraph," Nu. 21''''', Heb., comparing also the serpent 
 of the temple of Serapis. Grant Allen, in Evolution of the Idea of 
 God, pp. 182 f., explains teraphim as representing the manes and 
 lares in the worship of ancestors. Schwally '^ and others have re- 
 cently derived teraphim from D^^£"l ' manes.' But the commonly 
 accepted view compares them to the Penates. It is noteworthy that 
 penates always occurs in the plural form as does teraphim, and the 
 two accounts of the stealing of teraphim may be compared to yEneas 
 taking the captured penates to Italy {.-En. I. 68).''" It is not at all 
 improbable that in the life of the Punic leader Hannibal in Corn. 
 Nepos {Nan. ix.), we are to understand teraphim by the statuas 
 aeneas. As to the form of the teraphim, it has been supposed from 
 
 1 Sa. 19" that they were of human shape and size,*^® but the inference 
 as to the size is not warranted, since the human appearance was eked 
 out by a pillow at the head ; all, according to Oriental custom, being 
 covered with the bedclothes. Of all the mentions of the teraphim 
 this is the only one that might seem to construe teraphim with the 
 singular, but it is not certain ; the suffixes supplied in the English 
 are omitted in the Hebrew, only one being used, Tnu"K"l_p, which, 
 however, may refer to David (so Budde) or even to the bed, though 
 it is masculine gender.^" The LXX to. KevoTd(j>La ' monuments of the 
 dead,' and Latin statiia '^ in place of the almost invariable idola may 
 
 ^* Das Leben nach dem Tode, p. 36. Further references may be found in 
 Moore'sy«^^5, Internatioital Com., p. 382, and in JM'Clintock and Strong's Eticyc, 
 of Biblical Lit. 
 
 '°^ Ethnologically one would err in imagining any connection between these 
 early peoples. On this Brinton says, in Religions of Primitive Peoples (p. 8), 
 " Professor Buchmann expressed some years ago what I believe to be the correct 
 result of modern research in these words : * It is easy to prove that the striking 
 similarity in primitive religious ideas comes not from tradition nor from relation- 
 ship or historic connection of early peoples, but from the identity in the mental 
 construction of the individual man, wherever he is found.' " 
 
 ^^ Not so, however, Ilitzig; see Commentary on I Sam. 19^^. 
 
 ^"^ Similar irregularity may be seen in several instances, e.g. Ex. 1 1'' 25^^ Jud. 1 1^* 
 etc., cf. Ges.-Kautzsch, § 135, 0. See W. Diehl, Das Pronomen pers. stiffixum 
 
 2 u. Topers, pliir. des Hebr. in djr alttest. Uberliefrung, Giessen, 1895. ^"^^ ^^^'^ 
 SB T., Critical Notes ofi Judges, p. 65 f. 
 
 ^* Note that the versions take teraphim as a plural, with the exception of this 
 s/atna. 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 29 
 
 be attempts to explain away the presence of teraphim in David's 
 house, or, it may be that the teraphim, among those who had given 
 up idolatry, took the form of ancestral images, associated more or 
 less with superstitious veneration, but not idolatry. In the account 
 of Rachel's steaHng and hiding her father's teraphim (Gen. si''*''^), 
 it is evident that the word is plural, and that the teraphim were 
 tolerably small images, or she could scarcely have carried them 
 without Jacob's knowledge or hidden them so that Laban could not 
 find them. 
 
 The association of teraphim with divination *''•' is so frequent that 
 it seems to indicate the principal use to which they were put. That 
 they were not used in idolatrous worship is to be inferred from the 
 fact that Hosea, who boldly censures idolatry, allows the use of ephod 
 and teraphim.™ But if they were idols, how could they have given 
 answers to questions? It is quite usual for commentators to speak 
 of " consulting idols, oracular idols," etc. Now a commentator may 
 sometimes give an oracular utterance, but an idol never ! If one 
 idol had ever given an oracle, we should never have had the magnifi- 
 cent arraignment of idols in Deutero-Is. 4i-^''^-: "Declare to us what 
 will happen in the future that we may know that ye are gods : yea, 
 do good, or do evil, do something, that we may all see it ! Behold 
 ye are of no account and your work is nothing at all ! " — yet many 
 commentators, who will not allow any supernatural occurrence to 
 pass without advancing a natural explanation, are quite prone to 
 imply, and base arguments on the conclusion that the idols in some 
 mysterious way gave oracles. Rychlak, e.g , in Osee, says that error 
 would be avoided, si de manifcstationibus idolorum, qjiae et consule- 
 Imnfi/r et aliqiiando consulentibiis responsa dabiint,in- 
 telligamiis. Again, referring specifically to the older passages which 
 mention the ephod, two of which, i Sa. 23^ and 30^, represent the 
 ephod as giving oracles, Maybaum says,'^ All those passages through- 
 out give the impression that by ephod is meant a real Yahweh image. 
 Now, either an image can give an oracle, or the supposition is 
 
 69 See an article by Farrer in Kitto's Cydop(vdia of Biblical Lit., Vol. III., 
 p. 986. 
 
 ™ In this passage, Hos. 3'*, the prophet says of his unfaithful wife that she 
 must abide with him many days in faithfulness, but without a wife's privileges; 
 so must Israel abide for a period of purification " without king and without 
 prince, and without sacrifice and without i>i(i(;(;ebdh, and without epliidh and 
 teraphim." Note that ephod and teraphim are more closely joined than the 
 other couples. 
 
 "1 Die Entiuickeliitig des altisrael. Prophetentuvis, 1883, p. 26. 
 
30 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 untenable.'- It may be argued that the users of them believed that 
 they gave oracles. They may easily have thought that idols heard 
 their prayers and influenced their destinies, but it is not credible that 
 they believed that any idol (apart from priest-jugglery) ever answered 
 such a question as this, " If I pursue this troop, shall I overtake 
 them?" I Sa. 30^', but David received the answer "yes." Now it 
 may have been that lots were used coram idolo and with some invo- 
 cation of the idol. In Cheyne-Black's Encyc. Biblica under " Divina- 
 tion," Professor Davies, of Bangor, in considering Ezek. 21*, says, 
 " We omit the reference to the teraphim because no new point is 
 indicated by it; the king consulted the teraphim [singular], by 
 shaking the arrows before it, as was always done also by the heathen 
 Arabs." His designating teraphim as singular is quite arbitrary (see 
 above, p. 28). By consulting the section on arrows (p. 34, below), 
 it will be seen that arrows were not always used before idols. But 
 farther on in the article Davies says that possibly the teraphim were 
 used as lots. Then why not here in Ezek. 21-*^? But the idea that 
 the Hebrevi^s consulted idols by casting lots before them is pure 
 supposition, while the use of lots is not supposition but fact, as has 
 been shown in regard to the ephod, and will be shown in regard to 
 Urim and Thummim. These were real oracles, not dumb idols. The 
 prophets could not say of them, " Behold ye are of no account, and 
 your work is nothing at all ! " for great leaders in Israel had relied 
 on them and had been victorious. 
 
 But "the teraphim," says the prophet Zechariah (10-), "have 
 spoken vanity," np'^T IIH n^Z:D1pm pK 1131 a^2nnn ^D, " and the 
 diviners have seen a lie." The LXX in this passage, and in Hos. 3'*, 
 renders teraphim respectively by diro<t)6eyy6ix€voL and S^Aoi, terms 
 which indicate anything but dumb idols, and in this connection 
 should be accorded due weight. In the passage in Hosea, and also 
 in Jud. 17 and 18, teraphim are associated with the ephod. Micah 
 makes an ephod and teraphim, puts them in a private chapel, secures 
 a competent priest, and then travellers stop in and consult the oracle. 
 With what is already known of the ephod, vis., that it was a pouch 
 
 "-In the same strain, Nowack (Die Kleiucn Propheten, 1S97, P- 26) says: 
 T2S in the old time undoubtedly was an idol which was used to give oracles, 
 I Sa. 2-^-^ Tp'. He adheres to the same view in his Richter und RiUh, 1901. 
 (Jn the other hand, cf. Meyer {Chronicon Ilehraoriun, 1699, p. 468), speaking of 
 a theory that teraphim were statues of loved ones : " Micol aiidivit quasi voceni 
 submissain loqiientem ad se de rebus futuris . . . quod est impossibile, cum sermo 
 non possit fieri nisi per organa a Deo in natura posita." 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 
 
 31 
 
 to contain the sacred lots, it seems quite likely that the teraphim 
 were little images used as lots. We have inferred from Gen. 31'^, 
 the account of Rachel hiding her father's teraphim, that they must 
 have been small ; from Hos. 3'' — the prophecy of Israel's being for 
 many days without teraphim (see note 70 on p. 29, above) — that they 
 were not condemned as idols, but associated with the ephod. The 
 order of occurrence is always ephod and teraphim. The ephod 
 itself was independent of the lots, which were called by another 
 name. The Urim and Thummim, as we shall see, were such lots ; 
 the arrows were lots ; the gordloth were lots ; the teraphim seem to 
 have been used as lots also. It is quite natural that an image, looked 
 upon with superstitious awe as in some way a supernatural agent, 
 should be the common household means of appeal to a wise and 
 benevolent Power, albeit but little known. The small size of such 
 images will cause no surprise to those who are familiar with the 
 innumerable Egyptian images not longer than three or four inches, or 
 the miniature idols of the Chinese. In Ezek. 21"'' the king of Babylon 
 wishes to have divine guidance as to the route of an expedition. 
 To obtain it he uses three means, of which one is consulting the 
 teraphim. He looked for real assistance. We are probably to 
 understand that he consulted the teraphim as we might speak of 
 consulting the dice. We conclude, then, that there is no Hebrew 
 authority to prove that teraphim is ever a pliiralis extensivus, indicat- 
 ing but one image, but there are three passages where it is evidently 
 plural, and the others are non-committal, or favor the plural. As 
 to size, our preconceived notions formed from the words image and 
 idol make it hard to think of the very small kind which, as among 
 the Chinese, may have been the common household image. The 
 narratives, where they are readily carried or concealed even by a 
 woman, certainly strengthen this view. That they were not used in 
 idolatrous worship in the time of Hosea (c. 740 b.c.) seems a fair 
 inference (cf. above, p. 29), and the connection with the ephod, 
 together with the fact that they gave oracles, seems to point to the 
 theory advanced, viz., that the teraphim were small images used as 
 lots in divination, at a period in all probability earlier than 1000 B.C. 
 For elaborate arguments for the identity of teraphim with Urim and 
 Thummim, the reader is referred to Spencer's De Lcgibiis ritualibus 
 Hebraeorum, 1732, III. 3, and to Robertson Smith's Old Testament 
 in the Jezvish Church, 1892, p. 292, n. i. That the teraphim were 
 gradually abandoned seems evident from their later condemnation 
 as something classed with idolatry and clung to with like stubborn- 
 
32 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 ness ; cf. i Sa. 15"'', "For rebellion is as the sin of divination (QCp, 
 see below, p. 34) and stubbornness is as iniquity (jlS, see below, 
 p. 40, n. 100) and teraphim." '■'' Apparently a later comment aimed 
 at superstitious practices more than at the principle of divination. 
 See also 2 Ki. 23"^, where teraphim are classed with, but not as idols. 
 
 2. Urim and Thummim. 
 
 The same reasons which made it necessary to investigate the 
 teraphim apply to the Urim and Thummim. Their origin, as in the 
 case of ephod and teraphim, is unknown. The earliest document 
 of the O.T. which mentions them is the Deuteronomic Blessing,'* 
 Deut. 33^, which has been assigned by Moore '' to the time of 
 Jeroboam II (782-743). The passage in no way helps to an under- 
 standing of what the Urim and Thummim were. The account in 
 I Sa. 14'*^ and 28'' associates the use of Urim and Thummim with 
 Saul. The narrative is probably E, prior to 750 B.C. ; and it is to 
 be noted that the use of Urim and Thummim is taken as a customary 
 thing, and although the passage in i Sa. 14*^ in the Hebrew, has be- 
 come corrupt, it is evidently since the third century B.C., and it shows 
 no signs of intentional alteration. The use of Urim and Thummim '® 
 in divination in pre-exilic times is seen in i Sa. i4''^*', where Saul 
 divines with them to discover who had broken the taboo which he 
 had placed upon food. From v.'' it will be seen that the ephod" 
 was used, and we are to understand that the lots were drawn from 
 it. Professor Haupt has rendered the passage as follows : '* " Saul 
 said : O Yahvveh, God of Israel, why hast Thou not responded to 
 
 74 iVcn tT'Kb T'TIKI -["an -laS ^"Ht, "And of Levi be said, thy Thummim 
 and thy Urim be for the man, thy godly one." 
 
 "^ Cheyne-Black's EncyclopLtdia, col. 1090, § 25. 
 
 '^ A careful survey of the literature on Urim and Thummim may lie found in 
 an article so entitled by Muss-Arnolt in the Ainer. Journal of Semitic Lit., July, 
 1900. 
 
 '^ In I Sa. 28^ we read that Saul could obtain no oracle, neither by dreams, 
 nor by Urim, nor by prophets, misbna QJ mn" inJU sbl m,T2 SlSU' bsC"1 
 D'X'^iS DJI D'llXD DX Comparing the undoubted use of the ephod by Saul, 
 the omission of it here is an indication that it was understood to be used with 
 Urim; cf. Driver's article on "Law" in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, 1900; 
 also Robertson Smith's OT. in the Jewish Ch., 1 881, p. 42S, n. 4. 
 
 <bs"it''' larn W". DS1 ams •r,'zr\ Ssnt" '"nbs* .t,t nn prn 'rr inrn-z *x 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD, 
 
 Thy servant this day? If the guilt be in me or in my son Jonathan, 
 O Yahweh, God of Israel, give Urim ; but if it should be Thy people 
 Israel, give Thummim." ''■^ With Wellhausen and Schwally, Haupt 
 combines D'^mS with "l"li^ curse, representing the unfavorable an- 
 swer, while D^^n means ' blamelessness, acquittal,' and is the favor- 
 able answer. 
 
 The general view of the size of Urim and Thummim is gained 
 from the description of the i^'fl, a kind of pocket (usually mistrans- 
 lated 'breast-plate '), which is given in Exodus and Leviticus. This 
 pocket, bearing twelve precious stones, was about twelve inches 
 square, fastened permanently to the high priest's breast, with an 
 opening to allow the high priest to take out the Urim and Thummim, 
 which were kept within. It could scarcely have been used as a 
 dice-box, for it could not be removed from the ephod. Here, how- 
 ever, we may see a trace of the pre-exilic form of the ephod, — a 
 pouch to contain the sacred lots. It is altogether unlikely that Urim 
 and Thummim were ever used with the jtl-'n, as nothing is heard of 
 it before the Exile, and after the Return it seems that Urim and 
 Thummim could not be used,^ or rather, that they no longer existed. 
 If they had survived the Captivity, they could doubtless have been 
 used. The Babylonian Talmud, Sota, 48, a, states that Urim and 
 Thummim were lost at the time of the destruction of the Temple, 
 586 B.C.'-' Maimonides,^- however, speaks of Urim and Thummim 
 having existed to complete the garments of the high priest though 
 they were not consulted. It seems probable that something was 
 made to represent them. 
 
 A good deal has been made by Wellhausen, Benzinger, and 
 Thenius-Lohr of the technic of the priest in the use of lots ; but 
 the idea has arisen from a misconception of the manner in which 
 they were used, and a misunderstanding of i Sa. 14''^ and perhaps 
 14^'^, where receiving no answer may have been ascribed to a fault 
 of technic. Undoubtedly, if the post-exilic priest had had Urim and 
 
 "^^ See BELR. in Journal of Biblical Lit., 1900, p. 58, and notes 54-61, and 
 cf. "Crit. Notes on Numbers," in SBO'J'., p. 57, 1. 45. 
 
 *" Cf. Ezra 2®^, and Berlheau-Ryssel's commentary; also Siegfried ad loc. 
 
 81 n-isni cms "hciZ n';ii:'S-in D'S'r: 'narD, " From the destruction of the 
 former prophets Urim and Thummim were lost." 
 
 8- Yadh Hachazaqah, Warsaw, llSl, tyipaS "bs T'^Sbn, x. lO : "X' T\"Z'Z "fy 
 
 p* pbsrj '\''r\ x'r'i' s'l'xi n'n;n n;br cbrnb "ns n'larn nnis*, " They made 
 
 in the Second Temple Urim and Thummim, in order to complete the eight 
 garments, although they were not consulted by them." 
 
34 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 Thummim, he would have used them ; but not having them, the idea 
 may have grown up that they were of the nature of charms. Well- 
 hausen, in Skizzen, III., p. 144, in speaking of amulets, says : " Frey- 
 tag has compared the Thummim of the high priest, which likewise 
 were carried at the neck. The phylacteries and bells on the pallium 
 show that one is not justified is repudiating the comparison. How- 
 ever, although the later Jews may have regarded Urim and Thummim 
 as a charm-ornament of the high priest, they seem to have been 
 originally two lots to which, when used for oracular purposes, was 
 attributed any alternative you please as signification (see Vatke, 
 323)." It is not improbable that the sacred lots had come down 
 from heathen times and that they were originally amulets.'*' They 
 may have been the sacred, or priestly, lots, while the teraphim were 
 the common household lots. Probably they were marked by color, 
 or more likely with the words by which they were called, indicating 
 one as the favorable, and the other as the unfavorable answer. Be- 
 ing lost at the Captivity, and forgotten, the very significance of the 
 names was no longer recognized and the Versions render " Lights 
 and Perfections." ' 
 
 3. Arrows and Rods. 
 
 These complete the list of articles used by the Hebrews in divina- 
 tion by lot, if, indeed, the arrow is to be distinguished from the rod. 
 It is misleading even to speak of the Hebrews in this connection, for 
 an undoubted instance of a Hebrew (not a Bedouin) divining with 
 arrows is yet to be found. 
 
 In Ezek. 2i-^''-, "the king of Babylon stood at the parting of the 
 way to use divination (DDp) : he shook the arrows, he consulted the 
 teraphim,*^* he inspected the liver. In his right hand is the lot, 
 Jerusalem, . . ." Much light is thrown on the use of arrows as lots, 
 in a dissertation by Anton Huber.*'' In the game of Meisir, arrows 
 were used for lots. They were previously marked with names or 
 notches, and then placed in a leathern bag or quiver, and shaken 
 under a sheet which was held so as to conceal the arrows from the 
 person who shook them. \\'hen an arrow was shaken up so as to 
 project above the others, it was drawn and handed to another person 
 
 ^^ Cf. Brinton, Religions of Primitive Peoples, 1897, P- '4S> o" lucky stones. 
 
 8* The idea advanced by Davies, of Bangor (see above, p. 30), that shaking 
 the arrows and consulting the teraphim were but one act is not borne out by the 
 Hebrew. The methods used are as evidently three as any brief statement could 
 make them. 
 
 85 Uber das " Meisir" genannte Spiel Jer heidnischen Araber, Leipzig, 18S3. 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 35 
 
 who gave it to the owner, who won according to the marks on the 
 arrow. This gives all the fects necessary for understanding how 
 arrows were used. The connection with Ezek. 21'-'' is estabhshed by 
 the word for shaking the arrows, Arab, qalqala, which is the ^\t^\> 
 of this passage. The lot in his hand, Jerusalem, was evidently the 
 arrow marked Jerusalem to indicate the course of the expedition."'' 
 Wellhausen, Skizze/i, III., p. 127, comes to the same conclusion, 
 based upon St. Jerome quoted by Gesenius, as follows : He consults 
 the oracle according to the ritual of his people, putting the arrows 
 into a quiver, after first marking them with the names of different 
 places, and then shaking them to see what place would be indicated 
 by the coming out of an arrow, and what city he should first attack. 
 The Greeks call this /ScXofjiavTM or pa(S8ofxavTLa. ^^'ellhausen's con- 
 jecture, Skizzen, III., p. 167, quoted by Benzinger, p. 408, n., that 
 tordh goes back to the lot-arrow and the verb 'TT^ ' cast ' used of 
 lots and of arrows, a ' direction ' being obtained in the first instance 
 from the way the arrow pointed when cast is very doubtful, inasmuch 
 as it lacks the element of chance which is the essence of divination 
 by lot ; for if arrows deviated in any unforeseen way from the direc- 
 tion in which they were shot, it would render skill in archery unat- 
 tainable. Besides, it is first necessary to show that arrows were ever 
 ' cast ' in divination. They were shaken and drawn. It was this 
 superstitious use of chance that caused Mohammed to forbid this 
 use of arrows, Koran, Sura V. 4, 92 ; he implies that Satan is the 
 one who directs chances, not God. Contrast with this Prov. 1 6'*^ : 
 see above, p. 27. Canon Driver, in his article on " Law," riTin, in 
 Hastings' Diciionary of /he Bible, 1900, seems to adopt Wellhausen's 
 conjecture in spite of his warning : Such conjectures always remain 
 uncertain and do not deserve too much credit. Wellhausen there- 
 upon retracts a conjecture made with as little foundation, that C^tSri 
 is related to tamcVim ' amulets.' But Driver thinks to brace up the 
 theory by the use of H"!^ in casting lots. There might be some 
 ground for it if lots were really cast as he supposes ; but being in 
 reality dratvn, as were the arrows, there is none. Some commenta- 
 tors have entered so heartily into the idea of the Loospfcile that an 
 arrow is never shot but it is in divination. So it is with Jonathan and 
 David, and so with Joash at Elisha's death-bed. But it is altogether 
 unlikely, since an arrow, when shot, is gone.^'' 
 
 ^'5 See Haupt's " Balwlonian Elements in the Levitical Ritual," JBL. XIX., 
 notes 11-13. 
 
 8" Sellin, in Beilrage ziir Reliponsgesch., 1897, P- "^ ff., is not convincing; 
 
36 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 In regard to the use of the rod, the only reference is Hos. 4'-, "'Xip 
 ^h TT ^hpf2^ Sstr^ I^VS, " My people consult their staff, and their 
 rod makes known to them." From this passage no idea can be 
 gained of the method used in divination, except the derivation of 
 7pS2 from ^7p, ' shake,' indicating, perhaps, the use of rods in a way 
 similar to that of the arrows ; and this is favored by the parallelism 
 with yV which may be used for ^H, ' arrow ' ; cf. i Sa. i f, " the 
 staff*^ of his spear." But it is not even certain that it was a lot at 
 all. The reference may be to a so-called divining rod which is said 
 to shake in the hand and indicate where water is to be found. If 
 the use of the rod, however, were similar to that of the arrow as a 
 lot, this verse (Hos. 4'-), with the use of 1131 'to go astray' after 
 lot-oracles (see above, p. 15) ought to be compared with Jud. 8-", 
 where the same expression is used of Gideon's ephod. The rod has 
 an extensive use in Hebrew literature as a magician's wand or pedes- 
 trian's staff, but the data that prove its use as a lot are wanting. 
 
 2. T/ie Ephod as a Part of tlie Insignia of Fries /s. 
 
 With the Captivity the ancient regime of the Hebrews came to an 
 end, and the period of Babylonian influence began. In all probability 
 many old customs and usages fell into desuetude, never to be revived • 
 many traditions derived from heathen times lapsed, and thereafter 
 were only remembered with shame; many ceremonial objects of 
 venerable antiquity were lost, and became names to conjure with, 
 or were restored under new forms bearing little likeness to the old. 
 So it was with the Urim and Thummim, which were never to appear 
 again; and yet the longing for them breaks forth in the Korahite 
 psalm (43) of the Second Temple : " O send out Thy Urim and 
 Thy Thummim, that they may lead me." ^"^ 
 
 But though Urim and Thummim did not exist after the Captivity 
 (see above, p. 33), yet the V^T\ was made, and also the ephod to 
 which it was attached; for the Babylonian Talmud, j^'^Hp, 37, «, 
 has a tradition of sages coming to a certain heathen Dama, the son 
 
 Ezek. 21-", e.g., certainly does not show that the //el>rrws used arrows. In Reclus, 
 Primitive Folks, p. 276, is a suggestion as to the meaning of an arrow shot. 
 Among the Kohls of Chota Nagpore, an arrow is shot in front of a person as a 
 sign that the way is cleared for him. 
 
 ^8 The text has J'PI, the Q're fl7; cf. also the interchange of // and " in modern 
 Arabic. 
 
 8^ See Lagarde, Propheiae Chaldaice, Lipsiae, 1872, p. xlvii, who emends: Tw^ 
 
 ''3inr r\i:>T\ I'lani imx. cf. Duhm ad loc. 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 37 
 
 of Nethina of Ashkelon, to purchase stones for the ephod.* But 
 though the ephod was restored in an altered form, it was never again 
 used in divination, and only survived as a part of the insignia of 
 the high priest. These insignia were known as the abundance of 
 garments, D'^l^D nDI")^, which is explained as follows : " High 
 priests who officiated from the day that the oil of anointment was 
 lost (Uterally hidden), had their high-priesthood indicated by the 
 abundance of their garments,'' that is, they wore the eight priestly 
 garments ; of which the four peculiar to the high priest are given 
 as : p^l |trm "IISSI b'VXS, the robe, the ephod, the breastplate, 
 and the gold plate. 
 
 It is impossible to say with certainty just what this high priest's 
 ephod was. Some writers, like Riehm {HaJidwot-terbiich des 
 biblischen Altertums, 2d ed., 1S93-4, "Ephod"), consider it essen- 
 tially a shoulder-piece ; as Thenius, e.g., says the ephod is nowhere 
 anything else than a shoulder garment. Others see in it a long robe 
 with a girdle about the waist and the hoshen, or ' pocket,' fastened 
 between the girdle and the shoulders. No doubt the description 
 was plain enough to him who wrote it ; but the only clue we can 
 have to the object described must come from a knowledge of what 
 the old ephod was. This gives us three points which, in all proba- 
 bility, were the traditional residuum from which the post-exilic ephod 
 was reconstructed.''^ These were the pouch for the sacred lots, the 
 girding about the waist, and the equivalence of ephod-bearer and 
 priest. Now the main points in the description of the later ephod 
 are that it is an essential part of the insignia of the high priest, the 
 hoshen, a pouch for the sacred lots, which were no longer in exist- 
 ence, and the woven piece for girding on. These have been brought 
 out in all descriptions of the post-exihc ephod, but the point that 
 has been overlooked is that the hoshen was upon the zcoven piece 
 (2'Cn) which was used to gird it on, Ex. 28-*, and not between the 
 band and the shoulders, as has been supposed. Moreover, the loca- 
 tion of the woven piece was not at the waist, but higher up, *' over 
 
 9^ "TEKb C":::X earn i:aa ICpr;. See Babylonian Talmud, SC", p. 73, a, 
 Commentary of Rashi. n2""l!2 is the participle Pual (n5~!2), and properly 
 denotes the high priest, not his garments; cf. Levy's Diet. n^nD; see also 
 Jast row's Diet, p. 838, /'. 
 
 31 Robertson Smith, O.T. in the Jew. Ch., p. 219, says: " Many features of the 
 old Hebrew life which are reflected in lively form in the Earlier Prophets, were 
 obsolete long before the time of the Chronicler, and could not be revived except 
 by archceological research. The whole life of the old kingdom was buried and 
 forgotten." 
 
38 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 the heart," Ex. 28"^'. Hence the band must have encircled the 
 body just under the armpits. The braces''^' over the shoulders, not 
 needed on the old ephod, were required to keep the band in place 
 when it was no longer around the loins. The " stones of remem- 
 brance " are an indication of the thought of a later age and are quite 
 in harmony with the fashioning of a decoration, the use of which 
 had long since passed away. The expression " over Aaron's heart " 
 is simply an indication of place ; the metaphorical sense of D7 was 
 mind as we still preserve it in the phrase to learn by heart. Rashi 
 (Breithaupt, p. 672) says : " I have neither heard of nor found in 
 the Talmud an exposition of the form of this ephod ; but I imagine 
 that it was a cincture of a breadth accommodated to a man's back, 
 something Hke an apron (succinctorium)." There is another indi- 
 cation of the location of this band. Ezek. 44'^^, giving directions as 
 to the priestly garments, says : Vlp T\T\\ X7, which is said to mean 
 that the band shall not be so high as to be sweated under the arms, 
 nor so low as to be liable to the same at the loins. But this is 
 doubtful. Yet so Rashi : " Hence they did not gird themselves in 
 places liable to sweat, neither at their armpits above nor their loins 
 below." Modern attempts at restoration of the post-exilic ephod 
 have neglected these points. Professor Moore (Cheyne-Black's 
 Encye. Biblica, vol. ii., " Ephod ") describes it as a curious garment 
 coming to the knees, apparently confusing it with the T"X2 or ' robe ' 
 of the ephod, Ex. 39", which was not a part of the ephod, but was 
 put on first, and is enumerated by itself as a distinct garment (see 
 above, p. 37). Braunius'"' has some curious pictures of the ephod, 
 and Riehm'-'^ has some still more curious, but they are, of course, 
 imaginary reconstructions and not intended to be taken as authentic. 
 But from the data given above we shall not be far astray if we 
 picture to ourselves the post-exilic ephod as a woven band, probably 
 as wide as the hoshen, i.e. a span, encircling the body between the 
 armpits and the loins, having jewelled braces to hold it in place, and 
 a jewelled pouch in front — the traditional receptacle for the sacred 
 lots. It is not hard to see in this portion of the ])ost-exilic insignia 
 
 ^2 Professor Haupt has kindly suggested to me that in the description of the 
 bronze carriages for the sacrificial basins in i Ki. 'j'^'^- *'' (cf. Crit. Notes on KingSs 
 SBOT. ad he. and Stade's paper in ZAT. XXI.), msn3 means 'struts, oblique 
 braces' = 'suspenders '; see the figure of a Bedouin with mSflS, Psalms, in 
 SBOT., p. 224. 
 
 ®^ De Vestiin Sacerdotum Hebr., 1701. 
 
 ^* Handivorlerbuch dcs biblischen Alter turns, 1884, Ephod, 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 39 
 
 the essential features of the ancient ephod. It cannot be termed a 
 development, but rather a reconstruction based upon a tradition 
 which embodied the chief characteristics of the antique ephod. 
 
 3. CONCLUSION. 
 
 In the light of the foregoing investigation it is apparent that many 
 commentators have gone astray because they did not give due weight 
 to the essential connection of the ephod with divination, — and not 
 some magical, image-speaking, priest-juggling, kind of divination, 
 which is utterly without proof among the Hebrews, but the ephod 
 is associated with divination by lot. This is the raison d'etre of the 
 old ephod, and an investigation which overlooks it is liable to any 
 kind of idle conjecture. Professor Marti's error has been of this 
 nature, and this is the difficulty with Professor ^Moore's article in 
 the Eiuye. Bibliea, although some of the inferences are no doubt 
 correct and were published by the present writer in the JHU Cir- 
 culars'^^ over eight months before that article appeared. 
 
 That the ephod was originally an idol and afterwards became 
 something to hold lots, is, again, opposed to the sound ethnological 
 principle stated by Robertson Smith that nothing is more foreign to 
 traditional rites than the arbitrary introduction of new forms. Any 
 custom that is based on a superstition cannot change, because the 
 essential cannot be distinguished from the non-essential. This is 
 clearly seen in the superstitious rites of the Romans, and especially in 
 magical incantations and the rites of the Salii.'"' Quintilian, I. 6, 40, 
 says: Salionim carinina vix saeerdotibus suis satis intel/ecta :^' sed 
 ilia mvtari vetat religio et consecratis utendum est. But divination 
 by lot was a superstition. The ephod, it is evident, goes back to 
 times that cannot long have been distinguishable from pure heathen- 
 dom. The lots used with the ephod were not common pebbles, but 
 traditional and sacred lots, whether teraphim or Uriin and Thiuninim. 
 Correctness of ritual is the more important as the rites are less 
 understood. Hence Micah's joy at having a Levite for a priest : 
 " Now I know that Yahweh will do me good, since I have gotten a 
 
 ^3 This statement is made, of course, in my own defence. The paper referred 
 to, antedating the appearance of the Encyc. Bibliea, does not note that the arti- 
 cle on Dress by Abrahams and Cook suggests the possibility of the ephod's being 
 originally a loincloth. 
 
 ^ See Teuffel and Schwabe, ///.f/i'ri' of Roman Lit., 1891, concerning the Salii 
 ^" How true of our own Authorized Version ! and the following too. 
 
 fT 8 R AR 
 
 or TME 
 
 VNIVERSi 
 
4© JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 Levite as my priest." "'^ The same devotion to the minutest detail 
 of ritual is to be noted in the Ceremoniale of the Roman Church. 
 And so with the ephod, unless the proper lots were had, no oracle 
 could be obtained ; cf. Ezra 2^, and see above, p. 33. The very 
 manner of drawing lots was of prime importance ; cf. Gemarah on 
 Yoma, 4^ (see above, p. 24). How, then, can we suppose that the 
 ephod was at one time an idol, and in less than two hundred years 
 after it was something to hold lots girded on little Samuel's waist ! 
 Yet Maybaum ''■' asserts that Micah's ephod was an idol (732) and 
 later on was called ^T^, a 'calf ! It has been suggested that the 
 ephod must have been connected with idolatry, because in several 
 passages the word ephod seems to have been purposely eliminated 
 from the narrative.™ Budde, in his commentary on Judges, 1897, 
 p. 68, says that the old ephod must somehow have represented the 
 deity and therefore was afterwards repudiated. But if any such 
 intentional corrupting of passages took place, it must have been 
 accomplished shortly before the Captivity, since, with the exception 
 of Wellhausen,^"^ commentators agree that Hosea allows the ephod 
 and teraphim as " necessary forms and instruments of the worship of 
 Jehovah," to use the words of Robertson Smith, and hence the ephod 
 could not have been an idol. As for post-exilic times it makes little 
 difference what it was, for it had evidently been forgotten ; and yet 
 one cannot help feeling that, had it been an idol or any object of 
 worship, it would not have been restored ; "'- but, like the teraphim, 
 which represented a comparatively harmless superstition, would have 
 been allowed to remain in oblivion. There is, however, another 
 reason for the corruption of the passages referring to the ephod 
 
 98 : pab 'i'?n ^h ,Tn "d "b n\T s'ts" '3 "nuT nni? nra n)2^{•^. what a 
 
 confession, by the way, that the Aaronic priesthood was not known ! See 
 Robertson Smith, O.T. in Jew. Ch., 1S81, p. 227 f. 
 
 99 Prophetenthiim, 1883, p. 27. 
 
 1'^'^ Cf. I Sa. 14I8 14*1 28^ 28" LXX, variant; i Ki. 2^6; also according to 
 Wellhausen, in Ezek. 44^^, and i Sa. 15--', where pS he thinks was HISN. 
 
 1"! Kleinen Propheten, p. 103, 1897. I* ^^ not without a touch of scorn that 
 Hosea here enumerates without explicit condemnation Masseba, Ephod, and 
 Teraphim, as something one will hardly get along w ithout in exile : this is neces- 
 sary, you know, you surely like it this way ! 
 
 1°^ The survival among Christian people of heathen rites which have lost their 
 ancient significance, such as, e.g., the Yule-log, is not parallel; inasmuch as a 
 century of disuse and oblivion would have done away with anything as a survival. 
 The later ephod was not a survival, but a reconstruction; while the earlier ephod 
 probably represents a survival. 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 4 1 
 
 which will be mentioned presently when the ephod is considered as 
 a survival. 
 
 Having considered all the passages that throw any light on the 
 ephod, and also the conjectures which seem to have most weight 
 and are most recent, it remains to sum up the conclusions arrived 
 at. Starting with the principle that what a thing is for is the truest 
 indication of what it is, we find that the ephod was evidently used 
 in divination by lot. An investigation of the use of lots reveals the 
 fact tliat they were said to be cast, but were in reality drawn ; and 
 the ephod was the receptacle, KXrjpo)TpL<;, that held them. Taken in 
 connection with the passages that speak of the ephod being girded 
 on or fastened about the waist (I^H having this special meaning), 
 and the passage in 2 Sa. 6'^", which shows what a scanty covering 
 it was, the ephod appears to have been a pouch, large enough to 
 put the hands into, which was hung at the waist of the person using 
 it. It was easily carried in the hand. Its early use was not confined 
 to any special order of priests ; ^"^ but, like other things originally 
 common to all, it gradually became a priestly function. Samuel as 
 a lad, girt with the ephod at Shiloh, is a remarkable parallel to the 
 child that drew the oracles of Fortuna at Prasneste. The ephod was 
 quickly consulted, though there was doubtless a technical method 
 which was always observed. The lots were probably teraphim in 
 the earlier times, but Urim and TJnimmim seem to be supplanting 
 them at least as early as the time of Saul, though they continued to 
 be associated with the ephod as late as Hosea, 740 B.C. There is 
 no reason for supposing that Micah's ephod was anything different 
 from that used by Saul and David. In regard to Gideon's ephod, 
 when we omit the later editorial comment, there is the bare state- 
 ment that it was made and placed in the city of Ophra. From this 
 statement no theory which conforms to what is known of the ephod 
 can be disproved. The strongest probability lies on the side of its 
 being what the ephod was later — a pouch for the sacred lots, made, 
 it may be, most sumptuously (compare the candles, etc., given to 
 churches), as befitted the maker's social position (as, e.g., Gideon's), 
 and used as Micah's ephod was, in a private chapel such as wealthy 
 citizens affected. It is best to leave it so. Coniectura vilis est. 
 
 Connected with the subject of the ephod is the consideration of 
 
 « i''3 But Wellhausen, Proleg., 2d ed., 1883, p. 137, states that only priests could 
 use the ephod. What shall we say, then, of Micah's Levite, of Samuel, or Saul, or 
 David? See also Robertson Smith, O.T. in Jeio. Ck., iSSi, p. 24S; and May- 
 baum, Prophetenthum, 1883, p. 10. 
 
42 
 
 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 it as a survival of a primitive usage for ceremonial purposes just as 
 the use of stone knives for circumcision, or the Shofar in the modern 
 synagogue, the use of candles instead of gas or electric lights at 
 dinner parties, or the costume of the yeomen of the guard in Eng- 
 land who are still habited in the costume of the sixteenth century, or 
 the academic gowns, the royal crowns and sceptres, or the vest- 
 ments ^'-* of the Catholic Church, etc. ; cf. Joshua in the Polychrome 
 Bible, p. 62, 1. 5. In the pw' sackcloth is a survival of primitive 
 usage ; cf. Gen. 42^ the corn sack, Is. 20- dress of prophets and 
 devotees, Gen. 37^^ conventional mourning garb. If the priests put 
 on the ephod, they did so because the ephod was a primitive usage. 
 It has been seen that no distinction is made in the O.T. between 
 ephodh and ephodh badh, which has been supposed to mean linen 
 ephod. But from the consideration on p. 3 above, note 7, and the 
 extended examination in Note D, p. 47, below, we must understand 
 
 ^'' ^ ^ ^ 
 
 Fig. 1. 
 
 Fig. 
 
 Fig. 3. 
 
 ephodh badh to be a covering of the nakedness, literally ephodh partis 
 {virilis). Such representations are to be seen on Egyptian and 
 Babylonian monuments. Perhaps the commonest shape of the 
 ancient loincloth is shown in Fig. i, which certainly meets the re- 
 quirements of the description of the mikhnese badh. The loincloth 
 of the Indians of Cape Horn (see above, p. 12, n. 33) was triangular 
 in shape and kept in place by a cord, as in Fig. 2. The ephodh badh, 
 however, considering the use to which it is put, may have developed 
 from something like Fig. 3, This is a pouch or bag, differentiated 
 from the kilt by its specialized use. For the ephod was not a mere 
 loincloth or covering of the nakedness. The mikhnese badh were 
 that, and became the sacred garment. The ephod was not a loin- 
 cloth per se, but a pouch for sacred lots existing side by side with 
 ordinary loincloths and sacred kilts. Moreover, the mikhnese badh, 
 or sacred kilt, does not appear to have excited any repugnance at a 
 
 1"* It may be noted that the vestments of the Church, especially the Chasuble, 
 Alb, and Stole, are probably the ancient official garments of civil magistrates of 
 the early centuries of the Christian era, and rather of Syrian officials than of 
 Greek or Roman. See the Century Dictionary, 1900, Vol, VIII., p. 6741. 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 43 
 
 period of greater refinement than that of the early monarchy. That 
 this was the case with the ephod seems, to most commentators, 
 proved by the apparently intentional corruption of some of the 
 passages referring to the ephod (see above, p. 40, n. 100). These 
 commentators explain this repudiation by supposing the ephod to 
 have been an idol. But this was not the case. Perhaps the reason 
 for the repudiation of the ephod by certain redactors of the Biblical 
 documents may have been that they considered it indecent, either 
 because it was too scanty for a loincloth, or perhaps, because it had 
 some connection with the phaUic worship of the Canaanites. The 
 ephod was not a phallus, which, we have constantly to remind our- 
 selves, was daily seen by the ancients without the slightest offence 
 (see Dr. Bollinger's Heidenthicm unci Judenthum, p. 169) ; but badh 
 may have meant phallus, and ephod was closely connected with it, 
 sharing the sacredness of the symbol, which to the ancients suggested 
 only profound and reverent thoughts. This cannot be doubted from 
 such references as Gen. 24- 47-^"' where a vow was rendered the 
 more inviolable by contact with what was looked upon as the symbol 
 of the mystery of life. Some such connection as this may account 
 for a feeling in later times that the ephod was indecent. 
 
 Ethnological Parallels. 
 
 The ephod seems to be a special development of the primitive 
 loincloth. The loin-covering was probably the starting-point of 
 development in the direction both of the garment and the pouch. 
 A step in this development is seen in an account by John Foreman,^"" 
 who travelled for several years in and about all the principal islands 
 of the Philippine Archipelago, and who proceeded to Paris, in Octo- 
 ber, 1898, at the request of the American Peace Commission, to 
 express his views before them. In 1696, he says, the men of the 
 Pelew Islands had a leaf- fibre garment around their loins, and to it 
 was attached a piece of stuff in front, which was thrown over their 
 shoulders and hung loose at the back. This loincloth, which cannot 
 but remind one of the ^g-\f^i hagoroth of our first parents (Gen. 3"), 
 would evidently furnish a place where articles could be carried. But 
 the ephod was not an ordinary pouch used for general purposes, 
 but it had a distinctly sacred character. The post-exilic ephod still 
 
 i"*^ Cf. Dillniann's Genesis, Leipzig, 6th ed., 1892, p. 301 ; also Gunkel's 
 Genesis, p. 232. 
 
 I'^s The Philippine Islands, 2d ed., London, 1899, p. 39. 
 
44 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 retained its sacred character, being a part of the meriihah begadlm 
 (see above, p. 37, n. 90) by which the high priest was distinguished. 
 This use of garments to denote dignity is not without parallel. 
 Herbert Spencer in Ceremonial Insiiiuiions, "Badges and Costumes," 
 1880, p. 181, quotes Cook as saying of the Sandwich Islanders, that 
 quantity of clothing is a mark of position, and of the Tongans he 
 says the same ; while he tells us that in Tahiti, the higher classes 
 signify their rank by wearing a large amount of clothing at great 
 inconvenience to themselves. The Arabs furnish an allied fact. In 
 Karseem " it is the fashion to multiply this important article of 
 raiment [shirt] by putting on a second over the first and a third 
 over the second." The same practice prevails in Altenburg, Ger- 
 many, where the peasant girls wear a great many skirts.'"' The 
 ephod came, in time, to be the symbol of a special class of men who 
 were, in a way, intermediary between man and God, for through 
 them divine oracles were obtained. A sacred band for the loins may 
 be the index of this divine mission. Frazer's Golden Bough, 1890, 
 Vol. I., p. 37, gives instances of kings in the South Sea Islands who 
 were regarded as divine persons and were consulted as an oracle. 
 He says : " At his inauguration the king of Tabid received a sacred 
 girdle'"^ of red and yellow feathers, which not only raised him to 
 the highest earthly station, but identified him with their gods." But 
 a still closer parallel to the ephod is to be found among the Colorado 
 Cliff-dwellers, who used a sacred girdle of cotton cloth, which, like 
 the later ephod, was about a span wide, and served as a pocket for 
 the prayer meal and sacred amulets (see above, p. 34) used in cere- 
 monials.'"^ We do not know that the amulets were used as lots, but 
 if so, here would be a primitive ephod with amulet-lots and distinctly 
 sacred character. No doubt many ethnological parallels will come 
 to light when the true idea of the ephod and divination by lot are 
 borne in mind ; but there can be no reasonable doubt that it reaches 
 back in its origin to most primitive times. 
 
 Etymology of the Term " Ephod." 
 
 No etymology yet proposed for the word IIES has been generally 
 accepted. The various forms of the stem which occur, are : m£S, 
 
 '^^' Cf. the plate " Volkstrachten, I., No. 20," in Meyer's Konversaiio7is-Lexikon. 
 i'^^ Cf. Iluxley, Science and Hebrew Tradition, New York, 1894, p. 332. 
 1*^^ Such a sacred girdle as is here described may be seen among the ethno- 
 logical exhibits of the University of Pennsylvania. 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. ^^g,t- "^" » " "•" ^ 45 
 
 ^£S!, rinSi^, "12X^1, in'iSS!, n'lSS;. it used to be definitely stated 
 that 1SX meant ' to gird or bind on,' and IISK was the ' thing girded 
 on,' and mSJ? the ' girding on.' One difficulty with this etymology 
 was the lack of Semitic parallels for ISX with such a meaning, which 
 is gained entirely from the context ; but the chief difficulty is that 
 critical research has shown that mSK was in use several centuries 
 earher than HEX and rn2i<, whence arose the later opinion that TSS 
 is denominative and HISS a derivative. Another group of commen- 
 tators following Lagarde {Ubersicht, p. 178; Mittheil. 4, pp. 17, 146) 
 refer TSS to Arab, wafada ' to come as an ambassador,' and finally 
 a ' garment of approach to God.' This is just as fanciful as Lagarde's 
 etymology of /^ and H^Kn. The ephod is not to be regarded as a 
 garment. Other commentators and scholars have based a theory on 
 the use of IT^Si^ "" in Is. 30-^ (see above, p. 16 f., for a consideration 
 of this passage) that IISX means a ' covering, garment, mask,' but 
 this verse may be as late as the second century B.C., and a careful 
 study of the parallelism would favor some such idea as ' ornament ' 
 for rnSii, which may be derived from the ornamental post-exilic 
 ephod. The form .TlSK: is the regular fem. of ^1£S! for ^'l£X, cf. 
 nnS!, ni^ns: ; b:^^ n'p:i ; especially D'n^' f nian;? and the by-form 
 D1"l''p. For the initial e, cf. D13K, Ges.-Kautzsch, §§ 23, h ; 84 a, q, 
 and Haupt, Assyr. E-vowel, p. 26, No. 10. The Syriac equivalent of 
 TlSi? has the fem. form, XfllS with aphseresis of the initial K ; see 
 Noldeke, Syriac Gram. §'32 (cf. KHnil e>id for Sn^nX). A 
 tentative explanation of m£>5 has been given recently by Hubert 
 Grimme in the Orient Litt.-Zeitung, February, 1901, under the title, 
 7X"1K und Statnmverwandtes, who notes the phenomenon seen in 
 the Semitic languages of p showing a tendency to become ^5. He 
 believes that there are two ^'s, a sonant q which is stable, and a surd 
 q which has a tendency to become ><."^ He gives several examples, 
 and among these are nBi"? ' wrap together," appearing as HiS ' wrap 
 up,' and mSS ' zusammenziehbare Loostasche.' This is, at least, the 
 meaning sought, but the etymology is not certain. 
 
 "^ Cf. the Talmudic XXtS« and KtllS. It is by no means necessary to 
 suppose that i<n"2 is derived from Latin /««^/(7. Funda (Macr. Saturn. 2, 4, 31) 
 may be a Semitic loan word. 
 
 "1 Cf. Haupt, in Zeitschrift fur Assyriologie, vol. ii (Leipzig, 1887), p. 270, n. 2; 
 Allen in PA OS., October, 1888, p. cxi; Talcott Williams' article on the Arabic 
 dialect of Morocco, in Beitrdge zur Assyr., Vol. IIL, p. 569, 1. 26. Professor 
 Haupt considers Grimme's theory very uncertain. 
 
46 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 NOTES. 
 
 A. According to Skeat's Etymological Dictionary of the Eng. Lang., Oxford, 
 1882, the verb kilt, to tuck up, is derived from a substantive signifying lap, occur- 
 ring in Swed. dial, kilta, the lap; cf. the Icelandic Kjalla, the lap, kjoltu-barn, a 
 baby in the lap. The oldest form of the substantive occurs in Moeso-Goth. kilthei, 
 the womb, from the same root as Eng. child. Thus the original sense of kilt as 
 a substantive is ' lap,' hence ' tucked-up clothes.' 
 
 B. Braunius, De vestitu sacerdotwn Hehr., I. 9 : Docet etiam doctissimus Hot- 
 tingerus in Hist. Orient, de Religione veterum Arabum, I. 8, " Koreischitas ante 
 Islamismum sacra sua celebrasse nudos, atque ita aedem Meccanam circuivisse." 
 See also Robertson Smith, Religion of the Semites? pp. 161, 450 f, where he 
 remarks : At Mecca, in the times of heathenism, the sacred circuit of the Caaba 
 was made by the Bedouins, either naked or in clothes borrowed from one of 
 the Horns, or religious community of the sacred city. Wellhausen has shown that 
 this usage was not peculiar to Mecca, for at the sanctuary of Al-Jalsad also it 
 was customary for the sacrificer to borrow a suiC from the priest; and the same 
 custom appears in the worship of the Tyrian Baal (2 Ki. lo-'^), to which it may 
 be added that, in 2 Sa. 61'*, David wears the priestly ephod at the festival of the 
 in-bringing of the Ark. He had put off his usual clothes, for Michal calls his 
 conduct a shameless exposure of his person (cf above, p. 7); see also i Sa. 19-^. 
 The Meccan custom is explained by saying that they would not perform the 
 sacred rite in garments stained with sin, but the real reason is quite different. 
 It appears that sometimes a man did make the circuit in his own clothes, but in 
 that case he could neither wear them again nor sell them, but had to leave them 
 at the gate of the sanctuary (Azraci, p. 125; B. Hisham, p. 128 f). They 
 became taboo {^liarun, as the verse cited by Ibn Hisham has it) through contact 
 with the holy place and function. See further in Robertson Smith; and cf 
 Jastrow in JAOS., XX., p. 144, also XXI., 1900, p. 23, The Tearing of Garments. 
 
 C. The primitive use of pTl is clearly seen from the following analysis, to be 
 associated with the sexual relation, as Professor Haupt has suggested. The uses 
 of ^'T\ are here classified in five groups which are arranged chronologically 
 according to the earliest passages quoted in each group. 
 
 1. The primitive use of pTl, as seen in the earliest passages, clearly refers to 
 sexual embrace; as. Gen. i6^ "I gave my handmaid into thy embrace." So 
 2 Sa. 128 I Ki. l2 (contemp.?) Prov. 5-' Mic. f; and probably Deut. 13" 28^*- ^6, 
 
 2. Another primitive use of p'il is seen in the place where a child is held. 
 If at the breast, the Hebrews used: "Tl, Hin, 2-*?, Tw, and "tii". If on the 
 shoulder, see Is. 46'. Undoubtedly the reference is to the abdominal part 
 of the body and the lap (cf. note A on kilt, above). So Xu. \\^'~ Ruth 4^'^ 
 2 Sa. 12^ (nearly contemp.) i Ki. 3"-'' 17^^ Is. 40" Lam. 2^-. Note that our use 
 oi bosom in these places is poetic and symbolical; cf. above, p. 23. 
 
 3. The use is then seen to be extended to the garment about the p"n, the lap, 
 the folds of a garment overhanging the girdle — the primitive pocket or place for 
 putting the hand. So Ex. 46-" (in J, 850 li.c.) Ps. 35" 74" 79I- 89=0 Prov. 6^^ 
 j533 1^23 21W Is. 656'' Jer. 32^8. 
 
FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 47 
 
 4. Then the word is used of a curved surface, showing a similarity of develop- 
 ment with sinus and koXvos. So I Ki. 22^* (600 K.C. ?) Ezek. 43'^^'^. 
 
 5. Among the latest uses of the word are Job 192', referring to the abdominal 
 cavity, and Eccles. 7^, referring to the same figuratively as seat of affections. 
 
 With the use of pTl compare Assyr. n/lu and siinu ; e.g. Descent of Istar, 
 Obv. 35, "the, slaves sa istu utlihairisina who from their husbands' embrace . . ." 
 And II R 35, Nr. 4, " a maid sa ina sun mutisa who in her husband's embrace . . ." 
 
 D. On p. 3 above, it is maintained that ID never means ' linen ' but always 
 ' part.' All the decisive passages are here discussed. Ex. 39-* makes it plain 
 that "O, does not refer to the material of the D"D:3I2. The LXX and Pesh. feel 
 the difficulty and omit 12. We revert then to the original meaning ' part.' Con- 
 sidering Ex. 28*'^ in this light, "lt"2 11132'?' ni"]?? and the following clause are 
 plainly explanatory of 12 and may be glosses. In Lev. 6* " even the miknese 
 badh shall he put over his flesh " seems to be a gloss on 12 11D, which with 
 the Samar. and Targum is better read 12 ^'Ip, vestiinenta partis (virilis'). In 
 Lev. 6^^ 12 between ri;ri2 and U'lp may have been added later when 12 was 
 misunderstood to mean linen; 12 after nSJU^i is also a subsequent addition; 
 after 'D32a and i252J< it is probably original. Note that the 121 ■'1J12 are worn 
 in the sanctuary only {i.e. in P). In Lev. 162* 12 is original, while in v.^"- ■'1J2 
 Cipi seems to be an explanatory gloss, as also in v.*. In i Sa. 2^^ 22^8 2 Sa. 6^* 
 I Chr. 15'-'' 12 I^EX, already sufficiently discussed, affords no reason for inventing 
 a new meaning for 12 ; these passages are amply satisfied with the original 
 meaning 'part.' In Ezek. 9-- 3- ^^ lo--'^- '' Dan. 10^ 12"'' D''12n ^27^, associated 
 with D"riS2, apparently refers to a loin cloth, D*12 for 12 z.% partes privatae for 
 pars virilis. The supernatural being in Ezek. 9 and 10 may have had on an 
 12 T£i< around 1"r!2 with an inkhorn stuck in the belt of the USS. This 
 argument becomes more cogent when it is seen that the Versions do not under- 
 stand 12. In the earlier passages: i Sa. 2^^ the LXX simply transhterates; in 
 22^8 Xlvov in Cod. Alex, is evidently a subsequent correction; and in 2 Sa. 6'* 
 e^aWov is clearly a guess. Some of the later passages show that 12 was supposed 
 by some translators to mean 'linen.' In i Chr. 152" the Chronicler (see above, 
 p. 11) apparently substituted another phrase for 12 IISS HI bl7% which was 
 added later under the influence of the parallel passage. But if we find ' linen' in 
 the LXX in i Chr. 15'-" as well as in the Priestly Code; consistently throughout 
 the Vulgate; and in the Peshita everywhere except in Dan. 10^ 12'''', neverthe- 
 less in Ezek. 9-- 3- n the LXX renders D'12 by 6 irodripr]s, and similarly TCp 
 1£"Cn was not understood. Moreover Theodotion, who must have known the 
 hypothetical ' linen,' discards it entirely and resorts to a transliteration, while the 
 Pesh. sometimes hazards 1p"K. From the Versions, then, it is plain that ' linen' 
 is simply a guess for 12 and is varied without scruple; cf. 2*121 t-? in 
 Ezek. 9^1 lo--^ variously rendered ivdeSvK<bs tov iroSrjpr], — ttiv (ttoXtjv. — ttjv 
 (TTo\j]v TT]v ayiav; contrast Exek. 44^'- ^^ Heb. and Versions. We may then 
 conclude that 12 'linen' never existed, and 12 in 12 HSK, 12 "DIDti, 12 "132 
 means /tfrj (virilis) and D*12 in 2*121 Z'zh is an accusative of the member, as 
 in Jud. 1^, cf. Ges.-Kautzsch § 121 c/, and means partes (privatas), or as Haupt 
 has suggested, D''12 means a covering of the 12 like x«'P^s, inanica, irodeiov, etc. 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY. 
 
 Alizon, F. La Mantique chez les Hebreux. Montaubon, 1900. 
 
 Allen, Grant. Evolution of the Idea of God. New York, 1897, P- '^^ f. 
 
 Augustine, St. The City of God. Edition of Marcus Dods. Edinburgh, 
 
 1872, II. p. 33. 
 Baudissin, W. Studien zur semitischen Religionsgeschichte. Leipzig, 1876, 
 
 I- P- 57- 
 Geschichte des alttestanientlichen Priestertums. Leipzig, 
 1889, p. 205 ff. 
 Benzinger, J. Hebraische Archaologie. Freiburg und Leipzig, 1894, 
 
 pp. 382 f., 408. 
 Bertheau, E. Das Buch der Richter und Ruth. Leipzig, 2 A. 1883, P- 162 ff. 
 
 Brinton, D. G. Religions of Primitive Peoples. New York, 1897. 
 
 Braunius, J. De Vestitu Sacerdotum Hebraeorum. Amsterdam, 1701, 
 
 I. 9; II. 6. 
 Budde, K. Richter und Samuel. 1890, p. 115 f. 
 
 Richter. Freiburg, 1897, p. 68. 
 Carpzovius, J. G. De Pontificum Hebraicorum Vestitu Sacro. Lipsiae, 1 748. 
 Davies, T. Witton. Magic, Divination, and Demonology, Hebi-aica. July, 
 1898. (Short paper.) 
 Magic, Divination, and Demonology. London and Leipzig, 
 
 1898. 
 Cheyne-Black, Encyclopaedia Biblica, 1900-1, Divination. 
 De Wette, W. Archaologie. Leipzig, 1864. 
 
 Qillmann, A. Alttestamentliche Theologie. Leipzig, 1S95, PP- "S^. I53- 
 
 Exodus und Leviticus. Leipzig, 1880, p. 299 f., 3 A. von 
 
 Ryssel, 1897, P- 332 ff. 
 Die Genesis. Leipzig, 1875, p. 314. 
 Dozy, R. Histoire des Musulmans d'Espagne. Leiden, 1847-51. 
 
 Driver, S. R. Introduction to Literature of the Old Testament. Edin- 
 
 burgh, 1898. 
 Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible. 1900. Ephod. 
 Notes on the Plebrew Text of the Books of Samuel. Oxford, 
 1890. 
 Duff, A. Old Testament Theology. London and Edinburgh, 1891, 
 
 pp. 103, 148. 
 Duhm, B. Das Buch Jesaia iibersetzt und erklart. Gottingen, 1892, 
 
 p. 200. 
 Eichhorn, K. F. Einleitung in das Alte Testament. Gottingen, 1823-4. 
 Foreman, John. The Philippine Islands. 2d ed. London, 1899, P- 39- 
 Frazer, J. G. The Golden Bough. London, 1890, I. p. 39; 2d ed., 1900, 
 
 3 vols. 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY. 
 
 Gesenius, W. Thesaurus Linguae Hebraicae et Chaldaicae. 1835, p. 135, 
 
 Gesenius-Buhl. Handworterbuch. 13th ed. Leipzig, 1S99. 
 
 Gramberg. Kritische Geschichte der Religionsideen. 1829, I. p. 488 ff. 
 
 Grimme, H. 7X1i< und Stammverwandtes (Orientalische Litteratur- 
 
 Zeitung. Feb., 1901). 
 Griineisen, C. Der Ahnenkultus und die Urreligion Israels. Halle, 1900, 
 
 p. 192 ff. 
 Haupt, P. Babylonian Elements in Levitical Ritual (Journal of Biblical 
 
 Literature. 1900, I). 
 Heidegger, J. H. Historia Patriarcharum. Amsterdam, 1667-71, p. 430. 
 Hitzig, F. Biblische Theologie und messianische Weissagungen des 
 
 Alten Testaments. Karlsruhe, 1880, p. 25, n. 
 Holzinger, H. Exodus (Marti series). TUbingen, 19CX), p. 135 f. 
 
 Huber, Anton. Uber das "Meisir" genannte Spiel der heidnischen Araber. 
 
 Leipzig, 1883. 
 Imraulkais. Mo'allaqat. Arab, ed., Arnold, 14. Lipsiae, 1850. 
 
 Jacobs, Jos. ' Studies in Biblical Archaeology. New York, 1894. 
 
 Jastrow, Jr., M. The Tearing of Garments as a Symbol of Mourning, JAOS. 
 
 xxi. p. 23. 
 Josephus, Fl. Whiston's ed. London, 1875. 
 
 Kautzsch, E. Textbibel (Erklarung der FremdwiJrter, Ephod). Freiburg, 
 
 Leipzig, Tubingen, 1899. 
 Keil, C. F. Handbuch der biblischen Archaologie. Frankfurt und 
 
 Erlangen, 1858. 
 Kittel, R. Geschichte der Hebraer. Gotha, 18S8, IL pp. 32 A., 74, 90, 
 
 173 f., 260. 
 Kitto, J. Palestine. London, 1841, p. 239. 
 
 Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature. Edinburgh, 1S70. 
 Klostermann, A. Die Biicher Samuels und der Konige. 1S87. 
 Knobel, A. Prophetismus. Breslau, 1837. 
 
 Kohler, A. Lehrbuch der biblischen Geschichte des Alten Testaments. 
 
 Erlangen, 1875-93. 
 Kdnig, F. E. Hauptprobleme der israelitischen Religionsgeschichte 
 
 Leipzig, 1884, p. 59 ff. 
 Lehrgebaude der Hebraischen Sprache. Leipzig, 1895, ^I^- 
 
 139^, 199(7, 494/;. 
 Kuenen, A. De goodsdienst van Israel. Haarlem, 1S69, I. p. 102. 
 
 Volksreligion und Weltreligion. Berlin, 1883, p. 83, 
 
 Rem. 3. 
 Lagarde, P. de. Prophetae Chaklaice, xlvii. Leipzig, 1872. 
 
 Ubersicht iiber die Bildung der Nomina. Gottingen, 1889, 
 
 p. 178. 
 Mittheilungen, 4, pp. 17, 146; CgN. 1890, p. 15 f. Gottingen. 
 Lotz, W. Realencyklopaedie fiir protestantische Theologie und Kirche. 
 
 Leipzig, 1898. Ephod. 
 Maimonides, M. Yad Hachazaqah. Warsaw, 1 181-82. 
 Maybaum, S. Die Entwickelung des altisraelitischen Prophetenthums. 
 
 Berlin, 1883, p. 25 ff. 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY. 
 
 Meyer, J. 
 Michaelis, J. D. 
 
 Montefiore, C. G. 
 
 Moore, G. F. 
 
 Miiller, F. Max. 
 Muss-Arnolt, W. 
 Nowack, W. 
 
 Ottley, R. L. 
 Olshausen, J. 
 
 Marti, K. Die Cleschichte der israelitischen Religion. Strassburg, 
 
 1S97, pp. 29, 50, lOI. 
 M'ClintOCk and Strong. Encyclopaedia of Biblical Literature. New York, 
 1867-81. Ephod, Teraphini. 
 Chronicon Hebraeorum. Amsterdam, 1699, pp. 407,468, 475. 
 Commentationes. Bremen, 1763. de Teraphis, 
 Supplementa. 1792, p. 109. 
 Religion of the Ancient Hebrews (Hibbert Lectures). 
 
 London, 1892, p. 43. 
 Judges. New York, 1895, p. 381 f. (The International 
 
 Critical Commentary.) 
 Cheyne-Black, Encyclopaedia Biblica, 1 900-1. Ephod. 
 Origin and Growth of Religion (Hibbert Lectures). 
 
 London, 1879, p. 57. 
 Urim and Thummim (Amer. Jour, of Semitic Languages and 
 
 Literature). Chicago, July, 1900. 
 Archaologie. Freiburg und Leipzig, 1894, IL p. 21 f. 
 Der Prophet Hosea. Berlin, 18S0, p. 45 f. 
 Richter und Ruth. Gottingen, 1900, pp. 81, 143 f. 
 Aspects of the Old Testament (Bampton Lectures). London, 
 
 1897, p. 113- 
 Lehrbuch der hebraischen Sprache. Braunschweig, 1 86 1, 
 P- 332. 
 Perceval, Caussin de. Essais sur I'histoire des Arabs. 1847, ii- 3io- 
 Rashi. Commentary on the Pentateuch (Latin translation by Breit- 
 
 haupt). Gotha, 1710, p. 672. 
 Reuss, Ed. Die Geschichte der Heiligen Schriften Alten Testaments. 
 
 Braunschweig, i88r, §§ 102, 139. 
 Riehm, Ed. Handworterbuch des biblischen Altertums. Bielfeld u. 
 
 Leipzig, 1884. Ephod. 2d ed. 1S93-4. 
 Robertson, J. Early Religion of Israel. Edinburgh and London, 1892, 
 
 pp. 229 ff., 239, 450, note. 
 Schultz, H. Alttestamentliche Theologie. Gottingen, 1889, pp. 135, 192, 
 
 257; 5 ''^. 189^^' P- loi- 
 
 Schwally, F. Das Leben nach dem Tode. Giessen, 1892, p. 35. 
 
 Sellin, E. Beitrage zur israelitischen und jiidischen Religionsgeschichte. 
 
 Leipzig, 1897, II. p. 115 ff. 
 
 Smend, R. Alttestamentliche Religionsgeschichte. 2 A. Freiburg, 
 
 1893, pp. 41 f., 57, 130 ff. 1899- 
 
 Smith, H. Preserved. Samuel (International Critical Commentarj'). New- 
 York, 1899, pp. 208, 295. 
 
 Smith, W. Dictionary of the Bible. 2d ed. 1894. Ephod. 
 
 Smith, W. Robertson. Old Testament in the Jewish Church. Edinburgh, 
 1881, pp. 220, 227, 230, 259, 264, 428; 2d ed. 1892. 
 Prophets of Israel. Edinburgh, 1882, p. 98. 
 Religion of the Semites. London, 1894, pp. 161, 451. 
 
 Spencer. De Legibus Hebraeorum ritualibus earumque rationibus. 
 
 Tubingae, 1732, III. 3. 
 
Vlll 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY. 
 
 Spencer, Herbert. 
 Stade, B. 
 
 Studer, G. L. 
 Thenius, 0. 
 Thenius-Lohr. 
 Van Hoonacker, A. 
 Vatke, W. 
 Wellhausen, J. 
 
 Whitehouse, 0. C. 
 
 Winer, G. B. 
 Zeller, P. 
 
 Ceremonial Institutions. New York, 1880, p. 181. 
 Lehrbuch der hebraischen Grammatik. Berlin, 1887 (1879, 
 
 §§103/;, 208 0- 
 Das Buch der Richter. 1835. 2 A, 1842. 
 Exegetisches Handbuch, Samuel. Leipzig, 1864. 
 Die Biicher Samuels. Leipzig, 1898, p. 60. 
 Le Sacerdoce Levitique. 1899, p. 37 ff. 
 Biblische Theologie. Berlin, 1835, Vol. L p. 267 ff. 
 Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels. Berlin, 18S3, p. 131; 
 
 4 A. p. 127. 
 Die Kleinen Propheten. Berlin, 1892. 
 Skizzen III. Berlin, 1897, pp. 127, 167. 
 Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible. New York, Edinburgh, 
 
 1 900- 1. Lois. 
 Biblisches Realworterbuch. Leipzig, 3 A. 1847-8. 
 Biblisches Handworterbuch. Calw and Stuttgart, 1885. 
 
 Ephod, Teraphiin. 
 
 ABBREVIATIONS AND DATES. 
 
 J = Judaic document, prior to 800 B.C. 
 
 El = Ephraimitic " " " 750 B.C. 
 
 £2 = " " " " 650 B.C. 
 
 D = Deuteronomistic editor, about 6th century B.C. 
 
 RD = " expansion of the combined documents J and E (called 
 
 JE), about 6th century B.C. 
 P = Priestly code, later than 550 B.C. 
 LXX =The Greek Bible, called the Septuagint, not earlier than 300 B.C. 
 
 A = Aquila 1 
 
 2 = Symmachus \ Greek versions, 2d century a.d. 
 
 = Theodotion J 
 
 Pesh. — Peshitta, a Syriac version by Christians of the 2d century. 
 
 V = Latin Bible, called the Vulgate, not earlier than the 5th century A.D. 
 
 O.L. — Fragments of an older Latin version, called the Itala. 
 
VITA. 
 
 Born at Dobbsferry, on the Hudson, July 26. 1857, I moved to Cleveland, 
 Ohio, in 1868, and studied in the public schools of that city, serving for 
 a year as assistant in the Public Library. In 1876 I matriculated at 
 Racine College, Wisconsin, where I served as organist during my college 
 course. In 1880 I graduated as salutatorian. receiving the degree of 
 Bachelor of Arts with honors in Latin. I taught English and Latin for 
 a year in Racine Grammar School. In 1881 I entered the General 
 Theological Seminary in New York City. In 1S82 I received the degree 
 of Master of Arts from Racine College, and in 1884 the degree of Bachelor 
 of Divinity from the General Seminary. I was ordered Deacon in 1884 by 
 the Bishop of Chicago, and advanced to the priesthood in 1885 by the 
 Bishop of Tennessee. From 1SS9-98 I took up parochial work in Cleve- 
 land, Ohio, devoting a portion of my time to teaching, privately, and in the 
 Young Men's Christian Association College. In 1898 I came to the Johns 
 Hopkins University, where I devoted special attention to Semitic and 
 Classical studies, attending courses given by Professors Haupt, Johnston, 
 Gildersleeve, Warren, Smith, and others. 
 
GENERAL LIBRARY 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA— BERKELEY 
 
 RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED 
 
 This book is due on the last date stamped below, or on the 
 
 date to which renewed. 
 
 Renewed books are subject to immediate recall. 
 
 4Je'54Dii 
 
 jLm2 41954 III 
 30Nov'63J P 
 
 Vil^^ 
 
 IN STACKS 
 
 SEP 26 1967 
 
 LD 21-100ni-l,'5?(1887sl6)476 
 
YD 4874^ 
 
 \r * ■ *, •*<" 
 
 ■'•.»■' II ■»