2. God being both the sovereign and the legislator of the only remarked, that it abrogated the fifth commandment, but Israelites, BLASPHEMY (that is, the speaking injuriously of he likewise added, as a counter-doctrine, that Moses, their his name, his attributes, his government, and his revelation) own legislator, had expressly declared, that the man who was not only a crime against Him, but also against the state; cursed father or mother deserved to die. Now, it is impossiit was, therefore, punished capitally by stoning. (Lev. xxiv. ble for a man to curse his parents more effectually, than by 10–14.)

a vow like this, when he interprets it with such rigour, as to 3. It appears from Deut. xviii. 20—22. that a False Pro- preclude him from doing any thing in future for their benefit. Pher was punished capitally, being stoned to death ; and It is not imprecating upon them a curse in the common style there were two cases in which a person was held as con- of curses, which evaporate into air; but it is fulfilling the victed of the crime, and consequently liable to its punish- curse, and making it to all intents and purposes effectual.”ı ment, viz. (1.) If he had prophesied any thing in the name Of the two crimes above noticed, the act of striking a parent of any other god,—whether it took place or not,-he was evinces the most depraved and wicked disposition: and at all events considered as a false prophet, and, as such, severe as the punishment was, few parents would apply to a stoned to death, (Deut. xiii. 2–6.)—(2.) If a prophet spoke magistrate, until all methods had been tried in vain. Both in the name of the true God,

he was tolerated, so long as he these crimes are included in the case of the stubborn, rebelremained unconvicted of imposture, even though he threat- lious, and drunkard son; whom his parents were unable to ened calamity or destruction to the state, and he could not keep in order, and who, when intoxicated, endangered the be punished? but when the event which he had predicted lives of others. Such an irreclaimable offender was to be did not come to pass, he was regarded as an audacious im- punished with stoning. (Deut. xxi. 18—21.) Severe as this postor, and, as such, was stoned. (Deut. xviii. 21, 22.) law may seem, we have no instance recorded of its being

4, DIVINATION is the conjecturing of future events from carried into effect; but it must have had a most salutary opethings which are supposed to presage them. The eastern ration in the prevention of crimes, in a climate like that of people were always fond of divination, magic, the curious Palestine, where (as in all southern climates) liquor produces arts of interpreting dreams, and of obtaining a knowledge more formidable effects than with us, and where also it is of future events. When Moses gave the law which bears most probable that at that time, the people had not the same his name to the Israelites, this disposition had long been efficacious means which we possess, of securing drunkards, common in Egypt and the neighbouring countries. Now, and preventing them from doing mischief. all these vain arts in order to pry into futurity, and all divina- 2. Civil government being an ordinance of God, provision tion whatever, unless God was consulted by prophets, or by is made in all well regulated states for respecting the persons Urim and Thummim (the sacred lot kept by the high-priest), of MAGISTRATES. We have seen in a former chapter, that were expressly prohibited by the statutes of Lev. xix, 26. when the regal government was established among the Israel31. xx. 6. 23. 24. and Deut. xviii. 9–12. In the case of a ites, the person of the king was inviolable, even though he person transgressing these laws, by consulting a diviner, God might be tyrannical and unjust. It is indispensably necesreserved to himself the infliction of his punishment; the sary to the due execution of justice that the persons of magistransgressor not being amenable to the secular magistrate. trates be sacred, and that they should not be insulted in the (Lev. xx. 6.) The diviner himself was to be stoned. (Lev. discharge of their office. All reproachful words or curses, xx. 27.)

uttered against persons invested with authority, are prohi5. Perjury is, by the Mosaic law, most peremptorily pro- bited in Exod. xxii. 28. No punishment, however, is specihibited as a most heinous sin against God; to whoin the fied; probably it was left to the discretion of the judge, and punishment of it is left, and who in Exod. xx. 7. expressly was different according to the rank of the magistrate and the promises that he will inflict it, without ordaining the inflic-extent of the crime. tion of any punishment by the temporal magistrate ; except III. The Crimes or offences AGAINST PROPERTY, mentioned only in the case of a man falsely charging another with a by Moses, are theft, man-stealing, and the denial of any thing crime, in which case the false witness was liable to the same taken in trust, or found. punishment which would have been inflicted on the accused 1. On the crime of THEFT, Moses imposed the punishment party if he had been found to have been really guilty (as is of double (and in certain cases still higher) restitution; and shown in p. 61, infra); not indeed as the punishment of if the thief were unable to make it (whick, however, could perjury against God, but of false witness.

rarely happen, as every Israelite by law had his paternal II. "Crimes against Parents and MAGISTRATES consti- field, the crops of which might be attached), he was ordered tute an important article of the criminal law of the Hebrews. to be sold for a slave, and payment was to be made to the in

1. In the form of government among that people, we jured party out of the purchase-money. (Exod. xxii. 1. 3.) recognise much of the patriarchal spirit; in consequence of The same practice obtains, according to Chardin, among the which fathers enjoyed great rights over their families. The Persians. The wisdom of this regulation is much greater Cursing or Parents, - that is, not only the imprecation of than the generality of mankind are aware of: for, as the deevil on them, but probably also all rude and reproachful lan- sire of gain and the love of luxuries are the prevalent induceguage towards them, was punished with death (Exod. xxi. ments to theft, restitution, varied according to circumstances, 17. Lev. xx. 9.); as likewise was the striking of them. would effectually prevent the unlawful gratification of that (Exod. xxi. 15.) An example of the crime of cursing of a desire, while the idle man would be deterred from stealing parent, which is fully in point, is given by Jesus Christ in by the dread of slavery, in which he would be compelled to Matt. xv. 4—6. or Mark vii. 9—12. ; " where he upbraids work by the power of blows. If, however, a thief was found the Pharisees with their giving, from their deference to hu- breaking into a house in the night season, he might be killed man traditions and doctrines, such an exposition of the divine (Exod. xxii. 2.), but not if the sun had arisen, in which case law, as converted an action, which, by the law of Moses, he might be known and apprehended, and the restitution would have been punished with death, into a vow, both obli- made which was enjoined by Moses. When stolen oxen or gatory and acceptable in the sight of God. It seems that it sheep were found in the possession of a thief, he was to make was then not uncommon for an undutiful and degenerate son, a two-fold restitution to the owner, who thus obtained a profit who wanted to be rid of the burden of supporting his parents, for his risk of loss. (Exod. xxii. 4.) The punishment was and in his wrath, to turn them adrift upon the wide world, to applicable to every case in which the article stolen remained say to his father or mother, Korban, or, Be that Corban (con- unaltered in his possession. But if it was already alienated secrated) which I should appropriate to thy support; that is, or slaughtered, the criminal was to restore four-fold for a Every thing wherewith I might ever aid or serve thee, and, of sheep, and five-fold for an ox (Exod. xxii. 1), in consequence course, every thing, which I ought to devote to thy relief in the of its great value and indispensable utility in agriculture, to days of helpless old age, I here row unto God.-A most abomi- the Israelites, who had no horses. In the time of Solomon, nable vow, indeed! and which God would, unquestionably, when property had become more valuable from the increase as little approve or accept, as he would a vow to commit of commerce, the punishment of restitution was increased to adultery. And yet some of the Pharisees pronounced on seven-fold. (Prov. vi. 30, 31.), When a thief had nothing to such vows this strange decision; that they were absolutely pay, he was sold as a slave (Exod. xxii. 3.), probably for as obligatory, and that the son, who uttered such words, was many years as were necessary for the extinction of the debt, bound to abstain from contributing, in the smallest article, and of course, perhaps, for life; though in other cases the to the use of his parents, because every thing, that should Hebrew servant could be made to serve only for six years. have been so appropriated, had become consecrated to God, If, however, a thief, after having denied, even upon oath, any and could no longer be applied to their use, without sacrilege theft, with which he was charged, had the honesty or conand a breach of his vow. But on this exposition, Christ not

1 Michaelis's Commentaries, vol. iv. p. 300. . See p. 44. supra.

science to retract his perjury, and to confess his guilt, instead (3.) When it is committed premeditatedly and deceitfully. of double restitution, he had only to repay the amount stolen, Exod. xxi. 14.)-(4.) When a man lies in wait for another, and one fifth more. (Levit. vi. 2-5.).

falls upon him, and slays him. (Deut. xix. 11.) In order 2. MAN-STEALING, that is, the seizing or stealing of the to constitute wilful murder, besides enmity, Moses deemed person of a free-born Israelite, either to use him as a slave it essential, that the deed be perpetrated by a blow, a thrust, himself, or to sell him as a slave to others, was absolutely or a cast, or other thing of such a nature as inevitably to and irremissibly punished with death. (Exod. xxi. 16. Deut. cause death. (Num. xxxv. 16–21.): such as, the use of an xxiv. 7.).

iron tool,-a stone, or piece of wood, that may probably 3. “Where a person was judicially convicted of having cause death,—the striking of a man with the fist, out of enDENIED ANY THING COMMITTED TO HIS TRUST, or found by mity, -pushing a man down in such a manner that his life him, his punishment, as in the case of theft, was double is endangered, and throwing any thing at a man, from sanrestitution; only that it never, as in that crime, went so far guinary motives, so as to occasion his death. The punishas quadruple, or quintuple restitution; at least nothing of this ment of murder was death, without all power of redemption. kind is ordained in Exod. xxii. 8. If the person accused of 2. Homicide or MANSLAUGHTER is discriminated by the folthis crime had sworn himself guiltless, and afterwards, from lowing adjuncts or circumstances :-(1.) That it takes place the impulse of his conscience, acknowledged the commission without hatred or enmity: (Num. xxxv. 22. Deut. xix. 4— of perjury, he had only one-fifth beyond the value of the 6.)—(2.) Without thirst for revenge. (Exod. xxi, 13. Num. article denied to refund to its owner." (Levit. vi. 5.) xxxv. 22.)-(3.) When it happens by mistake. (Num. xxxv.

4. The Mosaic laws respecting Debtors were widely dif- 11. 15.)–(4.) By accident, or (as it is termed in the English ferent from those which obtain in European countries: the law) chance-medley: (Deut. xix. 5.) The punishment of mode of procedure sanctioned by them, though simple, was homicide was confinement to a city of refuge, as will be very efficient. Persons, who had property due to them, shown in the following section. might, if they chose, secure it either by means of a mort- Besides the two crimes of murder and homicide, there are gage, or by a pledge, or by a bondsman or surety. two other species of homicide, to which no punishment was

(1.) The creditor, when about to receive a pledge for a annexed; viz. (1.) If a man caught a thief breaking into his debt, was not allowed to enter the debtor's house, and take house by night, and killed him, it was not blood-guiltiness, what he pleased; but was to wait before the door, till the that is, he could not be punished; but if he did so when the debtor should deliver up that pledge with which he could sun was up, it was blood-guiltiness; for the thief's life ought most easily dispense. (Deut. xxiv. 10, 11. Compare Job to have been spared, for the reason annexed to the law (Exod. xxii. 6. xxiv. 3. 7–9.)

xxii. 2, 3.), víz. because then the person robbed might have (2) When a mill or mill-stone, or an upper garment, was it in his power to obtain restitution; or, at any rate, the thief, giver as a pledge, it was not to be kept all night. These if he could not otherwise make up his loss, might be sold, articles appear to be specified as examples for all other in order to repay him.—(2.) If the Goël or avenger of blood things with which the debtor could not dispense without overtook the innocent homicide before he reached a city of great inconvenience. (Exod. xxii. 26, 27. Deut. xxiv. 6. 12.) refuge, and killed him while his heart was hot, it was consi

(3). The debt which remained unpaid until the seventh or dered as done in justifiable zeal (Deut. xix. 6.); and even sabbatic year (during which the soil was to be left without if he found him without the limits of his asylum, and slew cultivation, and, consequently, a person was not supposed to him, he was not punishable. (Num. Xxxv. 26, 27.), The be in a condition to make payments), could not be exacted taking of pecuniary compensation for murder was prohibited; during that period. (Deut. xv. 1–11.). But, at other times, but the mode of punishing murderers was undetermined ; and, in case the debt was not paid, the creditor might seize, first, indeed, it appears to have been left in a great degree to the the hereditary land of the debtor, and enjoy its produce until pleasure of the Gol. An exception, however, was made to the debt was paid, or at least until the year of jubilee; or, the severity of the law in the case of a perfect slave (that is, secondly, his houses. These might be sold in perpetuity, one not of Hebrew descent), whether male or female. Alexcept those belonging to the Levites. (Levit. xxv. 11–32.) though a man had struck any of his slaves, whether male or Thirdly, in case the house or land was not sufficient to cancel female, with a stick, so as to cause their death, unless th the debt, or if it so happened that the debtor had none, the event took place immediately, and under his hand, he was person of the debtor might be sold, together with his wife not punished. If the slave survived one or two days, the and children, if he had any. This is implied in Lev. xxv. master escaped with impunity: it being considered that his 39.; and this custom is alluded to in Job xxiv. 9. It existed death might not have proceeded from the beating, and that it 'in the time of Elisha (2 Kings iv. 1.); and on the return of was 'not a master's interest to kill his slaves, because, as the Jews from the Babylonish captivity, some rich persons Moses says (Exod. xxi. 20, 21.), they are his money. If the exercised this right over their poor debtors. (Neh. v. 1- slave died under his master's hand while beating him, or 13.), Our Lord alludes to the same custom in Matt. xviii. 25. even during the same day, his death was to be avenged; but As the person of the debtor might thus be seized and sold, in what manner Moses has not specified. Probably the his cattle and furniture were, consequently, liable for his Israelitish master was subjected only to an arbitrary punishdebts. This is alluded to by Solomon, in Prov. xxii. 27. It ment, regulated according to circumstances by the pleasure does not appear that imprisonment for debt existed in the age of the judge. of Moses, but it seems to have prevailed in the time of Jesus In order to increase an abhorrence of murder, and to deter Christ. (Matt. xviii. 34.)

them from the perpetration of so heinous a crime,-when it (4.) If a person had become bondsman, or surety for an- had been committed by some person unknown, the city nearother, he was liable to be called upon for payment in the est to which the corpse was found was to be ascertained by same way with the original debtor. But this practice does mensuration : after which the elders or magistates of that not appear to have obtained before the time of Solomon (in city. were required to declare their utter ignorance of the whose Proverbs there are several references to it), when it affair in the very solemn manner prescribed in Deut. xxi. was attended with serious consequences. It seems that the 1—9. formality observed was, for the person who became surety 3. For other CORPORAL INJURIES of various kinds, different to give his hand to the debtor, and not to the creditor, to intí- statutes were made,

which show the humanity and wisdom mate that he became, in a legal sense, one with the debtor; of the Mosaic law. Thus, if a man injured another in a fray, for Solomon cautions his son against giving his hand to a he was obliged to pay the expenses of his cure, and of his stranger, to a person whose circumstances he did not know : bed, that is, the loss of his time arising from his confineand entreats him to go and urge the person to whom he had ment. (Exod. xxi. 18, 19.) By this admirable precept, given his hand, or for whom he had become surety, to pay most courts of justice still regulate their decisions in such his own debt; so that it must have been to the debtor that cases. If a pregnant woman was hurt, in consequence of a the hand was given. See Prov. xi. 15. xvii. 18. and xxii. 26. fray between two individuals,--as posterity among the Jews

IV. Among the CRIMEs which may be committed AGAINST was among the peculiar promises of their covenant,-in the THE PERSON,

event of her premature delivery, the author of the misfortune 1. Murder claims the first place. As this is a crime of was obliged to give her husband such a pecuniary compensathe most heinous nature, Moses has described four accessory tion as he might demand, the amount of which, if the offencircumstances or marks, by which to distinguish it from sim- der thought it too high, was to be determined by the decision ple homicide or manslaughter; viz. (1.) When it proceeds of arbitrators. On the other hand, if either the woman or from hatred or enmity. (Num. xxxv. 20, 21. Deut. xix. 11.) her child was hurt or maimed, the law of retaliation took its -(2.) When it proceeds from thirst of blood, or a desire to full effect, as stated in Exod. xxi. 22—25.—The law of satiate revenge with the blood of another. (Num. xxxv. 20.)- retaliation also operated, if one man hurt another by either assaulting him openly, or by any insidious attack, whether 8. Dichotomy, or cutting asunder.—9. Tujiuvioucs, or beat the parties were both Israelites, or an Israelite and a foreigner. ing to death.-10. Exposing to wild beasts--11. Crucifixion (Lev. xxiv. 19–22.) This equality of the law, however, did not extend to slaves : but if a master knocked out the

-(1.) Prevalence of this mode of punishment among the an

cients.—(2.) Ignominy of crucifixion.—(3.) The circum eye or tooth of a slave, the latter received his freedom as a stances of our Saviour's crucifixion considered and illuscompensation for the injury he had sustained. (Exod. xxi. trated. 26, 27.) If this noble law, did not teach the unmerciful slave-holder humanity, at least it taught him caution; as one

The end of punishment is expressed by Moses to be the rash blow might have deprived him of all right to the future determent of others from the commission of crimes. His services of his slave, and, consequently, self-interest would language is, that others may hear and fear, and muy shun the oblige him to be cautious and circumspect.

commission of like crimes. (Deut. xvii. 13. xix. 20.) By the 4. The crime, of which decency withholds the name, as wise and humane enactments of this legislator, parents are nature abominates the idea, was punished with death (Lev. not to be put to death for their children, nor children for their xviii. 22, 23. xx. 13. 15, 16.), as also was adultery (Lev. parents (Deut. xxiv. 16.), as was afterwards the case with xx. 10.),—it should seem by stoning (Ezek. xvi. 38. 40. the Chaldæans (Dan. vi. 24.), and also among the kings of John viii. 7.), except in certain cases which are specified in Israel (1 Kings xxi. and 2 Kings ix.

26.), on charges of treaLev. xix. 20-22. Other crimes of lust, which were com


Of the punishments mentioned in the sacred writers, mon among the Egyptians and Canaanites, are made capital some were inflicted by the Jews in common with other naby Moses. For a full examination of the wisdom of his tions, and others were peculiar to themselves. They are laws on these subjects, the reader is referred to the commen- usually divided into two classes, non-capital and capital. taries of Michaelis.2

I. The NON-CAPITAL or inferior PUNISHMENTS, which were the Mosaic law more admirably displayed, than in the rigour Mosaic law was SCOURGING. (Lev. xix. 20. Deut. xxii. 18.

V. In nothing, however, were the wisdom and equity of inflicted for smaller offences, are eight in number; viz. with which CRIMES OF Malice were punished. Those pests of society, malicious informers, were odious in the eye of xxv: 2, 3.) After the captivity it continued to be the usual that law (Lev. xix. 16–18.), and the publication of false punishment for transgressions of the law, so late indeed as the reports, affecting the characters of others, is expressly pro:) it five times. (2 Cor. xi. 21.) In the time of our Saviour it

time of Josephus;' and the apostle tells us that he suffered hibited' in Exod. xxiii. 1.: though that statute does not annex any punishment to this crime. One exception, how- was not confined to the judicial tribunals, but was also inever, is made, which justly imposes a very severe punish-flicted in the synagogues. (Matt. x. 17. xxiii. 34. Acts xxii. ment on the delinquent. See Deut. xxii. 13–19. All manner 19. xxvi. 11.) The penalty of scourging was inflicted by of false witness was prohibited (Exod. xx. 16.), even though judicial sentence. The offender having been admonished to it were to favour a poor man. Exod. xxiii. 143.) But in acknowledge his guilt, and the witnesses produced against the case of false testimony against an innocent man, the him as in capital cases, the judges commanded him to be tied matter was ordered to be investigated with the utmost strict- by the arms to a low pillar: the culprit being stripped down ness, and, as a species of wickedness altogether extraordi- to his waist, the executioner, who stood behind him upon a nary, to be brought before the highest tribunal, where the stone, inflicted the punishment both on the back and breast priests and the judges of the whole people sat in judgment: with thongs ordinarily made of ox's hide or leather. The and after conviction, the false witness was subjected to pu- number of stripes depended upon the enormity of the offence. nishment, according to the law of retaliation, and beyond the According to the talmudical writers, while the executioner possibility of reprieve; so that he suffered the very same was discharging his office, the principal judge proclaimed punishment which attended the crime of which he accused these words with a loud voice :-If thou observest' not all the his innocent brother. (Deut. xix. 16–21.) No regulation words of this law, &c. then the Lord shall make thy plugues can be more equitable than this, which must have operated wonderful, isc. (Deut. xxviii. 58, 59.); adding, Keep thereas a powerful prevention of this crime. Some of those fore the words of this covenant, and do them, that ye may prosexcellent laws, which are the glory and ornament of the per in all that ye do (Deut. xxix. 9.); and concluding with British Constitution, have been inade on this very ground. these words of the Psalmist (!xxviii. 38.): But he being full Thus, in the 37 Edw. III. c. 18., it is enacted, that all those of compassion forgave their iniquities ; which he was to repeat, who make suggestion, shall suffer the same penalty to which if he had finished these verses before the full number of the other party would have been subject, if he were attainted, stripes was given. It was expressly enacted that no Jew in case his suggestions be found evil. A similar law was should suffer more than forty stripes for any crime, though a made in the same reign. (38 Edw. III. c. 9.) By a law less number might be inflicted. In order that the legal numof the twelve tables, false witnesses were thrown down the ber might not be exceeded, the scourge consisted of three Tarpeian rock. In short, false witnesses have been deserv- lashes or thongs : so that, at each blow, he received three edly execrated by all nations, and in every age.

stripes: consequently when the full punishment was inflicted, the delinquent received only thirteen blows, that is, forty stripes save one ; but if he were so weak, as to be on the point of fainting away, the judges would order the executioner to

suspend his flagellation. Among the Romans, however, the SECTION IV.

number was not limited, but varied according to the crime of ON THE PUNISHMENTS MENTIONED IN THE SCRIPTURES.3

the malefactor and the discretion of the judge. It is highly

probable that, when Pilate took Jesus and scourged him, he Design of punishments.- Classification of Jewish punishments. directed this scourging to be unusually severe, that the sight -I. PUNISHMENTS, NOT CAPITAL.—1. Scourging:-2. Retali- of his lacerated body might move the Jews to compassionate ation.—3. Pecuniary Fines.4. Offerings in the nature of the prisoner, and desist from opposing his release. This appunishment.-5. Imprisonment.—6. Banishment.--Oriental pears the more probable; as our Saviour was so enfeebled by mode of treating prisoners.7. Depriving them of sight.- this scourging, that he afterwards had not strength enough 8. Cutting or plucking of the hair.-9. Excommunication. left to enable him to drag his cross to Calvary. Among the -II. Capital Punishments.—1. Slaying with the sword. Jews, the punishment of scourging involved no sort of igno2. Stoning.-3. Burning to death.4. Decapitation.-5. miny, which could make the sufferer infamous or an object Precipitation.6. Drowning.7. Bruising in a mortar.- of reproach to his fellow-citizens. It consisted merely in the

physical sense of the pain.8 1 As the Jewish law inficted such heavy punishments on those who com- 2. RETALIATION, or the returning of like for like, was the nitted fornication and adultery, it is probable, from Prov. ii. 16., that the punishment inflicted for corporal injuries to another,--.ye for them into impurity

and idolatry, and who might be tolerated in some cor- eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot. (Exod. xxi. rupt periods of their state. The case was the saine at Athens, where foreign 24.) It appears, however, to have been rarely, if ever, harlots were tolerated. Hence the terın strange women, came to be applied to all bad women, whether foreigners or Israelites. Orton's Exposition, vol. v. p. 6.

4 Michaelis's Commentaries, vol. iv. p. 371. vol. iii. pp. 404.400—402. Vol. iv. pp. 163–203.

5 Ant. Jud. lib. iv. c. 8. $11. • The general authorities for this section are, Schulzii Archeologia Fic- 6 In inflicting the punishinent of whipping, the Jews sometimes, for notobraica, pp. 82-92. Calmet, Dissertation sur les Supplices des Hébreux, rious offences tied sharp bones, pieces of lead, or thorns to the end of the Dissert. tom. I. pp. 241-276. ; Brunings, Antiq. Febr. pp. 107-111.; Alber, thongs, called by the Greeks ertpaye.wixs uzrTigus, flagra ta.zillaia, Hermeneut. Vet. Test. tom. i. pp. 225-233. C. B. Michaelis

, de judiciis, but in the Scriptures terined scorpions. To these Rehoboam alludes in poenisque capitalibus Hebræoruin, in Pott's and Ruperti's Sylloge Commen- 1 Kings xii. 11. --Barder's Oriental Literature, vol. I. p. 414. tationum, vol. iv. pp. 177--239. ; Jahn, Archæologia Biblica, $S 249–255. ; Cited by Dr. Lightfoot, Works, vol i. p. 901. folio edit. Ackermann, Archæologia Biblica, SS 243-258.

8 Michaelis's Commentarics, vol. iii. pp. 444–448.

strictly put in execution : but the injurious party was to give celled by making a trespass-offering, and making up his dethe injured person satisfaction. In this sense the TAUTETAdese ficiencies with twenty per cent. over and above. (Lev. v. among the Greeks, and the Lex Talionis among the Romans, 14, 15.). was understood; and an equivalent was accepted, the value (5.) The same was the rule, where a person denied any of an eye, a tooth, &c. for the eye or tooth itself. It should thing given him in trust, or any thing lost, which he had seem that in the time of Jesus Christ, the Jews had made found,

or any promise he had made; or again, where he had acthis law (the execution of which belonged to the civil magis- quired any property dishonestly, and had his conscience awaktrate) a ground for authorizing private resentments, and all Jened account of it, even where it was a theft, of which he the excesses committed by a vindictive spirit. Revenge was had once cleared himself by oath, but was now moved by the carried to the utmost extremity, and more evil returned than impulse of his conscience to make voluntary restitution, and what had been received. On this account our Saviour pro- wished to get rid of the guilt. (Lev. vi. 1-7.) By the hibited retaliation in his divine sermon on the mount. (Matt. offering made on such an occasion, the preceding crime was v. 38, 39.)

wholly cancelled ; and because the delinquent would other3. RestITUTION.— Justice requires that those things which wise have had to make restitution from two to fire fold, he have been stolen or unlawfully taken from another should be now gave twenty per cent. over and above the amount of his restored to the party aggrieved, and that compensation should theft. be made to him by the aggressor. Accordingly, various fines (6.) In the case of adultery committed with a slave, an or pecuniary payments were enacted by the Mosaic law; as, offering was appointed by Lev. xix. 20-22.: which did not,

(1.). Fines, wsy (onesh), strictly so called, went commonly however, wholly cancel the punishment, but mitigated it from to the injured party; and were of two kinds,-Fixed, that is, death, which was the established punishment of adultery, to those of which the amount was determined by some statute that of stripes for the woman, the man bringing the trespassas for instance, that of Deut. xxii. 19. or xxii. 29. ,—and Un- offering in the manner directed by Moses.3 determined, or where the amount was left to the decision of Such measures as these, Michaelis remarks, must have had the judges. (Exod. xxi. 22.)

a great effect in prompting to the restitution of property (3.) I'wo-fold, four-fold, and even five-fold, restitution of unjustly acquired: but in the case of crimes, of which the things stolen, and restitution of property unjustly retained, good of the community expressly required that the legal with twenty per cent. over and above. Thus, if a man killed punishment should uniformly and actually be put in execution, a beast, he was to make it good, beast for beast. (Lev. xxiv. no such offering could be accepted.4 18.)- If an ox pushed or gored another man's servant to 5. IMPRISONMENT does not appear to have been imposed death, his owner was bound to pay for the servant thirty by Moses as a punishment, though he could not be unacshekels of silver. (Exod. xxi. 32.)- In the case of one man's quainted with it; for he describes it as in use among the ox pushing the ox of another man to death, as it would be Egyptians. (Gen. xxxix. 20, 21.) The only time he menvery difficult to ascertain which of the two had been to blame tions it, or more properly arrest, is solely for the purpose of for the quarrel, the two owners were obliged to bear the loss. keeping the culprit safe until judgment should be given on The living ox was to be sold, and its price, together with his conduct. (Lev. xxiv. 12.) In later times, however, the the dead beast, was to be equally divided between them. If, punishment of the prison came into use among the Israelites however, one of the oxen had previously been notorious for and Jews; whose history, uuder the monarchs, abounds with pushing, and the owner had not taken care to confine him, instances of their imprisoning persons, especially the proin such case he was to give the loser another, and to take the phets, who were obnoxious to them for their faithful reproofs dead ox himself. (Exod. xxi. 36.)—If a man dug a pit and of their sins and crimes. Thus, Asa committed the prophet did not cover it, or let an old pit remain open, and another Hanani to prison, for reproving him (2 Chron. xvi. 10.) man's beast fell into it, the owner of such pit was obliged to Ahab committed Micaiah (1 Kings xxii. 27.), as Zedekiah pay for the beast, and had it for the payment. (Exod. xxi. 33, did the prophet Jeremiah, for the same offence. (Jer. xxxvii, 34.)—When a fire was kindled in the fields and did any 21.) John the Baptist was imprisoned by Herod, misnamed damage, he who kindled it was to make the damage good. the Great (Matt. iv. 12.); and Peter by Herod Agrippa. (Exod. xxii. 6.)',

(Acts xii. 4.) Debtors (Matt. xviii. 30.) and murderers (Luke (3.) Compensation, not commanded, but only allowed, by xxiii

. 19.) were also committed to prison. We read also of law, to be given to a person injured that he might depart Tapnoes an ucois, a common prison, a public gaol (Acts v. 18.), from his suit, and not insist on the legal punishment, whether which was a place of durance and confinement for the worst corporal or capital. It is termed either 103 (Kopher), that is, sort of offenders. In their prisons, there was usually a dunCompensation or VDI 77D (PIDJON Nephesh), that is, Ransom of geon (Jer. xxxviii. 6.), or a pit or cistern, as the word nya Life. In one case it is most expressly permitted (Exod, xxi. (BOR) is rendered in Zech. ix. 11. where it unquestionably 30.); but it is prohibited in the case of murder and also in refers to a prison : and from this word we may conceive the homicide. (Num. xxxv. 31, 32.), The highest fine leviable nature of a dungeon, viz. that it was a place, in which indeed by the law of Moses, was one hundred shekels of silver, a great there was no water, but in its bottom deep mud; and, accordsum in those times, when the precious metals were rare.2 ingly, we read that Jeremiah, who was cast into this worst

4. To this class of punishments may be referred the Sin and lowest part of the prison, sunk into the mire. (Jer. and Trespass OFFERINGS, which were in the NATURE OF xxxviii. 6.) PUNISHMENTS. They were in general extremely moderate, In the prisons also were Stocks, for detaining the person and were enjoined in the following cases :

the prisoner more securely. (Job xiji. 27. xxxiii. 11.)? (1.) For every unintentional trangression of the Levitical Michaelis conjectures that they were of the sort by the law, even if it was a sin of commission (for in the Mosaic doc- Greeks called TIETETUPyZey, wherein the prisoner was so contrine concerning sin and trespass offerings, all transgressions fined, that his body was kept in an unnatural position, which are divided into sins of commission, and sins of omission), a must have proved a torture truly insupportable. The Esatepe sin-offering was to be made, and thereupon the legal punish- Dursun, or Inner Prison, into which Paul and Silas were ment was remitted, which, in the case of wilful transgression, thrust at Philippi, is supposed to have been the same as the was nothing less than extirpation. (Lev. iv. 2. v. 1.4-7). pit or cistern above noticed ; and here their feet were made

(2.) Whoever had made a rash oath, and had not kept it, fast in the wooden stocks (Acts xvi. 24), te gunos. As this was obliged to make a sin-offering; for his inconsideration, prison was under the Roman government, these stocks are if it was an oath to do evil, and for his neglect, if it was an supposed to have been the cippi or large pieces of wood in oath to do good. (Lev. v. 4.).

use among that people, which not only loaded the legs of (3.) Whoever had, as a witness, been guilty of perjury- prisoners, but sometimes distended them in a very painful not, however, to impeach an innocent man (for in that case the manner. Hence the situation of Paul and Silas would be lex talionis operated), but-in not testifying what he knew against a guilty person, or in any other respect concerning

3 Michaelis's Commentaries, vol. iii. pp. 482-487.

• Ibid. pp. 488. the matter in question ; and in consequence thereof felt dis- * This place is termed the prison-house : but it appears that suspected quieted in his conscience, might, without being liable to any persons were sometimes confined in part of the house which was occupied farther punishment, or ignominy, obtain remission of the per-pose. In this manner Jeremiah was at first confined (Jer. xxxvii. 15.), and jury, by a confession of it, accompanied with a trespass- probably Joseph

in the same manner (see Gen. xl. 3.); a similar practice offering. (Lev. v. 1.)

obtains in the East to this day. See Harmer's Observations, vol. iii. p. 503. (4.) Whoever had incurred debt to the sanctuary, that is

6 Michaelis's Commentaries, vol. iii. pp. 439—442. Schulzii Archæol.

Hebr. pp. 84, 85. had not conscientiously paid his tithes, had his crime can- * The word rendered stocks in our authorized version or Jer. xx. 2. and

xxix. 26. ought to have been rendered house of correction. See Dr. Blay. 1 Michaelis's Commentaries, vol. ii. pp. 363–367. 477, 478. ney's notes

on those passages. Ibid. pp. 478, 479.

i Michaelis's Commentaries, rol. iii. p. 443. VOL. II.



rendered more painful than that of an offender sitting in the off the heads of some of the seven Maccabean brethren. As stocks, as used among us; especially if (as is very possible) an historical composition this book is utterly destitute of they lay on the hard or dirty ground, with their bare backs, credit; but it shows that the mode of punishment under conlacerated by recent scourging.'

sideration was not unusual in the East. This sort of torture The keepers of the prison anciently had, as in the East is said to have been frequently inflicted on the early martyrs they still have, a discretionary power to treat their prisoners and confessors for the Christian faith. just as they please; nothing further being required of them, 9. EXCLUSION FROM SACRED Worship, or ExcOMMUNICAihan to produce them when called for. According to the TiON, was not only an ecclesiastical punishment, but also a accurate and observant traveller, Chardin, the gaoler is mas- civil one; because in this theocratic republic there was no ter, to do as he pleases ; to treat his prisoner well or ill; to distinction between the divine and the

civil right. The fanput him in irons or not, to shut him up closely, or to hold cies of the Rabbins, relative to the origin of excommunica him in easier restraint ; to admit persons to him, or to suffer tion, are endless. Some affirm, that Adam excommunicated no one to see him. If the gaoler and his servants receive Cain and his whole race; others, that excommunication began Jarge fees, however base may be the character of the prisoner, with Miriam, for having spoken ill of Moses; others, again, he shall be lodged in the best part of the gaoler's own apart- find it in the song of Deborah and Barak (Judg: v. 23. ment: and, on the contrary, if the persons, who have caused Curse ye Meroz), interpreting Meroz as a person who had rethe prisoner to be confined, make the gaoler greater presents, fused to assist Barak. But it is most probable, that the he will treat his victim with the utmost inhumanity. "Chardin earliest positive mention of this punishment occurs after the illustrates this statement by a narrative of the treatment return from the Babylonish captivity, in Ezra x. 7, 8., or in received by a very great Armenian merchant. While he the anathema of Nehemiah (xiii. 5.) against those who had bribed the gaoler, the latter treated him with the greatest married strange women. In later times, according to the rablenity; but afterwards, when the adverse party presented a binical writers, there were three degrees of excommunication considerable sum of money, first to the judge, and afterwards among the Jews. The first was called 973 (NiDUI), removal to the gaoler, the hapless Armenian first felt his privileges or separation from all intercourse with society: this is, in the retrenched: he was next closely confined, and then was New Testament, frequently termed casting out of the synatreated with such inhumanity as not to be permitted to drink gogue. (John ix. 22. xvi. 2. Luke vi. 22, &c.) This was in oftener than once in twenty-four hours, even during the hot-force for thirty days, and might be shortened by repentance. test time in the summer. No person was allowed to approach During its continuance, the excommunicated party was prohim but the servants of the prison : at length he was thrown hibited from bathing, from shaving his head, or approaching into a dungeon, where he was in a quarter of an hour brought his wife or any other person nearer than four cubits: but if to the point to which all this severe usage was designed to he submitted to this prohibition, he was not debarred the priforce him. What energy does this account of an eastern vilege of attending the sacred rites. . If, however, the party prison give to those passages of Scripture, which speak of continued in his obstinacy after that time, the excommunicathe soul coming into iron (Psal. cv. '17. marginal rendering); tion was renewed with additional solemn maledictions. This of the sorrowful siguins of the prisoner coming before God second degree was called on (cherm), which signifies to (Psal. Ixxix. 11.), and of Jeremiah's being kept in a dungeon anathematize, or devote to death: it involved an exclusion many days, and supplicating that he might not be remanded from the sacred assemblies. The third, and last degree of exthither lest he should die! (Jer. xxxvii. 16–20.)

(-ATHA) 6. Banishment was not a punishment enjoined by the (MaRaN-ATHA), that is, the Lord cometh, or may the Lord come ; Mosaic law; but after the captivity, both exile and forfeiture intimating that those against whom it was fulminated, had of property were introduced among the Jews: and it also nothing more to expect but the terrible day of judgment.6 existed under the Romans, by whom it was called diminutio The condition of those who were excommunicated was the capitis, because the person banished lost the right of a citizen, most deplorable that can be imagined. They were perpetuand the city of Rome thereby lost a head.? But there was ally excluded from all the rights and privileges of the Jewish another kind of exile, termed disportatio, which was accounted people, were debarred from all social intercourse, and were the worst kind. The party banished forfeited his estate; and excluded from the temple and the synagogues, on pain of being bound was put on board ship, and transported to some severe corporal punishment. Whoever had incurred this island specified exclusively by the emperor, there to be con- sentence was loaded with imprecations, as appears from fined in perpetual banishment. In this manner the apostle Deut. xxvii. where the expression cursed is he, is so often John was exiled to the little island of Patmos (Rev. i. 9.), repeated : whence to curse and to excommunicate were equivawhere he wrote his Revelation.

lent terms with the Jews. And therefore St. Paul says, that 7. In the East, anciently, it was the custom to put out no man, speaking by the Spirit of God, callcth Jesus anathema THE Eyes of Prisoners. Thus Samson was deprived of or accursed (1 Cor. xii. 3.), that is, curses Him as the Jew sight by the Philistines (Judg. xvi. 21.), and Zedekiah by did, who denied him to be the Messiah, and excommunicated the Chaldees. (2 Kings xxv. 7.) It is well known that cut- the Christians. In the second degree, they delivered the ting out one or both of the eyes has been frequently practised excommunicated party over to Satan, devoting him by a in Persia and other parts of the East, as a punishment for solemn curse: to this practice St. Paul is supposed to allude treasonable offences. To the great wor of restoring eye-|(1 Cor. v. 5.); and in this sense he expresses his desire even balls to the sightless by the Messiah, the prophet Isaiah to be accursed for his brethren (Rom. ix. 3.), that is, to bo probably alludes in his beautiful prediction cited by our excommunicated, laden with curses, and to suffer all the Lord, and applied to himself in Luke iv, 18.5

miseries consequent on the infliction of this punishment, if it 8. CUTTING OFF the Hair of criminals seems to be rather could have been of any service to his brethren the Jews. In an ignominious than a painful mode of punishment: yet it order to impress the minds of the people with the greater appears that pain was added to the disgrace, and that the horror, it is said that, when the offence was published in the hair was violently, plucked off, as if the executioner were synagogue, all the candles were lightel, and when the proplucking a bird alive. This is the literal meaning of the clamation was finished, they were extinguished, as a sign original word, which in Neh. xiii. 25. is rendered plucked of that the excommunicated person was deprived of the light of their hair; sometimes hot ashes were applied to the skin after Heaven; further, his goods were confiscated, his sons were the hair was torn off, in order to render the pain more exqui- not admitted to circumcision; and if he died without repentsitely gente. In the spurious book, commonly termed the ance or absolution, by the sentence of the judge a stone was fourth hook of Maccabees, it is said that the tyrant Antio- to be cast upon his coffin or bier, in order to show that he chus Epizhapes calised the hair and skin to be entirely torn deserved to be stoned.? · Dodilridge's Expositor, and Kuinöel, on Acts xvi. 2. Biscoe on Acta, PUNISHMENTS of the Jews into lesser declhs, and such as were

II. The Talmudical writers have distinguished the CAPITAL vol. I. p. 31. - llarmer's Observations, vol. iü. pp. 504, 505.

more grievous : but there is no warrant in the Scriptures for • Dr. Aldun's Roman Antiquties, dep. 66, 67. * In 18:0, Mr. Rae Wilson inet, at Acre, with numerous individuals, who themselves what particular punishments are to be referred to

these distinctions, neither are these writers agreed among his sanguinary cruelties filly surnamel Djazaar, or the Butcher. They these two heads. A capital crime was termed, generally, a were distizured in various ways, by a hand amputated, an eye torn out, or sin of death (Deut. xxii. 26.), or a sin worthy of death (Deut. a nose which had been split, or parily or totally cut off. (Travels in the Torty Land, vol. ii. p. 43.) to the winter of 1826, two enirs had their eyes 6 Robinson's Lexicon on the Gr. Test, voce A FoTVVZ9u994. Jahn, hurnt oul, and their tongues in part cut vil by the Emir Buehir, the prince Archæologia Biblica, $ 278 Ackermann, Archol. Bibl. $ 232. Encyclopæ.

Mount Lelmon, their uncle; on account of their having been concerned dia Metropolitana, vol. xxi. p 703. in moddisturbuisces against his government. (Missiowary Register, July, • Grotius's Note, or rather Dissertation, on Luke vi. 22. Lightfoot's 13.7.333.)

Works, vol. ii. pp. 747-719. Selden, de Jure Nature et Gentium, lib. iv. c. Frag!ıxats suppleme:tary to Calori, No. 132.

8. Lamy's Irraratu.j Biblicus vol. i. pp. 279-291.

« ElőzőTovább »