the keeping of flocks, was a principal employment among men Gen. ii, 15;
iii, 17–19; iv, 2. It is an art which has ever been a prominent source,
both of the necessaries and the conveniences of life. Those states and
nations, especially Babylon and Egypt, which made the cultivation of the
soil their chief business, arose in a short period to wealth and power.
To these communities just mentioned, which excelled in this particular
all the others of antiquity, may be added that of the Hebrews, who
learned the value of the art while remaining in Egypt, and ever after
that time were famous for their industry in the cultivation of the
earth. Moses, following the example of the Egyptians, made agriculture
the basis of the state. He accordingly apportioned to every citizen a
certain quantity of land, and gave him the right of tilling it himself,
and of transmitting it to his heirs. The person who had thus come into
possession could not alienate the property for any longer period than
the year of the coming jubilee: a regulation which prevented the rich
from coming into possession of large tracts of land, and then leasing
them out in small parcels to the poor: a practice which anciently
prevailed, and does to this day, in the east. It was another law of
Moses, that the vender of a piece of land, or his nearest relative, had
a right to redeem the land sold, whenever they chose, by paying the
amount of profits up to the year of jubilee, Ruth iv, 4; Jer. xxxii, 7.
Another law enacted by Moses on this subject was, that the Hebrews, as
was the case among the Egyptians after the time of Joseph, should pay a
tax of two-tenths of their income unto God, whose servants they were to
consider themselves to be, and whom they were to obey as their King and
Lord, Lev. xxvii, 30; Deut. xii, 17–19; xiv, 22–29; Gen. xxviii, 22. The
custom of marking the boundaries of lands by stones, although it
prevailed a long time before, Job xxiv, 2, was confirmed and perpetuated
in the time of Moses by an express law; and a curse was pronounced
against him who without authority removed them. These regulations having
been made in respect to the tenure, incumbrances, &c, of landed
property, Joshua divided the whole country which he had occupied, first
among the respective tribes, and then among individual Hebrews, running
it out with the aid of a measuring line, Joshua xvii, 5, 14; Amos vii,
17; Micah ii, 5; Psalm lxxviii, 55; Ezek. xl, 3. The word, חבל, _a
line_, is accordingly used by a figure of speech, for the heritage
itself, Psalm xvi, 6: “The _lines_ have fallen to me in pleasant places,
yea I have a goodly heritage.” Though Moses was the friend of the
agriculturist, he by no means discouraged the keeper of the flock.
The occupation of the husbandman was held in honour, not only for the
profits which it brought, but from the circumstance that it was
supported and protected by the fundamental laws of the state. All who
were not set apart for religious duties, such as the priests and the
Levites, whether inhabitants of the country, or of towns and cities,
were considered by the laws, and were, in fact, agriculturists. The rich
and the noble, it is true, in the cultivation of the soil, did not
always put themselves on a level with their servants; but none were so
rich or so noble as to disdain to put their hand to the plough, 1 Sam.
xi, 7; 1 Kings xix, 19; 2 Chron. xxvi, 10. The priests and Levites were
indeed engaged in other employments, yet they could not withhold their
honour from an occupation which supplied them with their income. The
esteem in which agriculture was held diminished as luxury increased; but
it never wholly came to an end. Even after the captivity, when many of
the Jews had become merchants and mechanics, the esteem and honour
attached to this occupation still continued, especially under the
dynasty of the Persians, who were agriculturists from motives of
religion.
The soil of Palestine is very fruitful, if the dews and vernal and
autumnal rains are not withheld. The country, in opposition to Egypt, is
eulogized for its rains in Deut. xi, 10. The Hebrews, notwithstanding
the richness of the soil, endeavoured to increase its fertility in
various ways. They not only divested it of stones, but watered it by
means of canals, communicating with the rivers or brooks; and thereby
imparted to their fields the richness of gardens, Psalm i, 3; lxv, 10;
Prov. xxi, 1; Isa. xxx, 25; xxxii, 2, 20. Springs, therefore, fountains,
and rivulets, were held in as much honour and worth by husbandmen as by
shepherds, Joshua xv, 9; Judges i, 15; and we accordingly find that the
land of Canaan was extolled for those fountains of water of which Egypt
was destitute. The soil was enriched, also, in addition to the method
just mentioned, by means of ashes; to which the straw, the stubble, the
husks, the brambles, and grass, that overspread the land during the
sabbatical year, were reduced by fire. The burning over the surface of
the land had also another good effect, namely, that of destroying the
seeds of the noxious herbs, Isa. vii, 23; xxxii, 13; Prov. xxiv, 31.
Finally, the soil was manured with dung.
The Hebrew word, דגן, which is translated variously by the English
words, _grain_, _corn_, &c, is of general signification, and comprehends
in itself different kinds of grain and pulse, such as wheat, millet,
spelt, wall-barley, barley, beans, lentils, meadow-cumin, pepperwort,
flax, cotton; to these may be added various species of the cucumber, and
perhaps rice. Rye and oats do not grow in the warmer climates; but their
place is, in a manner, supplied by barley. Barley, mixed with broken
straw, affords the fodder for beasts of burden, which is called כליל.
Wheat, חטה, which, by way of eminence, is called דגן, grew in Egypt in
the time of Joseph, as it now does in Africa, on several branches from
one stalk, each one of which produced an ear, Gen. xii, 47. This sort of
wheat does not flourish in Palestine: the wheat of Palestine is of a
much better kind.
HUSKS, κεράτιον, Luke xv, 16; the husks of leguminous plants, so named
from their resemblance to κέρας, _a horn_; but Bochart thinks that the
κερατία were the _ceretonia_, the husks or fruit of the carob tree, a
tree very common in the Levant. We learn from Columella, that these pods
afforded food for swine; and they are mentioned as what the prodigal
desired to eat, when reduced to extreme hunger.
HUTCHINSONIANS, the followers of John Hutchinson, Esq., a learned and
respectable layman, who was born at Spennythorn, in Yorkshire, in 1674.
In 1724, he published the first part of that curious work, “Moses’s
_Principia_,” in which he ridiculed Dr. Woodward’s “Natural History of
the Earth,” and exploded the doctrine of gravitation established in Sir
Isaac Newton’s “_Principia_.” In the second part of this work, published
in 1727, he maintained, in opposition to the Newtonian system, that a
_plenum_ is the principle of the Scripture philosophy. In this work he
also intimated that the idea of a Trinity is to be taken from the grand
agents in the natural system, fire, light, and spirit. From this time he
continued to publish a volume every year or two till his death; and a
correct and elegant edition of his works, including the MSS. which he
left was published in 1748, in 12 vols. 8vo. Mr. Hutchinson thought that
the Hebrew Scriptures comprise a perfect system of natural philosophy,
theology, and religion. He entertained so high an opinion of the Hebrew
language, that he thought the Almighty must have employed it to
communicate every species of knowledge, human and divine; and that,
accordingly, every species of knowledge is to be found in the Old
Testament. Both he and his followers laid a great stress on the evidence
of Hebrew etymology. After Origen, and other eminent commentators, he
asserted that the Scriptures are not to be understood and interpreted in
a literal but in a typical sense, and according to the radical import of
the Hebrew expressions; that even the historical parts, and particularly
those relating to the Jewish ceremonies and Levitical law, are to be
considered in this light; and he also asserted that, agreeably to this
mode of interpretation, the Hebrew Scriptures would be found amply to
testify concerning the nature and offices of Jesus Christ. His plan was
to find natural philosophy in the Bible, where hitherto it had been
thought no such thing was to be met with, or ever intended. His editors
tell us, he found, upon examination, that the Hebrew Scriptures nowhere
ascribe motion to the body of the sun, nor fixedness to the earth; that
they describe the created system to be a _plenum_ without any vacuum at
all, and reject the assistance of gravitation, attraction, or any such
occult qualities, for performing the stated operations of nature, which
are carried on by the mechanism of the heavens, in their threefold
condition of fire, light, and spirit, or air, the material agents set to
work at the beginning; that the heavens, thus framed by almighty Wisdom,
are an instituted emblem and visible substitute of _Jehovah Aleim_, the
eternal Three, the coëqual and co-adorable Trinity in Unity; that the
unity of substance in the heavens points out the unity of essence and
the distinction of conditions, the personality in Deity, without
confounding the persons or dividing the substance; and that, from their
being made emblems, they are called in Hebrew _shemim_, the names,
representatives, or substitutes, expressing by their names that they are
emblems, and, by their conditions or offices, what it is they are
emblems of. He also found that the Hebrew Scriptures have some capital
words, which he has proved, or endeavoured to prove, contain, in their
radical meaning, the greatest and most comfortable truths. Thus, the
word _Elohim_, which we call God, or, as he reads it, _Aleim_, he refers
to the oath or conditional execration, by which the eternal covenant of
grace among the persons in Jehovah was and is confirmed. The word
_berith_, which our translation renders “covenant,” signifies, “he or
that which purifies” and so the Purifier or purification _for_, not
_with_, man. The cherubim, which have been thought “angels placed as a
guard to deter Adam from breaking into Eden again,” he explains to have
been a hieroglyphic of divine construction, or a sacred image, to
describe, as far as figures could go, the _Aleim_ and man taken in, or
humanity united to deity. In like manner, he treats several other words
of similar, though not quite so solemn, import. Hence he drew this
conclusion, “that all the rites and ceremonies of the Jewish
dispensation were so many delineations of Christ, in what he was to be,
to do, and to suffer; and that the early Jews knew them to be types of
his actions and sufferings, and, by performing them as such, were in so
far Christians, both in faith and practice.” His followers maintain,
that the cherubim, and the glory around them, with the divine presence
in them, were not only emblematical figures, representing the persons of
the ever blessed Trinity, as engaged in covenant for the redemption of
man, but also that they were intended “to keep or preserve the way of
the tree of life, to show man the way to life eternal, and keep him from
losing or departing from it.” That Melchizedec was an eminent type of
Christ, there can be little doubt; but that he was actually the second
person of the Trinity, in a human form, is a tenet of the
Hutchinsonians, though not entirely peculiar to them. Mr. Hutchinson
supposes that “the air exists in three conditions, fire, light, and
spirit; the two latter are the finer and grosser parts of the air in
motion: from the earth to the sun, the air is finer and finer till it
becomes pure light near the confines of the sun, and fire in the orb of
the sun, or solar focus.” From the earth toward the circumference of
this system, in which he includes the fixed stars, the air becomes
grosser and grosser till it becomes stagnant, in which condition it is
at the utmost verge of this system; from whence, in his opinion, the
expression of “outer darkness,” and “blackness of darkness,” used in the
New Testament, seems to be taken. These are some of the principal
outlines of this author’s doctrines, which have been patronized by
several eminent divines, both of the church and among the Dissenters.
2. The followers of Mr. Hutchinson have not erected themselves into a
sect or separate community. Among them may be reckoned some eminent and
respectable divines, both in England and Scotland; but their numbers
seem at present to be rather on the decrease. Of those who, in their
day, were ranked in the list of Hutchinsonians, perhaps the most eminent
were the following: Mr. Julius Bate, and Mr. Parkhurst, the
lexicographers; Mr. Holloway, author of “Originals,” and “Letter and
Spirit;” Dr. Hodges, provost of Oriel College, Oxford; Mr. Henry Lee,
author of “Sophron, or Nature’s Characteristics of the Truth;” Dr.
Wetherell, late master of University College, Oxford; Mr. Romaine;
Bishop Horne; and Mr. William Jones, the bishop’s learned friend and
biographer.
HYMN, a song, or ode, composed in honour of God. The Jewish hymns were
accompanied with trumpets, drums, and cymbals, to assist the voices of
the Levites and people. The word is used as synonymous with canticle,
song, or psalm, which the Hebrews scarcely distinguish, having no
particular term for a hymn, as distinct from a psalm or canticle. St.
Paul requires Christians to edify one another with “psalms, and hymns,
and spiritual songs.” St. Matthew says, that Christ, having supped, sung
a hymn, and went out. He recited the hymns or psalms which the Jews were
used to sing after the passover; which they called the _Halal_; that is,
the Hallelujah Psalms.
HYPERBOLE. This figure, in its representation of things or objects,
either magnifies or diminishes them beyond or below their proper limits:
it is common in all languages, and is of frequent occurrence in the
Scriptures. Thus, things which are lofty are said to reach up to heaven,
Deut. i, 28; ix, 1; Psalm cvii, 26. So things which are beyond the reach
or capacity of man are said to be in “heaven,” in the “deep,” or “beyond
the sea,” Deut. xxx, 12; Rom. x, 6, 7. So a great quantity or number is
commonly expressed by the “sand of the sea,” the “dust of the earth,”
and the “stars of heaven,” Genesis xiii, 16; xli, 49; Judges vii, 12; 1
Sam. xiii, 5; 1 Kings iv, 29; 2 Chron. i, 9; Jer. xv, 8; Heb. xi, 12. In
like manner we meet with “smaller than grasshoppers,” Num. xiii, 33, to
denote extreme diminutiveness; “swifter than eagles,” 2 Sam. i, 23, to
intimate extreme celerity; the “earth trembled,” the “mountains melted,”
Judges v, 4, 5; the “earth rent,” 1 Kings i, 40. “I make my bed to
swim;” “rivers of tears run down mine eyes.” So we read of “angels'
food,” Psalm vi, 6; cxix, 136; lxxviii, 25; the “face of an angel,” Acts
vi, 15; and the “tongue of an angel,” 1 Cor. xiii, 1. See also Gal. i,
8; iv, 14. We read “sigh with the breaking of thy loins,” Ezek. xxi, 6,
that is, most deeply. So we read that “the stones would cry out,” and
“they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another,” Luke xix, 40, 44;
that is, there shall be a total desolation.
HYPOCRITE, a word from the Greek, which signifies one who feigns to be
what he is not; who puts on a masque or character, like actors in
tragedies and comedies. It is generally applied to those who assume
appearances of a virtue, without possessing it in reality. Our Saviour
accused the Pharisees of hypocrisy. In the Old Testament, the Hebrew
word _caneph_, which is rendered “hypocrite,” “counterfeit,” signifies
also a profane wicked man, a man polluted, corrupted, a man of impiety,
a deceiver. It was ingeniously said by Basil, that the hypocrite did not
put off the old man, but put the new man upon it.
HYPOSTATICAL UNION; the union of the divine and human natures of Christ
in one person. This is the doctrine generally received in the church of
Christ; but there have been some who have denied this, who yet
acknowledge our Lord’s divinity. Nestorius, who had been taught to
distinguish accurately between the divine and human nature of Christ,
was offended with some expressions commonly used by Christians in the
beginning of the fifth century, which seemed to destroy that
distinction, and particularly with their calling the Virgin Mary
θεότοκος, as if it were possible for the Godhead to be born. His zeal
provoked opposition; in the eagerness of controversy he was led to use
unguarded expressions; and he was condemned by the third of the general
councils, the council of Ephesus, in the year 431. It is a matter of
doubt whether the opinions of Nestorius, if he had been allowed by his
adversaries fairly to explain them, would have appeared inconsistent
with the doctrine established by the council of Ephesus, that Christ is
one person, in whom two natures were most closely united. But whatever
was the extent of the error of Nestorius, from him is derived that
system concerning the incarnation of Christ, which is held by a large
body of Christians in Chaldea, Assyria, and other regions of the east,
and which is known in the ecclesiastical history of the west by the name
of the Nestorian heresy. The object of the Nestorians is to avoid every
appearance of ascribing to the divinity of Christ the weakness of
humanity; and therefore they distinguish between Christ, and God who
dwelt in Christ as in a temple. They say, that from the moment of the
virgin’s conception, there commenced an intimate and indissoluble union
between Christ and God, that these two persons presented in Jesus Christ
one ϖρόσωπον, or aspect, but that the union between them is merely a
union of will and affection, such in kind as that which subsists between
two friends, although much closer in degree. Opposite to the Nestorian
opinion is the Eutychian, which derives its name from Eutyches, an abbot
of Constantinople, who, about the middle of the fifth century, in his
zeal to avoid the errors of Nestorius, was carried to the other extreme.
Those who did not hold the Nestorian opinions had been accustomed to
speak of the “one incarnate nature” of Christ. But Eutyches used this
phrase in such a manner as to appear to teach that the human nature of
Christ was absorbed in the divine, and that his body had no real
existence. This opinion was condemned in the year 451, by the council of
Chalcedon, the fourth general council, which declared, as the faith of
the catholic church, that Christ is one person; that in this unity of
person there are two natures, the divine and the human; and that there
is no change, or mixture, or confusion of these two natures, but that
each retains its distinguishing properties. The decree of Chalcedon was
not universally submitted to. But many of the successors of Eutyches,
wishing to avoid the palpable absurdity which was ascribed to him, of
supposing that one nature was absorbed by another, and anxious at the
same time to preserve that unity which the Nestorians divided, declared
their faith to be, that in Christ there is one nature, but that this
nature is twofold or compounded. From this tenet the successors of
Eutyches derive the name of Monophysites; and from Jacob Baradæus, who
in the following century was a zealous and successful preacher, of the
system of the Monophysites, they are more commonly known by the name of
Jacobites. The Monophysites, or Jacobites, are found chiefly near the
Euphrates and Tigris; they are much less numerous than the Nestorians;
and, although they profess to have corrected the errors which were
supposed to adhere to the Eutychian heresy, they may be considered as
having formed their peculiar opinions upon the general principles of
that system. The Monothelites, an ancient sect, of whom a remnant is
found in the neighbourhood of Mount Libanus, disclaim any connection
with Eutyches, and agree with the Catholics in ascribing two natures to
Christ; but they have received their name from their conceiving that
Christ, being one person, can only have one will: whereas the Catholics,
considering both natures as complete, think it essential to each to have
a will, and say that every inconvenience which can be supposed to arise
from two wills in one person, is removed by the perfect harmony between
that will which belongs to the divine, and that which belongs to the
human nature of Christ.
HYSSOP, אזוב, Exod. xii, 22; Lev. xiv, 4, 6, 49, 51, 52; Num. xix, 6,
18; 1 Kings iv, 33; Psalm li, 7; Matt, xxvii, 48; Mark xv, 36; ὑσσωπὸς,
John xix, 29; Heb. ix, 19. It grows plentifully on the mountains near
Jerusalem. It is of a bitter taste; and, from being considered as
possessing detersive and cleansing qualities, derived probably its
Hebrew name. The original word has been variously translated; and
Celsius has devoted forty-two pages to remove difficulties, occasioned
by the discordant opinions of the Talmudical writers, and to ascertain
the plant intended. That it is the hyssop seems most probable: the
passage in Heb. ix, 19, sufficiently identifies it. Under the law, it
was commonly used in purifications as a sprinkler. When the children of
Israel came out of Egypt, they were commanded to take a bunch of hyssop,
to dip it in the blood of the paschal lamb, and sprinkle it on the
lintel and the two side-posts of the door. It was also used in
sprinkling the leper. The hyssop is extremely well adapted to such
purposes, as it grows in bunches, and puts out many suckers from a
single root.
ICONIUM, the chief city of Lycaonia, in Asia Minor. An assault being
meditated at the place by the unbelieving Jews and Gentiles upon the
Apostles Paul and Barnabas, who, by preaching in the synagogue, had
converted many Jews and Greeks, they fled to Lystra; where the designs
of their enemies were put in execution, and St. Paul miraculously
escaped with his life, Acts xiv. The church planted at this place by St.
Paul continued to flourish, until, by the persecutions of the Saracens,
and afterward of the Seljukian Turks, who made it the capital of one of
their sultanies, it was nearly extinguished. But some Christians of the
Greek and Armenian churches, with a Greek archbishop, are yet found in
the suburbs of this city, who are not permitted to reside within the
walls. Iconium is now called Cogni, and is still a considerable city;
being the capital of the extensive province of Caramania, as it was
formerly of Lycaonia, and the seat of a Turkish beglerberg, or viceroy.
It is the place of chief strength and importance in the central parts of
Asiatic Turkey, being surrounded by a strong wall of four miles in
circumference; but, as is the case with most eastern cities, much of the
enclosed space is waste. It is situated about a hundred and twenty miles
inland from the Mediterranean, on the lake Trogilis. Mr. Kinneir says,
Iconium, the capital of Lycaonia, is mentioned by Xenophon, and
afterward by Cicero and Strabo; but does not appear to have been a place
of any consideration until after the taking of Nice by the crusaders in
1099, when the Seljukian sultans of Roum chose it as their residence.
These sultans rebuilt the walls, and embellished the city: they were,
however, expelled in 1189 by Frederic Barbarossa, who took it by
assault; but after his death they reëntered their capital, where they
reigned in splendour till the irruption of Tchengis Khan, and his
grandson, Holukow, who broke the power of the Seljukians. Iconium, under
the name of Cogni, or Konia, has been included in the dominions of the
grand seignior ever since the time of Bajazet, who finally extirpated
the Ameers of Caramania. The modern city has an imposing appearance from
the number and size of its mosques, colleges, and other public
buildings; but these stately edifices are crumbling into ruins, while
the houses of the inhabitants consist of a mixture of small huts built
of sun-dried bricks, and wretched hovels thatched with reeds. The city,
according to the same authority, contains about eighty thousand
inhabitants, principally Turks, with only a small proportion of
Christians. It is represented as enjoying a fine climate, and pleasantly
situated among gardens and meadows; while it is nearly surrounded, at
some distance, with mountains which rise to the regions of perpetual
snow. It was formerly the capital of an extensive government, and the
seat of a powerful pasha, who maintained a military force competent to
the preservation of peace and order, and the defence of his territories.
But it has now dwindled into insignificance, and exhibits upon the whole
a mournful scene of desolation and decay.