Italy; now called Pozzuoli, in a province of the kingdom of Naples,
called Terra di Lavoro, and about eight miles from Naples. St. Paul
stayed a week with the Christians of this place, in his journey as a
prisoner to Rome, Acts xxviii, 13. The Alexandrian merchant vessels
preferred Puteoli to all the harbours in Italy, and here they deposited
their rich freights. They conducted the ships adorned with wreaths and
festive garments, in the form of a fleet, one after another, into the
harbour, where they were received with the greatest demonstrations of
friendship. Such was the case with the sale of Alexandrian commodities
throughout Italy. According to the course then pursued, the vessel in
which St. Paul sailed went direct into this harbour.
QUAIL, שלו, Exod. xvi, 13; Num. xi, 31, 32; Psalm cv, 10; a bird of the
gallinaceous kind. Hasselquist, mentioning the quail of the larger kind,
says, “It is of the size of the turtle dove. I have met with it in the
wilderness of Palestine, near the shores of the Dead Sea and the Jordan,
between Jordan and Jericho, and in the deserts of Arabia Petrea. If the
food of the Israelites was a bird, this is certainly it; being so common
in the places through which they passed.” It is said that God gave
quails to his people in the wilderness upon two occasions: first, within
a few days after they had passed the Red Sea, Exod. xvi, 3–13. The
second time was at the encampment at the place called in Hebrew,
Kibroth-hataavah, the graves of lust, Num. xi, 32; Psalm cv, 40. Both of
these happened in the spring, when the quails passed from Asia into
Europe. They are then to be found in great quantities upon the coast of
the Red Sea and Mediterranean. God caused a wind to arise that drove
them within and about the camp of the Israelites; and it is in this that
the miracle consists, that they were brought so seasonably to this
place, and in so great number as to furnish food for above a million of
persons for more than a month. The Hebrew word _shalav_ signifies “a
quail,” by the agreement of the ancient interpreters. And the Chaldee,
Syriac, and Arabic languages call them nearly by the same name. The
Septuagint, Symmachus, and most of commentators, both ancient and
modern, understand it in the same manner; and with them agree Philo,
Josephus, Apollinaris, and the rabbins; but Ludolphus has endeavoured to
prove that a species of locust is spoken of by Moses. Dr. Shaw answers,
that the holy psalmist, in describing this particular food of the
Israelites, by calling the animals feathered fowls, entirely confutes
this supposition. And it should be recollected, that this miracle was
performed in compliance with the wish of the people that they might have
flesh to eat.
QUAKERS. See FRIENDS.
QUESTIONS. Among the ancients no pastime was more common than that of
proposing and answering difficult questions. The person who solved the
question was honoured with a reward; he who failed in the attempt
suffered a certain punishment; both the rewards and penalties were
varied according to the disposition of the company. That the custom of
proposing riddles was very ancient, and derived from the eastern
nations, appears from the story of Samson, in the book of Judges, who
proposed one to the Philistines at his nuptial feast. Nor were these
questions confined to entertainments, but, in the primitive times, were
proposed on other occasions, by those who desired to make proof of
another’s wisdom and learning. Agreeably to this custom, the queen of
Sheba came to prove Solomon with hard questions, 1 Kings x, 1.
QUIETISTS, the disciples of Michael de Molinos, a Spanish priest, who
flourished in the seventeenth century, and wrote a book called “The
Spiritual Guide.” He had many disciples in Spain, Italy, France, and the
Netherlands. Some pretend that he borrowed his principles from the
Spanish Illuminati; and M. Gregoire will have it that they came
originally from the Persian Soofees; while others no less confidently
derive them from the Greek Hesycasts. The Quietists, however, deduce
their principles from the Scriptures. They argue thus: “The Apostle
tells us, that ‘the Spirit makes intercession for’ or _in_ ‘us.’ Now if
the Spirit pray in us, we must resign ourselves to his impulses, by
remaining in a state of absolute rest, or quietude, till we attain the
perfection of the unitive life,” a life of union with, and, as it should
seem, of absorption in, the Deity. They contend, that true religion
consists in the present calm and tranquillity of a mind removed from all
external and finite things, and centered in God; and in such a pure love
of the supreme Being, as is independent of all prospect of interest or
reward. To prove that our love to the Deity must be disinterested, they
allege, that the Lord hath made all things for himself, as saith the
Scripture; and it is for his glory that he wills our happiness. To
conform, therefore, to the great end of our creation, we must prefer God
to ourselves, and not desire our own happiness but for his glory;
otherwise we shall go contrary to his order. As the perfections of the
Deity are intrinsically amiable, it is our glory and perfection to go
out of ourselves, to be lost and absorbed in the pure love of infinite
beauty. Madam Guion, a woman of fashion in France, born 1648, becoming
pious, was a warm advocate of these principles. She asserted, that the
means of arriving at this perfect love, are prayer and the self-denial
enjoined in the Gospel. Prayer she defines to be the entire bent of the
soul toward its divine origin. Some of her pious canticles were
translated by the poet Cowper, and represent her sentiments to the best
advantage. Fenelon, the amiable archbishop of Cambray, also favoured
these sentiments in his celebrated publication, entitled, “The Maxims of
the Saints.” The distinguishing tenet in his theology was the doctrine
of the disinterested love of God for his own excellencies, independent
of his relative benevolence: an important feature also in the system of
Madam Guion, who, with the good archbishop, was persecuted by the pope
and by Bossuet. See MYSTICS.
RAB. The title rabbi, with several others from the same root, רבב,
_magnus est, vel multiplicatus est_, began first to be assumed,
according to Godwin, as a distinguishing title of honour by men of
learning, about the time of the birth of Christ. We find it anciently
given, indeed, to several magistrates and officers of state. In Esther
i, 8, it is said, the king appointed כל-רב ביתו, which we render “all
the officers of his house.” In Jeremiah xli, 1, we read of the ורּי
המלך, “the princes of the king.” In Job xxxii, 9, it is said, that the
רבים, which we render “great men, are not always wise;” a rendering
which well expresses the original meaning of the word. It was not
therefore in those days properly a title of honour, belonging to any
particular office or dignity, in church or state; but all who were of
superior rank, and condition in life were called רבים. We do not find
the prophets, or other men of learning in the Old Testament, affecting
any title beside that which denoted their office; and they were
contented to be addressed by their bare names. The first Jewish rabbi,
said to have been distinguished with any title of honour, was Simeon,
the son of Hillel, who succeeded his father as president of the
sanhedrim; and his title was that of rabban. The later rabbies tell us,
this title was conferred with a good deal of ceremony. When a person had
gone through the schools and was thought worthy of the degree of rabbi,
he was first placed in a chair somewhat raised above the company; then
were delivered to him a key and a table book: the key, as a symbol of
the power or authority now conferred upon him, to teach that knowledge
to others which he had learned himself; and this key he afterward wore
as a badge of his honour, and when he died it was buried with him: the
table book was a symbol of his diligence in his studies, and of his
endeavouring to make farther improvements in learning. The next ceremony
in the creation of a rabbi was the imposition of hands on him by the
delegates of the sanhedrim, practised in imitation of Moses’s ordaining
Joshua by this rite, to succeed him in his office, Num. xxvii, 18; Deut.
xxxiv, 9. And then they proclaimed his title.
According to Maimonides, the imposition of hands was not looked upon to
be essential; but was sometimes omitted. They did not always, saith he,
lay their hands on the head of the elder to be ordained; but called him
rabbi, and said, “Behold thou art ordained, and hast power,” &c. We find
this title given to John the Baptist, John iii, 26; and frequently to
our blessed Saviour; as by John’s disciples, by Nicodemus, and by the
people that followed, John i, 38; iii, 2; vi, 20. The reason of our
Saviour’s prohibiting his disciples to be called rabbi is expressed in
these words: “Be not ye called rabbi, for one is your master, even
Christ,” καθηγητὴς, your guide and conductor, on whose word and
instructions alone you are to depend in matters of religion and
salvation. Accordingly the inspired Apostles pretend to nothing more
than, as the ambassadors of Christ, to deliver his instructions; and,
for their own part, they expressly disclaim all dominion over the faith
and consciences of men, 2 Cor. i, 24; v, 20. The Jewish writers
distinguish between the titles rab, rabbi, rabban. As for rab and rabbi,
the only difference between them is, that rab was the title of such as
had had their education, and taken their degree, in some foreign Jewish
school; suppose at Babylon, where there was a school or academy of
considerable note; rabbi was the title of such as were educated in the
land of Judea, who were accounted more honourable than the others. But
as for rabban, it was the highest title; which, they say, was never
conferred on more than seven persons, namely, on R. Simeon, five of his
descendants, and on R. Jochanan, who was of a different family. It was
on this account, it should seem, that the blind man gave this title to
Christ, Mark x, 51; being convinced that he was possessed of divine
power, and worthy of the most honourable distinctions. And Mary
Magdalene, when she saw Christ after his resurrection, “said unto him,
Rabboni,” John xx, 16, that is, my rabban, like _my lord_ in English;
for rabbon is the same with rabban, only pronounced according to the
Syriac dialect.
There were several gradations among the Jews before the dignity of
rabbin, as among us, before the degree of doctor. The head of a school
was called _chacham_, or wise. He had the head seat in the assemblies
and in the synagogues. He reprimanded the disobedient, and could
excommunicate them; and this procured him great respect. In their
schools they sat upon raised chairs, and their scholars were seated at
their feet. Hence St. Paul is said to have studied at the feet of Rabbi
Gamaliel, Acts xxii, 3. The studies of the rabbins are employed either
on the text of the law, or the traditions, or the cabbala; these three
objects form so many different schools and different sorts of rabbins.
Those who chiefly apply to the letter of Scripture are called Caraites,
Literalists. Those who chiefly study the traditions and oral laws of the
Talmud are called Rabbanists. Those who give themselves to their secret
and mysterious divinity, letters and numbers, are called Cabbalists,
Traditionaries. The rabbins are generally very ignorant in history,
chronology, philology, antiquity, and geography. They understand the
holy language but imperfectly. They know not the true signification of a
multitude of words in the sacred text. They are prodigiously conceited
about their traditions, so that there is very little profit in reading
them; and experience shows that most who have applied themselves to
peruse their books, have been but little benefited by them, and have
entertained a perfect contempt of their understanding and their works.
The chief function of the rabbins is to preach in the synagogue, to make
public prayers there, and to interpret the law; they have the power of
binding and loosing, that is, of declaring what is forbidden, and what
allowed. When the synagogue is poor and small, there is but one rabbin,
who at the same time discharges the office of a judge and a teacher. But
when the Jews are numerous and powerful, they appoint three pastors, and
a house of judgment, where all their civil affairs are determined. Then
the rabbin applies himself to instruction only, unless it be thought
proper to call him into the council to give his advice, in which case he
takes the chief place.
RABBATH, or RABBAT-AMMON, the capital city of the Ammonites, situated
beyond Jordan. See AMMON.
RABBATH-MOAB, the capital city of the Moabites, called otherwise Ar, or
Areopolis. See MOAB.
RABBI. See RAB.
RABSHAKEH, a chief butler, or cupbearer. This is a term of dignity, and
not a proper name. Rabshakeh was sent by Sennacherib, king of Assyria,
to summon Hezekiah to surrender Jerusalem, 2 Kings xviii, 17, 18; xix,
4; Isaiah xxxvi.
RACA, a Syriac word which properly signifies _empty_, _vain_,
_beggarly_, _foolish_, and which includes in it a strong idea of
contempt. Our Saviour pronounces a censure on every person using this
term to his neighbour, Matt. v, 22. Lightfoot assures us that, in the
writings of the Jews, the word _raca_ is a term of the utmost contempt,
and that it was usual to pronounce it with marked signs of indignation.
RACHEL, the daughter of Laban, and sister of Leah. The Prophet Jeremiah,
xxxi, 15, and St. Matthew, ii, 18, have put Rachel for the tribes of
Ephraim and Manasseh, the children of Joseph, the son of Rachel. This
prophecy was completed when these two tribes were carried into captivity
beyond the Euphrates; and St. Matthew made application of it to what
happened at Bethlehem, when Herod put to death the children of two years
old and under. Then Rachel, who was buried there, might be said to make
her lamentations for the death of so many innocent children sacrificed
to the jealousy of a wicked monarch.
RAHAB was a hostess of the city of Jericho, who received and concealed
the spies sent by Joshua. The Hebrew calls her Zona, Joshua ii, 1, which
Jerom and many others understand of a prostitute. Others think she was
only a hostess or innkeeper, and that this is the true signification of
the original word. Had she been a woman of ill fame, would Salmon, a
prince of the tribe of Judah, have taken her to wife? Or could he have
done it by the law? Beside, the spies of Joshua would hardly have gone
to lodge with a common harlot, they who were charged with so nice and
dangerous a commission. Those who maintain that she was a harlot,
pretend that she was perhaps one of those women who prostituted
themselves in honour of the Pagan deities; as if this could extenuate
her crime, or the scandal of her profession if she was a public woman.
It is also observable that such women are called _kadeshah_, not _zona_,
in the Hebrew. Rahab married Salmon, a prince of Judah, by whom she had
Boaz, from whom descended Obed, Jesse, and David. Thus Jesus Christ
condescended to reckon this Canaanitish woman among his ancestors. St.
Paul magnifies the faith of Rahab, Heb. xi, 31.
Rahab is also a name of Egypt, Isa. xxx, 7; li, 9.
RAIMENT. In addition to what occurs under the article _Habits_, it may
be observed that to make presents of changes of raiment, Gen. xlv, 22,
has always been common among all ranks of orientals. The perfuming of
raiment with sweet-scented spices or extracts is also still a custom,
which explains the smell of Jacob’s raiment. A coat or robe of many
colours, such as Jacob gave to Joseph, is also a mark of distinction.
The Turks at Aleppo thus array their sons; and, in the time of Sisera, a
coat of divers colours is mentioned among the rich spoils which fell to
the conquerors. A frequent change of garments is also very common both
to show respect and to display opulence. Is there an allusion to this in
Psalm cii, 26: “As a vesture shalt thou change them, and they shall be
changed?” If so, it conveys the magnificent idea of the almighty Creator
investing himself with the whole creation as with a robe, and having
laid that aside, by new creations, or the successive production of
beings, clothing himself with others, at his pleasure.
RAIN, the vapours exhaled by the sun, which descend from the clouds to
water the earth, Eccles. xi, 3. The sacred writers often speak of the
rain of the former and latter season, Deut. xi, 14; Hosea vi, 3. Twice
in the year there generally fell plenty of rain in Judea; in the
beginning of the civil year, about September or October; and half a year
after, in the month of Abib, or March, which was the first month in the
ecclesiastical or sacred year, whence it is called the latter rain in
the first month, Joel ii, 23. (See _Canaan_.) The ancient Hebrews
compared elocution, and even learning or doctrine, to rain: “My doctrine
shall drop as the rain,” Deut. xxxii, 2.
RAMESES, or RAAMSES, a city supposed to have been situated in the
eastern part of Egypt, called the land of Goshen, which was also hence
termed the land of Rameses. It was one of the cities built by the
Israelites as a treasure city, as it is translated in our Bibles;
probably a store city, or, as others interpret it, a fortress. Its
position may be fixed about six or eight miles above the modern Cairo, a
little to the south of the Babylon of the Persians, the ancient
Letopolis; as Josephus says that the children of Israel, after quitting
this place, in their first march to Succoth, passed by the latter city.
RAMOTH, a famous city in the mountains of Gilead, 1 Kings iv, 13. It is
often called Ramoth-Gilead. Josephus calls it Ramathan, or Aramatha. The
city belonged to the tribe of Gad, Deut. iv, 43. It was assigned for a
dwelling of the Levites, and was one of the cities of refuge beyond
Jordan, Joshua xx, 8; xxi, 38. It became famous during the reigns of the
latter kings of Israel, and was the occasion of several wars between
them and the kings of Damascus, who had made a conquest of it, which the
sovereigns of Israel endeavoured to regain, 1 Kings xxii, 3–5. Eusebius
says, that Ramoth was fifteen miles from Philadelphia toward the east.
St. Jerom places it in the neighbourhood of Jabbok, and consequently to
the north of Philadelphia.
RAVEN, עורב, in Chaldee, _orba_, in Syriac, _croac_, in Latin, _corvus_,
Gen. viii, 7; Lev. xi, 15; Deut. xiv, 14; 1 Kings xvii, 4, 6; Job
xxxviii, 41; Psalm cxlvii, 9; Prov. xxx, 17; Cant. v, 11; Isa. xxxiv,
11; κόραξ, Luke xii, 24; a well known bird of prey. All the interpreters
agree that _oreb_ signifies the raven, from _oreb_, “evening,” on
account of its colour. Michaëlis, in proposing a question respecting
certain birds, says of the _oreb_, “_Il est decidé, que c’est le
corbeau; il seroit donc superflu de le demander. Mais je desirerois plus
de certitude sur le nom Syriaque des corbeaux_.” [It is settled that
this is the raven; it would therefore be superfluous to investigate it.
But I could wish more certainty respecting the Syriac name of ravens.]
One can hardly doubt that it is taken from the note of this bird. On the
decrease of the waters of the flood, so that the tops of the mountains
became visible, Noah sent forth out of one of the windows of the ark a
raven, a bold and adventurous bird, by way of experiment, to see whether
the waters were sunk or abated. Forty days the violent rain had
continued; and he might think this, therefore, a likely time for the
waters to run off again. In the original text, in the Samaritan, in the
Chaldee and Arabic, it is said that the raven “returned” to the ark; but
the Greek interpreters, the Syriac, the Latin, and most of the eminent
fathers and commentators, say that it did not return any more. Here are
great authorities on both sides, but the latter reading, though so
contrary in sense to the other, yet in the Hebrew is not very different
in the form of the letters, and appears to be the better reading of the
two. For if the raven had returned, what occasion had Noah to send forth
a dove? Or why did he not take the raven in unto him into the ark, as he
did afterward the dove? Or why did he not send forth the same raven
again, as he did afterward the same dove again? It is not improperly
expressed in our translation, that “the raven went forth to and fro,”
flying hither and thither, “until the waters were dried up from off the
face of the earth.” He found, perhaps, in the higher grounds, some of
the carcasses of those who had perished in the deluge.
The Prophet Elijah was in his retirement fed by this bird. A writer,
indeed, in the Memoirs of Literature, for April, 1710, endeavours to
show, from many authors, that there was in the country of Bethschan, in
Decapolis, by the brook Cherith or Carith, a little town called Aorabi
or Orbo, Judges vii, 25; Isa. x, 6; and he therefore explains the word
_orebim_, which, in 1 Kings xvii, 4, we translate “ravens,” of the
inhabitants of that village, some of whom, he contends, daily carried
bread and flesh to Elijah, who had retired to and lay in a cave in the
neighbourhood. On the other hand, Scheuchzer ably vindicates the
commonly received opinion. The editor of Calmet, also, in the appendix,
under the article _Elijah_, has some pertinent observations on this
subject. “We ought to consider,” says he, “1. That Ahab sought Elijah
with avidity, and took an oath of every people, no doubt, also, in his
dominions, that he was not concealed among its inhabitants; his
situation, therefore, required the utmost privacy, even to solitude. 2.
That when the brook Cherith was dried up, the prophet was obliged to
quit his asylum, which he needed not to have done, had a people been his
suppliers, for they could have brought him water as well as food.”
In Psalm cxlvii, 9, it is said, “The Lord giveth to the beast his food,
and to the young ravens which cry.” And in Job xxxviii, 41, “Who
provideth for the raven his food, when his young ones cry unto God,
wandering for want of meat?” Job and the psalmist may allude to what is
said by some naturalists, that the ravens drive out their young ones
early from their nests, and oblige them to seek food for their own
sustenance. The same kind Providence which furnishes support to his
intelligent offspring is not unmindful of the wants, or inattentive to
the desires, of the meanest of his creatures.
Lo, the young ravens, from their nest exiled,
On hunger’s wing attempt the aerial wild!
Who leads their wanderings, and their feast supplies?
To God ascend their importuning cries.
Christ instructs his disciples, from the same circumstance, to trust in
the care and kindness of Heaven: “Consider the ravens; for they neither
sow nor reap, neither have storehouse, nor barn; and God feedeth them.
How much better are ye than the fowls!” Luke xii, 24. Solomon, speaking
of the peculiar regard and veneration due to the worthy persons and
salutary instructions of parents, observes, that an untimely fate, and
the want of decent interment, may be expected from contrary conduct; and
that the leering eye, which throws wicked contempt on a good father, and
insolent disdain on a tender mother, shall be dug out of the unburied
exposed corpse by the ravens of the valley, and eaten up by the young
eagles, Prov. xxx, 17. It was a common punishment in the east, and one
which the orientals dreaded above all others, to expose in the open
fields the bodies of evil doers that had suffered by the laws of their
offended country, to be devoured by the beasts of the field, and the
fowls of heaven. The wise man insinuates that the raven makes his first
and keenest attack on the eye, which perfectly corresponds with his
habits, for he always begins his banquet with that part. Isiodore says
of him, _Primo in cadaveribus occulum petit_; [he attacks first the eye
of the dead;] and Epictetus, Ὁι μεν κορακες των τετελευτηκοτων τους
οφθαλμους λυμαινονται, “the ravens devour the eyes of the dead.” Many
other testimonies might be adduced, but these are sufficient to justify
the allusion in the proverb.