Crimes and pdnishmen'ts

4. CRIMES. — The term occurs in tlie Scriptures as a tr. of the foil, words :—B?;fP, Ezk 7^; .1^. Job 31"; DVK, Gn 26"'; alHa, Ac 25", changed in RV to 'charges,' and 'fault' in AV Jn 18» W" to ' crime ' ; (yKXitfui, Ac 25", changed in RV to 'matter.' Crime is an act that subjects the doer to legal punishment ; a grave oltence against the legal order ; wickedne.ss ; iniquity. In the Bible such an act is regarded as an otl'ence against (1) God or (2) man.

The distinction cannot always be maintained, for an injury to the creature is ob- noxious to the Creator. For convenience of refer- ence the list appears in alphabetical order. Adultery in general terms was forbidden in the seventli commandment (Ex 20"). It usually de- notes sexual intercourse of a married woman with any otlier man than her husband, or of a married man with any other than his wife. More specifi- cally in the Isr. as well as Rom.

law, the term was coniined to illicit intercourse of a married or be- trothed woman with any other man than hei CRIMES AXD PUNISHMENTS CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS 621 husband. Other unchaste relations were dis- approved, but they were described by ditrerent words. It was deemed an outrageous crime, ■triking at the laws of inheritance and indicting a spurious ollspring on the husband, and was to be punished with death, Lv 20'" 19^*', Ezk 16^- ■■", by the act of stoning, Jn 8'.

It has been seriously doubted whether the extreme penalty was exe- cuted, Lightfoot failing to lind the record of a single instance, except of a priest's daughter who was burnt according to tne order, but she was unmarried. A bondmaid was only scourged (Lv 19-"). Muti- lation of nose and ears is mentioned (Ezk 23"). See Mutilation. Divorce became a substitute for severer j^enalties.

The word is used to describe the unfaithfulness of the covenant people who dis- solved their relation with God (Jer 2' 3" IS" 3F», Hos 8'), and those who rejected Christ are described as an ' adulterous generation ' (Mt 12^' 16, Mk S*). Affray. — He who inflicted an injury was required to pay for loss of time and the medical expenses, ana an especial consideration for a pregnant woman indirectly injured (Ex 21"- "• "'").

A certain form of vicious attempt was to be summarily and piti- lessly punislied (Ut 25"- "). Assassination. — See Murder. Assault, resulting in damage, incurred the penalty of retaliation. The 7''r as well as the home-born was protected (Lv 24'''-^). Bestiality, treated as a rank and mortal ofTence (Ex 22'», Lv IS'o 20"'- "). The Talm. gives as a reason for slaughter of the beast, that all memory of the low transaction might be obliterated.

The crime was charged on the Canaanites, and was said to exist in Egypt. Blasphemy. — An irreverent use of the name of God, accompanied with cursing (Lv 24'"''') ; a pre- sumptuous deed, or, KV, an act done ' with a high hand ' (Nu IS'") ; contempt towards God. bee •rparate article. Breach of Covenant. — In this term are included : (1) A failure to observe the Day of Atonement (Lv 23») ; work on that day (Lv 23=»). (2) The Sacrifice of Children to Molech (Lv 20^).

(3) Neglect to Circumcise the holy seed (Gn 17", Ex 4"). (4) An unauthorized manufacture of the holy Oil (Ex 3lP), and (5) Anointing a Stranger therewth (Ex ^(f). (6) Neglect of the Passover (Nu 9'^). Breach of Ritual. — (1) Eating Hlood, whether of fowl or beast (Lv T'" 17") ; because God has sancti- fied the life to Himself. (2) Eating Fat of the beast of sacrifice (Lv 7") ; regarded as insanitary. (3) Eating Leavened Bread during the passover (Ex 12"- '^).

(4) OU'ering a sacrifice after the ap- pointed time (Lv 19"). See7"'"'". (5) l''ailure to bring an Ollering when an animal is slaughtered for food (Lv 17). The notion that such was dedicated to a deity existed even in Egypt. (6) OU'ering a sacri- fice while the worshipper is in an Unclean condi- tion (Lv 7"-" 22^--"). (7) Manufacturing holy Ointment for private use (Ex 30^-'- ^). I'erfume was regarded by the Semites as a holy thing (I'liny, xii. 54 ; see W. R. Smith, JiSp. 433).

(8) Using the eatne for Perfume (Ex 30^). (9) Neglect of Purifi- cation in general (Nu U)"-"). The offender 'de- fileth the tabernacle of the l^rd." Cf. 1 Co 3". (10) Slaughtering an animal for food away from the door of the Tabernacle (Lv 17*-"). The order was designed to enforce religious proprieties in eating, and to prevent formal worship elsewhere. ICven the jr/'r must comply. (II) Touching holy things (RV the sanctuary) illegally (Nu 4"- '»"»'). See 2 S 6', 2 Ch 2G'-".

Breach or Betrayal of Trust, including false dealing ' in a matter of deposit, or of bargain, or of robliery, or oppression,' and involving ilio con- cealment of stolen goods, was regarded as a crime to which not only a penalty was attached, but a sacrificial service was required for expiation (Lv 6'^''). In this may be included breach of contract, which was also severely condemned in the religion of the ancient Persians (Zend. Fa7-g. iv.)

The removal of landmarks as set by God is an oll'ence that exposes to the divine curse, Ut 19''' 27'' (Jos. Ant. IV. viii. 18.) It was wrong to move them when set by the fathers (Pr 22'" 23'"). Bribery in general was forbidden, Ex 23', Dt 16"*, and condemned, 2 Ch 19', Job 15", Ps 26'", Pr 6»= H'^, Is 1^ 33", Ezk 22'^. It was a vice to which rulers seem to have been addicted (1 S 8' 12' Am 5'"). Burglary. — See Robbery.

Deb[, while it might be a misfortune, could bo incurred so as to expose to penalty where the in- solvency was the result of fraud or neglect (Mt b" jjj-is-wj Perhaps punishment was inflicted to deter others, rather than as a vindictive act against the oliender. In Egypt he was subjected to the bastin- ado (Wilkinson, Ancient Eiji/jitians, 1854, ii. 211). See se[iarate article. Divination. — See MAGIC and sep. art.

Drunkenness, a vice which, in view of its con- sequences, may be regarded as a crime (Is 28'-'' 56"^, Ezk 23" RV). Religious abstinence from strong drink was viewed in the same liglit as refraining from unclean meats (W. R. Smith, 7i^' 465). Teetotal- ism was required of a Nazirite, Jg 13, and com- mended, Jer 35'". Inebriety is forbidden in the Koran. See STRONG DitiNK and Drunkenness.

Fornication, a sexual vice that was common before the time of Moses, being grossly prevalent in Egypt, as shown in Gn 39' and tlie evidence of the monuments; also in Babylonia (Rawlinson, Ancient Monarchies, iii. 30). Prostitution, a hein- ous crime (Jos. Ant. IV. viii. 9), was not tolerated by the Sin. code, being an abomination in the sight of God (Lv 19», in 23"-i«).

Its price could not be accepted in the sanctuary, Mic 1', and death by stoning was the penalty (or an unmarried woman who had concealed her crime, Dt 22*- "'. It would seem from the term ' strange woman,' in Pr 2'°, that harlots were procured from foreigners. By the Koran a courtesan was not allowed to testify, and, according to the Zendavesta, she might be killed without warrant, like a snake.

Her vile methods and their terrible eflects are severely por- trayed in Pr 2'""' 5'"' 7''", and as arousing the dis- pleasure of God, Jer 5', Am 2' 7". Such excesses were very common among the heathen in the time of the apostles (I Co S'-'- '" 6", Gal 5'», Eph 5»). Terms for this vice are frequently used in a sym- bolical sense, the chosen nation being represented as a harlot or adulteress (Is l'", Jer 2', Ezk 16, Hos F 3'). Idolatry itself is so designated (Jer 3>'-", Ezk le'-" 23").

Fornication is a type of unholy alliances in the Bk. of Rev, especially in chs. 17, 18, and 19. Homicide, which consists in taking human life without hatred or thirst of blood, or bj' mistake or accident, included cases like that of the owner ot an ox which gored a man when it was not known to bo vicious (Ex 21^) ; the slaying of a thief overtaken in the night (Ex 22^-'); taking life without pre- meditation, or by casting a stone or missile ut random (Nu 35-'^''^), or by the slipping of an a.

\< :''"■; " in 22 GOKL. head from its helve (Dt 19'). See Dt 22" and ajt. Idolatry. — See separate article. Incest. — Carnal intercourse is treated as criminal when between a man and his mother, steii-mother, half-sister, grand-daughter, stepsister, aunt, wife of an uncle, daughter-in-law, sister-in-law, step- daughter, step-graiid-daughter (Lv 18""'*) ; or hia niolJierinlaw (Dt 27-'"- '■''). Mention of an own sister is omitted as too gross to consider. Infanticide. — See Murder.

522 CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS Kidnapping was a mortal offence (Dt 24'). Lying, an attempt to deceive by speaking an un- trutli, was forbidden in the Mosaic law (Lv 19"), and includc'l in the category of sins against God. It was a common evil among Oriental people, but con- sidered very disgraceful {WUkinson, .i4 nc.j^(7y/)?ianj, 1854, ii. 207).

The prophets especially fulminated against the efTort to lead the people astray by false teaching (Is 9i» 28"'- ", Jer 14" 27'"- >• »• '», Ezk 21^, Mic 1", Zee 13^ and many other passages). Falsehood is severely rebuked m Ps 62 119"", Pr j4t. a 196. »_ In NT it is regarded as a sin odious to God (Ac 5'-*) ; contrary to the essence of the gospel (1 Jn 1' 2^'- "') ; and disqualifying the perpe- trator for the new order (Rev 21''- » 22'»). It is associated with perjury (1 Ti 1">).

See OATH, Witness, and Lying. Malice, that was made apparent in tale-bearing, lying in wait for blood, secret hatred, and bearing a grudge, is condemned (Lv 19'"''*). Murder, according to the divine word, is a crime against wliich all nature revolts (Gn 4"'-^- "). The sanctity of human life is founded on the fact that man was made in the image of God (Gn 9°).

Murder may be instigated by hatred (Nu 35^- -') ; or by thirst for blood, prompted by premeditated design (Dt 19") ; or accomplished oy deceitful stratagem (Ex 21"). Assassination is an aggra- vated form in which life is destroyed by surprise or unexpected assault and treacherous violence (2 S 4'- '), and the following instances occur : Eglon, Jg 3«'-^ ; Ishbosheth, 2 § 4»- « ; Nadab, 1 K 15"- ^ ; Sennacherib, 2 K 19^', 2 Ch 32-i ; Gedaliah, Jer 41^.

In the times of Felix and Festus there appeared a fanatical faction of Jewish patriots known as Sicarii, armed with daggers, sicc(E, who, flitting about unobserved among the crowds during festival seasons, removed opponents by assassination, and then feigned deep sorrow to avert suspicion. See Ac 21^ (Jos. Ant. XX. viii. 5, Wars, II. xiii. 3, II. xvii. 6, IV. vii. 2, ix. 5,vil. viii. 1, x. 1, xi. 1; Schiirer, IIJP I. ii. 178, 185).

There is no mention of parricide and infanticide in the Mosaic code, as if these crimes were not known to exist or be possible. In Egypt the parent was doomed to embrace the corpse of the child for three days (Wilkinson, Anc. Egyp. ii. 209) ; and while the Koran condemned prenatal murder as well, E. H. Palmer states in a note to Koran vi. 137, that female children were buried alive in Arabia.

The following cases of suicide appear : Saul and his armour-bearer, 1 S 31- »; AluUiophel, 2 S 17; Zimri, 1 K 16"; Judas Iscariot, Mt 27° ; also Ptolemy Macron, 2 Mac 10'^ and Razis, 2 Mac H"-"". It could be treated as a crime by the Jews (Jos. Wars, III. viii. 5), but there is no mention of penalty in the Scriptures. Murder in all its forms is forbidden in Ex 20", Dt 5". No sanctuary was to be allowed to the criminal (Ex 21'-, Lv24", ', Nu 35"'- '», Dt 19''», 1 K 2^').

In poetic thought the voice of blood shed cried for vengeance until the murderer was punished (Gn 4'°). A woe is pronounced on the city that is regarded as guilty (Ezk 24'"*) ; and when unsuccessful, after the most diligent efforts, in detecting the criminal (Jos. Ant. IV. viii. 16), it must by an elaborate and impressive ceremony exonerate itself (Dt 21'"').

So sacred was tlie regard for human life, that the owner of an ox known to be vicious and causing death was held guilty of a capital crime, and the ox was stoned (Ex 21^). In Egypt, he who witnessed a murder without giving information of it was considered particeps criniini.i. Irreverence and Dnkindness to Parents. — The command to honour father and mother (Ex 20'-), also inculcated in the Koran (xvii. 24. 25), rests on a Sillied relation corresponding to that of the divine creation.

God's majesty is violated when parents are dishonoured (Ex 22'). Hence the following are prohibited: (1) Cursing father or mother (Ex 21', Lv 20^). Examples of this otl'ence in practice are condemned in Mt 15"", Mk 7^"". (2) Striking (Ex 21'^). This was a capital crime (Dt 21'"*'). It is possible that insolence to parents was condonable by reformation, and there are evidences that the laws were not invariably executed with extreme rigour. Jos. {Ant. XVI. xi.

2) recounts an ineffectual attemiit of Herod at Berytus to get rid of his sons on this charge. Prophesying Falsely.— See Prophecy. Prostitution. — See Fomicatiun. Rape, a foul crime that demanded capital punish- ment (Dt 222»). S:6& Seduction. Robbery, when the act is accompanied with violence, as burglary, placed the offender beyond protection (Ex 22-). The Egyp. law was similar.

Various degrees of the crime were recognized, it being a capital offence to take the ' devoted thing ' (Jos 7"), or to steal a man (Ex 21'«, Dt 24'). See Kidnapping. Sabbath-Breaking.— See Sabbath. Seduction consisted in the enticement of an un- betrothed virgin, for which restitution was to be made by subsequent marriage, unless the father interposed an obstacle, but then the usual dowry was exacted (Ex 22>«).

In Dt 22=8 jj, [3 stated that a fine of 50 shekels was required, and there is no hint of possible compromise. Selden (Heb. Laws) states that the Sannedrin added other mulcts, because this was so insignificant : one for the shame and dishonour ; one for the loss of virginity and the vitiating of the body, and still another if force had been used ; and some account was taken of the quality and station of the person injured (see W. R. Smith, RS 276).

An offending bond- maid was scourged, and her enticer, besides paying the fine, must make a trespass-offering (Lv Iff"""^). Slander was prohibited, though no punishment is named (Ex 23') except when a wife's chastity was falsely impeached (Dt 32''""). See separate article. Sodomy was delicately but positively condemned in Gn 13" 19°-', and regarded as an abomination (Lv 18^ 20"). Ob this crime the Koran and Zendavesta likewise are very severe. The Israelites were not always innocent.

It was an evil practised in religious ceremonies, as appears from the terms c'"^ and nviip (Gn 38-' and Hos 4'), which show that both males and females were set apart for such flagitious uses ; but if allowed in heathen temples, it was never to be permitted in the worship ot J ', Dt 23", 1 K 14"- 15'"- 22", 2 K 23', Job 36', IIos 4" (W. R. Smith, BS 133). Speaking Evil of Rulers.

— In the theocracy rulers are regarded as standing in the place of God, and so all reproachful words are ])roliibited. In Ex 22- 2«, Jg 5, 1 S 2**, Ps 82'- '• ^ the term D-nSx is used so as to imply that judges or legal officers are divine representatives. Swearing Falsely was never excusable even on behalf of the poor (Ex 20'" 23'"') ; but when it was directed against the innocent, it was so aggravated a crime as to permit of no reprieve or pity (Dt 19'«"2'). See Lying and Oath.

Theft involved the culprit, when convicted, in fines of varying grades, and it has been thought, from Pr e'"-" compared with Ex 22', that the evil was more prevalent in the later history of the people. Ma.rmcr (Obscrviitions, ii. 194) shows that It was shameful to steal in a c.-iiavanserai (Sir 41"*). In later times it was not considered a crime to steal from a Samaritan or another thief.

Uncleanness as the result of incontinence, lack of restraint, or self-abuse, was forbidden directly (Lv 18'" 20") ; marked with the divine displea.sure (Gn 38"') ; and indirectly disapproved (Lv IS'"'"). The Zendavesta pronouuces a similar condemnation, CEIMES AND PUISISHMENTS CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS 623 and allows of no atonement for the last-named. See separate articlt^. Usary migho not be taken from lar.

brethren, although the foreigner {nvkhri) was expressly ex- cluded from this and similar privileges (Kx 22^, Dt 23». ai), Xhe practice was forbidden by Egyp- laws, and is reproved in the Koran (xxx. 38). In various passages those who abstain from the evil are com- mended (Dt 15'" 24", Psl5»37»i-«' 112», Pr 19", Ezk 18"). Extortionate and oppressive dealing is condemned (Job 22" 24'- '). See sep. article. B. PUNISHMENTS.

— Punishment is defined as ' pain or any other penalty on a person for a crime or otl'ence by an autiiority to which the oUender is subject ; any pain or detriment suflered in con- sequence of wrong-doing ' [Standard Diet.) This article will describe some forms of sufl'ering in- flicted on victims who might not be guilty of legal offences. Various words in OT are tr. by ' punish- ment,' but the Heb. word that most frequently represents the idea is ij?, in the sense of ' visit.'

In NT the word is employed generally as a tr. of itiXairit and Tifiupia ; also of Jisi) (2 Th 1"), iviTiida (2 Co 2"), iKSiicTiais (1 P 2"). Its purpose is not so much to execute vengeance as to deter from further violations, so that the oflender ' will hear and fear and do no more presumptuously' (Dt IT'* 19^). It was the belief of the Israelites that crimes were en- couraged bj' indulgence (Jos. Ant. VI. vii. 4).

The ancient Parsees taught that crime was punished in the next as well as in this world (Darmesteter, i'ac. Sks. E. p. xcvi). The term is properly restricted to penalty for violation of law; but sufl'ering has often been imposed on the irmocent and weak, as if these had transgressed order, when it meant no more than the arbitrary will of one in superior authority. Punishment may extend to the forfeiture of life, and is then known in common law as Capital.

In the Bible one thus liable is described as having committed a sin of death (Dt22'^); a sin worthy of death (Dt 21'-'''). Such as he are said to be ' sons of death ' (1 S 20" 26", 2 S \2^), or ' men of death ' (19®). ' He shall be put to death for his own sin ' (Dt 24>«, 2 K 14"). SceakoJn 8-'-^: 'Ye shall die in your sin.'

Varicus modes of inflicting the penalty are mentioned, some of them as legally authorized among the chosen people, and others as administered by other nations or without regular warrant. The larger class of penalties was of secondary grade, and various means were devised to piinisli the otl'ender and deter others from repeatini; the crime. The f()llowing are either alluded to or mentioned in the liihle and the historical or literary works of the i>eople of Israel : — Anathema (ivaOena).

— See sep. art. Curse. Banishment. — Tliere was no provision in the Mosaic code for exile, unless it is to be understood that in some instances he wlio was cut oil' from the congregation was expelled from his country as well as from his people. Tem|iorary exclusion was ordered in the ca.se of Miriiun (Nu VI"). In the Pers. period it appears as a possible penalty, Ezr 7" (Kawlinson, Anc. Mun. iii. 194). The Kom. authority resorted to this measure in the case of John, the author of the Apoc.

(1"), an<l it was much dreaded by the Jews (Jos. Ant. xvi. i. 1). A wholesale deportation, as a military measure, was made by Sarj'on, king of Assyria (2 K 18"). The flight of Absalom to Geshur to escape his father's displeasure after Amnon's assassination (2 S 13"' 14'- "), and of Jeroboam to l'"gyi>t to avoid king Solomon (1 K 11), are cases of voluntary exile, but not formal punishment. Beating (Tvniraviaiib^, He 11").

— The bastinado was in common use among the Egyptians for thefts, petty frauds, and breach of trust. With it the male adulterer was ounished. In minor oU'ences a stick was used. A debtor was often beaten (Wilkin- son, Anc. Egyp. ii. 21011'.) In As.syria a mace was used to crush the skull (Layard, iVtn. and Bab. 458). Though designed as a chastisement for slaves by the Greeks, a criminal might be beaten to death (2 Mac 6'»- »•*'). See Braying. Beheading.

— A capital punishment not sanc- tioned in Mosaic law, but frequently practised among the Assyr., Pers., Gr., Kom., and others. A cut in Rawhnson's Ancient Monarchies shows the victim standing upright, while the executioner seizes him by a lock of the hair in despatching him. In this way the chief baker who incurred Pharaoh's displeasure may have suflered (Gn 40''-'), the subsequent suspension of the body being an added reproach (see Hanging).

It is doubtful whether the seven sons of Gideon were thus slain, Jg 9° (see Slaying with Spear or Sword. Ahab's seventy sons lost their heads by command of Jehu (2 K lO^-S). The head of John the Baptist was severed by order of Herod (Mt 14»-'», Mk 6"). Thus also suflered James the Apostle (Ac 12-). Many of the early martyrs were beheaded (Rev 20*). The head of Ishbosheth was removed after death (2 S 4'). Whether Sheba was slain before he was beheaded is not stated (2 S 20"-^). Blinding.

— The only legal authority for putting out the eyes under the Mosaic dispensation would be found indirectly in the law of retaliation ' an eve for an eye' (Ex 21«, Lv 24=», Dt 19"-2»), and therefore the punishment would be seldom inflicted. There is an indistinct reference to something of this sort in boring out the eyes of the spies (Nu 16").

As practised by foreign nations, the Assyrians and Babylonians sometimes using hot irons U)r the purpose, it was rather designed to incapacitate the victim from rebellion, revolt, or the power of doing further harm. Thus Samson suflered (Jg 16*'). Zedekiah lost his eyes partly as a vindiitive visitation, but more to ell'ectually unfit him foi rulership (2 K 25' and Jer 52"). In Persia it was inflicted for rascality, thieving, and rebellion.

Criminals were not permitted to look on the face of the king (Est 7°). Nah.ash the Ammonite threatened that he would thrust out the right eyes of the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead as a reproach on Israel, 1 S U'' (Rawlinsou, .^nc. A/on. ; Harmer, Observations). Branding and Burning. — It has been surmised that in some cases where burning was inflicted as the punishment for unchastity, it meant branding on the forehead as a mark of sliame.

If, however, the extreme penalty is intended, it is represented as of pre-Mosaic authority, and was proposed for Tamar (Gn 38-'''). The Sinaitie law directs that a priest's daughter shall be burned for fornication (Lv 21") ; and that this shall be the form of punish- nient for incest with a wife's mother (Lv 2U'''). Eire from the Lord supcmaturally slew Nadaband Abiliu (Lv 10''). Burning alive or scorching was practised by the Phil. (Jg 14"), and !is.

sociated with a sortof confiscation (12'); alsohythe liab. and Chakl. (Jer 29-'''). Esarhaddon burned a king alive [('•. Smith, Assyr. Discov.), and buriiin'' was attempted on Shadiacli and his companions (Dn 3). There ia an allusion to the practice in Is 43^ ; .see also 2 Mac 7'. Tradition states that Nimrod cast Abraham into the fiery furnace for refusing to worshiji Chald. gods (Layard, Bab. and Niti.; Koran xxi. 08, xxx vii. 95). Cf.

Gn IP' with Neh 9', where iw, 'iir, may be interjjreted as light (of a flame). The [louring of molten lead down the throat (Jalin, Bib. Arch.) has no other authority than that of liabbin. statement. Slaves were sometimes brande<i on the hand (Is 44'), but such disfigurement was forbidden by Jewish law (Lv !!)=»; cf. Gal 6"). Branding accompanied deportation by the Persians (liawlin son. Anc. Mon. lii. Ifl4). 824 CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS Braying or Pounding in a Mortar.

— This act U mentioned in Pr 27'^ as unavailing in the cure of a fool. KV Bpecilies that the victim may be bruised as with a pestle among corn (see Nestle, Cheyne, etc. in Expos. Times, 1897, viii. 287, 335,etc. ). fennant is authority for the statement that it still remains as a Cingalese penalty. The Turks have been charged with such cruelty, and a king of Canday is said to have compelled a wife to pound her infant cliild to death.

There is probable allusion to this form of punishment in He ll'"-', where the faithful are said to have been tortured or beaten (irufj-vapla- S-Qdai'), and to have had trial of scourgings. It is said that Eleazar was beaten on an instrument like a drum (2 Mae G'), and Jos. (De. Mace. 5, 9) mentions a wheel (rpoxii) as an instrument of tor- ture. Hazael put men under sledges with iron spikes (2 K 8" W, ^, with Am l"-), to which also the Ammonites were probably subjected (2S 12', 1 Ch 20').

The Talra. is quoted by Lightfoot as saying that Nebuzaradan used iron rakes on stme of his captives (Jer 39' 52-"'*'). Confiscation. — An act for which no provision is made in the Mosaic economy, but authorized in a modified form by Pers. rule, so that a residence might be destroyed ; but no mention is made of the forfeiture or property for the benefit of the State (Ezr 6", Dn 2= 3-='). The act described in Ezr "i^ seems to convey the idea of modem confiscation. Crucifixion. — See sep. art.

CROSS. Cutting Asunder. — In carrying out the threat as recorded in Dn 2^ and 3'-''', the body might be cut in more than two pieces. The verb used in Mt 24", Lk 12', is S'xtnotulv, which in its etymology signifies severing in two parts. Cutting oflP from the People (i'?;?, n"?i,'p nij, '3, LXX ^f dXoflpet/oi).

— A term used in Gn 17" as penalty for neglect of circumcision, and in the law to be employed as a punisliment for certain breaches (1) in morals, (2) in the Abrahamic cove- nant, and (3) in the Levitical ritual. For immor- ality such as filial irreverence, incest, and unclean connexions, the offender, in at least seven cases, was unquestionably exposed to death (Lv 18^ 20'"").

In like manner he who does aught pre- sumptuously (RV 'with a high hand'), that is, wilful sin in general, was liable (Nu IS"''). In the breach of the covenant it may be doubted whether the extreme penalty of death was invariably inflicted, as in Ex 30=», Lv 2321- *>, and Nu 9". There are instances where the punishment for offences that were kindred to such as are expressly designated as a breach of ritual, meant death.

Such are the cases of (1) Nadaband Abihu (Lv 10'- -) ; (2) Korah, Dathan, and Abiram (Nu 16^). These ' perished from the congregation ' (see Nu 12'^, in which it is stated that Miriam, for leprosy, was ' as one dead ' in her temporary exclusion). The punishment in general seems so severe that it has been sug- gested that it was possibly voidable either by an elaborate atonement on the offender's part (Nu IS"'"), or by a divine commutation, the penalty being recorded but not executed.

In some in- st^inccs it meant, perhaps, only deprivation of cftrtain civil and social privileges. There are two such cases : ( 1 ) when the people ate of the blood in one of Saul's campaigns (1 S 14'); (2) when king Uzziah offered incense (2 Ch 26"'- »>). On the other hand, in Ex SI''"- the meaning of the penalty as attached bo Sabbath-breaking is interpreted as death. t • The plural 0py apparently means 'kinsfolk,' 'relatives.'

so that 'rut off from his (their) people* ia a better renderin^f tlian ' from the people.' tit may be questioned whether, when 'cut off from his people ' stands alone, anythint; more is intended than to express Btronplv the di\ine diwmpproval under threat of excommunica- tion. Ct. '/willcutoff,' LV1710 203 » "(all Ill,and8eeNowack, Beb. Arck.i.ias t. uid Dillm. on On 17>«. I Divine Yiaitation. — In the theocratic economy there were certain sins for which the nation at large suffered.

The punishment was considered as inflicted by the divine hand, the visitation itself being manifestly due to no human in- strumentality, though man was sometimes the executioner of God's will. Divine condemnation was executed against idolatry. Sabbath-breaking, ojipression of the poor, covetousness, and other sins w hich betokened a rebellious or unholy spirit, or for which an individual could not obtain redress.

Human agencies might be employed in the admin- istration of the penalty, but God Himself was regarded as the avenger of the wron".

He it was who led the people, for their wickedness, into captivity (Ezr 9', Jer 15-, Am ^), threatened them with the curse (Dt 28""^, Jer 24'-'), with consump- tion and fever (Lv 26'), and inflammation and fiery heat (Dt 28-^), caused the drought (Dt 11" 2S='-2^, Is 5s, Jer 14'' 5tf«, Hag l'"-"), and famine (Lv 26"«, Jer 24'" 34''", Rev 6»), kindled a consuming fire (Dt4=^, Is 66'", He 12^), showed His indignation by hail and tempest (Is 30", Hag 2"), inflicted pestilence and plague (Ezk 6" 7"), exposed to the taunt of proverb and reproach (Dt 28", 2 Ch 7", Jer •24"'), smote with scourge (Is 10=»28'»-"), and with the sword in the hands of enemies, as shown in so many passages that the reader may consult a concordance for a complete view of these and all other providential punishments named.

His dis- pleasure at Korah was shown by the earthquake (Nu IG*"). Idolatry was punished by captivity. Delay of justice provoked war. Perjury invited wild "beasts. Neglect of tithes was attended with drought and famine (Schiirer, HJP II. ii. 91). Drowning was not distinctively a Jewish punish- ment. It was the penalty in "Babylonia for tlie wife who repudiated her husband (Encyc. Brit. art. 'Babylonia ).

Jerome, however, says that oflendtrs were thus sometimes put to death among the Jew-' as well as among the Romans. There is an allusion to this mode of dying in Mt 18', Mk 9". Jos. {Ant. XIV. XV. 10) states that some Galileans revolted and drowned the partisans of Herod. Exposure to Wild Beasts. — Daniel and his enemies were cast into a den of lions (Dn 6), and the practice of thus dealing with offenders is said to be still in vogue in Fez and Morocco.

In the use of a strong figure in Mic 4" human beings are repre- sented as being gored or trodden by beasts. The lion from whom St. Paul was said to be delivered (2 Ti 4") undoubtedly means Nero. No conclusive exegesis has been given of 1 Co 15'^. Many are of the opinion that human foes are described, but there is some plausible argument in favour of the literal view.

'The inroads of wild animals, as by an act of God, are to be regarded as a punishment of Israel for unfaithfulness (Lv 26=2, Dt 32«, 2 K 17^). The disobedient prophet, named Jadon according to Jos. (Ant. VIII. ix. 1), met death from God by a lion (1 K 13). Contrariwise, the righteous are protected (Job 5P, Hos 2").

Fines were permitted at the option of the injured party as a special privilege to freedmen (slaves being punished), and in earliest times the money was presented to the priest or at the sanctuary. It was not in accordance with Sem. doctrine to com- pel the aggrieved to accept material compensation (\V. R. Smith, RS 329, 378).

In the case of a mortal result, the mulct which might be in lieu of corporal penalty was called ' ransom (RV ' redemp- tion') of life' (fix 21*'), but was never allowed for wilful murder (Nu 35"-'^).

The specific amount was generally left to be determined oy the judicial tribunal (Ex 21—-'), but the sum for fatal injury by an ox to a servant was fixed at 30 shekels (fcx 21'), for humbling an unbetrothed virgin at 50 shekels (Dt 22*"), and the highest amount named CRLMES A'SD PUNISHMENTS CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS 62& is for slander against a wife's chastity, 100 shekels (Dt 2-2'"). See Restitution. Flaying is mentioned (fig.)

Mic 3*-K It was a practice in Assyria, though the victim may have £revioiisIy died (Itawlinson, Anc. Mun. i. 478 ; layard, yin. and Bub. ; Mon. of Nin.) Tlie Persians would flay and tlien crucify (Rawlinson, Lii. 246 ; also recognized in the Zendavesta). Herodotus (iv. 64, v. 25) states that Persians and Scythians used the skins so obtained. Hanging consisted usually in the suspension of the lifeless form as a mark of reproach.

By this David showed his disapproval of the slaughter of Ishbosheth (2 S 4"). 1 he person whose body was so exposed was ' accursed of God ' (Dt 21^, Gal 3"), and lor this reason it mi"ht not remain in view over ni^ht (Jos S'" 10^). Ihis word is used for the act of impaling (d>'o(r/toXorrii'ei», Ezr 6"), a common custom in Assyria. A sharp-pointed stake in a perpendicular position penetrated the body just below the breast- bone (Rawlinson, Anc. Mon. i. 477). It was frequent in Persia.

Darius impaled 3000 Babj'lonians (Layard, Kin. and Bab. 295 n. ; Herodotus, iii. 159). The Philistines gibbeted (on crosses, Jos. Ant, VI. xiv. 8) the dead bodies of Saul and Jonathan (1 S 31'«, 2 S 21"- "). Other Greek words used to represent this act are ^fvXidj'fii' and rapaStiyitarlitty, for which the Vulg. uses crucifigcre (see Cross); and so St. Paul, according to the accepted exegesis of the time, applied Dt 21^ to the Ignominy of Jesus.

Execution on the gallows was not prescribed for any crime in the Jlosaic code. There is a dill'erence of opinion whether the chief baker (Gn 41") lost his life by being hanged by theneck, or whether his liody.afterbeingdespatcheu, was exposed to shame (Wilkinson, Anc. Egyptians, ii. 213). In later history ollenders were hanged by the hands (La 5", Targ. 12), and in 1 Mac P' it is stated that dead children were hanged to the necks jf their mothers.

Ahithophel (2 S 17^) and Judas (Mt 27', Ac 1'*) voluntarily, in chagrin and re- morse, took their lives by hanging. There is an apparent allusion to this form of punishment in 1 K 2CP'). The Gibeonites may have adopted this method of avengeraent on the sons of Saul (2 S 21"), because it was in vogue among the alrariginal nations of the land. Stanley (Hist. Jew. Ch. ii. 37) says the victims were first crucified, then suspended.

Under tlie Persian rule there was resort to the allows (j'V, but called 'tree' in Gn 40'", Dt21") or punishing the conspirators against Ahasuerus ( Est 2-^), Hainan ("'• '") and his ten sons (9") ; possibly the same as impalement. Imprisonment. — Ollenders were confined by the Israelites as well as other nations. The prison was often used merely for keeping a person in ward until the pleasure of the judicial power should be known.

So Joseph by Potiphar (Gn 39-''-='); the son of Shelomith, for blasphemy (Lv 24") ; the m.an who gathered sticks on the Sabbath (Nu 15**) ; the apostles after healing the lame man (Ac 4') ; St. Peter, by order of Herod, till a convenient time for his execution (Ac 12'). Incarceration was often accompanied with other punishments (cf. Samson grinding for the Philistines, Jg 16-'), or it was re- gardcMl as an alternative (Kzr 7'-'"). Jeremiah was smitten as well as imprisoned (Jer 37").

The murderer and debtor might be delivered both to prison and the tormentors (Mt IS^). Zedekiah used the prison for the protection of Jeremiah from his enemies (.Jer 37"). He was then transferred to the princes, who cast him into the dungeon or ]iit (Jer 38'). For the Eng. word 'dungeon' or ■prison' in On 40" 39>, 1 K 22-'^, 2 K 25", 2 Ch 16", Ps 142', Ec 4", Is 24« 42', Jer 37*-" 52", there are eight difl'erent roots in the Heb.

which would imply that detention of those under accusa- tion or in disfavour was regular and ([uite common, fc the confinement itself being for the purpose oi punishment. Confinement in jail was inflicted as a preliminary punishment by Ahab on Micaiah, accompanied with spare bread and water diet ( 1 K 2-I-'') ; by Asa on Hanani (2 Ch 16'">). The motive of Herod in imprisoning John the Baptist is un- certain (Mt 4'^).

Baralibas was committed for insurrection, and it would appear as if this were intended to be final (Lk 23'"). In the prison-house, which might contain cells (Jer 37"), there was sometimes a pit with or without water (Jer 38", Zee 9"), and the court of the prison is mentioned in Jer 37, 38, 39, and elsewhere. In some pri.sons there were stocks (Jer 2U'' 29-", Ac 16-^). To the Kom.

prison there were three parts : communiora, uUeriura, where Paul and Silas were kept, and the Tullianum or dungeon, the place of execution (Conybeare and Howson, St. Paul, i. 304 n.) There is an allusion to prisoners at labour in Job 3", and they might be held in chains (Ps 105"* 107'", Jer 40^). Indignities. — There was resort to various means of heajiing contumely on an ofl'ender ; such as ignominious or obscure burial for a blasphemer (Jos. Ant. IV. viii.

6 ; 1 K 14", 2 K 9'" 21'»- -«, 2 Ch 24''», Jer 22'"). Some victims were slain and left in the street or cast behind the walls (Ps 79, ^ To 2'). Heads of the slain were removed and carried in triumph (1 S 17" 31"). Dead bodies were burned (Jos 7"- ", Lv 20', Am 2>. See Burning) or hanged (2 S 4", Gn 40""' [see Hanging], Nu 25- », Dt 2P, ^). Stones were thrown on the corpse, as on that of Achan (Jos 7"-'*), the king of Ai (Jos 8^), and on the tomb of Absalom (2 S 18").

Mohammedans still maintain the custom when passing by its supposed site (Thomson, Land and Book, i. 61) ; but Harmer plausil)ly suggests that the ' heap of stones ' was erected in honour. Some forms of execution were regarded as more disgraceful than others, as cruci- fixion ( Jn 19"), but it was not the design of the Mosaic law to cover a sutt'erer with perpetual infamy. In Egypt a calumniator of the dead was subject to severe punishment (Wilkinson, Anc. Egup.)

Mutilation was practised, but not under direct sanc- tion of the covenant law. The thumbs and great toes of Adonibezek were severed (Jg !"•'). The slayers of Ishbosheth (2 S 4'") lost their hands, but pos.sibly after death. Nebuchadrezzar threatened to cut in pieces his oQending counsellors (Dn 2°). At the command of Antiochus Epiphanes (ace. to 2 Mac 7''*'), seven brothers sutlered horrible outrages, among others that of tearing out the tongue, a very common cruelty among the Assyrians.

In Egj'pt robbers were sometimes deprived of the right hand for the first ollence, the left foot for the second, and the left hand for the third ; though the theft of food not quickly perishable was not so severely punished (Lane, ilud. Erjijp.) To this act our Saviour's statement in Mt 24°', Lk 12", seems to allude. An Egyptian victor was known to dis[ilay severed hands as proof of the number of his trojihies (see 1 S 18-'').

The town of Rhinocolura was said to be peopled b}' robbers who had lost their noses. The nose and ears of an adulterer were cut olI( Diod. Sic. i. 78), and from E/.k 23^ it aiipcars that the usage was in vogue among the liabyloiiiana. (On the horrible cruel tiesofAssurbani[)al, as recorded on hiscylinder, see HP iii. 39-50.) Kings were put in the lips <.i noses of captives (2 Ch 31!" ' among the thorns,' KV 'in chains,' Is 37^, Ezk 19*-"; Rawlinson, Anc. Mon. iii. 7 ; and see Am 4").

Plucking off the Hair was a punishment inflicted on Jews who had indulged in mixed marriages (Neh 13"°). It may have been intended simply for disfigurement. The prophet in Is 50' alludes to the ju<licial practice as common in his time. The efl'ort was so vicious as de.scrilicd in 2 Mac 7', that tlic skin was torn oil" with the hair ; but in scalping, 526 CKIMES AND PUNISHMENTS CKIMES AND PUNISHMENTS as practised by the N. American Indians, a knife was used.

As an insult to David's servants, half of the beard was shaven off (2 S 10). The head was subjected to other indignities (Job 30", Mt 27', Mk 12*). Precipitation. — It is stated in 2 Ch 25" that 10,000 Edomites were cast from a rock by the children of Judah. So two Jewish women are said to have sufiered (2 Mac 6'"). Of the same sort are the acts mentioned in 2 K S'^, Hos 10" 13'«. On column iv. 100, 101 of Assurbanipal (G.

Smith), it is stated that certain persons were thrown on tlie stone lions and bulls in a quarry, the fall designed to be fatal. Calmet is of opinion, with Jerome as authority, that this was the fate of Oreb and Zeeb (Jg 7^). An attempt after this manner was made on the life of Jesus (Lk 4^). Restitution. — There was enacted an elaborate system for compensating an injured party under the sanction of Mosaism.

As far as possible the restoration was identical with, or analogous to, the loss of time or power (Ex 21'8-m, Lv 24;8-2i, Dt lO^'). He who stole and then slew or sold a live ox had to restore fivefold ; if it was a live sheep fourfold. The penalty was designed in part to be prohibitory, because sheep were more exposed in the desert, while oxen were necesPAry and not so easily taken. In later history it appears as if sevenfold might be exacted (Pr 6". See also the LXX tr.

of 2 S 12*, where seven is substituted for four). If the iden- tical animal was restored, another of equal value was all that the law required besides. Burglary doomed the culprit to oniequited death or to slavery. For breach of trust. -. r for trespass, twenty per cent, additional to M"j original sum was demanded (Lv 6'"°, Nu 5' "•). He who was de- tected in the theft of a pledge, < ir was found guilty in the matter of trespass while the property was in his hand, must pay double.

Pecuniary com- pensation must be furnished for damages by an animal, when not on its own ground (Ex 22') ; and when a fatality occurred in the case of a servant, thirty shekels must be paid to the loser (Ex 21'^ ; see Dt 22"). One case only is mentioned of per- mitted commutation for biul-goring (Ex 21^'*'). In case a married woman was killed, the fine was paid to her father's (instead of her own) family (Lewis, Heb. Ant.)

Akin to restoration is redemption, referred to in Lv 25''- "*, Ezk 18'- ". Remuneration was expected for loss by fire, through negligence, of a standing grain field ; or for the loss or damage of a pledge (Ex 22'- "• "). Under Rom. law a jailer losing his prisoner was liable to the punishment which was to be inflicted for the crime on which the arrest had been made (Ac .12" 16"). In NT morals it was taught that the guilt of theft could not be compounded by restitution.

' Let him that stole steal no more ' (Eph 4^) ; but Zacchaeus, on the occasion of his pardon, proposed to restore fourfold (Lk 19*). Retaliation was authorized in the code of Ex 2124. 23 jj ^yj^g ij, ^gg among other nations, esp. the Egyptians (cf. the lex talionis of the Romans). It was not unequivocally approved by ancient authors, because it was apt to degenerate into mere revenge and would often be unfair in its operation.

The possibility of its baneful consequences is shown by Thomson (Land and Book, i. 447, 449). Diodorus Siculus instances a one-eyed man as suffering more than the victim with two eyes. Favorinus shows the injustice of this principle in operation as con- tained in one of the Twelve Tables, in that the same member may be worth more to one man than to another, as the right hand of a scribe or painter comjiared with that of a singer. Hence it had to be administered with certain modifications.

Thus Heb. law adopted the principle, but lodged the appli- cation with the judge (Ex ^l"^'^-, Lv 24'»-22) ; and an aggresRor, by the payment of a ransom, could com- pound with the aggrieved and be relieved from thp full penaltj'of thelaw. A false accuser was required to sutler the same penalty that he proposed against the accused (Dt 19"). Heo. law was milder in spirit than that of heathen jurisprudence.

Moses would not allow parents or children to sutler for the oft'ences of each otlier (Dt 24""). This equitable exemption was not regarded by the Chald.-cans (Dn 6"), or even by the kings of Israel (1 K 21^1, 2 K 9='). Sawing Asunder. — In He 11" the term is used to describe an ancient form of punishment, which was possibly a crushing under instruments of iron (Am 1') ; and it is said, on the authority of Justin Martyr (Dial, with Trypho), to have been practised on Isaiah.

There is an allusion to something of this sort in Pr 20^ (RV) ' He bringeth the threshing wheel over them ' (cf. Is 28^- ^). Saws are men- tioned in 2 S 12", 1 Ch 20^ ; and while it is painful to admit that David may have been guilty of such severity, the literal interpretation is the most plausible and accords with the usages of the times. (See, however. Driver, Heb. Text of Sam. 226 11'. ).

In Shaw's Travels a case is described where the victim was placed between two boards and dis severed longitudinally (Smith, DB), and anothei case is mentioned by Harmer (Observations) aa occurring on Stewart's journey to Mequinez. Scourging with Thorns (see also Stripes). — In the marginal reading of Jg 8', Gideon is repre- sented as threatening to thresh the men of Succoth with thorns and briers, and in the margin to 8" it is stated that they were thiis punished, as Stanley (Hist. Jew. Ch.

) suggests, with the acacia. The scorpions (O'jipi') mentioned in 1 K 12" may have been knotted sticks, or ropes into which wire wa« plaited, or iron points or nails or cutting pieces of lead were inserted. Calmet guesses that David so treated the Moabites (2 S 8'). Some attempt to solve the much-mooted difficulties of 2 S 12" by a reference to this mode of punishment. SlaYery. — In Heb. law it was possible for a person to fall into servitude for a limited time.

A thief, when unable to make restitution, was sold with wife and children (Ex 22'). The misfortune of debt led to the same result (2 K 4', Neh 5'). The statute of limitations mercifully provided against oppressive usage and permanent enslave- ment (Lv 25^-«, Dt 15", Jer 34"). The Rabbins say a woman could not be sold for theft. Joseph proposed, as an Egj-ptian procedure, to make a slave of the detected pilferer of his cup (Gn 44"). See separate article. Slaying by Spear or Sword.

— This was an ex- peditious method, sometimes adopted in an emer- gency. The spear, javelin, or dart (He 12™) was to be used on trespassers at the foot of Sinai (Ex 19"). Phinehas went so armed in eager and immediate punishment of the man found with a Midianitish woman (Nu 25'-'). The sword was taken by the Levites against the worshippers of the golden calf (Ex 32"), and in Dt 13"-'* authority is given for its use in the wholesale slaughter of a city for idolatry.

Some cutting instrument was employed by Abimelech in the murder of his brethren (Jg 9*). Samuel hewed Agag to pieces with the sword (1 S 15"), and with the same Doeg massacred the priests in Nob (I S 22"- "»). According to the lex tnlionis, the young Amalekite who claimed tliat he drew the sword to kill Saul was put to death with the same kind of implement (2 S 1"), with which or the spear Ishbosheth was assassinated (2 S 4'-').

Tlie sword was used in the summary executions ordered by Solomon (1 K2*-"-"-"). By it Elijah slew the prophets of Baal (1 K 19'), and it was common in regal and martial proceedings, Iweoming still more prominent in post- Bab. times. The sword or axe was employed to carry out the order of Jehu on Ahab's CRIMES AND PUXISILMEXTS CRISPUS 527 BODS (2 K 10') (see Beheading). Thus Jehornni murdered his brethren (2 Ch 21'), and Julioiakini despatched Urijah (Jer 26^).

Tlie sword as an instniMient of punishment is specifically mentioned in Job 19'^. See also Divine Visitation. The Stocks (nj?'7'?> ivXdf vtirrfavpiY'/o'')- This machine, though probably of Egyp. ori-^in, is not described in the Mosaic legislation, but in it Hanani, the seer, was put by Asa (2 Ch 16'°), and Jeremiah was punished (Jer 20^). In Jer 27' KV uses 'bars for AV 'yokes,' and in Jer 29* changes 'priiion' to 'stoclcs,' and 'stocks' to 'shackles,' that is, the pillory.

It usually contained five holes for the neck, arms, and legs, which sometimes were inserted crosswiBe. One form (np) was designed for the legs only. The word ' stocks ' is employed in Job 13" 33'f and Pr 7", and this form of torture was probably in mind when Ps 105" was written. It was an infliction among the Romans as indicated by Ac 16".

Stoning was the ordinary formal and legal mode of indicting punishment in the earlier history of the children of Israel, and was in vogue before the departure from ECTpt (Ex 8"). Even beasts might be the victims, evidently as a spectacular example (Ex 19" 21»«- "■ "). Stoning was the penalty for taking ' the accursed thing ' (Jos 7*°); for adultery and unchastity,the death sentence bein^ pronounced in Lv 20'°, and the means of carrying it out stated in Dt 22"- ", Jn 9.

^- ' ; for blasphemy (Lv 24'""), and on this specious charge Nauoth (1 K 21'°) and Stephen (Ac 7') suffered, and an effort was made to show Jesus guilty by a feint to stone Hiui (Jn 10") ; for divination (Lv 20"'- "), idolatry (Dt 13'°), dishonour to parents (Dt 21'), i>rophesying falsely (Dt 13»-'°), and Sabbath, breaking (Ex 31" 35^ Nu 15"- "•). Doubtless other capital crimes would thus be punished, and the city of Jerusalem was so threatened as if it were an individual culprit (Ezk M").

In an orderly proceeding the witness was to east the first stone (Dt 17', J n 8'), and as the Rabbins Kky. on the chest ; and if others were necessary to produce death, the bystanders hurled them. Law- less movements are mentioned or suggested, like that to which Moses thought himself exposed (Ex 17*), the accomplished acts on Adoram (1 K 12'") and Zechariah (2 Ch 24^'), in the danger dreaded by the priests on account of their estimate of the Baptist (Lk 20'), and the assault on St.

Paul in Iconium (Ac 14'). Poisoners among the Persians were laid on one stone and crushed by another (Rawlinson, Anc. Mon. iii. 247 ; see M^ 21**, Lk 20'"). Strangling was a later form of capital punishment among the Jews (W. R. Smith, RS .398), but there is no scriptural authority for it. The convict was immersed in clay or mud, and a cloth was twisted around the neck and drawn in oi>posite directions by two lictors, so as to take the breath.

During the operation molten lead might be poured down the throat (Sanhedr. 10. 3). Tlie proposed humili- ation of the Syrians before Israel (1 K 20") may hint at the jiractice. See Hanging, Stripes. — The Mosaic economy ordained that an ofTendcr might be puniHhe<l with strines (Lv 19=", Dt 22'"), not exceeding forty (Dt 2.5*) ; and this limit was carefully observed, as on St. Paul (2 Co 11"), for a single stroke in excess subjected the executioner to punishment.

The scourge was com- posed of three thongs, of which 39 was the largest multiple within the limit. It was the most com- mon mode of secondary punishment, and the idea of disgrace did not seem to attach to it (but see Jos. Ant. IV. viii. 21). No station of life was exempt (see from Pr 17", indicating that the noble may be smitten, and 10" that a rod is proper for the vacant-minded). The Viastinado may nave been iiKed on Jeremiah (20' 37").

Scourging was in- flicted on a bondmaid overtaken in illegal inter- course (Lv 19^), on a husband who falsely accused his wife, on a person who used abusive language (Jos. Ant. XIII. X. 6), on ecclesiastical ofi'enders in the synagogue (Mt 10", Ac 26"), and it might be used on the debtor (Mt S" 18*).

As to the method : the culjjrit lay on the ground while under casti- gation, in the presence of the judge, who during the infliction proclaimed the words in Dt 28'''- '", and concluded with those in Ps 78**. In later times an adult male was stripped to the waist and in a bending posture lashed to a pillar ; a female received the stripes while sitting with head and shoulders bent forward ; and a boy was punished with his hands tied behind him.

The Alosaic re- gulations were in pleasing contrast with those of the Zendavesta, which authorizes as many as 10,000 strijjes for the murder of a water dog (Darmesteter, Intro.) The Porcian law forbade the scourging of Rom. citizens (Cic. in Verr. v. 53, Ac 16^' 22^). Nevertheless, it was regarded as a wholesome punishment, and is zealously advocated in Pr 13" 23"- ' ; see also Sir 30'"'. It is a symbol of divine correction (Ps 89^=), and is regarded as a purifier (Pr20*').

The Moslems have a proverb that the stick is from heaven, a blessing from God. Suffocation was a recognized Pers. mode of dealing with ofi'enders. A case is described (2 Mac 13*"') : Menelaus was fastened to a revolving wheel in a standpipe 50 cubits high, filled with ashes, in which ne was repeatedly immersed, until death ensued.

Another description attributes a similar method to the Macedonians, the victim being placed on a beam, under which the ashes were constantly stirred untQ he was overcome with heat and dust (see Rawlinson, Anc. Mon. iii. 246). LiTEEATUBE.— In addition to the authorities cited in the art , the reader may consult Hamburger, RE. art. Lohn u. Strafe' (pp. 691 -703) and Vergeltung" (pp. 1252-57) ; artt.

on the varioui cnmes and punishments enumerated above, in Riehm, II WB, lienogt KEt and Srhenkel, liiljeUex.;Sa3.liii:hutz,da«Mo/tautehe Rpcht ; the Bib. ArchaoL of Keil, Henziiiger, and Nowack ; Po8l, Familienrecht, 358 f. ; Hartmann, Kw/f. Verbind. d. A.T. mit d. N. 197 S. ; Schiirer. IIJP ll. ii. 90 (T. ; W. R Smith, OT./C 340 I., 308 f. ; J. W. Haley, Etther (1885), pp. 122-130 ; DiUmann, Com. on the Pent., and Driver, Vent, (jjansim), J. POUCHER,