Urim and thummim (Hastings' Dictionary)

From an interesting passage of an early historical work we learn that the ancient Hebrews recognized three principal media through which the Divine will might be revealed to men. When Saul in his later years 'inquired' of J", 'J" answered him n t, neither by dreams, nor by Urim — which we may provisionally render, by the sacred lot — nor by prophets' (1 S 28").

The same three channels of Divine com- munication were also recognized in ancient Greece, although there divination by lot 'was entirely overshadowed by the prophetic frenzy and inspira- tion through dreams ' (art. ' Sortes ' in Smith's Diet, of Aixtiq.^). In this article we have to investigate the mode of ascertaining the Divine will by means of the sacred lots, known as ' the Urim and the Thummini [more correctly Tummini].'

Considering the evident importance of this, apparently the only legitimate, mode of divination in early times, the number of express references to the Urim and Thummim is surprisingly limited. In Ex 28-», Lv 8' (both P) we have D-iixn (ha-''(lrim) and D'Eijn {hat-tummim) ; in Ezr 2^, Neh 1^, without the article (here only in OT) 'tirim and tummim. Dt 33^ gives them in the reverse order (see below). In Nu 27'-', 1 S 28* 'lirim stands alone.

1 S H'"'-, from which, in our ^NIT, Urim and Thummim has disappeared, will be fully discussed below,* where also will be found the few references in the apocryphal writings. The present vocalization leaves no doubt as to the etjtnology and signification of C'l^N and D'pp intended by the Massoretio scholars.

The former is evidently connected with iHk 'light,' the latter is the plural of ori, ' completeness,' in a moral senss 'perfection,' 'innocence*: the idea being, perhaps, that Urim was the lot which brought to light t.'ic •luUt of the subject of the ordeal, while Thummim establishetl his innoeejice. "The words are to be understood as intensive plurals, and rendered, on this hypothesis, ' Light and Perfection (or Innocence),' rather than as RVm (Ex 28^'^), ' the Lights and the Perfections.'

It will, however, appear in the sequel that the sacred lot was fre- quentl) used where there is no question of guilt or innocence, and it is an open question whether the Massoretic pronuncia- tion reaches back to the time when the lot was in use. Various alternative et.vmologies have been proposed of late. Thus Well- hausen in his ProUijomena (Eng. ea. p.

394) proposed to connect Urim with the verb T]N, 'to curse,' and expressed approval of Freytag's connexion of Thummim with the Arabic tamXina, a species of amulet (S'-e Krevtag, Lex A rah. -Lot, i. IDyb ; JBL xix. (1900) 68); cf. Haupt-Schwally, ZdTW xi. 172, who sug^ pests ' cursing and blessing' as probable renderings; and Ball, m the list of proper names at end of his Light J'rom the East, ' biddings and forbiddings (V)-* In his later works, however, Wellh. has given up this etymology.

In view of the ancient and long -continued influence of Babylonian ideas on the religious thought of the West, there is greater probability in the etymology recently proposed b.v some Assyriologists of repute, who suggest as the root of O'Tk the Piel intiB. form u'uru (stem "iNiX or TK), 'to send forth (an edict),* wheno« vrtu and tertu, the technical liabylonian terms for an oracle. (See Zimmern, Beitrdfje zur Kentni^ rf. bah. Reliijion, S8f. 91, note 2; Muss-Amolt. AJSL xvi. (1900) 218).

One is further tempted to connect Thunmiim with the verb tamU, Piel tummim, freipient in the divination vocabulary of the Babylonians, in the sense of ' to put under a spell ' (see Ziinmem'e vocabulary, op. eit. 78). ' If these derivations are correct, D'l'N and D'^n would correspond tothe Babyl. urtu ("command," "decision," mostly of the gods), and taniUu. a synonym of pirwAfw = " oracle, " oracular decision of the gods " ' (Muss-Amolt, op. cit. 219).

The renderings of the ancient VSS give no help either towards the etymology and significance of the original terms, or towards the real nature of the objects themselves. • In Ps 433 Lagarde (Propheta chald. p. ili-ii) would read ' send forth thy Urim and thy Thummim ' (d. Dt 838). See alM Duhm in Kurztr Bandam. mioe. UEIM AXD THUMMIM UKISI AND THUMMIM 839 The Tap(,'Tjni9 and Syr. VS3 merely transliterate ths tiet-. temis. The Or.

VSS vary in & reniartiablc way, show-ing that their authors had no tradition to guide them. Kor c"i;K we find the toltowinf; renderings: (u) d^A^Mrir, 'manifestation' (pcrhajia rather ' direction,' ' instruction,' since the correspond- ing Zn>-t^ is used by LXX to render the Uiphil of inn; in Dt 33^0 «nd other synonymous Ileb. verbs). Ex 2S» (LXX 28), Lv 88, 1 Ks S-w ; (6) lr>.ai * [sciV.

Xif«i], ' clear,' ' transparent [jewels, see below], Nu 272", Dt :«», 1 S U" [not in MT| -2^, Sir 45", also Stf" |EV 333], according to the better reading of KA ; of. AVm •as the asking of Urim'; (c) the verb frt, C«, 'to give light,' Ezr 2^, Neh 7^5 ; (d) the later translators prefer the more literal renderin;^ f^rrif/^,, 'lights,' so Aq., Symm., and Theod. Ex 2S3'>: but in L>t 33s Symm. has (c) 3**»x'^> t'^6 source of Jerome's doctritiat unless the Latin Father so understood ir,>.

anrn as above suggej>ted. For D'pn we h&ve (a) iXy.Ouctt 'truth' — perhaps suggested by the fact that the presiding judge in Eg^-pt wore, suspended from his neck, an image of Tme, the E'.;yptian goddess of truth (see end of this article) — Ex., Lv., Dcut., 1 Es., as above, Sir4'jiO; {If) irivrt.t, IS 14*, t here 'innocence'; (r) TiKuet, 'perfect things,' Ezr 26a ; (d) in the later trauslat-rs (.Aq. etc.) also liter- ally-rt'.ujTTjTif, perfections.'

The renderinj;s of the Old Latin anil Jerome hesitate in the same way Ijetween doctrina, dcimtn- itratin, ostensio, also docftu, for Urim, and Veritas^ perjectio, »anetU<u, perfecius, ervdUut, tor Thummim. In proceeding to investi<;.ate the natnre and use of the Urim and Thummim, it .seems advisable to he;;in with the data of the youngest products of Hcb. lilerature, and to proceed baclcwards to tliose of the earliest.

Setting aside for the present the speculations of Philo and Josephus, to whom we Bliall return, we find no help in our investigation from the references in the (leutero-canonical writ- ings recorded above, viz. 1 Ks 5**, in which the high priest is descril)cd as ' wearing Urim and Thummim ' (so RV; AV, following Vulg., ' clothed in dmtiine and truth'), Sir 36^ 45'".

The iirst item of interest is furnished by the fact recorded in Kzr 2*" = Neh 7", that certain families were ex- cluded from the enjoyment of priestly rights until the purity of their descent should be estab- lished by 'a priest with Urim and with Thummun.' From this it is manifest that the use of tliese mysterious objects, and possibly also their precise nature, were unknown to the Jewish authorities of the post-exilic age. This brings us to the Priests' Code.

Without pausing to inquire, at this stage, into the full significance attributed by the compilers of this dociiiiierit to the Urim and Thummim, we may kani at least two facts which will dwir the way for further inve.stigatiim, and prove tiie impo.ssi- bility of a widely current view as to the identity of these objects. After giving minute directions for the making of the 'breastplate of judgment' (for which see vol. i. p. 319 f.)

, attached to the high priest's epliod, P proceeds thus : 'And thou [Moses] shall put into the (breastplate or) pnmh of jui/r/- m-iil tlie Urim and the Thummim' (Kx •28'). lIo explan.'ition is given of these, nor any instructions for making them. The latter omission so impressed the Samaritans that the requisite order is supplied here, and executed .3'J", in their recension of the Pentateuch. The rendering above given of the ambiguous phrase of the original t:p, :;■: lyrrSy f.

n;i is that imperatively demanded by tlie context (see the commentaries) in preference to the possible allernative adopted by the LXX, xoi iwiOr/jut irl Ti> XU71OC rJJs Kpiffeios riiv di)\<iJ(TLv Kal tt]** dX'^OeiaiVf 'thou shalt/)H< uponX the oracle of judgment the Urim and the Thummim.' This mistaken render- ing is mainly responsible for the view entertained by many writers, from Josephus to Kalisch (Hist, and Crit. Comm.

in loc), tliat the Urim and Thummim are to be identified with the jewels of the breastplate, enumerated in the verses preced- ing. P's contribution to the dLscussion, therefore, • IIos 3* LXX tor ' tcraphim.' t The .MT has here the corrupt reading O'Sp, aee below. 1 The SamaritAD-Uebrew actually read Sy nnnji here and liiLv89.

consists in showing (1) that theUrira and Thummim were understood in priestly circles, about the close of the Exile, as something distinct both from the ejihod and from the gems with which the pouch of t!ie ephod was ornamented ; and (2) that they were conceived as vuiterial objects of comparatively small dimensions, capable of being inserted in the pouch, which indeed was constructed solely with a view to contain them.

The other references of the Priestly Code (Lv 8', Nu 27-') give no further clue to the nature of Urim and Tliumiiiim. The second passage, however, shows the iiiii)ortance attached to them in the ideal theocratic com- munity of P as the authorized mediiun of Divine revelation.

When we pass from these ideal representations to the actual history of the pre-exilic period, while we meet with au ci]ual readiness to presuppose familiarity with the objects under discussion, we are able for the Hrst time to learn something as to the modus operandi in the use of the sacred lot. The most explicit of the earlier passages in which this modus operandi is exhibited is the grajiliic narrative in 1 S 14.

Uere we find the Hebrew host, led by Saul and Jonathan, proceeding to ascertain the cause of the Divine displetusure (v.") in the face of their hereditary enemies, the Philis- tines. Unfortunately, the Heb. text has here suffered serious mutilation, and, as even the mo.st conservative scholars admit, must be restored by the help of the Greek version. The latter, in Lucian's recension (Lagarde's ed.), runs thus, v.*"- : 'And S.

iul said, O Lord, the God of Israel, why hast tliou not answered thy servant this day? if the iniquity be in me or in Jonathan mj' son, give Urim (06s SijXoi/s [see above]); and if thou sayest thus : The inii]uity is in the people, give Thunmiira (o4s offiirijT-a ; NlT C'.pti .njri, which cannot possibly niean, as RV, '.show the right').* And the lot fell ujiou .Saul and Jonatlian, and the people escaped. Ami Saul said : Cast the lot between me and Jonatlian my son, and on wliom.

soever the Lord shall cause the lot to fall, let him die.' The true text was apparently still accessible to .Jerome, who renders: '.si in me aut in Jonatha lilio meo, est iniquitas liivc, tla ostensionem [Urim]; aut si h:cc iniquitas est in populo meo da sanctitatem [Thiiiuiiiim].'

From the text of this important passage in its original form, then, we learn (I) that the Urim and Thummim were the recognized medium for discovering Ihe gtiilt or innocence of suspected parties, a species of Divine ordeal ; (2) that as the lots were only two in number, only one question could be put at a time, and that in a way admitting only of two alternative answers ; (3) that where these answers, from the nature of the case, could not be given by a mere ' yes ' or ' no ' (see below), it was necessarj' to agree beforehaiul on the way in which the i.

ssuing lot was to be interpreted ; (4) a fourth inference, that the manipul.ation of the lots was the prerogative of the priests, may be drawn from the context (see below), but is more explicitly stated in the onlj' other reference to Urim and Thummim in pre-exilic literature. In the so-called ' Blessing of iMo.ses' (Dt 33) — perhaps as early as the time of Jeroboam I. (so Dillmann and Driver), certainly not later than Jeroboam II.

(so most critics) — the benediction of Levi opens thus : ' Give to Levi thy Thummim, and thy IJrim to the man of thy favour' (v.*, following LXX with Ball, rSBA, 18%, 11811"., and Bertholet, Kurzer Handcom. in loc). Another step forward is suggested by the com- parison of the function here assigned to the • See Driver's Sota an the Heb. Text of the Booki 0/ Samuet for the restoration of the original Hct>rew of the essentia portions of the above.

«40 UEIM AND THUMMIM URIM A^S^D THUMMIM Levitical priesthood with another recital of the priestly prerogatives, where the tribe of Levi alone IS represented as chosen by J" ' to oft'er upon mine altar, to burn incpiise, and to hear (nxb'Sjan ephod before me' (1 S 2-', cf. 22" LXX). For although our present Hcb. text nowhere expressly associates the L'rini and the Thummiin with the mysterious epiiod-iniage of tlie early writers (see Ephod, No. 2, vol. i.)

, an examination of the wliole narrative of 1 S 14 in the Greek text, and of other passages in tlie Books of Samuel, wliere this ephod figures as indispensable to the manipulation of the lot, leads to the conclusion that the ephod-image and Urim and Thummim had some intimate but as yet undiscovered connexion the one with the other. Thus, in 1 S 14, the priest of v.""

who presides over the ordeal of Urim and Thummim can be no other than Ahijah the descendant of Eli, who accom- panied Saul, 'bearing an ephod' (iien hVi v.') In V.'*, according to the true text, he is summoned to ' bring forward the ephod ' (Trpoiriyaye t6 iipovS — not as in MX ' the ark ' ; see Ark, vol. i. p. 15U", note § ; Ephod, vol. i. p.

776, note J), evidently for the purpose of consulting the lot, but immediately ordered to ' withdraw ' his hand when on the point of proceeding to its manipulation (v.'*). Again, in the story of David's adventures at Keilah, we read of his being joined by the priest Abiathar, bring- ing 'an ephod in his hand' {1 S 23°). He is requested by David, in terms identical with those used by Saul, to ' bring forward the ephod ' {v.")

; whereupon the former proceeds to ask a series of questions, each capable of being answered by a simple 'yes' or 'no' (vv. '"-'-). It is impossible to escape the inference that these two narratives of a solemn inquiring of J" on the part of Saul and David offer complete parallels, that in both the answer is obtained by means of UrimandThummim, and that in either case these objects are carried in and cast from, or in some otlier wav intimately connected with, the ephod-image.

What has now- been said of the incidents of 1 S 2.'i''- applies equally to the similar procedure in SO'-, where David again 'inquired of J"' by means of the cjiliod. Indeed most scholars would go further, and miiintain tliat in a number of otlier places, where the same phrase 'to inquire of J" ("$ hK'i')' is em- ployed, and where tlie use of the sacred lot ' before J"' is stated, recourse to Urim and Thummim is implied in every case.

Tlie most important of siu'li passages are Jos 7'''"'* Aclian's trespass, Jg I"- 1'\f\ 1 S 1U'»,, the election of Saul, 2 S 2' S'"-^. To say that the Urim and Tliummim of the earlier historians must have been intimately con- nected with tlio portable images to w-hicli they gave tlie name of epliod in the casting of the sacred lot, does not help us to discover the real nature of the objects in question. Tlie etymology, as we have seen, is equally of no avail.

The Greek trans- lators in rendering Urim by STfKoi [\l0oi.'] ap])arentl3' iilentitied it with the jewels of the breastplate. We are therefore left to conjeclure that, on the analogy of the sortcs of classical antiquity, they may have been two stones, either in the sh.apo of dice or in tablet form, perhaps also of difVerent colours. Some support is given to this view, which is that of most modern writers {see Litera- ture at end of article), by the fact tliat the Heli.

word for 'lot,' gordl, as is inferred from its Arabic congeners, originally signitied a stone (cf. Gr. \j'rjipos, 'a pebble used in voting,' and the Bab. purtt, 'a stone,' whence, according to Jensen, quoted by Wihleboer in Kiirzer Hanihom., D'TS Est 3', eynonymuus with ^"yn, is derived).

With the growth of more spiritual conceptions Not 08 EV to wear,' a 8t-nse which K^j nowben haa io Hebrew of the Divine character and of His relation to mundane aft'airs, recourse to the lot as a means of ascertaining the mind of J" gradually fell into abeyance. It cannot be a mere coincidence that the use of Urim and Thummim is never mentioned in the historical narratives after the time of David.

The rise of the prophetic order in Israel provided the nation with a worthier channel for the revela- tion of tlie Divine wUl, and with more trustworthy counsellors in the crises of the individual and national life. The further we descend the .stream of history the more conspicuous is this displace- ment of the priestly lot by the prophetic voice (contrast Ezr 2«3=Neh 7" with 1 Mac 4-"' 14-"). That the Urim and Thummim should reappear in the scheme of the Priestly Code is not surprising.

It is part of its ideal reconstruction of the theocracy that the high priest should be at all points fully equipped for his office as the Divine vicegerent in the tlieocracy. For this end he is provided with the already mysterious Urim and "Thummim, the manipulation of which was one of the most prized of the ancient prerogatives of the priestly caste.

Their early association with the now long tabooed ephod-image, and the fact that the bosom-folds of the upper garment was a common receptacle for the ' lot ' as used in everyday aliairs (see Pr IG" ' the lot is shaken in the bosom-fold, but the whole dis- posing thereof is of J" '), may have suggested to the authors of the Priestly Code the placing of the Urim and Thummim in the jewelled pouch of the high priest's ephod. In any case it is clear from the principal passage.

Ex 2^^, that it is rather a symbolical than a practical significance that is attached to the mysterious contents of the ' pouch of judgment (or decision).' Israel, in the person of Aaron its representative, is here presented as the continual recipient of J"'s ' decisions ' and guidance, and the position of the symbols 'upon his heart' betokens the readiness of Israel at all times to j'ield obedience to these Divine commands.

After the exhaustive presentation of the earlier biblical data as to the use and associations of the Urim and Thummim, little need be said of the views of older scholars, whose method of research was vitiated by their taking the representations of the Priests' Code as decisive for the nature and use of these objects in the historical period.

Thus, probably, few will be found to maintain the once widely accepted theory that found the prototype of the Urim and Thummim in the jewelled image of Tme, the goddess of truth and patron of justice, which the Chief Justice (6 d/jxiSixaaT-ijs, .iFlian, Var. Hist. xiv. 34 ; cf. Diod. Sic. i. 48) of Egypt wore on his breast ; still less to defend an Egyptian etymology for Urim and Thummim (Wilkinson, Anc. Egyptians [1878], voL iii. p. 183, with figure of judge's breastplate).

t The same comjiarative ignoring of the evidence of our oldest sources as to the nature of the ancient lot is fatal to the acceiitanee of the thesis recently brouglit for- ward by an American scholar (Muss-Arnolt, see below), that the Urim and Thummim are a re- flexion of the ' Tablets of Destiny ' of the Baby- lonian mythology.

^ Nor need we dwell on the many absurd specula- tions as to the nature of Urim and Thummim, and as to the mode in which their guidance was su|>- plied, which are to be found in the works of Jewish and Christian writers from Pliilo and Josephus * Of. Book of Jiil)ilee8 8", where the lota for the appuitioiiing of the earth among the sons of Nouh are drawu from the patriarch's bosom. t See, however, Hommel, AIIT 282 f.

, who finds the orifrinal of the Jewish liiph priest's ephod in the pectoral of the lligh Priest of Memphis, as flared bv Emian, hgijpt, '2i)S. t The most that can l>e said for thia view is that the pres« oca of these tablets on the breasts of Marduk and NelM) was linewn to P, and may possitily have influenced bis placlug of them OD the breast of the high priest (but see al>ove). USURY UZ 841 dowiiwanis, ami for which the curious reader is referred to the bibliography at the end of this article.

* Philo, it may bo said, did not, as is often erroneously stated, regard the Urim and Thuraraira as two images carried in the breastplate (see Mangey's note, 0pp. ii. 152), but as symbols of 'the t\\o virtues. Illumination and Truth {Si]\iixtlv re xai i\fiO(Lav),' Josephus (Ant. III. viii.

9) does not ex- pressly name the Urim and Thnmmim, but appears to identify them with the jewels of the breastplate and on the shoulders of the high priest, which, by a miraculous ellulgence, gave supernatural guidance, particularly on the eve of battle.t A favourite explanation of Jewish writers, reaching back to the Jerusalem Targum ^pseudo- Jonathan on Ex 28*^), was to the ellect that Urim and Thuinmim contained the sacred tetragramma- ton (ni.

T), which spelled out answers to inquirers by illuminating the letters of the tribal names on the transparent gems ! Scarcely less curious is the view, probably still widely entertained, that the liigli priest threw himself into a hypnotic trance bj' ga/.ing intently on the dazzling jewels, — again wrongly identified with Urim and Thumniim, — and while in this state was the recipient of the Divine message (see Kalisch, Exodus, pp. 540-545, and cf. Plumpire in art. cited above). LiTKRATURs.

— For the views of older scholara nee Buxtorf, *llit>loria Urim et Thummini' in Ugolini, Tfui^aunis, vol. xii., And Hiivnt^cr, De U^!J. ILbritorum ritualibus i^lisui), diijsert. 7. 0( nioiieni works and articles reference may be made, besides the ordinary commentaries, to the artt. in Winer's RWB (with reff. to many older works); Kiehm, UWB, art. 'Licht und Kecht' (Luther's rendering of L'riiu and Xhummin); Smiths Dli, and esp. to the excellent study of Kautzsch in J'JlI-y vol. xvi.

; the standard treatises on Biblical Archaeology; Kaliscb's excursus in the bo<iy of hiscomroentary on Exodim, pp. 540-.'>45; Haupt, 'Babylonian Klements in the Levitical Itituaf' in JUL xix. (r.WO) I>P- 5s f., 72 f.; and for a complete conspectus of the views of nuidem schoIaiN, W. iluss-Anmlt, The i'riin and TIfummim, a Swjf}estion as to thrir orujinai Sature and Signi- fieancf, a reprint from AJSL, July 190U. A. R. S. Kennedy.