Greek inscriptions which have come down to us show that they had already then added or developed vowels. It was Greek influence which finally led to the development of an apology for vowels, a system of points, among the Syrians. It was in the schools of Edessa that this system of pointing, as it was called, was introduced. First, diacritical signs were used to distinguish certain letters, indicating whether a letter was to be pronounced single or double, soft or hard (in the case of mutes), as vowel or consonant (in the case of semi-vowels), etc. Then this gave place to a system of vowel points, that is, points placed by a letter above or below, to indicate the vowel to be pronounced after that letter, or that no vowel at all was to be pronounced. This system reached its full development among the Hebrews not earlier than the seventh century probably, in Babylonia, and the eighth century in Palestine. More closely we cannot date it. We know that about 600 A.D. such points were not used in Hebrew Bible manuscripts, and that about 900 A.D. systems of pointing were fully developed.

The earliest pointed manuscript which has come down to us is the St. Petersburg codex of the prophets, dated 916 A.D.; but the pointing in this is quite different from the system which ultimately prevailed among the Jews everywhere, and which is commonly called the Palestinian system. The earliest manuscripts having the latter system of pointing which we now possess are probably not earlier than the eleventh century A.D.; but we have information of the existence of such pointed manuscripts as early as the middle of the preceding century. By that date, that is, the tenth century A.D., the Hebrew script had definitely assumed the form with which we are familiar in our printed Hebrew Bibles, written, as to the consonants, in a square character, the vocalisation indicated by certain marks above and below the line, and certain points indicating whether letters are to be doubled or not, whether mutes are hard or soft, etc. Of course, errors were made in this pointing or vocalisation of the text, most of them of little importance, a few materially changing the sense. Many of these latter can be corrected by a critical process, and often

by comparison of the Greek translation made while the old script was in use and before any system of pointing had been introduced.

To sum up, the Hebrew Scriptures were written originally in the old Hebrew script, a special Hebrew development of the Phoenician alphabet. Somewhere, probably in the first century B.C., they were transliterated out of these early characters into the later square characters-a script of a very different description. Originally, the Scriptures were written in consonants only, and without division of words. Several centuries after Christ points of various descriptions began to be introduced to assist the readers in a correct reading of the text. These points at first were simply diacritical. Then they were developed so as to indicate, in a rough way (for, at the best, the Hebrew system of vowel punctuation is an extremely rough one, indicating a very small range of vowel sounds actually used), the vowels to be pronounced after the respective consonants. Gradually also words were separated. At least two complete systems of pointing were developed among the Hebrews. One of these systems we find in use in a manuscript of the ninth century. The other, which ultimately prevailed, was in use at the same time, but has not come down to us in any manuscript earlier than the eleventh century A.D. From that century dates our first complete manuscript of the Old Testament.

CHAPTER XIII

STONE WORSHIP

FORM of worship not uncommon among primitive This worship of stones was peculiarly characteristic of the religion of the heathen Arabians before the time of Mohammed. At every sanctuary one or more stones were set up. Generally these stones were unworked, like the caaba at Mecca. Sometimes they were rudely hewn. By preference they were oblong or cone-shaped. These stones served a double purpose. They represented the god of the sanctuary, and at the same time they served as altars. The stone was not regarded as an image of the god, but the god was supposed to have his regular dwelling in the stone, or to be in some way connected with it, so that through the stone one might come into peculiar relation with the god. Sacrifice consisted in pouring the blood of the creature killed upon this stone, or smearing the stone with blood and pouring out the rest of the blood in a hole at the bottom of the stone. Then the sacrificer and his friends ate the flesh of the creature offered. The blood had been given to God through the stone, and the people ate the flesh. In case of a covenant or treaty, seven stones were sometimes set up. The hands of the contracting parties were cut with a sharp stone, the blood from their hands was put upon the stones that had been set up, and the god was invoked to witness the treaty or contract between the parties.

Apeoples is the worship of stones.

These sacred stones, used for purposes of worship, were called among the Arabs manzab, and an individual stone was

called nuzub, the former being the collective of the latter. East of the Jordan and in the Jordan valley not a few evidences of this stone worship have been found, and occasionally a gilgal, or rude circle of stones. Some remains of this particular form of stone worship have been found also west of the Jordan valley, in Palestine proper. Such was the group of stones over or about which a temple was built at Tel es-Safi, supposed to be the ancient Gath, excavated by Dr. Bliss for the Palestine Exploration Fund. Here, in a temple, and partly embedded in its walls, were found some six conical stones, an ancient gilgal, a shrine of the primitive inhabitants. One is tempted to think that there may have been originally seven stones instead of six, as we find to have been the case at times with the Arabs, and as was apparently the case at the well of Beersheba, so sacred in the earlier Hebrew times. This rude shrine at Gath was, like the primitive Arabian shrines, a few sacred stones under the open heaven not covered by any building. At a later date, it would seem, a temple took the place of the earlier rude open-air shrine or sanctuary, and some of the stones of the gilgal were built into the walls of the temple. We find a somewhat similar method employed in the case of at least one Babylonian temple, where a sacred stone, or baitylion was built into the temple wall. Such stones represented a ruder and more primitive type of worship. This ruder type of stone worship had, in general, given way in Babylonia at a very early date to a more ornate religion, with images of gods and goddesses and highly decorated shrines. Yet the sanctity of the ancient stones was such that here and there they survived, inclosed within walls, or even embedded in the wall, but too ancient and too sacred to be entirely done away with. One is reminded of the persistence of the ancient stone worship among the Mohammedan Arabians in the supreme sanctity of the caaba at Mecca. Mohammed either did not feel himself strong enough to abolish the worship of this stone, or else he was himself in regard to it under the spell of ancestral custom, so that while he did away with other idolatrous practices of the same sort, he yet preserved the

caaba, and allowed it to remain as the central sanctuary and most sacred object of Islam.

The Bible shows us that in the earlier times stone pillars, stone circles, etc., used in connexion with the worship and religious rites, both of Canaanites and Israelites, were common all over the land. Taking up the Book of Joshua, we find that the first headquarters established by the Israelites west of the Jordan were at a place called Gilgal, that is, a circle of stones. According to the account in Joshua iv., this circle was erected by the Israelites themselves, who took twelve stones out of the Jordan and set them up there; and in chapter v. we have an interpretation of the name gilgal (circle) given as the rolling away of the reproach of the Egyptians from off the Israelites by the circumcision at that place. The prophets tell us that this gilgal, or circle of stones, was in their day regarded as a sanctuary of peculiar holiness, to which people made pilgrimages. But this was not the only gilgal west of Jordan. There is at least one other place of this name mentioned in the Old Testament, and probably two. One of these gilgals was in the neighbourhood of Bethel, in the mountains of central Israel, where we find a place called Gilgiliya existing to-day. Another, mentioned in Joshua xii. 23, as in the neighbourhood of Dor, is called to-day Gilgulie. Besides these two gilgals on the west side of Jordan, the Bible mentions a gilgal, called also a mazzebah, or collection of stones, in Gilead. This gilgal, or mazzebah, was erected, according to Genesis xxxi. 45-54, by Jacob. He sacrificed at it, and made there a covenant with Laban. It will be seen that this was precisely the same sort of thing which the ancient Arabs made use of in connexion with their covenants, as described above, and the word mazzebah, which we find here and frequently in the Old Testament, is the same word as the Arabic manzab, which, as we have seen, was used as the name for these stones. Not only that; the Bible also tells us that in the earlier days the Hebrews did actually sacrifice at such stones, pouring the blood upon them or at their feet in precisely the same way as the Arabs did.