the innocent or the guilty. Of this kind is that which was in use among our Saxon ancestors, and which has, in some respects, a striking analogy (perhaps intended) to that which now engages our attention. The suspected party had to swallow a bit of bread or cheese, which had been previously consecrated, with many ceremonies. If the person was guilty, it was believed that the sacred morsel would stick in his throat, and choke him, but that he would readily swallow it if innocent. The following is part of the imprecation used on delivering the bread to the accused person after he had received the communion. May this bread (or this cheese), which is given him to bring truth to light, stick in his throat, and find no passage, if he be guilty. May his face turn pale, may his limbs be convulsed, and may his whole body be horribly changed. But if indeed innocent of the crime laid to his charge, may he easily swallow this bread (or cheese), consecrated in thy name, to the end that he may know," &c. As less danger attended this than any other ordeal, the clergy, who allowed the continuance of this ancient pagan custom, with some modifications, and who had the administration of the various ordeals, secured it for themselves; and this was generally that to which they were subjected when accused of any crime. Several forms of Hindoo ordeal are mentioned in the first volume of the 'Asiatic Researches,' one of which has a striking resemblance to that of the Hebrew water of jealousy. The accused party is made to drink three draughts of water in which the images of the sun, of Devi, and of other deities, have been washed for the occasion; and if, within fourteen days, he has any sickness or indisposition, his crime is considered as proved. It would be endless to multiply instances of a mode of trial which has, in one form or another, been diffused over the world. It will be recollected that it applies exclusively to cases of suspicion, incapable of proof. The general practice in all European countries is to account a person innocent against whom crime cannot be proved; and this is undoubtedly the wisest and safest course for those who have not the express promise of God to give effect to a test to distinguish the innocent from the guilty. Without such a warrant, an "appeal to Him," as it is profanely called, whether by fire, or water, or sword, or pistol, is in the highest degree presumptuous and profane.

Heb, vine of the wine.
Heb. fall.
7 Acts 21. 24.

Verse 2. "Nazarite."-This word is from the verb, natzar, "to separate," and therefore means "the separated one." This chapter does not mention any other Nazarite than one who has himself undertaken the vow of separation; but it also appears that there were others devoted from their birth to the state of Nazaritism. Such were Samson and John the Baptist, and perhaps also Samuel. These are the only instances in Scripture; and as the two first instances of separation for life were in obedience to the express command of God, it would seem doubtful whether we are at liberty to infer any general practice from them. It seems clear to us that Moses contemplated no other than a temporary and voluntary Nazariteship; and if the practice did come to prevail of parents devoting their children to this state from their birth, we venture to conjecture that it may have arisen from the direction which the angel gave to the parents of Samson, that he should be a Nazarite from his birth. The conspicuous character of that extraordinary man would make the instance very generally known, and would naturally enough lead people to suppose, that such devotion of a child from his birth must be lawful and acceptable to God, even when not, in the particular instance, commanded by him. These instances of direct command do indeed appear to give a sanction to perpetual Nazaritism which we should not have been authorized to infer from the law of this chapter alone. But that the law did not contemplate perpetual Nazaritism seems evinced by the absence of any regulations as to the course to be taken in case the perpetual obligation should prove inconvenient or repugnant to the person on whom it was laid without his own concurrence. The analogy of the other laws would lead us to suppose that, in such a case, it would have been provided that he should be allowed to redeem himself. Whether this was permitted when perpetual Nazaritism came to be introduced, we have no means of knowing; but we should rather infer, from what we do know, that it was not. It does seem, however, that these perpetual Nazarites either were not considered subject to all the laws for the voluntary Nazarites, or else observed them more loosely. We incline to think that the terms of the vow, in their case, comprehended no more than was expressed ; and it never expressed all the Nazarite rules. Thus Samson was only forbidden to cut his hair, or to use wine or strong drink, and he appears to have thought himself left free in other respects, as he did not hesitate to attack and destroy the Philistines, from whose dead bodies a strict Nazarite must have fled to avoid defilement. Samuel's mother vowed no more than that no razor should come upon her son's head (1 Sam. i. 11), and John the Baptist was only prohibited the use of wine and strong drink. That Samuel drank no wine, or that the Baptist let his hair grow, is more than we can tell. It seems clear, from the manner in which the subject is introduced, that such a condition of life was previously known to the Israelites; and it is probable that specific regulations were made on the subject, defining what the Nazarites were to do, in order to prevent those who were devoutly inclined from falling into those extraordinary and unnatural austerities by which, in different countries, people have sought to propitiate the favour of the gods they serve. Several peculiarities of Nazaritism will hereafter be noticed, in order to illustrate the texts in which they occur. directions in this chapter are too clear to require much illustration. There is a custom in Persia which offers some remarkable analogies to the vow of Nazaritism, particularly to that form under which the Nazarites were separated from their birth. It will be recollected that the male Persians, in common usage, have their heads constantly shaven. But it frequently happens, after the birth of a son, that if the parent be in distress, or the child be sick, or that there be any other cause of grief, the mother makes a vow that no razor shall come upon the child's head for a certain portion of time, and sometimes for all his life. If the child recovers, and the cause of grief be removed, and if the mother's vow be but for a time, then when the time has expired, and the vow has been properly fulfilled, she has his head shaved, making, at the same time, a small entertainment, and collects money and other things from her friends and relations, which are sent as nezers (offerings) to the mosque of Kerbelah (the most holy place of the Persians), and are there consecrated. (See Morier's Second Journey.') These offerings are similar to those at the completion of the Nazarite vow (verses 14 and 15). The analogy is stronger than at first view appears, because the interdiction of wine and strong drink would probably also appear in the Persian vow, were it not rendered unnecessary by the general law of their religion, which excludes all Mohammedans from such indulgence.

The

5. "Shall let the locks of the hair of his head grow."-Bishop Patrick observes, in illustration of this text, that the Egyptians used sometimes to let their hair grow in honour of particular deities, and thinks that the custom was borrowed from the Hebrew Nazarites. We however feel so strongly persuaded of the previous existence of these customs, that we rather incline to the opinion of those who think that the Israelites had learnt this practice in Egypt, and that it was allowed in the law, with a reference to the true God, in order to take away occasion for its being preserved in honour of idols. A rooted custom, in itself harmless, but applied to purposes of evil, may with less difficulty have its object altered than be wholly eradicated. In viewing the laws of Moses it is always useful, so far as may be possible, to distinguish those which originate usages, from those which only correct, modify and alter usages already existing.

12. "The days that were before shall be lost."-Cases of sudden death must sometimes occur, and the most careful Nazarite could not always avoid the pollution thus occasioned. The present law provides for this case, by directing that after he had purified himself by proper offerings and ceremonies, he should begin his period of Nazaritism anew, the whole time previous to the defilement being lost in the computation. Had the restrictions of Nazaritism been remarkably rigid, as they certainly were not, this would have been very severe upon those who had vowed for any long term, and happened to pollute themselves when the time of its expiration approached.

18. "Take the hair of his head...and put it in the fire which is under the sacrifice."-The remark on verse 5 applies in a considerable degree to this text also. It was a very ancient custom among the heathen nations to consecrate to their gods the hair when cut off as well as when growing on the head. The hair was sometimes consumed on the altar, sometimes deposited in the temples and often suspended upon trees. A famous instance of the consecration of hair is that of Berenice, the consort of Ptolemy Euergetes. When the king went on his expedition to Syria, she was anxious for his safety and made a vow to consecrate her hair, which was much admired for its fineness and beauty, to Venus, if he returned safe. He did return safe; and she offered her hair in the temple at Cyprus. This consecrated hair, being afterwards missing, was fabled to have become a constellation in the heavens, which constellation is called Coma Berenices (the hair of Berenice) to this day. Another remarkable instance is that of Nero, who, according to Suetonius, cut off his first beard, put it in a casket of gold set with jewels, and consecrated it to Jupiter Capitolinus. In fact the hair of the head and beard has been held, more or less, in a sort of mystical respect in most countries. It may be traced in our own country, perhaps in the reputed use of the human hair in spells and incantations. To this day, the Arabs and other Orientals treat the hair which falls or is taken from them, with a degree of care which indicates the superstitious feelings which they connect with it. They bury it very carefully, that no one may see it or employ it to their prejudice. The impossibility of procuring a hair, while in the midst of a numerous population, prevented Ali Bey from being able to mend his hygrometer at Mecca.