or PECTORAL, one part of the priestly vestments, belonging
to the Jewish high priests. It was about ten inches square, Exod.
xxviii, 13–31; and consisted of a folded piece of the same rich
embroidered stuff of which the ephod was made. It was worn on the breast
of the high priest, and was set with twelve precious stones, on each of
which was engraven the name of one of the tribes. They were set in four
rows, three in each row, and were divided from each other by the little
golden squares or partitions in which they were set. The names of these
stones, and that of the tribe engraven on them, as also their
disposition on the breastplate, are usually given as follows; but what
stones really answer to the Hebrew name, is for the most part very
uncertain:--
_Sardine_, _Topaz_, _Carbuncle_,
REUBEN. SIMEON. LEVI.
_Emerald_, _Sapphire_, _Diamond_,
JUDAH. DAN. NAPHTALI.
_Ligure_, _Agate_, _Amethyst_,
GAD. ASHER. ISSACHAR.
_Beryl_, _Onyx_, _Jasper_,
ZEBULUN. JOSEPH. BENJAMIN.
This breastplate was fastened at the four corners, those on the top to
each shoulder, by a golden hook or ring, at the end of a wreathen chain;
and those below to the girdle of the ephod, by two strings or ribbons,
which had likewise two rings or hooks. This ornament was never to be
separated from the priestly garment; and it was called the _memorial_,
because it was a sign whereby the children of Israel might know that
they were presented to God, and that they were had in remembrance by
him. It was also called the _breastplate of judgment_, because it had
the divine oracle of URIM and THUMMIM annexed to it. These words signify
_lights_ and _perfections_, and are mentioned as in the high priest’s
breastplate; but what they were, we cannot determine. Some think they
were two precious stones added to the other twelve, by the extraordinary
lustre of which, God marked his approbation of a design, and, by their
becoming dim, his disallowance of it; others, that these two words were
written on a precious stone, or plate of gold, fixed in the breastplate;
others, that the letters of the names of the tribes, were the Urim and
Thummim; and that the letters by standing out, or by an extraordinary
illumination, marked such words as contained the answer of God to him
who consulted this oracle. Le Clerc will have them to be the names of
two precious stones, set in a golden collar of the high priest, and
coming down to his breast, as the magistrates of Egypt wore a golden
chain, at the end of which hung the figure of truth, engraven on a
precious stone. Prideaux thinks the words chiefly denote the clearness
of the oracles dictated to the high priest, though perhaps the lustre of
the stones in his breastplate might represent this clearness. Jahn says
the most probable opinion is, that URIM and THUMMIM (אורים, ותמים,
_light_ and _justice_, Septuagint, δήλωσις καὶ ἀλήθεια) [manifestation
and truth] was a sacred lot, 1 Samuel xiv, 41, 42. There were employed,
perhaps, in determining this lot, three precious stones, on one of which
was engraven כן, _yes_; on the other, לא, _no_; the third being
destitute of any inscription. The question proposed, therefore, was
always to be put in such a way, that the answer might be direct, either
_yes_ or _no_, provided any answer was given at all. These stones were
carried in the purse or bag, formed by the lining or interior of the
pectoral; and when the question was proposed, if the high priest drew
out the stone which exhibited _yes_, the answer was affirmative; if the
one on which _no_ was written, the answer was negative; if the third, no
answer was to be given, Joshua vii, 13–21; 1 Sam. xiv, 40–43; xxviii, 6.
In the midst of all this conjecture, only two things are certain: 1.
That one of the appointed methods of consulting God, on extraordinary
emergencies, was by URIM and THUMMIM: 2. That the oracles of God
rejected all equivocal and enigmatical replies, which was the character
of the Heathen pretended oracles. “The words of the Lord are pure
words.” His own oracle bears, therefore, an inscription which signifies
_lights_ and _perfections_, or, _the shining_ and _the perfect_; or,
according to the LXX, _manifestation_ and _truth_. In this respect it
might be a type of the Christian revelation made to the true Israel, the
Christian church, by the Gospel. St. Paul seems especially to allude to
this translation of Urim and Thummim by the Septuagint, when he speaks
of himself and his fellow labourers, “commending themselves to every
man’s conscience _by manifestation of the truth_;” in opposition to
those who by their errors and compliances with the Jewish prejudices, or
with the philosophical taste of the Greeks, obscured the truth, and
rendered ambiguous the guidance of Christian doctrine. His preaching is
thus tacitly compared to the oracles of God; theirs, to the misleading
and perplexed oracles of the Heathen.
BRIDE and BRIDEGROOM. Under this head an account of the marriage customs
of ancient times, the knowledge of which is so necessary to explain many
allusions in the Holy Scriptures, may be properly introduced. Among the
Jews, the state of marriage was, from the remotest periods of their
history, reckoned so honourable, that the person who neglected or
declined to enter into it without a good reason, was thought to be
guilty of a great crime. Such a mode of thinking was not confined to
them; in several of the Grecian states, marriage was held in equal
respect. The Jews did not allow marriageable persons to enter into that
honourable state without restriction; the high priest was forbidden by
law to marry a widow; and the priests of every rank, to take a harlot to
wife, a profane woman, or one put away from her husband. To prevent the
alienation of inheritances, an heiress could not marry but into her own
tribe. The whole people of Israel, being a holy nation, separated from
all the earth to the service of the true God, and to be the depositaries
of his law, were forbidden to contract matrimonial alliances with the
idolatrous nations in their vicinity. The marriage engagement of a
minor, without the knowledge and consent of the parents, was of no
force; so sacred was the parental authority held among that people.
These customs appear to have been derived from a very remote antiquity;
for when Eliezer of Damascus went to Mesopotamia to take a wife from
thence unto his master’s son, he disclosed the motives of his journey to
the father and brother of Rebecca; and Hamor applied to Jacob and his
sons, for their consent to the union of Dinah with his son Shechem.
Samson also consulted his parents about his marriage; and entreated them
to get for him the object of his choice. Marriage contracts seem to have
been made in the primitive ages with little ceremony. The suitor
himself, or his father, sent a messenger to the father of the woman, to
ask her in marriage. In the remote ages of antiquity, women were
literally purchased by their husbands; and the presents made to their
parents or other relations were called their dowry. Thus, we find
Shechem bargaining with Jacob and his sons for Dinah: “Let me find grace
in your eyes, and what ye shall say unto me, I will give: ask me never
so much dowry and gift, and I will give according as ye shall say unto
me; but give me the damsel to wife,” Gen. xxxiv, 2. The practice still
continues in the country of Shechem; for when a young Arab wishes to
marry, he must purchase his wife; and for this reason, fathers, among
the Arabs, are never more happy than when they have many daughters. They
are reckoned the principal riches of a house. An Arabian suitor will
offer fifty sheep, six camels, or a dozen of cows: if he be not rich
enough to make such offers, he proposes to give a mare or a colt,
considering in the offer the merit of the young woman, the rank of her
family, and his own circumstances. In the primitive times of Greece, a
well-educated lady was valued at four oxen. When they are agreed on both
sides, the contract is drawn up by him that acts as cadi or judge among
these Arabs. In some parts of the east, a measure of corn is formally
mentioned in contracts for their concubines, or temporary wives, beside
the sum of money which is stipulated by way of dowry. This custom is
probably as ancient as concubinage, with which it is connected; and if
so, it will perhaps account for the Prophet Hosea’s purchasing a wife of
this kind, for fifteen pieces of silver, and for a homer of barley, and
a half homer of barley. When the intended husband was not able to give a
dowry, he offered an equivalent. The patriarch Jacob, who came to Laban
with only his staff, offered to serve him seven years for Rachel: a
proposal which Laban accepted. This custom has descended to modern
times; for in Cabul the young men who are unable to advance the required
dowry “live with their future father-in-law, and earn their bride by
their services, without ever seeing the object of their wishes.” The
contract of marriage was made in the house of the woman’s father, before
the elders and governors of the city or district. The espousals by
money, or a written instrument, were performed by the man and woman
under a tent or canopy erected for that purpose. Into this chamber the
bridegroom was accustomed to go with his bride, that he might talk with
her more familiarly; which was considered as a ceremony of confirmation
to the wedlock. While he was there, no person was allowed to enter: his
friends and attendants waited for him at the door, with torches and
lamps in their hands; and when he came out, he was received by all that
were present with great joy and acclamation. To this ancient custom, the
Psalmist alludes in his magnificent description of the heavens: “In them
he set a tabernacle for the sun; which, as a bridegroom coming out of
his chamber, rejoices as a strong man to run a race,” Psalm xix, 4. A
Jewish virgin legally betrothed was considered as a lawful wife; and, by
consequence, could not be put away without a bill of divorce. And if she
proved unfaithful to her betrothed husband, she was punished as an
adulteress; and her seducer incurred the same punishment as if he had
polluted the wife of his neighbour. This is the reason that the angel
addressed Joseph, the betrothed husband of Mary, in these terms:
“Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife;
for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.” The Evangelist
Luke gives her the same title: “And Joseph also went up from Galilee
unto Bethlehem, to be taxed, with Mary his espoused wife,” Luke ii, 4,
5.
2. Ten or twelve months commonly intervened between the ceremony of
espousals and the marriage: during this interval, the espoused wife
continued with her parents, that she might provide herself with nuptial
ornaments suitable to her station. This custom serves to explain a
circumstance in Samson’s marriage, which is involved in some obscurity.
“He went down,” says the historian, “and talked with the woman,” (whom
he had seen at Timnath,) “and she pleased him well,” Judges xiv, 7, &c.
These words seem to refer to the ceremony of espousals; the following,
to the subsequent marriage: “And after a time he returned to take her,”
Judges xiv, 8. Hence a considerable time intervened between the
espousals and their actual union. From the time of the espousals, the
bridegroom was at liberty to visit his espoused wife in the house of her
father; yet neither of the parties left their own abode during eight
days before the marriage; but persons of the same age visited the
bridegroom, and made merry with him. These circumstances are distinctly
marked in the account which the sacred historian has given us of
Samson’s marriage: “So his father went down unto the woman, and made
there a feast; for so used the young men to do. And it came to pass when
they saw him, that they brought thirty companions to be with him,”
Judges xiv, 10. These companions were the children of the bride chamber,
of whom our Lord speaks: “Can the children of the bride chamber mourn as
long as the bridegroom is with them?” Matt. xix, 15. The marriage
ceremony was commonly performed in a garden, or in the open air; the
bride was placed under a canopy, supported by four youths, and adorned
with jewels according to the rank of the married persons; all the
company crying out with joyful acclamations, “Blessed be he that
cometh!” It was anciently the custom, at the conclusion of the ceremony,
for the father and mother and kindred of the woman, to pray for a
blessing upon the parties. Bethuel and Laban, and the other members of
their family, pronounced a solemn benediction upon Rebecca before her
departure: “And they blessed Rebecca, and said unto her, Thou art our
sister, be thou the mother of thousands of millions; and let thy seed
possess the gate of those that hate them,” Gen. xxiv, 60. And in times
long posterior to the age of Isaac, when Ruth, the Moabitess, was
espoused to Boaz, “all the people that were in the gate, and the elders,
said, We are witnesses: the Lord make the woman that is come into thine
house like Rachel, and like Leah, which two did build the house of
Israel; and do thou worthily in Ephratah, and be famous in Bethlehem,”
Ruth iv, 11, 12. After the benedictions, the bride is conducted with
great pomp to the house of her husband: this is usually done in the
evening; and as the procession moved along, money, sweetmeats, flowers,
and other articles, were thrown among the populace, which they caught in
cloths made for such occasions, stretched in a particular manner upon
frames. The use of perfumes at eastern marriages is common; and upon
great occasions very profuse.
3. It was the custom among the ancient Greeks, and the nations around
them, to conduct the new-married couple with torches and lamps to their
dwelling; as appears from the messenger in Euripides, who says he called
to mind the time when he bore torches before Menelaus and Helena. These
torches were usually carried by servants; and the procession was
sometimes attended by singers and dancers. Thus Homer, in his
description of the shield of Achilles:--
--ἐν τῇ μέν ῥα γάμοι τ’ ἔσαν εἰλαπίναι τε,
Νύμφας δ’ ἐκ θαλάμων, δαΐδων ὑπο λαμπομενάων,
Ἠγίνεον ἀνὰ ἄστυ. κ. τ. λ. _Il._ lib. xviii, l. 490.
“In one of the sculptured cities, nuptials were celebrating, and solemn
feasts; through the city they conducted the new-married pair from their
chambers, with flaming torches, while frequent shouts of Hymen burst
from the attending throng, and young men danced in skilful measures to
the sound of the pipe and the harp.”
A similar custom is observed among the Hindoos. The husband and wife, on
the day of their marriage, being both in the same palanquin, go about
seven and eight o’clock at night, accompanied with all their kindred and
friends; the trumpets and drums go before them; and they are lighted by
a number of flambeaux; immediately before the palanquin walk many women,
whose business it is to sing verses, in which they wish them all manner
of prosperity. They march in this equipage through the streets for the
space of some hours, after which they return to their own house, where
the domestics are in waiting. The whole house is illumined with small
lamps; and many of those flambeaux already mentioned are kept ready for
their arrival, beside those which accompany them, and are carried before
the palanquin. These flambeaux are composed of many pieces of old linen,
squeezed hard against one another in a round figure, and thrust down
into a mould of copper. The persons that hold them in one hand have in
the other a bottle of the same metal with the copper mould, which is
full of oil, which they take care to pour out from time to time upon the
linen, which otherwise gives no light. The Roman ladies also were led
home to their husbands in the evening by the light of torches. A Jewish
marriage seems to have been conducted in much the same way; for in that
beautiful psalm, where David describes the majesty of Christ’s kingdom,
we meet with this passage: “And the daughter of Tyre shall be there with
a gift; even the rich among the people shall entreat thy favour. The
king’s daughter is all-glorious within; her clothing is of wrought gold.
She shall be brought unto the king in raiment of needle work; the
virgins, her companions that follow her, shall be brought unto thee.
With gladness and rejoicing shall they be brought: they shall enter into
the king’s palace,” Psalm xlv, 12, &c. In the parable of the ten
virgins, the same circumstances are introduced: “They that were foolish
took their lamps, and took no oil with them: but the wise took oil in
their vessels with their lamps. While the bridegroom tarried,” leading
the procession through the streets of the city, the women and domestics
that were appointed to wait his arrival at home, “all slumbered and
slept. And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom
cometh! Go ye out to meet him. Then all those virgins arose and trimmed
their lamps. And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil;
for our lamps are gone out,” Matt. xxv, 6.
The following extract from Ward’s “View of the Hindoos” very strikingly
illustrates this parable: “At a marriage, the procession of which I saw
some years ago, the bridegroom came from a distance, and the bride lived
at Serampore, to which place the bridegroom was to come by water. After
waiting two or three hours, at length, near midnight, it was announced,
as if in the very words of Scripture, ‘Behold, the bridegroom cometh! Go
ye out to meet him.’ All the persons employed now lighted their lamps,
and ran with them in their hands to fill up their stations in the
procession; some of them had lost their lights, and were unprepared; but
it was then too late to seek them, and the cavalcade moved forward to
the house of the bride, at which place the company entered a large and
splendidly illuminated area, before the house covered with an awning,
where a great multitude of friends dressed in their best apparel were
seated upon mats. The bridegroom was carried in the arms of a friend,
and placed on a superb seat in the midst of the company, where he sat a
short time, and then went into the house, the door of which was
immediately shut, and guarded by Sepoys. I and others expostulated with
the door keepers, but in vain.”
4. But among the Jews, the bridegroom was not always permitted to
accompany his bride from her father’s house; an intimate friend was
often sent to conduct her, while he remained at home to receive her in
his apartment. Her female attendants had the honour to introduce her;
and whenever they changed the bride’s dress, which is often done, they
presented her to the bridegroom. It is the custom, and belongs to their
ideas of magnificence, frequently to dress and undress the bride, and to
cause her to wear on that same day all the clothes made up for her
nuptials. These circumstances discover the force of St. John’s language,
in his magnificent description of the Christian church in her millennial
state: “And I, John, saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down from
God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband,” Rev.
xxi, 2.
5. Those that were invited to the marriage were expected to appear in
their best and gayest attire. If the bridegroom was in circumstances to
afford it, wedding garments were prepared for all the guests, which were
hung up in the antechamber for them to put on over the rest of their
clothes, as they entered the apartments where the marriage feast was
prepared. To refuse, or even to neglect, putting on the wedding garment,
was reckoned an insult to the bridegroom; aggravated by the circumstance
that it was provided by himself for the very purpose of being worn on
that occasion, and was hung up in the way to the inner apartment, that
the guests must have seen it, and recollected the design of its
suspension. This accounts for the severity of the sentence pronounced by
the king, who came in to see the guests, and found among them one who
had neglected to put it on: “And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest
thou in hither, not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless,”
Matt. xxii, 11, because it was provided at the expense of the
entertainer, and placed full in his view. “Then said the king to the
servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into
outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
The following extract will show the importance of having a suitable
garment for a marriage feast, and the offence taken against those who
refuse it when presented as a gift. “The next day, Dec. 3d, the king
sent to invite the ambassadors to dine with him once more. The
Mehemander told them, it was the custom that they should wear over their
own clothes the best of those garments which the king had sent them. The
ambassadors at first made some scruple of that compliance; but when they
were told that it was a custom observed by all ambassadors, and that no
doubt the king would take it very ill at their hands if they presented
themselves before him without the marks of his liberality, they at last
resolved to do it; and, after their example, all the rest of the
retinue.”
to the Jewish high priests. It was about ten inches square, Exod.
xxviii, 13–31; and consisted of a folded piece of the same rich
embroidered stuff of which the ephod was made. It was worn on the breast
of the high priest, and was set with twelve precious stones, on each of
which was engraven the name of one of the tribes. They were set in four
rows, three in each row, and were divided from each other by the little
golden squares or partitions in which they were set. The names of these
stones, and that of the tribe engraven on them, as also their
disposition on the breastplate, are usually given as follows; but what
stones really answer to the Hebrew name, is for the most part very
uncertain:--
_Sardine_, _Topaz_, _Carbuncle_,
REUBEN. SIMEON. LEVI.
_Emerald_, _Sapphire_, _Diamond_,
JUDAH. DAN. NAPHTALI.
_Ligure_, _Agate_, _Amethyst_,
GAD. ASHER. ISSACHAR.
_Beryl_, _Onyx_, _Jasper_,
ZEBULUN. JOSEPH. BENJAMIN.
This breastplate was fastened at the four corners, those on the top to
each shoulder, by a golden hook or ring, at the end of a wreathen chain;
and those below to the girdle of the ephod, by two strings or ribbons,
which had likewise two rings or hooks. This ornament was never to be
separated from the priestly garment; and it was called the _memorial_,
because it was a sign whereby the children of Israel might know that
they were presented to God, and that they were had in remembrance by
him. It was also called the _breastplate of judgment_, because it had
the divine oracle of URIM and THUMMIM annexed to it. These words signify
_lights_ and _perfections_, and are mentioned as in the high priest’s
breastplate; but what they were, we cannot determine. Some think they
were two precious stones added to the other twelve, by the extraordinary
lustre of which, God marked his approbation of a design, and, by their
becoming dim, his disallowance of it; others, that these two words were
written on a precious stone, or plate of gold, fixed in the breastplate;
others, that the letters of the names of the tribes, were the Urim and
Thummim; and that the letters by standing out, or by an extraordinary
illumination, marked such words as contained the answer of God to him
who consulted this oracle. Le Clerc will have them to be the names of
two precious stones, set in a golden collar of the high priest, and
coming down to his breast, as the magistrates of Egypt wore a golden
chain, at the end of which hung the figure of truth, engraven on a
precious stone. Prideaux thinks the words chiefly denote the clearness
of the oracles dictated to the high priest, though perhaps the lustre of
the stones in his breastplate might represent this clearness. Jahn says
the most probable opinion is, that URIM and THUMMIM (אורים, ותמים,
_light_ and _justice_, Septuagint, δήλωσις καὶ ἀλήθεια) [manifestation
and truth] was a sacred lot, 1 Samuel xiv, 41, 42. There were employed,
perhaps, in determining this lot, three precious stones, on one of which
was engraven כן, _yes_; on the other, לא, _no_; the third being
destitute of any inscription. The question proposed, therefore, was
always to be put in such a way, that the answer might be direct, either
_yes_ or _no_, provided any answer was given at all. These stones were
carried in the purse or bag, formed by the lining or interior of the
pectoral; and when the question was proposed, if the high priest drew
out the stone which exhibited _yes_, the answer was affirmative; if the
one on which _no_ was written, the answer was negative; if the third, no
answer was to be given, Joshua vii, 13–21; 1 Sam. xiv, 40–43; xxviii, 6.
In the midst of all this conjecture, only two things are certain: 1.
That one of the appointed methods of consulting God, on extraordinary
emergencies, was by URIM and THUMMIM: 2. That the oracles of God
rejected all equivocal and enigmatical replies, which was the character
of the Heathen pretended oracles. “The words of the Lord are pure
words.” His own oracle bears, therefore, an inscription which signifies
_lights_ and _perfections_, or, _the shining_ and _the perfect_; or,
according to the LXX, _manifestation_ and _truth_. In this respect it
might be a type of the Christian revelation made to the true Israel, the
Christian church, by the Gospel. St. Paul seems especially to allude to
this translation of Urim and Thummim by the Septuagint, when he speaks
of himself and his fellow labourers, “commending themselves to every
man’s conscience _by manifestation of the truth_;” in opposition to
those who by their errors and compliances with the Jewish prejudices, or
with the philosophical taste of the Greeks, obscured the truth, and
rendered ambiguous the guidance of Christian doctrine. His preaching is
thus tacitly compared to the oracles of God; theirs, to the misleading
and perplexed oracles of the Heathen.
BRIDE and BRIDEGROOM. Under this head an account of the marriage customs
of ancient times, the knowledge of which is so necessary to explain many
allusions in the Holy Scriptures, may be properly introduced. Among the
Jews, the state of marriage was, from the remotest periods of their
history, reckoned so honourable, that the person who neglected or
declined to enter into it without a good reason, was thought to be
guilty of a great crime. Such a mode of thinking was not confined to
them; in several of the Grecian states, marriage was held in equal
respect. The Jews did not allow marriageable persons to enter into that
honourable state without restriction; the high priest was forbidden by
law to marry a widow; and the priests of every rank, to take a harlot to
wife, a profane woman, or one put away from her husband. To prevent the
alienation of inheritances, an heiress could not marry but into her own
tribe. The whole people of Israel, being a holy nation, separated from
all the earth to the service of the true God, and to be the depositaries
of his law, were forbidden to contract matrimonial alliances with the
idolatrous nations in their vicinity. The marriage engagement of a
minor, without the knowledge and consent of the parents, was of no
force; so sacred was the parental authority held among that people.
These customs appear to have been derived from a very remote antiquity;
for when Eliezer of Damascus went to Mesopotamia to take a wife from
thence unto his master’s son, he disclosed the motives of his journey to
the father and brother of Rebecca; and Hamor applied to Jacob and his
sons, for their consent to the union of Dinah with his son Shechem.
Samson also consulted his parents about his marriage; and entreated them
to get for him the object of his choice. Marriage contracts seem to have
been made in the primitive ages with little ceremony. The suitor
himself, or his father, sent a messenger to the father of the woman, to
ask her in marriage. In the remote ages of antiquity, women were
literally purchased by their husbands; and the presents made to their
parents or other relations were called their dowry. Thus, we find
Shechem bargaining with Jacob and his sons for Dinah: “Let me find grace
in your eyes, and what ye shall say unto me, I will give: ask me never
so much dowry and gift, and I will give according as ye shall say unto
me; but give me the damsel to wife,” Gen. xxxiv, 2. The practice still
continues in the country of Shechem; for when a young Arab wishes to
marry, he must purchase his wife; and for this reason, fathers, among
the Arabs, are never more happy than when they have many daughters. They
are reckoned the principal riches of a house. An Arabian suitor will
offer fifty sheep, six camels, or a dozen of cows: if he be not rich
enough to make such offers, he proposes to give a mare or a colt,
considering in the offer the merit of the young woman, the rank of her
family, and his own circumstances. In the primitive times of Greece, a
well-educated lady was valued at four oxen. When they are agreed on both
sides, the contract is drawn up by him that acts as cadi or judge among
these Arabs. In some parts of the east, a measure of corn is formally
mentioned in contracts for their concubines, or temporary wives, beside
the sum of money which is stipulated by way of dowry. This custom is
probably as ancient as concubinage, with which it is connected; and if
so, it will perhaps account for the Prophet Hosea’s purchasing a wife of
this kind, for fifteen pieces of silver, and for a homer of barley, and
a half homer of barley. When the intended husband was not able to give a
dowry, he offered an equivalent. The patriarch Jacob, who came to Laban
with only his staff, offered to serve him seven years for Rachel: a
proposal which Laban accepted. This custom has descended to modern
times; for in Cabul the young men who are unable to advance the required
dowry “live with their future father-in-law, and earn their bride by
their services, without ever seeing the object of their wishes.” The
contract of marriage was made in the house of the woman’s father, before
the elders and governors of the city or district. The espousals by
money, or a written instrument, were performed by the man and woman
under a tent or canopy erected for that purpose. Into this chamber the
bridegroom was accustomed to go with his bride, that he might talk with
her more familiarly; which was considered as a ceremony of confirmation
to the wedlock. While he was there, no person was allowed to enter: his
friends and attendants waited for him at the door, with torches and
lamps in their hands; and when he came out, he was received by all that
were present with great joy and acclamation. To this ancient custom, the
Psalmist alludes in his magnificent description of the heavens: “In them
he set a tabernacle for the sun; which, as a bridegroom coming out of
his chamber, rejoices as a strong man to run a race,” Psalm xix, 4. A
Jewish virgin legally betrothed was considered as a lawful wife; and, by
consequence, could not be put away without a bill of divorce. And if she
proved unfaithful to her betrothed husband, she was punished as an
adulteress; and her seducer incurred the same punishment as if he had
polluted the wife of his neighbour. This is the reason that the angel
addressed Joseph, the betrothed husband of Mary, in these terms:
“Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife;
for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.” The Evangelist
Luke gives her the same title: “And Joseph also went up from Galilee
unto Bethlehem, to be taxed, with Mary his espoused wife,” Luke ii, 4,
5.
2. Ten or twelve months commonly intervened between the ceremony of
espousals and the marriage: during this interval, the espoused wife
continued with her parents, that she might provide herself with nuptial
ornaments suitable to her station. This custom serves to explain a
circumstance in Samson’s marriage, which is involved in some obscurity.
“He went down,” says the historian, “and talked with the woman,” (whom
he had seen at Timnath,) “and she pleased him well,” Judges xiv, 7, &c.
These words seem to refer to the ceremony of espousals; the following,
to the subsequent marriage: “And after a time he returned to take her,”
Judges xiv, 8. Hence a considerable time intervened between the
espousals and their actual union. From the time of the espousals, the
bridegroom was at liberty to visit his espoused wife in the house of her
father; yet neither of the parties left their own abode during eight
days before the marriage; but persons of the same age visited the
bridegroom, and made merry with him. These circumstances are distinctly
marked in the account which the sacred historian has given us of
Samson’s marriage: “So his father went down unto the woman, and made
there a feast; for so used the young men to do. And it came to pass when
they saw him, that they brought thirty companions to be with him,”
Judges xiv, 10. These companions were the children of the bride chamber,
of whom our Lord speaks: “Can the children of the bride chamber mourn as
long as the bridegroom is with them?” Matt. xix, 15. The marriage
ceremony was commonly performed in a garden, or in the open air; the
bride was placed under a canopy, supported by four youths, and adorned
with jewels according to the rank of the married persons; all the
company crying out with joyful acclamations, “Blessed be he that
cometh!” It was anciently the custom, at the conclusion of the ceremony,
for the father and mother and kindred of the woman, to pray for a
blessing upon the parties. Bethuel and Laban, and the other members of
their family, pronounced a solemn benediction upon Rebecca before her
departure: “And they blessed Rebecca, and said unto her, Thou art our
sister, be thou the mother of thousands of millions; and let thy seed
possess the gate of those that hate them,” Gen. xxiv, 60. And in times
long posterior to the age of Isaac, when Ruth, the Moabitess, was
espoused to Boaz, “all the people that were in the gate, and the elders,
said, We are witnesses: the Lord make the woman that is come into thine
house like Rachel, and like Leah, which two did build the house of
Israel; and do thou worthily in Ephratah, and be famous in Bethlehem,”
Ruth iv, 11, 12. After the benedictions, the bride is conducted with
great pomp to the house of her husband: this is usually done in the
evening; and as the procession moved along, money, sweetmeats, flowers,
and other articles, were thrown among the populace, which they caught in
cloths made for such occasions, stretched in a particular manner upon
frames. The use of perfumes at eastern marriages is common; and upon
great occasions very profuse.
3. It was the custom among the ancient Greeks, and the nations around
them, to conduct the new-married couple with torches and lamps to their
dwelling; as appears from the messenger in Euripides, who says he called
to mind the time when he bore torches before Menelaus and Helena. These
torches were usually carried by servants; and the procession was
sometimes attended by singers and dancers. Thus Homer, in his
description of the shield of Achilles:--
--ἐν τῇ μέν ῥα γάμοι τ’ ἔσαν εἰλαπίναι τε,
Νύμφας δ’ ἐκ θαλάμων, δαΐδων ὑπο λαμπομενάων,
Ἠγίνεον ἀνὰ ἄστυ. κ. τ. λ. _Il._ lib. xviii, l. 490.
“In one of the sculptured cities, nuptials were celebrating, and solemn
feasts; through the city they conducted the new-married pair from their
chambers, with flaming torches, while frequent shouts of Hymen burst
from the attending throng, and young men danced in skilful measures to
the sound of the pipe and the harp.”
A similar custom is observed among the Hindoos. The husband and wife, on
the day of their marriage, being both in the same palanquin, go about
seven and eight o’clock at night, accompanied with all their kindred and
friends; the trumpets and drums go before them; and they are lighted by
a number of flambeaux; immediately before the palanquin walk many women,
whose business it is to sing verses, in which they wish them all manner
of prosperity. They march in this equipage through the streets for the
space of some hours, after which they return to their own house, where
the domestics are in waiting. The whole house is illumined with small
lamps; and many of those flambeaux already mentioned are kept ready for
their arrival, beside those which accompany them, and are carried before
the palanquin. These flambeaux are composed of many pieces of old linen,
squeezed hard against one another in a round figure, and thrust down
into a mould of copper. The persons that hold them in one hand have in
the other a bottle of the same metal with the copper mould, which is
full of oil, which they take care to pour out from time to time upon the
linen, which otherwise gives no light. The Roman ladies also were led
home to their husbands in the evening by the light of torches. A Jewish
marriage seems to have been conducted in much the same way; for in that
beautiful psalm, where David describes the majesty of Christ’s kingdom,
we meet with this passage: “And the daughter of Tyre shall be there with
a gift; even the rich among the people shall entreat thy favour. The
king’s daughter is all-glorious within; her clothing is of wrought gold.
She shall be brought unto the king in raiment of needle work; the
virgins, her companions that follow her, shall be brought unto thee.
With gladness and rejoicing shall they be brought: they shall enter into
the king’s palace,” Psalm xlv, 12, &c. In the parable of the ten
virgins, the same circumstances are introduced: “They that were foolish
took their lamps, and took no oil with them: but the wise took oil in
their vessels with their lamps. While the bridegroom tarried,” leading
the procession through the streets of the city, the women and domestics
that were appointed to wait his arrival at home, “all slumbered and
slept. And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom
cometh! Go ye out to meet him. Then all those virgins arose and trimmed
their lamps. And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil;
for our lamps are gone out,” Matt. xxv, 6.
The following extract from Ward’s “View of the Hindoos” very strikingly
illustrates this parable: “At a marriage, the procession of which I saw
some years ago, the bridegroom came from a distance, and the bride lived
at Serampore, to which place the bridegroom was to come by water. After
waiting two or three hours, at length, near midnight, it was announced,
as if in the very words of Scripture, ‘Behold, the bridegroom cometh! Go
ye out to meet him.’ All the persons employed now lighted their lamps,
and ran with them in their hands to fill up their stations in the
procession; some of them had lost their lights, and were unprepared; but
it was then too late to seek them, and the cavalcade moved forward to
the house of the bride, at which place the company entered a large and
splendidly illuminated area, before the house covered with an awning,
where a great multitude of friends dressed in their best apparel were
seated upon mats. The bridegroom was carried in the arms of a friend,
and placed on a superb seat in the midst of the company, where he sat a
short time, and then went into the house, the door of which was
immediately shut, and guarded by Sepoys. I and others expostulated with
the door keepers, but in vain.”
4. But among the Jews, the bridegroom was not always permitted to
accompany his bride from her father’s house; an intimate friend was
often sent to conduct her, while he remained at home to receive her in
his apartment. Her female attendants had the honour to introduce her;
and whenever they changed the bride’s dress, which is often done, they
presented her to the bridegroom. It is the custom, and belongs to their
ideas of magnificence, frequently to dress and undress the bride, and to
cause her to wear on that same day all the clothes made up for her
nuptials. These circumstances discover the force of St. John’s language,
in his magnificent description of the Christian church in her millennial
state: “And I, John, saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down from
God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband,” Rev.
xxi, 2.
5. Those that were invited to the marriage were expected to appear in
their best and gayest attire. If the bridegroom was in circumstances to
afford it, wedding garments were prepared for all the guests, which were
hung up in the antechamber for them to put on over the rest of their
clothes, as they entered the apartments where the marriage feast was
prepared. To refuse, or even to neglect, putting on the wedding garment,
was reckoned an insult to the bridegroom; aggravated by the circumstance
that it was provided by himself for the very purpose of being worn on
that occasion, and was hung up in the way to the inner apartment, that
the guests must have seen it, and recollected the design of its
suspension. This accounts for the severity of the sentence pronounced by
the king, who came in to see the guests, and found among them one who
had neglected to put it on: “And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest
thou in hither, not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless,”
Matt. xxii, 11, because it was provided at the expense of the
entertainer, and placed full in his view. “Then said the king to the
servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into
outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
The following extract will show the importance of having a suitable
garment for a marriage feast, and the offence taken against those who
refuse it when presented as a gift. “The next day, Dec. 3d, the king
sent to invite the ambassadors to dine with him once more. The
Mehemander told them, it was the custom that they should wear over their
own clothes the best of those garments which the king had sent them. The
ambassadors at first made some scruple of that compliance; but when they
were told that it was a custom observed by all ambassadors, and that no
doubt the king would take it very ill at their hands if they presented
themselves before him without the marks of his liberality, they at last
resolved to do it; and, after their example, all the rest of the
retinue.”