heir worship. Thus idols are called D, the inane (Lev. xix. 4); ban, vanities—the rà uárata of Acts xiv. 15 – (Jer. ii. 5) ; †18, nothing (Isa. Ixvi. 3); "sp", abominations (1 Kings xi. 5); b), stercora (Ezek. vi. 4); and their worship is called whoredom, which is expressed

זנה oy the derivatives of

The early existence of idolatry is evinced by Josh. xxiv. 2, where it is stated that Abram and xis immediate ancestors dwelling in Mesopotamia served other gods.' The terms in Gen. xxxi. 53, and particularly the plural form of the verb, seem to show that some members of Terah's family had each different gods. From Josh. xxiv. 14, and Ezek. xx. 8, we learn that the Israelites, during their sojourn in Egypt, were seduced to worship the idols of that country; although we possess no particular account of their transgression. In Amos v. 25, and Acts vii. 42, it is stated that they committed idolatry in their journey through the wilderness; and in Num. xxv. 1, sq., that they worshipped the Moabite idol Baal-peor at Shittim. After the Israelites had obtained possession of the promised land, we find that they were continually tempted to adopt the idolatries of the Canaanite nations with which they came in contact. The book of Judges enumerates several successive relapses into this sin. The gods which they served during this period were Baal and Ashtoreth, and their modifications; and Syria, Sidon, Moab, Ammon, and Philistia, are named in Judg. x. 6, as the sources from which they derived their idolatries. Then Samuel appears to have exercised a beneficial influence in weaning the people from this folly (1 Sam. vii.); and the worship of the Lord acquired a gradually increasing hold on the nation until the time of Solomon, who was induced in his old age to permit the establishment of idolatry at Jerusalem. Ou the division of the nation, the kingdom of Israel (besides adhering to the sin of Jeroboam to the last) was specially devoted to the worship of Baal, which Ahab had renewed and carried to an unprecedented height; and although the energetic measures adopted by Jehu, and afterwards by the priest Jehoiada, to suppress this idolatry, may have been the cause why there is no later express mention of Baal, yet it is evident from 2 Kings xiii. 6, and xvii. 10, that the worship of Asherah continued until the deportation of the ten tribes. This event also introduced the peculiar idolatries of the Assyrian colonists into Samaria. In the Kingdom of Judah, on the other hand, idolatry continued during the two succeeding reigns; was suppressed for a time by Asa (1 Kings xv. 12); was revived in consequence of Joram marrying into the family of Ahab; was continued by Ahaz; received a check from Hezekiah; broke out again more violently under Manasseh; until Josiah male the most vigorous attempt to suppress it. But even Josiah's efforts to restore the worship of the Lord were ineffectual; for the later prophets, Zephaniah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, still continue to utter reproofs against idolatry. Nor did the capture of Jerusalem under Jehoiachim awaken this peculiarly sensual people; for Ezekiel (viii.) shows that those who were left in Jerusalem under the government of Zedekiah had given themselves up to many kinds of idolatry; and Jeremiah (xliv. ) charges those inhabitants of Judah who

had found an asylum in Egypt, with having turned to serve the gods of that country. On the tivity, they appear, for the first time in their his restoration of the Jews after the Babylonian captory, to have been permanently impressed with a sense of the degree to which their former idolatries had been an insult to God, and a degradation of their own understanding-an advance in the culture of the nation which may in part be ascribed to the influence of the Persian abhorrence of images, as well as to the effects of the exile as a chastisement. In this state they continued until Antiochus Epiphanes made the last and fruitless attempt to establish the Greek idolatry in Pales tine (1 Macc. i.).

The particular forms of idolatry into which the Israelites fell are described under the names of the different gods which they worshipped [ASHTORETH, BAAI, &c.]: the general features of their idolatry require a brief notice here. According to Movers (Die Phönizier, i. 148), the religion of all the idolatrous Syro-Arabian nations was a deification of the powers and laws of nature, an adoration of those objects in which these powers are considered to abide, and by which they act. The deity is thus the invisible power in nature itself, that power which manifests itself as the generator, sustainer, and destroyer of its works. This view admits of two modifications: either the separate powers of nature are regarded as so many different gods, and the objects by which these powers are manifested-as the sun, moon, &c.are regarded as their images and supporters; or the power of nature is considered to be one and indivisible, and only to differ as to the forms under which it manifests itself. Both views coexist in almost all religions. The most simple and ancient notion, however, is that which conceives the deity to be in human form, as male and female, and which considers the male sex to be the type of its active, generative, and destructive power; while that passive power of nature whose function is to conceive and bring forth, is embodied under the female form. The human form and the diversity of sex lead naturally to the different ages of life-to the old man and the youth, the matron and the virgin—according to the modifications of the conception; and the myths which represent the influences, the changes, the laws, and the relations of these natural powers under the sacred histories of such gods, constitute a harmonious development of such a religious system.

Those who saw the deity manifested by, or conceived him as resident in, any natural objects, could not fail to regard the sun and moon as the potent rulers of day and night, and the sources of those influences on which all animated nature depends. Hence star-worship forms a prominent feature in all the false religions mentioned in the Bible. Of this character chiefly were the Egyptian, the Canaanite, the Chaldæan, and the Persian religions. The Persian form of astrolatry, however, deserves to be distinguished from the others; for it allowed no images nor temples of the god, but worshipped him in his purest symbol, fire. It is understood that this form is alluded to in most of those passages which mention the worship of the sun, moon, and heavenly host, by incense, on heights (2 Kings xxiii. 5, 12; Jer. xix. 13). The other form of astrolatry, in which the idea of the

any deduction, that are drawn from them. This much, however, we there learn of the political constitution of the Seirite Aborigines, that, like the Esauites and Israelites, they were divided into tribes, and these tribes were sub-divided into families-the very polity which still obtains among the Arabs by whom Idumæa is now peopled. Each tribe had its own Alluf-a term which is unhappily rendered in the English Version by Duke-for though that has, no doubt, the radical meaning of the Latin dux, a leader,' it now only suggests the idea of a feudal title of nobility. Of these chiefs of the Horites seven are enumerated, viz., Lotan, Shobal, Zibeon, Anah, Dishon, Ezer, and Dishan. The only one of these who is spoken of as related to the other is Anah, the son of Zibeon. The primitive and pastoral character of the people is incidentally brought out by the circumstance that this Anah, though a chieftain's son, was in the habit of tending his father's asses. It was when thus employed that he found in the wilderness eth-ha-yemim, rendered in the English Version by the mules,' but meaning more probably the hot springs; and thus interpreted, the passage seems to be an intimation that he was the first to discover the faculty with which asses and other animals are endowed, of snuffing the moisture of the air, and thus sometimes leading to the opportune discovery of hidden waters in the desert. There is in the country to the south-east of the Dead Sea (which formed part of the Seirite possessions), a place, Kallirhoë, celebrated among the Greeks and Romans for its warm baths, and which has been visited by modern travellers (Josephus, De Bell. Jud. i. 33. 5; Pliny, Hist. Nat. v. 5. 17; Legh's Travels).

Esau first married into two Canaanitish families of the Hittite and Hivite tribes (Gen. xxvi. 34; xxxvi. 2; in one or other of which places, bowever, the text seems corrupt); but anxious to propitiate his offended parents, he next formed a matrimonial alliance with one of the race of Abraham, viz., Mahalath, otherwise called Bashemath, daughter of Ishmael, and sister of Nebaioth, whose descendants, the Nabathæans, by a singular coincidence, obtained in after times possession of the land of Edom (Gen. xxviii. 9). Esau's first-born (by Adah or Bashemath, of the daughters of Heth) was Eliphaz, whose son Teman gave name to a district of the country (Gen. xxxvi. 11, 34; 1 Chron. i. 45; Ezek. xxv. 13; Obad. verse 9). The Temanites were renowned for their wisdom (Jer. xlix. 7, 20; Baruch iii. 22, 23). The chief speaker in the book of Job is another Eliphaz, a Temanite,-which is one of the circumstances that have led many to place the scene of that story in the land of Edom Jos]. The name of Teman was preserved to the days of Eusebius in that of Thaiman, a small town five Roman miles from Petra. Another son of the first-mentioned Eliphaz was Amalek, who is not to be confounded, however, with the father of the Amalekites, one of the doomed nations of Canaan, of whom we hear so early as the age of Abraham (Gen. xiv. 7).

As a modern Arab sheikh is often found to exrrcise influence far beyond the sphere of his hereditary domain, so in the list of the Edomite emirs preserved by Moses we have perhaps only the ames of the more distinguished individuals who

acquired more or less authority over all the tribes. This oligarchy appears gradually to have changed into a monarchy, as happened too among the Israelites; for in addition to the above mentioned lists, both of Horite and Esauite leaders, we have, at Gen. xxxvi. 31, a catalogue of eight kings (Bela, Jobab, Husham, Hadad, Samlah, Saul, Baal-hanan, Hadar or Hadad) who reigned in the land of Edom before there reigned any king over the children of Israel.' It is not necessary to suppose that this was said by Moses prophetically: it is one of those passages which may have been inserted by Ezra when finally arranging the canon, inasmuch as it occurs also in the first book of Chronicles, of which he is the reputed compiler. The period when this change to regal government took place in Idumæa can only be matter of conjecture. In the Song of Moses (Exod. xv. 15) it is said that at the tidings of Israel's triumphant passage of the Red Sea the rulers or princes (Alluf) of Edom trembled with affright, but when, some forty years afterwards, application had to be made by the Israelites for leave to traverse the land of Edom, it was to the king (Molek) that the request was addressed (Num. xx. 14). The road by which it was sought to penetrate the country was termed 'the king's highway' (ver. 17), supposed by Robinson to be the Wady el-Ghuweir, for it is almost the only valley that affords a direct and easy passage through those mountains. From a comparison of these incidents it may be inferred that the change in the form of government took place during the wanderings of the Israelites in the desert, unless we suppose, with Rosenmüller, that it was only this north-eastern part of Edom which was now subject to a monarch, the rest of the country remaining under the sway of its former chieftains. But whether the regal power at this period embraced the whole territory or not, perhaps it did not supplant the ancient constitution, but was rather grafted on it, like the authority of the Judges in Israel, and of Saul, the first king, which did not materially interfere with the government that previously existed. It further appears, from the list of Idumæan kings, that the monarchy was not hereditary, but elective (for no one is spoken of as the 'son or relative of his predecessor); or probably that chieftain was acknowledged as sovereign who was best able to vindicate his claim by force of arms. Every successive king appears to have selected his own seat of government: the places mentioned as having eujoyed that distinction are Dinhabab, Avith, Pagu or Pai. Even foreigners were not excluded from the throne, for the successor of Samlah of Masrekah was Saul, or Shaul,' of Rechoboth, on the river. The word Rechoboth' means, literally, streets, and was a not uncommon name given to towns; but the emphatic addition of 'the river,' points evidently to the Euphrates, and between Rakkah and Anah, on that river, there are still the remains of a place called by the Arabs Ra chabath-Malik-Ibn Tauk. In the age of Solomon we read of one Hadad, who was of the king's seed in Edom' (1 Kings xi. 14); from which some have conjectured that by that period there was a royal dynasty of one particular family; but all that the expression may imply is, that he was a blood-relation of the last king of the country Hadad was the name of one of the carly sove

reigns who smote Midian in the field of Moab' (Gen. xxxvi. 35).

The unbrotherly feud which arose between Esau and Jacob was prolonged for ages between their posterity. The Israelites, indeed, were commanded not to abhor an Edomite, for he was their brother' (Deut. xxiii. 7); but a variety of circumstances occurred to provoke and perpetuate the hostility. The first time they were brought into direct collision was when the Edomites, though entreated by their brother Israel,' refused the latter a passage through their territories; and they had consequently to make a retrograde and toilsome march to the Gulf of Elath, whence they had to compass the land of Edom' by the mountain desert on the east. We do not again hear of the Edomites till the days of Saul, who warred against them with partial success (1 Sam. xiv. 47); but their entire subjugation was reserved for David, who first signally vanquished them in the Valley of Salt (supposed to be in the Ghôr, beside Usdum, the Mountain of Salt); and, finally, placed garrisons in all their country (2 Sam. viii. 14; 1 Chron. xviii. 11-13; 1 Kings xi. 15. Comp. the inscription of Ps. lx. and v. . 9; cviii. 9, 10, where the strong city' may denote Selah or Petra). Then were fulfilled the prophecies in Gen. xxv. 23 and xxvii. 40, that the elder should serve the younger; and also the prediction of Balaam (Num. xxiv. 18), that Edom and Seir should be for possessions to Israel. Solomon created a naval station at Ezion-geber, at the head of the Gulf of Elath, the modern Akaba (1 Kings ix. 26; 2 Chron. viii. 18). Towards the close of his reign an attempt was made to restore the independence of the country by one Hadad, an Idumæan prince, who, when a child, had been carried into Egypt at the time of David's invasion, and had there married the sister of Tahpanhes the queen (1 Kings xi. 14-23) [HADAD]. If Edom then succeeded in shaking off the yoke, it was only for a season, since in the days of Jeho shaphat, the fourth Jewish monarch from Solomon, it is said, there was no king in Edom; a deputy was king: i. e. he acted as viceroy for the king of Judah. For that the latter was still master of the country is evident from the fact of his having fitted out, like Solomon, a fleet at Ezion-geber (1 Kings xxii. 47, 48; 2 Chron. xx. 36, 37). It was, no doubt, his deputy (called king) who joined the confederates of Judah and Israel in their attack upon Moab (2 Kings iii. 9, 12, 26). Yet there seems to have been a partial revolt of the Edomites, or at least of the mountaineers of Seir, even in the reign of Jehoshaphat (2 Chron. xx. 22); and under his successor, Jehoram, they wholly rebelled, and made a king over themselves' (2 Kings viii. 20, 22; 2 Chron. xxi. 8, 10). From its being added that, notwithstanding the temporary suppression of the rebellion, Edom revolted from under the hand of Judah unto this day,' it is probable that the Jewish dominion was never completely restored. Amaziah, indeed, invaded the country, and having taken the chief city, Selah or Petra, he, in memorial of the conquest, changed its name to Joktheel (q. d. subdued of God); and his successor, Uzziah, retained possession of Elath (2 Kings xiv. 7; 2 Chron. xxv. 11-14; xxvi. 3). But in the reign of Ahaz, hordes of Edomites made incursions into Judah, and carried away captives (2 Chron. xxviii.

17). About the same period Rezin, king of Syria, expelled the Jews from Elath, which (according to the correct reading of 2 Kings xvi. 6) was thenceforth occupied by the Edomites. In our version. it is said, the Syrians dwelt in Elath;' but the Keri, or marginal Masoretic reading, instead of D', Aramæans, has DD, Edomites, the letter being substituted for 7; and this is followed by many MSS., as well as by the Sept. and Vulgate, and best accords with historical fact. But then, to make both clauses of the verse to correspond, we must, with Le Clerc and Houbigant, read the whole thus: At that time Rezin, king of Aram, recovered Elath to Edom, and drove the Jews from Elath; and the Edomites came to Elath, and continued there unto this day. Now was fulfilled the other part of Isaac's prediction, viz. that, in course of time, Esau should take his brother's yoke from off his neck' (Gen. xxvii. 40). It appears from various incidental expressions in the later prophets, that the Edomites employed their recovered power in the enlargement of their territory in all directions. They spread as far south as Dedan in Arabia, and northward to Bozrah in the Hhauran; though it is doubtful if the Bozrah of Scripture may not have been a place in Idumæa Proper (Isa. xxxiv. 6; lxiii. 1; Jer. xlix. 7, 8-20; Ezek. xxv. 13; Amos i. 12). When the Chaldæans invaded Judah, under Nebuchadnezzar, the Edomites became their willing auxiliaries, and triumphed with fiendish malignity over the ruin of their kinsmen the Jews, of whose desolated land they hoped to obtain a large portion to themselves (Obad. verses 10-16; Ezek. xxv. 12-14; xxxv. 3-10; xxxvi. 5; Lament. iv. 21). By this circumstance the hereditary hatred of the Jews was rekindled in greater fury than ever, and hence the many dire denunciations of the daughter of Edom,' to be met with in the Hebrew prophets (Ps. cxxxvii. 7-9; Obad. passim; Jer. xlix. 7; Ezek. xxv. and xxxv.). From the language of Malachi (i. 2, 3), and also from the accounts preserved by Josephus (Antig. x. 9. 7), it would seem that the Edomites did not wholly escape the Chaldæan scourge; but instead of being carried captive, like the Jews, they not only retained possession of their own territory, but became masters of the south of Judah, as far as Hebron (1 Macc. v. 65, comp. with Ezek. xxxv. 10; xxxvi. 5). Here, however, they were, in course of time, successfully attacked by the Maccabees, and about B.C. 125, were finally subdued by John Hyrcanus, who compelled them to submit to circumcision and other Jewish rites, with a view to incorporate them with the nation (1 Macc. v. 3, 65; 2 Macc. x. 16; xii. 32; Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 9. 1; 15. 4). The amalgamation, however, of the two races seems never to have been effected, for we afterwards hear of Antipater, an Idumæan by birth, being made by Cæsar procurator of all Judæa; and his son, commonly called Herod the Great, was, at the time of Christ's birth, king of Judæa, including Idumæa; and hence Roman writers often speak of all Palestine under that name (Joseph. Antiq. xiv. 1. 3; 8. 5; xv. 7. 9; xvii. 11. 4). Not long before the siege of Jerusalem by Titus, 20,000 Idumæans were called in to the defence of the city by the Zealots; but both parties gave themselves up to rapine and murder (Joseph. De Bell. Jud. iv. 4. 5; 6. 1; vii. S. 1).

This is the last mention made of the Edomites in history. The author of a work on Job, once ascribed to Origen, says that their name and language had perished, and that, like the Ammonites and Moabites, they had all become Arabs. In the second century Ptolemy limits the name Idumæa to the country west of the Jordan.

350. [Ravine in Idumæa.]

But while, during the captivity of the Jews in Babylon, the Edomites had thus been extending their territory to the north-west, they were themselves supplanted in the southern part of their native region by the Nabathæans, the descendants of Ishmael's eldest son, and to the article NEBAIOTH, we must refer the reader for the subsequent history of the land of Edom.

From the era of the Crusades down to the present century the land of Esau was, to Europeans, a terra incognita. Its situation was laid down on the best maps more than a hundred miles from the true position, and as if lying in a direction where it is now known there is nothing but a vast expanse of desert. Volney had his attention drawn towards it, when at Gaza, by the vague reports of the Arabs, and in 1807 the unfortunate Seetzen penetrated a certain way into the country, and heard of the wonders of the Wady Musa; but the first modern traveller who passed through the land of Edom' was Burckhardt, in the year 1812. And it has been well remarked by Dr. Robinson (Amer. Bib. Reposit. vol. iii. p. 250), that had he accomplished nothing but his researches in these regions, his journey would have been worth all the labour and cost expended on it, although his discoveries thus shed their strongest light upon subjects which were not comprehended in the plan or purpose either of himself or his employers.' Burckhardt entered Idumæa from the north, and in the year 1818 he was followed in the same direction by Messrs. Legb, Bankes, Irby and Mangles. In 1828

Laborde and Linant found access from the south; and since then it has been visited and described by so many that the names of its localities have become familiar as household words.

The limit of the wanderings of the Israelites in the desert was the brook Zered, after crossing which they found themselves in the territory of Moab (Deut. ii. 13-18). This brook is supposed to be identical with the Wady-el-Ahsy, which, rising near the Castle el-Ahsy, on the route to Mecca of the Syrian caravan upon the high eastern desert, penetrates through the whole chain of mountains to near the south-east corner of the Dead Sea. It was thus the southern border of Moab and the northern of Edom, whence the latter region extended southwards as far as to Elath on the Red Sea. The valley which runs between the two seas consists first of El-Ghor, which is comparatively low, but gradually rises into the more elevated plain of El-Arabah to the south. The country lying east of this great valley is the land of Idumæa. It is a mountain tract, consisting at the base of low hills of limestone or argillaceous rock, then lofty mountains of porphyry forming the body of the mountain; above these, sandstone broken up into irregular ridges and grotesque groups of cliffs; and again farther back, and higher than all, long elevated ridges of limestone without precipices. East of all these stretches off indefinitely the high plateau of the great eastern desert. Robinson and Smith estimated the height of the porphyry cliffs at about 2000 feet above the Arabah; the elevation of Wady Musa above the same is, perhaps, 2000 or 2200 feet, while the limestone ridges further back probably do not fall short of 3000 feet. The whole breadth of the mountainous tract between the Arabah and the eastern desert does not exceed fifteen or twenty geographical miles. Of these mountains the most remarkable is Mount Hor, near the Wady Musa. [HOR, MOUNT]. While the mountains on the west of the Arabab, though less elevated, are wholly barren, those of Idumæa seem to enjoy a sufficiency of rain, and are covered with tufts of herbs and occasional trees. The wadys, too, are full of trees and shrubs and flowers, while the eastern and higher parts are extensively cultivated, and yield good crops. Hence Robinson thinks its appearance fulfils the promise made to Esau (Gen. xxvii. 39), Thy dwelling shall be the fatness of the earth and of the dew of heaven from above. Yet many critics are of opinion (e. g. Vater, De Wette, Geddes, Von Bohlen) that "DD should there be rendered from," i. e. far away from, or destitute of,' the fatness of the earth, &c.; and it is immediately added,

for thou shalt live by thy sword; and it does not appear that Idumæa was ever particularly noted for its fertility. This mountainous region is at present divided into two districts. The northern bears the name of Jebál, i. e. The Mountain,' the Gebal of the Hebrews (Ps. lxxxiii. 8), and the Gebalene of the Greeks and Romans. Commencing at Wady el-Ahsy, it terminates, according to Burckhardt, at Wady el-Ghuweir, the largest place in it being Tutileh, perhaps the Tophel of Deut. i. 1. The southern district is esh Sherah, extending as far as Akabah, and including Shôbak, Wady Musa, Maan, &c. Burckhardt mentions a third dis