the beard. 31. And if the priest looks at the plague of the scall, and, behold, its appearance is not deeper than the other skin, but there is no black hair in it; the priest shall shut up him that has the plague of the scall seven days; 32. And on the seventh day, the priest shall look at the plague, and, behold, if the scall has not spread, and there is no yellow hair on it, and the appearance of the scall is not deeper than the skin; 33. He shall be shaven, but the scall shall not be shaven; and the priest shall shut up him that has the scall seven days again; 34. And on the seventh day, the priest shall look at the scall: and, behold, if the scall has not spread in the skin, nor is in appearance deeper than the skin, the priest shall pronounce him clean; and he shall wash his clothes and be clean. 35. But if the scall spreads in the skin after his having been pronounced clean, 36. The priest shall look at it; and behold, if the scall the first and second week of isolation, but if it re-appeared at a later period, and even after cleanness had been pronounced by the priest; however, spreading of the spot was considered decisive, even irrespective of the change of hair (comp. Mishn. Neg. III. 5; IX. 1 sqq.). If after the conclusion of the second week, the disease had not advanced and was declared harmless, washing of garments sufficed to restore levitical purity: if bathing had been required, as some suppose, the text would not have failed to enjoin it (see p. 165). PHILOLOGICAL REMARKS.-2 30) prop. shining, then yellow, prob. the colour of gold (a, comp. 3, *7, *, * etc.), Rashi (on ver. 37) (ver. of sores or wounds that break (comp. supra p. 219; Job VII. 5), a scall, Sept. pausua (breaking), Saad. W pustules; Syr. vaguely s (plague); Vulg. macula or percussura (in XIV. 54); others suppose pr to refer to the "falling out" of the hair in consequence of the disease (like, p. 225; so Rashb., Gesen., a. o.), or attribute to it the sense of tearing and scratching (so Knobel, who compares κνήφη and κνάω, ψώρα and ψάω or ψέω, scabies and scabere, etc.). It is in) ושער שחור true that the reading ver. 31) is rather strange, and that .comp) ושער צהוב we almost expect ver. 32), which is indeed expressed by the Sept. (pi§ §avdiLovca); yet it a שחור would be unsafe to declare גוון קרוב לגוון or pale, Kimchi אור פלא mistake either of the author or of the copyist"; the writer possibly alludes to an intermediate and undecided stage of the disease, in which the hair turns temporarily yellow, to resume its usual colour at the return of health: therefore the presence of yellow hair at the first inspection has spread in the skin, the priest shall not seek for yellow hair; he is unclean. 37. But if the appearance of the scall has remained the same, and if black hair has grown up therein, the scall is healed; he is clean, and the priest shall pronounce him clean. 38. And if a man or a woman has in the skin of their flesh bright spots white bright spots, 39. The priest shall look; and, behold, if the bright spots in the skin of their flesh are palish white, it is a white eruption that has broken out in the skin; he is clean. 40. And if a man loses the is bald-headed; yet he is clean. the hair of his head towards מַחֲרָנִי נִתְקָא) "surrounding the scall orʻ), which is evidently against the author's meaning; while the Mishnah (Neg. X. 5) explains, not less questionably, "the hair is shaved off all around the scall, yet two hairs are left on each side, to enable the priest to judge whether the spot is spreading or not." The Sept. adds after (in ver. 34) μetà tò Evpndivaι abτóv (comp. vers. 7, 36, 55, 56). 38, 39. Modern testimonies confirm the harmless nature of that palish white eruption or tetter which in the East is still termed bohak (prz, 3). The spots are very little higher than the skin; they appear usually on the neck and face, but rarely on the hands or on the hairy parts of the head; they spread for some time, and then vanish of themselves, without having caused much inconvenience or apprehension. Orientals believe that this slight affection is often occasioned by sudden and excessive hair of his head, he 41. And if he loses his face, he is forehead 40-44. Baldness was doubtless looked upon by the Hebrews, as by other eastern nations proud of a luxuriant growth of hair, as a disgrace, and often as a Divine punishment (comp. 2 Ki. II. 23; Isai. III. 17; Jerem. XLVIII. 37); but it is in no part of the Bible distinctly connected with leprosy; in our text it is even in itself, and if unattended by other symptoms, declared to exercise no influence upon levitical purity, whether it be baldness on the crown of the head, or at the temples and the forehead. Yet it may either be the herald or the companion of that disease. The leper's hair, both of the head and beard, gradually becomes thinner, splits at the bald; yet is he clean. 42. But if there is on the bald crown or bald forehead, a white reddish sore, it is leprosy springing up on his bald pate or on his bald forehead. 43. Then the priest shall look at it; and, behold, if there is a white reddish rising of the sore on his bald crown or on his bald forehead, in appearance like the leprosy on the skin of the flesh; 44. He is a leprous man, he is unclean; unclean shall the priest pronounce him; his plague is on his head. 45. And the leper in whom the plague is, his clothes shall be rent, and his head shall be bare, and he shall points, and shows at the roots small pustules; often the bare parts of the head are covered with a reddish-white eruption resembling that which arises in the place of healed boils (ver. 19); and these were proofs of the presence of leprosy on the head, which was socially and levitically treated like any other form of the same disorder. According to Jewish tradition, it was judged by two usual symptoms-the growth of raw flesh, and extension of the eruption, within two weeks; or extension beyond this time if, after the declaration of cleanness, either of the symptoms re-appears (comp. Mish. Neg. III. 6). is מרט PHILOLOGICAL REMARKS. properly to make smooth or bare (comp. Syr. ), hence in Niph. to be made or to become bald; Sept. padav (comp. Aristoph. Plut. 266). A person losing his hair from the crown of his head downward towards the neck is , a person losing it "towards his face" ("E NEE), that is, in the front part, at the temples or the forehead, is ; hence (like ) is baldness on the crown of the head, ra: baldness on the front part; and metaphorically, the former is a threadbare spot on the nether side of any stuff or texture, the latter a threadbare spot on the outer side (ver. 55, see notes in loc.); the Sept. renders the two adjectives φαλακρός and ἀναφάλαντος, the Vulg. calvus and recalvaster; Onk. expresses the latter by Syr. : to deprive of hair), Jon., and Saad. . According to the Mishnah (Neg. X. 10), p is baldness from the crown downwards to the first vertebra of the fron גבחת and ,(עד פרקה של צואר) neck the crown forward to the extreme hair in front; and in both cases it was supposed to arise from eating, or putting on the head, anything that prevents the growth of hair, or from a wound which has the same effect. Arabic poets also distinguish between "noble baldness" () and "servile baldness" (p), the former being frequently occasioned by the wearing of the helmet. The meaning attributed to "one that has boils, therefore originally a leper" (Michael. Mos. R. IV. 180), is more than doubtful, the etymological sense of p being to be smooth. The two words (ver. 43) form a compound notion "white-reddish"; the Sept. inserts between them, unnecessarily, 4, and the Syr. "N. 45, 46. The leper, looked upon as stricken by the hand of God, was in every respect to appear as the mourner did in the time of his bereave cover his beard, and shall cry, Unclean, unclean. 46. All the time that the plague is on him, he shall be unclean, he is unclean; he shall dwell apart, without the camp shall his habitation be. ment with his garments rent, his head uncovered, and his beard, the pride of the Oriental, veiled (comp. Mich. III. 7; Ezek. XXIV. 17, 22), though Jewish tradition decorously released women from rending their garments and uncovering their heads (Mishn. Sot. III. 8). But both disgust and fear prompted the Asiatics to exclude the abhorred leper from their society. For instance, among the Persians, at least in later times, he "was inaccessible to all"; at his sight a solemn prayer was recited; he was forbidden to enter a city or to have intercourse with his countrymen; if a foreigner, he was expelled from the land as one who had grievously sinned against the sun (Avesta, Yesht Sade 49; Herod. I. 139; Ael. N. A. X. 16; Plut. Symp. IV. v. 3; Cles. Pers. 41; comp. Rhode, Heil. Sage pp. 501-504). But the laws and customs prevailing in Christian countries during the twelfth century were awful. The priest, wearing his stole and holding up the crucifix, conducted the leper into the church. Here he ordered him to exchange his clothes for a peculiar black garment, read to him the mass, and performed the full service for the dead. Then the leper was brought into a sequestered house, where the priest, after repeated exhortations, threw a shovel of earth upon his feet, warned him never to appear otherwise than in his black garment and barefooted, and enjoined upon him on no account to enter a church, or any place where corn was ground or bread was baked, nor ever to approach a well or a fountain. The unhappy outcast for but as beard and chin may, by way of metonomy, be substituted for each other, has probably also the meaning of chin, which it must have if applied to women (comp. bearded chin, Syr. sp beard and chin, Rashi "hair on the lips", " grenon moustaches). The connection of Dr with lip, or with to cover is doubtful (Sept. cópa, Vulg. os). Ebn Ezra who adopts this interpretation (b ), explains that the leper had to cover his mouth lest he injured others; which is incompatible with עטה על the parallel passages in which DE is mentioned not in reference to disease but to misfortune in general; moreover, the patient could not proclaim his uncleanness, if his mouth were covered up. Onk. and Jon.render the last words of ver. 45 freely; the 1 47. And if a garment has the plague of leprosy, whether it be a woollen garment or a linen garment; 48. Whether it be cloth or stuff of linen or of wool; whether in a skin or in anything made of skin; 49. And if the plague is greenish or reddish in the garment, or in the skin, or in the cloth, or in the stuff, or in any utensil of skin; it is a plague of leprosy, and shall be shown to the priest. 50. And the priest shall look at the plague, and shut up that which has the plague seven days. 51. And he shall look at the plague on former "do not defile yourselves (851 Taser), do not defile yourselves, shall be the cry;" the latter, "a herald shall call out, 'Keep aloof, aloof from the unclean!'"; and after --Jon. adds "nor shall he approach the side of his wife". 47–59. “Leprosy of garments," a term peculiar to the Bible, like "leprosy of houses", must imply a disorder analogous to leprosy of persons, since it is expressed by the identical words (). The simplest and most obvious explanation seems to be the safest, namely, that it denotes an infectious condition of clothes and stuffs, caused by contact with leprous matter, and therefore subject to changes and effects similar to those of leprosy itself. The leprous substance of wounds and boils is so strong, that it corrodes and injures all kinds of textures and clothes; the marks it produces not only resist repeated washing, but spread by the process (comp. Mead, Med. sacr. pp. 14 sqq.). Wool and linen are here, as elsewhere, named as the sole materials of garments (comp. Deut. XXII. 11; Hos. II. 7, 11; Prov. XXXI. 13); for cotton seems to have been long unknown to the Hebrews, as it was to the Greeks (Voss, Mythol. Briefe, III. 264, 265). Now, any manufacture made of wool or linen, or of skins, is liable to be impregnated with the obnoxious mat ter. Greenish or reddish spots appear, which often extend and prove so malignant that the manufacture cannot be saved. Therefore, the treatment of leprous garments and leprous persons was strikingly similar (see Summary). It seems hardly necessary to seek for another interpretation; certainly none that has been proposed is more acceptable. It has been conjectured, that the diseases of men were, by a figure of speech, applied to bad conditions of things; as in Egypt and Palestine certain disorders of trees, occasioned by the hurtful activity of insects, are still called leprosy, and the Swiss speak of a "cancer" in buildings (comp. Maim. De Lepra XII. 13; XVI. 9). But the Biblical parallels are, in both cases, so distinct and so specific, that the supposition of a vague metaphor appears to be out of the question; and if similar terms are used in modern languages, they have commonly been borrowed from our passage. Or it has been contended (by Michaelis, who is followed by others), that the law refers to garments made of "dead wool" and to objects made of "dead skins", that is, to wool and skins of sheep that have not been slaughtered, but have died of some lingering disease; such wool and skins are coarse and useless, and easily infected by |