JEWISH ANTIQUITIES. CHAP. I. OF DAYS, HOURS, WEEKS, AND YEARS. THE Hebrews, in common with other nations, distinguished their days into natural, consisting of twenty-four hours; and artificial, that is, from sun rise to sun set. Concerning the natural day, it is inquired when it began and ended. Godwin conceives the ancient Jews had two different beginnings of the natural day; one of the sacred or festival day, which was in the evening; the other of the civil or working day, which was in the morning. That the sacred day began in the evening is certain from the following passage of Leviticus: "From even unto even shall ye celebrate your sabbaths," Lev. xxiii, 32; and also from the following words in the book of Exodus, "In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at even, ye shall eat unleavened bread, until the one and twentieth day of the month at even," Exod. xii, 18. Nevertheless the passage, which our author alleges out of the evangelist Matthew, " In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn towards the first day of the week," Matt. xxviii, 1, does not so certainly prove, that the civil, natural day began in the morning. For "the first day of the week" may there be understood of the artificial day; as indeed the word ETIQwoxovoŋ* seems to imply. In like manner, though we begin the natural day at midnight, yet we speak of the day breaking or dawning a little before sun rise. That the Jews began the day, not at evening, but at midnight, or in the morning, at the time of their migration out of Egypt, appears * See on this word Dr. Macknight's Commentary in loc. from hence, that the fifteenth day of the month, in which they departed from Egypt, is said to be the morrow after the passover, which was kept on the fourteenth day in the evening, Numb. xxxiii, 3, compared with Exod. xii, 6. But neither will this prove, that they reckoned the beginning of their civil and sacred day from a different epocha. It is more probable, that, before their departure out of Egypt, they began all their days, both civil and sacred, with the sun's rising, as the ancient Babylonians, Persians, Syrians, and most of the eastern nations did*. And, at the time of their migration, God ordered them to change the beginning, not only of the year and of the week, but likewise of the day, from the morning to the evening, in opposition to the customs of the idolatrous nations, who, in honour to their chief god, the sun, began their day at his rising. Cocceius, who supposes, that only the sacred day began in the evening, finds out this mystery in it, that God appointed the sabbath of the Jewish church to begin with the night, in order to signify the darkness of that dispensation, compared with the subsequent one of the gospel; the light of divine knowledge being in those times like that of the moon and stars in the night, but under the Christian dispensation, like that of the sun in the day+. It has been commonly supposed, that the epocha, or beginning, of the natural day was originally in the evening; "The evening and the morning," saith Moses in the book of Genesis, "were the first day," Gen. i, 5. And if so we are to conclude, that the idolaters had changed the beginning of the day to the morning, in honour of the sun; and that God restored it, by the law which he gave to the Jews, to its original epocha. But learned men are not agreed about the meaning of this passage, and the reason of Moses's setting the evening before the morning. Le Clerc begins the first day from the creation of the chaos, and by the evening he understands all the time it remained in darkness, before the production of light. But this opinion does not well agree with the import of the Hebrew word 2 gnerebh, the evening, * Petav. de Doctrinâ Temporum, lib. vii, p. 609. + Vid. Cocceii Comment. in Lev. xxiii, sect. xviii, Oper. tom. ì, p. 175. In loc. Tr from gnarabh, miscuit; which therefore denotes twilight, in which there is a kind of mixture of light and darkness; rather than total darkness, such as there was before light was produced. Others think it more natural, to date the beginning of time, and the succession of day and night, from the first production of light. But as for the reason of Moses's setting the evening before the morning, the most probable opinions are those of Cocceius and Lyra. Cocceius understands the words in the following manner, that the light moved away from the place or hemisphere, on which it first appeared, and was succeeded by darkness; and when it returned to enlighten the same hemisphere again, the first day was completed*. So that, according to him, the evening signifies the light moving away, which it began to do from its first appearance. The other opinion is, that the two parts of the natural day, namely, the artificial day and artificial night, are denominated from the terms which complete them, from the evening, which is the end of the day, and from the morning, which is the end of the night; and so the evening and the morning make up one natural day; namely, from morning to morning† But whatever were the reasons of Moses's setting the evening before the morning, or the night before the day, his expression has plainly been followed by other writers, and in other languages. Hence days are expressed in the book of Daniel by a generebh-boker, evening and morning, Dan. viii, 14. Hence also is the use of the Greek word vuxnμεpov, 2 Cor. xi, 25. And may we not observe some faint traces of the same original in the English language, in our computing time by nights rather than by days; as, in the words se'nnight, fortnight, &c. With respect to the artificial day and night, I observe, that the Hebrews divided the night into four watches, as appears from St. Matthew, who speaks of the fourth watch of the night, Matt. xiv, 25; and from St. Mark, who styles these watches, the even, midnight, cockcrowing, and the morning, Mark xiii, 35. Nevertheless it should seem, that they anciently divided the night into an odd number of watches, pro * Vid. Cocceii Cur. prior. in Gen. i, 5. bably into three; since we read in the book of Judges, of "the middle watch," Judg. vii, 19. It is probable, these watches had their rise, and their name, from the watchmen, who kept guard at the gates of the city and of the temple by night, and who relieved one another by turns. And if anciently there were but three watches, then each watched four hours; and more in the winter, when the nights are above twelve long. But that being found too tedious and tiresome, the number of watches was afterwards increased to four. We, therefore, never read of the middle watch in the New Testament. The day was divided into hours; which are reckoned to be of two sorts, less and greater. The lesser hours were twelve, as appears from the following question in the evangelist John, "Are there not twelve hours in the day?" John xi, 9. Each of these was a twelfth part of the artificial day. Herodotus observes, that the Greeks learned from the Babylonians, among other things, the method of dividing the day into twelve parts. But whether the Hebrews derived it from the Babylonians, or the Babylonians from the Hebrews, cannot now be known*. Nor does it appear how ancient this division of the day into hours, among the Hebrews, was. The first hint in scripture, which seems to imply such a division, is a passage in the second book of Kings, chap. xx, 9—11, where we read of the shadow's going back twenty degrees on the sundial of Ahaz. But the history gives us no intimation, what those degrees were, or what portion of time was marked by them. The mention of this dial suggests a question which has occasioned much dispute among the learned: Whether the miracle of the shadow's going back was wrought upon the sun, or only upon the dial? Vatablus, Montanus, and several moderns observe, that there is not a word said of the sun's going back, but only of the shadow upon the dial; which might be effected by the divine power, perhaps by the ministry of angels, obstructing or refracting the rays of the sun, or altering the position of the dial, so as to make the shadow retire without changing the motion of the sun itself. The *Herodot. Euterp. cap. cix, p. 127, edit. Gronov. |