Lice
VIEW:38 DATA:01-04-2020
LICE (kinnîm, Exo_8:16-18, Psa_105:31; cf. kçn, Isa_51:6, see Gnat).RVm [Note: Revised Version margin.] suggests sandflies or fleas instead of lice. All the insects named are only too common in Palestine and Egypt. The three well-known varieties of pediculi or lice are perpetually prevalent among the dirty, and a plague of them would certainly be much more terrible than one of the harmless, though irritating sand-fly (Simulium), and far more disgusting than one of the flea (Pulex). Cf. p. 733b.
E. W. G. Masterman.
Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible
Edited by James Hastings, D.D. Published in 1909
kinnim. (See EXODUS; EGYPT.) Mosquitoes, troublesome in Egypt toward October, soon after the plague of frogs, not only giving pain, but entering the body through the nostrils and ears; so Septuagint, Philo, and Origen. But mosquitoes' larvae are deposited in stagnant waters, whereas Exodus (Exo_8:17) states "all the dust became lice throughout all the land of Egypt." Sir S. Baker writes similarly from experience, "it is as though the very dust were turned into lice"; a tick no larger than a grain of sand becomes swollen with blood to the size of a hazel nut. The Egyptian chenems (related to kinnim)), "mosquito," retained in the Coptic, favors the former. The Egyptian ken, "force," "plague," may apply to either view.
Fausset's Bible Dictionary
By Andrew Robert Fausset, co-Author of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown's 1888.
Lice. (Hebrew, cinnam, cinnim). This word occurs, in the Authorized Version, only in Exo_8:16-18 and in Psa_105:31 both of which passages have reference to the third great plague of Egypt. The Hebrew word has given occasion to whole pages of discussion. Some commentators, and indeed modern writers generally, suppose that gnats are the animals intended by the original word; while, on the other hand, the Jewish rabbis, Josephus and others, are in favor of the translation of the Authorized Version.
Upon the whole, it appears that there is not sufficient authority for departing from this translation. Late travellers (for example, Sir Samuel Baker) describe the visitation of vermin in very similar terms: ? "It is as though the very dust were turned into lice." The lice which he describes are a sort of tick, not larger than a grain of sand, which when filled with blood expand to the size of a hazel nut. ? Canon Cook.
Smith's Bible Dictionary
By Dr. William Smith.Published in 1863
Swarms of lice was the third plague with which God punished the Egyptians, Exo_8:16. The Hebrew word כנום , which the LXX render σκνιφες, some translate flies, and think them the same as gnats. Origen says that the sciniphe is so small a fly, that it is scarcely perceptible to the eye, but that it occasions a sharp stinging pain. However, the original, according to the Syriac, and several good interpreters, signifies lice.
But Josephus, the Jewish rabbins, and most of the modern translators render the Hebrew word at large lice; and Bochart and Bryant support this interpretation. The former argues that gnats could not be meant.
1. Because the creatures here mentioned sprang from the dust of the earth, and not from the waters.
2. Because they were both on men and cattle, which cannot be spoken of gnats.
3. Because their name comes from the radix כזן , which signifies to make firm, fix, establish, which can never agree to gnats, flies, &c, which are ever changing their place, and are almost constantly on the wing.
4. Because כנה is the term by which the talmudists express the term louse, &c. To which may be added, that if they were winged and stinging insects, as Jerom, Origen, and others have supposed, the plague of flies is unduly anticipated; and the next miracle will be only a repetition of the former. Mr. Bryant, in illustrating the aptness of this miracle, has the following remarks: The Egyptians affected great external purity, and were very nice both in their persons and clothing; bathing and making ablutions continually. Uncommon care was taken not to harbour any vermin. They were particularly solicitous on this head; thinking it would be a great profanation of the temple which they entered, if any animalcule of this sort were concealed in their garments. The priests, says Herodotus, are shaved, both as to their heads and bodies, every third day, to prevent any louse, or any other detestable creature, being found upon them when they are performing their duty to the gods. The same is mentioned by another author, who adds, that all woollen was considered as foul, as from a perishable animal; but flax is the product of the immortal earth, affords a delicate and pure covering, and is not liable to harbour lice. We may hence see what an abhorrence the Egyptians showed toward this sort of vermin, and what care was taken by the priests to guard against them. The judgments, therefore, inflicted by the hands of Moses, were adapted to their prejudices. It was, consequently, not only most noisome to the people in general, but was no small odium to the most sacred order in Egypt, that they were overrun with these filthy and detestable vermin.
Biblical and Theological Dictionary by Richard Watson
PRINTER 1849.
lı̄s (כּנּים, kinnı̄m (Exo_8:17, Exo_8:18; Psa_105:31), כּנּם, kinnim (Exo_8:16), כּנּם, kinnām (Exo_8:17, Exo_8:18); Septuagint σκνῖφες, sknı́phes (Exo_8:16, Exo_8:18), τὸν σκνίφα, tón sknı́pha, once in Exo_8:18; σκνῖπες, sknı́pes (Psa_105:31); Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) scniphes; according to Liddell and Scott, under the word σκνίψ, sknips, Slav. sknipa = culex): The references, both in Exodus and in Psalms, are all to the plague of ?lice.? the Revised Version margin suggests ?fleas? or ?sandflies.? The Septuagint rendering would favor ?sandflies? or ?mosquitoes,? between which two insects the Old Testament writers would hardly be expected to discriminate. Mosquitoes belong to the order of Diptera, family Culicidae; the sandfly (Plebotomus papataci) to the family of Simuliidae of the same order. The sandflies are much smaller than mosquitoes, and are nearly noiseless, but give a sharp sting which may leave an unpleasant irritation. They are abundant in the Levant. In Southern Europe they cause the ?three-day fever? or ?papataci.? As stated under GNAT (which see), there is little ground other than the authority of the Septuagint for deciding between ?lice,? ?fleas,? ?sand-flies,? or ?mosquitoes? as translations of kinnı̄m. See also under GNAT the note on kēn, the Revised Version margin ?gnat? (Isa_51:6).
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
PRINTER 1915.
Lice occurs in Exo_8:16-18 (Exo_8:12-14 Heb.); Psa_105:31. The name of the creature employed in the third plague upon Egypt, miraculously produced from the dust of the land. Its exact nature has been much disputed. Those who suppose the name to be derived from a Hebrew word which means tosfix, settle, or establish, infer lice is meant, from their fixing themselves on mankind, animals, etc. Dr. A. Clarke has further inferred from the words 'in man and in beast,' that it was the 'tick.' It is probable, however, that not lice, but some species of gnats is the proper rendering. It is not a valid objection, that if this plague were gnats, etc., the plague of flies would be anticipated, since the latter most likely consisted of one particular species having a different destination [FLY]; whereas this may have consisted of not only mosquitoes or gnats, but of some other species which also attack domestic cattle, as the ?strus, or tabanus, or zimb; on which supposition these two plagues would be sufficiently distinct.
But since mosquitoes, gnats, etc. have ever been one of the evils of Egypt, there must have been some peculiarity attending them on this occasion, which proved the plague to be 'the finger of God.' From Exo_9:31, it appears that the flax and the barley were smitten by the hail; that the former was beginning to grow, and that the latter was in the ear?which, according to Shaw, takes place in Egypt in March. Hence these gnats would be sent about February, i.e. before the increase of the Nile, which takes place at the end of May, or beginning of June. Since, then, the innumerable swarms of mosquitoes, gnats, etc. which every year affect the Egyptians come, according to Hasselquist, at the increase of the Nile, the appearance of them in February would be as much a variation of the course of nature as the appearance of the gadfly in January would be in England. They were also probably numerous and fierce beyond example on this occasion; and as the Egyptians would be utterly unprepared for them (for it seems that this plague was not announced), the effects would be signally distressing. For a description of the evils inflicted by these insects upon man, see Kirby and Spence, Introduction to Entomology, London1828, i. 115, etc.
The Popular Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature
by John Kitto.
Lice
(כֵּן, ken, perh. from כָּנִן, to nip; only once in the sing. used collectively, Isa_2:6, and there doubtful, where the Sept., Vulg., and Engl. Vers. confound with כֵּן, so, and render ταῦτα, haec, "in like manner;" elsewhere plural, כַּנַּים, Exo_8:16-18; Psa_105:31 : Sept. σκνῖφες, Psa_105:17 σκνίψ, v.r. σκνῖπες; Vulg. sciniphes, in Psalm cinifes; also the cognate sing. collective כַּנָּם, cinnam, Exo_8:17-18, Sept. and Vulg. σκνῖφες, sciniphes), the name of the creature employed in the third plague upon Egypt, miraculously produced from the dust of the land. Its exact nature has been much disputed. Dr. A. Clarke has inferred, from the words "in man and in beast," that it was the acarus sanguisuqus, or "tick" (Comment. on Exo_8:16). Michaelis remarks (Suppl. ad Lex. 1174) that if it be a Hebrew word for lice it is strange that it should have disappeared from the cognate tongues, the Aramaic, Samaritan, and Ethiopic. The rendering of the Sept. seems highly valuable when it is considered that it was given by learned Jews resident in Egypt, that it occurs in the most ancient and best executed portion of that version, and that it can be elucidated by the writings of ancient Greek naturalists, etc. Thus Aristotle, who was nearly contemporary with the Sept. translators of Exodus, mentions the κνῖπες (the σκνῖφες of the Sept.) among insects able to distinguish the smell of honey (Hist. Animnal. 4:8) and refers to species of birds which he calls σκνιποφάγα, that live by hunting σκνῖπες (8:6). His pupil Theophrastus says, "The κνῖπες are born in certain trees, as the oak, the fig-tree, and they seem to subsist upon the sweet moisture which is collected under the bark. They are also produced on some vegetables" (Hist. Plant. 4:17, and 2, ult.). This description applies to aphides, or rather to the various species of "gall-flies" (Cynips, Linn.). Hesychius, in the beginning of the third century, explains σκνίψ as "a green four-wcinged creature," and quotes Phrynichus as applying the name to a sordid wretch, and adds, "From the little creature among trees, which speedily devours them." Philo (A.D. 40) and Origen, in the second century, who both lived in Egypt, describe it in terms suitable to the gnat or mosquito (Philo, Vita Mosis, 1:97, 2, ed. Mangey; Origen, Homilia tertia introd.), as does also Augustine in the third or fourth century (De Convenientia, etc.).
But Theodoret, in the same age, distinguishes between σκνῖπες and κώνωπες (Vitac Jacobi). Suidas (A.D. 1100) says σκνίψ, "resembling gnats," and adds, "a little creature that cats wood." These Christian fathers, however, give no authority for their explanations, and Bochart remarks that they seem to be speaking of gnats under the name σκνῖπες, which word, he conjectures, biased them from its resemblance to the Hebrew. Schleusner adds (Glossema in Octateuch) σκνῖφες, "less than gnats," and (Lex. Cyrilli, MS. Brem.), "very small creatures like gnats." From this concurrence of testimony it would appear that not lice, but some species of gnats, is the proper rendering, though the ancients, no doubt, included other species of insects under the name. Mr. Bryant, however, gives a curious turn to the evidence derived from ancient naturalists. He quotes 'Theophrastus, and admits that a Greek must be the best judge of the meaning of the Greek word, but urges that the Sept. translators concealed the meaning of the Hebrew word, which he labors to prove is lice, for fear of offending the Ptolemies, under whose inspection they translated, and the Egyptians in general, whose detestation of lice was as ancient as the time of Herodotus (2:37) (but who includes "any other foul creature"), and whose disgust, he thinks, would have been too much excited by reading that their nation once swarmed with those creatures through the instrumentality of the servants of the God of the Jews (Plagues of Egypt, Lond. 1794, page 56, etc.).
This suspicion, if admitted, upsets all the previous reasoning. But a plague of lice, upon Bryant's own principles, could not have been more offensive to the Egyptians than the plague on the River Nile, the frogs, etc., which the Sept. translators have not mitigated. Might it not be suggested with equal probability that the Jews in later ages had been led to interpret the word lice as being peculiarly humiliating to the Egyptians (see Josephus, 2:14, 3, who, however, makes the Egyptians to be afflicted with phthiriasis). The rendering of the Vulg. affords us no assistance, being evidently formed from that of the Sept., and not being illustrated by any Roman naturalist, but found only in Christian Latin writers (see Facciolati, s.v.). The other ancient versions, etc., are of no value in this inquiry. They adopt the popular notion of the times, and Bochart's reasonings upon them involve, as Rosenmüller (apud Bochart) justly complains, many unsafe permutations of letters. If, then, the Sept. be discarded, we are deprived of the highest source of information. Bochart's reasoning upon the form of the word (Hieroz. 3:518) is unsound, as, indeed, that of all others who have relied upon etymology to furnish a clew to the insect intended. It is strange that it did not occur to Bochart that if the plague had been lice it would have been easily imitated by the magicians, which was attempted by them, but in vain (Exo_8:18). Nor is the objection valid that if this plague were gnats, etc., the plague of flies would be anticipated, since the latter most likely consisted of one particular species having a different destination, SEE FLY, whereas this may have consisted not only of mosquitoes or gnats, but of some other species which also attack domestic cattle, as the oest rus, or tabanus, or zimb (Bruce, Travels, 2:315, 8vo), on which supposition these two plagues would be sufficiently distinct. SEE PLAGUES OF EGYPT.
But, since mosquitoes, gnats, etc., have ever been one of the evils of Egypt, there must have been some peculiarity attending them on this occasion which proved the plague to be "the finger of God." From the next chapter, Exo_8:31, it appears that the flax and the barley were smitten by the hail; that the former was beginning to grow, and that the latter was in the ear, which, according to Shaw, takes place in Egypt in March. Hence the kinnim would be sent about February, i.e., before the increase of the Nile, which takes place at the end of May or beginning of June. Since, then, the innumerable swarms of mosquitoes, gnats, etc., which every year affect the Egyptians, come, according to Hasselquist, at the increase of the Nile, the appearance of them in February would be as much a variation of the course of nature as the appearance of the oestruts in January would be in England. They were also probably numerous and fierce beyond example on this occasion, and, as the Egyptians would be utterly unprepared for them (for it seems that this plague was not announced), the effects would be signally distressing. Bochart adduces instances in which both mankind and cattle, and even wild beasts, have been driven by gnats from their localities. It may be added that the proper Greek name for the gnat is ἐμπίς, and that probably the word κώνωψ, which much resembles κνίψ, is appropriate to the mosquito. Hardouin observes that the κνῖπες of Aristotle are not the ἐμπίδες, which latter is by Pliny always rendered culices, a word which he employs with great latitude. SEE GNAT.
For a description of the evils inflicted by these insects upon man, see Kirby and Spence, Introduction to Entymology, Lond. 1828, 1:115, etc.; and for the annoyance they cause in Egypt, Maillet, Descript. de l'Egypte par l'Abbe Mascrier,(Paris, 1755), 90:37; Forskal, Descr. Animal. page 85. Michaelis proposed an inquiry into the meaning of the word σκνῖφες to the Societ des Savants, with a full description of the qualities ascribed to them by Philo, Origen, and Augustine (Recueil, etc. Amst. 1744). Niebuhr inquired after it of the Greek patriarch, and also of the metropolitan at Cairo, who thought it to be a species of gnat found in great quantities in the gardens there, and whose bite was extremely painful. A merchant who was present at the inquiry called it dubabel-keb, or the dog-fly (Description de l'Arabie, Pref. pages 39, 40). Besides the references already made, see Rosenmüller, Scholia in Exod.; Michaelis, Suppl. ad Lex. Hebraic. 1203 sq.; Oedmann, Verm. Samml. aus der Naturkunde, 1:6, 74-91; Bakerus, Annotat. in Et. M. 2:1090; Harenberg, Observ. Crit. de Insectis AEgypt. infestantibus, in Miscell. Lips. Nov. 2:4, 617-20; Geddes, Crit. Rem. on Exo_8:17; Montanus, Critic. Sac. on Exo_8:12; Kitto, Daily Bible Illust. ad loc.; Bochart, Hieroz. 2:572. SEE GNAT.
"The advocates of the other theory, that lice are the animals meant by kinnim, and not gnats, base their arguments upon these facts:
(1) because the kinnim sprang from the dust, whereas gnats come from the waters;
(2) because gnats, though they may greatly irritate men and beasts, cannot properly be said to be 'in' them;
(3) because their name is derived from a root (כּוּן) which signifies to 'establish,' or to 'fix,' which cannot be said of gnats;
(4) because, if gnats are intended, then the fourth plague of flies would be unduly anticipated;
(5) because the Talmudists use the word kinnlah in the singular number to mean a louse; as it is said (Shab. 14:107, b), 'As is the man who slays a camel on the Sabbath, so is he who slays a louse on the Sabbath'" (Smith).
"The entomologists, Kirby and Spence, place these minute but disgusting insects in the very front rank of those which inflict direct injury upon man. A terrible list of examples they have collected of the ravages of this and closely allied parasitic pests. They remark that, 'for the quelling of human pride, and to pull down the high conceits of mortal man, this most loathsome of all maladies, or one equally disgusting, has been the inheritance of the rich, the wise, the noble, and the mighty; and in the list of those that have fallen victims to it, you will find poets, philosophers, prelates, princes, kings, and emperors. It seems more particularly to have been a judgment of God upon oppression and tyranny, whether civil or religious. Thus the inhuman Pheretima mentioned by Herodiotus, Antiochus Epiphanes, the dictator Sylla, the two Herods, the emperor Maximin, and, not to mention more, the persecutor of the Protestants, Philip the Second, were carried off by it' (Introd. to Entomol. volume 4). The Egyptian plague may have been somewhat like that dreadful disease common in Poland, and known as plica Polonica, in which the hair becomes matted together in the most disgusting manner, and is infested with swarms of vermin. Each hair is highly sensitive, bleeds at the root on the least violence, and if but slightly pulled feels exquisite pain. Lafontaine, whom Hermann calls a very exact describer, affirms that millions of lice appear on the wretched patient on the third day of this disease (Mem. Apterol. page 78). These insects form the order Anoplura of Leach, and Parasitat of Latreille. Most mammalia, if not all, and probably all birds, are infested by them; each beast and bird, as is stated, having its own proper species of louse, and sometimes two or more. Three distinct species make the human body their abode." SEE INSECT.
CYCLOPEDIA OF BIBLICAL, THEOLOGICAL AND ECCLESIASTICAL
press 1895.
E. W. G. Masterman.
Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible
Edited by James Hastings, D.D. Published in 1909
kinnim. (See EXODUS; EGYPT.) Mosquitoes, troublesome in Egypt toward October, soon after the plague of frogs, not only giving pain, but entering the body through the nostrils and ears; so Septuagint, Philo, and Origen. But mosquitoes' larvae are deposited in stagnant waters, whereas Exodus (Exo_8:17) states "all the dust became lice throughout all the land of Egypt." Sir S. Baker writes similarly from experience, "it is as though the very dust were turned into lice"; a tick no larger than a grain of sand becomes swollen with blood to the size of a hazel nut. The Egyptian chenems (related to kinnim)), "mosquito," retained in the Coptic, favors the former. The Egyptian ken, "force," "plague," may apply to either view.
Fausset's Bible Dictionary
By Andrew Robert Fausset, co-Author of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown's 1888.
Lice. (Hebrew, cinnam, cinnim). This word occurs, in the Authorized Version, only in Exo_8:16-18 and in Psa_105:31 both of which passages have reference to the third great plague of Egypt. The Hebrew word has given occasion to whole pages of discussion. Some commentators, and indeed modern writers generally, suppose that gnats are the animals intended by the original word; while, on the other hand, the Jewish rabbis, Josephus and others, are in favor of the translation of the Authorized Version.
Upon the whole, it appears that there is not sufficient authority for departing from this translation. Late travellers (for example, Sir Samuel Baker) describe the visitation of vermin in very similar terms: ? "It is as though the very dust were turned into lice." The lice which he describes are a sort of tick, not larger than a grain of sand, which when filled with blood expand to the size of a hazel nut. ? Canon Cook.
Smith's Bible Dictionary
By Dr. William Smith.Published in 1863
Swarms of lice was the third plague with which God punished the Egyptians, Exo_8:16. The Hebrew word כנום , which the LXX render σκνιφες, some translate flies, and think them the same as gnats. Origen says that the sciniphe is so small a fly, that it is scarcely perceptible to the eye, but that it occasions a sharp stinging pain. However, the original, according to the Syriac, and several good interpreters, signifies lice.
But Josephus, the Jewish rabbins, and most of the modern translators render the Hebrew word at large lice; and Bochart and Bryant support this interpretation. The former argues that gnats could not be meant.
1. Because the creatures here mentioned sprang from the dust of the earth, and not from the waters.
2. Because they were both on men and cattle, which cannot be spoken of gnats.
3. Because their name comes from the radix כזן , which signifies to make firm, fix, establish, which can never agree to gnats, flies, &c, which are ever changing their place, and are almost constantly on the wing.
4. Because כנה is the term by which the talmudists express the term louse, &c. To which may be added, that if they were winged and stinging insects, as Jerom, Origen, and others have supposed, the plague of flies is unduly anticipated; and the next miracle will be only a repetition of the former. Mr. Bryant, in illustrating the aptness of this miracle, has the following remarks: The Egyptians affected great external purity, and were very nice both in their persons and clothing; bathing and making ablutions continually. Uncommon care was taken not to harbour any vermin. They were particularly solicitous on this head; thinking it would be a great profanation of the temple which they entered, if any animalcule of this sort were concealed in their garments. The priests, says Herodotus, are shaved, both as to their heads and bodies, every third day, to prevent any louse, or any other detestable creature, being found upon them when they are performing their duty to the gods. The same is mentioned by another author, who adds, that all woollen was considered as foul, as from a perishable animal; but flax is the product of the immortal earth, affords a delicate and pure covering, and is not liable to harbour lice. We may hence see what an abhorrence the Egyptians showed toward this sort of vermin, and what care was taken by the priests to guard against them. The judgments, therefore, inflicted by the hands of Moses, were adapted to their prejudices. It was, consequently, not only most noisome to the people in general, but was no small odium to the most sacred order in Egypt, that they were overrun with these filthy and detestable vermin.
Biblical and Theological Dictionary by Richard Watson
PRINTER 1849.
lı̄s (כּנּים, kinnı̄m (Exo_8:17, Exo_8:18; Psa_105:31), כּנּם, kinnim (Exo_8:16), כּנּם, kinnām (Exo_8:17, Exo_8:18); Septuagint σκνῖφες, sknı́phes (Exo_8:16, Exo_8:18), τὸν σκνίφα, tón sknı́pha, once in Exo_8:18; σκνῖπες, sknı́pes (Psa_105:31); Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) scniphes; according to Liddell and Scott, under the word σκνίψ, sknips, Slav. sknipa = culex): The references, both in Exodus and in Psalms, are all to the plague of ?lice.? the Revised Version margin suggests ?fleas? or ?sandflies.? The Septuagint rendering would favor ?sandflies? or ?mosquitoes,? between which two insects the Old Testament writers would hardly be expected to discriminate. Mosquitoes belong to the order of Diptera, family Culicidae; the sandfly (Plebotomus papataci) to the family of Simuliidae of the same order. The sandflies are much smaller than mosquitoes, and are nearly noiseless, but give a sharp sting which may leave an unpleasant irritation. They are abundant in the Levant. In Southern Europe they cause the ?three-day fever? or ?papataci.? As stated under GNAT (which see), there is little ground other than the authority of the Septuagint for deciding between ?lice,? ?fleas,? ?sand-flies,? or ?mosquitoes? as translations of kinnı̄m. See also under GNAT the note on kēn, the Revised Version margin ?gnat? (Isa_51:6).
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
PRINTER 1915.
Lice occurs in Exo_8:16-18 (Exo_8:12-14 Heb.); Psa_105:31. The name of the creature employed in the third plague upon Egypt, miraculously produced from the dust of the land. Its exact nature has been much disputed. Those who suppose the name to be derived from a Hebrew word which means tosfix, settle, or establish, infer lice is meant, from their fixing themselves on mankind, animals, etc. Dr. A. Clarke has further inferred from the words 'in man and in beast,' that it was the 'tick.' It is probable, however, that not lice, but some species of gnats is the proper rendering. It is not a valid objection, that if this plague were gnats, etc., the plague of flies would be anticipated, since the latter most likely consisted of one particular species having a different destination [FLY]; whereas this may have consisted of not only mosquitoes or gnats, but of some other species which also attack domestic cattle, as the ?strus, or tabanus, or zimb; on which supposition these two plagues would be sufficiently distinct.
But since mosquitoes, gnats, etc. have ever been one of the evils of Egypt, there must have been some peculiarity attending them on this occasion, which proved the plague to be 'the finger of God.' From Exo_9:31, it appears that the flax and the barley were smitten by the hail; that the former was beginning to grow, and that the latter was in the ear?which, according to Shaw, takes place in Egypt in March. Hence these gnats would be sent about February, i.e. before the increase of the Nile, which takes place at the end of May, or beginning of June. Since, then, the innumerable swarms of mosquitoes, gnats, etc. which every year affect the Egyptians come, according to Hasselquist, at the increase of the Nile, the appearance of them in February would be as much a variation of the course of nature as the appearance of the gadfly in January would be in England. They were also probably numerous and fierce beyond example on this occasion; and as the Egyptians would be utterly unprepared for them (for it seems that this plague was not announced), the effects would be signally distressing. For a description of the evils inflicted by these insects upon man, see Kirby and Spence, Introduction to Entomology, London1828, i. 115, etc.
The Popular Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature
by John Kitto.
Lice
(כֵּן, ken, perh. from כָּנִן, to nip; only once in the sing. used collectively, Isa_2:6, and there doubtful, where the Sept., Vulg., and Engl. Vers. confound with כֵּן, so, and render ταῦτα, haec, "in like manner;" elsewhere plural, כַּנַּים, Exo_8:16-18; Psa_105:31 : Sept. σκνῖφες, Psa_105:17 σκνίψ, v.r. σκνῖπες; Vulg. sciniphes, in Psalm cinifes; also the cognate sing. collective כַּנָּם, cinnam, Exo_8:17-18, Sept. and Vulg. σκνῖφες, sciniphes), the name of the creature employed in the third plague upon Egypt, miraculously produced from the dust of the land. Its exact nature has been much disputed. Dr. A. Clarke has inferred, from the words "in man and in beast," that it was the acarus sanguisuqus, or "tick" (Comment. on Exo_8:16). Michaelis remarks (Suppl. ad Lex. 1174) that if it be a Hebrew word for lice it is strange that it should have disappeared from the cognate tongues, the Aramaic, Samaritan, and Ethiopic. The rendering of the Sept. seems highly valuable when it is considered that it was given by learned Jews resident in Egypt, that it occurs in the most ancient and best executed portion of that version, and that it can be elucidated by the writings of ancient Greek naturalists, etc. Thus Aristotle, who was nearly contemporary with the Sept. translators of Exodus, mentions the κνῖπες (the σκνῖφες of the Sept.) among insects able to distinguish the smell of honey (Hist. Animnal. 4:8) and refers to species of birds which he calls σκνιποφάγα, that live by hunting σκνῖπες (8:6). His pupil Theophrastus says, "The κνῖπες are born in certain trees, as the oak, the fig-tree, and they seem to subsist upon the sweet moisture which is collected under the bark. They are also produced on some vegetables" (Hist. Plant. 4:17, and 2, ult.). This description applies to aphides, or rather to the various species of "gall-flies" (Cynips, Linn.). Hesychius, in the beginning of the third century, explains σκνίψ as "a green four-wcinged creature," and quotes Phrynichus as applying the name to a sordid wretch, and adds, "From the little creature among trees, which speedily devours them." Philo (A.D. 40) and Origen, in the second century, who both lived in Egypt, describe it in terms suitable to the gnat or mosquito (Philo, Vita Mosis, 1:97, 2, ed. Mangey; Origen, Homilia tertia introd.), as does also Augustine in the third or fourth century (De Convenientia, etc.).
But Theodoret, in the same age, distinguishes between σκνῖπες and κώνωπες (Vitac Jacobi). Suidas (A.D. 1100) says σκνίψ, "resembling gnats," and adds, "a little creature that cats wood." These Christian fathers, however, give no authority for their explanations, and Bochart remarks that they seem to be speaking of gnats under the name σκνῖπες, which word, he conjectures, biased them from its resemblance to the Hebrew. Schleusner adds (Glossema in Octateuch) σκνῖφες, "less than gnats," and (Lex. Cyrilli, MS. Brem.), "very small creatures like gnats." From this concurrence of testimony it would appear that not lice, but some species of gnats, is the proper rendering, though the ancients, no doubt, included other species of insects under the name. Mr. Bryant, however, gives a curious turn to the evidence derived from ancient naturalists. He quotes 'Theophrastus, and admits that a Greek must be the best judge of the meaning of the Greek word, but urges that the Sept. translators concealed the meaning of the Hebrew word, which he labors to prove is lice, for fear of offending the Ptolemies, under whose inspection they translated, and the Egyptians in general, whose detestation of lice was as ancient as the time of Herodotus (2:37) (but who includes "any other foul creature"), and whose disgust, he thinks, would have been too much excited by reading that their nation once swarmed with those creatures through the instrumentality of the servants of the God of the Jews (Plagues of Egypt, Lond. 1794, page 56, etc.).
This suspicion, if admitted, upsets all the previous reasoning. But a plague of lice, upon Bryant's own principles, could not have been more offensive to the Egyptians than the plague on the River Nile, the frogs, etc., which the Sept. translators have not mitigated. Might it not be suggested with equal probability that the Jews in later ages had been led to interpret the word lice as being peculiarly humiliating to the Egyptians (see Josephus, 2:14, 3, who, however, makes the Egyptians to be afflicted with phthiriasis). The rendering of the Vulg. affords us no assistance, being evidently formed from that of the Sept., and not being illustrated by any Roman naturalist, but found only in Christian Latin writers (see Facciolati, s.v.). The other ancient versions, etc., are of no value in this inquiry. They adopt the popular notion of the times, and Bochart's reasonings upon them involve, as Rosenmüller (apud Bochart) justly complains, many unsafe permutations of letters. If, then, the Sept. be discarded, we are deprived of the highest source of information. Bochart's reasoning upon the form of the word (Hieroz. 3:518) is unsound, as, indeed, that of all others who have relied upon etymology to furnish a clew to the insect intended. It is strange that it did not occur to Bochart that if the plague had been lice it would have been easily imitated by the magicians, which was attempted by them, but in vain (Exo_8:18). Nor is the objection valid that if this plague were gnats, etc., the plague of flies would be anticipated, since the latter most likely consisted of one particular species having a different destination, SEE FLY, whereas this may have consisted not only of mosquitoes or gnats, but of some other species which also attack domestic cattle, as the oest rus, or tabanus, or zimb (Bruce, Travels, 2:315, 8vo), on which supposition these two plagues would be sufficiently distinct. SEE PLAGUES OF EGYPT.
But, since mosquitoes, gnats, etc., have ever been one of the evils of Egypt, there must have been some peculiarity attending them on this occasion which proved the plague to be "the finger of God." From the next chapter, Exo_8:31, it appears that the flax and the barley were smitten by the hail; that the former was beginning to grow, and that the latter was in the ear, which, according to Shaw, takes place in Egypt in March. Hence the kinnim would be sent about February, i.e., before the increase of the Nile, which takes place at the end of May or beginning of June. Since, then, the innumerable swarms of mosquitoes, gnats, etc., which every year affect the Egyptians, come, according to Hasselquist, at the increase of the Nile, the appearance of them in February would be as much a variation of the course of nature as the appearance of the oestruts in January would be in England. They were also probably numerous and fierce beyond example on this occasion, and, as the Egyptians would be utterly unprepared for them (for it seems that this plague was not announced), the effects would be signally distressing. Bochart adduces instances in which both mankind and cattle, and even wild beasts, have been driven by gnats from their localities. It may be added that the proper Greek name for the gnat is ἐμπίς, and that probably the word κώνωψ, which much resembles κνίψ, is appropriate to the mosquito. Hardouin observes that the κνῖπες of Aristotle are not the ἐμπίδες, which latter is by Pliny always rendered culices, a word which he employs with great latitude. SEE GNAT.
For a description of the evils inflicted by these insects upon man, see Kirby and Spence, Introduction to Entymology, Lond. 1828, 1:115, etc.; and for the annoyance they cause in Egypt, Maillet, Descript. de l'Egypte par l'Abbe Mascrier,(Paris, 1755), 90:37; Forskal, Descr. Animal. page 85. Michaelis proposed an inquiry into the meaning of the word σκνῖφες to the Societ des Savants, with a full description of the qualities ascribed to them by Philo, Origen, and Augustine (Recueil, etc. Amst. 1744). Niebuhr inquired after it of the Greek patriarch, and also of the metropolitan at Cairo, who thought it to be a species of gnat found in great quantities in the gardens there, and whose bite was extremely painful. A merchant who was present at the inquiry called it dubabel-keb, or the dog-fly (Description de l'Arabie, Pref. pages 39, 40). Besides the references already made, see Rosenmüller, Scholia in Exod.; Michaelis, Suppl. ad Lex. Hebraic. 1203 sq.; Oedmann, Verm. Samml. aus der Naturkunde, 1:6, 74-91; Bakerus, Annotat. in Et. M. 2:1090; Harenberg, Observ. Crit. de Insectis AEgypt. infestantibus, in Miscell. Lips. Nov. 2:4, 617-20; Geddes, Crit. Rem. on Exo_8:17; Montanus, Critic. Sac. on Exo_8:12; Kitto, Daily Bible Illust. ad loc.; Bochart, Hieroz. 2:572. SEE GNAT.
"The advocates of the other theory, that lice are the animals meant by kinnim, and not gnats, base their arguments upon these facts:
(1) because the kinnim sprang from the dust, whereas gnats come from the waters;
(2) because gnats, though they may greatly irritate men and beasts, cannot properly be said to be 'in' them;
(3) because their name is derived from a root (כּוּן) which signifies to 'establish,' or to 'fix,' which cannot be said of gnats;
(4) because, if gnats are intended, then the fourth plague of flies would be unduly anticipated;
(5) because the Talmudists use the word kinnlah in the singular number to mean a louse; as it is said (Shab. 14:107, b), 'As is the man who slays a camel on the Sabbath, so is he who slays a louse on the Sabbath'" (Smith).
"The entomologists, Kirby and Spence, place these minute but disgusting insects in the very front rank of those which inflict direct injury upon man. A terrible list of examples they have collected of the ravages of this and closely allied parasitic pests. They remark that, 'for the quelling of human pride, and to pull down the high conceits of mortal man, this most loathsome of all maladies, or one equally disgusting, has been the inheritance of the rich, the wise, the noble, and the mighty; and in the list of those that have fallen victims to it, you will find poets, philosophers, prelates, princes, kings, and emperors. It seems more particularly to have been a judgment of God upon oppression and tyranny, whether civil or religious. Thus the inhuman Pheretima mentioned by Herodiotus, Antiochus Epiphanes, the dictator Sylla, the two Herods, the emperor Maximin, and, not to mention more, the persecutor of the Protestants, Philip the Second, were carried off by it' (Introd. to Entomol. volume 4). The Egyptian plague may have been somewhat like that dreadful disease common in Poland, and known as plica Polonica, in which the hair becomes matted together in the most disgusting manner, and is infested with swarms of vermin. Each hair is highly sensitive, bleeds at the root on the least violence, and if but slightly pulled feels exquisite pain. Lafontaine, whom Hermann calls a very exact describer, affirms that millions of lice appear on the wretched patient on the third day of this disease (Mem. Apterol. page 78). These insects form the order Anoplura of Leach, and Parasitat of Latreille. Most mammalia, if not all, and probably all birds, are infested by them; each beast and bird, as is stated, having its own proper species of louse, and sometimes two or more. Three distinct species make the human body their abode." SEE INSECT.
CYCLOPEDIA OF BIBLICAL, THEOLOGICAL AND ECCLESIASTICAL
press 1895.
BUSCADAVERDADE
Visite o nosso canal youtube.com/buscadaverdade e se INSCREVA agora mesmo! Lá temos uma diversidade de temas interessantes sobre: Saúde, Receitas Saudáveis, Benefícios dos Alimentos, Benefícios das Vitaminas e Sais Minerais... Dê uma olhadinha, você vai gostar! E não se esqueça, dê o seu like e se INSCREVA! Clique abaixo e vá direto ao canal!
Saiba Mais
-
Nutrição
Vegetarianismo e a Vitamina B12 -
Receita
Como preparar a Proteína Vegetal Texturizada -
Arqueologia
Livro de Enoque é um livro profético?
Tags