i. In 1 Mac 10® 11" 13^ allusion is made to crowns due from the Jews to the Syrian kings, by which are meant, not coins so named, but money tribute, which represented allegiance as formerly the presentation of a crown had done (1 Mac 13", 2 Mac U* ; Jos. Ant. XII. iii. 3, are- (papirris tpopoi; see Levy, Gesch. der Jiid. Mitnzen; Madden, Jewish Coinage).
The Heb. has other words synonymous with those mentioned (as ix? head-dress ; I'iy turban ; m/jj dia- dem ; n;i'? garland), but their consideration does not fall here. The later Jews spoke of three crowns, of the law, the priesthood, and the king, and added ' the crown of a good name' as best of all (Carpzov, Appar. Crit. p. 60 ; Braunius, De Vestitu, p. 634). The word is also used in A V for the top of the head (Gn 49», Dt 33», 2 S 14^, Is 3", Jer 2" 48« ; tr. pate Ps 7", head [RV ' crown of the head '] Dt 33", scalp Ps 68'»).
In NT the A V gives ' Crown ' for two words {<rri- (pavos and SidSrjfia) which RV properly distinguishes. ZT^<payos was not applied by the Greeks to a king's crown. ' It is the crown of victory in the games, of civic worth, of military valour, of nuptial joy, of festal gladness . . . the wreath in fact, or the garland . . . but never, any more than corona in Latin, the emblem and sign of royalty' (Trench, Si/n. of NT, xxiii. ; see, too, Lightfoot on Ph 4'). Roman law likewise regulated tTie bestow ment o( special coronce as rewards of military valour and civic seirice ; and while it was customary to use crowns on ceremonial and festive occasions, they never symbolized royalty. The word for the latter was diadema (see DiADEM). Tliis distinction is obsen-ed in NT, though not always in the LXX (see 2 S 12*', 1 Ch 20^ Ps 21(20)*, Ezk 2]'», Zee 6"' "). In NT a crown is an emblem of victory or reward. It describes the Christi.an's final recom- pense (1 Co 9^, Rev 3" 4*-"'), specifically called a crown of righteou.sness (2 Ti 4'), of life (Ja 1'*, Rev V), of glory (1 P 5*). St. Paul applies it to his converts as being his reward (I'h 4', 1 Th 2"). Hence in the Apoc. a crown is represented on the conquering Christ (Rev 6' 14'''), on the symbolic locusts (Rev 9'), and on the 'woman' of ch. 12, as a sign of >'ictory. In 12' 13' 19'^, on the other liund, the ' dragon ' and the ' beast ' and the kingly Christ have diadems, the 'many diadems' signi- fying Christ's universal empire (see v.'*). Thus Crovm in NT is the emblem of attainment, tha
CROWN OF THORNS
CUCUMBER
reward of service. Even the ' crown of thorns ' was probably a mock symbol of victory, suggested to the soldiers by the corona of military or civic service ; though Trench remarks that ' woven of such materials as it was, SiiSrum could not be ajifilied to it.'
While the use of crowns among the Greeks and Romans seems to have originated with the athletic games, — allusions to which are made by St. Paul in the places cited above, — and while the crown docs not appear in Homer as an emblem of victory, later traditions attributed its invention to one or other of the gods. Tliose traditions are collected by Tertullian in his tract De Corona, in which he violently inveighs against the use of crowns by Christians.
LmSATCRB. — PaachaHuB, Corona ; Meuraiiis, D« Coronis ; FabriciuB, Bibliographia Antiqvaria\ Keland, AntiguUat€» tacr. vttn-. Hettr. ; BriLuniua. De \'fttHu itacerU, Bfbr. ; Jiihn's ftnd Keil's Bib. Arch. ; Bahr, Symboiik det iloKaUrhen CuUlui ; Nowack, Hil/r. Archaol. G. T. I'L'KVES.
CROWN OF THORNS.— See Thorn. FIXION See Cross.
CRUCI-
CRUELTY. — The habits and sentiments of Gentiles and average Israelites, both in OT and NT, are often tainted with gross cruelty. Even acta of divinely atipointed leaders of Israel, utter- ances of the psalmists and prophets, and ordin- ances of the inspired Law, sometimes seem inhuman when juilged by the highest standards of modem Christianity. These standards require the righteous man to treat hiuaan life as sacred, and to refrain scrupulously from inliicting unnecessary pain. But Christianity has only rei^entlj' secured any widespread practical recognition of these principles, and even now they prevail only with minorities in a few of the most advanced com- munities. Moreover, cirilization has developed a sensitiveness which often renders the punishment of a criminal really as severe as in ancient times ; the mitigation of physical cruelty has been compensated for by the rehnement of mental torture. The constant tendency of inspired teaching is towards humanity, and ordinances which seem inhuman often mitigate prevailing barbarity.
The facts are as follows. The extermination of enemies is frequently commanded, Dt 20" etc., and such extermination is described with apparent approval, Jos 6" etc. David massacred the Ammon- ites with great barbarity, 2 S 12", 1 Ch 20", cf. 2 K 15". Amongst the Israelites themselves the Law ventures to impose only a moderate limitation of blood-revenge. Ex 2r*'- '' (JE) forbids the actual bciiting to death of a male or female slave, but does not feel it po.ssible to deal with ca.ses in which the victim survives a day or two. Death is to be inflicted for a large number of oflences, some of them slight, e.g. sabbath-breaking, Ex 35^ (P). An incestuous person, Lv 20" (H), and an unchaste woman of the priestly clan, Lv 21" (H), were to be burnt to death. The OT records great cruelty on the part of (ientiles, barbarous outrages on women ami children, 2 K 8", Hos 13", Am I", and cniel mutilation, 2 K 25'. These are more than borne out by the sculptures of the A.ssyrians, who dcli;.'liti'd to dei>ict Haying alive and other tortures iiillicted upon their enemies, e.g. upon the Elainitu prisoners on sliibs 48-.')0 in the Kouvunjik Gallery of the British Museum. In the S'T we meet with the barbiirous Homan punishments of scourging and cruciti.xion. W. II. Bennett.