Soothsaying, though separate from magic, is nevertheless very closely associated with it (see Magic). It niaj' be defined as involving an abnor- mal mode of obtaining knowledge. Just as magic is the abnormal method of obtaining control over persons or events by means of some supernatural Divine or demonic agency, so soothsaying involves the corresponding abnormal method of obtaining information. The soothsayer is to be found in every primitive religion, and ancient Semitic culture formed no exception to the rule. The comp.irison of early Arabic religion with that of primitive Israel conducts us irresistibly to the conclusion that the Hebrew priest in early times was also a soothsayer. For the Heb. jnb is tlie Arab, kd/iin, 'soothsayer,' who owned the local shrine and kept watch and ward over it, and gave replies to the inquiring pilgrim. We thus observe how the priest and the prophet in primitive Semitic antiquity started from a common base and blended their functions. The priest ofi'ered sacrifices, and likewise gave answers to satisfy the worshipper who came to seek information and guidance. Both functions, that of sacrifice and that of divination, were united in one person. Indeed, as we know in the case of the soothsayer and propliet Balaam, sacrifices accompanied the declarations which he made* (Nu 22-"' 2.3'- *• "• '^- »). Accordingly, the combination of the functions of divination and sacrifice may be assumed to be characteristic of primitive Israel as it was of ancient Arabia. To the priest belonged the function of giving replies by (a) Urim and Tuummim, (6) by Teuaphim, and, lastly, (c) by El'HOD.
Much obscurity Invests the actual nature of all these objects. The most probable view is that the Uraphim were anct^stral images and of human shape (to which I S 1913.16 irresistibly points, cf. Gn 3119- *>), and that the ephod waa a plated itna/e
used as a symbol of Jehovah, This seems clear from Jg 8261"-, in which we are told that Gideon made it of the p'old ring* captured from the Ishmaelites and Midianites. Both ephud and teraphim are mentioned together in Hos 3-* ; and Ezk 21'^ and Zee 102 clearly prove that the teraphim were employed in the act of divination. Reference to the emploj-ment of the ephod is to be found in a series of ancient OT passages which describe the consultation of Jehovah in special emergencies. A series of interrogations was put to the deity, one following in logical sequence on the other, each capable of being answered in the alternative form of 'yes' or 'no.' Of this, perhaps the most instructive example is to be found in 1 S 23^^, in which DaWd inquires through the priest Abiathar by means of the ephod, and a series of categorical affirmative (or in other cases negative) replies are given (cf. 1 S 307- **. and Benzinger, Heb. Arch. pp. 3S2, 4US). Obviously, information could be eked out by this process only very slowly, and in one ca^e we read that Saul was com- pelled by the exigencies of war (1 S 1419) to interrupt the tardy procedure of the priest as the timiult of the advancing Philistine army increased. Sometimes the omens were unfavourable for obtaining Divine answers (lA. 143^. The close connexion which certainly subsisted between the ephod which was carried by the priest (1 S 236) and the divination which he practised, seems to point to the conclusion that the ephod was m some way a part at least of the apparatus of inquirj-.' But it is not necessary to suppose that it was more than the symbol or idol which repre- sented the deity whose presence gave validity to the whole procedure. The actual apparatus of soothsaying probably con- sisted in blunted arrows or, in primitive times, small tViirs; and it is to this rude mechanism of inquiry that Rosea (4i2)
refers under {'y (cf. Arab.
c;^-
in WeUh. BetW, p. 132)
• ' In petitioning the deity a sachflce was naturally offered. Throu;;h the sacrifice, whicn was rendered acceptable to the deity by the mediation of the priest, the desired answer to a question was obtained' (Morris Jastrow, ReOgion oS H^Jtbylonia tnd Aajfria, p. 331).
and 72?, while Ezk 2121 mentions the arrows.
Early Arabic cultus, as Wellhausen has pointed out (I.e. p. 141), bears an unmistakable family likeness to the Hebrew, and it is to ancient Arabic usage that we turn for the most instructive illus- trations of our subject. Among primitive Arab warrior tribes, as in ancient Israel, campaigns were never conducted without constant resort to the kdhin or priest-soothsayer, who usually be- longed to a family which on-ned the sanctuary and kept guard over its treasures.
Ordinarily the answer to the inquiry consists only in * yes ' or 'no,' indicated by one arrow for aflinuative and another for negative. There "might also be complicated alternatives. The arrows might be marked to meet every possible range of inquiry, and the arrow drawn forth or shaken out was the answer to the question. Soothsaying was constantly resorted to before a militarj- expedition. It is said of nearly all the clan chiefs of the Kuraish that they consulted the lots before their departure to Badr, although Abu Sufian, for whose deli\ eranoe the expedition was made, liad sent them word that they were not to begin by consulting the lots. Strictly speaking, this consult.ition takes place in the sanctuary bejtyre tAe idol (Well- hausen)^