The Heb. name for the spirit to whom the summons was given was din, a word which is prob- ably no other than that which is used in Job 32'" for a skin-bag for holding water. The term would lie a}>pliod to the spirit on account of the mysterious hollow sound which he was supposed to make, as though speaking from some hollow cavity.* This a^x or spirit was considered to reside in the necromancer, who was for the time identified with it. The term properly used to describe the necromancer was 3in Syj, or for the female sorceress 3iN n^j;?. We might compare the 0';v3 n'ji^s of Nah 3^ sin n'pj;; is tlie term applied to the witch of Endor (1 S 28'), who summons Samuel from his grave at the request of Saul (,.y 12-u) and plays the part of clairvoyante as well.
Anotiier obscure term frequently combined with 3\v is 'Ky., and it is exceedingly difficult to say w licther anj- actual distinction of meaning properly belonged to the use of either. Tlie etymology of the latter word, corresponding to our English word wizard, suggests the divining function of the spirit inhabiting the necromancer, whereas a'lK was rather a term which indicated the ventriloqiiizing and hollow tones of his utterance. The LXX usually render iSn or 'k Syj by iyyiurTpiiivSos, once (Is IJr) by iK yrit tpuvCiv ; whereas 'jjrj:, which they hardly
• This derivation Is, however, disputed by Nowack and others. Hitzig, in his Comnientarv (on Is 8'"), connect* it with the
Arabic <__) I (.i.e. t_jl!, rex>ermi fuiV), and thus regards it as mcanini; 'returnin(r one.' CI. Baudissin, Stud, tut semil. Retigiomciriich. i. p. 143 footnote. On the whole, we agree with Dillm. on Lv 1931 that the connexion with aiK, ' bag,' is the most probable. The interpretation of the word as connected with :i:k, and as signifying ' enemy (ol Ood),' ia the least prob-
understood, is variously rendered by TepaTotrKS-roi, ^waotSds, and yvioar-qs (yviopiffTi^s)^ and apparently in one instance (Is 19^) by iyyaaTplixvdos. In Dt 18" there is a curiously amiililied pliraseology which ought not to be presseil, viz. 'interrogator (Sxr) of the lis,' 'i>y., and the 'inquirer of the dead' (D"n?rr'?N irni). In this as in the preceding verso (v.'") we have a fairly exhaustive phraseology, but each term employed does not cover an altogether distinct conception, but is more or less a synonym.
During the closing decades of the 8th cent., amid the dangers, apprehensions, and calamities occasioned by the Assyrian invasions, the people resorted in large numbers to these occult modes of inquiry. To this Isaiah refers in scathing terms of rebuke (S'*''-). Instead of turning their faces heavenwards to Jehovah and to the words of the Torah committed to faithful prophets, many were saying in these degenerate days, 'Consult the conjurers of the dead and the necromancers, who chirp and whisper, Shall not a people inquire of their manes* on behalf of the living, of the dead ? ' t To this pitiful and degrading appeal to popular superstition the prophet replies in tones of tliunder: 'To the instruction and testimony!' The wide prevalence of necromantic practice is illustrated by a vivid simile employed by the same prophet. In a beautiful and graphic oracle (eh. 29) Jerusalem is threatened with all the horrors soon to impend over the city in the siege of Sen- nacherib : ' And thou shalt lie prostrate, speaking from the earth, and from the dust shall thy speech sound low, and thj- voice shall be like a ghost (:m) from the earth, and from the dust shall tny speech twitter' (v.").
Thus the higher prophetic teaching was as hostile in its attitude towards necromancy as it was towards magic and soothsaying ; and this tone of reprobation is echoed in the stem penalties of death denounced against it in the legislation, Dt 18" (cf. 1 S 2S'), Lv igs' 20»- '. The attitude of the teachers in the Talmud is not so uncompromising, i'liough they regarded it as the work of the devU, they believed in the validity of the art of necro- mancy [BerakkCt/i 59a", Shnbb. 1526). The dead can only be conjured in the first year 'after burial. It is said of Rab that he even himself inquired of the dead (Baba mezia 1076).
LiTERATtTRK. — ^This has been indicated throughout this article. On Jewish magic Blau's work is the main authority. On Greek magic consult Warre -Cornish's Concise Diet, o/ Greek and Sioman Antiq., * Superstitio ' : and Miss Macdonald in PSBA, vol. xiii. (Feb. 3, 1891), art. ' Inscriptions relating to Sorcerj- in Cyprus.' In this instructive art. there are useful citations from W'essely's Griechische Zaitherpapyri. A good illustration is given of a recipe for a xaraht^/Mit taken from his edition of Papyrus Anastasi in the British Museum. On the subject of maffic in general Frazer's GtMeii Bought should be consulted, and A. Lang in Fortnvjhtlj/ lino. Feb. and April 1901. The litera- ture has been indicated already in art. Maoic, bv reference to the exhaustive list in Schiirer, GVFS iii. pp. 300-304.
Owen C. Whitehouse. SORE.— This word is used freely in AV as adj., suhst., or adverb.
The Anglo-Saxon adj. Mr, meaning 'painful,' develops a subsu stir, meaning ' a sore,' as that which caused the pain ; from this subst. another adj. was formed, sdrig, in the sense of ' sad.' .Vdr became in later Eng. 'sore,' as hdn became ' bone,' hdm ' home,' etc Sdruf became ' sorry,' the double r being a mistake, due to a fancied connexion with the subst 'sorrow.' Between ' sorrj- ' and ' sorrow ' (Anglo-Sax. $oTg) there is no etymological connexion.