1. The diameter being given as 10 cubits, in math- ematical strictness the periphery woidd have been 31 § cubits; or the circumference, if of exactly 30 cu- bits, would yield a diameter of 9;V^4 cubits. Yet we have no occasion, in order to confute infidel objections (Spinoza, Tractat. theol. polit. c. 2, p. 181, ed. Jen.), to resort to any artificial hypothesis, c. g. cither that the basin was hexagonal (Reyher, Mathesis Mos. p. 715; Deyling, Observatt. i, 125), or that the diameter was measured quite over the rim, and the circumference just below its flange or lip (Schmidt. Jiiblishi r Mulh m. p. 160). See, however, Nicolai, Diss, de gymmetria maris trnei (Viteb. 1717). The breadth across was doubtless 10 cubits, and the perimeter is given merely in round numbers, as sufficiently exact.
2. The capacity of the basin, as given in 1 Kings vii, 26 (comp. also Joseph. 1. c), is certainly more reliable
than that in 2 Chron. iv, 6, and the number in the lat- ter passage may be only a corruption (see Mover-, JJeb. d. Chronik. p. 63). The older archseologers understand that the 3000 baths designate the maximum contents, but that there were usually only 2000 baths actually in it, lest otherwise the priests should be in danger (so Deyling, ut sup.) of drinking from it! For other, and, for the most part, strange views, see Thenius (tit sup. p. Ill sq.).— Winer, ii, 68.
3. The figure of the vessel is not given in detr.il in the sacred document, and Keil (in loc.) has pronounced the older investigations on this point in vain. As the text gives but a single diameter, most writers have thought only of a cylindrical form ; but this would be unusual for such a vessel, and Josephus appears to rep- resent it as having a hemispherical or bowl-like shape, which certainly would lie far more elegant. The ques- tion, however, can only be determined with certain- ty by means of a calculation upon the elements of the height (5 cubits) and the capacity (2000 baths). The depth confirms the supposition that it was semi-sphe- roidal in shape, for it is exactly equal to the radius, being one half the diameter, computing the admeas- urements internally. If now, in accordance with the best authenticated estimates, we reckon the ancient cu- bit at 20.625 inches, and the Hebrew bath as equivalent to 8.875 gallons (wine measure, the gallon = 231 cubic inches), the brazen sea, if perfectly hemispherical, with a radius of 5 cubits, would contain 2,296,089 cubic inch- es, or 9940 gallons, or 1120 baths ; if a cylinder, with cor- responding dimensions, its capacity would be one half more, i. e. 1680 baths. This proves, first, that the read- ing 2000 is the true one, being sufficiently correct for a round number, as it evidently is ; and, secondly, that the vessel was nearer a cylindrical than a semi-globu- lar form, rendering indeed a considerable swell toward the bottom requisite, in order to make up its utmost capacity to a close approximation to the lesser figure given in the text. For other calculations, see Bockh, Metrol. Untersuch. p. 261 sq.
(Joiijectii
4. How the priests used this huge bowl for washing in, the Bible does not inform us. It was probably fur- nished with faucets, by means of which the water was drawn out as occasion required. This latter contri- vance is supplied in most representations of the brazen sea; it rests, however, upon no better authority than mere conjecture. See Sea, Moi.ticn.
Brazen Serpent (TUana ttJTO, net-hash' necho'- sheth, serpent of copper, o0t£ j^aXicouc). On the way from .Mount Hor to the Elanitic Gulf, the Israelites were bitten by venomous serpents (&"»SHto, seraphm/), and many of them died. SeeSBBPENT. Moses theie- fore, at the Divine command, erected (hung on a pole) the metallic (••brazen," I. e. copper-cast) figure of one (such) serpent, and everyone that had been bitten who looked toward it was cured (Num. xxi, 6 sq. ; comp. Wisd. xvi, 5 Sq. ; John iii, 11). This ••brazen ser- pent" was still (under the name "'ITin, hati-Xe- chushtan), in the time of Hczekiah, an object of idola- trous reverence among the Israelites (2 Kings xviii, 4). This miraculous relief is interpreted by the Jews
BRAZIL
880
BREAD
(comp. Wisd. xvi, 7) as the result of a lively faith in Jehovah on the part of the beholders (see Onkelos, the Targums, Jerome, and the rabbins, in the younger Buxtorf's Hist, s rpentis cm. v, 5, in his Exercitt. p. while others of them regard this serpent-form as a talisman which Moses was enabled to prepare, from his knowledge of astrology (see Rabbi Sam. Zirza in Deyling's Observatt. ii, p. "210). From the notice in the Gospel (John Hi, 14), most Christian interpreters have rightly inferred that the "brazen serpent" was inl "I d as a type of Christ as the Redeemer of the world (see Menken. Ueb. die ekerne Schlange, Brem. 1812; Kerns, in Bengel's Archiv. v, 77 sq., SCO sq., 508 sq.). For various futile attempts to explain this miracle on natural principles, see Bauer, Jlebr. O'esck. ii. 320; also Ausf&hrl. Erldar. der Wunder des A. T. i. 228; Paulas, Comment. IV, i, 108 sq. ; Hoffmann, in Scherer's Schriflforsch. i, 576 sq. See Moses.
Parallels more or less complete have been traced between the brazen serpent and similar ideas among other nations, which, although not strictly illustrative of the Biblical narrative, are yet interesting, as show- ing that the fact was not at variance with the notions of antiquity. From 2 Kings xviii, 4, it would seem to have been eventually looked upon by the degenerate Jews themselves as a symbol of curative power (comp. Ewald, 1st. Gesck. ii, 177); as among the ancients the ligurc of a serpent appears to have been derived from the East as a type of Esculapius, i. e. health (Macrob. Sat. i. 20; see Junker, in Meusel's Museum, ii, 127 sq. ; Muller, Archaol. p. 507). In the Egyptian the- ology the (innocuous) serpent was early an emblem of anatory virtue ; such were worshipped in the The- baid (Herod, ii, 74), and they appear on the monument- al delineations in various connections, sometimes with the beneficent Isis, sometimes ingrafted upon the fig- ure of Serapis [? as a benign deity] (Creuzer, Symbol. i, 504 sq. ; ii, 303). So Philo interprets the serpent of the wilderness (TUHppoavvrj dXt^iicaKoc'). See fur- ther Punk, De Ntchustane et JEsculapii serpente (Berol. 182 : ) : Wbchter, Natures et Scriptures concordia (Leips. 1752), p. 11G; Nova Biblioth. Lubec. iii, 1 sq. ; Heng- stenberg, Beitr. i, 164.— Winer. See Nehusiitan.