Do'<Sg (Heb. Z>oJ^, "XtX^i, fearful, 1 Sam. xxi, 7, Sept. Acmiy v. r. Awi^k ; or Jifi^'i'n, Psa. lii, title, Sept. Aw^k; in 1 Sam. xxii, 18, 22, Doyeg', y&H^ after the Syrian pronunciation, Sept. Aa»^), an Edomite, and chief overseer of king Saul's flocks (Josephus, ^w}koq, " keeper of the king's mules," Ant, vi, 12, 1), which is an important trast in Oriental courts. B.C. 1062. At Nob he was witness of the assistance which the high- priest Ahimelech seemed to afford to the fugitive Da-
^ by furnishing him with the sword of Goliath, and
by supplying him with bremd even from the wnd^ ble (1 Sam. xxi, 7). Of this he iafled not to iski the king, who, regardless of the explanation offs^iir Ahimelech, and finding that the chiefr censand^ and hesitated to lay their hjuida upon a penoe k * cred, commanded Doeg to slay him and his priat r. the number of 86 persons), and to destnj all ie families and property — a task which was eieeu with equal readiness and cruelty bj the Edodb .. Sam. xxu, 18 sq.). This truculent act called fan^ o of David's most severe imprecative prayers (P«.Ei of which divine and human justice seem alike ti kjt required the fulfilment. See Datid; Psauh. 1 question has arisen on the nature of the boasee W which h€%as * detained before the Lord*' (nir;, Stfi ffWiXOUivoQ NcHToropav ; Y olgate, satef m tabenaai DonUnt). The difficulty which lies in the id« is Doeg was a foreigner, and so hicapable cf a Kanra vow (Mischn. de Votis, Ix, 1, Sorenh.), hss beca ex- plained by the supposition that he was a pro9dTtE.s> tending under some vow or some act of porificalia c the Tabernacle (compare 1 Sam. xx, 18). Tbeci (Kurtg, exeg, hanidb. in loc.) has corrected Gcscsis; interpretation ( Thescatr. p. 1059) of the phnse tt msc- ing * * was assembled before Jehovah.** Ephren Srr% (Opp. i, 876) explains the term as merely iadioas: that Doeg had introduced himself theie ssa^h. whether by right or otherwise. With tkis i^m^ FUrst's rendering (Hebr. Handw, p. 175), tbst k ki tarried behind (zurtlckbleiben) as a spy.
Dog (Sba, ke'leb, so called from his tortiy; la- bic helb; Greek xvutv, whence Eng. hmmd; Sm^ tive Kwdpiov) occurs in numerous passages bed tf the Old and the New Testament (see J^o€baxt,Bfrc i, 769 sq.). An animal so well known, whose mv^ ous varieties come under daily observation, reqasu w detailed description (see the Peany Cyclopadia, a. t i There is, however, in Asia still extant one, period more than one, species, that never have ben the t» panions of man, and there are races of uncertia ob- gin, that may have been formerly ^omeiticatBi t« which are now feral, and as fierce as woItcs; vH'«. in accordance with Oriental modes of specck, \ks are others, exceedingly nnmeroos, neither wQd ms domesticated, but existing in all the cities sad to«a of the Levant, without owners ; fteding oa curia and offal, and still having the tme histinct of pnCe^ ing property, guarding the inhabitants of thediitne or quarter where they are tolerated ; and to fv (^ ished, that water and some food are not aasaiST placed within their reach (see Jardine's JVi^sraEd' Library, ix, x). The trae wild species of Upper td
Wild Persian Dog.
Eastern Asia is a low, sharp-nosed, reddish csr-^^ not unlike a fox, but with less taiL In Pttw ^ Turkey there exists a larger dog resembliB; « ^ exceedingly savage. Botii are gregaiioiis, hsit '^ packs, but are occasionally seen akme. Tkef ^ readily distinguished from a wolf by their shalff » ftimished tails. In the time of the 8(9oaniii«<tf »- rael in Egypt, there were already in existence dses- tic dogs of the principal races now extsni— tk« ^' dog or fox-dog, tiie honnd, the greyhound, and crvi • kind of low-legged turnspit (WUkmson, AndsKtS^
DOG
853
DOG
Ancient Egyptian Dogs.
mdgm. i, 230), All the above, both wild and re- aimed, there is every reason to believe, were known • the Hebrews (see Mishna, Baba Kamma^ vii, 7), id although the Mosaic prohibition is presumed, yet lienor habits, and, in some measure, the necessity ' their condition, must have caused cattle-dogs to be tained as property (Deut xxiii, 18), for we find one ' that race, or a house-do^, actually attending on avellers (Tobit v, 16 ; xi, 4). It is to be presumed tat practically the street-dogs alone were considered I abisolutely unclean ; though all, as is the case among lohammedans, were excluded from familiarity. (See eijeau, Dog$ on Old Sadpturet, etc. Lond. 1863.) In gyptj anterior to the Christian sera, domestic dogs ere venerated. See Nibhaz. They continued to be lerished till the Arabian conquest, when they, like le unowned street-dogs, fell under the imprecation of [oharamed, who with reluctance, though with good >licy, modified .his denunciations and sentence of de- ruction in favor of hunting-dogs, and even permitted ime killed by them to be eaten, provided they had St devoured any portion of it (comp. Exod. xxii, 31). he words of the Lord Jesus to the Syrophoenician Oman, and her answer (Matt, xv, 26, 27), certainly oply a domestication and domiciliation of dogs; but mple toleration of their presence is all that can be ithered. They lived on what they could get. Among le Moors of North Africa a similar position of the dog occasionally seen. They ** grant him, indeed, a cor- er of their tent, but this is all ; they never caress im, never throw him anything to eat" (Poiret's Bar- iry, i, 253). Besides the cattle-dog, the Egyptian ound, and one or two varieties of greyhound, were tost likely used for hunting — a pastime, however, hich the Hebrews mostly pucsued on foot. On the ^3rrian monuments they are depicted in hunting