induce parents to thus treat their children at a later age, if they showed an aptness for such preferment. The characteristics as regards beard, voice, etc., might then perhaps be modified, or might gradual!}' follow. The Poti-pherah of Gen. xli, 50, whose daughter Joseph married, was "priest of On," and no doubt a diflerent person. (See Delphini, Eunuchi conjugium, Hal. 1G80.) The origination of the practice is ascribed to Semi- ramis (.\mm. Marcell. xiv, G), and is no doubt as earlj', or nearly so, as Eastern despotism itself. Their inca- pacity, as in the case of mutes, is the ground of reli- ance upon them (Clarke's Travels, pt. ii, § 1, 13; Bus- becq, i};. i, 33). By reason of the mj'sterious distance at which the sovereign sought to keep his subjects (Herod, i, 99; comp. Esth. iv, 11), and of the malig- nant jealousy fostered by the debased relation of the sexes, such wretches, detached from social interests and hopes of issue (especially when, as conunonlv, and as amongst the Jews, foreigners), the natural slaves of either sex (Esth. iv. 5), and having no prospect in rebellion save the change of masters, were the fittest props of a government resting on a servile relation, the most complete organs of its despotism or its lust, the surest (but see Esth. ii, 21) guardians (Xenoph. Cyrop. vii, 5, § 15; Herod, viii, 105) of the monarch's person, and the sole confidential witnesses of his un- guarded or undignified moments. Hence thej- have in all ages frequently risen to high offices of trust. Thus the " chief" of the cup-bearers (q. v.) and of the cooks of Pharaoh were eunuchs, as being near his per- son, though their inferior agents need not have been so (Gen. xl, 1). (Wilkinson \^Anc. Egypt, ii, 61] de- nies the use of eunuchs in Egj'pt. Herodotus, indeed [ii, 9i], confirms his statement as regards Eg3'ptian monog;miy ; but if this as a rule applied to the kings, they seemed, at anj- rate, to have allowed themselves concubines [p. 181]. From the general beardless char- acter of Egyptian heads, it is not easj' to pronounce whether any eunuchs appear in the sculptures or not.) The complete assimilation of the kingdom of Israel, and latterly of Judah, to the neighboring models of despotism, is traceable in the rank and prominence of eunuchs (2 Kings viii, 6 ; ix, £2 ; xxiii, 11 ; xxv, 19 ; Isa. Ivi, 3, 4 ; Jer. xxix, 2 ; xxxiv, 19 ; xxxviii, 7 ; xli, 16; Iii, 25). They mostly appear in one of two rela- tions— either military, as " set over the men of war," greater trustworthiness possibly counterbalancing in- ferior courage and military vigor, or associated, as we mostly recognise them, with women and children. (2 Chron. xxviii, 1 is remarkable as ascribing eunuchs to the period of David, nor can it be doubted that Solo- mon's poh'gani}' made them a necessary consequence; but in the state Vaej do not seem to have played an important part at this period.) We find the Assyrian Eab-Saris, or chief eunuch (2 Kings xviii, 17), em- ployed, together with other high officials, as ambassa- dor. Similarly, in the details of the travels of an em- bassy sent bj- tlie duke of Holstein (p. 13G), we find a eunuch mentioned as sent on occasion of a state-mar- riage to negotiate, and of another (p. 273) who was the Meheter, or chamberlain of Shah Abbas, who was al- ways near his person, and had his ear (comp. Chardin, iii, 37), and of another, originally a Georgian prisoner, who officiated as supreme judge. Fryer (Travels in In- dia and Persia, p. 1698) and Chardin (ii, 2831 describe them as being the base and ready tools of licentious- ness, as tyrannical in humor, and pertinacious in the authority which tlicy exercise ; Clarke (Travels in Eu- rope, etc., pt. ii, § ], p. 22), as eluded and ridiculed by those whom it is their office to guard. A great num- ber of thom accompany the shah and his ladies when hunting, and no one is allowed, on pain of death, to come within two leagues of the field, unless the king sends a eunuch for him. So eunuchs run before the closed arabahs of the sultanas when abroad, crying out to all to keep at a distance. This illustrates Esth. i, 10, 12, 15, 16 ; ii, 3, 8, 14. The moral tendency of this
EUNUCHS
351
EUPHRATES
sad condition is well known to be the repression of counige, gentleness, shame, and remorse, the develop- ment of malice, and often of melancholy, and a dispo- sition to suicide. The favorable description of them in Xenophon {l. c.) is overcharged, or, at least, is not confirmed by modern observation. They are not more liable to disease than others, unless of such as often follows the foul vices of which tliey are the tools. The operation itself, especially in infancy, is not more dan- gerous than an ordinary amputation. Chardin (ii, 285) says that only one in four survives; and Clot Bey, chief physician of the pasha, states that two thirds die. Burckhardt, therefore (Xub. p. 329), is mis- taken when he says that the operation is onlj^ fatal in about two out of a hundred cases. See Hakesi.
It is probable that Daniel and his companions were thus treated, in fulfilment of 2 Kings xx, 17, 18 ; Isa. xxxix, 7 ; comp. Dan. i, 3, 7. The court of Herod of course had its eunuchs (Josephus, .!«<. xvi, 8, 1 ; xv, 7, 4), as had also that of queen Candace (Acts viii, 27). Michaelis (ii, 180) regards them as the proper conse- quence of the gross polygamy of tlie East, although his further remark that tliey tend to balance the sexu- al disparity which such monopolj^ of women causes is less just, since the countries despoiled of their women for the one purpose are not commonlj'^ those which fur- nish male children for the other.