That this condition of persons existed in the earliest states of society is clear from Gen. xxxviii, 15. From that account it woidd ajipear tliat the " veil" ^vas at that time peculiar to harlots. Judah thought Tamar to be such " because she had covered her face." Mr. Bucking- ham remarks, in reference to this passage, that " the Turcoman women go unveiled to this day" {Travels in Megojfolamia, i, 77). It is contended by Jahn and oth- ers that in ancient times all females wore the veil (Bibl. Archceol. p. 127). Possibly some peculiarity in the size of the veil, or the mode of wearing it, may have been (Prov. vii, 10) the distinctive dress of the harlot at that period (see New Translation, by the Rev. A. De Sola, etc., p. 116, 248-9). The priests and the high-priest were forbidden to take a wife that was {had been, Lev. xxi, 14) a harlot. Josephus extends the law to all the Hebrews, and seems to ground it on the prohibition against oblations arising from prostitution, Dent, xxiii, 18 (.1 nt. iv, 8, 23). The celebrated case of Rahab has been much debated. She is, indeed, called by the word usu- ally signifying harlot (Josh, ii, 1 : vi, 17 ; Sept. -Koprt] ; Yulg. meretrir; and in Heb. xi, 31 ; James ii, 25) ; but it has been attempted to show that the word may mean an innkeeper. See Rahab. If, however, there were such persons, considering what we know of Canaanitish morals (Lev. xviii, 27), we may conclude that they would, if women, have been of this class. The next in- stance introduces the epithet of '-strange woman." It is the case of Jephthah's mother (Judg. xi, 2), who is also called a harlot {irnpyr} ; meretrix) ; but the epithet tTinX ln"-"X {achereth), ^^ strange Avoman," merely de- r\otes/oreign extraction. Josephus says ^ivof Trtpt rrjv lxr]T(pa, "a stranger by the mother's side." The mas- terly description in Prov. vii, 6, etc. may jiossibly be that of an abandoned jnomVrf woman (ver. 19, 20), or of the solicitations of a courtesan, "fair speech," under such a pretension. The mixture of religious observances (ver. 14) seems illustrated by the fact that " the gods are ac- tually worshi^iped in many Oriental brothels, and frag- ments of the offerings distributed among the frequent- ers" (Dr. A. Clarke's Comment, ad loc). The represen- tation given by Solomon is no douht founded upon facts, and therefore shows that in his time prostitutes plied their trade in the "streets" (Prov. vii, 12; ix, 14, etc; Jer, iii, 2; Ezek, xvi, 24, 25,31), As regards the fash- ions in\'olved in the practice, similar outward marks seem to have attended its earliest forms to those which we trace in the classical writers, e, g. a distinctive dress and a seat by the -.vay-side (Gen. xxxviii, 14 ; compare Ezek. xvi, Ig, 25; Bar. vi, 43; Petron. Arb. Sat. xvi; Juv. vi, 118 foU, ; Dougtaei Analect. Sacr. Exc, xxiv). Public singing in the streets occurs also (Isa. xxiii, 10; Ecclus, ix, 4). Those who thus pubUshed their infamy
were of the worst repute ; otlicrs had houses of resort, and both classes seem to have been known among the Jews (Prov. vii, 8-12; xxiii, 28; Ecclus. ix, 7, 8); the two women, 1 Kings iii, IG, lived as Greek heta^rje some- times did, in a house together (Smith, Z'ic^ Gr. and Ro- man Ant. s. V. Heta;ra). The banefiU fascination as- cribed to them in Prov. vii, 21-23, may be compared with what Chardin says of similar effects among the young nobility of Persia (Voyages en Perse, i, 163, ed. 1711), as also may Luke xv, 30, for the sums lavished on them {ib. 162). In earlier times the price of a kid is mentioned (Gen. xxxviii), and great wealth doubtless sometimes accrued to them (Ezek. xvi, 33, 39; xxiii, 26). But lust, as distinct from gain, appears as the induce- ment in Prov. vii, 14, 15 (see Dougtaei Anal. Sacr. ad loc), where the victim is further allured by a promised sacrificial banquet (comp. Ter. Enn. iii, 3). The "har- lots" arc classed with " publicans," as those who laj' un- der the ban of society in the N. T. (jMatt. xxi, 32), No doubt they midtipUed with the increase of polygamy, and consequently lowered flie estimate of marriage. The corrupt practices imported by Gentile converts into the Church occasion most of the other passages in which allusions to the subject there occur, 1 Cor, v, 1, 9, 11 ; 2 Cor, xii, 21 ; 1 Thess, iv, 3 ; 1 Tim, i, 10, The decree, Acts XV, 29, has occasioned doubts as to the meaning of TTopvila there, chiefly from its context, which may be seen discussed at length in Deyling's Observ. Sacr. ii, 470, sq, ; Schottgen, JIo?: Ilebr. i, 468 ; Spencer and Hammond, ad loc. The simplest sense, however, seems the most probable. The children of such persons were held in contempt, and could not exercise privileges nor inherit (John viii, 41 ; Deut. xxiii, 2 ; Judg. xi, 1, 2). The term " bastard" is not, however, applied to any ille- gitimate offspring bom out of wedlock, but is restricted by the Rabbins to the issue of any connection witMn the degrees prohibited by the law. A mamzer, accord- ing to theMishna {Yebamoth,i\, 13), is one, says R.Alii- ba, who is born of relations between whom marriage is forbidden. Simeon the Temanite says it is every one whose parents are lial le to the punishment of "cutting off" by the hands of Heaven ; R. Joshua, everj' one whose parents are liable to death by the house of judg- ment, as, for instance, the offsjiring of adulterj-. On the general subject, Michaelis's Luus of Moses, bk. a', art. 268; Selden, De Ux. Iltbr. i, 16; iii. 12; and De Jur. Natur. V, 4, together -with Schiittgen, and the authori- ties there quoted, may be consulted.