cinity of el-Bepidh (the Bciyudh of Van de Velde's Map, about haif way between Kerioth and Arad). See Nos. 2. and 4.
4. H.VZOR-AMA1I (to be so joined for the same rea- sons as in No. 2), probably identified with Kerioth-IIer- zon (in the Heb. the four names stand "i'l^H ri^np D'^X "liun ^''T\,villa[ies ofCheisron ichich is Chatsor- Amam ; Sept. ai nokuQ 'ATipwv [v. r. 'A(T£pw/tJ, a'urrj tort 'Affwp, Kai 'Ajxc'tfi [v. r. ' kat^wfiaix] ; Vulg. Carioth, Ilesron, hcec est Asor, Amam), a town in the soutli of Judah (but apparently not in the Simconite territory), mentioned between Bealoth and Shema (Josh, xv, 24- 26) ; no doubt (if thas combined) the modern el-Khu- reyetein, as suggested by Roijinson {Researches, iii, Ap- pend, p. 114). See KjiKioTir.
5. (Vat. MS. of Sept. omits; Vidg. Asm:) A city inhabited by the Benjamites after the Captivity, men- tioned between Ananiah and Ramah (Xeh. xi, 33) ; pos- sibly the modem Gazur, a short distance east of Jaffa (for otliers of the associated names, although likewise within the ancient tcrritorj' of Dan, are also assigned to Benjamin), since Eusebius and Jerome {Onomnsf. s. v. Asor) mention a Hazor in the vicinity of Ascalon, al- though they assign it to Judah, and confomid it with those in the south of that tribe (Robinson's Researches, ii, 370, note). From the places mentioned with it, as Anathoth, Nob, Ramah, etc., it would seem to have lain north of Jerusalem, and at no great distance therefrom. Schwarz thinks it is called Chasor (lOn) in the Tal- mudical -(vriters {Palest, p. 162). Robinson suggests the identity of Hazor and the modern Tell Asur, a ruin on a little hill about six miles north of Bethel {Bib. Res. n, 264, note). This, however, appears to be too far from Ramah. Tobler mentions a ruin called Khurbet A rsur, near Ramah, a little to the west, the situation of which would answer better to Hazor {Teqmgr. ii, 400; Van de Velde, Memoir, p. 319). The place in question is prob- ably the same with the B.v^vl-h.vzor (q. v.) of 2 Sam. xiii, 23.
6. A region of Arabia, spoken of as an important place, in the vicinity of Kedar, in the prophetic denun- ciations of desolation upon both by Nebuchadnezzar (Jer. xlix, 28-33). It can hardly be Petra, as supposed by Vitringa {on Isa., i, p. 624), nor the Asor placed by Eusebius 8 miles west of Philadelphia (Hitzig, Jesuits, p. 196), but probably is a designation of the confines of Arabia with south-eastern Palestine, inhabited by no- made tribes dwelling in mere encampments. See Ha-
ZAR.
Hazzurim. See Helkatii-hazzurim.
Head (properly dx"i, rosh, Ki<pa\iii), the topmost part of the human body.
I. Anatomicalli/ considered, the general character of the human head is such as to establish the identity of the human race, and to distinguish man from every oth- er animal. At the same time, ilifferent families of man- kind are marked by pecuUarities of construction in the head, which, though in individual cases, and when ex- tremes are compared togetlier, they rmi one into tlie other, to the entire loss of distinctive lines, yet are in the general broadly contrasted one with the other. These peculiarities in the struct lu-e of the skull give rise to and are connected with other peculiarities of feature and general contour of face. In the union of cranial jiccid- iarities with those of the face, certain clear marks are presented, by which physiologists have been aide to range the individuals of our race into a few great class- es, and in so doing to afford an unintentional corrobora- tion of the information which the Scriptures afford re- garding the origin and dispersion of mankiufL Cam- per, one of the most learned and clear-minded phj'si- cians of the 18th century, has the credit of being the first who drew attention to the classification of the hu- man features, and endeavored, by means of what he termed the facial angle, to furnish a method for distin- guislmig different nations and races of men, which, be-
HEAD
110
HEAD
ing himself an eminent limner, he designed for applica- tion cliietiy in the art of drawing, and which, tliough far from producing strictly defniitc and sci>;ntific residts, yet aflords views that arc" not without interest, and ap- proximations that at least prepared the way for some- thing better (see a collection of Camper's pieces entitled (Euvres qui outpour Objet I'l/isioire Naturelle, la Physi- oloffie, et VA natomie comparee, Paris, 1803). It is, how- ever, to the celebrated J. F. Blumcnbach, whose merits in the entire spliere of natiu-al history are so transcend- ent, that we are mainly indelitcd for the accurate and satisfactorv classifications in regard to cranial structiu-e which now prevail. Camper had observed that the breadth of the head differs in different nations; that the heads of Asiatics (the Kalmucs) have the greatest breadth ; that those of Europeans have a middle degree of breadth ; and that the skidls of the African negroes are the narrowest of aU. This circumstance was by Blu- nienbach made the foundation of his arrangement and description of skulls. By comparing different forms of the human cranium together, that eminent physiologist was led to recognise three great tj^ies, to which all oth- ers could be referred — the Caucasian, Mongolian, and Ethiopic. These three (lifter more widely from each other than any other that can be found; but to these three, Blumenbach, in his classification of skulls, and of the races of men to which they belong, added two oth- ers, in many respects intermediate between the three forms already mentioned. In this way five classes are established, corresponding with five great families. 1.