pecudum imaginationem tantum fuisse causam adju- vantem, ac plus in hoc negotio divin.-e tribuendum esse virtuti, ([uaj suo concursu sic debilem causie secunda; vim adauxit ut quod ea sola secundum naturam praista- re non valeret id divina benedictione supra naturam pra3staret;" and then Nitschmann cites the passage in Gen. xxxi, 5-13, where Jacob expressly states that his success was due to divine interference ; for it is hard to believe that Jacob is here uttering nothing but a tissue of falsehoods, which appears to be the opinion of Kalisch (Hist, and Crit. Comment. Gen. xxx and xxxi), who represents the patriarch as " unblushingly executing frauds suggested by his fertile invention, and then abusing the authority of (jod in covering or justifying them." We are aware that a still graver difiiculty in the minds of some persons remains, if the above expla- nation be adopted; but we have no other alternative, for, as Patrick has observed, " let any shei)herd now trj^ this device, and he will not find it do what it did then by a divine operation." The greater difficulty alluded to is the supposing that God would have directly inter- fered to help Jacob to act fraudulently towards his un- cle. But are we quite sure that there was any fraud fairly called such in the matter? Had Jacob not been thus aided, he might have remained the dupe of Lallan's niggardly conduct all his days. He had served his monej^-loving uncle faithfully for fourteen years; Laban confesses his cattle had increased consideraljly under Jacob's management, but all the return he got was un- fair treatment and a constant desire on the part of La- ban to strike a hard bargain with him (Gen. xxxi, 7). God vouchsafed to deliver Jacob out of the hands of his hard master, and to punish Laban for his cruelty, which he did by pointing out to Jacob how he could secure to himself Lirge flocks and abundant cattle. God was only helping Jacob to obtain that which justly belonged to him, but which Laban's rapacity refused to grant. " Were it lawful," says Stackhouse, " for any private person to make reprisals, the injurious treatment Jacob had re- ceived from Laban, both in imposing a wife upon him and prolonging his servitude without wages, was enough to give him both the provocation and the privilege to do so. God Almighty, however, was pleased to take the determination of the whole matter into his own hands." This seems to us the best way of understanding this disputed subject.
The relation of the sheep to man, in a pastoral coun- trj', gave rise to many beautiful symbols and interest- ing illustrations. Jeliovah was the shepherd of his people, and Israel was his flock (Psa. xxiii, 1 ; Lkxx, 1 ; Ixxix, 13; Isa. xl, 11; Jer. xxiii, 1, 2; Ezek. xxxiv, and often elsewhere) ; the apostasy of sinners from (iod is the straying of a lost sheep (Psa. cxix, 176; Isa. liii, 6; Jer. 1, 6) ; and the ever-blessed Son of God coming down to our world is a shepherd seeking his sheep which were lost (Luke XV. 4-6). He is the only shepherd ; all who do not own him are thieves and robl)ers (John x, 8); wolves in sheep's clothing (]\l:itt, vii, 15). He is the good shepherd, who gave his life for the sheep (John x, 11); and now he gives them his own life in resurrec- tion, and this is eternal life (ver. 28 ; Rom. vi, 9-11 ; Col. ii, 12). As the sheep is an emblem of meekness, pa- tience, and submission, it is expressly mentioned as typi- fying these qualities in the person of our blessed Lord (Isa. liii, 7 ; Acts viii, 32, etc.).
In the vision of the prophet Daniel, recorded in ch. viii, the Medo-Persian monarchy w-as seen under the figure of a ram with two unequal horns, which was over- thrown by a one-horned he-goat, representing the Mac- edonian i)iiwer. We have already remarked on the pro- priety of tiie latter symlml [see <ioAr], and tlio former is no less correct. There is abundant evidence that the ram was accepted as the national emblem by the Persian people, as the he-goat was by the Macedonians. Am- mianus Marcellinus states that the king of Persia wore a ram's head of gold set with precious stones, instead of a diadem. The type of a ram is seen on ancient Persian
SIIEEPCOTE
642
SIIEEPCOTE
Oiieiital Sheepfold ot btcue.
coins, as on one of undoubted c^enuineness in Hunter's collection, in which the obverse is a ram's head and the reverse a ram couchant. Kams' lieads, with horns of unequal height, are still to be seen sculptured on the pil- lars of Persepolis.—Kitto ; Smith; Fairbairn.
Sheepcote (or Sheepfold) is designated by sev- eral Heb. terms. ni3, nuveh (a hahitation or dwelling- place, as usually rendered, "sheepcote," 2 Sam. vii, 8; 1 Chron. xvii, 1; "fold," Isa. Ixv, 10; Jer. xxiii, 3; Ezek. xxxiv, 14; "stable," xxv, 5), means, in a gen- eral sense, a place where flocks repose and feed; and, as the Orientals do uf)t usually fold their flocks at night, it must be left to tlie context to determine whether we are to understand "pastures" or "sheep- folds." A more distinctive term is iT'TS, gederdh, an enclosure, " cote" (I Sam. xxi v, 3 ; " fold." Numb, xxxii, 16. 24, 36; Zeph. ii, 6; elsewhere "hedge" or "wall"), which means a built pen or safe structure, such as ad- joins buildings, and used for cattle as well as sheep. Special terms are fibz'O, mikldh (a j)tn for flocks; "fold," Psa. 1, 9; Ixxviii, 70; Hab. iii, 17), and D'^rSS'J'a, mis/ipethdyim (the dual form of which indi- cates double rows, as of stalls for cattle or sheep ; "sheep- folds," Judg. v, 16; "two burdens," Gen. xlix, 14). It is to be observed that the Oriental flocks, when they belong to nomads, are constantly kept in the open country, without being folded at night. This is also the case when the flocks belonging to a settled people are sent out to feed, to a distance of perhaps one, two, or three days' journey, in tlie deserts or waste lands, where they possess or claim a right of pasturage. This seems to have been the case with the flocks fed by David. As such flocks are particularly exposed to the depredatory at- tacks of the regidar nomads, who consider the flocks of a settled people as more than even ^ usually fair prey, and contest their right to t'V, ])asture in the deserts, the she|iherds. when they ^ ^ j: are in a district particularly liable to danger from this cause, or from the attacks of wild beasts, and doubt whether themselves and their dogs can afford adequate protection, drive their flocks at night into caves, or, where there are none, into uncovered enclosures, which have been erected for the purpose at suitable distances. These are