THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
the alphabet as numbers was known in times before the Ptolemies, and among the Jews it is proved by Maccabean coins. In earlier times the Hebrews used the system of the Babylonians, which was employed also by Assyrians and in the West, even in Egypt, and extended eastward into India. From the foregoing it follows that the derivation, attempted by many exegetes, of critically suspected numbers from written numbers indicated by letters is to be accepted with the greatest caution, since such changes could have arisen only in a period after the text was fixed. Corrections of numbers like those of the Chronicler, looking to the systematic substitution of lower numbers, is useless, since those numbers are in the texture of the Chronicler's work. Among diverse peoples certain numbers were employed in such a way that the question is raised whether originally a symbolic meaning was not inherent. This question is raised in interest when there is noted the frequent employment of a number in connection with sacred things. From the notice of the last fact, the inference has been drawn
that under all much-used numbers a Symbolism symbolical meaning lay hidden; to of Numbers this supposition strength was given by in General, the early endeavor in Jewish circles to
give a significance to words through the numerical value of the component letters (as when the 318 of Gen. xiv. 14 is connected with Eliezer, or the eighty-five priests of I Sam. xxii. 18 is connected with the Hebrew for " priests," or the 603,000 Hebrews of Num. i. 46 is brought into relations with the Hebrew for " Children of Israel ")• This method of exegesis received strength from the idea taken over from Greek philosophy, that numbers and numerical relations are fundamental in the universe, and there arose not only a Jewish but a Christian Cabala (see Cabala), followers of which yet exist. Although the disciples of the cabalistic school differ from each other so much in methods and results, while they attempt to obtain access to " deeper meanings," new arbitrary arrangements are continually " discovered " to which significance is given. K. C. W F. Bahr gave an impulse to this sort of research in his Symbolik des mosaischen Cultus (2 vols., Heidelberg, 1837-39), followed by Kurtz (in TSK, 1844, pp. 315 sqq.), Kliefoth (in Theologische Zeitschrift, 1862, pp. 1 sqq., 341 sqq., 509 sqq.), and Kliefoth's pupil Lammert, who yet could not agree with his master. Are there, then, in the Bible numbers used unmistakably in a symbolical sense? If so, they must have been intelligible not only to the author, but to the reader. At least the numbers seven, twelve, ten, and three are used symbolically in the Bible. This use is based upon two standards, arithmetical and historical. The former is the general ground which has led diverse nations to use these numbers in the same symbolical manner. Natural facts have strengthened the usage, as when seven is related to the moon's periods and twelve to the ratio of the moon's course to the sun's. Three had significance as the simplest group of units, seven as a double group with a central point, twelve as four times the group of three and also as the first number divisible by four numbers, ten as the basis of decimals.
These qualities explain the wide use of these numbers as sacred. While all cases can not be explained on the ground of derivation from Babylonia, the wide influence of that region upon culture and religion in the pre-Christian world, especially upon the Old Testament and thus upon the New Testament and consequently later upon Christian peoples, is now fully recognized, and this is in some cases traced backward to the early pre-Semitic civilization of Babylonia. It seems probable that the emphasis upon certain numbers originated in the religious field, and that thence the symbolic significance spread to other domains. Especially is this true of the number seven, the word for which in Sumerian the Semitic Babylonians translated by a word meaning " completeness." The coincidence of this number with natural phenomena, as the length of a moon's phase, would emphasize the number's supposed qualities (see Week). Further, the employment of sacred numbers in the Old Testament shows more or less consciousness of an original idea of this sort; sometimes, however, this employment is secondary in its reference. The use of these numbers in sacred connections influenced their employment in other relations. To the relations of sacred import were added also historical relations; sometimes the latter are first in mind.
Some numbers usually convey certain definite ideas. Thus three recalls deity, four the world or mankind, five half of completion, ten full completion, twelve the people of God. If it Seven, be asserted that three has significance Three, for the Christian doctrine of the Trinand Four, ity, that four recalls the quarters of the earth or the winds, and so on, this may be granted; but if it be claimed that, whenever these and like numbers appear with a semblance of significance, a concealed and mystical reference to the assumed symbolical meaning is present, this is a cabalistic eisegesis against which protest is a pressing duty. On seven see Seven, the Sacred Number. To the evidence there furnished may be added Zech. iii. 9, iv. 10, where the seven eyes connote divine omniscience and forethought, and iv. 2 sqq., where the seven lamps symbolize the divine fulness of light. Similar ideas of completeness are involved in Isa. xxx. 26; Dan. iii. 19; Deut. xxviii. 7, 25. Seven-day periods are frequent (see Week). Multiples of seven are numerous: twice seven, Lev. xii. 5; thrice fourteen, Matt. i. 17; ten times seven, Deut. x. 22; Ex. xxiv. 1; Num. xi. 16, 24; Luke x. 1; Gen. 1. 3; Dan. ix. 2; eleven times seven, Judges vii. 14; Ezra viii. 35; and seven multiplied by multiples of ten is of common occurrence. Next to seven three occurs often, and seems to derive its significance from its arithmetical qualities as something absolute — the beginning, middle, and end. In this Babylonian conceptions seem to meet and greet Roman and Greek ideas. But that the number three in the Old Testament has significance for the doctrine of the Trinity must be rejected. Gen. xviii. 2 sqq. speaks not of an appearance of Yahweh in triple form, but of his theophany accompanied by two companions. The threefold blessing of Num. vi. 24 sqq. and the trisagion of Isa. vi. 3 are merely a kind of superlative. A support for the doctrine