Lectionary Calendar
Tuesday, June 18th, 2024
the Week of Proper 6 / Ordinary 11
Tired of seeing ads while studying? Now you can enjoy an "Ads Free" version of the site for as little as 10¢ a day and support a great cause!
Click here to learn more!

Bible Encyclopedias

Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature

Search for…
Prev Entry
Pungel, Nicolaus, Dr.
Next Entry
Punishment, Future
Resource Toolbox
Additional Links

(most properly expressed in Hebrew by some form of פָּקִד, pakad, strictly "to visit," and in Greek by κόλασις or τιμωρία, but frequently denoted by other terms). The following account is based upon the Scripture statements, with illustrations from ancient and modern sources. (See CORPORAL INFLICTIONS).

I. Historical Review of Bodily Inflictions among the Hebrews. The earliest theory of punishment current among mankind is doubtless the one of simple retaliation, "blood for blood", (See BLOOD REVENGE), a view which in a limited form appears even in the Mosaic law. Viewed historically, the first case of punishmnent for crime mentioned in Scripture, next to the fall itself, is that of Cain, the first murderer. His punishment, however, was a substitute for the retaliation which might have been looked for from the hand of man, and the mark set on him, whatever it was, served at once to designate, protect, and perhaps correct the criminal. That death was regarded as the fitting punishment for murder appears plain from the remark of Lamech (Genesis 4:24). In the post-diluvian code, if we may so call it, retribution by the hand of man, even in the case of an offending animal, for blood shed, is clearly laid down (Genesis 9:5-6); but its terms give no sanction to that "wild justice" executed even to the present day by individuals and families on their own behalf by so many of the uncivilized races of mankind. The prevalence of a feeling of retribution due for blood shed may be remarked as arising among the brethren of Joseph in reference to their virtual fratricide (Genesis 42:21). The punishmenit of death appears among the legal powers of Judah, as the head of his family, andl he ordered his daughterin-law, Tamar, to be burned (Genesis 38:24). It is denounced by the king of the Philistines, Abimelech, against those of his people who should injure or insult Isaac or his wife (Genesis 26:11; Genesis 26:29). Similar power seems to have been possessed by the reigning Pharaoh in the time of Joseph (Genesis 41:13).

Passing onwards to Mosaic times, we find the sentence of capital punishment, in the case of murder, plainly laid down in the law. The murderer was to be put to death, even if he should have taken refuge at God's altar or in an asylum city, and the same principle was to be carried out even in the case of an animal (Exodus 21:12; Exodus 21:14; Exodus 21:28; Exodus 21:36; Leviticus 24:17; Leviticus 24:21; Numbers 35:31; Deuteronomy 19:11-12; and see 1 Kings 2:28; 1 Kings 2:34). Moses, however, did not allow parents to be put to death for their children, nor children for their parents (Deuteronomy 24:16), as did the Chaldeans (Daniel 6:24) and the kings of Israel (comp. 1 Kings 21:9; 1 Kings 21:26).

The extensive prescription of capital punishment by the Mosaic law, which we cannot consider as a dead letter, may be accounted for by the peculiar circumstances of the people. They were a nation of newly emancipated slaves, and were by nature perhaps more than commonly intractable; and if we may judge by the laws enjoined on them, which Mr. Hume well remarks are a safe index to the manners and disposition of any people, we must infer that they had imbibed all the degrading influences of slavery among heathens. Their wanderings and isolation did not admit of penal settlements or remedial punishments. They were placed under immediate divine government and surveillance. Hence, wilful offences evinced an incorrigibleness which rendered death the only means of ridding the com munity of such transgressors, and this was ultimately resorted to in regard to all indiviluals above a certain age, in order that a better class might enter Canaan (Numbers 14:29; Numbers 14:32; Numbers 14:35). If capital punishment in Christian nations be defended from the Mosaic law, it ought in fairness to be extended to all the cases sanctioned by that law, and, among the rest, as Paley argues, to the doing of any work on the Sabbath day (Mor. Phil. b. v, c. 7).

II. Capital Crimes under Mosaism.

(A.) Absolute. The following offences also are mentioned in the law as liable to the punishment of death:

1. Striking, or even revilinlg, a parent (Exodus 21:15; Exodus 21:17).

2. Blasphemy (Leviticus 24:14; Leviticus 24:16; Leviticus 24:23 : see Philo, V. M. 3:25; 1 Kings 21:10; Matthew 26:65-66).

3. Sabbath-breaking (Numbers 15:32-36; Exodus 31:14; Exodus 35:2).

4. Witchcraft, and false pretension to prophecy (Exodus 22:18; Leviticus 20:27; Deuteronomy 13:5; Deuteronomy 18:20; 1 Samuel 28:9).

5. Adultery (Leviticus 20:10; Deuteronomy 22:22 : see John 8:5, and Josephus, Ant. iii, 12, 1).

6. Unchastity

a. Previous to marriage, but detected afterwards (Deuteronomy 22:21).

b. In a betrothed mwoman with some one not affianced to her (ibid. Deuteronomy 22:23).

c. In a priest's daughter (Leviticus 21:9).

7. Rape (Deuteronomy 22:25).

8. Incestuous and unnatural connections (Leviticus 20:11; Leviticus 20:14; Leviticus 20:16; Exodus 22:19).

9. Man-stealing (Exodus 21:16; Deuteronomy 24:7).

10. Idolatry, actual or virtual, in any shape (Leviticus 20:2; Deuteronomy 13:6; Deuteronomy 13:10; Deuteronomy 13:15; Deuteronomy 17:2-7 : see Joshua 7 and Joshua 22:20, and Numbers 25:8).

11. False witness in certain cases (Deuteronomy 19:16; Deuteronomy 19:19). Some of the foregoing are mentioned as being in earlier times liable to capital or severe punishment by the hand either of God or of man, as (1) Genesis 9:25; (5) Genesis 12:17; Genesis 20:7; Genesis 39:19; (6) Genesis 38:24; (8) Genesis 19:38.

(B.) Relative. But there is a large number of offences some of them included in this list which are named in the law as involving the penalty of "cutting off (כָּרִת; Sept. ἐξολοθρεύω ) from the people." On the meaning of this expression some controversy has arisen. There are all together thirty-six or thirty-seven cases in the Pentateuch in which this formula is used, which may be thus classified:

1. Breach of Morals. Under this head we have the following: Wilful sin in general (Numbers 15:30-31). *Fifteen cases of incestuous or unclean connection (Leviticus 18:29; Leviticus 20:9-21).

2. Breach of Covenant, as follows:

* Uncircumcision (Genesis 17:14; Exodus 4:24). Neglect of Passover (Numbers 9:13). *Sabbath-breaking (Exodus 31:14).

Neglect of Atonement-day (Leviticus 23:29).

Work done on that day (Leviticus 23:30).

* Children offered to Molech (Leviticus 20:3).

* Witchcraft (Leviticus 20:6).

Anointing a stranger with holy oil (Exodus 30:33).

3. Breach of Ritual, as follows:

Eating leavened bread during Passover (Exodus 12:15; Exodus 12:19). Eating fat of sacrifices (Leviticus 7:25). Eating blood (Leviticus 7:27; Leviticus 17:14). *Eating sacrifice in an unclean condition (Leviticus 7:20-21; Leviticus 22:3-4; Leviticus 22:9).

Offering too late (Leviticus 19:8).

Making holy ointment for private use (Exodus 30:32-33). Making perfume for private use (Exodus 30:38). Neglect of purification in general (Numbers 19:13; Numbers 19:20). Not bringing offering after slaying a beast for food (Leviticus 17:9). Not slaying the animal at the tabernacle door (Leviticus 17:4). Touching holy things illegally (Numbers 4:15; Numbers 4:18; Numbers 4:20; and see 2 Samuel 6:7; 2 Chronicles 26:21).

In the foregoing list, which, it will be seen, is classified according to the view supposed to be taken by the law of the principle of condemnation, the cases marked with * are (a) those which are expressly threatened or actually visited with death, as well as with cutting off. In those (b) marked , the hand of God is expressly named as the instrument of execution. We thus find that of (a) there are in class I seven cases, all named in Leviticus 20:9-16; in class 2, four cases; in class 3, two cases; while of (b) we find in class 2 four cases, of which three belong also to (a), and in class 3 one case. The question to be determined is, whether the phrase "cut off" be likely to mean death in all cases; and to avoid that conclusion Le Clerc, Michaelis, and others have suggested that in some of them the ceremonial ones it was intended to be commuted for banishment or privation of civil rights (Michaelis, Laws of Moses, vol. iii, § 237, p. 436, trans.). Rabbinical writers explained "cutting off" to mean excommunication, and laid down three degrees of severity as belonging to it (Selden, De Syn. i, 6). (See ANATHEMA).

But most commentators agree that, in accordance with the prim facie meaning of Hebews 10:28, the sentence of "cutting off" must be understood to be death-punishment of some sort. Saalschtitz explains it to be premature death by God's hand, as if God took into his own hand such cases of ceremonial defilement as would create difficulty for human judges to decide. Knobel thinks death- punishment absolutely is meant; so Corn. a Lapide and Ewald. Jahn explains that when God is said to cut off, an act of divine providence is meant, which in the end destroys the family, but that "cutting off" in general means stoning to death, as the usual capital punishment of the law. Calmet thinks it means privation of all rights belonging to the Covenant. It may be remarked (a) that two instances are recorded in which violation of a ritual command took place without the actual infliction of a death- punishment: (1) that of the people eating with the blood (1 Samuel 14:32); (2) that of Uzziah (2 Chronicles 26:19; 2 Chronicles 26:21), and that in the latter case the offender was, in fact, excommunicated for life; (b) that there are also instances of the directly contrary course, viz. in which the offenders were punished with death for similar offences: Nadab and Abihu (Leviticus 10:1-2); Korah and his company (Numbers 16:10; Numbers 16:33), who "perished from the congregation;" Uzzah (2 Samuel 6:7); and, further, that the leprosy inflicted on Uzziah might be regarded as a virtual death (Numbers 12:12). To whichever side of the question this case may be thought to incline, we may perhaps conclude that the primary meaning of "cutting off" is a sentence of death to be executed, in some cases, without remission, but in others voidable (1) by immediate atonement on the offender's part; (2) by direct interposition of the Almighty, i.e. a sentence of death always "recorded," but not always executed. It is also probable that the severity of the sentence produced in practice an immediate recourse to the prescribed means of propitiation in almost every actual case of ceremonial defilement (Numbers 15:27-28). See Saalschtitz, Arch. Hebr. 10:74, 75, vol. ii, 299; Knobel, Calmet, Corn. a Lapide on Genesis 17:13-14; Keil, Bibl. Arch. vol. ii, p. 264, § 153; Ewald, Gesch. App. to vol. iii, p. 158; Jahn, Arch. Bibl. § 257.

III. Penalties. Punishments, in themselves, are twofold, capital and secondary; and in the cases we are considering they were either native or foreign.

(A.) Of capital punishments, properly Hebrew, the following only are prescribed by the law.

1. Stoning, which was the ordinary mode of execution (Exodus 17:4; Luke 20 :$; John 10:31; Acts 14:5). We find it ordered in the cases which are marked in the lists above as punishable with death; and we may remark further that it is ordered also in the case of an offending animal (Exodus 19:13; Exodus 21:29). The false witness, likewise, in a capital case would, by the law of retaliation, become liable to death (Deuteronomy 19:19; Maccoth, i, 1, 6). In the case of idolatry, and, it may be presumed, in other cases also, the witnesses, of whom there were to be at least two, were required to cast the first stone (Deuteronomy 13:9; Deuteronomy 17:7; John 8:7; Acts 7:58). The Rabbinical writers add that the first stone was cast by one of them on the chest of the convict, and if this failed to cause death, the bystanders proceeded to complete the sentence (Sanhedr. 6:1, 3, 4; Goodwyn, Moses and Aaron, p. 121). The body was then to be suspended till sunset (Deuteronomy 21:23; Joshua 10:26; Josephus, Ant. 4:8, 24), and not buried in the family grave (Sanhedr. 6:5).

2. Hanging is mentioned as a distinct punishment (Numbers 25:4; 2 Samuel 21:6; 2 Samuel 21:9), but is generally, in the case of Jews, spoken of as following death by some other means. Hanging alive may have been a Canaanitish punishment, since it was practiced by the Gibeonites on the sons of Saul (2 Samuel 21:9).

3. Burning, in pre-Mosaic times, was the punishment for unchastity (Genesis 38:24). Under the law it is ordered in the case of a priest's daughter (Leviticus 21:9), of which an instance is mentioned (Sanhedr. 7:2); likewise in case of incest (Leviticus 20:14); but it is also mentioned as following death by other means (Joshua 7:25), and some have thought it was never used excepting after death. Among the heathens this merciful preliminary was not always observed, as, for instance, in the case of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego (Daniel 3). The Rabbinical account of burning by means of molten lead poured down the throat has no authority in Scripture.

4. Death by the sword or spear is named in the law (Exodus 19:13; Exodus 32:27; Numbers 25:7), although two of the cases may be regarded as exceptional; but it occurs frequently in regal and post-Babylonial times (Judges 9:5; 1 Samuel 15:33; 1 Samuel 22:18; 2 Samuel 1:15; 2 Samuel 4:12; 2 Samuel 20:22; 1 Kings 2:25; 1 Kings 2:34; 1 Kings 19:1; 2 Kings 10:7; 2 Chronicles 21:4; Jeremiah 26:23; Matthew 14:8; Matthew 14:10) a list in which more than one case of assassination, either with or without legal forms, is included.

5. Strangling is said by the rabbins to have been regarded as the most common but least severe of the capital punishments, and to have been performed by immersing the convict in clay or mud, and then strangling him by a cloth twisted round the neck (Goodwyn, M. and A. p. 122; Otho, Lex. Rab. s.v. "Supplicia;" Sanhedr. 7:3; Ker Porter, Trav. ii, 177; C. B. Michaelis, De Judicus, ap. Pott, Syll. Comm. 4: § 10, 12). This Rabbinical opinion, founded, it is said, on oral tradition from Moses, has no Scripture authority.

(B.) Besides these ordinary capital punishments, we read of others, either of foreign introduction or of an irregular kind. Among the former,

1. Crucifixion (q.v.) is treated separately, to which article the following remark may be added, that the Jewish tradition of capital punishment, independent of the Roman governor, being interdicted for forty years previous to the Destruction, appears in fact, if not in time, to be justified (John 18:31, with De Wette, Comment.; Goodwyn, p. 121; Keil, 2, 264; Josephus, Ant. 20:9, 1).

2. Drowning, though not ordered under the law, was practiced at Rome, and is said by St. Jerome to have been in use among the Jews (Cicero, Pro Sext. Rosc. Am. 25; Jerome, Com. on Matthew lib. iii, p. 138; Matthew 18:6; Mark 9:42). Josephus records that the Galilaeans, revolting from their commanders, drowned the partisans of Herod (Ant. 14:15, 20).

3. Sawing asunder or crushing beneath iron instruments. The former is said to have been practiced on Isaiah; the latter may, perhaps, not always have caused death, and thus have been a torture rather than a capital punishment (2 Samuel 12:31, and perhaps Proverbs 20:26; Hebrews 11:37; Just. Mart. Tryph. 120). The process of sawing asunder, as practiced in Barbary, is described by Shaw (Trav. p. 254).

4. Pounding in a mortar is alluded to in Proverbs 27:22, but not as a legal punishment. It is mentioned as a Cingalese punishment by Sir E. Tennant (Ceylon, ii, 88). Something similar to this, beating to death (τυμπανισμός ), was a Greek punishment for slaves. It was inflicted on a wooden frame, which probably derived its name from resembling a drum or timbrel in form, on which the criminal was bound, and beaten to death (2 Maccabees 6:19; 2 Maccabees 6:28; comp. 2 Maccabees 6:30). In Josephus (De Macce.) the same instrument is called τροχός, or "wheel" (5, 9). Hence, to beat tupon the tympanum, to drum to death, is similar to "breaking on the wheel" (Hebrews 11:35). David inflicted this among other cruelties upon the inhabitants of Rabbath-ammon (1 Chronicles 20:3).

5. Precipitstion, attempted in the case of our Lord at Nazareth, and carried out in that of captives from the Edomites, and of St. James, who is said to have been cast from "the pinnacle" of the Temple; also said to have been executed on some Jewish women by the Syrians (2 Chronicles 25:12; 2 Maccabees 6:10; Luke 4:29; Euseb. H.E. ii, 23). This punishment resembles that of the Tarpeian rock among the Romans.

6. The Persians had a singular punishment for great criminals. A high tower was filled a great way up with ashes, the criminal was thrown into it, and the ashes, by means of a wheel, were continually stirred up and raised about him till he was suffocated (2 Maccabees 13:4-6).

Criminals executed by law were buried outside the city gates, and heaps of stones were flung upon their graves (Joshua 7:25-26; 2 Samuel 18:17; Jeremiah 22:19). Mohammedans, to this day, cast stones, in passing, at the supposed tomb of Absalom (Fabri Evagatorium,, i, 409; Sandys, Trav. p. 189; Raumer, Palast. p. 272).

(C.) Of secondary punishments among the Jews, the original principles were,

1. Retaliation, "eye for eye," etc. (Exodus 21:24-25; see Gell. Noct. Att. 20:1). Retaliation, the lex talionis of the Latins, and the ἀντιπεπονθός of the Greeks, is doubtless the most natural of all kinds of punishment, and would be the most just of all if it could be instantaneously and universally inflicted; but when delayed, it is apt to degenerate into revenge. Hence the desirableness that it should be regulated and modified by law. The one-eyed man mentioned by Diodorus Siculus (12) complained that if he lost his remaining eye, he would then suffer more than his victim, who would still have one left. Phavorinus argues against this law, which was one of the twelve tables, as not admitting literal execution, because the same member was more valuable to one man than another; for instance, the right hand of a scribe or painter could not be so well spared as that of a singer. Hence that law, in later times, was administered with the modification, "Ni cum eo pacet," except the aggressor came to an agreement with the mutilated person, de talione redimenda, to redeem the punishment by making compensation. Moses, accordingly, adopted the principle, but lodged the application of it in the judge. "If a man blemish his neighbor, as he hath done, so shall it be done to him. Life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, wound for wound, stripe for stripe, breach for breach" (Leviticus 24:19-22). He, however, makes wilful murder, even of a slave, always capital, as did the Egyptians. Roman masters had an absolute right over the lives of their slaves (Juvenal, 6:219). The Egyptians doomed the false accuser to the same punishment which he endeavored to bring on his victim, as did Moses (Deuteronomy 19:19).

2. Compensation, identical (restitution) or analogous; payment for loss of time or of power (Exodus 21:18-36; Leviticus 24:18-21; Deuteronomy 19:21). The man who stole a sheep or an ox was required to restore four sheep for a sheep, and five oxen for an ox thus stolen (Exodus 22:1). The thief caught in the fact in a dwelling might even be killed or sold; or if a stolen animal were found alive, he might be compelled to restore double (Exodus 22:2-4). Damage done by an animal was to be fully compensated (Exodus 22:5). Fire caused to a neighbor's corn was to be compensated (Exodus 22:6). A pledge stolen, and found in the thief's possession, was to be compensated by double (Exodus 22:7). All trespass was to pay double (Exodus 22:9). A pledge lost or damaged was to be compensated (Exodus 22:12-13); a pledge withheld, to be restored with 20 per cent. of the value (Leviticus 6:4-5). The "sevenfold" of Proverbs 6:31, by its notion of completeness, probably indicates servitude in default of full restitution (Exodus 22:2-4). Slander against a wife's honor was to be compensated to her parents by a fine of one hundred shekels, and the traducer himself to be punished with stripes (Deuteronomy 22:18-19).

3. Stripes, whose number was not to exceed forty (Deuteronomy 25:3); whence the Jews took care not to exceed thirty-nine (2 Corinthians 11:24; Josephus, Ant. 4:8, 21). This penalty was to be inflicted on the offender lying on the ground in the presence of a judge (Leviticus 19:20; Deuteronomy 22:18). In later times, the convict was stripped to the waist and tied, in a bent position, to a low pillar, and the stripes, with a whip of three thongs, were inflicted on the back between the shoulders. A single stripe in excess subjected the executioner to punishment (Macccoth, iii, 1, 2, 3, 13, 14). It is remarkable that the Abyssinians use the same number (Wolff, Trav. ii, 276). We have abundant evidence that it was an ancient Egyptian punishment. Nor was it unusual for Egyptian superintendents to stimulate laborers to their work by the persuasive powers of the stick. Women received the stripes on the back, while sitting, from the hand of a man; and boys also, sometimes with their hands tied behind them. The modern inhabitants of the valley of the Nile retain the predilection of their forefathers for this punishment. The Moslems say, "The stick came down from heaven a blessing from God." Moses allowed corporal punishment of this kind by masters to servants or slaves of both sexes (Exodus 21:20). Scourging was common in after-times among the Jews, who associated with it no disgrace or inconvenience beyond the physical pain it occasioned, and from which no station was exempt (Proverbs 17:26; comp. 10:13; Jeremiah 37:15-20). Hence it became the symbol for correction in general (Psalms 89:32). Solomon is a zealous advocate for its use in education (Proverbs 13:24; Proverbs 23:13-14; comp. Sirach 30:1). In his opinion, "the blueness of a wound cleanseth away evil, and stripes the inward parts of the belly" (Proverbs 20:30). It was inflicted for ecclesiastical offences in the synagogue (Matthew 10:17; Acts 26:11). Among torturing or tedious penalties,

4. Scourging with thorns is mentioned (Judges 8:16). Reference to the scourge with scorpions, i.e. a whip or scourge armed with knots or thorns, occurs in 1 Kings 12:11. So in Latin, scorpio means a knotted or thorny switch. The stocks are mentioned (Jeremiah 20:2); passing through fire (2 Samuel 12:31); mutilation (Judges 1:6; 2 Maccabees 7:4; and see 2 Samuel 4:12); plucking out hair (Isaiah 1, 6; Nehemiah 13:25); in later times, imprisonment, and confiscation or exile (Ezra 7:26; Jeremiah 37:15; Jeremiah 38:6; Acts 4:3; Acts 4:18; Acts 12:4). Imprisonment, not as a punishment, but custody till the royal pleasure was known, appears among the Egyptians (Genesis 39:20-21). Moses adopted it for like purposes (Leviticus 26:12). It appears as a punishment inflicted by the kings of Judah and Israel (1 Kings 22:27; 2 Chronicles 16:10; Jeremiah 37:21); and during the Christian tera, as in the instance of John (Matthew 4:12) and Peter (Acts 12:4). Murderers and debtors were also committed to prison, and the latter "tormented" till they paid (Matthew 18:30; Luke 23:19). A common prison is mentioned (Acts 5:18); and also an inner prison, or dungeon, which was sometimes a pit (Jeremiah 38:6), in which were "stocks" (Jeremiah 20:2; Jeremiah 29:26; Acts 16:24). Prisoners are alluded to (Job 3:18), and stocks (13:27). Banishment was inflicted by the Romans on John (Revelation 1:9). As in earlier times imprisonment formed no part of the Jewish system, the sentences were executed at once (see Esther 7:8-10; Selden, De Syn. ii, c. 13, p. 888). Before death, a grain of frankincense in a cup of wine was given to the criminal to intoxicate him (ibid. 889). The command for witnesses to cast the first stone shows that the duty of execution did not belong to any special officer (Deuteronomy 17:7).

(D.) Of punishments, especially non-capital, inflicted by other nations we have the following notices: In Egypt, the power of life and death and imprisonment rested with the king, and to some extent also with officers of high rank (Genesis 40:3; Genesis 40:22; Genesis 42:20). Death might be commuted for slavery (Genesis 42:19; Genesis 44:9; Genesis 44:33). The law of retaliation was also in use in Egypt (Wilkinson, Ancient Egyptians, 2:214. 215, 217). In Egypt, and also in Babylon, the chief of the executioners, Rab-Tabbachim, was a great officer of state (Genesis 37:36; Genesis 39; Genesis 40; Jeremiah 39:13; Jeremiah 41:10; Jeremiah 43:6; Jeremiah 52:15-16; Daniel 2:14; Mark 6:27; Michaelis, Mos. Recht, iii, 412; Josephus, Ant. 10:8, 5). He was sometimes a eunuch (Josephus, Ant. 7:5, 4). (See CHERETHITE)

Putting out the eyes of captives, and other cruelties, as flaying alive, burning, tearing out the tongue, etc., were practiced by Assyrian and Babylonian conquerors; and parallel instances of despotic cruelty are found in abundance in both ancient and modern times in Persian and other history. The execution of Hamnan and the story of Daniel are pictures of summary Oriental procedure (2 Kings 25:7; Esther 7:9-10; Jeremiah 29:22; Daniel 3:6; Daniel 6:7; Daniel 6:24; comp. Herod. 7:39; 9:112, 113; see Chardin, Voy. 6:21, 118; Layard, Nineveh, ii, 369, 374, 377; Nin. and Bab. p. 456, 457). The duty of counting the numbers of the victims, which is there represented, agrees with the story of Jehu (2 Kings 10:7), and with one recorded of Shah Abbas Mirza, by Ker Porter (Travels, ii, 524, 525; see also Burckhardt, Syria, p. 57; and Malcolm, Sketches of Persia, p. 47).

With the Romans, stripes and the stocks, πεντεσύριγγον ξύλον , nervus and columbar, were in use, and imprisonment with a chain attached to a soldier. There were also the liberoe custodioe in private houses (Acts 16:23; Acts 22:24; Acts 28:16; comp. Xenoph. Hell. iii, 3, 11; Herod. 9:37; Plautus, Rud. iii, 6, 30, 34, 38, 50; Aristot. Eq. [ed. Bekker] 1044; Josephus, Ant. 18:6, 7; 19:6, 1; Sallust, Cat. 47).

Exposure to wild beasts appears to be mentioned by St. Paul (1 Corinthians 15:32; 2 Timothy 4:17), but not with any precision. The lion's den was a Babylonian punishment (Daniel 6), and is still customary in Fez and Morocco (see accounts of, by Hoest. c. ii, p. 77).

Bibliography Information
McClintock, John. Strong, James. Entry for 'Punishment'. Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature. https://www.studylight.org/​encyclopedias/​eng/​tce/​p/punishment.html. Harper & Brothers. New York. 1870.
Ads FreeProfile