Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.
|
See also:ARK (a word See also:common to See also:Teutonic See also:languages, cf. Ger. Arche, adapted from the See also:Lat. See also:area, See also:chest, cf. arcere, to shut up, enclose)„ a chest, See also:basket or See also:box. The See also:Hebrew word tebah, translated in the' A.V. by " ark," is used in the Old Testament (1) of the See also:box made of bulrushes in which See also:Pharaoh's daughter found the See also:infant See also:Moses (See also:Exodus ii . 3), and (2) of the See also:great See also:vessel or See also:ship in which See also:Noah took See also:refuge during the See also:flood (See also:Genesis vi.–ix.) . Noah's See also:Ark.— According to the See also:story in Genesis, Noah's ark was large enough to contain his See also:family and representatives of each See also:kind of See also:animal . Its dimensions are given as 300 cubits See also:long, 50 cubits broad and 30 cubits high (cubit= 18-22 in.) . It was made of " See also:gopher " See also:wood, which has been variously identified with See also:cypress, See also:pine and See also:cedar . Before the days of the " higher See also:criticism " and the rise of the See also:modern scientific views as to the origin of See also:species, there was much discussion among the learned, and many ingenious and curious theories were advanced, as to the number of the animals and the space necessary for their reception, with elaborate calculations as to the subdivisions of the ark and the quantities of See also:food, &c., required to be stored . It may be interesting to recall the See also:account given in the first edition of the See also:Encyclopaedia Britannica (1771), which contained a See also:summary of some of these various views (substantially repeated up to the publication of the eighth edition, 1853) . "Some have thought the dimensions of the ark as given by Moses too scanty . . . and hence an See also:argument has been See also:drawn against the authority of the relation . To solve this difficulty many of the See also:ancient Fathers and the modern critics have been put to miserable shifts . But Buteo and See also:Kircher have proved geometrically that, taking the cubit of a See also:foot and a See also:half, the ark was abundantly sufficient for all the animals supposed to be lodged in it . Snellius computes the ark to have been above half an See also:acre in See also:area .
. . and Dr See also:Arbuthnot computes it to have been 81,062 tuns
.
. . if we come to a calculation the number of species of animals will be found much less than is generally imagined, not amounting to a See also:hundred species of quadrupeds, nor to two hundred of birds
.
.
.
. Zoologists usually reckon but an hundred and seventy species in all
.
The progress of the " higher criticism," and the See also:gradual surrender of attempts to square scientific facts with a literal See also:interpretation of the See also:Bible, are indicated in the shorter account given in the eighth edition, which concludes as follows:—" the insuperable difficulties connected with the belief that all the existing species of animals were provided for in the ark, are obviated by adopting the See also:suggestion of See also:Bishop See also:Stillingfleet, approved by See also:Matthew See also:Poole, See also:Pye See also: The See also:fuller titles of the ark originate in the belief that it contained the " covenant " (berith) or " testimony " (`eduth), the technical terms for the See also:Decalogue (q.v.) ; primarily, however, it would seem to have been called " the ark of Yahweh" (or " Elohim "), or simply " the ark." The word itself (dron) designates an See also:ordinary chest (cp . Gen . 1 . 26; 2 See also:Kings xii. xo), and the (See also:late) description of its See also:appearance represents it as an oblong box 21 cubits long, x4 cubits in549 breadth and height (roughly I.2 by •75 metres) . It was lined within and without with gold, and through four See also:golden rings were placed staves of acacia wood, by means of which it was carried . A slab of the same See also:metal (the so-called "See also:mercy-seat," kapporeth, Gr. hilasterion) covered the See also:top, and this was surmounted by two See also:Cherubim (Ex. See also:xxv . 10-22, See also:xxxvii . 1-9) . The latter, however, are not mentioned in earlier passages (Dent. x . 1, 3), and would naturally increase the See also:weight of the ark, which, according to 2 Sam. xv . 29, could be carried by two men . The ark was See also:borne by the See also:Levites (Deut. x . 8), and the latest narratives amplify the statement with a See also:wealth of detail characteristic of the post-exilic See also:interest in this See also:order . (See LEvITEs.) An interesting passage See also:relating the commencement of an Israelite journey vividly illustrates the See also:power of the sacred object . As the ark started, it was hailed with the cry," Arise, Yahweh, let thine enemies be scattered, let them that hate thee flee from before thee," and when it came to See also:rest, the cry again rang out," Return, O Yahweh, to the myriads of families of See also:Israel" (Num. x . 33-36) . This saying appears to imply a settled See also:life in See also:Canaan, but both affirm the warlike significance of Yahweh and the ark . Thus it is the permanent See also:pledge of Yahweh's gracious presence; it guides the See also:people on their journey and leads them to victory . It is no See also:mere receptacle, but a sacrosanct object as much to be feared as Yahweh himself . To presume to fight without it was to invite defeat, and on one notable occasion the Israelites attempted to attack their enemy See also:north of Kadesh without its aid, and were. defeated (Num. xiv . 44 sq.) . There are many gaps in its See also:history, and although at the See also:crossing of the See also:Jordan and at the fall of See also:Jericho the ark figures prominently (Josh. iii. sq., vi. sq.), it is unaccountably missing in stories of greater See also:national moment . Once it is found at See also:Bethel (See also:Judges xx . 27 sq.) .
It is met with again at See also:Shiloh, where it is under the care of See also:Eli and his sons, descendants of an ancient family of priests (I Sam. ii
.
28; cp
.
Josh. xviii
.
I)
.
After a great defeat of Israel by the See also:Philistines it was brought into the See also:
I)
.
For many years the ark remained untouched—apparently forgotten
.
Shiloh disappears from history; neither See also:Saul nor even See also:Samuel, whose youth had been spent with it, takes any further thought of it
.
After a remarkable See also:period of obscurity, the ark enters suddenly into the history of See also:David (2 Sam. vi.)
.
Some time after the See also:capture of Jerusalem the ark was brought from See also:Baal-See also:Judah, but at the threshing-See also:floor of Nacon (an unintelligible name) Abinadab's son Uzzah laid hands upon it and was struck down for his impiety
.
On this account the See also:place is said to have received the name See also:Perez-Uzzah (" See also:breach of Uzzah ")
.
It was taken into the house of Obed-See also:edom the Gittite (i.e. of See also:Gath); and brought a blessing upon his house during the three months that it remained there
.
Finally the See also: 16) it was a thing of no consequence . Later, in the age of the priestly See also:schools, the ark received much See also:attention, although it must obviously be very doubtful how far a true recollection of its history has survived . But nowhere is any See also:light thrown upon its See also:fate . The invasion of Shishak, the 550 capture of Jerusalem by See also:Joash (2 Kings xiv . 13,14), the troublous reign of See also:Manasseh, the destruction of Jerusalem by See also:Nebuchadrezzar, have found each its supporters . The See also:wild legends of its preservation at the taking of Jerusalem (2 See also:Mace. ii. and else-where) only show that the popular mind was unable to See also:share the view that the ark was an obsolete relic . More poetical is the tradition that the ark was raised to See also:heaven, there to remain till the coming of the See also:Messiah, a thought which embodies the spiritual See also:idea that a heavenly pledge of God's covenant and faithfulness had superseded the earthly See also:symbol.' A See also:critical examination of the history of the Israelite ark renders it far from certain that the object was originally the See also:peculiar See also:possession of all Israel . Many different traditions have gathered around the story of the Exodus, and the ark was not the only divinely sent See also:guide or forerunner which led the Israelites . Its presence at Shiloh, and its prominence in the life of Joshua, support the view that it was the See also:palladium of the See also:Joseph tribes, but the traditions in question conflict with others . The account of the commencement of the ark's journey associates it with Moses and his See also:kin (Num. x . 29 sqq.)—that is, with the See also:south Palestinian clans with which the See also:term " Levites " appears to be closely connected . (See LEVITES.) A distinct See also:movement See also:direct into Judah is implied by certain old traditions (see See also:CALEB), but this is subordinated to the more comprehensive account of the journey See also:round by the See also:east of the Jordan . (See Exodus, THE.) The narratives in i Sam. iv.–vi. stand on a See also:plane by themselves, and the See also:gap between them and 2 Sam. vi. has not been satisfactorily fixed . But it is not certain that the two belong to the same See also:cycle of tradition; Kirjath-jearim and Baal-Judah are identified only in later writings, and the behaviour of Saul's daughter (2 Sam. vi . 15 sqq.) may conceivably imply that the ark was an unknown object to Benjamites . It is of course possible that the ark was originally the sacred See also:shrine of the clans which came direct to Judah, and that the traditions in r Sam. iv.–vi., Josh.iii. sqq. are of secondary origin, and are to be associated with its appearance at Shiloh, the fall of which place, although attributed to the time of Samuel, is apparently regarded by Jeremiah (See also:xxvi . 6) as a See also:recent event . Of these two divergent traditions, it would seem that the one which associates it with the kin of Moses and David may be traced farther in those late narratives which connect the ark closely with the Levites and even attribute its workmanship to Bezalel, a Calebite (Ex. xxxi . 2; I Chron. ii . 19 sqq.) . The tradition in See also:Psalms cxxxii . 6.of the See also:search for the ark at Jaar (Kirjath-jearim) and Ephratah is not clear; but a comparison with r Chron. ii . 50 seems to show that it recognized the " Calebite " origin of the ark . See, on this, S.A.See also:Cook, Critical Notes on 0 .
T
.
History (See also:Index s.v.), and, for other views, Kosters, Theol
.
Tijd. See also:xxvii
.
361 sqq.; See also:Cheyne, Encyc
.
Bib
.
" Ark "; G
.
See also:Westphal, Yahwes Wohnstatten, pp
.
55 sqq., 85 sqq
.
(See also:Giessen, 1908)
.
Whether the ark originally contained some symbol of Yahweh or not has been the subject of much discussion
.
Thus, it has been held that it contained See also: Others have regarded it as an empty portable See also:throne,2 or as a receptacle for sacred serpents (analogies in Frazer, See also:Pausanias, iv. pp . 292, 344) . That it contained the tables of the law (Deut. x . 2; 1 Kings viii . 9) was the later Israelite view, and the subsequent development is illustrated in Heb. ix . 4 . It is enough to decide that the ark represented in some way or other the presence of Yahweh and that the safety of his followers depended upon its See also:security (analogies in Frazer, Paus. x. p . 283) . The Semitic See also:world affords many examples of the belief that a See also:man's See also:religion was See also:part of his See also:political connexion and that the See also:change of See also:nationality involved 'Cp . Rev. xi . 19, and W . R .
Smith, Old Test. in Jeu'
.
See also: He who leaves his See also:land to enter another, leaves his god and is influenced by the religion of his new See also:home (I Sam. xxvi . 19; See also:Ruth i. i6 sqq.), but strangers know not " the cult of the God of the land " (2 Kings xvii . 26) . No nation willingly changes its god (Jer. ii . II), and there are means whereby the follower of Yahweh may continue his See also:worship even when outside Yahweh's land (2 Kings v . 17) . When a people migrate they may take with them their god, and if they conceive him to be a spiritual being who cannot be represented by an See also:image, they may See also:desire a symbolical expression of or, rather, a substitute for his presence . Accordingly the conception of the ark must be based in the first instance upon the beliefs of the particular clans or tribes whose sacred object it was . See further, W . R . Smith, Religion of the Semites, p . 37 ; Schwally, Kriegsaltertumer, i. p . 9 ; Revue biblique (1903), pp . 249 sqq . ; and on the ark, generally, in addition to the literature already cited, Kautzsch, See also:Hastings' See also:Diet . Bible, v. p . 628; A . R . S . See also:Kennedy, See also:Century Bible: Samuel (Appendix) ; E . See also:Meyer, See also:Die Israeliten, Index s.v . Lade," ; and R . H . See also:Kennett, Enc. of Rel. and See also:Ethics . (S . A . |
|
|
[back] ARJUNA |
[next] ARKANSAS |
There are no comments yet for this article.
Do not copy, download, transfer, or otherwise replicate the site content in whole or in part.
Links to articles and home page are encouraged.