1. Scope of the Subject
Among cultic objects preserved among practically
all primitive peoples and often continued in use in
an advanced state of society are pillars and sacred
stones. Regard for these objects is in
part attri
butable to fetishistic or animistic concepts (see
Comparative Religion, VI., 1, a, 1-3, 7;
Fetishism); in
part to superstitious regard of what was, at
the time when sacredness
first attached
to the object, inexplicable or myster-
ious;
and in part to later association
with divine powers. Sometimes the
reasons for which these objects became
sacred have long been lost and are now
irrecoverable-such a case is
presented by the sacred stone
at Delphi, to explain which a myth was invented
(see
Comparative Religion, VI., 1, a, § 7). For
many of the occurrences found in the Semitic field,
especially the monoliths regarded as deities, the
animistic basis
is evident. Other monuments,
such as those at crossroads or on boundaries,
received their sacred character through being,
regarded as representing the god of highways or of
boundaries. Among the classes of objects to be
considered in this article are such reminders of
past events as were set up by Jacob
(Gen. xxxi. 46
sqq.) and Joshua (Josh. iv., xxiv. 6-7), or such
as
marked a grave
(Gen. xxxv. 20),
or which at some
time received veneration as embodying a god or as
marking the
haunt of deity
(Gen. xxviii. 18, xxxv. 14;
Judges vi. 20).
These objects include menhirs
(single stones or rude undressed columns), dolmens
('stone tables, possibly used as altars, one stone
supported by two or more),
cromlechs or circles
of stones like that at Stonehenge, England, sometimes having a menhir in the center, and cairns or
heaps of stones; besides these should be mentioned
the figures developed from these originally rough and
unshaped forms. These monuments are traceable
all the way across the continents of Asia and Europe,
and as far west as Ireland.
Because of the abundant remains of Greek
literature, the number of sacred stones in Greece
appears to have been exceptionally large; but it
may be taken for granted that that country is
simply illustrative of a certain stage of civilization.
Examples taken from this field are the sacred stone
at Hyettos, the thirty stones which
2. In Non-
the Pharaeans worshiped, that in
Semitic
Baeotia which figured in the sacred
Territory.
festivals, and the image of Artemis
in Ephesus. Theophrastus (373-283
B.c.)
illustrates the frequency
of these monuments
when he satirically describes a superstitious Greek
performing his devotions before the sacred stones
along the road, a part of the worship consisting of
anointing them with oil
(Characteres ethici, xvi.).
The form of these early monuments was that of a
rough monolith set upright. But it was not to be
expected that the artistic Greek would continue to
be content with such crude monuments: accordingly
the pillar was chiseled into smooth quadrangular
form and surmounted later by a sculptured head,
originally that of Hermes (whence these pillars bore
the name
Hermce
or
Hermula)
but later that of other
deities. The reference to these in Pausanias is
frequent; cf. Frazer's ed. on viii. 34,
1
3, x. 24; § 6.
The origin of these Hernias is quite distinctly traced
to the rough blocks of stone which marked roads or
boundaries and bore the name of
hermeia
or
hermakes;
these in
turn may have developed from the cairn, to
which respect was shown by the passer-by in the
addition of a stone to the heap. The Hermee
passed over to the Romans in the shape of
termini,
having the same general form. Egyptians and
Assyrians extended the usage by erecting stelai and
pillars to mark the bounds of their conquests. It is
noteworthy that this development of the monolith
into the statue does not appear among the Semites.
Among the sacred places of the Greeks were those
known as baetyli (a name formed from the Hebrew
Bethel), the center of which were usually sacred
stones, some of them meteoric, like that of Artemis
mentioned above (cf.
Acts xix. 35).
There was a
sacred meteorite at Tyre (reported by Philo Byb
lius, q.v.), and one in the temple of Heliogabalus
at Emesa. It is probable that in many cases the
sanctity of the stone was due to its emblematic
character, as when it figured a holy mountain in a
Canaanitio high place or a Babylonian ziggurat
(see
High Places).
For citations of sacred stones
over a larger area and among both primitive and
more highly cultured peoples, cf. E. B. Tyler,
Primitive
Culture,
chap. xv. (London, 1903), where
examples are cited from western Europe as late as
the middle of the nineteenth century.
Among Semites the existence of a cult of sacred
stones has long been known. The two sacred stones
of the Kaaba (q.v.) are merely illustrative of a
wealth of sacred objects of
this character among
pre-Mohammedan Arabs. Lampridius speaks of
"stones which were called gods"
3. Among at Syrian sanctuaries, perhaps the
Semites. menhirs, dolmens, and the like referred
to above. Wastenfeld
(ZDMG, xviii.
452, 1864) notes that the Arab geographer Yakut
about 1200
A.D.
knew of a stone near Aleppo said to
mark the tomb of a prophet upon which pilgrims
(Moslems, Jews, and Christians) poured rosewatea
Renan
(Mission de Ph6nice, pp.
399-400, Paris,
1864) speaks of a milestone near Sidon which was
anointed with oil. Niebuhr is reported to have
heard of a .stone venerated by the Jacobite sunworshipers of Mesopotamia (cf. D. Chwolson,
Die Ssabier, i.
153, Leipsic, 1856). Among the
Arabs sacred pillars (menhirs) were numerous, the
most celebrated being the Allat stones (Smith,
Kinship, pp.
292 sqq.; C. M. Doughty,
Arabia
Deserts, ii.
515 sqq., Cambridge, 1888), looked upon
as deities. E. A. T. W. Budge (Egyptian
Magic,
chap. iii., London, 1899) shows that Egyptians
believed that the statue of a god contained the
deity's spirit; hence the superstitious Christianized
Egyptians endeavored to shatter the image in order
to make the spirit homeless. In this respect the
conceptions of Egyptians and Arabs alike rest upon
an animistic basis. For a notice of Canaanitic pillars see
Gezer, § 3. The place of such a pillar was
a "Bethel" (cf.
Gen. xxviii. 18-19),
a word which
passed over into the Greek
baityloa
or
baitylion
(ut sup.), cf. the Greek
temenoa,
Hebr.
'admath
kodesh, "holy
ground," Arab.
haram.
It implied
a manifestation of deity by theophany, vision,
dream, release from peril, victory, or the like. Into
the idea of such a place there enters the notion of
taboo (see
Comparative Religion, VI., 1, c) and
consecrates the spot to the deity resident or manifest
there. Possibly the Hebrew prohibition against
using tools on the
altar-stones
(Ex. xx. 25)
was due
to this animistic conception and the desire not to
disturb the numen in the stone.
The most general name in the Semitic field for
the pillar is derived from a root
nzb
(Hebr.
mwzebah,
pl. mazzeboth,
the most general word,
muzzabh,
nezibh,
ef.
Gen. xix. 26;
I Sam. x. 5, xiii. 3-4,
where
for " garrison " should be read " memorial pillar "
as the context clearly implies; Arab.
nuzub, manzab,
nuzb, pl. anzab,
Phenieian
mazzebeth,
4. The Aramaic
nzb;
the Hebrew also emMazFebah. ploys the terms
ammudh,
Gen. xix. 26,
Jer. xxvii. 19,
rendered by the Greek
stalk, styles, kiln;
and
hamman,
a pillar for sunworship,
Isa. xvii. 8, xxvii. 9;
Ezek. vi. 4, 6;
Lev. xxvi. 30;
II Chron. xiv. 4, 7).
The Phenician
mazzebeth
usually means a memorial at a grave
(as in modern Jewish usage), but is also used of a
pillar (not structural) in a temple, as
at Sidon, and
may possibly refer to a votive tablet. The Aramaic
nzb
applies to a statue, possibly at a grave. Before
Phenician temples twin pillars, not structural,
usually stood, as is indicated by coins. Herodotus,
ii. 44, describes the two in the temple of MelkartHeracles at Tyre, one of which he says was of pure
gold and the other of emerald (glass? of. Rawlinson's
note on Herodotus, ii. 81, New York, 1875). Bronze
pillars were in the temple of Baal-Heracles at Gades.
These seem to have been round, though others of
the Phenician cult were square with pyramidal
tops. Through the spread of Phenician influence
along the Mediterranean, the phrase "the pillars
of Hercules" came to denote the extreme West,
and to be applied to the mountains at the western
end of the Mediterranean. The Phenician derivation of the two pillars in Solomon's temple is clear
(
I Kings vii. 15-21).
At Palmyra votive offerings
took the shape of conical terra-cottas, miniature
pillars with possibly a phallic reference. Nisibis
in Mesopotamia may have
derived its name from the
word for pillar and the existence there of one of
these objects of more than common renown. A
stele at Larnaka in Cyprus is called in the inscription
a
mazzebah,
and has a pyramidal top.
Among the Hebrews the mazzebah is clearly
distinguished from the Asherah (q.v.), the former
being of stone and the latter of wood. Hebrew
narratives contain references to the ma*?,ebah
as
the evidence of the presence of deity. Jacob's
stone pillow becomes a pillar
(Gen. xxviii. 18, xxxv. 14);
Joshua's pillar is a hearing witness
(Josh. xxiv. 26-27;
cf.
Judges ix. 6;
a
5. Hebrew thoroughly animistic conception). As
Usage. a reminder of an event of importance
the mazzebah is of frequent occurrence.
It (or a heap of stones; there are two narratives
united in the account in
Gen. xxxi. 45-47)
marked
the compact between Jacob and Laban; twelve
pillars at Sinai commemorated the covenant
(Ex. xxiv. 4),
and Moses commanded to erect
monoliths at Mt. Ebal with the words of the law
incised in the plaster overlaid on the stones
(Deut. xxvii. 2
sqq.); Joshua had twelve pillars set up in
the bed of the Jordan and twelve at Gilgal to
commemorate the crossing
(Josh. iv. 3 sqq., 20
sqq.;
the place-name Gilgal, from a word meaning to
encircle, may be taken from the existence of
cromlechs at the various places bearing that name);
in remembrance of the victory over the Philistines
Samuel erected a "atone" (Hebr.
ebhen,
not
mazzebah,
I Sam. vii. 12),
and Saul also set up a monument
of victory (Hebr.
yadh,
"hand,"
I Sam. xv. 12;
the verb is to be read
hizxabh),
and a great stone
served as an altar
(I Sam. xiv. 33;
cf.
Altar, I., §§ 2-3). Absalom reared a pillar
(mazzebeth)
to perpetu
ate his own memory
(II Sam. xviii. 18).
As a monument to the dead,
corresponding to the Phenician
and modern Jewish usage, the pillar occurs in
Gen. xxxv. 23
(Rachel);
II Kings xxiii. 17;
Ezek. xxxix. 15
(a temporary sign), and
I Macc. xiii. 27.
This is
parallel with the Arabic usage which applies
nuzb
to a memorial at a grave (I. Goldziher,
Muham
medanische Studien, i.
231-238, Halle,
1889; D6ren
bourg, in JA, 8 ser., ii. 245, 1883). Heaps of stones
covered the grave of a man executed
(Josh. vii. 26, viii. 29;
II Sam. xviii. 17).
Thus it is seen that
memorials at graves were common to Semitic
custom, maintained by the Hebrews. Isaiah
(mix. 19) predicts that a pillar inscribed "Yahweh's
(land)" is to be set up at the border of Egypt as a
token that Egypt too is to be a part of God's
territory when his kingdom is realized; and Hosea
(iii. 4, x. 1-2) mentions piflars as belonging to the
Yahweh cult. Other cases of sacred stones to be
noted are the stone of Rohan
(Josh. xv. 6, xviii. 17),
that at Shechem
(Josh. xxiv. 26-27),
at Ophrah
(Judges vi. 20-21),
at Gibeon
(II Sam. xx. 8),
the
stone of Ezel
(I Sam. xx. 19),
and of Zoheleth
(I Kings i. 9;
a stone of sacrifice).
Isa. lvii. 6
may
refer to sacred but prohibited stones, cf. Ivi. 4 sqq.
The
;iyyun,
"direction posts," of
Jer. xxxi. 21
were not sacred objects in Israel, though they were
elsewhere (cf.
Ezek. xxi. 21).
Ma;Teboth are
prohibited in
Deut. xvi. 22, vii. 5, xii. 3;
Lev. xxvi. 1;
as are the
hammanim
(R. V. " sun images ")
in
Lev. xxvi. 30;
cf.
Ezek. vi. 4, 6;
.
Isa. xxvii. 9;
II Chron. xiv. 5, xxxiv. 4, 7;
Jelin destroyed the
pillars of Baal in Samaria
(II Kings x. 26-27),
and
Josiah broke those of
the southern kingdom
(II Kings xxiii. 14).
The cultic importance of these objects is implicit
in what precedes
(Gen. xxviii. 22, xxxi. 13, xxxv. 14),
and is further supported by the name Bethel
(which has the generic
signification of " sanctuary ")
and by the ritual observance of anointing the pillar
with oil or performing sacrifice at it or upon it
(cf.
I Kings i. 9).
The ma4Zebah, as a rough
unhewn stone, was an accessory of
6. Cultic
Importance.
the pre-Deuteronomic sanctuary (see
High Places),
and is unquestionably
to be connected with early Semitic
stone-worship. Even in
Hebrew times the pillar
marked the presence of deity (outside of
Gen. xxviii. 16
sqq., cf.
Josh. xxiv. 26-27,
" this stone is
a witness, . . it hath heard "). Accordingly it
received the blood or fat of the victim or the oil of
the vegetable offering. Thus are to be explained
the hollows in many of these
objects where the
substance of the offering was applied. For the
stages in the developmenb%f the conception of these
objects see the references to
Altar above. That
the Hebrew but followed common Semitic usage is
suggested by the fact that in Arabic custom the
blood or fat of the sacrificial victim was
applied to
the stone with the purpose of bringing it into direct
contact with deity (cf. the modern custom of
stroking with the hand the sacred stones of the
Kaaba). Arabs swore by the
anzab
about a sanctuary (Wellhausen,
Reste,
2d ed., p.102), and Herodotus (iii. 8) testifies to the application of the blood
directly to the stones. The Hebrew altar of unhewn
stones has its analogue in the cairn, which is sometimes an altar, as in the camel sacrifice reported by
Nilus, in which case the animal was bound upon a
heap of stones (Smith,
Rel.
of Sem.,
2d ed., p. 338).
In modern Syria many spots sacred to saints are
marked with pillars regarded as sacred, and cultic
performances still take place in many respects
identical with those noted in earlier times (S. I.
Curtiss,
Primitive Semitic Religion
To-dory, chap.
vii., New York, 1902): The passage in Isa. Ivii. 6
might have been written of most primitive peoples.
Anointing of stones continued in Norway till the
close of the seventeenth century (S. Nilsson, Prim
itive Inhabitants
of Scandinavia, p.
241, London,
1868), and the earl of Roden reports a case in
which the Irish of Inniskea worshiped a stone
kept carefully wrapped in flannel (Tylor,
ut
qUp.,
ii. 167).
A question yet under debate is the.relation to
this subject of the use of the Hebr. pr as applied to
Yahweh
(Deut. xxxii. 4;
I Sam. ii. 2;
Ps. xviii. 2, 31;
Isa. xvii. 10,
xxa. 29). This application ocoure
only in late passages, never in J or E, and the
connection with pillars or stones is not made out.
7ux appears to be used
figuratively. On the other
hand, analogy seems to give some support for the
idea advanced in the fact that ,zur occurs as an
element in proper names among Sabians, and
possibly among place-names in Judea and Midian.
On zur as a divine name cf. A. Wiegand, in
ZATW, 1890, pp. 85 sqq.
Geo. W. Gilmore.
Bibliography:
Benzinger, Archäologie, pp. 314 sqq. et pas
sim; Nowack, Archäologie, i. 90-93, ii. 17-21; Smith.
Ref, of Sem., passim; idem.
Kinship, pp. 292 sqq.; G.
Baur, Geschichte der alltedamenaiche
Weissapung, i. 128 131, Giessen, 1861; F. Lenormant, in Comptes rendus de
Paoadimie des ineeriptione et belles-letree, 1888,. pp. 318
322; idem, in Revue de 1'hietodre des religions, iii (1881),
31-53; W. von Baudiasin, Studien our semiliachm Religions
geschichts, vol. ii., Leipsic, 1878; Fslconnet, in Mémoires
do l'acadimis des inscriptions et belles-lettres, vi (1729),
513-532; F. Mffnter, Ueber die won Himmel gefallanen
Steins, Leipsic, 1805; F. von Dalberg, Ueber den Metsor
Cultus der Alten, Heidelberg, 1811; C. R. Conder, Beth
and Moab, pp. 190-287, London, 1883; idem, Syrian
Stone Lore, ib. 1886; R. Pietachmann, Oewhichte der
Ph6nisier, pp. 205-213, Berlin, 1889; H. Schultz, O. T.
Theology, f. 209-210, London, 1892; A. von Gall, AMP.
raelitisahe Kullstatten, Giessen, 1898; A. S. Palmer, Studies
on Biblical Subjects, no. II., London, 1899; S. L Curtiss,
Primitive Semitic Religion Today. New York, 1902; P.
Torge, Ashera and Astarte, pp. 29-35, Greifewald, 1902;
E. B. Tylor, Primitive Culture, chap. xv., London, 1903;
J. 0. Frazer, Attis, Adonis and Osirie, London, 1906;
Jane Ellen Harrison, Prolegomena to the Study of
Greek Religion, Cambridge, 1908; Folk Lore, vi. 24 sqq.; Well
hausen, Heideruhum; the literature under
Altar; DB,
i. 75-77, iv. 289-290. 617-619.
