[Hebrew:  zebel] has another sense, [Greek:  kopros], particularly of camels, from the round form; and the word was common, in the later Hebrew, in that sense.  Hence the evil spirit is called [Hebrew:  ba`al-zbwl], a contemptuous name, instead of [Hebrew:  ba`al-zbwb] = [Greek:  Beelzeboul] instead of [Greek:  Beelzeboub] (Matt. xii. 24.).

The negative of this word [Hebrew:  ’iyzebel] might, without any great forcing of the literal sense, imply “the undefiled,” [Greek:  Amiautos]; and this conjecture is supported by comparing 2 Kings, ix. 37. with the same verse in the Targum of Jonathan.  They are as follows:  (Heb.): 

  [Hebrew:  wihayta niblat ’iyzebel krmen `al-pneiy hasreh]

In the Targum thus: 

  [Hebrew:  wtiheiy nibeiylta’ r’iyzebel kzebel mbarar `al ’apeiy taqla’:]

It is quite clear that the Targumists intended here a strong allusion to the original meaning of Jezebel’s name; viz. that she who was named “the undefiled” should become as “defilement.”  I am not sure whether a disquisition of this kind may be considered irrelevant to your work; but as the idea seems not an improbable one to some whose judgment I value, I venture to send it.

E.C.H.

* * * * *

SOCINIAN BOAST.

(Vol. ii., p. 375.).

One of your correspondents, referring to the lines lately quoted by Dr. Pusey—­

  “Tota jacet Babylon; destruxit tecta Lutherus,
  Calvinus muros, sed fundamenta Socinus.”

inquires “by what Socinian writer” are these two hexameter verses used ?

In reply, I beg to remark that by “Socinian” is, I suppose, meant “Unitarian,” for even the immediate converts of Socinus refused to be called Socinians, alleging that their belief was founded on the teaching of Jesus Christ; and modern Unitarians, disowning all human authority in religious matters, cannot take to themselves the name of Socinus.

The distich, however, appears to have been in use among the Polish Unitarians shortly after the death of Faustus Socinus, as respectfully expressive of the exact effect which they conceived that he had produced in the religious world.  Mr. Wallace, in his Antitrinitarian Biography, vol. iii. p. 323., states that it is “the epitaph said to have been inscribed on the tomb of Faustus Socinus.”  Mr. Wallace’s authority for this assertion I have not been able to discover.  Bock (Hist.  Antitrinitariorum, vol. iii. p. 725.), whom Mr. Wallace generally follows, observes that the adherents of Faustus Socinus were accustomed to use these lines “respecting his decease,” (qui de ejus obitu canere soliti sunt).  This would seem to imply that the lines were composed not long after the death of Faustus Socinus.  Probably they formed originally a part of poem written as a eulogy on him by some minister of the Unitarian church.  The case would not be without a parallel.