IN5ECTS INJURIOUS TO THE VINE. 



127 



The word gaza occurs in Joel ii. 25 : — " I will restore to 

 you the fruits of the year, and all that arbeh, jelek, cha;::il, 

 and gaza, that devouring multitude which I sent against you, 

 have destroyed." 



But the passage in Joel in which ga^^a occurs, that is most 

 important to the interpretation of the word, is in chap. i. 

 ver. 4: — " y^ha,t gaza leaves arbeh eats; that which arbeh 

 \ea.\es jelek eats ; and what jelek leaves chazil eats." 



In these different passages, the Septuagint translates gaza 

 by kanipe, and the Vulgate by eruca, i. e. a caterpillar. 

 The pastors of Geneva, and Sacy, have adopted this latter 

 translation. Bochart and Michaelis agree with them in 

 opinion.' But the Chaldean version employs the word gaza 

 to designate a kind of wingless locust ; and in the book of the 

 Prophets alone, the Talmud enumerates ten species of locusts, 

 among which gaza is included. 



The three other insects mentioned in Joel in the same verse 



with gaza, i. e. arbeh, jelek, and chazil, are also included 



among the ten species enumerated by the Hebrew doctors in 



the Talmud. The interpreters of the Bible differ as to the 



signification of the words jelek and chazil, but they all agree 



on the meaning of the word gaza. There is no doubt that it 



was intended for a locust. The Chaldean version agrees with 



the Septuagint and Vulgate in all the passages where the word 



is found in the Bible. Arbeh is the first of four kinds of 



insects, or crawling creatures, pointed out by Moses as fit for 



food ; and Forskael tells us that the Arabs still give the name 



of arbeh to a kind of locust they eat in their country. Now 



we learn from Joel, that whdit gaza leaves the arbeh eats, and 



we may safely conclude that gaza was the name of an insect 



eminently destructive, not only to the vine, but to all kinds of 



plants ; and that to its ravages succeeded the attacks of many 



kinds of locusts, who finished the work of destruction, and 



completely consumed every thing this formidable insect had not 



devoured. Some learned interpreters have considered this insect 



to be a caterpillar ; others, of equal authority, have concluded 



that it was a kind of wingless locust. We will endeavour to 



ascertain the true meaning hereafter, but at present, adhering 



to our proposed plan, as we have now examined all that the 



Hebrews have handed down to us respecting the insects 



' Rocliart, Hierozoicon. part ii. p, 483. 



