Works

VERS. I.

WHAT is that, that is allowed as to the living, (on the Sabbath day) but as to the dead it is not? It is anointing.

VERS. II.

THE distinction of the Twilight among the Rabbins was this.

I. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The hind of the morning: the first appearance of light. R. Chaiia Rabb, and R. Simeon ben Chalaphta travailing together in a certain morning in the Valley of Arbel, saw the hind of the morning, that its light spread the sky. R. Chaiia said, Such shall be the Redemption of Israel. First, It goes forward by degrees, and by little and little, but by how much the more it shall go forward, by so much the more it shall increase.

It was at that time that Christ arose; namely, in the first morning; as may be gathered from the words of Matthew. And to this the title of the two and twentieth Psalm seems to have respect, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 See also Revel. XXII. 16. I am the bright and morning Star. And now you may imagine the women went out of their houses towards the Sepulcher.

II. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 When one may distinguish between purple color and white. From what time do they recite their Phylacterical prayers in the morning? From that time, that one may distinguish between purple color and white. R. Eliezer saith, Between purple color and green. Before this time was Obscurum adhuc coeptae lucis. The obscurity of the begun light, as Tacitus his expression is .

III. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 When the East begins to lighten.

IV. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Sunrise. From the hind of the morning going forth, until the East begins to lighten; and from the time the East begins to lighten, until Sun rise, &c.

According to these four parts of time, one might not improperly suit the four Phrases of the Evangelists. According to the first, Matthews, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . As it began to dawn. According to the second, Johns, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Early in the morning when it was yet dark. To the third, Luke's, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Very early in the morning. To the fourth, Marks, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Very early in the morning, and yet, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . At the rising of the Sun.

For the woman came twice to the Sepulcher, as John teacheth: by whom the other Evangelists are to be explained. Which being well considered, the reconciling them together is very easy.

VERS. XIII.

THAT in the verses immediately going before the discourse is of the two Disciples going to Emmaus, is without all controversy. And then, how do these things consist with that relation in Luke, who saith, That they two returning to Jerusalem, found the Eleven gathered together, and those that were with them, who said, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon? Luke XXIV. 23, 34. The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , saying, evidently makes those to be the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of the Eleven, and of those that were gathered together with them. Which when you read the Versions you would scarcely suspect. For when that word is rendered by the Syriac, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by the Arabic 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by the Vulgar, Dicentes; by the Italian, Dicendo; by the French, Disans; by the English, Saying; who, I pray, would take it in another sense, than that those two, that returned from Emmaus, said The Lord is risen indeed, &c. But in the Original Greek, when it is the accusative case, it is plainly to be referred to the Eleven Disciples, and those that were together with them. As if they had discoursed among themselves of the appearance made to Peter, either before, or now in the very access of those two coming from Emmaus. And yet saith this our Evangelist, that when those two had related the whole business, they gave credit, no not to them. So that according to Luke, they believed Christ was risen and had appeared to Simon, before they told their story; but according to Mark, they believed it not, no not when they had told it.

The reconciling therefore of the Evangelists is to be fetched thence, that those words pronounced by the Eleven, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. The Lord is risen indeed, &c, doth not manifest their absolute confession of the Resurrection of Christ, but a conjectural reason of the sudden and unexpected return of Peter.

I believe that Peter was going with Cleophas into Galilee, and that being moved with the words of Christ told him by the women, Say to his Disciples and Peter, I go before you into Galilee. Think with yourself, how doubtful Peter was, and how he fluctuated within himself, after his threefold denial, and how he gasped to see the Lord again, if he were risen, and to cast himself an humble supplicant at his feet. When therefore he heard these things from the women (and he had heard it indeed from Christ himself, while he was yet alive, that when he arose, he would go before them into Galilee ) and when the rest were very little moved with the report of his Resurrection, nor as yet stirred from that place, he will try a journey into Galilee, and Alpheus with him. Which when it was well known to the rest, and saw him return so soon, and so unexpectedly, Certainly, say they, the Lord is risen, and hath appeared to Peter, otherwise he had not so soon come back again. And yet when he and Cleopas open the whole matter, they do not yet believe even them.

VERS. XV.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 To every Creature, a manner of speech most common among the Jews: by which

• I. Are denoted all men. The wise Men say, Let the mind of man always be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 mingled, or complacent, to the creatures. The Gloss there is. To do with every man according to complacency 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 He makes the Holy Spirit to dwell upon the creatures: that is, Upon men. In every Judge in the Bench of three is required Prudence, Mercy, Religion, hatred of money, Love of truth, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and love of the creatures: that is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , The love of mankind.
• II. But especially by that phrase the Gentiles are understood. R. Jose saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Woe to the Creatures, which see, and know not what they see; which stand and know not upon what they stand, namely, upon what the earth stands, &c. He understands the Heathens especially, who were not instructed concerning the creation of things. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The speech of all the Creatures (that is, of the Heathens) is only of earthly things, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And all the prayers of the Creatures are for earthly things; Lord let the Earth be fruitful, let the Earth prosper. But all the prayers of Israelites are only for the holy place; Lord let the Temple be built, &c. Observe, how 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Creatures, are opposed to Israelites.

And the parallel words of Matthew, Chap. XXVIII. do sufficiently prove this to be the sense of the phrase 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , every creature, in this place: that which in Mark is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Preach to every creature, in that place in Matthew is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Disciple all Nations; as those words also of S. Paul, Coloss. I. 23. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . The Gospel that was preached in all the creation.

In the same sense you must of necessity understand the same phrase, Rom. VIII. 22. Where, if you take the whole passage concerning the Gentiles breathing after the Evangelical liberty of the Sons of God, you render the sense very easy, and very agreeable to the mind of the Apostle, and to the signification of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Creature, or Creation. When they who render it otherwise, dash upon, I know not what, rough and kno • ty sense. Let me, although tis out of my road, thus paraphrase the whole place.

Vers. 19. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. For the earnest expectation of the Creature, or of the Heathen World, waiteth for the revelation of the Sons of God. For God had promised, and had very often pronounced by his Prophets, that he would gather together, and adopt to himself innumerable sons among the Gentiles. Therefore the whole Gentile World doth now greedily expect the revelation, and production of those sons.

Vers. 20. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. For the Creature, the whole Heathen World, was subjected to the vanity of their mind: (as Rom. I. 21. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Became vain in their imaginations. And Eph. I. 17. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . The Gentiles walk in the vanity of their mind, not willingly, but because of him that subjected it.

Vers. 21. Under hope, because the Creature also (or that Heathen World) shall be freed from the servie of (sinful) corruption (which is in the World through lust, 2 Pet. I. 4.) into the (Gospel) liberty of the Sons of God. From the service of Satan, of Idols, and of Lusts, into the liberty, which the sons of God enjoy through the Gospel.

Vers. 22. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. For we know, that the whole Creature (or Heathen World) groaneth together, and travaileth, and, as it were with a convex weight, howeth down unto this very time, to be born and brought forth.

Vers. 23. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. Neither the Gentiles only, but we Jews also (however we belong to a Nation, envious of the Heathen) to whom God hath granted the first fruits of the Spirit, we sigh among ourselves for their sakes, waiting for the adoption, that is, the redemption of our Mystical body, whereof the Gentiles make a very great part.

SECT. I. Some Historical Passages concerning the Territories of Herod, &c.

B EFORE we make any particular enquiries into the Countries mentioned Luke III. 1. it will not be amiss to dip into History a little more generally.

Augustus Caesar received Herod's Sons Alexander and Aristobulus, upon their arrival at Rome, with all the kindness imaginable, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; granting a power to Herod to establish the Kingdom in which of his Sons he pleased: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 : yea and moreover, gave him the Region of Trachonitis, Batanea, and Abranitis. We find Perea (peculiarly so called) not mentioned in this place, when yet it was most assuredly under Herod 's jurisdiction; how else could he have built Herodium, which was in the extreme confines of Perea, Southward, where he himself was buried?

Neither indeed doth St. Luke say anything of Perea, even then when he mentions the Tetrarchy of Herod Antipas, under whose jurisdiction Josephus tells us, was both Perea and Galilee. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Perea and Galilee were both under Antipas,

Why Josephus should not mention Perea when he is speaking of the Fathers Kingdom, or why St. Luke should omit it, when he instances the Tetrarchy of the Son, that being so unquestionably within his jurisdiction; I confess is something strange to me: nor could I pass it without some remarque.

The same Josephus tells us this of the Tetrarchy of Philip: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. Batanea also and Trachonitis, Auranitis, and some parts of Zeno's House, about Jamnia; yielding the profits of one hundred talents, were under Philip's Government. And again, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Then died Philip, in the twentieth year of the Reign of Tiberius, when he himself had governed for seven and thirty years, over Trachonitis, Gaulonitis, and the Country of the Bataneans. Here we see Auranitis is not mentioned, but Gaulonitis is; and in St. Luke, neither Batenea, nor Gaulonitis, nor Auranitis; but instead of them, Iturea. There is a Chronological difficulty in these words of Josephus, which is not easily solved; but this is not the business of this Treatise.

It is hard to say whether this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 House of Zenon, have any relation with Zenodorus the robber. Josephus in the place above quoted, mentions him, saying, That Augustus was the more willing to put Batanea, Trachonitis, and Auranitis under the Government of Herod the Great, that he might the more effectually suppress the Thefts and Rapines committed by one Zenodorus and the Trachonites. Strabo also speaks of this Zenodorus, telling us, That there were few Robberies committed now; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , The Robbers of Zenodorus party being cut off.

But if the name should be writ in the mother tongue, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Beth Zenun, it might signify a place or region of cold; and so denote some Country adjacent to the Snows of Lebanon; or some part 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the mountain of Snow; which I rather believe.

SECT. 2. Whether Perea may not also be called Galilee.

I. ALthough the whole Transjordanine Country might justly enough be called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Perea; for this very reason; because it was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , on the other side Jordan: yet, generally speaking, the Country is distinguished, and that is peculiarly called Perea; which was the Kingdom of Sehon, the dwelling afterwards of the Reubenites, and part of the Tribe of Gad.

Hence that of Ptolomey, That 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , From the East of the River Jordan; there are only these Cities reckoned up by him.

• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Cosmos.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Livias.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Callirrhoe. Of old Lasha.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gazorus.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Epicerus.

Other places that were beyond Jordan, he mentions under other districts; as some under Celosyria, others under Batanea.

That which we are now enquiring about is, whether the Transjordanine Country was ever called Galilee. The rise of this question is, because our Evangelist mentions the whole Tetrarchy of Herod, under the name of Galilee, when as Perea was a great part of it. I incline much to the affirmative, for these Reasons: And first, I suppose that the upper part of the Country beyond Jordan might be called Galilee.

1. From Matth. IV. 15. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , By the way of the Sea beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles. Are not those places beyond the Sea of Gennesaret, called in this place Galilee of the Gentiles, in distinction to Galilee properly so called, on this side Jordan?

2. Judas who moved the Sedition against the Roman Tax, is by Gamaliel called Judas of Galilee, Acts V. 37. who yet by Josephus is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , A Gaulonite of the City of Gamala. Now it is well enough known, that Gaulona and Gamala were beyond Jordan.

II. I suppose Perea, properly so called, to have gone also under the name of Galilee, for these Reasons:

• 1. The whole Land of Canaan, both that beyond, and that on this side Jordan, was under the jurisdiction of Herod the Great. So that divide this whole Country into four Tetrarchies, the first Judea; the second, Samaria; both which were under the Government of Pilate; the third, Iturea and Trachonitis, under Philip; the fourth will be Galilee on this side, and Perea beyond Jordan. Whereas therefore St. Luke, in the division of the Tetrarchies, names only Galilee, as that which belonged to Herod; it is manifest he includes Perea under that of Galilee, and speaks of it as a known, and commonly received thing.
• 2. In Luke XVII. 11. It is said of Jesus, That as he went to Jerusalem, he passed through the midst of Samaria and Galilee. One would have thought it had been proper to have said, through the midst of Galilee and Samaria. For when he went from Jerusalem to his own Country, he then passed through Samaria, and so into Galilee; but going from home to Jerusalem, be in his passage went through Galilee, and then through Samaria: But now it is very certain that in that journey he did pass through Perea, having first gone through the Samaritan Country. Whence it is very probable that Perea is called by our Evangelist in this place, Galilee; in the very same manner as he had also included it in the mention of Galilee, Luke III. 1.
• 3. In that Tragical Feast wherein the last mess was the Head of John the Baptist, those who then were treated by Herod, are called the great estates of Galilee, Mark VI. 21. Now that Supper was kept in the Palace Herodium which was in the very extreme parts of Perea toward the South, and therefore surely those great Estates of Galilee that were with him, must be no other than the Great Estates of Perea.
• 4. There is mention 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of Geliloth of Jordan, Josh. XXII. 11. when the passage was concerning Perea: whence that Country might well take its name of Galilee.

SECT. III. Some things in general concerning the Country beyond Jordan.

AS to the Tetrarchies of Herod and Philip: this I suppose we may determine without prejudice or question, that nothing was within their jurisdiction, but what was within the confines of the Land of Israel, properly so called. (As to what may be objected concerning Iturea, we shall consider in its own place.) Whiles we are therefore looking into these Countries, our main business will be with what was beyond Jordan; for that on this side the River, was only Galilee, about which we shall not much trouble ourselves, because there is no difficulty concerning it.

The Trans-jordanine Country, if I mistake not, from geatest Antiquity, is divided in that story, Gen. XIV. 5. Chedorlaomer and the Kings that were with him, smote the Rephaims in Ashtaroth-Karnaim, and the Zuzims in Ham, and the Emims in Shaveh Kiriathaim, and the Horites in Mount Seir.

These two things we may apprehend from this passage: 1. That the Country of Basan was inhabited by the Rephaims; Perea (another part of the Land beyond Jordan ) by the Zuzims, Moab by the Emims. 2. That Ashtaroth-Karnaim, Ham, and Shaveh Kiriathaim, are not everyone the names of whole Countries, but particular places in those Countries; perhaps where the several fights were, or where the people of that Country had been subdued.

As to Ashtaroth-Karnaim, there is little doubt but that was in the Kingdom of Bashan, the larger Region being called Astaroth, Karnaim is added in a distinstuishing limited sense: [ Deuter. I. 4. Og the King of Bashan which dwelt at Ashtaroth in Edrei. ]

Of the place itself the Jewish Doctors thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 At twenty Cubits Man sits in the shadow of his tent (viz. in the Feast of Tabernacles) he does not sit in the shadow of his Tabernacle beyond twenty cubits, but in the shadow of its sides. [That is, if the roof or cover of his Tabernacle be above twenty cubits high.] Abai saith unto him, if therefore any one shall pitch a Tabernacle in Ashtaroth-Karnaim, is not the Tabernacle so also? Gloss. Ashtaroth Karnaim were two great Mountains, with a Valley between; and by reason of the height and shadow of those Mountains, the Sun never shone upon the Valley.

Why the Samaritan Copy should use here 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Aphinith Karnaiah, instead of Ashtaroth Karnaim, especially when it retains the word Ashtaroth elsewhere, is not easy to say, unless it should have some relation to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Boughes; as a place thick and shady with Boughes. But such is the confusion of the guttural Letters in the Samaritan Language, that ue can determine nothing positively.

That the Zuzims inhabited Perea, as it is distinguished from the Country of Bashan, may be evident from the progress of the Conqueror; for, whereas it is plain that the Rephaims dwelt in Bashan, and the Emims in the Country of Moab, Deuter. II. 10, 11. It is manifest that the Zuzims who were conquered after the Rephaims, and before the Emims, lay in a Country between both, and that was Perea.

And hence are those to be corrected, that would correct the reading here, and instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Zuzims in Ham, would render it, the Zuzims with them. So the Gr. Vulg. &c. As if the Zuzims were amongst the Rephaims, when they were distinguished both in Nation and dwelling. The Samaritan we may be sure took 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for no other than a place, when it renders it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 In Lishah.

When the Israelites went out of Egypt into that Land, the whole Trans-jordanine Region was divided into these two Seigniories, the Kingdom of Sehon, and the Kingdom of Og. That of Sehon was Perea, strictly so called now; That of Og was all the rest under the name of Bashan. But, after the return of Israel from Babylon, Bashan was so sub-divided, that Batanea, or Bashon, was only a part of it, the rest going under the name of Trachonitis, Auranitis, and, if you will, Gualonites too, for we meet with that distinction also in Josephus To give therefore all these Countries at this time their proper bounds and limits, if it does not exceed all human skill and wit, I am sure it doth mine.

So that all we can do in this matter, is only to propound a few things of these places thus divided, as far as conjecture may carry us, which we submit fairly to the fair and candid judgment of the Reader. Let us therefore begin with Trachonitis.

SECT. IV. TRACHONITIS.

ARGOB mentioned Deuter. III. 14. is by the Targumists called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Trachona. And so Jonath. 1 Kings IV. 13. the Samaritan hath it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Rigobaah, which seems akin to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Regab, amongst the Talmudists.

Tekoah hath the preeminence for Oil: Abba Saul saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the next to that is Regab beyond Jordan.

Gul. Tyrius would derive the name from Dragons. For so he: It (Trachonitis) seems to have taken its name from Dragons. Those hidden passages and windings under-ground, with which this Country abounds, are called Dragons. Indeed, almost all the people of this Country, have their dwellings in Dens and Caves; and in these kind of Dragons.

Other things might be offered as to the signification of the word: but we are looking after the situation of the place, not the Etymology of the name. And the first things to be inquired into, as to its situation, is, whether it extended in longitude from the South to the North, or from the West to the East. The reason of our enquiry is partly upon the account of Auranitis, which we are to speak of presently, and partly those words in Josephus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Batanea was bounded with Trachonitis. How so? Either that Batanea lay between Perea and Trachonitis, extending itself from the West toward the East, or between Trachonitis and Galilee, strictly so called, extending itself in length from the South toward the North: which last I presume most probable; and so we place Trachonitis in the extreme parts of the Trans-jordanine Country toward the East. And both which, upon these reasons taken together.

• 1. The Gemarists describing the circumference of the Land from the North, do mention 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tarnegola [or Gabara] the upper, which is above Cesarea [Philippi] and Trachona which extends to Bozrah : where the extension of Trachona, must not be understood of its reaching to some Bozrah in those Northern borders; but to some Bozrah or Bosorrah in the confines of Perea : and so it supposes the Country extending itself from the North toward the South.
• 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Of the Province of Batanea; East of which is Saccea, and here under the Hill Alsadamus, are the Trachonite Arabians. Behold here the Trachonites living East of Batanea.
• 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ▪ The Country of Gamala, and Gaulonitis, and Batanea, and Trachonitis. But were not Gamalitiea itself and Gaulonitis within Batanea? right; but by this distinction he divides between that Batanea that was nearer Galilee, and that that was further off. That Country that lay nearest, from those noted Towns, of Golan, and Gamala, he calls Gaulonitis, and Gamalitica; and that which was further off, he calls by its own name of Batanea, and what lies still yond that, Trachonitis.

There was a time when all that whole Country which now is distinguished into these severals, had one general name of Bashan: which word, how it came to change into Bathan, or Batanea; as also with the Targumists and Samaritan, into Bathnin and Mathnin, any one indifferently skilled in the Syrian Tongue will easily discern.

SECT. V. AURANITIS.

THAT Auranitis took its denomination from Hauran, hardly any one will question, especially that observes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Ezek. XLVII. 16. to be rendered by the Gr. Interp. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; which are upon the borders of Auranitis.

Hauran is reckoned up amongst those Hills, at the top of which, by lifting up some flaming Torches, they were wont to give notice of the new year.

Where did they hold up those lights? 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 From Mount Olivet to Sartaba. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And from Sartaba to Gryphena. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And from Gryphena to Hauran. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And from Hauran to Beth Baltin. And from Beth Baltin, he that held up the light there, did not depart, but waved it hither and thither, up and down, till he saw the lights kindled throughout the whole Captivity.

The Gemarist queries, What is Beth Baltin? Rabh saith it is Biram. What is the Captivity? Rabh Joseph saith it is Pombeditha. Gloss. The sense of it is this: That Biram is in the Land of Israel, How? Is Biram the same with Beth Baltin, and yet is Biram within the Land of Israel? When in the Jerusalem Gemara, Rabh Honna saith, When we came hither, we went up to the top of Beth Baltin, and discerned the Palm-trees in Babylon. If this be true, the Geographers are to consider whether there can be any prospect of Babylon from the Land of Israel. In their sense it may be true enough, who commonly by the name of Babylon, understand all those Countries into which the Babylonish Captivity were carried; not only Chaldea, but Mesopotamia also, and Assyria: So that bounding the Land of Israel with the River Euphrates, (which indeed the Holy Scriptures themselves do) they make it contiguous with Mesopotamia, the River only between; and they place Beth Baltin not far from the bank on this side the River.

The Gemarists acknowledge that Lights were lifted up upon some Hills between those which they had mentioned, but these were the most known and celebrated, and therefore they named them only. Now it is probable enough that Mount Hauran gave the denomination to the whole Country Auranitis, which we are now upon: Perhaps there might be some part of Antilibanus, called Hauran, either from the Syriac word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Havar, which signifies white; or from the Hebrew word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hor, a Cave. It may well enough agree either way, the Hill being white with Snow, and hollow with the subterranean passages that were there.

However, it is plain enough from the place in Ezekiel before quoted, that Hauran was situated in the very extreme parts of the Land, toward the North, and from thence the Country as it had its situation there, so had its name Auranitis. Gul. Tyrius (by what authority I cannot tell) placeth it near the Sea of Gennesaret Subito enim transcursâ regione Auranitide quae secus Mare Tyberiadis est, &c. The Country of Auranitis being suddenly run through, which is by the Sea of Tiberias, &c.

And that the River Orontes [Springing between Libanus and Antilibanus near Heliopilis, as Pliny hath it; took its name from Hauran, the word itself seems to assure us. Although some quoted by Eustath. in Dionys. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . do apprehend it to be a Latin name. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (saith he) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ▪ As if Orontes were the same with Orientalis, The Eastern. But what that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 should mean is a little difficult. Orontes was of old called Typhon, as Strabo tells us.

SECT. VI. ITUREA.

THE Reader must excuse me if I make a narrower search into the situation of Iturea, although Barradius may confidently enough have told him (upon his own trust merely, as far as I can learn) That the Country is in the Tribe of Naphtali, at the foot of Mount Libanus. Perhaps he hath followed Borchard, who himself writes only upon the credit of Jacobus de Vitriaco: Scias regionem Decapolin quàm vary in Scriptures denominari, &c. You must know the Region of Decapolis hath several names in Scripture. Sometimes it is called Iturea, sometimes Trachonitis; sometimes the plain of Libanus, sometimes the Land of Moab: in one place Gabul, in another place Galilee of the Gentiles, and the upper Galilee; but everywhere it is all one and the same Country. Thus he confusedly enough.

Pliny places some Nation or other, called by the name of the Itureans, in Cyrristica of Syria: Et inde Cyrristica, &c. Next that is Cyrristica, the Irneates, the Gindareni, the Gabeni, two Tetrarchies, which are called Granii Com • titae, the Emisenes, the Hylatae, a Nation of the Itureans, and those of them also called the Betarreni, the Mariamitani, &c.

After Macra, is Marsyas, wherein are some hilly places, on one of which stands Chalcis a Garrison of Marsyas. The beginning of it is Laodicea, about Libanus. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ▪ The Itureans and Arabs hold all the Mountanous places, a very mischievous sort of people, all of them.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ▪ David made war with the Edomites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Itureans, the Nabbathites and Nabdites, He had said before, That he had subdued the Syrians dwelling by Euphrates and Commagene, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the Assyrians and Phoenicians that were in Galladene.

Secus Mare Galilaeae viam carpentes, &c. Taking the way by the Sea of Galilee, we entered Phenice, and leaving Paneas, which is Cesarea Philippi, on the right hand, we came to Iturea.

Rex pertransiens agrum Sydonensem, &c. The King passing through the Country of Sidon, and going up some hilly places, which lay between ours and the enemies borders, he 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 came to a place every way accomodated with all necessaries, a fruitful soil, and well watered; the name of it Messahara. Going thence into the Valley called Bacar, he found the Land which hath been said to flow with Milk and Honey. Some are of opinion, that this Country was of old called Iturea. But long before that, viz. in the days of the Kings of Israel, it was called the Grove of Libanus.

Where at length shall find this Iturea? Had Philip any part of his Tetrarchy within Cyrristica, Chalcidice of Syria? And yet, if you believe either Pliny or Strabo, there were the Itureans. I suspect there is something couched in the Etymology of the word, that may as much puzzle as the situation of the place.

If Bacar, as it is described by Tyrius, be indeed Iturea, it may be derived from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hittur, which signifies wealth; or from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which denotes crowning, especially when the Country its self is crowned with so much plenty. It is a notion familiar enough amongst the Talmudic Authors.

Indeed, if I could believe that Iturea were the same with Decapolis, then I would suppose the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ten, might have been altered by the change of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shin into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Thau, according to the Syriac manner; but I neither can believe that, nor have I ever met with such a change made in that word, but rather that it would go into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Samech.

May it not therefore be derived from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hitture, diggings; because of the Caves and hollows under-ground? So that the Iturei might signify the same with Troglodyte, those that dwell in Caverns and holes. And so the Troglodytes which were on the North of Israel, are distinguished from those that were on the South, viz. the Horites in Edom. Now that these Countries of which we are treating, were peculiarly noted for Caves and Dens; and they not only numerous, but some very strange and wonderful, Strabo, Josephus, Tyrius and others do abundantly testify.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . There are beyond Damascus two Mountains called Trachones. Afterward; Toward Arabia and Iturea, there are some cragged Hills, famous for large and deep Caves; one of which was capable of receiving four thousand men in it. But that was a prodigious Cave of Zedekiah 's, where ever it was, that was XVIII. miles space; at least if those things be true which are related concerning it .

There was a Cave beyond Jordan, about XVI. miles from Tiberias, that was three stories high; had a lower, a middle, and an upper Dining-room . Which indeed was fortified, and held a Garrison of Soldiers in it.

So that we may, not without reason, conjecture the Iturea of which we now speak, might be so called from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chitture, such kind of diggings under ground. And that Pliny and Strabo when the talk of the Nation of the Itureans in Cyrristica and Chalcis, do not place the Country of Iturea there; only hinted that the Troglodytes, who dwelt in Dens and Caves were there.

Iturea therefore, mentioned by our Evangelist was in the Country beyond Jordan, viz. Batanea, and Auranitis or Auranitis alone, as may appear out of Josephus, compared with this our Evangelist. For St. Luke saith, That Philip was Tetrarch of Iturea and Trachonitis: Josephus, That he was Tetrarch of Trachonitis, Batanea, and Auranitis: Either therefore Auranitis and Batanea in Josephus, is the Iturea in St. Luke, or else Batanea in Josephus is confounded with Trachonitis mentioned in St. Luke, and Auranitis alone is Iturea. For that passage in Josephus ought to be taken notice of: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Caesar invests Agrippa with the Tetrarchy that Philip had, and Batanea, adding moreover Trachonitis with Abella. Where it is observable, that there is mention of the Tetrachy of Philip distinct from Batanea and Trachonitis; And what is that? certainly Auranitis in Josephus, and perhaps Iturea in St. Luke.

SECT. VII. ABILENE.

JOsephus in the words before quoted, speaking of Abella, adds this passage; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , that had been the Tetrarchy of Lysanias. So also Ptol. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Abila that bore the name of Lysanias: and he reckons this up among the Cities of Celo-Syria under these degrees:

• Heliopolis 68. 40. 33. 40.
• Abila. 68. 45. 33. 20.

speaks of Abila in that Country: Paneas in quâ Cesarea, cum supra dicto fonte [viz. cap. 15.] Abila, Arca, Ampeloessa, Gabo.

It is not without cause distinguished by its relation to Lysanias, because in one place or another, there were several Abila 's or Abella's: for the Hebrew word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abel, goes into that termination in the Greek; and there were many places of that name.

Abel Shittim, where the Israelites pitched their Tents immediately after they had passed the River Jordan, in Josephus is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abila, distant from Jordan threescore furlongs: which he also mentions with Julias 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , in Perea. There is also Abel Meholah, and Abel beth Maacah, &c.

Near this sound comes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abelas of the Cilicians. The very word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abilene is in Vajicra Rabba 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Sabaeans fell upon them, and took them away, Job I. 15. R. Abin bar Cahna saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ▪ They came out of Caphar Karinus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and they went through all Abilene, and came to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Migdol Zaba •• h, and there died.

SECT. VIII. 2 Sam. XX. 18. discusst.

AMongst all the Cities and Countries that bear the name of Abel, the most celebrated is that in 2 Sam. XX. made famous by the History of a foolish Sheba and a wise Woman. The Woman's expression is not a little wrested and tortured by Interpreters. : 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They were wont to speak in old time, saying, they shall surely ask counsel at Abel; and so they ended the matter.

The Greek Version hath more perplexed it: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . The Latin Interpreter renders it thus: They spake a word in former days, saying, asking he was asked in Abel, and in Dan, if those things have failed which the faithful of Israel laid up. Asking they will ask in Abel, and so if they have failed.

If any one can make any tolerable sense of these words, he would do well to teach others how to do it too; especially let them tell the reason why Dan should be added here. It is true Dan and Abel beth Maacah are mentioned together as not very distant from one another, 1 King. XV. 20. And if we do by the words understand their neighborhood to one another, I see nothing else that can be picked out of them.

However, both the Roman and Alexandrian Edition agree in this reading, which have the preference of all other Editions of the Greek Version. And let them now who are for correcting the Hebrew Bibles by the Greek, say whether they are for having them corrected here: only let them give me leave to enjoy the Hebrew Text as we now have it.

The Hebrew makes the sense plain if the first words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 be but rightly applied, namely to Sheba and his party speaking; When Sheba and his followers come hither, they at first certainly said thus, that they would ask Abel of its peace, or on whose side it was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and so they made the matter entire, or made a show of their own integrity. For that that Joab was chiefly to be satisfied in, was, that this City had not taken part with the Conspirators, which is directly done, if we admit this sense and interpretation of the words. This prudent Woman assures him that those of Abel had by no means invited Sheba and his fellow Rebels into their Town, or by any consent with them in their Rebellions would ever willingly have admitted them, but that they were miserably deceived by their fawning and false words, whiles they only pretended to inquire about the peace and well being of that City. And that you may know more effectually that all this is true which I now affirm to you, we will immediately throw you the head of Sheba over our wall.

SECT. I. Zarephath. Obad. verse. 20. where.

SAREPTA in the Story of Elijah, 1 King. XVII. is written in Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tzarephath, and with the same Letters in Obad verse. 20. and therefore it may be reasonably inquired whether it be one and the same place. Indeed, there would hardly be any doubt in it, but that the Jews ordinarily by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 understand France, and by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Sepharad, which by the Prophet is used in the very same verse, Spain. The words of the Prophet are very variously rendered, and yet in all that variety, nothing hinders but that Zarephath there may be understood of the Zarephath mentioned in the Kings. For, whether the passage concern the Captivity's being detained in Zarephath, or the Captivity's possessing the Land to Zarephath (for in that variety chiefly, the words are expounded) in either sense, it may well enough be, that the Sarepta that belongs to Zidon, may be the scene of the affair. As to the former, if we compare but that passage concerning Tyre, the Sister of Sidon, Amos I. 9. and withal the potency and dominion of the Sidonians, it may not be improbable but that the Israelites might be captived in Sarepta of Sidon. And as to the latter, whereas in the verse. immediately before, the discourse is of the possession of the Mount of Esau, of the Fields of Ephraim, Samaria, and Gilead, and then there is mention of possessing the Land of Canaan, as far as Zarephath; who would seek Zarephath in France, and not in some neighbouring place, according to all the rest of the places their named, which were all very near. Let me add moreover, that whereas there is mention of possessing the Land of the Canaanites even unto Zarephath, the Greek Interpreters will tell you who those Canaanites were, that are distinguished from the rest of the Nations in the Land of Canaan, viz. the Phoenicians, Josh. V. 1. And by the Kings of the Hittites mentioned 1 Kings X. 29. and 2 Kings VII. 6. I would likewise suppose the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Phoenician Kings.

SECT. II. SEPHARAD. Where.

THE Italian Interpreter for Sepharad, retains Zarphath: For so he, Et i transferiti de questo esercito de figlioli de Israel, che sono de Chenahanei, in fino a Zarphath, & i transferiti di Jerusalem, che Sono in Zarphath, &c. Whether too warily, or too unwarily he hath thus done, let him look to that himself.

The Greek hath 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ephratha, with which the Arabian Interpreter agrees. But the Syriac with the Targumist, Spain. The vulgar, Bosphorus, confusedly, besides that it makes the preposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a radical Letter: And yet Nobilius hath this passage. St. Jerome tells us, the other Interpreters agreed with the Hebrew word Sepharad, which he rendered Bosphorus. If he means that all agreed in acknowledging the word Sepharad, he tells us no news: but who agreed with his word Bosphorus?

I must confess, Sepharad is not a place so obvious as Zarephath, nor can anything be offered in it, but conjecture only: and if I might be allowed my guess; I would look for Sepharad in Edom, rather than in Spain: and that because Obadiah prophesies against the Edomites, properly so called. Whereas therefore he tells us, That the Captivity of Israel in Sarepta of the Phoenicians shall possess the Land of the Canaanities: It is probable he means by the Captivity in Sepharad, those Captives in Edom, who shall possess the Cities of the South. The Zarphathani, or Sareptani were of the North, the Sepharadeni of the South: amongst the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Whom you may rightly call the Troglodyte Arabs, saith Strabo, That is, probably the Horims in Mount Seir; for I suspect Horim, by ill use, might form itself into Eremb.

If we consider that the Jews do generally by Edom, understand the Roman Empire, and indeed all the Christian Nations in the West, we shall easily perceive why they fix these places Zarephath, and Sepharad so far from Palestine. For Obadiah prophesying against the Edomites, properly so called, the Jews change the scene and persons, according to the vulgar construction of Edom, which they had received amongst themselves.

SECT. III. The situation of Sarepta.

INDE [à Tyro] Euhydra, ac Sarepta, & Ornithon oppida▪ Et Sidon artifex vitri • Thebarumque Baeotiarum parens. From Tyre is Euhydra, and Sarepta, and Ornithon, certain Towns so called: Sidon where Glass is made, and from whence sprung the Beotian Thebes.

Borchard. A Tyro ad tres leucas admodum breves, &c. About three very short leagues from Tyre, the River Eleutherus runs into the Sea; About two leagues from that River is Sarepta: About two leagues from Sarepta is Sidon. Sarepta at this time doth not consist of above eight Houses, though the ruins do still say it was once a brave Town.

Some would have Zarephath signify as much as a place of melting; from boiling and melting metals, but especially Glass.

Between Acon and Tyre there is a shore all spread over with little hillocks of sand; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , that bears a glassey sand: the Glass indeed is not cast here, but being carried to Sidon, there it is made fusile, &c.

SECT. I. Concerning Naim near Tabor, shewn to strangers.

IN the Alexandrian Copy 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ijon is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nain, 1 Kings XV. 20. In the Roman, it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ain. So Hazar-Enan Numb. XXXIV. 9. in the Roman Copy is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Arsenain, in the Alexandrian, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Asernain; neither of them agrees with our Nain. For it is very absurd to conceive that our Savior ever was at Hazar-Enan the utmost borders of the Land toward Syria; nor can we suppose him in Ijon, that seeming to be according to the order of the places as they are ranked in the Text above quoted, either beyond Dan, or in the extremist borders of the Land on that side.

As to our Nain, Borchard saith thus, A Nazareth duabus leucis, &c. Two leagues from Nazareth, not much above one from Mount Tabor, Southward is Mount Hermon the less, on the North side of which is the City Nain; at whose Gates Jesus recovered a Widows Son from death, as we read, Luke VII. So also Breidenbach: So some Tables as to the situation of Hermon near Tabor, and the situation of Naim near Hermon.

I am well enough satisfied that they should place Naim in the Tribe of Issachar, if there be no mistake among them as to Mount Tabor. For whereas Tabor is indeed the very utmost border of Issachar, Northward, Jos. XIX. 22. It must needs be that what is beyond that, Southward, a league or two, should be reckoned within that Tribe. But I much suspect the Tabor mentioned by them, and that which is now shewn to Travelers, is not the true Tabor: nor do I much question but that Hermon of which they talk, is made out of a mistake, and misconstruction of Psal. LXXXIX. 12. Tabor and Hermon shall rejoice in thy Name. My scruple as to Mount Tabor, ariseth hence; because that Tabor which is shewn to strangers, as our Country-man Biddulph, and another acquaintance of mine own, who were on the top of it, do describe it, does not at all agree with the description Josephus gives us of the true Mount Tabor. Our Countryman tells us, It is an hill not very steep, nor very high, nor very large; but a round beautiful hill, &c. On the contrary, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Mount Tabor is in height thirty furlongs, very difficult of ascent on the North-side; the top is a great plain of about six and twenty furlongs.

The Persian Interpreter instead of Nain hath 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nabelis, that is, Neapolis, which is also Sychem: but for what reason I know not. Nor do I suppose that it was conceived by any one Expositor, that the Widow's Son whom Christ raised from death, was a Samaritan; he was indeed upon the borders of Samaria, but at a great distance from Sychar.

SECT. II. Concerning the Nain in Josephus and the Rabbins.

THE Darshanim (Expositors) upon Beresh. rabb. speak of a certain place called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Naim, upon this occasion. Issachar is a bony (or strong) Ass, [Gen. XLIX. 14.] It is spoken of Issachar's Country. For as an Ass is low before and behind, and high in the middle; so is it in the Tribe of Issachar; it is a Valley here and a Valley there, and hilly otherwhere; it couches between two borders. These are the two valleys, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Valley of Pislan, and the Valley of Jezreel. And he saw that rest was good, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 this is Tinaam: And the Land, that it was pleasant 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 this is Naim.

We have here by the way a taste of those allegorical and far-fetched ways of expounding the Scriptures, wherein these egregious Commentators do so much please and value themselves. However, we are thus sar beholding to them, that they have given us to understand, that there was a Naim in the Tribe of Issachar, called so from the pleasantness of its situation (as indeed Tinaam bears the same derivation) which we have some reason to judge was the same Naim with ours in the Evangelist, and that in Josephus.

It was usual for the Galileans, coming up to the holy City to the Feasts, to take their journey through the Samaritans Country, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . And then their way lay through a Town called Nais. (I confess the Greek expressions are something perplexed; but it is no great matter.) It happened that some of the Samaritans and inhabitants of the great plain, fought with them, and killed a great number.

You may think he repeats the very same Story, though differing in some circumstances . There was another fight betwixt the Galileans and Samaritans; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . • or hard by a Town called Gema situated in the great plain of Samaria, multitudes of Jews going up to the Feast there was a certain Galilean slain.

It is not much worth our examining whether they be one and the same story with the other, or whether this Gema be the same Town with Nain; but this we may gather hence, that Nain was in the extreme borders of Issachar, touching upon the Samaritan Country, and Gema in the extreme borders of Samaria that were next adjoining to Issachar. And when the Galileans went down from Nain, a Town in Issachar, into the great plain of Samaria, the first Town in their way is Gema, there the enemy meets and fights them: if at least Gema and Nain be not one and the same place.

SECT. III. ENGANNIM.

THere is a great inclination in me to believe, that Naim is the same with Engannim, mentioned Josh. XIX. 21. and Chap. XXI. 29. For, I. Both of them were within the Tribe of Issachar; Engannim, as the H. Scriptures, and Naim as the Jewish Doctors tell us; and why we should not take their word in such a thing as this, I know no reason. II. Both of them signify pleasantness: Naim in the very Etymon implies pleasantness: and Engannim, a Fountain and Gardens. III. The Engannim mentioned Jos. XXI. 29. in 1 Chron. VI. 73. is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Anem. Now if you transpose the Letters (as is done in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ) it will be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Naim. IV. Let me add, That Engannim (if there be any credit to those guides, that commonly show these places to Travelers) lies directly in the way, going from Galilee to Jerusalem; and so, as is very evident, was our Naim. Of this place, thus our Country-man Biddulph: a Town, commonly called Jenine, of old Engannim: exceedingly pleasant, abounding with waters and gardens, and delightsome walks.

Why the LXX should render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Engannim by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a fountain of letters, Jos. XXI. 29. let those that are more learned search out. It is true the Children of Issachar are celebrated for their skill in computing the times, 1 Chron. XII. 32. where the Targumist; They were skilled in calculating the beginnings of the Years, the Calends of the Months, and the intercalation both of Years and Months 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Sophists [skillful] in new Moons 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Astrologers [conversant] about Planets and Stars, &c.

If we would include the Levites that dwelt amongst the Tribe of Issachar, under the general name of Issachar, then might Engannim (being a Levitical City) be an Academy for that kind of Mathematical learning; but in both we are very uncertain. Nor is it less obscure that the same Greek Interpreter hath instead of Remeth, Engannim, Enhaddah, and Bethpazes rendered, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ▪ Remmas, and Jeon, and Tomman, and Aemerec, and Bersaphes, Jos. XIX. 21.

SECT. I. Several things about its name and place.

WE have spoken something already concerning Emmaus in our Choragraphical Century, Chap. 45. let us add some few things in this place.

I. It was distant from Jerusalem, as appears both from our Evangelist, and Josephus , about threescore furlongs. By account of common miles, Seven and a half: Eight of the Jewish. What copy therefore of Josephus must the Learned Beza have by him, who thus speaks upon the place? 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sixty, so the Syriac hath it and indeed all copies: so that here is either a mistake in the number, or else it is ill written in Josephus ; thirty furlongs. Our Josephus plainly hath it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ▪ A Town called Emmaus distant from Jerusalem threescore furlongs.

II. The Syriac, Arabic, and Persia Interpreters write the name in the Evangelist with an 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 at the beginning; the Syriac and Persian 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . So also the Syriac, in 1 Macc. III. 40. But the Arabic 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the Talmudists 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the beginning. Indeed in Talm. Bab. in Erachim, fol. 10. 1. it is written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; but in the Misnaioth printed by themselves it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . So it is in Succah. fol. 51. 5.

III. Josephus commonly renders Chammoth of Tiberias (a place so called from the HotBaths ) by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Ammaus; but whether our Emmaus ought to have this derivation is a question. There were indeed at Emmaus noted waters; but we can hardly suppose they were warm, if we consider but the usual writing of the word amongst the Talmudists.

Rabban Johanan ben Zacchai had five Disciples, who while he lived sat always with him, but when he died they retired to Jafne. But R. Eliezer ben Erech betook himself to his Wife 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 at Emmaus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a place of pleasant waters, and pleasant dwelling. There is something in this little Story that might not be unworthy our enquiry, as to the Scholastical History of the Jews; viz, where Rabban Johanan should make his abode, if not in Jabneh? for that is the place they commonly allot to him: But this is not a place to dispute of such matters.

Pervenerunt Nicopolim, &c. They came to Nicopolis: Now Nicopolis is a City in Palestine. This the Book of the Gospel calls Emmaus; while it was yet a Village. There through the plenty of good waters, and all necessary provisions, they enjoyed a good comfortable night.

This Author, upon this occasion, quotes some passages out of Sozomen, in the sixth Book of the Tripartite History, which are in his fifth Book, Chap. 20. wherein the waters at Emmaus are celebrated not only for their plenty, but as they were wonderfully wholesome and medicinal. For thus he: There is a City in Palestine which now hath the name of Nicopolis, of which the Holy Gospel makes mention, as of a Village (for then it was so) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and calls it Emma. The Romans, having sacked Jerusalem, and gained an entire victory over the Jews, from the event of that War, gave this Town the name of Nicopolis. Before the City near the road (where our Savior after he had arisen from the dead, walking with Cleophas, made as if he was hastening to another Town) there is a certain Medicinal Spring, wherein not only men that are sick, being washed, are cured, but other sort of Animals also, of whatsoever diseases they are afflicted with. The report is, that Christ as he was once going that way with his Disciples, turned aside to that fountain, and having washed his feet in it, the waters have ever since retained an healing quality and virtue in them.

We leave the credit of the Story to the relater of it: only one thing we may observe from the hint he gives us, that it is no wonder if in the Evangelists time, Emmaus was but a little Village, whenas not long before it had been burnt and destroyed by Varus . Nor is it more strange that its ancient name Emmaus, should change into Nicopolis, when the place itself, became a Roman Colony .

SECT. II. Its situation.

PTOLOMEY tells us something of its situation by its degrees, saying, Emmaus, 65. 45. 31. 45.

As to the vicinage of Countries or places adjacent; thus the Jerusalem Sheviith : 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 From Beth-horon to Emmaus it is hilly. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 From Emmaus to Lydda it is Champagne, and from Lydda to the Sea is Valley.

If you would hear Ptolomey more largely, thus he writes:

• Jamnia 65. 40. 32. 0.
• Lydda 66. 0. 32. 0.
• Antipatris 66. 20. 32. 0.
• Emmaus 65. 45. 31. 45.
• Jerusalem 66. 0. 31. 40.

Although this account of the distance betwixt Jerusalem and Emmaus, doth not very well agree, with what our Evangelist, and Josephus have said; yet may we learn, from the places named along with it, in what quarter of the Heaven it was situated. To all which we may add that of Josephus Antiq. lib. 12. cap. 11. and 1 Maccab. IV. Judas Maccabeus engages with Gorgias near Emmaus: the Gorgians fly, and the Maccabeans pursue 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , As far as Gadaron (Gezer) to the plains of Edom, Azotus, and Jamnia.

I therefore recite this passage, that it may appear that Emmaus, lay toward Galilee, although from Jerusalem it inclined also Westward: For whereas, considering the latitude of Galilee extending itself from West to East, there must of necessity be several Roads from Jerusalem to this or that part of it: So this through Emmaus was one; through Beth Horon another; through Antipatris a third; if at least this last did not fall in with that of Emmaus. That passage in Gul. Tyr. makes me think it might; who, describing the Encampings and journeyings of the Croysade Army, tells us, Relictis a dextrâ, &c. Leaving the Maritime Towns, Antipatris and Joppe, on the right, they passed through Eleutheria, and came to Lydda, which is Diospolis. And Cap. 24. From whence, taking guides along with them, persons well skilled in those places, they came to Nicopolis: Which is the same with Emmaus.

From all which, we may reasonably presume that the two Disciples were going to Emmaus, not as to the utmost limit of their journey, but as that lay in their way toward Galilee.

SECT. III. Some Story of it. Also of Timnath and Mount Gilead, Jud. VII. 3.

To what Tribe Emmaus belonged would be something hard to determine, because of the situation of Bethoron, which was in Ephraim, Josh. XVI. But that the Talmudists do clearly enough say it was not in the Samaritan Country.

They were Servants of the Priests, saith R. Meir. But R. Jose saith, They were of the Family of Beth Pegarim, and Beth Zippory, in Emmaus, who had placed their Daughters in Marriage with the Priests.

The discourse is about the Musicians in the Temple, and the dispute is, whether they were Levites, or Israelites, particularly natives of Emmaus, and of those two Families who for their purity were thought worthy to be taken into the affinity and blood of the Priests themselves. And this passage indeed puts it out of all question that Emmaus was not within the Tribe of Ephraim; because it would be ridiculous to suppose that either Samaritan Women should be joined in Marriage with the Priests, or that Samaritan Men should be admitted to play on the Instruments in the Temple. Emmaus therefore must be placed in the Tribe of Benjamin, which, what it was called before, is not easy to guess.

I conceive there is mention made of this place, in Spihra . R. Akibah said; I asked Rabban Gamaliel, and R. Joshua 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the shambles of Emmaus, when they went to receive the Beast to make a Feast for their Son, &c. Now Rabban Gamaliel, and R. Joshua were both of Jafneh; so that by considering the situation of Jafne we may more confidently believe, that they were in the Emmaus we are speaking of. We have the same passage in Maccoth, fol. 14. 1.

It was one of the larger Cities: For so Josephus speaks of it; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Cassius disfranchised four Cities, the greatest of which was Gophna and Emmaus: and next to these was Lydda and Thamna.

Under the disposition of the Duke of Palestine amongst the rest, was Ala Antana of the Dromedaries of Admatha; where Pancirole notes that Admatha in St. Jerome in his Hebrew places, is called Ammata. This, by the agreeableness of sound may seem to be our Emmaus, unless more probably at this time it bore the name of Nicopolis.

When I take notice that Hammath 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or the Baths of Tiberias, are commonly in the Greek rendered 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 : and withal, that our Emmaus was much celebrated for famous Waters: I cannot forget the waters of Nephtoa, or the Fountain of Etam, from whence water was conveyed by Pipes into the Temple. This was in the same quarter from Jerusalem with our Emmaus: So that our 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 may as well be derived from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ammath, a Channel of waters, as well as the other 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hammath, the warm Baths. But this I leave to the Reader's judgment.

In memory of this place let us record a Story out of Sigeverts Chronicle in the Reigns of Theodosius and Valentinianus. Hoc tempore in castello Judeae Emmaus, &c. At this time in a Garrison in Judea called Emmaus, there was a perfect Child born. From the Navel upward, he was divided, so that he had two Breasts, and two Heads, either of which had their proper senses belonging to them: The one eat when the other did not: the one slept when the other was awake. Sometime they slept both together; they plaid one with another: they both wept, and would strike one another. They lived near two years; and after one had died, the other survived about four days.

If this two headed Child was the issue of a Jew, then might that question be solved, which is propounded, Menacoth, fol. 37. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 If any one should have two heads 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 on which of the Foreheads should the Phylacteries be bound? No mean scruple indeed. But let us have from the Glossator as considerable a Story: Asmodeus produced from under the pavement before Solomon, a Man with two heads. He Marries a Wife, and begot Children like himself, with two heads, and like his Wife with one. When the Patrimony comes to be divided, he that had two heads requires a double portion; and the cause was brought before Solomon to be decided by him.

As to that Thamna or Timnath which Josephus in the place above quoted makes mention of, it is disputed in Sotah, fol. 17. 1. where Rabh asserts, that there were two Timnaths, one in Judea, and the other that of Samson. We all know of a third of that name, Joshua's Timnath, viz. Timnath-Serah in Mount Ephraim where Joshua was buried, Jos. XXIV. 30. Here give the Rabbins a little play, and let them trifle by transposing the names of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Serah and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Cheres, and from thence ground a fiction that the image of the Sun was fixed upon the Sepulcher of Joshua, in remembrance of the Sun's miraculous standing still by his word. This is like them. Nor indeed is that of a much better mould, which the LXX add, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. There they put into the monument with him, the stone-knives, with which he circumcised the Children of Israel in Galgal, when he brought them out of Egypt, as the Lord had commanded them. Were these, think you, in the Hebrew Text once, and have they slipped out since? Do they not rather savor of the Samaritan gloss, or the Jewish tradition?

They recede from the Hebrew Text in the same Story, but something more tolerably when they render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 on the North-side of the Hill Gaash: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , From the North-side of the Hill Galaad: where, as far as I am able to judge, they do not paraphrase ill, though they do not render it to the Letter. Let us consider that obscure passage which hath so much vext Interpreters in Jud. VII. 3. Proclaim now in the ears of the people, saying, whosoever is fearful and afraid, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 let him return early from Mount Gilead. The place where this thing was acted was either in or very near the vale of Jezreel, distant from Mount Gilead beyond Jordan, twenty or thirty miles; and therefore how could these Gideonites depart from Mount Gilead? I am not ignorant what some do allege toward the untying this knot, viz. that it should be taken thus, Whoever be of Mount Gilead let them return. The Targumist to this sense; Whosoever is fearful, let him return, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and let choice be made out of Mount Gilead, i. e. Let the Gileadites be chosen. But whether his meaning was, that the Gileadites should be chosen to remain because they are not afraid; or be chosen to return because they were; I shall not reckon it worth the while to inquire.

But may not Mount Gilead in this place, be understood of the Hill Gaash? It is certain, the situation agrees well enough, and perhaps there is no great difference in the name.

Whence that Mount Gilead beyond Jordan first had its name, is not unknown; namely, from that heap of stones set up by Jacob for a witness of the Covenant betwixt him and Laban, Gen. XXXI.

We read of something not unlike it, set up by Joshua near Shechem, in testimony of the Covenant betwixt the people and God, Jos. XXIV. 26. Now therefore, who can doubt but that Joshua was buried near Shechem? For when that place was particularly bequeathed and set out by Jacob, for his Son Joseph; who of the whole stock and lineage of Joseph could justlier inherit that part of the Country than Joshua?

He was buried on the North-side of the Hill Gaash, in his own ground. Might not that Hill be also called Gilead, upon the account of that Pillar of Witness that was built there a little from Shechem? whence the foot of the Hill, and the Hill itself beginning to rise (if it were Northward, which we suppose, then it) might very well reach not far from that place where this matter of Gideon was transacted. For, whereas the field wherein the Battle was, was within the Tribe of Manasseh, contiguous to Mount Ephraim, and Gideon proclaims that whosoever were afraid should depart from Mount Gilead; we can perhaps think of no proper sense wherein this Mount Gilead can be taken, than that that part of Mount Ephraim was so called from the Pillar of Testimony placed on the South-side of it, when the common name for it was the Hill Gaash.

SECT. I. Some Historical Passages concerning the Territories of Herod, &c.

B EFORE we make any particular enquiries into the Countries mentioned Luke III. 1. it will not be amiss to dip into History a little more generally.

Augustus Caesar received Herod's Sons Alexander and Aristobulus, upon their arrival at Rome, with all the kindness imaginable, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; granting a power to Herod to establish the Kingdom in which of his Sons he pleased: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 : yea and moreover, gave him the Region of Trachonitis, Batanea, and Abranitis. We find Perea (peculiarly so called) not mentioned in this place, when yet it was most assuredly under Herod 's jurisdiction; how else could he have built Herodium, which was in the extreme confines of Perea, Southward, where he himself was buried?

Neither indeed doth St. Luke say anything of Perea, even then when he mentions the Tetrarchy of Herod Antipas, under whose jurisdiction Josephus tells us, was both Perea and Galilee. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Perea and Galilee were both under Antipas,

Why Josephus should not mention Perea when he is speaking of the Fathers Kingdom, or why St. Luke should omit it, when he instances the Tetrarchy of the Son, that being so unquestionably within his jurisdiction; I confess is something strange to me: nor could I pass it without some remarque.

The same Josephus tells us this of the Tetrarchy of Philip: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , &c. Batanea also and Trachonitis, Auranitis, and some parts of Zeno's House, about Jamnia; yielding the profits of one hundred talents, were under Philip's Government. And again, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Then died Philip, in the twentieth year of the Reign of Tiberius, when he himself had governed for seven and thirty years, over Trachonitis, Gaulonitis, and the Country of the Bataneans. Here we see Auranitis is not mentioned, but Gaulonitis is; and in St. Luke, neither Batenea, nor Gaulonitis, nor Auranitis; but instead of them, Iturea. There is a Chronological difficulty in these words of Josephus, which is not easily solved; but this is not the business of this Treatise.

It is hard to say whether this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 House of Zenon, have any relation with Zenodorus the robber. Josephus in the place above quoted, mentions him, saying, That Augustus was the more willing to put Batanea, Trachonitis, and Auranitis under the Government of Herod the Great, that he might the more effectually suppress the Thefts and Rapines committed by one Zenodorus and the Trachonites. Strabo also speaks of this Zenodorus, telling us, That there were few Robberies committed now; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , The Robbers of Zenodorus party being cut off.

But if the name should be writ in the mother tongue, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Beth Zenun, it might signify a place or region of cold; and so denote some Country adjacent to the Snows of Lebanon; or some part 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the mountain of Snow; which I rather believe.

SECT. 2. Whether Perea may not also be called Galilee.

I. ALthough the whole Transjordanine Country might justly enough be called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Perea; for this very reason; because it was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , on the other side Jordan: yet, generally speaking, the Country is distinguished, and that is peculiarly called Perea; which was the Kingdom of Sehon, the dwelling afterwards of the Reubenites, and part of the Tribe of Gad.

Hence that of Ptolomey, That 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , From the East of the River Jordan; there are only these Cities reckoned up by him.

• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Cosmos.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Livias.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Callirrhoe. Of old Lasha.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gazorus.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Epicerus.

Other places that were beyond Jordan, he mentions under other districts; as some under Celosyria, others under Batanea.

That which we are now enquiring about is, whether the Transjordanine Country was ever called Galilee. The rise of this question is, because our Evangelist mentions the whole Tetrarchy of Herod, under the name of Galilee, when as Perea was a great part of it. I incline much to the affirmative, for these Reasons: And first, I suppose that the upper part of the Country beyond Jordan might be called Galilee.

1. From Matth. IV. 15. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , By the way of the Sea beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles. Are not those places beyond the Sea of Gennesaret, called in this place Galilee of the Gentiles, in distinction to Galilee properly so called, on this side Jordan?

2. Judas who moved the Sedition against the Roman Tax, is by Gamaliel called Judas of Galilee, Acts V. 37. who yet by Josephus is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , A Gaulonite of the City of Gamala. Now it is well enough known, that Gaulona and Gamala were beyond Jordan.

II. I suppose Perea, properly so called, to have gone also under the name of Galilee, for these Reasons:

• 1. The whole Land of Canaan, both that beyond, and that on this side Jordan, was under the jurisdiction of Herod the Great. So that divide this whole Country into four Tetrarchies, the first Judea; the second, Samaria; both which were under the Government of Pilate; the third, Iturea and Trachonitis, under Philip; the fourth will be Galilee on this side, and Perea beyond Jordan. Whereas therefore St. Luke, in the division of the Tetrarchies, names only Galilee, as that which belonged to Herod; it is manifest he includes Perea under that of Galilee, and speaks of it as a known, and commonly received thing.
• 2. In Luke XVII. 11. It is said of Jesus, That as he went to Jerusalem, he passed through the midst of Samaria and Galilee. One would have thought it had been proper to have said, through the midst of Galilee and Samaria. For when he went from Jerusalem to his own Country, he then passed through Samaria, and so into Galilee; but going from home to Jerusalem, be in his passage went through Galilee, and then through Samaria: But now it is very certain that in that journey he did pass through Perea, having first gone through the Samaritan Country. Whence it is very probable that Perea is called by our Evangelist in this place, Galilee; in the very same manner as he had also included it in the mention of Galilee, Luke III. 1.
• 3. In that Tragical Feast wherein the last mess was the Head of John the Baptist, those who then were treated by Herod, are called the great estates of Galilee, Mark VI. 21. Now that Supper was kept in the Palace Herodium which was in the very extreme parts of Perea toward the South, and therefore surely those great Estates of Galilee that were with him, must be no other than the Great Estates of Perea.
• 4. There is mention 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of Geliloth of Jordan, Josh. XXII. 11. when the passage was concerning Perea: whence that Country might well take its name of Galilee.

SECT. III. Some things in general concerning the Country beyond Jordan.

AS to the Tetrarchies of Herod and Philip: this I suppose we may determine without prejudice or question, that nothing was within their jurisdiction, but what was within the confines of the Land of Israel, properly so called. (As to what may be objected concerning Iturea, we shall consider in its own place.) Whiles we are therefore looking into these Countries, our main business will be with what was beyond Jordan; for that on this side the River, was only Galilee, about which we shall not much trouble ourselves, because there is no difficulty concerning it.

The Trans-jordanine Country, if I mistake not, from geatest Antiquity, is divided in that story, Gen. XIV. 5. Chedorlaomer and the Kings that were with him, smote the Rephaims in Ashtaroth-Karnaim, and the Zuzims in Ham, and the Emims in Shaveh Kiriathaim, and the Horites in Mount Seir.

These two things we may apprehend from this passage: 1. That the Country of Basan was inhabited by the Rephaims; Perea (another part of the Land beyond Jordan ) by the Zuzims, Moab by the Emims. 2. That Ashtaroth-Karnaim, Ham, and Shaveh Kiriathaim, are not everyone the names of whole Countries, but particular places in those Countries; perhaps where the several fights were, or where the people of that Country had been subdued.

As to Ashtaroth-Karnaim, there is little doubt but that was in the Kingdom of Bashan, the larger Region being called Astaroth, Karnaim is added in a distinstuishing limited sense: [ Deuter. I. 4. Og the King of Bashan which dwelt at Ashtaroth in Edrei. ]

Of the place itself the Jewish Doctors thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 At twenty Cubits Man sits in the shadow of his tent (viz. in the Feast of Tabernacles) he does not sit in the shadow of his Tabernacle beyond twenty cubits, but in the shadow of its sides. [That is, if the roof or cover of his Tabernacle be above twenty cubits high.] Abai saith unto him, if therefore any one shall pitch a Tabernacle in Ashtaroth-Karnaim, is not the Tabernacle so also? Gloss. Ashtaroth Karnaim were two great Mountains, with a Valley between; and by reason of the height and shadow of those Mountains, the Sun never shone upon the Valley.

Why the Samaritan Copy should use here 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Aphinith Karnaiah, instead of Ashtaroth Karnaim, especially when it retains the word Ashtaroth elsewhere, is not easy to say, unless it should have some relation to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Boughes; as a place thick and shady with Boughes. But such is the confusion of the guttural Letters in the Samaritan Language, that ue can determine nothing positively.

That the Zuzims inhabited Perea, as it is distinguished from the Country of Bashan, may be evident from the progress of the Conqueror; for, whereas it is plain that the Rephaims dwelt in Bashan, and the Emims in the Country of Moab, Deuter. II. 10, 11. It is manifest that the Zuzims who were conquered after the Rephaims, and before the Emims, lay in a Country between both, and that was Perea.

And hence are those to be corrected, that would correct the reading here, and instead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Zuzims in Ham, would render it, the Zuzims with them. So the Gr. Vulg. &c. As if the Zuzims were amongst the Rephaims, when they were distinguished both in Nation and dwelling. The Samaritan we may be sure took 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for no other than a place, when it renders it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 In Lishah.

When the Israelites went out of Egypt into that Land, the whole Trans-jordanine Region was divided into these two Seigniories, the Kingdom of Sehon, and the Kingdom of Og. That of Sehon was Perea, strictly so called now; That of Og was all the rest under the name of Bashan. But, after the return of Israel from Babylon, Bashan was so sub-divided, that Batanea, or Bashon, was only a part of it, the rest going under the name of Trachonitis, Auranitis, and, if you will, Gualonites too, for we meet with that distinction also in Josephus To give therefore all these Countries at this time their proper bounds and limits, if it does not exceed all human skill and wit, I am sure it doth mine.

So that all we can do in this matter, is only to propound a few things of these places thus divided, as far as conjecture may carry us, which we submit fairly to the fair and candid judgment of the Reader. Let us therefore begin with Trachonitis.

SECT. IV. TRACHONITIS.

ARGOB mentioned Deuter. III. 14. is by the Targumists called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Trachona. And so Jonath. 1 Kings IV. 13. the Samaritan hath it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Rigobaah, which seems akin to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Regab, amongst the Talmudists.

Tekoah hath the preeminence for Oil: Abba Saul saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the next to that is Regab beyond Jordan.

Gul. Tyrius would derive the name from Dragons. For so he: It (Trachonitis) seems to have taken its name from Dragons. Those hidden passages and windings under-ground, with which this Country abounds, are called Dragons. Indeed, almost all the people of this Country, have their dwellings in Dens and Caves; and in these kind of Dragons.

Other things might be offered as to the signification of the word: but we are looking after the situation of the place, not the Etymology of the name. And the first things to be inquired into, as to its situation, is, whether it extended in longitude from the South to the North, or from the West to the East. The reason of our enquiry is partly upon the account of Auranitis, which we are to speak of presently, and partly those words in Josephus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Batanea was bounded with Trachonitis. How so? Either that Batanea lay between Perea and Trachonitis, extending itself from the West toward the East, or between Trachonitis and Galilee, strictly so called, extending itself in length from the South toward the North: which last I presume most probable; and so we place Trachonitis in the extreme parts of the Trans-jordanine Country toward the East. And both which, upon these reasons taken together.

• 1. The Gemarists describing the circumference of the Land from the North, do mention 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tarnegola [or Gabara] the upper, which is above Cesarea [Philippi] and Trachona which extends to Bozrah : where the extension of Trachona, must not be understood of its reaching to some Bozrah in those Northern borders; but to some Bozrah or Bosorrah in the confines of Perea : and so it supposes the Country extending itself from the North toward the South.
• 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Of the Province of Batanea; East of which is Saccea, and here under the Hill Alsadamus, are the Trachonite Arabians. Behold here the Trachonites living East of Batanea.
• 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ▪ The Country of Gamala, and Gaulonitis, and Batanea, and Trachonitis. But were not Gamalitiea itself and Gaulonitis within Batanea? right; but by this distinction he divides between that Batanea that was nearer Galilee, and that that was further off. That Country that lay nearest, from those noted Towns, of Golan, and Gamala, he calls Gaulonitis, and Gamalitica; and that which was further off, he calls by its own name of Batanea, and what lies still yond that, Trachonitis.

There was a time when all that whole Country which now is distinguished into these severals, had one general name of Bashan: which word, how it came to change into Bathan, or Batanea; as also with the Targumists and Samaritan, into Bathnin and Mathnin, any one indifferently skilled in the Syrian Tongue will easily discern.

SECT. V. AURANITIS.

THAT Auranitis took its denomination from Hauran, hardly any one will question, especially that observes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Ezek. XLVII. 16. to be rendered by the Gr. Interp. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; which are upon the borders of Auranitis.

Hauran is reckoned up amongst those Hills, at the top of which, by lifting up some flaming Torches, they were wont to give notice of the new year.

Where did they hold up those lights? 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 From Mount Olivet to Sartaba. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And from Sartaba to Gryphena. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And from Gryphena to Hauran. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And from Hauran to Beth Baltin. And from Beth Baltin, he that held up the light there, did not depart, but waved it hither and thither, up and down, till he saw the lights kindled throughout the whole Captivity.

The Gemarist queries, What is Beth Baltin? Rabh saith it is Biram. What is the Captivity? Rabh Joseph saith it is Pombeditha. Gloss. The sense of it is this: That Biram is in the Land of Israel, How? Is Biram the same with Beth Baltin, and yet is Biram within the Land of Israel? When in the Jerusalem Gemara, Rabh Honna saith, When we came hither, we went up to the top of Beth Baltin, and discerned the Palm-trees in Babylon. If this be true, the Geographers are to consider whether there can be any prospect of Babylon from the Land of Israel. In their sense it may be true enough, who commonly by the name of Babylon, understand all those Countries into which the Babylonish Captivity were carried; not only Chaldea, but Mesopotamia also, and Assyria: So that bounding the Land of Israel with the River Euphrates, (which indeed the Holy Scriptures themselves do) they make it contiguous with Mesopotamia, the River only between; and they place Beth Baltin not far from the bank on this side the River.

The Gemarists acknowledge that Lights were lifted up upon some Hills between those which they had mentioned, but these were the most known and celebrated, and therefore they named them only. Now it is probable enough that Mount Hauran gave the denomination to the whole Country Auranitis, which we are now upon: Perhaps there might be some part of Antilibanus, called Hauran, either from the Syriac word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Havar, which signifies white; or from the Hebrew word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hor, a Cave. It may well enough agree either way, the Hill being white with Snow, and hollow with the subterranean passages that were there.

However, it is plain enough from the place in Ezekiel before quoted, that Hauran was situated in the very extreme parts of the Land, toward the North, and from thence the Country as it had its situation there, so had its name Auranitis. Gul. Tyrius (by what authority I cannot tell) placeth it near the Sea of Gennesaret Subito enim transcursâ regione Auranitide quae secus Mare Tyberiadis est, &c. The Country of Auranitis being suddenly run through, which is by the Sea of Tiberias, &c.

And that the River Orontes [Springing between Libanus and Antilibanus near Heliopilis, as Pliny hath it; took its name from Hauran, the word itself seems to assure us. Although some quoted by Eustath. in Dionys. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . do apprehend it to be a Latin name. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (saith he) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ▪ As if Orontes were the same with Orientalis, The Eastern. But what that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 should mean is a little difficult. Orontes was of old called Typhon, as Strabo tells us.

SECT. VI. ITUREA.

THE Reader must excuse me if I make a narrower search into the situation of Iturea, although Barradius may confidently enough have told him (upon his own trust merely, as far as I can learn) That the Country is in the Tribe of Naphtali, at the foot of Mount Libanus. Perhaps he hath followed Borchard, who himself writes only upon the credit of Jacobus de Vitriaco: Scias regionem Decapolin quàm vary in Scriptures denominari, &c. You must know the Region of Decapolis hath several names in Scripture. Sometimes it is called Iturea, sometimes Trachonitis; sometimes the plain of Libanus, sometimes the Land of Moab: in one place Gabul, in another place Galilee of the Gentiles, and the upper Galilee; but everywhere it is all one and the same Country. Thus he confusedly enough.

Pliny places some Nation or other, called by the name of the Itureans, in Cyrristica of Syria: Et inde Cyrristica, &c. Next that is Cyrristica, the Irneates, the Gindareni, the Gabeni, two Tetrarchies, which are called Granii Com • titae, the Emisenes, the Hylatae, a Nation of the Itureans, and those of them also called the Betarreni, the Mariamitani, &c.

After Macra, is Marsyas, wherein are some hilly places, on one of which stands Chalcis a Garrison of Marsyas. The beginning of it is Laodicea, about Libanus. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ▪ The Itureans and Arabs hold all the Mountanous places, a very mischievous sort of people, all of them.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ▪ David made war with the Edomites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Itureans, the Nabbathites and Nabdites, He had said before, That he had subdued the Syrians dwelling by Euphrates and Commagene, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the Assyrians and Phoenicians that were in Galladene.

Secus Mare Galilaeae viam carpentes, &c. Taking the way by the Sea of Galilee, we entered Phenice, and leaving Paneas, which is Cesarea Philippi, on the right hand, we came to Iturea.

Rex pertransiens agrum Sydonensem, &c. The King passing through the Country of Sidon, and going up some hilly places, which lay between ours and the enemies borders, he 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 came to a place every way accomodated with all necessaries, a fruitful soil, and well watered; the name of it Messahara. Going thence into the Valley called Bacar, he found the Land which hath been said to flow with Milk and Honey. Some are of opinion, that this Country was of old called Iturea. But long before that, viz. in the days of the Kings of Israel, it was called the Grove of Libanus.

Where at length shall find this Iturea? Had Philip any part of his Tetrarchy within Cyrristica, Chalcidice of Syria? And yet, if you believe either Pliny or Strabo, there were the Itureans. I suspect there is something couched in the Etymology of the word, that may as much puzzle as the situation of the place.

If Bacar, as it is described by Tyrius, be indeed Iturea, it may be derived from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hittur, which signifies wealth; or from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which denotes crowning, especially when the Country its self is crowned with so much plenty. It is a notion familiar enough amongst the Talmudic Authors.

Indeed, if I could believe that Iturea were the same with Decapolis, then I would suppose the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ten, might have been altered by the change of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Shin into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Thau, according to the Syriac manner; but I neither can believe that, nor have I ever met with such a change made in that word, but rather that it would go into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Samech.

May it not therefore be derived from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hitture, diggings; because of the Caves and hollows under-ground? So that the Iturei might signify the same with Troglodyte, those that dwell in Caverns and holes. And so the Troglodytes which were on the North of Israel, are distinguished from those that were on the South, viz. the Horites in Edom. Now that these Countries of which we are treating, were peculiarly noted for Caves and Dens; and they not only numerous, but some very strange and wonderful, Strabo, Josephus, Tyrius and others do abundantly testify.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . There are beyond Damascus two Mountains called Trachones. Afterward; Toward Arabia and Iturea, there are some cragged Hills, famous for large and deep Caves; one of which was capable of receiving four thousand men in it. But that was a prodigious Cave of Zedekiah 's, where ever it was, that was XVIII. miles space; at least if those things be true which are related concerning it .

There was a Cave beyond Jordan, about XVI. miles from Tiberias, that was three stories high; had a lower, a middle, and an upper Dining-room . Which indeed was fortified, and held a Garrison of Soldiers in it.

So that we may, not without reason, conjecture the Iturea of which we now speak, might be so called from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Chitture, such kind of diggings under ground. And that Pliny and Strabo when the talk of the Nation of the Itureans in Cyrristica and Chalcis, do not place the Country of Iturea there; only hinted that the Troglodytes, who dwelt in Dens and Caves were there.

Iturea therefore, mentioned by our Evangelist was in the Country beyond Jordan, viz. Batanea, and Auranitis or Auranitis alone, as may appear out of Josephus, compared with this our Evangelist. For St. Luke saith, That Philip was Tetrarch of Iturea and Trachonitis: Josephus, That he was Tetrarch of Trachonitis, Batanea, and Auranitis: Either therefore Auranitis and Batanea in Josephus, is the Iturea in St. Luke, or else Batanea in Josephus is confounded with Trachonitis mentioned in St. Luke, and Auranitis alone is Iturea. For that passage in Josephus ought to be taken notice of: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . Caesar invests Agrippa with the Tetrarchy that Philip had, and Batanea, adding moreover Trachonitis with Abella. Where it is observable, that there is mention of the Tetrachy of Philip distinct from Batanea and Trachonitis; And what is that? certainly Auranitis in Josephus, and perhaps Iturea in St. Luke.

SECT. VII. ABILENE.

JOsephus in the words before quoted, speaking of Abella, adds this passage; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , that had been the Tetrarchy of Lysanias. So also Ptol. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Abila that bore the name of Lysanias: and he reckons this up among the Cities of Celo-Syria under these degrees:

• Heliopolis 68. 40. 33. 40.
• Abila. 68. 45. 33. 20.

speaks of Abila in that Country: Paneas in quâ Cesarea, cum supra dicto fonte [viz. cap. 15.] Abila, Arca, Ampeloessa, Gabo.

It is not without cause distinguished by its relation to Lysanias, because in one place or another, there were several Abila 's or Abella's: for the Hebrew word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abel, goes into that termination in the Greek; and there were many places of that name.

Abel Shittim, where the Israelites pitched their Tents immediately after they had passed the River Jordan, in Josephus is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abila, distant from Jordan threescore furlongs: which he also mentions with Julias 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , in Perea. There is also Abel Meholah, and Abel beth Maacah, &c.

Near this sound comes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abelas of the Cilicians. The very word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abilene is in Vajicra Rabba 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Sabaeans fell upon them, and took them away, Job I. 15. R. Abin bar Cahna saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ▪ They came out of Caphar Karinus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and they went through all Abilene, and came to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Migdol Zaba •• h, and there died.

SECT. VIII. 2 Sam. XX. 18. discusst.

AMongst all the Cities and Countries that bear the name of Abel, the most celebrated is that in 2 Sam. XX. made famous by the History of a foolish Sheba and a wise Woman. The Woman's expression is not a little wrested and tortured by Interpreters. : 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 They were wont to speak in old time, saying, they shall surely ask counsel at Abel; and so they ended the matter.

The Greek Version hath more perplexed it: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . The Latin Interpreter renders it thus: They spake a word in former days, saying, asking he was asked in Abel, and in Dan, if those things have failed which the faithful of Israel laid up. Asking they will ask in Abel, and so if they have failed.

If any one can make any tolerable sense of these words, he would do well to teach others how to do it too; especially let them tell the reason why Dan should be added here. It is true Dan and Abel beth Maacah are mentioned together as not very distant from one another, 1 King. XV. 20. And if we do by the words understand their neighborhood to one another, I see nothing else that can be picked out of them.

However, both the Roman and Alexandrian Edition agree in this reading, which have the preference of all other Editions of the Greek Version. And let them now who are for correcting the Hebrew Bibles by the Greek, say whether they are for having them corrected here: only let them give me leave to enjoy the Hebrew Text as we now have it.

The Hebrew makes the sense plain if the first words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 be but rightly applied, namely to Sheba and his party speaking; When Sheba and his followers come hither, they at first certainly said thus, that they would ask Abel of its peace, or on whose side it was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and so they made the matter entire, or made a show of their own integrity. For that that Joab was chiefly to be satisfied in, was, that this City had not taken part with the Conspirators, which is directly done, if we admit this sense and interpretation of the words. This prudent Woman assures him that those of Abel had by no means invited Sheba and his fellow Rebels into their Town, or by any consent with them in their Rebellions would ever willingly have admitted them, but that they were miserably deceived by their fawning and false words, whiles they only pretended to inquire about the peace and well being of that City. And that you may know more effectually that all this is true which I now affirm to you, we will immediately throw you the head of Sheba over our wall.