A Pisgah-sight of Palestine and the confines thereof with the history of the Old and New Testament acted thereon / by Thomas Fuller ...

OBJECTIONS ANSWERED Concerning this DESCRIPTION. The fifth Book.

CHAP. 1. The intention of the Author in this Treatise.

PLATO being sick said to the Physician being about to prescribe Physick unto him, Cure me not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as a Countrey-oxe-driver, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as one well versed in Philosophy; and demanded of him the reason of his receipts, how the medicine was proper for his malady, why this, why thus, why now, why thus much, why no more was prescribed unto him. In like manner it seemeth unreasonable for Map-makers, here to plant a wood, there mount a hill, here to sink a valley, there to run a river in their draughts; and then magisterially obtrude all these on the beliefe of an ingenuous Reader, without giving a particular account how the same are conformable to Nature and true Geography: especially seeing it is vehemently suspected, that many maps are full of affected extravagancies. And must their fancies draw up the forms for other mens judgments to subscribe?

But on the other side it seems not onely an ungentile harshness, but an unconscionable injustice, strictly to exact a reason for every Puntillo in a Map. Gally-slaves would be in a more freer condition then Geo∣graphers, if thus dealt with. As the Poets feign Atlas was wearied by bearing the weight of heaven, Mercator would be more tired by bearing the burden of his own Atlas, if questioned for the crookedness or straight∣ness of every line in so vast a volume. A lawfull latitude herein hath

been ever allowed. For instance, it is generally agreed that Meander, a River in Phrygia, runs wonderfully winding; but it breaks not the head of Truth in a Map, if a curle of that River be made more or less, or be put out of its proper place. Let the Stewards of Lords Courts, or rather Bailifes of Gentlemens Manors know each nook of a wood, corner of a field, reach of a River within so small a compass; such as describe a Countrey in generall, if truly presenting the most materiall things there∣in without visible disproportion, doe what their diligence can exactly perform, and what the Readers discretion can rationally expect.

Desiring therefore to acquit my self in the best manner to all ingeni∣ous capacities, I have here exposed my self to the strongest objection•• which without favour or flattery, I could make against the former de∣scription. And left scattering of them before in the respective Tribes should have interrupted the entireness of our discourse (what thred can run smooth if full of so many knots? we have reserved them all for a small Treatise by themselves in the conclusion of the work. Solemnly promising that if any shall enfavour me so far as to convince me of any error therein, I shall in the second Edition (God lending me life to set it out) return him both my thanks and amendment, or else let him con∣clude my face of the same metall with the Plates of these Maps.

Whatsoever can be objected against the Generall description of Iudea re∣turns in the particular Tribes, and therefore to avoid repetition we shall there more properly meet with it. This premised, without further de∣lay (by Gods blessing) we fall on the matter in hand. And can we be∣gin higher then at Adam it self?

CHAP. II. Objections concerning Reuben answered.

Philogus. Alethaeus.

Philol.

I First take exceptions at your placing the City Adam so near unto Iordan. For where it is said, That the waters which came down from above, stood and rose up upon an heape, verya 1.1 far from the City Adam, which is besides Zartan, you make Adam not above three miles from that stoppage of waters, which is not very far.

Aleth.

Very far, is a relative terme, and accordingly admits of much alteration. Three miles is little in respect of so many leagues, but very far in respect of so many furlongs. Attend I pray you the main scope of the holy Spirit, which was to notifie the place where these upper waters failed in view of the Israelites. Which must be acknowledged within the discovery of their sight; otherwise the land-mark more obscure, then the staying of the waters that were dated from it. Where therefore the

distance is measured in a plain Countrey by the eye, three miles may well pass for very far.

Philol.

Why make you so great a flexure in Iordan just at his influx into the Dead-sea, contrary to the nature and custome of great Rivers? In∣deed small brooks like little children goe wadling on one side, their streams are winding and crooked, because they must run where they may run, and finde soft ground to receive them. But great Rivers which doe not finde but make their way, flow generally in a straight channell, and so it seems should Iordan, sliding through a flat, low, and levell Countrey, and not meeting with any effectuall opposition.

Aleth.

I have sufficient warrant for this my description. Pliny saith of Iordan, Invitus Asphaltit••n lacum, natur••d dirum petit; unwillingly he goes into that slimy Lake, terrible by nature. You perchance will say, Iordan needs not to follow the motion of Plinies pen, as if because he makes a flourish with his phrase, the River must fetch a compass with his channell. But consider, I pray, how in the mixture of all liquours of contrary kinds, the best liquour (which may be said to lose by the bargain) incorpo∣rates always with a reluctancy, and the same Antipathy causeth here this crookedness of Iordan. This is precisely taken notice of by learnedb 1.2 S••l∣masius, and is agreeable to the observations of modern Travellers.

Philol.

You place three severall stations of Balak and Balaam with seven altars a piece upon them in this Tribe of Reuben, whereas more probably all those passages were transacted south of Arnon in the King∣dome of Moab. It is utterly unlikely that King Balak would adventure his person out of his own dominions, into a strangers (not to say an enemies) Countrey.

Aleth.

In so short a journey the pains was little, the danger none at all. For (although on Balaks side there might be private▪ heart-burnings) there was no open hostility betwixt Israel and Moab. Yea we know that then the Israelites had familiarity, much with the men, tooc 1.3 much with the women of that Countrey. I confess the places as described in Scrip∣ture stand (as I may say) equivocally betwixt Israel and Moab. But here∣in I have followed the example ofd 1.4 Adrichomius, and other good authors, not to say, that if Balak had taken his view in the kingdome of Moab of the people encamping then at Abelshittim, he could not at that distance have taken a discovery of them.

Philol.

M^r. More in his Maps bringeth down the waters of Nim••im (with a stream in breadth corrivall, if not bigger then Arnon it self) running through the very midst of this Tribe into the Dead-sea, whereof no appearance at all in your description. It was a very envious part of the Philistines toc 1.5 stop up the wells of Isaac, (so needfull a commodity in that Countrey) but how great a fault in you to deprive Reuben of this river, except it was not your envy that stopped, but ignorance that omitted it?

Aleth.

I am sensible full well of such waters, but cannot be convin∣ced that they took their course through this Tribe into the Dead-sea, but rather conceive they ran onely through the Tribe of Gad, and emptied themselves in Aroer, whereof in due time we shall give our best account.

Philol.

I wonder you make Nophah so near to Medeba contrary to f 1.6 others descriptions, which set it thence twenty miles at least.

Aleth.

I wonder they place it so far from Medeba contrary to the words of theg 1.7 Scripture, and we have laid them wast unto N O P H A H which reacheth unto M E DE B A: where the verb, though supplyed by the Translatours, is implyed in the Text.

Philol.

Why make you three fishponds in Heshbon, to which the eyes of theh 1.8 Spouse are compared, which is in effect to make her a mon∣ster if the resemblance be applyed?

Aleth.

I set a certain for an uncertain number: in the originall it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 plurall, and therefore indefinite. In all these comparisons, the strength of the similitude lies in the nature, not the number of the things. They deserve not the name of a flock of sheep which are under an hundred, to which the teeth of the Spouse arei 1.9 compared, and nature commoly allowes not above thirty two.

Philol.

The City of Misor belonging to the Levites, and recorded by Adrichomius in this Tribe, is omitted by your oversight.

Aleth.

Commendable is his charity to the Levites. For whereas Moses allotted them but four Cities in Reuben, namelyk 1.10 Kedemoth, Iahazah, Me∣phaah, and Bezar: his bounty bestoweth a fifth, this Misor, upon them. But the poor Priests might well be full lean, had they nothing to feed them, but this imaginary City, groundless in the Hebrew, and onely founded on the erroneous Vulgar. Yea generally the descriptions of Adrichomius are guilty herein, that (more made ad splendorem, then ad veri∣tatem) to render them specious to the beholder (because a lean bald Map is not so amiable as one filled full) he poulders them thick with places, rather scraped then gathered, thereby offending the judgments of the learned to please the eyes of the ignorant. But it is my business to excuse my self, not accuse him, and consciousness to my own many faults, commands me to be tender to the errors of others.

CHAP. III. Objections concerning Gad answered.

Philol.

VVHy make you the City of Iazer so in-land into this tribe, which Adrichomius placeth on the River of Arnon?

Aleth.

I can demonstrate, it could not stand on that River, and by consequence must be more within the Tribe of Gad. For, Arnon, is noto∣riously known to be the eastern bound of Canaan▪ Now attend what

Moses saith, And the suburbs of the Cities, which yee shall give unto the Levites, shall reach from the wall of the City, and outwards a thousand Cubits round about: And yee shall measure from without the City on the east side, two thousand Cubits, and on the south side two thousand Cubits, and on the west side two thousand Cubits, and on the north side two thousand Cubits, and the City shall be in the middest, this shall be to them the suburbs of their Cities. Iazer therefore being a City of theb 1.11 Levites, could not stand upon Arnon, because they could not measure three thousand Cubits eastward, for then they should take so much out of an enemies Countrey, which belonged not to Israel. Where we may also observe, that no sea-town was allotted the Levites, because, for the reason aforesaid, it would have proved less unto them, hindering the circular dimensions of their possessions.

Philol.

You are much mistaken in the placing of the City of Aroer. The b 1.12 Scripture saith, that it is before Rabba, or as Tremellious rendreth it, ante conspectum Rabbae, within the view, or sight of Rabba. Whereas your Map presents it six and twenty miles off from that place. Lynceus his eyes need a prospective-glass to discover Rabba from Aroer, at the distance in your description.

Aleth.

Judicious Sird 1.13 Walter Raleigh answers in my behalf; that Rabba, near to which Aroer was seated, was not (as you erroneously conceive) Rabba of Ammon, to which it was neither near, nor in sight, (as he wor∣thily observes) but Rabba a chief City of Moab. Which Rabba bordered on Aroer, as in our Map of Moab doth appear; though, here straitned fro room, no mention is made thereof.

Philol.

You ill observe Scripture-instructions, in fixing the first tent of Ioab, when sent to number the people. For thec 1.14 text saith that the he pitched in Aroer (that is, in the Countrey not City of Aroer, wherein I con∣cur with you) on the right side of the City that lyeth in the midst of the River of Gad, and toward Iazer. Be your own judge, whether or no, the tent be set on the right side of the City.

Aleth.

The chief directory in placing this tent is the word right hand, and that relative term is varied, according as the face is setled. If Ioabs face in his journy respected the north, then the east is the right hand of the City, and then the posture of the tent is rightly placed. However the best is, a tent is but a tent, no solid or substantiall structure, it will be no great work, or weight, on better grounds, to take it down and re∣move it.

Philol.

IN Ia••obs travells you place Soccoth fifteen miles from Peniel, yet was it the very nextf 1.15 station, to which he removed. Now I appeal to Nurses and Drovers (the most competent judges in this controversie) whether it be not too long a journy, for little Children and E••s big with young; except you conceive, miles are as easily gone on the grounds, as measu∣red in a Map with the Compass.

Aleth.

Though in Iacobs Gests, Succoth succeeds the next place to Peniel,

yet it follows not, that Iacob with his train went so far in one day. Pro∣bably, he might bait, yea lodge severall days betwixt them; the Scri∣pture not mentioning every stage of his staying, but onely marking sig∣nall places, whereat some memorable accidents did happen, or wherein for some considerable time he made his abode.

Philol.

Sir Walter Raleigh (whose judgment you deservedly honour) makes the River of Iabbok the northern bound on the matter of the Tribe of Gad, therein following the example of Adrichomius. Whereas you ex∣tend this Tribe many miles beyond that river, even to the sea of Cinneroth or Galilee; a great tract of ground, which you injuriously take from Ma∣nasseh, and bestow on this Tribe.

Aleth.

I exactly follow Scripture directions, in dividing this land be∣twixt them.g 1.16 The text saith expresly, that the border of the inheritance of the Gadites reached even to the edge of the sea of Cinneroth, and therefore the land betwixt Iabbok, and the edge of the sea, undoubtedly belongs to this Tribe, which justly may have an action of trespass against the foresaid Author, for depriving it of so considerable a part of its true possession. And yet (under favour) I conceive, M^r. More in his Maps doth much overdoe, stretching the inheritance of this Tribe to the utmost, and most northern part of the sea of Galilee.

Philol.

I admire much at your inconstancy. In your Map of Palestine, some seven years since prefixed to your Holy War, you set Iabesh-Gilead north of the river Iabbok in the Tribe of Manasseh, which now you have translated many miles southward into this Tribe. It seems, you need no other to confute you but your self.

Aleth.

I have seen mine* 1.17 error, and you see my retractation thereof. One day teacheth another. To live, and not to learn, is to loiter, and not to live. Confessions of our former mistakes, are the honourable Trophies of our conquest over our own ignorance. The main reason, why Iabesh-Gilead could not be so far north, is this, because Saul marched from Bezek in the Tribe of Ephraim, with an army of foot, in an afternoon and a night, over Iordan, unto this City, and came hither in theh 1.18 morning-watch. Now though we allow, that zeal to their brethren in danger, spurred on the souldiers, and did horse those foot in point of speed, yet they almost needed wings, in so short a time to goe so long a journey (fifty miles at least besides the crossing of two great rivers, Iordan, and Iabbok) and to come thither so early. Wherefore with master More we have placed Iabesh-Gilead south of Iabbok, some thirty miles from Bezek, having the concurrence of other Authors for the position thereof.

••hilol.

You have found a nest of Cities in thei 1.19 Apocrypha, and place them all in this Tribe. Whereas two of them, namely, Bozra and Betzer, are by learnedk 1.20 Tremellius found to be, the one in Edom, the other in Reuben, many miles from the Tribe of Gad.

Aleth.

I deny not, but two Cities of the foresaid names are presented in those Countreys, but could not be the same, with these Cities which Maccabeus relieved. It is expresly recorded (oncel 1.21 and again for the more certainty thereof) that these places were in the land of Gilead. And that any part of Edom, or Reuben, was ever reputed to belong to the land of Gilead, is as I conceive an opinion unpresidented in any good author, and unavouchable by any strong argm••nts.

CHAP. IV. Objections concerning Manasseh beyond Jordan answered.

Philol.

YOu have made the countrey of Manasseh beyond Iordan, too large in the dimensions thereof. for, it being the porti∣on but of half a Tribe, is, according to your scale of miles, little less in proportion, then the Countrey which other entire Tribes did possess.

Aleth.

I confess the truth of what you alledge, which is no whit strange in it self. What more common then to call a Twin, half a man? Yet I doubt not, but you have seen such half-men, as proper persons, as any single-born. And the moiety of this Tribe, possessed as much ground, as most other whole Tribes in Israel. This may appear by the number of Cities, no fewer thena 1.22 threescore contained therein. Yet under fa∣vour, I conceive, that the land east of Iordan was not altogether so civi∣lized, but more wilde, and warlike, then the countrey west thereof. Especially this of Manasseh, subject to hostile incursions from the north and east; and therefore their portion was cut out in the largest size, that what they wanted in the quietness, they might have in the quan••ity of their possessions.

Philol.

You make Chorazin within two miles of Capernaum, whereas M^r. More in his Maps, placeth it on the west side of the sea of Galilee, hard by Bethsaida; in my minde with more probability of truth. For, our Saviour saith,b 1.23 Woe be to thee Chorazin, woe be unto thee Bethsaida, coupl∣ing them together in his commination, who probably would have joined Capernaum and Chorazin together, for the vicinity both of their profaneness, and place, had they been seated so near together, as they are presented in your description.

Aleth.

Your argument concludes nothing at all. Have you not often seen malefactours manacled together, whose places of birth and breed∣ing were farthest asunder? So might it be with Chorazin, and Bethsaida; whilest Capernaum is singled out, and set solely by it self, in our Saviours threatning, as a signall offender, most eminent for its ingratitude. As for our placing of Chorazin, we have therein observed the instructions of Saintc 1.24 Hierome, and other good Authours.

Philol.

You make the brook Cherith in this Tribe, without rendering any reason, why you place it here; which Adrichomius (no doubt on good ground) appointeth to be on the west side of Iordan, in the Tribe of Ephraim.

Aleth.

The brook is but once mentioned in Scripture, and therefore we want exact instructions for the position thereof. Yea generally the Maps of Palestine take no notice of this brook. As if it had been so dried up, with the long drought in the days of Eliah, that the channell thereof did not afterwards appear. But to the point; Two things are obser∣vable in Scripture, concerning the post••re of this Cherith; First, that Eliah after his message done to Ahab in Samaria, was commanded to turn himselfd 1.25 Eastward: Secondly, that the brook Cherith, whither he was sent, is said to be before Iordan; the Hebrew hath it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and Tremellius ren∣dereth it è regione Iordanis; All which put together, clearly speaketh it, to have been ••ast of Samaria, and on the other side of Iordan, where judi∣cious M^r. More in his Map hath placed it, whom I conceive my self to fol∣low on good reason.

CHAP. V. Objections concerning Naphtali answered.

Philol.

YOu make all the Tribe of Naphtali west, and on this side the River of Iordan; whereas that passage foretold by the a 1.26 Prophet, and applied by theb 1.27 Evangelist, describes it on the other side; The land of Zebulun, and the land of Naphtali by the way of the sea beyond Iordan, Galilee of the Gentiles. The particle beyond is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the Greek, which makes it plain, that Naphtali lay on the east side of Iordan.

Aleth.

The strength of your objection consists in the words beyond Iordan, which are variously rendered by learned men. By Tremellius in Isaiah secundum Iordanem, by the same Author in Matthew, transitus Iordan; by Beza, secus Iordanem. The dicision of the difficulty depends on the proper sense of the preposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ••nebher, in Hebrew; which barely imports no more, then over; but which way, whether Cis, or Trans; whether on this side, or beyond, is to be expounded by the context. This flexible nature, and promiscuous sense of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gnebher, is observed byc 1.28 Tremellius, and others; so that the text alledged by you, renders no more, then the land of Naphtali over Iordan, without specifying any side of the river. Secondly, we answer, that those words beyond Iordan, are so indifferently placed in the Prophet, that they may equally be referred, to what followeth, Galilee of the Gentiles; part of which Galilee, we have d 1.29 formerly described, to lie east of Iordan, and therein the City Chorazin, wherein our Saviour so frequently conversed.

Philol.

You make two fountains, the one Ior, the other Dan, as the

father and mother of the River Iordan: a fancy (I fear) rather pretty, them solid; bearing too much affinity with the derivation of the River Dourdan in France, from the confluence of the two streams, Dour, and Dan; whilest such a composition hath more of Latine, then Hebrew therein. Not to say, that Iosephus is wholly silent hereof, I suspect it for a modern conceit, unavouchable by ancient Authors; and prefer his opi∣nion e 1.30 as most probable, who deduceth Iordan from the Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Iarad, to descend, because it comes down with a powder, and at set timesf 1.31 overflowes, all his bankes.

Aleth.

The negative argument from Iosephus, is of small validity; but to attest the antiquity of Iordans descent, according to our description, grudge not to read the following testimony of Philostorgius, both because he is an ancient Author (living in the fifth Century after Christ) and his book at this day not extant, save that some parcells of his are recited by Ioannes Antiochenus, out of whoseg 1.32 Manuscript, not yet printed, the following words are transcribed, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In this Countrey of Paneas one of the fountains of Iordan is be∣gotten, there being two of them; Dan so called even to this day from the ancient name thereof. As for the other, which is named for, a certain hill of the sameh 1.33 mountain sendeth it forth, distant from the former about an hundred and sixty furlongs; from either of which flows a rivolet, the one termed Io••ates, the other, Danites, which flow∣ing by the mountains to the foot of the plain, thence forthwith compleate one great Ri∣ver Iordan, in the same mingling both their names and streams. See here an ex∣cellent evidence of the extraction of Iordan, which cannot be condem∣ned for a modern invention. However if any will deduce Iordans name from a third fountain, (that Hebrew word aforesaid) let him herein con∣tentedly embrace his own opinion.

Philol.

If you stick so stedfastly to the authority of Philosto••gius, why dissent you from him in the distance between those two fountains, which ••e makes an hundred and sixty furlongs, that is, twenty miles, (if eight furlongs make a mile) and the interstitium in your Map amounts not fully to half so much?

Aleth.

Some mistake may justly be suspected in Philostorgius his num∣ber, because for exceeding the proportion in other Authours. Ii 1.34 former∣ly acquainted you with that arbitrating power I have assumed (I hope not unjustly) to reconcile such differences in Authors by pitching on a middle number betwixt their extremities, and here have made use of the same power accordingly.

Philol.

What mean you by these eight nameless buildings sur∣rounding

the City of Cesarea Philippi?

Aleth.

They are set there to signifie the townes of Cesarea Philippi menti∣oned by thek 1.35 Evangelist, whereabouts Saint Peter gave that eminent testimony of the Deity of our Saviour.

Philol.

At Dan in this Tribe (aliàs Leshem, and Cesarea Philippi) you erect one of Ieroboam his Calves; whereasl 1.36 Brocard, who exactly survey∣ed Palestine, in his Iournall gives us to understand, that half a league from Bethel, where one of the Calves were set up, stood a mountain called Dan op∣posite thereunto, where the other Calfe was erected.

Aleth.

His authority cannot countervaile Saint Hieromes, Benjamin in Itinerario, and others, yea Truth it self, which are on our side, and against his opinion. For, Ieroboam was too good an husband to lavish both his Calves in one place, which he rather would scatter in distant Cities, the better to spread Idolatry in his kingdome. Besides, consider the end pretended at their erection, namely to spare the peoples pains, It is too m 1.37 much for you to goe up to Ierusalem, that these Calves should be (as it were) Chappels of ease, to save his subjects a tedious journey. Now, if both his Calves were penn'd up in a stall near Bethel (as Brocard would have it) little ease thereby was given to the northern Tribes, and their journey not considerably shortned. Therefore the other Calfe was set up at Dan in Naphtali, as we have described it.

Philol.

All that you have said, doth not satisfie me, that this Dan was the place where the Calfe was worshipped. For, soon after Ieroboams death, in the reign of Baasha, this Dan you speak of wasn 1.38 smitten by Ben∣hadad King of Syria. This, probably, would have extinguished Calfe∣worship, if set up in that place, which notwithstandingo 1.39 continued many hundred years after in the kingdome of Israel.

Aleth.

You might argue on the same grounds, that the other Calfe was not erected in Bethel, seeing even in the life of Ieroboam, Abijah King of Iudah took from himp 1.40 Bethel with the towns thereof. Observable herein is di∣vine Justice, punishing both those idolatrous places by the sword of their enemies, so soon after the Calves were set up in them. But, we may be confident, the Kings of Israel recovered both Dan and Bethel again, and restored them to their former impious uses.

Philol.

In the Worthies of Naphtali you account on Hiram Solomons Architect in building the Temple,q 1.41 as a Naphtalite by the mothers side: And yet in ther 1.42 description of Dan you make him a Danite by his female extraction. Now, what saith Nicodemus?s 1.43 Can a man enter the second time into his mothers wombe? Yea, can he be born (as you would have it) twice, though not of the same, of severall women?

Aleth.

This your objection is not brought against my description, but against the very letter of the Scripture that affirmeth the same.

1 KING. 7. 14.

He was a widows son of the Tribe of Naphtali, and his Father was a man of Tyre.

2 CHRON. 2. 14.

The son of a woman of the daugh∣ters of Dan, and his father was a man of Tyre.

Now although I am not ingaged to meddle with the solution of this difficulty; yet, under favour, I conceive the same properly to depend on an observation in Chorography. May you be pleased to remember, that Dan had a parcell of his portion acquired by conquest, near the fountains of Iordan, where Leshem, Laish, or Dan was placed, which small territory lay above an hundred miles from the main body of that Tribe, surrounded about with the Tribe of Naphtali, as appeareth in ourt 1.44 description thereof. Now I suppose Hiram (whose paternall ex∣traction from Tyre is confessed on all hands) was descended a Danite by his mother, and called a Naphtalite also by his mothers side, because of her habitation (though in Dans small Countrey aforesaid) lying in the land allotted to Naphtali.

Philol.

You term itu 1.45 a most erroneous opinion in such, who conceive the Galileans more drossie Iews then the rest, herein contradicting your self, ha∣ving formerlyw 1.46 affirmed, that they were courser, and less refined Iews.

Aleth.

Give me leave to distinguish, between Iews courser in Religion, and courser in Extraction. The former we confess, that the Galileans were less pure in Gods service, as probably descended from the remnant of the ten Tribes: Yet were they most truly the lost sheep of Israel, not deba∣sed by mixture of Gentilisme in their bloud, like the Samaritans, whom Christ declined, whilest he constantly conversed with these Galileans.

Philol.

You say, that the City Naasson depends meerly upon the credit of the vulgar translation Tobit 1. Whereas looking on the Hebrew Map, graven at Amsterdam by Abraham Goos, but designed, and made by another Abraham a great Rabbin, skilled in the land, and language of his own nation, this Naasson appears there in Hebrew characters, the Author (no doubt) having good assurance for the same. Whose Map (I can tell you) is much valued by many Antiquaries, as appears by their difficult procuring, dear purchasing, and carefull preserving thereof. And you may finde it solemnly set up, at the upper end of Sion Colledge Library.

Aleth.

It ill becomes me to detract from the pains of any, being also my self, a man under authority of the pens, and tongues of others, and Can∣didate for the Readers good will in this my description. Yet, give me leave, plainly to profess, that the Map by you alleadged, answereth not the great price, and generall praise thereof, being nothing else but Adri∣chomius his Map translated into Hebrew. What once Sir Iohn Old Castle, Lord Cobham, spoke jeastingly, that the Priests made Christ to be boots, and spurs, and all in the Sacrament, may I serously say that Adrichomius, with his faults, and failings, dross, dirt, and all together, without any cor∣rection, is cast into this Abrahams overvalued description, so that the

Map you alledge is not gold, but mean metall gilded over, containing surreptitious names out of the Vulgar Latine therein Hebraized, and pre∣senting many spurious places utterly disclaimed in the Originall.

CHAP. VI. Objections against Asher answered.

Philol.

I Admire you have altogether omitted the River Eleutherus in this Tribe (much mentioned ina 1.47 Maccabees, and which Adrichomi∣us makes to fall into the Mediterranean in the mid-way betwixt Zidon and Tyre. Yea,b 1.48 M. George Sandys in his travels, going from Sarepta to Tyre, crossed a little valley divided by the River Eleutherus, called Casmire at this day by the inhabitants thereabouts.

Aleth.

By what name, or title soever, the water, he there went over, is known at this day, sure I am, it cannot be the ancient Eleutherus, which by Ptolemy, Strabo, and generall consent of all Authors, falls above sixty miles more northward, into the Mediterranean. And therefore the error of Adrichomius and others herein, is briefly taxed by judicious Sir c 1.49 Walter Ralegh.

Philol.

You make Asher to border on Zidon, contrary to the descrip∣tion ofd 1.50 Wolsegangus Wiseburgius, and learnede 1.51 Tostatus, who set Zebulun in the same place, as the most north-west of all the Tribes, and alleadge f 1.52 Iacobs words to avouch the same, prophecying, that Zebuluns borders shall be unto Zidon.

Aleth.

Godsg 1.53 Word, the coast of the Countrey, and all good authors justifie our description, those two onely excepted which you alleadge, being both deceived, by taking Zidon restrictively in Iacobs prophecy, for the City so called, whereas the whole Countrey thereby is intended (as Sarepta is called a Cityh 1.54 of Zidon) and the name of Zidonians adequate to Phenicians, in which sense Zebulun confined on the Countrey, though Asher onely on the City of Zidon.

Philol.

You peremptorily place the defeat of Ben••adad, and fall of Apheks wall on his flying Army, in this Tribe, not remembring the while, that there is anotheri 1.55 Aphek in Issachar, (nearer to Samaria) which puts in with more probability to be the theater, whereon that tragical accident was acted.

Aleth.

I confess Aphek a place in Issachar, but finde it not charactered to be a City, such an one as ourk 1.56 Aphek in Asher is described, and whose walls are therefore more probable to doe the foresaid execution. How∣ever, be it known unto you, whensoever two places are with equall likelihood corrivals for actions therein atchieved, we adjudge it to that place, that falls first under our description. Thus, the start of half an

hour, bestows on the elder twin, the whole inheritance. To avoid con∣fusion, and prevent repetition, first come, first serv'd; the place first occur∣ring, carries away all history in our describing thereof.

CHAP. VII. Objections, against Zebulun, answered.

Philol.

YOu, very confidently, make Iordan continue his un••ixit stream, clean through the Galilean-sea (a course somewhat ir∣regular in nature) without alleadging any authority for the proof of so improbable a passage.

Aleth.

Excellent Authors avouch the same.a 1.57 Tacitus, amongst others, tells us of this River, Unum, atque alterum lacum integer perfluit, tertio ••etinetur; One, and another lake (viz. the waters of Merom, and Galilean-sea) it runneth through entire, but is stopped in the third; namely, in Asphaltite-lake, or Dead-sea. More full is the testimony of Philostorgius, and deserveth our serious perusall thereof. Who speaking of this River, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Which (saith he) passeth through the lake of Tiberias, cutting it in the middle, and flowing clean through it in its own proper channell. Which cutting of the lake, implies the entire continuance of Iordans water; otherwise, that knife doth not cut the loaf, but is cut by the loaf, which is broken in the dividing thereof.

Philol.

I wonder you pass over Shimron-Meron in such silence, which appears a place of great note, yea, a Royall City in the days of Ioshua, as the Coronet thereupon doth inform us.

Aleth.

I confess it signed with a Coronet, and with something more, a flag of uncertainty, having nothing sure of the location thereof, the chiefest cause that I willingly declined the mention of it. However, we will scrue our selves into as much certainty of this place, as may be extracted out of Scripture: and observe, the four first wreaths of my scrue are un∣doubtedly, the fifth and last more then probably true, as followeth.

• 1 Shimron-Meron was one of theb 1.58 Royall Cities, whose King Ioshua destroyed.
• 2 The same City is elsewhere called plainlyc 1.59 Shimron, without any addition.
• 3 It lay on the northern part of the land, because the King thereof associated in the northern, and secondd 1.60 combination of the Canaanites against Ioshua.
• 4 A City named Shimron, was alloted to the Tribe ofe 1.61 Zebulun.
• 5 Most probably this is the same Shimron, whose King was destroy∣ed by Ioshua.

This is all, which my best industry could collect out of Scripture, or good Authors, concerning the situation of this place.

Philol.

What mean you by that third smooty circle, which (as the Meteor Halo about the Sun) surroundeth the Levites City of Iockneam?

Aleth.

It signifieth nothing, being a meer aberration of the Graver, which (now but obscure) will in process of Printing, wholly disap∣pear. And I could hartily wish, no other faults in our Maps, would be of longer continuance.

Philol.

You make the Galilean-sea all along the east boundary of this Tribe. Whereas I am altogether of the minde of Masius, that no part of Zebulun touched on that sea; with him principally grounding my opinion on the Scriptures silence, which mentioneth not any contermi∣nating of this Tribe thereupon. Which might soon have been spoken, yea surely would not have been omitted, had Zebulun been so situated.

Aleth.

That Zebulun bordered on this sea, may cleerly be demonstra∣ted; first from Iacobs prophecy, that he should dwell 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉f 1.62 At the haven of the Seas. Seas in the plurall, pointing at his position betwixt the Mediterranean, and Galilean seas, the west and east bounds of his possessi∣on. Now lest any should seek to wave these words by an Enallage in Number (a figure, we confess, frequent in Hebrew) Zebuluns bounding on the Galilean-sea, is unfallibly collected out of theg 1.63 Gospell, where Christ is said to dwell in Capernaum which is upon the sea coast, in the borders of Z••bulun, and Naphtali.

Philol.

Christ his feeding of five thousand, with five loaves, and two fishes, is misplaced in your Map, as which ought to be set on the east side of the Sea of Galilce.

Aleth.

Learned men are much perplexed about the position of this miracle. A miracle, so remarkable in it self, that of all the passages be∣twixt Christs conception, and the introduction to his passion, this onely, and the descent of the Dove at his baptisme are recorded in all four Evangelists. Yet some difficulty appears in the particular place thereof.h 1.64 Luke term∣eth it the desert of Beth••aida; but Saint Iohni 1.65 who wrote the last, (there∣fore supplying the omissions, and explaining the doubts in other Go∣spells) assigneth the particular place to be near Tiberias, both being Cities on the west side of the sea, so that north of Tiberias, betwixt it* 1.66 and Beth∣saida, (in a desert named from the latter, because leading to it) this mi∣racle is properly placed.

Philol.

But immediately at the ending thereof, the Disciples are said to sail 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,k 1.67 unto the other side unto Bethsaida, or as Saint Iohn says, towardsl 1.68 Capernaum (both these being Cities not far asunder.) Wherefore, if they crossed over the Sea to go to Bethsaida, they were not already on the same side thereof when the miracle was wrought, and by consequence were then on the other [the eastern] side of the Sea.

Aleth.

By 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, is meant the opposite shoar, on the same side of the Sea, but so that it was over a reach, or bay which they crossed therein, sailing (not athwart the breadth of the Sea from west to east, but) almost foreright

the length of the lake, from a place near Tiberias to the land ofm 1.69 Gennesa∣ret, on the north end of the lake, betwixt Bethsaida and Capernium. Thus, such who on the Severn Sea sail from Bristoll to Barstable, may be said in some sense to cross the water, as well as those that saile from Barstable to Cardif••e. And thus, in placing this miracle we have not onely followed the judgment ofn 1.70 worthy Calvin, but also the eyes ofo 1.71 Biddulph a modern traveller, who beheld the place.

CHAP. VIII. Objections against Issachar answered.

Philol.

WHat vast mountains have you made those of Gilboa to be? the highest of them four miles perpendicular: Sure∣ly the battell betwixt Saul, and the Philistines could scarce be fought on such ascents. Yea, David might well have spared his wish,a 1.72 Let there be no dew, neither let there be rain upon you, whose tops, (as you have exalted them) may be presumed higher then the clouds themselves.

Aleth.

I confess them to be of the largest size, store of room and want of other matter to fill it, gave the occasion to their greater growth. Which fault is amended in the following Map of Manasseh, where be∣hold them reduced to a more moderate proportion, less then many of the mountains in Wales.

Philol.

How comes a parcell of mount Ephraim to straggle into the Map of Issachar? It being proper for those mountains to be confined to their own Tribe of Ephraim, whence they fetcht their denomination.

Aleth.

I may say the Tribe of Ephraim had the Preemption, but not the Monopoly of them. I mean his turn was first served, and he had the best and most of those mountains in his possession, whence they deser∣vedly took their name. Yet so, that some part of mount Ephraim ranged south ward into the Tribe of Benjamin, (as mountb 1.73 Zemaraim) and some branched northward into Issachar, as Shamir in mountc 1.74 Ephraim; certainly in this Tribe,d 1.75 because Tola a man of Issachar was buried therein.

Philol.

It followeth not, because he was extracted from this Tribe, that therefore the place of his buriall was in the same, finding many mens interments in Scripture, casuall, out of the Tribes of their nativity. Thus Saul and Ionathan being Benjamites, were notwithstanding buried in the Tribe of Gad, ate 1.76 Iabesh Gilead: as also Ishbosheth and Abner their Countreymen got graves atf 1.77 Hebron in the Tribe of Iudah: so infirme is your inference, that Shamir in mount Ephraim was in Issachar, because Tola an Issacharite was intombed therein.

Aleth.

You instance onely in persons, some forcibly, others treache∣rously slain, which occasioned their hasty, tumultuary, and extravagant

interment. Remember also that Saul and Ionathan, (though interme∣diately at Iabesh Gilead) were finally intombed in theg 1.78 sepulchres of their Father, in the land of Benjamin, as we may presume that Tola his corps a peaceable Judge (no violent detention, or disturbance appearing to the contrary) did rest in the possessions of that Tribe; the Iews gene∣rally being as ceremonious to be buried in their own land, as to be mar∣ried in their own linage.

CHAP. IX. Objections against Manasseh on this ••ide Jordan answered.

Philol.

ANd why so much of the Map of Issachar presented again in Manasseh? What need this waste, and repetition of the same again?

Aleth.

The squaring of the Map necessarily commanded the repetiti∣on thereof; nor is it lost labour, because two scattered pieces in Issachar belonged to Manasseh.

Philol.

But ô what a medley motley pieced Map have you made of this half Tribe of Manasseth! Surely Iosephs coate consisted not of more a 1.79 colours then Manasseh (Iosephs sons) portion is made up of shreds and par∣cels as you have presented it, marring the in••ireness of this halfe Tribe with your manifold divisions.

Aleth.

And yet no more then what are warranted by Gods word. Let none part what he hath put together, nor put together what he hath parted. I delight not out of wantonness, to make smp•• of Manasseh's por∣tion, but the Tex•• puts the Shears into my hand, commanding me to cut it so: because Manasseh hadb 1.80 three Countreys in Issachar and Asher: That is, surrounded with them, which necessitates the cantoning of this halfe Tribe into such dis-jointed parcels.

Philol.

You make a piece of Asher, parted from the main body thereof, to confine on Manasseh, whilest Bonfrerius finds a fitter expedient by cut∣ting off the west ends of Zebulun and Issachar from the Mediterranean, and continuing Asher along the sea side to Manasseh, so preserving Asher intire thereby.

Aleth.

His Expedient raiseth more difficulties then it allaieth; as di∣rectly opposite to Scripture, Reason, and the generall consent of Writers, as formerly hath been largely proved in our Objections against Zebulun. Better it is therefore to admit a parcell of Asher separated from the main of the Tribe (Instances in English Counties being frequent in this case) then by Bonfrerius his shift, to allow Truth parted from Iacobsc 1.81 pro∣phecy, which inevitably followes, if Zebulun be made Land••locked, and cut off from bounding on the sea.

Philol.

Indeed you put Manasseh's separate Countreys within Issachar, but not within Asher, not invironed there with, but onely joining thereto, whereas the Text saith equally,* 1.82 And Manasseh had in Issachar and Asher &c.

Aleth.

The main body of Issachar confining on Manasseh afforded us conveniency to insert such Countreys therein. But Asher his part being in it self but a small dis-jointed portion, is not so capable of surrounding a Countrey within it, seeing such a parcell within a parcell would ap∣pear so diminutive a subdivision as almost inconsiderable. Besides, the preposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 rendred In in the Text, may sometimes be satisfied with sig∣nifying ad, or juxta, nigh, or by, that is, a bare proximity, apposition, and contiguousnes of a thing. In which sense Manasseh had land border∣ing on this dis-jointed piece of Asher.

Philol.

In* 1.83 Ephraim you say that Iezreel was more then twenty miles from Samaria, which measured by the scale in your Map are not above twelve miles asunder.

Aleth.

Let not the Typographicall mistake of the Printer be accounted the Topographicall errour of the Author; That twelve should be twenty, and in the Errata is mended accordingly.

Philol.

You might almost as well inscribe this Map the Tribe of Levi, as the Half Tribe of Manasseh. It was the complaint in time of Popery, that the Church did eate up the Commonwealth; every third foot in the king∣dome being Church-land, before the dissolution of Abbies. You ende∣vour to reduce Palestine to the same proportion. It was a pious wish of Moses,c 1.84 Would God, that all the Lords people were Prophets: But a covetous de∣sire in you to convert so much of the land into the Levites portion, by ex∣tending the circular suburbs of their Cities to six miles Diameter; whereas Authours contract them, within less then halfe that compass, yet observing the true dimension of the Cubit therein.

Aleth.

For number such Cities are no moe then the Scripture assigneth, though here haply falling thicker then in other Maps. As for the three thousand Cubits of their extent on all sides, we have in the manner of the measuring thereof followed the direction of judiciousf 1.85 M^r. Ainsworth, (as he the learned Rabbi Maimony) preferring it amongst various exposi∣tions, as most naturall to the Text. Now let none wonder that we make a thousand Cubits adequate to a thousand paces, or on English mile. For, although lesser Cubits were used by the Iews, about their vessels, and buildings; yet their Geometricall Cubit (generally employed for their better expedition, because largest, in their surveying of land) contained sixl 1.86 common Cubits; and Rabbim 1.87 Kimhi expresly saith that a thousand Emoth, or Cubits make a mile. Besides, consider I pray, these three thousand Cubits were to be measured from the wall of the City, the flexures and bendings whereof, produced the parallel bendings in the bounds of the Levites suburbes. But because we cannot be instructed in what from the line of their walls ranged about, we begin our mea∣sure

from the midst of the City, and therefore 〈◊〉〈◊〉 bound to make their lands amends with the largeness of the C••ibts, because beginning our mensuration to their disadvantage, from the ••••n••er of the City, in s••ead of the [unknown] circumf••••••••ce thereof.

Philol.

I am not satisfied in the situation of 〈◊〉〈◊〉, that it was seated in this half Tribe of Manass••h.

Aleth.

It is seated according to Adrichomi••s, and the judgment of most other* 1.88 Authors. But if I might interpose mine own opinion, I conceive it many miles nearer unto Ierusalem in the Tribe of Ephraim, rather nigh then on the sea, in the road betwixt Ierusalem, and Cesarea, some thirty miles from the former; whither I shall remove the same, when my opinion herein shall be countenanced with the approbation of others. My reason that Antipatris could not be so far northward, (full sixty miles as they make it from Ierusalem) is, because thei 1.89 ••ootmen sent to attend Saint Paul marched thither from Ierusalem in one night. Now, although their suspicion of the Iews pursuing them to rescue Saint Paul, might quicken their pace, yetk 1.90 foot-souldiers could not be foot-posts, it being im∣possible for spearmen to go so far, in so short a time, betwixt the third hour [nine a clock at night] and the next morning.

CHAP. X. Objections against Ephraim answered.

Philol.

YOu make a strange desultory Description of the bounds of this Tribe, va••lting over from length to breadth in such a fashion as is hard to be understood, and worse to be applied to the letter of the * 1.91 Text.

Al••th.

Wise Agur confessed he knew not the† 1.92 way of an Eagle in the aire, whose flight therein 〈◊〉〈◊〉 not to be traced, leaving no visible perforation behinde it, partly through the swiftness of his motion, partly through the subtileness of the aire presently closing up the passage. So short and concise is the Holy Spirit in bounding the children of Ioseph, and so long since hath time taken all impression of many limitary obscure places there mentioned, that exactness herein, by the confession of the* 1.93 best Authors, is not to be attained. But herein we have followed the directi∣on of the learned Bonfrerius, save that we have not contracted the east of Ephrain to wards Iordan into so narrow a point, but bounded it broader, to make it a degree the better with the descriptions of other Authors.

Philol.

You make Sechem in this Tribe, full seventy miles from He∣bron in the Tribe of Iudah. Me thinks they should be much nearer seeing Iacob sent Ioseph froma 1.94 Hebr••n to Sechem to give a visite to his brethren. Now how could his tender love adventure his darling child alone so tedious and dangerous a journey? Surely the distance was far less then you make it.

〈◊〉〈◊〉.

〈1 paragraph〉〈1 paragraph〉

Philol.

Rama in this Tribe, doubtlesly was a City of the Levites as doth appear by Elkanah and Samuel their constant habitation there, both of then Levites. Why therefore is it not surrounded in your Map with a double circle, like other Cities of the saine qualification?

Aleth.

I acknowledge Ra••a for the reasons by you alledged, proba∣bly pertaining to the Levites, but have omitted the double incircling thereof, because I finde it not amongst the four Cities given the Levites in Ep••raim, nor the fortyc 1.95 eight assigned to them in the whole kingdome.

Philol.

Was it not then usurpation in the Levites to inhabite a City which by God was never granted unto them?

Aleth.

Under favour I conceive, though the Levites must have four, they might have moe Cities in Ephrain, or elsewhere, if the charity of well disposed people was pleased to bestow them. Thus, beside the three Cities for Refuge west of Iordan the Israelites were bound, if God did inlarge theird 1.96 coasts, to adde three more for the same service. By which analogy it may be collected, that the Ephraimites in gratitude to God, who gave them more intire possession of their portion then any other Tribe in Ioshua's division (nothing out ••ezer, a Levites City being de∣tained from them by the Can••anites) might give this Ra••a as a gratuity to the Levites. Besides, the suburbs and lands of the Levites reached from th•• walls of the Cities three thousand Cubits round about, with in which space they might erect what buildings they please, being therein (without incroaching on any other Tribe) resident on their proper in∣heritance. Rama therefore might be built within that circumference, and by the proportion of miles we collect it to stand within the circuit of Gezer, so that though they could not get Gezer it self, they might gain and build Rama within the compass thereof for their habita••ion. However, we define nothing positively, much less impose it on the beliefe of others. Clipt money is worth as much as it weighs, though it will not pass for what it was coined; and conjectures, though they will not goe for certain truths, deserve to finde as much acceptance, as they bring probability with them.

Philol.

Have you nothing more to observe concerning the blessings, and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 pronounced on mount Ebal and Gerizim

Aleth.

I conceive on second thoughts, that the Prie••ts with the A••ke stood in the valley betwixt the two hils (whilest the whole body of the ordinarye 1.97 Levites were on the mount of Gerizi••) whose station in the

half way betwixt both, when they pronounced the blessings and the cursings, facilitated the conveyance of the sound on both sides, as appear∣eth on the seriousf 1.98 comparing of the Scripture.

Philol.

Tiphsah is made by you a City in this Tribe. But, if it were si∣tuate herein, very short were the dominions of Solomon even in the very height of his greatness, who then reigned on this side of the river from g 1.99 T••phsah even to Azza, or Gaza, in the Tribe of Simeon, not fully an hun∣dred miles, as appears by your Scale in the generall Description of the land.

Aleth.

Tiphsah there mentioned being the eastern boundary of Solomons Empire (from ourh 1.100 Tiphsah where cruell Menahem began his reign) was near a thousand miles north-east on the river Euphrates, probably the same with the City Tharsacus, whereof Ptole••y, Strabo, and Stephanus take spe∣ciall notice.

Philol.

Have you any miraculous faith, who so easily have removed the mountain of Phinehas (wherein Eleazar was buried) from the north of this Map, within the suburbs of Bethhoron a Levites City, to the south thereof near Shiloh, where in your Map generall the same is presented?

Aleth.

On better consideration I see no necessity, that his mountain should be brought within the bounds of any Leviticall City. Phinehas was an extraordinary person, and therefore his land might be extraordinary in the location thereof. This his portion was no part of the Levites pa∣trimony in their forty eight Cities given them by God, but seems rather the s••perpondium of the peoplesi 1.101 bounty cast into the balance, as an ho∣nourable augmentation in reward of hisk 1.102 eminent desert. I conceive therefore it lay in Mount Ephraim, near Shilob, where the Tabernacle was set up, bestowed upon him thereabouts, for his more convenient at∣tending of Gods service therein.

CHAP. XI. Objections against Dan answered.

Philol.

YOu positively affirme that the land of Dan belonged primi∣tively to Iudah, yet produce no Scripture for the proof there∣of. We beleeve the same of Simeon, thea 1.103 Text affirming that their inheri∣tance was within the inheritance of Iudah, but no evidence appears of such de∣rivation of Dans possession originally from Iudah.

Aleth.

The same is infallibly collected from Scripture, because the Cities of Eshtaol,b 1.104 Zoreah,c 1.105 Timnah,d 1.106 Ekron were first bestowed on Iudah, ande 1.107 afterwards we finde the same places, (with the Countrey there∣abouts by necessary consequence) conferred upon Dan's posterity for their portion.

Philol.

Such an alteration seems utterly inconsistent with divine im∣mutab••lity,

with whom is no 〈◊〉〈◊〉, nor shadow off 1.108 changing. To give a thing and take a thing is unproportionable with his proceedings, whose Gifts are pronounced by the Apostle to be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,g 1.109 without Repen∣tance.

Aleth.

Indeed such gifts as amount to the notion of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 are unca∣pable of alteration, to which his other grants are subject. Besides, God never so passed away that land but he still reserved it as his own Demesnes. For the land (saith he) is mine; not was, but is, even after the Israelite, had long possessed the same. Is it not lawfull for him to doe as he will with his own,i 1.110 and to change at pleasure what tenants to rent, or rather what Bailifes to occupy his own ground?

Philol.

The faces of the Men which bear the great bunch of grapes, are set the wrong way. For being to goe south-east to Kadesh-••arnea, they look full west to the Mediterranean sea.

Aleth.

You put me in minde of a man, who being sent for to pass his verdict on a Picture, (how like it was to the person whom it was to resemble) fell a finding fault with the frame thereof (not the Limners but the Ioiners work) that the same was not handsomely fashioned. In stead of giving your judgment on the Map, (how truely it is drawn to re∣present the Tribe) you cavill at the History••properties therein, the act of the ••raver, not Geographer. Yet know Sir when I checkt the* 1.111 Graver for the same, he answered me that it was proper for Spies, (like Water-men and Rope-makers) for surety sake to look one way and work another.

CHAP. XII. Objections against Simeon answered.

Philol.

VVHy both an Asteriske and flag of uncertainty over Sheba? For, though unassured of the exact position thereof, the Text ascertaineth us, that it was a reall City in Simeon,a 1.112 Beer-sheba, and Sheba, and Moladah &c.

Aleth.

I am not satisfied that Sheba was a distinct City by it self, but rather conceive it the same with Beer-sheba. Because,

• 1 They are both accounted the sameb 1.113 when originally denomi∣nated.
• 2 Sheba is omitted inc 1.114 Chronicles where other Simeonite Cities are summ'd up) as the same with Beer sheba.
• 3 Simeon had butd 1.115 thirteen Cities, which make fourteen if Sheba be ac∣counted a distinct City by it self.

The premisses considered, Sheba appears the same with Beer-sheba (as e 1.116 Salem with Ierusalem) commonly so called for brevity sake.

Philol.

But then how doe you answer the Text, which expresly maketh Sheba a distinct City, Beer-sheba, and Sheba, and Moladah &c?

Aleth.

Proteus appeared not in more shapes, then the Particle•• (here rendred and) hath severall significations, for though chiefly it is copulative, other whiles it is causall, collective, adversative, exegeticall, redditive, and dis∣junctive, asf 1.117 Bonfrerius readeth it here, Beer-sheba, or Sheba, and Moladah &c.

Philol.

You say that Simeon wasg 1.118 surrounded on all sides with Iudah, where∣as in your Map, the northern side thereof, is all along fairly flanked with the Tribe of Don.

Aleth.

You may remember (what we so lately proved) that Dan's portion primitively pertained to Iudah, and was a canton cut out thereof. In which sense according to Scripture, Simeons inheritance wash 1.119 within the children of Iudah's, and originally encompassed therewith.

Philol.

Why call you this Tribei 1.120 a jagged remnant, being as whole a cloth as the rest, and (though not so great) as entire as the other Tribes? I am not sensible by this your Map of any notorious dispersedness of the Simeonites habitations.

Aleth.

Undoubtedly Iudah his portion made many incisures, and lar∣cinations into the Tribe of Simeon hindering the entireness thereof. Par∣ticularly Askelon andk 1.121 Gaza first given to, oncel 1.122 possessed by Iudah, (though regained by the Philistines) were continued and tyed by some narrow labell of land to the main of Iudah, at leastwise had a Church-path (as I may terme it) a passage to the Temple, without going through any part of Simeon. But, wanting certain instructions, how to contrive, and carry on such indented conveyances, and not willing to confine the Rea∣der to our conjecturall fancies, we have left him to his liberty, presen∣ting Simeon* 1.123 entire, wherein he may frame such incursions of Iudah as comply best with his own opinion.

Philol.

You make this Tribe to range some miles south of Beer-sheba, whereas that place passeth currant for the utmost border of the Coun∣trey. What more common in Scripture, thenl 1.124 from. Dan to Beer-sheba, that is, from the north to the south of the land of Canaan?

Aleth.

It was the utmost eminent City, but not absolutely the farthest place in Palestine, as neither mentioned amongst the southern boundaries of the land in generall, Numb. 34. nor with the utmost limits of the Tribe of Iudah, Iosh. 15. In ordinary discourse we measure England east and west from Dover to the Mount, as the farthest western place of note, though Cornwall stretches seven* 1.125 miles beyond it unto the lands end. So Beer-sheba was the remotest remarkable City of Canaan, where the cloth, as I may say, ended, though the list thereof reached beyond it to the River of Egypt.

CHAP. XIII. Objections against Benjamin answered.

Philol.

VVHy make you Nob a Levite City in Benjamin, within the suburbs of Anathoth? Seeing Nob is neither named amongst the four Cities bestowed on the Levites in this Tribe, Iosh. 21. 17. nor is it any of the eight and forty belonging unto them throughout the whole Countrey of Canaan.

Aleth.

That Nob was in this Tribe, appears by that ca••alogue of Cities presented us ina 1.126 Nehemiah, which the Benjamites repossessed after their return from Babylon. That it was a Levites, yea a Priests City, appears (too plainly) by theb 1.127 Massacre therein on them committed. We confess it none of the eight and forty originally assigned to the Levites. Yet how they in after-ages, were capable of supernumerary Cities more then in their first Charter, and how the Mort••main of the Levites (as I may term it) was enlarged with new foundations, we have lately answered in the objections of Ephraim* 1.128, whither we refer you for further satisfaction.

Philol.

You make the sons of Saul executed on an hill nigh Gibeah of Saul, which your judiciousc 1.129 friend will have hung up before the Taber∣nacle in Gibeon, observing therein an exemplary piece of divine justice, that, whereas Saul had ruined the Tabernacle at Nob, his sons were hung up before the same in Gibeon.

Aleth.

Not to be a Plaintise against him, but a Defendant of my self▪ I conceive him mistaken in confounding Gibeah of Saul with Gibeon, distinct Cities, as may appear by their severall owners, and actions therein performed.

GIBEON.	GIBEAH.
An ancient City of the Hi∣vites, whosed 1.130 inhabitants de∣ceived the Israelites,e 1.131 given to the Levites, in the Tribe of Benjamin, where the Taber∣nacle was set up in the time of Solomon.	A City in Benjamin, hard by I••rusalem, distinct from thef 1.132 former, whose inhabitants were meer Benjamites, and by their lust abused the g 1.133 Levites Concubine to death, for which their Tribe was almost extirpated: it was afterwards called Gibeah of Saul from his birth and frequent residence therein.

Now the text expresly saith, that the Gibeonites did hang them up unto the Lord in Gibeahh 1.134 of Saul, that is, in Sauls native place, and Court, where he had issued out his cruell edicts for the slaughter of the Gibeonites.

Philol.

But that expression they hanged them in the hilli 1.135 before the Lord, im∣ports the same performed in some religious place, probably in the pro∣spect or view of the Tabernacle.

Aleth.

Before the Lord implies no more, then what in the foregoing verse was termedk 1.136 unto the Lord, that is, in a sacred manner, not out of private revenge, but in an holy zeal, tendering the parties executed an ob∣lation to divine justice, and so is interpreted by the Expositors there∣on.

Philol.

In your particular Map of Benjamin, Iordan runs almost di∣rectly south, the whole course of whose channell visibly bendeth east∣ward in your Map generall of Palestine.

Aleth.

That generall Map, (though first placed) was last perfected, wherein we have amended three mistakes, as escaped in our particular descriptions. One that wherein you instance, another 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Re••••en (for∣merly forgott••n to be confessed) making that Tribe a little longer from north to south, then it is represented in our particular description thereof. My care shall be, God willing, in the second edition, to conforme those particular Maps, according to these rectisi••ations in the generall description.

CHAP. XIV. Objections against Judah answered.

Philol.

WOuld not it affright one to see a dead man walk? And will not he in like manner be amazed to see the Dead-sea moving? Why have you made the surface of the waters thereof wa∣ving, as if like other seas it were acted with any ty••e, which all Authors avouch, and your self confessetha 1.137 to be a standing stinking lake? Think•• not to plead, that such waving is the impression of the winde there∣upon, seeing Tacitus affirmes of this sea, Nequeb 1.138 vento impellitur, it is such a drone, it will neither goe of it self, nor yet be driven of the winde.

Aleth.

I will not score it on the account of the Graver, that it is onely lascivia, or ludicrum coeli, the over-activity of his hand: And in such cases the flourishings of the Scrivener are no essentiall part of the Bond: but behold Mercators, and other Authors Maps, and you shall finde more motion therein, then is here by us expressed. The most melancholy body of moisture, (especially of so great extent) is necessarily subject to such simpe∣ring in windy weather, as inseparable from the liquidity thereof.

Philol.

Why set you Zeboim most northernly of all the five Cities in the Dead-sea, in the place where Sodome is situated in all other descriptions?

Aleth.

The placing of them is not much materiall, whether longwise all in a File as M^r. More sets them, or in two Rankes, (two and two) as they are ordered by* 1.139 Mercator. Skuls in a charnel-house never justle for the upper place; and as sensless is the contention betwixt these dead Cities, which shall stand first, whose foundations long since were doubly destroyed with fire and water. But the sole motive of my placing Zeboim most northern of these four Cities, is because I findec 1.140 the valley of Zeboim in the Tribe* 1.141 of Benjamin, which probably lay near the influx of Iordan into the Dead-sea, denominated from the vicinity of Zeboim there∣abouts.

Philol.

The Hebrew Orthography confutes your conceit. For Zeboim by

you last alledged is spelled with different letters from the City which was burnt with fire from heaven.

Aleth.

I confess a threefold variation in the writing of this name, though all the same in effect,

• 1 Gen. 14. 2. and so also Deut. 29. 23. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• 2 1 Sam.d 1.142 13. 18 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• 3 Hoseah 11. 8. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. I shall set thee at Zeboim &c.

Here to mollifie the word, the Gutturall is either altered, or wholly omit∣ted; neither amounting to make it a new word: How variously are the names of the same English towns spoken and spelled; as Lester, Leicester, Legeocester, Legecester, yet the same word dressed in severall spel∣lings and pronunciations?

Philol.

Why make you Heb••on being a noted City of the Priests, and City of Refuge, different from all the rest, onely with a single circle about it?

Aleth.

Because the fields and villages thereof were none of the Priests,f 1.143 but were given to Caleb the son of Iephunneh for his possession.

Philol.

If so, then Hebron ought not to have had any circle at all about it, being a bare City of the Priests without any suburbs belonging there∣unto.

Aleth.

The Priests in Hebron had, and had not, suburbs pertaining thereunto, according to the severall acception of suburbs. If by them you onely understand aedificia suburbana, buildings (though without the City walls) contiguous thereunto, these (no doubt) belonged to the Priests, who hadg 1.144 Hebron with her suburbs: otherwise if you extend them to ager suburbanus, the fields surrounding the City, these related to Caleb as the proper owner thereof.

Philol.

You might well have afforded conjecturall flags to most of the Cities in Iudah, going generally by guess in your placing of them, and differing from all other authors therein.

Aleth.

The Learned in Anatomy have informed me, that veins are alike in their trunks, but not in their branches; so that although the great Channels of bloud run alike in all bodies, yet the smaller veines (as is most visible in their diva••ication on the back of the hand) disperse them∣selves diversly, in divers persons: The like is confessed in all Maps of Iudah, wherein the grand Cities, Hebron, Debir, Bethlehem &c. have their certain position agreed on by most Authors, whilest their inferiour places (and no Tribe afforded more obscure Cities but once named in Scripture) are subject to much variety, according to the fancies of Au∣thors. Wherein we hope we have observed, as much as might be, these short, and small directions we finde in Scripture.

Philol.

But you are not constant to your self in the location of those lesser places, as appears by some diversity of their distances (both amongst themselves and from Ierusalem) in the particular description of Iudah, and in the generall Map of Palestine.

Aleth.

I confess the same; who having discovered some errors in the particular Map, reformed the same in the Map-generall. Which may be beheld in this point, as a new Edition of the former, corrected and amen∣ded. Request I therefore the Reader in such small differences, to rely ra∣ther on the credit of the Map-generall.

Philol.

You* 1.145 once placed Hepher a royall City in Manasseh on this side Iordan, which since you have removed into Iudah, without giving any account of the alteration.

Aleth.

Some probability perswaded us to our former opinion. Cheif∣ly because Hepher is mentioned in Ioshua'sa 1.146 list, next to Tapuah; which is known to be in Manasseh. But since finding also a Tapuahb 1.147 in Iudah, and a land ofc 1.148 Hepher near Sochoh, a place also ind 1.149 Iudah, it hath staggered our judgment, and caused us to remove Hepher into Iudah with a flag of uncer∣taintie thereon; all Authors finding an Ignoramus for the exact position thereof.

Philol.

The land of Goshen is sufficiently known to be ine 1.150 Egypt: And how stragleth off 1.151 Countrey of Goshen into this Tribe?

Aleth.

You know that besides this England wherein we live, there is an Anglia in Denmark, whence our Ancestors are said to have come; and there is England beyond Wales, whither some of our nation removed. Some such occasion (to us unknown) might give the name of Goshen to a petty tract of ground in Iudah: Or else it might be so called from some assimilation in the fruitfulness thereof. Wonder not at a Goshen in Egypt, and another in Iudah; when we finde twog 1.152 Ziphs, twoh 1.153 Zenoahs, two i 1.154 Socohs &c. (As two Kirbies market-townes in Westmorland) within the compass of this Tribe.

Philol.

Conceive you that any wildernesses wherewith Iudah aboun∣ded, were places of any pleasant habitation?

Aleth.

I am confident thereof. For instance, Engedi though ak 1.155 Wil∣derness, was so delicious a place,l 1.156 that the Spouse is compared to a cluster of Camphire in the Vineyards of Engedi. Besides, it had the conveniency of Palmtrees, thereforem 1.157 in Scripture called Hazazon-Tamar, which is Engedi Tamar, being in Hebrew a Palme. Nor can I omit the testimony of n 1.158 Pliny as the best comment herein in Gods word; who speaking of people living on the west of the Dead-sea; amongst these (saith he) is the town ENGADDA; Second to Ierusalem in fruitfulness, and WOODS OF PALME-TREES; but now become another heap of Ashes.

Philol.

I finde indeed a City, and wilderness of Maon in this Tribe, but were the dwellers therein, those same Maonites, which are said Iudg. 10. 12. with the Zidonians and Amalekites to have oppressed Israel?

Aleth.

O no. I take these tyrant Maonites to have been a fierce and forein Nation. Saint Hierom, de locis Hebraicis, conceives Maon to be the Countrey of Moab. The vulgar Latine translates it Canaanites, because Maonites signifieth inhabitants, and the Canaanites we know were the an∣cient

and originall dwellers in the land) whose Relicks left in the land contrary to Gods command, were constant thornes in the sides of the Israelites. But I conceive rather with learned Cajetan on this place, these Mao∣nites were a distinct neighbouring nation, whose certain habitation is to us unknown.

Philol.

Saul, when marching against the Amalekites, is said to have numbred the people (being two hundred and ten thousand, in* 1.159 Telaim: which by the coast of the Countrey seems south in or near Iudah. Yet no such place appears in your Map thereof.

Aleth.

The Hebrew word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is variously interpreted, the Rab∣bins render it appellatively in Lambes; affirming the Saul did not count them in specie, but for more safety or expedition, computed the people by their Paschall Lambes, proportioning such a number of men to a Lambe. Others read it, He numbred them as Lambes, that is, now grown meek and quiet, (whereas at the first there were some* 1.160 animosities of the people against him: Shall Saul reign over us?) contentedly submitting themselves to his command. But I take Telaim for a true City, and the same with Telem Iosh. 15. 24. which you may finde in our description.

CHAP. XV. Objections against the Land of Moriah answered.

Philol.

I Perceive the imperfection of your description by the omitting of a memorable valley therein, namely the vale of Ba∣ca, mentioned by the Psalmist pronouncing him blessed who passing through the vale of Bacaa 1.161 maketh it a Well. You in stead of passing through, pass by this vale unmentioned.

Aleth.

I reserved my observations on this vale for this place. Some render it appellatively, The vale of weeping: meaning thereby the militant condition of a Christian in this life, incumbred with constant afflictions. If so, this vale of Baca is too big to come under my description; all the moun∣tains in the world being but part of this valley, the extent whereof is ade∣quate to the whole earth. But if you be pleased to take this vale for a proper place, I embrace the opinion of learned Ainsworth on the text, that this vale of Baca, or Mulberry trees, (for so also it signifieth) was near to Ierusalem; out of the tops of whichb 1.162 trees, God sounded the Alarum to David when he conquered the Philistines.

CHAP. XVI. Objections against the City of Jerusalem answered.

Philol.

VVHat is charged unjustly on Saint Paul and his compa∣nions, that they hada 1.163 turned the world upside down, may truly be laid to your charge, you have in your description of Ierusalem tumbled all things topsie turvy, in the position of the gates thereof; yea the foundations of the City, as presented by you, are out of course, and con∣trary to the rules of other writers.

Aleth.

Let God be true, and every man a liar. In this particular I profess my self a pure Leveller, desiring that all humane conceits (though built on most specious bottomes) may be laid flat and prostrated, if opposing the written Word. In conformity whereunto, we are bound to dissent from such Authors (otherwise honouring them for their severall deserts) to ac∣commodate the Description of the Gates and Towers of Ierusalem, accor∣ding to a threefold eminent Directory, which we finde in Nehemiah.

Philol.

Give us I pray you an account of them in order.

Aleth.

The first main Scripture direction we are to observe is, the night survey which Nehemiah took of the walls, (or rather ruines) of Ieru∣salem, described in this manner:

NEHEM. 2. 13, 14, 15.

And I went out by night by the gate of the valley, even before the Dragon Well, to the Dung port, and viewed the walls of Ierusalem, which were broken down, and the gates thereof were consumed with fire. Then went I out to the gate of the fountain and to the Kings pool, but there was no place for the beast that was under me to pass. Then went I up in the night by the brook, and viewed the wall, and turned back and entred by the gate of the valley, and so returned.

The second is the severall reparations (where the same were required) done on the Gates and walls of the City by severall persons, in a circular form, from the Sheep-gateb 1.164 surrounding the whole City till they returned to the same place where they began▪ Whose names we have carefully inscribed on those portions of buildings, upon which their cost and pains were expended.

The third, but most materiall, (because most declaratory of the me∣thod of the Gates) is the solemn Processions, which the people divided into two Quires, made round about the walls: each of them measuring a Semi-circle; both of them incompassing the whole circumference of Ierusalem, and at last joining together in the (best meeting place) the Temple of God.

First Quire, Nehem. 12. 31.

One great company went on the right hand, upon the wall towards the Dung-gate, consisting of half the Princes of Iudah: and Ezra the Scribe before them. And at the fountain-gate which is over against them, they went up by the staires of the City of David, at the going up of the wall above the house of David, even unto the water-gate eastward.

Second Quire, Nehem. 12. 38, 39.

And the other company of them that gave thanks went over against them,a 1.165 and I after them, and the half of the people upon the wall, from beyond the Tower of the furnaces even unto the broad wall. And from above the gate of Ephraim, and above the old-gate and above the fish-gate, and the tower of Hananeel, and the tower of Meah, even unto the sheep-gate; and they stood still in the* 1.166 prison-gate. So stood the two companies of them that gave thanks in the house of God.

Now I request the Reader with his eye to examine, whether the walls of Ierusalem, as designed in our draught, agree not with these directions of Scripture. To purchase the favour whereof, I pass not for the frowns of any Authors. Omne excelsum cadet, down with whatever dare oppose our embracing of the Text. This we hope for the main▪ will satisfie any indifferent Reader; otherwise if being as impossible for me in this short discourse, to meet with the severall exceptions of private fancies; as for a Geographer in the Map-generall of a Countrey, to set down the house of every particular person.

Philol.

You set Sion south of Ierusalem, clean contrary to the description of the Psalmistb 1.167, Beautifull for situation, the joy of the whole earth is mount Sion, on the Sides of the North the City of the great King.

Aleth.

The place by you alleadged is difficult, much canvassed by Comments, who fasten upon it two principall interpretations.

1 Sense. Some make this verse a description of Sion a∣lone, the latter clause by Apposition so referring unto it, that Sion it self is solely charactered to be the City on the side of the North.

2 Sense. Others make this verse the full description of all Ierusalem, consisting of two principall parts, by the figure of Asyndeton coupled together.

• 1. Sion. Beautiful for situation the ••oy of the whole earth is Mount Sion.
• 2. Properly Jerusalem. On the sides of the North the City of the great King.

That the latter is the truer interpretation we send the Reader to the vo∣luminous labours ofc 1.168 Villalpandus proving the same out of Scripture, Io∣sephus, and other Authors. Besides (though time and casualty hath made many alterations on Ierusalem, yet) what Peter in his time said of Davids sepulcher, even in our age true of mount Sion,d 1.169 it is with us unto this day, standing still full south of Ierusalem, as Travellers doe affirme, no doubt in the ancient place and posture thereof. For, although Ioseph could re∣move the Egyptians frome 1.170 one end of the borders of the land, unto the other end thereof; yet mountains are too firmly fastned to be transplanted from their naturall location.

Philol.

You doe commit what you condemn in Adrichomius, taxing f 1.171 him for fashioning the streets of Ierusalem after his own fancy; assu∣ming the same liberty to your self in conjecturall ranging them with∣out warrant from Gods word.

Aleth.

Reason dictates what we have done herein. For Gates being made for entrance, probably the streets from them stretched forth-right,

as we have de••igned them. Those Insulae, or Quadrants of buildings, are no∣thing else but the necessary product of the decussation and thwarting of such direct streets where they cross one another. It is impossible that in describing Ierusalem we should doe what Saul in another case desired of the Ziphites,a 1.172 See therefore and take notice of all the lurking places, and come yee again with the certainty; onely such generalls in likelyhood may be presu∣med, and the rest is left to every mans free conception.

Philol.

You have forgotten the Porta fictilis or Potters-gate, which b 1.173 Villalpandus solemnly sets up on the east of the City, building on a place alleadged out of the Prophet Ieremy.

Aleth.

His Porta fictilis, is rather fictitia and so brittle a gate that it is broken with perusing the text by him cited, for the proof thereof.c 1.174 Thus saith the Lord, goe and get a potters earthen bottle, and take of the ancients of the people and of the ancients of the Priests, and goe forth unto the valley of the son of Hinnom, which is by the entry of the east gate, and proclaim there the words that I shall tell thee. See here (whatever may be in the vulgar Latine) no sherd of a Potters-gate, though we confess a Pottersd 1.175 field nigh the City; but, thence it cannot be collected that there was also a gate of that name, no more then if followes, because of Smithfield, there must be Smith-gate in London.

Philol.

You affirme 1.176 that we meet with no gate at all in Sion, flatly contra∣ry to the words of David,f 1.177 The Lord loveth the gates of Sion more then all the dwellings of Icoab.

Aleth.

I say again, that because of the precipice of the place, Sion had no out-gates, but had those which led into Ierusalem which might be meant by the Psalmist. But to speake plainly, Gates of Sion are not there to be taken literally, being put for the assemblies of the people at Gods publick worship; especially, whilest the Ark was in Davids time fixed in Zion.

CHAP. XVIII. Objections against the Courts of Solomons Temple answered.

* 1.178

Philol.

IN your description of the Courts of Solomons Temple, I finde one∣ly four gates to the cardinall windes, but neither Parbar nor Asuppim Gate, though both of them eminently mentioneda 1.179 in the Bible.

Aleth.

I must confess my self utterly unsatisfied in the position of these places, whether or no they were in the first two Courts, as built by So∣lomon, or added in after ages, when the newb 1.180 or third Court was added to Solomons foundation: which latter I am most inclined to beleeve. For perusing the date of the first book of Chronicles, I finde it written long after the Iews return from the captivity of Babylon, as appears by reckoning up the grand-children ofc 1.181 Zorobabel, and therefore I suspend the describing of them till further information.

Philol.

At the entrance of the House of the Lord, youo 1.182 make horses, but omit the Chariots of the Sun, both equally mentioned inP 1.183 Scripture, and destroyed by Iosiah. Besides, you make them artificiall statues, which (no doubt) were naturall horses, sent out with riders every morning in a superstitious frolick, to give a welcome, or visit to the dawning-day, and to salute the Sun in the first arising thereof.

Aleth.

Chariots must be supposed there, though not expressed for lack of room. Sure they were no reall horses, which the [idolatrous] Kings of Israel had given to theq 1.184 Sun. For (except thereby be meant a successive breed, or race) such horses must be extremely old at this refor∣mation, after ther 1.185 eighteenth year of Iosia••, probably set up by Ahaz sixty years since. Besides, it is improbable, that living horses were kept so close to the Temple, and that noisome stables should be so near Gods house, generally set at some distance from mens dwellings. However, I had rather subscribe, then ingage in a controversie not worth the conten∣ding for.

Philol.

Yous 1.186 mention onely one Table of shew-bread, whereas David made preparation for thet 1.187 Tables thereof. And lest so plain a place of Scripture should be avoided, by the frequent figure of Enallage, Solomon is expresly said to have madeu 1.188 ten Tables and placed them in the Temple, and it is added not long after, whereon thew 1.189 shew-bread was set.

Aleth.

I am confident, there was but one principall Table for the presen∣tation of shew-bread, whereon, by Gods appointment, the twelvex 1.190 Cakes were set in two rowes, according to the number of the twelve Tribes of Israel. Now, if there were ten Tables provided for that purpose, the twelve Cakes could not be equally set upon them without a fraction. I conceive therefore the other nine, onely as side-cupboards, or Livery tables ministeriall to that principall one, as whereupon the shew-bread elect was set before the consecration thereof, and whereon the old shew-bread removed for some time, might be placed, when new was substituted in the room thereof.

Philol.

To proceed to the Altar. I approve youry 1.191 answer taken from the Celestiall fire thereupon, as satisfactory in relation to the Tabernacle, and Solomons Temple, that so many sacrifices were so suddenly consumed without any noisomeness. But, the difficulty still remains as touching the second Temple: where, by generall confession (in default of hea∣venly) the Priests were fain to make use of common, and ordinary fire.

Aleth.

Although I beleeve not in full latitude, what the Iewish Rabbins doe affirme; That the Pillar of smoak which ascended from the sacrifice, curled onely upwards in direct wreaths to heaven, without any scatter∣ing, or shedding if self abroad; yet for the main, we may be confident, it was no whit offensive to the Priests, or people thereabouts. This we impute to the providence of God, passing an Act of indemnity, that none should be impaired, either in health or wealth, by the performance of

any service according to his appointment. And, as the land of the Iews was secured from forein invasionz 1.192 during the appearing of all the males thrice a year at Ierusalem: so the same goodness of God ordered, that his people should sustain no damage or detriment, either in their purses, or per∣sons, whilest busied in his worship: the main reason that no infection did arise, no smoak, nor ill savor sented from the fat, offall, and excre∣ments of so many sacrifices offered in so short a time, and small a compass.

Philol.

You say something for the avoiding of noisomeness, but no∣thing in answer, that that common fire should so quickly devour so many sacrifices, though, I confess the offerings in the second Temple, nothing so numerous as those in Solomons.

Aleth.

We must totally ascribe this to the work of the Lord, who though not granting this second Temple the honour and use of Celestiall fire (al∣lowed to the former) yet, in approbation of his own ordinance, indu∣ed common fire with more then common activity. As, often in extre∣mities, when miracles are denied, ordinary means are blessed with extra∣ordinary efficacy in their operation.

CHAP. XIX. Objections against Zorobabels Temple rebuilt by Herod.

Philol.

I Forbear from objecting any thing against this Map of the Temple, seeing, by your confession, it is none of your own designing, but borrowed from Ludovicus Capellus. Onely let me tell you, that I have seen a draught of the same Temple, as in fashion much un∣like it, so in exactness far above it. I mean the same which Constantine L' Empereur hath set forth out of Middoth, or the Rabbinicall book of Solomons building.

Aleth.

I confess my self to give little credit to Rabbinicall relations therein, and think the worse of the writings of all Rabbins, for their own thinking so well thereof, comparing them with, yea preferring them be∣fore Scripture it self. Sucha 1.193 passages (which for me shall goe unenglished) being found frequent therein.b 1.194 In illis qui operam dant lectioni Biblicae, virtus aliqua est, aut potiùs nulla; at qui traditioni, virtus est, propter quam accipitur praemi∣um. Egredientic 1.195 è studio Talmudico ad studium Biblicum, non erit pax.d 1.196 Scito verba Scribarum amabiliora esse verbis Prophetarum. Justly therefore did Christ com∣plain of thē,e 1.197 Making the word of God of none effect through your traditiōs which ye have delivered. And, although I am not of the mind off 1.198 Villalpandus, who ad∣viseth such as would read the Rabbins without danger, first to fense them∣selves with the signe of the Cross, and then whilest reading their books, often to repeat our Saviours word, You are of your father theg 1.199 Devill; yet

I conceive Epicharmus his counsell very usefull herein, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Re∣member thou not to beleeve, their books (I mean in many passages therein) being the Leaven of the Scribes and Pharisees, whereof Christ forewarneth us to beware.

Philol.

Grant them unsound in points of faith, they may be true in mat∣ters of fact. And though we must zealously reject their doctrinall positi∣ons, we may safely embrace their historicall relations; especially con∣cerning the contrivance of the second Temple extant in their age.

Aleth.

As touching this second Temple, the works of the Rabbins now extant can give us no true intelligence thereof. The Iews once said to our Saviourh 1.200, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? taxing him for pretending to more antiquity, then his age could extend unto. Though this was but a cavill at Christ, the same may justly be charged on the Rabbins, that the oldest of them extant at this day, (all of them wri∣ting since Ann. Dom. 100. in Trajans time) are too late and modern to give us any infallible information of the second Temple, as which their eyes did never behold. Whilest Iosephus (out of whose instructions Capellus his description was lately taken) was an eye-witness thereof.

Philol.

Allow their personall experience too short to reach the Temple, their reports proceed on ancient records, declaring, as what was done in their days, so in the old time before them.

Aleth.

So many and prodigious are thei 1.201 monstrosities by them deli∣vered, that it is hard to discern their Lampreys from their Snakes; and the very truths among them are rendered suspicious, because mixed with so many falshoods: Who, because they received not the truth [Christ him∣self] for this cause God hath sent them strongk 1.202 delusions that they should beleeve a lye.

Philol.

Grant the Rabbins generally guilty hereof, yet Rabbi Iudah may be credited, living about Trajans time, not much above thirty years after the destruction of the Temple. One commonly styled the Prince, and the Holy, conceived by his Countreymen next to Moses in knowledge and piety. Wherefore that new description of the Temple I so lately commended, deserves beleefe, coming from the pen of this Rabbi Iudah, as far exceeding other Rabbins, as the Patriarch Iudah excelled other Tribes.

Aleth.

Your so much admired Rabbi Iudah was swolne with Pharisai∣call hypocrisie, as high as any other. Witness his dying words, breathing out his soul with an expression to this effect,I 1.203 Lord of the world, it is mani∣fest and known unto thee, that I have laboured in thy law with my ten fingers, and have not received any gain, no not with so much as the least finger. Justly therefore may we be jealous of this water coming from such a fountain.

Philol.

Well, to wave the description of this Rabbin, and to give you onely an occasion to enlarge your self, I desire farther information both in this draught of Capellus, and also in your own written description of Zorobabel-Herods Temple. For the first, I wonder you have omitted the Bridge from mount Olivet to the Temple, mentioned in Middoth.

Aleth.

We finde indeed such a Bridge (others call it a Caus-way) in Mid∣doth built on purpose from mount Olivet to the mountain of the house,* 1.204 whereon the Temple was built. But oh! how long must that Bridge be? Above a mile in the direct extent thereof. How many, but especially how high must the arches therein be, to stride over so vast a concavity? What need of so expensive a structure, seeing an ordinary plank would serve for a bridge over Kedron? which in sommer time was all bridge it selfe. How came Iosephus (one neither blinde to see, nor dumb to tell of beautifull buildings for the honour of his nation) to take no notice hereof? In∣deed the high Priests amongst the Romans, anciently had an inspection over the making and mending of bridges, thence called Pontifices: but he deserved to be Pontifex Maximus amongst the Iews, who erected this sum∣ptuous bridge, on which may beliefe dare not walk with confidence, for fear of falling, and therefore I conclude it well omitted by Capellus.

Philol.

I am not satisfied in the reasons you give why Solomons Porch was so called.

Aleth.

Concerning the name whereof,* 1.205 let me adde this (to what formerly we havew 1.206 written on this subject) that some conceive it so called, not because Solomon ever built it, but because in after ages erected by Herod, it did approximate, or come the nearest in state and magnifi∣cence to that of Solomons first founding. Thus Manna is termedx 1.207 Angels food, not because they ever eat thereof, but had they any intention to feed thereon, better dainties could not be desired by them, or afforded to them: as this Solomons porch (at leastwise in the apprehension of the builders thereof, well conceited of their own workmanship) was so called, be∣cause as brave, and beautifull, as if Solomon himself with all his wealth, and glory, had been the erectour thereof?

Philol.

I conceive some carnall reason for the buyers and sellers of Sheep and Oxen in the Temple, (driven out by our Saviour) because men, to save the tedious driving of them up in kinde, brought flocks and heards up in their purses to Ierusalem, (money wherewith there they bought them) but what use was there of money-changers in the Temple?

Aleth.

* 1.208 Besides their changing of strangers gold into silver, for less pay∣ments at their coming hither; silver into gold for the lighter portage, at their departure hence; under favour I conceive, they fitted people coming hither with Shekels, for their religious service. True it is, the Roman coins were onely currant in common and civill paiments (as appears by Christs question and the Iews answer, Whose image and superscription is this? and they said, Cesars) but probably Shekels were used in sacred paiments, the Romans permitting the Iews the free enjoyment of their Religion, in things not destructive to their civill government. Now, seeing the Iews were enjoined by Gods Law, to tender unto him Shekels of the Sanctuary, not onely in valuation, but in Specie (especially in the case ofy 1.209 vowes, paying moe or few according to the age, or sex of the person) it is likely

that the money-changers here furnished the aforesaid Votaries with Shekels, and other pieces thereof, in exchange for their Roman moneys. But here∣in such Brokers so improved themselves on the present necessities of some, and ignorance of others, that they much defrauded people with their contracts, therefore termed by our Saviour az 1.210 Den of theeves.

Philol.

Why was the outward Court in the Temple called the Court of women?

Aleth.

* 1.211 Not, that they alone were permitted to be there; but because they were not suffered, unless on speciall occasions, to goe any farther. Thus * 1.212 Iosephus calls it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the proper place for wo∣men to worship in; but elsewhere expounds himself,† 1.213 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, farther then this the Temple was unaccessible to women; so that this Court was proper for, but not peculiar unto the weaker sexe for their staying therein.

Philol.

Seeing that Court was signally so called from Women, doe you conceive as many women as men repaired to Gods publick service in Ierusalem?

Aleth.

O no! All males were enjoined to appeara 1.214 thrice a year (and that not empty handed) before the Lord in the Temple; whilest the same was not required of women. Whose exemption proceeded partly from the infirmity of their sexe, not able to endure so long a journey; partly to protect their chastity in such a concourse of people; and part∣ly that they might attend their young Children, and family-affaires. For though God gave themb 1.215 assurance, that during their husbands absence, no enemy should invade the land; yet their tender* 1.216 children were not exempted from inconveniencies which might arise if their mothers were away from them.

Philol.

Me thinkes the place in the Temple, where the Sacrifices were slain and fleaed, seems too small for such a purpose, if all the Paschall Lambes (computed by Iosephus to be thousands) were as the Rabbins will have it) all killed by the Priests in the Temple, and that betwixt the two Evenings, (i. e. between three and six a clock in the afternoon) no longer time being allotted thereunto? I say, if so, a far greater square then what is presented in your Map was requisite for that service.

Aleth.

I am not bound to finde room for all their Lambes. Sufficeth it that I have exactly followed my pattern in the dimensions of the place. But to the point, may I be so bold as to whisper my opinion in your eare; I conceive that, after the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (or Priests appointed to view the blemishes of Lambes)* 1.217 had at more leasure approved those Lambes legally perfect, a private person might sacrifice them in his own house; and then the less room was required in the Temple for such performances. And here I alledge the authority of Philo,* 1.218 affirming that (as undoubtedly at the first institution of the Passeover and before the erection of the Tabernacle) every one was a Priest in his own family,

even in his days, and sufficiently qualified for the offering of such sacrifices.

Philol.

You make staires ascending to the Altar, flatly against Gods command;c 1.219 Neither shalt thou goe up with steps unto my Altar; and the rea∣son is rendered, that thy nakedness be not discovered thereon.

Aleth.

To salve the matter, (and to reconcile our, with the Rabbins, description) I conceive under the favour of Capellus, that the going up to the Altar was not divided into steps (as he presenteth it) but that it heightened it self by insensible degrees, being (though a Rise of many Cubites) an even ascent (as I may term it) equally elevated, so that the Priests, not striding, but pacing up thereon, were not necessitated to any d 1.220 divarication of their feet, which might occasion the discovery of any uncomeliness.

Philol.

You make the Holy immediately continued to the Holy of Holies, whereas there was a Cubit distance betwixt them, and that covered with two vailes, which interstitium was called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by the Rabbins.

Aleth.

I have read as much in their writings, and that they were un∣resolved whether to refer this space to the Holy or Holy of Holies; (like the condition of dying men in transitu, dubious whether to be accounted in this or another world) and thence they say it was called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, i. e. e 1.221 Perturbation or disturbance, because the Priests were much disquieted thereat to which part of the Temple to relate it. But what ••aith the Psalmist? manf 1.222 disquieteth himself in vain, as here the Rabbins do, causelesly troubling themselves about that which appears not in Scripture. This we know, the Temple (besides the Porch) had two fair rooms, the Holy and Holiest; but as for this partition-Closet betwixt them, no foundation there∣of in Gods word.

Philol.

You confidently deny that the Ark was in the second Temple, whereas, upon inspection of the Triumphant Marble of the Vespasians in Rome, the same appeareth pourtraicted thereupon.

Aleth.

Their eyes are much mistaken which finde the Ark on that Mon••ment, though something Ark-like, (but in very deed nothing else but the Table of shew-bread) be presented therein: as for further satisfacti∣on we have causedg 1.223 here to be exemplified.

Philol.

You avouch an utter abolition of all Temple-Utensils, and no surviving Reliques thereof at this day. I conceive the contrary may be made good out of History and daily experience.

Aleth.

I confess the fingers of superstition have itched to be tampering with them. But finding the same not to fadge, at last she was fain Hands-off to desist from such improbable designes. Oneh 1.224 tells us of a chea∣ter in France which many hundred years agoe pretended to Moses his wonder-working Rod (though that of Aaron, not Moses, was preserved in the Tabernacle) and essayed to work miracles therewith, till at last he was beaten with his own Rod, detected and punished for an impostor. I con∣fess

also thati 1.225 Comestor, and out of himk 1.226 Ribera in altari Lateranensi infra quod dicitur esse Arca, In the Lateran Altar, say they [in Rome] beneath [within] which IT IS SAID the Ark is; but both of them speak so uncertainly, and put it on publick fame, that they teach us to deny the Truth thereof.

Philol.

You are very briefe in the destruction of the City and Temple by the Romans, whereas so memorable a subject deserved a fuller de∣scription.

Aleth.

It is largely related by Iosephus to whom the Reader is referred; onely I will adde a word of the remarkable time thereof. God graci∣ously promised his people, Neither shalll 1.227 any man desire thy land, when thou shalt goe up to appear before the Lord thy God thrice a year. Obedience is better then an Army to secure ones estate. As the Meniall-servants of great Persons are protected in some cases, from Arrests, whilest they waite on their Masters in publick imployment; so Gods people were priviledged from damage during their attendance on him thrice a year in his Temple; no invasion being found to befall them on that occasion clean through the Scripture. But at last, in token that they, by their wic∣kedness, had out-lawed themselves of his protection, and he withdrawn his defending of them, the Romans besieged them in Ierusalem, coming up thither on the solemn feast of the† 1.228 Passeover; and soon after both Temple and City was destroyed, by Vespasian and Titus his son, seventy two years after our Saviours birth. Not one stone of the Temple left upon ano∣ther; though three towers of the City (Ma••iamne, Phaselus, and Hippicus) were left standing; not out of pity, but pride; their devouring sword leaving this mannerly bit on purpose, that posterity might tast how strong the place was, to the greater credit of the conquerours.

Philol.

To adde to the solemnity of the State, Titus with his Father Vespasian made a solemn Triumph in Rome, wherein the golden Table and Candlestick, with othern 1.229 sacred Utensils of the Temple, formerly reve∣renced, now derided, made once for Gods service, now served to adorn the Trophees of Pagans. We read what befello 1.230 Belshazzar when he quaffed in the vessels of the Temple. Some perchance might here expect that God, to punish the profana••ion of these holy instrument••, should then have shewed some signall judgment on the profaners. But the case was altered, because the date of Ceremonies was then expired, the use of Types ended, Christ the Truth being come: and the Moon may set ob∣scurely without any mans taking notice of her, when the Sun is risen.

Aleth.

* 1.231 The last and greatest Trophee then carried in triumph was the p 1.232 LAW OF THE IEWS: probably that very numericall book, the Authenti••k or Originall of the Law, which by Gods command was constantly to be kept in the* 1.233 Temple. And this perchance was permitted by divine providence, not without a peculiar mystery therein, to shew, that the Law, which formerly bound men over to damnation, was now bound it self in captivity, outed of its former dominion, deposed

from its condemning power, having now the Gospell of Grace succeeding in the place thereof. Lastly, orders were issued out to the Governour of Syria to set the whole land of Iudea to sale; which was done accordingly. Time was, when by the Leviticall Law, Iewish land though ••old, yet at the year of Iubile was to revert to the ancient* 1.234 owners; but now the King of heaven granted such a license of Alienation, that it was fully and finally passed away from its ancient possessors.

Philol.

* 1.235 To perpetuate th•• memory of this Roman conquest, besides many other monuments, Coins were stamped both in gold andr 1.236 silver, with the Image of Vespasian and Titus, on the one side, and on the reverse a woman placed in a pensive posture under a Palme-tree, which tree was the Hieroglyphick of Iudea, onely differing herein, that the Palme-tree the more depressed, the more it flourisheth, whereas Iudea sunke under the weight of her woes, and never again outgrew her miseries. And lest men should miss the fancy of the Impress, they are guided thereunto by the Motto subscribed, Iudaea capta, Iudea taken.

Aleth.

* 1.237 What ••an on sight hereof would not call to minde the com∣plaint of the Prophet,s 1.238 How doth the City sit solitary that was full of people? how is she become as a widow? she that was great among the nations, and Princess among the Provinces, how is she become tributary? Great, no doubt, was the grief of the Iews hereat. But few drops seasonably showred, would preserve the green blade from withering, when much rain cannot revive the roots once withered. Eyes dry for their sins, are vainly wet after their sufferings: and a drought in the Spring is not to be repaired by a deluge in the Autumn.

CHAP. XX. Objections, concerning the Description of Mount Libanus, answered.

Philol.

YOu make Libanus to be the north-ridge of these hills, and Anti-Libanus to be the south part thereof, clean contrary unto lear∣ned a 1.239 Munster in his description of it.

Aleth.

Munster is singular therein, unseconded by any other Authors. However, the controversie is not important as touching Scripture, wherein this distinction appears not at all, both the north and south chains of those mountains being promiscuously called Libanus in Holy Writ. Some humane Authors lay this distinction in point of east and west, so great is the difference among them. If I may freely profess my opinion herein, I conceive that the inhabitants of this mountain, termed the place of their own habitation, wheresoever they dwelt, Libanus, and named the mountains of their overthwart neigh••bours Anti-Libanus: as commonly men account their own Religion onely to be Christianity,

and all such opinions as are opposite to their own, Antichristian

Phil••l.

In your Map generall of old Canaan, the Island of Arvad (or Aradus) is not above forty miles from Zidon, which in this Map of mount Libanus are fourscore miles asunder. Indeed I have read of a floating Isle in Scotland, moving from place to place with the winde and waves. But is this Isle of Aradus fixed to no firmer foundations, so that it hath swom forty miles more northward in this, then in your former draught thereof?

Aleth.

May you be pleased to remember, that in our instructionsb 1.240 pre∣mised to the Reader, we gave notice that places standing on the Um-stroke▪ or utmost line of any Map, denote not their accurate position, but situ∣ation thereabouts, to clear the continuation of the Countrey. Such the location of Arvad in our former Map, which in this of mount Libanus is placed according to the true distance thereof.

Philol.

You make the River Aban•• (in heathen Authors Chrysorrho••s) to sink into the ground, without communicating it self to the sea. This is out of the common road of nature, that this River should be free from paying tribute to the Ocean, to which all smaller waters are in∣debted. Yea andc 1.241 Adrichomius (no doubt on good authority) maketh it, when passing from Dam••scus, to run through a plain called Arch abod, and so into the Syrian, or Medite••ranean-sea.

Aleth.

His error therein is confuted, both by ancient, and modern writers. Strabo speaking thereof, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Which Chrysorrho••s beginning from the City, and Countrey of Damascus, in a manner is wholly spent in drains thence derived; for it watereth much ground, and that very deep. Some thing more may be collected from Ptolemies ex∣pression, not terming the fall of Chrysorrhoas 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (his ordinary word) the Out-lets, or Ejections thereof into the sea, but onely 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the End, or determination thereof. Where, by the degrees by him assigned, Be••tius in his Maps presenteth this River swallowed up wholly in the sands: and the same is confessed by Bellonius an eye-witness thereof, and other modernd 1.242 Geographers, that it never cometh unto any sea.

Philol.

You have omitted the Vale of Salt in your Map (near Aram•• Zo∣ba••) neither mentioning in your description that most memorable de∣feat, which David gave the Syrians therein. Your modern Merchants of Aleppo will inform you thereof, who have been on the very place where the battell was fought, as tradition reporteth.

Aleth.

I have heard so much from the mouths of my judicious e 1.243 friends, which have lived in those parts: and have formerly read the same in effect; How, within halfe a days-journeyf 1.244 of Aleppo, there is a very great plain, without grass growing on it, the sand whereof is naturally good salt, and after rain being dried again with the Sun, the people gather it. However, I cannot be perswaded, that this Salt Vale was the place, whereon David gave his

enemies that notable overthrow, as on the perusall of the following Scriptures will appear.

2 Sam. 8. 13

And David gat him a name when he returned from smiting the Syrians in the valley of Salt being eighteen thousand men. And he put garrisons in Edom, throughout all Edom put he gar∣risons.

1 Chr. 18. 12.

Moreover Abishai the sonne of Zerviah slew of the Edomites in the valley of Salt, eighteen thousand.

Inscription of Psal. 60.

To the chief Musician upon Sushan-Eduth; Michtam of Da∣vid, to teach. When he strove with Aram Maharaim, and with Aram Zobah, when Ioab returned and smote of Edom in the valley of Salt, twelve thousand.

Here under favour, I conceive, these severall Scriptures intend one, and the same victory, because fought in the same place, the Valley of Salt, whilest the seeming contradictions, in the names of the Conquerors, dif∣ferent numbers, and nations of the persons conquered, are easiely reconciled:

• 1. Ioab (as Generall) might give the Command, and Abishai (Lieutenant Generall) do the execution, whilest David (as Soveraign) received the honour of the Action.
• 2. Twelve thousand might be slain on the place, and six more kild in the pursuit, so making up eighteen thousand in the totall number.
• 3. This slaughter fell on the Edomites, who are called Syrians, not by their Countrey (though Syria taken in a large sense is compre∣hensive of many nations) but cause, and confederacy, as ingaging themselves (to their cost) auxiliaries in the same quarrell of the Syrians against King David.

This battell thus stated (with most probability in my opinion) it seems fought rather in the land of Edom, where there is another Valley of Salt emi∣nent ing 1.245 Scripture, and not near Aleppo, or Aram Zobah. However, because Tradition is a Tyrant on the contrary, I dare resolve nothing positively, but suspend my own, and attend the judgments of others herein.

Philol.

You make Marra the next modern stage south of Aleppo: where∣as there be many moe miles, and intermediate lodging-places (namely Cane-Toman, andh 1.246 Saracoop) betwixt them.

Aleth.

I confess no less, but am sorry your memory is so short, that I must so often incultate the same rule unto you: That places situate on the Um-stroke (such the location of Aleppo in our Map) are not in their exact position, whilest we onely make a long arme to reach them con∣fusedly into our description, though otherwise they be at greater distance, then the scale of miles will admit.

Philol.

I wonder you make the Mediterranean from Tripoli to Antioch, to run with such a crooked flexure, in form of an Hook, which certainly will not catch the beleefe of any judicious beholder thereof. The rather because no Geographers take cognizance of it, and such a bending is disavowed by all modern Maps.

Aleth.

Consult Ptolemies Maps (as drawn by learned Bertius) and they present the fashion thereof accordingly: though such an Elbow ap∣pears

not in the late Cardes of this Countrey. No news now adays for Sea to gain, Land to lose, or (reciprocally) both to alter their ancient, and accept new forms: seeing our Cornish-men will tell us, that a good piece of their horn is blunted, and broken off by the sea: whose land formerly stretched out more westward, and wasi 1.247 called (as they say) Lioness, before the waters devoured both the paws, and whole body thereof.

CHAP. XXI. Objections answered against the eastern confines of Palestine.

Philol.

YOu have left the eastern part of this Map altogether empty, which you ought to have furnished with moe towns, and Cities therein.

Aleth.

Whose image and superscription doth this Map bear? Is it not of Arabia the desert, a wild barren Countrey? To make a desert full, is as ab∣surd, as to paint a Black-more faire. Besides, whence should the Geogra∣pher fetch the names of these Cities, except from his own groundless fancy? And then, as King Edgar is said to have founded in England as many Monasteries as there be weeks in the year, a Map-maker might build moe Cities then there be hours therein, whilest the Reader must have as much simplicity, as the Author dishonesty, that gives credit there∣unto.

Philol.

You have false pointed (to use your owna 1.248 expression) the Iewish peregrinations, seeing those four intermediate stages (Comma's, as you term them) be Ar, Mattanah, Nahaliel, and Bamoth, being named after the stream of Arnon, seem on the other side of the River, and there∣fore rather to be placed in the Tribe of Reuben.

Aleth.

I have consulted the text, and best Comments upon it, and cannot yet be convinced, but that the same is rightly situate. Arnon I conceive divided into many streams, therefore plurally termed the brooks ofb 1.249 Arnon, probably tributary brooks running into that main River: and though the places aforesaid lay north of these rivolets, they were south of the main Arnon, and in the land of Moab. However, because of their so ambiguous posture, being more willing to learn then to teach, I am ready to alter them on any better information.

Philol.

You make Iobs sons tent in your Map blown down on his children therein, whereasc 1.250 Scripture calleth it expresly an house, and other∣wise it is unlikely they should be slain, with such slight curtains falling upon them.

Aleth.

I will not plead that a tent is also termed an house in Scripture d 1.251 phrase, that tent-dwelling was most fashionable in the eastern Coun∣tries,

especially in that ancient age, that statory, or long standing tents were quilted with timber, for their stronger support; that Iob•• children might be (though not killed with weight) stifled with the closeness of the very linnen in the tent, when Satan with such violence in a vengeance, drave it in upon them; but fairly charge it on the account of the Graver following his own fancy therein.

Philol.

You have made the Red-sea too near to the Dead-sea, presenting not above sixty miles distance betwixt them, when there is much more in all authentick descriptions of them. See now what covetousness doeth, it makes men guilty of much falshood, as here your over-gree∣diness to recover Ezion Gaber within this Map, hath tempted you to trespass on due proportion.

Aleth.

I confess the main channell of the Red-sea runs many miles more south-west; but this Bay called Sinus Elaniticu••; from 〈◊〉〈◊〉 (E••ath in Scripture, a fair City built bye 1.252 Uzziah, and restored to I••••••ah,f 1.253 hard by Ezion Gaber) buncheth out more to the north, and in M^r. Mores Maps, and others of good credit, is advanced as near to the Dead-sea, as in this our description. Besides, I have good reason to conceive, that this Reach of the Red-sea, anciently stretched more north-ward, then now adays; even to the City of Elana, or Elath, whence it takes its name; because in Ptolemies Map, Elana is set in the land, some miles distance from the Sea; whither, no doubt, it reached formerly, and made an haven for Ezion Gaber thereabouts.

Philol.

But, how can Ezion Gaber stand on the Red-sea, when we read of Huram King of Tyre (an haven sufficiently known to be seated on the Mediterranean) that he sentg 1.254 ships to Solomon to Ezion Gaber? Surely, they sailed not round about Africa, much less can you conceive them to goe over land, (ships having fins, and not feet) and a shole of fish may with as much probability be driven over the Continent.

Aleth.

Here Sir, I will not tell you of the Prince of Orange his constant∣ly carrying boats to make bridges of (though of no great burden) in his wagons: much less will I instance in those seventy lesser ships, and Galliots, brought by Zoganes Bassa Anno 1453. up ah 1.255 great hill, and so by dry land with all their sails abroad▪ out of the Bosphorus, the space of eight miles, into the haven of Constantinople, by an ingenious device, and a great strength of men to manage it, whereby the said City was soon after unexpectedly taken by the Turke. An invention formerly found out, and practised by the Venetians at the lake of Bennacus. But, waving these things, take notice, I pray, of two memorable passages concerning the matter in hand.

1 King. 9. 26.

And King Solomon made a navy of Ships in Ezion Gaber.

2 Chron. 8. 18.

And Huram sent him [to Ezion Gaber] by the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of his servants, Ships, and servants that had know∣ledge of the sea.

The result of both is this, Solomons ships were built in the place at Ezion

Gaber, where all their lumber, and ma••sie timber was provided, at the Dock wherein they were made: whilest their tackling, and other essenti∣all implements thereof (easily portable when taken in pieces) might be sent from Tyre by land-carriages. Such far carting being part of the bur∣dens Solomon imposed on the people, whereof they afterwards so grie∣vously i 1.256 complained: or else by Hurams sending ships, by a Metonymie of the cause understand ship-rights, such as found materials there, and brought art and industry (virtually with the former a whole navy) thither with them.

Philol.

Seeing Edom bounded north-ward on the Dead, south-ward on the Redsea (whereon stood Ezion Gaber in the land of* 1.257 Edom) how can the children of Israel be conceived (when denyed passage through it) tol 1.258 compass the land of Edom without coming into any part thereof, ex∣cept they went into the water?

Aleth.

Understand it, they went not the nearest way to Canaan through the heart, and fruitfull middle of Edom, but surrounded the same, going through the borders thereof (leaving the Red-sea on the right hand) where their passage was no whit prejudiciall to the Edomites, as being through a base Countrey secured against the long stay of any passengers therein, by its own barrenness. Besides,m 1.259 some conceive the land of Edom extended not anciently so far as the Red sea, so that in Moses his time Ezion Gaber belonged not thereunto, though in the days of Solomon ac∣counted parcell thereof.

CHAP. XXII. Objections against the Wilderness of Paran answered.

Philol.

IN your Map of Simeon and Iudah, you make that the River of Egypt, which runs nigh Rinocolura into the Mediterranean sea. And here you call both that brook that runs into the Syrbon Lake, as also the easternmost stream of Nilus by the name of the River of Egypt. How comes this triplication? Where the Scripture presents but one, you multiply three Rivers of Egypt.

Aleth.

You put me in minde of a passage Bishop Latimer confesseth of himself, whilest as yet a young Priest, and zealous Papist. He, being en∣joined by the Rubrick to mingle water with the wine in the Ch••lice at Mass, was soa 1.260 scrupulous to doe it effectually, that he powred in water so much, and so often, that he almost diluted all into water. Such is the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of my caution herein, who have Egypt-rivered this Map to pur∣pose, willing to please all without displeasing of the truth. You know who saith,b 1.261 If it be possible, as much as in you lyeth have peace with all men, as herein I have endevoured. For,

• 1 The Rivolet south of Simeon, by generall consent
• 2 That running into the Syrbon-lake, by M^r. More
• 3 The easternmost stream of Nile, by Bochartus
• is made the Ri∣ver of Egypt.

Thus each opinion having learned men to patronize it, we equally ten∣der them all to the Readers discretion, to reject, or accept which of them he shall conclude most probable.

Philol.

You make Sinai (where the Law was given) a different, and distinct mountain from mount Horeb. Whereas in Scripture it plainly appears, that Horeb was the same with Sinai, two names for one and the same mount. For, that the Law was given in Sinai, all agree, and the same is attributed to Horeb also. The Lord our God made a covenant with us inc 1.262 Horeb.—The Lord talked with you face to face in the mount, out of the midst the fire.

Aleth.

Somed 1.263 conceive this mountain (as Moses is erroneously fanci∣ed with hornes) to rise up Parnassus-like, with a double top; whereof the one is called Horeb, the other Sinai. Or else the former, like the Alpes, is a genericall name to many, whilest Sinai, like mount Senis amongst the Alpes, is more eminent and conspicuous then the rest, for the height thereof.

Philol.

Seeing the Spies were sent froma 1.264 Kadesh-Barnea to discover the Land, a City afterwards assigned tob 1.265 Iudah, how come you to make the Israelites to incamp so many miles south of the same place?

Aleth.

None can be so wild as to conceive that the Israelites during their journeying in the wilderness, ever came within the walls of any City, but always pitched in the open desert. This premised, when they are said to bec 1.266 in Kadesh-Barnea, we understand thereby a Countrey, not City, so named, which began southwardly about Rithmah (the fifteenth station of the Israelities, whence they sent their spies) and extended north∣wardly to Kadesh-Barnea properly so called, (probably a City) certainly a limitary place belonging afterwards to the Tribe of Iudah.

Philol.

You term their provocation of God in this placed 1.267 as yet the last and greatest temptation, which seems to me not of so hainous a nature.

Aleth.

So many and great were their Rebellions, it is hard to define which was their highest offence. Their carriage for forty years is styled by God ae 1.268 day of temptation, whose transgressions were so frequent and came so fast, that they all compleated but one intire, constant, and con∣tinued temptation. But to the point, that this their despising of thef 1.269 pleasant land was a paramount impietie, appears not onely by the exclusion of that whole generation from entering the same, but by the confession of modern Iews: Manasseh Ben Israel (the Hebrew Divine at this day in Amsterdam) observes the ninth day of the moneth Ab, whereon saith he g 1.270 Exploratores flebant sinecau••a, The spies sent to discover the land [and all the congregation occasioned by their false reports]h 1.271 wept without cause, hath ever since been unfortunate to their nation, their first, and second Temple

being burnt on the same day, and many dysasters have since befallen them thereon. Thus the Iews travell far off in their inquiries, fetching the cause of their misfortunes from their forefathers in the wilderness more then three thousand years agoe, which with more ease might take up their lodging nearer hand, and finde the same in their crucifying of Christ, as their highest sin, and the cause of their deepest suffering.

Philol.

Think you that Rithmah (the fifteenth stage of the Israelites) was the particular place, whither the spies returned bringing the report of Canaan?

Aleth.

Though many conceive so, under favour I take it more pro∣bable, that the next mansion, Rimmon-parez by name, was the proper scene of that action. For, it signifieth in Hebrew the Division of Pomegra∣nates, so called (as I conceive) not from any growing there (too bar∣ren a place for such beautifull fruit) but brought thither by the Spies (i 1.272 Pomegranates being specified amongst the fruits of the land) which here were divided, and shared among the people of Israel, to show them a sample of the fruitfullness of Canaan.

Philol.

What a blank and vacuity have you left betwixt Ezion-Gaber the thirty second, and Kadesh-Zin the thirty third station of the Israelites (sixty miles at least) without any stage interposed? It is not probable that they travelled so far, without resting themselves betwixt them.

Aleth.

Surely they had intermediate Mansions where they took their nightly repose, though not named by Moses, because not making any con∣siderable abode therein. I conceive, that after their departure from Ezion-Gaber, God quickned the Israelites (who truanted before in their slow, and snail-like proceedings) making them mend their pace, probably tra∣velling every day will they came to Kadesh, which their young men might the better endure, the old generation being almost worn out.

Philol.

How comes Aaron to be buried in mountk 1.273 Hor, whom else∣where the Scripture affirmeth to be interred inl 1.274 Mosera?

Aleth.

It is no news to have severall names for the same place. The forest of Black-more, and the forest ofm 1.275 White-Hart (though black and white be contrary colours) signifie the self same tract of ground in Dorset-shire. Hor wasn 1.276 the east part, and Mosera the west part of this mountain. This Mosera had formerly been theo 1.277 twenty seventh Mansion of the Israelites in their passage to Ezion-Gaber, near which afterwards they made their thirty fourth station (when Aaron was buried there) which sufficiently argues the crookedness of their journying, crossing those parts again where they had been before.

Philol.

I commend your cunning that hath slipt over in silence, four of the hardest names contained all in one verse Deut. 1. 1. These be the words which Moses spake unto all Israel, on this side Iordan in the wilderness, in the plain over against the Red-sea, between Paran, and Tophel, and Luban, and Hazer••th, and Dizahab, Direct us to the position of these places.

Aleth.

Some* 1.278 conceive thep 1.279 plains of Moab (wherein Moses wrote the

book of Deuteronomy) described thereby with the eminent bounds (though at some distance) round about it, in manner following.

[illustration]

Others refuse this interpretati∣on, as an obscure, and far fetch'd bounding of those plains, preferring our English translati∣on (reading it Red-sea, in stead of Zuph, or Sedgie-land) and so making these severall places the signall stages of the children of Israel in their passage out of Egypt. Whereof the Red-sea, and Paran are sufficiently known, Laban the same with Libna•• theirq 1.280 seventeenth station;r 1.281 Hazeroth the place where Miriam was punished with leprosie; Dizahab, which the Greek renders golden mines, and the Chaldee refers to the place where the goldens 1.282 Calfe was made, and stamped to powder, whilest Tophel (not mentioned again in Scripture) is conceived some station in Paran. Thus Deuteronomy is a repetition of the law, and of the memorable actions which occurred at these severall places.

Philol.

I object nothing against the draught of the Tabernacle, because the authority of Arias Montanus (whence you confess it taken) will pass it without exception. But I question the exactness of severall places in your Map of Egypt.

Aleth.

You minde me of a Gentlemans finding a Picture in the shop of a Country-Painter, whom he mistook for the maker thereof, and there∣upon fell a finding many faults therein. But being informed that the same was drawn by one of the rarest Masters in Italy, he instantly turned his cavilling at, into commending thereof. Such a convent your judg∣ment will quickly be when I shall tell you that the Map of Egypt is of Ortelius his making, save onely that the southern part thereof (uselesse for our history) is cut off, and such places onely inserted herein as appears in Scripture. The same I plead for the Habits, and Idols of the Iews; the former taken all out of Scripture, the latter out of such Authors as are se∣verally cited in our description. Onely I could wish, that in the Picture of Moloch out of Benjamins Itinerarie the three statues had been presented ••it∣ting according to ourt 1.283 directions. And by the Altar to the unknown God we mean not that erected in Athens (to a Grecian, no Iewish Deity) but onely we intend the same for a reserve for those many Iewish Idols, whose names, and severall worships are unknown unto us. But, it is time to break off, lest one grand objection be made against all our Objections and Answers, that they swell the volume into tediousness.

Notes

• a 1.1

  Josh. 3. 16.
• b 1.2

  In Plinianis exercit. in Ca•••• Iul•••• Solini Po∣lyhist. p. 577.
• c 1.3

  Numb. 25. 1.
• d 1.4

  In Theat. Ter. sanc. in R••uben.
• c 1.5

  Gen. 26. 18.
• f 1.6

  See M. Mores Map.
• g 1.7

  N••m. 21. 30.
• h 1.8

  Cant. 7. 4.
• i 1.9

  Cant. 3. 2.
• k 1.10

  Josh. 21. 36.
• b 1.11

  Josh. 21. 39.
• b 1.12

  Josh. 13. 25.
• d 1.13

  History of the World ••. part 2. book 10. chap. •• 5.
• c 1.14

  2 Sam. 24. 5.
• f 1.15

  Gen. 33. 17.
• g 1.16

  Josh. 13. 27.
• * 1.17

  I request this mine answer may be applyed to those many differences be∣twixt my for∣mer Map, and this present de∣scription.
• h 1.18

  1 Sam. 1••. 11.
• i 1.19

  1 Mac. 5. 26.
• k 1.20

  Vid. T••••m i•• locum praed.
• l 1.21

  1 Mac. 5. 25. 27.
• a 1.22

  Josh. 13. ••0.
• b 1.23

  Mat. 11. 21.
• c 1.24

  Hie••on, in locis Hebr. lit. C. & Br••chardus iti∣n••re 3. &. 5.
• d 1.25

  1 King. 17. 8.
• a 1.26

  Isa. 9. 1.
• b 1.27

  Mat. 4. 15.
• c 1.28

  On mat. 4. 15. instancing on J••r. 22. 20.
• d 1.29

  Lib. 1. ca. 11. parag 6.
• e 1.30

  Greg. Gr••g. Lex. Sa••c••num. 209.
• f 1.31

  Josh. 3. 15.
• g 1.32

  In part set down by Sal∣••••sius in his notes on Soli∣nus cap. 35.
• h 1.33

  Meaning Li∣banus.
• i 1.34

  Book. 1. ca.••.
• k 1.35

  Mark. 8. 27.
• l 1.36

  In descrip. Ter. sanc. pag. 237.
• m 1.37

  1 Kin. 12. 28.
• n 1.38

  1 Kin. 15. 20.
• o 1.39

  1 Kin. 10. 29.
• p 1.40

  2 Chr. 13. 19.
• q 1.41

  Description of Naph. §. 1.
• r 1.42

  Descrip. of Dan. §. 9.
• s 1.43

  Jo••. 3. 4.
• t 1.44

  See our Map of Dan, and de∣scription. §. 9.
• u 1.45

  In descrip. Naph. §. 5.
• w 1.46

  Book. 1. cap. 11. §. 7.
• a 1.47

  Mac. 11. 7. & 12. 30.
• b 1.48

  Lib. 3. p. 213.
• c 1.49

  Hist. lib. 2. part. 1. pag. 289
• d 1.50

  See Masius on the 19. of Joshua.
• e 1.51

  In his Com∣ment on Gen. ••9.
• f 1.52

  Gen. 49. 13.
• g 1.53

  Josh. 19. 2••.
• h 1.54

  Luke. 4. 26.
• i 1.55

  Men••ioned 1 Sam. 29. 1.
• k 1.56

  Josh. 19. 30.
• a 1.57

  Hist. lib. 5. pag. 618.
• b 1.58

  Josh. 12. 20.
• c 1.59

  Josh. 11. 1.
• d 1.60

  See book. 1. cap. 8. §. 3.
• e 1.61

  Josh. 19. 15.
• f 1.62

  Gen 49. 13.
• g 1.63

  Mat. 4. 13.
• h 1.64

  L••k. 9. 10.
• i 1.65

  John 6. 23.
• * 1.66

  The Reader is intreated with his eye to ••emove the p••∣cture of the peoples feeding, a little north of Tiberia••.
• k 1.67

  M•• k. 6. 46.
• l 1.68

  Joh. 6. 17.
• m 1.69

  Mat. 14. 34.
• n 1.70

  In his Har∣mony on the Text.
• o 1.71

  See our Zebu∣lun § 26.
• a 1.72

  2 Sam. 1. 21.
• b 1.73

  Compare Josh. 18. 22. w^th 2 Chr. 13. 4
• c 1.74

  Jud. 10. 1.
• d 1.75

  Judg. 10. 1. 2
• e 1.76

  1 Sam. 3. ••. 12.
• f 1.77

  2 Sam. 4. 12.
• g 1.78

  2 S••m. 21. 14.
• a 1.79

  Gen. 37. 3.
• b 1.80

  Josh. 17.11.
• c 1.81

  Gen. 49. 23.
• * 1.82

  Josh. 17. 11.
• * 1.83

  Parag. 32.
• c 1.84

  Num. 11. 29.
• f 1.85

  Vid. on Num. 35. 4, 5.
• l 1.86

  M. Godwin his Moses and Aaron lib. 6. pag. 248.
• m 1.87

  In Ez••kielis ca. 48. 2. cited by Arias Mon∣tanus de Men∣suris sacris.
• * 1.88

  Merca••or, G••il. Tyrius & generally in most Maps.
• i 1.89

  Act. 23. 31, 32.
• k 1.90

  Ibid. v. 23. 32.
• * 1.91

  Josh. 17.
• † 1.92

  Prev. 30. 19
• * 1.93

  Masins in Josh. 17.
• a 1.94

  Gen. 37.14.
• c 1.95

  See Josh. 21.
• d 1.96

  D••ut. 19. 8, 9.
• e 1.97

  Deut. 30. 2.
• f 1.98

  Compare Deut. 11. and cap. 27. with Josh. cap. 8.
• g 1.99

  1 King. 4. 24.
• h 1.100

  2 Kin. 15. 16.
• i 1.101

  Josh. 24. 33.
• k 1.102

  Num. 25. ••.
• a 1.103

  Josh. 19. 1.
• b 1.104

  Josh. 15. 33.
• c 1.105

  Josh. 19. 57.
• d 1.106

  Josh. 19. 45.
• e 1.107

  Josh. 19. 41. 43.
• f 1.108

  James 1. 17.
• g 1.109

  Rom. 11. 29.
• i 1.110

  Mat. 20. 15.
• * 1.111

  Ro. Vaughan.
• a 1.112

  Josh. 19. 2.
• b 1.113

  Gen. 26. 33.
• c 1.114

  1 Chr. 4. 28.
• d 1.115

  Josh. 19. 6.
• e 1.116

  Psal. 76. 2.
• f 1.117

  In locum Iosh.
• g 1.118

  In the des••r. of Iudah §.1.
• h 1.119

  Josh 19. 1.
• i 1.120

  In descript. of Simeon § 1.
• k 1.121

  Josh. 15. 47.
• l 1.122

  Judg. 1. 18.
• * 1.123

  Adrichomius hath done the same.
• l 1.124

  Judg. 20. 1. & 1 Sam. 3. 20 & 2 Sam. 3. 10. &c.
• * 1.125

  Consult cam∣dens and Speeds Maps.
• a 1.126

  Neh. 11. 31.
• b 1.127

  1 Sam. 22. 19.
• * 1.128

  Concerning 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• c 1.129

  M. ••ight soot in th•• T••mpl▪ pag. 264.
• d 1.130

  Josh. 9. 3. &c.
• e 1.131

  Josh. 21. 17.
• f 1.132

  Compare Josh. 18. v. 25. with 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 28.
• g 1.133

  Judg 29. 16.
• h 1.134

  2 Sam. 21. 6.
• i 1.135

  Ibid. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 9.
• k 1.136

  Ibid. v••••. 6.
• a 1.137

  In description of Iudah §. 5.
• b 1.138

  ••is••. li. 5. p. 618
• * 1.139

  So set in our Map of old Canaan.
• c 1.140

  1 Sam. 13. 18.
• * 1.141

  Ne••. 11. 34.
• d 1.142

  So also Ne∣hem. 11. 34.
• f 1.143

  Iosh. 21. 12.
• g 1.144

  Ibid. v. 13.
• * 1.145

  Lib. 1. p. 22. § 2.
• a 1.146

  Josh. 12. 17
• b 1.147

  Josh. 15. 34.
• c 1.148

  1 King. 4. 10.
• d 1.149

  Josh. 15. 35.
• e 1.150

  Gen. 46. 28.
• f 1.151

  Josh. 10. 41. and 15. 15.
• g 1.152

  Josh. 15. 24. and 55.
• h 1.153

  Josh. 15. 34. and 56.
• i 1.154

  Josh. 35. & 48.
• k 1.155

  1 Sam. 24. 1.
• l 1.156

  Cant. 9. 14
• m 1.157

  2 Chr. 20. 2.
• n 1.158

  In••ra ••os En∣gadda oppidum est, s••cundum ab Hierso••ymis s••••ilitate, Pal∣metorumque nemoribus, nunc alterum bus••um.
• * 1.159

  1 Sam. 15. 4.
• * 1.160

  1 Sam. 10. 27. & 1 Sam. 11. 12
• a 1.161

  Psal. 84. 6.
• b 1.162

  2 Sam. 5. 23.
• a 1.163

  Act. 17. 6.
• b 1.164

  Ne••. 3. 1. & 32.
• a 1.165

  Not behind them in place, but somewhat later in time.
• * 1.166

  Porta custodiae or the Watch-gate being (as Vill••lp••••d••s excellently proveth) the East-gate of the Temple.
• b 1.167

  Psal. 43. 2.
• c 1.168

  Apparat. Vr∣bis part 1. lib. 1. cap. 11. pa. 40. col. 2. & lib. 2. cap. 18.
• d 1.169

  Act. 2. 29.
• e 1.170

  Gen. 47. 21.
• f 1.171

  Lib. 3. pa 342. par. 3.
• a 1.172

  1 Sam. 23. 23.
• b 1.173

  Apparat. Vrbis pa••l. 1. lib. 3. c••p. 25.
• c 1.174

  Ier. 19. 1, 2.
• d 1.175

  Mat. 27. 7.
• e 1.176

  Lib. 3. pa. 320. par. 6.
• f 1.177

  Psal. 87. 2.
• * 1.178

  Objections a∣gainst Solomons Temple are whollyomitted, because the draught thereof is intirely taken out of Arias Montanus, and chargeable on his account.
• a 1.179

  1 Chr. 26. 17.
• b 1.180

  2 Chr. 20. 5.
• c 1.181

  1 Chr. 4. 21.
• o 1.182

  Pag. 385. §. 3.
• P 1.183

  2 King. 23. 11.
• q 1.184

  Ibidem.
• r 1.185

  Compare the foresaid place with 2 King. 22. 3.
• s 1.186

  Pag. 391. §. 2.
• t 1.187

  1 Chr. 28. 16.
• u 1.188

  2 Chr. 5. 8.
• w 1.189

  Ibid. ver. 19.
• x 1.190

  Levit. 24. 5, 6.
• y 1.191

  Pag. 394. §. 3.
• z 1.192

  Exod. 34. 24.
• a 1.193

  As translated by Buxtorse in his R••censio opc∣ris Talmudici.
• b 1.194

  In Codice juris Bava M••tria sol. 33. 1.
• c 1.195

  In Codice juris Chagiga. so. 10. 1.
• d 1.196

  Iacob in Libro Caphtor. ••o. 121.
• e 1.197

  Mark 7. 13.
• f 1.198

  Tom. 2. par. 2. pag. 576.
• g 1.199

  John 8. 44.
• h 1.200

  John 8. 57.
• i 1.201

  See Sixtus Senensis on this subject.
• k 1.202

  2 Thes. 2. 11.
• I 1.203

  Constantine L' Emper••ur in M••ddo••b. cap. ••. Sect. ••.
• * 1.204

  A bridge from mount Olivet to the Temple.
• * 1.205

  Solomons porch.
• w 1.206

  In descripti∣on of Zoroba∣bels Temple.
• x 1.207

  Psal. 78. 25.
• * 1.208

  Money-chan∣gers their im∣ployment.
• y 1.209

  Levit. ••7. 3.
• z 1.210

  Mat. 21. 13.
• * 1.211

  Why called Court of wo∣men.
• * 1.212

  De Bello Iud. lib. 5. cap. 14.
• † 1.213

  Anti. ••••. 15. c. 14
• a 1.214

  Deut. 16. 16.
• b 1.215

  Exod. 34. 24.
• * 1.216

  1 Sam. 1. 22.
• * 1.217

  For they were not confined to so few hours ••n their scru∣tiny.
• * 1.218

  Libro tertio de vita Mosis, and again in his book de deca∣loge.
• c 1.219

  Exod. 20. 26.
• d 1.220

  See Constantine L' Empereur in Middoth. p. 111.
• e 1.221

  See M Light∣••oo•• in his Temple.
• f 1.222

  Psal. 39. 7.
• g 1.223

  See the last draught or frag∣m••nt•• Sacra.
• h 1.224

  Vill••lpand••s.
• i 1.225

  In lib. hist. Exod. 1. ca. 6.
• k 1.226

  De iis quaee fu••∣runt in cap. 1.
• l 1.227

  Exod. 34. 24.
• † 1.228

  Iosep. Bell. Iud. li. 6. c. 4.
• n 1.229

  Iosep. de Bel. Iud. li. 7. cap. 21.
• o 1.230

  Dan. 5. 5.
• * 1.231

  The Law car∣ried captive.
• p 1.232

  Iosep. ut prius.
• * 1.233

  Deut. 17. 18. & 2 Chr. 24. 14.
• * 1.234

  Levit. 25. 28.
• * 1.235

  Coins made in memoriall of the Rom••n con∣quest.
• r 1.236

  Baronius An¦nal. Eccles. anno. 73. ex numis L••lii Pasquali∣ni Romani.
• * 1.237

  Conclusion of the description.
• s 1.238

  Lamen. 1. 1.
• a 1.239

  Cosmog. lib. 5. pag. 1001.
• b 1.240

  Lib. ••. cap. 14. § 8.
• c 1.241

  In his desc••ip∣tion of Manas. beyond Iordan. Lit. A.
• d 1.242

  V••d•• Ferrarii L••x con Geogra∣phicum.
• e 1.243

  M. Roger Vi∣vion and M. Hump. Brown.
• f 1.244

  Riddul••hs Travels pa. 45.
• g 1.245

  2 King. 14. 7. & 2 Chr. 25. 11
• h 1.246

  See Biddulph•• Travels pa. 88.
• i 1.247

  Camdens Brit. in Cornwall.
• a 1.248

  Pag. ••7. §. 45.
• b 1.249

  Num. 21. 14.
• c 1.250

  Job. 1. 13.
• d 1.251

  Compare Gen. 26. 25. with Gen. 27. 25.
• e 1.252

  2 King. 14. 22.
• f 1.253

  Deut. 2. 8.
• g 1.254

  2 Chr. 8. 17, 18.
• h 1.255

  Knowls T••••k. Hist. pag. 343.
• i 1.256

  1 King. 12. 4.
• * 1.257

  King. 9. 26.
• l 1.258

  Num. 21. 4.
• m 1.259

  〈…〉〈…〉.
• a 1.260

  See the pre∣face of M. Ma∣son de Ministeri•• A••glic.
• b 1.261

  Rom. 12. 18.
• c 1.262

  Deut. 5. 2. & 4.
• d 1.263

  Sir Walter Ra∣leigh
• a 1.264

  Num. 32. 8. & Deut. 1. 19.
• b 1.265

  Josh. 15. 6.
• c 1.266

  Josh. 14. 6.
• d 1.267

  Description of Paran §38.
• e 1.268

  Psal. 95. 8.
• f 1.269

  Psal. 106. 24.
• g 1.270

  In his book called Spes Is∣ra••lis, Sect. 28. pa. 86.
• h 1.271

  Num. 14. 1.
• i 1.272

  Num. 13. 23.
• k 1.273

  Num. 20. 27, 28.
• l 1.274

  Deut. 10. 6.
• m 1.275

  C••md. Brit. in. Dorset-shire.
• n 1.276

  Sir Walter Ra∣••eigh book 2. part 1. pa. 254.
• o 1.277

  Num. 33. 31.
• * 1.278

  Vide Tremel. in locum.
• p 1.279

  See our de∣scription of Reuben.§23.
• q 1.280

  Num. 33. 20. See Ainsworth thereon.
• r 1.281

  Num. 11. 35. & 12. 1.
• s 1.282

  Exod. 32. 20.
• t 1.283

  See our de∣scription of Chemosh.