The works of the Reverend and learned John Lightfoot D. D., late Master of Katherine Hall in Cambridge such as were, and such as never before were printed : in two volumes : with the authors life and large and useful tables to each volume : also three maps : one of the temple drawn by the author himself, the others of Jervsalem and the Holy Land drawn according to the author's chorography, with a description collected out of his writings.

§ In what language Matthew wrote his Gospel.

I. All confess, that the Syriac Language was the Mother Tongue to the Jewish Nation dwelling in Judea; and that the Hebrew was not all understood by the common people may especially appear from two things.

• 1. That in the Synagogues, when the Law and the Prophets were read in the original Hebrew, an Interpreter was always present to the Reader, who rendred into the Mother Tongue that which was read, that it might be understood by the common people. q 1.1 Hence those rules of the office of an Interpreter, and of some places, which were not to be rendred into the Mother Tongue.
• 2. That Jonathan the son of Uzziel, a Scholar of Hillel, about the time of Christs birth, rendred all the Prophets (that is, as the Jews number them, Joshua, Judges, Sa∣muel, the Books of the Kings, Esaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the twelve lesser Pro∣phets) into the Chaldee Language, that is, into a Language much more known to the people than the Hebrew, and more acceptable than the Mother Tongue. For if it be asked, why he translated them at all, and why he translated not rather into the Mo∣ther Tongue, which was known to all: and if it be objected concerning S. Matthew, and S. Paul, that writing to the Jews, one his Gospel, the other his Epistle (to the

• ... Hebrews,) must have written in the Syriac Tongue, (if so be they wrote not in He∣brew,) that they might be understood by all. We answer,

First, It was not without reason, that the Paraphrast Jonathan translated out of the Hebrew original into the Chaldee Tongue, because this Tongue was much more known and familiar to all the people, than the Hebrew. The holy Text had need of an Interpre∣ter into a more known Tongue, because it was now in a Tongue not known at all to the Vulgar. For none knew the Hebrew, but such as learned it by Study. However there∣fore all the Jews, inhabiting the land of Canaan, did not so readily understand the Chal∣dee Language, as the Syriac, which was their Mother Language; yet they much readilier understood that, than the Hebrew, which to the unlearned was not known at all. Hence it was not without necessity, that the Prophets were turned into the Chaldee Language by Johnathan, and the Law not much after by Onkelos, that they might a little be under∣stood by the common people, by whom the Hebrew original was not understood at all r 1.2 We read also, that the Book of Job had its Targum in the time of Gamaliel the Elder, that is Pauls Master.

the sense of the words, yet they reputed it not for a prophesie, because it was not uttered in the Language that was proper for prophetical predictions. But we tarry not here. That which we would have, is this, that Matthew wrote not in Hebrew, (which is proved sufficiently by what is spoken before) if so be we suppose him to have written in a Language vulgarly known and understood, which certainly we ought to sup∣pose: Nor that he, nor the other Writers of the New Testament writ in the Syriac Lan∣guage unless we suppose them to have written in the ungrateful Language of an ungrate∣ful Nation, which certainly we ought not to suppose. For when the Jewish people were now to be cast off and to be doomed to eternal cursing, it was very improper certainly, to extol their Language, whether it were the Syriac Mother Tongue, or the Chaldee its cozin Language, unto that degree of honour, that it should be the original Language of the New Testament. Improper certainly it was, to write the Gospel in their Tongue, who above all the Inhabitants of the World most despised and opposed it.

II. Since therefore the Gentiles were to be called to the Faith, and to embrace the Gospel by the preaching of it, the New Testament was writ very congruously in the Gentile Language, and in that, which among the Gentile Languages was the most noble, viz. The Greek. Let us see what the Jews say of this Language, envious enough against all Languages besides their own.

z 1.3 Rabban Simeon ben Gamaliel saith, Even concerning the holy Books, the wise Men per∣mitted not that they should be writ in any other Language, than Greek. R. Abhu saith, that R. Jochanan said, the Tradition is according to Rabban Simeon; that R. Jochanan said more∣over, Whence is that of Rabban Simeon proved? From thence, that the Scripture saith, The Lord shall perswade Japhet, and he shall dwell in the tents of Sem? The words of Ja∣phet shall be in the Tents of Sem: and a little after, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 God shall perswade Japhet, i. e. The grace of Japhet shall be in the Tents of Sem. Where the Gloss speaks thus; The Grace of Japhet is the Greek Language; the fairest of those Tongues, which be∣long to the sons of Japhet.

a 1.4 Rabban Simeon ben Gamaliel saith, Even concerning the sacred books, they permitted not, that they should be written in any other Language than Greek. They searched seriously, and found, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 That the Law could not be translated according to what was needful for it, but in Greek. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 You have this latter clause cut off in Masse∣cheth Sopherim, where this story also is added: b 1.5 The five Elders wrote the Law in Greek for Ptolomy the King: and that day was bitter to Israel, as the day wherein the golden Calf was made, because the Law could not be translated according to what was needful for it. This story of the five Interpreters of the Law, is worthy of consideration, which you find seldom mentioned, or scarce any where else. The Tradition next following after this, in the place cited, recites the story of the LXX. Look it.

When therefore the common use of the Hebrew Language had perished, and when the Mother Syriac or Chaldee Tongue of a cursed Nation, could not be blessed, our very enemies being judges, no other Language could be found, which might be fit to write the (New) divine Law, besides the Greek Tongue. That this Language was scattered, and in use among all the Eastern Nations almost, and was in a manner the Mother Tongue; and that it was planted every where by the Conquests of Alexander, and the Empire of the Greeks, we need not many words to prove, since it is every where to be seen in the Historians. The Jews do well near acknowledge it for their Mother Tongue even in Judea.

c 1.6 R. Jochanan of Beth Gubrin said, There are four noble Languages, which the world useth: The Mother Tongue for Singing, the Roman for War, the Syriac for Mourning, and the He∣brew for Elocution; and there are some who say, the Assyrian for Writing. What is that which he calls the Mother Tongue? It is very easily answered, The Greek, from those enco∣miums added to it, mentioned before: and that may more confidently be affirmed from the words of Midras Tillin, respecting this saying of R. Jochanan, and mentioning the Greek Language by name. d 1.7 R. Jochanan said, There are three Languages, The Roman for War, the Greek for Speech, the Assyrian for Prayer. To this also belongs that, that oc∣curs once and again in Bab. Megillah, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 e 1.8 In the Greek mother Tongue, you have an Instance of the thing: f 1.9 R. Levi coming to Cesarea heard some 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 reci∣ting the Phylacteries in the Hellenistical Language. This is worthy to be marked. At Cesarea flourished the famous Schools of the Rabbins. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Rabbins of Cesarea are mentioned in both Talmuds most frequently, and with great praise, but especially in that of Jerusalem. But yet among these, the Greek is used as the Mother Tongue, and that in reciting the Phylacteries, which you may well think, above all other things, in Judea were to be said in Hebrew.

In that very Cesarea, Hierom mentions the Hebrew Gospel of S. Matthew to be laid up in the Library of Pamphilus, in these words: Matthew, who was also called Levi, from a Publican made an Apostle, first of all in Judea composed the Gospel of Christ in Hebrew letters

and words, for their sakes, who were of the circumcision and believed. Which Gospel, who he was that afterwards translated it into Greek, it is not sufficiently known. Moreover that very Hebrew Gospel is reserved to this day in the Library at Cesarea, which Pamphilus the Marlyr with much care collected. I also had leave given me by the Nazareans, who use this Book in Berea, a City of Syria, to write it out.

It is not at all to be doubted, that this Gospel was found in Hebrew, but that which deceived the good man, was not the very hand writing of Matthew, nor indeed did Matthew write the Gospel in that Language; but it was turned by some body out of the original Greek into Hebrew, that so, if possible, the Learned Jews might read it. For since they had little kindness for forreign books, that is, Heathen Books, or such as were written in a Language different from their own, which might be illustrated from various Canons concerning this matter; some person converted to the Gospel, excited with a good zeal, seems to have translated this Gospel of S. Matthew out of the Greek Original into the Hebrew Language, that learned Men among the Jews, who as yet believed not, might perhaps read it, being now published in their Language: which was rejected by them, while it remained in a foreign speech. Thus I suppose this Gospel was written in Greek by S. Matthew for the sake of those that believed in Judea, and turned into He∣brew by some body else for the sake of those that did not believe.

The same is to be resolved concerning the original Language of the Epistle to the He∣brews. That Epistle was written to the Jews inhabiting Judea, to whom the Syriac was the Mother Tongue, but yet it was writ in Greek for the reasons above named. For the same reasons also the same Apostle writ in Greek to the Romans, although in that Church there were Romans, to whom it might seem more agreeable to have written in Latine; and there were Jews, to whom it might seem more proper to have written in Syriac.

Notes

• q 1.1

  Bab. Megill. fol. 25 &c. Massech. Sophe∣rim, cap. 11. 12 &c.
• r 1.2

  Hierof. Schabb. fol. 15. col. 3.
• z 1.3

  M••gillab, fol. 9. 2.
• a 1.4

  Hierof. Me••ill, fol 71. ••.
• b 1.5

  Cap. 1. artic. ••
• c 1.6

  Hieros. Megill. in the place above, col. 2.
• d 1.7

  Midr. Till. fol. 25. 4.
• e 1.8

  Fol. 18. 1.
• f 1.9

  Hieros. Sotah, fol. 21. 2.