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.

CHAP. I. Of the places mentioned in LUKE III.

I. Some Historical Passages concerning the Territories of Herod and the Tetrarchies of his Sons. II. Whether Perea was not also called Galilee. III. Some things in general concerning the Country beyond Iordan. IV. Trachonitis. V. Auranitis. VI. Iturea. VII. Abilene. VIII. 2 Sam. XX. 18. discust.

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

BEFORE we make any particular enquiries into the Countries men∣tioned Luke III. 1. it will not be amiss to dip into History a little more generally.

a 1.1 Augustus Cesar received Herod's Sons Alexander and Aristobulus, upon their arrival at Rome, with all the kindness imaginable, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; granting a power to Herod to establish the Kingdom in which of his Sons he pleased: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: yea and moreover, gave him the Region of Trachonitis, Batanea, and Abranitis. We find Perea (peculiarly so called) not mention'd in this place, when yet it was most assuredly under Herod's jurisdiction; how else could he have built Herodium, which was in the extreme confines of Perea, Southward, where he himself was buried?

Neither indeed doth St. Luke say any thing of Perea, even then when he mentions the Tetrarchy of Herod Antipas, under whose jurisdiction Josephus tells us, was both Perea and Galilee. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, b 1.2 Perea and Galilee were both under Antipas,

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

The same Josephus tells us this of the Tetrarchy of Philip: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. c 1.3 Batanea also and Trachonitis, Auranitis, and some parts of Zeno's House, about Jamnia; yielding the profits of one hundred talents, were under Philip's Government. And again, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. d 1.4 Then died Philip, in the twentieth year of the Reign of Tiberius, when he himself had governed for seven and thirty years, over Trachonitis, Gaulonitis, and the Country of the Bataneans. Here we see Auranitis is not mentioned, but Gaulonitis is; and in St. Luke, neither Batenea, nor Gaulonitis, nor Auranitis; but instead of them, Iturea. There is a Chronological dif∣ficulty

in these words of Josephus, which is not easily solved; but this is not the busi∣ness of this Treatise.

It is hard to say whether this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 House of Zenon, have any relation with Zenodorus the robber. Josephus in the place above quoted, mentions him, saying, That Augustus was the more willing to put Batanea, Trachonitis, and Auranitis under the Government of Herod the Great, that he might the more effectually suppress the Thefts and Rapines committed by one Zenodorus and the Trachonites. e 1.5 Strabo also speaks of this Zenodorus, telling us, That there were few Robberies committed now; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The Robbers of Zenodorus party being cut off.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2. Judas who moved the Sedition against the Roman Tax, is by Gamaliel called Ju∣das of Galilee, Acts V. 37. who yet by Josephus is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a 1.6 A Gaulonite of the City of Gamala. Now it is well enough known, that Gaulona and Gamala were beyond Jordan.

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

• 1. The whole Land of Canaan, both that beyond, and that on this side Jordan, was under the jurisdiction of Herod the Great. So that divide this whole Country into four Tetrarchies, the first Judea; the second, Samaria; both which were under the Govern∣ment of Pilate; the third, Iturea and Trachonitis, under Philip; the fourth will be Ga∣lilee on this side, and Perea beyond Jordan. Whereas therefore St. Luke, in the divi∣sion of the Tetrarchies, names only Galilee, as that which belonged to Herod; it is manifest he includes Perea under that of Galilee, and speaks of it as a known, and com∣monly received thing.
• 2. In Luke XVII. 11. It is said of Jesus, That as he went to Jerusalem, he passed through the midst of Samaria and Galilee. One would have thought it had been proper to have said, through the midst of Galilee and Samaria. For when he went from Jerusalem to his own Country, he then passed through Samaria, and so into Galilee; but going from home to Jerusalem, be in his passage went through Galilee, and then through Samaria: But now it is very certain that in that journey he did pass through Perea, having first gone through the Samaritan Country. Whence it is very probable that Perea is called by our Evangelist in this place, Galilee; in the very same manner as he had also inclu∣ded it in the mention of Galilee, Luke III. 1.
• 3. In that Tragical Feast wherein the last mess was the Head of John Baptist, those

• who then were treated by Herod, are called the great estates of Galilee, Mark VI. 21. Now that Supper was kept in the Palace Herodium which was in the very extreme parts of Perea toward the South, and therefore surely those great Estates of Galilee that were with him, must be no other than the Great Estates of Perea.
• 4. There is mention 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of Geliloth of Jordan, Josh. XXII. 11. when the passage was concerning Perea: whence that Country might well take its name of Galilee.

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

AS to the Tetrarchies of Herod and Philip: this I suppose we may determine with∣out prejudice or question, that nothing was within their jurisdiction, but what was within the confines of the Land of Israel, properly so called. (As to what may be objected concerning Iturea, we shall consider in its own place.) Whiles we are therefore looking into these Countries, our main business will be with what was beyond Jordan; for that on this side the River, was only Galilee, about which we shall not much trouble our selves, because there is no difficulty concerning it.

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

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

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

Of the place it self the Jewish Doctors thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 At twen∣ty Cubits a 1.7 Man sits in the shadow of his tent (viz. in the Feast of Tabernacles) he does not sit in the shadow of his Tabernacle beyond twenty cubits, but in the shadow of its sides. [That is, if the roof or cover of his Tabernacle be above twenty cubits high.] Abai saith unto him, if therefore any one shall pitch a Tabernacle in Ashtaroth-Karnaim, is not the Ta∣bernacle so also? Glosse. Ashtaroth Karnaim were two great Mountains, with a Valley be∣tween; and by reason of the height and shadow of those Mountains, the Sun never shone upon the Valley.

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

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

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

When the Israelites went out of Aegypt into that Land, the whole Trans-jordanine Region was divided into these two Seigniories, the Kingdom of Sehon, and the King∣dom of Og. That of Sehon was Perea, strictly so called now; That of Og was all the rest under the name of Bashan. But, after the return of Israel from Babylon, Bashan was so sub-divided, that Batanea, or Bashon, was only a part of it, the rest going under the name of Trachonitis, Auranitis, and, if you will, Gualonites too, for we meet with that distinction also in Josephus b 1.8 To give therefore all these Countries at this time their proper bounds and limits, if it does not exceed all humane skill and wit, I am sure it doth mine.

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

SECT. IV. TRACHONITIS.

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

a 1.9 Tekoah hath the preeminence for Oyl: Abba Saul saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the next to that is Regab beyond Jordan.

Gul. Tyrius would derive the name from Dragons. For so he: It b 1.10 (Trachonitis) seems to have taken its name from Dragons. Those hidden passages and windings under-ground, with which this Country abounds, are called Dragons. Indeed, almost all the people of this Country, have their dwellings in Dens and Caves; and in these kind of Dragons.

Other things might be offered as to the signification of the word: but we are looking after the situation of the place, not the Etymology of the name. And the first things to be enquired into, as to its situation, is, whether it extended in longitude from the South to the North, or from the West to the East. The reason of our enquiry is partly upon the account of Auranitis, which we are to speak of presently, and partly those words in Josephus c 1.11 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Batanea was bounded with Trachonitis. How so? Either that Batanea lay between Perea and Trachonitis, extend∣ing it self from the West toward the East, or between Trachonitis and Galilee, strictly so called, extending it self in length from the South toward the North: which last I pre∣sume most probable; and so we place Trachonitis in the extreme parts of the Trans-jor∣danine Country toward the East. And both which, upon these reasons taken together.

• 1. The Gemarists describing the circumference of the Land from the North, do men∣tion 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tarnegola [or Gabara] the upper, which is above Cesarea [Philippi] and Trachona which extends to Bozrah d 1.12: where the extension of Trachona, must not be understood of its reaching to some Bozrah in those Northern borders; but to some Bozrah or Bosorrah in the confines of Perea e 1.13: and so it supposes the Country extending it self from the North toward the South.
• 2. f 1.14 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Of the Province of Batanea; East of which is Saccea, and here under the Hill Alsadamus, are the Trachonite Arabians. Behold here the Trachonites living East of Batanea.
• 3. g 1.15 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉▪ The Country of Gamala, and Gaulonitis, and Batanea, and Trachonitis. But were not Gamalitiea it self and Gau∣lonitis within Batanea? right; but by this distinction he divides between that Batanea that was nearer Galilee, and that that was further off. That Country that lay nearest, from those noted Towns, of Golan, and Gamala, he calls Gaulonitis, and Gamalitica; and that which was further off, he calls by its own name of Batanea, and what lies still yond that, Trachonitis.

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

SECT. V. AURANITIS.

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

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

a 1.16 Where did they hold up those lights? 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 From Mount Olivet to Sar∣taba. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And from Sartaba to Gryphena. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And from Gryphena to Hauran. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And from Hauran to Beth Baltin. And from Beth Baltin, he that held up the light there, did not depart, but waved it hither and thither, up and down, till he saw the lights kindled throughout the whole Captivity.

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

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

However, it is plain enough from the place in Ezekiel before quoted, that Hau∣ran was situated in the very extreme parts of the Land, toward the North, and from thence the Country as it had its situation there, so had its name Auranitis. Gul. Tyri∣us a 1.17 (by what authority I cannot tell) placeth it near the Sea of Gennesaret Subitò enim transcursâ regione Auranitide quae secus Mare Tyberiadis est, &c. The Country of Au∣ranitis being suddenly run through, which is by the Sea of Tiberias, &c.

And that the River Orontes [Springing between Libanus and Antilibanus near Heliopi∣lis, as Pliny b 1.18 hath it; took its name from Hauran, the word it self seems to assure us. Although some quoted by Eustath. in Dionys. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. do apprehend it to be a Latine name. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (saith he) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉▪ As if Orontes were the same with Orientalis, The Eastern. But what that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 should mean is a little difficult. Orontes was of old called Typhon, as Strabo c 1.19 tells us.

SECT. VI. ITUREA.

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

a 1.20 Pliny places some Nation or other, called by the name of the Itureans, in Cyrristica of Syria: Et inde Cyrristica, &c. Next that is Cyrristica, the Irneates, the Gindarèni, the Gabeni, two Tetrarchies, which are called Granii Com••titae, the Emisenes, the Hylatae, a Na∣tion of the Itureans, and those of them also called the Betarreni, the Mariamitani, &c.

b 1.21 After Macra, is Marsyas, wherein are some hilly places, on one of which stands Chalcis a Garrison of Marsyas. The beginning of it is Laodicea, about Libanus. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉▪ The Itureans and Arabs hold all the Mountanous places, a very mischievous sort of people, all of them.

c 1.22 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉▪ David made war with the Edomites, the Ammonites, the Moabites, the Itureans, the Nabbathites and Nabdites, He had said before, That he had sub∣dued the Syrians dwelling by Euphrates and Commagene, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Assyrians and Phenicians that were in Galladene.

d 1.23 Secus Mare Galilaeae viam carpentes, &c. Taking the way by the Sea of Galilee, we entred Phenice, and leaving Paneas, which is Cesarea Philippi, on the right hand, we came to Iturea.

e 1.24 Rex pertransiens agrum Sydonensem, &c. The King passing through the Country of Si∣don, and going up some hilly places, which lay between ours and the enemies borders, he

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

came to a place every way accomodated with all necessaries, a fruitful soil, and well watered; the name of it Messahara. Going thence into the Valley called Bacar, he found the Land which hath been said to flow with Milk and Honey. Some are of opinion, that this Country was of old called Iturea. But long before that, viz. in the days of the Kings of Israel, it was called the Grove of Libanus.

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

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

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

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

f 1.25 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. There are beyond Damascus two Mountains called Trachones. Afterward; Toward Arabia and Iturea, there are some cragged Hills, famous for large and deep Caves; one of which was capable of receiving four thousand men in it. But that was a prodigious Cave of Zedechiah's, whereever it was, that was XVIII. miles space; at least if those things be true which are related concern∣ing it g 1.26.

There was a Cave beyond Jordan, about XVI. miles from Tiberias, that was three stories high; had a lower, a middle, and an upper Dining-room h 1.27. Which indeed was fortified, and held a Garrison of Souldiers in it.

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

Iturea therefore, mentioned by our Evangelist was in the Country beyond Jordan, viz. Batanea, and Auranitis or Auranitis alone, as may appear out of Josephus, compared with this our Evangelist. For St. Luke saith, That Philip was Tetrarch of Iturea and Tracho∣nitis: Josephus, That he was Tetrarch of Trachonitis, Batanea, and Auranitis: Either therefore Auranitis and Batanea in Josephus, is the Iturea in St. Luke, or else Batanea in Josephus is confounded with Trachonitis mentioned in St. Luke, and Auranitis alone is Iturea. For that passage in Josephus i 1.28 ought to be taken notice of: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Caesar in∣vests Agrippa with the Tetrarchy that Philip had, and Batanea, adding moreover Trachoni∣tis with Abella. Where it is observable, that there is mention of the Tetrachy of Philip distinct from Batanea and Trachonitis; And what is that? certainly Auranitis in Jose∣phus, and perhaps Iturea in St. Luke.

SECT. VII. ABILENE.

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

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

a 1.29 speaks of Abila in that Country: Paneas in quâ Caesarea, cum supra dicto fonte [viz. cap. 15.] Abila, Arca, Ampeloessa, Gabo.

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

Abel Shittim, where the Israelites pitcht their Tents immediately after they had passed the River Jordan, in Josephus b 1.30 is called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abila, distant from Jordan threescore fur∣longs: which he also mentions with Julias c 1.31 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in Perea. There is also Abel Meholah, and Abel beth Maacah, &c.

Near this sound comes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 d 1.32 Abelas of the Cilicians. The very word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Abilene is in Vajicra Rabba e 1.33 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Sabeans fell upon them, and took them away, Job I. 15. R. Abin bar Cahna saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉▪ They came out of Caphar Karinus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and they went through all Abilene, and came to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Migdol Zaba••••h, and there dyed.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Notes

• a 1.1

  Joseph. An∣tiqu. lib. 15. cap. 13.
• b 1.2

  De Bell. lib. 2. cap. 9.
• c 1.3

  De Exid. lib. 2. cap. 9.
• d 1.4

  Antiqu. lib. 18. cap. 6.
• e 1.5

  Strab. lib. ••••.
• a 1.6

  Antiqu. lib. 18. cap. 1.
• a 1.7

  Succah. fol. 2. 1.
• b 1.8

  Lib. •••• Ex∣cid. 3. cap. 4.
• a 1.9

  Menacoth, fol. 85. 2.
• b 1.10

  De Bell. Sacr. lib. 16. cap. 9.
• c 1.11

  Attiqu. lib. 17. cap. 2.
• d 1.12

  Hieros. She∣viith, fol. 36. 3.
• e 1.13

  Antiqu. lib. 1••. cap. 12.
• f 1.14

  Ptol. cap. 15. toward the end.
• g 1.15

  Joseph. de excid. lib. 3. cap. 4.
• a 1.16

  Rosh hasha∣nah, cap. 2. Hal. 2.
• a 1.17

  Lib. 22. 26.
• b 1.18

  Lib. 5. cap. 22.
• c 1.19

  Lib. 16.
• a 1.20

  Lib. 5. 23.
• b 1.21

  Strabo, lib. 16.
• c 1.22

  Eupolemus in Euseb. Praepar. Evangel. lib. 9. cap. 30.
• d 1.23

  Gal. Tyr. de bell. Sacro lib. 9. cap. 15.
• e 1.24

  Ibid. lib. 2••. cap. 11.
• f 1.25

  Strab. lib. 16.
• g 1.26

  Bemidbar rab. fol. 21 1. 2.
• h 1.27

  Gul. Tyr. lib. 22. 15.
• i 1.28

  Antiqu. lib. 20. cap. 5.
• a 1.29

  Nat. Hist•• lib. 5. cap. 18.
• b 1.30

  Antiqu. lib. 5. cap. 1.
• c 1.31

  De Exid. lib. 2. 22.
• d 1.32

  Targ. Jonath. upon Numb. xxxiv. 8.
• e 1.33

  Fol. 18••. 1.