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.

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

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

a 1.1 They were Servants of the Priests, saith R. Meir. But R. Jose saith, They were of the Family of Beth Pegarim, and Beth Zippory, in Emmaus, who had placed their Daughters in Marriage with the Priests.

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

I conceive there is mention made of this place, in Spihra b 1.2. R. Akibah said; I asked Rabban Gamaliel, and R. Joshua 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the shambles of Emmaus, when they went to receive the Beast to make a Feast for their Son, &c. Now Rabban Gamaliel, and R. Joshua were both of Jafneh; so that by considering the situation of Jafne we may more confidently believe, that they were in the Emmaus we are speaking of. We have the same passage in Maccoth, fol. 14. 1.

It was one of the larger Cities: For so Josephus speaks of it; c 1.3 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Cassius disfranchised four Cities, the greatest of which was Gophna and Em∣maus: and next to these was Lydda and Thamna.

d 1.4 Under the disposition of the Duke of Palestine amongst the rest, was Ala Antana of the Dromedaries of Admatha; where Pancirole notes that Admatha in St. Jerom in his He∣brew places, is called Ammata. This, by the agreeableness of sound may seem to be our Emmaus, unless more probably at this time it bore the name of Nicopolis.

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

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

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

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

They recede from the Hebrew Text in the same Story, but something more tolerably when they render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 on the North-side of the Hill Gaash: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, From the North-side of the Hill Galaad: where, as far as I am able to judge, they do not paraphrase ill, though they do not render it to the Letter. Let us con∣sider that obscure passage which hath so much vext Interpreters in Jud. VII. 3. Proclaim now in the ears of the people, saying, whosoever is fearful and afraid, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

let him return early from Mount Gilead. The place where this thing was acted was either in or very near the vale of Jezreel, distant from Mount Gilead beyond Jordan, twenty or thirty miles; and therefore how could these Gideonites depart from Mount Gilead? I am not ignorant what some do alledge toward the untying this knot, viz. that it should be ta∣ken thus, Whoever be of Mount Gilead let them return. The Targumist to this sense; Whosoever is fearful, let him return, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and let choice be made out of Mount Gilead, i. e. Let the Gileadites be chosen. But whether his meaning was, that the Gi∣leadites should be chosen to remain because they are not afraid; or be chosen to return because they were; I shall not reckon it worth the while to enquire.

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

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

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

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

Notes

• a 1.1

  Erachin, fol. 10. 1. and Suc∣cah, fol. 51. 1.
• b 1.2

  Fol. 9. 4▪
• c 1.3

  Antiqu. lib. 14. cap. 18.
• d 1.4

  Notitia I••∣per. Orient.