A Commentary on the New Testament
from the Talmud and Hebraica
John Lightfoot
(1602-1675)
Chapters
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
5
A Chorographical Decad;
a searching unto some places of the Land of Israel;
those especially whereof mention is made in St. Mark.
When this our evangelist, whom we have
undertaken to handle, makes mention of some places in the land of
Canaan, whose situation is somewhat obscure and more remote from
vulgar knowledge; I might seem to be wanting to my task, if I should
pass them over unsaluted, and not clear them, as much as lies in me,
with some illustration: which I thought very convenient to do here in
the very entrance; partly, lest, by the thrusting-in of these
discourses into the body of this comment, whatsoever it be, the order
of it might be too much broken; and partly, because I would do the
same here that I did before my animadversion on St. Matthew.
That I have enlarged upon some places,
besides those in the evangelists, I have done it for the reader's
sake; to whom, I hope, it will not be unacceptable to hear such
things, which do either bring with them profit or pleasure,--or, at
least, such as are not commonly heard of.
There was a time when the land of
Israel and Idumea were not only distinct countries, but separated with
an iron wall, as it were, of arms and hostility: but, I know not how,
Idumea at last crept into Judea; and scarcely left its name at home,
being swallowed up in Arabia.
They were truths, which Pliny speaks,
in that time, when he spake them; "Arabia is bounded by Pelusium
sixty-five miles. Then Idumea begins, and Palestine, at the rising up
of the Sirbon lake." But "thou art deceived, O Pliny," would the
ancienter ages have said; for Idumea is bounded by Pelusium sixty-five
miles: then begins Palestine, at the rising up of the Sirbon.
We are beholden to Strabo, that we
know the reason of the transmigration of that people and of the name.
For thus he writes: "The Idumeans and the lake [of Sirbon] take up the
farthest western parts of Judea, next to Casius. The Idumeans are
Nabateans: but being cast out thence by a sedition, they joined
themselves to the Jews, and embraced their laws."
Every one knows what the land of Edom,
or Idumea, in the Old Testament, was: but it is not the same in the
New; and if that old Idumea retained its name (which it scarcely did,
but was swallowed up under the name of Arabia), then, by way of
distinction, it was called "Great Idumea." Idumea the Less, or the
New, is that which we are seeking, and concerning which St. Mark
speaks, no small part of Judea;--so called either from its nearness to
Idumea properly so called, or because of the Idumeans that travelled
thither and possessed it, and that became proselytes to the law and
manners of the Jews. Such a one was Herod Ascalonita. When, therefore,
it is said by the evangelist, that "a great multitude followed Jesus
from Galilee, and from Judea, and from Jerusalem, and from Idumea," he
speaketh either of the Jews inhabiting that part of Judea, which, at
that time, was called Idumea,--or at least of the Idumeans, who
inhabited it, being now translated into the religion of the Jews.
Concerning the country now contained under that name, we shall speak
by and by, following, first, Pliny's footsteps a little, from the
place where he sets out his progress,--namely, from Pelusium.
In
Ezekiel 30:15,16, Sin, in the Vulgar interpreter is 'Pelusium':
which the Latin interpreter of the Chaldee paraphrast follows there:
nor without good reason. For Sin, and Tin, among the
Chaldees, is Mud. See the Targum upon
Isaiah 57:21. And 'Pithom' and 'Raamses' (Exo
1:11), in the Targums of Jerusalem and Jonathan, are Tanis and
Pelusium: thence those two gates of Nile, the 'Tanitic' and the 'Pelusiac,'
in Ptolemy and the maps. But now, that country or place, which the
Syrians and Chaldeans call Sin, that is, Muddy,--the
Greeks call Pelusium, from Mud. And who sees not that Tanis
is derived from Tin?
And here, for the sake of learners,
let me observe, that Pelusium...which who would not presently
interpret Cappadocia?
Would not any render the words thus,
"If a man marries a wife in Cappadocia and divorces her in Cappadocia,
let him give her the money of Cappadocia." But hear Rambam upon the
place; [it] "is Caphtor, and is called by the Arabians Damiata:
which all know is the same with Pelusium."
Hence the Targums of Jerusalem and
Jonathan, and the Syriac interpreter upon
Genesis 10:14, for Caphtorim, read Cappadokia; but
the Arabic reads Damiatenos; and the Seventy, upon
Deuteronomy 2:23, for "The Caphtorim going out of Caphtor," read
"The Cappadocians going out of Cappadocia."
The Targum upon
Jeremiah 47:4, for "The remnant of the country of Caphtor," hath
"of Kapotokia." Where Kimchi saith, "R. Saadias interprets Caphtor
Damiata."
"These words were written upon the
gate of Pelusium; 'Anpak, Anbag, Antal.'" Which were the names of some
measures, that it might be known to all, that they were to buy and
sell according to that measure.
We now go on from Pelusium to mount
Casius: so Pliny; "From Pelusium, the trenches of Chabrias. Mount
Casius, the temple of Jupiter Casius. The tomb of Pompey the Great,"
&c.
Casius was distant about three
hundred furlongs from Pelusium (in Antoninus it is forty miles), and
the lake of Sirbon was twenty-eight miles from Casius. Thus Pliny's
sixty-five miles arise from 'Pelusium to the ending of Arabia.'
Casius, in Ptolemy, is written 'Cassion,'
and 'Cassiotis,' with a double s; and so also it is in Dion Cassius,
who adds this story:--
"Pompey died at mount Cassius, on
that very day whereon formerly he had triumphed over Mithridates and
the pirates. And when, from a certain oracle, he had suspicion of the
Cassian nation, no Cassian laid wait for him, but he was slain and
buried at the mountain of that name."
Those words of Moses do rack
interpreters,
Exodus 17:16: Jad Al Cas-jah. The Seventy render it, "The
Lord wars with a secret hand." All other versions almost render it to
this sense, "The hand upon the throne of the Lord." So the Samaritan,
Syrian, Arabic, Vulgar, and the Rabbins,--that is, 'God hath sworn.'
What if Cas-jah be Casiotis?
For that country was the country of the Edomites, but especially of
the Amalekites, concerning whom Moses treats in that history. We will
not too boldly depart from the common consent of all, and we do
modestly and humbly propound this conjecture: which if it may take any
place, the words may there be rendered, without any scruple or knot,
to this sense, "The hand of the Lord is against Cassiotis," (the
country of the Amalekites; for) "the Lord hath war with Amalek from
generation to generation."
We are now come to the river Sichor;
called 'the river of Egypt'; not because it was within the Egyptian
territories, but because it was the Jews' limits towards Egypt. There,
heretofore, was 'Rhinocorura.' Whence the Seventy, in
Isaiah 27:12, render "Unto the river of Egypt," "Unto the
Rhinocoruri." I suppose the Arabic interpreter imitated them, and writ
first Corura; but that at last a little point crept in into the
last letter, and so it was changed from 'r' into 'n.' So that now we
read which is sounded Coronis, in the Latin interpreter.
Passing the river, we enter into new
Idumea, anciently the region of the Avites; in the Holy Scripture
called Hazerim,
Deuteronomy 2:23: in the eastern interpreters, Raphia: in Pliny,
Rhinocorura, and Raphia Inwards. Sometimes also in the Holy Scripture
it is called Shur; and instead of it, in those interpreters, it is
called 'Chagra.' Whence is the name of mount Angaris concerning which
Pliny speaks,--"Gaza, and inwards Anthedon, mount Angaris." For when
the Syrians pronounced 'Chaggara,' the Greeks would sound a double
Gamma by 'n' and 'g,' and would say 'Angara.'
Shur also is sometimes rendered by
the eastern interpreters Chaluzzah, as the Jerusalem Targum
upon
Genesis 16:7; and Jonathan upon
Exodus 15:22. The Arabic so renders Gerarim,
Genesis 20:1; and Jonathan, Bared,
Genesis 16:14. Bared indeed, signifies hail...
Shur, sometimes in the Syriac
interpreter, is Sud, as
Exodus 15:22; the point for difference in the last letter being
placed amiss. In
Genesis 16:7,14, Shur and Bared are rendered by them
Gedar, instead of Gerar, by the same error. Bared
in the Arabic is Jared there, with two points placed under the
first letter instead of one.
The country of the Avites, call it by
what name you will, ended at Gaza, being stretched out thither in
length, from the river of Egypt, forty-four miles. But the Idumea
which we seek ended not there, but extended itself farther into Judea,
swallowing up, under the name, that whole breadth of the land, from
the Mediterranean sea to the sea of Sodom, according to the length of
it.
It swallowed up, first, the whole
portion of Simeon, a great part of which was contained within the
country of the Avites; but not a small part also extended itself
farther into Judea. Mention is made of his 'fourteen cities,'
Joshua 19 if you tell them one by one; but they are said to be
only thirteen, verse 6; where the LXX make an even number,
while they take Sharuhen, not for a city, but render it as if
they had read 'their fields.' But Sheba seems rather to be one and the
same with Beersheba; and so the number is made equal.
It swallowed up also the whole
country of south Judea, which was more generally marked out by two
names, 'The Upper and the Nether South': more particularly and
diffusively, as some of the Jews please, it is divided into seven
parts...
So that when the Holy Scripture
divides the south of Judea from Idumea,
Numbers 34 and
Joshua 15--we must know that dividing line now is broken, and all
the south of Judea is called Idumea. But here, by the way, I cannot
but note the Arabic interpreter, who renders Edom, in
Joshua 15:1, by Rome:--by what authority let himself look
to it; so let the Jews do too, who commonly call the 'Romans,' 'Edomites.'
How much this New Idumea shot itself
into Judea is not to be defined; since it admitted indeed no limits,
but where either the force or fraud of that nation could not thrust
itself in farther. If you betake yourself to Josephus, here and there
speaking of that nation, you would think that it extended almost as
far as Hebron. Thence, perhaps, were those endeavours of some, of
freeing the hill-country of Judea from tithing. Of which endeavour we
can scarce conceive another reason, than that that country was now too
much turned heathen, and tithes should not be taken from heathens. For
these Idumeans were but a remove from heathen: they had passed into
the Jewish rites; but they were neither friends to the Jews nor to
their religion.
While I am thinking of this New
Idumea, I have a suspicion whether the 'third Palestine,' which is
also called 'the Healthful,' may not be understood of this very part
of Palestine; and, while I think upon it, I doubt again of the
division of Palestine into two parts, in the code of Justinian and
Theodosius; and into three parts in the Notitia.
In the edict of Theodosius and
Valentinian are these words; "The chief of the Jews, who were over the
Sanhedrims in both Palestines, or live in other provinces," &c.
The mention of 'both Palestines'
seems plainly to exclude a threefold division; or at least to
conclude, that there were no Sanhedrims in the third part. For without
all scruple, the 'Notitia Imperii' gives us a 'third part,' in which
are ranked, "Under the disposition of the worthy man, the Earl of the
East, these provinces underwritten: Palestine, Phoenice, Syria,
Cyprus, Palestine the second, Palestine the Healthful, Phoenice of
Libanus."
And Justinian hath these words; "When
all Palestine formerly was one, it was afterward divided into three
parts."
The head of the first the same
emperor assigns to be Caesarea; Gulielmus Tyrius to be Jerusalem: and
concerning the second and third, he and Pancirolus do not agree. For
the metropolis of the second, according to Tyrius, is Caesarea,--and
Scythopolis of the third:--according to Pancirolus, Samaria is the
metropolis of the second,--and Jerusalem of the third.
On the credit of Justinian, you may
with good reason suppose the first to be that, whose head is Caesarea;
the second, reason itself will persuade us to have been that of
Jerusalem; and where you will go to seek the third, I, for my part,
know not, if not in this our Idumea. It is not indeed to be
dissembled, that, in the Notitia Imperii, in the scheme adorned with
the pictures of the Roman garrisons, Jordan is painted, running
between them, five being placed on this side, and eight on that. So
that it may seem that the country beyond Jordan was the third
part. But I shall not dispute here, whether that be not in part to be
disposed under the governor of Syria or Arabia; but there are some
things which seem to favour such an opinion, partly in the Notitia
itself, but especially in the authors alleged.
If, therefore, I may be allowed my
conjecture concerning this New Idumea, then some answer may be given
about the Sanhedrims of both Palestines, in the meantime not denying
the threefold division of it. We must consider, indeed, that there
were councils or Sanhedrims in the times of Theodosius and Valentinian,
&c. They were, in times past, in that Palestine whose head was
Caesarea, and in that Palestine whose head was Jerusalem: but not in
that Idumea concerning which we speak, whose head, whether ye state it
to be Gaza or Ascalon, or Eleutheropolis, concerning which Jerome so
often speaks, and perhaps Bereshith Rabba, we do not define.
Mention indeed occurs in the
Talmudists of "The southern Rabbins"; but not so called, because they
dwelt in the furthest southern parts of Judea, for those of Jafne and
Lydda had that name, but because Judea was south of Galilee. For the
Rabbins of Tiberias give them that title.
But, whatsoever at last that 'Third
Palestine' was, no less scruple arises why it was called 'Salutaris,'
the 'Healthful.' Pancirolus will have it to be from the wholesome
waters: and he learned from Sozomen, that they ran from Emmaus into
Judea, namely, that fountain where Christ washed his disciples' feet:
"From whence the water (to use his words), became medicinal for divers
distempers."
But besides that that story savours
enough of fable, the word Emmaus, if I may be judge, deceived
its first author, which indeed sometimes is written for Ammaus,
denoting "hot baths," and translates the word Chammath into Greek
pronunciation; but he, whosoever was the first author of it, had
scarcely found that town of Judea called Emmaus, written by the Jews
Chammath, but Ammaus, very far from the signification of
'warm baths.'
To this add also, that mention is
made in the same Notitia, of Galatia Salutaris, or the 'Healthful';
and there is a distinction between Macedonia and Macedonia the
Healthful; Phrygia Pacatiana, and Phyrgia the Healthful; Syria of
Euphrates, and Syria the Healthful. In all which it will be somewhat
hard to find medicinal waters: and the examples which the author
alleged produecth concerning some of them are so incredulous, that I
would be ashamed to relate them after him.
I should rather think these countries
so called from the companies and wings of the Roman army, called 'Salutares':
for mention is made, in the same Notitia, of 'Ala Salutis,' 'the wing
of health,' or safety; as 'the second wing of safety,' under the duke
of Phoenice; or perhaps the best appointed and strongest garrisons of
the Romans, and such as conduced most to the safety and peace of the
whole country, had their stations there. And in this our Idumea, which
we suppose to be the Third Palestine, or Salutaris, were placed, and
that out of the greater muster-roll,--
"The Dalmation horse of Illyria, at
Berosaba," or in Beersheba.
"The shield-bearing horse of Illyria,
at Chermula," or in Carmel, where Nabal dwelt.
"The promoted horse, inhabitants at
Zodecath"; which I suspect to be the cave of Zedekiah, concerning
which the Talmudists speak.
"The javelin-bearing horse,
inhabitants at Zoar." But let these things be left in suspense.
And now to return thither whence this
whole dispute was raised, when it is said by St. Mark, that "a great
multitude followed Jesus from Galilee and Judea, and Jerusalem, and
from Idumea, and from beyond Jordan"; he retains the known and common
division of the land of Israel at that time, although not in the same
terms. The division was into Judea, and Galilee: and
"The country beyond Jordan."--'Galilee and the country beyond Jordan,'
he expresseth in terms: and for Judea in general, he names the parts
of it, Jerusalem and Judea, as distinguished from Idumea, and Idumea
as the south part of Judea.
The word wilderness stops us
in a wilderness, if it is of so various and doubtful signification.
I. Sometimes it denotes only the
fields, or the country in opposition to the city; which we
observed at
Matthew 3:1: where if any one be displeased that I rendered 'Seah
of the wilderness' by 'the country Seah,' when it might be rendered,
and perhaps ought, 'the Seah which the Israelites used when they
encamped in the wilderness,' let him, if he please, take another
example for it.
"They do not water and kill the
cattle of the wilderness." The Gloss is, "It was usual to water cattle
before killing them, that they might the more easily be flayed. But
they water domestic [or tame] cattle. And these are cattle of the
wilderness, those that go out to pasture in time of the Passover,
and return home at the first rain, that is, in the month Marchesvan.
Rabba saith, These are cattle of the wilderness, all that feed in
the meadows and come not home." The Gloss is "The cattle of the
wilderness are those that are abroad in the fields."
II. The word "the wilderness,"
denotes a champaign country, where one man's ground is not
distinguished from another's by fences.
"They do not breed up smaller cattle
in the land of Israel, but in Syria they do. And in the
wildernesses of the land of Israel." Where the Gloss thus: "They
do not breed such cattle in the land of Israel, that they feed not
down the fields: now the fields in the land of Israel do belong,
without doubt, to some Israelite." But they fed in the deserts; that
is, where field was not distinguished from field, but all was common.
Hence you may understand what is signified by the desert of Ziph, of
Maon, of Tekoah, &c.; namely, a region or country near to cities,
where also were scattered houses; but especially, either champaign,
where no fences were to make distinction of lands; or mountainous,
and that which was barren and without improvement.
III. There is no need to speak of the
deserts that were altogether desolate and without inhabitant; such as
the deserts of Arabia, of Libya, &c.
Perhaps I shall be laughed at if I
distinguish between the wilderness of Judah and the wilderness of
Judea. And formerly such a distinction did deserve laughter; but when
the name of Idumea, as I have shewed, swallowed up a great part of
Judea, then it was not only to be borne with, but necessary also, to
distinguish between the wilderness of Judah, of which
Joshua 15:61, and the title of
Psalm 63, and the wilderness of Judea where John baptized.
The title of that Psalm in the
original Hebrew is thus, "A Psalm of David when he was in the desert
of Judah." But the Greek interpreters render it, "A Psalm of David
when he was in the wilderness of Idumea." And the Vulgar, "A
Psalm of David when he was in the desert of Idumea": acting the part
of no good interpreters, but of no ill paraphrasts. So
Jeremiah 9:26; "Upon Idumea, and upon Edom."
If you ask where David was when he
composed that Psalm, it is answered (1
Sam 24:1), "In the wilderness of En-gedi": and if you search
further for the precise place, it was there where the castle Masada
was afterward built. For I doubt not at all, that that place, as
Josephus describes it, was the same with "the rocks of the wild
goats." [1
Sam 24:3]
I appeal here to the maps and their
authors, in whom 'En-gedi' and 'Masada' (and 'Lot's cave') are placed
not very far from the utmost north cost of Asphaltites: let them say
whether Idumea stretched out itself so far. If not, let them correct
the interpreters whom we have named; and thought it be so, they might
show by what authority they place those places there, and let them
friendly correct me putting them far elsewhere.
We are now indeed out of our bounds;
but we hope not out of the bounds of truth. Therefore, in one or two
words, we thus confirm the situation that we have assigned to these
places:
I. In
Genesis 10:19, Gaza and Sodom are made to lie in a parallel line.
II. Lasha is Callirrhoe. So Jonathan
renders 'unto Lasha,' 'unto Callirrhoe.' So also Bereshith Rabbah, and
the Jerusalem Talmudists, in the places cited at the margin.
You have the situation of it in
Pliny, on the same coast with Macherus. "Arabia of the Nomades looks
upon Asphaltites on the east,--Macherus, on the south. On the same
side is Callirrhoe, a warm spring, of a medicinal wholesomeness."
And now let it be observed, from the
place alleged out of Genesis, that, after the same manner as Sidon and
Gaza, the limits on the west part, are placed, so are Sodom and Lasha
seated on the east, one on the south, and the other on the north; and
the other cities stood in this order: from Lasha, southward, Zeboim;
after it, Admah; after it, Gomorrah; and after it, on the utmost
southern coast, Sodom.
III. The Asphaltites, saith Josephus,
is extended in length, "unto Zoar of Arabia"; and,
Deuteronomy 34:3, Moses, from mount Nebo, beheld Zoar from the
utmost bounds of the land on that side, as he had beheld the utmost
bounds of it from other sides.
IV. En-gedi is Hazezon-tamar; so the
Targum of Onkelos in
Genesis 14:7: see
2 Chronicles 20:2; and Tamar was the utmost south border:
Ezekiel 47:19.
V. "The border of Judea (saith
Solinus) was the castle Masada. And that not far from Asphaltites."
Josephus indeed saith, that his
castle was "not far from Jerusalem"; which seems to thwart me in
placing it as I have done. But, besides that we might contend about
that reading, when it is very usual with historians to use the words
'not far off,' and 'near,' in a very wide and loose sense,--one can
hardly build any thing upon this. So Solinus; "Calirrhoe is a fountain
very near Jerusalem"; when yet how far off was it! And in Strabo,
Lecheus is "a port near Italy"; when yet it was distant many hundreds
of miles.
Masada in Hebrew is Matsadah,
which implies fortification: and that with good reason, when
that castle was fortified even to a miracle. The name is taken from
1 Samuel 23:14,19...For they read in the former place, "in the
strait places"; and in the latter, "in Maserem" (otherwise Masereth),
"in the strait places." The Syriac and Arabic read Masroth; as
though they had read in the original. So Josephus; "He (David), with
those that were with him, went up to the strait place of Mastheri."
Thus far we have launched out into
the wilderness of Judah, or Idumea; and that the more willingly,
because in describing it, I have described also some part of New
Idumea, of which discourse was had in the chapter aforegoing. Now we
seek "the wilderness of Judea," concerning which the Gospels speak in
the history of the Baptist.
I. And first, we cannot pass it over
without observation, that it was not only without prophetical
prediction that he first appeared preaching in the wilderness,
Isaiah 40:3, but it was not without a mystery also. For when the
heathen world is very frequently in the prophets called 'the
wilderness,' and God promiseth that he would do glorious things to
that wilderness, that he would produce there pools of waters, that he
would bring in there all manner of fruitfulness, and that he would
turn the horrid desert into the pleasure of a paradise (all which were
to be performed in a spiritual sense by the gospel); it excellently
suited even in the letter with these promises, that the gospel should
take its beginning in the wilderness.
II. I, indeed, think the Baptist was
born in Hebron, a city of Aaron, in the hill-country of Judea,
Joshua 21:11,
Luke 1:5,39; he being an Aaronite by father and mother. The house
of his cradle is shown to travellers elsewhere; concerning which,
inquire whether Beth Zachariah, mentioned in Josephus, and the Book of
the Maccabees, afforded not a foundation to that tradition. It was
distant from Bethsura only seventy furlongs, or thereabouts, as may be
gathered from the same Josephus (by which word the Seventy render
South Beth-el in
1 Samuel 30:27); and whether the situation does not agree, let
them inquire who please.
A little cell of his is also shewed
further in the wilderness, as it is called, of Judea, cut out of a
rock, together with his bed, and a fountain running by; which we leave
to such as are easy of belief: the wilderness certainly where he
preached and baptized is to be sought for far elsewhere.
III. Luke saith, that "the word of
the Lord came to John in the wilderness and he went into all the
country about Jordan." He sojourned from wilderness to wilderness. In
the wilderness, in the hill-country of Judea, he passed his youth as a
private man; not as an eremite, but employed in some work or study;
and assumed nothing of austerity, besides Nazariteship, before the
thirtieth year of his age. Then the Spirit of prophecy came upon him,
and "the word of the Lord came unto him," teaching him concerning his
function and office, instructing him about his food and clothing, and
directing him to the place where he should begin his ministry.
The region about Jericho was that
place, or that country, that lay betwixt that city and Jordan, and so
on this side of it and on that about the same space; also on this side
Jericho, towards Jerusalem. A country very agreeable to the title
which the evangelists give it, and very fit for John's ministry. For,
I. It was sufficiently desert,
according to what is said, "John came preaching in the wilderness."
"The space (saith Josephus) from
Jericho to Jerusalem, is desert and rocky; but towards Jordan and the
Asphaltites, more level, but as desert and barren." And Saligniac
writes; "The journey from Jerusalem is very difficult, stony, and very
rough; the like to which I do not remember I have seen. Jericho is
distant from Jordan almost ten miles," &c.
II. This country might, for
distinction, be called 'the wilderness of Judea,' because other
regions of Judea had other names: as, 'The King's mountain,' 'The
plain of the South,' 'The plain of Lydda,' 'The valley from En-gedi,'
'The region about Betharon,' &c.
III. Although that country were so
desert, yet it abounded very much with people. For, besides that
abundance of villages were scattered here and there in it, 1. Jericho
itself was the next city to Jerusalem in dignity. 2. There were always
twelve thousand men in it, of the courses of the priests. 3. That way
was daily trodden by a very numerous multitude, partly of such who
travelled between those cities, partly of such who went out of other
parts of Judea, and likewise out of the land of Ephraim into Perea,
and of them who went out of Perea into those countries. 4. John began
his ministry about the time of the Passover, when a far greater
company flocked that way.
IV. This country was very convenient
for food and provision, in regard of its wild honey; of which let me
say a few things.
When it is so often repeated in the
Holy Scripture, that God gave to his people Israel "a land flowing
with milk and honey," hence, 1. One would conclude that the whole land
flowed with it; and, 2. Hence one would expect infinite hives of bees.
But hear what the Talmudists say of these things:
"R. Jonah saith, The land flowing
with milk and honey is the land, some part of which flows with milk
and honey." And that part, they say, is in Galilee: for thus they
speak; "For sixteen miles every way from Zippor is a land flowing with
milk and honey": of which thing and country we shall speak elsewhere.
"R. Jose of Galilee saith, They bring
not the firstfruits out of the country which is beyond Jordan, because
that is not the land flowing with milk and honey." And he that brought
the firstfruits was to say, "The Lord gave us this land flowing with
milk and honey; and now I have brought the firstfruits of the land,
which thou, O Lord, hast given me."
Deuteronomy 26:9,10.
But that part that flowed, how did it
flow with honey? Learn that from Rambam upon the place: "When he saith
'and honey,' he understands the honey of palms. For the palm
trees, which are in the plain and in the valleys, abound very much
with honey."
There was honey also distilling from
fig-trees. "R. Jacob Ben Dositheus saith, I went on a certain
time from Lydda to Ono before day-break, up to the ancles in the honey
of figs."
This is the 'wild honey,' of which
the evangelists speak, as of the Baptist's food. And how convenient
for this the region about Jericho was, which was called 'The country
of palm-trees,' is clear to every eye. Diodorus Siculus hath these
words of a certain nation of Arabians: "They have pepper from the
trees, and much honey, called wild honey, which they use to drink with
water." Whether it were also as plentiful in locusts we do not say;
certainly, in this also it gave place to no country, if either
barrenness or fruitfulness served for the breeding them: for Jericho
and the adjacent parts was like a garden of pleasure in the midst of a
desert. Certainly, the place was very convenient for that great work
to be performed by the Baptist; that is, baptizing in Jordan.
Here that of Borchard is not unuseful:
"Know, that from the rise of Jordan under Libanus, unto the desert of
Pharan, almost a hundred miles, Jordan itself, on both shores, hath
spacious and pleasant fields, which are compassed behind with very
high mountains." The truth of which, if his eyes had not experienced
it, he might have learned from Josephus, who speaks thus:
"Over Jericho hangs a mountain
stretched forth northward, even to the country of Scythopolis; and
southward to the country of Sodom, and the utmost borders of the
Asphaltites. It is craggy, and not habitable by reason of barrenness.
Against it runs out a mountain near Jordan, beginning at Julias, and
the north country, and stretched out southward unto Gomorrah, where it
bounds the rock of Arabia. The middle between these two mountainous
regions is called The great plain, extended from the town
Ginnabri into the Asphaltites: in length twelve hundred furlongs, in
breadth one hundred and twenty. And it is cut in the middle by
Jordan." The plain of Jordan before the overthrow of Sodom, &c.
Genesis 19 is 'the country about it,' in the Seventy.
Those words teach what is "the region
about Jordan": and the word, 'all,' added by the evangelist, may
persuade us that the further side may also be taken in, especially if
it be considered how small a distance the river made. The space was so
little, that, as the Gemarists relate, "a fire kindled on one side
reached over to the other." And they suppose, water on this side might
be spirted to the other, in that caution: "Let no man take the waters
of purification and the ashes of purification, and carry them beyond
Jordan; nor let him stand on this side, and spirt to the other."
However, the river was not so broad,
but that two, standing on each bank, might look upon one another, cast
something over from the one side to the other, yea, and talk together.
And then think, whether the inhabitants of the further side resorted
not to the Baptist, being so near him, and, as it were, within sight
of him.
The masters dispute, whether Jordan
be to be esteemed as 'the bounds of the land of Israel,' or as 'the
land itself'; and the occasion of that dispute ariseth from another
question, namely this: The flock of one man is separated and divided
into two parts, and those two parts feed in distant places: it is
asked, Whether tithe is to be taken as of one flock, or two? Hence the
discussion of the point glides to Jordan; one part of the flock is on
this side Jordan, the other on the other. If Jordan be to be esteemed
for 'the bounds of the land,' then one part is within the land, the
other without. But if it be to be reputed for 'the land itself,' then
the business is otherwise. Among other things in this dispute,
"Saith Rabbah Bar Bar Channah, R.
Jochanan saith Jordan is not, but inwards from Jericho, and beneath
it." You would think me more skilful than a diver, to fetch this
secret from the bottom. 'Jordan is not Jordan above Jericho,' is a
paradox that vexes the Glossers themselves, much more therefore may it
me. One understands the thing according to the bare letter; for "he
that voweth (saith he) that he will not drink of Jordan, may drink
above Jericho." Another understands it of Jericho, as being a bounds,
yea, as the bounds named below Jericho only;
Joshua 18:20. We make no tarrying upon the business. But if Jordan
had such a limitation, that Jordan was not above Jericho, 'The region
about Jordan,' is to be understood in the same limitation, namely,
that it is only below Jericho. See the Seventy on
Genesis 13:10,12.
The masters, sifting this business,
out of one scruple move another; for they speak these words; "Jordan
floweth out of the cave of Paneas, goes along by the Sibbechean sea,
by the sea of Tiberias, by the sea of Sodom, and passeth on, and
glides into the Great sea; but Jordan is not but inwards from Jericho,
and below it." Let any shew me where Jordan flows out of the sea
of Sodom into the Mediterranean. The river Shihor, carrying
blackness in its name, may be taken for it, if it be any other;
but neither does this appear concerning it.
While you see multitudes gathered
together to John, and gladly baptized in Jordan, without fear, without
danger, alas, how much was Jordan changed from that Jordan in that
story of Saligniac! "Jordan (saith he), in which place Christ was
baptized, is famous for a ruinous building. Here, therefore, all we
pilgrims went into the holy river, and washed our bodies and our
souls; those from filth, and these from sin; a matter of very great
joy and health, had not an unhappy accident disturbed our joys. For a
certain physician, a Frenchman, of our company, an honest man, going
something further into the river, was caught with a crocodile (whether
one should call it a dragon or a beast, it is uncertain), and
swallowed him up, not without the common grief of our brethren."
The wilderness also, where our
Saviour underwent his forty days' temptation, was on the same bank of
Jordan where the baptism of John was; St. Luke witnessing it, that
Jesus, being now baptized, "returned from Jordan," namely, from the
same tract whereby he came thither.
That which the Talmudists say of some
other things, that "they were two, which at last became four," may
have place as to the Corbans, or holy treasuries. They were two,
as to their end; but four, as to the despatch of them to that
end.
There was a Corban for the repair
of the building of the Temple; and there was a Corban for the
preparing such things as were necessary for the divine service in
the Temple. And both were two. The duplicity of the former you have in
this tradition:
"There were two chambers in the
Temple. The chamber of the silent [or of the private]; where pious
men offered privately; whence the children of pious parents were
nourished also privately"; that is, they did their charity secretly
for this pious use, that it might not be known who did it. There are
some who think these silent ones, were the same with the
Essenes; of which we will not dispute: nor do we number this
charitable treasury among the Corbans, concerning which we are now
treating; because it conferred nothing to the business of the Temple.
But the tradition goes forward;
"And there was the chamber of the
vessels, where whosoever offered any vessel laid it. And after
thirty days the treasurers opened the chambers; and whatsoever vessel
was found in it, which was useful to the repairing of the building,
was laid up for that use. And whatsoever was not useful was sold; and
the price of it went to the chamber for the repairing of the house."
You observe, how there was a 'Corban
of vessels,' or instruments of iron, brass, silver, &c.; and a 'Corban
of money'; both for the same end, that is, for the repair of the
building and structure of the Temple and courts, if by some means or
other they might fall down, or might receive damage by the injury of
time, of tempests, or rains.
Maimonides adds, The veils of the
Temple also come out of the chamber for the repair of the
building; but the veils of the doors out of the Corban chamber:
of which afterward.
There was also a double Corban,
whence the charges of things necessary for the divine worship were
defrayed. The first was certain chests, of which thus the
masters:
"There were thirteen chests in
the Temple, in which was written, New shekels [that is, of
the present year], Old shekels [or, shekels of the year past],
Turtles," &c.
Maimonides still more largely and
plainly: "In the Temple were thirteen chests formed like trumpets";
that is, narrower below, and more broad above.
"The first was for the shekels of
the present year. The second was for the shekels of the year past. The
third, for those who were to bring an oblation of two turtles, or
pigeons, one for a burnt-offering, the other for a sacrifice for sin;
the price of it they cast into this chest. The fourth, for him who
otherwise ought an oblation of birds. The price of it he cast into
this chest. The fifth for him who voluntarily offered money to buy
wood for the altar. The sixth, for him who offered money to buy
frankincense. The seventh, for him who offered gold for the
mercy-seat. The eighth, for that which remained of the sacrifice for
sin: namely, when one dedicated money for the sacrifice for sin, and
bought a sacrifice with it, and something remained over and above, let
him cast that into this chest. The ninth, for that which remained of
the sacrifice for transgression. The tenth, for that which remained of
the pigeons for the women that had fluxes, and that were delivered
from childbirth. The eleventh, for that which remained of the
oblations of the Nazarite. The twelfth, for that which remained of the
sacrifice of the leper. The thirteenth, for him who offered moneys for
the burnt-offering of cattle. And upon each chest was written that for
which the money that was laid up in it was appointed."
In one of these chests the widow,
commended by our Saviour, cast in her two mites: but where they were
placed, we will inquire by and by.
There was also a chamber in which
whatsoever money was collected in these chests, of which we have
spoken, was emptied out into three other chests; which is called by
the Talmudists, emphatically the chamber.
"There were three chests, each
containing three seahs, into which they empty the Corban, and on them
were written Aleph, Beth, Gimel. And why, saith R. Jose, was Aleph,
Beth, Gimel, written upon them? namely, that it might be known which
of them was filled first, that it might first be emptied. R. Ishmael
saith, The inscription was in Greek, Alpha, Beta, Gamma."
The chests which are here spoken of
were those into which the three greater were emptied, which always
stood unmovable in the chamber. The manner of the emptying of which
take from the words of the Gloss in the place alleged: "Those chests
in which the money was laid-up did contain twenty seven seahs (each
nine); and they were covered with a linen cloth. He who was to
empty entered with three chests containing nine seahs. He first filled
the chest marked Aleph, out of the first of the three great chests;
and then covered it with the linen cloth. Then he uncovered the second
of the great chests; and out of it he filled the second chest, marked
with Beth; and covered it again. Then he uncovered the third of the
great chests, and filled the third chest, marked Gimel but covered not
the other again," &c.
Moreover, of the manner and time of
this emptying, thus the masters speak: "Thrice in a year they take
care about the chamber" (for let me render it thus in this place);
that is, as the Gloss writers [out of the thirteen chests they
transferred whatsoever had been collected in them into these three
great ones, which were in this chamber, and in like manner they
emptied them into three less, of which before], "About the space of
half a month before Passover, before Pentecost, and before the
Feast of Tabernacles: or, in the beginning of the month Nisan, and of
the month Tisri, and fifteen days before Pentecost."
And here I cannot but transcribe the
words of the Glosser in that place of the Talmud, which we are now
upon, as not a little illustrating the place in the Evangelists.
"They published (saith he) and made
known that they should bring the oblation of the Lord (the
half-shekel), they that were near (to Jerusalem), at the Passover;
and they that were further off, at Pentecost; and they that were most
remote, at the Feast of Tabernacles." These words serve for a light to
the story in St. Matthew, chapter 17, of the collectors of the
Didrachm, or half-shekel, requiring it of Christ at Capernaum, when
the feast of the Passover was now past a great while ago. But we go
on.
"He who went into the chamber to
empty the chest, went not in with a folded garment, nor with shoes,
nor with sandals, nor with phylacteries, nor with charms," &c. And the
reason was, that there might be no opportunity, and all suspicion
might be removed, of stealing and hiding any of the money under them.
The money taken thence served to buy
the daily sacrifice, and the drink-offerings, salt, wood,
frankincense, the showbread, the garments of the priests, and, in a
word, whatsoever was needful for the worship and service of the
Temple.
Yea, "Rabh Asa saith, the judges
of things stolen, who were at Jerusalem, received as their stipend
ninety-nine manas out of the rent of the chamber."
We have searched out the things; now
let us inquire after the places.
I. Those thirteen chests, which were
called trumpets, we have fixed, without all doubt, in the court
of the women: and that upon the credit of Josephus; "The walks (saith
he, speaking of that court), running along between the gates, extended
inwardly from the wall before the treasuries, were borne up with fair
and great columns." To this let us add the words of the evangelist
John, 8:20: "These words spake Jesus in the treasury":--if it
had been said, over-against the treasury, which Mark saith, it
might be understood of one of the chambers of which we have spoken:
which sense the Arabic interpreter seems to follow; who renders it,
that "Jesus sat at the gate of the treasury." But when it is
said that he spake those words in the treasury, those chambers
are wholly excluded, into which it would be ridiculous to think that
they permitted Christ to enter.
But note, the word treasuries,
in Josephus, is the plural number, and that he speaks of the court of
the women, and you will be past doubting that he respected these
chests under the word treasuries: and you will doubt as little
that Mark looked the same way when you shall have observed that his
speech is of the women, how both she and others cast money into the
treasury; which, as appears from those things we have produced out
of the Talmudists, was neither customary, nor allowed to do into other
Corbans.
This court, indeed, is commonly
called in the Jewish writers, the court of the women; not that
women only entered in there, but because women might not go further;
in the same sense as the outward court is called 'the court of the
Gentiles,' not that heathens only might enter there, but because they
might not go further. That court was also most ordinarily called
the Mountain of the Temple; so this also whereof we are treating
was called the treasury.
When, therefore, it is said by St.
Mark that Jesus sat over-against the treasury, it comes to
this, that he sat under the walk before which those chests were
placed. And when John saith, "Jesus spake these words in the
treasury," it is all one as if he had said, 'He spake these words in
the court of the women'; yea, in that place where those chests were,
that that place might be distinguished from others which were in that
court; for in every corner of that court there was a little court,
each one called by its own name, as appears in the places written in
the margin.
II. To trace the situation of the
rest of the Corbans, concerning which we have made mention, is not now
the business before us; for that which was propounded as our task we
have despatched. But this we cannot but advise for the reader's sake,
that on the north side of the court of Israel was a gate which was
called 'the Corban-gate'; yea, by comparing the words of the masters,
there seem to be two gates of the same name: one of which if you make
to belong to that Corban-chamber, into which the money out of the
thirteen chests was emptied, and the other to belong to that Corban
that was appointed for the repair and amending of the building itself,
perhaps you will not mistake. Certainly you will not find any place
more probable in those writers.
In the Talmudic book Zavim these
words occur obscure enough: "He saw one [woman] multiplied [or
continued] like three, which are as from Gad Javan to Siloah." The
thing discoursed of is of the discovery of some profluvious issue. For
example, one discovers such a profluvious issue in himself, now one by
and by another, presently after a third; it is disputed how great or
how little distance of time is to be assigned, to make it one or two
profluviums; and consequently, to how great or how small an oblation
the party is bound for his purification. The tradition which we have
produced comes to this: namely, if one sees such an issue at one time,
which is so continued, that it contains the space of three
discoveries; that is, so much time as one might walk "from Gad Javan
to Siloam, behold! such a man is completely profluvious."
The Glossers and the Aruch teach us
what was Gad Javan. Hear themselves; "Gad Javan is a
phrase drawn from those words: 'That prepare a table for that troop':
(Isa
65:11: where the LXX read, 'preparing a table for the devil.' The
Vulgar reads, 'who set a table for fortune.' The Interlinear, 'a table
of Jupiter.') And it is a place where the kings of Grecia erected an
idol: as it is said in the book Avodah Zarah, In the corner looking
north-east the Asmoneans hid the stones of the altar, which the Greeks
had profaned with their idols."
But whether these our interpreters
suppose Gad Javan to be that chamber where those stones lay
hid, laid up there by the Asmoneans when they repaired the altar,
concerning which place see if you please the place in the margin; or
whether they suppose it to be the place itself where the idol stood,
inquire. But how much space it was thence, and what way they went from
thence to Siloam, I heartily wish they had told us. They say only thus
much of that matter, that "it was so much space as one might walk
while a man twice bathed, and twice dried himself."
Being now in the Temple we cannot
but take notice of a name of it usual among the masters, namely,
Birah, that is, as the Aruch explains it, a palace. "If a
mischance in the night [or a gonorrhea] happened to any Levite going
forth, he went down into a secret walk which led away under Birah,
or the sanctuary, to a bath," &c. These things are related of the
second Temple. But elsewhere, when it is disputed 'Whether men were
better under the first Temple or the second,' Rabba determines it,
Birah may teach this which they had that lived before; but they had
not that lived after. If by Birah, is to be understood the
Temple itself, both they that lived before and they that lived after
had it; if some particular part of the Temple, they that lived after
had that also, as appears from the places alleged. But by the thread
of the discourse in the place quoted, it seems, that by Birah,
Rabbah understood not the Temple itself, but the glory of the Temple,
and those divine endowments of it, "The heavenly fire, the ark, Urim,"
&c. which were present to the first Temple, but absent from the
second. For presently they slip into discourse concerning the ceasing
of prophecy under the second Temple, and the Bath Kol's succeeding in
its places. The word Birah is in David's mouth,
1 Chronicles 29:19; "to build the palace for which I have made
provision."
Let us also salute Jerusalem, and
that under its most glorious name, 'The Holy City.' Herodotus points
it out, if we are not much mistaken, under the name of Cadytis.
"From Phoenice unto the mountains of Cadytis, which is the city
of those Syrians who are called Palestines." That Jerusalem is pointed
out by him under this name, these things following persuade me:
I. It was commonly called
Kedoshah, Holy. The Jewish money, wheresoever dispersed, spoke out
this title of the city. But now when it was very common in the Syrian
dialect to change Shin into Thau, how easy was it among them, and
among other nations imitating them, that Cadysha should pass into
Cadyta and Caditis: as Chadasha, New, passed into Chadatha.
II. He compareth Cadytis to
the great city of Sardis. For "From the city Cadytis," as he
goes on, "not much less than Sardis, as I think." But now there was no
city at all within Palestine worthy to be compared with Sardis, a most
famous metropolis in times past, except Jerusalem.
III. These things also he speaks of
Nechoh king of Egypt: "But Necus joining in a foot battle with the
Syrians in Magdolus, obtained the victory: and after that, too,
Cadytis the great city of Syria."
Which passage, if it be compared
with the holy story of Pharaoh Nechoh overcoming Josiah in the battle
in the vale of Megiddo, and disposing of the Jewish throne,
2 Kings 23:33,34, it fixeth the thing beyond all controversy.
Herodotus goes forward; "From
Cadytis, the sea mart towns as far as Jenysus, belong to Arabia; from
Jenysus onward to the Serbon lake belong to the Syrians." Words
obscure enough; especially which was the city Jenysus: the
Talmudists indeed mention Jenush among the towns which they say
are in the confines; but the situation does not agree. But we
will not pursue the matter in this place.
"The streets of Jerusalem were swept
every day." Hence, "The moneys that were found in Jerusalem before
those that bought cattle are always tenths. The moneys found in the
mount of the Temple are profane or common. In Jerusalem
on other days of the year they are common; but in the time of the
feasts they are all tenths. But, saith R. Shemaia, Upon what reason is
this? when the streets of Jerusalem are swept every day."
The Gloss writes thus; "They are
always tenths: both in the time of the feasts, and in the time when
there are no feasts. But moneys found in the mount of the Temple were
common, even in the time of the feasts. For it is supposed, those
moneys fell from them [or were lost], in the mount of the
Temple; and thereupon they are common. But why were they tenths in
Jerusalem in the time of the feasts? And why is it not said, That they
had fallen from them there before the feast, as we say of the mount of
the Temple? Because the streets of Jerusalem were swept every day; and
if moneys had been lost there before the feast, they who swept the
street had found them before. But the mount of the Temple had no need
to be swept every day: for dirt and dust remained not there; because
the mount was shelving: and moreover, it was not lawful for any to
enter there with his shoes, or with dust on his feet."
I cannot omit what he saith besides:
"Much of the flesh which was eaten at Jerusalem," in the time of the
feasts, 'was of the second tithes.' For scarce any one tarried there
until he had eaten all his tithes; but he gave the moneys of the
tithes either to the poor, or to his friends in the city. And, for the
most part, with the moneys of the tithes they bought their
thank-offerings.
"Rabban Jochanan Ben Zaccai sat
under the shadow of the Temple, and taught the people the whole
day," The Gloss, "When the Temple was a hundred cubits high, it cast
its shadow a great way in length, unto that street which was before
the Mountain of the House. And because that street was spacious,
and might contain a great multitude of men, Jochanan taught there by
reason of the heat. For no synagogue could contain his hearers."
That street which was before the
mount of the Temple, according to the accustomed form of speech, was
that by which they went to the Temple at the east gate; concerning
which street, and the people convened thither by Hezekiah, mention is
made
2 Chronicles 29:4. This street went out into the valley of Kedron,
by the Water-gate. And this way the priest went out, that was to burn
the red cow in Olivet. And this way our great High Priest entered with
palms and Hosanna. This was called "the Street of the Temple,"
Ezra 10:9.
"As they came near to Jerusalem, to
Bethphage and Bethany." So also Luke: when, according to the order of
the story, one would think it should rather be said, 'To Bethany and
Bethphage.' For Christ, in his travelling, came to Bethany, and there
lodged,
John 12; and from that city went forward by the space almost of a
mile, before he came as far as Bethphage. And yet it is named by them
in this order, "To Bethphage and Bethany"; that it might be shewn that
the story is to be understood of the place where Bethany and Bethphage
touch upon one another: Matthew therefore names Bethphage alone.
We have elsewhere shewn more at
large these two things out of the Talmudists, which do not a little
tend to the clearing of this matter:
I. That a tract, or one part of
mount Olivet, was called Bethany, not from the town of that name,
where Lazarus dwelt, but the town was so called from that tract; and
that tract from the dates or palm trees growing there, Beth Hene,
the place of dates.
II. That there was no town at all
named Bethphage, but another tract of Olivet was so called, for
green figs growing there; that is the meaning of Beth-phagi,
'The place of green figs'; and that the village, or outmost street of
Jerusalem, lying next it, was called by the same name.
We observed also, that that place in
mount Olivet, where these two tracts Bethany and Bethphage touched on
one another, was a sabbath-day's journey from the city, or
thereabouts. Which how it may be applied to illustrate the present
business we are upon, let us say a few things concerning such a
journey.
How far the bounds of a sabbath-day's
journey reached, every one knows: and every one knows that that space
was measured out every way without the cities, that the certain bounds
might be fixed, and that there might be no mistake; and that, by some
evident mark, the limits might be known, that they might not remain
doubtful in a thing wherein they placed so much religion.
These are the rules of the masters
concerning measuring two thousand cubits from every side of the city:
"A city which is long or square,
when it hath four just corners, they let be as it is; and they measure
two thousand cubits for it on every side. If it be round, they frame
it into a square, and they measure from the sides of that square. If
it be triangular, they frame it into a square, and measure from the
sides of the square," &c. And after, "They measure only with a line of
fifty cubits, and that of flax."
An intimation is given concerning
the marks of those bounds by that canon; "They do not ride upon a
beast" (on the sabbath, and on a holy-day), "that they go not forth
beyond the bounds." Where the Gloss is, "Because he that walketh not
on foot seeth not the marks of the bounds."
It is said by St. Mark, that the two
disciples sent by Christ "found the colt tied where two ways met." Let
me pass my conjecture,--that it was in such a place where a mark was
set up of a sabbath-day's journey from the city; where the sabbath-way
from the city, and the common way thence into the country, touched on
one another.
"The shops of the children of Chanan,
were laid waste three years before the destruction of the Temple." "And
why were the shops of Beth Heno laid waste three years before the
destruction of the Temple? Because they established their doings upon
the words of the law," &c. The Gloss is, "That which was forbidden by
the words of the wise men, they found allowed by the words of the
law."
The story is the same in both
places. In the former place the shopkeepers are named; in the latter,
the place of the shops. The shopkeepers were the sons of Chanan
or Jochanan; for, in the Jerusalem language, Chanan and
Jochanan are the same. The place was Beth Heno; which I
fear not to assert to be the same with Bethany. The reason of my
confidence is twofold: 1. Because the Talmudists call Bethany Beth
Hene; to which how near does Beth Heno come! 2. Because in
them there is open mention of shops in mount Olivet.
"There were two cedars (say they) in
mount Olivet: under one of them there were four shops, where all
things needful for purification were sold. From one of them they
produced forty seahs of pigeons every month, whence women to be
purified were supplied." Four shops were under one; and how many were
there under another, whence so many pigeons should come? Therefore,
either shew me some other village between the town of Bethany and the
first skirt of Bethphage; or else allow me to believe that this was
that to which the two disciples were sent, and which, then when they
were sent, was "the village over-against you": namely, either a
village consisting of those various shops only, or a village, a part
of which those shops were.
Pardon the word which I am forced to
frame, lest, if I had said the bath, or the laver, they
might straiten the sense of the thing too much. That place whereof we
are now speaking was a pool, or a collection of waters, where people
were wont to wash; and it agreeth very well with those things that
were spoken before concerning purifications. Here either unclean men
or unclean women might wash themselves; and presently buying in the
neighbouring shops what was needful for purification, they betook
themselves to Jerusalem, and were purified in the Temple.
Of this place of washing, whatsoever
it was, the Gemarists speak in that story, "A fox rent a sheep at
the lavatory of Beth Hene: and the cause was brought before the
wise men, and they said, It is not a rending." We doubt not
that Beth Hene is Bethany: and this cause was brought
thence before the wise men of Jerusalem, that they might instruct them
whether it were lawful to eat of the carcase of that sheep, when the
eating of a beast that was torn was forbidden. See, if you please,
their distinction between snatching away by a wild beast, and
tearing, in the place cited, where they discuss it at large [Bab.
Cholin, fol. 53. 1.].
Travellers speak of a cistern near
the town of Bethany, "near which, in a field, is shewn the place where
Martha met our Lord coming to Bethany." They are the words of Borchard
the monk. Whether the thing itself agrees with this whereof we are
speaking, must be left uncertain.
By occasion of these places
discovered to us by the Talmudists, I cannot but observe another also
out of them on another side of the city, not further distant from the
city than that whereof we now spake, if it were as far distant as
that; that is, Migdal Eder, or the Tower of the Flock,
different from that mentioned
Genesis 35:21. The Jerusalem Talmudists, of this our place, speak
thus: "The cattle which are found from Jerusalem as far as Migdal
Eder on every side," &c. The Babylonian writers more fully; "The
cattle which are found from Jerusalem as far as Migdal Eder, and in
the same space on every side being males, are burnt-offerings, females
are peace-offerings."
In that place the masters are
treating and disputing, Whether it is lawful to espouse a woman by
some consecrated thing given in pledge to assure the thing. And
concerning cattle found between Jerusalem and Migdal Eder, and the
same space every where about Jerusalem, they conclude that they are to
be reputed for consecrated. "Because it may be supposed" (as the Gloss
speaks), "that they were strayed out of Jerusalem; for very many
cattle going out thence were to be sacrificed."
They have a tradition not unlike
this, as we said before, of money found within Jerusalem: "Moneys
which are found in Jerusalem, before those that buy cattle, are always
tithes," &c.
But to our business. From the words
alleged we infer that there was a tower or a place by name Migdal Eder,
but a very little space from Jerusalem, and that it was situate on the
south side of the city: I say, "a little space from Jerusalem"; for it
had been a burden to the inhabitants dwelling about the city not to be
borne, if their oxen or smaller cattle, upon any occasion straying
away and taken in stray, should immediately become consecrated, and
that the proper owner should no longer have any right in them. But
this tower seems to be situate so near the city, that there was no
town round about within that space. We say also, that that tower was
on the south side of the city; and that upon the credit, (shall I
say?) or mistake of the Seventy interpreters.
Here, reader, I will resolve you a
riddle in the Seventy, in
Genesis 35. In Moses the story of Jacob in that place is thus:
"They went from Beth-el; and when it was but a little space to Ephrath,
Rachel travailed," &c. And afterward; "Israel went on and pitched his
tabernacle beyond the tower Edar."
The Seventy invert the order of the
history, and they make the encamping of Jacob beyond Migdal Eder to be
before his coming to the place where Rachel died. For thus they write:
"And Jacob, departing from Beth-el, pitched his tent over-against the
tower Gader. And it came to pass when he approached to Chabratha to
come to Ephratha, Rachel travailed," &c.
I suspect, unless I fail in my
conjecture, that they inverted the order of the history, fixing their
eyes upon that Migdal Eder which was very near Jerusalem. For when
Jacob travelled from Beth-el to the place of Rachel's sepulchre, that
tower was first to be passed by, before one could come to the place;
and when Jacob in his journey travelled southward, it is very probable
that tower was on that quarter of the city.
There was, indeed, a Migdal Eder
near Beth-lehem, and this was near Jerusalem; and perhaps there were
more places of that name in the land of Israel. For as that word
denotes the Tower of a Flock, so those towers seem to have been
built for the keeping of flocks; that shepherds might be there ready
also a-nights; and that they might have weapons in a readiness to
defend their flocks, not only from wild beasts, but from robbers also.
And to this sense we suppose that expression, 'the Tower of the
Keepers,' is to be taken in that saying, "From the Tower of the
Keepers to the strong city,"
2 Kings 17:9, 18:8.
Hence the Targumist Jonathan, to
distinguish Migdal Eder of Beth-lehem from all others, thus
paraphraseth Moses' words: "And Israel went forward and pitched his
tabernacle beyond Migdal Eder, the place whence the Messias is to be
revealed in the end of days." Which very well agree with the history,
Luke 2:8. Whether Micah, chapter 4:8, speak of the same, inquire.
We have spoken of the places nearest
the city, the mention of them taking its rise from the triumph of
Christ sitting upon the ass, and the people making their acclamations:
and this awakens the remembrance of that pomp which accompanied the
bringing of the firstfruits from places also near the city. Take it in
the words of the masters, in the place cited in the margin:
"After what manner did they bring
their firstfruits? All the cities which were of one station"
(that is, out of which one course of priests proceeded) "were gathered
together into a stationary city, and lodged in the streets. In the
morning, he who was the first among them said, Arise, let us go up to
Zion, to the house of the Lord our God."
"An ox went before them with gilded
horns, and an olive crown upon his head" (the Gloss is, that ox was
for a peace-offering); "And the pipe played before them until they
approached near to Jerusalem. When then they came to Jerusalem, they
crowned their firstfruits" (that is, they exposed them to sight in as
much glory as they could), "and the chief men, and the high officers,
and treasurers of the Temple came to meet them, and that to do the
more honour to them that were coming; and all the workmen in
Jerusalem rose up to them" (as they were in their shops), "and saluted
them in this manner, 'O our brethren, inhabitants of the city N., ye
are welcome.'"
"The pipe played before them till
they came to the Mount of the Temple. When they came to the Mount of
the Temple, even king Agrippa himself took the basket upon his
shoulder, and went forward till he came to the court; the Levites
sang, 'I will exalt thee, O Lord, because thou hast exalted me, and
hast not made mine enemies to rejoice over me' (Psa
30:1). While the basket is yet upon his shoulder, he recites that
passage (Deut
26:3), 'I profess this day to the Lord my God,' &c. R. Judah saith,
When he recites these words, 'A Syrian ready to perish was my father,'
&c. verse 5, he casts down the basket from his shoulders, and holds
its lips while the priest waves it hither and thither. The whole
passage being recited to verse 10, he placeth the basket before the
altar, and adores, and goes out."
Matthew 15:39: "And came to the coasts of Magdala."--Mark
8:10: "came into the parts of Dalmanutha."
The story is one and the same; and
that country is one and the same: but the names Magdala and
Dalmanutha are not so to be confounded, as if the city 'Magdala'
was also called Dalmanutha; but Dalmanutha is to be
supposed to be some particular place within the bounds of Magdala.
I observe the Arabic interpreter in the London Polyglott Bible, for
Dalmanutha, in Mark, reads Magdala, as it is in Matthew; in
no false sense, but in no true interpretation. But the Arabic of
Erpenius' edition reads Dalmanutha.--"Erasmus notes (saith Beza
upon the place), that a certain Greek copy hath Magdala. And
Austin writes, that most copies have Mageda. But in our very
old copy, and in another besides, 'into the parts of Dalmanutha,'
is written 'into the coasts of Madegada.'"
If the name and situation of
Magdala in the Talmudists had been known to these interpreters, I
scarcely think they would have dashed upon so many uncertainties. We
have largely and plainly treated of it in another volume, out of those
authors: and out of the same, unless I mistake, something may be
fetched, which may afford light to Mark's text of Dalmanutha.
Which thing before we take in hand, perhaps it will not be
unacceptable to the reader, if we describe the sea of Gennesaret, and
the places adjoining, by some kind of delineation, according to their
situation, which we take up from the Hebrew writers.
1. A scheme of the sea of
Gennesaret, and the places adjacent.
Comparing this my little map with
others, since you see it to differ so much from them, you will expect
that I sufficiently prove and illustrate the situation of the places,
or I shall come off with shame. I did that, if my opinion deceive me
not, a good while ago, in some chapters in the Chorographical century.
I will here despatch the sum total in a few lines:
I. "Chammath was so called, because
of the warm baths of Tiberias: from which it was so very little
distant, that, as to a sabbath-day's journey, the men of Tiberias and
the men of Chammath might make but one city."
It is called Chammath of Gadara,
not only to distinguish it from Chammath of Pella, that is, 'Callirrhoe';
but because a part of it was built upon the bank of Gadara, and
another part upon the bank of Nephthali, or Tiberias, the bridge lying
between: which shall be shewn presently.
Tiberias stood touching on the sea;
"for on one side it had the sea for a wall."
"Gennesaret was a place near
Tiberias, where were gardens and paradises." They are the words of the
Aruch.
Capernaum we place within the
country of Gennesaret upon the credit of the evangelists,
Matthew 14:34, and
Mark 6:53, compared with
John 6:22,24.
Taricha was distant from Tiberias
thirty furlongs: Bethmaus, four furlongs.
Magdala was beyond Jordan; for it is
called Magdala of Gadara: and that which is said by the
Talmudists, "The Gadarenes might, by the permission of R. Juda Nasi,
come down to Chammath on the sabbath, and walk through it, unto the
furthest street, even to the bridge," is expressed and expounded by
them in the same place, "That the people of Magdala, by the permission
of R. Judah Nasi, went up to Chammath," &c. From which single
tradition one may infer, 1. That Magdala was on the bank of Gadara. 2.
That it was not distant from Chammath above a sabbath-day's journey.
3. That it was on that side of Chammath, which was built on the same
bank of Gadara by which it reached to the bridge above Jordan, which
joined it to the other side on the bank of Galilee.
"Hippo was distant from Tiberias
thirty furlongs." With which measure compare these words, which are
spoken of Susitha; which that it was the same with Hippo, both the
derivation of the words and other things do evince:
"R. Juda saith, The monoceros
entered not into Noah's ark, but his whelps entered. R. Nehemiah saith,
Neither he nor his whelps entered, but Noah tied him to the ark.
And he made furrows in the waves, for as much space as is from
Tiberias to Susitha." And again, "The ark of Noah swam upon the
waters as upon two rafters, as much space as is from Tiberias to
Susitha."
Gadara was distant sixty furlongs
from Tiberias.
"Bethsaida was in lower
Gaulonitis," beyond Jordan in Batanea. It is shown to pilgrims on
the shore of the sea of Gennesaret in Galilee; and thence the error of
the maps was taken. Hear our countryman Biddulph, who saw those places
about the year 1600:
"March the twenty-fourth, we rode by
the sea of Galilee, which hath two names,
John 6:1, 'The sea of Galilee,' and 'Tiberias of Galilee,' because
it is in Galilee; and 'of Tiberias,' because the city of Tiberias was
built near it: also Bethsaida, another ancient city. We saw some ruins
of the walls of both. But it is said in that chapter,
John 6:1, that Jesus sailed over the sea of Galilee. And
elsewhere, that he went over the lake; and
Luke 9:10, it is said that he departed into a desert place near
the city Bethsaida. Which text of John I learned better to understand
by seeing, than ever I could by reading. For when Tiberias and
Bethsaida were both on the same shore of the sea, and Christ went from
Tiberias to, or near, Bethsaida; hence I gather, that our Saviour
Christ sailed not over the length or breadth of the sea, but that he
passed some bay, as much as Tiberias was distant from Bethsaida. Which
is proved thence, in that it is said elsewhere, That a great multitude
followed him thither on foot; which they could not do if he had sailed
over the whole sea, to that shore among the Gergasenes which is
without the holy land." These are his words.
But take heed, sir, that your
guides, who show those places under those names, do not impose upon
you. If you will take Josephus for a guide, he will teach, that
"Philip repaired the town Bethsaida; and he called it Julias, from
Julias the daughter of Caesar": and, that "that Julias was in lower
Gaulonitis." Nor is the argument good, "otherwise they would not
follow him a-foot"; for, from Capernaum and Tiberias, there was a very
beaten and common way by the bridge of Chammath into the country of
the Gadarenes, and so to Bethsaida.
Cana was a great way distant from
Tiberias: Josephus spent a whole night travelling from this town to
that with his army. It was situate against Julias of Betharamphtha, as
may be gathered from the same author in the place quoted in the
margin. Now that Julias was situate at the very influx of Jordan into
the sea of Gennesaret.
These things might be more largely
explained and illustrated, but we are afraid of being too long; and so
much the more, because we have treated copiously of them elsewhere.
This will be enough to an unbiased reader, to whose judgment we leave
it; and now go on to Dalmanutha.
If we may play a little with the
name Dalmanutha, hear a Talmudical tradition. "He that sells a farm to
his neighbour, or that receives a place from his neighbour, to make
him a house of betrothing for his son, or a house of widowhood for his
daughter; let him build it four cubits this way, and six that."
Where the Gloss, "A house of widowhood for his daughter, whose
husband is dead, and she now returns to the house of her father."
The meaning of this tradition is,
'When the son of any one had married a wife, he did not use to dwell
with his father-in-law; but it was more customary for his father to
build him a little house near his own house.' So also when the husband
was dead, and the daughter, now being a widow, returned to her father,
it was also customary for the father to build her a little house; in
which she dwelt, indeed, alone, but very near her father.
But now from some such house of more
note than ordinary, built for some eminent widow; or from many such
houses standing thick together, this place, perhaps, might be called
Dalmanutha, that is, "The place of widowhood." And if some more
probable derivation of the name occurred not, it might, not without
reason, have had respect to this.
But we suppose the name is derived
elsewhere; namely, from Zalmon, Tsade being changed into Daleth;
which is no strange thing to the Syrians and Arabians.
Of Zalmon we meet with mention,
Judges 9:48;--namely, a mountain, or some tract in a mountain,
near Sychem: but that place is a very great way off of that concerning
which we are now treating. But the Talmudists mention a place called
Zalmon, which agrees excellently well with Dalmanutha. "There is a
story (say they) of a certain man in Zalmon, who said, I, N., the son
of N., am bitten by a serpent, and behold I die. They went away and