THE SIXTH BOOK OF MISCELLANEOUS RITES.

CHAP. I. Of Circumcision.

Their Sacraments were two. First, the Passover of which there hath been a set Chapter. Secondly, Circumcision, of which now.

Circumcision, was a cutting off the foreskin, as a sign and seal of Gods Covenant made with the People of the Jews. It is called a sign by God in its first institution, Gen. 17. and a seal by the Apostle, Rom. 4. 11. Yea, it is called a sign and a seal, by a Doctor of the Jews,[617] more ancient than their Talmud.

It was used (though not as a Sacrament) by many other Nations:[618] by the inhabitants of Colchis, the Æthiopians, the Trogloditæ, and the Egyptians.

In a figurative sense, alluding unto this Sacramental Rite, we read of three other sorts of Circumcision in the Scripture; so that in all there are four mentioned. 1. This of the flesh. 2. Another of the heart. 3. A third of the lips. 4. And a fourth of the ears. We are to consider it in its proper acception, and here to observe: First, the time when it was administred. Secondly, the manner how. Thirdly, the penalty in case it was omitted.

The time was the eighth day; yea, the eighth day was so precisely observed, that if it fell on the Sabbath, yet they circumcised the Child; whence rose that saying among them, Circumcisio pellit Sabbatum Circumcision driveth away the Sabbath; or, the Sabbath giveth place to Circumcision. And with this accordeth that of our Saviour, Ye on the Sabbath day circumcise a man, John 7. 22. The Jews superstitiously conceiting that each creatures perfection depended upon the sanctification of one Sabbath day at least, say that God did therefore enjoyn the eighth day, that one Sabbath might first pass over each male, before he should be partaker of this Sacrament. But more probably we may say, that the reasons why God would not suffer them to anticipate the eighth day, were first to shew, that God in the matter of Salvation, neither was, nor is simply tyed to Sacraments; for then there had been no less cruelty in forbidding Circumcision until the eighth day, than there was love in permitting it upon the eighth. Secondly, because in this time of the Mosaical Pedagogie, there was a kind of legal uncleanness, in which the creatures were thought to be, as remaining in their blood, for the first seven daies after their birth, Levit. 22. 27. It. 12. 2, 3. Notwithstanding, God thought it not convenient to defer it longer than eight daies, for the comfort of the Parents, which they received by a mature and seasonable initiation of their children.

The manner how Circumcision was administred, I find thus recorded: Some of those that were present held a vessel full of dust,[619] into which they did cast the foreskin being cut off. Again, they prepared in the room, a certain void chair for Elias;[620] which was done, partly in honour of him, for which respect also, as often as they fell on any difficult place in Scripture they would say[621] Veniet Elias, & omnia enodabit; We know that Elias will come, and he will tell us all things: But chiefly it was done, because they thought Elias to be present there in spirit, whose bodily coming they did, and do daily expect. These ceremonies are meerly Jewish, practised by the latter Jews, but utterly unknown in our Saviour Christ his time, and, as it appeareth by the Samaritan woman her speech, that proverbial saying applyed now to Elias, was of old applyed to Christ, John 4. 25. Thirdly, he which supplyed the place of the Witness, or as we phrase it, of the Godfather,[622] held the Child in his arms whiles it was Circumcised: this Godfather they called Baal Berith, and Sandack; that is, the Master of the Covenant. Uriah the Priest, and Zachariah the son of Jeberechia, are thought[623] to have been Godfathers at the Circumcision of Maher-shalal-hash-baz, Esay. 8. 2. and from them the custome of having Godfathers in Baptisme, to have taken its original. Fourthly, the Parents named the Child, and in Zacharies time, it seemeth that in the naming of the Infant, they had respect to some name of his Ancestors. They said unto her, there is none of thy kindred that is named with this name, Luk. 1. 61. Other Nations had their set daies also after the birth, for the naming of their Children. The Romans[624] gave names to their male-children on the ninth day, to the female on the eighth. The Athenians[625] gave names on the tenth. Others[626] on the seventh. These daies Tertullian[627] called Nominalia. The Grecians besides the tenth day on which they named the Child, they observed also the fifth,[628] on which day the Midwives took the Child, and ran about a fire made for that purpose, using that Ceremony as a purification of themselves and the Child: on this day the Neighbours also sent in gifts, or small tokens, Munera natalitia;[629] from which custom that amongst Christians, of the Godfathers sending gifts to the baptized Infant, is thought to have flown. But to return again to the Rites of the Jews. After the Child had been circumcised, the Father said:[630] Blessed be our Lord God, who hath sanctified us with his precepts, and hath commanded us, that we should cause this child to enter into the Covenant of Abraham. After this, the whole Church or company present replyed in this manner,[631] As thou hast made him to enter into the Covenant, so make him also to enter into the Law, into Matrimony, and into good works.

The penalty for the omission of Circumcision running in this form; That soul shall be cut off from his people, Gen. 17. 14. I understand the penalty to be pronounced against such an omission; which proceeded either from contempt or wilful neglect. In this case the question is, what is meant by this phrase, His soul shall be cut off from the people. Secondly, who ought thus to be punisht? whether the child, or the parents, and such who supply the place of parents? For the first, besides Gods secret action in punishing such Delinquents, methinks there is a rule of direction for the Church, how to proceed against such in her Discipline: If any understand here, by cutting off such a mans soul from his people, the sentence of excommunication, or casting him out of the Synagogue, I shall not oppose it; though I rather incline to those, who understand hereby a bodily death inflicted upon such an offender, in which sense the phrase is taken, Exod. 31. 14. Whosoever doth any work on the Sabbath, that soul shall be cut off from among his people. And it is very remarkable, that when Moses his child was uncircumcised, the Lord sought to kill Moses: which as it intimated the punishment of this fault to be a bodily death so it clearly evinceth, that not the child till he cometh to years of discretion, but the parents were liable to punishment. The opinion of the Rabbines concerning this latter point is thus delivered:[632] If the Father circumcise him not, then the Judges are commanded to circumcise him: and if it be unknown to the Judges, and they circumcise him not, when he is waxen great, he is bound to circumcise himself, and every day that passeth over him, after he is waxen great, and, he circumciseth not himself, lo he breaketh the Commandment.

Here it may be demanded, how it is possible for a man, after once he hath been marked with the sign of Circumcision, to blot out that character and become uncircumcised? for thus some Jews, for fear of Antiochus, made themselves uncircumcised, 1 Mac. 1. 16. Others for shame, after they were gained to the knowledge of Christ, and to entertainment of the Christian faith, uncircumcised themselves, 1 Cor. 7. 18. The answer is,[633] that this was done by drawing up the foreskin with a Chirurgion his instrument; and unto this the Apostle in the fore quoted place alludeth, μὴ ἐπισπάσθω, Ne attrahat præputium. This wicked invention is ascribed unto Esau, as the first Author and practiser thereof.

CHAP. II. Of their first fruits and their firstlings, or first-born.

The use and end of their first-fruits, was that the after-fruits might be consecrated in them. To this purpose they were enjoyned to offer the first fruits of their trees, which served for food, Levit. 19. 23, 24. In which this order was observed; the three first years after the tree had been planted, the fruits were counted uncircumcised and unclean: it was unlawful to eat them, sell them, or make any benefit of them: on the fourth year, they were accounted holy, that is, either they were given to the Priests,[634] Num. 18. 12, 13. or the owners did eat them before the Lord at Jerusalem, as they did their second tithe: and this latter is the common opinion of the Hebrews.[635] After the fourth year, they returned to the use of the owner: we may call these πρωτογεννήματα, simply the first-fruits.

Secondly, they were enjoyned to pay yearly the first-fruits of every years increase, and these we may call, ἀπαρχὰς, and of them there were many sorts. First, first-fruits in the sheaf, Lev. 23. 10. Secondly, first-fruits in two wave-loaves, Levit. 23. 17. These two bounded their harvest, that in the sheaf was offered in the beginning of harvest, upon the fifteenth of Nisan, the other of the loavs at the end, upon their Penticost: and Levit. 23. they are both called ‎‏תנופות‏‎ Thenuphoth, that is, shake-offerings. Thirdly, there was a first of the dough. Num. 15. 20. namely,[636] a four and twentieth part thereof, given unto the Priests: which kind of offering was observed, even when they were returned out of Babylon, Nehem. 10. 37. Unto this St. Paul hath reference, Rom. 11. 16. If the first fruits be holy, the lump is holy. Fourthly, they were to pay unto the Priests the first-fruits of the threshing floor, Numb. 15. 20. These two last are called ‎‏תרומות‏‎ Therumoth, that is, heave offerings: this the heave-offering of the threshing floor; the other the heave-offering of the dough, Numb. 15. 20. Under the name of first-fruits, commonly Authors treat of no others but this last, and wholly omit all the former sorts. Before we proceed to the explaining of the last, note with me the difference of these two words, Thenuphoth, and Therumoth: both signifie shake-offerings, heave-offerings, or wave offerings, but with this difference;[637] the Therumoth was by a waving of elevation, lifting the oblation upward and downward, to signifie, that God was Lord both of Heaven and Earth. The Thenuphoth was by a waving of agitation, waving it to and fro, from the right hand to the left, from the East to the West, from the North to the South: by which kind of agitation, they acknowledged God to be Lord of the whole world. Now, that we may know what these first-fruits of the threshing floor were, the Rabbies, and the others following them, distinguish them into two sorts: the first of these, was first-fruits of seven things only: 1 Wheat. 2 Barley. 3 Grapes. 4 Figs. 5 Pomgranates. 6 Olives. 7 Dates. For all which the Promised Land is commended, Deut. 8. 8. These the Talmudists[638] term ‎‏בכורים‏‎ Biccurim; and when they treat of first-fruites they treat of them under this name, and understand by the name of Biccurim no other. These, they say, are the first fruits, which the people are so often in the Law commanded to bring up unto the Sanctuary, at the Feast of Pentecost, which was the end and closure of their harvest, as was signified both by this oblation, and likewise by that of the two wave-loaves, Lev. 23. 17.

The second was paid of Corn, Wine, Oyl, and the Fleece, Deut. 18. 4. Numb. 18. 12. yea, of all things else that the earth brought forth of mans food. Thus their Doctors are to be understood, where they say,[639] Quicquid eduliorum ex terra incrementum capit, obnoxium est primitiis, Therumæ, & decimis. This they call, ‎‏תרומה‏‎ Theruma, an heave-offering: the Greek renders it, ἀφωρίσμος, A separation, because this was a consecration, or setting apart of the Lords portion. In allusion unto this, I take S. Paul to have termed himself ἀφωρισμένον ἐς ἐυαγγέλιον, separated unto the Gospel, Rom. 1. 1. ἀφοριεῖ Ἀαρὼν, Aaron shall separate the Levites, so the Greek renders it; but the Original is, Aaron shall wave the Levites, Numb. 8. 11. Again, ἀφορίσατε Separate me Barnabas and Saul, Acts 13. 2. Drusius delivereth another reason, as hath been said in the Chapter of the Pharisees. But to proceed: the Hebrews called this second payment, not only Theruma, simple, but sometimes Theruma gedola,[640] the great heave offering, in comparison of that Tithe which the Levites payed unto the Priests: for that was termed Theruma magnasher, the heave offering of the Tithe, Numb. 18. 26. which though it were one of ten, in respect of that portion which the Levites received; yet it was but one of an hundered, in respect of the Husbandmans stock, who payed the Levites: and thus it was a great deal less than the great heave offering, as will presently appear. This (the Hebrews say) the owners were not bound to bring up to Jerusalem.

The law prescribed no set quantity to be paid, either in the Biccurim or in the Theruma; but, by tradition, they were taught to pay at least the sixtieth part in both, even in those seven things, also paid under the name of Biccurim, or first fruits, as well as in their heave-offering termed Theruma, or Theruma gedola.

Thus the Talmudists do distinguish the Biccurim from the Theruma gedola: but in my opinion the Biccurim may be contained under Theruma gedola; and in truth, both of them are nothing else but the heave-offering of the floor, formerly mentioned out of Num. 15. 20. My reasons are these: 1. Scripture giveth no such leave to keep any part of their first-fruits at home; if that could be proved, the distinction were warrantable. 2. Scripture doth not limit first fruits unto those seven kinds, which alone go under the name of Biccurim. 3. Themselves confound both members; for their Biccurim, they say, they paid, 1. Wheat. 2. Barley. In their Theruma, they say, they paid Corn; as if under Corn; Wheat and Barley were not contained. Some may say, they paid their Biccurim in the Ear, while the harvest was yet standing and their Theruma in Wheat and Barley ready threshed and winnowed. My reasons why it cannot be so, are these: 1. Because then they should pay twice a sixtieth part in their corn. 2. Because the corn offered in the sheaf was but a little quantity, and it was offered not at their Pentecost when their harvest ended, but at their Passover when their harvest began, Levit. 23. 10. Whereas their Biccurim, or first fruits, were alwayes offered at their Pentecost.

But omitting further proofs, I proceed to shew the ground, why in this heave-offering of the floor, at least a sixtieth part was prescribed: it is grounded upon that of the Prophet Ezek. This is the oblation that ye shall offer, the sixth part of an Ephah out of an Homer, Ezek. 45. 13. that is, the sixtieth part of the whole, because an Homer containeth ten Ephahs. Hence they took that distinction of these offerings. Some[641] they say, gave the fortieth part of their encrease: this, because it was the greatest quantity given in this kind of oblations, they termed Theruma oculi boni,[642] The oblation of a fair eye: others (though they were not so liberal as the former, yet they might not be reputed niggardly) gave a fiftieth part, and this they termed Theruma mediana,[643] The oblation of a middle eye: others, whom they reputed sordid, gave just a sixtieth part, less then which they could not give, this they termed Theruma oculi mali,[644] The oblation of an evill eye; so that the payment of these was bounded by the tradition of the Elders, between the sixtieth and the fortieth part: But the Pharisees[645] that they might be holy above others, made their bounds the fiftieth and the thirtieth part; so that he was reputed sordid with them that paid the fiftieth part; and none liberal except he paid the thirtieth. The manner how these first-fruites termed Biccurim were paid, is at large set down, Deut. 26. But in time of the Prophets other Ceremonies seem to have been received, of which the Hebrew Docters say thus:[646] When they carried up their first-fruits, all the Cities that were in a county gathered together to the chief City of the county to the end that they might not go up alone: for it is said, In the multitude of people is the Kings honour, Prov. 14. 28. And they came and lodged all night in the streets of the City, and went not into houses, for fear of pollution: and in the morning the Governor said, Arise, and let us go up to Sion, the City of the Lord our God. And before them went a Bull which had his horns covered with Gold, and an Olive Garland on his head, to signifie the first fruits of the seven kinds of fruits. There was likewise a pipe struck up before them, untill they came near to Jerusalem and all the way as they went, they sung, I rejoyced in them that said unto me, we will go into the house of the Lord, &c. Psal. 122. Unto this, and other like manner of solemn Assemblies the Prophet hath reference, saying, Ye shall have a song as in a night when a holy solemnity is kept, and gladness of heart, as when one goeth with a pipe to come unto the mountain of the Lord, Esay. 30. 29.

The firstlings, or first-born of man and beast, the Lord challenged as his own, Exod. 13. The ground of this Law was, because God smote all the first-born in Egypt from man to beast, but spared the Israelites; for a perpetual memory of which benefit, he commanded them to sanctifie all their first-born males unto him. Now the first born men, and unclean beasts, were redeemed for five silver shekels of the sanctuary, paid unto the Priests for each of them, Numb. 18. 15, 16. Unto this S. Peter alludeth saying, We are not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, 1 Pet. 1. 18. The firstlings of a clean beasts ought to be sacrificed, their blood to be sprinkled on the Altar, their fat to be burnt for a burnt-offering, and their flesh to return to the Priests.

Observe how God would be honoured by the firstlings of men and cattel; by the first-fruits of trees, and of the earth, in the sheaf, in the threshing-floor, in the dough, in the loavs: All which teach us to consecrate the first and prime of our years unto the Lord.

CHAP. III. Of Tithes.

We are here to enquire: First, what things in general were titheable: Secondly how many kind of Tithes there were: Thirdly, the time when each sort of tithes began to be titheable.

First, their yearly encrease was either Cattel, fruits of the trees, or fruits of the land; of all these[647] they payed tithes, even to mint, anise, and cumine, These things they ought not to leave undone, Mat. 23. 23.

Secondly, the sorts of tithes payed out of the fruits, both of the trees and the land, by the Husbandman, were two, payd in this manner: When the Harvest had been ended, and all gathered, then the Husbandman laid aside his great Theruma, otherwise called the first-fruits of his threshing floor, of which it hath been spoken in the Chapter of the first fruits. This being done, then out of the remainder he paid a tenth part unto the Levites, and this they termed Magnasher rischon,[648] the first tithe, Tob. 1. 7. This was always paid in kind, and as it seemeth to me, it was not brought up to Jerusalem by the husbandman, (others[649] think otherwise) but payed unto the Levites in the several Cities of tillage, Neh. 10. 37. out of this first tithe the Levites paid a tenth portion unto the Priests; this they termed Magnasher min hammagnasher,[650] the tithe of the Tithes, Neh. 10. 38. and Decima sanctitatum, the tithe of holy things, 2 Chron. 31. 6. this the Levites brought up to the house of God, Neh. 10. 38. When the Levites had paid this tenth portion unto the Priests, then the Levites and their Families might eat the remainder of the first tithe in any place, even out of Jerusalem, Num. 18. 31.

This first tithe being paid, the Husbandman paid out of that which remained a second tithe; this the Husbandman might pay in kind if he pleased, or if he would, he might by way of commutation pay the worth thereof in money; but when he payed in money, he added a fifth part; so that what in kind was ten in the hundred, that changed into money, was twelve in the hundred. This the Husbandman brought up unto Jerusalem, and made a kind of Love-feast therewith, unto which he invited the Priests and Levites, only every third year he carried it not to Jerusalem, but spent it at home within his own gates, upon the Levites, the fatherless, the widows, & the poor, Deut. 14. 28. They reckoned[651] their third year from the Sabbatical year, on which the land rested: so that the first and second Tithe was payed by the Husbandman; the first, second, fourth and fifth years after the Sabbatical year: but upon the third and sixth years only, the first Tithe was paid to the Levites, and the second was spent at home. Hence in respect of the kinds, this is called Magnasher scheni,[652] the second tithe, Tobit. 1. 7. in respect it was paid to the poor every third year: it is called Magnasher gnani[653], πτωχοδεκάδαι, the poor mans tithe, and Magnasher schelischi[654], the third tithe, Tob. 1. 1. On those years on which it was carried up to Jerusalem, it ought of necessity to be eaten within the Court of the Temple, Deut. 14. 26. and by the third tithe we are to understand the poor mans tithe on the third year, which year is termed a year of tithes, Deut. 26. 12.

They likewise tithed their cattel. Of their bullocks, & their sheep, and all that passed under the rod, the tenth was holy to the Lord, Lev. 27. 32. Some Expositors understand by this phrase of passing under the rod, that all cattel are titheable which live under the custody of a keeper, as if there were allusion to the shephards staff, or keepers rod, which they use in keeping their cattel. The Hebrews more probably understand hereby, the manner of their decimation or tithing their cattel, which was as followeth.[655] He that hath Lambs (or Bullocks) thus separateth his tenth, he gathereth all his lambs and all his bullocks into a fold to which he maketh a little door, that two cannot go forth together; their dams are placed without the door, to the end, that the lambs hearing them bleating, might go forth one after another in order. Then one beginneth to number with his rod, one, two, three, &c. and the tenth which cometh forth, whether it be male or female, perfect, or blemished, he marketh it with a red mark, saying this is for tithe. At this day the Jews, though they are not in their own Country, neither have any Levitical Priesthood, yet those who will be reputed religious among them, do distribute in lieu of tithes, the tenth of their encrease unto the poor, being perswaded that God doth bless their estates the more: for their usual Proverb is,[656] Thegnasher, bischebil sche thegnasher; that is, Pay tithes, that thou mayst be rich.

The time of the year from which they reckoned tithes, was different. For beasts[657] they counted the year from Elul to Elul, that is, from August to August, for grain, pulse, and herbs,[658] from Tisri to Tisri, that is, from September to September: for the fruit of trees, from Schebat to Schebat, that is, from January to January.

In this Synopsis following (which Sixtinus Amama hath taken out of Scaliger) the manner of Israels tithings is set down.

The Husbandman had growing 6000 Bushels in one year.

100 Bushels was the least that could be paid by the Husbandman to the Priests for the first-fruits of the threshing floor.

5900 Bushels remained to the Husbandman, out of which he payed two Tythes.

590 Bushels were the first Tithe to the Levites.

59 Bushels the Levites paid the Priests, which was called the Tithe of the Tithes.

5310 Bushels remained to the Husbandman, out of which he paid his second tithe.

531 Bushels were the second Tithe.

4779 Bushels remained to the Husbandman as his own, all being paid.

1121 Bushels are the sume of both Tithes joyned together, which is above a sixth part of the whole, namely nineteen out of an hundred.

We are to know moreover, that through the corruption of the times, in time of Hezekiah’s reign, Tithes began generally to be neglected, insomuch that then Overseers were appointed to look to the true payment thereof, 2 Chr. 31. 13. Notwithstanding, partly through the negligence of the Overseers, partly through the covetousness of the people, about one hundred thirty years before our Saviours Incarnation, corruption so prevailed, that the people in a manner neglected all tithes, yea none or very few payed either their first, second, or poor manns tithe, only they paid the great heave-offering justly. For this reason (saith Moses Kotsensis[659]) in the daies of John the Priest, who succeeded Simeon the just, (I take it he meaneth Johannes Hyrcanus) their great Court, termed their Sanhedrim, made a Decree, that more faithful Overseers should be appointed for the Tithes. At this time many things became questionable, whether they were tithable or no; whence the high Court of their Sanhedrim decreed, that in the things doubtful (which they termed ‎‏דמאי‏‎ Demai)[660] though they paid neither first, nor poor mans tithe, yet they paid a second tithe, and a small heave-offering; namely, ‎‏אחד ממאה‏‎ one part of an hundred: Mint, Anise and Cummin, seemeth to have been of these doubtful things; in which, though the decree of their Sanhedrim required but one in the hundred, yet the Pharisees would pay a just tenth, Mat. 23. 23., and hence it is that they boasted, They gave tithes of all that they possessed, Luk. 18. 12. In which they outstripped the other Jews, who in these payments took the liberty granted them by the Sanhedrim.

CHAP. IV. Of their Marriages.

In this Chapter of their Marriages, we are to consider: First, the distinction of their wives. Secondly, the manner of their betrothings. Thirdly, the rites and ceremonies of their marriage. Lastly, the forme of their divorce. The Patriarchs in the Old Testament had many of them, two sorts of wives: both of them were reputed lawful, and true wives, and therefore the children of both were accounted legitimate. The Hebrews commonly call the one ‎‏נשים‏‎ Naschim; Primary-wives, married with nuptial ceremonies and rites requisite. Some derive the word from ‎‏נשה‏‎ Nischa, Oblitus fuit, quasi Obliviosæ dictæ, because for the most part, womens memory is not so strong as mens: but they think not amiss, who say that women are so called from oblivion, or forgetfulness, because the Fathers family is forgotten, and in a manner extinct in their daughters when they are married. Hence proceeds that common saying of the Hebrews,[661] Familia matris non vocatur familia: and for the contrary reason, a male child is called ‎‏זכר‏‎ Zacar, from his memory, because the memory of the Father is preserved in the Son,[662] according to that speech of Absolom, I have no Son to keep my name in remembrance, 2 Sam. 18. 18.

The other sort of wives they call[663] Pillagshin, secondary wives, or half wives; the English translates them Concubines, and that not unfitly, for sometimes the Hebrew word it self denoteth an infamous Strumpet, or common Harlot.

The differences between these Concubines, and the chief or primary wives, are many. 1. A disparity in their authority, or houshold government: the Wife was a Mistress, the Concubine as an hand-maid or servant. She had only Jus thori, a true and lawful right unto the marriage bed as the chief wife had; otherwise she was in all respects inferiour. And this appeareth in the history of Sarah and Hagar. Secondly, the betrothing was different: the chief wife at her espousals received from her Husband certain Gifts and Tokens, as pledges and ceremonies of the contract. Thus Abrahams steward (who is probably thought to be Eliezer, of whom we read, Gen. 15. 2.) gave in Isaacs name unto Rebecca, jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment, Gen. 24. 53. This custome was in use also among the Grecians, who calleth these gifts Ἕδνα.[664] Moreover[665] the chief wife likewise received from her husband a bill of writing, or matrimonial letters, whereas the Concubine received neither such gifts, nor such letters. Thirdly, only the children of the chief wife succeeded the father in his inheritance; the children of the Concubine received gifts or legacies: Abraham gave all his goods to Isaac, but unto the sons of the Concubines which Abraham had, Abraham gave gifts, Gen. 25. 5, 6. And here, by the way we may take notice, that the first-born by right of primogeniture, received a double portion of his fathers goods, the father shall give him a double portion of all that he hath for he is the first of his strength, Deut. 21. 17. Unto this custome the Prophet Elisha’s speech alludeth, when he prayeth Elijah, that his spirit might be double upon him, 2 King. 2. 9. that is that he might have a double portion of his spirit, in comparison of the other Prophets, or rather the sons of the Prophets, amongst whom he obtained the place of an elder brother, and therefore prayeth for the right of primogeniture: so that we are not to understand him, as if he did ambitiously desire a greater measure of the spirit than rested upon his Master, but that he desired to excel the other remaining Prophets, unto whom afterward he became a father. The Hebr. phrase[666] is in both places the same. Secondly, in their betrothing we are to consider, 1. The distance of time between the espousals, and the confirmation of their marriage, which some have conceited to have been a full year, at least ten months; and this they observe from Rebecca, her brother and mothers answer unto Abrahams servant, desiring that the Maid might not depart presently, but remain after the Espousals at least ten dayes, Gen. 24. 55. Which Text they interpret[667] ten months, understanding thereby that which elsewhere is phrased[668] an year of dayes, Gen. 41. 1. But if we should yield this interpretation (although our English at least ten dayes is more agreeable unto the Septuagint and the Original) yet it followeth not, that this time was craved for the fulfilling of any prescribed distance between the Espousals and the marriage, but rather it implieth the tender affection of the mother towards her daughter, as being loath so suddenly to part with her: Notwithstanding, it is not unlikely that there was a competent distance of time between the first affiancing, and the confirmation of the marriage, though not prescribed, or limited to any set number of dayes, weeks, or months. The second thing considerable in their betrothings, is to enquire the manner of their contracting, which might be done in Israel three ways.[669] First, By a piece of money. Secondly, By writing. Thirdly, By copulation, and all these in the presence of witnesses. By a piece of money, though it were but a farthing, or the worth thereof, at which time the man used this, or the like form of words;[670] Lo thou art betrothed unto me: and he gave her the mony before witnesses. By bill, and then he wrote the like form of words; Be thou betrothed unto me, which he gave her before witnesses; and it was written with her name in it, else it was no betrothing. By copulation, and then he said likewise, Lo thou shalt be betrothed unto me by copulation, and so he was united unto her before two witnesses, after which copulation she was his betrothed wife. If he lay with her by way of fornication, and not by the name of betrothing; or if it were by themselves, without the fore-acquainting of Witnesses, it was no betrothing: however he might not lye with her the second time, before the marriage was accomplished. And though the betrothing might be any of these three wayes, yet usually it was by a piece of money; and if they would, they might do it by writing, but betrothing by copulation was forbidden by the wise men of Israel, and who so did it was chastised with rods: howbeit the betrothing stood in force. These solemnities in betrothing were performed by the man and woman under a Tent or Canopy made for the purpose, called in their language Chuppa,[671] a Tabernacle or Tent: to this the Psalmist alludeth, Psal. 19. 4, 5. In them hath he set a Tabernacle for the Sun which as a Bridegroom coming out of his Chamber, rejoyceth as a strong man to run a Race.

Thirdly, the rites and ceremonies of their marriage were performed in the assembly of ten men at least, with blessings and thanksgivings unto God, whence the house it self was called Beth hillula,[672] the House of praise and their marriage song Hillulim,[673] praises. The Bridegrooms intimate friends which accompanied him & sung this Epithalamium or marriage song, were termed υἱοὶ τοῦ νυμφῶνος, children of the Bride-chamber, Mat. 9. 15. Such I conceive those thirty companions to have been which Sampson associated to himself, Judg. 14. 11. The form of this phrase or blessing is at large described by Genebrard, and the sum thereof is this: The chief of these companions taketh a cup, and blesseth it saying Blessed art thou O Lord our God, the King of the world, w^ch createst the fruit of the vine: afterward then he saith, blessed be the Lord our God the King of the world, who hath created man after his own Image, according to the image of his own likeness, & hath therby prepared unto himself an everlasting building, blessed be thou, O Lord, who hast created him. Then followeth again, Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, who hast created joy and gladness, the Bridegroom and the Bride, charity and brotherly love, rejoycing and pleasure, peace and society: I beseech thee, O Lord, let there suddenly be heard in the Cities of Judah, and the streets of Jerusalem the voice of joy & gladness, the voice of the bridegroom & the Bride: the voice of exultation in the bride-chamber is sweeter than any feast: and children sweeter than the sweetness of a song: and this being ended, he drinketh to the married couple.

This custome of praising God at such times was not needless or superfluous, for the fruit of the womb was expected as a special blessing from God, and so acknowledged by them in that saying, that four keys were in the hand of him who was the Lord of the whole world, which were committed neither to Angel nor Seraphim; namely Clavis pluviæ, clavis cibationis, clavis sepulchrorum, & clavis sterilitatis.[674] Concerning the key of Rain, thus speaketh the Scripture, the Lord will open to thee his good treasure, Deut. 28. Concerning the key of food, thou openest thy hands, Psal. 145. Concerning the key of the grave, when I shall open your sepulchres, Ezek. 37. Concerning the key of barrenness, God remembred Rachel and opened her womb, Gen. 30. Whereby it is intimated, that these four things God hath reserved in his own hand and custody: namely, Rain, food, the raising of our bodies and the procreation of children.

The time of their marriage feast appeareth clearly to have been usually seven daies.[675] Sampson continued his feast seven daies, Judg. 14. 10, 11. And of this seven daies feast, Divines[676] do understand that speech of Labans unto Jacob, concerning Leah, fulfill her weak, and we will also give thee this, Gen. 29. 27. in which speech, it is thought that Laban did desire Jacob, not to reject and turn away Leah, but to confirm the present marriage, by fulfilling the usual days of her marriage feast. From this custom, together with the practise of Joseph, mourning seven dayes for his father, Gen. 50. 10. arose that usual proverb among the Jews, Septem ad convivium, Septem ad luctum. The chief governor of the feast was called Baal mischte;[677] which name is fitly expressed by being called the ruler of the feast,[678] Joh. 2. 9. The modern Jews in Italy, when they invite any to a marriage feast, use this form of words, Such a one, or such a one entreateth you to credit his daughters marriage with your presence at the feast, &c. Then he which is invited replieth, Mazal tob[679] which some interpret to be the wishing of good luck in general, but I rather think, that hereby was wished to the married parties, a special blessing in the procreation of children: whence the wedding ring, given unto the Bride-wife, had this inscription or posie Mazal tob;[680] and the Hebrews call the Planet Jupiter, Mazal, whose influence they thought to be of great efficacy and force for generation: but in truth, Mazal, signifieth any other Planet or Star in the Heaven, according to that Hebrew Proverb,[681] There is no herb in the earth, that hath not a Mazal or Star in the Firmament answering it, and striking it, saying grow. Now tob signifieth good; so that the phrase soundeth as much as, be it done in a good hour, or under a good Planet.

At the time of the marriage also, the man gave his wife a dowery bill, which the Scrivener wrote, and the Bride-groom paid for, whereby he endowed his spouse, if she were a Virgin, with 300 Deniers, (that is fifty shekels) and if she had been married before with an hundred Deniers, that is twenty five shekels and this was called the root or principal of the dowry: the dowry might not be less, but more, so much as he would, though it were to a talent of gold. There is mention of a contract between Tobias and Sarah, and that was performed, not by a Scrivener, but by Raguel, the womans father; where we may observe, that before the writing of this bill there was a giving of the woman unto her husband. The form of words there used is, Behold, take her after the Law of Moses, Tobit. 7. 14. A copy of this Dowry-bill is taken by Bertram out of the Babylon Talmud. The words thereof are thus:[682] Upon the sixth day of the week, the fourth of the month Sivan, in the year five thousand two hundred fifty four of the creation of the world, according to the computation which we use here at Massilia, a City which is scituate near the Seashore, the Bridegroom Rabbi Moses, the son of Rabbi Jehuda, said unto the Bridewife Clarona, the daughter of Rabbi David, the son of Rabbi Moses, a Citizen of Lisbon; Be unto me a wife according to the law of Moses and Israel: and I according to the word of God, will worship, honour, maintain, and govern thee according to the manner of the husbands among the Jews, which do worship, honour, maintain, and govern their wives faithfully, I also do bestow upon thee the dowry of thy Virginity, 200 Deniers in silver, which belong unto thee by the law: and moreover, thy food, thy apparel, and sufficient necessaries; as likewise the knowledge of thee, according to the custom of all the earth. Thus Clarona the Virgin rested and became a wife to Rabbi Moses the son of Jehuda, the Bridegroom.

After the marriage was finished, then the wife might challenge from her Husband three things as debt. 1. Food. 2. Apparel. 3. Cohabitation, or the right of the bed; which they note from Exod. 21. 10. where it is said, If he take him another wife, her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage shall he not diminish. And unto this the Apostle alludeth, calling it Due benevolence, 1 Cor. 7. 3.

The Wife, when she was first presented unto her Husband, covered her Head with a veil, in token of subjection. Rebecca took a veil, and covered her self, (Gen. 24. 65.) and for this cause (namely in sign of subjection) ought the woman to have power on her head, 1 Cor. 11. 10. where by Power the Apostle understandeth a veil. Do any ask the question, why he should denote this veil by the name of power, especially seeing it was in token of subjection? The Apostle being an Hebrew of the Hebrews, might have respect to the Hebrew word Radid,[683] signifying a veil, which cometh from the root Radad, to bear rule and authority, and so might use the Greek word,[684] signifying power in the same sense as the Hebrews did. And, in truth, what was this subjection to the husband but a kind of power and protection derived unto the Wife, in comparison of her former state, being a Virgin? and therefore in case her husband was jealous of her, among other tokens of sorrow, she was commanded to stand at her tryal with her head uncovered,[685] Numb. 5. 18. intimating thereby, that if she could not then clear her self, she was from thenceforward deprived of all power, which heretofore she enjoyed by the means of her Husband.

After the marriage was finished, sometimes there was permitted a Bill of Divorce: this the Hebrews called Sepher Kerithuth,[686] a Bill of cutting off, because the woman is by this means cut off from her Husbands family. Ten things were thought[687] requisite as the root and foundation of a divorce. 1. That a man put her not away but of his own will. 2. That he put her away by writing, not by any other thing. 3. That the matter of the writing be to divorce her, and put her away, out of her possession. 4. That the matter of that divorcement be between him and her. 5. That it be written by her name. 6. That there be no action wanting, after the writing thereof, save the delivery of it unto her. 7. That he give it unto her. 8. That he give it her before witnesses. 9. That he give it her by the law of divorces. 10. That it be the Husband or his deputy that delivereth it unto her. The form or copy of this bill of divorcement was as followeth,[688] Upon such a day of the week, such and such of the month N. such or such an year of the Creation of the world, according to the computation which we use here in this City N. scituate near the River N. that I of the Country N. the son of Rabbi N. of the Country N. But now I dwelling in such or such a place, near such or such a river, have desired of my own free will, without any coaction, and have divorced dismissed and cast out thee, thee I say, thee my wife N. of the country N. the daughter of Rabbi N. dwelling in such or such a country, and dwelling now in such or such a place, scituate near such or such a river, which hast been my wife heretofore, but now I do divorce thee, dismiss thee, and cast thee out, that thou mayst be free, and have the rule of thy self, and to depart, and to marry with any other man whom thou wilt, and let no man be refused by thee for me from this day forward for ever. Thus be thou lawful for any man, and this shall be to thee from me, a bill of separation, a bill of divorce, and a letter of dismission, according to the law of Moses and Israel.

N. the son of N. witness. N. the son of N. witness.

This bill was written by a Scrivener, or publick Notary.[689] And furthermore,[690] a woman being divorced, or otherwise a widow, it was not lawful for her to marry again, till she had tarried ninety days, besides the day of her divorce, or of her husbands death, and her last espousals: to the end it might be known, whether she were with child or no, & that there might be proof, whether it were the seed of her first husband, or of her second.

It was a common custome among the Romans, about the time of our Saviours birth, even for the women to divorce their Husbands, and to marry again at their pleasure. Of this, Heathen Authors speak:

Non consulum, sed maritorum numero annos suos computant, &c.[691] The bill tendred by the woman, was termed[692] Γράμματα ἀπολείψεως, letters of forsaking; not letters of cutting off, or putting away. This same practise was in use also among the Hebrews. Hence is that saying of our Saviour: If a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, &c. Mark 10. 12. Now although, at that time, humane laws forbad not marriages renewed with others upon such divorce, yet Gods law condemned both such divorces, & such marriages, and, before God, persons marrying after such divorcements were reputed digamites, that is, to have two husbands, or two wives. For this reason, a Minister above others is commanded to be μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἀνὴρ; The husband of one wife, 1 Tim. 3. 2. And the woman she is commanded to be ἑνὸς ἀνδρὸς γυνὴ, The wife of one husband, 1 Tim. 5. 9. In which text, second marriages (in case of the Husbands or Wives death) are no more forbidden, than the Poet forbade them in the like phrase.

Note in the last place, that among the Jews the Bride-woman also brought a dowry to her husband; it was sometimes more, sometimes less; it was called by the Rabbins[693] ‎‏נדוניא‏‎ Nedunia: Raguel gave with his daughter Sarah half his goods, servants and cattel, and money, Tob. 10. 10.

CHAP. V. Of their Burials.

At the time of a mans death, before his Burial, many ceremonies were observed. First, the next of the kin closed the eyes of the deceased body. Joseph shall put his hands upon thy eyes, Genes. 46. 4. This was likewise practised both by the Romans and the Græcians.

Secondly, they washed the body being dead. Tabitha died, and when they had washed her, they laid her in an upper-chamber, Act. 9. 37. The baptization or washing at such a time was threefold. The first was βαπτισμὸς ἀπὸ νεκρῶν, Eccles. 34. 26. A washing from the pollution contracted by the touch of a dead carkass; that if haply any ignorantly and unawares became thus unclean, then was he by a kind of washing to be made clean again. The second was βαπτισμὸς τῶν νεκρῶν, a baptization or washing of the dead Corps it self. Thus Tabitha was washed: neither is the word βαπτισμὸς, unusually applied to common washings, as Mar. 7. 4. we read of the washing of cups, pots, vessels, tables, the Greek is βαπτισμὸς. The first of these washings was proper to the Jews: this second in use with Jews Christians,[694] and Heathens:[695] the third (which was βαπτισμὸς ὑπὲρ τῶν νεκρῶν, a baptization for the dead, 1 Cor. 15. 9.) proper to some amiss-led Christians. It may be demanded, what manner of Baptism this was? with submission of my judgment, I understand this place with S. Ambrose[696] of a Sacramental washing, applied unto some living man in the name and behalf of his friend, dying without Baptism, out of a superstitious conceit, that the Sacrament thus conferred to one alive, in the name of the deceased, might be available for the other dying unbaptized. As if the Apostle did wound those superstitious Corinthians with their own quills, and prove the Resurrection of the dead from their own erroneous practice, telling them in effect, that their superstitious custome of baptizing the living for the dead, were vain and bootless, if there were no resurrection, and therefore the Apostle useth an emphatical distinction of the persons, in the next immediate verse, saying, why are we also in jeopardy every hour? he inferreth the resurrection by force of a double argument; the first drawn from their superstitious baptization for the dead: the second, from the hourly jeopardy and peril wherein we, that is, himself and other Christians are. So that as that Father noteth, the Apostle doth not hereby approve their doing, but evinceth their hope of the resurrection from their own practice, though erroneous. That there was Vicarium tale Baptisma (as Tertullian[697] calleth it) in use among the Marcionites, is evident, yea, and among the Corinthians[698] also: the manner thereof is thus described:[699] When any Catechumenist died, some living person placed under the bed of the deceased, they came unto the deceased party, and asked him whether he would be baptized: then he replying nothing, the party under the bed answered for him, saying that he would be baptized: and thus they baptized him for the dead, as if they acted a play upon the Stage.

The third ceremony used by the Jews towards the dead party, was the embalming of the corps, which for the main thereof, it is probable they learned from the Egyptians, for we find Joseph to be the first that practised it, Gen. 50. 2. The Egyptian manner of embalming was thus:[700] they took out the bowels of the dead, they cleansed them and washed them with the wine of Dates, and after that again with odors: then filled they the bowels with pure Myrrh beaten, and Cassia, and other Odors (except Frankincense) and sewed them up. After this they seasoned the corps hidden in Nitre seventy days, not longer: after seventy days they washed the corps, and wrapped it in fine linnen cloth gummed, which gum the Egyptians often used instead of glew. The Greeks termed this ταριχεύειν. And the use thereof was for the preservation of the body, that it might not putrifie; and therefore when the Funeral Obsequies were not long delayed, they used another kind of embalming, namely, an external and outward application of Spices and Odours, without the unbowelling of the corps. This the Greeks termed ἐνταφιάζειν.[701] This was used toward our Saviour Christ, John 19. 40.

Sometimes they did use to burn the corps, preserving onely the bones in some urn or pitcher, Amos 6. 10. But commonly they interred the whole body, and buried it in the earth. The ancient Jews if they received not from their Ancestors, then would they purchase a burial place themselves, for the burial of them and their family. The form of that place was thus: It was a vault hewed out in a rock,[702] six cubits long, and four broad, in which eight other cells or lesser holes (or as some say, thirteen) were made, as so many distinct receptacles, or tombs for the dead bodies to be laid in: as often as they buried any, they were wont to roll a great stone to the mouth of the cave. The cave or vault it self they termed from the act of burial, Keber,[703] which signifieth a place of burial, or from its form, Magnara,[704] a den or cave. These several cells or receptacles in which the body was laid, they called cucim,[705] graves, tombs: and the stone they named Golel,[706] a rolling stone. This giveth great light to that in the Gospel. Joseph took the body of Christ, and wrapped it in a clean linnen cloth, and put it in his new tomb, which he had hewen out in a rock, and rolled a great stone to the door of the Sepulchre, Mat. 27. 59, 60. These caves or vaults the wealthier sort would paint, garnish, and beautifie at the mouth or enterance of them: hence cometh that phrase, Sepulchra dealbata, painted tombs. As often as they had an occasion to mention or speak of any friend deceased, they used that in the Proverbs, The memory of the just is blessed, Prov. 10. 7. Hence the Rabbies,[707] in their quotations of any worthy Author deceased, usually subjoyn this honourable commemoration, N. Benedictæ memoriæ, N. such or such a one of blessed memory.

But their usual Epitaph or inscription upon their Sepulchers, was,[708] Let this soul be bound up in the Garden of Eden, or in the bundle of the living, Amen, Amen, Amen, Selati.

The latter Jews have been strangely conceited concerning the place of burials, and are perswaded that if an Israelite be buried in any strange country, out of the promised Land, he shall not be partaker so much as of Resurrection, except the Lord vouchsafe to make him hollow passages, under the earth, thorow which his body by a continual volutation and rolling, may be brought into the land of Canaan. The ground hereof is taken from the charge of Jacob unto his son Joseph, that he should not bury him in the land of Egypt, but in Canaan. For which charge they assign three reasons.[709] First, because he foresaw by the spirit of Prophecy, that the dust of that land should afterward be turned into lice. Secondly, because those who died out of the holy Land should not rise again without a painful rolling and tumbling of their bodies thorow those hollow passages. Thirdly, that the Egyptians might not idolatrously worship him.

They made a feast at their burials, which is stiled The bread of men, Ezek. 14. 17. And a cup of consolation, Jer. 16. 7. because it was administred to comfort those that were sad of heart. It much resembled the Roman Silicernium.

From those two places last quoted, we may observe, that at the burial of their friends, they used these ceremonies which follow; some to testifie, some to augment their grief. 1. Cutting themselves, that is, wounding or cutting any part of their body, with any kind of Instrument. This practice was learned from the Heathens,[710] who were wont not only to scratch their face, but to punch and prick certain parts of their body with a needle, and then cover it over with ink, which they used as a special ceremony in their superstitious worship, and therefore it is forbid, Deut. 14. 1. Secondly, making themselves bald,[711] which was done divers manner of ways; either by shaving their hair, or plucking it off with their hands, or by impoisoned plaister to make it fall off. Other Nations were wont to shave off the hair of their head, and to offer it in the behalf of the dead: they did sometimes shave their cheeks, sometimes their eye-lids: and this also, being an Heathenish custome, was likewise forbidden in Israel, Deut. 14. 1. Thirdly, going bare headed, that they might cast dust or ashes upon their heads, signifying thereby that they were unworthy the ground on which they went. Fourthly, going barefooted for their greater humiliation. Fifthly, the covering of their lips, for that was a special sign of sorrow and shame, The Seers shall be ashamed, &c. they shall all cover their lips, for they have no answer of God, Mich. 3. 7. If it be demanded, how they covered their lips? It is thought[712] they did it by casting the skirt of their cloak, or garment over them. Sixthly,[713] renting their cloaths. Seventhly, putting sackcloth about their loyns, Gen. 37. 34. These were general tokens of grief, used upon all extroardinary occasions of sorrow. Two other there were, more proper to burials, to augment their grief. First, Minstrels, who with their sad tunes inclined the affections of the people to mourning.[714] Of these there were two sorts: Some playing on pipes, others sounding trumpets. At the funeral of Noblemen, or old men, they used a trumpet: at the funeral of the common people, or children, they used a pipe.[715] In this respect it is said; That Jesus, when he raised Jairus his daughter, cast out the Minstrels, Mat. 9. 23. Secondly, women hired to sing at burials for the same purpose, and likewise by outward significations of sorrow, to move the company, and more strongly to affect them, Call for the mourning women, &c. and send for skilful women, Jer. 9. 17. These the Romans called, Præficas, quasi in hoc ipsum præfectas, Chief or skilful mourners.

CHAP. VI. Of their Oaths.

The manner of swearing was sometimes by lifting up their hands towards heaven; Abraham said to the King of Sodom, I have lifted up my hand unto the Lord; that is, I have sworn, that I will not take from a thred, even to a shoe-latchet, Gen. 14. 22. Unto which custome the Psalmist seemeth to allude, Psal. 106. 26. He lifted up his hand, that is, he swore. Sometimes he that took the Oath did put his hand under the others thigh, which administred the Oath. We read this manner of administration to have been used by Abraham, Gen. 24. 2. and Jacob, Gen. 47. 29. Which ceremony some[716] interpret to be as a token of subjection; others[717] as a mystery of circumcision; the sign wherof they bore about that place of their body: Others[718] more probably think it to be a mysterious signification of Christ the promised seed, who was to come out of Abrahams loyns, or thigh; as the like phrase is used, Gen. 46. 26. the souls that came out of Jacobs thigh. Sometimes also the manner of deposing, was to stand before the Altar, 1 Kings 8. 31. Which was also the custome of the Athenians,[719] the Carthaginians,[720] and the Romans.[721]

The object of a lawful Oath was, and is, onely the Lord: whence he that took the Oath was said to confess unto God, compare Isa. 45. 23. with Rom. 14. 11. And the ancient form of imposing an Oath was this, Give glory to God, Josh. 7. 19. John. 9. 24. Now God was glorified by an Oath, because thereby there was a solemn confession and acknowledgement of Gods Omni-presence, that he is present in every place: of his Omniscience, that he knoweth all secrets: of his truth, that he is a maintainer of truth, and an avenger of falshood: of his justice, that he is willing; and his omnipotency, that he is able to punish those that by swearing shall dishonour him, And as the object of a lawful oath was onely God: so it is implied, that it was not rashly or unadvisedly to be undertaken, but by a kind of necessity imposed; for the Hebrew word ‎‏נשבע‏‎ is a Passive, and signifieth to be sworn, rather than to swear.

In corrupter times they were wont to swear by the creatures,[722] but the Jews chiefly by Jerusalem, by the Temple, by the gold of the Temple, by the Altar, and the gift on the Altar. This gift in Hebrew was termed Corban,[723] and it was one of those oaths which in our Saviour Christs time the Scribes and Pharisees accounted principally obligatory. If any swore by the Altar, it was nothing: but if any swore by the oblation of the Altar, he was bound to perform it, Matth. 23. 18. Yea, although Gods law enjoyned honour, and relief toward parents; yet if they had bound themselves by this oath Corban, that they would not help or relieve their parents, they taught they were discharged. Whence, saith their Talmud,[724] Every one ought to honour his father and mother, except he hath vowed the contrary. And it is evident[725] that the Jews did often by solemn vows and oaths bind themselves, that they would never do good to such, or such a man. We must furthermore know that usually to their oaths there was an execration, or conditional curse annexed, which sometimes was expressed, as, if I do not do thus and thus, then the Lord do so to me, and more also, 1 Sam. 14. 44. Also 1 Kin. 20. 10. Sometimes it is understood, as, I have sworn, if I take from a thred to a shoo-latchet, Gen. 14. 22. then let the Lord do so to me, and more also; this, or the like, is understood and maketh the former part of the oath to sound negatively; as if Abraham had said, I have sworn, I will not take from a thread to a shoo-latchet. In like manner, Psal. 95. I have sworn, if they shall enter into my rest; that is, They shall not enter into my rest, Heb. 3. 18. This helpeth the exposition of that difficult place, Mat. 15. 5. which we read,[726] By the gift that is offered by me thou maist have profit: but if we conceive it thus, according to the form of the oath Corban, By Corban if thou receive any profit by me, and understand the execration implyed: Then let God do thus, and much more to me; the sense will be thus; By Corban thou shalt receive no profit by me. This exposition is as agreeable to the scope of the place, as it is to their form of swearing, and plainly sheweth how the Pharisees by their traditions transgressed the Commandment of God. For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and Mother. But the Scribes and Pharisees said; Whosoever should say to father or mother seeking relief, By Corban thou shalt receive no profit from me, he was discharged.

CHAP. VII. Of their Writing, Masorites, and their Work.

Writing in no Nation came to its perfection on a sudden, but by degrees: The Opinions of the Ancients concerning the Authors and Inventers of letters are different. Some say[727] Cadmus brought the use of letters into Greece: others say,[728] Palamedes: some say,[729] Radamanthus brought them into Assyria: Memnon into Egypt: Hercules into Phrygia: and Carmenta into Latium. Likewise some say the Phœnicians had first the knowledge and use of letters.

Others say the Ethiopians:[730] others the Assyrians.[731] But upon better grounds it is thought,[732] that Moses first taught the use of letters to the Jews, and that the Phœnicians learned them from the Jews, and the Grecians from the Phœnicians.

In like manner, the matter upon which men wrote, in ruder times was different. Some wrote on rinds of trees, whence Liber, signifying originally a rinde of a tree, is now used for a book:[733] some wrote on tile-stone with a bone instead of a pen; some on Tables; this last was chiefly in use among the Jews, the Decalogue was was written in two tables. Again, write these things upon a table, Esay. 30. 8. ἐπὶ πυξίου, saith the Septuagint, as if the writing-tables at that time were made of Box-trees. They used not then pens or quills, but a certain instrument or punch, made of Iron or Steel, called Stylus, it was sharp at one end, for the more convenient indenting or carving of the characters, and broad at the other, for the scraping or blotting out what had been written: whence sprang that Proverbial speech:[734] Invertere stylum, to unsay what he had said, or to blot out what he hath written: Scribe stilo hominis: write with the pen of man, Esay. 8. 1. Afterward before they came to bind up books in manner as now we have them, they wrote in a roll of Paper or Parchment, which sometimes was ten cubits broad, and twenty long, Zac. 5. 2. This they called ‎‏מגלה‏‎ Megilla, in Hebrew, from Galal, to roll, Volumen in Latine, in English a volumn, from volvo, to roll. In the volumn of the book it is written, Psal. 40. 7. And Christ closing the Book, gave it to the Minister, Luk. 4. 20. the word is πτύξας, complicans folding, or rolling it up: and vers. 17. ἀναπτύξας, explicans, unfolding, or opening it.[735] These volumns were written not with one entire continued writing, but the writing was distinguished into many spaces, columns or platforms, like unto so many Areæ: these platforms, filled with writing, were instead of so many pages in a book: and thus we are to understand that Jer. 36. 23. When Jehudi had read three or four leaves, he cut it with a pen-knife, &c. These leaves were nothing else but such spaces, and platforms in the roll. After this manner the Jews reserve the Law written in such rolls, and with such spaces, in their Synagogues at this day.

It is much controversed, whether the Jews did from the beginning write with vowels and accents, or whether they were added by the Masorites; for the understanding of which, it will be needful, First, to enquire who the Masorites were: Secondly, what their work was; and then to deliver in a proposition what may be probably thought in this point.

First, concerning the Masorites, we are to know that ‎‏מסר‏‎ Masar signifieth tradere, to deliver, and Masor a tradition, delivered from hand to hand to posterity without writing, as the Pythagoreans and Druides were wont to do; but by the figure Synecdoche, it signifieth those critical notes or Scholion, written in the margine of the Bible, and those that were the Authors of those critical observations were termed Masoritæ, Masorites. Concerning these Authors, who they were there are two opinions. Some[736] think that they were certain learned Jews living in the City Tiberias, they termed them Sapientes Tiberiadis, the wise men of Tiberias. These wise men are thought to have added these marginal notes unto the Hebrew Bibles[737] some time after the finishing of the Babylon Talmud, which was about the year of our Lord, 506. This opinion is unlikely for these two reasons. 1.[738] Because we cannot find in Histories, the continuance of any Colledg or School in Tiberias so long, but rather that degrees in learning ceased there within four hundred years after our Saviour his birth. 2.[739] In both Talmuds mention is made of the Masora, and the things contained therein. Others therefore more probably say,[740] that the Masorites were that Ecclesiastical Senate or Council held by Esra, Haggai, Zachary, Malachi, and divers others assembled for the reformation of the Church after their return from Babylon; they are called Viri Synagogæ magnæ. This Council continued at least forty years: for Simeon the just, who went out in his Priestly robes, to meet and pacifie Alexander the Great, coming in hostile manner against Jerusalem,[741] was the last of that Council, and that was above three hundred years before the birth of our Saviour. Esra was the President or Chief of this Council; he was of such repute among the Jews, that they parallel’d him with Moses, saying,[742] Dignus erat Esra, quod data fuisset lex per manus ejus Israeli, si non præcessisset eum Moses.

In the second place we are to consider the work, what the men of this great Synagogue, being the true Masorites, did: their work may be reduced to these particulars. 1. When this great Council was assembled, they, among whom Ezra was chief (who was assisted with the inspiration of Gods Spirit)[743] determined what Books were Canonical, what spurious and Apocryphal. Secondly,[744] the authentick and Canonical Books, were purged by them, of all errors crept into the Text in time of their captivity. Thirdly,[745] they digested the Old Testament into twenty two books, according to the number of the Hebrew letters. Fourthly, they distinguisht it into great Sections and Verses; for though the Law was not so confusedly written, without any space or note of distinction between word and word that it seemed all one continued verse, or as the Kabbalists speak, ‎‏תיבה אחת‏‎ Theba achath, one word, until the time of the Masorites; yet it was not so distinguisht into Sections and Verses, as now we have it. Fifthly, they added their censures and critical observations, concerning the irregularity of many words, in respect of the vowels and accents. Sixthly, they numbered the verses, words, and letters of every Book, to prevent all possibility of corrupting the Text in future times; for now they say, the gift of Prophesie should cease. Lastly, they noted the different writing, and different reading, for the understanding of which we must know, that in the Hebrew Text many words are written with more, many with fewer letters, than they are pronounced; many words written in the Text which are not pronounced, &c.[746] In the margin the difference is expressed: whence the difference in the Text they term ‎‏כתב‏‎ Cethib, Scriptionem, the writing; the difference in the margin they term ‎‏קרי‏‎ Keri, Lectionem, the Reading: because they do read according to that in the margin. This difference is thought by some[747] to be a correction of the Bible, according to several copies after their return from Babylon: but, that it is of Divine Authority, containing many mysteries known to Moses, and the Prophets successively (though many of them unknown to our Age) and that it was not any correction, but the difference it self primarily and purposely was intended by the Prophets, and holy Penmen of the Scripture, evidently appeareth by the diversity of readings in those books which were written by Haggai, Zachary, Malachi, Daniel, and Esra: They being the Authors of their own books, needed no correction at that time, themselves being present, yet in them this different reading is used.

In the third place, the Proposition followeth; namely, Seeing that the Masorites passed their censure on many words for their irregularity in their vowels and accents; therefore, the vowels originally were not from the Masorites, but of the same antiquity with their words; and in truth, otherwise they had been a body or carkass without a soul.

CHAP. VIII. Of Israels pitching their Tents, or of their Camps.

Whiles the Israelites wandred thorow the Wilderness, their Church was a Tabernacle; and their habitations, Tents: so that their whole Camp might be termed a moveable City. It was divided into three parts. In the centre or middle of all was the Tabernacle it self, with its Courts, this they termed the Camp of the Divine Majesty. Next round about, pitcht the Priests and Levites, to whom the charge of the Tabernacle belonged, (and therefore the nearest adjoyning place of habitation might be the convenientest for them) this was called the camp of Levi. In the utter parts, round about Levi, the twelve Tribes pitcht their Tents; this they termed the Camp of Israel. The first Camp resembled a great Cathedral Church, with its Church-yard. The second a Priviledg-place about the Church, as it were for Colledges for the habitation of the Clergy. The third, the body of a City, wherein the Towns-men or Laity dwelt. The form of the whole, is probably thought to be four-square, some say twelve miles long, and twelve miles broad.[748]

In the Eastern part pitched these three Tribes, Judah, Issachar, and Zebulon. On the South-side, Reuben, Simeon, and Gad. On the West, Ephraim, Manasses, and Benjamin. On the North, Dan, Asher, and Napthali: and these made up the outward Camp, termed the Camp of Israel. Between each Tribe, in every one of those four quarters, there were distant spaces like Streets, where there was buying and selling as in a market, and tradesmen in their shops in manner of a City leading to and fro.[749] This Camp is thought[750] to be round a mile distant from the Tabernacle, that is a Sabbath daies journey; and this is gathered from Josh. 3. 4. where the distance between the People and the Ark is commanded to be two thousand cubits.

After this, pitched the Camp of Levi: in the Eastern part Moses, Aaron, and the Priests; in the South the Cohathites; in the West the Gershonites; in the North the Merarites.

In the middle was the Camp of the Divine Majesty. Unto this David alludeth: God is in the middest of her, she shall not be moved, Psal. 46. 5.

After the same manner the parts of the City Jerusalem were distinguished, when the Commonwealth was setled.[751] From the gate of Jerusalem, to the mountain of the Temple, was the Camp of Israel; from the gate of the mountain of the Temple, to the gate of the Court (which was otherwise called Nicanors gate) was the Camp of Levi: from the gate of the Court, and forward, was the Camp of the Divine Majesty.

Furthermore we are to know, that the twelve Tribes had between them four principal Banners, or Standards; three Tribes to one Standard: for which reason, the Church is said to be terrible as an Army with banners, Can. 6. 4. The Hebrew word Banner, Numb. 2. 2. the Greek[752] translateth Order and so the Caldee calleth it Tekes[753] (a word borrowed of the Greek τάξις) order: Whence the Apostle taketh his phrase, Every man in his own order, 1 Cor. 15. 23.

Every banner was thought to be of 3 colours,[754] according to the colours of the precious stones in the brest-plate, bearing the names of their Patriarchs. But this proportion will not hold in all, seeing Levi (who is not here among the other Tribes) was in the breast-plate one of the twelve: and Joseph there graved on the Beril hath here two Tribes, Ephraim and Manasses, unto whom two colours cannot be allowed from the breast plate.

Each Banner had its several motto, or inscription. In the first Standard was written, from Num. 10. 25. Rise up, Lord, and let thine enemies be scattered, and let them that hate thee flee before thee. It is moreover taught by the Hebrews,[755] that each Standard had a distinct sign engraven in it. Reubens Standard had the Image of a Man: Judahs the Image of a Lion: Ephraims the Image of an Ox: and Dans the Image of an Eagle.

These same four creatures are used by Ezekiel, Ez. 1. 10. to describe the nature of Angels. Every Cherubim is said to have four faces: the face of a man; to shew his understanding; of a Lion, to shew his power; of an Ox, to shew his ministratory office; of an Eagle to shew his swiftness in the execution of Gods will.[756] The same description of Angels you may find, Rev. 4. 6.

By the same four, in the opinion of many of the Fathers,[757] are shadowed forth the four Evangelists. The man shadowed S. Matthew, because he begins his Gospel with the Generation of Christ, according to his humanity: The Lyon S. Mark, because he beginneth his Gospel, from that voice of the Lion roaring in the Wilderness, Vox clamantis in deserto: The Ox S. Luke, because he beginneth with Zacharias the Priest: and the Eagle S. John, who soaring aloft beginneth with the Divinity of Christ.

Thus have we seen how they pitch’d their camps, their marching followeth: and here we are to consider, first, their marching in their journeys thorow the Wilderness. Secondly, their marching in their battels.

Concerning their marching in their journeys, they either moved forward, or abode still, according to the moving or standing of the Cloud, which conducted them: the manner thereof is described, Numb. 10. and summarily we may view it thus: when God took up the Cloud, Moses prayed, and the Priests with Trumpets blew an alarm, then Judah the first Standard rose up, with Issachar and Zebulon, and they marched foremost: then followed the Gershonites and Merarites, bearing the boards and coverings of the Tabernacle in wagons; the Trumpets sounded the second alarm, then Reuben, Simeon, and Gad rose up and followed the Tabernacle, and after them went the Kohathites, in the midst of the twelve Tribes, bearing on their shoulders the Ark, Candlestick, Table, Altar, and other holy things. At the third alarm rose up the Standard of Ephraim, Manasses, and Benjamin, and these followed the Sanctuary: unto this David hath reference, when he prayeth, Psa. 80. 2. Before Ephraim, Benjamin, and Manasses, stir up thy strength, and come and save us. At the fourth alarm, arose the Standard of Dan, Asher, and Napthali: and to these was committed the care of gathering together the lame, feeble, and sick, and to look that nothing was left behind: whence they are called the gathering Host, Josh. 6. 9. unto this David alludeth: when my Father and my Mother forsake me, the Lord will gather me, Psal. 27. 10.

Concerning their marching in War: First, the Priests sounded the alarm with Trumpets, Num. 10. 9. this they termed: Therugnah.[758] Secondly, one Priest was selected out of the rest, to stir up the hearts of the people, and by a kind of hortatory Oration, to encourage them to the war, Deut. 20. 2. him they called Unctum belli, the anointed of the battel. Thirdly, they marched on by five and five in battel-array, Exo. 13. 18. so the Original signifieth in that place.[759]

In the last place, we are to consider how they were to deal in besieging a Town; for the conceiving whereof, note these two propositions.

1. They were to offer peace unto all Forreigners, and Canaanites, Deut. 20. 10. And this is clearly signified Josh. 11. 19. There was not a City that made peace with the Children of Israel, save the Hivites, the inhabitants of Gibeon, all other they took in battel. For it was of the Lord to harden their hearts. Yet here Moab and Ammon are excepted; Israel must not seek their peace, Deut. 23. 6.

2. They were to make covenant with none of the seven Nations, Deut. 7. 2. Exod. 23. 32. & 34. 14. With Forreigners they might, Josh. 9. 17. peradventure you dwell among us, and how shall we make a covenant with you? Not, how shall we make peace with you?

Some may question, what the difference was between making peace, and making a covenant? I answer, two fold. 1. The making of peace was a naked stipulation, or promise, mutually made for the laying aside of all hostile affections towards each other; whereby life on both sides might be secured. Making a covenant, was a solemn binding of each other, to performance of this mutual promise by outward ceremonies,[760] of cutting a beast in twain, and passing between the parts thereof, Jer. 34. 18. as if they would say; Thus let it be done to him, and thus let his body be cut in two, who shall break this covenant? Secondly, peace was not concluded by the Israelites, but only upon these terms, That the People should become tributary unto them, Deut. 20. 11. The making of a covenant was upon equal terms, without any condition either of tribute or service, as is gatherable from the Covenant made by Joshua with the Gibeonites, where there is no mention of any condition at all, Josh. 9.

This difference seemeth to me warrantable, and serveth to reconcile many places of Scripture, as where God saith, Offer peace to all, and make a covenant with none. Secondly, It sheweth the fraud of the Gibeonites to be greater than is commonly conceived, for they sought not peace simply, but a covenant. Make a league with us, Josh. 9. 6. Thirdly, It salveth that common Objection made in defence of unadvised Oaths, to prove them obligatory, though unlawful. The Argument is framed thus; The covenant which Joshua made with the Gibeonites unadvisedly, was unlawful: but that was observed by him, and the breach thereof, when Saul slew the Gibeonites, punished by God, 2 Sam. 21. 1. Therefore, &c. I say it salveth that Objection: because if we diligently observe Joshua’s practise, we shall find unadvised Oaths to be so far, and only so far binding, as they agree with God’s words. God’s word required the Gibeonites should have their lives secured, because they accepted peace; Thus far therefore the covenant was still of force. God’s word required, that the Canaanites, after the acceptation of peace, should become tributary; here the covenant was not of force, and therefore Joshuah made them hewers of wood, and drawers of water, which is a kind of tribute in the language of the Scripture, a tribute of the body, though not of the purse: in which sense the Ægyptian Task-Masters are in the Original called Tribute-masters, Exod. 1. 11.

CHAP. IX. Their Measures.

Measures in use among the Hebrews, and so among all other Nations, are of two sorts: some Mensuræ applicationis, measures of application, as, a span, a cubit, a yard, and the like. Secondly, Mensuræ capacitatis, measures of capacity, as pints, quarts, pecks, bushels, &c. Measures of application, mentioned in Scripture, are these that follow (in which there might be no deceit; the ground of these measures was the breadth of so many, or so many barley corns middle sized, laid by one another) ‎‏אצבע‏‎ Etsbang, Digitus, a finger, an inch.[761] It containeth the breadth of six barley corns joyned together where they are thickest: though in round-reckoning it goeth for an inch, yet in accurate speaking four fingers make three inches.[762] Of this there is mention, Jer. 52. 21.

Palmus, This was two fold; Palmus minor, and Palmus major. The lesser containeth the breadth of four fingers, (i.) three inches, the Hebrews term it, ‎‏טפח‏‎ Tophach, the Greeks παλαιστίδα: the greater is termed ‎‏זרת‏‎ Zereth, by the Greeks σπιθαμὴ; in Latine Spithama, & Dodrans. It containeth the measure that is between the thumb and the little finger stretcht out, a span.

‎‏פעם‏‎, Pagnam, Pes, a foot. It containeth twelve inches.[763]

‎‏אמה‏‎ Amma, Cubitus, a Cubit. We shall find in Authors mention of four kinds of Cubits. 1. Cubitus communi, this was the measure from the elbow to the fingers end. It contained a foot and half, or half a a yard, it is called the common Cubit. 2. Cubitus sacer, An holy Cubit, this was a full yard, containing two of the common Cubits, as appeareth by comparing 1 Kin. 7. 15. with 2 Chron. 3. 15. In the first place, the pillars are reckoned each of them eighteen cubits high: in the second place they are reckoned five and thirty cubits high; which, together with the basis, being one ordinary cubit high, doubleth the number: so that the first Text is to be understood of holy cubites; the second of common cubits. 3. Cubitus regis, the Kings cubit; this was three fingers longer than the common cubit:[764] Whereas the common cubit is termed cubitus viri, the cubit of a man, Deut. 3. 11. Onkelos doth improperly term it, cubitum regis, the Kings cubit. Lastly, there was cubitus geometricus, A geometrical cubit, it contained six common cubits,[765] and according to these cubits, it is thought that Noah’s Ark was built.

Some make the difference between the cubit of the sanctuary, and the common cubit, to be thus; The common cubit, they say, contained fifteen inches,[766] the holy cubit eighteen inches.[767] But that the holy cubit contained two common cubits, hath been evidently proved; and it is probable, that those who make the difference to be only three inches, have mistaken the Kings cubit, for the holy cubit.

‎‏חבל‏‎ Chebel, Funiculus, a line or rope. The just length thereof is unknown: the use thereof was to measure grounds; whence it is sometimes taken for the inheritance it self. The lines are fallen to me in pleasant places, Psal. 16. 6. That is, mine inheritance.

‎‏קנה‏‎ Kaneh, Arundo, the Reed. The use of this was to measure buildings; the length thereof was six cubits and an hand-breadth, Ezek. 40. 5. The cubits in this place are interpreted[768] Kings cubits: it was less liable to deceipt than the Rope, because it could not be shortened or lengthened, by shrinking or stretching: hence the Canon or rule of the holy Scripture is mystically typed out by this Reed, Ezek. 40. and Revel. 21. 15.

To these may be added other measures, wherewith they measured their wayes and walks. The least of these was ‎‏צגד‏‎ Tsagad, passus, a pace.

Στάδιον, Stadium, a furlong. It is often mentioned in the New Testament, not at all in the Old. It contained one hundred twenty five paces,[769] which is the eighth part of our mile. Some think it to be called so, ἀπὸ τῆς στάσεως, from standing, because Hercules ran so much ground before he stood still.

Milliarium, a mile; It containeth with us a thousand paces, but much more among the Hebrews. Their word ‎‏ברה‏‎ Barah, translated often Milliarium, properly signifying a dinner or meal, and being applyed unto journeys, walks or ways, it signified so much ground as usually is gone, or conveniently may be travelled in half a day, between meal and meal, or bait and bait. The word is read, Gen. 35. 16. When there was (‎‏כברת הארץ‏‎ Cibrath haarets) about half a daies journey of ground. The Greek in that place hath an uncouth word χαβραθὰ; doubtless it was made from the Hebrew’s Cibrath, and signifieth half a daies journey.

Their measures of capacity, termed Mensuræ capacitatis, were of two sorts; some for dry things as Corn, Seed, &c. Some for liquid things, as Wine, Oyl, &c. In both, that there might be a just proportion observed, all their measures were designed by a set number of Hens eggs-shells of a middle size.

In my parallelling of them with our measures, where I speak of Bushels, half Bushels, Pecks, &c. I am to be understood according to Winchester measure, as we phrase it: such a bushel contained eight gallons. Where I speak of gallons, pottles, quarts, &c. I am to be understood according to our Ale-measure, thereby I avoid fractions of number.

‎‏קב‏‎, Kab, Kabus, a Kab.[770] This contained twenty four eggs, it held proportion with our Quart. The least measure mentioned in Scripture, is the fourth part of a Kab, 2 Kings 6. 25. The famine in Samaria was so great, that a fourth part of a Kab of Doves dung was sold for five pieces of silver. The Rabbines have a Proverb, that ten Kabs of speech descended into the world, and the women took away nine of them.[771]

‎‏עמר‏‎ Omer. It contained[772] one Kab and an half, and a fifth part of a Kab, that is, three pints and a half pint, and a fifth part of an half pint. It was the tenth part of an Ephah, Exod. 16. 36.

‎‏סאה‏‎ Seah, σάτον, a Satum; The Latine Interpreters commonly render it by Modius. It contained[773] six Kabs, that is a Gallon and half. We translate the word in general, a measure: To morrow this time, a measure (that is, a Satum) of fine flower shall be sold for a Shekel, 2 Kings 7. 1.

‎‏אפה‏‎ Ephah. It contained[774] three Sata, that is, half a bushel, and a pottle.

‎‏לתך‏‎ Lethec. It contained[775] fifteen Modios (i.) Sata; that is, two bushels, six gallons, and a pottle. Mention of this is made, Hos. 3. 2. It is there rendred in English, half an Homer.

‎‏חמר‏‎ Homer. It is so called from ‎‏חמור‏‎ Chamor, Asinus, an Ass, because this measure contained so much grain or corn as an Ass could well bear. It contained ten Ephahs, Ezek. 45. 11. that is, forty five gallons or five bushels, and five gallons.

‎‏כור‏‎ Cor, Corus. The Cor, and the Homer, were of the same quantity, Ezek. 45. 14. It was not only of liquid things, Luke 16. 7.

These measures of which we have spoken hitherto, the Hebrews used in measuring dry things: Three other measures there were, which they used for liquid or moist things.

‎‏לוג‏‎ Log. It contained[776] six egg-shells. It was of the same quantity as the fourth part of a Kab, half a pint.

‎‏הין‏‎ Hin. It contained[777] the quantity of seventy two egg-shells, so that it was of our measure three quarts.

‎‏בת‏‎ Bath; βάτος, Bathus, the Bath. It was of the same capacity with the Ephah, the tenth part of an Homer, Ezek. 45. 14. The Latine Interpreters commonly render it Cadus. Hieron[778] writing upon Ezekiel, renders it Vadus. Decima pars Cori, inquit, in speciebus liquidis vocatur Bathus, sive Vadus. I sometimes thought there had been some error in the print, namely, Vadus, put for Cadus: But now I find the Greeks to use both βάτος, and βάδος, for this measure, and from the last of these Greek words, that ancient Father reads it, Vadus. Sometimes our English renders it, in general, a measure, Luk. 16. 6. It contained four gallons and a half.

All these measures were proper to the Hebrews: I find three others mentioned in the N. T. taken from other Nations.

Σεστός; Sextarius. We English it, in general, a Pot, Mar. 7. 4. It was of the same quantity with the Log,[779] if we understand it of the Roman Sextarius. It was somewhat more, if we understand it of the Attick Sextarius: undecim Attici sextarii æquabant Romanos duodecim. In probability we are to understand the Roman measure, so that it contained six eggs, that is, half a pint.

Χοῖνιξ, Chenix, a measure, Rev. 6. 6. It signifieth properly that measure of corn, which was allowed servants for their maintenance every day. Whence was occasioned that speech of Pythagoras: Super Chænice non sedendum. That is, we must not rest upon the provision which sufficeth for a day, but we must take care for the morrow. It contained[780] four Sextarii, that is, a Quart.

Μετρητὴς, Metretes, Joh. 2. 6. It is translated a Firkin. It was a measure in use among the Athenians. It was of the same quantity with Cadus,[781] and Cadus (as before was noted) was equal to the Hebrew Bath, so that it contained four Gallons and an half.

CHAP. X. Their Coyns. First of brazen Coyns.

That they might have just Coyns and Weights they weighed both them and their weights by Barley-corns.

Λεπτὸν, Minutum, a Mite, Luk. 21. 2. Mar. 12. 42. The latter Hebrews call it ‎‏פרוטה‏‎, the Syriack ‎‏שמונא‏‎ (i. Octava, the eighth part of Assarium,) It weighed half a barly-corn.[782] It valued of our mony, three parts of one c.

Κοδράντης Quadrans, a Farthing. It was a Roman coyn, weighing a grain of barly; it consisted of two mites. The poor Widow threw in two mites which makes a farthing, Mark. 12. 42. By consequence it valued of ours c. ½.

Ἀσσάριον, Assarius, vel assarium. It was a Roman coyn, weighing four grains. The Rabbins call it ‎‏איסור‏‎ Isor, and say, that it containeth[783] eight mites. Of this we read, Mat. 10. 29. Are not two Sparrows sold for (an Assarium?) our English readeth it, for a farthing? It valueth of ours, in precise speaking, q^a.—q.

Their silver Coyns.

‎‏גרה‏‎ Gerah. It was the twentieth part of the shekel of the Sanctuary; A shekel is twenty Gerahs, Exod. 30. 13. It was the least silver coyn among the Hebrews; it valued of ours 1 d. ob.

‎‏אגורת‏‎ Agorath: We English it in general, a piece of silver, 1 Sa. 2. 36. But it appeareth by the Chaldee paraphrase, that it is of the same value with Gerah; that paraphrase renders both ‎‏מעא‏‎ Megna; by the Greek they are both rendred ὄβολος the value therof therfore is 1 d. ob.

‎‏קשיטה‏‎ Keshitah. The word signifieth a lamb, and is used for a certain coyn among the Hebrews, on the one side whereof the Image of a lamb was stamped; our English reads it in general, a piece of mony. Jacob bought a parcel of a field for an hundred pieces of mony, Gen. 33. 19. In the original it is, for an hundred lambs. But it is apparent, that Jacob paid mony; for S. Stephen saith, he bought it for mony, Act. 7. 16. In the judgment of the Rabbines,[784] it was the same that Obolus, twenty of them went to a shekel;[785] so that the value thereof was 1 d. ob.

‎‏כסף‏‎ Ceseph, ἀργύριον Argenteus, a piece of silver: as the Romans numbred their sums by Sesterces, insomuch that Nummus is oftentimes put absolutly to signifie the same as Sestertius: So the Hebrews counted their sums by shekels, and the Grecians by Drachmæ: Hence Argenteus, a piece of silver, being put absolutely in the Bible, if mention in that place be of the Hebrew coyns, it standeth for a shekel, and valueth 2 s. 6 d. if it stand for the shekel of the sanctuary: if it stand for a common shekel, then it valueth 1 s. 3 d. But if mention be of the Greek coyns, as Acts 19. 19. then it signifieth the Attick Drachma, which valueth of our money 1 d. ob.

Δραχμὴ, Luk. 15. 8. It was a quarter of a shekel,[786] and thus by consequence it valued of ours 7 d. ob.

Δίδραχμον, Didrachmon; Mat. 17. 24. We English it tribute money: The Syriack readeth Duo Zuzim;[787] now that coyn which was termed Zuz by the Hebrews, was answerable to the Roman Denair; whence it appeareth, that it valued of ours 1 s. 3 d.

Στατὴρ, Stater. We English it a piece of money at large, but it contained precisely two didrachmas. For the tribute money to be paid for each person, was Didrachmum, as is evident, Mat. 17. 24. and this Stater was paid for two, namely, for Christ and Peter, the value of it therefore was, 2 s. 6 d.

Δενάριον, Denarius, a peny. This was their tribute money, Mat. 22. 19. There were two sorts of pence[788] in use among them: the common peny, which valued of ours 7 d. ob. And the peny of the Sanctuary, which valued 1 s. 3 d. For it was answerable to their Didrachmum; and of this last we must understand S. Matthew in this place, for their tribute mony was Didrachmum, as before hath been noted out of Mat. 17. 24. This Didrachmum or half shekel was formerly paid by the Isrælites every year after they were 20 years old;[789] towards their Temple, Exod. 30. 13. Cæsar by taking away this money from the Temple, and changing it into a tribute for his own Coffers, did in truth take away from God that which was God’s. Hence in that question proposed unto Christ, Is it lawful to give tribute unto Cæsar, or not? Christ answereth, Render unto Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s. This very tribute afterward was paid by the Jews[790] toward the Roman capital, by vertue of a Decree made by Vespasian.

‎‏זוז‏‎ Zuz, It was the fourth part of a shekel of silver:[791] it valued therefore of ours, 7 d. ob.