Jewish antiquities

Front matter

Class "

/f is"

COURSE OF LECTURES

Preface

vii the subject, and render the discourse regular and uniform ; particularly in the chapter on the gates of Jerusalem, which, in the Author's MS copy, consisted merely of what the reader will here find on the miracle which our Saviour wrought at the pool of Bethesda ; situated, as some suppose, near the Sheep Gate. Nevertheless, though it is not requisite frequently to turn to Godwin in perusing this work, for a complete view of the subject, yet if the correspondent chapters in the two treatises are read in conjunction, we shall see reason, on the comparison, to entertain the higher opinion of the industry with which our learned Author hath collected his materials, and of the judgment and skill with which he hath discussed the particular subject before him.

The Editor hath taken care all along to insert the words of the text of Scripture which occur, and which in the manuscript were only quoted by the chapter and verse. The Author might reasonably expect from his pupils, that the passages referred to should be carefully consulted ; but it would have been irksome and tedious to the generality of readers, to be continually turning to passages of Scripture in order to understand the meaning of the Author's observations upon them, or reasoning from them. And the necessity the Editor was under of introducing the texts obliged him to make some small alterations in the phraseology, especially in the connective particles and sentences, and even a few transpositions, in order to introduce them consistently with the regularity and uniformity of the whole.

viii

PREFACE.

The references to authors, either for proof or illustration, which are very numerous, have for the most part been carefully examined, and made very particular, for the benefit of those who are disposed to consult the authorities on which the Author relies, or those writers who have treated more largely on the subject. For want of producing his authorities, Lewis's Jewish Antiquities, which are otherwise valuable, are very unsatisfactory to a man who is desirous, not only to know what hath been said, but by whom it hath been said, and what credit it deserves.

With respect to the Dissertation on the Hebrew Language, it may be observed, that the Author once thought more highly of the antiquity and authority of the Masoretic readings, and of the vowel points, than he did after perusing the ingenious and learned Dr. Kennicott's two dissertations, especially his second on the Hebrew text; by which the Author, as well as the generality of the learned world, was convinced, they deserved not that extravagant and superstitious regard, which the credit of the two Buxtorfs, and of some other eminent Hebraicians in the last age, had procured them from men of letters. Once in particular he expressed his sentiments on this subject to the Editor, and gave some general idea of his intended alteration in the Dissertation on the Jewish Language; which, it is presumed, he was prevented from accomplishing by the declining state of his health for some time before his decease. The ^Editor hath endeavoured to supply this little defect in some measure, by inserting a few references to, and obser-

PREFACE.

IX vations from, Dr. Kennicott, and by softening a few expressions, in conformity with the Author's latest sentiments on this head.

The reader will observe some digressions, in the earlier part of the work especially, to subjects which have an affinity to those of which the Author is treating. Some of these the Editor hath thrown into notes, and might perhaps have done it with a few more, particularly in the chapter on the patriarchal government. As most of these relate to illustrations of Scripture, the Author was willing- to indulge himself in them ; declaring to his pupils, that he never thought himself out of his way while he was explaining the sacred oracles. However, these digressions are not numerous, and chiefly at the beginning of the work.

Though this volume professedly treats of the subjects which are contained in the three first books of Godwin, yet several things are occasionally introduced relative to the subjects of his three last books ; which was one reason why the Author did not proceed to the particular consideration of them. Another was, that the three first books comprise all the subjects which relate to the sacred or ecclesiastical antiquities of the Hebrews, and which are peculiarly requisite to the understanding of the Jewish, and, consequently, in some measure, of the Christian scheme of theology.

This piece of Godwin, styled Moses and Aaron, the method of which our Author chose to follow, hath been annotated and commented upon by a variety of authors. One of the most judicious, who have favoured the public with their lucubrations, is Hottinger. There are two

X

PREFACE.

sets of annotations in manuscript, one by the learned Witsius, which he read to his students in the university of Leyden ; a copy of which was in the hands of Dr. Jennings, who hath been, in a few instances, and but in a few, beholden to it. Another annotator, whose performance is yet in manuscript, was the late Mr. Samuel Jones, of Tewkesbury. His work, of which there are several copies extant, is written in neat Latin, and contains very valuable remarks, which discover his great learning and accurate knowledge of his subject. From this writer the Editor hath inserted a note at page 380, and in a few other places. Dr. Jennings never saw Mr. Jones's Annotations, though there is a similarity in a few of their observations, they having both been in possession of a copy of Witsius. But the Doctor's own work surpasses the performances of both these learned writers, as in some other respects, so particularly in compass and variety, and as it contains the opinions and improvements of later authors : and it is hoped will answer the end for which it was originally composed, and is now published, — the advancement of religion and learning, and the knowledge of those oracles of God, which are able to make us wise to salvation.

PHILIP FURNEAUX.

Chapter I. Of The Form Of The Hebrew Commonwealth

The ancient state and form of the Hebrew government maybe distinguished into patriarchal and special. The patriarchal universally prevailed in the first ages. By special we mean the government peculiar to the people of Israel, from the time of their entrance into Egypt to the end of their polity.

Of the Patriarchal Form of Government.

L The patriarchal form (so called from irarpia, familia, and ap\<j)v , princeps) is denned by Godwin to consist, in " the fathers of families, and their first-born after them, exercising all kinds of ecclesiastical and civil authority in their respective households; blessing, cursing, casting out of doors, disinheriting, and punishing with death."

It is natural to suppose, that Adam, the father of all mankind, would be considered as supreme amongst them, and have special honour paid him, as long as he lived; and that when his posterity separated into distinct families and tribes, their respective fathers would be acknowledged by them as their princes. For as they could not, in any tolerable manner, live together without some kind of government, and no government can subsist without some head in whom the executive power is lodged, whom were the children so likely, after they grew up, to acknowledge in this capacity, as their father, to whose authority they had been used to submit in their early years? And hence those, who were at first only acknowledged as kings over their own households, grew insensibly into mo-

B

JEWISH ANTIQUITIES.

[HOOK I.

narchs of larger communities, by claiming the same authority over the families which branched out from them, as they had exercised over their own. However, the proper patriarchal government is supposed to have continued among the people of God until the time of the Israelites dwelling in Egypt; for then we have the first intimation of a different form of government among them.

Our author hath perhaps assigned greater authority to the patriarchs than they reasonably could or did claim and exercise; at least, the instances he produces to prove they were ordinarily invested with such a despotic power, " in dvilibus et sacris," as he ascribes to them, are not sufficiently convincing.

That there was some civil government in the first ages, is supposed to appear from the history of Cain, who was not only banished, but was apprehensive he should be punished with death, for the murder of his brother Abel. "And Cain said unto the Lord, My punishment is greater than I can bear. Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that everyone that findeth me shall slay me;" Gen. iv. 13, 14. Where nft"JN adhamah, which we render, the earth, may signify his native country, viz. that part of the world where Adam dwelt, where himself was born, and where his nearest kindred and acquaintance lived : this word, as well as v IN arets, being frequently applied to a particular country, as to the land of Canaan, Gen. xxviii. 11; to the land of Egypt, Exod. viii. 17; and to several others. #

By " the face of God from which he was hid," or banished, is properly meant what the Jews called the Shechinah, a shining light or glory, in which God was wont to manifest his presence, and to present himself as a visible object of worship, and from which he gave oracles, as he did afterward in the Jewish tabernacle over the mercy-seat; though St.Chrysostom understands his being " hid from the face of God," of the Divine Being's withdrawing his gracious presence from him, and putting him from under his protection.

* Vid. Stockii Clav. in verb.

PATRIARCHAL GOVERNMENT.

Many have thought, that upon his being thus banished from the divine presence, he turned idolater, and set up the worship of the sun, as the best resemblance of the Shechinah, or visible divine glory; and thus they account for the early introduction of that most general and most ancient kind of idolatry.

The reason why this lighter punishment of banishment was inflicted on him, instead of that severer one of death, which his crime had merited, is supposed to be either, first, that he might continue a living example of divine vengeance, in order to deter others from the like crime, whereas had he been put to death, the criminal and his punishment might soon have been forgotten : or, secondly, as Grotius conceives, because there being yet but few inhabitants in the world, it was fit he should be suffered to live for the propagation of the species ; or at least an example of severity was less requisite, as there were not many who were likely to be exposed to such outrages.*

However, it appears that Cain, being sensible of his deserts, was afraid the punishment of death would be inflicted on him : for he adds, " I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond on the earth ; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me that is, either as a common enemy, or at least as one banished and outlawed, and not under the protection of the government.

It follows, Gen. iv. 15, "And the Lord said unto him, Therefore whoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him seven-fold:" that is, as some understand it, to the seventh generation; or it may rather be a definite number for an indefinite ;f and so the meaning is, he shall endure many punishments, or shall be severely punished.

" And the Lord set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should slay him." Many are the conjectures, both of Jews and Christians (some of them ridiculous enough), concerning this mark. Some will have it, God stigmatized him with a brand in his forehead, to denote his being accursed; others, that he had a wild aspect, and bloody eyes, which rolled in a horrid manner. The fathers, in general, suppose, that he had a con-

* De jure belli et pacis, lib. i. cap. 2, sect. 5.

f Instances of this you have in Psalm xii. 6; cxix. 164; and Prov. xxiv. 16, and many other places.

b2

JEWISH ANTIQUITIES.

[BOOK I.

tinual trembling of the body, so that he could hardly get his food to his mouth. This opinion is favoured by the Septuagint, which renders " a fugitive and a vagabond," <ttevwv kul rptfiov, lamenting and trembling. Others tell us, that wherever he went the earth shook under him. And another notion (as well founded as any of the former) is, that he had a horn growing out of his forehead, to warn people to avoid him. Le Clerc imagines, that God ordered him to wear some distinguishing garment, perhaps of some glaring colour, as a mark or sign upon him for his preservation ; like the blood upon the door-posts of the Israelites' houses, Exod. xii. 13 ; or the scarlet line in Rahab's window, Josh. ii. 18 ; for had he been clothed only with the skins of wild beasts, as in those days men generally were, after the fashion of their first parents, Gen. ui. 21, he would have been very liable, whenever he had wandered in the woods and thickets, to have been shot at by some hunter, and perhaps killed through mistake. A similar instance you have in the fable of Cephalus and Procis.

However, Dr. Shuckford's opinion is the most probable, who renders the words TDK y*pb mrh DiZW vejasem Jehovah lecain oth, " God gave to Cain a sign," or token, probably by some apparent miracle, that he would providentially protect him; so that none that met him should kill him.* In this sense the word JTIK oth is used when the rainbow is called the niK oth, that is, the sign or token of the covenant which God made with Noah ; whereby he assured him, that he would drown the world no more ; Gen. ix. 12 — 17 : and when Gideon desired, that the angel would show him a sign, or some miraculous token, that he brought him a commission from God, and that he should be able to destroy the Midianites ; Judges vi. 17: see also Psalm lxxxvi. 17.

Another article in the history of the antediluvian ages, which is supposed to intimate that there was a civil government then subsisting, is the story of Lamech. " Lamech said unto his wives, Adah and Zillah, Hear my voice ; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech : for I have slain a man unto my wounding, and a young man to my hurt. If Cain shall be avenged seven-fold, truly Lamech seventy and seven-

* Shuckford's Connect, vol. i. p. 8.

PATRIARCHAL GOVERNMENT.

fold Gen. iv. 23, 24. This speech, which is introduced without any connexion with the preceding history, has given interpreters not a little trouble. The Jewish Rabbies attempt to explain it by the help of a story, perhaps of their own invention ; that Lamech, as he was hunting, being informed by a certain youth, that a wild beast lay lurking in a secret place, went thither, and unawares killed Cain, who lay hid there, with a dart ; and then, upon finding his mistake, in a fit of rage for what he had done, beat the youth to death ; so that Cain was the man he had slain by wounding him ; and the youth, the young man he had killed by hurting, or beating him. But as this story is without any foundation in Scripture, we have no reason to look upon it in any other light than as a mere fable ; though St. Jerome says it was received as true by several Christians. Jacobus Capellus, in his Historia Sacra et Exotica, fancies that Lamech, being in a vapoury humour, was boasting of his courage, and what he would do if there was occasion : " I would, or will, kill a man, if he wound#me; and a young man if he hurts me." But this version offers too much violence to the Hebrew text : Onkelos, who wrote the first Chaldee paraphrase on the Pentateuch, has given us an easier sense, reading the following words with an interrogation : " Have I slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt V and accordingly he paraphrases it thus : " I have not killed a man, that I should bear the sin of it; nor have I destroyed a young man, that my offspring should be cut off for it." Dr. Shuckford has improved this interpretation, by supposing that Lamech was endeavouring to reason his wives and family out of their fear of having the death of Abel revenged upon them, who were of the posterity of Cain. As if he had said, " What have we done, that we should be afraid ? We have not killed a man, nor offered any injury to our brethren of any other family ; and if God would not allow Cain to be killed, who had murdered his brother, but threatened to take seven-fold vengeance on any that should kill him ; doubtless they must expect much greater punishment, who should presume to kill any of us. Therefore, we may surely look upon ourselves as safe under the protection of the law, and of the providence of God."

6 JEWISH ANTIQUITIES. [BOOK 1.

Having thus considered those parts of sacred history which are produced as evidences of a civil government in the early ages of the world ; we now proceed to examine the particular instances alleged of that despotic power of the patriarchs, which our author ascribes to them.

The first is of Noah, who pronounced a curse upon Canaan — " Cursed be Canaan ; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren Gen. ix. 25.

It may reasonably be believed, that Noah, being the second father of mankind, had, for a considerable time, the honour and authority of universal monarch, as Adam had before him. Some insist upon it, that Nimrod was the first that drew 7 off a party from their allegiance to Noah ; and, setting up for a king, proved an oppressive tyrant. Accordingly, his being called piO nnj gibbor baarets, which the Septuagint renders yiyag tin ty\q yr\g, Gen. x. 8, may refer, not to his stature, but to his power ; for Hesychius makes yiyag to signify the same as ^vvaarr]g, ivyypog, potens, robustus. Nimrod is expressly said to have set up " a kingdom," ver. 1#; and, just before, ver. 9, " to have been a mighty hunter before the Lord." Which the Jerusalem Paraphrast interprets of a sinful hunting after the sons of men, to turn them off from the true religion. But it may as well be taken in a more literal sense, for hunting of wild beasts; inasmuch as the circumstance of his being a mighty hunter, is mentioned with great propriety, to introduce the account of his setting up his kingdom ; the exercise of hunting being looked upon in ancient times as a means of acquiring the rudiments of war :* for which reason, the principal heroes of heathen antiquity, as Theseus, Nestor, &c, were, as Xenophon tells us, bred up to hunting. Besides, it may be supposed, that by this practice Nimrod drew together a great company of robust young men to attend him in his sport ; and by that means increased his power. And by destroying the wild beasts, which, in the comparatively defenceless state of

* Vid. Xenophon. Cyrop. lib. i. p. 10, edit. Hutch.; Philon. lud. de Joseph, ab initio, apud opera, p. 411, edit. Colon. Allobrog. et eundem de vita Mosis, p. 475. See these and other authors cited by Bochart in his Geographia Sacra, lib. iv. cap. 12.

Chap. 1.] Patriarchal Government

society in those early ages, were no doubt very dangerous enemies, he might, perhaps, render himself farther popular ; thereby engaging numbers to join with him, and to promote his chief design of subduing men, and making himself master of nations.

But to return to Noah, and to the instance which our author assigns of his patriarchal authority, in denouncing a curse upon Canaan.

Unless it could be proved, that all the patriarchs were endowed with a prophetic spirit, as it was evident Noah was, when he foretold the fate of his three sons and their posterity, it will by no means follow from the instance before us, that the authority of the patriarchs generally reached so far as to pronounce effectual blessings and curses on their children and subjects. In short, in this affair, Noah seems to have acted rather as a prophet than as a patriarch : no argument therefore can be drawn from his conduct on this occasion, to prove the extent of the patriarchal power.

Some difficulties occur in this piece of sacred history, which we cannot pass over without attempting at least to explain them.

1st. It is inquired in what Ham's crime consisted. '

The history informs us, that he " saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without ;" Gen. ix. 22. Now merely seeing might be accidental, unavoidable, and no way criminal. We must, therefore, suppose, there was something more in the case than is plainly expressed.

Some Jewish doctors make his crime to be castrating his father Noah, to prevent his having any more sons, lest his share in the division of the world should not be as large as he wished ; which conceit some very grave authors have seriously refuted, from these words : " Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him ver. 24. They argue, that if Ham had performed so painful an operation upon his father, the anguish would undoubtedly have awoke him, and the criminal had been taken in the very fact.

Mr. Vander Hart, professor of the oriental languages in the university of Helmstad, is of opinion, that Ham's crime was committing incest with his father's wife. But if we may sup— pose the narrations of Moses to be thus disguised, there will

ANTIQUITIES.

be hardly any depending upon a single fact he relates. The most probable, therefore, as well as the easiest account, is this, that Ham told his brethren of what he had seen, in a scornful manner. It is said, " he told his brethren without;'' perhaps in the street, publicly before the people, proclaiming his father's shame with contempt and derision ; the very sin to which such exemplary vengeance was afterward threatened : " The eye that mocketh at his father, and despiseth to obey his mother, the ravens of the valley shall pick it out, and the young eagles shall eat it;" Prov. xxx. 17.

2dly. It is inquired, why Noah denounced the curse, not on Ham himself, but on his son Canaan; Gen. ix. 25.

It might very likely be a reason, why Canaan is here so particularly mentioned by Moses, that hereby the Israelites might be encouraged to war against the Canaanites, who were the posterity of this Canaan ; when they knew, that by a curse they were devoted to subjection and slavery; and that on this account, they might be assured of victory over them.

But as to the reason of the curse being denounced on Canaan :

1st. Some by Canaan understand Canaan's father; which is a very harsh interpretation.

2dly. The opinion of the Hebrew doctors is, that Canaan first saw Noah in an indecent posture, and made a jest of it to his father Ham. For proof of this, they allege the words already quoted, " Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him ;" ver. 24. By |tOpn 133 beno hakatan, which we render Noah's younger son (Jilius parvus), they understand his grandson. But this, also, is too forced an interpretation. For as bYU gadhol, magnus, is elsewhere applied to Japhet, to signify his being the elder, Gen. x. 21, so pp katan, parvus, is most naturally, in this place, to be understood of the younger son.

3dly. The easiest solution of this difficulty, I conceive, is this, that what is commonly called a curse, in this place, is rather a prophecy ; so that the words, " cursed be Canaan," Gen. ix. 25, would better be rendered, " cursed shall Canaan be," that is, the posterity of Canaan, who from him were called Canaanites ; for the blessings which Noah emphatically pronounced upon his two other sons, related to their posterity ;

CHAP. I.J PATRIARCHAL GOVERNMENT.

as is evident from the following words : " God shall enlarge Japhet, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem;" ver. 27. Now though the Canaanites suffered for their own sins (Lev. xviii. 24, 25, and Gen. xv. 16), yet it was a present punishment inflicted upon Ham, to be informed by the spirit of prophecy, that one branch of his posterity would prove so exceeding vile as to fall remarkably under the curse of God, and be made a slave to the posterity of his brethren. Which leads us to inquire,

3dly. What is meant by his being a " servant of servants " Cursed be Canaan ; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren."

This may easily be determined from the use of the like phrase on other occasions. Sanctum sanctorum signified the most holy place in the Jewish tabernacle and temple ; and canticum canticorum, the most excellent song. In like manner, servus servorum, a servant of servants, is the basest and vilest of servants, that is, a slave ; and very remarkably was the prediction fulfilled eight hundred years after, when the Israelites, who were descended from Shem, took possession of the land of Canaan, subduing thirty kings, killing a vast number of the inhabitants, laying heavy tributes on the remainder, or driving them out of their country, and using the Gibeonites, who saved themselves by a wile, though not properly as slaves, yet as mere drudges for the service of the tabernacle ; and when, afterwards, the scattered relics of the Canaanites, at Tyre, at Thebes, and at Carthage, were all conquered and cut off by the Greeks and Romans, who were descended from Japhet.*

The second instance which Godwin produces of the despotic power of the patriarchs, is Abraham's turning Hagar and Ishmael out of his family; Gen. xxi. 9, &c.

When Abraham left his father's house, and came into the land of Canaan, being there sui juris, and subject to none, he doubtless exercised a patriarchal jurisdiction in his own family; in which he was succeeded by Isaac and Jacob. But as for his turning his concubine and her sons out of doors,

* See Philippi Olearii disputat. historico-moral. de Cham, maledict. Lips. 1707; and Apud Thesau. nov. theologico-philolog. torn. i. p. 168, Lugd. Bat et Amstel. 1732.

JEWISH ANTIQUITIES.

[BOOK I.

when he had a child by his lawful wife, it is too common a case to be an evidence of any singular authority vested in the patriarchs, and peculiar to those ages.

The third instance is that of Jacob's denouncing a curse upon Simeon and Levi, — " Cursed be their anger, for it was fierce ; and their wrath, for it was cruel : I will divide them in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel;" Gen. xlix. 7.

But this might have been more properly alleged as an instance of prophetic inspiration than of patriarchal authority ; it being among the predictions which, under a divine afflatus, Jacob delivered concerning the posterity of his twelve sons. And very remarkably was this prediction fulfilled. The tribe of Simeon, upon the division of the land of Canaan, had not a separate inheritance assigned them by themselves, but only a portion in the midst of the tribe of Judah ; Josh. xix. 1. 9. And when they were afterward increased, they acquired possessions where they could, far from the rest of their brethren ; 1 Chron. iv. 39. 42. And if the Jewish tradition be credible, that many of them, wanting a livelihood, engaged in teaching children, and were employed as schoolmasters in all the other tribes of Israel, it was a further accomplishment of Jacob's prophecy. As for the tribe of Levi, it was remarkably scattered among the other tribes ; having no tract of land assigned it, in the manner they had, but only certain cities (with a little land about them), out of all the other tribes. See Josh . xxi. passim. Howbeit, as this tribe manifested an extraordinary zeal against idolatry in the affair of the golden calf, Exod. xxxii. 26 — 28, the curse was taken off, or rather turned into a blessing, ver. 29 ; for it was consecrated of God to " teach Jacob his judgments, and Israel his laws," Deut. xxxiii. 9, 10 ; and the Levites had the tenth of all the increase of the land assigned them, throughout all the country.

The fourth instance of patriarchal authority, which is alleged, is of Judah ; who, when he was informed that Tamar, his daughter-in-law, had played the harlot, and was with child by whoredom, said, " Bring her forth, and let her be burnt;" Gen. xxxviii. 24. From whence it is inferred, that Judah, as a patriarch, was invested with supreme authority in his own house, and even with power of life and death. But to this it is objected,