and where therefore they expected to meet an assembly of people. Mr. Mede observes, that it should have been g ενομίζετο προσευχή γίνεσθαι, not είναι, to express where prayer was wont to be made: and De Dieu seems to be of the same opinion. That the Jews had houses, or places for prayer, called πpoσsuxa, appears from a variety of passages in Philo*; and particularly in his oration against Flaccus he complains, that their porεuxaι were pulled down, and there was no place left in which they might worship God and pray for Cæsart. And Josephus, in his Life, mentions the proseuchæ more than once, and speaks of the people's being gathered as TM ρоEUX. To the same purpose is the following passage of Juvenal, if he be rightly understood by Godwin, Vitringa§, and others: Ede ubi consistas; in quâ te quæro Proseuchâ? Sat. iii, 1. 296||. Sd edit. p. 1741. Erasmus Schmidius (in loc.) supports this sense of roETO by some passages in Aristophanes. Consult Scapula and Constantine in verb. * Vid. in Flaccum, et Legat. ad Caium passim. † Phil. in Flacc. apud Opera, p. 752, F, edit. Colon. Allobr. 1613. ↑ Joseph. in Vit. sect. liv et lvi, p. 27, tom. ii, edit. Haverc. § Vitring. de Synag. Vetere, lib. i, part i, cap. iv, p. 119. The late learned Mr. Samuel Jones of Tewkesbury, in his MS Lectures on Godwin, hath the following note on this passage of Juvenal: "Autor noster et etiam Vitringa aliique poetam his verbis Synagogam Judæorum innuisse putant. Sed alitèr mihi videtur. Nam in hoc loco de Judæis nil habet; inducit verò Umbritium, Romanum quidem, non Judæum, de contumeliis, quibus pauperes afficiebant ebrii petulantesque juvenes, conquerentem, et referentem verba talium juvenum rogantium pauperem quendam, à quo conches et porra mendicasset, et quo in loco ad mendicandum stare assuetus erat. Quinetiam haud verisimile est Romanos mendicandi causâ synagogas frequentâsse, quum ipsi tunc temporis pauperrimi habebantur et mendici, ut ex hoc ipso aliisque constat poetis. Insuper quum poeta dicit; in quâ te quæro Proseuchâ? innuit, quod plurimæ erant tunc temporis Romæ Proseucha. Non autem verisimile est plurimas ibi fuisse synagogas, quia Judæi tunc temporis pauperes erant et exosi et sæpe ab Imperatoribus longè ab urbe discedere jussi. "Turnebus, ut hanc quæ autoris est sententiam probet, citat locum Cleomedis. Extat ille locus, lib. ii, p. 204, Kuxλixns Jewpras μedewpwr, ubi Epicurum in suâ, de quâ gloriabatur, locutione vocibus corruptis, ridiculis et absurdis usum fuisse dicit; quarum quasdam perstringit, quasi ano peons Among those who make the synagogues and proseuchæ to be different places are the learned Mr. Joseph Mede* and Dr. Prideaux+; and they think the difference consists, partly, in the form of the edifice; a synagogue, they say, being ædificium tectum, like our houses, or churches; and a proseucha being only encompassed with a wall, or some other mound or enclosure, and open at the top, like our courts. They make them to differ in situation, synagogues being in towns and cities, proseuchæ in the fields, and frequently by the river side §. Dr. Prideaux mentions another distinction, in respect της προσευχής και των επ' αυτης προαιτουντων Ιεδαικα τινα και παρακεχαραγμένα και κατα πολυ των ερπετων ταπεινότερα. Sed de Synagogis Judæorum non videtur loqui. Tempore enim Epicuri, nempe circa Ptolomæi Philadelphi ætatem, lingua Græca in synagogis, dum precabantur, usos fuisse Judæos, haud verisimile est ; et si usi fuissent, an eas Epicurus, homo gentilis et irreligiosus, frequentaret, ut inde verba depromeret? et si ita fecisset, an necesse esset eæ voces essent corruptæ et humiles? Porro, quod non de synagogis, sed de locis ubi mendicantes stabant, egit, constare mihi videtur ex voce pa, quæ non in synagogis precantibus, optimè verò alibi mendicantibus, convenit. Nec quicquam est hoc in loco, quod cujusquam in animum suspicionem induceret, Cleomedem de Judæis egisse, nisi sola vox Iudaixa. Sed ut ea vox hìc videtur absurda, et à contextu aliena, ita nullus dubito, quin corrupta est. In versione de Judæis ne verbum quidem; ledaixa autem redditur' vulgaria;' versionis igitur autor non legit Iudaixa, sed Idшrine, aut talem aliquam vocem. Eodem modo ex Iswv, Act. xxiv, 23, aliqui conflaverunt Iuda, ut in quibusdam editionibus extat, et ad locum notat Erasmus-Пρoσ ideo apud profanos hosce autores erat locus publicus, in quo pauperes stipem petebant." * Ubi supra, p. 65, et seq. + Connect. part i, book vi, vol. ii, p. 556, et seq. 10th edit. See the account which Epiphanius gives of the Jewish Proseuchæ, Hæres. lib. iii, tom. ii, hæres. lxxx, sect. i, Oper. vol. i, p. 1067, 1068, edit. Petav. § See a decree of the people of Halicarnassus, in favour of the Jews (Joseph, Antiq. lib. xiv, cap. x, sect. xxiii, p. 712, edit. Haverc.), in which are the following words δεδοκται ημιν Ιεδαίων της βυλόμενος-τας προσευχας ποιεσθαι προς τη θαλασση κατα το πατριον εθος. The custom of building proseuche by the water-side seems to have been derived from another custom of the Jews, namely, their washing before prayer (vid. Elsner, Observ. Sacr. in Acts xvi, 13), though De Dieu supposes it to be derived from the example of Isaac. There is a remarkable passage in Philo, which shows how fond the Jews were of praying by the sides of rivers, or on the sea shore, Phil. in Flacc. p. 760, D, E, edit, Colon. Allobr. 1613; see also de Vit. Mosis, lib. ii, p. 510, F; and Tertullian (ad Nationes, lib. i, cap. xiii, to the service performed in them; in synagogues, he saith, the prayers were offered up in public forms in common for the whole congregation; but in the proseuchæ they prayed, as in And thus our the temple, every one apart for himself. Saviour prayed in the proseucha into which he entered. Yet, after all, the proof in favour of this notion is not so strong, but that it still remains a question with some, whether the synagogues and the proseucha were any thing more than two different names for the same place; the one taken from the people's assembling in them, the other from the service to which they were more immediately appropriated; namely, prayer. Nevertheless, the name proseuche will not prove, that they were appropriated only to prayer, and therefore were different from synagogues, in which the scriptures were also read and expounded; since the temple, in which sacrifices were offered, and all the parts of divine service were performed, is called oxos poσeux75, an house of prayer, Matt. xxi, 13. And we find St. Paul preaching in the proseucha at Philippi, in the forecited passage of the Acts, chap. xvi, 13. Dr. Prideaux acknowledges, that in our Saviour's time synagogues were called by the same name with the proseuchæ ; and so both Josephus* and Philo+ seem to use the word. Mr. Mede lays great stress upon that passage in the book of Joshua, wherein he is said "to set up a pillar under an oak that was by the sanctuary of the Lord, Josh. xxiv, 26, to prove, that there were proseuchæ, even in Joshua's time, distinct from the tabernacle; arguing, that because the law expressly forbad planting trees near to God's altar, Deut. xvi, 21, Oper. p. 50, edit. Rigalt.), among several Jewish rites, mentions Orationes litorales. * See the passages before quoted from the Life of Josephus, where the proseucha, in which the people assembled in a great multitude, seems to have been the great synagogue at Tiberias. + Philo speaks of many proseuchæ in the city of Alexandria: oddas de (προσευκαι Sc.) εισι και εκαςον τμήμα της πόλεως (Legat. ad Caium, p. 782, F.); and of one in particular, which he styles μeyin xai regionμotarn (p. 788, A.); and it was, no doubt, that very celebrated and magnificent synagogue of which the Jerusalem Talmud gives a very pompous description. Vid. Vitring. lib. i, part i, cap. xiv, p. 256. ↑ Vid. Vitring. de Synag. Vetere, lib. i, part i, cap. iv, p. 119–129; et Witsii Meletem. de Vit. Pauli, sect. v, vi, p. 70, 71. therefore this sanctuary of the Lord by the oak could not be the tabernacle, which had the altar by it, but was one of the proseuche, which were very often inclosed with trees*. But Bishop Patrick observes, that though it was sinful to plant trees near to God's altar, it was not so to set up the sanctuary under or near the trees which had been planted before, especially when it was done only for a short time. And he further remarks, that the words "by," or, as it may be rendered, in "the sanctuary of the Lord," do not necessarily refer to the oak, but may be connected with "the book of the law of God," mentioned in the former clause: " Joshua wrote these words in the book of the law of God (and took a great stone, and set it up under an oak), that was by, or in, the sanctuary of the Lord:" that is, he wrote these words in the book of the law of God, that was in the sanctuary of the Lord; the intermediate words being inserted in a parenthesis. There is a similar instance of a remote connection in the following passage of the book of Genesis: "And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of Jordan, that it was well watered. everywhere, before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, even as the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt, as thou comest unto Zoar," Gen. xiii, 10; where the connection is, he "beheld all the plain of Jordan, as thou comest unto Zoar, that it was well watered everywhere," &c. * Philo, Legat. ad Caium, p. 782, F, τας μεν (προσευκαι) εδενδροτομησαν. CHAP. III. OF THE GATES OF JERUSALEM AND OF THE TEMPLE. JERUSALEM, saith Godwin, had nine gates; or rather, according to the authors of the Universal History, ten; five from west to east-by-south, and five from west to east-bynorth. By south, 1. Dung-gate. 2. Fountain-gate. 3. Water-gate. 4. Horse-gate. 5. Prison-gate, or miphkadh. By north, 1. Valley-gate. 2. Gate of Ephraim, 3. Old-gate. 4. Fish-gate. 5. Sheep-gate. This account is very little, if any thing, different from the plan of the city prefixed to the Polyglot. But Hottinger, in his notes on Godwin*, hath given a very different description of the situation of these gates, which he endeavours to trace by the account of the order in which they were erected after the captivity, in the book of Nehemiah; where the sheep-gate is mentioned first, which he places on the west side of the city, and towards the south; principally for these two reasons; because he supposes it was the same with the gate which Josephus calls ruŋ soonwy, that is, not the gate of the Essenes, it being improbable that a gate of the city, which must of course be common to all sorts of persons, should be called by the name of a particular sect; but the word Josephus uses is, he imagines, only the Hebrew word hatsan, ovis, with a Greek termination; and if so, TUAN SONY, which Josephus saith was on the west side of the city, literally signifies the sheep-gate. Another reason for his assigning it this situation is, that the fish-gate, which is next mentioned in Nehemiah, * Thomæ Godwini Moses et Aaron, &c. illustrati, emendati et præcipuis thematibus aucti, studio Job. Henr. Hottingeri, p. 392 et seq. 2d edit. Francof. ad Mænum, 1716. |