Book I. y^e Temple i?/Wi (dome. 19:^

faich Joannes Antiochenm^ but ^qavov nuKicriJLivovy or as Jobn Jzetzes quoteth the place to LycophroHy 'a^iTKoTTtct Kctn^Tv^y Telefmatically confecrated or under a good Horofcope by A liiis the Philofopher^ and prefented to the founder JroM^ «/V vmv ^ (pv^ATjovfet 7r\v To^/r *iv^* imKUTAi d-TTA^'^.f^TJovy t 6. as a Stutue enabled hy AVt to freferVe the City wherein itjhouid be laid up in a vidorious and impregnable State.
^lywpiUorus relatetli from Valerius Governour Ihacia under Condantihs the Ewperour^ ^i^i
AvS'eJLAV T«y A§yv^av TiTiM^fJiUvy Uf 3cl^^d^&>^
^)ui\v(TiVy of cercaitie Silver ft atuei laid up under the confines oflhracia and lHyria^ Jeleftndtically cohprrutcd again the Incur fions of the Barbarians^ which at the command o^ Valerius being du^cfeouc an l C'iken a-» way iue]' oniyAf vifM^^i tI amT^'iX*^ Ti}v 0^elKi)v^ &c within a few dayes aHer all Ihracia and Illyria iPds ever runne by the Gothes ? /^ Hunnes
Ifay thenofthe Claudi and the C£ci^ that they were no other then thofe rd nrixAi AfofjLZVA^oix^^'^ii T«; ToKid)^ (^vhAKKritiA, Statuary Telcfmes fo much celebrated of old (as Nicetas') which unlefs they kept the City, the watchman laboured but in vain.
They were placed by tht Aftrotogers in fome con- venient Recefsof theFort^and haddoubtlefs made gbodtheplace againft Vavid^smtn^ but that as the great Sooth-faycr himfelf confeflT.d, Ihre was no enchantment againft Jacob^ nor divination againft Ifrai l^
Numb. 27, 27,.
Thcufual interpretation of this place is (and 'tis the beftofthe bad) that the Jobufttes trufiing them- felves to the invincible condition of their Fort, broughc up Lam^ and Blind meii to caft a fcorr.c
N upou
194. i At' Temple
v^onVavids approaches. Therefore his foul hated them. 1 am lure 1 have made the beft of this con- flruc^ion^aiui yet he that Ihall run it through all the circuiiift.ioces of theTexc^wilI find it to be as imperi- neniiy caft up^as thatof thecW/^/t^^jwhich inftead of Imctgts rendrcch by way of Paraphrafe^ the tinners and ungodly Jehufites. "^Vhich fomeof ihe Hebrews er.uea\ our to tollow^ biic at an intolerable diflance. Read Gr^gonVi Notes
I (liall not want for a very confidcrable part of them, whothough they have not lighted upon the very fame^ yet have faid enough as to the cleernefs andadvancement of that fenfeand meaning, which
1 have refolvcd upon. In the Cdijak^ar you'l find that the I//'-.^ and tht plhtd mav be taken for Images^ K Solomon faith exprefly C^-Qy^'n uZ^T] that they were lo, and K David that they were DDnin ''D^V.
2 mage s of bra fs. K.Efay^^ K David and Leii Ben Gerfon
fay moreover That the B//W and the L/r?w
were Images written upon with tlic oath which Ahrahmi and Ifuic w.ade to Ahimelech^ and that they were cad'd Blind and Lame y bccat.fe they had eyes and fiw Hoty they had feet and wallet not^ &c.
But as concernijig the conceipt of - Jfaacs oat!) to Alimelech^l leave it at large. That which I take from ihem is^ that they were Images of fr^ifs. and the rcafon why they were called the J^lif.d andthe lanjc^ which if it had not been fugge- l;ed by them^yec is the very pbrafe of the scripture.
They were the ■.^t{>ici'/Wu; or Conjlellated hvages of Irafsj in up in theRecefs of the Fort, called in fcorn Tas they were hated by Davids foul J the Blind and the Lams Yet fo furcly entrufted with the Jveeping oftheplace, that if they did not hold it oucj the Jibufites [?.id they (hould not come into thfi
hoiifej