næa, should be taken from Zenodorus and given to Herod. (Josep. Ant. xv. 10. 1.) On the death of Zenodorus, Herod obtained the remaining province, Gaulanitis. Herod died in the year B. c. 4, and bequeathed these possessions to his son Philip. (Id. xvii. 11. 4. Luke 3: 1.) This prince ruled over them for thirty-seven years. He adorned Paneas, and called it Cæsarea Philippi; and he also founded or decorated Bethsaida and gave it the name Julias, in honor of a daughter of Augustus. Dying without heirs, his dominions fell into the hands of the Roman governor. In A. D. 37, these provinces were bestowed by Caligula upon Herod Agrippa, whose awful death is recorded in Acts xii. His son Agrippa was only seventeen years old when his father died, and in consequence of this the Roman emperor appointed a procurator to take charge of the kingdom. But in A. D. 52, he received the provinces of Bashan, with the title of king; and his kingdom was afterwards much enlarged. He endeavored to dissuade his countrymen from their war with the Romans; and when he failed and the war commenced, he espoused the cause of the emperor. He had afterwards the dignity of prætor conferred on him as a reward for his loyalty. He died about the commencement of the second century; and with him expired the royal line of Herod. The Roman prefect of Syria, Cornelius Palma, now assumed the government of Bashan, conquered the neighboring kingdom of Arabia, and established the seat of his power at Bostra (Bozrah). The country now began to revive after a long period of distressing and devastating wars. Many great and noble cities were erected and adorned by the Roman rulers. All the temples and public buildings, which are now seen, date from this period to the age of Constantine. Philip, the emperor of Rome from 244 to 249, was a native of Trachonitis. Evidences of his genius and his taste are still visible among the ruins of 'Orman, which he had called Philippopolis. When Christianity became the established religion of the empire, the temples in the various cities were soon converted into churches; and as an evidence alike of the density of the population in that age, and of the number of the Christians, it VOL. XIII. No. 52. 68 may be stated that in the "Notitiæ Ecclesiasticæ," there are no fewer than thirty-four episcopal cities enumerated under the metropolis Bostra, all of which save two were within the borders of Bashan. But the conquest of Bostra by the Mohammedans, in the seventh century, was the commencement of an era that proved fatal to Bashan. The cities were plundered, the country laid waste, the inhabitants either murdered or forced to flee; and a lazy, fanatical race took their places. Turkish oppression and rapacity have finished the work commenced by Arab robbery. Temples, churches, and mosques, are now alike deserted. The Arab pitches his tent beneath their shadow, and the wild beast finds a home within them. § II. ITUREA. ('Iτovpaía, ""; modern Arabic,) The Greek form of this name occurs only once in the Scriptures, Luke 3: 1. In the days of the Messiah, the province of Ituræa was included in the tetrarchy of Philip. In Gen. 25: 15, we find the name Jetur applied to one of the sons of Ishmael; and in the following verse it is said: "These are the sons of Ishmael, and these are their names, by their towns, and by their castles, twelve princes according to their nations." Jetur, therefore, was the name of a town or castle, with the province attached to it, as well as of a man. It was the usual custom, in these early ages, for the leader of a tribe to settle in some unoccupied district, and to call it by his name. In 1 Chron. 5: 19, we read that the tribes of Reuben and Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, made war with the Hagarites (the descendants of Ishmael were so called from Hagar the Egyptian maid of Sarah, and Ishmael's mother), with Jetur, and Nephesh, and Nadab; and the Hagarites were delivered into their hand. In this chapter of Chronicles it would, at first sight, seem as if there were a considerable amount of confusion in describing the geographical position of the land possessed by the several tribes of the Ishmaelites; but a closer examination, combined with some knowledge of the countries, tends to make everything plain and intelligible. The Ishmaelites were divided into twelve tribes, which did not live together, but were scattered over a very large district. The Reubenites made war with a section of them, which dwelt on the high plain to the east of Gilead (ver. 10). The united forces of the two tribes and a half also made war on a section of them, namely, on the provinces of Jetur, Nephesh, and Nadab; and having conquered them, they took possession of their land. And in immediate connection with the latter statement, it is said: "The children of the halftribe of Manasseh dwelt in the land; they increased from Bashan unto Baal-Hermon and Senir, and unto Mount Hermon." Now this points out, very clearly, the precise position of the district conquered and colonized-it lay between Bashan and Hermon. The province of Jetur, which seems to have enjoyed its independence hitherto, was then subdued by the Israelites (B. c. 1000), and held by them until the time when Tiglath Pileser carried them away captive to a remote part of Assyria (B. c. 740). It is highly probable that some of the descendants of Jetur were, at that time, taken with the Israelites and Syrians; as the Assyrian monarch ravaged the whole country east of the Jordan (2 Kings 15: 27-31. 16: 3-10). The ancient tribes rose again to importance, after the Jews had been removed, under the sway of the Assyrian and Babylonian kings; for we find the ancient names of the several sections of country revived—such as Trachon and Hauran, which appear, under the Greek forms, Trachonitis and Auranitis. After the conquests of Alexander, and during the reigns of the Seleucidæ and the Ptolemies, the province of Ituræa generally followed the fortunes of Damascus; being for the most part subject to the Egyptian kings until the time when the Syrian kingdom was divided (B. c. 111), and Damascus became the seat of government for one branch of the Seleucidæ. A few years after this event, the newly constituted king of the Jews, Aristobulus, taking advantage of the dissentions in Syria, enlarged the boundaries of his own kingdom by successful wars in the country east of the Jordan. Ituræa was then conquered by him, and the inhabitants received the choice either to embrace the Jewish faith, or leave their country. They chose the former alternative (Josep. Ant. xiii. 11.3). This country was afterward border land between the kingdoms of Arabia and Judæa; and was, consequently, often exposed to all the horrors of border warfare. On the conquest of Damascus by the generals of Pompey (в. c. 65), and the subjection of Aretas by the Roman armies, Ituræa was embraced in the Roman province of Syria, under Scaurus. But whether it remained long under the immediate rule of the Roman governors, does not appear. It probably formed part of the kingdom of the first Lysanias, prince of Chalcis; and, when he was murdered, was given by Antony to Cleopatra. After her death it was, for a time, farmed by Zenodorus the robber; and was then given, by the Roman emperor, to Herod the Great, B. c. 20. (See generally Josep. Ant. xiv. to xvii.) During all these changes, the warlike Ituræans seem to have maintained a kind of independence and distinctive nationality. This no doubt, in a great measure, arose from the position of their country; as they could, during the heat of war, retire to the rugged slopes of Hermon, where there was excellent pasturage for their cattle, and also some land for cultivation. This view is sanctioned by the statements of Strabo (Geog. xvi. p. 520), who, when describing Antilebanon, thus writes: "The kingdom of Chalcis begins at Laodicæa, which is at Lebanon. It is a mountainous region, inhabited by Ituræans and Arabs, a wicked race of men (κακούργοι πάντες). These people were celebrated for their skill in archery. Herod, in his will, left the provinces of Batanæa, Auranitis, and Trachonitis to his son Philip; as is stated by Josephus (Ant. xvii. 8. 1). It has been supposed by Lightfoot (Hor. Heb. Chorg. s. v. Ituræa) and Reland (Palest. p. 107), that Ituræa is only another name for Auranitis. The reason assigned for this somewhat strange opinion is as follows:Luke represents Philip as tetrarch of Ituræa and the region of Trachonitis; while Josephus says he was tetrarch of Bata næa, Trachonitis, Auranitis, and a certain part of what was called the House of Zenodorus. Luke mentions Ituræa but not Auranitis; and Josephus mentions Auranitis, but does not allude to Ituræa; therefore, it is concluded, these two are identical. This syllogism, however, does not stand the test of logical analysis; for it so happens that Ituræa was included in that section of the House of Zenodorus which is referred to by Josephus, as may be seen by a comparison with Ant. xv. 10. 3. About the year A. D. 48, Claudius the Roman emperor gave Ituræa to Herod Agrippa, who had previously held the kingdom of Chalcis. He was the last of the Herodian family; and upon his death his kingdom lapsed to the Roman governors. From the several quotations above cited from the Scriptures, Josephus, and Strabo, the general position of Ituræa can be pretty accurately determined. It must have been on the south-eastern side of Hermon, between Trachonitis and Galilee. It bordered on Damascus, Trachonitis, and Gaulanitis; and either included a portion of the ridge of Antilebanon, or, as is more probable, lay close along its base. It was well known, and its position accurately fixed, in the time of the Crusades, as will be seen from the following passage, taken from "Jacobi de Vitriaco Histor. Hierosol." in the Gesta Dei per Francos, p. 1074: "Post regionem autem Decapoleos, cujus fines seu extremitates sunt inter mare Galilææ et Sydonem, quae etiam post civitatem Tyberiadensem versus Damascum protenditur, est Ituræa regio, scilicet post territorium Sydonense et montana, media inter nos et Saracenos, in valle quae dicitur Bachar; et quia ad radices Libani protenditur, saltus Libani noncupatur. Ituræa autem regio praedictae regioni Trachonitidi vicina est et contermina." ancient province corredistrict of Jedûr. Je The name and position of this spond, exactly, with the modern dûr lies on the south-west side of the great plain of Damascus. It is bounded on the east by the Haj Road, which separates it from the plain that runs along the side of the |