Of the nature and use of lots a treatise historical and theologicalOf the nature and vse of lots a treatise historicall and theologicall
Of the nature and use of lots a treatise historical and theological; written by Thomas Gataker B. of D. sometime preacher at Lincolns Inn, and now pastor of Rotherhith.Of the nature and vse of lots a treatise historicall and theologicall; written by Thomas Gataker B. of D. sometime preacher at Lincolnes Inne, and now pastor of Rotherhith.
Thomas Gataker 1574–1654London: printed by Edward Griffin, 1619
[12], 360 p. · 94k words · STC 11670 · ESTC S102922
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Others think pthat the twelve men assigned to that Office of dividing the Land by Lot, had a power by virtue of that Edict conferred upon them, after the Lottery performed according to the partition made by others employed thereunto by them, to enlarge or straighten the bounds of each several portion, as they should see good; by virtue of which power they were to fit each part to the number of the people that were of that Tribe, which the same by Lot was fallen unto. This indeed hath more ⟨p. 66⟩show of probability then the former; and rwe find some alteration and change in this kind after the several possessions were determined by Lot.
Others thinke pthat the twelue men assigned to that Office of diuiding the Land by Lot, had a power by virtue of that Edict conferred vpon them, after the Lotery performed according to the partition made by others imployed thereunto by them, to enlarge or straighten the bounds of each seuerall portion, as they should see good; by virtue of which power they were to fit each part to the number of the people that were of that Tribe, which the same by Lot was fallen vnto. This indeed hath more ⟨p. 66⟩shew of probabilitie then the former; and rwee finde some alteration and change in this kinde after the seuerall possessions were determined by Lot.
pEx Hebr••rum quorundam sei•entia, quam R. Levi i• comment. ad Josh. approbat, ad Num. reijcit; Masius ad I•sh. c. 15.Ex Hebr••rum quorundam seientia, quam R. Leui i comment. ad Iosh. approbat, ad Num. reijcit; Masius ad Ish. c. 15.
But yet that seemeth to be soundest that some qothers have conceived, that in that Edict there is mention of a two-fold partition, and either of them, necessarily required. The former a sgeneral division of the whole Land (taking in that on this side Jordan, theld by the Reubenites, Gadites, and half the Tribe of Manasseh) into 12. Shires or Cantons equally divided, to be distributed by Lot: the latter ua particular Subdivision of each Canton or Shire unequally parted among those of that Tribe whom the same by Lot had befallen, as their Families or kindreds were more populous or more penurious of people.
But yet that seemeth to be soundest that some qothers haue conceiued, that in that Edict there is mention of a two-fold partition, and either of them, necessarily required. The former a sgenerall diuision of the whole Land (taking in that on this side Iordan, theld by the Reubenites, Gadites, and halfe the Tribe of Manasses) into 12. Shires or Cantons equally diuided, to be distributed by Lot: the latter ua particular Subdiuision of each Canton or Shire vnequally parted among those of that Tribe whom the same by Lot had befalne, as their Families or kindreds were more populous or more penurious of people.
qIn familijs subdivisa •st per sor•es inaequales pro numero personarum. Ex aliorum sententia. Lyra in Num. c. 26. Et ex Josh. 15.1. Oleast. Et Trem. ac Jun. ibid.In familijs subdiuisa •st per sor•es inaequales pro numero personarum. Ex aliorum sententia. Lyra in Num. c. 26. Et ex Iosh. 15.1. Oleast. Et Trem. ac Iun. ibid.
Now as God enjoined, so xJoshua accordingly did: For yhe divided the whole Land among them by Lot. zHe began the work so soon as the Land was at any rest, and aafterward went on with it till he had made an end of it; assisted therein according to bGods own appointment by Eleazar the High-priest and the 12. Heads of the twelve Tribes. Their several Lots in what course they came the holy Ghost hath left upon record. For at the first Session or solemn meeting for the performance of that business, cthe first Lot fell to Judas, and dthe second to Joseph in eEphraim & fManasseh. gAt the second Assembly had the other seven Tribes, to wit, hBenjamin, iSimeon, kZebulun, lIssachar, mAsher, nNaphtali, and oDan, (for thus by course their Lots came out) their portions ⟨p. 67⟩allotted them; nthe rest of the Land, not before assigned, being divided into seven parts, not oby ten men, as Josephus, but pby 36. rather, or 21. at the least, (three a piece out of each Tribe, qeither of the whole Twelve, or rof those seven whose turns then were to be served) employed specially to that purpose.
Now as God enioyned, so xIosua accordingly did: For yhe diuided the whole Land among them by Lot. zHe beganne the worke so soone as the Land was at any rest, and aafterward went on with it till he had made an end of it; assisted therein according to bGods owne appointment by Eleazar the High-preist and the 12. Heades of the twelue Tribes. Their seuerall Lots in what course they came the holy Ghost hath left vpon record. For at the first Session or solemne meeting for the performance of that busines, cthe first Lot fell to Iudas, and dthe second to Ioseph in eEphraim & fManasses. gAt the second Assembly had the other seuen Tribes, to wit, hBeniamin, iSimeon, kZabulon, lIsac•ar, mAsher, nNephthalim, and oDan, (for thus by course their Lots came out) their portions ⟨p. 67⟩
Concerning the manner of Lottery used in that action there is some diversity of opinion. sSome think that the Lots of the Land were put into one pot, and the Tribes names into another, and that one choice person, to wit Eleazar, drew for all. tOthers imagine that there was only one pot of Tickets containing the names of the portions, out of which one of each Tribe drew for the Tribe he was of.
Concerning the manner of Lotery vsed in that action there is some diuersity of opinion. sSome thinke that the Lots of the Land were put into one pot, and the Tribes names into another, and that one choise person, to wit Eleazar, drew for all. tOthers imagine that there was onely one pot of Tickets containing the names of the portions, out of which one of each Tribe drew for the Tribe he was of.
sRabbini in Baba Bathra teste Masio: & Schindl. lex. Pent.
tJoseph. antique l. 5. c. 3.Ioseph. antique l. 5. c. 3.
uOthers lastly suppose that the Tribes names only were put into the Lot-pot, and that each Tribe, as it was drawn, had his choice of which part he would yet undisposed when he drew. The first opinion seemeth most probable, both because once drawing so might well end all, xwhich would not be in the second, where question might be who should draw first, which would ask a new Lottery; and again because it is not said in the story, that such a Tribe drew or was drawn first or second simply, but that ythe Lot came out first or second for such a Tribe, which agreeth not with the third.
uOthers lastly suppose that the Tribes names onely were put into the Lot-pot, and that each Tribe, as it was drawne, had his choise of which part he would yet vndisposed when he drew. The first opinion seemeth most probable, both because once drawing so might well end all, xwhich would not be in the second, where question might be who should draw first, which would aske a new Lotery; and againe because it is not said in the story, that such a Tribe drew or was drawne first or second simply, but that ythe Lot came out first or second for such a Tribe, which agreeth not with the third.
xNeque •nim certum satis quod Mas. ad Josh c. 15. tribuum praerogativam in prius posteriusque sortiendo seruatam. Et manifestò falsum qu•d Oleast. ad Num. c. 33. ordinem nascend• in sortiendo secutos.Neque •nim certum satis quod Mas. ad Iosh c. 15. tribuum praerogatiuam in prius posteriusque sortiendo seruatam. Et manifestò falsum qu•d Oleast. ad Num. c. 33. ordinem nascend• in sortiendo secutos.
There was indeed za special hand of God in this Lottery, (as there is oft in others) as it was done by special appointment from him; in regard whereof it may seem to some worthy to be ranked rather ⟨p. 68⟩among extraordinary Lots; considering especially how fitly the event of it sorted with yJacobs prophetical prediction in his last will and Testament. But yet I take this rather to be the proper place of it: because howsoever there were a special providence of God in it, thereby to fulfil that holy Patriarchs prophecy, yet the main matter that it was applied unto and that was aimed at in it by those that were agents therein, is like to have been no other then zan ordinary partition of such possessions as by conquest and Gods gift were cast upon them, without expectation of any special direction of them, and the Tribes they were drawn for, to such certain parts and seats.
There was indeed za speciall hand of God in this Lotery, (as there is oft in others) as it was done by speciall appointment from him; in regard wherof it may seeme to some worthy to be ranked rather ⟨p. 68⟩among extraordinarie Lots; considering especially how fitly the euent of it sorted with yIacobs propheticall prediction in his last will and Testament. But yet I take this rather to be the proper place of it: because howsoeuer there were a speciall prouidence of God in it, thereby to fulfill that holy Patriarkes prophecie, yet the maine matter that it was applied vnto and that was aimed at in it by those that were agents therein, is like to haue beene no other then zan ordinarie partition of such possessions as by conquest and Gods gift were cast vpon them, without expectation of any speciall direction of them, and the Tribes they were drawne for, to such certaine parts and seates.
Now as the whole Land in general was thus divided by Lot, so in particular were the Cities assigned to the Levites divided among them by Lot likewise according to their Families. For whereas aGod had commanded that 48. Cities in all should be assigned them, more from those that had more, and fewer from those that had less; again, whereas bthe Levites were divided into three Families according to Levies three sons, Kehath, Gershon, and Merari; and cthe Kehathites were subdivided again into two ranks, to wit, the Aaronites or the issue of Aaron, Kehath's nephew by his son Amram, which alone had the Priesthood, and the rest of that house which came not of Aaron; there were dLots cast by them for these their several Families in what Tribes there should Cities be assigned unto each. So that the Princes set down how many Cities each Tribe should afford according to the ⟨p. 69⟩quantity of their possessions and the number of their Cities; as also which Cities in each Tribe should be given them as most convenient for their abode, who were to be dispersed into all parts of Gods people. Which being first by them determined, ethe four Families drew Lots then, which of them should have the Cities set apart in each Tribe; and so fthe Aaronites had 13. in Judah, Simeon, and Benjamin; gthe other Kehathites 10. in Ephraim, Dan, and the one half of Manasseh; hthe Gershonites 13. in Issachar, Asher, Naphtali, and the other half of Manasseh; and ithe Merarites 12. in Reuben, Gad, and Zebulon• the whole 48. in all.
Now as the whole Land in generall was thus diuided by Lot, so in particular were the Cities assigned to the Leuites diuided among them by Lot likewise according to their Families. For whereas aGod had commanded that 48. Cities in all should be assigned them, more from those that had more, and fewer from those that had lesse; againe, whereas bthe Leuites were diuided into three Families according to Leuies three sonnes, Kehath, Gershon, and Merari; and cthe Kehathites were subdiuided againe into two rankes, to wit, the Aaronites or the issue of Aaron, Kehaths nephew by his sonne Amram, which alone had the Priesthood, and the rest of that house which came not of Aaron; there were dLots cast by them for these their seuerall Families in what Tribes there should Cities be assigned vnto each. So that the Princes set downe how many Cities each Tribe should affoord according to the ⟨p. 69⟩quantitie of their possessions and the number of their Cities; as also which Cities in each Tribe should be giuen them as most conuenient for their abode, who were to be disperst into all parts of Gods people. Which being first by them determined, ethe foure Families drew Lots then, which of them should haue the Cities set apart in each Tribe; and so fthe Aaronites had 13. in Iuda, Simeon, and Beniamin; gthe other Kehathites 10. in Ephraim, Dan, and the one halfe of Manasses; hthe Gershonites 13. in Issachar, Asher, Nephthali, and the other halfe of Manasses; and ithe Merarites 12. in Reuben, Gad, and Zebulon• the whole 48. in all.
And as at their first coming into the Land of promise, the possession of it was in this manner divided by Lot; so at their return again unto it from the Chaldean Captivity, was ka Colony by Lot drawn for the peopling of Jerusalem, one taken of each ten, and so a tenth of the whole company for the storing of the City, beside such as voluntarily offered themselves thereunto, the remnant being left to replenish other places, and to possess the residue of the Country round about. Yea the whole City it self (if we might believe lthe counterfeit Ben-Gorion, or at least his abridger, for the true Josephus saith motherwise) was by Lot shared in three parts by the three seditious Commanders in the time of the Roman siege.
And as at their first comming into the Land of promise, the possession of it was in this manner diuided by Lot; so at their returne againe vnto it from the Chaldean Captiuitie, was ka Colonie by Lot drawne for the peopling of Ierusalem, one taken of each ten, and so a tenth of the whole companie for the storing of the Citie, beside such as voluntarily offred themselues thereunto, the remnant being left to replenish other places, and to possesse the residue of the Countrey round about. Yea the whole City it selfe (if we might beleeue lthe counterfeit Ben-Gorion, or at least his abridger, for the true Iosephus saith motherwise) was by Lot shared in three parts by the three seditious Commaunders in the time of the Romane seige.
As namely first in some cases for the setting out ⟨p. 70⟩of Tithe. nEvery tenth one, saith God, of the Bullocks, or neat, and of thy flocks, or lesser cattle, goats and sheep, as they pass under the rod, shall be holy to the Lord: there shall no regard be had of good or bad, nor any exchange be made of it. For whereas the very tenth indeed, or that which fell in the tenth place precisely was in strict right the Priests due, but which that should be could not easily be known where great herds of neat or flocks of sheep were, this seemed the equallest course, and is enjoined therefore by God, that oevery tenth one of them should be touched and taken, as they came out of the stall or the fold, by the Tithing-mans rod, and so set apart for the Priest. That which God alludeth unto where he telleth his people by the Prophet, that phe would cause them to pass under the rod, and bring them into the Bond of his Covenant: that is, qby a Metaphor taken from Shepherds that count their sheep with a rod or a sheep-hooks rhe would search his people, and sort them, as the Shepherd doth his sheep, to take the better sort of them, srejecting and excluding the rest, into his fold, to be in league with him and under his charge.
As namely first in some cases for the setting out ⟨p. 70⟩of Tith. nEuery tenth one, saith God, of the Ballockes, or neate, and of thy flockes, or lesser cattle, goates and sheepe, as they passe vnder the rod, shall be holy to the Lord: there shall no regard be had of good or bad, nor any exchange be made of it. For whereas the very tenth indeed, or that which fell in the tenth place precisely was in strict right the Preists due, but which that should be could not easily be knowne where great herds of neate or flockes of sheepe were, this seemed the equallest course, and is enioyned therefore by God, that oeuery tenth one of them should be touched and taken, as they came out of the stall or the fold, by the Tithing-mans rod, and so set apart for the Preist. That which God alludeth vnto where he telleth his people by the Prophet, that phe would cause them to passe vnder the rod, and bring them into the Bond of his Couenant: that is, qby a Metaphore taken from Sheepheards that count their sheepe with a rod or a sheep-hookes rhe would search his people, and sort them, as the Sheepherd doth his sheepe, to take the better sort of them, sreiecting and excluding the rest, into his fold, to bee in league with him and vnder his charge.
oUt quo ordine ex stabulis sua sponte exeunt, decimum quodque baculo numerantis tangatur, & segregelur Domino. Jun. ad Leu. c. 27. & R. Sal. Jareb. ibid.Vt quo ordine ex stabulis sua sponte exeunt, decimum quodque baculo numerantis tangatur, & segregelur Domino. Iun. ad Leu. c. 27. & R. Sal. Iareb. ibid.
Again in division of Booties, of prey and spoils taken in war. So are tLots said to have been cast upon Jerusalem when it was sacked by the Chaldees, and uher people by Lot shared among the Conquerors for Slaves: As also xthe Nobles were of Nineveh in the sacking of that City, whether by the Medians, or by the yScythians, by whom it was at several times surprised.
Againe in diuision of Booties, of prey and spoiles taken in warre. So are tLots said to haue been cast vpon Ierusalem when it was sacked by the Chaldees, and uher people by Lot shared among the Conquerors for Slaues: As also xthe Nobles were of Nineueb in the sacking of that City, whether by the Medians, or by the yScythians, by whom it was at seuerall times surprised.
And of Goods otherwise gotten, as by pillage or stealth. As where David complained of his enemies that ythey had parted his garments among them, and cast Lots upon his vesture. Which thing is by zgood writers justly supposed to have been first practised upon David, *what time constrained to fly for fear of his life, his house was rifled by his foes, and his goods to his very garments sea•ed on, and by Lot, it is likely, shared among them: but was questionless, (the aholy Ghost testifieth it) fulfilled in our Saviour, when the Soldiers that executed him, parted his garments among them, and pto save it from quartering, cast Lots apart upon one of them, to wit, the Coat without seam (the rather, qsay some, because garments commonly so woven or wrought, are wont to ravel much away if they be rent,) but the rest of them, or the other two (for rit is not likely that they were above three in all, a shirt, an inner, and an upper coat) being rent into 4. quarters (which smany observe not, and yet tMark evidently saith) uwere likewise by Lot parted to each of the *four a fourth part. What form of Lottery was used by them is not apparent, (as not greatly material) save that the Popish tradition saith it was by casting of Dice, which xthey are said to show to this day three in number (* he may believe it that lift) one at Triers and two other at Saint Saviours in Spain; and so ysome would expound zNonnus when he speaketh of Christs ⟨p. 72⟩passion, though aother with better reason understand him of bMication or shifting of fingers, the one divining or guessing how many the other held up, which the same Author also else-where cmore largely describeth, a dkind of Lottery eanciently much used aswell in serious businesses, as in sport & pastime: Nor hindereth it, but that Nonnus might well mean it, though fthat cannot, as they say, be practised well but between two only at once. gPoets even the best oft-times take liberty beside the precise truth of story, and the ordinary use of those things they deal with. And no marvel therefore if Nonnus should fail somewhat herein, being esteemed one but hof the lower rank of them.
And of Goods otherwise gotten, as by pillage or stealth. As where Dauid complained of his enemies that ythey had parted his garments among them, and cast Lots vpon his vesture. Which thing is by zgood writers iustly supposed to haue beene first practised vpon Dauid, *what time constrained to flie for feare of his life, his house was rifled by his foes, and his goods to his very garments sea•ed on, and by Lot, it is likely, shared among them: but was questionlesse, (the aholy Ghost testifieth it) fulfilled in our Sauiour, when the Souldiers that executed him, parted his garments among them, and pto saue it from quartering, cast Lots apart vpon one of them, to wit, the Coate without seame (the rather, qsay some, because garments commonly so wouen or wrought, are wont to rauell much away if they bee rent,) but the rest of them, or the other two (for rit is not likely that they were aboue three in all, a shirt, an inner, and an vpper coate) being rent into 4. quarters (which smany obserue not, and yet tMarke euidently saith) uwere likewise by Lot parted to each of the *foure a fourth part. What forme of Lotery was vsed by them is not apparent, (as not greatly materiall) saue that the Popish tradition saith it was by casting of Dice, which xthey are said to shew to this day three in number (* hee may beleeue it that lift) one at Triers and two other at Saint Sauiors in Spaine; and so
pNe inutilis redderetur.Aug. in Joan. tr. 218. & Suarez in 3 •om. 2. disp. 38 §. 1.Ne inutilis redderetur.Aug. in Ioan. tr. 218. & Suarez in 3 •om. 2. disp. 38 §. 1.
qResoluta in partes, partes etiam in particulas resoluentur. Simon d• Cassia super Evang. l. 13. Et Baron. amnal. tō. 1. an. 34.Resoluta in partes, partes etiam in particulas resoluentur. Simon d• Cassia super Euang. l. 13. Et Baron. amnal. tō. 1. an. 34.
But to leave these uncertainties, such a Lot as this iSolomon alludeth unto, where he bringeth in thievish Companions not so much kinviting him whom they would persuade to adventure his part with them, (for there is nothing to be adventured lightly on their part but limb and life) as lpromising him, that he shall cast Lot with them, that is, shall have an equal share with them in whatsoever they get: mas those are wont to do and to have that ⟨p. 73⟩deal by way of lawful traffic together in joint stock.
But to leaue these vncertainties, such a Lot as this iSalomon alludeth vnto, where hee bringeth in theeuish Companions not so much kinuiting him whom they would perswade to aduenture his part with them, (for there is nothing to be aduentured lightly on their part but limme and life) as lpromising him, that he shall cast Lot with them, that is, shall haue an equall share with them in whatsoeuer they get: mas those are wont to doe and to haue that ⟨p. 73⟩deale by way of lawfull trafficke together in joynt stocke.
kSor•ē mitt •obiscū. Vulg i. consort noster ••• Vat. Cast thy Lot in among v• Angl.Sor•ē mitte •obiscū. Vulg i. consort noster ••• Vat. Cast thy Lot in among v• Angl.
lSortē conijcies in•er nos, i communis praedae partē e••qun nobiscū sort capies. Jun. & Cart.Sortē conijcies in•er nos, i cōmunis praedae partē e••qun nobiscū sorte capies. Iun. & Cart.
mA legitima negotiatorum societate sumptalocutio. Jun.A legitima negotiatorum societate sumptalocutio. Iun.
To this Head may we further refer the designing or picking out of persons by Lot to be saved or to be slain. So nsome expound that of oDavids measuring out the Moabites with two cords to be destroyed, and with one full cord to be saved alive: though pthe most turn it another way. Yea so smost Interpreters understand Gods speech, where he biddeth the Prophet rpull the flesh piece by piece, every piece of it out of the pot or caldron, and cast no Lot on it: thereby signifying that the people should not be some destroyed and some saved, but should all utterly be destroyed without distinction or difference; though tsome of late understand this also otherwise. But of this use evidently was uthe Lot that was cast on the two Goats, (for it was merely divisory, not divinatory to tell whether was fitter for the service, both being alike fit for it) whereby the one was taken for the Scape-goat to be saved and sent out alive, the other left to be slain and to make a Sin-sacrifice to God in the behalf of his people. And these be all Examples that I find of this Use of Lots in holy writ.
To this Head may we further referre the designing or picking out of persons by Lot to be saued or to be slaine. So nsome expound that of oDauids measuring out the Moabites with two coards to bee destroied, and with one full coard to be saued aliue: though pthe most turne it another way. Yea so smost Interpreters vnderstand Gods speech, where he biddeth the Prophet rpull the flesh peice by peice, euery peice of it out of the pot or caldron, and cast no Lot on it: thereby signifying that the people should not be some destroyed and some saued, but should all vtterly be destroied without distinction or difference; though tsome of late vnderstand this also otherwise. But of this vse euidently was uthe Lot that was cast on the two Goates, (for it was meerely diuisory, not diuinatory to tell whether was fitter for the seruice, both being alike fit for it) whereby the one was taken for the Scape-goat to bee saued and sent out aliue, the other left to be slaine and to make a Sinne-sacrifice to God in the behalfe of his people. And these bee all Examples that I finde of this Vse of Lots in holy writ.
sNon cecidit super eam sors, ut alij perirent, alij saluarentur; sed cunctis communis vent intericus. Hier. in Ezech. quem sequuntur L•uat. Lyra, & Geneu. nota.Non cecidit super eam sors, vt alij perirent, alij saluarentur; sed cunctis communis ven•t intericus. Hier. in Ezech. quem sequuntur L•uat. Lyra, & Geneu. nota.
§ 12. Among profane Writers there is nothing almost rifer then the use of Lots in this kind. xInheritances among Coheirs were by Lot oft divided. For so; to pass by the Poets fiction of ySaturn's three sons that should so part among them Heaven, Sea, and Hell; as also the Grammarians groundless conceit of ⟨p. 74⟩zClaros, aLacedaemon, and divers other places that from hence should have their names: thus, I say, we find bPeloponnesus after the right of possession by joint conquest recovered, parted between Cresphontes, Temenus, and the Sons of Aristodemus; though there were some slight therein used, as we shall hereafter show: Thus cLotharius his four sons, Charibert, Gunthram, Chilperis and Sigebert parted the Realm of France between them after their Fathers decease. Thus dFrederick the second King of Denmark, and Adolf Duke of Holst divided between them the Territory of the elder John of Holst deceased without issue. And thus, saith the Orator, eshould Oedipus his two sons rather have done (and yet in part too it is said they did, itaking either of them their year by turns, as the Lot at first ordered it) and not by mutual war and strife (as at length they did) work either others overthrow.
§ 12. Among prophane Writers there is nothing almost rifer then the vse of Lots in this kinde. xInheritances among Coheires were by Lot oft diuided. For so; to passe by the Poets fiction of ySaturnes three sonnes that should so part among them Heauen, Sea, and Hell; as also the Grammarians groundlesse conceipt of ⟨p. 74⟩zClaros, aLacedaemon, and diuers other places that from hence should haue their names: thus, I say, wee finde bPeloponnesus after the right of possession by joint conquest recouered, parted betweene Cresphontes, Temenus, and the Sonnes of Aristodemus; though there were some slight therein vsed, as wee shall hereafter shew: Thus cLotharius his foure sonnes, Charibert, Gunthram, Chilperis and Sigebert parted the Realme of France betweene them after their Fathers decease. Thus dFredericke the second King of Denmarke, and Adolfe Duke of Holst diuided betweene them the Teritory of the elder Iohn of Holst deceased without issue. And thus, saith the Orator, eshould Oedipus his two sonnes rather haue done (and yet in part too it is said they did, itaking either of them their yeere by turnes, as the Lot at first ordred it) and not by mutuall warre and strife (as at length they did) worke either others ouerthrow.
y[Greek or Hebrew]. Apollod. bibl. l. 1. Hinc Hou•. Il. [Greek or Hebrew] &c. Et Virg. Aen. 1. Non illi imperium pelagi, sed mihi sorte datum. Vise ibi Sernium: sed & Lactant justis. l. 1. c. 11.〈non-Latin alphabet〉. Apollod. bibl. l. 1. Hinc Hou•. Il. 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 &c. Et Virg. Aen. 1. Non illi imperium pelagi, sed mihi sorte datum. Vise ibi Sernium: sed & Lactant iustis. l. 1. c. 11.
zClaros [Greek or Hebrew]. Ex Nearch. Eust. ad perieg.Claros 〈non-Latin alphabet〉. Ex Nearch. Eust. ad perieg.
a[Greek or Hebrew]. cùm inter Heraclidas conuenisset [Greek or Hebrew]. Eustath. Il. ••. & Steph. de urb. [Greek or Hebrew]. Etymol.〈non-Latin alphabet〉. cùm inter Heraclidas conuenisset 〈non-Latin alphabet〉. Eustath. Il. ••. & Steph. de vrb. 〈non-Latin alphabet〉. Etymol.
bUt [Greek or Hebrew], cui sors prinia obtigisset, vel Spartam vel Argos optaret; cui tertia, M•ssenen obtineret. Polyaen. stratag. l. 1. aliter paulò quàm Pausan. M•ssen & Apollod. l. 2. Vise infra cap. 12. § 6.Vt 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, cui sors prinia obtigisset, vel Spartam vel Argos optaret; cui tertia, M•ssenen obtineret. Polyaen. stratag. l. 1. aliter paulò quàm Pausan. M•ssen & Apollod. l. 2. Vise infra cap. 12. § 6.
The Civill Law kwilleth that the goods and chattels of every Courtier deceased, where a fourth part is to come to the Court, be parted by the heir or Executor into four parts, and then lLots cast whether he shall choose his three, or the Court her fourth. Where divers good reasons also of this ⟨p. 75⟩course are rendered: for that mIt is commonly neglected, that is held in common: Men think they have nothing at all, if they have it not apart: and out of an envious disposition (like nthe wrong Mother in Scripture) they suffer things oft to be spoiled rather then an other should have good of them. The like is willed to be done where the choice of some Chattel is bequeathed to divers; or that one that it was bequeathed to dying leaveth divers Executors; if they cannot otherwise agree. oAnd our Common-law likewise, among other courses of partition of Land between partners or female Coheirs, alloweth this for one, pby dividing the Land into parts as equal as may be, and then wrapping up scrolls of each part in as many waxen balls, to be drawn by the Partners, in order of years, out of the bonnet of some other indifferent party.
The Ciuill Law kwilleth that the goods and chattels of euery Courtier deceased, where a fourth part is to come to the Court, be parted by the heire or Executor into foure parts, and then lLots cast whether he shall chuse his three, or the Court her fourth. Where diuers good reasons also of this ⟨p. 75⟩course are rendred: for that mIt is commonly neglected, that is held in common: Men thinke they haue nothing at all, if they haue it not apart: and out of an enuious disposition (like nthe wrong Mother in Scripture) they suffer things oft to be spoiled rather then an other should haue good of them. The like is willed to be done where the choise of some Chatell is bequeathed to diuers; or that one that it was bequeathed to dying leaueth diuers Executors; if they cannot otherwise agree. oAnd our Common-law likewise, among other courses of partition of Land betweene partners or female Coheires, alloweth this for one, pby diuiding the Land into parts as equall as may be, and then wrapping vp scroles of each part in as many waxen balls, to be drawne by the Partners, in order of yeeres, out of the bonnet of some other indifferent party.
lV• rebus totis insortium casum deductis, vel Curiae quadrantis, velhaeredi aut fidei commissario dodrantis electio ex sortis falicitate contingat.
mNatural vi •ū est negligi quod in commune possidetur: vique nil•t habere se, qui n•n totum habeat, arbitretur: denique suam quoque sortem corrumpi patiatur, dumb inuidet alienae.Natural vi •ū est negligi quod in commune possidetur: vique nil•t habere se, qui n•n totum habeat, arbitretur: denique suam quoque sortem corrumpi patiatur, dum inuidet alienae.
oJustin. Institut. l. 2. t. 20. Siinter optandum dissenserint, fortuna sit optionis judex. Et Cod. lib. 6. tit. 42. leg. 3. Sort inter altercantes alhibenda.Iustin. Institut. l. 2. t. 20. Siinter optandum dissenserint, fortuna sit optionis iudex. Et Cod. lib. 6. tit. 42. leg. 3. Sorte inter altercantes alhibenda.
Poets euen the best oft-times take libertie beside the precise truth of story, and the ordinary vse of those things they deale with. And no maruell therefore if Nonnus should faile somewhat herein, being esteemed one but
uEtiā v•stomenta reliqua sort divisa. Ambr. in Luc. 23. & exhort. ad Virg. & Theophyl ad Marc. 15. & Glos. ad Digest lib. 10. tit. 2. le•. 5.Etiā v•stomenta reliqua sorte diuisa. Ambr. in Luc. 23. & exhort. ad Virg. & Theophyl ad Marc. 15. & Glos. ad Digest lib. 10. tit. 2. le•. 5.
*Quat•or n. milites erant. Au. in 10.118. id quod [Greek or Hebrew]. a•Act. 12.4.Quat•or n. milites erant. Au. in 10.118. id quod 〈non-Latin alphabet〉. a•Act. 12.4.
xCaluin. de reliq. & Becon of Romish relics.Caluin. de reliq. & Becon of Romish reliques.
*•tred•t Jud•us Apella, sed Non ego credulus illis.•tred•t Iud•us Apella, sed Non ego credulus illis.
yDactylis, i.•alú, •esseris, aleisuè è manu crisis: Gallicè un dét, five dé (dice.) Hadr. Jun. & Fr. Nans. in Non. par.Dactylis, i.•alú, •esseris, aleisuè è manu ••issis: Gallicè un dét, fiue dé (dice.) Hadr. Iun. & Fr. Nans. in Nonn. par.
z[Greek or Hebrew].-Non. parap. Joan.〈non-Latin alphabet〉.-Nonn. parap. Ioan.
aFalkenberg. in Non. dio•.
b[Greek or Hebrew]. Gloss.〈non-Latin alphabet〉. Gloss.
c[Greek or Hebrew]. Non. Dionys. l 33.〈non-Latin alphabet〉. Non. Dionys. l 33.
dMicare est sor•iri digitis Nonius de propr. serm o• [Greek or Hebrew]. Ptol m. H• phaest. his•. n••al. 4. qui & im • tionē •ius Helenae tribuit: in Pho•ij biblioth. 1•0. Quid sorsest? quod micare, quod talos, tesser. • i•cere. Cic. divin. l. 2.Micare est sor•iri digitis Nonius de propr. serm o•〈non-Latin alphabet〉. Ptol m. H• phaest. his•. n••al. 4. qui & im • tionē •ius Helenae tribuit: in Pho•ij biblioth. 1•0. Quid sorsest? quod micare, quod talos, tesser. • i•cere. Cic. diuin. l. 2.
eVude natū p•overbium de homine qui certiss•ma esset fide, Dign•m esse quicum in tenebris •icetur. Cic. Ossic. l 3. & sin. l. 2. quod de lusu acceptum Eras. chill. c. cent. 8. ad 23. ad contractus verèretulit Casaub ad Suet. Aug.Vude natū p•ouerbium de homine qui certiss•ma esset fide, Dign•m esse quicum in tenebris •icetur. Cic. Ossic. l 3. & sin. l. 2. quod de lusu acceptum Eras. chil. c. cent. 8. ad 23. ad contractus verèretulit Casaub ad Suet. Aug.
fDuorum tantum est. Nans.
gSic Homerus Solē singit per •unciù boū suorū caed•m resciscere Odyss •.de quo tamen alibi, [Greek or Hebrew]. Et Il.•. lovē fulgurare ubi ningit. Scal. Poet. l. 5. c. 2. Apud Virg. Aen. 6. Palin•us Aeneam portus Velin•s requirere jubet, qui post ann. 600. •o nomine primum n•ncupati. Ge•. noct. At. l. 10. c. 16. Idē po•tū describit, qualis nullus spianinora Africana. Seru. ad Aen. 1. Ceruorū agmen ibid. ab Aenea repertins. Cùn cer•os Africa serè sola non gignat. Pli hist. not. l. 8 c. 34. & Arist. hist. animal. 18. c. 28Sic Homerus Solē singit per •unciù boū suorū caed•m resciscere Odyss •.de quo tamen alibi, 〈non-Latin alphabet〉. Et Il.•. louē fulgurare vbi ningit. Scal. Poet. l. 5. c. 2. Apud Virg. Aen. 6. Palin•us Aeneam portus Velin•s requirere iubet, qui post ann. 600. •o nomine primum n•ncupati. Ge•. noct. Att. l. 10. c. 16. Idē po•tū describit, qualis nullꝰ spiāinora Africana. Seru. ad Aen. 1. Ceruorū agmen ibid. ab Aenea repertīs. Cùn cer•os Africa serè sola non gignat. Pli hist. nat. l. 8 c. 34. & Arist. hist. animal. 18. c. 28
hMimū ridiculū. Jos. Scal. ep. ad Salmas.Mimū ridiculū. Ios. Scal. ep. ad Salmas.
cDeditque sors Char. sedem habere Parisios, Gunt. Aurelias, Chill. Suessionas, Sig. Remos. Greg. Tur. hist. l. 4. c. 22.Deditque sors Char. sedem habere Parisios, Gunt. Aurelias, Chil. Suessionas, Sig. Remos. Greg. Tur. hist. l. 4. c. 22.
dChytrae• in Judic. c. 1.Chytrae• in Iudic. c. 1.
e[Greek or Hebrew]. Dion. Chrys. 64.〈non-Latin alphabet〉. Dion. Chrys. 64.
iHinc Stat. Theb. 1. -jam sorte carebat Dilatus Polynicis honos. Et l. 2. - animum subit illa dies, qua sorte benigna Fratris Echio•ia sleterat privatus in aula. Et Eteocles, Quae sors justa mihi, qua non indebitus annis Sceptra dicavit honos, teneo, aeternumque tenebo.Hinc Stat. Theb. 1. -iam sorte carebat Dilatus Polynicis honos. Et l. 2. - animum subit illa dies, qua sorte benigna Fratris Echio•ia sleterat priuatus in aula. Et Eteocles, Quae sors iusta mihi, qua non indebitus annis Sceptra dicauit honos, teneo, aeternumque tenebo.
