TOWNS. We use the term in its general sig nification, so as to embrace any assemblage of inhabited human dwellings of larger size than a hamlet or a village, the only way in which we can speak with correctness and advantage.
Towns are a natural result of the aggregative principle in human nature. Necessity led the early races of men to build their towns on lofty spots, where, with the aid of the natural advan tages of the ground, they could easily protect themselves against beasts of prey and human foes. A town, and a stronghold or fort, would thus be originally identical. As population increased and agriculture spread, so some degree of security came, which permitted the inhabitants of the cas tle to diffuse themselves over the hillside, and take up their abode in the valley, and by the side of the stream that lay nearest their acropolis; still the inhabitants kept at no great distance from the center of strength, in order not to be deprived of its protection. The town, however, would thus be enlarged, and as the necessity for self-defense still existed, so would the place soon be sur rounded with walls. Thus would there be outer and inner bulwarks, and in some sort two species of community—the townspeople, who tilled the ground and carried on trade, and the soldiers, whose business it was to afford protection: these two, however, in the earliest stages of civilization were one, the peasant and tradesman taking arms when the town was put in danger.
(1) Origin. How early towns were formed cannot be determined by any general principle: they were obviously a work of time. The pri mary tendency in population was to diffuse it self. Aggregation on particular spots would take place at a later period. When then Cain is said to have built a city (Gen. iv:17), the first city (Enoch, so called after Cain's son), we have evi dence which concurs with other intimations to show that it is only a partial history of the first ages that we possess in the records of the book of Genesis. In the time of the Patriarchs we find towns existing in Palestine which were originally surrounded with fortifications, so as to make them 'fenced cities.' In these dwelt the agricultural population, who by means of these places of strength defended themselves and their property from the nomad tribes of the neighboring desert, who then, as they do now, lived by plunder. Nor were works of any great strength necessary. In Palestine at the present day, while walls are in most parts an indispensable protection, and agri culture can be advantageously prosecuted only so far as sheltered by a fortified town, erections of a very slight nature are found sufficient for the pur pose, the rather because the most ,favorable locali ties offer themselves on all sides, owing to the natural inequality of the ground.
(2) Ancient Method. Of the ancient method of building in towns and cities we have no ac curate knowledge, any farther than we may information nformation from the ruins which still lie on the soil of Palestine. But these ruins can af ford only general notions, as, though they arc nu merous, and show that the Land of Promise was thickly peopled and highly flourishing in its better days, the actual remains of ancient towns are to be ascribed to different and very distant periods of history. The crusades left many strongholds which are now in a state of dilapidation; but the crusades are of modern days compared with the times of the Savior, which themselves are remote from the proper antiquity of the nation. The
law of sameness, however, which prevails so rig idly in Eastern countries, gives us an assurance that a modern town in Palestine may be roughly taken as a type of its ancient predecessors.
(3) Gates. At the gates of the town, which were frequented as the court of justice, the town's market, the rendezvous for loungers, newsmong ers, pleasure-seekers, there were wide open places of greater or less dimensions, where on important occasions the entire population assembled for con sultation or for action (Neh. viii 16; 2 Citron. xxxii :6; 2 Sam. xxi:12; Job xxix :7 ; 2 Kings The streets were not so narrow as streets generally are in modern Oriental towns. Their names were sometimes taken from the wares or goods that were sold in them: thus in Jer. xxxvii. 21, we read of 'the bakers' street.' The present bazaars seem to be a continuation of this ancient custom. The streets of Jerusalem at least were paved (Joseph. Antiq. xx :9. 7) ; but the streets of most cities of Palestine would not need pav ing, in consequence of the rocky nature of the foundations on which they lay. Herod the Great laid an open road in Antioch with polished stone (Joseph. Antiq. xvi. 5. 3; comp. I Kings xx:34). In regard to the earlier periods, we find only a notice to the effect that Solomon caused the fore court of the Temple to be laid with flags. Besides paved streets, Jerusalem before the exile had an extensive system of watercourses or aqueducts, which seems to have been rendered necessary by the natural supply having been limited to one or two spots in the immediate vicinity. This sub ject has been handled by Robinson, and more fully by Olin (ii. t39, sq.: see Is. vii :3; xxii :9; 2 Kings XX :20 ; Joseph. Antiq. xviii. 3. 2). Other cities were contented with the fountains whose existence had probably led to their formation at the first.
(4) Municipal and Sanitary Regulations. "What may be called the police and sanitary reg ulations were of the strictest character. Of Cx sarea, e. g., we know that there was a regular sys tem of drainage into the sea, apparently similar to, but more perfect than that of any modern town (Josephus, Ant., xv, 9, 6). The same holds true with regard to the temple buildings at Jerusa lem. But in every town and village sanitary rules were strictly attended to. Cemeteries, tan neries, and whatever also might he prejudicial to health, had to be removed at least fifty cubits out side a town. Bakers' and dyers' shops, or stables, were not allowed under the dwelling of another person. Again, in building, the line of each street had to be strictly kept, nor was even a projec tion beyond it allowed. In general the streets were wider than those of modern Eastern cities The nature of the soil, and the circumstance that so many towns were built on hills (at least in Judara), would, of course, be advantageous from a sanitary point of view. It would also render the paving of the streets less requisite. But we know that certain towns were paved—Jerusalem with white stones (Josephus, Ant., xx, 9, 7). To ob viate occasions of dispute, neighbors were not al lowed to have windows looking into the courts or rooms of others, nor might the principal entrance to a shop he through a court common to two or three dwellings" (Edersheim, Sketches of Jewish Social Life, pp. 87-93).