II. RAMAH, or Ramatha, Ramola, Ramula, Ramba, Ruma, or Remphtis, a City lying to the West of Jerusalem, between Hieron. in Epitaph. Paulæ. Le Brun, p. 251.Lydda and Joppa, as St. Jerom places it; or between Joppa and Jerusalem, as the modern Travellers describe it. Phocas puts it about six and thirty Miles from Jerusalem. Heretofore, near this Place, and towards Lydda, was to be seen the neat Church of St. George, with a Monastery bearing his Name, wherein the Body of this Saint and Martyr Bernard. Monach. Itin. an. 870. Reland. Palæst. l. 3. p. 950. Sanut. in secretis fidel. crucis, p. 152.was deposited. Abulfeda, quoted by M. Reland, says, that this City was built by Solyman Son of Abdolmelic, after the Destruction of Lydda; and Sanutus also says, that the Arabians built it near Lydda, after the Crusadoes began to come into that Country. M. le Brun describes the fine Reservoirs of Water to be seen there, and many other Marks of Antiquity: He says it is but four Leagues from Jafa, or Joppa, and stands in a plain and even Country: He says also, that Lydda is on one Side, and about three Miles from Rama.
These Circumstances determine me to Euseb. in Ἀρμαθαίμ. Hieron. in Epitaph. Paulæ. Matt. xvii. 57.think that this is the same Place that Eusebius and St. Jerom took for Arimathea, the Country of Joseph of Arimathea, so well known in the Gospel. St. Jerom places it between Lydda and Joppa: And Eusebius says it is in the Canton of Thamnis, and near to Diospolis, otherwise call’d Lydda. This is the same that was taken from Samaria, and added to Judea. See 1 Mac. xi. 34. and Josephus’s Antiquities, l. 13. c. 8. p. 438. But if this be so, we must acknowledge this City to have been very ancient, and to have been in being long before our Saviour’s time: And, consequently, when it is said, that it was built only since the Time of the Crusadoes, it must be understood only to have been then rebuilt, repair’d, or fortify’d anew. Eusebius and some others seem to have thought, Euseb. & Hieron. in Armathasophim.that this City is the same as Ramath of Samuel, or Ramathaim-zophim of the Mountains of Ephraim. But this Opinion cannot be supported by any means.