On an uproar having broken out at Jerusalem, the heads of the people met under the New-gate (Jer. xxix, 20), where they were sure to find insurgents. The town-gates were to the ancient Orientals what the cof- fee-houses, exchanges, markets, and courts of law are in our large towns ; and such is still the case in a great degree, altliough the introduction of coffee-houses has in this, and other respects, caused some alteration of Eastern manners. In capital towns the quidnuncs occasionally sat with the same views near the gate of the royal palace, where also the officers and messen- gers of the palace lounged about ; and where persons having suits to offer, favors to beg, or wishing to rcc- omniind tliemselves to favorable notice, would wait day after day, in the hope of attracting the notice of the prince or great man at his entrance or coming forth (Esth. ii, 19, 21 ; iii, 2).
Criminals were punished without the gates (1 Kings xxi, 13; Acts vii, 59), which explains the passage in Heb. xiii, 12. The same custom existed among the Romans (see Plant. j\Iilit. Glorias, act ii, sc. iv, G, 7). At Pome executions took place without the Porta IVIe- tia or Esqnilina. As to the gate through which Christ was led before his crucifixion, opinions differ; some taking it to have been the Dung-gate (Lamy, Apparat. Gcorp-rtph. ch. xiii, § .^, p. 321) ; others, following Hot- tinger (^Cipp. Jlebr. p. ]G) and Godwyn, understand it of the (iate of Judgment. But for all that concerns the gates of Jerusalem, we must refer to the article Jeku-
SAI.K.'M.
Gates are put figuratively for public places'of towns and palaces. The gates of a-town are alsp put instead of the town itself (Gen. xxii, 17; xxiv, CO ; Judg. v, h; IhithiVjlO; Deut.xii,r2; rsa.lxxxvii,2; cxxii,2).
By ffates of righteousness (Psa. cxviii, 19) those of the Temple are no douljt meant. The gates of death and of hell occur in Job xxxviii, 17 ; Psa. ix, 14 ; ]Mi- cah ii, 13. Doors and gates of liell are especially in- troduced, Prov. V, 5; Isa. xxxviii, 10; Matt, xvi, 19; and the Jews go so far in their writings as to ascribe real gates to hell (Wagenseil, Sota, p. 220). Virgil {yEn. vi, 12G) also speaks of infernal gates. The ori- gin of this metaphorical expression is not difficult to explain ; for it was very common to use the word gates as an image of large empires (Psa. xxiv, 7) ; and in pagan authors the abode of departed souls is represent- ed as the residence of Pluto (see Virgil, yE7i. vi, 417 sq.). In the passage, then, IMatt. xvi, 19, by "gates of hell" must be understood all aggressions by the in- fernal empire upon the Christian Church. — Kitto, s. v. ; Smith, s. v. See City.
Gath (Heb. id. f^Ji, a wine-i'«/, as in Isa. Ixiii, ?, etc.; Sept. usually TsS-; Josephus rirra or Terra), one of the five royal cities of the Philistines (Josh, xiii, 3). It was one of the cities upon which the ark is said to have brought calamity (1 Sam. v, 8, 9), and which offered in connection therewith a trespass-offering, each one a golden enierod (1 Sam. vi, 17). Goliath, of the family of giants which Joshua spared (Josh, xi, 22), of which other mcmliers may be found mentioned in Scripture (1 Chron. xxi, 5-8; 2 Sam. xxi, 19-22), has rendered Gath a word familiar from our childhood ; but it is not certain whether Goliath was a native or merely a resident of Gath (1 Sam. xvii, 4). To Achish, king of Gath, David twice fled for fear of Saul (1 Sam. xxi, 10; xxvii, 2-7; Psa. Ivi). At his own entreaty David received from Achish tlie city of Ziklag. David dwelt in the countrj' of the Philistines "a full year and four months.'' David's connection with Gath throws light on the feelings which dictated the words (2 Sam. i, 20), " Tell it (tlie death of ' Saul and Jona- than his son') not in Gath." Micah also (i, 10) says, "Declare it (the wound come unto Judah, ver. 9) not at Gath." It was conquered by David, and fortified both by him and by Itehoboam (2 Sam. viii, 1; 1 Chron. xviii, 1 ; 2 Chron. xi. 8). From 2 Sam. xv, 18, it ap- pears that David had a band (GOO men) of Gittites in his service at the time of the rebellion of Absalom. Their devotedness to him under Ittai their leader forms a beautiful episode in the history of David's varied fortune (2 Sam. xv, 19 sq). Shimei's visit to Gath and its fatal consequences to himself may be read in 1 Kinirs ii, 39-4G. In the reign of Solomon mention is made of a king of Gath (1 Kings iv, 24), who was doubtless a tributary prince, but powerful enough to cause api)rehension to Solomon, as appears from the punislnnent he inflicted on Shimei. Under Jehoash, Hazael, king of Syria, took Gath (2 Kings xii, 17); from his successor, Benhadad, the place was recovered (2 Kings xiii, 24). It nuist, however, have soon re- volted; for Uzziah (2 Chron. xxvi, 6), finding it nec- essary to war against the Philistines, " broke down the wall of Gath." Probably the conquest was not of long duration. This constant witlistanding of the power of Jerusalem shows that Gath was a place of great resources and high eminence — a conclusion which is confirmed by the language employed bj- the prophets (Amos vi, 2; Micah i, 10). The ravages of war to which Gath was exposed appear to have de- stroj'ed it at a comparatively early period, as it is not mentioned among the other royal cities bj' the later prophets (Zeph. ii, 4 ; Zech. ix, o, G).