BEFORE I begin with the immediate subject which brings me before your
notice this evening, I would venture to crave your indulgence if my
lisping, broken accents, and my limited attainments, should not reflect
the credit upon your noble Institution which it so richly deserves. I
humbly trust, that you will kindly take into consideration that it is
comparatively but a short time since I began to pay attention to your
language and literature.
It is but little more than eight years since I landed on the shores of
England, and eight years to a _day_¹ since I arrived in your town of
Liverpool, at a time when you, in all probability, little thought of
erecting such a magnificent edifice for so laudable a purpose. As for
me, I positively aver that I did not then entertain the least ambition
of ever appearing before you as lecturer in any shape whatever, being
then totally ignorant of your language. I trust, therefore, to your kind
and well-known courtesy, that you will put the best construction you
possibly can on my humble efforts.
¹ October 28th, 1845.
Whilst it would be unpardonable presumption in me, seeing as I do before
me such a host of learned and highly-gifted men, to imagine that there
were not those present who, from more extensive reading, were not better
acquainted with several, if not with all the subjects which will come
before them in the progress of these lectures; it would be, at the same
time, regarded as mere affectation and false modesty if I pretended that
there were not others less conversant with these subjects than myself,
and to whom it may be in my power to impart some information which they
may not before have possessed.
The history of the Jews――part of which I purpose bringing before you in
this and five following lectures――stands indeed associated with all that
is sublime in the retrospect of the past, affecting in the contemplation
of the present, and magnificent in the future history of mankind.
No one who has any feeling at all can help manifesting it at the mention
of the name Jew――a name “big with a world of import.” The Jew stands
forth until the present day, in the face of the whole world, a living
and lasting miracle――a mighty, though shattered monument, on every
fragment of which is inscribed, in letters of the brightest gold, the
truth of holy writ. No wonder, therefore, that Lord Rochester, when a
conceited infidel (for such is the character of all infidels), was
obliged to make the following confession: “I reject all arguments with
one single exception, that founded on the existence of the Jews; that
alone baffles my scriptural infidelity.” I say, no one can help feeling
interested in the history of the most ancient and venerable people on
the face of the whole earth. The Jewish people can trace back their
progenitors to the very cradle of the human race: the nations about them
are infantine when compared with their hoary antiquity. The following
are the words, respecting them, of a learned English divine, father
of the celebrated Addison, author of “The Spectator:”――“This people, if
any under heaven, may boldly glory of their antiquity and nobleness of
descent; there being no nation who can prove its pedigree by such clear
and authentic heraldry as the Jews. For, though a ridiculous vanity hath
tempted some to date their original before that of the world, and others,
with great assurance, have made themselves sprung from their own soil,
yet the Jews, by an unquestionable display through all periods since
the creation, can prove their descent from the first man. So that all
other nations must have recourse to the Jewish records to clear their
genealogies and attest their lineage.” The interest in the history of
such a people must at all times be intense, and, if at all times, more
especially so now.
It is a singular fact that, at this present moment, that people
draws the eyes of all the civilized nations with an intensity never
experienced before. The facilities of locomotion have covered Syria and
Palestine with visitors of the curious, or the devout; the claims of the
rightful proprietors of Canaan engage the attention of the statesman;
the tide of worldly interest rolls back upon the shores of Palestine;
and upon a question as to the possession of the land of promise, lately
depended, perhaps still depends, the peace of Europe, the fate of the
habitable world. The dominion of the heathen Roman has long since ceased,
the conquest of the Khosroes is forgotten, the Saracens have passed away,
the Crusaders and the Califs have alike crumbled into dust; all those
are gone, and have left scarcely a vestige behind, whilst the Jews are
once more brought prominently into view. They exist still in very great
numbers, and in all the separatedness of their original character, in
spite of all the persecutions they have gone through. How true did the
Jew speak when he said, “persecution cannot dismay us――time itself
cannot destroy us.” I repeat again, the interest in the history of such
a people must be intense.
The portion of Jewish history to which I wish particularly to call
your attention in this _first_ series of lectures, is _that_ connected
with this country up to the year 1290, when all the Jews were banished
by EDWARD the First. The _second_ series, which I may deliver at some
future period, will form the history of the Jews from the time of Oliver
Cromwell to our own day.
Difficult as the historian may find it to fathom the origin of the
first inhabitants who peopled this country, certain it is that the most
difficult part of the same is that of the Jewish early introduction and
establishment in this realm; which is enveloped almost in impenetrable
obscurity. The sources from which we can draw any information at
all on the subject, are very scanty. English historians afford us
no information whatever, and neither have the ante-expulsion Jews
bequeathed us any records or chronicles of their antiquities in this
country. We are left therefore to conjecture from the glimmering sparks
which we now and then catch in the pages of foreign literature; but
no one can venture to fix a positive date to the first landing of the
dispersed of Judah on the shores of Britain.
In order to prevent erroneous conclusions, however, it may be well just
to state the probable reason why the ante-expulsion Jews yield us no
light on their early history. I am aware that prejudice will readily
exclaim, as a reason, “The Jews had no learned men amongst them to
record their passing events;” or, “They were too much absorbed in money
getting, so that they could not find time to think of anything else.”
But any one acquainted with the national character of the Jews, will
at once produce an array of facts which will prove incontrovertibly the
fallacy of such reasons. I have already demonstrated elsewhere, that
there never has been a period in their history when they were destitute
of first rate genius and learning. It is a striking fact, that there
is _no_ science in which some Jewish name is not enrolled amongst its
eminent promoters. They always entertained a profound love for learning,
and were inspired with an uncontrollable energy in the pursuit of
knowledge. They grace the literary pages of Spain, as pre-eminent
philosophers, philologists, physicians, astronomers, mathematicians,
historians, grammarians, orators, and highly-gifted poets.¹ D’Israeli
does not improperly put the following sentence into Sidonia’s mouth:
“You never observe a great intellectual movement in Europe in which the
Jews do not greatly participate”²――which he illustrates by notorious
facts, and which Dr. Wolff corroborates. But besides all this, we shall
see from their history in this country, even from the little that we can
gather of it, that the ante-expulsion Jews really had learned men, who
were able even to vie with the most learned ecclesiastics of their day,
as I shall show in the progress of these lectures. Mr. Moses Samuel,
a learned Jew of this town, (Liverpool) observes――“Let me tell you,”
addressing his brethren in this country, “that you had great men living
in England eight hundred years ago. The sayings of the wise men of
Norwich and of York are quoted _in_ some of the additions made by the
expounders of the Talmud.”³ A modern Christian writer bears testimony
to the same effect; he says――“Their (_i.e._ Jews’) schools afforded
a far more superior education than those of the Christians, and the
children of the latter were invariably instructed in those schools in
arithmetic and medicine, and also in higher branches of study.”⁴
¹ See “the Fundamental Principles of Modern Judaism
investigated”――“An Address to Christians.”
² Coningsby, vol. ii., p. 201.
³ “An Address on the Position of the Jews in Britain,” p. 27.
⁴ Knight’s London, part 31, p. 5.
But what _then_ may the reason be for the melancholy deficiency of their
own historical records? The probable reason strikes me to be this; the
severe ill-usages which have been their painful lot to encounter. For
the history of the then Jews is an extremely dreary tale of woe.
The Jewish historian finds himself in the same dilemma in which Gildas,
commonly called “the wise,” found himself; who sadly lamented (in
the beginning of his epistle, in which he has undertaken to give
some account of the ancient British Church) the want of any domestic
monuments to give him certain information. “For,” saith he, “if there
were any such, they were either burnt by our enemies, or carried so far
by the banishment of our countrymen, that they no longer appear, and
therefore I was forced to pick up, what I could, out of foreign writers,
without any continued series.” So it is with the Jewish historian.
Fearful in length is the catalogue of the massacres, extortions, and
persecutions which the Jews have sustained in this country during the
dark ages of its annals. Consider how many times they were plundered,
how often fire was set to their houses, which destroyed all their
possessions. Behold them at York, how that before they destroyed their
own persons, they first burnt every thing belonging to them――view them
just before their final banishment, robbed on every side――all which I
shall show more fully in their proper places. I say, take all this into
consideration, and the probable reason will suggest itself――viz., that
the Jewish records perished with their persons and other possessions. It
is not too much to assume, for any one who knows the real character of
the Jews, that they were in possession of valuable documents relative to
their earliest introduction into this country, but which were lost with
the rest of their valuables, by which not only they themselves sustained
a great loss, but also their survivors.
Deprived as we are of the Jewish own information respecting this
important inquiry; and silent as are the ancient English historians
about their first setting foot on Albion’s ground, which put it beyond
the modern historian’s power to ascertain the positive date of their
doing so: still any one who, having paid critical attention to the
subject, must come to the conclusion that those English historians who
fixed the time of their introduction into this country to be coeval with
the Norman conquest, were wrong. It is highly probable that the Jews
visited this country at a very early period.
Be it recollected that the Jewish nation had been trained to be
a wandering nation, to prepare them, no doubt, for their mighty
dispersion. Their progenitor, Abraham, seems to have been a type of the
same, who was commanded (Genesis, xii. 1), “Get thee out of thy country,
and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto a land that I
will show thee;” and his descendants have ever and anon manifested a
peculiar migratory disposition, as you always find in holy writ.
Methinks, however, I hear some one say, It may be all true that the Jews
betrayed a migratory disposition at a very early period of their history,
which must, however, be confined to the east, for surely it cannot
be imagined that they travelled as far as the west, at a remote age;
especially, when we take into consideration the rudeness of the state of
navigation in those days. I would respectfully call to such objectors’
minds a statement of an eminent ancient writer――I mean Tacitus――who
says that the first colonizing expeditions were performed by water,
not by land;¹ and the result of research into the affinities of
nations seems to have established, that at no time, however remote,
has the interposition of sea presented much obstacle to the migratory
dispositions of mankind.²
¹ “Nec terra olim, sed classibus advehebantur, qui mutare
sedes quærebant.”
² See Appendix A.
As I said before, however, that Abraham’s descendants were trained to be
a wandering people, so say I, moreover, now, that they were trained to
be a maritime nation; in which pursuit we find them employed soon after
they entered the land of promise. Not only did they possess the small
sea of ♦Galilee, but they were placed all along the upper border of the
great, or Mediterranean, Sea; and no sooner were they established in
their country than they began to be engaged in maritime affairs, as we
read in sacred history (1 Kings, ix. 26–28)――“And King Solomon made a
navy of ships in Ezion-geber ♦which is beside Eloth, on the shore of the
Red Sea, in the land of Edom. And Hiram sent in the navy his servants,
shipmen that had knowledge of the sea, with the servants of Solomon.
And they came to Ophir, and fetched from thence gold, four hundred and
twenty talents, and brought it to King Solomon.”
♦ ‘Gallilee’ replaced with ‘Galilee’
♦ ‘whieh’ replaced with ‘which’
As also in chap. x. 22――“For the king had at sea a navy of Tharshish,
with the navy of Hiram: once in three years came the navy of Tharshish,
bringing gold, and silver, &c.”
The Israelites, therefore, had an opportunity of traversing the known
world at a very early period of their history, and thus made known the
wisdom of their heaven-taught monarch; we can, therefore, admit in the
amplest magnitude of signification the narrative contained in verses
23–26 of the same chapter. “So King Solomon exceeded all the kings of
the earth for riches and for wisdom.
“And all the earth sought to Solomon, to hear his wisdom, which God had
put in his heart.
“And they brought every man his present, vessels of silver, and vessels
of gold, and garments, and armour, and spices, horses, and mules, a rate
year by year.
“And Solomon gathered together chariots and horsemen: and he had a
thousand and four hundred chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen, whom
he bestowed in the cities for chariots, and with the king at Jerusalem.”
It will be interesting to our subject to take a brief view of the
navigating expeditions of the Phœnicians at that period, which was their
most prosperous epoch, and who, with far more knowledge of the art of
navigation than modern assumption gives them credit for, were to be seen
in the Mediterranean, the Baltic, the Atlantic――every where upon the
waters; and in doing so, I must refer you to the twenty-seventh chapter
of Ezekiel, where we have a concise, but precise description of their
marine expeditions, which is as follows――“O thou that art situate at
the entry of the sea, which art a merchant of the people for many isles,
thus saith the Lord God; O Tyrus, thou hast said I am of perfect beauty.
“Thy borders are in the midst of the seas, thy builders have perfected
thy beauty.
“They have made all thy ship boards of fir trees of Senir; they have
taken cedars from Lebanon to make masts for thee.
“Of the oaks of Bashan have they made thine oars; the company of the
Ashurites have made thy benches of ivory, brought out of the isles of
Chittim.
“Fine linen, with broidered work from Egypt, was that which thou
spreadest forth to be thy sail; blue and purple from the isles of
Elishah was that which covered thee.
“The inhabitants of Zidon and Arvad were thy mariners: thy wise men, O
Tyrus, that were in thee, were thy pilots.
“The ancients of Gebal and the wise men thereof were in thee thy calkers;
all the ships of the sea with their mariners were in thee to occupy thy
merchandize.
“They of Persia, and of Lud, and of Phut, were in thine army, thy men
of war; they hanged the shield and helmet in thee; they set forth thy
comeliness.
“The men of Arvad with thine army were upon thy walls round about, and
the Gammadims were in thy towers: they hanged their shields upon thy
walls round about; they have made thy beauty perfect.
“Tharshish was thy merchant by reason of the multitude of all kind of
riches; with silver, iron, tin, and lead, they traded in thy fairs.
“Javan, Tubal, and Meshech, they were thy merchants: they traded the
persons of men and vessels of brass in thy market.
“They of the house of Togarmah traded in thy fairs with horses, and
horsemen, and mules.
“The men of Dedan were thy merchants; many isles were the merchandise of
thine hand; they brought thee for a present horns of ivory and ebony.
“Syria was thy merchant by reason of the multitude of the wares of thy
making: they occupied in thy fairs with emeralds purple, and broidered
work, and fine linen, and coral, and agate.
“Judah and the land of Israel, they were thy merchants; they traded in
thy market wheat of Minnith, and Pannag, and honey, and oil, and balm.
“Damascus was thy merchant in the multitude of the wares of thy making,
for the multitude of all riches; in the wine of Helbon, and white wool.
“Dan also and Javan going to and fro, occupied in thy fairs; bright iron,
cassia, and calamus, were in thy market.
“Dedan was thy merchant in precious clothes for chariots.
“Arabia, and all the princes of Kedar, they occupied with thee in lambs,
and rams, and goats: in these were they thy merchants.
“The merchants of Sheba and Raamah, they were thy merchants: they
occupied in thy fairs with chief of all spices, and with all precious
stones, and gold.
“Haran, and Canneh, and Eden, the merchants of Sheba, Asshur, and
Chilmad, were thy merchants.
“These were thy merchants in all sorts of things, in blue clothes, and
broidered work, and in chests of rich apparel, bound with cords, and
made of cedar, among thy merchandise.
“The ships of Tarshish did sing of thee in thy market, and thou wast
replenished and made very glorious in the midst of the seas.
“Thy rowers have brought thee into great waters; the east wind hath
broken thee in the midst of the seas.”――Ezek. xxvii. 3–26.
It would be beside my subject to enter into an investigation, on this
occasion, of all the places mentioned in this portion of Scripture. I
will therefore confine myself to the meaning of _Tarshish_, which bears
close connexion with the object I have in view. After a rigorous and
critical examination of different works written on it, I am led to adopt
the view of the profoundly learned Bochart――viz., that the Tarshish
of the Scriptures was the Tartessus of Spain, with a district around
including Cadiz.¹ Let us view for a moment the state of Spain in
ancient times. Its treasures of gold and silver were immensely vast.
We read in Strabo a description of the natives by Posidonius, who, he
says, used mangers and barrels of gold and silver. Such a country could
not fail being very attractive to the Phœnicians. Indeed, it is a well
authenticated fact that the Phœnicians did trade to Carthage and Spain.
¹ See Appendix B.
But we also read of Israel’s monarch (1 Kings, x. 21, 22)――“And all
King Solomon’s drinking vessels were of gold, and all the vessels of the
house of the forest of Lebanon were of pure gold; none were of silver;
it was nothing accounted of in the days of Solomon.
“For the king had at sea a navy of Tharshish with the navy of Hiram:
once in three years came the navy of Tharshish, bringing gold, and
silver, &c.” Now if Tharshish be Spain, the conclusion is inevitable,
the Israelites must have visited the western countries in the days of
Solomon.
The conclusion resulting from the examination of the meaning of Tarshish,
is confirmed by two very ancient sepulchral monuments found in Spain.
As these monuments attracted the attention of the learned Christian
antiquarians about two hundred years ago, it may not be uninteresting to
give a short sketch of their history, and especially since they form an
important link in the chain of evidence of the very early wanderings of
the Jews.
The Duke of Savoy, formerly viceroy of Valencia, presented Francis
Gozanga, Bishop of Mantua and General of the Franciscans, with a
manuscript which was originally dedicated to Alfonso Duke of Segorbe
and Count of Ampurias, written in an antique Spanish dialect, in which
the ruins of Saguntum are noticed. After many Roman monuments being
described, a sepulchral monument, bearing a Hebrew epitaph, is mentioned
as being of far greater antiquity than the Roman monuments; for the
characters were more ancient than the square alphabet now in use,
_which_ must have been the Samaritan, as those characters were used
by the Hebrews prior to their Babylonish captivity. In consequence of
the stone being much fractured and defaced, the following could only be
decyphered, but which gives us still a somewhat correct idea of its date.
It runs thus:
זהוא קבר אדונירם עבד המלך שלמה
שבא לגבת את־המס ונפטר יום . .¹
of which the following is the Spanish manuscript version:――“De Adoniram
la fossa es esta, que vigne Salomo del Re servent dia, y mori tribut lo
pera rebre....” The following is a literal English translation:――“This
is the grave of Adoniram, the servant of King Solomon, who came to
collect the tribute, and died on the day....”
¹ See Appendix C.
The Bishop of Mantua published a history of the Franciscan order, in
which he mentioned, on the authority of the manuscript alluded to,
the existence of the above-menioned monument. Villalpando, a learned
Jesuit and a shrewd critic, read the book, but not being willing to
put implicit confidence in the bishop’s startling assertion, desired
his brethren, the Jesuits, who lived in Murviedro, a beautiful little
place built from the ruins of Saguntum, to make great search for that
particular stone on the site described; his request was complied with;
an investigation was instituted. The Murviedro natives immediately
pointed out a large stone near the gate of the citadel, which was
commonly called by the natives, “The Stone of Solomon’s Collector.”
There was an almost obliterated Hebrew inscription on the self-same
stone, but not corresponding to the one looked for: which we shall
presently notice. There was, however, a manuscript chronicle preserved
in the town, in which they found the following entry: “At Saguntum, in
the citadel, in the year of our Lord 1480, a little more or less, was
discovered a sepulchre of surprising antiquity. It contained an embalmed
corpse, not of the usual stature, but taller than is common. It had,
and still retains on the front, two lines in the Hebrew language and
characters, the sense of which is――‘The sepulchre of Adoniram, the
servant of King Solomon, who came hither to collect tribute.’ Of this
Adoniram, the servant of Solomon, mention is made in the 5th chapter
[14th verse] of the first book of Kings, and more expressly in the 4th
chapter [6th verse] of that book. The Hebrew letters rendered into Roman
are these: ‘Ze hu keber Adoniram ebed ha Melec Selomo, seba ligbot et
hammas, voniptar yom.’”
In page 112 of the same chronicle they found the following: “The marble
mausoleum of surprising antiquity, which was discovered at Saguntum in
the year of our Lord, 1482, and was inscribed with the Hebrew letters
which are these in Roman, ‘Ze hu keber,’ &c. [as above], still exists in
the citadel before the outer gate.” Villalpando did not stop there; he
succeeded in possessing himself afterwards of a careful copy (through
others of his order) of some other manuscript, which makes honourable
mention of the same monument.
Were the rabbies the originators of this circumstance, I would certainly
have hesitated before I brought it before you; not because I think that
_every thing_ rabbinical is of necessity absurd, ridiculous, and false;
but in order to conciliate the strong prejudices of some who do think
so, and treat _every thing_ coming from that quarter with contempt; and
generally, because they do not understand them. Not a word of the whole
transaction is mentioned by any of the rabbies. The investigation was
set on foot by Christian authors of great learning and extensive reading.
Nor can it be said that it was a story conjured up by the Jesuits. There
was no object in their doing so. They were never friendly to any thing
Jewish; and in Villalpando’s time the most venomous animosity prevailed
in their breast against every thing Jewish. Again, if their object was
to deceive, why did they not make out the inscription on the monument
which the natives have pointed out to them, to correspond with the
one recorded in the Duke of Savoy’s ancient manuscript. There is not
the remotest affinity between the two epitaphs. All the incidental
circumstances connected with those monuments seem to me to conspire to
attest that it was not their object to deceive in this matter.
Now, I wish to call your attention for a few minutes to the inscription
which Villalpando’s friends discovered on the stone pointed out to them
by the natives. It is the following, according to their decyphering:――
שארן נבח פקוד מרה
לשרו קחו יה
... והדה עד מלך אמציה
The inscription, as thus given, though it makes rhyme, certainly makes
no sense whatever. To say the least, it is very bad Hebrew, if Hebrew at
all; and is enough to puzzle the worst Hebrew scholar to make any sense
of it.¹ Strange to say, however, there were found such bad Hebrew
scholars, who were able to favour the world with a literal translation,
as they think, of the inscription; and it is the following: “Of Oran
Nebahh, the President, who rebelled against his prince. The Lord has
taken him ... and his glory to King Amaziah.” The only words which I
conceive to be Hebrew are מרה _Marah_, which has been translated
“rebelled,” instead of bitter; יה _yah_, the Lord; and מלך אמציה _Melech
Amaziah_, King Amaziah. I candidly confess, that were I asked to
translate the above, I would have humbly acknowledged my ignorance,
without the least compunction. I find, however, in an old Hebrew book,
called דרכי נעם _Darcay Noam_, or “Ways of Pleasantness” (written by R.
Moses, bar Shem Tob, Aben Chaviv, above a century before Villalpando
instituted the inquiry), an account of an epitaph which, I have no doubt,
is none other but the same with the one which the Jesuits attempted to
decypher; and the following is the rabbi’s account of it according to
his own words: “When I was in the kingdom of Valencia, at the synagogue
of Morvitri [Murviedro], all the people at the gate, as well as the
elders informed me, that a sepulchral monument existed there, of a
prince of the army of Amaziah, King of Judah; I hastened, therefore, to
inspect it. The monument stands on the summit of a hill; whither having
ascended with labour and fatigue, I read the inscription, which was in
verse, and as follows:――
שאו קינה בקול מרה
לשר גדול לקחו יה׃²
“Raise with a bitter voice, a lamentation
For the great prince; the Lord has taken him.”
¹ The author has met with many indifferent linguists who were
quicker in making sense of a bad composition than many
learned philologists.
² Any one acquainted with the Samaritan alphabet can easily
trace the blunders in the Jesuits’ version of the same.
I could not read more; but at the conclusion was the word לאמציה “To
Amaziah.” It seems evident that there was more than one Hebrew monument
at Murviedro.
I hesitate not in saying that, after having examined rigorously these
and various other evidences bearing on the same question, I see no
reason for disbelieving that there were Jews in Spain in the time of
David and Solomon――_startling_ as it may appear. It is easy indeed to
treat the arguments of a young lecturer with a sneer, and to resolve
them into the rashness, or conceit, of inexperience; allow me to
suggest, however, that denial is not answer, and that of all logic flat
contradiction is by far the most illogical.
Villalpando did certainly not arrive hastily at his conclusion; but
it was after mature consideration that he decided that there existed
colonies of Hebrews all over the world, in the reigns of David and
Solomon, and that the Hebrews thus scattered remitted large sums of
money for the erection and support of the temple.¹
¹ See Appendix D.
The short time allotted for a lecture of this kind, prevents me
from dwelling much longer now on this subject. To do justice to this
investigation would require a whole series of lectures, exclusively, on
it.¹ I proceed, therefore, at once to trace the probable footsteps of
the Israelites into Britain.
¹ See Appendix E.
Taking for granted that it is highly probable that the Jews visited
Spain in the days of David and Solomon, in company with the Phœnician
merchants; may we not extend the probability also to Britain?
Appian tells us, that the Spaniards of his time used to perform the
passage to Britain in half a day.¹ Britain was a place of attraction
to mercantile persons at a very early period, and London was styled by
the ancients, at a remote date, “_nobile emporium_.” There remaineth
now no doubt whatever respecting the early intercourse between the
Phœnicians and the Britons――all historians are unanimous upon it.
¹ “Quando in Britanniam, una cum æstu maris transvehuntur quæ
quidem trajectio dimidiati diei est.”
Sir Isaac Newton tells us, “With these Phœnicians came a sort of men
skilled in religious mysteries.” Might they not have been Jews? True it
is that we cannot appeal to monuments in order to establish our position;
but we can, at the same time, appeal to the languages of the Hebrews and
ancient Britons, which furnish a strong argument that they have known
something of each other.
I begin with the _name_ your country bears, viz. Britain. Various are
the conjectures which antiquarians and philologists advanced in order
to account why this island is so called. Herodotus calls the British
Isles _Cassiterides_, which signifies, the islands of tin. It is a
name whereby the Phœnicians jealously contrived to conceal from their
Mediterranean neighbours the locality of these islands, being the remote
sources of their wealth. Now, Strabo calls Britain Βρετανικη. Bochart,
a profound Oriental scholar, shows that Βρετανικη is a corruption of the
Hebrew words ברת אנך _Barat-Anach_, which are in signification the same
with Cassiterides.¹ Is it not highly probable that Jews came over to
this island with the Phœnicians, and named it according to its peculiar
quality; which designation was ultimately adopted by the aborigines when
they began to have intercourse with the Jews.
¹ See Appendix F.
Any one having paid critical attention to the early history of this
country, can scarcely remain in doubt as regards the existence of an
intimate acquaintance between the Jews and the old Britons or Welch.
An eminent Cornish scholar of last century, who devoted a great deal of
his time to prove the affinity between the Hebrew and Welch languages,
observes,¹ “It would be difficult to adduce a single article or form
of construction in the Hebrew grammar, but the same is to be found in
Welch, and that there are many whole sentences in both languages exactly
the same in the very words.” From two columns of quotations, which
he adduces, I select the following for your satisfaction, and shall
translate them according to the Welch:――
¹ See Monthly Magazine, 1796, vol. ii., p. 543.
בני אלים
Beni Elyv,
Reared ones of power.――Ps. xxix. 1.
מחיה מתים
Mychweii Methion,
Thou dost quicken those that have failed.
בלע אדני את כל נאות יעקב
By-llwng adon-ydh holl neuodh Iago,
The Lord has swallowed up all the tabernacles of
Jacob.――Lam. ii. 2.
דרך ביתה יצעד
Dyrac buth-hi ai-i-sengyd,
The avenue of her dwelling he would go to tread.
――Prov. vii. 8.
דרכי שאול ביתה יורדות אל חדרי מות
Dyracei sâl buth-hi ea-warededh ill cadeiriau mêth.
That leads to vileness is her abode, going the descent
to the seat of failing.――Prov. vii. 27.
ברוך אתה יהוה אלהינו מלך העולם
Barwch wytti iâ el-eini maelog y-hwylma,
Seat of increase art thou, Supreme, our intellectual power,
possessor of the space of revolution.¹
¹ The first sentence of almost all Jewish thanksgivings to this
very day.
מגיני על אלהים
Meigen-i hwyl elyv.
My protection is from the intelligences.――Ps. vii. 11.
מיהוא זה מלך הכבוד יהוה צבאות חוא מלך הכביד סלה
Py yw-o sy maeloc y-cavad I-A-YW-YO savwyod yw-o maeloc
y-cavad. Sela.
Who is he that is possessor of attainments? I THAT AM HIM of hosts,
he is the possessor of attainment――BEHOLD.――Ps. xxiv. 10.¹
¹ This passage must have been a great favourite with the Jews.
The whole of the twenty-fourth Psalm is supposed to have been
written for, and sung on the occasion of the removal of the
ark by David to Jerusalem. It is moreover supposed, and very
justly, that this Psalm had been employed when the ark was
carried into the majestic temple which Solomon had erected.
The Levites are regarded as approaching in solemn procession,
bearing the sacred depository of sacramental treasures. As
they approached the massive gates, they claimed admission for
the King of Glory, who was perpetually to dwell between the
cherubim that should overshadow the ark, in the words of the
Psalmist, “Lift up your heads, O ye gates, and be ye lift up,
ye everlasting doors, and the King of Glory shall come in!”
The keepers of the gates are supposed to have heard the
summons, and they demanded from within, “Who is this King
of Glory?” The answer was, “The Lord strong and mighty in
battle;” and then we are to imagine the ponderous gates
thrown open, and the gorgeous throng of priests and Levites
pressing towards the recesses of the sanctuary. Such a
glorious scene could not fail to make a lasting impression
on the Israelite’s mind, and cause him to adopt the above
passage alluded to as a motto for his God, of whom he had
every reason to be proud. It is not at all unlikely that the
aborigines Britons ultimately chose the same as their motto.
Now, if the aborigines Britons knew not the Jews, where could they have
got hold of such whole Hebrew, purely Hebrew, sentences? I say, then,
_again_, Is it not highly probable, if not demonstrated, that the Jews
visited this island at a very early period, and tried to teach the
natives the lessons which they have themselves learned?
They possessed already the simple but most sublime Mosaic records,
written above 1000 years before the history of Herodotus; the Psalms
and Proverbs written 1040 years before Horace; and probably Isaiah and
Jeremiah, for they were written 700 years before Virgil. Many Jews were
fathers in literature before any of the present nations, especially
those of Europe, had their existence. Did time permit,¹ I would have
called your attention to some of the proper names which have prevailed
among the aborigines Britons, as _Solomon_, of which name, according
to Lloyd’s Cambria, they anciently had three kings. We read of a Duke
of Cornwall, Solomon by name, openly professing Christianity about the
middle of the fourth century; Daniel, also Abraham, Asaph, and Adam,
from which circumstance some antiquarians attempted to prove that the
Welch are descendants of the children of Israel.² I think that I am very
moderate in endeavouring only to establish a probability of the Jews
mixing with the Britons earlier than it is generally supposed.
¹ See Appendix G.
² See Jewish Expositor, 1828, pp. 125–130.
It may not be out of place here to state that “The isles afar off” (Jer.
xxxi. 10) were supposed by the ancients to have been Britannia, Scotia,
and Hibernia. The following statement was made by a celebrated and
venerable divine of the Church of England, when pleading the cause of
the “London Society for promoting Christianity amongst the Jews”――I
mean the Rev. Dr. Marsh:――“The command is to declare the Lord’s purpose
concerning Israel ‘in the isles afar off’ (the expression always
used by the Hebrews for _these islands_――known to them through the
reports of the merchants of Tyre――Britannia, Scotia, and Hibernia). The
proclamation is to be made here.” This notion receives additional force
from the command contained in the 7th verse of the same chapter. “For
thus saith the Lord, sing with gladness for Jacob, and shout among the
_chief of the nations_: publish ye, praise ye, and say, O Lord, save thy
people, the remnant of Israel.
“Hear the word of the Lord, O ye nations, and declare it in the isles
afar off, and say, He that scattereth Israel will gather him, and keep
him as a shepherd doth his flock.”
The prophet seems to behold Britain in his vision. There can be no doubt
that Britain is now the _chief of the nations_. Her monarch’s territory
is one upon which the sun never sets. The expression “The end of the
world,” mentioned in Isaiah lxii. 11, is also supposed to mean Britain,
which was a common appellation for this island in remote ages. An
expression which readily brings to our mind the phrase
“... ultimos
Orbis Britannos.”
I wish now to call your attention to another circumstance, which also
gives colour to the idea, that the Jews visited this country earlier
than is generally supposed.
There existed once a very amicable alliance between the Hebrews and the
Romans. It is a well-known fact, that many Jews served as soldiers in
the Roman army; they resided in great numbers at Rome and other western
countries in the days of the Cæsars. Josephon ben Gorion informs us
that when Julius became Cæsar, Hyrcanus sent messengers to Rome to renew
the alliance, which had just then expired. Now (B.C. 55) Cæsar invaded
Britain twice, and defeated its gallant natives in several battles,
and compelled them to give hostages, and ultimately planted the Roman
standard in this country. Why should it be a thing unlikely that the
Jews went with him as warriors into Gaul, and aided in his conquests,
and from thence accompanied him into Britain, and remained here under
the protection of the Roman banner. For to assist each other in war was
just in accordance with their original agreement, which is preserved
in the 1st book of the Maccabees, viii. 22–29, and which is as follows:
――“This is the copy of the epistle which the senate wrote back again,
in tables of brass, and sent to Jerusalem, that there they might have
by them a memorial of peace and confederacy:――
“Good success be to the Romans, and to the people of the Jews, by sea
and by land for ever: the sword also and enemy be far from them. If
there come first any war upon the Romans, or any of their confederates
throughout all their dominion, the people of the Jews shall help them,
as the time shall be appointed, with all their heart. Neither shall
they give any thing unto them that make war upon them, or aid them with
victuals, weapons, money, or ships, as it hath seemed good unto the
Romans, but they shall keep their covenant without taking any thing
therefore. In the same manner also, if war come first upon the nation
of the Jews, the Romans shall help them with all their heart, according
as the time shall be appointed them. Neither shall victuals be given to
them that take part against them, or weapons, or money, or ships, as it
hath seemed good to the Romans, but they shall keep their covenants, and
that without deceit. According to these articles did the Romans make a
covenant with the people of the Jews.”
A copy of a letter preserved in Josephon ben Gorion, which the Jews of
Asia sent to Hyrcanus and to the nobles of Judah, contains the following
passage:――
“Be it known to you that Augustus Cæsar sent, by the advice of his
ally, Antoninus, throughout all the countries of his dominion, as far
as beyond the Indian Sea, and as far as beyond the British territory,
and commanded that in whatever place there be man or woman of the Jewish
race, servant or handmaiden, to set them free without any redemption
money. By the command of Cæsar Augustus and his ally, Antoninus.”¹
¹ See Appendix H.
In the צמח דוד or “Branch of David,” a Jewish chronicle of some importance,
written by Rabbi David Ganz, we have the following paragraph:――
“A.M. 4915.――Cæsar Augustus was a pious and God-fearing man, and did
execute judgment and justice, and was a lover of Israel. And as to that
which is recorded in the beginning of the book, ‘Sceptre of Judah,’ that
Cæsar Augustus caused a great slaughter amongst the Jews, his informant
deceived him, for I have not met even with a hint respecting it in all
the chronicles I have ever seen. On the contrary, in all their [_i.e._
Gentile] annals, and also in the fifteenth chapter of Josephon, it is
recorded that he was a faithful friend of Israel. He also records in the
forty-seventh chapter, that this Cæsar sent an epistle of freedom to the
Jews in all the countries of his dominion; to the east as far as beyond
the Indian Sea, and to the west as far as beyond the British territory
(which is the country Angleterre, and which is designated England in the
_lingua franca_.”)¹
¹ See Appendix I.
The Jews in this country chronicle the same event, annually, in their
calendar; in the following words:――“Augustus’s edict in favour of the
Jews in England, C. Æ. 15.”
An ingenious antiquary of the seventeenth century, Mr. Richard Waller
by name, came to the same conclusion in consequence of a curious
Roman brick which was found in his time in London, when digging up
the foundation of a house in Mark-lane. The brick had on one side a
bass-relief, representing Sampson driving the foxes into a field of
corn. The whole circumstance is thus related in Leland’s Collections,
in the preface to the first volume, pp. 70, 71:――
“And now I shall take notice of a very great curiosity found in the
Mark-lane――more properly called Mart-lane, it being a place where the
Romans, and not improbably the ancient Britains, used to barter their
commodities, as tin, lead, &c. with other nations, it may be the Greeks,
who often came into this island to purchase the like goods.... The
curiosity I am speaking of is a brick, found about forty years since
[_i.e._ about 1670], twenty-eight feet below the pavement, by Mr.
Stockley, as he was digging the foundation of an house that he built
for Mr. Wolley.... This brick is of a Roman make, and was a key-brick to
the arch of a vault where a quantity of burnt corn was found. ’Tis made
of curious red clay, and in bass-relief on the front hath the figure of
Sampson putting fire to the foxes’ tayles, and driving them into a field
of corn. This brick is deposited in the museum belonging to the Royal
Society’s house, Fleet-street.” Dr. Leland then gives an extract from
a letter of Mr. Richard Waller, which is the following: “How the story
of Sampson should be known to the _Romans_, much less to the _Britains_,
so early after the propagation of the Gospel, seems to be a great doubt,
except, it should be said, that some _Jews_, after the final destruction
of _Jerusalem_, should wander into Britain; and London being, even in
Cæsar’s time, a port or trading city, they might settle here, and in the
arch of their granary record the famous story of their delivery from
their captivity under the Philistines.”
All these circumstantial evidences are sufficient, to my mind, to
establish a probability, at least, that the Jews visited this country at
a remote age.
Baronius may therefore be right after all, that St. Peter preached
the Gospel in Britain, notwithstanding the learned Stillingfleet’s
opposition. The principal argument which the Bishop of Worcester
advances against St. Peter’s visiting this island for the purpose of
preaching the Gospel, is, that St. Peter was emphatically called the
“Apostle of the Circumcision;” but――argues the learned prelate――as
there were no Jews in Britain at that time, consequently Baronius must
be wrong. With all due deference to the most learned Stillingfleet, I
venture to say, that his lordship took for granted what remains to be
proved. Baronius himself must certainly have been convinced that there
were Jews in this realm in the days of the Apostles, or else he must
have contradicted himself. He states that, until the 65th year of our
Lord, the Gospel was preached to none but to the Jews; but he also tells
us, that A.D. 61, Peter came over to Britain in order to preach the
Gospel. Of course, he must have meant, to the Jews of Britain.
Lippomanus declares, and Nicephorus makes use of his declaration, that
St. ♦Peter preached also to the Britons; “for he carried,” says the
latter, “the same doctrine to the Western Ocean and to the British
Isles.”
♦ ‘Petre’ replaced with ‘Peter’
But methinks I hear one say, Suppose there were a few Jews in
this island, would that circumstance afford St. Peter sufficient
encouragement and invitation to visit it. I answer, yes――there was
encouragement and invitation enough for an apostle to the Jews to travel
such a great distance. The Jews, being thus far removed from Jerusalem,
had no opportunity of hearing any thing of the awful scene that was
exhibited on Calvary, they would, therefore, be free from all the
prejudices which prevailed in the breasts of their brethren in Palestine.
The apostle might, therefore, calculate on sure success, for he would
come to them, and preach the things noted in their Scriptures of truth
respecting their Messiah, who was then universally expected by them.
St. Peter would unfold to them the ninth chapter of the Book of the
Prophet Daniel, where the time of Messiah’s first advent was fixed,
as also that He was to “be cut off, but not for himself;” all of which
is, to unprejudiced and unbiassed minds, so self-evident, that the
then British Jews could not but believe, especially when preached by a
holy and pious countryman of their own. Dr. Wolff’s last journal of his
travels to Bokhara convinces me, that where the Jews are ignorant of the
controversy at issue between Jews and Christians, the Gospel meets with
an easy and favourable reception by them, as you will perceive from the
following extract:――
“Here I may as well notice the Jews of Yemen generally. While at Sanaa,
Mose Joseph Alkaree, the chief rabbi of the Jews, called on me. He is
an amiable and sensible man. The Jews of Yemen adhere uniquely to the
ancient interpretation of Scripture in the passage (Isaiah, vii. 14),
‘A virgin shall conceive,’ and they give to the word עלמה the same
interpretation, virgin, that the Christians do, without knowing the
history of Jesus. Rabbi Alkaree asserted, that in Isaiah, liii. the
suffering of the Messiah is described as anterior to his reign in glory.
He informed me that the Jews of Yemen never returned to Jerusalem after
the Babylonish captivity; and that when Ezra wrote a letter to the
princes of the captivity at Tanaan――a day’s journey from Sanaa――inviting
them to return, they replied, ‘Daniel predicts the murder of the Messiah,
and another destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, and therefore we
will not go up until He shall have scattered the power of the holy
people, until the thousand two hundred and ninety days are over.’ I
demanded, ‘Do you consider these days to be literal days?’ The Alkaree
replied, ‘No; but we do expect the coming of the Messiah from the
commotions now going on at Yemen. We think he begins to come from Teman,
_i.e._, Yemen, for you see the tents of Cushan are now in affliction,
and the curtains of Midian tremble. There is now war in the wilderness
unprecedented in our memory. There are twelve gates at Sanaa. As soon as
one of them――the Bab Alstraan, which is always kept closed――is opened,
we expect Him. Rechab and Hamdan are before it.’ I then expounded Isaiah,
liii., and read him the holy history of Jesus. He said, ‘Your exposition
is in better agreement with the ancient interpretation; I approve
it much more than that of our nation, which ascribes the passage to
Josiah.’ This kind Jew assisted me in the distribution of Testaments
among his people. Sanaa contains 15,000 Jews. In Yemen they amount to
20,000. I conceive the total population of the Jews throughout the world
amounts to 10,000,000. I baptized here sixteen Jews, and left them all
New Testaments.”¹
¹ Vol. i., p. 60.
The latest intelligence we received from Persia bears testimony to the
same striking fact. The following is an extract from a letter of the
Rev. H. A. Stern, dated Tehran, June 19, 1845:――
“May 16th, Kermanshah.――We were visited by Hassan Khan Kalentar: he was
very polite, and offered us the use of his house, but we declined his
offer, prefering to remain where we were. We went to the Jewish quarter,
which is situated in the lowest part of the town, and inquired for the
synagogue. A crowd of Jews quickly surrounded us, and conducted us to it.
We had to wait several minutes while a messenger was despatched for the
keys. On entering, we descended into an extremely poor place of worship,
affording the strongest evidence of the poverty and oppression of the
Jews here. They told us that they had repeatedly laid down expensive
carpets, and ornamented the books of the law, but the soldiers had
as often broken in at night, and stolen every article of value. We
then called upon one of the mullahs or rabbies, and preached Jesus
of Nazareth to him. He confessed he had never heard of the message
of salvation, and was entirely ignorant of every thing respecting a
Redeemer. He repeatedly said, ‘Did our forefathers so err?’ During our
conversation the greater part of the Jewish population had crowded round
the door, and the people were anxiously listening to what was said.
“May 17th.――We went again to the synagogue, and had scarcely entered
before we were called up to the oratory. The mullah, with whom we had
the conversation after our former visit, said he was very sorry that we
did not come before the reading of the law, as he would have conferred
the honour upon us. Some of the Jews gave us vases of roses which
were standing near the reading-desk; and at the conclusion of the
service, two of the mullahs and another influential Jew requested the
congregation to remain quiet while we addressed them. We did so, for
some time, on the first advent of the Messiah, his rejection by the
Jewish nation, his sufferings and atonement, the reason of his coming in
humility the first time, and of his future coming in glory. We entreated
them to believe in Christ, and no longer to reject the proffered
salvation.
“ONE OF THE MULLAHS――‘We are in captivity, and groan under oppression.
What can we do?’
“I――‘Believe in Jesus Christ, and he will redeem you. It grieves us much
to see you scattered like sheep without a shepherd――instead of hearing
the lovely songs of Zion, to hear the wailings of affliction. Shall the
gold always remain dim, and the sword always reek with your blood? No:
come to Jesus, hear the blessed Gospel, and you will then find peace
here and life eternal hereafter.’ Upon which, the whole synagogue――men,
women, and children――loudly answered, ‘Amen! speedily, speedily; and
may the blessing of God rest upon your heads!’ We spoke Hebrew, and
the mullahs interpreted all we said to the people. We gave each of the
mullahs a New Testament, and presented a Bible to the synagogue. Thus
were we enabled, by God’s grace, to preach Christ to no less than three
hundred souls, and in a public synagogue.
“As we were on our way home, one of the mullahs sent a messenger to
invite us to his house; but his wife being ill, and he poor, we did not
accept the invitation.”¹
¹ See Jewish Intelligence, 1845, pp. 362, 363.
But Dr. Wolff’s late enterprise convinces us, likewise, that it is
possible for a man who is inspired with benevolence and zeal, to travel
5,000 miles, in order to deliver two fellow-creatures only. Considering
the superiority of the Apostle’s mission, there will be no reason to
object to the probability of St. Peter’s visiting the Jews in this
island, few as they may have been, in order to rescue them from that
eternal death which ever dying never dies.
As to St. Paul’s being one of the first heralds of salvation in this
island, there can scarcely be any doubt on the subject. Indeed, if we
do not believe it we must make up our minds to reject all the hitherto
authentic historians. By them we can prove to a demonstration, that St.
Paul did preach the Gospel in Britain. However, as to prove this is not
my object at present, I shall, therefore, only confine myself to a few
writers on the subject.
Dr. Burgess, late Bishop of Sarum, one of the most learned and pious
bishops of our Church, has shown most satisfactorily, in the tracts
he published, that whilst to the Apostles generally――to St. Paul most
particularly is Britain indebted for the foundation of her national
Church. Clemens Romanus, who was an intimate friend and fellow-labourer
of St. Paul, declares in his Epistle to the Corinthians, that “St. Paul
having been a herald of the Gospel both in the east and in the west,
he received the noble crown of faith, after teaching righteousness to
the whole world, and gone even, ἐπὶ τὸ τέρμα τῆς δύσσεως, to the utmost
bounds of the west:” an expression, well known to every scholar, that
always designated, or at least included, the British Islands.
Theodoret, one of the most learned and sound Church historians of the
fourth century, mentions Britain among the nations which had received
the Gospel. He states in his observations on Psalm cxvi., that “Paul
carried salvation to the islands which lie in the ocean.” Jerome shortly
afterwards writes, when commenting on the fifth chapter of Amos, that
“St. Paul’s diligence in preaching extended as far as the earth itself.”
Again, after his ♦imprisonment he preached the Gospel in the _western
parts_” (De Script. Eccl.), in which (as is evident from a passage in
his Epistle to Marcella) he included Britain. Venentius Fortunatus,
Bishop of Poitiers, who lived in the fifth century, states that “Paul
having crossed the ocean, landed and preached in the countries which
the Britons inhabit.” I could multiply quotations on this subject almost
without end; but they would be as tedious, as they are unnecessary. I
may, however, observe, that some of the greatest men of this country,
who spent a great part of their lives in such researches――viz. the most
learned Ussher, Parker, Stillingfleet, Cave, Camden, Gibson, Godwin,
Rapin, and a great many others――have clearly shown that St. Paul was
the founder of the British Church. But Archbishop Ussher proves also,
that St. Paul did not quit this island before he had appointed the
first bishop or bishops, and the other ministers of the Church――that
Aristobulus was the first bishop he had appointed. Some of the old
Welch writers state, that Bran, son of Llyr Llediaeth (who had been a
hostage for several years at Rome, for his son Caradoc or Caractacus),
brought with him as preachers, on his return from Rome, one Aristobulus,
an Italian, and two Israelites, named Ilid and Cynvan (Hughes’ Hora
Britanica, vol. ii., p. 23), which must have taken place soon after
St. Paul left Rome.
♦ ‘imimprisonment’ replaced with ‘imprisonment’
As far as the investigation of my subject is concerned, all the above
rays of historical light converge to one point, which is, that some
Jews must have been in this country during the first century; yea, the
government of the British Christian Church was established and set in
proper scriptural order by Jews themselves, be they who they may――Peter,
Paul, Simon Zealotes, Joseph of Arimathea. So that the British Church
actually owes to the Jewish nation a great debt of gratitude, for her
beautiful and scriptural order, and for all her godlike religion.