Hastings’ _D.B._, Ext. 466 _b_.
Footnote 21:
§ (61).
Footnote 22:
I have in this section made considerable use of the essay, “On the
Personal Character and Credibility of Josephus,” prefixed to Dr.
Traill’s translation of the _Jewish War_—a very judicious estimate.
Footnote 23:
§ (2).
Footnote 24:
§ (43).
Footnote 25:
_Op. cit._ p. 6.
Footnote 26:
§ (26) with Appendix, Note II.
Footnote 27:
§ (37).
Footnote 28:
§ (29).
Footnote 29:
Phil. iv. 22.
Footnote 30:
Acts xxvi. 26.
Footnote 31:
Traill, _op. cit._, p. 19.
Footnote 32:
Gen. iii. 15.
Footnote 33:
§ (50).
Footnote 34:
See, _e. g._, the historian’s reading of Herod’s character, § (19).
Footnote 35:
§ (3).
Footnote 36:
§ (49).
Footnote 37:
Cf. § (38), first paragraph.
Footnote 38:
οἱ ἀρετῆς τι μεταποιούμενοι, II. 51 (Jowett’s translation).
Footnote 39:
_e. g._ in §§ (31) p. 86, and (55) p. 160, “professedly virtuous
persons”; cf. also § (21) p. 65.
Footnote 40:
See Drüner, _Untersuchungen über Josephus_ (Marburg, 1896), pp. 1-34.
Footnote 41:
_e.g._ Edersheim.
Footnote 42:
§§ (25), (28).
Footnote 43:
§ (39).
Footnote 44:
§ (31).
Footnote 45:
§ (21).
Footnote 46:
§ (24).
Footnote 47:
§§ (24), (35).
Footnote 48:
§ (22).
Footnote 49:
§ (29).
Footnote 50:
§ (33).
Footnote 51:
§ (34).
Footnote 52:
§ (27).
Footnote 53:
§ (39).
Footnote 54:
§ (36).
Footnote 55:
§ (37).
Footnote 56:
§ (65).
Footnote 57:
§§ (53) ff.
Footnote 58:
§ (58).
Footnote 59:
§ (6).
Footnote 60:
§ (45), with Appendix, Note V.
Footnote 61:
Quoted by Edersheim, _Dict. Christ. Biog._ III. 442 _a_, note.
Footnote 62:
See Appendix, Note IV.
Footnote 63:
_E.g._ §§ (19) and (20).
I. AUTOBIOGRAPHY
(1) The Boy among the Doctors. His Education
I was brought up with Matthias, my own brother by both parents, and made
great progress in my education, gaining a reputation for an excellent
memory and understanding. [Sidenote: A.D. 51-2] While still a mere boy,
about fourteen years old, I won universal applause for my love of
letters; insomuch that the chief priests and the leading men of the city
used constantly to meet in order to obtain from me more accurate
information on some particular in our legal institutions. [Sidenote:
A.D. 53-4] At about the age of sixteen I determined to gain personal
experience of the several sects into which our nation is divided. These,
as I[64] have frequently mentioned, are three in number—the first that
of the Pharisees, the second that of the Sadducees, and the third that
of the Essenes. I thought that, after a thorough investigation, I should
be in a position to select the best. So I submitted myself to hard
training and laborious exercises and passed through the three courses.
Not content, however, with the experience thus gained, on hearing of one
named Bannus, who dwelt in the wilderness, wearing only such raiment as
trees provided, feeding on such things as grew of themselves, and using
frequent ablutions of cold water, by day and night, for purity’s sake, I
became his ardent disciple. With him I lived for three years and, having
accomplished my purpose, returned to the city. [Sidenote: A.D. 56-7]
Being now in my nineteenth year I began to govern my life by the rules
of the Pharisees, a sect which is akin to that which the Greeks call the
Stoic school.—_Vita_ 2 (8-12).
Footnote 64:
Lit. “we.” For the various descriptions of the Jewish sects see §§
(53)-(55).
(2) A Shipwreck on the Voyage to Rome. The Eve of the War
Josephus meets with the same fate as St. Paul within a few years of
the event so graphically described in Acts xxvii.
[Sidenote: _c._ A.D. 64]
Soon after I had completed my twenty-sixth year it fell to my lot to go
up to Rome for a reason which I will proceed to relate. At the time when
Felix was procurator of Judæa, certain priests of my acquaintance, very
excellent men, were on a slight and trifling charge sent by him in bonds
to Rome to render an account to Cæsar.[65] I was anxious to discover
some means of delivering these men, more especially as I learnt that,
even in affliction, they had not forgotten the pious practices of
religion, but supported themselves on figs and nuts. I reached Rome
after being in great jeopardy at sea. For our ship foundered in the
midst of the sea of Adria, and our crew of some six hundred souls had to
swim all that night. About daybreak, through God’s good providence, we
sighted a ship of Cyrene, and I and certain others, about eighty in all,
outstripped the others and were taken on board. Landing safely at
Dicæarchia, which the Italians call Puteoli, I became on friendly terms
with Aliturus, an actor who was a special favourite of Nero and of
Jewish origin. Through him I became known to Poppæa, Cæsar’s wife, and
took the earliest opportunity of soliciting her aid to secure the
liberation of the priests. In addition to this kind service, I received
large gifts from Poppæa, and so returned to my own country.
There I found revolutionary movements already on foot, and that many
were building high hopes on the prospect of revolt from Rome. I
accordingly endeavoured to repress these promoters of sedition and to
bring them over to another frame of mind. I urged them to picture to
themselves the nation on which they were about to make war, and to
remember that they were inferior to the Romans, not only in military
skill, but in good fortune; and I warned them not thus recklessly and
with such utter madness to expose their country,[66] their families and
themselves to the direst perils. With such words I earnestly and
insistently sought to dissuade them from their purpose, foreseeing that
the end of the war would be most disastrous for us. But my efforts were
unavailing; the madness of desperation was far too strong for me.—_Vita_
3-4 (13-19).
Footnote 65:
Nero.
Footnote 66:
Lit. “countries.”
(3) The “Jewish War” and its Reception. Criticism of a rival Historian
(Justus)
I cannot but wonder at your impudence in daring to assert that your
narrative is to be preferred to that of all who have written on this
subject, when you neither knew what happened in Galilee—for you were
then at Berytus[67] with the king[68]—nor acquainted yourself with[69]
all that the Romans endured or inflicted upon us at the siege of
Jotapata; nor was it in your power to ascertain the part which I myself
played in the siege, since all possible informants perished in that
conflict. Perhaps, however, you will say that you have accurately
narrated the events which took place at Jerusalem. How, pray, can that
be, seeing that neither were you a combatant nor had you perused the
Memoirs of Cæsar, as is abundantly proved by your contradictory account?
But, if you are so confident that your history excels all others, why
did you not publish it in the lifetime of the Emperors Vespasian and
Titus, who conducted the war, and while King Agrippa and all his family,
persons thoroughly conversant with Hellenic culture, were still among
us? You had it written twenty years ago, and might then have obtained
the evidence of eyewitnesses to your accuracy. But not until now,
[Sidenote: After A.D. 100] when those persons are no longer with us and
you think you cannot be confuted, have you ventured to publish it.
_I_ had no such apprehensions concerning my work. No; I presented the
volumes to the Emperors themselves, when the events had hardly passed
out of sight, conscious as I was that I had preserved the true story. I
expected to receive testimony to my accuracy and was not disappointed.
To many others also I immediately presented my History, some of whom had
taken part in the war, such as King Agrippa and some of his relatives.
Indeed, so anxious was the Emperor Titus that my volumes should be the
sole authority from which the world should learn the facts, that he
affixed his own signature to them and gave orders for their publication;
while King Agrippa wrote[70] sixty-two letters testifying to the truth
of the record. Two of these I subjoin, from which you may, if you will,
learn the nature of his communications:—
“King Agrippa to dearest Josephus greeting. I have perused the book
with the greatest pleasure. You seem to me to have written with much
greater care and accuracy than any who have dealt with the subject.
Send me the remaining volumes. Farewell.”
“King Agrippa to dearest Josephus greeting. From what you have
written you appear to stand in no need of instruction, to enable us
all to learn (everything from you) from the beginning.[71] But when
you meet me, I will myself instruct you in many things of which you
are ignorant.”[72]—_Vita_ 65 (357-366).
Footnote 67:
Beirut.
Footnote 68:
Herod Agrippa II.
Footnote 69:
The word is that rendered in St. Luke’s preface (i. 3) “traced the
course of (all things).”
Footnote 70:
Or “has left in writing.”
Footnote 71:
The king’s alleged “culture” here fails him; the Greek is vulgar and
obscure. For ἡμᾶς ὅλους, “us all,” perhaps we should read ἡμᾶς ὅλως,
“us completely.”
Footnote 72:
Or “not generally known.”
(4) After the War. Josephus as Roman Citizen
[Sidenote: A.D. 67]
After the siege of Jotapata I was in the hands of the Romans and was
kept under guard, while receiving every attention. Vespasian showed in
many ways the honour in which he held me, and it was by his command that
I married one of the women taken captive at Cæsarea, a virgin and a
native of that place. She did not, however, remain long with me, for she
left me on my obtaining my release and accompanying Vespasian to
Alexandria. There I married again. From Alexandria I was sent [Sidenote:
A.D. 70] with Titus to the siege of Jerusalem, where my life was
frequently in danger, both from the Jews, who were eager to get me into
their hands, to gratify their revenge, and from the Romans, who
attributed every reverse to some treachery on my part, and were
constantly and clamorously demanding of the Emperor that he should
punish me as their betrayer. Titus Cæsar, however, knowing well the
varying fortunes of war, repressed by his silence the soldiers’
outbursts against me.
Again, when at last Jerusalem was on the point of being carried by
assault, Titus Cæsar repeatedly urged me to take whatever I would from
the wreck of my country, stating that I had his permission. And I, now
that my native place had fallen, having nothing more precious to take
and preserve as a solace for my personal misfortunes, made request to
Titus for the freedom of some of my countrymen; I also received by his
gracious favour a gift of sacred books.[73] Not long after I made
petition for my brother and fifty friends, and my request was granted.
Again, by permission of Titus, I entered the Temple, where a great
multitude of captive women and children had been imprisoned, and
liberated all the friends and acquaintances whom I recognized, in number
about a hundred and ninety; I took no ransom for their release and
restored them to[74] their former fortune. Once more, when I was sent by
Titus Cæsar with Cerealius and a thousand horse to a village called
Tekoa, to prospect whether it was a suitable place for an entrenched
camp, and on my return saw many prisoners who had been crucified and
recognized three of my acquaintances among them, I was cut to the heart
and came and told Titus with tears what I had seen. He gave orders
immediately that they should be taken down and receive the most careful
treatment. Two of them died in the physicians’ hands; the third
survived.
When Titus had quelled the disturbances in Judæa, conjecturing that the
lands which I held at Jerusalem would be unprofitable to me, because a
Roman garrison was to be quartered there, he gave me another parcel of
ground in the plain. On his departure for Rome, he took me with him on
board, treating me with every mark of respect. On our arrival in Rome, I
met with great consideration from Vespasian. He gave me a lodging in the
house which he had occupied before he came to the throne; he honoured me
with the privilege of Roman citizenship; and he assigned me a pension.
He continued to honour me up to the time of his departure from this
life, without any abatement in his kindness towards me.... Vespasian
also presented me with a considerable tract of land in Judæa.
About this time I divorced my wife, being displeased at her behaviour.
She had borne me three children, of whom two died; one, whom I named
Hyrcanus, is still alive. Afterwards I married a woman of Jewish
extraction who had settled in Crete. She came of very distinguished
parents, indeed the most notable people in that country. In character
she surpassed many of her sex, as her subsequent life showed. By her I
had two sons, Justus the elder, and then Simonides, surnamed Agrippa.
Such is my domestic history.
The treatment which I received from the Emperors continued unaltered. On
Vespasian’s decease [Sidenote: A.D. 79] Titus, who succeeded to the
empire, showed the same esteem for me as did his father, and never
credited the accusations to which I was constantly subjected. Domitian
succeeded [Sidenote: A.D. 81] Titus and added to my honours. He punished
my Jewish accusers, and for a similar offence gave orders for the
punishment of a slave who was a eunuch and my son’s tutor. He also
exempted my property in Judæa from taxation—a mark of the highest honour
to the privileged individual. Moreover, Domitia, Cæsar’s wife, never
ceased conferring favours upon me.
Such are the events of my whole life; from them let others judge as they
will of my character.—_Vita_ 75-76 (414-430).
For further autobiographical details see below, §§ (38), (43), (44),
(46), (48).
Footnote 73:
Or “the sacred books.”
Footnote 74:
Meaning uncertain; Traill, “paying that compliment to.”
II. SPECIMENS OF AMPLIFICATION OF THE BIBLICAL NARRATIVE
(5) Moses, the Infant Prodigy, introduced to Pharaoh
For Moses’ beauty, cf. Acts vii. 20. The name of Pharaoh’s daughter,
Thermuthis, occurs also in the _Book of Jubilees_ (xlvii. 5,
Tharmuth); elsewhere she is called Bithiah (cf. 1 Chron. iv. 18).
For Rabbinical parallels, see art. “Moses” in the _Jewish
Encyclopædia_.
When he was three years old, God added wondrously to his stature; and
there was no one so lost to an appreciation of beauty as, on seeing
Moses, not to be amazed at his comeliness. It often happened that
persons meeting him as he was carried along the road, attracted by the
child’s appearance, turned round and, leaving their pursuits, gave
themselves up to gazing at him. Such boyish charm, so remarkable and
perfect as his, held the onlookers spellbound.
Such was Moses when Thermuthis, who was not blessed with offspring of
her own, adopted him as her son. Now on one occasion she brought him to
her father and showed him to him, and told him how, in case it was God’s
will that she should have no child of her own, she had made provision
for a successor, by bringing up a boy of divine beauty and noble spirit,
and by what a miracle she had received him from the bounteous river.
“And I thought,” she added, “to make him my child and the heir to your
kingdom.”
With these words she laid the babe in her father’s arms; and he took him
and hugged him to his breast, and, to please his daughter,
affectionately placed his diadem upon his head. But Moses, in mere
childishness, tore it off and dashed it to the ground and trampled upon
it.
The incident was thought ominous, portending ill to the kingdom. The
sacred scribe, who had foretold that the child’s birth would cause the
humiliation of the Egyptian Empire, witnessed the scene and rushed
forward to kill him, with an alarming cry. “This, O king,” so he cried,
“is that child of whom God told us that if we kill him we need fear
nothing. By his action[75] in trampling on (the symbol of) thy
sovereignty and treading the diadem under foot[76], he bears out my
prediction. Kill him, then, and at one stroke relieve the Egyptians of
their fear of him and deprive the Hebrews of the confident hopes which
he inspires.”
But Thermuthis was too quick for him and snatched the child away. The
king, too, was reluctant to slay him, being inclined to mercy by God,
whose providence watched over Moses’ life. Great care was accordingly
devoted to his upbringing; the Hebrews resting high hopes upon him for
their future, while the Egyptians viewed his education with
suspicion.—_Ant._ II. 9. 6 f. (230-237).
Footnote 75:
Text emended.
Footnote 76:
Perhaps a gloss (omit Latin VS.).
(6) Exorcism in the name of Solomon
“By whom do your sons cast them out?”
God also enabled Solomon, for man’s benefit and cure, to learn the art
of encountering devils. He both composed charms for the alleviation of
diseases and also left behind him certain methods of exorcism, by which
the poor prisoners[77] may expel the devils so that they never return.
This treatment even to this day is of the greatest efficacy among the
Jews. I have myself witnessed one of my countrymen, a certain Eleazar,
in the presence of Vespasian and his sons and some tribunes and a crowd
of soldiers of other ranks, releasing[78] (from their bondage) persons
who were possessed by these[79] devils. The mode of treatment was as
follows. To the demoniac’s nose he applied his ring which held beneath
the seal a root obtained in accordance with Solomon’s prescription, and
then as the man smelt it he drew the devil out through his nostrils. The
patient at once fell down and Eleazar adjured the devil never to return
into him again, using Solomon’s name and reciting the incantations which
that monarch composed. Moreover, in his desire to convince the
bystanders and to prove that he really possessed this power, Eleazar
used to place a little in front of the demoniac a cup or basin[80] full
of water, with a command to the devil on his exit from the man to
overturn these vessels and so to let the spectators know that he had
left him. On this taking place, the skill and wisdom of Solomon were
clearly established.—_Ant._ VIII. 2. 5 (45-49).
Footnote 77:
Lit. “persons bound in”; cf. Luke xiii. 16.
Footnote 78:
The same word as in Luke xiii. 12 (“art loosed”).
Footnote 79:
Text doubtful.
Footnote 80:
Lit. “foot-bath.”
(7) Micaiah and Zedekiah prophesy before Ahab
Cf. 1 Kings xxii. With the alleged discrepancy between prophecies of
Elijah and Micaiah, cf. Jos. _Ant._ X. 7. 2 (106 f.) for seeming
inconsistency between Jeremiah and Ezekiel which led King Zedekiah
to disbelieve both.
So Ahab summoned his own prophets, in number about four hundred, and
bade them enquire of God whether, if he led his forces against Ader,[81]
He would grant him victory and enable him to overthrow the city[82]
which was his objective in going to war. The prophets advised him to
undertake the expedition, assuring him that he would defeat the Syrian
(king) and get him into his power as on the former occasion. But
Jehoshaphat understood from their words that they were false prophets,
and asked Ahab whether there was some other prophet of God besides, that
they might obtain more accurate information about the issue. Ahab
replied that there was such a man, but that he hated him because he
prophesied evil and had foretold that he would be defeated and slain by
the Syrian (king). “I have him now in ward,” he said, “and his name is
Micaiah, the son of Omblaiah.”[83] However, as Jehoshaphat urged that he
should be produced, Ahab sent a eunuch to fetch Micaiah.
The eunuch explained to him on the road how all the other prophets had
foretold that the king would be victorious; to which he replied that it
was impossible for him to give a false report of God’s word, but he
would speak whatever God should tell him concerning the king. So when he
came before Ahab, and had been adjured by him to tell him the truth, he
said that God had shown him the Israelites in flight, pursued by the
Syrians and scattered by them to the mountains like flocks that had lost
their shepherds. He added that it was revealed to him that they would
return to their homes in peace, but he, and he only, would fall in the
battle.
When Micaiah had thus spoken, Ahab said to Jehoshaphat, “See, I told you
but now of this fellow’s disposition towards me and how he predicted for
me nothing but the worst.”
Micaiah replied that Ahab ought to listen to all that God foretold, and
that the false prophets were inciting him to make this war, hoping that
he would be victorious, whereas he was destined to fall in the battle.
This caused the king to reflect; but Zedekiah, one of the false
prophets, approached and advised him to pay no heed to Micaiah. “There
is,” he said, “no truth in his words, as I can prove from a prophecy of
one who could read the future better than this fellow, I mean Elijah.
Elijah foretold that dogs would lick up your blood in the field of
Naboth, as they had licked the blood of Naboth who for your sake was
stoned to death by the people.[84] Clearly, then, this fellow is a liar,
when he contradicts a prophet greater than himself, by asserting that
you will die at a distance of three days’ journey from that spot. But
you shall all learn whether he speaks the truth and possesses the power
of the divine spirit. The instant I strike him, let him injure my hand,
as Jadaus withered king Jeroboam’s right hand when he wished to arrest
him.[85] You have heard, I presume, that that actually happened.”
So he struck Micaiah, and, when no harm happened to him, Ahab took
courage and was ready to lead his army against the king of Syria. Fate,
I suppose, was winning the day and causing the false prophets to appear
more plausible than the true, that so she might find a handle to bring
about his end.—_Ant._ VIII. 15. 4 (401-439).
Footnote 81:
_i. e._ Ben-hadad, in the LXX “the son of (H)ader.”
Footnote 82:
Ramoth-gilead.
Footnote 83:
Imlah.
Footnote 84:
1 Kings xxi. 19.
Footnote 85:
1 Kings xiii. 4. The name Jadaus (or, as the Latin has, Jadon) is
unscriptural.
III. THE COMING OF THE ROMANS
(8) Loss of Jewish Independence. Palestinian Settlement under Pompey
The quarrels between the brothers Aristobulus II and Hyrcanus II
bring about the intervention of Rome in Palestinian affairs. Pompey
takes Jerusalem, and Syria becomes a Roman province. [Sidenote: 63
B.C.] See Map 40 in the _Hist. Atlas of Holy Land_ of G. A. Smith
and J. G. Bartholomew.
The sanctuary, which hitherto had been inaccessible and screened from
view, suffered gross outrage. Pompey, with several of his staff,
penetrated into the inner court and saw things which it was unlawful for
any save the high priests to behold. There stood the golden table, and
the holy candlestick,[86] and the cups for libations, and a mass of
spices;[87] besides these, in the treasury was the sacred money
amounting to two thousand talents. Yet Pompey out of piety touched none
of these, acting here again in a manner worthy of his noble nature.
On the following day he gave orders to those in charge of the Temple to
cleanse the precincts and to offer to God the offerings prescribed by
the Law. The high priesthood he restored to Hyrcanus, in gratitude for
his other services and chiefly because he had restrained the Jews of the
country from taking up arms for Aristobulus. Those who had been
responsible for the war were beheaded; Faustus and all who had gallantly
scaled the wall received at his hands the appropriate rewards of valour.
Jerusalem he made tributary to Rome, and the cities of Cœle-Syria which
had in times past been subdued by the inhabitants (of the metropolis)
were taken from them and placed under a governor[88] appointed by
himself; and the whole nation, whose power had until then been greatly
increasing, was strictly confined within its own bounds. He rebuilt
Gadara, which had recently been destroyed,[89] to gratify his freedman
Demetrius who was a Gadarene. The other cities—Hippos, Scythopolis,
Pella, Dium, Samaria, also Marisa, Azotus, Jamnia and Arethusa—he
restored to their inhabitants. These, as well as the cities which had
been razed, were all in the interior of the country. On the sea-board
Gaza, Joppa, Dora and Strato’s Tower—afterwards magnificently rebuilt by
Herod and embellished with harbours and temples under the new name of
Cæsarea—all these were liberated by Pompey and attached to the province
(of Syria).