suggestion, made long ago and recently revived by Wellhausen, to
identify the Zacharias of Josephus with the “Zachariah son of Barachiah”
of Matt. xxiii. 35. “Son of Barachiah” is a well-known _crux_ in that
passage, but, _pace_ Wellhausen, there is little or no doubt that our
Lord there referred to the murder of Zechariah son of Jehoiada described
in 2 Chron. xxiv. 19 ff.
The theory of Wellhausen and others evades the difficulty of an apparent
confusion in Matthew between the pre-exilic prophet and the prophet of
the Restoration, but introduces far greater difficulties. The text of
Josephus just fails to supply the desired evidence. The name of the
father of the Zacharias of Josephus _resembles_, but, it will be
observed, only resembles, the Βαραχίας of the N.T. There is a variety of
readings, but Βαρίσκαιος (LMmg) has the appearance of being what
Josephus wrote or at least the nearest approximation in the MSS to the
original name. Βάρεις of most MSS is a corruption of this. The reading
“Baruch” (the nearest approach to “Barachias”) is doubtless a
correction; it occurs only in cod. C which in other instances replaces
an unfamiliar by a Biblical name (Niese, vol. VI, p. xxxix), and as an
alternative to “Bariscæus” in cod. M.
Again, it may be urged in support of this theory that the two murders
mentioned in Matthew are cited as the first and last of a series, and
that as that of Abel was the first recorded in Biblical history, so that
of Zachariah ben Bariscæus was the last outstanding murder of a Jew by
his own countrymen before the Fall of Jerusalem, which is the
culminating event in the mind of the Speaker in Matt. xxiii. The
contemporaneous murder of Ananus is regarded by Josephus as the
beginning of the end.
The obvious difficulty of this identification is that in the mouth of
our Lord the words must be prophetical, whereas the past tense is used
in both reports of the words (“whom ye _slew_,” Matt., “who _perished_,”
Luke xi. 51).
The passage in Matthew and the parallel passage in Luke are both derived
from an older source, an early collection of the Sayings of Jesus
(commonly called “Q”); and behind that again apparently lies a still
older source, an apocryphal Wisdom book from which Christ is quoting
(“Therefore also said the Wisdom of God,” Luke xi. 49). Luke does not
insert the words “son of Barachiah,” and it is therefore doubtful
whether they stood in Q; Harnack (_Sayings of Jesus_, p. 104) concludes
that they did not. But that they belong to the original text of the
first Gospel and are not a later interpolation there seems no reason to
doubt. If the error originated with the Evangelist himself, we may
compare the rather similar confusion (“Jeremiah” for “Zechariah”) in
Matt. xxvii. 9; if, as seems more probable, he has taken it over from
Jewish tradition, it is natural to find such influence in this
particular Gospel.
The three persons bearing the name of Zacharias who come primarily[431]
into the question are:—
(1) Z. ben Jehoiada, murdered in the first Temple (2 Chron. xxiv.).
(2) Z. ben Berechiah ben Iddo, the prophet of the Restoration (Zech. i.
1).
(3) Z. ben Bariscæus, murdered in Herod’s Temple (Josephus).
There is every reason for identifying the Zacharias referred to by our
Lord with the first of these, whether we look at the original text of
Chronicles or at the Jewish Haggadah which grew up round it.
(i) With the words of Christ, or of the personified Wisdom in the work
from which He quotes, “I send unto you prophets” (Luke “I will send unto
them prophets”) compare 2 Chron. xxiv. 19, “Yet he sent prophets to them
to bring them again unto the LORD.”
(ii) With St. Luke’s twice repeated “may (shall) be required of this
generation” (xi. 50 f.) cp. the dying words of Zechariah, “The LORD look
upon it and require it,” as also Abel’s blood “crying from the ground”
(Gen. iv. 10).
(iii) Turning to Jewish tradition, we find that legend has been active
in connexion with the murder in the Temple of a pre-exilic Zachariah who
can be no other than the son of Jehoiada. And it is noteworthy that the
two points dwelt on are just those which appear in the N.T. passage,
viz. (_a_) the exact spot in the Temple where the murder occurred (cp.
the precise localisation “between the sanctuary and the altar”) and
(_b_) the crying out of the blood from the ground for vengeance, like
that of Abel, and the terrible expiation required to still it. “R.
Johanan said,” we read,[432] “‘Eighty thousand of the flower of the
priesthood were slain on account of the blood of Zachariah.’ R. Judan
asked R. Aha ‘Where did they kill Zachariah? In the Court of the Women
or in the Court of Israel?’ He answered, ‘Neither in the Court of the
Women nor in the Court of Israel, but in the Court of the Priests.’” The
legend goes on to tell how the murder was rendered more heinous by being
committed on a sabbath and that the Day of Atonement, and how
Nebuzaradan when he entered the Temple saw the prophet’s blood welling
up from the floor, and of the holocaust of priests which hardly availed
to quench the stream.
(iv) Furthermore, there is evidence to show that the Rabbis, like the
author of the first Gospel, confused or, disregarding chronology,
identified the pre-exilic victim with Zechariah the prophet of the
Restoration. The Targum on Lam. ii. 20 (“Shall the priest and the
prophet be slain in the sanctuary of the Lord?”) runs, “Is it also fit
that they should slay a priest and prophet in the Temple of the Lord, as
ye slew Zacharias _the son of Iddo_ ... in the house of the Sanctuary,
on the day of Expiation?” (Lightfoot _l. c._). The Midrash (tr. Wünsche)
interprets the same passage of Lam. of Zechariah son of Jehoiada.
(v) What is the intended series or line of which Zechariah is the last
representative? Abel is naturally the first, but, chronologically, Z.
ben Jehoiada was not the last prophet whose murder is recorded in the
O.T.; Uriah (Jer. xxvi. 20 ff.) was later. The usual explanation that
his murder stands last in the arrangement of the Hebrew Bible with
Chronicles at the end is unsatisfactory; the books of the O.T. still
circulated separately in the first century of our era. Moore’s answer is
“It is not because the death of Z. was the last crime of the kind in
Jewish history that it is named in the Gospel, but because it was in
popular legend the typical example of the sacrilegious murder of a
righteous man, a prophet of God, and of the appalling expiation God
exacted for it.” But the identification of the victim with the prophet
of the Restoration suggests another answer. Zechariah ben Berechiah
_did_ in fact stand chronologically at the end of the prophets; as
Josephus writes (§ 63), the succession failed after Artaxerxes (_i. e._
Ahasuerus). The context in Matthew relates to the _ancient_ prophets;
the later generation that built the prophets’ tombs is set over against
that of the forefathers who murdered them. That the final instance of
such murder should be drawn from recent (to say nothing of future)
history would be inappropriate. The son of Bariscæus was no prophet or
priest and “as a layman would have no business in the part of the court
between the temple and the altar” (Moore).
For the opposite view see Wellhausen _Einleitung in die drei ersten
Evangelien_, ed. 2 (1911), pp. 118 ff. His main points are that
Chronicles was a learned, not a popular, book and not likely to have
been known to or quoted by Christ (but Christ is apparently quoting at
second hand from one of those apocryphal books which were essentially
popular), and that the rabbinical legend is in its origin unconnected
with the story in Chronicles and really an echo (_Nachklang_) of the
episode in Josephus, the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans having
here, as elsewhere, been confused with the earlier destruction by the
Babylonians.
Footnote 431:
Tradition also connects Z. ben Jeberechiah (Isa. viii. 2) and
Zacharias, father of John the Baptist, with the N.T. passage.
Footnote 432:
Translated from _T.J., Taanith_ iv. 5, by G. F. Moore in the _Journal
of the American Oriental Society_, vol. xxvi. (1906), pp. 317 ff.; cf.
Lightfoot _Horæ Hebraiacæ_ on Matt. _l. c._
VI. Note on § (50). PORTENTS AND ORACLES
With this passage should be compared the following allusions in Roman
writers:—
Tacitus _Hist._ V. 13. “Portents had occurred; but that nation, at once
a prey to superstition and an enemy of religious rites, regards it wrong
to avert such omens by sacrifices or votive offerings. There were
visions of armies joining battle in the heavens with armour glowing
red,[433] and the Temple in an instant was all lit up with fire from the
clouds. The doors of the sanctuary opened of a sudden and there was
heard a voice of superhuman strength saying that the gods were
departing, and at the same moment a mighty commotion of departing
beings. Yet few saw a fearful meaning in these things. Many were firmly
persuaded that their ancient priestly lore contained a prediction that
at that very time the East was to wax strong and persons proceeding from
Judæa were to become masters of the world. This enigmatic utterance had
foretold of Vespasian and Titus, but the common people, with the usual
ambition of humanity, read it as predicting this high destiny for
themselves, and even disaster failed to bring home to them its true
meaning.”
Suet. _Vesp._ 4. “An ancient and rooted belief had spread throughout the
whole of the East that persons proceeding from Judæa were destined at
that time to become masters of the world. The prophecy, as after events
proved, had reference to the Roman Emperor, but the Jews appropriated it
to themselves and plunged into revolt.”
For interesting discussions on Josephus and Tacitus and the (Messianic)
prophecy the reader is referred to the articles by Norden and Corrsen
mentioned at the head of Note II.
Footnote 433:
After Virg. _Æn._ VIII. 528 f.
VII. Note on § (63). THE TWENTY-TWO BOOKS OF SCRIPTURE
This passage is important in connexion with the history of the O.T.
canon. The language of Josephus implies that the canon had long since
been closed, the test of canonicity being antiquity. Nothing written
later than Artaxerxes (_i. e._ Ahasuerus) has full credentials. The
mention of Artaxerxes must refer to the book of Esther, which Josephus
thus regards as the latest addition to the collection. The statement
differs in some respects from what is believed to be the oldest
Palestinian tradition, but there is no reason to doubt that the unnamed
22 books are other than those comprised in the modern Hebrew Bible.
(1) The _number 22_ as the total of the books of Scripture is here met
with for the first time, but reappears as the dominant reckoning in
early Eastern Church writers (Melito, Origen, etc.), who connect it with
the 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet. As these writers were in touch
with Palestinian tradition and Melito expressly states that he derived
his information from the East (ap. Eus. _H.E._ IV. 26), it seems that
this reckoning had the support of at least one section of the synagogue.
The normal tradition, however, made the total 24, a number which first
appears in a work almost contemporary with the _Contra Apionem_, 2
Esdras (or the Apocalypse of Ezra) xiv. 45 (Oriental text). The smaller
number was reached by treating Ruth and Lamentations as supplements
respectively to Judges and Jeremiah. The arrangement in 24 books
possibly arose in Babylonia.[434]
It is uncertain which of these two reckonings is the older, but in
favour of the priority of the number 24 it may be said that (i) the
equation with the number of Hebrew letters is artificial and therefore
likely to be late, although as Josephus does not allude to this it may
be an after refinement; (ii) it is easier to understand the subsequent
attachment of Ruth and Lamentations to prophetical books with which
their contents or supposed authorship connected them than how, having
once gained admission among the Prophets, they could afterwards be
relegated to the lower category of “Writings,” in which they now stand.
A third and later arrangement names 27 books, a number arrived at by
dividing the double books, while the parallelism with the Hebrew
alphabet is retained by reckoning separately the “final” forms of those
letters which possessed them. Jerome in his preface to the Books of
Samuel and Kings shows acquaintance with all three systems.
(2) Josephus presents a _tripartite arrangement_ (5 + 13 + 4 books), but
not the normal one (5 + 8 + 11: Law, Prophets, Writings). His third
group is reduced to 4 by the transference to the “Prophets” of a number
of books commonly included in the “Writings.” The normal arrangement,
which reflects the stages in the formation of the canon and places, _e.
g._, Daniel in the third group because of the late date at which it
gained admission, is clearly the more ancient. Josephus as a Greek
historian writing for Greek readers neglects this and follows the
example of the translators of the Greek Bible in grouping all the
historical and prophetical books together. A close parallel to his third
class (“hymns to God and practical precepts for men”) may be found in
the description of the sacred books of the Therapeutæ in Egypt in the
_De Vita Contemplativa_ ascribed to Philo, “Laws and oracles delivered
by prophets and _hymns and the other (works) by which knowledge and
piety are promoted and perfected_” (ed. Conybeare p. 61).
(3) The _constituent books_ doubtless here, as with the Christian
writers who name 22 as the total and enumerate the books (cp. Origen in
Eus. _H.E._ VI. 25), coincide with the normal Hebrew canon. Dr. Ryle
(_Canon of O.T._ p. 165 f.) concludes that the 13 books of the Prophets
are probably (1) Joshua, (2) Judges + Ruth, (3) Sam., (4) Kings, (5)
Chron., (6) Ezra + Nehemiah, (7) Esther, (8) Job, (9) Isaiah, (10)
Jeremiah + Lamentations (11) Ezekiel, (12) Minor Prophets, (13) Daniel;
while the group of four will comprise (1) Psalms with (2) Song of Songs,
constituting the “hymns,” and (3) Proverbs with (4) Ecclesiastes, the
“practical precepts.” The view of Grätz that Josephus omitted
Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs, as not having yet been admitted to
the canon, has not met with acceptance.
(4) The canon here laid down has not governed the historian’s practice.
He does not scruple to draw upon apocryphal books like 1 Maccabees, nor
does he hint that the authorities used in the latter part of the
_Antiquities_, for the period subsequent to “Artaxerxes,” are less
trustworthy than the rest; he implies, on the contrary, that the whole
work is in accordance with “the holy books” (cp. _Ant._ I. 17; XX. 261).
The reader may consult in particular the works on the _Canon of the
O.T._ by Ryle (pp. 160-66) and Buhl and the article “Bible Canon” in the
_Jewish Encylopædia_.
Footnote 434:
Fürst (_Kanon des A.T._), p. 4.
TABLE OF DATES
The figures in brackets refer to the numbered translations.
B.C. JUDÆA AND SYRIA. ROME.
135 JOHN HYRCANUS I (56)
104 ARISTOBULUS I
103 ALEXANDER JANNÆUS (57)
76 QUEEN ALEXANDRA (57) (58)
67 ARISTOBULUS II
63 Pompey takes Jerusalem and
Syria becomes a Roman province
(8)
63-40 HYRCANUS II a Roman vassal
_c._ 57 Gabinius divides Palestine
into five districts (9)
48 Battle of Pharsalia.
Defeat of Pompey by
J. Cæsar
47 Palestinian settlement under
J. Cæsar (10)
_c._ 46 Antipater and Herod in power.
Trial of Herod (12)
44 Death of J. Cæsar
_c._ 43 Cassius in Syria. Herod made
governor of Cœle-Syria (13)
42 Battle of Philippi.
Defeat of Brutus and
Cassius by Antony
and Octavian
41 Antony appoints Herod and
Phasæl tetrarchs of Judæa (14)
40 Invasion of Palestine by the
Parthians. Flight of Herod to
Rome (15)
40-37 ANTIGONUS
37 Jerusalem captured by Herod
and Sosius.
37-4 HEROD THE GREAT
31 Battle of Actium.
Defeat of Antony by
AUGUSTUS
30 Herod’s kingdom confirmed by
Augustus (16)
29 Execution of Mariamne (17)
23 Trachonitis etc. added to
Herod’s kingdom (18)
_c._ 7 Execution of Alexander and
Aristobulus (20)
4 Death of Herod. His kingdom
divided between ARCHELAUS
(B.C. 4-A.D. 6), PHILIP (B.C.
4-A.D. 34) (22) and Antipas
(B.C. 4-A.D. 39)
A.D.
6 Judaæa annexed to the province
of Syria under procurators
(23)
6/7 Census of Quirinius and revolt
of Judas (24)
14 TIBERIUS
26-36 Pontius Pilate procurator (25)
(28)
37 HEROD AGRIPPA I. (30) CALIGULA (31)
41 CLAUDIUS (32)
44 Death of Herod Agrippa I. (33)
Famine in Judæa (34)
_c._ 46 Crucifixion of sons of Judas
(35)
50-100 HEROD AGRIPPA II. (3) (36)
54 NERO
Procurators—
52-60 Felix (36)
60-62 Festus (39)
62-64 Albinus (39)
64-66 Gessius Florus (39)
66 Outbreak of war with Rome
Cessation of daily offering
for the Emperor (40)
66 Oct. Defeat of Cestius Gallus near
Beth-Horon (41)
Josephus in command of Galilee
67 Advance of Vespasian from
spring Antioch
July Capture of Jotapata (43)
67-68 Civil war in Jerusalem (45)
winter
68 June Campaign interrupted through death of Nero
68-69 GALBA, OTHO,
VITELLIUS
69 July VESPASIAN proclaimed
Emperor
70 April Titus lays siege to Jerusalem
July Cessation of Temple sacrifices
(48)
Aug. Capture and burning of Temple
(49)
Sept. Capture of the whole city (51)
79 TITUS
81-96 DOMITIAN
INDEX
Abel, 195, 197
Abella, Abila, 88, 94, 102
Actium, battle of, 55, 73
_Acts_, 90, 107 _n._, 192 ff.
Ader = Ben-hadad, 42
Adiabene, 90, 99
Agrippa, M., 57 f., 60
—— son of Felix and Drusilla, 95
—— Herod Agrippa. _See_ Herod
Ahab, 42 ff.
Albinus, 96 f., 105, 144
Alexander the Alabarch, 93
—— brother-in-law of Herod, 54
—— Jannæus, 164
—— son of Herod, 58, 60
——, Tiberius, 93, 193
Alexandra, 164 ff.
Alexandria, 92, 97
Alexandrium, 60
Alexas, 63
Aliturus, 34
Alphabet, the Hebrew, and the books of Scripture, 201
Amathus, 47
Ananias, 91
—— high priest, 107
Ananus I, high priest, 73, 96
—— II, high priest, 96 f.
—— III, high priest, 118 f., 130 f., 184, 195
—— son of Jonathan, 113
Anaxagoras, 171
Antigonus, 53 f.
Antioch, 107, 110
Antiochus, 110
—— Epiphanes, 162
Antipas, 109
Antipater, father of Herod, 47 ff, 51 ff.
—— son of Herod, 62
—— nephew of Herod, 68
Antipatris, 111, 117
Anti-Semitism, 18 f.
Antonia, 84
—— Tower of, 135, 138, 145
Antony, 51 f., 55 f.
_Apion, Against_, 18 f.
Aqiba R., 148
Aqueduct, 75
Arabia, 80, 99
Arabians, 55
Aramaic original of _B. J._, 14, 98
—— speech in, 136
Archelaus, 16, 29, 66 ff., 140 n., 189
Arethusa, 46
_Aristeas, Letter of_, 17
Aristobulus II, 45 f., 165
—— son of Herod, 58, 60
—— brother of Herod Agrippa I, 85
Artaxerxes = Ahasuerus, 176, 198, 200
Artemisium, month of, 143
Ascalon, 71
Asphaltitis, Asphaltophorus (= Dead Sea), 63
Athenian laws, 172
Athens, plague of, 26
Atomos, 95
Atratinus, 53
Augustus (Octavius, Cæsar), 51, 53 f., 55 f., 57 f., 60, 68 ff.
Auranitis, 58, 70, 88 _n._, 110
Autocratoris (= Sepphoris), 74
Azizus, 94 f.
Azotus, 46, 70
Babylonians, 99;
Babylonian and Roman destruction of Jerusalem confused, 199
Bagoas, 169
Bannus, 10, 33
Baptism, John’s, 80 f.
Barachiah, Berechiah, 195 ff.
Baris, Bariscæus, Baruch, 131, 195 ff.
Batanæa, 58, 70, 94, 102, 110
Berendts, A., 189f.
Berenice, 95
Berytus, 35
Betharamphtha, 74
Beth-Horon, 111, 116
Bethsaida, 74
Bezetha, 113
Blass, F., 193
Books (the) Sacred, 123, 145
Borcæus, 112
Brigands, 102, 104 f., 150
Burial, Jewish care for, 130
Burkitt, F. C., 183, 188, 193
Cæsar, Julius, 47
——, Sextus, 48, 50
Cæsarea (Strato’s Tower), 46, 57 _n._, 74 f., 88, 90, 104
—— Philippi, 74
Caligula (= Gaius), 16 f., 19, 27, 82-7, 90, 186
Callirrhoe, 63
Calvarius, Sextus, 120
Calvinus, 54
Candlestick, seven-branched, 45, 147
Captain of Temple. _See_ Temple
Carus, 169
Cassius, 51 f.
Catapult, 117, 144 _n._
Caudine Forks, 110
Census, periodic in Egypt, 181
Cerealius, 38
Cestius Gallus, 11, 15, 106 f., 110 ff.
Chalcis, 94, 102
Christians and Christianity, 10, 22 f., 76, 182 ff.
_Chronicles_, 195, 198 (as last book in the Heb. Bible)
Circumcision, 90 f., 95
“Civil List” of Vespasian, 13
Claudius, Emperor, 76, 88, 90, 102
Claudius Felix. _See_ Felix
Cleopatra, 52, 55f.
—— wife of Herod the Great, 192
Cluvius Rufus, 17, 27
Cœle-Syria, 46, 51
_Collaborateurs_ of Josephus, 14, 186
Coponius, 72.
Corban, an oath, 29, 179;
sacred treasure, 75 _n._
Corrsen, P., 182, 200
Costobar, 109, 117
Crasis, 187
Crete, 39
Crucifixion, 38, 68, 102, 130, 185
_Custodia, libera_, 83 _n._
_Customs and Causes_, projected work, 19
Cyprus, 92, 95
Dacians, 160
Daphne, 52
Darius, 110
Demetrius of Gadara, 46
Demoniacal possession, 41f.
Destiny, 61. Cp. Fate
Dicæarchia (= Puteoli), 34
Didius, Quintus, 56
Dionysius of Halicarnassus, 15, 26
Dium, 46
Dius, month of, 117
Domitia, 39
Domitian, 39
Domitius Sabinus, 120
Dora, 46
Drusilla, 29, 94f.
Drusus, 81
Education, the two systems of, 172
Egyptian false prophet, 103f.
Eleazar, 42, 91
—— the brigand, 102
—— Captain of the Temple, 107
—— a Pharisee, 162
—— son of Simon, 118
Elijah, 44
Elymas, 29, 94
Epaphroditus, 15, 17
_Esdras II_, 201
Essenes, 33, 148-60
_Esther_, 200
Eusebius, 89 _n._, 96, 183
Exorcism, 41 f.
Ezekias, 48 f.
Ezekiel, 42
Fadus, Cuspius, 93, 192
Famine at Jerusalem, 92 f.
Fasts, Jewish, observed by aliens, 178
Fate, 141, 145, 148, 157, 159.
Cp. Destiny
Faustus, 45
Feast of Unleavened Bread, 106, 142
—— of Passover, 66, 189
—— of Pentecost, 68, 143
—— of Tabernacles, 111, 143
—— commemorating Herod’s death, 64 _n._
Felix, Claudius, 10, 29, 34, 94 f., 102 ff.
Festus, 29, 105
Florus, Gessius, 106 f., 109, 161
Flute players as mourners, 129
Fortune, 61, 126
Free-will, 61, 148, 159
Fulvia, 77
Future Life, 124, 159, 174.
Cp. Immortality
Gabinius, 47, 53
Gadara, 46, 47, 70
Gaius. _See_ Caligula
Galilee, 11, 48 f., 70, 102
Gallicanus, 122
Gamala, 73, 80
Gamaliel, 28, 192 f.
Games: Isthmian, Nemean, Olympic, 174 _n._
Gaulanitis, 102
Gaza, 46, 70
Gennesaret, Lake of, 74
Gerizim, Mount, 77
Gibeon, 111, 115
Gorpiæus, month of, 146
Gospels, primitive error in, 192
Grätz, 202
Greek philosophy, 171
Hades, 125, 156, 158
Haggadah, Jewish, 196 ff.
Harnack, A., 183, 193, 196
Hegesippus, 95
Helena, 90ff.
Herod the Great, 16f., 28, 48-65, 66-71, 104, 167-9, 190
—— Antipas (the Tetrarch), 29, 67, 70, 73 f., 79 ff., 189
—— Philip. _See_ Philip
—— husband of Herodias, 79, 191 f.
—— Agrippa I, 17, 29, 79, 87, 88-90
—— Agrippa II, 13-15, 17, 25, 29, 36 f., 94, 96 f., 102, 109 f., 112
Herodias, 29, 79, 81 f., 189, 191 f.
Hiatus, avoidance of, 188
Hippos, 46, 70
Historians, ancient, contrasted with contemporary, 101
Hyperberetæus, month of, 113
Hyrcanus I, 161 ff., 166
—— II, 45-54
—— son of Josephus, 39
Idumæa, 70;
Idumæans, 129ff.
Images, making of, 74
Immortality of Soul, 155-9
Innocents, murder of the, 28, 63
Inspiration, 176
Interpolation, Christian in Josephus, 182 ff.
Irenæus, 67
Islands of the Blessed, 156
Ixion, 156
Izates, 90 ff.
Jadaus (Jadon), 44
James, the brother of Jesus, 22, 29, 95 f.
Jamnia, 46, 70
Jeconiah, king, 136
Jehoiada, 195 ff.
Jehoshaphat, 43
Jeremiah, 42
Jericho, 47, 63, 66
Jeroboam, 44
Jerome, 24, 188, 201
Jesus Christ, 22, 76, 182 ff.
—— son of Ananias, 143 f.
—— son of Damnæus, high priest, 97, 130 f.
_Jewish Antiquities_, 15 ff., 24 f.;
Books XVII-XIX, peculiarities of style in, 26, 186;
Roman sources of, 186
_Jewish War_, 14 f., 25, 35 ff., 98 ff.;
Aramaic original of, 14, 98, 190 f.;
Slavonic version of, 183, 189 ff., 192
Jews in Rome, 69, 76 f.;
in Egypt and Babylon, 175
——, persecution of, 177 f.
Joazar, high priest, 72
John the Baptist, 22, 80 f., 189
—— of Gischala, 11, 135 ff.
Jonathan, high priest, 103
—— a Sadducee, 162 f.
Joppa, 46, 111
Joseph, the patriarch, 123 f.
—— of Arimathæa, 191
—— brother-in-law of Herod, 56 f.
—— son of Gorion, 118
—— high priest, 96
Josephus, life of, 9 ff.;
works, 14 ff.;
authorities, 16 f, 25 f.;
character, 20 ff.;
attitude to Judaism, 22;
to Christianity, 22 f., 188 f.;
as historian, 24 ff.;
importance of, 27 f.;
as illustrating N.T., 28 ff.;
autobiography of, 33 ff.;
style, 186 ff.
Jotapata, 12, 21, 35, 37, 119 ff., 128 f., 133
_Jubilees, Book of_, 40
Judæa, 70 ff., 78, 88, 90, 96, 102
Judas the Gaulanite or Galilæan, 72f., 161., 192 ff.;
sons of, 94, 193 f.
Julias, 102.
Justus, historian, 13, 18, 35
—— son of Josephus, 390
Lacedæmonians, 172
Law, the Jewish, 61, 74 f., 77, 91, 147, 163, 174, 176 ff.
———— weekly reading of, 172 f.
Lebanon, 88
Liberalius, 140
_Life_, the, of Josephus, 17 f.
Lightfoot, Bishop, 152 _n._, 154 _n._ 156 _n._
———— John, 197 _n._
Lots, drawing of, 125 f.