The Wars of The Jews by Flavius Josephus (easy readers .TXT) 📖

Ananus and his other adversaries were slain; and until the rulers of that country were so afflicted with the multitude of those that were slain, and with the continual ravage of what they had, that they raised an army, and put garrisons into the villages, to secure them from those insults. And in this state were the affairs of Judea at that time.

 

WAR BOOK 2 FOOTNOTES

 

(1) Hear Dean Aldrich’s note on this place: “The law or Custom of the Jews (says he) requires seven days’ mourning for the dead, Antiq. B. XVII. ch. 8. sect. 4; whence the author of the Book of Ecclesiasticus, ch. 22:12, assigns seven days as the proper time of mourning for the dead, and, ch. 38:17, enjoins men to mourn for the dead, that they may not be evil spoken of; for, as Josephus says presently, if any one omits this mourning [funeral feast], he is not esteemed a holy person. How it is certain that such a seven days’ mourning has been customary from times of the greatest antiquity, Genesis 1:10. Funeral feasts are also mentioned as of considerable antiquity, Ezekiel 24:17; Jeremiah 16:7; Prey. 31:6; Deuteronomy 26:14; Josephus, Of the War B. III.

ch. 9. sect. 5.

 

(2) This holding a council in the temple of Apollo, in the emperor’s palace at Rome, by Augustus, and even the building of this temple magnificently by himself in that palace, are exactly agreeable to Augustus, in his elder years, as Aldrich and from Suttonius and Propertius.

 

(3) Here we have a strong confirmation that it was Xerxes, and not Artaxerxes, under whom the main part of the Jews returned out of the Babylonian captivity, i.e. in the days of Ezra and Nehemiah. The same thing is in the Antiquities, B. XI. ch.6

 

(4) This practice of the Essens, in refusing to swear, and esteeming swearing in ordinary occasions worse than perjury, is delivered here in general words, as are the parallel injunctions of our Savior, Matthew 6:34; 23:16; and of St. James, 5:12; but all admit of particular exceptions for solemn causes, and on great and necessary occasions. Thus these very Essens, who here do so zealously avoid swearing, are related, in the very next section, to admit none till they take tremendous oaths to perform their several duties to God, and to their neighbor, without supposing they thereby break this rule, Not to swear at all. The case is the same in Christianity, as we learn from the Apostolical Constitutions, which although they agree with Christ and St. James, in forbidding to swear in general, ch. 5:12; 6:2, 3; yet do they explain it elsewhere, by avoiding to swear falsely, and to swear often and in vain, ch. 2:36; and again, by “not swearing at all,” but withal adding, that “if that cannot be avoided, to swear truly,” ch. 7:3; which abundantly explain to us the nature of the measures of this general injunction.

 

(5) This mention of the “names of angels,” so particularly preserved by the Essens, (if it means more than those “messengers” which were employed to bring, them the peculiar books of their Sect,) looks like a prelude to that “worshipping of angels,” blamed by St. Paul, as superstitious and unlawful, in some such sort of people as these Essens were, Colossians 2:8; as is the prayer to or towards the sun for his rising every morning, mentioned before, sect. 5, very like those not much later observances made mention of in the preaching of Peter, Authent.

Rec. Part II. p. 669, and regarding a kind of worship of angels, of the month, and of the moon, and not celebrating the new moons, or other festivals, unless the moon appeared. Which, indeed, seems to me the earliest mention of any regard to the phases in fixing the Jewish calendar, of which the Talmud and later Rabbins talk so much, and upon so very little ancient foundation.

 

(6) Of these Jewish or Essene (and indeed Christian) doctrines concerning souls, both good and bad, in Hades, see that excellent discourse, or homily, of our Josephus concerning Hades, at the end of the volume.

 

(7) Dean Aldrich reckons up three examples of this gift of prophecy in several of these Essens out of Josephus himself, viz.

in the History of the War, B. I. ch. 3. sect. 5, Judas foretold the death of Antigonus at Strato’s Tower; B. II. ch. 7. sect. 3, Simon foretold that Archelaus should reign but nine or ten years; and Antiq. B. XV. ch. 10. sect. 4, 5, Menuhem foretold that Herod should be king, and should reign tyrannically, and that for more than twenty or even thirty years. All which came to pass accordingly.

 

(8) There is so much more here about the Essens than is cited from Josephus in Porphyry and Eusebius, and yet so much less about the Pharisees and Sadducees, the two other Jewish sects, than would naturally be expected in proportion to the Essens or third sect, nay, than seems to be referred to by himself elsewhere, that one is tempted to suppose Josephus had at first written less of the one, and more of the two others, than his present copies afford us; as also, that, by some unknown accident, our present copies are here made up of the larger edition in the first case, and of the smaller in the second. See the note in Havercamp’s edition. However, what Josephus says in the name of the Pharisees, that only the souls of good men go out of one body into another, although all souls be immortal, and still the souls of the bad are liable to eternal punishment; as also what he says afterwards, Antiq. B. XVIII. ch. 1. sect. 3, that the soul’s vigor is immortal, and that under the earth they receive rewards or punishments according as their lives have been virtuous or vicious in the present world; that to the bad is allotted an eternal prison, but that the good are permitted to live again in this world; are nearly agreeable to the doctrines of Christianity. Only Josephus’s rejection of the return of the wicked into other bodies, or into this world, which he grants to the good, looks somewhat like a contradiction to St. Paul’s account of the doctrine of the Jews, that they “themselves allowed that there should be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust,” Acts 24:15. Yet because Josephus’s account is that of the Pharisees, and St. Patti’s that of the Jews in general, and of himself the contradiction is not very certain.

 

(9) We have here, in that Greek MS. which was once Alexander Petavius’s, but is now in the library at Leyden, two most remarkable additions to the common copies, though declared worth little remark by the editor; which, upon the mention of Tiberius’s coming to the empire, inserts first the famous testimony of Josephus concerning Jesus Christ, as it stands verbatim in the Antiquities, B. XVIII. ch. 3. sect. 3, with some parts of that excellent discourse or homily of Josephus concerning Hades, annexed to the work. But what is here principally to be noted is this, that in this homily, Josephus having just mentioned Christ, as “God the Word, and the Judge of the world, appointed by the Father,” etc., adds, that “he had himself elsewhere spoken about him more nicely or particularly.”

 

(10) This use of corban, or oblation, as here applied to the sacred money dedicated to God in the treasury of the temple, illustrates our Savior’s words, Mark 7:11, 12.

 

(11) Tacitus owns that Caius commanded the Jews to place his effigies in their temple, though he be mistaken when he adds that the Jews thereupon took arms.

 

(12) This account of a place near the mouth of the river Belus in Phoenicia, whence came that sand out of which the ancients made their glass, is a known thing in history, particularly in Tacitus and Strabo, and more largely in Pliny.

 

(13) This Memnon had several monuments, and one of them appears, both by Strabo and Diodorus, to have been in Syria, and not improbably in this very place.

 

(14) Reland notes here, that the Talmud in recounting ten sad accidents for which the Jews ought to rend their garments, reckons this for one, “When they hear that the law of God is burnt.”

 

(15) This Ummidius, or Numidius, or, as Tacitus calls him, Vinidius Quadratus, is mentioned in an ancient inscription, still preserved, as Spanhelm here informs us, which calls him Urnmidius Quadratus.

 

(16) Take the character of this Felix (who is well known from the Acts of the Apostles, particularly from his trembling when St.

Paul discoursed of “righteousness, chastity, and judgment to come,” Acts 24:5; and no wonder, when we have elsewhere seen that he lived in adultery with Drusilla, another man’s wife, (Antiq.

B. XX. ch. 7. sect. 1) in the words of Tacitus, produced here by Dean Aldrich: “Felix exercised,” says Tacitas, “the authority of a king, with the disposition of a slave, and relying upon the great power of his brother Pallas at court, thought he might safely be guilty of all kinds of wicked practices.” Observe also the time when he was made procurator, A.D. 52; that when St. Paul pleaded his cause before him, A.D. 58, he might have been “many years a judge unto that nation,” as St. Paul says he had then been, Acts 24:10. But as to what Tacitus here says, that before the death of Cumanus, Felix was procurator over Samaria only, does not well agree with St. Paul’s words, who would hardly have called Samaria a Jewish nation. In short, since what Tacitus here says is about countries very remote from Rome, where he lived; since what he says of two Roman procurators, the one over Galilee, the other over Samaria at the same time, is without example elsewhere; and since Josephus, who lived at that very time in Judea, appears to have known nothing of this procuratorship of Felix, before the death of Cureanus; I much suspect the story itself as nothing better than a mistake of Tacitus, especially when it seems not only omitted, but contradicted by Josephus; as any one may find that compares their histories together. Possibly Felix might have been a subordinate judge among the Jews some time before under Cureanus, but that he was in earnest a procurator of Samaria before I do not believe.

Bishop Pearson, as well as Bishop Lloyd, quote this account, but with a doubtful clause: confides Tacito, “If we may believe Tacitus.” Pears. Anhal. Paulin. p. 8; Marshall’s Tables, at A.D.

49.

 

(17) i.e. Herod king of Chalcis.

 

(18) Not long after this beginning of Florus, the wickedest of all the Roman procurators of Judea, and the immediate occasion of the Jewish war, at the twelfth year of Nero, and the seventeenth of Agrippa, or A.D. 66, the history in the twenty books of Josephus’s Antiquities ends, although Josephus did not finish these books till the thirteenth of Domitian, or A.D. 93, twenty-seven years afterward; as he did not finish their Appendix, containing an account of his own life, till Agrippa was dead, which happened in the third year of Trajan, or A. D. 100, as I have several times observed before.

 

(19) Here we may note, that three millions of the Jews were present at the passover, A.D. 65; which confirms what Josephus elsewhere informs us of, that at a passover a little later they counted two hundred and fifty-six thousand five hundred paschal lambs, which, at twelve to each lamb, which is no immoderate calculation, come to three millions and seventy-eight thousand.

See B. VI. ch. 9. sect. 3.

 

(20) Take here Dr. Hudson’s very pertinent note. “By this action,” says he,