The Wars of the Jews or History of the Destruction of Jerusalem

F >> Flavius Josephus >> The Wars of the Jews or History of the Destruction of Jerusalem

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38

(3) Josephus here calls this Antiochus the last of the
Seleucidae, although there remained still a shadow of another
king of that family, Antiochus Asiaticus, or Commagenus, who
reigned, or rather lay hid, till Pompey quite turned him out, as
Dean Aldrich here notes from Appian and Justin.

(4) Matthew 16:19; 18:18. Here we have the oldest and most
authentic Jewish exposition of binding and loosing, for punishing
or absolving men, not for declaring actions lawful or unlawful,
as some more modern Jews and Christians vainly pretend.

(5) Strabo, B. XVI. p. 740, relates, that this Selene Cleopatra
was besieged by Tigranes, not in Ptolemais, as here, but after
she had left Syria, in Seleucia, a citadel in Mesopotamia; and
adds, that when he had kept her a while in prison, he put her to
death. Dean Aldrich supposes here that Strabo contradicts
Josephus, which does not appear to me; for although Josephus says
both here and in the Antiquities, B. XIII. ch. 16. sect. 4, that
Tigranes besieged her now in Ptolemais, and that he took the
city, as the Antiquities inform us, yet does he no where intimate
that he now took the queen herself; so that both the narrations
of Strabo and Josephus may still be true notwithstanding.

(6) That this Antipater, the father of Herod the Great was an
Idumean, as Josephus affirms here, see the note on Antiq. B. XIV.
ch. 15. sect. 2. It is somewhat probable, as Hapercamp supposes,
and partly Spanheim also, that the Latin is here the truest; that
Pompey did him Hyrcanus, as he would have done the others from
Aristobulus, sect. 6, although his remarkable abstinence from the
2000 talents that were in the Jewish temple, when he took it a
little afterward, ch. 7. sect. 6, and Antiq. B. XIV. ch. 4. sect.
4, will to Greek all which agree he did not take them.

(7) Of the famous palm trees and balsam about Jericho and
Engaddl, see the notes in Havercamp's edition, both here and B.
II. ch. 9. sect. 1. They are somewhat too long to be transcribed
in this place.

(8) Thus says Tacitus: Cn. Pompelna first of all subdued the
Jews, and went into their temple, by right of conquest, Hist. B.
V. ch. 9. Nor did he touch any of its riches, as has been
observed on the parallel place of the Antiquities, B. XIV. ch. 4.
sect. 4, out of Cicero himself.

(9) The coin of this Gadara, still extant, with its date from
this era, is a certain evidence of this its rebuilding by Pompey,
as Spanheim here assures us.

(10) Take the like attestation to the truth of this submission of
Aretas, king of Arabia, to Scaurus the Roman general, in the
words of Dean Aldrich. "Hence (says he) is derived that old and
famous Denarius belonging to the Emillian family [represented in
Havercamp's edition], wherein Aretas appears in a posture of
supplication, and taking hold of a camel's bridle with his left
hand, and with his right hand presenting a branch of the
frankincense tree, with this inscription, M. SCAURUS EX S.C.; and
beneath, REX ARETAS."

(11) This citation is now wanting.

(12) What is here noted by Hudson and Spanheim, that this grant
of leave to rebuild the walls of the cities of Judea was made by
Julius Caesar, not as here to Antipater, but to Hyrcanas, Antiq.
B. XIV. ch. 8. sect. 5, has hardly an appearance of a
contradiction; Antipater being now perhaps considered only as
Hyrcanus's deputy and minister; although he afterwards made a
cipher of Hyrcanus, and, under great decency of behavior to him,
took the real authority to himself.

(13) Or twenty-five years of age. See note on Antiq. B. I. ch.
12. sect. 3; and on B. XIV. ch. 9. sect. 2; and Of the War, B.
II. ch. 11. sect. 6; and Polyb. B. XVII. p. 725. Many writers of
the Roman history give an account of this murder of Sextus
Caesar, and of the war of Apamia upon that occasion. They are
cited in Dean Aldrich's note.

(14) In the Antiquities, B. XIV. ch. 11. sect. 1, the duration of
the reign of Julius Caesar is three years six months; but here
three years seven months, beginning nightly, says Dean Aldrich,
from his second dictatorship. It is probable the real duration
might be three years and between six and seven months.

(15) It appears evidently by Josephus's accounts, both here and
in his Antiquities, B. XIV. ch. 11. sect. 2, that this Cassius,
one of Caesar's murderers, was a bitter oppressor, and exactor of
tribute in Judea. These seven hundred talents amount to about
three hundred thousand pounds sterling, and are about half the
yearly revenues of king Herod afterwards. See the note on Antiq.
B. XVII. ch. 11. sect. 4. It also appears that Galilee then paid
no more than one hundred talents, or the seventh part of the
entire sum to be levied in all the country.

(16) Here we see that Cassius set tyrants over all Syria; so that
his assisting to destroy Caesar does not seem to have proceeded
from his true zeal for public liberty, but from a desire to be a
tyrant himself.

(17) Phasaelus and Herod.

(18) This large and noted wood, or woodland, belonging to Carmel,
called apago by the Septuagint, is mentioned in the Old
Testament, 2 Kings 19:23; Isaiah 37:24, and by I Strabo, B. XVI.
p. 758, as both Aldrich and Spanheim here remark very
pertinently.

(19) These accounts, both here and Antiq. B. XIV. ch. 13. sect.
5, that the Parthians fought chiefly on horseback, and that only
some few of their soldiers were free-men, perfectly agree with
Trogus Pompeius, in Justin, B. XLI. 2, 3, as Dean Aldrich well
observes on this place.

(20) Mariamac here, in the copies.

(21) This Brentesium or Brundusium has coin still preserved, on
which is written, as Spanheim informs us.

(22) This Dellius is famous, or rather infamous, in the history
of Mark Antony, as Spanheim and Aldrich here note, from the
coins, from Plutarch and Dio.

(23) This Sepphoris, the metropolis of Galilee, so often
mentioned by Josephus, has coins still remaining, as Spanheim
here informs us.

(24) This way of speaking, "after forty days," is interpreted by
Josephus himself, "on the fortieth day," Antiq. B. XIV. ch. 15.
sect. 4. In like manner, when Josephus says, ch. 33. sect. 8,
that Herod lived "after" he had ordered Antipater to be slain
"five days;" this is by himself interpreted, Antiq. B. XVII. ch.
8. sect. 1, that he died "on the fifth day afterward." So also
what is in this book, ch. 13. sect. 1, "after two years," is,
Antiq. B. XIV. ch. 13. sect. 3, "on the second year." And Dean
Aldrich here notes that this way of speaking is familiar to
Josephus.

(25) This Samosata, the metropolis of Commagena, is well known
from its coins, as Spanheim here assures us. Dean Aldrich also
confirms what Josephus here notes, that Herod was a great means
of taking the city by Antony, and that from
Plutarch and Dio.

(26) That is, a woman, not, a man.

(27) This death of Antigonus is confirmed by Plutarch and.
Straho; the latter of whom is cited for it by Josephus himself,
Antiq. B. XV. ch. 1. sect. 2, as Dean Aldrich here observes.

(28) This ancient liberty of Tyre and Sidon under the Romans,
taken notice of by Josephus, both here and Antiq. B. XV. ch. 4.
sect. 1, is confirmed by the testimony of Sirabe, B. XVI. p. 757,
as Dean Aldrich remarks; although, as he justly adds, this
liberty lasted but a little while longer, when Augtus took it
away from them.

(29) This seventh year of the reign of Herod [from the conquest
or death of Antigonus], with the great earthquake in the
beginning of the same spring, which are here fully implied to be
not much before the fight at Actium, between Octavius and Antony,
and which is known from the Roman historians to have been in the
beginning of September, in the thirty-first year before the
Christian era, determines the chronology of Josephus as to the
reign of Herod, viz. that he began in the year 37, beyond
rational contradiction. Nor is it quite unworthy of our notice,
that this seventh year of the reign of Herod, or the thirty-first
before the Christian era, contained the latter part of a Sabbatic
year, on which Sabbatic year, therefore, it is plain this great
earthquake happened in Judea.

(30) This speech of Herod is set down twice by Josephus, here and
Antiq. B. XV. ch. 5. sect. 3, to the very same purpose, but by no
means in the same words; whence it appears that the sense was
Herod's, but the composition Josephus's.

(31) Since Josephus, both here and in his Antiq. B. XV. ch. 7.
sect. 3, reckons Gaza, which had been a free city, among the
cities given Herod by Augustus, and yet implies that Herod had
made Costobarus a governor of it before, Antiq. B. XV. ch. 7.
sect. 9, Hardain has some pretense for saying that Josephus here
contradicted himself. But perhaps Herod thought he had sufficient
authority to put a governor into Gaza, after he was made tetrarch
or king, in times of war, before the city was entirely delivered
into his hands by Augustus.

(32) This fort was first built, as it is supposed, by John
Hyrcanus; see Prid. at the year 107; and called "Baris," the
Tower or Citadel. It was afterwards rebuilt, with great
improvements, by Herod, under the government of Antonius, and was
named from him "the Tower of Antoni;" and about the time when
Herod rebuilt the temple, he seems to have put his last hand to
it. See Antiq. B. XVIII. ch. 5. sect. 4; Of the War, B. I. ch. 3.
sect. 3; ch. 5. sect. 4. It lay on the northwest side of the
temple, and was a quarter as large.

(33) That Josephus speaks truth, when he assures us that the
haven of this Cesarea was made by Herod not less, nay rather
larger, than that famous haven at Athens, called the Pyrecum,
will appear, says Dean Aldrich, to him who compares the
descriptions of that at Athens in Thucydides and Pausanias, with
this of Cesarea in Josephus here, and in the Antiq. B. XV. ch. 9.
sect. 6, and B. XVII. ch. 9. sect. 1.

(34) These buildings of cities by the name of Caesar, and
institution of solemn games in honor of Augustus Caesar, as here,
and in the Antiquities, related of Herod by Josephus, the Roman
historians attest to, as things then frequent in the provinces of
that empire, as Dean Aldrich observes on this chapter.

(35) There were two cities, or citadels, called Herodium, in
Judea, and both mentioned by Josephus, not only here, but Antiq.
B. XIV. ch. 13. sect. 9; B. XV. ch. 9. sect. 6; Of the War, B. I.
ch. 13. sect. 8; B. III. ch. 3. sect. 5. One of them was two
hundred, and the other sixty furlongs distant from Jerusalem. One
of them is mentioned by Pliny, Hist. Nat. B. V. ch. 14., as Dean
Aldrich observes here.

(36) Here seems to be a small defect in the copies, which
describe the wild beasts which were hunted in a certain country
by Herod, without naming any such country at all.

(37) Here is either a defect or a great mistake in Josephus's
present copies or memory; for Mariamne did not now reproach Herod
with this his first injunction to Joseph to kill her, if he
himself were slain by Antony, but that he had given the like
command a second time to Soemus also, when he was afraid of being
slain by Augustus. Antiq. B. XV. ch. 3. sect. 5, etc.

(38) That this island Eleusa, afterward called Sebaste, near
Cilicia, had in it the royal palace of this Archclaus, king of
Cappadocia, Strabo testifies, B. XV. p. 671. Stephanus of
Byzantiam also calls it "an island of Cilicia, which is now
Sebaste;" both whose testimonies are pertinently cited here by
Dr. Hudson. See the same history, Antiq. B. XVI. ch. 10. sect. 7.

(39) That it was an immemorial custom among the Jews, and their
forefathers, the patriarchs, to have sometimes more wives or
wives and concubines, than one at the same the and that this
polygamy was not directly forbidden in the law of Moses is
evident; but that polygamy was ever properly and distinctly
permitted in that law of Moses, in the places here cited by Dean
Aldrich, Deuteronomy 17:16, 17, or 21:15, or indeed any where
else, does not appear to me. And what our Savior says about the
common Jewish divorces, which may lay much greater claim to such
a permission than polygamy, seems to me true in this case also;
that Moses, "for the hardness of their hearts," suffered them to
have several wives at the same time, but that "from the beginning
it was not so," Matthew 19:8; Mark 10:5.

(40) This vile fellow, Eurycles the Lacedemonian, seems to have
been the same who is mentioned by Plutarch, as (twenty-live years
before) a companion to Mark Antony, and as living with Herod;
whence he might easily insinuate himself into the acquaintance of
Herod's sons, Antipater and Alexander, as Usher, Hudson, and
Spanheim justly suppose. The reason why his being a Spartan
rendered him acceptable to the Jews as we here see he was, is
visible from the public records of the Jews and Spartans, owning
those Spartans to be of kin to the Jews, and derived from their
common ancestor Abraham, the first patriarch of the Jewish
nation, Antiq. B. XII. ch. 4. sect. 10; B. XIII. ch. 5. sect. 8;
and 1 Macc. 12:7.

(41) See the preceding note.

(42) Dean Aldrich takes notice here, that these nine wives of
Herod were alive at the same time; and that if the celebrated
Mariamne, who was now dead, be reckoned, those wives were in all
ten. Yet it is remarkable that he had no more than fifteen
children by them all.

(43) To prevent confusion, it may not be amiss, with Dean
Aldrich, to distinguish between four Josephs in the history of
Herod. 1. Joseph, Herod's uncle, and the [second] husband of his
sister Salome, slain by Herod, on account of Mariamne.

2. Joseph, Herod's quaestor, or treasurer, slain on the same
account. 3. Joseph, Herod's brother, slain in battle against
Antigonus. 4. Joseph, Herod's nephew, the husband of Olympias,
mentioned in this place.

(44) These daughters of Herod, whom Pheroras's wife affronted,
were Salome and Roxana, two virgins, who were born to him of his
two wives, Elpide and Phedra. See Herod's genealogy, Antiq. B.
XVII. ch. 1. sect. 3.

(45) This strange obstinacy of Pheroras in retaining his wife,
who was one of a low family, and refusing to marry one nearly
related to Herod, though he so earnestly desired it, as also that
wife's admission to the counsels of the other great court ladies,
together with Herod's own importunity as to Pheroras's divorce
and other marriage, all so remarkable here, or in the Antiquities
XVII. ch. 2. sect. 4; and ch. 3. be well accounted for, but on
the supposal that Pheroras believed, and Herod suspected, that
the Pharisees' prediction, as if the crown of Judea should be
translated from Herod to Pheroras's posterity and that most
probably to Pheroras's posterity by this his wife, also would
prove true. See Antiq. B. XVII. ch. 2. sect. 4; and ch. 3. sect.
1.

(46) This Tarentum has coins still extant, as Reland informs us
here in his note.

(47) A lover of his father.

(48) Since in these two sections we have an evident account of
the Jewish opinions in the days of Josephus, about a future happy
state, and the resurrection of the dead, as in the New Testament,
John 11:24, I shall here refer to the other places in Josephus,
before he became a catholic Christian, which concern the same
matters. Of the War, B. II. ch. 8. sect. 10, 11; B. III. ch. 8.
sect. 4; B. VII. ch. 6. sect. 7; Contr. Apion, B. II. sect. 30;
where we may observe, that none of these passages are in his
Books of Antiquities, written peculiarly for the use of the
Gentiles, to whom he thought it not proper to insist on topics so
much out of their way as these were. Nor is this observation to
be omitted here, especially on account of the sensible difference
we have now before us in Josephus's reason of the used by the
Rabbins to persuade their scholars to hazard their lives for the
vindication of God's law against images, by Moses, as well as of
the answers those scholars made to Herod, when they were caught,
and ready to die for the same; I mean as compared with the
parallel arguments and answers represented in the Antiquities, B.
XVII. ch. 6. sect, 2, 3. A like difference between Jewish and
Gentile notions the reader will find in my notes on Antiquities,
B. III. ch. 7. sect. 7; B. XV. ch. 9. sect. 1. See the like also
in the case of the three Jewish sects in the Antiquities, B.
XIII. ch. 5. sect. 9, and ch. 10. sect. 4, 5; B. XVIII. ch. 1.
sect. 5; and compared with this in his Wars of the Jews, B. II.
ch. 8. sect. 2-14. Nor does St. Paul himself reason to Gentiles
at Athens, Acts 17:16-34, as he does to Jews in his Epistles.

BOOK II.

Containing The Interval Of Sixty-Nine Years.

From The Death Of Herod Till Vespasian Was Sent To Subdue The
Jews By Nero.

CHAPTER 1.

Archelaus Makes A Funeral Feast For The People, On The Account Of
Herod. After Which A Great Tumult Is Raised By The Multitude And
He Sends The Soldiers Out Upon Them, Who Destroy About Three
Thousand Of Them.

1. Now the necessity which Archelaus was under of taking a
journey to Rome was the occasion of new disturbances; for when he
had mourned for his father seven days, (1) and had given a very
expensive funeral feast to the multitude, (which custom is the
occasion of poverty to many of the Jews, because they are forced
to feast the multitude; for if any one omits it, he is not
esteemed a holy person,) he put on a white garment, and went up
to the temple, where the people accosted him with various
acclamations. He also spake kindly to the multitude from an
elevated seat and a throne of gold, and returned them thanks for
the zeal they had shown about his father's funeral, and the
submission they had made to him, as if he were already settled in
the kingdom; but he told them withal, that he would not at
present take upon him either the authority of a king, or the
names thereto belonging, until Caesar, who is made lord of this
whole affair by the testament, confirm the succession; for that
when the soldiers would have set the diadem on his head at
Jericho, he would not accept of it; but that he would make
abundant requitals, not to the soldiers only, but to the people,
for their alacrity and good-will to him, when the superior lords
[the Romans] should have given him a complete title to the
kingdom; for that it should be his study to appear in all things
better than his father.

2. Upon this the multitude were pleased, and presently made a
trial of what he intended, by asking great things of him; for
some made a clamor that he would ease them in their taxes;
others, that he would take off the duties upon commodities; and
some, that he would loose those that were in prison; in all which
cases he answered readily to their satisfaction, in order to get
the good-will of the multitude; after which he offered [the
proper] sacrifices, and feasted with his friends. And here it was
that a great many of those that desired innovations came in
crowds towards the evening, and began then to mourn on their own
account, when the public mourning for the king was over. These
lamented those that were put to death by Herod, because they had
cut down the golden eagle that had been over the gate of the
temple. Nor was this mourning of a private nature, but the
lamentations were very great, the mourning solemn, and the
weeping such as was loudly heard all over the city, as being for
those men who had perished for the laws of their country, and for
the temple. They cried out that a punishment ought to be
inflicted for these men upon those that were honored by Herod;
and that, in the first place, the man whom he had made high
priest should be deprived; and that it was fit to choose a person
of greater piety and purity than he was.

3. At these clamors Archelaus was provoked, but restrained
himself from taking vengeance on the authors, on account of the
haste he was in of going to Rome, as fearing lest, upon his
making war on the multitude, such an action might detain him at
home. Accordingly, he made trial to quiet the innovators by
persuasion, rather than by force, and sent his general in a
private way to them, and by him exhorted them to be quiet. But
the seditious threw stones at him, and drove him away, as he came
into the temple, and before he could say any thing to them. The
like treatment they showed to others, who came to them after him,
many of which were sent by Archelaus, in order to reduce them to
sobriety, and these answered still on all occasions after a
passionate manner; and it openly appeared that they would not be
quiet, if their numbers were but considerable. And indeed, at the
feast of unleavened bread, which was now at hand, and is by the
Jews called the Passover, and used to he celebrated with a great
number of sacrifices, an innumerable multitude of the people came
out of the country to worship; some of these stood in the temple
bewailing the Rabbins [that had been put to death], and procured
their sustenance by begging, in order to support their sedition.
At this Archclaus was aftrighted, and privately sent a tribune,
with his cohort of soldiers, upon them, before the disease should
spread over the whole multitude, and gave orders that they should
constrain those that began the tumult, by force, to be quiet. At
these the whole multitude were irritated, and threw stones at
many of the soldiers, and killed them; but the tribune fled away
wounded, and had much ado to escape so. After which they betook
themselves to their sacrifices, as if they had done no mischief;
nor did it appear to Archelaus that the multitude could be
restrained without bloodshed; so he sent his whole army upon
them, the footmen in great multitudes, by the way of the city,
and the horsemen by the way of the plain, who, falling upon them
on the sudden, as they were offering their sacrifices, destroyed
about three thousand of them; but the rest of the multitude were
dispersed upon the adjoining mountains: these were followed by
Archelaus's heralds, who commanded every one to retire to their
own homes, whither they all went, and left the festival.

CHAPTER 2.

Archelaus Goes To Rome With A Great Number Of His Kindred. He Is
There Accused Before Caesar By Antipater; But Is Superior To His
Accusers In Judgment By The Means Of That Defense Which Nicolaus
Made For Him.

1. Archelaus went down now to the sea-side, with his mother and
his friends, Poplas, and Ptolemy, and Nicolaus, and left behind
him Philip, to be his steward in the palace, and to take care of
his domestic affairs. Salome went also along with him with her
sons, as did also the king's brethren and sons-in-law. These, in
appearance, went to give him all the assistance they were able,
in order to secure his succession, but in reality to accuse him
for his breach of the laws by what he had done at the temple.
2. But as they were come to Cesarea, Sabinus, the procurator of
Syria, met them; he was going up to Judea, to secure Herod's
effects; but Varus, [president of Syria,] who was come thither,
restrained him from going any farther. This Varus Archelaus had
sent for, by the earnest entreaty of Ptolemy. At this time,
indeed, Sabinus, to gratify Varus, neither went to the citadels,
nor did he shut up the treasuries where his father's money was
laid up, but promised that he would lie still, until Caesar
should have taken cognizance of the affair. So he abode at
Cesarea; but as soon as those that were his hinderance were gone,
when Varus was gone to Antioch, and Archclaus was sailed to Rome,
he immediately went on to Jerusalem, and seized upon the palace.
And when he had called for the governors of the citadels, and the
stewards [of the king's private affairs], he tried to sift out
the accounts of the money, and to take possession of the
citadels. But the governors of those citadels were not unmindful
of the commands laid upon them by Archelaus, and continued to
guard them, and said the custody of them rather belonged to
Caesar than to Archelaus.

3. In the mean time, Antipas went also to Rome, to strive for the
kingdom, and to insist that the former testament, wherein he was
named to be king, was valid before the latter testament. Salome
had also promised to assist him, as had many of Archelaus's
kindred, who sailed along with Archelaus himself also. He also
carried along with him his mother, and Ptolemy, the brother of
Nicolaus, who seemed one of great weight, on account of the great
trust Herod put in him, he having been one of his most honored
friends. However, Antipas depended chiefly upon Ireneus, the
orator; upon whose authority he had rejected such as advised him
to yield to Archelaus, because he was his elder brother, and
because the second testament gave the kingdom to him. The
inclinations also of all Archelaus's kindred, who hated him, were
removed to Antipas, when they came to Rome; although in the first
place every one rather desired to live under their own laws
[without a king], and to be under a Roman governor; but if they
should fail in that point, these desired that Antipas might be
their king.

4. Sabinus did also afford these his assistance to the same
purpose by letters he sent, wherein he accused Archelaus before
Caesar, and highly commended Antipas. Salome also, and those with
her, put the crimes which they accused Archelaus of in order, and
put them into Caesar's hands; and after they had done that,
Archelaus wrote down the reasons of his claim, and, by Ptolemy,
sent in his father's ring, and his father's accounts. And when
Caesar had maturely weighed by himself what both had to allege
for themselves, as also had considered of the great burden of the
kingdom, and largeness of the revenues, and withal the number of
the children Herod had left behind him, and had moreover read the
letters he had received from Varus and Sabinus on this occasion,
he assembled the principal persons among the Romans together, (in
which assembly Caius, the son of Agrippa, and his daughter
Julias, but by himself adopted for his own son, sat in the first
seat,) and gave the pleaders leave to speak.

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38