1. I Suppose that by my books of the Antiquity of the Jews, most
excellent Epaphroditus, (2) have made it evident to those who peruse
them, that our Jewish nation is of very great antiquity, and had a
distinct subsistence of its own originally; as also, I have therein
declared how we came to inhabit this country wherein we now live.
Those Antiquities contain the history of five thousand years, and
are taken out of our sacred books, but are translated by me into the
Greek tongue. However, since I observe a considerable number of
people giving ear to the reproaches that are laid against us by
those who bear ill-will to us, and will not believe what I have
written concerning the antiquity of our nation, while they take it
for a plain sign that our nation is of a late date, because they are
not so much as vouchsafed a bare mention by the most famous
historiographers among the Grecians. I therefore have thought myself
under an obligation to write somewhat briefly about these subjects,
in order to convict those that reproach us of spite and voluntary
falsehood, and to correct the ignorance of others, and withal to
instruct all those who are desirous of knowing the truth of what
great antiquity we really are. As for the witnesses whom I shall
produce for the proof of what I say, they shall be such as are
esteemed to be of the greatest reputation for truth, and the most
skillful in the knowledge of all antiquity by the Greeks themselves.
I will also show, that those who have written so reproachfully and
falsely about us are to be convicted by what they have written
themselves to the contrary. I shall also endeavor to give an account
of the reasons why it hath so happened, that there have not been a
great number of Greeks who have made mention of our nation in their
histories. I will, however, bring those Grecians to light who have
not omitted such our history, for the sake of those that either do
not know them, or pretend not to know them already.
2. And now, in the first place, I cannot but greatly wonder at those
men, who suppose that we must attend to none but Grecians, when we
are inquiring about the most ancient facts, and must inform
ourselves of their truth from them only, while we must not believe
ourselves nor other men; for I am convinced that the very reverse is
the truth of the case. I mean this, - if we will not be led by vain
opinions, but will make inquiry after truth from facts themselves;
for they will find that almost all which concerns the Greeks
happened not long ago; nay, one may say, is of yesterday only. I
speak of the building of their cities, the inventions of their arts,
and the description of their laws; and as for their care about the
writing down of their histories, it is very near the last thing they
set about. However, they acknowledge themselves so far, that they
were the Egyptians, the Chaldeans, and the Phoenicians (for I will
not now reckon ourselves among them) that have preserved the
memorials of the most ancient and most lasting traditions of
mankind; for almost all these nations inhabit such countries as are
least subject to destruction from the world about them; and these
also have taken especial care to have nothing omitted of what was
[remarkably] done among them; but their history was esteemed sacred,
and put into public tables, as written by men of the greatest wisdom
they had among them. But as for the place where the Grecians
inhabit, ten thousand destructions have overtaken it, and blotted
out the memory of former actions; so that they were ever beginning a
new way of living, and supposed that every one of them was the
origin of their new state. It was also late, and with difficulty,
that they came to know the letters they now use; for those who would
advance their use of these letters to the greatest antiquity pretend
that they learned them from the Phoenicians and from Cadmus; yet is
nobody able to demonstrate that they have any writing preserved from
that time, neither in their temples, nor in any other public
monuments. This appears, because the time when those lived who went
to the Trojan war, so many years afterward, is in great doubt, and
great inquiry is made, whether the Greeks used their letters at that
time; and the most prevailing opinion, and that nearest the truth,
is, that their present way of using those letters was unknown at
that time. However, there is not any writing which the Greeks agree
to he genuine among them ancienter than Homer’s Poems, who must
plainly he confessed later than the siege of Troy; nay, the report
goes, that even he did not leave his poems in writing, but that
their memory was preserved in songs, and they were put together
afterward, and that this is the reason of such a number of
variations as are found in them. (3) As for those who set themselves
about writing their histories, I mean such as Cadmus of Miletus, and
Acusilaus of Argos, and any others that may be mentioned as
succeeding Acusilaus, they lived but a little while before the
Persian expedition into Greece. But then for those that first
introduced philosophy, and the consideration of things celestial and
divine among them, such as Pherceydes the Syrian, and Pythagoras,
and Thales, all with one consent agree, that they learned what they
knew of the Egyptians and Chaldeans, and wrote but little And these
are the things which are supposed to be the oldest of all among the
Greeks; and they have much ado to believe that the writings ascribed
to those men are genuine.
3. How can it then be other than an absurd thing, for the Greeks to
be so proud, and to vaunt themselves to be the only people that are
acquainted with antiquity, and that have delivered the true accounts
of those early times after an accurate manner? Nay, who is there
that cannot easily gather from the Greek writers themselves, that
they knew but little on any good foundation when they set to write,
but rather wrote their histories from their own conjectures?
Accordingly, they confute one another in their own books to purpose,
and are not ashamed. to give us the most contradictory accounts of
the same things; and I should spend my time to little purpose, if I
should pretend to teach the Greeks that which they know better than
I already, what a great disagreement there is between Hellanicus and
Acusilaus about their genealogies; in how many eases Acusilaus
corrects Hesiod: or after what manner Ephorus demonstrates
Hellanicus to have told lies in the greatest part of his history; as
does Timeus in like manner as to Ephorus, and the succeeding writers
do to Timeus, and all the later writers do to Herodotus (3) nor
could Timeus agree with Antiochus and Philistius, or with Callias,
about the Sicilian History, no more than do the several writers of
the Athide follow one another about the Athenian affairs; nor do the
historians the like, that wrote the Argolics, about the affairs of
the Argives. And now what need I say any more about particular
cities and smaller places, while in the most approved writers of the
expedition of the Persians, and of the actions which were therein
performed, there are so great differences? Nay, Thucydides himself
is accused of some as writing what is false, although he seems to
have given us the exactest history of the affairs of his own time.
(4)
4. As for the occasions of so great disagreement of theirs, there
may be assigned many that are very probable, if any have a mind to
make an inquiry about them; but I ascribe these contradictions
chiefly to two causes, which I will now mention, and still think
what I shall mention in the first place to be the principal of all.
For if we remember that in the beginning the Greeks had taken no
care to have public records of their several transactions preserved,
this must for certain have afforded those that would afterward write
about those ancient transactions the opportunity of making mistakes,
and the power of making lies also; for this original recording of
such ancient transactions hath not only been neglected by the other
states of Greece, but even among the Athenians themselves also, who
pretend to be Aborigines, and to have applied themselves to
learning, there are no such records extant; nay, they say themselves
that the laws of Draco concerning murders, which are now extant in
writing, are the most ancient of their public records; which Draco
yet lived but a little before the tyrant Pisistratus. (5) For as to
the Arcadians, who make such boasts of their antiquity, what need I
speak of them in particular, since it was still later before they
got their letters, and learned them, and that with difficulty also.
(6)
5. There must therefore naturally arise great differences among
writers, when they had no original records to lay for their
foundation, which might at once inform those who had an inclination
to learn, and contradict those that would tell lies. However, we are
to suppose a second occasion besides the former of these
contradictions; it is this: That those who were the most zealous to
write history were not solicitous for the discovery of truth,
although it was very easy for them always to make such a profession;
but their business was to demonstrate that they could write well,
and make an impression upon mankind thereby; and in what manner of
writing they thought they were able to exceed others, to that did
they apply themselves, Some of them betook themselves to the writing
of fabulous narrations; some of them endeavored to please the cities
or the kings, by writing in their commendation; others of them fell
to finding faults with transactions, or with the writers of such
transactions, and thought to make a great figure by so doing. And
indeed these do what is of all things the most contrary to true
history; for it is the great character of true history that all
concerned therein both speak and write the same things; while these
men, by writing differently about the same things, think they shall
be believed to write with the greatest regard to truth. We therefore
[who are Jews] must yield to the Grecian writers as to language and
eloquence of composition; but then we shall give them no such
preference as to the verity of ancient history, and least of all as
to that part which concerns the affairs of our own several
countries.
6. As to the care of writing down the records from the earliest
antiquity among the Egyptians and Babylonians; that the priests were intrusted therewith, and employed a philosophical concern about it;
that they were the Chaldean priests that did so among the
Babylonians; and that the Phoenicians, who were mingled among the
Greeks, did especially make use of their letters, both for the
common affairs of life, and for the delivering down the history of
common transactions, I think I may omit any proof, because all men
allow it so to be. But now as to our forefathers, that they took no
less care about writing such records, (for I will not say they took
greater care than the others I spoke of,) and that they committed
that matter to their high priests and to their prophets, and that
these records have been written all along down to our own times with
the utmost accuracy; nay, if it be not too bold for me to say it,
our history will be so written hereafter; - I shall endeavor briefly
to inform you.
7. For our forefathers did not only appoint the best of these
priests, and those that attended upon the Divine worship, for that
design from the beginning, but made provision that the stock of the
priests should continue unmixed and pure; for he who is partaker of
the priesthood must propagate of a wife of the same nation, without
having any regard to money, or any other dignities; but he is to
make a scrutiny, and take his wife’s genealogy from the ancient
tables, and procure many witnesses to it. (7) And this is our
practice not only in Judea, but wheresoever any body of men of our
nation do live; and even there an exact catalogue of our priests’
marriages is kept; I mean at Egypt and at Babylon, or in any other
place of the rest of the habitable earth, whithersoever our priests
are scattered; for they send to Jerusalem the ancient names of their
parents in writing, as well as those of their remoter ancestors, and
signify who are the witnesses also. But if any war falls out, such
as have fallen out a great many of them already, when Antiochus
Epiphanes made an invasion upon our country, as also when Pompey the
Great and Quintilius Varus did so also, and principally in the wars
that have happened in our own times, those priests that survive them
compose new tables of genealogy out of the old records, and examine
the circumstances of the women that remain; for still they do not
admit of those that have been captives, as suspecting that they had
conversation with some foreigners. But what is the strongest
argument of our exact management in this matter is what I am now
going to say, that we have the names of our high priests from father
to son set down in our records for the interval of two thousand
years; and if any of these have been transgressors of these rules,
they are prohibited to present themselves at the altar, or to be
partakers of any other of our purifications; and this is justly, or
rather necessarily done, because every one is not permitted of his
own accord to be a writer, nor is there any disagreement in what is
written; they being only prophets that have written the original and
earliest accounts of things as they learned them of God himself by
inspiration; and others have written what hath happened in their own
times, and that in a very distinct manner also.
8. For we have not an innumerable multitude of books among us,
disagreeing from and contradicting one another, [as the Greeks
have,] but only twenty-two books, (8) which contain the records of
all the past times; which are justly believed to be divine; and of
them five belong to Moses, which contain his laws and the traditions
of the origin of mankind till his death. This interval of time was
little short of three thousand years; but as to the time from the
death of Moses till the reign of Artaxerxes king of Persia, who
reigned after Xerxes, the prophets, who were after Moses, wrote down
what was done in their times in thirteen books. The remaining four
books contain hymns to God, and precepts for the conduct of human
life. It is true, our history hath been written since Artaxerxes
very particularly, but hath not been esteemed of the like authority
with the former by our forefathers, because there hath not been an
exact succession of prophets since that time; and how firmly we have
given credit to these books of our own nation is evident by what we
do; for during so many ages as have already passed, no one has been
so bold as either to add any thing to them, to take any thing from
them, or to make any change in them; but it is become natural to all
Jews immediately, and from their very birth, to esteem these books
to contain Divine doctrines, and to persist in them, and, if
occasion be willingly to die for them. For it is no new thing for
our captives, many of them in number, and frequently in time, to be
seen to endure racks and deaths of all kinds upon the theatres, that
they may not be obliged to say one word against our laws and the
records that contain them; whereas there are none at all among the
Greeks who would undergo the least harm on that account, no, nor in
case all the writings that are among them were to be destroyed; for
they take them to be such discourses as are framed agreeably to the
inclinations of those that write them; and they have justly the same
opinion of the ancient writers, since they see some of the present
generation bold enough to write about such affairs, wherein they
were not present, nor had concern enough to inform themselves about
them from those that knew them; examples of which may be had in this
late war of ours, where some persons have written histories, and
published them, without having been in the places concerned, or
having been near them when the actions were done; but these men put
a few things together by hearsay, and insolently abuse the world,
and call these writings by the name of Histories.
9. As for myself, I have composed a true history of that whole war,
and of all the particulars that occurred therein, as having been
concerned in all its transactions; for I acted as general of those
among us that are named Galileans, as long as it was possible for us
to make any opposition. I was then seized on by the Romans, and
became a captive. Vespasian also and Titus had me kept under a
guard, and forced me to attend them continually. At the first I was
put into bonds, but was set at liberty afterward, and sent to
accompany Titus when he came from Alexandria to the siege of
Jerusalem; during which time there was nothing done which escaped my
knowledge; for what happened in the Roman camp I saw, and wrote down
carefully; and what informations the deserters brought [out of the
city], I was the only man that understood them. Afterward I got
leisure at Rome; and when all my materials were prepared for that
work, I made use of some persons to assist me in learning the Greek
tongue, and by these means I composed the history of those
transactions. And I was so well assured of the truth of what I
related, that I first of all appealed to those that had the supreme
command in that war, Vespasian and Titus, as witnesses for me, for
to them I presented those books first of all, and after them to many
of the Romans who had been in the war. I also sold them to many of
our own men who understood the Greek philosophy; among whom were
Julius Archelaus, Herod [king of Chalcis], a person of great
gravity, and king Agrippa himself, a person that deserved the
greatest admiration. Now all these men bore their testimony to me,
that I had the strictest regard to truth; who yet would not have
dissembled the matter, nor been silent, if I, out of ignorance, or
out of favor to any side, either had given false colors to actions,
or omitted any of them.
10. There have been indeed some bad men, who have attempted to
calumniate my history, and took it to be a kind of scholastic
performance for the exercise of young men. A strange sort of
accusation and calumny this! since every one that undertakes to
deliver the history of actions truly ought to know them accurately
himself in the first place, as either having been concerned in them
himself, or been informed of them by such as knew them. Now both
these methods of knowledge I may very properly pretend to in the
composition of both my works; for, as I said, I have translated the
Antiquities out of our sacred books; which I easily could do, since
I was a priest by my birth, and have studied that philosophy which
is contained in those writings: and for the History of the War, I
wrote it as having been an actor myself in many of its transactions,
an eye-witness in the greatest part of the rest, and was not
unacquainted with any thing whatsoever that was either said or done
in it. How impudent then must those deserve to be esteemed that
undertake to contradict me about the true state of those affairs!
who, although they pretend to have made use of both the emperors’
own memoirs, yet could not they he acquainted with our affairs who
fought against them.
11. This digression I have been obliged to make out of necessity, as
being desirous to expose the vanity of those that profess to write
histories; and I suppose I have sufficiently declared that this
custom of transmitting down the histories of ancient times hath been
better preserved by those nations which are called Barbarians, than
by the Greeks themselves. I am now willing, in the next place, to
say a few things to those that endeavor to prove that our
constitution is but of late time, for this reason, as they pretend,
that the Greek writers have said nothing about us; after which I
shall produce testimonies for our antiquity out of the writings of
foreigners; I shall also demonstrate that such as cast reproaches
upon our nation do it very unjustly.
12. As for ourselves, therefore, we neither inhabit a maritime
country, nor do we delight in merchandise, nor in such a mixture
with other men as arises from it; but the cities we dwell in are
remote from the sea, and having a fruitful country for our
habitation, we take pains in cultivating that only. Our principal
care of all is this, to educate our children well; and we think it
to be the most necessary business of our whole life to observe the
laws that have been given us, and to keep those rules of piety that
have been delivered down to us. Since, therefore, besides what we
have already taken notice of, we have had a peculiar way of living
of our own, there was no occasion offered us in ancient ages for
intermixing among the Greeks, as they had for mixing among the
Egyptians, by their intercourse of exporting and importing their
several goods; as they also mixed with the Phoenicians, who lived by
the sea-side, by means of their love of lucre in trade and
merchandise. Nor did our forefathers betake themselves, as did some
others, to robbery; nor did they, in order to gain more wealth, fall
into foreign wars, although our country contained many ten thousands
of men of courage sufficient for that purpose. For this reason it
was that the Phoenicians themselves came soon by trading and
navigation to be known to the Grecians, and by their means the
Egyptians became known to the Grecians also, as did all those people
whence the Phoenicians in long voyages over the seas carried wares
to the Grecians. The Medes also and the Persians, when they were
lords of Asia, became well known to them; and this was especially
true of the Persians, who led their armies as far as the other
continent [Europe]. The Thracians were also known to them by the
nearness of their countries, and the Scythians by the means of those
that sailed to Pontus; for it was so in general that all maritime
nations, and those that inhabited near the eastern or western seas,
became most known to those that were desirous to be writers; but
such as had their habitations further from the sea were for the most
part unknown to them which things appear to have happened as to
Europe also, where the city of Rome, that hath this long time been
possessed of so much power, and hath performed such great actions in
war, is yet never mentioned by Herodotus, nor by Thucydides, nor by
any one of their contemporaries; and it was very late, and with
great difficulty, that the Romans became known to the Greeks. Nay,
those that were reckoned the most exact historians (and Ephorus for
one) were so very ignorant of the Gauls and the Spaniards, that he
supposed the Spaniards, who inhabit so great a part of the western
regions of the earth, to be no more than one city. Those historians
also have ventured to describe such customs as were made use of by
them, which they never had either done or said; and the reason why
these writers did not know the truth of their affairs was this, that
they had not any commerce together; but the reason why they wrote
such falsities was this, that they had a mind to appear to know
things which others had not known. How can it then be any wonder, if
our nation was no more known to many of the Greeks, nor had given
them any occasion to mention them in their writings, while they were
so remote from the sea, and had a conduct of life so peculiar to
themselves?
13. Let us now put the case, therefore, that we made use of this
argument concerning the Grecians, in order to prove that their
nation was not ancient, because nothing is said of them in our
records: would not they laugh at us all, and probably give the same
reasons for our silence that I have now alleged, and would produce
their neighbor nations as witnesses to their own antiquity? Now the
very same thing will I endeavor to do; for I will bring the
Egyptians and the Phoenicians as my principal witnesses, because
nobody can complain Of their testimony as false, on account that
they are known to have borne the greatest ill-will towards us; I
mean this as to the Egyptians in general all of them, while of the
Phoenicians it is known the Tyrians have been most of all in the
same ill disposition towards us: yet do I confess that I cannot say
the same of the Chaldeans, since our first leaders and ancestors
were derived from them; and they do make mention of us Jews in their
records, on account of the kindred there is between us. Now when I
shall have made my assertions good, so far as concerns the others, I
will demonstrate that some of the Greek writers have made mention of
us Jews also, that those who envy us may not have even this pretense
for contradicting what I have said about our nation.
14. I shall begin with the writings of the Egyptians; not indeed of
those that have written in the Egyptian language, which it is
impossible for me to do. But Manetho was a man who was by birth an
Egyptian, yet had he made himself master of the Greek learning, as
is very evident; for he wrote the history of his own country in the
Greek tongue, by translating it, as he saith himself, out of their
sacred records; he also finds great fault with Herodotus for his
ignorance and false relations of Egyptian affairs. Now this Manetho,
in the second book of his Egyptian History, writes concerning us in
the following manner. I will set down his very words, as if I were
to bring the very man himself into a court for a witness: “There was
a king of ours whose name was Timaus. Under him it came to pass, I
know not how, that God was averse to us, and there came, after a
surprising manner, men of ignoble birth out of the eastern parts,
and had boldness enough to make an expedition into our country, and
with ease subdued it by force, yet without our hazarding a battle
with them. So when they had gotten those that governed us under
their power, they afterwards burnt down our cities, and demolished
the temples of the gods, and used all the inhabitants after a most
barbarous manner; nay, some they slew, and led their children and
their wives into slavery. At length they made one of themselves
king, whose name was Salatis; he also lived at Memphis, and made
both the upper and lower regions pay tribute, and left garrisons in
places that were the most proper for them. He chiefly aimed to
secure the eastern parts, as fore-seeing that the Assyrians, who had
then the greatest power, would be desirous of that kingdom, and
invade them; and as he found in the Saite Nomos, [Sethroite,] a city
very proper for this purpose, and which lay upon the Bubastic
channel, but with regard to a certain theologic notion was called
Avaris, this he rebuilt, and made very strong by the walls he built
about it, and by a most numerous garrison of two hundred and forty
thousand armed men whom he put into it to keep it. Thither Salatis
came in summer time, partly to gather his corn, and pay his soldiers
their wages, and partly to exercise his armed men, and thereby to
terrify foreigners. When this man had reigned thirteen years, after
him reigned another, whose name was Beon, for forty-four years;
after him reigned another, called Apachnas, thirty-six years and
seven months; after him Apophis reigned sixty-one years, and then
Janins fifty years and one month; after all these reigned Assis
forty-nine years and two months. And these six were the first rulers
among them, who were all along making war with the Egyptians, and
were very desirous gradually to destroy them to the very roots. This
whole nation was styled Hycsos, that is, Shepherd-kings: for the
first syllable Hyc, according to the sacred dialect, denotes a king,
as is Sos a shepherd; but this according to the ordinary dialect;
and of these is compounded Hycsos: but some say that these people
were Arabians.” Now in another copy it is said that this word does
not denote Kings, but, on the contrary, denotes Captive Shepherds,
and this on account of the particle Hyc; for that Hyc, with the
aspiration, in the Egyptian tongue again denotes Shepherds, and that
expressly also; and this to me seems the more probable opinion, and
more agreeable to ancient history. [But Manetho goes on]: “These
people, whom we have before named kings, and called shepherds also,
and their descendants,” as he says, “kept possession of Egypt five
hundred and eleven years.” After these, he says, “That the kings of
Thebais and the other parts of Egypt made an insurrection against
the shepherds, and that there a terrible and long war was made
between them.” He says further, “That under a king, whose name was
Alisphragmuthosis, the shepherds were subdued by him, and were
indeed driven out of other parts of Egypt, but were shut up in a
place that contained ten thousand acres; this place was named Avaris.”
Manetho says, “That the shepherds built a wall round all this place,
which was a large and a strong wall, and this in order to keep all
their possessions and their prey within a place of strength, but
that Thummosis the son of Alisphragmuthosis made an attempt to take
them by force and by siege, with four hundred and eighty thousand
men to lie rotund about them, but that, upon his despair of taking
the place by that siege, they came to a composition with them, that
they should leave Egypt, and go, without any harm to be done to
them, whithersoever they would; and that, after this composition was
made, they went away with their whole families and effects, not
fewer in number than two hundred and forty thousand, and took their
journey from Egypt, through the wilderness, for Syria; but that as
they were in fear of the Assyrians, who had then the dominion over
Asia, they built a city in that country which is now called Judea,
and that large enough to contain this great number of men, and
called it Jerusalem. (9) Now Manetho, in another book of his, says,
“That this nation, thus called Shepherds, were also called Captives,
in their sacred books.” And this account of his is the truth; for
feeding of sheep was the employment of our forefathers in the most
ancient ages (10) and as they led such a wandering life in feeding
sheep, they were called Shepherds. Nor was it without reason that
they were called Captives by the Egyptians, since one of our
ancestors, Joseph, told the king of Egypt that he was a captive, and
afterward sent for his brethren into Egypt by the king’s permission.
But as for these matters, I shall make a more exact inquiry about
them elsewhere. (11)
15. But now I shall produce the Egyptians as witnesses to the
antiquity of our nation. I shall therefore here bring in Manetho
again, and what he writes as to the order of the times in this case;
and thus he speaks: “When this people or shepherds were gone out of
Egypt to Jerusalem, Tethtoosis the king of Egypt, who drove them
out, reigned afterward twenty-five years and four months, and then
died; after him his son Chebron took the kingdom for thirteen years;
after whom came Amenophis, for twenty years and seven months; then
came his sister Amesses, for twenty-one years and nine months; after
her came Mephres, for twelve years and nine months; after him was
Mephramuthosis, for twenty-five years and ten months; after him was
Thmosis, for nine years and eight months; after him came Amenophis,
for thirty years and ten months; after him came Orus, for thirty-six
years and five months; then came his daughter Acenchres, for twelve
years and one month; then was her brother Rathotis, for nine years;
then was Acencheres, for twelve years and five months; then came
another Acencheres, for twelve years and three months; after him
Armais, for four years and one month; after him was Ramesses, for
one year and four months; after him came Armesses Miammoun, for
sixty-six years and two months; after him Amenophis, for nineteen
years and six months; after him came Sethosis, and Ramesses, who had
an army of horse, and a naval force. This king appointed his
brother, Armais,, to be his deputy over Egypt.” [In another copy it
stood thus: After him came Sethosis, and Ramesses, two brethren, the
former of whom had a naval force, and in a hostile manner destroyed
those that met him upon the sea; but as he slew Ramesses in no long
time afterward, so he appointed another of his brethren to be his
deputy over Egypt.] He also gave him all the other authority of a
king, but with these only injunctions, that he should not wear the
diadem, nor be injurious to the queen, the mother of his children,
and that he should not meddle with the other concubines of the king;
while he made an expedition against Cyprus, and Phoenicia, and
besides against the Assyrians and the Medes. He then subdued them
all, some by his arms, some without fighting, and some by the terror
of his great army; and being puffed up by the great successes he had
had, he went on still the more boldly, and overthrew the cities and
countries that lay in the eastern parts. But after some considerable
time, Armais, who was left in Egypt, did all those very things, by
way of opposition, which his brother had forbid him to do, without
fear; for he used violence to the queen, and continued to make use
of the rest of the concubines, without sparing any of them; nay, at
the persuasion of his friends he put on the diadem, and set up to
oppose his brother. But then he who was set over the priests of
Egypt wrote letters to Sethosis, and informed him of all that had
happened, and how his brother had set up to oppose him: he therefore
returned back to Pelusium immediately, and recovered his kingdom
again. The country also was called from his name Egypt; for Manetho
says, that Sethosis was himself called Egyptus, as was his brother
Armais called Danaus.”
16. This is Manetho’s account. And evident it is from the number of
years by him set down belonging to this interval, if they be summed
up together, that these shepherds, as they are here called, who were
no other than our forefathers, were delivered out of Egypt, and came
thence, and inhabited this country, three hundred and ninety-three
years before Danaus came to Argos; although the Argives look upon
him (12) as their most ancient king Manetho, therefore, hears this
testimony to two points of the greatest consequence to our purpose,
and those from the Egyptian records themselves. In the first place,
that we came out of another country into Egypt; and that withal our
deliverance out of it was so ancient in time as to have preceded the
siege of Troy almost a thousand years; but then, as to those things
which Manetbo adds, not from the Egyptian records, but, as he
confesses himself, from some stories of an uncertain original, I
will disprove them hereafter particularly, and shall demonstrate
that they are no better than incredible fables.
17. I will now, therefore, pass from these records, and come to
those that belong to the Phoenicians, and concern our nation, and
shall produce attestations to what I have said out of them. There
are then records among the Tyrians that take in the history of many
years, and these are public writings, and are kept with great
exactness, and include accounts of the facts done among them, and
such as concern their transactions with other nations also, those I
mean which were worth remembering. Therein it was recorded that the
temple was built by king Solomon at Jerusalem, one hundred
forty-three years and eight months before the Tyrians built
Carthage; and in their annals the building of our temple is related;
for Hirom, the king of Tyre, was the friend of Solomon our king, and
had such friendship transmitted down to him from his forefathers. He
thereupon was ambitious to contribute to the splendor of this
edifice of Solomon, and made him a present of one hundred and twenty
talents of gold. He also cut down the most excellent timber out of
that mountain which is called Libanus, and sent it to him for
adorning its roof. Solomon also not only made him many other
presents, by way of requital, but gave him a country in Galilee
also, that was called Chabulon. (13) But there was another passion,
a philosophic inclination of theirs, which cemented the friendship
that was betwixt them; for they sent mutual problems to one another,
with a desire to have them unriddled by each other; wherein Solomon
was superior to Hirom, as he was wiser than he in other respects:
and many of the epistles that passed between them are still
preserved among the Tyrians. Now, that this may not depend on my
bare word, I will produce for a witness Dius, one that is believed
to have written the Phoenician History after an accurate manner.
This Dius, therefore, writes thus, in his Histories of the
Phoenicians:
“Upon the death of Abibalus, his son Hirom took the kingdom. This
king raised banks at the eastern parts of the city, and enlarged it;
he also joined the temple of Jupiter Olympius, which stood before in
an island by itself, to the city, by raising a causeway between
them, and adorned that temple with donations of gold. He moreover
went up to Libanus, and had timber cut down for the building of
temples. They say further, that Solomon, when he was king of
Jerusalem, sent problems to Hirom to be solved, and desired he would
send others back for him to solve, and that he who could not solve
the problems proposed to him should pay money to him that solved
them. And when Hirom had agreed to the proposals, but was not able
to solve the problems, he was obliged to pay a great deal of money,
as a penalty for the same. As also they relate, that oneœAbdemon, a
man of Tyre, did solve the problems, and propose others which
Solomon could not solve, upon which he was obliged to repay a great
deal of money to Hirom.” These things are attested to by Dius, and
confirm what we have said upon the same subjects before.
18. And now I shall add Menander the Ephesian, as an additional
witness. This Menander wrote the Acts that were done both by the
Greeks and Barbarians, under every one of the Tyrian kings, and had
taken much pains to learn their history out of their own records.
Now when he was writing about those kings that had reigned at Tyre,
he came to Hirom, and says thus: “Upon the death of Abibalus, his
son Hirom took the kingdom; he lived fifty-three years, and reigned
thirty-four. He raised a bank on that called the Broad Place, and
dedicated that golden pillar which is in Jupiter’s temple; he also
went and cut down timber from the mountain called Libanus, and got
timber Of cedar for the roofs of the temples. He also pulled down
the old temples, and built new ones; besides this, he consecrated
the temples of Hercules and of Astarte. He first built Hercules’s
temple in the month Peritus, and that of Astarte when he made his
expedition against the Tityans, who would not pay him their tribute;
and when he had subdued them to himself, he returned home. Under
this king there was a younger son of Abdemon, who mastered the
problems which Solomon king of Jerusalem had recommended to be
solved.” Now the time from this king to the building of Carthage is
thus calculated: “Upon the death of Hirom, Baleazarus his son took
the kingdom; he lived forty-three years, and reigned seven years:
after him succeeded his son Abdastartus; he lived twenty-nine years,
and reigned nine years. Now four sons of his nurse plotted against
him and slew him, the eldest of whom reigned twelve years: after
them came Astartus, the son of Deleastartus; he lived fifty-four
years, and reigned twelve years: after him came his brother Aserymus;
he lived fifty-four years, and reigned nine years: he was slain by
his brother Pheles, who took the kingdom and reigned but eight
months, though he lived fifty years: he was slain by Ithobalus, the
priest of Astarte, who reigned thirty-two years, and lived
sixty-eight years: he was succeeded by his son Badezorus, who lived
forty-five years, and reigned six years: he was succeeded by
Matgenus his son; he lived thirty-two years, and reigned nine years:
Pygmalion succeeded him; he lived fifty-six years, and reigned
forty-seven years. Now in the seventh year of his reign, his sister
fled away from him, and built the city Carthage in Libya.” So the
whole time from the reign of Hirom, till the building of Carthage,
amounts to the sum of one hundred fifty-five years and eight months.
Since then the temple was built at Jerusalem in the twelfth year of
the reign of Hirom, there were from the building of the temple,
until the building of Carthage, one hundred forty-three years and
eight months. Wherefore, what occasion is there for alleging any
more testimonies out of the Phoenician histories [on the behalf of
our nation], since what I have said is so thoroughly confirmed
already? and to be sure our ancestors came into this country long
before the building of the temple; for it was not till we had gotten
possession of the whole land by war that we built our temple. And
this is the point that I have clearly proved out of our sacred
writings in my Antiquities.
19. I will now relate what hath been written concerning us in the Chaldean histories, which records have a great agreement with our
books in oilier things also. Berosus shall be witness to what I say:
he was by birth a Chaldean, well known by the learned, on account of
his publication of the Chaldean books of astronomy and philosophy
among the Greeks. This Berosus, therefore, following the most
ancient records of that nation, gives us a history of the deluge of
waters that then happened, and of the destruction of mankind
thereby, and agrees with Moses’s narration thereof. He also gives us
an account of that ark wherein Noah, the origin of our race, was
preserved, when it was brought to the highest part of the Armenian
mountains; after which he gives us a catalogue of the posterity of
Noah, and adds the years of their chronology, and at length comes
down to Nabolassar, who was king of Babylon, and of the Chaldeans.
And when he was relating the acts of this king, he describes to us
how he sent his son Nabuchodonosor against Egypt, and against our
land, with a great army, upon his being informed that they had
revolted from him; and how, by that means, he subdued them all, and
set our temple that was at Jerusalem on fire; nay, and removed our
people entirely out of their own country, and transferred them to
Babylon; when it so happened that our city was desolate during the
interval of seventy years, until the days of Cyrus king of Persia.
He then says, “That this Babylonian king conquered Egypt, and Syria,
and Phoenicia, and Arabia, and exceeded in his exploits all that had
reigned before him in Babylon and Chaldea.” A little after which
Berosus subjoins what follows in his History of Ancient Times. I
will set down Berosus’s own accounts, which are these: “When
Nabolassar, father of Nabuchodonosor, heard that the governor whom
he had set over Egypt, and over the parts of Celesyria and
Phoenicia, had revolted from him, he was not able to bear it any
longer; but committing certain parts of his army to his son
Nabuchodonosor, who was then but young, he sent him against the
rebel: Nabuchodonosor joined battle with him, and conquered him, and
reduced the country under his dominion again. Now it so fell out
that his father Nabolassar fell into a distemper at this time, and
died in the city of Babylon, after he had reigned twenty-nine years.
But as he understood, in a little time, that his father Nabolassar
was dead, he set the affairs of Egypt and the other countries in
order, and committed the captives he had taken from the Jews, and
Phoenicians, and Syrians, and of the nations belonging to Egypt, to
some of his friends, that they might conduct that part of the forces
that had on heavy armor, with the rest of his baggage, to Babylonia;
while he went in haste, having but a few with him, over the desert
to Babylon; whither, when he was come, he found the public affairs
had been managed by the Chaldeans, and that the principal person
among them had preserved the kingdom for him. Accordingly, he now
entirely obtained all his father’s dominions. He then came, and
ordered the captives to be placed as colonies in the most proper
places of Babylonia; but for himself, he adorned the temple of Belus,
and the other temples, after an elegant manner, out of the spoils he
had taken in this war. He also rebuilt the old city, and added
another to it on the outside, and so far restored Babylon, that none
who should besiege it afterwards might have it in their power to
divert the river, so as to facilitate an entrance into it; and this
he did by building three walls about the inner city, and three about
the outer. Some of these walls he built of burnt brick and bitumen,
and some of brick only. So when he had thus fortified the city with
walls, after an excellent manner, and had adorned the gates
magnificently, he added a new palace to that which his father had
dwelt in, and this close by it also, and that more eminent in its
height, and in its great splendor. It would perhaps require too long
a narration, if any one were to describe it. However, as
prodigiously large and as magnificent as it was, it was finished in
fifteen days. Now in this palace he erected very high walks,
supported by stone pillars, and by planting what was called a
pensile paradise, and replenishing it with all sorts of trees, he
rendered the prospect an exact resemblance of a mountainous country.
This he did to please his queen, because she had been brought up in
Media, and was fond of a mountainous situation.”
20. This is what Berosus relates concerning the forementioned king,
as he relates many other things about him also in the third book of
his Chaldean History; wherein he complains of the Grecian writers
for supposing, without any foundation, that Babylon was built by
Semiramis, (14) queen of Assyria, and for her false pretense to
those wonderful edifices thereto buildings at Babylon, do no way
contradict those ancient and relating, as if they were her own
workmanship; as indeed in these affairs the Chaldean History cannot
but be the most credible. Moreover, we meet with a confirmation of
what Berosus says in the archives of the Phoenicians, concerning
this king Nabuchodonosor, that he conquered all Syria and Phoenicia;
in which case Philostratus agrees with the others in that history
which he composed, where he mentions the siege of Tyre; as does
Megasthenes also, in the fourth book of his Indian History, wherein
he pretends to prove that the forementioned king of the Babylonians
was superior to Hercules in strength and the greatness of his
exploits; for he says that he conquered a great part of Libya, and
conquered Iberia also. Now as to what I have said before about the
temple at Jerusalem, that it was fought against by the Babylonians,
and burnt by them, but was opened again when Cyrus had taken the
kingdom of Asia, shall now be demonstrated from what Berosus adds
further upon that head; for thus he says in his third book:
“Nabuchodonosor, after he had begun to build the forementioned wall,
fell sick, and departed this life, when he had reigned forty-three
years; whereupon his son Evilmerodach obtained the kingdom. He
governed public affairs after an illegal and impure manner, and had
a plot laid against him by Neriglissoor, his sister’s husband, and
was slain by him when he had reigned but two years. After he was
slain, Neriglissoor, the person who plotted against him, succeeded
him in the kingdom, and reigned four years; his son Laborosoarchod
obtained the kingdom, though he was but a child, and kept it nine
mouths; but by reason of the very ill temper and ill practices he
exhibited to the world, a plot was laid against him also by his
friends, and he was tormented to death. After his death, the
conspirators got together, and by common consent put the crown upon
the head of Nabonnedus, a man of Babylon, and one who belonged to
that insurrection. In his reign it was that the walls of the city of
Babylon were curiously built with burnt brick and bitumen; but when
he was come to the seventeenth year of his reign, Cyrus came out of
Persia with a great army; and having already conquered all the rest
of Asia, he came hastily to Babylonia. When Nabonnedus perceived he
was coming to attack him, he met him with his forces, and joining
battle with him was beaten, and fled away with a few of his troops
with him, and was shut up within the city Borsippus. Hereupon Cyrus
took Babylon, and gave order that the outer walls of the city should
be demolished, because the city had proved very troublesome to him,
and cost him a great deal of pains to take it. He then marched away
to Borsippus, to besiege Nabonnedus; but as Nabonnedus did not
sustain the siege, but delivered himself into his hands, he was at
first kindly used by Cyrus, who gave him Carmania, as a place for
him to inhabit in, but sent him out of Babylonia. Accordingly
Nabonnedus spent the rest of his time in that country, and there
died.”
21. These accounts agree with the true histories in our books; for
in them it is written that Nebuchadnezzar, in the eighteenth year of
his reign, laid our temple desolate, and so it lay in that state of
obscurity for fifty years; but that in the second year of the reign
of Cyrus its foundations were laid, and it was finished again in the
second year of Darius. I will now add the records of the
Phoenicians; for it will not be superfluous to give the reader
demonstrations more than enough on this occasion. In them we have
this enumeration of the times of their several kings:
“Nabuchodonosor besieged Tyre for thirteen years in the days of
Ithobal, their king; after him reigned Baal, ten years; after him
were judges appointed, who judged the people:
Ecnibalus, the son of Baslacus, two months; Chelbes, the son of
Abdeus, ten months; Abbar, the high priest, three months;
Mitgonus and Gerastratus, the sons of Abdelemus, were judges six
years; after whom Balatorus reigned one year; after his death they
sent and fetched Merbalus from Babylon, who reigned four years;
after his death they sent for his brother Hirom, who reigned twenty
years. Under his reign Cyrus became king of Persia.” So that the
whole interval is fifty-four years besides three months; for in the
seventh year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar he began to besiege Tyre,
and Cyrus the Persian took the kingdom in the fourteenth year of
Hirom. So that the records of the Chaldeans and Tyrians agree with
our writings about this temple; and the testimonies here produced
are an indisputable and undeniable attestation to the antiquity of
our nation. And I suppose that what I have already said may be
sufficient to such as are not very contentious.
22. But now it is proper to satisfy the inquiry of those that
disbelieve the records of barbarians, and think none but Greeks to
be worthy of credit, and to produce many of these very Greeks who
were acquainted with our nation, and to set before them such as upon
occasion have made mention of us in their own writings. Pythagoras,
therefore, of Samos, lived in very ancient times, and was esteemed a
person superior to all philosophers in wisdom and piety towards God.
Now it is plain that he did not only know our doctrines, but was in
very great measure a follower and admirer of them. There is not
indeed extant any writing that is owned for his (15) but many there
are who have written his history, of whom Hermippus is the most
celebrated, who was a person very inquisitive into all sorts of
history. Now this Hermippus, in his first book concerning
Pythagoras, speaks thus: “That Pythagoras, upon the death of one of
his associates, whose name was Calliphon, a Crotonlate by birth,
affirmed that this man’s soul conversed with him both night and day,
and enjoined him not to pass over a place where an ass had fallen
down; as also not to drink of such waters as caused thirst again;
and to abstain from all sorts of reproaches.” After which he adds
thus: “This he did and said in imitation of the doctrines of the
Jews and Thracians, which he transferred into his own philosophy.”
For it is very truly affirmed of this Pythagoras, that he took a
great many of the laws of the Jews into his own philosophy. Nor was
our nation unknown of old to several of the Grecian cities, and
indeed was thought worthy of imitation by some of them. This is
declared by Theophrastus, in his writings concerning laws; for he
says that “the laws of the Tyrians forbid men to swear foreign
oaths.” Among which he enumerates some others, and particularly that
called Corban: which oath can only be found among the Jews, and
declares what a man may call “A thing devoted to God.” Nor indeed
was Herodotus of Halicarnassus unacquainted with our nation, but
mentions it after a way of his own, when he saith thus, in the
second book concerning the Colchians. His words are these: “The only
people who were circumcised in their privy members originally, were
the Colchians, the Egyptians, and the Ethiopians; but the
Phoenicians and those Syrians that are in Palestine confess that
they learned it from the Egyptians. And for those Syrians who live
about the rivers Thermodon and Parthenius, and their neighbors the
Macrones, they say they have lately learned it from the Colchians;
for these are the only people that are circumcised among mankind,
and appear to have done the very same thing with the Egyptians. But
as for the Egyptians and Ethiopians themselves, I am not able to say
which of them received it from the other.” This therefore is what
Herodotus says, that “the Syrians that are in Palestine are
circumcised.” But there are no inhabitants of Palestine that are
circumcised excepting the Jews; and therefore it must be his
knowledge of them that enabled him to speak so much concerning them.
Cherilus also, a still ancienter writer, and a poet, (16) makes
mention of our nation, and informs us that it came to the assistance
of king Xerxes, in his expedition against Greece. For in his
enumeration of all those nations, he last of all inserts ours among
the rest, when he says,” At the last there passed over a people,
wonderful to be beheld; for they spake the Phoenician tongue with
their mouths; they dwelt in the Solymean mountains, near a broad
lake: their heads were sooty; they had round rasures on them; their
heads and faces were like nasty horse-heads also, that had been
hardened in the smoke.” I think, therefore, that it is evident to
every body that Cherilus means us, because the Solymean mountains
are in our country, wherein we inhabit, as is also the lake called
Asphaltitis; for this is a broader and larger lake than any other
that is in Syria: and thus does Cherilus make mention of us. But now
that not only the lowest sort of the Grecians, but those that are
had in the greatest admiration for their philosophic improvements
among them, did not only know the Jews, but when they lighted upon
any of them, admired them also, it is easy for any one to know. For
Clearchus, who was the scholar of Aristotle, and inferior to no one
of the Peripatetics whomsoever, in his first book concerning sleep,
says that “Aristotle his master related what follows of a Jew,” and
sets down Aristotle’s own discourse with him. The account is this,
as written down by him: “Now, for a great part of what this Jew
said, it would be too long to recite it; but what includes in it
both wonder and philosophy it may not be amiss to discourse of. Now,
that I may be plain with thee, Hyperochides, I shall herein seem to
thee to relate wonders, and what will resemble dreams themselves.
Hereupon Hyperochides answered modestly, and said, For that very
reason it is that all of us are very desirous of hearing what thou
art going to say. Then replied Aristotle, For this cause it will be
the best way to imitate that rule of the Rhetoricians, which
requires us first to give an account of the man, and of what nation
he was, that so we may not contradict our master’s directions. Then
said Hyperochides, Go on, if it so pleases thee. This man then,
[answered Aristotle,] was by birth a Jew, and came from Celesyria;
these Jews are derived from the Indian philosophers; they are named
by the Indians Calami, and by the Syrians Judaei, and took their
name from the country they inhabit, which is called Judea; but for
the name of their city, it is a very awkward one, for they call it
Jerusalem. Now this man, when he was hospitably treated by a great
many, came down from the upper country to the places near the sea,
and became a Grecian, not only in his language, but in his soul
also; insomuch that when we ourselves happened to be in Asia about
the same places whither he came, he conversed with us, and with
other philosophical persons, and made a trial of our skill in
philosophy; and as he had lived with many learned men, he
communicated to us more information than he received from us.” This
is Aristotle’s account of the matter, as given us by Clearchus;
which Aristotle discoursed also particularly of the great and
wonderful fortitude of this Jew in his diet, and continent way of
living, as those that please may learn more about him from
Clearchus’s book itself; for I avoid setting down any more than is
sufficient for my purpose. Now Clearchus said this by way of
digression, for his main design was of another nature. But for
Hecateus of Abdera, who was both a philosopher, and one very useful
ill an active life, he was contemporary with king Alexander in his
youth, and afterward was with Ptolemy, the son of Lagus; he did not
write about the Jewish affairs by the by only, but composed an
entire book concerning the Jews themselves; out of which book I am
willing to run over a few things, of which I have been treating by
way of epitome. And, in the first place, I will demonstrate the time
when this Hecateus lived; for he mentions the fight that was between
Ptolemy and Demetrius about Gaza, which was fought in the eleventh
year after the death of Alexander, and in the hundred and
seventeenth olympiad, as Castor says in his history. For when he had
set down this olympiad, he says further, that “in this olympiad
Ptolemy, the son of Lagus, beat in battle Demetrius, the son of
Antigonus, who was named Poliorcetes, at Gaza.” Now, it is agreed by
all, that Alexander died in the hundred and fourteenth olympiad; it
is therefore evident that our nation flourished in his time, and in
the time of Alexander. Again, Hecateus says to the same purpose, as
follows: “Ptolemy got possession of the places in Syria after that
battle at Gaza; and many, when they heard of Ptolemy’s moderation
and humanity, went along with him to Egypt, and were willing to
assist him in his affairs; one of whom (Hecateus says) was Hezekiah
(17) the high priest of the Jews; a man of about sixty-six years of
age, and in great dignity among his own people. He was a very
sensible man, and could speak very movingly, and was very skillful
in the management of affairs, if any other man ever were so;
although, as he says, all the priests of the Jews took tithes of the
products of the earth, and managed public affairs, and were in
number not above fifteen hundred at the most.” Hecateus mentions
this Hezekiah a second time, and says, that “as he was possessed of
so great a dignity, and was become familiar with us, so did he take
certain of those that were with him, and explained to them all the
circumstances of their people; for he had all their habitations and
polity down in writing.” Moreover, Hecateus declares again, “what
regard we have for our laws, and that we resolve to endure any thing
rather than transgress them, because we think it right for us to do
so.” Whereupon he adds, that “although they are in a bad reputation
among their neighbors, and among all those that come to them, and
have been often treated injuriously by the kings and governors of
Persia, yet can they not be dissuaded from acting what they think
best; but that when they are stripped on this account, and have
torments inflicted upon them, and they are brought to the most
terrible kinds of death, they meet them after an extraordinary
manner, beyond all other people, and will not renounce the religion
of their forefathers.” Hecateus also produces demonstrations not a
few of this their resolute tenaciousness of their laws, when he
speaks thus: “Alexander was once at Babylon, and had an intention to
rebuild the temple of Belus that was fallen to decay, and in order
thereto, he commanded all his soldiers in general to bring earth
thither. But the Jews, and they only, would not comply with that
command; nay, they underwent stripes and great losses of what they
had on this account, till the king forgave them, and permitted them
to live in quiet.” He adds further, that “when the Macedonians came
to them into that country, and demolished the [old] temples and the
altars, they assisted them in demolishing them all (18) but [for not
assisting them in rebuilding them] they either underwent losses, or
sometimes obtained forgiveness.” He adds further, that “these men
deserve to be admired on that account.” He also speaks of the mighty
populousness of our nation, and says that “the Persians formerly
carried away many ten thousands of our people to Babylon, as also
that not a few ten thousands were removed after Alexander’s death
into Egypt and Phoenicia, by reason of the sedition that was arisen
in Syria.” The same person takes notice in his history, how large
the country is which we inhabit, as well as of its excellent
character, and says, that “the land in which the Jews inhabit
contains three millions of arourae, (19) and is generally of a most
excellent and most fruitful soil; nor is Judea of lesser
dimensions.” The same man describe our city Jerusalem also itself as
of a most excellent structure, and very large, and inhabited from
the most ancient times. He also discourses of the multitude of men
in it, and of the construction of our temple, after the following
manner: “There are many strong places and villages (says he) in the
country of Judea; but one strong city there is, about fifty furlongs
in circumference, which is inhabited by a hundred and twenty
thousand men, or thereabouts; they call it Jerusalem. There is about
the middle of the city a wall of stone, whose length is five hundred
feet, and the breadth a hundred cubits, with double cloisters;
wherein there is a square altar, not made of hewn stone, but
composed of white stones gathered together, having each side twenty
cubits long, and its altitude ten cubits. Hard by it is a large
edifice, wherein there is an altar and a candlestick, both of gold,
and in weight two talents: upon these there is a light that is never
extinguished, either by night or by day. There is no image, nor any
thing, nor any donations therein; nothing at all is there planted,
neither grove, nor any thing of that sort. The priests abide therein
both nights and days, performing certain purifications, and drinking
not the least drop of wine while they are in the temple.” Moreover,
he attests that we Jews went as auxiliaries along with king
Alexander, and after him with his successors. I will add further
what he says he learned when he was himself with the same army,
concerning the actions of a man that was a Jew. His words are these:
“As I was myself going to the Red Sea, there followed us a man,
whose name was Mosollam; he was one of the Jewish horsemen who
conducted us; he was a person of great courage, of a strong body,
and by all allowed to be the most skillful archer that was either
among the Greeks or barbarians. Now this man, as people were in
great numbers passing along the road, and a certain augur was
observing an augury by a bird, and requiring them all to stand
still, inquired what they staid for. Hereupon the augur showed him
the bird from whence he took his augury, and told him that if the
bird staid where he was, they ought all to stand still; but that if
he got up, and flew onward, they must go forward; but that if he
flew backward, they must retire again. Mosollam made no reply, but
drew his bow, and shot at the bird, and hit him, and killed him; and
as the augur and some others were very angry, and wished
imprecations upon him, he answered them thus: Why are you so mad as
to take this most unhappy bird into your hands? for how can this
bird give us any true information concerning our march, who could
not foresee how to save himself? for had he been able to foreknow
what was future, he would not have come to this place, but would
have been afraid lest Mosollam the Jew should shoot at him, and kill
him.” But of Hecateus’s testimonies we have said enough; for as to
such as desire to know more of them, they may easily obtain them
from his book itself. However, I shall not think it too much for me
to name Agatharchides, as having made mention of us Jews, though in
way of derision at our simplicity, as he supposes it to be; for when
he was discoursing of the affairs of Stratonice, “how she came out
of Macedonia into Syria, and left her husband Demetrius, while yet
Seleueus would not marry her as she expected, but during the time of
his raising an army at Babylon, stirred up a sedition about Antioch;
and how, after that, the king came back, and upon his taking of
Antioch, she fled to Seleucia, and had it in her power to sail away
immediately yet did she comply with a dream which forbade her so to
do, and so was caught and put to death.” When Agatharehides had
premised this story, and had jested upon Stratonice for her
superstition, he gives a like example of what was reported
concerning us, and writes thus: “There are a people called Jews, and
dwell in a city the strongest of all other cities, which the
inhabitants call Jerusalem, and are accustomed to rest on every
seventh day (20) on which times they make no use of their arms, nor
meddle with husbandry, nor take care of any affairs of life, but
spread out their hands in their holy places, and pray till the
evening. Now it came to pass, that when Ptolemy, the son of Lagus,
came into this city with his army, that these men, in observing this
mad custom of theirs, instead of guarding the city, suffered their
country to submit itself to a bitter lord; and their law was openly
proved to have commanded a foolish practice. (21) This accident
taught all other men but the Jews to disregard such dreams as these
were, and not to follow the like idle suggestions delivered as a
law, when, in such uncertainty of human reasonings, they are at a
loss what they should do.” Now this our procedure seems a ridiculous
thing to Agatharehides, but will appear to such as consider it
without prejudice a great thing, and what deserved a great many
encomiums; I mean, when certain men constantly prefer the
observation of their laws, and their religion towards God, before
the preservation of themselves and their country.
