the antiquities of the jews-1-第321节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


grant　them；　but　did　it　for　the　one　half　of　that　nation　in　a　few
years　afterward；　upon　fresh　complaints　made　by　the　Jews　against
Archelaus；　who；　under　the　more　humble　name　of　an　ethnarch；　which
Augustus　only　would　now　allow　him；　soon　took　upon　him　the
insolence　and　tyranny　of　his　father　king　Herod；　as　the　remaining
part　of　this　book　will　inform　us；　and　particularly　ch。　13。　sect。
2。

（21）　This　is　not　true。　See　Antiq。　B。　XIV。　ch。　9。　sect。　3；　4；　and
ch。　12。　sect。　2；　and　ch。　13。　sect。　1；　2。　Antiq。　B。　XV。　ch。　3。
sect。　5；　and　ch。　10。　sect。　2；　3。　Antiq。　B。　XVI。　ch。　9。　sect。　3。
Since　Josephus　here　informs　us　that　Archelaus　had　one　half　of　the
kingdom　of　Herod；　and　presently　informs　us　further　that
Archelaus's　annual　income；　after　an　abatement　of　one　quarter　for
the　present；　was　600　talents；　we　may　therefore　ga　ther　pretty
nearly　what　was　Herod　the　Great's　yearly　income；　I　mean　about
1600　talents；　which；　at　the　known　value　of　3000　shekels　to　a
talent；　and　about　2s。　10d。　to　a　shekel；　in　the　days　of　Josephus；
see　the　note　on　Antiq。　B。　III。　ch。　8。　sect。　2；　amounts　to　680；000
sterling　per　annum；　which　income；　though　great　in　itself；　bearing
no　proportion　to　his　vast　expenses　every　where　visible　in
Josephus；　and　to　the　vast　sums　he　left　behind　him　in　his　will；
ch。　8。　sect。　1；　and　ch。　12。　sect。　1；　the　rest　must　have　arisen
either　from　his　confiscation　of　those　great　men's　estates　whom　he
put　to　death；　or　made　to　pay　fine　for　the　saving　of　their　lives；
or　from　some　other　heavy　methods　of　oppression　which　such　savage
tyrants　usually　exercise　upon　their　miserable　subjects；　or　rather
from　these　several　methods　not　together；　all　which　yet　seem　very
much　too　small　for　his　expenses；　being　drawn　from　no　larger　a
nation　than　that　of　the　Jews；　which　was　very　populous；　but
without　the　advantage　of　trade　to　bring　them　riches；　so　that　I
cannot　but　strongly　suspect　that　no　small　part　of　this　his　wealth
arose　from　another　source；　I　mean　from　some　vast　sums　he　took　out
of　David's　sepulcher；　but　concealed　from　the　people。　See　the　note
on　Antiq。　B。　VII。　ch。　15。　sect。　3。

（22）　Take　here　a　very　useful　note　of　Grotias；　on　Luke　3：1；　here
quoted　by　Dr。　Hudson：　〃When　Josephus　says　that　some　part　of　the
house　（or　possession）　of　Zenodorus　（i。e。　Abilene）　was　allotted　to
Philip；　he　thereby　declares　that　the　larger　part　of　it　belonged
to　another。　This　other　was　Lysanias；　whom　Luke　mentions；　of　the
posterity　of　that　Lysanias　who　was　possessed　of　the　same　country
called　Abilene；　from　the　city　Abila；　and　by　others　Chalcidene；
from　the　city　Chaleis；　when　the　government　of　the　East　was　under
Antonius；　and　this　after　Ptolemy；　the　son　of　Menneus；　from　which
Lysanias　this　country　came　to　be　commonly　called　the　Country　of
Lysanias；　and　as；　after　the　death　of　the　former　Lyanias；　it　was
called　the　tetrarchy　of　Zenodorus；　so；　after　the　death　of
Zenodorus；　or　when　the　time　for　which　he　hired　it　was　ended。　when
another　Lysanias；　of　the　same　name　with　the　former；　was　possessed
of　the　same　country；　it　began　to　be　called　the　Tetrarchy　of
Lysanias。〃　However；　since　Josephus　elsewhere　（Antiq。　B。　XX。　ch。
7。　sect。　1）　clearly　distinguishes　Abilene　from　Cilalcidcue；
Groius　must　be　here　so　far　mistaken。

（23）　Spanheim　seasonably　observes　here；　that　it　was　forbidden　the
Jews　to　marry　their　brother's　wife　when　she　had　children　by　her
first　husband；　and　that　Zonaras　（cites；　or）　interprets　the　clause
before　us　accordingly。

BOOK　18　FOOTNOTES

（1）　Since　St。　Luke　once；　Acts　5：37；　and　Josephus　four　several
times；　once　here；　sect。　6；　and　B。　XX。　ch。　5。　sect。　2；　Of　the　War；
B。　II。　ch。　8。　sect。　1；　and　ch。　17。　sect。　8；　calls　this　Judas；　who
was　the　pestilent　author　of　that　seditious　doctrine　and　temper
which　brought　the　Jewish　nation　to　utter　destruction；　a　Galilean；
but　here　（sect。　1）　Josephus　calls　him　a　Gaulonite；　of　the　city　of
Gamala；　it　is　a　great　question　where　this　Judas　was　born；　whether
in　Galilee　on　the　west　side；　or　in　Gaulonitis　on　the　east　side；
of　the　river　Jordan；　while；　in　the　place　just　now　cited　out　of
the　Antiquities；　B。　XX。　ch。　5。　sect。　2；　he　is　not　only　called　a
Galilean；　but　it　is　added　to　his　story；　〃as　I　have　signified　in
the　books　that　go　before　these；〃　as　if　he　had　still　called　him　a
Galilean　in　those　Antiquities　before；　as　well　as　in　that
particular　place；　as　Dean　Aldrich　observes；　Of　the　War；　B。　II。
ch。　8。　sect。　1。　Nor　can　one　well　imagine　why　he　should　here　call
him　a　Gaulonite；　when　in　the　6th　sect。　following　here；　as　well　as
twice　Of　the　War；　he　still　calls　him　a　Galilean。　As　for　the　city
of　Gamala；　whence　this　Judas　was　derived；　it　determines　nothing；
since　there　were　two　of　that　name；　the　one　in　Gaulonitis；　the
other　in　Galilee。　See　Reland　on　the　city　or　town　of　that　name。

（2）　It　seems　not　very　improbable　to　me　that　this　Sadduc；　the
Pharisee；　was　the　very　same　man　of　whom　the　Rabbins　speak；　as　the
unhappy；　but　undesigning；　occasion　of　the　impiety　or　infidelity
of　the　Sadducees；　nor　perhaps　had　the　men　this　name　of　Sadducees
till　this　very　time；　though　they　were　a　distinct　sect　long
before。　See　the　note　on　B。　XIII。　ch。　10。　sect　5；　and　Dean
Prideaux；　as　there　quoted。　Nor　do　we；　that　I　know　of；　find　the
least　footsteps　of　such　impiety　or　infidelity　of　these　Sadducees
before　this　time；　the　Recognitions　assuring　us　that　they　began
about　the　days　of　John　the　Baptist；　B。　1。　ch。　54。　See　note　above。

（3）　It　seems　by　what　Josephus　says　here；　and　Philo　himself
elsewhere；　Op。　p。　679；　that　these　Essens　did　not　use　to　go　to　the
Jewish　festivals　at　Jerusalem；　or　to　offer　sacrifices　there；
which　may　be　one　great　occasion　why　they　are　never　mentioned　in
the　ordinary　books　of　the　New　Testament；　though；　in　the
Apostolical　Constitutions；　they　are　mentioned　as　those　that
observed　the　customs　of　their　forefathers；　and　that　without　any
such　ill　character　laid　upon　them　as　is　there　laid　upon　the　other
sects　among　that　people。

（4）　Who　these　Polistae　in　Josephus；　or　in　Strabo。　among　the
Pythagoric　Dacae；　were；　it　is　not　easy　to　determine。　Scaliger
offers　no　improbable　conjecture；　that　some　of　these　Dacae　lived
alone；　like　monks；　in　tents　or　caves；　but　that　others　of　them
lived　together　in　built　cities；　and　thence　were　called　by　such
names　as　implied　the　same。

（5）　We　may　here　take　notice；　as　well　as　in　the　parallel　parts　of
the　books　Of　the　War；　B。　II。　ch。　9。　sect。　1；　that　after　the　death
of　Herod　the　Great；　and　the　succession　of　Archclaus；　Josephus　is
very　brief　in　his　accounts　of　Judea；　till　near　his　own　time。　I
suppose　the　reason　is；　that　after　the　large　history　of　Nicolaus
of　Damascus；　including　the　life　of　Herod；　and　probably　the
succession　and　first　actions　of　his　sons；　he　had　but　few　good
histories　of　those　times　before　him。

（6）　Numbers　19：11…14。

（7）　This　citation　is　now　wanting。

（8）　These　Jews；　as　they　are　here　called；　whose　blood　Pilate　shed
on　this　occasion；　may　very　well　be　those　very　Galilean　Jews；
〃whose　blood　Pilate　had　mingled　with　their　sacrifices；〃　Luke
13：1；　2；　these　tumults　being　usually　excited　at　some　of　the　Jews'
great　festivals；　when　they　slew　abundance　of　sacrifices；　and　the
Galileans　being　commonly　much　more　busy　in　such　tumults　than
those　of　Judea　and　Jerusalem；　as　we　learn　from　the　history　of
Archelaus；　Antiq。　B。　XVII。　ch。　9。　sect。　3　and　ch。　10。　sect。　2；　9；
though；　indeed；　Josephus's　present　copies　say　not　one　word　of
〃those　eighteen　upon　whom　the　tower　in　Siloam　fell；　and　slew
them；〃　which　the　4th　verse　of　the　same　13th　chapter　of　St。　Luke
informs　us　of。　But　since　our　gospel　teaches　us；　Luke　23：6；　7；
that　〃when　Pilate　heard　of　Galilee；　he　asked　whether　Jesus　were　a
Galilean。　And　as　soon　as　he　knew　that　he　belonged　to　Herod's
jurisdiction；　he　sent　him　to　Herod　；〃　and　ver。　12；　〃The　same　day
Pilate　and　Herod　were　made　friends　together　for　before　they　had
been　at　enmity　between　themselves；〃　take　the　very　probable　key　of
this　matter　in　the　words　of　the　learned　Noldius；　de　Herod。　No。
219：　〃The　cause　of　the　enmity　between　Herod　and　Pilate　（says　he）
seems　to　have　been　this；　that　Pilate　had　intermeddled　with　the
tetrarch's　jurisdiction；　and　had　slain　some　of　his　Galilean
subjects；　Luke　13：1；　and；　as　he　was　willing　to　correct　that
error；　he　sent　Christ　to　Herod　at　this　time。〃

（9）　A。D。　33；　April　3。

（10）　April　5。

（11）　Of　the　banishment　of　these　four　thousand　Jews　into　Sardinia
by　Tiberius；　see　Suetonlus　in　Tiber。　sect。　36。　But　as　for　Mr。
Reland's　note　here；　which　supposes　that　Jews　could　not；
consistently　with　their　laws；　be　soldiers；　it　is　contradicted　by
one　branch　of　the　history　before　us；　and　contrary　to　innumerable
instances　of　their　fighting；　and　proving　excellent　soldiers　in
war；　and　indeed　many　of　the　best　of　them；　and　even　under　heathen
kings　themselves；　did　so；　those；　I　mean；　who　allowed　them　their
rest　on　the　sabbath　day；　and　other　solemn　festivals；　and　let　them
live　according　to　their　own　laws；　as　Alexander　the　Great　and　the
Ptolemies　of　Egypt　did。　It　is　true；　they　could　not　always　obtain
those　privileges；　and　then　they　got　executed　as　well　as　they
could；　or　sometimes　absolutely　refused　to　fight；　which　seems　to
have　been　the　case　here；　as　to　the　major　part　of　the　Jews　now
banished；　but　nothing　more。　See　several　o