« السابقةمتابعة »
term, it would fall under their power: and farther he fays, he pointed out his own fortune at a distance, that he would not be flain, but taken alive. Yet none of these particulars could any one divine from Voltaire's detail, important as they are, to give any fhadow of reasonablenefs to Vefpafian's reliance on his prediction of his future grandeur, amidst the appearances which it had of artful and interested flattery.
Of his Mifrepresentations in Chapter forty-fifth; where he affirms that JOSEPHUS makes DANIEL Governor of three hundred and fixty provinces, and ZOROBABEL a Jewish Slave, an intimate Friend of the King of Kings, and very imperfectly relates his Account of DARIUS's Question, and of the Answers of his Academy of Wits.
NOW pass over to Voltaire's forty-fifth chapter. This will furnifh feveral inftances of grofs mifrepresentation. I might obferve, that he has no authority from Jofephus's book against Appion, to affert, as he does, that his history of the Jewish nation met with a small number of readers, when it appeared at Rome. For he fays in his preface, or dedication to Epaphroditus, That he wrote his answer to Appion, ❝ because he *faw many gave ear to flanders, which were thrown out by fome through hatred, and did 'not credit his Antiquities; and ufed as an argu'ment that their nation was of a later rife, that the
• Επει δε συχνες όρω, δε
illuftrious Greek hiftorians were filent about them:" which leads rather to fuppofe, that he had a great number of readers, fo far as it juftifies any conclufion about the matter:---But I do not dwell upon this. goes on a little after*, Jofephus relates, that • Darius the fon of Aftyages, had appointed the prophet Daniel governor of three hundred and fixty cities, whom he forbade, upon pain of death, to pray to any God for a month.' But is this a fair account? The Jewish hiftorian writes thus: That † Daniel was one of the three presidents whom Da'rius fet over three hundred and fixty provinces; 'for he made fo many.' He is therefore filent about the number of cities, and does not reprefent him to have been vefted alone with the government and fuperintendency of fo many provinces, but to have had two others joined with him in rule over them. It is even probable, that the provinces are here fwelled to three hundred and fixty, through a mistake of fome tranfcriber, or, according to Hudfon, through a flip of memory in Jofephus himself, fince Daniel, from whofe book the relation here is in general plainly borrowed, intimates, that the empire was divided only into one hundred and twenty provinces. It pleafed Darius to fet over the kingdom an hundred ' and twenty princes, who fhould be over the whole 'kingdom; and over these three presidents, of whom • Daniel was first, &c.' Further, Jofephus himfelf makes the number of the provinces only one hundred and twenty-feven, in the reign of Darius Hyftafpes, about eighteen years after; when yet the empire had Antiq. 10. 11. 4. Compare Daniel vi, 1. B
• Page 216.
been enlarged by additional conquefts through the interval.
It follows, Jofephus feems to imagine afterwards, • that all the Perfians turned Jews.' But where is the foundation for this? For my part I can fee none. It is true, that after mentioning Daniel's deliverance from the lions, and the destruction of them who accused him, laying fnares for his life, Jofephus writes, King Darius fent through the whole country, praising the God whom Daniel worshipped; and faying that he alone was true, and poffeffed all power.' But furely every one must be fenfible this is not enough to fhew, that the hiftorian entertained fuch a conceit, as is here imputed to him.
Mr. Voltaire proceeds: The fame Jofephus gives the facred temple of the Jews rebuilt by Zorobabel, a fingular origin. "Zorobabel, fays he, was the " intimate friend of king Darius." A Jewish flave an intimate friend of the king of kings! This is 'much the fame as if one of our hiftorians fhould tell us, that a fanatic of the Cevennes, released from the gallies, was the intimate friend of Lewis XIV.' How unjust this reflection, let every reader judge. Jofephus indeed, when he begins to inform us how the fecond temple, the foundations of which were laid under Cyrus, was at laft completed in Darius's time, (the progrefs of the work having been stopped in the intermediate reigns, through the artifices of the Samaritans, and other enemies,) fpeaks in this manner: This + Darius, fon of Hyftafpes, while he
was a private perfon, had vowed to God, if he 'fhould be raised to the kingdom, that he would * Antiq. 10. 11. 7. † lb. 11. 3. 1.
⚫fend all the veffels of God, which were in Babylon, 'to the temple in Jerufalem. But about that time,' (the time of his being made king) Zorobabel, who had been anointed prince or ruler of the Jewish cap'tives, came from Jerufalem to Darius, for he had a 'friendship of a long ftanding with the king; where 'being accounted worthy to be a body-guard to him 'alfo with two others, he enjoyed the honour which ' he hoped.' Now where is the abfurdity of this account of his friendship with the Perfian monarch? Zorobabel, though a captive in war, was not adjudged as a public criminal and malefactor to fome ignominious punishment, like Voltaire's fanatic condemned to the gallies. Besides he was a man of high birth in his own nation, and of exalted rank: for in Cyrus's decree, which granted liberty to the Jews to return, he is long before denominated governor or leader of the Jews, and hath a joint commission with Mithridate, the keeper of the king's treasure, to rebuild the temple in Jerufalem; and a joint truft given him of the vessels which had been carried away to Babylon, though of immense value. His intimacy moreover with Darius, is not represented to have commenced after his elevation to the throne, but faid to have been many years previous to it; for it was a friendship which had been of old, or of long
continuance,' fays the hiftorian, speaking of the time when he was chofen king, after nurdering with the affiftance of others, Smerdis the mage, who ufurped the crown as Cyrus's fon, 'hrough the well known ftratagem of his groom. As incredible then as it is, that a fanatic released from the gallies, should Παλαι γαρ ην αυτω φιλια πρ ο, τον βασιλέα,
have been an intimate friend of Lewis XIV. who fucceeded to the throne of France, in right of his defcent from a long race of kings, there is no improbability at all, that there should have been a familiarity between Darius a Persian nobleman, before his election to fway the Perfian fceptre, and Zorobabel a prince of the Jews; efpecially when we confider that we are certain fome captives of this nation dwelt about Sufa or Sushan, where that nobleman's father' refided as governor. Have not perfons, who have been prifoners by the fate of war, been often admitted to a familiarity and friendship with fubjects of the moft diftinguished parentage, fortune, and station, in the country where they were detained? The fact cannot be denied.---It were therefore needless to bestow more words on expofing the futility of Mr. Voltaire's fcoff here.
He goes on: Be this as it may, according to Fla'vian Jofephus, Darius who was a very fenfible prince, propofed to all his court a queftion worthy ' of the Mercure Gallant; namely which had the 'moft power, wine, kings, or women? The perfon ⚫ who gave the best answer, was to be recompenced with a flaxen + head-drefs, a purple robe, a golden necklace, &c. Darius feated himself upon his golden throne, to hear the answers of his academy of wits. One entered into a differtation in favour of wine, another was for kings, Zorobabel was an ad
+ Sonidapir Guσown is turned; but the expreffion denotes a tiara of fine linen. Now the tiara was a kind of turban rifing up with a sharp point without bending, which was a drefs peculiar to the Perfian kings; for the other Perfians wore their turbans bending downwards to their foreheads, in token of fubjaction. See Ant. Univ. Hift. vol. 5. p. 121.