« السابقةمتابعة »
more reasonable to suppose Jofephus was mistaken about the order of time in which the journey to Jerufalem was executed, then to conclude the whole an idle fiction, merely because it is omitted by the few heathen authors now extant, out of the great number that wrote Alexander's tranfactions, who, they obferve, muft in general be thought to have entertained too much averfion and hatred against the Jewish nation, to preferve and perpetuate the memory of a fact in its circumftances and effects fo honourable to them, whatever information they might have of its certainty. They conclude, therefore, Alexander went thither while his troops were employed in the fiege of Tyre, or after it was finished, while the main army was refreshing; rather than that he first paffed fo confiderable a fortrefs, and then went back from Gaza to take it in: which is making Jofephus only guilty of an error in a circumftance, while they admit him a good voucher for the principal fact. Nor is this fhewing him greater respect than is often paid to the fingle teftimony of hiftorians of approved credit. For upon fuch evidence we often allow the truth of a fact about which others are filent. Especially we do fo when it is corroborated or fupported by any appearances which are beft accounted for from it, and of that kind is the prefent one. For Jofephus informs us, that Alexander granted to them extraordinary privileges, the use of their own laws, and freedom from tribute every seventh year, as in it they did not cultivate and fow their lands. And Hecataeus, *a contemporary of this prince, af
* His words, as he is cited by Jofephus against Appion, 2. 4. are, * Την Σαμαρειτιν χωραν προσέθηκεν αυτοις εχειν αφορολογητον.
fures us, appealing to Alexander's letters, and other monuments in teftimony of it, that he also beftowed upon them the country of the Samaritans, after they had mutinied, and murdered Andromachus their governor, with an immunity from taxes for its poffeffion: which are indications they must have stood high in his favour.
After this, Voltaire having related Jaddus's order from God to falute this king, and his obedience to it, with Alexander's perfuafion, that he was the fame man who had inftructed him feven or eight years before to come and conquer Perfia, which he communicated to Parmenio, proceeds thus: Jad'dus had upon his head his cap, ornamented with a plate of gold, upon which a Hebrew word was 6 engraved. Alexander, who was doubtless a pro'ficient in the Hebrew, immediately discovered the 'word Jehovah, and proftrated himself with humility, knowing very well that none but God could have this name.' In this manner he laughs, and leads his readers to think Alexander confidered the high-prieft as the Divinity. But Jofephus having observed, that the name of God was infcribed on the plate of gold, (without marking whether it was Hebrew or Greek; though I fuppofe it was the former, wherefore Alexander would need to receive an explication of its import from others,) only fays, that
hereon het worshipped the name, and faluted the high-prieft.' So that he plainly diftinguishes between his behaviour toward Jehovah, and toward his prieft. Accordingly he acquaints us, that when
† Antiq. xi. 8. 5. Το τυ Θεκ ονομα εγεγραπτο, προςελθων μας πος προσεκύνησε το όνομα, και τον αρχιερά πρώτος ησπάσατο.
Parmenio, as the king and he were alone, asked why he whom all men worshipped, worshipped the Jewish high-priest, he replied, 'I did not worship this man, 'but the God with whofe high-priesthood he hath been 'dignified;' and that thereafter having gone up into the temple, he offered facrifice to God according to his direction, and bestowed upon the high-prieft and the priests fuitable honours.' Further, whereas Voltaire adds, Jaddus inftantly displayed prophecies, " which clearly indicated that Alexander would conquer Perfia, prophecies that were ever made after the event had happened;' Jofephus fays no more than this: The book of Daniel having been fhewed him, in which he declared that a certain perfon among "the Greeks would deftroy the empire of the Perfians, thinking himself was the perfon fignified, he with joy difmiffed the multitude; and having 'called them to him on the fucceeding day, he commanded them to ask whatever gifts they pleased.' And then adds, In confequence of this, he indulged 'them in the use of their own laws, and in freedom 'from tribute every seventh year, as in it they did ' not cultivate their land.' As to his charge, that the prophecies in Daniel concerning the deftruction of the Persian empire by the Greeks, were forged after its actual overthrow, it does not now fall under my confideration, unless it be to remark, that it hath no foundation in Jofephus, left any person should fufpect, ftrange as it may feem, that it was his fuggeftion, when it is wholly Voltaire's own sense of things. So much for the misrepresentations of Jofephus in his fortyfixth chapter.
I cannot, however, forbear here to vindicate fo
agreeable and profitable a writer, as Rollin, from a reflection which he hath thrown upon him in it. It is this: Rollin indeed fays, that Alexander took Tyre, only because the inhabitants fcoffed the Jews, and that God would avenge the honour of his people; but Alexander might have had ftill ' other reasons. By his manner of expreffion, a perfon is inclined to believe, that Rollin made Alexander to be actuated by a defire of chaftifing the Tyrians, for their injuries to the people of God. But does Rollin afford any reason to impute this fentiment to him? Far otherwife. He fays in his Antient Hiftory, Tyre had now filled up the measure of her iniquity by her impiety against God, and her barbarity exercised against his people;' and having recounted her infults over the ruins of Jerufalem, and her violence to the inhabitants of the land, and her feizure of the most precious things from the temple of God there, to enrich therewith the temples of her idols, he remarks,This profanation and cruelty ' drew down the vengeance of God upon Tyre.' But though God had this intention in profpering his efforts against Tyre, he always fuppofes Alexander to have been animated by other motives, fuch as, his refentment at the affront the Tyrians put upon him, in refufing him entrance into their city when he afked it, that he might offer a facrifice to Hercules its tutelar god, and the importance of his poffeffion of it to his intereft. For he thus expreffes himself, fpeaking of the above-mentioned indignity: This C conqueror, after gaining fo many victories, had too
high an heart to put up fuch an affront, and there
upon was refolved to force them to it by a siege.'
Again, Alexander imagined that there were effen
Of his Affertion, That Jofephus does not include the Book of Job among the Writings of the He brew Canon, in Chapter forty-feventh.
O return from this digreffion, which, it is believed, was due to fo excellent a writer's merit, as nothing occurs in Voltaire's forty-feventh chapter that requires animadverfion, according to my present defign, I go forward to his forty-eighth chapter where is a fentence too material to be overlooked, viz. That Jofephus does not include the book of Job among the writings of the Hebrew canon. After affirming, that the book of Job was firft written by the Arabians, his words are: Flavian 'Jofephus, who does not include it among the writ
*See Rollin's Ancient Hiftory, Book XIV. Sect. vi, pages 166, 167, 183, 184. + Page 231.