which certainly happened about this time. Whether I am in the right or not others will judge.

e

St. Luke has not expressly told us how long this rest of the churches lasted, but it is likely that it reached some way into Herod Agrippa's reign. He was at Rome when Caligula was killed, and was very serviceable to his successor Claudius, in settling matters between him and the senate. But this is certain, that the great danger the Jews were in of utter ruin in the reign of Caligula, and the gracious as well as just edicts passed in their favour by Claudius, in the beginning of his reign, had little effect upon them. For St. Luke says, that when "Herod stretched forth his hand to vex certain of the church, and killed James with the sword," the satisfaction which they expressed in these cruelties, was an inducement to him "to take Peter also," Acts xii. 1-3.

XIII. This brings me to the proceedings of the third period, the reign of Herod. But I need not add any thing here to what has been already said in the former chapter; where it has been shown, that Herod had at this time sovereign authority in Judea, though he was dependent on the Roman emperor.

I have now given the reader a view of the state of Judea, according to the sacred and other writers, so far as I proposed at the beginning of this chapter.

I must not proceed any farther, till I have owned myself much indebted to Mr. Huber, for his Dissertation on this subject. But by this acknowledgment I have not discharged all my obligations to that learned and agreeable writer. I have found him a good guide, upon other occasions beside this.

I am sensible some learned men have given a different account of this matter: but it will not be expected I should enter here into controversies with any. This argument is long enough already. I shall, however, make a few remarks upon Dr. Lightfoot's account taken from the Talmudical and other Jewish writers.

1. Lightfooth quotes these words from the Jerusalem Talmud. A tradition: forty years before the temple was destroyed, judgment in capital causes was taken away from 'Israel. And he says himself, It cannot be denied but

e

Joseph. de Bell. lib. ii. cap. 11.

Libri tres.

"Zachariæ Huber Dissertationum Amst. 1721. Dissertatio prima, quâ adseritur Judæorum magistratus, tempore Christi Servatoris, non habuisse merum imperium, sive jus gladii. See his Hebrew and Talmudical Exercitations on Matt. xxvi. 3. John

xviii. 31.

↳ Ibid. p. 248.

'Ibid. p. 611.

'that all capital judgment, or sentence upon life, had been 'taken from the Jews for above forty years before the 'destruction of Jerusalem, as they oftentimes themselves 'confess.' I think, the natural meaning of the words of the tradition is, that the people of the Jews were deprived of the right of inflicting capital punishment by some superior power or force. It does therefore in the main confirm my account. For since we know, that Judea was a Roman province for some considerable time before the destruction of Jerusalem, it may be reasonably concluded, the Roman government had taken away judgment in capital causes. But this tradition is inaccurate as to the time; for if the Jews had lost this power for forty years before the destruction of the temple, then they had it not in the reign of Herod Agrippa, and consequently not after Judea was first made a Roman province, A. D. 6 or 7, which was above sixty years before the ruin of their city. However, it is plain the just mentioned Herod had supreme power in Judea. How far he entrusted the council with judgment in capital causes, I do not pretend to determine.

2. But yet Lightfoot says, The Romans did not take away their power of judging in capital matters, but they by their own oscitancy, supine and unreasonable lenity, 'lost it themselves. For so the Gemarah goes on: "Rabh "Nachmanbar Isaac saith, Let him not say that they did not 'judge judgments of mulcts, for they did not judge capital 'judgments either. And whence comes this? When they saw that so many murders and homicides multiplied upon them, that they could not well judge and call them to an ' account, they said, It is better for us that we remove from place to place; for how can we otherwise not contract a guilt upon ourselves?"-They thought themselves obliged to punish murderers, whilst they sat in the room Gazith; "for" the place itself engaged them to it." They are the words of the Gemarists. Upon which the gloss,-They • removed therefore from Gazith, and sat in the Taberne.k I cannot think this is a just account. If robbers and murderers were so numerous, that the council could not punish them; yet certainly the christians were not able for forty years together, before the destruction of the temple, either by their own numbers, or by their interest with the people, to strike any awe upon the council. And if they had a lenity and tenderness for Israelitish robbers and murderers, (which I do not deny,) yet they had little or no tenderness for christians, if there be any truth in the history of the New * Id. Ibid. p. 612.

6

6

Testament, or of ancient christian writers. And yet they did not judge any of these capitally. For so the tradition, confirmed likewise (as Lightfoot allows) by many Jewish writers, says, judgment in capital causes had been taken away from them for forty years before the destruction of 'the temple.' Since therefore they did not judge christians capitally, and since they could not be restrained from it by any dread of the christians, nor by lenity toward them, it follows, they must have been hindered by some superior authority. And what could that be but the Roman?

3. That we may yet farther confirm our opinion,' says Lightfoot, that the authority of their council was not 'taken away by the Romans, we will produce two stories, as clear examples of the thing we assert. One is this:

6

6

• R. Lazar, son of R. Sadock, said, "When I was a little boy, sitting on my father's shoulders, I saw the daughter of a priest that had played the harlot, compassed round 'with faggots and burnt." Hieros. Sanhedr. fol. 24. 2. The council no doubt judging and condemning her, and this ' after Judea had then groaned many years under the Roman yoke, for that same R. Lazar saw the destruction of the city.' The other story is taken from the same book, and is told of one Ben Sudta, in Lydda. They placed two disciples of the wise in ambush for him, and they brought him before the council and stoned him.-The Jews openly profess that this was done to him in the days of R. Akiba, long after the destruction of the city; and yet then, as you see, the council still retained its authority in judging of capital causes. They might do it for all the Romans, if they dared to do it to the criminals." I think the first, R. Lazar's story, proves too much; for it not only proves that the Romans had not taken away this power from the council, but that it was not taken away at all for forty years before the destruction of the temple. But this is a contradiction to the tradition, which Lightfoot allows to be true, and well supported. If we must suppose the sight the little boy is said to have had sitting upon his father's shoulders, to be matter of fact, it will be needful to reconcile it with the tradition above mentioned. This I do not know how to do any otherwise, than by supposing, that the tradition represents the legal state of the constitution they were under, for forty years before the destruction of the temple; and that the burning of the priest's daughter, if it was done by order of the Jewish council, was an irregular and illegal action. The same thing ought also to be Ibid. p. 249.

supposed of the second story, if it be true. But this way of reconciliation would not suit Lightfoot.

Upon the whole, though the tradition confirms my account, I cannot but think, that the testimonies I have alleged relating to the subject, are preferable to the testimonies of Talmudical, or other later Jewish writers. All the authors I have quoted must be allowed to have been acquainted with the form of government, which the Romans established in their provinces; and Josephus must have known the state of Judea in particular. And I hope the reader is convinced, that there is upon this subject a perfect agreement between these authors and the sacred writers of the New Testament.

6

I shall borrow one passage more from that learned writer: Christ answers the treachery of the question propounded (upon the tribute money) out of the very deter'minations of the schools, where this was taught; Wheresoever the money of any king is current, there the in'habitants acknowledge that king for their lord. Maimon. on Gezelah, ch. 5.'m

There remain two or three particulars, which, not regarding the main point in question, have not yet been considered; but however may not be quite omitted.

XIV. St. John says, chap. xviii. 3, "Judas then having received a band of men, and officers from the chief priests and pharisees, cometh thither, to the garden.” Ver. 12, "Then the band, and the captain, and officers of the Jews took Jesus." This band I suppose to have consisted of Roman soldiers. The Greek word [onepa] is, I think, ever used in the New Testament concerning soldiers." Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus. And gathered unto him the whole band of soldiers," Matt. xxvii. 27. Mark xv. 6," Cornelius a centurion of the Italian band." Acts. x. 1, xxi. 31, xxvii. 1.

Farther, when the chief priests and pharisees went to Pilate, and desired he would" command that the sepulchre be made sure unto the third day. He said unto them, Ye have a watch, [EXETE KROтwdiav] go your way, make it as sure as you can," Matt. xxvii. 64, 65. From whence one would be apt to conclude, that there was, at least at the feast times, a guard of soldiers upon duty, from which they might draw out a sufficient number for any particular purpose.

"As they were about to kill him, [Paul,] tidings came unto the chief captain of the band that all Jerusalem was in an uproar: who immediately took soldiers and centurions,

Id. on Matt. xxii. 20

And he com

and ran down unto them, Acts xxi. 31, 32. manded him to be carried into the castle. And as Paul was to be led into the castle, when the chief captain had given him licence, Paul stood on the stairs, and there spake unto the people, ver. 37-40. And when Lysias sent Paul from Jerusalem to Cæsarea, it was under a strong guard of horse and foot," ch. xxiii. 33.

There was therefore at Jerusalem a Roman officer, who had the government of the castle, and a good body of troops under him.

6

6

6

6

A passage or two from Josephus will confirm and illustrate these particulars. 'Antonia,' says he,' was situated at the angle of the western and northern porticoes of the outer temple, [or outer court of the temple.] It was built upon a rock fifty cubits high, steep on all sides. It was the work of king Herod, in which he had shown his ' usual magnificence. On that side where it joined to the porticoes of the temple, there were stairs reaching to each portico, by which the guard descended; (for there was always lodged here a Roman legion) and posting themselves in their armour in several places in the porticoes, they kept a watch on the people on the feast days, to prevent all disorders. For as the temple was a guard to the city, so was Antonia to the temple.' This from the history of the Jewish War." In his Antiquities he says: 'The feast called the passover approaching, at which it is our custom to eat unleavened bread, and a great number of people being come up from all parts to the feast, Cumanus fearing some disturbance, commanded a company of sol'diers to post themselves in their armour in the porticoes of the temple, to suppress disorders, if any should happen : which was what the procurators had been wont to do at 'the feasts.' This Cumanus was Felix's predecessor: and this order was given, as it seems, A. D. 48.P

The reader must needs observe here two things: first, that there was always a legion which kept garrison in the castle at Jerusalem. Secondly, that at the feasts there was a detachment of these soldiers, which came down from the

* Καθα δε συνηπτο ταις το ιερό τοαις, εις αμφοτέρας είχε καταβασεις· δι' ὧν κατιοντες οι φρεροι κάθητο γαρ αει επ' αυτης ταγμα Ρωμαίων, και διισαμενοι περι τας τους μετα των οπλων, εν ταις εορταις, τον δημον, ὡς μη τι νεωπερισθείη, παρεφυλαττον φρέριον γαρ επέκειτο τη πόλει μεν το ιερον, τῷ ιερῳ δε ή Αντωνια. Lib. v. cap. 5. sect. 8. • Κέλευει των τρατιωτών

μιαν τάξιν αναλάβεσαν τα όπλα επι των τε ιερό 50ων εταναι κατασελώντας τον νεωτερισμον, ει αρα τις γενοιτο τετο δε και οι προ αυτό της Ιεδαίας επιTрOTTENσAVTEC EV Tαiç εOρTai επpаTTоv. Antiq. lib. xx. cap. iv. sect. 3. P Vid. Pagi Critic. in Baron. et Basnage Annal. A. D. 48.