and it appears from Josephus, and Tacitus," that long after this, in the reign of Claudius, this same Vibius Marsus came to be actually president of Syria. There is therefore no absurdity at all in supposing, that Cyrenius was sent by Augustus with extraordinary power at the latter end of Herod's reign to make a survey in Judea, and that about ten or twelve years afterwards he came as the ordinary governor into Syria, and then made a census in that province, and in Judea annexed to it.

2. It is objected, that none of the Roman or Greek historians, though Cyrenius has been spoken of by several of them, have taken any notice of this census.

I answer, that this is no difficulty at all. I suppose, that no one will make any question, but that Cyrenius made an assessment in Syria and Judea when he was sent president into Syria, because we have Josephus's authority for it; and yet none of the Roman or Greek authors have said any thing of that census.

Though Tacitus has in the passage above cited reckoned up divers of Cyrenius's exploits and honours, and others have made mention of him, and some of his services, yet Florus has taken notice of a considerable action of his omitted by all the rest: if indeed be means our Cyrenius.

3. But it will be said: It may be certainly concluded from the account which Josephus has given of the census madec by Cyrenius after Archelaus's banishment, that Cyrenius had never been in Judea, or enrolled the Jews before; if he had, Josephus could not well have omitted to take notice of it then.

I own, that at first sight this must appear a very considerable difficulty.

(1.) But it ought to be observed, that Josephus does not particularly name any of Cyrenius's honours or services, beside those which relate to the city of Rome. Josephus knew of divers others, but he does not express them: and among those omitted or referred to in the general only, may be that of the first survey in Judea.

(2.) I think it is plain, that either Josephus did not care to give any particular account of that oath taken by the 5 Και μετ' 8 πολυ, Πετρώνιον μεν Μαρσος διεδέξατο, και διειπε Συριαν. Ant. 1. xix. c. 6. sect. 4. Et reciperare Armeniam, ni Vibio Marso Syriæ legato bellum minitante cohibitus foret. Tacit. Ann. xi. cap. 10. About A. U. 795. vid. Pagi. Crit. in Bar. A. D. 42. n. 8. b Marmaridas atque Garamantas Curinio subigendos dedit [Augustus]. Potuit et ille redire Marmaricus; sed modestior in æstimandâ victorià fuit. Florus, lib. iv. c. 12.

See the account above, p. 307.

Jews to Augustus in the latter end of Herod's reign, or else that he found but a slight account of it in those memoirs or histories which he made use of. He had said nothing of it, had it not been for a most remarkable disturbance in Herod's court and family, with which it had a connexion.

And any one may perceive, that it is then touched upon very slightly. Is it not strange, that Josephus should not name the officer that took the oath for Augustus? No one can make any doubt, but there was some person of eminence deputed by the emperor for that work. As Josephus did not mention him then, I should never expect to find his name afterwards. And whoever can account for Josephus's omissions relating to the affair of the oath, may account for his silence in this passage, though Cyrenius had been once before in Judea.

(3.) I think, that arguments formed upon the omissions of historians are of very little weight. There are in Josephus other omissions as remarkable as this. I desire to consider the account he gives, in his War of the Jews, of the reducing Judea to a province. 'Archelaus's country

being reduced to a province, Coponius, a man of the equestrian rank among the Romans, was sent procurator, being invested with the power of life and death. In his time [ET T8T8] a certain Galilean, whose name was Judas, 'excited the people to a rebellion; telling them, That they were of a mean spirit, if they could endure to pay tribute to the Romans, and acknowledge mortal men for their lords after God had been their king. This man was the 'head of a distinct sect in nothing liked the rest.' This is all he says. He does not say there was now any census made, has not one word of Cyrenius, or his coming into Judea.

e

It is true, that Josephus has in two other places in the War of the Jews occasionally mentioned Cyrenius, and in the latter of those places his census also; but it must be allowed to be a very great omission, not to do this in the proper place, in the account of the reduction of Judea to the state of a province. This might have been reasonably expected in the History of the War, when this assessment made by Cyrenius, and the principles broached at that time, were main foundations of it.

If it be said, that Josephus passed over this affair slightly in the War, because he intended to write his Antiquities, and mention it more particularly then I answer, this is said

d De Bell. lib. ii. cap. 8. sect. 1. lib. vii. cap. 8. sect. 1.

* Ibid. cap. 17. sect. 8. et

without ground and I might as well say, that Josephus omitted in his Antiquities the particular account of Cyrenius's first assessment, because he intended to write afterward another book of the history of the Jews, and go over their affairs once more, as he expressly assures us at the conclusion of his Antiquities.

Josephus informs us in his Life, written after the War and the Antiquities, that the Jews had a battle with Gessius Florus, their last procurator, and killed him, and a good many of his men; and that this victory was fatal to them, forasmuch as this determined them to the war with thef Romans. Is it not strange that Josephus should say nothing of this in the History of the War, where he has made so frequent mention of Florus, and ascribed the Jewish uneasiness under the Roman government to the cruelties and other irregularities of this man? For this instance I am indebted tos Mr. Le Clerc.

There is another omission appears to me very remarkable. Pheroras, Herod's youngest brother, is often mentioned by Josephus. He has particularly informed us, that when Augustus was in Syria, he gave this Pheroras a tetrarchy," at the request of Herod; and we are informed by Josephus, of Pheroras's retirement into his tetrarchy, of Herod's visiting him there, and of Pheroras's dying at home, and of his being brought afterwards from thence to be buried. But yet, if I mistake not, he has never once said what this tetrarchy was, whose it had been before, nor where it lay. It is true, that whereas in the Antiquities Josephus says, Pheroras went to his tetrarchy; in his War' he says, he went to Peræa; or, as in some copies, Petræa: but Peræa, properly so called, could not be this tetrarchy, because Peræa belonged all along to Herod. But this tetrarchy of Pheroras was given him by Augustus, and was distinct from that estate or revenue which had been settled upon him by Herod. These particulars may convince us, that though Cyrenius was in Judea in the time of Herod, Josephus was capable of omitting to take notice of it.

k

4. Again, it will be said: It may be fairly concluded

Γ Ο δ' επελθων και συμβαλων μαχη, ενικήθη, πολλων των μετ' αυτε πεσοντων και γίνεται το Γεσσιο πταισμα, συμφορα το παντὸς ἡμων εθνες επήρθησαν γαρ επι τετῳ μαλλον οἱ τον πολεμον αγαπησαντες, και νικήσαντες της Ρωμαιος εις τελος ηλπισαμεν in Vit. sect. 6. Hist. Eccl. A. D. 66. n. 12.

i Ibid. l. xvii. c. 3. de B. J. l. i. c. 29.

Ant. l. xv. c. 10. sect. 3.

k

Φερώραν δ' επ. της αυτό τετραρχίας' p. 756. ν. 37.

Φερώρας δε

ὑποχωρήσειεν εις την Περαιαν, p. 1031. v. 41. vid. et p. 1032. v. 26.

m

Τῳ μεν αδελφῳ Φερωρᾳ παρα Καισαρος ήτησατο τετραρχίαν, αυτός απονειμας εκ της βασιλειας προσοδον ἑκατον ταλαντων, κ. λ. Ant. I. xv. c. 10. sect. 3

from another place in Josephus, that Cyrenius was but once in Judea. For he says, that Massada was then held by Eleazar, the chief man of the sicarii, a descendant of Judas, who persuaded not a few of the Jews not to enrol 'themselves, as I have said" above, when Cyrenius the cen'sor° was sent into Judea.'

I own this is a difficulty, but the argument is not conclusive. It is true, that Judas made this disturbance when "Cyrenius was sent into Judea," or in the time of Cyrenius; but it does not follow, that Cyrenius was sent but once into Judea. The New Testament will afford us an instance upon this very subject, which will be of use to us. Gamaliel says, Acts v. 37, "After this man, rose up Judas of Galilee, in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him." If we had in our hands this book only of St. Luke, namely, the Acts of the Apostles, it is not unlikely, that many would have supposed, that St. Luke knew of no other taxing made in Judea, but that in the time of which Judas rose up. But we are assured from his gospel, that this conclusion would have been false: for there he has spoke very particularly of another, which he calls the first, or at least distinguishes very plainly from some other.

I must be allowed to repeat here once more, that arguments formed upon the silence of writers are very seldom of much moment. Josephus is the only Jewish writer of those times in whom we have the history of that country; and it cannot be justly concluded, that any particular thing was not done, or that such or such circumstance did not attend it, because he has not mentioned it. All writers have their particular views, and some things we are very desirous to know, might, for some reason or other which we are ignorant of, lie without the compass of their designs. Besides, the most accurate and careful historians have omitted many facts or incidents, that might be very properly mentioned, through forgetfulness or oversight. I take the omission of the description of the tetrarchy that belonged to Pheroras, to be a remarkable instance of this sort.

5. But it will be said, that Tertullian is positive, the census in Judea at the time of our Saviour's birth was made by Sentius Saturninus, P

n Vid. de Bell. 1. ii. c. 17. sect. 8.

• Καλείται δε το μεν

φρέριον Μασαδα, προεισήκει δε των κατειληφότων αυτο σικαρίων δυνατος ανηρ Ελεαζαρος, απογονος Ιεδα το πείσαντος Ιεδαίων εκ ολίγες, ως προτερον δεδηλωκαμεν, μη ποιεισθαι τας απογραφας, ότε Κυρηνιος τιμητης εις την Ιεδαίαν EжεμOOŋ de B. 1. vii. c. 2. sect. 1. P Sed et census constat actos sub Augusto nunc in Judæâ per Sentium Saturninum. Apud quos genus ejus inquirere potuissent. Cont. Marc. lib. iv. cap. 19.

I answer to this: (1.) It ought to be considered, that the heretic Marcion, with whom Tertullian disputes in this place, did not admit the authority of the first chapters of St. Luke's gospel. And it was the custom of Tertullian, to argue from those parts of scripture which the heretics he was dealing with acknowledged. Possibly therefore Tertullian having, or supposing he had, reason to think, that this census was made when Saturninus was president of Syria, he might choose to mention the ordinary officer as a thing certain; but yet might not intend to affirm, that the census was made by him, but only that it happened in his time. Isaac Casaubon judged it not unreasonable so to understand Tertullian, who often uses words improperly. I thought it not fit to deprive the reader of this answer of that learned man: but I do not adopt his interpretation of Tertullian.

(2.) Tertullian's authority ought not to outweigh the testimony of more ancient writers, who were nearer the event. Justin Martyr, in his first apology, presented to the Roman emperor sixty years before Tertullian wrote his books against Marcion, says, this census was performed in Judea by Cyrenius; and all other writers agree with Justin, as has been shown already.

(3.) Tertullian's authority is of the less weight in this point, because he has made very gross blunders in history, of which I shall say somewhat more in the third chapter.

4. I imagine some account may be given of this mistake of Tertullian. It has been observed, that Marcion, whom Tertullian was now arguing with, did not own the first chapters of St. Luke's gospel. Tertullian therefore not having his eye particularly on St. Luke, and supposing that this census was made in Judea when Saturninus was president of Syria, says, it was made by him.

Judea having been afterwards a branch of the province of Syria, he concluded it was so at this time, and that therefore the census must have been made by the president of Syria: but this was arguing from later to more early times, as men not thoroughly versed in history are apt to do.

Accedit his Cerdon quidam.-Solum evangelium Lucæ, nec tamen totum recipit. Post hunc discipulus ipsius emersit Marcion.-Hæresin Cerdonis approbare conatus est. De præscrip. Hæret. c. 51.

Quam et argumentationibus earum, et scripturis quibus utuntur, provocavimus ex abundanti. De Carne Christi, cap. 25.

Tertullianus, cum adversus Marcio scribit, Sed et constat,-ad majorem fidem magistratum ordinarium potius nominat, quam extraordinarium. Ait autem per Sentium Saturninum dure et Tertullianice, hoc est, improprie pro επι Σεντια Σατορνιν, vel ἡγεμονεύοντος της Σ. Κ. Casaub. Exercit. 1 n. 31.