Footnotes

1 (return) [ We may hence correct the error of the Latin copy of the second book Against Apion, sect. 8, [for the Greek is there lost,] which says, there were then only four tribes or courses of the priests, instead of twenty-four. Nor is this testimony to be disregarded, as if Josephus there contradicted what he had affirmed here; because even the account there given better agrees to twenty-four than to four courses, while he says that each of those courses contained above 5000 men, which, multiplied by only four, will make not more than 20,000 priests; whereas the number 120,000, as multiplied by 24, seems much the most probable, they being about one-tenth of the whole people, even after the captivity. See Ezra 2:36-39; Nehemiah 7:39-42; 1 Esdras 5:24, 25, with Ezra 2;64; Nehemiah 7:66; 1 Esdras 5:41. Nor will this common reading or notion of but four courses of priests, agree with Josephus's own further assertion elsewhere, Antiq. B. VII. ch. 14. sect. 7, that David's partition of the priests into twenty-four courses had continued to that day.]

1 (return) [From this, we may correct an error in the Latin copy of the second book of Against Apion, section 8. The Greek text is lost at that point. The Latin says there were then only four tribes or courses of priests, instead of twenty-four. Nor should we disregard this evidence as if Josephus contradicted his statement here. The account there fits twenty-four courses better than four. Josephus says that each course contained more than 5,000 men. Multiplied by only four, that would make no more than 20,000 priests. But multiplying by 24 gives 120,000, which seems much more probable. The priests made up about one-tenth of the whole people, even after the captivity. See Ezra 2:36-39, Nehemiah 7:39-42, and 1 Esdras 5:24, 25, together with Ezra 2:64, Nehemiah 7:66, and 1 Esdras 5:41. The common reading or idea that there were only four courses of priests also conflicts with another statement by Josephus. In Antiquities, Book VII, chapter 14, section 7, he says that David's division of the priests into twenty-four courses had continued to his own day.]

2 (return) [ An eminent example of the care of the Jews about their genealogies, especially as to the priests. See Against Ap. B. 1 sect. 7.]

2 (return) [ A notable example of the care Jews took with their genealogies, especially those of priests. See Against Ap. B. 1 sect. 7.]

3 (return) [ When Josephus here says, that from sixteen to nineteen, or for three years, he made trial of the three Jewish sects, the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Essens, and yet says presently, in all our copies, that he stayed besides with one particular ascetic, called Banus, with him, and this still before he was nineteen, there is little room left for his trial of the three other sects. I suppose, therefore, that for, with him, the old reading might be, with them; which is a very small emendation, and takes away the difficulty before us. Nor is Dr. Hudson's conjecture, hinted at by Mr. Hall in his preface to the Doctor's edition of Josephus, at all improbable, that this Banus, by this his description, might well be a follower of John the Baptist, and that from him Josephus might easily imbibe such notions, as afterwards prepared him to have a favorable opinion of Jesus Christ himself, who was attested to by John the Baptist.]

3 (return) [ Josephus says that from age sixteen to nineteen, he tried the three Jewish sects: the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Essens. Yet he soon says, in all our copies, that he also spent time with an ascetic named Banus. Josephus did this before he was nineteen. That leaves little time for him to try the other three sects. I therefore suppose that the old reading might have been “with them” rather than “with him.” This is a very small change, and it removes the difficulty. Dr. Hudson's conjecture is also quite plausible. Mr. Hall mentions it in his preface to the Doctor's edition of Josephus. Dr. Hudson suggests that Banus, as described here, might well have been a follower of John the Baptist. Josephus might easily have learned ideas from Banus that later prepared him to view Jesus Christ himself favorably. John the Baptist testified about Jesus Christ.]

4 (return) [ We may note here, that religious men among the Jews, or at least those that were priests, were sometimes ascetics also, and, like Daniel and his companions in Babylon, Daniel 1:8-16, ate no flesh, but figs and nuts, etc. only. This was like the austere diet of the Christian ascetics in Passion-week. Constitut. V. 18.]

4 (return) [ We may note that religious Jews, or at least Jewish priests, were sometimes ascetics too. Like Daniel and his companions in Babylon (Daniel 1:8-16), they ate no meat, but only figs, nuts, and similar foods. This was like the strict diet of Christian ascetics during Passion Week. Constitut. V. 18.]

5 (return) [ It has been thought the number of Paul and his companions on ship-board, Acts 27:38, which are 276 in our copies, are too many; whereas we find here, that Josephus and his companions, a very few years after the other, were about 600.]

5 (return) [ Some have thought that 276 people is too many to have been aboard ship with Paul in Acts 27:38, as our copies say. Yet we find here that Josephus and his companions numbered about 600, only a few years later.]

6 (return) [ See Jewish War, B. II. ch. 18. sect. 3.]

6 (return) [See Jewish War, Book II, chapter 18, section 3.]

7 (return) [ The Jews might collect this unlawfulness of fighting against their brethren from that law of Moses, Leviticus 19:16, "Thou shalt not stand against the blood of thy neighbor;" and that, ver. 17, "Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people; but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself;" as well as from many other places in the Pentateuch and Prophets. See Antiq. B. VIII. ch. 8. sect. 3.]

7 (return) [ The Jews could have understood that fighting against their fellow Jews was unlawful from the law of Moses in Leviticus 19:16: "You shall not stand against the blood of your neighbor." Verse 17 also says, "You shall not take revenge or bear a grudge against the children of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself." Many other passages in the Pentateuch and Prophets say the same. See Antiq. B. VIII. ch. 8. sect. 3.]

8 (return) [ That this Herod Agrippa, the father, was of old called a Great King, as here, appears by his coins still remaining; to which Havercamp refers us.]

8 (return) [ Herod Agrippa the father was called a Great King in ancient times, as he is here. His surviving coins show this, and Havercamp refers us to them.]

9 (return) [ The famous Jewish numbers of twelve and seventy are here remarkable.]

9 (return) [ The well-known Jewish numbers twelve and seventy are noteworthy here.]

10 (return) [ Our Josephus shows, both here and every where, that he was a most religious person, and one that had a deep sense of God and his providence upon his mind, and ascribed all his numerous and wonderful escapes and preservations, in times of danger, to God's blessing him, and taking care of him, and this on account of his acts of piety, justice, humanity, and charity, to the Jews his brethren.]

10 (return) [Here and everywhere else, Josephus shows that he was a deeply religious person. He had a profound sense of God and his providence. He attributed all his many wonderful escapes and survivals in times of danger to God's blessing and care. He believed God cared for him because of his acts of piety, justice, humanity, and charity toward his fellow Jews.]

11 (return) [ Josephus's opinion is here well worth noting:— That every one is to be permitted to worship God according to his own conscience, and is not to be compelled in matters of religion: as one may here observe, on the contrary, that the rest of the Jews were still for obliging all those who married Jewesses to be circumcised, and become Jews, and were ready to destroy all that would not submit to do so. See sect. 31, and Luke 11:54.]

11 (return) [ Josephus's opinion here is well worth noting: Everyone should be free to worship God according to their own conscience. No one should be forced to follow a religion. In contrast, we can see here that the rest of the Jews still wanted to require all men who married Jewish women to be circumcised and become Jews. They were ready to destroy all who would not submit to these requirements. See section 31 and Luke 11:54.]

12 (return) [ How Josephus could say here that the Jewish laws forbade them to "spoil even their enemies," while yet, a little before his time, our Savior had mentioned it as then a current maxim with them, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy," Matthew 5:43, is worth our inquiry. I take it that Josephus, having been now for many years an Ebionite Christian, had learned this interpretation of the law of Moses from Christ, whom he owned for the true Melah, as it follows in the succeeding verses, which, though he might not read in St. Matthew's Gospel, yet might he have read much the same exposition in their own Ebionite or Nazarene Gospel itself; of which improvements made by Josephus, after he was become a Christian, we have already had several examples in this his life, sect. 3, 13, 15, 19, 21, 23, and shall have many more therein before its conclusion, as well as we have them elsewhere in all his later writings.]

12 (return) [ It is worth asking how Josephus could say that Jewish laws forbade them to "spoil even their enemies." Shortly before his time, our Savior had mentioned a saying then common among them: "Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy," Matthew 5:43. I believe Josephus had learned this interpretation of the law of Moses from Christ. By then, he had been an Ebionite Christian for many years. He acknowledged Christ as the true Melah, as the following verses show. Though Josephus may not have read this interpretation in St. Matthew's Gospel, he may have read much the same explanation in their own Ebionite or Nazarene Gospel. We have already seen several examples of such improvements Josephus made after becoming a Christian. They appear in sections 3, 13, 15, 19, 21, and 23 of this life. We will find many more before its conclusion, just as we find them elsewhere in all his later writings.]

13 (return) [ Here we may observe the vulgar Jewish notion of witchcraft, but that our Josephus was too wise to give any countenance to it.]

13 (return) [Here we may observe the common Jewish belief in witchcraft, but our Josephus was too wise to support that belief.]

14 (return) [ In this section, as well as in the 18 and 33. those small vessels that sailed on the sea of Galilee, are called by Josephus, i.e. plainly ships; so that we need not wander at our evangelists, who still call them ships; nor ought we to render them boats, as some do, Their number was in all 230, as we learn from our author elsewhere. Jewish War. B. II. ch. 21. sect. 8.]

14 (return) [ In this section, as well as in sections 18 and 33, Josephus calls the small vessels that sailed on the Sea of Galilee ships. So we need not wonder why the evangelists also call them ships, nor should we translate the word as boats, as some do. There were 230 vessels in all, as we learn from Josephus elsewhere. Jewish War. Book II. chapter 21. section 8.]

15 (return) [ Part of these fortifications on Mount Tabor may be those still remaining, and which were seen lately by Mr. Maundrel. See his Travels, p. 112.]

15 (return) [Some of these fortifications on Mount Tabor may still remain. Mr. Maundrel recently saw them. See his Travels, p. 112.]

16 (return) [ This Gamaliel may be the very same that is mentioned by the rabbins in the Mishna, in Juchasin, and in Porta Mosis, as is observed in the Latin notes. He might be also that Gamaliel II., whose grandfather was Gamaliel I., who is mentioned in Acts 5:34, and at whose feet St. Paul was brought up, Acts 22:3. See Prid. at the year 449.]

16 (return) [ This Gamaliel may be the same one mentioned by the rabbis in the Mishna, in Juchasin, and in Porta Mosis. This possibility is noted in the Latin notes. He might also be Gamaliel II., whose grandfather was Gamaliel I. Gamaliel I. is mentioned in Acts 5:34, and St. Paul studied at his feet, Acts 22:3. See Prid. for the year 449.]

17 (return) [ This Jonathan is also taken notice of in the Latin notes, as the same that is mentioned by the rabbins in Porta Mosis.]

17 (return) [ The Latin notes also identify this Jonathan as the one mentioned by the rabbis in Porta Mosis.]

18 (return) [ This I take to be the first of Josephus's remarkable or divine dreams, which were predictive of the great things that afterwards came to pass; of which see more in the note on Antiq. B. III. ch. 8. sect. 9. The other is in the War, B. III. ch. 8. sect. 3, 9.]

18 (return) [ I believe this was the first of Josephus's remarkable or divine dreams that foretold the great things that later happened. For more on these dreams, see the note on Antiq. B. III. ch. 8. sect. 9. The other dream is in the War, B. III. ch. 8. sect. 3, 9.]

19 (return) [ Josephus's directions to his soldiers here are much the same that John the Baptist gave, Luke 3:14, "Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely, and be content with your wages." Whence Dr. Hudson confirms this conjecture, that Josephus, in some things, was, even now, a follower of John the Baptist, which is no way improbable. See the note on sect. 2.]

19 (return) [ Josephus's instructions to his soldiers here are much like those John the Baptist gave in Luke 3:14: "Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely, and be content with your wages." Dr. Hudson takes this as support for the conjecture that Josephus was, even now, a follower of John the Baptist in some respects. That is not at all improbable. See the note on section 2.]

20 (return) [ We here learn the practice of the Jews, in the days of Josephus, to inquire into the characters of witnesses before they were admitted; and that their number ought to be three, or two at the least, also exactly as in the law of Moses, and in the Apostolical Constitutions, B. II. ch. 37. See Horeb Covenant Revived, page 97, 98.]

20 (return) [ Here we learn that, in Josephus’s day, Jews examined the character of witnesses before accepting them. There had to be three witnesses, or at least two, exactly as required by the law of Moses and the Apostolical Constitutions, Book II, chapter 37. See Horeb Covenant Revived, pages 97 and 98.]

21 (return) [ This appeal to the whole body of the Galileans by Josephus, and the testimony they gave him of integrity in his conduct as their governor, is very like that appeal and testimony in the case of the prophet Samuel, 1 Samuel 12:1-5, and perhaps was done by Josephus in imitation of him.]

21 (return) [Josephus appealed to all the Galileans, and they testified that he had acted with integrity as their governor. This closely resembles the appeal and testimony in the case of the prophet Samuel, 1 Samuel 12:1-5. Perhaps Josephus was imitating Samuel.]

22 (return) [ It is worth noting here, that there was now a great Proseucha, or place of prayer, in the city of Tiberias itself, though such Proseucha used to be out of cities, as the synagogues were within them. Of them, see Le Moyne on Polycarp's Epistle, page 76. It is also worth our remark, that the Jews, in the days of Josephus, used to dine at the sixth hour, or noon; and that in obedience to their notions of the law of Moses also.]

22 (return) [ It is worth noting that there was now a great Proseucha, or place of prayer, in the city of Tiberias itself. Such Proseucha were usually outside cities, while synagogues were inside them. On Proseucha, see Le Moyne on Polycarp's Epistle, page 76. It is also worth noting that Jews in Josephus's day usually dined at the sixth hour, or noon. They did so in obedience to their understanding of the law of Moses.]

23 (return) [ One may observe here, that this lay Pharisee, Ananias, is we have seen he was, sect. 39, took upon him to appoint a fast at Tiberias, and was obeyed; though indeed it was not out of religion, but knavish policy.]

23 (return) [Note that Ananias, a lay Pharisee as we have seen in section 39, took it upon himself to declare a fast at Tiberias. He was obeyed, though he acted not from religious motives but from dishonest political calculation.]

24 (return) [ The character of this history of Justus of Tiberias, the rival of our Josephus, which is now lost, with its only remaining fragment, are given us by a very able critic, Photius, who read that history. It is in the 33rd code of his Bibliotheca, and runs thus: "I have read [says Photius] the chronology of Justus of Tiberias, whose title is this, [Footnote The Chronology of] the Kings of Judah which succeeded one another. This [Justus] came out of the city of Tiberias in Galilee. He begins his history from Moses, and ends it not till the death of Agrippa, the seventh [ruler] of the family of Herod, and the last king of the Jews; who took the government under Claudius, had it augmented under Nero, and still more augmented by Vespasian. He died in the third year of Trajan, where also his history ends. He is very concise in his language, and slightly passes over those affairs that were most necessary to be insisted on; and being under the Jewish prejudices, as indeed he was himself also a Jew by birth, he makes not the least mention of the appearance of Christ, or what things happened to him, or of the wonderful works that he did. He was the son of a certain Jew, whose name was Pistus. He was a man, as he is described by Josephus, of a most profligate character; a slave both to money and to pleasures. In public affairs he was opposite to Josephus; and it is related, that he laid many plots against him; but that Josephus, though he had his enemy frequently under his power, did only reproach him in words, and so let him go without further punishment. He says also, that the history which this man wrote is, for the main, fabulous, and chiefly as to those parts where he describes the Roman war with the Jews, and the taking of Jerusalem."]

24 (return) [ Justus of Tiberias was a rival of our Josephus. His history is now lost, but the highly capable critic Photius read it. In the 33rd code of his Bibliotheca, Photius describes the history and gives its only surviving fragment: "I have read [says Photius] the chronology of Justus of Tiberias. Its title is [Footnote The Chronology of] the Kings of Judah who succeeded one another. Justus came from the city of Tiberias in Galilee. He begins his history with Moses and ends it with the death of Agrippa. Agrippa was the seventh [ruler] of the family of Herod and the last king of the Jews. He took power under Claudius. His authority was increased under Nero and increased still more by Vespasian. He died in the third year of Trajan, and the history ends there. Justus writes very concisely and passes quickly over the matters that most needed attention. He was himself a Jew by birth and shared Jewish prejudices. He makes no mention at all of the appearance of Christ, what happened to him, or the wonderful works he did. Justus was the son of a Jew named Pistus. Josephus describes Justus as a man of deeply corrupt character, enslaved by money and pleasure. In public affairs, Justus opposed Josephus. He is said to have plotted against Josephus many times. But although Josephus often had his enemy in his power, he only reproached him and let him go without further punishment. Josephus also says that the history Justus wrote is mostly fiction. This is especially true, he says, of its accounts of the Roman war with the Jews and the taking of Jerusalem."]

25 (return) [ Here Josephus, a priest, honestly confesses that he did that at the command of Vespasian, which he had before told us was not lawful for a priest to do by the law of Moses, Antiq. B. III. ch. 12. sect. 2. I mean, the taking a captive woman to wife. See also Against Apion, B. I. sect. 7. But he seems to have been quickly sensible that his compliance with the commands of an emperor would not excuse him, for he soon put her away, as Reland justly observes here.]

25 (return) [ Here Josephus, a priest, honestly admits that he acted on Vespasian’s orders. He had previously told us that the law of Moses forbade a priest to do this (Antiq. B. III. ch. 12. sect. 2). I mean that he married a captive woman. See also Against Apion, B. I. sect. 7. But he seems to have quickly realized that obeying an emperor’s orders would not excuse him. For he soon divorced her, as Reland rightly observes here.]

28 (return) [ Of this Epaphroditus, see the note on the Preface to the Antiquities.]

28 (return) [For more about this Epaphroditus, see the note on the Preface to the Antiquities.]