the fourteenth and the beginning of the fifteenth day of the Month of Nisan 1. Because the day of their going out of Aegypt is mentioned to have been the fifteenth of the Month of (p) Numb 33. v. â— Nisan from whence it is evident that according to the Jewish Institution they celebrated the Passover on the same day 2. From the Hebrew Text the Words are as follows (q) â—xod 12. v. 5 6. Your Lamb shall be without Blemish of the first Year you shall take it out from the Sheep or Goats and you shall keep it up till the fourteenth day of the same Month and the whole Assembly of the Congregation of Israel shall kill it in the Evening 3. From the Computation of the days of Unleavened Bread the Words of the Institution of this Feast are these (r) Ex. 12. v. 17. And you shall observe the Feast of unleâ—vened Bread for in this self same day have I brought your Armies out of the Land of Aegypt therefore shall you observe this day in your Generations by an Ordinance for ever In the first Month on the fourteenth day of the Month at Even you shall eat unleavened Bread until the one and twentieth day of the Month at Even Which Words plainly intimate that the Feast of the Unleavened Bread ended on the one and twentieth Day of the Month of Nisan in the Evening it being likewise said in the following Verse Seven Days shall there be no Leaven found in your House It is very evident from thence that the beginning of the Days of the Unleavened Bread ought to be fixed on the End of the fourteenth Day of the Month of Nisan or on the Beginning of the fifteenth to count from Sun-set And it is sufficiently demonstrable out of many Passages in (s) Exod. 12. v. 6. 17. Holy Scripture that the Feast of the Unleavened Bread and of the Passover began on the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That which has occasioned this difference among the Chronologers is that since that time the Jews have begun their Months from the New Moon so that the same day which before was the fifteenth was afterwards called the fourteenth day of the Month Nisan § 5. The Chronologers do disagree in their The Israeliteâ— went out of Aegypt on the 5th â—eria Opinions concerning the Character of the Feria when the Israelites went out of Aegypt There are many among which are Henricus Buntingus Hicronymus Zanchius and Hamlinus who maintain this day to have been the seventh Feria They alledge in their behalf the Words in Deuteronomy (t) C. 5. v. 15. Remember that thou wast a Servant in the Land of Aegypt and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and a stretched out Arm Therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath Day (u) Lib. 2. c. â— de an Christ p. 263. William Lange determines the Day of their Departure out of Aegypt to have been the fifteenth of Nisan the fifth Day of April according to the Julian Calendar the first Day of the Unleavened Bread and the sixth Feria which he pretends to prove from the Authority of the Seder Olam Rabbah or the great Hebrew Chronicle with whom in some measure consents (x) Lib. 1. p. 53. demonstr Chronol Temporaritis But the most general Opinion is that the Jews began their Passover and went out of Aegypt on the fifth Feria to commence the Day from the Sun-set Besides many of the Ancients among the Modern Chronologers (y) L. 3. Can. Isag p. 282. Josephus Scaliger (z) Lib. 2. Tit. 3. Cap 1. Behmius in his Chronological Manuduction Dorsheus Frankenbergerus and Calvisius agree in this Point because it has most evidently appeared out of the Astronomical Calculations that in the first year of the Departure of the Israelites out of Aegypt the Passover which was celebrated at the Full Moon was coincident with the fifth Feria and the same Character is correspondent to what is related in Exodus in the sixteenth Chapter For if the two and twentieth day of the second Month called Jiar was the seventh Feria it must needs follow that the fifteenth of the Month of Nisan was the fifth Feria For betwixt the twenty second Day of the Month Jiar and the fifteenth of Nisan are thirty seven Days which if divided by 7 the Residue is two Days which if subtracted from 7 there remains 5 which demonstrates the fifteenth Day of the Month of Nisan to have been the fifth Feria That the 23d of the Month of Jiar was the seventh Feria is evident out of the above-mentioned sixteenth Chapter of Exodus where it is said that on the fifteenth Day of the second Month Jiar they came unto the Wilderness of Sin the same Day they murmured against Moses and in the Evening the Quails came up and covered the Camp and the next following Day being the sixteenth before Sun-rising they were blessed with the Manna for six Days together to wit the 16th 17th 18th 19th 20th 21st The last Day they gathered twice as much as the other Days because of the Rest of the Sabbath of the next following Day being the 22d and the seventh Feria But to give you a more exact Idea of such Maters as have a Relation to the Chronology of this Epocha the following Table represents the three first Months of the Year of the Israelites Departure out of Aegypt and their Congruity with the Julian Calendar D. of the Mon. Nis Days of the Mon. of April The Feriae  1 II 5 The beginning of the Ecclesiastical Tear 2 III 6  3 IV VII  4 V 1  5 VI 2 ☉ in ♈ 6 VII 3  7 VIII 4  8 IX 5  9 X â— Exod. 12. v. 3. 10 XI VII Segregation of the Paschal Lamb. 11 XII 1  12 XIII 2  13 XIV 3  14 XV 4 out of Aegypt 15 XVI 5 The Pas First-born slain Departure 16 XVII 6 They pitch their Tents in Etham 17 XVIII VII They pitch in Pihahiroth 18 XIX 1 They pass through the Red Sea 19 XX 2  20 XXI 3 They pitch in Marah 21 XXII 4  22 XXIII 5  23 XXIV 6  24 XXV VII  25 XXVI 1  26 XXVII 2  27 XXVIII 3  28 XXIX 4  29 XXX 5  30 I of May 6  D. of the Mon. Jiar Days of the Mon. of May. The Feriae  1 II VII  2 III 1  3 IV 2  4 V 3  5 VI 4  6 VII 5  7 VIII 6  8 IX VII  9 X 1  10 XI 2  11 XII 3  12 XIII 4  13 XIV 5  14 XV 6  15 XVI VII They come to the Wilderness of Sin 16 XVII 1 The Gathering of Manna 17 XVIII 2  18 XIX 3  19 XX 4  20 XXI 5  21 XXII 6  22 XXIII VII No Manna by
Assembly several Persons skilful in Calculation being gathered together did as it were constitute a Circle of 19 Years as an Example for following Generations This Circle they called Enneadecaeterida Let us follow that Example not that we ought to doubt with any vain Opinion concerning so great an Assembly but true Reason being found in it let the Affections of all so concur that upon the same Night our Sacrifice may be offer'd for the Resurrection of our Lord. § 6. Altho' we say that we have those things Whether the Christians received the Lunar Cycle from the Jews which the Christians first invented from the Latter Jews yet from the Scope which the first Authors of the Cycle intended it seems apparent that they examined the secret Writings of the Jews lest they should celebrate at the same time the Feast of the Pasca with Unbelievers For suppose the ancient Lunar Cycle together with the Pascal Times were different from the Cycle of the Jews certainly Christians could not know by the Use of the same Cycle at what time the Jews would celebrate the Pasca nor how they ought to refrain from the sacred Things of their Adversaries (d) Ration pag. 9. de doct Temp. T. 1. p. 615. Isaacus Argyrus confirms my Opinion in this that before the Pasca of the Christians the Judaic one was placed which in the Holy and first Oecumenic Synod the Holy Fathers so constituted that it might be observed in what Day of the Week the Pasca of the Jews fell that on the following Lord's Day the Christians might perform theirs § 7. Tho' the first Authors of the Lunar Cycle thought that 19 Lunae-Solar Years were equal to Whether or no the first Authors of the Lunar Cycle thought that 19 Luna-Solar Tears or 235 Lunations were equal to 19 equal Jul. Years The manner how the Ancients us'd the Lunar Cycle noting down Pascal Limits from its Numbers 19 Julian Years yet 't is not so if we regard Mathematical Rigour for they will fall betwixt both For 19 Julian Years make 6939 D. 18 H. but 19 Lunar Solar Years contain only 6939 D. 16 H. 32′ 20″ whose difference is 1 H. 27′ 40″ yearly And so much do 19 mean New and Full Moons lose every 19 Years which in about 1257 Years make four Days almost § 8. To find the just time of the Pasca the ancient Christians as was now said used the Lunar Cycle and that the Use hereof may more largely appear we shall lay down the whole Lunar Cycle with the Pascal times in which the utmost Limits are the 23d of March for upon this Dâ—â— the Author of the Vernal Equinox would have it fall which the Full Moon Pascal ought always to precede very nearly and April the 19th whence Christians would never celebrate their Pasca before the 22d of March or after the 25th of April To which the ancient Verses of those Computers have Relation Extremum Pasca monstrat tua passio Marce Item Pasca nec undenas Aprilis ante Kalendas Nec post septenas Maii valet esse Kalendas C. ☽ 1 T. P. April 5 2 Mar. 25 3 April 13 4 April 2 5 Mar. 22 6 April 10 7 Mar. 30 8 April 18 9 April 7 10 Mar. 27 C. ☽ 11 T. P. Apr. 15 12 Apr. 4 13 Mar. 24 14 Apr. 12 15 Apr. 1 16 Mar. 21 17 Apr. 9 18 Mar. 29 19 Apr. 17 But in the Gregorian Year the Pascal Limits are found by the Lunar Cycle till the Year 1700 from the following Table C. ☽ 1 T. P. April 12 2 April 1 3 Mar. 21 4 April 9 5 Mar. 29 6 April 17 7 April â—â— 8 Mar. 26 9 April 14 10 April 3 C. ☽ 11 T. P. Mar. 23 12 Apr. 11 13 Mar. 31 14 Apr. 18 15 Apr. 8 16 Mar. 28 17 Apr. 16 18 Apr. 5 19 Mar. 25 § 9. Some think that for its Worth and The Reason why the Character of the Lunar Cycle was in times past called â—he Golden Number great Use that it might be compared with Gold and from this Comparison take its Name whereas it was a Rule for the Ancients in calculating the Full and New Moons upon which account (e) Ration p. 9. de doct temp T. 1. p. 615. Petavius says Beginning at any Year For Example from that which gives a New Moon on the 23 d of Jan. Feb. 21st March 23 d c. Vpon those Days he wrote the Figure 1 in the Margin of the Calendar on the 2 d Year they considered and found the New Moons got forward about 11 Days viz. on Feb. 10. and March the 12th c. and against those Days they placed in their Calendar the Figure 2. So on the 3 d 4th and following Years upon those Days that the New Moon fell every Month they placed the Figures 3 4 c. against them in the Calendar And at last having past over 19 Years they renewed the same Figures again These were the Figures or Numbers in the Calendar which were called the Golden Number Others relate that the Alexandrians in times past sent this Cycle to the Romans in a Silver Table writ with Golden Figures and thence they took their Name CHAP. VII Of the Cycle of Indiction 1. The Cycle of Indiction is a System of 15 Julian Years perpetually recurring that the times of certain Pensions might be made known to the Roman Subjects § 1. SOme of the Graecians will have Indictio quasi in Actio and Cedrenus is admired What we ought to understand by tâ—e Name Indiction for following this Opinion Onuphrius will have Indictio to come ab Indice Crucis seen by Constantine when he fought against Maxentius But these are frivolous Conjectures Indictio rather comes ab indicere and was particularly used at first to denominate a certain Species of Pensions (a) Apud Pudaeum in Pandect p. 83. Ascanius reckons up three kinds of Pensions or rather Pensitations well known to the ancient Romans First the Canon to which Imposts Tributes c. were referr'd Secondly the Oblation at this time called the Aids And Thirdly the Indiction which the Ancients called Collecting Cicero also calls it collected The Greeks call this Cycle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dio calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the same Sense that the Olympias is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. which last Words are used by the Writers of the Antiochian History By the (b) Pallad de Rebus Gestis Chrysost Cod. Theod. de Indulg Debit Latines Distributiones and Fusiones were commonly used instead of Indictiones § 2. There are many Opinions in this matter The chief are these (c) Lib. 11. de doct temp item in Ration p. 1. l. 6. c. 1. First Dionysius Of the Original and Antiquity of these Indictions Petavius brings a great many Opinions about the time but thinks them all Conjectures (d) Canon Isagog l. 3. p. 179.
reason of the Sabbath 23 XXIV 1 They come in Raphidim 24 XXV 2  25 XXVI 3 Moses strikes Water out of the Rock 26 XXVII 4 The Jews vanquish the Amalekites 27 XXVIII 5 Jethro comes to Moses 28 XXIX 6 Election of the LXX Elders 29 XXX VII  D. of the Mon. Siv Days of the Mon. of June The Feriae  1 XXXI 1 They come into the Wildern of Sinai Exod. 19. v. 1. 2 I June 2  3 II 3  4 III 4  5 IV 5  6 V 6  7 VI VII Beginning of the 40 days Moses staid 8 VII 1 upon the Mount the End of which falls in the Month of Tamuz which is observed as a Fast-day by the Jews to this day 9 VIII 2  10 IX 3  11 X 4  12 XI 5  13 XII 6  14 XIII VII  15 XIV 1  16 XV 2  17 XVI 3  18 XVII 4  19 XVIII 5  20 XIX 6  21 XX VII  22 XXI 1  23 XXII 2  24 XXIII 3  25 XXIV 4  26 XXV 5  27 XXVI 6  28 XXVII VII  29 â—XVIII 1  3â— XXIX 2  § 6. The Words in (a) Cap. 12. v. 6. Exodus and the whole Of the time when they killed the Lamb for the Passover Assembly of the Congregation of Israel shall kill it betwixt the two Evenings have met with various Interpretations Aben Ezra understands by it the Interval betwixt Sun-set and the Beginning of the Night of which Opinion is also Rabbi David Kimchi But since according to (b) L. 7. c. 17. de Bel. Judaic Josephus at the Feast of one Passover there were slain 255600 Lambs we also agree with the same Author in Opinion who asserts that the Jews used to begin at nine a-clock about three in the Afternoon with us to kill these Beasts and leave off again at eleven about five with us CHAP. X. Of the two Epocha's of the Division of the Land of Canaan among the Tribes of Israel and of their first beginning to cultivate the Ground 1. They first began from that time after they Israelites had passed the River of Jordan and made themselves Masters of the Land of Canaan (a) Numb 33. v. 51. seq 2. At which time all the Tribes had their particular inheritance assigned them (b) Numb 34. v 1. seque 3. The year of this Distribution was the 45th after the second from the time of their going out of Aegypt as is evident from the Words of (c) Jos 14. 7. 16 Caleb Forty Years was I when Moses the Servant of the Lord sent me from Kadesh-Barnea to espy out the Land and I brought him word again as it was in mine Heart And now behold the Lord hath kept me alive as he said the 45 years ever since the Lord spake this Word unto Moses while the Children of Israel wandred in the Wilderness and now I am this day eighty five years old (d) Vid. Num. 1. and 13. 4. The year of the Distribution of the Land was the last Sabbatick Year in the Proleptick Cycle and the following was the first in the Sabbatick Cycle according to God's Institution (e) Lev. 25. v. 2. When you come into the Land which I give you then shall the Land keep a Sabbath Rest unto the Lord Six years thou shalt sow thy Field and six years thou shalt prune thy Vineyard and gather in the Fruit thereof But in the seventh year shall be a Sabbath of Rest unto the Land a Sabbath for the Lord thou shalt neither sow thy Field neither prune thy Vineyard (f) Vid. Ex. 23. v. 10 11. and Deut 15. v. 1 c. 31. v. 9. 5. From these Characters we conclude that the year of the Division of the Land was coincident with the 3261st year of the Julian Period Cycl ☉ 15. ☽ 14. And that the first year of cultivating the Ground began in the Month Tisri or first Autumnal Month of the same year of the Julian Period 6. If therefore 3261 years and 9 Months be subtracted Any year given of the Julian Period to investigate the year since the beginning of this Epochâ— from any certain year of the Julian Period the Residue shews the Year since the beginning of the Epocha of the Division of the Land of Canaan and if 3262 Years and 9 Months be subtracted from the same year of the Julian Period the Residue shews that since the beginning of the Epocha of the cultivating of the Land And if these several 3261 and 3262 years be added to the years of the before-named Epocha's the Product will be correspondent to the year of the Julian Period § 1. (g) L. 9. c. â—5 de doct temp Dionysius Petavius in Opposition to Whâ—ther the beginning of the Sabba tick Year may be gathered from the Words of Caleb Scaliger maintains that from the Words of Caleb no exact Computation can be made as to the year of the cultivating of the Land it being dubious whether the same ought to be accounted from the Beginning or End of the forty sixth year after the Departure of the Israelites out of Aegypt But besides that the Perspicuity of the Words of Caleb is an undeniable Argument against Petavius it is evident that the year of the Distribution of the Land was a Sabbatick Year and that of the cultivating of the Land the first of both the Sabbatick and Jubilean Cycles § 2. (h) L. 2. Chron. Laurentius Codomannus (i) L. 3. Johannes Different Opinions concerning the Epocha of cultivating the Ground Temporarius in his Chronological Demonstrations Jacobus Capellus and several other modern Chronologers are of Opinion that the first year of the cultivating of the Land was the fortieth after the Departure of the Israclites out of Aegypt at which time Joshua being declared Successor to Moses they passed Jordan and the Manna ceased But it seems very improbable to me that the Jews should immediately after their passing that River have begun to cultivate the Ground before they were in possession of any considerable part of it and that in a fertile Country where without question they found the Cities and Country stored with all manner of Necessaries for their Sustenance § 3. In Seder Olam or the Hebrew Chronicle published by Genebrardus which is of great Authority The Opinion of the Jews concerning it among the Jews the Author pretends to evince that the Division of the Land was not made till seven years after the six and fortieth year after the going out of Aegypt but they are mere Jewish Trifles not deserving a Place here as may be seen in (k) In Jos c. 13. quaest 14. Serrarius CHAP. XI Of the Epocha of the Destruction of TROY 1. This Epocha being much involved in Fables and Poetical Fictions the same must be carefully distinguished from the true Historical Relâ—tions so that not all that
of Sardis and the Banishment of the Pisistratides from Athens 2. The Battel of Marathon was according to Thucydides fought in the 20th year after the Banishment of Hippias from Athens 3. At which time Darius Hystaspes Father of Xerxes reigned over Persia whose Generals were Datis and Attaphernes Son to Attaphernes Brother of Darius and the Athenians had chosen Miltiades their General as may be seen in Herodotus Plutarch Justin Cornelius Nepos and a great many others 4. This Defeat of the Persians hapned in the fifth or sixth year before the Death of Darius So that the Battel of Marathon was fought in the 31st year of the Reign of Darius Hystaspes according to Herodotus 5. In the same 31st year of Darius there hapned a notable Eclipse of the Moon which Ptolemy observes to have been in the Night betwixt the third and fourth day of the month Tybis in the year of the Julian Period 4223 on the 25th of April the 4th Feria 6. The Athenians obtained this signal Victory when Phanippus was Archon or Prince of Athens who was succeeded by Aristides as may be seen in (e) In Vit. Arist Plutarch After Phanippus says he under whose Government the Athenians vanquished the Persians near Marathon Aristides was constituted Archon 7. At the same time Macerinus and Augurinus were Consuls at Rome according to Sulpitius Severus 8. The Battel of Marathon was fought in the 16th year after the Death of Brutus who freed his Native Country from the Kingly Government according to Dionysius Halicarnassaeus 9. Of this Expedition (f) L. 3. de Leg. Plato with whom agree (g) Lib. 1. Thucydides and (h) Orâ—t 31. Lysias has the following Words About ten years before the Sea-Fight near Salamis Datis came with the Persian Fleet into Graecia by the Order of Darius who had expresly commanded him under pain of Death to conquer and carry away Captives the Eretrians and Athenians 10. The Athenians obtained this Victory over the Persians towards the End of the 260th year after the Building of the City of Rome according to the Observations of (i) Lib. 17. c. 21. A. Gellius and Sulpitius Severus 11. The Battel of Marathon was fought either before or just at the time of the Full Moon as is evident out of what (k) Lib. 6. Herodotus has observed concerning the Lacedaemonians who at the Request of Phidippus were to assist the Athenians These are his Words The Lacedaemonians were not unwilling to assist the Athenians against the Persians but they were not at that time in a Condition to put it immediately in Execution being forbidden by their Laws it and being the ninth Day of the Month on which day the Soldiers refused to march as being just upon the Point of the Full Moon 12. (l) In Camill. Plutarch observes that the Battle of Marathon was fought on the 6th day of the Month Boëdromion and inserts a whole Catalogue of Days of the Month Boëdromion which prov'd fatal to the Persians On the 6th day of the Month Boëdromion says he the Persians were defeated by the Greeks at Marathon on the 3d of the same Month near Plataeas on the same day near Mychale on the 26th at Arbelas The Athenians vanquished the Persians at Sea near Naxus under the Command of Chabrias their General near the Full Moon of the Month of Boëdromion and near Salamis on the 20th day of the same Month. According to the several Observations and Testimonies of the Ancient Historians concerning this Signal Victory we agree with Scaliger that this Battle was fought in the year of the Julian Period 4223 Cycl ☉ 23. ☽ 5. towards Autumn or about the time of the Full Moon in August which hapned in that year on the 21st day of the same Month which Scaliger being misguided by the Athenian Years has fixed on the 5th day of October If therefore from any certain given year of the Julian Any certain year given of the Julian Period to find out the year since the beginning of this Epocha Period be subtracted 4222 years and seven Months the Residue shews the year since the Victory obtained at Marathon Vnto which if the above-mentioned Sum be added the Product is correspondent to the year of the Julian Period § 1. THE War betwixt the Greeks and Persians The Occasion of the War betwixt the Persians and Greeks was occasioned thus The Ionians inhabiting the Sea-Coasts of Asia had rebelled against Darius and being assisted by the Athenians had burnt the City of Sardis which so incensed Darius that he ordered one of those who attended him at Supper to repeat every day thrice these Words MY LORD REMEMBER THE ATHENIANS Another Cause was the Banishment of the Pisistratides by the Athenians who also grossly abused the Ambassadors sent by Darius Hippias who was descended from the Family of the Pisistratides and likewise banished Athens was not idle in improving these Opportunities to his Advantage and to stir up Darius against the Athenians which at last turned to his own Destruction he being stain in the Battle of Marathon as is evident out of (m) L. 2. c. 9. Justin and (n) Ad Attic. 9. Ep. 12. Cicero § 2. Those who have left us the History of these Times affirm that Darius sent a Fleet of The vast Army of Darius 600 Ships into Greece under the Command of Datis a Median by Birth and Artaphernes the Son of his Brother Artaphernes who together with Hippias and an Army of 200000 or as some will have it 300000 Foot and 10000 Horse invaded Greece but with very ill Success Of which Herodotus Justin Probus and others may be consulted § 3. The Athenians who saw themselves Of the Bravery of the Athenians not in a Condition to oppose a proportionable Force to that of their Enemies yet did not lose Courage but having gathered what Forces they could both of their own and amongst the Plataeans who were the only People that assisted the Athenians they with 10 or 11000 Men courageously encountred the Persians which Heroick Action of the Athenians is very pathetically represented by (o) Orat. 3â— Lysias the Athenian and one of the ten Orators of Greece Neither ought it to be pass'd by in Silence what is observed by (p) Dissert 14. Maximus Tyrius to wit that the Athenian Forces were for the most part composed of Country Fellows who at the News of the Enemies landing at Marathon flock'd in from the adjacent Countries to defend their Native Country against so powerful an Invasion § 4. Sethus Calvisius is of Opinion that Plutarch Whether the Battle of Marathon was fought â—â— the 6th day of the Month Boëdromion was mistaken in his Relation when he says that the Battle of Marathon was fought on the sixth day of the Month Boëdromion because says he this Battle hapned just at the N. Moon but in the Athenian Years the F. Moon could not happen on the sixth day of the
would deduce its Origin not from the time of this solemn Edict or Commandment but from that time when God foretold the rebuilding of the Temple and City by the Prophet But the Jews make themselves most ridiculous in that to invalidate the Arguments of the Christians by which they prove from this Prophecy that the Messias is already come they pretend to put this fictitious Computation upon the World that the Weeks of Daniel ought to begin with the Destruction of the first and end with the Destruction of the second Temple so that the 70 years of their Captivity during which time the Temple remained desolate is to be added to 410 years which they say is the time the 2d Temple has stood as may be seen in their Chron. Major in Rabbi Isaac Abarbinel Rabbi Isaac Ben Abraham and others of the same Stamp This Opinion is contradictory to the express Words of the Angel That from the going forth of the Commandment to restore the City these 70 Weeks are to be computed Besides that it is l Cap. 9. v. 17. absolutely false that there is an Interval of 490 years betwixt the Destruction of the first and the second Temple For as has been sufficiently demonstrated before n the Destruction of the first Temple hapned in the Year of the Julian Period 4124 whereas the second Temple was laid in Ashes in the Year of the Julian Period 4783 so that the whole Interval amounts to no less than 659 years It is also quite beyond the Purpose when the Jews pretend to explain the Words of the Angel concerning the Messiah of King Cyrus For tho' we read in (o) C. 45. v. 1. Isaiah Thus said the Lord to his Anointed to Cyrus no Infetence is to be made from thence that the Word Messiah either by it self or with such Attributes as occur in this Passage of Daniel are ever applied in the Scripture to any Earthly Prince See D. Mulleri Judaism c. 10. and Constantini L'Empereur Annotat. ad Jachiâ—d § 5. We read of four several Edicts concerning Four several Edicts concerning the Rebuilding of the City occur in the Scripture the Restauration of the Jews and the Rebuilding of the Temple and City in the Holy Scripture The first we meet with is in (p) C. 1. v. 1. Ezra In the first Year of Cyrus King of Persia that the Word of the Lord by the Mouth of Jeremiah might be fulfilled the Lord stirred up the Spirit of Cyrus King of Persia that he made a Proclamation throughout all his Kingdom and put it also in Writing saying Thus said Cyrus King of Persia The Lord God of Heaven hath given me all the Kingdoms of the Earth and he hath charged me to build him an House at Jerusalem which is in Judah Who is there among you of all his People His God be with him and let him go up to Jerusalem which is in Judah and build the House of the Lord God of Israel he is the God which m Ch. 22. is in Jerusalem c. The same Words we read also in the (q) C. 6. â— â—2 2â— Chronicles pursuant to the Prophecy of (r) C. â—â— Isaiah The second Mandate or Edict concerning this Restitution is describ'd likewise by (s) C 6. v. â—â— 11. 12. Ezra which being sent by Darius in the same year that the Prophets Haggai and Zechariah began to prophesie to the Governours beyond the River contains the following Words Let the Work of this House of God alone Let the Governour of the Jews and the Elders of the Jews build this House of God in his Place c. Also I have made a Decree that whosoever shall alter this Word let Timber be pulled down from his House and being set up let him be hanged thereon and let his House be made a Dunghil for this And the God that hath caused his Name to dwel there destroy all Kings and People that shall put to their Hand to alter and to destroy this House of God which is at Jerusalem I Darius have made a Decree let it be done with speed And the Prophecies of Hâ—ggai and Zachariah cited by Ezra mention expresly the second Year of Darius and the Month. for thus we read in Haggai Chap. 1. v. 1. seq In the second Year of Darius the King in the sixth Month in the first Day of the Month â—â—me the Word of the Lord by Haggai the Prophet unto Zetubbabel the Son of Shealtiel Governour of Judah and to Joshua the Son of Josedech the High Priest saying thus saith the Lâ—rd of Hosts c. Go up to the Mountain and bring Wood and build the House and I will take Pleasure in it and I will be glorified said the Lord The same Mandate is repeated by (t) C. 1. v 1. Zâ—chariah in the eighth Month of the same second Year of Darius when pursuant to God's Commandment and the Decree of the Persian King the Work was happily brought to Perfection according to the Words of Ezra (u) C. â— v. 15 16. And this House was finished on the third Day of the Month Adar which was in the sixth year of the Reign of Darius the King And the Children of Israel the Priests and the Levites and the rest of the Children of the Captivity kept the Dedication of this House with Joy The third Edict is likewise described by (x) C. 7. v. â— sâ—qâ— Ezra This Ezra went up from Babylon and the King granted him all his Request according to the Hand of the Lord his God upon him And there went up some of the Children of Israel and of the Priests and the Levites and the Singers and the Porters and the Nethinims unto Jerusalem in the 7th year of Artaxerxes the King And he came to Jerusalem in the 5th Month which was in the 7th Year of the King This Decree of King Artaxerxes granâ—s full Liberty to the Jews to return to Jerusalem and exempts all the Priests Levites and other Ministers of the House of God from Toll Tribute or Custom The fourth Edict concerned particularly Nehemiah (y) Ezr. â— v. 13. 24. who in the 20th year of King Artaxerxes got leave to go to Jerusalem with the King's Letter to the Governours beyond the River and unto Asaph the Keeper of the King's Forests that he should give the Jews Timber to make Beams for the Gates â—f the Palace which appeâ—tâ—ineth to the House and for the Wall of the City and for the House he was to enter into as may be seen more at large in Nehemiah Chap. 2. from the 1st to the 9th Verse And these are the four several Mandates concerning the Restauration of the Jews and the Rebuilding of the Temple and City unto one of which the Beginning of these 70 Weeks mâ—st be fixed For the better understanding of the different Opinions of the Chronologers concerning the Time and Reigns of these Kings unto whom the said Mandates are ascribed we have
Timâ—us Callisthenes whose Works are lost but the 〈◊〉 of them to be found in (f) Biblioth Diodorus Siculus Besides that the Reigns of these ancient Persian Monarchs are rendred illustrious to Posterity by many Celestial Characters as may beseen in (g) Almagest l. 5. c. 14. Ptolemy As to what relates to that Argument that no other of the Persian Monarchs are to be allow'd of but such as are mentioned in the Scripture (h) Chron. l. 2. p. 58. Vbbo Emmius has very well answered Hugo Broughton who patronizes the same Opinion in the following Words To prove their Hypothesis they alledge that only these Kings are named by Ezra and Nehemiah and therefore the rest mention'd in Pâ—ophanâ— History ought to be considered as supposititious If this way of arguing be allowable I see no Reason why it may not be said with the same Right The Books of the Kings and the Chronicles mention only five Assyrian Kings to wit Phul Theglaphalaâ—sar Sâ—â—â—anassar Sennacherib Asar-Hâ—â—don for Meroâ—â—â— Nabuchodonâ—sor Balshazar and Evilmerodach were Chaldaeâ—â—s not Assyrians therefore no other Kings have ruled over Assyria And thus we might proceed to the Kings of Syria and Egypt Can any thing be more weak or more vain For what is more evident than that in the History of one particular Nation no further mention used to be made of the Kings of the Neighbouring Nations than is requisite for the explaining or perfecting their Relations and that a whole Catalogue or Series of the Kings of any Nation is not to be look'd for but in the particular History of that Nation the Author intends to treat of Of which to say more would be superfluous c. § 8. One of the main Questions and the most difficult to be resolved belonging to this Point It was Darius Nothus whose Edict is mentioned Ez c. 6. is which of the three Darius's is to be understood by that Darius mentioned by Haggai Zechariah and Ezra It is well known that the first Darius is commonly sirnam'd Hystaspis the second Nothus and the third Codomannus Concerning the last it is put beyond all Dispute by the Consent of all the Chronologers that he had not the least Share in this Decree or Edict but about the two first the most learned Interpreters are very different in their Opinions (i) Ant. Lib. 9. cap. â— Josephus refers this Edict to Darius Hydaspis of whom he relates that being put in mind by Zorobabel of his Promise before he was King of rebuilding the City and Temple of Jerusalem and to restore all the Vessels and Utensils carried away by Nebuchadnezzar to Babylon he joyfully granted his Request commanding his Governours to conduct him and his Followers safely to Jerusalem to perfect the Structure of the Temple and ordering those of Phoenicia and Syria to furnish them with Cedars from Mount Libanon But tho' Bishop Vsher stands up in defence of the Opinion of Josephus yet his Relation renders the whole very dubious For he describes this Edict as an Effect of the Marriage betwixt Darius Hydaspis and Esther which how much contrary it is to Truth we have spoke of sufficiently before not to mention the unpardonable Mistake of Josephus when he makes those who went with Nehemiah to Jerusalem to amount to many Millions On the other hand there are very strong Motives which induce us to believe that the Edict of the Rebuilding of the Temple was made by Darius Nothus in the second year of his Reign For First it must be understood of the Reign of the same Darius when the Jews lived in Cieled Houses and the Temple laid waste which was the Reason they were afflicted with a general Scarcity (k) Hagg. 1. v. 4. c. 2. v. 16. Now there being but 12 years betwixt the Edict of Cyrus and the second year of the Reign of Darius Hydaspis it seems very improbable that in so short a time especially under the Reign of Cambyses the Jews should have built themselves Ceiled Houses and have quite laid aside that Zeal they had so lately shewn in contributing cheerfully towards the Rebuilding of the Temple (l) â—zr 2. v. 68. seq Secondly it is to be understood of the Reign of the same Darius under whose auspicious Reign the Jews after they had endured a great deal of Misery began to enjoy the Benefit of a more peaceable State pursuant to the Words of God in (m) C. 8. v. 11. seq Hag. 2. v. 9. Zechariah But now I will not be unto the Residue of this People as in the former days saith the Lord of Hosts For the Seed shall be more prosperous the Vine shall give her Fruit and the Ground shall give her Encrease and the Heavens shall give their Dew and I will cause the Remnant of this People to possess all these things and it shall come to pass that as ye were a Curse among the Heathen and House of Judah and House of Israel so will I save you and ye shall be a Blessing Fear not but let your Hands be strong For thus saith the Lord of Hosts As I thought to punish you when your Fathers provoked me to Wrath saith the Lord of Hosts and I repented not so again have I thought in these Days to do well unto Jerusalem and to the House of Judah Fear ye not But who is so little versed in the History of the Jewish Nation as to be ignorant of the many and various Calamities the Jews groaned under after the Reign of Darius Hydaspis Thirdly the above-cited Passages are to be understood of the same Darius who lived and reigned many years after the Solution of the Babylonian Captivity it being evident out of (n) Cap. 5. v. 6. Ezra that the Persian Nobles had not the least Remembrance of the Edict published in behalf of the Jews by Cyrus For which Reason it was that they were obliged to search the Royal Records But this appears in no wise agreeable to the Reign of Dar. Hydaspis there being but a few years betwixt the beginning of the Reign of Cyrus and that of this Darius who it is probable was one of the chief Persian Lords under Cyrus But this being applied to the Reign of Darius II. sirnamed Nothus there remains not the least Difficulty there being betwixt Cyrus and Darius Nothus above a hundred years For the Confirmation of which I cannot but alledge here the Words of (o) Hisâ— Univ p. â—58 Rupertus formerly Professor in the University of Altorf If it was Darius Hydaspis that granted Leave to the Jews to rebuild the Temple how is it possible that the Edict of Cyrus concerning the Restauration of the Jews could be so entirely forgotten For Darius Hydaspis was one of the principal Persian Lords under Cyrus and yet this same Darius is obliged to have Recourse to the Records Nehemiah was forced to inspect the Genealogies of those that returned with Zorobabel when at the time of Darius Hydaspis there were
Temple was destroyed on the Eve of the Sabbath towards the latter end of the 7th Year and it was likewise in the Week of the Station of Joarib and the 9th day of the Month Ab. In the same Manner hapned the 2 d Destruction And at both times the Levites were singing the Canticle And what Canticle God our Lord will return upon their Heads their Iniquity and destroy them in their Malice c. In the other Chronological Treatise written by Rabbi David Ganz they indeed own that Expedition of Fl. Vespasian and Tit. Vespasian to have been the same but at the same time relate Matters in a very different manner concerning Josephus and the Destruction of the Temple to the 3828th Year after the Creation and the 420th Year after its first Foundation All which is a convincing Argument of the Ignorance of the Jews in relation to their own History and the Destruction of their City § 3. We have already said in the foregoing Concerning the Computation of the Fathers of this Epocha Chapter that the Fathers have too much contracted that Interval betwixt the time of the Baptism and Passion of Christ from whence it is evident that their Computations of the Interval betwixt the Passion of Christ and the Destruction of Jerusalem being built upon an erroneous Hypothesis no great Account is to be made upon their Opinions in this Point § 4. (o) De â—su Tab. p. 59. Joh. Jac. Hainlinus is of Opinion that Whether the Destruction of the City hapned in the 71st year of Christ the Destruction of the City of Jerusalem hapned in the 71st year of Christ and in the 4784th year of the Jul. Period But this Opinion being founded upon the Fictitious Hypothesis of his Mystical Years is directly repugnant to the Ancient History Neither is it possible to find out an Expedient to make the Month of September of the 71st year of Christ coincident with the 2d year of the Reign of Vespasian as our Author would willingly persuade the World § 5. It is a very difficult Task to explain What Months are understood by Josephus in his Relation of the Destruction of Jerusalem the Foreign Names of the Months mentioned by Josephus in his Relation of the Destruction of Jerusalem For in his 6th Book Ch. 4. (p) De Bel. Jud. he says the Siege began on the 14th day of the Month Xanticus And in the same Book in the 8th Chapter he says that the Romans made themselves Masters of the first Wall on the 5th day of the Month Artemisius Thus he frequently makes mention of the Month Lous and refers the total Desolation of the City to the 8th day of the Month Gorpiaeus It is beyond all dispute that Josephus had borrowed these Names from the Macedonians who being subdued by the Romans had been forced to change their Ancient Lunar Calendar for the Solar of the Romans The Macedonian Months do thus correspond with the Julian Audinaeus January Peritius February Dystius March Xanthicus April Artemisius May. Daesius June Panemus July Lous August Gorpiaeus September Hyperberetaeus October Dius November Apellaeus December But whether Josephus by the Names of these Macedonian Months did understand them according to the Julian Months is a great Question Ruffinus Josephus Scaliger Calvisius Archbishop Vsher and many others are of this Opinion But for my part I am rather inclined to believe that Josephus by these Macedonian Names did understand the Jewish Months For it is expresly said by Josephus that his Country-men did go out of Aegypt on the same 14th day of the Month Xanthicus when Titus began to invest the City of Jerusalem and it being unquestionable that this was the 14th of the Month Nisan there is but little Probability that Josephus intended to make this day of the Month Nisan correspondent with a certain Day of the Julian Calendar And the Characters of the Epocha of the Departure of the Jews out of Aegypt shewing most evidently that the Jews did depart out of Aegypt not on the 14th but 16th day of April we may rationally conclude that Josephus did by the Month Xanthious understand the Month Nisan on the 14th day of which Month the Feast of the Passover was constantly kept by the Jews Secondly it is not very probable that the Jews should refer the Day of the first Destruction of their Temple to any certain Day of the Julian Calendar which was not as much as thought of at that time it being mention'd by Josephus that on the 10th day of the Month Lous likewise the first Temple was destroyed by Fire I see no Reason why by the Month Lous should not be understood the Month called AB by the Ancient Jews Thus the Words of the Prophet Jeremiah (q) C. 52. v. 12. may be reconciled with the Relation of Josephus In the Month says the Prophet on the 10th day of the Month AB which was the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar King of Babylon came Nebuzaradan Captain of the Guard which served the King of Babylon into Jerusalem and burned the House of the Lord c. According to this Hypothesis the Months are as follows Xanthicus Nisan Artemisius Giar Daesius Sivan Panemus Tamutz Lous Ab. Gorpiaeus Elul Hyperberetaeus Tisri Dius Marchesvan Apellaeus Casleu Audinaeus Tebeth Peritius Schebath Dystius Adar § 6. It is commonly supposed that Jerusalem How ofteâ— Jerusalem was taken was taken but twice and that not altogether without Reason if it be understood in reference of its total Destruction Nevertheless (r) L. 8. c. 18. de Bell. Jud. Josephus affirms that it was taken five several times before it was destroyed by Titus Jerusalem says he was taken five times before By Asoch the Aegyptian King and after him by Antiochus then by Pompey and after these by Herod and Sosias who preserved the City But before that time the King of Babylon had laid it quite desolate Which sufficiently contradicts that Vain-glorious Inscription mentioned by (s) Inscr Ant. fol. 154. Justus Lipsius which is as follows IMP. TITO CAESARI DIVI VESPASIANI F. VESPASIANO AUG PONTIFICI MAXIMO TRIB POT X. IMP. XVII COS. VIII P. P. PRINCIPI SUO S. P. Q. R. QUOD PRAECEPTIS PATRIS CONSILIISQUE ET AUSPICIIS GENTEM JUDAEORUM DOMUIT ET Uâ—BEM HIEROSOLYMAM OMNIBUS â—â—â—TE SE. DUCIBUS REGIBUS GENTIBUSQUE AUT FRUSTRA PETITAM AUT OMNINO INTENTATAM DELEVIT § 7. The Temple Destroyed by Titus is generally The Temple destroyed by Titus was the 2 d Temple called the second Temple For tho' according to (t) L. 15. c. 14. Ant. Josephus Herod did demolish the Temple and built a new one instead of it yet this being done only with an Intention to render the Structure of the Temple the more Magnificent and having no relation to its interiour Parts is therefore not called the 3d but the 2d Temple § 8. Josephus affirms that in the Siege and How many of the Jews perâ—shed in