truth. A similar judgment must be passed upon that part of the Mishna which relates to this subject. Let it not be thought that the Talmud contains none but true recollections of early times for even in the Mishna we meet with a mode of refining upon difficult points of antiquity quite analogous to the so-called Rationalism of modern times.1 But there were other works also which united the two purposes of historical description and moral exhortation. Such a work is the Book of Jubilees, written by a Jewish hand, about the first century before Christ, and much read by Christians afterwards. In modern times it was supposed to be irrecoverably lost, until the recent discovery of an Ethiopic translation. The evident design of its strict exhortations is to recommend the accurate observance of the Sabbath with all the festal arrangements of the Old Testament; but it also explains from history the meaning of all the sacred divisions of time, especially the Jubilees; to this end breaking up the entire history of the world down to the giving of the law at Sinai into small periods,* everywhere half fancy and half truth. Thus during the few centuries before and after Christ arose, even within the bounds of the ancient community, an extremely extensive and varied literature on the subject of the ancient history. Very few of these works, however, have come down to us complete; many are as yet only very imperfectly known; and the very existence of many once popular works can only be inferred from certain indications, which do not even enable us to give their names or trace them with any certainty. This truth must be steadily borne in mind in reading the works which have come down to us: or else we shall miss the true See for instance the trifling explanation of the lifting of Moses' hands in Ex. xvii., and of the serpent in Numb. xxi., which is given by the nun UN ch. iii. end. Even the Arabian Rabbis, as Saadia Tanchum, are often only triflers in Biblical exegesis: Ewald, Ueber die Arabisch geschriebenen Werke Jüdischer Sprachgelehrten, Stuttgart, 1844, p. 7; and in the Tübingen Theologische Jahrbücher, 1845, p. 574 sq. 2 The first certain allusion to this book occurs as early as 4 Ezra xiv. 4-6. Translated by Dillmann, with a dissertation on its age, in the Jahrbücher der Biblischen Wissenschaft, ii. p. 230 sqq. and iii. It was published in Ethiopic, also edited by Dillmann, at Kiel, 1859. On a recently discovered ancient Latin version, see Göttinger Gelehrte Anzeigen, 1862, p. 2 sq. Hence seems to have arisen its other name, signifying in effect rà λeжTà (subtilia, minuta) Ts Fevérews (comp. Karà TÒ λεπτὸν διηγεῖσθαι and λεπτολογεῖν in Epiph. Hær. (li. 10. 12 sq. 30), and still more abbreviated Ἡ λεπτὴ Γένεσις, Parva Genesis; which however is illsuited to a work of such extent. See Göttinger Gelehrte Anzeigen, 1860, p. 404 sq., and D'Abbadie's Catal. Codd. Aethiop. p. 133. The Ethiopians generally name the book Kûfâlæ. 5 Philo, at the commencement of his Life of Moses, refers to many highly-esteemed historical works, on Moses for instance, written by Jews, but not included among the sacred writings; but his own works show how little of any importance respecting the ancient history could be gleaned from them. meaning and importance of much which even they contain.' Moreover it is very possible, indeed often obvious, that many, and especially the earlier of these authors, made use of written records not admitted among the canonical books. We must not overlook even such authorities; though the most careful search will be rewarded with but few grains of gold in this increasingly desolate expanse. For it is most melancholy to perceive, that with the advance of time the correct understanding of the distinctive features and even of the sublimity of antiquity retrogrades. Of this many instances will come before us as we advance. Before the expedition of Alexander, no Greek observer had specially noticed the peculiar manners and history of this recluse people; they were at that time confounded with the Syrians, Phoenicians, and Palestinians (or properly Philistines): even Herodotus neither visited their country nor learned anything definite about the people or their name, except that they were circumcised. But as the Jews, and subsequently the Christians, became better known to the Greeks and Romans, some few writers among the latter gradually began to take some interest in the ancient history and peculiar customs of the Israelites. Few of these however were so free from prepossession against them as Aristotle3 or Hecatæus of Abdera; the greater number were hindered by the strong wall of existing prejudices against the nation from gaining any profound or comprehensive view of their history, as will be further shown in its proper place. A fresh impetus, both stronger and purer, to the study of this history, was felt by early Christianity. No sooner had the Christian Church gained a firm and peaceful footing in the world, than such men as Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome turned their fresh energies to this sphere. Here we see the first serious preparation and prelude to a philosophic treatment of the Old Very little has as yet been correctly observed on the question how many and what uncanonical books are referred to in the New Testament; but it ought at length to be seen that much that is alluded to in the historical books and in the Epistles, especially that to the Hebrews, must necessarily come from writings which have not become canonical. It is usual to assume an oral tradition as the basis of such stories, without considering the utter impossibility of this assumption in the greater number of cases; for even if any view not found in the canonical books had been first formed in a school (which Philo assumes, ii. p. 81), yet it must have been early reduced to writing. In the same According to Clearchus, in Josephus' Against Apion, i. 22. This entire disquisition in Josephus is of importance. 4 In Josephus, Against Apion, i. 22; Eusebius, Præp. Evangelica, ix. 4; and Diod. Sic. i. 40, according to Photius. Testament history. But it is notorious that all such efforts were then left incomplete, and that a long night of increasing darkness soon supervened. Through Islam this darkness became even denser; since, with all its eagerness to catch up and remodel any traditions of Biblical antiquity which came in its way, it took them only from the mouth of the then living Jews and Christians, and not even from the best extant sources.' Owing its own birth to a neglect of history, Islam has never given birth to any true history. We have now in the broad light of day to complete (what the best Fathers of the Church began) a philosophic history, the certainty and truth of which shall ultimately attract all alike— Jews and Mohammedans as well as Christians, scholars as well as soldiers and kings. These traditions are found collected in the great Islamite Chronicles, beginning with that of Tabari, or as an introduction to the history of Muhammed; see Weil, Biblische Legenden der Muselmänner, 1845, and my own remarks in the Tübingen Theologische Jahrbücher, 1845, p. 571 sqq. 204 SECTION III. CHRONOLOGY OF THE ANCIENT HISTORY. THE chronology of the history of an ancient nation, whether in its larger divisions, or in its entire extent, can never be secure and readily available as exact science, unless it is proved that during its national existence it employed a continuous and fixed computation of years (or Era) in specifying the order of events. Yet how long it is before a nation reaches this point at all! and how few of the nations of antiquity, despite their high culture in many other respects, ever understood the necessity of this art, simple and all-sufficient as it is! The great historical phenomena and events themselves may so entirely absorb the thoughts of a nation or other community, that for a long time they hardly find it necessary to look any further and enquire to what definite period of time they belonged. In Israel this deep interest in the internal life, and childlike disregard of the outside of history, was of long duration, induced and cherished as it was by historical position. Even in the New Testament age, the narratives of the Gospel-history long remained at this first stage of self-sufficing and homelike seclusion, until at length Luke began to find its place for it in the chronology of the great world. And ancient Israel rejoiced for centuries in its deliverance from Egypt and the bondage of Pharaoh, without even seriously asking the name of the Pharaoh under whom Moses rose up, or caring much in what year or even century he reigned. Where in the ordinary transactions of life a date could not be dispensed with, as in deeds concerning transfers of property, the ancient Israelites probably found it sufficient to count time by the years of their ruler. No such Israelitish document has indeed as yet been discovered; but this system was in use among the Egyptians, even as late as the age of the Ptolemies. Before the Monarchy, one sort of supreme power in Israel possessed the requisite permanency to serve as interpreted, at least as far as the numbers are concerned. Many Egyptian records of the kind have already been discovered and reliably a reference in counting the course of years-the High-priest's office; and this it could do even when greatly reduced in power.' But when in much later times documents such as these were appealed to, it would be necessary in the first instance to obtain from some master of the science a determination of the time when any given ruler lived; and thus a system seemingly simple proved itself in the end particularly technical and complicated. Extraordinary events also, whether joyous or grievous, not unfrequently served as chronological landmarks, as we clearly see in some examples taken from common life. But no one such date remained long enough in the national memory to become permanent. Thus during the whole period in which Israel flourished as a nation, no one era ever came into continuous and general use. 1. But it would be a mistake to infer from this that the ancient Israelites possessed no means of counting the course of years. They were assuredly not so barbarous as this; and in every civilised state the necessity of a continuous survey of the years is felt at every step. Computations of years, reaching back very far, were especially required for the settlement of the annual festivals and the entire calendar.3 In the ancient world generally, and in Egypt especially, this work was the duty of the Priesthood; and so it doubtless was in Israel. Moreover the Sabbatical and Jubilee years of the Israelites, which were undoubtedly faithfully observed.in the earliest ages, introduced the further necessity of computing long series of years (Cycles). As the Priests thus had to compute very various and sometimes extensive periods, we can see no reason why they should not have possessed a permanent chronology.5 The mode in which the Book of Origins marks time furnishes 1 The great excitement occasioned in drinus, Strom. vi. 4. early times by the death of a High-priest and the consequent inauguration of a successor, and the marked epoch formed by these events, may be imagined from the indications explained in my Alterthümer des Volkes Israel, p. 197, 425. 2 Amos i. 1; comp. Zech. xiv. 5; the case briefly mentioned above (p. 52) may have been a similar one in primeval times; a third instance is that of Ezekiel's reckoning from the captivity of King Jehoiachin, i. 2, &c. Especially as distinct traces are perceptible of two beginnings to a year; one of which at least (that maintained by the Priests) required a scientific calculation. See my Alterthümer, p. 394 sq. Of the Egyptian priests we have the important description in Clemens Alexan The calculation of centuries would be much easier if the fiftieth year were always the year of Jubilee; see my Alterthümer, p. 415 sq. The later Jewish scholars generally fixed the fiftieth and not the forty-ninth as the Jubilee year; as we see plainly by the Seder Olam rabba, c. xi.; Philo's Questiones in Genesin xvii. 1 seq. apud Aucher, ii. p. 209; Constitutiones Apostolice, vii. 36, and other authorities; see my Alterthümer, p. 419. The Book of Jubilees, however, reckons by jubilees of precisely seven weeks, i. e. of forty-nine years; but this is only a learned fancy of treating and reckoning the whole ancient history as sacred, as if some special sanctity lay in the constantly-recurring number seven. |