of this author, that the other sacred books also were taken to Rome, it seems extraordinary that a small portion only of this most interesting part of the spoils should be borne in the triumph, no notice, apparently, being taken of the other and much larger portion. This subject will perhaps receive some additional light from the following passage of our author, which occurs near the conclusion of his account of his own life. 6 JOSEPHUS. 1' Moreover, when the city Jerusalem was taken by force, Titus Caesar persuaded me frequently to take whatsoever I would out of the ruins of my country; and said that he gave me leave to " do so. But when my country was destroyed, I thought nothing else to be of any value, which I 'could take and keep as a comfort under my calamities: so I made this request to Titus, that my family might have their liberty. I had also the holy books by Titus's concession.' 6 6 · Ἤδη δὲ κατὰ κράτος τῆς τῶν Ἱεροσολυμιτῶν πόλεως έχομένης, Τίτος Καίσαρ ἔπειθέν με πολλάκις ἐκ τῆς κατασκαφῆς τῆς πατρίδος πᾶν ὅ,τι θέλοιμι λαβεῖν· συγχωρεῖν γὰρ αὐτὸς ἔφασκεν. Ἐγὼ δὲ τῆς πατρίδος πεσούσης μηδὲν ἔχων τιμιώτερον, ὃ τῶν ἐμαυτοῦ συμφερῶν εἰς παραμυθίαν λαβὼν φυλάξαιμι, σωμάτων ἐλευθέρων, τὴν αἴτησιν ἐποιούμην Τιτον, καὶ βιβλίων ἱερῶν ἔλαβον χαρισαμένου Τίτου. Josephi Vita. §. 75. The author hopes he shall be pardoned for introducing here a critical remark on the concluding sentence of this passage, and on Whiston's translation of it. The translator considered the clause, σωμάτων ἐλευθέρων, as the genitive case governed by τιμιώτερον, and understood the request of Josephus (τὴν αἴτησιν) as referring to these words. Now according to this construction, the following clause, relating to the books, is introduced very awkwardly in the midst of another subject with which it has no connexion. The answer also of Josephus is irrelevant to the complimentary offer of Titus, which obviously referred to the valuable treasures contained in the city any of which Josephus was urged to take and carry away with him as memorials of that country, which he was now about to quit, and of that greatness and The reader will, perhaps, observe the apparent inconsistency between this and the preceding extract: for the expression, the holy books,' would seem to include all the volumes which composed the Old Testament: whereas the Pentateuch at least was reserved for the public triumph, and afterwards deposited in the royal palace. The difficulty, however, arises not from the statement of Josephus himself, but from the oversight of his translator. 'some of the holy books,' glory which had now passed away for ever. It was not the natural answer to such an offer, to beg the liberty of his family. Again, with reference to the actual household of Josephus, this request was unnecessary: for he had been set at liberty, at Alexandria, in the preceding year; and that in the most honourable manner. (Compare Jewish War, Book 111. chap. viii. §. 8, 9. with Book IV. chap. x. §. 7.) And if the request be supposed to be made for the collateral branches of his family, his brother would have been included in the number: whereas in the very next sentence we read, that his request for the liberty of his brother and of fifty friends with him was a distinct event, which occurred some short time after the incident now under consideration. The author, therefore, imagines that the construction of this passage has been mistaken. He considers the words, σωμάτων ἐλευθέρων, as the genitive case absolute, ovTwv being understood; and he interprets this clause as parenthetical, referring to the freedom already granted. He would translate the sentence, therefore, I had would have more correctly as follows: 'But I, thinking no thing more precious, which I 'could take and keep as a con'solation under my misfortunes, '(personal liberty having been already granted us,) made re'quest to Titus, and took some of the sacred books, Titus him'self freely bestowing them upon 'me. The importance of this correction of the passage arises from this consideration: that, according to Whiston's translation, Titus gave the books to Josephus, without knowing that he would attach any peculiar value to them. But, according to the proposed version, he gave them at Josephus's own request;-these being the things, which Josephus selected as the most precious relics, which he could save out of the ruins of his country, and to the perusal of which he looked forward as his only consolation under his misfortunes. He would, therefore, take every precaution, that none of the volumes should be lost or injured in their transfer, but that, as far as depended upon him, at least, they should all be safely conveyed to Rome. 1 expressed the sense of the original. The two accounts, therefore, are perfectly consistent with each other and from a comparison of these two assertions of the historian, we may perhaps venture to conjecture, that the Pentateuch was now selected for the triumph by the order of Titus himself, and the remainder of the volumes presented by him to Josephus. From these passages of the Jewish historian it seems clear that the authentic copy of the Old Testament, which had been deposited in the temple of Jerusalem, did not perish in the siege, but was carried from Jerusalem to Rome. CHAPTER II. THE SACRED BOOKS DID NOT SHARE THE FATE OF THE OTHER SPOILS OF THE TEMPLE OF JERUSALEM. WE have learned from Josephus that the spoils of the temple of Jerusalem were deposited in the public museum, in the temple of Peace:-but that the sacred books were not reckoned among those spoils; for the law was laid up in the royal palace, and the remainder of the volumes were in his own custody. Now there is no evidence to prove that these books were ever afterwards placed in the temple of Peace, among the other Jewish spoils: on the contrary, there are reasons for supposing that the separation thus recorded by the historian was final. Not to dwell again on the evidence of the triumphal arch of Titus, which contained a representation of the other spoils, but not of the sacred books; we shall turn to the historians, who mention the subsequent removals of those spoils, and to the state of the world at the time when those removals took place. SECTION I. THE SUBSEQUENT REMOVALS OF THE JEWISH SPOILS. THE temple of Peace, in which the Jewish spoils were first deposited, was destroyed by fire in the reign of the Emperor Commodus: but these spoils were preserved from the flames; and were first removed from Rome to Carthage by Genseric, and thence by Belisarius to Constantinople. The historians, who record these events, mention the golden vessels of the Jews, but are silent respecting the sacred books: an omission, which could scarcely have occurred, had those books on either occasion formed part of the plunder. First, at the sacking of Rome by Genseric and the Vandals, in the year 455, the spoils of the Jewish temple were carried by the conquerors to Carthage. Which circumstance is thus recorded in the chronicle of THEOPHANES. 1'Genseric entered Rome, without meeting any resistance, on the third day after • the murder of Maximus: and, seizing all the treasures, and carrying on board his ships all the choicest • ornaments of the city;—among which were vessels belonging to the churches, of solid gold, and or'namented with precious stones, and the Hebrew ' vessels, which Titus the son of Vespasian, after the 'destruction of Jerusalem, had brought with him to "Rome;-together with these taking also the Empress 'Eudoxia and her daughters, he set sail for Africa.' Again, in the year 534, when Belisarius had reconquered Africa, and returned in triumph to Constantinople, the same author speaks of the recovery of these treasures which had been carried from Rome, and among them of the spoils of the Jewish temple.2 Procopius, also, in his description of the triumph of Belisarius, mentions the same Jewish treasures, with 1 Ὁ δὲ Γιζέριχος, μηδενὸς αὐτῷ ἀντιστάντος, εἰσῆλθεν εἰς Ρώτ μην τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ τῆς σφαγῆς Μαξίμου, καὶ λαβὼν πάντα χρήσ ματα, καὶ τὰ τῆς πόλεως θεαματα εἰς τὰ πλοῖα ἐμβαλων·—ἐν οἷς ἦσαν κειμήλια ὁλόχρυσα καὶ διά λιθα ἐκκλησιαστικά, καὶ σκεύη — Εβραϊκά, ἅπερ Ουεσπασιανοῦ |