nary; though there had been yet more circumstances in which they had agreed, this would have been no proof that one and the same person is spoken of.

Gamaliel says, Theudas boasts himself to be somebody,' and he' was slain;' Josephus, that Theudas said he was a 'prophet,' and his head was cut off.'

Josephus has informed us, concerning the Theudas he speaks of, that he got a good number of people to follow him to Jordan. Though Gamaliel and Josephus had concurred in so particular a circumstance as this, (which they do not,) yet it would not have been a sufficient reason for our supposing that they intended the same person.

I shall give an instance. Of Simon above mentioned, servant of Herod, Josephus says, that he plundered and burnt the palace at Jericho; and that he burnt several royal houses in divers parts, having first given them to be plundered by his followers. He says also, that the people with Simon were chiefly Peræans, or people that lived on the other side of Jordan. Afterwards, even while he is speaking of affairs that passed in Judea soon after the death of Herod, he says, that at Amatha near Jordan, a royal palace was burnt down, by a number of men very much like those 'who were with a Simon.'

If Josephus had omitted this last fact, and some other historian had related it, together with the name of the leader of this body of men, and given them their character; which, if true, must have resembled that of the men with Simon; unless the reputation of this historian had been very well established, it would have been thought that he was mistaken, and that the person he meant was Simon, though be called him by another name. A palace burnt down at Amatha by Jordan; who could these be but Simon's people, who, Josephus says, were mostly Peræans? Then the time agrees exactly; both facts in the absence of Archelaus from Judea after his father's death. This writer therefore must have been grossly mistaken, in the name of the person to whom he ascribes the conduct of this action.

Or, it is not unlikely, that critics might have been divided; some would have vindicated Josephus, and some the other writer; and yet they would have been all mistaken, unless they had allowed two different bodies of men, and two dif

μενα.

* Το εν Ιεριχεντι βασιλειον πιμπρησι δι' ἁρπαγης αγων τα εγκαταλελειμ Ant. l. xvii. c. 12. sect. 6. Το τε πολυ των Περαιων ibid. Κατεπρήσθη δε και τα επι τῳ Ιορδάνη ποταμῳ εν Αμαθοις βασιλεια υπο τινων συσάντων ανδρων Σίμωνι παραπλησιων ibid.

a

ferent matters to be spoken of, and that both the historians were in the right.

It is certain, that these impostors about this time had a resemblance in their pretensions, and their fates: one boasted he would give his followers a passage over Jordan, as Josephus's Theudas; another promised his people they should see the walls of Jerusalem fall down before them, as the Egyptian impostor. The great scene of expectation was the wilderness. But in this they agreed universally, the company was routed and dispersed, and usually the leaders executed. This, we may be certain, was the case, or else the government had been overturned.

These few circumstances then, in which Gamaliel's Theudas resembles him mentioned by Josephus, are no good argument, that one and the same person is intended.

Besides, there is one material circumstance in which they differ. Gamaliel says; "Before these days rose up Theudas-to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves." But Josephus says of his Theudas, that he 'persuaded a very great multitude to follow him:' and that many were slain, and many taken prisoners.' Josephus's Theudas must have had with him a much larger company than the former.

(3.) It has been very well observed by Whitby, that the ancients generally agreed, there was a Theudas before the coming of our Lord, though Josephus has taken no notice of him. Beza was of opinion, that the Theudas of whom Gamaliel speaks, did not arise before our Saviour's nativity, but soon after Herod's death, in that sort of interregnum, which there was in Judea whilst Archelaus was at Rome. Which was also archbishop Usher's opinion, as I have shown before.

It is certain, that this was a time of the utmost confusion. Josephus has mentioned several by name, who then gave disturbance in that country; and hinted at mischiefs done by others, whose names he has not put down. It is plain, he has past by many more than he has mentioned; for he says, At that time there were innumerable disturbances in Judea,'

Considering all these things, that there had been before. b Matt. xxiv. 26. Jos. Ant. 1. xx. c. 7. sect. 6, 10. et alibi.

C

Ερεμεν ότι Θευδας προ της γενέσεως Ιησε γεγονε τις παρα Ιεδαίοις, μεγαν Tiva javrov λeywv. Orig. cont. Cels. p. 44. See more citations in Whitby upon the place. d In loc.

• Εν τετῳ δε και έτερα μύρια θορυβων εχόμενα την Ιωδαιαν κατελαμβανε. Ant, 1. xvii. c. 12. sect. 4. vid. et de B. l. ii. c. 4.

this many pretenders in Judea; that Josephus has been far from mentioning all that rose up in the latter end of Herod's reign, and in that remarkable time of confusion which succeeded his death; since there had been in this country, in a very short time, divers adventurers for power and authority of one and the same name; and since Theudas was no uncommon name among the Jews: and since these leaders of parties and factions very much resembled each other, and that sometimes in more particulars than those specified by Gamaliel; it is not at all unlikely, that there were two Theudases who were impostors. We may depend upon it there were; Gamaliel speaks of one who was before Judas of Galilee, and Josephus of another in the time of Claudius. Indeed I am somewhat surprised, that any learned man should find it hard to believe, that there were two impostors in Judea of the name of Theudas in the compass of forty years.g

Batricides, patriarch of Alexandria, about the middle of the eighth century, supposed that the high-priest Simon, surnamed the Just, and who according to other historians" died about 290 years before the christian æra, and Simeon, who took our Saviour into his arms when he was presented at the temple, were one and the same person, and that he was then 350 years of age. I do not say that these two mistakes are equal, but the pretence for thus confounding two persons is just the same in both these cases, which is the agreement in name and character. For the high-priest's name is sometimes written Simeon : he was called the Just; and the evangelist says, that Simeon was " Just and devout."

'Frequens erat id nomen apud Hebræos. Itaque non mirum est diversis temporibus plures extitisse factiosos homines ejusdem nominis. Grot. in loc. 8 Duos enim Theudas fuisse, qui se prophetas esse mentiti, alter post alterum Judæos ad spem rerum novarum concitaverint, nunquam adduci possim ut credam. Vales. ubi supra.

h See Prideaux Conn. Part. i. Book 8. year before Christ 292.

In septuaginta autem fuit vir, qui nuncupatus est Simeon Justus ; is qui excepit ulnis Dominum nostrum Christum e templo.--Produxit autem Deus ei vitæ terminum, adeo ut viveret cccl. annos, et videret Dominum nostrum Christum. Quem cum vidisset, dixit, Nunc dimitte servum tuum, O Domine, &c. apud Selden. De Succ. Pontif. 1. i, c. vii.

CHAP. VIII.

OF THE EGYPTIAN IMPOSTOR.

THERE is yet another particular, in which it has been thought by some that Josephus contradicts St. Luke. In ch. xxi. of the Acts of the Apostles, is the account of the uproar at Jerusalem, when the Jews apprehended Paul, and would have "killed him." When the chief captain had taken him from the Jews, and had got him in his own custody, it is said, he put this question to him; " Art not thou that Egyptian, which before these days madest an uproar, and leddest out into the wilderness four thousand men that were murderers ?" Acts xxi. 38.

The objection lies against the number here mentioned. For Josephus, speaking of this same Egyptian, says,' He gathered together thirty thousand men.

We have the story twice told in Josephus, in his Antiquities, and in his History of the Jewish War. I shall set down Josephus's words, and leave it to the reader to judge, whether an objection of any weight can be formed against St. Luke from the account we have of this affair in Josephus. I shall in the first place transcribe the account in the Jewish War, because that was first written.

'But the Egyptian false prophet brought a yet heavier 'disaster upon the Jews. For this impostor coming into the country, and gaining the reputation of a prophet, gathered together thirty thousand men, who were deceived

6 a

by him. Having brought them round out of the wilderness up to the mount of Olives, he intended from thence to 'make his attack upon Jerusalem, and having beaten the Roman guard, to bring the people into subjection to him, and govern them by the help of his armed associates. But

* Μείζονι δε ταυτης πληγη Ιεδαίες εκακώσεν ὁ Αιγυπτιος ψευδοπροφητης παραγενόμενος γαρ εις την χωραν, ανθρωπος γοης, και προφητε πιςιν επιθεις ἑαυτῷ, περι τρισμυρίες μεν αθροιζει των ηπατημενων περιαγαγων δε αυτές εκ της ερημιάς εις το Ελαιων καλεμενον όρος, εκείθεν οἷος τε ην εις Ιεροσολυμα παρελθειν βιαζεσθαι, και κρατησας της τε Ρωμαϊκής φρερας και το δημε τυραννειν, χρωμενος τοις συνεισπεσωσι δορυφοροις· φθανει δε αυτε την όρμην Φηλιξ ὑπαντίασας μετα των Ρωμαϊκων ὁπλιτων, και πας ὁ δημος συνεφηψατο της αμυνης" ώτε συμβολης γενομενης, τον μεν Αιγυπτιον φυγείν μετ' ολιγων, διαφθαρηναι δε και ζωργηθηναι πλείσες των συν αυτῷ' το δε λοιπον πληθος σκεδασθεν ETI TηY ÉαVTWv ikasov diaλa0v De Bell. 1. ii. c. 13. sect. 5.

Felix coming suddenly upon him with the Roman soldiers, 'prevented the attack; and all the people joined with him in their own defence, so that when they came to engage, the Egyptian fled, followed by a few only. A great num'ber [or, the greatest part] of those that were with him were ' either slain, or taken prisoners. The rest of the multitude, 'being scattered, shifted for themselves as they could.'

6

6

The account he gives of this affair in the Antiquities is thus: About the same time [he had been speaking of some other events in the beginning of Nero's reign] there 'came a person out of Egypt to Jerusalem, who pretended 'to be a prophet, and having persuaded a good number of 'the meaner sort of people to follow him to the mount of 'Olives, he told them, that from thence he would let them 'see the walls of Jerusalem fall down at his command, and 'promised through them to give them entrance into the city. But Felix, being informed of these things, ordered his sol'diers to their arms, and marching out of Jerusalem with a large body of horse and foot, fell upon those who were with the Egyptian, killed four hundred of them, and took two hundred prisoners; but the Egyptian getting out of the fight, escaped.'

The reader, if he thinks it needful, may consult the commentators, and other writers, who have considered this difficulty. Grotius supposes, that they were at first four thousand, but that at length they increased to the number of thirty thousand. Valesius reckons there were four thousand only that were murderers, or sicarii; though the whole company amounted to the number which Josephus mentions. Whitby thinks, that it is likely the number in Josephus was originally three thousand. And certainly none of these solutions are contemptible. But, for my own part, I think there is more need of reconciling Josephus with himself, or at least one of these accounts with the other, than to reconcile St. Luke with Josephus.

If indeed we had any good reason to think, that the num

b Αφικνείται δε τις εξ Αιγύπτε κατα τέτον τον καιρον εις τα Ιεροσόλυμα, προφητης ειναι λεγων, και συμβελεύων τῳ δημοτικῳ πλήθει συν αυτῳ προς όρος το προσαγορευομενον Ελαιων ερχεσθαι-θελειν γαρ, έφασκεν, αυτοις εκείθεν επιδειξαι, ὡς, κελευσαντος αυτό, πιπτοι τα των Ιεροσολύμων τείχη, δι' ὧν την εισοδον αυτοις παρέξειν επηγγελλετο Φήλιξ δε, ώς επύθετο ταυτά, κελεύει τις τρατιωτας αναλαβειν τα όπλα, και μετα πολλων ἱππεων τε και πεζων όρμησας απο των Ιεροσολύμων προσβάλλει τοις περι τον Αιγυπτιον και τετρακοσίες μεν αυτων ανειλε, διακοσίες δε ζωντας ελαβεν· ὁ δε Αιγυπτιος αυτος διαδρασας εκ της μάχης αφανης εγένετο. Ant. 1. xx. c. 7. sect. 6.

c. 21.

Grot. Whitby in loc. Joseph. p 1075. not. p. Vales. Euseb. Hist. l. ii.