UNDER Adrian the Jews revolted, and were feverely handled, and Jerufalem was again taken and facked and burnt, and totally deftroyed, according to feveral writers. The me lancholy view of its ruinous condition caused an infinite number of people to embrace Christianity, as it fet before their eyes the truth of Chrift's predictions, fays Tillemont, Hift. des Emp. ii. 295for which he refers us to Eufebius, Demonftr.. Evang. p. 407. Ed. Par. But this accurate author is here mistaken, I think, and makes Eufebius fay more than can fairly be inferred from his words. See the paffage, which is too. long to be here inferted.

AT this time lived Aquila, who tranflated: the Bible into Greek. He was converted from Paganifm by the piety and miracles of the Chriftians, fays Epiphanius De Menf. c. 14, 15. and afterwards apoftatized, and went over to Judaifm, But Epiphanius was made up of haftinefs and credulity, and is never to be trusted where he speaks of a miracle. For example:

He relates that many fountains and rivers were annually turned into wine on the fame day, and at the fame hour when Chrift wrought his miracle at Cana in Galilee; that this wonder continued at Cibyra in Caria, where he himself had drunk out of the fountain, and at Gerafa in Arabia, and that many teftified the fame of the river Nile.

The Pagans had miracles of the fame kind. In Andro infula, templo Liberi Patris, fontem Nonis

Nonis Januariis femper vini fapore fluere Mucianus ter Conful credit. Plinius ii. 106. p. 121. Mucianus Andri, e fonte Liberi Patris, ftatis diebus feptenis ejus Dei vinum fluere, fi auferatur a confpectu templi, fapore in aquam tranfeunte. Idem, xxxi. 13. P. 549.

Baronius was either fo credulous, or so difingenuous, as to urge this miracle at Andros in confirmation of those which are attefted by Epiphanius. It was an artifice of the priests of Bacchus, and ferved to delude filly Pagans, as S. Bainage obferves Ann. i. 217.

. We may conjecture, from the relation of Epiphanius, that there were in his time, i. e. in the fourth century, pious Knaves, who once a year conveyed wine into the fountain at Cibyra, and that the Father drank a cup of this adulterated liquor, and was impofed upon by thefe jugglers. The trick might ferve for other purposes befides thofe of a godly nature; it might draw company to the Wells of Cibyra once a year, and enrich the neighbourhood, and the proprietors of the holy water.

This is the civileft thing that we can fay of Epiphanius, fince he must have been either a dupe or a deceiver. Learned and judicious men, who have examined his writings, have been forced to conclude that, with all his learning and piety, he was credulous, careless, cenforious, and one who made no fcruple of romancing and mifrepresenting.

The miracle of the fountains is juft as good as that recorded by Orofius, that the tracks of Pharaoh's

Pharaoh's chariot-wheels remained in the fand of the Red-fea, and that neither the winds nor the waves could efface them.

Here is another Tradition of the fame kind from Epiphanius. Jerom mentions a particularity of the fountain Siloam, that it flows not regularly, but bursts out with great violence at different times: Siloam autem fontem effe ad radices montis Sion, qui non jugibus aquis, fed in certis horis diebufque ebulliat, et per terrarum concava et antra faxi duriffimi cum magno impetu veniat, dubitare non poffumus, nos præfertim qui in hac habitamus provincia. In Efai. viii.

If we may believe Epiphanius, God produced this fountain at the prayer of Isaiah, a little before the death of that Prophet, when he was just expiring, and wanted water to drink, and thence it was called Siloam, or Sent. He adds, that when the Jews were befieged, if they went to draw water there, it fprang up in great abundance; but if their enemies approached to it, it withdrew itself: in teftimony of which, fays he, the fountain ftill bursts out at intervals, and fuddenly: De Vit. Proph. This fable alfo is tranfcribed by Baronius, as a thing to be credited, for which he is justly censured by S. Bafnage Ann. i. p. 334: whom the Reamay confult.

der

But what Jofephus affirms concerning this fountain at the time when Jerufalem was befieged by the Romans; and which is alfo taken notice of by Bafnage, is extremely remarkable, and fhould be added to what has been faid, VOL. I: Book

Y

ai

Book i. p. 14. concerning the wonders which happened at the deftruction of Jerusalem, and which fhewed that God had forfaken the Jews: Τίτῳ μὲν καὶ πηγαὶ πλεσιώτεραι ρέουσιν, αἱ ξηρανθεῖσαι πρότερον ὑμῖν. πρὸ δ το αυτό παρουσίας, τα τε Σιλωάμ ἐπιλιπᾶσαν ἴσε, καὶ τὰς ἔξω τὸ ἄςε@ ἁπάσας, ὥςε πρὸς ἀμφορεῖς ὠνεῖος τὸ ὕδωρ. τὸ ἢ να ἔτω πληθύουσι τοῖς πολεμίοις ὑμῶν, ὡς μὴ μόνον αὐτοῖς καὶ κτήνεσιν, ἀλλὰ κήποις διαρκεῖν. Even the fountains fow profufely for Titus, which refufed their streams to you: for this you know, that before his coming, Siloam, and all the fprings without the city, failed to fuch a degree, that water was bought by the pitcher, but now they are fo profufely liberal to your enemies, as to fupply not only them and their beafts, but the gardens also. Bell. Jud. Ed. Hav. v. 9.

IN the time of Domitian, Trajan, and Adrian, lived Plutarch. In his numerous writings he never makes any mention of the Christian religion, perhaps not daring to fpeak well, and not caring to speak ill of it, fays Tillemont. I rather think that he had never examined it, or concerned himself about it. Philosophy and hiftory engroffed his thoughts and his time.

A LITTLE earlier flourished Quintilian, who hath made a flight mention of Judaism. Et eft conditoribus urbium infame contraxiffe aliquam perniciofam cæteris gentem, qualis eft primus Judaica fuperftitionis auctor. iii. 7. p. 270. Ed. Burm. Some have imagined that he meant Chrift and the Chriftians, but it is plain to the

laft

laft degree that he reflects upon Mofes. He had probably in view the conquests which that People made under Mofes and Joshua, and their war with Vefpafian and the Romans:

POLYCARP fuffered under Marcus Aurelius, about A. D. 169. of whofe martyrdom we have an account in Eufebius, iv. 15. who took it from an Epistle of the Church of Smyr na, of which he inferted the greater part in his history. Usher found and publifhed a copy of this Epistle, and it is inferted in Le Clerc's Patres Apoftolici. In the conclufion there is a foolish note of one Pionius the tranfcriber. There are fome differences (though most of them fmall) between Eufebius and the Epiftle, as for example in the dream or vision of Polycarp, in the doxology at the end of his prayer, and in the description of the Martyr standing in the flames, as a iné, as a loaf whilst it is baking, which is not in Eufebius.

The wonders relating to his martyrdom are thefe:

He had a dream or vifion, portending what fhould befal him. Much the fame thing is faid to have happened to Socrates. See Book i. p. 78. Καὶ προσευχόμμΘ ἐν ἐπλασία γέγονε, πρὸ τρι ῶν ἡμερῶν ὁ συλληφθῆναι αὐτόν· καὶ εἶδεν προσκεφάλαιον αύτε ὑπὸ πυρὸς καλακαιόμβρον και τραφεὶς εἶπεν πρὸς τις συνόντας αὐτῷ προφητικώς. Δεί με ζῶνα κατακαυ Ova. Et cum oraret, triduo ante quam comprebenderetur, vifio ei oblata eft; viditque cervical fuum incendio conflagrare. Tum converfus ad

Y 2

comites