rally paid in current money, which, from the time of Julius Cæsar, bore the head of the reigning prince. Tiberius thought this impression so sacred, that he made it a high crime to carry a piece with his head upon it to any vile place; and he condemned a master as guilty of treason, for having chastised a servant who had about him some of the emperor's coin. His severity aggravated the misery of the Jews, and the Pharisees allude to it in a conversation with Jesus Christ. They are inquiring whether it was lawful to pay tribute, and they say to our Saviour: "Thou carest not for any man, for thou regardest not the person of men;" that is, You are braving a prince extremely severe in the exaction of tribute. Jesus Christ taught them, that the payment of a tax ought not to be blended with duty towards God, and that obedience to kings should be distinguished from religion. "Render," said he, "to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's." Pope Constantine was so far from following the rule and example of his master, that he wished to efface the head of an emperor from his currency, because he had been excommunicated as a heretic.

VIII. Judea had paid, up to this time, only a land tax and a capitation, which gave into the Roman treasury eight hundred and ninety talents of silver (about one million seven hundred and eighty thousand crowns ;) but Titus enacted that the half shekel which was given to the temple by each man, and which Cicero observes was sent from Rome, and all parts of the world to Jerusalem, as a tribute to the Deity from his subjects, should be in future confiscated to the emperor, who usurped the place of God, and appropriated the sacred money to his own use." half shekel is worth about thirteen pence halfpenny, so that the amount levied was very considerable. This third impost was the most ignominious, because it obliged the Jews to purchase liberty of conscience; and Domitian exacted it

with the utmost severity.

The

IX. In the first place, Xiphilinus informs us that, after the conquest of Judea, those Jews who continued true to the faith of their fathers, were obliged to purchase the right to worship God as their conscience dictated, by paying yearly a half shekel to the Capitoline Jupiter. Secondly, Tertullian complains bitterly that Christians were placed on the same footing with common prostitutes, and that rogues (or Jews) were allowed to live at Rome, by the payment of a poll-tax. Then, as Judaism had become extremely odious after the destruction of Jerusalem, the Romans required its professors to buy the unmolested enjoyment of their faith. In fine, Suetonius mentions the rigid severity with which Domitian claimed his tribute; in one case an individual was required to undress, that the receivers of the emperor might ascertain whether he were a Jew, and therefore liable to a tax. Neither the rank, age, nor oaths of individuals were regarded; and the Jew was by no means secure, though he declared himself

890 talents of silver. Their tribute was always paid in silver.

+ Xiphil. in Vesp. 217. Suet. lib. viii. p. 187.

a pagan, rather than pay the required sum. The receivers compelled a man ninety years old to undergo a disgraceful examination, which was made the pretext for every obscenity.

"Sed, quæ de Solymis venit perustis
Damnatam modo mentulam tributis."*

but included the Jews in a common persecution with the Christians.† There can be no doubt on this point, if we reflect that Christians and Jews were both guilty, in the eyes of the Romans, of impiety, because they worshipped one God and rejected idols. Besides, Dion assures us, that many individuals, who had embraced Judaism, others to the confiscation of their property, on a were condemned, some of them to death, and charge of impiety or atheism, which was often a pretext for persecution. These severities were first felt by the Jews in A. D. 95.

X. The hatred of Domitian did not rest here,

made

I am not surprised that Baronius places this persecution six years after my date, for his desire to bring pope Cletus into the list of martyrs has induced him to alter the chronology of those times. But it is astonishing that he should reject the evidence of Brutus, an ancient author and a pagan, who gives the rise of this persecution to the fifteenth year of Domitian, agreeing perfectly with the accounts of Tertullian and secution was very short, continuing but a single Lactantius, which besides mention that the per

year. Baronius is unwilling to allow that it ceased so soon, because he thinks it arose when orders were transmitted to Evocatus in Judea, to send the parents of Jesus Christ to Rome for

examination; and as orders could not reach Judea, and the parents of our Saviour be sent to Rome, in a single year, he infers that the persecution was of longer duration. But there is no the sending to Judea for the parents of Jesus necessary connexion between the persecution and Christ; for Domitian might have had a distrust

of Joseph and Mary, and a desire to examine them, long before the persecution arose. At any rate, Baronius is wrong, when he says, that letreturn made in a single year.§ Dodwell, whose ters could not have been sent to Judea, and a chronology we here follow, maintains that Domitian was content with banishing the persecuted, and did not take their lives. But this is not true, habits, to Nero, and further, Dion assures us for Tertullian compares Domitian, in temper and that proselytes to Judaism were capitally punished; and we may very naturally suppose that those accused of impiety and atheism, that is, the Christians, were punished as severely. It was on this charge, that Clemens, the emperor's own cousin, was condemned and executed. I am surprised that the ancient martyrologies do not mention him, and that they have received so many imaginary saints and rejected a true martyr, whose cruel death is attested by a pagan. Glabrion should also be considered a martyr, Mart. lib. vii. Epigr. 14.

unless we class him with the Jews; for impiety was the charge on which he was condemned. XI. But at length Nerva, who succeeded Domitian, enacted three laws in favour of the Jews. 1. He discharged all who were accused of impiety or atheism, and recalled those who had been banished. Therefore, if Domitian had ever purposed to recall them, he was prevented, by his assassination, from executing his design. Nerva prohibited the persecution of the subjects of his empire, on account of impiety or Judaism. 3. He freed the Jews from the burden of the taxes by which they were oppressed under Domitian. A medal confirms this last statement by this inscription:

CALUMNIA FISCI JUDAICI SUBLATA.*

2.

Some authors infer too much from this medal, when they tell us, that the tax of the half-shekel was remitted; for Origen so expressly asserts that it was still paid in his time, that we cannot doubt it. The medal merely implies that the Jews were no longer calumniated, that is, they were no longer, as in the reign of Domitian, fined heavy sums on frivolous or false charges.

XII. We place the rise of the patriarchs in Judea under Nerva, for two reasons. 1. There is little probability that the Jews could early re-establish themselves in their native land, after a dispersion almost total. 2. They would not attempt it under Domitian, whose avarice and cruelty allowed them no rest. Gamaliel II. was chief of the fathers, or, as the Greeks express it, patriarch, in the time of Nerva. We shall relate in the sequel the misunderstanding between him and Joshua, which occasioned his deposition from that office. The Jews found considerable difficulty in selecting a suitable successor to Gamaliel, because his influence was still powerful and prevented the election of Joshua, his enemy. Akiba was the next candidate; but his mean birth induced a fear, that Gamaliel, who was skilled in magic, would cast a spell upon him. Eleazar, the son of Azarias, next presente himself as well fitted for the patriarchal office, because he was of noble birth, and able to pay a considerable sum, if he was taxed by the emperor. He consulted his wife as to the propriety of accepting the dignity if offered to him, and she expressed her apprehensions that the Jews would soon depose him; but Eleazar quieted her fears by observing, that we should use a glass to-day, though we knew it would be broken on the mor"You will be despised," said his wife," for you have not yet a grey beard." This was indeed a formidable obstacle; for Eleazar had no beard, although at that time eighteen years old. But God removed the difficulty, by covering his chin

row.

in a moment with a fine white beard. At the sight of the miracle, his wife ceased to object, and Eleazar immediately obtained a large increase of followers by opening the gates of the academy to those whom Gamaliel had deemed unworthy of its privileges. Joshua was elected president

Petit. Var. Lect. 2569.

+ Orig. ad Afric. 243.

In the Talmud, they call the day of Eleazar's election, the Great Day, and as often as these words are met with, D2, the day of Eleazar's election is intended. In Barachot. fol. 27. Wagenseil, in Sota Mishna, tom. v. p. 247.

of the senate, and Eleazar, patriarch. He associated Gamaliel with himself, and they enjoyed the dignity in common. The former, according to historians, presided two Saturdays and the latter one; whence it may be inferred, that the duties of the patriarch respected particularly religion and the sacred rites.*

XIII. The Jews believe that a body of learned men survived the destruction of the temple, and flourished as late as the beginning of the second century, who conduced to the glory of their enslaved nation by many works; which we, however, think supposititious.

Eliezer the Great then flourished. He is said to have been the son of Hyrcanus, a man of rank, who had attended so little to his education, that Eliezer, at the age of twenty-eight, had not read the law. His ignorance was a cause of deep grief to him, until the prophet Elias appeared, and informed him where he might find an instructor. Eliezer, unknown to his father, travelled to Jerusalem to find John, the son of Zechai, who introduced him to an instructor, able to teach him some points of the law and his prayers. Eliezer wept and fasted for eight days, until he had mastered his task. His father came to Jerusalem to disinherit him, at the suggestion of his brothers; but was so much pleased with the wisdom and modesty of his son, that he abandoned his purpose, and would hardly be seated in his presence. He punished the brothers by disinheriting them, and bequeathing his property to Eliezer. Of his instructor Eliezer said, "No man can draw more water from a reservoir than was put into it, but he could do it from a fountain which is perennial;" that is, No one could teach more than he had learned; but his master, like a living fountain, was continually pouring forth more precepts than God had given on Sinai. Eliezer professed on his death-bed that he understood the art of transporting a crop from one field to another.

"Atque satas alio traducere messes."

On one occasion, as he was walking with Akiba, he pointed out to him a field of cucumbers ; and they obeyed him. The talmudists reprehe ordered them to collect themselves in a heap,

sent him as so inflated with the idea of his own worth, that a short time before his death he asked, "What precept of the law is there which I have not obeyed?" But Akiba humbled his vanity by answering, "Sir, you have always taught us that there is not on earth a man just and sinless."§

XIV. Rabbi Joshua (Jehoshua) was associated with Eliezer; and his reputation was so great,. that he is cited in the Mishna without a title or

mark of distinction. Such was his influence at

⚫ Ganz, Zemach.

+. Pirke Rabbi Eliezer, Chapters or Maxims of Rabbi Eliezer. Wendelin, canon of Gand, believed this work to be very ancient, and omposed by the son-in-law of Gamaliel, the instructor of St. Paul, and he there ore had a great d sire to see it; but father Morin says that it was much more modern, and that Buxtorf was deceived in the opinion that it was a historical work; for it contains only the traditions of the Jews without arrangement, and some fables of the talmudists. They cite many fables which were composed after Eliezer. Antiq. Eccles. Orient. Ep. xl., xli., p. 340.

1 Ex. Gemar. Sanhedr. cap. vii. Coce. duo Tit. p. 280 § Sanhedr. cap. xi. Coce. duo Tit. p. 410.

the court of Trajan, that the emperor gave permission to the Jews, at his intercession, to rebuild the sanctuary.* Joshua was deformed in person, which led the emperor's daughter to ask him why such profound wisdom was deposited in so mean a vessel. The princess smiled at her own wit, while she taunted him with his natural defects; but he continued unmoved by the sarcasm. He turned to her and inquired why she allowed the wine to be kept in earthen jars, at the same time advising her to use silver or gold. The princess followed his advice, and the wine soured. Trajan was irritated to find the wine spoiled, and ordered Joshua into his presence. The rabbi did not attempt to excuse himself, because he wished to inculcate the lesson, that treasures were sometimes kept in earthen vessels; but plainly told the emperor that his daughter had first taunted him with his deformity. This man was thought to possess the power of flying through the air, by virtue of a magical word.

XV. We shall speak more fully as we proceed, of Simeon Jochaides, the reputed author of the cabalistic work called Zohar; and of Eliezer Haggalili, or the Galilean, another cabalistic doctor and a contemporary, who wrote the thirtytwo Excellences of the Law, corresponding to the thirty-two Ways to Wisdom.† The Rabbins tell us that we should take the greatest pains to impress these mystical expositions on our minds. There was a third Eliezer, the son of James, whose mantle was burnt in the temple, to punish him for having slept there. This last Eliezer is the reputed author of a treatise on the temple, and Bartolocci believes that as this doctor had seen the temple, and was an able man, the rabbins in after times derived much of their information respecting it from him. But this is allow ing antiquity to a work which may be of modern origin. Indeed, these doctors and their works are only known to us through the rabbins who lived long after them; and we find in their books such frequent reference to works and facts of a later period, that we must believe them to be a mere fabrication.

XVI. At this period flourished the poet Ezekiel, who composed, in Greek verse, the Departure from Egypt. He was a Jew, and apparently wished to console his nation, oppressed by the Romans, by celebrating a miraculous deliverance, and exciting their hopes of a redeemer like Moses. He lived between the times of Josephus and Clement of Alexandria, and is quoted by the latter. We must therefore place him at the close of the first, or early in the second century.

XVII. The author of the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs probably lived about the same time. This man has concealed his religious principles; but he writes so often like a Jew, that a learned author, who first gave the world the Greek text of this work, (which was unknown be

fore, except in a bad translation by the Bishop of Lincoln, and in a few fragments,) is of opinion that the original was composed in Hebrew by a Jewish doctor, some time before the appearance of Jesus Christ; for the author, whoever he may be, has embraced the general expectation of that period, namely, that the Messiah would be a great warrior, renowned for victories, and not a moral teacher.*

The bishop of Lincoln was of the same opinion, for he bitterly complains of the jealousy of the Jews, who had concealed this work so long from the Christians, through fear that they would take advantage of its prophecies referring to the Messiah, in reasoning with them.†

XVIII. The Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs was evidently written towards the close of the first century; for the author speaks of the destruction of Jerusalem, of the actions of the Messiah, and the writings of the evangelists, like one who had a personal knowledge of these subjects. Origen saw the work, and found in it much that was valuable in sentiment, though the Jews do not place it in their canon.

Tertullian applies to St. Paul, who was first a persecutor and afterwards a teacher of nations, these words: "Benjamin shall raven as a wolf; in the morning he shall devour the prey, and at night he shall divide the spoil." Some authors have thought that Tertullian obtained this quotation from a passage in the Testament of Benjamin; but I cannot coincide with them. For Tertullian was an African, and not familiar with the Greek, and the citation differs from any thing which can be found in that work. The passage in the Testament which appears most like it is a prophecy, which promises to posterity that a man shall arise from the seed of Benjamin who shall be loved of God, shall seize on knowledge with the rapacity of a wolf, and diffuse it among the nations. But there is no need of going to the Testament of Benjamin for the quotation of Tertullian, when it may be found in the benediction of Jacob. But whether Tertullian was acquainted with this work or not, it is undoubtedly very ancient, for Origen has quoted it. Probably, the original text was not Hebrew, for it has never appeared in that language, and the manuscript of the bishop of Lincoln, discovered in the thirteenth century, was in Greek. Besides, the work exhibits no Hebraisms, nor idioms foreign to the Greek, which would doubtless be retained, were it a translation. In a manuscript copy of the work it is written, "The transcribers have followed the Greek version of St. Chrysostom;" but this father does not exhibit, in any of his writings, sufficient knowledge of Hebrew for a translator. Besides, is it probable that the Greek fathers of the fifth century possessed the original Hebrew of this Testament, knowing it to be the work of a Jew, and yet made no use in argument of the prophecies to be found on every page,

Grabe, Spicileg. Patrum. tom. i. sæc. i.

+ Utrum autem iste liber ex Typographia Græca nobis incompertum. Nourry, Apparatus ad Bibl. Pat. 240 fol. But the work of Mr. Grabe had appeared four or five years before.

↑ Orig. in Joshua, cap. i. p. 705.

§ Testam. XII. Patriarch. Benjam. sect. 12, p. 252.

when they might have thus silenced a Jewish opponent ?*

The author of the Testament of Benjamin was probably a Jew and a proselyte to Christianity, who lived in Egypt, where Origen found his work. His design was to spread a knowledge of the principal circumstances in the life and death of Christ; and to advance his object, he conceals himself under the venerable title of the twelve patriarchs, though his former Judaism constantly appears in his prophecies. We ought not then to attribute this work to a Jew, nor adduce against the Jews arguments drawn from it. XIX. The oppressed are always disorderly and mutinous. A spirit of revolt has been thought peculiar to some religions, and to the bias of certain nations; but this is a groundless prejudice, for men are naturally inclined to a state of peace.+ Allow them liberty of conscience, and the right of enjoying and accumulating property, and there will be no rebellions against the government. Men will not relinquish a state of peace, unless the hatred of parties, persecution, or the tyranny of rulers, which are the common causes of insurrection, drive them to despair and violence. We need not wonder, then, that the Jews, in spite of their misfortunes, had the spirit to rebel; for it is under oppression that men are most restless, and seek redress by any means, though they often deepen their misery in the search.

The Jews were unfortunate in choosing the reign of Trajan for rebellion; but soured and irritated by former miseries, they pushed their cruelty to a horrid extreme, and, in their infatuation, braved the utmost severity of a powerful prince. The insurrection broke out at Cyrene, a city of Libya, where the Jews had been settled and powerful for many centuries. They obtained at first some advantages over the Greeks, (another name for Egyptians;) but the fugitives took refuge in Alexandria, and spreading their own fears and thirst for vengeance, they massacred all the Jewish population of that city. The Cyrenians were enraged at this just reprisal, and furiously stormed the place under the command of a general named Andrew. Mr. Cuper has informed me that Abulfaragius calls this commander Luminum; and Eusebius, who relates the fact, calls him Lucuas. It is not easy to ascertain the origin of this diversity of names; and it is idle to attempt it, where nothing can be offered but conjecture. Abulfaragius is wrong, when he relates that Andrew the Light marched into Palestine; for his conquests were not achieved there, but in Egypt. The forces of Andrew ravaged the open country, and massacred two hundred and twenty thousand of the inhabitants. The Romans entered the field under Martius Turbo, whom Trajan had ordered to suppress the insurrection. He effected this object after many bloody battles; but Libya had been so depopulated by the massacres at the beginning of the war, that Adrian sent colonists to re-people it.§

XX. The account of this rebellion by Euse

• Apud Grabe, ibid. p. 143.

A. D. 115, sub Imper. Trajan.
Euseb. lib. iv. cap. 2.

§ Ganz, Zemach David. Chronol. p. 104. Solomon Fil. Virg. Tribus Judæ, p. 67.

bius is not consistent with itself; for in his History he places the insurrection in the eighteenth year of Trajan, but in his Chronicle, a year later. As the History is more correct than the Chronicle, we adopt its date, and place this event in the beginning of the second century, A. D. 115. The Jewish historians attribute this war to the ambition of the fugitives who took refuge in Alexandria after the destruction of Jerusalem, and there built a temple; but divisions arising, Trajan was requested to interfere by the weaker party. He complied, and massacred five hundred thousand Jews. But surely these historians are wrong in one respect, for the Jews never built a temple in Egypt, excepting that of Onias. XXI. The Talmudists, always ignorant of history, give us a still more erroneous account. Some of them assert, that it was Adrian who slew more Jews in Egypt, than went from it under Moses; while others refer the carnage to Trajan. They find it recorded, that this massacre was perpetrated by command of Alexander the Macedonian, and are at a loss how to reconcile the account with history. One suggests that Macedonian should be erased, and another thinks that this is unnecessary, for the commander-in-chief of Nero's army, who may be supposed to have served in the same capacity under Trajan and Adrian, was named Alexander, and was from Macedonia. Unfortunately, the general who commanded in the Jewish war was not called Alexander, but Martius Turbo. The Talmudists have fallen into a strange mistake; but it is equalled by another which we shall now relate.

XXII. Vorstius makes Rabbi Ganz say, that Imrah, the daughter of Trajan, was so deeply in love with Rabbi Joshua, that she wore a mean dress, and kept her wine in earthen jars, rather than use gold or silver, to express her affection for the Jewish doctor. The fact was, that she taunted Joshua, because to his wisdom was united a slovenly habit, and Joshua answered her, that wine was kept in earthen jars and not in silver.* The Jews inform us, that the Rabbi was in such favour at the court of Trajan, that permission was granted him to rebuild the temple, and the Jews eagerly made arrangements for the work. But it was represented to Trajan that they would revolt, and refuse to pay tribute, if allowed to re-establish themselves in so advantageous a situation as Jerusalem. Trajan, unwilling to recall his orders, asked the advice of his counsellors. They replied, that he must direct the building to be made nine feet longer or shorter than the former temple. The Jews were assembled at Rhumon. When this order reached them, they were thrown into consternation, and had recourse to Joshua, the son of Chanania, whose profound wisdom was universally acknowledged. He related to them the apologue of the lion who was tortured, while devouring his prey, by a bone which he could not swallow. The animals were summoned to his aid with promises of a great reward; but when the stork had extracted the bone, and claimed the reward, the lion answered, You are fortunate to escape un

66

injured from my jaws." The application was readily made. "We are fortunate, (said Joshua,) in living peaceably among this heathen nation, and we must be contented." Some Rabbins refer this narrative to the time of Julian the Apostate, who conceded to the Jews the privilege, never granted them by Trajan, of rebuilding the temple. But in removing one difficulty, they create another; for, unless our chronology be altered, Joshua, who lived under Trajan, cannot be made contemporary with Julian the Apostate.*

XXIII. But to proceed. The insurrection of the Grecians was quelled, though new tumults distracted Mesopotamia the following year. The trembling inhabitants of this province anticipated the fate of the Egyptians, until their fears were removed by the arrival of Lucius Quietus, a Moor, one of the most skilful generals that the empire then possessed. In the execution of the orders of Trajan, he slew so many seditious Jews, that the spirit of the rest was broken; but as his presence was necessary to restrain them, and his departure would have been the signal for renewed hostilities, he was appointed governor of Palestine by the emperor, to watch their motions.t

XXIV. Another storm was lowering over the island of Cyprus. The Jews of this island began a revolt by the massacre of two hundred and forty thousand of the inhabitants. Their own historians do not palliate the act, but increase rather than diminish the number of the slain; for they tell us, that information respecting insurrections elsewhere having reached Gophri, that is, Cyprus, the Jews rose on the pagans, and the massacre was so complete, that not a soul survived. Trajan sent Adrian, the commander-in-chief of his forces, against them, and the Romans, after subduing them, passed an edict, that no Jew should land on the island under the severest penalties. I know not why the critics should attempt to correct these historians. Some of them would substitute Egypt for Cyprus, and imagine their conjecture is well founded, because if a letter in the word Gophri be changed, it becomes Egypt. Others say, that the massacre was perpetrated at Cyprus, a castle beyond Jericho, built by Herod the Great, and thus named from his mother; but none of them attempt to prove their conjectures true; and their narratives are merely the vagaries of the imagination. These critics should know that the Jews had been powerful in Cyprus for ages before Trajan, and that hence sprung St. Barnabas, the companion of St. Paul's travels; and further, that all historians, Jewish, pagan, and Christian, agree as to the place of the massacre.

• Vorstius makes Ganz say, that the daughter of Trajan was named Imrah; but Mr. Reland, a profound scholar in oriental antiquities, has made it appear to the satisfaction of all, that Imrah was not the name of the princess, but that the word means "She said."

+ Euseb. in Chronic. id. Hist. lib. iv. Xiphil. ex Dion. lib. lxviii. Auctor de locis Actuum Apost. apud Hieron. Orosius, lib. vii. cap. 12.

t' Begiphri. Zachutus in Juchasin. Ganz in Chron. p. 102.

They change R into D, which is easily effected from the resemblance of to 7.

Dion, a pagan, says in express terms, that the Jews of Cyprus, with Artemion at their head, killed two hundred and forty thousand of the inhabitants, and therefore no Jew was afterwards permitted to land there, and when driven ashore by tempests, they were slain. Besides the Jewish historians who agree with Dion, Eusebius too relates that the Jews ravaged Salamis, and murdered all its inhabitants; and he confines the massacre to this city of Cyprus; but when we reflect that two hundred and forty thousand dead were counted, and that the revolters were probably more numerous still, we must be satisfied that the carnage could not be confined to a single city.

Some authors assure us, that there is no need of supposing an army sent to Cyprus to repress these disorders and avenge the massacre, because the inhabitants who escaped took up arms and avenged themselves; but there must have been an immense number of pagans in the island, to raise an army after such a carnage.

The Jewish account is more probable; which informs us, that Adrian transported an army to the island, killed the rebels, and forbade the Jews to land on it; and they were so rigidly excluded, that but few of them were afterwards found in Cyprus. But they could not complain of severity, with their own example before them.

CHAPTER II.

HISTORY OF THE REVOLT OF THE JEWS IN THE REIGN OF ADRIAN, UNDER BARCHOCHEBAS AND AKIBA, TO A. D. 138.

I. The Jews become fortune-tellers. II. Project falsely attributed to the emperor Adrian. III. Cause of the war as related by the Jews, incorrect. IV. The cause to which it is attributed by St. Chrysostom. V. The true reasons of the war. Remarks on the prohibition of circumcision. VI. Colony sent to Jerusalem previous to the war. VII. Impostors who preceded Barchochebas. St. Luke arranges the false Messiahs differently from Josephus, St. Gamaliel invoked. VIII. Defeat of Judas. IX. Dositheus and Simon. X. Barchochebas and his children. XI. His genealogy and the length of his reign erroneous. XII. How he declared himself the Messiah. XIII. Jewish eulogies on Akiba his precursor. XIV. He was president of the sanhedrim. Difficulty with regard to his age. XV. Description of Bither, the capital of king Barchochebas. XVI. Jewish date of the beginning of the war. XVII. Error of St. Jerome. XVIII. Conjecture of father Pagi. XIX. Other conjectures better founded. XX. This war is fabulous, according to father Hardouin. XXI. Whether Adrian went to Judea, only in a time of peace and without an army. XXII. There were no Jews at Jerusalem, but it was inhabited by Greeks, and called Capitolias. XXIII. Medals of the emperor Adrian, counterXXIV. Refutation of this conjecture. XXV. War breaks out. Advantages gained by Barchochebas. XXVI. Whether he slew only Christians. Justin Martyr refuted. Error of Ganz. XXVII. Conference of Akiba with Tinnius Rufus. XXVIII. Severus takes his place. XXIX. Siege and capture of Bither. Death of Barchochebas. XXX. Akiba and other martyrs. XXXI. Dreadful massacre in this war. XXXII. Ælia built. XXXIII. How rendered odious to the Jews. XXXIV. Whether they were exiled from the Holy Land. XXXV. Medal of Adrian, badly explained by Tristan. XXXVI. Condition of the Asiatic Jews during the war. XXXVII. Whether the Jews purchased of Adrian the right to read the Scriptures in Hebrew. XXXVIII. Refutation of this opinion.

feit.

I. THE wretchedness of the Jews was aggravated by the oppression of Adrian to such a de