1

be fure to vary and deface it with false Circumstances in the Reports, which they gave out concerning it.

And here I must once more complain of Mr. Blount, who, as if he had been an Ægyptian Historian, that had an implacable Hatred of our Religion, professing to translate that place of Tacitus, which concerns the Original of the Jews, cuts his Translation short, and goes no farther than the vilifying and false part of the Account, which Tacitus gives: for his Character of their Religion, and the Relation of what Pompey discover'd upon his Entrance into the Temple, is omitted. And besides, that which he has translated, is far from being exact: but as I observ'd before, that in speaking of the Ark, he had made Sir Thomas Brown say, that will not appear feasible, which the Learned Knight had said, will appear feasible; so he has dealt no better with Tacitus, making him likewise deny what he had affirm'd: Tacitus f says, Hi ritus, quoquo modo inducti, antiquitate defen. duntur: These Rites, by what means foever introduced, are defended by their Antiquity. Which & Mr. Blount translates thus: But by what means Soever they have been introduc'd, they have no Antiquity for their Patronization. This is to use the History of Tacitus as ill as he doth that of the Bible, and much worse than Tacitus himself has done the Jews. For if it be rightly understood, what Tacitus has written of the Jews proves a

Tacit. Hift. I. v.

& Oracl. of Reason, p. 132.

7

very remarkable Vindication of their Religion. He says indeed that they confecrated the Image of an Ass, but he says it only as a Report, which he confutes afterwards himself by acknowledging, that Pompey, when he entred into the Temple, found no Image in it; and giving an Account of their Religion, he says: Ægyptii pleraque animalia, effigiesque compofitas venerantur. Judai mente sola, unumque numen intelligunt. Profanos, qui Deum imagines mortalibus materiis, in species Hominum effingunt. Summum illud, æternum, neque mutabile, neque interiturum. Igitur nulla fimulachra urbibus fuis, nedum templis funt. Which is so contrary to what this Historian writes before in these words, Effigiem animalis, quo monstrante, errorem fitimque depulerunt, penetrali facravere ; that fome have charg'd him with contradicting himself: But it is evident, that the Story of their worshipping an Ass, is related as a Tradition, which is afterwards sufficiently confuted by his own Account of their Doctrine and Worship, and by what Pompey found, Nulla nitus Deum effigie, vacuam sedem, & inania arcana. cana. Whatever his Design was, and however his obfcure way of writing has made him to be misunderstood there can hardly be any thing said more for the Truth and Honour of the Jewish Religion, than what Tacitus has deliver'd of it.

,

And if any one will compare that which Tully hath said in the same h Oration of the Greeks

h Pro Flacco.

and

and of the Jews, he must conclude, that what is spoken against the Jews, is rather to their Commendation, than to their Disgrace. Tully there declares the Greeks to be of no Credit nor Esteem, but unfaithful, and of the worst Reputation, even to a Proverb in their Testimonies and Oaths. He is careful not to involve the Athenians and Lacedæmonians in the com-mon Scandal, who appear'd for his Client, and gives a high Character of the Maffilians, and would feem to confine his Discourse to the Afiatick Greeks, by whose own Confefssion, he says, the People of Phrygia, Myfia, Caria, and Lydia were proverbially infamous. When he has express'd this Contempt of the Greeks, he falls next upon the Jews: But what has he to say of them? He calls their Religion a barbarous Superstition, and Jerusalem a suspicious and railing City, and he pronounces the Jewish Religion to be unsuitable to the Splendor and Gravity, and the Customs of the Romans; he infinuates that they were a People not well affected to the Roman State, and urges the Conquest of them by Pompey, as an Argument against the Truth of their Religion. When so very Learned an Orator had nothing but these common Topicks of Slander to charge them withal, tho it was for the Interest of his Cause to speak the worst he knew of them; what could be a greater Justification of the Jews and their Religion? One of the Accusations laid against Flaccus, whose Defence Tully had undertaken, was, that Sums of Gold having been wont to be fent out

)

of

4

of Italy, and out of all the Roman Provinces to the Temple at Jerusalem, Flaccus had forbidden any to be exported from Afia. Here it concern'd Tully to expose the Worship of the Jews, and to vindicate the Prohibition relating to it; but he, who never spoke little upon any Subject, that could afford a Scope for his Eloquence, says so little here to the dispraise of the Jews and their Religion, that the Commendation of another had been less to their Honour. It is observable, that Tully mentions nothing of their Worshipping an Ass, which was so groundless and foolish a Slander, that it is hard to imagine what could give occasion to it; and perhaps no better Account of it can be afsigned, than that the Enemies of their Religion were refolved to fasten the worst and most ridiculous Falshood they could upon it. But if it may be permitted me to add a Conjecture to those which have been made by others, it seems probable, that the highest degree of Excommunication among the Jews being styled Shammatha, which is the same with MaranAtha, Sham signifying Lord, as Maran also doth in the Syriac and other Languages, and Atha signifying cometh ; Atha might either ignorantly or maliciously be mistaken for Athen, which signifies an Afs. And it is likely, that this Calumny might be first raised by some body, who had been Excommunicated, and turned Apostate, in Heliopolis, or some other part of

Vid. Grot. & Ham. ad 4 Cor. xvi. 22.

b

Egypt

Ægypt; for Apion was the first that vented it : and the Jewish Temple, in Heliopolis, being * denominated from its Founder, Onias the High Prieft; that might give some countenance to this pretence, as if it had taken its Name from "Ov, an Ass, and had been from thence called Ὀνεῖον, as the Temple of Aftaroth is in the Version of the LXXII. ̓Αςαρθεῖον, 1 Sam. xxxi. 10. and by 1 Jofephus; denoting the Images of Sheep, which were worshipped by the Sidonians and Philistines, as Buxtorf observes from Kimchi.

But I must here observe, that Fabricius, in his Codex Apochryphus, imagines me to suppose, that Shammatha, or Maran Atha, was changed into Athon: which indeed is very unlikely, but that Atha should, by mistake, or by design, be changed into Athon, and Shammatha, or Maran Atha, into Maran Athon, or Shammathon, is not improbable for the Reasons alledged.

It would be a very wrong Inference from what has been said, to conclude, that there is no certainty in the Greek and Latin, and other Heathen Historians : For the Circumstances of the Relation, and the Consent of divers Authors, may put most parts of History past doubt. But it ought to be considered, that those which have been mentioned, are Exceptions, to which the Sacred Historians are by no means liable; they do not charge one another with Falshood,

* Προσέταξε τις Λέπῳ ἢ ἐν τη Ὀνίς καγόμθμον νεων καθελῶν ἢ ἰκδαίων. Joseph. de Bell. Jud. L. vii. c. 3. Antiq. lib. vi. fin.

nothing