Sivut kuvina


Virtutibus, are the same; though it be a melancholy fact, that the Jews, not only in Egypt, but every other province, were oppressed without any interruption, during the last three years of Caligula's reign.

The last mentioned work being written against that infamous emperor, relates his cruelty as displayed in the murder of his friends and relations ; his folly in assuming the names and insignia, without emulating the supposed virtues, of Jupiter, Apollo, Mars, and Mercury, and his wickedness in attempting to place his statue in the temple at Jerusalem, in opposition to the whole Jewish nation, together with the treatment which the deputation sent from Alexandria in behalf of the Jews, received from Caligula. The book, indeed, is one of the finest publications of that eloquent author; and is equal, if not superior, to any of the choicest productions of Greece and Rome, for the elegance of its style, the richness of its sentiments, the lustre of its eloquence, and the importance and variety of the topics on which it dwells. Eusebius has mentioned one circumstance respecting this work, which happily accounts for the peculiar features by which it is distinguished. He says, that the contents of it were delivered before the emperor Claudius and senate; and that so forcible was the impression, which his narrative of the sufferings of the Jews

left on the assembly, that, obdurate and prejudiced as they were, they so admired it, as to have it placed in the public library *. This assertion of the father of ecclesiastical history, is abundantly corroborated by internal evidence. 1. Philo, in one place, personally addresses the reigning Cæsart, and compliments him as rising in the character of universal emperor, above the the mean jealousy of individuals, families, or

* Επι πασης λεγεται της Ρωμαίων συγκλήτου κατά Κλαδίον διελθειν, ως και της εν βιβλιοθήκαις αναθέσεως θαυμασθεντας αυτου καταξιωθηναι τους λόγους. Ε. Η. lib. 2. c. 18.

† Φθονος ουδέποτε πασαν την οικούμενην εκράτησεν, αλλ' ουδε τας μεγάλας αυτής αποτυμας, όλην Ευρωπην, η όλην Ασίαν· αλλ' ιοβόλου τροπον ἑρπετου φωλευει, βραχεσιν ειςερπύσας χωρίοις, ανδρι ἕνα, η οικω ένι, η ειποτε πολυς αγαν πνεοι, πόλει μια προς δε μειζονα κύκλον εθνούς η χώρας ου προσεισι, και μάλιςα αφ' ὃν το ὑμεπερον γενος, το Σεβασίου ούτως ηρξατο πρυτανεύειν των πανταχου παντων. Ρ. 999. Here the author speaks of envy, under the figure of a serpent, which was deemed the symbol of divinity among the Egyptians: with the envy and malignity which this people had shewn towards the Jews, Philo contrasts the liberality and beneficence of the house of Cæsar. Hence the source of his metaphor, and the meaning of the passage, which is equally elegant, energetic, and appropriate.

cities, and spreading peace and plenty over the whole world. 2. The author, in this work, mentions many of the heathen gods, and that without exposing them as false or fictitious, as he has done with great force and eloquence in his other works; a circumstance which supposes, that such an exposure, on the occasion in which he delivered its contents, would be unsafe or imprudent. 3. The people of Alexandria would have refrained from rising against the Jews, if they had not been assured, that they were objects of dislike and jealousy to Caligula; and from the same assurance only Flaccus connived at, or favoured the the insurrection. That emperor, therefore, was the primary author of the miseries with which that nation were visited in Egypt. Accordingly, in this book, Philo arraigns Caligula as the sole cause of the calamities which befel the Jews at Alexandria: while he alludes to the governor as having only tolerated iniquities, which he had power to restrain*. 4. Finally, it appears evident that the insurrection mentioned in the book

* Του δε επιτρόπου της χώρας, ὡς μονος εδύνατο βουληθείς ώρᾳ μια την οχλοκρατιαν καθελειν, προσποιούμενου ά, τε εωρα μη όραν, και ών ήκουε, μη επακουειν, &c. P. 1011. This very language our author uses respecting Flaccus, in the book against that præfect; and this of itself sufficiently shews that Flaccus is here intended. See p. 971.

De Virtutibus was new, sudden, and unexpected. It could not, therefore, have been preceded by another, but must have been the same with that which commenced under Flaccus.

These arguments, it seems to me, prove with moral certainty, that the author refers in both works to the same persecution: it follows therefore, that while the book De Virtutibus was published at Rome, that against Flaccus was published at a later period in Egypt; each giving an account of the same transactions, with such diversity of circumstances, as the two situations respectively required. The former is more brief and general, and imputes the mischiefs complained of to the emperor; the latter, on the other hand, is more minute and circumstantial, and traces the same subjects of complaint to Flaccus as the immediate cause.



[ocr errors]

PHILO, we have shewn, is a christian writer, a christian apologist, and on many occasions a christian historian. His zeal for Christ, there fore led him, as much as possible, to throw the veil of secrecy and silence over the gospel, as the primary and innocent cause of all the disturbances which took place in Egypt. He accordingly refers those disturbances to the bad passions of those men who, hating the light and influence of christianity, became the immediate agents in raising them. Thus, he represents the city of Alexandria as envying the Jews; next as alienating from them the emperor and præfect; and, lastly, as falling upon that devoted people, and putting them to death in every shape, with all the circumstances of the most savage barbarity, and that with little intermission during the space

« EdellinenJatka »