of Herod Agrippa I., a Roman province. In the year 48 A.D., Cumanus1 was appointed procurator of Palestine. Under his administration, the discontent which had long prevailed in the public mind, manifested itself, for the first time, in acts of open resistance. The first outbreak occurred during the celebration of the passover of that year. In order to preserve order amongst the multitudes who thronged the capital at the great feasts, a guard of Roman soldiers was placed in the corridors surrounding the temple. Some idea of the numbers usually present at these festivities may be conceived, from the fact that, about twenty years afterwards, the inhabitants of Jerusalem, during that period, were computed to amount to nearly three millions. The grossly outrageous conduct on this occasion of one of the Roman soldiers, who was not brought to justice for it, excited a popular tumult, which was quelled only after a considerable loss of life. This indignity was soon followed by other acts of lawless oppression and of outrage upon the Jewish faith. The Samaritans were not slow to avail themselves of the growing anti-Jewish feeling on the part of the authorities. Some pilgrims coming from Galilee were murdered in a Samaritan village. If the Romans did not connive at it, the Samaritans at least escaped unpunished. As usual, before the outbreak of a revolution, numbers of the national party now formed themselves into bands of guerillas, and resorted to the mountains of Judea, where all who were disaffected joined them. This plan had been the commencement of a successful resistance to foreign tyranny under the Maccabees, and the land of Judea offered peculiar facilities for it. At last, Agrippa, who instead of Chalcis received the former tetrarchy of Philip, successfully pleaded the Jewish cause with the emperor, and obtained from him the recall of Cumanus, in room of whom Felix was appointed (probably 52 A.D.). This governor, who speedily became the husband of Drusilla, one of King Agrippa's sisters, was as tyrannical and corrupt as his predecessor. When Felix was at length recalled, Nero, who succeeded Claudius in the empire, appointed Festus procurator (circ. 1 Jos. Ant. xx. 5. 3-6. 3; Wars, ii. 12. 1 60 A.D.). The latter was, on the whole, a much better governor than any of his predecessors; but he only lived to administer Jewish affairs for about two years, and was followed by Albinus, a man whose covetousness made every attempt at administering justice impossible. In 64 A.D. he was recalled, and Gessius Florus, in many respects the worst governor whom Judea had ever seen, was appointed in his place.2 The historian Josephus charges him with almost every crime. It is certain that his mal-administration converted the public excitement into the utmost state of frenzy. In 66 A.D., Cestius Gallus, the governor of Syria, and the superior of Florus, attended at the paschal festivities at Jerusalem. In vain did the Jews prefer their complaint against Florus; they were put off with promises, while the procurator stood by laughing. Events were now hastening to a crisis. The last and decisive provocation was given at Cæsarea, which was adjudicated by Nero to belong to the heathens, who were in future to hold first rank as citizens in that town. Dissensions soon arose, and acts of provocation on the part of the heathens drove the Jews into an open rebellion, which speedily extended to Jerusalem. It was in vain that King Agrippa, and the more moderate party, besought the people to abstain from entering on so unequal a combat. Eleazar, the president of the temple, refused to offer sacrifices for the prosperity of the Roman empire; and one, Menahem, a son of Judas of Galilee, openly took up arms against Rome. But although he and most of his adherents were murdered by Eleazar, who in turn assumed authority, the insurrection was not quelled. Cestius now marched against Jerusalem, and took and burnt one of the suburbs.3 He then proceeded to attack the temple mount, but, after six days, when a part of the northern wall had been already undermined, he most unaccountably withdrew. The Jews followed him, and routed the Romans with great slaughter. Many of their military engines fell into the hands of the Jews, who afterwards employed them against the Romans. 1 Comp. Schürer, I. ii. 182 ff. 3 Jos. Wars, ii. 19. 2 Jos. Ant. xx. 11; Wars, ii. 14 ff. This event changed a partial rebellion into a general rising, and invested it with the character of a national war. The most moderate amongst the Jews now felt that they had entered on a struggle which the Romans would feel in honour bound to prosecute to the end, and in which they would indiscriminately take vengeance on all prominent persons in the nation. The only chance of safety now lay in successful resistance; and if death by Roman hands were ultimately to fall to their lot, it was at least desirable to meet it in honourable defence of their liberty and faith. Accordingly, however unwilling they might formerly have felt, all now entered cordially into plans which were too hastily conceived, and imperfectly carried out. To Josephus, a Jewish general, the defence of Galilee was entrusted. Against him Vespasian, Nero's ablest general, had been despatched. Successful in every engagement, he took city after city. At last Josephus surrendered to him-an event which threw the leaders of the national party in Jerusalem into the utmost consternation. In that doomed city, instead of harmony, strife and contention had reigned; instead of uniting against the common foe, they were engaged in an internecine war. Three parties fought for supremacy in Jerusalem. They sought only to destroy one another and the stores which were so necessary for a protracted defence of the city, and at last killed every wealthy and peaceably disposed person. In the interval, Vespasian succeeded to the Roman empire, and left the command of the army to his son Titus, who appeared before Jerusalem in April 70. The garrison soon felt the combined horrors of famine and pestilence, of the reign of terror within, and the presence of a relentless enemy without the city walls. The siege lasted altogether four months, and was attended with varying success. We purposely abstain from giving any of the details connected with it. The Jews displayed the greatest valour, and an enthusiasm which almost bordered on madness. They fought under the conviction that some deliverance must at last be wrought for them, since God could not give up His city, people, and temple. But Titus, who, in order to prevent any escape from the city, had caused it to be completely surrounded with a stone wall, made continuous though slow progress. Gradually he penetrated into the city, until, on the 10th Ab (August), the temple was burnt,1 and, on the 8th Elul (September), the upper city destroyed.2 Titus had to the last been most desirous to spare at least the temple, but a torch thrown into it by a soldier quickly enveloped it in flames, which could not be suppressed.3 Thus perished the proud and beautiful city, which “ would not have this man reign over it." With it perished the last remainder of the typical dispensation, and of the Jewish state. A new era now commences. Israel is again cast forth as a wanderer, but this time without a home in view-without a tabernacle in which to worship-and without the cloud by day, or the guiding pillar of fire by night. Yet can we learn many a lesson as we trace the footmarks in the sand of time. And these footmarks they have left on every shore, as they have inscribed their name on every page of history. A nation without a country-a religion which, historically speaking, belongs to the past, and has become impossible in the present -a people persecuted yet not exterminated, driven from every place yet always reappearing, and who, without having a present, bear in their past the seed of future greatnesssuch is the picture now presented to us. Israel can be neither transformed nor subdued by the hand of man. belong to God. Since the destruction of Jerusalem, a continual miracle, kept as a testimony to the God of the Bible before the eyes of an unbelieving world, and as the harbinger of future blessings in the prayers of an expectant Church, both they and their history are unaccountable by an ordinary mode of reasoning, and can only be understood when viewed in the light of scriptural statement and prediction. They 1 Jos. Wars, vi. 4. [According to Rabbinical tradition, the temple was destroyed on the evening of the Sabbath (Taan. 29a). With this agrees the statement of Dio Cassius, lxvi. 7. Comp. Derenbourg, p. 291.] 2 Ut supra, vi. 8. 4-5. 3 [On the ground of a statement of Sulpicius Severus (Chronicon ii. 30), which is probably taken from a lost book of Tacitus, it has been disputed whether Titus really wished to spare the temple, Comp. Schürer, I. ii. 244 f.] CHAPTER II CLOSING SCENES OF THE JEWISH WAR OF INDEPENDENCE. THE last embers of the conflagration had died out at Jerusalem, and silence reigned in her deserted streets, save that the hollow tread of the Roman guard betokened the presence of the conqueror. down the steep streets of Mount Zion to the valley of the Son of Hinnom, were dried up; the groans of the dying, the lamentations of the bereaved and the captives, were hushed. Of the beautiful and proud city nothing remained but three towers, left to indicate the strength of a place which, after so protracted a defence, could not resist Roman prowess; a portion of the old wall, to serve as defence to the garrison; and a few houses here and there, where the aged, the feeble, and, in general, those from whom nothing could be apprehended, found a shelter.1 The streams of blood which had flowed Before marching against the capital of Judea, the Roman generals had wisely resolved to subdue the whole country. By this plan Jerusalem was isolated, the defenders of Jewish nationality were ultimately shut up in it, all supplies cut off, while the fall of the city necessarily put a period to farther resistance. This plan of operations, and the fact that the siege of Jerusalem overtook the Jews during the celebration of the Passover, when multitudes came to worship in the temple, will also account for the large number of captives taken in that city. When it is said that these amounted to not less than 97,000, that 1,100,000 had fallen since the commencement of the war, while multitudes escaped from 1 Jos. Wars, vii. 1. 1; Epiph. Mens et Pond. 14. 2 Ut supra, vi. 9. 3. |