*

was commissioned to assure him, that the kings of Syria and Israel should remain only the heads of their respective cities, they should not prevail against Jerusalem, and within sixty and five years Israel should be so broken as to be no more a people. The learned Vitringa is of opinion, that the text is corrupted, and that instead of sixty and five, it was originally written sixteen and five. Sixteen and five, as he confesseth, is an odd way of computation for one and twenty; but it designs perfectly the years of Ahaz and Hezekiah. For Ahaz reigned sixteen years, and Hezekiah five years alone, having reigned one year jointly with his father and it was, in the sixth year of Hezekiah,' that 'Shalmaneser took Samaria, and carried away Israel unto Assyria,'-2 Kings xviii. 10, 11. Then indeed the kingdom of Israel was broken: and the conjecture of Vitringa would appear much more probable, if it could be proved that it had ever been usual to write the numbers or dates of years partly in words at length, and partly in numeral letters. But without recourse to such an expedient, the thing may be explicated otherwise. For, from the first of Ahaz, compute sixty and five years in the reigns of Ahaz, Hezekiah, and Manasseh, the end of them will fall about the 22d year of Manasseh, when Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, made the last deportation of the Israelites, and planted other nations in their stead ; and in the same expedition probably took Manasseh captive, 2 Chron. xxxiii. 11, and carried him to Babylon. It is said expressly that it was Esarhaddon who planted the other nations in the cities of Samaria: but it is not said expressly in scripture, that he carried away the remainder of the people, but it may be inferred from several circumstances of the story. There were other deportations of the Israelites made by the kings of Assyria before this time. In the reign of Ahaz, Tiglath-pilezer took many of the Israelites, even the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and the half tribe of Manasseh, and all the land of Naphtali, and carried them captive to Assyria, and brought them unto Halah, and Habor, and Hara, and to the river Gozan,'1 Chron. v. 26; 2 Kings xv. 29. His son, Shalmaneser, in the reign of Hezekiah, took Samaria, and carried away still greater numbers unto Assyria, and put them in Halah and in Habor by the river of Gozan,' the same places whither their brethren had been carried before them, and in the cities of the Medes,'— 2 Kings xviii. 11. His son Sennacherib came up also against

• Comment. in locum.

See Usher, Prideaux, &c.

:

Hezekiah, and all the fenced cities of Judah; but his army was miraculously defeated, and he himself was forced to return with shame and disgrace into his own country, where he was murdered by two of his sons, 2 Kings xviii. 19. Another of his sons, Esarhaddon, succeeded him in the throne, but it was some time before he could recover his kingdom from these disorders, and think of reducing Syria and Palestine again to his obedience and then it was, and not till then, that he completed the ruin of the ten tribes, carried away the remains of the people, and to prevent the land from becoming desolate, brought men from Babylon, and from Cuthah, and from Hava, and from Hamath, and from Sepharvaim, and placed them in the cities of Samaria, instead of the children of Israel,'-Ezra iv. 2, 10; 2 Kings xvii. 24. Ephraim was broken from being a kingdom before, but now he was broken from being a people. And from that time to this, what account can be given of the people of Israel as distinct from the people of Judah? where have they subsisted all this while? and where is their situation, or what is their condition at present?

We see plainly that they were placed in Assyria and Media : and if they subsisted any where, one would imagine they might be found there in the greatest abundance. But authors have generally sought for them elsewhere; and the visionary writer of the second book of Esdras, xiii. 40, &c. hath asserted, that they took a resolution of retiring from the Gentiles, and of going into a country which had never been inhabited; that the river Euphrates was miraculously divided for their passage, and they proceeded in their journey a year and a half, before they arrived at this country, which was called Arsareth. But the worst of it is, as this country was unknown before, so it hath been equally unknown ever since. It is to be found no where but in the apocryphal book, which is so wild and fabulous in other respects, that it deserves no credit in this particular. Benjamin of Tudela, a Jew of the twelfth century, hath likewise assigned them a large and spacious country, with fine cities ;* but no body knoweth to this day where it is situated. Eldad, another Jew of the thirteenth century, hath placed them in Ethiopia, and I know not where; and hath made the Saracens and twenty-five kingdoms tributary to them. Another Jewish writer, Peritful, of Ferrara, who lived in the century before the last, hath given them kingdoms in a country called Perricha, For these particulars the reader may consult Basnage's Hist. of the Jcws, book 6, chap. 2 and 3.

enclosed by unknown mountains, and bounded by Assyria, and like wise in the deserts of Arabia, and even in the East Indies. Ma nasseh, a famous rabbi of the last century, and others, have asserted, that they passed into Tartary, and expelled the Scythians: and others again from Tartary have conveyed them into America. But

all these differing accounts prove nothing but the great uncertainty that there is in this matter. The best of them are only conjectures without any solid foundation, but most of them are manifest forgeries of the Jews, to aggrandize their nation.

The difficulty of finding out the habitations of the ten tribes hath induced others to maintain, that they returned into their own country with the other two tribes, after the Babylonish captivity. The decree indeed of Cyrus extended to all the people of God,'-Ezra . 3, and that of Artaxerxes to all the people of Israel,'—vii. 13; and no doubt many of the Israelites took advantage of these decrees, and returned with Zerubbabel and Ezra to their own cities: but still the main body of the ten tribes remained behind. Ezra, who should best know, saith that there rose up the chief of the fathers of Judah and Benjamin,'-i. 5, and he calleth the Samaritans the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin,'-iv. 1, these two tribes were the principals, the others were only as accessories. And if they did not return at this time, they cannot be supposed to have returned in a body at any time after this; for we read of no such adventure in history, we know neither the time nor occasion of their return, nor who were their generals or leaders in this expedition. Josephus, who saw his country for several years in as flourishing a condition as at any time since the captivity, affirms that "Ezra sent a copy of the decree of Artaxerxes to all of the same nation throughout Media, where the ten tribes lived in captivity, and many of them came with their effects to Babylon, desiring to return to Jerusalem; but the main body of the Israelites abode in that region; and therefore it hath happened (saith he) that there are two tribes in Asia and Europe, living in subjection to the Romans: but the ten tribes are beyond the Euphrates to this time;' and then addeth, with the vanity of a Jew speaking of his countrymen, that "they were so many myriads, that they could not be numbered.'+

* See Calmet's two Dissertations, 1st. Sur le pays où les dix tribus d'Israel furent transportées, et sur celui où elles sont aujourd'hui-Comment. vol. 3; 2d. Ou l'on examine si les dix tribus sont revenues de leur captivité, dans la terre d'Israel. -Comment. vol. 6.

+ Το δ' ἀντίγραφον αὐτῆς παρα παντας έπεμψε τις ομοεθνεις τις κατα την Μηδίαν όντας, πολλά δ' αίτων, και τας κτήσεις ἀναλαβοντες, ήλθον εις Βαβυλώνα, αποθώντες την εἰς τα Ιεροσο

Others, finding no good authority for admitting that the ten tribes of Israel were restored in the same manner as the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin, have therefore asserted, that "the ten tribes of Israel which had separated from the house of David, were brought to a full and utter destruction, and never after recovered themselves again. For those who were thus carried away (excepting only some few, who joining themselves to the Jews in the land of their captivity, returned with them) soon going into the usages and idolatry of the nations among whom they were planted, (to which they were too much addicted while in their own land) after a while became wholly absorbed, and swallowed up in them, and thence utterly losing their name, their language, and their memorial, were never after any more spoken of."* But if the whole race of Israel became thus extinct, and perished for ever, how can the numerous prophecies be fulfilled, which promise the future conversion and restoration of Israel as well as of Judah?

The truth I conceive to lie between these two opinions. Neither did they all return to Jerusalem, neither did all, who remained behind, comply with the idolatry of the Gentiles, among whom they lived. But whether they remained, or whether they returned, this prophecy of Isaiah was still fulfilled: the kingdom, the commonwealth, the state of Israel was utterly broken; they no longer subsisted as a distinct people from Judah, they no longer maintained a separate religion, they joined themselves to the Jews from whom they had been unhappily divided, they lost the name of Israel as a name of distinction, and were thenceforth all in common called Jews. It appears from the book of Esther, that there were great numbers of Jews in all the hundred twenty and seven provinces of the kingdom of Ahasuerus, or Artaxerxes Longimanus, king of Persia, and they could not all be the remains of the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin, who had refused to return to Jerusalem with their brethren; they must many of them have been the descendants λυμα καθοδον ο δε πας λαός των Ισραηλιτων κατα χωραν έμεινε διο και δυο φυλας εἶναι συμβέβηκεν ἐπι τε της Ασίας και της Ευρωπης, Ρωμαίοις ὑπακουσας· αἱ δε δεκα φυλαι πέραν εἰσιν Εὐφρατη έω, δευρο, μυριάδες άπειροι, και άριθμω γνωσθήναι μη δυνάμεναι. Exemplar vero ejus in Mediam ad omnes gentis suæ homines misit.-Multi vero ex iis cum re sua familiari Babylonem se contulerunt, ut qui Hierosolyma revertendi desiderio tenebantur. Omnis autem multitudo Israelitarum in ea regionc mansit. Quapropter duæ tantum tribus per Asiam atque Europam sub Romano degunt imperio. Decem autem reliquæ tribus usque in hodiernum diem loca ultra Euphratem colunt, infinita hominum millia, nec numero comprehendenda.—Antiq. lib. 11, cap. 5, sect. 2, p, 482. edit. Hudson. [Translated in the text.]

* Prideaux Connect. part 1, book 1, anno 677. Manasseh, 22.

of the ten tribes whom the kings of Assyria had carried away captive; but yet they are all spoken of as one and the same people, and all, without distinction, are denominated Jews. We read in the Acts of the Apostles, ii. 9, that there came to Jerusalem to celebrate the feast of Pentecost, Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia:' these men came from the countries, wherein the ten tribes had been placed, and in all probability therefore were some of their posterity; but yet these, as well as the rest, are styled, ver. 5,- Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.' Those likewise of the ten tribes, who returned to Jerusalem, united with the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin, and formed but one nation, one body of Jews; they might for some ages perhaps preserve their genealogies; but they are now incorporated together, and the distinction of tribes and families is in great measure lost among them, and they have all, from the Babylonish captivity to this day, been comprehended under the general name of Jews. In St. Paul's time there were several persons of all the ten tribes in being; for he speaketh of the twelve tribes hoping to attain to the promise of God,'-Acts xxvi. 7; and St. James addresseth his epistle to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad.'-James i. 1. And we make no question, that several persons of all the ten tribes are in being at present, though we cannot separate them from the rest; they are confounded with the other Jews; there is no difference, no distinction between them. The Samaritans indeed (of whom there are still some remains at Sichem and the neighbouring towns) pretend to be the descendants of the children of Israel,* but they are really derived from those nations, which Esarhaddon, king of Assyria, planted in the country after he had carried thence the ten tribes into captivity. And for this reason the Jews call them by no other name than Cuthites, (the name of one of those nations) and exclaim against them as the worst of heretics, and if possible have greater hatred and abhorrence of them than of the Christians themselves.

Thus we see how the ten tribes of Israel were in a manner lost in their captivity, while the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin were restored and preserved several ages afterwards. And what, can you believe, were the reasons of God's making this difference and distinction between them? The ten tribes had totally revolted from God to the worship of the golder calves in Dan and Bethel; and

* See Prideaux, as before.