has been attributed to his jealousy as a contemporary author, and a member of the same profession, eclipsed by the glory of the great conqueror. But these censures seem unnecessarily ascribed to any sinister motive. Pollio tracked him throughout his whole career, as a captain, a historian, and an orator. An observer so acute, and so much in the secret, might become acquainted with many circumstances stated erroneously or even falsely by the author, for want of caution or the means of verifying them he might have convicted him even of some fabulous narratives, and yet have left much for us to admire, much from which we may derive instruction.

:

It has been affirmed that Cæsar did not write the three books of the civil war, and even that Suetonius was the author of the seven books on the Gallic War. But Vossius has vindicated Cæsar's title to the authorship of the Commentaries, as they stand in the editions, though he does not vouch for his accuracy or veracity on all occasions.

There are few great works, of which literary envy and malignity have not endeavoured to despoil their authors. The testimony of ancient writers, the passages quoted by them from these Commentaries, leave Cæsar in full and unquestionable possession of his property in them. There may be faults in him as an author, there may be local corruption in the manuscripts: but the works have come down to us as genuine, and as worthy of our acceptance in point both of matter and style, as is consistent with the frailty of human nature when unassisted. The opinion that the extant Commentaries are not Cæsar's may possibly have arisen from a confusion of circumstances between two works. It is believed

that he wrote Ephemerides, containing a journal of his life; but they are lost. Servius has quoted a very remarkable circumstance from this lost work: -"Hoc de historia tractum est: namque Caius Julius Cæsar, cum dimicaret in Gallia, et ab hoste raptus, equo ejus portaretur armatus, occurrit quidam ex hostibus, qui eum nosset, et insultans ait, Cæsar, Cæsar: quod Gallorum lingua dimitte significat: et ita factum est ut dimitteretur. Hoc autem ipse Cæsar in Ephemeride sua dicit, ubi propriam commemorat felicitatem."-In En. lib. xi. ver. 743.

Plutarch, in Cæsare, quotes the Ephemerides; by which he probably meant the work referred to by Servius. It is true, the substance of the passage occurs in the fourth book of the Commentaries; but the same personal anecdotes must frequently have been told in both works. Had Plutarch not meant the Ephemerides, he would scarcely have adopted the term in preference to another in common use, signifying Commentaries. Thus Strabo: Οὕτω δὲ καὶ ὁ Θεὸς Καῖσαρ ἐν τοῖς ὑπομνήμασιν εἴρηκεν. Lib. iv. init. T.

Frontinus relates many of Cæsar's stratagems not mentioned in the Commentaries; and must in all probability have read them in the Journal; the loss of which must be lamented by readers of every class, and especially by those who consider biography among the most interesting of studies, and find more to profit and delight in the history of the statesman's private mind, than in the official papers of his administration.

ON THE HISTORY OF JOSEPHUS. ON HEROD, MARIAMNE, AND HEROD THE TETRARCH.

Jos

OSEPHUS says at the end of his Antiquities of the Jews, that no person was so well qualified as himself, to deliver these accounts to the Greeks with accuracy. Those of his own nation freely acknowledged, that he far exceeded them in the learning belonging to Jews, to which he had taken much pains in adding that of the Greeks. Though his usual habit had been to speak his own tongue, he thoroughly understood the Greek language, but could not pronounce it with sufficient exactness. The Jews held an opinion, that there is no merit either in the acquisition of foreign languages, or in smoothness and elegance of composition. They looked on that kind of accomplishment as common, and easily acquired by slaves as well as by free men. At the end of this work, the author declares his intention, God willing, to give the public an abridgment of the Jewish war, and to carry the narrative down to the day on which he is writing, which is in the thirteenth year of Domitian, A. D. 93. It is not known whether he carried this project into execution. His motive probably was, to correct several mistakes in the first two books of the War, written in his youth, when he was comparatively an incompetent antiquary. Many passages occur in authors, avowedly quoted

from him, which are not now extant. They might possibly be contained in that compendium. Yet many of his references to works of his own, which have not come down to us, and many of his errors, belong to still earlier times. Neither he, nor any one else, ever quotes this abridgment. The probability therefore rather inclines against the publication. He wrote his own life as an Appendix to the Antiquities, more than seven years after they were finished; and this might perhaps supersede the other work. At the same time, he announces another intended treatise, in not less than three books, concerning God and his essence, and concerning the Jewish laws, why, according to them, some things were permitted to the Jews, and others prohibited. This last he had promised, should God afford him time for it, at the conclusion of his preface to the Antiquities. We have not much reason to believe that he ever published any of them. The death of his friends at court, Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian, the accession of Nerva and Trajan, with whom he had no personal acquaintance, his removal from Rome to Judea, with the subsequent course of events, might easily interrupt his progress as an author.

The great value of Josephus consists in the testimony borne by an opponent to many facts of Gospel history. It is stated in Scripture, that John the Baptist was beheaded by order of the younger Herod. Josephus confirms this: and mentions Herodias by name, as his brother's wife, whom Herod had married after divorcing his own. She was the daughter of Aretas, king of the Petrean Arabians. Her husband was not dead when Herod took her. Aretas made war against

him on account of this dishonourable conduct. Herod's whole army was destroyed in a battle. His adultery might sufficiently account for the divine displeasure; but Josephus attributes it to his cruelty towards John. He also relates that Herod lost his kingdom, and was banished to Lyons with Herodias. He states in the eighteenth book, that many of the Jews considered this destruction as a judgment from God for the murder of a good man, who had taught them virtue in their actions, and piety in their sentiments. He then enters into a discussion on the efficacy of baptism to purification, externally in reference to the body, internally on the supposition that the soul is previously purified by righteousness, as preached by John. Herod is represented as fearing that his persuasive power might raise sedition; for the people seemed entirely at John's disposal. By way of prevention, Herod sent him a prisoner to the castle of Macharus, where he was put to death. Josephus goes on to speak of our Saviour:-"There was about this time one Jesus, a wise man, if he may be called a man; for he did marvellous works. He taught those who were willing to receive his doctrine, drawing over to him many, both Jews and Gentiles. He was the Christ."

Josephus is principally to be received as a witness against himself. The head and front of John's offending was the declaration, It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother's wife.

Josephus also relates, that Jerusalem was taken in the reign of Vespasian, forty years after the Jews had dared to put Jesus to death. James, bishop of Jerusalem, the brother of our Lord, was thrown down from the temple at the same time,