« ZurückWeiter »
ment of his treachery, with a note, that the perjurer cannot deceive God.
Of Aristomenes no more is remaining to be said, than that committing his people to the charge of his son Gorgus and other sufficient governors, who should plant them in some new seat abroad, he resolved himself to make abode in those parts, hoping to find the Lacedæmonians work at home. His daughters he bestowed honourably in marriage. One of them Demagetus, who reigned in the isle of Rhodes, took to wife, being willed by an oracle to marry the daughter of the best man in Greece. Finally, Aristomenes went with his daughter to Rhodes, whence he purposed to have travelled unto Ardys the son of Gyges king of Lydia, and to Phraortes king of Media; but death prevented him at Rhodes, where he was honourably buried.
The Messenians were invited by Anaxilas, (whose great grandfather was a Messenian, and went into Italy after the former war,) being lord of the Rhegians in Italy, to take his part against the Zancleans in Sicily, on the other side of the straits. They did so; and winning the town of Zancle, called it Messene, which name it keeps to this day.
This second Messenian war ended in the first year of the twenty-eighth Olympiad. Long after which time, the rest of that nation, who staying at home served the Lacedæmonians, found means to rebel ; but were soon vanquished, and being driven to forsake Peloponnesus, they went into Acarnania; whence likewise, after few ages, they were expelled by the Lacedæmonians, and then followed their ancient countrymen into Italy and Sicily; some of them went into Africa, where they chose unto themselves a seat.
It is very strange, that during two hundred and eighty years this banished nation retained their name, their ancient customs, language, hatred of Sparta, and love of their forsaken country, with a desire to return unto it. In the third year of the one hundred and second Olympiad, that great Epaminondas, having tamed the pride of the Lacedæmonians, revoked the Messenians home, who came flocking out of all quarters, where they dwelt abroad, into Peloponne
sus. There did Epaminondas restore unto them their old possession, and help them in building a fair city; which, by the name of the province, was called Messene, and was held by them ever after, in despite of the Lacedæmonians, of whom they never from thenceforth stood in fear.
SECT. V. Of the hings that were in Lydia and Media while Manasses
reigned. Whether Deioces the Mede were that Arphaxad which is mentioned in the book of Judith. Of the history of Judith.
ARDYS king of Lydia, and Phraortes of the Medes, are spoken of by Pausanias, as reigning shortly after the : Messenian war. Ardys succeeding unto his father Gyges, began his reign of forty-nine years, in the second of the twenty-fifth Olympiad. He followed the steps of his father, who encroaching upon the Ionians in Asia, had taken Colophon by force, and attempted Miletus and Smyrna. In like manner Ardys won Priene, and assailed Miletus, but 'went away without it. In his reign the Cimmerians, being expelled out of their own country by the Scythians, overran a great part of Asia, which was not freed from them before the time of Alyattes, this man's grandchild, by whom they were driven out. They had not only broken into Lydia, but won the city of Sardes; though the castle or citadel thereof was defended against them, and held still for king Ardys; whose long reign was unable, by reason of this great storm, to effect much.
Phraortes was not king until the third year of the twentyninth Olympiad, which was six years after the Messenian war ended; the same being the last year of Manasses's reign over Juda.
Deioces, the father of this Phraortes, was king of Media three and fifty of these five and fifty years in which Manasses reigned. This Deioces was the first that ruled the Medes in a strict form, commanding more absolutely than his predecessors had done. For they, following the example of Arbaces, had given to the people so much license, as caused every one to desire the wholesome severity of a more
lordly king. Herein Deioces answered their desires to the full. For he caused them to build for him a stately palace; he took unto him a guard, for defence of his person ; he seldom gave presence, which also when he did, it was with such austerity, that no man durst presume to spit or cough in his sight. By these and the like ceremonies he bred in the people an awful regard, and highly upheld the majesty, which his predecessors had almost letten fall, through neglect of due comportments. In execution of his royal office, he did uprightly and severely administer justice, keeping secret spies to inform him of all that was done in the kingdom. He cared not to enlarge the bounds of his dominion by encroaching upon others; but studied how to govern well his own. The difference found between this king and such as were before him seems to have bred that opinion which Herodotus, 1. 1. delivers, that Deioces was the first who reigned in Media.
This was he that built the great city of Ecbatane, which now is called Tauris; and therefore he should be that king Arphaxad mentioned in the story of Judith, as also Ben Merodach, by the same account, should be Nabuchodonosor the Assyrian, by whom Arphaxad was slain, and Holo fernes sent to work wonders upon Phud and Lud, and I know not what other countries. For I reckon the last year of Deioces to have been the nineteenth of Ben Merodach; though others place it otherwise, some earlier, in the time of Merodach Baladan, some later, in the reign of Nabulassar, who is also called Nabuchodonosor.
In fitting this book of Judith to a certain time, there hath much labour been spent, with ill success. The reigns of Cambyses, Darius Hystaspis, Xerxes, and Ochus, have been sought into, but afford no great matter of likelihood ; and now of late, the times foregoing the destruction of Jerusalem have been thought upon, and this age that we have in hand chosen by Bellarmine, as agreeing best with the story; though others herein cannot (I speak of such as fain would) agree with him. Whilst Cambyses reigned, the temple was not rebuilt, which in the story of Judith is found standing and dedicated. The other two Persian kings, Darius and Xerxes, are acknowledged to have been very favourable to the Jews; therefore neither of them could be Nabuchodonosor, whose part they refused to take, and who sent to destroy them. Yet the time of Xerxes hath some conveniences aptly fitting this history; and above all, the opinion of a few ancient writers, (without whose judgment the authority of this book were of no value,) having placed this argument in the Persian monarchy, inclines the matter to the reign of this vainglorious king. As for Ochus, very few, and they faintly, entitle him to the business. Manifest it is, and granted, that in the time of this history there must be a return from captivity lately foregoing; the temple rebuilt ; Joachim high priest; and a long peace, of threescore and ten years, or thereabout, ensuing. All these were to be among the Jews. Likewise on the other side, we must find a king that reigned in Nineveh eighteen years at the least ; that vanquished and slew a king of the Medes; one whom the Jews refused to assist; one that sought to be generally adored as God, and that therefore commanded all temples of such as were accounted gods to be destroyed; one whose viceroy or captain-general knew not the Jewish nation, but was fain to learn what they were of the bordering people.
Of all these circumstances; the priesthood of Joachim, with a return from captivity, are found concurring, with either the time of Manasses before the destruction of Jerusalem, or of Xerxes afterward; the rebuilding of the temple a while before, and the long peace following, agree with the reign of Xerxes; the rest of circumstances requisite are to be found all together, neither before nor after the captivity of the Jews and desolation of the city. Wherefore the brief decision of this controversy is, that the book of Judith is not canonical. Yet hath Torniellus done as much, in fitting all to the time of Xerxes, as was possible in so desperate a case. For he supposeth, that under Xerxes there were other kings, among which Arphaxad might be one, (who perhaps restored and reedified the city of Ecbatane, that had formerly been built by Deioces,) and Nabuchodonosor might be another. This granted, he adds, that from the twelfth year to the eighteenth of Nabuchodonosor, that is, five or six years, the absence and ill fortune of Xerxes, in his Grecian expedition, (which he supposeth to have been so long,) might give occasion unto Arphaxad of rebelling: and that Nabuchodonosor, having vanquished and slain Arphaxad, might then seek to make himself lord of all by the army which he sent forth under Holofernes. So should the Jews have done their duty in adhering to Xerxes, their sovereign lord, and resisting one that rebelled against him; as also the other circumstances rehearsed before be well applied to the argument. For in these times, the affairs of Jewry were agreeable to the history of Judith, and such a king as this supposed Nabuchodonosor might well enough be ignorant of the Jews, and as proud as we shall need to think him. But the silence of all histories takes away belief from this conjecture; and the supposition itself is very hard, that a rebel, whose king was abroad, with an army consisting of seventeen hundred thousand men, should presume so far upon the strength of twelve hundred thousand foot, and twelve thousand archers on horseback, as to think that he might do what he list, yea, that there was none other god than himself. It is indeed easy to find enough that might be said against 'this device of Torniellus; yet, if there were any necessity of holding the book of Judith to be canonical, I would rather choose to lay aside all regard of profane histories, and build some defence upon this ground; than, by following the opinion of any other, to violate, as they all do, the text itself. That Judith lived under none of the Persian kings, Bellarmine (whose works I have not read, but find him cited by Torniellus) hath proved by many arguments. That she lived not in the reign of Manasses, Torniellus hath proved very substantially, shewing how the cardinal is driven, as it were, to break through a wall, in saying that the text was corrupted, where it spake of the destruction of the temple foregoing her time. That the kings Arphaxad