Chapter VIII. Josephus on the Polity of Moses

[JOSEPHUS] [1] ‘BUT who it was that made the best laws, and attained the worthiest belief concerning God, it is easy for us to discern from the laws themselves by comparing them one with another: for it is time now to speak of these points.

‘Now although the particular differences in the customs and laws received among all mankind are infinite, one may go over them thus in a summary way.

‘For some entrusted the authority of their civil government to monarchies, and some to oligarchical dynasties, and others to the commons. Our Lawgiver, however, paid no regard at all to these, but rendered our government, as one might call it by a strained expression, a Theocracy, ascribing the authority and the power to God, and persuading all the people to look unto Him, as being the Author of all good things, both those which are possessed by all men in common, and whatever they themselves obtained by praying to Him in difficulties; persuading them also that it was not possible for any either of one’s actions or of one’s inward thoughts to escape His knowledge.

‘But Him he represented as uncreated, and for ever unchangeable, surpassing in beauty all mortal form, and unknown in His essential nature, though known to us by His power.

‘I do not now stay to show that the wisest among the Greeks were taught to entertain these thoughts of God from the principles which he supplied: but that these thoughts are honourable and becoming to God’s nature and majesty, they have borne strong testimony; for Pythagoras and Anaxagoras and Plato, and the Stoic philosophers who came after him, and almost all others, have evidently entertained such thoughts of God’s nature.

‘But whereas these men addressed their philosophy to few, and did not dare to publish the truth of their doctrine to multitudes prejudiced with other opinions, our Legislator, inasmuch as he made his actions agree with his laws, not only persuaded the men of his own time, but also inspired those who were to be begotten of them in every age with a belief in God that nothing could remove.

‘And the reason was, that he far surpassed all others in the tendency of his legislation towards utility. For he did not make religion a part of virtue, but made other things parts of religion, and so looked at them all together and established them: I mean justice, temperance, fortitude, and the agreement of fellow citizens one with another in all things.

‘For all our actions and occupations, and all our discourse, have reference to piety towards our God: and none of these did he leave unexamined nor undetermined.

‘For there are in all education and moral training two methods, the one of which instructs by word, and the other by the training of moral habits. Other legislators therefore were divided in their judgements, and having chosen the one of these ways, each whichever pleased him, neglected the other. As for instance the Lacedaemonians and Cretans used to educate by habits, not by words; but the Athenians, and nearly all the other Greeks, enjoined by the laws what things men ought to do or leave undone, but took little care to habituate them thereto by actual deeds.

‘Our Lawgiver, however, combined both these ways with great care; for he neither left the practice of moral habits without explanation in words, nor suffered the teaching of the Law to go unpractised; but beginning at once from the nurture of infancy and from every man’s domestic mode of life, he left none even of the smallest matters freely dependent upon the wishes of those who were to deal with them; but even about kinds of food, from which one must abstain, and which one must adopt, and concerning those who should live in common with them, and concerning their diligence in labour and on the other hand their rest, he himself made the Law a limit and a rule, in order that living under this as a father and a master we might neither wilfully nor through ignorance commit any sin.

‘For he did not leave even the excuse from ignorance, but appointed the Law to be both the best and most necessary instruction, to be heard by them not merely once, nor twice nor many times; but every week he commanded them to desist from all other employments, and assemble for the hearing of the Law, and to learn it thoroughly and exactly, a thing which all legislators seem to have neglected.

‘And so far are the greatest part of mankind from living according to their own laws, that they hardly even know them; but when they sin, then they learn from others, that they have transgressed the law. Those too who administer the greatest and most absolute powers among them acknowledge their ignorance, for they appoint those who profess to be expert in the laws to preside with them over the administration of affairs.

‘But any one of us whom a man might ask about the laws would tell them all more easily th’an his own name. So by learning them thoroughly as soon as ever we become sensible of anything, we have them engraven as it were on our souls: and while there are few who transgress, no plea can possibly save from punishment.

‘It is this before all things that has produced in us so wonderful an agreement. For to have one and the same opinion concerning God, and no difference between one and another, is our daily life and customs, produces a most excellent harmony in men’s moral dispositions.

‘For among us alone a man will hear no statements concerning God contradictory one to another, though such things are frequent in other nations; for not only by ordinary men is the casual feeling of each expressed, but even among some of the philosophers there has been the same rashness of utterance, some having undertaken to exterminate God’s nature altogether by their arguments, while others deprive Him of His providence over mankind. Nor will one observe any difference in the habits of life; but among us there is a community in all men’s actions, and unity of statement, in agreement with the Law, concerning God, declaring that He takes oversight of all things.

‘Moreover in regard to our habits of life, a man may learn even from women and servants that all other things must have piety for their end. Hence also has resulted the charge which some bring against us, that we have not produced men who were inventors of novelties in words or in works.

‘For others think it a fine thing to abide by no customs derived from their forefathers, and testify to the shrewd wisdom of those who are boldest in transgressing them: but we on the contrary have understood that the only wisdom and virtue is neither in act nor in thought to contradict at all the original enactments of our Law.

‘And this conduct may reasonably be considered a proof that the Law was admirably ordained. For ordinances which have not this character are proved by the tests of experience to require amendment: but for us, who were persuaded that the Law was from the beginning ordained in accordance with God’s will, it would thenceforth have been impious not to guard it safely.

‘For what part of it could one have altered? Or what could one have discovered better, or what transferred from other laws as more useful? Should the whole constitution of the state have been altered? But what could be nobler or more just than the constitution which has made God ruler of the whole, and allows the administration of the chief affairs to the priests in common, but withal has entrusted the government over the other priests to the Chief Priest of all?

‘These from the very first the Lawgiver appointed to their honourable office, not as superior in wealth nor in any other accidental advantages; but he placed the service of God in the hands of those of his companions who excelled others in persuasiveness and prudence.

‘And herein was an exact care both of the Law and of the other institutions: for the priests were appointed overseers of all things, and judges of disputed matters, and punishers of those who had been condemned.

‘What government then could be more holy than this? Or what honour more befitting to God, since the whole people were trained to religion, and the priests entrusted with an especial superintendence, and the whole state administered in the manner of a religious solemnity?

‘For what other nations call “mysteries” and “solemnities,” and cannot observe in practice for a few days, these things we observe through our whole lifetime with much delight and unalterable purpose.

‘What then are these premonitions and proclamations? They are simple and easily known. And the first and leading precept is that which says of God, God holds all things together, being all-perfect, and blessed, sufficing for Himself and for all; He is the beginning, middle, and end of all things, manifest in His works and gifts, and more conspicuous than any other being whatsoever, but to us in form and magnitude most invisible.

‘Every material, costly though it be, is unworthy to form His image; and every art unskilled to conceive a similitude: no likeness of Him was ever seen or conceived, or may without impiety be represented.

‘His works we behold, light, heaven, earth, sun and moon, waters, generations of animals, produce of fruits. These things God made, not with hands, not with labour, not with need of any fellow workers, but when He willed them to be beautiful, at once they were born in beauty.

‘Him all must follow, and serve Him in the practice of virtue; for this mode of worshipping God is the most holy.

‘One temple of One God (for like is ever dear to like), a temple common to all men for the common God of all. The priests continually serve Him, and their leader is ever the first by birth. He together with his fellow priests is to offer sacrifices to God, to guard the laws, to judge of disputed matters, to punish the convicted. Whoever refuses to obey him must suffer punishment, as guilty of impiety towards God Himself.

‘The sacrifices which we offer are not for our own surfeit and drunkenness (for these things are contrary to God’s will, and may be made a pretext for insolence and extravagance), but are sober, orderly, and simply arranged, that in sacrificing men may be most temperate. Also at the sacrifices we must first pray for the common salvation, and then for ourselves, for we are made for fellowship; and he who esteems this higher than his private interest would be most acceptable to God.

‘In prayer let God be invoked and entreated, not that He give good things (for He has given them of His own free will, and has imparted them in common to all), but that we may be able to receive them, and, when we have gotten, to keep them.

‘At the offering of sacrifices the Law has prescribed purifications from mourning for the dead, from defilement, from conjugal intercourse, and many other things, which it would be too long now to write. Such is our doctrine concerning God and His worship, and the same is also our law.[2]

‘Now what are the laws concerning marriages? Our law recognizes no other than the natural intercourse with a wife, and that, if it is to be for the sake of children. The intercourse of males it abhors; and should any one attempt it, the penalty is death.

‘It bids men marry, not out of regard to dowry, nor by forcible abduction, nor yet by crafty and deceitful persuasion, but to ask a woman in marriage from him who has the right to give her, and a woman suitable in respect of kin. Woman, it says, is inferior to man in all things: therefore let her obey, not to be insulted, but that she may be ruled: for God gave power to the man.

‘With her alone the husband must consort, and to attempt another’s wife is unholy. But should any one do this, no entreaty can save him from death; nor if he should violate a virgin betrothed to another man, nor if he should entice a married woman.

‘All children the Law ordered to be reared; and forbade women to cause abortion or to destroy what is begotten: but if discovered, she would be guilty of child-murder, for destroying life, and diminishing the human race.

‘So then if any should proceed to defile the marriage-bed, he can no longer be pure. Even after the lawful intercourse of man and wife, the Law enjoins ablution: it supposed this act to involve a transference of part of the soul to another place. For by growing into union with bodies the soul suffers ill, and again when separated from them by death. For which reason, in all such cases, the Law appointed purifications.

‘Moreover, not even on the birthdays of children did it permit us to celebrate a feast and make pretexts for drunkenness; but it directed the very beginning of education to be temperate, and commanded us to instruct children in the learning that relates to the laws, and that they should be acquainted with the deeds of their forefathers; in order that they may imitate these deeds, and being bred up in those laws may neither transgress them, nor have any excuse from ignorance.

‘It provided for the reverence due to the dead, not by costly funeral rites, nor by erection of conspicuous monuments, but appointed the nearest relations to perform the usual obsequies, and made it customary for all who were passing by at the time of a burial to draw near and join in the mourning. It also commands that the house and its inhabitants be purified from the defilement of death, in order that one who has committed murder may be very far from thinking that he is undefiled.

‘It ordained the honour of parents to be next to that of God; and the son who does not requite the benefits received from them, but fails in any point, it delivers over to be stoned.

‘It also says that the young must pay honour to every elder, since the eldest of all things is God.

‘It does not permit the concealment of anything from friends, because that is no friendship which does not trust in all things: and if any enmity occur, it has forbidden the disclosure of their secrets.

‘Should any one acting as a judge take bribes, the penalty is death. If one disregards a suppliant, when it is in his power to help him, he is responsible. What a man did not lay down, he must not take up. He is not to touch anything belonging to another. If he has lent money, he must not take usury. These ordinances, and many like to these, bind close our fellowship with one another.

‘But it is worth while to see also what was the mind of our Lawgiver in regard to equity towards men of other nations: for it will appear that he made the best of all provision, that we might neither destroy our own institutions, nor begrudge those who wished to share in them.

‘For all who are willing to come and live under the same laws with us, he receives in a friendly spirit, considering that affinity consists not only in race, but also in the purpose of life: but those who come to us only casually he did not wish to be mixed up in close communion with us.

‘He has, however, prescribed the other gifts which we are bound to impart; to supply to all that are in need fire, water, and food, to show them the roads, not to leave a corpse unburied.

‘Also in the treatment of those who are judged to be our enemies we must be equitable: for he does not let us ravage their land with fire, nor has he permitted us to cut down fruit-trees; nay more, he has forbidden us to spoil those who have fallen in battle, and has provided for captives, that no outrage be done to them, especially to women.

‘So far did he carry his zeal to teach us gentleness and humanity, that he did not neglect the care even of brute beasts; but permitted only the accustomed use of them, and forbade all other. Any of them which take refuge in our houses, like suppliants as it were, he forbade us to destroy; nor did he suffer us to slay the parents with the young: he bade us spare the labouring cattle even in an enemy’s country, and not put them to death.

‘Thus did he provide on all sides what tended to clemency, by using the aforesaid laws to instruct us, and on the other hand enacting the penal laws without any excuse against those who transgress. For most of the transgressors the penalty is death, if one commit adultery, if he violate a damsel, if he dare to make attempt on a man, if one so attempted submit to be abused.

‘In the case of slaves, also, the Law is equally inexorable. Moreover, if any one should cheat in regard to measures or weights, or in an unfair and fraudulent sale, and if one steal another’s property, and take up what he did not lay down, for all these there are penalties, not merely such as in other nations but more severe.

‘For in regard to injury to parents, or impiety towards God, if a man even think of it, he is immediately put to death.

‘For those, however, who act in all things according to the laws there is a reward not of silver nor gold, no, nor yet a crown of wild-olive or parsley, with a corresponding proclamation; but each man who has the testimony of his own conscience is persuaded by the prophetic declaration of the Lawgiver, and by God’s confirmation of his faith, that to those who have constantly kept His laws, and would readily die, if it were needful in their defence, God granted that they should be born again, and receive in exchange a better life.

‘I should hesitate to write thus now, were it not manifest to all by their actions that many of our countrymen many times ere now, to avoid uttering a word against the Law, have nobly preferred to endure all sufferings. And yet had it not been the case that our nation is well known to all men, and that our voluntary obedience to the laws is manifest, but had some one either read them to the Greeks, saying that he had written them himself, or had asserted that somewhere out of the limits of the known world he had met with men, who held such a reverent notion concerning God, and had through long ages lived in constant obedience to such laws, I think that all men would have marvelled, because of the continual changes among themselves. At all events when men have attempted to write anything of a like kind in regard to polity and laws, they charge them with having made a collection of marvels, and assert that they adopted impossible assumptions.

‘And here I say nothing of those other philosophers who dealt with any such subject in their writings: but Plato, though admired among the Greeks, both as distinguished by gravity of life, and as having surpassed all who have been engaged in philosophy in power of expression and persuasiveness, is little better than scoffed at continually and ridiculed by those who claim to be clever in political matters.

‘And yet any one examining his writings would constantly find things milder and more nearly like the customs of mankind in general. And Plato himself has confessed that it was not safe to publish the true opinion concerning God to the unintelligent multitudes. Some, however, think that Plato’s discourses are empty words written in a fine style of great authority.

Among lawgivers Lycurgus has been most admired; and all men sing the praises of Sparta for having so long patiently endured his laws.

‘Well then, let it be confessed that this is a proof of virtue, to be obedient to the laws. But let those who admire the Lacedaemonians compare their duration with the more than two thousand years of our political constitution: and let them further consider that though the Lacedaemonians seemed to observe their laws strictly so long as they retained their own liberty, yet when changes of fortune occurred to them they forgot almost all their laws: but we, though involved in countless vicissitudes, because of the changes of the ruling monarchs of Asia, yet never even in the extremities of danger betrayed our laws.’

These are the statements of Josephus concerning the political constitution of the Jews established by Moses. But with regard to the allegorical meaning shadowed out in the laws enacted by him, though I might say much, I think it sufficient to mention the narratives of Eleazar and Aristobulus, men originally of Hebrew descent, and, as to date, distinguished in the times of the Ptolemies.

Of these Eleazar, as we showed a little above, had been honoured with the dignity of the High-Priesthood, and when the ambassadors had come to him from the king for the sake of the translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into the Greek tongue, he sketches out the nature of the allegorical sense in the sacred laws, and presents the doctrine of his discourse in the following form: