X. 9; Talmud of Babylon, _Niddah_,
fol. 13 _b_; _Jebamoth_, 47 _b_, _Kiddushim_, 70 _b_; Midrash, _Jalkut
Ruth_, fol. 163 _d_.]
[Footnote 5: Apocryphal letter of Baruch, in Fabricius, _Cod. pseud.,
V.T._, ii., 147, and following.]
[Footnote 6: II. Book of Maccabees, ch. vii. and the _De Maccabaeis_,
attributed to Josephus. Cf. Epistle to the Hebrews xi. 33, and
following.]
[Footnote 7: III. Book (Apocr.) of Maccabees; Rufin, Suppl. ad Jos.,
_Contra Apionem_, ii. 5.]
The persecutions of Antiochus Epiphanes made this idea a passion,
almost a frenzy. It was something very analogous to that which
happened under Nero, two hundred and thirty years later. Rage and
despair threw the believers into the world of visions and dreams. The
first apocalypse, "The Book of Daniel," appeared. It was like a
revival of prophecy, but under a very different form from the ancient
one, and with a much larger idea of the destinies of the world. The
Book of Daniel gave, in a manner, the last expression to the Messianic
hopes. The Messiah was no longer a king, after the manner of David and
Solomon, a theocratic and Mosaic Cyrus; he was a "Son of man"
appearing in the clouds[1]--a supernatural being, invested with human
form, charged to rule the world, and to preside over the golden age.
Perhaps the _Sosiosh_ of Persia, the great prophet who was to come,
charged with preparing the reign of Ormuzd, gave some features to this
new ideal.[2] The unknown author of the Book of Daniel had, in any
case, a decisive influence on the religious event which was about to
transform the world. He supplied the _mise-en-scene_, and the
technical terms of the new belief in the Messiah; and we might apply
to him what Jesus said of John the Baptist: Before him, the prophets;
after him, the kingdom of God.
[Footnote 1: Chap. vii. 13, and following.]
[Footnote 2: _Vendidad_, chap. xix. 18, 19; _Minokhired_, a passage
published in the "_Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenlaendischen
Gesellschaft_," chap. i. 263; _Boundehesch_, chap. xxxi. The want of
certain chronology for the Zend and Pehlvis texts leaves much doubt
hovering over the relations between the Jewish and Persian beliefs.]
It must not, however, be supposed that this profoundly religious and
soul-stirring movement had particular dogmas for its primary impulse,
as was the case in all the conflicts which have disturbed the bosom of
Christianity. The Jew of this epoch was as little theological as
po
|