y appears that our Josephus ever saw.
[9] Here we have an account of the first building of the city of
Jerusalem, according to Manetho, when the Phoenician shepherds were
expelled out of Egypt about thirty-seven years before Abraham came out
of Harsh.
[10] Genesis 46;32, 34; 47:3, 4.
[11] In our copies of the book of Genesis and of Joseph, this Joseph
never calls himself "a captive," when he was with the king of Egypt,
though he does call himself "a servant," "a slave," or "captive," many
times in the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, under Joseph, sect. 1,
11, 13-16.
[12] Of this Egyptian chronology of Manetho, as mistaken by Josephus,
and of these Phoenician shepherds, as falsely supposed by him, and
others after him, to have been the Israelites in Egypt, see Essay on the
Old Testament, Appendix, p. 182-188. And note here, that when Josephus
tells us that the Greeks or Argives looked on this Danaus as "a most
ancient," or "the most ancient," king of Argos, he need not be supposed
to mean, in the strictest sense, that they had no one king so ancient as
he; for it is certain that they owned nine kings before him, and Inachus
at the head of them. See Authentic Records, Part II. p. 983, as Josephus
could not but know very well; but that he was esteemed as very ancient
by them, and that they knew they had been first of all denominated
"Danai" from this very ancient king Danaus. Nor does this superlative
degree always imply the "most ancient" of all without exception, but is
sometimes to be rendered "very ancient" only, as is the case in the like
superlative degrees of other words also.
[13] Authentic Records, Part II. p. 983, as Josephus could not but know
very well; but that he was esteemed as very ancient by them, and that
they knew they had been first of all denominated "Danai" from this very
ancient king Danaus. Nor does this superlative degree always imply the
"most ancient" of all without exception, but is sometimes to be rendered
"very ancient" only, as is the case in the like superlative degrees of
other words also.
[14] This number in Josephus, that Nebuchadnezzar destroyed the temple
in the eighteenth year of his reign, is a mistake in the nicety of
chronology; for it was in the nineteenth. The true number here for the
year of Darius, in which the second temple was finished, whether the
second with our present copies, or the sixth with that of Syncellus,
or the tenth with that of Eusebius, is very
|