writes: "Those Antiquities contain the history of 5,000 years, and are taken out of our sacred books."53 Josephus, in his writings; largely presented the accepted Pharisaic view of his day.

So that the Rabbis, immediately following the destruction, believing themselves to be in the final cycle of the fifth millennium, thought that the "days of the Messiah" would last 40, 60 or 70 years, and expected the Messiah to come during the second century; to be more exact, within the first half of the second century; for it is very likely that the destruction of the Temple was soon regarded by them as the beginning of this Messianic age—the terminus a quo. The Messianic age was to begin at a time when the fortunes of the people were at their lowest ebb. It was quite natural, therefore, for them to assume that "on the day when the Temple was destroyed the Messiah was born."54 If this is correct, the Messianic age, beginning with the destruction of the Temple and lasting 40, 60 or 70 years, would culminate in the years 110, 130 or 140 c. E. The Bar Kochba revolution was, in a sense, the political upthrust of these perfervid Messianic expectations, based on the Millenarian chronology of the early second century, the immediate occasion being Hadrian's prohibition of circumcision, and his avowed intention to restore the Temple as a shrine for Jupiter Capitolinus.

The collapse of this movement at the close of the putative fifth millennium prompted the Rabbis not only to project the Messianic date to a more distant future, but also to revise their notion of the Creation calendar. They were living not at the close of the fifth but at the close of the fourth millennium. The people need not despair of the Messiah. He is still to come. He may come at any time within the fifth millennium, not necessarily at its close; perhaps in 4231 A. M. or 4250, or 4291.55 The Messianic age has actually begun with the destruction of the Temple,

53 Bk. I.1

54 Jer. Ber. II, 5a; Mid. Ekah. R. 1.57. 55 See infra, p. 26.

but before its final denouement 365 or 400 years or more may elapse.

Christian polemics may also have been responsible for this 1000-year revision in the Creation calendar, which took place before the third century. Christian propagandists from the first century on maintained that Jesus was the fulfilment of prophecy, and that he was born at the close of the fifth, or in the first part of the sixth millennium, when, according to prophecy, the Messiah would be born. St. Augustine preserves the tradition that Jesus was born in the year 5000 A. M.56 Theophilus (2 c.), the first of the Christian chronologers, traces 5,529 years from Creation to the birth of Jesus.57 So do also Hippolytus58 (2-3 c.), Clement of Alexandria (2 c.)59 and Julius Africanus 60 preserve the tradition that he was born c. 5500. "For the Jews . . . have handed down to us by their extant Hebrew histories the number 5,500 years as the period up to the advent of the Word of Salvation, that was announced to the world in the time of the sway of the Caesars." The Rabbis found it necessary to counter this by asserting that this claim is false, inasmuch as the sixth millennium is still far off. The church fathers and later Christian writers accused the Rabbis of deliberately falsifying the Creation calendar in order to deny the Messiahship of Jesus.61

3. Rabbi Eleazar ben Azariah, a contemporary of Rabbi Eliezer, believed that the Messiah would come 70 years

The Mohammedan chronologer Albiruni (973-1048) 'gives evidence that such a charge was made even in his day by Christian scholars against the Jews. He writes: "The Christians reproach the Jews with having diminished the number of years with the view of making the appearance of Jesus fall into the fourth millennium in the middle of the seven millennia, which are, according to their view, the time of the duration of the world, so as not to coincide with that time at which, as the prophets after Moses had prophesied, the birth of Jesus from a pure virgin at the end of time, was to take place." (The Chronology of Ancient Nations, ed. C. E. Sachau, London, 1879, p. 18.)

63

after the destruction (that is, c. 140 c. E.), and based his judgment on Is. 23.15: "And it shall come to pass in that day that Tyre shall be forgotten 70 years, according to the days of one king"-the one king being the Messiah.62 4. Rabbi Jose, the Galilean, a contemporary of Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Eleazar ben Azariah, thinks that the Messiah will come three generations (60 years) after the destruction (i. e., c. 130 c. E.), and bases his opinion on Ps. 72.5: "They shall fear thee while the sun endureth, and as long as the moon, throughout all generations." (017717=3 generations.)

This may also have been the opinion of Rabbi Ishmael (2 c.)64. Rabbi Ishmael is quoted by Rabbi Nathan (2 c.) as basing a Messianic computation upon Ps. 80.6: "Thou hast fed them with the bread of tears and given them tears to drink in a threefold measure," == three generations. 65

All the above-mentioned teachers lived during or shortly after the fall of Jerusalem, and believed that the Messiah would appear in the very near future. Akiba, too, who credited the Messianic mission of Bar Kochba, believed that the end was near. He is quoted by Rabbi Nathan (2 c.) as basing his hope for an early appearance of the Messiah on Haggai 2.7. "Yet a little while longer and I will shake the heavens and the earth."'66 This seems also to have been the hope of the Tanna, Jose ben Ķisma (2 c.), who was an eye witness of the Bar Kochba insurrection. His disciples asked him: "When will the son of David come?" He answered: "When this gate will fall and rise, and fall and rise again, and fall a third time, then the Messiah will come before they have time to rebuild it."67

62 San. 99a.

63 We follow the version of Mid. Tehillim 90.17 rather than that of the Baraita in San. 99a, which reads "Rabbi" who offered another date.

64 We follow Klausner's suggestion that in place of Simlai, an Amora of the third century, we should read "Ishmael", a contemporary of Rabbi Akiba (see 'n j’y¬7, p. 25, note 1).

65 San. 97b.

66 San. 97b. 67 San. 98a.

"This gate" probably refers to the gate of Jerusalem; the first and second fall to the first and second destruction; and the third to the fall of Jerusalem before Julius Severus. The Rabbi expected the deliverance to come soon after the great catastrophe, probably through a victory of the Parthians over the Romans.68

M. Friedmann correctly remarks: "In the first generation after the destruction, when Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai, who had said, 'Prepare ye a throne for Hezekiah, king of Judea, who is come,' had died, the hearts of the great men and teachers in Israel were filled with hope that within a short time the visions of the prophets (concerning the restoration) would be fulfilled." They searched

Holy Writ for intimations. Especially did they peruse the Book of Daniel. R. Nathan states that certain Rabbis deduced the Messiah's date from an interpretation of Dan. 7.25: "And they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and half a time."70

From the first century we also have the testimony of Josephus that the Book of Daniel was held to contain prophecies concerning the ultimate redemption from the "Roman" yoke. In his Antiquities he writes: "In the very same manner Daniel also wrote concerning the Roman government, and that our country should be made desolate." Josephus seems also to have known of a definite interpretation of the "beasts" and "times" visions of Daniel, which, however, he quite deliberately withholds from his readers: "Daniel did also declare the meaning of "the stone" to the king, but I do not think proper to relate it, since I have only undertaken to describe things past or things present, but not things of the future; yet if anyone be so very desirous of knowing truth, as not to wave such points of curiosity, and cannot curb his inclination for understanding the uncertainties of futurity, and

68 See infra, p. 28.

69 Seder Eliahu rabba und Seder Eliahu zuta, Vienna, 1902, Intro., p. 21 et passim and chap. iii.

70 San. 97b.

71 Bk. X, 11.7.

whether they will happen or not, let him be diligent in reading the Book of Daniel, which he will find among the sacred writings."72 So also the author of IV Ezra, who, quite consciously, is supplementing and interpreting the visions of Daniel, writes: "The eagle which they saw come up from the sea is the fourth kingdom which appeared in vision to thy brother Daniel."73

The Rabbis of the period immediately after the destruction even discussed the day and month of the Messiah's coming. Rabbi Joshua (1-2c.) said: "In Nisan (the 14th day) were they (the children of Israel) redeemed, in Nisan will they again be redeemed." Rabbi Eliezer (1-2c.) believed that the Redemption would take place in Tishri (on New Year's day). The latter bases his conclusion on a combination of Ps. 81.4-5 and Is. 27.13, and the former on Ex. 12.42.74

It is of interest to note how many of the above-mentioned teachers who deliberated upon the Messianic advent were of a definite mystic bias. Yohanan ben Zakkai studied and taught Ma'aseh Merkabah.75 Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus was fond of employing the mystic technique of Notarikon" in interpreting the Bible" and was even accused of Christian leanings. 78 Rabbi Akiba was one of the four who entered the Pardes (engaged in esoteric philosophy) but escaped heretical taint. He too was a student of the Merkabah," and later ages regarded him as the author of the mystic text, Othiot d. R. Akiba. Rabbi Joshua is highly praised by Yohanan ben Zakkai for his great knowledge of Ma'aseh Merkabah.80 Rabbi Jose the Galilean was looked upon as a miracle workers and as late as the tenth century men invoked him in prayer:

72 Ant., Bk. X, 10. 4.

73 12.10.

74 R. H. 11b.

75 The mystic lore concerning the Heavenly Chariot (Ezek. 1). Hag. 14b. 76 See infra, pp. 244 ff.

77 Sab. 55b; Mid. R. Num. 23.2.

78 'Ab. Zar. 16b.

79 Hag. 14b.

80 Hag. 14b.

81 Jer. Ber. 9b.