Draft sections of the 'Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended' and of a treatise on Daniel: section c

1. Of the History of the Iews in the reign of Cyrus & Cambyses. /& Darius Hystaspis\

This history is conteined partly in the three first chapters of y^e book of Ezra & by five first five verses of y^e 4^th & partly in the book of Nehemiah from the 5^t vers of the 7^th chapter to y^e 9^th verse of the 12^th For Nehemiah copied all this out of the Chronicles of the Iews as may appear by reading the place & considering that y^e men \Priests & Levites/ who sealed the covenant in y^e 24^th day of the seventh month were the very same w^th the {sic} those who returned from captivity in the first year of Cyrus \& y^t all those who returned sealed it/ This you will perceive by y^e following comparison of their names.

|The \Levites/ Kadmiel & Hodaviah or Iudah here mentioned, are recconed chief fathers among the people who returned with Zerubbabel at first (Ezra 2.40) & they assisted as well in laying the foundation of the Temple (Ezra 3.9) as in reading of the Law & making & sealing the Covenant Nehem 8.7 & 9.5 & 10.9, 10.|

<1v>

Comparing therefore the return of y^e history of y^e Iews und books of Ezra & Nehemiah, the history of the Iews under Cyrus & Cambyses \& Darius Hystaspis/ will be that they returned from Captivity \to Ierusalem & Iudah every one to his city/ under Zerubbabel in y^e first year of Cyrus with the holy vessell|s| & a commission to build the Temple \& came to Ierusalem & Iudah every one to his City &/ & {sic} dwelt in the|ir| cities of Iudah & {illeg} till y^e seventh month & then coming to Ierusalem the|y| \first/ built the Altar & on \the 1^st day of y^e 7^th month/ began to offer the dayly burnt offerings & read in the book of the law & they kept the feast of Tabernacles & on the 24^th day of this month they kept a solemn fast & sealed a covenant & \thenceforward/ the r|R|ulers of the people dwelt at Ierusalem & y^e rest of y^e people cast lots to d{illeg}|w|ell one in ten at Ierusalem & y^e rest in the cities of Iudah & in the second year of their coming in y^e 2^d month they laid the foundation of the Temple, but y^e the adversaries of Iudah troubled them in building & hired counsellours against them all the days of Cyrus & [untill the reign of \afterwards, viz^t the reign of Cambyses]/ untill y^e reign of Darius king of Persia. /2. Of the History of the Iews in the reign of Darius Hystaspis.\ But in the second year of his reign by the prophesying of Z|H|aggai & Zechariah they returned to the work & by the help of a new Decree from Darius finished it \on the 3^d day of the month Adar/ in the six {sic} year of his reign & kept the Dedication w^th joy & the Passover & Feast of unleavened bread.

Now this Darius was \not Darius Nothus but/ Darius Hystaspis as I gather by these arguments. First considering that y^e second year of this Darius [when by the prophsying {sic} Haggai & Zechary they Iews returned to y^e work] was y^e 70^th of y^e desolation of y^e Ci{illeg}|t|y (Zech. 1.12 & 7.5) \w^ch is true of Darius Hystaspis/ & y^t at that time there were men living who had seen the first Temple (Haggai 2.3) whereas y^e second Temp year of Darius Nothus was 167 years after the desolation of the City. a|A|nd \further/ if the finishing of the Temple be deferred to y^e sixt year of Darius Nothus, Ieshua & Zerubbabel must have been y^e one High Priest the other Capitain of y^e people for 112 years together, besides their ages before; w^ch is surely too long. For in the first year of Cyrus the chief \chief/ Priests were Seraiah, Ieremiah, Ezra, Amariah, Malluch, Shechaniah, Rehum, Meremoth, Iddo, Gen{illeg}|e|tho, Abijah, Miamin, Maadiah, Bilgah, Shemajah, Iojarib, Iedaiah, Sallu, Amock, Hilkiah, Iedaiah. These were Priests in y^e days of Ieshua, and the eldest sons of them all were Priests in y^e days of Iojakim (Merajah y^e son of Serajah, Hanamiah y^e son of Ieremiah Me|s|hullam the son of Ezra &c) were chief Priests in y^e days of Iojakim the son of Ieshua (Nehem 12) & therefore the High Priesthood of Ieshua was but of an ordinary length.

2 Of the History of the Iews in the reign of Xerxes & Artaxerxes Longimanus Artaxerxes Longimanus.

I place th{illeg}|e| Histories of Ezra & Nehemiah in y^e reign of this Artaxerxes not in that of Artaxerxes M{illeg}|ne|mon. For during all the Persian Mo
narchy there were six High Priests in continuall succession of father & son namely Ieshua, Iojakim, Eliasib, Iojada, Ionathan, Iaddua, & if by an equal division of the times of their Priesthood their|re| be allotted about 34 years to each, so that all together may take up the whole time of that Monarchy w^ch stood 200 years the High Priesthood of Eliasib \& by consequence the days of Ezra & Nehemiah/ will fall in with the reign of the first Artaxerxes. For Ezra & Nehemiah flouished in the High Priesthoods of Iojakim & Eliasib Nehem 3.1 & 12.26 & 13.28 But if Eliasib & Nehemiah be placed in y^e second year reign of the second Artaxerxes, since they lived beyond the 32^th year of that King (Nehem 13.28) there must be at least 157 years allotted to the three first High Priests <2r> and but 43 to y^e five last, a division too unequal. For the High-Priesthoods of Ieshua Iojakim & Eliasib were but of an ordinary \length/, that of Iesshua fell in with one generation of the chief Priests & that of Iojakim with the next generation (as we have shewed already) & that of Eliasib fell in with the third generation. For at the dedication of the wall Zechariah y^e son of Shemaaiah Ionathan the son of Shemaiah was Priest one of the Priests (Nehem 12.35) & Ionathan \& his father Shemaiah/ was|er||e| contemporary|ie||s| to Iojakim & Ieshua \& {sic} his father/ Ieshua (Nehem. 12.6, 18.) I observe further that in the first year of Cyrus Ieshua & Bani or Binnui were chief fathers of the Levites (Nehem 8.10 & Ezra 2.4 & 3.9) & that Iozabad the son of Ieshua & Noadiah y^e son of Binnui were chief Levites in the seventh year of Artaxerxes when Ezra came to Ierusalem (Ezra 8.33) so that this Artaxerxes began his reign before the end of the second generation. And that he reigned in y^e time of y^e third generation is confirmed by two instances more. For Meshullam the son of Berechiah y^e son of Meshezabeel & Azariah the son of Maasejah the son of Anamiah were fathers of their houses at the repairing of the wall (Nehem 3.4, 23) & their Grandfathers Meshezabeel & Hananiah subscribed the covenant in the reign of Cyrus Nehem 10.21, 23. Yea Nehemiah himself this same Nehemiah the son of Hachaliah was then Tirshatha & subscribed it (Nehem. 10.1 & 8.9 & Ezra 2.2, 63) & therefore in the 32^th year of Artaxerxes Longimanus was above 120 years old & if you produce his age to y^e 32^th of Artaxerxes Mnemon he will be above 180 years old, an age surely too great. The same may be said of Ezra if he was that Priest & Scribe who read the Law Nehem 8. For he is the son of \Serajah the son of/ Azariah the son of Hilkiah the son of Shallum &c (Ezra 7.1) & this Serajah went into captivity at the burning of the Temple & was there slain (1 Chron. 6.14) & 2 King. 25.18) & from his death to y^e 20^th year of Artaxerxes Mnemon is above 200 years, an age too great.

I consider further that Ezra \(chap. 4)/ names Cyrus, – \*/, Darius, Ahasverus (or Achswerus \or Asswerus Tobit 14 Asveres/) & Artaxerxes in continual order as successors to one another & these names agree to Cyrus, – \*/, Darius Hystaspis, Xerxes & Artaxerxes Longimanus & to no other Persian Kings. When th Ezra had told how the people of the land \in y^e days of Cyrus/ weakened the Iews hands of Iudah {illeg} & troubled troubled Iudah & hired counsellours against them to frustrate their purpose \in building the temple/ all the days of Cyrus untill y^e & \further/ untill y^e reign of Darius, before he proceeds to tell how the people they built the Temple \was built/ in y^e reigne of this king he proceeds to tell how they pu wrote accusations against y^e Iews to Ah \same people hindred the Iews also in the reigns of/ Achswerus & Artaxerxes the not in building y^e Temple for that was finished before, but in building y^e City & the wall & then returns back Some here {illeg} take this Artaxerxes to be \{illeg}des not the successor but/ the predecessor of Darius Hystaspis, in whose reign the temple was built, not \not/ considering that in the|i||s| reign \of this Artaxerxes/ the Iews were busy in building the City & the wall (Ezra 4.12) & by consequence had finished the Temple before. Ezra describes first how the I|p|eople of the land hindred the land hindred the building of y^e Temple all the days of Cyrus & \further/ till the reign of Darius & after y^e Temple was <2v> built how they hindred the building of the city in the reign of Acha|s|werus & Artaxerxes & then returns back to y^e story of the Temple in y^e reign of Cyrus & Darius. And this will is confirmed by the book comparing the book of Ezra w^th y^e first book of Esdras. For if in y^e book of Ezra you omit the story of Achswerus & Artaxerxes & in that of Esdras you omit the same story of Artaxex|r|xes & y^t of the three wise men the two Books will agree so that y^e book of Esdras was \originally/ copied of out of fragments scattered leaves from the sacred wr \(if you except the story of the three wise men) was originally copied/ from fragments of the s writings of good authority|.| except the story of y^e three wise men. Now the story of Artaxerxes w^ch \(w^th that of Ahaswerus)/ in y^e book of Ezra interrupts the story of Darius, \does not interrupt it/ it in the book of Ezdras \but is there/ inc|s|erted into y^e story of Cyrus between the first & second chapter of Ezra & all the rest of the story of Cyrus & that of Darius is told in y^e book of Ez|s|dras in continual order w^thout any interruptiō. So that the Darius y^e in y^e book of Ezra precedes Achswerus \& Artaxerxes/ & the Darius w^ch \in the same book/ follows them is by y^e book of Esdras one & the same Darius, & I take the book of Esdras to be the best interpreter of the book of Ezra. So then the Darius mentioned next after Cyrus \between Cyrus & Achsuerus/ is Darius Hystaspis & his successors therefore Achswerus & Artaxerxes who succeed him are Xerxes & Artaxerxes Longimanus & they who the Iews who came up from Artaxerxes to Ierusalem & began to build the city & the walls \Ezra 4.13/ are Ezra w^th his companions. Which being understood the history of y^e Iews in the reign of those Kings |w|is|l||l| {illeg} \be/ as follows.

In y^e After y^e Temple was built & the Darius was dead the enemies of y^e Iews in y^e beginning of the reign of \his successor Achswerus or/ Xerxes wrote unto him an accusation against these|m| \Iews/ But (Ezra 4.6) but in y^e seventh year of his successor Artaxerxes Ezra \& his companions/ went up from Babylon \&/ with many Iews w^th offerings & Vessels for the Temple & power to bestow \on it/ out of y^e Kings Treasure for y^e House of God what should be requisite (Ezra 7.) Whence the Temple is said to be finished according to y^e commandm^t of Cyrus & Darius & Artaxerxes the King of Persia (Ezra 6.14) Their commission was also to set Magistrates \& Iudges/ over the land & {illeg} & thereby becoming a new Body Politick they were encouraged to attempt the rebuilding of y^e {sic} \wall of/ Ierusalem. {sic} |& its wall. And thence Ezra saith in his prayer that God had extended mercy to them in the sight of the Kings of Persia & given them a wall reviving to set up the house of their God, & to repair the desolation thereof & to give them a wall in Iudah & in Ierusalem. (Ezra 9.9.) But t|w|he|n| enemies of y^e they had begun to repair the wall their enemies wrote &c| & But their enemies \of the Iews/ wrote against them to y^e King. Be Artaxex|r|xes & the King gave order that they should ce Be it known, say they, unto y^e King that if y^e Iews y^e came up from thee to us are come into Ierusalem building the rebellious & the bad City & have set up the walls thereof & joyned the foundations &c Whereupon \And/ y^e King wrote back that y^e Iews should cease & y^e City not be built untill another commandment should be given from him, whereupon their enemies \went up to Ierusalem &/ made them cease by force & power (Ezra 4.) But in y^e 20^th year of the King E Nehemiah hearing that y^e Iews were in great affliction & distress & that y^e wall of Ierusalem \(that wall (w^ch \{illeg}/ had been \newly/ repaired) {illeg}/ was broken down & the gates thereof burnt w^th fire ob (Nehem 1.3 \& {Ezra}/) & that he obteined {illeg} leave of the King to go & built|d| \the City & the Governours house/ {illeg} (Nehem 1.3 & 2.176, 8, 17) but after he had built the wall the people in the City were but few & the houses were unbuilt (Nehem. 7.1, 4) \And/ In this condition he left Ierusalem in y^e 32^th year of the King & after some time returning back refor{illeg}|m|ed such abuses as had been committed in his absence (Nehem 13.) And here ends y^e sacred history \of y^e Iews/ except that |in| the original manuscript of the Chronicles the Genealogy of the Priests & Levites was recorded till about y^e end of the Persian Monarchy (Nehem 12.22, 23

Chap
Of the sacred history of the Persian Empire.

^[1] This history is described in y^e books of Ezra & Nehemiah & to adjust it w^th prophane history has perplext learned men. I shall not stand to adjust \recite/ other men's opinions but propose as shortly as I can what I take to be y^e truth.

I op|b|serve therefore 1^st that Ezra & Nehemiah lived \flourished/ in y^e times of \one &/ y^e same Artaxerxes. For \the/ Ezra the|i|s Ezra the scribe was \w^th Nehemiah/ at y^e dedit|c|ation of y^e wall of Ierusalem Nehem 12.36.

2. Between Cyrus & Alex During the \That/ During all y^e Persian Monarchy there were six High Priests in a continual succession of father & Son, namely, Ieshua Iojakim, Eliaship|b|, Iojada, Ionathan, Iaddua,|.| & That if by an equal division of their times \of their priesthood/ there be allotted about 34 years to each, \so that all together may take up the whole time of that monarchy w^ch stood 200 years,/ the high Priesthood of Eliashib will fall in with \almost all/ the reign of the first Artaxerxes. But t And that Nehemiah floure|i|shed in y^e reign of High Priesthood of Eliashib Eliashib, \Nehem 3.1 & 13.28./ But if Eliasib |& Nehemiah| be d placed in y^e reign of y^e 2^d Artaxerxes, he will since they lived beyond y^e 32^th year of that king \Nehem 13.28)/ there must be at least 157 years allotted to y^e three first High Priests & but 43 to y^e five last, a division too unequal.

3 The times \ages t ages/ /times\ of y^e three first \of these/ high Priests fell in w^th y^e ordinary generations of y^e other \rest of the all the other chief Priests/ Priests & so |mentioned in Nehem. 12.| |& so| were but of an ordinary length. For in y^e high-priesthood of Ieshua the \chief/ Priests were Serajeh, Ieremiah, Ezra, Amariah, Malluc or Melicu, Hattush, Shechaniah or Shebaniah, R{illeg}ehum or Harim, Meremoth, Iddo, Ginnetho, Abijah, Miame|i|n, Maadiah, Bilgah, Shemaiah, &c |Nehem. 12.1| Iojarib Iedaiah And th in the high-priesthood of \his son/ Iojakim the {illeg} \their {illeg}/ immediate sons were y^e \chief/ Priests were their immediate \eldest/ sons, Merajah, Hananiah, Meshullam, Iehohanan, Ionathan, Ioseph, Adna, Helkai, Zechariah, Meshullam, Zichri, * Piltai, Shammua, Iehonathan, &c. \This Iehonathan or Ionathan was son of Shemaiah above mentioned/ And in the high priesthood of Eliashib the highpriesthood was at y^e dedication of the wall, Zechariah y^e son of Ionathan {illeg} Iehonath y^e son of Shemaiah was one of the Priests \Nehem. 12.35/. So <4r> then these thre {sic} ages were but ordinary ones & therefore {illeg} scarce reach beyond the age \reign/ of the first Artaxerxes.

4. At y^e seventh year of Artaxerxes \when Ezra came to Ierusalem/ Z|I|ozabat|d| the son of Ieshua & Noadiah y^e son of Binnui were Levites \Ezra 8.33./ And their fathers Ieshua & Binni fl were Levites \of chief note/ at the return of the captivity under Cyrus y^e therefore could no

4 The reading of y^e law & keeping sealing y^e covenant, Nehem. 8, 9, 10, was al in y^e first \of these/ generations \in y^e time of the first priesthood of y^e first generations of these generations./ as you may perceive by comparing y^e names of the Priests & Levites who subscribed sealed w^th it, Nehem. 10, w^th those who returned from y^e Captivity under Cyrus Nehem. 12 Now And y^e {illeg} feast of Tabernacles then kept was the first fest|a|st w^ch they kept after that return Nehem. 8.14. & therefore kept in y^e first year of y^e return Ezra 3.4. Now at that time Ieshua & \Bani or/ Binnui were \chief fathers of y^e/ Levites of chief note Nehem 8. & 10 \& Ezra 2.40 & 3.9/ & thi Iozabad y^e son of Ieshua & Noadiah y^e son of Binnui were \chief/ Levites Ezra in y^e seventh year of Artaxerxes when Ezra came to Ierusalem. Ezra \2.40 &/ 8.33. This Artaxerxes \therefore/ bega{illeg}|n| his reign {illeg} There were two Nehemiah's {illeg} \&/ the first was the Tirshatha at y^e first return from captivity Nehem. 8.9, & founded|in||g| a library gathered together the acts of y^e Kings & the Prophets & of David wro                      before the end of y^e \priesthood of the/ second generation. & so was |And|      5 And hence we have tw that the reigned in \the time of/ y^e third \generation/ is yet confirmed by two instances more. For Meshullam the son of Berechiah y^e son of Meshezabeel, & Azariah y^e son of Maasejah the son of Ananiah were fathers of their houses i|a|t the repairing of the wall \Nehem. 3.4, 23/, & their grandfathers Meshezabeel & Azariah {illeg} Hananiah subscribed the Covenant in y^e reign of Cyrus Nehem 10.21, 23. Yea Nehemiah himself, this same Nehemiah y^e Son of Hachaliah, was then Tirshatha & subscribed it Nehem 10.1. & 8.9. & Ezra 2.\2,/ 63, & therefore was {thus} \in y^e 32^th year of Artaxerxes was/ above 120 years old & if you produce his ages to y^e same \32^th/ year of y^e 2^d Artaxerxes he will be above 180 years old, an age surely too great. The same may be said of Ezra if he was that Priest & scribe who read the law Nehem 8. For he is y^e Son of Serai|j|ah y^e son of Azariah y^e son of Hilkiah y^e son of Shallum &c \Ezra 7.11/ {illeg} & this Saraiah w^th his eldest son Iozadatk {sic} went into captivity at y^e burning of the Temple \& was there slain/ 1 Chron 6.14 2 Kings. 25. 18. And from his death to the 20^th year of y^e 2^d Artaxerxes is above 200 years.

<5r>

5. It conclude was therefore \So then it was/ in the reign of the first Artaxerxes that Ezra & Nehemiah came to Ierusalem & therefore since \y^e second/ Darius reigned after this Artaxerxes it must be in y^e reign of the first Darius y^t the Temple was fir built. For {illeg} y^e second year of {illeg} Darius wherein |in| \w^ch/ y^e foundation was laid, was the sixt seventith {sic} of y^e captivity (Zech. 1.12 \& 7.5/) & at that time there were were {sic} men living who had seen the first Temple {illeg} (Haggai 2.3) & if the finishing of the Temple be deferred to y^e 6^t year of y^e second Darius, Ieshua & Zerubbabel must both of them ha{illeg}ve been the one Ca High{illeg} Priest y^e other {illeg} of Capitain of y^e people for 112 years together besides their ages before: w^ch surely is too long a time.

6. They that refer these things to y^e second Darius & second Artaxerxes ground their opinion on y^e order of five \five/ Persian Kings named in order \Temples being built in the reigne of the last of the five Persian Kings/ in Ezra {illeg} Cyrus, Darius, Ahasuerus \or Xerxes/, Artaxerxes, |&| Darius in y^e reign of y^e Ezra 4 Ezra 4 & named in order Ezra 4. & {illeg} And in this I agree w^th them that Ahasuerus Achswerus or Axerxes is Xerxes but I say that y^e last Darius is y^e same w^th y^e first. For y^e letters to Ahasuerus & Artaxerxes \there mentioned/ concern not y^e building of y^e Temple but y^e building of y^e City after y^e Temple was finished And Ezra when he had related these letters \about y^e City/ returns back to relate y^e building of y^e Temple in y^e reign of the first Darius.

7. Or, to speak what I more suspect, these letters order of y^e books o leaves of y^e books of Ezra & Nehemiah hab|s| been changed since y^e first writing & these \two/ letters inserted in a wrong place. For these books & the first book of Esdras consist of the same sheets \parts of history/ set together in different orders & these story of the Temple is there continued without the interposition of these letters. I suspect therefore that after \when/ Antiochus Epiphanes had burnt y^e sacred writings & made it death for any man to conceale them & Iudas Maccabeus had recollected what he find could afterwards find: some of the sacred writings (as the book of y^e Chronicles of y^e Kings of Israel) <6r> {were} lost & others found only in scattered leaves & put together \sometimes/ in a wrong order. For tis agreed that y^e a latter part of y^e book of Zacchary now extant was written by Isaiah. part of the prophessy {sic} of Isaiah is now added to y^e book of Zacchary. And some suspect |y^t by| y^e like accident in \in some le{illeg}|a|ves of/ y^e book of Iob {&} & in y^e have been set together in wrong order & that in y^e book of Samuel the story of Davids playing before Saul to drive away his evil spirit & becoming his Armor bearer & Saul's loving him greatly has been set before the story of Davids killing Goliah {sic} when Saul knew him not but asked again & again whose son he was. Certainly the 1^st book of Esdras {illeg} is made up of the same leaves \pieces of history/ w^th y^t of Ezra & Nehemiah but \set into/ in another order: & no man would have joyned them in a wrong order had y^e right order been then known. I will not unders|t|ake to rectify the sacred books but out of them & y^e 1^st book of Esdras I will try to set down \only say {direct} how/ y^e history \Iew history/ of y^e Persian Empire \may be read/ in one continuall order of time.

In order to this

< insertion from f 5v >

In order to this I would distinguish y^e books of Ezra into several joint severall joynts or parts & then consider how they are to be set together. The first joynt I reccon the first chapter \of Ezra/, the second the second chapter to y^e end of y^e last vers but one, the third that vers & y^e 3^d chapter \to reach thence to y^e {sic}/ to y^e end of y^e 7^th vers of y^e third chapter, y^e fourth thence to the end of y^e 5^t vers of the 4^th chapter, y^e fift thence to y^e end of y^e 23^d vers of y^e same chapter y^e sixt thence to y^e end of y^e book, the seventh thence to y^e last vers but one of y^e seventh chapter of Nehemiah, the eighth thence to y^e end of y^e three next chapters, the ninth thence to y^e {illeg} end of y^e next chapter y^e 10^th thence to y^e end of y^e 12^th chapter & y^e 11^th thence to y^e end of y^e book. For the first & second joynts are found divided from another in {illeg} Esdras: T|t|he second is followed by the 4|8|^th in {illeg} Nehemiah, but{illeg} ought to be followed by the ninth: The eighth ought to come in between the third & 4^th, & T|t|he fift is wantint|g|ing in Esdras between y^e 4^th & sixt & between the 10^th & 11^th some sheets leaves seem to have been lost.

Now the history will become continued & clear & consonant to profane|phan||e| history if the joynts be read in this order, the first, the second, the ninth, the third, the eighth, the fourth, the sixt, the fift, the seventh, the ninth, y^e eighth the 10^th & 11^th. And this will appear by these three things corrections \alterations/.

First that y^e 11^th chapter of Nehemiah ought in \ninth joynt ought in/ point of time to be inserted between the two last verses of the second chapter of Ezra, that is the ninth joynt between the {sic} second & third \joynts./ as also between the seventh & eighth. For-

< text from f 6r resumes >

Ez
The Book of Ezra.

Now in the first year of Cyrus – – – \Ezra 1, 2./ – – – – So the Priests & y^e Levites & some of the people & the singers dwelt & y^e porters & y^e Nethenims dwelt in their cities & all Israel in their cities. And the rulers of the people dwelt at Ierusalem: the rest of y^e people also cast lots to bring one of ten to dwell in Ierusalem the holy City & nine parts to dwell in other Cities – – – – – – – – – – – – Nehem. 11. – – – – – – – And of the Levites were divisions in Ia|u|dah & Benjamin.

First read{illeg} y^e two first chapters of Ezra. For so far the narration is

First then I would insert y^e 11^th chapter of Nehemiah between the two last verses of y^e second chapter of Ezra. For it conteins a relation how all the people upon their \first first/ return from captivity were under Cyrus distributed themselves by lot {illeg} at Ierusalen {sic} to |go| thence into their several cities \where they were found in y^e seventh month beginning of y^e next article/. This I gather partly by out of 1 Chron. 9 where I {illeg} th{illeg}|is| 11^th chapter of Nehemiah is in part repeated & the people at this distribution are said to be y^e first inhabitants that dwelt in their possessions in their cities 1 Chron 9.2: & partly <6v> by the names of those who inhabitants who east when who were concerned in this distribution. For for \Akkub & Talmon/ the chief of the Porters were there were there & so was the Levite Mattaniah the son of Mica the son of Asaph \who was over the thanksgiving/ {illeg} Nehem 11.17, 19 & these returned from y^e captivity w^th Zerubbabel. Ezra 2.42 Nehem. 12.8.

Secondly that the 8^th 9^th & 10^th chapters of Nehemiah \8^th joynt ought {sic}/ ought \in point of time/ to be inserted between the seventh & eighth verses of y^e 3^d chapter of Ezra: that is the 8^th joynt between y^e {sic} 3^d & 4^th |joynts|. For the reading of the law began y^e same day of y^e w^th y^e sacrifices \at the first return/, as I shewed above by \comparing \{illeg}// y^e names of those who subscribed y^e covenant w^th \compared w^th the names of/ those who first returned from y^e captivity. |For Ezra read y^e law in y^e seventh month next after Zerubbabels return Nehem 7.73 & 8.1, 2.|

Lastly that y^e 4^th chapter from y^e 6^t verse to y^e {illeg}|23|^th verse inclusively conteins fift joynt ought to come between the sixt & seventh. For in The chief Levites who re The chief fathers of y^e Levites who returned w^th Zerubbabel & stood up to lay y^e foundations of y^e Temple were Ieshua Kadmiel & Hodaviah, \Hodajah/ of Iudah Ezra 2.40. & these were chief in explaining the law to the people when Ezra \&/ read it Nehem. 3. & in making the covenant Nehem. 3 & 4. And y^e names of them y^t subs thes Priests & Levites who returned w^th Zerubbabel subscr sealed it as you may see by the following comparison of their names

Thus you see all the chief Priests & Levites who returned w^th Zerubbabel (besi & some others besides) sub sealed the covenant & therefore it was made soon after y^e return, And being & therefore \by consequence/ y^e first year \as was/ because at y^e revival of y^e feast of Tabernacles as was shewed above. Nehem 8.14. Ezr. 3.4

The third alteration is that \to place/ the fift joynt be placed next after the sixt that is \the Letters to Ahashuerus & Artaxerxes/ at y^e end of the book of Ezra. For the fourth & sixt joynts are continued in y^e book of Esdras. & y^e fourth being about, by interposing the fift |& the sixt set in another place before y^e 4^th, so that it was a fragment w^ch the Collector knew not how to place. By placing the it 4|b|etween the 4^th & 6^t| the story of building y^e temple is interrupted by y^e story of building the city. {illeg} \This/ was of a later date & therefore \is misplaced &/ ought to come afterwards. In the letter to Artaxerxes there is no mention of building y^e Temple as there would have been surely, had y^e Iews been then about that \& therefore tis of a later date. {sic}/. The letter represents that the Iews w^ch came up from Artaxerxes to Ie were \then/ come to Ierusalem building y^e rebellious & bad city & had set up y^e walls thereof & joyned the foundations: & therefore it was writ against Ezra & his companions not long \some time/ after their commi|ing| from y^e King to Ierusalem upon occasion of their attempting to restore the C repaire the City. \These being \For these were/ the only men who came up from this King to do these things./ {illeg} And hence when y^e enemies of y^e Iews had by this letter procured y^e Kings order that y^e city should not be built till he gave a new commandment \& made them cease by force & power/, Nehemiah soon after enquiring of y^e state of y^e Iews \at Ierusalem/ hears that they {illeg} were in distress great reproach & affliction & reproach & y^t y^e wall of Ierusalem was broken down & y^e gates burnt w^th fire This was news to him in the 20^th year of the King & therefore done not long \many months/ before by the enemies of Nehemia Ezra, as he had procured by vertue of the Kings letter. \as above./ For these reasons therefore I will subjoyn these letters to y^e story of Ne Ezra as an introduction to the story of Nehemiah.

Also If n

If you now read over the sacred History according to y^e order presented by these \three/ alterations, {illeg} you will find it agreable to regular \more eaven & intelligible &/ agreable to prof|p|hane history then <8r> before & to amount only to this, That in y^e reign of Artaxerxes Cyrus when Zerubbabel came w^th y^e people to Ierusalem they went thence by lot into y^e|their| cities till the seventh & then began to sacrifice to heare y^e law {illeg} & to keep y^e feast of Tabernacles. The next year they laid the foundation of y^e Temple but were hindred from finishi building all y^e reign of Cyrus & Camp|b|yses till y^e 2^d year of Darius \Hystaspis./ Then they finished it in four years. But so soon as their friend Darius was dead their enemies wrote in the beginning of y^e reign of his son Ahashuerus or Xerxes wrote \an accusation/ against them to y^e King. So the Iews continued in di distress till y^e seventh year of his son Artaxerxes \Longimanus/ when Ezra {illeg} by a new degree carryed a bo new body of Iews from captivity to Ierusalem, adorned y^e Temple restored \revived/ the \In/ worship, & polity restored the polity of the nation, &|but| when they had made good progress in building the City & y^e walls \& the work went on fast,/ their enemies {illeg}|b|y a new accusation procured y^e Kings order that y^e City should not be built till he gave a new commandment, & thereupon \they/ made them cease by \armed/ force & burnt brake down the wall & burnt the gates. But so soon as this came to y^e ears of Nehemiah, he procured y^e Kings order for building the City & between y^e 20^th & 32^th years of y^t King repaired y^e walls & took a register of all the people. Afterwards he returned to y^e king & the people in his absence began to corrupt themselves but before y^e King's death he came again to Ierusalem & reformed them. And here ends y^e Iewish history excepting that the \fathers off t /genealogy\ of the/ Priests & Levites wer|as|e written in y^e r|R|egisters te|i|ll y^e end of y^e Persian Monarchy. But these genealogies being lost & y^e Iews having no history of y^e later Kings of Persia, they have made y^e duration of this Monarchy much shorter then it was.

The history being cleared let us now see how it agrees w^th y^e Prophesy of Daniel's weeks.

Seventy weeks are de cut out upon thy people & upon thy holy city to finish transgression & |to| seal up sins & to expiate iniquity & bring in everlasting righteousnes & to seale y^e vision & the prophesy & to annoint y^e most h Holy. There were two returns from captivity, \the first under Zerubbabel the second under Ezra/ & at{illeg} y^e second when Ezra by addition access \y^e addition/ of the people he brought w^th him became a by {illeg} re\vi/ving \{illeg}/ their worship Iewish worship \at Ierusalem/, & by {illeg}|o||rdaining| Magistrates in all the land \by the Kings/ to judge & govern them according <8v> to the law|s| of Moses & y^e King, they became a people or body politick & a holy City. For till they had a polity & government of their own they were neither |a| people nor a City in the sense of Daniel. And by the death & resurrection of Christ was transgression finished & sins sealed up or absolved & iniquity expiated \& everlasting righteousness brought in/ & this prophesy ended & y^e most Holy annoynted. And from y^e first period to y^e last that is from y^e year of y^e Iulian period 4257 to y^e year 4747 are just 490 years, that is seventy weeks. For Xerxis was slain an 4 Olymp 78 (Diodor. l 11 Euseb. Chron.\Sulpitius/) Then Artabanus reigned 7 months & Artaxerxes {illeg} \Longimanus/ began his reign an 1 Olymp 79 (Diodor. l 11. Euseb. Chron.) & his 20^th year fell in w^th an 4 Olymp 83 (Africanus apud Euseb.) Whence his reign began about y^e end of Summer \or in autumn/, a|A|nno. Per. Iul. 424|5|0 ^✝ < insertion from the left margin of f 8v > ✝ For his 20^th year extended from the ninth month to y^e first month Nehem 1.1 & 2.1 & from y^e first to y^e fift Ezr. 7.7, 8, 9 & therefore his years began in the autumnal half year < text from f 8v resumes > & Ezra's journey in his seventh year being in spring was a|A|n. Per. Iul. 4257. The death of Christ is usually referred to y^e \of Christ/ 4|3|3 but I had rather refer it to the year following \An. Per. Iul. 4747{illeg}/, this being both the sabbatical year & as Eusebius notes, the year of Iubile. {illeg} affords us \For this affords us/ a reason why y^e disciples \first Christians/ had all things common, Act. 2.44, 45.And [Christ in |the beginning| the last day of y^e feast of Tabernacles in y^e great day of the feast in saying If any man thirst] it was to y^e drawing out |manumission of servants & the drawing| of water out of y^e river Siloam in y^e end of y^e feast of Tabernacles in y^e beginning of this \sabattical/ year that Christ alluded to |at this time Feast when he spake of making servants free & drinking water of life & rivers of this water flowing out of his belly Iohn 7 & 8| when he said: {If a} The servant abideth not in y^e house for ever but y^e Son abideth for ever. If y^e son shall make you free ye shall be free indeed. And again If any man thirst let him come unto me & drink He that beleiveth on me out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water Iohn 7 & 8.

Know also & understand that from y^e going forth of the commandment to {illeg} cause to return & to build Ierusalem unto y^e Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks The former \part of the/ Prophesy related to the capt first coming of Christ, this \being{illeg} dated to the coming of y^e Messiah to be Prince./ seems to relate to y^e {illeg} second{illeg}. For all Daniel's Prophesies reach to y^e end of y^e world & thi|e|re is scarce a prophesy in y^e old Testament {illeg} concerning Christ y^e does not in something or other relate to his second coming. Nor |is| is|t| this a new opinion \to apply some part of this prophesy {illeg} to that second coming. For so did/ For Irenæus l. 5. c. 25. æ \also/ Iulius Africanus the Chronologer, Hippolytus an Arabian Bishop & Apollinaris B^p of Laodicea as Ierom in his commentary on this place mentions This clause therefore being the only I had rather leave to time be explained by time then venture upon a rash interpretation Wha of what I do not yet understand.