Anglo-Israel Source Documents

Josephus And The Restoration

The famous Jewish first-century historian, Flavius Josephus, wrote a well-regarded religious history of the people of Israel entitled, “Antiquities Of The Jews.” In book 11, chapter 6 is an interesting and often-quoted statement concerning the “Restoration,” the return of part of the Jewish nation to Canaan sometime after the Babylonian captivity. British-Israel writers have frequently quoted this in the past, but (as far as I am aware) without a detailed analysis of all of the interesting points made by Josephus. There is more in his short statement below than most modern historians realize. Here is a closer look at a key section of Josephus’ remarkable account, examined in five parts, with his words in bold italics followed by my comments.

            “…these Jews…were all greatly pleased[at Persian King Xerxes’ offer to let them resettle in Jerusalem-jsb]; nay, many of them took their effects with them, and came to Babylon, as very desirous of going down to Jerusalem;”

The intimation here is that many of the “Jews,” or house and tribe of Judah, were now planning to move to Jerusalem. Josephus’ reference to Persian King Xerxes (Hebrew Ahasuerus) dates this to the fifth century, B.C., circa 485-465 B.C., over a half-century after Babylon’s fall. Most theologians teach that all of the exiled Israelites returned to Canaan immediately after the fall of Babylon, but this is patently untrue. The Bible concurs with Josephus about this in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. The Prophet Ezra arrived in Jerusalem in the seventh year of Persian King Artaxerxes (see Ezra 7:8), which is dated to 458 B.C. This was in fact after the time of King Xerxes, and a full eighty years after the fall of Babylon.
It is interesting to note that because Josephus mentions Jews who “came to Babylon,” it is obvious that they were not all living in Babylon. This is exactly what the Bible tells us: that the house of Judah was scattered throughout the world in their exile.

The Prophet Jeremiah tells us that Judah was not just deported to Babylon: "I will cause them to be removed into all kingdoms of the earth..." (Jeremiah 15:4) The famous theologian, Charles C. Torrey of Yale University, speaking of the Babylonian captivity of Judah said, "The exile, into all lands, and among all nations, was as irrevocably decreed as was the destruction of the city [Jerusalem]." (Journal of Biblical Literature, vol. 56, p.206) The book, “Story of Celto-Saxon Israel” by W.H. Bennett gives convincing evidence that a portion of the House of Judah migrated to Europe in early times.
This being the case, the Jews did not all group together for a mass return after the Babylonian exile, since they were not all in one place. Nor did all of the Judean exiles return to Canaan.

“but then the entire body of the people of Israel remained in that country”;
Since Josephus states that “the Jews” made plans to return to Jerusalem, his use of the phrase, “the people of Israel” for those who did not return must refer specifically to the Ten Tribes of the house of Israel.

The word, “Israel,” is used in different ways in different contexts in the Bible. Sometimes it refers to all twelve tribes, other times only to the Ten Tribes of the house of Israel. The Encyclopedia Britannica defines an Israelite as, “In the broadest sense...a descendant of the…patriarch Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel after an all-night fight at Penuel near the stream of Jabbok (Genesis 32:28). In early Jewish history, Israelites were simply members of the 12 tribes of Israel. After 930 BC and the establishment of two independent [Hebrew] kingdoms in Palestine, the ten northern tribes constituting the Kingdom of Israel were known as Israelites to distinguish them from Jews in the southern Kingdom of Judah.”

Secondly, Josephus states that they “remained in that country.” In other words, the return of Judah after the Babylonian exile did not include the Ten Tribes of the house of Israel. This disproves the false idea that Ten-Tribe Israel and Two-Tribe Judah rejoined one another and all returned together to Palestine after the fall of Babylon.

            “wherefore there are but two tribes in Asia and Europe subject to the Romans,”
            The Romans controlled Palestine during the first century, A.D. Therefore, the two tribes subject to the Romans must refer to Judah and Benjamin, the two tribes that comprised the house of Judah in Palestine.

It is curious that Josephus mentions Europe, and specifically the fact that none of the tribes of the house of Israel were “subject to the Romans.” Was he alluding to the fact that, at this time, the Romans did not control Britain, Ireland, Denmark, Scandinavia, and most of northern Europe? Was he in fact hinting that lost Israel of the Ten Tribes was to be found in non-Roman areas of northwest Europe, either in whole or in part? If not, why mention that fact that the Romans did not rule over Israelite tribes in Europe, unless there actually were Israelite tribes in Europe?

            “while the ten tribes are beyond Euphrates till now,”
It is probable that the phrase “beyond Euphrates” was a Hebraism, a Hebrew expression essentially meaning “parts unknown” – unidentified, unfamiliar, unheard of lands beyond the Euphrates where all communication with them was lost. The Ten Tribes indeed became “the lost house of Israel,” and were so designated by Christ (Matt. 10:5: 15:24) just prior to Josephus’ time in the first century, A.D. Remember that in the first century, Europe was for the most part still a remote, unsettled, unexplored wilderness. It was even more of an unknown wilderness five centuries earlier at the time of the Restoration.

The Ten Tribes went into Assyrian exile in several deportations between the years 732 and 676 B.C. Where were they two to three centuries later in 458 B.C. when Ezra returned to Canaan? It is probable that these tribes moved out of Assyria by the time of Assyria’s weakening and death throes in the two or three decades prior to the final collapse at Carchemish in 605 B.C. Since military confrontation was coming against Assyria from the south (Babylon) and east (Medes and Persians), a migration north and west into Europe was really the only option open to them.

In spite of this, mainstream writers assume that the exiles of Israel and Judah all returned to Canaan. However, Professor Brad Kelle’s book, “Hosea 2: Metaphor and Rhetoric in Historical Perspective,” (Brill, 2005) gives evidence that disagrees with the popular assessment. He says, “The restoration of Israel as God’s people will occur in a particular ‘place’. The scholarly discussion of the unnamed ‘place’ in which this reversal is set has varied greatly…Garrett and Andersen and Freedman suggest that the unnamed place may be the wilderness mentioned as the place of reconciliation in [Hosea] 2:14.” (p.214) Neither Palestine nor Assyria was a wilderness, but northern Europe at the time of the exile was undeveloped and unpopulated, so that it is probable that "the wilderness" was a Hebraistic expression for the lands of Europe to the north.

            “and are an immense multitude, and not to be estimated by numbers."
            Josephus here seems to be referring to the Biblical promise that Israel was to become “as the dust of the earth” (Gen. 13:16; 28:14), and “the stars of heaven” (Gen. 26:4; Ex. 32:13), and “the sand on the seashore” (Gen. 32:12; Isa. 10:22; Hos. 1:10; Rom. 9:26) for multitude.

Why did the numerous exiled Israelites not retain knowledge of their identity over succeeding centuries? Dr. Adele Berlin of the University of Maryland explains, “Dispersion of the population dissolves its political identity, and idol worship dissolves its religious identity.” (“Did the Jews Worship Idols in Babylonia?”) For these reasons both the political and religious identity of exiled, lost Israel, took place over time.

-J.S. Brooks