Selected quad for the lemma: father_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
father_n	die_v	issue_n	son_n	13,628	5	5.9273	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A09268	The period of the Persian monarchie VVherein sundry places of Ezra, Nehemiah and Daniel are cleered: extracted, contracted, and englished, much of it out of Doctor Raynolds, by the late learned and godly man William Pemble, of Magdalen Hall in Oxford. Published and enlarged since his death by his friend, Richard Capel.	Pemble, William, 1592?-1623.; Capel, Richard, 1586-1656.; Rainolds, John, 1549-1607.	1631 (1631)	STC 19582; ESTC S114347	63,361	88

THE PERIOD OF THE PERSIAN Monarchie Wherein sundry places of Ezra Nehemiah and Daniel are cleered Extracted contracted and englished much of it out of Doctor Raynolds by the late learned and godly Man WILLIAM PEMBLE of Magdalen Hall in Oxford Published and enlarged since his death by his friend RICHARD CAPEL Postquam gens Iudaea coepit non habere prophetas proculduhio deterior facta est eo scilicet tempore quo sciperabat instaurato templo post captivitatem quae fuit in Babylonia futuram esse meliorem Aug de Ciu. Dei l. 18. c. 45. LONDON Printed by R. T. for Iohn Bartlet at the signe of the guilt Cup in Cheape-side in the Goldsmiths Row 1631. To the Reader COurteous Reader The thing I must desire of thee is that as thou goest along thou wouldest first reade the Texts of Scripture and the heads which are in the margin else many things will be but cloudy and darke the rather because in some places the sentences are not so fitly distinguished as it were to be wished as for instance may appeare in page 56. the 5. chap. ver 19. chap. 13 ●er 15. Wherefore I intreat the Reader still to haue his eye on the margin and view first the contexts there and then the explication will come to his hand with more clearenesse and perspicuity Also I am to begge of the Reader that he will with his pen ere he reade this Tract mend the faults here noted many whereof maimne the sense and lose the meaning occasioned by the Transcribers mistaking in the copying of it out smaller matters as mispointing and the like I forbeare to trouble you with as comming of themselues to euery mans obseruation RICH. CAPEL In the Margin PAg. 26 line 1. reade vid. 23. quaest p. 32. l. 17 r. abstenti l. 21. r. appartati dal sacerdotio ibid. l. ult r. § 1. p. 34. l. ult r. Dtus in ● Pet. p. 35. l. 26. adde in marg Ier. 3.16 p 36 l 5. r. quartò p. 40. l. 13. r. lun in 1. King ibid. l. 18.19 r. facelle ammarstrar ibid. l. 26. r. haure●be l. 27. r. benche l. 28. r. pure p. 41. l. 2. adde in marg Piscat in 1. Reg 3.1 p. 44. l. 16. r. predecessori l. 18. r. habbiaro put in i. e. the iniquities of our predecessors which we haue imitated p. 50. l. 16. r. but new respectu actus revelandi p. 57. l. 7. r. cap. 12. p. 62. ac l. 17. adde in marg Perk. Cas. Consc. l. 1. c. 12. § 2. q. 3. Deodat Ital. annot on Dan. 4.25 p. 63. at l. 12. adde in marg Act. 12.22.23 Ioseph Antiq. l. 19. c. 7. Euseb. Hist. l. 2. c. 10. p. 67. at l. 30. adde in marg Walae de 4. praecepto p. 130. p. 78. l 1. r. the marginall note thus The very word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in diuers ancient writers is taken metaphorically applyed to the minde and not onely for civill freedome in the compound euer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the abstract 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Meannesse Base Basenesse See plenty of instances in Scapula Stephanus p. 88. l. 26. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the Booke PAg. 5. l. 2. à fine for the Magus reade this Magus p. 13. l ult blot out the in both places p. 17. l. 4. after that put in times p. 21. l. 27. à fine after the word Wall adde But before the building of the Street and Wall aboue c. p. 33. l. 33. r. the old Testament was almost compleat p. 35. l. 9. blot out the. p. 37. l. 7. for that r. their p. 41. l. 6. r. Deut. 7. 4. p. 43. l. 3. for be r. doe p. 47. l. 4. r. haue bin vsed p. 54. l. 21. r. that that which David p. 56. l. 28. begin a new Section with the words The last c. p. 56. l. 26. r. their fal●e or foolish p. 64. l. 28. r. in their office p. 69 l. 2. r. it is because p. 69. l. 18. r. as from this p. 73. l. 16. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 75. l. 2. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 11. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 77. l 9. r. The freemen except such and such freemen p. 78. l. 23. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 79. l. 30. for others r. other p. 8● l. 33. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 8● l. 2. 31. for wherefore r. where for our Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we translate the Nobles of Iudah p. 83. l. 28. for doth r. did p. 83. l. 33. r. Freemen long before when it first c. A CHRONOLOGIE OF THE PERSIAN MONARCHIE CHAP. I. CYRVS tooke Babylon about the 20 th yeare of his reign and was after Emperour of that Monarchy Years 9 Moneths 2 Cambyses his sonne called Dan. 10.13 Prince of the Kingdome of Persia because he did rule at home as Prorex during his fathers warlike expeditions abroad Whiles his father liued he hindred the worke of the Temple But that he reigned with his father 2 yeares at least and that those two yeares should bepart of those seuen which Herodotus gives him cannot be proued They may rather be part of those nine yeares that Sulpicius Severus or of those more that Ctefias and Alexandrinus ascribe vnto him Hee slew his Brother and not long after dyed of a wound hee gave himselfe by chance having reigned after the death of his Father Yeares 7 Moneths 5 3 Darius Hystaspis Cambyses dying without issue was chosen Emperour by the 7 Princes of Persia. He reigned ouer the Monarchie 36   4 Xerxes the sonne of Darius by Atossa the daughter of Cyrus succeeded his Father in the Empire Hee had an elder Brother Artobarzanes or Artemenes who gave way to Xerxes his younger brother This X●rxes was Assuerus the mighty Emperour who married Ester the Iew. He reigned after the decease of his Father and two yeares together with his Father after the maner of the Persians as Viceroy 20 and aboue somewhat 5 Artaxerxes Longimanus Nehemiah his Lord and Master the sonne of Xerxes by Queene Ester being much what about 14 yeares of age succeeded his Father Artabazanus who affected the Crowne and held vp some 7 moneths being slaine and reigned They that giue him but 40 doe disjoine those odde moneths that Xerxes and Zogdianus reigned Ptolemy and Clemens Alexandrinus joyne them with Artaxerxes yeares and so giue him 41. 41   6 Darius Nothus so called because he was Artaxerxes his Bastard succeeded his Father Artaxerxes had a young sonne called Xerxes who some fortnight after his Fathers death was slaine and deprived of his life and right by Zogdianus or Secundanus his bastard Brother who tooke the Crowne but held it not aboue 7 Moneths For being slaine also this Darius called before Ochus a bastard also tooke the Empire and was called Darius and held it some give Artaxerxes his Father 41 yeares some 46 yeares but the most

our Darius succeeded Cyrus And by the tenor of this fourth Chapter we find that the building was letted the daies of Cyrus Assuerus Artaxerxes even untill the second yeare of this Darius therefore our Darius was not onely after Cyrus but after Assuerus and Artaxerxes also 2 Not Darius Hystaspis as Iosephus thought For Ezr. 4.6 7. there is mention of Assuerus and Artaxerxes who went betwixt Cyrus and our Darius But Darius Hystaspis was the immediate successor of Cambyses and Cambyses succeeded Cyrus his father therefore our Darius cannot be Darius Hystaspis For betwixt Cyrus and our Darius Ezra mentions two but betwixt Cyrus and Darius Hystaspis there was but only Cambyses As for the Magus he is not in accompt among the Kings of Persia eyther for that hee was a tyrant or else for that he stood but seven moneths 3 Therefore this our Darius was Darius Notbus the sonne of Axtaxerxes Longimanus named Ezra 4.7 the father of Artaxerxes Mnemon CHAP. VII HEre are sixe generations left out betwixt Merajoth and that Azariah who was the Priest as it is 1. Chron. 6. viz. Amariah Ahitub Zadok Ahimaaz Azariah Iothanan These were omitted here for brevitie sake because hast is made to shew onely that Ezra came from Aaron to honour Ezra and to give him the more authority And likely it is that those are passed over who were borne in the time of the Babylonian Captivitie and those set upon record here as though they had been the verie next whose memorie was fresh and most famous as being Priests about the time the Temple was ruinated Wee may say That he doth set downe by name the Catalogue of those his Ancestors only who flourished during the standing of the Temple And 't is a truth that Ezra was not the immediate but the mediate sonne of Serajah and so Ezra useth the word Son in a many of places CHAP. VIII THe question is Whether in case a man marry an Amorite now an infidell he be to put her away by vertue of this Law No by no meanes He must keepe her if shee will stay with him as Paul shewes 1. Cor. 7.12 And Peter inferres 1. Pet. 3.1 Where hee shewes that Christian wives must by their conuersation labour to winne their husbands that obey not the Word that is that are Heathens Therefore they are not bound to part a beleeving man from an unbeleeving wife a beleeving wife from an unbeleeving and infidell husband Wee must say then that this Law in Ezra was a part of Moses policy which did bind them then but not us now Next I say It did not bind them simply neither but in case such wives were not Proselytes but did remaine in their superstition For Salmon did marry Rahab a convert Canaanite and did well in it But these in Ezra did persist in their infidelity and superstition And if Pharaohs daughter were a Proselyte Solomon did not sin against that Law of Moses then much lesse was hee bound to put her away He is deceived who writes that Solomon did not ill in it not on this ground because she was a Proselyte but because shee was none of those seven cursed Nations named Deut. 4.7 This evasion is not currant For though those seven be only named yet other the like are meant And Ezra 9.1 the Egyptians are set downe by name and the Moabite Yet Boaz did his duty in marrying of Ruth the Moabitesse shee being now in faith and religion united to the people of God The summe is that it was a Law of Moses binding during the time of his policy That if an Israelite should marry an Infidell remaining an Infidell shee was to be put away and it seemes her children too which Law is not in force now Christians are not bound to it but doe sinne if they divorce such wives very Infidels that are willing to live with their Christian husbands CHAP. IX THis shewes that Nehemiah was the penner of this Booke And therefore it is a mistake in those who make Ezra to be the writer of this Booke of Nehemiah And this appeares further in that he speaketh often of himselfe in the first person I Nehemiah and not in the third person For though some that are makers of a Booke doe sometimes speake of themselves in the third person as Matthew and Iohn doe in their Gospels and Moses in his history Matthew said Iohn said Moses spake yet he that is not the author of a Booke never speaks of himselfe in that Booke in the first person as in this Booke often Nehemiah doth Neither is it any argument that Ezra wrote it because in the Hebrew editions it is called Ezra sith the Ebrewes did this to tell up the iust number of twenty foure Bookes of the old Testament Both the Bookes of Samuell stand under his name yet Samuell was not the writer of all but part was written by Samuell some by Nathan and some by Gad. The conclusion is cleare That we ought to confesse the sins of our fathers but first not to have a pardon for them when they are dead and gone 2 Nor that God pardons us their sins The soule onely that sinneth that shall dye No guilt necessarily passeth from the father to the sonne but that of Adam together with the sinne There is but one only Originall sinne The sonne is not guilty of the fathers sinne any further than he doth make it his owne sinne also by some consent either affirmative by doing or liking what his father hath done in point of sinne being glad of the broth wherein the abominable thing was sodden so subscribes to it by a tacite and interpretative consent Or 2 Negative when we doe not dissent A childe is bound to humble himselfe for his fathers sins upward as farre as ordinarily hee may come to the certaine knowledge of them which sometimes is to the third and fourth generation Now if he bee not humble and take them to heart there is a secret consent because he doth not by this act of humbling shew his dissent And had such a childe the occasions and tentations his forefathers had he would doe as they did And thus he sets his fathers sins on his score and makes them his owne According to that of Daniel to Belshazzar cap. 5. ver 22. And thou his son O Belshazzar hast not humbled thine heart though thou knewest all this viz. Nebuchadnezzars sinne and punishment In the Legall Covenant of workes the guilt together with the fault and corruption did convey it selfe to the Posterity Originall sinne descends by force of that Covenant And that Commination to visit the sins of the Fathers hath an eye to the Covenant of the Law But now in the Evangelicall Covenant of grace the sinne and the wrath of God goes no further than the very persons offending Only God doth sometimes make the fathers sinnes an occasion never a cause of punishing the

Vrim and Thummim was not to decide matters of doctrine but events and facts and successes in warre and peace as we see in David often vid. Numb 27.18 1. Sam. 23.5.9 30.7.8 And this was in x Ioseph Antiq. lib. 3. cap. 9. extraordinary cases In things ordinary the Prince was to have the Law before hisface Deut. 17. Ios. 1. but in extraordinary Accidents he was to seeke answer from God by the Vrim and the Thu●mim of the Priest 3 The Church was in as good case for certainty in things of salvation under the second Temple when the Vrim and Thummim was not as under the first Temple when it was That of Rabbi Talmud in Ion. cap. 1. fol. 21. that not only Vrim and Thummim Henry Ainsworth in Exod. 28.30 seemes to like too well this Rabbinicall Blasphemy as hee doth in his annot dote on the Rabbins too often but the holy Ghost was wanting in the second Temple is blasphemous For had not Christ and his Apostles the holy Ghost and did not they live under the second Temple Nay Is not more and more full revelation promised in the second Temple than in the first Hag. 1.8 Cap. 2.4.10 4 Besides after Vrim and Thummim was gone they had some Prophets as Haggai Zechariah and Malachy I confesse that Prophets by office and commission ended in Malachy Yet y Drus. 2. Pet. 1.21 there be that hold that after him there were now then some Prophets only by the Spirit I know there was a great silēce of Prophets after Malachy to prepare the people for to expect the coming of that great Prophet For though it were vox populi and a tradition among the Priests z Iohn 1.20.21 7.40.41 and Levites that the great Prophet was one distinct from the Christ the Messias yet I doubt not but the Church did understand Moses the great Prophet prophecyed of to be no other than the expected Messias And therefore the dampe that was of Prophets after Malachy turned to the good of the godly It taught them that Christ Iesus was now at hand And upon his comming we finde that the Lord stirred up two Prophets in a line a Maldonat in Ioh. 1.21 Zacharie the father and Iohn the Baptist his sonne to point out him Prophets by grace rather than by office And so I may say that the want of Vrim and Thummim did teach the Church that they were shortly now to expect the true Vrim and Thummim Christ Iesus the high Priest of their profession And besides it should have taught them to cleave the more to the written Oracles of God This Ieremy seemes to mee to shew in the losse of the Arke viz. That that losse should be no losse The people of God should not care to looke after the Arke any more but set their hearts on the true Arke Christ Iesus the Arke of Arkes This then the Church got by it That by the want of Vrim they learned that the Ceremonies were in going and the Messias in comming that salvation was not to be placed in the ordinances of Moses since Vrim and Thummim it selfe was utterly gone Lastly wee see that the Church did stand and was the pillar of truth without Vrim and Thummim The b Bellarm. de Rom. Pontif. lib. 3. cap. 4 §. quartà probatur Argument is loose that is made to prove the infallibility of the great Bishop of Rome from the Vrim and Thummim of the high Priest For beside that the Argument may follow from the c Heb. 4.14 8.1 Leviticall high Priest to Christ our high Priest of whom that high Priest was a Type and not of the Pope yet we see that the Church stood to the word when there was no Vrim Thummim from the taking of Ierusalem to the comming of Christ Iesus for in that interim the high Priest had no Vrim and Thummim And for that slender voyce called Bath-col mentioned by Tremelius in Act. 12.22 which Henry d on Exod. 28.30 Ainsworth would have to make some supply for the defect of Vrim it hath no ground and is to be turned backe to the foolish Rabbins from whom it came And therefore the Law and the Prophets was the standard and not the Vrim and Thummim I doubt not but the people had by some meanes perfect notice of the Revelation made to the Priest and they were absolutely to stand to the Oracles given by Vrim and Thummim from the mouth of God Yet me thinkes 't is hard to prove that the Priest did use it for matters of Religion and doctrine and not onely for matters of fact and event Next that the Priest had answere when he would though he himselfe were never so wicked or lastly That the sinnes of the people did not hinder the giving of the Oracle sometime 'T is enough that for some 550. yeares the high Priest was destitute of Vrim and Thummim and yet I hope the Lord did not leave his people without a sure and certaine rule of faith and direction of life which is the holy Word of God And Malachy doth tell us that though the Priests lips by that place and office should haue preserved knowledge yet often they did not And though while Vrim lasted it never gave any false or fallacious answers yet many times what for the sinnes of the Priest and what for the sinnes of the people the Lord refused to give any answer at all and the answers that were given were rather in matters of e Numb 17.21 1. Sam. 23.11 12. 30.7 8. fact than of doctrine and of faith The argument is too weake that the Cardinall doth draw from the Iewish Church to prove that the Pope hath the deciding Spirit and Voyce in matters of Faith sith from the destruction of Ierusalem to Messiah the Prince a space of some 550. yeares there was no Oracle by Vrim and Thummim no f Psal. 74.9 Wee see not our signes there is no more any Prophet succession of Prophets nor but a few Prophets at all from Malachy till Zachary the father and Iohn Baptist the sonne No miracles except the Poole of Bethesda graunted to the Iewes to strengthen them in the true worship of God under the persecution of Antiochus till the dayes of Zachary and Iohn Baptist and the Lord Iesus And yet the providence of God did not leave the Church for all that time without sufficient and ample meanes of their salvation In a word the losse of Vrim and Thummim the Arke and other Ceremonials taught them to looke off from the shadowes and to looke for the Truth the Lord Iesus CHAP. VI. CYrus after the Edict made in behalfe of the Iewes was called abroad to the warres He left his sonne Cambyses the power of a King at home and Cambyses hindred the execution of his fathers Proclamation 1 Not Darius Medus as Ben-Gorion saith for he was predecessor to Cyrus Now it is plaine by this Text that

and best agree vpon 40 yeares This Darius Nothus his bastard sonne had the honour to have the holy Citie builded and finished in his dayes He reigned in all Yeares 19 Moneths 6 7 Artaxerxes Mnemon In his dayes flourished the Prophet Malachie Cyrus his brother called Cyrus the younger tooke armes against him with the losse of his owne life Whose expedition is described by that famous Xenophon This Artaxerxes reigned 43   8 Ochus called Darius Artaxerxes Ochus He reigned 23   9 Arses the sonne of Ochus was slaine by Bagoas an Eunuch who killed first Ochus his Father Arses reigned 3   Broughton leaues out the 20 yeares of Ochus and makes Ochus and Arses to be but one man and thrusting out Arses gives vnto Ochus his three yeares and no more He was deceived by the Florentine Printer of Clemens Alexandrinus printing for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 20 put by the Librarie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Yeares Moneths 10 Darius Codomannes his sonne succeeded him and in the 6 yeare of his reigne he was beaten by Alexander Magnus and slaine by Bessus Gouernour of Bactrya one of Alexanders Princes and Captaines and so an end of the Persian Monarchie He reigned 6   The whole time of the Persian Monarchy was a matter of 228 yeares Cyrus began to reigne in Persia the 55 Olympiad Darius the last was subdued by Alexander the 112 Olympiad So betwixt Cyrus and Darius there fell in 57 Olympiads each Olympiad had the terme of 4 yeares so we finde 228 compleat yeares onely adding the imperfect yeares of the 112 Olympiad in which Olympiad Darius was slaine Some petty differences there are about small matters in judicious Chronologers chiefely about Cyrus his time after he was Emperour for some giue him but 3 or 4 yeares at the most But in the summe of the matter the chiefest agree vpon this reckoning and giue to the Persian Monarchie about 228 yeares     CHAP. II. An Explanation of the former Kings of the Persian Monarchie out of Daniel Dan. 11.2 There shall stand vp yet 3. Kings in P●rsia and the 4. shall be far●e richer than they all And by ●is strength through ●is rubes he shall stirre vp all against the Realme of G●aecia SIth the former voyce shewes this was in the f●rst yeare of Darius the Mede and therefore whereas it is said There shall stand vp yet three Kings the sense is That from or after Darius the Mede there shall be three Kings in Per●ia viz. Cyrus Cambyses Darius Hystaspis and then the fourth is plainly Xerxes as appeares by that of his gr●at riches and his huge and mighty preparations made to invade Greece Now sith 't is as cleere as day that the fourth was Xerxes the other 3 can be no other than Cyrus Cambyses and Darius Hystaspis The only Objection that can be made is of a Magus named Smerdis who tooke vpon him to be the sonne of Cyrus and vsurped the Throne after Cambyses against whom he conspired But the answere is that the Holy Ghost doth not hold him worth the naming and hee beares no place in the holy writ amongst the Kings of Persia whether it be for that his time was short for e●e he saw 7 moneth● the Nobles conspired against him and suppressed him or whether he being a conspirator is rather to be called a Tyrant than a King 't is out of question the Holy Ghost doth passe the Magus or Sm●rdis over Some doe take the odde moneths that this Smerdis vsurped and adde them to the time of Cambyses and so giue him somewhat a longer time of reigne than I haue done but so small a difference is not worth the speaking of 2. Chron. 36. a 20 And they were servants to him and to his b sons a Nebuchadnezzar b His son Euilmerodach 2. Reg. 25.27 His nephew Belshazzar Dan. 5.1 And all nations shall feare him and his sonne and his sonnes son vntill the time of his Lord come when many nations and great Kings shall serue themselues of him 2. Chron. 36.21 To fulfill the Word of the Lord spoken by c Ieremiah untill the land had her fill of Sabbaths for all the dayes that she lay desolate she kept Sabbath d 70 yeares c Ier. 25.11 And this whole land shall be desolate and an astonishment and these Nations shall serue the King of Babell 70. yeares and Ier. 19.10 d beginning when Iehoiaki● or Ieconiah was carried away captiue ending at the first yeare of Cyrus and Darius the Mede Kings of Persia. That they began at Ieconiahs captivity is proved by Ezek. 40.1 In the fiue and twentieth yeare of our being in captivity in the beginning of the yeare in the 10 th day of the moneth in the 14 th yeare after the Citie was smitten c. Now Ezekiel for the most part reckons the yeare from the first of Ieconiahs captivity As Ezech. 1.2 And more plainely out of Ieremiah cap. 29.2.10 where writing to those that were carried away with Ieconiah he tels them that they shall be 70 yeares in captivity from the time of their carrying away as may appeare if the Chapter be rightly considered of 2. Chron. 36.22.23 But in the first yeare of c Cyrus King of Persia c. Thus saith Cyrus King of Persia. c Together with Darius the Mede whom Cyrus had of his owne accord admitted into the governement of the Empire with himselfe as Dan. 5.31 Darius of the Medes tooke the Kingdome being 62. yeares old and Daniel 9.1 In the first yeare of Darius the sonne of Ahash●erosh of the seed of the Medes which was made King of the realm of the Chaldeans For Cyrus led with ambition went about warres in other Countries and therfore Darius had the title of the King though Cyrus were King in ●ffect Ezra 1.1 Now in the first f yeare of f Cyrus King of Persia that the Word of the Lord by the mouth of Ieremiah might be accomplished the Lord stirred vp the spirit of Cyrus K. of Persia and he made a proclamation throughout all his Kingdome c. f When he first reigned ouer Babylon for otherwise hee reigned 30. yeares in Persia and in the 28 th of his reigne of Persia was this captivity of the Iewes ended Ezra 2.2 Which came with g Zerubbabel to wit Ieshua Nehemiah c. g Zerubbabel was chiefe Captaine Ieshua or Iehoshua son of Iehozadak high Priest Hag. 1.1 But Nehemiah a man of great authority went not now but came 64. or 54. yeares after Ezra 3.1 And when the 7. moneth was come and the children of Israel were in their Cities the people assembled themselues as one man vnto Ierusalem From the first day of the 7. moneth they offered burnt offerings h And Cambyses his sonne synecdochicè Ezra 3.8 In the second yeare of their comming vnto the house of God in Ierusalem c. they began to set forward the worke of the