maryhelena

I have no problem with 'Josephus' being a pseudonym. And if that were so, it does not change the writing labeled 'Josephus' that we do have. We have to deal with that written text whatever the author's real name. Same with the gospel of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John - and Paul for that matter.

stephan huller

But it is similar to the problem that Marcion presents the inherited gospels. We are explicitly told 'Marcion corrupted the gospels.' But why is this to believed if his witness is chronologically older? The same thing here - if Clement is first with his 'History of the Jews' by 'Flavius Josephus' of 147 CE - why is he the idiot, why is he ignored (not by you per se but generations of Josephus scholars) when he is the first guy to tell us about 'Flavius Josephus'? I am not claiming I have all the answers but to me at least this casts doubt on the idea that EVERYONE ALWAYS thought that the books of Josephus were written by the main protagonist of the Jewish War narrative.

stephan huller

I wonder whether the Josephus reference in Dio Cassius is actually from one of the books or just a story Dio heard about his prophesy to Vespasian.

DCHindley

You are right about the 1,179 figure:

JOE Wars of the Jews 6:440 And from King David, who was the first of the Jews who reigned therein, to this destruction under Titus, were one thousand one hundred and seventy-nine years;

JOS Wars of the Jews 6:440 ἀπὸ δὲ Δαυίδου τοῦ βασιλέως ὃς πρῶτος αὐτῆς ἐβασίλευσεν Ἰουδαῖος μέχρι τῆς ὑπὸ Τίτου γενομένης κατασκαφῆς ἔτη χίλια καὶ ἑκατὸν ἑβδομήκοντα καὶ ἐννέα

The time periods I gave previously are from Dissertation V in Wm. Whiston's Josephus: Works. Whiston has this bad habit of emending the numbers to his liking, and not always saying so.

Gotta start work ...

DCH

Grog

That was the point I was fishing for.

stephan huller

No this isnt like that

Toto

There was an established usage of referring to oneself in the third person to create an air of objectivity and solemnity. Vernon Robbins made a point of this in distinguishing the use of first person plural in Paul's sea voyages.

By Land and By Sea: The We-Passages and Ancient Sea Voyages

at p. 223:

At least as early as Thucydides (ca. 460-400 B.C.) a standard had been set for narrative historiography that included third person narrative style. . . . Thucydides, the objective, truthful narrator features himself in the narrative for a number of pages, never using first person narration. By this means Thucydides hopes to persuade his readers that his account is based on the finest evidence and presented in the most accurate manner.

. . .

Both Thucydides and Xenophon consider third person narration to be the proper historiographical style. ....

stephan huller

But in the surving texts it suddenly shifts from first to third person sort of like Acts. Would Josephus a native Aramaic speaker have been aware of classical Greek conventions and why change back and forth wrecking the nobility of the ancient model?

stephan huller

Some examples from Book 5 of the Latin Hegesippus:

chapter 13 - Caesar entrusted the task to Josephus, in truth he who had experience in the treacheries of the Jews answered that he saw nothing sincere in it. Aeneas however advanced nearer the wall and that he might receive the one coming ran to meet him. To whom shoutings that he should open his bosom that he might receive gold, let fly a stone. He with watchful eyes foresaw the stone and having dropped with a quick leap of his body evaded it. However the vast catastrophe of the stone enveloped another standing near. Caesar brooded over this bitterly ordering the war machine to be driven with greater force for the casting down of the walls. In opposition fires were hurled down to burn up the machines. But when the wall was brought down Castor pretending greatness of mind in contempt of death with a trick as if he threw himself in the fire, with a disgraceful trick seized a way of escape with his life.

chapter 14 - He commands Josephus that he should address the citizens in their native tongue, that he himself might perhaps change his fellow tribesmen, that they should reject their madness. Who although he knew the hatred of the Jews to have been showered upon himself, moved back from the walls as far beyond the flight of an arrow as he was able, however so that he could be heard, he described in detail what was to the best interests of the citizens in this well known address to them.

chapter 15 - (after long speech) - When Josephus was saying this, he was jeered from the wall, they slandered him who was persuading helpful actions. Many even were shooting arrows, trying if they could bring him down with death. But he, because he was not prevailing on the untameable with reasoning, thought they should be approached also with the evidences of the scriptures, especially because they were saying that god would not fail as a guard for his temple.

chapter 17 - (after another long speech) - Josephus cried out these things with tears and he influenced very many of the people, that they should take refuge with the Romans having sold all they possessed. Whom Titus directed whither each wished, to surrender themselves without fear to the Romans even though the remainder were being challenged. And so the opportunity found of coming out, assured of safety if they came to the Romans, and not anxious about slavery to whom freedom was saved

chapter 23, 24 - XXIII. The father of Josephus was held imprisoned and access to him was not allowed to anyone. Josephus was zealously inviting the Jews to surrender and had too incautiously approached the wall, so that he might his country with his father. In which place struck in the head with a stone he fell, and would almost have been killed by the weapons thrown from above, unless by the order of Caesar they had been sent who snatched him protected by their shields from death. His mother the wound of her son having been learned and terrified by the shouts of the mocking bandits of his death put on alarm and faith at the same time. She also began to lament pitiably herself to have been saved for these fruits of fecundity, that she should neither gain the service of a living son nor bury him dead. It had been her prayer, that he rather would give burial to his mother, that she would breath out her last breath between his hands, that he would [p. 355] warm the cold limbs of her dying, that he would collect the last breaths from her mouth, he would close the eyes of her the dying, that he would compose her yet breathing face. But because he had escaped her prayer, it would have been a consolation, if she herself had even been able to be present at the last moments of her dying son, indeed a miserable circumstance but bearable however, that whom she had wished to outlive her, she should instead hold his funeral rites, "even if from the wall," she said. "May it be permitted me to see the dead body of my son, even if it is not permitted to touch it. Would indeed that no one prevents! But whom should I abandoned by such a great son fear? Why should I fear, for whom to die is a kindness? Would that all would turn their For whom indeed Titus weapons against me, that they would transfix me with a sword! What I was not able to do living, dead at least I will cover the body of my son with my clothing. The robe of one is sufficient for the burial of two, and perhaps someone of the enemy will feel pity, that with the mantle of the son he may cover the eyes of the mother, and may join eyes to eyes hands to hands face to faces." And so rushing herself to the walls she filled the sky itself with pitiable laments. Her own people mocked her, the Romans wept, among her compatriots there was cruelty, among the enemy there was compassion. "Pierce me," she said, " if there is any pity: I gave birth to him on whom you think vengeance must be taken. I gave an unlucky breast to him, kill me, if you demand vengeance for that."

While she is lamenting, Josephus went forward to the voice of his mother and began to mourn bitterly that he had escaped death, to whom it had been sweet to die before his country and for his country, while he is urging salvation to it, to sink down, himself no longer to strive for the safety of his parents, who given up to old age, while they are finishing their last days of life in prison, would be liberated if they should die, feared for the altar for the temple for the thus far half-destroyed fortifications of the city. He had offered himself to wounding, so that he should not see the country being destroyed. Aroused by which lament many thought they must go over to the Romans by whatever route they were able to take themselves away from the ambushes of those engaged in brigandage and pretending to be guards. For whom in fact Titus reserved the promised mercy, but a worse misfortune befell them.

stephan huller

The prologue to the Latin text apparently from 'Josephus"


Having followed with my pen the four books of Kings which the sacred writings embrace all the way to the captivity of the Jews and the destruction of the wall and the triumphs of Babylon, I arranged this in the manner of history. The prophetic speech also summarizes in a few words the things done by the Macchabaeans; of the rest all the way to the burning of the temple and the booty of Titus Caesar the excellent narrator Josephus (covers) with his historical pen, would that he had been attentive to religion and truth as to tracking down events and the staidness of speeches. He showed himself in his own words even a partner of the treachery of the Jews, which he made known about their punishment, and whose arms he deserted, but whose sacrilege he did not give up: he lamented tearfully their hardships, but he did not understand the cause of this hardship. Whence it was a concern for us relying not upon the help of tricks but the purpose of faith to go in the history of the Jews a little beyond the chain of sacred writing so that, as if seeking a rose among the thorns, among the savage crimes of the impious, which were paid off at a price worthy of the impiety, we may dig up something of reverence of the sacred law or of the miracle of the divine destiny, which although to evil heirs were either a pretext in unfavorable circumstances or a reason for honor in favorable ones; at the same time, because it is proof of domestic wickedness, establishes for all that they themselves were for themselves the authors of their own destruction, first because they turned the Romans who desired something different against themselves [p. 4] and attracted them to an examination of their kingdom, for which it was preferable to be ignored, not about to keep faith they asked for friendship, unequal in strength they violated the peace, finally they brought on war, to whom all hope was in their walls not in their strength, since to be shut in by a siege is a miserable thing for all, which even if it proceeds well, is accustomed more frequently to increase rather than to decrease the dangers. And lest anyone should think us to have undertaken a task empty of faith and unnecessary, let us consider that all the tribe of Hebrews was so led by their leaders, as is plainly evident, whether from the loins of Judas the successors of his begetting nowhere were deficient, or in truth offended in the chain of leaders, but continued in him in whom all things remained placed and who was himself the hope of the nations. From here therefore we take up our beginning.