stephan huller

Any claim that Hegesippus is a Latin translation of the received Greek text disappear when we move through the narrative. The received text moves on from the last point in our discussion to two paragraph description of Simon bar Giora ('bar Giora' being a name which never appears as far as I can see in Hegesippus) which - like its extensive 'John of Gischala' subplot - does not appear in Hegesippus:

And thus were the disturbances of Galilee quieted, when, upon their ceasing to prosecute their civil dissensions, they betook themselves to make preparations for the war with the Romans. Now in Jerusalem the high priest Artanus, and do as many of the men of power as were not in the interest of the Romans, both repaired the walls, and made a great many warlike instruments, insomuch that in all parts of the city darts and all sorts of armor were upon the anvil. Although the multitude of the young men were engaged in exercises, without any regularity, and all places were full of tumultuous doings; yet the moderate sort were exceedingly sad; and a great many there were who, out of the prospect they had of the calamities that were coming upon them, made great lamentations. There were also such omens observed as were understood to be forerunners of evils by such as loved peace, but were by those that kindled the war interpreted so as to suit their own inclinations; and the very state of the city, even before the Romans came against it, was that of a place doomed to destruction. However, Ananus's concern was this, to lay aside, for a while, the preparations for the war, and to persuade the seditious to consult their own interest, and to restrain the madness of those that had the name of zealots; but their violence was too hard for him; and what end he came to we shall relate hereafter.

But as for the Acrabbene toparchy, Simon, the son of Gioras, got a great number of those that were fond of innovations together, and betook himself to ravage the country; nor did he only harass the rich men's houses, but tormented their bodies, and appeared openly and beforehand to affect tyranny in his government. And when an army was sent against him by Artanus, and the other rulers, he and his band retired to the robbers that were at Masada, and staid there, and plundered the country of Idumea with them, till both Ananus and his other adversaries were slain; and until the rulers of that country were so afflicted with the multitude of those that were slain, and with the continual ravage of what they had, that they raised an army, and put garrisons into the villages, to secure them from those insults. And in this state were the affairs of Judea at that time.[Jewish War 2.21.1,2]

I don't know how those who claim that Hegesippus is merely a copy or even a 'summary' of our received text of Jewish War. There are absolutely no similarities in this section. One would presume a 'copy' would show signs of copying. But then again I bet no one actually did a systematic comparison of the two texts like we are engaged in. Belief was enough to sustain our predecessors.

An even better question is how a first person 'eye witness' narrative of Josephus should be thought to include details regarding Simon's exploits. But then again most of these bozos think Mark wrote a gospel having no firsthand knowledge of the events in question. Why not Josephus then? Anything goes I guess ...

stephan huller

Pseudo-Hegesippus is not a copy of Jewish War. This is just a lazy explanation to help 'close the book' on this curious text. I would argue that the 'Hegesippus' textual tradition which includes the Slavonic and the Yosippon actually represents a separate line of transmission dating back to our 'second century Josephus' figure.

Just look at what happens when we go back to side by side comparison of Pseudo-Hegesippus and Jewish War in the section which immediately follows our last post:

First the account of Pseudo-Hegesippus:

But in fact the Periatian Niger and the Babylonian Sylas and Johannes Essaeus, collecting all that were in Judaea of strong young men, attacked Ascalonis, large however and a city defended by strong walls, but in want of aid and assistance, which was separated from the city of Jerusalem by seven hundred and twenty stadia and by great hatreds. Therefore the Jews wishing to destroy a city hostile to themselves rushed upon it with their collected troops. Antonius was in charge of the city with a lesser number of Roman troops than he considered to be able to resist the Jews. But a man of acute judgment and an equally experienced soldier he allowed them scattered and trusting more upon number than valor, his cavalry having been led out, to cross to the city, then he attacked those in advance, harassed those following, scattered those crowded together, put the disordered to flight and pursued those straggling over the entire plain. Others turned about are driven against the walls all possibility of flight cut off, others seek different ways but surrounded by the horsemen they are cut to pieces. Many fall down upon themselves and in turn scatter themselves in their impetuosity. And so until evening slaughtered they lost out of their troops ten thousand men, their leaders Johannes and Sylas as well killed. Few however of the Romans were wounded in that battle. The rashness of the Jews however was not restrained but inflamed. For grief aroused their daring and the disgrace called out eagerness of avenging themselves. They are armed therefore with greater by far fury and the wounds of the injured not yet healed and more having been collected than the first time they rush in to attack, but them having been caught by arranged ambushes, before they came into hand to hand combat, Antonius cut them off surrounded by cavalry, and surrounded ordered them to be destroyed. Once more eight thousand were killed, the rest having been put to flight. Niger himself having slipped away betook himself into a fortification. There was a tower, enclosed on all sides by strong rock, the Romans because they were not able to destroy it encompassed it with set fires. Them having been lighted having crossed over from the tower into a certain cave he lay hidden from the enemy, he escaped the fire, and untroubled by the Romans because he himself should have been consumed by the conflagration, after the third day his own troops searching for his body for burial, he is restored alive and flourishing. And so with great joy saved from the enemy he is presented to the Jews.

Vespasian in the meantime the Hellespont having been crossed and crossing Bythinia and Cilicia, when he reached Syria, he led forth the legions and the other military forces which he found in it to Antioch. That city of Syria without objection is regarded as the foremost and thus the chief city, founded by those who adhered to the fighting Alexander the Great, called by the name of its founder. The location of the city: the length spread out immensely, narrower in width, because it is limited on the left by the steepness of a mountain, so that the sizes of the boundaries of the city are unable to be extended further. Necessity marks out the location, because the lofty mountain would give a hiding place to Parthians bursting in through hidden byways, from which they would pour themselves in an unexpected arrival and a quick attack against the unprepared Syria, unless the city threw up as if a barrier to the mountain and blocked the exit for those arriving, so that if any of the foreigners should climb it, he would immediately be seen from the middle of the city. Finally they say, when stage plays are frequented in that city, a certain actor of the mimes with eyes raised to the mountain saw Persians coming and said immediately: 'I either am dreaming or I see great danger. There! Persians!' For the mountain so overhangs the city, that not even the height of the theater is an impediment to seeing the mountain. A river in the middle cuts it asunder, which arising from the rising of the sun not far from the city is plunged into the sea, which from the course of its beginning men of old called the Orient, as it is commonly thought they gave the name to places, when from thence it was accepted. From the vigor itself of which flowing and the colder zephyrs continually blowing through those places the entire state is cooled at nearly every moment, so that it will have hidden the Orient in parts of the Orient. Within sweet waters, without a neighboring grove interwoven with numerous cypresses and abundant fountains. They call it Daphnen, because it never puts aside its greenness. Numerous and happy people and as is the greatest part of the Orient more merry than almost all but nearer to licentiousness. Previously a city in the third place out of all, which in the Roman world are considered states, but now in the fourth place after the city of the Byzantines outgrew Constantinople, once the capital of the Persians, now a means of defence. I think enough has been said about the site of the city. Nor for instance does it seem worth delaying by describing its buildings. When I said the East was behind it, it was clear that South lay to the left, Europe lay in front, to the right the northern races live and the Caspian kingdoms are held, which previously were most inclined to invade Syria. But after Alexander the Great established the Caspian Gate at the critical spot of the Taurus mountain and shut off every route for the interior tribes, he restored the peaceful renowned city, unless perhaps mistrusting Persian movements. In that city king Agrippa with all his troops was awaiting the arrival of Vespasian, nor did he adhere longer to the loitering retinue. The route having been joined they began to make for the city Ptolomais. Near that city they met the inhabitants of Sepphorim seeking (that) the peace entered into long ago with Caesentius Gallus be confirmed by Vespasian. Whose discretion having been praised, because they took regard for their own safety by not provoking the Romans, and good faith having been accepted, he received them into friendship and auxiliary troops of foot soldiers and horsemen having been added he fostered security, lest perhaps stirred up by the pain of failure arousers of war should rise up against them, since like a certain frontier fortress of Judea, the Sepphoritanians offering themselves to the Roman empire, it was resolved, that a passable route into it would be open to an enemy, which would run against the protector of the entire race as a certain opportune obstacle against an enemy. For it was besides its fitness as a fortified place even the greatest city of Galilaea. Which thing suggests that since there are two Galilaeas, one higher, the other lower, connected and joined to themselves, we should distinguish one from the other. But first (something) must be said about each. [Pseudo-Hegesippus 3.4,5]

And then we read in the section which roughly parallels what we just read in Hegessipus:

When Nero was informed of the Romans' ill success in Judea, a concealed consternation and terror, as is usual in such cases, fell upon him; although he openly looked very big, and was very angry, and said that what had happened was rather owing to the negligence of the commander, than to any valor of the enemy: and as he thought it fit for him, who bare the burden of the whole empire, to despise such misfortunes, he now pretended so to do, and to have a soul superior to all such sad accidents whatsoever. Yet did the disturbance that was in his soul plainly appear by the solicitude he was in [how to recover his affairs again].

And as he was deliberating to whom he should commit the care of the East, now it was in so great a commotion, and who might be best able to punish the Jews for their rebellion, and might prevent the same distemper from seizing upon the neighboring nations also, - he found no one but Vespasian equal to the task, and able to undergo the great burden of so mighty a war, seeing he was growing an old man already in the camp, and from his youth had been exercised in warlike exploits: he was also a man that had long ago pacified the west, and made it subject to the Romans, when it had been put into disorder by the Germans; he had also recovered to them Britain by his arms, which had been little known before whereby he procured to his father Claudius to have a triumph bestowed on him without any sweat or labor of his own.

So Nero esteemed these circumstances as favorable omens, and saw that Vespasian's age gave him sure experience, and great skill, and that he had his sons as hostages for his fidelity to himself, and that the flourishing age they were in would make them fit instruments under their father's prudence. Perhaps also there was some interposition of Providence, which was paving the way for Vespasian's being himself emperor afterwards. Upon the whole, he sent this man to take upon him the command of the armies that were in Syria; but this not without great encomiums and flattering compellations, such as necessity required, and such as might mollify him into complaisance. So Vespasian sent his son Titus from Achaia, where he had been with Nero, to Alexandria, to bring back with him from thence the fifth and. the tenth legions, while he himself, when he had passed over the Hellespont, came by land into Syria, where he gathered together the Roman forces, with a considerable number of auxiliaries from the kings in that neighborhood.

Now the Jews, after they had beaten Cestius, were so much elevated with their unexpected success, that they could not govern their zeal, but, like people blown up into a flame by their good fortune, carried the war to remoter places. Accordingly, they presently got together a great multitude of all their most hardy soldiers, and marched away for Ascalon. This is an ancient city that is distant from Jerusalem five hundred and twenty furlongs, and was always an enemy to the Jews; on which account they determined to make their first effort against it, and to make their approaches to it as near as possible. This excursion was led on by three men, who were the chief of them all, both for strength and sagacity; Niger, called the Persite, Silas of Babylon, and besides them John the Essene. Now Ascalon was strongly walled about, but had almost no assistance to be relied on [near them], for the garrison consisted of one cohort of footmen, and one troop of horsemen, whose captain was Antonius.

These Jews, therefore, out of their anger, marched faster than ordinary, and, as if they had come but a little way, approached very near the city, and were come even to it; but Antonius, who was not unapprized of the attack they were going to make upon the city, drew out his horsemen beforehand, and being neither daunted at the multitude, nor at the courage of the enemy, received their first attacks with great bravery; and when they crowded to the very walls, he beat them off. Now the Jews were unskillful in war, but were to fight with those who were skillful therein; they were footmen to fight with horsemen; they were in disorder, to fight those that were united together; they were poorly armed, to fight those that were completely so; they were to fight more by their rage than by sober counsel, and were exposed to soldiers that were exactly obedient; and did every thing they were bidden upon the least intimation. So they were easily beaten; for as soon as ever their first ranks were once in disorder, they were put to flight by the enemy's cavalry, and those of them that came behind such as crowded to the wall fell upon their own party's weapons, and became one another's enemies; and this so long till they were all forced to give way to the attacks of the horsemen, and were dispersed all the plain over, which plain was wide, and all fit for the horsemen; which circumstance was very commodious for the Romans, and occasioned the slaughter of the greatest number of the Jews; for such as ran away, they could overrun them, and make them turn back; and when they had brought them back after their flight, and driven them together, they ran them through, and slew a vast number of them, insomuch that others encompassed others of them, and drove them before them whithersoever they turned themselves, and slew them easily with their arrows; and the great number there were of the Jews seemed a solitude to themselves, by reason of the distress they were in, while the Romans had such good success with their small number, that they seemed to themselves to be the greater multitude. And as the former strove zealously under their misfortunes, out of the shame of a sudden flight, and hopes of the change in their success, so did the latter feel no weariness by reason of their good fortune; insomuch that the fight lasted till the evening, till ten thousand men of the Jews' side lay dead, with two of their generals, John and Silas, and the greater part of the remainder were wounded, with Niger, their remaining general, who fled away together to a small city of Idumea, called Sallis. Some few also of the Romans were wounded in this battle.

Yet were not the spirits of the Jews broken by so great a calamity, but the losses they had sustained rather quickened their resolution for other attempts; for, overlooking the dead bodies which lay under their feet, they were enticed by their former glorious actions to venture on a second destruction; so when they had lain still so little a while that their wounds were not yet thoroughly cured, they got together all their forces, and came with greater fury, and in much greater numbers, to Ascalon. But their former ill fortune followed them, as the consequence of their unskilfulness, and other deficiencies in war; for Antonius laid ambushes for them in the passages they were to go through, where they fell into snares unexpectedly, and where they were encompassed about with horsemen, before they could form themselves into a regular body for fighting, and were above eight thousand of them slain; so all the rest of them ran away, and with them Niger, who still did a great many bold exploits in his flight. However, they were driven along together by the enemy, who pressed hard upon them, into a certain strong tower belonging to a village called Bezedeh However, Antonius and his party, that they might neither spend any considerable time about this tower, which was hard to be taken, nor suffer their commander, and the most courageous man of them all, to escape from them, they set the wall on fire; and as the tower was burning, the Romans went away rejoicing, as taking it for granted that Niger was destroyed; but he leaped out of the tower into a subterraneous cave, in the innermost part of it, and was preserved; and on the third day afterward he spake out of the ground to those that with great lamentation were searching for him, in order to give him a decent funeral; and when he was come out, he filled all the Jews with an unexpected joy, as though he were preserved by God's providence to be their commander for the time to come.

And now Vespasian took along with him his army from Antioch, (which is the metropolis of Syria, and without dispute deserves the place of the third city in the habitable earth that was under the Roman empire, both in magnitude, and other marks of prosperity,) where he found king Agrippa, with all his forces, waiting for his coming, and marched to Ptolemais. At this city also the inhabitants of Sepphoris of Galilee met him, who were for peace with the Romans. These citizens had beforehand taken care of their own safety, and being sensible of the power of the Romans, they had been with Cestius Gallus before Vespasian came, and had given their faith to him, and received the security of his right hand, and had received a Roman garrison; and at this time withal they received Vespasian, the Roman general, very kindly, and readily promised that they would assist him against their own countrymen. Now the general delivered them, at their desire, as many horsemen and footmen as he thought sufficient to oppose the incursions of the Jews, if they should come against them. And indeed the danger of losing Sepphoris would be no small one, in this war that was now beginning, seeing it was the largest city of Galilee, and built in a place by nature very strong, and might be a security of the whole nation's [fidelity to the Romans].[Jewish War 3.1 - 2.4]

The difference in parallel 'red sections' is quite striking. Pseudo-Hegesippus devotes a whole paragraph to Vespasian's exploits. Jewish War 'divides' the account into two different sections. The difference between the calculated distance from Jersualem and Askelon is striking also - 520 stadia in Jewish War, 720 in Hegesippus. Jewish War's interest in the goings on in Nero's court is utterly absurd. Josephus could not read Greek. So how did he know what Nero was doing in Rome?

His original account dealt exclusively with the goings on the ground in Palestine. These sections represent later additions in both traditions. The reference to Constantinople by name in the long section added by the fourth century editor is also worth noting.

maryhelena

So, its 'critical interpretation' - same difference albeit a difference that is now given a 'scholarly' gloss...
No, the safe way to deal with the MSS is not to assume they were written by a "first century Josephus who fought on the side of the Jewish revolutionaries". The safe way to deal with the MSS that have been preserved is to first establish the type of documents one is dealing with - what genre are they. The assumption has been that they are historical documents. I have previously referred to two scholarly books dealing with the issue of 'Josephus' being a 'prophetic historian'. To jump to the conclusion, a conclusion derived from the narrative itself, is unwarranted - it's no better than reading the gospels and maintaining that the character therein, Jesus, was a historical character. Or reading the letters of 'Paul' and claiming historicity on that basis. It is no longer possible to maintain that the writer of 'Josephus' was *only* writing history.
All the 'evidence', all the 'critical' interpretation, will not remove from the writing of 'Josephus' the 'prophetic historian' element therein. It will not be able to transform a non-historical creation into a historical figure.
I'm sure you will find contradictions galore - one finds the same thing between the four gospels. One can attempt, in the case of the gospels, to mistakenly try and resolve the contradictions instead of allowing the contradictions to open up others avenues for investigation. Or, in the case of 'Josephus' start throwing out various manuscripts in the endeavor of trying to establish which manuscript is the original, the 'purer' manuscript. That approach makes as much sense as trying to find the original gospel manuscript - the illusive Q. A futile task. What is necessary is to deal with what we have - contradictions in the manuscripts. Which basically means that a historical approach to Josephus, as to the gospels, does not work.

Great theory, Stephen - but where is the independent historical evidence that your first 'Josephus' actually lived - was a flesh and blood historical figure?
Nothing to do with the thread - come off it Stephen. You are presenting a theory re 'Josephus' - I am asking for historical evidence. You don't have it. Textual corruption, interpolations - sure all that is possible. And what is that old saying - one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist. Once interpretation is part of the picture - then, as I keep saying - it's anyones game...

What is more important than interpretation is bedrock historical facts - we don't have them re the gospel Jesus nor 'Josephus. It's possible that many ancient figures don't have historical evidence on their side. Be that as it may - the interest here is in 'Josephus'. And the interest in 'Josephus' is because of the NT storyline - a story with a timeline that is connected to the historical time period that the writing of 'Josephus' relates to. So, in this case, the case of 'Josephus', the relevance of whether this figure is historical or a figurative figure, is monumental. Unraveling the historical origin story of early christianity rests upon an understanding of 'Josephus'. If 'Josephus' was a historical figure - then it's a dead-end for any quest re early christian origins. There is no way through the Josephan roadblock. However, if 'Josephus' is, like the gospel Jesus, a non-historical figure, a figure created to retell Hasmonean/Herodian history in the light of prophetic insights or interpretations of that history - then the roadblock to the historical origin story of early christianity is removed.....

And that is why I will challenge you anytime you seek to 1) undermine any role of a 'prophetic historian' for the writer of the work that goes by the designation of 'Josephus', 2) propose any theory regarding multiple historical figures named 'Josephus' that were relevant to the writing of the Josephan manuscripts.

stephan huller

I was expecting people to question the second century Josephus - but first century Josephus? Porco Dio! There was a king Agrippa right? There was a Justus of Tiberias right? There was probably someone like Josephus, right? A Jewish general that was spared by Vespasian who went on to challenge Justus's Chronology with an account of his own.

Where else did all this material come from? Why would Christians be interested in a wholesale invention of Josephus? Why would they invent a Josephus with all this baggage - i.e. revolt from the Empire, the fight with Justus, the specific charges leveled against him?

A better question is why is it that no matter what the topic there is always someone here questioning the historical reality of the original witness? It always puzzles me.

So his name is 'Joe Siphus' instead of Josephus who cares?

There's a tradition that a guy named Mark wrote the gospel that seems to be the earliest of all the gospels in the NT.

Oh but maybe Mark is a fiction.

I don't understand the attraction of this argument. The indiscriminate use of this argument seems to be used by people who are mad the facts are getting in the way of their daydreaming.

The study of history is supposed to be like mathematics. There are right and wrong answers. Sometimes we get ideas and the facts tell us they can't work. That's life. Move on. It's time to get over it and try something else.

It is utterly ridiculous to assume that all the underlying conflict with Justus in Vita is just made up. It's seems so utterly real. The weaselly way Josephus is trying to play with the facts to explain his actions during the war seem pretty real to me. I imagine you could find war tribunals today with exactly the same arguments - 'they say that Joseph butchered that village in Rwanda. Okay but it wasn't me. It was the Joseph the son of the doctor. I am Joseph the son of the butcher. I was getting my hair cut ..."

Josephus is as real as the Holocaust.

stephan huller

Next comes the topographic description of ancient Palestine. First in Pseudo-Hegesippus:

Syria and Phoenice touch each Galilaea and Ptolomais with the boundaries of its territory and Mount Carmelus limits them on the west, Mount Carmelus which previously belonged to the Galilaeans, but now is joined to the territory of the Tyrians, to which is joined the state Gabaa, which at one time was a great source of mischief for the Jews. On the east Ippene and Gadara cut it off with their territories; moreover the same boundaries were prescribed in ancient times to the Gaulanitidian region and to the kingdom of Agrippa. On the southern flank Scythopolis and Samaria with their own territories intercept each and they are not allowed to extend beyond the river Jordanis. Its northern parts Tyrus shuts off on the right side and all the territory of the Tyrians, by whose interposition the territories of Galilaea are delimited. Between themselves however they are distinguished by this only, that lower Galilaea so-called extends in length from the city of Tiberias all the way to the city which has the name Zabulon above the maritime boundaries of Ptolomais. Its width however extends not at all doubtfully from the village Xaloth which is in the great plain all the way to Bersaben. From which even the beginning of upper Galilaea is uncovered, which extends as far as to the boundaries of the village Bachathe; moreover by this very village even the boundaries of the land of Tyria are fixed. Also the beginning of its length is the village Thalla, Roth is the end. Thalla borders upon the Jordan. It is given to be understood from this, how far the territories of upper Galilaea stretch themselves, whose beginning is the Jordan, or its limit. Therefore by this assessment of its size each Galilaea is distinguished. The land however is fertile, abounding in grass, supporting itself by diverse types of agriculture, studded with trees, so that its attracts anyone whatever to his satisfaction and invites and excites anyone avoiding labor to the pursuit of agriculture. Finally no part of the land in that place however small is idle, it is crowded with many inhabitants. Many cities, numerous towns, an innumerable multitude of men, so that a small town in his district might have fifteen thousand inhabitants. Each Galilaea is surrounded also by foreign races poured around, and thus a warlike race of men, from the earliest age trained in battle exercises, abundant in number, ready in daring, and prepared in all the arts of war. The Perea region however is preeminent in size, which from thence had received the designation, which we told above. This greater but more useful Galilaea, all of which is cultivated, nor is any part of it unfruitful of crops but all its land is rich and productive, Perea however is more extended but in the greater part deserted which does not know to be softened by plowing nor to subdue easily the rougher furrows. But again a part of it is easy for cultivation, fertile for use, pleasant in aspect, mild for exercising, useful for fruit trees by grafting, producing everything, so that trees separated in front border its fields, in the middle they generally beautify and protect the crops from too much sun or cold, and especially a field covered with olive trees interwoven with vines, or distinguished with palm trees. It is indescribable how charming it is when the rows of palm trees driven by the wind make sounds and the pleasant odors of the dactyls are poured forth as usual. It is no wonder if all of this is thanks to the greenness, when the overflowed field is watered by the pleasant wanderings of the streams running down from the high peak of the mountains, bubbling over with snowy fountains it is seized with envy, wished for with thanks. Its length is from Macheruntis all the way to Pella, that is from the south to the north, its width however is from Philadelphia all the way to the river Jordan that is on the east it is bordered by the fields of Arabia, in the west however it is seen to extend all the way to the Jordan river. Also the Samaritan region lies midway between Iudea and Galilaea, beginning from the village which has the name Eleas, ending in the land of the Acrabattenians, of a very similar nature and not differing in any respect from Judaea. For each is mountainous and level according to the difference of locations, neither is everything spread out in plains nor is its broken up by the cliffs of mountains in all places, but it has the loveliness of each characteristic. For the practice of agriculture the loose and softer land and from that useful for grains and as for the fertility of the soil almost second to none, certainly for the maturity of the crops earlier than all. For while in other places they are still sowing grain, here they are reaping. The appearance also and the very nature of the grain is by no means considered more outstanding in any place else. The water is sweet, good in appearance, agreeable for drinking, so that according to the pleasures of the elements the Jews considered it that land promised to their fathers flowing milk and honey, when he promised them preference of resurrection. And indeed divine goodness had gathered each, if they had kept the faith, but with disloyal souls each snatched away by the yoke of captivity, there in the bonds of sin. A well-wooded region and therefore rich in cattle and flowing with milk. Finally nowhere so full of milk, the cattle bear udders, the woods fruits or grafted things above the amounts of all regions, each filled full however with a multitude of men from Samaria or Judaea, so that the Jews seem to me to have interpreted from this place that which is written that there was nothing among these sterile and unfruitful, since the law directed this about the fecundity of the well-deserving and about the fruitfulness of courage. The beginning of Samaria (is) from the boundaries of Arabia from the village which has the name Jordan, it ends in the north at the village Borceus. the breadth however of Judaea (extends) from the river Jordan all the way to Iopen. For it begins at the sources of the Jordan and from Mount Libanus and extends all the way to the lake of Tiberias. Also from the village Arfa (there is) the beginning of its length which extends all the way to the village Iuliadis, in which (there is) the joint habitation equally of Jews and Tyrians. In the middle however the city of Judaea as if the center of the entire region, is called Jerusalem, as pleased the sensible. A region abounding with inland resources but not cheated of the maritime, because it extends all the way to Ptolomais and it fringes upon all that sea with its shores. (There are) many cities but among all these Jerusalem stands out, and just as the head in the body does not overshadow its limbs but rules and is beauty and a protection for them. About Judaea and the neighboring regions, although an abridgment is advantageous, we have not omitted those things which should have been pointed out. [Pseudo-Hegesippus 3.6]

And then the parallel passage in Jewish War:

NOW Phoenicia and Syria encompass about the Galilees, which are two, and called the Upper Galilee and the Lower. They are bounded toward the sun-setting, with the borders of the territory belonging to Ptolemais, and by Carmel; which mountain had formerly belonged to the Galileans, but now belonged to the Tyrians; to which mountain adjoins Gaba, which is called the City of Horsemen, because those horsemen that were dismissed by Herod the king dwelt therein; they are bounded on the south with Samaria and Scythopolis, as far as the river Jordan; on the east with Hippeae and Gadaris, and also with Ganlonitis, and the borders of the kingdom of Agrippa; its northern parts are hounded by Tyre, and the country of the Tyrians. As for that Galilee which is called the Lower, it, extends in length from Tiberias to Zabulon, and of the maritime places Ptolemais is its neighbor; its breadth is from the village called Xaloth, which lies in the great plain, as far as Bersabe, from which beginning also is taken the breadth of the Upper Galilee, as far as the village Baca, which divides the land of the Tyrians from it; its length is also from Meloth to Thella, a village near to Jordan.

These two Galilees, of so great largeness, and encompassed with so many nations of foreigners, have been always able to make a strong resistance on all occasions of war; for the Galileans are inured to war from their infancy, and have been always very numerous; nor hath the country been ever destitute of men of courage, or wanted a numerous set of them; for their soil is universally rich and fruitful, and full of the plantations of trees of all sorts, insomuch that it invites the most slothful to take pains in its cultivation, by its fruitfulness; accordingly, it is all cultivated by its inhabitants, and no part of it lies idle. Moreover, the cities lie here very thick, and the very many villages there are here are every where so full of people, by the richness of their soil, that the very least of them contain above fifteen thousand inhabitants.

In short, if any one will suppose that Galilee is inferior to Perea in magnitude, he will be obliged to prefer it before it in its strength; for this is all capable of cultivation, and is every where fruitful; but for Perea, which is indeed much larger in extent, the greater part of it is desert and rough, and much less disposed for the production of the milder kinds of fruits; yet hath it a moist soil [in other parts], and produces all kinds of fruits, and its plains are planted with trees of all sorts, while yet the olive tree, the vine, and the palm tree are chiefly cultivated there. It is also sufficiently watered with torrents, which issue out of the mountains, and with springs that never fail to run, even when the torrents fail them, as they do in the dog-days. Now the length of Perea is from Macherus to Pella, and its breadth from Philadelphia to Jordan; its northern parts are bounded by Pella, as we have already said, as well as its Western with Jordan; the land of Moab is its southern border, and its eastern limits reach to Arabia, and Silbonitis, and besides to Philadelphene and Gerasa.

Now as to the country of Samaria, it lies between Judea and Galilee; it begins at a village that is in the great plain called Ginea, and ends at the Acrabbene toparchy, and is entirely of the same nature with Judea; for both countries are made up of hills and valleys, and are moist enough for agriculture, and are very fruitful. They have abundance of trees, and are full of autumnal fruit, both that which grows wild, and that which is the effect of cultivation. They are not naturally watered by many rivers, but derive their chief moisture from rain-water, of which they have no want; and for those rivers which they have, all their waters are exceeding sweet: by reason also of the excellent grass they have, their cattle yield more milk than do those in other places; and, what is the greatest sign of excellency and of abundance, they each of them are very full of people.

In the limits of Samaria and Judea lies the village Anuath, which is also named Borceos. This is the northern boundary of Judea. The southern parts of Judea, if they be measured lengthways, are bounded by a Village adjoining to the confines of Arabia; the Jews that dwell there call it Jordan. However, its breadth is extended from the river Jordan to Joppa. The city Jerusalem is situated in the very middle; on which account some have, with sagacity enough, called that city the Navel of the country. Nor indeed is Judea destitute of such delights as come from the sea, since its maritime places extend as far as Ptolemais: it was parted into eleven portions, of which the royal city Jerusalem was the supreme, and presided over all the neighboring country, as the head does over the body. As to the other cities that were inferior to it, they presided over their several toparchies; Gophna was the second of those cities, and next to that Acrabatta, after them Thamna, and Lydda, and Emmaus, and Pella, and Idumea, and Engaddi, and Herodium, and Jericho; and after them came Jamnia and Joppa, as presiding over the neighboring people; and besides these there was the region of Gamala, and Gaulonitis, and Batanea, and Trachonitis, which are also parts of the kingdom of Agrippa. This [last] country begins at Mount Libanus, and the fountains of Jordan, and reaches breadthways to the lake of Tiberias; and in length is extended from a village called Arpha, as far as Julias. Its inhabitants are a mixture of Jews and Syrians. And thus have I, with all possible brevity, described the country of Judea, and those that lie round about it.[Jewish War 3.3.1 -4]

stephan huller

Mary Helena.

Since you are the only one who reads this thread with any regularity I was just looking for a second opinion before I look at the original Greek - is Josephus saying that Galilee, Samaria and Judea PLUS all the northern countries were part of the kingdom of Agrippa at the time Josephus was writing?

... and the borders of the kingdom of Agrippa; its northern parts are hounded by Tyre, and the country of the Tyrians. As for that Galilee which is called the Lower, it, extends in length from Tiberias to Zabulon, and of the maritime places Ptolemais is its neighbor; its breadth is from the village called Xaloth, which lies in the great plain, as far as Bersabe, from which beginning also is taken the breadth of the Upper Galilee, as far as the village Baca, which divides the land of the Tyrians from it; its length is also from Meloth to Thella, a village near to Jordan.

These two Galilees, of so great largeness, and encompassed with so many nations of foreigners, have been always able to make a strong resistance on all occasions of war; for the Galileans are inured to war from their infancy, and have been always very numerous; nor hath the country been ever destitute of men of courage, or wanted a numerous set of them; for their soil is universally rich and fruitful, and full of the plantations of trees of all sorts, insomuch that it invites the most slothful to take pains in its cultivation, by its fruitfulness; accordingly, it is all cultivated by its inhabitants, and no part of it lies idle. Moreover, the cities lie here very thick, and the very many villages there are here are every where so full of people, by the richness of their soil, that the very least of them contain above fifteen thousand inhabitants.

In short, if any one will suppose that Galilee is inferior to Perea in magnitude, he will be obliged to prefer it before it in its strength; for this is all capable of cultivation, and is every where fruitful; but for Perea, which is indeed much larger in extent, the greater part of it is desert and rough, and much less disposed for the production of the milder kinds of fruits; yet hath it a moist soil [in other parts], and produces all kinds of fruits, and its plains are planted with trees of all sorts, while yet the olive tree, the vine, and the palm tree are chiefly cultivated there. It is also sufficiently watered with torrents, which issue out of the mountains, and with springs that never fail to run, even when the torrents fail them, as they do in the dog-days. Now the length of Perea is from Macherus to Pella, and its breadth from Philadelphia to Jordan; its northern parts are bounded by Pella, as we have already said, as well as its Western with Jordan; the land of Moab is its southern border, and its eastern limits reach to Arabia, and Silbonitis, and besides to Philadelphene and Gerasa.

Now as to the country of Samaria, it lies between Judea and Galilee; it begins at a village that is in the great plain called Ginea, and ends at the Acrabbene toparchy, and is entirely of the same nature with Judea; for both countries are made up of hills and valleys, and are moist enough for agriculture, and are very fruitful. They have abundance of trees, and are full of autumnal fruit, both that which grows wild, and that which is the effect of cultivation. They are not naturally watered by many rivers, but derive their chief moisture from rain-water, of which they have no want; and for those rivers which they have, all their waters are exceeding sweet: by reason also of the excellent grass they have, their cattle yield more milk than do those in other places; and, what is the greatest sign of excellency and of abundance, they each of them are very full of people.

In the limits of Samaria and Judea lies the village Anuath, which is also named Borceos. This is the northern boundary of Judea. The southern parts of Judea, if they be measured lengthways, are bounded by a Village adjoining to the confines of Arabia; the Jews that dwell there call it Jordan. However, its breadth is extended from the river Jordan to Joppa. The city Jerusalem is situated in the very middle; on which account some have, with sagacity enough, called that city the Navel of the country. Nor indeed is Judea destitute of such delights as come from the sea, since its maritime places extend as far as Ptolemais: it was parted into eleven portions, of which the royal city Jerusalem was the supreme, and presided over all the neighboring country, as the head does over the body. As to the other cities that were inferior to it, they presided over their several toparchies; Gophna was the second of those cities, and next to that Acrabatta, after them Thamna, and Lydda, and Emmaus, and Pella, and Idumea, and Engaddi, and Herodium, and Jericho; and after them came Jamnia and Joppa, as presiding over the neighboring people; and besides these there was the region of Gamala, and Gaulonitis, and Batanea, and Trachonitis, which are ALSO [emphasis mine] parts of the kingdom of Agrippa. This [last] country begins at Mount Libanus, and the fountains of Jordan, and reaches breadthways to the lake of Tiberias; and in length is extended from a village called Arpha, as far as Julias. Its inhabitants are a mixture of Jews and Syrians. And thus have I, with all possible brevity, described the country of Judea, and those that lie round about it [Jewish War 3.4.1 - 5]

I know what the scholarly consensus based on whatever thought previous generations put into this problem. But I was struck by the peculiar phraseology. Are we meant to see the two references to Agrippa as brackets listing the territories under his rule (i.e. Galilee, Samaria and Judea + the northern countries)?

Book 7 makes explicit the claim that the northernmost part Agrippa's territory extended just below Tyre after the war.

maryhelena

Since the whole chapter is dealing with a description of Galilee - placed between two chapters dealing with conflict - the possibility does arise that 'Josephus' is simply reminiscing, having a flash back, upon a more peaceful time in the history of Galilee. A time when the father of Agrippa II, Agrippa I, was ruling. Thus, questions of territory that are out of order for Agrippa II, could indicate that the reminiscing has more to do with Agrippa I than Agrippa II

Depending upon historical analysis of 'Josephus' only serves to generate more problems than it attempts to solve....

I would see this 'problem' as being a problem related only to a historical approach to 'Josephus. From a perspective of viewing 'Josephus' - or whoever is writing this work - as a 'prophetic historian', then examples like the one above, can be viewed as 'Josephus' bringing the past back into the present - history repeating itself albeit within an interpretative prophetic framework. History repeats itself, life goes in cycles - the father is in the son....

So, if a natural, historical, reading of 'Josephus' does not make any sense or is seen to be contradicting something else that he wrote - try out a non-historical approach. View the 'problem' as one for an alternative, a non-historical, explanation. When historical problems arise - problems that cannot be resolved without denigrating the credibility of 'Josephus - then before one writes him off as a bad historian - remember that being a *mere* historian is not what 'Josephus' is all about...

maryhelena

And there was Pontius Pilate and the high priests Annas and Caiaphas...
Probably someone like Josephus? How about Agrippa II and the role he played in the war? From a Jewish perspective he could just as well be described as a 'traitor' as was 'Josephus. Expelled from Jerusalem, siding with the Romans, having his own troops march with Vespasian, he himself campaigned with Titus and was wounded at the siege of Gamala. (a siege from which no human remains have been found...).....If anyone needed to clean up their image after 70 ce it would be Agrippa II - and what better way to do that than to create 'Josephus' to take all the blame and take the focus away from him....He reminds me a bit of the apostle 'Paul' - prior to his 'conversion' he had a history of being a hothead regarding those who he disagreed with....Who knows, but after 70 ce Agrippa II had his own 'conversion' experience - re a rethink on the whole 70 ce saga....
Christians, generally speaking, don't seem to have been bothered re 'Josephus' - as long as the TF is there, the mention of James the brother of the Lord, they are more than happy to leave everything else alone...All christian historicists are interested in is the Josephan backup for their historicist position re the gospel Jesus...

Where did all the Josephan material come from? Obviously, someone wrote it. Why? As just another attempt at history - hardly. Anyone could do that. What 'Josephus' had was something additional - a prophetic interest in the Hasmonean/Herodian history. Yes, 'Josephus' has the Hasmonean bloodline. He also had the wherewithal to ensure that it would be his version of that history that would be authorized history. I can't imagine the Romans being particularly interested in the intrigues of the Hasmonean/Herodian family after the 70 ce scenario. That's all water under the historical bridge. But for someone interested in a prophetic take on this history - different ball game. And who would that someone be - a Jewish general who became a 'traitor' and sided with the Romans - or King Agrippa II who had a personal, family, connection to this history?
Perhaps your not too familiar with the mythicist position re the gospel story re the crucified Jesus. That position is basically a position that denies the historicity of the crucified gospel Jesus. Once that position is upheld - then questions arise re the real historical origins of christianity. Once the historicity of the crucified Jesus is questioned - then questions arise re all the other characters within the NT storyline - and an extension of that is the question re the historicity of 'Josephus'....They could well be two peas in the same pod - the one the 'spiritual' construct - the other the 'historical' construct.

Makes no difference whether its 'Josephus' or 'Joe Siphus' - it's the name of the writer that is important not the name of the character he puts in a book....
Quite, maybe 'Mark' is a fiction - at least the one in the gospels. But if there is a Mark that has some connection with early christianity - that's a different matter. And if this Mark happens to be Marcus Julius Agrippa - Agrippa II - well and good. Great theory...:thumbs:

But we are not dealing, with 'Josephus', with *pure* history. We are dealing with a writer who ascribes to prophetic insights etc. In that sense mathematics does still apply - re the use of number symbolisms from the OT and with a Pythagorean interest. Quite, re facts can turn our 'insights' into wishful thinking pretty quickly. And being wrong is no stumbling block to research of any kind - we just move on and learn from our mistakes...

I'm not saying it's unreal. I'm suggesting that the conflict is not between 'Josephus' and Justus but between Justus and Agrippa II. One man would have history as his goal - the other man a prophetic interest in history as his motivation...So that's it then - an attempt to discredit 'Josephus'?

stephan huller

We move on to the next sections in Hegesippus and Jewish War which once again parallel one another because they go back to a common grandfather text.

Here is the account of Hegesippus:

The Sepphoritanians also attacked their neighboring regions with (demands for) tribute, assistance, military items, claiming a free right for themselves to engage in brigandage under the pretext of the war, which was being waged by the Jews against the Roman empire. Whence Josephus eagerly desiring to avenge the injury of harshness received hastened to make an attack against the city Sepphorin having associated to himself a number of powerful people, in order that he should call them back into the alliance of Judaea or if he were able ovethrow them resisting by their final destruction. But he fell short in each attempt, because he was neither able to dissuade them from the election of the Roman alliance or to overthrow the city, which he himself had strengthened with such great fortifications, that it was not able to be stormed by the far more impressive Romans. And so an assault having been attempted without any effect he sounded the trumpet call and aroused war against the entire region. He laid waste everything by day and night burning buildings, plundering inheritances, killing whomever was fit for fighting that he had seized, throwing the weak into slavery. All Galilaea was filled with burning blood robbery, by the appearance of no exempt misery and of the deformity of all things, when if anything remained from fire and murder, it was held for captivity. For whose evils those things which a little before had been considered too harsh were brought forward.[Pseudo-Hegesippus 3.7]

Here is the account of Jewish War:

NOW the auxiliaries which were sent to assist the people of Sepphoris, being a thousand horsemen, and six thousand footmen, under Placidus the tribune, pitched their camp in two bodies in the great plain. The foot were put into the city to be a guard to it, but the horse lodged abroad in the camp. These last, by marching continually one way or other, and overrunning the parts of the adjoining country, were very troublesome to Josephus and his men; they also plundered all the places that were out of the city's liberty, and intercepted such as durst go abroad. On this account it was that Josephus marched against the city, as hoping to take what he had lately encompassed with so strong a wall, before they revolted from the rest of the Galileans, that the Romans would have much ado to take it; by which means he proved too weak, and failed of his hopes, both as to the forcing the place, and as to his prevailing with the people of Sepphoris to deliver it up to him. By this means he provoked the Romans to treat the country according to the law of war; nor did the Romans, out of the anger they bore at this attempt, leave off, either by night or by day, burning the places in the plain, and stealing away the cattle that were in the country, and killing whatsoever appeared capable of fighting perpetually, and leading the weaker people as slaves into captivity; so that Galilee was all over filled with fire and blood; nor was it exempted from any kind of misery or calamity, for the only refuge they had was this, that when they were pursued, they could retire to the cities which had walls built them by Josephus.

As we noted earlier this Sepphoris narrative originally followed the assault by Josephus against Gamala (Gamala Vita 36 - 38; Sepphoris Vita 65 - 67) The holocaust at Gamala must have been particularly severe as even 'first century Josephus' invents a second Josephus to wipe his hands clear of the event.

We will get to that shortly but notice at once also that Josephus continually makes reference to specific war crimes associated with his actions in Sepphoris too. This is why both Hegesippus and Jewish War gloss over the particulars here.

The first Josephus builds up the walls of Sepphoris (Vita 37). Then he blames a certain Jonathan for mistreating the Sepphoraeans "So Jonathan and his partners went away from them without success, and came to Sepphoris, the greatest city of all Galilee. Now the men of that city, who inclined to the Romans in their sentiments, met them indeed, but neither praised nor reproached me and when they were gone down from Sepphoris to Asochis, the people of that place made a clamor against them, as those of Japha had done; whereupon they were able to contain themselves no longer, but ordered the armed men that were with them to beat those that made the clamor with their clubs." (Vita 45) Then Josephus makes reference to specific accusations of Justus regarding his involvement in war crimes (Vita 65) and then finally Vita's section which parallels the above mentioned parallel section of Hegesippus and Jewish War:

But about this time it was that the people of Sepphoris grew insolent, and took up arms, out of a confidence they had in the strength of their walls, and because they saw me engaged in other affairs also. So they sent to Cestius Gallus, who was president of Syria, and desired that he would either come quickly to them, and take their city under his protection, or send them a garrison. Accordingly, Gallus promised them to come, but did not send word when he would come: and when I had learned so much, I took the soldiers that were with me, and made an assault upon the people of Sepphoris, and took the city by force. The Galileans took this opportunity, as thinking they had now a proper time for showing their hatred to them, since they bore ill-will to that city also. They then exerted themselves, as if they would destroy them all utterly, with those that sojourned there also. So they ran upon them, and set their houses on fire, as finding them without inhabitants; for the men, out of fear, ran together to the citadel. So the Galileans carried off every thing, and omitted no kind of desolation which they could bring upon their countrymen. When I saw this, I was exceedingly troubled at it, and commanded them to leave off, and put them in mind that it was not agreeable to piety to do such things to their countrymen: but since they neither would hearken to what I exhorted, nor to what I commanded them to do, (for the hatred they bore to the people there was too hard for my exhortations to them,) I bade those my friends, who were most faithful to me, and were about me, to give on reports, as if the Romans were falling upon the other part of the city with a great army; and this I did, that, by such a report being spread abroad, I might restrain the violence of the Galileans, and preserve the city of Sepphoris. And at length this stratagem had its effect; for, upon hearing this report, they were in fear for themselves, and so they left off plundering and ran away; and this more especially, because they saw me, their general, do the same also; for, that I might cause this report to be believed, I pretended to be in fear as well as they. Thus were the inhabitants of Sepphoris unexpectedly preserved by this contrivance of mine.

Nay, indeed, Tiberias had like to have been plundered by the Galileans also upon the following occasion: - The chief men of the senate wrote to the king, and desired that he would come to them, and take possession of their city. The king promised to come, and wrote a letter in answer to theirs, and gave it to one of his bed-chamber, whose name was Crispus, and who was by birth a Jew, to carry it to Tiberias. When the Galileans knew that this man carried such a letter, they caught him, and brought him to me; but as soon as the whole multitude heard of it, they were enraged, and betook themselves to their arms. So a great many of them together from all quarters the next day, and came to the city Asochis, where I then lodged, and made heavy clamors, and called the city of Tiberias a traitor to them, and a friend to the king; and desired leave of me to go down and utterly destroy it; for they bore the like ill-will to the people of Tiberias, as they did to those of Sepphoris.

When I heard this, I was in doubt what to do, and hesitated by what means I might deliver Tiberias from the rage of the Galileans; for I could not deny that those of Tiberias had written to the king, and invited him to come to them; for his letters to them, in answer thereto, would fully prove the truth of that. So I sat a long time musing with myself, and then said to them, "I know well enough that the people of Tiberias have offended; nor shall I forbid you to plunder the city. However, such things ought to be done with discretion; for they of Tiberias have not been the only betrayers of our liberty, but many of the most eminent patriots of the Galileans, as they pretended to be, have done the same. Tarry therefore till I shall thoroughly find out those authors of our danger, and then you shall have them all at once under your power, with all such as you shall yourselves bring in also." Upon my saying this, I pacifie the multitude, and they left off their anger, and went their ways; and I gave orders that he who brought the king's letters should be put into bonds; but in a few days I pretended that I was obliged, by a necessary affair of my own, to out of the kingdom. I then called Crispus privately, and ordered him to make the soldier that kept him drunk, and to run away to the king. So when Tiberias was in danger of being utterly destroyed a second time, it escaped the danger by my skillful management, and the care that I had for its preservation.

About this time it was that Justus, the son of Pistus, without my knowledge, ran away to the king; the occasion of which I will here relate. Upon the beginning of the war between the Jews and Romans, the people of Tiberias resolved to submit to the king, and not to revolt from the Romans; while Justus tried to persuade them to betake themselves to their arms, as being himself desirous of innovations, and having hopes of obtaining the government of Galilee, as well as of his own country [Tiberias] also. Yet did he not obtain what he hoped for, because the Galileans bore ill-will to those of Tiberias, and this on account of their anger at what miseries they had suffered from them before the war; thence it was that they would not endure that Justus should be their governor. I myself also, who had been intrusted by the community of Jerusalem with the government of Galilee, did frequently come to that degree of rage at Justus, that I had almost resolved to kill him, as not able to bear his mischievous disposition. He was therefore much afraid of me, lest at length my passion should come to extremity; so he went to the king, as supposing that he would dwell better and more safely with him.

Now, when the people of Sepphoris had, in so surprising a manner, escaped their first danger, they sent to Cestius Gallus, and desired him to come to them immediately, and take possession of their city, or else to send forces sufficient to repress all their enemies' incursions upon them; and at the last they did prevail with Gallus to send them a considerable army, both of horse and foot, which came in the night time, and which they admitted into the city. But when the country round about it was harassed by the Roman army, I took those soldiers that were about me, and came to Garisme, where I cast up a bank, a good way off the city Sepphoris; and when I was at twenty furlongs distance, I came upon it by night, and made an assault upon its walls with my forces; and when I had ordered a considerable number of my soldiers to scale them with ladders, I became master of the greatest part of the city. But soon after, our unacquaintedness with the places forced us to retire, after we had killed twelve of the Roman footmen, and two horsemen, and a few of the people of Sepphoris, with the loss of only a single man of our own. And when it afterwards came to a battle in the plain against the horsemen, and we had undergone the dangers of it courageously for a long time, we were beaten; for upon the Romans encompassing me about, my soldiers were afraid, and fell back. There fell in that battle one of those that had been intrusted to guard my body; his name was Justus, who at this time had the same post with the king. At the same time also there came forces, both horsemen and footmen, from the king, and Sylla their commander, who was the captain of his guard: this Sylla pitched his camp at five furlongs' distance from Julias, and set a guard upon the roads, both that which led to Cana, and that which led to the fortress Gamala, that he might hinder their inhabitants from getting provisions out of Galilee. [Vita 67 - 71]

Look how much longer and more detailed this account is than the other two accounts we cited earlier. I am certain that Hegesippus and Jewish War represent careful abridgments which go back to the grandfather of both texts - undoubtedly written by 'second century Josephus' in order to preserve the reputation of first century Josephus. It was part of carefully orchestrated plan to gloss over Joseph bar Gorion's disloyalty to the Roman state.

It should be noted that Hegesippus's account is VERY DIFFERENT to what appears in Jewish War. Jewish War completely ignores Justus's accusations of war crimes in Sepphoris. There isn't even so much of a mention of Josephus's atrocities in Jewish War. Rather there is only the mention of bad deeds done by the people of Sepphoris and the Roman armies. Hegesippus is much closer to the original material emanating from Vita when he summarizes the section as "[w]hence Josephus eagerly desiring to avenge the injury of harshness received hastened to make an attack against the city Sepphorin having associated to himself a number of powerful people, in order that he should call them back into the alliance of Judaea or if he were able ovethrow them resisting by their final destruction ... so an assault having been attempted without any effect he sounded the trumpet call and aroused war against the entire region. He laid waste everything by day and night burning buildings, plundering inheritances, killing whomever was fit for fighting that he had seized, throwing the weak into slavery. All Galilaea was filled with burning blood robbery, by the appearance of no exempt misery and of the deformity of all things, when if anything remained from fire and murder, it was held for captivity." Once again Hegesippus is closer to the grandfather text; Jewish War only happens to be more favorable to Josephus so we assume that this reflects Josephus's attempting to free himself from charges related to his actions as a military commander. The reality is that he was getting 'help' from fourth century editors trying to prepare him (posthumously) for full integration with Roman society.

aa5874

You are simply producing convolution after convolution.

It was pseudo-Hegesippus that was FULLY intergrated with 4th century Roman.

Roman society was Christianized in the 4TH century and pseudo-Hegesippus was also fully christianized at around the same time.

One can read about the raising of the dead by Peter in the resurrection competition between Peter and Simon Magus in pseudo-Hegesippus 3.

Pseudo-Hegesippus appears to be simply and fundamentally a work of "christianized" fiction.

Pseudo-Hegesippus" 3 The fables of Christianized pseudo-Hegesippus are NOT at all found in the writings of Josephus.