Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 688




fT. E. PAGE, C.H., LITT.D.

t E. CAPPS, PH.D., LL.D.

t W. H. D. ROUSE, litt.d.

L. A. POST, l.h.d.

E. H. WARMINGTON, m.a., f.r.hist.soc.










r^; -LONDON, t







First printed 1030

ReprintvU 1957. 1961










Printed in Great firitain



List of Josephus' Works








THE JEWISH antiquities-





Book III

Book IV



(Books I-IV)

ancient Table of Contents






; i>lii^


The Jetvish Archaeology ,'^ or, as it is commonly called,

the Jewish Antiquities, the ynagnum opus of Josephus, presents in many respects a marked contrast to his

earlier and finer work, the Jenish War.

The War,

written in the prime of life, with surprising rapidity

and with all the advantages of imperial patronage,

was designed to deter the author's countrymen from

further revolt by portraying the invincible might of

Rome. The Archaeology was the laboured work of middle life ; compiled under the oppressive reign of

Domitian, the enemy of all literature and of historical

writing in particular, it was often apparently laid

aside in weariness and only carried to completion through the instigation of others, and with large assistance towards the close ; its design was to

magnify the Jewish race in the eyes of the Graeco- Roman world by a record of its ancient and glorious


The author thus severs his connexion with Roman Proem

political propaganda and henceforth figures solely and

as Jewish historian and apologist.

of Roman ties and adoption of a more patriotic theme

But this severance T^g '';Jxx.

" For this brief Introductionlimited by considerations of spaceI have made use of my Lectures (iii-v) on Josephus the Man and the Historian (New York, 1929).


hardly warrant the suggestion" that he was prompted

by self-interested motives, hoping thereby to re-

habilitate himself with his offended countrymen.

The project of writing his nation's history was no new one, having been already conceived when he

In an interesting proem he

wrote the Jenish War.''

tells us something of the genesis, motives, and diffi- culties of the task. He had not Hghtly embarked

upon it, and two questions had given him cause for

serious reflection, concerning the propriety of the

work and the demand for it.

Was such a publication

consonant with piety and authorized by precedent .''

Was there a Greek reading public anxious for the

information ? He found both questions satisfactorily

answered in the traditional story of the origin of the

Alexandrian version of the Law under king Ptolemy

Philadelphus. He, Josephus, w-ould imitate the high priest Eleazar's example in popularizing his

nation's antiquities, confident of finding many lovers

of learning hke-minded with the king ; while he would extend the narrative to the long and glorious

later history.

In this allusion to the legitimacy of

paraphrasing the inspired Scriptures, the author is

doubtless controverting the views of the contemporary

rabbinical schools of Palestine, where the Septuagint

version was now in disrepute and men like R. Johanan

ben Zakkai and R. Akiba were engaged in building

As regards a reading

up a fence about the Law.

pubhc, he might justly count on a curiosity concern-

ing his nation having been awakened in Rome and elsewhere by the recent war, by the sculptures on

the Arch of Titus, and by that religious influence of

" Laqueur, Der ji\d. Historiker Flav. Josephus, p. 260.

" Ant. i. 6.


the race which was now permeating every house-


Besides the Greek Bible, which Josephus names Dionysiusoi

as in part a precursor of his own work, there was ua^sus!^

another unacknowledged model, which would have

found still less favour in Palestinian circles.

In the

year 7 b.c. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, like Josephus

a migrant from the east to the western capital, had produced in Greek his great Roman history, comprised

in twenty books and entitled 'Pw^atKv) 'Ap)(^aLoXoyia

(Roman Afitiquities). Exactly a century later Josephus

produced his magnum opus, also in twenty books and

entitled 'lonSatK?) 'ApxatoXoyia (^Jeuish Aritiquiiies).

There can be no doubt that this second work was

designed as a counterpart to the first.

If, in his

Jenisk War, the author had counselled submission

to the conqueror, he would now show that his race

had a history comparable, nay in antiquity far

Dionysius had devoted

superior, to that of Rome.

the larger part of his Archaeology to the earlier and mythical histq^y of the Roman race : Josephus, on

the basis of the Hebrew Scriptures, which were

" pure of that unseemly mythology current among

others," ** would carry his history right back to the creation. The influence of the older work may also

be traced in a few details. The account of the end of Moses seems to be reminiscent of the record of the

" passing " of the two founders of the Roman race, Aeneas and Romulus.'' From Dionysius, too, prob- ably comes a recurrent formula, relating to incidents

of a miraculous or quasi-mythical character, on which


the reader is left to form his own opinion.'*

« C. Ap. ii. 284.

' ib. iv. 326 note.

'' Ant. i. 13.

"* ib. i, 108 note.



has also clearly


In the final paraijraph of his work ° the author tells

us that it was completed in the thirteenth year of the

reign of Domitian and in the fifty-sixth of his own

been consulted



model of

life, i.e. in a.d. QS-Q^.

mediately after the publication of the Greek edition

of the Jeivinh War, the larger work was some eighteen years in the making. From the concluding para-

graphs the further inference may be drawn that

the author issued a later edition, to w^hich the Auto-

biography was


If it was taken in hand im-






Antiquities contains two perorations, the original

conclusion having (like the original preface to a modern work) been relegated to the end, while to this has been prefixed another peroration, mentioning

the proposal to append the Life.^ The Life alludes "^ to the death of Agrippa II., an event which, according

to Photius, occurred in a.d. 100. We may therefore


of the

Antiquities appeared early in the second century. The work, like the Ltfe and the Contra Apionem

which followed it, is dedicated to a certain Epaphro-

ditus,'' the Maecenas whom Josephus found when

bereft of his earlier royal patrons, Vespasian and

Titus. The name Epaphroditus was not uncommon ;

but of those who bore it and of whom we have any


that this later and enlarged edition

record, two only come under consideration.

Niese *

and others have identified the patron of Josephus

with the freedman and secretary of Nero, who re-

mained with that emperor to the last and assisted

Ant. XX. Jtil.

" Anl. \. 8 f

" ib. XX. 259-266.

' Vita 339.

Vita 430. Ap. i. I. ii. 1, 296. Vol.

V. p.



him to put an end to himselfan act for which he

was afterwards banished and slain by Domitian,


when in terror of designs upon his own life."

philosopher Epictetus was the freedman of this

Epaphi'oditus ; and, when Josephus describes his patron as " conversant with large affairs and varying

turns of fortune " (tv^^'-^ TroAwrpoTrots),^ it is tempt-

ing to see an allusion to the part which he had played

in the death of Nero. But chronology refutes this


93-9-t. First edition of the Antiquities.

C- 95-96. Banishment and death of Epaphroditus.

Yet the dedication to Epaphroditus reappears both in the Life (after 100) and in the C Apionem, which also followed the Antiquities and hardly so soon as the year 9^-95, as Niese supposes. With far more reason may we identify this new patron with Marcus

Mettius Epaphroditus, a grammarianmentioned by

Suidaswho had been trained in Alexandria and

spent the latter part of his life, from the reign of

Nero to that of Nerva, in Rome, where he amassed a

Hbrary of 30,000 books and enjoyed a high reputation

for learning, especially as a writer on Homer and

To him and to his large library

Josephus may well owe some of his learning, in

the Greek poets."

particular that intimate acquaintance with Homeric

problems and Greek mythology displayed in the

Contra Apionem.

The work naturally falls into two nearly equal Sources:

parts, the dividing-line being the close of the exile '

reached at the end of Book X. A consideration of

» Ant. i. 8,

" Dio Casslus, Ixvil. 14.

' Schurer, G.J. V. (ed. 4) i. p. 80 note.

'"'^'^ ^^'


the sources employed for the second half may be

For the first half the

reserved for a later volume.

author is mainly dependent on Scripture and tradi-

tional interpretation of Scripture. As a rule he closely follows the order of the Biblical narrative, but

he has, with apologies to his countrymen," rearranged and given a condensed digest of the Mosaic code,

reserving further details for a later treatise.


the history of the monarchy he has amalgamated

the two accounts in Kings and Chronicles. In general

he is faithful to his promise ^ to omit nothing, even

the less creditable incidents in his nation's race ; the most glaring omission is that of the story of the

golden calf and the breaking of the first tables of

the Law." Here, as elsewhere,'^ he is concerned, as apologist, to give no handle to current slanders about

the Jewish worship of animals. He has employed

at least two forms of Biblical text, one Semitic

whether the original Hebrew or Aramaic, for there

are indications in places that he is dependent on an

early Targumthe other Greek. Throughout the

Octateuch his main authority seems to be the Hebrew

(or Aramaic) text ; the use of the Greek Bible is here

slight, and the translation is for the most part his own.

For the later historical books the position is reversed :

from 1 Samuel to 1 Maccabees the basis of his text is a Greek Bible, and the Semitic text becomes a

subsidiary source.

Notwithstanding his repeated assertion* that he has

added nothing to the Biblical narrative, the historian

has in fact incorporated a miscellaneous mass of

« Ant. iv. 196 flF.

' lb. iii. 99 note.

* lb. i. 17, x. 218.

* iii.

l^ti note.

ib. i. 17, X. 218.


traditional lore, forming a collection of first century

Midrash of considerable value. In the realm of Hagga-

dah or legendary amplification of Scripture, we have, for instance, tales of the birth and infancy of Moses "

and of the Egyptian campaign against Ethiopia under

his leadership,'' which find partial parallels in Rabbini-

cal and Alexandrian writings : other additions of this

nature may be illustrated from the Book of Jubilees

(c. 100 BX.)."^ In the sphere oi Halakahthe practical

interpretation of the laws according to certain tradi-

tional rules, TO. vo/jLifjia as Josephus would call them

the detailed exposition of the Mosaic regulations

in the present volume '^ affords ample scope for

exegesis of this nature.

Where the traditions

differed, the author naturally, as a rule, inclines to

the Pharisaic interpretation. For the full Rabbinical parallels the reader must consult the invaluable commentary of M. Julien Weill in the French trans-

lation of Josephus edited bv the late Dr. Theodore

Reinach and special treatises on the subject ; the principal points are mentioned in the notes to the

present volume. The account of the creation with the encomium Phiio

on Moses prefixed to it * betrays clear dependence

on the De opijicio mundi of Philo ; acquaintance with a few other works of the Alexandrian writer is shown


Besides the Bible, the historian quotes, wherever

possible, external authority in support of it. Berosus

" Ant. ii. 205 ff.

" ii.



" i. 41, 52, 70 f., ii. 224 (with notes).

<* ill. 224 ff., iv.

196 ff.

i. 18-33 (notes).

' De Abrahamo, i. 177, 225, and perhaps De migratione

Abrahami, i. 157 : De losepho, ii. 41 f., 72.


Non-Jewish the Bal)ylonian, Manetho the Ej^yptian. Dius the

authorities. Phoenician, Menander of Ephesus, the Sibylhne

oracles, the Tyrian recoi-ds, and other writers, supply

evidence on the flood, the longevity of the patriarchs,

the tower of Babel, and, for the later Biblical history,

on the correspondence of Solomon and Hiram, on Sennacherib and Nebuchadnezzar. But the author's

repertory is here limited, and the fact that more than once an array of such names ends with that of Nicolas of Damascus " suggests that he perhaps knows of the

other sources mentioned only through Nicolas, whose

Universal History was later to serve as one of his main authorities for the post-Biblical period.

The historian, or his assistant, has not scrupled,

on occasion, to enliven the narrative by details derived

from pagan models. A battle scene is taken over

from Thucydides '' ; another episode owes touches

to Herodotus.*^


Reference has been made elsewhere ** to the aid

ahsis ail s. ^yhicjj i^hg historian received from Greek assistants

((riH'£/jyot). His indebtedness to them in the Jetvish

War is acknowledged "' and apparent in the uni-

formly excellent style of that earlier work. In the

Antiquities there is no similar acknowledgement, and

tlie style is much more uneven ;

but here too the

collaborators have left their own impress. Two of

thesethe principal assistantsbetray themselves

in the later books, where the author, wearying of his magmim opus, seems to have entrusted the com-


Ant. i. 94, 107 f., 158 f. ; c/. vii. 101.

" iv. 92.

'' Vo]. ii. p. XV ;

' iv. UU note.

a fuller statement in Josephtis the Man

and the Historian (New York, 1929), Lecture v.

' Ap. i. 50.



position in the main to other hands. Books xv-xvi

are the work of one of the able assistants already

employed in the War, a cultured writer with a love of the Greek poets and of Sophocles in particular (I

call him the " Sophoclean " assistant) ; xvii-xix show

the marked mannerisms of a hack, a slavish imitator

of Thucydides (I call him the " Thucydidean "). In

these five books (xv-xix) these two assistants have,

it seems, practically taken over the entire task. In

the earlier books (i-xiv) they have lent occasional

aid the Thucydidean rarely, the poet-lover more


(i) The neat style of the " Sophoclean " assistant is trace-

able in many passages in

Books i-iv, e.g. the proem, the

wooing of Rebecca (i. 2t2 ff.) and of Rachel (i. 285 fF.), the

temptation of Joseph by Potiphar's wife (ii. 39 ff.), the exodus

and passage of the Red Sea, the rebellion of Korah, the

story of Balaam, the passing of Moses. Elsewhere he would

appear to have revised and edited the author's work, indica-

tions of his hand appearing at the end of a paragraph. Echoes of Sophocles, not so prominent as in A. xv-xvi,

appear in ii, 2.54 oTrrecr^at ^ovXev/^drLji' (Soph. Ant.


300 KaKoi KaKu/s dwoWvcrdaL (Phil. 1369), iii. 15 rd ^f ttoitI xaxd

(cp. 12 : Ant.

1.327), 99 TrpbvoLav ^^f" 7r«pi Ttcos {Ant. 283),

14.1 and 1(55 Trepoi/it (else only Track. 925), 264 i^iKeTtvuv (O.T.

760), iv. 15 6r]pda6ai c. inf. {Ai. 2), iv. 265 d^iotpos yrjs (cp. Ai.

Euripides (Here. Fur. 323 f.) is clearly the model in

the story of Hagar's expulsion (i. 218). From Homer we

have ^7ri yqpw^ ovouj (i. 222 : cp. //. xxii. 60 etc.), Tridaiif 6\iyai$

(iii. 33 : //. xvi. 825), ^x^'o-^" (iii- 203 : Od. xii. 406), wart

waloai tiKppdvai ko.1 y\n'a.iKai (iv,

narrative of the seduction of the Hebrew youth



1326 f.).

117 :

after //. v. 688).


Midianite women (iv. 131 ff.) is modelled on the story of the

Scythians and Amazons in Herodotus (iv. Ill If.).


Herodotus (iii. 98) comes also the phrase Trpo? fi\^oi' dviV^o^'Ta

(iv. 305).

Beside this dependence on classical authors, another

marked feature of this assistant, which he shares with his


favourite poet ' and perhaps took over from him. is his fond-

ness for trichotomy. Three reasons, three parties, the triple group in various formssuch modes of expression are a sure

index of the work of this assistant and sharply distinguish

him from an inferior awfpyoi who appears later on (A.

vi) and is characterized by his love of hendiadys and the double group. Three reasons are given for the longevity of

the patriarchs {A.

Egypt in full (ii. 29.1), for the route of the exodus (ii.'322 f.),

i. 106), for narrating the plagues of

for the three annual feasts of the Het)rews (iv. 203).


parties hold contrary opinions concerning the lawgiver (iii.

96 f., iv. 36 f. tCov jjLfv

70)1/ 5^ (ppovifxwv

6 oi trdt 6jui,\os . , .).

Three alternative methods of delivering the Israelites at the Red Sea are open to the Deity (ii. 337). Instances of similar

grouping are to be found in ii. 189,275(0u)fT7, 6\pis,vpoar]yopia),

283, 326, iii. 22, 45 bis {ottXuji/ xpwi''''^'' Tpo<pfi<> : 6X1701' &vow\ov

aaBfvis), 80 {^avetj.oi


Kepawoi), 319 (oi fjLfv

oi 5i


TToWol 5(



.), iv. 26 (ovk

iweLby) .






oi'dt Sid (pi\a5e\(piai'), 40 (S^cnrora tujv eV oiipavou

re Kal yrjs Kai 6a\a.c!<jr}%^ cf. 45), 48 (ai,'roi)5 a/xa rrj ynxa nal tois

VTrdpxovffiv), etc.

(ii) The " Thucydidean " assistant, who towards the close of the Antiquities (xvii-xix) was to lend liberal aid, in the

earlier books plays but a small part.

His plagiarism from

Thucydides and a few mannerisms betray his hand in some

five passages.

Here he has been employed as a sort of " war-

correspondent " for battle scenes and military matters.

it is who describes the battles with the Amalekites (iii. 53 ff.)


and the Amorites (iv. 87 ff.) :

twice his hand appears at a

point where there is a transition from civil to military regula-

and he has also supplied the

picture of the burning of the company of Korah (iv. 54 ff.).

tions (iii.

287 ff.,


293 ff.) ;

After elimination of the work of these two assistants,

whose large aid in the later books enables us in some measure to identify their style elsewhere, it is diffi-

cult to say how much of the composition is left to the author himself. But there are cruder passages in

" See the


paper on

Sophocles and the Per/eel

Number (Proceedings of the British Academy, vol. xvi).


A. i-xiv, XX and the Life, which it is not unreason-

and it may even be possible to

detect an occasional trace of the influence of his

native Aramaic speech, as in the colloquial use of

ap\i(rOai with infinitive, familiar in the New Testa-


able to refer to him ;

As in

previous volumes, the


text here Greek text

printed is based on that of Niese, but is of an eclectic ^^^ "^^^ nature, the readings quoted in his apparatus criiicus

being occasionally adopted. The original text is to be looked for in no single group of mss. As a rule the

group followed by NieseRO(M)is superior ^ ; at the other extreme stands a pair of mss—SPwhich,

when unsupported, are seldom trustworthy ; the

remaining authorities are of a mixed character, the

old Latin version being specially important.

The length of the Jeriish Antiquities led at an early

date to its bisection in the mss,'^ and our authorities

for the text of the first half of the work differ from those in the second half. The ancient authorities for A. i-x used by Niese and quoted in the present

volume are as follows :




Codex Regius Parisinus, cent. xiv.

Codex Oxoniensis (Bodleianus), miscell. graec.

186, cent. xv.

Codex Marcianus (Venetus) Gr. 381, cent. xiii.

" See an article in the Journal of Theological Studies, vol.

XXX (1929) p, 361, on " An unrecorded ' Aramaism ' in Josephus."

* e.p. in i. 89, 148, where (R)0 alone have preserved the

correct figure, while the other authorities conform to the

Hebrew text of Genesis. ' There are indications of a division at one time into /our parts (Niese, vol. i. p. viii).







Codex V'indobonensis II. A 19, bistoricus

Graecus 2, cent. xi.

Codex Parisinus Gr. lilQ, cent. xi.

Codex Laurentianus, plut. Ixix. 20, cent. xiv.

Latin version made by order of Cassiodorus.

cent. V or vi.

Excerpts made by order of Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus, cent. x.

E Epitome, used by Zonaras, and conjectured

by Niese to have been made in cent, x


or xi.

The Chronicon of J. Zonaras, cent. xii.

ed. pr. The edltio princeps of the Greek text (Basel,

1544') seems

to be derived in part


some unknown MS and is occasionally an important authority.

If the author of the Jovish Aniiquilies received much

assistance from others in the composition of his work,

so also has his translator.

In particular he must

here gratefully acknowledge his constant indebted-

ness, both in the translation and more especiallv in

the notes, to the invaluable work of Monsieur Julien Weill, the translator of Books i-x of the Anfiquities in the CEuvres completes de Flavins Josephe edited by

the late Dr. Theodore Reinach (Paris, IPOO etc.) ;

M. Weill's collection of Rabbinical parallels to the

historian's exposition of the Mosaic code is an in-

dispensable companion to all students of this portion of Josephus. For the Greek text, besides the great

work of Benedict Niese (Berhn, 1887), that of Naber

(Leipzig, Teubner, 1888) has been consulted through-


Among previous tx-anslations, after that of M.

Weill the most helpful has been the Latin version


of John Hudson in the edition of Havercamp (Am-

sterdam, 1726) ; the translation of WilHam Whiston,

revised by the Rev. A. R. Shilleto (London, 1889),

On two special points

has furnished occasional aid.

the translator has to express his thanks to experts for assistance received : to Professor A. E. Housman and to Mrs. Maunder on an astronomical point {A.

iii. 182) ; while Mr. F. Howarth, Lecturer in Botany

in the Imperial College of Science and Technology, has kindly supplied a note, with illustration, on the

description of the plant henbane (iii. 172). Thanks

are also due to the press reader for his vigilance and

acute suggestions.


A. = (Ant.) = Artdquitaies Judaicae.

Ap. = Contra Apionem.

B. (B.J.) = Bellum Judakum.

codd. = codices (all mss quoted by Niese).

conj. = conjectural emendation.

ed. pr. = editio princeps of Greek text (Basel, 1544).

ins. = inserted by.

om. =omit.

rt\\.= codices reliqui (the rest

of the

mss quoted

by Niese).

Conjectural insertions in the Greek text are in- dicated by angular brackets, < > ; doubtful ms readings by square brackets, [ ]. The smaller sections introduced by Niese are shown

in the left margin of the Greek text.


throughout are to these sections.

The chapter-

division of earlier editions is indicated on both pages