The Jewish Historian Flavius Josephus: A Biographical Investigation

acquire citizenship again, so to speak.
Shortly before, Cicero had sent an “epistulam non mediocrem ad instar voluminis scriptam"
to Pompey, in which he had fully reported “de rebus suis in consulatu gestis" (Sull. 67; schol.
Bob. page 270, Or.). [151] As we learn from the scholion mentioned above, Pompey had taken
this epistle of Cicero amiss and had written a letter to Cicero in which the latter found only an
exiguam significationem tuae erga me voluntatis. Cicero had expected a gratulatio, but was dealt a
slap in the face (Fam. 5.7); he is most deeply hurt. One must keep this situation in mind if one
wishes to understand the passage Arch. 24 in which Cicero speaks about Pompey and
Theophanes. Strabo had told us in all seriousness that Pompey has welcomed Theophanes into
his circle of friends because of his political activity, yet Cicero claims that he has presented
him with citizenship as “scriptor rerum suarum". Not only was Cicero given credence to the
word, but from his statement the conclusion was even drawn that Theophanes’ work had been
completed at that time, i.e. in the year 62 (W. Fabricius, Theophanes von Mytilene als Quelle des
Strabon, Straßburg, 1888, page 5). This is factually impossible because up to that point there
was no time available for recording, but above all because the work did require a conclusion.
But where could it lie other than with Pompey’s return (cf. page 152)? – In truth, Strabo’s view
is the correct one: Pompey had rewarded the politician Theophanes. But Cicero had just
received the latest news from the Orient: Pompey had also chosen Theophanes as “scriptor
rerum suarum" for himself. His vanity wounded by Pompey, [Cicero] could not control his
caustic tongue now either: “Our great man”, so he proclaims, “has honoured the herald of his
deeds in order to secure eternal memory for himself”. Thus on the one hand Archias’ right was
reinforced in that it appears to be the custom of commanders, as it were, to endow the heralds
of their deeds with citizenship, which is why Cicero also singles out precisely this distinction,
on the other hand, however, as a result of exactly this he excites suspicion against this writing
of Pompey’s favourite, which was to be expected soon. It probably was then published around
the year 60.
So the timing, orientation and factual knowledge correspond perfectly to our
requirements for the source common to Strabo and Diodorus. But there is more. It is a wellknown
fact that Strabo used Theophanes to a very great extent; his reports about Pompey’s
[military] actions campaigns [152] are based on him (cf. W. Fabricius), and Ant. 38 - 40
obviously belongs to these very [military] actions, which furthermore, by their accurate
133