The Jewish Historian Flavius Josephus: A Biographical Investigation

Antiquities 20.267 - 268 from beginning to end is nothing but an overview, intended for the
publisher, of the completed work and of the books [32] planned for the future, which is a
totally extraordinary passage in our literature!
Josephus never wrote the works announced here even though he must have lived at
least another ten years after the year 93/94, as we now already definitely know. The book
“About the Nature of God and about the Rational Sense of the Mosaic Laws,” which is the title
of one of these as reproduced fittingly by Schürer (page 91), would have been too specialized
even for the grammarian Epaphroditus, who, in principle, collected obscure literature as well
(Suidas), that he could hope to attract a readership for it. Instead of this we see that in the
following years Josephus prepared the writing against Apion at Epaphroditus’ instigation: I
would like to presume here that the patron and publisher, while on the one hand rejecting the
writing about God’s nature etc., on the other hand encouraged at the same time the treatment
of this theme which indeed always excited special interest. And with this we might now also
find a different and better explanation for the words already discussed above on page 25, διὰ
σὲ from the concluding statement of the writing against Apion (2.296). We may no longer
recognize in these [words] a mere politeness formula but rather, when Josephus wrote the
book for Epaphroditus and for others only “for his sake,” then he is thinking of the other
readership really only on account of Epaphroditus. But if the latter appears in some way
interested that other people should read the book, then I can imagine him only as the
intermediator between author and public, or as we would say, the publisher.
Josephus did not write the second text announced in Antiquities 20.267 either; for
Schürer (page 87) was perfectly correct that a treatment of Jewish history from the outbreak of
the war until the present κατὰ παραδρομὴν῎8 was promised there, and that this book [33] in no
way coincided with Josephus’ Life that we have received as an expansion to the Antiquities. But
why did Josephus not write this historical book, which would have been just as interesting as
the Antiquities to Epaphroditus and his clientele? The animosity against Justus of Tiberias gives
18 The transmitted text reads κατὰ περιδρομὴν, a word that I cannot verify for the meaning
required here. Thus I am changing it with a slight emendation to κατὰ παραδρομὴν. Cf.
Plutarch περὶ παίδων ἀγωγῆς page 7C: ἀλλὰ ταῦτα μὲν ἐκ παραδρομῆς μαθεῖν... τὴν δὲ
φιλοσοφίαν πρεσβεύειν; Polybius 21.34.2 οὐκ ἄξιος ἐστιν ἐκ παραδρομῆς, ἀλλὰ μετ’ ἐπιστάσεως
τυχεῖν τῆς ἁρμοζούσης μνήμης. Thus Josephus now announces a projected shorter treatment
compared to the rather extensive presentation that he had already given of the War.
32