The Jewish Historian Flavius Josephus: A Biographical Investigation

as the Antiquities. Justus' work, as we know (cf. chapter 2), was published as a refutation of the
account of the Jewish-Roman War that Josephus had given in his War; Josephus’ War was not
completed before the year 75 (v. Gutschmid, Kl. Schriften IV, 344), so Justus could have
composed his refutation at the earliest just at that time. Between completion and publication,
however, Justus had left his work lying in his desk for 20 years (Josephus Life 360); so it could
have been published at the very earliest in the year 95. Therefore Josephus’ self-portrayal,
which responds to the work released by Justus, also could not have been completed until after
the year 95. The bond connecting the Antiquities and the Life is also disrupted by this, and the
problem would persist, even if Agrippa had died before the year 100, which, however, now
appears as firmly established. So then nothing truly remains but to acknowledge that the Life
must have been written after the year 100, while the Antiquities, which forms a unit together
with the Life, was already completed by 93/94. How is this discrepancy to be resolved?
The question posed here can be answered only by considering another connection: long
[4] before my attention was drawn to the aforementioned chronological difficulties, I had
already ascertained that the conclusion of the Antiquities, i.e. precisely that portion containing
the crucial passage 20.266, was problematic. It is quite understandable that Josephus, standing
here at the end of a formidable task, would look back upon his accomplishment with
satisfaction; it is however impossible that he, proceeding from a consistent mindset ‘line of
thought’ – closer to the german??, should have designated the actual final endpoint of his
work twice in immediate succession with almost the identical words (παύσεται δ’ ἐνταῦθά μοι
τὰ τῆς ἀρχαιολογίας 259; ἐπὶ τούτοις δὲ καταπαύσω τὴν ἀρχαιολογιάν 267). So where then
should the conclusion of his work actually be located? This is, however, not the only
duplication. The reference in 258 to the “Jewish War”, now entering into consideration as a
sequel, likewise discloses an exact equivalent in the words μεθ’ ἣν καὶ τὸν πόλεμον ἠρξάμην
γράφειν (259). Who can in all seriousness believe Josephus capable of referring to the final
conclusion of his work twice in succession and of commending twice in succession the sequel
to the Antiquities provided elsewhere. It is unthinkable that 259 ff. be positioned either next to
258 or next to 267/8, i.e. 259 ff. is – let us state for the time being –- an added segment.
According to this finding, the two passages 258 and 267/8 fit together perfectly and
designate the definitive conclusion of the work; because the information about the number of
impossible, and he totally beats around the bush about the difficulty of Ant. 17.28 (cf. page 45).
8