The Jewish Historian Flavius Josephus: A Biographical Investigation

Admittedly, John also acquired the means to recruit them through shady dealings, 39 but not in
such an ingenious manner as Josephus: John took advantage of the price differential for ritual
oil that existed between his hometown of Gischala and beleaguered Caesarea by importing it
into Caesarea and earning 1000% in selling it (74 - 75). Furthermore, he had at his disposal the
large repositories of grain in Upper Galilee, which were of highly singular importance for the
maintenance of his troops (70 - 72). In addition to all this, John was firmly rooted in his
hometown and he [had] achieved considerable success in defending it (43 - 45), 40 so in just this
way he had such a head start over Josephus that later on, when Josephus had really asserted
himself in general, he himself was able to continue functioning in Gischala, unchallenged.
So in Josephus and John we recognize two men who both aspired to a leading position
for themselves in Galilee and precisely for that reason were to enter into opposition. Indeed,
their relationship was apparently good initially; even if Josephus portrayed it in such a way
that he agreed to the relegation of the grain and the transfer of the oil to Caesarea only under
constraint (73; 76), yet we would still easily have the right to consider the report of the alleged
constraint to be a result of Josephus’ subsequent, extremely spiteful disposition against John,
and, in truth, to infer a good relationship from the [113] agreement between the two men
about these issues, which [relationship] stands at the least in direct contrast to the conflict
they later directed against each other. Only thus is it also explained why John approached
Josephus for use of the baths in Tiberias and why the latter had entertained no misgivings
whatsoever in welcoming John in the most hospitable manner (85, 86). Later on Josephus does
get wind of duplicity in John here as well, but initially the facts that are reported in 73, 76 and
85 speak an entirely different and unequivocal language. And this is only natural as well; for
Josephus had first come into in the land as a delegate of the Council in Jerusalem in order to
persuade the robbers to lay down their weapons. Since John, for his part, was likewise an
opponent of these robbers (43 - 45), there was therefore no reason for him to cause difficulties
for the official delegate of Jerusalem, nor for the latter to express any misgivings or to
39
It is a pity that the author of the second book of Pseudo-Aristotle’s Economics did not live
later. The recruitment tactics of Josephus and John would have provided him with quite
wonderful material.
40 I am using this passage for our context [even though] it stems from a later period (after 100).
When composing the administrative report, Josephus did indeed suppress everything that was
in any way favourable to John.
100