The Jewish Historian Flavius Josephus: A Biographical Investigation

Antiquities it is without rhyme or reason, and while reading this work it remains completely
incomprehensible, too, why Hyrcanus decided upon a violent return to Jerusalem, since he had
really only sought from Aretas protection for his [own] life. From this, however, it follows
compellingly once again that within the old established framework a new bias has been
introduced secondarily, but such that not all contradictions were eliminated: the War is
therefore the source of the Antiquities.
By Hyrcanus’ fleeing to Aretas for fear of assassination, the theme that had been put
forward in the War as the reason for the flight (the older Hyrcanus having been dispossessed of
his kingship by the younger Aristobulus) became redundant: But Josephus does not cast it
aside any more than [he discarded] the theme of building the walls (cf. page 71 f.), rather he
uses it in such a way that he has Antipater make those remarks, which he had made to Aretas
in the War, now to the “most powerful of the Jews”. We do not find out how they reacted to
this or what happened otherwise as a result; this part is left hanging in the air. But here also
we detect the secondary handiwork, which threatens to disrupt a fixed framework! In its
execution it is noteworthy that Josephus again [140] expands the context with an insertion.
Antipater – so it reads in section 12 – attempts to malign Aristobulus by suggesting that he is
seeking Hyrcanus’ life; the latter does not believe these aspersions because this went against
his character. When Antipater saw that he was not being successful, he maligned Aristobulus
to Hyrcanus, suggested that Aristobulus was after his life, and convinced [him]. It can be
clearly seen that the narrative about the maligning is interrupted by the characterization, and
that for the purposes of interpolation [Verzahnung] the report about the maligning was
duplicated. The original thought read: τούτους τε συνεχῶς πρὸς τὸν Ὑρκανὸν ποιούμενος
διετέλει τοὺς λόγους καὶ // διαβάλλων πρὸς αὐτὸν τὸν Ἀριστόβουλον ὡς ἀποκτεῖναι θέλοντα
καὶ μόλις ἐγκείμενος πείθει (12a, 14b). The trait of Hyrcanus that was given in between, that he
“did not lightly accept maligning because of his sense of lawfulness”, was to serve [the purpose
of] excusing Hyrcanus for his character and of thereby shifting the entire blame onto
Antipater in whose hands Hyrcanus was a hapless tool; this is why Josephus time
and again underscores this characterization of Hyrcanus as a shiftless person (cf. 44 and 179) in
the Antiquities, thereby exaggerating an image that is only slightly implied in the War where
their mother, Alexandra, appoints the “more indolent” Hyrcanus as high priest as opposed to
the “hot-blooded” Aristobulus because she fears no persecution from the former (War 1.109).
123