The Jewish Historian Flavius Josephus: A Biographical Investigation
The Jewish Historian Flavius Josephus: A Biographical Investigation
The Jewish Historian Flavius Josephus: A Biographical Investigation
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
demand, which he considered to be beneath his dignity, he departed from Diospolis. Pompey is<br />
angered by this and decides upon military action against Aristobulus. It is impossible that this<br />
report be taken over by the Antiquities. First of all, the real premises are already missing, since<br />
according to Antiquities 30 Hyrcanus also had attempted to bribe Scaurus, so that the<br />
comparison given in the War between δίχα δωρεῶν (131) and πεποιθὼς τῇ Σκαύρου δωροδοκίᾳ<br />
(132) became impossible here. In addition, however, the view became different; indeed the<br />
sympathies of the War lie on the side of Hyrcanus, since he wins Pompey over to himself<br />
“without gifts, only using the justice of his cause” as opposed to Aristobulus’ “violence”, and as<br />
a result he manages to have the Roman commander reinstate the regnancy to the one “who<br />
was in truth entitled because of his [greater] age”. Conversely, this violence of Aristobulus was<br />
to correspond to his regal robes and his reluctance to appear in an unroyal manner. But if<br />
according to the Antiquities justice was on now Aristobulus’ side, as we saw, then this line of<br />
thought had to be abandoned.<br />
After the view that “bribery has triumphed over justice” had been eliminated in the<br />
Antiquities as opposed to War 128, the idea that Hyrcanus had based himself on “justice” could<br />
also not be adopted from War 131 for the Antiquities. And after Hyrcanus had affirmed that he<br />
agreed to live as a commoner and had reinforced this by oath (6 - 7) in the Antiquities as<br />
opposed to War 121, [147] Hyrcanus could no longer allege that he was entitled to the<br />
regnancy because of his [greater] age. All these moments logically had to be abandoned in<br />
their old form, but <strong>Josephus</strong> retains each individual theme, as we have already observed so<br />
often, and just resurrects it in a new form. <strong>The</strong> idea of Scaurus’ being bribed (War 132) becomes<br />
the motive for the report about the complaint that Gabinius and Scaurus had allowed<br />
themselves to be bribed (Ant. 37). Aristobulus’ violence mentioned in War 131 became a motive<br />
in the Antiquities for clarifying the circumstances for Aristobulus’ purposes; for he responds to<br />
the grievances of his opponents [by explaining] that he has deposed Hyrcanus of necessity<br />
because of his lack of energy, since he feared that the rulership would otherwise pass over into<br />
other hands (44) – meaning Antipater. <strong>The</strong>refore Aristobulus is the true proponent of the<br />
<strong>Jewish</strong> high priesthood, and no usurper of the crown. But then Aristobulus’ haughty act<br />
reported in the War naturally must no longer apply either; <strong>Josephus</strong> transfers – quite foolishly<br />
– this theme of Aristobulus over to his attendants (45). Finally, when Pompey decides upon<br />
possibility.<br />
129