The Jewish Historian Flavius Josephus: A Biographical Investigation

esult. Diodorus (frg. 40.2) reports to us about the same events as those that are provided in
the Antiquities as a supplement to the War: “While Pompey is staying in Damascus, King
Aristobulus and his brother Hyrcanus, who were fighting about the regnancy, appear before
him. In addition, more than 200 of the most prominent [Jews] came to Pompey and explained
that their forefathers, who had stood at the head of the temple, had sent a legation to the
Senate from whom they had been granted the leadership of the free and autonomous Jews, so
that no king ruled, rather the high priest guided the people. These [men], however, –
Aristobulus and Hyrcanus – had abolished the laws of the fathers and had subjugated the
citizens by force and had thus usurped the kingship in an unjust way. Pompey postponed his
ruling on the disputes until later, reprimanded Hyrcanus and his people regarding the
violation against the Jews and the offence against the Romans and explained that they would
in principle [149] merit a more drastic and bitter change of circumstances, yet he pardoned
them after all.”
From this fragment it follows, first of all, that an offence against the Romans, 54 for
which Hyrcanus was being held responsible, had been mentioned in the preceding [passage].
Now, we read in Josephus 43 that in his defence Hyrcanus maligns Aristobulus, [claiming] that
it was he who conducted the raids into the neighbouring territory and the acts of piracy at sea,
and therefore it emerges that this same accusation had been raised against Hyrcanus in
Josephus’ source as [was raised] in Diodorus; for the acts of piracy were of course a violation
against the Romans. In addition, however, the accusations of the 200 most prominent Jews in
Diodorus coincide perfectly with those in Antiquities 41, so that the uniformity extends as far as
the structure of the two reports: first they stress that they do not want to be dominated by
kings, since from ancient times among them the high priest has ruled over a free people, and
then they add to this that Aristobulus and Hyrcanus attempted to enslave the people by
instituting the kingship (καταδεδουλῶσθαι Diodorus = δοῦλον γένοιτο Ant. 41). In view of the
fact that the Jews had for a long time – since 104 – already been under a kingship, the
agreement of the two reports in this technically incorrect accusation against the two brothers
is certainly crucial, and the only remaining conclusion is that the additions in Antiquities 41
and 43 originate from the same source as Diodorus 40.2. Now, since the [passage from] Strabo
54 I would prefer not to work with the παρανομία τῶν ᾿Ἰουδαίων since it is difficult to decide
whether this is a subjective genitive or an objective genitive.
131