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.
victorious students who proved to be φιλόπονοι, i.e. they had distinguished themselves<br />
precisely in the manner that Justus strove to appear to follow, according to <strong>Josephus</strong>. That<br />
<strong>Josephus</strong> was truly thinking here of the school competitions is apparent from the fact that he<br />
referred to the γύμνασμα ἐν σχολῇ μειρακίων (C. Ap. 1.53) in the same context (cf. p. 20). <strong>The</strong><br />
concept spread from the academic environment to literature, and Nicolaus (F.H.G. 3.350 f.),<br />
when he had brought his work to completion, referred with pride to his φιλοπονία, which<br />
enabled him to accomplish an achievement that would have daunted even a Hercules. Now, if<br />
Justus truly proves to be φιλόπονος in his works – as he had aspired – then his historical work<br />
is accordingly commended to his readership in order to damage the older presentation of<br />
<strong>Josephus</strong> in the same way that the victors in the school competition for φιλοπονία gained an<br />
advantage over their inferior companions. [11] For this reason, such aspiration for the renown<br />
of φιλοπονία is extremely closely connected to disparagement of the opponent, an<br />
opportunity for which Justus also did not overlook.<br />
<strong>Josephus</strong> addresses him in 357, “You have the impudence to claim that you have<br />
recounted the history better (ἄμεινον) than all others.” Justus’ words are produced verbatim<br />
once again by <strong>Josephus</strong> in 359 (εἰ δὲ θαρρεῖς ἄμεινον ἁπάντων συγγεγραφέναι): apparently<br />
they stem from the preface of Justus who, following the example of Anaximenes and<br />
<strong>The</strong>opompus (frg. 25 Grenfell-Hunt), wished to justify right away why he had added a new<br />
presentation to those already in existence. <strong>Josephus</strong> believes that he can repudiate the claim<br />
raised by Justus by demonstrating how inadequate the factual credibility of his writing must<br />
be; thus he reinterprets the ἄμεινον of Justus by the term ἀκρίβεια (e.g. 358; 360 etc.) or<br />
ἀλήθεια (367). Surely this was not what Justus had in mind, for we learn from section 40 that<br />
he had intended to exert his effect by means of his expert rhetorical education. <strong>Josephus</strong><br />
himself must admit to Justus’ mastery of rhetoric (καὶ γὰρ οὐδ’ ἄπειρος ἦν παιδείας τῆς παρ’<br />
Ἕλλησιν), but he accuses Justus of feeling entitled to flout the truth by virtue of this formal<br />
education (ὡς τῷ λόγῳ τούτῳ περιεσόμενος τῆς ἀληθείας). Thus Justus had reproached – we<br />
may again assume in his preface – previously published literature for its stylistic inadequacy;<br />
only he among the authors in question had acquired the necessary Greek culture that enabled<br />
one to write to the full satisfaction of educated readers.<br />
That the key phrase Ἑλληνικὴ παιδεία did in fact appear in Justus’ preface can be<br />
proven in another way: <strong>Josephus</strong> addresses Justus in 359, “If you insolently claim to have<br />
14