The Jewish Historian Flavius Josephus: A Biographical Investigation

obtusely, even though it is grammatically feasible, the account about Hyrcanus’ fortune, and
therefore does the same as Harmund, except that he changes the jarring οὐ πλείω into a
harmless ὡς and he leaves out the phrase that has become unusable ἐπετύγχανον δε’ καὶ τῶν
ἄλλων οὐχ ὅσοις ἤλπισαν, in a manner that is logical and appropriate to his new view. He has
therefore drawn consequences from the misunderstanding. – Something similar happened
with the women. The phrase [in] War 273 had referred to those women who above all
interested [191] the Parthians, but the corresponding passage Ant. 365 overlooks the μάλιστα
and extracts from the problematic phrase the meaning – finding a successor in Harmund
herein as well – that the women whom Antigonus had intended to give had fled, i.e. all [of
them] and not just those whom the Parthians had desired above all. That Josephus did actually
envisage it thus in the Antiquities becomes compellingly apparent from section 379 where
Herod reports the following to Rome about these events: Antigonus had promised the
Parthians 1000 talents and 500 women who were to belong to the principal families, however,
he himself rescued these [women] from the hands of the enemy with unspeakable efforts
during an escape by night. In truth, this assertion holds only for his next of kin, precisely those
whom the Parthians desired most, but now after the original text, War 273, had been construed
in the other way, this disintegration [Auseinanderklappen] of the text ensued as an inevitable
consequence.
Therefore Josephus constructed the text of the Antiquities anew here due to the fact
that he reinterpreted the original text when he approached his War [again] after years [had
passed]. This reinterpretation is certainly conscious – at least in the topic of the promise of the
women. It clearly shows an intensification in the attitude with respect to Antigonus when he
has promised 500 noblewomen to the Parthian satrap, and one must relate to this [the fact]
that in Ant. 331 it is Antigonus himself who gives the promise (cf. also 365) whereas in War 248
Lysanias had arranged the affair. 66 Josephus’ sentiment towards the man who had promised
Jerusalem and its women as plunder to the hordes of Parthians is expressed more strongly in
66
The dependence of the Antiquities upon the War is revealed in this as well. In [the War]
Lysanias has his position as intermediary and as originator of the whole transaction and we
therefore justifiably hear more details about him; on the other hand in the Antiquities, where
Antigonus himself is made out to be the agent of the transaction, [Lysanias] has lost nothing
but the information about him is dragged along farther (section 330) even though he now has
been forced back into a negligible role.
168