The Jewish Historian Flavius Josephus: A Biographical Investigation

accumulation into one passage of two stories that are not in principle related to each other
ultimately originates from the interests of Herod, who recounts to the Jews that Antigonus has
set the halls of the temple on fire, while he himself, in spite of the war, granted everything to
the Jews for the performance of the cult ritual.
[214] As a matter of fact, we have already been able to detect the traces of Herod’s memoirs
in a great number of passages 77 with great probability, and it is understandable that these
proofs support each other mutually. It is of course not said by this, however, that Josephus
himself has looked at this work; an indirect use would also explain the facts in the same way;
having said that, it has become clear to us that the reinterpretation of the narratives available
to Josephus corresponds perfectly to the bias of the Antiquities and can therefore derive from
Josephus [himself].
While Josephus took the conclusion of the battle for Jerusalem verbatim from the War so
that the Antiquities acquires the value of the oldest manuscript, he attached an observation of
his own accord at the end (489 - 491), in which we encounter his true sentiment. Here the
downfall of the Hasmoneans is illuminated from the most diverse aspects, and Josephus stands
entirely on the side of this “noble house, distinguished because of its lineage as well as its high
priesthood and its meritorious deeds [Verdienste] on behalf of the people”. In contrast to this,
the Herodians are from lowly circles, they are commoners and as such they had to obey the
king. It is the same view, which disposed Josephus to [effect] the change [discussed] in section
8, which had him make the pessimistic observation in sections 77/78 (cf. page 162 ff.), and
which ultimately also induced him to turn the self-sufficient Antipater of the War into one of
Hyrcanus’ tools who only executed the orders of this master! (cf. page 166 ff., 187). Therefore,
as much as Josephus is [215] well-disposed to the Hasmoneans in comparison to the
77
In this series we can now also include the report [mentioned] on page 138, which was
separated from [those discussed in] section 10, but which concerned the past of the Herodians.
The tradition provided there, which does not originate from Nicolaus, is essentially welldisposed
towards the Herodians: Alexander’s appointment of Antipater I as governor of all
Idumea proves this. A disapproving colouring, however, enters the context in that the main
value of the obviously commendable service, which is later attributed to Antipater, namely
winning the Arabians, Gazaites, and Ascalonites over to King Alexander’s cause, is eliminated
by ascribing this success to alleged bribery of these tribes. So here as well the inherently
favourable picture has become clouded by additions. Ultimately, there also seems to be no
doubt to me in principle, that we may expect such particulars in the memoirs of the king.
Their factual reliability is not to be dismissed lightly.
188