The Jewish Historian Flavius Josephus: A Biographical Investigation

disposal for these fees paid by the Galileans. In so doing Josephus was clever enough to oblige
the robbers at the same time to refrain from any attack on the Romans (Life 78). Thus the one
substantial concern of the government in Jerusalem was eliminated and also the second fear
was silenced, at least for the time being: granted, the robbers were not disarmed but Josephus
still could report to the government that he kept them firmly in hand. It was therefore more [a
matter of] posing the question of what trust could the government place in their envoy; if he
was playing an honest game then there was no more threat of danger from the robbers for the
time being; but Josephus did not have in mind that he wished to become a puppet in the hands
of the government; he was tantalized by the [249] craving for power and he knew that
Jerusalem could afford him no resistance (cf. page 109 ff.).
Fear of the robbers secured him dominance in Galilee; as soon as he did not pay over
the fees, the bands would invade Galilee, and it was known what this signified. So the Galileans
then followed Josephus’ leadership apparently willingly, happy to be released from their
misery (page 111 ff.) and Josephus meets with opposition only from a few characters who feel
threatened in their own status by Josephus. In the first instance it is John of Gischala who calls
for battle against the tyrant, but the inhabitants of the localities where he spreads his agitation
against Josephus follow him only reluctantly; and the ranks close together behind Josephus
time and again. Admittedly the Tiberians reject him, but the inhabitants of Tarichea appreciate
him all the more and their example is imitated in Galilee. So nothing remained for the
opposition other than to appeal to Jerusalem; in fact, the government in Jerusalem was
compelled to step in as soon as it had become clear to them that Josephus shamefully deceived
the trust that they had placed in him: he was to have disarmed the robbers but he actually
availed himself of their power in order to establish a tyranny for himself in Galilee. To be sure
he had taken care as a precaution not to allow himself to be controlled by the robbers – his
behaviour towards the Romans was perfectly correct –, but the opposition in Galilee saw to it
that those in Jerusalem received notice of his ambitions: Josephus was dismissed.
But he was already too firmly entrenched in his power for the dismissal to be
enforceable. Josephus himself claims that the Galileans had stood behind him so manifestly
that the legation, which was to dismiss him, could not enforce this mandate. Of course, at the
same time the Galileans referred exclusively to their concern that the robbers would invade
their land after Josephus’ departure. Therefore it really was this relationship of Josephus to the
218