The Jewish Historian Flavius Josephus: A Biographical Investigation

family’s past and to incorporate this report into the work, which, on the one hand, was at the
most risk, and which, on the other hand, was the best one to be reinforced precisely by this
proof of priestly lineage. For this reason the Antiquities is expanded by the addition of the selfportrayal.
In a transition passage (Ant. 20.259 ff.) he refers once more to his achievement,
stressing that no one else could write such a work as he [did]; [269] for Jewish scholarship has
nothing to do with the smooth talking [Schönrederei] of the Hellenes; every slave has a
command of the Greek language, but what matters with such a work is the knowledge of the
law and of the Holy Scriptures; only few [men] have this [knowledge] by virtue of their
education; therefore it is quite necessary that Josephus tell about his ancestry, his education
and his path of life.
With this reasoning, the transition to the Life is effected; however, this Life does in truth
provide even more than what was projected here: Josephus presents his entire life also in such
a way, which in principle has nothing to do with his suitability as historian of the Jewish
Antiquities. He does this because Justus had intertwined his polemics against the War and the
Antiquities together so [much] that even Josephus could not separate the two. For this reason
he interweaves the idea that Justus had been his political opponent from the outset into the
self-portrayal. So it became obvious why the latter was now persecuting him; it was in revenge
for [the fact] that Josephus as governor of Galilee had put him back in his place. Thus, if at a
ripe old age Josephus was driven by the necessity of his defence against Justus to portray the
course of his career, then he was not lacking in material. Admittedly, the War with its Roman
bias could not be used, now that it was quite important to emphasize Judaism; but during his
governorship in Galilee he had sent an administrative report to his superiors, in which he had
defended his administration. And, differently from the War [written] later on, he had not
denied his Jewish convictions there; it sufficed if the idea that Justus had barred Josephus’ path
absolutely everywhere was now woven into this old writing. This was the reason for which
such foolish insertions had been included, as we described in chapter II.3.
All the same, even this repulsion of Justus cannot yet totally clarify for us the goals that
Josephus pursued in the Life. Among the segments, which the author had added to the old
administrative report, are the narratives examined on page 43 ff., which deal with the
Babylonian Jews. With the first glance one can [already] see that in principle they do not
belong in the Antiquities; for [270] Josephus has nothing to do with these incidents. These
235