The Jewish Historian Flavius Josephus: A Biographical Investigation

segments, however, do indeed form the continuation to the insertions in the Antiquities
discussed in the place cited; they originate from the same source and they follow each other
smoothly. So this here concerns material, which Josephus had gathered after the completion of
the Antiquities, in order to extend the history of the Jews factually and – this is significant –
extend it further [in time]. The stories about the Babylonian Jews, as they now stand without
any purpose in the Autobiography, were intended for a history of the Jews in the War. But
Josephus did not place them there, nor could he, since he indeed entertained a plan for a new
edition of the War, though he had not put it into execution because Justus’ work had appeared
in the meantime (cf. page 33). And within this same group of materials belongs a segment,
which is in direct connection to this (Life 43 - 45): John of Gischala, who [was] once so scorned
because he had created difficulties for Josephus in Galilee, and who [was] attacked so severely
in the War because Josephus, the Romanoid [Römling], viewed him as a warmonger, is showered
with praise here; it is the same attitude that characterizes the insertion War 1.4 - 5; Josephus
stands entirely behind national Judaism in his feelings.
If Josephus now partly absorbed the material destined for the new edition of the War
into the Autobiography, then it follows that he not only abandoned the plan for the new edition
of the War, but also that the Autobiography was in some manner to represent a substitute for
the new edition of the War. And only with this, finally, is the Autobiography now historically
explained: its entire existence is completely motivated by Justus’ attack. The latter had made
the new edition of the War impossible by dint of his [own] brilliantly written presentation of
the war, therefore Josephus relinquished [his plan] and in its stead he used the old
administrative report to write the defence of his lifework, which had become necessary.
Whatever new material he had gathered for the new edition of the War is inserted into this
“Autobiography”. Thus emerges an inorganic [Ed.: i.e., disjointed] work that evidently was
produced in a great hurry in order to respond as quickly as possibly to Justus’ outrageous
attack.
In so doing Josephus attaches particular importance to his [271] priestly descent and
profession, and he then significantly emphasizes this when he defends the Antiquities (C. Ap.
1.54; Ant. 20.282), whereas in fending off the attacks on the War he refers to the testimonies of
the Roman emperors and Agrippa (C. Ap. 1.50 ff.; 56; Life 360 ff.). Now, Justus had just contested
Josephus’ descent from priests (Life 6; cf. Ant. 20.262), and if, conversely, Josephus proves the
236