FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS: EYEWITNESS TO ROME'S FIRST-CENTURY CONQUEST OF JUDEA by Mireille Hadas-Lebel. MacMillan, New York,1993 $20.00 270 pp. Maps, illustr. Reference notes, glossary, appendices, index.
The importance of Josephus' writings can hardly be overstated. His The Jewish War is the only surviving first-person testimony of the momentous events surrounding the defeat and dispersion of the Jews of Judea at the dawn of the Christian era. Roman historians are disappointing on the Judean Rebellion. After all, a triumphal arch in the Forum warrants more than the offhand comments we find in the classical authors, who were writing generations after the event. Tacitus was brief on the Jewish uprising and Dio Cassius was patently anti-Semitic in harmony with the temper of his own era. Accordingly, the publication of a new quasi-popular biographical history of this pivotal individual and his epoch is welcome.
Why should readers of this newsletter, presumably wargamers and military history buffs, be interested in a manifestly literary (i.e., "The Classics") or theological subject? One possible reason is that Josephus was, for a fleeting few months, the de facto military commander of all Jewish forces in Galilee. He found himself, essentially against his will, stoicly preparing his countrymen to mount what he believed to be a futile and suicidal resistance against an unstoppable war machine. His own record of these events, the only actual war diary of the Jewish rebellion, is akin to a commissioned Roman official history of the war. The military detail on Roman order of battle and tactics is meticulous and unsurpassed among ancient sources.
Josephus wrote his account to in part console his defeated countrymen against their shame at being so soundly whipped. He did this by describing the omnipotence of the enemy's war machine. Perhaps his most compelling motivation was the defense of his own outwardly cynical acts to his doubting coreligionists, whom, after all, he claims not to have abandoned. His record of the political in-fighting among the various ideological Judean parties caught in the closing Roman vise is unique. For a surprisingly accurate rendering of the discord among the rebel camps, I recommend the British Monty Python film parody, The Life of Brian. Though essentially farcical, the movie contains a faithful rendering of the squabbling among the Peoples' Army, the Priests' factions, and the other modern-sounding splinter groups.
Josephus' life and times are the stuff of epic bards and movie moguls. The war, as seen through Josephus' somewhat tinted lenses, was a remarkable act of defiance and endurance. Just compare the relatively subdued rising in Gaul just a few years earlier. There is even some love interest that modern writers might give a sensual twist, such as Nero's favorite wife Poppea's dalliance with our hero or Agrippa I's daughter Beatrice's affair with the Roman conquering general of Jerusalem, Titus Caesar. But was Josephus Hero or Traitor ? Herein lies the theatrical appeal. After an unparalleled staunch defense of the Galilean Fortress Jotapata, -- at least as our narrator tells it -- Josephus masterminded a fraudulent mutual suicide pact among his lieutenants and himself as they awaited the Roman search parties closing in on their underground bunker. This master mathematician rigged the casting of lots so that he would survive.
He next ingratiated himself with the conquering general, Vespasian, by prophesizing that he, Josephus, would live to serve Emperor Vespasian. The story of his duels with the several Jewish splinter groups who opposed him even while the legions marched against his armies is a text book on the art of deception. Josephus spent some time in Vespasian's headquarters (and R&R center) at Caesarea on the Judean seacoast, where he agreed to serve as a go-between and interpreter at the forthcoming siege of Jerusalem. In his account of this perilous mission, he does not conceal the way in which he was jeered and stoned from the city's walls by his scornful countrymen.
Finally, he is the sole source for the epic fall of Masada. The last major effort to delineate Josephus in fiction is the somber, ponderous three-volume treatment drafted by the German Jewish author Lion Feuchtwanger in the 1930s. This trilogy is rarely read today possibly because it is encumbered by a moral thesis aimed at Feuchtwanger's native Third Reich, which he fled as a political-racial refugee. It is a docu-drama, long on "docu" and short on drama. While it well repays reading, it is hardly suitable for today's rushed reader, nurtured on fiction that reads like movie scripts (which many are).
Surprisingly, the works of Josephus are currently unfamiliar outside of Israel save to historians of the early Christian church, Roman Empire scholars and specialists of Hasmonean era Judaica. This obscurity is borne out by the personal experience of the reviewer. I have been making a special study of Josephus over the past year or so in connection with an historical novel, more accurately a pseudo- or alternate history, on this fascinating theme. My manuscript will emphasize the military campaigns in Judea and Galilee and will incorporate a "lost" military history derived from the "rediscovered" war diary of the Tenth Legion. It will also utilize an imaginary Josephus Scroll newly uncovered in a hidden cave at Qumran. There is no need to invent gratuitous counterfeit sex scenes -- lust and adultery are intrinsic to the actual events. When I mention my project to manifestly cultivated people they confess that they never heard of my subject. They marvel that such a distinguished and significant personality is so little known and that, to their knowledge, no historian, let alone romance novelist or playwright, has tackled such a magnificent theme. Yet earlier in this century Josephus' writings were kept in devout Christian homes alongside the Bible and other holy teachings. They were requisites of the Puritans' religious bookshelf. Once they were virtually an element of the Christian canon. It seems that the Church Fathers valued the most controversial passage in Josephus' writings, the so-called Testimonium Flavinium.
This was an extremely rare near-contemporary reference to Jesus outside of the New Testament. This passage has been revealed as having been tampered with by Christian scribes to magnify its alleged acceptance of Christ as the Messiah (something which is out of character for Josephus). However, there is strong evidence that Josephus did intend to make some passing reference to "Joshua", as he called him, as well as Jesus' brother James. Familiarity with Josephus has lapsed along with the decline of religious comprehension among the laity. One can quote scripture as fed to an impressionable congregation by a flamboyant preacher, but rarely does one know the texts firsthand, let alone the apocryphal writings.
To return to Ms. Hadas-Lebel and her theme, the book, as I mentioned, is a "quasi-popular" treatment. This term is not meant to be derogatory. Much of modern Josephus scholarship is confined to erudite works unknown beyond the academic circles of Biblical philologists/theologians or Ancient Middle East pedagogues. They expound endlessly on the interpretations of words and phrases or the meanings of certain obscure allusions. Those who consult them are already acquainted with Josephus and need only to nail down the pedagogical fine points. Hadas-Lebel assumes that the reader is largely uninformed about the epoch yet she does not condescend. She does not cheapen her theme by adopting a "gee whiz" mannerism. As good historical writing should, this book tells a story. It also provides an account of the major historical debates without seriously disrupting the flow with esoteric digressions. There are sufficient footnotes at the back of the book to direct the curious and clarify some possibly unfamiliar references. It is not a path breaking book even among informal histories.
There was a fine popular treatment of this theme in 1964, done by the translator and editor of the Penguin Classics edition of Josephus' THE JEWISH WAR. Dr. G.A. Williamson's The World of Josephus. Then there was Brauer's Judea Weeping, in 1970, a more general history of the Jewish resistance to Roman rule in the Herodian and early Christian epoch through the fall of Masada in A.D. 73. There are a number of excellent studies of Josephus for the classical or theological scholar, replete with exegesis of obscure or controversial passages, morphological and syntactical discussions, and imaginative interpretations of related biblical passages.
However, these dry pedagogical treatises hardly recommend themselves to the researcher interested in the military course of the "Jewish War" or the political backdrop to the struggle. This recent Josephus survey surpasses the earlier works in updating the legacy of the Josephus cycle among Jews and Christians and its place in the historiography of the Roman Empire and its Biblical framework. It also conveniently consolidates all aspects of the controversy within the framework of Josephus' perilous experiences. There are interesting details of the continuing debate over whether Josephus was a traitor or a realistic patriot. Also discussed are his role as either objective historian or mealy-mouthed apologist and rationalizer. The brief excursus on the disputed passages alluding to Christ -- the earliest near-contemporary mention of him -- will interest readers not particularly concerned with the ancient history of Israel or the Romans. Also, though Dr. Hadas-Lebel does not herself take an ideological slant, she notes that modern interpreters often use Josephus to make some point about modern Israeli internal politics or diplomacy.
One will not find a precise technical discussion of the military aspects; this is not Ms. Hadas-Lebel's forte. Some clumsy phrases, such as "fired the first shot" and references to "knights" may cause some to wince. We don't know whether this is the fault of the translator rather than the author. However, there is sufficient synopsis of the fighting and the combat setup to whet the appetite for more intensive study of this military historical backwater. Though not always acknowledged as such, Josephus is a fundamental resource on First Century Roman military organization and practice.
Josephus has gone to great lengths to delineate the Roman battle array as a preliminary to his meticulous descriptions of the legions' operations against walled cities. He was telling his people (and any other would-be insurgents) "Believe me, warring against the Roman legions is futile --- here is why." The book has enough of this aspect to at least incite the military buff to explore further. Why was Josephus, who appears to have received his military education merely through close observation and possibly some perfunctory tutoring while in Rome, selected to lead the rag-tag mobs who faced the Legions in the northern districts? His principal pursuits before his "assignment" (under suspicious circumstances) to organize the Jewish defensive setup in the north involved a composite of religious, scholarly and administrative specialties. Was he a "Wannabe" armchair strategist who, by chicanery bluffed his way into his generalship? We are, after all, talking about an unpolished peasant army of what would today be considered irregulars or partisans.
Moreover, his commission was granted by the Sanhedrin (priestly judicial/executive body) who desired him to quell the unruly brigandage in Galilee as well as prepare its bastions against possible Roman reprisals. He maintained excellent relations throughout his generalship with the neighboring kingdom of Agrippa II, which was usually the enemy of the very factions he sought to unify and lead. His suspicious alliances and behavior aroused a coalition among the parties to demand his recall by the Jerusalem bureaucracy, leading to a commission of inquiry that narrowly cleared him of treason. Yet his performance up to and at the defense of Jotapata exhibits considerable military expertise and tenacity. This is a vexing matter that requires some further examination --- and it is simply introduced, though not really addressed, in the work under discussion. I have some ideas on the matter, which I hope to demonstrate in my simulated history.
Most importantly, the book provides a good prelude to a reading of Josephus' actual texts. The novice should probably read an annotated edition. The Penguin version is accessible and written in a graceful style. Loeb Classics are preferable for those who would like to see the original Greek text alongside the modern rendering. One doesn't have to be a literary sleuth to grasp that Josephus had an axe to grind. He was interested in (1) explaining to his co-religionists why he was not a traitor to his people but, on the contrary, tried to prevent an even worse tragedy (such as that happened in the wake of the Bar Kochba uprising some 35 years after Josephus' death) and (2) warning the remaining Jewish colonies outside of the ravaged Judean heartland as well as in the non-Jewish provinces of the Empire that it was suicidal to defy the all-powerful Roman legions.
He was also writing from a decidedly aristocratic point of view, denigrating the rabble-rousing egalitarianism of the ultra-nationalistic mobs. He was of a priestly family and does not let the reader forget that he preaches from the moral high ground. He drove home the (mistaken) point that it was a fanatic fragment of the population, whom he continually termed bandits, that inspired and conducted the revolt. He proclaimed that this rabble was un-characteristic of the population as a whole. Such sentiments aroused great resentments among bereft families who knew better. To be fair to Josephus, his sermonizing tone, as well as some suspect details, is largely attributable to the his epoch's conventional historical rhetoric. His Greek version was completed with the assistance of scribes very familiar with the Greek "classics" of the day. Hence, some of the standardized mannerisms -- such as narration through long, pseudo-speeches -- creep into the translation. In fact whole phrases and literary devices are lifted from some of the earlier authors. Further, he was authorized to study the after-action reports of commanding generals of the campaign and other accounts stashed in the restricted Roman archives.
Accordingly, he wrote as an official chronicler of the Roman victory, beholden to the Flavians for his life, his handsome pension, and his rank. So one can hardly approach the material without a guiding hand to enlighten the unsuspecting modern reader. The book under discussion is an excellent place to begin.
Back to Cry Havoc #5 Table of Contents
Back to Cry Havoc List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1993 by David W. Tschanz.
This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com