FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS VOLUME 10 AGAINST APION FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS translation and commentary EDITED BY STEVE MASON VOLUME 10 AGAINST APION TRANSLATION AND COMMENTARY BY JOHN M.G. BARCLAY BRILL LEIDEN • BOSTON 2007 This book is printed on acid-free paper. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Detailed Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication data are available on the Internet at http://catalog.loc.gov ISBN 10: 90 04 11791 1 ISBN 13: 978 90 04 11791 4 © Copyright 2007 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Hotei Publishing, IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910 Danvers MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. PRINTED IN THE NETHERLANDS introduction v For Joel Marcus an outstanding Mensch, scholar, and friend vi introduction introduction vii CONTENTS Series Preface: The Brill Josephus Project. ix Abbreviations and Sigla . xiii Acknowledgements . xv Introduction. xvii Josephus, Against Apion Book 1 . 3 Book 2 . 167 Appendix 1: Manetho . 335 Appendix 2: Pseudo-Hecataeus . 338 Appendix 3: Exodus Narratives in Cultural Context . 341 Appendix 4: The Judeans and the Ass . 350 Appendix 5: The Sources of the Apologetic Encomium (2.145-286) . 353 Appendix 6: Judaism in Roman Dress? . 362 Bibliography . 371 Indices Ancient Texts . 391 Places and Names mentioned by Josephus . 421 Greek and Latin Words . 424 Modern Scholars . 425 viii abbreviations and sigla series preface: the brill josephus project ix SERIES PREFACE THE BRILL JOSEPHUS PROJECT Titus (?) Flavius Josephus (37–ca. 100 CE) was methods. Philo’s goals were not those of the author born Joseph son of Mattathyahu, a priestly aristo- of Qumran’s Commentary on Nahum or of the crat in Judea. During the early stages of the war Church Father Origen. In order to assist the reader against Rome (66-74 CE), he found himself of this series, the Brill Project team would like to leading a part of the defense in Galilee, but by the explain our general aims and principles. Our most spring of 67, his territory overrun, he had basic premise is that we do not intend to provide surrendered under circumstances that would the last word: an exhaustive exegesis of this rich furnish grounds for endless accusation. Taken to corpus. Rather, since no commentary yet exists in Rome by the Flavian conquerors, he spent the English, we hope simply to provide a resource that balance of his life writing about the war, Judean will serve as an invitation to further exploration. history and culture, and his own career. He Although we began with the mandate to prepare composed four works in thirty volumes. a commentary alone, we soon realized that a new If Josephus boasts about the unique importance translation would also be helpful. Keeping another of his work (War 1.1-3; Ant. 1.1-4) in the fashion existing translation at hand would have been of ancient historians, few of his modern readers cumbersome for the reader. And since we must could disagree with him. By the accidents of comment on particular Greek words and phrases, history, his narratives have become the indis- we would have been implicitly challenging such pensable source for all scholarly study of Judea existing translations at every turn. Given that we from about 200 BCE to 75 CE. Our analysis of needed to prepare a working translation for the other texts and of the physical remains unearthed commentary in any case, it seemed wisest to by archaeology must occur in dialogue with include it with the commentary as an efficient Josephus’ story, for it is the only comprehensive point of reference. A few words about the trans- and connected account of the period. lation, then, are in order. Although Josephus’ name has been known Granted that every translation is an inter- continuously through nearly two millennia, and he pretation, one can still imagine a spectrum of has been cited extensively in support of any options. For example, the translator may set out to number of agendas, his writings have not always follow the contours of the original language more been valued as compositions. Readers have tended expressly or to place greater emphasis on idiomatic to look beyond them to the underlying historical phrasing in the target language. There is much to facts or to Josephus’ sources. Concentrated study in be said for both of these options and for each inte- the standard academic forms—journals, scholarly rim stop in the spectrum. Accuracy is not neces- seminars, or indeed commentaries devoted to sarily a criterion in such choices, for one might Josephus—were lacking. The past two decades, gain precision in one respect (e.g., for a single however, have witnessed the birth and rapid growth word or form) only at the cost of accuracy else- of “Josephus studies” in the proper sense. Signs of where (e.g., in the sentence). Homer’s epic poems the new environment include all of the vehicles and provide a famous example of the problem: Does tools that were absent before, as well as K. H. one render them in English dactylic hexameter, in Rengstorf’s Complete Concordance (1983), Louis looser verse, or even in prose to better convey the Feldman’s annotated bibliographies, and now a sense? One simply needs to make choices. proliferation of Josephus-related dissertations. The In our case, the course was suggested by the time is right, therefore, for the first comprehensive constraints of the commentary. If we were pre- English commentary to Josephus. paring a stand-alone translation for independent The commentary format is ancient, and even in reading, we might have made other choices. And antiquity commentators differed in their aims and certainly if Josephus had been an Athenian poet, x series preface: the brill josephus project other considerations might have weighed more into separate sentences and also varied the heavily. But Greek was his second or third translation of the form, thus: “After X had done Y,” language. His narratives are not great literature, “When [or Once] X had occurred,” and so on. and they vary in quality considerably from one part Again, although in a very few cases Josephus’ to another. Since the commentary bases itself upon “historical present” may find a passable parallel in his particular Greek words and phrases, it seemed colloquial English, we have generally substituted a necessary in this case that we produce a translation past tense. Thus we have not pursued literalness at to reflect the patterns of the Greek as closely as all costs, but have sought it where it seemed possible. We can perhaps tolerate somewhat less feasible. clarity in the translation itself, where the Greek is In the case of Josephus’ personal names, we have ambiguous, because we intend it to be read with the used the familiar English equivalent where it is commentary. close to his Greek form. Where his version differs We happily confess our admiration for the Loeb significantly from the one familiar to Western translation, which has been the standard for some readers, or where he varies his form within the time, begun by Henry St. John Thackeray in the same narrative, we have represented his Greek 1920s and completed by our colleague on the Brill spelling in Roman characters. That is because his Project (responsible for Ant. 1-4) Louis H. Feldman unusual forms may be of interest to some readers. in 1965. For us to undertake a new translation In such cases we have supplied the familiar English implies no criticism of the Loeb in its context. The equivalent in square brackets within the text or in a older sections of it are somewhat dated now but it footnote. Similarly, we keep Josephus’ units of still reads well, often brilliantly. measurement and titles, giving modern equivalents The chief problem with the Loeb for our purpose in the notes. is only that it does not suit the needs of the com- We do not pretend that this effort at literalness is mentator. Like most translations, it makes always more accurate than an ostensibly freer idiomatic English the highest virtue. It renders rendering, since translation is such a complex terms that Josephus frequently uses by different phenomenon. Further, we have not always been English equivalents for variety’s sake; it often able to realize our aims. Ultimately, the reader who injects explanatory items to enhance the narrative cares deeply about the Greek text will want to flow; it collapses two or more Greek clauses into a study Greek. But we have endeavored to provide a single English clause; it alters the parts of speech translation that permits us to discuss what is hap- with considerable freedom; and it tends to homo- pening in the Greek with all of its problems. genize Josephus’ changing style to a single, ele- The commentary aims at a balance between what vated English level. Since we have undertaken to one might, for convenience, call historical and annotate words and phrases, however, we have literary issues. “Literary” here would include required a different sort of foundation. Our goal matters most pertinent to the interpretation of the has been to render individual Greek words with as text itself. “Historical” would cover matters related much consistency as the context will allow, to to the hypothetical reconstruction of a reality preserve the parts of speech, letting adjectives be outside the text.