Josephus and Nahum Revisited
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Christopher BEGG The Catholic University of America, Washington JOSEPHUS AND NAHUM REVISITED Over seventy years ago Julien Weill published a short note in this journal in which he discussed the “quotation” of Nah. 2:9-12 in Josephus, Anti- quities of the Jews (hereafter Ant.) 9.239-2411. Weill devotes most of his piece to a textual difficulty in 2:9 (see below) which, he believes, can be resolved on the basis of Josephus' citation of the verse. In this essay I shall concentrate rather on the Josephus side of the connection pointed up Weill. Specifically, I intend to investigate the question of how and with what intent the historian makes use of the figure and words of the rather obscure prophet Nahum in his overall retelling of Biblical history2. My investigation will further involve a comparison of the text of Nah. 2:9-14* cited in Ant. 9.239-241(242) with that attested by the MT (BHS), 4QpNah3, LXX4, and Targum Jonathan on the Prophets (hereafter TJ)5 with a view to 1. Weill, “Nahoum II, 9-12, et Josèphe (Ant., IX, XI, # 239-241)”, REJ 76 (1923) 96-98. Weill's proposed reading in Nah. 2:9 on the basis of Josephus is seconded by P. Humbert, “Nahoum II, 9”, REJ 83 (1927) 74-76. Already prior to Weill, M. Adler, “A Specimen of a Commentary and Collated Text of the Targum to the Prophets: Nahum”, JQR 7 (1894) 630- 57, p. 645, n. 9 had called attention to the Josephan quotation of Nah. 2:9-12. Adler (who is not mentioned by Weill) does not, however, share the latter's view of its text-critical value, characterizing Josephus' rendition “as a kind of Targumic paraphrase, agreeing neither with the Masoretic text nor any known Version”. 2. For the text and translation of Josephus' writings I use H.St. J. Thackeray, R. Marcus, A. Wikgren, and L.H. Feldman, eds., Josephus (LCL; Cambridge, MA/ London 1926-1965 [AJ 9.239-242 is found in Vol. VI, pp. 126-129 where the translation and notes are by Mar- cus]). In addition I have consulted the following editions/translations of the Josephan corpus: B. Niese, Flavii Josephi Opera. Editio maior (Berlin 1885-1895) and T. Reinach (ed.), Œuvres complètes de Flavius Josèphe (Paris 1900-1932 [AJ 9.239-242 is found in Vol. II, pp. 291-292 where the translation and notes are by Weill]). 3. For the text and translation of 4QpNah I use J.M. Allegro and A. A. Anderson, eds., Qumrân Cave 4 I (4Q158-4Q186) (DDJ 5; Oxford 1968) 37-42. Unfortunately, the extant text of 4QpNah parallels those portions of Nah. 2.9-14 cited by Josephus only to a minimal extent, i.e. for 2:14, whereas 2:12b-13 which are quoted in the pesher are passed over by Josephus. 4. For the LXX text of Nahum I use J. Ziegler, Duodecim prophetae (Septuaginta XIII; Göttingen 19843). 5. I use the text of TJ published by A. Sperber, The Bible in Aramaic III (rpt. Leiden 1992) and the translation of this by K.J. Cathcart and R.P. Gordon, The Targum of the Minor Prophets (The Aramaic Bible 14; Wilmington 1989) 131-42. See also the text and translation of the Nahum Targum by Adler cited in n. 1. Revue des Etudes juives, CLIV (1-2), janvier-juin 1995, pp. 5-22 6 JOSEPHUS AND NAHUM REVISITED ascertaining where Josephus' textual affinities lie in this instance. I shall likewise offer some comparison of the Josephan handling of the person and message of Nahum with those found (sporadically) elsewhere in Jewish tradition. With my study I hope then to contribute to the development of a Rezeptionsgeschichte for the book of Nahum6. I now turn to a detailed reading of Josephus' “Nahum segment” (Ant. 9.239-242) which I divide up into the following segments: 1) Introduction (9.239a); 2) Quotation (9.239b-241); and 3) Concluding Notices (9.242). Introduction Josephus inserts his treatment of Nahum (9.239-242) into his account of king Jotham of Judah (9.236-238.243a)7, introducing it with the chronological indication “there was at that time” (i.e. of Jotham's reign). Already this dating of Nahum's prophetic activity raises questions in that neither the book of Nahum itself nor the Biblical sources for Jotham's reign (2 Chron. 27:1-9 // 2 Kgs. 15:32-38) provide any basis for it as such8. How then is Josephus' procedure to be accounted for? I suggest that several factors need to be taken into account here. First of all, the fact that the book of Nahum lacks any explicit indication as to when in the course of Israel/Judah's history the prophet functioned made it necessary for Josephus himself to assign him some definite date in order that his presentation of him might be integrated into his account of the series of Israelite/Judean kings in Ant. 9. Why though does he opt to situate Nahum precisely in the reign of the Judean king Jotham? In response to this question, I would note that Josephus' treatment of Nahum's prediction of Nineveh's overthrow (9.239-242) stands in rather close proximity to his presentation of another prophet and his words against Assyria, i.e. Jonah in 9.208-2149. By situating his reproduction of 6. K. Seybold, Profane Prophetie. Studien zum Buch Nahum (SBS 135; Stuttgart 1989) 96 points out that this is a rather neglected topic. In the short chapter which he devotes to the subject (Ibid., 89-96), Seybold does not treat Ant. 9.239-242. 7. For his account of Jotham, Josephus follows the Chronicler's more expansive (2 Chron. 27:1-9) version of the summary treatment of him found in 2 Kgs. 15:32-38. 8. Nah. 1:1 lacks any synchronization of Nahum's ministry with the reigns of kings of Israel and/or Judah of the sort often found in the titles of the books of other classical prophets (see, e.g., Isa. 1:1; Hos. 1:1; Amos 1:1; Mic. 1:1). Conversely, the accounts concerning Jotham in Kings and Chronicles make no mention of Nahum either. 9. Josephus appends his (drastically abridged) version of the book of Jonah to his account of the successful reign of the wicked king Jeroboam II (9. 205-207 // 2 Kgs. 14:23-29). This arrangement is obviously inspired by the fact that 2 Kgs. 14:25 speaks of Jeroboam's fulfilling a prophecy uttered by “Jonah the son of Amittai” who then reappears in the opening verse of the book of Jonah. On Josephus' treatment of Jonah, see L.H. Feldman, “Josephus' Inter- pretation of Jonah”, AJS Review 17 (1992) 1-29. JOSEPHUS AND NAHUM REVISITED 7 Nahum's words of doom against Nineveh in the context of his account of Jotham, son of Azariah whose reign overlapped (see 2 Kgs. 15:1) that of Jeroboam II, the Israelite ruler under whom Jonah was active, Josephus is able to reinforce in reader's minds Jonah's message of Nineveh's coming demise. Such “reinforcement” was all the more in order, given that in 9.236, i.e. in between his treatment of the two prophets, Josephus relates (// 2 Kgs. 15.29) the Assyrian Tiglath-pileser's triumphant intervention against Israel, large portions of whose territory he annexes while also deporting their population. This item might well make readers wonder if Jonah's prediction (9.214) of Nineveh's imminent loss of power still holds. With his citation of Nahum's similiar prophecy just a few paragraphs after the notice of 9.236 and in the context of his presentation of Jotham, the very next king to be treated by him, Josephus makes clear that Jonah's prediction has not lost its validity. In addition, however, for his placing of Nahum's activity after that of Jonah, the historian may have been influenced by a tradition on the matter, one which finds expression both in TJ10 and in the (first century C.E.?) Lives of the Prophets11 which itself may have been influenced by the canonical order of the two prophets' books. On the other hand, Josephus' more precise dating of Nahum's activity during the reign of Jotham of Judah seems to have no parallel/precedent elsewhere in Jewish- Christian tradition. Indeed, that dating conflicts with the statement of Seder Olam 20 that Nahum (along with Joel and Habakkuk) functioned at a much later point, i.e. during the reign of Manasseh12. It was in the time of Jotham, 9.239 continues, that there emerged “a cer- tain prophet (tiv...profßtjv)13 named Naum (NaoÕmov)"14. Thereafter, 10. TJ gives a greatly amplified version of Nah. 1:1. The relevant section reads: “Previously Jonah... prophesied against her [Nineveh] and she repented of her sins; and when she sinned again there prophesied once more against her Nahum...”. 11. Lives 11:2 reads “after Jonah this man (Nahum) gave to Nineveh a portent...”. The translation is that of D.R.A. Hare in OTP 2 (Garden City, NY 1985) 393. 12. This, of course, is the dating for Nahum's activity generally advocated in modern scholar- ship (particularly in view of the reference in Nah. 3:8 to the Assyrian destruction of Thebes in 663 B.C.E.). For more details on the question of the dating of Nahum, see the commentaries. 13. The book of Nahum itself nowhere uses the title “prophet” for Nahum as such. Josephus' employment of the designation corresponds to his fourfold application of the title to Jonah in his retelling (9.208-214) of the book of Jonah which itself never calls Jonah a “prophet” (see, however, 2 Kgs.