¹ An examination of the bibliographies of Josephus by Heinz Schreckenberg and myself indicates that there has been no study of Josephus's portrait of Joshua at all approaching comprehensiveness. Typical is the tantalizing brief remark of Varneda, Pere Villalba i, The Historical Method ofFlavius Josephus (Leiden: Brill, 1986) 32, that the figure of Joshua is filled out in comparisonwith the biblical text; but we are given almost no detailsGoogle Scholar.

² See esp. Thackeray, Henry St. J., Josephus the Man and the Historian (New York: Jewish Institute of Religion, 1929) 110–14Google Scholar.

³ See my “Josephus as a Biblical Interpreter: The Aqedah,” JQR 75 (1984–1985) 225–26Google Scholar.

⁴ All references to Josephus's works in this essay are to the Antiquitates Judaicae unless otherwise noted.

⁵ The word Πρνλανενω is borrowed from Athenian politics and refers to holding the presidency of a tribe and presiding over the Boulē (Senate) and the Ekklēsia (Assembly).

⁶ See my “Use, Authority, and Exegesis ofMikra in the Writings of Josephus,” in Mulder, Jan and Sysling, Harry, eds., Mikra: Text, Translation, Reading, and Interpretation of the Hebrew Bible in Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity (Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum, sect. 2, vol. 1; Assen: van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988) 481Google Scholar.

⁷ Sifre Numbers 78, Sifre Zuta 75, Numbers Rabbah 8 (end), Megillah 146, Seder Eliyahu Zuta 22.37. Cited by Ginzberg, Louis, The Legends of the Jews (7 vols.; Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1928)6. 171 n. 12Google Scholar.

⁸ The Midrash Ruth 2.1 (126a) mentions Rahab asthe ancestress of the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel. Matt 1:5 mentions Rahab as an ancestress of the Messiah.

⁹ The Aramaic word pundekita has a double meaning of “prostitute” and “innkeeper.”

¹⁰ , Ginzberg, Legends, 6. 172 n. 16, suggests that Josephus's statement (5.34) that Gilgal means “liberty” presupposes the view that by performing the rite of circumcision there the Israelites definitely won their liberty; but we may respond that there is no hint anywhereelse in Josephus of such a connotation of the word “liberty.”Google Scholar

¹¹ See my article on “Jewish Proselytism,” in Attridge, Harold W. and Hata, Gohei, eds., Eusebius, Judaism, and Christianity (forthcoming)Google Scholar.

¹² On these charges see my “Anti-Semitism in the Ancient World,” in Berger, David, ed., History and Hate: The Dimensions of Anti-Semitism (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1986) 30–32; and on Josephus's answer to them see my “Use, Authority, and Exegesis,” 494-96Google Scholar.

¹³ We may here note, of course, that “marrying out” was frowned upon by many ancient nations. In particular, the Greeks disapproved even of marrying citizens of other Greek cities. Yet, we may note, e.g., that Josephus (5.286) tones down considerably the severe objection of Samson's parents to his intermarriage; and in place of “Is there never a woman among the daughters of thy brethren, or among all my people, that thou goest to take a wife of the uncircumcised Philistines?” he has the mere declaration that “they were for refusing because she was not of their race.” See my “Josephus' Version of Samson,” JSJ 19 (1988) 212–13Google Scholar.

¹⁴ , PlatoProt. 349B: “Are wisdom and self-control and courage and justice and piety five names which denote the same thing?”Google Scholar

¹⁵ See my “Abraham the Greek Philosopher in Josephus,” TAPA 99 (1968) 143–56;Google Scholar“Abraham the General in Josephus,” in Greenspan, Frederick E., Hilgert, Earle, and Mack, Burton L., eds., Nourished with Peace: Studies in Hellenistic Judaism in Memory of Samuel Sandmel (Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1984) 43–49;Google Scholar“Josephus' Portrait of Saul,” HUCA 53 (1982) 45–99;Google Scholar“Josephus' Portrait of David,” HUCA 60 (1989) 129–74;Google Scholar“Josephus as an Apologist to the Greco-Roman World: His Portrait of Solomon,” in Fiorenza, Elisabeth Schüssler, ed., Aspects of Religious Propaganda in Judaism and Early Christianity (Notre Dame: Universityof Notre Dame Press, 1976) 69–98; and “Use, Authority, and Exegesis,” 488-94Google Scholar.

¹⁶ Similarly, Gideon (5.231) is praised for rescuing the people from civil strife (στ⋯σις) when they were on the brink of it. As Josephus puts it, by pacifying the wrath of the aggrieved tribe of Ephraim Gideon did a greater service than by his military success.

¹⁷ On Josephus's possible knowledge of Latin see Nadel, Beniamin, “Josephus Flavius and the Terminology of Roman Political Invective,” Eos 56 (1966) 256–72 (in Polish)Google Scholar; Thackeray, , Josephus the Man, 119–20Google Scholar; Menahem Stern, “The Greek and Latin Literary Sources,” in idem and Shmuel Safrai, eds., The Jewish People in the First Century: Historical Geography, Political History, Social, Cultural and Religious Life and Institutions (Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum, Sect. 1, 2 vols.; Assen: Van Gorcum, 1974) 1. 29; and Daube, David, “Three Legal Notes on Josephusafter His Surrender,” Law Quarterly Review (London) 93 (1977) 191–94Google Scholar.

¹⁸ This is particularly interesting inasmuch asprophecy is constantly, well into the Christian period, regarded by Christians as the essential element of biblical literature.

¹⁹ See my “Josephus' Portrait of Samson,” 171-214; “Josephus' Portrait of Saul”; and “Use, Authority, and Exegesis,” 490-91.

²⁰ Bell. 4.459; Ant. 3.59; 4.165,324; 6.84; 7.68, 294; 9.207, 280; 11.112.

²¹ Bamberger, Bernard J. (“The Dating of Aggadic Materials,” JBL 68 [1949] 115–23)Google Scholar has argued convincingly that the Talmud and Midrashim are compilations of traditional material which had existed orally for a considerable time before they were written down, and has noted a number of examples of such midrashic material found in much earlier sources such as the Septuagint. On the degree to which Josephus agrees with rabbinic formulation of halakhah, see Goldenberg, David, “The Halakhah in Josephus and in Tannaitic Literature: A Comparative Study” (Ph.D. diss., Drop-sie University, 1978), and my “Use, Authority, and Exegesis,” 507-18. On Josephus's knowledge of aggadic lore, seeGoogle ScholarRappaport, Salomo, Agada und Exegese bei Flavius Josephus (Vienna: Holz-hausen, 1930); see also my various articles (above, n. 15)Google Scholar.

²² To maintain authenticity, however, Josephus avoids exaggeration. Thus, whereas the Bible (Josh 11:8) declares that none of the Canaanites was left after Joshua engaged them in battle, Josephus (5.66), more credibly, says that Joshua destroyed the whole of the enemy's army, save for a few.

²³ Cf., e.g., my “Abraham the General in Josephus.”

²⁴ Chronicon Samaritanum (ed. Juynboll, ) 26–32Google Scholar, cited by, Ginzberg, Legends, 6.179 n. 45Google Scholar.

²⁵ See my “Use, Authority, and Exegesis,” 491-92; and “Josephus' Portrait of Saul,” 79-82. See also my “Josephus' Portrait of David.”

²⁶ Goodenough, Erwin R., “The Political Philosophy of Hellenistic Kingship,” YCS 1 (1928) 95Google Scholar.

²⁷ See my “Josephus' Portrait of Saul,” 82-83 n. 73; and “Use, Authority, and Exegesis,” 492-93.

²⁸ Thus when Abraham lies to the Egyptian pharaoh and to Abimelech, Josephus (1.162, 207) is extremely careful, in an extra-biblical addition, to explain why he does so. Moreover, when Josephus editorializes about David (7.110) he stresses that David was just by nature and that he looked only toward truth in giving judgment. Indeed, whereas in Scripture (2 Sam 19:28), Mephi-bosheth says to David merely that he, the king, is an angel of God, in Josephus (7.269-70) he declares his full confidence that no calumny will enter David's mind, because his mind is just and loves the truth, which God also wishes to prevail. We may note that in his apologeticfor Samson, Josephus omits Delilah's accusation to Samson that he has told her lies (Judg 16:10, 13), for the Achilles-like hero and the Aristotelian μεΥαλóψυχος is truthful.

²⁹ A similar regard for the inviolability of anoath given by Joshua to the Gibeonites is shown in rabbinic literature (Git. 462), where we are told that Joshua kept his promiseto the Gibeonites in order to sanctify the name of God by showing how sacred an oath is to the Israelites.

³⁰ Cf. Philo Mut. nom. 40.225; Vit. Mos. 2.2.9;Decal. 30.164; and the discussi by Wolfson, Harry A., Philo: Foundations of Religious Philosophy in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (2 vols.; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1947) 2. 218–20Google Scholar.

³¹ So Macrobius on Cicero's Som. Scip. 1.8, cited by , Wolfson, Philo, 2. 220 n. 146Google Scholar.

³² On the importance of piety for Josephus, as seen in numerous extra-biblical comments, see my “Use, Authority, and Exegesis,” 493-94; and “Josephus' Portrait of Saul,” 83-93.

³³ See Bomstad, Roland G., “Governing Ideas of the Jewish War of Flavius Josephus” (Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 1979)Google Scholar; Thérond, Bernard, “Le discours de l'histoire dans ‘La guerre des Juifs’ de Flavius Josèphe” (Diss., University of Paris, 1979); and my “Use, Authority, and Exegesis,” 503-7Google Scholar.

³⁴ See my “Josephus as a Biblical Interpreter,” 237-41.

³⁵ See Delling, Gerhard, “Josephus und das Wunderbare,” NovT 2 (1957-1958) 291–309;Google ScholarMacRae, George W., “Miracle in The Antiquities of Josephus,” in Moule, Charles F. D., ed., Miracles: Cambridge Studies in Their Philosophy and History (London: Mowbray, 1965) 127–47;Google ScholarAttridge, Harold W., The Interpretation of Biblical History in the Antiquitates Judaicae of Flavius Josephus(HDR 7; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1976) 95–96Google Scholar; and the discussions in my Josephus and Modern Scholarship (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1984) 477–80; and in my “Use, Authority, and Exegesis,” 506-7Google Scholar.

³⁶ So , Delling, “Josephus und das Wunderbare,” 291–309;Google Scholar, MacRae, “Miracle,” 136–42Google Scholar.

³⁷ Herodorus 2.123; 5.45; Thucydides 6.2.1; Dionysius of Halicarnassus Ant. Rom. 1.48.1, 4; 2.40.3, 74.5; 3.36.5; , LucianHow to Write History 10; andGoogle Scholar, PlinyHist. nat. 9.18Google Scholar.

³⁸ See my “Josephus as a Biblical Interpreter,” 247-48.

³⁹ In my essay on “Josephus' Portrait of David,” 163, I have conjectured that one reason for the omission of miraculous elements in Josephus's account of David, such as are frequent in the rabbinic accounts of him, may be that they might have raised David too high in the minds of his readers; and Josephus was eager to avoid this lest he irritate his Roman readers, who might know that the Messiah (by definition a political rebel) would be descended, it was said, from David.

⁴¹ See , Ginzberg, Legends,4. 13 and references in 6. 179 n. 45Google Scholar.

⁴¹ Ibid.,4.10.

⁴² Elsewhere we may note that when he comes to describe the miracle of the crossing of the Sea of Reeds (the Red Sea) Josephus (2.347-48), likewise aware that the miraculous parting of the sea would seem incredible to his readers, notes the parallel to this marvelous event in the parting of the Pamphylian Sea before the troops of Alexander the Great. We may also cite as a parallel to the seemingly miraculous parting of the waters the account (Polybius10.9-15; Livy 26.42-46; , AppianSpain 21–22, cited byGoogle ScholarGaster, Theodor H., Myth, Legend, and Custom in theOld Testament: A Companion Study with Chapters from Sir James G. Frazer's Folklore in the Old Testament [New York:Harper, 1969] 239–40) of the successfulfording of the lagoon at New Carthage in Spain by the forces of Scipio the Elder during the Second Punic War through the ebbing of the tide thereGoogle Scholar.

⁴³ The biblical text (Josh 4:6) not only explicitly mentions the parallel with the crossing of the Sea of Reeds butalso closely parallels the passage (Deut 6:20-21): “When thy son should ask thee in time to come, saying: What mean the testimonies?” [referring to the miracles connected with Passover]; similarly, Josh 4:6 reads: “When your children ask in time to come, saying: What mean ye by these stones?” This same question is repeated somewhat later (Josh 4:21); and there the answer that is to be given to the children specifically invokes the parallel of the crossing of the Sea of Reeds: “For the Lord your God dried up the waters of Jordan from before you, until ye were passed over, as the Lord your God did to the Sea of Reeds.”

⁴⁴ Tanhuma 3.68; Tanhuma Ahare 9;Gen. Rab. 6 end, cited by , Ginzberg, Legends, 6. 178 n. 41Google Scholar.

⁴⁵ See my “Use, Authority, and Exegesis,” 496-97.

⁴⁶ The fact that Aristotle (Poet. 9.1451A-B) sharply distinguishes tragedy from history leads B. L. Ullman to conclude that Duris, who wrote history in tragic terms, might havedeserted from the Peripatetic to the Isocratean school (“History and Tragedy,” TAPA 73 [1942] 27–53)Google Scholar; but more recent scholarship has questioned the hard and fast distinction between the two schools. See Walbank, F. W., “History and Tragedy,” Historia 9 (1960) 216–34Google Scholar; and my “Cicero's Conception of His-toriography” (Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 1951) 16–52; and “Josephus' Portrait of Saul,” 46-52Google Scholar.

⁴⁷ See Walbank, F. W., Polybius (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1972) 38Google Scholar.

⁴⁸ See my “Cicero's Conception,” 16-52.

⁴⁹ See my “Abraham the General in Josephus,” esp. 46. Similarly, the drama of David's surprise attack upon the Amalekites (6.362-63) is increased by the addition of details not found in the original (1 Sam 30:16-17), where we are toldthat the Amalekites were spread over all the ground, eating and drinking because of all the great spoil which they had taken from the Philistines. In Josephus's version there are added details that some were at their morning meal, while others were already drunk and relaxed with wine and actually regaling themselves with their spoil.The gory details that follow are Josephus's own, namely, that some were surprised at the outspread tables, and that streaming bloodactually swept the food away, that some were, ironically, even drinking to each other's health when they were slain, and that others were plunged in sleep through their drunkenness. Josephus's source for his additions may well have been Herodotus (1.211), who has a similar account of Cyrus's victory over his drunk and sleeping opponents.

⁵⁰ I should like to express my gratitude to Professor A. D. Wasserstein for several helpful suggestions.