*For the sake of brevity we have used the sections into
which Niese has divided the text. These are also given in brackets in the other principal critical edition—that of Naber.
Character
=
462 JOSEPHUS
JOSEPHUS
visit of Josephus to Rome nearly synchronizes with the period of St. Paul’s imprisonment in that city ; but the earlier dates now generally assigned to the latter portion of the Apostle’s life* force us to the conclusion that he had already been liberated, and that his liberation cannot have been in any way connected, as Edersheim conjectured, with the mission of Josephus. Whether or no the Jewish priest became acquainted at this time with the life and work of the Apostle it is impossible to say: he has at all events maintained the same silence with regard to him with which he passes over all that concerns the history of the early Christian Church.
His brief visit to Italy seems to have impressed Josephus with a sense of the invincible power of Rome; and on his return to Juda, where he found his countrymen ready for revolt, and every- thing pointing towards the immediate outbreak of war, he at first tried to pacify the war party, but in vain (Vita, 17). After the defeat of Cestius Gallus, the governor of Syria, in the defiles near Beth-horon, towards the end of A.D. 66, he realized that the irrevocable step had been taken. Josephus, then barely thirty years old, was appointed. to the important post of the command of Galilee (BJ 11. 568; Vita, 28). Apparently, his connexion with the priestly party obtained for him this office, as, in spite of his frequent assertions of his skill and strategy, he does not seem to have possessed many of the qualities necessary to a successful general. He found Galilee in a divided state: Sepphoris and Gamala were disposed to favour the Romans, Tiberias and Gischala were unwilling to submit to the commands of the newly-sent general. His first steps were to fortify the principal places, to reform the army after the Roman model by appointing a number of subordinate officers (BJ I. 577), and to appoint a council consisting of seventy of the principal Galileeans, who were to try cases, and would at the same time be hostages for the fidelity of the district (Vita, 79). But his efforts to enforce discipline and to secure the allegiance of the Galileeans were unavailing. He found many opponents, the most formidable being John of Gischala, who afterwards played so im- portant a part in the siege of Jerusalem ; and the spring of A.D. 67 was chiefly spent in civil war and in avoiding plots against his life. He was sus- pected, perhaps not without justice, of harbouring designs of betraying the country to Rome. At length John sent to the capital, accusing Josephus of setting himself up as a tyrant, and prevailed on the high priest Ananus and the principal men of the city to recall him from the command (BJ Il. 627; Vita, 189). An embassy under the com- mand of four leading men was accordingly sent to supersede Josephus. He, however, refused to accept the order, and succeeded in obtaining letters from Jerusalem by which he was reinstated{( Vita, 309). Meanwhile Vespasian, who had been com- missioned by Nero to conduct the war, was ad- vancing from Antioch upon Galilee. Gadara was quickly taken, and Josephus, who at the first onset was half inclined to surrender, and wrote to Jerusalem for instructions on the subject (BJ Ill. 137), at length threw himself into Jotapata, and resolved to stand a siege.
Of this siege Josephus has given us a detailed account in the third book of the Jewish War, with much encomium upon his own skill, although he does not conceal the fact that at one period he meditated quitting his post and saving himself by flight. At length a deserter betrayed the fact to the Romans that the sentinels could no longer
* The close of the Acts is placed early in 4.D. 59 by Harnack,
in 61 by Turner, 62 by Ramsay, and 63 by Lightfoot (see art. Curonooey or NT in vol. i. p. 424).
keep awake through the night, and advised them to make an attack in the early morning. ‘This advice was acted on, and the place was taken after a siege of forty-seven days, on the lst of the month Panemos (July A.p. 67). Josephus with forty others concealed himself in an underground cavern, where-he was discovered by the Romans. He was ready to surrender himself, but was pre- vented by his comrades, who insisted on his sharing their fate, and dying either by their hands or his own. Josephus, by some stratagem, prevailed on them to draw lots as to the order in which they should put each other to death, and managed [‘ whether we must attribute it to chance or to Divine Providence’ are his words] to be reserved till the last with another, whom without difficulty he persuaded to seek liberty along with himself. Being brought before Vespasian, he posed as a prophet, and foretold the elevation of the general and his son Titus to the empire, and was kept a prisoner, although treated with consideration. The prophecy of Josephus has been repeated_by Roman historians—Suetonius (Vesp. 5) and Dio Cassius (Ixvi. 1). Rabbinical tradition ascribes a similar prophecy with reference to Titus to Rabbi Jochanan ben Saccai, and both emperors are said to have been informed of the destiny awaiting them by heathen oracles (Tac. Hist. ii. 78, the priest Basilides at Mount Carmel to Vespasian ; Suetonius, Vesp. 5, Titus, 5). Both Tacitus and Suetonius tell us that there was a widespread belief that at that time men coming from the East would become masters of the world (Tae. Hist. v. 13; Suet. Vesp. 4). Josephus could not but be aware of this belief, and might with no great shrewdness be able to read the signs of the times in the growing dissatisfaction with Nero’s rule, which came to a climax in the following ear.