We conclude, then, that the passage about Christ was introduced into the text by a Christian reader towards the end of the 3rd cent., between the time of Origen and that of Eusebius. For the literature and an admirable discussion of the question, see Schiirer, GJV? i. 544-549 (to which the present writer is largely indebted). For the passage about James, see i. 581 ff. of the same work.
vi. STYLE.—A few remarks may not be out of place with regard to the style of the historian, upon which there can_be no doubt that he spent considerable pains. He tells us as much in Ant. XX. 263; and, while he justly claims to have acquired a certain skill in the grammar, he con- fesses that long usage of his national language had prevented his mastering the Greek pronuncia- tion (riv mpopopdv). Elsewhere, he tells us that his chief aims are accuracy and beauty of style (76 74s érayyeMas xdé\dos), 80 far as this is attainable by the choice of words and their arrangement, and the use of other ornaments of speech (Ant. XIV. 2). His fastidiousness in this direction may be illus- trated by the way in which, while using the LXX, he regularly replaces certain words used by the translators by others of a more literary character. Thus he uses éc6%s for LXX iudriov (-.ruds), éuariu- mpdvat for eumuplfewv, kardmw for xardmiober, veavloxos for maddpiov, méumew for dmrocré\dew, vravrav for owarray, broorpépew for emorpéper. Similarly, he has taken the trouble to re-shape most of the sentences in the Letter of Aristeas, while retain- ing a good deal of the language. His Greek is almost entirely free from Hebraisms; the use of mpocrldecOa (like Heb. 4D") is the only certain instance which Schmidt discovers (de Flav. Jos. Elocutione, p. 516). He tells us that, in writing the Jewish War, he employed collaborateurs to assist him with the Greek (c, Ap. i. 50, xpnoduevds Tiot Tpos Thy ‘EAAqvlda pwviy cuvepyors), and no doubt he had similar assistance in writing the Antiquities, It would be interesting to know how far their work extended. N. aturally, variations in the style
JOSEPHUS.
NUMBERS, HOURS, AND YEARS 473
and vocabulary occur, partly due to the different sources on which he draws, partly perhaps to the advice of different cuvepyol.
The most marked instance of change of style occurs in three of the later books of the Antiquities (XVII. XVIII. XIX.). Among the most striking of the phrases and uses peculiar to or characteristic of these three books, the following may be noted : a large use of the neuter participle (pres. aor. pf. fut.) with article as an abstract noun [e.g. XVII. 1, TO Wh emckowuvjoov ; 171, év édrlde Tod dvacgadodvros ‘of recovery’: a list is given in Schmidt, op. cit. 361-368 : the use is Thucydidean] ; a more frequent use of the optative [Schmidt notes that the con- junctive is absent from Book Xvit.]; the use of ei with inf. in oratio obliqua, of the Attic termina- tion -aro for -yro (Thucydidean), of érécos where éoos is used in the earlier books, of écrwotv (rap oytwodv, otorwas=rdyras), and the phrases ék Tov d&éos, pndéy eis dvaBodds (cf. Thucydides), and, com- bined, udev eis dv. add’ éx rod d&€os. The departure in these books from the ordinary practice of the writer extends to the orthography. Whereas else- where Josephus, according to the MSS, almost invariably writes the Attic r7, in these books oo is the rule, and 77 is almost unrepresented ; it begins to recur towards the end of Book xIx., and in Xx. the two spellings occur in almost equal proportions. It must be added that in these books the imitation of Thucydidean words and phrases is more marked ; the writer has tried to reproduce the difficult style and involved periods of his model, with the result that he has often made his meaning very obscure, and the text has suffered much corruption. The subject-matter in this portion of the work is less carefully arranged, and there is not a single refer- ence to authorities. Schmidt (op. cit. p. 368) has suggested that the peculiarities of this section are due to the use of Nicolaus of Damascus. But the remaining fragments of Nicolaus do not contain the usages in question ; traces of his style may rather be found in the books preceding XviI. The use of a single authority for this long section is out of the question, and the difference of style is probably to be accounted for by the employment of another cwepyés and amanuensis. It is not unlikely that the work was laid by for some time when the end of Book XVI. was reached.
An interesting study has been made by Driiner (Untersuchungen iber Josephus, Marburg, 1896, pp. 1-34) of the use made by Josephus of Thucy- dides as a model. The imitation is considerable in the earlier books of the Antiquities: from Book VI. to XI., and in XX., it is non-existent or very slight: in XIII.-XVI. it gradually increases, and reaches its climax in XVII.-xIx. It is not confined to the diction. The narrative of incidents in the history of the Israelites has been heightened by touches from the account of the siege of Plateea and the Sicilian expedition (cf. Ant. Iv. 55 with Thue. ii. 77, and Ant. Iv. 91f. with Thue. vii. 83f.). The Sicilian expedition especially has roused the Jewish historian to imitation. (See also Kennedy, Sources of NV Greek, 56f.; J. A. Ernesti, Obser- wationes Philologico -critice, ete., Leipzig, 1795). The style of Josephus has also been influenced, though in a less degree, by a study of Herodotus (Schmidt, op. cit. 509 f.). ;