on friendliness to outsiders. Josephus next expands his emphasis on
Judean endurance (2.219-35), by comparison with the famous resilience of
the Spartans. In the final part of this section (2.236-86), he answers
Apollonius’s criticisms of Judean religious and social separatism; with an
amusing assault on Greek mythology (heavily dependent on Greek philos-
ophy), he defends Judean religious difference but finishes on a positive
note by claiming that Moses has long been imitated by Greek philoso-
phers, and that Judean customs continue to be copied by ordinary observ-
ers. A final peroration (2.287-96) sums up the work and claims that no
greater constitution could be imagined or invented.Genre
The genre of the treatise is primarily apologetic; even the first part, the
proof of Judean antiquity, is presented within the larger frame of response
to scurrilous libels and hostile doubts. The work constitutes, in fact, the
only known example of ethnic “apology” from antiquity, and the first
Judean text explicitly formulated in this originally legal genre (see Barclay
2007: xxx-xxxvi). In overall arrangement, and in many of its individual ar-
guments, its rhetoric is highly skilled, enlivened by effective point-scoring,
amusing character assassination, and clever manipulation of classical
tropes. While there is evidence of some dependence on sources (e.g., in the
overlap of materials in 2.145-286 with Pseudo-Phocylides and the Philonic
tractHypothetica), the bulk of the credit for this rhetorical performance
must go to Josephus himself, by now sufficiently proficient in the Greco-
Roman rhetorical tradition to use it for his own purposes.Setting, Audience, and Purpose
The treatise was written in Rome in a context where highly diverse opin-
ions about Judean culture were in circulation. Anti-Judean stereotypes
flourished (witness those recycled and embellished by Tacitus a few years
later), and in 95c.e.Domitian staged political trials against individuals ac-
cused of “drifting into Judean ways” (Dio 67.14.1-2); but the hostility ex-
pressed in both cases was the flip side of the evident attraction of Judean
culture to some Romans. The treatise declares itself to be addressed to
sympathetic non-Judeans (1.1; 2.147, 296) and also implies, by its assump-311JosephusEERDMANS -- Early Judaism (Collins and Harlow) final text
Tuesday, October 09, 2012 12:04:11 PM