Which 'Josephus' is Closer to the Original? Pseudo-Hegesippus Book 4 Chapter 6 or Bellum Judaicum Book 4 Chapter 3 [p. 1]

We continue with our side by side critical examination of Pseudo-Hegesippus and Jewish War. In our last post we noted that the last section in Pseudo-Hegesippus has a most important reference, one which can only be described as a preservation of the original second century editor admitting that he is shifting sources to describe what happened during the capture of Jerusalem - i.e. getting away from the original narrative of Josephus and using undoubtedly Justus of Tiberias's chronology which Hegesippus acknowledges aren't exactly accurate - i.e. "there will be perhaps in these a shadow not truth, but however the shadow points out the track of the truth." Compare Photius's report on the Chronology of Justus that "they say that the history which he wrote is for the most part fictitious, and especially in the things by which he details the Roman war against the Jews and the capture of Jerusalem."

In any event, the next section we cite from Pseudo-Hegesippus reads:

Fleeing as we said above, from the districts of Galilaea Johannes took himself to the city of Jerusalem and as if a certain plague infected the minds of a great many, who the leaders of outrages from diverse regions had assembled there as if in a cesspool. For this was in fact for that city the cause of its great destruction, that the incorrigible brought about with their villainies, that most came together there, in which place they believed they would be safer or more arrogantly could pile up their outrages, they were considered to put aside their faith. And so they were received everywhere as if they came from devoted love of the temple to defend it. This was the foremost stroke of misfortune. From this was suppressed the mildness of the few by the haughtiness of the many, from this it progressed into slaughter, since a stranger is less forbearing, from this it was plotted that the solemnities of the law should be be disregarded, the sacerdotal offices should be diverted from the good people to the wicked, because it was not known by men unacquainted not only with religious education but even with knowledge of the law what was sacred. At first were overcome the men of royal stock who were resisting, by which the rest yielded from fear, then were killed, and that the crime should be concealed, those whom they killed without trial assassins having been sent into the prison, they fabricated the same to have been killed for the invented crime of treachery. And so all were terrified by fear. For which powerful men and the blameless Antipas, Levias, and Foras were easily crushed, and already did not dare to resist. From this it progressed to the point that undistinguished and unfit men replaced the leaders of the priests and for whom no reason for meriting the honor was advanced, they contrary to their worth having obtained the priesthood were suborned to every crime in the judgement of those considering the matter. But when the priestly men and especially Ananus senior to the rest, lest through esteem should be granted a prerogative of the highest name, they demand the foremost of the priests be created by a drawing of lots, in which it is considered that the outcome of the drawing is entrusted not to favor but to a divine judgment. In truth they pretended an ancient usage by which it was the custom that those being placed in the first rank of the priesthood were selected by lot, evidently however they worked out a loosening of the law. For when the law of priestly succession selected men for the drawing, they for the sake of appearance alone from the priestly tribe set up one present Eniachim by name and ordered it done by lot. Then a certain Phanis was selected by lot, a village man the son of Samuel, to whom not only was no succession supported by leaders of the priests, but to whom there was not even any knowledge of priestly duty, for the reason that he was at leisure in the country and thus what the foremost of the priests was he did not know. Finally a false character if placed upon him drawn from his fields and resisting as if in a play. He puts on also the holy garments, at the right time he is taught what it is necessary for him to do. And therefore by the outcome of the lot was exposed the wickedness of the seditious, that the carrying out of the great sacerdotal duties was entrusted to an ignorant and rustic person. To them the mockery of the ancient solemnity was a joke, to the priests a grief, who weeping bewailed the mockery of the law by corrupt men.[Pseudo-Hegesippus 4.6]

And the parallel section in Jewish War reads:

Now upon John's entry into Jerusalem, the whole body of the people were in an uproar, and ten thousand of them crowded about every one of the fugitives that were come to them, and inquired of them what miseries had happened abroad, when their breath was so short, and hot, and quick, that of itself it declared the great distress they were in; yet did they talk big under their misfortunes, and pretended to say that they had not fled away from the Romans, but came thither in order to fight them with less hazard; for that it would be an unreasonable and a fruitless thing for them to expose themselves to desperate hazards about Gischala, and such weak cities, whereas they ought to lay up their weapons and their zeal, and reserve it for their metropolis. But when they related to them the taking of Gischala, and their decent departure, as they pretended, from that place, many of the people understood it to be no better than a flight; and especially when the people were told of those that were made captives, they were in great confusion, and guessed those things to be plain indications that they should be taken also. But for John, he was very little concerned for those whom he had left behind him, but went about among all the people, and persuaded them to go to war, by the hopes he gave them. He affirmed that the affairs of the Romans were in a weak condition, and extolled his own power. He also jested upon the ignorance of the unskillful, as if those Romans, although they should take to themselves wings, could never fly over the wall of Jerusalem, who found such great difficulties in taking the villages of Galilee, and had broken their engines of war against their walls.

These harangues of John's corrupted a great part of the young men, and puffed them up for the war; but as to the more prudent part, and those in years, there was not a man of them but foresaw what was coming, and made lamentation on that account, as if the city was already undone; and in this confusion were the people. But then it must be observed, that the multitude that came out of the country were at discord before the Jerusalem sedition began; for Titus went from Gischala to Cesates, and Vespasian from Cesarea to Jamnia and Azotus, and took them both; and when he had put garrisons into them, he came back with a great number of the people, who were come over to him, upon his giving them his right hand for their preservation. There were besides disorders and civil wars in every city; and all those that were at quiet from the Romans turned their hands one against another. There was also a bitter contest between those that were fond of war, and those that were desirous for peace. At the first this quarrelsome temper caught hold of private families, who could not agree among themselves; after which those people that were the dearest to one another brake through all restraints with regard to each other, and every one associated with those of his own opinion, and began already to stand in opposition one to another; so that seditions arose every where, while those that were for innovations, and were desirous of war, by their youth and boldness, were too hard for the aged and prudent men. And, in the first place, all the people of every place betook themselves to rapine; after which they got together in bodies, in order to rob the people of the country, insomuch that for barbarity and iniquity those of the same nation did no way differ from the Romans; nay, it seemed to be a much lighter thing to be ruined by the Romans than by themselves.

Now the Roman garrisons, which guarded the cities, partly out of their uneasiness to take such trouble upon them, and partly out of the hatred they bare to the Jewish nation, did little or nothing towards relieving the miserable, till the captains of these troops of robbers, being satiated with rapines in the country, got all together from all parts, and became a band of wickedness, and all together crept into Jerusalem, which was now become a city without a governor, and, as the ancient custom was, received without distinction all that belonged to their nation; and these they then received, because all men supposed that those who came so fast into the city came out of kindness, and for their assistance, although these very men, besides the seditions they raised, were otherwise the direct cause of the city's destruction also; for as they were an unprofitable and a useless multitude, they spent those provisions beforehand which might otherwise have been sufficient for the fighting men. Moreover, besides the bringing on of the war, they were the occasions of sedition and famine therein.

There were besides these other robbers that came out of the country, and came into the city, and joining to them those that were worse than themselves, omitted no kind of barbarity; for they did not measure their courage by their rapines and plunderings only, but preceded as far as murdering men; and this not in the night time or privately, or with regard to ordinary men, but did it openly in the day time, and began with the most eminent persons in the city; for the first man they meddled with was Antipas, one of the royal lineage, and the most potent man in the whole city, insomuch that the public treasures were committed to his care; him they took and confined; as they did in the next place to Levias, a person of great note, with Sophas, the son of Raguel, both which were of royal lineage also. And besides these, they did the same to the principal men of the country. This caused a terrible consternation among the people, and everyone contented himself with taking care of his own safety, as they would do if the city had been taken in war.

But these were not satisfied with the bonds into which they had put the men forementioned; nor did they think it safe for them to keep them thus in custody long, since they were men very powerful, and had numerous families of their own that were able to avenge them. Nay, they thought the very people would perhaps be so moved at these unjust proceedings, as to rise in a body against them; it was therefore resolved to have them slain accordingly, they sent one John, who was the most bloody-minded of them all, to do that execution: this man was also called "the son of Dorcas," in the language of our country. Ten more men went along with him into the prison, with their swords drawn, and so they cut the throats of those that were in custody there. The grand lying pretence these men made for so flagrant an enormity was this, that these men had had conferences with the Romans for a surrender of Jerusalem to them; and so they said they had slain only such as were traitors to their common liberty. Upon the whole, they grew the more insolent upon this bold prank of theirs, as though they had been the benefactors and saviors of the city.

Now the people were come to that degree of meanness and fear, and these robbers to that degree of madness, that these last took upon them to appoint high priests. So when they had disannulled the succession, according to those families out of which the high priests used to be made, they ordained certain unknown and ignoble persons for that office, that they might have their assistance in their wicked undertakings; for such as obtained this highest of all honors, without any desert, were forced to comply with those that bestowed it on them. They also set the principal men at variance one with another, by several sorts of contrivances and tricks, and gained the opportunity of doing what they pleased, by the mutual quarrels of those who might have obstructed their measures; till at length, when they were satiated with the unjust actions they had done towards men, they transferred their contumelious behavior to God himself, and came into the sanctuary with polluted feet.

And now the multitude were going to rise against them already; for Ananus, the ancientest of the high priests, persuaded them to it. He was a very prudent man, and had perhaps saved the city if he could but have escaped the hands of those that plotted against him. These men made the temple of God a strong hold for them, and a place whither they might resort, in order to avoid the troubles they feared from the people; the sanctuary was now become a refuge, and a shop of tyranny. They also mixed jesting among the miseries they introduced, which was more intolerable than what they did; for in order to try what surprise the people would be under, and how far their own power extended, they undertook to dispose of the high priesthood by casting lots for it, whereas, as we have said already, it was to descend by succession in a family. The pretense they made for this strange attempt was an ancient practice, while they said that of old it was determined by lot; but in truth, it was no better than a dissolution of an undeniable law, and a cunning contrivance to seize upon the government, derived from those that presumed to appoint governors as they themselves pleased.

Hereupon they sent for one of the pontifical tribes, which is called Eniachim, and cast lots which of it should be the high priest. By fortune the lot so fell as to demonstrate their iniquity after the plainest manner, for it fell upon one whose name was Phannias, the son of Samuel, of the village Aphtha. He was a man not only unworthy of the high priesthood, but that did not well know what the high priesthood was, such a mere rustic was he ! yet did they hail this man, without his own consent, out of the country, as if they were acting a play upon the stage, and adorned him with a counterfeit thee; they also put upon him the sacred garments, and upon every occasion instructed him what he was to do. This horrid piece of wickedness was sport and pastime with them, but occasioned the other priests, who at a distance saw their law made a jest of, to shed tears, and sorely lament the dissolution of such a sacred dignity. [Jewish War 4.3.1 - 10]

The first thing that immediately comes to our attention is the solution to the reason why Pseudo-Hegesippus - which has with the last section been finally proven I think to be closer to the original υπομνημα or υπομνηματα of second century Josephus - only introduces John of Gischala in the last part of the last section before 'switching' to completely to Justus's Chronicle. I think that the section century editor saw that John went unmentioned by Josephus but figured prominently in Justus's account.

The solution was to originally add a brief mention of this 'John' escaping from Gischala at the last minute and running to Jerusalem as we see here. There had to be some sort of link between the two conflicting narratives. Vita and Jewish War continue the expansion of John's role in the Galilean revolt until he seems to take over the rebel side.

Not surprisingly Jewish War goes to greater lengths to pin the blame for the revolt on John's bravado:

But for John, he was very little concerned for those whom he had left behind him, but went about among all the people, and persuaded them to go to war, by the hopes he gave them. He affirmed that the affairs of the Romans were in a weak condition, and extolled his own power. He also jested upon the ignorance of the unskillful, as if those Romans, although they should take to themselves wings, could never fly over the wall of Jerusalem, who found such great difficulties in taking the villages of Galilee, and had broken their engines of war against their walls. These harangues of John's corrupted a great part of the young men, and puffed them up for the war; but as to the more prudent part, and those in years, there was not a man of them but foresaw what was coming, and made lamentation on that account, as if the city was already undone

Pseudo-Hegesippus's blames all the leaders of the revolt for the downfall of Jerusalem saying in the parallel section:

Johannes took himself to the city of Jerusalem and as if a certain plague infected the minds of a great many, who the leaders of outrages from diverse regions had assembled there as if in a cesspool. For this was in fact for that city the cause of its great destruction, that the incorrigible brought about with their villainies, that most came together there, in which place they believed they would be safer or more arrogantly could pile up their outrages, they were considered to put aside their faith. And so they were received everywhere as if they came from devoted love of the temple to defend it. This was the foremost stroke of misfortune. From this was suppressed the mildness of the few by the haughtiness of the many, from this it progressed into slaughter, since a stranger is less forbearing, from this it was plotted that the solemnities of the law should be be disregarded, the sacerdotal offices should be diverted from the good people to the wicked, because it was not known by men unacquainted not only with religious education but even with knowledge of the law what was sacred

This is a very significant corruption for it parallels what happens as we noted in the work as a whole - John becomes the scapegoat for all the problems of the Jews. Indeed Jewish War in the narrative that follows about the slaughter of the priests of royal rank attributes those actions to a certain '"they sent one John, who was the most bloody-minded of them all, to do that execution: this man was also called "the son of Dorcas," in the language of our country." The language here sounds suspiciously similar to Acts 9:35 with its reference to "a disciple named Tabitha (which, when translated, is Dorcas)." 

The running theme of the Jews being infected with the example of Saul continues through this part of the narrative too when Pseudo-Hegesippus preserves the original accusation against the rebels for using lots to choose their priests:

But when the priestly men and especially Ananus senior to the rest, lest through esteem should be granted a prerogative of the highest name, they demand the foremost of the priests be created by a drawing of lots, in which it is considered that the outcome of the drawing is entrusted not to favor but to a divine judgment. In truth they pretended an ancient usage by which it was the custom that those being placed in the first rank of the priesthood were selected by lot, evidently however they worked out a loosening of the law. For when the law of priestly succession selected men for the drawing, they for the sake of appearance alone from the priestly tribe set up one present Eniachim by name and ordered it done by lot. Then a certain Phanis was selected by lot, a village man the son of Samuel, to whom not only was no succession supported by leaders of the priests, but to whom there was not even any knowledge of priestly duty, for the reason that he was at leisure in the country and thus what the foremost of the priests was he did not know. Finally a false character if placed upon him drawn from his fields and resisting as if in a play. He puts on also the holy garments, at the right time he is taught what it is necessary for him to do. And therefore by the outcome of the lot was exposed the wickedness of the seditious, that the carrying out of the great sacerdotal duties was entrusted to an ignorant and rustic person. To them the mockery of the ancient solemnity was a joke, to the priests a grief, who weeping bewailed the mockery of the law by corrupt men.

It is worth noting that Jewish War transforms the outrage that the original editor felt towards the use of lots to determine the priesthood and writes instead that:

These men made the temple of God a strong hold for them, and a place whither they might resort, in order to avoid the troubles they feared from the people; the sanctuary was now become a refuge, and a shop of tyranny. They also mixed jesting among the miseries they introduced, which was more intolerable than what they did; for in order to try what surprise the people would be under, and how far their own power extended, they undertook to dispose of the high priesthood by casting lots for it, whereas, as we have said already, it was to descend by succession in a family. The pretense they made for this strange attempt was an ancient practice, while they said that of old it was determined by lot; but in truth, it was no better than a dissolution of an undeniable law, and a cunning contrivance to seize upon the government, derived from those that presumed to appoint governors as they themselves pleased. Hereupon they sent for one of the pontifical tribes, which is called Eniachim, and cast lots which of it should be the high priest. By fortune the lot so fell as to demonstrate their iniquity after the plainest manner, for it fell upon one whose name was Phannias, the son of Samuel, of the village Aphtha. He was a man not only unworthy of the high priesthood, but that did not well know what the high priesthood was, such a mere rustic was he ! yet did they hail this man, without his own consent, out of the country, as if they were acting a play upon the stage, and adorned him with a counterfeit thee; they also put upon him the sacred garments, and upon every occasion instructed him what he was to do. This horrid piece of wickedness was sport and pastime with them, but occasioned the other priests, who at a distance saw their law made a jest of, to shed tears, and sorely lament the dissolution of such a sacred dignity. 

In either case the argument is again clear - the priesthood was being established in the same manner as Saul was chosen:

Then Samuel brought all the tribes of Israel near, and the tribe of Benjamin was taken by lot. He brought the tribe of Benjamin near by its families, and the family of the Matrites was taken by lot; finally he brought the family of the Matrites near man by man, and Saul the son of Kish was taken by lot. But when they sought him, he could not be found. So they inquired again of The Lord, "Did the man come hither?" and The Lord said, "Behold, he has hidden himself among the baggage. Then they ran and fetched him from there; and when he stood among the people, he was taller than any of the people from his shoulders upward. And Samuel said to all the people, "Do you see him whom The Lord has chosen? There is none like him among all the people." And all the people shouted, "Long live the king!" (1 Samuel 10:20-24)

Clearly this can't be coincidence. It is a running theme throughout the second century narrative - i.e. the example of Saul wrongly defining the 'law of the Jews.'