This chapter deals with the Hebrew translation of Josephus’ Antiquitates Judaicae (Qadmoniyot ha-Yehudim) published by Abraham Schalit in 1944.1 Comparing this with other translations, it also discusses the problems attendant upon translating Josephus into modern languages. Finally, it provides an outline and some critical notes.
Earlier reviews of Schalit are very brief, only covering specific aspects of the translation.2 A through and comprehensive analysis of the whole work lying beyond the scope of this chapter, I shall discuss a number of select examples.
According to Yochanan Glucker,3 good translations of Greek and Roman texts into Hebrew demand that:
The translator be a master of Hebrew and ancient Greek and Latin grammar and vocabulary;
Be aware of the diverse aspects of culture, history, religion, philosophy, and society;
Contextualize the ancient source in its cultural and literary setting;
Be able to identify allusions to earlier authors;
Recognize and characterize ancient genres, etc.;
Be accurate;
Offer an introduction and interpretation containing information that may assist modern readers.
Glucker argues that Schalit meets all these requirements.
With respect to Josephus in particular, the translator also has to be in full command of Second Temple writings—the Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, Qumran scrolls, rabbinic literature, and other Jewish-Hellenistic works—and the vast secondary literature written on these sources. He or she must be capable of finding the most appropriate equivalent term in the target language, “experienced in textual criticism and [with] a grasp of the problems manuscripts and their potential corruption can cause.”4
Finally, Hebrew translators of ancient works written in foreign language all face the questions of which Hebrew to use—Modern, Biblical, or Mishnaic—and whether the translation should be colloquial or formal.5 Schalit appears to have preferred Biblical Hebrew—a theme to which I shall return later.
Before dealing with Schalit’s translation, let us review the most recent Hebrew translations of Josephus’ other works:
The Bellum Judaicum was translated in 2010 by Lisa Ullman of the Hebrew University.6 This edition has brief footnotes, a comprehensive introduction by Jonathan Price, and appendices on the Roman army by Israel Shatzman. Accompanied by color photographs, maps, genealogies, illustrations, chronological tables, and bibliography, it has been well received by scholars and laypeople alike.7
Contra Apion was translated by Aryeh Kasher in 1997.8 This two-volume work includes an introduction, translation, (often lengthy) notes, and bibliography.9
Daniel Schwartz translated the Vita in 2007.10 This tome includes translation, notes and appendices, color photos, maps, chronological tables, and a bibliography.
Alexander Schorr published a partial translation of the Antiquities in 1940.11
…
A Professor at the Hebrew University, Abraham Schalit’s (1898–1979) interest in Josephus was complemented by more general research into Roman Rule in the Land of Israel (1937), his scholarly biography of Herod being translated in expanded form into German as Koenig Herodes (1969). Schalit addressed various aspects of Josephus’ methodology and sources in numerous articles, translating his introduction to the Antiquities (Books 1–10 in 1944 and 11–20 in 1963) into Hebrew and editing a concordance of all the names appearing in Josephus’ works (1968).12
Schalit was responsible for the entries relating to the Second Temple period in the Encyclopaedia Judaica, also editing some of the volumes in The World History of the Jewish People series. For many years he devoted himself to an exhaustive German commentary on Antiquities 11–20, this being followed by a greatly expanded German version of his Hebrew commentary on the first half.13 His translation is thus the result of much hard work. The labor of love culminated in three volumes, an introduction preceding the first ten books and notes concluding volume 2. The third volume covers books 11–20 and focuses on the Second Temple period. Schalit unfortunately dying before completing it, this contains the translation without any introduction or notes.14
In contrast to the Brill Josephus Project, Schalit worked alone—an admirable feat.15 While he made use of Thackeray and other translations, the only Hebrew translation at his disposal was Alexander Schorr’s partial attempt.16 A French translation was also made by Théodore Reinach.17
According to Bezalel Bar-Kochva (Tel Aviv University), “in general, Schalit’s translation of the Antiquities of the Jews … is the best translation of the writings of Josephus into Hebrew published so far, perhaps surpassing all the translations into modern European languages.”18 It immediately became a standard reference book for scholars writing in Hebrew.
Schalit added the references to the biblical text in Antiquities 1–11 (Genesis to Esther). While these are included in the LCL edition and Brill Josephus Project, they must all be double checked. I have addressed this issue with respect to Josephus’ rewriting of the pentateuchal laws.
1 The Introduction
Schalit’s introduction is masterful. Covering 82 pages, it provides an important framework for the translation. Its subdivision is less helpful, however, making it difficult to follow; nor is the table of contents of any help in this regard. Schalit could have taken a leaf out of Louis Feldman’s Josephus’s Interpretation of the Bible.19 In the following, I present the topics with which both volumes deal:
Josephus’ historiographical predecessors
The schools of Isocrates and Aristotle
Josephus and Dionysius of Halicarnassus
Historiography in the Bellum vs. the Antiquities
Josephus’ biblical text
Knowledge of a Hebrew text
Use of a Greek text
Use of an Aramaic Targum
Josephus’ biblical texts for the various biblical books
Josephus’ assurance that he will not modify the Scriptures
Josephus’ audience
Josephus’ sources
The prophet and the historian
Josephus and rabbinic tradition
Josephus as apologist to non-Jews and Jews
Hellenizations
Dramatic language and motifs
Romantic motifs
Appeal to philosophic interests
Psychologizing20
Schalit’s influence on Feldman is not surprising in light of the fact that the latter considers him the “foremost Josephus scholar of the past generation.”21
2 Bibliography and Indices
A cumulative bibliography would have been very helpful to the reader. The same holds true with respect to Schalit’s work on Herod, only the German translation containing a bibliography. In the Antiquitates, the reader must garner the bibliographic references by trolling the footnotes. The information is very important, subsequent scholars adducing the same works as Schalit—Helscher, Siegfried, Bloch, Mez, Rahlfs, Schürer, et al.22 Schalit’s volume also lacks any indices of ancient texts/persons/place and modern authors. This further compounds the difficulties of finding anything therein.
3 The Page Structure
Schalit’s follows the following format:
Translation of Josephus’ Greek text into Hebrew
Chapters and sub-chapters and numerical division
Notes at the end of volume 2
Annotations regarding Josephus’ biblical text
The paragraphs are numbered in both Arabic numerals and Hebrew characters. While scholars traditionally referred to either of these, today the custom is to cite the book and section number—Qad.7:2, for example. The same numbering is thus employed in Schalit, Thackeray, and Brill.
Rather strangely, Schalit does not start a new paragraph on a new line. The notes also appear at the end of the second volume contra the footnote system followed by both LCL and Brill. The notes being too sporadic to provide a specific ad hoc commentary, the reader must rely on them and the Introduction to reconstruct Josephus’ general rewriting principles. Ideally, each book of the Antiquitates should be prefaced by an analysis of its structure and general observations regarding characterization, omissions, additions, and modifications, and an excursus.
4 The Greek Text
None of the Hebrew translations of Josephus, including Schalit’s, print the Greek text, presumably due to technical and practical constraints. The Brill Josephus Project (“Flavius Josephus Online”), which employs the newer translation of Josephus’ works, and the PACE website are the only places where this is available.23
Strangely, Niese, upon whose edition Schalit based his translation, is only cited once in passing in the Introduction—in Hebrew characters and without full bibliographical information.24 The Brill Josephus Project also uses Niese’s edition as its basis, supplemented by the Loeb Greek text and the Münster and Étienne Nodet’s enterprises.25
5 The Notes
The more than three thousand notes collected at the end of volume 2, which include a collation of the various manuscripts of Josephus’ writings, are invaluable. Schalit regularly compares Josephus with the LXX and MT, on occasion explaining his choice of certain words or phrases. He also compares Josephus with rabbinic literature, both halakhic and aggadic. While basing himself upon Rappaport and Ginzberg’s monumental work on the Legends of the Jews, he adds references to the Aramaic Targumim, Philo, and Hellenistic and Roman authors.26 The notes also take issue with earlier scholars and translators.
Schalit’s translation of the Antiquitates being published some years before the findings at Qumran, much has changed since then. In the textual fields, some Qumran scrolls support Josephus’ readings, others do not. Some scholars thus suggest that Josephus’ employed a particular Greek version of the Bible whose Vorlage was closely related to 4QSamuel.27
6 The Nature of Schalit’s Translation
As is well known, Josephus’ Greek syntax and grammar is complex.28 This fact is compounded by the debate over whether a translation should cleave to the source or flow in the target language. In the preface, Schalit observes:
The aim was to give the translation the character of the Hebrew language of the time of Josephus without forfeiting even earlier forms of speech of Hebrew … Another difficulty … was the translation from Greek to Hebrew— two languages that are completely different in structure and character. The Hebrew language does not like long chains of clauses while the Greek does. It was necessary to break up and divide the long and complicated sentences of the Greek original without transgressing two important principles to which every translator must adhere: fidelity and accuracy.29
Like Schalit, the Brill Josephus Project follows the same procedure. Two examples will suffice:
This passage has multiple subordinate clauses which Schalit makes more comprehensible by using punctuation and breaking it up into two sentences.30
The Greek text of Antiquitates Judaicae 10.93 comprises one long, complicated sentence, which Schalit again breaks into short sentences.
7 Consistency
One of the criteria for evaluating translations is consistency—“the question when a varied use of words is preferable to a consistent use of words.”31 Each volume of the Brill Josephus Project states that the goal was
to render individual Greek words with as much consistency as the context will allow, to preserve the parts of speech, letting adjectives be adjectives and participles be participles, to preserve phrases and clauses intact, and in this way to reflect something of the particular stylistic level and tone of each section.
Is Schalit consistent? One example may suffice to show that he is. He translates
Schalit also uses the phrase
8 Archaic and Inaccurate Translations
In Antiquitates Judaicae 8.186 Josephus describes King Solomon as “taking a ride” (
In his retelling of Joshua 7 in Antiquitates Judaicae 5.38, Josephus states that, seeing the army so dismayed and full of pessimism, Iesous spoke frankly (
9 Personal Names
Translators employ various strategies when translating names from one language to another: copying, conveying the meaning, finding a parallel, and replacing the original with one that is partially or completely unrelated to it.34 The Brill Josephus Project adopts the second, transliterating Habramos in Latin letters. Schalit prefers cleaving to the MT, and does not make efforts to conform his transliteration to that of Josephus. This is a problematic move: readers not being familiar with Hellenized versions of biblical proper names, they find it difficult compare the translation with the Septuagint. While Schalit undertakes this task in the notes, these are gathered in a separate volume. This method also impinges on the assessment of Josephus’ consistency with regard to personal name: he refers to the biblical
10 Adherence to Biblical Hebrew
One of the hallmarks of Schalit’s translation is his adherence to Biblical Hebrew.36 This can be illustrated by several examples.
1. The MT explains the name Naphtali:
2. Schalit also seeks to connect
3. In Josephus’ rewriting of Num 16 (Antiquitates Judaicae 4.15) Schalit leaves the biblical term
4. Schalit translates Josephus’
5. According to 2 Sam 13:22, Tamar remained
Schalit may have wished to point out the similarities between the MT and Josephus. This is unlikely, however, as in the Introduction he cites cases where Josephus differs from the MT. A more probable explanation is that his desire to imitate the biblical style dictated leaving it verbatim, modern Hebrew only allowing him an alternative such as
6. In Antiquitates Judaicae 7.130, Josephus describes Bathsheba as “bathing in cool water in her own house … of beautiful appearance and superior to all others.” Schalit translates
7. Schalit translates the hapax legomenon
8. Rewriting the laws of Sukkot (Lev 23:33–44) in Antiquitates Judaicae 3.244–247, he renders
9. In Antiquitates Judaicae 10.75, Schalit renders
10. Another case of Schalit’s “biblicising” of Josephus is his translation of Antiquitates Judaicae 12.325: “And from that time to the present we observe this festival, which we call the festival of Lights.”44 Schalit translates
11. According to Gen 21:2, “Sarah conceived and bore Abraham a son in his old age, at the time of which God had spoken to him.” Josephus rewrites this verse in Antiquitates Judaicae 1.214 as:
11 Conclusion
Schalit’s translation remains the most authoritative Hebrew translation of Josephus’ Antiquitates, also contributing greatly to the newly-emerging positive evaluation of Josephus.47 Even students untrained in modern Hebrew can benefit from his notes—although scholars around the world perhaps cite him less frequently than might be expected. Almost seventy years after its first publication, however, it is time for a new translation into modern Hebrew. This should:
Insert the Greek source alongside the Hebrew translation, either in print or digitally;
Abjure adherence to Biblical Hebrew in order to be comprehensible to modern Hebrew readers;
Employ footnotes rather than endnotes. The size of the printed volume could be the same as that of the Brill Josephus Project;
Write new introductions taking the many studies written, Qumran material discovered, and all other relevant material now available into consideration;
Add a glossary, indices, maps, and color photos.
Old Testament commentaries such as the Anchor Bible might serve as a good model, each biblical book including a translation with translational and text-critical notes, outline of major themes and topics, verse-by-verse commentary, historical background, and photographs, illustrations, and maps of artifacts and places associated with biblical figures and sites. Although this makes for lengthy tomes, in a day when books are distributed electronically, size becomes immaterial. Analyzing the unit as a whole, “grammatical and syntactical help, literary appreciation, and historical criticism” can then be ensured.48 Rather than working alone, the new Hebrew translation of the Antiquitates should be the work of a team of translators and scholars.
Bibliography
Avioz, Michael. “Josephus’ Portrait of Michal.” JSQ 18 (2011): 1–18.
Bar-Kochva, Bezalel. “The Festival of Purim in Second Temple Times and the Scroll of Esther in Asia: ‘Historical Approach’ and ‘Orthodox History.’” Sinai 121 (1998): 37–85. [Hebrew]
Begg, Christopher T. Flavius Josephus. Volume 4: Judean Antiquities, Books 5–7. Leiden: Brill, 2005.
Begg, Christopher T., and Paul Spilsbury. Flavius Josephus. Volume 5: Judean Antiquities, Books 8–10. Leiden: Brill, 2005.
Berrey, Marquis. Hellenistic Science at Court. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2017.
Bialik, Hayim N. Behind the Fence. Tel Aviv: Dvir, 1965: https://benyehuda.org/read/5279. [Hebrew]
Bin-Gorion, Emmanuel. “Mishné Mikra [A Review of Schalit’s Qadmoniyot HaYehudim)].” Moznaim 18 (1944): 240–244. [Hebrew]
Bittner, Hansjörg. Evaluating the Evaluator: A Novel Perspective on Translation Quality Assessment. London/New York: Routledge, 2020.
Driesbach, Jason K. 4QSamuela and the Text of Samuel. Leiden: Brill, 2016.
Feldman, Louis H. “Flavius Josephus Revisited: The Man, His Writings, and His Significance.” ANRW 2.21.2 (1984): 763–786.
Feldman, Louis H. Josephus and Modern Scholarship (1937–1980). Berlin: De Gruyter, 1984.
Feldman, Louis H. Josephus’s Interpretation of the Bible. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998.
Feldman, Louis H. Flavius Josephus. Volume 3: Judean Antiquities, Books 1–4. Leiden: Brill, 2004.
Forte, Anthony J. “Translating Book 1 of Josephus’ “Bellum Judaicum”: Some Critical Observations.” Pages 383–403 in Josephus and Jewish History in Flavian Rome and Beyond. Edited by Joseph Sievers and Gaia Lembi. Leiden: Brill, 2005.
Gera, Dov. “Joseph’s Coat of Many Colors.” Cathedra 142 (2011): 151–154. [Hebrew]
Ginzberg, Louis. The Legends of the Jews, 6 Volumes. Philadelphia: JPS, 1959.
Glucker, John. “Aryeh Kasher’s Translation and Commentary on Contra Apion.” Zion 63 (1998): 89–123. [Hebrew]
Goldstein, Jonathan A. 1 Maccabees. New York: Doubleday, 1976.
Goodman, Martin. Josephus’s The Jewish War: A Biography. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2019.
Haggai, Shmuel. Josephus: Bellum Judaicum. Jerusalem: Rubin Mass, 1964. [Hebrew]
Harrison, Thomas. “Review of Flower and Marincola, Herodotus: Histories, Book IX.” Classical World 99 (2005): 98–99.
Hartman, Louis F., and Alexander A. Di Lella. The Book of Daniel. New York: Doubleday, 1978.
Ilan, Tal, and Vered Noam. Josephus and the Rabbis. 2 Volumes. Jerusalem: Yad Ben-Zvi, 2017. [Hebrew]
Kasher, Aryeh. Flavius Josephus: Against Apion, 2 Volumes. Jerusalem: Zalman Shazar Center, 1997. [Hebrew]
Ladouceur, David J. “Studies in the Language and Historiography of Flavius Josephus.” PhD Diss. Brown, 1976.
Ladouceur, David J. “The Language of Josephus.” JSJ 14 (1983): 18–38.
Lewy, Hans. “New Paths in the Investigation of Jewish Hellenism.” Zion 10 (1945): 197–204. [Hebrew]
Marcus, Ralph. “A Review of Flavius Josephus’ Antiquities of the Jews. Translated [into Hebrew] with an Introduction and Notes by Abraham Schalit.” Classical Philology 40 (1945): 265.
Marcus, Ralph, trans. Jewish Antiquities, Books XII–XIV. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1961.
Mason, Steve. Flavius Josephus on the Pharisees: A Composition-Critical Study. Leiden: Brill, 1991.
Mason, Steve, ed., Flavius Josephus: Translation and Commentary. Leiden: Brill, 2000–.
Mason, Steve. Josephus and the New Testament. 2nd Edition. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003.
Milgrom, Jacob. “Priestly Terminology and the Political and Social Structure of Pre-Monarchic Israel.” JQR 69 (1978): 65–81.
Naber, Samuel A. ed. Flavii Josephi Opera Omnia: Post Immanuelem Bekkerum. 6 Volumes. Leipzig: Teubner, 1888–1896.
Niese, Benedict, ed. Flavii Iosephi opera (= editio maior). 7 Volumes. Berlin: Weidmann, 1885–1895.
Niese, Benedict, ed. Flavii Josephi opera (= editio minor). 6 Volumes. Berlin: Weidmann, 1885–1895.
Rabinowitz, Meir. Ha-mahanaim. New York: Y.A. Brodi and Y. Tselimer Press, 1888.
Rappaport, Salomo. Agada und Exegese bei Flavius Josephus. Vienna: Alexander Kohut Memorial Foundation, 1930.
Rappaport, Uriel. The First Book of Maccabees: Introduction, Hebrew Translation, and Commentary. Jerusalem: Yad Ben-Zvi, 2004. [Hebrew]
Reinach, Théodore. Oeuvres Complètes de Flavius Josèphe. Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1912.
Rubenstein, Jeffrey L. A History of Sukkot in the Second Temple and Rabbinic Periods. Providence: Brown University Press, 1995.
Schalit, Abraham. Yosef ben Matityahu: Qadmoniyot ha-Yehudim [Flavius Josephus: Antiquities of the Jews]. 3 Volumes. Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1944–1963. [Hebrew]
Schalit, Abraham. Namenwörterbuch zu Flavius Josephus. Leiden: Brill, 1968.
Schatz, Andrea, ed. Josephus in Modern Jewish Culture. Leiden: Brill, 2019.
Schmidt, Guilelmus. “De Flavii Josephi Elocutione Observationes Criticae.” Pages 345–550 in Jahrbücher Für Classische Philologie. Leipzig: Teubner, 1894.
Schorr, Alexander, trans. Antiquitates Judaicae. 2 Volumes. Jerusalem: Rubin Mass, 1940. [Hebrew]
Schürer, Émil. Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi. 5 Volumes. 3rd/4th Edition. Leipzig: J.C. Heinrichs, 1898–1901.
Schwartz, Daniel R. The Second Book of Maccabees: Introduction, Hebrew Translation, and Commentary. Jerusalem: Yad Ben-Zvi, 2004. [Hebrew]
Schwartz, Daniel R. “‘Judaean’ or ‘Jew’? How Should We Translate Ioudaios in Josephus?” Pages 3–27 in Jewish Identity in the Greco-Roman World: Jüdische Identität in der griechisch-römischen Welt. Edited by Jörg Frey, Stephanie Gripentrog, and Daniel R. Schwartz. Leiden: Brill, 2007.
Schwartz, Daniel R. Flavius Josephus—Vita: Introduction, Hebrew Translation, and Commentary. Jerusalem: Yad Ben-Zvi, 2007. [Hebrew].
Schwartz, Daniel R. “From Masada to Jotapata: On Josephus in Twentieth-Century Hebrew Scholarship.” Pages 419–439 in A Companion to Josephus. Edited by Honora Howell Chapman and Zuleika Rodgers. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2016.
Schwartz, Daniel R. “Hellenism, Judaism, and Apologetic: Josephus’s Antiquities according to an Unpublished Commentary by Abraham Schalit.” JSIJ 19 (2020): 1–20. https://jewish-faculty.biu.ac.il/files/jewish-faculty/shared/JSIJ19/schwartz.pdf.
Schwartz, Seth. Josephus and Judaean Politics. Leiden: Brill, 1990.
Siegfried, Carl. “Die hebräischen Worterklärungen des Josephus.” Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 3 (1883): 32–52.
Simchoni, Jacob Naftali. Yossef ben Matityahu: Toledot milḥemet ha-Yehudim ‘im ha-Roma’im. Tel Aviv: Masada, 1968 [1923]. [Hebrew]
Spilsbury, Paul. The Image of the Jew in Flavius Josephus’ Paraphrase of the Bible. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998.
Stendebach, Franz Josef “שנה.” TDOT 15:333.
Thackeray, Henry St. J., Ralph Marcus, Allen Wikgren, and Louis H. Feldman, eds. Josephus. 9 Volumes. [reprinted in 10]. LCL. London: Heinemann, 1926–1965.
Tur-Sinai, Naphtali Herz. The Language and the Book: Beliefs and Doctrines. Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1955. [Hebrew]
Ullman, Lisa. Yosef Ben Matityahu, [Titus] Flavius Josephus: History of the Jewish War. Jerusalem: Carmel, 2010. [Hebrew]
Ulrich, Eugene. “Josephus’ Biblical Text for the Books of Samuel.” Pages 81–115 in Josephus, the Bible and History. Edited by Louis H. Feldman and Gohei Hata. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1989.
Ulrich, Eugene. The Qumran Text of Samuel and Josephus. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1978.
Vagelpohl, Uwe. Aristotle’s “Rhetoric” in the East: The Syriac and Arabic Translation and Commentary Tradition. Leiden: Brill, 2008.
Vermes, Albert P. “Proper Names in Translation: An Explanatory Attempt.” Across Languages and Cultures 4 (2003): 89–108.
Wallach, K.S. “A. Shalit: Introduction to the Antiquities of the Jews by Josephus.” Digital Library for International Research Archive, Item #1981: http://www.dlir.org/archive/items/show/1981. [Hebrew]
Warmuth, Georg. “Pāṯal.” TDOT 12:191–194.
Zipor, Moshe. The Septuagint Translation to the Book of Genesis. Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan University Press, 2006. [Hebrew]
Schalit, Yosef ben Matityahu. For the Hebrew name of the book, see Schwartz, “‘Judaean’ or ‘Jew’?”
Wallach, “A. Shalit: Introduction;” Bin-Gorion, “Mishné Mikra;” Lewy, “New Paths;” Marcus, “A Review.”
Glucker, “Aryeh Kasher’s Translation and Commentary on Contra Apion.”
Vagelpohl, Aristotle’s “Rhetoric” in the East, 7.
Zipor, The Septuagint Translation to Genesis.
Ullman, Yosef Ben Matityahu.
Gera, “Joseph’s Coat of Many Colors.” The very early translations of Simchoni and Haggai are rarely cited by modern scholars: see Simchoni, Yossef ben Matityahu; Haggai, Josephus, Bellum Judaicum. See also Feldman, Josephus and Modern Scholarship, 34–36. For other Hebrew translations of Josephus, see Schatz, Josephus in Modern Jewish Culture.
Kasher, Flavius Josephus: Against Apion.
For a review, see Glucker, “Aryeh Kasher’s Translation and Commentary on Contra Apion”—who severely criticizes both the translation and the notes.
Schwartz, Flavius Josephus, Vita.
Schorr, Antiquitates Judaicae.
Schalit, Namenwörterbuch zu Flavius Josephus.
Feldman, Josephus and Modern Scholarship, 34.
Schwartz (“Hellenism, Judaism, and Apologetic,” 5) reports that there remained a “233-page German typescript by Schalit, comprising a commentary to the first 108 paragraphs of Antiquities 11.”
Mason, Flavius Josephus: Translation and Commentary; Feldman, Judean Antiquities, Books 1–4; Begg, Judean Antiquities, Books 5–7; Begg and Spilsbury, Judean Antiquities, Books 8–10.
Thackeray et al., Josephus. Schalit cites Thackeray and Marcus more than a hundred times in the notes.
Reinach, Oeuvres Complètes de Flavius Josèphe.
Bar-Kochva, “The Conquest of Samaria,” 30.
Feldman, Josephus’s Interpretation of the Bible.
The topics that Feldman alone covers are: Josephus’ priestly bias; answers to the charges made by anti-Jewish writers; establishment of the historicity of the biblical events; the rehabilitation of non-Jewish leaders; the problems of assimilation and intermarriage; appeal to political interests; Josephus and nationalism; a response to proselytism; stylistic and other changes; resolution of difficulties and contradictions in the text; appeal to social interests; Josephus’ attitude to women; de-theologizing; Josephus as rewriter of the Bible/rewriting model.
Feldman, “Flavius Josephus Revisited,” 767.
Siegfried, “Die hebräischen Worterklärungen des Josephus;” Schürer, Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes. In addition to Feldman, see also Spilsbury, The Image of the Jew; Mason, Josephus and the New Testament; et al.
Niese), Flavii Iosephi opera, vols. 1- (=editio maior); Niese Flavii Josephi opera (= editio minor). See also Naber, Flavii Josephi Opera Omnia.
See Mason’s comments in the preface that opens each volume of the Brill Josephus Project.
Rappaport, Agada und Exegese; Ginzberg, The Legends of the Jews. See also S. Schwartz, Josephus and Judaean Politics, 47–57; Feldman, Josephus’s Interpretation, 3–20. For Josephus and rabbinic literature, see Ilan and Noam, Josephus and the Rabbis.
See Ulrich, The Qumran Text of Samuel and Josephus; Ulrich, “Josephus’ Biblical Text;” Driesbach, 4QSamuela and the Text of Samuel.
See the preface to the individual volumes in Mason, Flavius Josephus, Translation and Commentary. The most comprehensive study of Josephus’ syntax is Schmidt, “De Flavii Josephi Elocutione Observationes Criticae.” See more recently, Ladouceur, “Studies in the Language and Historiography of Flavius Josephus;” Ladouceur, “The Language of Josephus;” Forte, “Translating Book 1.” Mason notes the “problematic language and syntax of [A.J.] books 17–19” (Flavius Josephus on the Pharisees, 281).
Schalit, Qadmoniyot, ix (my translation).
As Ullman notes in her preface to the Bellum, however: “In my translations I have tried to preserve something of the complexity of Josephus’ language. I did not find it appropriate to completely eliminate the difficulties of the original, and only occasionally split sentences that were too long” (Ullman, Yosef Ben Matityahu, 10–11).
Bittner, Evaluating the Evaluator, 117.
See Bialik, Behind the Fence (1909).
Josephus borrows this term from Isocrates and others: see Berrey, Hellenistic Science at Court.
Vermes, “Proper Names in Translation.”
See Avioz, “Josephus’ Portrait of Michal.”
Cf. “We have tried to ensure, certainly not with complete success, a language close to the language of biblical historiography (especially of the books of early prophets)” (Rappaport, The First Book of Maccabees, 3). The choice is reasonable in light of the close relationship between Maccabees and the Hebrew Bible: see Goldstein, I Maccabees.
Schorr, Antiquitates Judaicae, 54. For the verse, see Tur-Sinai, The Language and the Book, 140–147; Warmuth, “Pāṯal.”
Feldman, Judean Antiquities 1–4, 121n944.
HALOT explains it as “national, legal and cultic communities.” Cf. Milgrom, “Priestly Terminology.”
This appears in several Greek sources, differing from LXX.
Melon tou tes persikos (or: medikos) was the original Greek term for the citron: see Rubenstein, A History of Sukkot, 75n113.
Ben-Yehuda, Dictionary, 2511. HALOT attributes it to Persian, however; see also Hartman and Di Lella, The Book of Daniel, 157.
Marcus, Jewish Antiquities, Books XII–XIV.
Cf. also Rabinowitz:
Stendebach, “
See Schwartz, “From Masada to Jotapata;” Goodman, Josephus’s The Jewish War, 106–107.
Language borrowed from Harrison, “Review of Flower and Marincola,” 98.