In Chron. 1234, Josephus is cited three times in connection with the siege and capture of Jerusalem by the Romans and portrayed as a “wise chronicler, worthy of praise, who was one of the famous Pharisees.”23 The praise for Josephus is reminiscent of Eusebius’
depiction of Josephus as “the most noted of all the Jews of that day,”24 and similar to
Dionysius bar Salibi’s emphasis on Josephus’ wisdom.25 The identification of Josephus as
a Pharisee, however, has no counterpart in any source. Although Josephus is nowadays
23 Chron. 1234, vol. 1, 129.6-8T. Comp. with Eus. HE III 9.1: “the son of Mattathias, a priest of Jerusalem, who
himself fought against the Romans in the beginning and was compelled to be present at what happened afterward.”
24 Eus. HE III 9.2.
believed to have belonged to this sect, Josephus never identifies himself as such. This identification also rather explicitly contradicts a Syriac tradition that can be traced back at least as early as the eighth century (Chron. Zuqn.26) and that identified Flavius
Josephus with Caiaphas (in reality Josephus, son of Caiaphas), the high priest who is said to have conspired to kill Jesus and to have been involved in Jesus’ trial.27 Whether the
Anonymous Chronicler purged this Josephus-Caiaphas link from this account,28 or
whether the Anonymous Chronicler’s source preceded this tradition cannot be determined.
The Syriac account of the siege and fall of Jerusalem can be divided into three sections: (1) the events leading up to the siege, (2) the siege itself, and (3) the signs that “foretold the approaching desolation.”29 This last section (3) is entirely composed of
almost verbatim copies of passages from Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History (III 8.1-5,7-930),
whose order was rearranged. Interestingly however, the Anonymous Chronicler does not refer to Eusebius as a source at all, but to Josephus himself. Since Eusebius does not mention Josephus in this chapter (though see III 5.4; 6.1, 13, 19), the Anonymous Chronicler (or his source?) must have had access to a complete version of Eusebius’
Ecclesiastical History, because he knew that Eusebius’ reference to “the sixth book of his
History” (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History III 8.1) should be interpreted as a reference to Josephus.
For the most part, the remainder of the description of the siege and capture of Jerusalem is a paraphrase of the sixth book of the Jewish Wars. Together with many other elements not extant in Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History, the Anonymous Chronicler’s use of the term ܐܢ ̈ܘܐܣ for shoes, in the context of the famine that occurred in Jerusalem, indicates that he (or his source) made use of the Syriac translation of Josephus’ Wars (VI
26 Chron. Zuqn., vol. 1, 92.26-8T, 71.28-30V.
27 Castelli 2001, 205 (Chron. Zuqn.), 208-9 (Chron. 1234), 214-5 (Ish.), 215-7 (Dion. Bar Sal., Georg. Arb. and Abu
‘l-Faraj ‘Abdallah Ibn at-Tayib).
28 Castelli 2001, 209. 29 Eus. HE III 8.1.
3.3) and not the Syriac translation of Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History (III 6.22) for this information. Like Eusebius,31 the author of this account perceives the capture of
Jerusalem as a divine punishment. Similarly to the case of Troy and Sodom and Gomorrah, the Lord delivered Jerusalem into the hands of a foreign nation, in this case, the “emperor Titus, the son of the emperor Vespasian.” Particularly noteworthy in this respect is the Anonymous Chronicler’s use of the term “speedy end” (ܐܬ ̈ܩܣܦܕܐܝܪܘܡܓ), which alludes to Daniel 9:25-7 (or perhaps Isaiah 10:23), biblical verses that speak of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (“the city and the sanctuary”) by “the people of the ruler” after the arrival and death of the “anointed one”.32
Also worth noting are two literary expansions of Josephus’ description of the fall of the city. The fire is described as burning as if “among the trees of a forest.”33 Similarly,
“blood” is said to have “flowed” to have “went forth, like a river on the streets of the city” and to have “left through the eastern gate that was near the valley of Jehosaphat, and through sources of water that the city possessed.”34
Peculiarly, Chron. 1234 also preserves information from Josephus’ fourth and fifth books, information that is not extant in Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History either. Some of this additional information such as the construction of siege-engines and other equipment for the siege is quite general and may have been added to enlarge the literary qualities of this account. The statement that Vespasian “left (Titus) against Jerusalem and moved up against Spain himself”, because “some news had come to him from the western regions of Egypt”35, is reminiscent of material from the Wars IV 11.5
and the title of this chapter, but clearly some confusion regarding the exact circumstances has occurred because the text actually says that this news came from Rome, when Vespasian was in Alexandria. This information probably reached the Anonymous Chronicler via a chronographic source, perhaps Agapius’ and Michael’s
31 Eus. HE III 8 emphasises that “for forty years after the crucifixion the Jews did not make penitence.” 32 Eus. HE III 5.4 refers to the “abomination of desolation, proclaimed by the prophets.”
33 Chron. 1234, vol. 1, 129.31-2T. 34 Chron. 1234, vol. 1, 129.21-3T. 35 Chron. 1234, vol. 1, 129.15-7T.
common source.36 Michael describes how, after “Galba started to reign in Iberia [=
Spain], for 7 months, and was killed in the centre of Rome,”37 “when Vespasian doubled
the strength in the siege of Jerusalem and when his army was ready to capture it, the news of the death of Nero and the events that followed it reached him” and that “after (Vespasian) had been proclaimed autocrator in Judah, (…) he went to Alexandria. After having captured the entire region of Egypt, he went to Rome by sea.”38 Michael’s
statement that Galba started to rule in Spain probably reflects Josephus’ statement that Galba “returned out of Spain to Rome” and is probably connected to the Anonymous Chronicler’s incorrect assertion that Vespasian “moved up against Spain”.
Similarly, the statement of the Anonymous Chronicler that Josephus “left, came (back), and interceded, brokering peace,” to no avail, is a paraphrase of the Wars V 9.2-4, but has counterparts in the work of Agapius39 (though not Michael40).
In this context, it is also worth noting that the Anonymous Chronicler attributes to Josephus a brief list of the number of captives and casualties of the famine and the siege. According to the Anonymous Chronicler: “Josephus writes: ‘Before the sack, 1,000,000 men died from the famine in Jerusalem. And when it had passed, Titus and his armies killed 60,000 men in it, and 100,000 were taken captive and enslaved,’”41 but these
numbers do not match Josephus’ claim (Wars VI 9.3) that 97,000 Jews were taken captive and 1,100,000 people died in the siege.
This attention to the casualties of the siege is in fact a particularly popular topos among Syriac historiographers. The authors of Chron. 724 and Chron. 846, Agapius and Michael, also record some of these numbers, but they vary between the witnesses.
36 Comp. Agap. Chron., vol. 2, 39-40 and Mich. Syr. Chron. VI 2 (98-101T; vol. 1: 160-2V). 37 Mich. Syr. Chron. VI 2 (98-101T; vol. 1: 160-2V). Agap. does not record the reign of Galba.
38 Mich. Syr. Chron. VI 2 (98-101T; vol. 1: 160-2V). Agap. has: “The first year of his reign, he invaded Egypt and
captured it; thereafter he want to Rome by sea.
39 Agap. Chron., vol. 2, 43.
40 Mich. Syr. Chron. VI 2 (98T; vol. 1: 163V) contains similar materials, but no mention of Josephus’ embassy. 41 Chron. 1234, vol. 1, 130.6-10T.
Source Casualties of the entire siege
Captives Casualties of the famine Casualties of the Roman swords Flav. Jos.42 1,100,000 97,000 /// /// Eus.43 1,100,000 Chron. 72444 /// 100,000 1,100,000 60,000 Chron. 84645 /// 70,000 1,100,000 60,000 Ishocdad46 1,200,000 3,000,000 /// ///
Agap. (1)47 /// 100,000 “a great number” 60,000
Agap. (2)48 1,200,000 110,000 /// ///
Mich. (1)49 1,260,000 /// /// ///
Mich. (2)50 /// 100,000 60,000 1,100,000
Chron. 123451 /// 100,000 1,000,000 60,000
The number 1,100,000 that Josephus provided as the total number of casualties of the siege reappears as the number of casualties of the famine in Chron. 724 and Chron. 846, and as the casualties of the Roman swords in Michael [Mich. (2)]. It is also the total of the captives and the casualties of the famine in Chron. 1234, whose author may have relied on the same source as Michael [Mich. (2)].
The consistent appearance of the number 60,000 in the Syriac sources but not in Josephus nor Eusebius indicates the involvement of a Syriac intermediary between Josephus and the Syriac chronicle tradition. Given the limited scope of sources of Chron. 724 and Chron. 846, it is probable that this information was introduced into a Syriac translation of the Chronicle of Eusebius, before 724, the year of the compilation of Chron.
42 Flav. Jos. Bell. Jud. 9.3.
43 Eus. HE III 7, copied by Chron. Zuqn., vol. 1, 113T, 85V. 44 Chron. 724, 117.22-118.1T, 92.9-15V.
45 Chron. 846, 180.20-3T, 139.14-8V. 46 Ish. Comm. Gosp. 154T, 91V (Mt 24:15). 47 Agap. Chron., vol. 2, 39.
48 Agap. Chron., vol. 2, 40.
49 Mich. Syr. Chron. VI 2 (101T; vol. 1: 161V). 50 Mich. Syr. Chron. VI 2 (101T; vol. 1: 162V). 51 Chron. 1234, vol. 1, 130.6-10T.
724, but probably even before 636, the year of composition of the Syriac Eusebian chronicle that was the main source of Chron. 724. Agapius’ and Michael’s common source was influenced by the same source [Agap. (1) and Mich. (2)], but at the same time also knew another tradition [Agap. (2) and Mich. (1)] of which Ishocdad was aware as
well. Considering the identity of these three witnesses, the source for this second tradition may be Andronicus.
Given that the materials from the fourth and fifth books of the Wars must have also been passed on to Anonymous Chronicler via a Syriac chronicle, we can logically assume that the paraphrase of the sixth book of the Wars came from the same source. Since Chron. 1234 gives numbers more closely resembling those in Chron. 724, Chron. 846, Agapius [Agap. (1)] and Michael [Mich. (2)] but offers information not extant in any of these works including that of Ishocdad, it is more likely that the Anonymous Chronicler
excerpted all of this information from another Syriac chronographic intermediary than Ishocdad, Agapius and Michael.
5.5 Conclusion
Josephus’ influence on the Anonymous Chronicler was considerable. Even though the latter did not have direct access to the former’s works, Josephus is cited six times. Material from his Antiquities survives in a passage on events occurring Pilate’s erection of an imperial statue in the Temple (XVIII 3.1), which the Anonymous Chronicler excerpted from the Syriac translation of Eusebius’ Chronicle, and in an account on the life of Moses before the Exodus (II 205-6, 224, 233-4, 236, 239, (241), 242, (244), 245-6, 249- 50, 252-3), which was passed on to the author of Chron. 1234 via an unknown Syriac historian.
Information from the Wars reached the Anonymous Chronicler via two paths. In the Syriac translation of Eusebius, the Anonymous Chronicler found a passage on the voice that was heard in the temple (Wars VI 5.3). Extensive information regarding the Roman
capture of Jerusalem in AD 40 can be traced back to books IV, V and VI of the Wars, but was transmitted to the Anonymous Chronicler via an unidentified Syriac chronicler.