Spin had reminded us of his own solution to the problem.
It had been a while, but here is a summary he posted on this list in 2014, which is partly concerned with
Ant 20:199-200:
spin, Fri Oct 17, 2014 2:52 am wrote:
Peter Kirby wrote:It's hard to understand Origen not using any kind of Testimonium from Josephus, even if only to refute it.
I thought I'd mapped the process in detail [apparently, on II (lost forever), FRDB (Peter has his search engine), and RatSkep (2011)].
1. Origen works from memory.
2. After mentioning JtB [[
Contra Celsum 1.47a]] he goes on to a passage regarding Jesus [[
C.C. 1.47d]].
3. The indications on this passage point to his using Hegesippus, a source he confused with Josephus (a known confusing in antiquity)
4. Origen gleans the notion of the death of James [[
C.C. 1.47b; 2.13;
Commentary on Matthew 13.55]] in the source pointing to the downfall of Jerusalem (certainly nowhere in Josephus)
5. He writes up his recollection on James as regarding something not from Hegesippus, but mistakenly from Josephus.
6. A scribe adds marginal comment [in AJ [[20:200]]] reflecting Origen's note.
7. A later scribe takes this [comment now in AJ] as an omission and inserts it into the text, causing discourse analysis anomalies.
8. Eusebius [[
History of the Church 2.23.3-21?]] sees no connection between Origen's comment regarding Josephus and AJ 20.200, citing them both as distinct passages, while assuming Origen correctly cites some unknown passage from Josephus. (This means the connection between Origen and AJ 20.200 is relatively modern.)
I added the passages I
think spin is alluding to in double brackets.
Regarding Eusebius, the following passage he obtained from a lost work of Clement (the 7th book of the Hypotyposeis), more completely/accurately related, he asserts, by Hegesippus, and strengthened the second author's statement by citing an otherwise unattested passage in Josephus:
3) The manner of the death of James has been already indicated by the above mentioned words of Clement [which he cites more fully at Church History 2.1.3-6], who records that he was thrown from the pinnacle of the temple and was beaten to death with a club. But Hegesippus, who lived immediately after the apostles, gives the most accurate account in the fifth book of his memoirs. He writes as follows:
4) James, the brother of the Lord, succeeded to the government of the church in conjunction with the apostles. He has been called the just by all from the times of the Lord to the present day, for there were many that bore the name of James. He was holy from the womb of his mother.
5) He drank no wine nor strong drink, nor did he eat flesh. No razor came upon his head; he did not anoint himself with oil, and he did not use the bath.
6) He alone was permitted to enter into the holy place; for he wore not woolen but linen garments. And he was in the habit of entering alone into the temple, and he was frequently found upon his knees begging forgiveness for the people, so that his knees became hard like those of a camel in consequence of his constantly bending them in his worship of God and asking forgiveness for the people.
7) Because of his exceeding great justice he was called the just, and oblias, which in Greek signifies a bulwark of the people, and justice, in accordance with what the prophets declare concerning him.
8) Now some of the seven sects, which existed among the people and which have been mentioned by me in the memoirs, asked him: What is the gate of Jesus? And he replied that it was the savior.
9) On account of these words some believed that Jesus is the Christ. But the sects mentioned above did not believe either in a resurrection or in the coming of one to give to every man according to his works. But as many as believed did so on account of James.
10) Therefore, when many even of the rulers believed, there was a commotion among the Jews and scribes and Pharisees, who said that there was danger that the whole people would be looking for Jesus as the Christ. Coming therefore in a body to James they said: We entreat you, restrain the people, for they have gone astray in regard to Jesus, as if he were the Christ. We entreat you to persuade all that have come to the feast of the Passover concerning Jesus; for we all have confidence in you. For we bear you witness, as do all the people, that you are just and that you do not respect persons.
11) Persuade, therefore, the multitude not to be led astray concerning Jesus. For the whole people, and all of us also, have confidence in you. Stand therefore upon the pinnacle of the temple, that from that high position you might be clearly seen, and that your words may be readily heard by all the people. For all the tribes, with the gentiles also, have come together on account of the Passover.
12) The aforesaid scribes and Pharisees therefore placed James upon the pinnacle of the temple and cried out to him and said: Just one, in whom we ought all to have confidence, forasmuch as the people are led astray after Jesus, the crucified one, declare to us what the gate of Jesus is.
13) And he answered with a loud voice: Why do you ask me concerning Jesus, the son of man? He himself sits in heaven at the right hand of the great power, and is about to come upon the clouds of heaven!
14) And, when many were fully convinced and gloried in the testimony of James, and said: Hosanna to the son of David, these same scribes and Pharisees said again to one another: We have done badly in supplying such testimony to Jesus. But let us go up and throw him down, in order that they may be afraid to believe him.
15) And they cried out, saying: Oh, oh, the just man is also in error! And they fulfilled the scripture written in Isaiah: Let us take away the just man because he is troublesome to us; therefore they shall eat the fruit of their works.
16) So they went up and threw down the just man, and said to each other: Let us stone James the just. And they began to stone him, for he was not killed by the fall; but he turned and knelt down and said: I entreat you, Lord God our father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.
17) And while they were thus stoning him one of the priests of the sons of Rechab, the son of the Rechabites, who are mentioned by Jeremiah the prophet, cried out, saying: Cease! What are you doing? The just one is praying for you!
18) And one of them, one of the fullers, took the club with which he beat out clothes and struck the just man on the head. And thus he suffered martyrdom. And they buried him on the spot, by the temple, and his monument still remains by the temple. He became a true witness, both to Jews and Greeks, that Jesus is the Christ. And immediately Vespasian besieged them.
19) These things Hegesippus at any rate also relates at length along with Clement. And James was so marvelous a one, and so acclaimed among all the rest for his justice, that the sensible ones of the Jews opined that this was the cause of the siege of Jerusalem, which happened immediately after his martyrdom for no other reason than their daring act against him.
20) Josephus, therefore, did not refuse to attest thereto in writing, by the words following: “These miseries befell the Jews by way of revenge for James the Just, who was the brother of Jesus that was called Christ, on this account, that they had slain him who was a most righteous person.”
Immediately after this Eusebius cites Jos Ant 20:200 as a description of James' death:
21) The same Josephus declares the manner of his death in the twentieth book of the Antiquities, in these words: “Cæsar sent Albinus into Judea to be procurator, when he had heard that Festus was dead. Now Ananus junior, who, as we said, had been admitted to the high priesthood, was in temper bold and daring in an extraordinary manner. He was also of the sect of the Sadducees, who are more savage in judgment than the other Jews, as we have already signified. Since, therefore, this was the character of Ananus, he thought he had now a proper opportunity [to exercise his authority,] because Festus was dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembles the Sanhedrim of judges, and brings before them James the brother of Jesus. who was called Christ, and some others [of his companions,] and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and those who were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done. They also went to the king [Agrippa,] desiring him to send to Ananus that he should act so no more, for that what he had already done could not be justified,” &c.
So, yes, Eusebius does not connect the statement about James the Just being the reason for the destruction of Jerusalem with the passage in Josephus 20:200 that he regards as an account of James' death. I'm not sure what this proves, though, as Eusebius may not know how Clement, Hegesippus, or Origen for that matter, came up with their statements.
Edit: That statement by Clement, passed on to us by Eusebius at Church history 2.1.3-6, seems to be in a side bar comment by Eusebius:
3) But Clement in the sixth book of his Hypotyposeis writes as follows: For they say that Peter and James and John after the ascension of the savior, as if also preferred by the Lord, did not strive for glory, but rather elected James the just to be bishop of Jerusalem.
4) And the same [Clement] in the seventh book of the same work says also these things concerning him: The Lord after the resurrection delivered knowledge to James the just and to John and to Peter, and they delivered it to the rest of the apostles, and the rest of the apostles to the seventy, of whom Barnabas was one.
5) But there were two Jameses, one being the just one, who was cast down from the pinnacle and was beaten unto death with a club by a fuller, and another who was beheaded.
6) Paul indeed makes mention of the same just one, writing: But I did not see any other of the apostles except James the brother of the Lord
However, a side-bar comment (corresponding sections 5-6 above) does not explain how he could make a mistake and attributed his own comment to Clement, unless he is citing a source for this, other than Clement's Hypotyposeis, which added comments (5-6). This may also have been Hegesippus.
A more full list of passages about James will have to follow later.
DCH
