Did Josephus write the received Paulina and Mundus?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Paul the Uncertain
Posts: 994
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:25 am
Contact:

Did Josephus write the received Paulina and Mundus?

Post by Paul the Uncertain »

There are some threads currently active about the Flavian Testimony and the term of Pilate in Judea. Much is made of Josephus's story of a 19 CE expulsion of Jews from Rome being surrounded by Josephus's Pilate stories.

I am skeptical about placing much weight on the received location of the expulsion story. The block of text would flow nicely from the mention of Germanicus's death some hundreds of words earlier, and not just because that incident, too, is datable to 19 CE. "Flow" arguments are frankly aesthetic; maybe Josephus wanted to skip back and forth both in space and (perhaps) also in time.

One observation I think many here will agree with is that the first words of the expulsion block occur just after a text which has been substantially altered over the centuries. Whether or not Josephus mentioned Jesus versus Pilate, what we receive on that subject was probably not written by Josephus alone.

Similarly, I suspect that just after the beginning of the received expulsion block lies a long, long stretch of editorial alteration, the story of Paulina and Mundus. As with the Testimony, I don't have a strong opinion about whether Josephus himself wrote something about Paulina and Mundus that has been improved since then, or whether what we read is entirely someone else's work.

I explained the foundations for my suspicions that Josephus is not the sole author of this tale a few years ago on the Uncertaintist blog,

https://uncertaintist.wordpress.com/201 ... f-paulina/

That posting as a whole is premised on the usual dating of Pilate's term (26-36 CE), which I happen to accept. However, the issue of authenticity is discussed more-or-less independently starting at the heading "Is the Paulina story credible and authentic?"

In brief compass, I find it anomalous that:

(1) The story is written as if it were the treatment of a fictive stage farce, an inversion of Plautus's Amphitryon
(2) The story runs about 4 times the length of the story about the Jewish crooks and the expulsion-conscription of thousands
(3) The story is about 10 times the length needed to convey everything relevant or parallel to the Jewish expulsion story
(4) There is a mass of digressive "literary" detail (e.g. Mundus's suicidal ideation and Paulina's leisurely progressive disillusionment after she's been seduced) - "Josephus" is in no rush to return to his account of a dramatic Jewish catastrophe
(5) There are no Jewish characters in sight
(6) Josephus doesn't claim that there is any connection between Paulina and Mundus and the Jewish disaster:
  • He never mentions that followers of the Egyptian religion were expelled at the same time as the Jews
  • No mass expulsion occurs in the Paulina and Mundus story itself: nobody except the few individuals involved suffers
  • The only character who is forced to leave Rome is Mundus, who does not follow the Egyptian religion
  • We don't know that an incident like this, even if one happened, was why the followers of the Egyptian religion were expelled from Rome

We only know about the commonalities between the two stories from later writers. If all we had was the received Josephus, then the strangeness of Paulina and Mundus would be even more immediately apparent.

Of course, my worst suspicions about Paulina and Mundus could be true, and the Jewish expulsion story could still have always been located amidst the Pilate material. Nevertheless, I have difficulty placing much weight on its received location when I suspect that that location is riddled with shennanigans.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Did Josephus write the received Paulina and Mundus?

Post by Giuseppe »

I agree that the Paulina episode and the four Jews episode are mere gossip introduced there not by Josephus in order to distance the TF from the episode of the Samaritan false prophet slain by Pilate. Without the two episodes, the TF is followed immediately by the Samaritan episode, hence raising potentially embarrassment about a possible connection Jesus/Samaria.
The argument holds even if, as you say, the reference to an expulsion of Jews from Rome was original and so a potential connection with Jesus was someway eclipsed by the interpolated gossip about Paulina.

I am talking however about "problems" (for Christian readers) raised after the interpolation of the entire TF and not at the origin of the interpolation of the TF.
User avatar
Ken Olson
Posts: 1278
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 9:26 am

Re: Did Josephus write the received Paulina and Mundus?

Post by Ken Olson »

Daniel Schwartz and other have proposed that the Paulina and Fulvia stories came from the same source, which concerned events in Rome, and Josephus inserted it into his narrative based on his main source which concerned Judea.

1) The introduction "About this time," which Josephus and other ancient writers use when introducing material not from other narratives into their main narrative. The words do not imply a causal relationship with other events narrated and only a very general temporal proximity. (See especially Schwartz, 'Kata Toyton ton Kaipon: Josephus' Source on Agrippa II', Jewish Quarterly Review 72.4 (1982) 241-268).
2) The fact that Tacitus Annals 2.85 also pairs the expulsion of the Egyptian and Jewish cults from Rome in 19 CE.
3) That Josephus included the story about Paulina, which has nothing to do with Jews, suggests that it was already paired with the Fulvia story in Josephus source, and that he decided to include it just because it was interesting. That it's probably not true (though perhaps 'inspired by actual events') and just street gossip that was circulating in Rome need not count against Josephus including it.

Best,

Ken
Paul the Uncertain
Posts: 994
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:25 am
Contact:

Re: Did Josephus write the received Paulina and Mundus?

Post by Paul the Uncertain »

@Giuseppe

I can see some apologetic advantage in separating mention of Jesus from mention of the charismatic Samaritan leader. There are many less intrusive ways to achieve that than intentionally displacing a big block of unrelated text. For example, insert the TF between the first and second Pilate anecdotes.

@Ken Olson

What are your thoughts on the Schwartz (and others) hypothesis?

I have much less doubt about the historicity of Fulvia and the Con-men than Paulina and Mundus, and that the Fulvia story was part of Josephus's original composition than that the Paulina was.

On your numbered points:

(1) I have no problem that the formula about this time lacks specificity and lacks causal import.

(2) Josephus mentions only Jews being conscripted, being punished for resisting conscription on account of Jewish tradition, or being banished from the city. That weighs against Josephus including something to explain why Jews were persecuted the same as other people, when according to him, they weren't.

(3a) "That Josephus included the story about Paulina" is what is being questionned. I have no problem that IF he included it, then he had a source, and that source might have included all manner of other material besides.
(3b) It is one thing to say that not everything a writer claims is gospel, but whether or not something is true is relevant to whether or not it was originally included in a work of purported fact that has all but certainly been partially corrupted in transmission.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Did Josephus write the received Paulina and Mundus?

Post by Giuseppe »

Paul the Uncertain wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 8:21 am @Giuseppe

I can see some apologetic advantage in separating mention of Jesus from mention of the charismatic Samaritan leader.
not even when in the Fourth Gospel the accusation thrown against Jesus is of being a Samaritan?

(I presume that you have meant in your original post: I can NOT see some apologetic advantage in separating mention of Jesus from mention of the charismatic Samaritan leader.)
Paul the Uncertain
Posts: 994
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:25 am
Contact:

Re: Did Josephus write the received Paulina and Mundus?

Post by Paul the Uncertain »

Analysts observe that the relevance of Paulina and Mundus to Jewish history would be that both Egyptian-rite adherents and Jews were persecuted at Rome in 19 CE.

In the Jospehan telling, conscription and expulsion fall only on Jews. In this, Suetonius corroborates Josephus, telling that although both groups were persecuted, only Jews were drafted (Tiberius 36). Suetonius's version lacks dates, so while Tiberius also banished unrepentant astrologers, that may have been at a different time.

https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/ ... rius*.html
He abolished foreign cults, especially the Egyptian and the Jewish rites, compelling all who were addicted to such superstitions to burn their religious vestments and all their paraphernalia. Those of the Jews who were of military age he assigned to provinces of less healthy climate, ostensibly to serve in the army; the others of that same race or of similar beliefs he banished from the city, on pain of slavery for life if they did not obey. He banished the astrologers as well, but pardoned such as begged for indulgence and promised to give up their art.
Tacitus's account doesn't categorically contradict Suetonius, although Tacitus can be very reasonably interpreted as saying that both religious groups suffered together. Then again, it's not so hard to harmonize the two versions, either.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... apter%3D85
There was a debate too about expelling the Egyptian and Jewish worship, and a resolution of the Senate was passed that four thousand of the freedmen class who were infected with those superstitions and were of military age should be transported to the island of Sardinia, to quell the brigandage of the place, a cheap sacrifice should they die from the pestilential climate. The rest were to quit Italy, unless before a certain day they repudiated their impious rites.
The position which I am exploring doesn't exclude that Josephus wrote something about scandals in Roman exotic religious circles. As with the Testimonium, there is no way to exclude Josephus having written something which was later improved by others. There are also affirmative cases to be made for both received passages having been built on something Josephus wrote about the subjects in question.

Fine. Let's leave it at Josephus is probably not the sole author of the Testimonium, a conclusion based mostly on the improbability of the author believing what the passage asserts. But at least Pilate killing a Jew disliked by some other Jews is relevant to the topic of the work.

Paulina and Mundus, as received in place, is a farce. It is improbable that Josephus believed what we now read. Moreover, neither Josephus himself nor what we can confidently assert really happened renders the Jewish predicament of 19 CE anywhere near commensurate with the Egyptian-rite situation.

(Anticipating the rejoinder that Josephus believed in religious miracles: this forum exists because about two billion living people profess to believe that a dead man lived again. It does not follow that any of those two billion would confuse a cliched literary sex farce with a factual report of a real-life event intended to be interpreted literally.)
User avatar
Ken Olson
Posts: 1278
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 9:26 am

Re: Did Josephus write the received Paulina and Mundus?

Post by Ken Olson »

Paul the Uncertain wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 8:21 am @Ken Olson

What are your thoughts on the Schwartz (and others) hypothesis?
Sorry for the slow reply. Other things intervened. I find the theory that Josephus was following a single source for the two events in Rome (Paulina and Fulvia) to be the most plausible available explanation for their appearance in his text.
(3a) "That Josephus included the story about Paulina" is what is being questionned. I have no problem that IF he included it, then he had a source, and that source might have included all manner of other material besides.
(3b) It is one thing to say that not everything a writer claims is gospel, but whether or not something is true is relevant to whether or not it was originally included in a work of purported fact that has all but certainly been partially corrupted in transmission.
If I'm understanding you right, you reject the theory that Josephus would have included the Paulina story if he found it in his source because:

(1) It is obviously not credible and

(2) Josephus either had too much personal integrity to include a story that is not credible in his work of purported fact, or at least he was concerned enough that his readers accept everything that he included as credible that he would not have included a story so obviously not credible.

Is that correct?

Also, have you read the discussion of the issue in Shelly Matthews, First Converts: Rich Pagan Women and the Rhetoric of Mission in Early Judaism and Christianity (2001). I can give a recap if not.

Best,

Ken
Paul the Uncertain
Posts: 994
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:25 am
Contact:

Re: Did Josephus write the received Paulina and Mundus?

Post by Paul the Uncertain »

Hi, Ken

No worries about the pace of replies. I hope all that intervened went well for you, and that you enjoyed a great Thanksgiving.
If I'm understanding you right, you reject the theory that Josephus would have included the Paulina story if he found it in his source ...
I reject that he wrote or included what we receive about Paulina and Mundus in the Antiquities.

Could he have written or included a more realistic note about somewhat parallel scandals in both Jewish and Egyptian Roman cult circles under Tiberius? Sure. And could he have understood those scandals as a chief reason for the expulsions (although he only mentions one of the two in what we receive)? Sure.
... because: (1) It is obviously not credible and
Yes, in the form we have it, and "not credible" in two senses:
  • that it didn't happen as told except perhaps onstage, and
  • some fact claims of the tale would be unknowable by natural means by a non-participant.
Also (1 bis) some of the fact claims are irrelevant to any Jewish concern, whether or not they are plausible or witnessable. (A list of examples is appended below.)

This is apart from the overall problem that Josephus doesn't explain any relation between the two scandals, nor does he mention a parallel expulsion of Egyptian cultists in what we receive. (Maybe in the original he did?) Some additional causes for skepticism were listed in the OP; I sense you're trying to focus on a few chief complaints here.
(2) Josephus either had too much personal integrity to include a story that is not credible in his work of purported fact, or at least he was concerned enough that his readers accept everything that he included as credible that he would not have included a story so obviously not credible.
I don't think he would make implausible fact claims for which there is no plausible non-fictive source. I don't see any basis in that to opine on his personal integrity or propose that he would have unrealistically high expectations about his reception.
Also, have you read the discussion of the issue in Shelly Matthews, First Converts: Rich Pagan Women and the Rhetoric of Mission in Early Judaism and Christianity (2001). I can give a recap if not.
I've read her chapter on Paulina-Fulvia, also the introduction and conclusion sections of her book. If you'd like to discuss something from the book here in this discussion, that'd be fine with me.

Appendix: some details suspicious of invention because of irrelevance, inherent implausibility, or difficulty of witnessing (one or more):

1. Mundus proposes that Paulina adulterously prostitute herself for a specific sum (200,000 drachmas)
2. Mundus's suicidal ideation, involving a specified cause of death (starvation, the likelihood of that plan succeeding is nil)
3. That Mundus did stop eating for a while
4. That Mundus's father was the specific person who freed Ida
5. The sum of Ida's bribe (50,000 drachmas)
6. That she got none of the money
7. That the terms of the bribe were half now, half on delivery
8. Which priest went to Paulina's house (the eldest)
9. The specific content of a two-party conversation described as private
10. Why the huband concurred with the plan (also in a two-party plausibly private conversation)
11. That Paulina took her supper on the fateful evening at the temple of Isis
12. The duration of the couple's sexual encounter
13. When Mundus left in the morning (before the priests got up, and the witness for that is ...?)
14. That she shared the experience with friends and their interior mental reactions
15. When she spoke with Mundus (two days later)
16a. The content of their two-party conversation despite its plausible privacy
16b. That after getting away with it, he would confess to raping a powerfully connected woman
16c. That he would argue that she ought to have prostituted herself instead.
User avatar
maryhelena
Posts: 2884
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: Did Josephus write the received Paulina and Mundus?

Post by maryhelena »

Paul the Uncertain wrote: Tue Nov 30, 2021 6:31 pm Hi, Ken

No worries about the pace of replies. I hope all that intervened went well for you, and that you enjoyed a great Thanksgiving.
If I'm understanding you right, you reject the theory that Josephus would have included the Paulina story if he found it in his source ...
I reject that he wrote or included what we receive about Paulina and Mundus in the Antiquities.

Could he have written or included a more realistic note about somewhat parallel scandals in both Jewish and Egyptian Roman cult circles under Tiberius? Sure. And could he have understood those scandals as a chief reason for the expulsions (although he only mentions one of the two in what we receive)? Sure.
... because: (1) It is obviously not credible and
Yes, in the form we have it, and "not credible" in two senses:
  • that it didn't happen as told except perhaps onstage, and
  • some fact claims of the tale would be unknowable by natural means by a non-participant.
Also (1 bis) some of the fact claims are irrelevant to any Jewish concern, whether or not they are plausible or witnessable. (A list of examples is appended below.)

This is apart from the overall problem that Josephus doesn't explain any relation between the two scandals, nor does he mention a parallel expulsion of Egyptian cultists in what we receive. (Maybe in the original he did?) Some additional causes for skepticism were listed in the OP; I sense you're trying to focus on a few chief complaints here.
(2) Josephus either had too much personal integrity to include a story that is not credible in his work of purported fact, or at least he was concerned enough that his readers accept everything that he included as credible that he would not have included a story so obviously not credible.
I don't think he would make implausible fact claims for which there is no plausible non-fictive source. I don't see any basis in that to opine on his personal integrity or propose that he would have unrealistically high expectations about his reception.
Also, have you read the discussion of the issue in Shelly Matthews, First Converts: Rich Pagan Women and the Rhetoric of Mission in Early Judaism and Christianity (2001). I can give a recap if not.
I've read her chapter on Paulina-Fulvia, also the introduction and conclusion sections of her book. If you'd like to discuss something from the book here in this discussion, that'd be fine with me.

Appendix: some details suspicious of invention because of irrelevance, inherent implausibility, or difficulty of witnessing (one or more):

1. Mundus proposes that Paulina adulterously prostitute herself for a specific sum (200,000 drachmas)
2. Mundus's suicidal ideation, involving a specified cause of death (starvation, the likelihood of that plan succeeding is nil)
3. That Mundus did stop eating for a while
4. That Mundus's father was the specific person who freed Ida
5. The sum of Ida's bribe (50,000 drachmas)
6. That she got none of the money
7. That the terms of the bribe were half now, half on delivery
8. Which priest went to Paulina's house (the eldest)
9. The specific content of a two-party conversation described as private
10. Why the huband concurred with the plan (also in a two-party plausibly private conversation)
11. That Paulina took her supper on the fateful evening at the temple of Isis
12. The duration of the couple's sexual encounter
13. When Mundus left in the morning (before the priests got up, and the witness for that is ...?)
14. That she shared the experience with friends and their interior mental reactions
15. When she spoke with Mundus (two days later)
16a. The content of their two-party conversation despite its plausible privacy
16b. That after getting away with it, he would confess to raping a powerfully connected woman
16c. That he would argue that she ought to have prostituted herself instead.
Have you given any thought to the idea that the Paulina story is an allegory? A Josephan allegory not Roman gossip. Yes, allegory requires interpretation - but in the case of the Pauline story, a story following the TF - perhaps a linkage between the two stories is possible. Both stories contain references to crucifixion.
Paul the Uncertain
Posts: 994
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:25 am
Contact:

Re: Did Josephus write the received Paulina and Mundus?

Post by Paul the Uncertain »

Greetings, MH
Have you given any thought to the idea that the Paulina story is an allegory?
I have thought about it as a stand-alone work. I don't see allegory so much as social satire. Fairly blunt social satire, too. Among the Roman characters (Paulina, Mundus, Ida, Saturninus, and Paulina's friends), intellectual firepower and severity of punishment are inversely correlated with social status.

Among them, only freedwoman Ida is depicted as having concern for a fellow human's well being (however callous she is towards Paulina). Paulina's relationship with her friends is depicted as dominated by status display, and Saturninus seems altogether emotionally absent, before and after the outrage.

In farce, heavy handedness like that is a feature, not a bug.
A Josephan allegory not Roman gossip.
I can see gossip at some lower level of detail and specificity (Temples of Isis are cesspits of corruption ...), and an opportunity to compare and contrast the Jewish scandal ("they made money the old fashioned way; they stole it") with something much worse, a toxic corruption perhaps believed to be typical of the Isis cult.
the Pauline story, a story following the TF
I doubt that the Fulvia story, and so whatever version of the Paulina story was originally present, if any, belongs where we find it now. However,
perhaps a linkage between the two stories is possible. Both stories contain references to crucifixion.
Yes, and there's the character name Saturninus in parallel roles, and the revelation of the crime specifically on the 'third day.' I am told that some people see the idea of a married woman consorting with her god as parallel to the betrothed mother of Jesus being impregnated by hers.

Moving the text block to its current position adjacent to the TF may have served somebody's agenda sometime during the 800-900 years that we don't get to see the state of the manuscripts.

It may be of some interest to compare the received Antiquities version of the story with pseudo-Hegesippus's (Book 2, chapter 4), online here:

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/heges ... _book2.htm

There's no Ida, executions but not specifically crucifixions, no name Saturninus, and no specific timing for the revelation of the crime. It is a bit shorter than the other, but develops other concerns of the characters in some detail, especially as "pillow talk," partially making up for its relatively streamlined cast and plot.
Post Reply