Slavonic Josephus: Master-copy of the Jesus Story?

[maryhelena]

Hi maryhelena, I'm not arguing directly right now (heh heh). I'm thinking of the obvious lacuna before the Herod/Persians story as we have it in L&L's text of SlaJos. It begins "Having so spoken (Herod) sent them off to the innkeepers ..." We don't know the cause of the lacuna, and since we don't know how much of the story preceded the part that we have, it's hard to make good guesses about the cause (e.g. whether a copyist missed a few lines, whether a whole page or more fell out of an earlier manuscript, whether the story was written in a margin and a later copyist didn't realize where it began, etc.). I wonder to what extent the mutilation of the text at this spot indicates that this story came into an older version of the text as a detached mini-narrative. If it did, that would generate some probability that the story is not located in our present text in the right place chronologically in the narrative.

The above may be of inconsequential import. Still, it seems to me that you may want to account for the text's mutilation, and any consequences of that for your hypothesis.

Cheers, f

Sure, we can propose arguments re why the lacuna in the text we now have. However, we have to deal with the context of the text that we do have. It would be interesting if a lost gospel was to turn up that included all the missing parts of the present text. Question then would be: 1) why would someone insert this material into War. 2) why the missing lucuna if they did so. 3) the master-copy of the Jesus story was originally to be found in an older version of War.

If somebody, some group, were wanting to develop a wonder-doer/Jesus story and just published a type of storybook - methinks it would not get much attention re longevity. Publish that story within a larger historical work - and bobs your uncle - your story will hit prime time....Yep, people so often think that Josephus can be used to support historicity for the gospel Jesus - the alternative is far more probable: The writing of Josephus is supporting the Jesus story not it's historicity.

[Clive]

a lost gospel

The nine tragedies of Seneca formed a philosophical whole, beginning with The Mad Hercules, in which some weighty moral questions are posed, and culminating with Hercules on Oeta, where the soul is at last liberated from its bodily prison.[15] It is reasonable to assume that this series originally included a historical drama, a fabula praetexta, in which the lessons expounded in the nine tragedies were applied to a contemporary subject. It is our hypothesis that this historical drama, which is now lost, was Seneca’s Nazarenus. When Lucilius decided to omit the Nazarenus from the collection of Seneca’s works, he substituted for it his own recently completed Octavia, a play for which he could expect to find an appreciative audience in the wake of Nero’s overthrow. But while Lucilius’ Octavia is a vitriolic piece of political propaganda, having no organic relationship to the nine extant plays of Seneca, the Nazarenus, as we reconstruct it in this book, was an eloquent summation of Seneca’s philosophical ideals and a monument to his mastery of the dramatic art.

While the gospels survived because they reinforced the Christian faith, Seneca’s Nazarenus was consigned to oblivion because it offended Christians and pagans alike. Christians must have welcomed some of the new information presented by Seneca particularly his additions to the lists of witnesses of the resurrection but were faced with the problem of reconciling this new testimony, coming from a source as respected as Seneca, with their previous­ly held beliefs. Each of the evangelists had a slightly different solution for this dilemma, expunging or modifying those elements that appeared too obviously pagan, or in direct conflict with accepted beliefs, while trying to explain why the information presented in the play had not been available earlier.

The evidence suggests that the author of Mark’s gospel witnessed a per­formance of Seneca’s tragedy. This gospel is usually considered the first to be set down in writing, and its author seems to have resided in Rome.[16] Obviously impressed by the perfor­mance, but shocked by its pagan tendencies, the author of Mark’s gospel did not dare to include more than a highly condensed summary of the play

http://www.nazarenus.com/0-4-tragospel.htm

[ficino]

Hi maryhelena, have you come across the Revelation of the Magi? I think it's in a Syriac manuscript in the Vatican. It was recently translated by Brent Landau. A friend who read it said that Landau distinguished layers within the text. The later layers are closer to orthodox Christianity in their theology than is that which Landau thinks is the earliest layer. See Landau's post on his own book:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brent-lan ... 88238.html

I haven't read the actual book (not sure that I will), so I don't know whether this text dovetails with SlaJos' story of the Persians and Herod. My friend said it didn't seem to do so, particularly.

[maryhelena]

Hi maryhelena, have you come across the Revelation of the Magi? I think it's in a Syriac manuscript in the Vatican. It was recently translated by Brent Landau. A friend who read it said that Landau distinguished layers within the text. The later layers are closer to orthodox Christianity in their theology than is that which Landau thinks is the earliest layer. See Landau's post on his own book:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brent-lan ... 88238.html

I haven't read the actual book (not sure that I will), so I don't know whether this text dovetails with SlaJos' story of the Persians and Herod. My friend said it didn't seem to do so, particularly.

Hi, ficino

No, I've not come across the Revelation of the Magi. I looked at the link but did not find anything there of interest.

I found a pdf review at this link:

https://www.academia.edu/3875660/Brent_ ... 011_294-98_

Further work needs to be done on situating the work within an Iranian context, not only in terms of distinctive
Iranian elements, but also in terms of the literature of Iranian Christians. Brock’s interesting suggestions of Manichean influence also need to be fully explored. Finally, serious consideration needs to be given to the dating of the text. Careful analysis of a variety of linguistic, thematic and text critical issues need to temper the natural desire to date a text as early as possible.

As to any connection with the Slavonic Josephus story, i.e. re knowledge of that story, I can't say without the actual text in front of me...Since the Slavonic Josephus story is condensed in gMatthew - that's all anyone would need to develop the story to suit their own particular context.

The NT related material in Slavonic Josephus is early. It is pre Antiquities 93/94 c.e, - or at least written by someone with no knowledge of Antiquities.

[ficino]

Thanks for the link!

[Stephan Huller]

The Slavonic text is not older than Antiquities give me a fucking break. It might have incorporated an older (Latin) version of Jewish Wars or other older material. But it is impossible to know that (i.e. the dating of the secondary source material) for certain.

[maryhelena]

The Slavonic text is not older than Antiquities give me a fucking break. It might have incorporated an older (Latin) version of Jewish Wars or other older material. But it is impossible to know that (i.e. the dating of the secondary source material) for certain.

I suggest, Stephan Huller, that you cut out your bad language when replying to any post of mine. Don't expect any reply from me when you resort to language that I find to be disrespectable in any civil exchange of ideas.

I am posting the following material as I had planned to do so:

Slavonic Josephus:

1. While Philip was [still] in possession of his dominion, he saw a dream,—how an eagle tore out both his eyes. 2. And he summoned all his wise men. 3. But when each interpreted the dream differently, there came to him suddenly, without being summoned, that man of whom we have previously written, that he went about in skins of animals and cleansed the people in the waters of the Jordan. 4. And he spake: "Give ear to the word of the Lord,—the dream which thou hast seen. 5. The eagle—that is thy venality; because that bird is violent and rapacious. 6. And that sin will take away thy eyes which are thy dominion and thy wife." 7. And when he had thus spoken, Philip died before evening and his dominion was given to Agrippa.

----------

1. And Herod, his brother, took his wife Herodias. 2. And because of her all the doctors of the Law abhorred him, but durst not accuse him before his face.

3. But only that one whom they called a wild man, came to him in anger and spake: "Why hast thou taken the wife of thy brother? 4. As thy brother hath died a death void of pity, thou too wilt be reaped off by the heavenly sickle. 5. God's decree will not be silenced, but will destroy thee through evil affliction in foreign lands. 6. For thou dost not raise up seed for thy brother, but gratifiest thy fleshly lust and committest adultery, seeing that four children of him are alive."

7. Now when Herod heard [this], he was filled with wrath and commanded that they should beat him and drive him away. 8. But he accused Herod incessantly wherever he found him, and p. 106 right up to the time when he (H.) put him under arrest and gave orders to slay him.

Antiquities: Book 18.

106 About this time Herod's brother Philip departed this life, in the twentieth year of the reign of Tiberius, after ruling Trachonitis and Gaulanitis and the Batanean nation for thirty seven years, with moderation and in an easy-going style. 107 He spent all his time in the area assigned to him, making his rounds with a few chosen friends. The throne on which he sat in judgment went with him on the circuit, and when anyone met him who needed his help, he made no delay, but wherever it might be he soon had his tribunal set up and sat and heard the case, penalising the guilty and aquitting those who were unjustly accused. 108 He died at Julias, and was brought to the tomb he had built for himself in advance, and buried with great pomp. As he left behind no children, Tiberius took his territory and joined it to the province of Syria, but ordered that the tributes collected in his tetrachy should be held on deposit.

Antiquities: Book 18.

36 Their sister Herodias was married to Herod, the son of Herod the Great by Mariamne, the daughter of Simon the high priest. They had a daughter, Salome, after whose birth Herodias set about overturning the laws of our country and divorced from her husband while he was alive and married Herod (Antipas), her husband's brother on the father's side, who was tetrarch of Galilee. 137 Her daughter Salome was married to Philip, Herod's son and tetrarch of Trachonitis, and as he died childless, Aristobulus, Herod's son and Agrippa's brother, married her.

Mark: ch.6:

17 For Herod himself had sent men who arrested John, bound him, and put him in prison on account of Herodias, his brother Philip's wife, because Herod had married her. 18 For John had been telling Herod, "It is not lawful for you to have your brother's wife."

Matthew ch.14

3 For Herod had arrested John, bound him, and put him in prison on account of Herodias, his brother Philip's wife, 4 because John had been telling him, "It is not lawful for you to have her." 5 Though Herod wanted to put him to death, he feared the crowd, because they regarded him as a prophet.

Luke ch.3

18 So, with many other exhortations, he proclaimed the good news to the people. 19 But Herod the ruler, who had been rebuked by him because of Herodias, his brother's wife, and because of all the evil things that Herod had done, 20 added to them all by shutting up John in prison.

Both gMark and gMatthew name Philip's wife as Herodias. gLuke, written post Antiquities drops Philip as being the husband of Herodias. The Slavonic Josephus, like gMark and gMatthew, looks to have been written prior to Antiquities.

Nikos Kokkinos has disputed the Antiquities account of the daughter of Herodias, Salome, being married to Philip. His argument is mentioned in an article by Ross Kraemer:

Implicating Herodias and Her Daughter
in the Death of John the Baptizer:
A (Christian) Theological Strategy?
Ross S. Kraemer

JBL 125, no. 2 (2006): 321–349

[wiki]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herod_II[/wiki]

Herod was the first husband of Herodias, and because the Gospel of Mark states that Herodias was married to Philip, some scholars have argued that his name was actually Herod Philip. Many scholars dispute this, however, and believe the Gospel writer was in error, a suggestion supported by the fact that the later Gospel of Luke drops the name Philip.[3][4][/b]

gMark and gMatthew in error - and gLuke got the facts straight re Herodias? Or the unthinkable - Josephus was writing, in Antiquities, a pseudo-historical version of Jewish history regarding Herodias, Salome and Philip - necessitating that gLuke drop any mention of Herodias being married to Philip.