Peter,
It is clear that at the beginning of Antiquities Josephus gives a slightly different explanation of the relationship between Antiquities and Jewish Wars:
Now I have undertaken the present work, as thinking it will appear to all the Greeks worthy of their study; for it will contain all our antiquities, and the constitution of our government, as interpreted out of the Hebrew Scriptures. And indeed I did formerly intend, when I wrote of the war, to explain who the Jews originally were, - what fortunes they had been subject to, - and by what legislature they had been instructed in piety, and the exercise of other virtues, - what wars also they had made in remote ages, till they were unwillingly engaged in this last with the Romans: but because this work would take up a great compass, I separated it into a set treatise by itself, with a beginning of its own, and its own conclusion; but in process of time, as usually happens to such as undertake great things, I grew weary and went on slowly, it being a large subject, and a difficult thing to translate our history into a foreign, and to us unaccustomed language. However, some persons there were who desired to know our history, and so exhorted me to go on with it; and, above all the rest, Epaphroditus, a man who is a lover of all kind of learning, but is principally delighted with the knowledge of history, and this on account of his having been himself concerned in great affairs, and many turns of fortune, and having shown a wonderful rigor of an excellent nature, and an immovable virtuous resolution in them all. I yielded to this man's persuasions, who always excites such as have abilities in what is useful and acceptable, to join their endeavors with his. I was also ashamed myself to permit any laziness of disposition to have a greater influence upon me, than the delight of taking pains in such studies as were very useful: I thereupon stirred up myself, and went on with my work more cheerfully. Besides the foregoing motives, I had others which I greatly reflected on; and these were, that our forefathers were willing to communicate such things to others; and that some of the Greeks took considerable pains to know the affairs of our nation.
So the story is of course that at the time of writing of Life (see conclusion) Antiquities was written apparently at the persuasion of a certain 'Epaphroditus' a name also associated with the orthodox Pauline corpus (i.e. at the point at which the short Marcionite letters were expanded to include large amounts of 'personal information' about the Apostle).
Coincidence? I don't think so. Nor do I think the explanation here of Josephus overcoming the mistrust of his 'race' (= the Jews) of outsiders is very convincing. But most importantly we have to question how and why a chronology of the Jewish people was written in 93 CE (cf the introduction of this volume):
His prophecy became true in 68 C.E. when Nero committed suicide and Vespasian became Ceasar. As a result, Josephus was freed; he moved to Roman and became a Roman citizen, taking the Vespasian family name Flavius. Vespasian commissioned Josephus to write a history of the war, which he finished in 78 C.E., the Jewish War. His second major work, the Antiquities of the Jews, was completed in 93 C.E. He wrote Against Apion in about 96-100 C.E. and The Life of Josephus, his autobiography, about 100. He died shortly after.
was completed ending at the beginning of the Jewish War (in the 60s)
but no mention is made of perhaps the most fascinating period of Jewish history - i.e. the period from 70 - 93 CE. What historians would give for information about that period when temple Judaism comes to an end! How isn't that 'interesting enough' for Josephus now to mention? As we see in Clement's Josephus - it is only natural for an author to think they are the center of the universe. Moreover most literary audiences too are most interested in the time they are living in is also second nature. Why wouldn't his audience, reading a book purporting to be a history of the Jewish people
have been completely surprised that we learn absolutely nothing - bupkis - about what happened to the Jews today - i.e. after the bloody Jewish War! Many presumably would have been dissatisfied with this chronology. The idea that this wouldn't have been of interest to anyone is simply nonsense. The reason it isn't here is because someone stopped the chronology which, as Clement of Alexandria notes, continued until 147/48 CE. That's the best explanation. Our first witness to a text should be believed. The idea that the Josephan corpus was altered is hardly controversial. It's not like, let's say the Bible
One more thing about the fighting age for 'men of war' of that period. When the rabbis discuss the two powers 'contradiction' in he Bible - viz. the apparent discrepancy that God appears as an old man in Daniel 7:9 and a 'youth' in Exodus 15:3 it plainly shows that 'men of war' were assumed to be about 20 years old. The idea that a soldier from the Jewish War lived until 147/48 is only surprising given his longevity. But plainly it wouldn't have survived Clement that a twenty year old in 67 CE could have lived to a hundred. Many monks are documented to have lived that long.
The argument that Josephus didn't want to appear redundant of course is contradicted plainly by the fact - as Shaye Cohen exploits - that Life and Jewish Wars cover the exact same period and reuse an original source (= the 'Aramaic hypomnema'). Why was 'Josephus' apparently VERY WILLING to go over the period of the Jewish War at the end of his life in his 'Life' (an apology for his actions in the War)? Why was Jewish War developed from an original lost 'short recension' of the Jewish war (i.e. that in fact THREE texts were originally penned by Josephus - viz. the lost Aramaic hypomnema, Jewish Wars, Life)? Moreover Josephus is not at hesitant again to duplicate
the period leading up to the Jewish war in both Jewish War and Antiquities?
As a result I have to say that Clement must originally be correct. There was a text associated with one 'Flavius Josephus the Jew' which went up to 147/48 and was a chronology of the Jewish people. Perhaps this 'Josephus' claimed to be a youth during the war (i.e. in his twenties) and lived to one hundred. Our biographical information is very unclear given that Photius's reference doesn't define whether it was Justus of Tiberias who died in 100 CE or Josephus - the usual difficulty with droning references to a conflict between two men and a vague statement that 'he' (one of the two men) lived to a certain date.
Shaye Cohen's discovery of a common text behind Jewish War and Life and Thackery's arguments about 'assistants' developing the Josephan corpus would in fact allow for an original date of the corpus c. 147/48. That changes were made to this text is hardly surprising given what happens to all Christian texts - i.e. the various 'Against Heresies' that emerge throughout the third century. Once again, no less than the gospels, Josephus is a mostly unreliable history. It is all we have in most cases. But hardly something I would bet my life on.
