Bibliography
| Title: David and Mephibosheth According to Josephus Secondary Title: AUSS Volume: 36 Pages: 165-182 Type: Journal Article Year: 1998 Abstract: Matthews, Christopher R. in: NTAb 43.2 (1999), 337: "The article investigates Josephus' rendition of the interaction between David and Mephibosheth in comparison with the major textual witnesses for the biblical version according to the following outline: Mephibosheth honored (2 Sam 9:1-13/Ant. 7:111-117a), Mephibosheth accused (2 Sam 16:1-4/Ant. 7:205-206), and Mephibosheth's self defense (2 Sam 19:25-31/Ant 7:267-271). The study discloses a whole series of affinities between Josephus' version and readings of B and/or L against the MT. It also brings to light a range of rewriting techniques (omission, abbreviation, rearrangement, etc.) that serve to convey messages to Josephus' doubt audience of (Roman) Gentile and fellow Jews".
Heider, George E. in: OTA 22.3 (1999), 503: "B. reviews the Mephibosheth account in 2 Samuel in Josephus vis-a-vis that in MT, Codex Vaticanus (B), the Lucianic recension (L) of the LXX, and Targum Jonathan in view of three questions: "Which text-form(s) of the above passages did Josephus employ? How, and on the basis of what sort of rewriting techniques, does his version differ from its source? Finally, what messages may Josephus have intended his version of the David-Mephibosheth story to convey to his double audience, i.e., (Roman) Gentiles and fellow Jews?" He finds "a whole series of affinities between Josephus's version and readings of B and/or L against MT". Rewriting techniques range from reordering of the text to redepictions of its characters (this to the benefit of David and Mephibosheth and the detriment ofZiba). Finally, B. concludes that Josephus depicts David as an Aristotelean "great-souled" man in his dealings with Mephibosheth, while urging his fellow-Jews to mutual reconciliation following their failed revolt and to skepticism about negative reports surrounding Josephus' own character". |