La Pascua en la obra de Flavio Josefo
| Federico Moisés Colautti Abstract:S. Mason affirms in the Series Preface of the new translation and commentary of FJ's works: "Although Josephus' name has been known continuously through nearly two millennia, and he has been cited extensively in support of any number of agendas, his writings have not always been valued as compositions. Readers have tended to look beyond them to the underlying historical facts or to Josephus' sources. Concentrated study in the standard academic forms -- journals, scholarly seminars, or indeed commentaries devoted to Josephus -- were lacking. The past two decades, however, have witnessed the birth and rapid growth of "Josephus studies" in the proper sense. Signs of the new environment include all of the vehicles and tools that were absent before, as well as K. H. Rengstorf's Complete Concordance (1983), Louis Feldman's annotated bibliographies, and now a proliferation of Josephus-related dissertations." This dissertation follows this new approach, and aims to investigate first the role of Passover within the work of FJ, and then, its position in the Judaism of that time, through an effort to place those results in their historical and literary context. The work is divided into three main parts. Part I is a comparison between the different mentions of Passover in the Bible and his re-elaboration of his biblical source(s). This comparison with the relevant passages of the Bible allows us to discern which tendencies he follows, namely, the aspects of this celebration that he underlines and those that he ignores. Part II identifies the explicit and implicit allusions to Passover, during the Hellenistic-Roman period, until the end of the Jewish War. The analysis of these passages is more complicated, because the sources of FJ are often unknown or no longer available. Nevertheless, for a long period of history there are two versions of the events from the author himself, namely, in the Jewish War and the Jewish Antiquities. Given the different historical contexts and aims of these works, we may assume that there was a certain evolution in his view of this celebration. Thus, the comparison shows that in Ant. the role of Passover is expanded, up to the point of being one clue, but not the only one, to understanding, according to FJ logically, the real causes of Jerusalem's destruction. This way of proceeding introduces two main questions about the importance of this feast in the so called "common Judaism", i.e.: Was Passover significant enough to lead his readers to this conclusion? Does FJ use this theme to give to his own people a hope for the future? In Part III, the results obtained are set in context: first of all (Part III.A), through a comparison with many other witnesses in contemporary Jewish literature, and then (Part III.B), through an investigation of the historical situation, i.e. what really happened and what is merely the product of FJ's literary skills. As a general conclusion, along with a synthesis of the different parts, we propose a hypothesis, which brings together all the main aspects of FJ's presentation of Passover. It seems that he deems Passover an essential institution, but not the only one, for the survival of the Jewish people after 70 CE. Therefore, he sends two messages to his intended readers. He says to the Jews that without a strong unity, which can be attained through the celebration of Passover, they run the risk of assimilation. At the same time, he tries to convince the Roman authorities that this celebration is not dangerous for them, because it does not necessarily presuppose political independence for the Jews. It is not possible to ascertain who really accepted and followed his teaching, but it is not improbable that those who actually took the leading role among the Jews after 70 CE were in some respects of a similar mind. |