242
Appendices
intellect. In his teen years, Josephus did the Judaean equivalent of the wanderjahr, or the Grand Tour of Europe and “going on the road to find oneself ” in later generations.... He was an apprentice, so to speak, in all three of the Jewish sects, the most interesting being the time spent with a religious hermit named Bannus in the wastelands dressed in and sheltered by only what grew wild. Some believe that Bannus was an Essene. It was this experience that seems to have impressed the young Josephus the most; however, being a practical man, he says he finally settled on the Pharisees — which, if true, would place him most likely among the progressive “reformers” faction of the Temple hierarchy as contrasted with the more politically conservative Sadducees. A patriotic Jew, Josephus both feared and admired Roman military supremacy, which he saw firsthand on a youthful visit to Rome. This was just after the great fire of 64. Josephus acted as an envoy seeking the release of some lower priests imprisoned for what he calls “some trivial offense.” Thanks to the assistance of Aliturius, a Roman actor of Jewish descent and a favorite of Nero’s consort, Poppaea Sabina, Josephus was received favorably in the imperial court. There, Poppaea allegedly not only acceded to his request for release of the Jewish clergymen but also showered him with gifts. In the German-Jewish novelist Leon Feuchtwanger’s wonderful fiction trilogy featuring our subject, the libidinous Roman empress flirts demurely with the pensive, scholarly Judaean innocent. Josephus was a pragmatist who saw no hope in resisting Roman rule. His realism starkly contrasted with the mystical fatalism of many of the other Jewish leaders. Because of his priestly lineage and evident intellect, he became a natural, albeit reluctant, military leader of the rebellion, the causes of which his history fails to explain in any depth, and in fact, which he tries to pin on what he calls a misguided and sacrilegious handful of rabble-rousers. He clearly had no sympathy with the rebels, whom he consistently denigrates as mere bandits, thugs, and worst of all, blasphemous defilers of Judaism. His disdain, on reflection, is less the attitude of an arrogant, reactionary elitist than that of a person truly horrified by the calamity that befell his nation. Josephus consistently tried to find a middle ground satisfying both the Imperial needs of Rome and the dignity and integrity of the Jewish way of life. He opposed the uprising against Rome. Before the escalation of events in the summer of 66, he was constantly reminding the hotheads of the invincibility of the Roman war machine that he had witnessed firsthand while in Rome. However, in the climate of the “terror” after the early, unforeseen success against Cestius Gallus, he would have been executed had he confronted the fanatical Jewish leaders. After an initial victory, the Jewish leaders were reduced to defending their fortified cities against the Roman armies of Ves-