The Jewish War: First half of Book 2
Mar. 1st, 2026 08:02 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cahnLast week: Discussion on how Herod stacked up against various Roman emperors in terms of body count of his nearest and dearest; how Friedrich Wilhelm might hear the Josephus text; Herod throwing money around; Cleopatra!
This week: ...uhhhh there was a lot going on and I haven't actually finished the reading yet *ducks* -- I am doing that right now and I should most likely be able to comment tomorrow. (I don't anticipate this being a problem again for at least two more months, and most likely not then either; this was a confluence of various time sinks that doesn't usually happen all at the same time.) But I wanted to go ahead and get the post up because I know you guys have read it... (ETA: have finished the reading now :P :) )
Next week: finishing up Book 2!
This week: ...uhhhh there was a lot going on and I haven't actually finished the reading yet *ducks* -- I am doing that right now and I should most likely be able to comment tomorrow. (I don't anticipate this being a problem again for at least two more months, and most likely not then either; this was a confluence of various time sinks that doesn't usually happen all at the same time.) But I wanted to go ahead and get the post up because I know you guys have read it... (ETA: have finished the reading now :P :) )
Next week: finishing up Book 2!
no subject
Date: 2026-03-03 04:25 am (UTC)I had to take notes again (though not as many). The problem with Herod the Great having so many wives and sons, even after he helpfully killed some of them, is that I can't keep track of them all! Even though in principle I know about some of them from the NT. All right, correct me if I've gotten any of this wrong:
Herod the Great's sons who are still standing and relevant in this part: Archelaus (named the successor to Herod-the-Great) and (Herod) Antipas (eventually became tetrarch of Galilee and Perea), sons of Malthace. Philip (eventually became tetrarch), son of Cleopatra of Jerusalem. Also Herod the Great's grandson Agrippa son of Aristobulus (one of the sons of Mariamme that Herod put to death).
Antipas thought he ought to be king because at some point Herod, flailing around deciding random sons should be king and random sons should be drowned or whatever, had flailed in that particular direction.
So everyone hangs out with Caesar and argues for their side. Antipater's side: Archelaus is THE WORST. Herod was senile when he named him! Archelaus' side: Archelaus was not so bad! Herod was not so senile!
Judea: Time to revolt!
Sabinus: Ugh, let me try to quell this.
Me: ...who the heck are you?
Josephus: I totally mentioned him at the beginning of this chapter. Pay attention! He's the procurator of Syria, which if you had been paying attention to the footnotes you would know is some sort of financial official who had a lot of power (though wasn't the ruler) under Varus, the Roman governor of Syria.
Random guys: Whee! Time to be brigands and such!
Sabinus: Varus, boss, this isn't going too well, can you come help??
Varus: Do I have to do everything around here? Oh fine. *quells*
Some other Jews who had gone to Rome before the revolt: Actually what we want is an autonomous nation-state! Herod really sucked and so does Archelaus! So actually what we want is to be with Syria under the administration of Roman governors, like this dude Varus.
Footnote: "It is unclear how much their petition may have been encouraged by Varus."
Nicolaus: It's not Herod and/or Archelaus who suck, it's the Jewish people!
Caesar: Half the kingdom goes to Archelaus with the title of ethnarch. If you behave maybe you will get to be king. Philip and Antipas can get a quarter each. Salome gets money (revenue) from some places, but in Archelaus' jurisdiction.
Archelaus turned out not to do a great job and was banished to Gaul, at which point Josephus decided that we all needed to learn all about the Essenes. Which was quite interesting! But very random!
OK. Augustus dies and Tiberius becomes emperor. Now that Archelaus is gone, I guess, Tiberius sends Pilate to Judaea. (Ohhhhh!) In a covert operation at night he smuggled into Jerusalem under wraps those portrait plaques of the emperor which are called standards. Okay, I totally get that this is a big deal because of the stricture against graven images, etc., but I still laughed anyway because it's just funny to me that they had a whole covert operation involving portraits of the emperor.
Agrippa: I hope Tiberius dies and you, Gaius, will be "master of the world."
Tiberius: *takes offense and locks Agrippa up*
Tiberius: *dies*
Gaius: *becomes master of the world, releases Agrippa*
Gaius: Huh, Philip's dead and his tetrarchy is now free. You can have it, Agrippa.
Herod Antipas: Wait, I want to be a king too!
Gaius: Nah, you're being presumptuous. Exiling you to Spain. Agrippa, you can have his territory too.
Agrippa: Sweet.
Okay, so Gaius dispatches this guy Petronius "with an army to Jerusalem to install statues of himself in the temple sanctuary." Wow, these guys are really committed to their portraits and statues. Anyhow, Petronius and the Jews have a bunch of talks and he's like, I don't want to kill all of you guys, and Gaius is mad about that, but fortunately dies before he can really do anything about it. (The footnote says that it is not true that he got word of Gaius' death a month before the letter from Gaius threatening him with death.)
So now Claudius is emperor -- is this the I, Claudius guy? -- reminding me, at least, that it has been so long that I actually do not remember anything about I, Claudius, and I will put that on my list, although who knows when I will actually get around to that because my progress is soooo slow. Agrippa is his spokesperson and helps Claudius maintain power. (One of you -- both of you? -- mentioned that Josephus was trying to show the entanglement of the Jews and the Romans, and this really does!) Claudius then gives Agrippa "the whole of his grandfather's kingdom," which since he already had Philip and Herod Antipas' half I guess means that he gave him Judaea too. (What happened to Pilate, then?)
But Agrippa only lasts three years after that, I guess. His kids were Agrippa II, Berenice, Mariamme, and Drusilla, and these must be the Agrippa/Berenice that are contemporary with Josephus himself! And then Agrippa I's kingdom becomes a Roman province again.
There are various incidents -- Hilariously, one of them is where a guard on duty for Passover (to prevent rioting) "pulled up his clothing, bent over obscenely to present his backside to the Jews, and let rip with the noise associated with that posture." Well okay then Josephus! (Also a well translated passage.) Anyway there is in fact a big riot.
And eventually, Claudius dies with Nero as his successor. (No mention of magic in my translation! I am disappointed.)
no subject
Date: 2026-03-03 09:35 am (UTC)(More cross connections for you: some years post Teutoburg Forest battle, Germanicus the brother of Claudius, husband of Agrippina the Elder and Dad of both Gaius and Agrippina the Younger got the job of dealing with the Germans. He did bury the mouldering bodies of the legions and sort of, kinda scored some military victories though never managed to get a hold of Arminius himself. His time in Germany was both when Agrippina was born - in a camp she later when Empress promoted to full settlement and city status, and which is still around, all hail the founding mother of Cologne - and where Gaius gained the nickname “Caligula”, i.e. “Little Boots”, “Bootsie”, so named because the legionaries made a mini legionary equipment complete with boots for the little boy.)
This part also sets the pattern of some Roman, either in high or low positions (thinking of the soldier who farts and bares his bottom here) fucking with the Temple, resulting in a Jewish uprising, Roman commanders in various degrees of competency trying to deal with it and lots of panicked missions to Rome. Note that once Augustus is dead, Josephus feels free to be more critical about the subsequent Emperors (who aren’t held in nearly the same esteem by the Romans.)
Pilate being accused of using some temple treasury for building his acquaeduct made me laugh because it reminded me of the famous “What did the Romans ever do for us?” Scene from “Life of Brian”. (If you haven’t seen it, acqueducts and thus a far better regular water supply were on the list and is indeed the project Pilate outside of the NT is most known for. As to what became of him by the time Claudius gives Herod Agrippa “the whole of his grandfather’s kingdom” - would have to google, I don’t know by heart, but presumably he was long gone as governor, since he was appointed in Tiberius’ time. Roman governships didn’t last more than a few years even in less unruly regions, I think.
Another thing in this section that caught my eye and which I hadn’t known before is that a fake Alexander (as in, one of the sons of Mariamme Herod the Great killed) shows up. The phenomenon of impostors pretending either dead rulers or dead aspiring rulers/princes showing up really is millennia old, isn’t it? And of course it will plague Rome itself with several fake Neros just a short time later.
No dark magic in your translation? Sheesh. I’m on the train now, will see if I can give you the exact sentence in German later.
no subject
Date: 2026-03-04 06:11 am (UTC)Nope! Nope, didn't realize at all, glad you are around :D
but mentions this relationship only in “Claudius the God”, i.e. the second novel.
I... think I might not actually have read the second novel? (My best friend K gave me the first one, and I think I didn't have a bookstore around at the time that had the second one.)
because Varus is none other than Quinctilius Varus of “Give me back my legions!” Fame, he who lost the battle against Arminius the Cheruscan in the Teutoburg Forest and perished together with three Roman legions
Ohhhh I vaguely remember this I think!
and where Gaius gained the nickname “Caligula”, i.e. “Little Boots”, “Bootsie”, so named because the legionaries made a mini legionary equipment complete with boots for the little boy.)
...I did not know this either!
the famous “What did the Romans ever do for us?” Scene from “Life of Brian”. (If you haven’t seen it, acqueducts and thus a far better regular water supply were on the list and is indeed the project Pilate outside of the NT is most known for.
Heh, I have seen Life of Brian but... decades ago, but I do remember now that you've mentioned it and the aqueducts. I did not realize Pilate was known for that!
Another thing in this section that caught my eye and which I hadn’t known before is that a fake Alexander (as in, one of the sons of Mariamme Herod the Great killed) shows up. The phenomenon of impostors pretending either dead rulers or dead aspiring rulers/princes showing up really is millennia old, isn’t it? And of course it will plague Rome itself with several fake Neros just a short time later.
I did know of course that this was a thing, but I didn't know about fake Neros. I'll look forward to that :)
No dark magic in your translation?
Yeah, it just says "Agrippina had tricked [Claudius] into adopting Nero as heir to the principate."
German tangent
Date: 2026-03-04 08:39 am (UTC)Quinctilius Varus: Sure, after Syria and Judea my German assignment will be a piece of cake!
Arminius: Martin Luther named me Herrmann because he wanted me to have a German name, and subsequent centuries followed suit, but current German historians have gone back to "Arminius", because my original name simply isn't known. I and my brother Flavus (see above for original name, Flavus means "Blond") were given as hostages/future rulers to be raised in Rome much like Herod's sons, Dad being the leader of the Cheruskii. We then fought in various wars; I distinguised myself in Pannonia and was made not just a Roman citizen but a Roman knight. Ditto Flavus. But guess what! Flavus may have been Romanized through and through, but I decided Romans are human and defeatable. Hey, Varus. I, your loyal leader of the Cheruskii, want you to do me a favour and march into the territory of this tribe I'm at war with, just as a show of strength, to show who's boss on both sides of the Rhine. I mean, we Cheruskii are Roman allies, right?
Segestes: Varus, don't do this. This young pub is my son-in-law, and we can't stand each other, so I know whereof I speak - this is a trap.
Arminius: He's just still furious me and his daughter Thusnelda are an item.
Varus: True love is great. Arminius, you have fought and bled for Rome and Segestes has not, of course I believe you! Legions, muster up! We're leaving headquarters for a show of strength for our valued ally.
Somewhere in the Teutoburg Forest, where the three Roman legions, so impressive in open territory, have been thinned out marching between trees:
Germans of both the Cheruskii and the tribe the Cheruskii supposedly were enemies of: Surprise, suckers!
*Two and a half day battle* Ensues.
Varus: Commits suicide early in day 2.
Three Roman legions: Are wiped out.
Augustus: QUINCTILIUS VARUS, WHERE ARE MY LEGIONS!
Tacitus: I'm writing up this battle big time to make a point about the decadence of our times in comparison to our ancestors. I mean, if you can get beaten by a bunch of barbarians, that's, like, totally humiliating.
Martin Luther: I'm using this battle to make a point about brave Germans beating back the oppression of perfidious Rome, by which I mean me and my followers versus the Pope and his bunch of Italians who need the Renaissance financed with indulgences. Me doing so reminds everyone this happened, and it returns to the popular consciousness.
Heinrich von Kleist: I'm living at the time of the Napoleonic wars, to be precise, in the phase where my home state of Prussia is getting its backside kicked by the French. Therefore, the Romans in my drama about this event are of course the perfidious French and the Cheruskii are the oppressed Germans fighting for their freedom.
Heinrich Heine: I, on the other hand, make fun of the Battle at the Teutoburg Forest cult in my epic "Deutschland. Ein Wintermärchen."
Lots and lots of 19th century nationalists: We double down on Hermann veneration and put money together to errect a giant statue of Hermann the German.
Later 20th century Archaelogists: More fool you, because a) you put in the wrong place, because we actually discovered where the battle has taken place by virtue of disovering Augustus age coins and lots of skeletons from young fighting age men. And our place is nowhere near your statue. Also, his name is Arminius.
Nazis: We, of course, were the worst fanboys, as is our want, and cast "Hermann" as guess who.
Later 20th century historians: We're still facepalming about this. And are calling it the "VArusschlacht" now, because at least with Varus we're sure what his name was.
Re: German tangent
Date: 2026-03-05 05:26 am (UTC)I laughed!
Martin Luther: I'm using this battle to make a point about brave Germans beating back the oppression of perfidious Rome, by which I mean me and my followers versus the Pope and his bunch of Italians who need the Renaissance financed with indulgences. Me doing so reminds everyone this happened, and it returns to the popular consciousness.
Nazis: We, of course, were the worst fanboys, as is our want, and cast "Hermann" as guess who.
So, when Arminius showed up I was like waaaaaait I am pretty sure I have heard of this guy! He's in The Oppermanns! Where, when I went back to find it, one of Berthold's arguments is that in the grand historical scheme of things Arminius didn't really make a lot of difference overall, because the Romans just came back, right? (Which makes Luther's argument kind of hilarious to me.)
Re: German tangent
Date: 2026-03-05 10:08 am (UTC)And hey, Luther would argue that the Romans never ruled over all the Germans, just some of the tribes, just like the Germans of his day ended up divided between those he helped see the light and those who insisted on being slaves to Rome. :)
Speaking of the Oppermanns, you may recall Berthold’s cousin Ruth the Zionist argues that despite not beating Rome for good Arminius’ temporary victory makes for an inspiring national resistance narrative, and she connects that directly with Zionism. Of course, Feuchtwanger wrote The Oppermanns in between Josephus Trilogy Volume I and II, so the “is it worth fighting a superior military power occupying your country if you know you don’t have the chance for long term military victory?” Question was very much on his mind.
In the correspondence between Feuchtwanger and Brecht, Brecht teases him when LF is working on Josephus that he should take care not to be swept away by emotion “or else I will write a drama about Hermann the Cheruscan”.
=> Varus isn’t the only connection between Jewish rebels and German rebels on a meta level
Re: German tangent
Date: 2026-03-10 03:50 am (UTC)In the correspondence between Feuchtwanger and Brecht, Brecht teases him when LF is working on Josephus that he should take care not to be swept away by emotion “or else I will write a drama about Hermann the Cheruscan”.
hee!
no subject
Date: 2026-03-04 01:42 pm (UTC)What the existence of fake Neros does demonstrate, though, is that he was still popular in some of the provinces, otherwise the fake Neros wouldn’t have been able to con so many people out of support and money so successfully. I mean, a fake Alexander, son of Herod, can play the sympathy card (“I had to hide because Dad tried to kill me!”) and the man he’s supposed to be never was in power and thus couldn’t make enemies beyond his family. But Nero had been in power for 13 years when he died.
(BTW, I think there is also a novel where a fake Nero is actually real Nero who faked his death, but I forgot by whom.)
“Tricked” versus “bewitched”: in either case, it’s a ridiculous charge. I mean, obviously she lobbied as hard as she could, but methinks Josephus just wants to let the man (i.e. Claudius) off the hook here for making the decision, because he can’t imagine another reason as to why a ruler would prefer his adopted to his biological son. (Especially since Josephus knows how the adopted son will turn out.) Which is ignoring both the possible reasons already named by me (Nero was older, he was via his mother a direct blood descendant of Augustus which neither Claudius nor Britannicus were, and adoption was a tried and true Roman custom) and another potential one, because Britannicus’ mother Messalina had not been the most faithful of wives, after all.
(Robert Graves gives Claudius a different reason for both the marriage with Agrippina and the adoption of Nero, because his Claudius secretly wanted to bring back the republic all his life, missed out on doing so when becoming Emperor, realised too late that when being a good Emperor he was making people fond of the monarchy and then decided to marry the worst woman ever, i.e. Agrippina, and make Nero his successor because he knew Nero would inevitably be the worst of the Julio-Claudians and expected that this would finally make Romans into Republicans again and finish the Principate for good. This premise works within the novel and tv show, but had a fatal heritage because ever since Robert Graves, every sympathetic Roman character in the Imperial Era wants to bring back the Republic, which, no, no, and no.)
In any event, again, Claudius was the first Emperor who even had a living son to not choose, and the next one would be Vespasian. Then once the three Flavians are gone, we famously get the Five Good Emperors, all of whom adopt the next one, and Marcus Aurelius finishing this grand tradition by not adopting someone and instead making his son Commodus his heir is infamously the one big thing held against Marcus Aurelius, though as Mildred says, none of his precedessors among the Five HAD a biological son. So basically in 130 years of Emperors, adoption is the norm and biological inheritance is the exception, because only Vespasian => Titus and then Marcus Aurelius => Commodus are cases where an Emperor makes his biological son his successor, and even if you add fraternal inheritance (i.e. Titus => Domitian), it’s still the exception compared to all the adoptions otherwise.
(To be fair: for the Julio-Claudians, adoptions within a larger family context. I.e. Augustus adopts Tiberius who is his wife’s son from her previous marriage. Tiberius adopts his nephew Germanicus and after Germanicus’ death makes Germanicus’ son Caligula his (co-)heir. (The other co-heir being his biological grandson Gemellus who doesn’t live long into Caligula’s reign.) Caligula doesn’t pick anyone because he gets murdered, but he is succeeded by his uncle Claudius. Claudius adopts Nero who is also his biological great-nephew (since Agrippina is his niece.) Nero is the last.)
It does occur to me that because the Herod family drama and inheritance battle happens all between biological sons (though said sons have factions and champions among the rest of the family, i.e. aunts, uncles etc.). The idea of adopting a nephew or great nephew instead presumably felt very alien to Josephus….
Graves' Claudius and the Republic
Date: 2026-03-05 05:43 am (UTC)Ah right, I remember you mentioned that he was popular in some places.
his Claudius secretly wanted to bring back the republic all his life, missed out on doing so when becoming Emperor, realised too late that when being a good Emperor he was making people fond of the monarchy and then decided to marry the worst woman ever, i.e. Agrippina, and make Nero his successor because he knew Nero would inevitably be the worst of the Julio-Claudians and expected that this would finally make Romans into Republicans again and finish the Principate for good.
Oh wow. This sounds like the kind of justification that can work in a novel and that I would enjoy in a novel buuuuut also seems to rely on so many things as to be rather implausible.
but had a fatal heritage because ever since Robert Graves, every sympathetic Roman character in the Imperial Era wants to bring back the Republic, which, no, no, and no.
Because they wouldn't actually have thought that way?
Re: Graves' Claudius and the Republic
Date: 2026-03-05 10:00 am (UTC)The other problem within the Graves version is that Claudius isn’t just willing to make Nero his heir over Britannicus so the monarchy will crash and burn, but marries his daughter Octavia to him (which neither Octavia nor Nero are keen on, in this or any other version), and this makes Claudius look far more ruthless towards people he claims to love (i.e. his kids) than the Graves version is supposed to be.
In terms of all the other fictional secret Republicans in movies and tv: most annoying when they’re living centuries later, the Emperor Marcus Aurelius being a case in point. There is absolutely zero indication Marcus Aurelius thought about the Republic at any point of his life, and given we have his “Meditations”, we actually know more about what Marcus Aurelius was thinking than we do of most other Emperors. Graves sells it with Claudius because Claudius never experienced the Republic himself, so can idealize it, and he comes off age when it’s not yet a given that the Principate of Augustus will remain something permanent; that only finalizes when the Senate first confirms Tiberius and then Caligula, whose reigns are anything but a reccomendation for the monarchy. But by the time Marcus Aurelius lives, there has been no other state system but the monarchy anywhere for centuries, and the big question is only “adopt or make my bio son the heir?” Not “Republic?”
Re: Graves' Claudius and the Republic
Date: 2026-03-10 03:55 am (UTC)Heh.
But by the time Marcus Aurelius lives, there has been no other state system but the monarchy anywhere for centuries, and the big question is only “adopt or make my bio son the heir?” Not “Republic?”
Ah, I see, that makes sense!
Re: Graves' Claudius and the Republic
Date: 2026-03-05 03:55 pm (UTC)The other started off as a good thing which became a bad. Following the Great Fire of Rome in 64 AD it became clear that Rome had been so overcrowded, with so little space between buildings, that once the fire had started there was no hope of stopping it, and a fire had been inevitable. Nero therefore instituted a programme of compulsory purchase (similar to what was done in Lisbon post their earthquake and fire) so that streets could be widened. This meant that the owners of the land lost some of it, and didn't feel they'd been adequately recompensed. Unfortunately, Nero (who had lost his palace in the fire) decided that he too deserved a little treat, and kept a chunk of the land to build his Domus Aurea on, which gave rise to speculation that he'd set the whole thing going so he could build a new palace. (I've seen a reconstruction, the Domus Aurea was very nice...)
The reconstruction of the city also required heavy taxation, and Nero ended up devaluing the currency, which is rarely a good idea. Still, he was immediately popular among the people, partly because, in the immediate aftermath of the fire, gardens and public buildings were opened to refugees, and food was distributed. I think he was also popular amongst the army, who he thought were 'real' Romans, as opposed to those wealthy Senators sitting on their arses saying he couldn't do things and failing to appreciate his mastery of the water organ.
Re: Graves' Claudius and the Republic
Date: 2026-03-10 03:58 am (UTC)Ohhhh this makes a lot of sense, both that he might do that and also that this would give rise to speculation!
as opposed to those wealthy Senators sitting on their arses saying he couldn't do things and failing to appreciate his mastery of the water organ.
...water organ??