The Jewish War: Last half of book 5

[cahn]

Last week: Titus saving the day single-handedly as a millenium-old trope. The synoptic gospels foreshadowing these events, and discussion of the abomination of desolation. The Yom Kippur service description of the priest in his vestments. How much Titus might have intended the destruction of Jerusalem, and when, and how much that question may be different from how Josephus feels like he needs to justify it? A mention of R. Yochanan ben Zakkai, which all of you should definitely tell me more about :D

This week: Jerusalem is under siege. It's quite awful for those under siege, what with famine inside the city and getting crucified by Romans if they try to escape. Titus and Josephus continue to be blameless and awesome.

Next week: First half of Book 6: "...from its rebuilding by Haggai in the second year of the reign of Cyrus to its capture under Vespasian was 639 years and 45 days" (270).

Comments

Re: Titus

[cahn]

You're not supposed to wipe them out entirely, mind, and you're certainly not supposed to brutalize client kingdoms, loyal allies and provinces which are in a peaceful state, that's just bad politics and interrupts trade, but if there is a war or a rebellion and you get send there to deal with it, then anything you do to ensure that a) it's over and b) it won't happen again just a few years down the line is fine with the Roman public.

Ha, I love the pragmatism!

What I'm trying to suss out is whether or not Josephus contorting himself so much to assure us Titus was sorry and didn't really want to do all this but had to was necessary for the Roman part of his readers, and I suspect it wasn't, the Romans would have been cool with Titus doing whatever to end the Jewish War, so basically he's doing it for himself mainly for the reasons we talked about in the last entry. Plus there might have been another reason which I just came across and will mention in a moment.

Heh, that rather makes sense. I guess I would have thought he was doing it for his readers as well as himself, but I'm willing to believe that he was doing it just for himself --

Which was why people were surprised when Titus became Emperor and he in turn now started to play good cop and was the mild one instead of Enforcer Guy, forgiving his enemies etc. (I would say that shows that Vespasian and Titus had a very shrewd grasp on what power dynamics and PR Rome needed after Nero's burn out and the chaotic Year of the Four Emperors.)

Ooh. I of course have a particular picture in my head of Titus from Feuchtwanger, but it's good to remember that he doesn't have to be that way. (My headcanon of Louis XVI is definitely not anything like Feuchtwanger's character!)

And you know - that actually makes psychological sense and fits with the fact that from a purely Roman (and for that matter Greek) pov, Josephus really does not have to show Titus as sympathetic to the Jewish people, or wanting the preserve the Temple and the city, see above for how war campaigns usually gets presented in Roman sources. But maybe he did it for just one reader in particular. (As well as needing to believe that Titus was originally well intentioned because of his own actions.)

Oooooh. This is so iiiiinteresting!

(Note Josephus gives us neither Berenice nor the dancing boys and eunuchs. I feel let down, Josephus.)

okay, I legit laughed :)

That Titus either had them or at least had the reputation of having them (pre-Emperorship) incidentally might also give us another glimpse of what it meant growing up at Nero's court. (Yuletide!)

I have to say I am getting more excited about this fic every week :P

Re: Titus

[selenak]

Well, since until a few days ago you never realised that Mozart’s Tito is also Feuchtwanger’s Titus, there is much room for additional versions. :)

(In another connection to salon, a reminder that Fritz in his old age confesses, via letter (either to Voltaire or Heinrich, can’t remember which one) to crying over Racine’s drama about Titus and Berenice and writes who would have thought he’d get sappy about love stories but he does. I’m going out on a limb here and will guess Berenice isn’t the one he’s identifying himself with, but Titus, the monarch forsaking True Love and joy for duty and service to the state.)

(Since Fritz wasn’t allowed to learn proper Latin, he wouldn’t have known about the dancing boys in addition to Berenice, of course. I very much doubt any French translation of Suetonius available to him would not have been censored, plus he seems to have taken much Roman history from Montesquieu anyway.)

What made me giggle like I’m 12 when checking up on my Suetonius was that Suetonius takes care to mention the boys were actually good enough as dancers to become successfull in public performances and Reformed!Titus even foresook watching them in public. I suppose Suetonius is getting at the contrast to Nero performing himself on the stage (shock horror for proper Roman aristocrats), since Titus has the anti Nero career anyway (starts out looked at as somewhat shady, between being a masterforger and a ruthless enforcer for Dad, has banquets and dancing boys and then also has his sole long term serious romantic relationship, not counting his arranged marriage earlier, with a foreign Queen older than himself, then becomes proper monarch who works hard, regards a day lost where he hasn’t done something good, forgives enemies and sends all sexual distractions away, where Nero starts out as a promising lad taught by Seneca, regarded as a softie and Mama’s boy, and then turns into a decadent self indulgent bastard who performs in public and goes on tour to Greece for a year as if he’s a rock star). But I can’t help but compare the insistence that those boys were good, competent dancers to how one of the clerics defended my guy the medieval Emperor Frederick II of the charge of keeping a harem by saying he’s keeping those girls for their agility with their fingers because they were such excellent weavers.

To get a bit more serious again: of course Titus, being a competent soldier (no one, friend or foe, is disputing that), wouldn’t have brought any troupe of dancers with him to the front line, so Josephus isn’t falsifying history by not mentioning them. But by the time he’s writing the entire account, he’s in Rome and must have known Titus in peacetime as well, so if there is any truth to Suetonius’ account of Prince Hal!Titus , him portraying John of Gishala’s followers as indulging in “effeminate” clichés looks like a massive case of projecting…