What do you think?
Rate this book
Antiquities of the Jews
Titus Flavius Josephus (37 – circa 100) was a Roman-Jewish historian in the 1st-century AD. Josehpus wrote much about the first Jewish-Roman War and strongly advocated Hellenistic Judaism. Josephus’ best known works are The Wars of the Jews and Antiquities of the Jews.
This version of Antiquities of the Jews includes a table of contents.
1392 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 94
About the author
Flavius Josephus
1,578 books219 followersTitus Flavius Josephus was a 1st-century Romano-Jewish historian and hagiographer who was born in Jerusalem - then part of Roman Judea - to a father of priestly descent and a mother who claimed royal ancestry.
He initially fought against the Romans during the First Jewish–Roman War as the head of Jewish forces in Galilee, until surrendering in 67 to Roman forces led by Vespasian after the six-week siege of Jotapata. Josephus claims the Jewish Messianic prophecies that initiated the First Roman-Jewish War made reference to Vespasian becoming Emperor of Rome. In response Vespasian decided to keep Josephus as a hostage and interpreter. After Vespasian did become Emperor in 69, he granted Josephus his freedom, at which time Josephus assumed the emperor's family name of Flavius.
Flavius Josephus fully defected to the Roman side and was granted Roman citizenship. He became an advisor and friend of Vespasian's son Titus, serving as his translator when Titus led the Siege of Jerusalem, which resulted -- when the Jewish revolt did not surrender -- in the city's destruction and the looting and destruction of Herod's Temple (Second Temple).
Josephus recorded Jewish history, with special emphasis on the 1st century AD and the First Jewish–Roman War, including the Siege of Masada, but the imperial patronage of his work has sometimes caused it to be characterized as pro-Roman propaganda.
His most important works were The Jewish War (c. 75) and Antiquities of the Jews (c. 94). The Jewish War recounts the Jewish revolt against Roman occupation (66–70). Antiquities of the Jews recounts the history of the world from a Jewish perspective for an ostensibly Roman audience. These works provide valuable insight into 1st century Judaism and the background of Early Christianity.
Alternate spelling:
Flávio Josefo (Romance languages)
He initially fought against the Romans during the First Jewish–Roman War as the head of Jewish forces in Galilee, until surrendering in 67 to Roman forces led by Vespasian after the six-week siege of Jotapata. Josephus claims the Jewish Messianic prophecies that initiated the First Roman-Jewish War made reference to Vespasian becoming Emperor of Rome. In response Vespasian decided to keep Josephus as a hostage and interpreter. After Vespasian did become Emperor in 69, he granted Josephus his freedom, at which time Josephus assumed the emperor's family name of Flavius.
Flavius Josephus fully defected to the Roman side and was granted Roman citizenship. He became an advisor and friend of Vespasian's son Titus, serving as his translator when Titus led the Siege of Jerusalem, which resulted -- when the Jewish revolt did not surrender -- in the city's destruction and the looting and destruction of Herod's Temple (Second Temple).
Josephus recorded Jewish history, with special emphasis on the 1st century AD and the First Jewish–Roman War, including the Siege of Masada, but the imperial patronage of his work has sometimes caused it to be characterized as pro-Roman propaganda.
His most important works were The Jewish War (c. 75) and Antiquities of the Jews (c. 94). The Jewish War recounts the Jewish revolt against Roman occupation (66–70). Antiquities of the Jews recounts the history of the world from a Jewish perspective for an ostensibly Roman audience. These works provide valuable insight into 1st century Judaism and the background of Early Christianity.
Alternate spelling:
Flávio Josefo (Romance languages)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 55 reviews
August 22, 2013
The Antiquities of the Jews is a long, long description of Jewish history from the creation of the world down to 66 AD. It was written by the Jewish historian Josephus around 94 AD in order to explain Jewish history and customs to a Greco-Roman audience. The book is invaluable from a historical perspective, as it is (I believe) the only ancient manuscript to lay out the history of the Jews from the first century continuously back to the days of Moses. Unfortunately, Josephus’ talents as a writer are, shall we say, “workmanlike” (he reminds me a lot of Xenophon), making this book something of a slog. However, there are three very famous passages that will interest many readers! To find out what they are, you will have to keep reading to the end of this review. Or just scroll down, I guess.
Part One
The first ten books dutifully trudge through the Hebrew Bible (or Old Testament, if you prefer) from Adam and Eve all the way to the end. If you are familiar with these stories there is precious little new here. Josephus’ audience (his Greco-Roman patrons) were not familiar with them, and unless they wanted to learn Hebrew Josephus was really their only option. Happily, today you can just pick up the King James Bible or whatever floats your boat and read these same stories told in a much more engaging fashion. Listening to Josephus grind through it all will make you feel like you’re one of the Israelites suffering through forty years in the wilderness (points for realism?). If I wasn’t due for a refresher on some of the Old Testament narratives I don’t know if I would have made it through this. Not strong.
Part Two
Happily, things do pick up a bit in the second half. This goes beyond the Hebrew Bible and covers Alexander the Great (interesting), the Maccabees (exciting!), and most of all the colorful King Herod. Herod was a very energetic king who reigned for a long time and had a rather difficult family life (when all was said and done, he ended up executing one wife and three sons over the course of his infamous tenure). Even if Josephus doesn’t win any points for storytelling verve, this all makes for interesting reading.
However, many people who dare to dive into this book today are doing so because of three specific passages, and I won’t hold you in suspense any longer:
John the Baptist
”Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist…Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion, (for they seemed ready to do any thing he should advise,) thought it best, by putting him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties, by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it would be too late. Accordingly he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod's suspicious temper, to Macherus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there put to death.” – Book XVIII, Chapter 5.2
This is the only quasi-contemporary (albeit 60 years after his death) written record of John the Baptist outside of the New Testament.
Jesus
Now we get to the main event. There are two passages that reference Jesus:
”Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned…” – Book XX, Chapter 9.1
This passage is one of the very few non-Biblical references to Jesus surviving from ancient times, and is generally considered to be solid proof as to the historical existence of Jesus of Nazareth. The second passage is more troublesome:
”Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.” – Book XVIII, Chapter 3.3
If you think this kind of language is mighty suspicious coming from a Jew writing at the end of the first century (in the sense that it is effusive in its praise, and even accepts the resurrection(!!!)), you are not alone. Scholars have squabbled for ages over whether this is a complete fabrication added by some zealous future Christian reader, whether these are Josephus’ actual words, or whether Josephus originally had included some morsel of fact here that was greatly expounded by later Christian copyists. Personally, I think the last possibility is the most likely, but readers will have to come to their own conclusions.
Summary
If you are coming to this book looking for the three passages above, just scroll up and save yourself 800 pages. If you are looking for a historical account of the Jewish people prior to the first century, this book is your go-to ancient source (along with the Old Testament, of course). If you like history and are looking for pleasure reading, I would look elsewhere. Josephus’ style is uninspired in my opinion, although the 18th century translation by William Whiston probably isn’t doing him any favors. An important historical document, invaluable for our understanding of Judea from the end of biblical times to the first century, but not a particularly fun read. 2 stars.
Part One
The first ten books dutifully trudge through the Hebrew Bible (or Old Testament, if you prefer) from Adam and Eve all the way to the end. If you are familiar with these stories there is precious little new here. Josephus’ audience (his Greco-Roman patrons) were not familiar with them, and unless they wanted to learn Hebrew Josephus was really their only option. Happily, today you can just pick up the King James Bible or whatever floats your boat and read these same stories told in a much more engaging fashion. Listening to Josephus grind through it all will make you feel like you’re one of the Israelites suffering through forty years in the wilderness (points for realism?). If I wasn’t due for a refresher on some of the Old Testament narratives I don’t know if I would have made it through this. Not strong.
Part Two
Happily, things do pick up a bit in the second half. This goes beyond the Hebrew Bible and covers Alexander the Great (interesting), the Maccabees (exciting!), and most of all the colorful King Herod. Herod was a very energetic king who reigned for a long time and had a rather difficult family life (when all was said and done, he ended up executing one wife and three sons over the course of his infamous tenure). Even if Josephus doesn’t win any points for storytelling verve, this all makes for interesting reading.
However, many people who dare to dive into this book today are doing so because of three specific passages, and I won’t hold you in suspense any longer:
John the Baptist
”Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist…Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion, (for they seemed ready to do any thing he should advise,) thought it best, by putting him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties, by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it would be too late. Accordingly he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod's suspicious temper, to Macherus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there put to death.” – Book XVIII, Chapter 5.2
This is the only quasi-contemporary (albeit 60 years after his death) written record of John the Baptist outside of the New Testament.
Jesus
Now we get to the main event. There are two passages that reference Jesus:
”Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned…” – Book XX, Chapter 9.1
This passage is one of the very few non-Biblical references to Jesus surviving from ancient times, and is generally considered to be solid proof as to the historical existence of Jesus of Nazareth. The second passage is more troublesome:
”Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.” – Book XVIII, Chapter 3.3
If you think this kind of language is mighty suspicious coming from a Jew writing at the end of the first century (in the sense that it is effusive in its praise, and even accepts the resurrection(!!!)), you are not alone. Scholars have squabbled for ages over whether this is a complete fabrication added by some zealous future Christian reader, whether these are Josephus’ actual words, or whether Josephus originally had included some morsel of fact here that was greatly expounded by later Christian copyists. Personally, I think the last possibility is the most likely, but readers will have to come to their own conclusions.
Summary
If you are coming to this book looking for the three passages above, just scroll up and save yourself 800 pages. If you are looking for a historical account of the Jewish people prior to the first century, this book is your go-to ancient source (along with the Old Testament, of course). If you like history and are looking for pleasure reading, I would look elsewhere. Josephus’ style is uninspired in my opinion, although the 18th century translation by William Whiston probably isn’t doing him any favors. An important historical document, invaluable for our understanding of Judea from the end of biblical times to the first century, but not a particularly fun read. 2 stars.
September 19, 2014
I'm surprised by the poor ratings given by other readers.
I was not expecting Josephus to be as accessible (readable) as he is. Rather than just adding unpronounceable names and bits of trivia, much of what he adds to the story is actually interesting and entertaining. For example, the Bible gives us precious little about Moses' young-adult life. Josephus, however, helps fill things out by including an account of Moses' general-ship in the Egyptian army during a conflict with Ethiopia. Apparently, the battleground (obviously arid desert) was home to a species of singularly-vicious, flying serpents, practically unknown outside this particular area. Determined to win, Moses figured out a way to finagle a cage that could hold and transport snake-eating birds, known as ibis, to clear the area of snakes, making it safe for his troops to pass.
Though there are (factual-type) discrepancies between Josephus and scripture, when read together--especially when read with other types of commentary on the subject--the reader can generally suss out for him/herself facts from fiction and really get a much fuller historical picture than can be had by reading scripture alone.
In every edition of "The Antiquities" that I have seen (this one included), explanatory footnotes are abundant and helpful. It would be nice if the digital editions would link the text numbering to the footnote at the end of each book, but as it is, it's manageable.
I was not expecting Josephus to be as accessible (readable) as he is. Rather than just adding unpronounceable names and bits of trivia, much of what he adds to the story is actually interesting and entertaining. For example, the Bible gives us precious little about Moses' young-adult life. Josephus, however, helps fill things out by including an account of Moses' general-ship in the Egyptian army during a conflict with Ethiopia. Apparently, the battleground (obviously arid desert) was home to a species of singularly-vicious, flying serpents, practically unknown outside this particular area. Determined to win, Moses figured out a way to finagle a cage that could hold and transport snake-eating birds, known as ibis, to clear the area of snakes, making it safe for his troops to pass.
Though there are (factual-type) discrepancies between Josephus and scripture, when read together--especially when read with other types of commentary on the subject--the reader can generally suss out for him/herself facts from fiction and really get a much fuller historical picture than can be had by reading scripture alone.
In every edition of "The Antiquities" that I have seen (this one included), explanatory footnotes are abundant and helpful. It would be nice if the digital editions would link the text numbering to the footnote at the end of each book, but as it is, it's manageable.
August 14, 2022
One of my goals for 2022 was to read (listen to) Josephus’ 1300 page (51 hour) long ‘Antiquities of the Jews’. One of my reasons for reading it was that it’s a classic, and not much else has been preserved from the first century AD. But another reason was that I wanted to get my own sense for whether or not Josephus’ references to Jesus the Christ were authentically Josephan. And now, having trudged through page after page of minutia, quoted letters, retold conversations and (oftentimes spurious) speculations, I don’t think that Josephus had ever heard of Jesus of Nazareth, may have never heard of Christianity (if he did, it was insignificant), and had no inclination of an early first century son of god-led revolution of Judaism in the holy land.
Josephus begins the book by retelling the Old Testament stories. I got the impression that Josephus had no other source for this material than the OT itself. It sounded like he had a Tanakh in front of him, and he was paraphrasing and commenting on it for his readers.
Eventually he moves on to historical events for which he must have had other source material, but it was almost always impossible to know what sources he was using. He simply describes what happened as though it’s 100% fact. He often interpolates his own ideas and things that people ‘would have’ said or even 'thought'. This makes him a somewhat untrustworthy historian, by today’s standards. As a side note, I’ve detected this style in many ‘modern’ historians. They write as though “Caesar did this” or “Pompei did that”, rather than “Letters discovered in Egypt, attributed to Festus, claim that prior to entering the battle, Caesar had a dream.” Josephus, and many modern scholars, would just write, “Then Caesar had a dream.”
The amount of data that Josephus relates in this book is enough to launch 10,000 PhDs. There are so many people and events related that it was impossible to keep track, and instead I found myself just going along for the ride while not expecting to retain a whole lot. You could pick just about any page and do a major research project. Now that I think about it, since there are 1300 pages, you could pick any page and do 7.69 research projects. 😊
The two alleged references to Jesus Christ in Josephus come toward the end of the book. The second, where Josephus refers to James the brother of Jesus, is, in my opinion, probably not about James or Jesus. It’s about a man called James who is the brother of Jesus the son of Damneus. This Jesus became a high priest, as Josephus relates. Josephus almost obsessively thoroughly introduces his characters, and in the context of this passage, there’s nothing about Jesus Christ, or James his brother, or the Christian sect. There are two other Jesus’ named in this section (a very common name), and Josephus shows no awareness of the effects of Christianity on the holy land. He’s not talking about Christianity’s Jesus and James, he’s talking about major political players in the region – aka the high priest and his brother.
As for the Testimonium Flavianum, I don’t think Josephus wrote it, not even without the clearly pro-Christian interpolations. Again, Josephus never (barring these two spurious passages) shows any consciousness of Christianity. Josephus is pedantic about introducing characters and new scenes, and not afraid to elaborate (confabulate?) on tangentials. Remove this small paragraph, and the text flows nicely from the preceding to the one that follows. After listening to Joesphus’ style for over 45 hours up to this point, the Testimonium is just out of place and style. Josephus spends much, much longer detailing events that would have been much, much less significant to Jewish matters in Palestine. He goes over kings, high priests, minor uproars, rebellions, temple activities, etc, etc, and he’s documenting what happened in the first half of the first century, linking one thing to another, especially regarding Pilate and Herod Antipas. He wouldn’t just throw an off-hand reference in there such as this one, and then move on. Clearly, Josephus was never compelled, for whatever reason, to relate anything that had anything to do with early first century Christianity – not even to re-interpret it, play it down, dismiss it, respond to prevailing ideas…. Just nothing. There is a reference to John the Baptist, which sounded relatively authentic to me, but even that Josephus doesn’t connect with a Christian movement. Josephus describes other major ideologies in first century Palestine – the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Essenes, and I think the Sicarioi (the Zealots?). And the fact that Origen doesn’t mention the TF, even though it would have greatly benefited his argument against Celsus, demonstrates that the TF wasn’t in Origen’s copy of Josephus, whom he references a dozen times.
I’m really glad I read this, but I don’t think I’ll ever read it again, unless it’s part of future studies. I'm giving it four stars, although rating ancient documents is kind of inane. I think my main takeaway was that history is complex, and there are so many details that we'll never know, but we know that there must have been details. I was continually furstrated at Josephus' source opacity and asking myself, "How could he have known that detail??" But it's still a classic.
Josephus begins the book by retelling the Old Testament stories. I got the impression that Josephus had no other source for this material than the OT itself. It sounded like he had a Tanakh in front of him, and he was paraphrasing and commenting on it for his readers.
Eventually he moves on to historical events for which he must have had other source material, but it was almost always impossible to know what sources he was using. He simply describes what happened as though it’s 100% fact. He often interpolates his own ideas and things that people ‘would have’ said or even 'thought'. This makes him a somewhat untrustworthy historian, by today’s standards. As a side note, I’ve detected this style in many ‘modern’ historians. They write as though “Caesar did this” or “Pompei did that”, rather than “Letters discovered in Egypt, attributed to Festus, claim that prior to entering the battle, Caesar had a dream.” Josephus, and many modern scholars, would just write, “Then Caesar had a dream.”
The amount of data that Josephus relates in this book is enough to launch 10,000 PhDs. There are so many people and events related that it was impossible to keep track, and instead I found myself just going along for the ride while not expecting to retain a whole lot. You could pick just about any page and do a major research project. Now that I think about it, since there are 1300 pages, you could pick any page and do 7.69 research projects. 😊
The two alleged references to Jesus Christ in Josephus come toward the end of the book. The second, where Josephus refers to James the brother of Jesus, is, in my opinion, probably not about James or Jesus. It’s about a man called James who is the brother of Jesus the son of Damneus. This Jesus became a high priest, as Josephus relates. Josephus almost obsessively thoroughly introduces his characters, and in the context of this passage, there’s nothing about Jesus Christ, or James his brother, or the Christian sect. There are two other Jesus’ named in this section (a very common name), and Josephus shows no awareness of the effects of Christianity on the holy land. He’s not talking about Christianity’s Jesus and James, he’s talking about major political players in the region – aka the high priest and his brother.
As for the Testimonium Flavianum, I don’t think Josephus wrote it, not even without the clearly pro-Christian interpolations. Again, Josephus never (barring these two spurious passages) shows any consciousness of Christianity. Josephus is pedantic about introducing characters and new scenes, and not afraid to elaborate (confabulate?) on tangentials. Remove this small paragraph, and the text flows nicely from the preceding to the one that follows. After listening to Joesphus’ style for over 45 hours up to this point, the Testimonium is just out of place and style. Josephus spends much, much longer detailing events that would have been much, much less significant to Jewish matters in Palestine. He goes over kings, high priests, minor uproars, rebellions, temple activities, etc, etc, and he’s documenting what happened in the first half of the first century, linking one thing to another, especially regarding Pilate and Herod Antipas. He wouldn’t just throw an off-hand reference in there such as this one, and then move on. Clearly, Josephus was never compelled, for whatever reason, to relate anything that had anything to do with early first century Christianity – not even to re-interpret it, play it down, dismiss it, respond to prevailing ideas…. Just nothing. There is a reference to John the Baptist, which sounded relatively authentic to me, but even that Josephus doesn’t connect with a Christian movement. Josephus describes other major ideologies in first century Palestine – the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Essenes, and I think the Sicarioi (the Zealots?). And the fact that Origen doesn’t mention the TF, even though it would have greatly benefited his argument against Celsus, demonstrates that the TF wasn’t in Origen’s copy of Josephus, whom he references a dozen times.
I’m really glad I read this, but I don’t think I’ll ever read it again, unless it’s part of future studies. I'm giving it four stars, although rating ancient documents is kind of inane. I think my main takeaway was that history is complex, and there are so many details that we'll never know, but we know that there must have been details. I was continually furstrated at Josephus' source opacity and asking myself, "How could he have known that detail??" But it's still a classic.
May 24, 2007
Lots of folks like to cite Josephus, so I figured it was time to read the man myself... not fun. It's good to read first century works besides the Bible. I don't think I'll ever read every one of the bazillion words in this book but it's good reference and I don't really trust the pointy headed acedemics who want me to trust them that they are telling me all I need to know about history.
October 5, 2025
Quite conflicted on this book. As I’m not a historian, I can’t really comment too much on the legitimacy of a lot of the content in this book, but despite that, I’ll at least try to summarize my thoughts.
For years of growing up in the church, I have heard countless pastors mention Josephus as a authority on Jewish history and culture, often citing his work in supporting proof of the Biblical text. Antiquities of the Jews’ strongest material presented itself in the last 40ish% of the book.
The first 60% of the book is essentially a recapping of the Old Testament. While some aspects line up, I’m personally staking my soul on the legitimacy of the Bible as in, and so I found it very difficult to give any real credence to this portion of the book as SO much is different between the Bible and Josephus’ work. There are many segments that last hours and hours before Josephus intercedes with any sort of external supporting reference or confirming text. Because he is viewed as a primary source by many, this is also hard to prove either true or not, which I guess one could argue is the difficulty of every history book written. I could rant on this for a long time, but I’ll move on for the sake of finishing this review.
Following this part of the history, Josephus eventually moves onto the “modern” history of the Jews, a time period that largely focuses on the introduction of Rome and the relationship between Roman rule and Jewish authority. This, I believe, is where Josephus’ work really shines. For context, Josephus himself (at least by his own account) was “forced” to lead a portion of one of the larger Jewish rebellions deeper into Roman rule. Upon escaping death, he eventually wound up under house arrest in Judea and then later (after prophesying that Vespasian would become emperor) ended up in Rome l was brought under the protection of the Vespasian family, changing his name to Flavius Josephus as a sign of respect in the process; a much more suitable name for a good Roman historian.
This, we see, plays heavily into the narrative. At many times, Antiquities of the Jews feels more like Josephus reminding Rome how each as done for the other as a survival method rather than a comprehensive history (which to be fair, is understandable.) While I can’t say this with certainty, it does stand to reason that the portion of history directly relating the Romans would being presented to the Romans would proooobably be a bit more reliable in terms of legitimacy.
All that too say, I can’t say I honestly enjoyed this book. I did enjoy complaining about it, but I don’t think that counts. If anything, I am grateful that I read it so as to have a butter perspective on one of the more famous historians that we reference in the Christian faith.
It’s always tricky giving a rating to a history book, but in terms of personal enjoyment:
2.5 🤩
For years of growing up in the church, I have heard countless pastors mention Josephus as a authority on Jewish history and culture, often citing his work in supporting proof of the Biblical text. Antiquities of the Jews’ strongest material presented itself in the last 40ish% of the book.
The first 60% of the book is essentially a recapping of the Old Testament. While some aspects line up, I’m personally staking my soul on the legitimacy of the Bible as in, and so I found it very difficult to give any real credence to this portion of the book as SO much is different between the Bible and Josephus’ work. There are many segments that last hours and hours before Josephus intercedes with any sort of external supporting reference or confirming text. Because he is viewed as a primary source by many, this is also hard to prove either true or not, which I guess one could argue is the difficulty of every history book written. I could rant on this for a long time, but I’ll move on for the sake of finishing this review.
Following this part of the history, Josephus eventually moves onto the “modern” history of the Jews, a time period that largely focuses on the introduction of Rome and the relationship between Roman rule and Jewish authority. This, I believe, is where Josephus’ work really shines. For context, Josephus himself (at least by his own account) was “forced” to lead a portion of one of the larger Jewish rebellions deeper into Roman rule. Upon escaping death, he eventually wound up under house arrest in Judea and then later (after prophesying that Vespasian would become emperor) ended up in Rome l was brought under the protection of the Vespasian family, changing his name to Flavius Josephus as a sign of respect in the process; a much more suitable name for a good Roman historian.
This, we see, plays heavily into the narrative. At many times, Antiquities of the Jews feels more like Josephus reminding Rome how each as done for the other as a survival method rather than a comprehensive history (which to be fair, is understandable.) While I can’t say this with certainty, it does stand to reason that the portion of history directly relating the Romans would being presented to the Romans would proooobably be a bit more reliable in terms of legitimacy.
All that too say, I can’t say I honestly enjoyed this book. I did enjoy complaining about it, but I don’t think that counts. If anything, I am grateful that I read it so as to have a butter perspective on one of the more famous historians that we reference in the Christian faith.
It’s always tricky giving a rating to a history book, but in terms of personal enjoyment:
2.5 🤩
February 17, 2026
Whew!!!! I made it!
Antiquities covers Jewish history from creation to the time of the Jewish Revolt again Rome in 66 AD.
Written in 94 AD, Josephus gives us unparallel insight into the 1st centuries both BC and AD of Judea and the Roman empire. This reading led to much study, looking at other sources and expounding my knowledge on people and events mentioned in this history.
Initially fighting again the Roman Empire, Josephus surrendered, became a slave/interpreter, given his freedom, adopted the emperor family name of Flavius, and then was granted full Roman citizenship. His works are written with a Roman readership in mind.
From Wiki:
Josephus's works are the chief source next to the Bible for the history and antiquity of ancient Israel, and provide an independent extra-biblical account of such figures as Pontius Pilate, Herod the Great, John the Baptist, James, brother of Jesus, and Jesus of Nazareth.
Antiquities covers Jewish history from creation to the time of the Jewish Revolt again Rome in 66 AD.
Written in 94 AD, Josephus gives us unparallel insight into the 1st centuries both BC and AD of Judea and the Roman empire. This reading led to much study, looking at other sources and expounding my knowledge on people and events mentioned in this history.
Initially fighting again the Roman Empire, Josephus surrendered, became a slave/interpreter, given his freedom, adopted the emperor family name of Flavius, and then was granted full Roman citizenship. His works are written with a Roman readership in mind.
From Wiki:
Josephus's works are the chief source next to the Bible for the history and antiquity of ancient Israel, and provide an independent extra-biblical account of such figures as Pontius Pilate, Herod the Great, John the Baptist, James, brother of Jesus, and Jesus of Nazareth.
April 15, 2023
A great history and, if not for the pompousness of Josephus, could easily be a four star book.
October 9, 2021
Incredible narrative of the people and history of the Jewish people as a companion to reading the biblical accounts.
January 3, 2026
This is a long book in which Josephus defends Judaism to a Greco-Roman audience. The first half is a retelling of the OT, while the second half is the history following until the 1st century, ending just before the Jewish revolt in the 60s.
I enjoyed the first half the most. It is so interesting the way he reinterprets OT stories, adds details (like Moses the general, Samuel's love for aristocracy, Abraham teaching science to the Egyptians - essentially extolling virtues in Bible characters), and gets around difficulties or inconsistencies in the text. I found the second half more difficult to get through since so much of it is spent on politics and leaders trying to stay in power and court Caesar (e.g., books 14-17 are all about Herod the Great, and are an in-depth look at just how paranoid and ruthless Herod becomes).
This is definitely recommended for serious students of the Bible as an account of how some people in the 1st century AD interpreted and understood the OT and Jewish history. It shows that Jews reinterpreted their own history in light of their own circumstances and culture, in this case Josephus reinterpretating it as someone whose patron is the emperor and who is seeking to defend Judaism to Greco-Romans.
I enjoyed the first half the most. It is so interesting the way he reinterprets OT stories, adds details (like Moses the general, Samuel's love for aristocracy, Abraham teaching science to the Egyptians - essentially extolling virtues in Bible characters), and gets around difficulties or inconsistencies in the text. I found the second half more difficult to get through since so much of it is spent on politics and leaders trying to stay in power and court Caesar (e.g., books 14-17 are all about Herod the Great, and are an in-depth look at just how paranoid and ruthless Herod becomes).
This is definitely recommended for serious students of the Bible as an account of how some people in the 1st century AD interpreted and understood the OT and Jewish history. It shows that Jews reinterpreted their own history in light of their own circumstances and culture, in this case Josephus reinterpretating it as someone whose patron is the emperor and who is seeking to defend Judaism to Greco-Romans.
November 21, 2023
"História dos Hebreus" de Flávio Josefo é uma obra histórica monumental que se destaca como uma fonte valiosa para compreender a antiguidade e, por extensão, a contextualização histórica da Bíblia Sagrada. Este livro desempenha um papel significativo ao fornecer um relato detalhado dos eventos que envolvem o povo hebreu, enriquecendo assim a compreensão das narrativas bíblicas.
Josefo, um historiador judeu do primeiro século, oferece uma perspectiva única e detalhada sobre a história dos hebreus, incluindo eventos como a destruição do Templo de Jerusalém. Sua obra serve como um elo valioso entre as Escrituras e o conhecimento histórico secular, fornecendo um contexto histórico que, por sua vez, contribui para a credibilidade da narrativa bíblica.
Ao destacar a importância deste livro, é crucial salientar que, embora ele possa fornecer informações históricas valiosas, a leitura da Bíblia Sagrada deve ser guiada pela fé e compreensão teológica. Josefo fornece um contexto histórico, mas a fé na revelação divina permanece como a base fundamental da compreensão das Escrituras.
Josefo, um historiador judeu do primeiro século, oferece uma perspectiva única e detalhada sobre a história dos hebreus, incluindo eventos como a destruição do Templo de Jerusalém. Sua obra serve como um elo valioso entre as Escrituras e o conhecimento histórico secular, fornecendo um contexto histórico que, por sua vez, contribui para a credibilidade da narrativa bíblica.
Ao destacar a importância deste livro, é crucial salientar que, embora ele possa fornecer informações históricas valiosas, a leitura da Bíblia Sagrada deve ser guiada pela fé e compreensão teológica. Josefo fornece um contexto histórico, mas a fé na revelação divina permanece como a base fundamental da compreensão das Escrituras.
October 3, 2021
The Antiquities is a work by Josephus during the time of Jesus. It comprises of twenty books in total. In the first parts, Josephus relates the Tanakh, together with the records he had as a Jewish historian. He said, "I shall accurately describe what is written in our records, in the order of time that belongs to them." This meant that the book contains more than what the Bible has. And indeed, the reader will find forests of information from Josephus. This is the reason why scholars do not take for granted Josephus' works as historian. Furthermore, after relating what was in his records, he also notes what was happening in his time politically, religiously and militarily (up to 66 AD) - an added value to Josephus' work.
There are indeed some visible signs that Josephus' Jewish Antiquities had been altered. Notably, with the account of the siege of the Assyrians to Jerusalem where the Bible mentioned 185,000 of the Assyrians were killed by the angel of God (2 Kings 19:35). Josephus appears to believe the account of Sennacherib (the then king of Assyria) and of the Bible, which made him look very self-contradictory. Sennacherib says that he subjugated Jerusalem, while the Bible says that the Assyrians incurred a heavy toll, enough for them to retreat. Josephus appears to believe both accounts in Antiquities.
Second is the account of Jesus, where he mentions of some miracles of Jesus including the resurrection. As one of the Bible scholars notes (Elgin Hushbeck, Jr.), had this account of Josephus been true, he could have been a Christian. He could have been fanatic of Jesus like St. Paul. But he did not proselytise. Moreover, in the first book, he expressed a doubt on Moses' miraculous splitting of the sea by comparing it with the Sea of Pamphilia 'paving the path' to Alexander. If he can doubt a miracle from his Jewish circle, how much more from the then newly-founded Christian sect?
However, these signs of alterations should not put off anyone looking into the history of Judaism or of its surroundings. These are minor. Besides, the scholar should always verify what is recorded by anyone.
Overall, the contents of the book is very valuable. The Bible scholar will find it forestful of information. The only negative thing I would say that is that the book is written in very small fonts. And with its 900 pages, the reader will struggle reading.
There are indeed some visible signs that Josephus' Jewish Antiquities had been altered. Notably, with the account of the siege of the Assyrians to Jerusalem where the Bible mentioned 185,000 of the Assyrians were killed by the angel of God (2 Kings 19:35). Josephus appears to believe the account of Sennacherib (the then king of Assyria) and of the Bible, which made him look very self-contradictory. Sennacherib says that he subjugated Jerusalem, while the Bible says that the Assyrians incurred a heavy toll, enough for them to retreat. Josephus appears to believe both accounts in Antiquities.
Second is the account of Jesus, where he mentions of some miracles of Jesus including the resurrection. As one of the Bible scholars notes (Elgin Hushbeck, Jr.), had this account of Josephus been true, he could have been a Christian. He could have been fanatic of Jesus like St. Paul. But he did not proselytise. Moreover, in the first book, he expressed a doubt on Moses' miraculous splitting of the sea by comparing it with the Sea of Pamphilia 'paving the path' to Alexander. If he can doubt a miracle from his Jewish circle, how much more from the then newly-founded Christian sect?
However, these signs of alterations should not put off anyone looking into the history of Judaism or of its surroundings. These are minor. Besides, the scholar should always verify what is recorded by anyone.
Overall, the contents of the book is very valuable. The Bible scholar will find it forestful of information. The only negative thing I would say that is that the book is written in very small fonts. And with its 900 pages, the reader will struggle reading.
October 6, 2012
Copy damaged in domestic incident.
June 25, 2017
It's basically like rereading the bible; it's about 3/4th the way in before you get to the interesting stuff, but by then you're so desperate to be done you don't really pay attention...
Read
April 17, 202293-94 CE
November 28, 2018
An intimidatingly long book that I enjoyed very much, once I had worked out which parts I could skip and skim.
In the first half, which runs from the creation of the universe to the Exile, Josephus takes the narrative parts of the Torah and the Former Prophets and retells them in such a way as to remove all the subtlety and depth. It’s stultifyingly dull. But all is not quite as it seems. In his account of Moses, for example, where we would expect to read an account of the murder of the Egyptian and Moses’ flight into Midian, Josephus tells us how Moses was appointed General of the Egyptian forces and invaded Ethiopia. This accounts for his Ethiopian wife. He then flees to Midian to escape the jealousy of the other Egyptian generals. Yet Josephus stresses multiple times throughout the whole work that he is simply recounting what he has read in the Jewish sacred books. Apparently there is a medieval Jewish text that recounts a very similar story of Moses. Did such a text exist at the time, or has he taken the story from an oral tradition? Was this alternative story widely believed at the time? If it existed as a text was it considered canon? Personally I’m not convinced that Josephus is entirely trustworthy. I think he may have been a bit of a scoundrel. He wrote this book in Greek for Hellenised peoples and, by extension, educated Romans. I think his deviation in the story is politically motivated. Thinking it might make a bad impression if the founder of Judaism made himself a murderer on account of a slave, I believe Josephus has cleaned things up and put a bit of spin on the story. There are quite a few instances of this sort of thing in the book and there’s probably a thesis or two to be made out of them if anyone can bear to trawl through. But I pity the person who undertakes it because these points of interest are few and far between and on the whole this first half is so boring it made me want to die. I skipped and skimmed through most of it. If you want to know the story, read the Old Testament where it’s told with infinitely more brevity and wit.
The second half of the book, from the Exile to the 60s AD is very different and really fascinating. Again, not everything Josephus says is true. Take, for instance, his account of Alexander’s deferential attitude to the Jews when he conquers Jerusalem and his reverence when the priests show how his coming was foretold in the Book of Daniel. An incredible story – literally – as Daniel wasn’t written until 164BC. Obviously, Josephus has a political agenda here. Following this there is a long political/military history of a Hellenising world. You get a real idea of what it would be like to live at the confluence of three major empires, all jostling for power in the region. Total carnage. It can get quite confusing as often the kings in a dynasty alternate between only two names and the accounts of each are brief. I wouldn’t want to lengthen this section but I could have done with more information on Queen Alexandra, who seems very interesting. Over all is the lengthening shadow of Rome and their attack, when it comes, is shockingly quick. You might note how Pompey’s desecration of the Temple is downplayed. The Roman’s bring the aqueduct, and peace. And let’s be honest, they’re the only ones who could in a place like that. They might bring peace, but they also bring Herod. Jopsephus’s account of Herod is detailed, exciting and at times really disturbing. I used to work with people who suffered from mental ill health and know a bit about the subject. Josephus is obviously biased and says as much himself, but I’m inclined to largely trust his account because even though my concept of poor mental health differs greatly from the concepts of the ancient world I could still clearly identify a number of the conditions with which Herod suffered. I understand there is a recent biography by a psychiatrist which analyses Herod using psycho-analytical theory. I’m going to track drown a copy.
So, very much a game of two halves and for my star rating I’ve taken the average. Certainly worth popping your nose in and taking a look even if you don’t read the whole thing. And it’s not without humour. At XIII:375-6 Josephus describes the later career of some petty warlord:
“From thence he fled to Jerusalem, where, on account of ill-success, the nation insulted him, and he fought against them for six years, and slew no fewer than fifty thousand of them.-And when he desired that they would desist from their ill-will to him, they hated him so much the more, on account of what had already happened; and when he had asked them what he ought to do? they all cried out, that ‘he ought to kill himself.’”
In the first half, which runs from the creation of the universe to the Exile, Josephus takes the narrative parts of the Torah and the Former Prophets and retells them in such a way as to remove all the subtlety and depth. It’s stultifyingly dull. But all is not quite as it seems. In his account of Moses, for example, where we would expect to read an account of the murder of the Egyptian and Moses’ flight into Midian, Josephus tells us how Moses was appointed General of the Egyptian forces and invaded Ethiopia. This accounts for his Ethiopian wife. He then flees to Midian to escape the jealousy of the other Egyptian generals. Yet Josephus stresses multiple times throughout the whole work that he is simply recounting what he has read in the Jewish sacred books. Apparently there is a medieval Jewish text that recounts a very similar story of Moses. Did such a text exist at the time, or has he taken the story from an oral tradition? Was this alternative story widely believed at the time? If it existed as a text was it considered canon? Personally I’m not convinced that Josephus is entirely trustworthy. I think he may have been a bit of a scoundrel. He wrote this book in Greek for Hellenised peoples and, by extension, educated Romans. I think his deviation in the story is politically motivated. Thinking it might make a bad impression if the founder of Judaism made himself a murderer on account of a slave, I believe Josephus has cleaned things up and put a bit of spin on the story. There are quite a few instances of this sort of thing in the book and there’s probably a thesis or two to be made out of them if anyone can bear to trawl through. But I pity the person who undertakes it because these points of interest are few and far between and on the whole this first half is so boring it made me want to die. I skipped and skimmed through most of it. If you want to know the story, read the Old Testament where it’s told with infinitely more brevity and wit.
The second half of the book, from the Exile to the 60s AD is very different and really fascinating. Again, not everything Josephus says is true. Take, for instance, his account of Alexander’s deferential attitude to the Jews when he conquers Jerusalem and his reverence when the priests show how his coming was foretold in the Book of Daniel. An incredible story – literally – as Daniel wasn’t written until 164BC. Obviously, Josephus has a political agenda here. Following this there is a long political/military history of a Hellenising world. You get a real idea of what it would be like to live at the confluence of three major empires, all jostling for power in the region. Total carnage. It can get quite confusing as often the kings in a dynasty alternate between only two names and the accounts of each are brief. I wouldn’t want to lengthen this section but I could have done with more information on Queen Alexandra, who seems very interesting. Over all is the lengthening shadow of Rome and their attack, when it comes, is shockingly quick. You might note how Pompey’s desecration of the Temple is downplayed. The Roman’s bring the aqueduct, and peace. And let’s be honest, they’re the only ones who could in a place like that. They might bring peace, but they also bring Herod. Jopsephus’s account of Herod is detailed, exciting and at times really disturbing. I used to work with people who suffered from mental ill health and know a bit about the subject. Josephus is obviously biased and says as much himself, but I’m inclined to largely trust his account because even though my concept of poor mental health differs greatly from the concepts of the ancient world I could still clearly identify a number of the conditions with which Herod suffered. I understand there is a recent biography by a psychiatrist which analyses Herod using psycho-analytical theory. I’m going to track drown a copy.
So, very much a game of two halves and for my star rating I’ve taken the average. Certainly worth popping your nose in and taking a look even if you don’t read the whole thing. And it’s not without humour. At XIII:375-6 Josephus describes the later career of some petty warlord:
“From thence he fled to Jerusalem, where, on account of ill-success, the nation insulted him, and he fought against them for six years, and slew no fewer than fifty thousand of them.-And when he desired that they would desist from their ill-will to him, they hated him so much the more, on account of what had already happened; and when he had asked them what he ought to do? they all cried out, that ‘he ought to kill himself.’”
January 22, 2022
Cei ce se îndeletnicesc cu scrierea istoriei nu au, după părerea mea, unul si acelaşi motiv, ci mai multe, între ele existând o mare deosebire. Căci unii se dedică acestui gen de lucrări ca să-şi demonstreze elocvenţa, spre a dobândi faimă prin intermediul ei; însă o fac doar ca să fie pe placul celor ale căror fapte le înfăţişează, ostenindu-se peste puterile lor în această treabă; sunt şi alţii pe care înseşi întâmplările la care au luat parte direct i-au constrâns să le fixeze în scris, spre a nu fi date uitării; dar pe mulţi tocmai măreţia a fost cea care i-a determinat să povestească fapte învăluite de tăcere, ca să fie în folosul tuturor. Din cauzele pe care le-am înşirat mai sus, ultimele două mi se potrivesc şi mie. Cât priveşte războiul pe care noi, iudeii, l-am purtat împotriva romanilor, atât participarea mea la el cât şi deplina cunoaştere a felului cum s-au desfăşurat evenimentele m-au silit să devin istoric, ca să-i dau în vileag pe cei care, în scrierile lor, au deformat adevărul.
Am întreprins opera de faţă, convins că aceasta va fi demnă de preţuirea tuturor grecilor. Căci ea va reda întreaga vechime, precum şi constituirea statului nostru, transpuse din scrierile ebraice în limba lor. încă mai înainte, când am aşternut în scris istoria războiului, m-am gândit să înfăţişez străvechea obârşie a iudeilor, prin câte întâmplări ale sorţii le-afost dat să treacă, sub ce mare legiuitor s-au deprins ei cu cinstirea lui Dumnezeu şi a celorlalte virtuţi, ca şi luptele pe care le-au dus de-a lungul atâtor veacuri, până, în sfârşit, la războiul purtat fără voia lor împotriva romanilor. Dar întrucât tema s-a dovedit a fi prea vastă, separat de acest război, mi-am propus să închin o lucrare aparte ursitei iudeilor, pe care s-o descriu de la primele începuturi şi până la izbucnirea ostilităţilor. O buna bucată de
vreme, aşa cum păţesc cei ce se înhamă la o sarcină deosebit de grea, m-a năpădit o anumită delăsare şi lene, având de tradus atât de multă materie într-o limbă din altă ţară, străină mie. Au fost însă unii care, mânaţi de dragostea lor pentru istorie, m-au încurajat în munca mea, în primul rând Epaphroditos1, un bărbat instruit în tot felul de ştiinţe, deosebit de dornic să cunoască evenimentele petrecute aievea, deoarece el însuşi era deprins cu marile isprăvi şi cu feluritele schimbări ale sorţii, vădind în toate împrejurările o fire aleasă şi statornica cultivare a virtuţii. Stimulat de un asemenea protector, mereu pregătit să-i sprijine pe cei în stare de lucrări folositoare şi cinstite, mi s-a părut ruşinos să pun lenea mai presus de cea mai lăudabilă trudă şi mi-am adunat toate puterile de care dispun; s-a mai adăugat şi ceva ce m-a pus serios pe gânduri, anume că şi propriii mei strămoşi s-au arătat bucuroşi să-şi dezvăluie întâmplările străinilor şi că unii dintre greci ardeau de nerăbdare şă cunoască faptele noastre.
Am întreprins opera de faţă, convins că aceasta va fi demnă de preţuirea tuturor grecilor. Căci ea va reda întreaga vechime, precum şi constituirea statului nostru, transpuse din scrierile ebraice în limba lor. încă mai înainte, când am aşternut în scris istoria războiului, m-am gândit să înfăţişez străvechea obârşie a iudeilor, prin câte întâmplări ale sorţii le-afost dat să treacă, sub ce mare legiuitor s-au deprins ei cu cinstirea lui Dumnezeu şi a celorlalte virtuţi, ca şi luptele pe care le-au dus de-a lungul atâtor veacuri, până, în sfârşit, la războiul purtat fără voia lor împotriva romanilor. Dar întrucât tema s-a dovedit a fi prea vastă, separat de acest război, mi-am propus să închin o lucrare aparte ursitei iudeilor, pe care s-o descriu de la primele începuturi şi până la izbucnirea ostilităţilor. O buna bucată de
vreme, aşa cum păţesc cei ce se înhamă la o sarcină deosebit de grea, m-a năpădit o anumită delăsare şi lene, având de tradus atât de multă materie într-o limbă din altă ţară, străină mie. Au fost însă unii care, mânaţi de dragostea lor pentru istorie, m-au încurajat în munca mea, în primul rând Epaphroditos1, un bărbat instruit în tot felul de ştiinţe, deosebit de dornic să cunoască evenimentele petrecute aievea, deoarece el însuşi era deprins cu marile isprăvi şi cu feluritele schimbări ale sorţii, vădind în toate împrejurările o fire aleasă şi statornica cultivare a virtuţii. Stimulat de un asemenea protector, mereu pregătit să-i sprijine pe cei în stare de lucrări folositoare şi cinstite, mi s-a părut ruşinos să pun lenea mai presus de cea mai lăudabilă trudă şi mi-am adunat toate puterile de care dispun; s-a mai adăugat şi ceva ce m-a pus serios pe gânduri, anume că şi propriii mei strămoşi s-au arătat bucuroşi să-şi dezvăluie întâmplările străinilor şi că unii dintre greci ardeau de nerăbdare şă cunoască faptele noastre.
May 13, 2026
Josephus was a general during the Jewish war with Rome that started in 66 AD. He was captured by the Romans, enslaved, and subsequently defected to their side. The war ended with the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in 70 AD. Josephus later wrote a history of the war and this book, which is a general history of the Jews and an explanation of their culture for a non-Jewish audience.
The work is separated into 20 books, the first half of which are a retelling of the Old Testament account. The remainder continue the history up until right before the war.
When I saw that this book was 1500 pages, I was pretty sure that my review at the end (if I made it to the end) was going to say it was a slog. But I like the Old Testament, so reading Josephus' version of it that was interesting. Then I figured after that I would be learning new things that would still keep me interested. Things did turn into a slog about 2/3 of the way through. Nothing really changed, it's just a lot of pages, and Josephus, like many of his contemporaries, is long-winded. Conciseness was not a literary virtue back then.
This book is not as popular as other classics that regularly get new translations, in that the only translation I could find was from 300 years ago. I'm guessing the length of it and the fact that half is a retelling of the Bible are both factors in that. I've since learned that there's a early 20th century translation that is liked by scholars and a 21st century translation currently in progress.
Some of Josephus' exclusions and additions are interesting. He completely skips over the episode of the golden calf with the Israelites in the wilderness, but does talk about the idols set up by Jeroboam. Elijah isn't translated, he just dies. Abraham taught the Egyptians science, and that's how the Greeks learned it.
Another thing that struck me is how often the high priest got changed near the close of the book. After being a hereditary lifetime office, it becomes the province of the rulers (Roman or Jewish king) to decide, but they seemed to change it every couple of years and most of the time Josephus just mentions it without comment. Since it seemed to sometimes get shifted among the same family, I wonder if it was to reduce the power of the high priest or for some other reason.
The work is separated into 20 books, the first half of which are a retelling of the Old Testament account. The remainder continue the history up until right before the war.
When I saw that this book was 1500 pages, I was pretty sure that my review at the end (if I made it to the end) was going to say it was a slog. But I like the Old Testament, so reading Josephus' version of it that was interesting. Then I figured after that I would be learning new things that would still keep me interested. Things did turn into a slog about 2/3 of the way through. Nothing really changed, it's just a lot of pages, and Josephus, like many of his contemporaries, is long-winded. Conciseness was not a literary virtue back then.
This book is not as popular as other classics that regularly get new translations, in that the only translation I could find was from 300 years ago. I'm guessing the length of it and the fact that half is a retelling of the Bible are both factors in that. I've since learned that there's a early 20th century translation that is liked by scholars and a 21st century translation currently in progress.
Some of Josephus' exclusions and additions are interesting. He completely skips over the episode of the golden calf with the Israelites in the wilderness, but does talk about the idols set up by Jeroboam. Elijah isn't translated, he just dies. Abraham taught the Egyptians science, and that's how the Greeks learned it.
Another thing that struck me is how often the high priest got changed near the close of the book. After being a hereditary lifetime office, it becomes the province of the rulers (Roman or Jewish king) to decide, but they seemed to change it every couple of years and most of the time Josephus just mentions it without comment. Since it seemed to sometimes get shifted among the same family, I wonder if it was to reduce the power of the high priest or for some other reason.
January 26, 2026
Finally! I'm finally done with this! It's war, war, war, war, war, Gaius, w- Wait a minute! There had been an Augustus here and Tiberius there, but all relating to their interaction with the Jews. Suddenly there's a play-by-play of the assassination of Gaius (AKA Caligula) riven with suspense even though everyone knows he was killed and Josephus even tells you that in the chapter heading and who dunnit! Is Cassius (not familiar with the name Cherea - is it a scan typo?) ever going to get around to it? According to the translator's (William Whiston) notes this is the most complete description of the assassination plot that exists. And while reading this I'm wondering, Why on earth is this included in a history of the Jews? I also wondered what that gossipy story about the silly Roman woman who's deluded into going to a temple to be a "god's" sex partner is doing in the chapter on Pontius Pilate. Everyone else highlights the bit about Jesus. No one questions the next bit?
Then it moves on Claudius taking over and back to his fair treatment of the Jews. Gaius can be mentioned as being a complete bastard by insisting his image be installed in the Temple in Jerusalem and to kill anyone who objects. Fortunately his representative listens to the complaints and writes a letter to Gaius (that could result in orders for him to fall on his own sword) to rethink those orders. Luckily, Cassius finally makes his move and Gaius is murdered and word gets to his representative of the death so he can skip installing the statue. But the whole conspiracy, naming the names, conversations (yeah, like those were recorded), planning, delays, all the blows it takes to finally kill, and the retribution of the German soldiers. Was all that necessary? Well, it was if this is the only source. And it's the most interesting part.
Josephus also has a lot to say about tyranny - not just about Roman emperors but Jewish kings too, which seems to be pertinent to our day and time.
On the Kindle version I read: It was free and you get what you pay for. The Wilder Publications version is riddled with errors, many that are easily understood as "i" being mistaken for "l," etc. And while that's really annoying, you get the gist.
Then it moves on Claudius taking over and back to his fair treatment of the Jews. Gaius can be mentioned as being a complete bastard by insisting his image be installed in the Temple in Jerusalem and to kill anyone who objects. Fortunately his representative listens to the complaints and writes a letter to Gaius (that could result in orders for him to fall on his own sword) to rethink those orders. Luckily, Cassius finally makes his move and Gaius is murdered and word gets to his representative of the death so he can skip installing the statue. But the whole conspiracy, naming the names, conversations (yeah, like those were recorded), planning, delays, all the blows it takes to finally kill, and the retribution of the German soldiers. Was all that necessary? Well, it was if this is the only source. And it's the most interesting part.
Josephus also has a lot to say about tyranny - not just about Roman emperors but Jewish kings too, which seems to be pertinent to our day and time.
On the Kindle version I read: It was free and you get what you pay for. The Wilder Publications version is riddled with errors, many that are easily understood as "i" being mistaken for "l," etc. And while that's really annoying, you get the gist.
December 27, 2024
I read the Loeb version translated by Thackeray. It was a pleasure to read. The language is old English which is similar to the KJV bible but with a few new words you need to learn to do with ancient Jewish culture, I read it along with reading Jodi Magnes books which helped me understand the context a lot better.
Overall the book is very interesting and worth a read for anyone interested in Jewish history or early Christianity. The first few books are very exciting as they basically recount the biblical story but through the lens of a 1st century Jewish historian, there are many added details which are very interesting to explore.
The old scholarship believed Josephus used only the MT with added stories as his source but there are countless evidences of him using only the LXX and modern scholarship has proved he most likely only used the LXX with some added Aramaic sources as he knew very little or no Hebrew. (Satlow 2020).
The books in the middle have interesting details about ancient history and reference many historical works which we no longer have access to. But the books become less philosophical and with less interesting commentary. Then the final books are not as interesting as they just recount Roman drama with barely any spiritual food for thought and with not as much relevance to the Jews as a people or their religion.
Josephus pays particular attention to genealogies and races of people such as the Jews and the ancient Israelites and their descendants (and those who pretend to descend from them) aswel as the genealogies of the people in Judah at his time such as Pharisees and Sadducees. He does make mistakes when referring to the bible at times but overall these are very valuable for any historian or genealogist.
Source:
- Josephus’s Knowledge of Scripture, Journal of Ancient, Judaism 11 (2020) 385–417, Michael L. Satlow, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
Overall the book is very interesting and worth a read for anyone interested in Jewish history or early Christianity. The first few books are very exciting as they basically recount the biblical story but through the lens of a 1st century Jewish historian, there are many added details which are very interesting to explore.
The old scholarship believed Josephus used only the MT with added stories as his source but there are countless evidences of him using only the LXX and modern scholarship has proved he most likely only used the LXX with some added Aramaic sources as he knew very little or no Hebrew. (Satlow 2020).
The books in the middle have interesting details about ancient history and reference many historical works which we no longer have access to. But the books become less philosophical and with less interesting commentary. Then the final books are not as interesting as they just recount Roman drama with barely any spiritual food for thought and with not as much relevance to the Jews as a people or their religion.
Josephus pays particular attention to genealogies and races of people such as the Jews and the ancient Israelites and their descendants (and those who pretend to descend from them) aswel as the genealogies of the people in Judah at his time such as Pharisees and Sadducees. He does make mistakes when referring to the bible at times but overall these are very valuable for any historian or genealogist.
Source:
- Josephus’s Knowledge of Scripture, Journal of Ancient, Judaism 11 (2020) 385–417, Michael L. Satlow, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
May 3, 2026
Flavius Josephus was a Jewish historian who lived from 37 to 100 AD, and in proximity to incredibly interesting times. The bulk of his work entitled the Antiquities of the Jews concerns Jewish matters from the creation to Josephus’ own day. A good sized portion of the work covers the uber-dysfunctional Herod the Great.
Aspects of this work that I enjoyed the most included several Jewish interactions with individual’s from Sparta. Also, Alexander the Great’s sparing of Jerusalem due to twin dreams, one by the chief priest of Jerusalem in how to welcome Alexander. The other given to Alexander that he attributed to the God of the Jews. He described it to his generals thusly.
Josephus was familiar with Christians and their beliefs. My favorite expression in his history was a brief description of Christ during the time of Herod.
Aspects of this work that I enjoyed the most included several Jewish interactions with individual’s from Sparta. Also, Alexander the Great’s sparing of Jerusalem due to twin dreams, one by the chief priest of Jerusalem in how to welcome Alexander. The other given to Alexander that he attributed to the God of the Jews. He described it to his generals thusly.
”I saw this very person [the high priest] in a dream, in this very habit, when I was at Dios in Macedonia, who, when I was considering with myself how I might obtain the dominion of Asia, [Jehovah] exhorted me to make no delay, but boldly to pass over the sea thither, for that he would conduct my army, and would give me the dominion over the Persians;
Josephus was familiar with Christians and their beliefs. My favorite expression in his history was a brief description of Christ during the time of Herod.
”Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day”.
February 1, 2022
I did it! I did it! I got all the way through The Antiquities of the Jews by Flavius Josephus. This is one huge chunk of literary of heavy lifting.
This thing is enormous and more than half of it is a rehash of the Hebrew Bible, a.k.a. the Old Testament, filtered through a first-century Pharisee for a Greco-Roman audience. As a result, there are additions, presumably drawn from Jewish tradition, and a number of glaring omissions, probably calculated to avoid offending his target audience.
I decided to read this one first and then move on to The Jewish War because it seemed logical to me to go in chronological order, if not the order they were written, and it has the added benefit of getting this great doorstop of a book over with. Seriously, much of this thing was incredibly tedious and I only stuck with it so I could say I did. It gets an extra star for being an important historical document, but there was a lot of heavy going here!
There were interesting parts, don’t get me wrong, and I understand its significance for its insights into the first-century Jewish worldview. Thinking about that, as well as imagining Josephus’s thought process as he tried to create a document that addressed anti-Jewish prejudice among Romans and Greeks, really helped me to keep going here.
There’s one little paragraph where he appears to write rather fawningly about Jesus Christ. I understand many historians doubt whether the passage is authentic. Honestly, I have my doubts too. If Flavius Josephus, the Pharisee, wrote that, why is there no evidence that he converted to Christianity?
Anyway, I’m off to read The Jewish War. It should be a breeze after what I’ve just been through.
This thing is enormous and more than half of it is a rehash of the Hebrew Bible, a.k.a. the Old Testament, filtered through a first-century Pharisee for a Greco-Roman audience. As a result, there are additions, presumably drawn from Jewish tradition, and a number of glaring omissions, probably calculated to avoid offending his target audience.
I decided to read this one first and then move on to The Jewish War because it seemed logical to me to go in chronological order, if not the order they were written, and it has the added benefit of getting this great doorstop of a book over with. Seriously, much of this thing was incredibly tedious and I only stuck with it so I could say I did. It gets an extra star for being an important historical document, but there was a lot of heavy going here!
There were interesting parts, don’t get me wrong, and I understand its significance for its insights into the first-century Jewish worldview. Thinking about that, as well as imagining Josephus’s thought process as he tried to create a document that addressed anti-Jewish prejudice among Romans and Greeks, really helped me to keep going here.
There’s one little paragraph where he appears to write rather fawningly about Jesus Christ. I understand many historians doubt whether the passage is authentic. Honestly, I have my doubts too. If Flavius Josephus, the Pharisee, wrote that, why is there no evidence that he converted to Christianity?
Anyway, I’m off to read The Jewish War. It should be a breeze after what I’ve just been through.
January 10, 2023
This is pretty awful as a work of literature - definitely not for pleasure reading. But very interesting as background information for the New Testament. There is a lot here about King Herod, for example, that confirms that he was someone who would not stop at anything to eliminate rivals to the crown. The Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Sanhedrin, John the Baptist, Jesus and the apostles - all make an appearance, along with background on the political dynamics among them and the Romans.
This is written to the Romans as an explanation of Jewish history and culture. Interestingly, Josephus summarizes the entire Old Testament without any mention of messianic prophecy - was this too dangerous of a topic for a Roman audience? The emphasis throughout is the priesthood and the Law. Josephus presents the Hebrew laws as the essence of the culture and nation for which the Jewish people will fight to the end. They represent an ideal philosophy of the virtuous life and political philosophy with the Sanhedrin as a sort of Senate in a non-monarchial constitutional system. Josephus is clearly influenced by Roman culture.
But it did get me thinking about this idea of virtue - why it doesn't seem to be talked about these days, and the high value of God's moral law. I also came away with much more knowledge about the time of Christ.
This is written to the Romans as an explanation of Jewish history and culture. Interestingly, Josephus summarizes the entire Old Testament without any mention of messianic prophecy - was this too dangerous of a topic for a Roman audience? The emphasis throughout is the priesthood and the Law. Josephus presents the Hebrew laws as the essence of the culture and nation for which the Jewish people will fight to the end. They represent an ideal philosophy of the virtuous life and political philosophy with the Sanhedrin as a sort of Senate in a non-monarchial constitutional system. Josephus is clearly influenced by Roman culture.
But it did get me thinking about this idea of virtue - why it doesn't seem to be talked about these days, and the high value of God's moral law. I also came away with much more knowledge about the time of Christ.
June 17, 2022
Josephus was a general, diplomat, and historian that is overflowing with paradox. He was a pacifist that went to war. He embellished history, yet proclaimed to want to write an accurate history. He was military commander but was not taught the art of war. He fought the Romans then befriended them. He was schooled in Aramaic, but wrote in Greek. His works target audience was Romans, Jews and Greeks. He was scorned by Jews but celebrated by Christians. He has been labeled a traitor, a sage and opportunist. Never-the-less, there is one thing perfectly clear; there is no doubt about the significance and importance of his writings. The single most important phrase in biblical and academic scholarship is “According to Josephus.” Without his work, we would have few facts and even less political knowledge of Herod the Great, Herod Antipas, Annas, Caiaphas, Herod Agrippas I and II. Pontius Pilot, Festux, Felix and the Governors of Roman Palestine.
These writings provide vital political, topographical, economic, social, intellectual and religious information to both the Bible and other ancient histories. Jesus himself is referred to in two separate books in the Antiquities.
It’s a tough read – you will need to take your time, but it is well worth the effort
These writings provide vital political, topographical, economic, social, intellectual and religious information to both the Bible and other ancient histories. Jesus himself is referred to in two separate books in the Antiquities.
It’s a tough read – you will need to take your time, but it is well worth the effort
April 22, 2023
The narration of the audiobook by Allan Corduner is astoundingly good. His diction is clear and steady throughout, and the timbre of his voice is intense enough to hold one's attention yet without being unpleasant. This is not a book to be read (or listened to) for its literary value; in fact it is a long episodic slog with little overall structure. It is of historical value not only for the history it tells (if not entirely reliably), but as an historical artifact itself. The initial re-telling of the Biblical stories would have been very confusing to me if I did not already know them (at least in outline). That said, he does provide some interesting new perspectives on them. I was brought up short when he said that the Jews are Egyptians (as opposed to saying that they merely sojourned in Egypt for a few generations). That assertion was not one of genetics, but of a layer of self-identity that I had never previously considered. (I am aware that there are various views about, inter alia whether the Exodus actually occurred, and if so, to what extent, and whether there was an actual conquering of Canaan.)
July 2, 2023
When one of my sisters was a sophomore in high school. She and her friend concocted a plan to pass the biology test without actually studying. One of them had read where if you just recorded the study data on a tape and then played it as you fell asleep, your unconscious brain would absorb all the information and voila! you'd pass the test. They tried it! And both of them failed the test.
I tell that story because I just finished listening through all 37 hours of Josephus' Antiquities. Josephus has a lot of interesting perspectives on Jewish history so the information contained in this book is good and worthwhile. It is not, however, riveting reading. I quickly learned that this book was VERY worthwhile for putting one to sleep while listening to it.
Now, would I pass a test on Josephus? Well, you be the judge based on my sister's failed experiment. But I can confidently say that I listened through all 37 painful and boring, indeed insomnia curing hours of Josephus. He really is useful to fall asleep to.
I tell that story because I just finished listening through all 37 hours of Josephus' Antiquities. Josephus has a lot of interesting perspectives on Jewish history so the information contained in this book is good and worthwhile. It is not, however, riveting reading. I quickly learned that this book was VERY worthwhile for putting one to sleep while listening to it.
Now, would I pass a test on Josephus? Well, you be the judge based on my sister's failed experiment. But I can confidently say that I listened through all 37 painful and boring, indeed insomnia curing hours of Josephus. He really is useful to fall asleep to.
May 5, 2026
It took me nearly two months, but I finally made it. What started as what I expected to be a straightforward history lesson turned into something much closer to an odyssey—a sprawling journey through political upheaval, social transformation, religious conflict, and the rise and fall of nations.
As someone who loves history, I found myself consistently engaged, not just because of the rich history of Ancient Israel and the surrounding region, but because the book gradually opens up into something much larger, a sort of window into the broader world of ancient history and the forces that helped shape it.
That said, it’s not without its rough patches. There are sections — particularly those centered around the kings of Israel and their repeated failings — where the material can start to feel a little cyclical, almost as if the same warnings and downfalls are playing out on repeat.
All in all, this was an engaging and rewarding read — less a lecture, and more a long, fascinating journey through the triumphs, failures, and contradictions of history.
As someone who loves history, I found myself consistently engaged, not just because of the rich history of Ancient Israel and the surrounding region, but because the book gradually opens up into something much larger, a sort of window into the broader world of ancient history and the forces that helped shape it.
That said, it’s not without its rough patches. There are sections — particularly those centered around the kings of Israel and their repeated failings — where the material can start to feel a little cyclical, almost as if the same warnings and downfalls are playing out on repeat.
All in all, this was an engaging and rewarding read — less a lecture, and more a long, fascinating journey through the triumphs, failures, and contradictions of history.
March 23, 2025
Lectura larga (2000 paginas) pero amena, aunque creo que el estilo (a pesar de ser un estilo griego agradable) es menos ameno que en las Guerras.
Se hace bastante interesante ver cómo suprime, añade o expande algunas cosas para hacer más atractivo al mundo grecorromano, aunque es bastante fiel (la mayoría de interpretaciones ya se ven en los textos apocrifos judíos, de los que cita y bebe directamente) y como narración ayuda a asentar la historia del AT.
Creo que el punto más atractivo es como tras macabeos narra la historia de Juan Hircano y la vida de Herodes, que conecta directamente con el Nuevo Testamento.
Su visión de Roma está favorablemente sesgada por su biografía pero aporta mucha luz, narra hechos que otros autores no, con lo que me parece bastante importante de cara a conocer la historia de Roma, aunque es sólo una parte menor de la obra.
Se hace bastante interesante ver cómo suprime, añade o expande algunas cosas para hacer más atractivo al mundo grecorromano, aunque es bastante fiel (la mayoría de interpretaciones ya se ven en los textos apocrifos judíos, de los que cita y bebe directamente) y como narración ayuda a asentar la historia del AT.
Creo que el punto más atractivo es como tras macabeos narra la historia de Juan Hircano y la vida de Herodes, que conecta directamente con el Nuevo Testamento.
Su visión de Roma está favorablemente sesgada por su biografía pero aporta mucha luz, narra hechos que otros autores no, con lo que me parece bastante importante de cara a conocer la historia de Roma, aunque es sólo una parte menor de la obra.
November 16, 2025
Very interesting perspective of a first century Jewish historian on the Biblical Old Testament, as well as some of the context for what was going on in the world before and during the events of the Biblical New Testament. However, Josephus seems to be fond of ambushing his readers with long, tedious descriptions of buildings and other details that, frankly, could not possibly be less thrilling to read about. So in all its a very worthwhile, thought provoking, at times challenging read, if only one can endure the parts where Josephus’ winsome enthusiasm for the subject matter far eclipses one’s own.
April 16, 2024
I believe that this is an extremely valuable book for every Christian, who wants to understand deeper the context of the Bible. Albeit not very accurate and contradictory sometimes, it is still a valuable source. It also contains one of the first historical witnesses about Christ and Jacob, the brother of Christ.
May 18, 2024
Great background info about ancient Israel. Both in the timeline of the Old and New Testaments. I used as a resource in finding historical info for background stories while teaching Gospel Doctrine classes on the Old and New Testament's.
Most info was great, but some requires so much research to understand some of the persons in many stories.
Most info was great, but some requires so much research to understand some of the persons in many stories.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 55 reviews