Steve Mason

York University

How the Judean War Portrays the Essenes

The Essene passage (War 2.119-61) is prompted by at least two narrative developments in the immediate context. First, while briefly describing Archelaus's ten-year reign, Josephus chooses to focus almost exclusively on an anecdote about the    )Essai~oj named Simon, who was instrumental in mediating the Judean God's judgement on this miscreant (2.112-16) for his savage treatment of Judeans and Samaritans (2.111). Much earlier in the story (1.78-80), Josephus had planted the seed of interest in the remarkable abilities of the Essenes with his story of Judas the    )Essai~oj, who never erred in his predictions. So now he opens a full discussion of this admirable group. Second, Josephus notes that the death of Archelaus (6 CE) marked the arrival of a Roman prefect and, consequently, sparked the creation of a new rebel school of philosophy that called for a)po/stasij from Rome (2.118), a major negative category (closely akin to sta/sij) in the War. We are in a rich thematic vein of the War, therefore, when Josephus now introduces the    )Esshnoi/, Pharisees and Sadducees, in potent contrast to the rebel school (2.118-19). The    )Esshnoi/ in particular, who receive the lion's share of attention, will illustrate brilliantly the noble tradition of the Judeans as good citizens. They form an integral part of Josephus's narrative.

What greater beauty than inviolable piety (eu)se/beia)? What greater justice (dikaio/teron) than obedience to the laws? What more beneficial than to be in harmony with one another (pro\j a)llh/louj o(monoei=n), to be a prey neither to disunion (dii/stasqai) in adversity, nor to arrogance (u(bri/zontaj) and faction (stasia/zein) in prosperity; in war to despise death (qana/tou katafronei=n), in peace to devote oneself to crafts or agriculture (te/xhnaij h)\ gewrgi/aij); and to be convinced that everything in the whole universe (pa/nta de\ kai\ pantaxou=) is under the eye and direction of God?

Let us now consider a dozen issues that Josephus raises concerning the    )Esshnoi/ of War 2, in order to see how this group serves his larger narrative emphases.

1. It is disguised by the Loeb translation, but Josephus is so eager to make an opening general statement about the    )Esshnoi/ that he does so before even mentioning their name. They are the third form of Judean philosophy, "which is reputed to, and certainly does, behave with gravity [or dignity] (dh\ kai\ dokei= semno/thta a)skei=n), called    )Esshnoi/: although they [too] are Judeans by birth, they are more affectionate toward one another (fila/llhloi) than the others are." All of this is thoroughly Josephan. To begin with, semno/thj is one of his favourite terms for appealing to his Roman audience (cf. Plutarch, Cato 6.3). When he is confronted by the embassy sent to replace him in Galilee, he summons the Galileans as witnesses: "So find out from them how I have lived, whether I have exercised my office with all gravitas (semno/thtoj) and all virtue (a)reth=j)" (Life 258). Connecting with the fundamental Roman virtues of gravitas and dignitas, he claims that the frivolous Egyptians, and even the admired Plato, could not match the semno/thj of the Judeans (Apion 1.225; 2.223): this is their distinctive national trait. One of Josephus's heroes is Joseph the Tobiad, who saved the Judean nation from poverty and weakness (Ant. 12.224) through his outward-looking efforts; Josephus introduces him as a man of unusual gravitas (semno/thj; 12.160).

The verb that Josephus uses for "practise" (a)ske/w), suggesting training or disciplina, would have been similarly resonant for a Roman readership (Plutarch, Cato the Elder 3.3; 4.3). This term comes up frequently in Josephus's exaltation of Judean culture in the final quarter of Against Apion: the Judean lawgiver was unique in his insistence upon the practical exercise of character alongside mere study (2.171, 173); one worships God by "exercising virtue" (2.192); Judeans have trained themselves in zeal for their laws (2.272). It would be hard to imagine a more direct appeal to Roman readers, to consider the Essenes as exemplary Ioudaioi and world citizens.

Even Josephus's phrasing in this opening pitch, which plays with the terms doke/w and dh/ and so the Platonic difference between merely seeming and being, is characteristic. He has already presented Alexander Janneus as someone who was merely reputed (doke/w) to be moderate (War 1.85), but was not in fact. His widow Alexandra both seemed (do/ca) to be pious and really was (dh/; 1.108). It was because the Pharisees were reputed to be unusually pious (doke/w; 1.110) that they deceived her, who really was (dh/) reverent of the Deity (1.111). It is a perfectly Josephan thing to say, therefore, that the Essenes both were reputed to train themselves in dignity and truly did. Also the delayed identifying phrase, "called Essenes" (X kalou=ntai), has close parallels elsewhere in Josephus, especially in the War (War 2.101; 7.43, 329, 359, 375; Ant. 4.72; 17.41, 324).

2. The first illustration Josephus gives of the Essenes' exemplary character, written in three me\n ... de/ contrasts, concerns their attitude toward the passions, sex, and women. "Although they shun the pleasures (h(donai/) as vice (kaki/a), they regard self-control (e)gkra/teia) and not submitting to the passions as virtue (a)reth/)" (2.120). "Although they hold marriage in contempt," they adopt the children of others "and they impress their principles of character (h)/qesin) upon them" (2.120). "Although they do not abrogate marriage and the succession [of humanity] from it, they protect themselves from the wanton actions of women (gunaikw=n a)selgei/aj), persuaded that no [woman] keeps faith (pi/stin) with one man."

Thus Josephus presents Judaism and its Essenes in terms quite familiar, even appealing, to his first readers. The juxtaposition of virtue and vice, a)reth\ kai\ kaki/a, which reappears near the end of the Essene passage (2.156), is for him standard (War 2.586; 4.325, 387; Ant. 1.72; 8.252; 17.101, 246; 18.14; Apion 2.145). Mastery of the pa/qh and avoidance of the h(donai/ (cf. Plutarch, Cato the Elder 2.3; 3.6; 4.2; 11.3) are prominent themes in his portrayal of his nation's laws. His namesake Joseph demonstrates his mastery over passion, while unsuccessfully trying to persuade Potiphar's wife to govern hers (Ant. 2.43, 53). Josephus focuses his final encomium of Moses on the great lawgiver's sovereignty over his passions (Ant. 4.328). By contrast, Mariamne used her womanly wiles to take advantage of Herod's unfortunate enslavement to passion (Ant. 15.219).

As for women's wanton behaviour (a)selgei/ai gunaikw=n), this is one of Josephus's preferred tropes (and cf. Philo, Life of Moses 1.305). He uses precisely this phrase to describe the notorious femmes fatales Jezebel (Ant. 8.318), Cleopatra (Ant. 15.98), and Mariamne (War 1.439). The ghost of Herod's son Alexander gives voice to Josephus's sentiments about women in Ant. 17.351-53: he comes back from the dead in a dream to chastise her for her subsequent remarriages, which prove (he says) "the saying that &'women are not to be trusted'." And Josephus's Moses, in rejecting testimony from women, throws in some remarks about their fickleness (Ant. 4.219; cf. 13.430-31 and Apion 2.201).

In remarking here upon the Essenes' e)gkra/teia, Josephus initiates one of his principal claims about them. In 2.138, similarly, he observes that they are kept outside the order for a year to prove their e)gkra/teia, and he goes on to identify this quality with their character (h)=qoj), which must be tested for two further years before full admission. This is all quite Josephan and quite Roman. Self-control was a basic ingredient of the Roman conception of character, and Josephus writes a book about his own character (Life 430), which repeatedly features his restraint and self-control. The early Saul was a model of this virtue (Ant. 6.63), and during the war the wise Vespasian counseled e)gkra/teia (War 4.373).The belief of Josephus's Essenes that someone (not themselves) needs to be having sex for the propagation of the human race is particularly telling about Josephus' relation to his Roman audience (see further below). We must ignore modern preconceptions as to what a monolithic "Judaism" might teach about sex, and remember that Josephus elsewhere attributes precisely these abstemious Essene views to all Judeans. Speaking in his own voice, he claims that the law permits "mixing" with women exclusively "for the procreation of children" (Apion 2.199). Accordingly, once a woman is pregnant, any man who has sex with her is impure (Apion 2.202). The Essenes, by abstaining from marriage altogether (here, but cf. 2.160-61 below) and recognizing it among others only for the propagation of humanity, reflect Josephus's ideals for the nation as a whole. On the marrying kind, see further below.

3. Josephus then turns to the Essenes' famous community of goods. If the Romans rhetorically valued simplicity of life and the avoidance of luxury, these Judeans were "despisers of wealth" (2.122)--a striking use of nomen agentis, parallel to "despisers of danger" later in the Essene passage (War 2.151). In Ant. 6.347 Josephus uses the same unusual phrase of those "despisers of danger" who emulate King Saul's bravery.

Although Josephus has little occasion to speak elsewhere of a group's common stock of property (to\ koinwniko/n), terms built on the koin- root as well as the theme of simplicity are extremely common in his writings. Koinwni/a is a major Josephan theme in part because, for him, it is the opposite of the misanqrwpi/a with which Judeans have so often been charged, especially after the revolt. But, he protests, the Judean laws are designed to produce koinwni/a (Apion 2.146, 151, 208). It is hard not to hear echoes of the Essenes when he continues: "we were born for koinwni/a, and he who sets its claims above his private interests is specially acceptable to God" (Apion 2.196). When the Greek philosophers taught "simplicity of life and fellowship with one another," they were only imitating Moses (Apion 2.281). This simplicity and sharing of goods have an important place in Josephus's final summary of the laws: "they do not teach misanthropy, but encourage the common sharing (koinwni/a) of possessions" (Apion 2.291).

No wonder Josephus considers the degree of common ownership among the Essenes marvellous (qauma/sioj). Incidentally, this editorial interjection of qauma/sioj is also normal for him (War 4.478; 5.174; Ant. 2.198, 265). Some other correlations in this passage: (a) Josephus reverts to the term ai(resij for the Essene "school" (War 2.122), which is characteristic (2.118; Ant. 13.171, 288, 293; Life 10, 12); (b) the phrase "abundance of wealth" at War 2.122 has a close parallel in Ant. 9.3; (c) and his unusual phrase for "they make a point of" [keeping a dry skin] (e)n kalw|= ti/qentai) is paralleled at Ant. 12.299.

5. Perhaps the most controversial statements that Josephus makes about the Essenes concern their reverence for the sun as a deity. Their special piety has them "offering certain prayers to him [the sun], as though entreating him to rise" (i(keteu/ontej a)ntei=lai; War 2.128). Further on we read that Essenes wrap their cloaks about them when defecating "so as not to outrage the rays of [the] God" (2.148). These remarks have long puzzled Josephus's users, especially those who read him in light of the DSS. His statements have either been flattened out to accord with the Scrolls' "prayers at dawn" (Beall 1988: 52-54) or they have encouraged arbitrary source theories (Bergmeier 1993: 84)--for surely no observant Jew could speak thus!

Again, however, we need to read this passage in the context of Josephus's narrative themes. The Essenes' "piety towards God" we shall return to presently, in conjunction with their oaths. For now, let us note that the verb i(keteu/w (entreat, approach as supplicant) is extremely common in Josephus, with more than one 100 occurrences, many of those in connection with God.

6. Essenes bathe daily in frigid water (a)polou/ontai to\ sw=ma yuxroi=j u(/dasin) for purification (a(gnei/a) and participate in various trades or crafts (te/xnai) (War 2.129). Elsewhere, Josephus explains, Judeans who experience nocturnal emissions plunge into cold water the next day (Ant. 3.263). He himself was no stranger to the purificatory cold bath. He boasts in Life 11 that when he was with Bannus he "bathed frequently in frigid water, day and night, for purification" (yuxrw=| u(/dati ... pro\j a(gnei/an). The reference to trades is also significant because, as we saw in the opening quotation from Apion 2.293, Josephus considers participation in trades (te/xnai) and agriculture the admirable peace-time activity of all Judeans. It is hardly coincidental that according to Ant. 18.19 the Essenes engage in the other side of this pair, agriculture--an ideal Roman pursuit (Plutarch, Cato the Elder 2.1; 3.1-4).

7. Of the Essenes' main meal, Josephus says that no bawling or mob-noise pollutes it (ou)/te de\ kraugh/ ... ou)/te qo/ruboj miai/nei); it is marked by sobriety and measuring or rationing (to\ metrei=sqai) of food and drink (trofh\ kai\ poto/j). They eat and drink until satisfied (me/xri ko/rou; War 2.132-33). With these phrases, compare: kraugh\ te kai\ qo/ruboj at War 3.493 (also 6.256); the ubiquitous theme of pollution in the War (the verb miai/nw occurring some twenty-one times in this book; seventeen times elsewhere in Josephus); trofh/ kai\ poto/j at War 7.278; Ant. 6.360, 377; 7.159, 274; rationing of water at War 3.183 [the metri- group is common in Josephus]; eating and drinking until satisfied (me/xri ko/rou) at War 4.465; and Josephus's general emphasis on the restraint of Judean sacrificial meals in contrast to those of other nations (Apion 2.195).

8. "Fair administrators of anger, able to restrain temper, masters of fidelity [or loyalty], servants of peace" (War 2.135). This description serves Josephus's narrative aims perfectly. Unlike the reckless rebel tyrants, whose hot-headed behaviour precipitated the revolt, the Essenes always keep their composure with dignity and peaceful action. Unlike the traitorous, lying rebels, they do not break faith. They are the best examples of the ideal Judean temperament. Peace (ei)rh/nh) is a favourite word of Josephus's: the noun appears 106 times alone. Temper (qumo/j), by contrast, is particularly common in the War, where Josephus regularly cites it as a vice of the rebels (thirty-nine of its fifty-seven occurrences). "Able to restrain," or kaqekt- words, occur only in the War (2.12; 5.20).

"Despisers of danger" (katafronhtai\ tw=n deinw=n), they smiled in their agonies. Contempt for death was understood to be the acid test of any true philosophy. Josephus knows this too, and so in the Against Apion he stresses this virtue of all Judeans (Apion 2.232-34):

Has anyone ever heard of a case of our people, not, I mean, in such large numbers, but merely two or three, proving traitors to their laws or afraid of death? I do not refer to the easiest of deaths, on the battlefield, but death accompanied by physical torture, which is thought to be the hardest of all. To such a death we are, in my belief, exposed by some of our conquerors ... from a curiosity to witness the astonishing spectacle of men who believe that the only evil which can befall them is to be compelled to do any act or utter any word contrary to their laws…. Our willing obedience to the law in these matters [sc. discipline with respect to food and drink] results in the heroism which we display in the face of death.

See also Apion 2.271-72 and 2.219: the facts [presumably, the recent war in particular] have made it clear to everyone that "already many of our people, and on many occasions, have chosen to suffer spectacularly rather than utter a single word against the law." Strikingly, in the closing remarks of his final book (above), he uses the very same word group (katafrone/w [qana/tou]) that he uses of the Essenes here in the War. His Essenes embody the most characteristic Judean ideals.

It is all but universally held that Josephus contradicts himself (or his sources do!) by first making a point of the Essenes' "avoidance" [or getting around, dodging] of swearing (o)mnu/ein perii/stantai), on the ground that every word of theirs is stronger than an oath (2.135), and now listing twelve dreadful oaths that they in fact swear (o(/rkouj ... o)/mnusi frikw/deij; 2.139) (Bergmeier 1993: 69). These are not contradictory propositions, however, and Josephus's explanation of Moses' commandments in Ant. 3.92 may help to clarify the matter. There, all Jews are forbidden "to swear by God on a trivial [or base: fau=loj] matter." Although swearing in other contexts is not encouraged, this passage implies that it is acceptable to swear oaths in rare and worthy cases. Indeed, Josephus himself is inclined to believe the Jerusalem delegation (not to chastise them for law-breaking) when they "swear the most dreadful oaths that we have" (tou\j frikwdesta/touj o(/rkouj par' h(mi=n; Life 275; cf. 101). From the context of War 2.135 it seems clear that the issue there is the common oath, simply to guarantee one's word in ordinary situations. The Essenes' "steering clear" of such swearing would not preclude making solemn, once-in-a-lifetime, dreadful (frikw/deij) oaths to God upon finally entering the order.

Their first two oaths involve piety toward the Deity and justice toward humanity (eu)sebh/sein to\ qei=on, e)/peita ta\ pro\j a)nqrw/pouj di/kaia fula/cein). We have already observed Josephus's keen awareness that his people, especially after the revolt, are widely accused of impiety (a)se/beia) or even atheism in relation to the gods, and misanthropy with respect to fellow human beings (Apion 2.148, 291). One of his most pervasive themes, therefore, running from the beginning to the end of his corpus, is that the Judeans in fact cherish piety toward God and justice and philanthropy toward their neighbours--more than any other nation.

These are an epitome of Josephus's portrayal of Judaism: Jews practice eu)se/beia toward God and ta\ di/kaia towards others. This pair of virtues provides, for example, his most typical characterization of Israel's leaders: Ant. 7.338, 341 (David: God always rewards the pious and just), 356 and 374 (David admonishes Solomon to rule with piety and justice), 384 (David's dying charge to Solomon: be just toward your subjects and pious toward God); 8.280 (Abijah to Jeroboam); 9:16 (Josaphat enjoyed divine favour because of his justice and piety toward the Deity); 9.236 (virtuous king Jotham was pious toward God and just toward humanity); 12.43 (Simon the Just was so called because of his piety toward God and benevolence toward humanity); 12.56 (modifying Aristaeas). According to Ant. 18.117, the renowned baptist named John also exhorted Judeans "to practise justice toward one another and piety toward God."

Essenes harm (bla/ptw) no one. Contrast Josephus's Pharisees, who have a tendency to bring harm to those in power (Ant. 13.401; 17.41).

If an Essene should himself take office, he is sworn "never to abuse his authority (mhde/pote e)cubri/sein ei)j th\n e)cousi/an), nor by dress or some other outward extravagance to outshine his subordinates." Note first the accessibility and public-minded spirit of these Essenes: they are not sequestered monks but, living as they do in every city, are quite eligible for public service--also an indispensable quality of the Roman male. Striking here is the characteristic phrasing. According to Josephus's scheme of things, outrage against the divinely-sanctioned order is the worst vice, and he uses the verb e)cubri/zw with ei)j> X to express such a violation. Several times he refers, precisely as here, to someone's abuse of (e)cubri/zw ei)j) power or office (e)cousi/a or a)rxh/): War 1.206: young Herod did not abuse his authority; 4.492: Nero did; Ant. 14.161: Herod's brother Phasael did not.

How one behaved in a position of authority was a major concern for Josephus's self-representation to his Roman readers. In the Life, which celebrates his character (h)=qoj, 430), he makes an issue of his behaviour when he held great e)cousi/a (80). Namely: he repeatedly adduces his clemency toward enemies held at his mercy (262-65, 304-8, 377-80), his mildness toward his dependent charges (30-31, 97-100, 112-13, 417-21), his protection of women's honour (80), and his invulnerability to bribery and corruption of all kinds (79-86).

Essenes swear to love truth (th\n a)lh/qeian a)gapa=n) and expose liars (2.141). Josephus's readers should certainly appreciate this reference, for at the very beginning (War 1.30) and end (Apion 2.296) of his literary corpus, he addresses his works precisely to toi=j th\n a)lh/qeian a)gapw=sin. The Essenes represent the best qualities of his readers! Elsewhere, he is always assuring them of his own truthfulness (War 1.4; Ant. 1.6; Life 40; Apion 1.6 et al.).

Essenes "maintain their hands pure from theft and their souls from unholy gain." This rather poetic parallelism captures the spirit of Josephus's summary of the latter half of the decalogue, which is binding on all Jews, in Ant. 3.92.

When Josephus says that Essenes promise "not to conceal anything from the members of the school; not to report anything of theirs to others," this might seem like a sectarian principle. Notice, however, that it corresponds rather precisely to Josephus's view of his entire nation's attitude toward outsiders, as he expresses this in Apion 2.209-10:

It will be seen that [Moses] took the best of all possible measures at once to secure our own customs from corruption, and to throw them open ungrudgingly to any who elect to share them. To all who desire to come and live under the same laws with us, [Moses] gives a gracious welcome.... On the other hand, it was not his pleasure that casual visitors should be admitted to the intimacies of our daily life.

Of the three final oaths, briefly mentioned, two are more parochial: to impart (metadi/dwmi) the school's teachings just as one receives (metalamba/nw) them, and to keep the integrity (sunthre/w) of the school's books and the names of the angels (2.142). Although the precise referents here are sectarian, the scrupulous preservation of Judean tradition is a major theme elsewhere in Josephus. He normally uses the paradi/dwmi / paralamba/nw pair, because he is describing the pure transmission of Judean culture from its Mosaic origin to the present (Ant. 3.280, 286; 4.295, 302; 4.304; Apion 2.279), whereas the context here is not so much inter-generational. Nevertheless, we are in the same semantic arena of accurate transmission.

The remaining oath, however, "to refrain from banditry" (lh|stei/a), may once again touch a major theme in War. It is plausible that this category simply develops another aspect of robbery (kloph/) from the earlier oath, in which case the life to avoided by the Essenes was that lived by Cain, who abandoned the simple and virtuous way in favour of h(donh/ and lh|stei/a (Ant. 1.61; cf. War 2.125). Yet in that case it is odd that Josephus would have two such similar oaths.

As is well known, Josephus uses the label of lh|stai/ not simply for robbers (though for them too--Horsley 1979), but for the rebels who have brought Judean culture into disrepute through their actions in the recent revolt (Hengel 1989: 41-46; Price 1992: 17-24). A subspecies of bandit is the group of Judean "assassins" with the suspiciously Latin name sicarii. These are not ordinary highway bandits, but prominent and named public figures engaged in political struggle, such as Menahem the son of Judas the Galilean, whom Josephus detests (War 2.228-29, 232-35, 253-54, 425, 431, 434, 441; Life 28). John of Gischala, Josephus's aristocratic competitor in Galilee and "close friend" of Simeon son of Gamaliel in Jerusalem (Life 192) was also, we are told, a "bandit" (War 2.587, 593). Josephus's opponent Jesus is a "bandit chief" (Life 105). Indeed, "bandit chief" becomes just another name for each of the turannoi/ who are the thematized villains of the War (War 1.10; 2.275; 7.261, etc.)

In Rome, of course, Cicero's conflict with Catiline had long ago enshrined a potent political sense for latrocinium; the great orator had effectively dismissed both his fellow aristocrat and that man's followers as latrones (Habinek 1998: 69-87). Now Josephus takes a similar tack, quite possibly with the Catilinarian background in mind as an extra-textual resource shared by author and reader. He also has convenient support from LXX Jeremiah 7.11--"you have made my house a den of lhˇstai/"--as a catalyst for his Temple apologetic.

At least, then, the Essene avoidance of lh|stei/a fits with Josephus's general emphasis on the virtue of Jewish life; at most, it is a comment on their refusal to engage in the political subversion to which he attributes the recent catastrophe in Judea, the subject of his book.

10. Josephus credits the Essenes with a peerless precision and justice (a)kribe/statoi kai\ di/kaioi) in the administration of laws (2.145). They practise a severe discipline, with capital punishment legislated for anyone who reviles either God or the lawgiver Moses. The word "lawgiver" (nomoqe/thj) is Josephus's characteristic term for Moses (e.g., Ant. 1.6, 15, 18; Apion 2.156, 161). The extraordinary rank that Josephus implies for Moses, in relation to God, such that defamation of his name amounts to blasphemy, is paralleled in Ant. 3.317-20. There Josephus speaks of Moses' "super-human force" (u(pe\r a)/nqrwpon; 3.318); and because of his laws, he is esteemed "higher than his [human] nature" (3.320). He surpassed all other men (4.328), and in his words one seemed to hear the very speech of God (4.329). Although Josephus does not divinize Moses, he leaves his special status ambiguous in much the same way that his Essenes do.

The key language in this section (a)kri/beia, dik-) is typically Josephan: he everywhere applauds the most scrupulous precision (a)kri/beia) in history-writing, truth-telling, and legal interpretation. Whereas the Pharisees are only reputed to be the most precise in the laws (War 1.110; 2.162; Life 191), his celebration of the Essenes here has no such qualification. More than that, he is extremely proud of the severity of Jewish law. We are apt to forget this, because the spirit of our time generally favours clemency in law, but Josephus considers it a powerful attraction of the Judean law code that it leaves no loopholes (Apion 2.276-77), that its justice is sure and swift (2.178), and that in it numerous crimes merit the death penalty (2.214-17). He contrasts this regime to other legal systems. Given the widespread despair over crime and social deterioration Roman authors attest (Catullus, Poems 64 [end]; Cicero Divination 2.2.4; Juvenal, Satires 3.268-314, etc.), we can imagine that he expected his readers to be attracted by the inexorable justice of the Judean code. The Essenes embody this attribute perfectly.

12.Josephus's last general statement about the Essenes in this passage concerns their renowned ability to predict the future (2.159). Some of them profess or undertake to do this, "being fully schooled in holy books (bi/bloij i(erai=j), various purifications, and sayings of prophets." It is not simply a spontaneous gift, therefore, but arises from long training. Josephus has already given two instances of Essene prediction in the War (1.78; 2.113), and in the former case the    )Essai~oj was teaching his art in the Temple court. Antiquities continues this portrayal of Essene prediction (13.311; 15.371-78; 17.346) as a special skill. Some scholars have sensed differences between Josephus's wording here and his narrative descriptions of Essene prediction, partly in the interest of establishing underlying sources (Gray 1993: 105-6; Bergmeier 1993: 54-55). But it seems to me that the words of War 2.159 are too few to support such speculations; further, that it is pointless to apply theological rigour to a rhetorical historian.

Most important: Josephus insists upon his own ability to predict the future with accuracy, and he claims to do so precisely on the basis of his training in the holy books' prophetic statements: "With respect to assessing dreams, he was quite capable of making coherent the ambiguous utterances of the Deity: he knew well the prophetic statements of the holy books, (i(erw=n bi/blwn) being both a priest himself and a descendant of priests" (War 3.352). In War 6.311 Josephus actually interprets such an "ambiguous" statement from the "holy writings." This is a subject in which Josephus as author is plainly interested (cf. 3.405)--not one that he would likely pass over if it appeared in his sources. In fact, Josephus and the Essenes are the only parties after John Hyrcanus (Ant. 13.299-300) whom he credits with accurate prediction, though pseudo-prophets abound.

As for his language, "holy books" is a common Josephan phrase: War 3.352; Ant. 1.26, 82, 139; 2.347; 3.81, 105; 4.326; 9.28 et passim. The a(gnei/a / a(gneu/w group is also significant for him (War 1.26; 5.194; 7.264, etc.).

They have an extraordinary interest in the compositions [or bodies of doctrine, or interpretations: sunta/gmata] of the ancients, selecting in particular those that work to the benefit of soul and body (pro\j w)fe/leian yuxh=j kai\ sw/matosj). On the basis of these, healthful medicinal roots (rhizai te alex˙t˙rioi) and the properties of stones (li/qwn i)dio/thtej) are investigated toward the treatment of diseases (pro\j qerapei/an paqw=n).

As Thackeray, following J. B. Lightfoot, already noted (Loeb, s.v.), this passage has a close parallel in Ant. 8.44-49. There Josephus describes one of the most prominent ancients, Solomon, whom he credits with thousands of "compositions" (sunta/ssw--8.44-45). These recorded his comprehensive study of nature and the various properties (i)diw/mata) of each form (8.44). In particular, they describe the craft (te/xnh) of exorcism, "for the benefit and treatment (ei)j w)fe/leian kai\ qerapei/an)" of humanity (8.55). Josephus then describes an actual instance of such therapeia (8.46, twice) that he witnessed. It will come as no surprise that the exorcist used a root (r(i/za) prescribed by Solomon for the purpose (8.47). By the time that we read his closing line--he has described Solomon in order that no one under the sun should be ignorant of him (8.49)--we are ready to believe that Solomon was the first Essene! Once again: Josephus describes the Essenes as admirable examples of the traits he claims for himself and for Judean culture as a whole.

To be sure, they are still not very keen on the project. Whereas we already learned that Essenes recognize a need for the succession (diadoxh/, as in 2.121) of life, but leave that task to others because of the alleged fickleness of women, Josephus now suddenly declares that these new Essenes use that same succession argument as the basis for their own marriages. Nevertheless, he insists, they take no other pleasure in marriage; they are careful to wed only when their potential wives are proven fertile, and they do not have sex while the wife is pregnant. But this is precisely what he says of all Judeans who would be pure (Apion 2.202).

First, in bringing forward the celibate Essenes as ideal representatives of his nation, Josephus must have realized that their lifestyle was most impractical for a whole culture. Roman aristocrats could admire philosophical ideals, and even go off to join a group of philosophers in youth, but they were expected to come back into the political main stream as adults (cf. Tacitus, Agr. 4.3). The celibate life was too extreme for ordinary living. Whatever caution some aristocrats and their physicians may have expressed about males losing vital energy, it was still a common assumption among Romans that marriage was unavoidable, though exclusively or mainly for the purpose of procreation: liberorum procreandorum causa (PMich, vol. 7, document 434, r, 3; PRyl., vol. 4, document 612 ext. 3; cf. Freier 1998: 95). Josephus's younger contemporary Soranus of Ephesus agrees with Josephus's Essenes that men and women are coupled in marriage precisely not for "the enjoyment of pleasurable sensations" but for "the sake of children and succession" (diadoxh/; Gynecology 3.24.1). Augustus's measures to increase the rate of marriage were clearly aimed at raising the fertility rate, not the level of personal or connubial fulfillment. Describing his measures, Tacitus (Annals 3.25) and Cassius Dio (54.16.1-2) both speak of "marriage and the procreation/rearing of children" as if there were little distinction between the two. If Josephus wished to make the Essenes entirely palatable to his Roman readers as a perfect ideal, it made sense for him to have at least some of them entertaining marriage, though strictly for the purpose of reproduction.

Throughout his portrayal of Judean culture, Josephus gives plenty of reason to think that he himself is its most perfect expression (War 2-3; Life). He also mentions other towering examples of Jewish virtue, however, such as Abraham, Moses, Solomon, and Daniel. And the group that best represents Judean ideals and lifestyle are the famous    )Esshnoi/. They capture more perfectly than others the dignity, self-control, simplicity, peacefulness, loyalty, piety, justice, purity, honesty, hospitality, diligence, courage, and frugality that all Judeans prize. Happily, Romans value these things too. The Essenes of War 2 serve, in obvious and important ways, the peaceful, anti-apocalyptic agenda of the Judean War, inasmuch as they embrace Roman (or any) rule as divinely appointed. Josephus hopes to show that these people are more than merely good world citizens: they are the living fulfillment of Roman society's fondest aspirations. They even possess in high concentration, indeed they are the current home of, those admired occult powers (prediction, exorcism, cures) to which all Judeans are legitimate heirs.