Institute for Biblical Research: BBR 6 (1996)

Member Info Login

Navigation

List Articles/Studies

Bulletin for Biblical Research (BBR) 1996

Jotham and Amon:

Two Minor Kings of Judah

According to Josephus

CHRISTOPHER BEGG

THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA

In the Bible the good king Jotham (see 2 Kgs 15:32-38//2 Chr 27:1-9) and his

wicked descendant Amon (see 2 Kgs 21:19-26//2 Chr 33:21-25) are both quite

minor figures. This essay explores the treatment of the two kings by Josephus

in his Antiquities of the Jews (9.236-43, Jotham; 10.46-48, Amon) in

relation to the biblical sources (as represented by MT, LXX and the Targums).

From the comparison it emerges that Josephus does not drastically modify the

source accounts of Jotham and Amon; also in his version they remain minor

kings. On the other hand, his presentation of the royal pair is of interest as

exemplifying many of the "rewriting techniques" employed by the historian

throughout the biblical segment of the Antiquities.

Key Words: Jotham, Amon, Josephus, rewritten Bible

The Bible gives very different evaluations of King Jotham of Judah and

his great-great grandson Amon: the former "did what was right in the

eyes of the Lord" (2 Kgs 15:34 // 2 Chr 27:2), whereas the latter did

"evil" (2 Kgs 21:20 / 2 Chr 33:22). The two rulers do, however, share

a common trait; both appear as quite minor figures—at least as far as

the biblical record goes. Thus 2 Kgs 15:32-38 devotes all of seven

verses to the sixteen-year reign of Jotham, while Amon's two-year rule

gets five verses in Kgs 21:19-26. Significantly, the Chronicler, who

elsewhere notably expands on Kings' accounts of various Judean mon-

archs, whether "good" (e.g., Jehoshaphat)¹ or "bad" (e.g., Jehoram),²

does not markedly elaborate the source's treatment of either Jotham

or Amon. To the former king he allots nine verses (2 Chr 27:1-9),

1. MT 1 Kgs 22:41-50 disposes of Jehoshaphat's twenty-five year reign in ten

verses; in 2 Chronicles 17-20 Jehoshaphat becomes the focus of a four-chapter segment.

2. 2 Kgs 8:16-24 allots J(eh)oram's eight-year reign nine verses, whereas 2 Chron-

icles 21 expands this to twenty.

2 Bulletin for Biblical Research 6

while his Amon receives only five (2 Chr 33:21-25), three less than in

Kings itself.

My purpose in this essay is to examine Josephus' treatment of the

bibilically insignificant kings Jotham and Amon in Antiquities 9.236-38

(239-42)243a and 10.46b– 48a, respectively.³ More specifically, I shall

compare Josephus' account of these two kings with the presentations

of Kings and Chronicles as represented by the following major wit-

nesses: MT (BHS), Codex Vaticanus (hereafter B)⁴ and the Lucianic (or

Antiochene) MSS (hereafter L)⁵ of the LXX, plus Targum Jonathan on

the Former Prophets and the Targum on Chronicles.⁶ I undertake this

comparison with the following questions in mind: Does Josephus con-

sistently follow one of the biblical sources for Jotham and Amon in

preference to the other? What text form(s) of Kings and Chronicles

were available to him in composing his accounts of the two rulers?

Are there features peculiar to Josephus' treatment of Jotham and

Amon, and if so how are these to be accounted for? Finally, what can

be said overall as to the relationship between the Tosephan portraits of

these kings and their biblical prototypes?

JOTHAM

I begin my discussion of the biblical and Josephan accounts of Jotham

with a word about their respective contexts. In 2 Kings Jotham is in-

troduced as regent for his leprous father Azariah (Uzziah) in 15:5b

and succeeds the latter in 15:7b. There follows a segment devoted to

the last six Northern kings: Zechariah, Shallum, Menahem, Pekahiah,

Pekah, and Hoshea (15:8-31). Kings then continues with its narra-

tions concerning Jotham (15:32-38) and his son Ahaz (16:1-20). The

Chronicler's sequence is simpler, given his non-reproduction of

Kings' material dealing with the Northern monarchs. In his presen-

3. For the writings of Josephus I use the Loeb Classical Library text and translation.

4. I use the edition of Alan E. Brooke and Norman Maclean, The Old Testament in

Greek according to the Text of Codex Vaticanus, II:II I and II Kings (Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1930); II:III I and II Chronicles (1932).

5. For the L text of Kings I use the edition of Natalio Fernández Marcos and José

Ramón Busto Saiz, El texto antioqueno de la Biblia Griega, II 1-2 Reyes (Madrid: CSIC,

199!). For the L text of Chronicles I use the critical apparatus of the Cambridge edi-

tio of the LXX cited in the previous note.

6. For Targum Jonathan I use the edition of Alexander Sperber, The Bible in

Aramaic, Vol. II (Leiden: Brill, 1959) and the translation of Daniel J. Harrington and

Anthony J. Saldarini, Targum Jonathan of the Former Prophets (The Aramaic Bible 10;

Wil ington: Glazier, 1987). For the Targum on Chronicles I use the text of Roger Le

Déaut and J. Robert, Targum des Chroniques (vol. 2; AnBib 51; Rome: Biblical Institute

Press, 1971) and the translation of this by J. Stanley McIvor, The Targum of Chronicles

(Th: Aramaic Bible 19; Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1994).

BEGG: Jotham and Amon: According to Josephus 3

tation accounts of Uzziah/Azariah (2 Chr 26:1-22 with notices on

Jotham's regency and succession in vv. 21b // 2 Kgs 15:5b] and 23b

[1/ 2 Kgs 15:7b] respectively), Jotham (2 Chr 27:1-9), and Ahaz (2 Chr

28:1-17) follow one another without interruption. As for Josephus,

his placing of his account of "Jothamos" ( )Iw/qamoj, see 9.236)⁷ aligns it-

self with that of Kings. In particular, after citing Jotham's regency

during his father Uzziah's later reign (9.277 // 2 Kgs 15:5b)⁸ and the

latter's death (2 Kgs 15:7a),⁹ he presents the succession of Northern

kings Zechariah through Pekah in dependence on 2 Kgs 15:8-29

(9.228-35). In Kings itself the "Northern interlude" continues in

15:30-31 (Pekah's assassination by Hoshea,¹⁰ source notice for Pekah),

this being followed by a segment treating the Southern kings Jotham

and Ahaz (15:32-16:20). Josephus, for his part, departs from Kings'

sequence following his parallel to 15:29 (Assyrian annexation of Isra-

elite territory) in 9.235 by giving first his account of Jotham and Ahaz

(9.236-57 // 2 Kgs 15:32-16:20) and only then his version of 15:30

(Hoshea's overthrow of Pekah)¹¹ in 9.258.

Having noted its biblical and Josephan contexts, I now turn to a

consideration of Josephus' account of Jotham in 9.236-43a itself. 2 Kgs

15:33 and 2 Chr 27:1 have in common two chronological indications

concerning Jotham: acceding at age twenty-five, he reigned sixteen

years.¹² 2 Kgs 15:32 precedes these data with an additional note that

synchronizes Jotham's accession with the second year of Pekah of

Israel. Like Chronicles, with its consistently Judean perspective, Jo-

sephus makes no use of this last item.¹³ In addition, however, he

7. This is the inflected form of the king's Hebrew name MtfwOy. Compare B 4 Rgns

)Iwnaqa/n, L 4 Rgns/2 Par )Iwaqa/m.

8. On the Josephan treatment of Uzziah, see C. T Begg, "Uzziah (Azariah) of

Judah according to Josephus," Estudios Bíblicos 53 (1995) 5-24.

9. Unlike both 2 Kgs 15:7b and 2 Chr 26:23b, Josephus mentions Jotham's acces-

sion, not as the conclusion of his account of Uzziah/Azariah in 9.227, but only at the

opening of his account of the former monarch in 9.236. Thereby, he avoids the "dupli-

cation" of 2 Kgs 15:7b (// 2 Chr 26:23b) in 15:32 (// 27:1a) both of which verses speak

of Jotham commencing his reign.

10. MT and B 2 Kgs 15:30 date Hoshea's deed to "the twentieth year of Jotham."

Like L, Josephus has oo equivalent to this indication in his version of 15:30 in 9.258.

Thereby, he avoids the problem of the apparent discrepancy regarding the length of

Jotham's reign between 2 Kgs 15:30 (at least twenty years) and 15:33 (sixteen years).

Rabbinic tradition as represented by S. ^cOlam 22 resolves the problem in a different

way, positing that in recognition of Jotham's righteousness, 2 Kgs 15:30 deducts four

years from the reign of his wicked son Ahaz and attributes these to Jotham, in this

way generating the figure of twenty years for his length of reign.

11. Josephus dispenses with the "source notion" for Pekah of 2 Kgs 15:31.

12. These same data are repeated in 2 Chr 27:8.

13. His non-utilization of the datum of 2 Kgs 15:32 is in line with Josephus' gen-

eral tendency to omit such synchronisms for the latter rulers of both Israel and Judah

4 Bulletin for Biblical Research 6

reserves, in line with his usual practice, his version of the sources'

two shared chronological data until the end of his account of Jotham

in 9.243a, see below. From 2 Kgs 15:33 // 2 Chr 27:1 he does, on

the other hand, take over at this point the specification that Jotham's

reign transpired "in Jerusalem" (9.236).¹⁴ To this notice he appends

mention of Jotham's mother "Jerasē" ( )Iera/shj), whose name he

draws from 2 Kgs 15:33b // 2 Chr 27:1b (MT )#f$w%ry;, B 4 Rgns )Erou/j,

L 4 Rgns )Ierou=sa, 2 Par )Ieroussa/). The sources further record the

name of Jerusha's father "Zadok" (so MT). In place thereof Josephus

qualifies Jotham's mother as "a native of Jerusalem."¹⁵

2 Kgs 15:34 // 2 Chr 27:2a begin their respective evaluations of

Jotham with the notice that he did "what was right in the eyes of the

Lord according to all that his father Uzziah had done" (Chronicles +

"only he did not invade the temple of the Lord").¹⁶ Josephus' parallel

(9.236b) varies the wording of this stereotyped formula (also leaving

aside its evocation of Uzziah¹⁷): "(Jotham) lacked no single virtue (ou)-

demia/j a)reth=j a)pelei/peto), but was pious towards God (eu)sebh_j . . . ta_

_____________________________________________________________________

(for the most part he does reproduce Kings' earlier synchronisms). In fact, for the

period following the reigns of Jeroboam II of Israel and Uzziah (Azariah) of Judah re-

spectively Josephus cites only one biblical synchronism, Hezekiah's accession in the

fourth year of Hoshea of Israel (9.260, compare 2 Kgs 18:1 third). Such a systematic

omission of Kings' synchronisms serves to signal the approaching end of Israel, when

it will no longer be possible to correlate the royal lines of North and South. On Jose-

phus' "monarchical chronology" in comparison with that of the Bible, see E. R. Thiele,

The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,

1951) 204-27.

14. Josephus adds the further specification that Jotham ruled "over the tribe of

Judah." With this designation of Jotham's domain Josephus leaves out of account the

other tribe over which he ruled, i.e., Benjamin. Elsewhere, by contrast, Josephus does

employ the title "king of the two tribes" for Judah's rulers, see Ant. 8.224, 246, 298,

3a4, 398; 10:1, cf. 8.274; 9.142, 216.

15. Twice elsewhere, Josephus interjects a comparable "unbiblical" notice about a

queen mother being a native of Jerusalem, i.e., 9.260 (compare 2 Kgs 18:1, the mother

of Hezekiah; as in 9.236 this notice replaces mention of the royal mother's patronym);

10.37 (compare 2 Kgs 21:1, the mother of Manasseh). In specifying Jerusalem as the

place of the queen mother's birth, Josephus was perhaps inspired by the consideration

that the rulers of the small kingdom of Judah would likely have drawn their wives

from families resident in the capital.

16. The reference here is to the Chronicler's Sondergut episode of Uzziah's at-

tempted offering of incense in the Temple, which leads to his being stricken with lep-

rosy in 2 Chr 26:16-20 (compare 2 Kgs 15:5). Josephus gives his version of the episode

in Ant. 9.222-26.

17. Josephus' dispensing with the sources' paralleling of righteous Jotham with

Uzziah is understandable given the serious offense into which the latter falls accord-

ing to 2 Chr 26:16-20 (see n. 16), this necessitating the Chronicler's qualification of the

statement about Jotham doing as Uzziah had done, which he takes over from 2 Kgs

15:34 in 27:2a, see above in the text.

BEGG: Jotham and Amon: According to Josephus 5

pro_j to_n qeo/n) and righteous towards men (di/kaioj . . . ta_ pro_j

a)nqrw/pouj)."¹⁸ Both biblical presentations go on to "qualify" their ini-

tial commendation of Jotham. 2 Kgs 15:35a notes that under him wor-

ship on the high places continued to flourish, while 2 Chr 27:2b

speaks in more general terms of the people still following "corrupt

practices" (RSV). By contrast, Josephus leaves his praise of Jotham un-

qualified, directly continuing his encomium of the king's virtues with

an elaborate transitional notice leading into the account of the royal

building measures that he adapts from 2 Kgs 15:35b // 2 Chr 27:3- 4.

This reads, "he also took care (e)pimelh/j) of the needs of the city,¹⁹ for

all places that were in need of repair or adornment he completely re-

constructed at great expense."

As noted, both biblical sources follow their evaluation of Jotham

with reference to his building activity. Specifically, 2 Kgs 15:35b //

2 Chr 27:3a credit him with "building the upper gate (LXX pu/lhn) of

the house of the Lord." Josephus represents Jotham as undertaking

more comprehensive construction activities at the Temple site: "he

erected porticos (stoa/j) and gateways (propu/laia) in the temple area

(e)n tw|= naw=|)."²⁰ The author of Kings confines himself to the single

building notice cited above. The Chronicler, on the contrary, expands

this with a number of additional items (27:3b- 4). Of these, the first

concerns Jotham "doing much building on the wall (LXX tei/xei) of

Ophel." Josephus, in reproducing this notice peculiar to the Chroni-

cler, once again generalizes: "he set up those parts of the walls

(teixw=n) that had fallen down."²¹

In 2 Chr 27:4 the Chronicler widens the perspective beyond Jeru-

salem itself in speaking of Jotham's building of cities in the Judean

hill country and "forts and towers (LXX pu/rgouj) on the wooded

hills." In Josephus the "very large and impregnable towers (pu/r-

gouj)" that Jotham constructs would, like the "walls" mentioned just

18. With the above collocation "pious towards God and just towards men" compare

7.384 where David exhorts Solomon "to be just towards your subjects (dikai/w| . . . . pro_j

tou_j a)rxome/nouj) and pious towards God (eu)sebei= . . . pro_j to_n . . . qeo/n)."

19. The above formulation is a verbal echo of that used by Josephus of Jotham's

father Uzziah: "he began to take thought (th_n e)poime/leian) thereafter for Jerusalem"

(9.218). Implicitly then, Josephus does link Jotham and his father as his sources do

explicitly in 2 Kgs 15:34 // 2 Chr 27:2a (see above in the text).

20. Josephus' reference to "porticos" here doubtless has in view Herod's Helle-

nized Temple.

21. Josephus' avoidance of the proper name "Ophel" of 2 Chr 27:3b in the above

formulation is in line with his tendency to leave aside such topographical particulars

that would be unfamiliar (and uninteresting) to Gentile readers. See the comparable

case of Ant. 9.218 where he passes over the various specific sites (the Corner Gate, the

Valley Gates, and "the Angle") where Uzziah is said to have erected his towers in the

source text (2 Chr 26:9).

6 Bulletin for Biblical Research 6

previously by him, seem rather to be part of the king's Jerusalem

building initiatives.²² Thereafter, however, Josephus rounds off his

account of Jotham the builder with a notice that does seem inspired

by 27:4's reference to his extra-Jerusalem activities: "and to any other

matters which had been neglected throughout his entire kingdom he

gave his entire attention."

The Chronicler's Jotham Sondergut continues in 27:5 with notices

on the king's subjection of the Ammonites and the tribute paid by

them. Josephus' parallel (9.238a) highlights Jotham's initiative: "he

also marched against (Chr fought with) the Ammanites (Chr the king

of the sons of Ammon), and having defeated (krath/saj, 2 Par kati/s-

xusen) them²³ in battle, he imposed upon them (Chr they [the Am-

monites] gave him) a yearly tribute²⁴ of a hundred talents (Chr + of

silver) and ten thousand kors (ko/rouj)²⁵ of wheat and as many of bar-

ley."²⁶ Chronicles rounds off its Sondergut segment (27:3b-6) with the

following reflection on Jotham's achievements: "So Jotham became

mighty (2 Par kati/sxusen), because he ordered his ways before the

LORD his God." Josephus rewords it, eliminating the source's theo-

logical component (9.238b).²⁷ His version, highlighting the stature of

Jotham himself, reads, "So greatly did he strengthen his kingdom,

22. In thus representing Jotham as (re-)building both "walls" and "towers"

specifically in Jerusalem, Josephus aligns his activities with those of his father Uzziah:

"he began to take thought for Jerusalem . . . whatever parts of the walls that had

fallen . . . he rebuilt and repaired. . . . In addition he built many towers (pu/rgouj), each

fifty cubits high (9.218, cf. 2 Chr 26:9 which speaks only of Uzziah's building "fortified

towers" in Jerusalem).

23. Josephus agrees with MT 2 Chr 27:5a in having Jotham defeat the Ammonites

as a whole; in 2 Par Jotham vanquishes "him," i.e., the king of the Ammonites cited at

the start of the verse. MT and LXX likewise diverge at the end of 27:5. In the former it

is the Ammonites who pay Jotham "the same amount in the second and third years,"

while in the latter the Ammonite king does so. In contrast to both MT and LXX Jose-

phus makes no mention of the Ammonite king in his version of 2 Chr 27:5.

24. Josephus' reference to the Ammonites' "yearly tribute" represents a sim-

plification of the circumstantial indications of 2 Chr 27:5 (MT): "they gave him that

year a hundred talents of silver . . . they paid him the same amount in the second and

third years."

25. Like 2 Par (ko/rwn) Josephus transliterates the Hebrew Myriko.

26. In its divergences from 2 Chr 27:5 the above formulation serves to reinforce

the parallelism between Jotham and his father Uzziah, compare 9.218, itself a reword-

ing/expansion of 2 Chr 26:8 ("the Ammonites paid tribute to Uzziah "): "Next he

subdued the Ammanites and, having imposed a tribute upon them. . . . " Note in par-

ticular that Josephus mentions explicitly a subjugation of the Ammonites by both rul-

er, whereas Chronicles cites this only of Jotham, just as he has both rulers take the

initiative in "imposing" tribute on the Ammonites in contrast to 2 Chr 26:8 and 27:5,

which speak of that people "giving" their tribute to Uzziah or Jotham respectively.

Finally, whereas 2 Chr 26:8 has Uzziah dealing with the Ammonites but 27:5 with

their king, Josephus refers in both instances simply to the "Ammanites."

27. On Josephus' tendency to "detheologize" in his rewriting of the Bible in his

Antiquities, see L. H. Feldman, "Use, Authority, and Exegesis of Mikra in the Writings

BEGG: Jotham and Amon: According to Josephus 7

that it was not lightly regarded (a)katafro/nhton)²⁸ by his enemies,

while to his own people it brought happiness (eu)dai/mona)."²⁹

At this point (9.239-42) Josephus deviates from the sequence of

both his narrative sources to cite a passage from the Book of Nahum

(2:9-12), whose activity he vaguely dates with the formula "there

was at that time" i.e., in the reign of Jotham [9:239]). Jotham himself

nowhere figures in this "prophetic interlude," so I leave it out of

account here.³⁰ However, I would at least like to address the question

of the reason for and effect of Josephus' dating Nahum's word against

Assyria in Jotham's time. This question arises because the Book of

Nahum itself provides no indication as such regarding the period

of the prophet's ministry, whereas S. ^cOlam 20 situates this during

the reign of Manasseh, Jotham's great-grandson. In responding to the

question I would begin by noting that Josephus' citation of the

Nahum passage (9.239-42) stands in fairly close proximity to his ver-

sion of the story of Jonah, another "anti-Assyrian" prophet (9.208-

14),³¹ which, inspired by the mention of Jonah in 2 Kgs 14:25, he

interjects into his account of Jeroboam II (9.205-7, 215). Perhaps

Josephus' procedure here reflects his knowledge of a tradition, at-

tested in Tg. J. on Nah 1:1 and Lives of the Prophets 11:2, which explic-

itly associated the two prophets and represented Nahum as arising

after Jonah.³² In any case, by positioning his quotation of Nahum's

word of doom for Assyria where he does, soon after his citation of

Jonah's similar message, Josephus underscores the certainty of As-

syria's demise as something announced by two different prophets.³³

_________________________________________________________________________

of Josephus," Mikra: Text, Translation, Reading and Interpretation of the Hebrew Bible in

Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity (Martin J. Mulder and Harry Sysling, eds.;

CRINT 2/1; Assen: van Gorcum, 1988) 455-518, 503-7.

28. The term a)katafro/nhtoj is hapax in Josephus.

29. On Josephus' use of this key term of Greek ethics, see H.-F. Weiss, "Pharisäis-

mus and Hellenismus. Zur Darstellung des Judentums im Geschichtswerk des jüdi-

schen Historikers Flavius Josephus," OLZ 74 (1979) 421-31, c. 427; S. Mason, Flavius

Josephus and the Pharisees: A Composition-Critical Study (SPB 39; Leiden: Brill, 1991) 185.

30. On Josephus' quotation of Nah 2:9-12 in Ant. 9.239-42 see C. T. Begg, "Jose-

phus and Nahum Revisited," REJ 154 (1995) 5-22; cf. J. Weill, "Nahoum II, 9-12 et

Josèphe (Ant. IX, XI, #239-41)," REJ 76 (1923) 96-98; P. Humbert, "Nahoum II, 9," REJ

83 (1927) 74-76.

31. On this passage, see L. H. Feldman, "Josephus' Interpretation of Jonah," AJS

Review 17 (1992) 1-29.

32. In this connection recall that in the Book of the Twelve Prophets, Nahum comes

after Jonah (with Micah supervening). On Josephus' familiarity with extrabiblical tra-

ditions, many of which are literarily attested only in Jewish writings postdating his own,

see L. H. Feldman, "Josephus' Portrait of Asa," BBR 4 (1994) 41-60, esp. 43-44, n. 5.

33. Nahum's message of doom as cited by Josephus can function all the more

effectively as a confirmation of Jonah's message in that in his version of the Book of

Jonah Josephus omits all mention of Nineveh's positive response to Jonah's preaching

and of God's corresponding decision to spare the city (see Jonah 3:5-10).

8 Bulletin for Biblical Research 6

Josephus rounds off his digression concerning Nahum with the

formula "And now, concerning these matters, what we have written

may suffice" at the end of 9.242. Thereafter he reverts to his narrative

sources for their indications (2 Kgs 15:38 // 2 Chr 27:9) on Jotham's

death and burial and the accession of his son Ahaz (9.243a). In so

doing, he passes over, as he does consistently elsewhere, the respec-

tive "source references" of 2 Kgs 15:36 ("the Book of the Chronicles of

the Kings of Israel") and 2 Chr 27:7 ("the Book of the Kings of Israel

and Judah") for Jotham.³⁴ In common with 2 Chronicles 27 Josephus

likewise has no equivalent to the afterthought notice of 2 Kgs 15:37,

according to which during Jotham's reign "the Lord began to send

Rezin the king of Syria and Pekah the son of Remaliah against

Judah." The non-utilization of this item by both the Chronicler and

Josephus is understandable in that it raises the theodicy question of

why God would have so afflicted a pious king like Jotham.³⁵

2 Kgs 15:38 // 2 Chr 27:9 both use the euphemism "he slept (LXX

e)koimh/qh) with his fathers" in reporting the death of Jotham. Josephus,

who never employs this familiar biblical phrase, substitutes the verb

meth/llacen, an abbreviation of the expression to_n bi/on metalla/ssein

found in 10.221. To this mention of Jotham's demise, he appends a

double chronological indication inspired by 2 Kgs 15:33 // 2 Chr 27:1a

(= 27:8): (Jotham died) "at the age of forty-one years,³⁶ of which he

reigned sixteen." The sources differ somewhat in their respective

burial notices for Jotham: according to 2 Kgs 15:38 he "was buried

(LXX e)ta/fh) with his fathers³⁷ in the city of David his father," which

2 Chr 27:9 condenses into "they buried (MT w%rb;@q;y@iwa LXX e)ta/fh) him in

the city of David." Once again, Josephus varies: "he was buried

(qa/ptetai)³⁸ in the royal sepulchres (e)n tai=j basilikai=j qh/kaij)."³⁹ Finally,

to his mention of the accession of Jotham's son Ahaz, the concluding

element in 2 Kgs 15:38 // 2 Chr 27:9, Josephus directly appends a nega-

34. Presumably, Josephus' reason for omitting the "source notices" of Kings and

Chronicles is that he is basing himself directly on the "Bible" rather than its sources.

35. The notice of 2 Kgs 15:37 is "duplicated" in 16:5 (// Isa 7:1), where the same

two foes (unsuccessfully) assault Jerusalem in the reign of Jotham's son Ahaz. Given

Ahaz's reprobate status (see 2 Kgs 16:2b-4), both the Chronicler (see 2 Chr 28:5-7) and

Josephus (9.244) find no difficulty in reproducing the latter notice—likewise reformu-

lating this into a statement that the allied kings defeated Ahaz.

36. In the sources the first figure given is for Jotham's age at accession. In accord

with his regular practice, Josephus substitutes the king's age at death (41), calculating

this figure by adding the biblical indications on his age at accession (25) and length of

reign (16).

37. L 2 Kgs 15:38 (like 2 Chr 27:9) lacks the MT and B phrase "with his fathers" here.

38. Frequently elsewhere as well, Josephus utilizes the historic present where

LXX has some past form, see C. T. Begg, Josephus' Account of the Early Divided Monarchy

(AJ 8, 212-42D) (BETL 108; Leuven: Leuven University Press/Peeters, 1993) 10-11, n. 32.

39. Elsewhere Josephus uses the above expression "in the royal sepulchres" in

9.166 (of the priest Jehoaida) and 14.124 (Aristobulus II), cf. 8.264.

BEGG: Jotham and Amon: According to Josephus 9

tine evaluation of the latter, drawn from 2 Kgs 16:2-4 // 2 Chr 28:

2– 4 whereas in the sources the chronological data for Ahaz's reign

of 16:1 // 28:1 supervene.

The foregoing detailed comparison of Josephus' treatment of

Jotham with that of the sources makes it clear that Josephus, as he

does regularly in like circumstances, has opted to follow the more

detailed presentation of Chronicles rather than the summary ac-

count of Kings. Specifically, he reproduces the former's Sondergut

items (2 Chr 27:3b– 6) concerning Jotham's additional building activi-

ties and subjugation of the Ammonites (9.237-38). Conversely, he

has no equivalent to those notices peculiar to Kings' Jotham segment,

the synchronization of 15:32 and the reference to the Syrian-Israelite

attack of 15:37. Given the lack of noteworthy divergences among

them it does not seem possible, on the other hand, to determine with

any assurance which text-form(s) of Chronicles he had available in

composing his Jotham narrative. In any case, Josephus goes beyond

both his sources in introducing into the body of his account of

Jotham a "digression" concerning the preaching of the prophet

Nahum who (purportedly) functioned under this king (9.239-42).

The image of Jotham presented by Josephus is still more positive

than that found in the Bible. Whereas 2 Kgs 15:35 and 2 Chr 27:2 both

indicate that cultic abuses continued among Jotham's people through-

out his reign, Josephus suppresses this item, even affirming that

Jotham "lacked no single virtue" (9.236).⁴⁰ Also noteworthy in Jose-

phus' version of Jotham are the various verbal echoes of his account of

Jotham's father Uzziah,⁴¹ these being his replacement for the explicit

paralleling of the two monarchs as found in 2 Kgs 15:34 // 2 Chr 27:2a.

Such affinities themselves, however, serve to heighten the Josephan

Jotham's perfection of character in that his achievements did not lead

him into a prideful offense against God as did Uzziah's similar accom-

plishments (see 9.222-24). In his imperviousness to the hubris that

took hold of Uzziah--as well as of many other characters in Antiqui-

ties,⁴² Jotham indeed shows himself to "lack no single virtue."

40. Such a magnification of Jotham's rectitude is in line with scattered comments

in rabbinic tradition. See Gen. Rab. 63:1, where God responds to the angels' lament at

the accession of the wicked Ahaz by stating that, given the righteousness of his father

Jotham, he (God) "can do nothing" to the reprobate. Even more strikingly, in Sukk. 45b

the first-century AD Rabbi Simeon b. Yohai is quoted as affirming that the combined

merits of himself, his son Eliezer, and king Jotham would suffice to exempt the world

from judgment from the creation until its final disappearance.

41. These concern especially the two kings' building measures in Jerusalem (com-

pare 9.237 and 9.218b) and subjugation of the Ammonites (compare 9.238 and 9.218a).

42. On Josephus' highlighting of the sequence prosperity-pride-offense-punish-

ment so familiar from Greek tragedy in his retelling of the Bible's history, see Feldman,

"Use, Authority and Exegesis of Mikra in the Writings of Josephus," 500.

10 Bulletin for Biblical Research 6

AMON

The short-reigned Amon appears en passant in 2 Kgs 21:19-26 //

2 Chr 33:21-25 between more extensive accounts of his father

Manasseh (2 Kgs 21:1-18 // 2 Chr 33:1-20) and son Josiah (2 Kgs

22 1-23:30 // 2 Chr 34:1-35:27). Josephus' equally brief treatment of

Amon (10.46b-48a) is likewise "sandwiched" between his presenta-

tions of Manasseh (10.37– 46a)⁴³ and Josiah (10.48b-80).⁴⁴

In the sources, mention of Amon's accession (2 Kgs 21:18 // 2 Chr

33 20) rounds off their respective narratives concerning Manasseh.

There then follows a double chronological indication: acceding at age

twenty-two Amon ruled two years in Jerusalem. Josephus reserves

the latter items for a subsequent point in his account (see below).

Accordingly, his notice on the succession of “Ammon” ( )Ammw/na

10.46b)⁴⁵ is followed immediately by the data concerning Amon's

mother, which he draws from 2 Kgs 21:19b (no parallel in Chronicles).

MT designates this figure as "Meshullemeth (tmele@#$em;) daughter of

Hazur from Jotbah (hbf+;yf)," while B 4 Rgns calls her Mesolla/m,

daughter of (Arou/j from )Ieseba/l (L )Etebaqa/). As is his wont, Josephus

passes over the name of the queen mother's father. The woman

herself he names "Emaselmē" ( )Emase/lmhj)⁴⁶ and her hometown

"Jatabatē" ( )Iataba/thj).⁴⁷

2 Kgs 21:20 // 2 Chr 33:22a both state that Amon "did what was

evil in the sight of the Lord, as Manasseh his father had done." There-

after, however, the biblical evaluations of Amon diverge, this reflect-

ing their differing overall treatments of Manasseh. According to 2 Kgs

21:21-22 Amon "walked in all the way his father walked, and served

the idols (MT Mylilu@ni@ha, LXX ei)dw/loij) that his father served, and wor-

shiped. He foresook the Lord . . . and did not walk in the way of the

Lord." By contrast, 2 Chr 33:22b-23 affirms that Amon "sacrificed to

all the images (MT Myliysip@;ha, LXX ei)dw/loij) that his father Manasseh

had made, and served them. And he did not humble himself before the

Lord, as Manasseh his father had humbled himself, but this Amon in-

curred guilt more and more." Josephus' evaluation of Amon is shorter

than that of either of his sources, leaving aside in particular their

43. On the Josephan Manasseh, see L. H. Feldman, "Josephus' Portrait of Manas-

seh," JSP 9 (1991) 3-20.

44. On this see L. H. Feldman, "Josephus' Portrait of Josiah," LS 18 (1993) 110-30.

45. This form of the name with duplication of the occurs in some mss of 4 Rgns

Compare )Amw/j in B 4 Rgns / 2 Par and )Amw/n (= MT) in L 4 Rgns.

46. Compare the variants )Emalse/mhj (M), )Emase/mhj (SP) and "Maselmis" (Lat).

According to A. Schalit the form of the name printed by Marcus represents a "contam-

ination" of the two Hebrew words that stand back-to-back in 2 Kgs 21:19, i.e.,

tmele@#$um; wOm@)i (Namenwörterbuch zu Flavius Josephus [Leiden: Brill, 1968] s.v. )Emase/lmh).

47. Compare the variants: )Iazaba/thj (R), )Iaba/thj (MSP) and "Iecabath" (Lat.).

BEGG: Jotham and Amon: According to Josephus 11

common reference to the king's worship of idols/images.⁴⁸ At the

same time, having reproduced the Chronicler's Sondergut account of

Manasseh's repentance (see 10.41-42 // 2 Chr 33:12-13), Josephus

also follows Chronicles in drawing a contrast—albeit a more allusive

one—between Amon's ways and those of his father (see 33:23a, com-

pare 2 Kgs 21:21). His summary evaluation of Amon thus reads, "he

imitated (mimhsa/menoj)⁴⁹ those deeds of his father which he had reck-

lessly committed (e)to/lmhsen) in his youth [i.e., before his later conver-

sion]" (10.47a).

2 Kgs 21:23 // 2 Chr 33:24 relate the assassination of Amon by his

"servants" (LXX pai/dej) who "conspired" (4 Rgns B sunestra/fhsan

[+ kai_ e)pebou/leusan , L] / 2 Par e)pe/qento) against him and "killed"

(4 Rgns e)qana/twsan 2 Par e)pa/tacan) him "in his house" (e)n [tw=|] oi1kw|

au)tou=). Josephus for ulates it equivalently: "after a plot was formed

(e)pibouleuqei/j) see the L plus in 4 Rgns 21:23 above) against him by his

own servants (oi)ketw=n), he was put to death (a)pe/qanen)⁵⁰ in his house

(e)pi_ th=j oi)ki/aj⁵¹ th=j au)tou=)" (10.47b). To this notice Josephus then

appends a version of the chronological data of 2 Kgs 21:19a // 2 Chr

33:21: "(Amon died) at the age of twenty-four years, of which he had

reigned for two."⁵²

2 Kgs 21:24a // 2 Chr 33:25a narrate the sequel to Amon's assas-

sination: "the people of the land" (MT Cre)fhf-M(a, LXX [pa=j, L 4 Rgns] o(

lao_j th=j gh=j) "slew" (B 4 Rgns / 2 Par e)pa/tacan, L 4 Rgns a)pe/kteinan)

the conspirators. Josephus' version runs, "But the people (to_ plh=qoj)⁵³

48. Elsewhere as well Josephus regularly avoids or minimalizes such "cultic par-

ticulars" in his rewriting of biblical narratives, likely for the sake of Gentile readers

who would not have found these of interest. See, e.g., Ant. 8.290 where he replaces the

notices on Asa's specific cultic reform measures of 1 Kgs 15:12-14 // 2 Chr 14:2-4 with

the generalizing statement "he (Asa) put his kingdom in order by cutting away what-

ever evil growths were fund in it and cleansing it from every impurity."

49. The terminology of "imitation" figures prominently in Josephus' versions of

the royal judgment notices of Kings and Chronicles, e.g., he refers to the (early)

Manasseh "imitating (mimou/menoj) the lawless deeds of the Israelites" (10.37).

50. With the above construction compare Josephus' notice on the assassination of

Ishbosheth in Ant. 7.46: e)pibouleuqei_j a)pe/qenen.

51. Note the word play between oi)ketw=n and oi)ki/aj in Josephus' notice of Amon's

death.

52. Once again Josephus substitutes a king's age at death for the biblical age at

accession, obtaining the former by combining the sources' statement that Amon ac-

ceded at age twenty-two, and ruled two years (see n. 36).

53. Also elsewhere Josephus avoids the biblical phrase "the people of the land";

see Ant. 10.150 where the reference in 2 Kgs 25:19 to "sixty men of the people of the

land" becomes "sixty other officers (h(gemo/naj)." His doing so might be influenced by

the terminological evolution, which led to the phrase Cre)fhf M(a becoming a derogatory

designation for the ignorant, nonobservant population of Palestine. On this develop-

ment, see EncJud 2, s.v. Am Ha-arez.

12 Bulletin for Biblical Research 6

punished his murderers" (10.48a). Both sources directly juxtapose the

avenging of Amon's death by the people of the land (21:24a // 33:25a)

with that group's subsequent initiative in making his son Josiah king

in his place (21:24b // 33:25b). Josephus interrupts this sequence to

mention that the people "buried Ammon with (sunqa/ptousi)⁵⁴ his

father." Josephus' inspiration for this inserted notice is 2 Kgs 21:26a

("they buried [LXX e1qayan] him in his tomb in the garden of Uzziah,"

no parallel in 2 Chronicles 33) which stands after the source notice of

21:25⁵⁵ and before the "resumption" of 21:24b in 21:26b. The histo-

rian's anticipation of the item positions it at what seems to be a more

appropriate point in the sequence of events—the people would surely

have first buried Amon before resolving the succession question. Only

thereafter does Josephus come to give his parallel to 2 Kgs 21:24b //

2 Chr 33:25b: "they gave the royal power (paradidou=sin⁵⁶ th_n basilei/an,

compare 4 Rgns / 2 Par e)basi/leusen) to his son Josiah."

Faced with the divergences of detail between his sources for

Amon, Josephus opted to make selective use of both. From Kings' Son-

dergut he draws the data concerning the queen mother (2 Kgs 21:19b)

and Amon's burial (2 Kgs 21:26a). In his reminiscence of Manasseh's

ultimate repentance, on the other hand, he follows 2 Chr 33:23a

against 2 Kgs 21:21 (10.47a). Josephus' use of both Kings and

Chronicles in developing his Amon account is clear; however, there

are no definite indications as to which text-form(s) of the two sources

he had available in this instance.

Overall, it might be said that Josephus' portrait of Amon lacks

distinctiveness vis-à-vis its biblical counterparts. In view, perhaps,

inter alia, of the shortness of the king's reign, he compresses (and gen-

eralizes) the relatively extensive source judgment notices on Amon.⁵⁷

As a result, the account of Amon's assassination and its sequels looms

larger in the Josephan presentation. Still, the historian does not go be-

54. Note the historic present, see n. 38.

55. The Chronicler has no equivalent to this item; neither does Josephus, who, as

we noted in connection with Jotham, invariably leaves aside such notices in his retell-

ing of the monarchical period.

56. Again, note the historic present.

57. Contrast the embellishment of the biblical record in Sanh. 103b (see also the

parallel tradition in S. ^cOlam 24), where Amon is portrayed as surpassing his father

Manasseh in evil-doing, being charged with burning the Torah, so neglecting the altar

that spider webs covered it, and violating his mother for the sole purpose of provok-

ing God. Nevertheless, because of the merits of his son Josiah, Sanh. 104b affirms that

Amon was not denied a place in the world to come. Christian tradition also elaborates

the figure of Amon, see The Apostolic Constitutions 2.23.2, which states that, inspired

by the life of his father Manasseh, Amon resolved to sin in his youth and then repent

when he got older, only to have God deny him the opportunity for such repentance

because of his early death.

BEGG: Jotham and Amon: According to Josephus 13

yond the sources either to supply a motivation for Amon's murder or

to represent it explicitly as divine retribution for the king's misdeeds.

CONCLUSIONS

In Josephus' version Jotham and Amon remain basically as they are in

the Bible, two minor kings, one markedly good, the other among

Judah's worst rulers. With both, Josephus was content to leave the bib-

lical record largely as he found it, neither notably modifying or am-

plifying this as he does in the case of many other scriptural figures.⁵⁸

On the other hand, the Josephan treatments of Jotham and Amon are

of interest as exemplifying many of his characteristic ways of dealing

with the data of his sources and the problems posed by these.

More generally, in his oscillation between close adherence to the

details of his scriptural source and free modification of the same,

Josephus, in the passages studied here, as well as throughout the bib-

lical segment of the Antiquities, stands as a noteworthy witness to a

much wider tendency within Judaism and Christianity both before

and after him. A like approach to an already normative text surfaces

within the OT itself in the Chronicler's handling of the Deuterono-

mistic History. Josephus' bifurcated treatment of the authoritative

biblical text has its counterpart as well in the retelling of Israel's

sacred history from creation through the death of Saul by his near

contemporary Pseudo-Philo, the author of the Biblical Antiquities.

Comparable too, from the Christian sphere, is the redoing of Mark

by Matthew and Luke. In sum, then, in attempting to appreciate

Josephus' handling of his biblical source, one needs to see him as one

among many figures around the turn of the era who felt themselves

called, not simply to preserve treasured tradition, but also to recast,

add to, and improve on that tradition.

58. The one exception is the "Nahum interlude," which Josephus introduces

within his account of Jotham in 9.239-42. Recall, however, that this is only very loosely

associated with his treatment of Jotham himself, which does not significantly deviate

from the source accounts.