It’s a tangled web of texts, traditions, and sometimes, well, good old-fashioned arguments. Imagine trying to prove your nation’s antiquity. How would you do it?
The historian Josephus, writing in his work Against Apion, grapples with this very question. He’s essentially defending the Jewish people against claims of being a new or insignificant nation. And his approach is fascinating.
He poses a hypothetical: What if the Jews tried to disprove the antiquity of the Greeks simply because Jewish records didn't mention them? Wouldn’t the Greeks rightly laugh and point to their own historical accounts and the testimony of their neighbors?
Josephus then turns the tables. He says he will do just that – use other nations to vouch for the antiquity of the Jewish people. But who to call as witnesses? Here’s where it gets interesting.
Josephus chooses the Egyptians and the Phoenicians as his "principal witnesses." Why them? Because, as he bluntly states, they were known for harboring "the greatest ill-will" towards the Jews. Think about that for a moment. He's not cherry-picking friendly sources. He's deliberately choosing witnesses who would be predisposed to speak against the Jewish people, arguing that if even they acknowledge the Jews' long history, then the case is pretty solid.
He does offer a slight caveat regarding the Chaldeans (ancient Babylonians). He acknowledges a kinship between them and the Jews, noting that "our first leaders and ancestors were derived from them." This connection meant the Chaldeans were more likely to mention the Jews favorably in their records. That ancestral link is important – and we see echoes of it throughout our history.
But the core of Josephus's argument is brilliant: if even your enemies acknowledge your existence and, implicitly, your history, it’s a powerful testament to its truth. It's like saying, "Even my harshest critics can't deny this!"
And then he promises to take it a step further. He intends to demonstrate that some Greek writers have mentioned the Jews, preempting any argument that the Greeks were completely ignorant of them.
It’s a clever strategy, isn’t it? To turn potential animosity into evidence. To use the very silence of some as a platform to amplify the voices of others. It makes you wonder, what other ancient arguments and debates are still echoing through the ages, shaping our understanding of the past? And who are our reluctant witnesses today?