Flavian Dynasty

An examination of the early career of the Emperor Domitian, younger son of Vespasian. This is a recent revision of a research paper first written in my Honours' year. Brian Jones, whose works are cited herein, was my supervisor for this work. Roman Imperial History. Roman History. Historiography. Prosopography. Epigraphy. Numismatics.

Who was Flavius Josephus? Answering this one question, leads to answers to virtually all other questions about ancient history. The answer is that he was Arrius Calpurnius Piso, a royal Roman. He wrote under the alias of Flavius Josephus and pretended to be a Jew. He was of Jewish descent, on his mother's side. Please read on and learn.

The emperor Constantine's family is referred to by scholars as either the Constantinian Dynasty, or the Neo-Flavians. The reason that they have been called the 'Neo-Flavians' or New Flavians, is not because scholars have traced back their descent from the Flavian Dynasty of the 1st century, but because members of the family of Constantine used the name 'Flavius'; as if a rebirth of the earlier Flavian Dynasty. Scholars have thought that this was done in an attempt to show themselves triumphant in ways that the earlier Flavian Dynasty had, and not because they were actually descended from that earlier dynasty. But, in reality, that is exactly why they had used the name Flavius among their family members. And this was to show that they knew of their own descent from those earlier Flavians; not to the general public, but to other royal families of the time, who were their relatives-and, many of whom, were also descended from those earlier Flavians. As my research (based upon the work of Sir Ronald Syme, Abelard Reuchlin and others, along with the primary source texts in their original languages), has revealed, the emperor Vespasian was a descendant of King Herod, and therefore, via his branch of that family, a relative (cousin) of King Agrippa II. The evidence for this is overwhelming once it is all brought together and considered; including the fact that Vespasian had his own Herodian relatives leave Judea before his attack upon Jerusalem. Another thing that I had noticed during the process of investigating the Flavian/Herodian connection, is that there was indeed, a family resemblance between King Agrippa II and the Emperor Vespasian; which can be easily seen when viewing certain of their coins side by side. But the purpose of this paper is not to demonstrate the relationship between the Herodians and Flavians, this is just an aspect that I felt that the reader should be aware of as they consider Vespasian as ancestor of the Neo-Flavians. What we need is many more researchers working to reveal the truth in ancient history. That is why I have been working as I have to bring as much of this information to the public, so that there are many aspects of this from which to choose from to get researchers started and so that they have their choice of just where they would like to begin their own work. Bear in mind that the research papers, genealogies, books and other information that I have made available, should all be read as so much of it is connected and will offer the researcher answers where they may not otherwise have them. When one reads and considers my work, such as with the genealogical connections presented in this paper, the reader should think about what I have stated in my other works with regards to how it is possible to reconstruct relationships within ancient royal individuals and the way in which they left that information to us. For instance, I have said that in order to find out just who these individuals actually were and how they were related to each other, one must do a vast amount of research and read all primary documents available (or as close to that as possible), in the original languages-as well as the later citations and references to those individuals (who may also be descendants of those same individuals). Secondary sources (such as that of modern researchers) can also be helpful. The papers of Sir Ronald Syme, for instance, are extremely helpful and important; many of which, were published in JRS [Journal of Roman Studies]. Again, I would like to stress the importance of the researcher building up a cross-referenced database.

Another thing is that Abelard Reuchlin not only passed along Inner-Circle knowledge that he was told, but he expounded upon it so that it could be more clearly understood by those who otherwise would not. He put forth a viable means in which to examine the texts of the time which includes those who were the witnesses to the creation of Christianity, those Jews who were writing the Talmud. In addition, he caused others, like me, to examine this further and allowed us to realize just how valuable it is in our studies to look much closer at the involvement of the Jews in trying to prevent the rise of those who would go on to create and promote Christianity. For, the Jews of the time, saw it (Christianity) for what it was truly was, an effort or tactic used by their enemies, as a part of the war that they had been fighting. And therefore, a fraud which needed to be exposed as such. The cause of the Pharisees and Scribes was for basic human rights, the end of slavery, and the foundation of a new fair democratic government. And, instead of teaching irrational and superstitious religion, they were trying to wean people off of that and replace it with sound, rational, practical, ethical reasoning. While Christianity, by contrast, was created to do the opposite of that. And that is because some greedy Roman rulers whose lives of luxury would be drastically changed, if the Pharisees and Scribes accomplished their goals for the people. Of course, to get people to believe in Christianity, the creators of Christianity had to make it appear to be something 'good', in much the same way that trappers set traps for dumb animals. Which, is exactly how those ancient royal rulers (the less than 1% of the time) saw non-royals, as nothing more than their own chattel which was there for no other reason than their own use for whatever purposes that they saw fit. Thus, Christianity was created as a means for them to better secure, control and manipulate the people, that they saw as their own sheep or chattel. This paper highlights the course that Abelard Reuchlin had taken in order to reach the conclusions that he was able to in order to advance our understanding of what the world was really like during the time in which the New Testament was being written and just who had motive to do so. And, his work also reminds us that we must consider all of the evidence of the time (that means the Jewish texts, the Jews of the time, and the Jewish war that was involved in the creation of Christianity). Reuchlin's work underscores our need to better understand what we study in the correct context in order to find out just who was actually writing at the time, and why. It is because of Abelard Reuchlin's work (and that of others, or course), that my own work was made more complete. I urge everyone to read and learn from the work that Reuchlin had devoted his life to in order that future generations could have that extremely important information.

There are so many areas which need to be studied when it comes to the First and Second Centuries of the Common Era, and so much more to learn about that time in history. If you read this paper and still wonder about various parts of it, it may mean that you need to do some reading to get caught up to where some of us already are.

Many within academia, for instance, still do not realize that when they are talking about the Jews of the time, they need to know exactly which 'Jews' they need to identify according to time, place and sect. This is important to better know what was being said by those recording both the Jewish historic material (i.e., the Talmud; 'Flavius Josephus' was not an actual 'Jew', but a Roman of Jewish descent).

This paper was written from the larger overview of an actual war going on at the time, instead of the view of isolated or sporadic Jewish "revolts". For more information about it being an actual long-standing war, read my other papers that cover the issue. A lot of material that that is necessary in order to uncover the fact of a genuine all-out war between the Romans and Jews can be deduced from items in the works of Flavius Josephus, various Roman authors, the Talmud, and the work of scholars such as Sir Ronald Syme, Joseph Neusner, and Abelard Reuchlin.

But, of course, you would have to read be at a level of study-ability that would allow you to know just what it is that you are reading. It is preferred that you know how to read the ancient texts involved in the original languages, using primary source documents and/or materials. When it comes to Classical material, the Loeb Classical Library edition is highly recommended. What must be known to reveal the truth about this long all-out war is that it did not begin with a disagreement between the Romans and Jews; it began with a split between the Jewish sects.

This paper tells a little known part of the story involving the creation of Christianity, and how a family alliance between the Flavians and Pisos had worked for the Piso family until the death of the Emperor Titus. And then, how, once Domitian became Emperor, he banished the Piso family from Rome.

This is a VERY ROUGH outline of my belief that the Emperor Domitian had aspergers syndrome.  I hope to expand over the next few months and add more evidence from secondary literature.  The focus here is on the primary sources of Suetonius and Cassius Dio.

Since I have been studying so many different areas of ancient history, particularly that of ancient Rome, this subject has been of some interest to me and others for a number of reasons. It has been apparent that the decline in the content of silver in Roman coinage directly related to various factors within the Roman Empire over the course of several centuries; namely, through the First Century AD/CE to the Fourth Century AD/CE. The examination of the part that coins played in history is crucial in helping to make important determinations in a number of areas of the study. For instance, the names used by various emperors, their family members, wives, and sometimes, relatives. It is for much more than simple interest or trivia that we, as historians, examine ancient coins. We find many things of interest and importance, that is, of value to us in our quest to learn more about the people and times in which they lived. Coins of the various emperors contain information. They give us portraits of the emperors which give us some idea as to how they looked. They tell us things from what they chose to include on their coins, such as symbols, gods and/or goddesses, motto and more. And, at times, we may even find examples of propaganda and historical reference. But in this instance, we are examining the silver content or the amount of silver contained within the silver denarius (or "denarii" in plural) as minted under the various emperors. Which, may tell us a few things or at least indicate or support various views of certain emperors at particular points in the historical timeline of the Roman Empire. One of the first things that comes to mind is that as the Roman Empire was expanding and more people and territory was being added to it, the demand for more coinage became a priority. And, one of the easiest ways to make silver coinage 'stretch' is to "water it down" so to speak. Or, in other words, reduce the silver content rather than the size of the coins-which, by the way, was another thing that we see happening as time went on (a good example of this can be seen in the reduction of size in both the denarius and the tetradrachm over the course of time). Coins which were produced under the Emperor Augustus were virtually as pure as they could make them, about 98 percent pure. We see, as time went on, that the silver coins minted under later emperors were reduced to 'billon' (a token amount of silver) and essentially copper coins with a silver wash to make them appear to be silver. Of course, with use, the silver washed coins would begin to show the copper as the silver wore off. Basically, the coins which were produced by the Julian Emperors remained for the most part, stable. The exception to that (and remember, we are focused primarily upon the denarius in this paper), could be coins produced for the various Roman territories in the form of coinage issued for use in the provinces. Once the rule of the Julian Emperors ended with the death of Nero, we begin to see where the rule of successive emperors changed the content of silver in their coins. The Silver Content In The Denarius Under Various Emperors*: [Again, remember that we find silver reduction in coins produced for the provinces] Augustus (ruled : 27 BC/BCE-14 AD/CE) 97/98%. Claudius (ruled : 41-54 AD/CE) 97%.

The purpose of this study is to show the importance of masculine imagery within Flavian imperial propaganda. This research combines gender theory with archaeological analysis, in an attempt to gauge the relationship between masculinity and imperial portraiture. The first step of this process will be exploring the roots of Greco-Roman masculinity and describing its role within society. The next step is examining the precedent of imperial propaganda set by Augustus, while pinpointing masculine aspects of this propaganda that would be replicated later on. The goal of this research would be to demonstrate that there is a correlation between masculine identity and the Principate, and how this is reflected in physical depictions within imperial propaganda.

Abstract: The triumph de Iudaeis had an enormous impact in Flavian Rome. Whereas a considerable amount of bibliography has accumulated over the years, no study examines in detail the issue of the exact date of such a major event. The present article aims to fill this gap, using all the available sources (literary and non-literary) to provide a reliable chronological reconstruction of Titus’s return from the East. The conclusion is that the Flavian triumphal procession over the Judaeans most likely took place in the second half/end of June 71 CE. ********** Riassunto: Il trionfo de Iudaeis ebbe un impatto enorme nella Roma dei Flavi. Sebbene nel corso degli anni si sia accumulata una notevole bibliografia, non esiste alcuno studio che esamini in dettaglio la questione della data precisa di questo evento fondamentale. Il presente articolo mira a colmare tale lacuna, utilizzando tutte le fonti disponibili (letterarie e non) allo scopo di fornire una ricostruzione cronologica attendibile del ritorno di Tito dall’Oriente. La conclusione è che il trionfo giudaico dei Flavi molto probabilmente ebbe luogo nella seconda metà/fine di giugno del 71 d.C.

A lo largo de su historia el Imperio romano tuvo que hacer frente a numerosas revueltas, debido al enorme territorio que controlaba. De entre los pueblos que las protagonizaron, los hebreos se contaban entre los que con mayor insistencia lucharon por recuperar su independencia. En cuanto a los diversos conflictos que enfrentaron a judíos y romanos, la que, a la postre, seria recordada como la Primera Guerra Judeo-romana (66-73 d.C.) pasó a la historia como el más importante de todos. Ello se debe tanto a que requirió de la participación de dos futuros emperadores al mando de las tropas romanas que debían restablecer la paz en la provincia de Judea, Vespasiano y su hijo Tito, como al hecho de que la ciudad de Jerusalén y el Gran Templo que albergaba acabaron completamente destruidos.

En el año 66 d.C. numerosos factores se unieron al odio que sectores radicales hebreos sentían hacia sus conquistadores romanos, provocando la caída del procurador de Judea, Gesio Floro, y la derrota del Legado de Siria, Cestio Galo, en Beth Horón, quien acudió con sus tropas a pacificar la región sin conseguirlo. El movimiento fue cobrando fuerza tras estos éxitos, y Jerusalén se convirtió en el epicentro del independentismo judío. Roma no podía permanecer pasiva ante estos acontecimientos y Nerón envió allí a Vespasiano, un general experimentado, para acabar de una vez por todas con el problema. La resistencia implacable que demostraron los rebeldes y los problemas políticos que, durante ese tiempo, se produjeron en Roma, provocaron que la conquista final quedara en manos de su capaz hijo Tito quien, a la postre, consiguió conquistar Jerusalén y acabar con la revuelta. El gran triunfo que se celebró en Roma para conmemorar la victoria era lo que la nueva dinastía Flavia necesitaba para afianzar su poder. Sin embargo, la campaña no finalizó hasta el año 73 d.C., tras la toma de la fortaleza de Masada, donde los últimos insurrectos prefirieron suicidarse antes de ser derrotados. El enfrentamiento se saldaría con una enorme pérdida de vidas, tanto entre los soldados romanos como entre los insurrectos judíos y la población civil. Gracias a la obra de Flavio Josefo, podemos reconstruir lo sucedido para poder así conocer con detalle uno de los grandes episodios de la Historia Antigua.

La legitimidad es un espacio político en continua construcción. Sin embargo, el respeto al legado augústeo y la explotación de su recuerdo, en aras de proyectar una imagen de continuidad con la casa imperial precedente, son constantes en la actuación política de Vespasiano y sus hijos. El propósito del presente trabajo es analizar el papel de de los símbolos y referentes ideológicos augústeos en la construcción y consolidación del Principado flavio a través de su reflejo en la documentación hispana. En particular, a través del estudio de un conjunto de inscripciones procedentes de la Bética, fechadas entre el reinado de Vespasiano y Domiciano, dedicadas a los miembros de la familia imperial y a divinidades asociadas a ellas, como Venus y Apolo.
    Un aspecto sumamente interesante es el perfil de los dedicantes: exmagistrados que elevan su agradecimiento a los emperadores flavios por la obtención de la ciudadanía romana en el marco del nuevo ordenamiento institucional. Por tanto, el análisis de estas dedicatorias constituye una excelente oportunidad para evaluar la recepción por parte de estas oligarquías municipales de la propaganda oficial flavia. A su vez, nos permitirá reflexionar cómo la difusión de estos modelos imperiales, y en particular aquellos orientados a la exaltación dinástica, influyen en el comportamiento y la proyección pública de estas élites sociales.

Since Bernays in 1861, scholars have disputed Josephus’ account in Bell. Iud. 6.252 that a Roman soldier during the siege of Jerusalem in 70 CE acted on ‘some supernatural impulse’ when he threw a piece of burning wood into the Temple, thus starting the fire that destroyed it. The vast majority of scholars have followed Bernays in giving more credence to the account of the Christian chronographer Sulpicius Severus, who in his Chronica reports that Titus ordered that the Temple be burned. Many a priori assumptions have come into play when examining Josephus’ narrative, which instead appears unequivocally clear, consistent and substantially trustworthy.

El objetivo del presente trabajo es profundizar en el estudio del papel asumido por las mujeres de la familia imperial dentro de las estrategias de legitimación y deslegitimación del Principado de Domiciano, convencidos de que su estudio permite obtener una mejor comprensión de la trascendencia histórica de su programa político e ideológico.

Índice:
Introducción
1. Vehículos de la propaganda oficial, víctimas de la campaña contra el emperador. Fuentes y perspectivas de estudio
2. El papel de las Mujeres de la familia en la creación y consolidación de la nueva casa imperial (69-81 D. C.)
        2.1. La configuración de una domus Augusta flavia. Alianzas matrimoniales y estrategias de legitimación política y dinástica (69-79 d. C.)
        2.2. La divinización de Vespasiano, los honores póstumos a Flavia Domitila I y la asociación de Flavia Julia (79-81 d. C.)
3. La evolución del proyecto político domiceaneo a través de las representaciones femeninas del régimen imperial (81-96 d. C.)
        3.1. Domus Augusta y Domus Divina. Conmemoración familiar, proyección celeste y crisis dinástica (81-83 d. C.)
        3.2. Las Augustas y la búsqueda de un sucesor. La equiparación del estatus dinástico de la emperatriz Domicia y de Flavia Julia, sobrina del emperador (83-89 d. C.).
        3.3. De la muerte y apoteosis de Julia al asesinato de Domiciano. El papel de las mujeres en el final de una dinastía (89-96 d. C.)
4. Conclusiones

Dentro del marco proporcionado por los juegos del anfiteatro flavio, el pequeño ciclo de tres epigramas acerca de las proezas del bestiarius Carpóforo sintetiza y ejemplifica lo
que Fitzgerald (2007) denomina “las estrategias del espectáculo”; particularmente, el modo en que estos ludi retomaron el acervo mítico para actualizarlo (y negarlo) en su
presente histórico-político.
Me propongo analizar en profundidad esta problemática mediante el análisis detallado de uno de los tres poemas del ciclo, el número 32 (28/7) del Liber spectaculorum, en
donde Marcial compara la muerte de varios animales feroces a manos del gladiador Carpóforo con el aniquilamiento de monstruos míticos por parte de Hércules y otros héroes.

Este trabajo fue presentado en las V Jornadas de Reflexión "Monstruos y Monstruosidades" (Buenos Aires, 2014).

Aizanoi, one of the most important cities of northwestern Phrygia, developed as a Pergamon colony in the 3rd century BC, and became a polis in a short time with its social and physical organization. At the center of this organization was the temple of Zeus Aizanon and temple lands, called Kleros, donated by the Kings of Pergamon and Bithynia. The subject of the historical process in question is the city elites benefiting from these lands. The city started to establish diplomatic relations with Rome shortly after establishment of Roman domination in Asia.  These relations gained momentum especially in the 1st century AD. In this process, the city increased its regional influence and became effective in the administration of the Province of Asia. The elites of the city, on the other hand, gained various positions and privileges thanks to the relations they established with the empire. In the first half of the century, the reason for the relations between Aizanoi and Rome was mainly taxation, cult expenses and land issues. In the second half of the century, the city’s desire to be an imperial cult center and a metropolis became what’s dominant in these relations. The aim of this study is to explain the nature of the diplomacy established between Aizanoi and Rome and thus to present a generalizable example for the relations between Rome and Hellen poleis in the 1st century AD.

In 70 na Christus werd de tempel van Jeruzalem verwoest door de Romeinen. Hiermee kwam een einde aan wat later ook wel de Eerste Joods-Romeinse Oorlog genoemd zou worden. De Joodse rebellen waren in 66 na Christus in opstand gekomen tegen hun Romeinse overheersers. Er worden verschillende redenen genoemd waarom de Joodse bevolking van Judea in opstand kwam. Dit was het gevolg van politieke en economische onvrede gemengd met religieus nationalistische sentimenten.  Ook zou er sprake zijn van een hoge belastingdruk, bemoeienis met de benoeming van hogepriesters, spanningen tussen Joodse en andere etnische gemeenschapen en de misdragingen van Romeinse bestuurders. Er waren dus verschillende redenen waarom de joden in opstand kwamen. Interessant is om te kijken wat de Joodse rebellen uiteindelijk bereikten met  hun opstand. Slaagden zij erin om, hoewel de opstand neergeslagen werd, hun positie binnen het Romeinse rijk enigszins te verbeteren of zorgde de opstand er juist voor dat de Romeinen negatief tegen de Joden aan gingen kijken en hun positie daardoor verslechterde? Dit essay zal een poging doen om de gevolgen van de opstand in kaart te brengen. De hoofdvraag die in dit onderzoek centraal zal staan is: Wat waren de gevolgen van de Joodse Oorlog, voor de Joodse gemeenschap binnen het Romeinse rijk in de periode van 66 tot 96 na Christus?

"The question of whether Titus ordered the burning of the Temple as Sulpicius Severus reports or whether the burning was caused by a soldier acting upon some “supernatural impulse” as Josephus relates [War 6.252] has been debated ever since Bernays in 1861 argued that the former version should be preferred. Leoni gives a very detailed history of scholarship on this question, pointing out how many a priori considerations have led to distrust Josephus. In the end he insists that Josephus’ reliability has to be judged case by case and that with regard to the burning of the Temple his account appears substantially trustworthy" (Joseph Sievers, in Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Period 34.2 (2003), p. 228).

[ES] En este trabajo se ofrecen nuevos datos que respaldan y completan la interpretación que propone la identificación de la Domicia de EE IX, 64 = ERAE, 553 con la emperatriz Flavia Domicia Longina, planteada ya por su primer editor, y cuestionada en ediciones posteriores. Concretamente, la presente propuesta parte del reconocimiento de una damnatio memoriae al comienzo de la l. 2, elemento que hasta la fecha había pasado inadvertido.
De ser cierta nuestra propuesta, este “nuevo” ho­menaje se suma a los escasos testimonios epigráficoshispanos en honor de las damas flavias, y en par- ticular, de Domicia Longina, de quien tan sólo conocíamos el pedestal de estatua dedicado en la vecina Metellinum. Asimismo, la pieza emeritense sería la única inscripción de todo el Imperio donde constatamos la aplicación de la damnatio memoriae dentro de la titulatura oficial de la emperatriz.
[EN]  In this paper, I offer new proofs to support and complete the identification of the Domitia of EE IX, 64 = ERAE, 553 with the empress Domitia Longina. I base this interpretation on the recognition of a damnatio memoriae at the beginning of the l. 2, an element that it had gone unnoticed until now.This inscription from Augusta Emerita would be the only honorific tribute to Domitia preserved in the Iberian Peninsula along with the statue pedestal from Metellinum. Besides, it would be the only testimony throughout the Empire in which we document the application of damnatio memoriae within the title of the empress.

What does it take to do the kind of work with ancient genealogies that I and a few others have? It takes time and dedication, and intense focus. After many years of observation and actual reconstruction of various ancient genealogies, it has now become second-nature to me. I've trained myself to know, almost by instinct, how to get the answers to complete various ancient genealogies that others would have abandoned and simply given up on; and I have completed them in many instances, in only a few hours. I remember when I had no idea where to look or what to look for. So, I have come a very long way indeed. There are several key items that I have learned that are essential to finding out just where an individual had belonged in terms of time, place and family. One of the main things that I had discovered is that all of these were left to be discovered, on purpose. That is, deliberately. They were made difficult, but not impossible. That is because the individuals who left these records, did so purposefully. Now, how and why would they do this, or even be able to? That is what anyone working with these genealogies should know before they even start. Today, we are hearing a lot of talk about 'oligarchy'. And many people today, imagine that it only really applies to certain wealthy families today; but they are not used to thinking of that in terms of our past history; at least not in a universal sense. But that is exactly what the case was. Who were the "us" and "them" of the past? Who were the "haves" and the "have nots"? Well, think about it. It was most certainly the royalty who were the "haves", it was not the common people. It was royalty who were keeping track of not only their own ancestry, but also of their fellow royals. To make the type of world in which ancient royalty needed in order to preserve what they had gained, that 'edge' over non-royals, wealth, privilege, and power, they needed to create an alternate reality for those who were not royal; in order to placate them and keep them in their place. That is, to prevent them from uprising and overthrowing them. So, they made it appear that royals and other leaders of all kinds came from the general populace, that they could rise from the ranks, and that they, the royals, were not perpetually protecting the royal 'right' of their privileged families. And one way of doing that was to make it appear that those who were writing were of all walks of life, that there was not a monopoly on it by royalty; but that is exactly what was happening. Royalty were the only ones who were leaving us written records, while making it appear that this was not so. And, they were not writing about anonymous commoners, but about their own family and their fellow royals. Now, once a researcher such as myself realizes this, we then understand that they also left both answers and clues to unravel just who they were. It was purposeful. They not only wrote the histories of their own families and left accounts of their individual actions, but they also made a point of protecting and preserving them; which is why so many of them have survived to this day. Granted, some were lost along the way, but one way that they got around this was to cross-reference much of their work. That is, they gave more than one account of various family members by making use of alias names for those individuals. Case in point, Arrius Calpurnius Piso. He and his family had created a number of alternate names for him. So many, in fact, that I doubt that even I yet know all of them.

A study of coin output in Egypt during the Flavian dynasty (AD 69–96) brings to light a dichotomy in circulation between billon tetradrachms and low denomination bronze coins. The composition of hoards with Flavian silver issues suggests minimal coin production due to a sufficient quantity of Nero's tertadrachms on the market. However, stray finds of coins from the Flavian dynasty consist mainly of bronze issues, apparently outnumbering Nero's low-denomination coin output. A tempting idea to consider is that the low number of Flavian silver coins in circulation resulted in an extended production of bronze issues.

Il libro ricostruisce la vita di Flavio Giuseppe a partire dalla genesi delle sue opere alla luce degli studi più recenti in materia. Attenzione particolare è riservata alla questione se Flavio Giuseppe debba o meno essere considerato un traditore del suo popolo. L'analisi induce alla conclusione apparentemente paradossale che Flavio Giuseppe deve essere considerato un traditore piuttosto quando militava nelle file dei ribelli come generale che dopo la sua resa, quando si prodigò per la causa di Roma.