1. Josephus,Antiquities, vol. 1, trans. A. Schalit, (Jerusalem — Tel-Aviv, 1943/44), xxiii, n. 35 (in Hebrew). Cf. below, n. 4. On Schalit, with whom the present writer had no personal contact, see U. Rappaport, “The Historiographical Work of the Late Abraham Schalit,”Cathedra 17 (October 1980):183–190, and M. Stern. “Abraham Schalit (1898–1979),” inJerusalem in the Second Temple Period: Abraham Schalit Memorial Volume, eds. A. Oppenheimer, U. Rappaport, & M. Stern (Jerusalem, 1980), 3–6. Both essays are in Hebrew.
2. According to an interview with Schalit inHaAretz (16 March 1956), he planned to follow up his thenforthcoming volume on Herod (see below, n. 12) with one on Agrippa II; he also planned a Hebrew commentary on Ant. 11–20 and a volume on Josephus, all asVorarbeiten for a comprehensive history of the Second Temple period. According to the preface to the third volume of his translation of Ant. (Jerusalem, 1963), the commentary was to have filled four volumes. L. H. Feldman has reported that at the time of his death Schalit was working on an “exhaustive” and “high quality” German commentary on Ant. 11–20, and was planning a “much expanded” German version of his Hebrew commentary on Ant. 1–10, which was published along with his translation of those books. See L. H. Feldman,Josephus and Modern Scholarship (1937–1984) (Berlin — New York, 1984), 34; on the question of German versus Hebrew, cf. below, n. 45. Papers in Schalit's file in The Hebrew University's administrative archives indicate that he was, in the 1930s and 1940s, planning and preparing volumes on Josephus, Nicolaus of Damascus, and the apocryphalAssumption of Moses, as well as a second volume of hisRoman Administration (see below, n. 9). Of all these, none appeared, although when Schalit died it was hoped that the first volume of the work on theAssumption of Moses might appear posthumously (Stern, “Abraham Schalit,” p. 6). Hopefully, the last word has not been said.
3. Mosnaim 2 (1933/34):296–305.
4. It will come as no surprise that the article is also missing from the two massive Josephus bibliographies now available: Feldman's (see n. 2 above) and H. Schreckenberg,Bibliographie zu Flavius Josephus (Leiden, 1968);Supplementband (Leiden, 1979).
5. For observations on comparable problems, see B. Bar-Kochva, “The Perception of the Battles of Judas Maccabaeus and Their Impact on Modern Israel,”Antike in der Moderne, ed. W. Schuller (=Xenia 15, pp. 15–23; Konstanz, 1985), 5–23; M. Braun, “King Herod as an Oriental Monarch,”Commentary 25 (1958):48–53; E. E. Urbach, “The Second Temple and Mishnaic Periods in the Eyes of Yitzhak Baer,”Proceedings of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities (Hebrew series) 6 (1983/84):59–82; G. I. Langmuir, “Tradition, History and Prejudice,”Jewish Social Studies 30 (1968):esp. 164–165; L. Poliakov, “Changing Views on Jewish History in the Wake of the Holocaust,”Yediot Yad Vashem 37 (Feb. 1967):14–17 (in Hebrew; in English inYad Vashem Bulletin 20 (April 1967):3–5).Cf. below, notes 37 and 77.