43 Or “tablets” or “plaques.” Josephus usually reserves the word δέλτος for an official tablet, often of copper or bronze, on which declarations are recorded: War 2.216; 7.110; Ant. 12.416; 14.191, 197, 219, 221, 266, 319; 16.48. Maintaining priestly genealogies was of practical as well as symbolic importance, and appears as a paramount concern after the return from exile (Ezra 2:61-3; Neh 7:63-5). Josephus’ access to such public registers (in Jerusalem?) after the devastation of 70 CE is often reasonably doubted (Cohen 1979:108 n. 33), though he anticipates the objection by insisting that priestly pedigrees were carefully preserved in the major Judean centers, and that after a war (including the recent one) the priestly survivors would quickly recreate (from fragments?) those records that had been destroyed ( Apion 1.31-5). Of course, this claim invites questions about the resulting documents’ accuracy, and Josephus’ proffered genealogy (above), which either omits a couple of names or is corrupted in our texts, does not inspire confidence. In general, further, when Josephus appeals to inscriptions (as in the passages from Ant. 14.188-89 and references above; cf. Moehring 1975; Pucci 1998) or when he invites readers to consult an original text ( Ant. 10.210; cf. S. Mason 1994:172-73), his appeal to sources is more of a rhetorical flourish than something he expects his audiences to pursue.