640 Although Josephus again uses φησί and the third-person indicative (as in 1.187-89), there are good reasons to suspect that this section constitutes paraphrase of his source, rather than direct citation. The content of this section goes much further than the examples cited in 1.192-93: the reference here to deaths is not matched by the examples to follow, where the pardons and exemptions seem to portray a more lenient atmosphere. Given his investment in this theme, it seems unlikely that Josephus would choose weak examples from his source; the generalizing comment in this section must represent either Ps.-Hecataeus’ exaggeration or that of Josephus. In this treatise Josephus makes much of Judean willingness to undergo torture and even death (1.42-43; 2.232-34, 272), with vocabulary closely parallel to that employed here (see below), so the exaggeration makes excellent sense as his own. It would not be the only time he claims his sources say more than they do (cf. 1.108, 132, etc.). Further, the unexplained “these” (see below) makes no sense in a citation, but refers to Josephus’ own comment on the laws in 1.190. Thus, against other editors, I decline to use quotation marks in this section and treat is as largely Josephan. It therefore cannot be used to reconstruct the opinion or date of his source.