The main source for confusion is that different sources use different names for that certain person Matgenus / Mattan. He's said to be the father of Dido who founded Carthage. There are a lot of historians (greek, roman) who wrote about Dido, herself being a quite "popular" person, using different names for her father (Timaeus has "Mutto"; Justin: "Mutgo"; Servius: "Methres"; Virgil: "Belus"). Furthermore, there are problems regarding the tradition of Josephus' texts - there are medieval manuscripts in greek and armenian, with a wide range of variants.

So, everyone speaking about "Matgenus / Mattan" has to decide which source to follow and which tradition to prefer. Part of this decision is to think about possible mistakes by scribes who copied a manuscript. The difference between matgenos and mattenos in greek is just the difference between γ and τ (which may look quite similar in handwritings).

Someone believing that mutgo is the correct name for "Matgenus / Mattan" would prefer the latinised version "Matgenus" when editing Contra Apionem. Someone else may stick to a certain manuscript, keeping Mettenos / Mattenos (cf. Thackeray in the Loeb edition, p. 212/213; also Niese in the Weidmann edition).

I'll try to elaborate on the situation of manuscripts of Contra Apionem, but this will take some time...

The main source for confusion is that different sources use different names for that certain person Matgenus (Μάτγηνος) / Mattan. He's said to be the father of Dido who founded Carthage. There are a lot of historians (greek, roman) who wrote about Dido, herself being a quite "popular" person, using different names for her father (Timaeus has "Mutto" (cf. Josephus, C.A. I:157: Μύττυνος); Justin: "Mutgo"; Servius: "Methres"; Virgil: "Belus"). Furthermore, there are problems regarding the tradition of Josephus' texts - there are medieval manuscripts in greek and armenian, with a wide range of variants.

So, everyone speaking about "Matgenus / Mattan" has to decide which source to follow and which tradition to prefer. Part of this decision is to think about possible mistakes by scribes who copied a manuscript. The difference between matgenos and mattenos in greek is just the difference between γ and τ (which may look quite similar in handwritings).

Someone believing that mutgo is the correct name for "Matgenus / Mattan" would prefer the latinised version "Matgenus" when editing Contra Apionem. Someone else may stick to a certain manuscript, keeping Mettenos / Mattenos (cf. Thackeray in the Loeb edition, p. 212/213; also Niese in the Weidmann edition).

EDIT:

According to Siegert, "Flavius Josephus - Über die Ursprünglichkeit des Judentums (Contra Apionem)", only Codex S (Codex Schleusingensis, a greek codex dating before 1544) has Μάτγηνος instead of Μέττηνος. Since the greek editio princeps (Arlenius, Basel 1544) is based on Codex S, it's very likely to be the source for that version. Interestingly, it's again Codex S at I:157 with Μύτγονος instead of Μύττυνος!

The main source for confusion is that different sources use different names for that certain person Matgenus / Mattan. He's said to be the father of Dido who founded Carthage. There are a lot of historians (greek, roman) who wrote about Dido, herself being a quite "popular" person, using different names for her father. Furthermore, there are problems regarding the tradition of Josephus' texts - there are medieval manuscripts in greek and armenian, with a wide range of variants.

So, everyone speaking about "Matgenus / Mattan" has to decide which source to follow and which tradition to prefer. Part of this decision is to think about possible mistakes by scribes who copied a manuscript. The difference between matgenos and mattenos in greek is just the difference between γ and τ (which may look quite similar in handwritings).

Someone believing that mutgo is the correct name for "Matgenus / Mattan" would prefer the latinised version "Matgenus" when editing Contra Apionem. Someone else may stick to a certain manuscript, keeping Mettenos / Mattenos (cf. Thackeray in the Loeb edition).

I'll try to elaborate on the situation of manuscripts of Contra Apionem, but this will take some time...

The main source for confusion is that different sources use different names for that certain person Matgenus / Mattan. He's said to be the father of Dido who founded Carthage. There are a lot of historians (greek, roman) who wrote about Dido, herself being a quite "popular" person, using different names for her father (Timaeus has "Mutto"; Justin: "Mutgo"; Servius: "Methres"; Virgil: "Belus"). Furthermore, there are problems regarding the tradition of Josephus' texts - there are medieval manuscripts in greek and armenian, with a wide range of variants.

So, everyone speaking about "Matgenus / Mattan" has to decide which source to follow and which tradition to prefer. Part of this decision is to think about possible mistakes by scribes who copied a manuscript. The difference between matgenos and mattenos in greek is just the difference between γ and τ (which may look quite similar in handwritings).

Someone believing that mutgo is the correct name for "Matgenus / Mattan" would prefer the latinised version "Matgenus" when editing Contra Apionem. Someone else may stick to a certain manuscript, keeping Mettenos / Mattenos (cf. Thackeray in the Loeb edition, p. 212/213; also Niese in the Weidmann edition).

I'll try to elaborate on the situation of manuscripts of Contra Apionem, but this will take some time...