Causes of the Temple's Destruction
Excerpts from Josephus
These excerpts are
provided to give the general reader a knowledge of Josephus' writings on
various subjects. I have added my own commentary
to provide context. These excerpts are a work
in progress and are not meant at any time to include all that Josephus
has to say on a subject.
References are
given in the form of Book, Chapter, and Paragraph of the Whiston edition
together with the Section number of the Greek (Loeb) edition. So "Ant.
18.1.6 23" indicates Book 18, Chapter
1, Paragraph 6 in Whiston, and in the Loeb edition, Book 18, Section 23.
- G. Goldberg
Why the Almighty Caused Jerusalem and His Temple to
be Destroyed
The burning of Jerusalem and its
Temple in 70 CE/AD created a profound dilemma for faithful Jews of the
time. Hadn't religious observance throughout the land reached new heights
in the years preceding the war? Wasn't the revolt against Rome directly
the result of zealous people vowing to have "no master except the Lord?"
(Ant. 18.1.6 23). Then why did the Lord allow the Romans to crush
the revolt and destroy his Temple?
Josephus offered a variety
of solutions to this problem. His overall goal was to defend the Jews against
the accusation that their Lord had deserted them. A further goal, which
he only hinted at, was to pave the way for approval by the Roman authorities,
at some future time, for the rebuilding of the Temple.
Contents
Death of the High Priest
The Pollution of the City
Pollution of the Temple with Blood
Assassins in the Temple
The Slaughter of the Guards
The Murder of Zacharias
The Lamentation of
Josephus
The Fulfillment of Ancient Prophecies
The Temple is Set on Fire
A Comforting Thought
Omens of Destruction
Star and
Comet
Light Around
the Altar
Cow Gives
Birth to Lamb
The Eastern
Gate
Miraculous
Phenomenon of Chariots in the Air
Sound of
a Great Multitude
Jesus son
of Ananias: A Voice from the East (A must-read.)
Prophecy of the Square Temple
Death of the High Priest
War 4.5.2 318
I should not be wrong in saying that the
capture of the city began with the death of Ananus; and that the overthrow
of the walls and the downfall of the Jewish state dated from the day on
which the Jews beheld their high priest, the captain of their salvation,
butchered in the heart of Jerusalem.
A man on every ground revered and of the highest
integrity, Ananus, with all the distinction of his birth, his rank and
the honours to which he had attained, had delighted to treat the very humblest
as his equals. Unique in his love of liberty and an enthusiast for democracy,
he on all occasions put the public welfare above his private interests.
To maintain peace was his supreme object.
Comment.
The revolt in
part derived from class warfare. The High Priests had authority over the
Temple worship and often acted as representatives of the Jews in dealing
with the Roman occupation government. They had an interest in maintaining
peace, some of them sincerely for the good of the nation, others no doubt
to protect their own wealth and power.
As a result,
many revolutionaries, especially the most extreme group, the Zealots,
considered their priests as the
enemy. Although some of the younger and poorer priests joined the revolution,
others opposed it and, as a result, were assassinated.
In the passage
quoted above, Josephus explicitly connects Ananus' murder by the Zealots
to the destruction of Jerusalem. This is one of his major themes, which
we might call "The Pollution of the City." No religious motivation, Josephus
is saying, can justify the atrocities that the Zealots committed. Not everything
can be done for the Divine Name. The Lord destroyed the Holy City because
the people had violated the basic principles of His Law and made the Temple
unfit for worship.
The Pollution of the City
War 4.5.2 323
I cannot but think that it was because God had doomed this
city to destruction, as a polluted city, and was resolved to purge his
sanctuary by fire, that he cut off those who clung to them with such tender
affection.
Comment
This explicitly states Josephus'
opinion that the city was destroyed because of its transgressions during
the war.
Pollution of the Temple with Blood
Assassins in the Temple
Antiquities 20.8.5 164-166
Certain
of these robbers went up to the city, as if they were going to worship
God, while they had daggers under their garments; and, by thus mingling
themselves among the multitude, they slew Jonathan [the high priest]; and
as this murder was never avenged, the robbers went up with the greatest
security at the festivals after this time; and having weapons concealed
in like manner as before, and mingling themselves among the multitude,
they slew certain of their own enemies, and were subservient to other men
for money; and slew others not only in remote parts of the city, but in
the Temple itself also; for they had the boldness to murder men there,
without thinking of the impiety of which they were guilty.
And this seems to me to have been the reason why God, out of his hatred
to these men's wickedness, rejected our city; and as for the Temple, he
no longer esteemed it sufficiently pure for him to inhabit therein, but
brought the Romans upon us, and threw a fire upon the city to purge it;
and brought upon us, our wives, and children, slavery - as desirous to
make us wiser by our calamities.
Comment
Josephus here seems
to make a distinction between two concepts. First, the wickedness of these
assassins, some ten years before the war, caused the divine rejection of
Jerusalem; but furthermore, the Temple was no longer "pure" enough for
the Lord to inhabit. In Jewish Law, ritual uncleanness caused by contact
with blood can be removed by purification with fire. So beyond simply abandoning
Jerusalem and its people, the area is purified so that it can again become
fit for heavenly contact. The people are not rejected, but only made wiser
by these calamities.
This may indicate why all
the people were punished, and not just the murderers. Ritual impurity needed
to be dealt with, regardless of its source. And the people as a whole did
not work hard enough to keep the criminals from defiling the Temple - Josephus
states the murder of Jonathan "was never avenged," thus emboldening them
- everyone had a share in the impurity.
The Slaughter of the Guards
War 4.5.1 305-313
The Idumaeans ascended through the city to the Temple.
The Zealots were also in great expectation of their coming, and earnestly
waited for them. When therefore these were entering, they also came boldly
out of the inner Temple, and mixing themselves with the Idumaeans, they
attacked the guards; and those that were upon the watch, but were fallen
asleep, they killed as they were asleep; but as those that were now awakened
made a cry, the whole multitude arose, and in the amazement they were in,
caught hold of their arms immediately, and betook themselves to their own
defence. So long as they thought they were only the Zealots that attacked
them, they went on boldly, as hoping to overpower them by their number;
but when they saw others pressing in upon them also, they perceived the
Idumaeans were got in; and the greater part of them laid aside their arms,
together with their courage, and betook themselves to lamentations. But
some few of the younger guards covered themselves with their armor
and valiantly received the Idumaeans, and for a while protected the weaker
people. Others, indeed, gave a signal to those that were in the city of
the calamities they were in; but when these were also made sensible that
the Idumaeans were come in, none of them durst come to their assistance;
only they returned the terrible echo of wailing, and lamenting their misfortunes.
A great howling of the women was excited also, every one having a relative
in the guards who was in danger of being killed.
The Zealots also joined the the shouts raised by
the Idumaeans; and the storm itself rendered the cry more terrible; nor
did the Idumaeans spare anybody...and acted in the same manner as to those
that supplicated for their lives, as to those that fought them, insomuch
that they ran those through with their swords who desired them to remember
the kinship there was between them and begged of them to have regard to
their common Temple. There was no place for flight nor any hope for preservation;
they were driven one upon another in heaps, so were they slain. Thus the
greater part were driven together by force, as there was now no place of
retreat, and the murderers were upon them, and having no other way, they
threw themselves down headlong into the city, undergoing a more miserable
destruction, in my opinion, than that which they avoided, because it was
voluntary. And now the outer Temple was all of it overflowed with blood;
and that day, as it dawned, saw eight thousand five hundred dead there.
Comment
This massacre of their countrymen
on the part of the revolutionary extremists and their allies occurred within
the court of the Temple itself. These and other murders, such as that of
Jonathan, are associated by Josephus with the irrevocable pollution of
the Temple. In Jewish Law, human blood and corpses cause ritual uncleanness;
add to this that the blood was shed in the atrocity of mass murder, and
the implication is that the Temple could never be cleansed.
The Idumaeans were descendants
of the Biblical Edomites and had been forcibly converted to Judaism by
the Hasmonean kings. The revolutionary party, the Zealots, manipulated
them to increase their forces during the revolt.
The Murder of Zacharias
War 4.5.4 335-344
And now these Zealots and Idumaeans were quite
weary of simple massacre, so they had the audacity to set up mock trials
and courts of justice for that purpose. They intended to have Zacharias,
the son of Baris, one of the most eminent of the citizens, slain. What
provoked them against him was that hatred of wickedness and love of liberty
which were so eminent in him; he was also a rich man, so that by taking
him off, they did not only hope to seize his effects, but also to get rid
of a man that had great power to destroy them.
So they called together, by a public proclamation,
seventy of the principal men of the populace, for a show trial, as if they
were real judges, although they had no proper authority. In front of
these citizens Zacharias was accused of a design to betray their city to
the Romans and to have traitorously sent to Vespasian for that purpose.
Now there appeared no proof or sign of what he was accused; but they affirmed
themselves that they were well persuaded that so it was, and desired that
such their affirmation might be taken for sufficient evidence.
Now when Zacharias clearly saw that there was no
way remaining for his escape from them, as having been treacherously called
before them and imprisoned, but with no intention of a legal trial, he
took great liberty of speech in that despair of life he was under. Accordingly
he stood up, and laughed at their pretended accusation, and in a few words
confuted the crimes laid to his charge; after which he turned his speech
to his accusers, and went over distinctly all their transgressions of the
Law, and made heavy lamentations upon the confusion they had brought public
affairs into.
In the meantime the Zealots grew tumultuous, and
could scarce refrain from drawing their swords, although they designed
to preserve the appearance and show of judicature to the end. They were
also desirous, on other accounts, to try the judges, whether they would
be mindful of what was just at their own peril.
Now the seventy judges brought in their verdict,
that the person accused was not guilty -- choosing rather to die themselves
with him, than to have his death laid at their doors.
Hereupon there arose a great clamor by the Zealots
upon his acquittal, and they were all indignant at the judges for not having
understood that the authority that was given them was but in jest. So two
of the boldest of them fell upon Zacharias in the middle of the Temple,
and slew him. And as he fell down dead they bantered him, and said, "Now
you have our verdict also, and a surer release." They then threw him down
out of the Temple into the valley beneath it.
Comment
The Zealots add the
sin of bearing false witness to the crime of murder in the Temple.
As a side note: This passage
has an intriguing parallel with the Book of Matthew: "...upon you [is]
all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous
Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between
the sanctuary and the altar." (Matt. 23:35) Can this last victim,
murdered in the Temple, be the same as the "Zecharias son of Baris" referred
to above?
If so, it would be counted
either as a prophecy that became fulfilled or a confusion on the part of
Matthew. However, in this case, the resemblance seems to be mere coincidence.
As Thackeray points out in his translation (Loeb edition), Matthew can
be read as referring to Zecharias son of Jehoiada, who was stoned
to death in the Temple court (2 Chronicles 24:21); Matthew had confused
his name with Zechariach son of Berechiah. This is a reasonable explanation;
still, the coincidence is quite curious.
The Lamentation of Josephus
War 5.1.4 19-20
The darts that were thrown by the engines [of the seditious factions]
came with that force, that they went over all the buildings and the Temple
itself, and fell upon the priests and those that were about the sacred
offices; insomuch that many persons who came thither with great zeal from
the ends of the earth to offer sacrifices at this celebrated place, which
was esteemed holy by all mankind, fell down before their own sacrifices
themselves, and sprinkled that altar which was venerable among all men,
both Greeks and barbarians, with their own blood. The dead bodies of strangers
were mingled together with those of their own country, and those of profane
persons with those of the priests, and the blood of all sorts of dead carcasses
stood in lakes in the holy courts themselves.
Oh most wretched city, what misery so great as this
didst thou suffer from the Romans, when they came to purify thee from thy
internal pollutions! For thou couldst be no longer a place fit for God,
nor couldst thou longer survive, after thou hadst been a sepulchre for
the bodies of thine own people, and hast made the Holy House itself a burying-place
in this civil war of thine. Yet mayst thou again grow better, if perchance
thou wilt hereafter appease the anger of that God who is the author of
thy destruction.
But I must restrain myself from these passions by
the rules of History, since this is not a proper time for domestic lamentation,
but for historical narrations.
Comment
The revolt fell apart into
factions vying for power. The actions of the Jews against the Temple during
this civil war, Josephus here asserts, were more terrible than that inflicted
by the Romans. Again emphasizing the unclean blood in the Temple, Josephus
laments that the later destruction by the Romans was necessary, and that
these conquerors were acting as agents of the Lord -- almost as priests
-- in their role as purifiers.
There is also a hint here,
hidden in the form of an emotional outburst, that the Temple should be
allowed to be rebuilt. "Mayst thou again grow better," he asks, pointing
toward a return to its former state, and expects this after the Jews "appease"
the author of their destruction, indicating that they act peacefully both
toward heaven and its agents of destruction, the Romans. But it is too
soon after the war, which greatly angered the Roman populace, for Josephus
to make an explicit appeal to the Emperor that the Temple be rebuilt.
The Fulfillment of Ancient Prophecies
War 4.6.3 381-388
But these Zealots came at last to that degree of
barbarity as not to bestow a burial either on those slain in the city,
or on those that lay along the roads; but as if they had made an
agreement to cancel both the laws of their country and the laws of nature,
an, at the same time that they defiled men with their wicked action, they
would pollute the Divinity itself also, they left the dead bodies to putrify
under the sun.
...These men, therefore, trampled upon all the laws
of man, and laughed at the Laws of God; and for the oracles of the prophets,
they ridiculed them as the tricks of jugglers. Yet did these prophets foretell
many things concerning virtue and vice, by the transgression of which these
Zealots occasioned the fulfilling of those very prophecies belonging to
their country.
For there was a certain ancient oracle of those
men, that the city should then be taken and the sanctuary burnt, by right
of war, when a sedition should invade the Jews and their own hands should
pollute the Temple of God. Now, while these Zealots did not disbelieve
these predictions, they made themselves the instruments of their accomplishment.
Comment
This passage segues into a
different explanation of the destruction: that it had been prophesied in
advance. The theme of prophecy is quite important to Josephus -- indeed,
he owed his life to one -- and throughout his work he stresses that the
observable fulfillment of prophecy is proof of the truth of the Jewish
Bible.
Yet the idea that Jerusalem
was destroyed as the fulfillment of a prophecy is not manifestly the same
as stating it was destroyed because of the sins of the people. In the above
passage, Josephus tries to link the two concepts. The prophecy is not that
the Temple is destined to be destroyed, but that it would be destroyed
due to a war started by the Jews that would pollute the Temple. This is
an interesting sliding between two concepts. If it was ordained in advance
that the Jews would pollute the Temple, how can they be held accountable?
Did the Lord cause the destruction to fulfill a pre-ordained plan or instead
to punish contemporary sins?
Josephus either wants it both
ways, or else oscillates between them as events dictate. In a similar fashion,
he notes elsewhere that the Pharisees, with whom he aligned himself, believed
in free will but also that some things, although not all, were decreed
by fate (War 2.8.14). The two concepts of the destruction pose the
old question, are humans predestined or do they have free will?
Incidentally, the "certain
ancient oracle" cited by Josephus in this passage is unknown to present
scholars.
The Temple is Set on Fire
Introductory Comment
Here is Josephus' description
of the moment when the first flame is put to the Temple. The agent of destruction
is an anonymous Roman soldier, acting impulsively against the orders of
the commander, Titus -- but obeying the orders, Josephus implies, of the
highest authority.
War 6.4.5 249-253
So Titus retired into the tower of Antonia, and resolved
to storm the Temple the next day, early in the morning, with his whole
army, and to encamp round about the Holy House; but, as for that House,
God had for certain long ago doomed it to the fire; and now that fatal
day was come, according to the revolution of the ages: it was the tenth
day of the month Lous, [Av,] upon which it was formerly burnt by the king
of Babylon; although these flames took their rise from the Jews themselves,
and were occasioned by them; for upon Titus's retiring, the seditious lay
still for a little while, and then attacked the Romans again, when those
that guarded the Holy House fought with those that quenched the fire that
was burning in the inner court of the Temple; but these Romans put the
Jews to flight, and proceeded as far as the Holy House itself.
At which time one of the soldiers, without staying
for any orders, and without any concern or dread upon him at so great an
undertaking, and being hurried on by a certain divine fury, snatched somewhat
out of the materials that were on fire, and being lifted up by another
soldier, he set fire to a golden window, through which there was a passage
to the rooms that were round about the Holy House, on the north side of
it. As the flames went upward the Jews made a great clamour, such as so
mighty an affliction required, and ran together to prevent it; and now
they spared not their lives any longer, nor suffered anything to restrain
their force, since that Holy House was perishing, for whose sake it was
that they kept such a guard upon it.
Comment
We have here all three possible
explanations for the Temple destruction: that it was a chance act of war,
that it was a Divine response to the murderous actions of the seditious
party, or that it was fated according to some vast and mysterious plan.
The aspect of fate is stated
by Josephus in saying that "God for certain long ago doomed it to the fire,"
and then pointing out that the Second Temple was set on fire by the Romans
on the same day that the First Temple was destroyed by the Babylonians
in 586 BCE. (Thackeray notes that this date accords with Jeremiah 53:12
but not with the seventh of Av in 2 Kings 25:8, and that Jewish tradition
memorializes both on the Ninth of Av.) This would seem to indicate a design
greater than a direct response to freely committed sin. This was, says
Josephus, "according to the revolution of the ages" -- again, not due to
specific human actions.
Josephus says rather directly
that is was the Lord who started the flames by directing the activity of
the anonymous Roman soldier. For this soldier set the fire "without any
concern or dread upon him at so great an undertaking," as though he had
the authority to do what he was doing. When he put the fire to the golden
window he was "being hurried on by a certain divine fury." The Greek is
daimnoioi horme tini chromenos, which can be translated also as
in Thackeray's version "moved by some supernatural impulse." The soldier
is an agent of heaven, and his impulsive attack may reflect divine anger
at the people for their pollution of the Temple. The emotional "fury" is
different from the cool, mathematical "revolution of the ages" that calendrically
pre-determined the fate of the Temple. Josephus has jumped from one explanation
to the other. Can they be joined into one?
A Comforting Thought
War 6.4.8 267-268
Now, although any one would lament the destruction
of such a work as this was, since it was the most admirable of all the
works that we have seen or heard of, both for its curious structure and
its magnitude, and also for the glorious reputation it had for its holiness;
yet might such a one comfort himself with this thought, that it was fate
that decreed it so to be, which is inevitable, both as to living creatures
and as to works and places also.
However, one cannot but wonder at the accuracy of
this period thereto relating; for the same month and day were not observed,
as I said before, wherein the Holy House was burnt formerly by the Babylonians.
Comment
Josephus finds comforting
the idea that "fate had decreed" the destruction, that it was "inevitable."
In this way he counters the idea that the deity of the Jews had abandoned
them or had been defeated by the Romans and their deities. Everything the
Romans did was at the behest of, not in spite of, divine will.
Why had fate decreed the destruction?
Again Josephus points out the identity of the date with that of the Babylonian
destruction. So even though he wants to teach that the people were being
punished -- the Pharisaic view that humans had free will -- yet here he
again oscillates to the concept that everything is ordained in advance.
The First Temple destruction was also the product of divine will, Josephus
states elsewhere, as it was foretold by Jeremiah (Antiquities 10.8.3 142).
In the excerpts that follow
we will see how Josephus attempts to reconcile these views by saying that
fate can be avoided if people would only heed the heavenly warnings and
cease from their foolishness.
Omens of Destruction
Introductory Comment
The third paragraph of the
fifth chapter of Book 6 of the War contains a fascinating series
of omens that foretold the fall of the Temple well in advance of the beginning
of the revolt. Josephus stresses the theme that the destruction had to
was predestined. This destiny seems detached from the sins of the people,
for these omens are not connected to any particular evil. They are:
Star
and Comet
Light
Around the Altar
Cow
Gives Birth to Lamb
The
Eastern Gate
Miraculous
Phenomenon of Chariots in the Air
Sound of a Great Multitude
Jesus
son of Ananias: A Voice from the East
Does this mean the war and
destruction could not be helped, but were only parts of a predestined and
mysterious plan? In a comment on these signs Josephus gives his view: these
were warnings from the Deity, and if only the omens had been heeded, disaster
could have been averted. I discuss this further below.
This paragraph follows immediately
upon Josephus' description of the burning of the Temple. It is the means
by which he steps back from the awesome drama he has been relating and
puts it in the context of world history and the philosophy of human folly.
War 6.5.3 288-309
Thus were the miserable people persuaded by these
deceivers, and such as belied God himself; while they did not attend nor
give credit to the signs that were so evident, and did so plainly foretell
their future desolation, but, like men infatuated, without either eyes
to see or minds to consider, did not regard the denunciations that God
made to them.
Star and Comet
Thus there was a star resembling a sword, which stood
over the city, and a comet, that continued a whole year.
Light Around the Altar
Thus also before the Jews' rebellion, and before
those commotions which preceded the war, when the people were come in great
crowds to the feast of unleavened bread, on the eighth day of the month
Xanthicus, [Nisan, April, about a week before Passover] and at the ninth
hour of the night, so great a light shone round the altar and the holy
house, that it appeared to be bright day time; which lasted for half an
hour. This light seemed to be a good sign to the unskillful, but was so
interpreted by the sacred scribes, as to portend those events that followed
immediately upon it.
Cow Gives Birth to Lamb
At the same festival also, a heifer, as she was
led by the high priest to be sacrificed, brought forth a lamb in the midst
of the temple.
The Eastern Gate
Moreover, the eastern gate of the inner temple,
which was of brass, and vastly heavy, and had been with difficulty shut
by twenty men, and rested upon a basis armed with iron, and had bolts fastened
very deep into the firm floor, which was there made of one entire stone,
was seen to be opened of its own accord about the sixth hour of the night.
Now those that kept watch in the temple came hereupon running to the captain
of the temple, and told him of it; who then came up thither, and not without
great difficulty was able to shut the gate again.
This also appeared to the vulgar to be a very happy
prodigy, as if God did thereby open them the gate of happiness. But the
men of learning understood it, that the security of their holy house was
dissolved of its own accord, and that the gate was opened for the advantage
of their enemies. So these publicly declared that the signal foreshowed
the desolation that was coming upon them.
Miraculous Phenomenon of Chariots in
the Air
Besides these, a few days after that feast,
on the one and twentieth day of the month Artemisius, [Iyar, May or June]
a certain prodigious and incredible phenomenon appeared: I suppose the
account of it would seem to be a fable, were it not related by those that
saw it, and were not the events that followed it of so considerable a nature
as to deserve such signals; for, before sun-setting, chariots and troops
of soldiers in their armor were seen running about among the clouds, and
surrounding of cities.
Sound of a Great Multitude
Moreover, at that feast which we call Pentecost,
as the priests were going by night into the inner [court of the temple,]
as their custom was, to perform their sacred ministrations, they said that,
in the first place, they felt a quaking, and heard a great noise, and after
that they heard a sound as of a great multitude, saying, "Let us remove
hence."
Jesus son of Ananias: A Voice from the East
But, what is still more terrible, there was
one Jesus, the son of Ananus, a plebeian and a husbandman, who, four years
before the war began, and at a time when the city was in very great peace
and prosperity, came to that feast whereon it is our custom for every one
to make tabernacles to God in the temple [Sukkot, autumn, 62 CE], began
on a sudden to cry aloud,
"A voice from the east,
a voice from the west,
a voice from the four winds,
a voice against Jerusalem and the Holy House,
a voice against the bridegrooms and the brides,
and a voice against this whole people!"
This was his cry, as he went about by day and by night, in all the lanes
of the city.
However, certain of the most eminent among the populace
had great indignation at this dire cry of his, and took up the man, and
gave him a great number of severe stripes; yet did not he either say any
thing for himself, or any thing peculiar to those that chastised him, but
still went on with the same words which he cried before.
Hereupon the magistrates, supposing, as the case
proved to be, that this was a sort of divine fury in the man, brought him
to the Roman procurator, where he was whipped till his bones were laid
bare; yet he did not make any supplication for himself, nor shed any tears,
but turning his voice to the most lamentable tone possible, at every stroke
of the whip his answer was,
"Woe, woe to Jerusalem!"
And when Albinus (for he was then our procurator) asked him, Who he
was? and whence he came? and why he uttered such words? he made no manner
of reply to what he said, but still did not leave off his melancholy ditty,
till Albinus took him to be a madman, and dismissed him.
Now, during all the time that passed before the
war began, this man did not go near any of the citizens, nor was seen by
them while he said so; but he every day uttered these lamentable words,
as if it were his premeditated vow,
"Woe, woe to Jerusalem!"
Nor did he give ill words to any of those that beat him every day, nor
good words to those that gave him food; but this was his reply to all men,
and indeed no other than a melancholy presage of what was to come.
This cry of his was the loudest at the festivals;
and he continued this ditty for seven years and five months, without growing
hoarse, or being tired therewith, until the very time that he saw his presage
in earnest fulfilled in our siege, when it ceased; for as he was going
round upon the wall, he cried out with his utmost force,
"Woe, woe to the city again, and to the people, and
to the Holy House!"
And just as he added at the last,
"Woe, woe to myself also!"
there came a stone out of one of the engines, and smote him, and killed
him immediately; and as he was uttering the very same presages he gave
up the ghost.
Comment
These astounding tales apparently
circulated among Jews after the war and were then collected by Josephus.
They show the need of the populace to make sense of the destruction as
well as Josephus' own interest in prophecy, which he uses here to indicate
to his non-Jewish readers that the Temple and the City were not burned
at the whim of the conquering Romans but were deliberately allowed, if
not destined, to be destroyed by the Deity.
The omens fall into interesting
groups. The star and comet always accompany momentous events; one recalls
the comet presaging the death of Julius Caesar and the star at the birth
of Jesus of Nazareth.The other omens are associated with Jewish festivals.
The next six signs that are described occur within days of each other,
in an unspecified year, but probably in the early 60s. Just before the
Passover celebration three of these signs occur together, and just after
it the chariots in the air appear. Fifty days after this same Passover,
on Shavuot (Pentecost), the earthquake and strange sounds occur. And Jesus
ben Ananias first makes his appearance at the festival of Sukkot.
One notes that Passover is
a spring festival, and Sukkot an autumn one, suggesting that these all
occurred within the same year, which, by the clues given (Albinus as procurator,
the duration of Jesus' lamentation), would have been 62. As it happens,
Josephus was most likely in Rome in that year, not in Jerusalem
(see the Chronology), so he is forced to report these signs at second hand.
Students of the New
Testament cannot fail to have noticed parallels in these passages with
events surrounding Jesus of Nazareth. The fantastic events occurring at
the Passover bring to mind those related at the death of Jesus thirty years
earlier, also at a Passover, when the curtain of the Temple was split
in two, and the earth shook (Matthew 27:51). At the following Pentecost
the apostles have a vision of Jesus and begin to speak in tongues, while
at Josephus' Pentecost sounds and voices are heard -- there are auditory
miracles in both texts.
The sad story of Jesus son
of Ananias related by Josephus has a number of parallels with the New Testament,
the first of which is the coincidence of a man named Jesus prophesying
against the Temple. As the name "Jesus" (Joshua) is one of the most common
held by men in Josephus' works, it should not be taken as significant in
itself. But one wonders if the tales of the two Jesuses became intertwined
by their tellers, with elements of one story creeping into the narrative
of the other. For this hypothesis one notes several parallels.
-
Woe to the people - Matt. 23 "Woe
to you, scribes and pharisees!" (The Greek word translated as "woe" is
"aiai" in Josephus, "ouai" in Matthew.)
-
Prediction of the Temple Destruction
- Matt. 24:2, which is associated with the "woes".
-
The leaders of Jerusalem bring
the doomsayer to the Roman governor - Matt. 27:2. As an aside -- Whiston
mistranslates this section to refer to "our rulers," not "the rulers."
Readers who have studied my article on Josephus' account of Jesus will
recognize this important point. Josephus does not use the first person
here, despite Whiston (why did he do this?); see rather the Loeb edition
for the Greek "hoi archontes" and Thackeray's correct translation.
-
The governor interrogates him, but the accused
says nothing to defend himself. (Matt. 27:13-14)
-
The accusation as unclear in Josephus' story as in
the New Testament. The grounds here are simply said to be " supernatural
impulse." What crime is that for the leaders?
The major difference is that the
nonresponding Jesus ben Ananias is let free in Josephus, and allowed to
continue his woes against the city; Jesus of Nazareth was not set free,
although Pilate was supposedly inclined in that way. What is the
difference between the cases? Was it due to additional claims the
earlier Jesus made about himself?
An odd coincidence was that
Jesus ben Ananias arose near the beginning of Albinus' governorship, very
soon after the death of James the brother of Jesus of Nazareth.
Prophecy of the Square Temple
War 6.5.4 310-311
Now if any one consider these things, he will find that God takes care
of mankind, and by all ways possible foreshows to our race what is for
their preservation; but that men perish by those miseries which they madly
and voluntarily bring upon themselves; for the Jews, by demolishing the
tower of Antonia, had made their Temple four-square, while at the same
time they had it written in their sacred oracles, -- "That then should
their city be taken, as well as their Holy House, when once their Temple
should become four-square."
Comment
The source for this prophecy
is unknown today.
Josephus repeats once more
his theme that the prophecies and omens are meant as warnings. This
leaves the paradox: a prophecy that is a warning is not a prophecy, for
it would never come to pass if the warning were heeded. Obeying divine
warnings would thus remove the proof of the truth of divine speech. Then
people who do good by their own accord would never find reason to have
faith in holy writings. Perhaps this is the ultimate, if unintended, direction
of Josephus' interpretation of history.
Flavius Josephus Home Page
|