Dr. Yechiam Sorek raises in the seminar he is giving to his students these days, where did the bodies of Masada suicides disappear to, and where did rumors emerge that the Jews revolted in Egypt and Karini (today's Libya) elsewhere in the writings of Yosef ben Matityahu, and perhaps these are the same people?
The story of the suicide in Masada, in the year 73 AD, in the midst of the Roman siege and the beginning of the Herodian enclave, as recorded by Joseph ben Mattathias, was and still is a bone of contention among scholars - was it or was it not?!
The difficulty in shattering the suicide myth involves several factors, and the main one, although mythological and sentimental, and therefore will not hold water on the one hand, but strengthened by the national-nationalist ethos on the other hand, is the Zionist aspect. The Masada incident naturally fascinated the Zionist leadership and its words to prove the historical decline of the Jewish people, who seek to be a people and a nation, and to characterize the Junge Juden (Jewish youth) as a noble expression of the new Jew, the young-healthy-fresh, in contrast to the anti-Semitic nickname of the mob The Berliner - Judenjungen ("Jews").
In 1919, the poet Yitzhak Lamdan wrote the poem "Masada", which served as a sort of light and totum for the pioneers of the Third Aliyah, in the form of "Shove Masada will not fall". The Beitarim anthem "Tagher" is characterized by the two lines: "To die or conquer the mountain / Yodeft (in two sgolim), Masada Beitar", and "really" did not bother them, Beitarim, the fact that all three of these strongholds fell into the hands of the Romans. And in general, on the one hand, everyone tried to smear the scent of Josephus as a traitor and as a Roman collaborator, and on the other hand, they tended to hang their historiographical jewel on Masada's story, the work of that author. Indeed, pornography is already a question of geography.
The Zionist youth movements were activated to bring the trainees to Masada and tell there the history of the heroic system of the fanatics. In 1942, when there was a fear that the Nazi armies under the command of the "Desert Fox", Field Marshal Erwin Rommel, would invade British Palestine from Egypt, a kind of defense, fortification and perhaps even suicide system was planned in the Carmel area, and this was called the "Masada Plan".
Moreover, the IDF made sure to indoctrinate recruits on the top of the Masada and tourists were instructed to reach the audio-visual vision above that top. Indeed, a heavy, pro-partisan system was built, and still exists, around a myth on its part, and it repelled any attempt to crack the myth even a little.
Like Ben, under the auspices of Zionism, the Bengurionist Israeli government and the IDF (how could it not be?!), Professor-Chief of Staff Yigal Yedin set out to carry out the excavations at the Masada, and when everyone is led to find confirmation and corroboration for the myth, considering the self-fulfilling prophecy, he licks every archeological find and scrap And was crowned as a great spoil, and thereby closed the circle that supports the myth from Masada.
But May? A number of weighty factors helped and are helping to dispel the aforementioned myth:
First - there is no confirmation or corroboration for the story in Roman historiography, and the claim that the Romans refused to let their smell be crushed, because many Roman failures were recorded in their ancient historiography, including the great rebellion of 73-66 CE suppressed by the Romans and considered an impressive achievement even in the face of the difficult atmosphere that prevailed So throughout the Roman Empire following the death of Emperor Nero and the civil war between the four who claimed the imperial crown.
Second - there is no confirmation or confirmation of the great rebellion outside of Jerusalem in the literature of the Sages, which began to be written and started to be prepared, from the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple (70 AD), and one that did not even begin, which is simply amazing, blaming not only the fanatics ("gratuitous hatred") , but indirectly even God, who as if turned his face away from Zion. In this literature, which covers tens of thousands of pages, her side is not mentioned and certainly not the myth of suicide. You will say that the Torah and the Halacha strongly disapprove of acts of suicide (but what about "Kiddush Hashem"?!), however such an act, which is unprecedented by any standard, deserved reference in the literature written and compiled close to the events of the rebellion.
Thirdly - it is true that around Masada important details were uncovered that testify to the Roman siege such as the remains of the camps, the dyke, the battery ("the white rock" according to Joseph ben Matthew) and the stones of the catapults, but the main detail was missing and it was the remains of the thousand suicides - the warriors and their families. Many researchers and diggers asked to find the remains of the Sikri fanatics, Masada warriors. They turned over every possible stone many kilometers away and brought up clay in their hands. Even the remains of skulls and bones found by Prof. Yigal Yedin, which were published as an intoxicating and pompous international discovery, were proven to belong to Byzantine monks who settled in the place hundreds of years after the rebellion.
Fourthly - the items of the Roman siege - camps, battery and catapult stones, may support the assumption that a tactical exercise was held there in order not to leave the forces unoccupied, in terms of military policy "since then".
Fifth - the various items of equipment, including even the regular braids of a woman/girl, the dates on their flesh, the vandalism left by the settlers in the place, who were undoubtedly jealous, and more, they have nothing to indicate not only the size of the jealous public that found refuge in Masada, but also its tragic fate as written by Joseph ben Matthew. The ostracon found in one of Masada's caves, with the inscription "Ben Yair" ("Ben Yair" in the original), is meant to hint at the presence of the commander of the Sikri fanatics - Elazar ben Yair - but not about his fate, and by the way, why was only this ostracon found?!
Shashit - Elazar ben Yair gives a first speech to the fighters, in which he wants to encourage them to commit suicide, but in vain, the majority of the public opposed the aforementioned deadly move, and therefore he gave them another persuasive speech, the main of which is the immortality of the soul' and suddenly, "the desire seized them to kill their wives and sons and send a hand with their souls" (Jewish Wars, Book VII, 389), which seems surprising and exaggerated, and perhaps there is a closing of the circle between the repentance of Joseph ben Matthieu, five years before, when he was the commander of the rebellion in Galilee, to commit suicide in the fortress of Yodfat, and "their success" of Masada fighters. In any case, the desert took this secret into the cracks of its sands.
So much for the known theories, and from here on something new:
Seventh - and thus we will add here an interesting interpretative segment, which has not yet been brought to the research table. It is known that Jerusalem, before it was besieged, was the scene of a hard and cruel struggle between the leaders of the fanatical groups: between Yohanan of Gush Halab, Shimon bar Giura, Eleazar ben Shimon and Eleazar ben Yair - the commander of the murderous and tyrannical Sikyria, those called in the terminology of Joseph ben Matthew as "bandits" ("listai" and "archilistai" from the Greek), and "strangers of strife" ("atasiastai" from the Greek). Even Sage sources call them by the name "Biryonim". Their name comes from the "sika" - the short dagger they used to hide between the folds of their robes and thus eliminate their opponents. Their murderous lust was for nothing in the almost besieged and besieged Jerusalem.
The leader of these was Menachem, a tyrannical and power-hungry leader, who wanted to take control of all of Jerusalem and make it his dominion. It was a manipulator and opportunist who likened himself to the Messiah King and who was known for his unrestrained cruelty. Many of his supporters, his loyalists, were captured by Eleazar (the son of the high priest Hananiah, who was murdered by the same zealots) and his supporters and executed. This move resulted in the flight of the rest of the Sikris from Jerusalem, led by Elazar ben Yair, the rest of Menachem's body, towards Masada.
These easily took over the place and made it the expected focus of their confrontation with the Roman armies.
And in the meantime, "until the Romans came", the Sicris engaged in robbery and looting, and who did they rob? the Jews around. They raided Ein Gedi, harassed the Jews and even murdered 700 of them, including women, children and the elderly, and then looted and emptied their homes. The booty was transferred, of course to Masada. In this context, archeology did us a "great favor" by finding the remains of the slaughterers, the result of the murder of the Sikriites, in a mass grave in Ein Gedi, and apparently the Sikriites tried to collect sponsorship fees from the Jewish producers of persimmon perfume in Ein Gedi.
The Sikris were among a group that originated from the ideology known by Josephus - the "fourth philosophy" which was conceived and developed by Yehuda the Galilean (and perhaps the Golani), in connection with the year 6 CE, when the land of Judah became a Roman province. At the center of that ideology is the fanatical principle of controlling God's rule over the earth, and in the name of this ideal legitimacy was given to do almost everything, and indeed the Sikris were loyal disciples of this ultimate, total principle and ideal.
And from here we come to the punchline of the article in question. The story of the suicide of the Sikris and their families accompanies, as we know, the historical memory of the people of Israel. But was it really so? So far we have sought to dispel this myth, but an important stone is missing in order to complete the above-mentioned attachment (puzzle).
And what?
Yosef ben Matatiyo, right after the description of the suicide, tells the rest of the story as follows: "After the fort (Masada) was captured in this way, the Roman commander (Silva) stationed a garrison there and left with his troops for Caesarea, since there was no enemy (rebel) left in all the land that had been subdued. In the long war... Moreover, after these things, many Jews also died in Alexandria. Because, for those of the Sikri movement who managed to escape there, it was not enough that they were saved, (and they) (the Sikri) began revolutionary actions and tried to entice many of the Jews who hosted them in their homes to demand (by force) their freedom and not to think of the Romans as stronger than them and to see God alone as their masters. Because some intermarried people opposed them (they) killed them, and continued to push the Tories and call them to revolt. When the heads of the Council of Elders saw the madness... of the Sikriim... the gathered realized the magnitude of the danger... (and) with great fervor they attacked the Sikriim and tried to capture them. 600 people were immediately captured. It wasn't long before all those who fled to Egypt and the Egyptian Thebes (that is the city of Noa-Amun) were caught and brought back...every form of torture and physical abuse imaginable was used against them, for one purpose only: that they would admit with their mouths that the emperor was their master. And yet none of them gave in... all stubbornly kept their faith that did not yield to any coercion and endured torture and suffering, as if their bodies did not feel them and their souls even enjoyed them. But most of all, the spectators were amazed by the children of preschool age, because they were not able to force a single one of them to call Caesar Lord..." (Jewish Wars, Book VII, 419-407).
The Sikriim group therefore tried to provoke a rebellion in Egypt, a sort of continuation of the failed rebellion in Judea and resorted to methods similar to those it carried out in Jerusalem until the retreat to Masada and even against the Jews who lived near Masada. It is about a group of 600 people, perhaps excluding women and children. Where did they come from, since there are no more Sikris left in Jerusalem, but in Masada, and their number in Masada was close to 1000 people. The reaction of the adults and especially the children shows that these are families organized in one framework, literally as an ideological, mind-controlling cult for all intents and purposes, one that took shape at least in the short period of 4-5 years, since it withdrew from Jerusalem.
Wouldn't he be inclined to assume that it was about the Sikris in Masada, who at some point fled to Egypt, thereby erasing another vestige of the assumption that the Sikris committed suicide in Masada? They made their way to Egypt to add more fire to the pyre of rebellion. If it had been a small number of people, they would not have made any impression on the established and rooted Jewish community in Alexandria, and certainly not on the Romans. Yosef ben Mattheyahu tells immediately later that the Roman emperor Vespasian feared that the Sikri rebellion might spread and therefore ordered the destruction of the temple of Honio (the one built by the third or fourth Honio - the high priest from Jerusalem during the Hellenistic period, following the decrees of Antiochus), which might have been perceived as a rebellious center Or as one that could become a rebellious focus, after the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed (70 AD).
Immediately afterwards, Josephus tells of the madness of another Sikyra group, headed by Jonathan the weaver of Judah, a swindler and deceiver, who mentioned the magicians, ideologists, and false messiahs, who flourished in Judah on the eve of the great rebellion, and he "tempted quite a few from the door of the people to join to his. He led them through the desert and promised to show them signs and wonders" (The Wars of the Jews, Book VII, 438-437).
This event takes place in Cyrene, the Roman province that bordered western Egypt, now Libya, and from the mention of the name of Catullus, the Roman commissioner in the province in 74-73 CE, who suppressed Jonathan's attempted rebellion, by "whistleblowing" the Jewish dignitaries in Cyrene (similar to what happened in Egypt right at the same time) it is certainly possible to draw an equal conclusion between the two cases, between the two events.
The relatively large number of Jonathan and his faction will also be learned from the fact that Catullus sent cavalry and foot units against them, in order to capture and neutralize them. Likewise, Josephus tells that the Roman commissioner ordered to condemn to death 3000 (and perhaps only 1000 according to one of the manuscripts, and in any case it is a completely excessive number) people, who may have belonged to the rogue's faction, or at least seemingly seemed to support him.
Where did those sicarian fanatics come from? And again, considering their presence as a group in the Masada, and not beyond it, teaches that the story of suicide was not and was not created.
Moreover, more than thirty years later there would be a great Jewish rebellion against the Hellenistic leadership in Egypt and Kyrenia, which would turn into a general rebellion against the Romans. Behind this rebellion were, of course, the groups who portrayed, according to their own way, their faith (religious war) and their methods of activity (such as an attack in Kachanlit against the Hellenistic-Roman temples and even their tyrannical actions - according to Roman evidence, including relevant documents) as sectarianism. It is worth noting that at the end of this rebellion an attempt was made to renew the building of the temple in Jerusalem.
It is impossible for such rebellions in the Egyptian and Kyrenian centers to be planned, organized and come to fruition, without the Sikri infrastructure, the one that found the escape route from rebellious Judea, from the top of the fortress, at the end of the great rebellion, in Egypt and Kyrenia.
Assuming that the last section of my article has some truth in it, then it joins the points that support the approach that the myth of suicide was not and was not created.
80 תגובות
A flowery theory
Where are all the bodies of thousands of people who lived in Jerusalem Philistines in Gaza
Canaanites
in Jericho
Some nonsense
The battery and the anti-boredom drill
the strange man
It is clear that Ethos on her part will be used for the benefit of the education of the people. There is nothing wrong with that except in the eyes of those who think that everything national becomes "nationalist".
The whole attempt to disprove the words of YBM is not reliable since there is nothing else that contradicts his words on the one hand and on the other hand as much as the archaeological finds in the sites mentioned in his books, they saw that he is very accurate.
Regarding the bodies that are not and have not been found, if I were the commander of the garrison left by Flavius Silva on the mountain, the first thing I would do is collect the many bodies, burn them to ashes and scatter them in the surrounding wadis. The floods will do the rest. You can't stay on the mountain with so many corpses. Within two days all the Roman soldiers were dead from disease.
In short, the theories that cancel what Josephus tells are not reliable because they are simply based on subjective assumptions and the controversy will continue to exist.
It is difficult to understand how no remains of corpses were found in the Masada and the surrounding areas (as I recall, it is about 1000 bodies), it does not make sense that the Romans, who were aware of hygiene, did not immediately bury or burn the many corpses in order to prevent an epidemic, even if they had thrown the bodies at the foot of the Masada and covered them Had remains been found, it is inconceivable that the Romans collected the bodies and took them with them (to Rome?). Masada's story is based entirely on one man's book and it is probably only a story.
Like many of the stories in the Bible, they are also stories and practicalities that were passed down for many years from father to son until they were collected as a book.
"It is impossible for such rebellions in the Egyptian and Kyrenian centers to be planned, organized and come to fruition, without the Sikri infrastructure, the one that found the escape route from the rebellious Judea, from the top of the fortress, at the end of the great rebellion, in Egypt and Kyrenia."
A statement that does not meet any scientific standards. There are endless scenarios in which such events take place without a single Jew who walked through it in Masada (regardless of how much truth there is in YBM's description at the moment) arriving in one of these cities. The probability that a Jew who withdraws from Masada is responsible for unrest and rebellion in the Diaspora is at the level of one to one... or as they used to say, "even if your assumption is correct, it is a broken clock that shows the correct time once every half day" and not a conclusion that arises from Masada's story itself and the results of the research.
And by the way - the Jewish sources do not mention Shimon bar Giora and Yochanan of Gush Halab either. Nor the Roman sources (which like to mention names of enemy leaders). Is the conclusion that they did not exist and Josephus invented them?
What explanation is there for the destiny stones found there? It's just a "death number" who has Shabbat left in the guard?
Masada existed from the first century BC until the Byzantine period. The present means hundreds of years. Even if it is clear to us that the number of people living on the citadel is about 1000 people. During the siege according to the archaeological evidence, there were many thousands of Romans in the same area of the citadel.. Did they probably die in these hundreds of years, not only those rebels who killed themselves along with Eleazar Ben Yair but many more. Were the graves or bones of these many found in the archaeological excavations. I'm speculating. The last Byzantines who are sitting in Masada. who maintain extreme purity. Can't we assume that they are diverting, and excuse me, simply throwing the remains of the bones of all the dead on the mountain into the surrounding valleys and these are swept away in floods to the sea from the east. According to the archaeological finds all over the country, we find very few remains of the people who lived here throughout all the periods.
I don't know if this is a myth, but the starting point of the writer that the condition for the correctness of the battle on the fortress is finding bodies is delusional. For the writer to collect information from battles that took place 2000 years ago and check how many bodies were discovered from these battles....according to the findings it will become clear....that these battles did not take place at all...
One thing I do not understand ..
How can it be said that Yosef ben Matityahu distorts and invents myths and at the same time treat his writings as an evidentiary source?
My friend, I have emphasized that I am secular and in any case I have no hold on one faith or another but only on solid evidence. I did not claim that the NL denies (in this article) the Jewish entity, but rather his biased and clearly unscientific desire to refute the Jewish narrative using pseudo-scientific tools to which he has access, or at least pretends to. After all, morning news is cracking all kinds of theories and paradigms that dominated the Kippa for a long period of time (eg the skull that was found a few days ago in the expedition in which Yoel Rek participated), so that even if we ignore the man and his work for a moment, the degree of humility and the proper perspective in relation to the place of man (every man) In the scale of human history and in general, it deserves to take a place before that man runs with a sword (literally) to smash and root without a sufficient factual and evidential basis. See Mr. Finkelstein how he shrinks and squirms every time a find is discovered that does not fit with the narrative he is building together with the German school and its branches in Scandinavia and the United Kingdom. Finkelstein is already in an endless loop that does not have the professional ability or personal decency to admit that slowly everything is crumbling. After all, even if tomorrow they find the hoards of David and Solomon with all the types of texts that archaeologists and historians fantasize about, the Finkelstein will rise like a phoenix and within a few days a new patch will bloom for the Talua paradigm that he scribbled all those years ago.
But no one will be convinced over an internet platform one way or another and in general I only logged on to the computer to check if it would rain tonight.
Have a good week everyone
Sagi Nahor, when you said the opposite. I don't understand the rant against the minimalists. They are just scientists who want to see facts and not let beliefs or opinions dictate their picture of reality. Even the minimalists do not say that there was no Jewish people, and if you read Yahyam's articles on the priesthood, you will understand why your argument is wrong. Rather, he knows the sources well and knows how to read them without the religious shackles.
No one doubts that such a nation has existed for at least the last two thousand years and even 2,500. One may wonder how it is that two such prominent kings who lived 3,000 years ago left stories in only one source written hundreds of years after them.
He digs a hole and digs it and it falls in the grass, he will work...
Mr. Yehi-Am (which nation did your parents mean on the day you were given your name? The Palestinian people perhaps?), you tried to portray yourself as pompous and continue your indulgence of the deconstructive minimalist gang in the casting of Silverman Finkelstein and Frankstein, and maybe you too will be noticed at the University of Cambridge Okret Israel, and maybe-maybe also You will receive the Dan-David Award for the deceivers of the Israeli-Jewish identity, as Mr. Finkelstein Israel received. (Do you notice the irony in the names of both of you? Israel- Ocher Israel, Yahi-Eam denies the right of the people. Truly a mockery of fate)
In any case, you fell here on readers who were able to separate the nonsense you spew here from your inclinations and the wishes of your heart, and most of them slapped you in the face and your scumbag.
Sha peace and blessing and we wish you to be the first in the final solution that our neighbors the camel riders and their friends from the Holy See and its wings wish for us.
Written on Shabbat by a strictly kosher secularist.
The Jews of York also committed suicide inspired by a myth on their part, Israel needs to be a more egalitarian country in order not to reach situations of civil war.
Another article by an "educated" idiot
You should read this delusional article for one reason only:
To learn for the umpteenth time about the self-hatred and the complete identification that the cancerous left has
With the enemy for generations!
How many inhabitants lived in the Land of Israel during the Roman occupation?
Was it reasonable for a large group of several hundred people, including children, to make a difficult journey through the desert and perhaps also by sea to reach Egypt and Libya at that time? For the Israelites it took an entire generation.
From the deserts of Dar Sorek it appears that in those days it was easy to travel such distances in such difficult climate and terrain conditions, easily
The claim that the Sikriks only sat on the citadel is unproven. It is certainly probable that this was a broader movement than that of the Masada group and that it had branches in the central Jewish communities in the region (as there were Christian Jews in Alexandria). All this does not negate Masada's story, which the writers of the Mishnah deliberately ignored, just as they ignored Jesus and the early Christians. Judaism carried on its shoulders a considerable number of fringe sects and delusions at that time who were waiting for the immediate arrival of the Messiah who would redeem Israel from the Roman occupation. Most of these sects developed in exile.
The question of whether the early Zionists were wrong in positioning Masada as a Zionist Jewish ethos is another question. In my opinion, in the framework we know today, the Midtsa can certainly be a Jewish and Zionist myth, the purpose of which is to place a warning sign both internally and externally, that it will never return. You will not return in the sense that the Jews of today will give a hand to the extremists among them from the left and the right to harass the country, and at the same time they will not let the Romans and Nazis of today - the Arabs and their supporters from the left - destroy the country.
The claim made in the article may sound interesting, but the article itself suffers from populism and lack of seriousness. Anyone who wants to make a weighty claim should bring serious evidence for his claim, and demonstrate factual evidence and analysis. There is one difficulty in the suicide story, and that is the absence of the remains of the bodies. This difficulty can be explained by their burial elsewhere, whether by the Romans or by the Jews. The author cites as reinforcement the fact that there is no evidence in Sage literature for the existence of the rebellion outside of Jerusalem. It's ridiculous. Did the Romans also engage their soldiers in training in the excavated Gamla and Jodefat? The reference to the construction of a huge siege embankment bridging height differences of about a hundred meters as part of an exercise for the employment of forces is not serious and vexatious. Sefi ben Yosef made this not serious claim years ago. From a person who is supposed to be a professional historian, I would expect him to provide any evidence for this puzzling claim. Is there any known exercise for Roman forces in which a complete siege formation was built around a fort, somewhere in the world? Relying on Elazar ben Yair's speech for an argument is also nothing but an act of clowning. This speech is a narrative trick accepted in the historiographical writing of the classical period, and it is clear to the world of research that there is no connection between the text and things that were said or not said on top of the fortress. Josephus' invented speech is a dramatic climax in his excellent book, and a source of his own perception of the people of the fourth philosophy (sicriks), and not a source of historical analysis of what happened or did not happen on the summit of the fortress. Citing the numbers of Sikariks or their supporters in the events that happened after the fall of Masada does not confirm anything. Would it be far-fetched to assume that there were Sikriks in places other than Masada? based on what? One thing clearly emerges from the article, and that is that the author seeks, according to his words, to shatter and negate the myth of suicide. Since he wants to negate a certain ideological position, he rapes the data to support another ideological position. Before us is lost writing that lacks the aspiration for objectivity as well as the evidence required from professional historical writing. The glorification of a myth on its part and the attempt to destroy it are two sides of the same coin. It is better to try to study the past with objective tools, because learning from it for the future is certainly not possible, and throwing it into the present is an act of fools.
Joseph ben Matityahu in his book History of the Jewish War in the Romans gives a first-hand account of the suicide. You can walk in Masada and Rodion according to the book. Accepted as a professional and reliable historian.
In Gaul, Julius Caesar carried out the extermination of a million inhabitants (and Kingitorix the leader of the waves). In England, Suetonius(?) massacred 250 thousand people in the Icans, and then terror massacred the population in general.
Where do you get a pile of nonsense at the scientific level.
To take Josephus as a historical source and then to mix it up with whatever you want to prove what you previously wanted to prove (regardless of reality)... this is neither research nor science - it is at most pseudo science, a nice idea that still needs to be proven.
I won't dismiss the idea entirely, but the tortuous way it takes to prove something that is apparently only meant to disprove the "Zionist myth" doesn't really smell good. Actually smells really bad and looks really unscientific.
If you use historical sources, you should first learn how to do it without sinning against the historical sources and also without using the archaeological find in the wrong way.
Well A short search on Google reveals that, as I thought, this is an extreme leftist and a regular writer in the "Left Bank". Not surprisingly, I really didn't fall out of my chair.
Why do I once again smell the smell of anti-Zionism in the air?
Everything they found you claim that it was possible and it would have been otherwise. In fact, most of your thesis rests on the fact that they did not find the bodies of the dead from Masada. You remind me of Finkelstein and Silverman whose far-fetched theories break and crack more and more with each passing day. Finkelstein himself has been stuttering badly lately when he is required to refer to the findings in Khirvat Kifa, sounds a bit like your article. By the way, the "compliments" you give to the IDF, Ben-Gurion and Zionism only strengthen the stench that stems from this slander that was clearly written with an agenda.
Indeed, the examples given here are interesting and point to a Roman policy in solving problems in the various provinces. But there is an interesting thing to note. All that is said in the writings of Joseph ben Matthieu, who writes from the testimonies of the military men and officials in Judea who arrive in Rome. Everyone is commanded to say what they know by decree or command of the emperor - or by his proxy. Hence, if there was an event of the type proposed here by the authors, it should have appeared in Josephus' records. Or they should have been omitted - something that seems dangerous to the "health" of the latter...
According to this assessment, the proposal presented here, which was given the option of leaving Masada as a falling policy.
A question for Dr. Sorek:
Is there another example of what you describe as a "Roman military exercise" - in your reference to the Roman camps, dyke and battery?
Many years ago I studied with Yehiam Sorek, a kind and knowledgeable man and I even prepared a seminar paper on Masada as part of his course.
What seems a bit puzzling to me is the fact that he bases most of his arguments on the writings of Josephus, but refuses to accept the act of suicide that the same historian describes...
It is indeed worrying, cold-hearted researchers come, devoid of illusory mysticism and show the holy people (including a price tag). Because the ethos of the nationalist romance is highly questionable. How should we deal with the problem? Should we denounce and dry up (budgetarily) those evil-hearted, evil-loving leftists, mercifully, a clown? Or do we have to look at it and establish our existence in our own country, a place to live in that we conquered with a tremendous national political and economic Zionist effort, over a century and more. So that he will guarantee us and our child a healthy reality with a chance for life, and not mass suicides of this and that??
I would very much appreciate a bibliographic reference for publication on behalf of Sefi Ben Yosef!!
Attention dear readers!
Dr. Sorek did not address almost any criticism directed towards his thesis. Therefore it should be treated as a flower crow.
Book IV, Chapter Two, Section IV
Can you please refer by chapter and subchapter?
Those who wish to refer to the escape through the Roman siege lines are invited, for the sake of an example, to look at Yosef ben Mattathias in his book Wars of the Jews, IV 106 ff.
To Michael
The Romans allowing deliberate escape are recorded in battles in Britain and Gaul. It is not about providing an opportunity for a mass escape, but as part of the Roman tactic, the main of which is: creating an option to divide and rule; To show the locals that this is not about cruelty, that the Romans want to control the regions in the future, which comes up in reverse, with a clear intention, in the speeches of Elazar ben Yair on the summit of the mosque. And this is knowing that in many cases the Romans did not hermetically close the dyke.
And in many cases the dyke was indeed hermetic, as implied in Sage literature regarding the siege ring around Beth-Ter, as appears in the sources under the name "Karchum Beit-Ter", when sages brought the wives of any of the besieged who tried to break through the dyke ring, to teach us that they were not treated as missing or fugitives, but as dead.
Yuval, the discussion about the value of human life in the IDF seems unnecessary to me. As for the Romans - it was extremely important for them to make it clear that there is no forgiveness for rebellion. On the contrary - here is one case in which the Romans allowed rebels in the final stages of suppressing a rebellion to escape. I'm sure you won't find one.
Machal, I referred to your claim 2.1. In addition, the conclusion that "the Romans cared less about the human lives of their warriors" is not relevant and does not seem correct: trained warriors, as long as they are loyal, are a valuable asset; However, if they violate the trust, they must be punished to the full extent of the law.
To Yuval,
First, I probably wouldn't have completed the battery to the top of the fortress if no one was already there.
I am not interested in developing comparisons that are of a certain political nature, but let's say that the Romans cared less about the human lives of their warriors (who enlisted voluntarily), and the executions of soldiers for minor disciplinary offenses testify to this, and they did not tolerate any manifestation of rebellion and killed rebels against them en masse in very cruel forms (crucifixion, for example). They wanted to show the whole world over which they ruled that there is no forgiveness and no forgiveness for rebellion, so that they would see and be seen. Different people have different values, so my reference was only at the level of military logic in action.
Speaking of which, are there any examples from Roman literature that the Romans let the rebels escape at the end of the rebellion?
to the point,
It's a shame you say that. In fact, even in medicine and ecology you have a lot of contradictory and problematic studies. This is a feature that characterizes sciences that meet at least one of two requirements: 1. Complex sciences in which the systems are truly able to show a very wide variety of behaviors and are very difficult to break down into components. 2. Sciences that have significant economic/political implications.
In my opinion, the individual study is not really "science". According to some professors in the Faculty of Natural Sciences at the Hebrew University, 90% of the publications in a given field are "noise". Hence, individual publications should not be taken too seriously, but only the totality of scientific knowledge accumulated in the field.
Machel,
You did not develop enough the comparison you made with the IDF in Gaza. Imagine a battalion of well-trained soldiers besieging a neighborhood in Gaza. His goal is to eliminate as many enemy men as possible. The latter are heartbroken and know that their fate is sealed. All that is left for them is to fight, and that they will do with all their might. The battalion commander spared his soldiers and he knows that an assault will cost him the lives of his best fighters. On the other hand, if the enemy's men had an escape route, there is a chance that at least some of them will choose to flee and this will benefit the narrow battalion in at least two factors: a) fewer enemies to fight now; b) The mere knowledge that his back is not against the wall will weaken the fighting spirit of the enemy. Put yourself in the shoes of the Roman strategist for a moment and think about what you would do.
and in addition, 2.4
2.4 How is Masada different from Yadfat and Gamla? Let's leave the subject of suicides, that's not the interesting part of your article. In all these cases there is no documentation except for Flavius not in the Sages, and it seems to me that you claimed not in Roman literature either (I am not familiar with it). It seems to me that no bodies were found there either, and in these cases too there were later rebellions. In addition, in all these cases there is a wealth of archaeological findings that testify to a battle. Hence, were these also exercises? In fact, maybe the area of Judea became the Romans' "Salim"?
In science, when an alternative hypothesis is raised, it cannot be allowed to float in the void, but it must be clarified how it fits with all the relevant findings and explains them better than the existing hypotheses.
Thanks in advance.
History is the collection of lies that everyone agrees to.
Historical "studies" have no place in science
To Dr. Sorek,
I think it is appropriate that you respond to the things that were raised before and also to the following things. After all, these correspondences are saved and documented and are actually the third item found on Google if your name is searched.
2.1. The claim that the Romans let the fanatics escape is unclear. "Sometimes the Romans would place escape routes in order to split the enemy forces." First, agree that they wouldn't have been able to escape if the Romans hadn't let them. And why would they let them escape when there are almost no rebels left?! In contrast, if we had succeeded at the end of the Gaza operation in imprisoning the majority of Hamas members in one neighborhood, do you think we would have let them escape in order to "split the enemy's forces"? Does that sound serious to you?
2.2 Why not assume that fanatics or people who identified with them who came as refugees went through the organization process within a few years in Alexandria? Isn't it simpler?
2.3 Regarding the silence of sages - and what do you expect them to do? They were not historians and their purpose in all their writings was to educate. For exactly the same reason, you also see very little documentation of the Bar Kochba rebellion in Sage literature relative to its consequences. It is likely that the Sages did not want to describe the rebels in a way that could be interpreted positively and wanted to forget them from memory.
I would also appreciate the reference to sections 1.1, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.7 from earlier.
To my uncle and Dr. Sorek
Until now, it sounds to me that the theory of the exercise is about as well-founded as the theory of "Hasidim brings children into the world" (which certainly deserves to be devoted to articles on this website). If the theory of the exercise is circulating somewhere (raised by Sefi Ben Yosef), could you please bring references, especially those from peer-reviewed literature (that is, not written in places where the page suffers from everything)?
Hello Prof. Sorek
Following on from the theory you brought up, I would like to clarify a few more things
1. The "exercise" theory was already put forward by Sefi Ben Yosef 20 years ago
2. Another theory I heard is that the rebels were not so isolated, and there were groups that fled after the destruction and "wandered" in the desert area to the west and east of the Dead Sea. This could indicate why the Romans took the revolt seriously
3. Masada was not mentioned at all by Chazal (except perhaps for a vague hint), as well as many other events. Masada's story reached Jewish consciousness through other sources in the Middle Ages
I wrote a master's thesis on the development of the myth in Masada. Was it or wasn't it - I was less interested, I was more interested in the way it was created and the way they made a "twist" from the horrible suicide story into something easier and "easier to digest"
The silence of the sages' sources is not surprising, even the greatest believer in the words of the sages will admit that from the words of the sages one can learn about what is written and not about what is not. It is clear that the sages in the legends of the destruction took an unrepresentative number of places and turned them into scenes of the rebellion because they had some message to convey that could not be conveyed through a Masada story. There is another sage story from the same period about the mass suicide of children/boys who were taken into prostitution in Rumi and jumped into the sea. One can see in the legends of the destruction a clear message of keeping the Torah commandments at all costs, but not preserving political independence at all costs. Masada's story is the opposite of this message.
In fact, it can be said that the same thing that hinders the modern historian in Masada "to die or conquer the mountain" also hindered the Sage.
Moreover, Masada's people were not exemplary people to say the least. The description of the act gives them a heroic aura that contrasts with the image of bandits that appears in the legends of the destruction.
To someone completely different - indeed, sometimes the Romans would lay escape routes in order to split the enemy's forces. A hint of this is given in the literature of Chaz, L regarding the places Hamta, Kfar Lakitia and more. It is assumed that the escape from Masada took place somewhere between the establishment of the camps and the beginning of the construction of the dyke
To Eric and to the point - justice is with you. I was indeed ashamed of myself and my assumptions
To Urbac - that's what I relied on even
to R.H. - I already addressed this in one of my responses, and by the way, since when were "remains of the rebels on the mountain"?
To Michael - the arrival in Alexandria is not a matter of a casual movement of refugees, and in particular it is a framework of fanatics and one that will organize a mass rebellion in a few years.
The desecration of the corpses is already a matter of sailing with a very special intention, and this is evident, for example, in the Diaspora revolt in Trianus when the sages sailed in the relative content of the Nile River - blood or water?
to R.H. - The chance that a great many of his contemporaries read his essays sounds less than slim, and maybe-maybe we are talking about Romans in Rome.
To learn about Masada's war it is appropriate to examine both sides - on the one hand - an abundance of Roman archeological data and on the other hand - almost zero information regarding the battle of the Sikris. And again, all critics and detractors forget a very important detail - the silence of the Sage sources regarding Parshat Masada, as well as regarding Yodafat, Gamla and more, and even the silence of the connection among the Roman historians, with the exception of that coin of "Judah the Captive", which indicates in general the distortion of all The revolt against the Romans.
It is also worth referring to the entire leadership of the rebellion from its inception and the task assigned to Joseph ben Matthieu - to command the rebellion of the two countries of the Galilee. I may devote a separate article to this.
to help the poor
You claimed that I sucked evidence from the finger, and after all, the "finger" is yours - Mekhalta, from Horowitz pp. 204-203; Avot Darbi Natan 22, Mahd. Shechter, 21-XNUMX; Baruch the Syrian XNUMX:XNUMX; Vision Ezra XNUMX:XNUMX-XNUMX and more.
To say - the disqualifier, in Momo disqualifies!
Even if there were only a handful of people on the citadel, it was important for the Roman government to eliminate every last one of them. Any spark of Mary could ignite a great rebellion raging all over the empire (for this very reason they also destroyed the temple of Khunio at the time and slaughtered all its priests). It was forbidden to let anyone escape, and this alone justifies the disproportionately large efforts and resources invested by the Convict Kingdom.
In addition to what Machel writes, is it possible that Josephus would have dared to invent such a heroic story and describe the fighting on the citadel in great detail when many of his contemporaries who read the book knew that the whole story was actually a trick? And if so, why?
As mentioned, it is enough to argue about the act of suicide itself or the speech of Elazar Ben Yair, which was most likely invented for purely literary reasons. But to cast doubt on the war on Masada because no bones were found of bodies that apparently were not buried or that Sikris appeared in Egypt afterwards? Sounds very weak.
Dr. Sorek
I'm very glad you responded. I would be happy to address the following points:
1. (from Wiki): At a point marked during the excavations as "locus 113", in an inner gate room connecting the water gate and the warehouse wing, a group of 11 ostraconi was uncovered. Based on the shape of the writing, it seems that the ostracans were written by one person. Each ostracon has one name listed. When they were revealed, Yedin attributed the ostrakas as the fates that the defenders imposed before committing suicide. Adding to the great excitement was the adaptation to the story of Yosef ben Matthew and the identification of the name "Ben Yair" among one of the ostraca.
2. Regarding the desecration of corpses - what about Bitar? Speaking of which - the cliffs of the Judean desert are a very popular nesting place for large birds of prey, including those that eat bones.
3. Regarding the bodies that were found - were the women also Byzantine nuns?
4. Can you bring accurate location mirrors for tactical exercises on such a scale that the Romans conducted (and exercise means not in the context of a real war), and preferably in deserts that are difficult to access, without a reasonable water supply and a scarcity of trees for the building?
5. "The whole idea is that the Sikris abandoned Masada before the Roman siege ring tightened around them, that is, during the establishment of the camps and before the closing of the dyke" - are you claiming that hundreds of people managed to escape from a Roman legion with auxiliary forces that were already stationed near them and managed to reach Alexandria?
6. Why not simply assume that multitudes of refugees arrived in Alexandria, among them Sikris who organized themselves there?
7. Have these interesting views been published in any peer-reviewed journal/book?
Additionally:
A. It is understood that skepticism and myth-busting is a critical thing for the development of science, however, when bringing radical arguments, it is necessary to bring extensive support. Otherwise... skepticism and myth-busting become the supreme goal and not the search for truth, and then we become postmodernists with all that implies.
B. There is quite a bit of audacity in the claim that giving talkbackists a platform to express opinions contrary to the writer's opinion has "breadth of the heart".
1. This is not the only act of suicide described by Flavius - a mass suicide is also described in Gamala. Since Gamla did not become a myth, Gamla's story did not bother any researcher. When it comes to reparation, it is clear to researchers that Jewish law should not be applied to the actions of the zealots because the zealots were not obligated to the sages and their laws.
2. The title of the article is misleading: the innovation of the article is not in opposition to the myth of suicide, but in questioning the entire siege on Masada's part. According to the writer, there was not and was not created any story on her part - this is a big Roman exercise.
This hypothesis goes against all the studies that have been done so far on Masada. And what's more, a revolutionary claim is made here without foundation - the Romans made exercises to occupy a fortified target with forces the size of a corps. There is no other source for maneuvers of this magnitude.
In fact, if we examine who's innovation is greater; Joseph's innovation in which he wonders about mass suicide or Yehiam Sorek's innovation on Roman siege exercises, I think we would prefer Flavius's limited innovation to Sorek's innovations.
3. Sorek's introduction to a Masada myth does not give him much credibility. In fact, he places himself in the same line with all those whom he criticizes. There is no difference between myth makers and their manipulators, both have a goal in front of their eyes and history is a tool in their hands for their needs.
Dr. Sorek
I'm very glad you responded. I would be happy to address the following points:
1. (from Wiki): At a point marked during the excavations as "locus 113", in an inner gate room connecting the water gate and the warehouse wing, a group of 11 ostraconi was uncovered. Based on the shape of the writing, it seems that the ostracans were written by one person. Each ostracon has one name listed. When they were revealed, Yedin attributed the ostrakas as the fates that the defenders imposed before committing suicide. Adding to the great excitement was the adaptation to the story of Yosef ben Matthew and the identification of the name "Ben Yair" among one of the ostraca.
2. Regarding the desecration of corpses - what about Bitar? Speaking of which - the cliffs of the Judean desert are a very popular nesting place for large birds of prey, including those that eat bones.
3. Regarding the bodies that were found - were the women also Byzantine nuns?
4. Can you bring accurate location mirrors for tactical exercises on such a scale that the Romans conducted (and exercise means not in the context of a real war), and preferably in deserts that are difficult to access, without a reasonable water supply and a scarcity of trees for the building?
5. "The whole idea is that the Sikris abandoned Masada before the Roman siege ring tightened around them, that is, during the establishment of the camps and before the closing of the dyke" - are you claiming that hundreds of people managed to escape from a Roman legion with auxiliary forces that were already stationed near them and managed to reach Alexandria?
6. Why not simply assume that multitudes of refugees arrived in Alexandria, among them Sikris who organized themselves there?
7. Have these interesting views been published in any peer-reviewed journal/book?
Additionally:
A. It is understood that skepticism and myth-busting is a critical thing for the development of science, however, when bringing radical arguments, it is necessary to bring extensive support. Otherwise... skepticism and myth-busting become the supreme goal and not the search for truth, and then we become postmodernists with all that implies.
B. There is quite a bit of audacity in the claim that giving talkbackists a platform to express opinions contrary to the writer's opinion has "breadth of the heart".
To all my loved ones and supporters
Watch further down the road for another article, no less upsetting, regarding the difficult atmosphere that prevailed in Jerusalem during the Roman siege, and not necessarily particularly indulgent of the so-called spirit of Judaism.
To Shmolik and Eli
Regarding the Machu Picchu theory, it is quite interesting, refreshing and original. It's worth checking out, and maybe we'll even get to the classic conspiracies of today.
The desert is quite protective, and out of a group of about a thousand people we would surely find organic remains, here and there.
And in general, it is worth noting how alarmed and shocked the keepers of the beliefs of the myths are, those who were educated on their knees for such a long period of time and still are. The myths, for our sake, and on the basis of the tribal bonfire, receive with time that Mkel is much more special than historical finds in general.
Michael Shalom
Rather, what other ostracon that was uncovered on the top of the fortress refers to the alleged suicide?
And what about Troy-Ilion for our part?
Moreover, the current website that I am not talking about, generously allows the response of the talkbackists, even if their opinion is completely different from that of the writer.
I am convinced that if any of the researchers and diggers in the academy had volunteered to write an article against me, they would certainly have found a worthy and promoting platform on the current site.
Similar cases were found in Gaul and especially in Britain, where the Romans fought hard and protracted battles
To my people and her daughters
First - I try very hard to complete (from the language of an academic doubt) my assumptions, and that's what I formulated.
Second - we learn about the Sikri's move to Masada from Yosef ben Matatiyo. There was no reason, in the middle stage of the rebellion, ie in 68-69 AD, to abandon Jerusalem and move to Egypt.
Thirdly - the whole idea is that the Sikris abandoned Masada before the ring of the Roman siege tightened around them, that is, during the establishment of the camps and before the closing of the dyke.
To my father and the gatekeeper
First, it was not the custom of the Romans, who, as warriors, respected their opponents. And the rare and seemingly understandable case of desecration of corpses involves the end of the third Punic war in Carthage-Hadda (Carthage).
Secondly - this is not the only case that the Romans build, and not just a battery, as part of a tactical exercise. And for your attention - what is happening in modern armies - how much expensive logistics is spilled in military exercises - from the departmental to the divisional-designation?
And one more thing (in favor of suicide): contrary to what Josephus wrote, the choice was not between living as a slave and dying as a free man. When the Zealots besieged Masada at the beginning of the rebellion, they promised the Roman garrison that if they laid down their weapons - they would be released. The Roman soldiers surrendered and were massacred.
The Romans had a long memory. Therefore the choice was between suicide and execution.
Avi,
I agree with Makal, you as someone who advocates the consensus of science and avoids giving too much weight to theories on the fringes such as those of warming, creationism or strange and not so well-founded physical theories new glimpses into the future, give a lot of weight to the opinions of Yahyam Sorek.
There is no problem with the things that are said if you would also give the accepted theories the right level and weight.
As a matter of fact, Ben Matatiyahu is one of the most reliable sources we have about the period. Even if he sinned here and there and distorted history according to his private view (and what's new about that??) and even if he made a mistake or made a mistake in the details, he is still an amazing source in his accuracy compared to any other source.
Second point, the exercise theory is ridiculous. A mighty Roman army will storm a mountain in the middle of the hottest desert in the area, build huge camps (which were found), build a wall that surrounds the entire mountain and prevents rebels from escaping, and build a huge battery just for an exercise??? Becher first asked the question, is there a single evidence in the scriptures or in archeology for such exercises in the Roman army?
Were the occupation of Gamla and Yodefet also exercises? And the burning of the temple? Divisional exercise?
By the way, whoever was in the battery saw the remains of the trees that made it up.
A third point is that the remains of the rebels were found on the mountain. So it is clear that a great battle took place there. Did they commit suicide or were they killed, did Elazar ben Yair actually give the speech that ben Matityahu gave, are far less essential questions.
Machal (apologies for omitting a letter. Writing your name accurately would have caused an unnecessary delay in displaying the response),
Right. And in the case in question, Yosef ben Matthiyahu applied to Masada what, according to a first-hand account, happened in Difat. Maybe it was just a logical assumption and maybe he really heard it from Roman soldiers who were in Masada. In the documentation methods of the time, it may not have been customary to include the names and roles of the witnesses, and perhaps he was just an amateur historian.
Urbac,
I'm not sure I understood you. What I said, in short: unlike in Difat and Jerusalem, where Yosef ben Matthieu saw the events with his own eyes, in Masada he was not present at the time of the event in question
jubilee
In fact, when you think about it, the vast majority of historians were not actually where the events they write about took place. It's even pretty obvious when you think about it… 🙂
jubilee
If I understood correctly, Yosef was not in the Mitzvah, the description of taking place in the Mitzvah,
He heard from Roman soldiers that he had surrendered.
I.e. if
1. We have in our hands the original writings of Yosef ben Matthew
2. Told correctly what he experienced
3. Quote the Roman soldiers correctly
4. They were indeed Roman soldiers
5. They were then in Masada
6. Tell the truth about what happened
Michael, these things were told to me by the head of the Department of Archeology and Bible at the time. I contacted him to get an exact reference. I will bring her, when he answers me.
Avi Blizovsky
"Admitting and leaving Yeruham". This article was born in sin.
It is not too late to fly it, and preserve the honor of the site, and the dubious honor of its author.
.
Yosef ben Matatiyo was in Beidat, and his description of the organized suicide there is from a first-hand source and witnesses to this were the Roman soldiers to whom he surrendered.
He was also in Jerusalem during its conquest by Titus (there is a Jewish legend that says that Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai spoke to Vespasian and prophesied to him that he would soon be appointed emperor, but Joseph ben Mattathias testifies himself that he was the one who prophesied this back at the time of the surrender at Dapat) and it is reasonable that his description reliable.
But he was not in Masada, and his descriptions of what happened there are not first-hand.
Dr. Yachiam
It would be correct if you base your conclusions on findings related to that period and accepted by the researchers
And avoid opinions and conclusions that lack factual basis as much as possible.
Avi,
I don't think you would give a platform to an article that denies evolution or global warming, and makes weak and tendentious arguments (even if it is written by one of your regular writers!). You have a stated policy against giving a platform to radical and unfounded opinions.
So why do you give a stage to an article in the spirit of the "new history" that clearly marks the target and then shoots the arrow, and brings such weak arguments?
How can one claim that the massive battery and this entire siege system at the edge of the dry desert is an "exercise" and not provide strong reasons? How can it be claimed that no more ostracans have been found and not refer to those that have been found (see wiki... you can object but you have to refer!)
Just as in science there is no room for balancing opinions, so there is no place in self-respecting (non-postmodernist) history either. Take note.
tree,
Can I show you a place? What does "no artificial material" mean? I would be quite surprised if they found synthetic polymers in the battery 🙂 The battery is made of dirt and wooden beams for support. What was Ben Gurion's finding?
You actually strengthened my words, that a myth (the ascension in this case) is stronger than any reality. And this regardless of whether Masada's story is true or not, such is the power of myths in general.
To my father Blizovsky!
Either you are innocent or stupid, choose. To say that the study of a historical event has no political implications, and in particular when it comes to an island where disputes and quarrels with the Arab people and the Muslim religion are abandoned, such a statement is disconnected from the reality of what is happening around and from politics. For example, the Arab people who firmly claim that Jerusalem is holy to Islam, and that Muhammad ascended from Jerusalem to heaven. And this despite the fact that Jerusalem is not mentioned at all in the Koran, and despite the fact that there is no basis for the second argument.
A possible point for the benefit of the article: in the last excavations that took place in Masada, on behalf of the archeology department of Ben Gurion University, it became clear that there is not a single gram of artificial material in the battery. Everything is natural.
This still allows for the siege story, but can also support the drill theory.
To all the respondents. I can't understand how an in-depth investigation of an event should be left-wing or right-wing. Regardless, the status of Mount Sinai is an event about which there is no doubt that there was no more impact than a thousand events that took place.
Dr. Yehiam Sorek is a man full of hatred.
As soon as I saw the name of the author of the article I remembered
In several articles of the Dr. from the past in which he claimed that King David was merely a neighborhood thug and the magnificent Temple was merely a squalid cabin
The man is an extreme leftist who tries with all his might to dissolve the history and myths of the Jewish people
It seems to me that the "gatekeeper" is right. The defenders were simply thrown from the walls
For the Vedas around.
If you believe Yosef ben Matityahu go with his description to the end.
It is unlikely that the Romans, who were artists in a siege war, left a path
Exit (and entry and supply!) to Masada, and if that's the case, then hundreds
People could not escape from there, but, at most, only a few.
Perhaps these are organized groups that left Jerusalem in some way
During the Roman invasion of the city or the siege itself (through underground passages
Lands for example like the shipping female, which is impossible
In the case of Masada), it makes more sense that there were groups that organized around
Leaders who left the country. In any case, it is absolutely clear that propaganda
of the honorable Dr. simply does not make sense at all.
General: The story of "heroism on her part" (was it or wasn't it) is not worthy of imitation and is a story of despair and loss.
He has no heroism.
It has no heroes.
There is no victory in it.
It has no purpose.
Below are comments to Dr. Sorek's claims:
1. The first claim deserves further research and examination.
It should be noted that this is only negative evidence that can have additional explanations, other than the negation of the event.
2. The second claim is also worthy of examination but, like the first claim, it can have additional explanations
I would like to point out that the Sages condemned the phenomenon of suicide and even stipulated that a suicide be buried in a separate plot outside the cemetery.
Against this background and against the background of the deviations from the fanatical groups and their leaders, it is possible that the central leadership did not want to glorify the story of the siege battle in general and the suicide event in particular.
The claim that the Sages accused God, implicitly or indirectly, of destruction, is out of the question.
3. The third claim - see responses to the above.
4. The fourth claim brings an opposite proof:
The remains of the camps, the battery and the stones of the catapults found support the verification of the event of the siege.
The author's opinion is divided on the act of ending the siege, but it is not necessary to disagree on the act of the siege itself.
The attempt to explain the findings as a tactical exercise seems weak.
5. See note 4.
6. The psychological explanation for the "invention of the event" by Joseph ben Matityahu gives precisely the opposite proof:
Yosef ben Matithahu tries to justify his remorse in the fortress of Yodafat.
He is subject to dissonance, so it is unlikely that he will invent the "Masada incident" that highlights the contrast between
The incident of heroism in Masada compared to his own behavior.
7. Comments to the seventh claim - see above.
In conclusion, I would like to propose an intermediate hypothesis:
A. Masada fought and was eventually conquered.
B. The events preceding the suicide did happen.
C. The mass suicide itself was not common property.
This hypothesis is consistent with the descriptions of Yosef ben Matityahu and perhaps can give an additional explanation to Dr. Sorek's questions.
General comment: turning a Masada story into a myth is puzzling and does not align with the values of Judaism and the values of Zionism.
Zionism in general and the central leadership in particular denied the behavior of extremist groups that acted independently
The Sikris and their charismatic leaders pushed and led the people to destruction and the story of their war deserves to be learned against the background of the disastrous results they inflicted on the public.
A person who died without being buried, will there be anything left of his body after 100 years? , sounds weird to me
come on. The only place Sikris can come from is from Masada?
Why not assume that the same conditions that created the Sikris of Masada also created the Egyptian extremists and the Diaspora rebellion?
Dear Dr. Yachiam.
As is customary in academia, and especially in Tel Aviv, you first made an assumption and then tried to prove it.
If the assumption, no matter how ridiculous, contradicts the Jewish narrative or criticizes the Jewish tradition, so be it.
I agree with you that everything should be doubted until proven correct.
But on the other hand, as long as you have not proven that the existing documentation is wrong, then it is presumed to be true.
There is no logical sequence in this article, which suggests doubt about the myth of the Masada suicide. And especially not in Panz Lane.
And as for the remains of the bodies, in a corrosive environment like the Dead Sea area, organisms are eaten very quickly, except for animals that eat carrion. If corpses were left forever in the field, the land would be covered with them.
In my opinion, the remains of Machu Picchu show that it was from there that the Sikirs fled to America. Without the help of an extremist on her side, how did they build Machu Picchu?
A lousy article that proves academic-research shallowness.
No bodies were found around Troy either, yes around Jerusalem (in the context of the rebellion) or Acre, Jaffa, Tiberias or any other city where there is no doubt that fierce battles took place.
This is for the simple reason that the bodies of the "enemy" were simply thrown away, weathered, devoured by animals and destroyed by the forces of nature.
According to the "doctor's" claim, there was no battle at Gamala at that time because no bodies were found there.
It is unbelievable that we appoint this "academy".
And then are you surprised that Yair Lapid is admitted to doctoral studies without a bachelor's degree?
What is the difference???
1. Dr. Sorek does not even raise the possibility that the Zealots arrived in Egypt together with other refugees who must have fled from Judea, and organized themselves into a group there.
2. The construction of the battery undoubtedly required a supreme effort, given the severe lack of trees in the desert. And all this for an exercise? In fact, can the Dr. name other places where evidence of such a scale of "exercise" has been found?
3. What happened to the other ostracon found in the same place in Masada along with Ben Yair's? Why doesn't the doctor treat them?
This site talked about the fact that in science there is no balance of opinions and there is no need to give a platform to every "skeptic" who backs up his words with half-truths and distortions. The site will be respected and implement its policy!
Punchline = punch line.
And besides: where is it written that all the zealots arrived at Masada? According to the scriptures, there were several groups of fanatics in Jerusalem, is it not possible that some of them arrived in Egypt without "camping" in Masada?
The writer first marked the goal and then looked for the reasons.
On the one hand, he claims, and rightly so, that one must be careful in establishing the facts, and on the other hand, when it is convenient for him, he states "because it is not possible..." and so'
Casting doubts is legitimate. The writer also deserves to emphasize that this is a possibility but not a certainty.
Failure to find bodies is explained by the common custom of the Romans to throw the bodies of their enemies over the wall,
In the case of Masada, beyond the wall, they spread out into the wadis that swept away the remains, so nothing was found,
The argument about "exercise" does not hold water.
Whoever claims that the Sikris escaped must explain how,
How do hundreds of people escape through the Roman guards,
It is possible to disagree about the "heroism" in Masada's story, it is more difficult to disagree about the course of events.
There is only one mistake
The Romans left a huge earthen embankment that was used to reach Masada
It is unlikely that an army that had spent a fortune would bother with a huge earthen embankment in the desert in some far away country with complicated water logistics just because they didn't want the soldiers to get bored.
And that leaves one option that they just didn't find the bodies as happened in many historical events.
It has become fashionable to say that all kinds of historical events did not happen, it is healthy from a research and scientific point of view.
Even Ahmadinejad recently claimed that the Holocaust did not happen.