Chapter 363 of 404

Notes to Appendix 1

1 Mason, Josephus and New Testament, 206; Borg, Conflict, 27-28; idem, Vision, 90; cf. Kingdon, “Zealots.”

2 Now widely held: Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, 214-17; cf. pp. 190-243; Baumbach, “Zeloten”; Smith, “Zealots”; Borg, “Zealot”; idem, Conflict, 35-36; Sanders, Judaism, 281-83.

3 Crossan puts Josephus’ bias best (Historical Jesus, 93): “Nobody from the highest aristocracy on either side is guilty of anything.”

4 Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, 220-41; cf. Crossan, Historical Jesus, 217.

5 Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, 190 distinguish the Sicarii themselves from peasants and social bandits, relating them to a line of teachers of resistance (pp. 194-97). They suspect Judas the Galilean may have advocated martyrdom rather than violence (pp. 197-98), but this is unclear.

6 Jos. War 2.228-29; note, however, that the villagers could not have caught everyone (cf. Deut 21:1).

7 Pace Crossan, Historical Jesus, 304-5; Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, 48-50, 69-70; Oakman, “Peasant,” 131. Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, 71 contend that the common people asked for justice against Herod when he killed the bandits, citing Jos. Ant. 14.168, but Josephus seems to refer to relatives. Villagers did protect bandits who robbed a servant of Caesar (p. 72, citing Jos. Ant. 20.113-17; War 2.228-31), and War 2.253 may also be relevant, but Josephus himself does not indicate that the “inhabitants” ravaged by the brigands were nobles. The drowning of nobles is significant (War 1.314-16, 326; Ant. 14.431-33), but Ant. 20.255-56 does not explicitly differentiate “Jews” as gentry from the “masses.” Jos. War 2.235-38 may well be relevant, but one wonders whether the elders in Ant. 14.167 are peasants, since the speaker is a Pharisee. The nuancing of Crossan, Historical Jesus, 170 (their social location between the powerful and powerless) may be helpful.

8 Cf. Donaldson, “Bandits.”

9 Cf. Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, 77-85.

10 Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, xiii-xiv, 250-51; Crossan, Historical Jesus, 194; Horsley, Galilee, 259. Josephus’ sources regarding brigands appear weak for 6-44, though he reports some uprisings (cf. also Mk 15:27); but after 44 he supplies many reports of bandits with heavy followings (War 2.228, 235, 238, 253; Ant. 20.121, 124, 161; Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, 66-69).

11 See Lewis, Life, 204.

12 Sanders, Judaism, 35-43.

13 Simon, Sects, 44; cf. Neusner, Beginning, 26-27; see especially Jos. Ant. 18.4, 23-25. Falk, Pharisee, 57-58, 120-25 even decides (too narrowly) that the Zealots were Shammaites. Sanders is undoubtedly right that the “Fourth Philosophy” was “largely Pharisaic in opinion,” except that their “members would accept no master but God (Antiq. 18.23; War 2.118)” (Sanders, Judaism, 13-14; cf. pp. 280-84, 408-11). Hengel, Zeloten, sees them as a religiously motivated movement; Giblet, “Mouvement,” believes they saw themselves as more religious than political. While assuming specific religious beliefs, the nationalists did not represent an organized religious group (Salomonsen, “Nogle”). Applebaum, “Zealots,” regarded the revolutionary movement as a natural response to the Roman situation. Evidence at Masada indicates the Sicarii’s religious commitment (Cornfeld, Josephus, 489, 499).

14 Josephus disparages “brigands” of all sorts except in the one case where he need not do so, the speech he creates for Eleazar (Sanders, Judaism, 6-7); but Josephus belonged to the elite.

15 Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, xv.

16 Cf. Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, 19, 76.

17 Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, xv; Borg, Conflict, 36-47.

18 Sanders, Judaism, 241.

19 Witherington, Christology, 83. Josephus may have assumed command of many brigands himself; see the evidence in Horsley, Galilee, 266-67.

20 Wright, People of God, 179-80; Witherington, Christology, 84-87.

↑ Back to top