| Nachman Ben-Yehuda in his monograph The Masada Myth attacks
the ideas which are now held about Masada as being contrary to the story
which was recounted by Josephus. I will follow this same line of inquiry,
in hopes that I can shed some light on the subject of Masada. Perhaps this
was not always viewed as a positive occurrence. Perhaps Josephus does not
view this event as something which showed the strength of the Jewish people,
but rather that it was merely the last place to fall to the Roman army.
Through a careful examination of the work of Flavius Josephus on the subject of Masada, I believe that it will be possible to bring some understanding to the reader who wishes to understand what really happened at Masada. The glorified version of this story is one which is often recounted in history classes, but is this what Josephus was really trying to say? This is the inquiry which I will now endeavor to understand. |
 Three
terraces of masada from the north |
Perhaps the story which is often recounted about Masada which glorifies
the incident, the story that these Jewish zealots decided to commit mass
suicide rather than succumb to the will of the Roman empire, is an embellished
account of what happened. This story is one which is often recounted in
Jewish circles today. It seems to show that these people were proud of
their Jewish heritage. It seems to show that these people were the last
defenders of their society, the brave people who refused to allow the Romans
to have their glory. These Jewish revolutionaries were those who believed
so much in their cause that they would rather die by their own hands than
fall to the Roman Army. Perhaps at this point a recounting of the story
as it is generally told would be useful to my thesis.
 masada
from the south |
During the first Century of the Common Era, The nation which we now
call Israel was held as a Roman colony. The Jewish people who lived in
this area, however, refused to succumb to the religious practices of Rome
and decided rather to remain true to the religious practices which there
ancestors had practiced. This Jewish faith was incompatible with that of
the Romans, and for this reason, the Jewish people began to revolt in 66
C.E. This revolt would mean the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state,
as the Romans proceed to destroy every stronghold of Judaism throughout
the area.
The last area where the Jewish people had power was an old fortress known as Masada. From this mountain fortress, these people known as Zealots lead raids on neighboring Roman towns and remained the only Jewish stronghold within Israel. As the war came to a close, the only place left for attack by the Romans was Masada. A Roman general laid siege to Masada in hopes of taking this last stronghold. The Zealots prepared themselves for a long siege by rationing food and water. The Roman forces were strong, and they broke through the outer wall. The Zealots had made there last attempt at survival, and knew that death was their only end. Rather than give the glory of victory to the Roman soldiers, these Zealots committed mass suicide, seeing this as the best way to avoid slavery and death by the hands of Romans. |
Flavius Josephus
The one thing that we must remember about Josephus from the outset of
any research about his is that he was a Jew, and that for this reason much
of his history is more than likely a history that will be biased towards
Judaism. Although he became a Roman citizen later in his life, most of
his history is directed at the history of the Jewish world. Josephus was
a General in the Jewish revolution which began in the year 66C.E., and
for this reason, much of what he says about the war is often perceived
as writing from only the Jewish side of things. It is however necessary
to remember that he became a citizen of Rome. After the Suicide of Nero
and the rise to power of Vespasian, Josephus became a part of Roman society,
and even took the name Flavius, the family name of Vespasian.
Josephus ideology is somewhat confusing. It seems as though he was hated
not only by the Jewish people for his relationships with Rome, but he was
also hated by the Romans because of his associations with the Jewish faith.
"He continuously went around the walls of the city (Jerusalem) advocating
surrender; at the same time, he was suspected of treachery by the Romans."(1)
When the city of Jerusalem fell, Josephus was commissioned by the emperor
of Rome, Vespasian, to write a history of the Jewish people. He continued
to publish his work throughout the reigns of the Flavian emperors, until
his death sometime after 100C.E.
Josephus is most often seen as being as impartial as possible in his
early works. However, his later work is often seen as having a bias toward
his Jewish faith, often "becoming an apologist for the Jewish people rather
than an impartial historian."(2) The work
in question here is the earliest of Josephus' published works: The Wars
of the Jews. This book can be seen as a bit of Roman propaganda written
to any other person who felt that they had the right to rebel against the
Roman Empire. It shows the destruction of the Jewish world. In the End,
the only fortress which the Jewish people held was Masada, and it too fell
to the Roman Army.
Today the work of Flavius Josephus is placed on par with the works of
the Greek Historians Herodotus and Thucydides, and the Roman historian
Tacitus. He is seen as one of the great early historians, and although
his histories are not always on par with that which people see as "good"
history today, it is some of the best history written in the classical
period. Just as these authors wrote their histories by second hand accounts,
so did Josephus. The speeches which are included within the work of Josephus
may not be word for word what was said on the occasion, but he may have
felt the need, just as Thucydides(3) did
to put the words which he felt were necessary into the mouths of the speaker.
However with the history of Masada, we are left to believe what is said
by Josephus, for he is the only source of this events occurrence. Has archeological
evidence verified that which is recounted? To some extent, however, the
bodies of the Jews who are believed to have died here have never been found.
| Josephus was not present at Masada when it was besieged, however it is believed that he read the diaries and reports which were written by the Roman soldiers who took Masada.(4) There is also a possibility that Josephus would have had the opportunity to interview the survivors of Masada. There were in fact two adult women who hid from the mass death which occurred in Masada, and Josephus makes a careful note that these women recounted the story to the Roman soldiers. If this is the case, then it is likely that he could have gotten the central points of the speeches which were given the night before the fall of Masada. Therefore, the history as written by Josephus may be a truthful account of the events. |  Hebrew
scroll of Psalm 82 found at masada |
What Josephus Says about Masada
There is more to the history of Masada written in Josephus than that
which I will here discuss. The one thing that we must know however is that
the site was heavily fortified during the reign of Herod. It became a Roman
site which was ideal for defense. The hill to Masada was steep, the walls
were thick, and there were many towers from which the inhabitants could
defend themselves. Within the complex were large facilities for the storage
of food and water. This was an ideal place for the defensive purposes which
are entailed in the story which we are here addressing. Masada was taken
early in the war by a group known as Sicarii, the people who become important
to the event in question.
Before analyzing the event, we must gain some background about the people
who are believed to have held Masada. These people are often called Zealots.
However, as mentioned in Josephus (bk. VII, ch. VIII ff.) These people
were actually a group known as Sicarii. These people are mentioned earlier
in the Wars of the Jews as the people who killed the women and children
at a city known as Engaddi. The story from Josephus (bk.IV ch.VII) states
that the Sicarii had taken Masada, and had began to pester the neighboring
village to take supplies. As the Jews began to question surrender, these
people made attack on Engaddi on the evening of the Feast of Unleavened
Bread. The citizens of this town were forced to flee, and those who could
not flee as well as the women and children were killed. The Sicarii were
said to have laid all of the towns surrounding Masada in Ruin. There is
however no mention of military action against Masada until the siege which
we will soon discuss. Only this mention of how they had been the agents
of destruction which had pillaged the countryside.
It is possible that Flavius Josephus could be so confused as to say
that these people, whom he lays responsibility for the utter desolation
of the area surrounding Masada, were the brave warriors whom we see in
the current Masada story? This is a highly doubtable idea. At this point
I would like to direct the reader to a careful analyses of the Masada story
as it is actually recounted by Josephus.(5)
The Josephus story can be broken down as follows: the siege laid to Masada
by the Romans, the defensive measures which the Sicarii took, the failure
of the defenses, the speeches of Eleazar, the deaths of the Sicarii, and
the taking of Masada by Roman forces.
The Romans Attack
| Masada was the last holdout of Jewish Revolutionaries, so it was decided
in the year 73 C.E. that this site must be taken. It had been three years
since the fall of Jerusalem, and only this group of Sicarii lead by a man
named Eleazar remained to rebel against the Roman empire. This group had
"got together against those that were willing to submit to the Romans,
and treated them in all respects as if they had been their enemies."(6)
Because of these raids, the Roman general Silva decided that this fortification
must fall and laid siege to it. He Built a wall around the fortress so
that no one could easily leave, and set up supply lines so that food and
water could be brought in as there was no place to get water in close proximity
to the site.
The site of Masada is a high rock which is surrounded by deep valleys with only two places which allow the climbing to the fortress. The fortress itself has a high wall with thirty-eight towers ideal for defensive military action. Within the fortress are cut many reservoirs for the holding of water. "And after such a manner was this citadel fortified, both by nature and by the hands of men, in order to frustrate the attacks of enemies."(7) This was an ideal site. Most every military tactician will agree that it is wisest to set ones self at the top of a hill so that the enemy must fight uphill to overtake. This site had this advantage as well as having the food and water which was necessary for survival. The Roman attackers had the disadvantage of fighting uphill on difficult terrain, relying on their supply lines to keep them alive. It seems as though the Romans had quite a siege to look forward to, and hence they brought in the siege machines which would ultimately mean the downfall of Masada. |
 Masada
as seen from Silva's camp |
The Defense and its failure
The Sicarii made haste in building a second wall within the fortress
which was made of pliable wood, two walls were built , and in between them
were mounds of dirt. When the battering ram hit these walls, the only thing
that would happen is the dirt would become more compacted. The Sicarii
felt that they had saved themselves by this means, and thought that they
would one again be safe from the attacks of the Romans. Silva however was
a cunning man, and thought of a way in which this fortification could be
destroyed. He set fire to the wooden wall, and as it burned, the Sicarii
who held Masada knew that this meant their doom.
It is at this point that the story becomes more interesting. The Myth
which has grown out of the Masada story recounts this piece of the story
in much the same way I have done. However there is a break with the Josephus
story when the fate of Masada is recounted. The speeches which follow this
story in Josephus till of a desperate leader, Eleazar, who did not want
to surrender to the Romans, and felt that his purpose would be better served
if he were to convince the people of Masada to meet death by their own
hands rather than at the hands of the Romans. As the Romans retired to
their camps for the night, Eleazar began to formulate his plan for the
action which the Sicarii would take.
The Speeches
There are in Josephus two speeches which were given by Eleazar to the
people inside Masada. It seems as though the first one was unsuccessful,
and it was the second one which convinced the majority of the Sicarii to
meet their death willingly. The speeches rely on the use of a Jewish concept
which would allow a person to accept death willingly: Kiddush Hashem. This
is an idea which is not often related to the Masada story, however it is
a concept which is necessary to understand why these people would be willing
to meet death. Kiddush Hashem is the idea that there are certain times
when it is acceptable for a person to meet death willingly. One time when
a Jewish person can willingly accept death is when they are forced to choose
between being Jewish or death. It seems as though this is one of the appeals
which is made by Eleazar.
This line is the beginning of Eleazar's first speech. It relies heavily
on the idea that if they fall to the Romans, they will be forced to serve
them instead of God. He creates a choice, the Sicarii must either choose
to give up their "Jewishness", or they must die. In the course of his first
argument, he makes the point that there is no way that they can escape,
and there is no way for them to win in battle against the Romans. Thus
because they can not allow themselves to be made the servants of the Romans
instead of the servants of God, they must die at their own hands. God has
turned against them for their iniquities, and they have no hope of victory,
and hence they must die or allow the Romans to defeat them.
A break is made with this idea toward the end of the speech. Rather
than take the religious view, he shifts to the idea that it would be more
noble to die with freedom.
 one
of the cisterns which supplied water to Masada |
By making this statement, Eleazar is attempting to say that it would
be better for the Sicarii to die by their own hands than to give the Romans
the gratification of knowing that they had been the victors. To compound
this post mortem blow to the Roman Army, Eleazar suggested that all of
the money, as well as the fortress should be burned so that the army could
take no loot from the site.
This seems to be a much more secular view than the Kiddush Hashem idea
which he began with. It seems as though he turned to the idea that not
only would they be protecting their families from the awful things which
the Romans would do to them, but they would be doing harm to the Romans
by removing the pay which they thought they would get. To strike a further
blow to the Romans, Eleazar suggested that they leave their supplies so
that the Roams could see that it was not for their lack of supplies that
they had chosen death. It had become more of a strike to the Romans than
a statement of religious belief or even a statement of political belief.
It was one final attempt to "hurt" the Roman army.
As stated previously, this first speech did not convince all that death
was the only option. Eleazar began quickly to create a second speech, the
one which would be successful. His second speech begins with an attack
on the bravery which these people felt that they had within them.
This seems to be a typical military tactic. If the people will not dedicate
themselves whole heartedly to the cause, then it is often deemed necessary
to attack the people as being week. This is exactly the method with which
Eleazar chose to speak to his people. He states that
|
Their holy city had been destroyed (Jerusalem), many of those who had
they same beliefs as they had been killed, and the Romans were going to
take away their right to worship. The Romans would feel that they had achieved
a victory if they were allowed to take the fortification, the women would
be "abused", and the children would be taken into slavery. All of these
were things which were probably true, and apparently it was enough for
the people of Masada to decide that their best choice would to be to die
not by the hands of the Romans, but by the hands of those which were near
to them.
The Deaths
| The deaths did not come in the way which is traditionally believed.
These people did not actually commit suicide, rather the men began by killing
the women and children, a group of men was then selected by lot to kill
the rest, and finally one man was selected by lot to kill those who remained
and then kill himself. This seems radically different that the choice of
group suicide. It is likely that many of the women and children were not
given the choice of life or death, they were just killed by the male head
of the household. It is one thing for all people to choose to commit suicide
because they are so dedicated to some cause. It is an entirely different
thing for some testosterone charged male who feels his manliness threatened
by his military leader to agree to follow orders. The men
The felt that they were doing this to avoid the intolerable pains which would be inflicted upon them by the Romans if they were to allow them to attack. The men became grief stricken for the murder of their families and resolved to finish the job as quickly as possible. Each man burned everything that he had, and "they chose ten men by lot out of them, to slay all of the rest."(13) These ten made sure that all were dead except for themselves, and once again by lot chose the man who would slay them all, set fire to the fortress and finally kill himself. This final man was the only true suicide in the fortress. |
an ostraca found at Masada with the name ben Ya'ir.
possibly the lot which was cast by Eleazar ben Ya'ir |
The next morning when the Romans woke to attack Masada, they were greeted
with silence. They expected to find some resistance, but instead found
two women and five children who had concealed themselves in caverns under
the ground. These women told the Romans the story of what had happened,
and it is from this story and the stories of the Roman army that we have
the history of Masada as recorded by Josephus.
Conclusion
Josephus does not paint a positive picture of the things which happened
at Masada. In fact the women who escaped from Masada, are the ones who
are portrayed in a positive light, not those who died there.
The deaths are portrayed as a slaughter, not as a glorious group suicide,
in which everyone was brave enough not to fear death, but rather to embrace
it as an end to their worldly suffering. Josephus tells the story of a
people who fell to the group mentality of "he is willing to kill his family
and the die, maybe I should be willing to do so also." It seems as though
this is portrayed as an early example of mob mentality, and the bad things
that can happen when power falls to the mob. This was a piece of propaganda
against any revolt which might occur in the future, and this example seems
to illustrate the problems which can arise when an unqualified ruler is
left to rule over a group of maniacal revolutionaries.
The idea of a glorious suicide is a later creation. People wanted to
see Masada as a group of people unwilling to fall to the Romans. Masada
was a place where the people would rather taste death by their own hands
than accept the rule of the Romans. They were so dedicated to their freedom
and to their religion that they would die rather than allow the Romans
to rape, kill, and enslave their families. The truth is something radically
different. There was only one man who was forced into this position of
utter dedication to his cause. The last man to die. The others had to be
dedicated enough to kill, but this is a given if they had been willing
to kill throughout the course of the war. Those who killed their families
felt that they were doing the best thing by not allowing them to be raped
an enslaved. Those who killed their friends felt they were doing them a
favor by letting them die honorably. But these are mercy killings. The
man who kills himself must feel that it is the only choice, not that it
is merely the best choice. For Suicide is final, and mercy killing is something
which can be excused by most people if it was the best choice.
1. The complete works of Flavius Josephus, Flavius Josephus, Trans. By Wm. Whiston. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Kregel Publications, 1960.) P. IX.
Hereafter cited as Josephus.
3. Book one Chapter 22 of Thucydides history states
"with reference to the speeches in this history, some were delivered before the war began, others while it was going on; some I heard myself, others I got from various quarters; it was in all cases difficult to carry them word for word in one's memory, so my habit has been to make the speakers say what was in my opinion demanded of them by the various occasions, of course adhering as closely as possible to the general sense of what they really said."
4. The Masada Myth, Nachman Ben-Yehuda, (Madison Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press, 1995.) P. 28.
5. This is only a brief analyses of the story, however there is much unmentioned information available both through the careful reading of Josephus, and through the readings of the numerous commentaries on Josephus. Ben-Yehuda's monograph The Masada Myth also gives an in depth analyses look at the Masada story.
6. Josephus: Wars of the Jews., Book VII, Chapter VIII, section I.
7. Josephus: Wars of the Jews., Book VII, Chapter VIII, section iii.
8. Josephus: Wars of the Jews., Book VII, Chapter VIII, section vi.
9. Josephus: Wars of the Jews., Book VII, Chapter VIII, section vi.
10. Josephus: Wars of the Jews., Book VII, Chapter VIII, section vii.
11. Josephus: Wars of the Jews., Book VII, Chapter VIII, section vii.
12. Josephus: Wars of the Jews., Book VII, Chapter IX section I.
13. Josephus: Wars of the Jews., Book VII, Chapter IX section I.
14. Josephus: Wars of the Jews., Book VII,
Chapter IX section I.
Ben-Yehuda, Nachman, The Masada Myth.(Madison Wisconsin: University
of Wisconsin Press, 1995.)
Flavius Josephus, The Complete Works of Flavius Josephus. Trans.
By Wm. Whiston. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Kregel Publications, 1960.)
Netzer, Ehud, Masada III: The Final Reports. (Jerusalem: The
Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1991.).
Yadin, Yigael, Masada: Herods Fortress and the Zealots Last Stand. (New York: Random House, 1966.).
All photos taken from Yigael Yadin, Masada: Herods Fortress
and the Zealots Last Stand
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
A Comparison
of Aristotle and Lao Tzu:
What
do they tell us about scientific inquiry?
