Hubbry Logo
ZealotsZealotsMain
Open search
Zealots
Community hub
Zealots
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Zealots
Zealots
Zealots
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

The Zealots were members of a Jewish political movement during the Second Temple period who sought to incite the people of Judaea to rebel against the Roman Empire and expel it from the Land of Israel by force of arms, most notably during the First Jewish–Roman War. "Zealotry" was the term used by the Jewish historian Josephus for a "fourth sect" or "fourth Jewish philosophy" during this period.

Key Information

At the core of Zealotry was the Jewish concept of "zeal," a total commitment to God's will and law,[1] which was epitomized by the biblical figures of Phinehas and Elijah, and the Hasmonean priest, Mattathias.[2][3] Zealotry was also driven by a belief in Israel's election by God,[1] and is often seen as a key driver of the First Jewish Revolt.[2][3]

Eleazar ben Simon's faction is the only group to have explicitly adopted the title of "Zealots,"[4][5] though the term has since been applied to other rebel factions as well. The Sicarii, another radical group active during the First Jewish Revolt, are widely recognized by scholars as a distinct and rival faction, though one that shared significant similarities with the Zealots. Led by descendants of Judas of Galilee, founder of the Fourth Philosophy, the Sicarii, as noted by scholars like Martin Hengel, adhered to many of the same principles as the Zealots, including a "theocratic ideal" and a deep commitment to the concept of "zeal."[6]

Etymology

[edit]

The term zealot, the common translation of the Hebrew kanai (קנאי‎, frequently used in plural form, קנאים‎, kana'im), means one who is zealous on behalf of God. The term derives from Greek ζηλωτής (zēlōtēs), "emulator, zealous admirer or follower".[7][8]

History

[edit]
Statue of Simon the Zealot by Hermann Schievelbein at the roof of the Helsinki Cathedral.

Josephus' Jewish Antiquities[9] states that there were three main Jewish sects at this time, the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Essenes. The Zealots were a "fourth sect", founded by Judas of Galilee (also called Judas of Gamala) in 6 CE against the Census of Quirinius, shortly after the Roman Empire declared what had most recently been the tetrarchy of Herod Archelaus to be a Roman province. According to Josephus, they "agree in all other things with the Pharisaic notions; but they have an inviolable attachment to liberty, and say that God is to be their only Ruler and Lord." (18.1.6)

According to the Jewish Encyclopedia article on Zealots:[10]

Judah of Gaulanitis is regarded as the founder of the Zealots, who are identified as the proponents of the Fourth Philosophy. In the original sources, however, no such identification is anywhere clearly made, and the question is hardly raised of the relationship between the Sicarii, the upholders of the Fourth Philosophy, and the Zealots. Josephus himself in his general survey of the various groups of freedom fighters (War 7:268–70) enumerates the Sicarii first, whereas he mentions the Zealots last.

Others have also argued that the group was not so clearly marked out (before the first war of 66–70/3) as some have thought.[11]

Simon the Zealot was listed among the apostles selected by Jesus in the Gospel of Luke[12] and in the Acts of the Apostles.[13] He is called Cananaean in Mark and Matthew (Matthew 10, Matthew 10:4, Mark 3,Mark 3:18) Two of Judas of Galilee's sons, Jacob and Simon, were involved in a revolt and were executed by Tiberius Alexander, the procurator of Iudaea province from 46 to 48.[14]

The Zealots took a leading role in the First Jewish–Roman War (66–73 CE), as they objected to Roman rule and violently sought to eradicate it by indiscriminately attacking Romans and Greeks. Another group, likely related, were the Sicarii, who raided Jewish settlements and killed Jews they considered apostates and collaborators, while also urging Jews to fight the Romans and other Jews for the cause. Josephus paints a very bleak picture of their activities as they instituted what he characterized as a murderous "reign of terror" prior to the Jewish Temple's destruction. According to Josephus, the Zealots followed John of Gischala, who had fought the Romans in Galilee, escaped, came to Jerusalem, and then inspired the locals to a fanatical position that led to the Temple's destruction. They succeeded in taking over Jerusalem and held it until 70, when the son of Roman Emperor Vespasian, Titus, retook the city and destroyed Herod's Temple during the destruction of Jerusalem.[citation needed]

Talmudic descriptions

[edit]

In the Talmud, the Zealots are characterized as non-religious, that is not following the contemporary religious leadership. They are called the Biryonim (בריונים) meaning "boorish", "wild", or "ruffians", and are condemned for their aggression, their unwillingness to compromise to save the survivors of besieged Jerusalem, and their blind militarism in opposition to the rabbis' desire to seek a peace treaty with Rome. However, according to one body of tradition, the rabbis initially supported the revolt until the Zealots instigated a civil war, at which point all hope of resisting the Romans was deemed impossible.[15]

The Zealots are further blamed for having contributed to the demise of Jerusalem and the Second Temple, and of ensuring Rome's retribution and stranglehold on Judea. According to the Babylonian Talmud, Gittin:56b, the Biryonim destroyed decades' worth of food and firewood in besieged Jerusalem to force the Jews to fight the Romans out of desperation. This event precipitated the escape of Johanan ben Zakai and his meeting with Vespasian, which led to the foundation of the Academy of Jamnia and the composition of the Mishnah, ensuring the survival of rabbinical Judaism.[16][17]

Ideology

[edit]
Further information: Kanai (Judaism)
Phinehas, who in the Torah killed an Israelite man and a Midianite woman for engaging in immoral acts, is seen as a central model for ancient Jewish zealotry

At the core of Zealotry was the Jewish concept of "zeal," a total commitment to God's will and law.[1] This concept drew on earlier figures associated with zealotry found in the Hebrew Bible. Perhaps the most authoritative role model for zealotry was Phinehas, the grandson of Aaron and the son of Eleazar, whose story is found in the Torah.[18][19] His act of zeal is described in Numbers 25:1–15, where he impales an Israelite man, Zimri, and a Midianite woman, Cozbi, who were engaged in a sexual act, thereby halting the divine plague brought upon Israel for its sins.[19][18] His enforcement of God's covenant through military means made him a central figure in the ideological framework of Zealotry.[18] His role as a priest amplified his influence within priestly circles; his zeal was used to justify the legitimacy of the Hasmonean dynasty, which invoked Phinehas' zeal to support their usurpation of the high priesthood from the descendants of Zadok.[18]

Other figures associated with zealotry include the biblical prophet Elijah and Hasmonean priest Mattathias.[2][3] Elijah, in 1 Kings 19, refers to himself as "zealous" when speaking to God after killing the worshippers of Ba'al; Mattathias, the Hasmonean patriarch who helped spark the Maccabean revolt in the 2nd century BCE,[19] is celebrated for killing a Jew who agreed to make a pagan sacrifice, as well as the Greek official who ordered it. He is portrayed in 1 Maccabees as a latter-day Phinehas;[20] according to the text, he "had burned with zeal for the law, just as Phineas did against Zimri, the son of Salu".[21][19]

Zealotry was also driven by a belief in Israel's election by God.[1]

While "zeal of the Torah" does not necessarily imply resistance to Roman rule, as noted by New Testament scholar Richard Horsley,[22] Zealot ideas can nonetheless be seen as a key driver of the First Jewish Revolt.[2][3] Judaic scholar Philip Alexander sees the common goal connecting all Zealot factions as 'freeing Israel from Roman rule by force.'.[23]

Sicarii

[edit]

The Sicarii were a splinter group of the Jewish Zealots who, in the decades preceding Jerusalem's destruction in 70 CE, strongly opposed the Roman occupation of Judea and attempted to expel them and their sympathizers from the area.[24] Their leader in the early stages of the revolt was Menahem ben Judah, a descendant of Judah of Galilee.[25][26] The Sicarii carried sicae, or small daggers, concealed in their cloaks.[27] At public gatherings, they pulled out these daggers to attack Romans and alleged Roman sympathizers alike, blending into the crowd after the deed to escape detection.

According to historian Hayim Hillel Ben-Sasson, the Sicarii, originally based in Galilee, "were fighting for a social revolution, while the Jerusalem Zealots placed less stress on the social aspect," and the Sicarii "never attached themselves to one particular family and never proclaimed any of their leaders king". Both groups objected to the way the priestly families were running the Temple.[14]

Historian Jonathan Price argues that the Zealots were initially part of the broader Sicarii movement, which may have been known by a different name in its earlier stages. He suggests that the Zealots, along with possibly other splinter factions, broke away from the Sicarii in a hostile manner as tensions escalated with the onset of the First Jewish Revolt. According to Price, both groups likely believed they were fulfilling the true intentions of the movement's founders, despite the Sicarii having "dynastic legitimacy."[28] The murder of Menahem and the expulsion of many of his followers in 66 CE, Price argues, was part of a broader struggle for control over the revolution in Jerusalem.[28] Judaic scholar Philip Alexander describes the Sicarii as a loose coalition of Jewish nationalists, united by the goal of expelling Roman rule through force.[23]

Aftermath

[edit]

Zealotry did not fade away immediately after the First Jewish Revolt but instead found new expressions in later uprisings.[29][23] In the early 70s, the Zealot mindset continued to drive Jewish resistance, first in Egypt and later in Cyrenaica. In Alexandria, Sicarii activists sought to incite rebellion, but their efforts were quickly quelled by local Jewish leadership, who acted to prevent further conflict with Rome. A similar Sicarii attempt to stir unrest occurred in Cyrenaica, where a figure named Jonathan led a group into the desert, promising signs of divine intervention, but was likewise suppressed by Roman forces after the leadership alerted them to the threat.[29]

Philip Alexander writes that the persistence of Zealot ideas laid the groundwork for later Jewish revolts, including the diaspora uprisings in 115 CE and the Bar Kokhba revolt in 132 CE.[30]

Affiliation with Paul the Apostle

[edit]

While most English translations of the Bible render the Greek word zelotes in Acts 22:3 and Galatians 1:13-14 and Philippians 3:5-6 of the New Testament as the adjective "zealous", an article by Mark R. Fairchild[31] takes it to mean a Zealot and suggests that Paul the Apostle may have been a Zealot, which might have been the driving force behind his persecution of the Christians (see the stoning of Saint Stephen) before his conversion to Christianity, and the incident at Antioch, even after his conversion. While Paul was not formally part of the Zealot movement—focused on violent resistance to Roman rule, his pre-conversion actions reflect a similar fervor for preserving Jewish purity and traditions. This zeal may also explain his later confrontations, such as the incident at Antioch, even after his conversion.[32][33][34]

In the two cited verses Paul literally declares himself as one who is loyal to God, or an ardent observer of the Law according to the Douay-Rheims of Acts 22:3, but the relationship of Paul the Apostle and Jewish Christianity is still debated. This does not necessarily prove Paul was revealing himself as a Zealot. The Modern King James Version of Jay P. Green renders it as 'a zealous one'. Two modern translations (the Jewish New Testament and Alternate Literal Translation) render it as 'a zealot'. The Unvarnished New Testament (1991) renders Galatians 1:14 as "being an absolute zealot for the traditions".

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Zealots

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The Zealots were a militant Jewish faction active in Judaea during the first century CE, distinguished by their uncompromising zeal for the and national sovereignty, which manifested in violent resistance against Roman political and cultural domination. This movement originated around 6 CE with and the Pharisee , who established a "fourth " rejecting Roman taxation and authority as tantamount to and slavery to man rather than God. The Zealots proper emerged as an organized group during the First Jewish-Roman War (66–73 CE), when leaders such as captured key positions in , including the Temple, and imposed a radical regime that prioritized religious purity and anti-Roman warfare over pragmatic governance. Their internal conflicts with other Jewish factions, including assassinations and civil strife, fragmented the revolt's defenses, facilitating Roman general Titus's and the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE, after which surviving Zealots, intertwined with the subgroup, made a final stand at in 73 CE. Primary accounts from the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, who participated in the war before defecting to Rome, portray the Zealots as fanatical extremists whose actions hastened Jewish defeat, though their legacy endures as a symbol of uncompromising monotheistic .

Etymology and Terminology

Origin and Meaning of "Zealots"

The term "Zealot" originates from the noun zelotēs (ζηλωτής), denoting an "emulator," "admirer," or "zealous follower," derived from the verb zēloō meaning "to emulate" or "to be jealous" and the root zēlos signifying ardor or emulation. This linguistic foundation reflects an intense emulation of a model, often in religious or ideological contexts, as seen in usages where zelotēs describes fervent adherence, such as Paul's pre-conversion zealotry in Galatians 1:13-14. In the Hebrew Bible, the concept of zeal aligns with qanna' (קַנָּא), an adjective connoting jealousy or zealous ardor, particularly divine possessiveness toward covenant fidelity, as in Exodus 34:14 where Yahweh is described as an "jealous God" ('ēl qannā') intolerant of rival worship. This term evokes protective fervor rather than petty envy, exemplified in Numbers 25:6-13, where Phinehas's violent intervention against Israelite-Midianite intermingling and idolatry—spearing the offenders Zimri and Cozbi—earns divine commendation for being "jealous with my jealousy" (qin'ā' biqin'ātî), halting a plague and securing a perpetual priesthood. Such biblical zeal emphasizes religious purification through decisive action against perceived apostasy, distinct from mere enthusiasm. The specific application of "Zealots" (Zelotai in Greek) to first-century Jewish militants emerged in the writings of the historian Flavius around 75-94 AD, who used it descriptively rather than as a self-adopted label to characterize rebels driven by fervent opposition to Roman rule, including refusal of taxes and emperor worship as idolatrous. , a Jewish-Roman apologist, portrayed this group as fanatics whose zeal precipitated the Great Revolt (66-70 AD), contrasting it with earlier prophetic zeal—such as Elijah's slaughter of Baal's prophets in 1 Kings 18—by highlighting its organized politicization into anti-imperial violence rather than isolated theocratic enforcement. This shift marked "Zealots" as a term laden with in 's narrative, emphasizing reckless extremism over pious emulation.

Historical Context

Roman Occupation of Judea

The Roman conquest of occurred in 63 BC when the Great, intervening in a Hasmonean civil war between and , besieged and captured after three months, annexing the region to the as a while allowing limited Hasmonean rule under Hyrcanus. This marked the end of Judean , with extracting tribute and influence through local proxies like the Idumean, whose son Herod was appointed king by the in 40 BC and secured control in 37 BC, ruling until his death in 4 BC as a loyal client who rebuilt but imposed heavy taxes to sustain Roman alliances and personal projects. Herod's reign masked direct Roman oversight, yet his Idumean origins and favoritism toward Hellenistic elites sowed seeds of ethnic and cultural friction among Judeans. After Herod's death, his will divided the territory among sons Archelaus, Antipas, and , but Archelaus's ineptitude prompted Roman intervention; deposed in 6 AD, his ethnarchy became the province of under direct equestrian procurators subordinate to the Syrian legate, shifting from client to imperial administration focused on revenue extraction. The immediate trigger for provincial unrest was the ordered by Publius Sulpicius as legate of in 6 AD to register property for taxation, which many perceived as a servile assessment undermining theocratic and imposing burdensome levies amid existing temple and local dues, leading to protests over doubled fiscal pressures. Roman taxation relied on publicani who often exceeded quotas through , compounding economic strain in an . Cultural impositions intensified grievances, as Roman governance promoted through urban gymnasia, theaters, and administrative Greek, clashing with strict Jewish and observance, while procuratorial insensitivity—such as routine military standards emblazoned with imperial effigies—evoked memories of Seleucid desecrations. , procurator from 26 to 36 AD, exemplified administrative abuses by diverting temple korbanot funds for a aqueduct and displaying Tiberius's image on ensigns in the city, actions that sparked mass demonstrations suppressed with violence, as reported by for their cruelty and rapacity. The imperial cult's expansion posed ongoing threats of , notably Caligula's 39–40 AD directive to install his in the Temple, interpreted as divine claim violating , though forestalled by provincial delays and his murder. Such episodes underscored Rome's prioritization of loyalty oaths and honors to emperors over local religious scruples, eroding acquiescence among Judean elites and populace.

Precursors to Zealotry: Judas of Galilee and the Fourth Philosophy

In 6 AD, following the deposition of Herod Archelaus and the imposition of direct Roman administration in Judea, the legate of Syria, Publius Sulpicius Quirinius, initiated a census for taxation purposes, prompting widespread unrest. Judas, known as Judas of Galilee, alongside the Pharisee Saddok, emerged as leaders of a revolt against this measure, rallying followers by declaring that payment of tribute to Rome equated to voluntary enslavement and that recognition of any human lordship violated monotheistic fidelity to God alone. Their agitation framed the census not merely as economic burden but as idolatrous submission to foreign dominion, inciting armed resistance that resulted in the deaths of Roman soldiers and Jewish elites before being quelled. The Roman response was decisive: the governor marched legions into , suppressing the uprising with executions, including the of around 2,000 rebels, while dispersing others across the . Flavius Josephus, the primary ancient chronicler of these events—who himself participated in the later Great Revolt before defecting to Roman service and thus exhibited a tendency to attribute Jewish misfortunes to radical agitators—credits Judas with originating what he termed the "Fourth Philosophy." This doctrine aligned with Pharisaic theology in most respects but diverged radically by positing God's exclusive sovereignty, rendering human rulers illegitimate and instilling an "inviolable attachment to " that precluded compromise with imperial authority. Though the immediate revolt failed, the Fourth Philosophy persisted as an ideological undercurrent, promoting non-collaboration and theocratic absolutism that influenced subsequent anti-Roman factions. Evidence of its endurance appears in the activities of Judas's descendants; his sons and Simon, for instance, led further disturbances and were crucified by procurator circa 46 AD during a crackdown on brigands and revolutionaries under Claudius's reign. This familial continuity underscores how Judas's teachings seeded a durable rejection of Roman suzerainty, distinct from accommodationist Jewish sects, though Josephus's portrayal—shaped by his post-defection incentives—may exaggerate the philosophy's direct causality in later upheavals to deflect blame from broader societal tensions.

Ideology and Beliefs

Theological Foundations

The Zealots drew their theological inspiration from biblical archetypes of zealous violence to defend covenantal purity against and compromise. In Numbers 25:6-13, , grandson of , executed an Israelite prince and a Midianite woman in the act of public fornication and Baal worship, averting a plague and securing God's grant of an everlasting priesthood for his zeal. This precedent, praised in Sirach 45:23-24 for Phinehas's fervor in executing judgment, exemplified the imperative to eradicate internal threats to through decisive action. This model found historical embodiment in Mattathias's revolt against Seleucid in 167 BC, as recorded in 2:1-28, where the priest slew a compromising Jew and a Greek official at Modiin, igniting the Maccabean uprising to restore Torah observance and Temple sanctity. Zealots venerated such acts as divinely sanctioned, tracing their lineage to these figures who prioritized fidelity to God's law over accommodation with pagan overlords. At the core of Zealot doctrine lay the unyielding assertion of 's exclusive kingship over , nullifying allegiance to any earthly sovereign. Josephus attributes this to Judas of Galilee's "fourth philosophy," which insisted that " alone is the ruler and lord" of the Jews, framing submission to as covenantal rather than pragmatic necessity. Roman dominion was tolerable only as divine chastisement warranting , not concessions like taxation or participation, which profaned the direct theocratic bond and the inviolable sanctity of the land and Temple. strategies of ritual adaptation were dismissed as dilutions of this absolute sovereignty, demanding instead uncompromised adherence to scriptural mandates for holy separation.

Political and Nationalistic Objectives

The Zealots, aligned with the "fourth philosophy" articulated by around 6 AD, pursued the establishment of a sovereign Jewish in which God alone served as ruler, rejecting all human overlords including Roman authorities and their client intermediaries. This framed submission to foreign dominion, such as through taxation or oaths of allegiance, as equivalent to and enslavement, insisting that true liberty demanded absolute fidelity to divine kingship without compromise. Central to their nationalistic agenda was vehement opposition to the and collaborating priestly elites, whom they viewed as puppets enabling Roman exploitation of . and his successors, appointed by to maintain order and collect tribute, embodied for the Zealots a betrayal of Jewish , prompting early resistance movements that targeted such figures as symbols of corrupted governance. , a primary contemporary source with sympathies toward Roman-aligned Jewish leadership, depicts this stance as fomenting unrest by portraying the ' pragmatic accommodations—such as tribute payment—as moral capitulation rather than survival strategy. The Zealots' uncompromising vision precluded alliances or diplomatic overtures, such as potential cooperation with against eastern threats like , prioritizing messianic restoration over tactical flexibility. This absolutism, per ' analysis, eroded prospects for cohesive national defense by alienating moderate factions and elites, substituting ideological purity for broader coalitions that might have mitigated Roman reprisals. Empirical outcomes bore out this causal rigidity: internal ideological schisms supplanted unified command, as evidenced by ' attribution of the revolt's escalation to the fourth philosophy's intolerance for any authority short of divine rule, ultimately contributing to factional self-destruction amid external .

Organization and Methods

Structure and Factions

The Zealots operated without a centralized formal hierarchy, consisting instead of autonomous bands led by charismatic figures who commanded regional loyalties and personal followings rather than a unified command structure. Prominent leaders included , a priestly figure who seized control of the Temple and its environs, and , who initially organized resistance in before relocating to with his adherents. These groups maintained distinct operational bases, such as Eleazar's hold on sacred precincts and John's forces in outer districts, fostering chronic disunity that attributed to personal ambitions and ideological rivalries, ultimately weakening collective cohesion. Factionalism within the Zealot movement was pronounced, with the representing a radical subset focused on targeted eliminations, distinct from the broader Zealot ranks yet allied in opposition to Roman rule and Jewish collaborators; portrayed the Sicarii as originating from northern agitators like Judas of Galilee's successors, while core Zealots drew from southern zeal, leading to tactical divergences and interpersonal distrust that fragmented alliances. This internal fragmentation, evident in shifting pacts and betrayals among leaders, exemplified the decentralized nature's inherent vulnerability, as bands prioritized local strongholds over strategic unity. Zealot ranks were predominantly recruited from lower socioeconomic classes, including rural peasants, artisans, and disaffected lower priests resentful of aristocratic dominance in Temple administration, channeling widespread grievances against elite accommodation with Rome. This populist base fueled an anti-aristocratic ethos, culminating in the rejection of hereditary high priestly succession; in a deliberate subversion of tradition, Zealot partisans selected Phannias ben Samuel, an obscure villager, by lot as high priest around 67 CE, stripping the office of its prestige and symbolizing their egalitarian disdain for established hierarchies.

Tactics: Assassination and Guerrilla Warfare

The , an extremist subgroup aligned with Zealot ideology, specialized in targeted assassinations using short daggers (sicae) hidden beneath cloaks, enabling them to infiltrate crowds during public festivals or gatherings for surprise stabbings of perceived collaborators. These attacks aimed to instill terror and deter compromise with Roman authority, often justified through religious appeals to scriptural precedents of zealous violence against apostasy, such as Phinehas's spear (Numbers 25:7-8). A notable instance occurred around 57 AD under procurator , when assassinated Jonathan ben Ananus in the Temple precincts, reportedly at Felix's instigation to eliminate a vocal critic, though the killers escaped into the throng while feigning outrage. Following the revolt's outbreak in 66 AD, Zealot forces transitioned to guerrilla operations, conducting ambushes and raids on Roman garrisons, supply convoys, and enforcers rather than engaging in open-field battles where Roman legions held superior and numbers. These exploited Judea's rugged terrain for evasion, targeting isolated outposts and blending into civilian populations to disrupt Roman logistics without committing to sustained engagements. However, the Sicarii's continued emphasis on stealth killings extended to Jewish moderates and elites advocating , such as stabbing opponents in Jerusalem's streets to suppress dissent. Josephus Flavius, a former Jewish commander who defected to , criticized these methods as self-defeating, arguing that the indiscriminate murder of fellow Jews eroded communal cohesion and popular support, transforming potential allies into enemies and inviting escalated Roman reprisals without establishing a coherent structure for prolonged resistance. While Josephus's narratives in and reflect his pro-Roman perspective and antipathy toward rebels—potentially exaggerating their fanaticism to justify imperial victory—their tactical flaws align with the revolt's rapid collapse, as internal purges fragmented defenses amid external . This approach prioritized ideological purity over pragmatic unity, yielding short-term intimidation but long-term isolation from broader Jewish society.

Role in the Great Jewish Revolt

Outbreak of Rebellion (66 AD)

The outbreak of the rebellion in 66 AD was precipitated by the actions of the Roman procurator , who seized 17 talents from the Temple treasury in , ostensibly to cover arrears owed to the emperor . This act, occurring amid longstanding grievances over Roman taxation and desecrations, ignited widespread protests during the month of Artemisius (April-May), with crowds numbering in the hundreds of thousands decrying Florus's greed and demanding redress from the Syrian legate Cestius Gallus. Florus responded by deploying troops to plunder the city and crucify approximately 3,600 Jews, including Roman equestrians, further inflaming tensions and prompting armed clashes. Zealot-aligned militants, including the faction under leaders like , allied with temple officials such as ben Ananias to escalate the uprising. , captain of the Temple guard, spearheaded the radicals' refusal to offer the customary sacrifices for the on the 15th of Lous (), a symbolic that unified disparate Jewish factions against . This radical stance, rooted in Zealot ideology of uncompromising opposition to foreign rule, mobilized the masses and led to the siege and capture of the , where rebels slaughtered the Roman garrison of several cohorts. Concurrently, forces under , who had seized the fortress of by treachery—killing its Roman garrison and arming themselves with captured weapons—marched on to bolster the revolt, distributing arms and briefly assuming a commanding role. These early successes extended beyond Jerusalem, with rebels expelling Roman detachments from and establishing control over much of , including the capture of as a strategic base. The decisive blow came in the defeat of the Roman legate Cestius Gallus's expeditionary force of around 20,000-30,000 troops at the Battle of Beth Horon in November 66 AD (8th of Dius), where Jewish forces killed approximately 5,300-6,000 Romans and seized their siege equipment and eagle standards. In the aftermath, a revolutionary council was formed in , headed by Joseph ben Gorion and the , to govern the provisional regime, repair fortifications, and coordinate defenses. However, Zealot involvement already manifested signs of overreach: Menahem's tyrannical pretensions prompted his execution by Eleazar's faction, foreshadowing the internal executions of moderates and the radicalization that would fracture rebel unity. This internal strife, driven by Zealot insistence on without compromise, alienated potential allies among the Jewish elite even as it propelled the initial momentum against .

Defense of Jerusalem and Factional Strife

During the Roman of in 70 AD, Zealot factions under leaders including and fortified key positions such as the Temple and its environs against Titus's legions. They employed tunnels to undermine Roman earthworks at the , causing structural collapses, and deployed fire as traps against siege engines and advancing troops, temporarily coordinating with rival groups to hurl projectiles and torches. These efforts included constructing and reinforcing inner walls, aiming to repel breaches despite the city's multi-layered defenses already straining under Roman pressure. However, severe factional strife among Zealot-aligned groups—led by (controlling the inner Temple court with zealot supporters), (commanding around 8,400 fighters including zealots in the Temple area), and (holding the upper and parts of the with 15,000 men)—undermined these defenses through incessant . Factions engaged in mutual assaults, dart exchanges, and executions of rivals, with John overpowering Eleazar's forces in the Temple precincts. This infighting escalated to the deliberate burning of stored grain and provisions in houses, destroying reserves sufficient to sustain the city for years and precipitating widespread that killed hundreds of thousands. The internal divisions prevented unified command or credible surrender negotiations, as leaders executed potential deserters and civilians to seize hidden , prolonging civilian and diverting resources from the external threat. , an eyewitness turned Roman ally, observed that this "sedition destroyed the city" more effectively than the Romans, who found subduing the factions harder than breaching the walls, thereby causally enabling the eventual Roman penetration despite initial defensive successes.

Destruction of the Second Temple (70 AD)

In the spring of 70 AD, Roman forces under breached 's outer walls after months of siege, escalating the conflict as Zealot factions mounted desperate defenses within the city. Zealot leaders, committed to uncompromising resistance against Roman rule, rejected overtures for surrender, executing moderates who advocated to preserve the Temple and populace. This intransigence, driven by ideological zeal for religious and national purity, prevented any negotiated resolution, ensuring the Roman advance into the Temple precincts. By August 70 AD, Roman legions overwhelmed the inner defenses, with intense fighting erupting in the Temple courts where Zealots made their final stand. Amid the chaos, the Temple was set ablaze— recounts soldiers igniting it despite Titus's orders to preserve the structure, though Zealot arson to deny Romans a remains a debated factor in ancient accounts. The conflagration consumed the sanctuary on , coinciding with the ninth of Av, leading to the looting of sacred vessels and the razing of the edifice, which symbolized the irrevocable end of the Levitical sacrificial system central to Jewish worship. Casualties during the siege were catastrophic; estimates over 1.1 million deaths in from combat, famine, and slaughter, a figure modern historians view as inflated but reflective of the immense scale of devastation amid a swollen population. Zealot refusal of terms, prioritizing messianic fervor over pragmatic survival, accelerated this outcome, forfeiting Judaism's physical and ritual core and compelling a pivot to synagogue-based rabbinic traditions for continuity. The destruction marked not merely military defeat but a causal rupture, where ideological absolutism hastened the loss of the Temple as Judaism's unifying institution.

Immediate Aftermath

Fall of (73 AD)

In 73 CE, served as the final redoubt for approximately 960 rebels—fiercely anti-Roman extremists aligned with Zealot ideology—led by ben Yair, who had fled after internal factional violence. The isolated desert fortress, originally fortified by with palaces, storerooms, and cisterns, provided a defensible plateau overlooking the , enabling prolonged resistance against Roman forces under . Silva commanded the Legio X Fretensis, supplemented by auxiliaries and thousands of Jewish prisoners pressed into labor, totaling an estimated 8,000–10,000 troops. The Romans established eight camps around the base, erected a circumvallation wall to blockade escapes, and constructed a massive ramp—spanning hundreds of meters and incorporating local stone, earth, and debris—over a period traditionally described as months, though a 2024 archaeological reassessment proposes a more rapid two-month effort leveraging the fortress's vulnerabilities. This feat allowed engines, including a , to breach the reinforced by spring. According to Flavius Josephus's , as the breach loomed, delivered speeches invoking Zealot principles of liberty over subjugation, urging communal suicide to deny Romans captives or glory. The defenders reportedly burned their possessions except food stores (to affirm they starved for principle, not necessity), then men slew their families before drawing lots: ten executed the nine hundred others, this process iterated until the final survivor self-immolated, claiming 960 lives on the 15th of Xanthicus (). Two women and five children, concealed in a cavern, emerged to recount details to the astonished Romans, who found the site ablaze but provisions ample. This narrative's reliability rests solely on Josephus, a former rebel who defected and wrote under Flavian patronage, raising suspicions of embellishment to underscore Roman inevitability or Zealot fanaticism—echoing his own aborted suicide pact at Jotapata. Excavations by Yigael Yadin (1963–1965) verified the ramp, arson layers, and stocked granaries but yielded only about 28 skeletons (three in the northern palace, 25 in a southern cave), far short of 960, with no mass graves and some remains (e.g., a woman's braid, adolescent males) possibly Roman or unrelated via DNA and context. Inscribed ostraca may represent lots, yet logistical implausibilities—like survivors overhearing speeches from afar—and tactical haste in Roman assaults suggest alternatives such as hidden surrenders, Roman killings, or narrative invention, though the act coheres with Sicarii's attested willingness for martyrdom over enslavement. Masada's collapse extinguished coordinated Zealot-Sicarii defiance, with Silva's troops occupying the site briefly before withdrawal; the handful of survivors, per , integrated under Roman oversight, while the episode later crystallized as an emblem of unyielding Jewish resistance against imperial tyranny.

Roman Suppression and Jewish Losses

The Roman campaigns under and after the fall of in 70 AD focused on eradicating pockets of Jewish resistance across , resulting in widespread devastation. , upon ascending as in 69 AD, dispatched forces to subdue remaining rebels, while oversaw the enslavement and dispersal of captives from . According to , a contemporary Jewish historian who defected to the Romans, approximately 97,000 Jews were taken captive during and immediately after the , many of whom were sold into across the empire or forced into labor on Roman projects. These policies contributed to a severe demographic contraction in , with ancient estimates by and suggesting 600,000 to 1.1 million total Jewish deaths from combat, famine, and disease during the revolt, though modern analyses indicate hundreds of thousands as more plausible given the region's pre-war of around 1-2 million. To secure the province, stationed as a permanent garrison in and surrounding areas, symbolizing ongoing military oversight and deterring future uprisings. This deployment, combined with the destruction of urban centers and agricultural infrastructure, left much of economically crippled and sparsely populated, shifting tax burdens onto survivors through the newly imposed . Established by around 71 AD, this annual two-drachma levy on all Jews empire-wide redirected the former half-shekel Temple tax to fund the Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus in , exacerbating financial strain on dispersed communities. Spoils from the Temple, including vast quantities of gold, silver, and sacred vessels, were transported to , where they financed imperial building initiatives such as the , construction of which began under circa 70-72 AD. The decimation of the Jewish elite—particularly the priestly Sadducean class tied to Temple functions—created a leadership vacuum filled by surviving Pharisaic scholars, whose emphasis on and synagogue-based practice preserved core elements of Jewish continuity amid the losses.

Relations with Contemporary Groups

Conflicts with Jewish Elites and Moderates

The Zealots, including their militant offshoot, targeted Sadducean s and other Jewish elites perceived as collaborators with Roman or authorities, denouncing them as apostates who diluted the covenant by accepting foreign overlordship. These attacks intensified in the years preceding the Great Revolt, with the employing kidnapping as a tactic to free captured members; in 64 CE, under procurator Albinus, they seized the secretary of ben Ananias—captain of the temple guard and son of former Ananias—to exchange for ten imprisoned , demonstrating their willingness to hold Jewish officials hostage. Similarly, early in the 66 CE uprising, Zealot-aligned forces pursued and killed Ananias ben Ananus after he urged accommodation with , dragging him from hiding in an aqueduct and slaying him alongside associates like his brother , whom they branded traitors. The Zealots extended their antagonism to moderates, including those sympathetic to the , whom they viewed as perpetuating Hellenistic compromises antithetical to strict observance and theocratic rule. Regarding the , while sharing doctrinal alignments on , fate, and evil—positions notes as largely congruent—the Zealots rejected Pharisaic tolerance for Roman administrative structures, such as payments and loyalty oaths, insisting instead that divine sovereignty precluded any human sovereignty over Jews. This divergence, rooted in the Fourth Philosophy's founding by and Pharisee Saddok around 6 CE, framed Pharisee pragmatism as covenantal dilution, prompting Zealot denunciations of such accommodationism as equivalent to . These purges exacerbated internal divisions, driving elites and moderates toward , neutrality, or outright Roman collaboration; records that Zealot violence against figures like alienated broader Jewish support, as potential defenders of either fled or withheld aid, prioritizing survival over entanglement in revolutionary extremism. By favoring ritual and ideological purity over strategic unity, the Zealots' actions, per ' account as a participant in the revolt's moderate faction, self-sabotaged collective resistance, converting internal rivals into de facto Roman assets and hastening 's isolation.

Ties to Early Christianity and Paul the Apostle

The Apostle 's self-description of his pre-conversion "zeal" in Philippians 3:6 refers to his zealous of the early church as a Pharisee, emphasizing religious rather than political insurrection against Roman authority. This fervor aligned with Pharisaic efforts to suppress perceived heresies within , distinct from the Zealots' armed resistance to foreign rule, with no textual or historical evidence linking Paul directly to the Zealot movement. Scholars interpret Paul's zeal as internal Jewish enforcement, not revolutionary nationalism, underscoring a theological rather than militaristic orientation. Among Jesus's disciples, Simon is designated "the Zealot" in the Gospels (Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), suggesting possible sympathy for zealous Jewish causes, but this epithet more likely denoted ardent devotion to the than affiliation with the later revolutionary Zealot party, which coalesced around 68 AD during the revolt. Historical analysis indicates the formalized Zealot faction emerged post-Jesus's ministry, rendering Simon's label a descriptor of pious enthusiasm akin to Phinehas-like biblical zealotry, not organized . Jesus's teachings explicitly countered violent anti-Roman agitation, as in his instruction to "render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's" (Matthew 22:21), affirming tax payment and distinguishing spiritual allegiance from political rebellion, in opposition to Zealot calls for total refusal of Roman sovereignty. Further, directives like (Matthew 5:39) and rebuking Peter's use of the sword during arrest (Matthew 26:52) promoted non-violent submission, incompatible with the Zealots' tactics and guerrilla strategies. Following the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD, early Christianity's deliberate separation from Jewish nationalist insurgencies facilitated its endurance amid Roman reprisals, as believers distanced themselves from the revolt's catastrophic fallout—over a million Jewish deaths and enslavements—avoiding association with Zealot extremism that invited annihilation. This divergence, rooted in apocalyptic over ethnic particularism, enabled Christianity's propagation beyond , contrasting the Zealots' path to extinction at and in suppressions.

Scholarly Interpretations and Legacy

Debates on Origins and Unity

Scholars debate the origins of the Zealots, with identifying as a foundational figure who, around 6 AD during the under , incited resistance against Roman taxation, framing it as enslavement and , thus establishing a "fourth philosophy" alongside , , and . However, Martin Hengel in his 1961 study The Zealots argued for a continuous revolutionary tradition rooted in religious zealotry from Judas onward, emphasizing theological motivations over mere political opportunism, while questioning whether this formed a structured party or an evolving ideological current amid sporadic uprisings. Counterarguments, such as those from David Rhoads, posit that Zealot radicalism emerged more during the 66–70 AD revolt, lacking direct lineage from Judas's brief insurgency, with groups like the —dagger-wielding assassins possibly active earlier or in parallel—representing distinct tactics rather than a unified evolution. Josephus's accounts, as the primary , face scrutiny for , given his to Roman forces in 67 AD and subsequent role as a client of the Flavian emperors, which incentivized portraying Zealots as irrational fanatics to legitimize Roman suppression and minimize the movement's popular appeal among Judeans aggrieved by procuratorial corruption and cultural impositions. This perspective downplays evidence of broader anti-Roman sentiment, as Josephus exaggerated internal Zealot savagery—such as temple desecrations—to align with Roman narratives of justified , while archaeological corroboration remains sparse, with no distinct Zealot artifacts, inscriptions, or sites identified beyond contested associations like Masada's fortifications, which reflect general rebel holdouts rather than ideological markers. Later rabbinic texts in the offer faint echoes of zealot-like figures through vague references to violent sectarians, but these are anachronistic and lack specificity, underscoring reliance on critically sifted literary testimony over material evidence. Contemporary consensus among historians holds that the Zealots did not constitute a monolithic but a spectrum of militant factions sharing anti-Roman ideology—centered on theocratic and refusal of imperial sovereignty—yet fractured by charismatic leaders' rival ambitions, as seen in the 69 AD Jerusalem infighting between figures like and . This view, advanced by scholars like Hengel and Rhoads, rejects Josephus's portrayal of a coherent "Zealot" entity in favor of a dynamic of zealots, where unity derived from shared scriptural imperatives against foreign rule but dissolved into factionalism, prefiguring the revolt's collapse without implying a formal organizational continuity from Judas's time.

Heroic Resistance vs. Fanatical Extremism

Scholars sympathetic to nationalist interpretations have viewed the Zealots as exemplars of heroic resistance, channeling biblical precedents of zealous defense against foreign domination, such as Phinehas's slaying of idolaters in Numbers 25, to justify uncompromised opposition to Roman rule. This perspective posits their fervor as a proto-nationalist impulse that echoed in later Jewish efforts, though critics argue it imposes modern ideological frameworks onto primarily theological motivations rooted in strict observance. Empirical analysis reveals such romanticizations often overlook causal factors like factional infighting, which undermined collective strategy more than Roman military superiority alone. In contrast, critiques frame Zealot actions as fanatical , with tactics such as the Sicarii's public assassinations—using concealed daggers in crowds—constituting early forms of targeted that mirrored insurgent methods but prioritized ideological purity over pragmatic defense. Flavius Josephus, a primary contemporary source despite his Roman patronage, explicitly condemned the Sicarii's "madness" as the origin of the revolt's cascading misfortunes, attributing to their provocation of Roman reprisals and elimination of moderate voices through internal purges. This assessment aligns with causal evidence: Zealot refusal to entertain compromise, even amid depleting resources, fragmented and invited decisive Roman intervention, culminating in the Temple's destruction as a foreseeable outcome of self-sabotaging zeal rather than inevitable . Post-1960s scholarship, including reevaluations in the , has increasingly emphasized Zealot disunity—not a cohesive "party" but disparate radicals whose ideological intransigence precluded alliances with pragmatists like those under or moderate elites. Works like Martin Hengel's investigations highlight how this splintering, driven by absolutist interpretations of divine sovereignty, rendered compromise impossible and amplified the revolt's catastrophic failure, validating Josephus's narrative over heroic mythologies. While some persist in seeing inspirational defiance, the preponderance of historical data underscores extremism's role in engineering collective ruin, cautioning against uncritical emulation in analyses of similar movements.

Long-Term Impact on Judaism and Western Thought

The destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD, exacerbated by Zealot refusal to negotiate with Roman forces, accelerated the decline of Temple-centered and the ascendancy of rabbinic traditions. Surviving Pharisee scholars, led by figures like Yochanan ben Zakkai, relocated to Yavneh around 70-80 AD, where they codified , emphasized , and adapted rituals to prayer and ethical observance, enabling Jewish survival amid and Roman suppression. This pivot decentralized authority from priestly hierarchies to rabbinic academies, prioritizing interpretive scholarship over militant restorationism, as evidenced by the compilation of the by circa 200 AD. Within Jewish , Zealot absolutism—rooted in unyielding opposition to foreign rule—became emblematic of self-destructive fervor, discredited by outcomes like the mass suicides at in 73 AD and the Bar Kokhba revolt's failure in 135 AD. Rabbinic , including Josephus's Jewish War (completed circa 78 AD), attributes the catastrophe to internal factionalism and zealotic extremism, fostering a doctrinal caution against political in favor of deferred redemption through and learning. This interpretive framework reinforced Judaism's resilience by channeling zeal into textual rather than , influencing medieval and modern Jewish thought to favor accommodation and . The Zealots' legacy permeated Western thought through early Christian , which framed the revolt as on Jewish , amplifying supersessionist themes and motifs in patristic writings from the onward. Paul's pre-conversion zealotry, referenced in Galatians 1:13-14 (circa 50 AD), provided a template for critiquing Jewish legalism as futile militancy, indirectly shaping anti-Judaic polemics that persisted into medieval . Conversely, the episode served as a historical for religious fanaticism's perils; Enlightenment-era discourse on pluralism invoked Zealot-like uniformity as a threat to civil order, paralleling critiques of theocratic overreach in favor of secular and incremental reform over ideological purity.

References

  1. https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/15185-zealots
  2. https://religiondatabase.org/browse/927/
  3. https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/revolutionaries-in-the-first-century
  4. https://www.etymonline.com/word/zealot
  5. https://bam.sites.uiowa.edu/its-greek-me/zealot
  6. http://biblehub.com/greek/2207.htm
  7. http://biblehub.com/hebrew/7067.htm
  8. https://blogs.blueletterbible.org/blb/2012/08/28/the-names-of-god-qanna/
  9. https://biblehub.com/commentaries/numbers/25-11.htm
  10. https://www.biola.edu/blogs/good-book-blog/2025/simon-the-zealot-was-not-a-zealot
  11. https://forward.com/culture/106291/yes-we-kana-i/
  12. https://www.livius.org/articles/concept/roman-jewish-wars/
  13. https://antigonejournal.com/2025/07/rise-of-herod-the-great/
  14. https://www.ancient-origins.net/history-famous-people/herod-0012600
  15. https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/the-roman-province-of-judea-a-historical-overview
  16. https://www.thedivinemercy.org/articles/part-4-did-roman-census-really-happen
  17. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvzgb9hm.10?seq=8
  18. http://files.eshkolot.ru/tuval2.pdf
  19. https://rsc.byu.edu/new-testament-history-culture-society/judea-roman-province-ad-6-66
  20. http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/jesus/jesuskeyfigures.html
  21. https://romanjews.com/ancient-rome-and-judea-caligula-and-the-temple-of-jerusalem/
  22. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/emperor-worship
  23. http://penelope.uchicago.edu/josephus/ant-18.html
  24. https://www.livius.org/articles/religion/messiah/messianic-claimant-4-judas-the-galilean/
  25. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/harvard-theological-review/article/zealots-and-sicarii-their-origins-and-relation/1EDE0291129AED8760A12638641E2A68
  26. https://www.ccel.org/ccel/josephus/complete.ii.xxi.v.html
  27. https://believersarmedanddangerous.blog/2024/06/08/zealots/
  28. https://www.thattheworldmayknow.com/zealots-people-of-the-palm-branch
  29. https://brewminate.com/judaism-and-zealots-in-the-ancient-roman-empire/
  30. https://josephus.org/causesOfWar.htm
  31. https://oxfordre.com/classics/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199381135.001.0001/acrefore-9780199381135-e-6928
  32. https://penelope.uchicago.edu/josephus/war-5.html
  33. https://referenceworks.brill.com/display/entries/EECO/SIM-00003696.xml?language=en
  34. https://www.encyclopedia.com/religion/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/zealots-and-sicarii
  35. http://wp1.temp.domains/~studyti0/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Article_on_the_Zealots_ABD.pdf
  36. https://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~wstevens/history331texts/josephus.html
  37. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/486729
  38. https://www.cryforjerusalem.com/post/jewish-assassins-sicarii
  39. https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13630-sicarii
  40. https://www.worldhistory.org/Zealots/
  41. https://www.heritage-history.com/index.php?c=resources&s=war-dir&f=wars_romanjewish
  42. https://readingacts.com/2017/04/22/roots-of-the-rebellion-zealots-and-sicarii/
  43. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1266&context=studiaantiqua
  44. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/376665812_The_Assassinations_of_the_Ancient_Jewish_Sicarii_from_an_Intelligence_Analysis_Perspective_Josephus_Flavius_Reexamined
  45. http://penelope.uchicago.edu/josephus/war-2.html
  46. https://josephus.org/FlJosephus2/warChronology7Fall.html
  47. https://www.livius.org/articles/concept/roman-jewish-wars/roman-jewish-wars-4/
  48. https://warhistory.org/%40msw/article/siege-of-jerusalem-70-ad
  49. http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/jewishtemple.htm
  50. https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/article/the-fall-of-jerusalem-in-70-ce-a-story-of-roman-revenge/
  51. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/masada-desert-fortress
  52. https://www.haaretz.com/archaeology/2024-09-03/ty-article-magazine/roman-siege-of-masada-was-much-quicker-than-assumed-israeli-archaeologists-say/00000191-b7ca-d13c-a39b-bfcf76ed0000
  53. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/maps/primary/josephusmasada.html
  54. https://aeon.co/essays/decoding-the-ancient-tale-of-mass-suicide-in-the-judaean-desert
  55. https://jamestabor.com/masada-mysteries-what-do-we-know-about-the-bones/
  56. https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna19378819
  57. https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1993/the-siege-of-jerusalem-in-70-ce/
  58. https://rsc.byu.edu/new-testament-history-culture-society/first-jewish-revolt-against-rome
  59. https://www.livius.org/articles/legion/legio-x-fretensis/
  60. https://www.livius.org/articles/concept/fiscus-judaicus/
  61. https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-sites-places/temple-at-jerusalem/jewish-captives-in-the-imperial-city/
  62. https://rsc.byu.edu/glory-god-intelligence/cultic-piety-torah-piety-after-70-ad
  63. http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/roman/Texts/Josephus/War/2D.html
  64. https://josephus.org/causeofDestruct.htm
  65. https://biblehub.com/commentaries/philippians/3-6.htm
  66. https://www.studylight.org/commentary/philippians/3-6.html
  67. https://versebyversecommentary.com/1996/01/02/philippians-36/
  68. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/jesus-and-the-politics-of-his-day/zealots-and-jesus/38BC5B84FECF6FDDDE495828E3515940
  69. https://newint.org/features/special/2008/05/01/jesus-christ
  70. https://ehrmanblog.org/heightened-opposition-to-jews-in-early-christianity/
  71. https://brill.com/display/book/edcoll/9789004352971/BP000019.xml?language=en
  72. https://answersingenesis.org/bible-history/is-josephus-reliable/
  73. https://repository.upenn.edu/bitstreams/0f0181c5-2a59-459c-9a90-83075d860e53/download
  74. https://www.brandeis.edu/cmjs/birthright/pdfs/masada051908.pdf
  75. http://penelope.uchicago.edu/josephus/war-7.html
  76. https://theendofhistory.net/who-were-the-zealots-history-of-terrorism-part-1/
  77. https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/the-zealots-of-the-21st-century/
  78. https://tidings.org/magazine/after-ad-70/
  79. https://www.historyskills.com/classroom/ancient-history/siege-of-jerusalem-ad-70/
  80. https://worldhistoryvolume.com/bc/zealots/
  81. https://www.jpost.com/blogs/the-jewish-problem---from-anti-judaism-to-anti-semitism/anti-judaism-in-christian-scripture-part-four-paul-as-zealot-363735
  82. https://www.icsahome.com/elibrary/topics/articles/zealotry-and-american-identity-langone-en6-3
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.