God is to be their only Lord and Master. They also do not mind dying any death, nor indeed do they heed the deaths of their relations and friends, nor could the fear of death make them call any man their master. And since this immutable resolution of theirs is well known to a great many, I shall speak no further about that matter; nor am I afraid that anything I have said of them should be disbelieved, rather do I fear that what I have said does not adequately express the determination that they show when they undergo pain.1

As a matter of fact the Jewish struggle for independence and the Zealot movement did not begin even with Judas the Gaulonite. Judas himself only continued the work of his father, Ezechias of Galilee,2 who with his very large following was killed by young Herod when the latter was only the captain, sτpaτηyós, of Galilee under Hyrcanus, the ethnarch of Judea. That was in the year 46 B. C. Even then the Sanhedrin of Jerusalem must have had strong sympathies with Ezechias, for Herod was accused before that body for killing Ezechias and his followers, and he would have fared badly had not Sextus Cæsar, the Roman governor of Syria, requested from Hyrcanus Herod's acquittal.3

Nor does the rebellion of the Jews begin with Ezechias. The rebellion of the Jews against Rome rather begins with the power of Rome over the Jews; and in the same degree as the Roman power over the Jews increased, did the political reaction against that power, the revolution against Rome, increase and

2

Josephus: Antiquities, XVIII, 1, 6.

Schürer: Geschichte des Jüdischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi, v. I, p. 420. (4th ed., Leipzig, 1901).

Josephus: Antiq., XIV, 9, 3-5. Jewish Wars, I, 10, 6-9.

spread. The Jewish revolutionists against Rome were called by the Romans bandits or robbers. Later they were called scitarii, "men with knives." The polite Josephus followed the Romans in calling them robbers; but whenever he tells us about the constant warfare, about either the Romans' or Herod's exploits against the robbers, it becomes clear that they are religious patriots who are fighting and dying for their country. So, for instance, Josephus describes one of Herod's expeditions against some Galilean robbers:

...

Now these men slew the robbers and their families . . . and as Herod was desirous of saving some of them, he issued a proclamation to them . . . but not one of them came willingly to him, and those that were compelled to come preferred death to captivity. . . . And here a certain old man, the father of seven children . slew his children one after another. .. Herod was near enough to see this sight and compassion moved him, and he stretched out his right hand to the old man and besought him to spare his children; yet did he not relent at all upon what he said, but reproached Herod on the lowliness of his descent, and slew his wife as well as his children; and when he had thrown their dead bodies down the precipice, he at last threw himself down after them.1

It is obvious here that we are dealing not with mercenary bandits, but with political and religious devotees who prefer death to submission. The Zealot movement, judging from Josephus's narrative, is of much older date than the revolt of Judas the Gaulonite, but that particular Galilean's uprising must have especially impressed itself upon the memory of men, for it is mentioned by way of illustration or characterization even in the Acts.

After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing [i.e., the enrolment] and drew away much people after him: he 1Josephus: Jewish Wars, I, 16, 4.

also perished; and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dispersed.1

Still more important the outbreak becomes when we consider what happened at the same time. For it was this very Census of Quirinius and this very enrolment which, according to Luke, brought Joseph and Mary from Nazareth to Bethlehem where Mary gave birth to Jesus.2 The chronology and details of Luke's narrative present many puzzles, important no doubt to the historian of dates and places, but not relevant in a history of ideas. The slight chronological discrepancies here we may overlook. For after all so far as influence and ideas are concerned, it does not matter whether the uprisings of Judas took place in the year I or in the year 7 after the birth of Christ. Certain it is that the great events under the shadow of which Jesus spent his childhood were memories of Herod's bloody rule, the annexation of Judea to the Roman province of Syria, and the revolt against Rome of Judas of Galilee.

The importance of Judas's uprising is attested to us by Josephus. The ideas for which Judas stood did not die with him, but were spreading and increasing till all of Judea and Galilee were in a veritable conflagration. Is it reasonable to suppose that Jesus paid no attention to what was going on around him? Is it reasonable to suppose that the souls of his fellow men, their ideas and ideals could be a matter of indifference to him?

You must remember that if there was a difference

1 Acts 5:37.

2 Luke 2:1-6.

between the Pharisees and the Zealots it was only in the method and the degree of their antagonism to Rome. The immediate followers of Judas grasped the sword as their answer to Roman taxation. But all the Jews in Jerusalem and throughout Judea resented the idea of paying tribute. Josephus tells us that they took the report of taxation "heinously," and that it took a great deal of persuasion on the part of the high priest Joazar to make them submit to the taxation.1 It is clear, however, that the difference in attitude between the Zealots and the Pharisees was that the former resisted with the drawn sword, while the submission of the latter was but passive resistance, with a heart full of resentment but with an arm too feeble or a mind too cautious to grasp the sword. Hence the Pharisaic question, "Is it lawful to give tribute unto Cæsar, or not?" 2 The inquirer knew as well as Jesus how unpopular the answer Yes would be with a Jewish audience. Jesus answered, however, in the affirmative, pointing out that they have lost their independence, that on their tribute coin is the image of Cæsar. Hence there is nothing left but to "render therefore unto Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's." 3

In the year 6 Judea was annexed to Syria; in the year 70 Jerusalem and its temple were destroyed. Between these two dates Jesus preached and was crucified on Golgotha. During all that time the life of the little nation was a terrific drama; its patriotic emotions were aroused to the highest pitch and then still more

inflamed by the identification of national politics with a national religion. Is it reasonable to assume that what was going on before Jesus' eyes was a closed book, that the agonizing problems of his people were a matter of indifference to him, that he had given them no consideration, that he was not taking a definite attitude towards the great and all-absorbing problem of the very people whom he taught?

In this setting, the Jewish nationalist could not separate religion from patriotism. Roman taxation, for instance, is certainly a purely political question, but Judas made a religious issue of it; and the Pharisaic interrogator of Jesus asked whether it was "lawful," that is, religiously permissible. Jesus therefore could not meditate about the religious problems of the people to whom he ministered without giving consideration to their engrossing political problem. That he had profoundly considered the problems of his day and wondered what the future contained for his people is shown by his reproach to the Pharisees:

The Pharisees also with the Sadducees came, and tempting desired him that he would shew them a sign from heaven. But he answered and said unto them, When it is evening, ye say, It will be fair weather: for the sky is red. And in the morning, It will be foul weather to-day: for the sky is red and lowering. O, ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times? 1

1 Matthew 16:1-3.