The "Son of Man" and Simon Bar Giora
Posted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 6:10 pm
In some of my (not so) recent posts on Hegesippus' fantastic story about Jacob the Just in his five volume "Note-Books", I had suggested that the story seems like a political show-trial. Searching the works of Josephus for a Jacob who might have served as a model, I came up with the Idumean general Jacob the son of Sosas as the most likely candidate.
This Jacob the son of Sosas was one of the Idumean generals who responded to the Zealot plea for help against the Provisional Revolutionary Government (PRG) of former HP Ananus son of Ananas & his second in command Jesus, also of High Priestly lineage.
First Ananus had closed the gates of the city to shut them out, speaking down to them insultingly from the top of the city wall, and then Jesus made a speech from the wall telling them they would only be let in as spectators to judge for themselves the "truth" of Zealot claims, but only of they laid down their arms first. The Idumeans, stung by their reception, of course did not agree, and stewed about this "disrespect" directed towards them by the PRG, as a torrential rainstorm pounded them accompanied by tremendous thunder and lightening.
As Ananus, Jesus and the PRG thought they had put the Idumeans firmly in their place, during the storm the Zealots had moved fighters into position and secretly opened the gates to let the Idumeans in. They moved in and promptly arrested, and summarily executed, Ananus and Jesus as well as any of the HP lineage they could lay their hands on. Their corpses were thrown over the city wall and guards were apparently posted at the base of it to prevent anyone from burying them. This seems overly dramatic, but might suggest a "show-trial", the kind of which Josephus described the Zealots and Idumeans conducting immediately after the executions of Ananus and Jesus.*
After a period of co-rule with the Zealots, the Idumeans, realizing the Zealots had used them as pawns to overthrow the PRG, withdrew from the city after releasing all the political prisoners they could, and appear to have allied themselves with Simon bar Giora, who was then fighting in the countryside. Jacob son of Sosas was by far the most prominent of Simon's Idumean supporters, and even helped him subdue Idumea for Simon's cause.
This situation continued until the Romans parked about the city and started to lay siege to it. Simon was by now master of much of the city. At this point the Idumean generals seem to have lost faith in Simon's ability to defeat the Romans, and consulted with one another about how they could extricate themselves from the mess and preserve their lives. They decided to offer to surrender the city to Titus on terms, but Simon somehow discovered their intention before the Romans had decided on their response, and promptly arrested the Idumean generals, including Jacob son of Sosas, and put to death those who had approached the Romans about the matter. See War 4:235-6, 238, 315-318, 5:248-249; 6:92, 148, 378-80.
At this point Jacob son of Sosas disappears from the narrative. However, given the Judean rebels love for show trials, I suggested that there was some document produced that gave a running transcript of Jacob's trial for treason before Simon bar Gioras. This trial transcript mocked Jacob son of Sosas by asking him "what is the wall of Jesus?" This referred to Jesus' speech to the Idumeans, where he had predicted that the Idumeans could become the reason for a Roman victory. The implication is that the chief-priest Jesus had been right about Idumeans all along, and by extension Jacob son of Sosas, that they should not have been trusted.
In the (bogus?) trial transcript, Jacob had apparently responded to Simon's charge, "I see the "son of man" sitting on the right hand of (god's) power!" This might be an allusion to the exalted "son of man" described in the Parables of Enoch, but how did Jacob mean "son of man" in this context. I was baffled at first.
Now it is unlikely that such documents got out of Jerusalem, considering the Roman circumvallation of the city, but copies would surely have fallen into the hands of the Romans upon the city's capture. Hell, Simon himself may have had it drawn up and sent to the Roman camp to show what he thought of them and their abortive "allies". In any event, like almost all documents "captured" in all wars, the account came to be circulated among some after the conflict, probably the non-Judean population of the region, until a copy fell into the hands of Hegesippus.
Hegesippus, traveling to Rome as part of his duties for his human master, created an amusing narrative of stories about the early pre-proto-orthodox Christians, and the members of Jesus' wild and wooly family, jotting in his note-book for the trip details from conversations he had had with other proto-orthodox Christians of similar employment he met on the journey. Think of The Canterbury Tales in England much later. In the process, I proposed that he used the "trial transcript" to frame his narrative about Jacob the Just.
As I mentioned, at first I was not so sure what Jacob son of Sosas would have meant by "son of man". Then I ran across a book, Simon Son of Man: A Cognomen of Undoubted Historicity, Obscured by Translation and Lost In The Resplendence Of A Dual Appellative, by John I Riegel and John H Jordan, dated 1917, which claims that Simon Bar Giora was in fact the original Son of Man. This would have definitely made the "trial transcript" propaganda for Simon bar Giora.
Don't get me wrong, Riegel & Jordan were kooks, but they do manage to show how many Aramaic words probably used to describe Simon and his commanders mentioned in Josephus' works can be linked to the accounts of Jesus in the Christian gospels. Josephus purposely omits any mention of Simon being "the Son of Man", and the NT attributes the title Son of Man to Jesus Christ.
https://ia800503.us.archive.org/1/items ... 023mbp.pdf
See where this might be leading?
DCH
*(JOE Jwr 4:326-343) 326 Now after these were slain, the Zealots and the multitude of the Idumeans attacked the people as upon a flock of profane animals, and cut their throats;
327 and, for the ordinary sort, they were killed in whatever place they caught them. But for the noblemen and the youth, they first caught them and bound them, and shut them up in prison, and put off their slaughter, in hopes that some of them would come over to their party;
328 but not one of them would comply with their desires, but all of them preferred death before being enrolled among such wicked wretches as acted against their own country.
329 But this refusal of theirs brought upon them terrible torments; for they were so scourged and tortured, that their bodies were not able to sustain their torments, till at length, and with difficulty, they had the favour to be slain.
330 Those whom they caught in the daytime were slain in the night, and then their bodies were carried out and thrown away, that there might be room for other prisoners;
331 and the terror that was upon the people was so great, that no one had courage enough either to weep openly for the dead man that was related to him, or to bury him; but those who were shut up in their own houses could only shed tears in secret, and dared not even groan without great caution, lest any of their enemies should hear them;
332 for if they did, those who mourned for others soon underwent the same death with those whom they mourned for. Only in the night time they would take up a little dust, and throw it upon their bodies; and even some that were the most ready to expose themselves to danger, would do it in the day time:
333 and there were twelve thousand of the better sort who perished in this manner.
334 And now these Zealots and Idumeans were quite weary of barely killing men, so they had the impudence of setting up fictitious tribunals and judicatures for that purpose;
335 and as they intended to have Zacharias, the son of Baruch, one of the most eminent of the citizens, slain,--so what provoked them against him was, that hatred of wickedness and love of liberty which were so eminent in him: he was also a rich man, so that by killing him, they did not only hope to seize his effects, but also to get rid of a man that had great power to kill them.
336 So they called together, by a public proclamation, seventy of the principal men of the populace, for a show as if they were real judges, while they had no proper authority. Before these was Zacharias accused of a design to betray their government to the Romans, and having traitorously sent to Vespasian for that purpose.
337 Now there appeared no proof or sign of what he was accused; but they affirmed themselves that they were well persuaded that so it was, and desired that their affirmation might he taken for sufficient evidence.
338 Now when Zacharias clearly saw that there was no way remaining for his escape from them, as having been treacherously called before them, and then put in prison, but not with any intention of a legal trial, he took great liberty of speech in that despair of his life he was under. Accordingly he stood up, and laughed at their pretended accusation, and in a few words confuted the crimes laid to his charge;
339 after which he turned his speech to his accusers, and went over distinctly all their transgressions of the law, and made heavy lamentation upon the confusion they had brought public affairs to:
340 in the meantime, the Zealots grew tumultuous, and had much ado to abstain from drawing their swords, although they designed to preserve the appearance and show of judicature to the end. They were also desirous, on other accounts, to try the judges, whether they would be mindful of what was just at their own peril.
341 Now the seventy judges brought in their verdict, that the person accused was not guilty, -- as choosing rather to die themselves with him, than to have his death laid at their doors:
342 hereupon there arose a great clamour of the Zealots upon his acquittal, and they all had indignation at the judges, for not understanding that the authority that was given them was but in jest.
343 So two of the boldest of them attacked Zacharias in the middle of the temple, and slew him [see Mat 23:35 RSV: "35 that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of innocent Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar"]; and as he fell down dead, they bantered him, and said, "You have also our verdict, and this will prove a more sure acquittal to you than the other.'' They also threw him down from the temple immediately into the valley beneath it.
This Jacob the son of Sosas was one of the Idumean generals who responded to the Zealot plea for help against the Provisional Revolutionary Government (PRG) of former HP Ananus son of Ananas & his second in command Jesus, also of High Priestly lineage.
First Ananus had closed the gates of the city to shut them out, speaking down to them insultingly from the top of the city wall, and then Jesus made a speech from the wall telling them they would only be let in as spectators to judge for themselves the "truth" of Zealot claims, but only of they laid down their arms first. The Idumeans, stung by their reception, of course did not agree, and stewed about this "disrespect" directed towards them by the PRG, as a torrential rainstorm pounded them accompanied by tremendous thunder and lightening.
As Ananus, Jesus and the PRG thought they had put the Idumeans firmly in their place, during the storm the Zealots had moved fighters into position and secretly opened the gates to let the Idumeans in. They moved in and promptly arrested, and summarily executed, Ananus and Jesus as well as any of the HP lineage they could lay their hands on. Their corpses were thrown over the city wall and guards were apparently posted at the base of it to prevent anyone from burying them. This seems overly dramatic, but might suggest a "show-trial", the kind of which Josephus described the Zealots and Idumeans conducting immediately after the executions of Ananus and Jesus.*
After a period of co-rule with the Zealots, the Idumeans, realizing the Zealots had used them as pawns to overthrow the PRG, withdrew from the city after releasing all the political prisoners they could, and appear to have allied themselves with Simon bar Giora, who was then fighting in the countryside. Jacob son of Sosas was by far the most prominent of Simon's Idumean supporters, and even helped him subdue Idumea for Simon's cause.
This situation continued until the Romans parked about the city and started to lay siege to it. Simon was by now master of much of the city. At this point the Idumean generals seem to have lost faith in Simon's ability to defeat the Romans, and consulted with one another about how they could extricate themselves from the mess and preserve their lives. They decided to offer to surrender the city to Titus on terms, but Simon somehow discovered their intention before the Romans had decided on their response, and promptly arrested the Idumean generals, including Jacob son of Sosas, and put to death those who had approached the Romans about the matter. See War 4:235-6, 238, 315-318, 5:248-249; 6:92, 148, 378-80.
At this point Jacob son of Sosas disappears from the narrative. However, given the Judean rebels love for show trials, I suggested that there was some document produced that gave a running transcript of Jacob's trial for treason before Simon bar Gioras. This trial transcript mocked Jacob son of Sosas by asking him "what is the wall of Jesus?" This referred to Jesus' speech to the Idumeans, where he had predicted that the Idumeans could become the reason for a Roman victory. The implication is that the chief-priest Jesus had been right about Idumeans all along, and by extension Jacob son of Sosas, that they should not have been trusted.
In the (bogus?) trial transcript, Jacob had apparently responded to Simon's charge, "I see the "son of man" sitting on the right hand of (god's) power!" This might be an allusion to the exalted "son of man" described in the Parables of Enoch, but how did Jacob mean "son of man" in this context. I was baffled at first.
Now it is unlikely that such documents got out of Jerusalem, considering the Roman circumvallation of the city, but copies would surely have fallen into the hands of the Romans upon the city's capture. Hell, Simon himself may have had it drawn up and sent to the Roman camp to show what he thought of them and their abortive "allies". In any event, like almost all documents "captured" in all wars, the account came to be circulated among some after the conflict, probably the non-Judean population of the region, until a copy fell into the hands of Hegesippus.
Hegesippus, traveling to Rome as part of his duties for his human master, created an amusing narrative of stories about the early pre-proto-orthodox Christians, and the members of Jesus' wild and wooly family, jotting in his note-book for the trip details from conversations he had had with other proto-orthodox Christians of similar employment he met on the journey. Think of The Canterbury Tales in England much later. In the process, I proposed that he used the "trial transcript" to frame his narrative about Jacob the Just.
As I mentioned, at first I was not so sure what Jacob son of Sosas would have meant by "son of man". Then I ran across a book, Simon Son of Man: A Cognomen of Undoubted Historicity, Obscured by Translation and Lost In The Resplendence Of A Dual Appellative, by John I Riegel and John H Jordan, dated 1917, which claims that Simon Bar Giora was in fact the original Son of Man. This would have definitely made the "trial transcript" propaganda for Simon bar Giora.
Don't get me wrong, Riegel & Jordan were kooks, but they do manage to show how many Aramaic words probably used to describe Simon and his commanders mentioned in Josephus' works can be linked to the accounts of Jesus in the Christian gospels. Josephus purposely omits any mention of Simon being "the Son of Man", and the NT attributes the title Son of Man to Jesus Christ.
https://ia800503.us.archive.org/1/items ... 023mbp.pdf
See where this might be leading?
DCH
*(JOE Jwr 4:326-343) 326 Now after these were slain, the Zealots and the multitude of the Idumeans attacked the people as upon a flock of profane animals, and cut their throats;
327 and, for the ordinary sort, they were killed in whatever place they caught them. But for the noblemen and the youth, they first caught them and bound them, and shut them up in prison, and put off their slaughter, in hopes that some of them would come over to their party;
328 but not one of them would comply with their desires, but all of them preferred death before being enrolled among such wicked wretches as acted against their own country.
329 But this refusal of theirs brought upon them terrible torments; for they were so scourged and tortured, that their bodies were not able to sustain their torments, till at length, and with difficulty, they had the favour to be slain.
330 Those whom they caught in the daytime were slain in the night, and then their bodies were carried out and thrown away, that there might be room for other prisoners;
331 and the terror that was upon the people was so great, that no one had courage enough either to weep openly for the dead man that was related to him, or to bury him; but those who were shut up in their own houses could only shed tears in secret, and dared not even groan without great caution, lest any of their enemies should hear them;
332 for if they did, those who mourned for others soon underwent the same death with those whom they mourned for. Only in the night time they would take up a little dust, and throw it upon their bodies; and even some that were the most ready to expose themselves to danger, would do it in the day time:
333 and there were twelve thousand of the better sort who perished in this manner.
334 And now these Zealots and Idumeans were quite weary of barely killing men, so they had the impudence of setting up fictitious tribunals and judicatures for that purpose;
335 and as they intended to have Zacharias, the son of Baruch, one of the most eminent of the citizens, slain,--so what provoked them against him was, that hatred of wickedness and love of liberty which were so eminent in him: he was also a rich man, so that by killing him, they did not only hope to seize his effects, but also to get rid of a man that had great power to kill them.
336 So they called together, by a public proclamation, seventy of the principal men of the populace, for a show as if they were real judges, while they had no proper authority. Before these was Zacharias accused of a design to betray their government to the Romans, and having traitorously sent to Vespasian for that purpose.
337 Now there appeared no proof or sign of what he was accused; but they affirmed themselves that they were well persuaded that so it was, and desired that their affirmation might he taken for sufficient evidence.
338 Now when Zacharias clearly saw that there was no way remaining for his escape from them, as having been treacherously called before them, and then put in prison, but not with any intention of a legal trial, he took great liberty of speech in that despair of his life he was under. Accordingly he stood up, and laughed at their pretended accusation, and in a few words confuted the crimes laid to his charge;
339 after which he turned his speech to his accusers, and went over distinctly all their transgressions of the law, and made heavy lamentation upon the confusion they had brought public affairs to:
340 in the meantime, the Zealots grew tumultuous, and had much ado to abstain from drawing their swords, although they designed to preserve the appearance and show of judicature to the end. They were also desirous, on other accounts, to try the judges, whether they would be mindful of what was just at their own peril.
341 Now the seventy judges brought in their verdict, that the person accused was not guilty, -- as choosing rather to die themselves with him, than to have his death laid at their doors:
342 hereupon there arose a great clamour of the Zealots upon his acquittal, and they all had indignation at the judges, for not understanding that the authority that was given them was but in jest.
343 So two of the boldest of them attacked Zacharias in the middle of the temple, and slew him [see Mat 23:35 RSV: "35 that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of innocent Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar"]; and as he fell down dead, they bantered him, and said, "You have also our verdict, and this will prove a more sure acquittal to you than the other.'' They also threw him down from the temple immediately into the valley beneath it.