|
Palestine Open Thread 2024-083
Only for news & views directly related to the war in Palestine.
EU's Borrell says Israel is provoking famine in Gaza – Reuters, Mar 18 2024
EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said on Monday that Israel is provoking famine in Gaza and using starvation as a weapon of war, an accusation Israel's foreign minister rejected.
"In Gaza we are no longer on the brink of famine, we are in a state of famine, affecting thousands of people," Borrell said at the opening of a conference on humanitarian aid for Gaza in Brussels.
"This is unacceptable. Starvation is used as a weapon of war. Israel is provoking famine."
The current open thread for other issues is here.
Please stick to the topic. Contribute facts. Do not attack other commentators.
‘When Menahem beheaded the High Priest (ca. 66), well of course according to Flavius Josephus the fault lies with the evil Menahem just like the evil Spartacus and his slaves for not loving the Romans properly.
And so everything: narcissism and lies”
Posted by: Simon | Mar 20 2024 13:21 utc | 170
Flavius Josephus stories cannot be trusted he was essentially a ‘double agent’ as he became amourous of Rome when he visited it as a young man:
At the age of twenty-six, he had occasion to undertake a journey to Rome in order to plead for two imprisoned Pharisees, in the presence of the empress Poppea, and he succeeded in obtaining their freedom. The Empress, who entertained a friendly feeling toward the Judaeans, loaded him with gifts.
Rome itself could not fail to exercise a great influence upon the character of Josephus. The glitter of Nero’s court, the busy life of the capital of the world, the immensity of all the imperial institutions, so dazzled him that he thought the Roman Empire would be an eternal one and that it was specially favored by Divine providence. He did not see, concealed beneath the purple and the gold, the terrible disease of which that great empire was sickening. Perhaps he did not see the diseases but, from the work of Graetz and of other historians, we get the impression that Josephus was one of Poppea’s many lovers. If this is true it might be one of the incentives for his later turning his back on all of his earlier training and give some impetus to his treasonable impulses.
Graetz continues with the description of the effect that the Roman visit had upon the youthful Josephus and the impression that his return to Judea made on him:
“From that moment Josephus became a fervent adherent of the Roman rule. Filled with enthusiastic admiration for Rome, he must upon his return have found the proportions of Judea humble and dwarfed. How sarcastically he must have smiled at the wild gestures of the frenzied Zealots who dreamt of expelling the Romans from Judea! Such an expectation appeared to him like the dream of a madman. With all the experiences that he had gathered in his travels, he tried to shatter the Revolutionary projects of the Zealots. But it was useless: the people determined on war, seized their weapons, and rose to revolt. Josephus, alarmed for his safety took shelter with some of his adherents in the Temple, whence he emerged only upon hearing that the more moderate Zealots, under the leadership of Eleazer were placed in control of affairs. Apprehensive that his well-known Roman proclivities might make him an object of suspicion, he simulated a desire for national liberty, whilst secretly rejoicing at the prospect of the advance of the Roman general Cestius, who, it was thought, would soon put an end to this mad struggle for freedom. But the result disappointed all his hopes. The retreat of Cestius resembled a defeat. Why Josephus, the devoted adherent of Rome should have been entrusted with the governorship of the important province of Galilee is inexplicable. Probably his friend, the former high priest Joshua, son of Gamala, whose voice carried great weight in the Sanhedrin, may have urged his claims, and Josephus’ dissimulation may have led those about him to look upon him as a Zealot. But, at all events, the heroic bearing of the insurgents and the victory that they had gained over the army of Cestius, cannot have failed to make upon Josephus, as upon other plain and matter of fact Judeans, a powerful impression.”
It seems strange that Graetz should have thought that Josephus’ command of Galilee was inexplicable. Being descended from the priestly family and being one of the ruling class, ability would have not been considered. It is not an uncommon thing, especially in countries where the “divine right of kings”, or in this case the divine right of high priests, is taken into account to see men placed in positions of command, though unfitted for such command, merely by reason of some accident of birth. The histories of England are full of such incidents both in the Middle Ages and even in fairly modern times when commissions as officers of the British armed forces were purchased. Josephus, being the type he was, apparently saw the opportunity to become firmly entrenched with both sides, playing the role, as we would not call it of a “double agent”. Regardless of which side won he would be promoting the interests of the one person who really mattered to him, Joseph ben Matthias.
Joseph Kastein in his “History and Destiny of the Jews” Viking. New York, 1933 states on page 127 the effect of the selection of Josephus as the commander of Galilee. “His election was a fatal mistake and may have been chiefly responsible for the various disasters that brought the war of liberation to a close. A member of the Pharisee intelligensia, he had spent some years among the Essenes and had also been to Rome. As an enthusiastic admirer of Rome’s political genius, he was too dispassionate, not to weigh the chances of success coolly with the result that, from the very beginning, he was a lukewarm supporter of his country’s cause.” Again, we must surmise that Josephus, like many another political opportunist, was waiting for the proper time (i.e. when victory was assured for a certain side)to espouse one or the other cause.” Whatever Josephus may have been, he was not naive and certainly he knew that, if Judea was to come out of the war in the ascendancy, he must appear to have been a supporter of the cause of the Zealots for the entire time.” (1)
1.https://www.skirret.com/papers/marsengill/13-flavius-josephus.html
Posted by: canuck | Mar 20 2024 13:36 utc | 169
|
