Imagining the End: Visions of
Yüklə 4,01 Mb. Pdf görüntüsü
|
| sub specie aeternitatis
, or rather sub specie judicii futuri . Imminent expectation, or expectation focused on any particular time, is incidental to Jewish apocalypticism. What is essential is the belief that God is in control of history and of human destiny. Most apoca- lyptic utopias provide for the restoration of Israel as a world-dominating power, even if this lasts for only years as in Ezra rather than for a millennium, like the reign of Christ in Revelation. Over and above this,
89 Eschatological Dynamics in Early Judaism however, all apocalyptic utopias envision a judgment of the dead. In most cases, this entails transformation to an angelic state; in some it implies bodily resurrection. But in all cases there is the belief that the world that now is does not represent ultimate reality. That reality is hidden. Hence the need for apokalypsis , or revelation. Some thirty years ago, Martin Hengel wrote of ‘higher wisdom through revelation’ as a characteristic of the Hellenistic world. 55 The dialectic of hidden/revealed, or spiritual/physical, inevitably recalls the Platonic world- view. Jewish apocalypticism is not demonstrably indebted to Plato. It is not a philosophical enterprise, and its idiom is rooted in the mythological language of the ancient Near East. There is a certain affinity with Platonism none the less, albeit in a different key. No doubt this affinity should be attributed to the
zeitgeist of the Hellenistic age, with its break-up of traditional cultures and the consequent desire for salvation in a world other than this one. 56
90 5 The Messiah and the Millennium: The Roots of Two Jewish–Christian Symbols
Harold W. Attridge The beginning of the second millennium of the common era has focused attention on phenomena associated with expectations of a radical alteration in political, social or existential conditions, the turn of a new age or epoch, when the vices of the past will be eliminated and a regime of peace and justice introduced. Such movements derive their label from the New Testament’s graphic depiction of the eschaton, the Book of Revelation. Its concluding visions include the triumph of an anointed king or ‘messiah’, at whose coming the forces of evil will be bound and a kingdom of the righteous installed in authority for ,
years: The Messiah : Then I saw heaven opened, and there was a white horse! Its rider is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war. His eyes are like a flame of fire, and on his head are many diadems; and he has a name inscribed that no one knows but himself. He is clothed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is called ‘The Word of God.’ And the armies of heaven, wearing fine linen, white and pure, were following him on white horses. From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron; he will tread the wine press of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty. On his robe and on his thigh he has a name inscribed, ‘King of kings and Lord of lords.’ (Revelation : – ) 1
: Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain. He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, and threw him into the pit, and locked and sealed it over him, so that he would deceive the nations no more until the thousand years were ended. After that he must be let out for a little while. Then I saw thrones, and those seated 91 The Messiah and the Millennium on them were given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Jesus and for the word of God. (Revelation :
– ) Whatever these late first century 2 visions may portend, and exegetes have struggled with them for , years,
3 the millennial kingdom envisions a vindication from persecution and righteous judgment under the sway of a beneficent King of Kings. Whatever else it may do, Revelation’s image res- ponds to a political and social situation, from the point of view of those who did not reap the benefits of an exploitative imperial system. Revelation’s images, which offer hope in a situation conducive to despair, call on the imaginative tradition of Jewish literature, adapting ancient prophetic traditions to meet new needs. The combination of images of messiah and , -year
kingdom are fully appreciated only against the background of
years of Jewish resistance to external political power, and to the Christian adaptation of that resistance. Repression and Resistance The first stirrings of the tradition which culminates in the visions of John of Patmos surface in the fourth decade of the second century during the attempt by the Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the Greek ruler of the Seleucid monarchy of Syria, to interfere with traditional Jewish religious practice by installing a new ritual in the Temple of Jerusalem and by prohibiting the observance of traditional customs, such as circumcision. Modern scholars have long debated what caused the adoption of this apparently extreme policy. Factional infighting and debates among the aristocratic leadership of Judaea about the appropriate mode of integrating Israel within a wider world no doubt played a part. Antiochus may not have been trying so much to reform Israelite practice as to support ‘progressives’ within the local leadership who favoured a more cosmopolitan configuration of traditional forms. 4 Whatever the cause of the persecution, pietistic and traditional segments of Israel resisted. Some of these mounted an armed defence of Torah and Temple. A priestly family from the village of Modiin assumed leadership of the revolt, and achieved some military successes. By December
, Antiochus cut his losses and allowed the restoration of traditional Jewish worship and observance. Not long before he changed his policy, another Israelite, dismayed at the affront to Yahweh and his sanctuary, resisting with the quill rather than the sword, composed the Book of Daniel, the final work included in the Hebrew Bible. 5 Developing traditional literary elements, Daniel tells of a Jewish seer 92 Judaism, Christianity and Islam successful at a Gentile court, 6 despite his rigorous adherence to ancestral custom. This seer also dreamed symbolic dreams, not only for his con- temporaries in the world of his story. Those visions and dreams also bore a message of hope for the people suffering from the persecution of Antiochus, symbolically portrayed as a ‘little horn’ broken on the head of a goat (Daniel :
), or in more direct language, ‘a king of bold countenance … skilled in intrigue’ ( :
), ‘a contemptible person on whom royal majesty has not been conferred’ ( :
). 7 This figure will ‘speak words against the Most High, shall wear out the holy ones of the Most High, and shall attempt to change the sacred seasons and the law’ ( :
), and will ‘exalt himself and consider himself greater than any god, and shall speak horrendous things against the God of gods’ ( : ). The visionary paints in the most sombre hues the portrait of the ungodly oppressor, but he is convinced that persecution is not the final word. At the centre of his visionary collection he limns a portrait of hope. At its heart is the image of the one in whom all sovereignty ultimately rests: As I watched, thrones were set in place and an Ancient One took his throne, his clothing was white as snow, and the hair of his head like pure wool; his throne was fiery flames, and its wheels were burning fire. A stream of fire issued and flowed out from his presence. A thousand thousands served him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood attending him. (Daniel :
– ) The ancient one is not, however, alone. A younger figure comes before him to be installed as king: As I watched in the night visions, I saw one like a human being [literally, ‘one like a son of man’] coming with the clouds of heaven. And he came to the Ancient One and was presented before him. To him was given dominion and glory and kingship, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that shall not pass away and his kingship is one that shall never be destroyed. (Daniel :
– ) The book does the reader the service of explaining the vision: ‘The kingship and dominion and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the Most High; their kingdom shall be an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey them’ (Daniel :
). This explanation, though helpful, left considerable room for speculative interpretation. On the surface, the text promises liberation from oppression and political sovereignty of an expansive sort, to the ‘people of the holy ones of the Most High’, no doubt faithful Israelites, obedient to divine law and respectful of the traditional form of worship. But the verse contains more 93 The Messiah and the Millennium than a simple prophecy of political import. The ‘holy ones’ who serve as a medium term between the Most High and his people are figures such as the great angel Michael, described in Daniel : – as, ‘the great prince, the protector of your people’. 8 When he appears there will be a remarkable transformation: There shall be a time of anguish, such as has never occurred since nations first came into existence. But at that time your people shall be delivered, everyone who is found written in the book. Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. Those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever. (Daniel : – ) Symbolic visions embedded in a revered text possess enormous generative power. Daniel’s combination of the ‘human being’, apparently a member of the heavenly court, endowed with royal insignia, and a faithful people who share in universal dominion, enjoyed an afterlife that far transcended the circumstances of Seleucid oppression. Hopes for Liberation and Divinely Sanctioned Leadership The cessation of the threat to Temple and Torah did not signal the end of struggle and turmoil in Israel. The Hasmonean family continued its struggle, securing increasing degrees of autonomy as the power of the Seleucid mon- archs waned. 9 Hasmonean propaganda suggested that under their leadership ancient promises were being realized, 10 and one of their number, John Hyrcanus (
–
), was reputed to have enjoyed the three ‘anointed’ offices of ‘command of the nation, high priesthood, and prophecy’. 11 He
would thus have been a ‘messiah’ in a very technical sense, but such status did not guarantee him or his line special reverence among his people, many of whom took with a pinch of salt the claims to good times that the dynasty issued.
12 Under Alexander Jannaeus ( –
), open hostility broke out between the ruling family and pietistic elements within Israel. 13 Whatever the general sentiment of the Israelite population towards the ruling family, some elements within Israel came to view the Hasmoneans not as the solution to the nation’s woes, but as a major part of the problem. Such circles nurtured hopes for deliverance, now from the domestic oppression of unrighteous rulers, and speculated on various forms of divinely authorized leadership that would bring liberation. The most extensive record of such hopes and aspirations appears amid the Dead Sea Scrolls, the collection of largely Hebrew and Aramaic documents
94 Judaism, Christianity and Islam found near the site of Qumran at the north-west corner of the Dead Sea. 14 This disparate collection clusters around a core of sectarian documents, written by a group usually identified with the Essenes known from first- century sources such as Philo and Josephus. 15 This group clearly was at odds with the high priestly leadership of the Hasmoneans 16 over issues such as the sacred calendar, and perhaps the legitimacy of the priestly line. 17 Whatever their complaints, the sect, alienated from the Temple now defiled by such unworthy priests, looked forward to a period of restoration under various ‘anointed ones’, individuals designated to play leadership roles in cultic and military spheres. Unlike the Hasmoneans, who celebrated the union of various messianic roles in a single individual, the sectarian scrolls celebrate a dyarchic messianism. 18 They look forward to a messiah of Israel, 19 who would share responsibilities but be distinct from a messiah of Aaron, the former tending to political and military affairs long associated with the house of David, 20 the
latter to cultic matters. 21 The sectarians looked forward to a time of bliss overseen by these leaders and celebrated that time in their sacred meals. 22 The authors of the Scrolls found support for their expectations in biblical prophecies of a ‘Branch of David’. 23 Other sources for their speculation about their coming deliverance include the oracle of the biblical book of Numbers : referring to a ‘scepter and a star’ that would arise from Jacob. 24 They
also found pointers to future deliverers in mysterious biblical figures such as Melchizedek, mentioned only in Genesis and Psalm . Speculating on such texts they imagined a figure like Michael in the Book of Daniel ( : ), a priestly angel 25 who would provide atonement for his people, but who, realizing the hopes of the biblical jubilee year, 26 would also release them from the bonds of indebtedness and slavery. Although members of the community hoped for divinely appointed leaders, and developed imaginative scenarios for a decisive conflict between the forces of good and evil, 27 much of their attention focused not on the coming tribulations and victory but on their contemporary participation in the heavenly world. They joined that world, and its hosts of angels in festive array, through their liturgical practice and prayer life. As they sang the songs of angels they experienced already that realm where God was sovereign. 28 Imperial Power and National Hope The autonomy gradually won by the Hasmoneans was short-lived. The col- lapse of the Seleucid state, which enabled the Israelite kingdom its brief moment in the political sun, left a power vacuum in the eastern Mediterranean soon filled from the west. The Roman republic had been engaged in the affairs of the Greek kingdoms of the region since the end of the third century
95 The Messiah and the Millennium and had gradually assumed control over Macedonia, Achaea, and the Attalid kingdom of Pergamon. 29 The east responded at the beginning of the first century
in the person of Mithradates of Pontus. Rome’s victory over his forces and the subsequent campaign against the pirates of the Cilician coast brought them to Israel’s threshold. Pompey, in command in the east, invited by the squabbling heirs of the Hasmoneans, crossed that threshold in
. Although Israelite leaders had dealt with Rome before, 30 now they did so not as distant ‘allies’ but as dependants. Pompey’s intervention made an impression on pious Israelites. His most egregious act was to visit the interior of the Temple, the realm reserved for the High Priest and only for the annual ritual of the Day of Atonement. 31 For
a Gentile to enter that space was an insulting sacrilege, a sure sign of Israel’s subjection, once again, to an inimical power. One pious observer of the political scene composed a series of poems in the biblical mould, attributing them to Solomon. Like the psalmists of old, he ‘cries to the Lord when severely troubled’ (Psalms of Solomon; hereafter PsSol
: ), 32 and laments what has happened to Jerusalem: Arrogantly the sinner broke down the strong walls with a battering ram and you did not interfere. Gentile foreigners went up to your place of sacrifice they arrogantly trampled (it) with their sandals. (PsSol :
– ) Pompey emerges as a particularly arrogant oppressor, in the mould of Antiochus IV, but within fifteen years the arrogant one had been brought low in his struggle with Julius Caesar. His ultimate demise elicits this comment from the psalmist: He did not consider that he was a man. He said, ‘I shall be lord of land and sea’; and he did not understand that it is God who is great, powerful in his great strength. He is king over the heavens, judging even kings and rulers. (PsSol :
– ) The fall of Pompey in
gave the psalmist hope, but not in the contemporary political order. Rather, he looked forward to an anointed ruler in the Davidic line who would restore Israel materially and spiritually. In a vivid portrait of messianic hopes, he prays, for liberation from foreign oppres- sion, a kind of ‘ethnic cleansing’, and a just political regime: See Lord, and raise up for them their king, the Son of David, to rule over your servant Israel in the time known to you, O God. 96 Judaism, Christianity and Islam Undergird him with the strength to destroy the unrighteous rulers, to purge Jerusalem from gentiles who trample her to destruction; in wisdom and in righteousness to drive out the sinners from the inheritance to smash the arrogance of sinners like a potter’s jar; to shatter all their substance with an iron rod; 33 to destroy the unlawful nations with the word of his mouth; 34 At his warning the nations will flee from his presence; and he will condemn sinners by the thoughts of their hearts. He will gather a holy people whom he will lead in righteousness and he will judge the tribes of the people that have been made holy by the Lord their God. He will not tolerate unrighteousness (even) to pause among them, and any person who knows wickedness shall not live with them. For he shall know them that they are all children of their God. He will distribute them upon the land according to their tribes; the alien and the foreigner will no longer live near them … And he will have gentile nations serving him under his yoke, and he will glorify the Lord in (a place) prominent (above) the whole earth. And he will purge Jerusalem (and make it) holy as it was even from the beginning, (for) nations to come from the ends of the earth to see his glory, to bring as gifts her children who had been driven out and to see the glory of the Lord with which God has glorified her. An he will be a righteous king over them, taught by God. There will be no unrighteousness among them in his days, for all shall be holy, and their king shall be the Lord Messiah. (PsSol : – ) Imperial Collaborators and Continued Hope The poetic vision of national renewal under the regime of a Davidic king was not fulfilled. The imperial political process instead delivered Israel into the hands of a very different monarch. The son of Antipas, the Idumean-born military commander of the high priest Hyrcanus, Herod came to prominence in the military service of his father when he conducted a brutal but successful campaign to rid Galilee of insurgents led by one Ezekias. 35 The death of 97 The Messiah and the Millennium Antipas did not impede Herod’s rise to power, nor did an invasion of Par- thians. Perhaps perceiving Roman weakness after the assassination of Julius Caesar, these eastern enemies, like the Romans before them, used domestic rivalries among the last of the Hasmoneans as an excuse to intervene in Judaea. Herod, with the backing of his patron Mark Antony, was designated king of Israel by the Roman Senate and collaborated with Roman military forces to expel the Parthian invaders. That action secured, at least temporarily, his position in Jerusalem. The respite did not last long, since the outbreak of hostilities between Octavian and Mark Antony soon jeopardized Herod’s position. After Antony’s defeat at the Battle of Actium in
, Herod quickly mended fences with his new imperial overlord, and was confirmed in his position in Israel. 36 The alliance between Roman imperial power and the Herodian family was to continue in various forms through the end of the first century
. Herod administered his kingdom as a dutiful part of the Roman system with a firm but generous hand. Lavish building projects at home, particularly the reconstruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, 37 coupled with benefactions to other Greek cities, 38 enhanced Herod’s prestige and established his reputa- tion as a significant benefactor. They also imposed burdens on the local economy, which naturally fostered resentments. Heavy taxation did not con- tribute to Herod’s popularity or improve the image of the Idumaean who had become Israel’s monarch at Rome’s decree. Under Herod’s regime, sentiments like those expressed in the Psalms of Solomon may have lurked beneath the surface, but the situation remained outwardly calm. Most of Herod’s problems arose within his own family, several of whom were executed on suspicion of treason. 39 Some popular discontent emerged late in Herod’s reign. At one point he imposed a fine on a group of Pharisees who refused to swear allegiance to him and to Rome. 40 Herod’s sister-in-law paid their penalty, but the episode generated prophecies of Herod’s downfall and his brother’s rise to power. The king executed some of the leading prophets, including a eunuch, Bagoas, and a young lover of the king. Josephus reports that the prophecies encouraged the eunuch to think that he would be exalted to royal status and given renewed virility. 41 While
the precise motives of resistance are unclear, the episode attests to the presence of oracular utterances promising radical change. The vision of the eunuch’s own future that Jospehus attributes to him suggests a belief in an eschato- logical reversal of dramatic proportions, fitting for the dawn of a messianic age. While not all the unrest at the end of Herod’s reign involved expectations of a messiah or a new political order, 42 some discontent certainly had such a focus. 98 Judaism, Christianity and Islam Royal Pretenders Practical resistance to the imperial regime and its local beneficiaries surfaced at Herod’s death. In Galilee, Judas, son of Ezekias, the local chieftain once suppressed by Herod, staged a revolt, which Josephus ascribes to ‘his craving for greater power and … his zealous pursuit of royal rank’. 43 In Jericho, Simon, a servant of Herod ‘dared to don the diadem’, and was acknowledged as king by his men before being suppressed by Herodian troops. 44 Whether these pretenders invoked ancient hopes of Davidic messianism is unclear. Another claimant, Athronges, like the mythical David, started life ‘as an obscure shepherd’. Despite, or perhaps because of, such origins he ‘aspired to kingship’, with four brothers to aid him, like the Maccabean rebels of the second century .
Their armed resistance to Herod and the Romans continued ‘for a long time’, anticipating the kind of guerrilla warfare that would vex Rome in the same area during the Bar-Cochba revolt just over
years later. Such revolts against Herod’s authority and, implicitly at least, against the power that stood behind him met with quick and brutal suppression. Whether the rebels hoped for the kind of dramatic transformation that the Book of Daniel or the Psalms of Solomon predicted, at least in the case of Athronges, they seem to have invoked the symbols of David, the archetypal anointed king. After Herod’s death in
, Rome divided his kingdom into three segments, each governed by one of his sons. The central portion, Judaea, fell to Archelaus, whose unsuccessful tenure lasted a mere ten years. After his deposition, Rome administered the province through equestrian prefects. In order to facilitate taxation, the Romans conducted a census, under the super- vision of the legate of Syria, Quirinius. This census, notoriously misdated in the Gospel of Luke, 46 was the occasion of further disturbances, led by one Judas, either from Galilee 47 or Gamala in the Gaulan. 48 Josephus credits him with the foundation of a ‘fourth philosophy’, similar to that of the Pharisees, but marked by ‘an invincible passion for liberty’. 49 The connections between this group and later revolutionary movements have been the subject of con- siderable scholarly discussion. 50 The description by Josephus leaves much to conjecture about the motives and self-understanding of the movement and its leader, but it is likely that some of the same ideals motivated them as operated in some of the revolts at the end of Herod’s reign. For several decades after the deposition of Archelaus, the situation in Herod’s former kingdom remained relatively quiet. While Roman prefects tended Judaea, Herod Antipas ruled Galilee until
, 51 his brother Philip the northern Transjordan region and southern Lebanon until
. 52 Under their administrations, the overall situation in Palestine remained uneasily calm. 53
99 The Messiah and the Millennium Jesus of Nazareth During this period, a prophetic preacher from Galilee appeared on the scene, destined to have a major impact on subsequent religious history. The degree to which he appropriated, and possibly transformed, the expectations manifest in Daniel and the Psalms of Solomon, expectations at work in the texts from Qumran and apparently inspiring various rebels and revolutionaries, has been a matter of considerable scholarly debate. 54 Part of the debate results from the theological predilections of interpreters, who have ever remade Jesus in their own image. 55 Part rests on the ambiguity of the sources themselves, which maintain distinct viewpoints. The whole debate cannot be reviewed here, yet some treatment of Jesus is clearly necessary in order to understand the roots of the images that are the subject of this essay. And while some details are unclear, certain major facts are beyond cavil. . Jesus made use of the image of the ‘Kingdom’ or ‘Reign’ of God as an important part of what he taught. This image obviously used a political category related to the prophecies of Daniel and the programme of the Psalms of Solomon. The image, however, had broader and deeper roots in Israel’s literature. It was redolent of the psalms and their portrait of God, Israel’s true king, 56
57 and ruler of all nature, 58 who governs with righteousness, 59 whose domain was above all the hearts and minds of his people. 60 Jesus spoke of the coming of this reign of God, 61 but called people to be aware of it in their midst, 62 and to act as if it really governed their lives. 63 The royal power of which he was the herald stood in opposition to the empire that dominated Israel. Power in God’s realm came not from a sword, but from unexpected sources, an embrace of powerlessness and a refusal to act as normal retainers do. 64 As the empire had a father who imposed his will by force of arms, so too did the reign of God, which demanded non- retaliation. 65 Yet Jesus is also remembered to have predicted the coming of God in power and might. 66 Much of the contemporary debate about his teaching revolves around the authenticity of those predictions. . Perhaps because of his use of the pregnant metaphor of God’s Kingdom or Reign, Jesus was perceived by the authorities to be a political threat, another Judas, or Simon or Athronges. His action in the Temple of Jerusalem, ‘driving out’ the money changers and overturning their tables, constituted at least a prophetic sign on the Temple and its administrators that could be construed as a symbolic, yet revolutionary threat. 67 The preacher of the Kingdom was thus crucified as ‘King of the Jews’. 68 . However he was perceived by the authorities, the claims that Jesus made for himself remain obscure. On this point, the Gospels offer a notoriously 100 Judaism, Christianity and Islam divided witness. At one end stands Mark suggesting that Jesus hinted at his real identity as ‘Son of God’, and hence royal messiah, 69 to those whom he healed and to his disciples, but enjoined them to keep it secret. 70 At the other extreme the Fourth Gospel has Jesus boldly proclaim his divine mission and his equality with God. 71 A frequent focus of the debate about Jesus’ messianic claims is the expression that came to prominence in the visions of Daniel, the Son of Man. The oddity of the phrase strongly suggests that Jesus indeed used it, 72 but its sense is unclear. Some attestations clearly evoke Daniel; 73 others seem to rely on the etymological meaning of the phrase to refer to ‘human beings’ generally. 74 Did he, as a literal reading of Mark : would suggest, predict that he or perhaps another agent of God would come to bring judgment and salvation? 75 Or did he, as at Mark : , use the expression to refer to himself in a perhaps ironic, self-effacing way, an expression only associated with Daniel by his followers? 76 While Jesus probably did use the phrase, and with it alluded to Daniel, his claims to be an or the ‘anointed one’ of God remain oblique and frequently ironic. . Some disciples of Jesus experienced him after his death newly and powerfully alive in their midst. Their experiences, whether visions, or inspired interpretations of scripture, convinced them that Jesus was, among other things, the Son of Man, the figure portrayed in Daniel as the recipient of sovereignty from God, now exalted to heavenly status, 77 the anointed one who would return to usher in an era of peace and justice. 78 The reflections on the significance of Jesus contained in the Gospels and in the letters of Paul manifest diverse Christian assessments of the prophetic teacher from Galilee, 79 but a central element in all is the proclamation of the present and future reign of God, and the role in that kingdom of God’s anointed one. Messianism and the Great Revolt As the Christian movement emerged, the political situation began to change. The emperor Claudius briefly reunited Herod’s old realm in the hands of Herod’s grandson, Agrippa I, who had already received the tetrarchy of Philip from the emperor Gaius in 80 and Galilee, vacated by the exiled Herod Antipas, in .
Claudius added the heartland, Judaea, in . 82 Agrippa, who merited that benefaction by long-standing association with the Julio-Claudian family and particularly by his role in the accession of Claudius, 83 did not live long to enjoy it, dying suddenly in
. After Agrippa’s untimely death, Rome assumed direct control of all of Palestine. In little more than twenty years, the increasingly restive local population, whose animosities were exacerbated by heavy-handed adminis- 101 The Messiah and the Millennium trators, rose in massive revolt against the imperial system and the procurators who were now its local ministers. 84 After an initial defeat, 85 the Romans launched a major military campaign to restore order. The assassination of Nero in June of brought a halt to military operations while leading generals assessed their situation. The com- mander of Roman forces in the east, Vespasian, decided that he was as fit to rule as any of the other generals who had put themselves forward for the task. He threw his helmet in the ring and left the suppression of the Jewish revolt to his son Titus. A swift series of campaigns brought Vespasian to Rome as its new master. Meanwhile, his son, Titus, commanding the Roman forces in Palestine, set about to complete the task. The delay caused by Roman political developments, following the rebels’ initial success against imperial forces, heightened expectations of final suc- cess.
86 Military opportunity, coupled with those heightened expectations, increased expectations that this was the confrontation between the forces of good and evil predicted by prophets and visionaries. Not all the leaders of the various factions who joined the revolt presented themselves as messiahs, but some did. Menachem, son of Judas the Galilean who had led a revolt after the deposition of Archelaus, played a leading role in the early stages of the rebellion 87 and apparently tried to assume kingly status. Arrayed in royal robes he visited the Temple, but was confronted by another revolutionary faction under Eleazar, a member of the priestly aristocracy, and was slain. 88 Two other leaders of the revolt, John of Gischala, and Simon son of Gioras from Gerasa, survived the siege and fall of Jerusalem and were brought to Rome as part of the triumph of Titus, John sentenced to lifelong imprison- ment and Simon to be executed as the culmination of the triumph. 89 Josephus accused both of acting in a despotic fashion, 90 but whether they made any claims to messianic or royal status is unclear. Following the revolt, the Romans tightened control over the province, and imposed on all Jews throughout the empire a -drachma tax, the amount which they had been contributing annually to the welfare of the Temple. 91 Some lands were confiscated and sold, and Roman veterans settled on them. 92 The locus of Torah-observant Judaism shifted to towns and villages outside Jerusalem, to Jamnia (Yavneh). Some of the supporters of the revolt who survived the catastrophe in the land of Israel moved to other provinces, such as Egypt and Cyrene, where they apparently fomented continuing discontent with the imperial system. 102 Judaism, Christianity and Islam Messiah and Millennium in Revelation The Book of Revelation alludes to the siege of Jerusalem 93 and perhaps its fall. 94 The book, like the Jewish revolutionaries of – , also saw Rome as the arch-enemy, the idolatrous incarnation of primordial evil itself. 95 Its author, who disputed with others the right to be called a Jew, 96 thus knew what hopes for political independence could produce, but it took a polemical stance towards the contemporary imperial power. Yet for Revelation Jesus had already come as the messiah. He was now enthroned in heaven as the ‘Son of Man’, 97 and was destined to return as the agent of God’s judgment and rule. The Book as a whole offers a vision celebrating the victory which that messiah has already won over the forces of evil at every level. As a result, the images of messiah and his kingdom sometimes have a paradoxical quality. The one who rides triumphant on the white horse, the ‘lion of Judah’ (Revelation : ), is also a lamb who has been slain ( :
). Those who participate in the administration of his kingdom are disembodied souls of people who have been beheaded ( : ). The kingdom that they rule has a new Jerusalem as its capital, but a Jerusalem founded on the names of the apostles of Jesus ( :
). While any simple reading of the complex and allusive symbolism of Revela- tion is bound to be a distortion, the book is as much a celebration, against all appearances, of the contemporary victory of the followers of Jesus over the social and political forces that persecuted them. For them, the most important coming of their messiah is the one that has already happened, in which Satan, while not finally vanquished, was overthrown (Revelation : – ) and in which God already established a kingdom ( :
– ) consisting of priests who worship him aright ( : ; : ). This vision of divine sovereignty thus has something in common with the structure of eschatological belief at Qumran, which also celebrated the participation by the sectarian community in a heavenly reality that anticipated the consummation of God’s final victory over forces of evil. Alternatives to the Vision of Revelation The appropriation and development of the images of the messiah and his kingdom in the Book of Revelation offer one of several options pursued by heirs of the traditional messianism. At roughly the same time another seer steeped in Jewish tradition reacted to the disastrous events of
and
composed a meditative lament in the person of the ancient scribe Ezra. This lengthy apocalypse deals in depth with the question of theodicy posed by the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in
, the same situation that 103 The Messiah and the Millennium confronted the Book of Revelation. While Ezra deems the ways of God inscrutable, it holds out hopes that justice will eventually be vindicated. Part of its message consists of an eschatological scenario, very similar in structure to that offered by John of Patmos: For behold, the time will come, when the signs which I have foretold to you will come to pass; the city which now is not seen shall appear, and the land which now is hidden shall be disclosed. And everyone who has been delivered from the evils that I have foretold shall see my wonders. For my son the Messiah shall be revealed with those who are with him, and those who remain shall rejoice four hundred years. And after these years my son the Messiah shall die, and all who draw human breath. And the world shall be turned back to primeval silence for seven days, as it was at the first beginnings; so that no one shall be left. And after seven days the world, which is not yet awake, shall be roused, and that which is corruptible shall perish. And the earth shall give up those who are asleep in it, and the chambers shall give up the souls which have been committed to them. And the Most High shall be revealed upon the seat of judgment, and compassion shall pass away, and patience shall be withdrawn, but judgment alone shall remain, truth shall stand, and faithfulness shall grow strong. And recompense shall follow. ( Ezra
: – ) 98 In the hands of this visionary, the symbols of anointed king and his realm still have force, but they are pushed to a distant eschatological future, a
- year period before a final cosmic transformation. Further Militant Messiahs While some seers pushed the expectations of a messiah and a new political arrangement for the righteous into the mythical future, others still saw them as real possibilities in their own lifetimes, and sought to realize them through military action. Some forty-five years after the destruction of Jerusalem, the seeds sown by the scattered rebels of the first revolt bore fruit in a violent upheaval, this time in North Africa. We are less well informed about this revolt than about the first or second revolt in the land of Israel. From what we can glean from scattered later sources, it is clear that the uprising in Egypt and Cyrene was violent and ultimately devastating to the Jewish population. 99 The factors that motivated the revolt remain unclear, but it is likely that both messianic expectations and hopes like those of the Psalms of Solomon nourished and sustained the revolt. 100 Ambiguous evidence comes from later reports, one by the third-century Roman historian Cassius Dio, who gives a succinct account of the revolt: 104 Judaism, Christianity and Islam Meanwhile the Jews in the region of Cyrene had put a certain Andreas at their head, and were destroying both the Romans and the Greeks. They would eat the flesh of their victims, make belts for themselves of their entrails, anoint themselves with their blood and wear their skins for clothing; many they sawed in two, from the head downwards; others they gave to wild beasts, and still others they forced to fight as gladiators … In Egypt, too, they perpetrated many similar outrages, and in Cyprus, under the leadership of a certain Artemion. 101
If even a portion of the grisly war stories are true, it is clear that deep-seated animosities, rivalling those of Bosnia and Kosovo in the late twentieth century, fuelled this ethnic strife. A second report appears in the fourth-century church historian Eusebius: The Jews of Cyrene continued to plunder the country of Egypt and to ravage the districts in it under their leader Lucuas. The emperor sent against them Marcus Turbo with land and sea forces including cavalry. He waged war vigor- ously against them in many battles for a considerable time and killed many thousands of Jews, not only those of Cyrene, but also those of Egypt who had rallied to Lucuas, their king. The emperor suspected that the Jews in Meso- potamia would also attack the inhabitants and ordered Lusius Quietus to clean them out of the province. 102 The Cyrenean leader, whether named Andreas or Lucuas, seems to have had some messianic pretensions, but the evidence is too slender to be certain. The results of the brutal revolt were equally brutal and the attempt of the Cyrenean Jews to rid themselves of Gentile oppression had the opposite effect. While the ideology espoused by the Jewish revolutionaries against Rome under Trajan is obscure, there is no doubt about the messianic dimensions of the final major Jewish revolt against Rome in antiquity. Anti-imperial senti- ments continued to fester in Palestine after the destruction of Jerusalem. These finally came to the surface in the reign of Hadrian in a massive guerrilla campaign that lasted from
to
in Judaea under the leadership of Simon Bar-Cosiba, known to his supporters as Bar-Cochba (‘Son of a Star’) and to the later rabbis as Bar-Koziba (‘Son of Lie’). 103 Sources for the revolt variously describe the factors that led to its outbreak. Cassius Dio attributes it to Hadrian’s plan to build a new Greco-Roman city, Aelia, on the site of Jerusalem, complete with a pagan temple. 104 A prohibition of circumcision, which was certainly enforced on the Jews after the war, may also have played a part. 105 Eusebius describes the leader: ‘The Jews were at that time led by a certain Bar Chochebas, which means “star,” a man who was murderous and a bandit, but relied on his name, as if dealing with slaves, and claimed to be a luminary who had come down to them from heaven and was magically enlightening those who were in misery.’ 106
105 The Messiah and the Millennium Although Eusebius is hardly a sympathetic source, his brief description probably reveals something of the messianic programme of the revolt’s leader. Like the Qumran sectarians, 107
he apparently appealed to Numbers : , making a play on his personal name, attested in documentary papyri. The claim made by that play was accepted by some of the leading rabbis of the time, including Rabbi Akiba: R. Simeon ben Yahai said, R. Akiba my teacher used to explain the passage, ‘A star shall go forth from Jacob’ thus. Koziba (read, Kokhba) goes forth from Jacob. Again, when R. Akiba saw Bar Koziba (Kokhba), he cried out, ‘This is King Messiah.’ Thereupon R. Yohanan b. Torta said to him: ‘Akiba, grass will grow out your cheek-bones and the Son of David will still not have come.’ 108
Ben Torta was of course right, and rabbinic editors in sympathy with his position transmitted this story. Other elements in Eusebius’s description of this messiah recall some claims made for Jesus by his followers. 109
Whether Bar-Cochba’s claims deliberately rivalled those of the Christians, 110 they drew on similar sources. The messianic revolt against Hadrian’s Rome also involved, if not a millen- nium, then at least a new age of liberty for Israel. Coins minted by the revolutionaries display an image of a star over the Temple, which they hoped to restore. Their legal documents, preserved in Judaean caves, proclaimed a new era, dating from ‘the liberation of Israel’. 111 Despite their hopes and a valiant struggle against Rome, the last active messiah of antiquity and the kingdom that he inaugurated ended in a blood- bath at a citadel Beththera, modern Bettir, km south-west of Jerusalem. Aftermath The suppression of the Bar-Cochba revolt marked at least the temporary end of militant messianism. Jewish rabbis turned towards the timeless structures of the Torah, although their liturgies continued to pray for the restoration of Jerusalem and the coming of the messiah. Christian leaders such as Eusebius greeted the acceptance of the Church by the empire as, in effect, the inauguration of a millennial age. At the same time they put off to the distant future their hopes for Jesus’ return. In neither tradition, however, did hopes for a new age and its anointed leader totally evaporate, and both intertwined symbols of liberation and renewal have exercised their fascination throughout Western history by groups yearning for release from empires perceived to be evil.
106 6 Messianism, Millennialism and Revolution in Early Islamic History Said Amir Arjomand Definitions Before turning to Islamic history, three related concepts can be distinguished and briefly defined: apocalypticism, messianism and millennialism. Apoca- lypticism, or the apocalyptic worldview, denotes the imminent expectation of the total transformation of the world. Messianism can be defined as the expectation of the appearance of a divine saviour. Millennialism will be used in the literal sense of the expectation of a radical break with the present at the end of a , -year age and, by extension, of the calculation of the time of the end and related numerological speculations. These three concepts can be meaningfully applied to Islamic history where they have close equivalents and analogues. In the preface to Yüklə 4,01 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|