88 CHAPTER TWO
Nevertheless, it is overwhelmingly likely that the period before the revolt
wasone of growing economic and social distress.^96 Even if Josephus’s focus
on disorder is somewhat misleading, the detailed character of his account
gives us the opportunity to see ho windividuals acquired follo wings in Je wish
Palestine—to determine, in other words, what the keys to power were, apart
from open collaboration with the Romans. For it is a noteworthy feature of
Josephus’s account that sixteen or seventeen of the twenty-odd disturbances
he reports for the period between the death of Herod and the outbreak of the
revolt were created by individuals who had gathered around themselves
groups of followers. In a summary discussion in War 2 (254–65), Josephus
divides the troublemakers into two classes, brigand chiefs andgoetes(i.e.,
magiciansorcharmers).Butthemore detailedaccountinAnt17–20suggests
a more complex classificatory scheme, although the individual reports are
often long on vituperation and short on information, so that many cases are
doubtful.
SophistsOn several occasions, prestigious legal scholars of a rigoristic tendency (whom
Josephusnormallydesignatessophistai)gatheredcrowdsandpreachedagainst
the legal transgressions of the Herodian family and the high priests appointed
by them. In the first case, the sermon actually led to a raid on the Temple.
The sophists’ students hacked to bits the golden eagle Herod had erected over
the Temple gate—which they, in apparent defiance of the legal authority of
the high priests, who had evidently found a way of permitting the eagle, con-
sidered a violation of the Torah. Herod, though on his deathbed, enraged at
whatheconsidered an act of sacrilege, had the sophists and some of their
followers executed. The survivors later led a protest against an insufficiently
pious high priest which, again, ended in bloodshed.^97 A similar incident in-
volving a rigoristic legal teacher and a Herodian’s mischief in the Temple
ended peacefully because the sophist was less threatening and the Herodian,
Agrippa I, more conciliatory.^98 Possibly an additional entry in this category is
the dynasty of Judas the Galilean (or Gaulanite). Josephus most often de-
scribes their activities as straightforward brigandage, yet in a celebrated pas-
sage he credits them with founding a so-called fourth philosophy (i.e., after
Pharisaism, Sadduceism, and Essenism)—a schismatic form of Pharisaism
that allegedly forbade submission to any human master.^99
(^96) For an account, see above, and Goodman,Ruling Class, especially pp. 50–75.
(^97) Ant17.149–64; 206–18. InAntJosephus evinced sympathy for the sophists, but not for their
hot-headed pupils.
(^98) Ant19.332–34.
(^99) Ant17.271–72; 18.4–10; 23–25; 20.102. InAnt17 Josephus claims that Judas, in attacking
a Herodian palace at Sepphoris, was aiming for royal rank. How can this be reconciled with their