The Illustrated Guide to Terrorism
Chapter 1: What Is Terrorism?
Page 19: The Sicarii – The Aftermath
NARRATOR
While the Zealots focused on attacking imperial power, the Sicarii seized the opportunity to attack (who else?) their fellow JEWS.
Sicarii chasing a man through the alleys of Jerusalem.
VARIOUS
We told you — we don’t fight Romans!
Come back here, collaborator!
Apostate!
Traitor!
NARRATOR
When Roman forces bottled up the rebel factions inside Jerusalem, the Sicarii BURNED all the food reserves, so [other] people would choose to fight rather than wait out the seige.
And they killed ANYONE who suggested negotiating a peaceful surrender.
The others retaliated by kicking all of the Sicarii OUT of the city.
Sicarii striding away from city walls, one shaking his fist in defiance, one flinging his arms wide expansively, one hunched over.
SICARII
Ingrates!
We did it all for you!
We did it all for you!
The hilltop fortress of Masada, with a file of Roman soldiers tramping up the long ramp.
NARRATOR
Another group of rebels had captured the mountain fortress “Masada” in the meantime. The Sicarii tricked their way inside, wrested control from the rebels at knifepoint… and there they SAT OUT the rest of the war with their families (about 960 of them in all).
To feed themselves, they raided nearby Jewish villages. The historian Josephus (who took part in the revolt) reported that the Sicarii slaughtered 700 women and children in a single raid on Ein Gedi.
The Roman Army eventually came to Masada. Rather than fight, the men of the Sicarii agreed to kill each others’ families, and then committed suicide.
VOICES
INSPIRING!
Wait, what?
We keep telling you — we don’t fight Romans!
ROMAN ARMY
Tramp, tramp, tramp
up the ramp, ramp, ramp!
NARRATOR
It all ended in disaster.
After four years of rebellion, Jerusalem lay in ruins. The great temple — more than a place of worship, a very real embodiment of its people’s identity — was utterly demolished. Over a million Jews had been killed, and all the rest had suffered.
Rome did what empired do, and marched away much of the population, scattering the Jews across its empire. This time, for good.
There would never be another Jewish kingdom in the land of Canaan.
Burnt-out rubble of Jerusalem with a couple towers from Herod’s palace still standing in the foreground, what remains of the western temple wall in the distance, and far off the multitudes being marched away to be swallowed up by the hills and desert.
VOICE
Not exactly the “final age” we had in mind…
NARRATOR
And that’s the story of the first terrorists. In the next chapter, we’ll skim through the history of MODERN terrorist groups, and see if history ever repeated itself.
[SUGGESTED EDIT: Spell “siege” correctly.]
Minor historical quibble here, but technically only one of the Sicarii committed proper suicide. Since it was regarded as an unforgivable sin, what they did was draw straws, murder each other until only one guy was left, and that last unlucky guy who got the short straw was the one who had to commit the deed of suicide.
Are we sure about this? It doesn’t seem especially difficult for two people to murder each other, with with simultaneous knife thrusts perhaps (although I can think of plenty of other possibilities). Are we trusting Roman reporting? How would they (or anybody) know what happened in such detail?
Obviously, 100% verification isn’t exactly possible. The initial source is the contemporary historian Flavius Josephus, himself a former Sicarii. Josephus was captured in an earlier siege of a Sicarii stronghold, was enslaved as punishment, and later set free some time after the revolt had ended. He seems to have believed it was his duty to record what happened and his account is the only one of the Jewish-Roman War which has survived to the current day. According to Josephus, he learned the story of what happened from two women who managed to survive the siege by hiding in Masada’s cisterns. There ARE inconsistencies and errors in Josephus’s account that throw them into doubt and various alternative theories have cropped up, but archeological evidence hasn’t really managed to verify either Josephus’s original account OR the alternative ones.
Yeah, I absolutely think that was just conjecture. Stating a reasonable assumption about something as fact was SOLIDLY within the range of acceptable behavior for a historian of the time, largely still is today. You wouldn’t believe some of the absurd fabrications they wouldn’t have even felt dishonest about entering into the annals back then, and even up to a few hundred years ago.
It’s very important to keep historiography in mind in general, but especially with this chapter as it’s explicitly about a group of people making up a history that influenced people in centuries and millennia to come.