Masada (מצדה) comes from the Hebrew word מְצוּדָה meaning fortress. This name
was chosen as Masada was one of the personal fortresses built by the ever so
paranoid King Herod.
King
Herod built Masada due to its perfect defense characteristics. First of all, it
is located in the desert. Secondly, it is a giant mountain with a flat top
perfect for building. Lastly, the other mountains surrounding it are separated
by a large ravine. This makes Masada a free-standing, natural fortress. Herod
then built a large palace hanging off the side of the cliff. Out of the three
sections, he personally lived in the middle part which was the safest. Due to
his paranoia, this mostly served as an emergency escape location rather than a
permanent residence.
After
Herod, Masada was inhabited by the Zealots during the Great Revolt around 70-73
CE. They chose Masada for two main reasons. Firstly, like Herod thought, Masada
is the perfect place to hide out and maintain as a fortress. Secondly, it
served as a big “haha” (for a lack of better terms) into the face of the Romans.
Herod built Masada up himself, and he was a puppet of the Roman Emperor. Thus
the Zealots took over a very large place under partial Roman control.
 |
| Cistern |
The
Zealots then added much to Masada in order to make it a suitable place for a
civilization. Herod only built up the defense for Masada. But what about the
drink, diet, and deals? The Zealots solved the first problem by build a large
system of cisterns and aqueducts in the side of the mountain.
 |
| Actual Aqueducts |
 |
| Aqueducts model |
For food, they
mostly focused on agriculture with the help of birds. Although the birds could
be eaten, they were more importantly used for fertilizing the ground so that vegetables
and fruits could be grown up top. Much of the fruit was then dried to keep it
for a long time.
 |
| Bird Cage |
 |
| Dried fruit |
Everything was kept in large storages with the goal of having
enough supplies for 10 years. The Zealots wanted to not only survive on top of
Masada, but thrive.
They also wanted to make more fun of the Romans by living
well, which is why they left some of the food when burning all of their
supplies to show the Romans that it was not starvation that killed them in the
end*. As for deals, the Zealots did not care too much about this as they were
hiding on top of a mountain. But, the nearby Dead Sea allowed them access to
salt. This was a very valuable item that could be used for trade if they needed
to.
*Speaking
of how the Zealots met their end, they did it on their own terms. When the
Romans were finally almost done building their ramp and seizing Masada (see right), the
Zealots made a choice. They decided that they’d rather kill themselves than
allow the Romans to do so or to enslave them. The patriarch of each family
killed all of their family, then ten of them killed the rest, then out of the
ten killed the other nine and himself. Although this seemed to be a better idea
than being captured by the Romans, it brought about a lot of controversial
discussion. Many agree that it’s unholy in Judaism to commit suicide and take
away the life the G_d gave to you. Others simply think that it is a cowardly
thing to do. Nonetheless the Rabbis don’t speak about it anywhere in their texts.
They do not want such a horrid thing remembered in the future that will make a
large group of Jews look bad.
Today
there is a phrase שנית מצדה לא תיפול which translates to “Masada will not fall
again”. Masada refers less to the actual mountain than it does to the Jewish
people overall. By saying this we remember the tragic event and tell to
ourselves that it will not happen again both in the sense that we will not give
up to another enemy again and that we will not allow ourselves to do such a
horrible thing to our own people and selves.
Returning
to the story of their fall, I pose the same question to everyone. It may not be
so original, but I feel like our time to share our opinion was cut short. “What
is your opinion of the demise of the Zealots?” Please take it in whichever context
you wish and elaborate as much as you need to get your opinion across.
Awkward Roman camp picture that I wanted to add but couldn't incorporate:
This was a great blog post and was very descriptive. My opinion of the demise of the zealots is that it was a smart way to go. I think that having that last bit of independence, even though it was extremely morbid, was a powerful sign that the zealots would never give up without a fight.
ReplyDeleteMy opinion on the demise of the Zealots is one of immense respect. They wanted to take their lives into their own hands. They did not want to let the romans dictate what would happen to them when Masada was eventually overrun, they wanted to go out in a way that they thought was the most respectful to them.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the zealots were wrong in killing themselves before the Romans got to the top of Masada. After being so judgmental over the other sects for not fighting for their beliefs, they gave up so easily. They had a certain mindset and certain ideas before this threat, and should have held their ground and fought for those, no matter the odds.
ReplyDeleteMaztada was totally awesome and had an interesting story too! I think the suicide of the Zealots was humble, but also sad. I think it showed strength and power and humility to not fall to the Romans, but it also showed some sort of 'give up' that the Zealots didn't want to fight. Either way I think Matzada was a really amazing hike and a really cool 'class'
ReplyDeleteI think that this question in itself is pretty vague, so I'm going to take it in the sense that I see it. I think that the demise of the zealots on masada was inevitable, which they obviously saw from the course of action that they took. However, I have mixed opinions about their mass suicide/homicide. I know the Torah says suicide is terrible, but wouldn't it be worse to commit homicide? What about their families? I assume that they had no say in their deaths, which greatly troubles me, never mind that they probably would have been killed by the romans anyway.
ReplyDeleteI think that the demise of the zealots was, as Caroline said, an inevitable one. Being stuck on top of a mountain with 10 years of food and Romans surrounding the mountain, if the Romans were not able to get to the fortress after 10 years, the food would have run out anyways. There was of course the possibility of a peace agreement with the Romans but it is doubtful that these warlike zealots would take part in such an event. As for the way they died, it seems that it was the best option in their own minds. It is mentioned that one family did not commit suicide because they did not feel it was the best option and given this, I would think that the rest of the zealots on the mountain made the conscious decision about how to end their life. The fact that they decided this, to me, means it was the best option in each and every one of their minds and not something that was just decided for them by leaders, making me a tad bit more comfortable with the end.
ReplyDeleteThis was another very impressive blog, very detailed and thorough. I still feel the same way about the demise of the Zealots as I always have. I think their decision was thought out and posed as a very specific message. They would not be taken by the romans. This being said, I suppose there is always another way out, perhaps they should have fought instead of giving up. Nevertheless I admire their devotion to Judaism to resist capture at such an extreme.
ReplyDeleteI feel that the decision made by the Zealots was necessary. With the rule over Jerusalem by the Romans, the Jews were once again being slowly rounded up only to be eventually exiled or killed. And so it happened, and Masada for some was their only hope. After the destruction of the second temple, I think the Jews had enough and that committing suicide was better for them than being enslaved or killed by the Romans.
ReplyDeleteI believe the decision of the Zealots killing themselves was better than being killed by the Romans. There was a huge probability of them being killed and it was probably more merciful if they did it themselves. They also got to die at the hands of their own instead of massacred by their enemies. They had an extremely elaborate system at the top of Masada and were able to resist for that long, but it had to come to an end and at least it wasn't as painful as it could have been.
ReplyDeleteI believe that what the Zelots did was smart and an act of bravery. They knew that they would not win the war and wanted to die in honor. Also, they really thought their plan out and did not just do it in the spur of the moment which proves further to their wisdom. If they did not take these measures I believe the consequences of living in fear and pain would be worse.
ReplyDeleteI do not agree with the decision that the Zealots made. They gave up on their lives and the future of their offspring before they were even under attack. Although I am sure that it was a difficult decision to make and a heart-breaking task to perform, it was a lazy solution to a problem that had not even begun.
ReplyDeleteGreat blogpost! I think that the Zealots killing themselves over being killed by the Romans was the best option. If they had not done it themselves it would have be done by the Romans, and it was better they did it themselves rather being defeated by the Romans. It would have been better if they tried to fight them so they looked stronger but they would never have won.
ReplyDeletethe way the zealots were able to thrive on their own is pretty remarkable if you ask me. though the way things ended was not really all that great, they lived for a while and pretty much laughed in the romans faces. personally thats what i would do, but im just a snarky person to begin with
ReplyDelete