John of Giscala

John of Giscala (Yohanan me-Gush Halav) ( _he. יוחנן מגוש חלב) or "Johannes ben Levi" (birth date unknown; death date after 70), was a leader of the Jewish revolt against the Romans in the First Jewish-Roman War.

The Romans attacked Gush Halav, John's home town in Upper Galilee and burned it to the ground. John helped to rebuild the city, hereby gaining the support of the people of Giscala. He used these people and about 500 fugitives to organize a large resistance against the Romans. Altogether their numbers reached about 5,000. When he asked Josephus if he could attack the emperor's grain store Josephus, at that time the governor of Galilee, refused. John took the grain store anyway and then built walls around Giscala. This sparked Josephus's long-term hatred of John.Fact|date=July 2008 This also started the Northern part of the First Jewish-Roman War.Fact|date=July 2008 After John's revolt in the North was put down by Vespasian, John fled to Jerusalem. After Jerusalem was taken, John was taken to Rome. According to Josephus he was sentenced to life in prison.Fact|date=July 2008

Josephus account

Josephus describes the fall of Gush Halav as follows:

Now no place of Galilee remained to be taken but the small city of Gischala, whose multitude yet were desirous of peace; for they were generally husbandmen, and always applied themselves to cultivate the fruits of the earth. However, there were a great number that belonged to a band of robbers, that were already corrupted, and had crept in among them, and some of the governing part of the citizens were sick of the same distemper. It was John, the son of...Levi, that drew them into this rebellion, and encouraged them in it. He was a cunning knave, and of a temper that could put on various shapes; very rash in expecting great things, and very sagacious in bringing about what he hoped for. It was known to every body that he was fond of war, in order to thrust himself into authority; and the seditious part of the people of Gischala were under his management, by whose means the populace, who seemed ready to send ambassadors in order to a surrender, waited for the coming of the Romans in battle-array. Vespasian sent against them Titus, with a thousand horsemen... but withdrew the tenth legion to Scythopolis, while he returned to Caesarea with the two other legions, that he might allow them to refresh themselves after their long and hard campaign... Now Titus, as he rode out to Gischala, found it would be easy for him to take the city...but knew withal, that if he took it by force, the multitude would be destroyed by the soldiers without mercy... So he was rather desirous the city might be surrendered up to him on terms. Accordingly, when he saw the wall full of those men that were of the corrupted party, he said to them, - That he could not but wonder what it was they depended on, when they alone stayed to fight the Romans, after every other city was taken by them, especially when they have seen cities much better fortified than theirs is overthrown by a single attack upon them... Now none of the populace durst not only make a reply, but durst not so much as get upon the wall... But John returned Titus this answer: That for himself he was content to hearken to his proposals...Yet he said that Titus ought to have such regard to the Jewish law, as to grant them leave to celebrate that day, which was the seventh day of the week...and that even the Romans were not ignorant how the period of the seventh day was among them a cessation from all labors; and that he who should compel them to transgress the law about that day would be equally guilty with those that were compelled to transgress it... Thus did this man put a trick upon Titus, not so much out of regard to the seventh day as to his own preservation, for he was afraid lest he should be quite deserted if the city should be taken, and had his hopes of life in that night, and in his flight therein... Titus was prevailed with by this pretense for a delay, and...pitched his camp further off the city at Cydessa..., a strong Mediterranean village of the Tyrians, which always hated and made war against the Jews... Now, in the night time, when John saw that there was no Roman guard about the city, he seized the opportunity directly, and, taking with him not only the armed men that where about him, but a considerable number of those that had little to do, together with their families, he fled to Jerusalem... Now on the next day Titus came to the wall, to make the agreement; whereupon the people opened their gates to him, and came out to him, with their children and wives, and made acclamations of joy to him, as to one that had been their benefactor, and had delivered the city out of custody; they also informed him of John's flight, and besought him to spare them,... But Titus, not so much regarding the supplications of the people, sent part of his horsemen to pursue after John, but they could not overtake him, for he was gotten to Jerusalem before; they also slew six thousand of the women and children who went out with him... However, Titus was greatly displeased that he had not been able to bring this John, who had deluded him, to punishment; yet he had captives enough, as well as the corrupted part of the city, to satisfy his anger... So he entered the city... [and] he repressed those that had disturbed the city rather by threatenings than by executions... However, he placed a garrison in the city for its security, by which means he should restrain those that were for innovations, and should leave those that were peaceably disposed in greater security. And thus was all Galilee taken, but this not till after it had cost the Romans much pains before it could be taken by them.

[Josephus Flavius Wars of the Jews, Book IV, Chapter 2]

John of Giscala in the Arts

John of Giscala was the subject of the Italian drama, "Giovanni di Giscala" (1754) by Alfonso Varano. The work inspired the Italian opera, "Giovanni di Giscala" (1855) by Giovanni Gaetano Rossi and Alfonso Cavagnar. [Gabriele Boccaccini, "Portraits of Middle Judaism in Scholarship and Arts" (Turin: Zamorani, 1992)]

References