The Kitos revolt was an uprising of Jews during the last three years of Trajan's rule. While the direct cause is unknown, as a good portion of information regarding it is lost, the best conclusion is that it was a reaction to Rome's invasion of Parthia the year before the uprising.
While local uprisings appeared independently of one another, it's the march of rebellion along the North African coast which led to the most brutal assault the revolt saw. Beginning in Cyrene at the start of the revolt, Jews, led by a figure known either as Lucas or Andrew (conjoined as Lukuas-Andreas), destroyed many temples to pagan gods, as well as slaughter the population of Greeks and Romans. They moved eastward through Lybia and into Egypt. Marcus Rutilius Lupus, governour of Alexandria, anticipating that the mob would reach the city, had ordered an evacuation (among those forced to leave was the historian Appian). When the mob arrived they were quashed by Quintus Marcius Turbo.
After this Turbo made his way to Palestine, perhaps in pursuit of Lucas. While it is unclear of what became of him, it is possible that he was defeated and executed in Alexandria (as alluded to in Acta Pauli et Antonini), or fled to Palestine and was one of those executed by Lucius Quietus in Lydda.
In Lydda another uprising had been sparked by the brothers Julian and Pappos. This uprising, in a critical trade route, disrupted the grain supply from Egypt to Parthia. While the two brothers were captured by Quietus. The account in the Talmud (Ta'anit 18b) of the brother's deaths may appear to be the result of liberties taken with history. The text reads that Trajan himself was present during the trial, and was killed himself minutes after the siblings' own death. Actually, Trajan died in Salinus. Rather it is understood that it was Quietus who had ordered the execution. Nevertheless this sparked an annual celebration of "Trajan's day" on the twelfth of Adar.
A passage appearing before this however notes that the celebration of Trajan's day had been discontinued out of respect for the brothers Shemaya and his brother Ahiya. The possibility thus that these two pairs of brothers are the same is, to me at least, made clear.
With this we can move onto the crux of the matter: that Revelations 11 was written with the Kitos revolt in mind.
Now as sensational as that may sound, I must clarify that I do not take that as meaning tat Revelation 11 predicted the Kitos revolt. Rather, it was written after it as a means of attaching apocalyptic significance to it. My view of Revelations is that 1) it is a composition spanning close to a century, with numerous redactions and historical anachronisms interwoven into it, and 2) that the main purpose of this text was as a means of divining history; that history was the language of God and revealed past and future events. As a whole, the book is dated to the end of the first century; but I believe the composition spanned from roughly 59 ad to at least the time of Justin Martyr, ca. 160 ad.
Also, Revelations 11 may be viewed as allegorized history. It is not meant to be a direct account of the revolt, but as an allegory of important events that happened during it. I don't now if that matters but I thought I should make that apparent.
The chapter opens with the author (presumably John) being handed a measuring rod [Also, this is from the English Standard Version translation]:
The appointing of the two witnesses here, if my interpretation holds water, would be the brothers Julian and Pappos. Indeed, given how they are described as causing death to those who oppose them hints at a necessity for violence, as was the case for the revolt. What's more is that the two brothers were also apart of a campaign to rebuild the Temple. It's rejection may have added fuel to the fire which caused the revolt.Then I was given a measuring rod like a staff, and I was told, “Rise and measure the temple of God and the altar and those who worship there, but do not measure the court outside the temple; leave that out, for it is given over to the nations, and they will trample the holy city for forty-two months. And I will grant authority to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth.” These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands that stand before the Lord of the earth. And if anyone would harm them, fire pours from their mouth and consumes their foes. If anyone would harm them, this is how he is doomed to be killed. They have the power to shut the sky, that no rain may fall during the days of their prophesying, and they have power over the waters to turn them into blood and to strike the earth with every kind of plague, as often as they desire
The death of the brothers by Quietus, who makes war against them, here transposed as the beast.And when they have finished their testimony, the beast that rises from the bottomless pit will make war on them and conquer them and kill them, and their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city that symbolically is called Sodom and Egypt, where their Lord was crucified. For three and a half days some from the peoples and tribes and languages and nations will gaze at their dead bodies and refuse to let them be placed in a tomb, and those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them and make merry and exchange presents, because these two prophets had been a torment to those who dwell on the earth.
It is here that a most crucial point is raised in regards to this interpretation. The chapter identifies their-- the two witnesses--Lord as being crucified in the same city in which they too were killed by the beast. So what is the great city to mean for this theory? Biblical exegetes and commentators interpret it to mean Jerusalem, as that is the city in which Christ is crucified. (Though outside the city walls). But beyond that there is no reason to presume this to be the only viable option; especially considering the allegorical nature of the text. The great city could truly be any city: Jerusalem, Babylon, Alexandria, and even Lydda.
And supposing the two witnesses were indeed the brothers Julian and Pappos, who then is their Lord referred to.
The fate of Lukuas-Andreas is not known. Both Eusebius and Cassius Dio only mentions him as leading the revolt, but not what happened to him after his defeat in Alexandria. The papyrus Acta Pauline et Antonini gives the impression that it was there he was executed (with mock performances of this being enacted). While on the authority of Abulfaraj, a tenth century Arabian historian, Friedrich Munter writes that Lucas had fled to Palestine (see The Wars of the Jews, pg. 18-19.) But then there is also the association of Lydda with yet another obscure figure hitherto misappropriated by a good many researchers: Yeshu ben Stada.
This Yeshu ben Stada, appearing only in a handful of scattered references in the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmud, does at once seem to fit the pattern established thus far with this interpretation of Revelation 11 and the Kitos revolt. Accordingly he was the product of a shameful conception, had traveled to Egypt where he was learned in the esoteric knowledge of the Egyptians, and returned to his native Judea a sage and a healer. After a course he was ordered to be stoned, in accordance with Deut 21:23, which occurred in Lydda.
Though I will fully admit that this is speculation, conjecture, and just down right guesswork, I do think that Lukuas-Andreas and Yeshu ben Stada are in fact one and the same. The evidence is circumstantial, (the coming from/fleeing from Egypt, the messianic pretense, as well as the possible connections to Lydda), but I hope there is enough to present at least an argument worth considering.
But if indeed this is the case then it may also brings together various other traditions of the theology: Simon of Cyrene, Simon Magus, and Simon of Jerusalem, may all be one and the same figure. I will elaborate upon this in future posts, but mention it hear to put a proverbial bug your ears.
But returning to the subject of the two witnesses, the chapter continues with this:
The resurrection of the two witnesses are followed by them being assumed up into heaven. This trope follows that of Enoch and Elisha in the Old Testament, but also that of the brothers Castor and Pollux in Greek mythology. The possible significance of this will also be elaborated in another post.But after the three and a half days a breath of life from God entered them, and they stood up on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw them. Then they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, “Come up here!” And they went up to heaven in a cloud, and their enemies watched them. And at that hour there was a great earthquake, and a tenth of the city fell. Seven thousand people were killed in the earthquake, and the rest were terrified and gave glory to the God of heaven.
Lastly, the mention of a great earthquake which followed their assumption also corresponds with the revolt. Cassius Dio records that at the beginning of the revolt an earthquake struck Antioch:
The closing verses also reflects a similar description of the earthquake:"While the emperor was tarrying in Antioch a terrible earthquake occurred; many cities suffered injury, but Antioch was the most unfortunate of all. Since Trajan was passing the winter there and many soldiers and many civilians had flocked thither from all sides in connexion with law-suits, embassies, business or sightseeing, there was no nation of people that went unscathed; and thus in Antioch the whole world under Roman sway suffered disaster. There had been many thunderstorms and portentous winds, but no one would ever have expected so many evils to result from them. First there came, on a sudden, a great bellowing roar, and this was followed by a tremendous quaking. The whole earth was upheaved, and buildings leaped into the air; some were carried aloft only to collapse and be broken in pieces, while others were tossed this way and that as if by the surge of the sea, and overturned, and the wreckage spread out over a great extent even of the open country. The crash of grinding and breaking timbers together with tiles and stones was most frightful; and an inconceivable amount of dust arose, so that it was impossible for one to see anything or to speak or hear a word. As for the people, many even who were outside the houses were hurt, being snatched up and tossed violently about and then dashed to the earth as if falling from a cliff; some were maimed and others were killed. Even trees in some cases leaped into the air, roots and all. The number of those who were trapped in the houses and perished was past finding out; for multitudes were killed by the very force of the falling débris, and great numbers were suffocated in the ruins. Those who lay with a part of their body buried under the stones or timbers suffered terribly, being able neither to live any longer nor to find an immediate death." ~Cassius Dio, Roman History, book 68, chapter 24
All of this, as disparate and coincidental as it may be, leaves me to theorize that Revelation chapter 11 was an allegory of the Kitos revolt; that Lukuas-Andreas was the crucified messianic figure; and that his two supporters, the brothers Julian and Pappos, were the two witnesses fighting on his behalf.Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet, and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, “The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign forever and ever.” And the twenty-four elders who sit on their thrones before God fell on their faces and worshiped God, saying, “We give thanks to you, Lord God Almighty, who is and who was, for you have taken your great power and begun to reign. The nations raged, but your wrath came, and the time for the dead to be judged, and for rewarding your servants, the prophets and saints, and those who fear your name, both small and great, and for destroying the destroyers of the earth.” Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant was seen within his temple. There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, an earthquake, and heavy hail.
With the above I hope I have at least intrigued some of you to give this a thoughtful consideration, even if I am mistaken or there is disagreement with you. Anyway, that's all I've got at the moment. So until next time: Amen.