Killing the keeper of a stockpile of Caesar's corn

[FransJVermeiren]

Earlier I have argued that the travel narrative in GLuke is in fact a veiled account of the flight of the Galilean rebels to Jerusalem in September 67 CE. After Mark’s mention that the Galileans started their journey in a state of shock and dismay (10:32a), I uncovered at least seven passages in GLuke that refer to the flight and/or war character of the so-called ‘journey to Jerusalem’.

-Gospel-	-----Passage-----	----------------------------------Subject----------------------------------
Mark	10:32a	Shock and dismay upon departure, and panic in those in the rear
Luke	9:52-56	Rejection in Samaria; suggestion for reprisal with burning arrows
	9:57-58	The complaint of a refugee
	9:59-62	The impossibility to return
	11:5-9	Hard-handed foraging
	12:16-20	The keeper of a huge stockpile of grain; a phantasy on plundering the stock and killing the keeper
	19:1-10	The Zacchaeus story: revolutionary taxation
	19:38	The singing of psalm 118, a fierce battle song, upon approaching Jerusalem

Thanks to the information provided by the recent thread ‘The census tax & the date of the gospel of Mark’ (Ben’s OP, the article of Zeichmann, the Numismatic Evidence article of the Kelsos blog, the taxation contributions of DCHindley) it is possible now to give a much more specific interpretation of the ‘parable of the rich fool’ (GLuke 12:16-20).

Zeichmann argues that before the Jewish war, taxation was predominantly in kind, more particularly in corn. He refers to Josephus who mentions an attempt to lay hands on a stock of ‘Caesar’s corn’ during the first year of the revolt against Rome (end of 66 CE / beginning of 67 CE):
For he [John of Gischala, one of the leaders of the rebellion in Galilee] requested me to authorize him to lay hands on the corn of Caesar (τὁν Καἰσαρος σῖτον) stored in the villages of Upper Galilee, professing a desire to expend the proceeds on the repair of the walls of his native town. (Vita verse 71)
This sentence shows that taxation in corn was in effect in Palestine and more specifically in Galilee at the beginning of the war.

Let’s now take a look at Luke 12:16-20:
(16) And he [Jesus] told them a parable, saying, “The land [χὠρα] of a rich man brought forth plentifully; (17) and he thought to himself, ‘What shall I do, for I have nowhere to store my crops?’ (18) And he said, ‘I will do this: I will pull down my barns, and build larger ones; and there I will store all my grain and my goods. (19) And I will say to my soul, Soul, you have ample goods laid up for many years; take your ease, eat, drink, be marry.’ (20) But God said to him, ‘Fool! This night your soul is required from you; and the things you have prepared, whose will they be?’ (21) So is he who lays up treasure for himself, but is not rich toward God.”

Looking to this text through taxation and revolt glasses, it yields a lot of fresh information. Maybe the rich man is not a competent farmer (he is not called a farmer altogether), but the tax collector of a certain area (region or district being the primary meaning of χὠρα). The bulging barns of the rich man can refer to a high tax rate and can therefore be interpreted as a criticism of Rome’s harsh taxation policy. The collaborator is depicted as a conceited man, quite understandable as he leans towards the powerful Romans. But the rebels (with God on their side) are eager to plunder the grain stock and to kill its keeper. The plundering of the corn serves a dual purpose: it is not only much needed food but also recuperated taxes.

While in an earlier phase of the revolt (end of 66 CE / beginning of 67 CE) John of Gischala wanted to sell the corn and use the proceeds for the reinforcement of the walls of Gischala, in a later stadium of the revolt (September 67 CE), with thousands of people on the run, Jesus will probably have had the intention to use the corn directly to feed the refugees. This is a logical strategic maneuver also as it weakens the logistic position enemy and strengthens the rebels. The corn that was meant for the Roman empire (shipping to Rome, use for the regional garrisons or selling to other provinces), is now used for the Jews who fight Rome.

Thoughts?

[Giuseppe]

I think that the passage is marcionite (the god being the evil Demiurge who applies his meter of sadistic 'justice' to his same believers).

But I thank you for your pointing the pre-war apocalyptic atmosfere of the parable (in the intentions of Marcion): who denies the Jesus son of the Alien God is the same Jew who will receive his ''reward'' by the evil Demiurge: the defeat in 70 (or in 135).

[DCHindley]

Frans,

I think I can see your point, but I don't give your suggested interpretation quite the weight that you do.

Every district would have a stockpile of grain collected as taxes paid in kind and managed for a number of possible uses. It can be used to feed soldiers on the march, reserve for times of famine, or convert to "cash" either by selling to city folks (where they had need) or barter to local farmers and artisans who would not have a field to live off of, in return for vegetables and herbs, handicrafts, textiles and locally manufactured wares like furniture or ceramics. The owners of the fields (government officials, Romans, Greeks and Judeans), who leased them to tenants (the vast bulk of it, even in Judea), would do the same with collecting of rents.

From what I understand, the person who had control of the land was responsible for the collection of taxes in kind from what the tenants brought to the threshing floors, so the owners would charge a rent that, like a modern escrow account, covers the rental contract and *also* the tax due. The taxable portion was further separated from the land-controller's portion, and also stored in nearby silos. Perhaps, in any one complex of silos, several were set aside for grain dedicated to government use.

When the grain is brought to the threshing floor, the agreed portions are separated out and the tenant gets the remainder, although probably held in trust at silos near the threshing floor. Each of these silos would hold the grain of many tenants in common, as I doubt that there would be a separate one for each tenant farmer. The tenant then has the right to withdraw portions from his stored allotment (I'm sure that storage and processing fees applied). He or she would withdraw enough each day to send to the mill, probably also close by (within eyesight), and mother could then go home with flour and start the bread-baking process at home.

Josephus would, if he was really a commissar sent to take control of the rebellion in Galilee, have the right to sell that grain for John's wall project. However, his hesitancy suggests that he 1) didn't believe John, 2) he believed John but wanted to spite him, or 3) he wasn't as well connected as he pretended to be and needed to appropriate the grain for his own warlord activities rather than give it to John. Militias need feeding, or they feed on their commanders.

DCH

[Charles Wilson]

Militias need feeding, or they feed on their commanders.

Josephus, Ant...,15,9, 2:

"In these circumstances he considered with himself how to procure some seasonable help; but this was a hard thing to be done, while their neighbors had no food to sell them; and their money also was gone, had it been possible to purchase a little food at a great price. However, he thought it his best way, by all means, not to leave off his endeavors to assist his people; so he cut off the rich furniture that was in his palace, both of silver and gold, insomuch that he did not spare the finest vessels he had, or those that were made with the most elaborate skill of the artificers, but sent the money to Petronius, who had been made prefect of Egypt by Caesar; and as not a few had already fled to him under their necessities, and as he was particularly a friend to Herod, and desirous to have his subjects preserved, he gave leave to them in the first place to export corn, and assisted them every way, both in purchasing and exporting the same; so that he was the principal, if not the only person, who afforded them what help they had. And Herod taking care the people should understand that this help came from himself, did thereby not only remove the ill opinion of those that formerly hated him, but gave them the greatest demonstration possible of his good-will to them, and care of them; for, in the first place, as for those who were able to provide their own food, he distributed to them their proportion of corn in the exactest manner..."

Matthew 7: 7 - 14 (RSV):
[7] "Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.
[8] For every one who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened.
[9] Or what man of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone?
[10] Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a serpent?
[11] If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him!
[12] So whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them; for this is the law and the prophets.
[13] "Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many.
[14] For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few.

There is a raging famine at this time and there is little water (See: John 5, the well supplied water for the cattle and the sons of Jacob). With apologies to Neil for connecting the dots here, things are very tight. Famine and starvation are significant motivators. Herod will sell it all and give the proceeds to Petronius for grain. Herod builds the Safe Harbor at Caesarea by dropping giant stones to form a breakwater. The safe entrance to this is narrow:

"Enter by the narrow gate..."

"Or what man of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone?"
***

"Militias need feeding, or they feed on their commanders..."

You got that right.

CW

[DCHindley]

Josephus, Ant...,15,9, 2:

"In these circumstances he considered with himself how to procure some seasonable help; but this was a hard thing to be done, while their neighbors had no food to sell them; and their money also was gone, had it been possible to purchase a little food at a great price. However, he thought it his best way, by all means, not to leave off his endeavors to assist his people; so he cut off the rich furniture that was in his palace, both of silver and gold, insomuch that he did not spare the finest vessels he had, or those that were made with the most elaborate skill of the artificers, but sent the money to Petronius, who had been made prefect of Egypt by Caesar; and as not a few had already fled to him under their necessities, and as he was particularly a friend to Herod, and desirous to have his subjects preserved, he gave leave to them in the first place to export corn, and assisted them every way, both in purchasing and exporting the same; so that he was the principal, if not the only person, who afforded them what help they had. And Herod taking care the people should understand that this help came from himself, did thereby not only remove the ill opinion of those that formerly hated him, but gave them the greatest demonstration possible of his good-will to them, and care of them; for, in the first place, as for those who were able to provide their own food, he distributed to them their proportion of corn in the exactest manner..."

"Militias need feeding, or they feed on their commanders ..."

You got that right.

Now you reminded me of Lynard Skynard. 1977, Street Survivors.

I tried everything in my life
Things I like I try 'em twice
You got that right
You sure got that right ...

But seriously (if at all possible) poor Herod was and is a misunderstood man. He was so ambitious he wouldn't allow himself to fail, not even a little bit.

The exception was his kids. I deal with family run businesses (a lot like Roman client kingdoms) all the time, and the kids either hate it, or embrace it. There are a few who scheme to take control from their siblings and might be persuaded to "help the matter along" when it comes to their good ol' dad's poor health. I guess he was disappointed with his older kids, the ones who should have known better and not f*cked up.

My understanding is that he took a good number of gold and silver vessels, plates, ceremonial armor, etc., and literally chopped it up (gold or silver scrap was called "chop" in the metal trade). The first time I read about this practice, I learned that there are examples of silver and gold hoards of metals like this. The picture I saw had spoons and mirror frames and such cut into pieces at angles like one used an industrial shear. But that was how the scrap dealers wanted it, as it was destined for some mint or smith's shop anyways, to be melted down for re-use. By doing so, the metal is reduced to the value of the metals themselves. There was no "Well, I could get more if I tote it to Ashdod ..." He liquidated his own beloved assets to make sure there was not a disastrous famine.

Understand that Herod had all the accumulated royal lands that had been building up under the Hasmoneans at his disposal. Taking the drastic step of scrapping his beloved heirlooms meant that he had already expended as much of the royal grain reserves as he dared. He was asking the Prefect of Egypt to divert grain destined for Rome to his people and also advanced Herod credit to cover buying and reselling of the grain (it wasn't free, I'll assume, although Herod may have subsidized the sale price a bit as famine has this bad habit of taking ones means of making a living) and its transport to Judea. Transport was a really big cost, which is why governments stockpiled grain at strategic points, to reduce the need to carry it too far.

Petronius clearly was stepping out on a limb by helping Herod in this way, but that was not frowned on if done for the right reasons. In the end, his decision paid off, and Herod came through with payment for the grain and his subjects were actually appreciative. I think that *really* impressed Petronius and many other Romans. A lot of client kings, or governors even, would have let people starve. But what Herod did, from Petronius' POV, was preserve himself for service to the empire. Herod was an amazing strategist and tactician. Sure he had a type A personality, which abrades against many, but folks like that seem to be the ones who get things done, in industry as well as politics. Herod came through. Should his services be needed by the empire, he would step up and offer support (highly skilled troops, political leverage, etc.) that would make a difference.

He cannot let himself fail. Ever.

DCH