TEXT: LINDSAY POWELL
  ILLUSTRATED BY PETER DENNIS
  THE BAR KOKHBA 
  WAR AD 132–136
  The last Jewish revolt against Imperial Rome
  
  CAMPAIGN 310
  THE BAR KOKHBA  
  WAR AD 132–136
  The last Jewish revolt against Imperial Rome
  LINDSAY POWELL  
  ILLUSTRATED BY PETER DENNIS
  Series editor Marcus Cowper
  
  CONTENTS
  STRATEGIC SITUATION 
  5
  Background n Causes of the war n King Messiah
  CHRONOLOGY 
  13
  OPPOSING COMMANDERS 
  16
  The Jews and their allies n The Romans and their allies
  OPPOSING ARMIES 
  22
  Jewish forces n Roman forces
  OPPOSING PLANS 
  32
  Jewish plans n Roman plans
  THE CAMPAIGN 
  39
  ‘For the freedom of Jerusalem’ n War of attrition n Turning point  
  Last stand at Betar n Caves of Horror
  AFTERMATH 
  80
  Rewards and punishments n Hero and myth
  THE BATTLEFIELD TODAY 
  87
  Israel n West Bank
  BIBLIOGRAPHY 
  91
  INDEX 
  95
  
  AFRICA
  PROCONSULARIS
  2
  4
  5
  6
  7
  11
  13
  14
  15
  16
  17
  18
  19
  20
  21
  22
  23
  24
  25
  27
  26
  28 29
  30
  Provincial boundary
  Imperial border
  Legionary base
  Naval base 
  Province
  RAETIA
  30
  12
  10
  9
  8
  3
  1
  250 miles
  250km
  0
  0
  N
  Legions
  1. 
  VII Gemina
  2. 
  II Augusta
  3. 
  XX Valeria Victrix
  4. 
  VI Victrix
  5. 
  IX Hispana
  6.  XXX Ulpia Victrix
  7. 
  I Minervia
  8. 
  XXII Primigenia
  9. 
  VIII Augusta
  10. X Gemina
  11. XIV Gemina
  12. I Adiutrix
  13. II Adiutrix
  14. IV Flavia Felix
  15. VII Claudia
  16. XIII Gemina
  17. I Italica
  18. XI Claudia
  19. V Macedonica
  20. XV Apollinaris
  21. XII Fulminata
  22. XVI Flavia Firma
  23. IV Scythica
  24. III Gallica
  25. VI Ferrata
  26. III Cyrenaica
  27. X Fretensis
  28. II Traiana
  29. XXII Deiotariana
  30. III Augusta
  BRITANNIA
  Eboracum
  Wallsend
  Maryport
  Deva
  Isca Silurum
  Cyrene
  Lugdunum
  Alexandria
  Byzantium
  Nicomedia
  Claudiopolis
  Thessalonica
  Sarmizegetusa
  Apulum
  Athenae
  Roma
  Ravenna
  Neapolis
  Mogontiacum
  Colonia Agrippinensis
  Gesoriacum
  Argentorate
  Carthago
  Lambaesis
  Ephesus
  Hierosolyma/
  Aelia Capitolina
  (Jerusalem)
  Bostra
  Seleucia Pieria
  Petra
  Antiocheia
  Zeugma
  Samosata
  Melitene
  Satala
  Raphanaea
  Trapezuz
  GERMANIA
  INFERIOR
  GERMANIA
  SUPERIOR
  RAETIA
  ALPES
  GRAIAE
  ALPES
  COTTIAE
  ALPES
  MARITIMAE
  NORICUM
  PANNONIA
  SUPERIOR
  Vindobona
  Carnuntum
  Brigetio
  Aquincum
  PANNONIA
  INFERIOR
  DALMATIA
  Singidunum
  Viminacium
  MOESIA
  SUPERIOR
  MACEDONIA
  EPIRUS
  ACHAEA
  ITALIA
  MOESIA INFERIOR
  Durostorum
  Novae
  Troemis
  GALATIA
  CAPPADOCIA
  CORSICA
  ET SARDINIA
  MAURETANIA
  TINGITANA
  HISPANIA
  LUSITANIA
  HISPANIA
  TARRACONENSIS
  GALLIA BELGICA
  GALLIA LUGDUNENSIS
  GALLIA
  AQUITANIA
  GALLIA
  NARBONENSIS
  HISPANIA
  BAETICA
  Gades
  Italica
  Corduba
  Tarraco
  MAURETANIA CAESARIENSIS
  SYRIA
  CYPRUS
  ARABIA
  PETRAEA
  IUDAEA
  AEGYPTUS
  SICILIA
  CRETA ET
  CYRENAICA
  LYCIA ET
  PAMPHYLIA
  CILICIA
  PONTUS
  ET BITHYNIA
  ASIA
  THRACIA
  DACIA
  Tel Shalem
  The Roman Empire, ad 132
  
  5
  BACKGROUND
  In the spring of ad 130 Hadrian, commander-in-chief of the armed forces and 
  ‘first man’ of the Roman world, arrived in Iudaea (Judaea). It was just one 
  of several territories he was visiting on his tour of the provinces since leaving 
  Rome two years before. Hadrian was in high spirits. He had inspected the 
  border regions and army camps, raising morale and enforcing discipline in the 
  military units stationed there. In towns and cities the crowds had welcomed 
  him as resitutor (restorer) and celebrated athletic and gladiatorial games in 
  his honour. Accompanying him was his male lover, a beautiful 19-year-old 
  named Antinous from Bithynia, and a new-found source of happiness for the 
  hard-working, vigorous older man. It seemed that the empire was enjoying 
  a new golden age of peace and prosperity.
  The people of Iudaea welcomed him too. As he travelled through the 
  province the citizens of Tiberias, colonia Prima Flavia Augusta Caesarea 
  (modern Caesarea), Salumias (Salem) and other towns received benefactions 
  from him. Celebrating his visit, coins were struck bearing the legend ‘For 
  Augustus’ Arrival in Iudaea’ using his honorific title. The resident Jewish 
  population also hoped for better relations with the emperor following decades 
  of discontentment reaching back to the disastrous war in Iudaea of ad 66–74. 
  Then, propelled by a national hope for redemption, radicalized Jews had 
  seized Hierosolyma (or Yerushalayim, modern Jerusalem) to liberate it from 
  Roman control, intending to install an independent government. The rebels 
  Hadrian toured the provinces, 
  travelling great distances, 
  often by sea, on an imperial 
  galley powered by sail (when 
  wind permitted) or by banks 
  of oarsmen at other times. 
  The legend, meaning ‘Revered 
  Good Luck’, conveys both the 
  good tidings of Hadrian’s arrival 
  and the happiness, prosperity 
  and security he brought 
  with him from Rome to the 
  provinces. (Roma Numismatics, 
  www.romanumismatics.com)
  STRATEGIC SITUATION
  
  6
  had minted coins boldly proclaiming ‘Jerusalem [the] Holy’ and ‘Freedom 
  [of] Zion’. The Roman army struck back. It besieged the ancient City of 
  David aggrandized by Herod the Great and, in the summer of ad 70, retook it 
  by force. The holy Second Temple was destroyed by fire. In a move calculated 
  to cause maximum offence the holiest artefacts of Judaism were stripped 
  from the Temple complex and paraded in Rome in triumph by the victorious 
  commander Titus, son of emperor Vespasian (ad 69–79). The proceeds from 
  the war spoils were used to build the Amphitheatrum Flavium (now known 
  as the Colosseum), which was inaugurated by Titus as emperor (ad 79–81). 
  Many of those not enslaved left Iudaea and joined the population of Jews 
  in the diaspora. Tensions grew in these mixed communities. Exacerbating 
  the situation, Vespasian imposed a punitive tax on all Jews (fiscus Iudaicus) 
  irrespective of their location, which was later expanded to include a broader 
  definition of Jewry by his other son Domitian when he subsequently became 
  ruler (ad 81–96).
  After Domitian died, the emperor Nerva (ad 96–98) removed the abuses 
  of the Jewish Tax, but resentment among Jews against Rome for destroying 
  the Temple and mutual hostility between them and their gentile neighbours 
  drove many living in communities in the diaspora again to seek liberty and 
  redemption. Their moment came when the new emperor Trajan launched 
  his war against Parthia (Rome’s long-time rival in the East), taking large 
  numbers of troops with him. The emperor now distracted, in ad 115 Jews 
  in Cyprus, Libya and Egypt turned upon symbols of Roman authority and 
  its supporters.
  On the island of Cyprus, one Artemion led Jewish insurgents in attacks 
  on the gentile population. The Roman historian Cassius Dio claims 240,000 
  perished in the violence. Trajan dispatched Marcius Turbo (one of his best 
  commanders) with infantry and cavalry aboard naval vessels to restore order. 
  Men of Legio III Cyrenaica and Legio XXII Deiotariana as well as several 
  auxiliary cohorts took part. A plan was even laid to dispatch the fleets from 
  Misenum and Ravenna.
  In Libya, Jewish rioters led by Andreas (or Lukuas) attacked their 
  neighbours. They set alight public buildings, including the sanctuary of 
  Apollo in Cyrene and of Asclepius at Balagrae. They toppled and smashed 
  milestones along the road between Cyrene and its port, Apollonia, even 
  ripping up the roadway itself to hinder any Roman troops arriving by sea 
  from moving swiftly inland. Marcius Turbo and his expeditionary force 
  Hadrian’s arrival (adventus) in 
  Iudaea in ad 130 was a great 
  state occasion. However, his 
  ban on circumcision and plan 
  for redeveloping Jerusalem 
  (Hierosolyma) were considered 
  extremely provocative to 
  the Jewish community. 
  (Classical Numismatics Group, 
  www.cngcoins.com)
  
  7
  may yet have landed and fought in Libya. To 
  assist, Trajan sent C. Valerius Rufus, tribune 
  of Legio II Claudia from Moesia Superior. 
  Several of the agitators, however, travelled 
  east to foment trouble in neighbouring Egypt.
  In Egypt, riots between Greek-speaking 
  Romans and Jews erupted in Alexandria and 
  spread as far south as Thebes. The shrine 
  of Nemesis near Alexandria was destroyed 
  by Jewish rioters. The historian Appian 
  (Appianus Alexandrinus) records in his 
  Roman History how he narrowly escaped 
  from angry Jewish forces, got lost at night 
  while trying to find his ship, then at dawn 
  next day found a trireme by accident and 
  managed to reach Pelusium on the eastern 
  side of the Nile Delta. (The ship he was 
  supposed to board was captured by Jewish 
  insurgents.) Aided by peasants, the Romans 
  struck back. Praefectus Aegypti Rutilius 
  Rufus personally led attacks upon the 
  insurgents but, with contingents of the local 
  army units away on campaign with Trajan, 
  the remaining men of Legio III Cyrenaica and 
  Legio XXII Deiotariana struggled to contain 
  the situation.
  In Mesopotamia, which was within the 
  Parthian Empire, the Jews banded together 
  with other resistance groups to impede 
  the advance of Trajan’s invading army. 
  The Roman commander-in-chief dispatched Lusius Quietus (a Moor of 
  consular rank who had proved his worth at Nisibis and Edessa) to crush 
  the insurgents beyond the Euphrates. There is a tantalizing reference to 
  an expeditio Iudaicae (a military ‘expedition in Iudaea’) on an inscription 
  found in Sardinia (AE 1929, 167), about which nothing more is known. He 
  accomplished the task with such violence that the Midrash records the ‘Kitos 
  War’ – or ‘War of Quietus’ – with sorrowful words.
  Then, on 7 or 8 August ad 117, Trajan died unexpectedly. He was 64 
  years old.
  His adopted successor, the 41-year-old Hadrian, inherited a world in 
  turmoil. An experienced military leader in his own right, he immediately 
  took command of the situation. He sent Marcius Turbo to Mauretania. 
  Significantly, the new emperor appointed Lusius Quietus as military governor 
  (legatus Augusti pro praetore) of Iudaea. (Hardly a year had passed when he 
  was dead under mysterious circumstances.) Hadrian changed the status of 
  the province of Iudaea from praetorian to consular. He replaced Quietus with 
  L. Cossonius Gallus (consul of ad 116), based at the administrative capital of 
  the province at Caesarea. He stepped up security measures. Hadrian doubled 
  the military presence there to augment Legio X Fretensis, which had been 
  encamped within Jerusalem’s walls since ad 70. Initially Legio II Traiana 
  Firma moved in (around ad 120). At a later date Legio VI Ferrata replaced 
  Hadrian’s deputy in the 
  province of Iudaea was the 
  legatus Augusti pro praetore, Q. 
  Tineius Rufus. His home and 
  office were in colonia Prima 
  Flavia Augusta Caesarea. 
  Originally built by Herod the 
  Great, by ad 130 the praetorium 
  was a complex covering 
  some 12,000 square metres. 
  Tineius’ personal suite was on 
  a promontory overlooking the 
  sea. An inscription on a statue 
  base confirms that Hadrian 
  stayed here during his official 
  visit. (Author’s collection)
  
  8
  it, establishing its camp at Tel Shalem in the Beth Shean Valley. Over the 
  next decade the existing network of military roads was extended. Surviving 
  milestones (all of them dated to ad 120 and 129–130) indicate that at least 
  12 roads were constructed by the army to facilitate troop movements in 
  the densely populated regions with a recorded history of unrest. So far the 
  strategy had worked; by the time of Hadrian’s visit in ad 130 there had been 
  no violent uprisings.
  Bordered by Syria in the north, the Mediterranean 
  Sea in the west and Arabia Petraea in the south and 
  east, this minor Roman province encompassed the 
  districts of Galilea, Samaria and Iudaea. In the north, 
  Galilea (Galilee) was prosperous and Jews, early 
  Christians and pagans mixed in the multicultural 
  cities of Caesarea, Scythopolis (Beth Shean), Sepphoris 
  (renamed Diocaesarea around the time of Hadrian’s 
  visit, modern Zippori) and Tiberias.
  In the central region was Samaria with Flavia 
  Neapolis (Shechem, modern Nablus) as its leading city. 
  Its population was a mix of Samaritans, Jews, early 
  Christians and pagans. Though their beliefs shared a 
  common origin with the Jews in the tribal patriarch 
  Abraham, the Samaritans claimed theirs to be the true 
  religion of the ancient Israelites. Their temple was built 
  on the holy hill of Gerizim, near Shechem, but it was 
  destroyed in the 2nd century bc. There was a long-
  standing enmity between Jews and Samaritans, and the 
  Samaritans often sided with enemies of the Jews.
  Below Samaria the district of Iudaea was bordered 
  in the east by the Dead Sea. On the coast, connected 
  by a road, stood the cities of Ioppe (Yafo), Azotus 
  (Ashdod), Ascalon (Ashkelon) and Gaza. Inland there 
  was a major city at Hebron, many smaller towns – such 
  Supported on stone arches 
  this aqueduct brought fresh 
  water from the Shuni springs 
  to colonia Caesarea. It was 
  then distributed through 
  underground pipes of clay 
  or wood to public fountains, 
  bathhouses and the homes 
  of the wealthy in the city. 
  (Author’s collection)
  In ad 130 the city of Jerusalem 
  was still in ruins 60 years after 
  the great siege. The Temple 
  itself had been destroyed by 
  fire and the walls of the Temple 
  Mount partially felled by 
  Roman troops as punishment. 
  Hadrian envisaged 
  redeveloping the city as a 
  new colonia (a city for veteran 
  soldiers) with a temple of 
  Jupiter Capitolinus at its centre. 
  (Author’s collection)
  
  9
  as Betar, Bethlehem, Eleutheropolis (modern Beit Guvrin), 
  Lydda (Lod) and Tekoa (El Khiam) – and numerous scattered 
  villages and farms. Jerusalem was once its largest city, but in 
  ad 130 it still lay largely in ruins. On the Dead Sea Ein Gedi 
  thrived on account of its freshwater oasis, famed vineyards 
  and valuable trade in balsam used in the perfume industry.
  In terms of terrain Iudaea comprised quite distinct 
  topographical zones. In the north there were high mountains 
  (which could be snow capped in winter) formed of basalt 
  and other igneous rocks, which cascaded eastwards down to 
  the Sea of Galilee, a freshwater lake fed by the Jordan River 
  that supplied abundant stocks of fish to the local population. 
  In the central region the range of Judaean Hills, reaching up 
  to 1,000m (3,280ft) in some places and made of hard chalk 
  and dolomite, offered few natural resources except for areas 
  of arable land and pasture used for grazing animals. The 
  Judaean Desert descended south-eastwards from Jerusalem, 
  ending in a deep escarpment that dropped steeply to the Dead 
  Sea (fed by the Jordan River and underground springs). West 
  of the Judaean Hills lay the Judaean Shephelah (‘Judaean 
  foothills’), an area of lowland formed of marl-covered 
  soft chalk with pockets of fertile rolling plains. Naturally 
  occurring in the landscape of Iudaea were caves. Farther south lay the dry 
  expanse of the Negev Desert where vegetation was sparse.
  Roman soldiers routinely patrolled the land and returned to barracks. 
  After Quietus, Roman governors came and went. All the while, the Jews 
  of Iudaea harboured their hope of national redemption and liberty. Since 
  ad 70 the nature of Judaism had changed. The destruction of the Temple 
  meant public worship and the sacrifices in Jerusalem specified in the Talmud 
  could not now be carried out by the hereditary priests. Political power and 
  judicial authority had shifted from the Sanhedrin (the assembly functioning 
  as a supreme court consisting of up to 71 men appointed from every city in 
  the Land of Israel) to the synagogues and prayer houses. There the emphasis 
  was traditionally on studying and debating the Torah (see Glossary) under 
  rabbis (teachers). Along with their students these teachers pored over 
  the Torah for what it told of civil and criminal law, as well as the many 
  religious statutes. The devout Jews now looked to their rabbis (instead of 
  the Sanhedrin) to adjudicate in legal disputes and willingly accepted their 
  rulings. Thus Rabbi Akiba was able to sentence an offender to pay a fine for 
  uncovering a woman’s head in the street, simply by the spiritual authority 
  vested in his position.
  CAUSES OF THE WAR
  Some Jews may have even begun to believe that it might be possible to rebuild 
  the Temple in Jerusalem. The Midrash and the Epistle of Barnabas (a Greek 
  Christian text written between ad 70 and the early 2nd century) both appear 
  to suggest that the Jews had received permission to rebuild it, though it is 
  not entirely clear from other written records that that was the case. Hadrian, 
  however, had an altogether different idea.
  Legio X Fretensis was encamped 
  in or near the ruined city of 
  Jerusalem. Its own construction 
  needs required a brick and 
  tile factory to be built. This 
  brick bears the official stamp 
  ‘LEG X FR’. (Exhibit at the 
  Israel Museum, Jerusalem. 
  Author’s collection)
  
  10
  While in the province, Hadrian trekked up along the road from Caesarea 
  or Neapolis into the Judaean Hills, rising some 786m (2,577ft) above the 
  level of the Mediterranean, to see Jerusalem for himself. ‘Those who visited 
  it could not believe it had ever been inhabited,’ wrote Josephus (Jewish War 
  7.1.1) after the siege of ad 70. Archaeological evidence suggests that in the 
  intervening 60 years the city was slowly recovering from the extensive war 
  damage, in part through the activities of suppliers of goods and services to 
  the resident legion; but Hadrian now envisaged completely rebuilding it in 
  Roman fashion as a colonia for retired soldiers.
  The city would have a radically new street plan and, among its amenities, 
  it would feature a Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus on the site of the former 
  Temple of the Jews’ God. It would bear the name Aelia Capitolina in honour 
  jointly of his family (gens Aelia) and the king of Roman gods. Hadrian’s 
  architect, a Greek-speaking man from Sinope in Pontus named Aquila, was 
  commissioned to begin work. Hadrian may have intended no offence to the 
  Jews. It was well known that he delighted in architecture and sponsored 
  construction of new buildings wherever he went. The derelict city located 
  in such a dramatic natural setting cried out to him for reconstruction. Work 
  would begin without delay. Over the north gate a new inscription was 
  unveiled. It read: ‘To Imperator Caesar Traianus Hadrianus Augustus, son 
  of the deified Traianus Parthicus, grandson of the deified Nerva, high priest, 
  invested with Tribunician Power for the fourteenth time, Consul for the third 
  time, Father of the Fatherland. [Dedicated by] Legio X Fretensis.’
  This was a crushing blow to the local people, ‘for the Jews deemed it 
  intolerable that foreign races should be settled in their city and foreign 
  religious rites planted there’, writes Cassius Dio (Roman History, 69.12.2). 
  It was now abundantly clear that there would be no rebuilding of the Temple. 
  Indeed, according to the Mishnah a plough was driven over the Temple 
  precinct. It was the quintessentially Roman purification rite conducted by 
  a priest prior to digging the foundations of a new building – the Temple 
  of Jupiter.
  Even before Hadrian arrived in the province there had already been deep 
  concern about his social policy. One of his recent edicts had been to ban 
  the practice of circumcision. Hadrian’s new directive put circumcision on a 
  par with castration – a practice outlawed under the Lex Cornelia signed by 
  Domitian and Nerva and deemed by the law as equivalent to murder. The Jews 
  took particular offence to it. They believed the commandment to circumcise 
  male children (brit milah) was given by God to Abraham in the Torah. It 
  ABOVE LEFT
  The Judaean Shephelah is 
  a region of fertile farmland. 
  In ad 130 (as it is today) it 
  was suited to vineyards and 
  unirrigated crops. To the east 
  the terrain rises up to the 
  Judaean Hills, which reach 
  800–1,000m (2,600–3,250ft) 
  above sea level. In between the 
  hills the broad vales are better 
  suited to grazing animals. 
  (Author’s collection)
  ABOVE RIGHT
  The Judaean Desert lies to the 
  south and east of Jerusalem. 
  It ends in a steep escarpment 
  that drops dramatically to 
  the Dead Sea. This view looks 
  north from the seashore to 
  Kibbutz Ein Gedi – the lowest 
  community on earth at some 
  400m (1,300ft) below sea level. 
  (Author’s collection)
  
  11
  was one of the most ancient and defining practices of Judaism. Hadrian 
  may, in fact, have not been specifically targeting Jews on religious grounds. 
  Other subject peoples also engaged in the rite, among them the Arabs of 
  Nabataea, Egyptians (at least high-ranking priests) and the Sarmatians. For 
  Hadrian it was a barbaric custom, no less than a ‘mutilation of the genitals’ 
  (Aelius Spartianus, Life of Hadrian, Historia Augusta 14.2). His personal 
  sensibilities would not tolerate it. Nevertheless, despite protestations by Jews 
  that it was a mortal blow to their faith and identity, the edict remained 
  in force.
  KING MESSIAH
  His business in Iudaea concluded, Hadrian and his entourage departed – 
  passing the hilltop city of Betar – on the road to Gaza bound for Arabia 
  Petraea and Egypt. Whether or not he knew it, the emperor had left many 
  Jews with deep feelings of outrage. To them it seemed that the Roman was 
  deliberately singling out the Jewish people for harsh punishment. They were 
  now highly motivated to establish a way to liberate their spiritual homeland 
  from the hegemony of the Romans and to find a leader who would help them 
  achieve it. Their yearning for an ‘anointed one’ – a moshiah (messiah) about 
  whom they had read in their religious studies – had been awakened.
  According to prevailing understanding, the moshiah referred to a future 
  king of Israel, blessed by the God of the Jews. In the fourth book of the 
  Torah it was written: ‘I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but 
  not nigh: there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out 
  of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children 
  of Sheth. And Edom shall be a possession, Seir also shall be a possession for 
  his enemies; and Israel shall do valiantly’ (Numbers 24:17–18). (Edom was 
  widely construed at the time to mean Rome.)
  In the Book of Ezekiel, God approaches the prophet exiled in Babylon 
  and says to him: ‘And I will set up one shepherd over them, and he shall 
  feed them, even my servant David; he shall feed them, and he shall be their 
  Before Hadrian left Jerusalem in 
  ad 130 an inscription mounted 
  over the north gate of the city 
  may have been dedicated in 
  his honour. Two segments 
  of it have been discovered. 
  The additional legionary 
  title Antoniniana was carved 
  several years later. (Exhibit at 
  the Israel Museum, Jerusalem. 
  Author’s collection)
  
  12
  shepherd. And I the Lord will be their God, and my servant David a prince 
  among them’ (Book of Ezekiel 34:23–24). Further:
  Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they 
  be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own 
  land: And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of 
  Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two 
  nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all: 
  Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols, nor with their 
  detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions: but I will save them out 
  of all their dwelling places, wherein they have sinned, and will cleanse them: 
  so shall they be my people, and I will be their God. (Book of Ezekiel 37:21–23)
  As described in the apocalyptic Jewish literature, such as ‘The Vision of the 
  Seventy Shepherds’ (Book of Enoch 85–90), the messiah would be a fierce 
  warrior who would kill the unjust leader of the pagan world by his own 
  hand, destroy his army and rid Jersualem of the impious heathen. Anointed 
  with holy oil, this ‘king messiah’ would bring the scattered Jews back into the 
  Land of Israel and unite them in a kingdom of peace and justice. He would 
  build the Third Temple, father a male heir, and cause other great things to 
  happen in a Messianic Age. Born of the earth (rather than sent from Heaven) 
  this moshiah would be descended from the royal line of David (the biblical 
  king who was both a successful war leader and a writer of psalms). A key 
  line in one religious text read: ‘Behold, O Lord, and raise up unto them their 
  king, the son of David, at the time known to you, O God, in order that he 
  may reign over Israel your servant’ (Psalms of Solomon 17:21).
  Some anticipated the imminent end of times, heralding the arrival of the 
  prophesied messiah. According to the Babylonian Talmud, the prophet Elijah 
  (9th century bc) had ‘said to Rab Judah, the brother of Rabbi Salia the pious: 
  “The world shall exist not less than eighty-five jubilees, and in the last jubilee 
  the son of David will come”’ (Sanhedrin 97b).
  One man did emerge, who many believed fitted the description of the king 
  messiah. His name was Shim’on ben Koseba. His moment had come.
  Hadrian’s visit had coincided with the appointment of Q. Tineius Rufus as 
  his new legatus Augusti pro praetore in the province of Iudaea. It would fall to 
  Rufus to deal with the consequences of his superior’s unpopular policy decisions.
  His visit to Iudaea completed, 
  Hadrian and his entourage 
  continued to Egypt. It would 
  be a fateful trip. His young 
  male lover, Antinous, drowned 
  in the Nile on 30 October that 
  same year. He was deified soon 
  after and a cult centre was 
  established at Antinoopolis 
  close to the place of his 
  death. (Roma Numismatics, 
  www.romanumismatics.com)
  
  13
  CHRONOLOGY
  All dates are ad
  44 
  Death of Herodes Agrippa I, King of Iudaea; 
  Romans impose control of Iudaea, riots in 
  major cities.
  66–74 
  First Jewish War.
  66 
  Jewish rebels seize control of Hierosolyma.
  70 
  Siege of Hierosolyma by T. Flavius (son of 
  T. Flavius Vespasianus)
  August 
  Destruction of the Second Temple, 
  Hierosolyma (9 Av).
  71 
  Triumph of T. Flavius Vespasianus for 
  victory in the Jewish War.
  73 
  Siege of Masada by Flavius Silva.
  74 
  Romans capture Masada.
  80 
  Opening of the Amphitheatrum Flavium 
  (Colosseum) paid for from proceeds of the 
  sale of spoils of the Jewish War.
  98
  28 January 
  Death of Nerva.
  February 
  Accession of M. Ulpius Traianus (Trajan) 
  as emperor.
  115–117 
  Revolt of the Jewish diaspora (Cyprus, 
  Egypt, Libya, Iudaea, Mesopotamia), also 
  known as the Kitos War.
  116 
  Rutilius Rufus leads counterinsurgency 
  against Jewish populations of Egypt.
   
  To quell Jewish insurrections, Trajan sends 
  Q. Marcius Turbo to Egypt, C. Valerius 
  Rufus to Cyprus and Lusius Quietus 
  to Mesopotamia.
  117 
  Hadrian in Antiocheia, Syria as legatus 
  Augusti pro praetore.
  7 or 8 August 
  Trajan adopts Hadrian. Death of Trajan at 
  Selinus, Cilicia.
  9 August 
  News of Trajan’s death reaches Hadrian 
  at Antiocheia.
  11 August 
  Hadrian acclaimed as imperator for the first 
  time at Antiocheia.
   
  Q. Marcius Turbo sent by Hadrian to 
  Mauretania to quell local rebellion.
   
  Lusius Quietus in Iudaea as legatus Augusti 
  pro praetore.
   
  Second legion (VI Ferrata) transferred to 
  garrison Iudaea.
   
  Jewish partisans begin stockpiling weapons 
  and converting caves into hiding places 
  and storage.
  118
  9 July 
  Hadrian arrives in Rome.
   
  Trajan’s conquests in Assyria, Mesopotamia 
  and Parthia abandoned, except Armenia.
   
  Death of Lusius Quietus?
  119 
  Hadrian tours Campania.
  Aug–Oct 
  M. Paccius Gargilius Antiquus as 
  suffect consul.
  120 
  L. Cossonius Gallus in Iudaea as legatus 
  Augusti pro praetore.
   
  Hadrian in Rome.
  May–June 
  C. Publicius Marcellus as suffect consul 
  in Rome.
   
  Legionary vexillations begin improving 
  the road network of Iudaea; establishment 
  of base at Caparcotna in Iudaea for 
  Legio VI Ferrata.
  
  14
  121–125 
  Hadrian’s first tour of the Roman provinces.
  121 
  Hadrian visits Tres Galliae, Germania 
  Superior, Raetia, Noricum.
  122 
  Hadrian visits Germania Inferior, Britannia 
  (Londinium, Vindolanda, commissions 
  the Wall), Tres Galliae, Hispania 
  Tarraconensis (Tarraco).
   
  Second Moorish Revolt.
   
  M. Paccius Gargilius Antiquus in Syria as 
  legatus Augusti pro praetore.
  123 
  Hadrian visits Mauretania (?), Africa (?), 
  Libya, Cyrene, Crete, Syria, the Euphrates 
  frontier (Melitene), Pontus, Bithynia (meets 
  Antinous for the first time), Asia.
  124 
  Hadrian visits Thracia, Asia, Athens, 
  Eleusis, Achaea.
   
  Q. Tineius Rufus in Thracia as legatus 
  Augusti pro praetore.
  125 
  Hadrian visits Achaea, Sicily; returns to Rome.
  126 
  Hadrian in Rome.
  127 
  Hadrian in Rome.
  May–Sept 
  Q. Tineius Rufus as suffect consul in Rome.
  Oct–Dec 
  Sex. Iulius Severus as suffect consul in Rome.
  128–132 
  Hadrian’s second tour of the Roman 
  provinces.
  128 
  Hadrian visits Africa, Rome, Athens.
  Winter 
  Hadrian in Athens.
  129 
  Hadrian visits Asia, Pamphylia, Phrygia, 
  Pisidia, Cilicia, Syria, Commagene 
  (Samosata), Cappadoceia, Pontus, 
  Syria (Antiocheia).
   
  C. Publicius Marcellus in Syria as legatus 
  Augusti pro praetore
  130 
  Q. Tineius Rufus in Iudaea as legatus 
  Augusti pro praetore.
   
  T. Haterius Nepos in Arabia Petraea in 
  Iudaea as legatus Augusti pro praetore.
   
  Hadrian visits Iudaea (Caesarea, Scythopolis 
  (?), founds colonia Aelia Capitolina on site of 
  former Hierosolyma), Arabia Petraea, Egypt.
  30 October 
  Hadrian’s lover Antinous drowns in the Nile 
  River; City of Antinoopolis founded.
  131 
  Sex. Iulius Severus in Britannia as legatus 
  Augusti pro praetore.
   
  Hadrian visits Syria, Asia.
  Winter 
  Hadrian in Athens.
  132–135 
  Second Jewish War led by Shim’on 
  ben Koseba.
  132 
  Hadrian in Rome.
  Summer 
  Jewish partisans led by Shim’on ben Koseba 
  at Herodium seize villages and towns 
  throughout Iudaea (except Jerusalem); 
  attack on Roman camp at Tel Shalem (?)
   
  Rabbi Akiba declares Shim’on ben Koseba 
  to be Bar Kokhba (‘son of a star’) (?)
  19 August 
  Last dated letter of Babatha of Maoza 
  (found in the ‘Cave of Letters’, Nahal Hever)
   
  Trial and execution of Rabbi Akiba 
  in Caesaraea (?)
  133 
  C. Publicius Marcellus arrives in Iudaea 
  with vexillations from Syria.
   
  T. Haterius Nepos arrives in Iudaea with 
  vexillations from Arabia Petraea Shim’on 
  ben Koseba at Herodium.
  134 
  Q. Lollius Urbicus arrives in Iudaea 
  as legatus imperatoris Hadriani in 
  expeditione Iudaica with vexillations from 
  Pannonia Superior.
  
  15
   
  Sex. Iulius Severus arrives in Iudaea 
  with vexillations from Britannia and 
  Moesia Inferior
  May–Sept 
  T. Haterius Nepos as suffect consul in Rome.
  Winter 
  Hadrian in Rome.
   
  Jews from the Roman province of Arabia 
  Petraea, Galilee and Transjordan find refuge 
  in caves in the Judaean Desert.
  135 
  Hadrian in Rome.
   
  Shim’on ben Koseba chastises the militia 
  leaders of Tekoa.
  May–Sept 
  Q. Lollius Urbicus as suffect consul in Rome.
  Spring  
  Siege of Betar; Shim’on ben Koseba at Betar.
  4 August 
  Fall of Betar, capture and slaughter of all 
  inhabitants (9 Av); death of Eleazar of 
  Modi’in and Shim’on ben Koseba.
  Autumn 
  Jewish survivors of the revolt flee to caves in 
  the Judaean Desert.
   
  Romans blockade refuge caves near Ein Gedi.
   
  Iudaea incorporated into Syria as Syria-
  Palaestina.
   
  Dedication of Temple of Venus et Roma 
  in Rome.
  136 
  Hadrian in Rome.
   
  Hadrian acclaimed imperator for second time.
   
  Triumphal ornaments awarded to Sex. 
  Iulius Severus (celebrated at Aequum), 
  C. Publicius Marcellus (Aquileia) and T. 
  Haterius Nepos (Fulginiae).
   
  Triumphal arch erected at Tel Shalem, base of 
  Legio VI Ferrata in Iudaea. Hadrian adopts 
  L. Ceionius Commodus (L. Aelius Caesar).
   
  Mopping-up operations continue across 
  Iudaea; blockade of refuge caves at Ein Gedi.
   
  Sex. Iulius Severus in Syria as legatus 
  Augusti pro praetore.
  Winter 
  End of blockade of refuge caves.
  137 
  Hadrian in Rome.
  138
  1 January 
  Death of L. Aelius Caesar.
  25 February 
  Hadrian adopts T. Aurelius Fulvus 
  Antoninus (acting as joint emperor).
  10 July 
  Death of Hadrian.
  11 July 
  Accession of T. Fulvus Aelius Hadrianus 
  Antoninus Augustus Pius.
  139 
  Completion of Hadrian’s Mausoleum, Rome.
  145 
  Dedication of Temple of Divus Hadrianus 
  in the Campus Martius, Rome by 
  Antoninus Pius.
  1948
  14 May 
  Foundation of the State of Israel with its 
  capital at Jerusalem.
  1982
  11 May 
  (Lag B’Omer) Ceremonial burial of bones 
  from the Cave of Horrors and Cave of 
  Letters at Nahal Hever.
  2015
  22 December 
  Hadrian: An Emperor Cast in Bronze 
  exhibition opens at Israel Museum, 
  Jerusalem.
  2016
  20 Feb–18 June Bar Kokhba: Historical Memory and the 
  Myth of Heroism exhibition at Eretz Israel 
  Museum, Tel Aviv.
  27 June 
  Hadrian: An Emperor Cast in Bronze 
  exhibition closes at Israel Museum, 
  Jerusalem.
  
  16
  THE JEWS AND THEIR ALLIES
  The military leader of the Jewish revolution was Shim’on ben Koseba 
  (c. ad 95–135). He was an only son and he may have been the nephew of 
  Rabbi Eleazar of Modi’in. The patronymic may indicate that a man named 
  Koseba was his father, or that he came from a place of the same name 
  (perhaps Kirbet Kosiba, a village or town north-west of Hebron, Palestine). 
  Nothing is recorded of his upbringing, beyond that he was raised a Jew. 
  At some point in his life he acquired the title to land near Herodium. He 
  was likely married. The medieval Jewish sources mention that he had a son 
  named Rufus. Another states that he was descended from the royal House of 
  David – a crucial claim if he was to be seen as the moshiah.
  Ben Koseba appears in the secular and religious texts fully formed as 
  a rebel leader. He consciously presented himself as a leader who could 
  be perceived by his followers as messianic. The formal title he adopted 
  for himself was ‘Prince (or President) Over Israel’ (Nasi’ Yisra’el), which 
  was sometimes used on correspondence (e.g. P. Yadin 45). The title both 
  established his claim to royalty and emphasized the national dimension of 
  his political aspiration, which was grounded in a religious hope to found a 
  land of the Jews.
  To the Romans he was ‘murderous and bandit-like’ (Eusebius, Church 
  History 4.6.2). In contrast the Jewish religious writings portray him as a 
  man of extraordinary physical strength: it was said he was able to withstand 
  the shock of a Roman ballista ball on his knee and to lob it back at the 
  enemy; and he could kill a man with a single kick of his foot. A leader able 
  to perform such great feats was called a gibbor, and, although Ben Koseba 
  is not specifically called this anywhere in the Jewish texts, the implication 
  was there nevertheless. (The biblical Samson, Judah Maccabee and his 
  brothers were renowned gibborim). A seemingly unbreakable spirit drove 
  this fearless warrior leader of his troops in the battle against the gentile foe. 
  Yet the same accounts show this hero also as arrogant, quick-tempered and 
  sometimes overconfident.
  Ben Koseba’s own writings reveal that he could be a tough, 
  uncompromising and harsh leader. He demanded complete obedience from 
  his subordinates. Indeed, he might even be described as a micro-manager in 
  the way he detailed missions and rebuked those who failed to carry them out, 
  even using sarcasm to make his point. Understandably he would have believed 
  Able to read and write, 
  Shim’on ben Koseba, ‘Prince 
  of Israel’, wrote constantly to 
  his deputies, issuing orders 
  and reprimands for failure to 
  comply. This stamp – designed 
  by Meir Eshel and issued by the 
  Israel Post Office in December 
  2008 – reproduces a letter he 
  wrote to Yeshua ben Galgula. 
  The name ‘Koseba’ is written 
  in Hebrew in Jewish-Aramaic 
  script on the se-tenant tab. 
  A devout Jew, it is believed 
  that Hebrew became the 
  official language of Israel 
  by order of Ben Koseba. 
  (Author’s collection)
  OPPOSING COMMANDERS
  
  17
  that compliance with his plan was crucial to its 
  ultimate success. Yet the extensive preparations 
  for the war suggest he was a master of military 
  strategy and a good tactical planner. Where 
  he learned the arts of war is unknown. It may 
  have come from having lived among bandits. 
  He appears to have been a charismatic leader 
  too. One surviving letter addresses him as 
  ‘beloved father’, though this could have been 
  a formality. He himself referred to his fellow 
  fighters as ‘brothers’.
  He was a literate man, educated in Jewish 
  scripture and his letters use Talmudic terminology, but the degree to which 
  his knowledge extended beyond that canon – to Greek or Latin literature – 
  is not known. He mandated that Hebrew (the language of the Israelites and 
  their ancestors) be the national language of the new Israel. Above all Ben 
  Koseba was a devout Jew. Even in the midst of war he scrupulously kept the 
  Sabbath for rest and rejoicing; he observed the holy days, such as Pesach and 
  Sukkot, and traditional rituals of his ancient faith. His sincere piety and zeal 
  attracted the attention of one of the pre-eminent religious leaders of the time.
  Ben Koseba’s armour-bearer (nose kelav) was Akiba ben Yosef 
  (c. ad 50–132 or 137), known as Rabbi Akiba. He was born in Diospolis 
  (Lydda, modern Lod) and spent his early life as a poor, illiterate shepherd. 
  At his wife’s urging, he went on to study under the eminent Mishnaic sage 
  Eliezer ben Hyrcanus (c. ad 45–117), whom he regarded as ‘rabbi’. By age 
  47 Akiba had established a reputation of his own as a great scholar of the 
  Jewish law and founded a school at Beneberak (located just outside Jaffa) that 
  attracted many students. Among his protégés was Rabbi Shim’on bar Yochai. 
  In ad 95–96 Akiba was in Rome and by 110 had been to Nehardea, visiting 
  many Jewish communities on his travels. It seems unlikely that he took part 
  in any of the anti-Roman uprisings in the diaspora or Galilee. Far from being 
  an arrogant man or political agitator he was modest by nature, given to acts 
  of kindness towards the sick and needy. He was also intellectually gifted, 
  contributing to the systematic organization of the Halakhah and the means 
  to study them. The Talmud compares him to Moses, which is the highest 
  compliment in Jewish literature. Akiba was one of the greatest of the first 
  rabbis (tannaim) whose words are recorded in the Midrash and Mishnah.
  Ben Koseba had a deputy. He is presumed to be the man whose name, 
  Eleazar the Priest, appears on several coins after ad 132. Three candidates 
  are suggested for this individual: Eleazar of Modi’in (El’azar HaModai); 
  Eleazar ben Azariah; and Eleazar ben Harsom. Tantalizingly, in the rabbinic 
  sources Rabbi Eleazar of Modi’in is mentioned as the uncle of Ben Koseba. 
  (It has been suggested, however, that the Eleazar cited on the coinage was 
  not a living person at all, but was actually a reference to Eleazar the Priest, 
  son of Aaron from the time of Joshua.) The Jerusalem Talmud calls him 
  ‘the arm of all Israel’ and ‘their right eye’ (Midrash Rabbah, Lamentations 
  2.2.4). The dual partnership between the warrior prince and the priest in 
  the rebel administration was highly significant. It aligned the political and 
  military aims of the messianic leader and his mission with the duty of serving 
  the Hebrew god. Prayer and the sword would both be needed in this new 
  Jewish state.
  Interpreting religious texts, 
  Rabbi Akiba recognized 
  Shim’on ben Koseba as the 
  long-awaited King Messiah 
  (moshiah). He declared him 
  to be the ‘Bar Kokhba’, ‘Son of 
  a Star’, interpreting Numbers 
  24:17. This street sign in 
  Jerusalem reads: ‘Of the 
  greatest Tannaim and Mishnah 
  scholars, [he] taught 24,000 
  students. [One] Of the ten 
  martyrs.’ (Author’s collection)
  
  18
  Several military commanders appointed by Ben Koseba are known 
  by name from his letters, several examples of which were found in the 
  Judaean Desert in modern times. Yeshua ben Galgula of the village Bet Bazi 
  commanded the garrison of the nearby Herodium. Three men (Yehonathan 
  bar Be’ayan, Masabala ben Shim’on of Tekoa and Eleazar ben Hitah) jointly 
  commanded the region of Ein Gedi and reported to one Elisha. Shim’on 
  ben Mahanim controlled an area of uncertain identity, which may be the 
  Machaerus region of Transjordan or the Zif region in the south Hebron 
  hills. Yehudah ben Manasseh served in Kiryat Arbaya. They each worked 
  alongside civilian administrators (parnasim) appointed by Ben Koseba. From 
  a lead weight found at Horbat ‘Alim the parnas is known to have been 
  Shim’on Dasoi.
  These men would strive to establish a free Jewish nation and defend it 
  with their lives from the inevitable onslaught of the Roman army.
  THE ROMANS AND THEIR ALLIES
  Imp. Caesar Traianus Hadrianus Augustus (24 January ad 76 to 10 July 
  ad 138) was commander-in-chief (imperator) of all Roman military forces. 
  He was born P. Aelius Hadrianus to an affluent family living in Baetica in the 
  Iberian Peninsula. When his parents died unexpectedly in ad 85 or 86 the 
  10-year-old boy became ward of M. Ulpius Traianus, the son of Hadrian’s 
  maternal great-uncle and a rising star in the military. This connection would 
  be crucial to his advancement through the Roman career ladder (cursus 
  publicus), which combined military and civilian positions of increasing 
  responsibility designed to expose a young man to a wide variety of aspects 
  of public service in the Empire that might culminate in his election to one of 
  the two annually appointed consuls (or their suffects).
  Having worked in his late teens as a junior magistrate, Hadrian was 
  appointed to his first army posting at age 20 as one of a team of military 
  tribunes with Legio II Adiutrix (c. ad 94–95) based in Pannonia at 
  Aquincum (modern Budapest) on the Danube River. Trajan was probably 
  the governor (legatus Augusti pro praetore) of the province and it is likely 
  on account of his influence that Hadrian secured the position. During his 
  time with the unit, Hadrian made the acquaintance of Q. Marcius Turbo, 
  then a centurion, with whom he struck up a friendship. In February ad 98 
  Trajan became emperor. Still as tribunus militum, Hadrian then transferred 
  to V Macedonica stationed at Oescus in Moesia Inferior before moving 
  (ad 97–98) to XXII Primigenia in Mogontiacum (modern Mainz) on the 
  Rhine in Germania Superior.
  Moving to Rome he served as one of the 20 quaestores responsible for 
  public finance, a post which granted him entry to the Senate. As one of 
  the nominees of the emperor he read aloud the official communications of 
  Trajan, who was away fighting the First Dacian War (ad 101–102). While 
  doing so he ‘provoked a laugh by his somewhat provincial accent’ (Aelius 
  Spartianus, Life of Hadrian 3.1). Embarrassed by the episode he devoted time 
  and effort to improving his speech ‘until he attained the utmost proficiency 
  and fluency’. He was later elected as Tribune of the Plebs (tribunus Plebis, 
  ad 102) and then, with the emperor back in Rome, served as praetor (105) 
  responsible for administering law and the courts.
  
  19
  He returned to army life when Trajan appointed him legatus legionis of I 
  Minervia Pia Fidelis (ad 105–106), at the time on active service in the final 
  stages of the Second Dacian War. Immediately following this, Trajan assigned 
  him to Pannonia Inferior as legatus Augusti pro praetore (ad 106–108). 
  There ‘he held the Sarmatians in check, maintained discipline among the 
  soldiers, and restrained the procurators, who were overstepping too freely 
  the bounds of their power’ (Aelius Spartianus, Life of Hadrian 3.9).
   Hadrian returned to Rome in ad 108 to serve as a suffect consul from 
  May to August. He went to Athens where he served as archon (ad 112–113) 
  and developed a deep love of Greek culture that would stay with him for the 
  rest of his life. He also began the practice of wearing a beard, at a time when 
  the fashion was to be clean-shaven. Hadrian had developed into ‘a pleasant 
  man to meet and he possessed a certain charm’ (Cassius Dio, Roman History 
  69.2.6²).
  By ad 113 Hadrian was on his way to Syria while Trajan made 
  preparations for a war against Parthia. The campaign against the Romans’ 
  arch-nemesis proved successful, but within the empire there was unrest 
  across the Jewish diaspora and the East. It was while in Antiocheia (modern 
  Antakya) that Hadrian received news of Trajan’s death and that he had been 
  adopted as his son. Hadrian succeeded him on 11 August ad 117 and was 
  acclaimed imperator by the assembled troops. He was only the second non-
  Italian to rule (Trajan having been the first).
  The sum of his military experience led Hadrian to believe that imperial 
  expansion was folly. Now commander-in-chief he implemented a policy of 
  containment, quickly abandoning most of his predecessor’s conquests (except 
  Armenia and Dacia). He undertook a series of tours of the provinces to 
  inspect the frontiers and installations. He enforced discipline among the 
  troops wherever he went. His letters and speeches reveal Hadrian to have 
  been a somewhat reticent man and always working. He was very proud of 
  his knowledge of military matters and was sure that he would notice any 
  irregularity in a review of the troops. He made a point of eating the same 
  food as the regular troops, going on their route marches, getting to know the 
  soldiers personally and visiting them when they were sick.
  By ad 132 he had been commander-in-chief for 15 years. Crucial 
  to the efficient running of the empire were the propraetorian legates he 
  personally appointed to the provinces. These direct reports were not career 
  military but (like himself) men who had risen through the cursus publicus. 
  Hadrian was a hard-working 
  and restless commander-in-
  chief, travelling the Roman 
  world to inspect the frontiers, 
  and enforcing discipline among 
  the troops guarding them. 
  With a passion for art and 
  architecture his generosity 
  also benefited the civilian 
  communities he visited. 
  This coin declares him to be 
  ‘Restoration of Africa’. His plans 
  for Jerusalem were in the same 
  vein. (Roma Numismatics, 
  www.romanumismatics.com)
  
  20
  Hadrian had known – and come to trust – them personally during his own 
  rise to prominence, and upon them he would now rely to prosecute the 
  Bellum Iudaicum.
  At the outbreak of the insurgency Q. Tineius Rufus (between c. ad 80 
  and 131) was in Iudaea as legatus Augusti pro praetore. His earlier career is 
  entirely lost to us, but he almost certainly followed the standard template of 
  the cursus publicus. He rose to suffect consul for May to September ad 127. 
  His appointment as governor three years later confirms the change in status 
  of Iudaea to a consular province. Based in colonia Prima Flavia Augusta 
  Caesarensis (Caesarea), he would have been in Iudaea when Hadrian made 
  his state visit the same year. He had command of two legions, VI Ferrata and 
  X Fretensis.
  In charge of neighbouring Syria to the north, was Legatus Augusti Pro 
  Praetore C. Quinctius Certus Publicius Marcellus, (c. ad 75 to after 136). 
  After a career of increasing responsibilities, Marcellus achieved the suffect 
  consulship for May to June of ad 120. He assumed his governorship of 
  Syria in ad 129 – certainly by the second half of 131. From his office at 
  Antiocheia, Publicius Marcellus had command of three legions (III Gallica, 
  IIII Scythica and XVI Flavia Firma) and several cohorts of auxiliaries. While 
  he was away his deputy, Ti. Severus (the legate of Legio IIII Scythica), took 
  charge of Syria.
  Also in Syria was Sex. Cornelius Dexter (c. ad 70 to after 136). A 
  native of Mauretania Caesariensis, his career is recorded on an inscription 
  (CIL VIII, 8934 = ILS 1400) found at colonia Saldae (modern Béjaïa in 
  Kabylia, eastern Algeria). Three times he was prefect of a military workshop 
  (praefectus fabrum), during which time he would have commanded teams of 
  skilled engineers (fabri). The fabri repaired damaged armour, constructed and 
  maintained the artillery and siege equipment, built bridges and superintended 
  mining operations. The office of praefectus fabrum was one of the highest 
  trust and importance. Among his other assignments was a stint as praefectus 
  of Cohors V Raetorum, an auxiliary cohort originally formed of recruits 
  from Raetia (modern Austria) but had long since seen service in other parts 
  of the Roman world. Around ad 129–130 he served as tribunus militum 
  with Legio VIII Augusta based at Argentorate (Strasbourg) in Germania 
  Superior. Thereafter, as prefect of Ala Augustae Geminae, he commanded 
  an ala quinquagenaria – a unit of 500 cavalry – stationed in Cappadocia. 
  In ad 132 Cornelius Dexter may have still been in that position, but was 
  later appointed equestrian prefect of the navy in Syria (Praefectus Classis 
  Syriacae), almost certainly by Hadrian himself.
  To the south was T. Haterius Nepos (c. ad 90 to after 136). In ad 132 he 
  was legatus Augusti pro praetore of Arabia Petraea (the territory annexed 
  by Trajan in ad 105–106). He had one legion (III Cyrenaica) under his 
  command. He was a native of Fulginiae (modern Foligno), according to 
  the find of an inscription (CIL XI, 5212 = ILS 1058). In Egypt T. Flavius 
  Titianus, who had been praefectus Aegypti since ad 126, had command of 
  two legions (II Traiana Fortis and XXII Deiotariana).
  Stationed on the Danube River was Q. Lollius Urbicus (c. ad 90 to 
  after 139), the son of M. Lollius Senecio, a Berber Numidian landowner. 
  An inscription (CIL VIII, 6706 = ILS 1065) found at Tiddis (a town in 
  eastern Algeria) details each step of his career. After serving in two junior 
  magistracies, he entered the army as a ‘tribune with the broad stripe’ 
  
  21
  (tribunus laticlavius) with Legio XXII Primigenia at Mogontiacum in 
  Germania Superior. On completion he transferred to the staff of the 
  proconsul of Asia as quaestor, whereafter he went to Rome and stood as 
  a candidate for Tribune of the Plebs and later as one of the praetors. He 
  returned to the army as legate of Legio X Gemina stationed in Pannonia, 
  either at Aquincum or Vienna.
  In far away Britannia, the governor at the time of the Jewish uprising was 
  Cn. Minicius Faustinus Sex. Iulius Severus (c. ad 80 to after 136). He was 
  born in the colonia Claudia Aequum (modern Čitluk near Sinj in Croatia) 
  in the province of Dalmatia. An inscription from his home town (CIL III, 
  2830 = ILS 1056) preserves his illustrious career. After civilian and military 
  postings (in Pannonia, ad 120–125), Hadrian picked Iulius Severus as his 
  legatus Augusti pro praetore of Dacia (ad 126–127). He was elected suffect 
  consul for the last quarter of ad 127. Thereafter he went as proconsul to 
  Moesia Inferior (ad 128–132). In ad 132 Severus transferred to Britain 
  where he had three legions, including VI Victrix and XX Valeria Victrix, 
  and some 50 cohorts of auxiliaries under his command. Over his career he 
  earned a reputation as one among the very best generals of his day. Cassius 
  Dio describes him as ‘a governor and leader who was just and prudent and 
  a man of rank’ (Roman History 69.14.4).
  Other men of lower military rank who were active in theatre in Iudaea 
  are known from inscriptions. Under the eagle standard of Legio X Fretensis 
  were tribunus Aemilius Iuncus and centurio Octavius Secundus. With Legio 
  III Gallica were tribunus angusticlavius M. Statius Priscus and centurion 
  M. Sabidius Maximus. Sex. Attius Senecio was tribune of X Gemina when 
  a detachment of his legion was dispatched from Pannonia to the war zone. 
  Marching with Legio III Cyrenaica were tribunus militum C. Popilius Carus 
  Pedo and reservist (or centurion) C. Nummius Constans.
  One M. Censorius Cornelianus was praepositus in charge of a detachment 
  of men from Cohors I Hispanorum. The title praepositus means ‘overseer’ 
  or ‘supervisor’, indicating that he was an acting commander, not the officer 
  of a regular unit. He dedicated an altar (RIB 3956) to Iupiter Augustus at 
  Maryport, an outpost on the Cumbrian coast, located on the far western 
  end of Hadrian’s newly constructed wall. On the same inscription he is cited 
  as c[enturio] leg[ionis X Fr]etensis, the legion stationed at the far eastern 
  end of the Roman Empire. He may have accompanied Iulius Severus on 
  his outbound journey from Britain. On reaching Iudaea he may have been 
  re-assigned as a centurion with the legion and then, at the end of the war, 
  returned to his former auxiliary cohort.
  With less certainty, Q. Fuficius Cornutus saw action in the Bar Kokhba 
  War. He was then a tribunus laticlavius of a legion now impossible to identify 
  because of damage to the inscription (AE 1897, 19) found at Ager Histonii 
  (modern Casalbordino). Another was Q. Albius Felix, who had been a 
  cornicularius to a praetorian prefect earlier in his career. As a centurion – 
  perhaps among the highest-ranking primi ordines – with Legio XX Valeria 
  Victrix based at Deva (modern Chester) he was twice decorated, receiving 
  torques, armillae and phalerae from the Emperor Trajan in person for valour 
  in the Parthian War of ad 114–117. That achievement likely marked him out 
  to take part in the war against the Jewish rebels.
  All these men would be tested in battle and serve with distinction to re-
  establish Roman rule.
  
  22
  JEWISH FORCES
  Shim’on ben Koseba’s initial command centre was at Herodium, but his 
  ultimate headquarters were located at the hilltop city of Betar. During the 
  conflict he may have travelled widely throughout the war zone, to lead 
  operations and motivate local units. From his base he communicated in 
  handwritten memoranda with his deputies. Each town and village militia was 
  called a camp (mahaneh). Significantly, the word is ideological and imbued 
  with religious meaning. It is thus associated with holy warfare, which is 
  consistent with the messianic vision of its supreme leader. A commander 
  (rosh hamahanaya, literally ‘head of the camp’) was in charge of each 
  mahaneh. This man was drawn from the local population and worked 
  alongside the civilian parnas. From the surviving letters the administrative 
  districts are known to have included Ein Gedi, Herodium, Ir-Nahash (Kirbet 
  Natash near Herodium), Kiryat Arabaya and Tekoa. At the height of the 
  rebellion, the area under insurgent control may have extended to border 
  with Galilee and the Jewish Transjordan of Arabia Petraea. The leadership 
  was not static; the extant letters indicate changes occurred during the war.
  To seize and defend the Land of Israel, Ben Koseba needed an army (tsaba) 
  of fit, motivated and committed men to serve in his ranks. He could appeal 
  to the many discontented and distressed, or impoverished and indebted, all 
  those struggling to make a living under the Roman occupation in Iudaea 
  with the promise of a better life. Foremost among entry qualifications, he 
  required all his soldiers to be Jewish. They 
  would be fighting for their moshiah. Akiba had 
  variously 12,000 ‘pair’ (24,000) or even 48,000 
  students – according to Jewish sources, which 
  likely inflate the actual number – attending his 
  school of rabbinical studies at Beneberak, many 
  of whom may have joined the war effort. As the 
  rebellion gained momentum, men from outside 
  the region – Galilee, the neighbouring Roman 
  province of Arabia Petraea and Nabataea 
  – would arrive to volunteer as fighters. It is 
  evident that not all drawn to the fight for the 
  freedom of Israel could communicate in the 
  native languages (Aramaic and Hebrew) of the 
  The Jewish insurgents used 
  several types of weapon. These 
  iron three-bladed (trilobate) 
  arrowheads from the Cave 
  of Mount Yishai are likely 
  captured Roman items. The 
  tang attached the arrowhead 
  to a shaft, either of wood or 
  cane, which was then tied 
  tightly with string. (Exhibit at 
  the Israel Museum, Jerusalem. 
  Author’s collection)
  OPPOSING ARMIES
  
  23
  country, however. In one letter to Ben Koseba a Nabataean called Soumaios 
  complains that he has to write in Greek because he cannot ‘write in Hebrew 
  letters’ (P. Yadin 52).
  Ben Koseba might have hoped to recruit from among the Christians, 
  whose prophet had been born a Jew. But they decided that this was not 
  their fight. They already had a messiah. The contemporary account of Justin 
  (Iustinus Martyr), preserved by Eusebius, laments that the rebel leader 
  required Christians ‘to be punished severely if they did not deny Jesus as the 
  Messiah and blaspheme him’ (Eusebius, Church History 4.8.4). The other 
  implication of this statement is that resident non-Jews could be forcibly 
  conscripted into the rebel army.
  The loyalty of Ben Koseba’s soldiers, however, is never questioned in 
  the literature. ‘There were two brothers in Kefar Haruba,’ the Midrash, 
  Lamentations records, ‘who did not allow any Romans to pass there’. 
  Jewish religious texts preserve legendary stories of how Ben Koseba tested 
  the courage and strength of his men. Those close to him at fortress Betar had 
  amputated a finger to show their commitment to the cause. The sages were 
  appalled at the self-inflicted mutilations and demanded to know, ‘“How long 
  will you continue to make the men of Israel blemished?” He [Ben Koseba] 
  asked them, “how else shall they be tested?” They answered, “let anyone 
  who cannot uproot a cedar from Lebanon while riding a horse be refused 
  enrollment in your army.” So he had 200,000 of these and 200,000 of those’ 
  (Jerusalem Talmud).
  The number of soldiers – 400,000 if the Talmud is to be believed – seems 
  wildly exaggerated given the geographically small size of Iudaea. Perhaps the 
  truer strength was a quarter or a third of that number, but that would still be 
  an immense army. Cassius Dio puts the number of rebel casualties at the end 
  of the conflict at ‘580,000 men’ (Roman History 69.14.1). This claim also 
  seems hyperbolical. All that can be inferred is that the army of the Jews under 
  Ben Koseba’s leadership numbered in the many tens of thousands of men.
  Consistent with an insurgent guerrilla war strategy, the Jewish militiaman 
  was typically lightly armed and ideally equipped for quick ‘hit-and-run’ 
  attacks. Wearing a short tunic of homespun wool or linen, he may have 
  fought with or without body armour according to his means. Examples of 
  highly coloured fabrics – in up to 34 hues – have been found wonderfully 
  preserved in the refuge caves at Ein Gedi. Tunics were simply two rectangular 
  sheets of woven textiles stitched together at the shoulders with a slit for the 
  head. The tunics often featured a contrasting stripe from the shoulder to knee 
  on each of the left and right sides. For wear they could be tied at the waist 
  with a belt or worn without one.
  Jewish metalworkers are 
  reported by Roman historian 
  Cassius Dio to have secretly 
  fashioned weapons before 
  the rebel war began. This 
  fine spearhead was found in 
  the Cave of the Spear in the 
  Judaean Hills. It may actually 
  have been taken from the 
  Roman army as a war spoil. 
  (Exhibit at the Israel Museum, 
  Jerusalem. Author’s collection)
  Sturdy footwear was essential 
  in the terrain and heat of the 
  Judaean countryside. These 
  leather sandals feature soles 
  of three layers of leather. Iron 
  hobnails were commonly used 
  to prolong the life of the soles. 
  (Exhibit at the Israel Museum, 
  Jerusalem. Author’s collection)
  
  24
  Initially his arms and armour would have been made in secret in 
  local workshops as described by Cassius Dio. Over time, however, 
  captured Roman gear would have augmented or replaced the kit 
  of Ben Koseba’s soldiers. The excavations at Betar uncovered a 
  rectangular scale with a rounded tip at one end, suggesting it 
  was part of a coat of scale armour (the Roman lorica plumata 
  or squamata). It featured a singe hole at the top, and pairs of 
  holes on each of the right, left and bottom edges. In the 
  Judaean Desert an entire section of scale armour was 
  found, composed of four rows, each made of six 
  overlapping scales; a rebel coin was fused into one 
  of the scales, dating it unequivocally to this period. 
  Archaeologists working in the Cave of the Spear (in 
  the Wadi Marrazah, north of Ein Gedi) found a single thin, 
  rectangular copper plaque, measuring 2.5cm (1in.) by 1.5cm (½in.). 
  Two holes were pierced in the upper corners. Another was found at the 
  Teomin Cave on the lower slopes of the Judaean Mountains.
  For defence he might carry a shield with a central boss and handgrip. 
  A fragment of a wooden plank shield was discovered in a refuge cave. The 
  shard of a single plank, measuring 8cm (3in.) by 3cm (1¼in.), has an acute-
  angled edge at the top indicating the complete shield was either hexagonal, 
  oval or round in shape. A line of small holes along the top suggests the 
  attachment of edging of stitched leather to protect the perimeter of the 
  buckler. Useful in one-to-one combat, several men could assemble together in 
  tight formation and form a defensive shield wall or phalanx in combination 
  with swords or spears.
  A rebel with a cause might just pick a stone from the ground and throw 
  it. To increase his range and accuracy he could cast the stone with a sling. It 
  was a simple weapon to make and use. Two lengths of twine were attached 
  to a small cradle or pouch into which the projectile – a pebble, stone, or shot 
  moulded of clay or lead – was placed. A slinger placed a finger through a 
  loop on the end of one cord and the thumb and forefinger holding a tab at 
  the end of the other cord. The sling was swung in an arc several times and 
  the tab was released at a precise moment. The effectiveness of the weapon is 
  highlighted in the Old Testament story of the duel in which David ‘put his 
  hand in his bag and took out a stone, slung it, and struck the Philistine on 
  his forehead’ and killed Goliath (1 Samuel 17:48–49). The great advantage 
  of the sling was its simplicity (meaning it could be made at low cost from 
  readily available materials) and its ease of use (meaning a soldier could reach 
  proficiency after a few hours of training). A team occupying the high ground 
  and equipped with slings and stones could launch a surprise attack on a 
  marching column of Roman troops in the valley below and just as quickly 
  disappear before the enemy could stage a counterattack.
  A variety of edged weapons was available. The bow and arrow were 
  used. Archery was widely practised in the region and often mentioned in 
  rabbinic literature. A trained archer could fire arrows at a rapid rate and 
  with precision over great distance. Simple flat, leaf-shaped arrowheads were 
  found in the Caves of the Spear. Specimens of the trilobate – or three-winged 
  – design were found in other locations. Twelve arrowheads have been found 
  in the Har Yishai Caves on the extension of the Yishai Mountain at Ein Gedi, 
  11 of which were in perfect condition. They were of two designs; four of 
  A helmet was a crucial item of 
  the Roman soldier’s kit. This 
  complete and well-preserved 
  specimen, dated to the 2nd 
  century ad (the so-called 
  ‘Weisenau’ or ‘Imperial Italic 
  G’ type), is made of iron. 
  The design, with integral 
  neckguard, browguard and 
  articulated cheekplates, 
  features riveted cross bars to 
  strengthen the dome from 
  direct blows to the head. 
  Unprovenanced, it is often 
  mistakenly referred to as the 
  ‘Hebron Helmet’. (Exhibit at 
  the Israel Museum, Jerusalem. 
  Author’s collection)
  
  25
  the blades were drawn back, while seven were 
  ‘cut’ towards the sharpened end. Behind the 
  blade was a narrow tang that was pushed into 
  the wooden shaft. One was still attached to the 
  shaft of the arrow and tightly wound with a strip 
  of sinew to increase the bond. A near-complete 
  arrow with its upper shaft and its three-winged 
  blade in place was found near the entrance of 
  the Cave of Letters at Nahal Hever. A further 30 
  specimens of the three-winged arrowhead have 
  been found at Horvat ‘Eqed, others at caves 
  in the Nahal David and Nahal Arugot. These 
  arrows were likely used with a composite bow. 
  A grip made of bone (from an ibex endemic only 
  to this region) was found at Herodium in a Bar 
  Kokhba War context.
  Spears could be thrown as missiles at an 
  enemy tens of metres away, or used to stab or 
  slice an opponent at close quarters. Examples 
  of bronze and iron blades were found in the 
  Caves of the Spear (so named because several 
  specimens were found there). They varied in 
  length, breadth and profile. The specimens were 
  generally flat leaf-shaped blades. One had a 
  pyramid-shaped point and narrow shank typical of a Roman pilum. Indeed, 
  it may have been a captured Roman weapon.
  A sword or dagger could be fashioned by a Jewish metalworker or 
  stripped from a fallen Roman soldier. As a last resort the war fighter might 
  even use kitchen cutlery. A chopper and four knives with wooden and 
  bone handles were found in a basket at the Cave of Letters at Nahal Hever. 
  Easily concealed in the folds of a tunic, their iron blades could inflict deadly 
  wounds. A curved knife called the sica was used by the bandits (after which 
  they acquired the name sicarii) who made their last stand at Masada in 
  ad 73.
  Roman military doctrine was 
  to attack an enemy in massed 
  formation on a battleground of 
  their choosing. Having thrown 
  missiles at medium-long range, 
  the infantry advanced to engage 
  in hand-to-hand combat, as 
  depicted on this bas-relief 
  from Glanum (Saint-Rémy-de-
  Provence) on display at the 
  Fourvière Gallo-Roman Museum, 
  France. (Rama, Wikimedia 
  Commons, CC-BY-SA-2.0-fr)
  A coat of chain mail (lorica 
  hamata) was commonly worn 
  by legionary and auxiliary 
  troops serving in Hadrian’s 
  army. Made of thousands 
  of small iron links riveted 
  together, it weighed around 
  10kg (22lb). This fragment, the 
  provenance of which is not 
  recorded, was found packed 
  in a helmet. (Exhibit at the 
  Israel Museum, Jerusalem. 
  Author’s collection)
  
  26
  Well-made footwear was essential in the varied terrain of the conflict 
  zone. Hobnails from the soles of open leather boots or military-style sandals 
  have been found at many sites, including Herodium and several hideouts, 
  including the Sabar Caves.
  ROMAN FORCES
  Hadrian’s army (exercitus) was composed of professional soldiers. A 
  freeborn Roman citizen could enrol in a legion at the age of 17 or 18. Having 
  passed a health examination, he would receive a military mark and be sent 
  to his unit. He signed on for 25 years and on completion of service was 
  awarded a bonus. On arrival at camp he would receive basic training in drill, 
  formations, riding, swimming and use of weapons, as well as route marching, 
  camp building and siege warfare.
  The new recruit would be assigned to a centuria of 80 men under the 
  command of a centurion. Hadrian ‘conferred the centurion’s vine staff on 
  those only who were hardy and of good repute’ (Aelius Spartianus, Life of 
  Hadrian 10.6). The centurion was assisted by a deputy (optio). Each century 
  had a signifer, an officer who carried a military standard (signum) used to 
  relay orders in concert with a horn player (cornicen). Six centuries formed a 
  cohort (480 men), the first cohort being of double size. Ten cohorts formed 
  a legion. A wing (ala) of 120 mounted soldiers provided an escort detail and 
  courier service.
  A legionary received a stipend in cash (paid three times a year). 
  Deductions were made for food and equipment. His defensive gear 
  included a helmet of bronze or iron with cheek plates, a brow guard and 
  a neckguard. (A specimen dated to the 2nd century ad features iron cross-
  bands to strengthen the dome in case of a direct blow to the head.) Several 
  types of body armour were in use in Hadrian’s time: the shirt of chain mail 
  (lorica hamata), made of individual iron links riveted together with shoulder 
  doubling; the shirt of scale (lorica plumata or squamata), assembled from 
  individual die-cut segments of bronze or iron and attached with wire or 
  cord to a jerkin; and the articulated cuirass with shoulder protection (the 
  so-called lorica segmentata), constructed from thin plates of iron riveted 
  to leather bands on the inside. An apron (cingulum) of metal discs fixed to 
  leather strips hung from a military belt. A curved shield – oval or rectangular 
  in shape – made of a type of plywood, featured 
  a central handgrip protected by an iron boss; 
  a blazon painted on the exterior surface 
  identified the legion.
  His weapons included the pilum, a 2m-long 
  (6ft 7in.) javelin comprising a slender iron 
  shaft with a pyramid-shaped tip attached to 
  a wooden shank with a pin, which broke on 
  impact so it could not be thrown back. In a 
  massed formation, volleys of these pila could 
  break an enemy line by piercing shields and 
  pinning them together or wounding or killing 
  the opponent. The bayonet-like gladius (sword) 
  was some 60–65cm (24–26in.) long, with 
  After discharging the pilum, 
  the Roman legionary engaged 
  the enemy with shield and 
  sword (gladius). The short, two-
  edged weapon was designed 
  for stabbing and thrusting. A 
  longer version (spatha) was 
  used by cavalry. The corroded 
  specimen shown here, from 
  Mount Zion, Jerusalem, is still in 
  its scabbard (vagina), complete 
  with rings for attaching 
  the baldric. (Exhibit at the 
  Israel Museum, Jerusalem. 
  Author’s collection)
  
  27
  a double-edged blade 45–50cm (18–20in.) long. It was his close-quarters 
  combat weapon for thrusting and stabbing. The short, leaf-shaped pugio 
  (dagger) was a sidearm of last resort.
  In command of a legion was a legate (legatus legionis), a senator 
  personally appointed by Hadrian. Reporting to him in turn was a ‘tribune 
  of the broad stripe’ (tribunus angusticlavius), a young man marked out for 
  promotion – again by Hadrian – through the Roman political, legal and 
  military career ladder. He was assisted by a team of five ‘tribunes of the 
  narrow stripe’ (tribuni laticlavii), generally teenagers just starting out on 
  their careers. Hadrian ‘appointed as tribunes only men with full beards or of 
  an age to give to the authority of the tribuneship the full measure of prudence 
  and maturity’ (Aelius Spartianus, Life of Hadrian 10.6). Ranked third in 
  the chain of command was a camp prefect (praefectus castrorum). He was 
  Ti. Claudius Fatalis was a 
  native of the city of Rome, 
  who enrolled in the army 
  when 19 years old. He served 
  with several legions in Britain 
  and Germany before arriving 
  in Jerusalem where his rank 
  was centurion tertius hastatus 
  in Legio X Fretensis. He died 
  aged 42. He freed from slavery 
  the woman he married, who 
  erected the stele, which is 
  dated ad 70–175. (Exhibit at 
  the Israel Museum, Jerusalem. 
  Author’s collection)
  Legionary cohorts often served 
  away from their main home 
  base camp on specific tactical 
  missions. This inscription, 
  carved into a slab of limestone 
  in the 1st or 2nd century ad 
  from Jerusalem or Samaria, 
  reads: ‘Legion X, Cohort IIX’; 
  note the use of IIX rather than 
  VIII for the number eight. 
  (Exhibit at the Israel Museum, 
  Jerusalem. Author’s collection)
  
  28
  responsible for administration, training, logistics, managing the legion on 
  the march, establishing the camp, maintenance of artillery and conducting 
  siege warfare. Next in the hierarchy was the chief centurion (centurio primus 
  pilus). The legion at full strength could number some 5,600 men-at-arms.
  There were 30 legions in service in ad 132. The theoretical strength of 
  Hadrian’s army was thus some 168,000 men. His order of battle was arranged 
  into army groups by province. The consular provinces were administered by 
  governors appointed by the Senate, the other territories (called praetorian) 
  by Hadrian. His own legal powers permitted him to pick a deputy to govern 
  each province. Every legatus Augusti pro praetore was responsible for 
  ensuring the security of his province and, to do so, he commanded all the 
  military units stationed there.
  In addition to legions, there were units of professional non-Roman citizen 
  soldiers. These auxiliary units were drafted from conquered peoples and 
  allies. After completing a term of service with honour the auxiliaryman 
  could look forward to being awarded citizenship, confirmed in an official 
  document (the so-called diploma). There were three kinds of tactical unit: 
  the ala of 480 or 720 cavalry; the cohors peditata of 480 or 800 men; and 
  the cohors equitata of mixed cavalry/infantry of 600 or 1,040 men. They 
  were commanded by a praefectus (or a tribunus militum in certain units). In 
  total the auxilia provided approximately 218,000 men for the Roman army 
  at this time. Their equipment was similar to that of the legionaries: helmet, 
  body armour (chain mail rather than plate), gladius for the infantry or longer 
  spatha for the cavalry and a spear (lancea, about 2m (6ft 7in.) in length).
  Available to support the land-based forces were fleets of the Roman navy. 
  These patrolled the seas and rivers keeping piracy and banditry in check, 
  and assisted with moving men and matériel in war time. A warship could be 
  powered by a rigged mainsail and artemon, or oars (the rowers being arranged 
  in two-banks in a liburna or three in a trireme). A liburna might be 27m (90ft) 
  long and was steered by a pair of side rudders mounted aft, operated from a 
  poop-deck. The ship was fitted with a built-up forecastle and a bronze beaked 
  prow (rostrum) at sea level. The crew of a liburna comprised 62 oarsmen and 
  six sailors, captained by a trierarchos. The ship’s combat unit of 15 marines 
  (all auxiliaries) was commanded by a centurion, who also had an optio 
  In peacetime, legionaries could 
  be called upon to perform 
  civil engineering duties. This 
  inscription, dating to around 
  ad 130, reads: ‘Imperator Caesar 
  Traianus Hadrianus made 
  [the aqueduct] by [means 
  of] a vexillation of Legio X 
  Fretensis’. Other inscriptions 
  also record Legiones II and VI 
  as having made repairs to the 
  same aqueduct near Caesarea. 
  (Exhibit at the Israel Museum, 
  Jerusalem. Author’s collection)
  
  29
  and specialists to assist him. Ten such vessels may have formed a squadron 
  commanded by a navarchus who reported to an equestrian praefectus classis.
  In ad 132 in Iudaea there were two legions (11,200 men-at-arms at 
  full strength):
  Legio VI Ferrata – at Tel Shalem in the Beth Shean Valley, it moved into 
  Iudaea sometime after ad 120 to replace Legio II Traiana Firma. Previously 
  the legion had been part of Trajan’s expeditionary army in the Parthian 
  War, after which it transferred to Arabia Petraea.
  Legio X Fretensis – encamped in the ruined city of Hierosolyma, it had a long 
  association in the province. Many men of the legion were likely seconded 
  away in Caesarea with the praefectus providing staff for his administrative 
  office, and carrying out repairs to the public infrastructure, such as the 
  aqueduct supplying the city with fresh water.
  Additionally, there were up to six units of auxiliaries (9,500 soldiers) in 
  Iudaea including:
  Cohors I Miliaria Thracum – at Beit Guvrin (the precursor to the later city of 
  Eleutheropolis), its presence is confirmed by the find of a tile. The cohort 
  was transferred in from Syria and was active in Iudaea from ad 124. Its 
  main base camp at Beit Guvrin was a square enclosure covering 3 hectares 
  (7½ acres), a space large enough for a 1,000-strong auxiliary cohort. A 
  detachment was stationed at Ein Gedi.
  Ala Antiana Gallorum et Thracum Sagittaria – also at Beit Guvrin, a unit of 
  cavalry (which fought with bows) is attested by floor tiles stamped with 
  the unit’s moniker at the site.
  In times of emergency a legatus Augusti could request assistance from the 
  commander-in-chief. Governors in neighbouring provinces could release 
  entire legions, which marched under their own eagles (aquilae), or individual 
  or multiple cohorts marching under detachment flags (vexilla). Pioneered 
  by Augustus and Tiberius, these vexillations could combine with units from 
  other legions to form a tactical field army to address the particular crisis at 
  hand. In these forms contingents of troops drawn from all over the empire 
  served in the Bar Kokhba War.
  From Syria:
  Legio III Gallica – stationed at Raphanaea (al-Rafniye, halfway between 
  Antioch and Damascus), it may have taken part in Trajan’s wars in Dacia 
  and Parthia. A vexillation of III Gallica was already in Iudaea in ad 116.
  Classis Syriacae – the home port of Syria’s navy was Seleucia Pieria from 
  where it patrolled the eastern Mediterranean. A squadron may have been 
  deployed to police the Dead Sea and monitor marine activity.
  Auxilia – three alae and 12 cohortes are attested in Syria in a diploma dated 
  to ad 139.
  From Arabia Petraea:
  Legio III Cyrenaica – stationed at Bostra (Busra al-Sham), it was one of the 
  legions that fought in the Jewish War and was at the siege of Hierosolyma 
  
  30
  in ad 70. The legion was transferred to Arabia Petraea after its annexation 
  in ad 106. It then moved to Egypt, where it was likely involved in 
  suppressing the uprising of Jews in Alexandria, and may have seen action 
  in the Parthian War. By ad 125 it was back in Arabia Petraea.
  From Cappadoceia:
  Legio XII Fulminata – encamped at Melitene, the legion had been part of 
  Trajan’s expeditionary force to Parthia. When Hadrian abandoned 
  Babylonia and Mesopotamia in ad 117–118 it returned to Cappadoceia.
  From Egypt:
  Legio II Traiana Fortis – based at Alexandria, the legion was founded by 
  Trajan in ad 105 to fight in his Dacian War. After the conflict it may have 
  gone to Arabia Petraea (where it would have joined III Cyrenaica) or 
  moved to a base on the Danube. In preparation for Trajan’s Parthian War, 
  it moved to Syria. Thereafter it (or part of it) went to Iudaea, where the 
  presence of troops at Caesarea is revealed by an inscription on an aqueduct.
  Legio XXII Deiotoriana – sharing its camp at Alexandria with Legio II 
  Traiana Fortis it is recorded on a document listing legions dated to ad 119 
  (or 123).
  From Pannonia Superior:
  Legio X Gemina – encamped at Vindobona (Vienna). It may have been 
  involved in Trajan’s Second Dacian War, but its main mission appears to 
  have been to patrol the Danube River.
  From Moesia Inferior:
  Legio V Macedonica – based at Troesmis (Iglita), part of it was dispatched to 
  fight in Trajan’s Parthian War or to Syria. Its presence during the Bar 
  Kokhba War is attested by an inscription.
  Legio XI Claudia – stationed at Durostorum (Silistra) in Moesia Inferior, it 
  likely took part in Trajan’s Dacian War. One of its responsibilities was to 
  protect the Greek-speaking communities of the Crimea. An inscription 
  confirms it took part in the Bar Kokhba War.
  Legio XIV Gemina – located at Carnuntum (Petronell), an epitaph from 
  Gadara suggests cohorts from the legion were in action during the Bar 
  Kokhba War, but it is disputed.
  From Britannia:
  Legio VI Victrix – though based at Eboracum (York) its presence in Iudaea is 
  suggested by an interpretative reading of a floor tile stamp found at 
  Beit Guvrin.
  Legio XX Valeria Victrix – stationed at Deva (Chester), the legion had been 
  in Britain since ad 43. It had played a part in crushing the rebellion of 
  Boudica and the Iceni (ad 60–61). Men of Legio XX had helped in the 
  building of Hadrian’s Wall (ad 122–128).
  
  31
  Cohors I Hispanorum milliaria – encamped at Maryport, Cumbria, the unit 
  was an 800-man infantry cohort.
  Cohors IV Lingonum – based at Wallsend, Tyne and Wear, the unit was a 
  600-man infantry cohort.
  The actual number of troops Hadrian sent to crush the insurgency is difficult 
  to calculate with any accuracy. Legiones VI Ferrata, X Fretensis and III 
  Gallica, plus the local auxilia, took part as complete units. Many other 
  legions and auxiliaries supplemented them as vexillations. The combined 
  force deployed in theatre at the height of the war could, thus, have numbered 
  as few as 25,000 or as many as 45,000. Given that the total force available at 
  the time was some 443,000, either number represented a sizeable investment 
  of men and matériel in regional conflict.
  Auxiliary units (alae) provided 
  the majority of cavalry 
  troops in the Roman army. 
  Their primary function was 
  to support infantry on the 
  battlefield, but they could 
  be deployed on patrols and 
  exploratory missions. This stele 
  in the Römisch-Germanisches 
  Museum, Cologne shows the 
  defensive equipment a rider 
  used included a helmet, chain-
  mail coat and an oval shield 
  (scutum), the weaponry a spear 
  (lancea) and a long sword 
  (spatha). (Wikimedia Commons, 
  CC-BY-SA-3.0-de)
  
  32
  JEWISH PLANS
  Ben Koseba’s primary objectives were to free the ancient Land of Israel from 
  Roman occupation and to liberate the city of Jerusalem. His was a messianic 
  vision of redemption with himself as warrior in chief. The extent to which 
  this meant establishing an independent self-governing Jewish state is still 
  debated. It was a venture of the highest risk; the price of failure would be 
  very great indeed. To succeed, he would need to understand the strengths 
  and weaknesses of his enemy, and to prepare both for a protracted war and 
  his people's survival. The lessons of past insurrections (of the First Jewish 
  War six decades before and of ad 115–117) would surely have informed his 
  strategy formulation and tactical planning.
  Firstly, he had to determine where to launch his revolt. Permanent Roman 
  garrisons were concentrated in the north of the province of Iudaea in the 
  district of Galilee and in Jerusalem. Taking the entire province would be 
  futile until he could raise sufficient forces to match or exceed those of the 
  occupying army. For historical and religious reasons the civilian population 
  in Samaria was unlikely to throw its support behind the Jewish cause. An 
  The fertile land of the Judaean 
  Shephelah produced a 
  variety of crops that could 
  sustain the population of the 
  independent Jewish state 
  led by Shim’on ben Koseba. 
  Called the ‘land flowing with 
  milk and honey’ (Deuteronomy 
  31:20), the Midrash explains 
  that milk symbolizes superior 
  quality, richness of taste and 
  nourishment, while honey 
  represents sweetness. Israel 
  is thus both nourishing and 
  pleasant. (Author’s collection)
  OPPOSING PLANS
  
  33
  attainable goal would be to seize the district 
  of Iudaea, bordered in the north by Samaria, 
  by Idumaea in the south, the Mediterranean 
  in the west and the Dead Sea in the east. 
  The terrain – and the Judaean Desert and 
  Shephelah in particular – would also work 
  to the advantage of the revolutionaries. 
  If Ben Koseba could demonstrate that 
  his rebellion had legs, disenchanted Jews 
  and other sympathizers elsewhere might 
  join his followers in Iudaea or escalate 
  the troubles consuming the Romans by 
  fomenting uprisings in their own regions, 
  such as in Galilee or Arabia Petraea. This 
  way the rebellion might spread well beyond 
  its epicentre. In the name of peace, perhaps 
  then the head of the Roman world might 
  be willing to reach an accommodation with the leader of the Jewish nation.
  Seizing Iudaea would mean ousting the Roman garrisons in the region. In 
  Ben Koseba’s favour, the Roman military presence was lighter in Iudaea than 
  in either Galilee or Samaria. The relatively small numbers of Roman troops 
  scattered along the roads and among the towns could be overwhelmed by 
  organized bands of armed fighters – just as bandits had done for decades. 
  He would find eager soldiers among the disaffected and the poor, as well 
  as idealistic young Jewish men (like the two brothers in Kefar Haruba 
  mentioned above) who shared his dream and burned with a desire to liberate 
  Israel from the Roman foe. They would have heard the war stories and tales 
  of heroism by Jews like them in Cyprus, Libya and Egypt, and how they had 
  resisted the Roman invasion of Mesopotamia. Outraged by reports of the 
  Roman emperor’s plans to strike at the very heart of their faith and identity, 
  these patriots would be motivated to fight to take their people’s destiny into 
  their own hands.
  An oasis supported a 
  community on the western 
  shore of the Dead Sea. Its 
  prosperity derived from 
  processing balsam, an 
  ingredient used in perfumes. A 
  harbour (yet to be identified by 
  archaeologists) allowed ships 
  to berth after crossing from 
  Arabia Petraea on the far shore. 
  (Author’s collection)
  This lead weight from the 
  Horvat Alim (Beit Guvrin 
  area) bears the paleo-Hebrew 
  inscription ‘Shim’on ben 
  Koseba, Prince of Israel’ and 
  the name of his parnas Shim’on 
  Dasoi. Parnasim enforced rules 
  and regulations for commerce 
  and trade in the rebel-held 
  administrative districts. 
  It weighs 803.6 grammes 
  (1lb 12oz). (Exhibit at the 
  Israel Museum, Jerusalem. 
  Author’s collection)
  
  34
  Ben Koseba’s rebel army would need to covertly amass an extensive 
  armoury of weapons to withstand a war with well-equipped Roman troops. 
  In one Roman source it is claimed that Jewish metalworkers commissioned 
  to provide the Roman army with equipment ‘purposely made of poor quality 
  such weapons as they were called upon to furnish, in order that the Romans 
  might reject them and they themselves might thus have the use of them’ 
  (Cassius Dio, Roman History 69.12.2). The historian’s statement might 
  contain a kernel of truth. The subject peoples of the Romans were often 
  required to pay taxes in cash or kind, some of which (such as foodstuffs, 
  animal hides or clothing) would be supplied to the army. The Jews certainly 
  had the skills and the means. A foundry has been identified at Herodium that is 
  contemporary with the war. Smithy tools have been found at Betar, including 
  iron anvils, hammerheads, tongs and chisels. With them an armourer could 
  both produce new equipment, and adapt and repair damaged pieces.
  Secondly, having taken territory, Ben Koseba would need a plan to govern, 
  sustain and defend it. The spiritual home of Judaism was Hierosolyma. 
  Liberating it would be an important medium- or long-term aim of the rebel 
  leader, one that would drive his ambition and inspire his soldiers. But the city 
  was still occupied by crack Roman troops of Legio X. Until it could be taken, 
  he needed a base from which to direct operations. As his command centre he 
  may have initially chosen Herodium. Situated 15km (9 miles) south-southeast 
  of the ruined city, it was a near impregnable – and now abandoned – fortress 
  built by Herod the Great (74/73–5/4 bc) and the old king was buried there. 
  However, Betar, a hilltop city 10km (6 miles) south-west of Hierosolyma on the 
  road to Gaza, would become the final headquarters of the national resistance.
  As Nasi’ Yisra’el he would quickly need to set up institutions to govern the 
  new nation and convince those living in the communities within its nominal 
  boundary that it was legitimate and worth supporting. He would need the 
  support of the upper and middle economic classes to make it function. 
  The goal would be ‘business as usual’, except that everywhere the rebels 
  Twelve kilometres south of 
  Jerusalem stands Herod the 
  Great’s fortified palace. A bird’s-
  eye view of the Herodium 
  reveals the geometric defensive 
  architecture of the fortress 
  built on the crest of the 
  mound. Beneath it, rebels loyal 
  to Shim’on ben Koseba dug 
  extensive tunnels. (Hebrew 
  Wikipedia Project)
  
  35
  held territory Jewish civil and criminal law (as interpreted by the rabbis) 
  would replace Roman. To minimize disruption, however, the administrative 
  districts would be based on existing Roman jurisdictions. From the surviving 
  letters these are known to have included Betar, Ein Gedi, Herodium, Ir-
  Nahash (Kirbet Natash near Herodium), Kiryat Arabaya and Tekoa. The 
  territory may have extended across the Jordan River. Each community 
  would be managed jointly by a civilian administrator (parnas) and a militia 
  commander reporting direct to Ben Koseba. The parnasim authorized land 
  leases, oversaw weights and measures and minted coins. They collected the 
  annual rent from tenants leasing land belonging to the head of state, ten per 
  cent of which was apparently paid into the national treasury to support the 
  revolutionary state.
  The upstart nation would need to feed its population and nurture its 
  fledgling economy. Access to the markets in the Roman Empire would 
  effectively be closed off by war (unless goods were smuggled in and out). 
  The people of Ben Koseba would, instead, need to develop self-sufficiency 
  and look East. The people of Iudaea were resourceful farmers (producing 
  fruit, honey, meat, olive oil, vegetables, wheat and wine in abundance) and 
  talented traders (in leather and metal goods). On the edge of the arid Judaean 
  Desert lay Ein Gedi, a natural spring. It was the most important oasis on 
  the western shore of the Dead Sea. The small town, located between Nahal 
  David and Nahal Arugot, prospered on the back of trade in balsam. Used in 
  perfumes, it was extracted from the persimmon plant and its processing as 
  a resin was a guarded trade secret because of its high resale value. The town 
  produced other cash crops too, like salt, asphalt and dates. Palm branches 
  and citrons (citrus medica) grown here also played an important role in 
  religious ritual. Sheep rearers brought their flocks down from the Judaean 
  Hills during the winter months. Caravans also stopped to trade at the market 
  in Ein Gedi and enjoy its cool, fresh water and to take a bath. With a harbour 
  (mahoz), the town’s location on the Dead Sea and access to Arabia Petraea 
  and the lands beyond to the east may have made it strategically valuable in 
  Ben Koseba’s plan for the Land of Israel’s independence.
  Lastly, defending his new nation from the certain retaliation of the Roman 
  authorities was Ben Koseba’s harder to achieve military objective. He clearly 
  believed he could achieve it. History showed that it could be done. During 
  the years 147–139 bc Viriathus had successfully led his people – the Lusitani 
  – to freedom, even reaching a settlement with a Roman consul (until he was 
  assassinated by men from his own side, bribed by other Romans intent on 
  outright conquest). In ad 9 Arminius had led a coalition of Germanic nations 
  that permanently ousted the army of Caesar Augustus from land on the 
  right bank of the Rhine. Like them, Ben Koseba would need to exploit his 
  opponent’s weaknesses while reducing to a minimum his own. Crucial to the 
  long-term success of his insurgency in Iudaea would be to avoid (at all costs) 
  set-piece battles against professional troops.
  His would be a campaign of asymmetric warfare. Unpredictability would 
  be his winning strategy. It would be a war of attrition. Ambushes would 
  wear down the heavily armed, but slow-moving columns of Roman soldiers 
  marching through Iudaea. The Jews would use their knowledge of local 
  terrain to pick the best and most advantageous positions from which to 
  launch hit-and-run attack missions. To avoid detection and discovery, they 
  would conceal their warriors and weapons underground in caves. Hewn 
  
  36
  out of the living rock, these offered ‘places of 
  refuge whenever they should be hard pressed, 
  and might meet together unobserved under 
  ground; and they pierced these subterranean 
  passages from above at intervals to let in 
  air and light’ (Cassius Dio, Roman History 
  69.12.3).
  Some 140 caves and hiding places have been 
  found in Israel and the West Bank. Fighting 
  underground was fraught with danger. It 
  relied on surprise – the Romans not knowing 
  where the Jews would strike. Herodium, for 
  example, was a conspicuous target: it is the 
  highest peak in the Judaean Desert, rising to 
  758m (2,487ft) above sea level. The element of surprise required a creative 
  approach. Ben Koseba’s men entered the cisterns beneath the fortified palace 
  originally constructed by Herod’s engineers and excavated tunnels deep into 
  the mound. The rebels dug them to be broad and high to facilitate movement 
  of large numbers of soldiers. These tunnels traced through the mound ending 
  in sally ports (two of which were beside the tomb of the great king). Normally 
  they would be covered to hide them. When the Romans scaled Herodium, its 
  defenders would quietly assemble in the tunnels, suddenly emerge through 
  the openings and attack the enemy en masse from behind.
  In the lowlands too, rebel soldiers could emerge covertly and launch 
  ambushes on unsuspecting Roman troops. The underground complexes in 
  the Judaean Shephelah (such as Horvat ‘Amuda, Horvat Naqiq and Khirbet 
  Binaya), however, seem to be designed with defence as the primary criterion. 
  Often adapting earlier hiding places, the Jews fiendishly designed their 
  tunnels to be narrow (reducing access to just a single man), and to meander 
  (often curving in a direction which exposed the intruder’s side unprotected by 
  a shield). Labyrinthine connections could quickly disorient anyone entering 
  and unfamiliar with the layout. In the darkness, an infiltrator would not 
  be able to see unless by lamplight, and the very illumination betrayed his 
  position to the defender who was enshrouded in darkness. Tunnels ended in 
  nodes or chambers where the intruder could be ambushed. Carved of rock 
  there was nothing to burn, and any combustible material brought in and set 
  alight by the interlopers might create smoke that simply blew back in their 
  faces, drawn by the backdraft from openings cut into the ceilings.
  Above ground across the region, the rebels fortified their homesteads, 
  farms and villages with stout defensive walls and high observation towers. 
  One such is Horvat Zalit. It is situated approximately 1.5km (1 mile) south-
  east of Meitar on a spur overlooking Nahal Eshtemo’a on the southern 
  slopes of the Judaean Shephelah. It was a fortified building consisting of a 
  square tower and a courtyard surrounded by rooms. Within the courtyard 
  was an extensive water system connected to pools of water (mikwa’ot) for 
  ritual bathing. The Romans would need to capture this location – and every 
  other one like it – to crush the rebellion. The process of doing so would delay 
  their advance, buying the rebels time to regroup and stage counterattacks.
  All of this would take careful planning over months (if not years) and the 
  collusion of a great many people who must be trusted to keep the plot secret 
  from the Romans.
  The Jewish rebels expanded 
  the tunnel network in the 
  Herodium mound dug by 
  their antecedents in the First 
  Jewish War (ad 66–70). The 
  new tunnels were deeper 
  and wider than the earlier 
  structures to allow more troops 
  to assemble and disgorge 
  from the exits hidden from the 
  casual observer outside. (Carole 
  Raddato, CC BY-SA 2.0)
  
  37
  ROMAN PLANS
  As the military governor, Tineius Rufus’ priority was to keep his province 
  pacata atque quieta, ‘pacified and quiet’ (Ulpian, Digest 1.18.13.pr.). The 
  legalistically minded Romans regarded rebellion (seditio) as a breach of 
  treaty – an injury (iniuria) to the Roman people – which must be met with 
  revenge (ultio). The traditional response was vastatio, a devastating punitive 
  war intended to send the unequivocal message that resistance would not 
  be tolerated. When the Jews rose in ad 66 they had been met with force. 
  During that war the Romans demonstrated an astonishing determination 
  to reduce those who challenged their authority, however long it took. Eight 
  years were needed finally to break the insurgents’ resolve, but in the end 
  victory went to Rome. Capital punishment faced those captured and charged 
  with sedition. After the Judaean Revolt of 4 bc (which was provoked by 
  the mismanagement of Procurator Sabinus) the Legatus Augusti of Syria, 
  P. Quinctilius Varus, showed clemency and forgave the mass of those who 
  had rebelled; but he singled out for harsh punishment the relations of Herod 
  who had taken part and crucified 2,000 of their followers.
  Learning of a violent outbreak, uppermost in the senior commander’s 
  mind would be to determine the location and extent of the challenge to his 
  authority. The situation would be dynamic, but in forming his assessment he 
  would be assisted by a constant flow of military intelligence. Deployed across 
  Iudaea were specialist soldiers (stationarii) who acted as highway police, 
  manned tollhouses and patrolled for bandit activity. The centurions, tribunes 
  or prefects of units on the ground encountering any trouble were empowered 
  to respond with force. They would relay messages up the line in the chain 
  of command. The newly expanded road network would assist in expediting 
  transmission of these communications. The region had a history of banditry 
  and short-lived campaigns of subversion, often inspired by cult leaders. 
  These minor infractions could be dealt with relatively quickly and with an 
  economy of force. However, if the local unit needed assistance, provincial 
  command in colonia Caesarea would be advised. Once received, the staff of 
  The open plains of the Judaean 
  Shephelah favoured the 
  combat doctrine of the Roman 
  army. With his lightly armed 
  troops Shim’on ben Koseba 
  would need to use the terrain 
  of Iudaea to level the odds and 
  defeat the enemy intent on 
  crushing him. Underground 
  caves were his secret assets. 
  (Author’s collection)
  
  38
  the office would advise the legatus Augusti, who would authorize sending 
  reinforcements as he deemed necessary to address the threat. It would take 
  time, however, to mobilize large numbers of troops and matériel from the 
  legate’s army group.
  Roman military strategy was predicated on bringing the enemy to fight in 
  the open in a set-piece battle, or containing him in a siege. The calculus did 
  not necessarily require overwhelming force. Romans believed that training, 
  discipline and technology generally won against an indisciplined rabble, 
  even when the odds were seemingly weighted against them. Preparation was 
  key to success, and statistical information about resources was the basis for 
  sound strategic and tactical planning.
  The process of collating such information was labour intensive. Each 
  centurion kept a daily roster (written by hand in ink on wooden sheets or 
  papyrus) that recorded where his individual soldiers were assigned and 
  what duties they were performing – even if they were sick or serving time 
  in prison. Morning reports collated this granular detail into summaries by 
  unit name, showing numbers of personnel (soldiers and officers) fit for duty, 
  departures and so on. Every year clerks prepared (normally on 31 December) 
  a high-level summary report (pridianum) of the unit’s location, date of 
  arrival there, net numerical strength, as well as numbers of promotions and 
  transfers in, transfers out, losses, new recruits, discharges and other germane 
  information. Though already several months out of date, Tineius Rufus 
  would, nevertheless, have been able quickly to access the resources available 
  to him in the summer of ad 132.
  The decisions Rufus made in the early weeks of learning about the Jewish 
  insurgency would determine the course and length of the coming war.
  The praetorium in Caesarea 
  featured a block of rooms 
  located on the north-east side, 
  overlooking the hippodrome 
  or circus. Here were located the 
  offices used by military clerks 
  (beneficiarii) on secondment 
  from the legiones VI and X 
  in the province. They were 
  managed by supervisors 
  (cornicularii) who reported to 
  a senior centurion (princeps 
  praetorii). (Author’s collection)
  
  39
  ‘FOR THE FREEDOM OF JERUSALEM’
  ‘So long as Hadrian was close by in Egypt and again in Syria, they remained 
  quiet,’ writes Cassius Dio (Roman History 69.12.2). Over the two years 
  since the Roman commander-in-chief had departed the province, Ben Koseba 
  had risen to become leader of an armed resistance movement. He used the 
  time to spread his message of redemption and to rally support from Jewish 
  communities throughout Iudaea.
  He received a major boost to his status when he was declared the 
  moshiah. It is claimed that Rabbi Akiba interpreted the messianic prophecy 
  in Numbers 24:17 – ‘there shall come a star (kohav) out of Ya’akob – and 
  coined the moniker ‘Bar Kokhba’ (‘son of a star’) for Shim’on ben Koseba. 
  There were, however, dissenters: ‘When Rabbi Akiba beheld Bar Koseba he 
  exclaimed: “This is the King Messiah!” Rabbi Yohanan ben Torta retorted: 
  “Akiba, grass will grow in your cheeks and still the son of David will not 
  have come”’ (Jerusalem Talmud, Ta’anit 4:5).
  The endorsement of the highly influential rabbi of Beneberak was crucial 
  in validating him as the military leader of the Jews in their war of liberation. 
  Based on his commendation, thousands – including many of his own students 
  – flocked to the man they now called the Bar Kokhba. Rabbi Shim’on bar 
  Roman troops marched by 
  cohort in lines, carrying some 
  25kg (55lb) of arms, equipment 
  and personal effects, as 
  depicted on Trajan’s Column. 
  The legionary was expected to 
  march 20 Roman miles in five 
  hours on a day in summer at 
  normal ‘military step’ (militaris 
  gradus), but in wartime a forced 
  march (magna itinera) at the 
  swifter ‘full step’ (plenus gradus) 
  could increase this to 24 miles. 
  (Public Domain)
  THE CAMPAIGN
  
  40
  M E D I T E R R A N E A N  S E A
  Sea of
  Galilee
  River Jordan
  Dead
  Sea
  N
  20 miles
  20km
  0
  0
  AD 133
  AD 132
  ARABIA
  PETRAEA
  Damascus
  Caesarea Philippi
  Tyre
  Ptolemais
  Gischala
  Sephoris 
  Legio
  Tiberias
  Hippos
  Gadara
  Adraa
  Bostra
  Gerasa
  Dora
  Colonia Prima
  Flavia Caesarea
  Ptolemais
  Pella
  Philadelphia
  Madaba
  Machaerus
  Zoar
  Mamshit
  Livias
  Tel Shalem
  Neapolis
  Scythopolis
  Hebron
  IUDAEA
  SAMARIA
  JEZREEL VALLEY
  GALILAEA
  TRANSJORDAN
  Ein Gedi
  Beit Guvrin
  Ascalon
  Azotus
  Emmaus
  Iamnia
  Ioppe
  Aelia
  Capitolina
  Betar
  Beth Horon
  Jericho
  Qumran
  Lydda
  Beneberak 
  Gophna
  Bethel
  Masada
  Beer Sheba
  Elusa
  Gaza
  Mt Gerizim
  Herodium
  A
  B
  1
  2
  4
  3
  C
  Events AD 132
  1. 
  Summer AD 132: Simon 
  ben Koseba declares 
  himself Prince of Israel, 
  possibly at Herodium, 
  and calls for the 
  Freedom of Israel. 
  2. 
  Students of Rabbi Akiba 
  leave Beneberak to join 
  Ben Koseba at 
  Herodium and Betar.
  3. 
  Camp of Legio VI 
  Ferrata at Tel Shalem 
  abandoned. 
  4. 
  Tineius Rufus mobilises 
  Legiones VI Ferrata and 
  X Fretensis to Judaean 
  Shephelah.
  Events AD 133
  A. Publicius Marcellus 
  arrives with vexillations 
  of Legio III Gallica from 
  Raphanea, Syria.
  B. Haterius Nepos arrives 
  with vexillations of 
  Legio III Cyrenaica from 
  Bostra, Arabia Petraea.
  C. Vexillations of Legiones 
  II Traiana and XXII 
  Deiotariana arrive from 
  Alexandria, Egypt.
  Nahal Hever
  Sebaste
  Heshbon
  Maoza
  Horvat ‘Ethri
  Adullam
  Antipatris
  Thimna
  Judaea Campaign, ad 132–133
  
  41
  Yochai was one of them. Out of view of the Romans, they began carefully 
  excavating hiding places and underground tunnels, fortifying villages and 
  amassing arms and armour in readiness for the coming violent clash.
  The exact date that marked the start of the war, which would have 
  the greatest consequences for the Jews of Iudaea, is lost to time. The first 
  year of the conflict is confirmed as ad 132 by Eusebius in his Chronicle 
  under the entry for ‘Hadrian’s Year 16’. Summer is the most likely season 
  – after the Hebrew month of Iyyar, perhaps in Tishri. The event which 
  launched the rebellion is also unrecorded. Perhaps on a pre-agreed day, the 
  rebels began attacking Roman military patrols wherever they encountered 
  them. Along the roads of Iudaea, Jewish forces ambushed the unsuspecting 
  troops moving through the country. They took advantage of the Romans’ 
  vulnerabilities. On the march they were laden with their personal effects 
  hanging from poles over their shoulders. Their heads were often unprotected 
  because they tied their helmets to their body armour. Their shields were 
  usually wrapped in protective leather covers, which added weight. Mules 
  and waggons slowed the army on the march. Roman troops could not 
  react quickly when faced with hit-and-run attacks. Showers of arrows, 
  sling stones and spears thrown at distance caused casualties among the 
  ordered but densely packed Roman lines of troops marching four or more 
  abreast. In towns and villages Jews turned on the Roman soldiers deployed 
  on policing duties, assaulting them from behind and cutting their throats, 
  or stoning them and firing arrows at them from above.
  The initial Roman response was almost dismissive. ‘At first,’ writes 
  Dio, ‘the Romans took no account of them’ (Cassius Dio, Roman History 
  69.13.1). Iudaea was known for sporadic acts of violence. Tineius Rufus 
  could reasonably expect that his local unit commanders would deal with the 
  infractions as they arose. The troublemakers would eventually be overcome 
  by superior discipline, training, equipment and tactics of the soldiers of 
  Legiones VI Ferrata based in Galilee and X Fretensis in Jerusalem. However, 
  trained in the combat doctrine of the bandit, Ben Koseba was fighting an 
  Apparently out of nowhere, 
  Jewish insurgents would 
  appear and inflict heavy 
  casualties on the unsuspecting 
  Roman troops. Rebel soldiers 
  gathered in caves and 
  launched hit-and-run attacks, 
  causing heavy casualties. 
  (Author’s collection)
  
  42
  
  43
  
  44
  REBELS PLOTTING THEIR NEXT MISSION IN A HIDING CAVE (PP. 42–43)
  To establish and hold the Jewish state of Israel, Shim’on ben 
  Koseba relied on a strategy of waging a war of attrition against 
  the occupying Romans. ‘They occupied the advantageous 
  positions in the country and strengthened them with mines 
  and walls,’ writes Cassius Dio (Roman History 56.12.3). Across 
  the Judaean Shephelah local people exploited the quality of 
  the geology beneath their feet to excavate networks of tunnels, 
  nodes and chambers.
  In this reconstruction scene Jewish rebels loyal to Ben Koseba 
  meet in the underground hiding complex at the village at Horvat 
  Naqiq near Tel Bet Mirsham. The commander (1) of the local camp 
  (mahaneh) explains a mission he has planned to a group of heads 
  of households (2) from other farms and villages located in his 
  jurisdiction. These men pay ten per cent of their earnings annually 
  into the national treasury to support the revolutionary state. The 
  commander is in direct communication with Shim’on ben Koseba 
  at his headquarters. The self-styled Nasi’ Yisra’el (‘Prince Over Israel’) 
  regularly writes to his militia leaders. Tough, uncompromising and 
  sometimes harsh, he demands complete obedience from them 
  and urges them to take action to keep their young nation secure.
  From these and similar underground caves the Jews have 
  successfully launched many hit-and-run ambushes upon columns 
  of Roman legionaries marching through their lands. Intimately 
  knowledgable about the local terrain, the local militias know the 
  best places to lie in wait. They have trained in the skills of the 
  bandit and skirmisher. A weapon can be as simple as a stone, 
  picked up off the ground and shaped into an aerodynamic bullet. 
  Thrown with a sling, the slingshot’s impact can be deadly. In the 
  years before the outbreak of the revolt, Jewish metalworkers 
  also fabricated arrows, spears and swords for such local militias, 
  arsenals of which have since been built up by gathering captured 
  Roman weapons (3) after waging successful attacks.
  In some of the local fortified farmsteads, seized Roman coins 
  are being overstruck with new images and messages approved 
  by Ben Koseba’s regime. ‘For the Freedom of Jerusalem’ is a 
  recurring theme of the rebellion. Fulfilling the dream motivates 
  Jews loyal to the national military leader they regard as the 
  ‘King Messiah’ – a view validated by Rabbi Akiba ben Yosef who, 
  interpreting the prophecy in Numbers 24:17, calls Bar Kokhba 
  (‘son of a star’).
  3
  2
  1
  
  45
  aggressive guerrilla war. He knew the strengths 
  and weaknesses of his forces – and those of his 
  opponent. ‘To be sure,’ writes Cassius Dio, ‘they 
  did not dare try conclusions with the Romans 
  in the open field’ (Roman History 69.12.3). 
  Instead, ‘they occupied the advantageous 
  positions in the country and strengthened them 
  with mines and walls, in order that they might 
  have places of refuge whenever they should be 
  hard pressed’ (Cassius Dio, Roman History 
  69.12.3).
  The insurgent leader’s operational strategy 
  worked remarkably well and the region was 
  soon ‘devastated’ (Eusebius, Chronicle). Buoyed by their early successes, 
  Ben Koseba’s parnasim began to mint coins. They took Roman silver and 
  bronze coins and overstruck them with images of their own choosing. The 
  high denomination tetradrachma became the shekel (or Neronian sel’a), 
  the denarius and provincial drachma was repurposed as the zuz, while 
  the sestertius, dupondius and as became prutah, or small change. As they 
  hammered the dies, they obliterated the symbols of Roman pagan worship 
  and replaced them with new ones emphasizing the religious objectives of 
  the revolutionary war. One issue of the repurposed coins now carried the 
  message ‘Year One of the Redemption of Israel’ with an image of a vine leaf 
  on one side, and the name ‘Shim’on’ with a palm tree with seven branches 
  and two clusters of dates on the other side. Another design displayed a bunch 
  of grapes in high relief with the legend ‘Year One of the Redemption of 
  Jerusalem’ on one surface and, on the other, a palm tree with two bunches 
  of dates and the name ‘Eleazer the Priest’ (Ben Koseba’s presumed second 
  in command).
  Encouraged by the success of 
  the rebellion, Jews still living in 
  Roman-controlled territory fled 
  to the relative sanctuary of the 
  land under the protection of the 
  ‘Prince of Israel’. In neighbouring 
  Arabia Petraea a Jewish woman 
  left her comfortable residence in 
  Mehoza (modern Maoza, Jordan) 
  and set off for Ein Gedi, which 
  was now under rebel control. 
  Named Babatha she came from a 
  wealthy family and had married 
  a man called Judah who owned 
  three date orchards near the oasis 
  town on the Dead Sea. According 
  to documents, which survive, in 
  ad 128 he had taken an interest-
  free loan from his wife. He died 
  two years later and Babatha took 
  the orchards in settlement of 
  the outstanding loan. However, 
  ‘They occupied the 
  advantageous positions in 
  the country,’ writes Cassius 
  Dio (Roman History, 69.12.3). 
  From high vantage points the 
  insurgents could track the 
  movement of Roman troops 
  and launch ambuscades – 
  firing arrows and slingshot 
  upon their lines – with deadly 
  effect. Even today visitors 
  have to beware of openings to 
  ancient underground hideouts 
  hidden by undergrowth. 
  (Author’s collection)
  In this cuirassed statue, 
  Hadrian is shown as military 
  commander (imperator). It 
  was discovered in 1975 at 
  the site of the base of Legio 
  VI Ferrata at Tel Shalem in the 
  Beth Shean Valley. The level 
  of workmanship in bronze 
  suggests it was cast in Italy. The 
  statue had, apparently, been 
  purposely buried in the ground. 
  (Exhibit at the Israel Museum, 
  Jerusalem. Author’s collection)
  
  46
  Judah’s first wife, Miriam, who was herself at Ein Gedi, brought an action 
  against Babatha over her late husband’s property at the local court. Even as 
  war raged in the Judaean Hills and Shephelah, the two litigants evidently felt 
  sufficiently confident in the rebel administration under its parnas approved 
  by Ben Koseba to conduct their legal business in the town.
  Rufus had seriously underestimated his adversary: ‘Soon, however, all 
  Iudaea had been stirred up, and the Jews everywhere were showing signs of 
  disturbance, were gathering together, and giving evidence of great hostility to 
  the Romans, partly by secret and partly by overt acts’ (Cassius Dio, Roman 
  History 69.13.1).
  In their camp at Tel Shalem, the legionaries of VI Ferrata were 
  mobilised to respond to the attack from Jewish insurgents. Archaeology 
  suggests a dramatic response to the emergency. A group of Roman soldiers 
  was apparently ordered to go with their entrenching tools to the base’s 
  headquarters (principia). There stood an over-life-size bronze statue of 
  Hadrian, shown wearing a commander’s panoply. The finely crafted head 
  may have been cast in a workshop in Rome and brought to Iudaea by the 
  legion when it relocated to the Beth Shean Valley. (It may have served a 
  ritual function there, perhaps either standing outside in the courtyard or 
  inside the building surrounded by the legion’s insignia.) The condition of the 
  head and torso – though missing the arms and legs – when it was found in 
  modern times strongly suggests that it was buried in the ground by Roman 
  legionaries to prevent it from falling into enemy hands and being defaced. 
  The camp then seems to have been evacuated.
  As intelligence reports of the uprising reached Caesarea, Rufus learned 
  the name of his Jewish adversary. The garbled spellings in the later historical 
  accounts hint that the first Roman army clerks to hear the unfamiliar Hebrew 
  name struggled to transcribe it into Latin or Greek, reporting it variously 
  as ‘Cochebas’ (Eusebius, Chronicle) or ‘Bar Chocheba’ (Justin quoted by 
  Eusebius, Church History 4.8), or ‘Bar Chochabas’ (Jerome, The Apology 
  Against the Books of Rufinus). The moniker Bar Kokhba had already 
  superseded the man’s real name.
  The role of Rabbi Akiba in declaring the rebel leader as ‘King Messiah’ 
  may have been the real reason behind his arrest by the Roman authorities, 
  likely in ad 132 (though a later date is possible). His actual involvement 
  in the Bar Kokhba War cannot now be determined. According to Jewish 
  This is a Roman bronze coin 
  overstruck by the rebel 
  administration during the 
  first year of independence (ad 
  132/133). The obverse shows a 
  palm branch within a wreath, 
  and the legend ‘Shim’on Prince 
  of Israel’ reading anti-clockwise 
  in paleo-Hebrew characters. 
  The reverse shows a six-
  stringed instrument (chelys) 
  and the inscription announces 
  ‘Year 1 of the Redemption of 
  Israel’. (Classical Numismatics 
  Group, www.cngcoins.com)
  
  47
  tradition, he was seized for continuing to teach Torah publicly, which had 
  been outlawed on pain of death. He was sentenced by Rufus to die. As he 
  faced his execution in Caesarea on the eve of Yom Kippur, Akiba recited the 
  Shema (one of two daily prayers specified in the Torah, beginning ‘Hear, 
  Israel, the Lord is our God’). The venerable rabbi uttered his prayer calmly, 
  even as he suffered terrible agonies from being flayed. Perplexed by his 
  serenity, Rufus asked him whether he was a sorcerer, since he appeared to 
  feel no pain. Akiba replied: ‘I am neither a sorcerer nor a mocker, but I 
  rejoice at the opportunity now given to me to love my God “with all my life,” 
  seeing that I have hitherto been able to love Him only “with all my means” 
  and “with all my might”’ (Jerusalem Talmud 9.14b). He then recited a verse 
  from Torah and uttered the words: ‘Behold the cause of my joy’ – and with 
  that he expired.
  WAR OF ATTRITION
  At the end of the first combat season Tineius Rufus reflected soberly on his 
  situation. He had failed to regain control of his province. Despite having two 
  legions and several auxiliary cohorts at his disposal the rebels had seized a 
  large tract of territory – and were holding on to it. It was every governor’s 
  nightmare. He needed to redouble his counterinsurgency efforts and he 
  needed more troops to replace the casualties his army had already sustained.
  This was likely the time Rufus appealed for help from Hadrian. A hostile 
  state could not be allowed to establish itself within Rome’s dominions or 
  sphere of influence. Its geography would rip a hole in the integrity of the 
  eastern Mediterranean. It must be surrounded and obliterated. The emperor, 
  understanding the need for containment and a swift end to the troubles, 
  responded to the request by authorizing deployment of additional units from 
  the military commands in the neighbouring provinces. ‘Then, indeed,’ writes 
  Cassius Dio, ‘Hadrian sent against them his best generals’ (Roman History 
  69.13.2). Initially detachments (vexillationes) composed of cohorts – rather 
  ‘Soon all Iudaea had been 
  stirred up,’ writes Cassius Dio 
  (Roman History 69.13.1). Roman 
  troops sent by Tineius Rufus 
  to contain and extinguish 
  the rebellion were impeded 
  in their progress by the 
  absence of military roads in 
  large tracts of terrain. In the 
  vales of the Judaean Hills, 
  the Jews had the advantage. 
  (Author’s collection)
  
  48
  
  49
  
  50
  AMBUSH IN TEKOA (PP. 48–49)
  Along with two legions stationed in the province of Iudaea were 
  at least two cohorts of professional non-citizen auxiliary troops, 
  including the Cohors I Miliaria Thracum, which was encamped 
  at Beit Guvrin. In this reconstruction, a detachment of Roman 
  auxiliary infantrymen on a routine patrol is ambushed in a street 
  of Tekoa.
  The village lay within the rebel jurisdiction of Herodium. Taking 
  control of this and other villages early in the revolt would help 
  secure the region, which was the military and administrative 
  centre of Shim’on ben Koseba’s new Jewish state. Famous as 
  having been home to the shepherd Amos of the Old Testament, 
  Tekoa was located 19km (12 miles – or a day’s march) south of 
  Jerusalem – the city the rebels hoped ultimately to liberate from 
  the Romans.
  Trained for fighting on an open battlefield, in an urban 
  environment these Roman auxiliary infantrymen (1) are at a 
  disadvantage when faced with an organized guerrilla insurgency. 
  They wear bronze helmets, giving good protection from blows 
  to the head from above or the side. Their chain-mail suits, made 
  of thousands of iron links riveted together, are designed to 
  withstand slashes or stabs from bladed weapons. The flat oval 
  shields can be used both defensively (to block handheld weapons 
  and deflect missiles) and offensively (to punch an opponent with 
  the shield boss or strike him with the blunt edge). In the confined 
  space, however, they cannot use their spears effectively.
  In contrast, the men (2) of the local Jewish militia know 
  well their enemies’ weaknesses. Dressed to blend in with the 
  villagers, they use the element of surprise to surround and 
  overwhelm the unsuspecting Roman soldiers. Equipped with 
  knives (3), they slit the enemies’ unprotected throats from 
  behind, or shoot them with arrows fired from bows from afar. 
  Afterwards they can retrieve the Roman arms and armour to 
  equip their own growing army of resistance.
  Similar attacks were carried out in towns and villages all across 
  the Judaean Hills and Judaean Shephelah at the start of the Bar 
  Kokhba War in ad 132 and into 133. The historian Cassius Dio 
  writes that the Romans were somewhat dismissive of reports of 
  the initial assaults. ‘Soon, however, all Judaea had been stirred 
  up,’ he records, ‘and the Jews everywhere were showing signs 
  of disturbance’ (Roman History 56.13.1). At the end of the first 
  year, Tineius Rufus, Legatus Augusti Pro Praetore of Iudaea, found 
  himself firmly on the defensive.
  1
  2
  3
  
  51
  than entire legions – marched from their base camps along the roadways of 
  the empire to the war zone. From the north Legio III Gallica arrived. In the 
  column was the Legatus Augusti Pro Praetore of Syria, C. Quinctius Certus 
  Publicius Marcellus. Confident that the Jews were not a problem in his own 
  province he had left Ti. Severus (the legate of Legio IIII Scythica) in charge. 
  From Egypt a vexillation of Legio II Traiana arrived.
  From Arabia Petraea in the east, III Cyrenaica reached Iudaea with its 
  provincial commander, T. Haterius Nepos. For the moment, the Jews in his 
  province posed no threat, and any (like Babatha) who were sympathetic to the 
  rebels had already departed for Iudaea. It was a calculated gamble, however. 
  III Cyrenaica was the only legion in Arabia Petraea. Its withdrawal might put 
  the province at risk if the mood of the resident Jews changed. One scholar has 
  proposed that, in fact, the Jews in Arabia took advantage of the rebellion in 
  Iudaea and did rise up. If so, Nepos then authorized a massacre of Jews, which 
  was the cause of Babatha’s flight. The evidence, however, is inconclusive.
  The infusion added up to 11,200 more combatants to check the contagion 
  and prevent it from spreading. With the additional resources the Romans 
  launched a new campaign in ad 133: ‘As the rebellion of the Jews at this 
  time grew much more serious, Rufus, governor of Iudea, after an auxiliary 
  force had been sent him by the emperor, using their madness as a pretext, 
  proceeded against them without mercy, and destroyed indiscriminately 
  thousands of men and women and children’ (Eusebius, Church History 4.6).
  Ben Koseba’s strategy was working – and very effectively too. His rebel 
  army continued to resist Roman attempts 
  to regain control. Inspired by their early 
  victories, when the army of Israel went into 
  battle the soldiers shouted: ‘O God, neither 
  help nor discourage us!’ (Midrash Rabbah, 
  Lamentations 2.2.4). His men continued to 
  excavate tunnels and underground hideouts 
  from which they launched more attacks, and 
  in which they stored additional weapons that 
  they had amassed from the fallen Romans, or 
  made themselves.
  Probably still commanding operations from 
  his base at Herodium, Ben Koseba needed more 
  soldiers to replace his casualties. It is recorded 
  A shekel struck by the rebel 
  administration during the 
  second year of independence 
  (ad 133–134) displays the 
  façade of the Temple and a 
  showbread table within, a 
  star (kohav) above and the 
  name Shim’on on the sides. 
  The reverse shows agricultural 
  symbols associated with the 
  harvest festival of Sukkot: a 
  lulav (frond of the date palm) 
  with an ethrog (yellow citron) 
  on the left. The accompanying 
  inscription announces ‘Year 
  2 of the Freedom of Israel’. 
  (Classical Numismatics Group, 
  www.cngcoins.com)
  By ad 134–135 ‘the war reached 
  its height’ (Eusebius, Church 
  History 4.6). Taking command 
  of operations, Sex. Iulius 
  Severus implemented a new 
  counterinsurgency strategy. 
  With outside resources 
  supplementing the resident 
  provincial units, the Romans 
  began to recapture territory 
  by focusing efforts on small 
  targets (like Horvat Zalit and 
  Horvat ‘Ethri), surrounding 
  them and starving them into 
  submission. This new approach 
  also reduced the risk of 
  casualties to the Roman side. 
  (Author’s collection)
  
  52
  that Akiba’s students had been struck down with plague and many had died 
  from it. According to tradition the turning point was the 33rd day of the 
  Counting of the Omer (Lag B’Omer) on the 18th day of the month of Iyyar. 
  (An omer is a sheaf of barley, and this festival is held at the time of the barley 
  harvest in May). The dying stopped. Other men responded voluntarily to the 
  call to action. Success is a great attractor of support. News of the rebels’ 
  victories even drew support from beyond Iudaea. Cassius Dio writes: ‘many 
  outside nations, too, were joining them through eagerness for gain, and the 
  whole earth, one might almost say, was being stirred up over the matter’ 
  (Roman History 69.13.2). Among them were mercenaries from Nabataea, 
  attracted to the conflict not by glory, but cash and a share of war spoils. The 
  Christian community, however, adamantly refused to assist him. Ben Koseba 
  now showed a cruel and vindictive side to his nature. If they were not for him, 
  he determined that they were against him. In his description of the key events 
  of the second year of the war Eusebius remarks: ‘Cochebas, dux (leader) of 
  the Jewish sect, killed the Christians with all kinds of persecutions [when] they 
  refused to help him against the Roman troops.’ (Hadrian’s Year 17, Chronicle).
  While the Romans stepped up their offensive, the insurgents proved able 
  to match them. The Midrash tells one apocryphal tale of Jewish valour:
  There were two brothers in Kefar Haruba, who did not allow any Roman to 
  pass there, because they killed him. They said: ‘The conclusion of the whole 
  matter is that we must take Hadrian’s crown and set it upon our own head.’ 
  They heard that the Romans were coming towards them; and when they set 
  out against them, an old man met them and said: ‘May the Creator be your 
  help against them!’ They retorted: ‘Let him neither help nor discourage us!’ 
  (Midrash Rabbah, Lamentations 2.2.4)
  The Jews may even have succeeded in destroying an entire Roman legion. 
  Legio XXII Deiotariana is known to have been based in Egypt in ad 119 
  (or 123), yet it is missing from an inscription carved in the time of M. 
  The fortified village of Horvat 
  ‘Ethri, on a hill 406m above 
  sea level, combined domestic 
  dwellings with public buildings, 
  all arranged around a central 
  courtyard. One of the structures 
  has been interpreted to be a 
  synagogue. The village was 
  damaged in the First Jewish 
  War, but was restored in the 
  years preceding the Bar Kokhba 
  War, during which it was a rebel 
  stronghold. (Ganot, Wikimedia 
  Commons, CC-BY-SA-3.0)
  
  53
  Aurelius (ad 161–180), which lists all legions then 
  in service. Its absence from the later inscription 
  implies that it had been disbanded or annihilated 
  in the intervening years. One explanation – which 
  is disputed – is that the legion was destroyed in the 
  Bar Kokhba War. It was not reconstituted.
  At times, even when not engaged in combat, 
  the two sides were physically very close to each 
  other. An epistolary affadavit (a combination 
  letter-legal document) was written on behalf of 
  both of the parnasim of Beth Mashiko to Yeshua 
  ben Galgula, the rosh hamahanaya at Herodium. 
  In it they explained that a soldier unlawfully 
  took a cow from a resident of the village, named 
  Ya’akob ben Yehudah, who had purchased it, and 
  the administrators claimed back the animal on the 
  man’s behalf. The claimants sought to explain they 
  could not petition Ben Galgula in person because 
  ‘the Gentiles are near us’ (P. Mur 42) – in other 
  words, units of Roman soldiers were stationed 
  in the vicinity and it was too dangerous for the 
  claimant and all the witnesses to travel beyond the 
  village. The scribe, Ya’akob ben Yosef, who was 
  also a militiaman, went alone and delivered it by 
  hand to Ben Galgula at command headquarters in 
  Herodium. Ensuring that the rule of law prevailed 
  in the Land of Israel was important.
  That the civilian population felt their lives were relatively secure under 
  their Jewish administrations around Iudaea is illustrated by surviving 
  contracts which document the buying or leasing of land and property. In the 
  spring of that year Eleazar ben Shmuel paid 650 zuzim to lease land in Ein 
  Gedi. He proceeded to make the initial payment on the negotiated lease in 
  the autumn.
  The government of Ben Koseba celebrated its survival into a second 
  year with new issues of coins. More Roman silver denarii or drachmae 
  were converted into Jewish zuzim. In one type, a palm branch decorating 
  Cassius Dio records that the 
  Jews ‘might meet together 
  unobserved underground’ 
  (Roman History, 69.12.3). 
  Beneath the fortified village of 
  Horvat Burgin the inhabitants 
  excavated burrows in the living 
  rock. The defenders could hide 
  themselves here, as well as 
  store provender and military 
  matériel. (Deror avi, Wikimedia 
  Commons, CC-BY-SA-3.0)
  A silver shekel struck by the 
  rebel administration during the 
  third year of independence (ad 
  134–135) displays the façade 
  of the Temple and the holy 
  Ark of the Covenant within, 
  a star above and the name 
  Shim’on on the sides in paleo-
  Hebrew characters. The reverse 
  shows a lulav with ethrog on 
  the left and the inscription 
  announces ‘For the Freedom of 
  Jerusalem’. (Roma Numismatics, 
  www.romanumismatics.com)
  
  54
  the centre of the flan is framed by the Hebrew legend ‘Year Two of the 
  Freedom of Israel’, while the other side shows three bunches of grapes 
  hanging from a branch and the name of the war leader ‘Shim’on’. A lower-
  value bronze coin shows a palm branch within a wreath and Hebrew 
  inscription ‘Shim’on Prince of Israel’ on one side, and on the other a wide 
  lyre of four strings surrounded by the slogan ‘Year Two of the Freedom 
  of Israel’.
  Coins minted by the rebel regime would only be used by sellers and 
  buyers willing to accept them as legal tender. The presence of such coins in 
  the archaeological record is an indicator of the whereabouts of people and 
  places sympathetic to the insurgents. The coins have been found as far north-
  west as Horvat Burnat (near Lod), north-east as far as Wadi ed-Daliyeh 
  (north of Jericho), west as far as Kibbutz Gak (near Beit Guvrin) and south 
  as far as En Boqeq. The new Land of Israel thus encompassed the foothills, 
  mountains and deserts of Iudaea and Benjamin. The paucity of coins found 
  in Jerusalem, Galilee or Transjordan strongly suggests that Ben Koseba’s 
  rebellion did not include these regions.
  Despite the presence of several legions and auxiliary cohorts, progress in 
  clawing back territory from the rebels was achingly slow. An indication of 
  the gravity of the situation is preserved by Cassius Dio: ‘Hadrian in writing 
  to the Senate did not employ the opening phrase commonly affected by the 
  emperors, “If you and our children are in health, it is well; I and the legions 
  are in health”’ (Roman History 69.14.3).
  A new approach was needed. Joining the leadership team in the war theatre 
  was Q. Lollius Urbicus, who was in charge of Legio X Gemina stationed in 
  Pannonia Superior, and named as ‘legate of Commander Hadrian’ (legatus 
  imperatoris Hadriani). About his war plan nothing is recorded, though his 
  contribution would later be recognized.
  However, one man who is singled out for particular mention by Cassius 
  Dio is Iulius Severus. He was then Legatus Augusti Pro Praetore of Britannia. 
  Hadrian ordered him to march to Iudaea without delay. On the long journey 
  Severus may have been accompanied by detachments of men from his own 
  province: Legio XX Valeria Victrix from Deva (Chester) – among whom 
  was centurion Q. Albius Felix; VI Victrix from Eboracum (York); and 
  the auxiliary units Cohors I Hispanorum (Maryport) under M. Censorius 
  Cornelianus as praepositus, and Cohors IV Lingonum. How the military 
  reporting structure now worked in Iudaea after he arrived is not understood. 
  A silver zuz struck by the rebel 
  administration during the 
  third year of independence 
  (ad 134–135) displays a 
  bunch of grapes and the 
  name Shim’on on the sides 
  in paleo-Hebrew characters. 
  The reverse shows a palm 
  branch and the inscription 
  announces ‘For the Freedom of 
  Jerusalem’. (Roma Numismatics, 
  www.romanumismatics.com)
  
  55
  M E D I T E R R A N E A N  S E A
  Sea of
  Galilee
  River Jordan
  Dead
  Sea
  N
  20 miles
  20km
  0
  0
  AD 135
  AD 134
  ARABIA
  PETRAEA
  Damascus
  Caesarea Philippi
  Tyre
  Ptolemais
  Gischala
  Sephoris 
  Sebaste
  Legio
  Tiberias
  Hippos
  Gadara
  Adraa
  Bostra
  Gerasa
  Dora
  Ptolemais
  Pella
  Philadelphia
  Madaba
  Heshbon
  Machaerus
  Zoar
  Maoza
  Mamshit
  Livias
  Tel Shalem
  Neapolis
  Scythopolis
  Hebron
  IUDAEA
  SAMARIA
  JEZREEL VALLEY
  GALILAEA
  TRANSJORDAN
  Ein Gedi
  Nahal
  Hever
  Beit
  Guvrin
  Ascalon
  Azotus
  Emmaus
  Horvat ‘Ethri
  Adullam
  Iamnia
  Ioppe
  Aelia
  Capitolina
  Betar
  Beth Horon
  Jericho
  Qumran
  Lydda
  Beneberak 
  Antipatris
  Thimna
  Gophna
  Bethel
  Masada
  Beer Sheba
  Elusa
  Gaza
  Mt Gerizim
  Herodium
  A
  B
  1
  2
  3
  4
  C
  Events AD 134
  1. 
  Lollius Urbicus arrives 
  with a vexillation of X 
  Gemina from Pannonia 
  Superior.
  2. 
  Iulius Severus arrives 
  with vexillations from 
  Britannia, and 
  vexillations of V 
  Macedonica and XI 
  Claudia from Moesia 
  Inferior.
  3. 
  Assault on Herodium.
  4. 
  Operations continue in 
  Judaean Shelphelah 
  and Judaean Hills.
  Events AD 135
  A. Legiones V Macedonica 
  and XI Claudia besiege 
  Betar.
  B. Operations continue in 
  Judaean Shelphelah 
  and Judaean Hills.
  Events AD 136
  C. Cohors I Miliaria 
  Thracum watches over 
  refuge caves at Nahal 
  Hever.
  Colonia Prima
  Flavia Caesarea
  Judaea Campaign, ad 134–136
  
  56
  Severus may have been placed in overall command of military operations, 
  which would have subordinated the host governor Rufus along with the 
  other legates. Alternatively all guest commanders might have retained their 
  ranks and reported to Rufus as the military governor of Iudaea for the 
  duration of the war; or Severus and Rufus could have worked together with 
  the other legates as equals. It is unclear if Hadrian went to Iudaea to direct 
  operations in person.
  TURNING POINT
  The following year (ad 134) ‘the war reached its height’ (Eusebius, Church 
  History 4.6). There were now soldiers of up to 12 legions in action in Iudaea. 
  Augmenting the forces of VI Ferrata and X Fretensis already based in Iudaea 
  was III Gallica (in its entirety) from Syria, as well as vexillations: III Cyrenaica 
  from Arabia Petraea; II Traiana Fortis (and perhaps XXII Deiotoriana) from 
  Egypt; XII Fulminata from Cappadocia; V Macedonica and XI Claudia from 
  A silver zuz struck by the rebel 
  administration during the 
  third year of independence 
  (ad 134–135) displays a 
  bunch of grapes and the 
  name Shim’on on the sides in 
  paleo-Hebrew characters. The 
  reverse shows a three-stringed 
  kithara and the inscription 
  announces ‘For the Freedom 
  of Israel’. (Roma Numismatics, 
  www.romanumismatics.com. 
  Coin in author’s collection)
  Depicted on Trajan’s Column 
  is the mobile carroballista, a 
  catapult on a two-wheeled 
  cart pulled by a donkey or 
  mule. Tests with modern 
  reconstructions show that 
  Roman catapults were 
  sufficiently accurate over 365m 
  (1,200ft) that an experienced 
  team of gunners could hit 
  specific targets, and reload the 
  piece every 15–20 seconds. 
  (Public domain)
  
  57
  Dead
  Sea
  Hebron
  I U D A E A
  S A M A R I A
  Ein Gedi
  Nahal Hever
  Beit Guvrin
  Horvat Zalit
  Horvat
  ‘Ethri
  Ascalon
  Azotus
  Emmaus
  Iamnia
  Ioppe
  Aelia Capitolina
  Betar
  Beth Horon
  Jericho
  Qumran
  Lydda
  Beneberak 
  Gophna
  Bethel
  Masada
  Beer Sheba
  M E D I T E R R A N E A N  S E A
  Mt Gerizim
  Herodium
  10 miles
  10km
  0
  0
  Key hiding complexes and refuge caves
  Caves in Judaea
  
  58
  
  59
  
  60
  ASSAULT ON HORVAT ‘ETHRI FORTIFIED VILLAGE (PP. 58–59)
  In the first phase of the war, the Romans tried to engage the rebels 
  on the open battlefield. However, Shim’on ben Koseba’s troops 
  avoided set-piece battles at all costs and, instead, employed the 
  tactics of the insurgent to ambush Roman troops on the march. 
  When Iulius Severus, Legatus Augusti Pro Praetore of the province 
  of Britannia (operating on the direct instructions of Emperor 
  Hadrian) arrived in ad 134, he changed the campaign’s military 
  strategy. He took the fight to the Jews in their homes.
  In this reconstruction, a detachment of Roman legionaries 
  attacks the fortified hilltop farm at Horvat ‘Ethri in ad 134. The 
  Romans have penetrated one of the entrances and progressed 
  into the complex, comprising a cluster of buildings surrounding 
  a courtyard. The Jews have been forced onto the defensive. 
  Standing on rooftops (1) and in the side streets below (2) they 
  lob sling stones or fire arrows at the approaching Romans. In 
  the middle distance legionaries advance in testudo or tortoise 
  formation (3), with shields raised and interlocked to protect 
  themselves from the missiles raining down upon them.
  In the foreground, a Roman centurion (4), who led the 
  offensive, has been struck down by an arrow. Surrounded by 
  men of his centuria, who have raised their shields to protect 
  him, he is attended by a capsarius (5), a medic trained in first 
  aid. By Hadrian’s time Roman medical practice has developed 
  techniques, instruments and medications for a wide range of 
  battle traumas. Cleaning the wound is an important first step to 
  recovery, followed by dressing it with a bandage; and ‘if it is not 
  effective when dry,’ writes A. Cornelius Celsus (c. 25 bc to c. ad 50) 
  the Roman encyclopaedist, ‘it is to be soaked in vinegar. Vinegar 
  is powerful in suppressing a flow of blood; and some, therefore, 
  pour it into wounds’ (On Medicine 5.21).
  Severus’ strategy change worked: ‘he was able, rather slowly, to 
  be sure, but with comparatively little danger, to crush, exhaust and 
  exterminate them,’ writes Cassius Dio, who notes ‘very few of them in 
  fact survived’ (Roman History 56.13.3). Nevertheless, the Bar Kokhba 
  War saw heavy Roman casualties overall that were still talked 
  about decades after the conflict’s end. The Roman grammarian, 
  rhetorician and advocate M. Cornelius Fronto (c. ad 100 to late 160s) 
  wrote to the then Emperor Marcus Aurelius: ‘under the rule of your 
  grandfather Hadrian what a number of soldiers were killed by the 
  Jews!’ (Letters, On the Parthian War ad 162).
  1
  2
  3
  4
  5
  
  61
  Moesia Inferior; X Gemina from Pannonia 
  Superior; and now (possibly) VI Victrix 
  and XX Valeria Victrix from Britannia. 
  Supporting them were several auxiliary 
  alae, cohortes and mixed units. It was a 
  heavy investment in blood and treasure by 
  Hadrian, but a necessary one to break the 
  usurper’s hold on Iudaea.
  Severus joined the war effort at a crucial 
  time. It had taken two years to make any 
  kind of progress. Working against the 
  Romans was the large number of enemy 
  combatants and their use of underground 
  hideouts and fortified strongholds. From 
  now on the Romans adopted a cautious, 
  but steady, strategy of divide and conquer: ‘Severus did not venture to attack 
  his opponents in the open at any one point, in view of their numbers and their 
  desperation, but by intercepting small groups, thanks to the number of his 
  soldiers and his under-officers, and by depriving them of food and shutting 
  them up, he was able, rather slowly, to be sure, but with comparatively 
  little danger, to crush, exhaust and exterminate them’ (Cassius Dio, Roman 
  History 69.13.3).
  From the watchtower at Horvat Zalit the lookout sounded the alarm. The 
  tower, surrounded by a glacis, stood on a spur overlooking Nahal Eshtemo’a 
  on the southern slopes of the Judaean Shephelah (about 1.5km (1 mile) 
  south-east of modern Meitar). From this high vantage point he could see 
  the Roman army coming. In the courtyard and surrounding rooms below, 
  the Jews stopped what they were doing and prepared to defend themselves. 
  Archaeologists working at the site in 1983 and 1984 found a coin hoard with 
  Roman coins as well as overstamped examples. They believe the place may 
  have served as a mint producing coins for the rebel administration and that 
  the coin maker was interrupted and hurriedly stashed the pile, intending to 
  recover it later.
  Some 32km (20 miles) to the north at Kirbet ‘Ethri near Beit Guvrin 
  another fortified courtyard settlement faced the imminent arrival of the 
  Roman army. It had been destroyed during the First Jewish War, but in the 
  intervening years half of the old complex had been restored and new features 
  added. Some buildings now rose to two storeys. One room likely served the 
  community as a synagogue. Below ground the new inhabitants had dug out 
  burrows and chambers connected by tunnels. The subterranean complex had 
  been designed with war in mind. It was accessible through vertical or stepped 
  shafts carved into the bedrock floors of the rooms. Recesses at the heads of 
  the shafts accommodated blocks of stone designed to conceal the entrances.
  When the Romans stormed the place the occupants fought back, but 
  they were unable to repel the enemy. Archaeologists working at the site 
  from 1999 to 2001 found a burnt layer at the centre of the site at floor 
  level – evidence of an extensive fire. A rebel zuz of the Ben Koseba regime, 
  which showed scorch marks, was found in the layer, confirming the date 
  as contemporary with the Bar Kokhba War. The ritual bath (mikwa) of the 
  settlement had been used as a makeshift burial. It contained the skulls and 
  bones of at least 12 individuals (seven adults, including females and males, 
  Jewish insurgents improvised 
  weapons and repurposed 
  old ones. This spear actually 
  consists of an iron tip from 
  a bolt used with a Roman 
  catapult, re-attached to a 
  new wooden shaft. It was 
  found in the Cave of Figs, 
  Judaean Desert. (Exhibit at 
  the Israel Museum, Jerusalem. 
  Author’s collection)
  
  62
  four adolescents and one foetus). They had apparently all been slaughtered 
  during the capture of the settlement. Cut marks on a neck vertebra were 
  found during conservation, indicating that at least one individual had been 
  beheaded by the blow of a sword. The bones also showed evidence that 
  they had been left exposed in the open air for a while, no doubt where they 
  began to decompose in the heat. Only later were the corpses gathered up 
  and unceremoniously buried in the mikwa, lying among the ephemera of 
  everyday life – bowls, casseroles, cooking pots, jars, jugs and oil-lamps. Two 
  silver coins had fused together and some of the glass vessels had deformed in 
  the intense heat when the buildings were set alight.
  All over the Judaean Shephelah and Judaean Hills the same grim process 
  of pacification was executed with unrelenting efficiency. What role Classis 
  Syriacae – the navy unit in Syria at Seleucia Pieria – played is nowhere 
  explained in the accounts which survive. That it did play a role is suggested 
  by an inscription honouring its equestrian prefect. It may have provided 
  vessels to transport troops from Britannia, Moesia Inferior and Pannonia 
  Superior from embarkation points by sea to Caesarea or Yoppe. It may have 
  patrolled the Dead Sea, intercepting and blockading supplies moving in and 
  out of Ein Gedi. (A wooden anchor, which originally weighed 130kg (286lb), 
  made from a jujube tree, reinforced with lead, iron and bronze with some 
  of its ropes still attached, and dated to the Roman period, was found at Ein 
  Gedi in 2005.) Alternatively, its marines may have joined the land army as 
  a fighting force in its own right, replacing Roman casualties, which were 
  running high. It has also been suggested that men of the fleet at Misenum 
  were transferred to Iudaea to join Legio X Fretensis, but the documentary 
  evidence is open to interpretation.
  Yet away from the myriad battlefields, life in the Judaean hinterland 
  carried on. The Jewish population still felt secure under their joint civil and 
  military administrations. From the autumn of that year Eleazar ben Shmuel 
  Located on a hill in the 
  Rephaim Valley, 11km (7 miles) 
  south-west of Jerusalem, Betar 
  was the site of Ben Koseba’s 
  last stand. Part of the defensive 
  circuit wall, which was hurriedly 
  erected when the Romans 
  arrived to besiege the city, still 
  survives at Khirbet el-Yahud 
  near Bittir. (Bukvoed, Wikimedia 
  Commons, CC-BY-SA-4.0)
  
  63
  Jericho
  Masada
  Ein Gedi
  Nahal David
  Nahal Hever
  Nahal Arugot
  Wadi Murabba’at
  Hebron
  Bethlehem
  Qumran
  Hierosolyma
  Har Yishai Cave
  Dead Sea
  MOAB
  I U D A E A
  River Jordan
  Cave of Letters
  Cave of the Vulture
  Sabar Cave
  Wadi Murabba’at caves
  Cave of the Spear
  Cave of Horrors
  N
  10 miles
  10km
  0
  0
  Key refuge caves
  Refuge Caves, Judaean Desert
  
  64
  and his friends together shared fields. In the winter Hillel ben Garis leased 
  land in Ir-Nahash, while Yehudah ben Yehudah borrowed one tetradrachma 
  (a coin worth four drachmae).
  Celebrating its third year, the government of Ben Koseba minted 
  new issues of coins, though from now on it omitted the number of 
  anniversaries. In one type a wreath surrounds the name of ‘Shim’on’, 
  while the opposite side shows a flagon with a handle and the words ‘For 
  the Freedom of Jerusalem’. On another coin the façade of the Temple at 
  Jerusalem is depicted, its doors open with a showbread table inside, and 
  a star above, all flanked by letters spelling the name ‘Shim’on’. Paired 
  on the other side is a lulav (a closed frond of the date palm tree) and 
  an etrog (a fruit used in the rituals of the festival of Sukkot) with the 
  familiar message ‘For the Freedom of Jerusalem’. Yet the harsh truth for 
  the rebel leader and his followers was that Jerusalem had remained firmly 
  in Roman control the whole time. The Temple was not yet built and it 
  was becoming painfully evident to many supporting the King Messiah 
  that it never would be. Yet hope of achieving it remained a driving force 
  for leader Ben Koseba.
  Maintaining the commitment, cohesion and discipline among his militia 
  units was now of primary concern to Ben Koseba. Without their continued 
  support the rebel state would quickly collapse. He took a close and personal 
  interest in matters. At his command centre at Betar he dictated a confidential 
  letter to a scribe in Aramaic:
  Letter of Shimeon ben Koseba, peace!
  To Yehonathan, son of Be’ayan: [My order is] that whatever Elisha tells you, 
  do to him and help him and those with him [or: in every action].
  Be well.
  (P. Yadin 53)
  Perhaps Elisha was planning an important mission and Yehonathan had a 
  special skill he could use to help him accomplish it?
  Binding them all together in common cause was their Jewish faith. 
  As Prince Over Israel by official title and redeeming King Messiah by 
  rabbinic interpretation, he actively encouraged religious observance among 
  the militias:
  Shimeon to Yehudah bar Menashe in Kiryat ‘Arabaya. I have sent to you two 
  donkeys, and you must send with them two men to Yehonathan, son of 
  Be’ayan and to Masabala, in order that they shall pack and send to the camp, 
  towards you, palm branches and citrons. And you, from your place, send 
  others who will bring you myrtles and willows. See that they are tithed and 
  send them to the camp. The request is made because the army is big. Be well. 
  (P. Yadin 57)
  In making this request he was invoking the command in the Torah: ‘And you 
  shall take you on the first day the boughs of goodly trees, branches of palm 
  trees, and the boughs of thick trees, and willows of the brook; and ye shall 
  rejoice before the Lord your God seven days’ (Leviticus 23:40). The letter 
  hints at the growing uncertainty of the current circumstances. Ben Koseba 
  had to provide the means to transport the items because the men in Kiryat 
  
  65
  ‘Arabaya presumably did not have pack animals available to spare. It also 
  implies that if he did not send the donkeys the militia might not carry out 
  the order.
  At the start of ad 135 the pressure on Ben Koseba was now severe. His 
  ‘big army’ had suffered terrible casualties and what was left was struggling 
  to resist the Roman onslaught. Aggravating the situation was that some of 
  his remaining regional militias were flouting their obligations to support 
  their fellow soldiers. In a letter to the rosh hamahanaya on the Dead Sea he 
  writes angrily:
  From Shimeon ben Koseba to the men of En-gedi. To Masabala and to 
  Yehonathan bar Be’ayan, peace! In comfort you sit, eat and drink from the 
  property of the House of Israel, and care nothing for your brothers.
  (P. Yadin 49)
  Some camp commanders seemed willing to ignore his orders altogether:
  Shimeon ben Koseba to Yehonathan and to Masabala… Let all men from 
  Tekoa and other places who are with you, be sent to me without delay. And 
  if you shall not send them, let it be known to you, that you will be punished…
  (P. Yadin 55)
  Embedded with civilians and away from the front, perhaps the soldiery 
  did not appreciate the gravity of their worsening predicament. Several men 
  gathered in a scribe’s shop in Ein Gedi to sign an agreement about sharing 
  fields with Eleazar ben Shmuel on ‘the twenty-eighth Marcheshvan of the 
  Third Year of Shim’on ben Koseba, Prince Over Israel’ (P. Yadin 44), which 
  dates the document to 6 November ad 134. He also invested in a house in 
  Kfar Baarou – something Shaul ben he-Harash and Eleazar ha-Shoter felt 
  comfortable doing as well. Indeed, Eleazar ben Levi bought several houses 
  and a courtyard. They evidently believed in the long-term viability of the 
  Approaching a fortified 
  stronghold was a high-risk 
  mission. The testudo offered a 
  group of soldiers protection 
  from the defenders’ missiles 
  raining down from above. The 
  front row of soldiers interlocked 
  their shields to form a wall, 
  while those behind held 
  theirs above their heads like a 
  tortoise shell. By co-ordinating 
  the footwork the formation 
  could be remarkably agile. 
  (Public domain)
  
  66
  revolution and were investing their cash based on that belief, but for others 
  it was speculation. The price of property had fallen. Those with ready cash 
  could buy houses at a discount and make money from rents. While the 
  economy of Ein Gedi remained robust, the reality was that the future of 
  Israel was very far from certain.
  LAST STAND AT BETAR
  Despite three years of determined resistance, Hadrian’s army was proving 
  itself successful at retaking large areas of the Judaean Shephelah and 
  Judaean Desert from the rebels. When and how Herodium fell is nowhere 
  recorded: the carefully dug secret tunnels did not, in the end, prevent its 
  capture from an army practised in siege warfare. Roman units remained in 
  the reconquered region to ensure the Jewish insurgents caused no further 
  harm. The tide had turned. Eusebius writes: ‘no high tower, no fortified wall, 
  no mightiest navy and not the most diligent in commerce could overcome the 
  might of the Roman army; and the citizens of Iudaea came to such distress 
  that they, together with their wives, their children, their gold and their silver, 
  in which they trusted, remained in underground tunnels and deepest caves’ 
  (On Isaiah 2:15).
  The rest of the expeditionary force under Severus’ command now turned 
  its attention east to the Judaean Hills. The Romans had identified Betar as 
  the centre of the rebels’ operations. It was a strategic imperative that Betar 
  be captured and Ben Koseba taken – either alive (so he could be displayed 
  in triumph by Hadrian) or dead (bringing an end to his claim to be the king 
  messiah). Two legions struck out from the rest to take the target. By the summer, 
  Legio V Macedonica and XI Claudia had arrived at the rebel-held town.
  The town lay on a hill (nowadays called Khirbet el-Yahud), 700m (2,300ft) 
  above sea level, in the Rephaim Valley. It was located 11km (7 miles) south-
  west of Jerusalem on the Roman road to Gaza, and just 24km (15 miles) 
  north-east of Horvat ‘Ethri. The hilltop sloped gradually to the north to 
  the steep drop of the Nahal Sorek 150m (490ft) above the valley floor. The 
  town itself was reached by a rock-cut approach road on the south-eastern 
  side. The inhabitants were supplied 
  with water from a spring in the 
  valley below and likely one or more 
  cisterns or caves cut into the rock. 
  Archaeologists estimate the pre-war 
  population of the unwalled town of 
  10 acres (4 hectares) was between 
  1,000 and 2,000 people. Since ad 
  132 it had steadily filled with Jews 
  fleeing the advancing Roman army. 
  Three years later it must have looked 
  like a shanty town, with every 
  available space between the existing 
  buildings occupied by temporary 
  shacks and tents. The Babylonian 
  Talmud records: ‘There were 400 
  synagogues in the city of Betar, and 
  An inscription found beside 
  the freshwater spring at Betar 
  in the Rephaim Valley confirms 
  the presence of vexillations 
  of Legiones V Macedonica and 
  XI Claudia. These units had 
  marched from Moesia Inferior 
  to the war zone. The illustration 
  is in Charles Clermont-
  Ganneau’s Archaeological 
  Researches in Palestine 
  During the Years 1873–74. 
  (Public domain)
  
  67
  in every one were 400 teachers of children, and each one had under him 400 
  pupils’ (Gittin 58a). The numbers are undoubtedly exaggerated, but they do 
  convey the sense of the town being overwhelmed by refugees. Among the 
  civilians were men of Ben Koseba’s army. The Babylonian Talmud states: 
  ‘eighty [thousand] battle trumpets assembled in the city of Betar’ (Gittin 
  57a) – almost certainly a grossly inflated number of soldiers, but nevertheless 
  confirmation that armed Jewish troops were at Betar in some strength.
  The legions set up their camps on the south-east side overlooking Betar. 
  What followed was a Roman textbook siege. Below in the valley floor 
  soldiers located the spring and set up a picket to prevent the rebels from 
  replenishing their store of water. Without water the rebels would not be able 
  to withstand a blockade for long. Meanwhile the other soldiers erected a 
  siege wall or circumvallation of field-stones – a ‘fence consisting of the slain’ 
  (Midrash Rabbah, Lamentations 2.2.4) – to seal off the town. Its inhabitants 
  could not now get out without risk of capture and relief troops coming to 
  their rescue could not get in. Unlike at Masada there is no evidence of a ramp 
  for a siege tower.
  Ben Koseba responded by erecting a stout but roughly finished stone 
  wall around the town. In constructing the wall they had to demolish several 
  existing buildings in a few places in order to create a continuous line following 
  the contours of the hill. The Jews used recycled material (such as prepared 
  ashlar blocks from the Herodian-era buildings they had pulled down) in their 
  new structure, the purpose of which was entirely defensive. The jerry-built 
  construction hints at the speed at which the besieged army of Israel had to 
  raise it. Semi-circular buttresses and rectangular external towers were set at 
  intervals along the south and west sides – at least six semi-circular towers 
  and three square ones. Eusebius describes the resulting stronghold as ‘a very 
  secure fortress’ (Church History, 4.3). Within the wall, defenders chipped 
  rocks (flint or limestone) to make round slingstones – ranging in size from 
  5cm to 9cm, and in weight from 110g to 650g (4oz to 23oz) – and kept them 
  beside the new circuit wall. They also amassed iron arrows in preparation 
  for the expected attack.
  The mood inside the citadel was tense. The Jewish sources portray the 
  commander-in-chief as a gibbor:
  In the city was Rabbi Eleazar of Modi’in, who continually wore sackcloth and 
  fasted, and used to pray daily: ‘Lord of the universe, sit not in judgment 
  today!’ so that Hadrian thought of returning home.
  A Cuthean went [to the Roman emperor] and found him and said: ‘My 
  lord, so long as that old cock wallows in ashes, you will not conquer the city. 
  But wait for me, because I will do something that will enable you to subdue it 
  to-day.’
  He immediately entered the gate of the city, where he found Rabbi Eleazar 
  standing and praying. He pretended to whisper in the ear of Rabbi Eleazar of 
  Modi’in. People went and informed Bar Koseba: ‘Your friend, Rabbi Eleazar, 
  wishes to surrender the city to Hadrian.’
  He sent and had the Cuthean brought to him and asked: ‘What did you 
  say to him?’
  He replied: ‘If I tell you, the emperor will kill me; and if I do not tell you, 
  you will kill me. It is better that I should kill myself and the secrets of the 
  government be not divulged.’
  
  68
  EVENTS
  1. 
  Shimo’n ben Koseba establishes his headquarters at Betar. Refugees fleeing the 
  Roman army advancing through the Judaean Shephelah and Judaean Hills settle in 
  the increasingly crowded city.
  2. 
  Vexillations of Legiones V Macedonica and XI Claudia arrive in the Rephaim Valley, 
  establishing camps on the crest of the southern range of hills opposite Betar.
  3. 
  A legionary picket is placed around the spring in the base of the valley to prevent 
  the Jewish rebels from accessing it.
  4. 
  Ben Koseba orders a wall to be erected around the town. When existing buildings 
  stand on the plotted course of the wall they are pulled down. Material from the 
  demolished buildings is incorporated in the roughly constructed wall, buttressed by 
  circular bastions.
  5. 
  Legionaries erect a circumvallation over the crest of the surrounding hills using 
  field stones to prevent the insurgents from escaping and any relief troops attempting 
  to enter Betar.
  6. 
  Defenders inside Betar shape flint and limestone into slingstones.
  7. 
  Legionaries assemble at the base of the hill in readiness for the final assault.
  8. 
  According to Midrash Lamentations, based on allegations that Rabbi ben Eleazar 
  of Modi’in wants to surrender Betar, Ben Koseba summarily executes him.
  9. 
  Romans unleash artillery missiles on the southern end of the city.
  10. Legionaries advance up the slope and break into the city.
  11. Jewish defenders engage in street-to-street fighting. Ben Koseba is killed in 
  the mêlée.
  12. Romans slaughter the defenders of Betar. The Babylonian Talmud mentions the 
  local streams running red with the blood of victims.
  13. Betar falls to the Romans on 9 Av in the Jewish calendar. Prisoners are taken to 
  Hebron and sold into slavery.
  JEWISH FORCES
  A. 4,000–8,000 men under Shim’on ben Koseba
  1
  BEN KOSEBA
  X X X X
  BETAR
  REPHAIM 
  VALLEY
  4
  5
  8
  13
  
  69
  THE SIEGE OF BETAR, 
  SUMMER ad 135
  Ben Koseba stages his last stand surrounded 
  by Iulius Severus’ army.
  ROMAN FORCES
  1. 4,500-6,000 men (2,000 men of Legio V Macedonica, 
  2,000 men of Legio XI Claudia and auxilia) under Sex. 
  Iulius Severus
  SEVERUS
  X X X X
  A
  1
  1
  ROMAN 
  ROAD
  SPRING
  2
  3
  6
  7
  9
  10
  11
  12
  
  70
  
  71
  
  72
  LAST STAND AT BETAR (PP. 70–71)
  In the last months of the war, Shim’on ben Koseba relocated 
  to Betar in the Rephaim Valley. He ordered the inhabitants, 
  refugees and his own soldiers, to hurriedly erect a stone wall with 
  buttresses around the town. In the meantime, Roman legions 
  V Macedonica and XI Claudia arrived and sealed off the hilltop 
  city with a circumvallation of their own. In ad 135 – on the 9th 
  Av, 4 August, according to Jewish tradition – the Roman army 
  assaulted Betar and breached its circuit wall.
  In this reconstruction of the rebel army’s last stand, the Jews 
  put up a fierce resistance. They have created a bottleneck in 
  the street below by using an upturned cart (1) as a makeshift 
  barricade, hoping to slow down the oncoming Romans, so they 
  can be picked off by a marksman archer and spear throwers 
  located on a verandah (2) of a fine, two-storey house. From 
  rooftops and at street level, slingers (3) cast stones and archers 
  loose arrows, often with little more than a buckler (4) each to 
  protect them. Men of all ages and boys too attack the Romans 
  with any weapons at their disposal. Ben Koseba’s professional 
  soldiers (5), armed with captured Roman helmets, shields and 
  swords or spears, attempt to pick off individual enemy troops at 
  the front. However, it is clear that the repulse is already failing and 
  the Jews have little choice now than to pull back.
  Unfazed by the resistance and well practised in siege warfare, 
  the Romans continue to advance cautiously down the main 
  street of Betar. Behind them Jewish rebels lie dead (6) amidst 
  the swirl of smoke from firebrands. Out of view, other Roman 
  troops have entered the town, swarming the city’s streets, and 
  have broken into buildings to flush out insurgents in hiding. The 
  target of incoming missiles, these legionaries in the vanguard of 
  the assault have, to this point, marched in a protective testudo (7). 
  Approaching obstacles and sensing a trap, the centurion (8) has 
  given the order to break formation and begin a charge at their 
  disorganized opponent. They hope to capture alive rebel leader 
  Shim’on ben Koseba and his right-hand man, the priest Eleazar. 
  There will be rich rewards for the men who succeed.
  Roman retribution for sedition is severe. No mercy will be 
  shown on this day. Armed rebels will be hunted down and slain. 
  Unless the Jews can stage a near miraculous recovery, the fall of 
  Betar will mean the end of the nation of Israel and with it their 
  King Messiah’s hope for the liberation of Jerusalem.
  1
  2
  3
  4
  5
  6
  7
  8
  
  73
  Bar Koseba was convinced that Rabbi Eleazar wanted to surrender the 
  city, so when the latter finished his praying, he had him brought into his 
  presence and asked him: ‘What did the Cuthean tell you?’
  He answered: ‘I do not know what he whispered in my ear, nor did I hear 
  anything, because I was standing in prayer and am unaware what he said.’
  Bar Koseba flew into a rage, kicked him with his foot and killed him. A 
  heavenly voice issued forth and proclaimed: ‘Woe to the worthless shepherd 
  that leaveth the flock! The sword shall be upon his arm, and upon his right 
  arm!’ [Zechariah 11:17].
  It was intimated to him, ‘Thou hast paralyzed the arm of Israel and blinded 
  their right eye; therefore shall thy arm wither and thy right arm grow dim!’
  (Midrash Rabbah, Lamentations 2.2.4)
  The duration of the siege of Betar is not recorded, only that ‘it lasted a 
  long time’ (Eusebius, Church History 4.6). It would not end with a mass 
  suicide as allegedly happened among the sicarii at Masada. Cut off from 
  fresh supplies of food and water, ‘the rebels were driven to final destruction 
  by famine and thirst’ (Eusebius, Church History 4.6). Before the final assault, 
  the Romans would have fired missiles from ballistas and catapults into the 
  city to break the will of the defenders to resist – probably from the higher 
  ground of the south-western side which they occupied. The ancient Jewish 
  texts capture something of the resilience of the rebel leader. ‘He would catch 
  the missiles from the enemy’s catapults on one of his knees,’ records the 
  Midrash describing Ben Koseba’s reflexes, ‘and hurl them back, killing many 
  of the foe’ (Midrash Rabbah, Lamentations 2.2.4).
  When the town was determined safe to approach the Roman troops 
  equipped in full armour climbed up the hill. The Romans may have attacked 
  from the south-western side (which the rebels had recently fortified), or the 
  gates on the south-eastern side, or both simultaneously. Attacks on multiple 
  fronts distracted the defenders and divided their resources as they tried to 
  anticipate where the main assault would come. Archaeology offers some 
  clues. Two badly preserved arrowheads have been found on the semi-circular 
  buttress at the southernmost end of the town, and a pile of 22 unthrown 
  sling stones were uncovered on top of the rectangular tower on the north-
  western side.
  The Romans burst through the wall. A general slaughter ensued in the 
  city’s streets. The Babylonian Talmud records: ‘when the enemy entered 
  there, they pierced them with their staves, and when the enemy prevailed and 
  captured them, they wrapped them in their scrolls and burnt them with fire’ 
  (Gittin 57a). As for the Prince Over Israel, ‘immediately Betar was captured 
  and Ben Koseba was killed’ (Jerusalem Talmud). In this version of events 
  his head was cut off and presented to Hadrian – a dramatic end for the 
  man called ‘Son of a Star’, but most likely a fictional one since the Roman 
  commander-in-chief was not there.
  More atrocities were committed. The memory of that harrowing day has 
  been preserved in the Jewish religious texts:
  Rabbi Yohanan said: ‘The brains of three hundred children were dashed upon 
  one stone, and three hundred baskets of capsules of phylacteries were found 
  in Bethar, each capsule having a capacity of 2130 litres.’ (Midrash Rabbah, 
  Lamentations 2.2.4)
  
  74
  It has been taught that Rabbi Eleazar the Great said: ‘There are two streams 
  in the valley of Yadaim, one running in one direction and one in another, and 
  the Sages estimated that at that time they ran with two parts of water to one 
  of blood.’ (Babylonian Talmud, Gittin 57a)
  In a Baraitha [rabbinical tradition] it has been taught: ‘For seven years the 
  gentiles fertilized their vineyards with the blood of Israel without using 
  manure.’ (Babylonian Talmud, Gittin 57a)
  Rabban bar Hanah said in the name of Rabbi Yohanan: ‘Forty times twenty-
  four phylactery boxes were found on the heads of the victims of Betar.’ 
  (Babylonian Talmud, Gittin 57b)
  According to Jerusalem Talmud (Ta’anit 4:6), Betar fell on the ninth day of Av 
  (Tisha b’Av) in the Jewish calender, or 4 August ad 135. It was the same day 
  on which the First Temple in Jerusalem had been razed by Nebuchadnezzar 
  II in 587 bc, and the rebuilt Second Temple was destroyed by Titus in ad 70.
  Ein Gedi
  Nahal David
  Nahal Hever
  Nahal Arugot
  Har Yishai Cave
  Dead Sea
  Cave of Letters
  Cave of the Vulture
  Tel
  Gorem
  Sabar Cave
  Water Mill
  Water Mill
  En Shulamit
  Ein David
  Bath House
  Harbour
  Cave of Horrors
  N
  1 mile
  1km
  0
  0
  Synagogue
  Metzad Arugot
  Tower
  Key refuge caves
  Ein Gedi, Judaean Desert
  
  75
  CAVES OF HORROR
  Mopping-up operations continued into the following year. The hobnailed 
  Roman boot was now firmly on the bare neck of the Jewish insurgent. As the 
  Babylonian Talmud records, the Romans now knew to look for underground 
  hideouts: ‘They were sitting in a cave and they heard a noise from above the 
  cave and they thought that the enemies had come upon them’ (Shabbath 
  60a). Some of those who had managed to flee ahead of the emperor’s army 
  had made for the apparent security of natural caves in the river valleys above 
  Ein Gedi – in the Wadi Murabba’at, Wadi Marrazah, Nahal Arugot and 
  Nahal Hever. Among them were Babatha and her entourage.
  Many of the fugitives must have hoped that, one day, they could reemerge 
  and return to their homes. Poignantly, among the ephemera found by 
  archaeologists in the 1960s were front door keys. The Jews had carefully 
  carried up to the caves all that they valued in willow baskets and wicker 
  bags: utilitarian pots and wooden bowls, packed with the finest glassware; 
  fishing nets and palm fibre tied with string; bronze jugs (some defaced to 
  remove the Graeco-Roman decoration in order to make them kosher), pans 
  and kitchen knives; sandals and brightly coloured linen fabric sheets, mantles 
  and tunics; jewellery boxes and polished brass mirrors. They also took with 
  them personal archives of documents on papyrus or parchment – letters 
  (some from Ben Koseba himself), deeds, marriage contracts, receipts and 
  biblical texts, all carefully rolled up or folded and neatly kept in pouches or 
  wrapped and tied with string for protection. Pips, seeds, shells and stones 
  reveal those in hiding had supplies of pomegranates, nuts, olives and dates. 
  But this was a war zone. Arrows (some arrowheads still attached to their 
  wooden shafts) and spears with which the Jews could defend themselves 
  from unwelcome intruders were found with the comforts of home.
  The Romans tracked them to their hideouts. Above the so-called Cave 
  of Letters on the east side of the Nahal Hever Valley, a detachment – likely 
  no larger than a century, and possibly from Cohors I Miliaria Thracum – 
  Caves are a natural feature of 
  the Judaean Desert landscape, 
  such as Nahal Arugot and 
  Wadi Marrazah, near Ein Gedi. 
  They occur when sections of 
  the numerous limestone and 
  sandstone layers collapse or 
  are eroded. Though difficult 
  to access, the caves provided 
  readily available refuges for 
  Jews fleeing the Roman army. 
  (Author’s collection)
  
  76
  which had once been stationed at Ein Gedi, erected a camp. They planned 
  to be there a while. Gathering up stones the men built a defensive wall close 
  to the edge of the cliff, and inside it installed the buildings (headquarters, 
  food stores and ovens) necessary for a functioning military outpost. In the 
  open spaces in between, the auxiliary soldiers set up their goatskin tents 
  within low stone walls forming protective cubicles. A second camp across 
  the canyon above the Cave of Horrors allowed the soldiers stationed there 
  to message the others about movements by the insurgents.
  As at Betar the Romans used thirst and starvation to do their work for 
  them. There would be no escape for the Jews trapped below. For them, as for 
  the Jews elsewhere in Iudaea, the Bar Kokhba War was now over:
  The canyon of Nahal Hever 
  drew refugees in some 
  numbers in the last phase 
  of the Bar Kokhba War. 
  Discovering the caves in which 
  they were hiding, the Roman 
  army deployed a unit (probably 
  Cohors I Miliaria Thracum) 
  which built a camp on a 
  promontory directly above the 
  Cave of Letters and with a line 
  of sight to the Cave of Horrors 
  to prevent the Jews from 
  escaping. (Author’s collection)
  This copper bowl has a length 
  of palm fibre rope – complete 
  with knots – still attached to 
  the handle. It was found in the 
  Cave of Letters, Nahal Hever, 
  Judaean Desert. (Exhibit at 
  the Israel Museum, Jerusalem. 
  Author’s collection)
  
  77
  It happened to one group who took refuge in a cave. One of them was told: 
  ‘go and fetch a corpse of one of those killed that we may eat.’ He went forth 
  and found the body of his father and hid it and marked it, and buried it, then 
  returned and said: ‘I did not find any [corpse].’ They said: ‘let another go 
  forth.’ One of them went out, and followed the stench of that corpse and 
  brought it back. They ate it and the teeth of the son became blunt. He asked: 
  ‘whence did you bring that corpse?’ And was answered: ‘from such and such 
  corner.’ He asked further: ‘what mark was on it?’ And was answered: ‘such 
  and such a mark.’ He said: ‘Woe to this child; he ate the flesh of his father.’ 
  (Midrash Lamentations).
  By the winter of ad 136 the caves were silent.
  Hiding from the Roman 
  army, fighters and refugees 
  took with them their prized 
  personal possessions and 
  plunder. These bronze jugs 
  were found with other fine 
  metal vessels, all carefully 
  packed in a basket in the Cave 
  of Letters, Nahal Hever. Some 
  were intentionally defaced by 
  removing any decoration to 
  make them kosher. (Exhibit at 
  the Israel Museum, Jerusalem. 
  Author’s collection)
  Anticipating life after the war, 
  Jewish fighters and refugees 
  took with them the keys to 
  their houses, as well as their 
  kitchen knives and other 
  utensils, and hid them in 
  caves in the Judaean Desert. 
  (Exhibit at the Israel Museum, 
  Jerusalem. Author’s collection)
  
  78
  BLOCKADE OF THE CAVE OF LETTERS, NAHAL HEVER, ad 135/136 
  2
  Roman auxiliary infantry (probably Cohors I Miliaria Thracum) 
  have built a camp on a promontory directly above the Cave of 
  Letters occupied by rebel fighters and refugees. The location also 
  provides a line of sight to the Cave of Horrors, in which Jews hide, 
  on the other side of the canyon. The camp is made of unhewn 
  stones with dry joints. It features an exterior wall with a single 
  gateway, protected by a curved wall (clavicula) on the exterior, 
  enclosing an area of 1,250 square metres. Pitched within stone 
  cubicles to shelter them from the elements, are the leather tents 
  for the officers and soldiers. Stone ovens provide the means to 
  bake bread, which is a staple of the soldiers’ diet. 
  The cohort will remain here until its orders are revoked in ad 
  136. The fort will be found, almost intact, 18 centuries later by 
  archaeologists assisted by the Israel Defence Forces.
  
  79
  1
  By late ad 135, many fighters and refugees from Ein Gedi have 
  retreated into caves in the Nahal Hever canyon. They have brought 
  with them provisions, weapons and valuable personal belongings. 
  On the north side of the canyon, in what will come to be known as 
  the Cave of Letters, these effects include the legal documents of 
  Babatha of Mehoza and military correspondence of Shim’on ben 
  Koseba. By taking refuge in the cave, the Jews hope to wait out 
  the final phase of the war and eventually return to their homes. 
  However, Roman scouts have since identified the cave as a 
  rebel hideout. An infantry unit has been deployed to the canyon 
  to prevent the insurrectionists from escaping or capture any 
  that attempt to do so. The Jews, trapped inside their caves must 
  carefully manage their supplies of food and water to survive. 
  The Midrash, Lamentations describes cannibalism among the 
  starving people. 
  
  80
  REWARDS AND PUNISHMENTS
  Some 75 years after the end of the war, Cassius Dio wrote: ‘Fifty of their 
  most important outposts and nine hundred and eighty-five of their most 
  famous villages were razed to the ground. 580,000 men were slain in the 
  various raids and battles, and the number of those that perished by famine, 
  disease and fire was past finding out’ (Roman History 69.14.1). The numbers 
  are generally considered to be exaggerations, yet they express the large scale 
  of the disaster that befell the rebels. Casualties were not in the hundreds or 
  thousands, but tens or even hundreds of thousands. Yet despite their final 
  victory, the cost in blood and treasure had been high for the Romans too. 
  Actual numbers are not known.
  The Romans’ response to sedition among its subject peoples was usually 
  severe. The punitive measures meted out to the survivors were harsh, 
  intended to send a message to other would-be rebels. In a form of social 
  engineering, removing troublemakers from a former conflict zone – in 
  particular the men of military age – was a post-war policy. Having defeated 
  the rebellious Salassi in 25 bc, the military commander A. Terrentius Varro 
  sold some 36,000 prisoners of war into slavery. Nero Claudius Drusus had 
  used the same approach against the Raeti in 15 bc, and his brother Tiberius 
  Caesar had employed it after a revolt in Illyricum in 12 bc. In ad 135–136 
  Achieving peace (pax) through 
  military victory was a central 
  policy dictum dating back to 
  Caesar Augustus. Hadrian’s 
  defeat of the Jewish rebels was 
  cause for national celebration. 
  The obverse of this silver 
  denarius shows a figure 
  (presumed to be Hadrian) 
  wearing a tunic and helmet 
  and holding a spear in one 
  hand and a victoriola (miniature 
  statue of winged Victory) in 
  the other. (Roma Numismatics, 
  www.romanumismatics.com)
  AFTERMATH
  
  81
  the prisoners of the Bar Kokhba War were hauled to the annual slave market 
  held by the Terebinth-Eloh tree in Hebron, where ‘Hadrian’s market’ was 
  spoken of for centuries. It was said that there were so many captives for 
  sale that the price of a human fell to that being paid for a measure of horse 
  feed. Unsold slaves were removed to Gaza to be auctioned there. Many 
  others were expatriated to Egypt and elsewhere, adding great numbers to 
  the Jewish diaspora.
  Hadrian instituted a reform of regional government. Iudaea as a stand-
  alone province ceased to be and it was absorbed into neighbouring Syria. 
  The combined entity was renamed, recalling an ancient name for the region 
  coined by the Greeks: Syria-Palaestina. The two legions in the former Iudaea 
  remained there. Legio V Ferrata now established its permanent base at 
  Caparcotna (also known as Legio) in the Jezreel Valley along the road from 
  Caesarea to Beth Shean in the vicinity of Megiddo. Its location gave the 
  legion direct access to the Galilee and inland valleys of northern Palestine. 
  Partially excavated in 2015, the fortress was some 300m by 500m (984ft by 
  1,640ft) and was large enough for two legions or the legion plus auxiliaries. 
  Legio X Fretensis continued to camp at Jerusalem. Its location gave it direct 
  access to the desert, hills and plains of the Judaean heartland. Additional 
  auxiliary units were moved in to support them.
  The weeks and months after the conclusion of the war were a time to 
  issue rewards. Hadrian received his second acclamation after ad 136, which 
  is believed to have been for the victory in Iudaea. It entitled him to use 
  the form ‘IMP[erator] II’ on official inscriptions and coins. Hadrian was 
  generous with decorations (dona) to officers and rankers for acts of valour. 
  They were awarded to the equestrians M. Statius Priscus (vexilla) and Sex. 
  Cornelius Dexter (hasta and vexilla), distinctions given for combat with 
  the enemy. Centurion Octavius Secundus received a corona aurea (a crown 
  awarded to a soldier for killing an enemy in single combat and holding the 
  ground to the end of the battle). Centurion Sabidius Maximus received a 
  corona muralis (a crown awarded to the first soldier who climbed the wall 
  of a besieged city and successfully placed the standard of the attacking army 
  upon it). An inscription (CIL XI, 3108) shows that Q. Albius Felix, centurion 
  with Legio XX Valeria Victrix (who had likely accompanied Iulius Severus 
  from Britannia) received the award of the hasta pura (a prized spear made 
  without iron) and corona aurea in an unspecified Hadrianic campaign, which 
  is presumed to be the Bar Kokhba War. A corona aurea was awarded to C. 
  Nummius Constans, an evocatus (a veteran recalled for service).
  Celebrating its victory over the 
  Jews, the Roman army erected 
  a triumphal arch near the camp 
  of the Legio VI Ferrata at Tel 
  Shalem. Dedicated to imperator 
  Hadrian, the carved lettering 
  on the monumental inscription 
  is of the highest quality. The 
  structure would have closely 
  resembled the Arch of Titus 
  in the Roman Forum, Rome, 
  which was erected to mark the 
  end of the First Jewish War. 
  (Exhibit at the Israel Museum, 
  Jerusalem. Author’s collection)
  
  82
  Hadrian was habitually much less generous with rewards to his direct 
  reports. The victors of the Bar Kokhba War, however, were the exception 
  to the rule. Triumphal ornaments (ornamenta triumphalia) were granted 
  to Publicius Marcellus, Haterius Nepos and Iulius Severus. That privilege 
  entitled them to a military parade in Rome. Not since the war to suppress 
  the Great Illyrian Revolt (ad 6–9) had so many senators been recognized 
  for a single campaign in this way. Each was also honoured with a bronze 
  statue and inscribed base in his home city. Hadrian made political awards to 
  his deputies too. Haterius Nepos, who might have suppressed a rebellion of 
  Jews in Arabia Petraea before he joined the war effort in Iudaea, was elected 
  suffect consul in ad 134. Lollius Urbicus became suffect consul the following 
  year. Iulius Severus, who had successfully led the counterinsurgency, likely 
  stayed in the region, becoming the first legatus Augusti pro praetore of the 
  enlarged province of Syria-Palaestina.
  A triumphal arch was erected at Tel Shalem – 12km (7½ miles) south 
  of Beth Shean (Scythopolis) – at the location of the base of Legio VI 
  Ferrata at the outbreak of the war. The inscription slab, which survives in 
  fragments, measured some 10–11m (33–36ft) in length. Its exquisitely carved 
  A winged victory carrying 
  a laurel branch is the 
  central image on this silver 
  denarius of Hadrian struck 
  after operations in the Bar 
  Kokhba War had ceased. The 
  inscription proclaims ‘Revered 
  Victory’. The Roman peace 
  in Iudaea had been won at 
  a high cost in blood and 
  treasure. (Roma Numismatics, 
  www.romanumismatics.com. 
  Coin in author’s collection)
  After the Bar Kokhba War an 
  amphitheatre was erected at 
  Beit Guvrin. It may have been a 
  reward for the Roman garrison, 
  Cohors I Miliaria Thracum. The 
  stone foundations supported 
  a wooden superstructure, 
  which could seat some 3,500 
  spectators. (Author’s collection)
  
  83
  lettering –  41cm (16in.) high in the first row and 24cm (9½in.) in the second 
  – rivals anything erected in Rome itself, including the Pantheon and Arch of 
  Titus. It may have been constructed to mark Hadrian’s visit to Iudaea in ad 
  130, but much more likely it celebrated the Roman victory over the Jewish 
  rebels (following a possible but unconfirmed return by Hadrian in ad 134). 
  It is conceivable that, understanding the significance of their victory, the 
  three field commanders (now consuls and ex-consuls) personally lobbied for 
  its construction.
  Hadrian fulfilled his vision of a new city for army veterans. Breaking 
  with the traditional grid pattern, the main streets of colonia Aelia Capitolina 
  formed a V, emanating from the northern gate. These broad avenues lined 
  with shops and businesses were colonnaded, affording visitors the comfort 
  of shade from the sun in spring and summer and the rain in autumn and 
  winter. Not one but two fora were established, one in the northern part of the 
  city, the other in the western. These were large rectangular enclosures with 
  floors of stone slabs for open air markets and conducting court hearings. The 
  gate to the northern forum was built in the style of a triumphal arch, with a 
  large central span, flanked by smaller arches. The jewel of the city, however, 
  was the Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus. Where once had stood the tetrastyle 
  Second Temple, now stood a shrine in the Greco-Roman style to the king of 
  Olympian gods. By decree Jews were banned from entering Aelia Capitolina. 
  To emphasize the point: ‘Before its gate, that of the road by which we go 
  to Bethlehem, he [Hadrian] set up an idol of a pig in marble, signifying the 
  subjugation of the Jews to Roman authority’ (Eusebius, Chronicles Hadrian’s 
  Year 20).
  The rebellion had, however, been a localized affair, restricted to the Jewish 
  heartland around Jerusalem. Jews in Galilee and Samaria had largely stayed 
  out of the conflict. While Betar was razed and never re-occupied, the Judaean 
  Shephelah and Judaean Hills were not laid waste by the Romans. Jewry per 
  se was not punished; Jews were not considered an enemy of the Roman 
  people. Judaism had a recognized status as a privileged creed (licita religio). 
  Indeed, Jews even served in the Roman army. Those not representing a threat 
  to Roman authority were permitted to remain in the former Iudaea. Thus, 
  after the Bar Kokhba War, Jews continued to live in Lydda, the region south 
  of the Hebron mountains and communities along the Mediterranean coast.
  HERO AND MYTH
  The Jews wondered how the campaign for redemption could have so 
  completely and disastrously failed. In analysing the war two rabbinic 
  traditions emerged for the man known as Bar Kokhba. One was of a 
  messianic imposter. Far from being the ‘Son of a Star’ (kokav) of Rabbi 
  Akiba’s interpretation, many reflected that Shim’on ben Koseba had, instead, 
  proved to be the ‘Son of a Liar’ (kazav). The second was of Bar Kokhba as 
  the flawed gibbor. He had not proved to be a great leader in the mould of 
  Judah Macabbee or Eleazar ben Yair, but a failure, a loser. Common to both 
  tropes was an arrogant man. He had presumed to take the place of the real 
  moshiah, and he had substituted God’s divine help with a belief in his own 
  mortal strength. There were lessons to be learned. Some sages rationalized 
  that the Jewish people had been punished by their God for the way in which 
  
  84
  they had sought national freedom. Military force was not 
  the way to do it. Instead they must look beyond Bar Kokhba 
  to Heaven for redemption and the means to achieve it. In 
  time the feelings of sorrow and suffering for the loss of the 
  dream of national freedom came to be seen as redemptive. 
  Accepting the historical outcome of Bar Kokhba’s struggle, 
  and the shortcomings of the man, he gradually became a 
  figure of hope and value for the future.
  In the wake of tragedy Judaism itself changed. The First 
  Jewish War resulted in the destruction of the Second Temple 
  and redistribution of the Sanhedrin’s authority to rabbis. After 
  the Bar Kokhba War Judaism was no longer a political entity 
  that could challenge Roman authority. Instead it was now 
  only a religion. Its people, displaced far and wide across the 
  Roman Empire, were even denied free access to their holiest 
  places in Jerusalem. Rabbinic Judaism shifted to Galilee 
  and the diaspora. The rift between Jews and Christians also 
  widened. Followers of the messiah Christ Jesus living by the 
  Law of Moses, who had in earlier decades been a bridge with 
  rabbinic Jews, declined in number. Christians now trod their 
  own separate path, becoming estranged from their Jewish 
  brothers and sisters.
  The story of Bar Kokhba became a legend embedded in Jewish tradition. 
  According to the Midrash, Lamentations the 9th Av (4 August) was the date 
  on which Betar fell to the Romans. It was also the date of the destruction of 
  the First and Second Temples. On the national day of fasting held annually 
  on Tisha b’Av it was customary to talk about, and reflect upon, the calamities 
  which had befallen the Jewish people: ‘When Av comes in gladness must be 
  diminished’ (Midrash, Lamentations). The occasion brought back memories 
  of human sin, death, destruction, fire, subjugation, divine wrath and exile. It 
  was a time for repentance.
  The holiday of Lag B’Omer, which occurs between Pesach and Shavuot 
  on the 18th day of the Hebrew month of Iyyar, took on new significance too. 
  The day was traditionally associated with the ending of the plague, which 
  had afflicted Rabbi Akiba’s students who had gone to fight for the King 
  Messiah. It was also the day on which Akiba’s loyal disciple Rabbi Shim’on 
  bar Yochai – a survivor of the revolt – died. On the day of his passing, the 
  rabbi instructed his followers to mark the date as the day of his joy. He 
  was buried at Kefar Meron. Candles were lit in his memory and festivities 
  held there. By the 16th century, making a pilgrimage to his grave site had 
  become popular, with bonfires, feasting, singing and dancing accompanying 
  the event. Three centuries later children were taught about the heroism of 
  Bar Kokhba on Lag B’Omer, using the day to create drawings or paper-cut 
  decorations, and to engage in other fun outdoor activities, such as hiking, 
  picnics, singing songs around campfires and competing in archery games 
  and Bar Kokhba races. To generations of children the ancient war chief was 
  presented as a much-loved folk hero, who was part of their happy memories 
  of growing up.
  What had changed? In the intervening years Bar Kokhba had become 
  a semi-mythic character, especially in the Jewish diaspora. In 1840 Rabbi 
  Dr. Samuel Meyer wrote a chapter in the Israelitischer Musen-Almanach 
  With the war won, Hadrian 
  proceeded to build his grand 
  new city. The north gate of 
  colonia Aelia Capitolina was 
  a large arch for road traffic 
  flanked by two smaller arches 
  for pedestrians. One of these 
  survives on the left side of the 
  Damascus Gate, Jerusalem. 
  As punishment for their 
  rebellion the Jews would be 
  banned from entering the city. 
  (Author’s collection)
  
  85
  (Almanac of the Jewish Muses) entitled Simon Barcocheba, der Messiaskönig 
  (Simon Bar Kokhba, King Messiah). It was a telling of the story in the form 
  of a historical novel. In it the author introduced the fantasy elements of a 
  bow and arrow and the lion (on which, the story went, having broken out 
  of a Roman prison, Bar Kokhba fled). A version for children was translated 
  into many languages – French, Hungarian and Yiddish among them. Inspired 
  by the tale, over the next one hundred years numerous works of art were 
  produced, including dramas, operas and novels. Bar Kokhba the warrior 
  prince became an emblematic figure printed on everything from playing 
  cards to wall posters to dinner plates.
  In the early years of the 20th century this portrayal was a source of 
  strength for many Jews living among Europeans, who often faced anti-
  semitism. The racial stereotype portrayed the Jew as a coward or weakling, a 
  person unworthy of respect. He was expected to kowtow, to take the insults 
  and not to retaliate. Against the background of emerging nationalism among 
  Austrians, Germans and Russians, Jewish men and women too sought to 
  establish a national identity of their own. Under the name Bar Kokhba, 
  people clubbed together in towns across Germany and founded associations 
  for athletic competitions, gymnastic contests and football matches. The 
  modern Jew was fit and healthy. This was exemplified in the bronze statue, 
  Bar Kokhba (1905), by Henrik (Hanoch) Glitzenstein. This ‘muscular 
  Jew’ appealed to the Zionist movement, which needed to emphasize the 
  importance of courage and the readiness for self-sacrifice in the armed 
  struggle for the Jewish state it was seeking to create anew in Mandatory 
  Palestine under British administration (1920–1948).
  Particularly appealing to the promoters of Zionism was the idea of Bar 
  Kokhba as the courageous leader who refused to accept defeat. In him, 
  David Ben-Gurion and others saw a hero to inspire young Jews who were 
  being asked to fight to establish their homeland. (In contrast, in the 1920s 
  the Alliance of Revisionists-Zionists in Palestine led by Ze’ev Jabotinsky 
  named their youth movement after Betar, the hilltop stronghold where Bar 
  Kokhba’s struggle for freedom met its end.) The State of Israel was finally 
  In the Israelitischer Musen-
  Almanach (Almanac of the 
  Jewish Muses) Rabbi Dr 
  Samuel Meyer wrote a chapter 
  entitled Simon Barcocheba, 
  der Messiaskönig (Simon Bar 
  Kokhba, King Messiah). Written 
  and published in Germany 
  in 1840, the story would be 
  translated into many languages 
  and spread the legend of Bar 
  Kokhba among the Jewish 
  diaspora. (Public domain)
  
  86
  established in 1948, with Ben-Gurion as it’s first 
  prime minister. Bar Kokhba remains an important – 
  if sometimes contentious – historical figure in Israel 
  today because he was the last leader of a Jewish 
  state before the rise of Zionism in modern times.
  The real name of Bar Kokhba, which had 
  since been lost in time, was finally revealed when 
  archaeologist (and the second Chief of Staff of the 
  Israel Defense Forces) Yigael Yadin and his team 
  – authorized by Ben-Gurion – were exploring the 
  refuge caves of Nahal Hever in 1961. They found 
  handwritten letters bearing his name: Shim’on ben 
  Koseba. The process of stripping away years of 
  mythologizing to reveal the real man could begin. 
  Archaeology continues to bring new finds out of the 
  ground and into the daylight. These allow us to learn 
  more about the Jewish rebel leader and his war.
  Just two years after the end of the Bar Kokhba 
  War, Hadrian died on 10 July ad 138. He was 62 
  and had ruled for almost 21 years. By then he was 
  unpopular and ‘much was said against him after 
  his death, and by many persons’ (Aelius Spartianus, 
  Life of Hadrian, Historia Augusta 27.1). The Roman commander-in-chief 
  remains an enigma. Famous for his wall in Britain, villa complex at Tivoli 
  and love affair with a young man who he made a god, a few of Hadrian’s 
  letters and speeches survive as fragments – all of them official communiqués 
  to embassies, deputies and soldiers – along with two of his verses. 
  Nowadays Hadrian is regarded as an exemplar of Roman political and 
  military leadership, a cultured intellectual and a civilized man. In the Jewish 
  community, however, he is still considered a figure of cruel oppression. His 
  name is often followed by the curse: ‘may his bones be ground to dust.’ He 
  has his war with Shim’on ben Koseba to thank for it.
  Four thousand years of Jewish 
  history come to life in Arthur 
  Szyk’s Visual History of Israel, 
  completed in 1948 (the year of 
  the foundation of the modern 
  State of Israel) and published 
  in 1949. The blue Star of David 
  dominates the design. Bar 
  Kokhba sits to the left of the 
  Star. (The Arthur Szyk Society 
  (www.szyk.org), CC BY-SA 4.0)
  Bar Kokhba: Historical Memory 
  and the Myth of Heroism, a 
  special exhibition at the Eretz 
  Israel Museum, Tel Aviv (20 
  February to 16 June 2016), 
  presented archaeological 
  exhibits, works of art, and 
  numerous items attesting to 
  the myth and popular culture 
  that were created in Israel and 
  in the diaspora around the 
  hero. A highlight was the over-
  life-size statue Bar Kokhba by 
  Henrik (Hanoch) Glitzenstein, 
  cast in bronze in 1905. It 
  represented a revisionist, 
  muscular vision of the rebel 
  leader. (Author’s collection)
  
  87
  The epicentre of the Bar Kokhba War occurred in what is now the Judaean 
  Shephalah and Judaean Hills in the State of Israel, and the area around 
  Hebron and the Dead Sea in the West Bank (also known as Occupied 
  Palestinian Territories or State of Palestine). Several sites can be visited today.
  ISRAEL
  Much of the hard fighting occurred at fortified villages. One example can be 
  visited at Horvat ‘Ethri (located within Adulam Park-France, heading south 
  of Beit Shemesh on Highway 38, signposted on the left). Excavated by Boaz 
  Zissu and Amirin Ganor (2009), it is now fully uncovered. Open to view are 
  several multi-room buildings with stone walls, one of which is interpreted 
  to be a synagogue, all arranged around a central courtyard. The site, on a 
  hill 406m (1,320ft) above sea level, has caves carved out of the living rock. 
  Archaeologists found harrowing evidence that the defenders were slaughtered 
  and the settlement was razed by the Romans during their campaigning.
  Scattered across the region – north and south of Beit Guvrin – are 
  examples of caves used for hiding and storage by the Jewish insurgents. 
  So-called Bar Kokhba Caves are located in the Adullam Caves Park, which 
  The region that was the 
  epicentre of the Jewish revolt 
  remains highly contentious to 
  this day. It is now split between 
  the State of Israel and the West 
  Bank under the Palestinian 
  government. Viewed from 
  Adullam Park, the route of the 
  modern Israeli West Bank Wall 
  separating the two political 
  entities is clearly delineated. 
  (Author’s collection)
  THE BATTLEFIELD TODAY
  
  88
  can be reached via Highway 38 (6km (2 miles) south of Ha’Ela Junction 
  signed Churvat Madras on the left). Some of the tunnels connecting the 
  caves are deliberately narrow, just 40cm (16in.) in places. Bringing a torch 
  to explore the dark subterranean spaces is recommended.
  After the war the victorious Roman troops were rewarded. At Beit 
  Guvrin (Beit Guvrin National Park on Highway 38, on the right heading 
  south) a stone amphitheatre, which was fully excavated in the 1990s, is 
  now open to visitors. The 2nd-century ad structure has stone foundations 
  and barrel vaults originally supporting a wooden superstructure for seating, 
  able to accommodate some 3,500 spectators. The central arena features sub-
  structures used for holding wild beasts or prisoners while they waited for 
  their grand entrance, and for storing equipment.
  Hadrian’s Aelia Capitolina is still preserved to an extent in the modern 
  street plan of Jerusalem. The city’s northern gate (now known as the 
  Damascus Gate) is still a major pedestrian thoroughfare. A well-preserved 
  arched portal – one of two for pedestrians which flanked the gate for road 
  traffic – can be seen on the left side of the gate about 5m (16.4ft) below 
  modern street level. The holes for its door hinges and recesses for the beams 
  which were used to bolt the wooden door, can also be seen. Within, at Roman 
  city level, is a museum (Roman Square at Damascus Gate) that explains the 
  history of the gate using maps, photographs and illustrations.
  The Roman main street (cardo maximus) extended from Damascus Gate 
  in a straight line running north–south along what is now El Wad-Ha Gai 
  Street and terminated at or around David Street. Paved with stone, it was 
  originally flanked by roofed colonnades along its length. A section has been 
  reconstructed in the Jewish Quarter. Crossing the ancient cardo was a road 
  aligned east–west, nowadays called the Via Dolorosa. A triple arch once 
  straddled it, which may have formed the entrance to the city’s forum, where 
  merchants traded goods in the open air. The large central span of it remains 
  (now known as the Ecce Homo Arch), located near to the eastern end of the 
  Via Dolorosa, while one of the smaller flanking arches is preserved in the 
  adjacent Ecce Homo Church.
  The Jerusalem Archaeological 
  Park – The Davidson 
  Center uses multi-media 
  interpretations to explain the 
  archaeology of the adjacent 
  site. It has a large collection 
  of bricks and tiles of Legio X 
  Fretensis. (Author’s collection)
  
  89
  The Davidson Center in the Jerusalem Archaeological Park (Temple 
  Mount Excavations, near the Dung Gate) explains the latest findings from 
  the site through artefacts, interpretative videos and models. It has a collection 
  of bricks and tiles made at the workshops of Legio X Fretensis – now located 
  under Jerusalem’s International Convention Center (Binyane Ha-Umma) – 
  with the distinctive legionary logo of a boar and ship.
  Not all of the city was repaired after the Bar Kokhba War. Stones from 
  the upper levels of the monumental wall, which surrounded the Temple 
  Mount and were toppled after the First Jewish War, can still be seen where 
  they fell at the south-western corner (accessible free of charge from the 
  street between the Western Wall Plaza and Dung Gate). This massive wall 
  of Herodian date is best preserved at the Western or Wailing Wall. It is a 
  place of greatest religious significance to Jews. Non-Jews can approach it 
  (men are required to wear a skull cap or kippah, which is available at the 
  site). A visit at night when the plaza is floodlit is a memorable experience. 
  Nothing remains of the Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, which is assumed to 
  have stood on the site now occupied by the Dome of the Rock (the shrine 
  sacred to Muslims).
  The spectacular Israel Museum and Shrine of the Book (Derech Ruppin 
  11, opposite the Knesset) houses an extensive collection of Bar Kokhba 
  War relics. It includes surviving letters of Ben Koseba, the documents of 
  Babatha, keys, baskets, Jewish religious artefacts, coins overstruck by the 
  revolutionary administration, as well as arrows and other weapons recovered 
  from various caves near Ein Gedi. The remains of the exquisite bronze statue 
  of the Emperor Hadrian, which likely came from a temporary camp of Legio 
  VI Ferrata at Tel Shalem, and dated to around ad 130–132, is the centrepiece 
  of the newly refurbished gallery. Adjacent cases display fragments of Roman 
  arms and armour of the period, including the complete legionary helmet 
  with cross-braces often assumed to come from Hebron, but which is, in 
  fact, of unknown provenance. Examples of bricks and tiles made by Legio 
  X, some with imprints of the soles of Roman boots, are on display. Also on 
  view are the fragments of the Roman inscriptions from the triumphal arch at 
  Tel Shalem and from the Damascus Gate in Jerusalem of Legio X Fretensis 
  (a second piece of the slab can be seen at Archaeological Museum-Studium 
  Biblicum Franciscanum in Jerusalem).
  As for the protagonists, the giant bronze Knesset Menorah – standing at 
  the edge of Gan Havradim (Rose Garden) opposite the Knesset building – 
  shows Shim’on ben Koseba on an inner branch (opposite King David). On 
  the helmet of the stylized figure depicted in his moment of death is a relief of 
  a lion, after the myth that he would ride to battle on one. It was designed by 
  Benno Elkan (1877–1960). The Tomb of Rabbi Akiba is at Tiberias, located 
  on the mountainside behind the Kiryat Moshe neighborhood, overlooking 
  the town and the Sea of Galilee. It has been a place of pilgrimage since the 
  early Middle Ages.
  WEST BANK
  The great hilltop fortress of Herodium (in Herodion National Park) is 
  located 12km (7 miles) south of Jerusalem and 5km (3 miles) south-east of 
  Bethlehem off Highway 398. Built by Herod the Great it was occupied by 
  
  90
  men loyal to Ben Koseba – and by the rebel leader himself – in the early years 
  of the War. Cut into the hillside are tunnels dug by troops during the First 
  Jewish War and extended by Ben Koseba’s men.
  Betar, the site of Ben Koseba’s last stand, is generally believed to be 
  Khirbet el-Yahud (Arabic meaning ‘Ruin of the Jews’) beside the modern 
  village of Battir (or Bittir). Located behind the 1949 Armistice Agreement 
  Line (the so-called Green Line), it is accessible via Bethlehem. There is now 
  little to see of the ancient citadel explored by W.D. Carroll (1923–24) and 
  David Ussishkin (1993). Much of the archaeology has either been disturbed 
  or destroyed, but a section of wall and a circular buttress are exposed. From 
  within Israel Betar can be seen at a distance from Mount Tayasim Nature 
  Reserve (near the Israeli Airmen Memorial) south-east of Jerusalem off 
  Highway 395 to Beit Shemesh. Viewed on the far horizon its close proximity 
  to the Holy City and the difficulty of the terrain to an invading army can be 
  fully appreciated.
  Some of the caves in which Jews hid themselves with their personal 
  belongings are located near Ein Gedi on the western shore of the Dead 
  Sea, some 80km (50 miles) south-east of Jerusalem, reached on Highway 
  90. Caves, examples of which can be seen at the Ein Gedi Nature Reserve 
  encompassing the river valleys of the rivers Nahal David and Nahal Arugot, 
  occur naturally in the local geology. About 5km (3 miles) south-west of 
  Ein Gedi on the north side of the adjacent valley of Nahal Hever are the 
  entrances to the so-called Cave of Letters (Ma’arat Ha’Igrot), which merge 
  into a single 150m-long (492ft) cavern inside. Explored in the 1960s by 
  Yigael Yadin (1971), here was found an archive of the residents of Ein Gedi, 
  which included a packet of 15 letters of Ben Koseba as well as the personal 
  documents of Babatha Bat Shim’on. The remains of the small Roman siege 
  fort, the garrison of which watched for people trying to escape from the cave, 
  is located above. A low wall of loose stones encloses a triangle-shaped space 
  (unlike the forts at Masada) with bases of rectangular structures for tents, 
  traces of ovens and other elements of military camp life.
  The Israel Museum in 
  Jerusalem has displays of 
  important artefacts from the 
  Bar Kokhba War period. It also 
  presents occasional special 
  archaeological exhibitions, 
  such as Hadrian: An Emperor 
  Cast in Bronze (22 December 
  2015 to 27 June 2016). It 
  brought together bronze 
  portraits of Hadrian from 
  the British Museum, London, 
  the Louvre, Paris and Tel 
  Shalem, Israel for the first time. 
  (Author’s collection)
  
  91
  Farther up the valley on the other side is the Cave of Horrors (Ma’arat 
  Ha’Eimim), so named on account of the several skulls and skeletons 
  discovered there. Above it is a monument (the unveiling of which, at a 
  ceremony attended by then Prime Minister Menachem Begin, was highly 
  controversial). Its inscription, translated from Hebrew, reads: ‘Here lie the 
  bones of the warriors of Bar Kokhba who fought the Romans in the Iudean 
  desert during ad 132–135, them and their families. The bones were collected 
  in the Cave of Letters and the Cave of Horrors and buried in a ceremony 
  (11.5.1982)’. (It was vandalized in 2005, but reconstructed three years later.) 
  Some believe the bones were actually those of Roman troops.
  BIBLIOGRAPHY
  Alexander, Paul J., ‘Letters and Speeches of the Emperor Hadrian’, Harvard Studies in Classical 
  Philology 49 (1938), pp. 141–177
  Avi-Yonah, M., ‘The Development of the Roman Road System in Palestine’, Israel Exploration 
  Journal 1.1 (1950–1951), pp. 54–60
  Baker, Renan, ‘Epiphanius, “On Weights and Measures” §14: Hadrian’s Journey to the East 
  and the Rebuilding of Jerusalem’, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 182 (2012), pp. 
  157–167 Bentwich, Norman, ‘The Graeco-Roman View of Jews and Judaism in the Second 
  Century’, The Jewish Quarterly Review 23.4 (Apr. 1933), pp. 337–348
  Ben-Zeev, Miriam Pucci, ‘L. Tettius Crescens’ expeditio Iudaeae’, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie 
  und Epigraphik 133 (2000), pp. 256–258
  Birley, Anthony R., Hadrian: The Restless Emperor (Roman Imperial Biographies), Routledge 
  (2000)
  Bowersock, Glenn W., ‘A Roman Perspective on the Bar Kokhba War’ in: Green, William S. 
  (ed.), Approaches to Ancient Judaism Vol. 2, Scholars Press (1980), pp. 131–141.
  Broshi, Magen, ‘Agriculture and Economy in Roman Palestine: Seven Notes on the Babatha 
  Archive’, Israel Exploration Journal 42.3/4 (1992), pp. 230–240
  Bruun, Christer, ‘The Spurious “Expeditio Ivdaeae” under Trajan’, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie 
  und Epigraphik 93 (1992), pp. 99–106
  Bryce, Trevor, Ancient Syria: A Three Thousand Year History, Oxford University Press (2014)
  Carroll, W.D., ‘Bittîr and Its Archaeological Remains’, The Annual of the American Schools of 
  Oriental Research 5 (1923–1924), pp. 77–103
  Clermont-Ganneau, Charles, Archaeological Researches in Palestine during the Years 
  1873–1874, Volume 1, Palestine Exploration Fund, London (1899)
  Cotton, Hannah M. and Eck, Werner, ‘P. Murabba‘at 114 und die Anwesenheit römischer 
  Truppen in den Höhlen des Wadi Murabba‘at nach dem Bar Kochba Aufstand’, Zeitschrift 
  für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 138 (2002), pp. 173–183
  D’Amato, Raffaele and Sumner, Graham, Arms and Armour of the Imperial Roman Soldier: 
  From Marius to Commodus, 112 BC–AD 192, Frontline (2009)
  Dabrowa, E., The Governors of Roman Syria from Augustus to Septimius Severus, Bonn, 
  Habelt (1998)
  Davies, R.W., ‘Fronto, Hadrian and the Roman Army’, Latomus 27.1 (Janvier–Mars 1968), 
  pp. 75–95
  Davies, R.W., Cohors I Hispanorum and the Garrisons of Maryport, read at Temple Sowerby, 8 
  July 1977 (http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archiveDS/archiveDownload?t=arch-2055-1/
  dissemination/pdf/Article_Level_Pdf/tcwaas/002/1977/vol77/tcwaas_002_1977_vol77_0004.
  pdf, accessed 27 February 2017)
  Deutsch, Robert, ‘A Lead Weight of Hadrian: The Prototype for the Bar Kokhba Weights’, Israel 
  Numismatic Journal 14 (2000–2002), pp. 125–128
  Deutsch, Robert, ‘A Lead Weight of Shimon Bar Kokhba’, Israel Exploration Journal 51.1 
  (2001), pp. 96–98
  Dorsey. D., The Roads and Highways of Ancient Israel, Johns Hopkins University Press (1991)
  Eck, Werner, ‘The bar Kokhba Revolt: The Roman Point of View’, The Journal of Roman 
  Studies 89 (1999), pp. 76–89
  Eliav, Yaron Z., ‘Hadrian’s Actions in the Jerusalem Temple Mount According to Cassius Dio 
  and Xiphilini Manus’, Jewish Studies Quarterly 4.2 (1997), pp. 125–144
  
  92
  Eschel, Hanan, ‘A Coin of Bar Kokhba from a Cave in Wadi el-Mackuck’, Israel Numismatic 
  Journal 9 (1987), pp. 51–52
  Eshel, H., ‘The History of Research and Survey of the Finds of the Refuge Cave’, in: Eshel, H., 
  and Amit, D., The Bar-Kokhba Refuge Caves (1998), pp. 60–61 (Hebrew)
  Eschel, Hanan, ‘The Bar Kochba Revolt, 132–135’, in: Katz, Steven T. (ed.), The Cambridge 
  History of Judaism, IV. The Late Roman Period, Cambridge University Press (2006), 
  pp. 105–127
  Eschel, Hanan, ‘“Bethar was captured and the city was plowed”: Jerusalem, Aelia Capitolina 
  and the Bar Kokhba Revolt’, Eretz-Israel: Archaeological, Historical and Geographical 
  Studies, Teddy Kollek Volume (2007), pp. 21–28
  Eschel, Hanan, and Amit, David, ‘A Tetradrachm of Bar Kokhba from a Cave in Nahal Hever’, 
  Israel Numismatic Journal 11 (1991), pp. 33–35
  Eshel H. and Zissu B., ‘Roman Coins from the “Cave of the Sandal” West of Jericho’, Israel 
  Numismatic Journal 13 (1999), pp. 70–77
  Eshel, Hanan, and Zissu, Boaz, The Bar Kokhba Revolt – An Archaeological Perspective. 
  Jerusalem, Yad Ben Zvi (2015) (Hebrew)
  Eshel, Hanan, Zissu, Boaz, and Barkay, Gabriel, ‘Sixteen Bar Kokhba Coins from Roman Sites 
  in Europe’, in: Barag, D., and Zissu, B. (eds.), Studies in Honour of Arnold Spaer [Israel 
  Numismatic Journal 17] (2010), pp. 91–97
  Garrett, M.G., ‘Thracian Units in the Roman Army’, Israel Exploration Journal 19.4 (1969), 
  pp. 215–224
  Gergel, Richard A., ‘The Tel Shalem Hadrian Reconsidered’, American Journal of Archaeology 
  95.2 (Apr. 1991), pp. 231–251
  Geva, Hillel, ‘The Camp of the Tenth Legion in Jerusalem: An Archaeological Reconsideration’, 
  Israel Exploration Journal 34.4 (1984), pp. 239–254
  Gichon, Mordechai, ‘New Insight into the Bar Kokhba War and a Reappraisal of Dio Cassius 
  69.12–13’, The Jewish Quarterly Review 77.1 (July 1986), pp. 15–43
  Gichon, Mordechai, and Vitale, Michaela, ‘Arrow-Heads from H. orvat ‘Eqed’, Israel Exploration 
  Journal 41.4 (1991), pp. 242–257
  Golan, David, ‘Hadrian’s Decision to supplant “Jerusalem” by “Aelia Capitolina”’, Historia: 
  Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte 35.2 (2nd Qtr. 1986), pp. 226–239
  Goodman, Martin, ‘Trajan and the Origins of Roman Hostility to the Jews’, Past & Present 
  182 (Feb. 2004), pp. 3–29
  Grant, Michael, The Jews in the Roman World, Barnes and Noble (reprint, 1995)
  Gray, William D., ‘The Founding of Aelia Capitolina and the Chronology of the Jewish War 
  under Hadrian’, The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures 39.4 (July 1923), 
  pp. 248–256.
  Gruber, Daniel, Rabbi Akiba’s Messiah: The Origins of Rabbinic Authority, Elijah Publishing (1999)
  Hadas, Gideon, ‘Where was the Harbour of ‘En-Gedi Situated?’, Israel Exploration Journal 
  43.1 (1993), pp. 45–49
  Hadas, Israel Gideon, Liphschitz, Nili, and Bonani, Georges, ‘Two Ancient Wooden Anchors 
  from Ein Gedi, on the Dead Sea’, International Journal of Nautical Archaeology 34.2 
  (Oct. 2005), pp. 299–307
  Harel, M., ‘Israelite and Roman Roads in the Iudean Desert’, Israel Exploration Journal 17.1 
  (1967), pp. 18–26
  Heichelheim, F.M., ‘New Light on the End of Bar Kokba’s War’, The Jewish Quarterly Review, 
  New Series 34.1 (Jul. 1943), pp. 61–63
  Hendin, David, ‘On the Identity of Eleazar the Priest’, Israel Numismatic Journal 18 (2014), 
  pp. 155–167
  Horbury, William, Jewish War under Trajan and Hadrian, Cambridge University Press (2014)
  Hufer, Holger, Der Bar Kochba-Aufstand (132-135/36 n. Chr.): Ursachen, Verlauf und Folgen 
  unter Einbeziehung aktueller wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisse, Grin Verlag (2013)
  Hufer, Holger, Die Erhebung der Juden unter Bar Kochba: Der heroische Kampf des jüdischen 
  Volkes gegen die römische Besatzung im 2. Jhd. n. Chr, Diplomica (2014)
  Isaac, Benjamin, and Roll, Israel, ‘Legio II Traiana in Judaea: A Reply’, Zeitschrift für 
  Papyrologie und Epigraphik 47 (1982), pp. 131–132
  Isaac, Benjamin, and Roll, Israel, Roman Roads in Judaea I: The Legio-Scythopolis Road, BAR 
  International Series 141, Oxford (1982)
  Jacobson, David M. and Kokkinos, Nikos, Judaea and Rome in Coins, 65 BCE–135 CE, Spink 
  (2012)
  Kanael, B., ‘Notes on the Dates Used During The Bar Kokhba Revolt’, Israel Exploration 
  Journal 21.1 (1971), pp. 39–46
  
  93
  Kennedy, D.L., ‘Legio VI Ferrata: The Annexation and Early Garrison of Arabia’, Harvard 
  Studies in Classical Philology 84 (1980), pp. 283–309
  Kislev, M.E., ‘Vegetal food of Bar Kokhba rebels at Abi’or Cave near Jericho’, Review of 
  Palaeobotany and Palynology 73 1–4 (30 September 1992), pp. 153–160
  Klein, E., Zissu, B., Goldenberg, G., and Ganor, A., ‘New Studies on the Hideouts Complexes in 
  the Iudean Foothills’, in: Stiebel, G.D., Peleg-Barkat, O., Ben-Ami, D., and Gadot, Y. (eds.), 
  New Studies in the Archaeology of Jerusalem and its Region, Collected Papers, Vol. IX, 
  Jerusalem (2015), pp. 235–255 (Hebrew)
  Kloner, Amos, ‘Underground Hiding Complexes from the Bar Kokhba War in the Iudean 
  Shephelah’, The Biblical Archaeologist 46.4 (Dec. 1983), pp. 210–221
  Kloner A., and Zissu B., ‘Underground Hiding Complexes in Israel and the Bar Kokhba Revolt’, 
  Opera Ipogea 1 (2009), pp. 9–28
  Kloner A., and Zissu B., ‘The Geographical Distribution of Hiding Complexes and Refuge 
  Caves during the Bar Kokhba Revolt – Some New Insights’ in: Tavger, A., Amar, Z., and 
  Billig, M., (eds.), Highland’s Depth, Ephraim Range and Binyamin Research Studies 4, Ariel-
  Talmon (2014), pp. 57–68 (Hebrew)
  Laperrousaz, E.M., ‘L’Hérodium, quartier général de Bar Kokhba?’, Syria 41.3/4 (1964), pp. 
  347–358
  Lapin, H., ‘Palm Fronds and Citrons: Notes on Two Letters from Bar Kosiba’s Administration’, 
  Hebrew Union College Annual 64 (1993), pp. 111–135
  Mantel, Hugo, ‘The Causes of the Bar Kokba Revolt’, The Jewish Quarterly Review 58.3, 
  (Jan. 1968), pp. 224–242
  Mantel, Hugo, ‘The Causes of the Bar Kokba Revolt (Continued)’, The Jewish Quarterly 
  Review 58.4 (Apr. 1968), pp. 274–296
  Marks, Richard G., The Image of Bar Kokhba in Traditional Jewish Literature: False Messiah 
  and National Hero (Hermeneutics: Studies in the History of Religions), Penn State University 
  Press (2005)
  Maxfield, Valerie, The Military Decorations of the Roman Army, Batsford (1981)
  Menashe, Har-el, ‘The Route of Salt, Sugar and Balsam Caravans in the Judaean Desert’, 
  GeoJournal 2.6, Geography in Israel (1978), pp. 549–556
  Meshorer, Y., The Coinage of Aelia Capitolina, Jerusalem (1989) (Hebrew)
  Mildenberg, Leo, ‘Bar Kokhba Coins and Documents’, Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 
  84 (1980), pp. 311–335
  Mildenberg, Leo, The Coinage of the Bar Kokba War, Typos VI, Sauerländer (1984)
  Mor, Menachem, ‘Two Legions: The Same Fate? (The Disappearance of the Legions IX Hispana 
  and XXII Deiotariana)’, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 62 (1986), pp. 267–278
  Mor, Menachem, ‘Are there any New Factors Concerning the Bar-Kokhba Revolt?’, Studia 
  Antiqua et Archaeologica 18 (2012), pp. 161–193
  Mor, Menachem, ‘What does Tel Shalem have to do with the Bar Kokhba Revolt?’, Scripta 
  Judaica Cracoviensa 11 (2013), pp. 79–96
  Mor, Menachem, The Second Jewish War: The Bar Kokhba War, 132–136 CE, (The Brill 
  Reference Library of Judaism Vol. 50), Leiden: Brill (2016)
  Netzer, Ehud, ‘Jewish Rebels Dig Strategic Tunnel System’, Biblical Archaeology Review 14, 4 
  (1988)
  Netzer, Ehud, and Arzi S., ‘Herodium Tunnels’, Qadmoniot 18, (1985), pp. 33–38 (Hebrew)
  Opper, Thorsten, The Emperor Hadrian: Empire and Conflict, British Museum (2008)
  Perowne, Stewart H., Hadrian, Croom Helm (reprint 1986)
  Porat, Roi, Eschel, Hanan, and Frumkin, Amos, ‘Finds from the Bar Kokhba Revolt from Two 
  Caves at En Gedi’, Palestine Exploration Quarterly, 139.1 (2007), pp. 35–53
  Porat, Roi, Eshel, Hanan, and Frumkin, Amos, ‘The “Caves of the Spear”: Refuge Caves 
  from the Bar-Kokhba Revolt North of ʿEn-Gedi’, Israel Exploration Journal 59.1 (2009), 
  pp. 21–46
  Rea, J.R., ‘The Legio II Traiana in Judaea?’, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 38 
  (1980), pp. 220–221
  Roll, Y., ‘The Roman Road Network in Eretz-Israel’, Qadmoniot IX (1976), pp. 38–50 (Hebrew)
  Schäfer, Peter, Bar Kokhba War Reconsidered: New Perspectives on the Second Jewish Revolt 
  Against Rome, Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism, 100, Mohr Siebeck (2003)
  Schiffman, Lawrence H., ‘Jerusalem: Twice Destroyed, Twice Rebuilt’, The Classical World 97.1 
  (Autumn 2003), pp. 31–40
  Schoenfeld, Andrew J., ‘Sons of Israel in Caesar’s Service: Jewish Soldiers in the Roman Military’, 
  Shofar: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Jewish Studies 24.3 (Spring 2006), pp. 115–126
  Sidebottom, Harry, ‘The Army in Syria’, The Classical Review 53.2 (Oct. 2003), pp. 431–433
  
  94
  Stebnicka, Krystyna, Identity of the Diaspora: Jews in Asia Minor in the Imperial Period, Journal 
  of Juristic Papyrology (2015)
  Stiebel, Guy D., ‘Military Equipment’, in: Syon, Danny (ed.), Gamla III: The Shmarya Gutmann 
  Excavations 1976–1989: Finds and Studies. Part 1, Israel Antiquities Authority Report 56 
  (2014), pp. 57–108
  Stinespring, William F., ‘Hadrian in Palestine, 129/130 A. D.’, Journal of the American Oriental 
  Society 59.3 (Sep. 1939), pp. 360–365
  Tsafrir, Yoram, and Zissu, Boaz, ‘A Hiding Complex of the Second Temple Period and the 
  Time of the Bar-Kokhba Revolt at ‘Ain-’Arrub in the Hebron Hills’, Journal of Archaeology 
  Supplementary Series 49 The Roman and Byzantine Near East Vol. 3 (2002), pp. 7–36
  Turel, Sara (ed.), Bar Kokhba: Historical Memory and the Myth of Heroism, Eretz Israel 
  Museum Tel Aviv (2016)
  Ussishkin, David, ‘Archaeological Soundings at Betar, Bar-Kochba’s Last Stronghold’, Tel Aviv 
  20 (1993), pp. 66–97
  Wise, Michael Owen, Language and Literacy in Roman Judaea: A Study of the Bar Kokhba 
  Documents (The Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library), Yale (2015)
  Yadin, Y., ‘Expedition D’, Israel Exploration Journal 11.1/2, The Expedition to the Judaean 
  Desert 1960 (1961), pp. 36–52
  Yadin, Yigael, Bar-Kokhba: The Rediscovery of the Legendary Hero of the Last Jewish Revolt 
  Against Imperial Rome, Random House (1971)
  Yadin, Yadin et al., The Documents from the Bar-Kokhba Period in the Cave of Letters. Hebrew, 
  Aramaic and Nabatean-Aramaic Papyri, Israel Exploration Society, Israel, 1989–2002
  Zeitlin, Solomon, ‘Bar Kokba and Bar Kozeba’, The Jewish Quarterly Review 43.1 (Jul. 1952), 
  pp. 77–82
  Zissu, B., and Eshel, H., ‘Coins and Hoards from the Time of the Bar Kokhba Revolt’, Hoards 
  and Genizot as Chapters in History [Hecht Museum Catalogue no. 33], Haifa (2013), 
  pp. 31–39
  Zissu, Boaz, and Ecker, Avner, ‘A Roman Military Fort North of Bet Guvrin/ Eleutheropolis?’, 
  Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 188 (2014), pp. 293–312Zissu, Boaz, and Ganor, 
  Amir, ‘A Lead Weight of Bar Kokhba’s Administration’, Israel Exploration Journal 56.2 
  (2006), pp. 178–182
  Zissu, Boaz, and Ganor, Amir, ‘Horvat ‘Ethri – a Jewish village from the Second Temple period 
  and the Bar Kokhba Revolt in the Iudean foothills’, Journal of Jewish Studies 60.1 (2009), 
  pp. 90–136
  Zissu, B., Klein, E., and Kloner, A., ‘Settlement Processes in the Territorium of Roman Jerusalem 
  (Aelia Capitolina)’, in: Alvarez, J.M., Nogales, T., and Roda, I. (eds.), XVIII CIAC: Centre 
  and Periphery in the Ancient World, Merida (2014), pp. 219–223
  Zissu, Boaz, Eshel, Hanan, Langford, Boaz, and Frumkin, Amos, ‘Coins from the Bar Kokhba 
  Revolt Hidden in Me’arat Ha-Te’omim (Mŭghâret Umm et Tûeimîn), Western Jerusalem 
  Hills’, Israeli Numismatic Journal 17 (2010), pp. 113–147
  Zissu, Boaz, Porat, Ro’i, Langford, Boaz, and Frumkin, Amos, ‘Archaeological remains of the 
  Bar Kokhba Revolt in the Te’omim Cave’, Journal of Jewish Studies 62.2 (2011), pp. 262–283
  
  95
  INDEX
  References to illustrations are 
  in bold
  Aelia Capitolina  10, 83, 84, 88
  Akiba, Rabbi  17, 17, 22, 39, 
  46–47, 89
  amphitheatre  82, 88
  Appian  7
  aqueducts  8
  archers  24–25
  armour  24, 25, 26, 31, 50
  awards  81–82
  Babatha  45–46
  Babylonian Talmud  12, 66–67, 
  73, 74, 75
  Bar Kokhba War
  aftermath of  80–86
  battlefield today  87–91, 87–88
  campaign  39–80
  campaign map  40, 55
  causes of  9–11
  last stand at Betar  66–74
  start of the campaign  41–47
  turning point  56–66
  war of attrition  47–56
  Beit Guvrin  29, 82, 88
  Ben Galgula, Yeshua  18, 53
  Ben-Gurion, David  85–86
  Ben Koseba, Shim’on 
  (Bar Kokhba)  16, 86
  assembles army  22–23
  background of  16
  and Christians  52
  death of  73
  and Eleazar, Rabbi  73
  leadership of  64
  main objectives of  32–35
  post-war view of  83–86
  pressure on  64–65
  qualities of  16–17
  relics of  86, 89
  status of  39
  Betar  62
  excavations at  24, 34
  post-war  90
  siege of  66–74, 68–72
  bricks  9
  Caesarea  38
  Cassius Dio  
  and aftermath of war  80
  and casualty numbers  23, 80
  and causes of the war  10
  and Hadrian  19, 39, 47, 54
  and Severus, Iulius  21, 54, 
  60, 61
  and tactics of the war  34, 36, 
  41, 44, 45, 46, 47 , 50, 52, 
  54, 60, 61
  casualties  23, 80
  cavalry  28, 31
  Cave of Horrors  91
  Cave of Letters  25, 75, 76–79, 
  90, 91
  Cave of the Spear  24, 25
  caves  24, 25, 35–36, 41–44, 57, 
  63, 74, 75–79, 75–79
  battlefield today  87–88, 90–91
  tunnels  36, 36, 51, 53, 61, 66, 
  88, 90
  Celsus, Cornelius  60
  chain mail  25, 26, 50
  Christians  23, 52, 84
  circumcision  10–11
  City of David  6
  civilian life  45–46, 53, 62, 64, 
  65–66
  clothing, Jewish soldiers  23
  coins  
  Jewish  45, 46, 51, 53–54, 
  53–54, 56, 61, 64
  Roman  5, 6, 12, 19, 80, 82
  Cornelianus, Censorius  21
  Cornutus, Fuficius  21
  Cyprus  6
  Dead Sea  33, 35, 62
  Dexter, Cornelius  20, 81
  Egypt  7
  Ein Gedi  35, 62, 65–66, 74, 90
  Eleazar, Rabbi of Modi’in  17, 
  67, 73, 74
  Eusebius  16, 23, 41, 45, 46, 51, 
  52, 56, 66, 67, 73, 83
  Fatalis Claudius  27
  Felix, Albius  21, 81
  first aid  60
  footwear  23, 26
  fortifications  36, 67
  foundry  34
  Fronto, Cornelius  60
  Hadrian  12 
  arrives in Judaea  5–6
  background of  18–19
  Bar Kokhba War  47, 54, 61, 67
  and causes of the war  9–11
  death of  86
  post-war  81–83
  qualities of  19, 19, 86
  staff appointments  20, 21, 
  26, 27
  statue of  45, 46
  succeeds Trajan  7
  helmets  24, 26, 50, 70
  Herodium  34, 34, 36, 36, 66, 
  89–90
  Hierosolyma  5, 34
  honours  81–83
  Horvat ‘Ethri  52, 58–60, 87
  Horvat Zalit  36, 61
  Israel
  battlefield today  87–89, 87–88
  establishment of state  85–86
  Jerusalem  8, 11
  earlier rebellions in  5–6, 8
  Hadrian’s plans for rebuilding  
  10, 88–89
  post-war  84, 88–89
  Roman control of  64
  Temple  9–10, 64
  Jerusalem Archaeological Park  
  88, 89
  Jerusalem Talmud  17, 23, 39, 
  47, 73, 74
  Jewish commanders  16–18
  Jewish forces  22–26
  assembling of  22–23
  discipline  65
  equipment of  23–26
  size of  23
  tactics  32–36, 41, 42–44, 
  45, 48–50, 51–53, 60, 67, 
  68–69, 72
  Jewish plans  32–36
  Josephus  10
  Judaea
  Hadrian’s arrival in  5
  post-war  81
  terrain  9, 10, 32, 37, 63, 74, 75
  Judaean Desert  9, 10, 63, 74, 75
  Judaean Shephelah  9, 10, 32, 37
  
  96
  Judaism
  changing nature of  9
  post-war  83, 84–86
  king messiah  11–13, 39
  Kirbet ‘Ethri  61–62
  Knesset Menorah  89
  Lag B’Omer (holiday)  52, 84
  liburna  28–29
  Libya  6–7
  Marcellus, Publicius  20, 51, 82
  medical practice  60
  Mesopotamia  7
  messiah  11–13, 39
  Meyer, Samuel  84–85, 85
  Midrash  7, 9, 17, 23, 51, 52, 67, 
  73, 77, 84
  Mishnah  10, 17
  moshiah (messiah)  11–13, 39
  museums  88–90
  Nahal Hever  76
  Cave of Letters  25, 75, 76–79, 
  90, 91
  navy  28–29, 29, 62
  Nepos, Haterius  20, 51, 82
  post-war 
  attitude to Jews  83
  battlefield today  87–91
  Jewish analysis of war  83–86
  new city  83, 84
  rewards and punishments  
  80–83
  Quietus, Lusius  7
  rewards  81–82
  roads  8
  Roman commanders  18–21
  Roman Empire, map  4
  Roman forces  4, 26–31, 39
  Ala Antiana Gallorum et 
  Thracum Sagittaria  29
  auxiliary units  28, 29, 31
  Classis Syriacae  29, 62
  Cohors I Hispanorum milliaria  
  21, 31, 54
  Cohors I Miliaria Thracum  
  29, 55, 78–79
  Cohors IV Lingonum  31, 54
  equipment of  26–28
  Legio II Traiana Fortis  4, 7, 
  30, 40, 51, 56
  Legio III Cyrenaica  4, 6, 7, 20, 
  21, 29–30, 40, 51, 56
  Legio III Gallica  4, 21, 29, 31, 
  40, 51, 56
  Legio V Ferrata  81
  Legio V Macedonica  4, 18, 30, 
  55, 56, 66, 68–69
  Legio VI Ferrata  4, 7–8, 20, 
  29, 31, 40, 41, 46, 56, 89
  Legio VI Victrix  4, 21, 30, 
  54, 61
  Legio X Fretensis  4, 7, 10, 20, 
  21, 27, 29, 31, 40, 41, 56, 
  62, 81
  Legio X Gemina  4, 21, 30, 54, 
  55, 61
  Legio XI Claudia  4, 30, 55, 
  56, 66, 68–69
  Legio XII Fulminata  4, 30, 56
  Legio XIV Gemina  4, 30
  Legio XX Valeria Victrix  4, 
  21, 30, 54, 61, 81
  Legio XXII Deiotariana  4, 6, 
  7, 20, 30, 40, 52–53, 56
  navy  28–29, 29, 62
  recruitment of  26
  size of  28, 31
  structure and organisation of  
  26–31
  tactics  25, 37–38, 51, 51–54, 
  60, 61, 62, 67, 68–69, 72, 
  73, 76
  Roman navy  28–29, 29, 62
  Roman plans  37–38
  Rufus, Tineius  7, 12, 20, 37, 38, 
  46, 47
  Samaritans  8
  Severus, Iulius  21, 54, 56, 60, 
  61, 82
  shields  24, 26, 41, 50, 60, 65, 
  70–71
  ships  28–29
  Spartianus, Aelius  11, 18, 19, 
  26, 27, 86
  Szyk, Arthur  86
  tactics  65
  Jewish  32–36, 41, 42–44, 
  45, 48–50, 51–53, 60, 67, 
  68–69, 72
  Roman  25, 37–38, 51, 51–54, 
  60, 61, 62, 67, 68–69, 72, 
  73, 76
  taxes  6
  Tekoa, ambush in  48–50
  Tel Shalem
  arch at  81, 82–83
  Hadrian’s statue  45, 46
  Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus  
  10, 83, 89
  Torah  9, 11–12, 47, 64
  Trajan, Emperor  6–7
  tunics  23
  tunnels  36, 36, 51, 53, 61, 66, 
  88, 90
  see also caves
  Turbo, Marcius  6–7, 18
  Urbicus, Lollius  20–21, 54, 82
  Vespasian, Emperor  6
  Wailing Wall (Western Wall)  89
  warships  28–29
  weapons  
  arrowheads  22, 24–25, 73
  catapults  56, 73
  daggers  25, 27
  knives  25, 50
  pila  26
  quality of  34
  shields  24, 26, 41, 50, 60, 65, 
  70–71
  slings  24, 41, 44, 70–71, 73
  spearheads  23
  spears  25, 28, 31, 41,42–44, 
  49, 61, 70–72
  swords  25, 26–27, 26, 31
  West Bank  87, 89–91
  Western Wall (Wailing Wall)  89
  Zionism  85–86
  
  First published in Great Britain in 2017 by Osprey Publishing, 
  PO Box 883, Oxford, OX1 9PL, UK 
  1385 Broadway, 5th Floor, New York, NY 10018, USA 
  E-mail: info@ospreypublishing.com
  Osprey Publishing, part of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc
  OSPREY is a trademark of Osprey Publishing, a division of Bloomsbury 
  Publishing Plc.
  © 2017 Osprey Publishing
  All rights reserved. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private 
  study, research, criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, 
  Designs and Patents Act, 1988, no part of this publication may be 
  reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by 
  any means, electronic, electrical, chemical, mechanical, optical, 
  photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written 
  permission of the copyright owner. Enquiries should be addressed to 
  the Publisher.
  A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
  Print ISBN: 9781472817983 
  PDF e-book ISBN: 9781472817990 
  ePub e-book ISBN: 9781472818003
  XML ISBN: 9781472822710
  Index by Sharon Redmayne 
  Typeset in Myriad Pro and Sabon 
  Maps by Bounford.com 
  3D BEVs by The Black Spot 
  Originated by PDQ Media, Bungay, UK 
  AUTHOR’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS & 
  DEDICATION
  For their kind help with this book, the author wishes to thank: Thortsen 
  Opper of the British Museum, London; David Mevorah and the staff of Israel 
  Museum, Jerusalem; Sarah Turel and Michal Bentovim of Eretz Israel 
  Museum, Tel Aviv; Richard Beale of Roma Numismatics, London; Dale Tatro 
  of Classical Numismatics Group, Lancaster, Pennsylvania; Carole Raddato of 
  the Following Hadrian blog; Oved Abed and David and Ros Gutman in 
  Austin, Texas; and finally Mark Judkins, my patient travel companion in 
  Britain and Israel.
  The book is dedicated to the men and women of the armed forces and 
  police who put their lives at risk every day to defend our freedoms of 
  speech, movement and association.
  AUTHOR’S NOTE
  The original written sources on which this book is based are variously 
  written in Aramaic, Greek, Hebrew and Latin. Sometimes the meaning is 
  obscure and one modern scholar’s translation can be challenged by 
  another. Often the texts are damaged or are no more than fragments so 
  that whole words are missing, in which case experts try their best to fill in 
  these lacunae using their skill and judgement. To this papyrological 
  material, archaeology, epigraphy, numismatics, philology, military and 
  religious studies can provide valuable insights, but these are also subject to 
  interpretation. New discoveries and theories can (and do) overturn 
  accepted ideas. Fully recognizing the challenges posed by the research 
  material, this book represents the author’s best attempt to build a coherent 
  narrative of the events of ad 132–135/6 and readily accepts that it cannot 
  be the last word on the Bar Kokhba War.
  Several spellings of Hebrew names and places are possible in English. I 
  have opted to spell Ben Koseba’s moniker as Bar Kokhba (rather than Bar-
  Cochba, Bar Kochba, Bar Kokhva or Bar Kosba) where the ‘kh’ is pronounced 
  ‘ch’ (as in the Scottish ‘loch’) and ‘ba’ as in the French ‘va’. I use Rabbi Akiba in 
  place of Akiva or Aquiba or Aquiva. For the city of Ben Koseba’s last stand I 
  have used Betar throughout (rather than Beitar, Bethar, Bethther, Beththera, 
  Bithara or Bittîr), and Ein Gedi (rather than En-gedi or En Gedi).
  The dating convention used throughout is the Anno Domini designation 
  of bc/ad.
  Translations of ancient texts are in the public domain: Cassius Dio’s 
  Roman History by E. Cary (1925) in the Loeb Classical Library; Eusebius’ 
  Ecclesiastical History by Kirsopp Lake (1926); the Old Testament books are 
  from the King James Bible; the Midrash by Rev. Samuel Rapaport (1907); 
  the Babylonian Talmud by Michael L. Rodkinson (1903–1918) and the 
  Jerusalem Talmud by Dr Moses Schwab (1886). The translations of the Ben 
  Koseba letters were taken from Yigael Yadin et al., The Documents from the 
  Bar-Kokhba Period in the Cave of Letters: Hebrew, Aramaic and Nabatean-
  Aramaic Papyri (Israel Exploration Society, Israel, 1989–2002).
  Unless otherwise accredited, all images are from the author’s 
  personal collection.
  Osprey Publishing supports the Woodland Trust, the UK’s leading woodland 
  conservation charity. Between 2014 and 2018 our donations are being 
  spent on their Centenary Woods project in the UK.
  To find out more about our authors and books visit 
  www.ospreypublishing.com. Here you will find extracts, author 
  interviews, details of forthcoming events and the option to sign up for 
  our newsletter.
  ABBREVIATIONS
  AE 
  Année épigraphique
  CIL 
  Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum
  ILS 
  Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae
  P. Mur 
  The Documents from the Bar-Kokhba Period in the Cave of Letters
  P. Yadin 
  The Documents from the Bar-Kokhba Period in the Cave of Letters
  RIB 
  Roman Inscriptions of Britain
  GLOSSARY OF HEBREW WORDS
  Av 
  Eleventh month of the Jewish civil calender, coinciding with 
  parts of July and August.
  Halakhah 
  Body of Jewish religious laws derived from the Written and 
  Oral Torah.
  Iyyar 
  Eighth month of the Jewish civil calender, coinciding with 
  parts of April and May.
  Midrash 
  Compendium of rabbinic commentaries of the Jewish Bible.
  Mishnah 
  Collection of ‘Oral Law’ and rabbinic traditions which 
  supplements, complements, clarifies and systematizes the 
  commandments of the Torah.
  Pesach 
  ‘Passover’, a major eight-day festival celebrated in the early 
  spring to commemorate the emancipation of the Israelites 
  from slavery in Egypt.
  Shavuot 
  Originally a harvest festival (held fifty days after the second 
  day of Pesach), it now also commemorates the giving of the 
  Torah by God to the Jews at Mount Sinai.
  Sukkot 
  ‘Feast of Tabernacles’, a major festival held in the autumn 
  (beginning on the 15th day of Tishri) to commemorate the 
  sheltering of the Israelites in the wilderness.
  Talmud 
  Book of 613 commandments given by God to the Jews.
  Tishri 
  First month of the Jewish civil calender, coinciding with parts 
  of September and October.
  Torah 
  Jewish ‘Written Law’, also known as the Five Books of Moses 
  (Pentateuch) or Hebrew Bible (Tanakh), comprised of the first 
  five books of the Old Testament.
  Yom Kippur ‘Day of Atonement’, a high holiday falling ten days after the 
  Jewish New Year (Rosh HaShanah) on the 10th of Tishri.
  MEASURES
  1 centimetre = 0.39 inches
  1 metre = 3.28 feet
  1 kilometre = 3,280.84 feet
  1 Roman mile = 4,850 feet (1,478.3 metres)
  
SOURCE: textdata/thevault/Osprey System/Campaign Series (CAM)/CAM 310 - The Bar Kokhba War AD 132-6.pdf