You’ve got to have something to eat and a little love in your life before you can hold still for any damn body’s sermon on how to behave.
Billie Holiday
If they had been in Carrhae that year, troops of Christian sentiment retiring to Jerusalem in 276 would have arrived with that accident of war fresh in their memories. In Jerusalem, Mauricius would have lived a life with leisure to meditate upon Christian attitudes towards war and the army.
Living in Israel, he must have reflected on his experience of civilians in North Africa opposing a brutal emperor as did the Jews of Israel in 66 and 132. Whatever the ideals for which they fought, civilians were no match for the legions; revolt was virtually suicidal. Under Roman brutal administration, Jews had, nevertheless, enjoyed considerable self-rule until the revolts. Israel thereafter lost its autonomy.
The first revolt was recorded at length by Flavius Josephus – Pharisee, rebel and turncoat joining the Romans. Lack of any other record leaves his version of events questionable in his facts and possible omissions.
The second revolt left scarcely any record, Roman or Jewish, which is an intriguing gap in history. Enough is known that the leader of the second revolt, Bar Kochba, was feared by compatriots as a tyrant. Israeli archaeologists would discover a letter with his signature threatening anyone sheltering ‘The Galileans.’ Who these Galileans were, people of that region of northern Israel or Christians often referred to by that name, remains unclear.
Whatever the case, the revolts split Christianity and Judaism apart. The Church was loyal to the most harsh emperors and under persecution remained non-violent. The pacifism of most church leaders while the Empire had almost perished from invasions must have disturbed Mauricius as a veteran with brio, pride as a professional military man. To reject violence to defend one’s self was one thing. To reject violence if it was essential to save others, was something quite different.
What then was he to believe? The three years of preparation usually required for baptism encouraged him to consider the origins of Church policy towards the military, a policy that was evolving.
Most great writers of the early Church were pacifists. Justin,1 Tatian,2 Athenogoras,3 Origen4 and Lactantius5 and many others firmly opposed baptized Christians in armed service.
In the Torah, the first five books of the Bible, the book of Deuteronomy declared that the conscript who was ‘yareyverach halevav’, fearful and fainthearted, was to be sent home.6 Rabbi Akiva (c.50–135AD) interpreted this to be the ‘hero among heroes’, powerful among the most powerful, who is at the same time merciful,7 the conscientious objector, not the fearful but the compassionate. His view opposed that of the leader of the second revolt versus Rome, Bar Kochba. Akiva died heroically under torture as a rebel against Rome. His perspective seems a reinterpretation. Deuteronomy8 gave the recruit excuses from service if he had built a house and not yet dedicated it, planted a vineyard and not yet enjoyed its fruit, or become engaged and not yet married. Bar Kochba probably forced men to join the revolt.
The Jewish community of Alexandria, Egypt, had successfully asked Julius Caesar to exempt Jews from military conscription,9 pleading that a devout observer of the laws of Moses could not serve with pagans. Forbidden to dine with the uncircumcized or to be in the presence of idols, restricted in diet, repelled by meat consecrated to pagan divinities by the butchers, prohibited from marching or fighting on the Sabbath and holy days or to be cremated in accordance with Roman army regulations, the devout Jew found military service with gentiles impossible. Morever, Judaism gave a high priority to married life, while Roman enlisted men in the era could not legally marry. If religion disarmed Jews, Roman authorities were pleased with the fact.
While religion disarmed some believers, it encouraged others to violent revolution. The unnamed author of the secret War Scroll of the Dead Sea Scrolls apparently regarded the Roman legionnaires as the enemies of God, to be destroyed by the Sons of Light led by the Messiah.10 The inept instructions for war in the War Scroll seem of a mindset removed from realities. Neither devotees of the War Scroll nor pacifist Church fathers were open to questions posited in goodwill by soldiers striving decently to pursue their profession. The danger then as now was a public conscience polarized between militarists and the irresponsibly naive, ideological extremes ousting the balance of facts and ideals.
Military conscription, dilectus11 was rare in the Empire until the time of Diocletian. Jesus and his apostles as Jews were never liable to dilectus.
In 129BC, conversion and circumcision were forced upon the conquered Idumeans12 of the Negeb and in 103BC similarly imposed upon the Ituraeans13 east of the Jordan and Galilee.
Their descendants tended to be lax observers. The city of Pella was destroyed because its populace was not adhering to Jewish customs.14 Herod the Great, of Idumean ancestry, was called a ‘half-Jew’.15 Nevertheless, uncircumcized converts16 by the first century AD were allowed to attend synagogue in concession to resistance to ritual law of persons not ethnically Jewish.
The Herodian Kings of Galilee had troops including five cohorts of ‘Jewish’, i.e. Ituraean archers.17 The troops of the Roman military governor of Judea were largely Syrians18 with a tradition of animosity towards Jews. The Ituraeans had a reputation for rioting over arrears in pay, as did the Idumeans serving in Judea as temple police.19 The population preferred them to pagan soldiers nonetheless. These Ituraean cohorts centuries later probably provided troops for the Theban Legion as shall be seen.
The New Testament mentions five Roman centurions: the one meeting Jesus at Capernaum; Cornelius, baptized with his household by Peter at Joppa; the officer rescuing Paul from a mob at Ephesus; the one escorting him as a prisoner to Rome and the soldier at the crucifixion who called Jesus ‘Indeed the Son of God’. All are portrayed favourably.
Is this a pro-Roman presentation made to placate reprisals by the imperial government? Or does it express a sincere bias in favour of some military? The usual stereotype was that of X Ferrata, the ‘Ironclad’ Legion, stationed in Israel, composed of anti-semitic thugs, mostly Hellenistic Syrians – long enemies of the Jews. The emperor had been repeatedly petitioned to replace them but never did. This set the scene for Israel’s ill-fated revolt in the year 66.
Jews had been mercenaries for many centuries.20 Five hundred Jewish horsearchers who had fled from the Persian Empire became the bodyguard of Saturninus, Governor of Syria, at Valatha near Antioch and were granted a veterans’ colony at Batanea, Ituraea.21 This same duplicitous Saturninus in 19AD persuaded the Emperor Tiberius to banish all Jews from the city of Rome. Four thousand were conscripted in violation of Julius Caesar’s decree and sent to unhealthy regions of Sardinia. Those too old or too young to serve were threatened with enslavement if they defied the order.22 Josephus relates that many were punished for refusing to serve.23 Later, these conscripts were made non-citizen freedman, generis libertini, employees of the state.24
Only Luke mentions soldiers present as John baptized at the Jordan, more accurately, guards or police.
The tax-collectors too came to be baptized. ‘Master’, they said to him, ‘What are we to do?’ He told them ‘Do not go beyond the salary appointed to you.’ Even the soldiers on guard asked of him ‘What of us? What are we to do?’ ‘Do not use men brutally, do not lay false information against them. Be satisfied with your pay.’25
John declared baptism a prerequisite for salvation. ‘What are we to do?’ seems appropriate if these people were refused baptism.
The centurion at Capernaum, his servant healed by Jesus, was probably a sebomenos, a ‘God fearer’ in Greek, a convert to Judaism not practising every detail of Mozaic law. He was introduced as a ‘friend of the people’ who had contributed to the building of the local synagogue. A devout Jew was forbidden to enter the home of the uncircumcized. The centurion’s protest against Jesus entering under his roof may have been in part his desire to save Jesus from the violation of ritual law. Jesus did not ask him to quit the military. As this centurion is not named in the gospels, it is uncertain if he is in the Church calendar of saints.
Jesus’ response was unique and extraordinary. To the soldier’s knowledge he declared, ‘Amen. Amen. I say to you I have not seen such faith in all Israel.’
There were many official Roman military veterans’ colonies in Israel. Originally, army soldiers were retired individually whenever their term of twenty-five years expired. They were described entering civilian life ‘like orphans alone’. Roman military life made it quite difficult for a soldier to maintain a family. Only officers were allowed to have wives within the camp. Then the law was changed early in Jesus’ lifetime to discharge veterans in groups every two years, arranging that they be settled together in colonies throughout the Empire as they chose.
Typically, Romans referred to household slaves as familia. Retired officers included enlisted veterans as members of their household. Peter’s baptism of Cornelius thus was not baptism of a man on active military service. Similarly, John the Baptist had apparently refused baptism to temple guards on active duty.
In driving the cattle sellers and money changers from the temple,26 Jesus used violence against property. Loss of their money seems to influence many in power much more than loss of human life.
On the night of his arrest Jesus told his apostles to sell their cloaks in order to purchase swords.27 Yet, a moment later, shown a sword by one of the twelve, he declared ‘Enough.’ This apparent change of mind is never explained in the gospels and seems to conceal a gap in the narrative.
What did Jesus seek to defend? Twelve civilians each armed with a sword were hardly a match for the Temple Guard or Roman troops.
Since this episode concerns Jesus’ betrayal it plausibly involves the traitor, Judas Iscariot, not to be confused with the Apostle Jude or Judas.
The word Iscariot is meaningless in Aramaic, Hebrew and Greek. In Latin, sicarius means an assassin or terrorist, literally a ‘dagger-man’.28 Jesus wished to die as the prophecies of the Messiah had foretold.29 If he feared being murdered by an assassin, the arming of the apostles makes sense. If Jesus saw the Iscariot alone as essentially the danger and if Judas, the treasurer of the apostles, had been the one handing over his sword, one sword was enough.
When seized in the garden at Gethsamene, Jesus was defended by Peter who slashed with the sword a member of the arresting party. Jesus abruptly told him to sheath his weapon, declaring that ‘He who draws the sword dies by the sword.’30 This statement has been broadly interpreted to condemn all military service. Surely many men use weapons in war and do survive to live in peace. Without self-defence they might not. Jesus’ statement referred to the immediate situation. Peter’s violence in the face of a large group of military could have triggered a massacre. That is the paradox of deterrence. The threat of force can be effective in keeping peace. Its use can rapidly escalate violence.
Before Pilate, the only gentile Jesus ever addressed in the gospels, Jesus stated that ‘I am a king but my kingdom is not of this world. If it were of this world my followers even now would be fighting in the streets to set me free.’31 Jesus was certainly a Jewish patriot. He wept over the destruction of Jerusalem, which he expected if his commands were not followed.32 The last question asked of him by his apostles was ‘When shall Israel be a free nation?’33 Jesus’ death can be seen as sacrifice, symbol and scapegoat forestalling a suicidal national rebellion against Rome for more than a generation.
In the Jewish revolt of 66–70 the Ituraean forces under Herod remained loyal to Rome but defended Jews against the pagans in Galilee, attacking them amidst the chaos unleashed. Herod’s forces quite probably became thereafter the six Ituraean auxiliary infantrymen and cavalry units on the Roman army list.34 About 56AD, the Jewish horse-archers at Batanaea became Cohors I Augusta35 These Judaic units in the Roman army must have compromised religious practices if they retained Judaic beliefs. Christianity could have been attractive to them.
In contrast to the satellite Judaic forces in Galilee, Judea and Samaria, the forces of Roman citizens (the legions), generally remained in Syria36 although non-citizen auxiliary infantry and cavalry units were stationed at cities in Palestine.37 Cornelius, the centurion of the ‘Italian cohort’ at Caesarea Maritima38 from archaeological evidence was probably in Cohors II Italica Civium Romanorum Voluntariorum,39 unusual as an auxiliary unit in that it was composed of Roman citizens.
Cornelius was apparently a Sebomenos, ‘God fearer’, a convert to Judaism since Peter as a strict observer of Mozaic law would not have willingly entered a pagan household. Cornelius was baptized in his home. As an officer he would have been allowed to live outside the camp if on special duty status, beneficiarius, or semi-retired after twenty years’ service.
In 13BC Emperor Augustus had allowed soldiers to leave barracks life after sixteen years of service provided that they served four more years semi-retired40 in special cohorts under a curator veteranorum. By 15AD,41 these semi-retirees trained recruits and dealt with administrative matters in return for various privileges, including living outside camp with their families. Presumably, Cornelius was one of these personnel.
Paul recorded a centurion saving him from a flogging,42 another stopping a plot to kill him,43 and Julius,44 probably of Cohors I Augusta at Batanea, taking him as prisoner to Rome.
By the third century the aforementioned Ituraean cohorts were stationed in Egypt.45 All were archers. These units disappeared from the army list in the third century. The Theban Legion must have incorporated some experienced troops of old units. This suggests a link between Judaic Roman military and the Theban Legion.
Another army unit of significance to Mauricius would have been Legio XII Fulminata, the ‘thunderstruck’ legion with veterans retired to colonies in Israel. Josephus described Legio XII Fulminata as one of the finest units in the Roman army. However, a Roman contemporary, Tacitus, described it as lax and poorly outfitted for war. In the first revolt it was called from Syria to the siege of Jerusalem, chosen among five legions to lead the assault to enter the city. The Fulminata rapidly gained access over the outer city wall to the rooftops within as Jews at the gates fought against rebel countrymen in order to allow the legion into the city. With victory within sight, the Roman commander ordered the Fulminata to withdraw.
Josephus gives no explanation for this puzzling happening. The Fulminata was subsequently sent to northern Israel, not to crush rebels as much as defend Jews against the Greek-speaking populace rioting versus them that had sparked the revolt. With defeat of the revolt, the legion was sent to Melitene in the Roman satellite kingdom of Armenia with many thousands of Jewish captives to resettle them as useful contributors to a kingdom in need of workers.
Possibly the reason for the Fulminata’s order to withdraw was that it was regarded as too friendly to Jews seeking no violence versus Rome. If it had readily seized the city, the opportunity for plunder for the other legions might have been cancelled. Intermarriage between the Legio XII Fulminata’s personnel and Jewish women could explain this to some degree . The Legio XII Fulminata was to become known as the unique Christian legion.
The Empire was no longer an aggressive power menacing its neighbours. It had been on the defensive for a century, although its policy conducted sweeps beyond its frontiers from time to time. The Fulminata’s strategic role was defensive. The change in the army’s function lessened Christian objections to military service, the more so considering the near collapse of the Empire at Valerian’s fall.
The essence of morality is caring. To be a Christian and scorn the defence of others must have seemed hypocritical to Mauricius, a man with brio, a soldier’s pride in his profession.
The Moors among the veterans practised old routines, such as a stave dance that was a military drill put to music and jousts of two horsemen racing at one another to fling short poles blunted at one end by cloth wrappings, the Moorish style of cavalry attack with javelins. Typically, the Moors wore no helmets and displayed thick mats of crinkled hair. The thought occurred that their efforts would have been better used training new troops instead of entertaining themselves. Mauricius was restless out of service in what had been a turbulently active career.
Rumours abounded of great changes to take place in order to secure the shaken Empire. There were veterans jealous of the opportunity to undertake such reforms; they missed being part of a larger institution.To be a Christian was to be a member of a universal community. Religious conversion had a strong appeal to some soldiers. To be intelligently honest a person needs be a cynic, but ultimately there is need to be cynical even of cynicism. That is where faith enters.