Talk:Kitos War

Chronology

The article reads, "But Turbo was himself executed upon special orders sent from Rome, and the lives of the brothers were saved." The article seems to place this around 117/8 CE. Indeed, the war lasted, according to the 1st article sentence, from 115 - 117 CE. However, the article on Turbo says he lived to at least 122 CE and was a good friend of both Trajan and Hadrian, making it unlikely they would send special orders to execute him. This does not add up.

Quintus Lucius Quietus

Is there a source for the name form "Quintus Lucius Quietus"? I found only evidence for "Lusius" or "Lucius Quietus". WolfgangRieger 21:26, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Changed "Palestine" to Iudaea, as the Province of Iudaea was not renamed Syria Palaestina until after 135 ad. User:Josephconklin 24 February 2006

Casualties

As per Humus_sapiens, I posted the casualty info that I could find. Anyone else that can add to either Roman, Greek, or Jewish losses, please update and post scholarly reference. Thank you. --Jtpaladin 20:33, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

The numbers you have posted are incredibly unrealistic. If those are the only ones you could find then I would suggest either not including them or including qualifiers and adding ambiguity about their accuracy.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 18:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Moshe, those numbers came from the Jewish Encyclopedia and were approved by Humus_sapiens. Is the Jewish Encyclopedia lying? No other source has been located that disputes those numbers and you've been here long enough to know that multiple citations are not needed to support a fact. Your actions are disgusting and unscholarly. If you have a problem with this matter, I suggest you speak to Humus_sapiens. Jtpaladin 14:54, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Those numbers do indeed seem quite unrealistic. While I will not completely discount them, I think additional source(s) would help confirm their legitimacy. My reasoning is that by that time in history, the romans had already become quite hostile toward Judaism, and the numbers may be exaggerated as a result of this hostility. Medevilenemy (talk) 00:24, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Kitos?

Why is it called the Kitos War? What's Kitos? --AW 16:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I think that it is a Hebrew disruption of the name Quietus - The main enemy of them in this war.

Thanks --AW (talk) 18:18, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

---

Why are people trying to Transliterate the primary Article name into English, when there is a Scholarly English name "Second Jewish Revolt" makes a lot more sense? How big would spelling tests in school be if every word in the world was transliterated into English spelling? DigDeep4Truth (talk) 04:37, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Look at the dates -- they're about 15 years apart. AnonMoos (talk) 05:14, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

You mean 7 years apart? Why does the time matter? How does a dividing line help? DigDeep4Truth (talk) 09:39, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

They started about 15 years apart. One set the stage for the other, but they were not the same. AnonMoos (talk) 13:51, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

---

Why is an English Title not right for an English Wiki article? ` DigDeep4Truth (talk) 07:54, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Not sure what English has to do with it -- the choice is between Latin and Hebrew. Anyway, Wikipedia usually goes with the most commonly-used name... AnonMoos (talk) 08:18, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

The question of casualties

82.119.85.227 (talk) 01:06, 8 February 2008 (UTC) Those indicating the number of casualties in article are having for sure a quite strange attitude. Those numbers are not only seaming but sure are obviously exaggerated from the historian and senator Dio Cassius – that can be because of his hostility towards both Jewish and Greeks, and because also his works are more literary than historical and scientific. The island of Cyprus is quite small and having today population of less than 800 thousand, pointing 240 thousand dead would be making population growing only two or three times until now which view the growth of population in Europe and Mediterranean is absurd. Same can be said about Cyrenaic – mountain peninsula with few Greek colonies.

In the same time why not indicating the Jewish casualties which official Jewish sources are pointing – that is of 1,2 million of Jewish dead (they are pointed in Jewish Bible), the number is seaming quite realistic as the Jewish Diaspora was growing incredibly fast with dispersion of Jews – as free populations or as slaves, and the number of proselytes was quite high (like every Antique religion Jewish one though staying quite undeveloped was finding adepts among different populations) – as a Jewish author was saying “because every land and every sea are full of thee”. The case of revolt can be sure similar to the Sicilian revolts of slaves which were establishing their states on island for few years. It is sure anyway that the number of Jews in empire was already then very high. They were actually already pointed more from their religious and not much their unclear ethnical definitions. The hostility towards the Roman power was also caused from religious reasons. Jewish populations were reaching in empire number of few millions.

The answer of Roman armies towards a revolt of the kind was always severe and would be directed towards any Jewish populations in empire – able of supporting revolt. Roman policy was though always directed towards having also a political solution for decreasing the different tensions in the state.

“Kitos war” and its principal reasons

Cheboksari (talk) 02:54, 30 November 2009 (UTC) As the so called “Kitos war” was concurring with time of the greatest and unprecedented spreading of Christianity in East Hellenist provinces of empire, it was representing so most probably an anti-Christian or Christian plot either a quite characteristic combination of both which would be punishing East provinces for their Christian tendencies and directions or would be proving the cruelty and inhumanity of “Old Testament” and Old Faith compared to Christian religion whose adepts were and should be always ready of suffering and of renouncing everything for their Christian faith (which seeming absurd for any "Pagans"). For the purpose Romans and Greeks would be (for a first time) using the Jewish populations, much numerous in any of provinces of empire (and defined by their religious belonging), which were principally opposing and opposed to new Christian religion (that principal opposition was started already in the 1st c. A D after the birth and deeds of the messiah – Son of God or illegitimate son of Roman soldier as the non-Christian sources pointing). Jewish were for a strange reason revolting in lands out of Palestine and this way out of their religious and political interest, where final victory was sure impossible and where revolt was not bringing much profit (except of provoking bloody answer of Roman armies). For their directed venture the Jewish were paying with 1,2 millions dead (pointed in Jewish Bible).

The forming principally later Judeo-Christian Mafia – for whom later the Jewish were becoming the “Chosen people” of the newly created and imagined Christian and Platonic God (instead of the original Jewish version of the people contracting with their tribal and "jealous" god of Jehovah – one of many as pointed in First Commandment) – was then probably still not trying of creating for Jewish a privileged economical and social situation characteristic for Middle Ages and later – when newly born bourgeoisie was wanting (without danger of being somehow bothered for that – and that’s why Jewish – first to have such positions and occupations should be there exceptionally supported and protected) following steps and example and sharing the positions of Jewish usurers, merchants and profiteers (robbing in unimaginable way common populations). The Kitos war was sure also a reason for later emp. Hadrian banishing Jewish from Palestine after local Bar-Kokhba uprising.

What a load of tripe. The Christian religion was miniscule at this stage and it certainly had no effect on the Kitos War. This was a Jewish uprising, simple as that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.43.227.18 (talk) 01:28, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Before writing some nonsense like that be sure of checking some well known facts, could be even enough reading something widely known like “Quo Vadis” by Henryk Sienkiewicz. Already in Apostolic times Christianism was one of important and much principal religious and social directions of empire – quite differing any another and becoming for that principally opposed from main layers of Roman rule and society (that is making Nero accusing widely opposed and hated Christians for set from him great fire of Rome, which is so becoming the first great persecution of Christians) and also from its “Abrahamic” rivals and enemies like Jews.

(Christians were the rivals of Judaists in Palestine and rest of empire, but from beginning of history of Christian sect it was principally established with its followers and religious leaders in city of Rome, though spreading also in whole rest of empire.)

For illustrating that situation I’m proposing here a correspondence between Plinius Junior, substitute in 111-113 of emperor Traianus in northwest Anatolian province “of Bithynia and Pontus”, and emperor Traianus himself, the governor is writing: “This religion is spreading everywhere, not only in cities and villages, but also in whole country, the Temples (of Pagans) are deserted, and people are since long not making sacrifices… with them (the Christians) is existing a rite of gathering into their certain places before rising of sun and praying Christ as a God”.

Traian is himself much alarmed about the situation and is also pointing in his correspondence with the governor “The one that denies being Christian and virtually proves this – that is with prayers towards our Gods, let him be then reprieved because of his repentance, however would he be suspicious by his past. But the attached anonymous lists shouldn’t be reason for accusations of any kind, as that would be one too bad example and yet is not responding to the spirit of our time”, Traianus is publishing an edict against “Secret Societies” and “Superstitions”, which principally concerning Christians.

Christianism had sure a principal importance for Rome as principal enemy of Roman state and ideology, when Jews had never had any principal importance for Rome, the Jewish “uprising” was sure unique of its kind in history of Jews, and, like said, was having no any chances for success or interest and profit and having as only result 1,2 million of Jews dead – it is so sure that Jewish were used for their venture by different directions of Roman society and policy (for some of which they could be considered as allies or opponents as being sure among principal enemies of Christianity).

Cheboksari (talk) 00:53, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

In the early 2nd century A.D. Christianity was gaining ground among the urban lower classes in certain parts of the Roman empire, and Christians were convenient targets of persecution or scapegoating (since in the eyes of many they were "atheists -- i.e. unwilling to participate on ordinary civic rituals that involved pagan deities or the worship of the emperor's "genius" -- but insofar as Christianity was separate from Judaism, not entitled to the special permission granted to Jews to abstain from such rituals). However, Christianity was really not a major force within the Roman empire at that time. AnonMoos (talk) 05:24, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Trajan was the first from emperors trying of systematically erasing Christian „superstition“ – seeing it as an enemy of Roman state. It is for sure that Christianity was major trouble, danger and opposition for Roman power already at time of Trajan, and also continuing growing as such. The preoccupation, concern, alarm of emperor, his edicts, policy, writings are clearly pointing that.

Cheboksari (talk) 00:25, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Paraphrase

This article includes sections of text quoted directly from the Jewish encyclopedia. Although references are given the relevant passages should be rewritten. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.177.205.224 (talk) 13:14, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Dio Cassius

Shouldn't there be something with the Dio Cassius quote that states it might come from a biased observer? His text is displayed as if it was full of facts from an objective reporter. His claims seem to be grossly exaggerated and I think it certainly plausible that he was embellishing them due to his own biases. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.141.240.55 (talk) 22:36, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

The article on the revolt by Alexander FUKS

I am surprised that no one mentioned yet the article by Alexander Fuks, that collects all available information from the papyri e.t.c.

I will have liked to create an account, read some information texts, add the reference... But I am a bit pressed for time. So..., if anyone from those that have read it agrees that it should be mentioned, here's the reference:

Aspects of the Jewish Revolt in A.D. 115-117 Alexander Fuks The Journal of Roman Studies Vol. 51, Parts 1 and 2 (1961), pp. 98-104 (article consists of 7 pages) Published by: Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/298842

Regards, -. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.149.168.135 (talk) 20:25, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

A good source, thank you. Can someone insert the info?Greyshark09 (talk) 16:52, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Change of title to: "Second Jewish-Roman War"

Since the current title, "Kitos War," has very little recognition in academic circles, it is my suggestion that the title of this article be changed to "Second Jewish-Roman War." Any comments?Davidbena (talk) 23:01, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

The original 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia quote

The second sentence of the two quoted here doesn't make sense, but it could just be a question of re-punctuation. Does anyone have the original 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia to verify it? Nick Barnett (talk) 12:10, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Relationship of this article with the Diaspora Revolt article

It appears that last month, someone made a completely separate, way more fleshed-out article on the Second Jewish-Roman War separate from this one. This is odd to me, because as I understand it "Kitos War", "Second Jewish-Roman War" and the "Diaspora Revolt" are all considered more or less synonymous. It appears that their goal was for the Kitos War article to be eventually reduced in scope to only cover the war's happenings in Judaea, but to me this makes little sense as the Diaspora Revolt and the war in Judaea eventually converged into one and the same with Lukuas (the leader of the North African Jewish rebels) fleeing to Egypt. Are there any historiographic precedents for considering these two conflicts separate rather than one and the same? Pescavelho (talk) 17:00, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Pescavelho, recent scholarship typically uses the term "Kitos War" to refer specifically to events in Judaea during the Diaspora Revolt, though it sometimes includes the actions of Lucius Quietus in Mesopotamia. A notable example can be found in the ''Cambridge History of Judaism'':

Pucci Ben Zeev, Miriam (2006). "The Uprisings in the Jewish Diaspora, 116–117". In Katz, Steven T. (ed.). The Late Roman-Rabbinic Period. The Cambridge History of Judaism. Vol. 4. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 93–104. doi:10.1017/CHOL9780521772488.005. ISBN 978-0-521-77248-8.

This chapter discusses the Diaspora Revolt in detail and includes a section titled "THE 'WAR OF KITOS' IN JUDAEA," showing that this term is applied by the author (one of the leading authorities on the topic) to one specific episode that took place during the broader conflict.

The same idea can be deducted also from: "Finally, the Mishnah and Seder Olam probably allude to and date similar repression in Judaea under the name ‘the war of Quietus’ (M. Sotah ix 14, Seder Olam Rabbah 30)" (Horbury, William (2014). Jewish War under Trajan and Hadrian. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-139-04905-4. p. 170)

Referring to the entire conflict as the "Kitos War" is anyway pretty misleading, as the primary theatres of the war (Egypt, Libya, Cyprus) involved different generals, not Quietus, but most notably, Marcius Turbo. Mariamnei (talk) 16:00, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

IMO the best way of going about it is renaming the Diaspora Revolt article to "Second Jewish-Roman War" and clarifying that "Diaspora Revolt" and "Kitos War" refer to the two different fronts of the war. This article can still exist, but imo it needs some retooling to make it stand on its own, otherwise there's not much of a point to having it be a separate article and not just a subsection of the Second Jewish-Roman War article. Pescavelho (talk) 14:42, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

The main event here, and what gets the most attention from scholars, is the Diaspora Revolt. The War of Kitos didn't really leave a major mark on history, and there's no real archaeological evidence for it in Judaea, unlike the abundance of findings from the Great Jewish Revolt and the Bar Kokhba revolt. Using the name the "Second Jewish-Roman War" as a title is also tricky, since that term is even more often used by scholars for the Bar Kokhba revolt (which is sometimes also labelled the third). I think the current setup works well, with the Diaspora Revolt as the main topic and title. Another option could be merging this article into the other, like Pucci Ben Zeev did in her chapter for the Cambridge series I mentioned. Mariamnei (talk) 14:52, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Merging this page into the Diaspora Revolt article seems sensible (or rather the reverse, since this page is older, it'd have to be renamed though, so it doesn't matter much). In fact, the two pages used to be the same article, which is what I was complaining about. Pescavelho (talk) 15:00, 6 November 2024 (UTC)