Masada and Jonestown

[DocMoriartty]

I have always wondered really what the difference between Masada and Jonestown was.

Both are outposts of religious extremists.

Both were opposed by the authorities.

Both had mass suicides when they authorities were going to step in.

Both had people who did not want to commit but were forced to by the soldiers of their communities.

So in many regards they were very similar. Yet Masada is a heroic last stand while Jonestown is a horrible massacre?

[BlkbrryTheGreat]

Jonestown? I can't even recall hearing of this incident; what happened there?

[Ted C]

A group of cultist drank poisoned koolaid rather than submit to authorities. I think the enclave was somewhere outside the US, but the incident was decades ago, so I don't recall many of the details.

[DocMoriartty]

It happened in 1978. A cult based around a prophet figure (Jim Jones) commited mass suicide through poisoned kool-aid.

The armed guards of the camp murdered a senator and his aides if I remember right who had come there to investigate.

Jonestown was located in Guyana in Central America.

[LadyTevar]

Yes, those are the details for Jonestown, a town ran by a cult leader just as crazy as the one that had his followers suicide so they could catch a ride on the passing comet.

IIRC, here are the basics of Masada:

Masada was a fortress where a Anti-Rome Jews made a stand to be free of the Roman Empire. They withstood a seige for 3(?) years, before the Romans built a long earthen ramp to negate the stiff cliffs that had stopped them. The Jewish leaders, realizing that the Roman Army would overwhelm them totally, chose by lots the men who would do the killing (and absolved them?). Those men killed every man, woman and child, so that the Romans wouldn't send them to slavery or crucify them.

[Trytostaydead]

Hmmm.. I'm not exactly sure about all the circumstances surrounding Jonestown, but Masada was the last ditch bastion of rebellion against the Romans.

Masada was Herods old Palace retreat I belief, and was designed to actually be near impenetrable based on its location and housed many stores that could last a long long time. The Romans of course circumvented this with their engineering know-how and started a long siege of Masada. Of course this was after they had taken Jerusalem and the blood-frenzy that occured when the Romans stormed the city and to say the least, Masada was infuriating the Romans a lot more than Jerusalem did.

I guess maybe the fighters in Masada who saw their rebellion crumbling and knew that almost certain death awaited them as soon as the Romans could scale the walls chose to take their own lives rather than give the Romans the satisfaction.

Jonestown I believe was just occupied by nuts and run by even bigger nuts.

[The Dark]

There are questions as to whether the Masada suicide actually happened. The only historian who records it is Josephus, a Jew who joined the Romans. It would be unlikely that he would record a massacre of the Jews by the people he had chosen to ally with. I'm uncertain as to what really happened at Masada, and the history will probably always say suicide, but I think that may be part of the difference; we don't know what happened at Masada exactly.

[Trytostaydead]

There are questions as to whether the Masada suicide actually happened. The only historian who records it is Josephus, a Jew who joined the Romans. It would be unlikely that he would record a massacre of the Jews by the people he had chosen to ally with. I'm uncertain as to what really happened at Masada, and the history will probably always say suicide, but I think that may be part of the difference; we don't know what happened at Masada exactly.

I think the evidence does lend support more to mass suicide though IIRC. At any rate, one would think that if the Romans had a great victory at Masada there would've been some documentation on it considering the great effort put through to reach the mountaintop fortress.

[The Dark]

At any rate, one would think that if the Romans had a great victory at Masada there would've been some documentation on it considering the great effort put through to reach the mountaintop fortress.

Maybe. Then again, for the Roman Army to take 9 years to defeat a small nation in the middle of an internal civil war is not exactly a point of pride. A contemporary military officer stationed at my school looked at the force composition and political make-up and said it should have taken between six months and two years for the Romans to win. They did celebrate taking Jerusalem, since that was the big political target. Masada was a sideshow.

[DocMoriartty]

At any rate, one would think that if the Romans had a great victory at Masada there would've been some documentation on it considering the great effort put through to reach the mountaintop fortress.

Maybe. Then again, for the Roman Army to take 9 years to defeat a small nation in the middle of an internal civil war is not exactly a point of pride. A contemporary military officer stationed at my school looked at the force composition and political make-up and said it should have taken between six months and two years for the Romans to win. They did celebrate taking Jerusalem, since that was the big political target. Masada was a sideshow.

Was he looking at the layout out of the fortress?

[DocMoriartty]

Hmmm.. I'm not exactly sure about all the circumstances surrounding Jonestown, but Masada was the last ditch bastion of rebellion against the Romans.

Masada was Herods old Palace retreat I belief, and was designed to actually be near impenetrable based on its location and housed many stores that could last a long long time. The Romans of course circumvented this with their engineering know-how and started a long siege of Masada. Of course this was after they had taken Jerusalem and the blood-frenzy that occured when the Romans stormed the city and to say the least, Masada was infuriating the Romans a lot more than Jerusalem did.

I guess maybe the fighters in Masada who saw their rebellion crumbling and knew that almost certain death awaited them as soon as the Romans could scale the walls chose to take their own lives rather than give the Romans the satisfaction.

Jonestown I believe was just occupied by nuts and run by even bigger nuts.

There has been some thought that not everyone at Masada wanted to commit suicide. That and the fact that small infants were put to death just as quickly as adults makes Masada feel quite a bit like Jonestown.

[DocMoriartty]

BTW, I would like to point out that the Romans were far from oppressive butchers. As rulers went they were pretty lenient. Pay your taxes and the Roman Empire didnt care if you worshiped your neighbors toilet.

[Darth Gojira]

Judaism is still popular, The cult is not. Hence, the glorification of fanatics.

[LadyTevar]

BTW, I would like to point out that the Romans were far from oppressive butchers. As rulers went they were pretty lenient. Pay your taxes and the Roman Empire didnt care if you worshiped your neighbors toilet.

However, try to withhold taxes, or to set up your own government, and they'd break you and crucify the survivors.

[SirNitram]

BTW, I would like to point out that the Romans were far from oppressive butchers. As rulers went they were pretty lenient. Pay your taxes and the Roman Empire didnt care if you worshiped your neighbors toilet.

However, try to withhold taxes, or to set up your own government, and they'd break you and crucify the survivors.

With the exception of putting people on sticks, most governments do that.

[The Dark]

At any rate, one would think that if the Romans had a great victory at Masada there would've been some documentation on it considering the great effort put through to reach the mountaintop fortress.

Maybe. Then again, for the Roman Army to take 9 years to defeat a small nation in the middle of an internal civil war is not exactly a point of pride. A contemporary military officer stationed at my school looked at the force composition and political make-up and said it should have taken between six months and two years for the Romans to win. They did celebrate taking Jerusalem, since that was the big political target. Masada was a sideshow.

Was he looking at the layout out of the fortress?

He saw the layout of the fortress, with topological data, along with photographs of the site as it is now, to give visual data on thickness of walls and height of the Masada plateau. He did say the six months was a best-case scenario, and one and a half to two years is what he would expect. However, nine years was longer than necessary in his opinion, particularly for the best-trained army in the world to crush a rebellious group 5% its size without military training.

[Trytostaydead]

i dunno, I 'd think you have to consider the logistics of it. Moving in the necessary material at the pace of your animals and men, placing the material, and of course keeping the men supplied adequately for long ardorous work and expect that they could fight as well.

[DocMoriartty]

BTW, I would like to point out that the Romans were far from oppressive butchers. As rulers went they were pretty lenient. Pay your taxes and the Roman Empire didnt care if you worshiped your neighbors toilet.

However, try to withhold taxes, or to set up your own government, and they'd break you and crucify the survivors.

Withhold taxes in America today and you go to jail. Try to forment violent revolt and you go to jail or get killed. Things dont change other than the Romans skiped the lesser sentances.

I see nothing wrong with the Romans reaction to armed rebellion.

[DocMoriartty]

Maybe. Then again, for the Roman Army to take 9 years to defeat a small nation in the middle of an internal civil war is not exactly a point of pride. A contemporary military officer stationed at my school looked at the force composition and political make-up and said it should have taken between six months and two years for the Romans to win. They did celebrate taking Jerusalem, since that was the big political target. Masada was a sideshow.

Was he looking at the layout out of the fortress?

He saw the layout of the fortress, with topological data, along with photographs of the site as it is now, to give visual data on thickness of walls and height of the Masada plateau. He did say the six months was a best-case scenario, and one and a half to two years is what he would expect. However, nine years was longer than necessary in his opinion, particularly for the best-trained army in the world to crush a rebellious group 5% its size without military training.

One small mistake.

From what you listed above the guy had about 1000% more information than the Romans had at the time. He knew everything about Masada. I would hope that anyone that knew that much would win that quickly.

[NecronLord]

You officer had one piece of information wrong.

It didn't take nine years, it took nine months

Masada was under Zealot Control for three years 70 - 73, while the romans were otherwise engaged. They then got around to dispatching General Flavius Silva to destroy Masada in CE 73, which he did.