Josephus was the victor. He turned on his countrymen in order to spare his own life and assist Rome.

@@-kepha8828 And where is Rome now?

@@SpaceMarine500You’re looking at the Romans asshole (Assuming you’re referencing The Sopranos )

I like this explanation. I hope it’s true because it does sound like a very realistic request and seemingly a thing Flavius would allow.

Just a theory, but considering the Roman presence in the region, maybe the words are related. Maybe the Latin fed Old Hebrew with that word.

@@eswissa1 Agree

@@eswissa1 Like Sam said in the video, their name comes from their usage of the sica, a dagger originating from the proto-balkan peoples and adopted by Rome; it was a very stealthy weapon that became very popular with general bandits and murderers, who were contemporaneously called "sicarii" (singular "sicarius").

It's an evolving process. I won't say more because I don't want to create expectations.

@@SamAronow fair enough mate, looking forward

I'd say overall that it'll be a mixture; giving overviews of certain places and time periods while also focusing in on specific figures therein.

Tbh they could have won if it wasn't for the factional infighting.He was given a situation where eveyone was working against him, so he realised there was no point in fighting and dieing if the people who were supposed to be his allies had no foresight and would betray each other instead of working against the larger threat of Rome.

Ha ha, that's because it's no longer a fortress

@@tonylast9181 Way to game the system

@@tonylast9181 I thought it is controlled now by IDF, and is their base of sorts?

but remember, Josephus was the Flavius family's "historian"... he had to make THEM the heroes of the stories, so they had to present the Jews as the persistence threat to the Romans and to make the Roman defeat more exhaustive than it was. Remember, he's alive because of Vespasian and Titus., so he did have an agenda and an obligation as it were to that family. Jews didn't preserve Josephus' works--- religious Jews regarded/regard him as a traitor and turn-coat. However, despite Josephus' often flowery speeches and exaggerated numbers he was the BEST "historian" in his intricate and exhaustive detail of Jerusalem as well as the geography of Israel at that time. The account of Masada was received by third hand info--- remember Josephus wasn't there. So he could include what thought happened there without betraying either his people or the family to put him up in his nice lifestyle throughout his life.

Both have PIE origins, but "seax" comes from "sek" (to cut), whereas "sica" comes from the proto-Albanian "tzika," which coms from the PIE "key" (to sharpen).

That's how Josephus wrote his Antiquities. It was a series of books written over a period of several years, divided according to chronological order in accordance with the Greco-Roman style of chronicle-writing.

@@andrewsuryali8540 thank you!! 🙂️

Possibly inside the Vatican. Not impossible.

When I walked near it I had the urge to pee. Fortunately, no ne was around so I pissed on the Arch of Titus.

You're not gonna believe this, but..... the Majora's Mask Deku Palace theme.

@@philpeer7407 nice

Three years was the total length of operations after the fall of Jerusalem, including the campaign against Judah Ben-Ari.

People called Romans they go the house?

@@Meirstein no, the one with the suicide command

@@gilgameschvonuruk4982 The Judean People's Front crack suicide division

…

Being a non-religious person I have to often remind myself not to lump everyone classified as "x-y-z" as being religious. Surely in modern times at least, there are people we call christians, jews, muslims, etc that are completely agnostic or atheist. And while, yes, we can assume most, if not all people, were very religious back then, the Jews in particular were / are considered as an actual race of people and not just a religious group. So somewhat similarly, I could be called/ labeled a Christian simply because I'm a white American just as most brown skinned Arabs are automatically labeled as Muslim but that's not our actual race. My point here is that whenever you, your family, tribe, city, etc, feel like you're being invaded by some outside group, I have to assume that the religious aspects, connotations, and labels for the struggle are only one part of the equation possibly even a smaller part. In short, you just want people who are not of your own race and or aggressors of any kind to stay out of your lands.

@@oldowl4290Thank you for your comment which prompted me to amend and clarify mine. I agree with your conclusion "In short...." It is natural for a group to seek to maintain and thus protect its cultural homogeneity necessary for the harmony of social relations. But I find it questionable to state that "the Jews in particular were/are considered as an actual race of people". But, is it true? I contend that Judaism is not a race and has never been a race. It is a belief system that creates a specific but artificial identity. A Jew is one who practices Judaism, that is to say, who assumes the artificial identity (taboos, prohibitions, obligations) created by this belief system. The distinction is important because it helps to understand the political tensions in Israel between Jews and non-Jews (who can be called Israelis). The problem is that Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox Jews think that the territory named Israel is or must be a Jewish state, that is, its identity must be the one circumscribed by the Torah. In other words, the Torah must be the fundamental law of the land. But non-Jews or Israelis (atheists, agnostics) don't want that and they try to create a modern identity, a new identity that is no longer defined by the Torah.

@@esprit-critique Ok, my question to you then is if you can say Asians are a race, Arabs and Persians are a race, Egyptians are a race, American Indians are a race, the west or east Indians are a race, Russians or Slavs are a race, Africans or "blacks" are a race, Mexicans and central Americans are a race, the aboriginals of Australia are a race, etc, etc..then how can you say that the Jews / Israelites are somehow not a race. Surely Hitler felt otherwise. He set out to kill Jews..the race of people, not necessarily Judaism, their religion. And I'm pretty positive most all Jews do consider themselves as their own race. Just because their people are also anchored in their own religion (like many other cultures are too) and or that they could be considered to have evolved from that, I do think most people typically consider people of Israel / Jews to have their own race. And isn't that kind of how and why Israel came to have it's own country post WWII anyway. And if they are not a race of people.. then just who are they? I can't easily classify Jewish people as Arabs nor Persians nor Turks even though they all evolved together in the same area. And they do have their own language too. So yeah, I consider them as a race.

@@oldowl4290 1. You write : « IF YOU CAN SAY Asians are a race, Arabs and Persians are a race, Egyptians are a race, American Indians are a race, ….THEN HOW CAN YOU SAY that the Jews / Israelites are somehow not a race » The answer is simple: NO, WE CAN NOT SAY that «Asians are a race, Arabs and Persians are a race....»!!! Your reasoning is strange because no one would be inclined to say today that the Arabs, the Persians, Egyptians or French .. are races. THEY ARE PEOPLES! There is definitely a problem with vocabulary and definitions here. Races, peoples, ethnicities, cultural identities, physical identities, human types, and so on must be carefully distinguished because they refer to specific realities and divisions. I invite you to clear the ground by checking the definitions given by the dictionaries. I randomly chose the Webster-Merriam www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/race Generally, when we talk about race, we focus on physical characteristics that are general enough to include most humans. Traditionally, three major races have been distinguished - the black race, the yellow, and the white. The color of the skin is the main criterion, but there are others: the type of hair, the shape of the eyes, the thickness of the lips, etc. And Webster's dictionary proves me right. You can read : "Sense 1a of this entry describes the word race as it is most frequently used: to refer to the various groups that humans are often divided into based on physical traits, these traits being regarded as common among people of a shared ancestry." 2. You write : « Surely Hitler felt otherwise. He set out to kill Jews..the race of people, not necessarily Judaism, their religion. Yes Hitler felt and many nazis felt that Jews were a race. But they were wrong, terribly wrong. This fundamental mistake was denounced by many German jurists. For them, there was nothing genetic about Judaism. No need to look for ancestors or take blood into account. It was clear to them that Judaism is a normative system based on beliefs. Only Germans practicing Judaism were to be considered Jews! And they resisted legislative changes incriminating Germans coming from Jewish families or having Jewish ancestry but not practicing Judaism. They were to be legally considered full-fledged Germans, like all other Germans. The saddest thing is that Hitler's mistake is nowadays that of Orthodox Jews who are looking for the genes of Jewishness!

@@esprit-critique TLDR. I honestly don't care either way. Take your essays elsewhere.

Lmao

Thank you brother

"Suffererd"?! 🤦

Just imagine how much less bloodshed there would have been if religion and god, under any name, was taken out of the equation. Take all the time you need.

He is considered a traitor by most if not all religious Jews.

How is it nonsense?