Historical Puzzles and Possible Interpretations of the Encounter Between 'Turnus Rufus' and 'Rabban Gamliel' in the Talmud (Taanit 29a)
Continuation of this previous post: “ ‘The Man with the Nose is Wanted’: The Talmudic Story of Tineius Rufus and Rabban Gamliel (Taanit 29a)” (December 25, 2023)
Illustration by Dall-e. Description: “A depiction of the Talmudic passage about Rufus ploughing over the Temple. The scene is set in ancient Jerusalem, with a representation of the Second Temple in the background, showcasing its architectural details as per historical records. Rufus, depicted as a Roman official, is seen ploughing the temple grounds, symbolizing the destruction. He wears a historically accurate Roman military outfit, and the plough is a simple, ancient design. The environment around the temple is depicted with accuracy, showing the landscape and city structures of ancient Jerusalem. The color palette is rich yet somber, emphasizing the historical significance and the solemn nature of the event.”
Problems
Chronological Inconsistency with Rabban Gamliel II
One can question the chronological accuracy of Rabban Gamliel II living during the Bar Kochba revolt. Norman Solomon, Talmud, on this passage, suggests that it should be Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel instead.
Anachronism of "The Sanctuary" (ההיכל)
The term "the sanctuary" in the Talmudic passage is problematic as it typically refers to the Temple, which was destroyed in 70 CE, much earlier than the Bar Kochba revolt and the era of Tineius Rufus.
(Heiman, Toldot, deals with some of these issues in passing, in his entry on Rabban Gamliel, p. 318, section “Days of His Life” - ימי חייו)
Linguistic Puzzles
The passage shifts from Hebrew to Aramaic and back to Hebrew, which is unusual and indicates possible later additions or edits to the original text: The passage starts in Hebrew, then switches to Aramaic, seemingly right in the middle of the story, from “Rabban Gamliel heard and went into hiding” (שמע רבן גמליאל, אזל טשא מינייהו). In standard current scholarly theory, this would indicate that from here ends the beraita, and starts an addition of the anonymously Talmud (Stam). But it starts right in the middle of a story, not as a gloss.
The story then switches back to Hebrew from יצתה בת קול, for the final line.
Inaccuracy in the Use of hegemon
The Greek loan word hegemon (הגמון) is typically used (similarly to its Greek origin) to mean a leader.
Possible Explanation - Conflation of Events
The Talmud often conflates events from the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE with those of the Bar Kochba revolt in 132 CE. This is particularly evident in the main sugya of "the destruction" in Gittin.
See especially in the main sugya of "the destruction" in Gittin, where stories of both are told, without any distinction made (see my previous piece quoting those passages: “Talmudic Stories Relating to the Destruction of the Second Temple” [July 27, 2023] > section “Outline”, where section # 7 - “The Destruction of Betar” refers to the Bar Kochba revolt.)
An Alternative (Speculative) Theory
Alternative Theory about Turanos-Rufus - Terentius Rufus
We can speculate whether the “Turanos-Rufus” (טורנוסרופוס) mentioned could in fact be Terentius Rufus, who was active around the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE, and is mentioned in Josephus,1 rather than the later Quintus Tineius Rufus. See Wikipedia:
Quintus Tineius Rufus (consul 127) - Wikipedia:
"According to the Jewish historian Josephus, a certain Terentius Rufus was left to command the Roman army in Jerusalem after the Romans had sacked the city during the First Jewish Revolt. When his arch-enemy Simon bar Giora was eventually caught and brought to him after hiding in a cavern in Jerusalem's Temple Mount, Terentius Rufus ordered that the Temple Mount be ploughed up in hopes of discovering other hideaways from the war. Whether this Terentius Rufus refers to the same Quintus Tineius Rufus who was made Consul suffectus some 59 years later is reasonably doubted."
If it’s Terentius Rufus, this explains the ‘r’ in ‘Turanos-Rufus’ (without needing to posit the bilingual pun on tyrannos, mentioned in the previous piece).
If this is true, then the ‘Turnus-Rufus’ in this Mishnah and Talmud in Ta’anit, is a different and much earlier person from the ‘Turnus-Rufus’ mentioned in relation to R’ Akiva.
Talmud Yerushalmi, Taanit (4:5.24)
ונחרשה העיר חרש רופוס שחיק עצמות את ההיכל
“And the city was ploughed over.” Rufus, may his bones be ground, ploughed over the Temple.
Here, the name is just given as Rufus.
Speculation on Talmudic Editing
To explain the shift from Hebrew to Aramaic and back to Hebrew, we can hypothesize that the Talmudic editors may have altered the original story. The anonymous editors of the Talmud assumed it was Tineius Rufus, and found it impossible that the infamous Tineius Rufus (always with epithet "the evil" or "may his bones by ground up" added in Talmudic literature) would be "designated for the life of the World-to-Come". So the middle part of the story was rewritten (in Aramaic), to have it refer to an unnamed Roman. The original is now impossible to recover
Stam's Corrections Based on Preconceived Philosophical Principles
Indeed, there’s a tendency of the anonymous Talmud (Stam) to correct earlier stories based on principle. On the anonymous Talmud (Stam) being uncomfortable with certain earlier stories on principle, and making corrections to them based on these principles, see my piece “A Preliminary analysis of stories of deception in the Talmud” (Academia.edu, registration required), section “Addition/interpretation of Stammaim?” on the phrase "and it's not so..." (ולא היא). In general, see Weiss-Halivni on ascribing "forced explanations" (שינויי דחיקי) to the Stam, discussed by Jefferey Rubenstein in his introduction to his translation of Weiss’s methodological summaries (David Weiss Halivni (author), Jeffrey L. Rubenstein (translator), The Formation of the Babylonian Talmud [2013]).
Cf. Flavius Josephus, The Wars of the Jews (William Whiston, A.M., Ed.) 7.26, f. 1:
This Tereutius Rufus, as Reland in part observes here, is the same person whom the Talmudists call Turnus Rufus; of whom they relate, that "he ploughed up Sion as a field, and made Jerusalem become as heaps, and the mountain of the house as the high Idaces of a forest;"“