I'lii's.) Though by nature Josephns's superior, more
order II.. ,.0.,, . . 1 , ■■ „. " •'•-.^ .",. hl c^. , i iiuunu ov nature .josepnus s superior, more
order. 11. ,^as present at the Council of Basle, in 1431, ; particularly in the art of warfore, he readih submitted
JOHN
969
JOHN
himself to the commands of the man whom the Sanhe- drim had seen fit to invest with superior authority. Not so patriotic was the conduct of Josephus, who, in his jealousy, hesitated not to put every obstacle in the way of John, so as to prevent the success of his noble and patriotic efforts. This impolitic conduct of Josciihus towards all who seemed to present any likelihood of be- coming rivals in office continued until the people's at- tention was directed to it, and their anger against him was so great that his very life was in danger. Instead, however, of profiting by this sad experience, Josephus, in his vanitj' and blindness, continued, so soon as he felt that the danger had passed, his animosity towards his colaborers, especially towards John of Gischala, whom he hesitated not to accuse even of having headed the attacks upon his life (Josephus, lAfe, 18, 19), a reproach which was not in the least deserved by John, who, how- ever great his disappointment in Josephus, never sought relief by violent measures. It is true that, when he found the people's confidence in Josephus restored, he sent messengers to Simon ben-Gamaliel and to the San- hedrim to remove the man in whom public confidence was so misplaced. Ordered to the defence of his native place, Jolm did everything in liis power to strengthen the fortification of (Jischala, and when, after a long siege from the experienced trooiis of Titus, he found it impossible to hold the city with his handful of country- men, more accustomed to the ploughshare than to the sword, he made his escape by a game of strategy which his enemy could never forgive him. Having obtained an armistice from the Romans on pretence that the day was their Sabbath, he improved the opportunity to make his escape with his forces to Jerusalem. The sa- cred city was at this time unfortunately divided of itself, anarchy reigned within the walls, and it was with great difficulty tliat John succeeded in rallying the people to their defence against a common enemy. He actually aroused them to sally forth against the Roman invaders, and succeeded in destroying the first works erected by them to besiege the city. Not so happy were they in their future undertakings. Defeat after defeat finally obliged John to seek refuge in the tower of Antonia. Soon after followed the fall of Jerusalem (A.D. 70), and John now sought refuge in a neighboring cave, deter- mined not to fall into the hands of Titus. But hunger soon ])roved even a more formidable foe than the Ro- mans, and John gladly went fortli from his hiding-place to surrender himself to them, who, in their pride and the savage state of that age, hesitated not to increase the mental with 700
victorious legions to tlie Eternal City, to enhance the magnificence of his public triumph. The grand spec- tacle over, John was imprisoned at Rome, and died in a dungeon of broken heart. Not so luck}', even, was his brother in arms, Simon bar-Giora (q. v.), who was dragged through the streets of Rome by a rope, and finally executed, in accordance with Roman custom, which demanded a human sacrifice in honor of a victory gained over their enemies. See Josephus, War, iv, 2 sf). ; Griitz, Geschichfe d. Juden, vol. iii, ch. xiv and xv ; RaphaU, Post Bibl. Hist, of the Jews, ii, 416 sq. (J. H.W.)
John Gocir. See Gocir.
John OF GoRZ, a French monk of some note who flourished in the 10th century, was born at Yendiere, near Pont-a-Mousson, and studied theology under Ber- ner, deacon of Toul. After joining various convents — among the last that of the Recluses — and not finding that earnest pietj' and strict ascetic life which he sought to impose upon himself, he finally gathered a few true friends of like mind in the convent of Gorz, presented to them by bishop Adalbert, of Mayence. In the latter part of his life, Otho the Great sent him as ambassador to Abderrahman II, in Cordova. His biography was written by a friend and contemporary, St. Amulph (died 9»4), and is given by Pertz, Monum. iv, 335.
See John THE Labori-
John THE Gkammauian ous.
John Hyrcanus. See Hykcanus. John THE Italian (Johannes Italus) (1), a monk of the 10th century. He was at first canon at Rome, but his acquaintance with Odon, abbot of Clugny, led him to France, and he entered a convent there. Some say that he afterwards returned to Italy, and became prior of a Iioman convent, wliile others say that lie be- came abbot of some French Cistercian convent, and that he died in France after 945. Our information regard- ing his personal history is derived only from his biogra- phy in the Life of St. Odon (in Mabillon, ylrftf Sanct. vii, 152). He published extracts of St. Gregory's Muralia. See Hist. Lift, de la France, vi, 265 ; Ceillier, Hist, des A uteiirs Sacres, xii, 825.
John THE Italian (Italus, 'IraXog) (2), a Greek philosojiher and heretic who flourished in the time of Alexius I Comnenus (1081-1118), escaped to Italy after the revolt of IManiaces against Constantine, and there prosecuted his preparatory studies. He finally returned again to Constantinople, and became a disciple of Mi- chael Psellus the younger. His learning and ability attracted general attention, and the emperor Michael Ducas (1071-1078), finding himself in need of a man ac- quainted with the Italian provinces to influence them to a return to the Byzantine empire, selected John Ita- lus for this purpose, and dispatched liim to Dyrrachium. He, however, proved unfaithful to the trust, and, his intrigues having become public, was obliged to flee to Rome to avoid persecution. He was subsequently al- lowed to return to Constantinople, and there entered the monastery of Pega. "When Psellus was banished in 1077, John was made first professor of philosophy (iJTraroe tiov (piXotrtcpwr), and filled this place with great success. Yet he was better acquainted with logic and Aristotle's philosophy than with the other branches of science, and was but little versed in grammar and rhetoric. He was very passionate and hasty in argu- ment, and sometimes even resorted to bodily violence, but he was, fortunately, prompt in acknowledging his errors. He expounded to his pupils Proclus, Plato, Jam- blichus. Porphyrins, and Aristotle, but often in a manner quite inconsistent with the position of Christian ortho- doxy. Alexius, soon after ascending the throne, caused Italiis's doctrines to be examined, and summoned him before an ecclesiastical court. Notwithstanding the protection of the patriarch Eustratius, John Italus was obliged publicly to recant and anathematir '