Torrey Seland, «Saul of Tarsus and Early Zealotism. Reading Gal 1,13-14 in Light of Philo’s Writings», Vol. 83 (2002) 449-471
One of the most consistent features in the portraits of Saul of Tarsus in the Acts of the Apostles and in the letters accredited to Paul, is the fervent zeal of his youth. The zeal of the young Saul has been dealt with in several studies, drawing on the issue of zealotry in Palestine, but the conclusions reached are rather diverse. The present study suggests that the often overlooked phenomenon of zealotry in the writings of Philo of Alexandria should also be considered. The material from Philo does not support the view that the early zealots formed any consistent movement or party, but that they were vigilant individuals who took the Law in their own hands when observing cases of gross Torah transgressions.
that Josephus applies various terms for the same party. Hengel finds the earliest evidence for ‘Zealots’ as a party name in the New Testament’s descriptions of some of the disciples of Jesus5, i.e., the term was in use already at about 30 C.E. The central model for all these ‘Zealots’ was the zeal and action of Phinehas (Num 25). Furthermore, he argues that the realization of such a zeal as that of Phinehas, that is the eradication of transgressors of the Law and the destruction of the pagans who led Israel astray, "called for an organized group ... and could not be accomplished by individual desperados"6. Such zeal, however, was not really confined to the zealots. It was something that concerned the whole of Palestinian Judaism at that time in form of a readiness to avenge every form of sacrilege. ‘Zeal’ was thus a typical element of piety in late Judaism7. Hence, while on the one hand postulating a specific zealotic party, according to Hengel, it was also a "typical element" of first century C.E. Judaism8.
Hengel’s view of the term ‘Zealots’ as designating a long-lasting party or party members did gain a role as the common view among many biblical scholars9. It has, however, also been challenged.
2. The Zealots as individuals; the Smith-Morin paradigm
Morton Smith10 has been one of the most prominent scholars arguing that the early zealots did not belong to or constitute any explicit party, but were individuals who championed zeal through their violent actions11. According to Smith, the zealots did not come into existence as a party until the winter of 67-68 CE. There had, indeed, been many individual zealots before that time; in fact, from at least the