The same incomprehensible distinction between Vespasian’s and Titus’ war occurs in the Mishna at the end of the tractate _Sota_. Graetz changed a single letter, ט {Hebrew: tet} into ק {Hebrew: kof}, and instead of טיטוס {Hebrew: Titus} (Titus), he reads קיטוס {Hebrew: Kitus} (Kitus), _i. e._ Quietus. In this way he discovered a rebellion in Palestine against Lucius Quietus. We know none of its details, but its occurrence is beyond the peradventure of a doubt. The conjecture, as simple as it is ingenious, has been corroborated by a manuscript reading.[59] A narrative in tractate _Sabbath_ 17_a_ is no less curious: “A sword was thrust into the academy, with the words: Whoever desires may go in, but none may come out,” etc. Graetz explains the enigma thus: in the first year of the rebellion against Nero a terrorist synod was dominated by the Shammaites.[60] In general, he considered the opposition between the schools of Hillel and Shammai not merely theoretic but also political, and he identified the rabid Zealots with extreme Shammaites. “Graetz is deserving of great praise for having established this fact [the existence of the terrorist synod], until then not sufficiently appreciated. In itself it is an extremely important result, and its value is heightened by reason of the data growing out of it.... At all events, Herr Graetz has won a second distinction of equally great importance by his use of the _Megilla Taanith_ as a historical source and his verification of its statements, even though many remain dubious.” This is the opinion of the historian[61] Jost, surely a competent judge in such matters.