THE JEW IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE
THE animosity between Jew and Gentile grew in intensity and bitterness
under the Roman rule, and its growth was marked by various acts of
mutual violence which finally resulted in the disruption of the
Jewish State and the dispersion of the Jewish race over the inhabited
globe. Already in the first half of the second century B.C. we find a
_praetor peregrinus_ ordering the Jews to leave the shores of Italy
within ten days. This was only the commencement of a long series of
similar measures, all indicative of the repugnance inspired by the
Jewish colonists. ♦63 B.C.♦ The hostility was enhanced by Pompey’s
sack of Jerusalem and his severity towards the people and the priests
of Palestine. Even in Rome, the hospitable harbour of countless races
and creeds, there was no place for these unfortunate Semitic exiles,
and their sojourn was punctuated by periodical expulsions. History is
silent on the first settlement of Jews in the capital of the world,
though the origin of their community may plausibly be traced to the
embassy of Numenius.[8] In any case, at the time of Pompey’s expedition
they already had their own quarter in Rome, on the right bank of the
Tiber, and their multitude and cohesion, even then, were such that
a contemporary writer did not hesitate to state that a Governor of
Palestine, if unpopular in his province, might safely count on being
hissed when he returned home.
♦59 B.C.♦
It was not long after that date that Cicero pleaded the cause of the
Praetor Flaccus, accused of extortion during his government of Asia
Minor. The Roman Jews took a keen interest in the case, and many of
them crowded to the trial, for among other charges brought against the
ex-praetor was that of having robbed the Temple of Jerusalem. When
Cicero reached that count of the indictment, he gave eloquent testimony
to the importance of the Jewish element in Rome, to the feelings which
he, in common with others, entertained towards them, and to his own
want of spirit. “Thou well knowest,” says the orator, addressing the
Prosecutor, “how great is their multitude, how great their concord,
how powerful they are in our public assemblies. But I will speak in
an undertone, so that none but the judges may hear. For there is no
lack of individuals ready to incite those fellows against me and all
honourable persons. But I will not help them to do so.” Then, in a
lowered voice Cicero proceeds to defend his client’s conduct towards
the “barbarous superstition” of the Jews, and his patriotic defiance
of the “turbulent mob who invade our public assemblies.” “If Pompey,”
he says, “did not touch the treasures of the Temple, when he took
Jerusalem, his forbearance was but another proof of his prudence: he
avoided giving cause of complaint to so suspicious and slanderous a
nation. It was not respect for the religion of Jews and enemies that
hindered him, but regard for his own reputation.... Every nation has
its own religion. We have ours. Whilst Jerusalem was yet unconquered,
and the Jews lived in peace, even then they displayed a fanatical
repugnance to the splendour of our state, the dignity of our name, and
the institutions of our ancestors. But now the hatred which the race
nourished towards our rule has been more clearly shown by force of
arms. How little the immortal gods love this race has been proved by
its defeat and by its humiliation.”[9]
Time did not heal the wound. Pompey had already amalgamated the
Jewish kingdom in the Roman province of Syria and carried the last
of the Hasmonaean princes captive to Rome. Five years later the
proconsul Sabinius stripped the High Priest of the last shreds of
civil authority and divided Judaea into five administrative districts.
♦57, 56, 55 B.C.♦ Frequent insurrections broke out in Palestine,
and were quelled with greater or less difficulty; the last of them
resulting in the robbery of the Temple of a great part of its riches
by the Proconsul Marcus Crassus, while not long after the Quaestor
Cassius, who acted as Governor after the death of Crassus, sold 30,000
disaffected Jews into slavery; and this state of things lasted till the
fall of the Roman Republic.
♦47 B.C.♦
Julius Caesar, like Alexander, was not slow to realise the weight
of the Jewish factor in the complex problem presented by the
conglomeration of nations which he had set himself to rule. The numbers
of the Jews scattered throughout the Empire entitled them to serious
consideration; their wealth, their activity, and their unity rendered
them worthy of conciliation. Moreover, Caesar, with the eye of a true
statesman, saw that the representatives of this race, so capable of
adapting themselves to new climatic and political conditions, and yet
so tenacious of their peculiar characteristics, might help to promote
that cosmopolitan spirit which was the soul of the Roman Empire. These
considerations were further reinforced by feelings of gratitude;
for Caesar had derived great assistance from the powerful Jewish
politician Antipater during his Egyptian campaign. He, therefore,
like his illustrious predecessor, granted to the Jews of Alexandria
special privileges, shielding their cult from the attacks of the pagan
priests, and affording them facilities for commerce, while in Palestine
he reunited the five administrative districts under the authority of
the High Priest and restored to the Jews some of the territory of
which Pompey had deprived them. In Rome also Caesar manifested great
friendship to the Jews. The Roman Jews showed that they were not
insensible to these acts of kindness. At the tragic death of their
benefactor they surpassed all other foreigners in their demonstrations
of grief. Amidst the general lamentation, to which every race
contributed its share after its own fashion, the Jews, we are told,
distinguished themselves by waking and wailing beside the funeral pyre
for many nights.[10] This spontaneous offering of sorrow on the part of
the foreign subjects of Rome forms the best testimony to the nobility
of Rome’s greatest son. Caesar might well claim the title of Father of
mankind.
♦44 B.C.♦
The end of Caesar’s life proved also the end of the consideration
enjoyed by the Jews under his aegis. Augustus, indeed, unbent so far
as to order that prayers for his prosperity should be offered up in
the Temple of Jerusalem, and even established a fund for a perpetual
sacrifice. But this was only an act of courtesy dictated by reasons
of policy. His real feelings towards the Jews and their religion are
better illustrated by his biographer’s statement that, while treating
the old-established cults with the reverence to which their antiquity
and respectability seemed to entitle them, “he held the others in
contempt.” Among the gods deemed unworthy of Imperial patronage were
those of Egypt and Judaea. During his sojourn in the land of the
Pharaohs Augustus refrained from turning aside to visit the temple of
Apis. Nor was he more respectful towards Jehovah. On the contrary, “he
commended his grandson Caius for not stopping, on his passage through
Palestine, at Jerusalem to worship in the Temple.”[11] The ancient
writer’s juxtaposition of Apis and Jehovah, linked at last in common
bondage, is as significant as it is quaint.
Under the successors of Augustus the Jews of Rome had more than
neglect to complain of. Their suppression appears to have been now
regarded as a public duty. The biographer of Tiberius, in enumerating
that emperor’s virtues, among other proofs of patriotism, includes
his persecution of the obnoxious race. After describing the measures
taken against “outlandish ceremonies” generally, and how those given
to Egyptian and Judaic superstitions were compelled to burn all their
ritual vestments and implements, he proceeds to inform us calmly
that “the Jewish youth, under pretence of having the military oath
of allegiance administered to them, were distributed over the most
unhealthy provinces, while the rest of the race, or those who followed
their cult, were banished from the city under pain of perpetual
servitude if they disobeyed.”[12] The indignation which these arbitrary
measures must have stirred up among the Jews found vent in the
following reign. The immediate cause of the explosion was Caligula’s
order that his own effigy should be placed in the Temple of Jerusalem
and that divine honours should be paid to him throughout the empire--an
order which, however natural it might have appeared to a Roman,
outraged the vital principle of Hebrew monotheism. ♦41 A.D.♦ The result
was stern and unanimous resistance on the part of the Jews, bloodshed
being only averted by the imperial lunatic’s opportune death.[13]
Meanwhile the Jews of Alexandria shared the woes of their brethren in
Palestine and Rome. Their prosperity moved the envy of their Greek
fellow-citizens, and the two elements had always met in a commercial
rivalry for which they were not unequally matched. If Hebrew astuteness
found its hero in Jacob, Odysseus formed a brilliant embodiment
of Hellenic resourcefulness. Both characters are typical of their
respective races. They are both distinguished not only by strong family
affections, by a pathetic love of home when abroad and a passionate
longing for travel when at home, by conjugal fidelity tempered by
occasional lapses into its opposite, and by deep reverence for the
divine, but also by a mastery of wiles and stratagems unsurpassed in
any other national literature. It was, therefore, not surprising that
the descendants of these versatile heroes should regard each other as
enemies. The hostility was increased by social and religious antipathy
and by the favours which the Greek kings of Egypt had always showered
upon the Jews. The fables and calumnies originally invented by the
Seleucid oppressors of Palestine spread to Egypt, where they were
amplified by local wits.
Under Augustus and Tiberius the lurking animosity was obliged to
content itself with such food as the Greek genius for sarcasm and
invective could afford; but the accession of Caligula supplied an
opportunity for a more practical display of hatred. The Governor of
Alexandria, being in disgrace with the new Emperor and afraid lest the
Alexandrians should avail themselves of the circumstance and lodge
complaints against him in Rome, became a tool of their prejudices.
Two unprincipled scribblers led the anti-Jewish movement. Insult and
ridicule were succeeded by violence, and in the summer of 38 A.D. the
synagogues of the Jews were polluted with the busts of the Emperor.
The governor was induced to deprive the Jews of the civil rights which
they had enjoyed so long, and the unfortunate people, thus reduced to
the condition of outlaws, were driven out of the divisions of the city
which they had hitherto occupied and forced to take up their abode
in the harbour. Their dwellings were looted and sacked, the refugees
were besieged by the mob in their new quarters, and those who ventured
out were seized, tortured, and burnt or crucified. The persecution
continued with intermittent vigour until the Jews resolved to send
an embassy to Rome to plead their cause before the Emperor. One of
the envoys was the famous Jewish Hellenist Philo. Caligula, however,
declined to listen to rhetoric or reason; but, on the contrary, he
issued the order for his own deification, which, as has been seen, was
frustrated only by his death.
Caligula’s successor Claudius favoured the Jews of Palestine for the
sake of their King Agrippa, to whose diplomacy he owed in part his
crown. But their brethren in Rome suffered another expulsion for
“continually disturbing the peace under the instigation of Christ.”[14]
The confusion of the Christians with the Jews by the Roman writer
is neither uncommon nor unintelligible. But, if the Christians were
persecuted as a Jewish sect--secret and, therefore, suspected--the
persecution of the Jews themselves was frequently due to their peculiar
“superstition.” That, in common with other products of the East, had
found its way to Rome, where it acquired great vogue and exercised a
strange fascination, especially among women and persons of the lower
orders. Many Gentiles visited the synagogues, and some of those who
went to scoff remained to worship. Horace, writing in the time of
Augustus, makes frequent mention of Judaism,[15] implying that it was
spreading and that it formed the topic of conversation in fashionable
circles; Josephus mentions a case of the conversion of a noble Roman
lady in the reign of Tiberius;[16] Persius, under Caligula and
Claudius, sneers at the muttered prayers and gloomy Sabbaths of the
Jews and of Roman proselytes to Judaism;[17] while Seneca, under Nero,
declares that “to such an extent has the cult of that most accursed of
races prevailed that it is already accepted all over the world: the
vanquished have given laws to the victors.”[18] Juvenal, writing in the
time of Titus and Domitian, bears similar testimony to the prevalence
of Judaism among the Romans, many of whom, especially the poor,
observed the Jewish Sabbath and dietary laws, practised circumcision,
and indulged in Hebrew rites generally.[19] To the Roman satirists
these aberrations from good sense and good taste were a rich fountain
of ridicule; but serious patriots regarded them with misgiving, as
detrimental to public morality. Hence we usually find the expulsions of
the Jews and the suppression of their cult accompanied by similar steps
taken against Chaldean soothsayers, Egyptian sorcerers, Syrian priests,
and other purveyors of rites pernicious to the virtue of Roman men and
women.
Under Nero the hostility towards the Jews was temporarily diverted
against the Christians, and, while the latter were ruthlessly made
to pay with their lives for the Emperor’s criminal aestheticism, the
former enjoyed an immunity from persecution, partly secured by feminine
influence at Court. But, while the Jews in the West were purchasing a
precarious peace and a miserable triumph over the Christians, their
brethren in the East were preparing for one of those periodical
struggles for independence which move at once the horror and the
admiration of the student of Jewish history. The Jews could not bear
the sight of the foreign despot in their country. His presence in
Jerusalem was a daily insult to Jehovah. The reverses which they had
hitherto sustained in their single-combat with the masters of the world
had not damped their desire for freedom. Disaster, far from crushing,
seemed to invigorate their courage. And for the sake of the Idea they
were ready to jeopardise the security and material comfort which they
generally enjoyed under the equitable and tolerant rule of the Romans.
In the eyes of the zealots the sensible attitude of the higher classes,
which acquiesced in the existing state of affairs,--an attitude
shared by famous Rabbis such as Jochanan son of Zakkai who re-founded
Judaism when the Temple fell--was nothing less than treachery to the
national cause. It was felt that, if no attempt were made to check
the “seductive arts of Rome,” the whole race would gradually sink
into spiritual apathy. Bands of irreconcilables were, as in the time
of the Seleucids, scattered about the country and set the example of
insubordination by frequent attacks on the Romans and their partisans.
These patriots were bound by a vow to spare no one who bended the knee
to the hated foreigner, and they fulfilled it with all the scrupulous
cruelty which characterises the vows of enthusiasts. The pursuit of
personal profit, as not unfrequently happens, was combined with the
pursuit of patriotism, and there soon appeared a secret revolutionary
association whose emissaries insinuated themselves into the very
precincts of the Temple and there struck down those who had incurred
their wrath. Sporadic assassination was gradually organised into a
regular conspiracy, and the murderers of yesterday were now ennobled by
the appellation of rebels. The voices of prudence and moderation were
drowned in the clamour of patriotism; the peace party was terrorised
into a zeal for liberty which it was far from feeling, and the standard
of rebellion was unfurled.
♦66 A.D.♦
In the meantime Alexandria witnessed another explosion of the
Graeco-Jewish feud. The Greeks determined to petition Nero for the
withdrawal of the rights of citizenship restored to the Jews by
Claudius. A public meeting was held in order to select the ambassadors
who were to carry the petition to Rome. Some Jews were discovered in
the amphitheatre where the meeting was held, and three of them were
dragged by the mob through the streets. Their co-religionists, fired
with indignation, rushed to the amphitheatre, threatening to commit
it and the assembled Greeks to the flames. The Governor attempted to
pacify the crowd; but, being himself a renegade Jew, he had little
influence over his former brethren, who cast his apostasy in his teeth.
Enraged thereat, he let his legions loose upon the Jewish quarter. This
was soon converted into an inferno of multiform brutality, wherein
fifty thousand Jews are said to have miserably perished.
To return to Palestine. The revolt against the Roman rule, begun in
66 A.D., ended in the famous fall of Jerusalem four years later.
♦70 A.D. Sept. 7.♦ The desperate obstinacy of the defence, and the
terrible barbarity which had disgraced the rising, provoked the
conquerors to pitiless retaliation. The holy city, which had once
been “the joy of the whole earth” and God’s own habitation, was no
more. Zion lay deserted. Her sons were slain, and her daughters sold
into slavery and shame. And the Prophet’s words seemed to have come
true: “Her gates shall lament and mourn; and she, being desolate,
shall sit upon the ground.”[20] Those Jews who had not been put to
death or driven forth to seek a refuge among their brethren, already
scattered over the East and West, were preserved to accompany Titus
to Rome as prisoners of war, to supply food for the wild beasts of
the arena, victims for the gladiators’ sword in the amphitheatre, and
amusement for the sporting public of the capital of the world. Most
awful calamity of all, the Temple of Zion--the sanctuary in which the
pride and the hope of the whole race centred--was doomed to the flames,
and its contents were carried off to grace the pagan victor’s triumph.
Among these treasures, hallowed by the veneration of fifteen centuries,
were the shittim wood table and the seven-branched candlestick of pure
gold, both wrought out of the liberal offerings which the children
of Israel had brought to Moses for the service of the tabernacle, at
the bidding of God in the desert. They were the works of wise-hearted
men of old, selected for the task by the Lord Himself, and instructed
thereto by His spirit. For nearly four centuries these spoils of Zion
served to adorn the Roman Temple of Peace, until an avenger arose and,
having dealt with Rome as Rome had dealt with Jerusalem, transferred
them to Carthage.
This national catastrophe, commemorated as it was for all time on the
imperishable marbles of the triumphal arch of Titus, left an indelible
impression on the mind of Israel. It aroused the strongest feelings
of the Hebrew nature, and fixed a chasm between Jew and Gentile
which even the lapse of long centuries proved unable to bridge. The
conqueror’s name was handed down the ages as a synonym for everything
that is monstrous and horrible, and his language was tabooed even in
epitaphs, the tombs in the Jewish catacombs at Rome bearing few Latin
inscriptions, though Greek ones abound.
Here we may pause to enquire into the causes of this persistent
warfare.