Aelia Capitolina
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
chapter 3 Aelia Capitolina The Foundation of the Colony In around 130CE, the Roman emperor Hadrian founded a new city in place of Herodian Jerusalem next to the military camp. He honored the city with the status of a colony and named it Aelia Capitolina. Aelia came from Hadrian’s nomen gentile (clan, or extended family name), Aelius, while Capitolina meant that the new city was dedicated to the Capitoline Triad: Jupiter, Juno and Min- erva. There is no agreement regarding the precise date of the establishment of the Roman city. Cassius Dio (LXIX, 12:1) recognized the outbreak of the Bar Kokhba Revolt (132CE) as being a result of Jewish opposition to the decision of Hadrian to build a Roman city on the ruins of Jerusalem and a Temple to Jupiter instead of the Herodian Temple, while Eusebius (Eus. HE IV: 6) suggested a reverse course of action, namely that the Jewish people first revolted and that Aelia Capitolina was founded after the revolt’s suppression (135/136CE), possibly as a result of the rebellion. The Mishnah (Taʾanit 4, 6) also lists the foundation of Aelia Capitolina, symbolized by the plowing of the pomerium, as later than the Bar Kokhba Revolt and the fall of Betar.1 While these sources suggest a ‘cause and effect’ relationship between the foundation of the Roman colony and the Bar Kokhba Revolt, two other sources—Epiphanius of Salamis (in the fourth century) and the Chronicon Paschale in the seventh century—specify an earlier date for the foundation of Aelia Capitolina (117/118CE or 119/120CE, respectively), disconnecting it from the Bar Kokhba War.2 Most scholars disagree with the early dates provided by Epiphanius and the Chronicon Paschale.3 An exception is Leah Di Segni, who suggests that 1 The Bar Kokhba Revolt has been discussed by several scholars; see Bowersock 1980; Eck 1999, 2003; Goodman 2003; Isaac and Openheimer 1998; Schäfer 1990, 2003, inter alia. The con- nection between the foundation of Aelia Capitolina and the Bar Kokhba Revolt was also discussed in detail by Di Segni 2014; Eliav 2003; Eshel 2000, 2007; Eshel and Zissu 2002; Gray 1923; Isaac 1998a; Kindler 2002; Tsafrir 2003; Weksler-Bdolah 2014b, inter alia. Below, I suggest a reconsideration of the events that relies on archaeological finds that have been revealed or published since 2000. 2 Epiph. De mens, 14; Chron. Pasch.: 613; Stern 1980:395. 3 Schürer 1973; Stern 1980:395; Isaac 2010:16, note 72; Baker 2012. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2020 | doi:10.1163/9789004417076_004 52 chapter 3 figure 22 A coin of Hadrian as founder, wearing a toga and ploughing with a bull and a cow. In background, vexillum; above to right COLAELKAPIT (Colonia Aelia Capi- tolina), in exergue COND after Meshorer 1989:70–71, Cat. No. 2; Photo: Elie Posner, courtesy of the Israel Museum, Jerusalem Hadrian’s decision to rebuild Jerusalem may have followed the Diaspora Revolt and taken place in as early as 117CE.4 It is not inconceivable, in Di Segni’s view, that Hadrian decided to found the city anew without physically visiting it. In other unrelated studies, Gray and later Capponi reached the conclusion that Hadrian did indeed visit Palestine in 117CE, immediately after the suppression of the Diaspora Revolt.5 The archaeological perspective on the connection between the foundation of Aelia Capitolina and the Bar Kokhba Revolt has been discussed in the past, mainly in relation to the numismatic evidence. Aelia Capitolina started issuing coins during Hadrian’s lifetime. Out of nine types that are known, two are firmly dated to the years 137CE, and 138CE. The chronology of the remaining coins is elusive.6 One of the undated coins commemorates the foundation ceremony of the colony (Fig. 22). The obverse side of the coin depicts the bust of Hadrian and the inscription IMP CAES TRAI HADRIANO AVG PP, while the reverse side depicts Hadrian, or a priest wearing the sacerdotal dress, identified as the founder of the city, ploughing with a bull and a cow to mark out the bound- aries of the new colony.7 The majority opinion is that this coin, with its special 4 Di Segni 2014. 5 Gray 1923; Capponi 2010. 6 Stein 1990:212–221. 7 Meshorer 1989:21, Catalogue no. 2. See also Kindler 2000..