14.Was There Judeophobia in Classical Antiquity?
Pagan attitudes and behavior towardthe Jews present us with apuzzling para- dox. Greeks and Romans have arelativelygood track recordintheir treatment of alien peoples, foreign cults,and exotic customs.They normallywelcomed—or at least put up with—other cultures,ethnic groups,and strangemodes of worship. They had good reason to do so. ManyGreek cities and, of course, Rome itself traced theirown origins to peoples from abroad, postulated aracialmixture within their own composition, and acknowledgedthe salutary influences that they had absorbed from othercultures.¹ Even on matters of religion, Romans in particularadapted practices that stemmed from elsewhere, and rarely sup- pressed or resisted foreign cultsthat might enrich theirown civilization.² Yetthe experience of the Jews would appeartobeareal blot on the record. Some unsettling,disturbing,indeed horrific, events marked that experience in the Greco-Roman period. Probablythe most dramatic and notorious episode oc- curred in Alexandria, the so-called “pogrom” of 38 C.E. Certain Greek trouble- makers in that city,soweare told in the account of Philo, acontemporary and possiblyaneye-witness, provoked the Roman prefect of Egypt at the time of the emperor Caligula into curtailing the privileges of Jews in the city.This tap- ped into some deep-seatedhatred of Jews among the Egyptians.There followed an escalatingseries of attacks, arising out of political, religious,orsocial discon- tents,orsome combination thereof. As aconsequence, Jews wereconfined to a ghetto, wheremobsindulgedinbeatings, torture, humiliation, and murder.In addition,Jewish women werearrested and compelled to eat swine’sflesh or suf- fer intolerable torments.³
See E.S. Gruen Rethinking the Other (Princeton, ), –. See E.M. Orlin Foreign Cults in Rome (Oxford, ), passim. Principal evidenceinPhilo, Flacc. –.The bibliographyonthe riots in Alexandria is huge.Unnecessary to register it here.See the references and discussion in E.S.Gruen Diaspora: Jews amidst Greeks and Romans (Cambridge,Mass., ), –, –;add also P.W. van der Horst Philo’sFlaccus:The FirstPogrom (Leiden, ); A. Kerkeslager “The AbsenceofDio- nysios, Lampo, and Isidoros from the Violence in Alexandria in C.E.” Studia Philonica Annu- al, (), –;J.E. Atkinson “Ethnic CleansinginRoman Alexandria in ,” Acta Clas- sica, (), –;A.Harker Loyalty and Dissidence in Roman Egypt: TheCaseofthe Acta Alexandrinorum (Cambridge, ), –;A.Avidov Not Reckonedamong Nations (Tübin- gen, ), –;and, especially, the fine studyofS.Gambetti TheAlexandrian Riots of C.E. and the Persecution of the Jews:AHistorical Reconstruction (Leiden, )., with full ref- 314 14. WasThereJudeophobia in Classical Antiquity?
The Alexandrian riot mayhavebeen the best documented case of this sort. But it was by no means alone. The citizens of Babylon, Josephus reports,had long harbored hostility to Jews dwellingintheirmidstbecause of the incompat- ibility of their laws. Hencethe Jews in 40 C.E. pulled up stakes and movedto Seleuceia on the Tigris. Their arrival, however,complicated tensions between Sy- rians and Greeks,then galvanized these twogroups into combined action, lead- ing to the victimization of the Jews. Morethan 50,000,accordingtoJosephus, werekilled; others fled to neighboring cities in Mesopotamia.⁴ At Caesarea around 59 C.E., quarrels eruptedovercompetingcivic privileges in the city be- tween Jews and Syrians.The two groups engagedinphysical assaultsonone an- other,thus promptingthe interventionofthe Romanprefect—who then turned his fire power primarilyonthe Jews.⁵ Those hostilitiesescalated in lethal fashion duringthe Jewish rebellion against Rome. The residents of Caesarea rose once more and slaughtered, so we are told, 20,000 Jews, emptying the city altogether of its Jewish population.⁶ The event sparked reprisals by Jews and counter-at- tacks by their enemies in city after city of the Decapolis and greater Syria. Jose- phus paints alurid picture of massacres and pillaging, piles of corpses,nospar- ing of the elderly, women, and infants, ahost of unspeakable atrocities.⁷ These are chilling episodes. How does one square this information with the general forbearance and lais- sez-faire attitudes of pagan antiquity toward foreign peoples and beliefs?Are the Jews aspecial case? Does the targeting of that people count as anti-semitism,a form of racism or proto-racism? As is well known, “anti-semitism” is amodern expression, not an ancient one. It first surfaces in 19th century Germany.⁸ No equivalent of this phrase occurs
erencestothe literature. See further B. Ritter Judeans in the Greek Cities of the Roman Empire: Rights, Citizenship and Civil Discord (Leiden, ). Jos. A. J. .–. Jos. B. J., .–;Jos. A. J. .–.See the valuable notesofS.Mason Flavius Jo- sephus,Translation and Commentary,vol. b, The Judean War (Leiden, ), –. Jos. B. J., .. Jos. B. J., .–,with the commentary of S. Mason Flavius Josephus, –. Earlier scholarship on “anti-semitism” in antiquity is convenientlysummarized by J.G. Gager TheOrigins of Anti-Semitism (New York, ), –.See further N. de Lange “The Origins of Anti-Semitism: Ancient Evidenceand Modern Interpretations,” in S.L. Gilman and S.T. Katz, Anti-Semitism in Times of Crisis (New York, ), –;Z.Yavetz “Judeophobia in Classical Antiquity:ADifferent Approach,” JJS, (), –;P.Schäfer Judeophobia: Attitudesto- wardthe Jews in the AncientWorld (Cambridge,Mass., ), –, –;B.Isaac The In- vention of Racism in ClassicalAntiquity (Princeton, ), –;V.Herholt Antisemitismus 14. WasThereJudeophobia in Classical Antiquity? 315 in Greek or in Latin. Indeed, “anti-semitism” as aformulation is misleading on anycount.Semiticpeoples encompass more than justJews. Babylonians were Semites too—as indeedare Arabs. Somehavesubstituted “anti-Judaism” for “anti-semitism.” But this does not help much.⁹ If the former signifies animosity towardthe religion rather than towardrace or ethnicity,thatseems inapplicable to the ancient situation. Religion as such, whatever that might mean (a matter of considerable dispute), was not suppressed, persecuted, or eradicated. Judaism was not the target—Jews were. Another phrase has gained some currency: “Judeophobia.” The term was ad- vocated independentlybytwo distinguishedscholars in the 1990s and retains force.¹⁰ It merits scrutiny. Are we to believethat there was widespread fear of Jews in pagan circles or pagan communities?Does some form of anxiety lie at the root of hostility to Jews, one thatcould even issue in apogrom? Jews werenoticed by some Greek and Roman writers, intellectuals, and framers of opinion. We possess afair number of remarks and observations from arangeofpagan authorswho had occasion to comment on the Jews.¹¹ It is easy enough to find passages in which Jews are stigmatized for one failing or another. So, for instance, the celebrated rhetorician Apollonius Molon, who taught on the island of Rhodesinthe 1st centuryB.C.E., characterized Jews as atheists and misanthropes. He went further to accuse them of both recklessness on the one hand and cowardice on the other.The traits of recklessness and cowardice do
in der Antike (Mörlenbach, ), –.The survey by D. Nirenberg Anti-Judaism: TheWestern Tradition (New York, ), –,focuses exclusively on Egypt and Alexandria. Cf. J.N. Sevenster TheRoots of PaganAnti-Semitism in the Ancient World (Leiden, ), –; Yavetz “Judeophobia in Classical Antiquity,” –; idem, Judenfeindschaft in der Antike (Mu- nich, ), –. Yavetz “Judeophobia in Classical Antiquity”;Schäfer Judeophobia. It is interestingthat Ya- vetz’slectures in German were entitled, Judenfeindschaft,which is rather different from “Judeo- phobia”;Yavetz (). Judenfurcht,however,does not seem to surfaceinthe scholarlylitera- ture.See the remarksonthis formulation by M.H. Williams “Review of Yavetz, Judenfeindschaft and Schäfer, Judeophobia,” JRS, (), ;Isaac (), –. The indispensable collection, of course, is that of M. Stern Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism, vols.(Jerusalem, , , ). Space allows treatment onlyofasmall se- lection. Foradiscussionofthe rivalExodusstories by Jewish and gentile authors, often taken as exemplary of mutual antagonism, see the paper by E.S.Gruen “The Use and Abuse of the Exodus Story,” JewishHistory, () – [available in this volume] and the responses to it by L.H. Feldman “Did Jews Reshape the Tale of the Exodus?” JewishHistory, (), –; J.G. Gager “Some Thoughts on Greco-Roman Versions of the Exodus Story,” JewishHistory, (), –;and J.M. Mélèze Modrzejewski, “The Exodus Traditions:Parody or Parallel Version?” JewishHistory, (), –. 316 14. WasThereJudeophobia in Classical Antiquity? not normallycoincide. But Apollonius seems unconcerned about inconsistency— if Josephus’ paraphrase is accurate. He adds that Jews werethe least talented of all barbarians (i.e. non-Greeks) and the onlyones who had made no creative contribution to civilization.¹² Acentury later, the caustic Alexandrian writer Apion showered invective upon the Jews. Among other things, he denounced them for worshippingthe wronggods, for promotingsedition, and for swearing an oathtobenasty to all gentiles, especiallyGreeks.¹³ Apion supplies ahost of other slanders, even adding gratuitouslyhis ownetymologyfor the word “Sab- bath”:itcomesfrom an Egyptian root meaningdisease of the groin.¹⁴ Latin writ- ers toocarried on this disparagement.One need citeonlyTacitus, who delivered the most sweeping condemnation. Forthe Roman historian, the Jews wereapeo- ple hateful to the gods, their practices of worship contrary to thoseofall other mortals, and they show animosity towardall people except themselves.¹⁵ This, of course, is amere sample. One could readilyciteother passages and otherau- thors. The Jews, it appears, lent themselvestovaried, colorful, and inventive abuse by Greek and Latin writers. That does not,however,answer our question. The hostile comments can, if one wishes, be balanced by numerous admiring assessments of Jews delivered by pagan intellectuals. So, for example, Varro, the Roman polymath writing at the end of the Republic, praised Jewish aniconism, claiming that the earlyRo- mans followed the same practice but abandoned it to theirdetriment.¹⁶ The au- thor of On the Sublime,usuallylabeled as Pseudo-Longinus, in the 1st century C.E., quoted and praised the beginning of Genesis, accepting the Jewish ascrip- tion of it to Moses.¹⁷ The Neoplatonic philosopher Numenius of Apamea in the 2nd centuryC.E. quoted from Jewish prophets and remarked in afamous phrase:
Apollonius Molon in Jos. C. Ap. ..See now the full studyofApollonius on the Jews by B. Bar-Kochva TheImage of the Jews in Greek Literature: TheHellenistic Period (Berkeley, ), –. Apion, in Jos. C. Ap. ., ., ., .. Apion, in Jos. C. Ap. .–.Alarge portion of the ostensiblyhostileremarks about Jews in Greek writers derive from Josephus’ final work, the ContraApionem. But it needs to be borne in mind that that treatise is riddled with rhetoric and misrepresentations,with Greek intellectuals as acollection of strawmen to be knocked down by the Jewish historian. Forthis interpretation, see E.S. Gruen “Greeks and Jews:Mutual Misperceptions in Josephus’ Contra Apionem,” in An- cient Judaism in Its Hellenistic Context, ed. C. Bakhos (Leiden: Brill, ), – [available in this volume]. Tac. Hist. .., ..–. Varro, in Aug. CivDei, .. De Subl. .. 14. WasThereJudeophobia in Classical Antiquity? 317
“What is Plato but Moses speaking in good Attic Greek?”¹⁸ Even Tacitushimself, no champion of the Jews, paid tribute to theirdetermination and courageinthe resistancetoRome.¹⁹ One could, of course,continue in this vein, recordingava- riety of comments reflectingapositive evaluation of Jewish achievementsor values.²⁰ Some indeed have gone further.Itispossibletodrawupaledgeroffavora- ble and unfavorable comments by pagan authorsabout Jews. One scholaractual- ly did thatvery thing anumber of years ago. He tabulated the results and an- nounced that 18%ofpagan assessments were favorable, 23%were unfavorable, and 59%wereneutral.²¹ Few, however,would regard that as set- tling the matter.The comments that have survivedconstituteonlyafraction of what might have been said. The contexts of the statements alsovary enormously, thus giving rise to their diverse tenor and significance. Andadecision on what constitutes favorable or unfavorable depends very much on the eyeofthe be- holder.The problem will not be solvedbycalculating sums and producing a table of results. Thisisnonumbers game. Even to characterize the majorityof pagan remarks as “neutral” misconceivesthe situation. The notion of “neutral- ity” implies that some sort of warofwords was taking place. In fact,however,it is quite striking to observethatvery few of the pagan statements occur in apo- lemical context at all. That point requires emphasis. What standsout in manyofthese writingsisneither admiration of the Jews nor hostility toward them. Instead, aconsiderable number leave the impression of aremarkable ignorance. Thisdisplays itself as much in the works that cast a positive light as in those thatdelivercriticism. Take, for example, the Greek his- torian Hecataeus of Abdera, writing in the late 4th century B.C.E., who had some approving remarks to make about Moses but also some reservations about Mo- saiclawsand themodeoflifethatsubsequent Jews embraced as aconsequence.²²
Numenius,inClement, Strom. ...;Origen, CCelsum, .. Tac. Hist. ...Tacitus’ excursus on the Jews in his Histories is much morecomplex and ironic than the usual interpretation placed upon it as avirulentlyhostiletext. The case for this understanding of Tacitus’ attitudecannot be developed here. It is argued in Gruen Rethinking the Other, –; idem “Tacitus and the Defamation of the Jews,” in J. Geiger,H.Cotton and G. Stiebel, Israel’sLand:PapersPresented to Israel Shatzman on his Jubilee. (Jerusalem, ), – [available in this volume]. Adifferent interpretation in R.S. Bloch AntikeVorstellungen vom Judentum: Der Judenexkurs des Tacitus im Rahmen der griechisch-romischenEthnographie (Stuttgart, ). See Gager TheOrigins of Anti-Semitism, –. L.H. Feldman Jewand Gentile in the Ancient World (Princeton, ), . On Hecataeus,see now the treatment by Bar—Kochva TheImage of the Jews in Greek Liter- ature, –. 318 14. WasThereJudeophobia in Classical Antiquity?
He wasevidentlynot engaged in polemic. And he gotsome important facts wrong. Hecataeus reports that the Jews never had aking,thatthey chose their HighPriest for his virtue and his wisdom, and that Moses founded the city of Jer- usalem whereheinstalled the Temple.²³ In fact,ofcourse, the ancient Israelites had many kings, their High Priesthood was ahereditary office, and Moses never made it to the HolyLand. Hecataeus, at least in part,drew on erroneous infor- mationand maynot have had much first-hand experience. Roman writers were hardlymorereliable in theirdepiction of Jewish practices,eventhough many Jews livedintheir midst.The Sabbath, for example, was regarded by manyas aday of fasting.²⁴ Others connected it with the godSaturn.²⁵ Plutarch, the biog- rapher and collector of arcane information, even compared the Sabbath to aDi- onysiac feast.²⁶ The speculations in short ranfrom fast daytofeastday.Asis clear,pagans entertained anumber of misconceptions, confusions, and inaccur- acies. These need not reflect animus nor deliberate distortion. Instead, they sug- gest alack of serious inquiry,asuperficial curiosity,and ageneral indifference. It appears thatmostofthe authors did not care enough to gettheirfacts straight. Indeedasubstantial proportion of pagan references to Jews and Judaism fall into asingle category.They constituteallusions to peculiar Jewishtraits, practi- ces,and customs.Greeks and Romans, as alreadynoted, could live comfortably with religious and culturalactivities practiced by awide variety of ethnic groups. The Jews, however,struck them as being particularlyweird. Hencetheirstrange habits turn up rather frequentlyinpagan texts.Romans who had the opportuni- ty to observeJews in their midst remarked often on their peculiarities. Afew in- stances will suffice. Some Romans regarded the keepingofthe Sabbath as aco- lossal folly. Seneca quipped thatbyobserving the Sabbath Jews waste 1/7 of their livesinidleness.²⁷ Tacitus speculated that the charms of laziness not onlyin- duced Jews to while away every seventh daybut even prompted them to devote every seventh year to lolling about.²⁸ The abstention from pork provoked similar cracks. As Augustus famouslyput it,inspeaking about the intrigues and mur- ders that took place in the familyand court of Herod, “Iwould feelsafer as Her- od’spig thanashis son.”²⁹ Petronius mocked the Jews as worshippingapig-
Hecataeus,inDiod. Sic. ..–. Strabo, ..;Trogus, apud Justin, ..;Suet. Aug. .;Petronius, fr. ,Ernout; Mar- tial, ... Tibullus, ..;Frontinus, Stratagems, ..;Tac. Hist. ... Plut. Quaest. Conviv. ... Seneca, in Aug. CivDei, .. Tac. Hist. ... Macrob. Sat. ... 14. WasThereJudeophobia in Classical Antiquity? 319 god.³⁰ And Juvenal observed thatJudaea is the one place wherepigscan live to a ripe old age.³¹ Circumcision, of course, drew similar jibes and mockery.Not only did Roman satirists likePetronius,Juvenal, and Martial find it asourceofamuse- ment,but the Jewish philosopher Philo acknowledgedthatitprompted ridicule and laughter among many.³² Remarks of this kind might be droll and parodic, but they hardlyconstituted deep animosity.The derogatory comments qualifymoreasamused disdainthan as acampaign of vilification. Nor wereJews the sole objects of scorn. Much is made of Cicero’snotorious statement that Jews and Syrians are born to be slaves.³³ But,when circumstances called for it,inother speeches, the orator could spoutcomparable vitriol at Gauls and Sardinians,atPhrygians, Mysians, Lydians, and Carians—all of whom come off no better than Jews.³⁴ Tacitus, some- times labeled as the arch anti-semite,certainlydid not reservehis fire for Jews alone. He can be quiteindiscriminate in his assault.Heblasts Britons and Ger- mans too, he is contemptuous of Egyptian religion, and he despises Christianity.³⁵ One need not belabor the point with regard to satirists. ForJuve- nal, easternersofevery stripe are offensive. He expresses his contempt infamous- ly in the lines about the Orontes riverpouring its refuse into the Tiber.And he blasts the Egyptians without mercy.³⁶ Someofthis maywell be tongue-in- cheek. But Juvenal does not single out Jews for opprobrium. Jews, in short, had no monopolyasvictims of invective.Pagans frequently poked fun at those who did not share their customs,their gods, their institutions, their garb, or their language. That gave ample scope for mockery,wisecracks, and caricature. Thejibes wereaimed at those who were different.But they fall well short of outrageoranimus, let alone oppression. Most of the disparagingre- marks made by pagans derive from Greco-Roman culturalsnobbery and adis- dain for alien customs,especiallythe more eccentric ones. The sneers, jokes, and put-downs marked no path to persecution. To regard this collection of sar- castic and dismissive utterancesasbuilding apicture of Jews that prompted pog-
Petronius, fr. ,Ernout. Juv. .. Philo. Spec. .–: ἄρξομαι δ᾽ἀπὸτοῦ γελωμένου παρὰ τοῖςπολλοῖς. Γελᾶται δὲἡτῶνγεν- νητικῶνπεριτομή.For satiric lampoons of circumcision, see, e.g., Petronius, .–; Juv. .–;Martial, .., ., . Cic. Prov.Cons. . See E.S. Gruen “Cicero and the Alien,” in D. Lateiner,B.K. Gold, and J. Perkins, Roman Literature, Gender and Reception (New York, 2013), 13–27. See Tac. Germ. ., .–, ., ., .; Agr. –; Hist. .., .; Ann. ..–. Juv. .–, .–. 320 14. WasThereJudeophobia in Classical Antiquity? roms would be well off the mark.³⁷ The perpetrators of outright brutality against the Jews in Alexandria, Caesarea, and elsewheredid not studyatthe feet of Apol- lonius Molon, learn philosophyfrom Seneca,ortaketheir cue from the pungent witticisms of Petronius and the wry ironies of Tacitus. Wasthere, in fact,Judeophobia in classicalantiquity?What did Greeks or Romans have to fear from Jews?Itisworth looking at those passages often cited to suggest concern about Jewishinfluence, impact,and infiltration into pagan society. Cicero’spowerful speech on behalf of Flaccus,the Roman governor of Asia, in 59 B.C.E. provides astriking picture of the weightthatJews could bring to bear in public deliberations at Rome. They objected sharplytoFlaccus’ actions in pre- venting the shipment of gold from Jews in the citiesofAsia Minor to the Temple in Jerusalem. Cicerolamented that the Jews of Rome constituted apressure group, thatthey rounded up asubstantial crowd, and that they exercised consid- erable authority in contiones,the political assemblies thatgathered to discuss public issues and consider legislative enactments.³⁸ Those lines certainlyattest to athriving community of Jews in Rome, one thatcould work in unison when amatter affected them directlyand could engageinpublic demonstrations if the occasion called for it.But one must exercise caution here. The forensic con- text,assooften, generated Ciceronian rhetoric that thrivesonexaggeration and overstatement.Itishardlylikelythat Jews would customarilyshow up in forceto attend contiones and throw their weight around. Moreover,Cicero’sfulminations include no suggestion that Romans felt nervous about the authority wieldedby Jews. The text of Pompeius Trogus, historian of the Hellenistic kingdoms, writing around the end of the 1st century B.C.E. or the beginning of the 1st centuryC.E., as transmitted by Justin, contains an intriguingstatement.Trogusoffered an ill-re- searched and muddled digest of earlyIsraelite history,includingthe assertion that Moses was son of Joseph, and that Moses’ son became both priest and king of his people. He adds thatthis elevation became the model for all subse-
See Gruen Diaspora, –;cf. M. Goodman Rome and Jerusalem: TheClashofAncientCiv- ilizations (New York, ), –.They aretaken much moreseriouslybyFeldman Jewand Gentile in the Ancient World, –;Schäfer Judeophobia, –;B.Rochette “Juifs et Ro- mains:Ya-t-il eu un antijudaisme romain?” REJ, (), –.Cf. also Isaac TheInvention of Racism in Classical Antiquity, –, idem “The Ancient Mediterranean and the pre-Chris- tian Era,” in A.S. Lindemann and R.S. Levy, Antisemitism:AHistory (Oxford, ), –. Cic. Flacc. –: illa turba quaesita est; scis quanta sit manus, quanta concordia, quantum valeat in contionibus. ...multitudinemIudaeorum flagrantem non numquam in contionibus. 14. WasThereJudeophobia in Classical Antiquity? 321 quent Jewishrulers who combined high priesthood with kingship.And he mar- vels that the combination of justice and religion has made the Jews incredibly powerful.³⁹ Trogus, in this hash of Jewish history,isplainly thinking about the combination of political and sacredofficesthat did not occur until the 2nd cen- tury B.C.E. under the Hasmoneans. The statement has been taken as areflection of pagan aweatJewishpower in the earlyyears of the Roman Empire.⁴⁰ That is surelyover-interpretation. Judaea had become more conspicuous on the interna- tional scene under the Herodian dynasty,probablythe time when Trogus com- posed his history.But,quite apart from the fact that monarchywas no longer combined with High Priesthood in thatperiod, Judaea was very much in thrall to and under the shadow of Rome in the Herodian years. Whatever Trogus in- tended to conveyinhis jumbled history,itcould hardlyrepresent serious Roman worry about Jewish power—nor does Trogus himself (whose account is rather positive on the Jews) suggest anysuch worry. Of greater account,atleast in modern interpretations, are references to con- version to Judaism, the growingnumbers of Jews, and the alarm expressed by pagan authors at the apostasy of their compatriots.Tacitus’ denunciation of those who entered the Jewishfold is virulent and memorable. He deplores the fact that they agreed to undergo circumcision, and he castigates them for despis- ing their own gods, for rejectingtheir nativetradition, and for holding theirpa- rents,children, and siblingscheap.⁴¹ Juvenalexpresses comparable displeasure with gentileswho embraced Judaism. He upbraidsthem for observing the Sab- bath, abstaining from pork,yielding to circumcision, and worshippingnogods but the clouds and some divinity of the sky.Evenworse, they accustomed them- selvestoscorningRoman laws, and,instead, study, observe, and revere Judaic justice, which Moses handed down in asecret volume.⁴² Seneca goes still further. He claims that the ways of this most criminalnation prevail so extensively that they are accepted in all lands, to the point thatthe vanquished now give laws to the victors.⁴³
Trogus,inJustin, ..–,esp. ..: ut eosdem reges et sacerdotes haberent, quorum iustitia religione permixta incredibile quantum coaluere. Cf. Feldman Jewand Gentile in the Ancient World, . Tac. Hist. ..: transgressi in morem eorum idem usurpant, nec quicquamprius imbuuntur quam contemneredeos,exuerepatriam, parentes liberos fratres vilia habere. Juv. .–: Romanas autem soliti contemnereleges/ Iudaicum ediscunt et servant ac me- tuuntius/tradidit arcano quodcumque volumine Moyses.. Seneca, in Aug. CivDei, .: cum interim usque eo sceleratissimae gentis consuetudoconva- luit, ut per omnes iam terras receptasit; victi victoribus leges dederunt. 322 14. WasThereJudeophobia in Classical Antiquity?
Does this combination of texts establish that Judeophobia grippedthe Ro- mans, thatthe proliferation of the Jews frightened pagans, that Jewishproselyt- izing panicked the officialdom and the populace?⁴⁴ The testimonycan hardly sustain that inference. The Tacitean passagesignals no widespread alarm. The historian directs his vitriol against proselytes who turn theirbacks on their owngods, nation, and families. So much the worse for them. But he does not infer thattheir conversion represents amenace to pagan society as awhole. Tacitus does follow that state- ment with the report thatJews takecare to increase their own numbers. But it is quite clear that this has nothing to do with encouragingconverts. Tacitus speaks here explicitlyofJewish prohibition on the slaying of anylate-born child and their commitment to increasingprogeny.⁴⁵ Juvenal’scaustic lines should not be taken as serious anxiety about aJewish threat to pagan well-being. Apart from the satirist’sgrumblingabout converts adopting bizarre Jewishhabits,his principal complaint is leveled at their studyof, adherenceto, and reverencefor the Mosaic code and their contempt for Roman laws. There is patent exaggeration here. We have no recordofJews, let alone proselytes, violating Roman laws or of being chargedwith such actions. Even if one weretotake the satirical caricature seriously, Juvenal says nothing about hordes of pagans abandoning their traditions and yielding to Jewish blan- dishments.Nohint surfaces in this text about an epidemic of conversions that might prompt Roman dread. The onlyalarming notice comesfrom Seneca.His remark that Jewishprac- tice is receivedthroughout the world and that the conquered now dictate laws to the conqueror would seem to implythatJews have spread everywhereand have the upperhand wherever they are. The latter claim is surelypreposterous. How much credence should be giventothe former? It is noteworthythat Seneca’snear contemporary,the Jewishhistorian Jose- phus, made acomparable claim, in his case aboastwith apositive spin. He maintained thatthere was not acity or apeople, whether Greek or barbarian, to which Jewish observance of the Sabbath, fasts, lightingoflamps, and dietary
So, e.g., J.L. Daniel “Anti-Semitism in the Hellenistic-Roman World,” JBL, (), – ;Gager TheOrigins of Anti-Semitism, –;K.Rosen “Der Historiker als Prophet: Tacitus und die Juden,” Gymnasium, (), , ;Schäfer Judeophobia, –. Tac. Hist. ..: augendae tamen multidudini consulitur;nam et necare quemquamexagnatis nefas ...hinc generandi amor. The statement is not an elaboration on whatTacitus had just said about proselytes. Note the tamen. 14. WasThereJudeophobia in Classical Antiquity? 323 regulations has not spread.⁴⁶ Acloselysimilar assertion had been made by Philo ageneration or so earlier.Heaffirms that the Sabbath and YomKippur are hon- ored by Greeks and barbarians,bythose who dwell on the continents or on is- lands, by east and west,Europe and Asia, indeedthe whole world from one end to the other.⁴⁷ These statements tooare rhetorical outbursts, not be taken liter- ally(or even close) by ancient or by modern readers.Incombination with Sene- ca’stirade, however,they do confirm (what we otherwise know from epigraphic, archaeological, and additional literary evidence) that Jews had indeedfound their waytonumerous sites in the Mediterranean world, thatthey had establish- ed communities widely, and that an extensive diasporahad taken holdwellbe- fore the time of Seneca,Philo, and Josephus.⁴⁸ Nor would it be at all surprising that many gentiles in those communities had emulated or adopted various Jew- ish practices.⁴⁹ Wasthis perceivedasathreat?OnlySeneca betraysany hint of it.And one needs to bear in mind that his overblownstatement comes not in anyextant text of Seneca but onlyinaquotation (paraphrase?) by St.Augustine four centuries later.Wedonot know the context of the original. Further,itisnoteworthythat Seneca’ssurviving work (a substantial corpus) nowheremakes direct mention of Jews. They werehardlyanobsession for him. If there was pervasive fear of Jewishnumbers or of the growingpredominance of Jewish practices,the lone passageofSeneca would certainlynot proveit. His allegation that the conquered imposed their laws upon the conqueror need mean no more thanthat the observ- ance of the Sabbath and other customs associated with the Jews had gained wide welcome in the Romanworld. Seneca maynot have been happy about that.But even he (if the quotation is accurate) does not saythatpagans panicked over the increase of Jewish numbers and influence.
Jos. C. Ap. .;cf. BJ, ..See the valuable commentary by J.M.G. Barclay Flavius Jose- phus,Translation and Commentary,vol. , Against Apion (Leiden, ), –. Philo, Mos. .–. See the discussion in Gruen Diaspora, –,with references. Suetonius, Dom. .,reportsthat those whosoughttoevade the fiscus Iudaicus under Do- mitian consisted both of those who live aJewish life without professingthemselvestobeJews and those whoconcealed their origins in order to avoid payingthe tax.Whether the first category (or even both) included proselytescannot be determined from the text, although it is often as- sumed. Cf. L.A. Thompson “Domitian and the Jewish Tax,” Historia , (), –; M.H. Williams “Domitian, the Jews,and the ‘Judaizers’—ASimple MatterofCupiditasand Maies- tas?” Historia, (), –;Schäfer Judeophobia, –.But they werecertainly persons who shared Jewish practices and ways of life. 324 14. WasThereJudeophobia in Classical Antiquity?
The whole issue has been tied by modern scholars to the fraught question of Jewishproselytism.⁵⁰ Did the Jews engageinmissionary activity to solicit con- verts and enhance their prominence? This is not the place to engageinanex- tended discussion of that much debated subject. But it maybeworth noting that the evidence for proselytizing by Jews is vanishinglysmall. The texts already discussed, while they attesttoconverts and the spread of Jewish customs to the gentiles, saynothing about aggressive proselytizing. Nor should it be inferred from other passages sometimes cited in that cause. Some notorious lines of Horace have offered ostensible support.Hestates that “if youare unwilling to yield to this, the large band of poets would come and be of assistance to me, for we are much largerinnumber and we, like the Jews, will forceyou to yield to this throng.”⁵¹ The phraseologyhas suggested to some that Horace implies aggressive proselytizing.⁵² But the inference is un- warranted. Thetext says nothing of conversion to Judaism. It refers to the band of poetswho will compel assent,just as Jews do. And compulsion was no- whereaJewish meansofwinning proselytes for their clan.⁵³ Where does one find anytracesofproselytizing activity?The argument has made use of episodes in which Jews wereexpelled from Rome. Forsome the ex- pulsions stemmed from Jewish efforts to win converts, thus generatingalarm and promptingremoval of the missionaries. That position is dubious at best,and ul- timatelyunsustainable. First of all, we know of onlythree examples of such ban- ishments, and they are widelyspaced in time. The first came in 139 B.C.E., the second in 19 C.E., and the third in 49 C.E. Did the Jews do no proselytizing in the interim periods?Ordid no one notice or care?
See, e.g.,Sevenster TheRoots of Pagan Anti-Semitism in the Ancient World, –;Daniel “Anti-Semitism in the Hellenistic-Roman World,” –;Gager TheOrigins of Anti-Semitism, –;Feldman Jewand Gentile in the Ancient World, –,with the criticisms by L.V. Rutg- ers “Attitudes to Judaism in the Greco-Roman Period: ReflectionsonFeldman’s Jewand Gentile in the Ancient World, “ JQR, (), –;Isaac TheInvention of Racism in ClassicalAn- tiquity, –; idem “The AncientMediterranean and the pre-ChristianEra,” –. Horace, Serm. ..–: cui si concederenolis/multa poetarum veniat manus,auxilio quae/ sit mihi; nam multo plures sumus,acveluti te Iudaei cogemus in hanc concedereturbam. Stern Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism (), ;Sevenster TheRoots of PaganAnti-Semitism in the Ancient World, ;Feldman Jewand Gentile in the Ancient World, . See J. Nolland “Proselytism or Politics in Horace, Satires,I,,?” Vigiliae Christianae, (), –;J.M.G. Barclay Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora from Alexander to Trajan ( BCE– CE) (Edinburgh, ), –;Schäfer Judeophobia, –.Itistrue that efforts to bringabout conversion by force occurred under the Hasmoneans.But this involved large-scale compulsion of peoples after military victory,not proselytizingactivity;Jos. A. J. .–, ..And Horace was surelynot thinkingaboutthe Hasmoneans. 14. WasThereJudeophobia in Classical Antiquity? 325
Anoteworthyfact needs emphasis. In each instance,the exiled Jews did not stayawayvery long.Alarge Jewish community thrived in Rome in the 1st century B.C.E., as Cicerohappens to attest in 59.⁵⁴ They had surelynot justarrived. So, the expulsion in 139 was far from permanent or sweeping,more ademonstration than afull-scale eviction. Further,Jews were not the sole targets.The Roman praetor’sdecrees ordered the exile of bothChaldeans (astrologers) and Jews. And there is nothing to suggest astrological proselytizing.The evidence itself is exceedingly thin and confused. It derivesfrom Valerius Maximus, writing in the reign of Tiberius,morethan acentury and ahalf later. Moreover,his text it- self is transmitted in two versions through epitomes by twoseparate Byzantine exceptors. The ground is at best shaky.One version alleges that Jews had at- tempted to pass their sacredrites to the Romans, the other that they wished to infiltrate Roman mores with the cult of Jupiter Sabazius.⁵⁵ No need to dwell on this muddle. If anyproselytism took place, it mayjust as likelyhavecome from adherents of Jupiter Sabaziusasfrom Jews.⁵⁶ And the prime victims may well have been astrologers rather than Jews (theywerethe first to be expelled). The whole episode represents an effort to trumpet official concern for reaffirming traditionalRomanvalues.⁵⁷ If Jews actuallyleft in anynumbers, they weresoon back. Proselytism, insofar as there was any, did not undulytrouble the author- ities. The much discussed expulsion of 19 C.E. under the emperor Tiberius re- quires no lengthytreatment here. It has alreadyreceivedextensive scrutiny.⁵⁸ One need note onlythat our main sources on the episode, Josephus, Tacitus, and Suetonius,givenohint that proselytizing triggered the government action. One sourcealone, Dio Cassius, writing almosttwo centuries later,mentions such activity.His brief text states simplythatwhen manyJews gathered in Rome and wereturningthe inhabitants to their ways of life, Tiberius banished most of them.⁵⁹ And the text wastransmitted by the 7th centuryChristian author
Cic. Flacc. –. Val. Max. .. (Nepotianus): Iudaeos quoque, qui Romanis traderesacrasua conati errant. ValMax. .. (Paris): idem Iudaeos,qui Sabazi Ioviscultu Romanos inficeremores conati erant. See the discussions of E.N.Lane “Sabazius and the Jews in Valerius Maximus:ARe-exami- nation,” JRS, (), –;P.Trebilco JewishCommunities in Asia Minor (Cambridge, ), –;H.D.Slingerland ClaudianPolicymaking and the Early Imperial Repression of Judaism at Rome (Atlanta, ), –. This interpretation receivesfuller treatment in Gruen Diaspora, –. See the analysis, with full bibliographic references, in Gruen Diaspora, –.Add Good- man Rome and Jerusalem, . Dio, ..a: ΤῶντεἸουδαίων πολλῶν ἐςτἠνῬώμην συνελθόντων καὶ συχνοὺςτῶν ἐπιχωρίων ἐςτὰσφέτερα ἔθη μεθιστάντων, τοὺςπλείονας ἐξήλασεν. 326 14. WasThereJudeophobia in Classical Antiquity?
John of Antioch. The fragment lacks all context,and it coincides with nothing else in the testimony. That does not justify jettisoning the account,but it provides onlythe most slender basis for inferring that fear of losing pagan converts to Ju- daism motivated Tiberius’ decree. One must observe thathere too, whatever the motivesorpretexts for expulsion, Jews werenot singled out.Worshippers of Isis and perhaps others departed as well.⁶⁰ And, once again they could hardlyhave been away long,ifmanyofthem left at all. AccordingtoPhilo’snarrative,Tiber- ius’ praetorian prefect Sejanus leveled chargesagainst Jews in Rome afew years later,but the emperor subsequentlydismissed them as false slanders.⁶¹ There is very little here to sustain the idea that missionary actions generated Romananxi- eties. The third episode is the most infamous of them, and certainlythe one over which most ink has been spilled. As is well known, Suetonius reports that the emperor Claudius expelled from Rome the Jews who were persistentlycausing upheavalatthe instigation of Chrestus.⁶² The passagehas been parsed innumer- able timeswith avast variety of interpretations. Happily, we do not need to pause over it.The motivesfor this banishment can be debated forever. But the text says not awordabout conversion. And once more the “exiles” were back in Rome in short order.⁶³ In brief, the very few episodesofJewish expulsion, widelyscattered and more symbolic than effective,givelittle foothold to thosewho wish to argue for pagan dread of Jewish proselytism.⁶⁴ The very idea of Judeophobia seems counter-intuitive.That there should be widespread apprehension about aJewishmenace among the denizens of Greek cities or the officialdomofthe Roman empire is highlyimplausible on the face of it.Certainlythe snide remarks about alien practices or the quips of clever sati- rists do not remotelysuggest anxiety about Jewish infiltration. And the supposed concern about proselytismislargely ared herring.
Tac. Ann. .;Suet. Tib. ;cf. Jos. A. J. .–. Philo, Legat. –; Flacc. , . Suet. Claud. .: Iudaeos impulsoreChresto assidue tumultuantis Roma expulit. Cf. Paul, Rom. :–. One other passage has often been used to make acase for Jewish missionary activity: Matt. :.Jesus rebukes “scribes and Pharisees” for crossingland and sea to makeasingle proselyte.But the reference maywell be to the recruitment of Pharisees rather than to anygen- eral mission to convert gentiles to Judaism. See M. Goodman “Jewish Proselytizinginthe First Century,” in J. Lieu, J. North, and T. Rajak, Jews Among Pagans and Christians in the Roman Em- pire (London, ), –; idem Mission and Conversion: Proselytizing in the Religious History of the Roman Empire (Oxford, ), –;cf. W. Huss “Zu den Ursprüngen des antiken Anti- judaismus,” in J.-F.Eckholt, M. Sigismund, and S. Sigismund, Geschehen und Gedächtnis: Die hellenistischeWelt und ihreWirkung (Münster, ), –. 14. WasThereJudeophobia in Classical Antiquity? 327
But this does not settle the matter.Weneed to return to the violent outbursts against Jews noted at the beginning of this paper:the massacres in Alexandria, Seleucia,and Caesarea. And they werebynomeans the onlyones. In the course of the Jewish war against Rome,the inhabitants of Skythopolis slaughtered 13,000 Jews and seized their property.⁶⁵ At Ascalon, 2500 Jews fell, 2000 at Ptol- emais, comparable numbers at Tyre,and in cities throughout Syria.⁶⁶ Renewed fighting brokeout in Alexandria in 66 C.E. The pattern wasafamiliar one. A melée in the amphitheater between Greeks and Jews led to the intervention of the Romanprefect with two legions. They performed their “peace-keeping” op- erations by spreadingcarnagethroughout the Jewishcommunity of the city. And even when the Roman commander,Ti. Julius Alexander,who was aformer Jew, called off the troops,the Alexandrian citizenry,driven, says Josephus, by ex- cess of hatred, indulgedthemselvesinmutilation of Jewish corpses.⁶⁷ Equally grim events occurred in Damascus. The citizens cooped up Jews in the gymnasi- um, ostensiblyfor purposes of security,and subsequentlybutchered them all, more than 10,000 within an hour.⁶⁸ Even the people of Antioch, normallyconge- nial, turned on the Jews in theirmidst in 70.They abolished Sabbath observance, forced Jews to conduct Greek sacrifices, and then made Jews acollective scape- goat for afire in the city.⁶⁹ The episode contains some chilling modern overtones. The numbers supplied by Josephus are suspiciouslyround, and all numbers in ancient manuscripts are unreliable or subject to exaggeration. But the bloated figures do not cast doubt upon the events themselves. No easy explanations exist for such events. And those offered by modern in- terpreters are somewhat strained and implausible. So, for example, Greek anti- Judaism has been analyzed as anti-Romanismindisguise.Since Rome accorded privileges to Jews in various communities,asinAlexandria, so it is argued, at- tacks on Jews would be an indirect but safer waytovent theirwrath against the Romans.⁷⁰ That answer is singularlyunsatisfactory.Would amassacre of
Jos. B. J., .–. Jos. B. J., .–. Jos. B. J., .–: δι’ ὐπερβολὴνμίσους. Jos. B. J., .–. Jos. B. J., .–. E.M. Smallwood TheJews under Roman Rule from Pompey to Diocletian: AStudy in Political Relations (Leiden, ), –;Gager TheOrigins of Anti-Semitism, , –;Yavetz Ju- denfeindschaft in der Antike, –.InadditiontoJewish civic rights in Alexandria, Greek interference with Jewish privileges in cities of Asia Minor can also be seen as indirect clashes with Roman guarantors of those privileges; cf. Barclay Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, –;M.Pucci BenZeev JewishRights in the Roman World: TheGreek and Roman Docu- ments Quoted by Josephus Flavius (Tübingen, ), –, –. 328 14. WasThereJudeophobia in Classical Antiquity?
Jews in Alexandria be reckoned as an affront to Rome? Apart from turmoilwhich aRoman governorwould be expected to repress,there is little to reason to be- lievethatRoman interests would be damaged by an attack on Jews. One might note indeed that, after the assaults on the Jewish community in Alexan- dria in 38, aJewish delegation to the emperor Caligula was greeted with derision.⁷¹ Roman prestige was plainlynot at stake. Adifferent interpretation turns this one on its head. It proposes that pagan propaganda against the Jews actuallyrepresents an effort to curry the favorofthe Romans. On this view Greeks employed tactics to blacken Jews in the eyes of Rome, thus to provetotheir Roman overlords that the Hellenizedpeople of the east were more reliable alliesthan the untrustworthySemites.⁷² That reconstruction is hardlyany more plausible than the reverse. How likelyisitthat the Romans would be impressed by Hellenic assaults on the Jews?When complaints about mistreatment or loss of privileges came to Roman officials from Jews in the Greek cities of Asia Minor,the decisions in fact normallyfavored the complainant.⁷³ Reconstructions of this sortsuffer from two major drawbacks. First,they over-rationalize or over-intellectualize incidentsthat wereactuallydrivenby more emotional—and more destructive—passions. And, secondly, they err in searchingfor some general phenomenon, some sweepingexplanation that un- derlayall of the particularoutbursts. Surely, the massacre of 10,000 trapped Jews (or whatever the actual numbermay have been) in Damascus, for instance, cannot be accounted for by cold political calculation—let alone by the depiction of Jews in pagan literature.⁷⁴ The intensity of feelings in such communities sug- gests local conflicts and narrowlybasedanimosities. Herein maylie the critical clue.
Philo, Legat. –. Yavetz “Judeophobia in Classical Antiquity,” –.For manyrecent scholars,Josephus’ lengthy apologia for the Jews in his ContraApionem was designed in large part to stress the sim- ilarities of Roman and Jewish values and ideals,thereby to refute Greek attackers whopointed to discrepancies between Jewish and Roman ways of life; see, e.g., G. Haaland “Jewish Laws for a Roman Audience: TowardanUnderstandingofContraApionem,” in J.U. Kalms and F. Siegert, Internationales Josephus-Kolloquium (Münster, ), –;K.Berthelot “The Use of Greek and Roman Stereotypes of the Egyptians by Hellenistic Jewish Apologists, with Special ReferencetoJosephus’ Against Apion,”in J.U. Kalms, Internationales Josephus-Kolloquium Aarhus, (Münster, ), –;J.M.G. Barclay “Judaism in Roman Dress:Josephus’ Tactics in the ContraApionem,” in J.U. Kalms, Internationales Josephus-Kolloquium Aarhus (Münster, ), –; idem Flavius Josephus v., –. See below. Forthe slaughter in the gymnasium at Damascus, see Jos. B. J., .–. 14. WasThereJudeophobia in Classical Antiquity? 329
We need to seek answers at the local level. Anoteworthytext can serveasan illustration. One fragmentary papyrus from the 1st century B.C.E., toodamaged to disclose the circumstances and situation, nonetheless contains apregnant phrase. It makesreference to the Egyptian community of Tebtunis and to the priest of that community,and it adds the statement “youknow how they loathe the Jews.”⁷⁵ The particulars thatgeneratedthis comment are elusive.But the text evidentlyindicatesalocal resentment of some sort.Thatiswhere the spotlight must be directed. Josephus supplies some vital documentation here. He preserves aseries of Roman decrees sent to individual cities in Asia Minor,the islands of the Aegean, Syria,Phoenicia,Palestine, and Cyrene in North Africa, arangeofcommunities around the Mediterranean. The decrees repeatedlyaffirm Roman protection of Jewishrights.⁷⁶ Of course,Josephus mayhavehad his own apologetic purposes in transmitting these documents. But that does not compromise their authentic- ity or diminish their value as evidence. What matters for our purposesisthe fact that the edicts had to be issued by Roman magistrates and other officials be- cause various citieshad evidentlyinterfered with or curtailed Jewish exercise of traditional practices.That issue, in one form or another,arisesagain and again. One might takeasanexample the edict of the Roman governor of Asia to the city of Ephesus. It directs the officialdom of that city to exempt Jews from mili- tary service because they cannot bear arms on the Sabbath and cannot obtain the food requiredbytheir dietary prescriptions.⁷⁷ Asimilar document went out to the city of Tralles in Asia Minor demanding that its leaders cease attacking Jews and preventing them from observing the Sabbath and other traditions.⁷⁸ The emperorAugustus subsequentlyaffirmedtothe provinces of Asia and Cy- rene that Jews should be free to practice theirrituals, thattheir contributions to the Temple in Jerusalemwereinviolable, and that no one was permittedto steal their sacredbooksormonies.⁷⁹ Several other letters,decrees,and edicts to various cities and states of Greeceand the Near East were collected and pre- served by Josephus. It stands to reason that such documents would not have been issued unless those communities had placed curbs on Jewish worship,
CPJ,I,#.Cf. J.M. Mélèze Modrezejewski TheJews of Egypt from Ramses II to Emperor Ha- drian (Philadelphia, ), –. See the thorough treatment by Pucci BenZeev JewishRights in the Roman World, passim;cf. Gruen Diaspora, –. Jos. A. J. .;Pucci BenZeev JewishRights in the Roman World, –. Jos. A. J. .–;Pucci BenZeev JewishRights in the Roman World, –. Jos. A. J. .–;Pucci BenZeev JewishRights in the Roman World, –. 330 14. WasThereJudeophobia in Classical Antiquity? had interfered with observance of the Sabbath, had hijacked Jewishcontribu- tions to the Temple, and had even stolen Jewishprayerbooks. All of this plainly had been prompted at the local level. Whydid the Roman imperial government choose to intervene at all?The em- peror or his appointees could hardlyhaveseen themselvesasgreat champions of Jewishrights and privileges—whatever Josephus might wish us to believe. Partic- ular conditions and circumstances called forth the interventions. Insofar as they reflected general policy,that would stem from the desire to maintain stability, order,and tranquility in the empire. Romans frowned on local disturbances and tensions that upset the smoothness of administration. Official policy,how- ever,was not always satisfactorilyimplemented on the ground. When the Roman governorwas distant or occupied, or indeedoccasionallycollaborative,regional hostilities playedthemselvesout,sometimes with deleterious effects. What needs to be emphasized, however,isthat these werelocal events, triggered by individual circumstances, not some ideological commitment to anti-semitism, let alone an official campaign of persecution. The events thatprompted particu- lar outbursts varied from community to community.They might involveacom- petition for civic rights in one city,rivalry for judicial privileges in another,re- sentment over tax benefits in another,anger over draft exemptions in still another.⁸⁰ The episodes wereoccasioned by social,economic, and political cir- cumstances that differed from place to place, rather than conformingtosome uniform, overall pattern. Another point requires strongstress.The outbursts werenot regular features of the historical landscape. If one surveys the long stretch of time from Alexand- er the Great to the outbreak of the Great Revolt,they claimed onlyatinyportion of thatperiod. Thedocuments collected by Josephus signalingconflicts over privileges for Jews in Greek cities are almost entirelyconcentrated in the period of Caesarand Augustus when political and military circumstances produced un- usual tensions.⁸¹ The so-called Alexandrian “pogrom” arose from the combusti- ble mixofrivalries among Greeks,Egyptians,and Jews in that city,triggered by the special situation in which the Roman prefect found himself.⁸² And most of the ferocious attacksonJews in the cities of Syria, Palestine, and Phoenicia came in the course of the Great Revolt itself when loyalties wereput to their
These and other issues aredocumented in the decrees,edicts,and exchange of communica- tions between Roman officials and Greek cities concerning the rights and privileges of Jewish communities,convenientlycollectedand commented upon by PucciBen Zev JewishRights in the Roman World, –. See Gruen Diaspora, –. See above, n. . 14. WasThereJudeophobia in Classical Antiquity? 331 most severe test and the need felt by manycommunities to distinguish them- selvesfrom the rebels was at its most intense. These are not to be taken as rep- resentative of Jewishexperience in the Hellenistic and Roman periods. The anti-semitism or Judeophobia thatweassociate with the medieval and modernworlds has no real counterpart in antiquity.Wedonot find ideological fixation, consistent caricatures,religious intolerance,racial stereotypes, or elab- orate justifications for oppression. If we are ever to understand the attacks that loom so large in the accounts, we must focus attention on local quarrels and community rivalries,oninternal friction over political rights, civic privileges, economic claims, or social distinctions that varied from place to place—and on the individual circumstances that brought latent tensions to the surface. Even if all this be granted, however,the matter is not closed. Contingency mayindeedexplain much. But whyisitthatJews are the ones who are so fre- quentlyvictimizedinthese situations?Why not Gauls, or Egyptians,orThra- cians, or Sardinians?They too werefrequentlylampooned by Greek and Roman writers,but do not turn up as regular prey for violent assault. There is no easy answer.But twoavenuestowardpartial understanding might be considered. First,the nature of our information. We happen to possess Josephus’ history of the Jewishexperience in antiquity.There is no Thracian Jo- sephus, no Celtic Josephus, no Sardinian Josephus. Had therebeen, we would have afuller and more balanced view of inner conflicts and regional rivalries elsewhere. The Jews might not seem to be singular targets.Second, there is per- haps something especiallynotable about the Jews. They (or at least asignificant proportion of them) held tenaciouslytotraits and observances that marked out their particularheritage. And, paradoxically, the more they became an integral part of pagan society,the greater the need they mayhavefelt to maintain their owntraditions and practices, in order to assert the distinctiveness of their identity.This was, to be sure, asourceofpride—but it could alsobea risk and ahazard. Through much of the time this commitment to singularity en- gendered nothing worse than amusement or irritation, and the Jews wereleft un- troubled. In periods of crisis, however,whether political upheaval or regional conflict,local tensions become intensified. Under such circumstances, cultural differences, usually ignored or just scorned, can leap to the surface and take on sudden relevance. Under such conditions,the outsider becomes more obvious and vulnerable, an easy object for scapegoating,and eccentric traits become characterized as undesirable and unwelcome. The Jews’ insistenceupon their special attributes and observances gave them afirmer sense of self-esteem, but it also meant that,when crises came, they werereadilyidentifiable—and an inviting targetfor victimization. When internal divisions in acommunity spil- led over into confrontation, Jews wereconspicuous and convenient casualties. 332 14. WasThereJudeophobia in Classical Antiquity?
In that sense the experience of Jews in classicalantiquity does have an in- teresting,illuminating, and indeed disturbing,resemblance to some events in the modern world.