A Commentary on the Various References to the Jews in Latin Literature from Cicero to Seneca by Roberto D. Melfi Thesis presented to the School of Graduate Studies of the University of Ottawa as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Mas^a-r^fy Arts j UttKAKlfcS *, Ottawa, Canada, 1972 R.D. Melfi, Ottawa, 1974. UMI Number: EC55547 INFORMATION TO USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMI® UMI Microform EC55547 Copyright 2011 by ProQuest LLC All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Curriculum Studiorum Roberto Domenico Melfi was born March 22, 1949, in Montreal. He attended Cardinal Newman High School and received the Bachelor of Arts degree in History from Loyola College in 1969- i Preface Graetz, Dubnov, Baron and Roth are but a few of the prominent scholars, since the early part of the nineteenth century, who have dealt with Jewish history in its entirety. Too often, however, universal histories of the Jewish people do not devote a sufficient amount of space to a detailed study of the condition of the Jews during the Hellenistic and Roman periods. Consequently, many historians have sought to rectify this situation. For instance, Bentwich, Radin and Tcherikover have shed some light on Jewish-Greek rela­ tions in the years following Alexander's death, while Shurer and Juster were among the, first to present a comprehensive account of the Jews in Roman times. Jean Juster was a French lawyer and it is from that standpoint that he studied the legal, economic and social conditions of the Jews in the Roman Empire. His detailed commentaries on various topics in addition to his copious notes clearly show his mastery of the whole ancient and modern literature up to~ his day bearing upon the subject. His volumes treat three main topics, namely, the Jewish privileges, the life of the Jews in the Diaspora and the individual conditions of the Jews in private and public law and in social and economic life. Juster's massive work is still generally considered to be the stand- ii ard authority for the legal status of the Jews in the Roman Empire. Another prominent classicist who has made significant contributions in the field of Jewish and Roman studies is H. J. Leon. Many of his articles, which date from the 1920's, have since been incorporated in his recent general study of the Jews of ancient Rome. The great value of Leon's book lies in the fact that it is based to a great extent on inscriptional data, derived mainly from the Jewish catacombs of Rome. In his book Leon does not generally go into any detail, but he often summarizes and examines the opinions of previous commentators on the many problems which arise in his subject. The result is a lucid and compact scholarly work. An extensive and annotated bibliography in addition to numerous footnotes are a valuable aid for those who wish, to have a deeper look at the problems. Some of the previous works directly bearing on the subject of the thesis remain to be mentioned. The growing interest in Jewish history during the nineteenth century also inspired a few historically-minded authors to collect- references to the Jews in classical literature. Two of the most noteworthy early attempts were made by Rev. Dr. Giles and J. Gill in 1854 and I872 respectively. These compilations are now quite antiquated; they contain too many gaps arid provide too few constructive commentaries to be of any value. By far the most comprehensive list of extracts iii relating to all aspects of Judaism found in classical literature is still the one that was compiled by T. Reinach in 1895. Reinach cited the original Greek or Latin text where some aspect of Judaism was mentioned and then gave a corresponding French translation. Although at times his explanatory notes are copious, they usually give too little information about the authors and the milieu in which each of them wrote. Moreover, despite the comprehensive nature of his work, he left out some references. H. Willrich, in his review of Reinach's book, was the first to point this out and made some additions of his own. Lastly, another prominent scholar in the field of Jewish and Roman history has been J. A. Hiid. In his series of articles on the treatment of the Jews by Roman authors, published in the 1880.'s, he rightly gave serious thought to the social and political context of each reference to the Jews. Hild's study is the first of its kind; his opinion is often cited in the footnotes of Reinach's book. However, Hild selected only the best known Roman authors for his commentary on references to jews in Roman literature. In the light of all these previous studies, it is the aim of this thesis to examine all types of references to Jews found in the works of Latin authors during the period c. 70 B.C.E. to c, 70 C.E. In general the method of approach is similar to the one used by Hild. Each author is taken iv separately and each reference to Jews or some aspect of Judaism is usually considered in the light of the political and social context in which it was written. The length of each discussion varies according to the extent of the inform­ ation presented by the passage on hand; in some instances, the discussion also takes into account relevant information about the author whose passage is being treated. With this method of approach the thesis is essentially a series of separate essays on each Roman literary reference pertaining to any aspect of Judaism. The sketch presented in the introductory chapter about the diplomatic relations between Judaea and Rome in the years following the Maccabean revolt is based to a great extent on the biblical first tv/o Books of the Maccabees. The other prominent Jewish sources used as background information for various other parts of the thesis are Josephus and to a lesser extent Philo, the famous Jewish philosopher from Alexandria. A few words might be said about the degree of credibility of these sources. In respect to the information found in I Maccabees, scholarly opinion is that in general it is reliable and clearly based on historical facts. The author of I Maccabees was in all probability a Jew from Jerusalem. Despite his ardent devotion to Judaism in conjunction with his support of the national movement of the Maccabees, his aim in writing v his book is plainly historical. In sharp contrast, however, to I Maccabees, II Maccabees is marred by an explicit religious interpretation. For this reason this particular book, from which only two passages are cited in the thesis, is considered much less trustworthy than I Maccabees. There are four extant works of Josephus and it would be impossible here to give a complete critical review of each of these works. These works were written at different times and their composition was occasioned by separate events; moreover, the excellence of their literary style varies considerably. If, therefore, one is to evaluate the credibility of Josephus in the briefest terms possible, the following may be taken as-the general scholarly opinion on the subject. The conditions under which Josephus wrote his first major work, the Bellum Iudaicum, and the apparent' motive for writing it would make certain sections of the account somewhat suspicious as to its reliability. Joseohus' magnum opus, the Antiquitates Iudaicae, was written some sixteen years after the publication of his,first major work. In contrast to this work the Antiquitates are not coloured by the tint of Roman bias; here Josephus was writing more as a Jewish historian and apologist for the social and religious ways of his people. Josephus' Vita seems likely to have been an appendix to the Antiquitates. It is less a biography than an attack on those who criticized the author's own activities vi in Galilee during the Jewish War with Rome. Josephus' last work is the so-called Contra Apionem. It is perhaps the most interesting of his works and certainly very valuable historic­ ally. Here the author is again concerned with a defence of the antiqtiity of the Jews against the current anti-Jewish propaganda of his day. One of the chief merits of the Contra Apionem is the preservation of numerous passages from lost works. On the whole Josephus' works are frequently marred by inconsistencies and certain problems arising from faulty chronology. But in-spite of these and other defects his works provide much valuable information on both the Jews and Romans not otherwise found in the traditional mainstream of Greek and Roman sources. ..Josephus is used in the thesis mainly as background information, as in the introductory chapter to supplement the account of I Maccabees and in the following chapters when there is a need to relate official Roman position vis-a-vis Jews or Judaea at different epochs. The passages cited from Philo are relatively few. As in the case with the citations from Josephus,~there is no important reason to question the trustworthiness of the information presented by these sources.