pledge of future peace. Among the Parthian presents which were sent to the Roman emperor is mentioned as a marvel a Babylonian Jew, Eleazar, seven feet in stature. The Tetrarch accompanied the Roman Proconsul on this mission of peace, entertained the two chief personages in a brilliant manner upon a bridge thrown over the Euphrates, and took care not to leave the Emperor uninformed of all the success of the negotiations. Indeed, his information arrived before that sent by Vitellius himself, which almost cost him the favour of the latter.1 At the commencement of the year 37 Vitellius received from the Emperor the strict command to carry out the war against Aretas, after the Arabian had in the meantime extended his conquests even as far as Damascus, to the painful humiliation of the Romans.2 The Roman general collected for this purpose a large army of Roman soldiers and allies. The Arab king remained very defiant, and afterwards it was related that in his confident courage he recklessly prophesied that no enemy would force his way to Petra, because one of three principal persons responsible for the war would soon fall. Vitellius advanced with his army from Antioch to Ptolemais,3 and proposed to strike across to Petra by the most direct road by Judea, Jerusalem, and the south of the Dead Sea. There was then sent from Jerusalem to meet him a very earnest deputation, with the petition that he would spare the district of the Holy City the march through it, on account of the Roman eagles. He yielded, and proposed to cross the Jordan, directing his march through the great plain between Galilee and Samaria. But, nevertheless, in company with the Tetrarch and a few intimate friends, he honoured Jerusalem with a visit, and was again received there with great splendour. Indeed, as a feast (either Easter or Pentecost) was at hand, he promised to himself present a sacrifice at it. However, on the fourth day of his stay there, he received the news of the death of Tiberius, administered to the army the oath of allegiance to Caius, and, probably not unwillingly, abandoned the campaign for which he had now no authority. A tolerable arrangement appears to have afterwards ended the contention, of which we must speak subsequently." 1 Acc. Jos. Ant. xviii. 4. 4 sq.; comp., as regards Vitellius, Suet. Vitell. ch. ii. and Tac. Ann. vi. 41-44, where, however, on account of the great hiatus at the close of lib. vi. the end of the above history is wanting. 2 On this important episode, see fur ther, vol. vi. [German]. 3 Vol. v. p. 236. 5 Jos. Ant. xviii. 5. 3; at this point in Tacitus the hiatus occurs. 6 Vol. vi. [German]. THE JUDEANS IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 1 81 Antipas remained, meantime, without children. On this account it was to be expected that this last remnant of the kingdom of Herod would soon become directly Roman. It is true that from the time of Augustus there had also existed all along in the neighbourhood a few small principalities not directly dependent on Rome, as in Chalkis or Abila; in Emesa, on the northern slope of the Lebanon, under King Sampsigeramus, to whose daughter a younger member of the Herodian family was married; in Cappadocia and in Cilicia.3 But the principles which prevailed in Rome were unfavourable to the continuance of such governments of 'allies,' and all such vassal-governments were gradually absorbed into the one empire of Rome. 2 3. The Members of the Ancient Nation in Heathen Countries. With regard to the numerous dispersed members of the nation in heathen cities and countries, their position and their lot remained in general the same as was described in the previous volume; but it is implied in the nature of the mutual relations thus formed, as they have already been there discussed, that their essential incompatibility, even during this generally peaceful period, could not be concealed, and that at least certain striking indications thereof should break out. We can observe this most plainly in that quarter where the light of history is for us at this time the brightest, that is, in in the Roman empire. We saw in the previous volume how favourably Cæsar and then Augustus were disposed towards the Judeans and Samaritans, and that they were well able to use the favourable opportunity to their own advantage. Tiberius gladly perpetuated in a similar way that which his predecessors had in this respect begun. He zealously promoted everywhere particularly peace, trade, and manufactures, and discountenanced internal discord. During the first half of his reign especially he kept a strict watch over the governors of all the provinces. Accordingly, this period before us of thirty years was in general a truly prosperous age for the widely-scattered Dispersion, in which their intercourse and wealth grew in all directions. Moreover, their religion also was not only left in peace amongst Vol. v. p. 404, comp. further in vol. vi. [German]. 2 Jos. Ant. xviii. 5. 4. 3 Tac. Ann. ii. 42, 78; comp. vi. 41, from which it appears that in Cilicia Tracheia also, in the year 36 A.D., a people VOL. VI. G just like the adherents of the Gaulonite, ante, p. 45 sq., revolted against the Romans, when, after the death of the King Archelaus, it was required to come directly under Rome and submit to a census, all kinds of heathen, but it was also freely taught, and could be brought in various ways under the notice of the curious heathen. The best evidence of this is supplied by one of the immediate contemporaries, Philo of Alexandria, particularly in his book on the Legation to Caius.' For this loquacious writer undoubtedly exaggerates somewhat the praise to be accorded to Tiberius, and still more that to be accorded to Augustus, inasmuch as by exalting these emperors he could throw Caius still more into the shade. Still, the facts which he brings forward are not inventions, and the whole impression which the rule of these two emperors had made upon the Judeans of that time must have been a very favourable one. Thus he mentions, with high commendation, that Tiberius never claimed from the Judeans the least mark of divine worship for himself or for the Roman empire and the family of Cæsar. However, such cautious abstention was everywhere manifested by this emperor, even in Rome and towards the Senate. Further, Philo mentions that he allowed the poor Judeans dwelling at Rome to share in the monthly distributions of money and corn which fell to the numerous poor of the city; indeed, that when the distribution chanced to fall on a Sabbath, he ordered it to be made on the next day, out of special consideration for them. But when Philo remarks that Tiberius caused daily sacrifices to be presented for himself in the Temple at Jerusalem also, and thereby paid the highest honour to the Judean religion,3 the sacrifices intended are undoubtedly only those which the Persian and Syrian kings had previously caused to be presented at the public cost.1 Nevertheless, these relations, which are extolled by Philo as so unexceptionally happy, began to be observably beclouded even at the commencement of the reign of Tiberius. At that time very many Judeans had long dwelt in Rome, settled in this central point of the world from very various causes. The largest number of them consisted of the descendants of those who had formerly come to Rome as public prisoners through the victories of Pompey and other Roman generals. As freedmen they had received a district across the Tiber as their locality," and lived there mostly in the greatest poverty. Many of these and of the others who then flocked to Rome did not, on account of their 1 Leg. ad Caium, ch. xxxviii. sq. Vol. v. p. 113. 5 The same district into which later, after the victories of Titus, a much larger number of such captives were removed, and which is in our own time still regarded as the Jews' quarter (il Ghetto) of Rome. Comp. Leg. ad Caium, ch. xxiii. (ii. p. 568) with vol. v. pp. 240, 401. THE DECEIVER SATURNINUS. 83 avocations, enjoy the best reputation. In their interpretation of the sacred antiquities of Mosaism particularly they did not always meet in the best way the curiosity of the Romans. For at that time all Romans, from the common people to the emperor, were smitten with the desire to occupy themselves with the singularities of the Judeans,' and, if possible, to present sacrifices themselves at Jerusalem, or, if that could not be, to get them presented for them.' Indeed, a universal longing to be initiated into the Oriental religions and mysteries had before that time taken possession of many Romans, particularly of many women, although the motives which produced this desire in individual cases were often anything but pure, and much vain curiosity, or still worse, was present. We shall have to speak further on this point in the next volume. Thus there came a Judean of bad reputation into the Imperial City, who had fled from Palestine on account of a transgression against the laws and from fear of further punishment. In Rome he professed publicly to be an interpreter of the Mosaic laws, or an exegete, and persuaded a noble lady, Fulvia, who had already been converted to the Mosaic religion, wife of a certain Saturninus, of Equestrian or Senatorial rank, to entrust to him purple and gold as an offering for the Temple. But the deceiver had previously concerted with three others to divide the treasures as soon as they got them into their power. The affair got abroad, and it was said that Saturninus himself had communicated it to the Emperor. As now at the same time there had also been loud complaints of still worse frauds on the part of the priests of Isis in Rome, and all these Oriental religions were as yet little distinguished from each other, at the instigation of Tiberius, a severe resolution of the Senate was issued with regard to the Egyptian and Judean religions.'3 According to this resolution, 4,000 of the younger men of such freedmen were to be forced into the military service (which was an abomination in the estimation of the Judeans'), and were to be sent to Sardinia (considered then one of the most unhealthy islands"), Suet. Oct. lxxvi., xciii., and the well-known witticisms of Horace (Sat. i. 4, 143 sq., and elsewhere), Persius (Sat. v. 180 sq.), Ovid (Rem. Am. 219 sq.) Comp. also Seneca, De Superst. (in Augustine's De Civ. Dei, vi. 11), who, however, here already, anticipating the manner of Tacitus, speaks of the sceleratissima gens. 2 Manifestly owing to this confusion, Jos. Ant. xviii. 3. 4, relates at length, before the Judean incident, § 5, the affair with the priests of Isis, who were even crucified in punishment of their serious frauds. It is necessary on this point to carefully take together the words of Tac. Ann. ii. 85, Suet. Tib. xxxvi., Jos. Ant. xviii. 3. 5, and those of Philo, Leg. ad Caium, ch. xxiv., in order to infer from them the real state of the case, and to fully understand the entire resolution of the Senate. See vol. v. p. 406. 5 Whither subsequently many Chris to destroy the robbers there; all the rest, if they did not renounce their superstition by a certain day, were to be driven from Italy; the sacred garments and the rest of the holy utensils were to be burnt. This incident took place in the year 19, accordingly, before Sejanus had obtained his great influence over Tiberius; which makes Philo's idle talk about the Judeans having had to suffer this simply from the hatred of Sejanus all the more foolish. On the contrary, the Judeans were now for the first time, according to Roman legislation, classed together with the adherents of the Egyptian and Syrian religions, the frivolity of which Augustus had previously sought to banish from Rome by a similar law. And undoubtedly the effect of such laws in hindering' superstition' and its teachers was not very lasting this time either: however, similar prohibitions could the more easily be repeated. We shall find subsequently a better opportunity of observing how the circumstances of the Babylonian Judeans also grew less favourable in these times. But in general several distinctions of greater significance between the dispersed descendants of the ancient nation who lived in the Roman and those who lived in the Parthian empire were still kept up from earlier times, and they were destined soon to become in the course of the subsequent times of greater importance. Those in the Roman Empire dwelt, it is true, in some localities nearer together, partly because they had in the last centuries been transplanted thither in large numbers as settlers or as prisoners, partly on account of the circumstances which were favourable to intercourse, as in Alexandria, Rome, Antioch, Thessalonica, Corinth; but in general they lived very much intermixed with the Gentiles, extending themselves in all directions, so that the name Dispersion, or Diaspora, was specially applicable to them. the other hand, those in the Parthian empire still continued to dwell closer together in certain localities, particularly those belonging to the great banishments of the Assyrian and Chaldean times, so that the Aramaic name Gálúth, i.e. exile, still remained for this and much later times the usual one for them collectively. As now Greek culture was, in the Eastern coun tians also were banished; comp. Hippol. Philosophumena, p. 287, Oxford edition. Romans also, whom it was desired very severely to punish, were not infrequently sent thither. Dio Cassius, Hist. liv. 6. 2 Comp. diaoпорà тwν 'Exλhvwv, John vii. 35, comp. xii. 20; whence the phrases Jam. i. 1 1 Pet. i. 1, although On transferred to the Christian society, are sufficiently explained. This name continued very constant, particularly in accordance with the usage of it in Ezekiel and "Isa." xlv. 13; that the exile was at all events originally a compulsory one, follows of itself from the feeling of ancient nations in this respect. |