Religion and Society in Roman Palestine

Old Questions, New Approaches

Douglas R. Edwards

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2004
• ISBN:
  9781134402885
• Edition: 1
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: Ancient History
• Index: History

This collection of papers combines important archaeological and textual evidence to examine diverse aspects of religion and society in Roman Palestine.

A range of international experts provide an unprecedented look at issues of acculturation, assimilation and the preservation of difference in the multicultural climate of Palestine in the Roman period.

Key themes include:

* the nature of ethnicity and ritual
* the character of public and private space in Jewish society
* the role of gender and space
* the role of peasants
* the impact of Roman rule
* ritual and the regional framework of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Religion and Society in Roman Palestine will be relevant to ancient historians, interpreters of the historical Jesus and subsequent Jesus movements, and those interested in the development of Judaism from Qu'ran to the rabbis.

1
CONSTRUCTING THE WORLD OF ROMAN PALESTINE
An introduction

Douglas R. Edwards

Mersaeus had eight sons, all of whom occupied the territory extending from Gaza to Egypt; but Phylistinus is the only one whose country has preserved the founder’s name, for the Greeks call his portion Palestine.

( Jos. Ant. I. 136)

Pompey’s conquest of the Near East in 63 BCE made it official. Rome controlled Palestine for the next 350 years with periodic interruptions (Millar 1993). The region had military import situated as it was between Egypt, Rome’s breadbasket, and Syria/Mesopotamia. At times those from the region even played an inordinate role in Roman history. In Egypt Julius Caesar received last minute support in his battle for power from a Jewish contingent led by Antipater, father of Herod the Great (Jos. Ant. XIV. 127–136). Caesar and his adopted son, Octavian, rewarded such allegiance with unique privileges to Jews that were to play an important part in Jewish participation in the Roman Empire for the next three centuries (Jos. Ant. XIV. 200–212; XVI. 161–166, 171; XIX. 282–283, 289, 302, 318). The Flavians, notably Vespasian and Titus, drew on their victory over the Jews in the first Jewish revolt, using images of the victory to bolster their power and prestige. Hadrian did as well after the second Jewish revolt in 132–135 CE and gave the official Roman imprimatur of Palestine to the region previously known to Josephus as Palestine and Judaea. But Palestine was generally off the world stage, simply one more territory, albeit at times troublesome, controlled by the Romans or those affiliated with them.

Yet Palestine became the locus of movements that were to have an impact in ways no one at the time could have foreseen. From a small Galilean village, a charismatic figure set the stage for movements that ultimately would make the Roman Empire Christian. Not far away at Sepphoris, and two centuries later, the rabbi Judah ha-Nasi (Judah the Prince) pulled together rabbinic sayings, which were to serve as crucial texts for Judaism to the present day. And from a series of small caves along the Dead Sea, manuscripts would emerge that shed light on elements of Judaism lost from view for almost 2,000 years. The import of these events is obvious from the collection of essays contained in this book. Most in the Roman Empire would wonder what all the current fuss is about. Our readership, I hope, will have no such difficulty.

Constructing history of any sort begins with key questions, many of which may have modern cultural and social overtones as Baker astutely notes in her essay. This need not cause alarm, but it should caution one to maintain the historical wariness so evident in the best of modern historians. Archaeology has played an increasing role in the construction of Roman Palestine. It provides a wider and ever-expanding array of information than the relatively fixed, largely elite perspectives of ancient writers. Gone certainly are the days when one could claim acute objectivity when using archaeological data to reconstruct the past. The accidental character of finds and the ‘framework of meaning’ employed by the interpreter mean that such material must be used with care. Yet archaeology offers material often mundane, sometimes extraordinary, that is not easily obtainable otherwise. Texts may discuss ritual; archaeology appears to have found evidence of its character. Texts may portray gendered relations; archaeology can provide concrete expressions of its practice. Texts may depict a village as a narrative construct; archaeology finds the stones and bones and ceramics that show a village’s cluttered social and cultural character.

The majority of contributors to this volume bring a wealth of archaeological experience to their analysis; several have directed excavations in Roman Palestine (Aviam, Avshalom-Gorni, Broshi, Edwards, H. Eshel, Levine, Magness). Some of the most recent archaeological evidence is incorporated into their essays, which give them an important and often unique archaeological slant. Yet contributors integrate the narrative world with its own peculiar problems and possibilities into her or his analysis. This is a delicate dance. Some have argued that interpretation of archaeological data and texts should involve two separate enterprises (Strange 1997). Moreover, the specialists needed to interpret the epigraphy, numismatic, and ceramics, not to mention the important anthropological contributions of late, make archaeology a much more multi-faceted enterprise than ever before. The same can be said with the various ‘criticisms’ that have arisen in the studies of ancient texts (sociological, genre, anthropological, social historical, reader response, to name a few). Indeed one must recognize the complexity involved, which these respective approaches bring to the construction of the past. Contributors to this volume are aware of this disjuncture. Indeed most have adeptly moved from archaeology to text and back for much of their academic career. What becomes clear in the essays is that little point is gained by creating an artificial edifice where text experts stand on one side and the archaeologists on the other.

Using a variety of interpretive frameworks, the following essays balance archaeology and texts to discern intriguing and complex aspects of religion and society in Roman Palestine. The book does not intend to be nor could it be comprehensive. Roman Palestine was simply too complex for a modest book of this sort to attempt that. But collectively the essays address key issues relevant to Roman historians, interpreters of the historical Jesus and subsequent Jesus movements, and those interested in the development of Judaism from Qumran to the rabbis. Each essay addresses one or more of the following themes: the nature of ethnicity and ritual (especially Jewish) and its key indicators; the role of boundaries, especially as they involve the character of public and private space (e.g. the nature of synagogues, the role of gender); the relation between differing ethnic, cultural, social, and political groups; the role of peasants in Roman Palestine; the impact of Roman rule; and the ritual and the regional framework of the Qumran site and the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Since Eric Meyers’ seminal work brought Galilee to the forefront of archaeological research, Galilee and its environs have played an increasing role in constructions of Roman Palestine (Meyers 1978, 1979, 1988). More regional studies have been done of late in large measure, as Fergus Millar has often remarked, because they elucidate the complex character of the Roman Empire and the many negotiations of power specific to particular regions (e.g. Millar 1983, 1987, 1993).

What constitutes a boundary, whether political, social, cultural, or ethnic has become central in understanding ancient societies. Avshalom-Gorni and Shaked present an intriguing look at the region initially under the control of Herod Philip through an analysis of ceramics and stone vessels found in the course of surveys. They further demarcate boundaries between Jews and non-Jews, work already begun in several other studies (cf. Adan-Bayewitz (1993) and Berlin (2002)) and make clearer than ever how culturally distinctive first century Galilee and its environs were. When Jesus and the early Jesus group crossed from Galilee into non-Jewish territory, they crossed a real cultural boundary. Aviam also uses pottery, a unique ware he calls GCW (Galilean coarse ware), to locate an unknown Gentile population, which if true offers a rare glimpse of a non-Jewish group for whom we have little information. Moreover, it appears that Jewish populations replaced this group in Galilee, providing important insight into the oft-debated question of when Jewish presence came in the pre-Hasmonaean period. But interactions within Galilee were complicated. Aviam argues that neat distinctions between the villages and cities fail to account for elite structures that existed in village and city alike, as do such Jewish features as miqvaot (ritual bathing pools), stone vessels, and the continued circulation of Hasmonaean coins. Moreland also addresses the village character of Galilee but draws heavily on the work of the anthropologist James Scott; his goal is to discern how peasants would react in Galilee of Antipas to the radical dictates of the Jesus movement associated by some scholars with the hypothetical document(s) Q. He challenges the popular perception that Q portrays Jesus as a peasant and argues that the message of Q would not have resonated with agrarian-based peasants who in fact rejected the movement.

Language invariably plays a role in understanding the question of boundaries (Millard 2000). The degree of literacy and the question of language (Greek, Aramaic, Hebrew) that circulated in villages of the first century have received additional although not conclusive evidence. Eshel and Edwards draw on the recent discovery of an Early Roman abecedary found at the village site of Khirbet Qana (Cana) to discuss the language field and literacy of artisans such as potters, lending credence to the argument that Jesus, some of his disciples and those of the artisan class were capable of a modicum of literacy.

Sepphoris, the capital of Antipas’ Galilee, has played a significant role in the constructions of Galilee in recent years. Numerous articles have made it an important linchpin for understanding the character of Galilee as an ancient provincial city (e.g. Meyers 1987, 1999; Meyers et al. 1986; Nagy et al. 1996; Strange 1992). Moreover, its close association with the rabbinic movement of the second and subsequent centuries lends it a stature not necessarily given cities of comparable size. Sepphoris serves as the starting point to address a difficult and provocative issue, the third century CE appearance and influence of pagan elements in a part of the city generally considered Jewish. Freyne discusses one of the well-known Sepphoris mosaics, which displays a cultic scene with Dionysos as the central character and a drunken Heracles as part of a bacchic revelry and ceremony. Some have suggested that the mosaic, dated to the Severan period, provides clear evidence for a strong pagan presence, if not pagan practice at Sepphoris at the very time the rabbis were holding court just 40 or so meters away. Freyne challenges this view, instead seeing the presentation as an effort by one or more local elites to curry favor with the Severans who closely associated themselves with both Dionysos and Heracles. The scene, Freyne argues, does not provide support for pagan practices nor is there direct evidence of such activity found at Sepphoris for this period. Rather, the mosaic becomes a vehicle to negotiate with Roman power (notably Severan power) and not an expression of ritual activity.

Chancey also addresses the intersection of Roman and local and regional power in his examination of the changing depictions on coins. The coins demonstrate the decreasing autonomy of the Jewish rulers as Roman portraiture, initially avoided on Herodian coins, becomes integral on Herod Agrippa II’s presentations and thus exemplifies the increasing role taken by Roman officials in the governance of this troublesome province.

Levine broadens the geographical arena as he examines the evidence for and the character of first century synagogues throughout Palestine. In minute detail, he stresses how the synagogue became a physical presence for local communities and not simply a literary construct for later periods. Moreover, the character of the synagogue evolved on the local level without close ties to any central structure. It served as a key religious and social institution throughout the first century, establishing a pattern that played a crucial role in subsequent periods. Baker addresses the issue of public space in somewhat different fashion. She argues that neat separations between public and private space and between female and male activity were not as apparent in Roman Palestine as many suppose. Indeed, she proposes that constructs that depict women staying in the home and only men performing public acts reflect nineteenth century western notions rather than ancient ideas of reality. ‘Privacy’ in architectural remains or in the discourse of the rabbis regarding appropriate ‘female’ activity indicates that the ‘private’ was often quite public in character. Peskowitz argues somewhat differently that gendered activity existed, especially in weaving. Both rabbinic traditions and archaeological remains indicate that women were expected to use an out-moded form of weaving using a single beam and loom weights while men could use the new two-beam loom developed in the second century CE as well as the older form. The rabbinic comments are particularly intriguing since they appear to be made after archaeological evidence suggests the old style of weaving had been discontinued a half century earlier.

The debate over ritual and on the appropriate use of archaeological and textual sources for understanding the Dead Sea Scrolls rages on. It finds clear expression in three diverse articles on Qumran and its relation to those scrolls. Magness, who has argued forcefully elsewhere for the association of the archaeological remains at Qumran with the Dead Sea Scrolls, continues her examination of the ritual character of the sect (Magness 2002). She reflects what must still be acknowledged the prevailing view of scholarship regarding the Dead Sea Scrolls and their provenance. Her essay builds on the association of text with site by examining the ritual character of the jars used to hold the Scrolls. The jars, she posits, were created for purposes of purity and thus were fitting containers to hold the most sacred of texts associated with the community. Eshel and Broshi also adhere to the standard argument that the Qumran community were Essenes. They examine briefly alternative views and conclude that the Essene hypothesis remains the best explanation for the evidence at hand. Zangenberg argues that constructs that associate the texts and the site before establishing the regional character of the site misunderstand the character of both. Taking a page from Eric Meyers, he argues that a regional approach is a necessary starting point. He concludes that although the community could have been Essene, trading associations and the ceramic evidence indicate a settlement integrated into the regional trade network, making its location not especially conducive for the secretive, monastic-style community often proposed for the Essenes. His position, sure to generate further debate, is that the common ground between the settlement and those who brought the Scrolls was a concern for Jewish practice and a desire to protect the Scrolls from the Romans.

Collectively, the articles add to our growing understanding of the complex world of Roman Palestine. The character of religion in the various societies that made up Roman Palestine often had intimate links with the political, social, and cultural concerns of the day. No longer can one neatly separate religious symbols and ideas from the environment in which they operated. Archaeology, anthropology, and close textual analysis all play their part in bringing alive once again a world so far removed from our own.

Bibliography

Adan-Bayewitz, D. (1993) Common Pottery in Roman Galilee: A Study of Local Trade, Ramat-Gan, Israel: Bar Ilan University Press.

Berlin, A. (2002) ‘Romanization and Anti-Romanization in Pre-Revolt Galilee,’ in A.M. Berlin and J. Andrew Overman (eds) The First Jewish Revolt: Archaeology, History, and Ideology, London and New York: Routledge Press.

Magness, J. (2002) The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls, Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans Publishing.

Meyers, E. (1978) ‘Galilean Regionalism: A Reappraisal,’ in W. Scott Green (ed.) Approaches to Ancient Judaism, vol. 5, Missoula, MN: Scholars Press.

—— (1979) ‘The Cultural Setting of Galilee: The Case of Regionalism and Early Judaism,’ in ANRW II.19.1, H. Temporini and W. Haase (eds) 686–702, Berlin and New York: de Gruyter.

—— (1987) ‘Artistry in Stone: The Mosaics of Ancient Sepphoris,’ BA 50: 223–231.

—— (1988) ‘Early Judaism and Christianity in the Light of Archaeology,’ BA 51: 69–79.

—— (1992) ‘Roman Sepphoris in Light of New Archaeological Evidence and Recent Research,’ in L. Levine (ed.) The Galilee in Late Antiquity, New York: The Jewish Theological Seminary.

—— (ed.) (1999) Galilee Through the Centuries: Confluence of Cultures, Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.

——, Netzer, E., and Meyers, C. (1986) ‘Sepphoris: Ornament of All Galilee,’ BA 49: 4–19.

Millar, F. (1983) ‘The Phoenician Cities: A Case Study of Hellenisation,’ PCPS 209: 55–71.

—— (1987) ‘Empire, Community and Culture in the Roman Near East: Greeks, Syrians, Jews and Arabs,’ JJS 38: 143–164.

—— (1993) The Roman Near East, 31 BC–AD 337, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Millard, A. (2000) Reading and Writing in the Time of Jesus, New York: New York University Press.

Nagy, R., Meyers, C., Meyers, E., and We...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Illustrations
• Contributors
• Foreword
• Acknowledgments
• Abbreviations
• 1. Constructing the World of Roman Palestine: An Introduction
• 2. First Century Jewish Galilee: An Archaeological Perspective
• 3. Jewish Settlement In the Southeastern Hula Valley In the First Century CE
• 4. The Galilean Response to Earliest Christianity: A Cross-Cultural Study of the Subsistence Ethic
• 5. Language and Writing In Early Roman Galilee: Social Location of a Potter’s Abecedary from Khirbet Qana
• 6. Dionysos and Herakles In Galilee: The Sepphoris Mosaic In Context
• 7. The First-Century Synagogue: Critical Reassessments and Assessments of the Critical
• 8. City Coins and Roman Power In Palestine: From Pompey to the Great Revolt
• 9. Imagined Households
• 10. Gender, Difference, and Everyday Life: The Case of Weaving and Its Tools
• 11. Why Scroll Jars?
• 12. Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls: The Contention of Twelve Theories
• 13. Opening Up Our View: Khirbet Qumran In a Regional Perspective