Flavius Josephus,
By
home page http://www.houseofdavid.ca/
2.8.3 Life (93-100 CE) and Against Apion (93/4 CE)
3. The Roman Empire in the First Century – its Nature and Problems
3.3
Insufficiency of Administrative Capacity
3.4
Insufficiency of Military Power
3.5
Some Roman Policies of Importance to Judaea
4. Judaea – Social and Political Instability
4.1.1 Political Legitimacy in the First
Temple Period
4.1.2 Trajectory of Priestly Power in
Judah/Yahud/Judaea
4.1.3 Political Legitimacy under the
Hasmoneans and Herodians
4.2
Social Conditions Palestine
4.3 The Situation of Wealthy Judeans
5. Roman Attitudes Toward the Jews and visa versa
5.3 Roman Policy Toward the Jews
5.4 Palestinian Jewish Attitudes toward the Roman Empire
Annex 1 - What Did Jeremiah Say and What Did Josephus
Say?
Annex 2 - Agrippa’s Speech at Jerusalem at War’s
Commencement
·
He was a serious Jew who tried the 3 “philosophies” – Pharisees, Essenes
and Sadducees – of the Judaism of his time. He was well educated in both Jewish
and Greek learning. “One should not
interpret Josephus’ pro-Roman point of view as an abandonment of Judaism. For it was the God of the Jews who had gone
over to the Romans, and the world events which Josephus had foreseen were understood by him as
fulfillment of Jewish prophecy…. Thus, he thought the Jewish revolt … (was) a
result of the inability and unwillingness of the Jews to perceive and submit to
the divine plan, God broke his work with the Jewish state, withdrew from the
holy city and temple, and allowed ‘fortune’ to pass wholly to the Romans….”.(Rhoads pp.
11-12);
·
Josephus saw himself as a Jewish seer
i.e. quasi-prophet -
“Josephus saw himself as part of a complex pattern of world history in which he
himself was chosen herald of some crucial historical events…. Josephus … claims
to have foreseen by revelation the impending fate of the Jewish nation as well
as the rise to power of the Roman sovereigns of the Flavian house in the person
of Vespasian…. Josephus (in his view) did not give a new prophecy, but was
apparently “inspired” to apply to his contemporary situation sayings which had
been spoken long before by the canonical prophets (War 3:353)[2]. ‘The
historical content of his prophecy reveals his conviction that God acts in
history. The fact that the temple in
According to Bilde (pp. 191) “…Josephus sees
himself as a continuer of the prophetic Jewish ‘writing of history’, and sees
his writings as a parallel to and continuation of the sacred Jewish scriptures,
divinely inspired as they are…. Josephus’ ranks himself as a priestly prophet
in line with Ezekiel. He identifies
himself … with Joseph, Elijah, Jeremiah, Daniel and ever Esther …. He perceives his own time as a kind of
repetition of the period around the time of the destruction of the first temple
in 586 BCE. During his own time of
crisis… Josephus acts as a prophetic interpreter of the scriptures and the
time. Towards
·
He
was from a privileged, upper class,
·
Throughout
the Empire, the Romans tried to co-opt privileged, upper class natives as local
collaborators in government – in fact, the Roman system depended on such
collaboration. “…along with most other
Jewish aristocrats, Josephus at first opposed the Revolt against
·
When
seeking to convince the defenders of
o
The
Romans are willing to spare the temple and the city – it’s the resistance of
the rebels that threatens
o
On
no occasions did the ancestors succeed by force or fail for the lack of it when
they committed their case to God;
o
The
Romans gained control of
o
The
sins of present day Jews have alienated God and a just God will punish them for
this
o
God
has given
·
These
points are very close to those made by Jeremiah just before the destruction of
the first temple (see
Annex 1 - What Did Jeremiah Say and What Did Josephus Say?)
·
It
is hard to determine the validity of charges made against Josephus during his
lifetime and repeated ever since i.e.
Josephus has been accused of:
o
engaging
in internecine strife when he should have been preparing to resist the immanent
Roman invasion of the
o
betraying
the rebellion and his people to the Romans when he urged the rebels to
surrender at the siege of
o
of
a cowardly unwillingness to follow through on the mass suicide pact made by the
survivors of the siege of Jotapata. Schalit describes it this way-
”When the city fell on Tammuz 1, 67, Josephus fled with 40 men to a cave. There each man resolved to slay his neighbor rather than to be taken captive by the enemy. Josephus artfully cast the lots, deceitfully managing to be one of the last two men left alive and then persuaded his companion to go out with him and surrender to the Romans.”
Of course, if he had killed himself, we would know almost nothing of the
Jewish War, as indeed is the case with the later Bar Kochba Rebellion, or about
the
·
“Despite the hostile criticism of
Josephus and his works, we need not see
him as a mere opportunist. His
writings reveal to us a man struggling between personal survival and a
commitment to Judaism; he did not wish to relinquish either…. The resolution to
that struggle came when Josephus was able to give himself up to Vespasian as
God’s servant (War 3:354). He could continue his commitment to Judaism,
but he would do it from the safety of the roman side. Undoubtedly, Josephus’ works contain much
that is a rationale of self-justification for his action. Yet to see him as a rank opportunist is too
harsh. And to depict his writings as an
exercise of justification does not begin to do justice to the breadth of
Josephus’ self-understanding.” (Rhoads pp. 8-9)
·
Bilde writes (p. 207-208)
“The
classical Jewish conception of Josephus with its contempt for the ‘traitor’ and
the ‘apostate’ has influenced the attitude not only towards the detested
person, but also to his writings.
Throughout these works, those who adopt this attitude detect
self-righteousness, alibis, flattery, distortions and deceit. In so doing, the road to a rewarding use of
Josephus’ vast material has been effectively blocked. Hatred and condemnation are not true guides
to knowledge.
“We
find… (an) ideological use of Josephus in modern Zionism…. In official Israeli
publications, such as school books and travel guides, we find an uncritical
acceptance, for example, of Josephus’ rhetorical rendering of the defense of
Jotapata, Gamala,
“…the
majority of modern archaeologists and historians… neglect(s) to take all of the
problems in the writings into consideration, and simply avails himself freely
of them without the slightest regard to the style, content and aim of the
author. In particular, many modern
archaeologists are guilty of using Josephus as a treasury which anyone can draw
upon as he or she pleases.”
2.6
What Josephus Was Not
·
A
19th-20th century European or American liberal;
·
A
19th-20th century political Zionist;
·
A
modern secularist.
“Now it is evident that Josephus
belongs both in a Jewish and a Greco-Roman tradition. He sees himself as a priestly-prophetic
continuer of the traditional Jewish writing of history in the canonical
scriptures. Nor is there any doubt that,
to a large extent, he maintains a genuine Old Testament and Jewish religious
understanding and interpretation of the history he renders. But at the same time, it is all presented in
Greek, and Josephus primarily addresses a non-Jewish audience in the
Greco-Roman world. Therefore … the
Jewish tradition, its contents, form and language are subjected to a certain
transformation[3]….
The Hellenization which Josephus makes in these areas must be determined as
being somewhat superficial and should rather be interpreted as a pedagogical
means of enlightening his Greco-Roman readers who must be presumed to have no
knowledge of Jewish affairs….
“The writings of Josephus are, of course, ideological and moralizing,
exactly as is the case with the works of Thucydides[4],
Polybius, Livy and Tacitus, although the methods differ…. He is an apologist
for his people, an agitator for his religion.
He is engaged both in a political struggle on behalf of the Jewish
people and in a vast cultural conflict between Judaism and the Hellenistic
world including parts of Greco-Roman history writing to which, at the same
time, he wishes to belong…. He is to be related closer to Old Testament and
Jewish tradition than to Hellenistic literature and historiography….
·
He
generally was fairly accurate though
he was not a particularly careful checker of facts (see). For main trends in modern Josephus research,
see the chapter of that name in Bilde pp. 123-171;
·
“Josephus
possesses a genuine interest in and a sincere will to write impartially and,
surprisingly, he often does so in his works. In a unique way, Josephus has
managed to combine his highly engaged religious Jewish historiographical
tradition with the Hellenistic literary culture and historiography in such a
way that decisive elements in both traditions are retained.”
2.8 The Extant works of Josephus (see Table 1)
2.8.1 The Jewish War 67-72 CE
·
He
wrote the Jewish War as a Roman
imperial client and this accounts for some of the differences between it and Antiquities which he wrote later as a
free Roman citizen unattached to the government
Client and Patron in “Latin Clientela, in
ancient Encyclopedia Britannica 2003 |
·
During
the Jewish War he observed key deliberations in
o
he
could not be everywhere and have seen everything, so some of his reports are
second hand;
o
he
was intimately involved in the war and had made many enemies so some of his
statements are likely to be deliberate, self-serving, distortions; and,
o
as
a Roman client, writing War
he had to please his Roman patrons who were the two top generals fighting
against the Jews – the Emperor Vespasian and his son Titus. This required that
Vespasian and Titus and the Roman Army come out looking good and that the book
serve a key imperial purpose, namely,
warning the Jews in Judaea not to rebel again and the Jews in Parthia not to
encourage a Parthian invasion of the Roman Empire (see (Rhoads p. 11).
2.8.2 Antiquities 94
CE – In my view one of the most
important books ever written about Jewish history.
·
Josephus
drew very heavily, and not very critically, on existing Greek histories. I.e. in many parts it is Josephus cutting and
pasting the work of earlier Greek language writers. It is important to remember that, except for
the last few decades covered, he had not lived through the periods covered by Antiquities and that the supporting
documentation for most of the periods covered by Antiquities would have been inadequate, unreliable and rather random
– i.e. almost point-by-point the opposite of the case for War;
·
The objective of Antiquities and Against Apion
was to defend, justify and glorify the Jewish people i.e. quite different from the objectives of War (see above);
2.8.3 Life (93-100 CE) and Against Apion (93/4
CE)
·
The
objective of Life was to defend
himself against the accusations of Justin of Tiberius about Josephus’s conduct
during the War. Unfortunately, we do not
have Justin’s book but it is possible to reconstruct his accusations by
Josephus’ responses in Life;
·
He obviously
felt defensive-ambivalent-guilty about his behavior during the war. So one must always watch out for
self-justification
·
Against
Apion refutes
anti-Semitic slanders.
3.1 Extent of the Empire
·
The Empire included the territories of about 35 modern
European, Levantine and north African countries.
·
The population is estimated to have been 50-60 million.
·
The population of
3.3 Insufficiency of Administrative Capacity
3.4 Insufficiency of Military
Power (See Table 2)
o
The
Roman authorities must give as few orders as possible but these must be carried
out; and,
o
Any revolt must be suppressed brutally. Potential rebels must be intimidated by
example. Slender resources meant that
the Romans could not afford to be forgiving.
3.5 Some Roman Policies of Importance to
The Egyptian grain supply which feeds Rome must be protected. This implies:
o
Judaea,
between the Syrian-Parthian[8]
frontier and Egypt, must not be allowed to fall into hostile hands; and,
o
Piracy
must not be allowed to return to threaten the sea[9] route
from Alexandria to Italy there fore, the whole shore of the Mediterranean must
be under Roman control.
The implications for Judaea are that the Roman Empire would not allow
any rebellion there to succeed.
4.1 Crisis of Legitimacy
4.1.1 Political Legitimacy[10]
in the First
As far as
we know, the supremacy and legitimacy of leadership of the House of David went
virtually unchallenged in the Kingdom of Judah during First Temple period
(950-586 BCE). This lent Judah, in sharp
contrast to the northern Kingdom of Israel, great political stability. Outside forces, notably the Mesopotamian
powers and
With the
exile and the return to Zion several factors come together to turn the Jews
from a nation with a national religion into more of a religious community with
a history as a nation. Among these
factors were:
4.1.2 Trajectory of Priestly Power
in Judah/Yahud/Judaea
It would
seem that the hereditary High Priests had political legitimacy during the
period c. 400-175 BCE. Of course, it is
unknowable how this would have played out had Judaea made the transition to
renewed independence and military expansion without the Seleucid persecution
and consequent Maccabean uprising.
4.1.3 Political Legitimacy
under the Hasmoneans and Herodians
The
Seleucid persecution and the consequent Maccabean uprising and wars rapidly
became a 4 party affair:
The internecine civil wars among the Hasmoneans,
which led to the Roman takeover and Herodian rule, showed how utterly bereft of
political legitimacy the dynasty had become.
Herod and
his dynasty were ruling by grace of Rome with very little support other than by
political opportunists who were often rewarded with large grants of land
This situation was a major factor
leading to the rebellion against
4.2 Social Conditions
in Palestine
4.3
The Situation of Wealthy Judeans
The local elite was totally dependant on Roman
favor. However, this very dependence
undermined their political legitimacy with the Jewish masses.
The wealthy leadership could:
·
Fight
for independence and risk losing everything;
·
Fight
for the Romans as did king Agrippa;
·
Abandon
property and leave the country – no doubt many did this; or,
·
Go
to Roman army-controlled sanctuary areas such as Lydda/Lod and
Jamina/Javneh as did Yohanan ben Zakkai.
The situation as intelligent observers, probably
including Josephus, might have seen it is laid out in a magnificent speech that
Josephus places in the mouth of king Agrippa.
·
The
ancient equivalent of Nazis with Jerusalem and Massada equivalent to the Warsaw
Ghetto uprising. Far from having an
anti-Jewish policy or a desire to exterminate the Jews, Rome had a policy of
benevolent recognition of Judaism. Smallwood (p. 539) writes, “
·
Humanitarian
or humane.
5.2
Mutual Incomprehension
Although the incomprehension was mutual, it was only
the Roman lack of understanding of the Jews that led to trouble since the
Romans had the power. Two examples of
Roman lack of understanding of Jewish sensitivities that led to trouble:
·
Bringing
their standards, with images of the emperor, into Jerusalem which helped
increase the tension leading to the first rebellion; and,
·
Hadrian
starting to rebuild Jerusalem as a pagan city putting a pagan temple on the
site of the Jewish temple. This may have
sparked off the second, Bar Kokhba, rebellion.
5.3
Roman Policy toward the Jews
·
The
pagan
·
The
Christian Roman Empire, from the mid-fourth century, was hostile and
persecuting toward the Jews.
5.4
Palestinian Jewish Attitudes toward the
Avi-Yonah (p. 64) wrote –
“From the earliest days of their subjection to the Roman government the Jews of Palestine evolved four different attitudes towards foreign rule: one positive, one moderate, one neutral and one hostile. Those who approved Roman Rule outright were always a small minority among the Jews.”
In closing, I would like to quote 2 passages from
Pirke Avot -
What Did Jeremiah Say and What Did Josephus Say?
1. From the Book of Jeremiah
Chapter 27
12: To
Zedeki'ah king of
13: Why will you
and your people die by the sword, by famine, and by pestilence, as the LORD has
spoken concerning any nation which will not serve the king of
Chapter 32
3: For
Zedeki'ah king of
Chapter 37
3: King
Zedekiah sent Jehucal the son of Shelemiah, and Zephaniah the priest, the son
of Maaseiah, to Jeremiah the prophet, saying, "Pray for us to the LORD our
God."
….
Do not
deceive yourselves, saying, "The Chaldeans will surely stay away from
us," for they will not stay away. …Jeremiah set out from
14: And
Jeremiah said, "It is false; I am not deserting to the Chaldeans."
But Irijah would not listen to him, and seized Jeremiah and brought him to the
princes.
15: And the
princes were enraged at Jeremiah, and they beat him and imprisoned him in the
house of Jonathan the secretary, for it had been made a prison.
16: When
Jeremiah had come to the dungeon cells, and remained there many days,
17: King
Zedekiah sent for him, and received him. The king questioned him secretly in
his house, and said, "Is there any word from the LORD?" Jeremiah
said, "There is." Then he said, "You shall be delivered into the
hand of the king of Babylon."
18: Jeremiah
also said to King Zedekiah, "What wrong have I done to you or your
servants or this people, that you have put me in prison? …
Chapter 38
Then the
princes said to the king, "Let this
man be put to death, for he is weakening the hands of the soldiers who are left
in this city, and the hands of all the people, by speaking such words to
them. For this man is not seeking the welfare of this people, but their
harm."
5: King
Zedeki'ah said, "Behold, he is in your hands; for the king can do nothing
against you." ……
14: King
Zedeki'ah sent for Jeremiah the prophet and received him at the third entrance
of the temple of the LORD. The king said to Jeremiah, "I will ask you a
question; hide nothing from me."
15: Jeremiah
said to Zedeki'ah, "If I tell you, will you not be sure to put me to
death? And if I give you counsel, you will not listen to me."
16: Then King
Zedeki'ah swore secretly to Jeremiah, "As the LORD lives, who made our
souls, I will not put you to death or deliver you into the hand of these men
who seek your life."
17: Then
Jeremiah said to Zedeki'ah, "Thus says the LORD, the God of hosts, the God
of Israel, If you will surrender to the princes of the king of Babylon, then
your life shall be spared, and this city shall not be burned with fire, and you
and your house shall live.
18: But if
you do not surrender to the princes of the king of Babylon, then this city
shall be given into the hand of the Chalde'ans, and they shall burn it with
fire, and you shall not escape from their hand." …
2. From Josephus’ Jewish War (Book V
Chapt. 9)
“But then Titus, knowing that the city would be either saved or
destroyed for himself, did not only proceed earnestly in the siege, but did not
omit to have the Jews exhorted to repentance; so he mixed good counsel with his
works for the siege. And being sensible that exhortations are frequently more
effectual than arms, he persuaded them to surrender the city, now in a manner
already taken, and thereby to save themselves, and sent Josephus to speak to
them in their own language; for he imagined they might yield to the persuasion
of a countryman of their own.
So Josephus went round about the wall, and tried to find a place that
was out of the reach of their darts, and yet within their hearing, and besought
them, in many words, to spare themselves, to spare their country and their
temple, and not to be more obdurate in these cases than foreigners themselves;
for that the Romans, who had no relation to those things, had a reverence for
their sacred rites and places, although they belonged to their enemies, and had
till now kept their hands off from meddling with them; while such as were
brought up under them, and, if they be preserved, will be the only people that
will reap the benefit of them, hurry on to have them destroyed. That certainly
they have seen their strongest walls demolished, and that the wall still
remaining was weaker than those that were already taken. That they must know
the Roman power was invincible, and that they had been used to serve them; for,
that in case it be allowed a right thing to fight for liberty, that ought to
have been done at first; but for them that have once fallen under the power of
the Romans, and have now submitted to them for so many long years, to pretend
to shake off that yoke afterward, was the work of such as had a mind to die
miserably, not of such as were lovers of liberty. Besides, men may well enough
grudge at the dishonor of owning ignoble masters over them, but ought not to do
so to those who have all things under their command; for what part of the world
is there that hath escaped the Romans, unless it be such as are of no use for
violent heat, or for violent cold? And evident it is that fortune is on all
hands gone over to them; and that God, when he had gone round the nations with
this dominion, is now settled in Italy. That, moreover, it is a strong and
fixed law, even among brute beasts, as well as among men, to yield to those
that are too strong for them; and to stiffer those to have the dominion who are
too hard for the rest in war; for which reason it was that their forefathers,
who were far superior to them, both in their souls and bodies, and other
advantages, did yet submit to the Romans, which they would not have suffered,
had they not known that God was with them. As for themselves, what can they
depend on in this their opposition, when the greatest part of their city is
already taken? and when those that are within it are under greater miseries
than if they were taken, although their walls be still standing? For that the
Romans are not unacquainted with that famine which is in the city, whereby the
people are already consumed, and the fighting men will in a little time be so
too; for although the Romans should leave off the siege, and not fall upon the
city with their swords in their hands, yet was there an insuperable war that
beset them within, and was augmented every hour, unless they were able to wage
war with famine, and fight against it, or could alone conquer their natural
appetites. He added this further, how right a thing it was to change their conduct
before their calamities were become incurable, and to have recourse to such
advice as might preserve them, while opportunity was offered them for so doing;
for that the Romans would not be mindful of their past actions to their
disadvantage, unless they persevered in their insolent behavior to the end;
because they were naturally mild in their conquests, and preferred what was
profitable, before what their passions dictated to them; which profit of theirs
lay not in leaving the city empty of inhabitants, nor the country a desert; on
which account Caesar did now offer them his right hand for their security.
Whereas, if he took the city by force, he would not save any of them, and this
especially, if they rejected his offers in these their utmost distresses; for
the walls that were already taken could not but assure them that the third wall
would quickly be taken also. And though their fortifications should prove too
strong for the Romans to break through them, yet would the famine fight for the
Romans against them.”
Agrippa’s Speech at Jerusalem at
War’s Commencement
War Book 2 chapter 16
"Had I perceived that you were all zealously
disposed to go to war with the Romans, and that the purer and more sincere part
of the people did not propose to live in peace, I had not come out to you, nor
been so bold as to give you counsel; for all discourses that tend to persuade
men to do what they ought to do are superfluous, when the hearers are agreed to
do the contrary. But because some are earnest to go to war because they are
young, and without experience of the miseries it brings, and because some are
for it out of an unreasonable expectation of regaining their liberty, and
because others hope to get by it, and are therefore earnestly bent upon it, that
in the confusion of your affairs they may gain what belongs to those that are
too weak to resist them, I have thought proper to get you all together, and to
say to you what I think to be for your advantage; that so the former may grow
wiser, and change their minds, and that the best men may come to no harm by the
ill conduct of some others. And let not any one be tumultuous against me, in
case what they hear me say do not please them; for as to those that admit of no
cure, but are resolved upon a revolt, it will still be in their power to retain
the same sentiments after my exhortation is over; but still my discourse will
fall to the ground, even with a relation to those that have a mind to hear me,
unless you will all keep silence. I am well aware that many make a tragical
exclamation concerning the injuries that have been offered you by your
procurators, and concerning the glorious advantages of liberty; but before I
begin the inquiry, who you are that must go to war, and who they are against
whom you must fight, I shall first separate those pretenses that are by some
connected together; for if you aim at avenging yourselves on those that have
done you injury, why do you pretend this to be a war for recovering your
liberty? but if you think all servitude intolerable, to what purpose serve your
complaint against your particular governors? for if they treated you with
moderation, it would still be equally an unworthy thing to be in servitude.
Consider now the several cases that may be supposed, how little occasion there
is for your going to war. Your first occasion is the accusations you have to
make against your procurators; now here you ought to be submissive to those in
authority, and not give them any provocation; but when you reproach men greatly
for small offenses, you excite those whom you reproach to be your adversaries;
for this will only make them leave off hurting you privately, and with some
degree of modesty, and to lay what you have waste openly. Now nothing so much
damps the force of strokes as bearing them with patience; and the quietness of
those who are injured diverts the injurious persons from afflicting. But let us
take it for granted that the Roman ministers are injurious to you, and are
incurably severe; yet are they not all the Romans who thus injure you; nor hath
Caesar, against whom you are going to make war, injured you: it is not by their
command that any wicked governor is sent to you; for they who are in the west
cannot see those that are in the east; nor indeed is it easy for them there
even to hear what is done in these parts. Now it is absurd to make war with a
great many for the sake of one, to do so with such mighty people for a small
cause; and this when these people are not able to know of what you complain:
nay, such crimes as we complain of may soon be corrected, for the same
procurator will not continue for ever; and probable it is that the successors
will come with more moderate inclinations. But as for war, if it be once begun,
it is not easily laid down again, nor borne without calamities coming
therewith. However, as to the desire of recovering your liberty, it is
unseasonable to indulge it so late; whereas you ought to have labored earnestly
in old time that you might never have lost it; for the first experience of
slavery was hard to be endured, and the struggle that you might never have been
subject to it would have been just; but that slave who hath been once brought
into subjection, and then runs away, is rather a refractory slave than a lover
of liberty; for it was then the proper time for doing all that was possible,
that you might never have admitted the Romans [into your city], when Pompey
came first into the country. But so it was, that our ancestors and their kings,
who were in much better circumstances than we are, both as to money, and strong
bodies, and [valiant] souls, did not bear the onset of a small body of the
Roman army. And yet you, who have now accustomed yourselves to obedience from
one generation to another, and who are so much inferior to those who first
submitted, in your circumstances will venture to oppose the entire empire of
the Romans.
“While those Athenians, who, in order to preserve the
liberty of Greece, did once set fire to their own city; who pursued Xerxes,
that proud prince, when he sailed upon the land, and walked upon the sea, and
could not be contained by the seas, but conducted such an army as was too broad
for Europe; and made him run away like a fugitive in a single ship, and brake
so great a part of Asia at the Lesser Salamis; are yet at this time servants to
the Romans; and those injunctions which are sent from Italy become laws to the
principal governing city of Greece.
“Those Lacedemonians also who got the great victories
at Thermopylae. and Platea, and had Agesilaus [for their king], and searched
every corner of Asia, are contented to admit the same lords.
“Those Macedonians also, who still fancy what great
men their Philip and Alexander were, and see that the latter had promised them
the empire over the world, these bear so great a change, and pay their
obedience to those whom fortune hath advanced in their stead. Moreover, ten
thousand ether nations there are who had greater reason than we to claim their
entire liberty, and yet do submit.
“You are the only people who think it a disgrace to
be servants to those to whom all the world hath submitted. What sort of an army
do you rely on? What are the arms you depend on? Where is your fleet, that may
seize upon the Roman seas? and where are those treasures which may be sufficient
for your undertakings? Do you suppose, I pray you, that you are to make war
with the Egyptians, and with the Arabians?
“Will you
not carefully reflect upon the Roman empire? Will you not estimate your own
weakness? Hath not your army been
often beaten even by your neighboring nations, while the power of the Romans is
invincible in all parts of the habitable earth? nay, rather they seek for
somewhat still beyond that; for all Euphrates is not a sufficient boundary for
them on the east side, nor the Danube on the north; and for their southern
limit, Libya hath been searched over by them, as far as countries uninhabited,
as is Cadiz their limit on the west; nay, indeed, they have sought for another
habitable earth beyond the ocean, and have carried their arms as far as such
British islands as were never known before. What therefore do you pretend to?
Are you richer than the Gauls, stronger than the Germans, wiser than the
Greeks, more numerous than all men upon the habitable earth? What confidence is
it that elevates you to oppose the Romans? Perhaps it will be said, It is hard
to endure slavery. Yes; but how much harder is this to the Greeks, who were
esteemed the noblest of all people under the sun! These, though they inhabit in
a large country, are in subjection to six bundles of Roman rods. It is the same
case with the Macedonians, who have juster reason to claim their liberty than
you have. What is the case of five hundred cities of Asia? Do they not submit
to a single governor, and to the consular bundle of rods? What need I speak of
the Henlochi, and Colchi and the nation of Tauri, those that inhabit the
Bosphorus, and the nations about Pontus, and Meotis, who formerly knew not so
much as a lord of their own, but arc now subject to three thousand armed men,
and where forty long ships keep the sea in peace, which before was not
navigable, and very tempestuous? How strong a plea may Bithynia, and
Cappadocia, and the people of Pamphylia, the Lycians, and Cilicians, put in for
liberty! But they are made tributary without an army. What are the
circumstances of the Thracians, whose country extends in breadth five days'
journey, and in length seven, and is of a much more harsh constitution, and
much more defensible, than yours, and by the rigor of its cold sufficient to
keep off armies from attacking them? do not they submit to two thousand men of
the Roman garrisons? Are not the Illyrlans, who inhabit the country adjoining,
as far as Dalmatia and the Danube, governed by barely two legions? by which
also they put a stop to the incursions of the Daeians. And for the Dalmatians,
who have made such frequent insurrections in order to regain their liberty, and
who could never before be so thoroughly subdued, but that they always gathered
their forces together again, revolted, yet are they now very quiet under one
Roman legion. Moreover, if eat advantages might provoke any people to revolt,
the Gauls might do it best of all, as being so thoroughly walled round by
nature; on the east side by the Alps, on the north by the river Rhine, on the
south by the Pyrenean mountains, and on the west by the ocean. Now although
these Gauls have such obstacles before them to prevent any attack upon them,
and have no fewer than three hundred and five nations among them, nay have, as
one may say, the fountains of domestic happiness within themselves, and send
out plentiful streams of happiness over almost the whole world, these bear to
be tributary to the Romans, and derive their prosperous condition from them;
and they undergo this, not because they are of effeminate minds, or because
they are of an ignoble stock, as having borne a war of eighty years in order to
preserve their liberty; but by reason of the great regard they have to the
power of the Romans, and their good fortune, which is of greater efficacy than
their arms. These Gauls, therefore, are kept in servitude by twelve hundred
soldiers, which are hardly so many as are their cities; nor hath the gold dug
out of the mines of Spain been sufficient for the support of a war to preserve
their liberty, nor could their vast distance from the Romans by land and by sea
do it; nor could the martial tribes of the Lusitanians and Spaniards escape; no
more could the ocean, with its tide, which yet was terrible to the ancient
inhabitants. Nay, the Romans have extended their arms beyond the pillars of
Hercules, and have walked among the clouds, upon the Pyrenean mountains, and
have subdued these nations. And one legion is a sufficient guard for these
people, although they were so hard to be conquered, and at a distance so remote
from Rome. Who is there among you that hath not heard of the great number of
the Germans? You have, to be sure, yourselves seen them to be strong and tall,
and that frequently, since the Romans have them among their captives every
where; yet these Germans, who dwell in an immense country, who have minds
greater than their bodies, and a soul that despises death, and who are in rage
more fierce than wild beasts, have the Rhine for the boundary of their
enterprises, and are tamed by eight Roman legions. Such of them as were taken
captive became their servants; and the rest of the entire nation were obliged
to save themselves by flight. Do you also, who depend on the walls of
Jerusalem, consider what a wall the Britons had; for the Romans sailed away to
them, an subdued them while they were encompassed by the ocean, and inhabited
an island that is not less than the [continent of this] habitable earth; and
four legions are a sufficient guard to so large all island And why should I speak
much more about this matter, while the Parthians, that most warlike body of
men, and lords of so many nations, and encompassed with such mighty forces,
send hostages to the Romans? whereby you may see, if you please, even in Italy,
the noblest nation of the East, under the notion of peace, submitting to serve
them. Now when almost all people under the sun submit to the Roman arms, will
you be the only people that make war against them? and this without regarding
the fate of the Carthaginians, who, in the midst of their brags of the great
Hannibal, and the nobility of their Phoenician original, fell by the hand of
Scipio. Nor indeed have the Cyrenians, derived from the Lacedemonians, nor the
Marmaridite, a nation extended as far as the regions uninhabitable for want of
water, nor have the Syrtes, a place terrible to such as barely hear it
described, the Nasamons and Moors, and the immense multitude of the Numidians,
been able to put a stop to the Roman valor. And as for the third part of the
habitable earth, [Akica,] whose nations are so many that it is not easy to
number them, and which is bounded by the Atlantic Sea and the pillars of
Hercules, and feeds an innumerable multitude of Ethiopians, as far as the Red
Sea, these have the Romans subdued entirely. And besides the annual fruits of
the earth, which maintain the multitude of the Romans for eight months in the
year, this, over and above, pays all sorts of tribute, and affords revenues
suitable to the necessities of the government. Nor do they, like you, esteem
such injunctions a disgrace to them, although they have but one Roman legion
that abides among them. And indeed what occasion is there for showing you the
power of the Romans over remote countries, when it is so easy to learn it from
Egypt, in your neighborhood? This country is extended as far as the Ethiopians,
and Arabia the Happy, and borders upon India; it hath seven millions five
hundred thousand men, besides the inhabitants of Alexandria, as may be learned
from the revenue of the poll tax; yet it is not ashamed to submit to the Roman
government, although it hath Alexandria as a grand temptation to a revolt, by
reason it is so full of people and of riches, and is besides exceeding large,
its length being thirty furlongs, and its breadth no less than ten; and it pays
more tribute to the Romans in one month than you do in a year; nay, besides
what it pays in money, it sends corn to Rome that supports it for four months
[in the year]: it is also walled round on all sides, either by almost impassable
deserts, or seas that have no havens, or by rivers, or by lakes; yet have none
of these things been found too strong for the Roman good fortune; however, two
legions that lie in that city are a bridle both for the remoter parts of Egypt,
and for the parts inhabited by the more noble Macedonians. Where then are those
people whom you are to have for your auxiliaries? Must they come from the parts
of the world that are uninhabited? for all that are in the habitable earth are
[under the] Romans. Unless any of you extend his hopes as far as beyond the
Euphrates, and suppose that those of your own nation that dwell in Adiabene
will come to your assistance; but certainly these will not embarrass themselves
with an unjustifiable war, nor, if they should follow such ill advice, will the
Parthians permit them so to do; for it is their concern to maintain the truce
that is between them and the Romans, and they will be supposed to break the
covenants between them, if any under their government march against the Romans.
What remains, therefore, is this, that you have recourse to Divine assistance;
but this is already on the side of the Romans; for it is impossible that so
vast an empire should be settled without God's providence. Reflect upon it, how
impossible it is for your zealous observations of your religious customs to be
here preserved, which are hard to be observed even when you fight with those
whom you are able to conquer; and how can you then most of all hope for God's
assistance, when, by being forced to transgress his law, you will make him turn
his face from you? and if you do observe the custom of the sabbath days, and
will not be revealed on to do any thing thereon, you will easily be taken, as
were your forefathers by Pompey, who was the busiest in his siege on those days
on which the besieged rested. But if in time of war you transgress the law of
your country, I cannot tell on whose account you will afterward go to war; for
your concern is but one, that you do nothing against any of your forefathers; and
how will you call upon God to assist you, when you are voluntarily
transgressing against his religion? Now all men that go to war do it either as
depending on Divine or on human assistance; but since your going to war will
cut off both those assistances, those that are for going to war choose evident
destruction. What hinders you from slaying your children and wives with your
own hands, and burning this most excellent native city of yours? for by this
mad prank you will, however, escape the reproach of being beaten. But it were
best, O my friends, it were best, while the vessel is still in the haven, to
foresee the impending storm, and not to set sail out of the port into the
middle of the hurricanes; for we justly pity those who fall into great
misfortunes without fore-seeing them; but for him who rushes into manifest
ruin, he gains reproaches [instead of commiseration]. But certainly no one can
imagine that you can enter into a war as by agreement, or that when the Romans
have got you under their power, they will use you with moderation, or will not
rather, for an example to other nations, burn your holy city, and utterly
destroy your whole nation; for those of you who shall survive the war will not
be able to find a place whither to flee, since all men have the Romans for
their lords already, or are afraid they shall have hereafter. Nay, indeed, the
danger concerns not those Jews that dwell here only, but those of them which
dwell in other cities also; for there is no people upon the habitable earth
which have not some portion of you among them, whom your enemies will slay, in
case you go to war, and on that account also; and so every city which hath Jews
in it will be filled with slaughter for the sake of a few men, and they who
slay them will be pardoned; but if that slaughter be not made by them, consider
how wicked a thing it is to take arms against those that are so kind to you.
Have pity, therefore, if not on your children and wives, yet upon this your
metropolis, and its sacred walls; spare the temple, and preserve the holy
house, with its holy furniture, for yourselves; for if the Romans get you under
their power, they will no longer abstain from them, when their former
abstinence shall have been so ungratefully requited. I call to witness your
sanctuary, and the holy angels of God, and this country common to us all, that
I have not kept back any thing that is for your preservation; and if you will
follow that advice which you ought to do, you will have that peace which will
be
common to you and to me; but if you indulge four
passions, you will run those hazards which I shall be free from."
Work and Time Span Covered |
Overlap with Other works and Value |
Josephus’ Situation |
Aim/Target Audience |
Literary Quality |
Jewish
War Aramaic first ed. before 75 CE (this work is lost) |
Unknown |
Imperial client |
To warning the Jews
in Babylonia and elsewhere not to take action against Rome |
Unknown |
Jewish
War Greek edition 75-79 CE |
End of Antiquities overlaps beginning of War for 175 BCE-67 CE - our only real
record of War against - understanding
nature of religious and social forces at work in - With Caesar’s
memoirs our major source on how legions actually fought |
Imperial client |
1. To glorify Romans
especially Flavians 2. To glorify the
Jews showing that they were worthy foes of Romans 3. To show that War
was caused by a combination of Roman misgovernment and greed and the
influence of lower class hooligans and misguided religious fanatics 4. To show that
Rome’s victory was willed by the God of Israel and that Jews should submit to
God’s will which includes serving the Romans (echoes of Jeremiah) |
very good |
Antiquities 94 CE |
1. First half retell
Bible history in way to appeal to educated Greeks and Greek-reading
Romans. Main importance is as help to
understand Greek literary culture of day and a few early midrashim. 2. For period,
approx 400 BCE-67CE it is virtually only useful written source we have except
for 1 and 2 Macabees which cover 187-134 BCE. |
Independent wealthy
Roman citizen |
To demonstrate
antiquity and excellence of God, Jews and Judaism |
|
Life 93-100 CE |
Overlaps 6 months
covered in War |
|
good |
|
Against
Apion 93/4 CE |
No overlap. Early Jewish apologetic. |
|
good |
Normal Judaea garrison
no legions and small units of auxiliaries.
Small garrison in Jerusalem and main garrison in Caesarea the seat of the
(equestrian) procurator mainly responsible for law an order under supervision
of (consulor) governor of Syria.
Procurator, with additional troops, in Antonia during the three pilgrim
festivals.
Troops required for internal
order, for population of 50 - 60 million spread over about 35 modern countries
including many mountainous areas and tribal areas where unrest was chronic and,
of course, for war.
The Augustan distribution of legions was.
Region |
Legions |
Legionary Troops (approx) |
Auxiliary Troops (approx) |
Total troops |
Spain |
3 |
15,000 |
15,000 |
30,000 |
Rhine |
8 |
40,000 |
40,000 |
80,000 |
Danube |
7 |
35,000 |
35,000 |
70,000 |
Egypt |
2 |
10,000 |
10,000 |
20,000 |
Syria (Parthian frontier) |
4 |
20,000 |
20,000 |
40,000 |
Africa |
1 |
5,000 |
5,000 |
10,000 |
TOTAL |
25 |
125,000 |
125,000 |
250,000 |
Josephus
Resources on the Web
·
Project on Ancient Cultural Enlightenment PACE
http://PACE.cns.yorku.ca
·
Whiston
translation of Josephus works http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/search?amode=start&author=Josephus%2C%20Flavius
Search in the following
(usually available in university libraries) for “Josephus”
Index To Theses (http://www.theses.com/ ) - A comprehensive listing of theses with abstracts
accepted for higher degrees by universities in
ProQuest Digital Dissertations – key online searchable source.
Alon, Gedalia, Jews, Judaism and the classical world :
studies in Jewish history in the times of the second temple and Talmud, translated from the Hebrew by Israel
Abrahams,
Avi-Yonah, M., The Jews
of
Bartlett, John R, Jews
in the Hellenistic and Roman cities, Routledge, 2002.
Bartlett, John R, Jews in the Hellenistic World : Josephus,
Aristeas, the Sibylline oracles, Eupolemus
Bilde, Per, Flavius
Josephus, between
Bohrmann, Monette, Janet Lloyd
(Translator) Yavne: Towards a Rereading
of the War of the Jews, Paperback - December 1994
Broshi, Magen, http:/www.centuryone.com/josephus.html
Buchler, Adolph, The Economic Condition of Judaea After
the Destruction of the Second Temple 1912 reprinted in Understanding the
Talmud ed A. Corre, Ktav 1975
Cohen, Shaye J. D, Josephus in
Cornfeld, G (ed.), Josephus: the Jewish War, Zondervan 1982
Farmer, William Reuben, Maccabees, Zealots, and Josephus : an
inquiry into Jewish nationalism in the Greco-Roman period,
Feldman, Louis H. and Hata,
Gohei (eds.) Josephus, the Bible, and
history, Wayne State University Press, 1989.
Feldman,
Louis H, Jew and Gentile in the ancient world: attitudes and interactions from
Alexander to Justinian, Princeton University Press, c1993.
Feldman, Louis H., "Josephus' Attitude toward the Samaritans: A Study
in Ambivalence" in Volume 3: Jewish
Sects, Religious Movements,and Political Parties in Proceedings
of the Third Annual Symposium of the Philip M. & Ethel Klutznick Chair in
Jewish Civilization October 14-15, 1990.
© 1992. ISBN 1-881871-04-5
Feldman, Louis H., Josephus's interpretation of the Bible,
Feldman, Louis H. and Hata,
Gohei (eds.), Josephus, Judaism, and
Christianity,
Feldman, Louis H., Josephus and modern scholarship, 1937-1980, W. de Gruyter, 1984.
Glatzer, Nahum N. (Editor),
Goodman, Martin (ed.), Jews in a Graeco-Roman world,
Goodman,
M, The Ruling Class of
Hengel, Martin, Jews, Greeks and barbarians : aspects of the Hellenization of Judaism in the pre-Christian period, [translated by John Bowden from the German], SCM Press
Horsley, Richard A.,
Josephus, Flavius, Uniform title Antiquitates Judaicae. English and
Greek , Jewish Antiquities,
Josephus, Flavius, Uniform
title De
Levine, Lee I., Judaism and Hellenism in antiquity: conflict or confluence?, Hendrickson Publishers, 1998.
Mader, Gottfried, Josephus and the Politics of Historiography: Apologetic and Impression Management in the Bellum Judaicum (Mnemosyne, Bibliotheca Classica Batava. Supplementum, No 205) 2000
Mason, Steve, Understanding Josephus :seven perspectives, Sheffield Academic Press, c1998.
McLaren, James S, Turbulent times? : Josephus and scholarship on Judaea in the first century CE, Sheffield Academic Press, c1998.
Oppenheimer, Aharon, The `am ha-aretz : a study in the social
history of the Jewish people in the Hellenistic-Roman period,
Paltiel, Eliezer, Vassals and rebels in the
Parente, F and Sievers, J (Editors), Josephus and History of the Greco-Roman Period: Essays in Memory of Morton Smith (Studia Post Biblica, 41)
Price, Jonathan J.,
Rajak, Tessa, The Jewish dialogue with
Rajak, Tessa, Josephus : the historian and his society, Duckworth, 1983
Rhoads,
David M,
Schalit, A, article Josephus in Encyclopedia Judaica (Keter 1972) vol 10 cols. 251-263
Schürer, Emil, 1844-1910 , The History of the Jewish people in the
age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C.-A.D. 135), literary editor:Pamela Vermes ; organizing editor:Matthew Black, Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark,
1973-1987.
Schwartz, Seth, Josephus and Judaean politics,
Smallwood,
E M, The Jews Under Roman Rule: From Pompey to Diocletian,
Talmon, Shemaryahu (ed.) Jewish civilization in the
Hellenistic-Roman period,
Whaley, Ernest Boyd, "Josephus' Antiquities 11.297-347: Unraveling the Evidence Regarding the Founding of the Gerizim Temple and the Background of the Samaritan Religious Community" in Volume 3: Jewish Sects, Religious Movements and Political Parties in Proceedings of the Third Annual Symposium of the Philip M. & Ethel Klutznick Chair in Jewish Civilization October 14-15, 1990. © 1992. ISBN 1-881871-04-5
Whaley, Ernest Boyd,
Villalba I Varneda, Pere, The Historical Method of Flavius Josephus, 1997
Williamson, G. A, The world of Josephus, Secker & Warburg [1964]
Wylen, Stephen M, The Jews in the time of Jesus : an
introduction, Paulist Press, c1996.
[1] In Jews and Arabs: Their Contact Through the Ages by S D Goitein, Schoken 1955, 1964 p. 35 appears “Islam has been characterized as a Judaism with universalistic tendencies.”
[2] Cf. Qumran peshers.
[3] An interesting example is converting Abraham into a Hellenistic scientist “He communicated to them arithmetic, and delivered to them the science of astronomy; for before Abram came into Egypt they were unacquainted with those parts of learning; for that science came from the Chaldeans into Egypt, and from thence to the Greeks also” Antiquities Book 1 chapt. 8
[4] “(Herodotus) … swallows many superstitions, records many
miracles, quotes oracles piously, and darkens his pages with omens and auguries;
he gives the dates of Semele, Dionysus, and Heracles; and presents all history,
like a Greek Bossuet, as the drama of a Divine Providence rewarding the virtues
and punishing the sins, crimes, and insolent prosperity of men. But he has his
rationalistic moments....
Nevertheless
the difference between the mind of Herodotus and that of Thucydides is almost
the difference between adolescence and maturity.
Thucydides
is one of the phenomena of the Greek Enlightenment, a descendant of the
Sophists …. He received all the education available in
Because
he failed to lead his forces to Amphipolis in time to relieve it from siege, he
was exiled by the Athenians. He spent the next twenty years of his life in
travel, especially in the Peloponnesus; to this direct acquaintance with the
enemy we owe something of the impressive impartiality the Peloponnesians and
the Athenians from the moment that it broke out, believing that it would be an
important war, and more
worthy
of relation than any that had preceded it…. Herodotus wrote partly with an eye
to entertain the educated reader; Thucydides writes to furnish information for
future historians, and the guidanceof precedent for future statesmanship....
Herodotus ranged from place
to
place and from age to age; Thucydides forces his story into a rigid
chronological frame of seasons and years, sacrificing the continuity of his
narrative. Herodotus wrote in terms of personalities rather than processes,
feeling that processes operate through personalities; Thucydides, though he
recognizes the role of exceptional individuals in history … leans rather to
impersonal recording and the consideration of causes, developments, and
results. Herodotus wrote of far-off events reported to him in most cases at
second or third hand; Thucydides speaks often as an eyewitness, or as one who
has spoken with eyewitnesses, or has seen the original documents; in several
instances he gives the documents concerned. He has a keen conscience for
accuracy; even his geography has been verified in detail. He seldom passes
moralistic judgments upon men or events … he keeps himself aloof from his
story, gives the facts with fairness to both sides, and recounts the story of
Thucydides'
brief military career as if he had never known, much less been, the man. He is
the father of scientific method in history, and is proud of the care and industry with
which he has worked. "On the whole," he says, with a glance at
Herodotus, the conclusions I have drawn from the proofs quoted may, I believe,
be safely relied on. Assuredly they will not be disturbed either by the lays of
a poet displaying the exaggeration of his craft, or by
the
compositions of the chroniclers that are attractive at truth's expense-the
subjects they treat being out of the reach of evidence, and time having robbed
most of them of historical value by enthroning them in the region of legend.
Turning from these, we can rest satisfied with having proceeded upon the
clearest data, and having arrived at conclusions as exact as can be expected in
matters of such antiquity. . . . The absence of romance in my history will, I
fear, detract somewhat from its interest; but if it be judged useful by those
inquirers who desire an exact knowledge of the past as an aid to the
interpretation of the future-which, in the course of human affairs, must
resemble, if it does not reflect, the past-I shall be content. In fine, I have
written my work not as an
essay
which is to win the applause of the moment, but as a possession for all
time.'"
Nevertheless,
he yields accuracy to interest in one particular: he has a passion for putting
elegant speeches into the mouths of his characters. He frankly admits that
these orations are mostly imaginary, but they help him to explain and vivify
personalities, ideas, and events. He claims that each speech represents the
substance of an address actually given at the time; if this is true, all Greek
statesmen and generals must have studied rhetoric with Gorgias, philosophy with
the Sophists, and ethics with Thrasymachus. The speeches have all the same
style, the same subtlety, the same realism of view; they make the laconic
Laconian as windy as any Sophist bred Athenian. They put the most undiplomatic
arguments into the mouths of diplomats, and the most compromising honesty into
the words of generals. The "Funeral Oration" of Pericles is an
excellent essay on the virtues of Athens, and comes with fine grace from the
pen of an exile; but Pericles was famous for simplicity of speech rather than
for rhetoric; and Plutarch spoils the romance by saying that Pericles left
nothing written, and that of his sayings hardly anything was preserved,'"
Thucydides
has defects corresponding to his virtues… there is no humor in his book…. he
has an eye only for political and military events. He fills his pages with
martial details, but makes no mention of any artist, or any work of art. He
seeks causes sedulously, but seldom sinks beneath political to economic factors
in the determination of events. Though writing for future generations, he tells
us nothing of the constitutions of the Greek states, nothing of the life of the
cities, nothing of the institutions of society. He is as exclusive towards
women as towards the gods; he will not have them in his story; and he makes the
gallant Pericles, who risked his career for a courtesan advocate
of
feminine freedom, say that "a woman's best fame is to be as seldom as
possiblementioned by men, either for censure or for praise.""… Here
at least is an historical method, a reverence for truth, an acuteness of
observation, an impartiality of judgment, a passing splendor of language and
fascination of style, a mind both sharp and profound, whose ruthless realism is
a tonic to our naturally romantic souls. Here are no legends, no myths, and no
miracles. He accepts the heroic tales, but tries to explain them in
naturalistic terms. As for the gods, he is devastatingly silent; they have no place in his history. He is sarcastic about oracles and
their safe ambiguity, and scornfully exposes the stupidity of Nicias in relying
upon oracles rather than knowledge. He recognizes no guiding
[5] The
[6] Late Roman writers complained about being overrun by a hoard of about 40,000 officials for the whole empire. Cf Rome 40,000 ps in late empire overrun cf Ratio of Total Population to Public Administration Employees in Canada (1999)
[7] The patron-client system was a unique feature of Roman society in which citizens formed relationships that acted as an important link in the political and social systems. Patrons, usually patrician, would take ‘clients’, young patricians or plebeians, under their influence and provide them with advice, money, business opportunities, or representation in court. In turn, clients would help to enhance their patron’s status by providing certain services, such as working on his patron’s political campaigns, appearing with his patron in public as part of a group of faithful retainers, or using their specialized skills or training to enhance their patron’s status. Clients ranged from freedmen and businessmen to artists and writers. It was a common practice in Republican Rome for a patron-politician to either ally himself with prominent writers or patronize them publicly. For the writer, this alliance provided financial support and a market for his work; for the politician it would promote his own personal celebrity. The writer and the public figure would form, in the form of a patron- client relationship, an alliance or a relationship of convenience in which both had much to gain. (Shelton, 1998)
[8] Parthia (Iran) was Rome's only powerful organized enemy in the first century CE.
[9] The costs of land transport at that time were 55 times that of sea shipping and 6 times the cost of shipping by river. That is why the biggest Roman cities were near the sea.
[10] I am defining Political Legitimacy as “the perception of the citizenry that the nation’s political institutions and leaders are generally acting in accordance with their interests and needs and that they have a right to lead and should be supported.”