For us, however, the prime importance lies in the sharp contrast between
the Greek and the Jewish attitude. Upon the philosophically cultured
man, the reasoning of Epiphanes could not fail to produce a certain
impression. In the case of the seven sons of Hannah, while many elements
are repeated (IV Macc. viii. 17 seq.), the writer has in mind the appeal
to the flesh, which Hellenism made. “Will you not change your mode of
life for that of the Greeks and enjoy your youth to the full?” asks
Antiochus (_ibid._ viii. 8); and that no doubt was the whisper that came
to the heart of many a young man, surrounded by the bright and highly
colored life of the Hellenic communities in which he dwelt. There is no
exchange of vituperation. The denunciations hurled against Antiochus are
impersonal, indeed are generic. He is the type of tyrant, another
Busiris or Phalaris, a bowelless despot. And the one word which
alternates with “senseless” in the mouths of Antiochus and his
executioners is “mad.”
The actual events described are of course quite unhistorical. But we do
not find here any of the various forms in which racial animosity or
personal spleen exhibited itself against the Jews. In spite of the
setting, the controversy is, judged by disputation standards, quite
decorous. The terms that qualify the Jewish doctrine as “irrational” are
almost controversial commonplaces. The martyrs do not resent the
epithet. They seem to accept it as the logical inference of the carnal
philosophy of their oppressors and claim to be justified by a higher
wisdom.
Jewish and Greek life began to touch each other at many points in the
six or seven generations that intervened between Alexander and Caesar.
Hellenism dominated the political and social culture of the Eastern
Mediterranean, although the nationalities it covered were submerged
rather than crushed. In Egypt the indigenous culture maintained itself
successfully, and forced concessions from the conqueror, which made the
Hellenism of that country a thing quite different from that of the other
lands within the sphere of Greek influence. The resistance of the Jews
also took the form of successful insurrection, and in their case enabled
an independent political entity to be constituted.
The dispersal of the Jews was already considerable at this time. It
differed from the dispersal of the Syrians in the fact that the bond of
union of the Jewish congregations existed in the common cult and the
common interest in the fortunes of the mother-country. On the other
hand, the Syrians of Rome and of Naples shared nothing except the
quickly effaced memory of a common racial origin.[229]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account