All these disorders required the presence of Varus[300] once more. He
marched on Jerusalem at the head of an army, turning over the various
towns on his route to be sacked by his Arabian allies, precisely as both
British and French used their Indian allies during the colonial wars in
America.
The effect of such conditions in so critical a place as Judea, was to
call Roman attention to the country to a much greater extent than was
advantageous to the Jews. The region very naturally appeared to them
as a turbulent and seditious section, much as Gaul did to Julius
Caesar and largely for the same reason, the instinctive love of
liberty and the presence of “innovators,” νεωτερισταί,
_cupidi rerum novarum_, restless and ambitious instigators of
rebellion.[301] The Jerusalem Jews are, to be sure, very eager to
escape the reproach of disloyalty. The rebellion was the work of
outsiders (ἐπήλυδες), to wit, the Galileans and
Gileadites above-mentioned.[302]
Varus crucified two thousand men, and then disbanded his auxiliary army.
The latter, composed obviously of natives of the country, proceeded to
plunder on their own account. Varus’ prompt action brought them to
terms. The officers were seized and sent to Rome, where, however, only
the relatives of Herod, who had added impiety to treason, were punished.
But the reproach of being a seditious people was resented by other Jews
than those of Jerusalem. The Jews in Rome were largely descended from
those who had left the country before even Antipater, Herod’s father,
had become powerful there. On them, of course, the house of Herod could
make no claim, and for obvious reasons closer relations with Rome seemed
to them eminently desirable. The Jewish embassy which Varus had
permitted the Judeans to send—how selected and led we have no
information—was joined by an immense deputation from the Roman
synagogues. The substance of their plea was the petition that they be
made an integral part of the province of Syria. “For it will thus become
evident whether they really are a seditious people, generally impatient
of all forms of authority for any length of time” (Jos. Ant. XVII. ii.
2; Wars, II. vi. 2).
This plea, to be joined to Syria, is particularly significant if we
remember that the motive of the Jews in sending the embassy was, in the
words of the Wars (II. vi. 1), to plead for the autonomy of their nation
(cf. Ant. XVII. xi. 1). We see strikingly confirmed the theory of the
Roman provincial system, in which the proconsul or propraetor was only
an official added to, but not superseding, the local authorities.
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