It is during the reign of his successor Claudius that we hear of another
expulsion: _Iudaeos impulsore Chresto adsidue tumultuantis Roma expulit_
(Suet. Claud. 25), “The Jews who engaged in constant riots by the
machinations of a certain Chrestus, he expelled from Rome.” It has
constantly been stated that this refers to the agitation in the Roman
Jewry which the preaching of Christianity aroused. For that, however,
there is no sufficient evidence. Jesus, to be sure, is called Chrestus,
Χρηστός, the Upright, in many Christian documents.[337]
This play upon words is practically unavoidable. But Chrestus is a
common name among all classes of society.[338] Jews would be especially
likely to bear it, since it was a fairly good rendering of such a
frequently occurring name as Zadok. The riot in question was no doubt a
real enough event, and the expulsion equally real, even if it did not
quite imply all that seems to be contained in it.
If it were a decree of general expulsion of all Jews, it would be
strikingly at variance with the edicts in favor of the Jews which
Claudius issued, and which are contained in Josephus (Ant. XIX. v.). As
in the case of other documents cited here, there is no reason to
question the substantial accuracy of their contents, although they are
surely not verbatim transcriptions from the records. It is as clearly
impossible in the case of Claudius as in that of Tiberius to suppose an
arbitrary disregard of law on his part, so that a general ejection of
all Jews from the city, including those who were Roman citizens, is not
to be thought of.
Neither Tacitus nor Josephus mentions the expulsion. The silence of
neither is conclusive, but it lends strong probability to the
assumption that the decree cannot have been so radical a measure as a
general expulsion of all Jews from the city would be. The passage from
Suetonius is concerned wholly with acts of Claudius affecting
foreigners—non-Romans, _i.e._ Lycians, Rhodians, Gauls, Germans—and if
we keep in mind Suetonius’ habits of composition, it is highly likely
that he has put together here all that he found together in his
source. We are to understand therefore by the _Iudaei_ of this passage
only foreign Jews, which implies that the majority of the Jews were
not affected by it at all.
But were even all foreign Jews included? Is there anything in the
passage that is not perfectly consistent with the assumption that some
relatively small group of Jews led by a certain Chrestus was ejected
from the city for disorderly conduct? The silence of the other writers,
the total absence of effect on the growth of the Jewish population,
would seem to make this after all the simplest meaning of Suetonius’
words.
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