Citizenship in the Greek Empire
Democratic citizenship was a foundational principle of the Greek Empire. One of Alexander the Great’s motives for expanding Macedonian influence was to restore democracy in city-states that had fallen under Persian control (Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, 1:205). When Alexander drove the Persians from most of Asia Minor, democracies arose in the city-states formerly occupied by Persians. These city-states in turn recognized Alexander as their redeemer and elected ruler (Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, 1:205). However, when residents of Macedonian colonies rebelled against Alexander’s appointed governors, they were sold into slavery or killed rather than given the opportunity to elect their own governor (Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, 1:207–08).
Following Alexander’s death, imperial citizenship in Egypt under the Ptolemies ceased to be rooted in the polis and instead became rooted in political and military allegiances with or against the families governing disputed territories (Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, 1:208–18; Grabbe, “Jews and Hellenization,” 60). In the region of Syria-Palestine, the primary families vying for control were the Ptolemies and the Seleucids. At first, only Greek settlers were granted citizenship (Grabbe, “Jews and Hellenization,” 63).
Over the approximately two centuries following Alexander the Great’s death, the Ptolemies and (later) Seleucids granted various levels of citizenship to the residents of Syria-Palestine (Grabbe, “Jews and Hellenization,” 63). Greek officials supervised every city and village to ensure that the subjects paid taxes, but native peoples often served as lower-level supervisors within the administration of the villages (Grabbe, “Jews and Hellenization,” 53; summarizing Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1:103–06). In Egypt, native Egyptians often rose to high-level administrative positions, indicating an even greater level of citizenship than that in Syria-Palestine (Grabbe, “Jews and Hellenization,” 58). Josephus claims Jews in Alexandria had full citizenship status under Ptolemy I (Josephus, Antiquities 12.1.1 §8). Residents of Babylon and Uruk were offered citizenship only after 223 bc, and then only through intermarriage (Grabbe, “Jews and Hellenization,” 60).
Citizenship for Jews under the Greek and Hasmonaean Rule
In territories ruled by Greek leaders—including Judaea—citizenship was generally limited to members of the upper class who had obtained a Hellenistic education (Grabbe, “Jews and Hellenization,” 59) or contributed to the synchronization of local tradition with Hellenistic rhetorical style or philosophy (Doran, “Jewish Education,” 127–28). Gymnasiums served as the educational center of a Seleucid-Greek polis. The Greek education offered at gymnasiums typically included athletic training as well as instruction in music and literature (Doran, “Jewish Education,” 117; Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism 1:74). Because this education contradicted Torah-oriented education, Jewish scribes often considered anyone who pursued citizenship through training in Greek gymnasiums to be apostate (Doran, “Jewish Education,” 117).
In an attempt to solidify Seleucid support of his status as the religio-political leader of Judaea, the high priest Jason orchestrated the construction of a gymnasium around 174 bc, which would turn Jerusalem into a Seleucid polis (Doran, “Jewish Education,” 126–27; Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, 1:272). Jews who wanted to become citizens of the Seleucid Empire were required to abandon their cultural values—including the reversal of their circumcision—and join the premilitary ranks of the domineering empire.
Between 170–167 bc, Antiochus IV made it illegal for anyone to practice Judaism, and desecrated the Jerusalem temple by sacrificing a pig to Zeus (Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, 1:272). The Jews revolted against the Seleucid Empire in what may have begun as a fight for religious freedom but quickly turned into a war for an independent Jewish nation-state (Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, 1:273; Horsley, “Expansion of Hasmonean Rule,” 136–37). In December of 165 bc, the Maccabean rebels achieved a partial victory by taking control of Jerusalem and rededicating the temple to the worship of Yahweh (Horsley, “Expansion of Hasmonean Rule,” 136–37). Opposition to the Seleucids continued for 20 years before Simon Maccabeus consolidated Hasmonaean rule of Judaea in Jerusalem (Horsley, “Expansion of Hasmonean Rule,” 138). After 30 years, Alexander Jannaeus secured the independence of the temple-state with borders rivaling those of the united monarchy (Horsley, “Expansion of Hasmonean Rule,” 139). Jewish citizenship was offered to residents of the newly annexed territories of Galilee and Idumaea, as long as the residents complied with Jewish laws (Horsley, “Expansion of Hasmonean Rule,” 159).
Jewish citizenship under this newly created state was not based on one’s relationship to the city, but rather one’s relationship to the temple. The citizens fell into three classes:
1. priestly aristocrats
2. scribes and artisans
3. peasants (compare Horsley, “Expansion of Hasmonean Rule,” 136, who groups the priests and their clients in the same category)
The priests served as the upper-class administrators of the temple-state, while middle-class scribes preserved and passed on their teachings. All of these upper-class priestly aristocrats would have been Hasmonaean Jews, with Idumaeans and Galileans excluded from administrative responsibilities (Horsley, “Expansion of Hasmonean Rule,” 160). Like scribes, artisans were middle-class citizens responsible for crafting supplies for religious, military, or common use. Peasants comprised the commoner class, and likely had little to do with the affairs of the temple-state, other than their participation in feasts and Sabbaths.
Citizenship for Jews under the Roman Empire
When the Roman Empire took control of Syria-Palestine in 63 bc, they gave limited autonomy to significant portions of Judaean-occupied lands (Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, 2:320–22, 334). The temple-state remained in control of Judaea and Galilee under the leadership of Hyrcanus. The priestly aristocrats became subjects of the Roman Empire under the leadership of Herod the Great’s father, Antipater (Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, 2:343). In 37 bc, Rome installed Herod as a client king—a new class of citizen for the Jewish people (Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, 2:324). Client kings were responsible for paying tribute or war indemnity to the empire, as well as providing military aid when needed (Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, 2:337). In return, the empire authorized the client king’s rule, maintaining control of border regions without having to incur the expense of installing Roman administrators (Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, 2:324). Under the authority of the Roman Empire, Herod expanded his territory to gain back what had been lost when Rome took control of Syria-Palestine in 63 bc (Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, 2:325, 335).
In addition to the emperor, five classes of citizenry existed within the Roman Empire (Sherwin-White, Roman Society, 144):
1. the Senate—the ruling class in Rome, part of the emperor’s council
2. the equestrian order—local rulers such as ethnarchs or kings (as in the case of the procurators and prefects of Judaea), as well as military leaders
3. the municipalities—cities whose citizens were automatically citizens of the empire, though with less privilege than the ruling class
4. the military—members of the Roman military
5. the freedmen—former slaves who had been freed to the status of half- or quarter-citizen, with some or all of the social rights but none of the political rights
People could move up within the hierarchy of Roman citizenship only at great cost or in exceptional circumstances (Sherwin-White, Roman Society, 144–62). Within this hierarchy, Herod the Great would have been a member of the equestrian order.
Herod the Great’s kingdom contained three types of administration, each with their own concepts of what defined Jewish citizenry (Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, 2:325). Greek cities were military colonies that were administered by Rome much in the same way as the Ptolemies and the Seleucids had previously. The Roman officials would have been citizens of the Roman Empire, though the subjects they governed would not necessarily have been. In Jewish regions, Herod appointed various administrative officials to govern provinces, toparchies, and villages. Residents of these three hierarchical districts could maintain their Jewish citizenry, though only appointed officials would have been considered part of the ruling class and have any rights as a Roman citizen. Within Jerusalem, the formerly ruling Sanhedrin still existed with their social title and prestige of upper-class citizenry, though all authority had been stripped from them. Only Herod or his representative could collect taxes or make decisions for Jerusalem (Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, 2:325, 337).
Herod died in 4 bc and was succeeded by Archelaus. Rather than receiving the title of a client king, Archaeleus received the title of ethnarch, “ruler of the people”(Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, 2:338). Ten years later, Judaea became a Roman province rather than a semi-autonomous theocracy (Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, 2:338).
Jews outside Syria-Palestine apparently had the opportunity to become citizens of their local polis under Roman rule. In some circumstances, Jews were given the right to form their own charter as a separate subgroup within a larger city, a sort of subcitizen status that had certain privileges but none of the traditional civic rights (Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, 2:406–07, 409).
Citizenship in the New Testament
The New Testament uses the language of citizenship within the Roman Empire. Both the New Testament and Septuagint use the Greek word for “citizen” (πολίτης, politēs), referring to members of a city or city state (πόλις, polis). The parable of the Prodigal Son implies that citizens had the right to own land and hire help in farming it (Luke 15:11–32). The parable of the Talents implies that citizens of noble birth had the ability to rise in power to the status of king or ethnarch. This ruler had the power to execute subjects who revolted against him, even if they were citizens (Luke 19:12–27). In Acts, Paul replies to a military commander who purchased his citizenship by stating that he, Paul, was a Roman citizen by birth (Acts 22:28). Paul’s Roman citizenship was linked directly to the city of Tarsus, where he was born (Acts 21:39). The idiom “no ordinary city” (οὐκ ἀσήμου πόλεως, ouk asēmou poleōs), which Paul uses in regard to Tarsus in Acts 21:39, indicates a city’s greatness and as such reflects Paul’s pride in his citizenship (Longenecker, “Acts,” 1043). Hebrews 8:11 references Jer 38:34 LXX (Jer 31:34 MT), which translates the Hebrew word for “friend,” “fellow,” or “neighbor” (רֵעַ, rea') with the Greek word “citizen” (πολίτης, politēs).
The New Testament draws on the Greek and Roman notion of city-granted citizenship when speaking of divinely granted citizenship within the house of God. In the ancient Near East, the phrase “house of a deity” referred not only to the temple wherein people worshiped a deity, but also to the surrounding city in which the essence of the deity dwelled. In the ancient Near East, the granting of citizenship to a foreigner would be equal to adopting the foreigner into the socio-religious customs of the city, making him or her a full member of the religious community. Ephesians 2 carries this same implication when it speaks of Gentiles being adopted as citizens into the house of God: Those who were formerly “separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise” (Eph 2:12 NASB) have been adopted into the community through Christ. As such, they are no longer “strangers and aliens,” but rather “fellow citizens with the saints,” members of the house of God (Eph 2:19–20 NASB). These citizens of God’s kingdom—the Church—are in turn growing into the new temple of the Lord, a dwelling place for God by the Spirit (Eph 2:21–22).
Bottéro, Jean.
Mesopotamia: Writing, Reasoning, and the Gods. Translated by Zainab Bahrani and Marc Van De Mieroop. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.
Mesopotamia: Writing, Reasoning, and the Gods. Translated by Zainab Bahrani and Marc Van De Mieroop. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.
Chadwick, Robert. First Civilizations: Ancient Mesopotamia and Ancient Egypt. 2nd ed. London: Equinox, 2005.
Chavalas, Mark. “The Age of Empires, 3100–900 BCE.” Pages 34–47 in A Companion to the Ancient Near East. Edited by Daniel C. Snell. Oxford: Blackwell, 2005.
Davies, Phillip R., and John M. Halligan, eds. Studies in Politics, Class, and Material Culture. Vol. 3 of Second Temple Studies. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002.
Doran, Robert. “Jewish Education in the Seleucid Period.” Pages 116–32 in Studies in Politics, Class, and Material Culture. Vol. 3 of Second Temple Studies. Edited by Philip R. Davies and John M. Halligan. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002.
Grabbe, Lester. “The Jews and Hellenization: Hengel and His Critics.” Pages 52–66 in Studies in Politics, Class, and Material Culture. Vol. 3 of Second Temple Studies. Edited by Philip R. Davies and John M. Halligan. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002.
———. Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian. 2 vols. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992.
Greengus, Samuel. “Legal and Social Institutions of Ancient Mesopotamia.” Pages 469–84 in vol. 1 of Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Edited by Jack M. Sasson. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1995.
Hengel, Martin. Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in Their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period. Vols 1 and 2. London: SCM, 1974.
Horsley, Richard A. “The Expansion of Hasmonean Rule in Idumea and Galilee: Toward a Historical Sociology.” Pages 134–65 in Studies in Politics, Class, and Material Culture. Vol. 3 of Second Temple Studies. Edited by Philip R. Davies and John M. Halligan. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002.
Limet, Henri. “Ethnicity.” Pages 370–83 in A Companion to the Ancient Near East. Edited by Daniel C. Snell. Oxford: Blackwell, 2005.
Longenecker, Richard N. “Acts.” In Luke–Acts. Vol. 10 of The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Rev. ed. Edited by Tremper Longman III and David E. Garland. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007.
Olyan, Saul M. Rites and Rank: Hierarchy in Biblical Representations of Cult. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2000.
Pritchard, James B. Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament [ANET]. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1969.
Propp, William H. Exodus 19–40: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Anchor Bible 2A. New York: Doubleday, 2006.
Robertson, John F. “Social Tensions in the Ancient Near East.” Pages 196–210 in A Companion to the Ancient Near East. Edited by Daniel C. Snell. Oxford: Blackwell, 2005.
Sasson, Jack, ed. Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. 4 vols. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1995.
Sherwin-White, Adrian Nicholas. Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament. Oxford: Clarendon, 1963.
Snell, Daniel, ed. A Companion to the Ancient Near East. Oxford: Blackwell, 2005.
Walton, John. Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament: Introducing the Conceptual World of the Hebrew Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2006.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please only leave comment If you are interested in the topic discussed above. No spam will be tolerated so don't even try to spam my readers.