[ImperialSun]

Hello all,

I am very fascinated by antiquity and Rome.
One aspect which I would love to know more details about, was the relationship between Rome and the territory then known as Judea.
Specifically the First war between the Romans & the Jews of Judea, which led to what I understand was a near extermination of the Jewish ethnic group, with only a few remnants surviving as slaves or converts, after which the Romans led by the soon to be Emperors Vespasian & his son Titus besieged Jerusalem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Jew ... 3Roman_War

This event fascinates me and puzzles me. It happened during the reign of the infamous emperor NERO.
My question is mainly this:
- The Roman Empire was mostly peaceful. It was quite tolerant of any local cult. Beyond the revolution of the Slaves during the Roman Republic (Spartacus), there was no major revolt WITHIN the Empire. So what prompted possibly the most devasting war during Rome's history? This is a war where millions died. Entire legions were decimated. Again, Jerusalem itself was cleansed of its population, children were killed, Jewish women raped, and the glorious Jewish Temple was ravaged.
So what prompted the Romans to unleash such a war upon Judea? Why did they ravage all Jewish cities not to mention the Temple? Where did this hate come from, when before during the Republic, the province of Judea was peaceful?
My very general question is...Who is the villain of this war? What are the reasons for it really? I can only find sources mentioning taxation or things which make no sense to me.

[blackjack21]

My very general question is...Who is the villain of this war? What are the reasons for it really? I can only find sources mentioning taxation or things which make no sense to me.

Jewish history is replete with David & Goliath type stories. The notion of David is this smaller power that defeats a larger power with ostensibly the aid of God. The more practical explanation is trickery and deceit. In this war, the Battle of Beth Horon sent the Romans into a dither.

Just as Jews today--usually purporting to be atheists--complain about Christian symbols on public property and such, in that era, Jews complained about Greeks sacrificing birds near a synogogue in Caesaria (a city built by Herod the Great to honor the Roman emperor). That is, the Jews hated the Greeks. The Romans didn't attack the Greeks as requested by the Jews, so the Jews started protesting Roman taxation. The protest grew large enough that the local kings like Agrippa II had to flee. The Romans were fairly successful in their campaign to restore order, but were unable to take the Temple Mount and also withdrew forces. Perhaps the Jews saw this as a sign from God. As the Romans travelled through the pass at Beth Horon, they were attacked by Jewish archery, but couldn't form their phalanx. So their cohesion fell apart and the Jews not only destroyed the legion but the refugees that accompanied them. That Jewish victory caused the uprising to spread, but at more or less the same time that word got back to Rome that the Jews had taken the Aquila--the Roman Eagle of that legion.

That's really bad shit in Roman parlance. It's like calling Broken Arrow in the American military. They basically pull out every can of whoop ass they have and use it on you. That's more or less why it happened.

[danholo]

So what prompted the Romans to unleash such a war upon Judea?

Power hungry douchebags.

[Frollein]

Who is the villain of this war?

There are no villains in politics, only more or less successful competitors.

[annatar1914]

.
So what prompted the Romans to unleash such a war upon Judea? Why did they ravage all Jewish cities not to mention the Temple? Where did this hate come from, when before during the Republic, the province of Judea was peaceful?
My very general question is...Who is the villain of this war? What are the reasons for it really? I can only find sources mentioning taxation or things which make no sense to me.

From a spiritual perspective, it was the tradition of the Early Church that the Roman-Jewish wars were judgement from God upon the Jewish Commonwealth. The Rabbis of the Talmud concur though for different reasons obviously.

The war of AD 66-70 was inevitable and irreversible though in an earthly sense when the Temple stopped sacrificing for the good of the Roman State, as was required under Roman occupation.

[starman2003]

The protest grew large enough that the local kings like Agrippa II had to flee.

Josephus included a great speech warning the Jews not to rebel.

The Romans were fairly successful in their campaign to restore order, but were unable to take the Temple Mount and also withdrew forces.

From what I've read Cestius could've taken Jerusalem but suddenly decided to retreat without justification.

As the Romans travelled through the pass at Beth Horon, they were attacked by Jewish archery, but couldn't form their phalanx. So their cohesion fell apart and the Jews not only destroyed the legion

I don't think they destroyed the Roman force just damaged and demoralized it.

annatar1914 wrote

The war of AD 66-70...

The fall of Jerusalem didn't quite end it; masada held out until 73 CE or 74 according to what I saw in The Middle East Under Rome

[Thunderhawk]

So what prompted the Romans to unleash such a war upon Judea? Why did they ravage all Jewish cities not to mention the Temple? Where did this hate come from, when before during the Republic, the province of Judea was peaceful?

Was the Roman response out of the ordinary? I dont recall Roman punitive action ever being described as mild or gentile.

[starman2003]

Beyond the revolution of the Slaves during the Roman Republic (Spartacus), there was no major revolt WITHIN the Empire.

There was an uprising in Illyria c 6 CE, in Gaul c 22 CE and another in Egypt around 172.

This is a war where millions died.

Not that many; Josephus's figures appear exaggerated.

So what prompted the Romans to unleash such a war upon Judea? Why did they ravage all Jewish cities not to mention the Temple?

The devastation of Sepphoris was gratuitous but other places like Jotapata and Jerusalem were centers of resistance.

Where did this hate come from, when before during the Republic, the province of Judea was peaceful?

One passage from Josephus is instructive. He mentioned people volunteering to help the Romans as they marched to suppress the revolt. At first the Romans were reluctant to accept civilian volunteers but decided to since their enthusiastic hatred of the Jews made up for their lack of training.

Who is the villain of this war?

Josephus blamed the radicals and zealots.

[Potemkin]

There was an uprising in Illyria c 6 CE, in Gaul c 22 CE and another in Egypt around 172.

Not forgetting the Kitos War of 115-7 AD. In the 1st and 2nd centuries AD, the Jews made themselves very unpopular in the Roman Empire, and not just in Judea. According to the Roman historian Dio Cassius:

Meanwhile the Jews in the region of Cyrene had put one Andreas at their head and were destroying both the Romans and the Greeks. They would cook their flesh, make belts for themselves of their entrails, anoint themselves with their blood, and wear their skins for clothing. Many they sawed in two, from the head downwards. Others they would give to wild beasts and force still others to fight as gladiators. In all, consequently, two hundred and twenty thousand perished. In Egypt, also, they performed many similar deeds, and in Cyprus under the leadership of Artemio. There, likewise, two hundred and forty thousand perished. For this reason no Jew may set foot in that land, but even if one of them is driven upon the island by force of the wind, he is put to death.

Needless to say, such massacres tended to provoke some rather negative feelings towards the Jews among the Greek and Roman populations. They were probably regarded in pretty much the same way that we now regard groups like Al Qaeda or the Islamic State.

[fuser]

I doubt that Cassius' statement can be take at face value even tough I agree that ummm let's say religious extremism was a major factor.

[Potemkin]

I doubt that Cassius' statement can be take at face value even tough I agree that ummm let's say religious extremism was a major factor.

I agree; the number of victims seems grossly exaggerated. In general, ancient historians and writers cannot be trusted on numbers, whether for the size of armies or the numbers of victims of massacres. In general, they tended to inflate them by a factor of about 10. A more realistic figure for the number of victims of the Jewish massacres in Cyprus is therefore probably about 25,000 rather than 240,000. All the same, it's clear that the Jews were a serious problem for their Gentile neighbours in the eastern Roman Empire at that time.

[annatar1914]

I agree; the number of victims seems grossly exaggerated. In general, ancient historians and writers cannot be trusted on numbers, whether for the size of armies or the numbers of victims of massacres. In general, they tended to inflate them by a factor of about 10. A more realistic figure for the number of victims of the Jewish massacres in Cyprus is therefore probably about 25,000 rather than 240,000. All the same, it's clear that the Jews were a serious problem for their Gentile neighbours in the eastern Roman Empire at that time.

This was a major factor in all the Roman-Persian wars all the way up to and including the Islamic conquests, with the Jews being a definite '5th Column' for the Sassanid Persians and later Arabs.

[Potemkin]

This was a major factor in all the Roman-Persian wars all the way up to and including the Islamic conquests, with the Jews being a definite '5th Column' for the Sassanid Persians and later Arabs.

I don't think that's entirely true. Before the Roman-Jewish Wars, the Jews were a major population group in the eastern Mediterranean. It is this fact which probably emboldened them to commit these atrocities and to rise up against Roman rule, and not just in Judea. However, during the course of the 1st and 2nd centuries AD, the Jews went from being a major population group in the eastern Mediterranean to being a hunted and despised minority, exiled from their heartland and placed under increasingly strict prohibitions on their ability to organise and their ability to integrate with mainstream Gentile society. For more than a millennium, they were unable to act as an effective Fifth Column for anyone. All of this culminated, of course, in the Nazi Holocaust, during which Hitler managed to kill off half of all Jews living in Europe. In a sense, the Holocaust was actually part of the same troubles between the Gentiles and the Jews which had begun back in the 1st century AD, as was the Zionist project to recolonise the Jewish heartland in southern Levant. As a wise man once said, "The past is never dead. In fact, it's not even past."

[starman2003]

Not forgetting the Kitos War of 115-7 AD.

Or the Bar Kochba rebellion of 135-38.

Needless to say, such massacres tended to provoke some rather negative feelings towards the Jews among the Greek and Roman populations.

There had been great animosity between the Greek and jewish populations in the eastern Mediterranean well before the jewish uprisings of 66-138 CE. Caesaria for example, witnessed a lot of violence.
I'm not sure if Cassius's figures are exaggerated, or greatly so. Cyrenaica was badly affected by Kitos massacres. Hadrian had to bring in colonists to repopulate it. Interestingly, in his big tome The Story of the Jews Schama omits any mention of jewish atrocities at the time even though he dwells at length on many trivial matters. It seems those who endlessly remind us of the holocaust don't want to be reminded of what they themselves once did....

[Potemkin]

Interestingly, in his big tome The Story of the Jews Schama omits any mention of jewish atrocities at the time even though he dwells at length on many trivial matters. It seems those who endlessly remind us of the holocaust don't want to be reminded of what they themselves once did....

Most people have historical blind spots, starman. Most members of the British ruling class, for example, have a blind spot concerning the atrocities committed by the British Empire, many Communists have a blind spot concerning Stalin's purges, and many Americans have a blind spot concerning the USA's brutal history of genocide and racism. This is perfectly normal, and to be expected. When we mentally look at ourselves, at our own history, our vision is obscured by that blind spot. Most of us like to see ourselves as victims of the world, when in fact we are both victims and perpetrators.

[starman2003]

Most members of the British ruling class, for example, have a blind spot concerning the atrocities committed by the British Empire, many Communists have a blind spot concerning Stalin's purges, and many Americans have a blind spot concerning the USA's brutal history of genocide and racism. This is perfectly normal, and to be expected.

Of course most people don't want reminders of certain things they did. Still, there have been all kinds of books and films about the suffering of American blacks; what Stalin did is well known. I've seen gory depictions of British atrocities like blowing Indian rebels out of guns c 1858. What I find inexcusable is the lack of any mention at all of Kitos killings by jews in a (supposedly) comprehensive work by a professional historian.

[KlassWar]

There was no 'villain'. The Romans wanted to maintain a stable and secure Empire, while the Jews wanted to regain their independence. And both conducted themselves with their usual brutality and cruelty. The Romans won because they were vastly more powerful, and the Jews lost because they were way too parochial and chauvinistic to establish an anti-Romman alliance with the other colonized nationalities of the Levant.

[starman2003]

The Romans won because they were vastly more powerful, and the Jews lost because they were way too parochial and chauvinistic to establish an anti-Romman alliance with the other colonized nationalities of the Levant.

According to what Josephus attributes to Agrippa, the jews stood no chance of gaining allies as other peoples in the region were either loyal to Rome or fearful of it.

[ImperialSun]

Very interesting perspective from everyone.
Especially interesting are the original tensions between Greeks & Jews.
It is known the Romans were quite influenced by Greek culture & civilization, so it could be they naturally took the side of the Greeks.

But what was it that made the Greeks & Jews impossible communities to live together?
Who was the intolerant one?

The whole religious question is also interesting.
With the pantheon of Gods believed by the Romans being so large, why did the Romans have intolerance for the Jewish God? Couldnt they have added him to the pantheon?

[Potemkin]

Especially interesting are the original tensions between Greeks & Jews.
It is known the Romans were quite influenced by Greek culture & civilization, so it could be they naturally took the side of the Greeks.

Precisely. Hardrian, in particular, was a Philhellene. His attempt to prevent the Jews from circumcising their male children (or, as he would have seen it, mutilating their male children) was one of the main factors which led to the Bar Kochba Revolt. The ancient Greeks had a visceral contempt for any 'barbaric' mutilation of the human body, and the Romans inherited this prejudice from them.

But what was it that made the Greeks & Jews impossible communities to live together?
Who was the intolerant one?

By modern standards, they were both intolerant. The Jews had lived under Greek rule since the time of Alexander the Great's conquests, which placed the entire eastern Mediterranean under Greek control. The Greeks, for cultural reasons, had a visceral dislike of the Jewish religion, which was exacerbated by the fact that Judaism stubbornly refused to be integrated into the Greek polity, unlike the religions of all their other subject peoples.

The whole religious question is also interesting.
With the pantheon of Gods believed by the Romans being so large, why did the Romans have intolerance for the Jewish God? Couldnt they have added him to the pantheon?

Actually, they did. The Greek rulers would sometimes issue coins bearing an inscription to Yahweh Sabaoth (the Lord of Hosts). They probably intended it as a gesture of respect, but they didn't seem to understand just how offensive this would be to devout Jews. This cultural misunderstanding and incompatibility escalated over time, until the conflict between the Greeks and the Jews became almost genocidal. And then the Romans came along....