In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Chapter 7 Jerusalem in the Greco-Roman Orbit: The Extent and limitations of Cultural Fusion1 255 We have already had occasion to note the profound impact of the Greco-Roman world on Herod's building projects in Jerusalem as well as the influence of Hellenistic culture on his court life. Herod's non-Jewish advisers (some of whom were accomplished savants in their own right), the use of Greek names in his family, and the Greek education he gave his sons are only a few examples of his deep commitment to Greco-Roman civilization. This was no less powerful a force in shaping his priorities than his loyalty to its political system, and both were undoubtedly interrelated. There are many other indications ofJerusalem's acculturation to the surrounding Greco-Roman world and, taken together, these accommodations played a major role in shaping the city's life during the next hundred years.2 Evidence of outside influence is apparent in the material (residential buildings of the Upper City, funerary remains), institutional (sanhedrin, polis), and cultural (language and religious pursuits) spheres; together they attest to Jerusalem's active participation in the larger Greco-Roman cultural world.3 1. In this chapter, we shall address both the Herodian and the post-Herodian eras down to the destruction of the city in 70 C.E. While the adoption of Hellenistic models was already evident in the Hellenistic and Hasmonean eras, it is quite clear that Herodian rule provided this process with an additional and significant impetus. In many ways, this process continued down to the destruction, fueled later on by other forces as well (see below). For a general survey of this topic, see Avi-Yonah, "Jewish Art and Architecture," 250--263. 2. On the phenomenon of acculturation and its complexities, see the discussions ofWachtel, "L'acculturation ," 124-146, and Bee, Patterns and Processes, 94-119. 3. What follows is to be balanced by the realization that many facets of Jerusalem society remained largely Jewish, intentionally or unintentionally avoiding emulation of Hellenistic mores. On some of the relatively unaffected components of Jewish society in late Second Temple Jerusalem, see below. Herod himself placed clear limitations on outside influences; with rare exception, he avoided figural art on his coins and public edifices (the main deviation being the eagle incident at the end of his life 256 HERODIAN JERUSALEM The Jewish response to outside influence, as alluded to already on several occasions, was invariably complex-a mixture of adoption, adaptation, imitation , and rejection. Some Hellenistic models were introduced into Jerusalem with minimal adaptation, often involving only the removal of any traces of figural art. Thus, for example, the complaint by some Jerusalemites against Herod's theater lay in their opposition to images, and the protesters peacefully dispersed upon learning that none indeed existed there. Moreover, Jerusalem's residential quarters contained many examples of Hellenistic-Roman decorative models, to the exclusion of images. The adaptation of Hellenistic cultural tools, such as language and forms of exegesis, is likewise in evidence, thus enabling the city's inhabitants to communicate within the wider Roman context (language) while enhancing their opportunity to plumb their literary and religious traditions (from biblical to oral) in greater depth (exegesis). Other forms and patterns were borrowed and subjected to similar adjustments (e.g., funerary customs and political institutions) so as to render them appropriate for a Jewish context. Examples of these processes are presented below, with an eye toward tracing the nature and extent of HellenisticRoman cultural penetration into Herodian and post-Herodian Jerusalem. Just as these influences reconfigured the city, so they were revamped to meet the needs and religious sensibilities of the local Jewish population. Both Hellenistic and Roman culture affected Judaea at one and the same time. Examples of the former include the widespread use of Greek, the introduction of the theater and hippodrome, adoption of the polis model, funerary monuments, and a plethora of Greek architectural styles. The influence of the latter, Roman, world is reflected in the appearance of the amphitheater with its gladiatorial and animal spectacles;4 the Roman-type theaters, baths, basilica, and forums; as well as the widespread use of aqueducts, vaults, arches, concrete, ossuaries, and the opus reticulatum building style. The influence of Roman material culture on the East is not unusual in and of itself. What is unique in the case of Herodian Jerusalem is its timing, fully a century or two earlier than elsewhere. That such influence is so abundant before the late...

Share