In the first century, Jews were expelled from Rome on various occasions. Ancient literary sources offer contradictory information on these expulsions. As a result, scholars have offered different reconstructions of what really happened. In contrast to earlier scholarship on the subject, this article seeks to place the expulsions of Jews from first-century Rome into the larger framework of Roman policy toward both Jews and other non-Roman peoples. It is argued that the decision to banish Jews from Rome resulted from pragmatic (...) and not from specifically anti-Jewish considerations: Roman magistrates just wanted to maintain law and order. It is then suggested that the reasons underlying the decision to expel Jews from Rome were essentially the same as those triggering expulsions of other groups such as Isis worshipers, devotees of Bacchus, or astrologers. Such evidence serves to illustrate the two main theses of this article. First, it is argued that in late Republican and early Imperial times, Rome never developed a systematic "Jewish policy." During this period, Rome rather responded to situations when confronted with disputes over Jewish rights. This conclusion then serves to bolster the second thesis of this paper, namely that in the first century, Rome never pursued a consistent policy of tolerance toward its Jewish subjects. (shrink)

In the 50sb.c.the Roman republic faced serious challenges, not least among them the related problems of electoral bribery and provincial extortion. The year 54b.c., which this article takes as a case study, witnessed both the worst electoral scandal Rome had ever seen and the high-profile extortion trial of M. Aemilius Scaurus. These events defy analysis in terms of the political allegiances and prosopographical connections usually tracked. It is more helpful to think of problems and (attempted) solutions, in which the younger (...) M. Porcius Cato played a leading role. Scaurus’ prosecutor summed up a vicious circle: governors who had engaged in extortion would buy the consulship with the money they had stolen and go on to plunder other provinces. Cato countered from both sides: in the Senate, he proposed a new form of process to combat electoral corruption; as president of the extortion court, he allowed the prosecution to hurry through a case that was as much aboutambitusasrepetundae. These initiatives, while not immediately successful, helped lay the groundwork for future reforms. (shrink)

Nabataean history is significantly overlooked in the works of ancient historians. Josephus is an exception to this, as he includes several important events from Nabataean history in De Bello Judaico and Antiquitates Judaicae. However, his retelling of these events differs between the two works. In this paper, I argue that Josephus became more “pro-Roman” over time and eventually overshadowed an accurate portrayal of Nabataean history in his later narrative. He undermined moments of tension between Rome and Nabataea in order to (...) showcase Roman power in the Near East, even beyond reality. In support of this argument, I analyze the Nabataean sections of Josephus’ works, as each passage has overlapping details, but significantly different emphasis, characterization, and perspective through variations in terminology, imagery, and tone. Though problematic, Josephus has preserved a unique look into Roman-Nabataean relations in the two centuries prior to the incorporation of Nabataea into the Empire. (shrink)