In a recent note, D. Braund has challenged my identification of the Pollio at whose home in Rome Herod's sons Alexander and Aristobulus stayed in 22 b.c. as Gaius Asinius Pollio, the famous consul of 40 b.c., who was a close friend of Julius Caesar and to whom Virgil dedicated his Fourth Eclogue. Braund's argument rests upon five grounds. If this Pollio were a man of the stature of Asinius Pollio, we would expect Josephus to make his identity clear and (...) not to describe him solely as one of Herod's most devoted friends. Josephus' reference to Pollio here is different from the definite references to Asinius Pollio elsewhere in Josephus, where he is referred to as Asinius or Gaius Asinius Pollio. In the latter passage his name is spelled Πωλίωνος, whereas the name of the host of Herod's sons is spelled Πολλίωνος. When Herod sent two other sons to Rome, they stayed ‘with a certain Jew’, and hence it seems likely that the two other sons likewise stayed with a Jew. Asinius' role in the elevation by the Roman Senate of Herod to the kingship of Judaea was no greater than that of any other magistrate. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Flavius Josephus and Flavian RomeErich S. GruenJonathan Edmondson, Steve Mason, and James Rives, eds. Flavius Josephus and Flavian Rome. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. xvi + 400 pp. 8 black-and-white ills. Cloth, $135.Josephus is now coming into his own. Previously scorned as tendentious time-server and panderer to the powerful, he has received increasingly serious attention in recent years. Indeed, a veritable Josephus industry has emerged, with regular international (...) colloquia, a burgeoning number of publications, and major commentaries on individual works (and parts of works) in the course of publication though collaborative projects in both German and English. And properly so. Josephus for too long remained the province primarily of scholars in Jewish studies. Classicists, for the most part, marginalized or ignored him. That neglect seems quite myopic in view of the unusually large corpus and the importance of Josephus not only for Jewish history but also for classical literature and historiography, for the perceptions of imperial power by subordinate peoples, and for the place of "alien wisdom" in the intellectual and cultural world of the Roman empire. The shift toward fuller and closer scrutiny of Josephus' work by classical scholars is now well underway—and most welcome.The essays in this volume laudably promote that enterprise. They grow out of a stimulating conference held at York University in Toronto in 2001. The editors deserve credit for focusing on a critical but largely overlooked subject: the relationship of Josephus' work to the social, political, and cultural setting in which he wrote, namely that of Rome in the Flavian era. Unlike most conference volumes, the quality of the papers is uniformly high, and the collection as a whole unusually coherent. The volume is a model example of its genre.The Jewish war culminated in the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 c.e. The consequences for Jewish history, of course, were momentous, a familiar and frequently explored topic. Much less studied but indispensable for an understanding of Josephus' work are the reverberations in Rome. The Flavian emperors exploited their victory to publicize, justify, and entrench a new imperial dynasty. Fergus Millar valuably surveys the monuments of Rome instituted to commemorate the conquest of Judaea: the arches erected for Titus, the Colosseum built with the spoils of the Jewish war (as Alföldy stunningly demonstrated a few years ago), and the Temple of Peace where the most celebrated objects [End Page 615] captured in Jerusalem were deposited. The Flavian public-relations spin not only celebrated military prowess but also made a pointed contrast with the age of Nero and underscored the arrival of a pax Flaviana. Advertisement of triumph over Judaea could hardly make the Jews of Rome comfortable, as Martin Goodman argues. He adds that imposition of the fiscus Iudaicus under Vespasian and malicious accusations under Domitian against those who lived like Jews but did not acknowledge their Judaism must have produced an oppressive atmosphere in the Flavian years. James Rives goes beyond this, arguing that the destruction of the Temple and the depositing of sacred objects represented a genuine effort to stamp out the Temple cult which, in Roman eyes, constituted a civic cult and a threat to imperial stability. Daniel Schwartz's paper, with different objectives, extends this theme still further. He points to the ostensibly anomalous decision to resume the administration of the Jewish state as a Roman province instead of bestowing it upon the Roman supporter Agrippa II as an enlarged kingdom. For Schwartz, this amounted to a decision to eliminate Judaea as a territorial entity, a decision reflected in the fact that the term Ioudaioi tended to lose its geographical connotation thereafter and became a designation for "Jews" rather than "Judaeans." The scene after 70, in short, was grim indeed. One might question some of the more speculative ideas expressed in these essays, such as Goodman's suggestion that "Judaizing" indicated opposition to the Flavian regime or Rives' notion that Rome regarded Jerusalem as a rival focus of loyalty in the empire. Nonetheless, the climate in Rome for a Jewish intellectual like Josephus, after the fall of Jerusalem, would not seem to have been the most hospitable and... (shrink)

I. The name earned early notoriety from L. Ambivius Turpio, the actor who performed in all the plays of Terence. It appealed to Lucilius: quid tibi ego ambages Ambivi scribere coner? Also to Wilhelm Schulze, duly citing the Lucilian reference. In the sequel the nomen failed to enlist proper regard. Three persons bore it, diverse in life and rank: a tavern keeper on the Via Latina, a gourmet writer, a procurator governing Judaea. To the first and to the third, (...) erudition in the recent time denies recognition; and the second through inadvertence misses his place and period. The Ambivii call for redemption. The venture will lead along circuitous or devious paths, ‘per ambages’, in the pursuit of names and identities. From that operation various instruction accrues on the flank. II. First, a casual notice in the criminal record of a family of the better sort at Larinum. Cluentius and his slaves, so it was alleged, had made an assault on ‘Ambivium quendam, coponem de via Latina’ . Traditional texts remained content with that name. Not so long ago recourse to manuscripts produced ‘A. Bivium’. It was adopted in two standard editions. Had editors given a thought to nomenclature, they might have conceived some disquiet. Absent from the repertorium, the nomen appeared to lack attestation. In itself no bar, to be sure. The dense forest of local Italian nomenclature carries plenty of unique specimens. Reassurance could be sought from ‘Bivellius’ and ‘Bivonius’. (shrink)

In a recent note, D. Braund has challenged my identification of the Pollio at whose home in Rome Herod's sons Alexander and Aristobulus stayed in 22 b.c. as Gaius Asinius Pollio, the famous consul of 40 b.c., who was a close friend of Julius Caesar and to whom Virgil dedicated his Fourth Eclogue. Braund's argument rests upon five grounds. If this Pollio were a man of the stature of Asinius Pollio, we would expect Josephus to make his identity clear and (...) not to describe him solely as one of Herod's most devoted friends . Josephus' reference to Pollio here is different from the definite references to Asinius Pollio elsewhere in Josephus, where he is referred to as Asinius or Gaius Asinius Pollio . In the latter passage his name is spelled Πωλίωνος, whereas the name of the host of Herod's sons is spelled Πολλίωνος. When Herod sent two other sons to Rome, they stayed ‘with a certain Jew’ , and hence it seems likely that the two other sons likewise stayed with a Jew. Asinius' role in the elevation by the Roman Senate of Herod to the kingship of Judaea was no greater than that of any other magistrate. (shrink)

This paper has four roots. First, an increasing dissatisfaction over the gulf between classical and theological studies. Christianity in origin, after all, is a part of the story of the ancient world, and has to be seen in context. The context is complex: it is Judaea as part of the Hellenistic world under the rule of Rome: we ignore any part of that context at our peril. Classical scholars tend to be suspicious of those with theological interests: I was (...) forbidden by an examining board of the University of London to set the first verse of St John's Gospel for comment in a paper on Greek philosophy: they were being doctrinaire, not I. But equally some theologians have neglected the disciplined study of the ancient world. It would not be so bad if they left the context out; but instead they offer windy generalisations, secondhand, ill-based and false. Some corrective is needed. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Klio Jahrgang: 99 Heft: 2 Seiten: 566-585.

Le parchemin fiscal Mur 10, découvert dans les grottes du wadi Murabba‘ât, permet de montrer que, durant la révolte de Bar Kokhba (132‑135 de notre ère), des femmes étaient soumises à l’impôt. La chose est d’autant moins anodine que la relation des femmes à la fiscalité est complexe en Judée romaine (entre 6 et 135). Si les femmes sont plus tôt que les hommes contribuables de la fiscalité provinciale, elles sont au contraire en position de retrait pour ce qui concerne (...) le système fiscal du temple, dont le paiement constitue un élément identitaire du peuple juif. Le choix du rebelle d’astreindre les femmes au paiement est donc d’autant plus paradoxal, qu’en les plaçant comme sujettes (c’est le sens de l’imposition fiscale), il réduit l’inégalité structurelle entre hommes et femmes au regard de l’administration. (shrink)