The Age of Hellenism – 1 / Jews and Greeks

The Greco-Persian Wars

Several political factors emerged in the fifth century BCE to disturb the relative security of the Levant during the reign of Darius I (522–486 BCE). The first and foremost of these were the Greco-Persian wars, which began at the end of the sixth century and ended in 449 BCE with the Peace of Callias between Persia and Athens. Though Persia managed to retain most of its holdings in the Levant during this struggle, the turmoil created among the local population was intense. So uncertain was the outcome of these wars in the fifth century that Egypt and Babylonia both sought to reestablish a degree of independence. The Babylonians succeeded in breaking away from the Persian satrapy of Beyond-the-River (which stretched from the Euphrates river in the east to the Mediterranean in the west and included Judah) in 481 BCE, and Egypt began its satrapies revolt in 464 BCE, sensing an opportune moment to reassert its power. The Egyptian attempt at independence was unsuccessfully supported by the Greek military.

The end result of these activities was the reassertion in several ways of Persian military control over local areas. First, the Persians constructed numerous fortresses on both sides of the Jordan River to control the major trade routes that linked Mesopotamia and Egypt. The fortresses were maintained by imperial garrisons charged with preventing the local populace from joining the Greek forces. Second, the existing road system was also strengthened to serve the political needs of the Persian government. Some of the most important reverberations of these momentous events are reflected in the oracles of Second Zechariah (Zechariah 9–14) envisioning the destruction of Israel’s enemies and the restoration of Zion. In the Greek tragedy The Persians, Aeschylus captures the poignant response of the Greeks to these events.

Alexander

Alexander the Great changed the face of Judea along with the rest of the then-known world. He reigned as emperor from 356 to 323. BCE In 336 BCE he became king of Macedonia and of the Greek city-states conquered by his father, Philip II. Within a decade he defeated the Persians and fell heir to their empire.

Early in that decade, in 332 BCE, he conquered Judea, a conquest that was to have profound and far-reaching effects on Jewish history. Conquest itself was nothing new to the Jews; Judea had been subjugated on numerous occasions. This time the conqueror came from the West, rather than the East (as had Assyria, Babylonia and Persia). Two factors made Alexander’s conquest indeed historic: The first is cultural; the second, geographic. The Greeks were interested not only in military victories, political expansion and economic gain; they were also committed to disseminating their way of life—their institutions, norms and ideas—to the world of the barbarians (as they called non-Greeks). In addition to political hegemony and imposition of taxes, Greek conquest exposed the eastern Mediterranean lands and beyond to an entirely different way of life—Hellenism.

Perhaps the most effective means by which Hellenism was propagated in new regions was by founding a Greek city, or by reconstituting an already existing city as a polis. Either step carried with it political, religious, social and cultural ramifications. The polis operated politically under a Greek constitution, a Greek deities were introduced into the city’s pantheon, and Greek educational and entertainment institutions were established. Within a century of Alexander’s conquest of Judea, Greek cities were founded along the Mediterranean coast, as well as inland at Beth-Shean and Samaria, and to the East in Transjordan. These cities served as centers of Greek life and influence and reinforced one another through joint commercial, cultural and athletic enterprises.

Judea’s Key Location

The geographic consequences of Alexander’s conquest deeply affected the course of Israel’s history. In previous conquests Israel had invariably remained at the periphery of world empires, far from seats of power and authority. Its marginal geographic location assured the Jews a measure of stability and insulation. But with the death of Alexander in 323 BCE and the breakup of his empire, Judea was thrown into the vortex of political and military activity. Geographically sandwiched between two poles of power—the Seleucid kingdom based in Syria and the Ptolemaic kingdom of Egypt, the capital of which was Alexandria—Judea served as a battlefield on which the Seleucids and the Ptolemies faced one another for the next century. No fewer than five major wars were fought between Egypt and Syria during the third century BCE, each lasting for at least several years. Garrison troops were posted all over Judea (including Jerusalem), and large armies were stationed throughout the country.

Either factor—exposure to Hellenistic culture or geographic centrality—would have been unsettling under any circumstances. But for the Jews of Judea these factors were wrenching, because in the centuries immediately preceding the conquest these Jews had lived in a kind of splendid isolation. When Persia ruled the world, Cyrus maintained a policy of actively supporting ethnic and religious groups, encouraging them to rebuild their institutions and develop their indigenous traditions. Naturally, Jewish leaders welcomed this policy with open arms. The Persians had demanded only political loyalty and the payment of taxes. The district of Judea, or Yehud, consisted of a small area around Jerusalem that was far removed from the main cities and international highways of the country. Its location guaranteed it relative isolation from the surrounding world—geographically, socially and religiously.

 Thus it is not surprising that, following Alexander’s conquest, Judea’s inundation by Ptolemaic government officials, merchants, soldiers and others was traumatic for many Jews. Jerusalem was no longer able to remain insulated from the outside world.

Many of Jerusalem’s inhabitants welcomed this change. The opportunities and attractiveness afforded by other cultures were not to be denied. The silver coins minted by the Jerusalem authorities between about 300 and 250 BCE provide a striking expression of the positive response of the city’s Jewish political leadership to Hellenistic influence. These coins bear representations of the Egyptian ruler Ptolemy I, his wife Berenike and an eagle—the symbol of Ptolemaic hegemony. The presence of these motifs on Jewish coins is a clear attestation of a desire, at least by some, for successful integration into the new world order.

A further example of the ties between Jerusalem’s ruling elite and the wider Hellenistic world is documented in the correspondence between the Jewish High Priest Onias II and Areus, king of Sparta, around 270 BCE. According to 1 Maccabees (12:5–23) and Josephus, a bond was forged between the citizens of Jerusalem and the people of Sparta, who saw themselves as descendants of Abraham and who sought to forge an alliance with Jerusalem. The text of the letter, as reported by 1 Maccabees 12:20–23, reads:

Areus, King of Sparta, to Onias, the High Priest, greetings. A document has been discovered concerning the Spartans and Jews that they are brothers and that they are both of the seed of Abraham. And now, since these matters have become known to us, please write us concerning your welfare. We in turn write to you that your cattle and property are ours, and whatever belongs to us is yours. We have ordered that you be given a full report on these matters.

The practical ramifications of this letter are unknown, but some 125 years later Jonathan the Hasmonean renewed these ties. It is also noteworthy that between these two instances of correspondence, Jason, the former high priest, sought refuge in Sparta (2 Maccabees 5:9), clearly indicating some sort of tie between these cities. While scholars differ as to the authenticity of the third-century BCE epistle, there nevertheless seems to have been some sort of connection between the two cities that would attest to the political-diplomatic integration of Jerusalem into the wider Hellenistic world.

In the various excavations conducted in Jerusalem over the years, more than 1,000 jar handles bearing the official stamp of Rhodes have been discovered. Based on the names of Rhodian priests inscribed on them, these handles are dated from the late fourth to the first century BCE, with most dating from the mid-third to the mid-second century BCE. These jars were used for wine imported throughout the eastern Mediterranean. Clearly, the inhabitants of Jerusalem imported Rhodian wine for their use; the assumption sometimes made that the wine was intended for the small pagan garrison in the city is most unlikely. On the other hand, it is likewise improbable that these finds attest to a wholesale rejection of the laws of idolatrous wine intended to distance Jews from anything associated with pagan cults. It is much more likely that such prohibitions did not as yet exist, and that many Jerusalemites availed themselves of this luxury commodity. Once again, archaeological remains point to the integration of Jerusalem in the wider Hellenistic world, this time with regard to international trade.

Nevertheless, it should be noted that other wine-jar handles discovered in the city point to a more conservative dimension of Jerusalem society. There were several types of locally made jar handles—one with the inscription Yehud in ancient Hebrew script and another with a five-pointed star inscribed with the word “Jerusalem.” These stamps emphasize the Jewish component of the city and were probably used for taxed goods and administrative purposes. Or they may indicate the place where the jar or its contents originated.