Diaspora : Jews amidst Greeks and Romans,

Rating:
Summary: 3.4 stars; Exile can be fun
Review: Erich Gruen's book on the Diaspora offers a major new reinterpretation of the Jewish experiences from Alexander the Great to the Jewish rebellion of 66 CE. Historically, both Othodox and Zionist Jews view the diaspora as a curse, whose denizens are perenially threatened by anti-Semitism. Gruen argues a rather different case. Jews, the vast majority of whom lived outside of Palestine, thrived in the diaspora. While taking advantages of the symposiums and civic institutions of the Hellenic and Roman worlds, they also established a plethora of synagogues and regularly paid the half-shekel temple tax to Jerusalem. By examining certain deuterocanonical and apocryphal works of literature, Gruen finds a confident sense of humor. There was no contemporary angst and agony over the diaspora.

It is important to contrast this book with Seth Schwartz's recent "Imperialism and Jewish Society," which argued for the weakness of Judaism in Palestine. Schwartz's book was based mostly on archaeological evidence, and said little about the diaspora. Except for a discussion of the plentiful arhcaeological evidence for synagogues, much of Gruen's work is based on analysis and interpretation of texts. These consist of the limited number of comments made by Romans on the Jews; Philo's account of the pogroms in Alexandra c. 40 CE; Josephus' collection of historical materials on Jewish defense of their rights, and discusssions of books such as Esther, Judith, Tobit and other books.

It is important to point out the limitations of such evidence. It tells us little about what the majority of Jews in the diaspora actually did for a living. We have mentions of the orthodoxy of Jews by Josephus and Philo, virtually the only two Jewish sources we know by name, and we have confirming mention when Romans noted Jewish customs and found them risible. But Romans and Greeks would not normally find Jewish apostasy worthy of mention, and Jewish sources might not draw attention to it. Some of Gruen's evidence is convincing. It probably is anachronistic to describe Roman society as "Anti-Semitic." To use an analogy Romans viewed Jews the way many Americans view Jehovah's Witness or the Amish; with some contempt and as fundamentally amusing, but not with malice. Gruen is also interesting on Josephus' collection of materials on Asian Jews. The frequent missives and pleas for support reflect less a constant fear of persecution, than the civil strife of first century BCE Rome, where constant shifts of power led Jews to ask the new rulers to respect their privileges. There are also interesting insights about sacral and civic institutions: Surprisingly enough, Philo was a considerable fan of the Alexandrian games.

Gruen's chapters on Jewish humor are less succesful. He starts off well, with a discussion of the many comedic elements in the Book of Esther. But then Esther is not that important a book, and Purim has always been more of a holiday than a holy day. But Gruen's discussion of other books, Tobit, Judith, and II Maccabees shows a certain tendentiousness, as he clearly strains to find humor. In his discussion of Susanna, he makes much of the silences of the text to try to bring humorous ambiguity into the text. But this ignores a key element of Biblical literature; its terseness. And when Gruen seeks to find a humorous element in Sarah's rudeness towards her maid in Tobit, he may simply be ignoring the general callousness towards servants and slaves in Hellenic times. If not well known to Protestants, Judith and Tobit have been considered holy scripture for millenia. It is one thing to argue that Jews and Christians have misinterpreted scriptures because of their theological biases. It is another to argue that they can't tell the difference between a didactic tale, and humorous anecdotes. Gruen also has a tendency to argue from silences and ambiguities in the text. But the books were not written by modernist authors; indeed they may not have been written by a single author at all, but has gone through a complex series of authors and editings, while working with legendary material. This leads to a larger problem: it is not simply that Gruen's portrait of a benign disapora ends before the brutal suppresion of the Jewish revolt, and several other revolts until the 130s. There is the problem that Gruen portrays a diaspora that is suprisingly similar to the one we have today. In both times Jews are clearly and distinctively Jewish, supportive and sympathetic of Israel, but at the same time they are also loyal citizens of their countries and active members of the community. Perhaps. But there are good reasons to be suspicious of such coincidences; I don't think this is a case of deja vu all over again.

Rating:
Summary: 3.4 stars; Exile can be fun
Review: Erich Gruen's book on the Diaspora offers a major new reinterpretation of the Jewish experiences from Alexander the Great to the Jewish rebellion of 66 CE. Historically, both Othodox and Zionist Jews view the diaspora as a curse, whose denizens are perenially threatened by anti-Semitism. Gruen argues a rather different case. Jews, the vast majority of whom lived outside of Palestine, thrived in the diaspora. While taking advantages of the symposiums and civic institutions of the Hellenic and Roman worlds, they also established a plethora of synagogues and regularly paid the half-shekel temple tax to Jerusalem. By examining certain deuterocanonical and apocryphal works of literature, Gruen finds a confident sense of humor. There was no contemporary angst and agony over the diaspora.

It is important to contrast this book with Seth Schwartz's recent "Imperialism and Jewish Society," which argued for the weakness of Judaism in Palestine. Schwartz's book was based mostly on archaeological evidence, and said little about the diaspora. Except for a discussion of the plentiful arhcaeological evidence for synagogues, much of Gruen's work is based on analysis and interpretation of texts. These consist of the limited number of comments made by Romans on the Jews; Philo's account of the pogroms in Alexandra c. 40 CE; Josephus' collection of historical materials on Jewish defense of their rights, and discusssions of books such as Esther, Judith, Tobit and other books.

It is important to point out the limitations of such evidence. It tells us little about what the majority of Jews in the diaspora actually did for a living. We have mentions of the orthodoxy of Jews by Josephus and Philo, virtually the only two Jewish sources we know by name, and we have confirming mention when Romans noted Jewish customs and found them risible. But Romans and Greeks would not normally find Jewish apostasy worthy of mention, and Jewish sources might not draw attention to it. Some of Gruen's evidence is convincing. It probably is anachronistic to describe Roman society as "Anti-Semitic." To use an analogy Romans viewed Jews the way many Americans view Jehovah's Witness or the Amish; with some contempt and as fundamentally amusing, but not with malice. Gruen is also interesting on Josephus' collection of materials on Asian Jews. The frequent missives and pleas for support reflect less a constant fear of persecution, than the civil strife of first century BCE Rome, where constant shifts of power led Jews to ask the new rulers to respect their privileges. There are also interesting insights about sacral and civic institutions: Surprisingly enough, Philo was a considerable fan of the Alexandrian games.

Gruen's chapters on Jewish humor are less succesful. He starts off well, with a discussion of the many comedic elements in the Book of Esther. But then Esther is not that important a book, and Purim has always been more of a holiday than a holy day. But Gruen's discussion of other books, Tobit, Judith, and II Maccabees shows a certain tendentiousness, as he clearly strains to find humor. In his discussion of Susanna, he makes much of the silences of the text to try to bring humorous ambiguity into the text. But this ignores a key element of Biblical literature; its terseness. And when Gruen seeks to find a humorous element in Sarah's rudeness towards her maid in Tobit, he may simply be ignoring the general callousness towards servants and slaves in Hellenic times. If not well known to Protestants, Judith and Tobit have been considered holy scripture for millenia. It is one thing to argue that Jews and Christians have misinterpreted scriptures because of their theological biases. It is another to argue that they can't tell the difference between a didactic tale, and humorous anecdotes. Gruen also has a tendency to argue from silences and ambiguities in the text. But the books were not written by modernist authors; indeed they may not have been written by a single author at all, but has gone through a complex series of authors and editings, while working with legendary material. This leads to a larger problem: it is not simply that Gruen's portrait of a benign disapora ends before the brutal suppresion of the Jewish revolt, and several other revolts until the 130s. There is the problem that Gruen portrays a diaspora that is suprisingly similar to the one we have today. In both times Jews are clearly and distinctively Jewish, supportive and sympathetic of Israel, but at the same time they are also loyal citizens of their countries and active members of the community. Perhaps. But there are good reasons to be suspicious of such coincidences; I don't think this is a case of deja vu all over again.