Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World:

Cultural Synthesis or Dissonance?

Rebecca Nicole Garcia

Studies in World Religions

Professor Larson

April 8, 2013

Garcia 2

In antiquity, or more specifically Second Temple Judaism,

Jews and Gentiles were frequently in contact with each other.

Considering that, after the Babylonian Exile in the 6th Century

BCE, many Jews lived in the diaspora and had much contact with

Gentiles. Gentiles, conversely, were made aware of the Jews’

practices and “particularities.” It should then come as no

surprise that each group, generally speaking, had contrasting

views of the “other.” It ought to be expected that some Jews,

and perhaps Gentiles, adopted practices from each other, forming

a unique “cultural synthesis.” There were several ways to

classify someone as a “Jew;” it could have been religious,

ethnic, or geographic in meaning. Ergo, there does not appear to

have been a “catch-all” definition for Jews in antiquity. Some

Jews and Jewish cities were quite Hellenized (i.e. they were not

entirely “Jewish”). This may create some concern, since it means

that the relationship of Jews and Gentiles was not commonly

understood. Usually, however, it seems that it was fairly easy

to classify someone as a “Gentile.” They were individuals who

were not “Jews,” or rather those who were not a part of the

covenant between God and Abraham. It appears that it would have

then been much simpler to say someone was a Gentile, as opposed

to a Jew. The following paragraphs will explicate the varying

degrees of the Jews’ assimilation into Graeco-Roman society,

including in the city of Alexandria. They will also comment on

the various ways in which the word Ioudaios, Judaean, could have

been understood by insiders and outsiders and what it meant for

the interaction between Jews and Gentiles.

In general, it seems that it was possible to adhere to the

principles of Judaism and Greek cultural norms.1 It was feasible

to be assimilated into Greek society, while being a believing Jew

at the same time. For the purposes of this paper, the term

“assimilation” will be defined as “social integration into non-

Jewish society.”2 This is not to say, though, that throughout

the ancient world, Jews were equally assimilated into Graeco-

Roman society. Some were highly

Garcia 3

assimilated into said society, but others were not.

An example of high assimilation may be observed in Dositheos

son of Drimylos.3 Dositheos was highly assimilated into Graeco-

Roman society. As a result of this, he renounced his religion

(Judaism) to achieve the highest position in the Alexandrian

court.4 According to 3 Maccabees 1:3, “…Dositheus… son of

Drimylus, a Jew by birth who later changed his religion and

apostatized from the ancestral traditions…”5 A letter from the

“Zenon Archive” notes that Dositheos was the hypomnematographos,

the “grand archivist” or “memorandum writer.”6 That is, he had a

fairly high rank within Alexandrian society.7 Given this,

letters written to Dositheos need not mention his title; they

could simply say “Dositheos” (it would have been superfluous to

mention his rank).8

Dositheos’ importance in Alexandrian society, howbeit, was

not limited to politics. Dositheos became a priest of the cult

of Alexander and of the “deified Ptolemies.”9 According to the

Hibeh Papyrus I 90, “In the twenty-fifth year of the reign of

Ptolemy… and Arsinoe the gods Adelphoi, when Dositheos son of

Drimylos was priest of Alexander and the gods Adelphoi and the

gods Euergetai…”10 In other words, Dositheos was an eponymous

priest, one of the highest attainable honors in the king’s

service.11 This was not an issue for the Greeks, being that

there was no obligation to be converted.12 In the context of the

3rd Century BCE, the notion of converting to paganism was

anachronistic (paganism was the norm).13 For Jews, the opposite

was true. In Judaism, it was not possible to reconcile the

Jewish faith and the holding of a pagan priestly office.14 One

was either a faithful Jew or not. Blatantly, the case of

Dositheos was one in which Jewish assimilation into Graeco-Roman

society stood in opposition to Judaism itself (e.g. obliterating

the First Commandment). Whereas the Greeks saw it as entirely

normal and acceptable, the Jews perceived it as abhorrent.

Garcia 4

From the Jewish point of view, not all assimilated Jews were

quite so abominable. A corresponding individual was Demetrios

who adopted Greek rationalism, yet remained faithful to

Judaism.15 As a Greek thinker, Demetrios should have considered

the Torah to be a mythological work, but because he was an ardent

Jew, he accepted it in its entirety.16 Consequently, he took it

upon himself to recount the Jews’ sacred history as fact.17

Demetrios accomplished this via the “scientific language of

numbers.”18 He chronologically recounted several Biblical

stories, such as Jacob’s posterity.19 While he may have been

unaware of it, Demetrios appears to have been the precursor of

traditional Jewish chronology.20 It then seems unlikely that

orthodox Jews would have viewed Hellenized Jews, akin to

Demetrios, as detestable. Demetrios and others analogous to him,

however, do not appear to have been highly assimilated into Pagan

society, but mediumly assimilated. Jews who were mediumly

assimilated into Graeco-Roman society had considerable social

ties to the Gentile world, yet were able to maintain their Jewish

identity.21 This may have been the most preferable level of

assimilation, since it allowed individuals to be both Jewish and

Gentile, neither one interfering with the other.

There was another type of assimilation, low assimilation.

Lowly assimilated Jews had minimal contact with Gentiles.22 The

Therapeutae were such a group. They were a Jewish community

composed of male and female philosophers, who resided near

Alexandria.23 The Therapeutae were an ascetic community, whose

members were separated by gender (i.e. the Therapeutic women sat

with other Therapeutic women and vice versa for the men).24 Even

though they did not frequently come into contact with non-Jews,

they appear to have become acculturated to some Gentile

practices. This may be best noted in their practice of gender-

segregated seating during their weekly communal meeting.25 The

aforenoted was observed in the Graeco-Roman world (e.g. at the

Greek Theatre), but was also employed by mainstream Jews

Garcia 5

(i.e. orthodox Judaean Jews).26 For instance, women could not

enter the Inner Courts when visiting the Second Temple (these

were restricted to men). Regardless, the Therapeutae do not

necessarily seem to have had much friction with Gentiles, despite

their living in Alexandria. Therefore, this form of assimilation

was probably the most sanctioned by Jews.

Hellenic Jews were not only in existence in Alexandria; they

resided in Jerusalem as well. During the Second Temple Period,

much of Judaea and its residents were Hellenized. For example,

it is plain to see the presence of foreign influences in the

practice of minting coins (a non-Jewish practice).27 Nearly all

of these recovered coins feature Pagan symbols, such as the

Athenian owl, the Ptolemaic eagle, a winged deity, and so

forth.28 Even the literature composed and/or edited during this

period appears to reflect Graeco-Roman ideas, including Ecclesiastes

and the Song of Songs.29 Some Second Temple literature seems to

have been produced in opposition to Hellenization, for instance,

Ben Sira and Jubilees, yet they too feature some non-Jewish

tendencies.30 This is akin to the Hasmonaeans’ adoption of

certain Graeco-Roman practices, but repugnance of others.31

The Hasmonaean revolt has oft been thought of as a protest

against Hellenization, but in reality they appear to have

revolted because of the persecutions and “instigations of radical

Jewish Hellenizers.”32 They soon adopted Hellenistic manners,

including the institution of holidays that celebrate military

victories (e.g. Nicanor Day on the 13th of Adar), signing

treaties with Rome, and forging close alliances with Jerusalem’s

upper class.33 In the second Hasmonaean generation, they began

adopting Greek names in conjunction with their Hebrew ones (e.g.

John Hyrcanus).34 Further, burial mounds and graves from said

period reflect Hellenic customs.35 To this day, the two main

“Graeco-Jewish” funeraries are the priestly Bnei Ḥezir tomb to

the east of the city and Jason’s tomb which is located in the

west.36 Both of these were

Garcia 6

constructed in a Hellenistic style; the former with a Doric

façade and the latter with a single Doric column and pyramid-type

monument.37 The Hasmonaean Hellenization does not end here; it

extends to other areas of life as well. The coins minted in the

Hasmonaean era are a prime example of cultural synthesis,

particularly the ones from Alexander Jannaeus’ time onward.38

These coins bear Hebrew and Greek inscriptions.39 In Greek, the

coins feature the ruler’s Greek name and his Greek title, basileus

(king).40 In Hebrew, they bear the Hebrew name of the ruler

(e.g. Judah) and the title “high priest” or “king.”41 It seems

that the Hasmonaean rulers lived comfortably within the Jewish

and Graeco-Roman worlds.42 Subsequently, this “syncretistic

lifestyle” appears to have been the message that they wanted to

send to their people via their coins.43 They wanted their people

to be both Jewish and Greek, not feeling any sense of reprobation

towards either one. It would then seem that the Hasmonaeans were

quite assimilated into Graeco-Roman society and wished the same

for their plebeians.

Much like the Jews’ assimilation varied in the ancient

world, the term Ioudaios varied in its usage and understanding.

The English word “Jew” is derived from the Greek term Ioudaios,

but the latter designation does not necessarily have the same

connotations as its English counterpart.44 The word “Jew” is

commonly understood as a religious term, while at other times, it

can have an ethnic nuance.45 It is rarely presumed to be,

outside of the state of Israel, a political term, much less a

geographic one.46 In antiquity, Ioudaios was primarily understood

as an ethnic-geographic term, denoting the eponymous dwellers of

Ioudaia, Judaea (not unlike the word “Egyptian”).47 Prior to the

2nd Century BCE, evidence suggests that Ioudaios was thought of as

an ethnic-geographic term, only later did it come to have

religious and political overtones.48 When it is understood as an

ethnic-geographic term, Ioudaios appears to be best translated as

“Judaean,” not “Jew.”49 Perhaps in contrast to “logic,” this

term was also applied to Judaeans

Garcia 7

who lived in the diaspora; it was not restricted to those who

lived in Ioudaia.50 The geographic aspect of the term Ioudaios was

abated for diaspora Judaeans, but often times it retained said

component.51 According to Philo, Jerusalem is the “mother city

of Judaeans throughout the world [and] the diaspora is a series

of colonies sent out from the mother country.”52

Considering that Ioudaios’ geographic connotation was

attenuated in the diaspora, this means that its ethnic overtone

was at the forefront.53 For instance, the emperor Claudius

addressed diaspora Jews as “the Judaeans in Alexandria,” even

referring to them as a unique nation.54 A considerable number of

scholars believe that some or all of the Alexandrian Jews made up

an ethnic corporation.55 Several inscriptions note “the ethnic

corporation of the Judaeans in Berenike.”56 In various places,

Greek diaspora Jews called their community laos, the people.57 It

seems that laos was “an ethnic self-designation.”58 This implies

that insiders (Judaeans) and outsiders (Gentiles) understood

Ioudaios to be an ethnic term. In fact, its ethnic nuance was so

paramount that Judaeans and Pagans had a notion that all Ioudaioi,

regardless of geography, were somehow a part of a single group.59

In addition to Ioudaios’ geographic and ethnic aspects, it had

religious as well as cultural understandings. These definitions

appear to have developed at a later time. Religiously speaking,

a Ioudaios is an individual “who believes certain distinctive

tenets, and/or follows certain distinctive practices.”60 A

Ioudaios is someone who worships Yahweh and follows the Jews’

lifestyle (e.g. keeping the Sabbath, male circumcision, a Kosher

diet, κτλ.).61 In Josephus’ account of the conversion of the

royal house of Adiabene, Izates comments that it is impossible to

be a Ioudaios without circumcision.62 Izates’ mother tells him

that his populace will not tolerate rule by a Judaean king.63

Here, the ethnic-geographic component of Ioudaios is absent; it is

commenting on conversion to Judaism and thus only its religious

definition is highlighted.64

Garcia 8

In another Josephan account, Ioudaios’ religious connotation is

present: “… [Felix] sent to… [Drusilla] one of his friends, a

Ioudaios named Atomos, a Cyprian by birth.”65 In this case, it is

possible to be a Ioudaios, religious-wise, and a Gentile, a

Cyprian, in the ethnic-geographic sense.66 This means that one

could be, religiously, a Jew, and, ethnically, a Pagan. Atomos

was born in Cyprus (i.e. was a Cyprian) and converted to the

Jewish religion, becoming a “Cyprian Jew.” In the Roman Empire,

communities of diaspora Jews were usually dubbed synagōgē

(“community,” “congregation”), as opposed to the ethnic terms

that had been used earlier.67 This reveals a “change of

emphasis,” from characterizing Jewish communities as ethnic

groups, to branding them as private religious associations.68

This did not only occur in the diaspora. During the 2nd Century

BCE, the Judaeans of Judaea began to view themselves as a

religious community.69 Both Gentiles and the Jews themselves

began to understand Ioudaios as a religious appellation.

According to 2 Maccabees 6:6, “People could neither keep the

Sabbath, nor observe the festivals of their ancestors, nor so

much as confess themselves to be Jews.”70 In Greek, the word

“Jews” is Ioudaioi and most importantly, it seems to be used

religiously. Theoretically, it cannot refer to its ethnic-

geographic nuance, Judaean; why would Antiochus have cared if

anyone “confessed to be a Judaean?”71 It appears that

individuals “could not declare themselves to be the practitioners

of the ancestral laws, the laws of Yahweh.”72 2 Maccabees 6:10

notes that two women were executed for circumcising their sons,

for following the ancestral laws.73 Circumcision was one of

Antiochus’ proscriptions, and as such he prevented people from

“confessing themselves to be Jews.”74 Ancestral laws were not

unique to the Jews; all ancient people had “ancestral laws,

customs, practices, and beliefs.”75 At any rate, the Jews were

different from others in that their ancestral laws were a part of

Judaean identity.76 Confessing to

Garcia 9

be a Jew was more than circumcision and the observance of

ancestral laws.77 According to 2 Maccabees 6:1, “… The Jews…

live by the laws of God.”78 In other words, being a Ioudaios also

included believing in Yahweh, the one true God, the God who

created the heavens and the earth.79 This then suggests that

Ioudaios in 2 Maccabees 6:6 had a religious meaning, Jew, and was

the first instance of said usage.80

Merely because Antiochus, a Gentile, was rather hostile to

the Ioudaioi, does not mean that all Gentiles viewed and/or

treated them in the forenamed manner. The ancient Greek

historian, Hecataeus of Abdera, provided a different take of

Second Temple Judaism.81 Despite the fact that Hecataeus

characterized Moses’ way of life as “unsociable and

unhospitable,” his account of Judaism was generally amicable.82

He depicted Judaism as “a religion of the law.”83 Hecataeus

tended to favor Judaism, for its laws were similar to those of

Egypt (he preferred Egyptian laws over those of the Greeks).84

He remarked on the humanitarian aspects of the laws, including

the protection of the poor and the persistence that children be

raised, not exposed.85 Even when the Jews destroyed Pagan

temples, Hecataeus praised them for doing so.86 He believed that

Jewish priests had gained their leadership because of “superior

wisdom,” and were hence assigned with guiding the nation along

with preserving Moses’ “unchangeable laws.”87 The plebeians were

busy at husbandry and had “equal and inalienable plots of

land.”88 This in turn barred the formation of large estates and

thus revolution.89 In some respects, however, Hecataeus was

utterly Greek. He believed that Moses, like other lawgivers

(e.g. Zoroaster), purported to have received his laws from God,

so as to secure the populace’s obedience.90 The High Priest

followed Moses’ example and presented his edicts as “divine

revelations.”91 Since the Jews had been brought up in this

manner, there existed individuals who declined to change their

laws and chose to suffer death, instead of transgressing their

ancestral customs.92 For

Garcia 10

Hecataeus, Judaism had a sociological role; religious fiction is

the “indispensable foundation of the state.”93 Although he and

others analogous to him admired Judaism’s laws, the fact is that

they had an unfavorable view of religion in general. This would

have rattled Ioudaioi to the core.

It is blatant that “Jewishness” varied in the ancient world,

be it in terms of assimilation or understanding. There were

highly, mediumly, and lowly assimilated Jews, producing a range

of “atheistic” to “syncretistic” types of Judaism.

Correspondingly, these “Graeco-Jewish” individuals were each

deemed differently by mainstream Jews. Even mainstream Jews seem

to have become Hellenized. This is observed in a wide array of

artifacts and the like from the ancient word, including

archaeological remains and literature. Their names, even

Hasmonaean ones, demonstrate the extent of the Jewish adoption of

Hellenic customs. Just as the Jews’ assimilation varied, so did

the meaning of the word Ioudaios. In the early days, Ioudaios

appears to have been an ethnic-geographic term, akin to saying

that an individual was Syrian, for instance. Later, it began to

take on religious overtones. Ioudaios was then understood to

refer to someone who believed in, for example, Yahweh, not

someone whose ancestors were from Judaea. This “shift,”

presumably, caused Gentiles to react in varying ways. Some, such

as Antiochus, were quite hostile to Judaism and wished for

Ioudaioi to become Greek pagans. Others, like Hecataeus, had a

favorable view of Judaism, but had a distinctly philosophical

view of religion (i.e. that it was a fictitious, social

construct). Consequently, it would seem that even though

millennia have transpired, much has not necessarily changed.

Jews’ assimilation into “Pagan” society still varies, Ioudaios can

be ethnic and/or religious in meaning, anti-Semitism continues to

exist, and religion is still deemed to be a “social construct.”

While this does not mean that change cannot occur, it seems to

reinforce the adage that “the more things change, the more they

are the same.”94

Garcia 11

Notes

11. Joseph Mélèze Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt: From Ramses II to Emperor Hadrian (Princeton: Princeton UP, 1995), 56.2

32. John M.G. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora: From Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE – 117 CE) (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1996), 1.

3. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 56.

4. Ibid.4

55. 3 Macc. 1:3 (New Revised Standard Version).6

6. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 57.7

7. Ibid, 59. 8

8. Ibid.9

9. Ibid., 60.

1010. Ibid.11

11. Ibid.12

12. Ibid.13

13. Ibid.14

14. Ibid., 61.

1515. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 56.

1616. Ibid., 63.17

17. Ibid.18

18. Ibid. 1919. Ibid.

20

20. Ibid., 65. 21

21. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 112.22Garcia 12

22. Ibid., 117.23

23. Ross Shepard Kraemer and Mary Rose D’Angelo, eds., Women & Christian Origins (New York: Oxford UP, 1999), 51. 24

24. Ibid., 64.25

25. Ibid., 65. 26

26. Ibid.27

27. Lee I. Levine, Judaism & Hellenism in Antiquity: Conflict or Confluence? (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1998), 37-38. 28

28. Ibid. 29

29. Ibid.30

30. Ibid., 38-39.31

31. Ibid., 40.32

32. Ibid., 39-40.33

33. Ibid., 40.34

34. Ibid., 41.35

35. Ibid. 36

36. Ibid. 37

37. Ibid. 38

38. Ibid., 42.39

39. Ibid. 40

40. Ibid., 42-43. 41

41. Ibid. 43.42

42. Ibid.

4343. Ibid. 44Garcia 13

44. Shaye J.D. Cohen, The Beginnings of Jewishness: Boundaries, Varieties, Uncertainties (Berkley: University of California Press, 1999), 69.45

45. Ibid.

4646. Ibid.47

47. Ibid.

4848. Ibid., 70.49

49. Ibid., 72. 50

50. Ibid., 73.51

51. Ibid.52

52. Ibid.53

53. Ibid., 74.54

54. Ibid.55

55. Ibid.56

56. Ibid.57

57. Ibid.58

58. Ibid.59

59. Ibid., 75.

60. Ibid., 78-79.

60 61. Ibid., 79.

6162. Ibid.62

6363. Ibid.64

64. Ibid.65

65. Ibid.66

Garcia 14

66. Ibid. 67

67. Ibid., 80.68

68. Ibid.69

69. Ibid., 80-81.

7070. 2 Macc. 6:6.71

71. Cohen, The Beginnings of Jewishness, 91.72

72. Ibid. 73

73. 2 Macc. 6:10. 74

74. Cohen, The Beginnings of Jewishness, 91.75

75. Ibid., 92.76

76. Ibid.77

77. Ibid. 78

78. 2 Macc. 6:1.79

79. Cohen, The Beginnings of Jewishness, 92.80

80. Ibid., 93.81

81. John Joseph Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem: Jewish Identity in theHellenistic Diaspora (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2000), 155.82

82. Ibid., 156.83

83. Ibid.84

84. Ibid.85

85. Ibid. 86

86. Ibid., 157.87

87. Elias J. Bickerman, The Jews in the Greek Age (Cambridge: HarvardUP, 1988), 17.88

Garcia 15

88. Ibid.89

89. Ibid.90

90. Ibid.91

91. Ibid. 92

92. Ibid. 93

93. Ibid.

94. Gary Martin, “English Proverbs,” Phrases, Sayings, Idioms and Expressions at the Phrase Finder, Accessed March 30, 2013, http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/proverbs.html.

Garcia 16

Bibliography

Barclay, John M.G. Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora: From Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE

– 117 CE). Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1996.

Bickerman, Elias J. The Jews in the Greek Age. Cambridge: Harvard UP,

1988.

Cohen, Shaye J.D. The Beginnings of Jewishness: Boundaries, Varieties, Uncertainties.Berkley: University of California Press, 1999).

Collins, John Joseph. Between Athens and Jerusalem: Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic

Diaspora. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2000.

Kraemer, Ross Shepard, and Mary Rose D’Angelo, eds. Women & Christian Origins. New

York: Oxford UP, 1999.

Levine, Lee I. Judaism and Hellenism in Antiquity: Conflict or Confluence? Seattle:

University of Washington Press, 1998.

Martin, Gary. “English Proverbs.” Phrases, Sayings, Idioms and Expressions at the Phrase

Finder. Accessed March 30, 2013.

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/proverbs.html.

Modrzejewski, Joseph Mélèze. The Jews of Egypt: From Ramses II to Emperor Hadrian.

Princeton: Princeton UP, 1995.

94