The Status of the Jews in Ptolemaic and Roman Egypt: New Light
from the Papyri Author(s): Angelo Segr Source: Jewish Social
Studies, Vol. 6, No. 4 (Oct., 1944), pp. 375-400 Published by:
Indiana University Press Stable URL:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4464616 Accessed: 17/09/2010 16:52Your
use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms
and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's
Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have
obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of
a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content
in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this
work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=iupress.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same
copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such
transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps
scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a
wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use
information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Indiana University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Jewish Social Studies.
http://www.jstor.org
THE STATUS OF THE JEWS IN PTOLEMAIC ROMAN EGYPT
AND
New Light from the Papyri*
By ANGELO SEGRE
Until comparatively recent times our knowledge of Jewish life in
Egypt under the Ptolemaic and Roman dispensations was derived
almost exclusively from literary sources-the Books of Maccabees,
Philo, Josephus and the like. During the past twenty-five years,
however, the spade of the excavator has brought to light a
considerable quantity of contemporary papyri from which it is
possible to recover a great deal of information concerning the
legal and civic status of Jews during these obscure periods and
also, in some measure, to reconstruct a picture both of the
political stressesto which they were subjected and of the political
aspirations which they evinced. The material has to be pieced
together from scattered fragments and tattered shreds, from a hint
here and an allusion there. In the process, many of our cherished
preconceptions may fall into the discard; a single* The principal
abbreviations employed in the notes are as follows: BGU-Aegyptische
Urkunden aus den koniglichen Museen zu Berlin (Berlin 1898 Sf.);
Juster-Juster, Jean, Les juifs dans l'empire romain. Leur condition
juridique, economique et sociale (Paris 1914); Schuerer-Schuerer,
Emil, Geschichte des jiidischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi,
4th ed. (Berlin 1901-11); Wilcken, Grundziige (or Chrestomathie)
-Mitteis, L., and Wilcken, U., eds., Grundziige und Chrestomathie
der Papyruskunde (Leipzig-Berlin 1912). Papyri are cited in the
familiar forms, listed in the last-named work, vol. i, pt. i, p.
xxv-xxviii. [The reader is asked to bear in mind that technical
terms, such as politeuma, prostagma, chrematistai, etc., are not
always susceptible of exact translation. The renderings here given
must therefore be regarded, in many cases, as mere approximations
for the benefit of the uninitiated. The original term has
invariably been added.-EDS.]
375
376
JEWISH
SOCIAL STUDIES
oblique reference may suddenly light up an entire institution or
enable us to trace more clearly the patterns of political
conditions hitherto obscure. The object of the following pages is
to present a digest of this new material, dovetailing it with that
which is already known and pointing out the necessary modifications
and corrections of time-honored views. The task, to be sure, is
laborious and tedious, but by no means unrewarding. We obtain new
and valuable information on the legal status of the Jews, the civic
constitution and fiscal organization of their coimmunity, their
cultural patterns and political ideologies, and on the attitude of
their neighbors towards them at one of the most important epochs of
their history. And through it all we begin to see, if only through
a glass darkly, what is in fact a prototype of the latter-day
Jewish struggle for emancipation and equality.
Civic Status Under the Ptolemies, the military colonists of
Egypt were usually considered to be nominally Greeks, although, in
point of fact, they belonged to a wide variety of ethnic groups.'
The Jews possessed, in addition, their own distinctive communal
organization (politeuma) ,2 but the religious basis upon which it
rested prevented any real assimilation or1The ethnic group
(ethnikon) did not necessarily coincide with the officially
recognized community (politeuma). See Bikerman, E., in Archiv fair
Papyrusforschung, vol. ix (1930), 23 et seq.; vol. xii (1936), 216
et seq.; Heichelheim, F. M., Auswdrtige Bevolkerung (Leipzig 1925)
p. 5 et seq. 2 Cf. Ruppel, W., "Politeuma," in Philologus, vol.
lxxxi (1926), 130 et seq.; Robert L., in Bulletin Corr. Hell., vol.
lix (1935), 428; Bikermann, E., Der Gott der Makkabder (Berlin
1937), p. 61 et seq.; id., Institutions des Seleucides (Paris
1938), p. 88 et seq.; Rostovtzeff, M. I., Social and Economic
History of the Hellenistic World (Oxford 1941), p. 1401; Otto W.,
and Bengston, H., "Zur geschichte des Niederganges des
Ptolemaerreiches" in Abhandlungen d. Wiss., Phil.-hist. Abt. N. F.
Heft xvii (Munich 1938), p. 68; Pringsheim, F., in Journal of
Egyptian Archaeology, vol. xxvi (1941), 147. On the Jewish
politeumata, see especially Schuerer, vol. iii, p. 42. The
inscription CIG, No. 5361, dating from 20 or 18 B.C.E., mentions
the politeuma of the Jews in Berenice, but since its members are
expressly distinguished from the ordinary citizens (politai), it
would appear that they did not enjoy citizenship in that
settlement; cf. Premerstein, A. von, in Sav. Zeitschrift, vol.
xlviii (1938), 468 et seq.
JEWS IN PTOLEMAIC AND ROMAN EGYPT
377
cultural syncretism with their non-Jewish neighbors. Contrary to
general belief, even in the metropolitan city of Alexandria the
hellenization of the Jews was but skin-deep, little more than a
veneer, and to all intents and purposes they remained a people
apart.3 In the earlier period, the civic status of the Jews seems
to have been approximately the same as that of the other military
colonists. The celebrated Letter of Aristeas,4for instance, quotes
a communication allegedly addressed by Ptolemy I Soter (305-285
B.C.E.) to the high Priest Eleazar, in which that monarch boasts
that his father employed Jewish captives in his army, "paid them
higher wages than usual" and, when the loyalty of their leaders had
been proved, put them in charge of garrisons. He himself, he adds,
adopted a similar attitude of benevolence, ransoming at his own
expense more than 100,000 captive Jews and paying them indemnities
for loss and damage suffered through mob violence. Under this
monarch's successor, Ptolemy II Philadelphus (285-247 B.C.E.) the
position of the Jews was even better. By this time, their loyalty
had been proved and the last traces of suspicion had vanished. Nor,
according to the evidence of the papyri, does there seem to have
been any change in the legal status of the Jews even under Ptolemy
IV Philopator (221-04 B.C.E.). True, that monarch attempted to
degrade them, but the incident appears to have been without
permanent significance. The details are recorded in the apocryphal
Third Book of Maccabees.5 In order to inflict a public stigma on
the Jewish nation, we read,6 Ptolemy posted a notice barring from
their own temples all who did not sacrifice to his gods, and
ordering all Jews to be registered among the laographoumenoi and
reduced to a state of servitude. Only those who were willing to be
initiated into the mysteries of Dionysus were to be3 On the basis
of an inscription of 1 B.C.E. or C.E., published by M. Norsa in
Bulletin de la Societe' Royale d'Alexandrie, vol. xxvi (1931), 243
et seq. Momigliano shows, in Aegyptus, vol. xii (1932), 171 et
seq., that the Jews of Leontopolis wvere indeed schismatic and
wholly hellenized. This, however, was an exception. Ay and large,
they spoke Greek, but their assimilation was purely superficial.4
?35.
5The Third Book of Maccabees was written at the beginning of the
second century B.C.E.; cf. the Hebrew edition by T. H. Gaster in
Sefarim Hizonim u-Meyuhasim (Tel Aviv 1935), vol. ii. The
persecution is dated after the battle of Raphia (217 B.C.E.). 8
2:27 et seq.
378
JEWISH
SOCIAL STUDIES
considered on an equal footing with the full-fledged citizens of
Alexandria. In a letter to his generals and enlisted men, Ptolemy
excused his attitude by asserting that he had been prepared all
along to confer on the Jews full Alexandrian citizenship and thus
to guarantee them permanent religious rights, but that they
themselves had opposed his designs and behaved as enemies of the
state.7 It was for that reason alone that he had instituted
measures against them. Nevertheless, says our record, as the result
of a miracle enacted in the hippodrome at Alexandria, when a herd
of elephants charged to trample the Jews had turned upon their
trainers,8 the volatile monarch changed his mind. The Jews were
freed, but a general registration of them was ordered.9 In order to
understand this narrative correctly, it is necessary to determine
the precise meaning of the term laographourmenoi. This is usually
rendered "persons liable to poll-tax," and it is assumed that
Ptolemy intended to subject the Jews to that form of impost. The
fact is, however, that laographia did not come to mean "poll-tax"
until the time of Nero, some two centuries later.'0 Throughout the
Ptolemaic age it meant simply "census." Hence, what our record
really indicates is that Ptolemy proposed to have the Jews
registered as laoi, that is, reduced from the status of Greeks to
that of the native Egyp73:21 et seq. 8 6:38. 9For such
registrations (apographai) in the Ptolemaic period cf. Wilcken,
Grundziige, p. 137 et seq., and the documents of the third century
B.C.E. printed by the same author in his Chrestomathie, pp. 198-99.
10The earlier name was laike syntaxis. Thus, in Papyrus Grenfell i
45 b, of 19-18 B.C.E., an Egyptian public cultivator registers
himself as "paying the syntaxis." Similarly, in Papyrus Michigan ii
121 recto, col. ii, 1.8 as also in Inv. Michigan 853-795 (48 C.E.)
and in PSI 902 i 7 et seq. (first cent. C.E.), laike syntaxis is
the term used for what was later called laographia. For further
examples of syntaxis in this sense, cf. Keyes, W., in American
Journal of Philology, vol. lii (1931), 263 et seq.; Wallace, S. L.,
Taxation, etc. (Princeton 1938), p. 129 et seq. Sometimes, to be
sure, the term denotes only a trade-tax, like the Byzantine
diagraphp (cf. the present writer in Byzantion, vol. xviii), but
that a poll-tax indeed existed in the third century B.C.E. is
attested by the express mention of an epikephalion in a papyrus of
235 B.C.E. (Pap. Tebt. iii, 1 701, 186) and in another (Pap.
Petrie, vol. iii, p. 174, n. 59b), from Arsinoites, which contains
a list of persons exempted from it. In Pap. Tebt., ii, 846 (dated
236 B.C.E.), the syntaxis may likewise be a poll-tax, there
connected with the temple. See fully, Wallace, S. L., "Census and
Poll-tax under the Ptolemies," in American Journal of Philology,
vol. lix (1938), 418-42; Preaux, C., L'economie royale des Lagides
(Brussels 1939), p. 382 et seq. If this is so, it would refute
Wallace's suggestion, loc. cit., that the syntaxis was introduced
by Ptolemy Philopator in 220 B.C.E. to raise funds for the campaign
which ended in the battle of Raphia.
JEWS
IN PTOLEMAIC
AND ROMAN
EGYPT
379
tians and therebyrenderedliable to the special levy (laike
syntaxis) imposedupon the latter. There is no clear evidencethat
these paid the polltax. Later, during the second century B.C.E.,
the law of Egypt came to be determined upon a purely
territorialbasis. The distance between Hellenes and Egyptians,and
consequentlybetween Jews and Egyptians, tended in this way to
decrease. Nevertheless, despite this growingequalization of civic
status, the Jews retained their identity; very few of them to
apostatized becomeGreeks. The practicalobstaclesto joint communal
life are nowhere better illustrated than in the story of what
happened in Jerusalem during the reign of Antiochus IV Epiphanes.
The events of that period show of clearly enough that the
prescriptions the Jewishreligion presentedan insuperableobstacle to
the existence side by side in the same city of a Jewishand a
Greekpoliteuma. Under Antiochus II, the Jews of Jerusalemhad been
granteda sort of autonomy;they were permittedto live as an ethnic
group (ethnos) in accordancewith their own traditionallaw.1' Under
Antiochus IV (173 B.C.E.), however, their condition underwent a
radical change. This monarchreplacedthe Law of Mosesby a
Greekconstitution. The high priest Jesus (aliasJason) was
removedfrom office,a certainOnias (alias Menelaus) being
installedin his stead. Jason,however,supportedby the majority of
the people, promptly organizedan opposition movement. Thereupon,
Onias went to the king, accompanied the son of Tobias by and
offered "collaboration." His party, he said,, was willing-nay,
anxious-to abandonits native lawsand the traditionalJewishway of
life and to adopt the king'slaw and Greekcustoms. To this end, they
offered to pay 150 talentsinto the royalexchequer,if the king would
grantthem permissionto build a gymnasiumand a junior college
(ephebia) and to registergraduates the formerinstitutionsas
full-fledged of "Antiochians.''12"n Bikerman, Die Makkabaer, p. 51
et seq.; 176 et seq. Our knowledge of this based principally on the
First and Second Books of Maccabees (both reliable supplemented by
Josephus, Antiquities, xii, 240-41. 121 Maccabees 1:3. Cf. also II
Maccabees 4:10, 19. These sources show that of Jerusalem had the
privilege of entering a Greek gymnasium and thereby quasi-Greeks or
"Antiochians" of the city. period is sources) the Jevs becoming
380
JEWISH
SOCIAL STUDIES
When this permission was granted, they even went so far as to
conceal all evidence of circumcision, so that even when naked they
might appear as Greeks and not bear upon their persons the mark of
the "covenant of Abraham."13 Under the new dispensation, Jews of
the upper classes achieved the status of "Jews of the gymnasium"
(apo gymnasiou) and ranked as the civic equals of the Greeks; while
the others, who remained outside of the gymnasium, continued as
plain Jews. These events are recorded in the First and Second Books
of Maccabees, and an interesting passage in the latter book of the
Apocrypha sheds further light on the true attitude of Jerusalemitan
Jewry during the period in question. We are informed that after
returning sick from his luckless campaign in Persia, Antiochus
"vowed unto the Lord to proclaim Jerusalem free and to make its
inhabitants equal to the Athenians.'14 From these words it is
apparent that the bulk of the local Jews did not accept with
equanimity the attempts at Hellenization, but that their aspiration
was to retain their Jewish identity though at the same time
enjoying the same civic privileges as their Greek neighbors. In the
long run, their efforts bore fruit, for the original Jewish
constitution was finally restored by Antiochus V in 163-2
B.C.E.15
Under Roman rule, the civic position of the Jews in Egypt
underwent a radical change. The various ethnic groups (ethnika)
were no longer organized as politeumata, and the Jews, who had
previously enjoyed the privileged status of Greeks with a separate
communal organization, were now accounted plain Egyptians, with the
same set-up. The monster of antisemitism soon reared its head. The
Alexandrians asserted that they were hostile to the Jews because
the latter had twice'8Josephus, loc. cit. 14 1 Maccabees, ch. 15.
Cf. also Papyrus Oxyrynchus 2177. "IBikerman, op. cit. p. 85 et
seq. Concerning the legal status of the Jews in Syria during the
subsequent period down to the Roman conquest we know nothing; but
it is perhaps permissible to draw conclusions from the contemporary
situation of their brethren in Egypt.
JEWS
IN PTOLEMAIC
AND ROMAN
EGYPT
381
betrayed them;16but the real reason was the recrudescence of
chauvinistic Alexandrian nationalism. In an age when its citizens
were being martyred for the Greek cause, the upper classes of
Alexandria could scarcely view with indifference the presence in
their midst of a Jewish community which insisted vociferously upon
equal citizenship but at the same time viewed with abhorrence any
identification with the common life and mores. In order to meet
this popular feeling, the Romans were obliged, once they decided to
reorganize the system of communities (politeumata), to reduce the
Jews to the rank of mere laographoumenoi, or endenized "natives."
To be sure, certain of their womenfolk were permitted to quality as
"female citizens" (astai), but this did not imply anything like the
citizenship of males, since women played no part in municipal
affairs or even in the public life of the city. The new status of
the Jews is amply attested by a collection of papyri from
Alexandria, dating in the reign of Augustus and coming mainly from
the Jewish quarters of the city.'7 One of these documents, for
example,18 concerns the petition of a certain Helenos, son of
Tryphon, who seeks release from the inferior status of a
laographoumenos, to which he had been reduced in a revision of the
census lists.'9 Previously registered as a full citizen (astos)20
he now describes himself simply as "a Jew from Alexandria.'"21
Similarly, the so-called A cts of the A4lexandrian Martyrs attest
thiepersecution of the Jews and their reduction to the status"ICf.
Bell, H. I., in Cambridge Ancient History, vol. x, p. 308. Papyrus
Giessen 46, edited by von Premerstein, op. cit., p. 40 et seq.,
shows that the Greeks of Alexandria made a point of boa.ting to
Gaius of their loyalty throughout some six and one-half
centuries!17
Cf. Segre, op. cit., p. 157 et seq.
to No. 58; Schuerer, op. cit., p. 718; Segre, op. cit., p. 159.
"IFor such revision of the census-lists cf. Wessely, C., Studien z.
Paliographie, etc., vol. iv, p. 58 et seq.'OFor the rule that a
full-fledged citizen (astos) had to be the son of parents
possessing the same status, see the present writer's "Note sull'
editto de Caracalla" in Rend. Pont. Ac., vol. xvi (1940), 184.
I' Cf. Wilcken, Chrestomathie, Introduction
21He had previously been connected somehow with the gymnasium.
For the connection of the latter with Greek citizenship in all of
the Greek cities of Egypt see the inscription (probably from
Ptolemis) published by Kornbeuttel in Archiv fur Papyrusforschung,
vol. xii (1936), 44-53.
382
JEWISH
SOCIAL STUDIES
of laographoumenoi;22while a Berlin papyrus which records the
trial of Isidoros, the gymnasiarch and Lampon, the ex-gymnasiarch23
shows, as do also the ostraca of the Apollonites,24 that the Jews
of Alexandria were subjected to the special tax of the "natives"
(laographia) and were therefore regarded as endenizened residents
rather than as full citizens. Lastly, there is evidence to show
that no Jew was ever regarded as a Greek citizen of the metropolis,
unless he had first acquired Roman citizenship.25 The latter is
indicated clearly in a letter of the Emperor Claudius, contained in
a London papyrus26and dated 41 C.E. The document contains the
Emperor's reply to representations made by the Alexandrians against
his two edicts confirming the privileges of the Jews in that city
and extending22Cf. Wilcken, U., "Zum Alexandrinischen
Antisemitismus," in Abhandlungen der Sachsischen Gesellschaft der
Wissenschaft, phil.-hist. KI., vol. xxvii (1919), 800 et seq.;
Premerstein, A. von, "Zu der sogennanten alexandrinischen Martyrer"
in Philologus, supplementary volume xvi (1923); id. "Das Datum des
Prozesses des Isidoros in den sogennanten heidnischen
Martyrer-Akten," in Hermes, vol. lxvii (1932), 174 ff. A
bibliography of the Acts is given by C. Welles in Transactions of
the American Philological Association, vol. lvii (1936), 7 et seq.
In the record of the trial of Isidoros and Lampon (Pap. Berl.
8877), Agrippa, asked whether the Jews do not pay the special tax,
like the Egyptians, replies: "the archons impose the tax on the
Egyptians, but on these (i.e. the Jews) nobody." This has been
taken by Uxkull Gylleband (Gnomon, vol. viii, 1932, 329 et seq.),
followed by A. Neppi Modona (Aegyptus, vol. xii, 1932, 333 et seq.)
to imply that the Jews did not pay the tax and enjoyed the same
rights as the Alexandrians. Such an interpretation, however, is
absolutely false, if for no other reason because Agrippa could
obviously not have afforded to make such a statement. What is meant
is, it may be suggested, that whereas the Egyptians pay the tax by
virtue of imposition by the archons, the system in the case of the
Jews is different. They do not pay it under any such authority
("nobody imposes it on them"), but simply on the basis of an
agreement with their politeuma. 23Pap. Berlin 8877. Cf.
Uxkull-Gylleband, in Sitzungsberichte der Akademie d. Wiss. Berlin,
phil.-hist. KI., vol. xxvii (1930), 664-79; Premerstein, A. von, in
Hermes, vol. lxvii (1932), 174-96. The trial of Isidoros and Lampon
which took place in 53 C.E. (von Premerstein, loc. cit.), is
recorded in the following sources: BGU, No. 511, cols i-ii; Pap.
Cairo 10448, col. iii-Wilcken Chrestomathie, p. 24-27; B.G.U. 8877;
Pap. London 2785. New fragments have been published by H. I. Bell
in this article in Archiv fur Papyrusforschung, vol. x (1931),
5-13, and by A. Neppi Modona in Aegyptus, vol. xii (1932), 17-24;
233-38. 24This source was not considered in the present writer's
paper in Bulletin de la Societc Royale d'Alexandrie, vol. xxix
(1934), but is well discussed in Juster, vol. ii, p. 330. 25There
were, of course, certain exceptions to this general rule. Thus,
Jews could attain Greek citizenship by first becoming Roman
citizens. N Pap. London 1912, edited by H. I. Bell in his Jews and
Christians (London, 1924). The letter was probably drafted in
Latin, and may have been amplified later by the emperor himself
(Bell, op. cit., p. 22). But the final redaction seems to have been
left to the special "office of decrees"; cf. Hirschfeld, Otto,
Kaiserliche Verwaltungsbeamten (Berlin 1905), p. 323, n. 1;
Laqueur, R., in Klio, vol. xx (1926), 102. Our extract occurs in
col. iv. I, 73.
JEWS IN PTOLEMAIC AND ROMAN EGYPT
383
them to their brethren throughout the empire. The Jews, it would
appear, were not satisfied with being allowed merely to retain
their communal organization (politeuma). They were agitating for a
division of the Alexandrian politeuma into two sections of equal
status-one, centered in the gymnasium, for the Greeks, and the
other, centered in the synagogue, for the Jews. The proposal,
however, was strenuously resisted by the Alexandrians, who saw in
it a threat to the entire civic structure. Accordingly, they
petitioned Claudius to restrict the privileges of the Jews and to
relegate them, once for all, to the status of aliens and
unacceptable foreigners. The Emperor's reply was as follows: I
conjure you yet once again that, on the one side, the
Alexandriansshow themselves forbearing and kindly towards the Jews
who for many years have dwelt in the same city, and offer not
outrage to them in the exercise of their traditional worship, but
permit them to observe their customs,ag in the time of divus
Augustuswhich customsI also, after hearing both sides, have
confirmed;and on the other side, I bid the Jews not to busy
themselves about anything beyond what they held hitherto and not to
act henceforth as if you and they lived in two cities sending two
delegations-such a thing has never occurredbefore-but to profit by
what they possessand enjoy in a city not their own-an abundanceof
all good things; and not to introduce or invite Jews who sail down
to Alexandria from Syria or Egypt, thus compelling me to conceive
the greater suspicion, otherwise I will by all means take
vengeanceon them as fomenting a general plague on the whole world.
If, desisting on both sides from these proceedings,you are willing
to live with mutual forbearanceand kindliness,I on my side will
continue to display the time-honored solicitude for the interest of
the city, with which my family has traditionalfriendship. In
castigating the Jews for sending a separate delegation to him,
Claudius was obviously repudiating their claim to represent part of
the Alexandrian citizenry.27 In his eyes, they spoke only for the
local Jewish community, and-doubtless in order to placate the
Alexandrians-he took pains to make it plain to them that they
should stick to their own group,-7The assumption that the Jews sent
two separate delegations is scarcely plausible. Such, however, is
the view of De Sanctis (Rivista Filologica, vol. ii, 1924, 491 et
seq.), who believes that the Jews formed a distinct community of
Alexandrian citizens and were attempting to upset the status quo by
constituting themselves into something they had not been before.
The latter part of this theory is approximately our own. See also
Willrich, U., in Hermes, vol. lx (1925), 482-89; id., in Wiener
Blaettner fuer die Freunde der Antike,
384
JEWISH
SOCIAL STUDIES
live as unobtrusively as possible, and not try to inject
themselves into Greek life.28 All of this obviously implies that
they were not regarded as full citizens. It also implies-and this
is equally important-that during the age of Claudius the Jews of
Alexandria sought citizenship not as individuals, who might perhaps
acquire it after conversion, but as a group seeking recognition and
incorporation within the official structure of the body politic.
Civically, then, the members of Alexandrian Jewry were simply "Jews
from Alexandria" tout court.29 Only in one respect was there any
deviation from this rule. When arraigned for debt, they were
regarded as "latter-dayPersians" ("Persians of the epigone") -an ad
hoc qualification likewise adopted in such circumstances by the
Romans, the full-fledged citizens (astoi), the metropolitans and
the Egyptians. But this was simply a legal fiction whereby process
was expedited and the defaulter rendered liable to more summary
treatment on the part of the creditor. It went back to the days of
Ptolemy III Euergetes (247-222 B.C.E.) in whose time-and until as
late as about 150 C.E.-Persians of this kind had constituted the
great bulk of debtors liable to such treatment.30vol. iv (1927),
31-35; and Momigliano, A., Claudius the Emperor (Oxford 1934), p.
97 et seq., who likewise suppose that two delegations were sent.
Both before and after 53 C.E., whenever the Jews of Alexandria
wished to make representations to the Roman emperors they
dispatched distinctive Jewish delegations. Pap. Oxyrynchus 1242
(part of the Acts of the Martyrs) shows, in fact, that once, under
Trajan, the Jewish delegation was more cordially received than that
of the non-Jews. 28According to Philo, In Flaccum, 91, the Jews led
a quiet life and kept to themselves. The Alexandrians were
therefore laying emphasis on a few ostentatious exceptions. 29Cf.
Segre, op. cit., p. 163. The Jews improperly styled themselves
Alexandrians, Antiochians and the like; cf. Josephus, Cont-a
Apionem, II, 4; Wilcken, U., in Archit' fur Papyrusforschung, vol.
vii (1924), 310; Segre, op. cit., p. 144, 167. Some of them were
"established residents" (incolae) , others mere "alien newcomers"
(advenae) ; cp. the case of the Jews of Delos, cited (from
Josephus, Anitiquities, xiv 2, 13) by Bell, op. cit., p. 13.
'1'hose who came to Alexandria from Syria and the rural areas
(chora) certainly fell into the latter category, whereas the
descendants of the older Jewish families of the city were classed
in the former. In time of persecution, however, the title of
incolae was questioned in respect of all Jews. 30On these
latter-day Persians see Zucker in Pauly-Wissowva,Realenzyklopddie
d. Klassischeni Altertum)swissenischaft, vol. xix, p. 910-26. For
the title as applied to Alexandrians and Greeks, cf. the present
writer in Aegyptus, vol. iii (1921), 1 et seq. and Tait, S. G., in
Archi7' fur Papyrusforschung, vol. vii (1924), p. 177 et seq. This
pseudo-ethnic title is scarcely related to the asylia; while a
genuine Persian ethnic group certainly did not exist in the second
century B.C.E.
JEWS
IN PTOLEMAIC
AND ROMAN
EGYPT
385
In order to appraise the civic position of Alexandrian Jewry at
this period it is of importance to determine the proportion of Jews
to full-fledged citizens. New light is shed on this point by a
papyrus of 37 C.E. which deals with an Alexandrian delegation to
Gaius, then but recently appointed.3' We are told that the
Alexandrians had appointed an assembly (gerousia) of 173 members to
represent an electorate of 180,000 citizens.32Unfortunately,
however, this evidence is open to question. The figure cited is in
flat disagreement with everything we know about the civic community
of Alexandria at this period, and the document probably expresses
some pipe-dream of contemporary Alexandrian politicians rather than
a sober matter of fact.33 If it were to be taken at its face value
(following the reading and interpretation of von Premerstein), it
would imply that citizenship was enjoyed by far more than a small
minority of Greeks, so that the exclusion of the Jews from this
privilege would stand revealed as an act of particularly harsh and
serious discrimination.
The comparatively few Jews who possessed Greek citizenship were
mostly Roman veterans who had previously acquired Roman
citizenship. The latter was granted to all new Romans-peregrini-and
not only to Jews, after hdnorable discharge from the army, and did
not require a severance of ancestral ties. The Jews, for instance,
who became Aurelii after the passing of the Antonine Constitution
of 212 C.E. enjoyed, along""Pap. Giessen 46. The text has been
brilliantly reconstructed by von Premerstein, but it is still so
mutilated that it must be used with caution. 32The gerousia had
long since ceased to exist, having been abolished, in all
probability, in the Ptolemaic age; cf. von Premerstein, op. cit.,
p. 59; Turner, E. G., in Archiv fur Papyrusforschung, vol. xii
(1937), 179 et seq. The ad hoc reconstruction of it would therefore
have been designed to confront Gaius with a fait accompli.
33According to Diodorus xvii, 52, 6 writing about 60 B.C.E., the
total population of Alexandria in his day was no higher than
300,000. Von Premerstein (op. cit., p. 50, 55) supposes that it may
have doubled by the first century C.E., and that Ptolemy II
Euergetes may have extended citizenship to all resident Greeks.
Even so, however, the figure of 180,000 full citizens would be
excessive. B.G.U. IV makes it clear that the full citizens formed
only a small minority, so that von Premerstein's calculation that
they numbered 120,000 out of a total 600,000 is likewise open to
question. Moreover, it should be observed that in 37 C.E.
Alexandria was seemingly divided into five phylae, 60 demoi and 720
phratriae (von Premerstein, p. 46). Accordingly if the figure of
180,000 were taken seriously, eaclh demos would have had to embrace
no less than 3,000 and each phratria no less than 250 citizens!
Lastly if we assume that the appointment of gerontes proceeded in
each case on the same proportional basis, the statement in our text
that there were 71 Jewish and 173 Greek gerontes would imply that
the ratio of Jews to Greeks in Alexandria was as high as 2 to
5.
386
JEWISH
SOCIAL STUDIES
with the other peregrini-such privileges of their original
politeuma as did not conflict with their newly acquired
citizenship.34 At certain periods these privileges included
exemption from military service. It is recorded, for example, that
Hyrcanus, the ethnarch of the Jews, was successful, on one
occasion, in obtaining such exemption, together with freedom of
worship, from Dolabella, the pro-consul of Asia.35 Similarly at a
later date, Lucius Lentulus is said to have issued a decree
exempting naturalized Jews of Ephesus from military service and
permitting them to follow the rites of their religion unmolested.36
It would appear, however, that this privilege was often more
nominal than real;37and, indeed, it is somewhat difficult to
believe that it could have been respected after the time of the
Severi when, on the one hand, the need for recruits had increased
and, on the other, the Jews had been reduced to the level of
proletarians, following the sack of Jerusalem and the subsequent
persecutions.38 It was, in fact, easier for the Jews to become
Roman citizens than to become Greek citizens. In the first place,
the Romans had no gymnasia, so that they could not demand
affiliation with one as a condition of34Cf. Segre, A., in Rend.
Pont. Acc., vol. xv (1940), 194 et seq. Once a Jew had become a
Roman citizen, it was easy for him also to acquire the civic
status of a Greek. In Antinoupolis, for example, Jews who were
Roman citizens were classed as Antinoupolitans, i.e. Greeks.
Similarly, it is possible that the apostle Paui, who was a citizen
of Tarsus and at the same time a Roman citizen, acquired the former
status via the latter. 5Josephus, Antiquities, xiv, 223 et seq. M
ib. xiv, 228. For the different versions of the edict, cf. Juster,
op. cit., vol. ii, p. 141 et seq. 37Thus Josephus relates
(Antiquities, xvii, 83-84) that when Tiberius ordered a mass
expulsion of the Jews from Rome, the consuls listed four thousand
males and sent them to Sardinia, but subjected a large number of
them to punishment because they refused, on religious grounds, to
serve in the army. Cf. Segre, A., Rend. Pont. Acc., vol. xvii
(1941), 171.38We know, as a matter of fact, that at a later date
the Jews lost several of their exemptions from the munera, just at
a time when the burden of them had become peculiarly heavy for
everyone. Under the imperial constitutiones, they were exempted
only from those munera which were incompatible with their religion.
But they were obliged to shoulder many new
burdens.Thus, accordingto Modestinus,Digest, xxvii, I, 15, 6
(written after the passing of theAntonine Constitution) they had to
accept guardianship even of non-Jews-an obligation which had
existed in Egypt even before this date (cf. Taubenschlag, R., in
Studi Bonfante I (Rome 1930) , p. 109 et seq.) . Similarly,
according to Ulpian, Digest I, 2, 33, they were obliged, under a
provision of Severus and Caracalla, to accept calls to honores,
i.e. to magistracies-an obligation which was extended to everyone
in the third century C.E., which such honores became particularly
heavy burdens.
JEWS IN PTOLEMAIC AND ROMAN EGYPT
387
naturalization. And in the second place the Roman system of
conferring citizenship automatically on discharged veterans, and of
according them religious and communal autonomy, was in marked
contrast with the Greek system whereby the privilege was usually
conferred by special decree of the Emperor and entailed that one's
offspring come to termswith paganism.
The civic distinction between Jews and Alexandrians under thie
Roman dispensation found its counterpart in social life. By and
large, the two kept apart. They were separated by mutual
.prejudices, the Jews by their intense religious feeling, the
Alexandrians by the feeling that as Greek aristocrats-latter-day
scions of ancient Athens-they should not be contaminated by the
barbarians,39 least of all by the Jews, whom they regarded as on a
par with the despised Egyptians.40 The Jews, of course, resented
this comparison, to which they were the more sensitive in view of
the fact that, from the civic point of view, they were indeed like
the Egyptians, mere endenizened "natives."141 Nor were they able to
find complete satisfaction within their own community; for while it
might possibly satisfy the orthodox Jew content to live unto
himself, it could never answer the needs of the common man who had
to deal daily with the gentiles. It was, after all, primarily a
religious body; politically it did not mean very much. Moreover,
its basis was precarious, since its continuance depended very
largely on the political circumstances of the day. The community
functioned under the terms of an old privilege which had been duly
confirmed by Octavian; and this confirmation was`*This is well
illustrated by a passage in Pap. Oxyrynchus2177, i, 12-18, where a
certain Athenodorus, appearing before Caesar, contends that the
laws of the Alexandrians and the Athenians are the same, for "they
are stronger than all other laws and have the same happy blend of
strength and humanity." Cf. also Josephus, Contra Apionem, ii, 28
et seq. 40For the special case of the Jewish citizens of
Antinoupolis see S.B. 7393 (of. 147 C.E. or later). The
Antinoupolitans probably intermarried wvithJews, as they did with
Egyptians;cf. Segre,op. cit., p. 162. 41Even though they had their
own official community (politeuma), they still ranked as Egyptians,
because that community was, for all practical purposes, a purely
religious organization. It is noteworthy in this connection that in
the Gnomon of the Idios Logos the Jews are not mentioned as a
distinctive ethnic group, whereas the Syrians,Nesiotides and
Paraetoniansare.
388
JEWISH
SOCIAL STUDIES
recognized by Jews of the early Imperial age as their Magna
Carta. Says Josephus,42not without a touch of pride, Many people
might be inclined to discredit statementsmade about us by the
Persiansand Macedonians since their writingsare not
generallyaccessible. However, the barbariansas well as ourselves
cannot gainsay what is contained in the various decreesof the
Romans, since these are not only available in the public archives
but have been deposited in the Capitol and engraved,moreover,on a
brazen pillar. What is more, Julius Caesarmade a pillar of brass
and publicly announced (thereon) that the Jews were citizens of
Alexandria.43 Under this privilege, periodically confirmed by
Octavian's successors, Jews were often exempted from military
service lest the rigors of army life conflict with the
prescriptions of their faith.44 In some cities, such as Tyre, it
also entitled them to own real estate, just as did members of the
Greek community;45 while by an edict issued by Augustus (renewing
previous grants by Julius Caesar in 2 B.C.E. and 2 C.E.) freedom of
worship was assured.46 In the age of Augustus, the civic community
(pioliteuma) of the Jews in Alexandria was patterned upon that of
Jerusalem.4 It was headed by a President (genarches), possibly to
be identified with the ethnarchwho enjoyed limited jurisdiction,
mostly in matters of religion, and who was empowered to levy the
characteristic communal tax-the annual "tithe" (aparche) of two
drachmas paid to the Temple in Jerusalem.42Antiquities, xiv,
187-89. 4 Possibly, Josephus here confuses Caesar with Octavian, as
again in Contra Apionem 2, 37 and 2, 61; cf. Scramuzza, Vincent,
The Emperor Claudius (Cambridge 1940), p. 253. 44Juster, vol. ii,
p. 135 et seq. 45ib., p. 149. 46ib., P. 151. However, the various
passages which state that the Jews were granted the same privileges
as the Macedonians mean only that they were likewise regarded as
"established residents" (katoikoi, incolae). (The statements of
Josephus in Contra Apionem LI, 4, 35 et seq. and Bellum Judaicum,
II, 18, 7 (487) et seq., are misinterpreted by Juster.) In B.G.U.
IV certain Jews are qualified as "Macedonians"; but the title is
purely honorific and has no formal meaning. Not improbably, Jews
descended from the older colonial families styled themselves
"Macedonians" to emphasize that they were not newcomers.47
Schuerer, p. 234 et seq.
4"The genarches of the Jews is mentioned by Philo, In Flaccum,
x, 74 (527) et seq. and by Strabo, apud Josephum, Ant. xiv,
117.
JEWS IN PTOLEMAIC AND ROMAN EGYPT
389
The Senate, or governing body (gerousia), consisted of
seventy-one members, and this system continued throughout the early
Imperial age.49 The community was subject to ordinary
Graeco-Egyptian law;50and when, in early Imperial days, the last
traces of the original distinction between Greek and Egyptian
legislation were being swept away, there was no difference betwen
the law applied to the Jews and that applied to all the other
inhabitants of the country. That law was embodied in royal edicts,
decrees of emperors and prefects, bills passed by the Roman Senate
(senatusconsulta), and the like.51 The Jewish communal authorities
had, in all probability, very little (if anything) to say in
questions of civil government, their function being restricted to
such matters as involved religious life and practice, e.g.
marriage.52 At the same time, the very fact that they were
recognized as an official community (politeuma) itself afforded the
Jews a certain measure of protection, for it entailed a number of
specific privileges. The nature of these can best be gauged from
two fairly familiar sources. The first is Philo's account of the
persecutions in the time of Gaius.53 Flaccus, we are told, in
seeking to abolish the civic status (politeia) of the Jews,
withdrew their traditional right to plead at law, herded them into
one of the five administrative districts of the city, dissolved
their representative assembly (gerousia) and ousted some
thirty-eight senators appointed by Augustus to supervise Jewish
affairs after the death of the ethnarch.49Juster, vol. i, p. 422,
no. 4; vol. ii, p. 153 et seq.; Premerstein, op. cit., p. 59.
Philo's reference (In Flaccum, xii, 97 (531) et seq.) to a
psephisma or "decree by vote" implies nothing concerning the
constitution of the politeuma because, as is well known, decrees
could be issued by the collegia just as much as by the cities; cf.
Juster, vol. ii, p. 419; Segre, op. cit., p. 165. r Segre, op.
cit., p. 165. 51 Cf. Gylleband, Gnomon des Idios Logos (Berlin
1919-34), p. 28 et seq. 52Flaccus, therefore, was not very far from
the truth when, in his proclamation (Philo, In Flaccum, viii, 53
(525) ), he characterized the Jews of Alexandria as "strangers"
(xenoi) and "visitors" (epelythes), and regarded the grant of a
politeuma to them as, to all intents and purposes, valueless.
Actually, it was something of a problem how exactly the Jews should
be classified, since Greek colonial cities recognized only
"established colonists" (katoikoi), but not "resident aliens"
(metoikoi). In Alexandria their status depended entirely on the
discretion of the emperor, though from the analogous case of the
Egyptian navicularii, suarii, etc., recorded in Papyrus Giessen 40
iii (215 C.E.), it would appear possible that, even if regarded as
"strangers," they could not be banished from the city. 63 In
Flaccum, viii, 53 et seq.
390
JEWISH
SOCIAL STUDIES
Following his seizure of our synagogues (saysthe record), he
proceededto the further scheme of destroyingour civic status his
idea being that once our life-line of traditional usages and
political rights had been cut away, we would be left to drift
without anchoragein the angrysea of hardship.... us To this end, he
characterized as parvenus and aliens, and withdrew our right of
pleading at law, thus leaving us to be condemned unheard.He also
permitted our property to be pillaged.. .
. Moreover, having thus
rendered us defenseless,he herded us into a tiny-area in one of
the five administrativedistrictsof the city, whereaspreviouslywe
had been concentrated in two of them and fairly liberally
distributedover the rest. The last statement demands a word of
comment. If it may be assumed that recognition as an official
community (politeuma) entitled the Jews to the status of "permanent
residents" (incolae), then eo ipso they could not be expelled from
the city. Moreover, the fact that they lived mainly in two out of
the five administrative precincts does not necessarily imply
ghettoization. We know that the native Egyptians were permitted to
own real estate anywhere in the city, and it is therefore
reasonable to suppose that Jews could also do so.54 The second
source of information concerning the privileges of the Jews is the
decree of Claudius, issued in 41 C.E. by which those originally
granted by Octavian were again restored. The text of this decree,
addressed to the prefect of Egypt, is given as follows by
Josephus:55 high priest and tribune of Tiberius
AlexanderCaesarAugustusGermanicus, the plebs thus ordains: Whereas
I am assuredthat the Jews of Alexandria who are called Alexandrians
have from the earliest times been joint residents of the city along
with the Alexandriansthemselves,and have obtained from the kings
equal privilegeswith the latter, as is attestedby public recordsin
their possession, as well as by the actual text of the decrees; And
whereas,after the annexation of Alexandriaby Augustus, these rights
and privileges have been continued by successiveprefects sent
thither, ands Real estate was usually acquired in Alexandria by
letters of transfer (synchoreseis) between buyer and seller. It was
customary, however, subsequently to embody these in formal deeds of
conveyance (katagraphia) drawn up after the legal status and
capacity of the parties had been checked by the municipal
authorities. Extant examples of
