Mt. Sinai in Ancient Near East History

Environmental Features Enhanced the Notion of the Home of Deity

Jun 24, 2009 Michael Streich

Throughout Ancient History, certain mountain tops came to be associated with the gods whether in Greece or Japan. For Some Near Eastern people, Sinai was such a place.

Throughout the ancient world, mountains played important roles in the religious experiences of peoples and their culture. Sacred mountains were the homes of gods, such as Mt. Olympus in Greece, or the repository of knowledge as in the case of Mt. Parnassus, also in Greece. In the ancient Near East, few sacred mountain tops rivaled Mt. Sinai, referred to as the mountain of fire and associated with the Old Testament law-giver Moses.

Prominence of Mount Sinai

Although not the tallest peak in the region, Mt. Sinai, at 7,370 feet, is considerably higher than the surrounding mountains, most of which rise to 4,000 feet. Mt. Sinai, also referred to as Mt. Horeb (although some scholars claim the two names denote different locations), features, in part, red granite rock which, when hit by the sun, looks like fire. The name “Sinai” is derived from the term “to shine.”

At certain times of the year, the mountain is alive with thunderstorms that, in ancient times, caused awe among the peoples below. Little wonder Sinai was considered the home of God. In Exodus 24:18, the writer states that, “Moses entered the midst of the cloud as he went up to the mountain…” This was the same mountain where, years earlier, Moses had experienced the “burning bush” in which Yahweh recruited him to go back to Egypt and bring out Israel to the “promised land.”

Scholars note that the rugged and stormy conditions associated with Mt. Sinai complemented the Hebrew view of God. Professor of Near East Studies Donald Redford comments that the Hebrew God “displays atmospheric and chthonic traits, being intimately associated with the wind, earthquake, fire and thunder.” (379)

Mt. Sinai is difficult to climb; the sides of the mountain feature sharp precipices. Not only did this discourage interested parties from attempting a climb to the summit, but it denoted special recognition to those who did - like Moses. Undoubtedly, these men were true conduits through which deity spoke.

Israel at Mount Sinai

According to Old Testament tradition, uncorroborated by substantive historical evidence, the Exodus Hebrews spent nearly a year encamped in the valley below the mountain. Four streams in the immediate vicinity would have provided the necessary water for such a mass of people.

Twice Moses ascended the mountain, staying at the top for forty days and nights each time. After the first sojourn, he returned with the Ten Commandments only to find that the people were in revolt. In anger, he smashed the tablets upon which the law had been written, “by the finger of God,” according to Old Testament writers. Following another forty-day period, Moses returned and presented the base of Hebrew law. In addition, he enunciated a “covenant,” so much a part of Old Testament tradition, made between God and his chosen people.

In essence, the Mosaic Law, which would fill many chapters of the Pentateuch, was in many cases nothing radically different from other Near East law codes.

The Symbol of Mt.Sinai for the Early Church

In the 4th and 5th centuries, as men and women became disillusioned with the lukewarm nature of official Christendom, many took to the deserts, especially in the Sinai, to pursue the ascetic lives of hermits. The imposing Mt. Sinai again reached out to these spiritually hungry Christians.

In AD 537, the Byzantine Emperor Justinian built a monastery at the base of the mountain which still stands today. As long as deity is associated with nature, particularly the “high places” of the world, Mt. Sinai will play a prominent role in religious experience.

Sources:

• Colonel Claude R. Conder, LL.D., “Sinai,” The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1939)
• Michael Grant, The History of Ancient Israel (History Book Club/Orion Publishing Group, 2002)
• Donald B. Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times (Princeton University Press, 1992)

 

Celibacy in the Early Middle Ages

• Aug 22, 2011
• Michael Streich       e

Traced to the Fourth Century, celibacy became a requirement for members of the clergy in the Early Middle Ages.

Clerical celibacy in the Roman Catholic Church is usually traced to the 4th Century CE and was subsequently strengthened and reaffirmed by the papacy. By 1123, at the First Lateran Council presided over by Pope Callistus II, Canon 7 (29) expressly forbade “priests, deacons, or sub deacons to live with concubines and wives…” Several reasons are given for the rise and enforcement of clerical celibacy, including the ascetic tradition in the Church following the Great Persecution as well as the marginalization of women. Celibacy was the “more perfect way,” supported, ostensibly, by Holy Scripture.

Marriage in the Early Church and the Passage in Matthew

Matthew 19: 10-12 is one of the most frequently used passages in Church writings of the Early Middle Ages to support Jesus’ advocacy of celibacy and it is still used today to defend celibacy. Yet nowhere in the passage does Jesus promote celibacy as the mandatory state for his disciples. Peter, the “rock” upon whom the Church was built, was himself married. Additionally, the passage is part of a larger dialogue concerning marriage and divorce.

In I Timothy 3:12 Paul states that “deacons” or “bishops” (depending upon the translation) should be “husbands of only one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households.” Early Church History recounts the lives of numerous married bishops. In some cases, according to W. H. C. Frend, Professor of Ecclesiastical History, children accompanied their fathers to places of execution, fathers that were bishops or in other overseer positions.

Factors Contributing to the Rise of Enforced Celibacy

Numerous views seek to explain why clerical celibacy became the norm in the medieval Church and continues so into the current century. Initially, during the early 4th Century, celibacy was strongly identified with the ascetic traditions associated with hermit monasticism. The ideal of the virgin was nothing new: it had been part of pagan beliefs for centuries. Early ascetics merely followed a path that was already characteristic of mysticism and an individual encounter with the sublime. The Essenes, for example, included members that advocated celibacy.

At the same time, the Church was developing a system of morality that placed celibacy above marriage and demeaned sexual activity. Tierney and Painter recount the suggestion of 9th Century Bishop Jonas of Orleans as to when married couples “should abstain from sexual relations.” These times included, “forty days before Christmas, forty days before Easter, eight days after Pentecost, every Sunday, Wednesday, and Friday, the eve of all great feasts, and five days before taking communion.”

Celibacy also set the clergy apart from other people. This process began in the 4th Century. Eventually, this enabled the Church to maintain greater authority in Western Europe through its agents. Church Historian Williston Walker, referring to Pope Gregory VII’s Church reforms, states that clerical celibacy became, “…not only the theoretical but the practical rule of the Roman Church.”

Yale Professor John Boswell cites the role of rural ethical codes, applicable in the Early Middle Ages in Western Europe. According to Boswell, “The exemption of the celibate from all reproductive pressure in rural value systems is a salient and innovative characteristic of Catholicism as a religion, imposed on it, at least in the view of Catholics, by Jesus.” Additionally, the relationships formed by a system of feudal obligations had to be addressed lest the clergy found itself between secular and Church allegiances.

The Marginalization of Women

Celibacy was defended by early Church writers who viewed women as weaker than men. Identified with Eve, they were seen as prone to temptation and sin. At the same time, celibacy assisted in further marginalizing women. The Church hierarchy was only open to men who believed that celibacy was the best way to serve God. Jerome, the producer of the Latin Vulgate, castrated himself. St Benedict cut his flesh when overcome by thoughts of lust. St Kevin of Ireland inadvertently caused the death of a local peasant girl who pursued him. Throughout the Middle Ages, one of the few avenues open to women was as a nun in a cloister or convent.

Defenders of celibacy point to men like St Augustine. Augustine sent way his concubine, but, according to historian Peter Brown, “…it was not moral scruples…It was ambition.” Brown also notes that Augustine defended marriage, although eventually electing a celibate life when he entered the priesthood.

Upholding Celibacy throughout the Middle Ages

Celibacy became a mandatory practice for members of the clergy during the Early Middle Ages. Numerous popes addressed celibacy as part of Church reform efforts to combat concubinage among members of the clergy. Pope Leo IX, at the Easter synod of 1049, renewed the Church position and sought to actively enforce it.

The Reformation ultimately challenged this view, allowing priests and ministers to marry and raise families. Within the Catholic Church, however, celibacy remains a requirement for all members of the clergy.

References:

• John Boswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality (University of Chicago Press, 1980)
• Peter Brown, Augustine of Hippo (Dorsett Press, 1967)
• First Lateran Council, Papal Encyclicals Online
• W.H.C. Frend, The Rise of Christianity (Fortress Press, 1984)
• New American Standard Bible (Moody Press, 1973)
• Brian Tierney and Sidney Painter, Western Europe In The Middle Ages 300-1475, 5th Edition (McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1992)
• Williston Walker, A History Of The Christian Church, 3rd Edition (Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1970)
• Ordericus Vitalis, “An Attempt to Enforce Clerical Celibacy,” (CE 1119) Medieval Reader, James B. Ross and Mary M. McLaughlin, editors (The Viking Press, 1969)

Copyright Michael Streich. Contact the author to obtain permission for republication.

Michael Streich -

Retired History Adjunct Instructor

 

 

Why the Protestant Reformation Succeeded

• Aug 9, 2011
• Michael Streich

Geopolitical changes, relief from ecclesiastical taxes, growing literacy, and a popular message all contributed to the success of the Reformation.

The “success” of the Protestant Reformation in the 16th Century may be a relative concept. The Reformation is generally associated with Martin Luther and the publication of his 95 theses in 1517. Yet, although the Reformation became very political, Luther’s focus remained on the Gospel and the epistles of the New Testament as pointing the way toward salvation through faith. He never set out to create a movement or form a new church. His “success,” however, owes much to the political climate of the day, notably the support of his patron Frederick the Wise as well as the relationship between Emperor Charles V, the Germanic princes, and the papacy.

The Sense of the German People and Their Grievances

Luther, had he been so inclined, could have agitated for a German “national” church much as England’s King Henry VIII had done. The idea of such an enterprise, however, was not part of Luther’s ministry even though contemporaries, both poor and rich, frequently viewed his message apart from the theological implications of his writings and preaching. Luther, for example, condemned the 1525 Peasant War.

Luther’s 95 theses were published before Charles V was confirmed Holy Roman Emperor by seven electors, one of who was Frederick the Wise of Saxony. According to scholars, there is no historical evidence that Charles or his agents influenced in any way Frederick’s vote, which was cast without any foreknowledge. The relationship between Frederick and Charles impacted how the new emperor would deal with Luther.

Charles was also keenly aware that many of the German princes sought taxation relief tied to Rome and the insatiable greed of the Church hierarchy. At issue was the so-called “Crusade” tax, also referred to as the “Turkish penny.” Luther historian Heiko Oberman writes that Luther’s patron, Frederick, was, “…at the forefront when it came to throwing off the yoke of ecclesiastical power.”

Frederick supported Luther’s criticism of the recently promulgated plenary indulgence, banning the Dominican Johann Tetzel from Saxony. Frederick’s decision, it should be noted, was to safeguard revenue obtained from his own relics collection; Tetzel was competition. Additionally, Luther was an important member of his faculty at the University of Wittenberg.

Changing World Patterns and Religious Policy

Unlike earlier centuries in which heretic groups like the Albigensians were the objects of Church-sanctioned crusades leading to merciless slaughtering, most notably in Southern France, the Europe of Charles V imposed different priorities. Oberman refers to “shifting geopolitical patterns.”

Charles was a Spanish Habsburg and Spain was rapidly developing a New World empire. At the same time, new Muslim incursions in the Levant and the eastern Mediterranean region threatened Venice while imposing upon Spain and Charles in particular a Christian sovereign’s duty to protect Christian Europe. The Luther-problem did not warrant similar concerns.

In not addressing the growing Protestant movement forcefully enough, Charles may have inadvertently strengthened Lutheranism and the various off-shoots that emerged later in the century such as Calvinism. Oberman, for example, argues that, “…it was the emperor’s religious policy that…enabled the powers Luther had unleashed to bring about radical change in theology, the church, and the balance of power in Europe.”

The Extravagance of the Roman Church

Indulgences were merely the proverbial “tip of the iceberg” when it came to Church abuse. Church extravagance had been an issue for centuries, prompting, for example, St. Francis of Assisi to embrace a poverty he and his initial followers identified with Jesus. Others, such as John Wycliffe in England, also a Franciscan, preached against the properties and luxuries of what was the wealthiest extension of Catholicism in Europe.

Luther himself had been appalled by the conditions he witnessed in Rome while on an official visit for the Augustinian order. Ironically, the visit was part of an on-going dispute between different factions within the order. Luther sided with the “Observant” faction that sought a simpler monastic life, rejecting the extravagance of other orders and the Church hierarchy.

Education and the Growth of Urban Centers

The success of Luther’s Reformation also has much to do with education and literacy. R. W. Scribner refers to the Reformation as the “first great age of mass propaganda” in his studies of 16th Century broadsheets and woodcuts. Filled with recognizable symbols, these images, often including rhymes easy to memorize by illiterate peasants, conveyed powerful if not always accurate messages.

Historian Miriam Chrisman, analyzing printing in Strasbourg, writes that the emerging pamphlets, songs, and other printed materials, “enable us to reconstruct the intellectual milieu of ordinary men and women.” It is significant that this took place first in the cities. Steven Ozment, writing about the Reformation in the cities, comments that, “Few movements have been assisted by a more able group of popular writers than the Protestant Reformation.”

The impact of literacy within imperial cities as contributory to the success of Luther’s Reformation is corroborated by Bernd Moeller’s study. According to Moeller, “…in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries the upper classes of the imperial cities formed the elite of the whole empire, and the intellectual life of Germany reached a truly European level for the first time.”

Moeller, however, concludes that towns tended to become more secular and that “…demands for Reformation with desires for social and economic reform…retarded…the victory of the Reformation.” The eventual triumph of the Reformation is attributed by Moeller to “much more profound sentiments.” The same general patterns were evident in French cities where Calvinism flourished.

Why the Protestant Reformation Succeeded

Luther’s success was tied to his focus: the message of salvation; the success of the ensuing movement had much to do with imperial politics, the personalities of men like Frederick and Charles V, mass facilitation of the printing press for the first time, growing literacy, and a spirit of urban autonomy tied to a better-educated community. At the same time, Catholicism rejected any real effort at reform, projecting the image of intractable extravagance.

Sources:

• Miriam U. Chrisman, “Printing and the Evolution of Lay Culture in Strasbourg, 1480-1599,” The German People And The Reformation, Edited by R. Po-Chia Hsia (Cornell University Press, 1988)
• Bernd Moeller, Imperial Cities and the Reformation (The Labyrinth Press, 1982)
• Heiko A. Oberman, Luther: Man between God and the Devil (Yale University Press, 1989)
• Steven Ozment, The Age of Reform 1250-1550 (Yale University Press, 1980)
• Steven E. Ozment, The Reformation in the Cities (Yale University Press, 1975)
• R.W. Scribner, Popular Culture and Popular Movements in Reformation Germany (The Hambledon Press, 1987)

Copyright Michael Streich. Contact the author to obtain permission for republication.

Michael Streich -

Retired History Adjunct Instructor

Martin Luther and the Jews

Michael Streich

September 11, 2011

 

Martin Luther’s frequently harsh language regarding the Jews is often attributed to the “old Luther,” while most biographies published before the latter part of the 20^th Century never mention such writings like his treatise Concerning the Jews and Their Lies (1543). Casual observers point out Luther’s influence in Nazi Germany as a rabid anti-Semite, a view of Luther discredited by historians and theologians. Others argue for a psychological explanation, looking for signs of senility. The true or real Luther, however, seen within an historical context, argues for an intensely passionate man completely devoted to St Paul’s message of justification by faith; conversion of the Jews and the notions of “apocalyptic prophecy” flow out of this baseline convictions.

 

The Reformation as an End Times Event

 

Luther scholar Heiko A. Oberman demonstrates that for Luther, the Reformation was part of a larger divine plan that would result in the return of Christ in fulfillment of Biblical prophecy. This view conflicts with general assumptions linking the Reformation to subsequent decades that featured a Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment. If the Reformation was seen within the scope of eschatological prerogatives per Luther, the Jews were as threatening to God’s people as were the Turks and the papacy.

 

Luther was a product of the Middle Ages, a period peppered with Jewish discrimination and persecution. During Luther’s lifetime, Jewish communities were uprooted and forced to migrate out of the principalities of the Holy Roman Empire. Luther’s own writings on the Jews are filled with scatological references and the recommendation to burn their houses of worship and sacred writings.

 

Did Luther hate the Jews? Could he be deemed an anti-Semite?  (the term itself is anachronistic). Oberman characterizes a different Luther: “The insistence upon Jewish toleration, to be sure a toleration only in the sense of a coexistence strictly predicated upon conversion, remains a lifelong concern for Luther.” Luther was also aware that in the Last Days, the Jews would convert, accepting Jesus as their Messiah.

 

Reformation Political and Social Conditions Impacting Luther’s Views

 

Luther believed that the purity of the Reformation message was being perverted by heretics, detractors, and Jews. Some Christians, for example, were even being converted to Judaism. Historian Mark Edwards comments that, “Having encountered Jewish propaganda and received report of active Jewish proselytizing, Luther became convinced that the Jews and their blasphemy were a threat to the public good.”

 

At the same time, the Reformation message was being obscured by politics as princes in the Holy Roman Empire became more concerned with the political implications and opportunities of the movement rather than the theological truths. Even the common folk used the opportunity to vent their aggressions as witnessed by the 1524-1525 Peasants’ revolt.

 

Within the fluid social and political climate, exacerbated by the latest onslaught of Islamic forces besieging Vienna, Luther’s writings against the Jews could well have led to popular incitement resulting in violence similar to the massacres of Jews at the time of the Crusades. According to Edwards, Luther’s more vehement writings were not republished in many areas with the same frequency as his other works, perhaps to avoid bloodshed.

 

Conversion of the Jews a Primary Goal for Luther

 

Luther scholars like Oberman have identified several phases that describe Luther’s response to the European Jewish presence. His 1523 writing, That Jesus Christ was Born a Jew, is believed to be sympathetic to the Jews, written with the hope that the Jews would see the errors of their Old Testament exegesis and convert.

 

In contrast, Luther’s February 15, 1546 An Admonition Against the Jews, written just before his death, reiterates other “old Luther” writings that refer to the Jews as blasphemers who had perverted God’s truth. Although Luther acknowledged that a few might convert, he had all but given up on the Jews as a group.

 

Explanations for Luther’s Polemics Against the Jews

 

Edwards maintains that excusing Luther strictly on the basis of a theological explanation is open to debate. Scholars opposing this view note that a purely theological explanation is merely a rationalization that ignores the entire context of historical scrutiny and analysis. Eric Gritsch, a Lutheran Church Historian, wrote that, “Luther was but a frustrated biblical scholar who fell victim to what his friend Philipp Melanchthon called the ‘rabies of theologians’: drawing conclusions based on speculations about the hidden will of God.”

 

Contrary to Gritsch’s seemingly simplistic evaluation, however, Luther did understand God’s will in regard to the preaching of the Gospel and for Luther, the Gospel message fell on deaf ears when it came to the Jews. Like contemporary evangelicals, Luther also understood the Jews in prophetic terms. Unlike modern evangelicals that still view Israel as God’s chosen (Hal Lindsey, for example, addressed this in at least one of his books in which he devotes a chapter on Luther), Luther believed that the “New Israel” was the Protestant movement.

 

In Concerning the Jews and Their Lies, Luther addressed obedience to the law and circumcision as the sign of that obedience. But, as Luther writes, the faith of the patriarchs like Abraham was not based on the act but on the obedience to God’s promises incorporated within the law: faith in the coming Messiah who was Jesus.

 

Luther’s final writings, notably his coarse language, are also taken to suggest signs of old age. Yet, as Oberman demonstrated in 1988, “One should not apologize, by way of psychogrammatic history or periodizations of Luther’s life, to explain away verbal vituperation as that of an old and unhappy man.” Oberman demonstrates, for example, that Luther was using scatological language in 1515 during a sermon reflection on backbiters and the devil.

 

Luther and the Jews in Context

 

Luther’s view toward the Jews must be seen within the context of history. This includes the myriad influences on Luther that were social, political, cultural, and religious. Modern observers tend to focus on only one aspect of these influences, resulting in questions such as whether Luther was an anti-Semite, whether he should be held responsible for Nazi Germany, etc. Such questions are like asking if Columbus should be held responsible for the subsequent annihilation of millions of Native Americans.

 

For Luther, the Jews had rejected Christ as Messiah and their on-going presence was as much a hindrance to the Gospel message of the Reformation as the papacy and the Turks (Islam). He didn’t single them out as a race. Luther’s final admonitions against the Jews can be viewed within the context of the historical moment, which included his theological convictions as well as the prevailing social views of the exiled people.

 

References:

 

Edwards, Mark U., Jr. Luther’s Last Battles. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1983.

Gritsch, Eric W. “Was Luther Anti-Semitic?” Christianity Today, Issue 39, July 1, 1993.

Luther, Martin. On the Jews and Their Lies. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1971.

Oberman, Heiko. “Teufelsdreck: Eschatology and Scatology In the ‘Old’ Luther,” Sixteenth Century Journal, Volume 19, No. 3, 1988.

Oberman, Heiko. The Roots of Anti-Semitism In the Age of Renaissance and Reformation. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1981.

[First published in Suite101. Copyright owned by Michael Streich. Any reprints require written permission]

 Tax Collecting in the First Century AD

Zaccheus Illustrates Popular Views on a Despised Profession

© Michael Streich

Dec 3, 2008

Indirect taxation in the Roman provinces were a source of resentment and bitterness, especially if the tax collectors were contractors from within the local communities.

Tax collection in the Roman imperial provinces during the first decades of what would be called the Pax Romana took varying forms. Direct taxes were extracted from all provinces. Roman citizens were exempt from direct taxation and Italy itself was immune, following a reversal of late republican state policy. Poll taxes were created in some of the provinces such as in Egypt and Palestine. During the life of Augustus, three censuses were conducted to help regulate and assess this tax. Indirect taxes were paid by everyone and these were often a source of much bitterness in the provinces.

Zacchaeus in Luke 19

As one of a handful of chief tax collectors, Zaccheus had great power and had achieved significant wealth. The Roman “publicanus” was essentially a contracted position. As chief tax gatherer, Zaccheus would have had subordinates assisting in the collection of customs levies and tolls and each of these would have kept a percentage. Publicans were viewed as extortionists, taking more than the legal amounts but protected by Roman authority. Over-collecting and bribery was common in the provinces.

Philippe Aries and Georges Duby write that, “Imperial authorities refrained from exhibiting too much curiosity about the way in which taxes were extorted from the peasantry.” Hence, men like Zaccheus could extract a reasonable sum for themselves above the amounts that were due. [1] A chief export of Jericho was the highly lucrative balsam. Tax revenues from its export would have provided Zaccheus with a substantial income, much of it coming from arbitrarily inflated fees. The extent of this extortion is demonstrated by Zaacheus eventual willingness to repay these sums at four times the original amounts.

The Despised Tax Collector

The Zaccheus story also demonstrates the level of antipathy held for tax collectors. The New Testament refers to “Publicans and sinners” in the same phrase, highlighting, particularly for Jews, the wretched nature of the occupation, as in the ninth chapter of Matthew’s Gospel. In Luke 19, however, this disgust is described in some detail and focuses on Zaccheus’ height.

Zaccheu

The Despised Tax Collectors was a short man. On the occasion of Jesus’ visit to Jericho, he wanted to personally see the man the whole countryside was talking about. Being short, however, the throngs of people blocked him. This was certainly intentional. Tax collections, especially those of Zacchaeus status, were protected by Roman authority. But there were ways to demonstrate opposition and hatred. This was one example.

Direct taxes such as the tributum soli were paid to imperial officers as was the poll tax. This was the tax paid by Jesus in Luke 20.19ff. Indirect taxes were "farmed out" or contracted to local agents. For Jews that viewed Roman taxation as anathema, bordering on sacrilege, the fact that Zaccheus was one of them made his position all the more precarious and despised. That Jesus referred to Zaccheus publicly as also being a “son of Abraham” indicates that the Publican was both an outcast and a renegade.

Summary

The story of the tax collector was included to illustrate an aspect of the early Christian message that was diametrically opposed to the norms in Roman society and culture. What other religion or mystery cult could so radically alter an accepted fixture in everyday life? So hated were tax collectors that in later decades Jerome would comment that the peasants welcomed the barbarian invaders to free them from the tax gatherers.

[1] Philippe Aries and Georges Duby, A History of Private Life From Pagan Rome to Byzantium (Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1987) p. 117.

New American Standard Bible Reference Edition, 1973.

The copyright of the article Tax Collecting in the First Century AD in Roman History is owned by Michael Streich. Permission to republish Tax Collecting in the First Century AD in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.

Rendering to Caesar

 Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome Compared

Roman Civilization Endured as an Empire Because of Self Identity

© Michael Streich

Dec 26, 2008

The temptation to compare and contrast two great ancient civilizations must be tempered with the fact that Greece and Rome were uniquely different communities.

Why did Rome succeed as an empire yet Greece did not? The answer to this question may well begin with the fact that Ancient Greece never was an empire in the strictest sense of the definition. Other than a brief “imperial” period under Athens – which did not involve all of the Greek city-states, and Philip of Macedonia’s unification of the Greek peninsula followed by his illustrious son’s Asian conquests, Greece could never compare with the centralized structure of Ancient Rome. Hellenisation disseminated Greek culture throughout the Mediterranean world, but this hardly constitutes an empire.

Roman Hegemony during the Republican Period

After defeating their one-time Etruscan masters, the Romans moved to consolidate power in Italy. This was accomplished through war, diplomacy, and the granting of Roman citizenship. The extent of these successes became evident during the Second Punic War when the Italian city-state allies of Rome remained loyal, denying Hannibal the support he needed to decisively defeat Rome.

The Punic Wars determined whether Rome or Carthage would dominate the Mediterranean. The result of the Third Punic War was the destruction of Carthage, recounted by Livy in brutal detail. Following the Punic Wars, Rome turned toward Greece, in part because of the Macedonian-Carthaginian Treaty. Unlike Egypt, which sent the Roman Senate congratulatory remarks following the victory over Carthage, the Macedonians were in league with Hannibal.

By the time Octavian became the first augusti, all of Greece was under the domination of Imperial Rome. Rome’s success was based on many factors that included a willingness to learn strong lessons from defeats and co-opt the ideas of its enemies. The Roman legion owed much to the Greek phalanx of earlier decades and her navy was modeled on Carthaginian designs and strategies. From Greece, Rome took culture and religion. Finally, Rome never interfered with provincial beliefs and customs unless they posed a threat to the core tenets of Roman ideology and practice.

Greek Limitations in the Ancient World

The voluntarily unity of Greek city-states occurred only when outside forces threatened the disparate civilization such as the invasion of Darius I and later Xerxes during the Persian Wars. Yet after these threats were eliminated, the city-states withdrew into their own spheres. Sparta, for example, was more concerned with internal security and control rather than empire building. Even the rise of an imperial Athens seemed motivated more by commercial interests and less by conquest.

The very nature of self interest among the Greek city-states may have been one factor among many in the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War, a series of conflicts and changing alliances that ultimately left a power vacuum filled by Macedonia. Unlike the rise of Rome, there was no central, powerfully competent state able to forge an empire with lasting ramifications. The successes of Philip of Macedonia and his son, Alexander, were built upon the personalities of the leaders so when Alexander died, the empire he forged fell apart.

Unlike Rome, no lasting institutional entities tied together an imperial or pre-imperial community of states. Rome had its period of civil wars such as the contest between Marius and Sulla and the conflicts within the triumvirates, yet the cogent example of Cincinnatus reminded the Romans what had made them a great people, an ideal Cato and Cicero kept in the forefront of Roman identity.

:

Mary T. Boatwright, Daniel J. Gargola, and others, The Romans From Village to Empire: A History of Ancient Rome from Earliest Times to Constantine (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004)

Michael Grant, History of Rome (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1978)

Srah B. Pomeroy, Stanley M. Burstein, and others, Ancient Greece: A Political, Social, and Cultural History (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999)

The copyright of the article Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome Compared in Ancient History is owned by Michael Streich. Permission to republish Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome Compared in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.

Roman Emperor Hadrian

Roman Aqueduct in S.France

Photos by Michael Streich

 Survival of the Early Christian Church

First and Second Century Christians Chart a Triumphant Future

© Michael Streich

Dec 26, 2008

The early Christian church faced many internal and external struggles in the first centuries of the Roman Empire but ultimately prevailed as a powerful institution.

The endurance of Christianity during the first centuries of the Roman Empire may be the greatest “miracle” of the faith tradition beyond the resurrection of the founder, Jesus. Attempts to eradicate the sect by a number of emperors merely strengthened the movement and provided it with heroic martyrs that modeled individual faith for neophytes while sharing in the death of Christ. Despite internal conflicts and external pressures, Christianity emerged as the predominant faith, able to preserve key elements of Roman culture once the empire dissolved in the fifth century.

The First Century Christian Church

The early followers of Jesus were Jews that were forced to worship in private homes after growing opposition by Pharisees and Sadducees. These early believers worshiped Jesus as Christ, the promised Messiah. Central in this worship was the re-enactment of the Last Supper, a celebration that would come to be seen as the Eucharist.

The three “missionary” journeys made by St. Paul over a 13 year period universalized the church. By the turn of the century, Christian communities flourished in Corinth, Ephesus, Antioch, Alexandria, and Rome. Christianity also made significant progress in Spain and North Africa.

Roman religion was an eclectic body of mystery cults, schools of philosophy, a pantheon of deities often borrowed from other cultures (such as Greece), and traditional Roman household worship that dated back to Etruscan times. Christianity, however, was monotheistic and its followers refused to participate in Roman religious rituals such as offering sacrifices to the emperors.

The Appeal of Early Christianity and Roman Responses

Christianity taught that all people could experience a relationship with God through Christ. The message was simple and easily understood. It offered a hope to those in the lowest social stratum. The Christian message attracted both the illiterate and the educated. Christians valued all life, taking in orphans and, through a sense of corporate solidarity, took care of each other.

The social values and morality flowing out of Christianity stood in direct contrast to Roman beliefs and practices. Further, Christians – at least the early Christians, met in secret. The Eucharist was not understood by Romans who heard tales of eating flesh and drinking blood. Much like the excesses of some mystery cults like that of Dionysus, which had been suppressed in the late Republic, Christianity was viewed with great caution and suspicion.

When Christians refused to worship the emperor as a divine being the unity of the Roman state appeared to be threatened. Some Christians refused to serve in the army and opposed the use of violence. Numerous persecutions ensued, ending with the “Great Purge” of AD 303 under Diocletian and Galerius.

The Christian church, however, persevered and grew. A common body of sacred literature, compiled by “church fathers” and endorsed as inspired texts, assisted in church organization. At the same time, hierarchical structures enabled the church to provide methods of defense against internal conflicts associated with heresies, some of which made their appearance as early as the second century.

Triumph of the Christian Church

Although the egalitarian nature of Christian social justice in the early centuries enhanced its appeal among peoples longing for a belief that offered Utopian directions rather than the turmoil following the death of Marcus Aurelius, there were many other factors that contributed to the triumph of Christianity.

The third century saw a waning of oriental mystery cults as well as average Romans seeking truth amidst economic and political breakdowns. The apocalyptic nature of Christianity also provided a particular hope that spoke of a new heaven and a new earth. Christians appeared to be united, even during times of great stress and persecution. Thus did this minority group survive to grow into a mighty institution during the centuries following Roman dissolution.

Sources:

Basic Sources of the Judeo-Christian Tradition, Fred Berthold, Jr., Alan E. Carlsten, and others, editors (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1962)

W. H. C. Frend, The Rise of Christianity (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984.

Williston Walker, A History of the Christian Church 3rd Ed. (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1970)

The copyright of the article Survival of the Early Christian Church in Roman History is owned by Michael Streich. Permission to republish Survival of the Early Christian Church in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.

Basilica of St. Paul