In A.D.70, the Romans destroyed Jerusalem.
What became of the rest of the Holy Land…Israel and Judea?
The land was already fully under Roman control. Jerusalem remained the only holdout against the Romans, and also had the Holy Temple for Jewish sacrificial service. When Jerusalem was conquered in 70 CE, the sacrificial service ceased and the resistance in Jerusalem was wiped out, but there was no real further work for the Romans to do in the rest of Israel/Judea.
Splitters!
Surely the Romans had it under control in A.D. 30-40 when Jesus was tried by Pontius Pilate, no? Did they throw the Romans out after that?
Fucking Judean People’s Front. I’d rather be a bloody Roman!
What is the debate?
I suppose, one thing to consider is whether the Romans were actually the “good guys”, liberating the starving population of Jerusalem from the local equivalent of ISIS.
"…apart from better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order… what have the Romans done for us?
— Brought peace!
— Oh, peace, yes… shut up!"
Wouldn’t you rather be ruled by your own people instead of a foreign power even if the foreign power gave you better stuff?
Romani eunt domus!!!
People like the Sicarii, Zealots, Biryonim, and the People’s Front of Judea? Fuck no.
There was a revolt and the pro-Roman client king abandoned Jerusalem which was subsequently held by a rebel government from 66-70. The actual seat of Roman rule at the time was Caesarea Maritima, so losing Jerusalem was less significant to Roman rule than you might imagine.
I felt Great Debates was the appropriate forum for Biblical questions.
I cannot believe I’m saying this to you, of all people, but–
If that’s true, then how in the name of all that is holy does Masada have such extreme importance?
I’m not sure in what context you consider Masada was important. The last stand there is important to Jewish religious/cultural history, but it wasn’t very important in the broader context of the Roman Empire or Roman history. In fact there are many similar sieges Roman forces conducted over a series of hundreds of years against rebellious groups within the Empire’s borders. In fact the Roman siege of Jerusalem earlier in the revolt was a much bigger engagement than Masada, with more dead on both sides. Masada was essentially just a mopping-up action.
The Jewish rebellion would not even rank very highly in the list of significant Roman rebellions. While it’s from the Republican era, the Third Servile War (Spartacus’ uprising) was always much more prominent in terms of Romans actually remembering it as important and reenacting Roman victories in the conflict. The Jews did successfully defeat one legion, and four legions were sent under Vespasian (who rose to Emperor near the end of the revolt, and whose son Titus took over command after Vespasian was recalled to Rome) to quell it, which means it was a fairly serious event, but it was in a remote province and the overall impact was small.
Arguably for example the British uprising under Boudica was much larger in impact, killing upward of 60,000 or so Romans that were living in Roman towns in Britannia. However it did resolve much faster and with less Roman forces involved (One legion and some auxiliares). The Britons chose to fight a decisive battle in the field against Suetonius’ legion + some additional forces he had been able to scrape together. Despite significantly outnumbering the Romans, the Britons were badly routed and their leadership scattered or were killed off, with Boudica taking poison soon after or dying of disease depending on which account is believed. (Interestingly one legion that received Suetonius’ call to arms refused to attend the battle, after Suetonius victory its commander literally fell on his sword as he likely had calculated Suetonius would be decisively defeated and he would avoid repercussion)
The Jewish forces appeared to prefer to fight defensively against the Romans, from behind city walls and fortified strongholds, which allowed them to stay in the fight much longer.
Like Flyer, I immediately thought of the Masada fortress, which didn’t fall until 74 A.D. I don’t know if Masada was “important” or not, but it’s an amazing fortress; the siege of the fortress by the Romans is an amazing story. Much of that story didn’t emerge until archaeological efforts (described in an excellent book) circa 1964.
Reza Aslan’s Zealot: The life and times of Jesus of Nazareth argues that Jesus was himself a Zealot. (Some say that backlash against the 62 AD stoning death, ordered by former and corrupt High Priest Ananus, of Jesus’ brother James led to the Jewish Revolt which led to the destruction of Jerusalem.)
In the Great Revolt, the Romans destroyed Jerusalem, razed some towns and killed and enslaved a bunch of people, but Jewish live in Judea recovered. The real disaster took place 60 years later, in the Bar Kochva Revolt of 132-136 AD. Starting as a result of Emperor Hadrian seeking to build a pagan temple on the ruins of the Temple of Jerusalem, the revolt, in which Judea achieved independence to two whole years, ended with the utter devastation - even genocide - of the Jewish community. Over half a million Jews were killed and many more were enslaved, and most of the Jewish towns in Judea were destroyed. The Romans themselves had a much harder time of it, losing up to 3 of the 12 legions they sent to suppress the rebellion.
After nearly depopulating the country, the Romans struck the name “Judea” from their records and replaced it with “Syria Palestina”, in honor of the Jews’ ancient enemy, the Philistines. 136 AD, and not 74 AD, is considered the true start of the Jewish diaspora.
Wikipedia and other historical websites have some answers on this.
Paraphrasing:
Tensions and attacks on Jews around the Roman Empire led to a massive Jewish uprising against Rome from 115 to 117 (the Kitos Revolt). Jews in Libya, Egypt, Cyprus and Mesopotamia fought against Rome. Many massacres ensued. Cyprus was severely depopulated.
The Bar Kokhba Revolt started in 132 CE and ended in 136 CE against Emperor Hadrian. The Romans brought an entire third of their army and lost two legions but achieved total victory. A massacre followed. After being defeated by the Romans, the Diaspora. Jews became a minority in Judea and Jerusalem was rebuilt as a pagan city. The Samaritans rebuilt their Temple, and enjoyed a brief independence.
I think the Romans were frustrated or confused because they were getting more revolts from certain groups of people, including but not limited to the Jews. They wrote about these constant revolts. Judaea typically required a Legion to control, and Britannia typically required three Legions to control, large numbers considering the populations there. In fact, Britannia was a unique problem, because any governor being given control of three Legions could decide they wanted to march on Rome instead. (Of course, far more than one Legion were used in the AD 70 Siege of Jerusalem.) The Roman Empire certainly had larger problems, but these conflicts were larger than expected.
In 351-352, Jews revolted against Constantinus Gallus, centered at Galilee, when the emperor was busy putting down other revolts, which in turn distracted him from fighting the Persians. By this time Rome was an early Christian nation. The Romans destroyed three cities in suppressing the rebellion.
Around 363, Julian, the last pagan emperor, hoped to rebuild the Temple, but he was killed fighting the Persians.
In 438 the Romans allowed Jews to pray at the Temple Mount (Temple remnant) but the now largely Christian city revolted, preventing this.
Between 484 and 572, Samaritans revolted against the Eastern Roman Empire. After the first revolt they were banned from their Temple at Mount Gerizim, with a signaling tower put on it to warn of revolts. In 495 the second revolt occupied the Temple, but failed. The revolt of 556 and 572 included Jews. Finally the Romans nearly wiped out the Samaritans.
Jewish Revolt of Heraclius: In 614 Jews led by Nehemiah ben Hushiel and Benjamin of Tiberias teamed up with Persians, briefly recapturing Jerusalem, but the Jewish leader was almost immediately assassinated by a Christian. Only three weeks later Jerusalem was retaken by the alliance but fell into anarchy. They finally surrendered to the Byzantines around 625-628, but were massacred by Christians in 629 and fled to Egypt. The Byzantine Christians would hold the area for about a decade.
Jerusalem would eventually be conquered by Caliph Omar ibn al-Khattab in 637 to 638 CE.
Afterward, I would suggest reading about the Crusades. Jerusalem would still find itself sacked a few times.
Sucks to be in the crossroads. Trade marches through guardedly, protective troops hang around to maintain order, and everyone prospers till the next invader’s troops move in. It’s fun while it lasts.
Sucks to be in the crossroads. Invaders and conquerors and occupiers from everywhere, knocked out by the latest raiders from somewhere, who occupy and fructify and are eventually swamped into the local genepool, but not until they’ve had a few memorials carved and epic poems recited aloud. Hey, here come the next invaders!
Great to be an invader. Those surviving the fight get to enslave the men, rape the women, loot the treasuries and granarys, etc, Just imagine if the Exodus escape had actually happened, and “Pharaoh’s got drownded / Oh Mary don’t you weep”. A foot-messenger brings the news to a nearby king, who calls his fighting leaders together. “Hey guys, did you hear? Pharaoh’s armies got drownded! Gold, beer, and pussy await us! Let’s roll!”
The Levant Coast is still loaded with wealth and pussy. When is the next invasion?
Sorry, that should have been, “Pharaoh’s army got drownded / Oh Mary don’t you weep”.