Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

FROM THE GOSPELS TO JESUS §9.8
alistic. 244 On the other hand, we have already noted that the attempt to depoliticise
the Pharisees in the late Second Temple period pushes the evidence too
far. 245 Given the observations in the preceding paragraph, the answer is probably
that certain Pharisees periodically visited Galilean villages, that some at least
were concerned by what they regarded as unacceptable slackness in Torah
observance, and that they were generally well regarded by observant Jews, 246
though some at least engendered a degree of popular disdain by expecting undue
recognition at sabbath assemblies and feast days and by a degree of overscrapulousness
in their halakhoth. The relevance of such conclusions will become clear
as we proceed.
9.8. The Political Context
In setting out the historical context we must remember, of course, that the land of
Israel/Palestine was under Roman rule during the period of our interest. The
Romans had conquered the territory under Pompey in 63 BCE, and established
their rule most effectively through the client king Herod the Great (37-4 BCE).
The united kingdom was then broken up among Herod's surviving sons, with
Herod Antipas being given Galilee and Perea. Judea, after a spell under the unpopular
Archelaus (4 BCE-6 CE), reverted to direct rule, which persisted from 6
CE till the outbreak of the revolt in 66 CE, apart from the brief interlude of Herod
Agrippa (41-44). 247
So long as taxes were paid and there was no undue unrest, the ruling hand
of Rome was fairly light. It was most obvious in the capital, Jerusalem, where
control was maintained over the national leadership of the High Priest, at least to
the extent that the Romans retained the power to appoint and dismiss the one
holding that office (Josephus, Ant. 18.34-35). 248 The Romans also retained in
244. S. J. D. Cohen, 'The Place of the Rabbi in Jewish Society of the Second Century',
in Levine, ed., Galilee 157-73; also 'Were Pharisees and Rabbis the Leaders' 89-105; L. I. Levine,
'The Sages and the Synagogue in Late Antiquity: The Evidence of the Galilee', in Levine,
ed., Galilee 201-22: 'throughout antiquity, and well into the Middle Ages, the rabbis never
played an official role per se in the synagogue. They were not employees of the institution....
Moreover, the ancient synagogue was primarily a local institution. It was built by local donors,
governed by a local body, and its practices and proclivities reflected local tastes' (212). Similarly
Horsley, Galilee 233-35; also Archaeology 151-53; 'Synagogues' 61-64.
245. See above §9.3a.
246. Josephus no doubt overstates the regard in which the Pharisees were held (particularly
Ant. 18.15), but overstatement is not creatio ex nihilo. See also Sanders, Judaism 402-404.
247. Full details in Schürer, History vol. 1. The fullest treatment of Herod Antipas is still
H. W. Hoehner, Herod Antipas (SNTSMS 17; Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1972).
248. Schürer, History 1.377.
308