---------- Katha :
> Alessandro -- If the romans gave the Jews a hard time in First Cent. bc
> wasn't it because the Jews rejected state polytheism and were also
> making trouble trying to get Palestine out from under rome?
you're right. Partially right. The jews were settled in Rome before the conquest of Palestine (63 b.c). Let me try to make myself clear. Take the history of the "diaspora" (this is the issue, I believe). The diaspora is something (historically) made possible by two different "situations" : exile (deportation) and choice.(a dualistic situation quite similar to each and every "migration") The diaspora begins with the first one (585 b.c., the exile in Babilonia). Then there is the foundation of Alexandria (forty percent of the population were jews, at the time). Now, take the "diaspora in a single country", Italy (geographically). The first settlements were originated by "choice" (the jews were "sent" to Rome). After the conquest of Palestine other jews were "sent" to Rome, but this time (mostly) as "slaves". Another piece of information is that around 70 a.d.(still during the "imperial era", or before the "christian era" of it) the jews of the diaspora already outnumbered the ones living in Israel (geographically intended). We're talking about "numbers" in the millions (5 m to be precise, at the time). I find this very unique. Don't you ?
> That's not
> really anti-semitism, or anti-Judaism as we are thinking about it.
Ok, here is the mis-understanding that is bothering you. There is nothing wrong with your "reading" of anti-semitism/judaism (as we know it). Your linking antisemitism (historically and geographically) to the historical (and cultural) development of Christianity is correct (I'm not disputing it). You have tracked it correctly : from the Empire to the Sacred Roman Empire to the Inquisition to the reform and counter reform to the role played by the orthodox church in Eastern Euorope (passing through few specific "national phenomena"). Don't worry, you are right.
> The
> romans didn't like anybody (christians for example) who exempted
> themselves from the state religion , which could accomodate all sorts of
> new ethnic divinities but not those who rejected the basic roman
> understanding of multiple gods all telling you to fulfill basic civic
> obligations (to pay taxes, play your part in civic functions, accept
> the Roman state as underwritten by the gods etc). Correct me if I'm
> wrong but I don't think the Romans thought the Jews were a special
> magically evil people set apart from normal humanity and responsible
> for plagues, child murder, natural disasters etc. They were just pains
> in the neck.
again, you're right. Not only that, but the Jews were freer than (probably) ever before or after(according to the archeologists, there were so many sinagogues in ancient Rome and surrounding area ...).
> I don't understand your point about nomadism. In the first Century BC,
> the Jews had their own homeland, albeit it was a Roman province. They
> were no more nomadic than the Greeks, or the Romans themselves.
no, they were (are?)"nomadic" in a complete different way (and numbers, back then, at least).
Look, I do not want to sound mysterious. I've been a lurker (a reader. I like it this way, because I can't stand your language, even after a decade living in the Us of A and more than three of studying, which doesn't make me very "credible", I know) for so long of this very mailing list(and others). It happened to me that I've been thinking ("working" is too much, really), lately, about the meta-historical characteristic of anti-immigration movements (or cultural "mass-feelings"). Then I saw that someone had linked anti-Semitism to anti-immigration. Eureka ! I've thought.,"How small has the world become !". That's it. All over Europe the left is debating about "immigration" as if this issue were "news". Which is not. We can link "migration" (domestic or internatinal) and changes in the way people work and live (the passage from the "professional worker" to the "mass worker" or the "worker of thousands jobs" to the "social worker", just to find out that Yoshi is "way wrong", about "workerism" or Negri's works). So this issue, this "question" - I do not know if it is just "coincidental"- becomes crucial.. Its implications are endless, indeed.
ciao, alessandro
P.S.
> Katha :
>
> does anyone know a good book about "anti=semitism" in the pre-christian
> world? Now I'm fascinated.
of course there are many archelogical references, but, unfortunately, not many books. The one I recall the best is by Attilio Milano about the history of the Jews in Italy (1963, Einaudi), but I think has not been translated in english. A good source of informations should be the Judaica section of UC at Berkeley library.