“Barbarians” judge the law

The rabbis on the uncivil law of Rome

Datos Bibliográficos

ID20074986
AutoresChristine Hayes (Yale University, autor de correspondencia)
Año2021
Páginas455-498
Fecha de publicación2021-01-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoCHAPTER
RevistaLegal engagement (SOURCE_BOOK)
EditorialPublications de l’École française de Rome (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.4000/books.efr.10143
OpenAlexW3187331685
ISBN9782728314652
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas1
Referencias citadas33

In the ancient and late antique world, various peoples engaged in competitive ethnic apologetics. In so doing, they drew on central tropes of the civilized/barbarian dichotomy, first formulated by the Greeks, which valorized law as the definitive mark of a civilized people and bulwark against barbarian savagery. Invoking familiar tropes of the “barbarian repertoire” (described by Kostas Vlassopoulos), ancient and late antique writers adopted a double strategy of apologetics and redirection, defending themselves against the charge of barbarism and redirecting it on to their accusers. Palestinian rabbis participated in this competitive ethnic apologetics in two ways. First, they defended themselves from the charge of barbarism by neutralizing violent elements of biblical death penalty law. Specifically, they “barbarized” the stubborn and rebellious son of Deuteronomy 21, and they imported substantive and conceptual elements from Roman law in order to conform biblical executions to the Roman standard of a dignified and aesthetically pleasing death. Second, they redirected the charge of barbarism onto Rome through ironic narratives focused on the savagery of Roman emperors

Political science · Classical Antiquity Studies · History · Law