Page:Jewish Encyclopedia Volume 2.pdf/454

408 THE JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA

Babylonia

Palestinian patriarch possibly he even meditated the erection of a new temple. This spirit of independence must certainly have been gratifying to the resh

galuta but when the Palestinian Sanhedrin sent two messengers to Babylon with the sarcastic suggestion that Ahijah (the resh galuta) should build another altar and that Hananiah should play the harp thereto, the remonstrance sufficed to bring the people to their senses again, and to nip the dangerous schism in the bud. This episode made such a strong im;

pression

upon the public mind that

there are several accounts of it (Ber. 63a; Yer. Ned. 40a; Yer. Sanh. 19a). Judah b. Bathyra, who had a college in Nisibis, also influenced Hananiah to give up his intention nevertheless, the college of the latter was still

recognized in Palestine as authorized (Sanh. 32b). Nathan, a son or brother of the exilarch, was vicepresident of the Palestinian Sanhedrin at this time. From this period on, instances are numerous of talented Babylonians attaining high esteem in Palestine. The Babylonians were well aware of their preeminence; and a Babylonian amora thus expressed himself concerning it: "When the Torah was forgotten

Ezra came from Babylon and restored it forgotten again, Babylonian Hillel came and rehabilitated it; forgotten once more, R. Hiyya and his sons came and reestablished it " (Suk. 20a). This rather boastful utterance ignores the fact that both Hillel and Hiyy a although Babylonians by birth, gained their knowledge in the Palestinian colleges. The fact that Abba Arika (commonly called " Rab "), a nephew of Hiyya, studied in Palestine, led to remarkable results for the Babylonian Jews for Rab was the intimate friend of the last Parthian king, Artaban IV. (209-226). The Persian people were now again to make their influence felt in the history of the world. Artaxthe full name erxes I. (Ardeshir I. son of Babek appears in Abraham ibn Daud, ed. Neubauer, p. 60) destroyed the rule of the Arsacids in the winter of 226, and founded the illustrious dynasty of the Sassanids. Different from the Parthian in Israel,

when

.



,



who in language and religion inclined toward Hellenism, the Sassanids intensified the Persian side of life, favored the Pahlavi language, and restored with zeal the old religion of the Magi, founded upon fireworship, which now, under the favoring influence of the government, attained the fury of fanaticism. Of course, both Christians and Jews suffered under Sassanid

rulers,

Period.

but the latter, dwelling in more compact masses, were not exposed to such general persecutions as broke out against the more isolated Christians. The attitude of the first Sassanid, Ardeshir I., toward this movement is not clear. Gibbon (" Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire," ch. viii.) narrates that Ardeshir persecuted both Christians and Jews, and adduces Sozomen, book ii., ch. i., as authority; this passage, however, refers only to Christians. Against the statement, also, is the evidence of Ibn Daud that in Ardeshir's days the Jews and Persians loved each otber.as also in the days of King Sapor. Ardeshir I. S. Cassel believes that the Jews were favored by the Persians; and Graetz knows of no persecution under Ardeshir. There is, however, in the " Small Chronicle " although not this



—

408

—

a statement that " the Persians obtained dominion in the year 245 after the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple, and instituted a persecution of the Jews." The passage in " Yuhasin" (ed. London, 93a) sets this event in the period of the exilarch Nehemiah, in the year 175 after the DestrucEar from being declared erroneous (Lazarus, in tion Brull's " Jahrbucher, " x. 95), this statement deserves full confidence, but the year should read " 165 " instead of " 175 " that is, the year 233 of the common era, seven years after the inauguration of Persian power. Certain Talmudical accounts, belonging to the period, corroborate this thus, R. Kahana says "Hitherto the Persians [Parthians] permitted Jews to exercise capital punishment but now the Persians do not permit it " (B. K. 117a). The Jews were no longer appointed to the wardenship of the canals (" reshe nahare "), nor to offices of the court (" gezirpati"; Persian, Jinzar paili; Greek, a^apa-Karelg), which, however, the Jews regarded as an advantage (Ta'anit 20a); canal-wardens, who were also taxcollectors, being held in such dread (as is graphically described in Sanh. 256) that the Jews were glad to prison-warder is menbe relieved from the duty. tioned (" zandukna, " Ta'anit 22a), but he was probably in the employ of the exilarch. When the news was brought to R. Johanan, the most esteemed amora in Palestine, that the Guebers (in the Talmud, " Habrin ") meaning the Magi had overrun and conquered Babylonia, he swooned away in sympathy but on being revived for his Babylonian brethren he reassured himself with the thought that the conquerors were open to money inducements (Yeb. 635). Difficulties were put in the way of the Jews in such matters as the slaughtering of cattle for food, and as to their bathing-places and cemeteries, which were subject to intrusion (ib.). On certain Persian holy days, the Guebers would not permit any light in the houses of the Jews (Sanh. 746; compare Skei'ltot di R. Ahai, § 42) they made no exception even in a case of sickness (Git. 17a). Such an instance happening in his own family, Rabba bar bar Hana is said to have exclaimed, " All-merciful God either under Thy protection, or, if not, under the protection of Esau [Rome]." That this utterance was opposed to another, by R. Hiyya, who ascribed it to God's especial providence that the Jews found refuge from Rome in Babylonia, was explained by the remark that the evil times in Babylonia commenced only with the Guebers (ib. ). The patriarch Judah II. was informed that the Parthians resembled the armies of King David, but that the New Persians were like demons of hell (Kid. 72a) and it was in these armies that the Jews, although possibly a little later, had to render military service (Sanh. 97S; MS. in its proper place

.







A

—

—





!



Munich, however, has

iDI") [Rome] for DID). All these things must have taken place under the vigorous Ardeshir. How powerful was the impression made by him upon the fancy of the Jews, may be gathered from the so-called Apocalypse of Elijah (ed. Jellinek, in "B. H." iii. 66; ed. Butten-

which most probably refers war against the Romans ("Jew. Quart. Rev." xiv. 360). To his campaign in 230 the obscure statement of the Latin author Solinus must be referred, that Jericho was destroyed by " Artaxwieser, Leipsic, 1897),

to Ardeshir's