Katheryn Whitcomb (Haverford College)
Josephus famously noted that, “Καῖσαρ μὲν οὐδένα μετὰ Ἀγρίππαν Ἡρώδου προετίμησεν, Ἀγρίππας δὲ μετὰ Καίσαρα πρῶτον ἀπεδίδου φιλίας τόπον Ἡρώδῃ.” (AJ 16.361; BJ 1.400). Indeed, based on Josephus’ account of their interactions, many scholars have adopted the view that Agrippa was a significant figure in Herod’s personal and political life. Further, the Roman statesman’s relationship with Herod not only caused Agrippa to figure prominently, albeit briefly, in the history of Roman-Jewish relations, but also led to mutual respect between Agrippa and the Jewish people with whom he came in contact (Reinhold 1933; Roller 1998; Hohlfelder 2000). Through a close reading of the Agrippa sections in Josephus, as well as a consideration of these sections in the broader context of Josephus’ corpus and contemporary events, this paper seeks to complicate the tidy picture of the positive impact of Agrippa and Herod’s friendship. In addition, I aim to shed more light on the power dynamics between Roman authorities and populations on the periphery of the empire.
There is plentiful evidence to suggest both a strong bond between Herod and Agrippa, and the positive outcomes this friendship created for Jews in the eastern reaches of the empire: the buildings (and family members) Herod named after Agrippa, the extended tour of the east the two men took shortly before Agrippa’s untimely death, perhaps the entire harbor of Sebaste can be seen as a monument to their friendship (Bauman 1983; Roller 1998; Hohlfelder 2000). One event in particular has been used to demonstrate the immense influence Herod must have had with Agrippa: a petition by Jews from Ionia for support to practice their ancestral rites unmolested by their Greek neighbors (Toher 2014). While Josephus’ notice that the Jews were successful in their petition illustrates that Roman commanders could perform actions that were, and were perceived by contemporary Jews to be beneficial to the Jewish community, it also reveals several anxieties inherent in the status of marginalized populations within the Roman world. According to Josephus, Agrippa claimed that he was granting to the Ionian Jews no more than previously had been allowed to them by Rome; a point that the delegation themselves makes clear. This assertion raises some disconcerting questions. If Roman statutes protecting Jewish religious liberty in Asia Minor were already in place, why is there the need to petition Agrippa? How enforced/enforceable were these previous Roman decrees?
A sense of fragility is further underscored by the conditions surrounding the petition: it is only allowed and successfully argued because of the friendship between Herod and Agrippa. What if Herod had not accompanied Agrippa? What if they were not close friends? What happens when Agrippa or Herod dies and there is no longer a strong personal connection between a powerful Roman and a Jewish king?
The friendship between Agrippa and Herod may have temporarily benefited the Jews in the East, but in the midst of its seeming benevolence, their friendship exposed the fragility of populations on the periphery.