Two Eternal Cities on a Collision Course?

Abstract

Two Eternal Cities on a Collision Course? ERICH S. GRUEN A he confrontation of Rome and Jerusalem cannot but quicken heartbeats, trigger associations, stir mem? ories, and spark curiosity. No other cities parade the combi? nation of great antiquity, tenacious traditions, turbulent history, complex cultures, and compelling narratives. Rome may possess the conventional crown of the "eternal city." But Jerusalem has at least as strong a claim on it. In 66 ce con? flictexploded between them, the so-called "Great Jewish Re? volt" (a label, of course, affixed from theRoman perspective) that took on unexpectedly monumental proportions at the time and produced reverberations that continue to re-echo. Martin Goodman's recent book, Rome and Jerusalem, de? mands attention. * Rightly so. Few scholars have the auctori tas to switch confidently and effortlesslybetween the cultures. Few have written as cogently and convincingly on each of them separately and on both in combination. A sweeping sur? vey of the subject by such a scholar, intended to reach an au? dience beyond the specialist researcher and the academic expert, marks an event of real significance. Itwould have re? ceived a wide welcome on any reckoning. But thatwas not enough for the publisher. A subtitle was added, "The Clash of Ancient Civilizations." The contem? porary allusion is patent?and blatant. Samuel Huntington put the phrase inplay a decade and a half ago with his Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, a con? troversial book much praised and much pilloried, widely * Martin Goodman, Rome and Jerusalem: The Clash of Ancient Civilizations (New York: Knopf, 2007), xiv + 598 pages, $35.00. ARION 17.1 SPRING/SUMMER2009 138 TWO ETERNAL CITIES ON A COLLISION COURSE? cited ifnot widely read. The thesis forecast a mighty contest between Western civilization and the cultures of Islam and Asia, a boost (whatever the intention) for neocons, and a target for their opponents. A link to that controversy would certainly capture notice. The publisher's move was a pre? scient one. Anthony Pagden's Worlds at War: The 2,joo Year Struggle between East and West (2008) came out at a propitious time. It traced the recurring conflict back to an? tiquity, thus conveniently fanning the flames and giving the ancient world conspicuous currency. Tensions between Eu? ropean culture and the nations of the Near East?not to mention open warfare?made the topic temptingly topical. Knopf's editors knew a good thingwhen they saw it. But Goodman is too good a historian to go in for facile generalizations or simplistic stereotypes. The book, in fact, is not about a clash of civilizations at all. Readers who sali? vated when spotting the subtitle will be disappointed. The phrase appears on just one page of thismonumental volume (perhaps also at publisher's prompting?). At that point (410) we are more than two-thirds of theway through the book. And even then thewords herald a clash to come rather than one that has hitherto featured in the story. Goodman opens with drama. The outbreak of revolt and itscourse, culminating in the destruction of the great Temple of Herod, a calamity of titanic proportions, constitute the prologue of the book. It plunges the reader directly into the centerpiece of the study. Goodman summarizes key events and supplies vivid verbal illustrations of the fighting.A most effective beginning. The prologue concludes with some pointed questions that the book proposes to answer: Why did the disaster come about? Was there anything intrinsic in Jewish and Roman society that made it impossible for Jerusalem and Rome to coexist? Did the tensions already sur? face in the time of Jesus' crucifixion at the hands of a Roman governor? Did the conflict of Jews and Romans spill over into relations between Jews and Christians in the Roman world? Perfectly reasonable questions, and very important Erich S. Gruen 139 ones. But they do not touch on clashes of civilizations. And any relevance to contemporary events is indirect and remote. The first question has gripped scholars and students for many generations. A solution by Goodman is devoutly to be desired. (He offered a different one in the past but has come to reconsider thematter). Yet the issue is shelved...