I have been developing arguments that the massive rectangular object that Harry Tzalas pointed out lay on the original shoreline of Alexandria (above) might be the Jewish temple built by the high priest Onias in the Ptolemaic period as a replica of the house of God in Jerusalem. I'd like to move on to the testimony of Philo. Levine brings in Philo's account of the structure from the Embassy to Gaius after recounting Judah b. Ilai's testimony. He writes:
This rabbinic tradition immediately calls to mind the large Alexandrian synagogue which Philo describes in his narrative of the events of 38 CE; he speaks of this building as 'the largest and most magnificent [megiste kai perisemotate] in the city,' one in which the pagan mobs erected a bronze statue of a man riding a quadriga. Thus it is quite plausible that both the rabbinic tradition and Philo are referring to the very same building.[p.85]
It should be noted right off the bat that Levine gives the wrong year for the events described in an Embassy to Gaius. They occur in 40 CE not 38 as he identifies here.
I will devote a future post to the significance of Judah b Ilai's description of 70 + 1 cathedrae being present in the building, Philo's account of the pagan mob's placement of an image of Gaius riding a chariot pulled by four horses AND the throne of St. Mark an object designed for a man to sit in a replica of the heavenly chariot which is associated with four living hiyyot.
It is enough to say that I think there is some common thread running through all of these references and to cite the report by Philo and let my readers draw their own inferences for the time being. The passage in Philo reads:
and, as they wished to curry favour with him by a novel kind of flattery, so as to allow, and for the future to give the rein to, every sort of ill treatment of us without ever being called to account, what did they proceed to do? All the synagogues that they were unable to destroy by burning and razing them to the ground, because a great number of Jews lived in a dense mass in the neighbourhood, they injured and defaced in another manner, simultaneously with a total overthrow of their laws and customs; for they set up in every one of them images of Gaius, and in the greatest, and most conspicuous, and most celebrated of them they erected a brazen statue of him borne on a four-horse chariot. And so excessive and impetuous was the rapidity of their zeal, that, as they had not a new chariot for four horses ready, they got a very old one out of the gymnasium, full of poison, mutilated in its ears, and in the hinder part, and in its pedestal, and in many other points, and as some say, one which had already been dedicated in honour of a woman, the eminent Cleopatra, who was the great grandmother of the last. Now what amount of accusation he brought against those who had dedicated this chariot on this very account is notorious to every one; for what did it signify if it was a new one and belonging to a woman? Or what if it was an old one and belonging to a man? And what, in short, if it was wholly dedicated to the name of some one else? Was it not natural that those who were offering up a chariot of this sort on behalf of the emperor should be full of cautious fear, lest some one might lay an information against them before our emperor, who took such especial care that every thing which at all affected or related to himself should be done in the most dignified manner possible? [Embassy 133 - 135 Yonge Translation]
I have speculated about a connection between an object which resembled the Alexandrian throne of St. Mark existing in the time of Philo (either a lost original upon which our existing relic is a 'remembrance' or our throne is surviving original 'updated' to include Christian references by re-carving the original). The deliberate placement of an image UNDERSTOOD BY THE MOB to represent Gaius riding a quadriga seems to be a 'correction' of a similar object ALREADY IN THE BUILDING to whom Jews devoted themselves (Moses, the Messiah, God?). In any event back to our discussion of the building.
As we go through Philo's references to this 'house of God' of Alexandria in the Embassy to Gaius it is unmistakable that we are dealing with a COMPLEX of buildings (like the temple in Jerusalem) rather than a single 'synagogue.' While it is of course conceivable that a 'great synagogue' could have other buildings associated with it, the description that emerges when this statement is developed alongside things said in Flaccus (which we will bring forward in our next post) and the rabbinic writings, is one of a series of LARGE buildings, a portico and a 'gate' which could reference the physical dimensions of a replica temple of Jerusalem.
Indeed the story in an Embassy to Gaius makes little sense WITHOUT such an understanding. I will cite the entire conclusion which takes place in the Alexandrian Holy Place. The Greeks accuse the Jews of not offering sacrifices to Caesar in their Holy Place. There are of course a number of synagogues in Alexandria and a Roman ruler would be quite aware that Jewish common houses were not set up for animal slaughter. As such Gaius goes to what I presume to be the altar of the temple of the Jews in Jerusalem and Philo narrates that:
when we began to reply to him [Gaius] and to explain it, he, as soon as he had a taste of our pleading on the principles of justice, and as soon as he perceived that our arguments were not contemptible, before we could bring forward the more important things which we had to say, cut us short and ran forward and burst into the principal building, and as soon as he had entered he commanded the windows which were around it to be filled up with the transparent pebbles very much resembling white crystal which do not hinder the light, but which keep out the wind and the heat of the sun. Then proceeding on deliberately he asked in a more moderate tone, "What are you saying?" And when we began to connect our reply with what we had said before, he again ran on and went into another house, in which he had commanded some ancient and admirable pictures to be placed. But when our pleadings on behalf of justice were thus broken up, and cut short, and interrupted, and crushed as one may almost say, we, being wearied and exhausted, and having no strength left in us, but being in continual expectation of nothing else than death, could not longer keep our hearts as they had been, but in our agony we took refuge in supplications to the one true God, praying him to check the wrath of this falsely called god. And he took compassion on us, and turned his mind to pity. And he becoming pacified merely said, "These men do not appear to me to be wicked so much as unfortunate and foolish, in not believing that I have been endowed with the nature of God;" and so he dismissed us, and commanded us to depart.
Having then escaped from what was rather a theatre and a prison than a court of justice (for as in a theatre, there was a great noise of people hissing, and groaning, and ridiculing us in an extravagant manner, and as in a prison, there were many blows inflicted on our bodies, and tortures, and things to agitate our whole souls by the blasphemies which those around us uttered against the Deity, and the threats which they breathed forth against ourselves, and which the emperor himself poured forth with such vehemence, being indignant with us not in behalf of any one else, for in that case he would soon have been appeased, but because of himself and his great desire to be declared a god, in which desire he considered that the Jews were the only people who did not acquiesce, and who were unable to subscribe to it), we at last recovered our breath, not because we had been afraid of death from a base hankering after life, since we would have cheerfully embraced death as immortality if our laws and customs could have been established by such means, but because we knew that we should be destroyed with great ignominy, without any desirable object being secured by such means, for whatever insults ambassadors are subjected to are at all times referred to those who sent them. It was owing to these considerations that we were able to hold up our heads for a while, but there were other circumstances which terrified us, and kept us in great perplexity and distress to hear what the emperor would decide, and what he would pronounce, and what kind of sentence he would ultimately deliver; for he heard the general tenor of our arguments, though he disdained to attend to some of our facts. But would it not be a terrible thing for the interests of all the Jews throughout the whole world to be thrown into confusion by the treatment to which we, its five ambassadors, were exposed? For if he were to give us up to our enemies, what other city could enjoy tranquillity? What city would there be in which the citizens would not attack the Jews living in it? What synagogue would be left uninjured? What state would not overturn every principle of justice in respect of those of their countrymen who arrayed themselves in opposition to the national laws and customs of the Jews? They will be overthrown, they will be shipwrecked, they will be sent to the bottom, with all the particular laws of the nation, and those too which are common to all and in accordance with the principles of justice recognized in every city. We, then, being overwhelmed with affliction, in our misery perplexed ourselves with such reasonings as these; for even those who up to this time had seemed to cooperate with us were now wearied of taking our part. Therefore, when we called them forth, they being within, did not remain, but came forth privily in fear, knowing well the desire which the emperor had to be looked upon as God. We have now related in a concise and summary manner the cause of the hatred of Gaius to the whole nation of the Jews; we must now proceed to make our palinode to Gaius.
It should be noted that Samaritan literature makes clear that it was absolutely critical that Israelite temples have open spaces. I will speak of this at greater length in a subsequent post.
