The Revolt in the ‘ 60s did not extend beyond Syria. If the Jews in Egypt and in Asia had joined in, the Romans would have been under the gun. The Jews might have made common cause with the Persians. It has been estimated that a tenth of the people of the Empire were Jews, the bulk of them in the East. Roman power, btw, was based on the Greeks. One criticism of Mel Gibson’s
Passion” was that he had Pilate speaking Latin/Aramaic to Christ when Greek would probably have been their common language. Relatively few of the Roman troops were in the area Latins or Italians of any sort.
“One criticism of Mel Gibson’s Passion” was that he had Pilate speaking Latin/Aramaic to Christ when Greek would probably have been their common language.”
Well, at the time and place of of Christ’s Trial, that was true.
But the revolt came later. Initial efforts to crush it failed and legions were brought in from other areas. I do not believe the legionnaires were ethnic Greeks. Some of them like the Tenth Legion, were from Spain, others recruited from the Balkans. And trying to determine who were ethnic Celts, Macedonians, Thracians, Iberians,etc. or ethnic Latins is difficult as when Rome conquered terriroty in the West, they had a practise of establishing Coloniae or colonies of discharged veterans to serve as a Romanizing influence. These people frequently married local women, had mixed chidlren by them who then went on to serve in the legions and be discharged later in other parts of the Empire.
The troops who were actually there in Jerusalem at the time of Christ’s trial were probably auxiliaries who may have been Greek speaking Syrians. Most of the people in the Middle East were Hellenized and spoke Greek, but that no more made them ethnic Greeks than the Ptolemys were ethnic Egyptians.
The Legions were stationed at the border because of the Parthian menace.
“Relatively few of the Roman troops were in the area Latins or Italians of any sort.”
Even at the time of Christ and probably during the Jewish Revolt, most of the Officer Class were still drawn from Italy - although that gradually changed as time progressed.
I know that there were large numbers of Jews spread throughout the Empire.
You have to remember that, at that time, the kind of specialized weaponry used by the average legionnary required a LOT of practice to use effectively and required officers who were most epxerienced, the senior centurions, who had the necessary skill to direct them.
A group of people unfamiliar with the use of those hand weapons and lacking the advantages of communication and central command and supply structure would have been fighting at a distinct disadvantage with dealing with the Romans.
Ancient warfare was not as surgical and detached as warfare today frequently is. It was brutal, bloody, tiresome, wearying, and in-your-face. It wasn’t as simple as shooting firearms.
Unless you were very well trained in the use of the arms of the time and disciplined, as the Jews were not, the chances of prevailing against the Roman military were remote.
At least that is my take on it.
Check out some of the books on the Roman Legions by Adrian Goldsworthy. He is a recent British historical scholar with special interest in the Roman Army and its command structure, tactics, etc.
Even in the case of the Battle of the Teutoberger Wald, the Romans were facing an enemy who was:
a) Skilled in the use of arms from youth
b) Familiar with the terrain
c) Led by an officer with experience in Roman Tactics
(Arminius servedi the Roman military establishment)
and the Romans were commanded by a fool - Qunctilius Varus.