The Jews of the time were always ready for vigorous hatreds, and in their relations with the
Samaritans they showed that extreme rancour which religious bigots keep, not for upjiosition, but for compromise. The attitude of Jesus to Samari- tans is one of the most illuminative of all the side- lights throAATi upon His mind and diaracter by the Gospels. On more than one occasion He took the unpopular direct route through Samaria while journeying between Jerusalem and Galilee (Jn 4-'). In religion, when it comes to be a question of locali- ties. He holds by Jenisalem, and refuses to admit that any other shrine can rival its claims (4--). Yet the error calls for no anger in Him, inasmuch as His thought of worship transcends all jjlace- limitations, and is as wide as the human spirit and truth (4"-^). He alloAvs for the unthinking brutality of inhospitable A-illages, and sharply rebukes disciples who Avould meet it in a like spirit (Lk 9^). There is a most pleasant sense of tolerant and kindly interest in the alien Samari- tans and their ways of thinking, which, while it asserts the higher morality (Jn 4*") and the higher worship, is yet ever friendly and gentle. He even goes out of His way to show how much nobler as a man a Samaritan may be than those Jews who professed superior nobiljty of faith. The parable of the Good Samaritan (Lk ICP), and Jesus' words about the grateful leper (IT'"'-), are direct ju-otests in the name of fairness again.st the common judg- ment and attitude of His countrymen.
A few words on the attitude whicli Jesus as- sumed to Rome and the Romans are necessary to complete the view of Palestine as He knew it. Rome thrust itself then upon the inhabitants of Palestine in two forms. In such governors as Pilate it was seen directly, as the hostile im- perial power governing the jirovince of Syria. From Antioch its roads and armies had subdued the land, j'et had never broken the spirit of its people, or quenched their fierce hopes of reprisals and of deliverance. At eveiy centre its tax-gatherers had their stations. Its Pr?etorium in Jerusalem was occupied by the palace of the hated Pilate, whose cruelties were held in check only by his fear of the still more cruel emj^eror, and whose desire to quell revolutions was hindered by the fear of complaints on the score of his financial crimes. On tlie other hand, there were tlie Herods, Idumsean princes whose policy was that of Romanizing. "With them, to a gi'eat extent, were the Sadducees, and under them the outward face of the country had rapidly assumed the appearance of a Western land. Archi- tecture, commerce, amusements, and worship all showed the work of Rome through the Herodian house. There was a Roman theatre in Jerusalem, with lavishly appointed games ; and a Roman eagle was set up on the Temple gates. Fortresses had risen along all the frontiers and in every part of the land, and it was Herod tlie Great Vho had cleared oirt the robbers from the Vallej" of Doves in Galilee, and so had opened Gennesaret and created Capernaum, thus unconsciously buikling the plat- form for a great part of the ministry of Jesus. At Jericho the palace - life was vmrestrained in its luxury and licentiousness ; in Jerusalem, Herod"s palace overlooked the city from the Jarta gate. Tiberias rose bj- the shore of the Galihean sea ; but as it was built on an old graveyard it was avoided by religious Israelites, and Ilesus never visited it, so far as our records tell. But all round the lake, villjts had been built, and the shores of Galilee seem to have been a fashionable watering- place for Romans, a development which every Herod must have found to his own heart. The disciples, who were Galila^an fisliermen, must have found a market for their fish in many a Roman household.
The attitude of Jesus towards Rome is very clearly depicted in the Gospels. From first to
298
PALESTINE
PALESTINE
last every point at which His life touches any of the Herods shows hostility of relations (Mk 8^^, Lk 13^'- ^- 23^, etc. ). He appears studiously to have avoided Tiberias, Csesarea, and the city of Samaria. Herodism and its effects He accepted without fur- ther protest as the actual state of the world in which He had to live ; but for that Herod with whom He had most to do He showed open con- tempt. To the popular mind, Herod was the mur- derer of John, who would also kill Jesus unless He sought escape (Lk 13^'). To Jesus he was but ' that fo.x,' by no means of sufficient importance to make Him cliange His plans ( 13^-). He manifested no admiration for the great stones and buildings of Herod the Great in the Temple which he had erected (Mk 13^- ^). This scorn of Jesus reached its climax in His silence under Herod's examination at Jeru- salem, and the contemptible revenge of the purple robe and crown of thorns (Lk 23*).
Towards the actual Roman Empire Jesus assumed another attitude. Galilee in Jesus' time was full of revolution. Along with its tolerant cosmopoli- tanism there always were elements of the most violent fanaticism there, — a combination by no means unusual in the history of nations. Judas of Galilee was the popular patriot and hero, and the sons of Judas, who grew up as boys near Jesus, were to perish on crosses after Him, for vain at- tempts against the Roman sway. Thoughts of such revolution may have been involved in the third temptation ; but if so, they were immediately rejected. Pilate's eager question, ' Art thou a king?' (Jn 18^), met with no response which could be used against Jesus as a serious charge. His payment of tribute, and the words He spoke about it on various occasions, show no sense of resented injury (Mt 22-i). His absence of bitterness towards the tax-gatherers, and His calling of one of them to be a disciple, were among the bitterest sources of the hatred borne to Him by the Pharisees (Mt 9^""). He saw the publicans as human beings, and not as renegades and traitors. The absence of pre- judice which enabled Him to adopt this attitude has been explained on the ground that He took ' no interest whatever in the burning questions of the times' (Hausrath, ii. 210). It would be more accurate to say that, so far as the political condi- tions were concerned. He accepted the facts and their inevitable consequences. He saw the coming destruction of Jerusalem with deep emotion (Mt 23^^), and He spoke of it as about to be trodden down by the Gentiles (Lk 21-'*), but He put forth no effort politically to change the course of events. The words in which He spoke of Pilate's slaughter of the Galilaeans, who were no doubt a band of revolutionary patriots, are certainly very remark- able. Not only did He refrain from any comment on the tragedy, or any tribute to their daring or their sacrifice; all He had to say of them was that they were not sinners above other Galilaeans (Lk 13^).