Caesar CXXXVII Posted November 30, 2008 Report Share Posted November 30, 2008 I came across a name - Caius Iulius Alexander Berenicianus cos. suff. 116 CE . The last name sounded like a descendant of the Jewish princess Berenici and I wondered about his origin . Did a little research and came up with this - Yehuda/Judah Aristobulus the Judaean Jewish king (66 to 63 BCE) had a son, Alexandros who had a daughter - Miriam/Mariamme the wife of king Hordus/Herod (a son of an Edomite who converted to Judaism) . The couple had a son, prince Alexandros "II", he had a son, Alexandros "V" (not "III") who had a son (or brother) - Tigranes V king of Armenia . The son of the Armenian king was prince Caius Iulius Alexander and he was the father of the above cos. suff. Certainty he had Other family connections (Armenian, Nabataean, Edomite, Persian, Greek and Medes) . It was 46 years after the great revolt of 70 CE . The amazing thing is that in the years 115-117 the Jews of the east (not including Judaea) were in revolt . Any connection ? There were others ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingsoc Posted November 30, 2008 Report Share Posted November 30, 2008 I believe you referring to descendant of Alexander (the son of Herod and Miriam) and Glaphyra (the daughter of Archelaus of Cappadocia), after Alexander was executed by his father in 7 BC Glaphyra return to her father court and her children lost any connection to Judaism. Around the time of Vespasian they made the transit from eastern royalty to Roman senators (see for example the case of Gaius Julius Alexander). Cassius Dio say that Titus Flavius Clemens, the consul of 95 and the cousin of Domitianus and father of his design heirs, had converted (or at least adopted some customs) into Judaism: "At this time the road leading from Sinuessa to Puteoli was paved with stone. And the same year Domitian slew, along with many others, Flavius Clemens the consul, although he was a cousin and had to wife Flavia Domitilla, who was also a relative of the emperor's. The charge brought against them both was that of atheism, a charge on which many others who drifted into Jewish ways were condemned. Some of these were put to death, and the rest were at least deprived of their property."(Cassius Dio, 67.14) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursus Posted November 30, 2008 Report Share Posted November 30, 2008 This is news to me. Until now I had thought the highest ranking Roman of Jewish persuasion was a certain Prefect of Egypt. http://www.livius.org/jo-jz/julius/alexander.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar CXXXVII Posted November 30, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2008 About Clemens - Because of the Romans of the 90' and on not knowing to distinguish between Jews and Christians (they thought that the Christians were just another Jewish sect) it is consider by many scholars that Dio ment that Clemens was a Christian . There is a storng Christian tradition that Clemens was Pope Clement... About Iulius Alexander - Cerrect me if I am worng but he was a Jew not by persuation but by origin, no ? About cos. suff. 116 - The Jews says - "Once a Jew, allways a Jew" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingsoc Posted November 30, 2008 Report Share Posted November 30, 2008 About Iulius Alexander - Cerrect me if I am worng but he was a Jew not by persuation but by origin, no ? He was born to a aristocratic Jewish family in Alexandria and later in life abandon the Jewish faith. About cos. suff. 116 - The Jews says - "Once a Jew, allways a Jew" To call a person which neither saw himself as a Jew in any way nor was seen as one by his environment a Jew just because more than 100 years ago one of his ancestors was Jewish is utterly ridicules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar CXXXVII Posted November 30, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2008 To call a person which neither saw himself as a Jew in any way nor was seen as one by his environment a Jew just because more than 100 years ago one of his ancestors was Jewish is utterly ridicules. Please tell me how a joke (good or bad) can be "utterly ridicules" ? For Judaea's sake...man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursus Posted November 30, 2008 Report Share Posted November 30, 2008 Both of you calm down, please. In regards to the Jewish question, If Iulius Alexander's mother was Jewish, does that not by internal Jewish law make him culturally Jewish, even if he himself was not practicing in a religious sense? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nephele Posted December 1, 2008 Report Share Posted December 1, 2008 In regards to the Jewish question, If Iulius Alexander's mother was Jewish, does that not by internal Jewish law make him culturally Jewish, even if he himself was not practicing in a religious sense? Yes, that's correct, Ursus. It's an old tradition that would have been observed in the time of C. Iulius Alexander Berenicianus, as it is today. I have to say that I personally find this entire thread fascinating, not having previously been aware of any possible Jewish Roman magistrates! -- Nephele Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar CXXXVII Posted December 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2008 Well, a surprise ! "In Jewish onomastics and literature, the name Berenicianus is indeed rare. As stated above, it is present only in the name of queen Berenice's son, and it is on this rarity that I have based our identification...the masculine name Berenicianus is withour doubt derived from the faminine Berenice...the male name Berenicianus was unheard of until the outspoken Herodian queen decided to name her son after herself . it was most common in the Hellenistic and Roman world and was becoming increasingly popular with the Jews to name women with the feminine version of the male name . Queen Berenice decided to reverse the practice. This Berenicianus may, therfore, be the first in the world...One Berenicianus, apparently mentioned in two inscriptions, one dated and one undated, may be of special interest. A Gaius Julius Alexander Berenicianus is mentioned in an inscription from Ephesus (no. 5 in n. 57), which was copied in the fifteenth century by Cyrique of Anacona and has not been seen since. This Berenicianus could be identified with another man who had served as proconsul of the province of Asia in the year 132-133 (ie - the cos. suff. 116), mentioned in an inscription from Laodicea (no. 6 in n. 57), where he is designated as Berenicianus, son of Alexander" (Julia Crispina, Daughter of Berenicianus, a Herodian Princess in the Babatha Archive: A Case Study in Historical Identification, Author Tal Ilan . Published by: University of Pennsylvania Press) Now, this Berenice (the wife of Herod of Chalcis) was a Jew by all criteria and without doubt . More than that - Berenicianus daugther was Iulia Crispina - a Jew ! This is the stemma of Ilan - Herod the Great (a Jew) and Mariamme the Hasmonean (a Jew) has a son, aristobulus (a Jew), he had a son, Agrippa I (a Jew), and he had a daugther, Berenice (a Jew), she married Herod of Chalcis the grandson of herod the Great (a Jew) and they had a Berenicianus . Tal calls this line as the Judaean/Chalcian Branch . Tal admit that there is a confusion about the men - a Jew or, as stated above, a descendant of Herod the great and miriam by the Armenian-Asiam Branch . According to this - Berenicianus was a Jew pure and simple or a descendant of Jews . Practicing "Judaism" is not relevant for the case . I am reffering to Genealogy, not religion . And BTW, according to the Nuremberg "laws" a Jew is Jew even if his great-grandfather was a converted Christian... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingsoc Posted December 1, 2008 Report Share Posted December 1, 2008 ASCLEPIADES is right (see the genealogy tree at the end of Ilan's article). also some cast doubt that the name "Berenicianus" first appear in the son of queen Berenice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar CXXXVII Posted December 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2008 Well, a surprise ! Actually, no surprise. If you check on your own notes, you will verify we're talking about two Berenicianus: 1) Gaius Julius Alexander Berenicianus, Cos 116, son of Caius Iulus Alexander and Queen Julia Iotapa of Cetis; widely discussed in our previous posts. He was born circa 75 AD. 2) Berenicianus (one name), only knowm by one casual mention from FL Josephus (Antiquitates Judaicae, Liber XX, cp. V, sec II): " He (HEROD OF CHALCIS) left behind him three sons; Aristobulus, whom he had by his first wife, with Berenicianus, and Hyrcanus, both whom he had by Berenice his brother's daughter." (Ergo, he must have born between 46 AD -his parents marriage- and 49 AD -his father's death-) They were from different branches and different generations of the Herodian dynasty: # 1 was great-great-grandson of Alexander; # 2 was the grandson of Aristobolus; These Alexander and Aristobolus were brothers; the sons of Herod the Great by Mariamne. ie, Berenicianus # 2 was a cousin of Julius Tigranes (VI of Armenia), the paternal grandfather of Berenicianus # 1. Actually I have just said that in the last lines of my post . Please read again . Ilan saye that there was one known Berenicianus and he must have been Berenici's son, otherwise there is no expelation for his name . We have Ben Matityahu's words and the inscription about a Berenicianus son of Alexander . That's it . Ilan conjectured that they are the same because the "son of Alexander" is the only evidence for him to be from the Armenian branch and not from the Judaean one . Besides, Berenice married an Alexander . Can we not question the Judaean origin of cos. suff. 116 ? or maybe he was of Norwegian origin ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar CXXXVII Posted December 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2008 ASCLEPIADES is right (see the genealogy tree at the end of Ilan's article). also some cast doubt that the name "Berenicianus" first appear in the son of queen Berenice. See his comment (on the chart) about Gaius Berenicianus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingsoc Posted December 1, 2008 Report Share Posted December 1, 2008 Actually I have just said that in the last lines of my post . Please read again . Ilan saye that there was one known Berenicianus and he must have been Berenici's son, otherwise there is no expelation for his name . We have Ben Matityahu's words and the inscription about a Berenicianus son of Alexander . That's it . Ilan conjectured that they are the same because the "son of Alexander" is the only evidence for him to be from the Armenian branch and not from the Judaean one . Besides, Berenice married an Alexander . She was never married to any one named Alexander, her husbands were: 1. Marcus the brother of Tiberius Julius Alexander. (2) her uncle Herod from whom she had her two sons. (3) Polemon king of Clicia. Can we not question the Judaean origin of cos. suff. 116 ? or maybe he was of Norwegian origin ? Berenice and Herod were married between 44-48, so her son must have born in this period. We know that Gaius Julius Alexander Berenicianus was consul in 116 and proconsul of Asia c. 132-3. To identify his with the son of Berenice will took some extrodenery evidence to prove that a person that was born in the middle of the first century was still alive and started a senatorial career in his old age. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar CXXXVII Posted December 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted December 1, 2008 (edited) She was never married to any one named Alexander, her husbands were: 1. Marcus the brother of Tiberius Julius Alexander. (2) her uncle Herod from whom she had her two sons. (3) Polemon king of Clicia. Berenice and Herod were married between 44-48, so her son must have born in this period. We know that Gaius Julius Alexander Berenicianus was consul in 116 and proconsul of Asia c. 132-3. To identify his with the son of Berenice will took some extrodenery evidence to prove that a person that was born in the middle of the first century was still alive and started a senatorial career in his old age. Well, he was Marcus Iulius Alexander !!! That is what I have ment . You see - Berenice married an Alexander... "extrodenery evidence" - Do we have evidence for Cos. suff. 116 that he was the son of of Gaius Iulius Alexander who became Marcus Iulius Agrippa in Ilan's chart ? We can agree that : 1. Con. suff. 116 was of Jewish origin (among others) as said in post 1 and on 2. We have one solid Berenicianus (Ben Matityahu's) 3. 116 and 132/3 seems too far for him to be the same one 4. We must (?) conjecture that the 116 was another one so we must (?) put him in another Herodian line 5. We came back to post no. 1 Asc' mentioned another consul from that family - Detalies would be welcome and so other names Edited December 1, 2008 by Caesar CXXXVII Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar CXXXVII Posted December 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted December 2, 2008 Found this - By the end of the third century - Theodotos (a palatinus) Aurelius Basileides from Sardis (a procurator) Paulus from Sardis (a comes !) Julianus (a palatinus, brother of a rabbi named Paregorius) Gelasius from Sepporis (a comes !) Iosses Maximinus Pannonius (principalis, he was high synagogue official) Cosmius (officer) Alexander (a prostates) 400 CE - Lectorius was elevated to the rank of praeses of the Balaeric islands In 418 - Theodore and Caecilianus held the military title of defensor civitatis There is more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.