Roman rule and relative autonomy of the Sanhedrin

At the dawn of Christianity, imperial policy consisted in governing only through the intermediary of local monarchs, ruling the neighboring nations still too unruly to accept a Roman Viceroy.

Such was the role of King Herod.

Under the Roman occupation, political life was extinct, only palace intrigues remained. Most Jews were simply excluded from public life.

Agents of the monarchy took charge of the temple worship: they bought the office of high priest for a price, kept it for the pleasure of the king, then, enriched by the income of their office, handed it - in the manner of the Greeks - to their appointed successors.

After the death of Herod, the Jews begged the Romans to unite their country with Syria and to entrust the administration to Roman governors. The Romans first tried to keep the sons of Herod in power, but this only caused new difficulties. They eventually yielded by appointing the first of a series of procurators, who resided in Caesarea, the Hellenistic city, only going to Jerusalem at the time of pilgrimages to attend the festivals. When one of them, Cestius, in the spring of 66 A.D., was killed in an ambush when he returned from Jerusalem, the government of the procurators ceased as abruptly as it had begun.

The Sanhedrin or high court enjoyed a certain freedom. The court certainly retained the sovereign right to manage the affairs of the Temple. It decided and settled litigation in civil and commercial law, defined personal and family status, and regulated marriage procedures. It was also the court that collected the taxes appointed by the Bible and who determined the liturgical calendar.

________________________________________

Jacob Neusner, Jewish author