cAjmJIl
On Pubs and Policemen in Roman Palestine - 1 4 i"
by Daniel Spebber, Ramat-Gan
The problem of Roman sumptuary laws has been discussed a number
of times.' Most recently, Ramsay MacMullen, in his Enemies of the
JRoman Order,^ has written as follows : "From the 70's a.D., the governing
classes, heavy eaters themselves and sometimes, like Nero, addicts of
dives and bars, tried to improve the character of the lower classes by
intermittent legislation to shut up taverns and to prohibit the sale of
cooked meats and pasties. That left vegetables, their definition at one
time being narrowed to peas and beans. After Vespasian, public morals
vs^ere given up as a bad job for three centuries. In the 370's, when prefects
renewed the war, they limited wineshops in what they could sell and in
the hours they could stay open. .." Of particular importance in this
connection is the statement of Ammianus Marcellinus* that Ampelius,
governor of Rome (371—2), gave orders that no wine-shop should be
opened before the fourth hour, (about nine o'clock in the morning), or
in other words that wine-shops should be shut at night.
It is clear from the above that an examination of pubs and licensiiig-
liours may afford valuable insights into social conditions of the time.
And since there is relatively little (primary) material in the classical
sources on the subject, this study is intended to offer to the classicist
some contemporary Rabbinic evidence, which may give yet further
glimpses into the everyday life of the times.
In Leviticus Rabba* we read the following tale :
It happened once that a certain man, who used regularly to drink
twelve xestes of wine a day, one day drank [only] eleven. He tried to go
* A list of abbreviations will be found at the end of the article This
article is intended as part 3 of the sories 'Studies in the Social History of
Roman Palestme' See Latomus XXVIII/I (1969), 186—8 and L'Antiquite
Classique 1969, 164—8
' See T. Klbbbbo, Hotels et Cabarets dans rAntiquite Romaine (= Bi¬
bliotheca Ekmaniana 61), Uppsala 1957, 101—3, 121—2.
2 1967 3 28. 4. 4.
* 12. 1 (250—2) and parallels, (Est. R. 5. 1, etc.). Cf Tanh. Shemini 5.
J. Isbablstam's translation (Midrash Rabbah, Leviticus, 1939, 154) is too
free to be of use to us.
to sleep, but sleep would not come to him. [So] he got up in the dark (= night) and went to the wine-shop«, and said to [the wine-seller] : "Sell me one xestes of wine." [The latter] replied to him: "I cannot, for it is dark." He said to him: "If you do not give [it] me, sleep will not come to me." [To which the wine-seller] replied: "Just now the watchmen*
have passed from (= by) here, and I am afraid of the watchmen and
can [therefore] not give [it] you." [The man] raised his eyes and saw a
hole in the door. [So] he said to him: "Hold the bottle' up to this hole;
you pour from the inside and I shall drink from the outside. He was
insistent. What did he (the wine-seller) do? He put the spout* [of the
bottle] through the crack* in the door and poured from the inside,
while the other drank from the outside. As soon as he finished [drinking],
he fell asleep in a corner in front of the door. The warchmen passed by
him before the door, and thinking him a thief, beat him. [But] he did
not feel [it]. They wounded him, and he did not notice [it]. They red¬
dened'" his eyes, and he saw nothing. [People]" applied to him the verse'* :
Who hath wounds without causel meaning: Who has undeserved wounds?
Who hath redness of eyes^. Who has swollen eyes? Who has all these? —
They that tarry long at the wine. Those who are first to enter the shop'*
and last to leave. Those who make searches after the wine, and learn
where there is a good brand'* and chase after it, saying: "The wine of
so and so is good. The wine of so and so is red. Give us and we shall
drink of it. The wine of so and so is hot (or bubbling). '« Give us and we
shall drink of it."
This passage belongs to the genre of moralistic homilies that used to
be preached in the synagogues on Sabbaths before a mixed crowd. It
5 See below for a discussion of the term.
* See below for a discussion of the term.
' There a number of variant readings here, (see Mabguues' apparatus) ;
I find this the most satisfactory one.
* The text reads suntema, which has boen emended and interpreted in a
number of different ways. The most convincing suggestion this far is that of
Y. Bband, in his Klei Höheres Besifrut Hatalmud (1953), 143, who suggests
that the word suntema equals the Greek *(juctto(iov, meaning a narrow-
spouted vessel. Elsewhere, in a detailed discussion of the problem, I have
suggested *cmaTO(xa — the narrow spout (of the vessel).
* Correct from zira (= hinge) to zaria (— crack), as suggested by I. Löw
in LW 377, and since borne out by manuscript readings, (see Margulies'
apparatus).
1" We would say : blacked.
" See Margulies' apparatus.
" Prov. 23. 29.
'3 See below for a discussion of this term.
1* Literally : a good wine.
15 A refemce to calidal See Klebebg op. cit., 104.
On Pubs and Policemen in Roman Palestine 269
belongs to a group of such anti-drinking sermons,'* and though it may
be tendentious in style and character, the reliability of the information
it contains on conditions in Palestine during the Roman period can
hardly be doubted. Unfortunately, the text cannot be closely dated, nor
can the geographical location of the event described be fixed with any
certainty. All one can state is that it is from between c. 270 and c. 380
C.E., and that it probably comes from one of the larger Palestinian
towns, such as Tiberias or Caesarea." In other words, it is neither clear
from where in Palestine it comes, nor whether or not it antedates the
leges sumptuariae of Rome of the 370's. What is, however, certain is that
some kind of licensing-hour regulations are being referred to, and that
such regulations were enforced by the local police.
The exact status of these police-nightwatchmen is not aU-to-clearly
defined in the text. It is known that there were in Palestine private
scdtuarii {= saltarii — aaXTuapioi ),'* payed for and supported by the
owners of (or renters in) villages and townships.'* However, these were
primarily for keeping off thieves and brigands,"* rather than enforcing
local (sumptuary) regulations. It seems more likely that our night-
watchmen were official policemen, whose job it was to enforce all rules
and regulations. The fact that their behaviour was somewhat on the
rough side, and that rather than take the would-be suspect into custody,
" This kind of anti-drinking holily occurs from the mid. Ill cont. through
the first half of the IV cent. Eg., Lev. R. 12. 1 (243—56); Tanh. Shemini,
passim; Num. R. 10. 8, etc.
" Lev. R. was compiled and edited in the Galilee, Tiberias, £tnd most of
the material it contains in Galilean. See Maboulibs' introduction, (1960)
XXVII — XXXI. However, it also contains non-Galilean material, and, as
will be seen below, there is evidence which points to Caesarea as being the
location of our story.
'* See M. Baba Batra 4. 7: If a man sold a town, he also sold the santer,
(an early II cent. text). Santer = saltuarius (contra Talmudic lexica) ; see
S. Krauss, Talmudische Archäologie II (1911), 106, 501 note 734, 185, 570
note 235; idem in Additamenta ad Aruch Completum, 298, s.v. santer. For
sources, see LW, 403, s.v. The other meaning of saltuarius, a bailiff, (e.g.
Dig. 32. 1. 58, 7. 8. 16, 33. 7. 15, etc.) is found used by Resh Lakish (Palesti¬
nian scholar, flor c. 250—76) in B. Sanhedrin 98 b. The santer is not identical with the "city watchman", see J. Baba Mezia 9. 1 (12a 32); J. Chagiga 1, 7 (76c 34).
19 M. Baba Mezia 9. 1, (but cf. T. Baba Mezia 9. 11, where the watchman
are not listed). See MacMullen, 257—9. On privately owned villages, see
previous note. On the payment of the watchmen by house-renters etc., see
GuLAK, Le-Heker Toldot lia-Mishpai ha-Ivri bi-Tekufat lia-Talmud 1, (1929),
28; Harper in Yale Classical Studies 1 (1928), 160—2. See also John Chry-
sostom Ad Stagirium 6 = PG 47, 458 (380 C.E.) on private nightguards,
(cited by MacMullen ibid.).
"» They tended to be rough, see J. Sheviit 4. 2, (35 b 18).
they heat him up,"' should not suggest that they had no authority to imprison,"" and that hence they were not official policemen. For we have
clear evidence that this kind of behaviour was quite the rule among the
official police too. Thus, in an undated text (cf. between c. 270—350 C.E.)
we read :"*
It once happened in Caesarea that there was a great man who had a
reputation in the city. One night, the city guards, while patrolling,
found a certain stranger"* and seized him. He said to them: "Do not hit me. I am a member of the house-hold of so and so," (i.e. tho great man).
When they beared this, they left him alone [merely] taking him into
custody for the night. In the morning, thy brought him to that man,
and said to him: "We found this member of your household last night."
He said to him: "My son, do you know me?" "No," he replied. "In that
case how are you a member of my household?" "I put my trust in you.
For were I not to have said that I was a member of your household, they
would have beaten me up." He said: "Since he put his trust in me, leave him alone."
Thus we see that the Caesarean police, when they found someone
whom they considered suspicious — at night — would forthwith beat
him up. It was only through ready wit and the invocation of a powerful
name that our stranger saved himself from this treatment.
Palestinian cities were, in fact, patrolled both by day and by night,"«
in day and night watches, usually by different shifts."* These watchmen
give the impression of having been very efficient and systematic. As one
text states:"' "... Just as the guards of the city do, passing during
the night before every single door." Small wonder then that the wine-
seller feared these watchmen. Furthermore, he claims that "they have
just passed by here," and he is monetheless afraid. He seems to have
known that they would be returning shortly. This suggests that their
"beat" was relatively short •— shorter than a "long drink" — and
"' Cf Num. R. 10. 8, cited below in extenso. See also Libanius, Epist. 532,
to Firminus, (ed. Foebsteb X, 501, 11. 1), where the chief of police of the
Nabatean town of Elusa, called Baithos, is mentioned (356 C.E.). See
Schwabe's discussion of that text in Bulletin of the Israol Exploration
Society, Reader II (1965), 153—64, (Hebrew).
22 People were imprisoned pending their trial. Rabbinic literature has
numerous references to the "pilki" (= 9uXaxr)), LW 448—9.
23 M. Ps. 4. 20 (211). The correct reading, however, is to be found in
J. Mann's artiele "Some Midrashie Genizah fragments", HUCA 14 (1939), 316.
2* achsanai = ^cvo?,, (Mann ibid.).
25 T. Sukka 2. 3 = B. Sukka 26a = J. Sukka 2. 5. Cf Lam. R. 2.
"« Ibid. 27 M. Ps. 48. 2 (275).
On Pubs and Policemen in Roman Palestine 261
constant. The picture that emerges from our analysis of this text is one
of a weU-manned,"* vigilant police-force, a trifle on the rough side —
exactly the same picture as appeared from the Caesarean text.
It was to be expected that such an area, around the wine-shop(s?)
be weU-patrolled, since, as MacMullen puts it"Taverns and cookshops
. .. lay under a more enduring suspicion as dens of criminals and prosti¬
tutes, centres of extravagance and loose living." The pohce, aware of the
nature of the place, had it under observation, and, finding a suspicious-
looking character lying at the door of the wine-shop, assumed him to be
a thief. Perhaps they thought he was feining drunkenness to escape their
attention. Without more ado, they set about beating him. Only when
they saw he was insensible to their treatment, did they realize that he
was truly drunk in a heavy alcoholic stupour, and left him alone, bruized,
cut up with blackened eyes.
It would appear that it was no crime to be drunk, nor was vagrancy
per se a criminal offence. Moreover, vagrancy was apparently unusual —
the stranger in Caesarea was immediately suspect — and streets were
quiet and empty at night. This, as we have seen above, was precisely the
point of sumptuary laws, to prevent an outbreak of drunken violence,
to preserve calm and peace, to enforce law and order in a restless and
disorderly period. A drunken brawl clould easily assume more serious
dimensions, even trigger off a riot. Thus we read, in yet another undated
text*" (cf between c. 270—370 C.E.):
It happened once that a band of "no-goods"*' were sitting around
drinking wine half way through the night. But they did not get [pro¬
perly] drunk. Wine was brought to them, and they said to the wine-
server (= waiter): "We want wine mixed with wine."
They continued to do (= drink) so until they were really saturated.
Then they got up and started beating one another up in their drunken¬
ness. There was an outcry** in the city. The ioper** came, took them in
28 But cf MacMuixen 337 note 4. On vuxToaxpaTYiyoi, see Oebtel, Die
Liturgie, 281—3; Vigiles, MacMullen, 103—7, 257—60, 336—7; Jones,
The Later Roman Empire III, 228 note 29; idem. The Oreek City, 252, 360
note 80. On Etpr^vapxT)? see D. Magie, Roman Rule in Asia Minor (1950),
514 note 46. On 7rapa9uXax£(; and 6pa9uXax£(; ibid., 647—8, 1515—6 note 47,
etc. See also Chronique D'Egypte 88 (1968), 347—52.
" MacMullen, 167.
*» Num. R. 10. 8. '' Zalim.
82 zevaha. Cf Tanhuma ed. Urbach, Kobez Al Yad VI (XVI) 1, (1966)
53 line 65.
S3 = rufdus, according to Kbauss, LW. 311—2; idem. MGWJ, 1894.
161—6; idem. Paras ve-Roma ba-Talmud u-ba-Midrashim (1948), 103 etc.
However, this identiflcation is not altogether certain. See Guttmann, Zion
18 (1953), 3—4.
19 ZDMG 120/2
and handed them over to the imperial authorities,** and they were all lost (= executed).
It seems clear that this "gang" was drinking in a tavern, rather than
a private house, where they were served by a waiter with a choice of
wines. Yet they were able to drink through the night. Evidently, no
licensing laws existed at this time and/or place. Sumptuary laws were
introduced as measures to prevent just such episodes, and since "troubles
begin when people congregate, especially drunken men",*« the law closed
potential trouble-spots for the night. The police were zealous to enforce
these laws, and the penalties were, no doubt, severe.*" We may now
appreciate the wine-seller's well justified fears.
What exactly were these regulations that the police so vigilantly
enforced? In order to answer this question accurately, we must first
determine what kind of place is being referred to in our text. The term
used is beit kapilia, literally : the house of a wine-seller, or, in other words
a wine-shop. Indeed, in the exegetical part of the homily, the term
hanut — shop — is used. However, the terms xaTajXetov and hanut are
also used for eating-places,*' and a henvani (from hanut), literally: a
shop-keeper, is also arestauranteur;** people used to eat in "meat-shops."
So also, the xaTajXeiov, through strictly speaking a wine-shop,*» is also
a place peope sit around and where drink, a pub.*" In our case too, it is
a pub that is being referred to, since the homilist says of our drunk that
he is one of "those who are first to enter the shop and last to leave."
Clearly, such people spent their whole day on the premises, drinking
themselves into a total stupour. The hcensing rules probably forbade
the publican to keep his "shop" open after dark, and consequently, to
3* ntalchut.
35 MacMullen, 167—8.
3' See Kleberg op. cit., 122, (citing Dio Cassius 59. 11. 6).
3' Gen. R. 19. 1, (170), kapilio = M. Prov. 7. 3 (60), hanut. See also
Eccles R. 1. 18.
38 Tanh. Buber, Balak 24, 145.
88 PRK Buber 122b, where swindlers, who water down their wine before
selling it, are described. See also Lam. R. 1. 4 (to 1. 1); J. Shevuot 7. 5
(38a 13); ,1. Baba Mezia 5. 8 (10c 53).
*o See Rostovtzeff, SEHHW, 1628 note 196. It should be noted that a
kapilia was not an inn, i.e. a place where one slept the night, etc. Such wore
called pundak (in) = TiavSoxtov; see LW 428. In such place animals were
stabled (T. Avoda Zara 3. 2 = M. Avoda Zara 2. 1), and people slept tho
night (T. Yevamot 1. 10, etc.). Such places, often just outside the town on
the main road (J. Demai 22c 87, Tanh. Numbers 9; ibid. Naso 15; Num.
R. 2. 12), also served, of course, food and drink (Gen. R. 21. 33 (583), Targum
(= Aramaic translation) to (Chron. 1. 20 etc.). See S. Krauss, Kadmoniot
ha-Talmud 1/1, 55, 131—43.
On Pubs and Policemen in Roman Palestine 263
sell liqueur after hours. Our publican could, however, not withstand the
pitious and insistant entreaties of a regular (?) customer, and, much
against his better judgement, phed him his drink through the crack in
the door.
The evidence we have brought above is partial, fragmentary and of
uncertain date. However, put together it suggests a mood of tension and
urban unrest — a conclusion fully borne out by a wealth of independent
classical and Rabbinic evidence*' — which came as a natural conse¬
quence of the growing economic and social deterioration of the III and
IV cent.*"
Abbreviations
B. Babylonian Talmud.
Eecles. R. Ecclesiastes Rabba (Wilna ed.).
Est. R. Esther Rabbah (Wilna ed.).
Gen. R. Genesis Rabbah (ed. J. Theodor — Ch. Albeck).
HUCA Hebrew Union College Annual.
J. Jerusalem Talmud (Zitomir and Krotoschin eds.).
JESHO Joumal of the Social and Economic History of the Orient.
Lam. R. Lamentations Rabbah (Wilna and Bubeb eds.).
Lev. R. Leviticus Rabbah (Margulies ed.).
LW. Griechische und Lateinische Lehnwörter in Talmud, Midrash
imd Targum 2, 1899, by S. Krauss, with additional notes by
I. Löw.
M. Mishnah.
M. Prov. Midrash Proverbs (ed. Buber).
M. Ps. Midrash Psalms (ed. Buber).
MacMullen R. MacMullen, Enemies of the Roman Order, 1967.
Num. R. Numbers Rabbah (Wilna ed.).
PRK Pesikta deRav Kahana (Buber and Mandelbaum eds.).
T Tosefta.
Tanh. Tanhuma (printed ed. and Buber ed.).
See MacMullen chap. V, entitled "Urban unrest", and my article in
Archiv Orientälni (= AO) 38, 1970, 1—25.
*2 See my studies in social and economic conditions in III and IV cent.
Palestine in AO ibid., AO 31 (1966). 56—66; Sinai 64/3—4 (1969), 185—9;
Sinai 66/1—2 (1969), 101—2; L'Antiquitö Classique 1969, 164—8, and my
articles in JESHO 1970 and HUCA 1971.
19*
By Bbenhakd Lewin, Göteborg
The existence in Arahic of conditional clauses lacking the funda¬
mental properties of regidar hypothetical periods (in which the content
of the headclause is a consequence conditioned by the 'if'-clause) was
observed by Reckendorf (Syntaktische Verhältnisse, § 232) and Brockel¬
mann [Grundriß, ii, 645). Picking up some loose threads left by these
authors, Renate Jacobi (ZDMG 117. 1967, 78—86) characterised this
type of sentences as 'sentences with a logical break' and pointed out a
method of interpreting them within the scheme of regular hypothetical
periods.
Observing exclusively the formal scheme of hypothetical periods, the
Arab grammarians, it is true, failed to see the specific nature of 'sentences
with a break'. When analyzing verses starting with an 'if, Arab com¬
mentators often realize the 'break' and propose two methods of inter¬
preting them : either one can restore the logical connexion between the
condition (Sari) and the headclause (gawab) by supplying a sentence that
fiUs up the gap, or one can understand the 'if as an element of 'corrobo¬
ration' (ta^kid). It is implied that this 'if-clause always precedes the
principal clause.
Before going into the subject of this paper, it seems useful to stress
once more the nature of a regular hypothetical period: the speaker
assumes something to be a fact and wants the hearer to make the same
assumption in order to show him what will follow from it.' The example
used by Reckendorf as a paradigm of an irregular hypothetical period :
'If Zaid steals/has stolen — his father has already stolen' can evidently
have been uttered in a situation where an examination of the case is
stiU going on and the question of Zaid's stealing has not yet been settled.
' The definition is adopted from Frank Behrb, Notes on Indicative
Clauses of Condition. Contributions to EngUsh Syntax and Philology Gothen¬
burg Studies in English, 14. Göteborg 1962), p. 57: "When I use the con¬
junction if, there aro two things that I wish to have conveyed to the hearer:
first that I assume something to be a 'fact' with a view to asserting that
something (to be specified) will follow from my doing so; secondly, that I
wish him (tho hearer) to assume the same thing as a 'fact', so that he should
get the right background for accepting what I am telling him in the con¬
sequent."
