After the fall of Jerusalem in 587 BCE, and the forced migration eastwards of apparently thousands of Judeans into the Babylonian heartland, the stage was set for the rise of a diaspora Jewish population who lived permanently outside the homeland of Judean territories.  Even after the Persian Empire allowed many Jews to return after 539 BCE, many chose to stay.  Furthermore, waves of Judeans also often headed south into Egypt, and after the conquests of Alexander the Great (after 333 BCE) and the division of his conquests among Hellenistic rulers, a large Jewish community was permanently resident in Egypt, especially in Alexandria, where scholars believe many books of the Bible were both translated, and some written.  But what was the relationship of these “diaspora” communities outside and land, and Jews and especially Jewish authorities in Jerusalem, back in the homeland?

Simkovich’s interesting study is an analysis of often conflicting ideas about the relationship between the “diaspora” – Jews living outside the land of the Judea, in dialogue with those living in Judea and especially Jerusalem.   She begins her conclusion with the following helpful summary statement that identifies the main interest of her study as a whole: “The successful establishment of Jewish communities outside the land of Israel was the single biggest theological problem for Jews in the Hellenistic era” (172).

For example, she shows that it was clear that some Jews maintained the idea that living outside the land was to continue to suffer an ‘exile’ as punishment from God (an idea represented heavily in Deuteronomy and Jeremiah with regard to the Babylonian invasions).  As a part of this idea, and starting already in Prophetic books (e.g. Second-Isaiah, Ch. 40) there was an expectation that the far-flung peoples would eventually ‘come home’ in a kind of ingathering from ‘the ends of the earth’. 

However, Simkovich shows that not all the Diaspora Jews believed they were living in the shadow of God’s punishment by living outside the land.  Some writings seemed to affirm an acceptable Jewish life and faith outside the land – such as the older Hebrew version of the canonical book of Esther, where there was no hint of a desire to return to the land. 

Related to this question of returning, or not returning, to the homeland is the question of whether the diaspora communities at least acknowledged and affirmed a certain religious  authority and central importance of the communities back in the homeland.  Did they recognize some kind of religious hierarchy with Jerusalem holding pride of place?  The Daniel stories certainly suggest that the Diaspora hero, Daniel, prayed toward Jerusalem (Ch 6), but Simkovich points out that any acknowledgement of the importance of Judea and Jerusalem by those in the diaspora was another issue where there is no universal agreement in Jewish diaspora writings of this time.

Simkovich considers a wide variety of literature and styles, including texts from Elephantine (late 5th Century BCE, from Egypt), but mainly Hellenistic period works like the alleged letters in 2 Maccabees 1:1 – 2:18; The Greek recension of Esther, and Sirach; the Epistle of Baruch; The Letter of Aristeas; and 3 Maccabees. 

Although Simkovich remains focused on the ancient Jewish texts, one of the interesting implications of her study is to reflect on the meaning of religious practices – one thinks of many indigenous religious traditions – that are as concerned about where you practice your faith as they are concerned with how you practice your faith.   Simkovich makes it clear that late Biblical traditions simply do not agree that where you practice your faith is an insignificant issue.  While her analysis does not include early Christian literature (whether Jewish or otherwise), it would be interesting to take up her lines of analysis and apply them to the earliest Christian literature as well, as one may discover that not all Christians were of a committed internationalist/pro-diaspora spirit from the beginning.  Even a diaspora Jewish-Christian like Paul made certain that he was seen to raise support for, and acknowledge the importance of, the Jerusalem Christians.  Frankly, Simkovich’s book suggests that this motif in Paul’s writings may be more important than I would have previously thought.  This is an excellent and thought-provoking analysis of Hellenistic period Jewish literature.