The Siege of Jerusalem details the Roman conquest over the Jews in a manner that portrays the Jews as evil lesser beings and as sympathetic warriors. However, the in general terms, the poem revels in the slaughter of the Jews as rightful vengeance for the crucifixion of Jesus. However, the means in which the author portrays Jews seems almost intentionally ignorant, occasionally referring to them with typical Eastern stereotypes, like employing war elephants in battle. Though these depictions are certainly incorrect, the author utilizes these stereotypes to make Biblical allusions, like when Christian forces were beset by war elephants in the book of Maccabaeus. However, this is further complicated when considering that the book of Maccabaeus featured the Jews as the heroic forces beset by terrorizing forces with war elephants that yet emerge victorious. Though the comparison is complex, the author intends to demonstrate that the Jews, while previously upheld in God’s favor, have fallen from grace and now occupy the role of violent savage threatening the Christian way of life. In this way, the author further condemns Judaism, instead of my previous impression of glorifying it.
Great post! I, too, found it interesting that the nation previously known as God’s chosen people were brutally slaughtered in revenge. It is an unoriginal, but still terrifyingly persistent idea that continues today; people blame entire cultures for the sins of a few. The entire Jewish nation took on the blame for nailing Jesus to a cross. Similarly, many people, in their ignorance, blame all Muslims for terrorist attacks. It’s like we’re all in elementary school again and that one kid at your table talks too much and the whole class loses recess. Who gets shunned though? Your whole table.Times like this make me wish I minored in psychology. Why do we just blindly hate, discriminate, and punish an entire group rather than the few who are actually to blame? Frankly, it’s depressing and nobody wins. What an awful way to live.