>>21801128>it's an anachronism to pretend it means "jew" before late 1st century AD.Proving you wrong Part 2/?
Tacitus, Histories 5.2-5
>((( Iudaei ))) adsciti in civitatem Romanam ceteros mortalium odio habuere, adversus omnes hostilem metum. separati epulis, discreti cubilibus, alieni coitu, abstemii Veneris, inter se fida, adversus omnes alios hostile odium. Servi fidelissimi domino, reges et principes supra ceteros contemnunt. pertinacia eorum in fide, misericordia in promptu, sed adversus omnes alios hostile odium. omnia profana apud illos, quae apud nos sacra; rursum concessa illic, quae nobis incesta.">The Jews, brought into the Roman state, held the rest of mankind in hatred, hostile fear against all. They are separated at meals, divided in their beds, strangers to sexual intercourse with others; among themselves they are fiercely loyal, but towards all others they feel a hostile hatred. They are most loyal to their masters, but they despise kings and princes more than all other men. Their obstinacy in their faith is great, their compassion is swift, but towards all others they show hatred as of an enemy. All things are profane to them which are sacred to us; again, what is permitted with them is by us regarded as impious.Tacitus's negative stereotypes about the Jews were widely shared by Romans and Greeks. He notes the jews (Iudaei) perceived separateness, their loyalty to their own group, and their supposed hostility toward all others. It highlights the Roman perception of Jewish customs and religious practices as strange and incompatible with Roman values. It's obvious which word he's using and which group he's talking about, even today.
