**The Relationship Of Roman And Jewish Law** #Unfinished against Alternate Resurrection Theories #Unfinished Herndon In order to keep peace in some places Rome would allow local laws to stay in place. In the book [Roman law and the trial of Christ](https://paperpile.com/app/p/45eea7d4-d3ee-02ed-a9cc-1ba0b463a745 'Roman law and the trial of Christ') Larry Overstreet sums up the way Romans ruled over providences: >“Generally speaking, Roman law allowed the local law of each province to be exercised without much interference”... On the following page, Overstreet notes the exceptions to this rule: > This execution has been set forth by Lyall: “The Romans did, for example, reserve the right to impose capital punishment, as in the case of Christ, but the day to day administration was none of their concern. <p style='text-align: right;'>--- [Larry Overstreet 2019](https://paperpile.com/app/p/45eea7d4-d3ee-02ed-a9cc-1ba0b463a745 'Roman law and the trial of Christ')</p> There is more evidence that Rome would allow Jewish customs, such as in the works like [The Embassy to Gaius. General Indexes](https://paperpile.com/app/p/b37184b3-9eef-0f09-8539-3e32d4861af5 'Philo: On the Embassy to Gaius; General Index') where Jews are found asking for Pilate to redress the shield and that it was the practice to safeguard the Jewish customs according to Tiberius, who even took the Jews side when appealed to. Or in the works of Josephus where Rome did not require Jews to violate their own national laws and did not interfere with the customs of the country [(Whiston 2008)](https://paperpile.com/app/p/932b1170-f8be-0111-a679-77315c03caff 'The Complete Works of Flavius Josephus'). Philo even mentions that he knew of a case in Egypt where crucified victims were taken down before a holiday took place. While this is not located in the same area as Judea, it may help support why the Jews were allowed to bury Jesus before the Passover. We find in the summary of Roman law (known as the Digest, See [(The Oxford Handbook)](https://paperpile.com/app/p/ca9b3f9b-591e-0e42-aa7e-de7ed91e436d 'The Oxford Handbook of Roman Law and Society')[(Roman Legal and Constitutional History)](https://paperpile.com/app/p/a211f098-2f5b-0527-a0bc-2d2ac30efdfe 'An Introduction to Roman Legal and Constitutional History')) that the relatives of the crucified victims were allowed to ask for the body to bury them[(Magness, J. 2015)](https://paperpile.com/app/p/4bc88e6a-62c1-0656-91e9-22415c8b6dc3 'What did Jesus tomb look like?'). There may also be supporting evidence from Quintilian[ (Declamationes Maiores)](https://paperpile.com/app/p/5a8ca579-82d3-0370-a6bf-f4dd129a74a7 'Declamationes Maiores: Latin Text') that says those who died on a cross were not forbidden from being buried. The practice of Rome regarding the governance of its territories, as highlighted by various sources, reflects a policy of considerable autonomy, especially in the realm of local customs and laws. The Roman Empire recognized the diversity of its vast holdings and generally allowed provinces to maintain their traditional legal systems/cultural practices. This approach is evident in the administration of Judea, where Roman authorities permitted the observance of Jewish customs, including matters of religious significance and burial rites, as long as they did not directly conflict with imperial interests or Roman law. Exceptions to this rule, such as the reservation of capital punishment rights, reveal the balance that Rome sought between local autonomy and imperial control. This policy not only facilitated smoother governance across diverse regions but also helped in mitigating potential resistance by respecting local traditions and laws, as evidenced by historical instances like the burial of Jesus before Passover and the respect for Jewish customs under Roman rule. <audio controls src = > </ audio> lfmvRaGjQD6TbZYnZaiqrg