The Politicization of Religion
As explained above, seeing the assimilation of his nation, the Exilarch joined in prevailing spirit of veneration for learning. Although even Rav endured harshness at the hands of the Exilarch's officers, from late second century on it would appear that the Exilarchs began to devote themselves to the acquisition of knowledge as well as of power, approaching thus the example of the Israeli patriarchs. However an event occurred which changed even the rulers of Rome and Parthia's opinion of the utility of religion.
Under the Parthians, the majority of the population in Armenia was an ally against Rome. In 162 CE, the Parthians declared war on Rome as the long-standing quarrel between Rome and the Armenians became violent. The Parthians succeeded in defeating the 4-legion Roman garrison, deposing King Manu VIII and installing their own ruler Wael bar Sahru. After the Sassanids took control in Persia, the Romans again tried to extend their influence. In 252 CE, the Persians under Shapur I attacked the eastern frontier in a dispute over control of Armenia, defeating the Romans at Barbalissos.
All this changed in 301 CE, after Armenia became the first nation to declare Christianity as its official religion. To the amazement of the Persians and the delight of Rome, in spite of repeated Persian military victories, the switch to Christianity turned Armenia from an ally of Persia to a steadfast ally of Rome. Conquest depends on logistics, and logistics depends on the local population, and the local population now had an influence every bit as potent as their military rulers: religion. The political power of religion became apparent to both rulers, and perhaps influenced Constantine when he declared Christianity the official religion of Rome in 312 CE.
In any event, the lesson was not lost on the Sassanid Persian rulers, and religious persecution and intolerance increased.
By Christian writers the Jews are accused without warrant of having instigated the slaughter of twenty-two bishops by Sapor II. (r310-382 CE) as part of his antagonism to the Christian predilection for Rome.[1] The "Small Chronicle" narrates that when Huna was exilarch, and Rabbah chief of the academy, Sapor went against Nisibis and conquered it. A persecution of the Jews is mentioned as taking place in 313 CE.[2] Rabbah b. Naḥmani, the head of the academy at Pumbedita (died 331), fell a victim to persecution. The charge was made against him that the 12,000 disciples who assembled for the usual twice yearly public study kallah, did so merely to avoid paying the tax. Rabbah fled and perished miserably.[3] His successors, R. Joseph the Blind and Raba (who followed Abaye), enjoyed the favor of the queen-mother Ifra Hormiz; which did not, however, prevent Raba from being imprisoned upon a baseless charge.[4] Rabbah and, still more, his pupils Abaye and Raba are considered as the founders of the acute Talmudic dialectics practised in Pumbedita. After the short presidencies of R. Joseph and Abaye, the renowned Raba became the head of Pumbedita; in his days it was the only remaining academy in Babylonia; for Sura had ceased to exist. R. Papa, however, presently founded a new school in Naresh near Sura, which later on was removed to that city, where, under R. Ashi, it attained to high eminence.
In 362 C.E, Julian waged a vigorous war in which Mesopotamia and Babylonia proper were involved. When Julian besieged the Persian capital of Ctesiphon, he announced plans to rebuild the Jewish Temple and even began construction. The Jews, in spite of the friendly attitude of the Roman ruler, sided with Persia. Birta was deserted by its inhabitants, Jews, who removed themselves to Jewish fortresses under the protection of the Exilarch. In retaliation the Romans burned the place.[5] The same fate befell the more important city Firuz Shavur (Pyrisabora), which also possessed a large Jewish population; Mahoza, too, near Ctesiphon, Raba's birthplace and the seat of his academy, was also laid in ashes, together no doubt with many other towns in which Jews dwelt. In all these cases, the Exilarch could not expect help from the Persia troops, but was free to defend itself – as long as the attackers were not Persian.