What did a water source contribute to a community’s identity in Mediterranean antiquity?
Many have observed the perennial importance of fresh water in the ancient landscape (Cole 2004, 10-11, 33-35, 194; Dillon 1997, 113-27).1 Alongside their more pedestrian functions, freshwater sites such as springs frequently provided a point of contact between human and divine, manifested in ritual activity such as at the spring in the sanctuary of Artemis at Brauron (Cole 2004, 192-94), the spring in the Caruso Cave (Larson 2001, 251-57), and the Sacred Spring in Corinth (Hill 1964; Steiner 1992; Sanders 2010).
Yet, the symbolic potency of freshwater and its related sources was not restricted to ritual activities, particularly in the Roman period. For example, Brenda Longfellow has demonstrated how fountain complexes could showcase the prestige and influence of their Roman elite sponsors (Longfellow 2011). By the same token Betsey Robinson has illustrated how fountains in Corinth, evolving through Greek and Roman periods, contributed to that city’s character and renown (Robinson 2001, 2005, 2011).[288] [289] [290]This paper considers the capacity of water sources for channeling identity in two different communities within the Roman Empire. The water sources compared are the Fountain of Glauke in Corinth and the treatment of Jacob’s Well in Samaria in John 4.[291] Focusing on the exploitation of traditions and spatial context, I assess each one’s contribution to the identity of its respective community. I argue that the messages communicated by the water sources entail alternative responses to Roman-ordered environments.
Let us first say something about the contexts of the communities for whom the Fountain of Glauke and Jacob's Well in John 4 possessed meaning. Corinth was founded as Colonia Laus lulia Corinthiensis in 44 BCE, nearly one hundred years after the Roman general Mummius destroyed the former Greek city as part of a campaign against the Achaean League.[292] Public inscriptions, buildings, and monuments testified to the colony's Roman orientation.[293] At the same time, in laying out the colony planners appropriated preexisting structures from the city's past, such as the temple of Apollo, Peirene Fountain, and the Fountain of Glauke (Bookidis 2005).[294] In so doing they displayed a sensibility to Greek cultural achievements, lending weight to a possible connection between the colonists and the Greek East (Millis 2010).[295] Our concern, however, is for how the singular Fountain of Glauke contributed to the identity of what was after all a Roman colony.
John's community, though difficult to locate with precision, also found its reality circumscribed by Rome (Cassidy 1992, 3-16).[296] Probably these Jesus followers lived in a city such as Ephesus, where evidence of imperial influence over civic religion and politics was in abundance (Rogers 1991; Friesen 1993; Scherrer 1995; Carter 2008, 58-64).[297] Against the backdrop of Roman hegemony, John presents readers with a challenge: embrace the implications of following Jesus as lord.[298] The narrative setting of Judea, due to its recent history of Roman rule, was a propos for John's contesting portrait of Jesus.
Judea became a client kingdom of Rome following Pompey's siege of Jerusalem in 63 BCE (Josephus, B.J. 1.138-58). The client king at the time of Jesus's birth was Herod, who expressed his allegiance to Rome through building programs that produced, inter alia, imperial cult temples in Sebaste (Samaria) and Caesarea Maritima (Josephus, B.J. 1.403, 414; Hanlein-Schafer 1985, 26-32; 201-3). Later in 6 CE the region came under the direct rule of Rome as the province of Judea. Samaria, the setting of John 4, also was incorporated into the province, adding to its reputation as a colonized territory (cf. 2 Kgs 17:24).11 Despite encountering resistance to its rule, Rome solidified its hold over Judea with the quashing of the Jewish revolt of 66-73 CE—sealed with the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in 70 CE. In light of this history, the setting of John's narrative, like that of his community, presupposes the presence of Rome.[299] [300] How does the evangelist's treatment of Jacob's Well construe the identity of Jesus followers in such a context?