Herodian Period Research Articles

Loren R. Spielman. Jews and Entertainment in the Ancient World

Loren R. Spielman. <i>Jews and Entertainment in the Ancient World</i>

Josephus’s Jewish Antiquities in Competition with Nicolaus of Damascus’s Universal History

Abstract In Jewish Antiquities 14–17, Josephus draws extensively on Nicolaus of Damascus’s Universal History. Josephus and his immediate audience in Rome at the end of the first century would have seen Nicolaus’s work as a direct competitor for telling the history of the Jewish people in the Herodian period. This essay looks at Josephus’s use of conventional historiographical polemic to impugn the motivations of his predecessor and rival. By casting Nicolaus the historical actor as biased, Josephus casts doubt on the reliability of the Universal History. Ultimately, this opens up a new perspective on the Antiquities’s more censorious posture vis-à-vis Herod (relative to the more generous posture in his earlier work, the Jewish War): in a virtual competition with Nicolaus, Josephus seeks to win admiration for his own work as frank and impartial in its assessment of Herod while simultaneously fostering suspicion of Nicolaus’s work as obsequious and partisan.

History &amp; Geography

History & Geography Christopher T. Begg, Andrew W. Litke, Victor H. Matthews, Randy C. Payne, William J. Urbrock, and Fred W. Guyette ________ 288. [Cyprus] M. G. Amadasi and J. A. Zamora, “The Phoenician Name of Cyprus: New Evidence from Early Hellenistic Times,” JSS 63 (2018) 77–97. The Phoenician name of Cyprus was not known with certainty until now. From the beginning of the Iron Age until the Hellenistic period, the island was divided into independent kingdoms, each of which took its name from that of its capital city. For this reason, only the names of towns or regions—not that of the entire island—appear in local inscriptions of the period in question with the result that the island’s name in Phoenician has been unknown. In our paper, we review all relevant evidence concerning the question, from the second and first millennia b.c., both internal and external, and present a new document, which definitively settles the question of the Phoenician name for Cyprus. [Adapted from published abstract—C.T.B.] 289. [Scribes; Libraries] Sidnie White Crawford, “Scribes and Libraries in Ancient Israel,” Scribes and Scrolls at Qumran, 49–111 [see #828]. In the previous chapter (see #48), I surveyed evidence for scribes and libraries in the ANE and the Hellenistic and Roman worlds. In this chapter, I narrow the focus to biblical Israel, beginning with the Iron Age kingdoms of Israel and Judah until the Babylonian destruction in 587 b.c.e., continuing through the Persian and early Hellenistic periods, and concluding with the Second Jewish Revolt against Rome (135 b.c.e.). I exclude the Qumran evidence (with the exception of a few pertinent texts), which I deal with in chap. 4 (see #703). In the first section of the chapter, I survey the epigraphic and literary evidence for scribes and writing, while in the second section I look at the archaeological evidence for book collections, archives, and libraries. The essay concludes with an appendix entitled “Scribes in the Synoptic Gospels.” [p. 49, adapted—C.T.B.] 290. Shimon Dar, “Archaeological Evidence for the Settlement Enterprises of the Hasmonean House in the Districts of Ofaraiam, Lod and Ramataim,” LASBF 68 (2018) 227–46. D.’s paper surveys a dozen archaeological sites that have been excavated in the ancient districts cited in his title in recent years. These districts were ceded to the Hasmonean rulers of Judea by King Demetrius II (reigned 145–140 b.c.e.), a Seleucid ruler who had a troubled reign. Prior to the excavations, only written sources were available to scholars for the reconstruction of the actual process referred to in 1 Macc 11:32–34. The excavations revealed the existence of many small villages and farmsteads established by [End Page 86] the Hasmonean rulers, particularly under John Hyrcanus I (134–104 b.c.e.) and his successors. This process of settlement continued until the Herodian period. At the excavated sites, many agricultural installations were unearthed, as were mikvaot, stone vessels, coins of the Hasmonean rulers, and synagogues in the larger settlements. During the two revolts against Rome, many of the settlements were destroyed and abandoned, especially after the Bar Kokhba war (132–136 c.e.). Several generations later, they were resettled by non-Jewish populations. [Adapted from published abstract—C.T.B.] 291. [Siloam Tunnel] Philip R. Davies, “The Siloam Tunnel Revisited,” Finding Myth and History, 30–50 [see #789]. In this essay, D. revisits an article that he and J. Rogerson published in 1996 in Biblical Archaeologist. In it they argued that the so-called Siloam Tunnel was built by a Hasmonean king in the second century b.c.e. rather than by Hezekiah. D. provides an updated discussion of the relevant issues in archaeology, history, biblical tradition, geology, and paleography regarding the tunnel. He concludes that while it may never be known who built the tunnel, “Hezekiah is a poor candidate.”—A.W.L. 292. [Nebuchadnezzar II] Alexander Fantalkin, “In Defense of Nebuchadnezzar II the Warrior,” Altorientalische Forschungen 44 (2017) 201–8. Recent scholarship tends to downplay the military achievements of Nabû-kudurrīuṣur II (Nebuchadnezzar II...

Pontius Pilate in Jerusalem: The Monumental Street from the Siloam Pool to the Temple Mount

For over a century and a half, excavations in Jerusalem have been uncovering segments of the city’s Early Roman period network of streets, particularly the street that wended its way from the southernmost gate of the city, alongside the Siloam Pool and towards the Temple Mount. The importance of this street is evident from its dimensions as well as from the quality of its construction, which undoubtedly required an expansive workforce that included skilled labourers and craftsmen. Based on archaeological and historical data, the creation of the street has variously been attributed to some time in the Herodian period, to the reign of Herod and to the days of Herod Agrippa II. Here, based on numismatic evidence, we propose a more precise timeframe. We suggest that the street was constructed in the 1st century CE, in the middle of the first period of direct Roman rule, specifically during Pontius Pilate’s tenure as governor of the newly named province of Judea. We bolster this claim with a discussion of Pilate’s mandate and goals as provincial governor.

Stuccowork in the Ancient Land of Israel

Large quantities of stucco fragments have been revealed in Hellenistic-Roman sites in the ancient Land of Israel. Masonry Style fragments of wall panels resembling drafted masonry; stucco-plastered architectural decorations; stucco finishings of pedestals, pilasters, and columns; and plain ceiling coverings, were already found in the Hellenistic period. The local aniconic tradition developed at that time would exert its influence in the Herodian period, when Masonry Style was replaced by new Roman styles. The popularity of stuccowork declined after the 1st cent. ce, but the technique continued to be used in some public and domestic buildings. Some fragments indicate the emergence of figurative decoration, reflecting changes which took place when a more tolerant attitude towards the depiction of humans and animals became widespread.

A Brief History of Jerusalem: From the Earliest Settlement to the Destruction of the City in AD 70

Klaus Bieberstein, Professor of Old Testament Studies at the University of Bamberg (about 130 miles east of Frankfurt, Germany), has written a clear and informative summary of the history of Jerusalem from its earliest settlement to its destruction by the Romans in AD 70. Jerusalem is one of the most excavated sites in the world, and yet only a fraction of its history has been uncovered to date. Bieberstein correctly likens the situation to “a puzzle of which only a fraction of the pieces are known” (preface).It is highly challenging to excavate Jerusalem, as the city has been continuously populated since early times and has a dense population today. Further complicating its archaeological history is the fact that several of the most important breakthroughs from the 1960s to 1980s only have had preliminary reports published (e.g., Kathleen Kenyon [1961–67]; Benjamin Mazar [1968–78]; Yigal Shiloh [1978–85]), with later finds often helping to correct earlier misconceptions from various archaeological discoveries. A book such as this, therefore, is decidedly helpful in sorting through all the significant data.After some preliminary comments in chs. 1 and 2, ch. 3 (“History of Archaeological Research”) nicely orients the reader for the more detailed archaeological descriptions that come later. While few of these earlier excavations were carefully recorded or properly written up, a number of these early visitors made important finds: Edward Robinson (1838, 1852; the Siloam Tunnel; Robinson’s Arch); Charles Wilson (1864, 1867–70; Wilson’s Arch); and Charles Warren (1867–70; Warren’s Shaft).The main section of the book, chs. 4 through 7, provides an overview of the archaeological finds from the first settlement in Jerusalem through the Achaemenid, Hellenistic, and Herodian periods. Little is known about Jerusalem’s earliest visitors, but what little evidence there is suggests that hunters and gatherers used it only for temporary stopovers. The first small settlement appeared during the Early Bronze Age above the Gihon Spring (3700–2500 BC). These dates differ slightly from those of Amihai Mazar, who dates this period to 3300–2300 BC (Archaeology of the Land of the Bible, 10,000-568 B.C.E., Anchor Bible Reference Library [New York: Doubleday, 1992], 30), but Bieberstein claims to follow Johanna Regev, Pierre de Miroschedji, et al., “Chronology of the Early Bronze Age in the Southern Levant: New Analysis for a High Chronology,” Radiocarbon 54 (2012): 525–66. However, it should be noted that there have been significant difficulties in matching up archaeological finds with radiocarbon dating. See, for example, Lily Singer-Avitz, “Archaeological Views: Carbon 14—The Solution to Dating David and Solomon?” BAR 35.3 (2009): 28, 71; Amihai Mazar and C. Bronk Ramsey, “14C Dates and the Iron Age Chronology of Israel: A Response,” Radiocarbon 50 (2008): 159–80; and Manfred Bietak, “Antagonisms in Historical and Radiocarbon Chronology,” in A. J. Shortland and C. Bronk Ramsey, eds., Radiocarbon and the Chronologies of Ancient Egypt (Oxford: Oxbow, 2013), 78–110.Particularly helpful in this section are the notations Bieberstein makes of more recent archaeological evidence that help to correct earlier opinions (e.g., pp. 27, 30, 32, 33). Additional maps or pictures to illustrate his descriptions would have been useful, especially when describing the walls and specific archeological finds, but this is not always within the control of the author. Bieberstein adopts a modern historical-critical approach to the biblical text. This is an interesting contrast to his approach to the works of Josephus and the books of Maccabees, which he appears to take at face value. A more balanced view of the biblical text would have been appreciated.An excellent bibliography provides an up-to-date overview of the archaeological excavations and many of the artifacts that have been found over the last century and a half. The wealth of valuable information it provides can serve as a springboard for further research. Overall, this book is easy to use and provides a solid foundation of the history of Jerusalem on which to build further.

The Politics of Psalmody: Psalm 60 and the Rise and Fall of Judean Independence

Psalm 60 exhibits two conflicting literary structures. One of these structures is evident by the psalm's use of chiasmus; the other is evident by the psalm's use of meter. The identification of these two conflicting structures indicates a two-stage composition of Ps 60. Examination of the chiasmus within the psalm and a consideration of its two-stage composition elucidate the date of Ps 60. While most scholars date Ps 60 to sometime between the late eighth century and early sixth century BCE, careful observation of the psalm's structure and political references indicates that the two-stage composition of Ps 60 dates to the Hasmonean and Herodian periods. Building on a second- and first-century BCE date for the two-stage composition of the psalm, a text-critical analysis of the psalm indicates that the Greek version of the psalm reflects a Hebrew Vorlage that predates the MT version of the psalm. Consequently, proto-MT Ps 60 seems to date to the end of the first century CE.craig evan andersoncraigevananderson@gmail.comAzusa Pacific University, Azusa, CA 91702Psalm 60 is one of the most politically oriented psalms in the Hebrew Bible.1 In order to understand the psalm properly, therefore, it is crucial to identify effectively the psalm's historical context.2 Despite ample scholarly investigation, however, the historical context of Ps 60 has remained elusive. For the past two centuries, scholars have proposed a range of dates for the psalm that spans nearly a millennium. In the nineteenth century and the early twentieth century, many scholars argued for a date as late as the Hasmonean period.3 Yet other scholars have dated it to as early as the time of David or Solomon.4Since the publication of an article on Ps 60 by Ulrich Kellermann in 1978 and, furthermore, since the publication of Hans-Joachim Kraus's commentary on the Psalms, which was instrumental in popularizing Kellermann's argument, scholars have formed a loose consensus dating the psalm to the last few years of Jerusalem before the Babylonian destruction of the city in 587 BCE.5 Kellermann's argument on behalf of this date rests largely on the confluence of two historical phenomena to which Kellermann believes Ps 60:6, 11 refer. Kellermann interprets ... in v. 6 as a reference to archers representative of die Gefahr aus dem Norden, and he understands v. 11 as indicative of a time of military conflict between Judah and Edom.6 On the basis of this observation, Kellermann notices that the one time that Judah faced invasion from a northern enemy while simultaneously standing in conflict with Edom was during the Babylonian invasion at the beginning of the sixth century BCE. Historically, it seems likely that Edom opportunistically capitalized on Judah's weakened state during the Babylonian invasion by launching incursions into Judean territory.7Following the publication of Kellermann's article, commentaries on the Psalms and articles on Ps 60 have followed suit, routinely dating Ps 60 to the fall of Jerusalem at the beginning of the sixth century BCE.8 Most scholars see a two-stage composition for Ps 60.9 The first stage consists of a Josian oracle in vv. 8-10.10 The second stage consists of the early-sixth-century communal lament that was built around this oracle in vv. 3-7, 11-14.Yet, despite the consensus that has formed around an early-sixth-century date for Ps 60, there are some major problems with this date, which, I believe, ultimately originate from a form-critical misreading of the psalm. Consequently, before I can directly address the problem of dating the psalm and propose an alternative to this date, a form-critical analysis of Ps 60 is in order.I. Form-Critical Analysis of Psalm 60Scholars almost unanimously affirm that Ps 60:3-14 features a tripartite structure. One of the clearest indications of this is the meter that the psalm employs: vv. 3-7 and 11-14 are arranged as bicola, while vv. 8-10 feature tricola. …

The Lost Gospel: Decoding the Ancient Text That Reveals Jesus’ Marriage to Mary the Magdalene by Simcha Jacobovici and Barrie Wilson (review)

Reviewed by: The Lost Gospel: Decoding the Ancient Text That Reveals Jesus’ Marriage to Mary the Magdalene by Simcha Jacobovici and Barrie Wilson Richard A. Freund Simcha Jacobovici and Barrie Wilson. The Lost Gospel: Decoding the Ancient Text That Reveals Jesus’ Marriage to Mary the Magdalene. New York: Pegasus Books, 2014. 544 pp. $21.30. ISBN-13: 978-1605986104. Pseudepigrapha is a well-known Jewish form of writing in which an ancient Jewish author used a “front” for writing about a very sensitive topic in his own time, by using a biblical name or setting the story in a different period, in order to obscure the real issue and yet explore the topic or tradition more fully. Many biblical scholars, for example, think that the book of Ruth, which was set in the time of the Judges in approximately the eleventh century BCE and dealt with the conversion of the Moabitess Ruth (who we are told in the end of the book is the ancestor of King David), was really written down in the time of Ezra (fifth century BCE), as a counterbalance to the edicts against intermarriage in that latter period. The use of this literary device is a well-known form of writing both in antiquity and throughout the Middle Ages that allowed Jews to write about difficult topics (both within Judaism and from without) without running the risk of being censured from within Judaism or from the local non-Jewish authorities. “Stand-ins” included biblical characters or small changes of letters in names or “nicknames” that would be hard to identify exactly. The most famous example of this phenomenon is in the Dead Sea Scrolls in which the authors went out of their way to conceal the time period and the names of the people who they were criticizing; titles like “the man of Belial,” “the Lion of Wrath,” “the Wicked Priest,” and the “the Man of Lies” were Hasmonean and Herodian period leaders in Jerusalem and enemies of the Qumranites who were already persecuting them. The latest book, The Lost Gospel by Simcha Jacobovici, an orthodox Jewish filmmaker and investigative documentarian, and Barrie Wilson, a Christian religious studies professor at York University, exposes one of the most explosive “secrets” of Jewish history, which was hidden in plain sight, in an unusual manuscript that sat on a shelf at the British Library for the last 150 years. It was assumed by most scholars to be an obscure Jewish story of the biblical Joseph and his marriage to Aseneth, the daughter of an Egyptian priest that is based upon a few fleeting lines in the book of Genesis. This book is important for scholars interested in historical Jewish identities because it points out that ancient literatures that appear to write about one issue are often really writing about something completely different. Jacobovici and Wilson’s book also shows that while Jews used this literary device to conceal major controversial issues, it was used by ancient Christians who apparently also needed to use this literary device to disguise controversial internal theological discussions in the first centuries of Christianity. Joseph and Aseneth were stand-ins for what the authors contend was an ancient Christian tradition (which was preserved in the Nag Hammadi Gnostic Gospels) in which a very human (and very much alive) Jesus is married to Mary the Magdalene, and they have two children. The ancient “Joseph and Aseneth” story is the “Lost Gospel” and the 4th century CE author uses the biblical narrative story of Joseph and Aseneth from the book of Genesis as a cover to write to those who accepted this ancient tradition about the details of their marriage and family life. Needless to say, [End Page 221] the book has created an enormous worldwide stir amongst traditional Christians. Jacobovici is no stranger to this type of controversy. He has produced two major films (and accompanying volumes) that have championed a similar line of interpretation based upon discoveries in the Talpiyot, the Jerusalem tombs that he dubbed the “Jesus Family and sympathizers Tombs (sic).” The films include archaeological evidence of a married Jesus, Mary the Magdalene, and even a possible heir to the mantle of Jesus...

The Old City of Jerusalem between Heritage and Urban Renewal: Public Buildings and Typological Aspects

The interest in the study of public buildings in ancient nucleus of Jerusalem stems from the need to investigate the develop principles of the urban structure between the Tyropoeion Valley and the western edge and northern of the Haram al-Sharif. The building fabric including madrasas, Ribat, hammams and the Suq al-Qattanin is only the latest result of a layering process culminating with the transformation work produced by Mamluks from 1260 until 1517. The identification of a modular distance between the routes or the measure correspondence in the individual blocks, suggest the adaptation of a previous planned urban fabric, dating probably at least to the Herodian period. The increase of religious pilgrimages and trades in Jerusalem during the Mamluk sultanate has stimulated an intensive building activity, centered mainly in the construction of Madrasas and Ribat, organically aggregated to form an urban fabric heavily infilled. In a period running from mid-XIII at the end of the fifteenth century, the building fabric finds its final set, then completed by Ottomans between the sixteenth and seventeenth century and involving especially, in addition to the reconstruction of the walls, the building of small libraries, the upgrading of existing buildings and construction of fountains in nodal points of urban structure. The paper explains a research in progress about historical urban fabrics of Jerusalem, [1] in which the close relation between the urban structure and the buildings is one of the main aspects toward an urban renewal hypothesis of the Old City, that is characterized by complex relationship among international heritage programs, public safety, and contemporary uses coherent with the role of the ancient public buildings according to the urban history.

HERODIAN INNOVATION: The Glass Industry

When timing, location, resources, experience, and inspiration coincide, a phenomenon can occur such as the invention of glass blowing and its impact on the development of the Roman glass industry. The impetus for this new industry came from Hellenistic glass production, particularly in Israel where Herod's personal relationship with Augustus assured economic, social, and political strength. The Herodian period is marked by creative energy, manifested in the technology of the time and demonstrated in remarkable advancements in the glass industry. New technology, originating in Jerusalem, spread so rapidly that it is difficult to track. This paper examines the late Hellenistic, Herodian and Augustan history of glass and how technical advancements coincided with improved Roman sea trade to transform glass making into a global industry. Earlier technical advancements had previously allowed greater production and lower prices, but it was the invention of glass blowing that truly revolutionized glass making.

Purity and Politics in Herod Antipas’s Galilee: The Case for Religious Motivation

Recent investigations of the milieu of Galilee in the late Second Temple period have largely sought to understand the emergence of the Jesus movement by searching for explanations in the living conditions of the region. Political, cultural and socio-economic factors have been pursued to unlock the mystery of the Jesus movement’s Galilean provenance. While not denying the validity of these perspectives, the present study aims at introducing religious motivation and purity concerns as distinct characteristics of Galilee in the Herodian period. This is done by discussing the material data that point to religious motivation and by surveying the relevant textual material that sheds light on the growing halakhic concern for purity in this period. It is concluded that religious motivation and purity concern indeed were driving factors in the Galilean milieu, placing Galilee firmly within the wider developments of the Jewish state from the Maccabean Revolt onward.

Historical-Allusional Dating and the Similitudes of Enoch

(ProQuest: ... denotes non-US-ASCII text omitted.) In 1909, Leon Gry entitled one of his series of articles on the Similitudes of Enoch with the seemingly simple question: Quand furent composees les Paraboles d'Henoch?1 In the century since, despite the proliferation of theories, this question has remained largely unanswered, at least with any certainty in the matter. It is perhaps therefore fitting at the centenary of the publication of the first article to deal solely with this enigma to review and reassess the status quaestionis on the dating of the Similitudes of Enoch.2 In the following, I shall attend to this task through a critical reevaluation of the historically dominant hypothesis, probing its weaknesses and offering alternative renderings of some of its commonly accepted tenets. Too many unknown variables and contradictory data exist, rendering the purported communis opinio on the dating of the Similitudes of Enoch an incomplete and unproven equation. I. The Scholarly Consensus In the early nineteenth century, Richard Laurence, who introduced Ethiopic Enoch (1 Enoch) into modern Western scholarship, proposed that the book as a whole be dated just prior to the turn of the era. This argument was constructed on two pillars, namely, that the contents of the Book of Dreams (chs. 83-90) alluded to the Herodian period and that mention of the Parthians along with the Medes (1 En. 56:5) indicated a date following the defeat of Mark Antony in 36 b.c.e.3 Laurence went on to conclude the following: At this time [36 b.c.e.] perhaps the credit of the Parthian arms was at the highest; and it is probable that about the same period, or at least not long after, the Book of Enoch was written.4 This argument was bolstered by a further examination of the remainder of ch. 56, wherein the observation that the contents of vv. 6-7 were offered a counterpart in the actions of the Parthians in setting Matthias Antigonus upon the Jewish throne in 40 b.c.e. prompted the rhetorical question: Is it not therefore probable, that the Parthian invasion of Judea at the period mentioned, the only one indeed upon record must have been in the contemplation of the author when he wrote the preceding passage? 5 While the quintpartite (or rather sexpartite) nature of the book has since been unanimously accepted along with the separate origins of each of these sections, at its core this theory is remarkably similar to that which has dominated the discussion of this topic over the past nearly two centuries in various forms, and which continues to do so in a much more monolithic manner.6 Indeed, the present-day hypothesis also alleges that the contents of 1 En. 56:5-8 allude to the Parthian incursion into Palestine in 40 b.c.e. The crucial pericope reads as follows: 56:5In those days, the angels will assemble themselves, and hurl themselves toward the East against the Parthians and Medes. They will stir up the kings, and a spirit of agitation will come upon them, and it will rouse them from their thrones. They will break out like lions from their lairs, and like hungry wolves in the midst of their flocks. 6They will go up and trample the land of his chosen ones, and the land of his chosen ones will be before them as a threshing floor and a (beaten) path; 7but the city of my righteous ones will be a hindrance to their horses. They will begin (to make) war among themselves, and their right hand will be strong against them(selves), a man will not acknowledge his brother, nor a son, his father or his mother; Until the number of corpses will be enough due to their slaughter, and their punishment will not be in vain. 8In those days, Sheol will open its mouth, and they will sink into it. And their destruction will be at an end; Sheol will devour the sinners from the presence of the chosen.7 On the basis of the reference to the Parthians in v. 5, a nation only rarely mentioned in Jewish literature, many scholars (albeit with varying degrees of certainty) choose to see this passage as rooted in vaticinium ex eventu. …

The Galilean Jesus and a Contemporary Christology

Current interest in the Galilean Jesus as a historical figure has obscured the christological claims of the New Testament with regard to his person and ministry. This article seeks to build bridges between Jesus and the proclamation about him by exploring three themes arising from accounts of his ministry (messiahship, openness to Gentiles, and the role of wisdom teacher) by examining each theme within the context of Galilean life in the Herodian period, and by demonstrating how these aspects of Jesus' Galilean career are carried forward and developed into the early Christian proclamation.

SOME ARCHAEOLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE AQUEDUCTS OF QUMRAN

De Vaux dated building of main aqueduct to before earthquake of 31 BCE,1 a dating subsequently accepted by others,2 although it has been assigned, without discussion, to time of Herod Archaelaus,3 and, with little explanation, it has been claimed that the entire water supply system was constructed at one time, that is, in Herodian period.4 A careful review of de Vaux 's field notes and of published photographs5 together with observations made in field6 reveal that aqueduct can be dated no earlier than time of Herod after earthquake. To justify this dating, which is of importance for an understanding of Qumran, one must consider known evidence for earliest, post-Iron Age building phase (de Vaux 's Period la) that pre-dated Main aqueduct, and how it was altered by construction of that aqueduct. De Vaux identified earlier (pre-main aqueduct) channels which fed pools loci 117, 110 and 118 via a sed-

Taxo's Martyrdom and the Role of the Nuntius in the "Testament of Moses": Implications for Understanding the Role of Other Intermediary Figures

(ProQuest Information and Learning: ... denotes non-USASCII text omitted.) The Testament of Moses, also known as the Assumption of Moses, is a pseudepigraphon that contains Moses's farewell discourse to his successor, Joshua. In this document, Moses predicts a series of historical events from the conquest of Canaan to the partial destruction of the temple during the reign of Herod the Great's sons (T. Mos. 1-6). Moses tells Joshua that a Levite named Taxo will appear at this time of persecution and say to his seven sons, us go into a cave which is in the open country, and let us die rather than transgress the commandments of the of Lords, the God of our fathers, for if we do this and die, our blood will be avenged before the Lord (T. Mos. 9:6-7). In the remainder of the work, Moses describes the eschaton and the arrival of God's messenger, the nuntius, who will punish the wicked (T. Mos. 10-12). The relationship between Taxo's martyrdom and the nuntius continues to be the most debated topic among scholars seeking to understand the Testament of Moses's date of composition as well as its philosophy of noble death. The purpose of this study is to present a new scenario for understanding Taxo's martyrdom and his relationship with the nuntius. In the first section I examine previous scholarship on the Testament of Moses, while the second part offers a proposal for dating the Testament to the Herodian period. This is followed by an examination of how the writer of the Testament of Moses, like the authors of many of the Dead Sea Scrolls, has combined traditions from Deuteronomy 31-34 and Numbers 25 to portray his current situation in the Herodian era as a modern-day wilderness experience to accentuate the vulnerability of Israel and to emphasize the importance of strict adherence to the words of Moses. In the fourth section I explore the identity and function of the nuntius. The Testament of Moses, once it is properly dated to the Herodian period, emerges as a valuable, yet largely neglected, source for understanding the role of other intermediary figures of the Second Temple period. I. CRITIQUE AND ANALYSIS OF SCHOLARSHIP ON THE TESTAMENT OF MOSES The Testament of Moses is a prophecy attributed to Moses that survives in a single, incomplete, partly illegible sixth-century C.E. Latin palimpsest in the Bibliotheca Ambrosiana in Milan, Italy.1 This Latin copy was apparently translated from a Greek edition, which was most likely based on a Semitic original.2 The references to the work in ancient lists of apocryphal books, which mention both a Testament of Moses and an Assumption of Moses, suggest that it circulated widely during the early Christian era.3 Based on the Christian references to the Testament of Moses, including a possible quotation from a lost portion of the text in Jude 9, it is very likely that it once contained an account of Moses's assumption to heaven and possibly a dispute between Michael and the devil over the final disposition of his body.4 Because the extant version of the Testament of Moses contains Moses's final instructions to his successor, Joshua, it is generally classified as a testament.5 Since the Testament largely imitates Deuteronomy (T. Mos. 1:5), it is perhaps best to view this work as belonging to the genre of literature commonly referred to as Bible, which is a type of literature that generally contains a narrative that follows Scripture and also includes substantial amounts of supplements and interpretative discussions.6 This designation of the work accurately describes the content of the Testament of Moses, since it is largely a rewritten version of the historical material found in Deuteronomy 31-34, where Moses recounts Israel's past and future history in his final charge to Joshua.7 The author of the Testament likely chose to base his composition primarily on Deuteronomy because he believed that Moses had predicted the recent burning of the temple (T. …

Implicating Herodias and Her Daughter in the Death of John the Baptizer: A (Christian) Theological Strategy?

(ProQuest Information and Learning: ... denotes non-USASCII text omitted.) (ProQuest Information and Learning: ... denotes formulae omitted.) Our earliest ancient narratives of the death of John the Baptizer are found in Mark 6:14-29; Matt 14:1-12; and Josephus, Ant. 18.116-19. Interestingly, the Gospel according to John contains no account of the Baptizer s death, nor does the Gospel according to Luke, which does note, more or less in passing, that Herod acknowledged having beheaded John (9:9). Q appears to lack an account of John's death, which is also, if unsurprisingly, absent from the Gospel of Thomas and from the extant portions of the Gospel of Peter. While both the Gospel narratives and Josephus's account appear relatively straightforward, there are serious, long-noted discrepancies between Josephus, on the one hand, and the Gospels, on the other, as well as striking if subtle differences between Mark and Matthew. Further, and less well noted, aspects of Josephus's narrative are egregiously and perhaps irresolvably at odds with claims he makes elsewhere about Herod Antipas and his wife, Herodias. Unsurprisingly, then, there is an extensive secondary literature on the death of John, so much so that one might wonder what else remains to be said on the subject.1 Understanding that the nature of the evidence does not allow us to know with absolute certainty that this is the case, I argue in this article that the extant accounts in Josephus and the Gospels are best regarded as separate narratives that both cannot and should not be amalgamated, with the conclusion that the assignment of blame to a young dancer, commonly taken to be Salome, and her mother, Herodias, is historically suspect and highly unlikely. While my argument to segregate Josephus and the Gospels is unusual, numerous scholars concur that the banquet story, and thus the role of the daughter, at least is likely to be fictitious, but they rarely then go on to pursue in any detail the origins, motivations, and functions of the Gospel accounts. I, however, argue that the implication of women in the death of John the Baptist is a Christian fabrication and that, in assigning women the primary responsibility not just for the death of John but for the particular means of his execution, namely, decapitation, the Gospel narratives have their function, and probably also their beginning. They are, in my view, a response to early Christian concerns about the vexing relationship between John and Jesus, most particularly the unnerving possibility that Jesus might have been John raised from the dead. The basis for my argument is in part the significant discrepancies between Josephus and the Gospels, not merely on the details of John's death but also on the likelihood that Herodias (or even, in some manuscript traditions, Herod) had a daughter who could have been the ... described as the dancer. These discrepancies, which I will lay out in some detail, are helpful to my argument, and they are what led me to it; but they are not, ironically, the logical crux of my argument. By themselves, these discrepancies do not necessarily demonstrate that the Gospels are wrong: hypothetically Josephus might have it wrong: Mark, at least, might have it right. Furthermore, while Josephus's report happens, in this case, to alert us to difficulties in the Markan and Matthean narratives, the absence of such conflicting accounts would not warrant our assuming the truthfulness of the Gospel account. A fabricated narrative might not necessarily contain the evidence of its own fabrication. As I shall demonstrate, however, in actual fact, Mark's story is made less probable by Josephuss contrary account, by these other, less immediately apparent conflicts between the Markan account and Josephuss accounts of the Herodian period, as well as by the fact that Josephus appears to have less motivation to fabricate in this case (or even to have erroneous information). …

The Dated Coins of Herod the Great: Towards a New Chronology

AbstractThis paper discusses and proposes a new chronology for a series of Herod the Great's coins, known as the dated series, which are largest and most artistic of his coin issues. While earlier scholarship dated these issues to the early Herodian period, this paper argues instead that the coins were struck in 27 B.C.E. to commemorate the rebuilding and renaming of Samaria/Sebaste in Augustus' honor. Herod minted these coins as a special series to celebrate this great achievement, an accomplishment that simultaneously advertised Herod's power and magnificence as well as his loyalty to the new Augustan regime.

Family Burial, Family Structure, and The Urbanization of Herodian Jerusalem

Epigraphic, archaeological, and historical data indicate that most of the population in Herodian Jerusalem was buried in family caves. In several cases, however, Diaspora Jews and proselytes were buried together, replacing the family by an alternative reference group of other immigrants or proselytes. Furthermore, the Qumran sectarians, and perhaps also some early Christians and pharisaic haverim, chose to withdraw from their families and to be buried in the sphere of the sect. This distinctive burial practice results from the ideological tension between the sect and the family (of the sectarian member).Analysis of the number of niches in 306 burial caves (presumably familial caves) in light of the skeletal remains from some of these caves leads to a tentative reconstruction of the family structure in Herodian Jerusalem. Most prevalent were the nuclear and the small extended families, whereas hamulas were distinctively rare. It seems that the average family became smaller during the Herodian period. It is suggested that this process was due to the urbanization of Jerusalem, and that the change in family structure accelerated the growth of individualism in Jerusalem society.

Abominated Temple and a Holy Community: The Formation of the Notions of Purity and Impurity in Qumran

The Hebrew roots milt: and tArm (pure and impure) and their equivalents occur with great frequency in the vocabulary of the scrolls from Qumran. This is not merely a lexical observation. The importance of purity and the separation from defilement for the Qumran sectarians cannot be overemphasized. The evidence from other sources, however, viz. Apocrypha, New Testament, and especially rabbinic literature, testify to the special concern of purity among other circles in second temple Judaism, such as the Pharisees and Sadducees. In a way, it seems that during the Hasmonean and Herodian periods there was competition within Judean society for who was the most scrupulous observer of purity. Indeed, the purity boundaries in the Community Rule were stricter than those of any other Jewish group. Interestingly, they treated other scrupulous observers of purity as impure heretics who were indifferent to the purity laws.2 Although the subject of purity has been discussed extensively in previous publications, there is no systematic analysis of its various theological components, implications for the sectarians' social life, or

The Geography of Restoration: Galilee–Jerusalem Relations in Early Jewish and Christian Experience

This paper discusses Galilee–Jerusalem relations in the context of the ‘geography of restoration’ as this is represented in various Jewish writings of the Second Temple period. The literary and archaeological records for the Jewish presence in Galilee in the Hasmonean and Herodian periods are examined against this ideology of a greater Israel. Finally, the alleged opposition in early Christianity between Galilee and Jerusalem is judged to be poorly grounded when various NT documents are read within this larger horizon of meaning.