When was the Second Temple Destroyed? Chronology and Ideology in Josephus and in Rabbinic Literature (original) (raw)
Online Publication Date:
25 Nov 2015
Jewish tradition holds that both the first and second Jerusalem temples were destroyed on the 9th of Av (m. Taʿan. 4:6). According to Josephus both temples were destroyed on the 10th of Av (J.W. 6.250). Although Josephus proffers an elaborately detailed chronology of the temple’s final days, an attentive reading reveals that he in fact delayed the destruction of the temple by one day. Ideological motives impelled Josephus to defer the date of the destruction of the Second Temple to the date he had for the destruction of the First Temple (the 10th of Av). He proposes an analogy between the two in support of his position that God was punishing the rebels for their sins. Finally, the article suggests that the Jewish tradition that establishes the 9th of Av as the date for the destruction of both temples, derives from a mythical conception of history.
Access options
Get access to the full article by using one of the access options below.
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
ProCite
RefWorks
Reference Manager
- 2
Herbert Danby, ed. and trans., The Mishnah (London: Oxford University Press, 1933), 200.
Herbert Danby, ed. and trans., The Mishnah (London: Oxford University Press, 1933), 200.
)| false - 8
Since Jacob Bernays, Über die Chronik des Sulpicius Severus: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der classischen und biblischen Studien (Berlin: Wilhelm Hertz, 1861),
Since Jacob Bernays, Über die Chronik des Sulpicius Severus: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der classischen und biblischen Studien (Berlin: Wilhelm Hertz, 1861), 48-61, nearly all scholars accept that Josephus’s account of Titus’s conciliatory attitude toward the temple is untrue. The bibliography on this topic is enormous. Tommaso Leoni, “ ‘Against Caesar’s wishes’: Flavius Josephus as a Source for the Burning of the Temple,” jjs 58 (2007): 39-51, esp. 41-45, contains a well-written, detailed summary. Leoni, for his part, tends to the minority opinion that lends credence to Josephus’s depiction. See also: Tessa Rajak, Josephus: The Historian and His Society (London: Duckworth, 1983), 206-210; Goodman, Rome and Jerusalem: The Clash of Ancient Civilizations (London: Penguin Books, 2007), 441. Steve Mason, “What is History? Using Josephus for the Judaean-Roman War,” in The Jewish Revolt against Rome: Interdisciplinary Perspectives (ed. Mladen Popović; Leiden: Brill, 2011), 155-240, esp. 226-28, expresses additional misgivings regarding the approach of Bernays and his successors, particularly in respect to their reliance on Sulpicius Severus. More fundamentally, however, he asserts the impossibility of determining which depiction to accept and applies this to most of Josephus’s historiography (ibid., 228-39). Recently, however, Schwartz, Reading, 136-39 has come to endorse the majority view. For a rebuttal of Leoni’s arguments see Miriam Pucci Ben Zeev, “Between Fact and Fiction: Josephus’ Account of the Destruction of the Temple,” in Flavius Josephus: Interpretation and History (ed. Jack Pastor, Pnina Stern, and Menahem Mor; Leiden: Brill, 2011), 53-63.
)| false - 9
Joshua Levithan, Roman Siege Warfare (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2013), 142.
Joshua Levithan, Roman Siege Warfare (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2013), 142.
)| false - 10
Fergus Millar, “Last Year in Jerusalem: Monuments of the Jewish War in Rome,” in Flavius Josephus and Flavian Rome (ed. Jonathan Edmondson, Steve Mason, and James Rives; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 101-28,
Fergus Millar, “Last Year in Jerusalem: Monuments of the Jewish War in Rome,” in Flavius Josephus and Flavian Rome (ed. Jonathan Edmondson, Steve Mason, and James Rives; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 101-28, esp. 101-2. Regarding the theological aspects, see: Helmut Schwier, Tempel und Tempelzerstörung. Untersuchungen zu den theologischen und ideologischen Faktoren im ersten jüdisch-römischen Krieg (66-74 n. Chr.) (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1989), 308-37.
)| false - 19
Adalberto Giovannini, “Die Zerstörung Jerusalems durch Titus: Eine Strafe Gottes oder eine historische Notwendigkeit?” in Contra quis ferat arma deos? Vier Augsburger Vorträge zur Religionsgeschichte der römischen Kaiserzeit: Zum 60. Geburtstag von Gunther Gottlieb (ed. Pedro Barceló; München: Vögel, 1996), 11-34,
Adalberto Giovannini, “Die Zerstörung Jerusalems durch Titus: Eine Strafe Gottes oder eine historische Notwendigkeit?” in Contra quis ferat arma deos? Vier Augsburger Vorträge zur Religionsgeschichte der römischen Kaiserzeit: Zum 60. Geburtstag von Gunther Gottlieb (ed. Pedro Barceló; München: Vögel, 1996), 11-34, esp. 30, raised similar objections against Josephus’s narrative (I thank the anonymous reviewer for this reference).
)| false - 23
On Jewish battle tactics see Price, Jerusalem under Siege, 120-25.
On Jewish battle tactics see Price, Jerusalem under Siege, 120-25. Especially noteworthy are their successes in face-to-face combat (pp. 281-85).
)| false - 25
Mason, “What is History,” 220-21 alludes to this problem as a possible reason to question Josephus’s credibility. See also I. M. J. Valeton, “Hierosolyma Capta,” Mnemosyne 27 (1899): 78-139,
Mason, “What is History,” 220-21 alludes to this problem as a possible reason to question Josephus’s credibility. See also I. M. J. Valeton, “Hierosolyma Capta,” Mnemosyne 27 (1899): 78-139, esp. 135.
)| false - 42
David Asheri, “The Art of Synchronization in Greek Historiography: The Case of Timaeus of Tauromenium,” Scripta Classica Israelica
David Asheri, “The Art of Synchronization in Greek Historiography: The Case of Timaeus of Tauromenium,” Scripta Classica Israelica 11 (1991/1992): 52-89, esp. 54. Recently Denis Feeney, Caesar’s Calendar: Ancient Time and the Beginnings of History (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2007), dealt extensively with this issue. Feeney examines various types of synchronisms. See pages 148-60 in particular regarding the significance of day synchronisms.
)| false - 48
This is evinced by Chaim Milikowsky, Seder Olam: Critical Edition, Commentary, and Introduction (2 vols.; Jerusalem: Yad Ben-Zvi, 2013),
This is evinced by Chaim Milikowsky, Seder Olam: Critical Edition, Commentary, and Introduction (2 vols.; Jerusalem: Yad Ben-Zvi, 2013), 2:439-41.
)| false - 61
Ithamar Gruenwald, Rituals and Ritual Theory in Ancient Israel (Leiden: Brill, 2003), 105.
Ithamar Gruenwald, Rituals and Ritual Theory in Ancient Israel (Leiden: Brill, 2003), 105.
)| false - 62
Yosef H. Yerushalmi, Zakhor: Jewish History and Jewish Memory (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1988), 22.
Yosef H. Yerushalmi, Zakhor: Jewish History and Jewish Memory (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1988), 22.
)| false - 63
Mircea Eliade, The Myth of the Eternal Return: Or, Cosmos and History (2nd ed.; trans. W. R. Trask; Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005).
Mircea Eliade, The Myth of the Eternal Return: Or, Cosmos and History (2nd ed.; trans. W. R. Trask; Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005). On the relationship between Eliade’s thesis and the affinity between myth and ritual see Gruenwald, Rituals, 114, 116.
)| false
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1301 | 144 | 19 |
| Full Text Views | 304 | 12 | 2 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 158 | 28 | 4 |
Online Publication Date:
25 Nov 2015
Download Citation Get Permissions
Access options
Get access to the full article by using one of the access options below.
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Jewish tradition holds that both the first and second Jerusalem temples were destroyed on the 9th of Av (m. Taʿan. 4:6). According to Josephus both temples were destroyed on the 10th of Av (J.W. 6.250). Although Josephus proffers an elaborately detailed chronology of the temple’s final days, an attentive reading reveals that he in fact delayed the destruction of the temple by one day. Ideological motives impelled Josephus to defer the date of the destruction of the Second Temple to the date he had for the destruction of the First Temple (the 10th of Av). He proposes an analogy between the two in support of his position that God was punishing the rebels for their sins. Finally, the article suggests that the Jewish tradition that establishes the 9th of Av as the date for the destruction of both temples, derives from a mythical conception of history.
Content Metrics
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1301 | 144 | 19 |
| Full Text Views | 304 | 12 | 2 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 158 | 28 | 4 |