The encounter of Simon the Just with Antiochus the Great: From Zenon of Rhodes to Josephus Flavius and the Talmud (original) (raw)
Related papers
Judaica, 2005
In this short note we discuss the origin and circumstances of the story about an encounter between a Jewish high priest (Shimon the Just in the Talmudic version or Jaddua in Josephus) and Alexander the Great. As was suggested by Solomon Zeitlin in 1924, the actual story related to the surrender of Jerusalem to Antiochus the Great in 199 BC by the high priest Shimon II. The question of whether Alexander could have possibly entered
Journal for the Study of Judaism, 2020
This book grew out of a larger collaborative project, headed by Noam together with Tal Ilan, that culminated in the two Hebrew volumes of Josephus and the Rabbis.1 Those hefty volumes, of which the first is dedicated to stories of the Second Temple period and the second to stories about the destruction of the Second Temple, trace the antecedents, and transformations along the way, of stories found in the writings of Josephus and in rabbinic literature. The six case-studies selected for the present volume bespeak and illustrate the same interest, but, given their common subject matter, also combine to enrich our understanding of ancient Jewish views of the Hasmoneans. The six studies, which are accompanied by a programmatic introduction and a new synthetizing concluding chapter on "The Image of the Hasmoneans: A New Perspective," deal, in chronological order, with six stories about the Hasmoneans that appear in Books 12-14 of Josephus's Antiquities and in rabbinic literature: the defeat of Nicanor; the heavenly voice heard by John Hyrcanus; the Hasmoneans' rupture with the Pharisees; the pelting of Alexander Yannai with citrons; Yannai's deathbed instructions to his wife; and the conflict between Yannai's sons and attendant death of Onias. Five of these six correspond to chapters by Noam in the Hebrew compendium and are, basically, revised translations of them; the one on Yannai's deathbed instructions to his wife was analyzed in the Hebrew compendium by Tal Ilan, and so Noam's study of it here is new. All of the studies are offered in support of the hypothesis that the rabbis did not use Antiquities, but, rather, that both Josephus and the rabbis made use of the same traditions, which-in all but one of the cases-are otherwise lost. The one exceptional case is the first, the defeat of Nicanor, for which an older version survives in 1 Maccabees 7, and Noam can therefore compare it separately to Josephus's version and to the rabbinic versions. In each case, the stories are presented in English translation and explained (including frequent reference to biblical allusions), and they are put in the historical context to which they refer. Noam's main objective is to show that the surviving witnesses depend on the same sources or traditions, and to analyze how the changes they underwent reflect the interests of the respective tradents. Most of the demonstration, that stories in Josephus and rabbinic literature depend on the same sources, is based on the application of two reasonable and venerable rules of thumb. First: the more a story in Josephus disrupts its context, or uses surprising or anomalous wording, the likelier it is that he did not create it himself but, rather, inserted it as a unit, from a source or tradition
Reconsidering Roman Power: Roman, Greek, Jewish and Christian Perceptions and Reactions, ed. Katell Berthelot; Ecole Française de Rome, 2020
Tales and traditions about Alexander the Great were popular throughout the Greco-Roman world. These sources present wide-ranging accounts of Alexander and his character, with the aim of delivering messages on numerous subjects, including power and its limits. Rabbinic literature also presents more than one perspective on Alexander. The earliest rabbinic narratives about Alexander take the form of two passages in the Jerusalem Talmud: Avodah Zarah 3:1, 42c and Baba Metzi‘a 2:4, 8c. In this paper, I re-evaluate these two talmudic tales and Genesis Rabbah 33:1 to demonstrate that they use the figure of Alexander to criticize Rome, specifically to refute the Roman illusion of unlimited power and its claim to a superior legal system, which in practice justified enriching the emperor’s coffers over protecting the lives of ordinary people. While scholars have viewed the mention of Alexander as a symbol of the Hellenistic world, and even the Greco-Roman world, the placement of these tales in a context that criticizes Rome is rarely considered.
2016
The aim of the paper is to analyse the king Antiochus IV Epiphanes actions in Jerusalem and his supposed involvement in the Jewish State. The widespread opinion about irrational aspects of the king’s actions, and his unparalleled anti-Jewish bias is questioned. Placing the events, described in 1 and 2 Maccabees, in the broad historical context allows interpreting the political situation in Jerusalem anew. The proposed interpretation emphasises the revolutionary aspect of the acts committed by the Jews, who had rebelled against the king, just behind the front-line in wartime. Such actions forced the king to act spectacularly to guarantee peace and the loyalty of the Jews. This interpretation allows seeing the actions of Antiochus as fully rational.