Scenes from the Mosaic at the "House of Dionysus" at Sepphoris

The following images come from a Roman style villa which was discovered in Sepphoris in the Galilee. The villa's triclinium, or dining room, was decorated with an elaborate mosaic depicting various scenes from the life of Dionysus, most notably a drinking contest between the Greek god and the often deified hero Herakles.We will discuss these images at length in class. Black and white reproductions of the images do not do these mosaics justice. Take a good look at the color scans of the scenes taken from the mosaic here and be prepared to discuss the images in class.

The first panel above shows the overall plan of the mosaic.

The second panel is a close up of the center of the mosaic- the drinking contest between Dionysus and Herakles.

The top panel here shows Herakles in a drunken state. The bottom panel shows Dionysus under the influence. Both panels have the word "drunkeness" written as a superscription in Greek.

These scenes depict more scenes from the life of Dionysus; his education at the hands of nymphs, here called Bacchai, and his wedding to Ariadne, the daughter of Minos who helped Theseus escape the maze of the Minotaur. Theseus abandoned her on the island of Naxos where she was discovered by Dionysus.

This is perhaps the most famous image from the Sepphoris mosaic, sometimes called "the mona lisa" of Sepphoris. There is little identifiable iconographic significance to this particular picture. Rather, it shows the technical quality of the mosaic which rivals that of contemporary mosaics from the Roman villas in North Africa.

The top panel presumably depicts the rape of Auge, the mother of Telephelus, by Herakles.

The bottom panel shows a scene from the childhood of Dionysus. He is being bathed by nymphs who were responsible for his early education.

Here you see the depiction of Dionysus' triumphant arrival to the East. After Alexander's conquests in the 330's BCE the myth of Dionysus' arrival in India was often depicted in graphic form.

Dionysos was, among other things, the god of wine. Perhaps this explains the incorporation of a depiction of three lenobate or "grape-treaders."

Having looked at these images, who do you think lived in the villa at Sepphoris? Can we say anything about them? What was their religion? How wealthy were they? What were their interests? What was their attitude towards Greco-Roman culture?

The answers to these questions (if there are any at all) are more complicated than you might at first assume.

The Ethiopic Book of Enoch

Jonah Rank
November 13, 2006
His1010x Ancient Jewish History
Instructor- Loren Spielman


The Ethiopic Book of Enoch

Remaining an almost universally extracanonical work (excepting in the Ethiopic church), the document variously referred to as I Enoch (or I En.) or the Ethiopic Book of Enoch offers the contemporary historian of early Jewish history an excellent insight into many different aspects of Judaism during the Second Temple period.
The book, in its pseudopygriphal style is attributed to (and, without a doubt, not truly written by) Enoch, the son of Jared, as mentioned in an obscure curious phrase in the fifth chapter of Genesis in which, without much explanation, the author of this section of Genesis informs the reader that Enoch was in some way “walking with God” (which, in an older mindstyle based on eschatological centrism, had been often interpreted as meaning that Enoch had a special relationship with the Divine and even never died but had rather ascended to Heaven [somewhat akin to the anachronistically formed story of Elijah the Prophet ascending to Heaven in a chariot of fire and never having been able to die]). The heavy messianic yearning and eschatological imagery in I Enoch is an inundating factor in the flow of this work: from a quote in which God refer’s to God’s own Son, and the seemingly pedestrian nature of the existence of the relationships that exist between Enoch and the angels and God. Furthermore, the text here seems to stray ideologically from most past mainstream forms of Israelite religion as, while Genesis did embrace breeding, much of I Enoch consists of shunning vices and sins that had previously not been seen necessarily as vices (cf. I En. 8:2, et al).
It is difficult to date I Enoch precisely; however, it is known that I Enoch, because of its references to various matters accomplished in the reign of Herod the Great, was written after the beginning of Herod the Great’s reign. The surmising of various historians has led many ancient Jewish historians to agree that this work was created circa the 2nd or 1st Century BCE.
Furthermore, the book at hand is claimed to have been written originally in Hebrew, according to Rabbi Joseph Halevi. Yet, none of the manuscripts found of the Enoch documents has been able to verify successfully with any certainty that Enoch I was originally written in Hebrew. The earliest transcriptions of I Enoch appear in Ethiopic (most fully), in Greek (noticeably fragmentarily), and – as found in the Qumran caves – in Aramaic. (Charles, an academic hoping to compromise the notion of its Hebrew origins and the Aramaic tendencies of the text interestingly has juggled the two and decided that the Aramaic is infused with Hebrew terminologies so that the Hebrew and the Aramaic are indecipherable one from another.
The text begins with an introduction where Enoch mentions briefly apocalyptically of the “Day of Judgment” and the happy fates of the “elect”. Enoch is then granted an explanation of all of the secrets of the natural scientific universe origins of the book are not so clear. In the second of a common series of dividing up the Ethiopic Book of Enoch into five sections, Enoch begins to prophecize about the “last day.” The third and intermediate section is a bit of a break and actually presumably the entirety of another extracanonical work, The Book of the Courses of the Heavenly Luminaries (discussing them in terms of the windows of space and the various new mathematically improved calendar for accuracy in which 364 days occur a year [rather than presumably the 354 lunar year often followed by contemporary Jews]). In the fourth section, a history beginning with the Children of Israel and ending with the Hasmonean dynasty’s beginning is recalled. In the fifth section and final section, Enoch reviews a history of Israel again from the theophany at Mount Sinai, and the writer’s voice disappears temporarily to insert another extracanonical work, The Book of Noa, and then Enoch leaves the reader with instructions for how to live better lives.
The Book of Enoch, despite its theological deviations from previous historical Israelite rite practices, it seems that certain eschatological and apocalyptic notions that seem innovative within this work, are matters that sometimes do consent and conform with later Rabbinic standards as recorded in the Talmud.

SOURCES CITED:
“Enoch, Ethiopic Book of.” Encyclopaedia Judaica: CD-ROM Edition. CD-ROM. Jerusalem: Keter, 1997.
Pratt, John P. Book of Enoch. 1883. Richard Laurence. November 13, 2006 http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html.

The Jewish Diaspora Before 117 CE

Hopefully, by next class we will have reached the beginning stages of the first Jewish revolt against Rome. We will then take a brief jaunt back in time to discuss the Jewish Diaspora. We have already discussed this topic to some extent when we covered the Ptolemaic period. We will take a more indepth look at Jews living outside of Palestine on Thursday.

Please take another quick look at the Letter of Aristeas. Don't focus so much on the story of the translation of the Septuagint. The letter actually gives us a rather rich view about how some Diaspora Jews may have viewed the high priest, the temple, and Jerusalem. The philospophical discussions between the Ptolemaic king and the Jewish delegates is also worth another look.

If you have not already done so, make sure that you have read the material from John Barklay's "Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora." The readings were sent to you a week ago as attachments to an email and are now available on the website.

You can also find them here , here and here.
In addition, I would like to start our section on the Diaspora by discussing the following list of names. Come to class prepared to discuss which figures you think are Jewish and which are not:


Iosepos
Joshua
Jason/Jesus
Sabbathios
Shelamzion

(the following three names roughly translate as "gift of god" or "god-given")
Dositheos
Theodotos
Theodoros

Artimodoros
Apollodoros
Horus
Gelasios (laughter in Greek)

Haggai son of Diaphoros (Greek for "different" or "excellent")
Hanniah father of Tasa ("the guardian" in Egyptian)
Apollonios son of Jason
Dositheos son of Artimodoros
Ezekias son of Ezekias

The Arrival of Rome and Herod

If you have not started already, I suggest diving into the readings for the Arrival of Rome and Herod, and Judaea under Roman rule.

The first reading for tomorrow's class, Josephus BJ I: 184-215 describes the early careers of Herod and his brother Phasael. The background is, of course, the civil war between Pompey the Great and Julius Caesar. Think about how Antipater and his two sons use this conflict to their advantage.

Herod, who eventually became the Roman client king over the Jews, early in his career met with harsh criticism. He was called to trial for his brutal treatment of a group of brigands, bringing him into near open conflict with Hyrcanus and prominent Jews from the Jerusalem community. How might this incident point to some of the political tensions that were brewing in early Roman Palestine during the high priesthood of Hyrcanus II?

The second reading, Josephus BJ: 401-428 , describes some of the building projects that Herod was responsible for after being crowned king.

Josephus Ant 18:261-209

Jennifer Abrams
October 9, 2006
His1010x Ancient Jewish History
Loren Spielman
Josephus Ant 18:261-309
The story described by Josephus in this passage recounts yet another test of the Jewish people’s commitment to their laws. Petronius is sent by Gaius, who is a leader under Caesar, to Judea on a mission to erect a statue of Gaius in the Temple: if possible with the consent of the Jews, or if necessary, by force.
In response to this decree, the Jews petition Petronius “not to use force to make them transgress and violate their ancestral code” (157). They even go so far as to beseech Petronius to kill them before assembling the statue so they would not have to go against the law. Here we see the extreme commitment of the Jewish people to their laws, so much that they are willing to give their lives. They are utterly sure that G-d will be with them because they have chosen to defend his decrees. From their defiant response, Petronius discovers it will not be a peaceful process to put the statue of Gaius up in the Temple.
As Petronius travels to survey the response in the North, the Jews neglect their fields and continuously offer themselves to be killed rather than transgress. The lack of harvesting leads to a great deal of banditry. Petronius is influenced by the universally negative response and writes a letter to Gaius to procrastinate the war, in hopes of changing his mind. Petronius gives a speech to the Jews to let them know about the letter and to try to pacify them. After this speech, G-d provids rain, which is extremely welcome in the midst of the severe drought, to show Petronius that G-d agrees with him. In his letter, Petronius outlines the detrimental effects of destroying the tens of thousands of Jews on the economy and after the speech, Petronius says it is a bad idea to fight against a people whose G-d was with them.
At the same time, Gaius’s friend, King Agrippa, whom he greatly looks up to, is visiting him. After providing him with many gifts, Gaius offers to grant any request of King Agrippa. The request King Agrippa makes is to abandon the mission to put the statue in the Temple. Because he had promised to grant the request, Gaius sends a letter to Petronius saying that if he already had erected the statue, he should leave it, but if he has not, he does not need to erect the statue.
Gaius receives the letter from Petronius and is upset because he thinks the Jews are challenging his authority. Gaius then writes to Petronius saying since Petronius is defying the decree on which he was sent, he should do whatever he wants; however, before this letter even reaches Petronius, another letter arrives announcing Gaius’s death.
In the end, the leaders and the people prefer Petronius to Gaius “since Gaius had vented his wrath against them without mercy” (177).
From this text, we can see the devotion of the Jewish people to their law and their G-d. They were even willing to incur death to avoid breaking the laws. Additionally, we see the societal value of mercy because of the support given to Petronius in his decisions to procrastinate and ultimately eliminate the extermination of the Jews because of their unwillingness to have a statue of a leader erected in their Temple.
Works Cited
Josephus. Jewish Antiquities XVIII. 18:261-309.

Assignments on the Exagoge

Abby Kerbel
His 1010x
Exagoge
10/6/06

The Exagoge is the story of Exodus, but in the form of a Greek tragedy. It was written by Ezekiel the Tragedian, who was Jewish writer writing in Greek. The piece can be dated to sometime after the Septuagint because based on the content of the play, Ezekiel the Tragedian had to have had extensive knowledge of the Torah in some form. In fact, when looking at the English translation of the Hebrew text of Shemot alongside the Exagoge, some of the narrative of the Exagoge seems almost word for word for what is in the biblical text. In this way we can tell that Ezekiel the Tragedian not only had familiarity with the biblical story, but an intimate knowledge of the text itself.
The story starts off with Moses, who is the main narrator throughout most of the text, recounting how the Israelites got to Egypt in the first place. This recounting of origin is a Jewish concept, as seen later in the Torah that this similar history is to be recited upon giving sacrifice in the Mishkan, and then later the Temple. Its inclusion in the Greek tragedy gives the tragedy a Jewish touch, while still maintaining the tragic narrative form. This is one piece of evidence that this tragedy was meant to bring Judaism and the Torah to the Jews through a Greek medium, rather than Greek-ifying Judaism.
Another interesting point in the beginning of the text is when Moses is recounting how the Israelites were “suffering, oppressed, ill-treated even to this very day by ruling powers and by wicked men.” (Lines 4-6) I can’t seem to figure out what suffering the Jews are facing when Ezekiel the Tragedian is writing this, because if we assume he’s writing this still during the Ptolemaic rule, the Jews were treated quite well at this time. This line makes me wonder what he’s talking about, and whether he is alluding to something we don’t know about regarding Ptolemaic rule and the Jews.
Further close reading of the text shows the use of Greek medium to transmit the story. It says that the Jews built walls and towers out of the bricks they were making. Egypt at the time of the actual Exodus, as far as I know, did not have walled cities with towers, and this seems like a more Greek concept. It’s the small details like this that make the Jewish story more Greek without compromising its Jewish identity. These little particulars are those things in the story that the Greek Jews can latch on to as identifiably Greek, and then this further draws them into the story and peaks their interest, making this very identity laden story easier for Greek Jews to handle.
While the text of the Exagoge for the most part is very close to the actual story of the Exodus, there is a hint of commentary or interpretation within the play. When Moses meets Sepphorah in the play, he asks where he has ended up, and her reply is Libya. She further goes on to explain that Aethiops also live in the land. This seems to be a way of explaining the issue many had with Moses marrying Sepphorah and also a Cushite woman. By taking the liberty to put this information in, Ezekiel the Tragedian may have tried to solve some of the contradictions of the Torah to make it easier to understand. At the same time though, a character named Chus is introduced alongside of Sepphorah. Chus looks like Cush, which would then present the idea that the Cushite woman was indeed separate from Sepphorah, and then Ezekiel would be contradicting himself. This slip up might be evidence of Ezekiel the Tragedian’s own indecision on the matter.
This play seems to be a way to bring the Septuagint to the Greek speaking Jews of the time. Just because the Jews spoke Greek, does not necessarily mean that they had access to the text of the Septuagint. The Exagoge is an example of how Judaism can still fit into Greek containers, so to speak, without compromising it. Ezekiel the Tragedian does take some poetic license with some parts but on the whole keeps true to the details of the biblical story. The ability to do this within the acculturation of Hellenistic society should be noted as example that Hellenization does not have to mean assimilation.

Some Assignments on the Letter of Aristeas

Matthew Platt
Ancient Jewish History
Loren Spielman
“Letter of Aristeas”

The, “Letter of Aristeas”, is the primary source for the compilation of the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible. Despite going on many tangents, it clearly portrays to the reader how the Septuagint came into existence. The story is portrayed through the eyes of Aristeas, presumably a Jew from Alexandria, Egypt. The letter is apparently a correspondence between Aristeas, and his brother in Palestine, Philocrates. Originally the text was written in Greek, however it was not written with the best grammar or style.
The letter opens with Aristeas greeting his brother Philocrates, telling him that he has tried to the best of his abilities to give him an accurate narrative of the events at hand. He continues to explain to Philocrates how a group had been gathered whose mission was the translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek, something that they accepted upon themselves enthusiastically. He also mentions how he had taken advantage of this moment and had gotten King Ptolemy Philadelphus to release the Jewish prisoners of war that his father, King Ptolemy son of Lagos, had captured.
Aristeas tells of Demetrius of Phalerum who, on his selection as keeper to the king’s library, took upon himself the task of collecting all the books in the world. The king soon asked Demetrius about the completeness of his library, to which he answers, that news had reached him of a Jewish text that was worthy of inclusion into the library. Upon hearing this, the king asks what had stopped Demetrius from obtaining the Jewish text, to which Demetrius replies that there isn’t a Greek translation of the text, and that it is only found in the language of the Jews. After learning of this problem, the king soon writes to the high Priest of the Jews, Eleazar, asking for his help to finish this task. At this point in the narrative, Aristeas chooses to make his first tangent. He attempts to convince the king to release the Jews that had been exiled from Judea by the king’s father. As a way to persuade the king, Aristeas points out that the Jews will not only translate the text but also interpret it as well, and how they would be more willing to do so if there wasn’t such a large number of Jews in subjection within his kingdom. The king promptly releases not only the Jews that had been taken under his father, but also all the Jews that had been taken before and afterwards as well.
Once these exiled Jews were released, the king then asked Demetrius about the status on the translation of the Hebrew Bible. To this Demetrius responds, that although he had received a transcription of the Jewish books, they were translated somewhat carelessly and were not satisfactory for inclusion into the library. He goes onto say that this is most likely due to the fact that this translation didn’t receive royal patronage, and asks the king for permission to send a letter to Eleazar, requesting six men from each tribe, who understand Jewish law, so that they could decide on a translation that will be accepted by the majority, to which the king agrees.
The king writes another letter to Eleazar, telling him what he wishes to accomplish, and thanks him in advance as well as complimenting the Jewish people and the Jewish G-d. He names both Aristeas and Andrea of the chief bodyguards, Jewish men from Alexandria who were regarded as important, as part of the delegation to Jerusalem; he also offers many gifts to the Jewish Temple, something he continues to do throughout the story. Eleazar soon responds to the king, agreeing to all of the king’s requests, pledging not only his obedience but also his friendship. Aristeas then names all seventy two people that were chosen from the twelve tribes. At this point Aristeas goes into another digression, now explaining the details of the gifts given to the Jewish temple, by the king.
From one topic Aristeas then jumps to another, explaining his journey to Jerusalem, which he gives in great detail. When he finally comes back to the subject of the translation, Aristeas explains that the men chosen were all well versed in both Hebrew and Greek texts, but immediately he is side tracked yet again. He goes into a lengthy description of a discussion that he had with Eleazar the High Priest. When Aristeas finishes his story, he then discusses the arrival of the Jewish delegation to Egypt. How the king received the delegation at once, which was not the custom of the kings court. This showed the great respect that the king had for both Eleazar and the Jewish people. The delegation had brought the king a gift, a copy of the Law written on fine skins in Hebrew.
The king then, in a course of seven days, asks each member of the delegation question concerning a wide variety of topics. He, as well as the gathered assembly of philosophers, is impressed with the answers that the members provide. This is especially notable; when it is pointed out that they answered the questions almost instantly. According to Aristeas, three days later Demetrius took the delegation and showed them their rooms, and gave them anything that they needed in order to finish the task. After seventy two days, the delegation finished the translation of the Hebrew Bible; something that Aristeas points out was miraculous in its own right. The Jews of Alexandria then proceeded to place a curse on anyone who dared to change this translation in any way, due to the fact that all the members had agreed upon this translation.