Alcimus’ Last Command

2015 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 86-102
Author(s):  
Daniel Lanzinger
Keyword(s):  
Historical Perspective ◽  
Historical Event ◽  
Military Operation ◽  
High Priest ◽  
The Temple

The note in 1 Maccabees 9:54 that the high priest Alcimus ordered the destruction of the wall of the inner temple court is taken by most scholars as a description of a historical event. This paper, however, suggests that the note should rather be read as part of a pro-Maccabean propaganda which serves to defame Alcimus. It is argued that, from a historical perspective, it was not Alcimus but Judas who was responsible for serious damage at the temple precinct as a result of his unsuccessful military operation against the Seleucid Acra (6:18-54). The author of 1 Maccabees tries to downplay this event and to villainise Alcimus by calling destruction what was actually restoration. The paper ends with a comparison to two other passages in 1 Maccabees (4:44-46 and 5:55-62) which shows that the suggested understanding of 9:54 fits well the strategies of legitimisation and delegitimisation that can be found throughout the book.

JUXTAPOSING LITERARY AND DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE: A NEW COPY OF THE SO-CALLED HELIODOROS STELE AND THE CORPUS INSCRIPTIONUM IUDAEAE/PALAESTINAE (CIIP)

2017 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
HANNAH M. COTTON-PALTIEL ◽  
AVNER ECKER ◽  
DOV GERA
Keyword(s):  
Documentary Evidence ◽  
High Priest ◽  
The Third ◽  
Multiple Copies ◽  
First Time ◽  
The Temple

Abstract This article was prompted by the recent discovery of two more copies of the so-called ‘Heliodoros Stele’ from Maresha. A second one from Byblos was published in 2015. The third one, re-discovered recently and published here for the first time, also comes from Maresha. The steles bear Seleukos IV's epistolary prostagma from 178 bc to his vizier Heliodoros, and forwarded to other officials with the instruction to display it in public. It contains an appointment of one Olympiodoros to be high priest in Koele Syria and Phoenicia. Both Seleukos IV and Heliodoros also appear in the story of the plundering of the Temple related in II Maccabees 3. The existence of multiple copies, though hardly surprising, made us suspect the king's apologetic tone and identify the ‘reform’ as an attempt to embellish the withdrawal of previously bestowed privileges on the Jews (so Josephus) as well as on others.

Different Names of God

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Schäfer
Keyword(s):  
Hebrew Bible ◽  
High Priest ◽  
The Temple

This chapter addresses a problem that must have plagued the rabbis a great deal: the undeniable fact that the Hebrew Bible uses various names for God, most prominent among them Elohim and the tetragrammaton YHWH. Both names attracted the attention and curiosity of Gentiles, the latter because of the mystery surrounding it—it was originally used only by the High Priest entering the Holy of Holies of the Temple, and its proper pronunciation was deemed lost—and the former because it is grammatically a plural and hence could easily give rise to the idea that the Jews worshiped not just one God but several gods. The “heretics” apparently knew enough Hebrew to seize the opportunity and insinuate that the Jews were no different in this regard than the pagans and indeed accepted the notion of a pantheon of various gods.

scholarly journals Acts, Events, and Stories. On the History of Danto’s Compatibilist Narrativism

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-79
Author(s):  
Thomas Uebel
Keyword(s):  
Historical Perspective ◽  
Philosophy Of History ◽  
History Of Philosophy ◽  
Developmental Trajectory ◽  
Analytical Philosophy ◽  
High Priest ◽  
History Of ◽  
Arthur Danto

Abstract The response given to C.G. Hempel’s well-known challenge by Arthur Danto in his Analytical Philosophy of History of 1965 – that deductive-nomological and narrative explanations are logically compatible yet employ incommensurable schemata – is here investigated from a historical perspective. It is shown that the developmental trajectory that emerges from an analysis of Danto’s previous writings – including not only a forgotten paper of 1958 but also his PhD dissertation of 1952 – contains distinctive step-changes with publications of 1953 and 1956 still prior to that of 1958–59 which enabled his subsequent discovery of narrative sentences. It is also argued that Danto’s developmental trajectory runs contrary to that presumed by some prominent commentators. Analytical History of Philosophy was not the midpoint of his ascent from mainstream philosopher of science to high priest of postmodern aesthetics, but represents a reasoned retreat from his early historical idealism.

John the Evangelist

2019 ◽  
pp. 43-98
Author(s):  
John Behr
Keyword(s):  
Gospel Of John ◽  
The Body ◽  
Second Century ◽  
Third Century ◽  
Historical Evidence ◽  
High Priest ◽  
The Cross ◽  
The Temple

Chapter One explores the figure of John and his Gospel from historical testimony given in the second and third century CE and as treated in contemporary scholarship. The John who wrote the Gospel, the chapter argues, was not the son of Zebedee, one of the twelve apostles, but the disciple of the Lord, the Elder who resided in Ephesus. The first part of this chapter also examines, on the basis of the historical evidence, the occasion for the writing of the Gospel, and argues for the unity of the Johannine corpus (including the Apocalypse). The second part of the chapter turns to the description given by Polycrates of Ephesus that John wore the ‘petalon’ in Jerusalem, that is, that he was the high priest of the temple, which, this chapter argues, refers to the fact that, in the Gospel of John, he alone amongst the disciples stood at the foot of the cross as the body of Jesus was lifted up upon the cross as the true Temple. It was, moreover, as this chapter shows, only the followers of John who had an annual celebration of Pascha, held on 14 Nissan, until the mid to late second century, when others began to celebrate this feast on the following Sunday, leading to the Quartodeciman controversy, the association of Sunday with the Resurrection, and the development of the Tridium, the three-day celebration of the Passion.

WHY IS VALERIUS FLACCUS A QUINDECIMVIR?

2016 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 239-244 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Jeffrey Tatum
Keyword(s):  
Historical Perspective ◽  
Imperial Period ◽  
Valerius Flaccus ◽  
Formed Part ◽  
The Temple

‘Valerius Flaccus knows how to write with elegant precision.’ – R. Syme, Tacitus (Oxford, 1958), 89.Phoebe, mone, si Cumaeae mihi conscia uatis 5stat casta cortina domo, si laurea dignafronte uiret …In these lines, as critics have long recognized, resides evidence for identifying Valerius Flaccus as a quindecimuir sacris faciundis. Emphasis is placed on the tripod emblematic of this sacred office which is here intimately associated with expertise in the oracular communications of the Cumaean Sibyl. The libri Sibyllini, the supervision and interpretation of which were amongst the earliest and most conspicuous of the XVuiri's responsibilities, could be traced to the Sibyl at Cumae (Lactant. Div. inst. 1.6.10-11, citing Varro, even if this connection was less than the entire story from a strictly historical perspective). Wreathes, too, formed part of the XVuir's equipment, and of course during the Imperial period the Sibylline books were deposited in the Temple of Apollo on the Palatine. In little more than two lines, then, one finds an abundance of references that cannot fail to fashion this addressee of Apollo as a quindecimvir.

The Ruthenian Uniate Church in its Historical Perspective

1968 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 365-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ludvik Nemec
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Evolution ◽  
Western Europe ◽  
Historical Perspective ◽  
Sharp Contrast ◽  
Political Life ◽  
Historical Event ◽  
Complex Phenomenon ◽  
The West ◽  
General Direction

To consider the Ruthenian Uniate Church in its historical perspective, and to encompass its complex phenomenon in a few pages is difficult for the historian who must treat this matter as an exception to the rule rather than an isolated historical event. It stands in sharp contrast to the historical precedent of the Kievan state whose inception and development, always represented politically, culturally, and ecclesiastically, the unity of all Russia. The division of Kievan Russia into principalities governed by members of the Rurik dynasty did not inhibit the cultural evolution, nor did it cut Russia off from contact with Western Europe. Rather, the cultural evolution developed in the general direction it had been given by Kiev, and contact with the West was further intensified in the principalities of Galicia-Volhynia and Novgorod. In addition to Kiev, several new centers of Russian political life developed in proportion to the number of principalities which increased as fathers divided their appanages among their children.

Ezekiel

2019 ◽  
pp. 299-311
Author(s):  
Ellen F. Davis
Keyword(s):  
Sacred Space ◽  
Religious Practice ◽  
High Priest ◽  
Narrative Frame ◽  
War Victims ◽  
The Temple ◽  
The Grotesque

Ezekiel’s prophecy was a major factor in the centuries-long transformation of Israel’s national religion into two vibrant global faiths. Ezekiel is the most theocentric of biblical writers; his biography and personal voice are eclipsed by divine oracles and vision reports, with only the sparest narrative frame. With shocking displays of “antilanguage,” including the grotesque metaphor of Israel as a faithless wife and imagery that evokes the shaming of war victims, Ezekiel seeks to strip Israel of self-destructive pride and refocus attention on YHWH, not Babylonia. The final chapters rise to a modulated hopefulness, through visions of the people’s resurrection and the reordering of sacred space. Later Ezekiel’s restoration vision would inspire the prophet Haggai’s successful campaign to rebuild the temple, providing the groundwork for a new consolidation of Jewish religious practice around the temple and the high priest.

The Importance of Three Judahite Figures in the Book of Haggai: Zerubbabel, Joshua, and Haggai

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel F. O'Kennedy
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
High Priest ◽  
Biographical Information ◽  
Final Structure ◽  
Building Process ◽  
Signet Ring ◽  
The Many ◽  
The Temple

Three prominent Judahite figures appear in the book of Haggai: the prophet Haggai, the governor Zerubbabel, son of Shealtiel, and the high priest Joshua, son of Jehozadak. The many occurrences of their names emphasise that the short book of Haggai gave prominence to these figures, more than any other biblical book. This article poses the following questions: Why do we have so little biographical information about the prophet Haggai, not even the name of his father? What were the different roles ascribed to these figures in the book of Haggai? Did they work together as a team or was there conflict between them? Who was the most prominent figure in the book of Haggai? What happened to these figures after the conclusion of the book? The book of Haggai does not provide definite answers to all these questions and different hypotheses will be discussed. There is also uncertainty about the role of these figures after the occurrences reported in Haggai since the other biblical books do not help us in this regard. However, we can conclude that the author/composer portrays them as central figures in the book and the temple building process. We cannot really say that one figure was more important than the other, but Zerubbabel is presented prominently in the final structure of the book. In his conclusion (2:20–23), Haggai prophesies about an eschatological day when the Davidic kingdom will be restored by means of Zerubbabel, Yahweh’s servant and chosen signet ring.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document