No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
The Herodian Dynasty: Origins, Role in Society and Eclipse
... Sin embargo, el ámbito sirio se vio implicado en las Guerras Civiles romanas, lo que precarizaría la condición de los dinastas locales, obligados a decantarse por uno u otro imperator ( Hekster 2012, 190-191, 202). Asimismo, a pesar de las medidas adoptadas por Pompeyo y los gobernadores siguientes, Roma no habría sido capaz de frenar el avance de los partos y lo cierto es que la región sería invadida por éstos en el 51 a.C., tras la derrota de Craso, y en el 41-40 a.C. 1938;Schalit 1969;Grant 1971;Schürer 1973, 287-329;Smallwood 1979, 44-104;Shatzman 1991, 129-169;Kasher 1990, 192-224;Schäfer 1995, 81-100;Roller 1998, 79-80;Kokkinos 1998;Sartre 2005, 50, 52;Sánchez Sanz 2013, 24-30;Rocca 2008. ...
Reflexiones sobre la actuación de Pompeyo Magno.
The tetrarch Herod Antipas was the son of Herod the Great and his Samaritan wife Malthace.
The article attempts at presenting the wives of Felix – a procurator of Judaea from 52 to 58/60 A.D. The governor is supposed to have had relationships with three women, two of whom are better known than the third. The author strives for solving the problem of kinship between the first wife – Drusilla of Mauretania – and Cleopatra VII, which is mentioned by Tacitus. Some researchers, however, have discredited the statement of the Roman historian that Drusilla would have been the granddaughter of the Egyptian queen. It was accepted by most historians and has been repeated in the following studies concerning Drusilla of Mauretania. Nevertheless, the renewed analysis of the matter indicates that it was Tacitus who was right and that Drusilla was the granddaughter of Cleopatra indeed. The second part of the article presents the second wife of Felix, who was the daughter of Agrippa I and is supposed to have started her relationship with the procurator of Judaea during his stay in the province.
Although ancient Idumea was certainly a marginal object of interest for classical writers, we do possess as many as thirteen extant classical non-Jewish authors (from the 1 st c. BCE to the 3 rd c. CE) who explicitly refer to Idumea or the Idumeans. For classical writers, Idumea was an inland territory between the coastal cities of Palestine, Egypt, and Arabia that straddled important trade routes. Idumea is also frequently associated in ancient literature with palm trees, which grew in Palestine and were exported throughout the Mediterranean. In the eyes of classical authors, the Idumeans were a distinctive ethnos living in the melting pot of southern Palestine. Ancient writers emphasized the Idumeans’ ethnic and cultural connections with the Nabateans, the Phoenicians and Syrians, and, finally, the Judeans, and also indicated that a great deal of Hellenization occurred in western Idumea in an urban context.
This article offers the first-ever comprehensive philological and historical commentary on possible historical allusions to the Idumeans in the following Pseudepigrapha: Pseudo-Aristeas, Judith, Jubilees, the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, the Apocalypse of Enoch, 1 Esdras, and 4 Ezra. This study argues that references to the Idumeans in the Pseudepigrapha (mostly hidden under the figure of Esau or sons of Esau) are of a very general character and as such are of little use to modern historians. Most passages are only literary expressions of the Judeans’ long-standing tradition of hostility towards the Edomites/Idumeans. Only in a few cases may we speak about general echoes of particular historical events. In 1 Esd. 4.50 and Jub. 37.1–38.14, an advanced Idumean settlement is reflected west of Arabah and south of Judea. Based on the archaeology, this settlement may have started as early as in the eighth century BCE and over time led to the emergence of a new province called Idumea in the Hellenistic period. The second-century BCE Maccabean–Idumean conflict is also echoed in several Pseudepigrapha. In general, the book of Judith reflects the strategic role of mountain passes and the use of lightly armed troops in Maccabean times. In turn, Jub. 37.1–38.14 and the T. Jud. 9.1–4 were written from a specific historical angle created by the Hasmonean conquest of Idumea, but their use of topography and chronology is so simplified that they cannot be employed by modern historians for the reconstruction of the course of the Hasmonean–Idumean conflict. Instead, both books express the ideology of territorial rights, disguised as patriarchal history. Finally, 1 Esd. 5.29 and 8.66 appear to express the ambivalent situation of the Idumeans after conversion: though they became part of the Judean community, the notion of their ethnic distinctiveness and inferiority survived.
While the impact of wars and national humiliations in the ancient Jewish cultural nationalism has been studied extensively, little has been written about the role of the related phenomena of cultures of resentment against foreigners or minority groups. Well before the Hellenistic period, the Jewish tradition had already created its own perfect enemy whose very name became synonymous of Israel's most malicious antagonist: Edom. This article aims to study the changing attitudes towards the Edomites/Idumaeans from the late Judaean kingdom to the Roman period using a long-durée perspective, particularly the growth of memories of humiliation and feelings of resentment product of the alleged crimes of Edom during Judah's fall and exile.
This article focuses on an unpublished Hismaic (Thamudic E) inscription housed in the Amman Museum (AMJ 2/J.14202), which was discovered in 1981 by W.J. Jobling in the area of Wādī Ramm, south-western Jordan. The text presents some interest for the study of the history and language of the nomadic tribes who lived in southern Transjordan and northern Arabia in antiquity, as it represents a rare example of an inscription carved by a woman and because it contains the first attestation, in Hismaic, of the feminine singular form of the relative pronoun ḏ.
Les documents épigraphiques et numismatiques en lien avec le pouvoir hérodien ne vont pas vraiment à l’encontre de ce que nous révèlent les sources textuelles au sujet d’Hérode. Ils confirment plutôt la complexité du roi et de sa politique, une complexité dont l’évocation n’est pas absente de l’oeuvre de Flavius Josèphe. Les inscriptions des amphores de Massada ou encore les types monétaires hérodiens nous font apparaître Hérode comme un souverain revendiquant son appartenance à l’ ethnos juif, tout en affirmant sa parfaite intégration dans le monde gréco-romain de l’époque.
After supporting Marc Antony in the Battle of Actium (31 B.C.), King Herod, fearful of losing his power, went to Rome, apologized to Augustus and assured him that he was his biggest supporter. Augustus, giving Herod an opportunity to redeem himself, allowed him to return to Judea as King of the Jews. In an effort for Herod to express his continued commitment to Rome, he reconfigured his building styles by making cities that would depict Rome in the Levant. Herod created architecture that implemented Roman technology, designs, and styles, while co-mingling them with his existing Hellenistic style of architecture that made him forever remembered as Herod the Great.
This article approaches the issue of Matthew’s theological context by examining Matthew’s use of Mark, including through redaction and supplementation, in Matthew 1–4. This is undertaken in two parts: Matthew 1–2, which is largely additional material, and Matthew 3–4, followed by a concluding assessment. Issues addressed or alluded to in these chapters frequently find resonance in the remainder of Matthew’s gospel and so give important clues about Matthew’s concerns and their relevance for understanding its context. Such issues include the importance of messiahship; continuity with Israel, but also with John the Baptist and the Church; defence against slander; heightened christological claims; soteriology; Gentile mission; the status of Torah; and Jesus as judge to come. The article suggests a location within a Jewish religious context with a Jewish self-understanding, separate from the synagogue, but claiming to belong where its opponents would claim it did not; and a Christian tradition where the approach of ‘Q’ to Torah is upheld in contrast to Mark’s, while embracing and expanding Mark’s Christology and restoring the common understanding of Gentile mission as a post- Easter phenomenon.
Five seasons of excavation (2008-2012) undertaken by the Leon Levy Expedition to Ashkelon in the area of the forum of Roman Ashkelon (ancient Askalon), a major seaport on the southern Levantine coast, have revealed a continuous sequence of occupation and building activity from the Hellenistic to the Crusader periods. Of primary interest are two monumental Roman phases: a first-century C.E. basilical structure that housed the city's bouleuterion and a Severan enlargement and renovation of this building. Most of the Severan phase has been revealed, as well as substantial portions of the earlier basilica/bouleuterion phase and a monumental Hellenistic complex. This article provides an overview of these architectural phases, the evidence for their date, suggestions for reconstruction, and a conspectus of the pre- and post-Roman use of this area of the city As some of the few systematically excavated examples of these building types in the southern Levant, these structures shed light on the principal monuments and the urban development of an important seaport at the height of its prosperity, and the evidence for the dismantling of the bouleuterion in late antiquity provides a glimpse into the end of Roman civic organization in an important city of the east.
Palestine Under Pompey and Caesar; John Hyrcanus II, High Priest The end of the Seleucid dynasty and the reduction of Syria to a Roman province were among the consequences of Pompey's victory over Tigranes of Armenia (66 bce). The political and territorial reorganization of the whole region (all the more necessary as the Roman power was now coming into direct contact with the Parthian empire) was bound to involve the Hasmonaean kingdom too. Here, after the death of Queen Alexandra Salome (67 bce), a dynastic struggle had broken out openly between her two sons, Hyrcanus (II) and Aristobulus (II), and this also drew in, in various ways, the different Jewish politico-religious groups and regional interests. The intervention on Hyrcanus' side of the Nabataean King Aretas, procured by Antipater governor of Idumaea with the promise of territorial compensation, had brought about the expulsion of Aristobulus in 65 bce. Roman interference in the affairs of the kingdom, undertaken at first by Pompey's Quaestor M. Aemilius Scaurus (65–64 bce) and the legate A. Gabinius, then by Pompey himself in 63 bce, was accepted more or less willingly by the two contenders, who vied for the favour and support of their new masters, with alternating results, by means which included valuable gifts. Before Pompey at Damascus the two rivals argued their cases: Hyrcanus, supported by Antipater and numerous prominent personages, relied on the rights of dynastic legality and accused Aristobulus of fomenting piracy and attacks on neighbouring peoples. Aristobulus maintained that his brother was incapable of governing. © Cambridge University Press 1999 and Cambridge University Press, 2008.
This paper provides preliminary results of our ongoing analysis of faunal remains from the Idumean site of Maresha, a site located in the Shephelah region of Israel and dated to the 4-2 centuries BC. The Zooarchaeological research in this key site is an efficient tool for portraying the social and cultural character of the site during the Late Persian and Hellenistic period. We sampled animal bones from several subterranean complexes in order to characterize the subsistence practices of the site's inhabitants. The explored dietary habits provide new lines of evidence regarding the cultural identity of its population. We highlight the main characteristics of the faunal assemblage and draw broad conclusions regarding differences and similarities in its dietary habits in the context of contemporaneous sites from the region. The high abundance of fowls and pigs show clear differences between Maresha and nearby chronologically matched sites.
Another interesting characteristic of the Maresha faunal assemblage is the abundance of sheep and goat astragali (knuckle bones) that are widely, yet differentially, dispersed across the site (NISP=512). We found direct connection between the amount of astragali in certain areas and their function. Underground rooms that show ritual activity are rich with inscribed astragali, while other contexts are not. For instance, in area 89, where an altar was excavated, we found the highest amount of astragali, many of them bear the names of gods. This discovery further illuminates the spiritual world and socio-cultural aspects of the Idumean people of Maresha.
Herod the Great, Idumean by birth, was king of the Jews from 40 to 4 BC. An able statesman, builder and warrior, he ruthlessly stamped out all perceived opposition to his rule. His last decade was characterised by vicious strife within his family and progressive will health. We review the nature of his illnesses and suggest that he had meningoencephalitis in 59 BC, and that he died primarily of uraemia and hypertensive heart failure, but accept diabetes mellitus as a possible underlying aetiological factor. The possibility that Josephus classical descriptions of Herod's disease could be biased by 'topos' biography (popular at the time), is discussed. The latter consideration is particularly relevant in determining the significance of the king's reputed worm infestation.
The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between the Iron Age land of Edom and its people, the Edomites, and the Hellenistic period Idumaea and its people, the Idumeans. In the Hebrew writings, and in the records of Israel's contemporaries in Assyria and Babylonia, the name Edom seems to have referred, originally at least, to the territory south-east of the Dead Sea, between the Wadi el-Hesa and the scarp of Ras en-Naqb and perhaps also down to the modern Gulf of Aqaba or Elat (barlett 1989, 33-54). When in the third and second centuries before our era the Greek translators of the Hebrew Bible wanted to translate the Hebrew name Edom into a Greek form, they used the name Idoumaia, which we use in Latin form Idumaea. edomites similarly became, in Greek, Idoumaioi (Hatch and Redpath 1906, 77). The apparently straightforward identification of Edom and Idumaea, however is complicated by the fact that from the fourth century B.C. to the first century A.D. historians writng in Greek used the name Idumaea to refer to an area immediately to the south of Judah or Judaea, an area which is not identical geographically with the biblical Edom. Similarly, when they referred to the Idumaeans they were not necessarily referring to the ancient Edomites, who flourished somewhere between the tenth and the sixth centuries B.C., but to people designated by the name Idumaeans between the late fourth century B.C. and the second half of the first century A.D. In short, the Greek translators of the Hebrew Bible and the secular Greek historians of the Hellenistic and early Roman period used the names Idumaea and Idumaeans not only for the land of Edom and the early Edomites south-east of the Dead Sea, but also for the area situated and the people living just south of Judaea. What is the connection between the two places and peoples? The usual, and the simplistic, answer has been for many years that from the sixth to the fourth centuries the ancient Edomites were pushed west
Annexed by Rome at the end of the mithridatic wars, Syria shows an odd feature in the territorial organisation, mixing during more than 150 years the administration by Roman officials and by some “clients” Kings. On the eastern border, Syria sustains some invasions of the Parthians but, when the civil peace is established again, it is the base for roman operations to Parthia and Armenia. Rome is respectful of the hellenistic heritage about local organisation and culture, but it has to face a growing agitation of the Jews who are living a deep social, cultural and religious crisis.
The current consensus regarding the location of Tarichaea as lying north of Tiberias by the Sea of Galilee, and as being identical to one of two cities with the name MGDL known from Rabbinical sources, is based on the old opinion of Albright. However, this opinion had unfortunately side-stepped the primary evidence of Pliny the Elder and badly misinterpreted that of Josephus. A closer look at the Greek text of the Jewish historian reveals that Tarichaea could only have been located south of Tiberias. Vespasian's approach to Tiberias, explained in geographical, geopolitical and military terms, shows the right direction, and the archaeologically established location of the hot spring called 'Ammathō' leaves no doubt. Further support is gained by an analysis of the information concerning the station 'Sennabris', the neglected outpost 'Homonoia', and the episode involving some youths from the village of Dabaritta. Any remains of Tarichaea — at the distance of '30 stadia' (or just over 5.5 km) from Tiberias according to Josephus — should be sought 1 to 1.5 km north and north-west of Tel Bet Yerach, also the site of Hellenistic Philoteria.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.