Table Of ContentTalmuda de-Eretz Israel:
Archaeology and the Rabbis in Late Antique Palestine
Studia Judaica
Forschungen zur Wissenschaft des Judentums
Begründet von
Ernst Ludwig Ehrlich
Herausgegeben von
Günter Stemberger, Charlotte Fonrobert
und Alexander Samely
Band 73
Talmuda de-Eretz Israel:
Archaeology and the
Rabbis in Late Antique
Palestine
Edited by Steven Fine and Aaron Koller
DE GRUYTER
ISBN978-1-61451-485-5
e-ISBN978-1-61451-287-5
ISSN0585-5306
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
ACIPcatalogrecordforthisbookhasbeenappliedforattheLibraryofCongress.
BibliographicinformationpublishedbytheDeutscheNationalbibliothek
TheDeutscheNationalbibliothekliststhispublicationintheDeutscheNationalbibliografie;
detailedbibliographicdataareavailableintheInternetathttp://dnb.dnb.de.
©2014WalterdeGruyter,Inc.,Boston/Berlin
Typesetting:METASystemsPublishing&PrintservicesGmbH,Wustermark
Printingandbinding:CPIbooksGmbH,Leck
♾Printedonacid-freepaper
PrintedinGermany
www.degruyter.com
Preface
Since the close of antiquity, interpreters have struggled to understand the
material world that is taken for granted in the writings of the ancient Rabbis.
Often they drew upon their own experiences and their own material cultures
forthesedenotations–culturesthatwereastonishinglyconsistentfromantiq-
uity until the industrial revolution. It is still possible to find old Jews from
Yemen or Kurdistan or even from the Russian Pale of Settlement who instinc-
tivelyunderstandtechnologiesandmodesofsocialorganizationdescribedby
theTalmudicrabbis.Theyareoftenabletoexplainhowtextsworkedinantiq-
uity, based upon their own childhood experiences. For those of us reared on
automobiles and computers, this knowledge is indeed distant – and growing
more foreign with each new technological gadget.1
Whilethiscontinuityfromantiquitytotheworldjustpassedbyisevident
with hindsight, medieval rabbis were all too aware that life had changed sig-
nificantly from late antiquity to the Middle Ages, and that modes of being
were quite different in Northern Europe than in North Africa, in Byzantium
or in Iraq. Commentators on rabbinic literature struggled to understand the
denotation of terms and ideas, often developing complex arguments and vir-
tual lexicons of Talmudic nouns – sometimes even resorting to drawings in
their commentaries where words failed.2 Burial practices, color denotations,
the shape of roofs, knives and myriad other aspects of material culture were
addressed by medieval commentators as they struggled with the unfamiliar
within Talmudic texts.
Occasionally rabbis were lucky, discovering artifacts from antiquity that
they believed could help to explain an object of biblical or rabbinic history.
The most famous of these is Nahmanides’ discovery of an ancient silver coin,
shown to him by the Jews of Acre in 1264 – which from his description was a
tetradrachma of the First Jewish Revolt. This discovery was so important that
itwasappendedtohisfamouscommentaryonthePentateuch,andsoisvery
widely known. Believing that he had discovered a biblical coin, Nahmanides
used it to ascertain the value of a biblical sheqel – engaging the opinions
of earlier rabbinic authorities.3 While premiere examples revolve around the
1 RichardSennettmakesthispointinmoregeneralterms.SeehisTheCraftsman(NewHaven,
2009).
2 Afullstudyofillustrationswithinhalakhictextsisadesideratum.
3 Perushha-Torah,ed.H.D.Chavel(Jerusalem,1960),2:557–558.Fordiscussionandmany
examples,seeMosesGaster,StudiesandTextsinFolklore,Magic,MediaevalRomance,Hebrew
Apocrypha,andSamaritanArchaeology(NewYork,1971),600–613;ShmuelZevReich,Mesoras
Hashekel:TracingtheTraditionoftheTorahMoney/WeightSystemfromtheAncientEraasit
AffectsContemporaryHalachicIssues(Toronto,SpringValleyandJerusalem,1989);JeffreyH.
vi Preface
EuropeandiscoveryofancientJewishcoinsandtheintegrationofthatknowl-
edgeintoourunderstandingofcoinageinrabbinicsources,infactthetravels
of Europeans to the Land of Israel and even to Babylonia deepened their
knowledge of the material world of rabbinic literature still further.
A well-known story reported for the first time in Sefer ha-Mitzvot Gadol,
theGreatBookofCommandments(ג"מס)ofRabbiMosessonofJacobofCoucy
(France,1240)andreproducedacrossrabbinicliterature,exemplifiesthethrill
of discovery.4 This text reports on a letter from Eretz Israel that reached the
Tosafists in France. The letter was thought to provide an early solution to a
dispute between Rashi (Solomon ben Isaac, d.1104) and his grandson, Rab-
benuTam(JacobbenMeir,d.1171)regardingtheorderofbiblicaltextswithin
tefillin,phylacteries.Strikingly,thisexactsubjectisaddressedinafragmentary
letter preserved in the Cairo Genizah and mentions the same rabbis (Rashi,
MaimonidesandRabbenuTam).ItwaswrittenbyRabbiJosephsonofBarukh
(d. 1221) from his home in Palestine to Egypt, intending that its final destina-
tion would be in France.5 Our tradition in Sefer ha-Mitsvot ha-Gadol adds a
significant element of realia:
דואמםינשיןיליפתםשואצמולאקזחירבקלעשהמיבהלפנשלארשיץראמבתכוחלשםגו
.ל"ז י"שרו השמ וניבר רדסכ
Also, they sent a letter from Eretz Israel, [reporting] that a platform (bema)
above the grave of Ezekiel had fallen down,6 and they found there very old
tefillin, [the biblical passages within the phylactery arranged] according the
Tigay,“‘Archaeology’oftheBibleandJudaisminLateAntiquityandtheMiddleAges”,inThe
ArchaeologyofJordanandBeyond;EssaysinHonorofJamesA.Sauer(ed.LawrenceE.Stager,
JosephA.Greene,andMichaelD.Coogan;WinonaLake,IN,2000),495–6;StevenFine,“Jew-
ishArtandBiblicalExegesisintheGreco-RomanWorld,”inPicturingtheBible:theEarliest
ChristianArt,ed.J.Spier(NewHaven,2007),24–6.Forapossiblemisreadingoftheancient
coins bythe Samaritan eldersconsulted by Nahmanides,see Yosef Ofer,“Why Did Nahma-
nidesMisreadtheInscriptionontheSheqel-Coin?,”Tarbiz80(2012),261–264(Hebrew).
4 Seferha-Mitsvotha-Gadol,PositiveCommandment22(ed.A.P.Parver,Ashdod,1991),p.33.
JosephKaro,BeitYosef,OraḥḤayyim34,andsourcescitedthere.
5 Jewish Theological Seminary of America, Adler collection, 2936.1. This manuscript is dis-
cussedbyEphraimKanarfogelandMosheSokolow,“RashiandMaimonidesMeetinaCairo
GenizaFragment:AReferencetoMishnehTorahinaLetterfromaTosafist,”Tarbiz67(1998),
411–16, esp. 415 (Hebrew). Many thanks to Prof. Kanarfogel for bringing this article to our
attention.
6 ApparentlyAlKifl,approximately100km.southofBagdhadinIraq.See:DavidM.Gitlitz
andLindaKayDavidson,PilgrimageandtheJews(Westport,CT2006)96–97;Tigay,“‘Archae-
ology’oftheBibleandJudaisminLateAntiquityandtheMiddleAges”,495.
Preface vii
order[ordainedby]ourRabbiMoses[Maimonides]andRashiofblessedmem-
ory.
Afurtherembellishmenttothistext,aboutacenturyafterMosessonofJacob
of Coucy, makes explicit that these were Ezekiel’s personal phylacteries, add-
ing that they were discovered hidden away under his skull (תחת ןיזונג
ויתושארמ)!7ThediscoveryoftefillinatQumranandamongtheremainsofthe
Bar Kokhba Revolt at Wadi Murabba‘at was thus not surprising to readers
steeped in halakhic literature. These tefillin are amazingly similar to those
describedinrabbinicliterature.Infact,someoftheQumrantefillincorrespond
tothepositionvoicedbyRashi,otherstoRabbeinuTam,andsometoneither!8
Beginninginthenineteenthcentury,andquicklybecomingamainstayof
Zionist Wissenschaft, modern scholars of rabbinic literature have looked to
archaeology as they have applied modern philological methods common to
classicalstudiestothestudyofrabbinictexts.Thisapproachwascalled“Jew-
ish archaeology” by the Budapest-based Wissenschaft scholar, David Kauf-
mannand“TalmudicArchaeology”byhisfarmorephilologically-focusedstu-
dent, Samuel Krauss. This approach, sometimes called “Talmudic realia” by
contemporaryIsraeli scholarsof rabbinicliteraturehas spawneda verybroad
literatureinHebrew.9Overthelasthalfcentury,archaeologicalresourceshave
been integrated as never before into the modern study of rabbinic literature,
to the point that in some circles insights gained through archaeology and
even photographs of artifacts have been integrated into commentaries on the
MishnahandtheTalmudthatappealtomassaudiences.10Thearchaeologyof
the Talmud has broad appeal among some sectors, as exemplified in Park
7 Shem Tov ibn Gaon (d. 1330), Migdal Oz to Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Laws of Tefillin
3:5,notedbyTigay,“‘Archaeology’oftheBibleandJudaisminLateAntiquityandtheMiddle
Ages,”494,n.9.Jeḥielha-LeviEpstein(d.1908)assumesthesetobeEzekiel’stefillinaswell.
SeehisArukhha-Shulkhan(NewYork,1961)toOraḥḤayyim34.
8 LawrenceH.Schiffman,“PhylacteriesandMezuzot,”EncyclopediaoftheDeadSeaScrolls,
eds. Lawrence H.Schiffman, James VanderKam (Oxford, 2000), 675–77.Yehudah Cohen has
shown, though, that there is no historical continuity here; see “Rabbenu Tam’s tefillin: An
Ancient Tradition or the Product of Medieval Exegesis?” Jewish Studies Quarterly 14 (2007)
319–327.SeealsoYonatanAdler,“TheContentandOrderoftheScripturalPassagesinTefillin:
A Reexamination of the Early Rabbinic Sources in Light of the Evidence from the Judean
Desert,”HalakhahinLightofEpigraphy,eds.AlbertI.Baumgarten,HananEshel,RonenKat-
zoffandShaniTzoref(Göttingen,2011),205–229.
9 SeeDanielSperber’scontributiontothisvolume,andS.Fine,ArtandJudaismintheGreco-
RomanWorld:TowardaNewJewishArchaeology(Cambridge,rev.ed.2010),17–18,22–3.
10 E.g.,TalmudBavli,tr.toHebrewanded.A.Steinsaltz(Jerusalem,1967–present);Mishnat
EretzIsrael,eds.S.Safrai,Z.Safrai,H.Safrai(JerusalemandTel-Aviv,2008–present).
viii Preface
Qazrin,thereconstructed“TalmudicVillage”intheGolanHeights.11Research
on the material culture reflected in rabbinic literature has reached “fervently
orthodox”circles,whereanascentmuseum,theLivingTorahMuseum,hasno
lessthanthreelocations(theBrooklynbranchdedicatedprimarilytotheBibli-
cal contexts, the Catskills resort branch to the world of the Mishnah, and the
branch in Lakewood, New Jersey dedicated to the Talmud). The Living Torah
Museum is even publishing its own archaeologically-focused Torah commen-
tary.12Withinacademiccircles–particularlyinIsrael–interestintheinterface
ofarchaeologyandrabbinicliteraturehas,ofcourse,developedfarbeyondthe
page of the Talmud, as scholars from diverse disciplines – from archaeology
tofolklore,literature,arthistory,history,Talmud,botany,medicineandgeog-
raphy – have sought out and interpreted literary and archaeological evidence
within their own disciplinary categories.
Talmudade-EretzIsrael:ArchaeologyandtheRabbisinLateAntiquePales-
tinebringstogetheraninternationalcommunityofhistorians,literatureschol-
ars and archaeologists to explore ways that the integrated study of rabbinic
texts and archaeology increases our understanding of both types of evidence,
andofthecomplexculturewhichtheytogetherreflect.Itassemblescasestud-
iesthatdemonstratethevalueofarchaeologyforthecontextualizationofrab-
binicliterature(definedbroadly)–andviceversa.Whateachofthesestudies
has in common is a deep respect both for the intricacies of textual analysis
and of the complexities of interpreting artifacts; a real desire to bridge that
chasmbetweenobjectsthatdonotspeak,andtextsthatareofteninexplicable.
Each essay begins with a specific rabbinic source that serves as a focal point
for the article. Together, these texts serve to unify the volume as a whole. In
thissense,thisvolumefollowsuponthetraditionalistscholarsofold,holding
the text to be central to our discussion, yet seeking – using contemporary
tools–bereachbeyondthetexttotheworldthattheyrepresent.Inchoosing
this rubric for this project, our goal is to consciously set aside the master
narrative that dominated Anglophone scholarship during the last part of the
last century, with its deep focus upon rabbinic authority and power. While
these were indeed significant questions, they have tended to dominate the
scholarly agenda, and sideline other approaches. The articles are organized
11 AnnKillebrewandStevenFine,“Qatzrin-ReconstructingVillageLifeinTalmudicTimes.”
Biblical Archaeology Review, 27, 3 (1991), 44–56; Ann E. Killebrew, Billy J. Grantham, and
StevenFine,“TheQasrin‘Talmudic’House:OntheUseofDomesticSpaceDuringtheByzan-
tine Period,” Near Eastern Archaeology, 66, 1–2 (2003), 59–72; S. Fine, Art, History and the
HistoriographyofJudaisminRomanAntiquity(Leiden,2013),8–9,123–37.
12 http://www.torahmuseum.com/ Shaul Shimon Deutsch, The Living Torah Museum Para-
shahSeries:SeferBereshis(Brooklyn,2012).
Preface ix
according to the chronological order in which each rabbinic document was
completed,beginningwiththeMishnahandcontinuingthoroughsourcesthat
were redacted at the cusp of the Islamic conquest in the seventh or eighth
century.
Talmuda de-Eretz Israel has its roots in a conference organized by the
YeshivaUniversityCenterforIsraelStudiesin2011,atwhichmostoftheessays
were presented orally. Happily, colleagues who could not join with us in New
York have joined the conversation in this print format. We are grateful to all
of the authors for the care, diligence, and good naturedness that they have
brought to this project. We thank Professor Günther Stemberger, an editor of
thisseries,forhiscarefulreadingofthemanuscript,andsuggestionstomake
itbetter.WealsothankthepeopleofDeGruyter,andparticularlytheintrepid
Michiel Klein Swormink as well as Emily Hough, John Whitley and Angelika
Hermannformakingtheproductionphaseofthisvolumesuchpleasantexpe-
rience. Assistance in preparing the index was provided by Elisha Fine of the
BernardRevelGraduateSchoolofJewishStudies,whoalsoperformedthefinal
editing of the manuscript. As always, we are grateful to the Academic Vice
PresidentofYeshivaUniversity,ProfessorMortonLowengrub,forfundingthis
project, and our president, Mr. Richard Joel, for allowing our Center to grow
as a place where Israel, its land and peoples, can be studied in all of their
profound complexity – across time and space.
We are pleased to dedicate this volume to two giants; archaeologist Eric
M.MeyersofDukeUniversityandtalmudistDanielSperberofBarIlanUniver-
sity. We do this in recognition of their vast contributions to the field, not the
least being the myriad ways that each has nurtured the next generation of
studentsandscholars.ThemethodologicalessaysthatProfessorsSperberand
Meyershavecontributedtothisvolumeexemplifytheirapproachestothedis-
cipline,whichformanyofushavebeen(paraphrasingPsalm119:105)“alamp
to our feet and a light to our path”.
Steven Fine,
Aaron Koller
The Center for Israel Studies,
Yeshiva University,
New York,
September, 2013
