Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Yahwism under the Achaemenid Empire
(Prof. Shaul Shaked in memoriam)
University of Haifa | 20-22.12.2022

https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www ... cwpvsrnCdv$

This three-day international symposium—in memory of the late Prof.
Shaul Shaked—is dedicated to the study of the touchpoints between
diverse Yahwistic communities throughout the Achaemenid empire and the
Iranian attributes of the empire that ruled over them for about two
centuries. This is arguably the most formative period in the
development, redaction and composition of some of the most central
texts within the Jewish (and, by extension, Judeo-Christian) heritage.
However, there has historically been too little dialogue between
scholars of Achaemenid history and linguistics and those of Jewish
history, the Bible and archeology and Semitics.

To respond to these lacunae, the conference’s approach is
fundamentally interdisciplinary. It brings together scholars of
Achaemenid history, literature and religion, Iranian linguistics,
historians of the Ancient Near East, archeologists, biblical scholars
and Semiticists. The goal is to better understand the diversity and
interchange of ideas, expressions and concepts as well as the
experience of historical events between Yahwists and the empire that
ruled over them for over two centuries.

The conference is sponsored by the University of haifa, The Israeli
Association for the Study of Religions (IASR), The Joseph & Racheline
Barda Chair for the Study and Research of Jewish Heritage In Egypt and
the Haifa Laboratory for Religious Studies. Additional sponsorship
opportunities are available.

General Information:
In-person access to the conference in Haifa will be available for free
- but advance registration is required:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www ... cwpiw5fYhR$ .

Online streaming access (via zoom) to the lectures will be available
with modest participation in the expenses of providing this option -
please register at https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www ... cwpiw5fYhR$ .

For more information, including complete schedule and abstracts:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www ... cwpvsrnCdv$


Confirmed speakers (by alphabetical order):
Dr. Gad Barnea (University of Haifa)
Features of Achaemenid-era Zoroastrianism: some echoes from Yahwistic
sources at Elephantine

Dr. Ohad Cohen (University of Haifa)
Shining a light on להוא in Judean Aramaic: Evidences from Achaemenid
Imperial Aramaic

Prof. Diana Edelman (University of Oslo)
Yhwh Shomron and Yhwh Elohim in the Achaemenid Province of Samaria

Prof. Israel Finkelstein (University of Haifa)
Archaeology's Black Hole: Jerusalem and Yehud/Judea in the Persian and
Early Hellenistic Periods

Dr. Margaretha Folmer (Leiden University)
The linguistic milieu of Elephantine Aramaic

Prof. Benedikt Hensel (Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg)
Was there an ‘Idumean Yahwism’? Material & Biblical Evidence on
Religion and Yahweh-Worship in Idumea

Prof. Tawny Holm (Pennsylvania State University)
Samarians in Egypt: Evidence from P. Amherst 63

Prof. Itamar Kislev (University of Haifa)
The cultic fire in the priestly source

Prof. Ingo Kottsieper (University of Münster)
From יהה צבאת to יהו מרא שמיא: Aspects of religious development on Elephantine

Prof. Reinhard Kratz (Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen)
Where to put Biblical, Torah-centered Yahwism in Achaemenid Times?

Prof. Oded Lipschits (University of Tel-Aviv)
"Those who live in these ruins in the land of Israel" (Ez. 33:24):
Living in the Shadow of the Ruins in Persian Period Judah

Dr. James Moore (Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin)
Administering Religion and Cult at Elephantine

Prof. Antonio Panaino (Università di Bologna)
Cyrus as Mašiaḥ or Χριστός

Dr. Laurie Pearce (University of California, Berkeley)
Through a Babylonian looking glass: what is the problem with foreign wives?

Prof. Bezalel Porten (Hebrew University, Jerusalem)
יהו and its cognates in personal names: the problem of Yama

Prof. Konrad Schmid (University of Zurich)
Theocracy and Eschatology: Assessing the Political-Theological Status
of the Achaemenid Empire in Persian Period Judaism

Prof. Stefan Schorch (Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg)
The Samaritan Pentateuch as Textual Witness of the Pentateuch in the
Persian Period

Prof. Michael Shenkar (Hebrew University, Jerusalem)
The Achaemenid Dynasty, Zoroastrianism and the Origin of the Fire-Temples

Dr. Jason Silverman (University of Helsinki)
Yahwism in the Religious Field of the Achaemenid Empire: Using
Bourdieu as a theorist of religious change in the Persian Empire

Prof. Karel van der Toorn (University of Amsterdam)
Persian Imperialism and the Religious Imagination in Early Judaism

Prof. Ran Zadok (University of Tel-Aviv)
Issues pertaining to the Judean exiles in pre-Hellenistic Babylonia

or as members of this forum would have it ... "fictional history."

"The Achaemenid or the Achaemenian Empire, also called the First Persian Empire, was an ancient Iranian empire founded by Cyrus the Great in 550 BC."

Secret Alias wrote: ↑Wed Oct 19, 2022 2:40 pm or as members of this forum would have it ... "fictional history."

Who says that?

As a long-time ancient history hobbyist I found the idea of such a conference exciting and I'd love to catch up with just about all of the presentations.

What surprised me was SA's dismissal of the views of some unnamed persons here as thinking that the Persian empire is fictional. If, SA, you are meant to be laughing at the idea of such a conference somehow debunking anything in Russell Gmirkin's thesis, then I can only suggest you 1) read the abstracts listed for that conference and 2) read something by Gmirkin himself -- even his comments and clarification here would be a good start.

Every abstract in that conference promises a discussion fo historical evidence that is entirely part of Russell Gmirkin's own thesis and all but one or two of those abstracts address ideas that are at variance with Gmirkin's -- those one or two happen to be explicitly saying they are extrapolating back from Hellenistic era evidence to play with ideas of what might have preceded in earlier times according the the traditional model of biblical origins.

Yahwism in the Persian era -- and the archaeological finds in Mesopotamia, Egypt, Samaria and Yehud -- -are all part and parcel of Russell Gmirkin's discussions in his works.

I used to think the idea of a Hellenistic provenance of the biblical literature was a bit too extreme and thought "minimalists" like P.R. Davies were on more secure ground with their Persian era dating. But the more I read of the actual evidence -- including the abstracts in the upcoming conference -- the more I find myself thinking that the Hellenistic era for the origin of the Pentateuch and Primary History has the data in its favour.

I must thank Stephen Goranson for bringing us notice of a conference that explores much of the relevant evidence in connection with Russell Gmirkin's 1) hypothesis and his 2) model!

The link to the abstracts of the papers to be presented at the conference:

https://www.yahwistichistory.org/items

If you will, compare the following two texts:

1) From Russell E. Gmirkin, Sat Oct 15, 2022 1:28 pm:

"According to the rigorous methodology I utilized, I began with the _removal_ of the then-common supposition that the Torah was written in the Persian Era or earlier. With this traditional but misguided assumption set aside, I was able to show that the first objective external evidence for the existence of the Torah was the LXX translation of 273-269 BCE. I then demonstrated that the Torah utilized Hecataeus of Abdera (320-315 BCE), Manetho (ca. 285 BCE), Berossus (278 BCE), and others, finally narrowing down the possible date of composition to 273-272 BCE. Additional arguments pointed directly to a provenance of Alexandria, where the authors found these various sources in the Great Library. And finally to the surprising inference that the same team of authors at Alexandria ca. 273-272 BCE were necessarily also responsible for overseeing tis immediate translation into Greek, the LXX, which took place at Alexandria for the Great Library at that very same time."

and
2) From the "Yahwism under the Achaemenid Empire" conference announcement, above:

"This is arguably the most formative period in the
development, redaction and composition of some of the most central
texts within the Jewish (and, by extension, Judeo-Christian) heritage."

StephenGoranson wrote: ↑Thu Oct 20, 2022 6:22 am If you will, compare the following two texts:

1) From Russell E. Gmirkin, Sat Oct 15, 2022 1:28 pm:

"According to the rigorous methodology I utilized, I began with the _removal_ of the then-common supposition that the Torah was written in the Persian Era or earlier. With this traditional but misguided assumption set aside, I was able to show that the first objective external evidence for the existence of the Torah was the LXX translation of 273-269 BCE. I then demonstrated that the Torah utilized Hecataeus of Abdera (320-315 BCE), Manetho (ca. 285 BCE), Berossus (278 BCE), and others, finally narrowing down the possible date of composition to 273-272 BCE. Additional arguments pointed directly to a provenance of Alexandria, where the authors found these various sources in the Great Library. And finally to the surprising inference that the same team of authors at Alexandria ca. 273-272 BCE were necessarily also responsible for overseeing tis immediate translation into Greek, the LXX, which took place at Alexandria for the Great Library at that very same time."

and
2) From the "Yahwism under the Achaemenid Empire" conference announcement, above:

"This is arguably the most formative period in the
development, redaction and composition of some of the most central
texts within the Jewish (and, by extension, Judeo-Christian) heritage."

You have this distinctive ability to misread what's staring you in the face, Stephen.

Did you actually read any of the abstracts?

But yes, "arguably the most formative period" is exactly the hypothesis that Russell Gmirkin is challenging. But RG's study is based on exactly the same kinds of evidence set forth according to the abstracts of papers at that conference -- exactly the same.

Do read the abstracts -- the details. You will discover an "amazing" overlap between RG's thesis and the evidence and topics discussed there for most part.

Those abstracts inform the reader -- I mean one who has high school level reading comprehension skills -- that there is no evidence for the Persian period being the "most formative period in the development, redaction and composition" of the Hebrew bible. None, Zilch. The abstracts say that themselves -- they say the evidence is only found in the Hellenistic era. And you know what? They are working with a hypothesis that those biblical books took centuries to evolve so they argue that the period in which there is no evidence for those actual books being composed is key to their composition. (The only exception is one or maybe two papers that point to Nehemiah and Ezra on the assumption that they are contemporary with the Persian era in provenance.)

Now it's a reasonable hypothesis. I have held it for some time myself and I like to think I try to be reasonable.

But .... well, if you were honest with the evidence before your eyes you would not declare that posts you have never seen taken offline are offline or arguments which are entirely consistent with the archaeological evidence of the Persian era are not consistent with the archaeological evidence of the Persian era. You would certainly not be viscerally invested in smearing the characters of people who think differently from you.

Now I think of it, I do recall pulling you up on other comments of yours here where it was obvious you only read the title of the abstract jumped to conclusions from that basis alone and had never read the actual work that flatly contradicted your assertions.

You here quote an advertizing blurb designed to provoke interest in the conference in a certain audience. Fair enough. Now do read the actual contents. You read the brand name, now read the label for the ingredients.

Okay -- I know SG is too damn lazy or fearful to read the abstracts onsite so here are key excerpts from them informing us what to expect to hear at the conference:

Dr Gad Barnea:

and studies some Zoroastrian/Avestan echoes preserved in Yahwistic sources in Upper Egypt, mostly at Elephantine, which provide first-hand documentation of Zoroastrian devotion.

Dr Ohad Cohen discusses Lhwh variant of Yhwh:

In my analysis I compare two corpora: ostraca from the closest neighboring province of Judea, namely Idumea, and texts from the Judean Elephantine community in south Egypt. These sources are written in Imperial Aramaic and contain a long list of personal names that reflect different ethnic situations – the exclusivity of Canaanite Judean personal names in Elephantine in contrast with the melting pot of Canaanite dialects that result in a variety of Canaanite names in Idumea.

Prof Diana Edelman:

The excavations conducted on Mt. Gerizim have indicated that the sacred precinct was built there in the first half of the fifth century BCE, not after the destruction of Samaria by Alexander in 332 BCE. . . . Thus, the foundation of the Persian-era Gerizim complex would have involved a new, separate prebendary priesthood for that facility, which would have been well established when Samaria was destroyed in 332 BCE . . . After reviewing the archaeological evidence, I will investigate the claims in Neh 13:28 and Josephus, Ant. 11, 302–3, 306–12, 325 that a son of the high priest of Jerusalem married the daughter of Sanballat and served as priest in the Gerizim temple.

Prof Israel Finkelstein:

The paper will present an updated picture of the archaeology of Jerusalem and Yehud/Judea between 586 and ca. 200 BCE: Demography, occupational history, settlement patterns and literacy. It will then deal with the possibility of intensive composition of biblical materials in the city/province at that time.

Dr Margaretha Folmer:

In this paper I want to discuss the linguistic setting of Elephantine Aramaic.

Prof Benedikt Hensel:

The paper will discuss the phenomenon of “Idumean Yahwism” in the light of the material sources, as well as through analysis certain exilic and postexilic biblical traditions that might reflect the multi-facetted ethnic fluidity and “Yahwistic activities” in the Southern Negev region.

Prof Tawny Holm:

This paper examines the evidence concerning Samaria that can be found in Papyrus Amherst 63, the long anthology written in Aramaic but using the Demotic Egyptian script. The multiple compositions on this late Persian or early Hellenistic period papyrus reflect the religious traditions and cultural memory of diverse Aramaic speakers living in Egypt, some of whom were Samarians. In a nostalgic passage with a broken reference to Babylon and Nineveh, Samarians and Judeans seem to view themselves as siblings who arrived together in Egypt in much need of food and support (xvii 1-6). Moreover, alongside poems describing deportations and destroyed cities of days long past, the papyrus also preserves “northern” psalms exalting Yahō (Yahweh), Baal/Hadad, and the Aramean-Israelite god Bethel, amongst other deities.

Prof Ingo Kottsieper:

. . . a development in the religious consciousness of the יהודיא on Elephantine (and in Syene) and in their relationship with other groups there and with the Persian administration during the 5th century BCE. This provides an interesting historical and religious background for the well known conflict about the Jahu-temple at the end of this century.

Prof Reinhard Kratz:

Apart from a few marginal intersections, however, only the Dead Sea Scrolls and some of the inscriptions from Gerizim, both coming from the Hellenistic-Roman period, contain evidence of biblical and parabiblical literature and Torah-centered ,“biblical” Yahwism among this wealth of sources. The paper will take this fact as an opportunity to discuss the methodological and historical problem of where the scriptures of the later Hebrew Bible and the related parabiblical literature had their historical and sociological place in Achaemenid times.

Prof Oded Lipschits:

Throughout the Persian period, Judah was a small province in the periphery of the empire, with many memories of the glorious past. . . .

Dr James D. Moore:

Since the discovery of Persian period Aramaic documents at Elephantine, which reference the island’s Judean inhabitants and a temple of Yahweh/Yahô, scholars have diligently tried to describe aspects of the island’s Judean religious experience.

Prof Antonio Panaino: -- here's one for RGPrice, addressing a specific question he has raised here...

One of the most interesting aspects of the cultural interconnections between Israel and Persia can be found in the story of the Jewish liberation from the Babylonian captivity under the kingdom of Cyrus the Great.

Dr Laurie Pearce:

this talk will review recent scholarship on social networks in Babylonian marriages and a perceived shift in the late Achaemenid period documentation of marriage practices in order to better understand historical, social, and economic factors shaping the environment in which Ezra issued his severe decree.

Prof Bezalel Porten:

Israel’s divine name YHWH has appeared in personal names spelled YHW in pre-exilic Judah and YW in northern Israel. In post-exilic times, both at Elephantine and in Yehud, YHW is abbreviated to YH. In contemporary Babylonia, this form appears as Yama, but its pronunciation is uncertain.

Prof Konrad Schmid:

This paper explores the legitimacy and the limits of Plöger’s model and proposes new perspectives for the political theologies of Judaism under Achaemenid rule.

Prof Stefan Schorch:

The Samaritan Pentateuch is generally conceived as a textual version of the Pentateuch that emerged in the Late Second Temple period, i.e. in the Hellenistic era. The presentation aims to demonstrate the relevance of SP as a main witness for the state of the text of the Pentateuch during the Persian period.

Dr Jason Silverman:

An as yet underutilized set of tools from the work of Pierre Bourdieu—though not his own analysis of religion—may help provide a more fruitful way to think about and analyze the role of “religion” in ancient society.

Prof Karel van der Toorn:

Perhaps future generations of scholars will look back to us and say we overrated the significance of the Persian period: How about crucial developments in the monarchic era, the formative experience of the diaspora, and the cultural impact of Hellenism? Trends tend to follow fashion. . . . I shall attempt to present a survey of those elements in the collective religious imagination of early Judaism that can be traced back to the historical experience of Persian imperialism.

Prof Ran Zadok:

I discuss here two main issues:
1. The reconstruction of a reliable statistical sample of the Judean exiles in Babylonia between 597 and 331 BCE;
2. Plausible scenarios and loci of Judeo-Iranian encounters.

As SG knows very well from his own careful reading RG's work, RG would be quite at home in such conference with his own contributions of the impact tropes and religious ideas with Persian era roots (not only Yahwism) in the Pentateuch.

How curious of neilgodfrey to claim that I had not read the abstracts when in fact I had read the abstracts soon upon receiving the conference notice.*

How curious of neilgodfrey to claim that the conference description (above) was written by someone as "an advertizing blurb" that somehow misleads about the conference; the conference description was sent by a conference convenor and presenter who is a Professor at the University of Haifa.

* If the links in the original post don't work, you could try
https://www.yahwistichistory.org/
and links there.