Ory Amitay

The Alexander Romance (AR) is a literary text that stands on the border of history and myth. On the one hand, it tells the story of a fully historical character, i.e. Alexander himself, and presents a supporting cast of other historical figures, such as the Persian monarch Dareios, the Indian monarch Poros, and the Makedonian general and future Pharaoh Ptolemy. On the other hand the storyline of the AR, while preserving some historical facts from Alexander’s time, is clearly a-historical, including some fictions as Alexander’s dealings with Rome and Carthage, a campaign in the Aegean arena after the first battle with Dareios, and a plethora of incidents which are not only a-historical, but are also unnatural (meeting people with two or no heads, or humanoids with canine heads or serpentine feet).
In my presentation I intend to argue that this unusual mythistorical mix is a product of its origins in Ptolemaic Egypt. In this context the AR was first composed as a piece of Ptolemaic propaganda, which used the figure of Alexander as a proxy for the Ptolemaic dynasty, reshaping history in order to fit Ptolemaic circumstances and agenda. In this way the Makedonian’s travels and conquests are realigned to present the wide reach of the Ptolemies around the middle of the third century BCE (that is, under Ptolemy II Philadelphos and in particular Ptolemy III Euergetes). In response, a secondary branch of the tradition, reflecting Seleukid realities and interests, came into being some two generations later. Therefore, the underlying literary logic of AR as a whole, that is using historical material in an a-historical fashion in order to comment on current affairs, creates a new kind of literary genre that is, by its very definition, liminal in nature.

Page 1. FROM ALEXANDER TO JESUS ORY AMITAY Page 2. Imprint in Classical Literature In honor of beloved Virgil— “O degli altri poeti onore e lume . . .” —Dante, Inferno The Joan Palevsky Page 3. ... Page 4. From Alexander to Jesus Page 5. ...

Résumé/Abstract The identity and chronology of Shim'on ha-Şadiq have been a subject of ongoing controversy for centuries. Three possible candidates have been suggested as Shim'on ha-Şadiq: Shim'on I and Shim'on II-Şadoqite high-priests at both ends of the third ...

Simon the Just (ha-tzadiq) is the name ascribed by Josephus and a variety of rabbinic sources to two Jerusalem high priests during the Hellenistic period. The pair, a grandfather and his grandson, presided at both ends of the third century bce. Keywords: ancient Near East history; ancient Near East history; biography; biography; historical fiction; historical fiction; Judaism; Judaism

In his masterful translation and commentary on the Second Book of Maccabees, Daniel Schwartz devotes a short appendix to the historicity of the information provided in chapter 6, verse 7:ἤγοντο δὲ μετὰ πικρᾶς ἀνάγκης εἰς τὴν κατὰ μῆνα τοῦ βασιλέως γενέθλιον ἡμέραν ἐπὶ σπλαγχισμόν, γενομένης δὲ Διονυσίων ἑορτῆς ἠναγκάζοντο κισσοὺς ἔχοντες πομπεύειν τΔιονύσῳ.And with bitter compulsion they were led each month to a banquet for the King's birthday, and as there was a Dionysia festival, they were forced to parade carrying ivy in honor of Dionysos.In the opening paragraph of his discussion of the verse, Schwartz states: “This verse refers to two elements in Antiochus’ persecution in Jerusalem: monthly celebrations of the king's birthday and the cult of Dionysus. Concerning both there is room to suspect that they reflect the Ptolemaic context of our author more than the realities of Seleucid Jerusalem.” In other words, he doubts the historicity of the information provided in the verse, making it an imaginative creation either by Jason of Kyrene or by the anonymous redactor of 2 Macc.

Page 1. FROM ALEXANDER TO JESUS ORY AMITAY Page 2. Imprint in Classical Literature In honor of beloved Virgil— “O degli altri poeti onore e lume . . .” —Dante, Inferno The Joan Palevsky Page 3. ... Page 4. From Alexander to Jesus Page 5. ...

Procopius of Caesarea reports the existence of an inscription in Numidia, allegedly written by the refugees from Canaan’s conquest by Joshua. While this claim cannot be taken at face value, it raises interesting questions as to its provenance and purpose. Regarding provenance, the complicated situation of the sources (especially the ongoing debate about the real date of Moses of Khorene) unfortunately prevents a firm conclusion. Regarding purpose, the inscription seems to reflect the political and religious tensions, which accompanied Belisarius’ campaign to regain North Africa for the Roman Empire and Justinian’s attempts to Christianize those parts of African society who abided by their polytheistic ancestral custom.

The story of Gviha Ben-Psisa and Alexander the Great is a rabbinic myth. The mythical Alexander represents the historical Pompey. Gviha, on the other hand, is a fully historical figure (a grandson of Jonathan Maqabi and great-grandfather of Josephus). The myth emerged out of the realities and anxieties created by the rise of Hasmonean imperialism under Hyrkanos I and his sons, and by its collapse at the hands of Pompey. It defends the Jewish rights over Eretz Israel by establishing the Torah as a source of legitimacy in international law. The myth also reflects Jewish ambivalence towards Pompey: at once a defiler and a preserver of the Temple.

The myth of Antaios and Herakles emerged from the encounter between the northern and southern shores of the Mediterranean. This article explores two parallel courses of the myth's progressive development. One is geographical, with the myth travelling from east to west (from Kyrenaika, through Tunisia, to Tangier). The other unfolds within the plot itself: at first Herakles stands for the Greeks (and later the Romans), while Antaios embodies the indigenous Libyans. However, shifting political circumstances also allow for the (conjectural) identification of Greeks with the figure of Antaios, and a (certain) equation of Libyans with Herakles. On the whole, the history of the myth from the seventh to the first centuries BCE reflects the development of a politically and culturally coherent Mediterranean over the same period, from the first Greek settlers in Libya to the Mediterranean empire of Augustus.

This chapter sets out a research program to use various digital, conceptual and computational approaches in order to prepare the ground for writing a history of Monotheism in Antiquity. The program suggested in the chapter makes use of various DH approaches. On the simplest level, a digital solution (MediaWiki) is sought in order to address an immediate technical difficulty: the need for a tried and true tool for collaborative research. Overcoming obstacles of time and space, the digital approach is a practical sine qua non for this kind of project. On a more philosophical level, wiki-style hypertextuality is a strong facilitator of mental flexibility. The nature of MediaWiki is admirably congruent with memetic theory, and easily applicable to Network Theory (NT). The author's aim is to use both these methodologies in his analysis of the information, both in his own database and in other databases too. Keywords: Antiquity; Biblical Studies; digital humanities; MediaWiki; memetic theory; Monotheism; Network Theory (NT)

In the twelfth book of his Jewish Antiquities, Flavius Josephus reports a dowry arrange- ment between Antiochos III and Ptolemy V Epiphanes in the aftermath of the Fifth Syrian War. While we know that the Seleukid princess Kleopatra (I) was eventually wed to Ptolemy V at Raphia in the winter of 194/3 BCE, the character of her dowry was, even in antiquity, shrouded in mystery, a sub- ject of diplomatic dispute a mere generation later. Adding to the confusion, modern scholarship has connected Josephus’ information about Kleopatra’s dowry with his stories about the Tobiads. The manifold problems raised by the Tales of the Tobiads, together with the assertion that any division of taxation from the same land between two sovereigns is unthinkable, have caused the majority of scholars to disbelieve the information provided by Josephus. In this paper, we argue that the discus- sion of Kleopatra’s dowry ought to be divorced from the Tales of the Tobiads. We adduce a number of examples for tax-sharing in the Hellenistic eastern Mediterranean that demonstrate the plausibility of the arrangement between the Seleukids and the Ptolemies. Further, we contend that the terms of the arrangement reported by Josephus make good sense in light of international relations and politics of its time. Thus, the testimony of Josephus that the dowry arrangement included a division between the two monarchies of the taxes of Koile-Syria, Samaria, Judea, and Phoenicia should re-enter the historical reckoning.

This paper sets out to explore what little remains from the now-lost work of the Hellenistic author Kleodemos Malchos (Joseph AJ 1.240–241; Euseb. Praep. evang. 9.20.2–4). The surviving fragment concerns the joint campaign of the Greek Hero Herakles and the sons of the Hebrew Patriarch Abraham against the Libyan giant Antaios, a struggle which resulted with a marriage alliance between the victors, the birth of a Libyan people, and the origin of the name “Africa”. The key point in the discussion is the etiological use by Kleodemos of the name Africa, which stands at the heart of the story. This use of Africa points to modern day Tunisia, to the popularization of the name following the second Punic War and to its official use in the new Roman province after the third Punic War. This final confrontation between Rome and Carthage is suggested as the historical context for Kleodemos’ story. It is further suggested that the myth of Herakles and Antaios is used as commentary on the third Punic War, with Herakles signifying Rome, Antaios Carthage, and the Libyan tribes spawned by Herakles standing for Masinissa’s nascent Numidian state. The role of Abraham is harder to ascertain, given the uncertainty about Kleodemos’ originality. It may be seen as a typical Hellenistic Jewish attempt to find a place for a Hero of Hebrew mythology within Greco-Roman culture, but may also represent a strong interest, possibly even some actual Jewish involvement, in the third Punic War. Cet article se propose d’explorer le peu qui reste de l’œuvre aujourd’hui perdue de l’auteur hellénistique Cléodème Malchos (Josèphe, Antiquités I, 240–241 ; Eusèbe, Préparation évangélique IX, 20, 2–4). Le seul fragment existant concerne la campagne conjointe du héros grec Héraclès et des fils du patriarche hébreu Abraham contre le géant libyen Antée, une bataille qui aboutit à une alliance matrimoniale entre les vainqueurs, à la naissance du peuple libyen et à l’origine du nom “Afrique”. Le point crucial de la discussion concerne l’utilisation étiologique que fait Cléodème du nom Afrique et qui se trouve au cœur du récit. Cette utilisation renvoie à l’actuelle Tunisie, à la popularisation du nom à la suite de la seconde guerre punique et à son usage officiel pour désigner la nouvelle province romaine après la troisième guerre punique. Cette dernière confrontation entre Rome et Carthage pourrait constituer le contexte historique du récit de Cléodème. De plus, le mythe d’Héraclès et d’Antée pourrait avoir servi de commentaire à la troisième guerre punique, en admettant qu’Héraclès signifie Rome, qu’Antée est Carthage et que les tribus libyennes engendrées par Héraclès représentent l’état numidien naissant de Masinissa. Le rôle d’Abraham est plus difficile à cerner, étant donné l’incertitude planant sur l’originalité de Cléodème. Il peut être vu comme la tentative typique d’un Juif hellénistique pour trouver une place à un héros de la mythologie hébraïque dans la culture gréco-romaine, mais il peut aussi illustrer un intérêt profond, voire même une implication juive dans la troisième guerre punique.

The myth of Antaios and Herakles emerged from the encounter between the northern and southern shores of the Mediterranean. This article explores two parallel courses of the myth's progressive development. One is geographical, with the myth travelling from east to west (from Kyrenaika, through Tunisia, to Tangier). The other unfolds within the plot itself: at first Herakles stands for the Greeks (and later the Romans), while Antaios embodies the indigenous Libyans. However, shifting political circumstances also allow for the (conjectural) identification of Greeks with the figure of Antaios, and a (certain) equation of Libyans with Herakles. On the whole, the history of the myth from the seventh to the first centuries BCE reflects the development of a politically and culturally coherent Mediterranean over the same period, from the first Greek settlers in Libya to the Mediterranean empire of Augustus.