Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Josephus' Version of Samson

Bibliographic Data

ID10908004
AuthorsLouis H Feldman (Yeshiva University, corresponding author)
Year1988
Volume19
Issue2
Pages171-214
Publication date1988-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal for the Study of Judaism (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0047-2212 • E-ISSN: 1570-0631
PublisherWalter de Gruyter GmbH (PUBLISHER • DE)
DOI10.1163/157006388x00246
OpenAlexW2058863992
LanguageEN
Citations received2

It has long been known that many of the homiletic expositions of Scripture known as midrashim are lost and are to be sought for in non-rabbinic writings. Many of them may be recovered in such works as the Septuagint; in Pseudepigraphic works such as the Books of Enoch, Jubilees, the Syrian Apocalypse of Baruch, and IV Esdras; in historians (extant in fragmentary form) such as Demetrius, Pseudo Hecataeus, Eupolemus, Pseudo-Eupolemus, Artapanus, Aristeas, Cleodemus-Malchus, and Thallus; in poets (likewise extant only in fragments), such as Philo the Elder, Theodotus, and Ezekiel the tragedian; in Philo; in the New Testament; in Pseudo-Philo1s Biblical Antiquities; in writings found in the Dead Sea caves, particularly the Genesis Apocryphon; in Josephus; in such Latin Church Fathers as Tertullian and Jerome; in such Greek Church Fathers as Origen; and in such Syriac Fathers as Aphrahat and Ephrem. Rene'e Bloch and Geza Vermes^ have, through sample studies, attempted to explain differences among these midrashim by postulating a continuous and interconnected midrashic tradition and by tracing the historical development of this tradition. It is here pro posed to contribute to the explanation of these differences in midrashic exposition by presenting a supplementary theory, at least so far as Josephus^ is concerned, namely that he has placed his personal Hellenized imprint on the Biblical narrative, and that his portrait is strongly influenced by his concern for defending the Jews against anti-Semitic charges. In the example here chosen, that of Samson, we shall see that the very characteristics which distinguish Josephus' account from the rabbinic expositions — possessed of the four cardinal virtues, and with increased erotic, heroic, and dramatic interest and decreased magical and divine interest — are typically Josephan־^ rather than a stage in the historical development of the midrashic tradi tion. On the other hand, the rabbinic midrashim are con cerned with word play, with the divine and the miraculous, and with the deflation of the heroic stature of Samson

Art · Art history · Biblical studies · Exposition (narrative · Extant taxon · Jewish studies · Josephus · Judaism · Literature · Narrative · New Testament · Portrait · Theology · Archaeology and Historical Studies · Biblical Studies and Interpretation · Classics · Historical and Linguistic Studies · History · Philosophy

  • The Portrayal of Phinehas by Philo, Pseudo-Philo, and Josephus

    Louis H Feldman•The Jewish Quarterly Review•2002

  • Josephus' Interpretation of Jonah

    Open Access•Louis H Feldman•AJS Review The Journal of the…•1992

Unique citing works2
Citations per year0.06
Citation span1992 - 2002 (11)
Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 1

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae