In the current discussion on Pliny`s and Philo`s Essenians as Jews or
Judeans, one point is I think, noteworthy: The fact that Josephus
feels
obliged to declare that the Essenians are Jews by birth, a
remarkable
statement if we were to ignore other sources on them than Philo`s. It
seems
I think one can show from Josephus' comments on the Essenes that they
treated other Jews (i.e. Jews who were not fellow Essenes) as if they were
not Jewish, boundary marking against them in much the same ways that Jews
regularly boundary marked against non-Jews. Judging from this behavior of
the
Peter Janku writes:
In the current discussion on Pliny`s and Philo`s Essenians as Jews
or Judeans, one point is I think, noteworthy: The fact that Josephus
feels obliged to declare that the Essenians are Jews by birth, a
remarkable statement if we were to ignore other sources on them than
George: There is reason-- it is true they are Jews by birth and not
converts-- priests are also jews by birth and not converts-- josephus
tells us that it would not be lawful for a priest to marry someone who was
not from a noble family-- while pharisees accpeted converts readily, it
may well
1. For a discussion of the place of boundary marking in Jewish groups of
antiquity see my article in Judaism 47 (1998) 387-404.
2. I think Josephus felt the need to note that the Essenes were Jews
because their boundary marking against other (non-Essene) Jews was much
more extreme than that of
That's beyond me, for boundary marking is quite normal under dualistic
presuppositions, internal as well as external. Cp. the DSS.
Therefore, please explain your idea on the basis of JosBell and JosAnt,
simply to avoid a classical 'hot air' or 'argument from silence' reproach.
Perhaps we've
I am replying to the Digest form of this list so my comments are a day behind.
I just wanted to point out that the Suda mention of the Essaioi can be found on-line at
http://www.stoa.org/sol-bin/findentry.pl?keywords=epsilon+3123
It is a short entry and this is it:
Essaioi: Ioudaioi, asketai,
It seems to me that Josephus' statement that the Essenes are Jewish
simply indicates that he lifted his material on the Essenes from a source
intended for a non-Jewish audience, one for which it would be necessary to
explain that Essenes are a branch of Jews.
Best regards,
Russell
- Original Message -
From: Albert I. Baumgarten [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Orion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2001 4:57 PM
Subject: orion-list refernce and afterthought
1. For a discussion of the place of boundary marking in Jewish groups of
antiquity see my article in
Peter Janku wrote,
It seems as if in Josephus`time, there was a widely expanded opinion
contesting the Jewishness of Essenes.
I, too, got this impression, from the translation used by GFMoore,
called Essenes, though by race they are Jews.
Thackeray's translation is also a bit misleading here.
10 matches
Mail list logo
