Das Buch von den Pforten des Jenseits by Erik Hornung; Andreas Brodbeck; ElisabethStaehelinReview by: Edmund S. MeltzerJournal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 107, No. 3 (Jul. - Sep., 1987), pp. 544-545Published by: American Oriental SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/603510 .

Accessed: 12/06/2014 23:06

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

American Oriental Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal ofthe American Oriental Society.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.122.73.250 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 23:06:33 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

544 Journal of the American Oriental Society 107.3 (1987)

rabbinic traditions about "the old citadel" (castra) and "the old archives" of Sepphoris, and the Jewish priests who lived in the city.

The introduction outlines what is commonly known of Sepphoris from archaeology and Greek and Latin literary sources. It also briefly indicates the difficulties in the use of rabbinic sources and some recent attempts to overcome these difficulties. To BUchler's work, in particular, Miller objects that we cannot be sure that rabbis, known to have worked in Sepphoris, speak of cases or conditions there, unless they explicitly say so. Therefore, "only traditions containing direct references to Sepphoris . .. will be considered in the studies presented below" (p. 12). Thus nine tenths of the evidence is thrown out, but if this left us a secure basis from which to begin, it might be defended as a beginning. No such luck.

As to the castra, the argument goes: M. cArakin 9.6 and Sifra on Lev. 25.29 mention "the old castra of Sepphoris" as the first example in a list of cities surrounded by walls since the days of Joshua. The Sifra adds a statement that these cities were sanctified after the return from the exile. Now Sepphoris appears to have been a Jewish stronghold in the days of Jannaeus (p. 25, evidence Ant. 13.338: Ptolemy Lathyrus attacked it. Feeble; Lathyrus attacked everything.) "Klein . .. has noted the cities which . .. played a role in Maccabean history must have had their origins in the... Persian period" (CArim, p. 74. Worthless. In the 230 years between Alexander and Lathyrus many cities developed from hovels--Alexandria, for instance.) Thus the "claim that these cities were . . sanctified by those returning from Babylonia is not so farfetched" (p. 25), but it does overlook the biblical report that the exiles returned only to Judea and vicinity, whence they had been taken (Ezra 2), and the report of I Macc. 5.21ff. that the Jews of Galilee were deported to Jerusalem by Simon. Neither Ezra 2 nor I Macc. 5.21ff. is considered by Miller, who also overlooks the Assyrian con- quest, but does conclude (p. 30) that the rabbinic traditions about pre-exilic Sepphoris are groundless and that the castra was "the oldest known settlement . .. probably . .. a fortified acropolis under Jewish control since the Maccabean era."

The next chapter deals with the difficulty that T Shabbat 13.9 and parallels locate gentile soldiers in the castra of Sepphoris. They must have come in after 70.

"The old archives of Sepphoris", referred to in M. Qid- dushin 4.5, are discussed in ch. 3. The discussion is most interesting as a collection of non-sequiturs, e.g., p. 50: Because there is a mention of a court empowered to try capital cases, and because before 70 capital cases were usually (?) tried in Jerusalem, therefore the mishnah "must" refer to the Jerusalem sanhedrin, therefore the "nucleus" of the mishnah must be prior to 70, therefore the statements by second-century rabbis, appended to the mishnah, "must also" refer to pre-70 institutions, therefore "the old archives of Sepphoris" must have been pre-70. Q.E.D. The reverse

method appears in the interpretation of Josephus, Vita 38, on p. 55. Vita indicates that when Sepphoris became capital the archives and royal bank of the former capital, Tiberias, were closed. Presumably they were appurtenances of the capital, but Miller does not see this implication. Conse- quently he does not see that Sepphoris can hardly have had them when it was not the capital. It may have had a Jewish religious records office, which came to be called "the old archives" after the new, official, civil one moved in. In this game, guesses are free, that's why the game is hardly worth playing.

Arguments equally cogent are advanced in the second half of the book to explain the stories in T. Yoma' 1.4 and T. Sotah 13.7 (and their parallels) about priests in Sepphoris in the days of the second temple. That in the first story the connection of the priest with Sepphoris depends on the report of a Galilean rabbi (Jose) who taught more than a century later, while the second story reports a miracle and is told to explain a nickname, are facts that do not inspire confidence. And the explanations seem as reliable as the stories. Chapters on "The Priests of Sepphoris following the Destruction" and "The Priests of the Third and Fourth Centuries" are somewhat better, but the most important thing established by the work as a whole is the generally folkloristic and ahistorical character of the tradition.

MORTON SMITH

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

Das Buch von den Pforten des Jenseits. By ERIK HORNUNG

with ANDREAS BRODBECK and ELISABETH STAEHELIN. Teil II: UBERSETZUNG UND KOMMENTAR. Pp. 317 and 12 Plates. Geneva: AEGYPTIACA HELVETICA 8 (1980). 1984.

This exemplary volume is everything we have come to expect from the scholar who is the foremost interpreter of these and related texts and one of the most profound commentators on Egyptian religion, and from his expert and conscientious collaborators. The texts translated and dis- cussed here were presented by the same authors in synoptic format in Aegyptiaca Helvetica 7 (1979); the present volume comprises an introductory Forschungsgeschichte, a descrip- tion of the sources, a brief discussion of the divisions of the Book, a list of abbreviations, the body of the work, a concordance to the Maystre-Piankoff and Hornung editions, indices, and twelve plates which give an overview of the representations accompanying the twelve hours. It is notable that the recording and study of the Book of the Gates (or Pylons) began with the work of Champollion and has been going on ever since, and that the only attested non-royal

This content downloaded from 62.122.73.250 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 23:06:33 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Reviews of Books 545

exemplar is found in the tomb of Tjanefer, who "sich damit kdnigliche Vorrechte angeeignet" (p. 18). Dependence on Seele's edition, The Tomb of Tjanefer at Thebes (OIP 86, Chicago, 1959), is explicitly acknowledged. The division of the Book into sections is more difficult than in the case of the Amduat and has been the subject of disagreement; Hornung differs from Maystre and Piankoff in that he regards the pylons as closing rather than opening the hours, and in that he numbers twelve hours followed by a "Schlussbild" rather than a "Tableau initial" followed by twelve hours. Most of the hourly divisions are subdivided into three registers, with the solar bark represented in the middle one; the divinities represented in the registers appear mainly in groups, the number twelve recurring frequently, and (though there is no hard-and-fast dividing line) are often the blessed dead rather than "true" deities.

In the translation and extensive commentary, not only are many philological, expository and text-critical notes pro- vided, but the scenes are fully described and discussed; in many cases, line drawings are provided, and these can easily be located in context by turning to the plates at the end. As is often the case with Egyptian materials, not only are the representations important and fascinating in themselves, but the interdependence of the text and pictorial materials makes it misleading to consider the text in isolation and virtually impossible to do so constructively. The coverage of the Egyptological literature is comprehensive and references have occasionally been added to publications which appeared after the manuscript went to press; there are also occasional and apposite references to such works as Dante's Inferno (p. 52) and Thomas Mann's Joseph der Erndhrer (p. 114). The translation itself is a model of meticulous and judicious work; the commentary indicates clearly the uncertainties and alternatives which often exist in both translation and under- standing, as well as the many points of grammatical, lexico- graphical and iconographic interest. So full and exhaustive is the treatment that it is difficult to find a stone that has been left unturned by the authors. The comments on the meaning of dsr and its derivatives (pp. 77, 104, 173f.) are illuminating in conjunction with the more recent discussion of Hoffmeier, Sacred in the Vocabulary of Ancient Egypt. The Term DSR, with Special Reference to Dynasties I-XX (OBO 59, Freiburg- Gottingen, 1985). The remarks on the cryptographic texts and the use of cryptography (pp. 36, 143-50) are cogent; C. W. Goodwin's pioneering work (ZAS 11 [1873]: 138-44) is rightly given credit for its impressive insight, and the admission that, for cryptographic texts lacking "clear" par- allels, " . . . tbersetzungen wie Deutungen bleiben an manchen Stellen problematisch" (p. 145) is refreshing in its modesty. Occasionally, more extensive citations on points of grammar might have been helpful; e.g., the comment on the meaning "nicht konnen" for the construction n sdm.n.f (p. 104) could have cited the discussions of Satzinger, Die

negativen Konstruktionen im Alt- und Mittelagyptischen (MAS 12, Berlin, 1968), ?30, and Gilula, JEA 56 (1970): 206f.

In summation, Professor Hornung and his collaborators have produced a compendium providing the fullest available current understanding of the texts and representations which constitute the Book of the Gates. This work will be invalu- able, not only for any further advances in our understanding of that material, but for the work that must be done on the larger problems of Egyptian mortuary texts and religion. Finally, mention should be made of the high standard of appearance and durability which has been maintained in the production of the volume. The hieroglyphs are admirably clear, as are the plates and the representations given in the text.

EDMUND S. MELTZER

CLAREMONT GRADUATE SCHOOL

A Bibliography of the Samaritans. By ALAN D. CROWN.

Pp. xvii + 194. (ATLA Bibliographical Series, No. 10.) Metuchen, N.J. and London: THE AMERICAN THEOLOGICAL

LIBRARY ASSOCIATION AND THE SCARECROW PRESS. 1984. $17.50.

A detailed bibliography of the Samaritans has long been a real need. There have been various attempts at supplying one, but they have usually fallen short of providing a full bibliography. Alan Crown has earned his laurels in Samaritan studies dealing primarily, in recent years, with problems of epigraphy and paleography but with strong interest in other matters too (as his own list of studies pp. 45-47 shows). There can be no doubt that all those interested in this field will welcome this book and any one who has tried his hand at compiling even a rudimentary bibliography in a field as dispersed as Samaritan studies will appreciate the effort and labor expended. A spot check, using the bibliographical resources of the Hebrew University and of the library of the Lcole biblique et archeologique in Jerusalem, has shown that Crown has covered the material very well. Naturally, some of the studies that have appeared in 1982 and 1983, when the book was composed, were missed. I will attempt to sup- plement the material from those years at the end of this review and bring the bibliography up-to-date to the end of 1985.

Before doing so some reflections are in order. 1) The author has chosen to include the archaeology of Samaria and its history in his bibliography, this is a dubious enterprise in my opinion for this is a bibliography of the Samaritans not of Samaria. It should include matter from the beginning

This content downloaded from 62.122.73.250 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 23:06:33 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions