No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
The Jewish Quarterly Review, XCIII, Nos. 1-2 (July-October, 2002) 257-268 Review Essay James M. S. Cowey and Klaus Maresch, Urkunden des Politeuma der Juden von Herakleopolis (144/3-133/2 v. Chr) (P. Polit. Jud.). Papyri aus den Sammlungen von Heidelberg, Köln, München, und Wien. Abhandlungen der Nordrhein-Westfälischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Papyrologica Coloniensia, vol. 29. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag, 2001. Pp. xvi+189, ill. and facsims. ARYEH KASHER, Tel Aviv University During the international conference of papyrology held in Berlin, August 13-19, 1995, nineteen new papyri documents dated 144/3-133/2 bce were reviewed by James M. S. Cowey from the Institut für Papyrologie, Ruprecht -Karls-Universität Heidelberg. Just recently (July, 2001), these new papyri were brought together by James M. S. Cowey and Klaus Maresch with a fragmentary document previously published in order to offer a scholarly edition of all twenty. The papyri, which are held by the universities of Heidelberg, Cologne, Munich, and Vienna, are referred to here by the numbering of the editors and following their chronological order. The book consists of three parts: an introduction, the texts, and indices. In addition, it contains a detailed relevant bibliography, and twenty-six photocopied plates of the documents, which are quite legible. It is a pity that a map was not included, since the exact location of Herakleopolis and its neighborhood is worthy of notice. The nucleus of the book is the 2000 Ph.D. thesis by James Cowey, titled Das Archiv des jüdischen Politeuma in Herakleopolis und das Archiv des Phruarchen Dioskurides. Achtzehn griechischen Papyri aus den Sammlungen von Heidelberg und Wien. The scholarly work of the present volume was divided between James Cowey, who took responsibility for twelve papyri (nos. 1, 2, 5, 10-12, 16, 18-20), and his co-editor Klaus Maresch, who took responsibility for the remaining eight papyri (nos. 3, 6-9, 13, 14, 17). The introduction (pp. 1-34) is divided into a preface (pp. 1-2) and seven valuable chapters. The preface offers the chronological framework for the new papyri, which fail undoubtedly in the reign of Ptolemy VIII Physcon (Euergetes II), more precisely, from his 27th year (144/3 bce) up to his 36th year (133/2 bce). At the outset of the book, the editors state that the new papri contain clear-cut and decisive proof of the existence of a Jewish politeuma in Hellenistic Egypt, a matter which has been doubted and disputed by several scholars (see discussion below). They conclude 258THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW their preface by expressing a rather meek desideratum, namely, that their papyrological discovery will enrich our knowledge of Egyptian Jewry. I hope that this review essay will be one of the first contributions to fulfill their expectation. The first chapter of the book (pp. 3-4) refers to the historical background of the establishment of the Jewish politeuma in Herakleopolis, which was contemporaneous with that of the Jewish military settlement in Leontopolis under the leadership of Onias IV. This synchrony hints, of course, to the resemblance between the two communities not only in matters related to their military functions in the service of the Ptolemies but also in regard to their right of self-organization, and their juridical and political status inclusive of their special privileges. The second chapter (pp. 4-9) sheds new light on Jewish politeumata in Egypt, a controversial matter since 1988, when C. Zuckerman, in a review article of my book, cast doubts on the very existence of Jewish politeumata in Egypt, Alexandria included.1 Because this issue is essential for a better understanding of Jewish history in the Hellenistic-Roman diaspora, I shall deviate briefly from the review of Cowey-Maresch's book in order to explain first the dilemma of determining what the term politeuma actually means. Among the common scholarly definitions of the term I shall start by quoting Strathmann with respect to the Jewish community in Alexandria, which is attested in the Letter ofAristeas 310, and the community of Berenice in Cyrenaica, which is mentioned in two honorary inscriptions dated to 12-13 bce (Corpus Inscriptionum Craecarum, 5361-5362: Bei diesen p???te?µata...
Loading…
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 5 citations exist upstream.
Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.