Resenhas no JHS: Volume 7 – 2007

As seguintes obras foram recentemente resenhadas pelo Journal of Hebrew Scriptures:

Athas, George, The Tel Dan Inscription: A Reappraisal and a New Interpretation. New York: T. & T. Clark, 2005.

Bienkowski, Piotr; Christopher Mee; Elizabeth Slater (eds.), Writing and Ancient Near East Society: Papers in Honor of Alan R. Millard. New York/London: T & T Clark International, 2005.

Campbell, Antony F.; Mark A. O’Brien, Rethinking the Pentateuch: Prolegomena to the Theology of Ancient Israel. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005.

Douglas, Mary, Jacob’s Tears: The Priestly Work of Reconciliation. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Lipschits Oded; Manfred Oeming (eds.), Judah and the Judeans in the Persian Period. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2006.

Scurlock, JoAnn, Magico-Medical Means of Treating Ghost-Induced Illnesses in Ancient Mesopotamia. Leiden: Brill/Styx, 2006.

Scurlock, JoAnn; Burton Andersen, Diagnoses in Assyrian and Babylonian Medicine: Ancient Sources, Translations, and Modern Medical Analyses. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2005.

Resenhas na RBL – 03.04.2007

As seguintes resenhas foram recentemente publicadas pela Review of Biblical Literature:

Bob Becking
Between Fear and Freedom: Essays on the Interpretation of Jeremiah 30-31
Reviewed by Donald C. Raney II

Stephen S. Carver
The UnGospel: The Life and Teachings of the Historical Jesus
Reviewed by Pieter J. J. Botha

Joan E. Cook
Hear O Heavens and Listen O Earth: An Introduction to the Prophets
Reviewed by Hallvard Hagelia

Philippe Hugo
Les deux visages d’Élie: Texte massorétique et Septante dans l’histoire la plus ancienne du texte de 1 Rois 17-18
Reviewed by Graeme Auld

Joseph Jensen
Ethical Dimensions of the Prophets
Reviewed by J. Gordon McConville

Hilmar Klinkott
Der Satrap: Ein achaimenidischer Amtsträger und seine Handlungsspielräume
Reviewed by Jacob L. Wright

Margaret M. Mitchell and Frances M. Young, eds.
The Cambridge History of Christianity, Volume 1: Origins to Constantine
Reviewed by Everett Ferguson

Henrik Pfeiffer
Jahwes Kommen von Süden: Jdc 5; Hab 3; Dtn 33 und Ps 68 in ihrem literatur- und theologiegeschichtlichen Umfeld
Reviewed by Stefan Beyerle

Eva Schönemann
Bund und Tora: Kategorien einer im christlich-jüdischen Dialog verantworteten Christologie
Reviewed by Judith Lieu

Isac Leo Seeligmann
Gesammelte Studien zur Hebräischen Bibel
Editor(s): Erhard Blum
Reviewed by Martin Rösel

Manuel Vogel
Commentatio mortis: 2Kor 5,1-10 auf dem Hintergrund antiker ars moriendi
Reviewed by Tobias Nicklas

James Ware
The Mission of the Church in Paul’s Letter to the Philippians in the Context of Ancient Judaism
Reviewed by Torrey Seland

Mark W. Waterman
The Empty Tomb Tradition of Mark: Text, History, and Theological Struggles
Reviewed by Michael R. Licona

Ben Witherington III
1 and 2 Thessalonians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary
Reviewed by Mark R. Fairchild
Reviewed by Craig L. Blomberg

Edição crítica do Evangelho de João

Uma edição crítica do Evangelho de João está sendo preparada por um grupo de respeito. Boa notícia para os especialistas em João.

The Gospel according to John: Editio Critica Maior. O que leio?

The International Greek New Testament Project is currently preparing a critical edition of the Gospel according to John as a collaborative effort between the Institute for Textual Scholarship and Electronic Edition (University of Birmingham), the Institut für Neutestamentliche Textforschung (University of Münster), the Theological Faculty of the University of Salzburg (Department of Coptology) and Dr P.J. Williams (University of Aberdeen). The end result will include a print publication in the series of the Editio Critica Maior and electronic editions of the Greek, Coptic, Syriac and Old Latin traditions of the Gospel which will be hosted on this site. A bibliography giving details of the IGNTP, its history, publications and procedures is available at the IGNTP website. It is hoped to link electronic editions of the Greek Majuscule manuscripts of John and the Old Latin manuscripts of John to this site in Autumn 2007.

 

Em The International Greek New Testament Project, site do IGNTP, leio:

Editions of John in different languages are being produced at the following institutions:

  • Greek: Institute for Textual Scholarship and Electronic Editing (ITSEE), University of Birmingham, under the direction of Professor D.C. Parker.
  • Latin: Institute for Textual Scholarship and Electronic Editing (ITSEE), University of Birmingham, under the direction of Dr P.H. Burton.
  • Coptic: Faculty of Theology, Department of Coptology (Forschungsabteilung Koptologie und Ägyptenkunde), University of Salzburg, under the direction of Professor Karlheinz Schüssler.
  • Syriac: Old Syriac – Dr P.J. Williams, (University of Aberdeen).
  • Syriac: Peshitta and Harclean version – Dr Andreas Juckel, (INTF), Münster.

Como construir uma pirâmide

Circula na web, entre egiptólogos e curiosos, uma persistente discussão sobre “novas teorias” acerca da construção das pirâmides egípcias, mais especificamente, sobre como teria sido construída a Grande Pirâmide de Quéops.

Segundo alguns especialistas, estas teorias não são assim tão novas, mas esta pode ser uma boa oportunidade para se ler um pouco sobre o assunto.

No blog Egyptology News, Andie recomenda, no post Bob Brier on pyramid construction, o artigo do egiptólogo Bob Brier, How to Build a Pyramid, no site da revista Archaeology, publicação de respeito da AIA.

Segundo Andie esta é a melhor síntese que ela conhece sobre novas e velhas teorias acerca das possibilidades de construção de pirâmides.

Quem não acompanhou a discussão, leia primeiro, por favor, a notícia abaixo, da BBC.

 

Francês diz que desvendou mistério de pirâmide egípcia

O arquiteto francês Jean-Pierre Houdin afirmou ter encontrado a chave para desvendar os mistérios da construção da pirâmide de Quéops, a maior das pirâmides do Egito.

Houdin diz que a construção de 4,5 mil anos, nos arredores do Cairo, foi executada com o auxílio de uma rampa interna para elevar os enormes blocos de pedra até os seus lugares.

As outras teorias afirmam que os 3 milhões de pedras – cada uma com 2,5 toneladas – foram empurradas até os locais em que se encontram por cima de rampas externas.

Houdin passou oito anos estudando o assunto e construiu um modelo computadorizado para ilustrar a sua teoria sobre a construção da pirâmide.

“Esta é melhor que as outras teorias, porque é a única que realmente funciona”, disse o arquiteto ao divulgar a sua tese com o auxílio de uma simulação em três dimensões.

Rampa externa

Ele acredita que uma rampa externa foi usada apenas para construir os primeiros 43 metros e que, então, foi construída a rampa interna para transportar os blocos até o cume da construção, de 137 metros de altura.

A pirâmide foi construída para servir de tumba ao faraó Khufu, também conhecido como Quéops.

A grande galeria no interior da pirâmide, outra fonte de mistério para egiptólogos, teria sido usada para abrigar um enorme contrapeso que teria suspendido as 60 lajes de granito que ficam acima da Câmara Real.

“Essa teoria vai contra as duas principais teses aceitas até hoje”, disse o egiptólogo Bob Brier à agência de notícias Reuters.

‘Erradas’

“Faz 20 anos que as ensino, mas no fundo, sei que elas estão erradas”, admitiu o especialista.

De acordo com Houdin, uma rampa externa até o alto da pirâmide teria tapado a vista e deixado pouco espaço para trabalhar, enquanto uma longa rampa frontal necessitaria de pedras demais.

Além disso, há muito poucos indícios de que jamais tenham sido montadas rampas externas no entorno da pirâmide.

Houdin disse ainda que, usando a técnica postulada por ele, a pirâmide pode ter sido construída por apenas 4 mil pessoas, em vez das 100 mil calculadas por outras teorias.

O arquiteto espera reunir um grupo de especialistas para comprovar a teoria com o auxílio de radares e outros métodos não invasivos.

Fonte: BBC Brasil – 31 de março, 2007


How to Build a Pyramid

by Bob Brier

Hidden ramps may solve the mystery of the Great Pyramid’s construction.

Of the seven wonders of the ancient world, only the Great Pyramid of Giza remains. An estimated 2 million stone blocks weighing an average of 2.5 tons went into its construction. When completed, the 481-foot-tall pyramid was the world’s tallest structure, a record it held for more than 3,800 years, when England’s Lincoln Cathedral surpassed it by a mere 44 feet.

We know who built the Great Pyramid: the pharaoh Khufu, who ruled Egypt about 2547-2524 B.C. And we know who supervised its construction: Khufu’s brother, Hemienu. The pharaoh’s right-hand man, Hemienu was “overseer of all construction projects of the king” and his tomb is one of the largest in a cemetery adjacent to the pyramid.

What we don’t know is exactly how it was built, a question that has been debated for millennia. The earliest recorded theory was put forward by the Greek historian Herodotus, who visited Egypt around 450 B.C., when the pyramid was already 2,000 years old. He mentions “machines” used to raise the blocks and this is usually taken to mean cranes. Three hundred years later, Diodorus of Sicily wrote, “The construction was effected by mounds” (ramps). Today we have the “space alien” theory–those primitive Egyptians never could have built such a fabulous structure by themselves; extraterrestrials must have helped them.

Modern scholars have favored these two original theories, but deep in their hearts, they know that neither one is correct. A radical new one, however, may provide the solution. If correct, it would demonstrate a level of planning by Egyptian architects and engineers far greater than anything ever imagined before.

According to the new theory, an external ramp was used to build the lower third of the pyramid and was then cannibalized, its blocks taken through an internal ramp for the higher levels of the structure. (Dassault Systemes) [LARGER IMAGE]

The External Ramp and Crane Theories

The first theory is that a ramp was built on one side of the pyramid and as the pyramid grew, the ramp was raised so that throughout the construction, blocks could be moved right up to the top. If the ramp were too steep, the men hauling the blocks would not be able to drag them up. An 8-percent slope is about the maximum possible, and this is the problem with the single ramp theory. With such a gentle incline, the ramp would have to be approximately one mile long to reach the top of the pyramid. But there is neither room for such a long ramp on the Giza Plateau, nor evidence of such a massive construction. Also, a mile-long ramp would have had as great a volume as the pyramid itself, virtually doubling the man-hours needed to build the pyramid. Because the straight ramp theory just doesn’t work, several pyramid experts have opted for a modified ramp theory.

This approach suggests that the ramp corkscrewed up the outside of the pyramid, much the way a mountain road spirals upward. The corkscrew ramp does away with the need for a massive mile-long one and explains why no remains of such a ramp have been found, but there is a flaw with this version of the theory. With a ramp corkscrewing up the outside of the pyramid, the corners couldn’t be completed until the final stage of construction. But careful measurements of the angles at the corners would have been needed frequently to assure that the corners would meet to create a point at the top. Dieter Arnold, a renowned pyramid expert at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, comments in his definitive work, Building in Egypt: “During the whole construction period, the pyramid trunk would have been completely buried under the ramps. The surveyors could therefore not have used the four corners, edges, and foot line of the pyramid for their calculations.” Thus the modified ramp theory also has a serious problem.

The second theory centers on Herodotus’s machines. Until recently Egyptian farmers used a wooden, cranelike device called a shadouf to raise water from the Nile for irrigation. This device can be seen in ancient tomb paintings, so we know it was available to the pyramid builders. The idea is that hundreds of these cranes at various levels on the pyramid were used to lift the blocks. One problem with this theory is that it would involve a tremendous amount of timber and Egypt simply didn’t have forests to provide the wood. Importing so much lumber would have been impractical. Large timbers for shipbuilding were imported from Lebanon, but this was a very expensive enterprise.

Perhaps an even more fatal flaw to the crane theory is that there is nowhere to place all these cranes. The pyramid blocks tend to decrease in size higher up the Great Pyramid. I climbed it dozens of times in the 1970s and ’80s, when it was permitted, and toward the top, the blocks sometimes provide only 18 inches of standing room, certainly not enough space for cranes large enough to lift heavy blocks of stone. The crane theory can’t explain how the blocks of the Great Pyramid were raised. So how was it done?

The Internal Ramp Theory

A radical new idea has recently been presented by Jean-Pierre Houdin, a French architect who has devoted the last seven years of his life to making detailed computer models of the Great Pyramid. Using start-of-the-art 3-D software developed by Dassault Systemes, combined with an initial suggestion of Henri Houdin, his engineer father, the architect has concluded that a ramp was indeed used to raise the blocks to the top, and that the ramp still exists–inside the pyramid!

The theory suggests that for the bottom third of the pyramid, the blocks were hauled up a straight, external ramp. This ramp was far shorter than the one needed to reach the top, and was made of limestone blocks, slightly smaller than those used to build the bottom third of the pyramid. As the bottom of the pyramid was being built via the external ramp, a second ramp was being built, inside the pyramid, on which the blocks for the top two-thirds of the pyramid would be hauled. The internal ramp, according to Houdin, begins at the bottom, is about 6 feet wide, and has a grade of approximately 7 percent. This ramp was put into use after the lower third of the pyramid was completed and the external ramp had served its purpose.

The design of the internal ramp was partially determined by the design of the interior of the pyramid. Hemienu knew all about the problems encountered by Pharaoh Sneferu, his and Khufu’s father. Sneferu had considerable difficulty building a suitable pyramid for his burial, and ended up having to construct three at sites south of Giza! The first, at Meidum, may have had structural problems and was never used. His second, at Dashur–known as the Bent Pyramid because the slope of its sides changes midway up–developed cracks in the walls of its burial chamber. Huge cedar logs from Lebanon had to be wedged between the walls to keep the pyramid from collapsing inward, but it too was abandoned. There must have been a mad scramble to complete Sneferu’s third and successful pyramid, the distinctively colored Red Pyramid at Dashur, before the aging ruler died.

From the beginning, Hemienu planned three burial chambers to ensure that whenever Khufu died, a burial place would be ready. One was carved out of the bedrock beneath the pyramid at the beginning of its construction. In case the pharaoh had died early, this would have been his tomb. When, after about five years, Khufu was still alive and well, the unfinished underground burial chamber was abandoned and the second burial chamber, commonly called the Queen’s Chamber, was begun. Some time around the fifteenth year of construction Khufu was still healthy and this chamber was abandoned unfinished and the last burial chamber, the King’s Chamber, was built higher up–in the center of the pyramid. (To this day, Khufu’s sarcophagus remains inside the King’s Chamber, so early explorers of the pyramid incorrectly assumed that the second chamber had been for his queen.)

Huge granite and limestone blocks were needed for the roof beams and rafters of the Queen’s and King’s Chambers. Some of these beams weigh more than 60 tons and are far too large to have been brought up through the internal ramp. Thus the external ramp had to remain in use until the large blocks were hauled up. Once that was done, the external ramp was dismantled and its blocks were led up the pyramid via the internal ramp to build the top two-thirds of the pyramid. Perhaps most blocks in this portion of the pyramid are smaller than those at the bottom third because they had to move up the narrow internal ramp.

There were several considerations that went into designing the internal ramp. First, it had to be fashioned very precisely so that it didn’t hit the chambers or the internal passageways that connect them. Second, men hauling heavy blocks of stones up a narrow ramp can’t easily turn a 90-degree corner; they need a place ahead of the block to stand and pull. The internal ramp had to provide a means of turning its corners so, Houdin suggests, the ramp had openings there where a simple crane could be used to turn the blocks.

There are plenty of theories about how the Great Pyramid could have been built that lack evidence. Is the internal ramp theory any different? Is there any evidence to support it? Yes.

A bit of evidence appears to be one of the ramp’s corner notches used for turning blocks. It is two-thirds of the way up the northeast corner–precisely at a point where Houdin predicted there would be one. Furthermore, in 1986 a member of a French team that was surveying the pyramid reported seeing a desert fox enter it through a hole next to the notch, suggesting that there is an open area close to it, perhaps the ramp. It seems improbable that the fox climbed more than halfway up the pyramid. More likely there is some undetected crevice toward the bottom where the fox entered the ramp and then made its way up the ramp and exited near the notch. It would be interesting to attach a telemetric device to a fox and send him into the hole to monitor his movements! The notch is suggestive, but there is another bit of evidence supplied by the French mentioned earlier that is far more compelling.

When the French team surveyed the Great Pyramid, they used microgravimetry, a technique that enabled them to measure the density of different sections of the pyramid, thus detecting hidden chambers. The French team concluded that there were no large hidden chambers inside it. If there was a ramp inside the pyramid, shouldn’t the French have detected it? In 2000, Henri Houdin was presenting this theory at a scientific conference where one of the members of the 1986 French team was present. He mentioned to Houdin that their computer analysis of the pyramid did yield one curious image, something they couldn’t interpret and therefore ignored. That image showed exactly what Jean-Pierre Houdin’s theory had predicted–a ramp spiraling up through the pyramid.

Far from being just another theory, the internal ramp has considerable evidence behind it. A team headed by Jean-Pierre Houdin and Rainer Stadlemann, former director of the German Archaeological Institute in Cairo and one of the greatest authorities on pyramids, has submitted an application to survey the Great Pyramid in a nondestructive way to see if the theory can be confirmed. They are hopeful that the Supreme Council of Antiquities will grant permission for a survey. (Several methods could be used, including powerful microgravimetry, high-resolution infrared photography, or even sonar.) If so, sometime this year we may finally know how Khufu’s monumental tomb was built. One day, if it is indeed there, we might just be able to remove a few blocks from the exterior of the pyramid and walk up the mile-long ramp Hemienu left hidden within the Great Pyramid.

Bob Brier is a senior research fellow at the C. W. Post Campus of Long Island University and a contributing editor to ARCHAEOLOGY.

Fonte: Bob Brier – Archaeology: Volume 60 Number 3, May/June 2007

IPCC

IPCC: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Painel Intergovernamental de Mudanças Climáticas.

Guarde esta sigla e este nome. Todos nós vamos precisar.

Ao clicar em um dos itens do menu, abre-se a possibilidade da escolha de outras línguas em “Languages” para o acesso dos dados do site do IPCC. Escolha a de sua preferência.

Lembre-se: “Pobreza crescente, falta de água potável, derretimento de geleiras e o desaparecimento de uma série de espécies até meados deste século são parte da descrição de uma paisagem negativa apresentada por um pré-relatório do Painel Intergovernamental… Os continentes mais afetados serão África e Ásia, mas nos países latino-americanos calcula-se que entre 100 e 400 milhões de pessoas podem ter problemas de acesso à água potável no ano 2080. Nas piores hipóteses, dezenas de milhões de pessoas podem sofrer de fome. O aquecimento já está derretendo as geleiras dos Andes e ameaça a floresta amazônica, cujo perímetro pode se transformar aos poucos em uma savana. O aumento do nível do mar provocará graves problemas nas regiões pantanosas e com deltas, especialmente no Brasil, Equador e Colômbia…” É o que se lê em ONU prepara novo relatório

Leia Mais:
Brasileiros são os mais preocupados com o aquecimento global
ONU prepara novo relatório sobre efeitos do aquecimento global

Atualizando: 06.04.2007 11h10
Aquecimento global pode provocar extinção de 30% das espécies, diz painel
De acordo com relatório do Painel Intergovernamental de Mudança Climática (IPCC, na siga em inglês – considerado a maior liderança mundial em mudança climática), até 30% das espécies do planeta enfrentam um risco crescente de desaparecerem se a temperatura global aumentar 2ºC acima da média dos anos 1980 e 1990. Para este século, a previsão do relatório é que as temperaturas aumentarão entre 1,8ºC e 4ºC. Áreas que atualmente sofrem com a falta de chuvas se tornarão ainda mais secas, aumentando o risco de fome e doenças no mundo, diz o relatório. O mundo enfrentará também ameaças crescentes de enchentes, tempestades e erosão. “É uma pequena visão de um futuro apocalíptico”, afirmou o grupo ambientalista Greenpeace sobre o relatório final (cont.) Fonte: Folha Online: 06/04/2007 – 09h43

Carta de Dom Mauro Morelli ao Rabino Sobel

Carta de Dom Morelli ao Rabino Sobel
Querido Rabino Sobel, estou a teu lado, solidário em teu sofrimento. De ti não me envergonho! Sempre senti orgulho de ti. Ao lado de Dom Paulo, teu corajoso testemunho nos anos de trevas não deve ser esquecido e tua imagem resguardada. Seja qual for a explicação que se queira prestar ao triste episódio, tu que foste tão misericordioso em teu ministério receba misericórdia, não humilhação. Oxalá que todos descubram que o Deus de Abraão, de Isaac e de Jacob, de Moisés e dos Profetas tem entranhas de misericórdia. Meu caro amigo, Shalom! Paz e Bem. Estou contigo nesta hora de contradição (cont.). Fonte: CNBB: 02/04/2007.

Com alterações de comportamento, Sobel permanece internado em SP
O rabino Henry Sobel permanece internado no Hospital Albert Einstein, na zona sul de São Paulo, sem previsão de alta. Ele chegou ao hospital na madrugada da última sexta (30), apresentando “episódio de transtorno de humor, representado por descontrole emocional e alterações de comportamento”, de acordo com boletim médico. A internação ocorreu um dia depois de a prisão de Sobel nos Estados Unidos ser divulgada no Brasil. Ele foi detido no último dia 23 sob acusação de ter furtado quatro gravatas de lojas de grifes luxuosas em Palm Beach, na Flórida. No sábado (31), o rabino afirmou, ainda no hospital, que “o Henry Sobel que cometeu aquele ato não é o Henry Sobel que vocês conhecem”. “É muito difícil para mim explicar o inexplicável”, disse. Ele também disse que havia tomado medicamentos sem recomendação médica e pediu desculpas pelos “transtornos” que causou (cont.). Fonte: Folha Online: 01/04/2007 – 18h11

Leia Mais:
Henry Sobel é detido nos EUA, diz polícia (G1: 29/03/2007 – 17h17)
Rabino Henry Sobel é detido nos EUA suspeito de furtar gravatas (Folha Online: 29/03/2007 – 17h40)
Henry Sobel é convidado do papa Bento 16 para encontro ecumênico (Folha Online: 29/03/2007 – 20h11)
Sobel diz que não quis furtar e pede afastamento de congregação (Folha Online: 29/03/2007 – 20h25)
Rabino Henry Sobel pede afastamento (G1: 29/03/2007 – 20h11)

Estudos sobre Ossuários

Com esta estória do sepulcro da família de Jesus falou-se muito de ossuários. Mas não das leituras fundamentais que podem ser feitas… É assunto especializado, porém vá lá, vou citar apenas três obras indispensáveis, publicadas, respectivamente, em 1994, 2002 e 2003.

 

RAHMANI, L. Y. A Catalogue of Jewish Ossuaries: In the collections of the State of Israel. Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority and The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1994, ix + 307 p., with 135 plates. ISBN: 9-6540-6016-7

Mais do que um simples catálogo ilustrado, esta obra cobre cada aspecto do estudo dos ossuários usados nos sepultamentos judaicos a partir de 20 a.C.: terminologia, materiais, forma, trabalho artesanal, inscrições e sinais, motivos ornamentais, paralelos ornamentais e arquitetônicos, possíveis influências estrangeiras e a questão da relação entre os relicários cristãos e os ossuários judaicos. São quase 900 ossuários fotografados e catalogados, embora a obra não seja completa, pois há outros ossuários judaicos discutidos na literatura especializada que não aparecem neste catálogo. Contudo, esta é uma obra de consulta obrigatória para todos os especialistas que abordam este tema.

Far more than an illustrated catalogue, Rahmani’s volume covers every aspect of the study of the ossuaries used in Jewish burial from around 20 BCE through the mid-third century CE: terminology, materials, form, the artisans and their work, inscriptions and marks, ornamentation and ornamental motifs, architectural and ornamental parallels, possible foreign influences, and the question of the possible relationship between the Christian reliquary and the Jewish ossuary.

 

ILAN, T. Lexicon of Jewish Names in Late Antiquity. Part 1: Palestine 300 B.C.E.-200 C.E. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002, xxvi + 484 p. ISBN 3-1614-7646-8

Tal Ilan, Professora de Estudos Judaicos na Universidade Livre de Berlim, Alemanha, apresenta um léxico de nomes judaicos usados na Palestina entre 330 a.C., início do domínio grego, até 200 d.C., fim do período mishnaico. A autora traz em seu léxico nomes encontrados em fontes literárias, em inscrições e em papiros. Os nomes estão em hebraico, grego, latim, aramaico, copta, persa e várias outras línguas. Tal Ilan discute a origem dos nomes, explica sua etimologia, analisa a identidade das pessoas e a escolha do nome e ainda indica os nomes mais populares daquela época, entre outras coisas. A obra pode ser encontrada, além da Mohr Siebeck, na Amazon.com e na Eisenbrauns. Uma resenha da obra pode ser lida na Review of Biblical Literature. Foi escrita por Rivka B. Kern-Ulmer, da Bucknell University, Lewisburg, PA, e publicada em 8 de janeiro de 2005. A resenha termina com uma avaliação positiva da obra: “Above all, this book will replace the other available onomastica; it is an indispensable tool that enlightens the researcher in respect to Jewish names in the Land of Israel during the Hellenistic and Early Roman periods. The Lexicon of Jewish Names belongs in every Judaic research library”.

In this lexicon Tal Ilan collects all the information on names of Jews in Palestine and the people who bore them between 330 BCE, a date which marks the Hellenistic conquest of Palestine, and 200 CE, the date usually assigned to the close of the mishnaic period, and the early Roman Empire. Thereby she includes names from literary sources as well as those found in epigraphic and papyrological documents. It is an onomasticon in as far as it is a collection of all the recorded names used by the Jews of Palestine in the above-mentioned period. Tal Ilan discusses the provenance of the names and explains them etymologically, given the many possible sources of influence for the names at that time. In addition she shows the division between the use of biblical names and the use of Greek and other foreign names. She analyzes the identity of the persons and the choice of name and points out the most popular names at the time.The lexicon is accompanied by a lengthy and comprehensive introduction that scrutinizes the main trends in name giving current at the time. It provides immediate information on all known persons of Jewish extraction from Palestine during the Hellenistic and Early Roman Period.

 

EVANS, C. A. Jesus and the Ossuaries: What Jewish Burial Practices Reveal About the Beginning of Christianity. Waco: Baylor University Press, 2003, 150 p. ISBN 0-9189-5488-6

Foi a partir da polêmica gerada pelo Ossuário de Tiago em 2002, que Craig A. Evans, Professor de Novo Testamento no Acadia Divinity College da Acadia University, em Wolfville, Nova Escócia, Canadá, escreveu este livro. Mas ele não vai tratar aqui da autenticidade ou não deste ossuário e de sua inscrição. Sua abordagem é sobre práticas judaicas de sepultamento e o que elas podem nos revelar sobre o mundo de Jesus, seu ensinamento e sobre sua própria morte, sepultamento e ressurreição. Por exemplo, o que Mt 8,21-22 quer dizer com: “Outro dos discípulos lhe disse: ‘Senhor, permite-me ir primeiro enterrar meu pai’. Mas Jesus lhe respondeu: ‘Segue-me e deixa que os mortos enterrem seus mortos'”. Ou Jo 11,17, que diz: “Ao chegar, Jesus encontrou Lázaro já sepultado havia quatro dias”. E mais: Jesus, ao morrer, terá sido retirado da cruz e enterrado, como dizem os evangelhos, ou teria seu corpo sido deixado para abutres e animais, como alguns especialistas sugerem? Estas e outras questões são o assunto deste livro.

A Introdução do livro está disponível online em formato pdf no site da Baylor University Press. Vale a pena a leitura, especialmente porque indica ao leitor, entre outras coisas, onde encontrar as fontes especializadas para o estudo de ossuários e práticas de sepultamento do judaísmo antigo. Mas tem mais: a terminologia usada nas práticas judaicas de sepultamento, em hebraico, aramaico, grego e latim, os formatos e funções das tumbas judaicas… Além disso, uma resenha da obra pode ser lida na Review of Biblical Literature. Escrita por Tobias Nicklas, da Universität Regensburg, Regensburg, Alemanha, foi publicada em 16 de abril de 2005. O resenhista termina assim: “… as I mentioned above, the value of the examples given is differing, and not each of them really allows us insight into the world of the New Testament or the historical Jesus. Indeed, the book is a valuable source for scholars who want to have an initial insight into Jewish burial practices or an overview of important ancient, mainly Jewish but also pagan and Christian, burial inscriptions”. Quer dizer: o livro é bom, mas nem tanto!

The ossuary bearing the inscription “Jacob, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus,” has generated a great deal of controversy since its announcement in 2002. In Jesus and the Ossuaries, Professor Evans takes no position with respect to the authenticity of this interesting inscription. Rather, he investigates Jewish burial practices and what they tell us about the world of Jesus, his teaching, and his own death, burial, and resurrection. What did Jesus mean when he told a would-be follower to “Let the dead bury their own dead”? Or, what was the significance of telling Jesus that Lazarus, his friend, had been dead for four days? Even more important, was Jesus himself taken down from the cross and given proper burial, or was his body left exposed to birds and animals, as a few scholars have recently suggested? These and other interesting questions are addressed in this book.

Para terminar, cito um trecho da Introdução do livro de Craig A. Evans, onde são mencionadas as fontes especializadas para o estudo de ossuários e práticas de sepultamento do judaísmo antigo:

The present study has been made possible by several important catalogues and studies. Foremost among these is Levi Yizhaq Rahmani’s A Catalogue of Jewish Ossuaries (1994a), which catalogues some 895 ossuaries, providing descriptions, photographic plates (of most), and facsimiles of inscriptions (which appear on about one quarter of the ossuaries). This tool is indispensable. However, it is not complete. There are other Jewish ossuaries discussed in the literature that do not appear in this catalogue. The older work by Erwin Ramsdell Goodenough, Jewish Symbols in the Greco-Roman Period, though dated, is still useful. The first three volumes of this thirteen-volume work are the most pertinent, with volume 1 (1953a) discussing archaeological evidence, including ossuaries and tombs, from Palestine, volume 2 (1953b) discussing archaeological evidence, including ossuaries, from the Diaspora (i.e., places where Jews lived outside the land of Israel), and volume 3 (1953c) exhibiting photographic plates of the artifacts discussed in volumes 1 and 2. Pau Figueras’s Decorated Jewish Ossuaries (1983) updates Goodenough’s classic at important points. For synthesis and interpretation Eric Meyers’s Jewish Ossuaries (1971) is the critical point of departure for the subject at hand. Other scholars in the field of Jewish ossuaries, tombs, and burial practices, who have made important and helpful contributions, include Nahman Avigad, Zvi Greenhut, Rachel Hachlili, Amos Kloner, and Ronny Reich. Frequent reference will be made to the excavation and study of the Beth She‘arim necropolis in Galilee. Volume 1, edited by Benjamin Mazar (1973), publishes the findings from catacombs 1–4, which includes some Hebrew and Aramaic inscriptions. Volume 2, edited by Moshe Schwabe and Baruch Lifshitz (1974), publishes the Greek inscriptions, and volume 3, edited by Nahman Avigad (1976), completes and summarizes the findings of all of the catacombs and tombs excavated. The finds at Dominus Flevit, at the Mount of Olives, Jerusalem, are also very important and are referred to many times (Bagatti and Milik 1958). The early collections of Jewish Palestinian inscriptions, collected and edited by Samuel Klein (1920) and Jean-Baptiste Frey (= CIJ), and Eleazar Lippa Sukenik’s pioneering works in archaeology, involving tombs, ossuaries, and ancient synagogues, are quite valuable. I might also mention that the finds and seminal studies by the great French archaeologist of the late nineteenth century, Charles Clermont-Ganneau, though dated, are still worth consulting (see Clermont-Ganneau 1873; 1878; 1899; as well as the pioneering studies of others, such as Hornstein 1900; Vincent 1902; Macalister 1908; Lidzbarski 1913; Gray 1914; Spoer 1914; Sukenik 1928; 1929; 1931a; 1932a; 1934b; Savignac 1929; and Maisler 1931). There are other important collections of primary texts that should be mentioned. The collection of Aramaic texts (literary and inscriptional) assembled by Joseph Fitzmyer and Daniel Harrington is invaluable (1978). The Jewish inscriptions of Greco-Roman Egypt catalogued by William Horbury and David Noy (1992), of Rome catalogued by Harry Leon (1995), and of the Diaspora in general catalogued by Pieter van der Horst (1991) were of great help. The published ostraca from Masada (= Mas), by Yigael Yadin and his many successors, were also of great help. And finally, Tal Ilan’s Lexicon of Jewish Names in Late Antiquity (2002) was enormously helpful.

Biblioblogueiro de abril de 2007: James Tabor

Brandon Wason, em Biblioblogs.com, entrevista James Tabor, autor de The Jesus Dynasty Blog, escolhido como o biblioblogueiro do mês de abril de 2007.

James D. Tabor, Professor do Departamento de Estudos Religiosos da Universidade da Carolina do Norte em Charlotte, USA, é Doutor em Estudos Bíblicos pela  TABOR, J. The Jesus Dynasty: The Hidden History of Jesus, His Royal Family, and the Birth of Christianity. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2006Universidade de Chicago, com ênfase nas áreas de Origens Cristãs e Judaísmo Antigo.

Entre outras coisas, Tabor é o autor de um polêmico livro sobre o Jesus Histórico, The Jesus Dynasty: The Hidden History of Jesus, His Royal Family, and the Birth of Christianity. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2006, 384 p.

O livro foi traduzido para o português: A dinastia de Jesus: a história secreta das origens do cristianismo. Rio de Janeiro: Ediouro, 2006, 368 p. ISBN 850002030X

Confira seu blog, onde há vários posts sobre a tumba de Talpiot. Ele é, no documentário, o principal assessor bíblico de Simcha Jacobovici. Está sempre ao seu lado, explicando ao telespectador várias questões arqueológicas e bíblicas.