Priests in Exile

The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period

Meron M. Piotrkowski

• Publisher: De Gruyter
• Year: 2019
• ISBN:
  9783110591125
• Edition: 1
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: Jewish History
• Index: History

Priests in Exile is the first comprehensive scholarly opus in English to reconstruct the history of the mysterious Temple of Onias, a Jewish temple built by a Jerusalemite high priest in his Egyptian exile that functioned in parallel with the Temple of Jerusalem.

Piotrkowski's book addresses a topic that is mysterious, important and anomalous: a Jewish community of mercenary priests in the (Egyptian) Diaspora in which the priestly sacrificial ritual was carried out daily over a period of more than two hundred years until the first century CE, outlasting the Jerusalem Temple by about three years.

Although the book focuses on the very circumscribed topic of the parallel Temple it casts a wide net, placing the story in the context of Jewish Diaspora life in ancient times. Ancient topics and texts are brought to bear, including papyri, epigraphy, archaeology, as well as the modern literature. Piotrkowski throws new light on a fascinating episode of ancient Jewish history that is usually left in the dark.

Part I The Sources on the Temple of Onias

Chapter 1 Flavius Josephus and Oniad History

1 Introduction

The writings of the first century CE Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (born 37 CE – ca. 100 CE) constitute our main source on the history of Onias’ Temple. It is because of their significance for my discussion of Onias’ Temple that I chose to sacrifice chronology and begin this inquiry into Oniad history with a thorough investigation of Josephus’ accounts on Onias’ Temple, rather than say, the earlier 2 Maccabees (see Chapter 2).

Born into a Jerusalemite priestly aristocratic family, Joseph ben Mattityahu ‏יוסף בן מתתיהו)‏‎‎, better known under his Latin name [Titus?] Flavius Josephus) became involved in Judaean politics fairly early in life.97 Prior to the outbreak of the First Judaean War (66 – 73/74 CE) he embarked on a mission to Rome, which had the purpose of liberating some Jewish priests from captivity – a mission he successfully concluded. A few years later, with the outbreak of Judaean-Roman hostilities, Josephus, being a member of the priestly ruling class, was assigned military and civilian command of the Galilee. He was commissioned to prepare the local population for the upcoming confrontation with the Romans and with thwarting any Roman advance into the Judaean heartland. This task was, it seems, too much for Josephus to handle. At the siege of Iotapata, the last Galilean stronghold, he fell into Roman captivity under dubious circumstances. Josephus, allegedly influenced by a vision he had in a dream, was brought before the prominent Roman general Vespasian. At this meeting he predicted that Vespasian would become emperor.98 Once Josephus’ prophecy was fulfilled, Vespasian set Josephus free and bestowed upon him several benefits, including territories in Judaea and a pension.99 After accompanying Vespasian and his son Titus (who was approximately the same age as Josephus) in Judaea and Egypt, Josephus followed his new patrons to Italy.

Fresh off the boat in Rome, Josephus began a new career as the author of a history of the Judaean War. He completed the Judaean War (a.k.a. Bellum Judaicum) around the year 79 CE, but it is possible that he produced revised editions of the composition over the next decades.100 Some twenty years after writing the first edition of the Judaean War, he composed a history of the Jewish people from creation to approximately the outbreak of the First Judaeo-Roman War, the Jewish Antiquities.101 The Antiquities comprise twenty books, perhaps in allusion to Dionysus of Halicarnassus’ Roman Antiquities.102 In addition to these two opera magna, he also wrote a brief autobiography (the Vita)103 and an apologetic/polemical two-volume composition directed against the anti-Jewish ravings of the Graeco-Egyptian scholar and publicist Apion (Contra Apionem).104 In his Antiquities (Ant. 4.198; 20.266 – 267) Josephus also expressed his future intention to write a theological treatise dealing with the customs of the Jews and the aetiology of their laws.105 It is doubtful, however, whether this project was ever realized. In any case, no such work has survived.

Of the Josephan corpus only two compositions, in fact, are of particular relevance for the present discussion, namely the Judaean War and the Jewish Antiquities. A brief passage from the Contra Apionem (C. Ap. 2.49 – 55) will be cited in a subsequent chapter of this study.106

2 A Word on Methodology

Before delving into the many problems in Josephus’ Onias narratives and the details of the material itself, it is necessary to address the subject of methodology. I grant that Josephus may be read and understood in many ways. Yet not every way that Josephus is read will yield satisfying results. That is to say, scholars sometimes create more problems than solutions by applying this or that reading to Josephus, or, more to the point, that to the extent they are not interested in the study of “what really happened” they do not ask questions that will help to discover that.107 For this reason I will briefly illustrate how I propose to analyse Josephus’ writings.

Much progress has been made within the last hundred years or so in Josephan scholarship. About a century ago, (mostly German) Josephan scholarship was dominated by Quellenkritik, an approach postulating that many ancient texts are compilations of sources collected by a given ancient author and that these sources may be disclosed by the modern scholar. Several ancient writers, Josephus included, were conceived of as mere compilers and not held in much esteem by these modern (German) scholars.108

This kind of attitude, however, was gradually revised during the latter half of the last century, as more modern scholars began to adopt the view that Josephus was not a mere compiler of sources, but also an independent author who expressed his own views in his writings and arranged and edited his materials, whatever their sources, accordingly.109 Thus, modern scholarship on Josephus experienced a shift from good old German Quellenkritik to a more literary approach, practiced predominantly by Anglo-Saxon scholars.110

Observing modern scholarship on Josephus, one occasionally gets the impression that both approaches are diametrically opposed to each other.111 However, there is no reason to discard one approach for the other. Put in other words, source-criticism can solve as many problems as literary/composition-criticism does and therefore it seems reasonable to combine both approaches. I will follow a combined approach of source-criticism and literary criticism in my analysis of Josephus’ accounts on Onias and his temple. As I hope to show, combining these two approaches can yield quite revealing and useful results.

Moreover, one has to keep in mind that Josephus was a first century CE Jewish historian writing in Rome (predominantly) for a Gentile Roman audience interested in Jews and Judaism.112 To these factors one should add Josephus’ own biography, beginning his life as a priestly aristocrat in Judaea and ending it as a Diaspora Jew in Rome. These factors certainly influenced his own mind-set, including his perception of the remote past (for instance, events that occurred in the Hellenistic period), just as they influenced the way he portrayed more recent Jewish history. It is hardly possible for us to enter into Josephus’ mind, but we can occasionally discover his own perception of things; this occurs every time Josephus himself comments on certain events. In the following analysis, I have attempted to pay heed to this and the above-mentioned factors as much as possible.

3 Josephus’ Onias Narratives

Josephus refers to “Onias” and Oniad history in several places throughout his oeuvre:

a)	The Judaean War
	BJ 1.31 – 33
	BJ 7.421 – 436
b)	The Jewish Antiquities
	Ant. 12.237 – 239
	Ant. 12.383
	Ant. 12.387 – 388
	Ant. 13.62 – 73
	Ant. 13.285
	Ant. 14.131
	Ant. 15.41
	Ant. 19.298
	Ant. 20.235 – 237
c)	Contra Apionem
	C. Ap. 2.49 – 55

Thus, in each of his major historical works (the War and the Antiquities) Josephus offers a fairly elaborate account of Onias’ Temple and of Oniad history. As mentioned, he also refers to matters Oniad in his apologetic treatise Contra Apionem, although in a much more modest fashion: His reference to Onias (apparently Onias III) and his involvement in the Ptolemaic fratricidal war (around 145 BCE) between Ptolemy VI Philometor, his sister-wife Cleopatra II, and his brother Ptolemy VIII Euergetes II (Physcon), does not appear in a historiographical context per se, but rather follows an apologetic rationale. Namely, his reference to Onias’ involvement in this context serves the purpose of emphasizing that Jews are loyal subjects to their rulers. I will focus on this episode and this claim in Chapter 9. In the present chapter, I shall discuss Josephus’ references to Onias and Oniad history in his War and Antiquities only.

4 Why are the Josephan Onias Narratives Problematic?

Josephus’ accounts on Onias and his temple are fraught with problems. Chief among them is the fact that his accounts are mutually contradictory. There are three main contradictions: a) one concerns the identity of the builder of Onias’ Temple (Onias III or his son, Onias IV);113 b) the second concerns the appearance of the temple (did it or did it not resemble the Temple of Jerusalem?);114 c) finally, what were Onias’ motives for building the temple (rivalry with Jerusalem or eternal fame)?115 Perhaps the most important question is the one of the identity of the temple’s founder. But this question is also connected to another: How to date the foundation of the temple?

In his earlier composition, The Judaean War, Josephus expresses the view that the founder of Onias’ Temple in Egypt was the high priest Onias III – a view he will change by the time he composes his Jewish Antiquities.116 In the latter work he ascribes the building of the temple to Onias III’s son, Onias IV. This contradiction has implications for any attempted reconstruction of Oniad history “wie es eigentlich gewesen,” for the question of the temple’s builder is of course linked to a chronological question too and then to the circumstances and the reasons of its foundation. By presenting to us two possible temple builders, who are separated by one generation one from the other, Josephus – deliberately or not – provides us with two different dates for the foundation of Onias’ Temple. If we were to adopt Josephus’ datum in BJ...