<p>I was not sure how to list my committee members on this form. Dr. Schuller is my advisor and Drs. Westerholm and Machiela are committee members. I do not have a "co-supervisor." Please correct this form if needed.</p> / <p>Almost every narrative in Pseudo-Philo’s <em>Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum </em>(<em>L.A.B.</em>), a late first or early second century C.E. rewriting of scriptural texts and traditions, deals in some way with issues of reward and punishment, a prominent theme in early Jewish literature. In 1917, M. R. James observed that two “truths” were “foremost” among the “great truths” in <em>L.A.B.</em>: (1) “the indestructibility of Israel” and (2) Israel’s “duty of faithfulness to the one God” (<em>Biblical Antiquities</em>, 34). Most studies of reward and punishment in <em>L.A.B.</em> emphasize one of these two “great truths” to the virtual (or complete) exclusion of the other. This has resulted in sharply contrasting conclusions concerning the concepts of reward and punishment within Pseudo-Philo’s ideology.</p> <p>A promising perspective from which to reconsider the concepts of reward and punishment in <em>L.A.B.</em> is the view of reward and punishment, which, according to E. P. Sanders’s theory of covenantal nomism, was pervasive within Judaism of the first centuries of the Common Era (<em>Paul and Palestinian Judaism</em>, 75, 421‒423, 426). Such an investigation will be the focus of this thesis. Scholars such as Heikki Räisänen (<em>Paul and the Law</em>, 180 n. 92), Frederick J. Murphy (<em>Pseudo-Philo: Rewriting the Bible</em>, 233 n. 18), and Sanders (<em>Judaism: Practice and Belief</em>, 263‒275) have contended that <em>L.A.B.</em> exemplifies covenantal nomism but this premise has never been examined thoroughly. In this study, through a side-by-side analysis of <em>L.A.B.</em> and scriptural texts and traditions, we will identify the changes that Pseudo-Philo made to the scriptural account and then extract Pseudo-Philo’s ideology through a careful analysis of these changes. The recognition that <em>L.A.B.</em> is a late Second Temple period rewriting of scriptural texts and traditions is central to this examination.</p> / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Les Pirqé de-Rabbi Eliézer (PRE) marquent un changement majeur dans l’histoire de la littérature rabbinique. Ce livre, datant du IXe siècle de notre ère, est principalement une « histoire biblique » depuis la création jusqu’au temps d’Esther. Il est le premier récit continu dans le corpus rabbinique. Il est aussi, selon toute probabilité, le premier ouvrage rabbinique qui dérive de la main d’un seul auteur. L’aspect le plus remarquable est l’introduction des légendes autour des personnages bibliques qui ne se trouvent nulle part dans la littérature rabbinique classique. La recherche contemporaine considère la matière non-rabbinique des PRE comme un exemple de la survivance de la littérature du Second Temple dans la tradition rabbinique. En revanche, la présente étude essaie d’expliquer la matière non-rabbinique des PRE comme le résultat de l’influence des cultures chrétienne et musulmane sur l’auteur, plutôt qu’une transmission interne de la littérature du Second Temple parmi les juifs. L’examen de cette hypothèse prendra la forme d’une étude de deux livres qui ressemblent aux PRE dans leur forme et leur contenu : le Livre des Jubilés, ouvrage hébraïque de l’époque du Second Temple, et la Caverne des trésors, un écrit chrétien syriaque du VIe siècle. Les trois constituent des exemples de « l’histoire sainte », c’est-à-dire l'histoire d’Israël ancien racontée indépendamment du texte biblique. Loin d’être un examen de l’histoire de l’exégèse, cette étude est une enquête sur la mythologie comparative, l’évolution des traditions, et la construction d’une identité à travers la transformation d’une histoire partagée, l’histoire des prophètes et des patriarches. / Pirqe de-Rabbi Eliezer (PRE) is a watershed in the history of rabbinic literature. This ninth-century work, an account of “biblical history” from creation until the time of Esther, is the first extended, continuous narrative of any sort in rabbinic literature. It is also, in all probability, the first major rabbinic work to derive from the hand of a single author. The most remarkable aspect of PRE, however, is its introduction into rabbinic tradition of several legends about biblical figures which are not found in the classical rabbinic corpus. Modern scholarship considers the non-rabbinic legends in PRE an example of the survival of Second Temple literature within Jewish tradition. The present study, however, will attempt to explain the non-rabbinic material found in PRE as the result of the author’s adoption (and adaptation) of elements from the surrounding Christian and Muslim culture rather than through the direct transmission of Second Temple works among Jews. This hypothesis will be tested through the examination of two works close to PRE in form and content, the Book of Jubilees (Hebrew, second century BCE) and the Cave of Treasures (Syriac, sixth century CE). All three are accounts of “Sacred History,” that is, the history of ancient Israel as recounted independently of the biblical text. It is not a study of biblical exegesis. Rather, it is an inquiry into comparative mythology, the evolution of tradition, and the construction of communal identities through the transformation of a shared history, the history of the ancient prophets and patriarchs.

No description available.

Asfår Asāṭīr, le « Livre des Légendes », est une réécriture araméenne du Pentateuque samaritain basée sur le targum, centrée sur Adam, Noé, Abraham et Moïse, et conclue par deux apocalypses. Sa langue est un précieux témoin de l’araméen samaritain tardif des Xè-XIè s. Ses nombreuses traditions haggadiques proviennent d’anciennes sources samaritaines, ou sont liées à la littérature juive et aux Histoires musulmanes des Prophètes ; elles révèlent un état encore fluctuant de la religion samaritaine. Beaucoup furent reçues comme canoniques par les Samaritains, qui attribuèrent l’œuvre, anonyme, à Moïse. Cette étude se propose d’établir une édition critique du texte araméen et une traduction tenant compte de ses commentaires arabes et hébreux, afin de rendre cette œuvre accessible à tout chercheur français ou européen. / Asfår Asāṭīr, the "Book of Legends", is an Aramaic rewriting of the Samaritan Pentateuch focused on Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses, and whose framework is the Targum; it ends with two Apocalypses. Its language is a rare witness of Late Samaritan Aramaic, in the 10th and 11th centuries. The text brings together traditions from ancient Samaritan sources, or related to Jewish literature and to Muslim stories of the Prophets. It shows that Samaritan religion was still in flux in the early Middle Age. Many of its haggadic traditions became canonical among Samaritans who attributed this text to Moses.This study proposes to establish a critical edition of the Aramaic text and to provide a translation taking into account its Arabic and Hebrew commentaries, so as to make this work accessible to all French or European researchers.

This thesis explores the relationship between the books of Kings and Chronicles and considers the value of having two different versions of the same monarchic history within the Tanak. It furthermore explores how these books are read in relation to one another. To be more specific, its concern is how the book of Chronicles is read in relation to the book of Kings as Chronicles is so often considered to be a later rewritten text drawing upon an earlier version of the Masoretic Text of Kings. The predominant scholarly approach to reading the book of Chronicles is to read it in light of how the text was emended (additions, deletions, etc.). This approach has great value and has furthered our understanding of the theology and purpose of Chronicles. While this thesis fully affirms this diachronic approach to reading Chronicles, it also finds it to be lacking. This said, I suggest that this predominant way of reading Chronicles through the lens of its source (Kings) sometimes misses the theological and rhetorical features of the Chronicler's text. In light of this suggestion, this thesis will answer the following question: “why were two narratives retained in the Tanak and what possible answers to this question might emerge by looking at the similarities and differences in the two narratives' contents, arguments, and theology?” The method by which this question will be addressed is to read the Solomon narratives in the books of Kings and Chronicles in two ways: first, to read each narrative as a whole and independently of one another, and second, to examine each narrative together in an effort to understand their uniqueness. The result of this analysis will show that these narratives can in fact read as whole narratives independent of one another, and furthermore, that Solomon is in fact less idealized (contra popular scholarly opinion) in the book of Chronicles.