Writing on the Wall: Graffiti and the Forgo en Jews of Antiquity by Karen B. Stern
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Reviewed by: Writing on the Wall: Graffiti and the Forgo en Jews of Antiquity by Karen B. Stern Benjamin D. Gordon Karen B. Stern. Writing on the Wall: Graffiti and the Forgo en Jews of Antiquity. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2018. Pp. 312, 55 b&w illus., 4 maps. Hardcover $35, paper $24.95, ebook. ISBN 9780691161334, 9780691210704, 9781400890453. In this absorbing book, Karen Stern tries to recover the voices of the "forgo en" Jews of antiquity who left graffiti on the walls of public spaces throughout the eastern Mediterranean. Many of these Jews were leaving messages behind, calling upon passersby to remember them or their loved ones for good, precisely because they feared oblivion. Yet they have been overlooked nonetheless, claims Stern, not because of some form of subjugation or erasure in antiquity but because of a certain modern scholarly bias [End Page 266] working against them. Historians of ancient Jewish life, overly reliant on classic Jewish texts, can give too li le a ention to ancient Jews who lived comfortably outside of rabbinic culture. Archaeologists can neglect experiential elements of Jewish life when they a end too closely to descriptive typological analysis. And epigraphists can favor monumental inscriptions while shying away from markings that are non-textual. The book has three main chapters, one each for graffiti from devotional, mortuary, and public contexts, respectively. It does not aspire to be an exhaustive catalog, but in its modeling of how a contextually aware analysis of graffiti ought to be carried out, it offers a timely companion to the newly published volumes of the Corpus Inscriptionum Iudaeae/Palaestinae and the online Ancient Graffiti Project. When taken seriously as a source of primary data, as Stern does in this book, graffiti can be a vital tool for scholars interested in the production of social space. It can speak to the human experience in a way that official modes of writing as reflected in classical texts or monumental inscriptions cannot. Chapter 1 looks at examples of graffiti from the synagogue at Dura Europos in Syria, the sacred complex to Pan at El Kanais in Egypt, and Elijah's Cave on Mount Carmel in Israel. Most interesting in this chapter is the claim that remembrance requests were wri en on the walls of holy spaces in hopes that others would say the name when they worshipped at the space, memorializing the deceased. The act of writing graffiti thus becomes a devotional or prayerful act, as does the act of reading it aloud, with worshippers becoming agents working on behalf of the graffiti writers. This expands our sense of what Jewish prayer consisted of in antiquity. Chapter 2 considers the mortuary graffiti at the Jewish necropolis of Beit Shearim in the Galilee. The numerous catacombs of the site are covered in markings that name the dead, picture the dead, curse those who disturb the dead, and signal the special sanctity of the tombs of the dead. In contrast to the tendency of the rabbis to limit interactions with corpses, the huge collection of Beit Shearim graffiti—some of which are published here for the first time—suggest to Stern that ancient Jews actually spent a lot of time communing with the deceased. They may have left simple lines or X and V symbols to mark visits to the graves, for example, like placing pebbles on a headstone. The penchant for etching images of ships over burials might reflect the belief that the dead were traveling to the underworld as if on a journey. This belief was commonly held in the Egyptian and Greco-Roman spheres. Chapter 3 discusses graffiti in public spaces of primarily Asia Minor. The chapter is the most complete expression in the book of a tendency to downplay ancient Jewish particularity, not to mention outright hostility between Jews and non-Jews, and to emphasize how Jews of the eastern Mediterranean were embedded culturally in the Greco-Roman milieu. The copious menorahs etched into public spaces in Asia Minor signal as much; as do the Jewish symbols on an informally scratched sign noting the presence by the Tyre hippodrome of a purple-dye business run by a woman named Matrona. [End Page...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».