Rhetoric, Spatiality, and the First-Century Synagogue: The Description and Narrative Use of Jewish Institutions in the Works of Flavius Josephus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The information about the first-century synagogue provided by Flavius Josephus must be handled with care when used in historical reconstructions. Josephus was a skilled rhetorician who was ideologically invested in the presentation of this institution. Due care must therefore be placed on understanding the context of his various mentions of synagogues within the overall rhetorical context of his works if we are interested in historical reconstruction of this Jewish institution. However, the tendentious nature of Josephus’ writings does not preclude historical study, not least because the assumptions and ideologies inherent in this tendenz are themselves historical. Especially in his later works (Antiquitates judaicae, Vita, and Contra Apionem), we find a deliberate presentation of the synagogue as a viable, supra-local rallying point for the Jews throughout the known world, as this institution represents an assembly in which the customs and Law of Judaism may be practiced and disseminated following the loss of the Temple and the Land. Even in the earliest work of Josephus, Bellum judaicum, we find a tendentious presentation of the synagogue as a ‘holy place’ whose precincts were breached due to the impiety of the Jewish insurgents and certain non-Jewish troublemakers. Due to the rhetorical nature of Josephus’ writings and the many hermeneutical issues that arise when we deal with space, the language of Edward Soja’s spatial theory is utilized, where heuristically profitable, in order to distinguish between the ‘spaces themselves’ (firstspace), the ideals held by the author regarding the institution (secondspace), and the combination of the two in the experience represented in the passages (thirdspace). It is precisely the rhetoric with which Josephus presents the synagogue that will lead us to a better understanding of the ideological importance that synagogues had in the lives of the communities and individuals inhabiting these spaces during the period in question.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".