Jewish Babylonia between Persia and Roman Palestine (review)

Hebrew Studies 48 (2007) 380 Reviews text and ancient audience? between text and modern reader? etc.). At times, she is not clear on why these motifs are unique to the texts in question (as, for instance, feminine imagery, which Boase even acknowledges on p. 54 was common to the Ancient Near East). Perhaps a shorter summary of the statistics and a stronger focus on theoretical application would have made her presentation more obvious. Overall, Boase’s study represents a starting point. It is helpful mostly in what it assumes but does not always consciously say, that the biblical texts, as products of their culture, share certain cultural meanings yet differ in their perspective and portrayal of those meanings. Therefore, because these texts were written at different times and for different reasons, modern readers must avoid imposing a monolithic meaning, or theology, upon them. Instead, one must first seek meaning from the text in question. Shared motifs must be analyzed for the unique perception that each text gives a particular motif. There is a significant complexity—theological certainly but also social—that any analysis of Lamentations, whether of its theology or other issue, must take into account. Jeremiah Cataldo Seton Hall University South Orange, NJ 07079 cataldje@shu.edu JEWISH BABYLONIA BETWEEN PERSIA AND ROMAN PALESTINE. By Richard Kalmin. Pp. xiv + 285. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006. Cloth, $65.00. About thirty years ago there were two important developments in the critical study of the Babylonian Talmud. First of all, Jacob Neusner began to demonstrate just how unreliable this and other rabbinic compositions are as sources of history. At the same time, Shamma Friedman and David Weiss Halivni began to separate the Bavli into different chronological layers, namely an amoraic level and an anonymous, redactorial level, dubbed “stammaitic” by Halivni and his students. In the past ten years, some textual scholars have begun to use the philological technique of separating the Babylonian Talmud into historical layers to reconstruct the history of the Babylonian rabbinic movement. The two scholars most intensely engaged in this endeavor are Jeffrey Rubenstein and Richard Kalmin, although others such as Daniel Boyarin, Christine Hayes, Alyssa Gray, and Michael Satlow have also been reconnecting texts with history. This new wave of scholars usually eschews writing about individual rabbis or particular events, preferring to focus on broader trends, frequently focusing on the difference be- Hebrew Studies 48 (2007) 381 Reviews tween Palestinian literature and Babylonian literature. The most important contribution is the notion that just because something is pseudepigraphic does not mean that it cannot be used as a source of history. Turning our attention specifically to Richard Kalmin and his latest book, his central thesis is that in the mid-fourth century Babylonian rabbis became more receptive to Palestinian literature and behavior. This is at least partly a result of the Persian conquest of Roman territory and the relocation to the east of Jews and Christians from the Roman empire. Kalmin hopes that his study of cultural contacts, influences, and overlaps between Palestine which was under Roman influence and Mesopotamia, largely under Persian influence , will shed light on larger trends occurring in the history of the period. While Kalmin’s theory is intriguing, most of the book is not directly addressed to proving it. The book, which consists mostly of individual articles, is largely a textual analysis concerning the difference between rabbinic behavior depicted in Palestinian texts and the rabbinic behavior depicted in Babylonian texts. In the first chapter, Kalmin demonstrates that in tales about the persecutions surrounding the Bar Kokhba revolt, Babylonian and Palestinian traditions are similar to each other with one significant difference. Babylonian sources more often portray the Romans as prohibiting Torah study than do Palestinian sources. This is evidence that Torah study was the obsession of the Babylonian rabbis, rabbis whose existence was inside the bet midrash. In contrast, Palestinian rabbis had more contact with non-rabbis and hence they portrayed the Romans as making general decrees against the commandments , an aspect of Judaism important to non-rabbis and rabbis alike. Put another way, Babylonian rabbis imagine the Hadrianic persecutions as directed against their rabbinic way of life while Palestinian rabbis imagine the persecutions...