1. Here and throughout this study the term synagogue will be used to refer to both a congregational institution and the building within which the institution was located. In a subsequent chapter, we will see that this usage reflects the usage of the word synagôgê in the Second Temple period: a synagôgê (congregation) met within a synagôgê (building). Occasionally, in order to emphasize one particular aspect of the term, phrases such as “synagogue structure” or “synagogue congregation” will be used. Otherwise, so as to avoid such cumbersome locutions, the context should make clear whether a building, a congregation or both are indicated.
2. On the view that the Pharisees constituted a “retainer class” prior to the Jewish War, see Anthony J. Saldarini, Pharisees, Scribes and Sadducees in Palestinian Society: A Sociological Approach (Wilmington, DE: M. Glazier, 1988). In his book, From Politics to Piety (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1973), Jacob Neusner takes the position that, beginning with Hillel (c. 50 B.C.E.–10 C.E.), the Pharisees abandoned political activism for more quietistic ways. This view, however, discounts the evidence presented by Josephus depicting the Pharisees as being involved in various political intrigues from the time of Herod the Great up through the Jewish War (e.g., Josephus, Ant. 17.41–43, 18.4, 23; Vita 20–23, 189–198). For a critique of Neusner’s view, see E. P. Sanders, Judaism: Practice and Belief, 63 BCE–66 CE (London: Trinity Press International, 1992), 380–412.
3. E.g., Matt 23. See Anthony J. Saldarini, Matthew’s Christian-Jewish Community (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1994), 44–52 for a helpful commentary on this chapter, though one which nevertheless understates the degree of separation between the Pharisees and the Matthean community.
4. For literary attestation of sacrifices being made by pilgrims from the diaspora, see Josephus, Ant. 18.312–313, 20.49; Philo, Legat. 155–158, 311, 315, 356. For the discovery of a votive offering to the temple by a Jew from the island of Rhodes, see Benjamin Isaac, “A Donation for Herod’s Temple in Jerusalem,” IEJ 33 (1983): 86–92.
5. On widespread payment of the Temple tax by diaspora Jews, see Josephus, Ant. 16.27–28, 162–167, 169–173; Philo, Spec. 1.77–78; Cicero, Pro Flacc. 66–69. On Vespasian’s transformation of this tax, see Josephus, BJ 7.218; JIWE 2.603.
6. See D.S. Robertson, Greek and Roman Architecture, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969), 164–169, 271–283.
7. E.g., Isaiah Sonne, “Synagogue” in IDB 4.476–491; Howard Clark Kee, Understanding the New Testament, 4th ed. (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1983), 104; Joseph B. Tyson, The New Testament and Early Christianity (New York: Macmillan, 1984), 93–94.
8. The date given for 2 Peter constitutes the upper terminus. Many scholars would opt for an earlier date. For a survey of the critical issues, see Andrew Chester and Ralph P. Martin, The Theology of the Letter of James, Peter and Jude (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 137–151.
9. On the problem of literary anachronism within the latest of these sources (Matthew and Luke-Acts), see below.
10. Eric M. Meyers, “Synagogue” in ABD 4.251–260.
11. An earlier phase of the Nabratein synagogue may date to some time during the second century C.E., so there is possibly some overlap between this structure and the later documents of the New Testament (Jude, 2 Peter), although these were written in the diaspora, not in Palestine, and they never make reference to synagogues.
12. Helmut Koester, Introduction to the New Testament, 2nd ed. (New York: Fortress Press, 1995), 1.207.
14. E.g., Dan Urman, and Paul Virgil McCracken Flesher, eds., Ancient Synagogues: Historical Analysis and Archaeological Discovery (New York: E.J. Brill, 1995), 1.3–50 is entitled, “The Origins of Ancient Synagogues”; three of the four articles in this section are devoted strictly to the examination of the pre-70 C.E. evidence.
15. Op. cit., 200–202. Sanders in some cases, however, may be guilty of literary anachronism. See Jacob Neusner, review of Judaism: Practice and Belief, 63 BCE–67 CE, by E. P. Sanders, JSJ 24, no. 2 (1994): 317–323.
16. For example, observe Josephus’ expressed concern over the credibility of his account in BJ 1.13–16.
17. E.g., George Foot Moore, Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era: The Age of the Tannaim (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1927), 298–300.
18. E.g., Louis Finkelstein, The Pharisees, 3rd ed. (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1962), 568–569.
19. E.g., Sonne, “Synagogue,” in IDB 4.476–491; Wolfgang Schrage, “Sunagwgh,” in TDNT 8.798–852; Emil Schürer, Geza Vermes, and Fergus Millar, A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ, Revised English ed. 3 vols. (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1973–86); Samuel Krauss, Synagogale Altertümer (Berlin: Hildesheim, 1922).
20. Jacob Neusner, The Rabbinic Traditions about the Pharisees before 70, (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1971), 1.1–2.
21. Jacob Neusner, A History of the Mishnaic Law of Purities, 22 vols. (Leiden: Brill, 1974–77); idem, A History of the Mishnaic Law of Holy Things, 6 vols. (Leiden: Brill, 1978); idem, A History of the Mishnaic Law of Women 5 vols. (Leiden: Brill, 1979–80); idem, A History of the Mishnaic Law of Appointed Times, 5 vols. (Leiden: Brill, 1981–82); idem, A History of the Mishnaic Law of Damages, 5 vols. (Leiden: Brill, 1982). Additional volumes on the tractates of the Division of Agriculture were published by several of Neusner’s students.
22. Jacob Neusner, Judaism, the Evidence of the Mishnah (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981).
23. Neusner, Rabbinic Traditions, 3.289–290.
24. E. P. Sanders, who in general accepts Neusner’s method, has criticized him for not applying it consistently. See E. P. Sanders, Jewish Law from Jesus to the Mishnah (Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1990), 152–254. Despite this, Sanders accepts Neusner’s conclusions regarding the early material’s silence on the synagogues (Judaism, 398).
25. For Neusner’s criticism of researchers who uncritically continue to rely on later rabbinic material when speaking of the Second Temple period see Jacob Neusner, The Documentary Foundation of Rabbinic Culture: Mopping up after Debates With Gerald L. Bruns, S.J.D. Cohen, Arnold Maria Goldberg, Susan Handelman, Christine Hayes, James Kugel, Peter Schaefer, Eliezer Segal, E.P. Sanders, and Lawrence H. Schiffman (Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1995), 179–207; idem, Ancient Judaism: Debates and Disputes (Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1996), 245–252; idem, Uppsala Addresses: And Other Recent Essays and Reviews on Judaism Then and Now (Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1996), 87–112.
26. Howard Clark Kee, “The Transformation of the Synagogue after 70 CE: Its Import for Early Christianity,” NTS 36 (1990): 1–24; idem, “Early Christianity in the Galilee: Reassessing the Evidence from the Gospels” in The Galilee in Late Antiquity, edited by Lee I. Levine (New York: The Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1992), 3–22; idem, “New Finds That Illuminate the World and Text of the Bible: The Greco-Roman Era” in The Bible in the Twenty-First Century, edited by Howard Clark Kee (Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1993), 89–108; idem, “The Changing Meaning of Synagogue: A Response to Richard Oster,” NTS 40 (1994): 281–283; idem, “Defining the First-Century CE Synagogue,” NTS 41 (1995): 481–500.
27. The translation, as with all other translations in this study (unless otherwise indicated), is from the NRSV.
30. Richard A. Horsley, Galilee (Valley Forge, Pa: Trinity Press International, 1995), 226. Horsley’s analysis of the relevant sources is on pp. 223–225.
31. Ibid., 225. The discussion of the excavated remains takes place in the first full paragraph of p. 224. See also idem, Archaeology History and Society in Galilee (Valley Forge, Pa: Trinity Press International, 1996), 133.
32. Paul Virgil McCracken Flesher, “Palestinian Synagogues before 70 C.E.: A Review of the Evidence” in Ancient Synagogues: Historical Analysis and Archaeological Discovery, edited by Dan Urman and Paul Virgil McCracken Flesher (New York: E.J. Brill, 1995), 1.27–39. This essay is a slightly modified version of an earlier paper: idem, “Palestinian Synagogues Before 70 CE: A Review of the Evidence” in Studies in Ethnology and Literature of Judaism, edited by J. Neusner and Ernest S. Frerichs (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989), 67–81. Flesher’s introductory comments in the volumes he co-edited are found in op.cit., 1.xxiv–xxv.
33. Flesher, “Palestinian Synagogues,” 39. The inscription is the famous Theodotus inscription, which will be discussed at length in subsequent chapters. The reference in Acts 6:9 is to the so–called “synagogue of the Freedmen.”
34. Meyers, “Synagogue,” 225. Emphasis in original.
35. Kee, “Transformations,” 13.
36. L. Michael White, Building God’s House in the Roman World: Architectural Adaptation among Pagans, Jews, and Christians (Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1990).
37. It is worth noting, however, that in his brief discussion of Palestinian synagogues, White takes a position similar to that of Kee: “Long-standing assumptions concerning the institution in Roman Palestine during the first century C.E. may have no historical grounding. While references to synagogues are known from late first-century sources, it does not appear that there was a formally ordered rabbinical institution as such prior to the second century C.E. Moreover, there is no archaeological evidence for exclusively synagogue buildings in the Homeland dating to the first century” (Building God’s House, 61).
38. White, Building God’s House, 62.
39. Ibid., 92. For another statement of this viewpoint, see Eric M. Meyers and L. Michael White, “Jews and Christians in a Roman World,” Archaeology 42, no. 2 (1989): 31–33.
40. To Kee, Meyers and Horsley’s acceptance of White’s conclusions, add the following: Saldarini, Matthew’s Christian-Jewish Community, 100; Bradley Blue, “Acts and the House Church” in The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting, edited by David W. Gill and Conrad Gempf (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1994), 136; John McRay, Archaeology and the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1991), 72.
41. Heather A. McKay, Sabbath and Synagogue: The Question of Sabbath Worship in Ancient Judaism (Leiden; New York: E.J. Brill, 1994). This volume grew out of an article published three years earlier: idem, “New Moon or Sabbath?” in The Sabbath in Jewish and Christian Traditions, edited by Tamara C. Eskenazi, Daniel J. Harrington and William H. Shea (New York: The Crossroads Publishing Company, 1991), 12–27. Beyond the defense of her overall hypothesis, it is also noteworthy that McKay agrees with Kee and Horsley’s verdict on the existence (or rather, non-existence) of synagogue structures in pre-70 Palestine: “There is no archaeological or epigraphic evidence that points unequivocally to the existence of synagogue buildings in first-century Palestine . . . First-century ‘synagogues’ are—on the whole—groups of male Jews. Any architectural remains of synagogue buildings in Palestine belong to a time later than the first century CE” (Sabbath and Synagogue, 250).
42. McKay, Sabbath and Synagogue, 251.
43. Lee I. Levine, “Synagogues,” in NEAEHL 4.1421. Cf. idem, “The Second Temple Synagogue: The Formative Years” in The Synagogue in Late Antiquity, edited by Lee I. Levine (Philadelphia: American Schools of Oriental Research, 1987), 19–20. Similarly, Steven Fine and Eric Meyers state, “Communal prayer is not presented as a function of synagogues before 70 CE” (Steven Fine and Eric M. Meyers, “Synagogues” in OEA 5.118).
44. A. Thomas Kraabel, “The Disappearance of the ‘God-Fearers’,” Numen 28 (1981): 120–121. For a similar set of arguments, see Robert S. MacLennan and A. Thomas Kraabel, “The God-Fearers—A Literary and Theological Invention,” BAR 12, no. 5 (1986): 46–53.
45. Kraabel, “The Disappearance of the ‘God-Fearers’,” 122.
46. Louis H. Feldman, “The Omnipresence of the God-Fearers,” BAR 12, no. 5 (1986): 58–63; Robert F. Tannenbaum, “Jews and God-Fearers in the Holy City of Aphrodite,” BAR 12, no. 5 (1986): 44–57; John G. Gager, “Jews, Gentiles, and Synagogues in the Book of Acts,” HTR 79, no. 1–3 (1986): 91–99; Joyce Maire Reynolds and Robert Tannenbaum, Jews and God-Fearers at Aphrodisias: Greek Inscriptions with Commentary: Texts from the Excavations at Aphrodisias Conducted by Kenan T. Erim vol. 12 (Cambridge: Cambridge Philological Society, 1987); Irina A. Levinskaya, “The Inscription from Aphrodisias and the Problem of God-Fearers,” TynBul 41 (1990): 312–318; Paul R. Trebilco, Jewish Communities in Asia Minor (Cambridge England; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 145–166; J. Andrew Overman, “The God-Fearers: Some Neglected Features” in Diaspora Jews and Judaism: Essays in Honor of, and in Dialogue with, A. Thomas Kraabel, edited by J. Overman and R. MacLennan (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992), 145–152. Kraabel responds to these criticisms in A. Thomas Kraabel, “Afterward” in Diaspora Jews and Judaism, 347–357.
47. Richard E. Oster, “Supposed Anachronism in Luke-Acts’ Use of SUNAGWGH: A Rejoinder to H C Kee,” NTS 39 (1993): 178–208; Rainer Riesner, “Synagogues in Jerusalem” in The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, edited by Richard Bauckham (Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 1995), 179–211; Lee I. Levine, “The Nature and Origin of the Palestinian Synagogue Reconsidered,” JBL 115 (1996): 428, n. 4; James F. Strange, “The Art and Archaeology of Ancient Judaism” in Judaism in Late Antiquity, edited by Jacob Neusner (Leiden; New York: E.J. Brill, 1995), 73.
48. See especially Kee, “The Changing Meaning of Synagogue: A Response to Richard Oster,” 281–283. Kee has not yet responded to Riesner or Levine in print. Horsley is similarly dismissive of Oster’s work in Richard A. Horsley, Archaeology History and Society in Galilee, 223, n. 38. Flesher has not yet responded to Riesner’s arguments. Likewise, McKay’s work apparently was completed before any of the above critiques were offered.
49. See Lester L. Grabbe, “Synagogues in Pre-70 Palestine: A Re-assessment” in Ancient Synagogues: Historical Analysis and Archaeological Discovery, edited by Dan Urman and Paul Virgil McCracken Flesher (New York: E.J. Brill, 1995), 1.17–26; Levine, “Nature and Origin of the Palestinian Synagogues,” pass.
50. E.g., J. Gwyn Griffiths, “Egypt and the Rise of the Synagogue” in Ancient Synagogues: Historical Analysis and Archaeological Discovery, edited by Dan Urman and Paul Virgil McCracken Flesher (New York: E.J. Brill, 1995), 1.3–16; Aryeh Kasher, “Synagogues as ‘Houses of Prayer’ and ‘Holy Places’ in the Jewish Communities of Hellenistic and Roman Egypt” in Ancient Synagogues: Historical Analysis and Archaeological Discovery, edited by Dan Urman and Paul Virgil McCracken Flesher (New York: E.J. Brill, 1995), 1.205–220; Paul E. Dion, “Synagogues et temples dans l’Egypte hellénistique,” ScEs 29 (1977): 45–75; Gideon Foerster, “Architectural Models of the Greco-Roman Period and the Origin of The ‘Galilean’ Synagogue” in ASR 45–48; Zvi ’Uri Ma’oz, “The Synagogue in the Second Temple Period—Architectural and Social Interpretation” in Eretz-Israel, edited by J. Aviram (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1992), 23.224–228 [Hebrew]; Ehud Netzer, “The Herodian Triclinia: A Prototype for the ‘Galilean-Type’ Synagogue” in ASR 49–51; Ernest Marie Laperrousaz, “A propos des deux plus anciennes synagogues actuellement connues de Palestine, et dernières nouvelles archéologiques de Jèrusalem,” REJ 144, no. 1–3 (1985): 297–304; Beat Brenk, “Zu den Grundriestypen der fruehsten Synagogen Palaestinas” in Atti Del IX Congresso Internazionale Di Archeologia Cristiana: Roma, 21–27 Settembre 1975, edited by Cristiana Congresso internazionale di archeologia (Citta del Vaticano, Roma: Pontificio istituto di archeologia cristiana, 1978), 539–550.
51. This is not meant to imply that all earlier studies viewed the synagogue and the Temple as rivals (e.g., Schrage, “Sunagwgh,,” 822–824). However, most of these based their conclusions at least partially upon the belief that a synagogue existed within the Temple complex, a thesis itself founded upon a faulty interpretation of later rabbinic material (e.g., m. Meg 1.3, b. Ber. 6a, 7b). See Sidney B. Hoenig, “Supposititious Temple-Synagogue,” JQR 54 (1963): 115–131; Solomon Zeitlin, “There Was No Synagogue in the Temple,” JQR 53 (1962): 168–169.
52. Avigdor Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1959), 124–125.
53. Joseph Gutmann, “Synagogue Origins: Theories and Facts” in Ancient Synagogues: The State of the Research, edited by Joseph Gutmann (Chico, California: Scholars Press, 1981), 4.
54. John 12:42: “Nevertheless many, even of the authorities, believed in [Jesus]. But because of the Pharisees they did not confess it, for fear that they would be put out of the synagogue [avposuna,gwgoi].”
55. Grabbe, “Synagogues in Pre-70 Palestine,” 23–24. In a subsequent chapter, we will explore other passages which Grabbe missed in his examination.
56. E. P. Sanders, Judaism, 398.
57. Flesher, “Palestinian Synagogues before 70 C.E.,” 27–28.
58. This point has recently been made by E. P. Sanders (Judaism, 77–82). See also S. J. D Cohen, From the Maccabees to the Mishnah (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1987), 62–69.
59. The translation, as with those of all other Greco-Roman texts quoted in this study (unless otherwise indicated), is from the LCL.
60. On Josephus’ account of his Pharisaism see Vita 12.
61. See Ellis Rivkin, “Ben Sira and the Non Existence of the Synagogue: A Study in Historical Method” in In the Time of Harvest, Essays in Honor of Abba Hillel Silver on the Occasion of his 70th Birthday, edited by Daniel Jeremy Silver (New York: Macmillan, 1963), 320–354.
62. See citations in n. 4 above.
63. The fourth Sibylline Oracle, written probably in the 80s (C.E.), constitutes the only clear rejection of the Temple in the Jewish literature (especially vv. 24–25). Yet this view may have been fostered from theological reflection upon the Temple’s demise: the author may have interpreted the destruction as proof of God’s judgment upon the cult. Some of the Christian literature reflects a similar view. Werner Kelber, for instance, argues that Mark’s Gospel was written in part as a polemic against the Jerusalem church’s messianic hopes which were centered on the Temple (Mark 13). See Werner H. Kelber, The Kingdom in Mark: A New Place and a New Time (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1974), 109–147; idem, Mark’s Story of Jesus (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979), 57–70.
64. AJC 2.272, no. 51–53; Dan Barag, “The Table of the Showbread and the Facade of the Temple on Coins of the Bar-Kokhba Revolt” in Ancient Jerusalem Revealed, edited by Hillel Geva (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1994), 272–276.
65. E. Mary Smallwood, The Jews under Roman Rule: From Pompey to Diocletian (Leiden: Brill, 1976), 544.
66. For criticism of the Hasmoneans (probably Jonathan Maccabaeus, the “Wicked Priest”) see 1QpHab 8.4–13, 9.7–12, 11.2–9. The Temple Scroll (11QT) presents the Essene’s reconstruction of the Jerusalem Temple and cult. See Yigael Yadin, The Temple Scroll: The Hidden Law of the Dead Sea Sect (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1985), 112–169.
67. Along these lines it is worth noting that Luke had no difficulty in portraying Paul as being involved in sacrifice (Acts 21:26). Whether or not this account is accurate is another matter (note, however, 1 Cor 9:20). In the pre-70 period, Christians had to wrestle with the continuing significance of the cult, a task that was made much easier after the Temple’s destruction. An important point is that the cult was not totally discarded, but reinterpreted with Christ absorbing the place of the Temple (John 2:21), the high priesthood (Heb 5:5–6), the feasts (John 7:37–38) and the sacrificial victim (Rom 3:24–25; Rev 13:8).
68. See Josephus, Ant. 11:87, 12.10, 13.74–79, 254–256; John 4:20.
69. See Robert Hayward, “The Jewish Temple at Leontopolis: A Reconsideration,” JJS 33 (1982): 429–443.
70. E. P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977), 57.
71. See Walter Burkert, Greek Religion (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1985), 54–118; John E. Stambaugh, “The Functions of Roman Temples” in ANRW II.16.1.554–608.
72. Josephus, Ant. 11.336, 12.406, 13.55, 13.243, 16.14, 18.122; Ap. 2.48; cf. 3 Macc 1:9, Ep. Arist. 45, Philo, Legat. 232. According to Josephus, the final spark to ignite the revolt was the refusal of Eleazar, son of the high priest Ananias, to accept gifts or sacrifices from foreigners. Josephus states that the high priests and the Pharisees were brought in to convince him and his followers that the law permitted such sacrifices. The appeal, however, was to no avail (BJ 2.409–421).
73. Philo, Legat. 319. On the offerings for the emperor: Josephus, BJ 2.197; Philo, Legat. 291.
74. Burkert, Greek Religion, 269.
75. On the temple as the vortex between heaven and earth, see Mircea Eliade, The Sacred and the Profane, 1st American ed. (New York: Harcourt, 1959), 8–65; idem, “Sacred Architecture and Symbolism” in Symbolism, the Sacred, and the Arts, edited by Mircea Eliade and Diane Apostolos-Cappadona (New York: Crossroad, 1985), 105–129.
76. Thus Josephus blames the destruction of Palestine during the Jewish War on the desecration of the Jerusalem Temple by the Zealots (BJ 5.5–20).
77. Cf. the similar beliefs of Josephus as expressed in Ap. 2.237–38.
78. These verses, of course, do not mention Jerusalem, but during the Second Temple period were understood as references to the Holy City. See Josephus, Ant. 4.200, 13.54.
79. Numerous references to “high places” (tAmB) in the Hebrew scriptures are certainly testimonies to this (e.g., Lev 26:30, Num 33:52, 1Kgs 3:2ff).
80. Or in the case of the Samaritans, to Mt. Gerizim.
81. Joan R. Branham, “Vicarious Sacrality: Temple Space in Ancient Synagogues” in Ancient Synagogues: Historical Analysis and Archaeological Discovery, edited by Dan Urman and Paul Virgil McCracken Flesher (New York: E.J. Brill, 1995), 2.345. Emphasis added.
82. Ibid., 334, n. 59: “One inscription from the time of the Ptolemies [JIE 9] mentions ‘sacred precincts’ i`ero.n peri,bolon.” Despite this acknowledgment, Branham elsewhere states that “the synagogue is not marked off by boundary indicators comparable to the temenos of the Temple” (ibid., 330). In another place (ibid., 334, n. 53), Branham alludes to various Roman decrees protecting the sanctity of the synagogues but does not mention that these decrees were issued prior to the Temple’s destruction.
83. Peter Richardson, “Early Synagogues as Collegia in the Diaspora and Palestine” in Voluntary Associations, edited by John S. Kloppenborg and Steven G. Wilson (London: Routledge, 1996), 102, 103.
84. See B. Mazar, “The Archaeological Excavations near the Temple Mount” in Jerusalem Revealed: Archaeology in the Holy City, 1968–1974, edited by Yigael Yadin (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1975), 28–29; Meir Ben-Dov, In the Shadow of the Temple, trans. Ina Friedman (New York: Harper & Row, 1985), 138–139. Richardson himself makes the point that “the rebuilding of the Temple in Jerusalem [by Herod] contained, with one important exception, no figures” (Peter Richardson, “Law and Piety in Herod’s Architecture,” SR 15, no. 3 [1986]: 350). The exception is an eagle placed over the main gate by Herod. Near the end of Herod’s reign, two zealous Jews tore down the offending image (Josephus, Ant. 15.267–291).
85. Rachel Hachlili, Ancient Jewish Art and Archaeology in the Land of Israel (New York: E.J. Brill, 1988), 235.
86. See the treatment of the Theodotus inscription in chapter two, the Gamla synagogue in chapter three, and the Delos synagogue in chapter four.
87. See chapter three, below. It should also be mentioned that, although Richardson correctly recognizes the importance of mikvaoth in identifying the Second Temple synagogues of Palestine (”Early Synagogues as Collegia,” 92), he does not take the next step and ask why these ritual baths were commonly built near such structures. Nor does he notice the parallel between this arrangement and that found in Jerusalem, where ritual baths surrounded the Temple complex.
88. See chapters three and four, below.
89. The same can be said of Shaye Cohen’s examination of the Temple cult, which dwells on the sacrificial role of the sanctuary to the exclusion of all other functions. See Shaye J. D. Cohen, “The Temple and the Synagogue” in The Temple in Antiquity: Ancient Records and Modern Perspectives, edited by T. Madsen (Provo, Utah: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1984), 151–174. Like Branham, Cohen deals primarily with the emergence of the Late Antique synagogue after the Temple’s destruction.
90. See chapters three, four and six, below.
91. Richardson, “Early Synagogues as Collegia,” 90.
92. As Simeon Guterman has pointed out, only the synagogues in the western half of the empire were constituted as collegia licita; those in the eastern half were authorized either as a result of treaty (Palestine) or as a reconfirmation of an earlier status under the Hellenistic rulers (Simeon L. Guterman, Religious Toleration and Persecution in Ancient Rome [London: Aiglon, 1951], 75–158). Generally, this meant that the synagogues in the east—at least those in cities with a long-established Jewish presence—served a larger set of functions (e.g., law courts, places of refuge) than those in Italy. See chapters four and six, below.
93. In addition to Mithraea, Richardson mentions the Bakcheion in Athens which “was a large hall with a decorated altar built for the worship of Dionysos” (“Early Synagogues as Collegia,” 97). For a consideration of another cultic hall, see the treatment of the House of the Poseidoniasts in chapter four, below.
94. On this point, see B. Hudson McLean, “The Place of Cult in Voluntary Associations and Christian Churches on Delos” in Voluntary Associations, edited by John S. Kloppenborg and Steven G. Wilson (London: Routledge, 1996), 195. While McLean rightly recognizes the relationship between the Delos synagogue and a central cultic site, his definition of “cultic” (viz., the offering of animal sacrifices or adoration of an idol only) is too narrow. See the treatment of the Delos synagogue in chapter four, below.
95. Kasher, “Synagogues as ‘Houses of Prayer’ and 'Holy Places’ in the Jewish Communities of Hellenistic and Roman Egypt,” 218.