CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 0Biblical Studies and InterpretationClassical Antiquity StudiesReligion, Theology, History, Judaism, Christianity

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 13 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Verfolgung der jüdischen Religion unter Hadrian: Zwischen Wirklichkeit und Martyrologie

Open access
Stemberger, Günter·2020·Scripta Classica Israelica
DOI 10.71043/sci.v33i.2697
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Most historians still accept the traditional position that in the years after the Bar Kokhba-revolt the Roman government prohibited most expressions of Jewish religious life, above all circumcision and Torah study, although some recent studies are much more cautious. Only the late Historia Augusta mentions a prohibition of circumcision in the context of the Bar Kokhba-revolt; but it is not clear whether this prohibition was the cause of the revolt or came after its suppression. All other texts used in the reconstruction of this persecution are rabbinic, becoming ever more detailed in later texts. No single early text explicitly connects such prohibitions with Hadrian. Jewish martyrology seems to have become a fashionable topic in later times. Without doubt, after the revolt the Romans reacted with repressive measures in Palestine, restricting the right of assembly which might have been understood as prohibition of public study of the Torah, and prohibiting the circumcision of non-Jews. In rabbinic memory this became an outright prohibition of Jewish religion; religious persecution soon became a topos of Jewish historiography, but only very little, if anything, can be based on historical sources.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

Stemberger re-examines the rabbinic evidence traditionally used to reconstruct a Hadrianic persecution of Judaism after the Bar Kokhba revolt (132–136) and argues that no broad Roman ban on Jewish religious practice can be securely documented from these sources. The likely historical core is more limited: local/administrative repression, especially restrictions on assemblies and a stricter ban on circumcision of non-Jews, around which later martyrological tradition accumulated further prohibitions.

Key findings

  • Peter Schäfer’s critical review found that the Mishnah at most uncertainly attests a ban on circumcision and tefillin; the first explicit prohibition of Torah study appears only in the Erfurt manuscript of Tosef.Sot.15:10 and is attributed to Simeon ben Gamaliel after the revolt, while the Vienna manuscript lacks such a decree. Stemberger judges Schäfer’s skepticism justified and says that, over thirty years later, he would likely prefer Schäfer’s minimal version.
  • Central proof texts are not historically secure: Mekh.Baḥodesh 6 (R. Natan) lists execution for circumcision, Torah reading, eating mazzah, and carrying the lulav, but Stemberger reads it as a literary composition shaped by biblical verses; Mekh.Shabbeta 1’s phrase “gave their life” means full devotion, not necessarily persecution. Tosef.Ber.2:13’s silent Shema before a quaestor is answered with “an hour of danger is no proof,” and its context concerns impurity. No early text securely prohibits Torah study or Torah reading; Tosef.Er.5:24 and 8:16 refer to general dangers, and the ordination story in Sanh.14a is a Babylonian construction historically unusable for Palestine.
  • On circumcision, the Historia Augusta links the revolt to a ban on mutilare genitalia, and the Antoninus Pius rescript in Digesta 48:8:11 permits Jews to circumcise only their own sons while imposing the castration penalty on others. Raʿanan Abusch is cited as arguing that “no Hadrianic prohibition of circumcision ever existed” and that Pius’s law was the first imperial law on circumcision, aimed at protecting slaves rather than reversing Hadrian. If an empire-wide ban had existed, diaspora reactions would be expected but are not attested.
  • Stemberger concludes that the review yields no secure results: rabbinic literature adds more details over time, and Roman “decrees” and “persecution” become topoi of religious exhortation. The only historically secure lasting consequence of the revolt—Aelia Capitolina and the ban on Jews/circumcised persons entering its city area—plays no role in rabbinic literature. He suggests the core was Roman restriction of assemblies, consistent with Roman law on collegia, plus the stricter ban on circumcision of non-Jews.

Methods

  • Historical-critical re-examination of early rabbinic texts traditionally cited as evidence for anti-Jewish decrees under Hadrian, with close attention to manuscript variants (Erfurt, Vienna, Oxford, Munich, Vatican, Genizah) and attributions.
  • Engagement with prior scholarship from Graetz, Lieberman, Herr, Avi-Yonah, Oppenheimer, Smallwood, Schäfer, Hadas-Lebel, Abusch, and others, comparing tannaitic, amoraic, and later rabbinic material.
  • Use of non-rabbinic sources where relevant, including Historia Augusta, Digesta, Justin Martyr, Cassius Dio, and Eusebius, to test the plausibility of rabbinic traditions.

Limitations

  • The paper states that all statements about Roman prohibitions of Jewish practices come from rabbinic writings and that, apart from circumcision, there is no confirmation in non-Jewish literature of the period. Most texts speak only of “danger,” “hour of danger,” later “destruction” (shemad), or “decrees” (gezerot), not explicitly of Hadrian, and later traditions are schematic.
  • The paper states that narrative baraitot without earlier parallels and found only in the Babylonian Talmud should be avoided for historical reconstruction; martyrdom stories are inconsistent, and even for R. Aqiva one cannot securely say when or for what offense he was executed. Manuscript variants also make key texts ambiguous.
  • Evident from the text: the positive reconstruction—assembly restrictions plus a stricter circumcision ban for non-Jews—is inferred from Roman legal context and limited non-rabbinic evidence rather than directly documented in the rabbinic sources, and Stemberger presents it as a likely core, not a certainty.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.71043/sci.v33i.2697

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 13 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingnone given

    The earliest lists of prohibitions that are said to have been issued during or after the revolt are found in the Mekhilta.

    “Die frühesten solchen Listen finden wir in der Mekhilta.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingreasoning

    The stories of the execution of individual rabbis of this period often do not agree with what other rabbinic texts tell about that rabbi.

    “Das gilt besonders auch für die Erzählungen von der Hinrichtung einzelner Rabbinen dieser Periode, die oft nicht mit dem übereinstimmen, was andere rabbinische Texte über diesen Rabbi erzählen.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingnone given

    In the Mishnah there is only one place where 'danger' denotes a concrete time, namely Ket.9:9, that 'since the danger' a woman can claim her ketubba even without a get.

    “In der Mischna gibt es nur eine einzige Stelle, wo -Gefahr‖ einen konkreten Zeitpunkt bezeichnet, nämlich Ket.9:9, dass ʻseit der Gefahrʼ (min ha-sakkana we-helakh) eine Frau (ihre Ketubba) auch ohne Get einfordern kann.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Many texts adduced for the Hadrianic persecution concern liturgical practice, such as the Lulav or the use of tefillin.

    “Auffällig ist, wie viele für die hadrianische Verfolgung herangezogene Texte liturgische Praxis betreffen, wie den schon erwähnten Lulav oder die Verwendung von Tefillin (Er.10:1; Meg.4:8: in beiden Texten ist ʻGefahrʼ gewiss allgemeiner gebraucht”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingreasoning

    Striking here is that already the mere reading of Torah and not only its public teaching brings a death sentence.

    “Auffällig ist hier, dass schon das bloße Lesen der Tora und nicht nur deren öffentliche Lehre ein Todesurteil bewirkt.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 26
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 33

  • Probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingreasoning

    The phrase 'they gave/set their being/their life for something' (natnu nafshan ʿal) does not necessarily mean doing something under threat of death, but simply doing something with full devotion and whole commitment.

    “ʻSie gaben/setzten ihr Sein/ihr Leben für etwas ein' (natnu nafshan ʿal) bedeutet nicht unbedingt, etwas unter drohender Lebensgefahr zu tun, sondern einfach, etwas mit voller Hingabe und mit ganzem Einsatz zu tun.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingnone given

    Only later texts speak explicitly of the time of Emperor Hadrian; most speak only of 'the danger' (sakkana), 'the hour of danger', later also 'destruction' (shemad), or simply of decrees (gezerot) that one or the wicked government issued (gazrah).

    “Nur spätere Texte sprechen explizit von der Zeit des Kaisers Hadrian, die meisten dagegen nur von ʻder Gefahrʼ (sakkana), ʻder Stunde der Gefahrʼ, später dann auch der ʻVernichtungʼ (shemad), oder einfach von Dekreten (gezerot), die man bzw.die frevelhafte Regierung erließ (gazrah).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    The first explicit prohibition of Torah study in Tosef.Sot.15:10 is only in the Erfurt manuscript as a decree and can be assigned to the Usha period after the revolt, while the Vienna manuscript does not speak of a decree and can also be related to an earlier period.

    “In Tosef.Sot.15:10 findet er das erste explizite Verbot des Torastudiums; doch nur in der Fassung der Handschrift Erfurt ist von ‗Dekreten' die Rede (gozrin ʿaleinu) und ist der Text als Aussage des Simeon ben Gamaliel in die Zeit von Uscha, also nach dem Aufstand, anzusetzen, während Handschrift Wien nicht von einem Dekret spricht und auch auf eine frühere Periode bezogen werden kann.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingreasoning

    The Yerushalmi offers nothing new that would be historically usable, and the relatively broad tradition of narratives in the Bavli traditionally connected with persecutions after the Bar Kokhba revolt contributes hardly anything historically usable; later rabbinic writings are completely unproductive.

    “Der Yerushalmi bietet nichts Neues, das historisch verwertbar wäre, und auch die relativ breite Überlieferung von Erzählungen im Bavli, die traditionell mit den Verfolgungen nach dem Bar Kokhba-Aufstand verbunden werden, trägt kaum historisch Verwertbares bei.Spätere rabbinische Schriften sind völlig unergiebig.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingreasoning

    In the halakhic Midrashim, the sequence of multiple prohibitions in the Mekhilta is striking, but their assignment to the Bar Kokhba revolt is in detail doubtful.

    “In den halakhischen Midraschim ist besonders die Reihung einer Mehrzahl von Verboten in der Mekhilta auffällig, die Zuordnung zum Bar Kokhba-Aufstand aber im Einzelnen zweifelhaft.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingcitation

    Not even about the most famous martyr of this period, R. Aqiva, can one say with certainty when within the years of the revolt or after it he was executed and what the offense was for which he was condemned.

    “Nicht einmal vom bekanntesten Märtyrer dieser Zeit, R. Aqiva, 13 Hadas-Lebel (1990), 177.kann man sicher sagen, wann innerhalb der Jahre des Aufstands oder danach er hingerichtet wurde und was das Vergehen war, wofür er verurteilt wurde.14”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingreasoning

    The list in Mekhilta Baḥodesh 6 brings, corresponding to the two plural forms in the biblical verse, two examples for 'those who love me', namely circumcision and Torah study, then two 'commandments', Mazzot and Lulav; the concluding verse Sach 13:6 leads to the conclusion that one is 'struck' for them.

    “Die Liste bringt entsprechend den zwei Pluralformen im Bibelvers zwei Beispiele für ʻdie mich liebenʼ, nämlich Beschneidung (durch Gen 17 mit Abraham verbunden, der schon zuvor als Typos derer genannt wird, ʻdie mich liebenʼ; cf.Jes 41:8: ʾAvraham ʾohavi), und Torastudium, dann zwei ʻGeboteʼ, Mazza und Lulav.Der abschließende Vers Sach 13:6 führt zum Schluss, dass man dafür -geschlagen‖ wird.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingreasoning

    The Tosefta names a whole series of further prohibitions, but their exact interpretation and especially their connection with Hadrianic persecution are doubtful.

    “Insgesamt nennt die Tosefta eine ganze Reihe weiterer Verbote, doch ist deren genaue Deutung und v.a.auch die Verbindung mit der hadrianischen Verfolgung zweifelhaft.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Findingnone given

    In Mekhilta Baḥodesh 6, the phrase is to be taken absolutely literally.

    “Absolut wörtlich zu nehmen ist dagegen die Phrase im zweiten Text der Mekhilta, Baḥodesh 6, einem Kommentar zu Ex 20:6 ʻbei denen, die mich lieben und auf meine Gebote achtenʼ.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingnone given

    Rabbinic literature brings ever more details with growing temporal distance from the events, though in many texts a direct or even exclusive reference to the years after the Bar Kokhba revolt cannot be secured.

    “Die rabbinische Literatur bringt mit wachsendem zeitlichen Abstand von den Ereignissen immer mehr Details, wobei allerdings in vielen Texten ein direkter oder gar ausschließlicher Bezug auf die Jahre nach dem Bar Kokhba-Aufstand nicht zu sichern ist.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingreasoning

    In Mekh.Baḥodesh 6, MS Oxford reads 'et beni', while MS Munich, MS Vatican and the first print read 'et bene Yisra'el', which perhaps reflects the more general formulation of the Roman permission.

    “Dies ist der Text von MS Oxford; MS München, MS Vatikan und der Erstdruck lesen stattdessen ʻdie Söhne Israelsʼ (et bene Yisra'el), was vielleicht die allgemeinere Formulierung der römischen Erlaubnis spiegelt.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingreasoning

    Palestinian sources describe various appointments of rabbis but know no fixed ritual and not the idea that a rabbi is thereby integrated into the chain from Moses at Sinai and thereby guarantees correct transmission of Torah.

    “Die palästinischen Quellen schildern zwar verschiedenste Ernennungen von Rabbinen, kennen dafür aber kein festes Ritual und auch nicht die Vorstellung, dass dadurch ein Rabbi in die Traditionskette ab Mose am Sinai eingegliedert wird und dadurch die korrekte Weitergabe der Tora garantiert.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    Only in the MS Erfurt version is there talk of an externally issued decree against study of Torah; the speaker here is not R. Yishma'el but Rabban Simeon ben Gamaliel, thus a rabbi of the generation after the revolt.

    “Nur in dieser Fassung ist von einem von außen erlassenen Dekret gegen das Studium der Tora die Rede; Sprecher ist hier nicht R. Yishma'el, sondern Rabban Simeon ben Gamaliel, damit ein Rabbi der Generation nach dem Aufstand.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingreasoning

    Even if first the occupation with Torah as such is forbidden, it is then only R. Aqiva, who holds public assemblies for Torah study, who is arrested and executed.

    “Auch wenn zuerst die Beschäftigung mit der Tora schlechthin verboten wird, ist es dann doch nur R. Aqiva, der öffentlich Versammlungen zum Torastudium abhält, der verhaftet und hingerichtet wird.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    MS Wien and a Geniza text have sakkana without the definite article, which can mean any dangerous situation, in which one chooses a quiet, safe place to read Torah.

    “MS Wien und ein Genizatext haben sakkana ohne bestimmten Artikel, womit jedwede gefährliche Situation gemeint sein kann, in der man sich einen ruhigen, sicheren Platz zum Lesen der Tora wählt.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingnone given

    The term Semikha comes only in the Bavli, while Semikha is said to have been possible only in Palestine.

    “Der Begriff der ‗Ordination', Semikha (wörtlich ‗Aufstützen', als Handauflegung verstanden, auch wenn sogar der babylonische Talmud diese nicht für unabdingbar hält), kommt nur im Bavli vor, während die Semikha nur in Palästina möglich gewesen sein soll.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingnone given

    To ever more forms of Jewish religious practice important to the rabbis, they emphasize that these are to be observed even in times of persecution.

    “Zu immer mehr Formen jüdischer Religionsausübung, die den Rabbinen wichtig sind, betonen sie, dass diese auch in Zeiten der Verfolgung einzuhalten sind.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Interpreting these phrases as referring to persecution would be possible only with additional information, which is lacking.

    “Sie auf eine Verfolgung zu deuten, wäre nur bei zusätzlichen Informationen möglich, die aber fehlen.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

    Premisenone given

    Most historians until today assume as secure fact that in the years after the Bar Kokhba revolt of 132-136 the Roman government criminalized the practice of the Jewish religion through various edicts, either only in Palestine or in the entire Roman Empire.

    “Die meisten Historiker nehmen bis heute als gesicherte Tatsache an, dass in den Jahren nach dem Bar Kokhba-Aufstand der Jahre 132-136 die römische Regierung die Ausübung der jüdischen Religion durch verschiedene Erlässe unter Strafe stellte, sei es nur in Palästina, sei es im gesamten römischen Reich.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

    Premisenone given

    For most authors, Mekhilta Baḥodesh 6 with its later parallels is the central evidence for the persecutions under Emperor Hadrian.

    “Für die meisten Autoren ist dieser Text mit seinen späteren Parallelen der zentrale Beleg für die Verfolgungen unter Kaiser Hadrian.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Thirty years after Schäfer's study, his skepticism was justified everywhere and in individual cases did not go far enough.

    “Wenn man über dreißig Jahre nach Schäfers Studie diese betrachtet, stellt man fest, dass seine Skepsis überall berechtigt war und im Einzelfall eher nicht weit genug ging.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Schäfer (1981)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The Mekhilta Shabbeta 1 text is rather timeless; the mention of the Temple does not fit the Hadrianic persecution because the Temple no longer existed, while its restoration was one of the central aims of the revolt for which many Jews risked their lives.

    “Der Text wird zwar gern auf die Verfolgung unter Hadrian bezogen.Doch passt dazu nicht recht die Erwähnung des Tempels.Er bestand nicht mehr, seine Erneuerung war aber sehr wohl eines der zentralen Ziele des Aufstands, wofür viele Juden damals ihr Leben aufs Spiel setzten.Insgesamt ist der Text eher zeitlos.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Such statements are very unspecific and later very schematically related to a persecution of the time after Bar Kokhba.

    “Solche Aussagen sind sehr unspezifisch und später sehr schematisch auf eine Verfolgung der Zeit nach Bar Kokhba bezogen.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

    Premisereasoning

    Narrative Baraitot, unlike halakhic texts, are especially problematic.

    “Erzählende Baraitot, mit denen wir hier zu tun haben, sind anders als halakhische Texte besonders problematisch.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Premisenone given

    In recent decades critical voices about the traditional picture of Hadrianic persecution have multiplied.

    “In den letzten Jahrzehnten vermehren sich aber auch kritische Stimmen.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

    Premisecitation

    Schäfer's assessment of the texts as an advanced stage of literarization without special proximity to historical events is completely correct.

    “Schäfers Einschätzung der Texte als ʻfortgeschrittene[s] Stadium der Literarisierungʼ ohne besondere Nähe zu den historischen Ereignissen 11 ist völlig richtig.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Schäfer (1981)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    No Hadrianic prohibition of circumcision ever existed, neither before the outbreak of the war nor in its wake.

    “ʻno Hadrianic prohibition of circumcision ever existed … neither before the outbreak of the war nor in its wakeʼ”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Abusch (2003)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Whether one must relate Ket.9:9 to the Bar Kokhba revolt is not certain; it can also mean more generally that since times have become so dangerous, one no longer demands all previously required documents, because one reckons they can be lost in uncertain times.

    “Ob man das auf den Bar Kokhba-Aufstand beziehen muss, ist jedoch nicht so sicher; es kann auch allgemeiner bedeuten: Seit die Zeiten so gefährlich geworden sind, verlangt man nicht mehr alle früher erforderlichen Dokumente; man rechnet damit, dass sie in unsicheren Zeiten verloren gehen können.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The text considers open carrying of a knife as dangerous in certain times; that circumcision as such brings danger is not to be read from the text.

    “Wesentlich in unserem Kontext ist, dass der Text in gewissen Zeiten das offene Tragen eines Messers als gefährlich betrachtet; dass die Beschneidung als solche in Gefahr bringt, ist aus dem Text nicht herauszulesen.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    Judaism was recognized as religio licita (as Tertullian conceptually formulates the legal status); a prohibition of a basic Jewish confession would therefore have been a complete reversal of previous Roman policy, but that would first have to be more comprehensively documented.

    “Das Judentum war als religio licita anerkannt (wie Tertullian 21 den Rechtsbestand begrifflich fasst); das Verbot eines jüdischen Grundbekenntnisses wäre demnach eine völlige Umkehr bisheriger römischer Politik gewesen; das wäre jedoch erst umfassender zu belegen.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Tertullian

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Thus the story about Jehuda ben Bava is a transfer of Babylonian ideas to Palestine of the years after Bar Kokhba and completely unusable for historical reconstruction.

    “Somit ist auch die Erzählung über Jehuda ben Bava eine Übertragung babylonischer Vorstellungen in das Palästina der Jahre nach Bar Kokhba und für eine historische Rekonstruktion völlig unbrauchbar.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The literary character of the composition dominates; an exclusive fixation on the time after the Bar Kokhba revolt is not necessary.

    “Doch muss ein solches Argument immer fragwürdig bleiben (auch Lieberman muss zugeben, dass die Hinrichtungsart in den Märtyrererzählungen nicht immer den Angaben dieser Liste folgt); der literarische Charakter der Komposition dominiert.Eine ausschließliche Festlegung auf die Zeit nach dem Bar Kokhba-Aufstand ist nicht notwendig.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    That could then easily be understood as a prohibition of common Torah study, even if it was not this but the assemblies themselves that seemed dangerous to Roman authorities and therefore were probably repeatedly forbidden.

    “Das konnte dann natürlich leicht als Verbot des gemeinsamen Torastudiums verstanden werden, auch wenn nicht dieses, sondern die Versammlungen an sich den römischen Behörden gefährlich schienen und daher wohl immer wieder verboten wurden.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    Pius did not issue his rescript with the aim of reversing his predecessor's legal innovations, but instead his law demonstrates his abiding commitment to protect slaves from their owners.

    “ʻPius did not issue his rescript with the aim of reversing his predecessor's legal innovations, as some would have it, but instead his law demonstrates his abiding commitment to protect slaves from their ownersʼ”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Abusch (2003)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationown data

    Only MS Erfurt reads be-shaʿat ha-sakkana, 'in the hour/time of danger', which points to a known danger situation, possibly the time of the Bar Kokhba revolt and the years after, to which the name of the tradent fits.

    “Nur MS Erfurt liest be-shaʿat ha-sakkana, ʻin der Stunde / zur Zeit der Gefahrʼ, was auf eine bekannte Gefahrensituation verweist, also eventuell die Zeit des Bar Kokhba-Aufstands und der Jahre danach sein könnte, wozu auch der Name des Tradenten passt.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Interpretationnone given

    The section translated according to MS Wien emphasizes that one must reorient after the Temple's destruction if Judaism as such is to survive.

    “Der hier nach MS Wien übersetzte Abschnitt betont, dass man sich nach dem Untergang des Tempels neu orientieren muss, wenn das Judentum als solches überleben soll.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    The Historia Augusta is not very reliable and suggests the circumcision ban as the cause of the Bar Kokhba revolt, although it does not explicitly name circumcision but the mutilation of the genitals.

    “Die nicht sehr zuverlässige Historia Augusta legt das Verbot der Beschneidung als Ursache des Bar Kokhba-Aufstandes nahe, auch wenn sie nicht ausdrücklich die Beschneidung nennt, sondern die Verstümmelung der Genitalien: Moverunt ea tempestate et Iudaei bellum quod vetabantur mutilare genitalia (Had.14:2).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Had.14:2

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisenone given

    This conflict was not new at the time of Hadrian and had already been solved for a century by Jews sacrificing and praying for the emperor but not sacrificing to him or worshipping him as divine.

    “Dieser Konflikt war jedoch zur Zeit Hadrians nicht neu und schon seit einem Jahrhundert dadurch gelöst, dass Juden für den Kaiser opfern und für ihn beten, nicht aber ihm opfern und ihn göttlich verehren.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationcitation

    The restriction of the permission to the sons of Jews excludes the circumcision of proselytes and of slaves in Jewish possession.

    “Die Einschränkung der Erlaubnis auf die Söhne von Juden schließt die Beschneidung von Proselyten aus, ebenso die von Sklaven in jüdischem Besitz; wieweit man sich in der Praxis daran gehalten hat, ist hier nicht zu diskutieren.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Digesta 48:8:11

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Interpretationreasoning

    In Tosef.Er. 8:16, all possible dangers are meant, wild animals, robbers etc., because of which one does not want to stay in the open field until evening.

    “Auch hier sind alle möglichen Gefahren gemeint, wilde Tiere, Räuber usw., deretwegen man nicht bis zum Abend auf dem freien Feld bleiben möchte.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    A prohibition of common study of Torah could at most be implied in MS Erfurt, but even there it is not the only possible understanding of the text.

    “Ein Verbot des gemeinsamen Studiums der Tora könnte höchstens in MS Erfurt impliziert sein, ist aber auch da nicht das einzig mögliche Verständnis des Textes.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    A reference to the Bar Kokhba revolt is not given here, likewise not a prohibition to possess a Torah scroll.

    “Ein Bezug auf den Bar Kokhba-Aufstand ist hier nicht gegeben, ebensowenig ein Verbot, eine Torarolle zu besitzen.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The suspicion is obvious that MS Erfurt is a later reshaping of an earlier text.

    “Der Verdacht liegt nahe, dass hier MS Erfurt eine spätere Umformung eines früheren Textes ist.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The text Ber.61b is literary and not usable as a historical source; yet at least in the perception of its redactor it is very much the public assembly that brings the authority to intervene.

    “Der Text ist literarisch ausgestaltet und nicht als Geschichtsquelle brauchbar; doch zumindest in der Wahrnehmung seines Redaktors ist es sehr wohl die öffentliche Versammlung, die die Behörde zum Eingreifen bringt.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

    Interpretationnone given

    The 'uprooting' of Torah refers probably to all its elements that are no longer possible without the Temple.

    “Das ‗Entwurzeln' der Tora bezieht sich da wohl auf alle ihre Elemente, die ohne Tempel nicht mehr möglich sind.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Effective would only have been confiscation and destruction of Torah scrolls; but rabbinic texts never mention this.

    “Wirksam wäre da nur die Beschlagnahme und Vernichtung der Torarollen gewesen; davon ist aber in rabbinischen Texten nie die Rede.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
46 of 46

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Prohibiting Jews from circumcising their sons does not fit the Roman tradition of toleration of Jewish religious practices; that Jews may observe the 'paternal laws' was undisputed since Caesar's times.

    “Juden die Beschneidung ihrer Söhne zu verbieten passt nicht in die römische Tradition der Duldung religiöser Praktiken des Judentums; dass Juden -die väterlichen Gesetze‖ einhalten dürfen, war seit Caesars Zeiten unbestritten.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The reading of Torah was a central element of synagogue service, and Roman authorities surely knew this.

    “Dass die Lesung der Tora ein zentrales Element des Synagogengottesdienstes war, haben sicher auch römische Behörden gewusst.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Public assemblies always remained problematic for authorities.

    “Sicher ist der Zeitabstand groß, doch öffentliche Versammlungen sind für die Behörden immer problematisch geblieben.”
3 of 3

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Lieberman citation points outside the listed page ranges

    Minor

    The text cites page 326 of Lieberman (1974), but the bibliography lists pages 213-245 for that work and 348-380 for its reprint. Page 326 falls in neither range.

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. --(2003). ʻHadrian, the Bar Kokhba-Revolt, and the Epigraphic Transmissionʼ, in: P. Schäfer (ed.), The Bar Kokhba War Reconsidered. New Perspectives on the Second Jewish Revolt against Rome. Tübingen, 153-170.
  2. Lieberman, S. (1974). ʻRedifat dat Yisra'elʼ, in S. Lieberman and A. Hyman (eds.), S.W. Baron Jubilee Volume. Jerusalem. Hebr. Teil, 213-245 (Nachdruck in: idem, Studies in Palestinian Talmudic Literature, ed. D. Rosenthal. Jerusalem, 348-380; frühere Fassung unter dem Titel ʻThe Martyrs of Caesareaʼ. AIPh 7, 1939-1944, 395-446).
  3. Oppenheimer, A. (1982). ʻMered Bar Kokhvaʼ, in: Z. Baras et al. (eds.), Eretz Israel from the Destruction of the Second Temple to the Muslim Conquest. Political, Social and Cultural History (Hebrew). Jerusalem, 40-74.
  4. --(2003). ʻThe Ban of Circumcision as a Cause of the Revolt: A Reconsideration', in: P. Schäfer (ed.), The Bar Kokhba War Reconsidered. New Perspectives on the Second Jewish Revolt against Rome. Tübingen, 55-69.
  5. --(1997). Judeophobia. Attitudes toward the Jews in the Ancient World. Cambridge, Mass. -London.
  6. Stemberger, G. (2005). ʻDie Ordination der Rabbinen -Idealbild oder historische Wirklichkeit?ʼ Trumah 15, 25-52 (Nachdruck in: idem, Judaica Minora, Tübingen 2010, 2:187-215).

Related

Metadata

Authors
Stemberger, G.
Affiliations
University of Vienna (AT)
Corresponding author
Stemberger, Günter
ORCID
Stemberger, Günter
Venue
Scripta Classica Israelica
Publisher
Israel Society for the Promotion of Classical Studies
Published
2020-03-29
Volume
33
Pages
255-268
ISSN
  • 0334-4509 (ISSN-L)
  • 2731-2933
DOI
10.71043/sci.v33i.2697
OpenAlex
W4407202609
Cited by
0
References
0
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Scripta Classica Israelica (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Biblical Studies and Interpretation
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Classics › Classical Antiquity Studies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Religion, Theology, History, Judaism, Christianity
Keywords
Hadrian, Bar Kokhba revolt, Torah study, Historia Augusta, Roman Palestine, Jewish historiography, anti-Jewish legislation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-29, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-29 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review