A Dataset for the Study of Jezebel in Late Antique Christian and Jewish Literature

A Dataset for the Study of Jezebel in Late Antique Christian and Jewish Literature This data set contains three sheets called “Data Model”, “Glosses”, and “Snapshots”. All data in this set was manually gathered from digital corpora: Ma'agarim, Sefaria, Simtho, the TLG, the TLL, Corpus Corporum, and Acta Sanctorum. It includes material in Hebrew, Jewish Literary Aramaic, Greek, Latin and Syriac written between Josephus and 850. UniqueIDs: the Snapshot Column A in “Data Model”, “Glosses”, and “Snapshots” The organizing principle of this data is the “snapshot”, a unit which meets these criteria: 1) cites Jezebel by name or, in Rabbinic sources and poetry, elide a verse where Jezebel’s name is explicitly mentioned. 2) Cites her as part of a contained point or argument. 3) Is continuous with itself, i.e the reference to Jezebel’s name is not separated by other references to her name by intervening material. In poetry, this can be difficult to discern, but anyone is welcome to dispute my decisions on creating my units of analysis. It is possible for two explicit references to Jezebel to be combined in one snapshot. In fact, there are nearly 700 references to Jezebel, but only 570 snapshots. EXAMPLE of one snapshot with two explicit references to Jezebel, from Jacob of Serugh, in his On Elijah and the Troops of Fifty: Along with fifty men, to bring him to him against his will./Had someone else been this heathen’s mother/ But it could only be proper that Jezebel would be the mother./Had he not actually been her son, he still would have been just like her/ How much the more so now that she had given him birth and he was educated by her./The hard heart, which was like Jezebel in its actions, wanted to fight Elijah with fifty men.[1] NOTE: The second “Jezebel” is part of the same rhetorical point as first, and is not separated by intervening material, so despite two references to Jezebel’s name, this constitutes one snapshot. Across each of the three workbooks, the uniqueID is the same for a given snapshot. · To see the text associated with a given snapshot in both the original language and English, see the sheet “Snapshots.” · In “Snapshots”, column F gives the excerpt in the original language, column G gives the translation, column H gives the edition of the text used, and column I gives the citation information for the translation. · Snapshots from Jacob of Serugh’s homilies on Elijah have both text and translation published in Kaufman, Stephen A., ed. Jacob of Sarug’s Homilies on Elijah: Metrical Homilies of Mar Jacob of Sarug. Texts from Christian Late Antiquity 913. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2009. They were too extensive to include as excerpts. · In 253 cases, the translator is given as “Briana Grenert” and was translated for this project by me. Please cite either this data set or dissertation if you use this work. Metadata Authorship and Pseudonymity Column B in “Data Model”, “Glosses”, and “Snapshots” – Author’s name Column B gives the name of the author. In a few cases, there is further information in this column in paratheses: 1) Disambiguation, e.g. (Pope) following Pelagius of disambiguate him from the famous British Pelagius, yielding “Pelagius II (Pope)”. 2) Pseudonymity, (Dub) or (Sp), yielding “Nilus of Ancyra (Dub)” for example 3) A note on the translator when this is important, as (trans. X), e.g. Eusebius (trans. Jerome) or Origen (trans. Rufinus). In cases when an author is pseudonymous, I have usually referred to them as “Author (Sp)”. In the case, for example, of the Ps. Chrysostom material, the manuscript tradition refers to the authorship as Chrysostom – and I emphasize that through my naming convention. I have called both Ps. Martyrius and Ps. Hegesippus “pseudo” respectively because there is a whole body of scholarship referring to them by these titles, and they seem to be individual authors embedded in one social context rather than the group of pseudo-Chrysostom materials or pseudo-Jerome materials. In general, to read about authorship, see the appendix to my dissertation. Column AD in “Data Model” – Pseudonymity Column AD marks whether the work has a secure author (Yes), is anonymous (Anon), or has a disputed author (Ps). The last category includes both dubious and spurious authors, or authorship that has been debated (as in Gregory Nazianzus’s Carmina Moralia which is probably genuine). This sheet is not the place to work out complex questions of authorship – when there is good reason to have a question, I have marked that for the user but it is not the goal of this dataset to resolve those issues. Works and Sections Column C and D in “Data Model”, “Glosses”, and “Snapshots” Column C gives the name of a given work in English, with the exception of a few works whose Latin names I maintained for clarity. The names of all works in their original language, where known, can be found in Appendix 1 and 2 of the dissertation. For Greek works frequently referred to by their Latin titles, you can find the Latin titles also in Appendix 1. Sections, unless otherwise noted, refer to sections in the edition (rather than the translation) or, in the case of biblical commentaries, the Bible verse under comment. Column D gives, where available, a section or page number. Language Column E in “Data Model”, “Gloss”, and “Snapshots” Column E marks the language of the snapshot. This is the current language of the current snapshot, not necessarily the original language of the text. Dates Columns F, G, and H in “Data Model” Column F is the century the author wrote in. All dates refer to an estimate of the original date of composition of a work, with one exception: Rufinus’s translation of Origen (where both the third and fifth centuries are listed). For sources where it is impossible to estimate, I have used “0”. For sources where the date of composition straddles centuries, I have chosen the one I think is more likely but the user is advised to be cautious and ensure they agree with these determinations. Column G gives an estimated terminus post quem, and Column H gives the terminus ante quem. I defaulted to the dates in the edition or translation, where that was given. When that was not given, I took the author’s birthdate (if know), and added 15 years to give a plausible point when they could have started writing for the start date in column G and their death for column H. In some cases, I preferred a different particular date, and these are always marked in the appendix to the dissertation. I would advise anyone who uses this data, if your argument hinges on dating, to verify all relevant dates. When the start and end date are the same, this means the date is that year. Locations Column I “Data Model” Two columns include location data. The first is Column I, which gives location data in a heterogenous manner. Some snapshots are tagged based on Roman categories (where available), and some are based on modern ones. Options include: · Roman territories: Palestine, Hispania, Syria, Egypt, North Africa, Britain · Modern countries: Cyprus, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Iraq, Turkey (excluding Istanbul), Switzerland · Other locations: Sardinia, Persia (in the case of Aphrahat and the Persian Martyr Acts), Constantinople Given the length of time this dissertation covers and how much the way we divide geography comments on the geopolitical situation of a given time, there was no way to both accurately reflect how authors would have viewed where they lived and also to provide a useful category for comparison. Someone for whom geography is a more important factor might want to retag for city, contemporary region, Roman province, and modern country. The goal of the “Location” column in this project was to search for patterns based on geographic groupings, which this heterogenous system allowed me to do. Confession Column J in “Data Model” These follow modern designations of material. In most cases, there is evidence that authors would have considered themselves a part of a given group, but in other cases these designations are scholarly conjectures (e.g. in the case of the Opus Imperfectum). Note: A given snapshot can have more than one designation, though these are the minority. Tyconius is tagged both “Christ (Pre-451)” and “Donatist”, Tertullian is both “Christ (Pre-451)” and “Montanist”, and Julian (author of the Commentary on Job) is tagged both “Christ (Pre-451)” and “Arian?” as is the Opus Imperfectum. The options are: - For Jewish material: Jewish (Rab) or Jewish (Hel) - For Christian material: Christ (Pre-451), Arian?, Donatist, Montanist, ???, Chalcedonian, CoE (Church of the East), Miaphysite, Henoticon? A Note on ??? - In this case, all ??? are Christian. - ??? is reserved for figures who are complicated, especially those right after the Chalcedonian controversy such as Romanos, Theodoret, and Procopius of Gaza or works that survive in multiple confessions but about whose composition we do not know, such as the Cave of Treasures or the Life of Bishoi. - In most cases, even when the author is anonymous, I tagged their confession as whatever milieux preserved their work or whatever theology seems to be present in the text. For example, the Greek Ps. Chrysostom material survives in a Chalcedonian milieux, and so is marked as Chalcedonian (despite Chrysostom’s universal popularity). Genre Column K and L in “Data Model” I tracked two types of genres, neither of which were straightforward to determine. The first, and easier category in Column K, a genre determination using late ancient categories. The categories of both Rabbinic Literature and Syriac literature are distinctive from their Greek and Latin counterparts. Some Greek genre have a clear Latin equivalent. Sometimes, there are different words used by the Medieval scribes and commentators that do not have a clear distinction (e.g. Commentaria and Commemoratorium), in which case I grouped them together. Genre categories are hardly mutually exclusive – it is possible to write an invective, for example, in a letter and most Lives are also encomia. Indigenous genre options in Column K: Midrash, Talmud, Tosefta, Piyyut, Mimro, Pušāqā, Sogitha, ʿelthā, Turgāmā, Letter, Tašʿitā/Šarbā, Mammllā, Zamirātā, Scholion/Excerpta, Nuhārā, Questions/Šuʾālā, Madrāšā, Maktabzabnā, Ktābā, Expositio, Homily/Sermon/ὁμιλία, Commentaria/Commemoratorium/Volumina/Τόμος, Dialogue/Altercatio, Gloss, Sentences/Sententia/Γνώμη, Oratio/Λόγος, Vita/Bios, Passio, Historia, Enarratio, Ars, Collectio, Heresiology, Itinerarium, Annotatio, Invective, Onomasticon, Acts/Gesta, Tractatus, Conversio, Carmina, Chronicle, Encomium, Rewritten Scripture, Canon, Catacesis, Catena, Polemic, Apology, Neṣḥana, Explanatio, Interpretatio/ἑρμηνεία, Targum, Praefatio, Breuiarium, Etymologies, Moralia, Κεφαλαία, Ὑπόμνημα, Cento, ᾠδή, Διηγήματα Column L is modern genre, as based on categories that regularly appear in modern scholarship on ancient religion. This allows more comparison across languages and rhetorical traditions. Modern genre options in Column L: Commentary (Bib), Commentary (Leg), Commentary (other), Apology/Polemic, Catechism, Chronicle, Dialogue, History, Homily/Sermon, Hymn/Liturgical Poetry, Letter, Life/Acts, Oration/Exhortation, Poetry (Other), Handbook, Heresiology, Etymology/Gazetteer, Collection, Encomium/Invective, Rewritten Scripture, Travel Log, Treatise Intertextuality Translation Status Column M in “Data Model” In Column M in “Data Model”, I have marked where the work under question is a translation. In some cases, both the original and the translation survive and are included in the data model. In some cases, only the translation survives. Where the translator is known or significant (e.g. Rufinus or Jerome), I have included their name though in most cases the translations are anonymous. I have, for the most part, only included ancient translations though there are times when we do not know when a work was translated and I have erred on the side of generosity (i.e. if it could have been translated in my period, I included it). For further notes on the translation of works, see Appendix 1 of my dissertation. Intertexts Column N in “Data Model” This repository tracks two types of intertextuality: intertextuality between texts in the data model, and allusions to the Bible. Column N notes when a given snapshot is citing an earlier snapshot. Sometimes, when a given text is reused/reappropriated many times, it is not possible to determine where a given author read that text. Many Latin authors, for example, might have read Eusebius’s etymology for Jezebel’s name not directly in Greek Eusebius or even Jerome’s translation of Eusebius’s Onomasticon, but rather from Isidore of Seville’s Sentences. The label of something as an intertext does not make a determination of how a given author came to know the work of their predecessor (or if they know of it, directly). Biblical Loci Columns O, P, and Q in “Data Model” These columns track only loci within the Jezebel story, i.e. Revelation 2 or 1 Kings 16-22 and 2 Kings 8-9. For other biblical figures who appear in a given snapshot, see Column Y. Column O can be tagged for “Kings”, “Rev”, both or neither (marked with ???). Only three snapshots are tagged for both. By default, Jewish and Syriac material was tagged for Kings as Revelation was not a part of those canons. Column P tracks biblical loci which can anchor a given snapshot, and a given snapshot can me tagged for one locus, multiple loci, or no locus marked as a 0. Column Q tracks subincidents. Sometimes, as in the case of Ahab’s Repentance, a given subincident might be tied to more than one bigger biblical locus. However, more commonly, these are smaller parts of a bigger story, i.e. Jezebel sending a letter as part of the Naboth Cycle. Rev/Kings in Column O Biblical Incidents in Column P Sub incidents in Column Q Kings Ahab Inciting Ahab to Idolatry Ahab's Marriage Ahab's Repentance Ahab goes into battle Contest at Mount Carmel Elijah restores rain Jezebel’s Table Jezebel’s threat Murder of the Prophets (Baal’s) Elijah Anoints Elijah's deliverance Elijah's fast Ravens Murder of Prophets (God's) Murder of the Prophets (Baal’s) Jezebel’s Table Naboth's Vineyard Ahab’s Repentance False Witnesses Letter Jezebel’s Fast Inciting Ahab to Idolatry Obadiah Obadiah hides the prophets The Hidden 7000 Obadiah’s wife Raising children Widow's table Rev or Kings Support of Baal Jezebel’s Table Elijah's Flight Jez’s Threat Ravens The Hidden 7000 The fifty soldiers Death in Kings Eaten by Dogs Pushed out window Trampled by Horses J’s makeup Eaten by birds Harlots bathing in blood Famine Death of children Revelation Death/Fate in Revelations Reward for her Defeat Idolatry /Teaching in Rev Offer of Repentance in Rev 0 0 0 Associated verses Column Z in “Data Model” This column includes Bible verses cited by authors explicitly with a verbal parallel. For example: - Jacob of Serugh On Naboth 11 232-234 says: “To picture a likeness of the One who was between the two thieves. Of our Lord it is written that they numbered him among the sinners So they embedded this oppressed man, too, among sinners.” (trans. Kaufmann, 198). à this is a direct citation of Mark 15:28 quoting Isaiah 53:12. It section does not include: 1) Allusions without a verbal citation. - Example: Jacob of Serugh On Naboth 15: 359-364 says “Do not allow Jezebel to inherit it as she wishes; 360 You take the vineyard and let the daughter of the wicked not enter it. Be my heir, take over the vineyard for me, so that whoever comes Shall find you in it, holding fast to it like a hero. Command the ground upon which innocent blood is being shed That it not hide it but disclose it, as that of Abel.” (trans. Kaufmann, 212). This is an allusion to Genesis 4:10 but not a verbal citation, and therefore not included. 2) Verbal references to the 1 Kings or Revelation 2 passages about Jezebel - Example: Jacob of Serugh On Naboth 19: 433-435 says “The Lord called to His honest servant and spoke with him, Arise, go down to meet King Ahab and reveal his falseness He has gone down here to inherit a stolen vineyard.” (Kaufmann, 222) The citation is from 1 Kings 21:18, and therefore not listed. Note: All passages follow the numbering in the Hebrew Bible (not the LXX). In the appendix of the dissertation, I included reference to further allusions that the text editors as well as both I and the other translators noticed. Associated People Column Y in “Data Model” This column includes other biblical figures mentioned, be they a part of the Jezebel cycle or from elsewhere in the biblical storyworld. A full list of figures I tracked is: Abel, Abigail, Abimelech, Abishai, Abraham, Achan, Adam, Ahab, Ahaziah, Ananias, Ataliah (Gotholia), Baal, Balaam, Barak, Bathsheba, Belus, Caiaphas, Cain, Cham, Children, Daniel, David, Deborah, Delilah, Doeg the Edomite, Elijah, Elisha, Esau, Esther, Ethbaal, Eve, Gehazi, Goliath, Hananiah, Herod, Herodias, Hiel, Isaac, Jacob, Jael, Jehoiada, Jehu, Jerubaal (Gideon), Jesus, Jews, Job, Job's wife, John the Baptist, Jonah, Jonathan, Joram, Joseph, Joshua Son of Nun, Judah, Judas, Laban, Micaiah, Micaiah, Moses, Naboth, Nicolaitans, Noah, Obadiah, Obadiah's wife, Omri, Peter, Pilate, Potifar's wife, Rachel, Rebekah, Samson, Sarah, Saul, Shemiramit, Solomon, Susannah, Vashti, Zipporah, widow · This list also includes two non-biblical figures who were of interest to me: Nestorius and Cyril · A zero indicates that no figures I was tracking appeared. A few cautions: · The three figures who appear the most are Elijah, Naboth, and Ahab. They appear so frequently I am sure I missed a few. · There are multiple Jorams in Kings, this list does not differentiate between them. · I have also tagged, more sporadically, for both “Jesus/Christ” and “the Jews” (etc.). Analysis Property Column R in “Data Model” Property Characteristics Pursuer/Persecutor Characteristics: vocabulary of chasing, pursuit, or persecution (in general), hiding, or Jezebel as the object that causes flight. Murderous Characteristics: Mentions of bloodthirstiness, killing, murder (except when specifically framed as persecution) Dead/Disgraced Characteristics: Discussion of Jezebel’s death, dismemberment, corpse, or disgrace, post-mortem shame, being eaten by dogs, pushed out a window, trampled by horses. Idolater/Heretic Characteristics: Mentions of her worshiping Baal, heresy, idolatry, image-worship, witchcraft Sexual Characteristics: mentions of sex, makeup, prostitution, illicit relations, adultery Inciting Sin Characteristics: Mentions of teaching, leading, or otherwise causing sin Tricky/deceit Characteristics: mentions of lying, plotting, tricks, deception. Husband Influencer Characteristics: mentions influence over Ahab, turning Ahab’s heart, leading Ahab astray Out-of-bounds Characteristics: lawlessness, out-of-control, words that indicate “beyond”, crazy Mother Characteristics: mentions of Jezebel’s motherhood or children Queen Characteristics: mention of Jezebel as queen, ruler. Foreign Characteristics: mentions of Sidonite identity, “foreign”, or being of another people Greedy Characteristics: Mentions of money, avarice, greed, luxury, coveting 0 No specific discernable property Literary Function and Comparison Column in S and T “Data Model” Column S, called “literary function”, tracks the rhetorical structures in which Jezebel appears. All of these categories tracking what I am calling “literary function” have some sort of recognition or appear regularly in late ancient rhetoric. Rhetors discuss the use of lists, for example, but do not discuss the effect of listing out bad women specifically, though lists were a regular practice. Similarly, rhetors discuss the necessity of setting the stage, for an audience, and this is the meaning of “story context”. There is no single rhetorical handbook that covers all the types of literature I am faced with, and also real rhetoric often extends beyond what theoretical literature prescribes. To that end, these are the structures I have noted and marked for my work: Bad Girls List, Bad Peoples List, Bad Rulers List, Comparison, Counterfactual, Ethnopoiea, Etymology, Example, Prooftext, Story Context, Typology, allegory, direct address, metonym, subject. Column T takes one of these features, “Comparison”, and expands on it. Who or what is compared or opposed to Jezebel? “Theodora OPP Jezebel”, for example, indicates that Theodora is the opposite of Jezebel in the comparison, while “Author to Elijah” indicates that the Author of the text is compared to Elijah. Collocations and Glosses Columns T, U, V and X in “Data Model” & Columns D, F, G, H, I, J, K in “Glosses” Every collocation column in “Data Model” is replicated in “Gloss”, and then glossed into English in the adjacent column in “Gloss”. The purpose of the entire sheet “Gloss” is to “Gloss” the collocations in “Data Model”, to enable cross linguistic comparison or to allow scholars who do not read a given language to still use this data. 1) When Jezebel is an agent, i.e. the actant in a verb: - Columns T in “Data Model” = Column E in “Gloss” labeled “Jezebel Agent” - They are glossed into English in “Gloss” Column F labeled “GLOSS Agent” 2) When Jezebel is the patient, i.e. the action happens to her: - Column U in “Data Model” = Column G in “Gloss” labeled “Jezebel Patient” - They are glossed into English in “Gloss” Column H labeled “GLOSS Patient” 3) When a modifier in whatever part-of-speech applies to Jezebel: - Column V in “Data Model” = Column I in “Gloss” labeled “Descriptions” - They are glossed into English in “Gloss” Column J labeled “GLOSS Descriptions” 4) When there are other items associated with her in a string that does not fit the previous three categories: - Column X in “Data Model” = Column K in Gloss labeled “Other Collocations” - They are glossed into English in “Gloss” Column L labeled “GLOSS Collocations” Related to John Chrysostm? Column AB “Data Model” This column is either a Yes or No. Yes covers anything attributed to Chrysostom or about his Life and his struggles with Eudoxia. Anti-Jewish Column AC “Data Model” There are four possible designations for this category: J, N, Y, 0 - J = Jewish - N = No - Y = Yes - 0 = Not specifically evaluated for anti-Judaism, but did was not identified as anti-Jewish when I was looking for anti-Jewish material [1] Jacob of Serugh, On Elijah and the Troops of Fifty 7.200-205, trans. Kaufman, 314.