Crucifixion, the Nahum Pesher, and the Rabbinic Penalty of Strangulation*
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Crucifixion, the Nahum Pesher, and the Rabbinic Penalty of Strangulation* DAVID J. HALPERIN DEPARTMENT OF RELIGION UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA, CHAPEL HILL O ne of the more fervently debated questions in Jewish 0 historiography is that of the Jewish attitude toward crucifixion during the last two centuries of the Second Temple period. Some scholars have held that Jewish courts practised crucifixion or at least did not disapprove of it in theory;' while other scholars assert that Jews regarded crucifixion as an alien and loathsome method of execution imposed by the Roman oppressor.2 In this article, I will examine some peculiarities of rabbinic jurisprudence in the light of a philological observation drawn from the Qumran Nahum Pesher; and I hope thereby to shed new light on this old problem. I Nahum 2:11-13 compares the "bloody city" of Nineveh to a "lion's den," where "the lion tore enough for his whelps and strangled prey for his lionesses; he filled his caves with prey and his dens with torn flesh" (v. 12, RSV). 3 * This paper developed from a lecture which I gave in a course taught jointly with Professor John H. Schiutz, Department of Religion, University of North Carolina. I read an earlier version of it at a meeting of the American Oriental Society, Toronto, April, 1978. 1 am grateful to Professor Schutz and our students, to my colleague Professor John Van Seters, to my teacher Professor Mordechai Friedman, and to my friends Marc Bregman and Professor Sid Z. Leiman, for their comments and suggestions. I E. Stauffer, Jerusalem und Rom im Zeita/terJesu Christi (1957), pp. 123-27; E. Bammel, "Crucifixion as a Punishment in Palestine," in Bammel, The Trial ofJesus (1970), pp. 162-65; Y. Yadin, "Pesher Nahum (4Q pNahum) Reconsidered," IEJ 21 (1971), pp. 1-12 (but cf. Yadin's qualification in Megillat hamMiqdas [1977], 1, p. 289n 11; J. M. Ford, " 'Crucify him, crucify him' and the Temple Scroll," Expository Times 87(1976), pp. 275-78; M. Hengel, Crucifixion (1977), pp. 84-85; J. A. Fitzmyer, "Crucifixion in Ancient Palestine, Qumran Literature, and the New Testament," CBQ 40 (1978), pp. 493-513. 2 P. Winter, On the Trial of Jesus (1961), pp. 62-66; H. Cohn, The Trial and Death of Jesus (1971), pp. 208-39; J. M. Baumgarten, "Does tIh in the Temple Scroll Refer to Crucifixion?" JBL 91 (1972), pp. 472-81. 3 MT (v. 13): 'aryeh (oref bede gorotaw ume/anneq lelib'otaw wayyemalle' (eref h3oraw ume'onotaw (erefah. The text quoted in 4QpNah differs from MT on a number of points; the only one that we need note is its reading melhanneq lelibyotaw (eref for umehanneq lelib'otaw. CRUCIFIXION, THE NAHUM PESHER, AND STRANGULATION An imperfectly preserved fragment of a commentary (peser) on Nahum, found in the Fourth Cave at Qumran, expounds this verse as follows:4 33 The lion tears by the agency of his cubs, I and strangles prey for his lionesses. [.. This refers to] the Young Lion of Anger, who smites by means of his great ones and the men of his council. [. Hefilled with prey] his cave, and his den with torn flesh. This refers to the Young Lion of Anger [ ven]geance [?] on those who seek smooth things, in that he hangs men alive (yitleh 'anasim hayyim) 1 ] in Israel previously. The Pesher continues: ki letaluy #ay 'al ha'es, then a broken word which is usually reconstructed as some form of qr', and then the beginning of the next Scripture-lemma (behold, I am againstyou, etc.). The interpretation of these words, and their link to the following lemma, is a very vexed problem into which we need not enter.6 Most scholars' believe that the Pesher alludes to an uprising against the Hasmonean ruler Alexander Jannaeus (104-78 B.C.), who celebrated his ultimate victory by crucifying eight hundred rebels "while he feasted with his concubines in a conspicuous place."8 What in the text of Nahum led the Qumran commentator to think of crucifixion? The only apparent basis for this exegesis is the words mehanneq lelibyotaw teref, "strangles prey for his lionesses."9 The 4 4QpNah, i, 4-8; published by J. M. Allegro, Discoveries in the Judaean Desert of Jordan, V (1968), p. 38. 5 The commentator evidently understood bede as bldt,, and expounded accordingly. The bet in his bigedolaw we'anse 'asato must therefore be translated "by means of" (G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English [2nd ed., 1975], p. 232), not "against" (T. Gaster, The Dead Sea Scriptures in English Translation [19561, pp. 243, 263-64). Note the very close exegetical link between the Scriptural text and the commentator's assertion - a link to be sought throughout the Pesher. 6 A. Dupont-Sommer, "Le Commentaire de Nahum decouvert pres de la Mer Morte (4QpNah)," Semitica 13 (1963), pp. 67-68; idem, "Observations nouvelles sur l'expression 'Suspendu Vivant sur le Bois' ...," Comptes Rendus des Seances de l'Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres (1972), pp. 712-15. 7 E.g., J. M. Allegro, "Further Light on the History of the Qumran Sect," JBL 75 (1956), pp. 89-95; F. M. Cross, The Ancient Library of Qumran (2nd ed., 1961), pp. 122-26; the articles of Dupont-Sommer cited in the preceding note; E. Schurer, The History ofthe Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (revised ed. by G. Vermes and F. Millar, 1973), 1, pp. 224n22; J. D. Amusin, "The Reflection of Historical Events of the First Century B.C. in Qumran Commentaries (4Q161; 4Q169; 4Q166)," HUCA 48 (1977), pp. 123-52. Against this interpretation: H. H. Rowley, "4QpNahum and the Teacher of Righteousness," JBL 75 (1956), pp. 188-93; 1. Rabinowitz, "The Meaning of the Key ('Demetrius')-Passage of the Qumran Nahum-Pesher," JAOS 98 (1978), pp. 394-99. 8 Josephus, Antiquities, XIII, 380 (tr. R. Marcus, in the Loeb Classical Library Josephus, VII [1943], p. 417); also War, 1, 97. , So Schurer-Vermes-Millar, loc. cit. It is not a decisive objection that the Scripture-lemma containing these words is not that to which the comment about "hanging men alive" is attached. Dupont-Sommer, Semitica 13 (1963), pp. 69, 73, gives examples of Biblical words or phrases that are expounded in the peser but not quoted in the appropriate lemmata. Vermes, indeed, suggests that the words me/,anneq lelibyotaw feref were repeated in the lacuna at the beginning of line 6, before "he filled with prey . (The Dead Sea Scrolls in English, p. 232). 34 JOURNAL OF JEWISH STUDIES commentator evidently understood the "strangling" - a seemingly inappropriate term for a lion's depredations'°- as a prophetic reference to crucifixion. Like some of the modern scholars who have discussed the difficult problem of the physiological cause of death in crucifixion, he perceived crucifixion as a prolonged process of asphyxiation." If we assume that the "Young Lion of Anger" was indeed Jannaeus, the Pesher's exegesis becomes particularly apt. The commentator saw an allusion to Jannaeus' concubines in the "lionesses" of Nahum's prophecy. He interpreted the "lion", who "strangles prey for the delectation of his lionesses" - so he understood the preposition of lelibyotaw'2- as the king who crucifies men for the entertainment of his concubines. We learn that the author of the Nahum Pesher regarded crucifixion as a form of strangulation, and assumed that it could be designated by the root hnq. II mSanh. 7:1 enumerates four methods of judicial execution: stoning (seqilah), burning (serefah), decapitation (hereg), and strangulation (heneq). The first two methods are clearly attested in the Bible. 1" The third, although evidently modelled on the standard Roman death penalty for the upper classes, 4 is documented in rabbinic sources by midrash of Scriptural '° Hence Vulgate paraphrases et necavit leaenis suis, Peshitta wafsaq 'af letenyanohi (but perhaps Peshitta read mehalleq for mehanneq). Cf. J. M. Powis Smith and others, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on . Nahum . (1911), p. 333; A. Halder, Studies in the Book ofNahum (1947), p. 61. According to K. J. Cathcart (Nahum in the Light ofNorthwest Semitic [1973], pp. 107-08), lions indeed strangle their prey, and are thus depicted in ancient Near Eastern art. But it is very plausible that the Qumran commentator, like Jerome, was surprised by the use of lnq for a lion and inferred that it must be applied, not to the lion of the prophetic image, but to the king concealed behind the image. " See J. Blinzler, Der Prozess Jesu (4th ed., 1969), pp. 381-384. We need not insist on the medical accuracy of this perception. If, as other scholars hold (ibid.), the cause of death on the cross was some sort of circulatory failure, we might expect difficulty breathing or gasping for air to be one of the more obvious symptoms. See The New Encyclopaedia Britannica (I 5th ed., 1974), articles "Cardiovascular System Diseases and Disorders" (Macropaedia, III, pp. 886-95, especially p. 894); "Shock, Physiological" (Macropaedia, XVI, pp. 699-702). 2 As in Judg. 16:25, wigal6eq lanu. Cf. BDB, s.v. I-, no. 5h (p. 515). 3 Stoning: e.g., Lev. 20:2, 24:16, Numb. 15:35, Deut. 17:5, IKi. 21:10, 13. Burning: Lev. 20:14, 21:9. Cf. A. BiOchler, "Die Todesstrafen der Bibel und der jOdisch-nachbiblischen Zeit," MGWJS50(1906), pp. 542-62, 664-91; J. Blinzler, "The Jewish Punishment of Stoning in the New Testament Period," in Bammel, The Trial of Jesus, pp. 147-61. " T. Mommsen, Romisches Strafrecht (1899, reprinted 1955), pp. 917-18; P. Garnsey, "Legal Privilege in the Roman Empire," Past and Present 41(1968), pp.