Signed in as:

You are browsing courtesy of:

Sign in to an additional subscriber account

Login

This account has no valid subscription for this site.

Forthcoming Articles Expand or collapse the "forthcoming articles" section

Intertextuality in the New Testament
Jeroboam
Mesopotamian Mythology and Genesis 1-11
Find more forthcoming articles...

Feedback

Print
Export Citations
Cite
Email this content

Share Link

Copy this link, or click below to email it to a friend
Email this content
or copy the link directly:

https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/display/document/obo-9780195393361/obo-9780195393361-0194.xml
The link was not copied. Your current browser may not support copying via this button.

Link copied successfully

9780195393361-0194

Introduction

In the context of biblical studies, the term “Persian period” is usually taken to refer to the time when the Ancient Persians were in power throughout the Near East. These early Persians are also referred to as “Achaemenids,” after the eponymous ancestor first named in inscriptions by Darius I, and later mentioned by Herodotus. This first world empire began with Cyrus II’s conquest of his fellow Iranians, the Medes, in about 550 BCE, and came to an end in 330 BCE with the death of Darius III, following the incursion of Alexander of Macedon and his Greek forces. At its greatest extent the Persian Empire stretched from Libya and the River Danube in the west to the Indus River and Sogdiana in the east. Cyrus’s victory over Nabonidus of Babylon in 539 BCE and the resultant release of Hebrews from Babylonian exile gave him significant standing in several biblical books, which also refer to subsequent Persian kings and rule. These texts include Deutero-Isaiah, Haggai, Zechariah (1–8), I and II Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, and Daniel. Several of the biblical books set in the Achaemenid period are thought by scholars to have been redacted during the earlier period of the second Iranian empire, that of the Parthians (c. 250 BCE–224 CE). Under Ancient Persian rule, many Jews returned from exile to the province that became known as “Yehud” (Judah), the Second Temple was built in Jerusalem, and new theological concepts began to appear in biblical texts. Outside Yehud, early Achaemenid-era Aramaic materials from the Jewish garrison at Elephantine (Aramaic, “Yeb”) in Egypt provide insights into the life of the Jewish community there. The timeframe from Cyrus’s entry to Babylon, through the reconstruction of the city of Jerusalem and its temple, to the incursion of Alexander, is denoted by biblical scholars as the “post-exilic,” or “restoration” period. When considering the following texts, focus will be primarily on the historical (that is, ancient) Persian period, from c. 550–330 BCE.

Introductory Works

There are few general reference works that explore the impact of Ancient Persian rule on the Near East of biblical times and texts. The first volume of the Cambridge History of Judaism (Davies and Finkelstein 1984) contains a multichapter entry with topics that involve the political and social history of “Persian Palestine,” including its archaeology and religious life. Much of this material has been augmented by further research in the intervening years. Yamauchi 1990 provides a useful list of relevant academic works and scholarship regarding biblical and nonbiblical Jewish sources. Iranist contributions include Frye 1984, a narrative of Iranian history; Curtis 1997, which considers the connections between the Iranian heartland and Mesopotamia; Wiesehöfer 1996, a chronological and thematic overview of the political, social, and cultural aspects of the Achaemenid empire; and Briant 2002, a comprehensive work, now translated into English. Waters 2014 looks to Greek historiography, archaeology, and ancient Near East (ANE) texts, to provide a historical and political narrative of the Ancient Persians.

Briant, Pierre. From Cyrus to Alexander: A History of the Persian Empire. Translated by Peter T. Daniels. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2002.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Substantial sections of this text detail the sociopolitical interactions of the Persians and Jews, although there is little discussion of their respective theologies. Over a hundred references to biblical sources are included.
Find this resource:
Curtis, John, ed. Mesopotamia and Iran in the Persian Period: Conquest and Imperialism, 539–331 BC. London: British Museum Press, 1997.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
A collection of five papers, by Walker, Haerinck, Stronach, Boucharlat and Mitchell, considering the interaction of the Persians with the political, economic, and material culture of Mesopotamia. Boucharlat focuses on Susa (biblical Shushan), and Mitchell on the Book of Daniel (See Daniel).
Find this resource:
Davies, W. D., and Louis Finkelstein, eds. The Cambridge History of Judaism. Vol. 1, Introduction: The Persian Period. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1984.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Chapters, written by experts on Jewish, biblical, and Zoroastrian studies, cover a wide range of topics under the heading “The Persian Period.” Naveh and Greenfield consider the development of Hebrew and Aramaic, while Ackroyd explores the concept of “Jewish community” from exile to return. Boyce’s article, “Persian Religion in the Achaemenid Age,” has been a key source for biblical scholars.
Find this resource:
Frye, Richard N. The History of Ancient Iran. Munich: C. H. Beck, 1984.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
A focused presentation on aspects of the political and social history of Iran not covered in depth by previous scholars. Hence, there is only a cursory overview of the archaeology of Iran, and very little material relating to the Zoroastrian religion, but there is a concentration on the history of eastern Iran.
Find this resource:
Waters, Matt. Ancient Persia: A Concise History of the Achaemenid Empire, 550–330 BCE. Cambridge, UK, and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
A historical overview of epigraphic finds, classical texts, and archaeological sources that situates Ancient Persia within a broad cultural and political context. The author incorporates discussion of the interpretive problems inherent in any study of the Achaemenids, and considers the ramifications and reverberations of their rule in the subsequent history of the Middle East.
Find this resource:
Wiesehöfer, Josef. Ancient Persia from 550 BC to 650 AD. Translated by Azizeh Azodi. London and New York: I. B. Tauris, 1996.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Part One, “Iran from Cyrus to Alexander the Great,” is a systematic study of the history and culture of the first Persian empire, prefaced with introductory surveys of contemporary testimonies, and highlighting the significance of passages from the Hebrew Bible in providing details about the Ancient Persians.
Find this resource:
Yamauchi, Edwin M. Persia and the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1990.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Presents a broad, generally clear survey of the history of the Medes and the ancient Persians, referring to biblical, Iranian, and Greek sources and relevant ANE documents. Concludes with chapters on Zoroastrianism, the Magi, and Mithraism. Rejects the possibility of Zoroastrian influence on Jewish thought in the Hebrew Bible, using the arguments of predecessors and, more recently, of Hanson 1979 (cited under Biblical Concepts: Cosmology and Eschatology) and Barr 1985 (cited under Zoroastrian and Jewish Interaction). Despite several dubious etymologies and misleading statements, particularly relating to the interpretation of some Iranian concepts and artifacts, the book’s comprehensive scope is useful to scholars in the field.
Find this resource:

General Overviews

Until the 1980s, the study of the development of Judah (Aramaic “Yehud”) and Judaism within the cultural, archaeological, and material context of Persian rule from the 6th to the 4th century BCE had been neglected by both archaeologists and biblical scholars, who focused either on the earlier period of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, or on the later Greco-Roman and Byzantine period. Toward the end of the 20th century, several weighty books by Iranists brought the Zoroastrian religion to the front and center of academic study. Biblical scholars began to reconsider the possible stimulus of some ancient Iranian religious ideas on the development of motifs in Judaism and Christianity. The putative components of the imperial Achaemenid religion have been debated by Iranists, rather than biblical scholars, with a particular focus on the relationship between the “Mazda worship” of the Persian kings from Darius I onward, the “Persian religion” as described by Herodotus, and later “Zoroastrianism.”

Persian-Period Israel

Inscriptions of Darius I refer to a regional governor of Babylonia and “Beyond the River” (Akkadian Eber-Nari; Aramaic Abar Nahara). The latter title referred to the area west of the River Euphrates, incorporating Phoenicia, Syria, and Palestine. Under Xerxes, “Beyond the River” became a separate satrapy of the Persian Empire. The relatively recent study of Jewish history within an Achaemenid imperial setting has exposed biblical scholars to a broader understanding of the political, economic, and social issues of the time. Carter 2003 briefly analyzes the problems in studying the transitional stages of development of material culture in the region from the late Iron Age/Neo-Babylonian period through Persian rule to the Greeks. Stern 1982 also focuses on the material culture of the satrapy, whereas The Persian Period section of his later work (Stern 2001) reviews internal and external literary and epigraphic evidence, as well as the geographical-historical background. Many questions remain regarding facets of life in Abar Nahara, perhaps the most pertinent being whether the Persian administration benignly allowed each satrapy to develop its own social, economic, and cultural institutions—if indeed, it did exercise control over such norms. Dandamaev and Lukonin 2004 asserts the autonomy of each satrapy in terms of social and economic development, provided it sent funds to the Achaemenid capital, Susa. The matter of control, as well as Judean identity, is raised in the volumes Lipschits and Oeming 2006, Lipschits, et al. 2007 (cited under Development of Post-Exilic Judaism), and Lipschits, et al. 2011. The development of Judaism under Persian rule is further considered in Gerstenberger 2012 and Williamson 2004.

Carter, Charles E. “Syria-Palestine in the Persian Period.” In Near Eastern Archaeology: A Reader. Edited by Suzanne Richard, 398–411. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2003.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Surveys the architecture, pottery, burial practices, and military traditions of the satrapy, then focuses on the finds from Yehud that provide insight into socioeconomic aspects.
Find this resource:
Dandamaev, Muhammad A., and Vladimir G. Lukonin. The Cultural and Social Institutions of Ancient Iran. Translated by Philip L. Kohl. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
A reprint of an original 1994 publication. Parts 2 and 3 focus on the Persian period, exploring the connections between Zoroastrians and Jews in chapters on “Ethnic and Cultural Contacts” and Achaemenid religion.
Find this resource:
Gerstenberger, Erhard S. Israel in the Persian Period: The Fifth and Fourth Centuries B.C.E. Translated by Siegfried S. Schatzmann. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2012.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Considers the emergence of the “Old Testament” against the backdrop of the pluralistic Persian Empire. Examines the general biblical portrait of Persia and of Judah under Persian rule. Looks at external and internal literary and aesthetic sources before discussing the theological developments of the period.
Find this resource:
Lipschits, Oded, Gary N. Knoppers, and Manfred Oeming, eds. Judah and the Judeans in the Achaemenid Period: Negotiating Identity in an International Context. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2011.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
The first part of this collection of papers contains ten chapters by different authors (Schmid, Schaper, Hagedorn, Nihan, Middlemas, Rom-Shiloni, Wöhrle, Dor, Southwood, and Fulton) on the theme of “Diversity within the Biblical Evidence.” The second part has fourteen chapters relating to cultural, historical, social, and environmental factors relating to “Judean” identity.
Find this resource:
Lipschits, Oded, and Manfred Oeming, eds. Judah and the Judeans in the Persian Period. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Pertinent chapters in Part 1 are Kessler’s discussion of the golah returnees’ relationship to imperialism in “Persia’s Loyal Yahwists,” and Fried’s contention that an aristocratic elite from Persia constituted “The am hā’ares of Ezra 4.4.” Part 2, “Biblical Perspectives,” has four papers on Ezra-Nehemiah issues, including one by Eskenazi disputing the Persian stimulus for the missions of Ezra and Nehemiah.
Find this resource:
Stern, Ephraim. Material Culture of the Land of the Bible in the Persian Period, 538–332 B.C. Warminster, UK, and Jerusalem: Aris & Phillips, 1982.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
A general, but groundbreaking, survey of Achaemenid-era Israeli sites excavated by the 1970s, supplemented by architectural plans of towns, public buildings, and temples, and a typology of graves. Analyzes new materials of the time, and reexamines previous finds: pottery, metalware, stoneware, glass, cult objects, seals, weights, and coins.
Find this resource:
Stern, Ephraim. Archaeology of the Land of the Bible. Vol. 2, The Assyrian, Babylonian, and Persian Periods, 732–332 BCE. New York: Doubleday, 2001.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Presents one book for each historical period. Book Three is titled The Persian Period (539–332 BCE). The historical evidence of settlement at sites throughout Israel, along with material finds, point to the establishment of the province of Yehud as late, around the 4th century BCE.
Find this resource:
Williamson, Hugh G. M. Studies in Persian Period History and Historiography. Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, 2004.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
A collection of articles based on three decades of research into the period in which Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah emerged. Several of these articles are reviewed in relevant subsections. The introductory chapter on early post-exilic Judaism, not published before, discusses issues facing historians and theologians writing about Yehud.
Find this resource:

The Ancient Persian Province of Yehud

To date, no written Persian documents have been discovered that relate directly to the situation in “Yehud,” the Aramaic term used to denote the Achaemenid administrative province incorporating the former lands of Judah and Benjamin. The material finds from Yehud are analyzed in Carter 1999 and Hoglund 2002 in an attempt to shed light on their social and cultural context. Articles in Frevel, et al. 2014 present new analyses of this material culture in keeping with recent discoveries and scholarly thought. Berquist 1995 and Williamson 1998 present views on the development of the history and theology of Yehud within the context of the profound societal and religious changes that occurred during this time, and Grabbe 2006 considers the historical information from the Hebrew Bible and assesses Achaemenid rule in the province. Lipschits is usually viewed as a proponent of “continuity” of settlement in rural Judah during the exilic period, and Faust that of “discontinuity,” but their main difference lies in their respective evaluation of data, particularly those relating to the community around Jerusalem and to the south (see Lipschits 2005 and Faust 2012, respectively). This lack of concensus regarding the reconstruction of Persian-era Yehud, particularly in the early period, is highlighted in Finkelstein’s “rejoinder” to scholars who dispute his post-Persian period dating for the List of Returnees and the reinstitution of the Temple (Finkelstein 2009). Using a wide range of literary documentation, Fried 2004 contends that Persian rule did not allow for the autonomy of subject peoples, and that the power of their respective priesthoods was limited.

Berquist, Jon L. Judaism in Persia’s Shadow: A Social and Historical Approach. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Tackles the question as to whether the post-exilic reconstruction of the public life and institutions of Yehud, as well as the community’s literary expression, were mainly caused by internal or external influences. Concludes that the impact of Persia was crucial in cementing an economic, political, and ideological basis for the province, in which Yahwism and its priesthood could flourish.
Find this resource:
Carter, Charles E. The Emergence of Yehud in the Persian Period: A Social and Demographic Study. JSOT Supp. 294. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Seeks to understand the material culture of Yehud through ethnoarchaeology relating to ancient Persian sites, biblical textual analysis, and social science theory. A “minimalistic” reconstruction of the social and demographic setting of Yehud.
Find this resource:
Faust, Aviraham. Judah in the Neo-Babylonian Period: The Archaeology of Desolation. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2012.
DOI: 10.2307/j.ctt5vjz28 Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Discusses the issue of the “empty land,” or devastation of Judah, following the Babylonian incursion beginning in 587 BCE. Based on archaeological evidence from the late Iron Age through the Persian period, incorporating the author’s recent discussions on 6th-century Judah and a current bibliography.
Find this resource:
Finkelstein, Israel. “Persian-Period Jerusalem and Yehud: A Rejoinder.” Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 9 (2009): 2–13.
DOI: 10.5508/jhs.2009.v9.a24 Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
The author refutes the arguments of scholars (specifically Ziony Zevit, Eilat Mazar, Gabriel Barkay, and Oded Lipshits) who contested his earlier conclusions concerning the settlement area of Persian-period Jerusalem, and the dating of a city wall to the time of the late Hellenistic/Hasmonean period, rather than that of Nehemiah (see Finkelstein 2008a and Finkelstein 2008b, cited under Ezra and Nehemiah). Reprint, Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2012.
Find this resource:
Frevel, Christian, Katharina Psychny, and Izak Cornelius, eds. A “Religious Revolution” in Yehud? The Material Culture of the Persian Period as a Test Case. Göttingen, Germany: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 2014.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
This edited volume introduces the range of artifacts—stamped jars, terracotta figurines, incense burners (in an article in German by Frevel and Psychny), coinage, bullae from Samaria (also in German, by Sylvia Schroer & Florian Lippke), and pottery—as discrete case studies for re-evaluating Ephraim Stern’s theory that there was a “religious revolution” in the emergent Yehud, which shaped the evolution of Judaism. Contributions discuss how the material culture of the period illustrates both continuities and discontinuities in the admininistrative system and in cultic practice: consensus is that it does not support the idea of a “religious revolution.”
Find this resource:
Fried, Lisbeth. The Priest and the Great King: Temple-Palace Relations in the Persian Empire. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2004.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
The chapter on “Temple-Palace Relations in Judah” contextualizes Yehud in terms of the written documents from the western region of the Achaemenid Empire, and refutes the common notion that Persian administration of the satrapies was benign and laissez-faire.
Find this resource:
Grabbe, Lester L. A History of the Jews and Judaism in the Second Temple Period. Vol. 1, Yehud: A History of the Persian Province of Judah. London and New York: T & T Clark, 2006.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
A comprehensive survey of archaeological and textual sources. Chapter 4 on biblical writings is of particular relevance. Part III compares the society and institutions of the Persian Empire and Yehud, including temple cult law, scripture, and belief. Part IV traces the history of Persians and Jews up to the arrival of Alexander. See also Zoroastrian and Jewish Interaction.
Find this resource:
Hoglund, Kenneth. “The Material Culture of the Persian Period and the Sociology of the Second Temple Period.” In Second Temple Studies III: Studies in Political, Class and Material Culture. Edited by Philip R. Davies and John M. Halligan, 14–18. JSOT Supp. 340. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Discusses the definition of “post-exilic society,” the cultural and cultic distinctiveness of Yehud, the evidence of Aramaic jar-stamps as indicative of political function, and criteria for discerning the boundaries of the province.
Find this resource:
Lipschits, Oded. The Fall and Rise of Jerusalem: The History of Judah under Babylonian Rule. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2005.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
An archaeological review of the material culture and demographics of Yehud in the 6th century BCE. Contends that, although major sites were devastated by the Babylonians, there is evidence of a certain continuity of settlement in both rural Judean society and even among some of the urban ruins.
Find this resource:
Williamson, Hugh G. M. “Judah and the Jews.” In Studies in Persian History: Essays in Memory of David M. Lewis. Edited by Maria Brosius and Amélie Kuhrt, 145–163. Leiden, The Netherlands: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 1998.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Challenges theories regarding the reconstruction of the post-exilic community in Judea. Contends that autonomous Yehud was always separate from Samaria, and was administered in a similar manner to other provinces, with circumscribed terms subjecting all laity to taxes and exempting religious officials. Finds no clear evidence for a separate city-temple community.
Find this resource:

“Persian Religion”

Boyce 1982 employs a wealth of sources and scholarship to show that a key to the success of the Persian Empire was its tolerance of the religions of its subjects. Boyce proposes a Zoroastrian background to the development of many aspects of emergent Judaism. Rose 2011 reviews a range of different sources, including biblical texts, in tracing the development of “Zoroastrianism” in the Achaemenid period, and Henkelman and Redard 2017 considers Achaemenid (Persian) religion within a broader context of both Iranian religious expression (the “Avestan tradition”) and that of surrounding cultures. De Jong 1997 discusses interpretations of the “Persian religion” as suggested by classical texts, beginning with Herodotus.

Boyce, Mary. History of Zoroastrianism II: Under the Achaemenians. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 1982.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Details the development of Zoroastrianism through the rise and fall of the Ancient Persians, postulating a transition to the religion by the Persians after Cyrus II. Includes reference to the Iranian elements of the biblical texts of Deutero-Isaiah and Ezra, and to the crystallization of concepts and practices among the “Yahweh-alonists” in Babylonia.
Find this resource:
de Jong, Albert. Traditions of the Magi: Zoroastrianism in Greek and Latin Literature. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 1997.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Contains translations and analyses of accounts of the “Persian religion”—in particular, the activities of the priests (the Magi)—by outside observers, including Herodotus and Strabo, as well as a handful of references to Philo and Josephus.
Find this resource:
Henkelman, Wouter F. M., and Céline Redard, eds. Persian Religion in the Achaemenid Period: La religion perse à l’époque achéménide. Classica Orientalia 16. Wiesbaden, Germany: Harrassowitz, 2017.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
This book developed out of a 2013 colloquium, which focused on new archaeological and textual sources relating to the religious beliefs and liturgical/ ritual practices of the Ancient Persians, in the context of both the “Avestan tradition” and local cultures, particularly of Elam. Various papers make clear that studies of close cultural ties with eastern Iranians in Bactria and Sogdiana pose qualitatively different questions concerning “Achaemenid heartland religion” than those of Persian associations with cultures in the west of the Empire (Babylon and Assyria). Four of the papers are in French, one in German, seven in English.
Find this resource:
Rose, Jenny. Zoroastrianism: An Introduction. London: I. B. Tauris, 2011.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
A chronological survey of the development of “Zoroastrianism” in its various forms, using relevant sources, including biblical texts. Discusses some of the early themes found in the Avesta (the earliest Zoroastrian sacred text) that resonate with some of the motifs of post-exilic Judaism and, later, Christianity.
Find this resource:

Aramaic Sources

Greenfield 1985 introduces the development of Imperial Aramaic as the lingua franca of the Persian Empire. Cowley 1923 and Porten 1968 discuss the late-6th–early-5th-century BCE Aramaic material from the Jewish military outpost at the mainland fort of Syene and the island garrison of Elephantine. These texts are the earliest extant extra-biblical sources of Jewish community life, documenting political, social, religious, and economic aspects, and are of great significance in understanding the development of Achaemenid-period Judaism. Porten 2011 analyzes the “Passover Letter,” containing instructions from Darius I to the Persian satrap of Egypt about Jewish observance of the Festivals of Passover and Unleavened Bread; he also examines letters relating to the destruction of the temple to Yahweh in 410 BCE by the Egyptian priests of Khnum, with the compliance of Widranga, the Persian garrison commander. This affair is also the topic of Briant 1996. Greenfield and Porten 1982 focuses on the Aramaic version of Darius I’s earliest inscription, which indicates that its religious sentiments must have been known to some Elephantine Jews.

Briant, Pierre. “Une curieuse affaire a Elephantine en 410 av. n.e.: Widranga, le sanctuaire de Khnum et le temple de Yahweh.” Mediterranées 6.7 (1996): 115–135.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Focuses on the two Aramaic documents petitioning reparation for the damage to the temple of Yahweh at Elephantine. Concludes that this was more of a conflict over real estate than religion.
Find this resource:
Cowley, Arthur E. Aramaic Papri of the Fifth Century BCE. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1923.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
The authoritative work on the Aramaic papyri from Elephantine prior to publication of the Brooklyn Library texts.
Find this resource:
Greenfield, Jonas C. “Aramaic in the Achaemenian Empire.” In The Cambridge History of Iran. Vol. 2, The Median and Archaemenian Periods. Edited by Ilya Gershevitch, 698–713. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1985.
DOI: 10.1017/CHOL9780521200912 Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Discusses the spread of Aramaic throughout the Near East in the Assyrian then Neo-Babylonian period, to become a lingua franca across the Persian Empire as far east as Kandahar and Taxila.
Find this resource:
Greenfield, Jonas C., and Bezalel Porten, eds. and trans. The Bisutun Inscription of Darius the Great: Aramaic Version. London: Lund Humphries, 1982.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
A new edition of this late-5th-century BCE Aramaic text from Elephantine of Darius I’s Old Persian inscription at Bisutun notes that copies of that inscription were dispatched across the empire.
Find this resource:
Porten, Bezalel. Archives from Elephantine: The Life of an Ancient Jewish Military Colony. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Uses the Elephantine texts to illuminate the Jewish community there, but also draws on biblical sources. Discusses the contemporary Egyptian setting and Persian imperial organization, as well as the religion of this diaspora community.
Find this resource:
Porten, Bezalel, ed. The Elephantine Papyri in English: Three Millennia of Cross-cultural Continuity and Change. 2d rev. ed. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2011.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
This second revised edition of an original 1996 publication includes a comprehensive translation of 175 documents, some of which are analyzed in Porten 1968, but many published and annotated in English for the first time. Three demotic texts from the Persian period include two property contracts. The 52 Aramaic texts include several relating to marriage and inheritance, “The Passover Letter,” and the letters relating to the Jewish temple.
Find this resource:

Development of Post-Exilic Judaism

The 6th–4th centuries BCE saw the emergence of Judaism as it is conceived today. General overviews of the evolution of Judaism during this period, including some of the presentations in Albertz and Becking 2003; Lipschits, et al. 2007; and the first part of Edelman, et al. 2016, help to contextualize its development within the Persian imperial administration of the satrapy of Abar Nahara. Discussions in Blenkinsopp 2009 consider the extent to which Jews in the Babylonian diaspora provided the stimulus for ideological reform, or whether the Persians exercised any influence on the development of Judaism and its literature. Several reviewers, in critiquing this work, doubt the historicity of Ezra-Nehemiah (EN), and therefore its use in determining what constituted post-exilic Judaism. Since the text of EN does not reference much material from the Pentateuch or 2 Kings (nor do the Elephantine papyri), the question is raised as to how much of the Hebrew Bible existed at that time. Bolin 1996 firmly dates the compilation of the majority of the Hebrew Bible to the Achaemenid period. The two-part text Grabbe 1992 addresses the difficulties faced by biblical scholars in reaching consensus on matters of chronology and historical authenticity in any deliberations on Judah at that time. Knowles 2006 examines textual and archaeological sources to discover how the post-exilic community redefined its sacred geography in terms of physical, rather than conceptual, expression.

Albertz, Rainer, and Bob Becking, eds. Yahwism after the Exile: Perspectives on Israelite Religion in the Persian Period; Papers Read at the First Meeting of the European Association for Biblical Studies, Utrecht, 6–9 August 2000. Assen, The Netherlands: Van Gorcum, 2003.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
This collection of papers focuses on the role of religion in the reinterpretation of Yahwism and the reformulation of identity of the Jewish community in Yehud.
Find this resource:
Blenkinsopp, Joseph. Judaism, The First Phase: The Place of Ezra and Nehemiah in the Origins of Judaism. Grand Rapids, MI, and Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans, 2009.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Discusses reactions to Persian rule in Judah as reflected in the literary styles of EN, particularly the memoir genre, and strictures about ethnic origins. Suggests that the agenda of EN was to implement a Judeo-Babylonian interpretation of religious law, promoting ritual and segregated ethnicity, but that this ideology did not replace indigenous, Samarian, or Elephantine expressions.
Find this resource:
Bolin, Thomas M. “When the End is the Beginning: The Persian Period and the Origins of the Biblical Tradition.” Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament 10.1 (1996): 3–15.
DOI: 10.1080/09018329608585078 Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Suggests that Cyrus sent new settlers, rather than repatriated exiles, to Judah with a mission to reconstruct the temple and its cult and to retrieve traditions about a common past in order to forge a collective self-identity for the future.
Find this resource:
Edelman, Diana, Anne Fitzpatrick-McKinley, and Philippe Guillaume, eds. Religion in the Achaemenid Persian Empire. Tübingen, Germany: Mohr-Siebeck, 2016.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
The secondary title of this book—“Emerging Judaisms and Trends”—indicates its primary focus; the first section introduces several themes relating to “emerging Judaism(s),” including the theological divergence evidenced within and across biblical texts. Contributions in the second part explore interactions—artistic, religious, and political—between the Achaemenids and those who were ideologically Other, but only one of these focuses on Achaemenid Persian religion per se.
Find this resource:
Grabbe, Lester L. Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian. Vol. 1, The Persian and Greek Periods. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Begins with a useful bibliographic guide for its time. Presents the Nehemiah Memoir as a significant contemporary record, along with parts of other biblical books, Greek historiographies, and Persian inscriptions.
Find this resource:
Knowles, Melody D. Centrality Practiced: Jerusalem in the Religious Practice of Yehud and the Diaspora in the Persian Period. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2006.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
The emphasis on practice, such as pilgrimage to Jerusalem, denotes a developing but inconsistent cultic, economic, and geographic reorientation toward the city for returnees and their co-religionists in diaspora.
Find this resource:
Lipschits, Oded, Gary N. Knoppers, and Rainer Albertz, eds. Judah and the Judeans in the Fourth Century B.C.E. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2007.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
A collection of articles arising from an international conference at the University of Munster in 2005. Focuses on recently discovered documentation relating to the region and neighboring provinces during the previously neglected period of history marking the transition from Persian to Greek rule. Of particular relevance are Wiesehöfer’s chapter, “The Achaemenid Empire in the Fourth Century BCE: A Period of Decline,” and Schmid’s article, “The Late Persian Formation of the Torah.” Achenbach proposes the redaction of the Pentateuch during this period alongside the evolving idea of prophecy.
Find this resource:

Zoroastrian and Jewish Interaction

The “minimalist” (or “Copenhagen”) school of historiography contrasts with the “maximalist” approach in terms of assessing the extent of Persian and Seleucid impact on the formation of the Hebrew Bible literature. Barr 1985 and, more recently, Isbell 2006 (cited under Biblical Books) argue against the minimalist view that challenges the historical reliability of the Bible, noting that “Persian” or “Zoroastrian” impact cannot be significant, since the earliest texts of the Avesta were not written down before the 6th century CE. Late-20th-century works such as Frye 1967 considered what the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls added to the discussion of the possible biblical “borrowing” of Zoroastrian concepts. Most scholars now accept a degree of mutual interconnection, but take a more nuanced approach, for instance the article by Guillaume in Edelman, et al. 2016 (cited under Development of Post-Exilic Judaism), which considers the connection between the seven-day week of the Hebrew Bible and a seven-day unit identified in an early-5th-century BCE Avestan calendar; also contributions in Berquist and Hunt 2012. Iranists such as Hinnells 2000 and Hultgård 2008, taking up Boyce’s compelling argument for a continuous Zoroastrian oral tradition, and for the religious and political stimulus of Persian rule on biblical texts (see Boyce 1987, as well as Boyce 1982, cited under Persian Religion), contend that even though direct borrowing cannot be verified, evidence for Iranian stimulus can be traced through moments of contact. Josephus’s Antiquities are of particular value to a study of the period in their merging of biblical, post-biblical, and political history. According to Shaked 1984, this period witnessed a profound Iranian impact on Jewish eschatology and apocalyptic material. Grabbe 2006, an appendix to the author’s study of Persian-period Judah, addresses the methodological issues inherent in such a comparative study, and some of the alleged areas of Persian influence. The impact of both Zoroastrian concepts and Persian rule on the Book of Judith are highlighted in Lipinski 2009. See also Silverman 2012, under Biblical Concepts: Cosmology and Eschatology.

Barr, James. “The Question of Religious Influence: The Case of Zoroastrianism, Judaism and Christianity.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 53 (1985): 201–235.
DOI: 10.1093/jaarel/LIII.2.201 Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Disputes any Zoroastrian influence on biblical literature or Judaism during the Persian period, maintaining a skeptical attitude concerning proposed mechanisms and motivations for the reception of Iranian religious ideas by the Jews. Claims that the adoption of Iranian loanwords in Hebrew and Jewish Aramaic texts indicates the possible Greek mediation of Iranian concepts.
Find this resource:
Berquist, Jon L., and Alice Hunt, eds. Focusing Biblical Studies: The Crucial Nature of the Persian and Hellenistic Periods. Essays in Honor of Douglas A. Knight. London and New York: T & T Clark, 2012.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Contributions in the first section of this edited book aim, as its title suggests, to focus biblical studies on the broader historical and cultural contexts for both biblical books and biblical history. A more recent, but substantially unchanged, version of Finkelstein 2009 (cited under Ancient Persian Province of Yehud) is incorporated here, titled “Persian Period Jerusalem and Yehud Rejoinders” (pp. 49–62). Papers in the second part consider specific biblical texts within this wider purview, particularly that of the Achaemenid empire and subsequent Macedonian incursion. See, for instance, Marbury 2012, cited under Ezra and Nehemiah.
Find this resource:
Boyce, Mary. Zoroastrianism: A Shadowy but Powerful Presence in the Judaeo-Christian World. London: Dr. Williams Trust, 1987.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Assumes a late, Achaemenid-era dating of biblical literature. Postulates that Greek was the medium through which some, but not all, Zoroastrian concepts became familiar to Jews.
Find this resource:
Frye, Richard. “Iran und Israel.” In Festschrift für Wilhelm Eilers. Edited by Gernot Wiessner, 74–84. Wiesbaden, Germany: Harrassowitz, 1967.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Contends that Iranian ideas, concepts, and loanwords can be found in biblical and post-biblical Judaism, including the term raz (borrowed from Old Avestan), which appears in the Dead Sea Scrolls as “mystery.”
Find this resource:
Grabbe, Lester L. “The Question of Persian Influence on Jewish Religion and Thought.” In A History of the Jews and Judaism in the Second Temple Period. Vol. 1, Yehud: A History of the Persian Province of Judah. By Lester L. Grabbe, 361–364. London and New York: T&T Clark, 2006.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
A useful bibliography of reference sources, mostly by Iranists, that are annotated in discussions about the methodology of determining “influence” and possible areas of influence, including cosmology and eschatology.
Find this resource:
Hinnells, John R. “Zoroastrian Influence on Judaism and Christianity: Some Further Reflections.” In Zoroastrian and Parsi Studies: Selected Works of John R. Hinnells. By John R. Hinnells, 73–92. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2000.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Comments critically on Yamauchi’s approach (see Yamauchi 1990, cited under Introductory Works), emphasizing the antiquity and continuity of Zoroastrian concepts, particularly its eschatology. Discusses historical connections between Iran and Israel as a stimulus for some conceptual developments in Judaism.
Find this resource:
Hultgård, Anders. “Zoroastrian Influences on Judaism, Christianity and Islam.” In Zarathustra and Zoroastrianism. Edited by Michael Stausberg, 101–112. London: Equinox, 2008.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Outlines the political and cultural background for Persian-Jewish encounters in the Achaemenid period, and the Greco-Roman exposure to Iranian religion. Considers the Old Iranian loanword pairidaeza, which is Graecized as paradeisos, or “paradise,” and which comes to relate to ideas of universal eschatology, with its attendant themes of a savior figure, judgment, and resurrection.
Find this resource:
Josephus, Flavius. Josephus: Jewish Antiquities X1–IX. Loeb Classical Library 6. Translated by Ralph Marcus. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1966.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Antiquities of the Jews, Book XI, Chapters 1–8 concerns the period of Jewish history from the beginning of the reign of Cyrus until the death of Alexander. Josephus presents Cyrus as being “stirred up” by the God of Israel to send His people to their own land to build a temple.
Find this resource:
Lipinski, Edward. “The Province Yehud and Jews in the Achaemenid Empire.” Studia Judaica 12 (2009): 1–2, 23–24, 369–379.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
In this review of Michael Heltzer’s collection of thirty prepublished articles—The Province Judah and Jews in Persian Times (Some Connected Questions of the Persian Empire). Tel Aviv: Archaeological Center, 2008—Lipinski addresses in particular Heltzer’s four papers relating to the Book of Judith, highlighting some of the Zoroastrian influences in the text (p. 372), and discussing whether the context for the book was an anti-Persian uprising under Artaxerxes III or Artaxerxes II Memnon (373–374). The identification of Holophernes with an Old Persian Auri-[Aura-] Farnā (the “Lord’s Radiance [Glory]”) is of significance in this discussion of both historicity and thematic stimulus.
Find this resource:
Shaked, Shaul. “Iranian Influences on Judaism: First Century BCE to Second Century CE.” In The Cambridge History of Judaism. Vol. 1, Introduction: The Persian Period. Edited by William D. Davies and Louis Finkelstein, 308–325. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1984.
DOI: 10.1017/CHOL9780521218801 Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Focuses on developments within Judaism and some later biblical books in the late Second Temple period. Proposes that many aspects of Jewish religious expression were stimulated by contact with Persian ideas and terminology, lasting through the time of Greek and Roman rule.
Find this resource:

Biblical books

An increasing number of biblical books are now being designated as originating or redacted in Achaemenid times, including the Pentateuchal source “P,” but scholarship remains divided as to the impact of the Persian political situation on the development of biblical literature. The early religionsgeschichtlich approach of Whitney 1905 and Bousset 1906 finds echo in Winston 1966 and Smith 1989. Garbini 1994 allows for a broad Near Eastern and Iranian impact. Isbell 2006 is, however, reluctant to allow for the primacy of any Zoroastrian texts, and therefore of Iranian religious thought. Neusner 1993, an analysis of the Persian and Jewish “writing down” of received religious traditions, maintains the separateness and uniqueness of both.

Bousset, Wilhelm. Die Religion des Judentums im späthellenistischen Zeitalter. 3d ed. Tübingen, Germany: H. Gressman, 1906.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
The novelty of this text lay in its focus on the historical relationship between Judaism and Christianity, rather than the religious. The final chapter considers the interaction between emergent Judaism and the religions of the ancient Near East and Greece, concluding that the Persian religion preceded the biblical in its concepts of eschatology, apocalypticism, cosmology, and angelology.
Find this resource:
Garbini, Giovanni. “Hebrew Literature in the Persian Period.” In Second Temple Studies II: Temple and Community in the Persian Period. JSOT Supp. 175. Edited by Tamara C. Eskenazi and Kent H. Richards, 180–188. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Explores the notion that the monarchy-centered Hebrew literature of earlier history was followed by the rise of a post-exilic priesthood and the emergence of Hebrew literature, including parts of the Torah, which reflected a neo-Babylonian cultural impact, including Iranian religious thought.
Find this resource:
Isbell, Charles David. “Zoroastrianism and Biblical Religion.” Jewish Bible Quarterly 34.3 (2006): 143–154.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Discusses the possible literary influence of Iranian sources on the Bible, particularly in the form of loanwords or personal names in books composed during and after the Achaemenid era. Maintains that the Torah antedates this influence, and that claims of influence of Zoroastrianism on biblical theology are “overstated” due to the lateness of written Zoroastrian sources.
Find this resource:
Neusner, Jacob. Judaism and Zoroastrianism at the Dusk of Late Antiquity: How Two Ancient Faiths Wrote Down Their Great Traditions. St. Petersburg: University of South Florida, 1993.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Compares and contrasts the processes of compilation and transmission of documents of each religious tradition, focusing on the Bavli and two Middle Persian rivayats, texts that belong to and continue a much more ancient received tradition—the written Torah and Avesta, respectively.
Find this resource:
Smith, Morton. “Bible II: Persian Elements in the Bible.” In Encyclopaedia Iranica. Vol. 4. Edited by Ehsan Yarshater, 200–203. New York: Bibliotheca Persica, 1989.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Contends that the emphasis on Yahweh as creator, prominent in Deutero-Isaiah, is a late feature of Judaism that may have been introduced under the impact of the Persian religion. This view leads to a post-exilic dating for the creation story in the Book of Genesis.
Find this resource:
Whitney, Loren Harper. Life and Teaching of Zoroaster the Great Persian, Including a Comparison of the Persian and Hebrew Religions. Chicago: M. A. Donahue, 1905.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Of historical interest as an early work, promoting the primacy of Zoroastrian texts and teachings over those of the Bible. Refutes the view that Jewish thought informed the development of Zoroastrianism, and uses western scholarship and textual translations to support the premise that Iranian religious ideas were conveyed to Jews during the post-exilic period, and thence into Christianity.
Find this resource:
Winston, David. “The Iranian Component in the Bible, Apocrypha and Qumran: a Review of the Evidence.” History of Religions 5.2 (1966): 183–216.
DOI: 10.1086/462522 Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
In demonstrating the probability that Zoroastrian elements had infiltrated the biblical books of Deutero-Isaiah and Daniel, as well as apocryphal texts, such as I and II Enoch and the Book of Tobit, Winston contends that these concepts should also be expected in the Qumran documents. This heavily footnoted article concludes with an appendix concerning the identification of Zoroaster with biblical figures, including Baruch, Balaam, and Ezekiel.
Find this resource:

Pentateuch

The debate concerning the Ancient Persian impact on the composition and form of the Pentateuch has generated much scholarly discussion in German and French, including Wiesehöfer 1995 and its commentary on Peter Frei’s theory concerning the influence of the Achaemenid Empire on the promulgation of Jewish legal texts, specifically the Pentateuch. The papers in Watts 2001 constitute the first in-depth English discussion of the role of Persian imperial authorization of the Torah. Knoppers 2001 suggests that the distinction between imperial and religious law in the Achaemenid and Seleucid period indicates that local leaders held more autonomy than Frei’s thesis asserts. In the same volume, Blenkinsopp 2001 raises some of the problems inherent in any attempt to determine Persian impact, while Briant 2000 offers some observations on the methods and directions of contemporary literature on the subject. Both Fried 2004 (see Ancient Persian Province of Yehud) and Lee 2011 appraise Frei’s contention that Ancient Persian imperial decree was a prime factor in the compilation of the Torah, using a range of legislative texts from Egypt and Asia Minor relating to local cult or polity. The first part of the collection Knoppers and Levinson 2007 covers the emergence of the Pentateuch during the Persian period, and includes a close reading of Frei by Schmid. Wöhrle 2015 dates the priestly passages of the Pentateuch to the Persian period, attributing the influence of Persian imperial ideology to the priestly concept of covenant.

Blenkinsopp, Joseph. “Was the Pentateuch the Civic and Religious Constitution of the Jewish Ethnos in the Persian Period?” In Persia and Torah: The Theory of Imperial Authorization of the Pentateuch. Edited by James W. Watts, 41–62. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2001.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Argues that although Achaemenid rule may have provided the impetus for local autonomy in Yehud, and for a correlating consolidation of Jewish legal texts, it cannot be known to what extent Persian authorization underlies the formative content of the Torah. There is no evidence that these laws were presented for imperial approval.
Find this resource:
Briant, Pierre. “Histoire imperial et histoire regionale: A propos de l’histoire de Juda dans l’empire acheménide.” In Congress Volume: Oslo, 1998. Edited by André Lemaire and Magne Saebø, 235–245. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2000.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Suggests that Judah was not of great strategic importance to the Ancient Persians, and that there was not any established “Achaemenid religious policy.”
Find this resource:
Knoppers, Gary N. “An Achaemenid Imperial Authorization of Torah in Yehud?” In Persia and Torah: The Theory of Imperial Authorization of the Pentateuch. Edited by James W. Watts, 115–134. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2001.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Contends that, although some central intervention is probable, it is plausible that regional officials, such as Nehemiah, would have used their authoritative positions to support internal community interpretations of the law.
Find this resource:
Knoppers, Gary N., and Bernard M. Levinson, eds. The Pentateuch as Torah: New Models for Understanding Its Promulgation and Acceptance. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2007.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
The initial, most pertinent, section includes Schmid’s clarifications of Frei’s theory of Persian imperial authorization; Hagedorn’s article maintaining that the local elite produced the Torah in order to retain control and so mollify their Persian rulers; and Kratz’s “Temple and Torah: Reflections on the Legal Status of the Pentateuch between Elephantine and Qumran,” which argues that the late Persian context, alongside that of Hellenism and the Hasmoneans, was decisive in the development of the Pentateuch. In the same section, Carr considers the scribal practices and social context of other ancient Near Eastern peoples.
Find this resource:
Lee, Kyong-Jin. The Authority and Authorization of Torah in the Persian Period. Leuven, Belgium: Peeters, 2011.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Begins with an assessment of Frei’s theories, and a range of scholars’ reactions to his work. Suggests that official Achaemenid support for the restoration was pragmatically based on economic and diplomatic strategy. Concludes that Persian central government supervised local legislation, but did not regularly intervene to enforce individual laws, except when petitioned by a local subunit. Such was probably the stimulus for the endorsement of Ezra’s mission.
Find this resource:
Watts, James W. Persia and Torah: The Theory of Imperial Authorization of the Pentateuch. Atlanta: School of Biblical Literature, 2001.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
This volume begins with Watt’s English-language translation of an essay by Frei, on “Persian Imperial Authorization” (1995) summarizing Frei’s theory, which highlights Ezra’s mission as an example of the local enactment of imperially sanctioned legislation. It then presents six papers from a 2000 SBL panel, which evaluate Frei’s hypothesis. Some of these papers are detailed in other subsections of this bibliography, including Blenkinsopp 2001 and Knoppers 2001, and Fried 2001 (cited under Ezra). Redford discusses the “codification” of Egyptian law under Darius I.
Find this resource:
Wiesehöfer, Josef. “‘Reichsgesetz’ oder ‘Einzelfallgerechtigkeit’? Bemerkungen zu P. Frei’s These von der Achämenidischen ‘Rechtsautorisation.” Zeitschrift für Altorientalische und Biblische Rechtsgeschichte 1 (1995): 36–46.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
This short article by a classical scholar rejects Frei’s hypothesis of Persian imperial authorization of local laws, and is often cited by Iranists and biblical scholars who are critical of Frei.
Find this resource:
Wöhrle, Jakob. “Abraham amidst the Nations: The Priestly Concept of Covenant and the Persian Imperial Ideology.” In Covenant in the Persian Period: From Genesis to Chronicles. Edited by Richard J. Bautch and Gary N. Knoppers, 23–39. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2015.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
This essay considers the twofold covenant—one with Noah and all humanity, the other with Abraham and his descendants—as displaying conceptual similarities with Persian ideology of empire. This ideology, exemplified in Darius I’s tomb inscription at Naqsh-i Rustam, emphasizes the notion of “happiness for humanity,” with each subject nation in its own “place.” Wöhrle designates the priestly concept of covenant as an “Israel-oriented adaptation” of that ideology (p. 34).
Find this resource:

Chronicles

As Ackroyd 1991 illustrates, I and II Chronicles are often studied alongside Ezra and Nehemiah as contemporary historiographies. Japhet 1993, through methodical critical analysis, sustains the argument for the separate authorship of Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah. Japhet’s discernment of extra-biblical sources and a 4th-century BCE date for the text is further advanced in two important recent commentaries, Knoppers 2004 on I Chronicles and Klein 2012 on II Chronicles. Van Rooy 1994 and Williamson 2004 consider the background context of Ancient Persian rule in Yehud for the eschatological focus of the text, whereas Jonker 2016 focuses on the sociohistorical stimuli for its “identity negotiation.”

Ackroyd, Peter R. The Chronicler in His Age. JSOT Supp. 101. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
A collection of essays, presented in order of their publication or composition, relating to both general and specific developments during the period documented in 1 and 2 Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah.
Find this resource:
Japhet, Sara. I and II Chronicles: A Commentary. Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox, 1993.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
A comprehensive, in-depth analysis of the entire text of Chronicles, with the translation of each chapter followed by notes on both the Masoretic and RSV texts; then an exploration of structure, sources, and form; concluding with commentary. Discerns a range of extra-biblical sources for the text, and dates it to the late Persian/early Seleucid period, around the end of the 4th century BCE.
Find this resource:
Jonker, Louis C. Defining All-Israel in Chronicles: Multi-Level Identity Negotiation in Late Persian-Period Yehud. Tübingen, Germany: Mohr-Siebeck, 2016.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
This South African author’s own experience of transition from a system of apartheid to majority rule impacted the theory developed here, that various levels of sociohistorical context in late-Persian period Yehud were influential in formulating the “reforming history” of Chronicles, with its focus on constructing a new identity. The author demonstrates that the dynamic of “identity negotiation” as applied to an analysis of Chronicles is also valid for other Persian-period literature, including Old Persian inscriptions, archaeological and glyptic evidence of Persian subject nations, and biblical texts.
Find this resource:
Klein, Ralph. 2 Chronicles: A Commentary. Edited by Paul D. Hanson. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2012.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
The companion volume to Klein’s I Chronicles (2006), which introduced many of the issues relating to the Chronicler’s text. The second volume connects aspects of that text to a theological agenda belonging to the late Persian or early Seleucid period—that is, to the 4th century BCE.
Find this resource:
Knoppers, Gary N. I Chronicles 1–9: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. New York: Doubleday, 2004.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
The first of two volumes that look to the Dead Sea Scrolls as useful in reconstructing the earliest Chronicler’s text, but that does not categorize it within the “rewritten Bible” genre. Discusses the relationship between Chronicles and earlier biblical books, and, using post-exilic archaeological and literary evidence, dates its development and some of its emphases to the late Persian/early Seleucid period. The second volume covers Chronicles 10–29.
Find this resource:
van Rooy, Harry V. “Prophet and Society in the Persian Period.” In Second Temple Studies II: Temple and Community in the Persian Period. JSOT Supp. 175. Edited by Tamara C. Eskenazi and Kent H. Richards, 163–179. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Examines the place of prophecy and the function of prophets in the post-exilic society reflected in I and II Chronicles. Contends that “Persian-period” prophets and prophecies were associated with apocalypticism, and that the temple and the Levites became the focus of the new order.
Find this resource:
Williamson, Hugh G. M. “Eschatology in Chronicles.” In Studies in Persian Period History and Historiography. 162–195. Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, 2004.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
A combination of two prior articles, taking Chronicles I and II as the work of a different author from Ezra-Nehemiah, and discussing the eschatological aspect of the text that differentiates it from other books of the Hebrew Bible.
Find this resource:

Daniel

The Book of Daniel, as Dobroruka 2011 notes, contains several apocalyptic themes not found in other biblical books, such as the world empires and the resurrection of the dead. Mitchell 1997 comments on the variant manuscript sources for Daniel, including Masoretic, Septuagint, and Theodotion Greek texts, and Syriac and Latin translations. Both authors consider the Iranian elements in Daniel.

Dobroruka, Vicente. “Persian Influence on Daniel and Jewish Apocalyptic Literature.” Paper given at the “Dead Sea Scrolls Project Seminary.” Princeton Theological Seminary (10 October 2011).
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
This bullet-point presentation allows for the anteriority of certain Iranian eschatological concepts found in the Book of Daniel and considers how ancient Persian thought might have influenced such concepts. The argument is made for a consistent Zoroastrian oral tradition.
Find this resource:
Mitchell, T. C. “Achaemenid History and the Book of Daniel.” In Mesopotamia and Iran in the Persian Period: Conquest and Imperialism 539–331 BC. Edited by John Curtis, 68–78. London: British Museum Press, 1997.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Outlines the manuscript sources for Daniel, and uses linguistic analysis to date the Masoretic composition to the 5th century BCE. Concludes that the text contains limited, but accurate, information about some Achaemenid institutions.
Find this resource:

Esther

Shaked 1982 and Friedberg 2000 present re-evaluations of the generally accepted period of composition for the Book of Esther in the Seleucid period and consider the possibility of the historical authenticity of elements relating to life in the Achaemenid court, and to the situation of Jews living under the Achaemenids. This view had earlier philological support in Gehman 1924 and, more definitively, in Hintze 1994, which contends that the variant Greek texts of Esther did not originate in a translation from Hebrew but from a composition in Aramaic written in Persia during the Achaemenid period. Previously, Karkaria 1918 and Lewy 1939 had found the origins of Purim in an Iranian festival. Russell 1990 discerns further Zoroastrian parallels with the Esther story.

Friedberg, A. D. “A New Clue in the Dating of the Composition of the Book of Esther.” Vetus Testamentum 50.4 (2000): 561–565.
DOI: 10.1163/156853300506567 Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Reconsiders the most widely accepted dating for Esther (late 4th–3rd century BCE) by pointing to its extensive use of a compound calendar connecting Babylonian lunar months and primitive ordinals. Claims that this form must precede the composition of Ezra-Nehemiah, but follow that of Zechariah, and must therefore be dated to the late 5th century BCE.
Find this resource:
Gehman, Henry S. “Notes on the Persian Words in the Book of Esther.” Journal of Biblical Literature 43.3–4 (1924): 321–328.
DOI: 10.2307/3259264 Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
An early analysis of the presence of Persian loanwords and proper names in the Hebrew book, Notes the original Avestan forms, such as memaugān (Esther 1:14, 16), meaning “a real Magian.”
Find this resource:
Hintze, Almut. “The Greek and Hebrew Versions of the Book of Esther and Its Background.” In Irano-Judaica: Studies Relating to Jewish Contacts with Persian Culture throughout the Ages. Vol. 3. Edited by Shaul Shaked and Amnon Netzer, 34–39. Jerusalem: Ben Zvi Institute, 1994.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Similarities between the two versions lead to discussions as to whether the Greek form of the name of the king (Artaxerxes), his vizier (Aman Bougaios), and of the festival of Purim (Phrouraia) might reflect an authentic—and therefore original—form.
Find this resource:
Karkaria, Rustomji P. “Purim and Farwardigan.” In The Dastur Hoshang Memorial Volume. 351–357. Bombay: Fort Printing Press, 1918.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Maintains the historicity of the story of Esther, set in the court of Xerxes, and the Ancient Persian festival of Farwardigan as the calendrical prototype for Purim.
Find this resource:
Lewy, Julius. “The Feast of the 14th Day of Adar.” Hebrew University College Annual 14 (1939): 127–151.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Considers that Near Eastern onomastic and epithetic parallels to the Book of Esther show it to be based on an older Ishtar story, but identifies the feast of 14th Adar with the 4th day of the Iranian Farvardīgān festival held on the 14th day of the Old Persian month Viyahna.
Find this resource:
Russell, James R. “Zoroastrian Elements in the Book of Esther.” In Irano-Judaica: Studies Relating to Jewish Contacts with Persian Culture throughout the Ages. Vol. 2. Edited by Shaul Shaked and Amnon Netzer, 33–40. Jerusalem: Ben Zvi Institute, 1990.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Discusses the anomalous festival of Purim, alongside the plot and motifs of the Esther story, with attention to the Iranian context and connections: these include the Esther mural in the Dura Europos synagogue; the resemblance between Esther and the Zoroastrian yazata Anahita; and the role of the two Amesha Spentas Haurvatat and Ameretat.
Find this resource:
Shaked, Shaul. “Two Judaeo-Iranian Contributions: 1. Iranian Functions in the Book of Esther.” In Irano-Judaica: Studies Relating to Jewish Contacts with Persian Culture throughout the Ages. Vol. 1. Edited by Shaul Shaked, 292–303. Jerusalem: Ben Zvi Institute, 1982.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Considers the Achaemenid background to some of the titles and administrative functions—such as the royal clerk who announced visitors, or the “king’s eye,” a royal informant—based on the continuity of such usage in the Parthian and Sasanian periods.
Find this resource:

Ezekiel

The Book of Ezekiel may be approached from several different perspectives. For Ruiz 2007, Ezekiel provides a timeless case study of the experience of exile and return, in which the Ancient Persians are the catalyst for repatriation; Russell 2003 focuses on its eschatological motifs, probably stimulated through contact with Iranian concepts; and Gnoli 2000 explores the roots for the identification of the ancient Iranian eponymous founder of Zoroastrianism with Ezekiel.

Gnoli, Gherardo. “Zoroaster-Pythagoras and Zoroaster-Ezekiel.” In Zoroaster in History. By Gherardo Gnoli, 95–129. New York: Bibliotheca Persica, 2000.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
This chapter argues that the identification of Zoroaster with Ezekiel mentioned by Clement of Alexandria in the second century CE (Stromata 1.15.70.1) may be far more ancient, deriving from an independent Jewish tradition of the Seleucid period linking the two figures with the Judeo-Babylonian milieu of the 6th century BCE.
Find this resource:
Ruiz, Jean-Pierre. “An Exile’s Baggage: Toward a Postcolonial Reading of Ezekiel.” In Approaching Yehud: New Approaches to the Study of the Persian Period. Edited by Jon L. Berquist, 117–135. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2007.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
This application of postcolonial theory to a study of Ezekiel draws parallels between the narrative of exile in Ezekiel 12:1–7 and the plight of political, religious and economic “exiles” in the modern period. The close reading of Ezekiel 20 from the perspective of minority discourse highlights the themes of subaltern resistance and return to the land Israel.
Find this resource:
Russell, James R. “Ezekiel and Iran.” In Irano-Judaica: Studies Relating to Jewish Contacts with Persian Culture throughout the Ages. Vol. 5. Edited by Shaul Shaked and Amnon Netzer, 1–15. Jerusalem: Ben-Zvi Institute, 2003.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Examines Ezekiel’s “dry bones” motif in relation to Zoroastrian concepts of an apocalypse and final resurrection. Refers to Shaked’s view that Jewish eschatology seems to have adapted some pre-existing Iranian ideas (See Shaked 1984, cited under Zoroastrian and Jewish Interaction). Considers the depiction of the Ezekiel scene in the Dura Europos synagogue, which contains Zoroastrian Middle Persian graffiti.
Find this resource:

Ezra and Nehemiah

The theories of Charles Torrey (in Torrey 1896, and his later Ezra Studies, 1912) that the Chronicler generated the Book of Ezra, and that Ezra never existed, continues to resonate with some modern authors, such as Lebram (see Lebram 1987, under Ezra). The exegeses of Hoglund 1992, Japhet 1994, and Japhet 2006 take the texts of Ezra and Nehemiah together as one book, Ezra-Nehemiah (EN). Eskenazi 1998 careful analysis of the structure of the extant EN is illuminating. Williamson 1991 looks at extra-biblical epigraphy to substantiate EN’s information about the Achaemenids and cultic reform, and Schulte 2016 focuses on the possible impact of Persian imperial propaganda on the sections of Nehemiah identified as “memoir.” For Marbury 2012, Persian rule was a significant factor in the separatist rhetoric of both Ezra and Nehemiah. In contrast, Grabbe 1998 discerns three separate traditions in the two independent Achaemenid-era biblical books. Two articles by Israel Finkelstein highlight the problem of uncritical reliance on the historicity of biblical text—in this instance parts of Nehemiah and Ezra relating to the building of the wall in Jerusalem (Finkelstein 2008a) and the “List of Returnees” (Finkelstein 2008b)—above archaeological finds. (See also Finkelstein 2009, cited under Ancient Persian Province of Yehud.)

Eskenazi, Tamara C. In an Age of Prose: A Literary Approach to Ezra-Nehemia. Atlanta: Scholars’ Press, 1998.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Identifies three main themes in EN: the agency of the community as a whole, not just specific leaders; the centrality of the concept of “house of God,” both as building and as core to Jerusalem; and the significance of “divinely initiated” written text—particularly Torah, but also the decree of Cyrus II—to the community.
Find this resource:
Finkelstein, Israel. “Jerusalem in the Persian (and Early Hellenistic) Period and the Wall of Nehemiah.” JSOT 32.4 (2008a): 501–520.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
The author disputes other archaeologists’ dating of the building of the wall in Jerusalem to the time of Nehemiah, claiming that finds show no evidence of a fortified “city” at this time. Finkelstein attributes the apparent negligent approach of these scholars to their uncritical reliance on biblical text over archaeological discovery. This article, along with Finkelstein 2008b, received widespread criticism, which is responded to in Finkelstein 2009 (also in Berquist and Hunt 2012, cited under Zoroastrian and Jewish Interaction).
Find this resource:
Finkelstein, Israel. “Archaeology and the List of Returnees in the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah.” Palestine Exploration Quarterly 140.1 (2008b): 7–16.
DOI: 10.1179/003103208x269105 Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Refering to archaeological finds, Finkelstein determines that sites mentioned in the so-called List of Returnees of Ezra and Nehemiah (Ezra 2:1–67; Neh. 7:6–68) were not inhabited in the Persian period, but later, indicating that the List was compiled during the Hasmonean period.
Find this resource:
Grabbe, Lester. Ezra-Nehemiah. London: Routledge, 1998.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
A close, thematic, reading of EN, 1 Esdras, Josephus on EN, and Ben Sira and 2 Maccabees on both the “Nehemiah tradition” and “Joshua-Zerubbabel tradition.”
Find this resource:
Hoglund, Kenneth G. Achaemenid Imperial Administration in Syria-Palestine and the Missions of Ezra and Nehemiah. SBLDS 125. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Explores the mid-5th-century administrative changes and legal reforms affecting the post-exilic Jewish community as expressed in the EN narrative, here assumed to be independent from Chronicles. Highlights the tension between the theological emphasis of EN and the political reality of imperial control.
Find this resource:
Japhet, Sara. “Composition and Chronology in the Book of Ezra-Nehemiah.” In Second Temple Studies II: Temple and Community in the Persian Period. Edited by Tamara C. Eskenazi and Kent H. Richards, 189–216. JSOT Supp. 175. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Concerned with both the literary-historical question of structure and composition (including the linguistic transitions between Hebrew and Aramaic in Ezra) and the historiographical question of chronology, based on attempts to match the events described to the historical reigns of successive Persian kings. This essay also appears in Japhet 2006.
Find this resource:
Japhet, Sara. From the Rivers of Babylon to the Highlands of Judah: Collected Studies on the Restoration Period. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
A collection of twenty-two essays with a primary focus on Ezra-Nehemiah, often in relation to the Book of Chronicles. Arranged in chronological order to show the author’s development of thought.
Find this resource:
Marbury, Herbert S. “Reading Persian Dominion in Nehemiah: Multivalent Language, Co-Option, Resistance, and Cultural Survival.” In Focusing Biblical Studies: The Crucial Nature of the Persian and Hellenistic Periods. Essays in Honor of Douglas A. Knight. Edited by Jon L. Berquist and Alice Hunt, 158–176. London and New York: T & T Clark, 2012.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
This essay considers the impact of Persian imperial domination on the institutional and economic management of temples and priesthoods, first of Babylon and Egypt and then of Judah. Marbury postulates that the separatist rhetoric of Nehemiah, including the admonition of intermarriage, relates to the Judean need to preserve land tenure to pay temple tithes and so the tribute required by Artaxerxes I. This ancient priestly-imperial line-blurring serves to provide perspective on contemporary church-state exchanges.
Find this resource:
Schulte, Lucas L. My Shepherd Though You Do Not Know Me: The Persian Royal Propaganda Model in the Nehemiah Memoir. Leuven, Belgium: Peeters, 2016.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Based on the author’s doctoral dissertation, a summary of prior scholarship relating to the Nehemiah Memoir (NM), is followed by in-depth analysis of Persian-period inscriptions dating from Cyrus II to Artaxerxes I, then scrutiny of NM depictions of the Persian king. The inscriptions are presented in translation from original Old Persian, Elamite, and Akkadian cuneiform, and Egyptian hieroglyphics; Schulte’s own translation of Isaiah 44:24–45:13 appears in an excursus. His study identifies a Persian model wherein the monarch receives validation from local gods as heir to a local dynasty. The NM portrayal of Artaxerxes suggests a Persian-period origin.
Find this resource:
Torrey, Charles C. The Composition and Historical Value of Ezra-Nehemiah. Giessen, Germany: Rickerscher Buchhandlung, 1896.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
An early proponent of the theory that Ezra was composed by the author of Chronicles, using a similar style to that of the (authentic) Memoirs of Nehemiah, and dating to the late Persian/early Seleucid period. Considers the Persian documents in EN as conceivably historical.
Find this resource:
Williamson, Hugh G. M. “Ezra and Nehemiah in the Light of the Texts from Persepolis.” Bulletin for Biblical Research 1 (1991): 41–61.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Uses Persepolis Fortification and Treasury texts written in Aramaic at around the traditional date for EN, along with some earlier Elamite tablets, to extend understanding of the vocabulary of EN, and to authenticate its expression of Achaemenid material support for cult activities in Jerusalem.
Find this resource:

Ezra

Although many scholars accept that Ezra was commanded by the Persian king to introduce a religious set of laws to Jews, there is no consensus as to whether this was binding on all Jews in the satrapy or only in Yehud. Janzen 2000 suggests that Ezra could have been sent to impose Mosaic law on the entire satrapy. In contrast, Grabbe 1994 considered that it was probable that a local Jewish law was imposed on the province of Yehud, but that in its present form, the mission is a piece of Jewish propaganda. Fried 2001 assumes that it was Artaxerxes II who initiated the command for judicial reform, and that Ezra, as the king’s agent, appointed royal judges for the entire satrapy to implement the legal rights and norms of the local populations in accordance with Persian law. Bickerman 1976 examines the Aramaic and Hebrew records of an ordinance of Cyrus in Ezra 6:3–5 and 1:2–4, respectively, and finds them to reflect authentic historical documents. Smith 1972 and Williamson 1998 (cited under Ancient Persian Province of Yehud) both place the narrative of Ezra in the time of Artaxerxes I, as does Steiner 2001, which ascribes to Ezra the role of intelligence officer to the Persian king. Lebram 1987 adheres to Torrey’s skeptical position that Ezra never existed (see Ezra and Nehemiah), and that the document attributed to him reflects the Hasmonean, rather than Persian, period.

Bickerman, Elias. “The Edict of Cyrus in Ezra.” In Studies in Jewish and Christian History Part One. 72–108. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 1976.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Identifies Ezra 6:3–5 as an Aramaic memorandum for the Persian treasury and Ezra 1:2–4 as a public proclamation to the Jews. The close reading of the latter Hebrew text determines that it is genuine, and constitutes an important and unusual documentation of ancient diplomacy.
Find this resource:
Fried, Lisbeth S. “‘You Shall Appoint Judges’: Ezra’s Mission and the Rescript of Artaxerxes.” In Persia and Torah: The Theory of Imperial Authorization of the Pentateuch. Edited by James W. Watts, 63–89. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2001.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Argues that Persian governors such as Nehemiah would have based their decisions on socially generated concepts of justice and fairness, which may have coincided with Mosaic law, but which were not the source of their authority.
Find this resource:
Grabbe, Lester L. “What Was Ezra’s Mission?” In Second Temple Studies II: Temple and Community in the Persian Period. JSOT Supp. 175. Edited by Tamara C. Eskenazi and Kent H. Richards, 286–299. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Considers the historicity of Ezra’s enigmatic mission in the context of its apologetic motive with regard to the Achaemenid government. Points out contradictions between the Aramaic letter of Artaxerxes authorizing the mission and the rest of the Hebrew narrative.
Find this resource:
Janzen, David. “The Mission of Ezra and the Persian-Period Temple Community.” Journal of Biblical Literature 119.4 (2000): 619–643.
DOI: 10.2307/3268519 Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Analyzes epistolary evidence for the authenticity of the letter of Artaxerxes and concludes that it was not genuine: Ezra’s work as “priest and scribe” within the temple administration was more in keeping with a Babylonian model of priesthood than that of a Persian-appointed official.
Find this resource:
Lebram, Jürgen C. H. “Die Traditionsgeschite der Esragestalt und die Frage nach dem Historischen Esra.” In Achaemenid History I: Sources, Structures and Synthesis. Edited by Heleen Sancisi-Weerdenburg, 103–138. Leiden, The Netherlands: Nederlands Instituut Voor Het Nabije Oosten, 1987.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Argues that Ezra was not a historical character, but that the Ezra Gestalt arose within the turbulence of the Hasmonean period, perhaps based on a Jewish (Pharisee) dissident leader. This view challenges the authenticity of the Persian proclamations.
Find this resource:
Smith, Morton. “Ezra.” In Ex Orbe Religionum: Studia Geo Widengren. Vol. 1. Edited by C. J. Bleeker, 141–143. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 1972.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Places Nehemiah 8 between Ezra 8 and 9, and Ezra’s date of arrival in Jerusalem as 458 BCE. Suggests that Ezra, a Babylonian Jew who was both a priest and an official, promoted purity laws, prompting his recall to Persia, and that Nehemiah only later effected these reforms.
Find this resource:
Steiner, Richard C. “The mbqr at Qumran, the episkopos in the Athenian Empire, and the Meaning of lbqr’ in Ezra 7:14: On the Relation of Ezra’s Mission to the Persian Legal Project.” Journal of Bibilcal Literature 120 (2001): 623–646.
DOI: 10.2307/3268263 Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Argues that Ezra resembled the episkopos, or “intelligence officer,” of 5th-century Athens, acting for the Persian king Artaxerxes I as “the King’s eyes.” Discusses Ezra’s mission within the historical context of codification of laws under Darius I.
Find this resource:

Haggai and Zechariah

As Tollington 1993 and, later, Kessler 2007, advocate, Zechariah 1–8 may be taken as a discrete text, dating to the late 6th–early 5th century BCE, and coterminous with the narrative of Haggai. Although both biblical texts relate to the reconstruction of the temple, Middlemas 2009 raises the question as to whether restoration did, in fact, begin under Cyrus II, who is not mentioned in either Haggai or Zechariah. Kessler 2002 explores the changes in the nature and function of prophecy in relation to the temple cult, and to the Jewish community in Yehud. Mitchell 2015 focuses on the impact of a particular Persian concept on “servant” terminology in Haggai-Zechariah, and connects Malachi’s covenantal language to servant passages in Dt.Isa.

Kessler, John. The Book of Haggai: Prophecy and Society in Early Persian Yehud. Vetus Testamentum Supp. 91. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2002.
DOI: 10.1163/9789004276178 Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Assumes the value of Haggai in delineating the vital role of prophecy for the life and faith of the Jewish community in Yehud during the first century of Achaemenid rule.
Find this resource:
Kessler, John. “Diaspora and Homeland in the Early Achaemenid Period: Community, Geography and Demography in Zechariah 1–8.” In Approaching Yehud: New Approaches to the Study of the Persian Period. Edited by Jon L. Berquist, 137–166. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2007.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
The text of Zechariah 1–8 is shown to have emerged from within Yehud at the time of the temple restoration, and its predictions of a Yahwist community centered in Jerusalem to apply inclusively to those beyond the provincial border, to those in other Persian-ruled lands, and even to Gentiles.
Find this resource:
Middlemas, Jill A. “Going Beyond the Myth of the Empty Land: A Reassessment of the Early Persian Period.” In Exile and Restoration Revisited: Essays on the Babylonian and Persian Periods in Memory of Peter R. Ackroyd. Edited by Gary N. Knoppers, Deidre Fulton, and Lester L. Grabbe, 174–194. London: Continuum International, 2009.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Maintains that both biblical texts indicate a cohesiveness of community and a continuity of ideology relating to monarchical Judah and the significance of Jerusalem as its capital.
Find this resource:
Mitchell, Christine. “Achaemenid Persian Concepts Pertaining to Covenant and Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi.” In Covenant in the Persian Period: From Genesis to Chronicles. Edited by Richard J. Bautch and Gary N. Knoppers, 291–306. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2015.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
This essay focuses on the Old Persian concept of bandaka, an expression of the “servant” relationship between vassal and king, which seems to be directly translated in the Elephantine Aramaic version of Darius’ Bisutun inscription, and which, Mitchell proposes, is a closer analogue to the concept of covenant in Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, than a Near Eastern vassal treaty.
Find this resource:
Tollington, Janet E. Tradition and Innovation in Haggai and Zechariah 1–8. JSOT Supp. 150, Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Dismisses any significant Ancient Persian (“Zoroastrian”) impact on Zechariah’s visions, including references to angels and Satan. Maintains that any Persian influence was sociopolitical in effect, rather than theological.
Find this resource:

Hosea

Some recent studies, in revisiting discussion concerning the historicity and historical context of the composition of the Book of Hosea, underscore the tension between scholars who allow for the possibility of transcription of “prophetic speech” alongside scribal composition, and those who only accept the latter. One study which opts for literary construction alone is Bos 2013, which argues for Hosea’s composition entirely during the Persian period. Another contested approach is that seen in Trotter 2002, which examines the way Hosea was interpreted in pre-Second Temple Yehud (that is, the early Persian period).

Bos, James M. Reconsidering the Date and Provenance of the Book of Hosea: The Case for Persian-Period Yehud. London: Bloomsbury, 2013.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
This dissertation-into-book, after surveying past scholarship on Hosea, maintains that historiographical and thematic evidence points to Persian-period composition of a text that promotes Judahite propaganda, including criticism of an (earlier) Israelite/Judean monarchy, and the dual themes of exile and return. Bos’ assertation that the scribal literary style and construction of Hosea reflect neither an 8th-century milieu nor the transcription of “prophetic” speech has been disputed by reviewers, as has whether Hosea’s anti-monarchical stance must reflect a time when there was no king.
Find this resource:
Trotter, James M. Reading Hosea in Achaemenid Yehud. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press (Bloomsbury), 2002.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
The author explores the concept of “reading” the prophets—that is, interpreting the form of speech, and social setting(s) for the prophetic books—and the historical “reading” of the Book of Hosea itself within specific sociohistorical contexts. Trotter highlights the setting of the final redactional stage, which he identifies as early Achaemenid Yehud (using works by Dandamaev and Hoglund), when the province was loyal to Persian rule, but the Yahwist cult also emerged.
Find this resource:

Isaiah (Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah)

Many scholars see Iranian influence on parts of Isaiah, particularly so-called Deutero-Isaiah (Dt.Isa), or Second Isaiah (40–66), which Baltzer 2001 views as a liturgical drama set in the 5th century BCE during the reign of Artaxerxes I. In contrast, Fried 2002 (cited under Messiah/Savior) maintains that Dt.Isa was contemporary with Cyrus II, and Albertz 2009 dates the first edition of the text to the accession of Darius I. Smith 1963 and Blenkinsopp 1988 consider Dt.Isa to reflect Persian propaganda circulating in Babylon just before the downfall of Nabonidus. Laato 1992 and Netzer 1974 explore its favorable portrayal of Cyrus. Some scholars split the book further, and recognize a third section—“Trito-Isaiah”—in Isaiah 56–66. As Strawn 2007 notes, Trito-Isaiah also seems to belong to the early Achaemenid period, exemplifying a world operating under the Pax Persica.

Albertz, Rainer. “Public Recitation of Prophetical Books? The Case of the First Edition of Deutero-Isaiah (Isa. 40:1–52:12).” In The Production of Prophecy: Constructing Prophecy and Prophets in Yehud. Edited by Diana V. Edelman and Ehud Ben Zvi. London and Oakville, CT: Equinox, 2009.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Building on an earlier work entitled Israel in Exile: The History and Literature of the Sixth Century BCE (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003 [2001]), Albertz’ article discusses the main features of Dt.Isa, which he dates in origin to 521 BCE, the first regnal year of the Achaemenid king Darius I. Albertz argues that the accession of Darius, following a regional rebellion, gave rise to Judean hopes of restoration and the composition of Dt. Isa, particularly its “eschatological hymns,” which were recited not in a cultic milieu, but at public gatherings in Judean settlements.
Find this resource:
Baltzer, Klaus. Deutero-Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 40–55. Translated by Margaret Kohl. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2001.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
The second section of the introduction, “Historical Questions,” deals with Persian contexts and references, which are revisited throughout the subsequent commentary.
Find this resource:
Blenkinsopp, Joseph. “Second Isaiah—Prophet of Universalism.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 41 (1988): 83–103.
DOI: 10.1177/030908928801304106 Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Assumes that Isaiah 40–48 was written by a Babylonian golah, and functions as both religious and political polemic. Introduces a new perspective: that adherence to Judaism was, in principle, open to all who confess the faith, including Gentiles. Cyrus, a Gentile, had begun the process of repatriation, and initiated the possibility for Israel to become the light for all nations.
Find this resource:
Laato, A. The Servant of YHWH and Cyrus: A Reinterpretation of the Exilic Messianic Programme in Isaiah 40–55. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell, 1992.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
A close, comparative reading of the Servant and Cyrus passages in Dt.Isa, including a study of extra-biblical parallels in Akkadian royal inscriptions and the Cyrus cylinder. Explores the rhetorical strategy of Dt.Isa, and its typological connection with contemporary messianic expectations, before postulating whether it may relate to an older royal ideology.
Find this resource:
Netzer, Amnon. “Some Notes on the Characterization of Cyrus the Great in Jewish and Judeo-Persian Writings.” Acta Iranica 2 (1974): 35–52.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Begins with a contextualization of the “Book of Consolation” (Isaiah 40–55), focusing on the allusions to Cyrus. Considers the approach of Josephus, the Midrash, and three Judeo-Persian works, including the Ardashir-nāmeh and Ezra-nāmeh of Shāhin, all of which fit Cyrus into both a religious and historical framework.
Find this resource:
Smith, Morton. “II Isaiah and the Persians.” JAOS 4 (1963): 415–421.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Argues that passages in Isaiah 40–48 derived from similar Persian propaganda to the Cyrus cylinder. Considers possible Persian (Zoroastrian) impact on the prominent cosmology in Dt.Isa, showing parallels with Yasna 44, a passage from the Gathas (“songs”) of Zarathustra.
Find this resource:
Strawn, Brent A. “‘A World under Control’: Isaiah 60 and the Apadana Reliefs from Persepolis.” In Approaching Yehud: New Approaches to the Study of the Persian Period. Edited by Jon L. Berquist, 85–116. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2007.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Presents the idea that Achaemenid religiopolitical propaganda depicted in palace architecture, iconography, and inscriptions at Persepolis not only constitutes a valuable external source of information relating to the historical and linguistic setting of Trito-Isaiah, but is also reflected in the shared motifs of solar imagery and the procession of foreign gift-givers of Isaiah 60.
Find this resource:

Psalms

Over a century ago, as Cheyne 1897 illustrates, Zoroastrian impact was found in most of the books of the Bible, including the Psalms. Berquist 2007 indicates a modification of this view.

Berquist, Jon. “Psalms, Postcolonialism, and the Construction of Self.” In Approaching Yehud. Edited by Jon L. Berquist, 195–214. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2007.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Contends that the Psalms reflect the Persian Empire’s social and ideological control of the subject people of Yehud, but that a postcolonial reading of these songs—as of Chronicles—reveals the construction of the self in ways that both connect to and resist such imperial dominance.
Find this resource:
Cheyne, Thomas Kelly. “The Book of Psalms, Its Origins and Its Relation to Zoroastrianism.” In Semitic Studies in Memory of Rev. Dr. Alexander Kohut. Edited by George Alexander Kohut, 111–119. Berlin: S. Calvary, 1897.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Seeks an indirect Gathic Avestan origin for the “heavenly wisdom” of Proverbs 8 and the Messianic ideas and expectations of some of the post-exilic Psalms, describing Zoroastrianism as “a noble ‘revealed’ religion,” neglected by Christian scholars.
Find this resource:

Biblical Concepts

The early-20th-century Religionsgeschichte school maintained that many elements in the formulation of Judaism during the Ancient Persian and the subsequent Greco-Roman periods—particularly eschatological themes—were strongly influenced by Zoroastrian precedents. This approach has since been challenged by some biblical scholars and Iranists, and refined by others. Shared motifs between the two religions include cultic purity, the creation and cessation of “time,” judgment after death, resurrection of the dead, the notion of hidden “mysteries,” and concepts of the “devil” and demonic forces in battle with angelic beings. Since the biblical Book of Daniel is the first to name angelic beings, mentioning their participation in future struggles, it figures prominently in any discussion as to which living religion—Judaism or Zoroastrianism—may precede and perhaps influence the other.

Cosmology and Eschatology

Cohn 1993, Hintze 1999 (cited under Messiah/Savior), Hultgård 1998, and Shaked 1994 all assert the primacy of Zoroastrianism, noting that the themes of Middle Persian apocalyptic texts such as the commentary on the Bahman Yasht, the Denkard (“Acts of the Religion”), and the Bundahishn (the “creation” account) are found in the earlier Avesta. Duchesne-Guillemin 1982 and Gignoux 1990 are, however, skeptical about the existence of an Iranian eschatological schema prior to the development of such ideas in Judaism, whereas Silverman 2012 argues for the historical priority of the Iranian tradition.

Cohn, Norman. “Zoroastrians, Jews and Christians.” In Cosmos, Chaos and the World to Come. By Norman Cohn, 220–231. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1993.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Maps an Iranian influence on biblical and post-biblical apocalyptic and eschatological ideas from the perspective of cultural history. Traces the contact periods for ideas from Achaemenid times to Babylonia during the Seleucid period and the revival of Iranian power under the Parthians.
Find this resource:
Duchesne-Guillemin, Jacques. “Apocalypse juive et apocalypse iranienne.” In La Soteriologia dei Culti Orientali nell’ Impero Romano. Edited by Ugo Bianchi and Maarten J. Vermaseren, 753–759. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 1982.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Focuses on mid-2nd-century BCE Jewish apocalypses. Parallels between the world ages of Daniel, the partially Christianized Oracles of Hystaspes, and the Zoroastrian Bahman Yasht are discussed, with the last text assigned a late date and a dependence on the first.
Find this resource:
Gignoux, Philippe. “Hexaéméron et Millénarisme: Quelques motifs de comparaison entre Mazdéisme et Judaïsme.” In Irano-Judaica: Studies Relating to Jewish Contacts with Persian Culture throughout the Ages. Vol. 2. Edited by Shaul Shaked and Amnon Netzer, 72–84. Jerusalem: Ben Tzvi Institute, 1990.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Notes some parallels between Zoroastrian and Jewish concepts, including seven “angelic” beings, and the periodization of world history, but dates all Zoroastrian apocalyptic works in Middle Persian to the Islamic period.
Find this resource:
Glasson, T. F. Greek Influence in Jewish Eschatology. London: SPCK, 1961.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Considers the closeness between Persian ideas and those of the Ionian Greeks to biblical concepts such as Daniel’s four ages and the resurrection, but minimizes the Iranian impact in attempting to show Greece as a forceful stimulus for Judaism.
Find this resource:
Hanson, Paul D. The Dawn of Apocalyptic: The Historical and Sociological Roots of Jewish Apocalyptic Eschatology. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Maintains that the assumption of late Iranian influence on such apocalyptic eschatology as systematized in Isaiah 65 is untenable: this system is compatible with internal community and cult. Also writes of the compromising collaboration of the temple (Zadokite) priesthood—which Haggai is associated with—and the Persian government.
Find this resource:
Hultgård, Anders. “Persian Apocalypticism.” In The Encyclopaedia of Apocalypticism. Vol. 1, The Origins of Apocalypticism in Judaism and Christianity. Edited by John J. Collins, 39–83. New York: Continuum, 1998.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Analyzes the primary Zoroastrian Middle Persian apocalyptic texts, many of which are framed in the context of a consultation between Zoroaster and Ahura Mazda, using an original Avestan genre, and referring to earlier authoritative sources. Considers Greek material supporting the antiquity of this Iranian apocalypticism, and its indirect impact on Jewish and Christian thought.
Find this resource:
Shaked, Shaul. “Eschatology and Vision.” In Dualism in Transformation. By Shaul Shaked, 27–51. London: School of Oriental and African Studies, 1994.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Contends that Zoroastrian eschatological concepts are more ancient than those of Judaism, and that they contained a developed schema long before the Middle Persian texts were committed to writing.
Find this resource:
Silverman, Jason M. Persepolis and Jerusalem: Iranian Influence on the Apocalyptic Hermeneutic. London: T & T Clark, 2012.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
This doctoral thesis-turned-book assesses prior studies relating to the debated topic of Iranian influence on Judaism, and discusses possible contexts for interaction between the two traditions. The author looks to Old Persian, ANE, and classical texts, alongside archaeological finds and the useful (but late) Middle Persian Zoroastrian books, to assert the historical primacy of the former. Specific Biblical texts (and parts of 1 and 2 Enoch) associated with early “Jewish apolcalypticism” and dated to the Achaemenid or Parthian periods are analyzed for evidence of Iranian “influence.”
Find this resource:
Steuernagel, Carl. “Die Strukturlinien der Entwicklung der jüdischen Eschatologie.” In Festschrift für Alfred Bertholet. 479–487. Tübingen, Germany: J. C. B. Mohr, 1950.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Acknowledges the parallels between the Zoroastrian saoshyant/Gayomard figure and the “Son of Man” of Daniel 7, but asserts that there is no proof of Persian influence on Judaism.
Find this resource:

Kingship/Rule

Biblical and Persian texts are compared in Bowick 2009, in an exploration of the symbiotic relationship between the king, deity, and people. Cataldo 2009 focuses on the term “theocracy” as an inadequate description of the government of Yehud in the Persian period. The discussion of favorable biblical and extra-biblical accounts of Persian rulers in Ackroyd 1990 contrasts with the later, more negative, rabbinic portrayals analyzed in Mokhtarian 2010.

Ackroyd, Peter. “The Biblical Portrayal of Achaemenid Rulers.” In Achaemenid History V: The Roots of the European Tradition; Proceedings of the 1987 Groningen Achaemenid History Workshop. Edited by Helen Sancisi-Weerdenburg and Jan Willem Drijvers, 1–16. Leiden, The Netherlands: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 1990.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Considers how to interpret the largely favorable Biblical portrayal of Persian rulers in Isaiah 44–45, Ezra 1 and 5–6, Haggai, Zechariah 1–8, Esther, and Daniel, as well as 1 Esdras and 2 Maccabees.
Find this resource:
Bowick, James. “Characters in Stone: Royal Ideology and Yehudite Identity in the Behistun Inscription and the Book of Haggai.” In Community Identity in Judean Historiography: Biblical and Comparative Perspectives. Edited by Gary N. Knoppers and Kenneth A. Ristau, 87–117. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2009.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
A close reading of Darius I’s Behistun inscription leads to a comparison of its understanding of kingship with that of the Yehudite community, as expressed in the prophetic narrative of Haggai. Bowick determines that, although the narrative forms and formulas differ, the Persian text presents a royal ideology that is similar to Zerubbabel’s role as “divine agent” of YHWH.
Find this resource:
Cataldo, Jeremiah W. A Theocratic Yehud? Issues of Government in a Persian Province. Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 498. New York and London: T & T Clark, 2009.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Discusses the sociopolitical and historical development of Yehud. Explores emerging “Yahwistic religious ideology” within the context of a Persian administration, and compares it with that of similar communities under Persian rule, particularly that of Elephantine. Rejects the EN reductive view of provincial society in Yehud.
Find this resource:
Mokhtarian, Jason Sion. “Rabbinic Depictions of the Achaemenid King, Cyrus the Great.” In The Talmud in Its Iranian Context. Edited by Carol Bakhos and Rahim M. Shayegan, 112–139. Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, 2010.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
An analysis of the somewhat negative portrayal of Cyrus in the Babylonian Esther Midrash (b. Meg 10b-17a), written in Sasanian Babylonia. Discerns Middle Persian Zoroastrian contexts for some Talmudic motifs and Babylonian rabbinical exegeses.
Find this resource:

Messiah/Savior

Hintze 1999 discusses the development of the Avestan concept of the individual saoshyant as one who brings future benefit, fights evil, and restores the world, bringing an end to death in the process, and draws parallels with the evolution of the mashiach in Jewish and Christian thought. Fried 2002 explores the various scholarly approaches to the notion of Cyrus as “mashiach” in Isaiah.

Fried, Lisbeth S. “Cyrus the Messiah? The Historical Background to Isaiah 45:1.” Harvard Theological Review 95.4 (2002): 373–393.
DOI: 10.1017/S0017816002000251 Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Maintains that the term “YHWH’s anointed” represents an intentional handing over of Judean court theology, just as texts from other subject regions (viz. Egypt and Babylon) also show Achaemenid appropriation of local royal theology.
Find this resource:
Hintze, Almut. “The Saviour and the Dragon in Iranian and Jewish/Christian Eschatology.” In Irano-Judaica: Studies Relating to Jewish Contacts with Persian Culture throughout the Ages. Vol. 4. Edited by Shaul Shaked and Amnon Netzer, 72–90. Jerusalem: Ben-Zvi Institute, 1999.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Considers the development of common traits relating to the Iranian saoshyant and the Jewish mashiach, and draws parallels in the formation of mythology about these “savior” figures, with reference to the shared eschatological motif of slaying a dragon.
Find this resource:

Priesthood/Temple

Within the Jewish tradition, the purpose of the return of the golah was to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem and so restore the means of fulfillment of Yahweh’s vision for his people (see, for instance, Zechariah 2:5–17). Josephus Antiquities 11:1 (see Zoroastrian and Jewish Interaction) states that God “stirred up the mind of Cyrus” to write an edict that a house of God should be [re]built in Jerusalem. This approach emphasizes the religious, as well as the political, significance of the restoration: the Jerusalem temple was the way in which the Judeans interacted with God. Any analysis of the relation between the Jewish priesthood and temple during the Persian period—as exemplified in Grabbe 2009 and Fried 2004—involves a consideration of the degree of involvement of the Persian central government in legitimizing the autonomy of Yehud and its religious institutions. Frei and Koch 1984 maintains that Achaemenid officials had to approve and authorize local laws and customs, lending their imprimatur to any priestly rise to power. This view finds echoes in Fried 2004, but Bedford 2001 and Grabbe 2009 consider different stimuli for the political situation in Jerusalem. In contradistinction to other scholars, the author of Edelman 2014 proposes that the Second Temple was not constructed until the time of Artaxerxes I, as part of a broader incoporation of Yehud into a Persian infrastructure. Fried 2003 contrasts local Jewish reactions to the destruction of the Jerusalem temple under the Babylonians and to that of Elephantine in the Achaemenid period, while Blenkinsopp 1991 provides a wider regional context for the development of local cult. Hultgård 1988 emphasizes the similarities between the two priestly “castes” of the Ancient Persians and Jews, with Zoroaster and Levi as their respective ancestors.

Bedford, Peter R. Temple Restoration in Early Achaemenid Judah. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, 2001.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Analyzes the biblical sources for the ideological significance of reconstruction, examining the apparent conflict between “returnees” and residents (construed here as an anachronistic 4th-century retrojection by the author of the Book of Ezra). Finds the motivation not in a powerful temple cult community, or a Persian initiative, but in pan-Judean hopes for the restoration of YHWH as ruler in and from Zion.
Find this resource:
Blenkinsopp, Joseph. “Temple and Society in Achaemenid Judah.” In Second Temple Studies 1: Persian Period. JSOT Supp. 117. Edited by Philip R. Davies, 22–53. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Considers the restoration of the temple and emergent Judaism against the backdrop of other regional cult centers within the Persian Empire, including Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Asia Minor.
Find this resource:
Edelman, Diana Vikander. The Origins of the Second Temple: Persian Imperial Policy and the Rebuilding of Jerusalem. London: Routledge, 2014.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
A provocative challenge to the conventional dating of the reconstruction of the Temple during the time of Darius I (late 6th century). Analyzing first the biblical texts concerning the origins of the Second Temple, then artifacts denoting the boundaries of Yehud (viz. stamp jars) and archaeological evidence of settlement patterns in the region at the time of Artaxerxes I, the author argues for a resettlement and rebuilding entirely in the latter period. This revisionist account does not convince all reviewers, but has prompted renewed discussion of the historicity and literary import of the biblical sources in question, and the political agenda of the Persians with regard to Yehud and Jerusalem as its provincial seat.
Find this resource:
Frei, Peter, and Klaus Koch, eds. Reichsidee und Reichsorganisation in Perserreich. Fribourg, Switzerland: Universitätsverlag, 1984. 2d rev. ed, 1996.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Contains Frei’s hypothesis concerning Achaemenid imperial influence on local legislation, particularly the authorization of the Jewish law referred to in Ezra 7. This is the text that begins the discussion concerning the extent of Persian “authorization” of the Torah.
Find this resource:
Fried, Lisbeth S. “The Land Lay Desolate: Conquest and Restoration in the Ancient Near East.” In Judah and the Judeans in the Neo-Babylonian Period. Edited by Oded Lipschits and Joseph Blenkinsopp, 21–54. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2003.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Suggests that the circumstances of the Babylonian destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, and that of Elephantine in the Persian period, affected the ideology of reconstruction: the former was a military conquest, the latter, probably a result of ethnic rivalries.
Find this resource:
Fried, Lisbeth S. The Priest and the Great King: Temple-Palace Relations in the Persian Empire. Biblical and Judaic Studies 10. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2004.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
A wide array of evidence is presented in this examination of the economic and political status of local priesthoods in the Achaemenid satrapies of Babylonia, Egypt, Asia Minor, and Yehud. Concludes that Yehud was neither self-governing nor theocratic, since Persian-appointed governors had control over local officials, including the high priest.
Find this resource:
Grabbe, Lester L. “Was Jerusalem a Persian Fortress?” In Exile and Restoration Revisited, Essays on the Babylonian and Persian Periods in Memory of Peter R. Ackroyd. Edited by Gary N. Knoppers, Deidre Fulton, and Lester L. Grabbe, 128–137. London: Continuum International, 2009.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Using Xenophon, Ezra-Nehemiah, and some archaeological findings as sources, Grabbe decides that there is little evidence of a Persian garrison in Jerusalem. This raises questions concerning the political role of Jerusalem (Was it a temple city? Was it protected with a wall?).
Find this resource:
Hultgård, Anders. “Pretres juifs et mages zoroastriens: Influence religieuses a l’époque hellénistique.” Revue d’histoire et de philosophie religieuse 68.4 (1988): 415–428.
Save Citation »Export Citation » Share Citation »
Traces Iranian influence in apocryphal works such as the Book of Jubilees, the Apocrypha of Levi, and other Jewish “Zadokite writings.”
Find this resource:

Biblical Studies

Jump to Other Articles:

Article

Down

In This Article Expand or collapse the "in this article" section The “Persian” Period

Related Articles Expand or collapse the "related articles" section about

Other Subject Areas

Forthcoming Articles Expand or collapse the "forthcoming articles" section

Share Link

The “Persian” Period
by
Jenny Rose
LAST REVIEWED: 03 April 2020
LAST MODIFIED: 11 January 2018
DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780195393361-0194

Introduction

Introductory Works

General Overviews

Persian-Period Israel

The Ancient Persian Province of Yehud

“Persian Religion”

Aramaic Sources

Development of Post-Exilic Judaism

Zoroastrian and Jewish Interaction

Biblical books

Pentateuch

Chronicles

Daniel

Esther

Ezekiel

Ezra and Nehemiah

Ezra

Haggai and Zechariah

Hosea

Isaiah (Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah)

Psalms

Biblical Concepts

Cosmology and Eschatology

Kingship/Rule

Messiah/Savior

Priesthood/Temple

Biblical Studies

Article

Recently viewed (0)

Sign in to an additional subscriber account

Login

In This Article Expand or collapse the "in this article" section The “Persian” Period

Related Articles Expand or collapse the "related articles" sectionabout

About Related Articles close popup

Other Subject Areas

Forthcoming Articles Expand or collapse the "forthcoming articles" section

Share Link

The “Persian” Period byJenny RoseLAST REVIEWED: 03 April 2020LAST MODIFIED: 11 January 2018DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780195393361-0194

Introduction

Introductory Works

General Overviews

Persian-Period Israel

The Ancient Persian Province of Yehud

“Persian Religion”

Aramaic Sources

Development of Post-Exilic Judaism

Zoroastrian and Jewish Interaction

Biblical books

Pentateuch

Chronicles

Daniel

Esther

Ezekiel

Ezra and Nehemiah

Ezra

Haggai and Zechariah

Hosea

Isaiah (Deutero- and Trito-Isaiah)

Psalms

Biblical Concepts

Cosmology and Eschatology

Kingship/Rule

Messiah/Savior

Priesthood/Temple

Biblical Studies

Article

Related Articles Expand or collapse the "related articles" section about

The “Persian” Period
by
Jenny Rose
LAST REVIEWED: 03 April 2020
LAST MODIFIED: 11 January 2018
DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780195393361-0194