STUDY OF RELIGIONS:

DEPARTMENT OF COMPARATIVE RELIGION

SCHOOL OF PHILOSOPHY & RELIGION

THE HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM

Report of the Review Committee

December 2010

Presented to Prof. Sarah Stroumsa, Rector

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary...3

The Committee's Report....8

Introduction
The Hebrew University, the Faculty of Humanities and
The Department of Comparative Religion...11

The Departments Goals and Their Implementation.......13

Department Faculty.16

Department Curriculum...21

Department Students...27

The Jerusalem Center for the Study of Religion and Society.32

Summary Evaluation...33

Appendices

a) Rsums of the Committee members .. ..40

b) List of people who met with the Committee ..60
c) Background material prepared by Department of Comparative
Religion and School of Philosophy and Religion

2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

3
Summary Evaluation:

From an early stage of the Committees work it became clear that the
Department review had to entail a comprehensive discussion of the place of
religion in the Hebrew University as a whole and not only of the
Department of Comparative Religion. Consequentially, there are a number
of observations that can be safely made on the basis of our review.
The two groups of Early Christianity and Indian Studies in the
Department do not match; the focus in the Department is too much on
earlier periods and too exclusively historical-philological; the staff of the
Christianity group is better in teaching than in research, and the
Department lacks the driving force of a scholar who might be capable of
raising the standing of the Department in the Hebrew University and
beyond. The Department must therefore undergo drastic reconstruction.
A satisfactory implementation of the Committees views will entail
long-range strategic planning that will involve the immediate appointment
of a scholar with theoretical skills and interests in the world of religion at
large and, subsequently, the gradual filling in of new positions in
Christianity and new joint positions in contemporary Islam and Judaism
(possibly to be combined with a post for a scholar interested in theoretical
and methodological issues) as current members of the Department retire.
The newly reconstructed Department will thus be able to articulate
for its students, the university and the wider academic community the
relevance of religious studies for the early twenty-first century. With the
strengths of the existing Department in its two fields, the additional
strategic appointments of faculty strongly committed to a social-scientific
approach and the foundation of a new Center for the study of religion and
society, the Department and the Hebrew University will re-emerge as a

4
leading centre in the study of religion in Jerusalem, Israel and the world at
large.

Summary of our recommendations:

1. We recommend an extensive overhaul of the current Department of

Comparative Religion, as this is the best way to guarantee the teaching and
continuing research in religion at HU.

2. To avoid misunderstandings and unrealistic expectations about the

contents and outcome of teaching and research as regards comparisons
between religions, we also recommend changing its English name into
Department of Religious Studies.

3. Given the current composition of the Department (basically a

combination of Early Christianity and Indian Studies) and its focus on early
periods of Christianity and India, we recommend a widening of its staff by
joint appointments in contemporary Islam and Judaism, preferably with a
demonstrable anthropological interest.

4. Before any restructuring of the Department takes place, it is essential

that a new appointment is made of a charismatic and leading figure in
religious studies with methodological and theoretical interests and a wide
view of religion, preferably in the study of contemporary religion.

5. Given the impending retirement of current staff in the teaching of

Christianity, we recommend maintaining at all times at least two positions

5
in Early Christianity and, possibly, also one in Eastern (Byzantine or
Syriac) Christianity.

6. In the immediate future, after the recent losses of two full positions in
the study of Christianity, it is necessary to replace at least one of these
positions with a position in Christianity. Notwithstanding the importance of
the study of the New Testament in Jerusalem, it is also crucial to study later
forms of Christianity, in particular modern or contemporary ones in
Jerusalem.

7. We recognize that the current expertise in the Department in Late

Antiquity would gain greatly by a specialist in Greek and Roman religion,
but we do not see this as a priority. Such a specialist, if appointed, should
be a joint appointment with the Department of Classical Studies.

8. Given the approaching retirement of most members of the Department,

the new configuration of the Department we advocate will be partially
realized by redefining the positions left vacant by staff as they retire.

9. In due time, the part of Indian Studies that focuses on Indian culture and
literature should be moved to a different department.

10. Regarding the curriculum we strongly commend the move already

made by the Department to incorporate Judaism and Islam in the B.A., but
the incremental progress of the different tracks, in particular, the proper
integration of language teaching into the courses for Islam, Judaism and
Christianity needs to be ensured.

6
11. The curriculum must be presented in such a way to potential students
that they can immediately see the wide range of teaching of Judaism and
Islam available to them in the university.

12. In the B.A., proper attention should be paid to method and theory
throughout the curriculum, but the comparative element should be kept to a
minimum, as students first have to acquire a satisfactory grasp of individual
religions. This is different in the M.A., where comparisons should be an
essential element of the study of religions.

13. In order to coordinate, facilitate and stimulate seminars, conferences

and research projects in the study of religion within the university across
the full gamut of the disciplines and, furthermore, to take full advantage of
the unique position of Jerusalem within Islam, Judaism and Christianity,
we strongly recommend the foundation of a new body to be called The
Jerusalem Center for the Study of Religion and Society. Its head must
be a charismatic, leading person in the fields of Islam, Judaism or Religious
Anthropology, firmly based in the Department, academically but also
administratively highly competent and willing to cooperate with scholars of
varying disciplinary backgrounds; moreover, we strongly recommend that
the selection of this crucial post be made by a specially appointed selection
committee of international experts in religious studies. We expect that the
proposed Center will greatly promote Jerusalem as an important center for
the study of religion within the wider scholarly world.

7
COMMITTEES REPORT

8
 REVIEW COMMITTEE

The Department of Comparative Religion

The Department of Comparative Religion, hereinafter "the Department,"

was established in 1956 and designed as a graduate department within the

Faculty of Humanities. In 2010, the Rector of the Hebrew University of

Jerusalem appointed a review committee to advise the University on ways

to address the entire spectrum of Study of Religions teaching and research

at the HU, and not only the current composition of the Department of

Comparative Religion, concerning itself with matters of undergraduate and

graduate programs, addressing fields of coverage and areas of strength and

weakness, and advise on ways to improve and develop the Study of

Religions at the University. The members of the review committee were

Professor (Emeritus) Jan N. Bremmer, University of Groningen, The

Netherlands (Chair), Professor Martin Goodman, University of Oxford,

United Kingdom, Professor (Emeritus) Shaul Shaked, Hebrew University

of Jerusalem and Professor (Emeritus) Harvey Goldberg, Hebrew

University of Jerusalem.

The review committee convened for four days from November 28

December 2, 2010. It read and discussed material prepared by the Head of

the School of Philosophy and Religion, Prof. Carl Posy and by Dr. Yael

9
Ben-Tor, Chairman of the Department of Religious Studies. Although very

helpful, this material was in some respects not wholly clear or complete but

it was supplemented by further written materials requested and received by

the Committee in the course of its visit.

Our evaluation of the Department is based on the material provided

in the Self Evaluation Report and these further written materials, and

complemented by an extensive number of interviews with staff and

students. The committee met with the deans of the Faculties of Social

Sciences and Humanities, the Head of the School of Philosophy and

Religion, the Chairperson of the Department, the members of the

Department, the chairs and members of relevant departments and institutes,

the Vice-Rector, the Rector and the President. The committee also met

separately with delegates of the Departments students, graduates, and PhD

students (see Appendix B for a list of people interviewed).

10
Introduction - The Hebrew University, the Faculty of Humanities and
the Department of Comparative Religion:

The growing importance of religion in the contemporary world has

contributed to a great increase in interest in religious studies in universities

across the world. In many areas of religious studies, the contribution of

scholars at the Hebrew University has been, and remains, exceptional. The

challenge faced by the University is how best to harness such talented

scholars as exist at the University to the benefit of the University at large

and its students, to the wider society in Israel and to the international

academic community.

The greatest strength of the Hebrew University in religious studies

has always been in the study of Judaism (in which the university remains at

the forefront of scholarship worldwide) and Islam (which has suffered from

some attrition in recent years). In both cases the strong emphasis on the

study of texts which has been traditional at the university has produced

scholarship of unrivalled excellence, but there has also been a distinguished

tradition of study (of these religions and others) within the social sciences

(particularly in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology in the

Faculty of Social Sciences). Many other aspects of religion (such as art,

archaeology, law, music and politics) are studied at a high level in other

parts of the university.

11
 The impact of the religious studies carried on at the University on the

wider academic and general public has been smaller than might have been

expected from the wealth of available expertise, primarily because of a lack

of coordination of all these efforts within the university. Moreover, in the

Faculty of Humanities the study of the religions that are so prominently

present in and important for Jerusalem Islam, Judaism and Christianity

is spread over several departments. Although the 2006 Gager Report has

led to the reduction of the number of departments, the present number of 22

departments, often with a strong sense of territoriality, is not really

conducive to the study of religion across disciplinary lines and historical

periods. The role of the Department of Comparative Religion (as it has

been named in English until now) in promoting such studies has been less

central than might have been expected from its name. In part this has been

precisely because of the excellence of the work in individual areas in other

parts of the Faculty of Humanities, which has often enabled study of

specific religions and approaches to be carried on in isolation. It is clear

that there are strong arguments for seeking a mechanism for encouraging,

coordinating, facilitating and stimulating such studies in Jerusalem, and for

taking advantage of the unique position of Jerusalem as a focus of religious

interest, even fervor, in three of the major world religions.

12
 The Committee considered carefully other options for the

reorganization of the study of religions within the Faculty of Humanities to

counter the existing fragmentation but concluded that it is of paramount

importance that one department be made responsible for providing focus

and stimulus for the study of religion as a general human phenomenon as

against the study of individual religions. Ideally, this should be the task of a

Department of Religious Studies. At the Hebrew University the current

Department has ended up, for historical reasons, as being not so much a

Department of Religious Studies as a Department of Early Christianity and

Indian Studies (the latter dealing primarily with language and literature,

and only marginally with religion). This is an unfortunate development that

should be rectified. It is the aim of the Committee to make a number of

recommendations to that effect.

The Departments Goals and Their Implementation:

The Departments Self Evaluation Report describes its initial

objective in the following terms:

to provide students with a broad basis in research on religious

and cultural phenomena with systematic study of specific

religions and comparisons between different religions. The

method of the study is, in the main, historical-philological, which

13
 means focusing on the religions and their literatures and

languages. Special attention is given to the methodological issues

involved in comparative studies, familiarizing students with

approaches that include the phenomenological, psychological,

sociological and anthropological.

However, the Committee must regretfully observe that the actual

reality falls short of this ideal. At the same time it is only fair to observe

that this is not only the fault of the Department. Historical developments

have meant that most members of the Department prefer to teach their own

specialities instead of giving sufficient training in the methodological

issues that they describe in the mission statement quoted above. This

situation has to change. In addition, the growing student population means

that, perhaps in contrast to previous decades, many students no longer go to

the Hebrew University to become scholars but, instead, to receive a good

general education that will equip them for positions in all walks of life. It is

time that their university training reflects this reality.

The Committee thinks that it is possible to remedy the present

situation by focusing on changes in the staffing of the Department and the

further restructuring of the curriculum. The Committee firmly concluded

that one alternative solution put to it, to transfer teaching in the study of

religions to a new interdepartmental Program in place of the current

14
Department, would not provide the answer to the current problems, as

emerged from a number of interviews conducted by the Committee: if

Programs which are taught by a number of departments are to be

successful, the participating departments themselves must be strong.

For the changes in the staffing of the Department, we recommend

creating a number of posts focusing on the study of contemporary religion.

Until now, this side of the study of religion has been, on the whole,

neglected in the Faculty of Humanities. This has meant that the Department

has not been able to make a noteworthy contribution to the study of the

modern problems that are of vital concern to a wide spectrum of society,

such as fundamentalism, the resurgence of religion in many parts of the

globe and the changing nature of religion in the Western world. By adding

modern and contemporary concerns to the curriculum, the university will

be promoting the acquisition of important perspectives and skills derived

from the social sciences.

As the result of the changes recommended by the Committee, the

Faculty will end up with, in effect, a completely new Department of

Religious Studies, which will be much better equipped to undertake the

role of its present mission statement.

15
Department Faculty:

The Department was founded in 1956 by two brilliant scholars,

David Flusser and R.J. Zwi Werblowsky, who had distinct personalities

and separate interests in the study of religious traditions, but complemented

each other in several ways. Zwi Werblowsky held leading positions in the

international organization for the study of religions and on the board of the

journal of that organization, Numen, and was very much sought after as a

speaker and writer by different scholarly bodies. David Flusser left his

mark on the study of Christianity and in particular the study of Jesus and on

the interpretation of the Dead Sea Scrolls and its relation to the formation

of Christianity. The shape and the traditions of the Department were largely

determined by these two founding fathers. The Department later included

Michael E. Stone, who is working on the Armenian tradition, especially in

relation to the Jewish Apocrypha, and Shaul Shaked, whose work is mainly

in the field of Iranian Studies as well as in that of Jewish and general

magical traditions in Late Antiquity in the Near East. Both have retired

some years ago. It also included David Shulman, who is still a member of

the Department, but who has never felt that his main vocation was the

study of religious phenomena. Shulman deals with Indian languages and

literatures, with particular interest in the South Indian literary traditions.

Each of the three last-named scholars held a joint appointment with the

16
Department of Indian, Iranian and Armenian Studies, which no longer

exists.

Currently the Department consists of two groups of instructors, in

line with the dual composition of the Department in general: a group of

people working on Christianity, mostly on early Christianity, and another

group working on Indian languages and literatures, mostly on earlier

periods. There seems to be little or no intellectual interaction between the

two groups.

The full-time members of staff working on early Christianity

currently consist of three people: Dr. David Satran, Dr. Bruria Biton-

Ashkeloni and Dr. Serge Ruzer. Professor Paula Fredriksen, a very eminent

scholar in the fields of New Testament studies and Patristics, is a

distinguished visiting professor attached to the Department. Up to about a

year ago there were two additional members of this section in the

Department: Professor Guy Stroumsa and Dr. Sergio La Porta, who left the

Department for different reasons. With the departure of these scholars the

Department has not only been considerably depleted in number in relation

to its overall staffing level, but it has also been deprived of two persons

who made unique contributions to its curriculum and endowed it with

dimensions that it lacks at the moment. The former is a highly regarded

scholar with an interest in the religion of Late Antiquity, in the study of

17
religion in general and in the history of modern scholarship of religion. Dr.

La Porta was the only member of the Department to deal with Eastern

Christianity (Dr. Ruzer contributes partly to this field, but chiefly from the

point of view of the study of the Gospels), and he was a major driving force

in organizing international conferences on problems of religion and culture

in general.

Professor Steven Kaplan, who is a specialist in African culture, with

particular emphasis on Ethiopia (and thus having a particular interest in

Ethiopian Christianity and Judaism), is also the one person in the current

composition of the Department who is interested in the methodology of the

study of religion in general. As he has held and is still holding important

central positions in the academic administration of the university, currently

as director of the Truman Institute for Peace, his attention has inevitably

not been wholly directed to the Department.

In looking at the composition of the Christianity section of the

Department, one cannot fail to notice that practically all full-time faculty

members are beyond the point of their mid-career and are approaching the

age of retirement. Within approximately ten years the whole of this section

of the Department will retire.

It is clear that the strength of the remaining full-time staff in early

Christianity does not lie primarily in their research output. They are widely

18
recognized as competent scholars, but most of them do not hold a

particularly prominent position in their field either in the Hebrew

University or internationally. On the other hand, one should take into

account the very high esteem they enjoy as teachers. The Committee has

read the ranking given to them by the student body and this was confirmed

by the frank talks with student representatives, who had only praise for the

dedication, openness, willingness to help and erudition of the instructors in

the Department, far above what one usually gets from students in a similar

department. Most students on all levels also claimed that their learning

experience in this Department is more satisfactory than in other

departments, and this is confirmed by the formal student evaluations.

It is also clear that the very good atmosphere that reigns in the

Department, an atmosphere that is conducive to good learning experience,

derives from the dedication of the staff to teaching rather than from the

research culture. What is missing in the Department in its present

composition is an outstanding scholar, who could lift the prestige of the

Department, override reservations from colleagues in other departments,

and create a new spirit of intensive and innovative research that is lacking

at this moment in the Department.

Considering these factors the Committee considers it necessary to

take radical measures in order to repair the standing of the Department. The

19
Committee is of the opinion that the profound changes that need to be

implemented in the Department can be brought about by appointing as soon

as it is feasible a leading scholar in a major field of religious studies, and

then, gradually, by making several new appointments to compensate for the

impending retirement of most members of the Christianity section. It is of

course absolutely necessary to see to it that the new appointments fulfill not

only the needs of the Department in the years to come as far as fields of

study are concerned, but also contribute to the standing of the Department

as a center for the general study of religion within the university and

beyond. The proper order of new appointments should therefore be, first,

the appointment of a senior, but preferably relatively young scholar, who

should be a driving force in the Department.

The other major section in the Department of Religious Studies is

that of Indian Studies, which in its present constitution is the result of the

decision to dissolve the Department of Indian, Iranian and Armenian

Studies by doing away with its Iranian component. The members of the

Indian section of that department preferred not to join the Department of

East Asian Studies. Notwithstanding, the natural place for those aspects of

Indian Studies that do not deal with religion should be in a department

different from that of Religious Studies. The existing combination of the

study of Christianity with that of a general section on Indian languages and

20
literatures does not make for an acceptable and well-balanced Department

of Religious Studies.

As far as the composition of the Indian section is concerned, the

leadership of David Shulman, who is a highly-regarded expert in the field

and a skilled moderator of people, has assured this section of the

Department a respected position not only in Israel but also globally. The

younger people in the group are all gifted scholars with a very good

reputation.

Department Curriculum:

The Department has for many years taught an M.A. syllabus in

which students are trained to an impressively high level in the study and

analysis of specific religious texts in Christianity, Hinduism or Buddhism.

A number of these students go on to doctoral studies in specific religious

traditions, again generally through analysis of specific texts. The current

B.A. degree has recently been restructured and divided into four tracks

(Judaism, Christianity, Islam and the religions and cultures of India and

Tibet); teaching for the B.A. is also in general text-based, and the provision

of the teaching in Judaism and Islam is for the most part provided through

courses offered by other departments within the Faculty of Humanities.

21
B.A. course

Full evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the B.A.

curriculum is restricted by the novelty of the degree in its present form and

its continuing evolution some aspects of the curriculum were only

implemented for the first time at the beginning of the current academic

year, and some other planned aspects have yet to be implemented. The

current syllabus shows signs of having been created out of existing

resources without the time and capacity for creative innovation which

would be desirable in designing such a syllabus from scratch.

Nonetheless, the general rationale and distinctive features of the

teaching methods and delivery of the current course are by now clear, and

some comment is possible.

The course is already attracting, and keeping, an impressive number

of students, so there is clearly a market for a course such as is being

offered, but delivery (perhaps inevitably, in light of the current stress on

staffing within the Department) is imperfect in the following ways:

a. There is considerable imbalance between the study of Indian

religions and the study of Christianity in the degree to which

language acquisition is required and the concentration on analysis of

texts in the original language: students of Indian religions study

22
 Sanskrit or other relevant languages from the first year and from

early in the course read Sanskrit texts, whereas the requirement to

learn Latin or Greek is deferred for students concentrating on

Christianity until the second and third years of the course, and the

texts are in practice studied in translation, so that the relevance of the

language study to the course is less obvious. The rhetoric of the

Department strongly emphasizes philological studies, and the

students we interviewed expressed a desire for more, not less,

language study, but it may be that substitution of other skills for the

study of religion, such as field work (not currently available in the

syllabus), would be more appropriate for a number of students. It is

in any case clear that all language study that is retained needs to be

properly integrated into the teaching of the course as a whole.

b. The current syllabus envisages that the teaching of Islam and

Judaism will be achieved primarily through courses already provided

by other departments within the Faculty of Humanities. This is

unavoidable in light of the current staffing profile of the Department,

but it was noted by some of the teachers from those other

departments when they gave evidence to the Committee that much of

that teaching is text-based and requires a level of linguistic and other

23
 expertise which cannot be taken for granted in the case of B.A.

students from the Religions department.

c. Teaching of methodological and comparative issues is effectively

confined to a single course on Introduction to the Study of

Religions (by all accounts excellently delivered, although it was

noted by some that the emphasis in the course was on western

religions and that additional emphasis on methods in the study of

eastern religions would be desirable). A number of students stressed

the need to expand teaching on method and to integrate such

teaching into the rest of the syllabus.

d. Comparative religion features very little in the current B.A. program;

it is essentially confined to a seminar examining a single issue in two

religions in the third year. Once the Judaism and Islam tracks are

more firmly established, it would seem desirable to include teaching

on Jewish-Muslim, Muslim-Christian and Jewish-Christian relations

and interactions, which would add a distinctive flavor (along with the

emphasis on method noted in the paragraph above) to the teaching of

Judaism and Islam in this Department compared to elsewhere in the

faculty.

24
e. A number of students voiced their frustration at the sparse offerings

on contemporary religions in the syllabus. The field study to

religious communities in Jerusalem was much praised by the

students, but they noted that it left them with only a very patchy

understanding of Christianity since Late Antiquity. There were not as

yet any students on the course studying Judaism or Islam for us to

interview, but we would expect the same criticism to apply to them.

f. If the B.A. is to attract students in Judaism and Islam taking full

advantage of appropriate teaching in these two religions elsewhere in

the Faculty, it is desirable to advertise in the academic catalogue, in

an accessible and effective manner, the nature and variety of the

elective courses available to prospective students.

g. Last but not least: once the new position of a scholar with a social-

science interest in the theory and methodology of religion is in place,

the curriculum should be drastically revised into two tracks of equal

value. The first track should retain the historical-philological

approach with languages. The second track should focus on theory

and social-science methods for the understanding of contemporary

religion. (Of course, there should be a requirement for students in

25
 one track to gain some exposure to the emphases of the other track.)

In this way we will have two tracks of different orientation but of

equally valuable skills and challenges. It should be possible for

students of either of these two tracks to be of the caliber that is

required for an honors track.

M.A. course

The M.A. students we saw declared themselves very pleased with the

teaching they were receiving, but a number stated that they were frustrated

by the lack of relevant courses in modern and contemporary religion,

especially on contemporary Christianity and on modern India. They also

raised two other general issues about the structure of the course:

a. There are insufficient courses on comparisons between religions.

b. A student who has failed to study a religion other than that in which

she or he is concentrating before reaching the M.A. level is not

permitted to count an introductory course to that second religion as

part of the M.A. curriculum.

In both cases, the students seemed to us to point to a weakness in the M.A.

program in that insufficient attention is paid to enabling students to benefit

from approaches comparing different religions.

26
Ph.D. course

The doctoral students expressed themselves highly satisfied with the

wealth of scholarly expertise made available to them by the Department. It

was clear that comparative studies were seen by some as very important

and by others as essentially a distraction from completion of their theses.

The committee noted that the Department had been supportive of a student-

led initiative to hold a seminar for M.A. and Ph.D. students but that a

forum for such comparisons is not provided for doctoral students unless

there are students who take the initiative, and that as a result much doctoral

study is carried on in isolation.

Department Students:

Currently (Fall 2010), the new B.A. program within the Department,

has begun its third year. The following table shows the present distribution

of students at the B.A., M.A. and doctoral levels, and also the breakdown

into years.

27
 Department of Comparative Religion
Student Enrollment Academic Year 2010-2011
[accurate as of October 28, 2010]

BA MA Ph.D

1st year 22 5
(registered in classes) + 2 (supplementary
studies preparatory to
M.A. program)

2nd year 18 7
[+ 2 on leave of
absence from studies]

3rd year 11 2

4th year 2

Total 51 16 13
+ 2 [supplementary
studies preparatory to
M.A. program]

Total number of students in 2010-2011: 82

Several points are noteworthy: the positive response to the new program in

which 51 students are now enrolled, and the encouraging high proportion

(18/22) of the students continuing from the first to the second years. The

most recent innovation is the ability to choose a concentration in Islam or

Judaism, in addition to the earlier tracks of Christianity and India, but it is

28
too early to assess the impact of these new possibilities on the number of

students.

We had the opportunity of interviewing students from the three

degree levels. Those who agreed to sit with the committee were self-

selected. Six B.A. students appeared. They included students focusing on

India (2) and those emphasizing Christianity (4). The general feeling about

the Department and the evaluation of the program was definitely positive,

and the students articulated themselves well. It is worth noting a remark by

a member of adjunct faculty, who has had experience in teaching B.A.

students in other universities in Israel. He stated that he could immediately

sense that the level and the commitment of the students in Jerusalem were

significantly higher than what he had experienced elsewhere. The students,

who expressed a range of points of view, also voiced what they felt was

missing in the program.

One was a lack of teaching about contemporary religious

phenomena. The students appreciated the importance of classical texts, and

some were enthusiastic about studying them, but they felt they should be

studying modern aspects of religion as well, including the contributions of

sociology, anthropology and political science. Others, while relating

positively to the text-based study, thought that it was not always integrated

with the idea of studying religion. The issue of "integration," or not being

29
sure about where the program as a whole was headed, came up in other

contexts as well.

This feeling of lack of clarity of direction was expressed by the

students, even while individual courses were said to be interesting and the

teaching was highly evaluated. Parallel to this, the one (first-year) course

devoted to general concepts and methods ("Approaches to the Study of

Religion") was viewed as standing by itself, and its link to the materials

and texts featured in other courses was not made explicit. This critique was

formulated in terms of wanting more instruction, and not as signaling a

general discouragement with what they were learning.

Seven M.A. students were interviewed, representing the following

concentrations: Christianity 4, India 2, Tibetan religion 1. Their sense

of identification with the Department was palpable, and they expressed

praise for the opening of the B.A. program even though it did not affect

them directly. They made special mention of the course based on tours of

Christian sites and meeting of communities, which gave them a sense of

contemporary Jerusalem. Like the B.A. students, they wished that there

were more teachers in the Department, and had to look to other

departments (including classes in the Rothberg school) to cover their

interests. Even though they reported that the teachers were helpful in

guiding them in this search, it was the Committee's impression that the

30
interdepartmental resources were under-utilized. The M.A. students also

were disappointed by the fact that they could not take advantage of the

recent incorporation of Islamic studies because they had not taken the

necessary language courses.

Four doctoral students appeared at the Committee interview, most of

them well-advanced in their dissertation writing. They were happy with the

teaching staff, but felt the lack of institutional support at several levels.

First was a lack of physical space where they might study, leave their

books (they had to work at both the Mt. Scopus and National libraries), and

interact with other graduate students. Parallel to this was the lack of

graduate-student seminars that could expand horizons and enrich their own

work. Also, they expressed eagerness for opportunities to teach during part

of their research-student careers. In addition, while they had received

support from the Authority of Research Students for one trip abroad, they

felt that in the current academic atmosphere there should be more support

for presenting papers at conferences. The picture emerging at all the levels

appeared consistent: satisfaction at the ability for in-depth study of specific

topics and religious traditions, but criticism of the isolation of their work

from other directions and disciplines within the university.

31
The Jerusalem Center for the Study of Religion and Society:

The Committee's deliberations on the study of religion at the Hebrew

University were carried out on two planes. One focused on the specific

department within the Faculty of Humanities, and the other concerned ways

of taking greater advantage of excellent scholars in the university, in all the

faculties, who work on topics that involved religion. In particular, the

engagement of the Faculty of Social Sciences (e.g. the departments of

Sociology and Anthropology, or Political Science), presents the possibility

of interdisciplinary research, while other units such as the School of

Education or the Law School are also relevant. It is the Committees strong

opinion that the best way to energize the study of religion is by the creation

of a formal Center that would encourage cooperation across disciplinary

boundaries, and emphasize the critical place of religion in a variety of

social (political, economic, and so forth) processes along with further

exploration of its cultural and spiritual dimensions. Such a Center would

coordinate, facilitate and stimulate a range of activities including seminars,

conferences, and innovative research projects, taking advantage of the

unique position of Jerusalem within Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. We

thus recommend the foundation of a body to be called The Jerusalem

Center for the Study of Religion and Society. It should be headed by a

charismatic, leading person in a field relating to the study of religion who

32
must be firmly based in the Department of Religious Studies, be highly

competent academically but also possessing administrative skills, and be

willing to cooperate with scholars of varying disciplinary backgrounds. We

expect that such a Center will greatly promote Jerusalem as an important

center for the study of religion within the wider scholarly world. Given the

prime importance of this position, it is absolutely necessary that the

selection of this crucial post be made by a specially appointed selection

committee of, mainly, international experts in religious studies. Members

of such a committee, of course, would first familiarize themselves with the

range of research, teaching, and personnel related to the study of religion at

the university. The creation of such a Center necessitates a commitment by

the University administration to set this as a high-priority goal in its fund-

raising activity. It may be assumed that given the resonance of Jerusalem

with the major religions this should not prove too difficult a task.

Summary Evaluation:

From an early stage of the Committees work it became clear that the

Department review had to entail a comprehensive discussion of the place of

religion in the Hebrew University as a whole and not only of the

Department of Comparative Religion. Consequentially, there are a number

of observations that can be safely made on the basis of our review.

33
 The two groups of Early Christianity and Indian Studies in the

Department do not match; the focus in the Department is too much on

earlier periods and too exclusively historical-philological; the staff of the

Christianity group is better in teaching than in research, and the

Department lacks the driving force of a scholar who might be capable of

raising the standing of the Department in the Hebrew University and

beyond. The Department must therefore undergo drastic reconstruction.

A satisfactory implementation of the Committees views will entail

long-range strategic planning that will involve the immediate appointment

of a scholar with theoretical skills and interests in the world of religion at

large and, subsequently, the gradual filling in of new positions in

Christianity and new joint positions in contemporary Islam and Judaism

(possibly to be combined with a post for a scholar interested in theoretical

and methodological issues) as current members of the Department retire.

The newly reconstructed Department will thus be able to articulate

for its students, the university and the wider academic community the

relevance of religious studies for the early twenty-first century. With the

strengths of the existing Department in its two fields, the additional

strategic appointments of faculty strongly committed to a social-scientific

approach and the foundation of a new Center for the study of religion and

society, the Department and the Hebrew University will re-emerge as a

34
leading centre in the study of religion in Jerusalem, Israel and the world at

large.

Summary of our recommendations:

1. We recommend an extensive overhaul of the current Department of

Comparative Religion, as this is the best way to guarantee the teaching and

continuing research in religion at HU.

2. To avoid misunderstandings and unrealistic expectations about the

contents and outcome of teaching and research as regards comparisons

between religions, we also recommend changing its English name into

Department of Religious Studies.

3. Given the current composition of the Department (basically a

combination of Early Christianity and Indian Studies) and its focus on early

periods of Christianity and India, we recommend a widening of its staff by

joint appointments in contemporary Islam and Judaism, preferably with a

demonstrable anthropological interest.

4. Before any restructuring of the Department takes place, it is essential

that a new appointment is made of a charismatic and leading figure in

35
religious studies with methodological and theoretical interests and a wide

view of religion, preferably in the study of contemporary religion.

5. Given the impending retirement of current staff in the teaching of

Christianity, we recommend maintaining at all times at least two positions

in Early Christianity and, possibly, also one in Eastern (Byzantine or

Syriac) Christianity.

6. In the immediate future, after the recent losses of two full positions in

the study of Christianity, it is necessary to replace at least one of these

positions with a position in Christianity. Notwithstanding the importance of

the study of the New Testament in Jerusalem, it is also crucial to study later

forms of Christianity, in particular modern or contemporary ones in

Jerusalem.

7. We recognize that the current expertise in the Department in Late

Antiquity would gain greatly by a specialist in Greek and Roman religion,

but we do not see this as a priority. Such a specialist, if appointed, should

be a joint appointment with the Department of Classical Studies.

36
8. Given the approaching retirement of most members of the Department,

the new configuration of the Department we advocate will be partially

realized by redefining the positions left vacant by staff as they retire.

9. In due time, the part of Indian Studies that focuses on Indian culture and

literature should be moved to a different department.

10. Regarding the curriculum we strongly commend the move already

made by the Department to incorporate Judaism and Islam in the B.A., but

the incremental progress of the different tracks, in particular, the proper

integration of language teaching into the courses for Islam, Judaism and

Christianity needs to be ensured.

11. The curriculum must be presented in such a way to potential students

that they can immediately see the wide range of teaching of Judaism and

Islam available to them in the university.

12. In the B.A., proper attention should be paid to method and theory

throughout the curriculum, but the comparative element should be kept to a

minimum, as students first have to acquire a satisfactory grasp of individual

37
religions. This is different in the M.A., where comparisons should be an

essential element of the study of religions.

13. In order to coordinate, facilitate and stimulate seminars, conferences

and research projects in the study of religion within the university across

the full gamut of the disciplines and, furthermore, to take full advantage of

the unique position of Jerusalem within Islam, Judaism and Christianity,

we strongly recommend the foundation of a new body to be called The

Jerusalem Center for the Study of Religion and Society. Its head must

be a charismatic, leading person in the fields of Islam, Judaism or Religious

Anthropology, firmly based in the Department, academically but also

administratively highly competent and willing to cooperate with scholars of

varying disciplinary backgrounds; moreover, we strongly recommend that

the selection of this crucial post be made by a specially appointed selection

committee of international experts in religious studies. We expect that the

proposed Center will greatly promote Jerusalem as an important center for

the study of religion within the wider scholarly world.

38
APPENDICES

39
 APPENDIX A

RESUMES OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS

1) Professor Jan N. Bremmer, Chair (University of Groningen)

2) Professor Harvey Goldberg (Hebrew University)

3) Professor Martin Goodman (Oxford)

4) Professor Shaul Shaked (Hebrew University)

40
 CURRICULUM VITAE

Jan Nicolaas Bremmer (b. December 18th, 1944)

Professor Emeritus Religious Studies
Faculty of Theology and Religious Studies
University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands

December 2010

SPECIALITIES:
Greek, Roman, Early Christian, and Contemporary Religion,
Social History, History of Scholarship

UNIVERSITY EDUCATION:
Free University, Amsterdam, 1962 - 1970 (Classics and Spanish)
Bristol University, 1969 - 1970

DISSERTATION:
The Early Greek Conception of the Soul (Free University Amsterdam:
1979)

EMPLOYMENT:
Military Service (Intelligence: Russian), 1970 -1972
Local high-school teacher, Classics, 1972 - 1974
Utrecht University: Assistant Professor of Ancient History, 1974-
1978; Associate Professor of Ancient History, 1978 - 1990
University of Groningen: Chair, Religious Studies, 1990-2009

FELLOWSHIPS AND VISITING PROFESSORSHIPS:

Center for Hellenic Studies, Washington D.C., 1980 - 1981
Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, Fall 2000
Visiting Canterbury Fellowship, Christchurch (NZ), March 2002
Inaugural Getty Villa Professor, Malibu, 2006-2007
Visiting Leventis Professor, Edinburgh, Autumn 2007
Senior Onassis Fellow, Autumn 2008

FORMAL LECTURES:
The Read Tuckwell Lectures, Inventing the Afterlife, Bristol, 1995,
published as The Rise and Fall of the Afterlife (London: Routledge,
2002)
Heuscheuervortrag, Heidelberg, 1996

41
 Loeb Lecture, Harvard, 1997
Samson Eitrem Memorial Lecture, Oslo, 1998
4 lectures on conversion, Graduiertenkolleg Das antike Christentum,
Bremen, October 2004

EDITORIAL ACTIVITIES:
Iconography of Religion, Leiden: Brill, editor-in-chief, 1990-
Kerk en Theologie, member Editorial Board, 1990-2006
Feit & Fictie, member Advisory Board, 1993-2005
Mortality, member International Editorial Board, 1995-2006
Studies on Early Christian Apocrypha, Leuven: Peeters, editor-in-
chief, 1995-
Acta Antiqua Hungarica, member Advisory Board, 2000-
Ancient Narrative, member Editorial Board, 2002-
Groningen Studies in Cultural Change, Leuven: Peeters, member
Editorial Board, 2003-
Studies in the History and Anthropology of Religion, Leuven: Peeters,
editor, 2007-

PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES:
Teaching Committee, Faculty of Letters, University Utrecht, Chairman
1985 - 1987
Dutch Society for the Science of Religion, President, 1991 - 1995
Rudolf Agricola Institute for the Study of the Humanities, Chairman,
1994 - 2002
Faculty of Theology and Religious Studies, University of Groningen,
Dean, 1996 - 2000, 2001-2005
The Future of the Religious Past, Netherlands Organisation for
Scientific Research Programme, vice-chairperson, 2003-

REFEREEING
Cambridge University Press, Cornell University, Hebrew University,
Jacobs University Bremen, Ohio State University, Oxford University
Press, Universitt Erfurt, University of Cincinnati, University of North
Carolina, Yale University, Yale University Press

HOMEPAGE:
http://www.rug.nl/staff/j.n.bremmer/index

MANY PUBLICATIONS:
http://www.creamofscience.org/nl/page/keur.view/11.keur

42
ROYAL DISTINCTION
Officer in the Order of Oranje-Nassau (2006)

BOOKS
(in preparation, Co-editor with Marco Formisano)
Perpetuas Passions, Oxford: Oxford University Press

1983 The Early Greek Concept of the Soul

Princeton: Princeton University Press, paperbackedition: 1987,
reprinted 1989,1993, translated as El concepto del alma en la antigua
Grecia, Madrid: Ediciones Siruela, 2002

1987 (Editor)
Interpretations of Greek Mythology, London: Croom Helm
paperbackedition: 1988, reprinted 1990, 1994

(Co-author, with N. Horsfall)

Roman Myth and Mythography
London: Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies, Supplements no
52

1988 (Co-author, with J. den Boeft)

Martelaren van de Oude Kerk (a translation into Dutch of the oldest
Christian Acta Martyrum), Kampen: Kok

(Editor)
Van Sappho tot De Sade: momenten in de geschiedenis van de
seksualiteit
Amsterdam: Wereldbibliotheek, translated as
From Sappho to De Sade. Moments in the History of Sexuality
London: Routledge: 1989, paperbackedition: 1991, reprinted 1991,
De Safo a Sade. Momentos na histria da sexualidade
Campinas: Papirus (Brazil), 1995

1991 Profeten, zieners en de macht in Griekenland, Isral en het

vroegmoderne Europa
Utrecht: Bijleveld (inaugural lecture)

(Co-editor, with Herman Roodenburg)

A Cultural History of Gesture, Cambridge: Polity Press
paperbackedition: 1993, reprinted 1994, translated as

43
 Gebaren en lichaamshouding van de oudheid tot heden, Nijmegen:
SUN, 1993
O istorie culturala a gesturilor, Bukarest: Editura Polimark, 2000

1992 (Co-editor, with F. Garca Martnez)

Sacred History and Sacred Texts in Early Judaism: a symposium in
honour of A.S. van der Woude, Kampen: Kok Pharos

1994 Greek Religion (Greece & Rome: New Surveys in the Classics 24)
Oxford: Oxford University Press, second edition 1999, reprinted 2003
translated as Gtter, Mythen und Heiligtmer im antiken Griechenland
Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1996
La religione greca, Cosenza: Giordano, 2002
Goden en mensen in het oude Griekenland, Kampen: Ten Have, 2004
La religion griega, Cordoba: Ediciones El Almendro, 2006

1995 (Co-editor, with Lourens P. van den Bosch)

Between Poverty and the Pyre. Moments in the History of Widowhood
London: Routledge
(Editor)
The Apocryphal Acts of John, Kampen: Kok Pharos

1996 (Editor)
The Apocryphal Acts of Paul and Thecla, Kampen: Kok Pharos

1997 (Co-editor, with Herman Roodenburg)

A Cultural History of Humour, Cambridge: Polity Press,
translated as Kulturgeschichte des Humors: von der Antike bis heute
Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1999
Homo ridens, Amsterdam: Boom, 1999
Una historia cultural del humor, Madrid: Sequitur, 1999
Una histria cultural do humor
Rio de Janeiro and So Paulo: Editora Record, 2000
Gaoxiao: Youmo wenhuashi, Beijing: Shehin Kexue Wenxian
Chubanshe, 2001

1998 (Editor)
The Apocryphal Acts of Peter: Magic, Miracles and Gnosticism,
Leuven: Peeters

44
2000 (Editor)
The Apocryphal Acts of Andrew, Leuven: Peeters

2001 (Editor)
The Apocryphal Acts of Thomas, Leuven: Peeters

2002 The Rise and Fall of the Afterlife, London: Routledge

2003 (Co-editor, with J. Veenstra)

The Metamorphosis of Magic from Antiquity to the Middle Ages,
Leuven: Peeters

(Co-editor, with I. Czachesz)

The Apocalypse of Peter, Leuven: Peeters

2005 Van zendelingen, zuilen en zapreligie, Delft: Eburon

2006 (Co-editor, with W.J. van Bekkum and A.L. Molendijk)

Cultures of Conversions, Leuven: Peeters

(Co-editor, with W.J. van Bekkum and A.L. Molendijk)

Paradigms, Poetics and Politics of Conversion, Leuven: Peeters

2007 (Editor)
The Strange World of Human Sacrifice, Leuven: Peeters

(Co-editor, with I. Czachesz)

The Visio Pauli and the Gnostic Apocalypse of Paul, Leuven: Peeters

2008 Greek Religion & Culture, the Bible and the Ancient Near East,
Leiden: Brill

2010 The Rise of Christianity through the Eyes of Gibbon, Harnack and
Rodney Stark Second Edition 2010: Groningen: Barkhuis.

(Co-editor with Andrew Erskine)

The Gods of Ancient Greece, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press

(Editor)
The Pseudo-Clementines, Leuven: Peeters

45
CURRICULUM VITAE

Harvey E. Goldberg May 16, 1939

EDUCATION
1961 Columbia College, A.B.
1963 Harvard University, M.A.
1967 Harvard University, Ph.D.
1961 Jewish Theological Seminary of America

ACADEMIC EMPLOYMENT (REGULAR APPOINTMENTS)

Spring, 1966 Harvard University Teaching Fellow
Fall, 1966 University of Iowa Instructor
1967-1969 University of Iowa Assistant Professor
1969-1972 University of Iowa Associate Professor
Curator of Human Relations
Area Files
1972-1979 Hebrew University Senior Lecturer
1979-1987 Hebrew University Associate Professor
1984-1987 Chairperson
1987- Hebrew University Professor
Spring, 2004 Co-organizer of Group at
Institute of Advanced Studies
Winter, 2005 Sarah Allen Shaine Chair in
Sociology and Anthropology
Fall, 2007 Emeritus

VISITING APPOINTMENTS
1968-1969 Columbia University Research Associate
Summer, 1975; Jewish Theological
1989; 1991; 1994 Seminary Visiting Lecturer
Summer, 1977 University of Texas Visiting Professor
1977-1978 University of Cambridge:
St. Johns College Visiting Scholar
Fall, 1987 New Hall College Fellow
Spring, 1988; University of California
1994 at Berkeley Visiting Professor
Fall, 1988 Brown University Visiting Professor
Fall, 1989 Annenberg Research
Institute Fellow
Winter, 1993 Ecole des Hautes Etudes

46
 en Sciences Sociales Visiting Lecturer
Winter, 1994 Oxford Centre for Hebrew
and Jewish Studies Skirball Fellow
Winter, 1995 Rockefeller Study
Center, Bellagio Fellow
Spring, 1995 Dartmouth College Visiting Professor
Spring, 1999 Boazii University,
Istanbul Visiting Professor
Fall, 1999; Center for Advanced
2003 Judaic Studies, University
of Pennsylvania Fellow
2002-2003 Indiana University Distinguished
Visiting Professor
2007-2008 University of Florida Visiting Professor

EDITORSHIPS
Corresponding editor for Israel, Current Anthropology, 1977-1983.
International Editorial Board, Ethnic Groups (through 1993).
International Editorial Board, The Maghreb Review.
International Editorial Board, Wayne State University Press series on Jewish
Ethnography
International Editorial Board, Jewish Cultural Studies series, Littman Library
Editor (with Matthias Lehmann), Indiana University Press series in Sephardi
and Mizrahi Studies

BOOKS AND EDITED VOLUMES

Cave-dwellers and Citrus-growers: A Jewish Community in Libya and

Israel.Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1972.

Editor, special issue of Ethnic Groups (published by Gordon & Breach) on

"Ethnicity in Israeli Society," Vol. I., No. 3, pp. 163-262, 1977.

Antropologia: Adam, Hevrah Ve-Tarbut [Introduction to Anthropology]. Tel

Aviv, "Gome" (Tcherikover), 1978. (In collaboration with Orit Ziv and
Eileen Basker, Hebrew)

Higgid Mordeca, by Mordecai Ha-Cohen. The history, institutions and

customs of the Jews of Libya. Edited and annotated by H. Goldberg.
Jerusalem, Ben-Zvi Institute, 1979. Second revised edition, 1980. (Hebrew)

47
The Book of Mordechai, by Mordecai Ha-Cohen. Trans. and edited by
Harvey Goldberg. Institute for the Study of Human Issues, Philadelphia,
1980. Reprinted: London, Darf Publishers, 1993.

Greentown's Youth: Disadvantaged Youth in an Israeli Development Town.

Assen, Van Gorcum, 1984.

Editor, Judaism Viewed from Within and from Without: Anthropological

Studies. Albany, State University of New York Press, 1987.

Danielle Storper-Perez and Harvey Goldberg. Au Pied du Mur de Jerusalem:

Approche anthropologique du Mur du Temple. Paris, Cerf, 1989.

Jewish Life in Muslim Libya: Rivals and Relatives. Chicago, University of

Chicago Press, 1990.

Editor, Sephardi and Middle Eastern Jewries: History and Culture in the
Modern Era. Bloomington and New York, Indiana University Press and The
Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1996.

Orit Abuhav, Esther Hertzog, Harvey Goldberg and Emanuel Marx, ed.
Yisrael: Antropologia Meqomit [A Reader in Israeli Anthropology]. Tel
Aviv, Tcherikover, 1998. (Hebrew)

Editor, The Life of Judaism. Berkeley, University of California Press, 2001.

Harvey Goldberg, Sam Heilman and Barbara Kirshenblatt-Gimblett. The

Israel Experience: Studies in Youth Travel and Jewish Identity, edited by
Barry Chazan. Jerusalem, ACBP Foundation, 2002.

Jewish Passages: Cycles of Jewish Life. Berkeley, University of California

Press, 2003.

E. Hertzog, O. Abuhav, H. Goldberg and E. Marx, ed. Perspectives on Israeli

Anthropology. Detroit, Wayne State University Press, 2009.

Harvey Goldberg, Steven M. Cohen and Ezra Kopelowitz, eds. Dynamic

Belonging: Contemporary Jewish Collective Identities. New York, Berghahn
Books, in press.

48
SOME RECENT ARTICLES AND CHAPTERS

Ethnic and Religious Dilemmas of a Jewish State: A Cultural and Historical

Perspective. In Akira Usuki, ed. State Formation and Ethnic Relations in the
Middle East. Osaka, Japan Center for Area Studies, National Museum of
Ethnology, 2001, 47-64.

Harvey E. Goldberg and Hagar Salamon. From Laboratory to Field: Notes

on Studying Diversity in Israeli Society. Hagar: International Social Science
Review 3:123-137, 2002.

Modern Jewish Society and Sociology. In Martin Goodman, ed. The Oxford
Handbook of Jewish Studies. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2002, 975-
1001.

Louis Finkelstein's The Jews: A Mid-Twentieth Century Presentation of

Judaism. In Jack Kugelmass, ed. Key Texts in American Jewish Culture.
New Brunswick, NJ, Rutgers University Press, 2003, 199-209.

Thinking Globally about Judaism. In Mark Juergensmeyer, ed. Global

Religions: An Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003, 40-
51. Reprinted in Mark Jurgensmeyer, ed. The Oxford Handbook of Global
Religions. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2006, 175-185.

Sephardi Rabbinic Openness in Nineteenth-Century Tripoli: Examining a

Modern Myth in Context. In Jack Wertheimer, ed. Jewish Religious
Leadership--Image and Reality, vol. 2. New York: Jewish Theological
Seminary Press, 2004, 695-714.

The Oriental and the Orientalist: The Meeting of Mordecai Ha-Cohen and
Nahum Slouschz. Jewish Culture and History 7:1-30, 2004

The Science of Judaism and the Science of Man: Some Jewish Threads in
the History of Anthropology. In Eli Lederhendler and Jack Wertheimer,
eds. Text and Context: Essays in Modern Jewish History and
Historiography in Honor of Ismar Schorsch. New York: Jewish
Theological Seminary, 2005, 283-317.

Sabbath Sport on the Shores of Tripoli: Muscles and Memory among the
Jews of Libya. In Jack Kugelmass, ed. Jews, Sports, and the Rites of
Citizenship. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2007, 131-144.

49
From Sefaradi to Mizrahi and Back Again: The Changing Meanings of the
Term Sefaradi in Its Social Environments. Jewish Social Studies 15:165-188,
2008.

Judaism as a Cultural System. In Judith Baskin and Ken Seeskin, ed. The
Cambridge Guide to Jewish History, Religion, and Culture. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2010, 288-310.

Anthropology and an Integrative Approach toward Jewish Studies

(Epilogue). In Raanan Boustan, Oren Kosansky, and Marina Rustow, ed.
Jewish Studies at the Crossroads of Anthropology and History: Authority,
Diaspora, Tradition. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2011,
318-334.

50
 CURRICULUM VITAE

NAME Martin David Goodman, M.A., D.Phil., D.Litt.,

F.B.A.

CURRENT POST Professor of Jewish Studies, University of

Oxford

DATE OF BIRTH 1 August 1953

EDUCATION 1971 (January-July) Hebrew University of

Jerusalem: One Year Programme

1971-80 Trinity College, Oxford: B.A. in Literae Humaniores 1971-75

D.Phil. 1975-80: Thesis in the Sub-Faculty of Ancient History on State

and Society in Roman Galilee, A.D. 132-212.

CURRENT POSITIONS

1991 - Reader in Jewish Studies in the University of

Oxford and Professorial Fellow of Wolfson
College. (Title of Professor of Jewish Studies
conferred in 1996)

1986 - Fellow of the Oxford Centre for Hebrew and

Jewish Studies.

1988 - Lecturer in Roman History at Christ Church,

Oxford.

PREVIOUS APPOINTMENTS HELD

1976 77 Kaye Junior Research Fellow at the Oxford

Centre for Postgraduate Hebrew Studies.

1977 - 86 Lecturer in Ancient History at the University of

Birmingham

51
 1986 - 91 Senior Research Fellow of St. Cross College.

1990 - 91 Hebrew Centre Lecturer in Ancient History,

University of Oxford.

1993 (March-September) Fellow at the Institute for

Advanced Studies, Hebrew University of
Jerusalem.

1995-6 and
1999-2000 Acting President of the Oxford Centre for
Hebrew and Jewish Studies.

2003-5 British Academy Research Reader

2005-7 Chairman of the Faculty Board of Oriental Studies

PUBLICATIONS (books)

Books authored:

State and Society in Roman Galilee, A.D. 132-212 (Oxford Centre for
Postgraduate Hebrew Studies series). Rowman and Allanheld, Totowa.
1983. (Republished with new introduction, Vallentine Mitchell, London
and Portland, Or. 2000).

Johann Reuchlin, On the Art of the Kabbalah (translation with Sarah

Goodman). Abaris, New York. 1983. (Republished with new introduction
by Moshe Idel, Bison Book edition, University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln
and London, 1993).

E. Schrer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ,
new English edition revised Geza Vermes, Fergus Millar and Martin
Goodman), volume 3. T. and T. Clark, Edinburgh. 1986 (part 1), 1987 (part
2). (Special responsibility for Section 33 on Jewish literature in Greek.)

The Ruling Class of Judaea: the origins of the Jewish revolt against Rome,
A.D. 66-70. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1987. (Reprinted

52
1988, 1989, 1991. Paperback edition published 1993; Portuguese and
Italian editions).
The Essenes according to the Classical Sources (with Geza Vermes). JSOT
Press, Sheffield. 1989.

Mission and Conversion: proselytizing in the religious history of the

Roman Empire. Oxford University Press, Oxford. 1994. (Paperback edition
December 1995).

The Roman World 44 B.C. - A.D. 180. Routledge, London. 1997. (Second,
expanded, edition forthcoming 2012).

Judaism in the Roman World: collected essays. Brill, Leiden, 2007.

Rome and Jerusalem: the clash of ancient civilizations. Allen Lane,

London, 2007. (US edition Knopf 2007; UK paperback Penguin 2008; US
paperback Vintage 2008; French, Italian and Polish editions).

Books edited:

Martin Goodman, ed., Jews in a Graeco-Roman World. Oxford University

Press, Oxford. 1998. (Paperback edition, January 2004).

Mark Edwards, Martin Goodman and Simon Price, eds., Apologetics in the
Roman Empire: Pagans, Jews, and Christians. Oxford University Press,
Oxford. 1999.

Apocrypha section of J. Barton and J, Muddiman, eds., Oxford Bible

Commentary. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2001, pp. 617-829 (to be
reissued as a separate volume as: Martin Goodman, John Barton and John
Muddiman, eds., The Apocrypha (Oxford Bible Commentary). Oxford
University Press, Oxford, 2011).

Alan Bowman, Hannah M. Cotton and Martin Goodman, eds.,

Representations of Empire: Rome and the Mediterranean World. British
Academy, Oxford, 2002.

Martin Goodman, ed., The Oxford Handbook of Jewish Studies. Oxford

University Press, Oxford, 2002.

53
Martin Goodman, George van Kooten and Jacques van Ruiten eds.,
Abraham, the Nations and the Hagarites, Brill, Leiden, 2010.

Martin Goodman and Philip Alexander, eds., Rabbinic texts and the
History of Late-Roman Palestine, British Academy, Oxford, 2010

HONOURS:

President, British Association for Jewish Studies (1995).

Elected Fellow of the British Academy (1996).

National Jewish Book Award for Scholarship (2003).

Patron of the Parkes Institute (2007).

54
 Shaul Shaked
CURRICULUM VITAE

1933, Born Debrecen, Hungary; has lived in Israel since 1934.

B.A., M.A. in Arabic Language and Literature, Semitic Philology
and Comparative Religion, at the Hebrew University, Jerusalem; Ph.D. in
Iranian Languages, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of
London.
1964/5, Assistant Lecturer, School of Oriental and African Studies,
London.
From 1965, Lecturer, subsequently Professor at the Hebrew
University, Jerusalem.
At various periods: Chairman, Department of Indian, Iranian and
Armenian Studies, Hebrew University; Chairman, Department of
Comparative Religion, Hebrew University; Chairman, Institute of Asian
and African Studies, Hebrew University.
Over the years, Visiting Professor or Fellow at various institutions,
among which: University of California, Berkeley; Harvard University;
Institute for Advanced Studies, Jerusalem; New York University and
Columbia University; Hochschule fr Jdische Studien, Heidelberg, and
Ruprecht-Karls-Universitt Heidelberg; Wolfson College, Cambridge; The
Annenberg Research Institute, Philadelphia; Ecole Pratique des Hautes
Etudes, Section des Sciences Religieuses, Paris; Collge de France, Paris;
the Netherlands Institute for Advanced Study in the Humanities and Social
Sciences (NIAS).
Member of the Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities. Past
Chairman of the Section of Humanities and Social Sciences at the Israel
Academy. 2000-2003, President of the International Academic
Union/Union Acadmique Internationale, and since 2003, Honorary
President of the UAI. Member of the Council of Corpus Inscriptionum
Iranicarum.
1993, Recipient of the Yoram Ben-Porat prize. 2000, Recipient of
the Israel Prize in Linguistics.
Since 1995, Honorary Fellow of University College, London. 1995-
1998, Vice-President of the Societas Iranologica Europaea. Past chairman
of the Academic Board, Ben-Zvi Institute, Jerusalem.
Member of the editorial boards of Israel Oriental Studies, vols. 1-7;
Bulletin of the Asia Institute; Peamim; Bulletin of the School of Oriental
and African Studies; Archiv fr Religionsgeschichte; Acta Iranica.
Chairman of the editorial board, Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam.

55
 Selected Publications

BOOKS
1 Wisdom of the Sasanian Sages. An edition, with translation and notes,
of Denkard, Book Six. Persian Heritage Series. Boulder, Col.: Westview
Press, 1979.
2 Irano-Judaica. Studies relating to Jewish contacts with Persian culture
throughout the ages, ed. by S. Shaked (with A. Netzer). vols. 1-6,
Jerusalem: Ben-Zvi Institute.
3 Amulets and magic bowls. Aramaic incantations of late antiquity, by J.
Naveh and S. Shaked, Jerusalem- Leiden: Magnes Press and Brill 1985.
4 Firdausi, Shah-nama, in Hebrew translation, scholarly editor.
5 Magic spells and formulae. Aramaic incantations of Late Antiquity, by
J. Naveh and S. Shaked, Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1993.
6 Dualism in Transformation. Varieties of Religion in Sasanian Iran (The
Jordan Lectures in Comparative Religion), London: School of Oriental and
African Studies 1994.
7 Magische Texte aus der Kairoer Geniza, 3 vols., ed. P. Schafer and S.
Shaked, Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1994-. (Texte und Studien zum antiken
Judentum, 42).
8 From Zoroastrian Iran to Islam. Studies in religious history and
intercultural contacts (Collected Studies Series, CS505), Aldershot:
Variorum, 1995.

ARTICLES

9 The notions menog and getig in the Pahlavi texts and their relation to
eschatology, Acta Orientalia, 33 (1971), 59-107.
10 Mihr the Judge, Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam, 2 (1980), 1-
31.
11 Epigraphica Judaeo-Iranica, Studies in Judaism and Islam presented
to S.D. Goitein, Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1981, 65-82, pl.
12 From Iran to Islam. Notes on some themes in transmission: 1. Religion
and sovereignty are twins in Ibn al-Muqaffas theory of government; 2.
The four sages, Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam, 4 (1984), 31-67.
13 Bagdana, King of the Demons, and other Iranian terms in Babylonian
Aramaic magic, Acta Iranica 24 (Papers in honour of Professor Mary
Boyce, II), Leiden: E.J. Brill 1985, 511-525.
14 From Iran to Islam: On some symbols of royalty, Jerusalem Studies
in Arabic and Islam 7 (1986), 75-91.

56
15 Payman: an Iranian idea in contact with Greek thought and Islam,
Transition periods in Iranian history. Actes du Symposium de Fribourg-en-
Brisgau (22-24 mai 1985) (Studia Iranica. Cahier 5), Paris: Association
pour lAvancement des Etudes Iraniennes 1987, 217-240.
16 Zoroastrian polemics against Jews in the Sasanian and early Islamic
period, in: Irano-Judaica II, ed. S. Shaked and A. Netzer, Jerusalem 1990,
85-104.
17 The myth of Zurvan: Cosmogony and eschatology, in: I. Gruenwald;
S. Shaked; and G.G. Stroumsa (eds.), Messiah and Christos. Studies in the
Jewish origins of Christianity presented to David Flusser (Texte und
Studien zum Antiken Judentum, 32), Tubingen: Mohr 1992, 219-240.
18 Some Iranian themes in Islamic literature, in: Recurrent patterns in
Iranian religions. From Mazdaism to Sufism. Proceedings of the round
table held in Bamberg (30th September - 4th October 1991) (Studia Iranica,
Cahier 11), Paris: Association pour lavancement des Etudes iraniennes,
1992, 143-158.
19 Innen und Aussen in der Religionsgeschichte. Einige typologische
Beobachtungen, in: J. Assmann and Theo Sundermeier (eds.), Studien zum
Verstehen fremder Religionen, Band 6: Die Erfindung des inneren
Menschen, Gtersloh: Gerd Mohn, 1993, 15-27.
20 Notes on the Pahlavi amulet and Sasanian courts of law, Bulletin of
the Asia Institute N.S. 7 (1993), 165-172.
21 Two Parthian ostraca from Nippur, BSOAS 57 (1994):208-212.
22 Some Islamic reports concerning Zoroastrianism, JSAI 17 (1994):43-
84.
23 Jewish Sasanian sigillography, in: R. Gyselen (ed.), Au carrefour des
religions. Mlanges offerts Philippe Gignoux (Res Orientales VII),
Bures-sur- Yvette, 1995:239-256.
24 Qumran: some Iranian connections, in: Z. Zevit; M. Sokoloff; and S.
Gitin (eds.), Solving riddles and untying knots. Biblical, epigraphic, and
Semitic studies in honor of Jonas C. Greenfield, Winona Lake, Indiana:
Eisenbrauns, 1995, 265-269.
25 Peace be upon you, exalted angels: on Hekhalot, liturgy and
incantation bowls, Jewish Studies Quarterly 2 (1995):197-219.
26 "The traditional commentary on the Avesta (Zand): Translation,
interpretation, distortion?", in: La Persia e l'Asia Centrale da Alessandro al
X secolo (Atti dei convegni Lincei, 127), Roma: Accademia nazionale dei
Lincei, 1996, 641-656.
27 "Two types of esotericism", in: Aleida and Jan Assmann (eds.), Schleier
und Schwelle. Geheimnis und ffentlichkeit (Archologie der literarischen
Kommunikation, V,1), Munchen: Wilhelm Fink, 1997, 221-233.

57
28 Popular religion in Sasanian Babylonia, Jerusalem Studies in Arabic
and Islam 21 (1997), pp. 103-117.
29 The poetics of spells. Language and structure in Aramaic incantations
of Late Antiquity. 1: The divorce formula and its ramifications, in: Tzvi
Abusch and Karel van der Toorn (eds.), Mesopotamian magic: textual,
historical, and interpretative perspectives (Ancient Magic and Divination,
1), Groningen, 1999, pp. 173-195.
30 Early Judaeo-Persian texts, with notes on a commentary to Genesis,
in: Persian originsEarly Judaeo-Persian and the emergence of New
Persian, edited by Ludwig Paul (Iranica, 6), 2003, Wiesbaden, pp. 195-
219.
31 Mind and power in the Gths: ritual notions or cosmic entities? ,
in: Carlo G. Cereti; Mauro Maggi; and Elio Provasi (eds.). 2003. Religious
themes and texts of pre-Islamic Iran and Central Asia. Studies in honour of
Professor Gherardo Gnoli (Beitrge zur Iranistik, 24), Wiesbaden, 2003,
pp. 391-398.
32 Zoroastrian origins: Indian and Iranian connections, in: J. P. Arnason;
S.N. Eisenstadt; and B. Wittrock (eds.), Axial civilizations and world
history (Jerusalem Studies in Religion and Culture, 4), Leiden, Boston
2005, pp. 181-200.
33 Cosmic origins and human origins in the Iranian cultural milieu, in: S.
Shaked (ed.), Genesis and regeneration, Jerusalem: Israel Academy of
Sciences and Humanities 2005, pp. 210-222.
34 "Form and purpose in Aramaic spells: some Jewish themes (The poetics
of magic texts), in: S. Shaked (ed.), Officina magica: essays on the practice
of magic in Antiquity, Leiden and Boston: Brill (2005), 1-30.
35 "Dramatis personae in the Jewish magic texts: some differences
between incantation bowls and Geniza magic", Jewish Studies Quarterly 13
(2006), 363-387.
36 The Iranian canon of scriptures and writings, in: F. Vahman and C.V.
Pedersen (eds.), Religious texts in Iranian languages. Symposium held in
Copenhagen, May 2002, Copenhagen, 2007, pp. 11-26.
37 Who gives lordship to Ohrmazd? A Zoroastrian debate, in: C. Allison,
A. Joisten-Pruschke and A. Wendtland (eds.), From Dan to Dn:
Religion, Kultur und Sprache in der iranischen Welt. Festschrift fr Philip
Kreyenbroek zum 60. Geburtstag, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2009,
pp. 209-212.
38 "Aramaic loanwords in Middle Persian", Bulletin of the Asia Institute 19
(2005 [published in 2009]), 159-168.

58
39 Time designations and other recurrent themes in Aramaic incantation
bowls, in: J. Stackert et al. (eds.), Gazing on the deep. Ancient Near
Eastern and other studies in honor of Tzvi Abusch, 2010, 221-234.
40 No talking during a meal: Zoroastrian themes in the Babylonian
Talmud, in: C. Bakhos and M. R. Shayegan (eds.), The Talmud in its
Iranian context (Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 135), Tbingen:
Mohr Siebeck, 2010, pp. 161-177.
41 Human identity and classes of people in the Pahlavi books, in: C.G.
Cereti (ed.), Iranian identity in the course of history. Proceedings of the
conference held in Rome, 21-24 September 2005 (Serie Orientale Roam
CV; Orientalia Romana 9), Rome: IsIAO, 2010, pp. 331-345.
42 Persian-Arabic bilingualism in the Cairo Genizah documents, in: B.
Outhwaite and S. Bhayro (eds.), From a sacred source: Genizah studies
in honour of Professor Sefan C. Reif (Cambridge Genizah Studies Series 1;
Etudes sur le Judasme medieval 42), Leiden: Brill, 2011, pp. 319-330.

59
 APPENDIX B

List of People who Met with the Committee

The President, Prof. Menahem Ben-Sasson

The Rector, Prof. Sarah Stroumsa
The Vice-Rector, Prof. Yaacov Schul

Dean of the Faculty of Humanities, Prof. Reuven Amitai

Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences, Prof. Avner De-Shalit

Chairman, Department of Religion Dr. Yael Ben-Tor

Head of School of Philosophy & Religion Prof. Carl Posy

Department Faculty (and former members of the Department):

Prof. Steven Kaplan
Prof. David Shulman
Prof. Michael Stone (emeritus)
Prof. Guy Stroumsa (emeritus)
Prof. Sara Sviri
Dr. Bruria Biton-Ashkelony
Dr. Ophira Gamliel
Dr. Yohanan Grinshpon
Dr. Amnon Ramon
Dr. Sharon Roubach
Dr. Serge Ruzer
Dr. David Satran
Dr. Eviatar Shulman
Ms. Dana Marzel

Other Faculty:
Prof. Haggai Ben Shammai
Prof. Yohanan Friedmann (emeritus)
Prof. Isaiah Gafni
Prof. Zeev Harvey
Prof. Galit Hasan-Rokem
Prof. Michael Heyd
Prof. Menahem Kister

60
Prof. Shlomo Naeh
Prof. Avigdor Shinan
Prof. Ella Landau-Tasseron
Prof. Shira Wolosky
Prof. Yair Zakovitch

Dr. Jonathan Garb

Dr. Miriam Goldstein
Dr. Ronnie Goldstein
Dr. Yehuda Goodman
Dr. Meir Hatina
Dr. Oded Irshai
Dr. Raymond Leicht
Dr. Maren Niehoff
Dr. Michael Segal
Dr. Moshe Sluhovsky
Dr. Nurit Stadler
Dr. Rina Talgam
Dr. Ofra Tirosh-Becker

Meeting with BA students (6)

Meeting with MA students (7)
Meeting with PhD students (4)

61