The following group of essays emerged out of a seminar held at the Association for Jewish Studies conference in 2015. As section heads of Jewish History and Culture in Antiquity and Rabbinic Literature and Culture, tasked to think about how to address gaps in our fields, we recognized that despite a large amount of scholarship available on the Jerusalem Temple and its priesthood, there was a dearth of cross-disciplinary scholarly exchange, especially between ancient Jewish historians and those of us who engage in literary analysis of rabbinic sources. As a result, our divisions joined together to create “The Jerusalem Temple in History, Memory, and Ritual,” taking advantage of the “seminar” format at the conference. Twelve scholars, each working with different source material and employing different methodological approaches, participated.

Jerusalem in the late Second Temple period (second century BCE–70 CE) was transformed into the largest pilgrimage city of the Hellenized East and the sole locus of sacrificial worship of the Jewish God in greater Judea. As argued in this paper, it also became a place for sightseeing and spectacle. By the early Roman era, movement to the city for pilgrimage was a significant component of Mediterranean and Near Eastern travel. The Jewish festival experience may have evolved to cater to the tastes of foreigners now regularly visiting the city from the Jewish Diaspora. The architecture of Herod's Temple complex and the distinctive religious customs practiced within its walls intrigued visitors, whether Jewish or non-Jewish. For those unable to witness the Temple or participate in one of its festivals firsthand, a virtual visit through a “walking-tour” description would have to suffice. Such descriptions, which are attested from the earliest days of the Second Temple, can charter in imaginative invention in order to foster a sense of awe and wonder for the audience.

When the mishnaic authors narrated the Temple rituals of the past, they made choices in how to imagine the nuanced dynamics of actors, spaces, objects, and actions that make up the ritual enactments. These choices point to their understanding of how Temple ritual worked and what it accomplished. Taking an unusual feature of many of the Mishnah's Temple-ritual narratives—the shifting back and forth between singular and plural, or, between individual and group—as a starting point, this article argues that for the rabbis of the Mishnah, Temple ritual bound together every Israelite with the collective whole, while simultaneously allowing for individuality. Moreover, it created a sense of solidarity and belonging within multiple levels of Jewish collective life—the whole people, the local city or town, and the lineal groupings of Israelite, Levite, and priest. Similarities to mishnaic rules about prayer-centered rituals, moreover, suggest that the rabbis believed these functions of ritual continued even in the absence of the Temple.

A feminist analysis of Bavli Yoma draws our attention to one of the ways the rabbis reflect on their relationship with the priesthood, which is through the lens of the physical body. The Temple procedure detailed in the first seven chapters of the tractate, focused as it is on the priest's body, is entirely different from the bodily self-denial discussed in the eighth chapter, where eating, washing, anointing, sandal wearing, and sexual relations are prohibited. Continuities between the observance of Yom Kippur in the Temple and the prohibitions that define the rabbinic Yom Kippur are surprisingly lacking, given the extent to which the rabbis controlled both the Temple accounts in Yoma and the discussions about Yom Kippur in the eighth chapter of this tractate. Focusing on references to feet, a part of both the Temple rite and the rabbinic observance of Yom Kippur, this article will present one perspective on how the Bavli offers insight into the rabbinic departure from the Temple Yom Kippur.

As recent research has emphasized, the Mishnah tractate Yoma is a model par excellence of the category of Mishnah tractates that take the form of narrative and describe key institutions of the lost Temple and its rituals. But even among those tractates, Yoma is unique in that it served as a source for liturgical recitation in what became the Avodah liturgy. This paper will look at the complex relationships between textual transmission and liturgical recitation in the history of the tractate by examining internal and external textual evidence. In particular, this discussion includes a detailed analysis of a papyrus fragment from Oxyrhynchus that has received insufficient attention so far. It is argued from this evidence that the tractate's literary nature coalesced with the substance of the tractate to produce a virtual enactment of sacrifice for its reciters and performers.

The mythical ʾeven shetiyah, often translated as the “foundation stone,” marks the physical place where the Jerusalem temples once stood in the rabbinic imagination. In its earliest incarnation it identified the place where the ark of the covenant resided in Solomon's Temple. Over the centuries it absorbed cosmogonic and eventually eschatological meaning. In later post-talmudic rabbinic literature, it adopted another mythic trope—the seal on the tehom. I argue that these two separate narrative strands of a seal on the tehomunder the Temple and ʾeven shetiyahin the Temple became intertwined, but only in late (post-talmudic) rabbinic midrash. I trace this evolutionary trend and argue that while the early rabbis both innovated and reinvigorated older biblical and ancient Near Eastern cosmogonic motifs with their ʾeven shetiyah, the later rabbinic texts were influenced by Christian and Muslim competition for spiritual and earthly Jerusalem. The stone that started as a means for rabbinic self-authorization became a reassertion of God's control of history and protection of Israel and the world, but in the process displaced priestly authority.

“Intersectionality,” a concept coined and developed by legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw, examines how our various identities change in meaning and valence when placed in dynamic relation with one another. Instead of exploring identity traits like “race,” “gender,” “religion,” and so on in isolation, an intersectional approach asks what these various characteristics “do” to one another in combination. I suggest that an intersectional approach—asking “what does Whiteness do to Jewishness?”—can help illuminate elements of the Jewish experience that would otherwise remain obscure. The core claim is that Whiteness and Jewishness in combination function in ways that are not necessarily grasped if one atomizes the identities and holds them apart. What Whiteness “does” to Jewishness is act as an accelerant for certain forms of antisemitic marginalization even as it ratifies a racialized hierarchy within the Jewish community. Absent an intersectional vantage, many political projects and controversies surrounding Jewish equality will be systematically misunderstood.

This article discusses the biographies of Menachem Mendel Schneerson (the Rebbe) within the broader context of Chabad historiographic lore, in particular the quasi-historical writings of Yosef Yiẓḥak Schneersohn from the 1930s and 1940s. Described by Ada Rapoport-Albert as “hagiography with footnotes,” these seemingly scholarly and modern texts constituted an alternative narrative to that of academic Jewish history. From this vantage point, I consider how biographies published by academics and by hasidic authors have mutually influenced each other, particularly in their scope, form, and method. To that end, I examine the controversy that surrounded the 2010 publication of the first academic biography of Schneerson, Samuel Heilman and Menachem Friedman's The Rebbe, and analyze the strategies undertaken by subsequent authors that have allowed them to present the Rebbe's life in a form that was no longer “hagiography with footnotes” (which would have alienated a secular readership) but as seemingly impartial biographies (without alienating the hasidic readership).