Suchergebnisse

International audience ; Ancient taxes were perceived in liminarity position: tolls were seized in borders, bridges, fords, city gates, etc.; personal taxes during the harvest period; temple revenues while crossing the borders of the sacred. This characteristic imposed the powers to invest at the borders in order to invest the border, and to impose themselves to the individuals. While paying, the faithful ones (in the case of 'religious' taxation) or the subjects (in the case of 'political' taxation) manifested their acknowledgment of the authority, the legitimacy of authority to possess the place, and last but not least, their submission. Fiscal payment proves itself to be an interesting tool for understanding the affirmation of domination materialized by powers at border zones. Far beyond financial and accounting issues and without taking count of economic issues, taxes are political, social and, in numerous cases in Antiquity, religious matters. ; L'impôt antique est prélevé en position de liminarité : les droits de passage aux frontières, ponts, gués, portes de villes, etc. ; les impôts personnels à l'occasion de la nouvelle récolte ; les revenus des temples à l'occasion du franchissement de la frontière du sacré. Cette caractéristique contraint les pouvoirs à investir en frontière afin d'investir la frontière, pour s'imposer aux sujets qui les y rencontrent. En payant, le fidèle (dans le cas de la fiscalité « religieuse ») ou le sujet (dans le cas de la fiscalité « politique ») manifeste sa reconnaissance de l'autorité, la légitimité de celle-ci à posséder cet espace, enfin sa soumission. Le paiement fiscal s'avère ainsi une porte d'entrée intéressante pour concevoir l'affirmation de domination matérialisée par les pouvoirs dans les zones frontalières car, bien au-delà de ses enjeux financiers et comptables, et sans tenir compte de ses enjeux économiques, l'impôt est une affaire politique, sociale et, dans de nombreux cas dans l'Antiquité, religieuse.

International audience ; Ancient taxes were perceived in liminarity position: tolls were seized in borders, bridges, fords, city gates, etc.; personal taxes during the harvest period; temple revenues while crossing the borders of the sacred. This characteristic imposed the powers to invest at the borders in order to invest the border, and to impose themselves to the individuals. While paying, the faithful ones (in the case of 'religious' taxation) or the subjects (in the case of 'political' taxation) manifested their acknowledgment of the authority, the legitimacy of authority to possess the place, and last but not least, their submission. Fiscal payment proves itself to be an interesting tool for understanding the affirmation of domination materialized by powers at border zones. Far beyond financial and accounting issues and without taking count of economic issues, taxes are political, social and, in numerous cases in Antiquity, religious matters. ; L'impôt antique est prélevé en position de liminarité : les droits de passage aux frontières, ponts, gués, portes de villes, etc. ; les impôts personnels à l'occasion de la nouvelle récolte ; les revenus des temples à l'occasion du franchissement de la frontière du sacré. Cette caractéristique contraint les pouvoirs à investir en frontière afin d'investir la frontière, pour s'imposer aux sujets qui les y rencontrent. En payant, le fidèle (dans le cas de la fiscalité « religieuse ») ou le sujet (dans le cas de la fiscalité « politique ») manifeste sa reconnaissance de l'autorité, la légitimité de celle-ci à posséder cet espace, enfin sa soumission. Le paiement fiscal s'avère ainsi une porte d'entrée intéressante pour concevoir l'affirmation de domination matérialisée par les pouvoirs dans les zones frontalières car, bien au-delà de ses enjeux financiers et comptables, et sans tenir compte de ses enjeux économiques, l'impôt est une affaire politique, sociale et, dans de nombreux cas dans l'Antiquité, religieuse.

International audience ; Using the concept of "normativities" already in use in Humanities and other Social Sciences to define groups' conceptions of what is (or should be) the socio-political norm, this paper aims to highlight the plurality of cosmogonic, political, and theocratic views of the Jews yet before the Seleucid conquest of Jerusalem in 200 BCE. The cognitive elements are used to show the importance, in each milieu, of erecting, maintaining, instrumentalizing, or, on the contrary, preventing the relations of trust between the individuals and the powers to legitimize (or delegitimize) the present order. This grid of analysis makes it possible to show that Roman domination did not shatter ancient Judaism, for it had long since been profoundly plural. The Roman domination only facilitated their irremediable separation. ; À l'aide du concept de « normativités » employé dans d'autres sciences humaines pour définir les conceptions que peuvent se faire des groupes de ce qui est (ou devrait être) la norme socio-politique, cet article se propose de mettre en évidence la pluralité des conceptions cosmogoniques, politiques et théocratiques des judaïsmes dès avant la conquête séleucide de Jérusalem en 200 av. J.-C. Les éléments cognitifs sont exploités pour montrer l'importance, dans chaque milieu, de construire, d'entretenir, d'instrumentaliser ou, au contraire, d'empêcher les rapports de confiance entre les individus et les pouvoirs en place pour légitimer (ou délégitimer) l'ordre présent. Cette grille d'analyse permet de montrer que la domination romaine n'a pas fait éclater le judaïsme antique, car celui-ci était depuis longtemps déjà profondément pluriel ; elle n'a fait que faciliter leur irrémédiable séparation

International audience ; Using the concept of "normativities" already in use in Humanities and other Social Sciences to define groups' conceptions of what is (or should be) the socio-political norm, this paper aims to highlight the plurality of cosmogonic, political, and theocratic views of the Jews yet before the Seleucid conquest of Jerusalem in 200 BCE. The cognitive elements are used to show the importance, in each milieu, of erecting, maintaining, instrumentalizing, or, on the contrary, preventing the relations of trust between the individuals and the powers to legitimize (or delegitimize) the present order. This grid of analysis makes it possible to show that Roman domination did not shatter ancient Judaism, for it had long since been profoundly plural. The Roman domination only facilitated their irremediable separation. ; À l'aide du concept de « normativités » employé dans d'autres sciences humaines pour définir les conceptions que peuvent se faire des groupes de ce qui est (ou devrait être) la norme socio-politique, cet article se propose de mettre en évidence la pluralité des conceptions cosmogoniques, politiques et théocratiques des judaïsmes dès avant la conquête séleucide de Jérusalem en 200 av. J.-C. Les éléments cognitifs sont exploités pour montrer l'importance, dans chaque milieu, de construire, d'entretenir, d'instrumentaliser ou, au contraire, d'empêcher les rapports de confiance entre les individus et les pouvoirs en place pour légitimer (ou délégitimer) l'ordre présent. Cette grille d'analyse permet de montrer que la domination romaine n'a pas fait éclater le judaïsme antique, car celui-ci était depuis longtemps déjà profondément pluriel ; elle n'a fait que faciliter leur irrémédiable séparation

International audience ; Using the concept of "normativities" already in use in Humanities and other Social Sciences to define groups' conceptions of what is (or should be) the socio-political norm, this paper aims to highlight the plurality of cosmogonic, political, and theocratic views of the Jews yet before the Seleucid conquest of Jerusalem in 200 BCE. The cognitive elements are used to show the importance, in each milieu, of erecting, maintaining, instrumentalizing, or, on the contrary, preventing the relations of trust between the individuals and the powers to legitimize (or delegitimize) the present order. This grid of analysis makes it possible to show that Roman domination did not shatter ancient Judaism, for it had long since been profoundly plural. The Roman domination only facilitated their irremediable separation. ; À l'aide du concept de « normativités » employé dans d'autres sciences humaines pour définir les conceptions que peuvent se faire des groupes de ce qui est (ou devrait être) la norme socio-politique, cet article se propose de mettre en évidence la pluralité des conceptions cosmogoniques, politiques et théocratiques des judaïsmes dès avant la conquête séleucide de Jérusalem en 200 av. J.-C. Les éléments cognitifs sont exploités pour montrer l'importance, dans chaque milieu, de construire, d'entretenir, d'instrumentaliser ou, au contraire, d'empêcher les rapports de confiance entre les individus et les pouvoirs en place pour légitimer (ou délégitimer) l'ordre présent. Cette grille d'analyse permet de montrer que la domination romaine n'a pas fait éclater le judaïsme antique, car celui-ci était depuis longtemps déjà profondément pluriel ; elle n'a fait que faciliter leur irrémédiable séparation

International audience ; Using the concept of "normativities" already in use in Humanities and other Social Sciences to define groups' conceptions of what is (or should be) the socio-political norm, this paper aims to highlight the plurality of cosmogonic, political, and theocratic views of the Jews yet before the Seleucid conquest of Jerusalem in 200 BCE. The cognitive elements are used to show the importance, in each milieu, of erecting, maintaining, instrumentalizing, or, on the contrary, preventing the relations of trust between the individuals and the powers to legitimize (or delegitimize) the present order. This grid of analysis makes it possible to show that Roman domination did not shatter ancient Judaism, for it had long since been profoundly plural. The Roman domination only facilitated their irremediable separation. ; À l'aide du concept de « normativités » employé dans d'autres sciences humaines pour définir les conceptions que peuvent se faire des groupes de ce qui est (ou devrait être) la norme socio-politique, cet article se propose de mettre en évidence la pluralité des conceptions cosmogoniques, politiques et théocratiques des judaïsmes dès avant la conquête séleucide de Jérusalem en 200 av. J.-C. Les éléments cognitifs sont exploités pour montrer l'importance, dans chaque milieu, de construire, d'entretenir, d'instrumentaliser ou, au contraire, d'empêcher les rapports de confiance entre les individus et les pouvoirs en place pour légitimer (ou délégitimer) l'ordre présent. Cette grille d'analyse permet de montrer que la domination romaine n'a pas fait éclater le judaïsme antique, car celui-ci était depuis longtemps déjà profondément pluriel ; elle n'a fait que faciliter leur irrémédiable séparation

International audience ; In the third year of his fight against Rome (134/135 CE), Bar Kokhba minted coins with the slogan "leḥerut Yerushalayim: For the freedom of Jerusalem". In this paper, I argue that what was meant by this expression was not the geographic place but a powerful idea: the worship center of the Jewish identity. Jerusalem as a slogan seems to be a metonymy for the temple, and the temple was the link between God and the Jews. By proclaiming the necessity to liberate Jerusalem, Bar Kokhba actually tried to regroup all the Jews under his banner, exploiting the theocratic ideals and the eschatological hopes of the time. However, the documents found in the desert reveal that this propagandist expectancy was not universally shared by his own troops. For the political needs of the leader, "Jerusalem" was probably the best slogan possible, but it appears to have meant little in real life, even perhaps in the eyes of Bar Kokhba himself.

International audience ; In the third year of his fight against Rome (134/135 CE), Bar Kokhba minted coins with the slogan "leḥerut Yerushalayim: For the freedom of Jerusalem". In this paper, I argue that what was meant by this expression was not the geographic place but a powerful idea: the worship center of the Jewish identity. Jerusalem as a slogan seems to be a metonymy for the temple, and the temple was the link between God and the Jews. By proclaiming the necessity to liberate Jerusalem, Bar Kokhba actually tried to regroup all the Jews under his banner, exploiting the theocratic ideals and the eschatological hopes of the time. However, the documents found in the desert reveal that this propagandist expectancy was not universally shared by his own troops. For the political needs of the leader, "Jerusalem" was probably the best slogan possible, but it appears to have meant little in real life, even perhaps in the eyes of Bar Kokhba himself.

International audience ; In the third year of his fight against Rome (134/135 CE), Bar Kokhba minted coins with the slogan "leḥerut Yerushalayim: For the freedom of Jerusalem". In this paper, I argue that what was meant by this expression was not the geographic place but a powerful idea: the worship center of the Jewish identity. Jerusalem as a slogan seems to be a metonymy for the temple, and the temple was the link between God and the Jews. By proclaiming the necessity to liberate Jerusalem, Bar Kokhba actually tried to regroup all the Jews under his banner, exploiting the theocratic ideals and the eschatological hopes of the time. However, the documents found in the desert reveal that this propagandist expectancy was not universally shared by his own troops. For the political needs of the leader, "Jerusalem" was probably the best slogan possible, but it appears to have meant little in real life, even perhaps in the eyes of Bar Kokhba himself.

International audience ; In this paper, I argue that the coins of the Jewish war of 66-70 C.E. demonstrate the theocratic conception of the Zealots and of the faction of Simon bar Giora. They are designed as responses to Roman issues and, therefore, are influenced by Roman currency. This minting is a powerful affirmation of independence for a so-called Jewish "State." The divisions into several factions make it impossible to recognize a unanimous conception of what the political system among the Jews must have been. However, each coin seems to support the theocratic ideal, focalized either on the temple of Jerusalem or on the redemption of the people.

International audience ; In this paper, I argue that the coins of the Jewish war of 66-70 C.E. demonstrate the theocratic conception of the Zealots and of the faction of Simon bar Giora. They are designed as responses to Roman issues and, therefore, are influenced by Roman currency. This minting is a powerful affirmation of independence for a so-called Jewish "State." The divisions into several factions make it impossible to recognize a unanimous conception of what the political system among the Jews must have been. However, each coin seems to support the theocratic ideal, focalized either on the temple of Jerusalem or on the redemption of the people.