Author: admin

Differences of scholarly research on the events that took place at Masada in 73 CE.
(5-7 double-spaced pages; Times New Roman, size 12 font)
Topic: The siege and fall of Masada in 73 CE provides us with an almost unparalleled opportunity to draw on both literary and archaeological information to understand one of the best-known events in ancient Jewish history. In 5-7 double-spaced pages(Times New Roman, size 12 font), analyze the following two readings in light of the below instructions.
Yigael Yadin, Masada: Herod’s Fortress and the Zealots’ Last Stand. Translated by Moshe Pearlman; New York: Random House, 1966.
Yadin, Masada (1).pdf
*Important: The file contains excerpts from different parts of Yadin’s book, and as such, the flow is sometimes interrupted. Even so, you should be able to follow the flow and logic of his argumentation. Read the following pages: pp. 54, 96-100, 193-201, 209-37. Note that pages 209-25 (the long section on the Roman camps) may be skimmed.
Shaye Cohen, “Masada: Literary Tradition, Archaeological Remains, and the Credibility of Josephus,” Journal of Jewish Studies 33 (1982): 385-405.
Cohen, Masada, Literary Tradition, Archaeological Remains, and the Credibility of Josephus_rotated.pdf
The assignment: Scholars often disagree about how to interpret evidence. Although this may seem obvious, it is not so easy to master two divergent points of view and present a fair case for both. With this paper you will try to weigh differing and at times contradictory analyses of historical evidence. Write a detailed account of the dispute encountered in the readings (listed above and provided on Canvas). It is up to you to decide how best to organize your essay. Do not write as if I already know the contents of the readings and the subject of the debate. The goal is to distill and analyze the main points related to the debate at hand (do not summarize or recount the readings at length). When relevant, you should not shy away from discussing nitty-gritty details (such as the nature and location of the discovery of skeletal remains). Explain the problem and present the essential evidence at stake. Make sure that you understand what positions are held, and at what specific point(s) the writers agree and disagree. Observe the particular patterns in the discussion, such as:
– who wrote first/second, and the effect of the statement/response (are they talking exactly about the same thing)?
– what is their approach and the logic of their argument?
– what evidence do they use and what evidence do they omit?
– do they categorize the evidence in the same manner?
– what is considered decisive by each writer?
Do not choose sides. For this paper, I am more concerned that you show a detailed and fair understanding of each position. It is sometimes said that one cannot begin a fair rebuttal of any position until one can present that position in terms that its own advocate would accept as accurate. Apply your critical thinking to the way(s) in which the writers develop their cases. In addition to the fulfillment of the above instructions, your paper will be graded on the basis of the following criteria: coherent organization, and clear, grammatical writing that is free of spelling errors.
Warning: You may encounter in these readings names of places and people as well as technical terms and foreign words that are unfamiliar to you. The fact that you do not know these will represent initial barriers to understanding the readings, but this is very much part of the point to this paper. Your job is to read for the structure of thinking, to follow the flow of an argument, and then to figure out each category of information and how it fits into the larger purpose of the reading. The significance of most of the evidence can be figured out this way. You should look up unfamiliar words in a dictionary. Most other technical information (such as references to other scholars’ articles or books and foreign words) can be figured out from context. Despite such features regularly found in scholarly literature, it should still be possible to follow the reasoning of the reading. these two links are the readings you are differentiating in this essay: https://yu.instructure.com/courses/66632/files/3899564?verifier=b3t1KUvV3DFBUh5o0gv90mIbuzlhO1g8u2j2tL7A&wrap=1 and https://yu.instructure.com/courses/66632/files/3899564?verifier=b3t1KUvV3DFBUh5o0gv90mIbuzlhO1g8u2j2tL7A&wrap=1