JEWS OR PAGANS? 145smallbronzealtar.^53 Theseitemswereobviouslyusedfordomesticratherthan
civic cult or decoration; in the case of the shovels, it is unclear whether they
were used at all.^54 On the other hand, not a single piece fro mthe appropriate
period with a Jewish symbol on it has been found; neither, however, has any-
thing like the impressive public statuary found at Scythopolis and Caesarea.
TIBERIASINTHEPALESTINIANTALMUDThe situation for Tiberias is similar, though here even more so than in Sep-
phoris the great majority of the sparse archaeological remains is late antique.
There is, however, a small corpus of epigraphical material of the second
through early fourth centuries, in addition to the aforementioned rabbinic
material. The Palestinian Talmud, which I will discuss first, is a product of
the later fourth century, by which time much of the old pagan city had disap-
peared.^55 The Talmud itself preserves several stories about the alterations of
thecity,whichgiveagoodideaofthecity’scharacterbeforetheywereunder-
taken and are of great interest in their own right. An important collection of
suchstoriesisfoundinY.AvodahZarah3:1,42c,partlyparalleledinB.Moed
Qatan 25b. It is worth quotinginextenso.^56
When R. Nahu mbar Si mai died, they covered theeikoniawith mats.^57 They
said, “Just as he did not look upon the min life, so let hi mnot look upon the m
in death.”... And why was he called Nahu mof the Holy of Holies? Because he
never looked at the image on a coin in his life....(^53) ThealtarismentionedonlyinNEAEHL1328.WeissandNetzer,Zippori,p.22,astonishin-
gly regard the incense shovels as “Jewish” because they resemble incense shovels later depicted
on synagogue mosaics! Incense was apparently burned in some late antique synagogues, but the
two known censers are not shovels. The rabbis of course regarded incense burning as a type of
sacrifice and so absolutely forbidden outside the Jerusale mTe mple. On the incense shovels, see
now Rutgers, “Incense Shovels at Sepphoris?” in E. Meyers, ed.,Galilee through the Centuries:
ConfluenceofCultures(Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1999), pp. 177–98.
(^54) In his article, Rutgers simply stated that there is no evidence they had been used (i.e.,
no clear indication of carbon deposits) but expressed more uncertainty on this point in private
communication.
(^55) For the date of the Palestinian Talmud, see Y. Sussmann, “Ve-shuv Li-yerushalmi Neziqin,”
inY. Sussmannand D.Rosenthal, eds.,MehqereiTalmud:TalmudicStudies(Jerusalem:Magnes
Press, 1990), 2: 55–133.
(^56) The translation is mine; Neusner’s is unreliable. In the source, the passage is fleshed out,
as usual, with interjections, digressions, and glosses, but the basic structure of the prodigy collec-
tion is easily recoverable, especially when it is compared with the parallel in the Bavli.
(^57) I leaveeikoniauntranslated; the Talmud clearly intends different things by the wordseikon-
ion,tzalma,andarta,and soon,butitisnot clearwhat.Herethereferenceseems tobetostatues
or reliefs lining the street along which the funeral procession passed. For a full discussion of the
sparse rabbinic material on Nahum, see Y. Florsheim, “R. Menahem (= Nahum) ben Simai,”
Tarbiz45 (1976): 151–53. The Babylonian parallel here readsishte’utzalamanayavehavulema-
halatzaya(the statues became smooth and were used as slabs for rolling machines), apparently
having confused the “mats” (mahatzalaya) of the Palestinian tradition for “slabs.”