Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time Slot
Browse By Person
Browse By Room
Browse By Division
Browse By Session Type
Search Tips
Conference Home Page
Conference Program Overview
Sponsors & Exhibitors
Plan Your Stay
Personal Schedule
Sign In
It has often been assumed that one of the primary functions of pseudonymous writing in early Judaism was a desire to legitimize anonymous or little-known works by means of attributing them to earlier, more authoritative figures. Without necessarily denying ‘authorization’ as an aspect of this phenomenon, several recent scholars have presented supplementary models for understanding pseudonymous writing in antiquity that attempt to transcend modern presuppositions around intellectual property and authorial intent (e.g. Hindy Najman, Annette Yoshiko Reed, Eva Mroczek). This essay aims to contribute to that discussion by comparing examples from early Jewish Pseudepigrapha with anthropological and ethnographic studies of contemporary spirit cults around the world where the spirits of dead ancestors are regularly hosted by professional mediums. Though at first glance, the cultural distance between these contexts may seem to prohibit such a comparison, I argue that so-called ‘possession studies’ can be enlightening for the study of early Jewish pseudepigraphy at a theoretical and analogical level. Four connections are highlighted: First, in contrast to popular stereotypes, as practiced in numerous contexts, spirit possession is often a positive and cultivated practice (rather than an affliction or a cause for social alienation). Possession is also often a corporate experience that is central to a community’s religious life. Second, these possession practices are usually regulated by established modes (and not just freeform nonsense). Anthropologist Michael Lambek has characterized this kind of spirit possession as a sophisticated “system of communication” that alludes to and comments on itself—even as it innovates. Third, spirit possession can function as a commentary on the “climate of affairs” for a community or individual. This is especially true in cultures that have experienced colonization. Fourth, spirit possession has been called a non-historiographical mode of describing the past and prescribing the future. It is a way of calling up trusted voices from a culture’s heritage and gaining their wisdom on new situations. It also puts historic figures into conversation with one another, though they were not contemporaries in life. Primary texts discussed include Daniel, Jubilees, and 11QPsa. Theorists include Lesley Sharp, Aisha M. Beliso-De Jesús, and Paul C. Johnson.