Excursus. The Dura-Europos Ezekiel Cycle This chapter has focused on the reception of Ezekiel 36–37 in Second Temple Jewish literature. I include here a brief excursus on the Ezekiel painting in the Dura-Europos synagogue. Although this painting post-dates the Second Temple period, it provides further evidence for how Ezekiel 37.1–14 was understood by certain Jewish communities within the first few centuries of the common era. The ruins of Dura Europos, located on a cliff above the Euphrates in Syria, were discovered in 1920 and include a third-century CE Jewish synagogue, which was excavated in 1932–1933.128 The synagogue walls were covered in intricate paintings, 126 Greek text from Montague Rhodes James, ed., The Testament of Abraham, TS 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1892). 127 Yates, Spirit and Creation, 55. 128 Edna Garte, ‘Theme of Resurrection in the Dura-Europos Synagogue Paintings’, JQR 64.1 (1973): 1. The Influence of Ezekiel 36–37 in Early Judaism likely executed between 245 and 256 CE,129 of biblical and extra-biblical narratives.130 The symbolism in the paintings provides evidence not only of communal worship practices, but also of the artist’s (and possibly a Jewish community’s) understanding of various biblical narratives. The largest of the paintings is a depiction of the vision of the valley of dry bones in Ezekiel 37.1–14.131 The size of the painting demonstrates its clear significance for the artist (and presumably those who worshipped in the synagogue). As Erwin Goodenough notes, ‘[t]o have been given so much space it must have had great importance in the mind of the person who designed the decoration.’132 There are several aspects of the Ezekiel painting which suggest that Ezekiel 37.1–14 was understood as a prophecy of eschatological resurrection rather than an image of the return of Israel to the land. Firstly, the painting contains a section which depicts a mountain which has been split in half, with a tree on both sides of the split. This is likely to be a depiction of the Mount of Olives. The idea of the Mount of Olives splitting in half is an eschatological motif. Zechariah 14.4 notes that on the day of the Yahweh, ‘his feet will stand … on the Mount of Olives which is in front of Jerusalem on the east and the Mount of Olives will be split in the middle’. Furthermore, Harald Riesenfeld has apparently drawn attention to the Targum on Song of Songs 8.5 which notes that when the Mount of Olives splits, the dead come out of it and ...
Excursus project debt counselling in prison regime ▪ special risk of relapse ▪ competence: basic social care in the prison ▪ in difficult cases: support from the new project ▪ project is promoted by the Assistance for Former Offenders “Straffälligenhilfe“ ▪ state-wide in Baden-Württemberg since January, 1 2018 15 Realisation of the cooperation agreement ▪ conclusion of the agreement: December 2016 ▪ beginning with over 200 peoples on 8 March 2017 ▪ designation of permanent contact persons done; list in the internet ▪ constant meetings with local cooperation partners; partially local contracts ▪ 2 meetings of a state-wide steering group ▪ beginning evaluation Evaluation ▪ Steps 1st step: online interview of all partners 2nd step: experts -interviews 3rd step: interview with prisoners 1st and 2nd step are completed ▪ Interim result: Cooperation has proved to be very useful ⮚ Substantial improvements in many areas ⮚ Further need for improvement for example: faster information flow, more personal contact and networking; standardisation of process flows First results of the evaluation ▪ 93% contact person is known (only 62 % before) ▪ 40% effectiveness and removing bureaucratic barriers ▪ 88% cooperation agreement makes sense 18 Thank you for your interest
Excursus. Local and centralised research support – a balancing act When the organisational structure of higher education institutions is on the agenda, centralisation and standardisation are recurring themes. The academic literature indicates a general shift of university structures towards more centralised settings, although at different paces and to varying extents in different contexts (Xxxxxxx et al., 2017; Xxxxxx, 2016). To go into the depth of the discussion on centralisation vis-à-vis decentralisation goes beyond the scope of this report. However, we illustrate the findings of a study by Xxxxxxxx & Xxxxxxxxx (2021), as their analysis directly addresses the question of the centralisation of support functions at universities. Xxxxxxxx & Xxxxxxxxx (2021, p. 55) concluded that ‘[e]very support task will require its own setting and combination of competences and levels of service. The organising of support and the broad palette of support tasks thus turn into a complex and entangled process of deciding what support is the most efficient and effective: centralised or decentralised.’ Furthermore, the findings of the analysis emphasise that allocating effective support structures is a balancing act: Providing answers as rapidly as possible, thus being close to research staff is seen as an advantage, while at the same time providing support in specialised fields, which might function well and be more efficient when managed centrally (Xxxxxxxx & Xxxxxxxxx, 2021, p. 55). In line with these findings, some participants in the focus group emphasised the importance of being physically close to the research staff they support, and the informal nature of good relationships with research staff was also mentioned. The importance of personal relationships with research staff, which favours more local structures, will be discussed further in the good practices section of the second report of the study.
