Rhetorical indications of the poet ’ s craft in the ancient synagogue

The fourth to eighth centuries CE saw the emergence of a class of professional liturgical poets in the Palestinian synagogue. These poets, known as payetanim , composed a genre of intricate poetry known as piyyut and formed a religious class independent of the rabbinic movement. This study discusses indications of how synagogue poets saw themselves both in relation to the divine and to their communities, focusing on the rhetoric of early piyyut and attestations to its use in the early synagogue. Two methodological models are explored: the construction of a liturgical ‘ self ’ in the introductions to piyyutim ; and the analysis of the use of ideal figures and construction of a past in these compositions. It is argued that ritual practitioners in the Jewish communities of late antiquity sought to distinguish themselves as worthy of consideration as members of a vocation that claimed a pedigree, identity, and singular status. the divine assembly. And how do we know that when three sit in judgment,¹ ⁵ the divine presence is among them? ” Among the elohim he pronounces judgment.


Introduction
In the sixth century CE two poets, the Christian hymnologist Romanos the Melodist of Constantinople and aJ ewishliturgical poet named Yannai, who livedin the Galilee, signed their namesi nt heir compositions in the form of an acrostic spelling out their names in the first letters of aseries of lines of verse.¹ This form, akind of watermark, allowed the author,among other things, to claim the work as his own. Name acrostics had appearedinclassicaland Hellenistic Greek and Latin poetry from at least the third centuryB CE (Courtney 1990). Among early Christian poets, Ephraem, the fourth-century Syriac preacher and hymnologist, also signed his name to his compositions in acrostics.² Beginningw ith the sixth century,t his practice became popular in Byzantine and Hebrew liturgical poetry.The reason for this development has implications for both the cultureand the microeconomics of the poet'sc raft.
The phenomenon of the acrostic signatureinliturgical Hebrew poetry is the culmination of alongprocess of evolution of genres,inwhich the poet presented himself not simply as ah umble supplicant before God, but as am aster of religious expertise representing ac ongregation. From approximately the second to sixth centuries CE, the liturgical poetry of the synagogue in Palestine evolved from aset of prosodic forms usedbylay prayer leaders to ahighlydeveloped literary corpus known as piyyut,c omposed by professional poets (payetaim).³ These poetsproduced hundreds of compositions based on the weeklylectionary reading, employing recondite vocabulary and allusions,complex prosodic structures,a nd often signed theirn amesi na crostics.T hey also formed ar eligious class independent of the rabbinic movement and mayh aver epresented the interests of ap riestlys ector of Jewish society after the destruction of the Temple. This studywill discuss indications of how synagogue poetssaw themselvesboth in relation to the divine and to their communities,f ocusing on the rhetoric of earlyp iyyut and attestations to its use in the earlys ynagogue.
Anecdotes about namedpoets whose work is known to us start appearingin Europe in the Middle Ages and they are singularlyunhelpful. Forexample, Yose ben Yose, the first payetan known to us by name, was said to be an orphan. This notion seems to be based on the custom of naming ac hild after ad eceased rel- Fori ntroductions to earlyp iyyut,s ee Fleischer and David (2007); ; Yahalom (1987aYahalom ( nd 1999; Swartz and Yahalom (2005); and Lieber (2012).  Foradiscussion of sources, see Schirmann (1951,1 29 -133) and Lieberman (1939); see also Sokoloff (1990)  ative;that is, if his name was the same as his father's, it must have been because his father died.⁵ According to the twelfth-century poet and commentator German Ephraim of Bonn, Yannai wasthe teacher of the great poet Eleazar Qillir,but he killed his student out of jealousyfor his talent by putting as corpion in his sandal.⁶ Af ew of the poets are said to have been priests, either according to tradition, or on account of theirn ames. Fore xample, the name Pinehash a-Kohen, "Pineḥas the Priest," is probablya ni ndication of priestlyl ineage ( Yahalom 1999,111-122).Aswewill see, this last detail maybesocially significant.The Jerusalem Temple was destroyed in 70 CE. Since then, the sacrificial system was obliterated and the priesthood as ac lass apparentlys erved virtuallyn op rofessional or ritual function in the Jewish community. Anyevidence for the social location of these poetsmust therefore be internal and comparative.F or comparativee vidence,wem ay draw on the role of the liturgical poets and hymnologists in in the wider culturalcontext,aboveall Greek and Latin hymnologists,includingthe emergent Christian poetry from the fourth century onwards.F or internal evidence the languageo ft he piyyutim can be examinedf or signs of the role of the poet as he conceivedi t.
In keeping with the theme of religious professionalism that forms the organisational principle of this volume, this studyconcerns how ritual practitioners in the Jewishc ommunities of late antiquity sought to distinguish themselvesa s See Mirsky,( 1991,13n .4)a nd the sourcesc itedt here.  Fors ourcesa nd bibliographys ee Lieber (2010,1 4). worthyofconsideration as members of avocation thatclaimedapedigree, identity,a nd singular status. In pursuit of indicators of the livede nvironment of the poet,this studythereforewill consist of methodological reflections on twomodels: (1) the construction of aliturgical "self" in the introductions to piyyutim;and (2)t he analysis of the use of ideal figures and construction of ap ast in these compositions. These reflections are each inspired by pioneering work done recentlyi no ther fields, including analysis undertaken by Peter Lenhardt, following EzraF leischer and other earlier scholars, on the reshut form in classical piyyut,inwhich the poet asks "permission" or "authority" to commence his discourse (Lenhardt,f orthcoming); and Derek Krueger'se xplorations of the construction of the past and the development of aliturgical 'I' in Byzantine hymnography(2004Byzantine hymnography( :2014. These reflections are meant to lead to further analysis of the vast corpus of Hebrew hymnologyo ft he Roman and Byzantine eras.

The Io fA leph
Hebrew liturgicalpoetry introduces the first person due to auseful coincidence: Most piyyutim are alphabetical acrostics,and the first-person imperfect or cohortative begins with the first letter,Aleph. Thismeans that the author oftenbegins by expressingh is relationship to the liturgical task at hand,o ften by declaring his intention to recitep raise, thanks, or narration in the first stanzas. As imple survey of the titles of early piyyutim,t aken from theirf irst lines, shows the rangeo ff irst-person expressions.T he following are the titles of the extant the works of Yose ben Yose, the first payetan known to us by name,w ho livedi n the fourth or fifth century CE. Thisl ist is based on Aaron Mirsky's1 991 edition of his poems. The genres are explained below: In this table, the opening phrases are listed in Hebrew,t ransliteration, and translation. The right-hand column lists the liturgical genre to which they belong,b ased on superscriptions in the manuscripts, the conventions of the literature, and Mirsky'sdesignations.The first three of these compositions are recited at the liturgy for RoshH ashanah, the New Year,s pecificallya si ntroductions to three units of the AdditionalS ervice (musaf)i nw hich biblical verses introduce the sounding of the shofar (ram'sh orn), announcing God'sk ingship (malkhuyot), remembrance (zikhronot), and the shofar (shofarot).⁸ The three prayers for Rosh Hashanah help initiate the tenD ayso fR epentance, and so the focus of the poems is on the individual'sd eeds. The seliḥot genre is likewise ap rayer for forgiveness from God,i nt his case recited on YomK ippur,the Dayo fA tonement.⁹ However the Avodah genre deals with another essential component of YomK ippur.I ti sa ne pic retellingo ft he YomK ippur sacrifice of purification and atonement carried out by the HighP riest in the Temple in Jerusalema sd escribed by Leviticus chapter 16 and the Mishnah tractate Yoma.¹⁰ This complex genre plays an important part in the studyo ft he social and culturalh istory of Hebrew liturgical poetry,n ot the least because of the destruction of the temple and the sacrificial system centuries earlier.
All but one of these opening phrases begin with the first person, and two with the first person plural; Atah Konanta begins with the second person singular.I nt he two main genres represented here, the triad for the shofar ceremony and the Avodah,t he first person singular is significant for different reasons. Although the first of the three compositions for RoshHashanah tells of God'sdeliverance of Israel in the past,the second and third focus on the individual'ssins and deliverance by God. In Efḥad be-Ma'asai,h ef ears that his deeds will condemn him; in Anusah la-Ezra,h ef lees to God for refuge.The focus on the indiben Yose. The fragmentary titles are Or 'Olam ("The Lightofthe World;" Mirsky 1991, 217); Eftaḥ Sefatai ("IShall Open My Lips"; Mirsky 1991, 218); and Az le-RoshTitanu ("When We Were Made the Head," Mirsky 1991, 219-221; the first line is based on Deut 38:13). Az le-RoshT itanu is a confession and Eftaḥ Sefatai maya lso be one; Or 'Olam consists onlyo fo ne line and it may be af ragment of a Yotser.  On this liturgical unit,s ee Elbogen ( 1993, 118 -121).  See Elbogen ( 1993,(177)(178)(179)(180)(181)(182)(183).  Foranintroduction to the Avodah as wellastexts and translations of the major earlyA vodah compositions,s ee Swartz and Yahalom (2005) and the bibliographyt here. All translations of Avodah piyyutim herea re from this volume unless otherwise noted; other translations are mine, unless otherwise noted. Ac omprehensive studyo ft he Avodah service and piyyutim from the perspective of the history of Hebrewl iteraturei sM alachi (1974). Forf urther editions and discussions of Avodah piyyutim,see also Goldschmidt (1970,2:18 -25); Yahalom (1996); Mirsky (1991); Swartz (1997,a nd 2013), and Münz-Manor (2013 vidual in this confessional mode should not be takenf or granted. Traditional Jewishp rayers for forgiveness are more often thann ot cast in the first person plural,e speciallyt he twoa crostic litanies of transgressions (the vidui,c onfession, and 'al ḥet, "for the sin […]" thatform the coreofthe confession ceremony of YomKippur).¹¹ Yet, these presumed expressions of individual contrition reflect the poet'sc onsciousness of his environment and vocation. An example can be found in the first stanzas of the second composition in the list, Anusah le-'Ezra (Mirsky 1991, 109). The poem introducest he shofarot service in the liturgy, which recalls prophecies in which the shofar will be sounded to signify redemption. Therefore, the author uses at echnique whereby each stanza ends with the word qol, "voice" or "sound".Inthese translations, each pair of lines represents ah emistich of four feet,a dding up to stanzas of two stiches apiece: If lee for help If ind it facingm e, God is near to me, When Ic all him with my voice.¹² In translation, this stanza looks like as imple declaration of the poet'sd ependence on God and faith in His presence; but it is also, like all of piyyut,produced by ac omplex processo fi nterweaving biblical and post-biblical allusions.T he languageo fp iyyut is famous for its use of dense, ornamental phraseologyi n which no person, thing,ora ction is allowed to stand for itself; instead, the predominant means of expression is metonymy, in which as ubstitute wordo r phrase (kinnui), usually basedonabiblical verse, signifies the subject of the discourse. The first hemistich, "If lee for help," is based on Isaiah 10:3: What will youd oo nt he dayo fp unishment, When the calamity comesf roma far, To whom will youf lee for help […]?
The kinnui form ofteni nvolvest aking av erse out of context,b ut sometimes the contrast can be instructive. In Isaiah the phrase is less an expression of assurance than aw arningt ot he sinnero fh is future desperation. In the piyyut,t he speaker is convinced of his deliverance. Thisi sb rought homeb yt he use of the root, qrb,t ob en ear.T his conceit of the poem, whereby each line ends with the word qol,a llows the author to establish ah omologyb etween the  On the statutory confessions for the YomK ippurs ee Elbogen ( 1993, 125 -126).  All biblical quotations areb ased on the NJPS with occasional modifications. sound of the shofar and the voice of the poet.That is, God will draw neari fh e raises his voice to call Him.
It is at this point thatthe poet acknowledgesthe liturgical setting explicitly: The one who, in the divine assembly, Stands close to me And here, in the Smaller Sanctuary, Io pen my mouth to Him with my voice.
The first line of this stanza, like the previous one, reflectsaremarkable use of a biblical source. God is referred to as the one "in the divine assembly," asher be-'adat el. This phrase and the word nitsav, "stands," in the next hemistich, are based on Psalm 82:1: Elohim nitsav be-'adat el be-qerev elohim yishpot.
God stands in the divine assembly; Amongt he gods he pronounces judgment.
In that Psalm, God stands among the assemblyo fg ods. He accuses them of injusticeand declares thathewill demote themtomortals. But in Jewish exegetical tradition, the phrase 'adat el is sometimes used to refer to the congregation of ten worshippers (minyan): Thusi nt he Palestinian Talmud (y. Berakhot 5:1[ 8d-9a]), the following statement is quoted in the name of Rabbi Abahu:¹³ "Seek the Lordw here He can be found" (Isa. 55:6). Wherec an He be found?I nh ouses of study. "Call to Him whereHeisnear" (ibid.). Where is he near?{In synagogues and houses of study.¹⁴}Rabbi Isaac son of Rabbi Eleazar (said): Not onlythat,but their God stands next to them. Howd ow ek now (byb iblical proof-text)? "God stands in the divine assembly" (Ps 82:1).
Likewise, in the Babylonian Talmud (b. Berakhot 6a),Ravin bar RavA da says in the name of Rabbi Isaac: Howdoweknow (bybiblical proof-text) that the HolyO ne, blessed be He,i sfound in the synagogue? As it is said, "God stands in the divine assembly." And how do we know that when tenpray, the divine presence(shekhinah)isamongthem?Asitissaid, "God stands in  The manuscript (MS Leiden) reads "Rabbi Abahu in the name of Rabbi Abahu",anobvious scribal error.  So MS Rome. the divine assembly." And how do we know that when threes it in judgment,¹⁵ the divine presencei sa mongt hem?" Amongt he elohim he pronounces judgment." By rendering elohim as referring to the judicial system, one meaning implied by other biblical usesofthe word,¹⁶ this exegesis strips the verse of its henotheistic implications. Likewise, 'adat el can become the quorum for human prayer.¹⁷ The second line of this stanza, beqirbi nitsav,echoes the word qarov, "near," in the third line above. While it has been translated here as "stands close to me," the word be-qirbi could also mean, literally, "among me" or "within me;" it can, therefore, alsor efer to God'sp resencew ithin the community,o rp erhaps the poet'si nspiration. The next line is more specific institutionally. The phrase miqdashm e ' at, "smaller sanctuary," comeso riginallyf rom Ezekiel 11:16: "Sayt hen: Thus said the LordGod: Ihaveindeed removed them far among the nations and have scattered them among the countries,a nd Ih aveb ecome to them as maller sanctuary in the countries wheret hey have gone."¹⁸ In one sourcei nt he Babylonian Talmud (b. Megillah 29a), the verse is used to refer to the synagogue. The citation occurs in the course of aTalmudic discussion about whether God'spresence, the Shekhinah,i st ob ef ound in the diaspora: "And Iwill be to them asmaller sanctuary" (Ezek 6:11): Rabbi Isaac said: These arethe synagogues and the houses of studyinBabylonia. R. Eleazar said: This is the house of our mas-terinBabylonia. Rava expounded: What is the meaningofthe verse: "Lord, Youhavebeen our dwelling place( ma'on)" (Ps 90:1)? These are synagogues and houses of study.
This exegesis of Ezekiel 6:11 thus interprets the phrase "smaller sanctuary" to refer both to synagogues and houses of studyi nB abylonia. It reflects the idea that the synagogue is am iniature or lesser temple.¹⁹ The stanza thereforerepre- and Exod 21:6;onthreeconstitutingarabbinical court,see Mishnah Sanhedrin 1:1.  Cf. also Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael YitroBaḥodesh 11; Avot de-Rabbi Natan Version Bch. 18; and DeuteronomyR abba ed. Lieberman, Ki Tavo ch. 2, p. 108.  NJPS translates "diminisheds anctity".  Although Rabbi Isaac was athird-century Tanna whohad traveled to Babylonia (Stemberger 1991), this passagea ppears in the Babylonian Talmud, which was redacted in the sixth century. This source is often citedi nm odern historiographyt od escribe Palestinian Jewish concepts of the synagogue. Our piyyut,however,may be one of the earliest attestations to this interpretation of Ezek. 6:11 in aPalestinian Jewish source. Cf. also amidrashic fragment on Leviticus fromthe CairoG enizah in Ginzberg( 1969, 77). sents the payetan as the one who raises his voice²⁰ in the substitute temple, bringingf orth the divine presence, an echo of the lost sanctuary.
The presenceofthe first person singular in the Avodah piyyutim is worthyof note as well. While the other genres in this list represent the individual'sintimate relationship with God, the recounting of the YomKippursacrifice represents the HighHolidays at their most collective.InLeviticus 16,the High Priest slaughters two bulls and agoat,uses their blood to cleanse the sanctuary of ritual impurity, and sends another goat out to the wilderness bearing the people'ss ins. In the course of the sacrificial procedure, he alsobringsincense into the HolyofHolies, whereheencounters the Potent PresenceofGod, the onlytime in the year when he does so. The Avodah genre relates this procedures tep by step, following the Mishnaht ractate Yoma'se xtensive narrative of the ritual and adorning it with elaborate poetic figures, excurses on the glorious appearance of the HighP riest and his garments, the drama of his encounter with the divinep resencei nt he Holyo fH olies,a nd the exultation of the nation at the news that she has been forgiven. But preceding this narration, the Avodah piyyutim attach an extensive prologuethat narratesthe history of the world from its creation, through the prehistory of humankind to the livesofthe patriarchs, to the selection of Aaron and his clan as priests, culminating in the sacrificial service in the Temple.²¹ The Avodah is thus an epic genre, which seeks to produce an almostAristoteliane mpathyb etween the congregation and the High Priest.B ut more than this,the High Priest is identified mimetically with the payetan himself, whose mission it is to take the community verballyi nto the vanished Temple.²² The earlyA vodah piyyutim sometimes open with af irst-person declaration, as we have seen in other genres.F or example, the most influential Avodah, Yose ben Yose's Azkir Gevurot Elohah,b egins: Is hall recount the wonders Of the magnificent God, Who is unique, therei sn oo ther, Self-sufficient and none second to Him.
There is none beyond Him in the universe, None prior to Him in heaven;


The phrase "open my mouth" is based on Isa 10:14, where the silenceo fb irds is used as a metaphor for the silenceo ft he nations while Assyria gathers wealth;f or am agical use of this verse see Schiffman and Swartz (1992, 140).  Other related piyyutim such as anonymous fourth century Az be-En Kol and the fifth-century preamble Seder Beriyot,g of urther,d escribingt he divine world before mundanec reation; see Rand (2005) and Swartz (2011).  Fort his argument,s ee Swartz and Yahalom (2005) and Swartz (2012).

None preceded Him, And none can supplant Him.
So too in his Eten Tehillah (Mirsky 1991, 173): ²³ Is hall give praise To God, whoi st ob ep raised; Is hall tell, in awe, Af ew of His works.
In these examples Yose signifies seeks permission before God to recount how He created the universe, chose as uccession of patriarchs and priests, and instructed them to present sacrificest oH im. However,a fter the first stanza he switches to at hird-person account of primordial cosmology.O ther examples of the Avodah begin with the second person, such as the phrase atah konanta olam, "Youestablished the world," which begins one of the earliest,anonymous Avodah compositions as well as one of Yose ben Yose'spoems.²⁶ Yetthe Avodah is not bereft of the kind of self-consciousness we found in the passages described above. By these introductions the poet signals that he is to begin as aga -not quite imploring "Om use, sing to me," but indeed the other waya round. By the use of the jussive or cohortative the poet seeks permission from God to sing to Him in front to the congregation. ²⁷ This idea, that the poet must ask permission to commenceh is discourse, is thereforeb uilt into the structure of this literature.T he term for this rhetorical turn is reshut,which means "permission,""authority",or"dominion." According to UriEhrlich (2004), it has its roots in scholastic protocol, in which the student or servant must ask permission from his master to speak, to approach him, or take leave of him. In av ersion of the liturgical unit known as the quedushah, or sanctification, which introduces the recitation of the trishagion of Isaiah 6:3, angels are said to "give one another permission (reshut)t os anctify theirc rea- My translation.  Hebrew me-'olam.  Hebrew 'ad lo 'olam.  See Swartz and Yahalom, (2005,70and 292);cf. Az be-En Kol,which begins with athird-person passageo nc osmology (Swartz and Yahalom 2005,9 7ff.).  See Lenhardt( forthcoming).
tor."²⁸ The passagep resupposes an angelic chorus that singsa ntiphonally, answering Isaiah 6:3w ith Ezekiel 3:12.I ta lsop resupposes ac elestialw orld ruled by intricate protocol. The "permission" each grants to the others eems to be the pronunciation of the potent divine name.
As EzraF leischer shows (1977), the poetic and rhetorical pattern in which the prayer leader asks permission from God to sing His praise goes back to some of the earliest piyyutim in the third or fourth centuries. It then developed into ad istinctive formal component of the more complex compositions of the fifth and sixth centuries,a nd eventuallyi nto as eparable unit called the reshut. One of the earliest examples is abrief anonymous quatrain that appears in several liturgies as as eparable introduction to the Avodah (Goldschmidt1 970, 2:430); its antiquity can be seen from the style and lack of rhyme:²⁹ Oḥilah la-El aḥaleh fanav Esh'alah mimmenu ma'aneh lashon; Asher bi-qehal-'am ashirah 'uzo; Abi'ah renanot be'ad mif'alav Ih ope for God, Ii mploreH is presence; Ia sk of Him the response of the tongue, So that in the assemblyo ft he people Im ay sing of His power. Is hall express songs of praise regarding His deeds.
In the second line, the poet requests ma'aneh lashon,l iterally, "the response of the tongue." This phrase, from Micah 7:7, maymean that the petitioner seeks an answer to his prayer.³⁰ But it can alsob er ead as ap rayerf or eloquence-the tonguei nq uestion not being the Deity'sb ut the poet's.³¹ Once again, the poet places himself in the midstofthe congregation, here taking languagefrom Judges 20:2,inwhich the "people of God",the tribes of Israel, gather under very different circumstances,t og ot ow ar against the Benjaminites.
By the eighth or ninth century,o ne payetan had structured his reshut as a remarkable portrait of his synagogue. This reshut,first published by EzraFleischer (1974), precedesa nA vodah piyyut, Eqrab e-Garon ("IS hall Call out Loudly with My Throat"), by PinehasH a-Kohen, an eighth-century poet from Palestine. Hereh el ists the classes that make up the congregation:³²  Foratext and translation see Birnbaum (1949, 73 -74).  On this unit as ap re-classicale xample of reshut see Fleischer (1977,3 59).  So Goldschmidt'sn ote ad loc.  So the translation in Silverman (1978,3 67): "Iw ill ask Him the gift of speech".  Fort his passage in the context of the history of the synagogue, see further Swartz and Yahalom (2005,7-10).
Ii mploret he Rock of eternity, Who has knowledge of the life³³ of the innocent; As Ic ast my eyes to the heavens, Ia sk permission from the Merciful One.
And so toow hen Is tand beforet he wise, Who hear words from the truthful, Who understand words of law; Ia sk permission from the wise.
Il ook out at the congregation of the noble; And am fearful of the One whoh umbles and raises; And of those standingb ehind me and beforem ea safence: Ia sk permission from the righteous.
The seed of the faithful, Believers, sons of believers, Who exploret he lawa nd understand: Ia sk permission from priests.
Those who[ … ]g oodness on my behalf; Who are satiated with good teachinga nd instruction, Fort hey attend grace and favor: Io pen my mouth with the permission of Levites.
Those whoh onor this daya nd fast, and respond "holy, holy, holy;" And teach scripturea nd Mishnah diligently: Io pen my mouth with permission of ḥazanim.
Those whoa re skilled in the subtleties of books; Abidingi nt he shade of the One who dwells in mystery;³⁴ Who sing sweet,p leasant words: Io pen my mouth with permission of scribes.
Those whoe ternallye levate the LivingO ne Who sayp rayerb eforeH im; Who stand beforet he One whom akesm ountains: Io pen my mouth with permission of those whor ecite liturgy.
Those whor ecite the specific and general;³⁵ Who sweep behind like water; Who reciter ighteousness and justice: Io pen my mouth with permission of singers.
 Lit., "days".  Based on Ps.91:1, interpreted here perhaps as "the Most High dwells in mysteries";cf. Swartz (1992, 150).  Referringtothe principles by which the Torahisinterpreted according to tradition and thus, perhaps, to the Midrash embedded in piyyutim.
Those whol end strong voices in melody; Lett heir cry beforey ou be pleasing; MayY ou consider the melodyo fm yt ongue. Io pen my mouth with permission of the whole people.
OAlmighty,a sY ou forgivet reachery; Listen to my entreaties from above; Grant me ap ureh eart that Im ay speak without fear or treachery: Io pen my mouth with permission of the entirec ongregation.³⁶ Each two stanzas represent ad ifferent category or pairo fs ocial categoriesi n the synagogue; the first threel ines of each describe thatc ategory,a nd the last identifiesi te xplicitly. This poem is also built on ar eligiously and sociallyh ierarchical structure, with God at the top in the first stanza and the congregation and entire nation in the last two. At the top of the social hierarchy, closest to God, are the sages -the "wise" and "righteous," who surround the poet like a fence and before whom he trembles.N ext come the priests and the Levitesthe formerb eing the "believers,s ons of believers" in that their office is hereditary.S cribes and ḥazanim come next.The ḥazan is associated with the scribes and described as one who "teach[es] scripture and Mishnah," two subjects that weret aught primarilyt oc hildren. Thisi sa ni ndication that whent his hymn was composed as ignificant function of the ḥazan was elementary education.³⁷ Next in the social order comes the payetan himself, who "arrange[s]prayers" and possiblya na ccompanyingc hoiro f" singers" (Fleischer, 1974).³⁸ The poet,therefore, ostensiblyplaces himself in ahumble position, close to the people for whom he is as pokesman. At the samet ime, this entire composition is a declaration of his intention to takeo nt he role of messenger of the community before God.

The Io ft he Ancestors
This bringsu st oo ur second model, thato fi deal figures.R abbinic tradition is distinguishedb yaconstant attention to the process of transmission of its wis- This translation is from Swartz and Yahalom (2005,8-9). The text appears in facsimile in Yahalom (1987, 71-72) and is edited in Fleisher (1974,46-47). See also Yahalom (1999,41-42).  On this function of the ḥazan see Sky (1992, 30 -31).  However,according to Yahalom (1999,41-42), the parallelistic structureofthe stanzas,each two standingf or one category,m akesi tl ess likelyt hat these twos tanzas represent separate classes of payetan and chorus. dom from its mythic origins to contemporary teachers,the rabbis. The Mishnah tractate Avot,o rS ayingso ft he Fathers, edited around 200C E, famouslyb egins with ac hain of tradition, tracing the reception of Torahf rom the initial revelation of Moses, to his biblical and post-biblical successors, Moses receivedT orah at Sinai and handed it down to Joshua, Joshua to the Elders,the Elders to the prophets, and the prophets handed it down to the Men of the Great Assembly.
The chain of tradition continues,e numeratingt he teachings of second-temple sages and eventuallyt ot he present-day rabbis themselves.³⁹ But while Moses, biblical prophets and legislators,a nd Pharisaic leaders of the Second Temple are included in the chain, Aaron, Moses' brother,and the priesthood are omitted. The Mishnah, thus, emphasizes that divine revelation was transmitted through scribes and sagest ot he Rabbis as ac lass.
Youl ooked favourably On those whoc ame forth from his loins: This is Aaron, The first holym an.
Yous pecified to him with what⁴⁰ He should entert he shrine And informed him of what he should do Beforey ou on the Dayo fP ardoning.
Youp laced af air garland Of favoru pon Levi, And of all his brothers Youp laced ac rown on him.⁴⁵  Referringt ot he HighP riest,who wears eight garments to the ordinary priest'sf our.  Abraham.  Levi (the thirds on); Heb. le-shalesh;a lternatively,o ne might emend to le-shamesh ("to serve").  Swartz and Yahalom (2005,7 2-74 In both cases Aaron'sb rother Moses is notable for his absence.
Later on in the Avodah, the High Priest is described as avirtuous, physically stronghuman being who carries Israel and its deeds heroicallywith him into the sanctuary,and expiates its impurities by his methodical performance of the sacrificial ritual. This valorisation of the priest standsi nc ontrast with the rabbinic texts that served as sources for the poet,which routinelybelittle the priesthood and casts uspicion on the priestly class of the second-temple period.⁴⁶ This and other structural and stylistic features of the genre are indications thatt he payetanim identified themselveswith the priesthood, at least for the duration of the Avodah liturgy.
Recently, Derek Krueger (2010) has shown how the extensive use of the history of Israel in early anaphora,from the Liturgy of St.Basil to the Apostolic Constitutions,s erved ideological and social purposes. He argues that "the liturgical repetition of Old Testament narrative assertedi ts relevance to the formation of Christian community" in Western Syria, wherethere weresignificant populations of both Jews and Marcionites.⁴⁷ So too, the Avodah'sr endering of sacred history constituted an alternative to the rabbinicn arrative in which the priesthood was belittled and its importance was minimized.T his counter-narrative mayh ave strengthened the prestige of the payetan in the culturalenvironment in Palestine in late antiquity.Ithas been argued (Yahalom 1999,107-36;Irshai 2003) that the synagogue was led in late antiquity by priestly circles thath ad retained their identity.⁴⁸ It is not certain whether the payetanim were indeed part of an organised priestly class. However,ithas been shown here that the Avodah constructs a priestly pedigree for the poem that is spiritual and cultural, if not genealogical. This poetic strategy would thereforeh avet he positioned synagogue poet in a centreo fc ultural production.

From Poetry to Society
The purpose of the close readings of generic markers offered aboveh as been to preparethe wayfor understanding the process of professionalism of the synagoguep oet from the fourth to sixth centuries.The evidence for such ap rocess increases with the development of the genres that express the poet'sconception of his vocation and place in the community.H owever,i th as its roots in the early piyyutim in which the poets place themselvesi nacentral position, as representative of the nation, as the successor to the hereditary priesthood, and even as the agent by whom the divine presenceh overs over the congregation.
It could be argued that these patterns might be understood more as signs of vocation than professionalisation. However,the trajectory of the history of piyyut seems to lead to as ociety in which the poet was seen as an individual author providingaservicet ot he community,w ho probablyc ompensated him in some way. The payetan was usually the performero fh is works,a nd would have been recognized as such by the congregation. One consequenceo fs igning one'sn ame in an acrostic is thati tp rotects the author'sw ork. In the Rabbinic milieu at this time and place, in which most literature was collective and transmitted orally, this was not at rivial matter if one'sl ivelihood was at stake. Regarding Greek and Latin poetry,E dwardC ourtney observes ( 1990,8 ), "In a time of predominantlyo ralt ransmission, ap oet who wished to retain the title to his poetry needed to stamp it with some mark of ownership."⁴⁹ An acrostic signaturec ould prevent another performerf rom representinga nother'sw ork as his own.
Twoo ther featureso ft he earlyl iterary history of piyyut are the increasing proliferation of sources between the fourth and seventh centuries and the increasingi ntricacy of its language. The onlye xtant compositions by Yose ben Yose are for the HighH olidays,t he days of repentance between the New Year and the Dayo fA tonement.T he liturgy of those days was the most extensive and dramatic of the year.W ed on ot know whether Yose would have been paid for his effortsb ut it has been argued here thatt he poet thoughto fh imself as fulfilling av ocation.I nt he next century,Y annai wroted etailed exegetical compositions for the entire weeklyl ectionary cycle. Eleazar Qillir'sw ork is  See also Kreuger (2010,170). Foranaccount of the problem of individual authorshipinearly Islam see Kilto (2001), especially, the case of the writer al-Jahiz (pp. 67-77), who forgedseveral books and attributed them to ancient authors,and was then faced with the prospect of proving his own authorship of those works. On authorship in medieval Spanish Hebrewpoetry,see Pagis (1970,101-106). even more voluminous;i na ddition, his use of novel linguistic forms, recondite allusions,and expanding use of sources gainedh im bothfame and notoriety in late antiquity and the Middle Ages.⁵⁰ Hence the legends in which his expertise causes his teacherY annai to flyi nto aj ealous rage.T his developmentc ould also be an indication of the transmission of techniques and sources in small groups or guilds of verbal craftsmen. That is, the intricacyo fQ illir'sl anguage, the poetic and linguistic innovations he instituted, and the overall virtuosity of his compositions could also servet oe xclude amateurs and dilettantesw ho did not have access to them.
We know from Talmudic sources and fragmentary literarycompositions that it was possible to hire professional poets to perform at funerals and weddings.⁵¹ The Babylonian Talmud (b.M oed Katan 25b), contains several anecdotes about funeral poets, including examples of theircraft.Ino ne story,R av Ashi asks two poets. BarK ipok and BarA bin, what they would sayf or his funeral. They each recites everal lines. RavA shi does not like their work and resolvesn ot to hire them.
With the rise of Christianity after Constantine, accordingt ot he most recent archaeological evidence,s ynagogues in Palestine grew from modest structures to monumental buildings,f eaturing dazzling mosaics, sculptural architectural ornamentation, and prominent dedicatoryi nscriptions( Levine2 000 and 2012, Fine 2005). Theseb uildingsc ould competew ith neighbouringc hurches in the new Christian empire. The inscriptions also allowed patrons to displayt heir devotion in the form of the narrative themesand symbols of liturgicalgraphic arts. The evidence presented here suggests that in their poetry,the payetanim hoped to present themselvesasritual experts trainedtobemessengers of the community,a nd that enlisting them was aw ay for theirp atrons to displayt heir devotion.⁵²