We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This chapter reexamines the extensively discussed evidence for the circumstances that drove the Jews to a seemingly irrational and hopeless challenge to the power of Rome. The account of Josephus, on which we almost exclusively rely, offers the teleological scenario of a long build-up of hostility that issued inevitably in disaster. While acknowledging the background and circumstances that lay behind the conflict, this chapter emphasizes the numerous contingencies, unanticipated events, personalities, and miscalculations that played a key role in bringing it about. The tension and anxiety that had built up for two generations in a series of individual episodes supplied a significant impetus. But error, accident, and unintended consequences are critical to understanding the course of events. Josephus’ sense of inevitability, born of hindsight and his special situation, needs a corrective.
This chapter explains why the loss and recovery of trauma memory is considered to be controversial. It also explores the historical themes that maintain or exacerbate the controversy. Consensus papers have appeared in scientific journals, at times written jointly by clinical researchers and non-clinical cognitive researchers. The chapter emphasizes that extremity is obviously in the eye of the beholder and details a few of the historical sources of the zealotry. The acrimony that has fueled the debate on recovered memory has abated in most arenas, clearing the way for scientific research that has clearly established the reality of the phenomena of both false memory (FM) and accurate recovered memory. Further work will benefit from a clearer distinction between the study of phenomena (both recovered and FM) and their mechanisms (suggestion, repression, and dissociation), and direct and forthright debate about the nature and weight of types of evidence.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.